The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
This is the wikipedia entry in French:Mode d'action La production d'antigène dans le cytosol de la cellule conduit, après clivage par des protéases, à présenter les épitopes de l'antigène au complexe majeur d'histocompatibilité de classe I, qui active l'immunité cellulaire, et au complexe majeur d'histocompatibilité de classe II, qui active l'immunité humorale31. Every single word of this sentence requires hours to understand what it is about.
Finally, an additional point will merit investigation in the context of DC’s role in SARS-CoV-2 infection. In particular, the importance of the reported ability of estrogen to stimulate DC activity  needs explaining and clarifying as to why women appear less likely to die from Covid-19 than men.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
Wiki on mRNA[^] might help as an intro. As you’ve no doubt already read, the “central dogma” is DNA -> RNA -> protein. It’s more complicated than that, but as there is no virus itself involved, it “shouldn’t” be an issue here.
I couldn’t find any references suggesting what cells the current vaccines target, but as they’re just liposomes in the blood stream, I suspect white blood cells. And yeah, I imagine they’ll be targeted after expressing the spike protein.
In mammalian cells, mRNA lifetimes range from several minutes to days. The greater the stability of an mRNA the more protein may be produced from that mRNA.
Having said that, the mRNA used in the vaccines has one base replaced (with pseudouridine, I think),so that may affect the lifespan.
tl;dr (and hilariously formatted in the original):
There is no feasible means by which an mRNA vaccine could end up in the nucleus of a cell, nor prime a reverse transcription reaction, nor give you a mitochondrial disease.
There is no reasonable possibility based on the totality of our knowledge of cell biology, reverse transcriptases, human genetics, and the immune system that mRNA vaccines can affect your DNA.
Cells that have been taken on someone or cultivated.
Marc Clifton wrote:
2. Does your body see these cells as "hostile" now and kills them off?
Yes. And it is "trained" to respond quickly to similar threats.
Marc Clifton wrote:
what is the basic biology of how long mRNA continues producing proteins?
With time, the response is not forgotten but takes longer - there is no fixed values for this, and parameters that influence it can be multiple. The other problem is that the response does not necessarily fits all virus variants, which means a vaccine for variant A of the virus cannot necessary affect the same way a variant B.
Vaccine or no vaccine, mRNA is essential hardware in the living organism (viruses are not alive and never were).
That statement precludes any misguided redirection through the use of ill-termed references to non-earth biological entities that might, if they actually existed, be caught up in the minds of 'ner-do-well pundits who call themselves experts, if not scientists, in fields such as epidemiology and genetics when they go on TV to say things that come off the tops of their heads without thinking about anything but the camera they sit before, about existential things like LIFE. And then apologize later for forgetting to begin their 15 minutes of fame by prefacing anything following (stuff in the future) with "viruses are not alive".
A traditional vaccine introduces a neutralised version of the virus (or more typically the antigens - the bits of the virus that can trigger an immune response) into your system and then your body, through trial and error, creates antibodies to attack the cardboard cutouts of the enemy that have been introduced.
The RNA vaccine, by comparison, delivers the instructions on how to build the antigens instead of the antigens themselves. It's not the instructions for the full virus, just fragments (eg the spike protein) that will trigger the necessary antibodies to be created to tackle the antigens. What the cells create are just pieces of junk, really. The assumption is these bits are totally harmless inside the body.
It's like you throw a bunch of blue prints into the workshop that creates proteins and hope that someone in the workshop picks up the instructions and starts building. We can do better, however, by throwing the instructions into the planning room of the cell's factory, instead of the factory floor (so to speak) to give it a better chance that someone will actually start building these pieces.
Basically there's a serious lack of oversight, resource allocation, accountability and focus going on in our cells. The minute you give them an interesting distraction they grab it and run with it.
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!