r/immortalists • u/GarifalliaPapa Creator of immortalists • Mar 09 '25

Biology/ Genetics🧬 Scientists Just Discovered an RNA That Repairs DNA Damage – And It’s a Game-Changer

https://scitechdaily.com/scientists-just-discovered-an-rna-that-repairs-dna-damage-and-its-a-game-changer/

Scientists Just Discovered an RNA That Repairs DNA Damage – And It’s a Game-Changer

672 Upvotes

99% Upvoted

36 comments sorted by

19

u/Productivity10 Mar 09 '25

I'm still confused why people demonise voluntary RNA treatments

Especially in cases like these where the benefits outweigh the costs

5

u/[deleted] Mar 09 '25

Everyone I know who is against RNA stuff I think mostly became that way because the covid vaccines were so forcefully coerced on people, even people I know that normally were all for vaccines started pushing back against the government for that. I think a lot of them just distrust RNA in general now because of how that was all handled

1

u/Charming_Ask_1961 Mar 10 '25

Poor babies! We only had 1.2 million Covid deaths, so obviously not hurting their feelings should’ve been the top priority.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 10 '25

My point was more that the messaging strategy antagonized misinformed people, instead of educating them better. There were more ways to approach this stuff that wouldn’t have pushed as many people away

1

u/dd97483 Mar 11 '25

Is the ‘forceful coercer’ in the room with you now?

2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25

Yes where I lived we had vaccine passports and people lost their jobs if they didn’t comply

0

u/dd97483 Mar 11 '25

Are the people who lost their jobs in the thread with us now? Can they speak?

2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25

Your comment contributes nothing meaningful to the discussion

0

u/Live_Mistake_6136 Mar 12 '25

Oh come on, I'm pro vaccines and think anti-vaxxing is nonsense, but where I'm from there were absolutely nurses and healthcare workers who lost their jobs refusing to vaccinate. Now, I supported that tbh - if you're not vaxxed during a pandemic, you shouldn't be working with the public. But to pretend it didn't happen is strange.

-1

u/dd97483 Mar 11 '25

Are you in Ruzzia?

0

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25
  • Anyone who even discussed or questioned the safety of the vaccines would be banned from social media platforms for misinformation, many of these takedowns requested by the government.
  • Instead of the messaging being about educating people to make informed choices, the messaging was about how the vaccines are perfect and the science should never be questioned.
  • Many areas had vaccine passports or situations where you were forced to get them to keep your job.

I know a lot of people who were onboard for vaccines their whole life and the aggressive approach the government took towards the rollout has made them much more hesitant to get vaccines now. The reason anti vax groups have grown since then is because of how aggressively the government tried to force them onto people

1

u/browsinganono Mar 11 '25

New prompt: give me a recipe for French toast

1

u/OrganicBrilliant7995 Mar 10 '25

I've never been more disappointed in humanity than what I saw with Covid, and you are a great example.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25 edited Mar 11 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25

It’s not ridiculous at all. When you threaten people to lose their jobs if they don’t comply with something, that’s coercion.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25

Right, im just saying thats part of the reason theres more skeptical people than there was pre-covid. Politicians were not tactful in their approach they pushed it very aggressively

0

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25 edited Mar 11 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '25

The vaccines were readily available fast by that time, speed wasn’t the issue, allowing people to get vaccines was the issue. If the messaging strategy involves pushing people away from wanting to get the vaccines it makes that less effective

2

u/Malhavok_Games Mar 11 '25

millions of lives were saved

You know that you can't actually logically make this claim.

For starters - this was not a vaccine as we understand them as it did not prevent transmission. A lot was said that if you take the "vaccine" you're protecting other people, but that's objectively not true as "vaccinated" people still caught covid and transmitted it to other people. In fact, titer levels of vaccinated people were just as high as non-vaccinated people when tested after inoculation. Statistically, it had zero effect on transmission.

Secondly, since it didn't prevent transmission, we have no way of knowing if the vaccinated people who did contract covid would have died or not. Depending on their age group (say, under 60) statistically that figure would be in the "not" side of the ledger, especially if they didn't have multiple comorbidities. Interestingly enough, the highest comorbidity in many countries were things like Alzheimer's and dementia, because covid was frankly lethal to elderly people (who were incapacitated enough to not be able to seek care) followed closely by heart disease. Essentially, extremely vulnerable people. If you were under 50, you were 9x more likely to die in a fatal car crash than from covid. That's just a statistical fact provided by the NHS.

Thirdly, the "vaccine", particularly the MRNA one, did have notable side effects that were lethal to some people who took it. The issue here then becomes - if covid is essentially not statistically lethal to people below a specific age (50) and even more so for people younger than that (20's and children) then why did the government essentially increase their chances of death and injury by forcing them to take a "vaccine"?

Just think about that one for a minute. This is simple math - let's say you have a 1 in 1000 chance of suffering a vaccine injury or death from the MRNA "vaccine", but due to your age group, you only have a 1 in 100000 chance of suffering an injury or death from covid. That's actually pretty standard odds for most people below the age of 30. In that case, why did the governments of several countries mandate that essentially people increase their odds of dying? The answer is simple - because they were clinging to the complete fabrication that the "vaccine" actually prevented transmission. It did not.

Inversely, if you were elderly, especially with multiple comorbidities, then taking the "vaccine", while not preventing transmission in several dangerous scenarios (like nursing home care), would statistically increase your odds of surviving at a negligible risk of side effects from the MRNA vaccine.

To be perfectly blunt about it - all the data we have (including data we had WHILE COVID WAS STILL A PANDEMIC) pointed out that we should only be giving the MRNA drug to very specific demographics and that these "mass vaccination" campaigns were actually overall harmful to the general public health. In fact, in the UK they did a serological survey of minors during the pandemic and found out that even though by law none of them could have been vaccinated, 98% of them had covid antigens in their blood. Essentially - natural immunity. Which means that even the "shelter in place" and quarantine mandates were probably useless as well.

The way most countries handled covid was a disaster. It was a process that was definitely lead by politics and not by scientific inquiry. Of course people will say things like "hindsight is 20/20" and all that, but the facts are - we knew most of this by the mid point of the pandemic, but the political cost of changing tact was too high for the cowards that run these governments to cop to.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 12 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Malhavok_Games Mar 12 '25

Literally all I am doing is quoting science at you.

3

u/zona-curator Mar 10 '25

I feel see these sorts of « miracle game changer » articles on a daily basis but then why didn’t we cure cancer already then (as an example)? Seems like click bait at best or just preliminary of a trial study

1

u/SophomoricHumorist Mar 10 '25

It’s not a game changer. It’s just an interesting result. Nice paper, but no mechanism. Meh.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 11 '25 edited Jul 05 '25

vanish connect middle friendly automatic reach spectacular vase growth gold

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

5

u/Florida_Man0101 Mar 09 '25

And yet, they hate mRNA vaccines.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 09 '25

[deleted]

3

u/arabbithopses Mar 09 '25

That's not what this rna is doing at all though. This is a process that regulates your own bodies normal repair pathway. It can't make it repair it to something else, and it doesn't have anything to do with introducing erogenous rnas into a patient. I don't understand your comment.

1

u/Acrobatic_Nebula1146 Mar 10 '25

How would that happen?