In response to a comment, it would be long and a lot, but here I will write it down separately.
Journalists call Zholobak a doctor, but I think she is a biologist.
Well, she said that the vaccine is administered intramuscularly, and this is an unnatural way for the virus to enter the body, because it must enter through the mucous membranes. Accordingly, the activation of immunity occurs in an unnatural way.
I fully support it. The virus usually gets in the wrong way, and we deceive it. And our immunity is activated in an unnatural way specifically in order to better train against the virus.
Immunity is naturally activated during infection, but 3% of people die. This is too high a price to pay for naturalness. So we will go our favorite unnatural path.
If the vaccine acted on mucous membranes, then yes, antibodies would be produced that would not allow infection. But these antibodies usually don't protect the lungs very well. And people are now dying from lung damage.
But the intramuscular vaccine is very good at stimulating the production of antibodies inside the lungs themselves. This is how the vaccine saves us from deadly pneumonia.
Then Zholobak says that the introduction of the antigen into the muscle leads to a shock state of immunity.
Then I did not understand. Almost all vaccines are injected into the muscle. Personally, over the past 5 years, I have been vaccinated against tick-borne encephalitis, viral hepatitis B, viral hepatitis A, typhoid fever, diphtheria, tetanus, influenza and new coronavirus infection. All my muscles were pricked. But there was no shock.
Then she said that this would lead to the development of oncopathology.
In general, immune activation leads to suppression of tumors, and some vaccines, such as the hepatitis B vaccine, specifically reduce the risk of cancer. My cat had vaccine sarcoma. It happens in cats. It doesn't work that way with people. Maybe it's about mice? Mice still have tumors.
Then Zholobak said that any vaccine gives stress to the immune system.
I support. Gives. And this is good. Immunity must be kept in good shape. Any vaccine spurs on nonspecific innate immunity, which then, like an angry dog, attacks any strangers. Personally, I like it. Let it pounce.
Then Zholobak vaguely explained something about narrowly targeted antibodies that would not affect new strains.
But this is already a lie, because new strains have appeared, and the vaccine is working. There is nothing to rebuild. Antibodies are not so narrowly sharpened. They act on a rather conservative part of the virus that doesn't change much. This is specially conceived.
Further, Zholobak tried to compose something at the expense of anti-body-dependent intensification of the infection in the sense that that if new strains appear, then the vaccine will not have time for them and will act as non-neutralizing antibodies.
It is immediately noticeable that she is composing. The vaccine is tailored for the production of neutralizing antibodies. Such vaccines do not provoke an antibody-dependent increase in infection. In short, read my article on this topic and you will understand that Zholobak attracts by the ears a horror story that actually lives in another world and has nothing to do with this vaccine.
This auntie is behind the times and is frantically trying to hop on the departing train, frightening us with old bikes. Not even funny. He is engaged in hysteria.
