What makes your comment random isn't the site. It's the fact that it makes no obvious point. I can also take a screen shot of a government website, circle a paragraph or two and post it somewhere with a caption saying "OMG LOOK!!!!!!!!!!!"
I was sincere in my original comment. You're pointing to some information but you're being extremely unclear as to what you think it says.
As to the point about mRNA, what you need to understand is that mRNA isn't new or cutting edge biology. We've known about it for decades. It's been over 10 years since I was in university and it was already basic part of any program that required any understanding of molecular biology at all. I can't give you lesson plans but I am the sort of pack rat to keep old text books in my hall closet for 10 years. Enjoy!
If you'd like to see more of the book I might be willing to copy more pages if you ask nicely. I'm also still willing to explain to you what's going on in the webpage you posted. It's really not clear what you're trying to say. Maybe you think government employees should be more on the ball about updating every corner of their websites? I really don't know.
At no point did I make an argument about definitions. I asked you to clarify what point you're trying to make with your post so that it would be possible to discuss it.
If you want to question the safety of the vaccine then go for it. The website you linked to doesn't help you make that point though. It contains some outdated information about the types of vaccines that exist and gives some generic advice about their use during pregnancy. I did my best to give you the benefit of the doubt but every chance you got you resorted to a personal attack rather then even attempt to create an argument based on factual merit.
What makes your comment random isn't the site. It's the fact that it makes no obvious point. I can also take a screen shot of a government website, circle a paragraph or two and post it somewhere with a caption saying "OMG LOOK!!!!!!!!!!!" I was sincere in my original comment. You're pointing to some information but you're being extremely unclear as to what you think it says.
As to the point about mRNA, what you need to understand is that mRNA isn't new or cutting edge biology. We've known about it for decades. It's been over 10 years since I was in university and it was already basic part of any program that required any understanding of molecular biology at all. I can't give you lesson plans but I am the sort of pack rat to keep old text books in my hall closet for 10 years. Enjoy!
https://ibb.co/gRRxJqh
https://ibb.co/dBnqhDs
If you'd like to see more of the book I might be willing to copy more pages if you ask nicely. I'm also still willing to explain to you what's going on in the webpage you posted. It's really not clear what you're trying to say. Maybe you think government employees should be more on the ball about updating every corner of their websites? I really don't know.
At no point did I make an argument about definitions. I asked you to clarify what point you're trying to make with your post so that it would be possible to discuss it.
If you want to question the safety of the vaccine then go for it. The website you linked to doesn't help you make that point though. It contains some outdated information about the types of vaccines that exist and gives some generic advice about their use during pregnancy. I did my best to give you the benefit of the doubt but every chance you got you resorted to a personal attack rather then even attempt to create an argument based on factual merit.