SPEAKER_04

But I mean, your cells are full of RNA.

So, I mean, you can't get away from the fact that your cells are full of RNA.

But it's also the means by which they delivered it, right?

I mean, the means by which it was delivered was a formulation of

a nucleotide that by itself was meant to be something called an adjuvant.

An adjuvant is something which activates the immune system you want.

I mean, when you get a vaccination, you are co-injected with something that hyperactivates the immune system to say, come hither.

And most of the pain that you get from an injection is not the vaccine itself, it's the adjuvant.

Well, at least locally.

Yeah.

No, I've read some of the, some of the work.

But if you get infected by a virus, it's over your whole body anyway.

So it's whether the spike protein itself was problematic.

And so I know I'll annoy somebody one side or the other by saying anything around this area.

And I'm not here to cause any controversy.

But your immune system works.

But if you can trick your immune system into getting ahead of the game...

then that's a good thing.

The question is back to this cost-benefit ratio.

Is the benefit to the larger statistical population worth it, knowing that some people are going to be hurt by it or not?