Perhaps you should actually do dome research into non-integrating gene therapies and associated mRNA technologies and delivery systems.
Sounds like you (and some others) are suffering from the same syndrome that Fauci was when he tried to deny "gain of function" research was being funded in China with US $$.
ps. You'd better tell these scientists that they don't know what they're talking about! :
This review covers the advantages and possible limitations of mRNA-based gene therapy, the in vitro synthesis of mRNA, the feasible methods for synthetic mRNA delivery and clinical therapeutic prospects of mRNA-based gene therapy for glioblastoma.--
Another method for synthetic mRNA delivery is the complexation of mRNA nucleic acids with cationic lipids or polymers forming lipoplexes and polyplexes through spontaneous charge interactions (
57). The carrier materials bind nucleic acids and protect their cargo from degradation by forming tight particles containing PH-sensitive molecules that escape from the endosome and enter the cytoplasm after endocytosis[SOUND FAMILIAR?] (22,58). Furthermore, these carriers can be functionalized for specific cell or tissue delivery of synthetic mRNA by modifying carrier's formulation (59). Now, lipoplex- and polyplex-mediated mRNA transfection is being commonly used in various preclinical studies. However, because cationic liposomes have relatively high cytotoxicity and may interfere with cell metabolism in different cells, cationic lipid-related carriers have been mainly limited toin vitrostudies. In recent years, more complex mRNA vectors have been created, such as PH-reactive polymer nanoparticles, which can also be systematically deliveredin vivo(60).
--
As described earlier, nano-scaled target mRNA-bearing lipoplexes, polyplexes, liposomes and exosomes are all able to cross BBB and BTB in the brain (87,88), overcoming the natural barriers. [MAJOR RED FLAG: able to cross the blood-brain barrier]. The rapid and transient expression nature of synthetic mRNA, which has been considered the biggest weakness of using mRNA for gene therapy, is just suitable for dealing with GBM's complexity and variability through its adaptive convertibility. It is also because of its short-term high-level expression, mRNA-based gene therapy has been intensively and almost exclusively focused on cancer treatment.
--
Furthermore, many reporters have revealed that mRNA-based gene therapy can be achieved at different levels, such as cell level, exosome level, and molecular-level. Till now, several mRNA-based modalities have been designed and developed for treating glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) in preclinical studies and some of them are undergoing different phases of clinical trials.
--
Gene therapy has emerged as a new strategy for cancer therapy. As an alternative nucleic acid material, messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) is being increasingly utilized in cancer gene therapy. However, unfulfilled requirements and a lack of ideal mRNA delivery vectors persist.
..
In recent years, there have been many efforts to develop ideal vectors for mRNA delivery with satisfactory delivery efficiency. Systems such as multi-component nanoparticles, modified polyethyleneimine (PEI)-derivatives, and peptide–protein conjugates have been created and applied in mRNA-based gene therapy studies.27–29Despite these efforts, the toxicity and complexity of developed vectors increased along with the enhancement of mRNA delivery capacity, which created an obstacle impeding further application. These complex structures and components increased the difficulty of manufacturing and quality control. A mass of introduced cationic groups and organic solvents used in the process of chemical modification elevated the toxicity of the vectors themselves. This further limited their in vivo application regardless of local or systemic administration. Therefore, there is a great demand for an advanced and efficient mRNA delivery vector with a simple composition....
Are the above claims that mRNA actually alters your genes? NO. Yet they STILL refer to this technology as GENE THERAPY.
Stoopid scientists, what would they know compared to some pimply-faced 20-buck-an-hour fact checker kid employed by reuters to spin the narrative...? LOL
Oh yeah, and don't forget this fact-checker quote from Griffith Uni's Dr Adam Taylor:
"mRNA vaccines will not enter a cell’s nucleus that houses your DNA genome. There is zero risk of these vaccines integrating into our own genome or altering our genetic makeup.”
...ZERO risk hey Adam? Is that backed by scientific evidence or just your hopeful opinion..?
Ponder that when you read this:
"We also show that BNT162b2 mRNA is reverse transcribed intracellularly into DNA in as fast as 6 h upon BNT162b2 exposure."
https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73/htm#B39-cimb-44-00073Sure, it's in-vitro, but it's using a human liver cell line and this should be raising immediate and HUGE red flags, initiating URGENT further research to understand the potential ramifications. This is EXACTLY the type of work that should have been conducted and extended before all of this "safe and effective" BS was parroted every 5 minutes, and before this sh!t was pushed onto everyone for a disease that is effectively harmless for the majority of people. This is EXACTLY the type of reasoning behind the concerns some people have for not trusting the rushed development and testing that was claimed to have "not taken any shortcuts" etc etc BS BS.
Pfizzer et al saw a multi-billion dollar pay day and did whatever it took to ensure it did not discover/reveal any damning findings, and to ensure the FDA and co would rubber stamp their potions and provide them full indemnity. If you think they genuinely and honestly investigated and assessed these products, I have a bridge to sell you across the harbour in Sydney. The end.
