It’s rather uncommon that I encounter an antivaccine talking point early enough in its course that it hasn’t shown up in a post by one of the big antivaccine websites, such as the ones run by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, Sherri Tenpenny, or Del Bigtree. This time around, this particular new antivaccine talking point seems to be mainly on Twitter. Have you heard the one about the spike protein and pulmonary hypertension? No? I’ll introduce you to it and then discuss why it’s really a stretch.
First, a few Tweets, not all from antivaxxers, as some appear to be from people worried about this claim being peddled by antivaxxers:
As an aside, actually, both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use mRNA that codes for the whole spike protein.
Dr. Richard Urso, it just so happens, is an ophthalmologist at Houston Eye Associates in Bellaire, Texas, who has been touting hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19. He told Fox News host Laura Ingraham last summer that he had been working with the drug for 30 years and has never had a patient with a heart issue. He’s also one of the so-called “America’s Frontline Doctors,” a group of quacks who have been promoting hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 (which does not work) and continue to promote quackery. He’s also made the claim that the mRNA in the RNA-based COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna vaccines) can “permanently alter your DNA, a claim that requires an utter ignorance of some very basic molecular biology. So of course he’s going to peddle claims that the spike protein will cause pulmonary hypertension.
You’ll notice that all the Tweets above reference a single study about spike protein and the lung published in January. What is it with cranks taking two or three months to discover these sorts of papers? I’m reminded of the “Stanford” study that wasn’t from Stanford claiming that masks don’t work and cause harm, which was also published in January but didn’t bubble up in the COVID-19 crankosphere until the last month or two, and I’m told by readers that this study is showing up all over the place on Facebook and other social media sites, posted by antivaxxers as yet another example to claim that COVID-19 vaccines are dangerous.
So what are we dealing with. It’s a study (a brief review article/opinion piece, actually) published in Vaccines (Basel), an open access journal in the MDPI group of journals. Unsurprisingly, MDPI journals are pretty dubious, with MDPI having been listed on Beale’s list of predatory journals in 2013. It ultimately successfully appealed and was removed from the list. However, from my perspective, I have not trusted MDPI journals and would never publish in one. That doesn’t mean that this paper might not be a decent paper, but let’s just say that the chances aren’t good.
So what about the paper? It comes from two investigators, Yuichiro J. Suzuki from Georgetown University and Sergiy G. Gychka from Bogomolets National Medical University in Ukraine and is entitled SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Elicits Cell Signaling in Human Host Cells: Implications for Possible Consequences of COVID-19 Vaccines. Before I dive into the details, let me just say that rarely in my many years of reading scientific papers have I seen so few experiments cited in a review article do such heavy lifting to provide such weak evidence for a conclusion like the claim that the spike protein can cause pulmonary hypertension.
Before I go on, first, what’s pulmonary hypertension. I’ve been told that I sometimes assume too much knowledge on the part of the reader, forgetting that not everyone is a physician or a physiologist with sufficient knowledge to know what such a condition is. At its essence, pulmonary hypertension is high blood pressure in the lungs. The circulatory system is divided into two components, the pulmonary system, in which blood flows through the blood vessels in the lungs, picks up oxygen from the lungs, and then flows to the systemic circulation (the rest of the body) to deliver that oxygen to the tissues. The pulmonary vascular system is a much lower pressure system than the systemic circulation, which is why the right ventricle, the chamber of the heart that pumps blood through the lungs, is less muscular than the left ventricle, which pumps blood through the rest of the body. In any event, pulmonary hypertension can be caused by a number of things, including some types of congenital heart disease, connective tissue disease, coronary artery disease, high blood pressure, liver disease (cirrhosis), blood clots to the lungs, and chronic lung diseases like emphysema. The sequelae of pulmonary hypertension can be severe, including right-sided heart failure, hemorrhage in the lung, clotting, pulmonary artery dissection, and more. Let’s just say that pulmonary hypertension can be very bad.
As I’ve discussed a number of times, the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines use a mRNA codes for the spike protein, a very important protein in SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Named because these are the proteins that give the characteristic appearance of “spikes” or “crowns” protruding from the virus, the spike protein, also called the S-protein or the S-glycoprotein because it has sugar residues attached to it, onto a receptor called ACE2. It is this binding that lets the virus get into the cell to do its virus thing and make more virus, ultimately killing the cell. The spike protein also appears to have a major role in some of the physiologic derangements associated with COVID-19. Spike protein has the following structure, borrowed from the paper.
The authors note about the current COVID-19 vaccines:
The remarkably rapid development of vaccines and therapeutics for COVID-19 in 2020 has been due to effective collaborations between governments and the private sector. On 9 November 2020, Pfizer and BioNTech announced that their mRNA-based vaccine candidate, BNT162b2, is more than 90% effective against COVID-19 [8]. This was welcome news in that it revealed that effective vaccines may soon become available. BNT162b2 encodes the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to elicit virus-neutralizing antibodies [9,10]. More specifically, it encodes the full-length spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 with two amino acids mutated to proline in the S2 subunit to maintain the prefusion conformation, while its sister vaccine BNT162b1 (also from Pfizer/BioNTech) encodes only the RBD of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, trimerized by the addition of a T4 fibritin foldon domain [9,10,11]. Clinical trials have demonstrated that neither BNT162b1 [11] nor BNT162b12 [9,10] exhibit serious short-term adverse effects. On 10 December 2020, the results of a large clinical trial for BNT162b were published, showing that this vaccine conferred 95% protection in persons 16 years of age or older [12]. Long-term consequences of these vaccines are, however, unknown.
Another promising vaccine, mRNA-1273 by Moderna, is also an RNA vaccine that encodes the full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike protein [13]. Viral vector-based vaccines such as AZD1222 by AstraZeneca, which uses a non-replicating chimpanzee adenovirus vector [14], Ad26.COV2.S by Johnson & Johnson, a non-replicating adenovirus 26-based system [15], and Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V) by Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology [16], all express the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. NVX-CoV2373 (Novavax), a recombinant protein-based vaccine [17], is also the full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. These vaccines as well as many others under development [18,19,20] introduce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein into our body, so that the production of antibodies and immunity against SARS-CoV-2 are stimulated.
So basically, different vaccine developers use slightly different versions of the spike protein, but they are all using the spike protein.
So how, you might ask, could the spike protein cause pulmonary hypertension? As I said, it’s a stretch, but let’s look at the paper. One thing you need to know (and that I’ve discussed multiple times), is that by design these vaccines don’t just keep making spike protein indefinitely. Indeed, in the case of the mRNA vaccines, even though mRNA is unstable and has a short half-life in the cell and manufacturers have chemically modified the mRNA to last longer, the production of spike protein is transient, a matter of days to weeks, not months to years or longer. Think of it this way at a very simple level: Why would the Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech vaccines require two doses only three or four weeks apart if the vaccines kept churning out spike protein indefinitely? It’s not as though pharmaceutical companies or public health authorities would prefer vaccines that require two doses, given the number of people who might not get the second dose. “One and done” has many advantages.
Be that as it may, the authors pursue their hypothesis that the spike protein alone, without SARS-CoV-2, somehow injures cells in the lung. This is where I started to see the deception antivaxxers are pulling, and it’s very much the same as the deception pulled by that “Stanford investigator” who supposedly found that “masks don’t work.” Basically, this is not a research paper. It’s an opinion piece/brief review article that appears to summarize a small body of research.
First:
It was found that the treatment of cultured primary human pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells (SMCs) or human pulmonary artery endothelial cells with the recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit is sufficient to promote cell signaling without the rest of the viral components [21]. Furthermore, our analysis of the postmortem lung tissues of patients who died of COVID-19 has determined that these patients exhibited pulmonary vascular wall thickening, a hallmark of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) [21]. Based on these results, we proposed that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (without the rest of the viral components) triggers cell signaling events that may promote pulmonary vascular remodeling and PAH as well as possibly other cardiovascular complications [21,22].
The first study is nothing more than a cell culture study coupled with a postmortem study of lungs first published last August, in which the authors combine observations to make the leap to speculation that spike protein alone can cause the problems seen in COVID-19. In the cell culture component, the authors treated the cells that line pulmonary arteries (pulmonary artery endothelial cells) and the smooth muscle that surrounds the endothelial cells with spike protein. Here’s what it found:
The treatment of human pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells or human pulmonary artery endothelial cells with recombinant SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit (Val16 – Gln690) at 10 ng/ml (0.13 nM) caused an activation of MEK phosphorylation. The activation kinetics was transient with a peak at 10 min. The recombinant protein that contains only the ACE2 receptor-binding domain of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 subunit (Arg319 – Phe541), on the other hand, did not cause this activation. Consistent with the activation of cell growth signaling in lung vascular cells by the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, pulmonary vascular walls were found to be thickened in COVID-19 patients.
This is the sort of paper that could only have been published early in the pandemic, with only four figures of its cell culture results showing a not particularly stunning finding, that the spike protein can induce a certain kind of cell signaling, MEK. I’m not going to go into detail, but it is important to know that some signaling proteins in the cell are activated to do their thing by having a phosphate group attached to them (being phosphorylated), and that activation of the signaling pathway that MEK is in causes a number of downstream functions, including cell growth and survival. In cancer, when these pathways are overactive, they can contribute to metastasis.
If you’re interested, here’s a nice little video explaining the pathway:
Basically, the finding reported is that the whole spike protein causes this signaling, and a fragment of the spike protein containing only the domain that binds to ACE2 does not. It’s an interesting result, but to leap from this observation to speculating that spike protein from vaccines might cause pulmonary hypertension years down the road is just that, quite a leap.
As for the second part of the paper, it is not at all surprising that people who die of COVID-19 would develop pulmonary hypertension and thickening of the walls of the pulmonary blood vessels. Severe COVID-19 results in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a severe inflammatory condition that results in the lungs filling with fluid and inflammatory debris, leading to stiff lungs and impaired oxygenation and, yes, pulmonary hypertension. It’s also known now that the disease can involve the vasculature, particularly the pulmonary vasculature, with its inflammation. So it should be no surprise that those who die of the disease show signs of pulmonary hypertension on autopsy. To be fair, the authors did compare the lungs of patients who died of H1N1 influenza to those who died of COVID-19 and found that the pulmonary arteries were markedly thicker in the patients who died of COVID-19. It’s an interesting observation, but if there’s one thing that was observed early in the pandemic it’s that the ARDS caused by COVID-19 was like nothing critical care doctors had ever seen before.
That’s basically it. No, seriously. That’s it. There is no more, at least not from these authors. Sure, they do cite two other papers, one from 2005 showing that injecting mice with recombinant spike protein from SARS reduced the ACE2 expression and worsened acid-induced lung injury. The other paper is from December and reports that the full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike protein activated NF-κB (a signaling pathway I’m well familiar with) and AP-1 transcription factors as well as p38 and ERK mitogen-activated protein kinases. Again, you don’t need to know the details other than that these are survival and growth pathways, but also that this observation was not made in cells from the pulmonary vasculature, but rather from a cell line (A549) from the lungs and another (Huh7.5) from the liver. The relevance of this study to whether spike protein can cause pulmonary hypertension is questionable at best.
OK, now that’s it: One study by the authors, two observations, one involving spike protein and one involving actual viral infection, plus an old study of SARS spike protein. I say this because it needs to be emphasized that what the authors reported was in patients who died of infection with the whole virus, SARS-CoV-2. You have to separate the effects of full infection and the effect of spike protein alone, and the authors did not do this, other than as a prelude to speculation, starting thusly:
However, recent observations suggest that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein can by itself trigger cell signaling that can lead to various biological processes. It is reasonable to assume that such events, in some cases, result in the pathogenesis of certain diseases.
Is it, though? Is it really? Again, the vaccines only produce spike protein transiently. They don’t do it in the context of a raging viral infection in which the virus is invading cells, using them to replicate, and then killing them all over the respiratory system (and in other organ systems). This doesn’t stop the authors:
Thus, it is important to consider the possibility that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein produced by the new COVID-19 vaccines triggers cell signaling events that promote PAH, other cardiovascular complications, and/or complications in other tissues/organs in certain individuals (Figure 3). We will need to monitor carefully the long-term consequences of COVID-19 vaccines that introduce the spike protein into the human body. Furthermore, while human data on the possible long-term consequences of spike protein-based COVID-19 vaccines will not be available soon, it is imperative that appropriate experimental animal models are employed as soon as possible to ensure that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein does not elicit any signs of the pathogenesis of PAH or any other chronic pathological conditions.
Notice how difficult to falsify this hypothesis is. The authors seem to be suggesting that the transient expression of the spike protein by existing COVID-19 vaccines over the course of, at most, six or seven weeks or so between two does of vaccine, will result in pulmonary hypertension years in the future. Again, this is not a case of spike protein circulating in the bloodstream in the context of a massive infection killing infected cells and causing a massive inflammatory reaction. It’s just spike protein being made and circulating at not very high levels compared to the local levels we would expect to see in the pulmonary vasculature.
What would we look for, though? Here are some of the symptoms of pulmonary hypertension:
- Shortness of breath (dyspnea), initially while exercising and eventually while at rest
- Fatigue
- Dizziness or fainting spells (syncope)
- Chest pressure or pain
- Swelling (edema) in your ankles, legs and eventually in your abdomen (ascites)
- Bluish color to your lips and skin (cyanosis)
- Racing pulse or heart palpitations
So far, we have not seen a wave of these symptoms after COVID-19 vaccination. Given the transient time during which the spike protein is produced and the unlikelihood that, without a concomitant raging viral infection going on, spike protein can do much, if any, damage, I’d be willing to bet that years from now we won’t, either.
Basically, at its heart, the hypothesis that the spike protein from COVID-19 vaccines is toxic and will lead to pulmonary hypertension is implausible and has no good evidence to support it—and barely any evidence even to suggest it. It’s no wonder that antivaxxers find it very appealing, though. It very much appeals to their love of viewing vaccines as irredeemably toxic and dangerous. I’m just surprised it took them three months to pick up on this article.
56 replies on “No, there’s no good evidence that spike protein from COVID-19 vaccines causes pulmonary hypertension”
In other words, a plausible hypothesis was raised and tested, only to be proven wrong, but antivaxxers being antivaxxers claimed it WAS happening.
They are really scraping the bottom of the barrel.
Except that the hypothesis isn’t even all that plausible…
To be brutally honest, there are no experiments in the paper in Vaccines. They refer to a just published paper of their own in Vascular Pharmacology that has a small number of not that impressive experiments. In the Vaccines paper, they indulge in a combination of believing their own press and taking leaps of faith.
I kind of meant that. The review refers to one paper of theirs and two tangentially related papers from other investigators, and those are the few experiment.
As with most anti-vax, woo and RI trollery, with tangentially being the key word.
I think you were a bit too kind about the review.
If I was to give the authors the benefit of doubt, perhaps they really believe this is a problem. However, this struck me more as an effort in scientific clickbait.
How about the paper from tbe Salk institute just published a couple days ago? It claims to be the first to have experimental evidence of how the spike protein damages cells…has been invoked by pseudo-skeptics to defend Joe Rogan. Yeah, I’ve been down in the weeds.
Be careful what you ask for. I’ve already read the paper. A post is in the works.
Also, even if this were a theoretical concern in designing vaccines, the lack of a serious safety signal in terms of vascular disorders beyond the one in a million to one in 100K incidence of clotting problems (for which it’s not even clear that the vaccine is causative) after >240 million doses administered in the US alone tells me that spike protein at the levels produced by the vaccines is not dangerous.
“A stupid person’s idea of a smart person.” (From Twatter.)
Thank you! (Seriously, thanks for all your efforts. Against the power of The Stupid the very gods fight in vain…yet Orac keeps plugging away!)
“So far, we have not seen a wave of these symptoms after COVID-19 vaccination”
the majority of the side effects you listed have been reported quite often…
Shortness of breath (dyspnea), initially while exercising and eventually while at rest. Check
Fatigue. Check
Dizziness or fainting spells (syncope). Check
Chest pressure or pain. Check
I appreciate that this “fact checker” gives deeper information than most sources but why does he have to add so much snark and imply these researches are up to something nefarious? Challenge them all you want, but do so in good faith.
I refrained from applying for a freelance editorial position with them. Gotta be something better.
I keep ignoring their invitations (sent from their branch office in China) to join their editorial boards. Although I just looked at the last invite and the journal already has about 100 people on their editorial board. Make that 210, I counted. They have no need of me.
A big question for me is whether pulmonary hypertension in any mammalian species is due to MEK cell signaling, whether it’s de novo, aberrant or excessive. Has it been shown that this form of cell signaling is a critical step in development of PAH?
Otherwise, what Suzuki and Gychka seem to be implying is that cell signaling in general is Bad.
As Orac pointed out, MEK cell signaling is a part of numerous physiologic processes, beneficial and otherwise. Linking an observation in smooth muscle cell culture to PAH in vivo based on the minimal data they supply is questionable to say the least.
An excellent question! As for NF-κB signaling (one of the cited papers), I know NF-κB signaling. I once had an R01 that studied NF-κB signaling. It’s easily activated. We used to joke that if you just swirled the media around on top of the cells you could activate NF-κB signaling.
One of the reasons I was admitted to the hospital when I had COVID-19 was a concern for pulmonary hypertension based on my chest CT (which also showed extensive pneumonia). Thankfully an echocardiogram done soon after admission did not support and effectively ruled out the concern for pulmonary hypertension and I didn’t progress to respiratory failure. As you very clearly point out pulmonary hypertension is something that can happen with COVID-19 infection. When I got the vaccine in late December and January the last thing on my mind was any concern that an mRNA vaccine would trigger any of the complications caused by the actual viral infection. Mostly I was just incredibly grateful for the vaccine and excited to have greatly lowered my odds of ever having this infection again.
It’s actually quite stunning that this paper in a called (of all things) Vaccines has languished for 3 months and not been scooped up by Mr. Pathogenic Priming himself, who has also found MDPI journals to be useful for publishing garbage related to vaccines. I’m not gonna state his name, but it shows how little actual journal reading he does in his claimed area of expertise. .
He’s too busy complaining that Fauci “has played…fast and loose with reality with gut-based guesswork”, which would have won this week’s Irony Meter-Busting Award, but was beaten out by the following line in a Natural News article:
“we have real standards and ethics”
Mr. Bigtree today said they aren’t talking about the mRNA vaccines shedding because they really want to get it right and fact check, in similar vein.
“we have real standards and ethics”
“Never leave a sucker in possession of money” is an ethos.
Dr. Hickie, I hope you made a full and complete recovery.
Anti-vaxxers spread misinformation about vaccines whilst the virus mutates
A development that illustrates where the movement might be going ( via twitter Dr DG and Richard Carpiano; Sacramento television news ) A group of anti-vaxxers, FKA the Freedom Angels, are now the MAMALITIA aligned against vaccines and public health measures, armed and dangerous, dressed to kill as they pose like fashion models with their guns. There has always been an association between anti-vaxxers and the Health Freedom movement and advocates like Adams and Jones are very vocal in their support of rightist causes. Some of these women appeared at RFKjr’s NYC speech, other events on the east coast and at the January 6th *storming of the Capitol.
Seriously. Women doing this? I despair. Fucking self-promoting poorly educated backwardness unconcerned with reality at others’ expense. ..
In other news…
India.
Dr mengele, that you?
WaPo reports today: “Some GOP gubernatorial hopefuls run on vaccine skepticism”.
“Many Republican officeholders have made resisting testing, masking, lockdowns and now vaccines into something of a successful personal brand.” The article notes there’s a spectrum of this poltiics. On the less extreme end is Minnesota gubernatorial hopeful Scott Jensen, a physician who has said he would not recommend the COVID vaccine to younger patients or pregnant women, and won’t get the shot because he has had the virus. On the more extreme end is Amanda Chase “a prominent Republican candidate for governor of Virginia” who expresses “profound distaste for the coronavirus vaccines and rejection of public health entreaties to wear masks.”
She’s leading the Republican field in the polls.
I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that a sketchy journal article that can be used to attack the COVID vaccines was a collaboration between authors in Washington DC and Ukraine. ;- \
You aint fooling me, Orac
Before I dive into the details, let me just say that rarely in my many years of reading scientific papers have I seen so few experiments cited in a review article do such heavy lifting to provide such weak evidence for a conclusion like the claim that the spike protein can cause pulmonary hypertension.
Before I go on, first, what’s pulmonary hypertension. I’ve been told that I sometimes assume too much knowledge on the part of the reader, forgetting that not everyone is a physician or a physiologist with sufficient knowledge to know what such a condition is.
Sure, youre so smart ORAC, that nobody understands you. Always showing off how smart you are with your mansplaining, attacking others for fun, somebody might think youre compensating for something?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansplaining
If youre so smart, surely you can explain why the vaccines will not cause vascular diseases in the future
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.21.423721v1
And explain why women have more side effects and why that was not prevented by the trials
https://www.aarp.org/health/conditions-treatments/info-2021/women-covid-vaccine-side-effects.html
It sure seems like something systemic not just related to race, but also gender
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_masculinity
What are you doing to promote social justice in STEM, ORAC?
What are you doing to promote more easy-to-read posts, qball? Think blockquote next time.
YHBT.
Wow, the one, three and five year data doesn’t support the claims!
Oh wait, there is no 5, , OR 1 year data!
Continuing speculating. You won’t see the auto-immune POSSIBLE issues for at least 1-3 years. So lets inject the kids and see what happens! Biggest Phase 3 trial in history!
And what makes you think problems caused by vaccination will take that long to manifest?
Oh, right. YOU have none.
You fail to mention specific autoimmune disease. There is data for diabetes 1:
Morgan E, Halliday SR, Campbell GR, Cardwell CR, Patterson CC. Vaccinations and childhood type 1 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Diabetologia. 2016 Feb;59(2):237-43. doi: 10.1007/s00125-015-3800-8. Epub 2015 Nov 12. PMID: 26564178; PMCID: PMC4705121.
No problems during 10 year interval.
They do say that, if all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
If you publish a scientific paper, you should accept criticism. Orac certainly criticized Robert Kennedy Jr, an epitome of white male privilege.
From your link:
“Historically, women have a stronger immune response to vaccines than men, and experts say that’s the most likely reason for their more intense side effects.
“It means that women’s immune systems are responding to the vaccine, and that is a positive thing, so you know it’s working,” says Rosemary Morgan, a scientist who studies gender differences at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health”
Your paper was not about pulmonary hypertension at all. Quite heavy speculation, I would say.
I am devastated to find out that I got an uncool Covid-19 vaccine (Moderna).
“Weirder still, one vaccine in particular—from Pfizer—has somehow become the cool vaccine, as well as the vaccine for the rich and stylish. Slate’s Heather Schwedel recently discussed the “Pfizer superiority complex” at length. As one source told her: “One of my cousins got Moderna, and I was like, ‘That’s OK. We need a strong middle class.’” On Twitter, the vaccinated are changing their usernames to reflect their new personal identities: There are Pfizer Princesses and Pfizer Floozies and Pfizer Pfairies and at least one Portrait of a Lady on Pfizer. “Pfizer is what was available when I signed up,” Jagger Blaec, a 33-year-old podcast host told me, “but it’s no coincidence every baddie I know has Pfizer and not Moderna.”
http://theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2021/04/pfizer-gang-and-sadness-vaccine-culture/618755/
At least it’s not as bad as getting the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, with its overtones of floor wax and other pedestrian household products. Horribly bourgeois.
“Horribly bourgeois”?
J&J floor wax and other pedestrian household products would struggle to escape the proles and rise to the petite bourgeois.. Far from being truly “rich and stylish” Pfizer and the pretensions of a “Pfizer superiority complex” are no more than haute bourgeois at best.
I did pop by and get a small honey baked ham on the bone after mine. I felt pretty bourgeois.
Pfizer is cherished by the aspirational class ( fka Yuppies, Nouveau Riche ) as I told my SO who after all, got his at a PUBLIC mega-site at a ((shudder)) sports stadium where thousands lined up in the cold and damp for hours! MODERNA is nearly as pretentious as it is frequently lauded by entrenched Tech Bros who always applaud the newest innovations thus enriching Gates, Musk, Bezos, Apple, Netflix et al
I got J&J with THE PEOPLE.who strive for excellence despite oppression from the ruling classes and work in grocery stores** enabling Life Itself!!!! Right on! We don’t need any brand name posturing!! /s
**Actually I got mine because they had leftovers from the clerks when I was food shopping at an over priced Whole Foods clone
I’m on Team Moderna with you, Dangerous Bacon!
T-shirt idea:
https://www.redbubble.com/i/t-shirt/Funky-Cold-Moderna-by-SMShow/75488160.NL9AC
Dangerous Bacon writes,
‘At least it’s not as bad as getting the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, with its overtones of floor wax and other pedestrian household products.”
MJD says,
SC Johnson manufactures floor wax and other household products.
@ Orac’s minions,
In the State of Hockey (i.e., Minnesota), it’s not uncommon to store hockey pucks in Zip Lock bags from SC Johnson to maintain their amorphous (non crystalline) properties.
@ Orac,
A hockey player that is respectfully insolent in front of the net usually takes a beating, although, it’s very entertaining.
I simply showed up for my appointment and said, “Whaddaya got today?” They said Pfizer, and I said, “Cool.”
Put me in with the lumpenproletariat
I may have broken something with these new-found D8 carts. I mean, If I cut my $16 a day drinking in half would that be like saving 8 dollars a day or 8 dollars every other day?
Here’s a lovely gift idea for your favorite antivaxer/germ theory denialist/Fox News devotee:
https://shop.fctry.com/collections/action-figures/products/dr-fauci-action-figure
Update, s’il vous plait?
It got better for awhile but…
[…] picked studies with exaggerated findings, such as a study purporting to show that spike protein might cause pulmonary hypertension in the future or fantastical claim based on no science that those vaccinated with these vaccines […]
Salk researchers have just published a paper showing the COVID-19 is a a vascular disease and that the spike proteins do play a role in the illness. https://www.salk.edu/news-release/the-novel-coronavirus-spike-protein-plays-additional-key-role-in-illness/
You really should read the most recent post on this blog. That study has no bearing on COVID-19 vaccine safety. https://www.respectfulinsolence.com/2021/05/04/about-that-salk-institute-paper-on-the-deadly-covid-19-spike-protein/
This is exactly what happened in animal trials…this is why mRNA vaccines never made it passed animal trials because all the animals died
Yawn.
[…] vaccinated “shed”…something. That something, presumably, is the spike protein. I discussed this particular trope in detail, in particular why it is nonsense, a couple of weeks ago, but I’ll have to revisit it again […]
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/americas-frontline-doctors-covid-vaccinated-can-shed-spike-protein-harming-unvaccinated
That article is hilariously bad in its arguments.
Tell us how vaccinated people can “shot spike protein to unvaccinated” ? Among other things, there is antibodies against the spike protein, which is the reason for vaccination. Immune reaction goes on until the spike protein is eliminated, and protective reaction is mounted from immune memory.
[…] (or pseudovirus particle), but rather exists as naked single protein molecules, and, as has been described before, it’s unclear that in this form spike protein, compared to the “crown of spikes” […]
[…] (or pseudovirus particle), but rather exists as naked single protein molecules, and, as has been described before, it’s unclear that in this form spike protein, compared to the “crown of spikes” that gives […]
[…] in an open-access journal, more than a little dubious journal, with no data, claims of risks that have not actually been seen in the data. It also tries to allege, again, the vaccines are unsafe. Ironically, even though the section is […]
All interesting stuff but nobody will debate this guy, I wonder why?
https://trialsitenews.com/should-you-get-vaccinated/
Any relationship to “demPanic” there, Rex?