dead virus cells that would trigger a positive COVID test?

I don't think it does as it creates a response to the spike proteins, but wanted to get an informed answer to this.

SIAP

It shouldn't even be possible right? The test tests for live virus cells, correct? The vaccine should only create a response to the spike proteins and has nothing to do with dead or alive COVID virus cells, correct?

Someone tried to tell me that a doctor told him that the vaccinated people testing positive for COVID is doing so because the test is picking up dead virus cells. Just wanted some confirmation that this is absolutely false.

Any vaccine experts or doctors want to chime in and confirm?

You don't have to be a doctor or a vaccine expert to understand and explain this.

You just have to understand basic biochemistry. Unfortunately, not all colleges require pre-med majors to take biochemistry.

However, most covid tests do not directly test for live virus cells. They look for virus DNA. Because samples contain such little usable material, the DNA has to be amplified (ie, artificially replicated) to determine if it's there. For those without a technical background, it's kind of like looking at the sample under a really strong magnifying glass.

This is why the number cycles of amplification is so important. Contamination of samples is a real issue, and the more cycles you subject the sample to, the more the DNA is replicated. So, you could turn a tiny bit of sample contamination into a positive covid test.

There is also the rapid antigen test, which looks for antigen proteins. These antigen proteins are only expressed by the virus if it's replicating.

So yes or no? Does the vaccine create COVID DNA? Again, don't think so but wanted to get some informed answers.

jpb1999 said:

---

So yes or no? Does the vaccine create COVID DNA? Again, don't think so but wanted to get some informed answers.

---

No, it uses mRNA to "trick" your cells into making the spike protein which triggers an immune response that results in the production of antibodies. This cannot cause a positive covid test using viral methods. It can cause a positive antibody test (because the whole point of the vaccine is to trick your immune system into producing antibodies)

But even IF the vaccine did produce something detectable, how in the world would that get into your nose or mouth, which is where most samples for a covid test are collected?

The whole reason noses/saliva are the sources of samples for covid tests is because the nose, mouth (and mucus membranes) are the point of entry for the virus. Antibody tests are blood tests.

Not trying to be a jerk, just trying to get people to think logically.

TXTransplant said:

---

jpb1999 said:

---

So yes or no? Does the vaccine create COVID DNA? Again, don't think so but wanted to get some informed answers.

---

No, it uses mRNA to "trick" your cells into making the spike protein which triggers an immune response that results in the production of antibodies. This cannot cause a positive covid test using viral methods. It can cause a positive antibody test (because the whole point of the vaccine is to trick your immune system into producing antibodies)

But even IF the vaccine did produce something detectable, how in the world would that get into your nose or mouth, which is where most samples for a covid test are collected?

The whole reason noses/saliva are the sources of samples for covid tests is because the nose, mouth (and mucus membranes) are the point of entry for the virus. Antibody tests are blood tests.

Not trying to be a jerk, just trying to get people to think logically.

---

Your not being a jerk to me...

I get it, and that is how I understand it using logic, but wanted to get an "experts" thoughts on it.

TXTransplant said:

---

You don't have to be a doctor or a vaccine expert to understand and explain this.

You just have to understand basic biochemistry. Unfortunately, not all colleges require pre-med majors to take biochemistry.

However, most covid tests do not directly test for live virus cells. They look for virus DNA. Because samples contain such little usable material, the DNA has to be amplified (ie, artificially replicated) to determine if it's there. For those without a technical background, it's kind of like looking at the sample under a really strong magnifying glass.

This is why the number cycles of amplification is so important. Contamination of samples is a real issue, and the more cycles you subject the sample to, the more the DNA is replicated. So, you could turn a tiny bit of sample contamination into a positive covid test.

There is also the rapid antigen test, which looks for antigen proteins. These antigen proteins are only expressed by the virus if it's replicating.

---

Huh? Biochem is required for the overwhelming majority of medical schools and you have to take it again in medical school.

That's why I said not all. I can only assume that the doctors who perpetuate these false myths simply don't know any better. Because if they actually took those classes and still don't understand how PCR tests and vaccines work, I don't know what to say.

It's not a knock on most doctors or the profession at all. I appreciate all you and the other doctors have contributed to these threads.

But just like any profession, there is always a minority that has questionable competency.

Edited to add: I'm looking at a list of requirements for the top 50 med schools. Over half don't require it (some do recommend it). If that info isn't accurate, I apologize. But I got curious about this months ago when I stared hearing stories about doctors recommending against the vaccine. I can't wrap my head around how anyone with an understanding of biochemistry could spread the false information we've seen over the last 9 or so months.

Biochemistry major undergrad here, which was more difficult than med school biochem. If what you say is true and many med schools have omitted biochem from med school requirements, then as a pt, I may be avoiding younger trained physicians. Scary.

I wasn't going to raise that point, but as a chemical engineering major, I was required to take a more in-depth (ie, harder) biochemistry course than the students who were planning to go to med school via other majors. We called the biochem course they took "baby biochem".

For fun, I looked up the med school reqs for Texas. Biochemistry is required.

Anecdotally, I've heard that a lot of the drs poo-pooing vaccines call themselves "functional medicine" doctors, which does not require an MD. Some of them are ODs. Many are quacks.

I honestly think I know people who either a) don't understand the difference or b) are so conspiracy-oriented that they don't trust MDs anymore.

Physical chemistry was the hardest course I've ever taken my whole career.

Marcus Aurelius said:

---

Physical chemistry was the hardest course I've ever taken my whole career.

---

Once I realized those silly physical chemists are just teaching thermodynamics, but with the +/- signs reversed, it was a breeze!

But with the exception of a few graduate-level chemistry majors, the rest of my p chem class was all chemical engineers.

Give me p chem any day over organic chemistry. I had the worlds worst prof for the first semester of o chem, and I still have a mental block to this day (20+ years later).

For the record....
B.S. Major in Molecular and Cell Biology.