https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/05/04/sp...
“Consider what happens when you’re infected by the actual coronavirus. We know now that the huge majority of such infections are spread by inhalation of virus-laden droplets from other infected people, so the route of administration is via the nose and/or lungs, and the cells lining your airway are thus the first ones to get infected. The viral infection process leads at the end to lysis of the the host cell and subsequent dumping of a load of new viral particles – and these get dumped into the cellular neighborhood and into the bloodstream. They then have a clear shot at the endothelial cells lining the airway vasculature, which are the very focus of these two new papers.
Compare this, though, to what happens in vaccination. The injection is intramuscular, not into the bloodstream. That’s why a muscle like the deltoid is preferred, because it’s a good target of thicker muscle tissue without any easily hit veins or arteries at the site of injection. The big surface vein in that region is the cephalic vein, and it’s down along where the deltoid and pectoral muscles meet, not high up in the shoulder. In earlier animal model studies of mRNA vaccines, such administration was clearly preferred over a straight i.v. injection; the effects were much stronger. So the muscle cells around the injection are hit by the vaccine (whether mRNA-containing lipid nanoparticles or adenovirus vectors) while a good portion of the remaining dose is in the intercellular fluid and thus drains through the lymphatic system, not the bloodstream. That’s what you want, since the lymph nodes are a major site of immune response. The draining lymph nodes for the deltoid are going to be the deltoid/pectoral ones where those two muscles meet, and the larger axillary lymph nodes down in the armpit on that side.”
Recent research (per No Agenda shownotes) showed that unlike traditional vaccines, Moderna mRNA spread through the bloodstream producing and distributing spike protein in the entire body.
Of course even in an IM injection, some will end up in the blood stream. The better question is the overall amount that stays within the deltoid vs that that travels elsewhere, and how the compares to natural infection. How does the virus deposit itself around the body vs. how does the spike protein via vaccination deposit itself around the body. As well, with the way the vaccine works, once it hits a cell, that cell will express the spike protein to the surface and that’s it, instead of contributing to further viral spread in the same region.
Has it been tested?
edit: this one: https://files.catbox.moe/0vwcmj.pdf
Here's the data in a plot:
https://trialsitenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Ovaries...
They correctly plotted the total lipid concentration for a lot of things, including the ovaries (which stand out on the plot) but completely ignored the injection site (which might be reasonable, but gives a sense of scale), the adrenal glands (which have around the same content as the ovaries), liver (roughly double ), the spleen (a bit more than double).
I'm having a difficult time taking these omissions as anything other than an attempt to spread fear. As a non-expert in biology it seems reasonable that a lot of an injection into my body should ultimately end up in my liver and spleen. The attempt to obscure this probably-natural result (and instead focus on ovaries) is strange.
Less that an acute infection, probably.
Less than a mild asymptomatic infection? Do we know that? My understanding was that they packed quite a lot of mRNA into the shot in order to ensure a response.
we are observing "asymptomatic" infections followed by cardiovascular problems for some. is it really asymptomatic in those cases?
Nothing is ever that simple, but of cases with effects consistent with the protein being in the blood stream with consequences to the heart and brain, if that were a factor, it would be both testable and avoidable, and provide the explanation people would need to choose to get the shot. If the odds of accidentally hitting a vein and the bloodstream consequences as described lined up, it could move the issue forward.
I have zero expertise in this area, my interest in asking is what would make a more compelling case for getting more people immune, and having a straightforward explanation for the causes of the prior reports of harm would go a long way toward that goal.
Put another way: would injecting directly into an artery or vein have risks that the intramuscular jab would not - and do those risks resemble the anecdotal reports of myo, clots, and deaths?
https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/Coronavirus/Community_Resource...
https://www.sortiraparis.com/news/coronavirus/articles/24662...