Coronavirus. The “random” studies on the alleged defective Spike of mRNA vaccines

Coronavirus. The “random” studies on the alleged defective Spike of mRNA vaccines
Coronavirus. The “random” studies on the alleged defective Spike of mRNA vaccines

You have reported to us the article of a user hidden behind the Gardener’s account. Apparently it seems well argued, by presenting scientific sources related to each statement. In summary, the author claims that mRNA vaccines against the new Coronavirus would present possible errors in reading and producing the Spike protein. Such errors would render our immune system unable to recognize the presence of SARS-CoV-2. Following the verification, the thesis finds no basis.

For those in a hurry:

  • MRNA vaccines must stimulate the immune system by making our cells produce Spike (S) proteins.
  • The mRNA contains the only information to produce Spike, the means by which SARS-CoV-2 infects cells, recognized as an antigen by the immune cells that produce the corresponding antibodies.
  • The author’s thesis is that these by presenting modified nucleotides (Ψ instead of U) lead to the production of incorrect Spikes.
  • The portion of Spike that binds to cell receptors (RBD) also features the S-2P subunit, which would lead to harmful neurological effects.
  • As we will see, all these theses, incorrectly extrapolated from dated articles, find no basis.

Analyses

The sources presented appear to be collected in bulk and mostly at random. They are over twenty and have the following limits:

  • Three articles were published without peer review by non-competent authors. One by Bert Hubert (software developer) and two by Kira Smith (specialist in security and unconventional warfare).
  • Some articles have been published in magazines of the Swiss publishing house MDPI, the same one that has recently published several articles that do not really comply with the scientific method.
  • Several papers have had peer review in peer-reviewed journals, but are dated to pre-pandemic time periods, between August 2008 and October 2019.
  • Two studies are from Nature, one of Pnas, but in no way suggest the author’s thesis.
  • The case is cited EmaLiks, which we had already seen fail to prove the authenticity of the documents released to the media.
  • The statements of geneticist Alexandra Henrion-Caude, who had already made unfounded claims about vaccines, understood by her as “gene therapy”, are cited.

“Messy Researchers”

The narrative focuses mostly on Pfizer’s vaccine. In essence, the way in which its mRNA was produced would give rise to errors during the reading inside our cells, leading to the production of Spikes different from those of the virus, so much so as to make them useless, because they would stimulate an inadequate immune response.

“The protein created by Pfizer is different from the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein. S-2P is an unstable protein. S-2P receptor binding domains (RDBs) do not train the body properly – reports the author – As our cell attacks the foreign genetic code, Pfizer’s mRNA code has replaced all the letters U (nucleotides) with Ψ to hide, increasing the probability of misinterpreting the code and generating a spike protein other than the one expected ».

Following the narrative, those of Pfizer would be “bungling researchers”, unable to notice such a mistake in the design of the vaccine. However, the author does not explain to us how this mRNA managed to overcome all the experimental phases, nor why in intensive care we continue to end up mainly people who are not fully vaccinated.

How Pfizer’s vaccine works

We have seen that some data, although dated, are extrapolated from quality studies. We asked Marco Gerdol the expert in comparative genomics of the University of Trieste for more clarifications.

«The history of pseudouridines (Ψ) is actually quite simple – continues Gerdol – the modification of the sequence of mRNA with these that replace the uridines (U) is the result of studies that began more than ten years ago. This substitution (with a natural modified nucleotide, because Ψ is normally found in ribosomal RNAs and many tRNAs) is introduced to ensure that the introduced RNA is not recognized by all that system of enzymatic activities, which lead to the degradation of a Exogenous RNA, normally activated with an RNA virus’.

“The fact that there is Ψ masks the RNA and makes it less attackable. The degradation occurs more slowly than normal and on the other hand increases the effectiveness with which it is translated into protein. So you make more protein. The author’s argument is that doing so would result in error-ridden Spikes, which would lead to a number of neurological diseases. But how often are they generated? When there is a Ψ, it is read as if it were a uridine, in most cases correctly. There is some degree of tolerance for tRNA pairing, so it can happen that you incorporate the wrong amino acid. The frequency is estimated to be less than 1%. This mistake has no material effect on Spike. The vast majority of the proteins produced match perfectly ».

“I imagine that when the author speaks of S-2P, he means the Spike protein encoded by the mRNA of vaccines, which has two modifications: a lysine and a valine substituted with prolins, two mutated positions, which make the protein is blocked in its pre-melting conformation. This is done to increase immunogenicity, i.e. its ability to stimulate the immune system, compared to a postfusion conformation. They derive from studies done on SARS in 2003, in which it was already seen that modifying the protein in this conformation actually makes the vaccine more effective. It is a modification of the mRNA vaccines, for example AstraZeneca does not use it ».

Is Pfizer’s vaccine genotoxic?

The author goes on to argue that Pfizer failed to verify that its vaccine was not genotoxic or carcinogenic, insinuating that they have deliberately abandoned a kind of due control since animal testing.

“And while Pfizer admits that codon optimization has an impact on safety, it did not test:” Safety pharmacology, genotoxicity and carcinogenicity studies were not conducted in accordance with the WHO’s vaccine guidelines. 2005 “. The WHO document of 2005 actually states that such tests are not necessary for the final formulation and approval of a NORMAL VACClNO, because genotoxicity and carcinogenicity are conducted during ANIMAL STUDIES, which for Pfizer were practically skipped. Yet EMA states that: “It is important to investigate the potential for undesirable pharmacological activity in appropriate animal models and, where necessary, to incorporate special monitoring for these activities in toxicity studies and / or clinical studies.”

All this speech is misleading. We can understand this better by reading the most recent literature on the subject:

‘No genotoxicity studies have been conducted as the components of the vaccine formulation (LNP and mRNA) are not expected to cause genotoxic effects. In particular, the delivered mRNA is active in the cytoplasm of a cell and does not enter the nucleus or interact with the genome, so as not to replicate “

Conclusions

As often happens, we are faced with a text that makes use of distorted sources to advance an erroneous thesis. Thus, putting together more or less scientific articles in bulk, sometimes written by authors competent in other subjects, the author comes to argue that mRNA vaccines would lead to the production of incorrect and dangerous Spike proteins. With a minimal analysis of the way in which the sources were collected, and the consultation of an expert, we understood that these theses have no basis.

Open.online is working with the CoronaVirusFacts/DatosCoronaVirus Alliance, a coalition of more than 100 fact-checkers who are fighting misinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Learn more about the alliance here (in English).

Read also:

PREV what he puts in the customer’s ice cream – Libero Quotidiano
NEXT Covid: US health authorities hold back on third vaccine dose – Last Hour