What is the difference between a vaccine using RNA vs DNA?

Discussion in 'Biology & Genetics' started by Dennis Tate, May 9, 2021.

  1. Dennis Tate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,154
    This article sounds like good advice.....

    This is a good place to put this article so that I can finish reading it later on.....

    My immediate reaction is that drinking extra water may assist the body to get rid of some additives like :


    Does drinking water reduce side effects after a COVID-19 shot?
    Good hydration might help ward off COVID-19 infection. But the science is murky on exactly how and why drinking before an injection might alter your immune reaction.


     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Dennis Tate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,154
    I just noticed a headline that raises a number of questions.

    Is this virus mutating too quickly for the vaccines to really stop it?

    This brings me back to the option of boosting our immune systems in other ways than a vaccine.


    https://time.com/6047442/covid-19-spreads-despite-vaccines-seychelles/
    COVID-19 Is Surging in the World’s Most Vaccinated Nation



     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Dennis Tate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,154
    The detail would seem to be rather important that although cases of COVID 19 in the Maldives and Seychelles are rather high..... even after so many people were vaccinated....... nobody has died!


    https://www.staradvertiser.com/2021...inated-nation-seychelles-sees-covid-19-surge/
    World’s most-vaccinated nation Seychelles sees COVID-19 surge

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Hercules Rockefeller Beatings will continue until morale improves. Moderator

    Messages:
    2,816
    Addressing the original post:

    That sentence makes absolutely no sense. The vaccines do not alter your RNA. They do not alter your DNA, either. Messenger RNA (mRNA) is a transient copy of a DNA gene. mRNA is inherently unstable and is rapidly degraded by cells. The mRNA in the vaccines contains instructions for the production of the SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein. Your cells use the vaccine mRNA to produce the S protein; the appearance of a viral protein in your body stimulates your immune response. Your cells then naturally degrade the vaccine mRNA. No permanent alterations are left behind.

    You would do well to acquaint yourself with what is called the central dogma of biology. There's no end of info on the interwebs.


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  8. KUMAR5 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Which cells do all this? I.e. production of spike protein and degrsdation of mRNA?
    Does it not need interlization of mRNA into cells to do all this? If yes, how such interlization can happen?
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  9. KUMAR5 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  10. Hercules Rockefeller Beatings will continue until morale improves. Moderator

    Messages:
    2,816
    They are good questions! I haven’t had the time to find precise answers.

    The mRNA vaccines use a nanoparticle (lipid) encapsulation. This is to stimulate endocytosis of the mRNA, I presume. The process of endocytosis will bring the mRNA into endosomes inside the cell, then into the cytosol. Whether all cell types that encounter the mRNA-containing nanolipid particles take in the particles via endocytosis, I don’t know. This would be mostly muscle cells for an upper arm intramuscular injection.

    It appears from a quick glance of the literature that the primary cellular targets of the vaccine are dendritic cells and macrophages. These are the primary ‘antigen presenting cells’ of the immune system. They are the cells that travel around the body, collect protein fragments from invading pathogens and tell the immune system “Hey, this is what we need to kill if we ever see it again”.

    I don’t know whether the vaccine relies on dendritic cells and macrophages that happen to be in the upper arm tissue at that time, or whether the immunization process stimulates/attracts dendritic cell and macrophage migration to the injection site. It’s probably a bit of both. (I was never very good at immunology.)

    https://www.nature.com/articles/nrd.2017.243
    https://www.phgfoundation.org/briefing/rna-vaccines
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3597572/
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  11. KUMAR5 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Thanks. It has given me awnsers to my questions. As claimed, let us hope it do not disturb our DNA in any manner. However btw, will the following tyoe of vaccine not still be better than other types:-
    "
    Subunit vaccine

    Description
    A subunit vaccine is a vaccine that presents one or more antigens to the immune system without introducing pathogen particles, whole or otherwise. The word "subunit" simply means the antigen is a fragment of the pathogen, and the antigens involved can be any molecule, such as proteins, peptides or polysaccharides.Wikipedia "
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  12. Dennis Tate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,154
    I suppose that the altering of RNA would be different from stimulating RNA to accomplish an objective... is that what you mean by this?
    Thank you for that interesting and potentially highly relevant detail!
     
  13. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,652
    THERE IS NO ALTERING OF RNA. THERE IS INSERTION OF NEW mRNA.
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  14. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,652
    The cells near the injection site, usually muscle cells.
    Yes, it does. The mRNA vaccine is contained in lipid nanoparticles. These bilayer "capsules" easily bind to sites on cells called endosomes, and "get inside" that way. The process is called receptor-mediated endocytosis.
     
    Dennis Tate likes this.
  15. KUMAR5 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Is it just limited to muscle cells near the injection site or also travel to other parts of body?

    If mRNA do not go inside the same cells as Covid virus go into, how can we claim spike protien produced by them will be same to covid virus protein? How then we can claim immune response, immunological memory and antibody production will also be same and specific to Covid vitus as happen on natural infection?
     
  16. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,652
    IM injections remain primarily in the muscle (hence the name.)
    Because the vaccine is designed to create the same COVID spike protein.
    Because the vaccine is designed to create the same COVID spike protein. Both are presented via cellular MHC's. The immune system cannot tell an infection from an mRNA vaccine for that protein.
     
  17. KUMAR5 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    We take many other injections whose content do soresd in whole body eg Insulin injections. Then how vaccine material remain limited to injection site,?

    Okay but what is need for going into so long and invasive process? Can't spike protein be produced in lab aand then injected directky?
    One type of vaccine is named as Sub unit vaccine, where they may use such part directly.
     
  18. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,652
    Insulin is usually injected subcutaneously rather than IM. Sub Q injections spread under the skin and diffuse into the blood supply of the skin.
    Because of diffusion. The highest concentration of a material is at the injection site. It is rapidly absorbed by tissue due to the mechanism listed above.

    Since intracellular spaces are drained by the lymphatic system, some ends up in lymph and spreads around that way. It is a very small amount.
    That would not provoke as robust an immune response, since the free floating spike proteins would not be presented by the MHC's and recognized by T and B cells.

    However, similar vaccines have been used in the past. The most common method is to take a live virus, kill (denature) it and inject the "debris." The immune system (usually) recognizes it as a foreign invader and attacks it.
    The subunit they are referring to is likely the spike protein.
     
  19. KUMAR5 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    I think blood supply is also there in IM. How then, vaccine is not diffused into IM blood supply? Is it a bigger molecule which can not oass into blood?
    However, on natural infection spread area should be much more than injection site area. If it remain limited to injected site area, how can we claim immune response and immune protection from vaccine will be much more than natural infection?

    Okay thanks.
     
  20. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,652
    Of course it is.
    Because 1) capillaries are not that big and 2) in general the vaccine isn't introduced into a capillary. So again, diffusion means it is most present to the muscle cells in the area. Some does leak into lymph and wind up in the blood.
    No one claims that. The immune reaction to the vaccination is not "much more" than the reaction to a natural infection. It merely generates immunologic memory so the reaction to a (later) natural infection is more rapid.
     
  21. KUMAR5 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Look at this quote from Wikipedia
    "

    UsesEdit
    Intramuscular injection is commonly used for medication administration. Medication administered in the muscle is generally quickly absorbed in the bloodstream, and avoids the first pass metabolism which occurs with oral administration.[2] The medication may not be considered 100% bioavailable as it must still be absorbed from the muscle, which occurs over time.Intramuscular injection may be preferred because muscles have larger and more numerous blood vessels than subcutaneous tissue, leading to faster absorption than subcutaneous or intradermal injections.
    "
    Sorry it suggest something different.


    There were some indications that vaccination orovide more and prolonged protection than natural infection. Is it not true?
     
  22. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,652
    We don't have enough data yet to know for sure, but it looks like the vaccine does indeed provide better protection than the infection itself. One reason may be that immunologic memory may be developed for an antigen that is not present in all the different strains - so the natural immunity may "miss" a more common marker like the spike protein.
     
  23. KUMAR5 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,221
    Yes look like so as also indicated here:-

    "“Ab levels induced by the vaccine are much higher than levels induced by natural exposure and infection,” Felgner said. “The vaccine also induces cross reactive Abs against other novel CoV strains that are not induced by natural exposure and infection.
    https://www.contagionlive.com/view/...accines-is-more-robust-than-natural-infection "
     
    exchemist likes this.

Share This Page