2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
Gorgo what is your current masking routine? 2x for flights? 1x for grocery stores? Just trying to get a gauge for how crazy you are.
You mark me as about a 4 out of 10 on the crazy-o-meter, but not for the reasons you'd imagine. I only wear a mask when appropriate at work or if I've been sick if I am teaching. I never wore two masks. I would say I have spent less than 1% of my work time in a mask in the past 6 months. I'm rarely anywhere near a place I need to be masked these days. But it is part of my job and I only wear a mask when I have to or when I feel I should because of recent illness.
Thanks for your interest in me, though. I'm flattered.
Just stop.
Read and learn.
mRNA does interact with the DNA, but it doesn't change it, which is why it is not gene therapy.
mRNA only works if it gets your DNA to actually ****ing produce the proteine It was targeted for .
your tribe is a joke, an insult to science, an insult to rationality.
even when your guys are kinda right they are still as wrong as they can possibly be.
genomiceducation.communism.ussr wasn't informative
Speaking of reading and learning.
the above is false because mRNA based vaccines have been approved as vaccines in the EU, so it's not true that you need "an antigene in the vaccine".
mRNA qualifies in Europe because it makes your body produce the antigene.
mRNA does interact with the DNA, but it doesn't change it, which is why it is not gene therapy.
Kind of. It can change DNA and it becomes something called cDNA. But this has no affect on the genome because it is not in the nucleus.
mRNA only works if it gets your DNA to actually ****ing produce the proteine It was targeted for .
Well, I see what you're trying to say here, but the terminology is pretty mangled and inaccurate. But sure?
I have no idea what the hell this means. You basically agreed I was right, without getting the details exactly right.
What guys? What the hell do you think I said that was wrong? You literally agreed with me? Are you on drugs?
cool? This was quite the bipolar-coaster my guy.
the above is false because mRNA based vaccines have been approved as vaccines in the EU, so it's not true that you need "an antigene in the vaccine".
Again, this is mostly correct. You can certainly define vaccine that way, but it's completely unnecessary and antiquated to do so. The only reason it was ever done that way was that it was really thought there would be any other approach.
Again, this is mostly correct. You can certainly define vaccine that way, but it's completely unnecessary and antiquated to do so. The only reason it was ever done that way was that it was really thought there would be any other approach.
can't find the exact legal quote right now from mobile but according to the EMA (our European CDC equivalent) a vaccine is any drug that, by any mean, makes a patient go through a process that makes him less fragile if he encounters the target pathogen in the future.
can't find the exact legal quote right now from mobile but according to the EMA (our European CDC equivalent) a vaccine is any drug that, by any mean, makes a patient go through a process that makes him less fragile if he encounters the target pathogen in the future.
Let’s focus on what’s important; that we’ve confirmed that BrianJames doesn’t know what the **** he’s talking about.
the above is false because mRNA based vaccines have been approved as vaccines in the EU, so it's not true that you need "an antigene in the vaccine".
mRNA qualifies in Europe because it makes your body produce the antigene.
Incorrect.
According to European regulations, vaccines are products capable of producing active immunity [17] and contain antigens capable of inducing active immunity against an infectious agent [4]. According to the EMA [11], the active substance of the COVID-19 Pfizer vaccine is mRNA: it is not an antigen. Therefore, according to the European and French pharmacopoeias, mRNAs should not be considered as vaccines because they do not contain antigens.
Cool misguided opinion of one person, dude!
Author Helene Banoun's list of credentials: "Independent Researcher." It also says nothing about whether it qualifies as gene therapy, only if it should be regulated under the same set of guidelines. It's noteworthy that it's NOT, and she just disagrees with that.
So...like I said, not gene therapy. Reading and learning would be cool for you to do though, so yeah, I do agree with that.
If you actually read the thing you would see that it does explain how it qualifies as gene therapy. It also explains how the only reason it wasn't classified as gene therapy is because doing that would have prevented it being fast tracked for EUA.
I wouldn't mind a deeper dive to understand why people like Tulsi would be considered viable, when she regurgitated Russian propaganda that had no other reasonable explanation to it, other than she has to be a Russian asset.
I heard they have a secret HQ in a pizza parlour in DC - you should go check it out and report back for any suspicious behaviour.
I don't know why you can't simply check EMA itself and you feel like checking Wikipedia
/
This guideline is focussed on the clinical development of vaccines, where vaccines are defined as
medicinal products intended for prevention, post-exposure prophylaxis and/or treatment of disease
caused by an infectious agent and which contain antigen(s) or genetic information for an antigen(s),
either of biological or synthetic nature, that induce a specific immune response against the causative
infectious agent(s) or its toxins.
The guidance is relevant to vaccines that contain one or more:
• Organisms that have been inactivated by chemical or physical means;
• Live organisms that are naturally non-virulent in humans or that have been treated or
genetically modified to attenuate their virulence;
• Antigens extracted from pathogens or secreted by them, which may be used in their native
state, detoxified by chemical or physical treatments or aggregated, polymerised or conjugated
to a carrier to increase their immunogenicity;
• Antigens produced by genetic engineering or chemical synthesis;
• Live bacterial or viral vector vaccines expressing foreign antigens;
• Nucleic acid, including plasmids engineered to express specific antigens.
If you can't beat'em, join'em. The fake patriot, fake Christian, fake truth party has captured America. It reveals what the country is, has become, and in a way always has been. A base of the rich, the religious, the easily duped, the fake macho, the prejudiced, etc. ... far and away overrides the sentiments and concerns of the forefathers. The Dems weren't up to the challenge of stopping it. Before long, the Department of Unamerican Activities Department will be censoring, disenfranchising, maybe even purging ... the enemies of the newly proclaimed reality spoken into truth abracadabra style. The whole thing seems both unAmerican and very, very American.
If you actually read the thing you would see that it does explain how it qualifies as gene therapy. It also explains how the only reason it wasn't classified as gene therapy is because doing that would have prevented it being fast tracked for EUA.
So, exactly what I said then, huh? It isn't classified as gene therapy, your author claims it should be and wasn't.
Cool man! We should let regulators determine what value pi has too. I'm sure they know better than mathematicians.
Its hilarious how you not only have no idea what a proper source for medical information is (hint: not EU regulators), but also you then undermine your own source by citing evidence that they don't care about reality when making their regulations.
Then you quote my post to tell me I'm wrong and say exactly what I said was what it actually said.
Holy crap, dude. Hang up the skates. And then freaking Luciom comes along and shows where both you and clown shoes Helene Banoun were wrong anyway.
The Dems themselves are all in on the fake patriot, fake Christian, fake truth,…rich, the religious, the easily duped, the fake macho, the prejudiced,
Yeah, Luciom seems to be stubbornly refusing to get this point. I'm obviously not using the right technical language, but obviously "being a fields medalist" criterion overrides the "being male" criterion.
I suspect that as a general rule, the more your criterion pares down the subgroup, the more weight it should be given. If 50% of the population are men but only 0.0005% or whatever are fields medalists, obviously that is a lot more specific and should be the overriding factor.
Right. Non random samples, even when large, often won't converge to the population means. That's why random sampling is so important. Like we know college educated whites vote closer to the total population means than white people and college. And college educated white men in particular show a strong leftward bias compared to to their non college counter parts. So it's obviously fallacious to state men doing math at MIT will lean right compared to a typical college grad because trailer park Bubba Joe who as an adult grades below average MIT grads when they were 7 in numerical skills is super likely to be a Trumper.
Trump Accidentally Helps Dems Get Key Judicial Nominees Approved By Taking Republicans To SpaceX Launch
If the Republican senators had been there, they likely would have been able to defeat the judicial nominations.
As Republicans have been trying to drag down the process of getting Joe Biden's judicial nominees approved, Republican senators warned that Donald Trump was hurting their progress by taking some members of Congress to watch the SpaceX launch, causing them to miss votes.
Sen. JD Vance and Sen. Marco Rubio were among senators who missed the opportunity to cast their votes Tuesday, leading fellow Republicans to express their frustrations.
...
Their utter incompetence may actually save us in the end.
