Hmmmmm…
’ 5. Conclusions
Our study is the first in vitro study on the effect of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 on human liver cell line. We present evidence on fast entry of BNT162b2 into the cells and subsequent intracellular reverse transcription of BNT162b2 mRNA into DNA.’
It should be noted that the study authors themselves emphasize that it was a carcinoma cell line.
As a complete non-scientist, my question is why would a researcher choose a cancer cell instead of a healthy liver cell to investigate this possibility?
I have a lot of questions on that article. I do hope @BunsenBurner weights in…
It begs the question…does this make cancer patients at greater risk for this effect?
Yes! Also does the fact that it’s a cancer cell which already has screwed up wiring so to speak affect the results?
Likely it was something they already had on hand. Primary cell cultures are much harder to maintain than standard, easily available ATCC immortalized cultures. Plus, to start a primary culture, you need a donor…
I have not read the article under a microscope, but I do not think we can conclude anything about long term effects on anyone. The authors themselves do not make any such conclusions. Tissue cultures are tools, but they are not perfect tools.
BTW, I had an experiment of N=1. Had a physical with a blood draw after my Pfizer booster. All liver enzymes etc. within normal range. No, I do not make any deep conclusions from this “experiment.”
Because you need a cell line that is actively dividing to integrate the genomic material. Cancer cells (in this case it is a cell line from a hepatic adenoma, a benign tumor) are more active than normal, non-neoplastic hepatocytes. So if you have a cell line that can genomically integrate anything, then it will integrate anything. But we all aren’t running around with hepatic adenomas or HCCs in our bodies. Normal hepatocytes show very little turnover. And this was in vitro, not in vivo.
ETA Sars-Cov2 does this as well, not just the vaccine
This caught my eye…’ In the BNT162b2 toxicity report, no genotoxicity nor carcinogenicity studies have been provided [26]. Our study shows that BNT162b2 can be reverse transcribed to DNA in liver cell line Huh7, and this may give rise to the concern if BNT162b2-derived DNA may be integrated into the host genome and affect the integrity of genomic DNA, which may potentially mediate genotoxic side effects. At this stage, we do not know if DNA reverse transcribed from BNT162b2 is integrated into the cell genome. Further studies are needed to demonstrate the effect of BNT162b2 on genomic integrity, including whole genome sequencing of cells exposed to BNT162b2, as well as tissues from human subjects who received BNT162b2 vaccination.’
Yes, I think he says in his review that that the authors said what you mentioned should be addressed in follow-up studies
Thanks!!
The components of the lipid nanoparticles used to formulate the Pfizer vaccine have been extensively studied. Because of that (and their lipid nature), no new studies were needed. The effects of the vaccine on fertility, embryo development, etc. have been studied in female rats, and no adverse effects were found. In Moderna’s case, a genotox study was done because one of the four lipids used in the formulation was novel.
Here is a good summary of the 3 vaccines used in the EU:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214750021000792
An actual viral infection (as opposed to an RNA vaccine) would have the same potential effect (integration of viral RNA into host genome, by LINE (endogenous) reverse transcription or in certain cases also by virally coded reverse transcription). So this particular potential effect of the virus isn’t some new Frankenstein monstrosity released upon the world, since IMO natural viral infection itself holds that risk (of integration into host DNA). I’m not panicking…yet.
Agree
HPV is an example
The virus integrates itself into human epithelial cells and causes oropharyngeal and cervical cancers, among others
Yes that’s a DNA virus integration example.
So would the more traditional vaccines - AstraZeneca, J&J would not pose the reverse transcription risk? It sure would make me reconsider next steps…
I don’t believe it is a real risk. But you are correct there is no naked mRNA component to those. Personally I think those have a higher risk profile in terms of cerebral clots. I had an issue with my first Pfizer dose but after talking to multiple specialists in different areas we all agreed that I was still better off with second Pfizer and boosters of Pfizer as well, and that’s what I have done.
AstraZeneca and J&J vaccines are not exactly traditional vaccines. They use a non-replicating adenovirus to deliver instructions to human cells to make spike proteins to stimulate an immune response. I.e. unlike protein subunit vaccines (e.g. Novavax) or inactivated real SARS-CoV-2 virus vaccines (e.g. Sinopharm, Sinovac, Covaxin), they send instructions into human cells to make spike proteins, rather than inject them directly.
The US has low vaccine diversity, with only 3 approved vaccines of 2 types, with 1 vaccine and 1 type out of favor, leaving just 2 vaccines of 1 type (mRNA) in favor. No protein subunit or inactivated real SARS-Cov-2 virus vaccines are authorized in the US.
Of course, if you are worried about the theoretical risk of your cells getting instructed to make spike proteins (and other things), that risk is likely much greater with an infection by real live SARS-CoV-2 viruses.
Our county remains in the high risk category with low vax rate and very little masking. After an accident I had to wait two days for X-rays and then another three days for a MRI since my injury was not life threatening.
Despite signs saying masks were required at the imaging center, several people wore theirs around their necks and none of the staff said anything. H took me inside, then left to wait in the car. The one positive was that between the two visits, we got a shipment of N95 masks to replace the basic masks we wore during the first visit.
Members of a local Facebook group that shares info on mask wearing have said that they have not found any physical therapy offices where mask wearing is enforced. I told my doctor that once I can start the PT exercises, I’ll do them at home. He didn’t object.
Friends in a nearby city had to go to the ER last month after the husband had a stroke. They waited seven hours to see a doctor and no bed could be found for him until the next day. I worry about the consequences of his treatment being delayed. The wife said the waiting area was filled with people who were coughing and most wore their masks as chin straps. She was livid.
We go to a PT who has her practice on the bottom floor of her home. She and the other PT and vaxed and boosted and everyone properly wears their masks.
My PT does it virtually. Not sure if that is going to continue though. Cases are low here.