2Semana
There seems to be a lot of ignorance in the comments section: 1. what payments should Biotech owe the state? Source? As far as I know, there are none apart from the taxes the company pays 2. there are already several MRNA drugs e.g. RSV vaccination Moderna 3. there is no MRNA or cancer patent for the one cancer drug (that's not possible either, I couldn't patent gravity back then either) There are many individual patents for lipids etc. attached is an article for those interested. Here, too, Biotech has a lot of intellectual property https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-021-00912-9 4)MRNA and the claim that it is associated with immune deficiencies :D So normal MRNA clearly yes, because outside the cell it poses a danger to the body - packaged in lipids clearly no. That's why there were even Nobel prizes for these lipid packages which enable entry into the cell. 5) And you really can't say that MRNA is a hype given the current evaluations @MrMister
••
2Semana
@Thommy98 yes, I also believe that he had a problem with the COVID procedures and therefore has mistrust. mRNA has an increased probability of rejection (compared to vectors) and the autoimmune diseases are tested individually. I haven't read anywhere about the payments, at least that you still have to pay them back. I've already mentioned the rest.
•
11
•2Semana
@topicswithhead https://youtu.be/h64uIXhBmfc?si=t1V9Ff24jiGRYVgl&t=3377 here the CureVac founder explains the topic quite well. normal Mona is actually even more active but is recognized as a danger outside the cell. Hence the lipid coating. But increased autoimmune reactions are nonsense
••
2Semana
@Thommy98 I had the subjects during the Corona period and am simply referring to the lecturer and the reading. He may well be talking nonsense, but I trust him (also DR. Pharmzeut) more than the founder of curevac.
•
11
•
2Semana
@Thommy98 1. ignorance: The information comes from BusinessInsider from 2020. also the information with the share launch of BioNTech in Oct 2019. I think the share launch without products and without market exposure is bullshit. 5 months later it was clear to me where the journey was going. Everyone can decide for themselves what they think. The state made payments to BioNTech and Curavac and whether you believe it or not, I don't really care.
2. the RSV vaccination is nothing more than a virus vaccination like the COVID-19 vaccination. We were talking about cancer or poison. The options there are simply better. For a virus vaccination, mrna is not recommended, see statements by Prof. Dr. Hockertz etc. 3. gravity: You cannot patent gravity, but you can patent products that create gravity or make systems inherently safe, such as heat exchangers. Your statement is therefore bullshit. There are indeed patents for heat exchangers for gravity circulation, for example. Mrna is only a transportation method, the know-how is given by the change of state or the transported goods in connection with the antivirus and is therefore patentable. 4. you clearly say no, I have to disagree with you: 2.3 Printed matter 18/16664 Bavarian State Parliament: The hazard assessment "... cannot be answered for lipid nanoparticles in general." Allergic reactions are possible.
5. look at the development of the BioNTech share. Outlooks, trends, profit expectations and price targets are constantly being revised downwards by analysts. I like to invest in the company. I am a realist. The hype is over and I really don't see a new upward trend.
2. the RSV vaccination is nothing more than a virus vaccination like the COVID-19 vaccination. We were talking about cancer or poison. The options there are simply better. For a virus vaccination, mrna is not recommended, see statements by Prof. Dr. Hockertz etc. 3. gravity: You cannot patent gravity, but you can patent products that create gravity or make systems inherently safe, such as heat exchangers. Your statement is therefore bullshit. There are indeed patents for heat exchangers for gravity circulation, for example. Mrna is only a transportation method, the know-how is given by the change of state or the transported goods in connection with the antivirus and is therefore patentable. 4. you clearly say no, I have to disagree with you: 2.3 Printed matter 18/16664 Bavarian State Parliament: The hazard assessment "... cannot be answered for lipid nanoparticles in general." Allergic reactions are possible.
5. look at the development of the BioNTech share. Outlooks, trends, profit expectations and price targets are constantly being revised downwards by analysts. I like to invest in the company. I am a realist. The hype is over and I really don't see a new upward trend.
•
11
•2Semana
Okey so just nonsense statements 1) yes they received money but I ask why they have to pay it back ? That's your claim 2) so if it's not recommended by the majority of science it's strange that both mRNA vaccines are approved (maybe a conspiracy ? ) 3) you're just talking nonsense as I said you can patent details of the mrna but not the whole technology otherwise it would be uninteresting for the companies to research, I have attached the source 5) so the price targets have all risen in the last 3 months the stock has made 40% in that period but yes you're right it's falling into the bottomless 😂😂😂
••