And people's body are flooded with the signal to build more blood vessels via VEGF.
No. The "signal" comes from the cells. VEGF is the evidence that the body got the message and is doing it.
Tomato tomato. The signal went through if there's evidence it did.
It's an important distinction to understand if you want to get to the bottom of it. Your initial statement in this quote string is incorrect. It should read "People's bodies are flooded with signals to build more blood vessels via the cells asking for it and elevated VEGF levels are evidence that the body is building/repairing them"
Your statement and the one I put here are VERY different.
Cool, I feel like I'm being played and you're messing with me? The need for different language when we're saying the same thing in the replied post I'm not following. I've explained I'm not a medical professional and I'm retelling what I'd heard and how I understood it. The precision of my words may not be up to medical standards, but what I'm describing here and what you are have the exact same outcome, "evidence of building/repairing blood vessels". I appreciate the correction in my wording. And honestly it's a side point to anything pertaining to the main topic. You can take the win and I'll concede.
We aren't saying the same thing. As long as you understand my analogy and what I'm saying, that's all I care about. If they try to tell you that VEGF is anything but an indicator that something is happening, they are lying to you. If they say elevated VEGF is causing something, they are lying to you.
They're probably saying it more precisely than I am, and if I've been lied to they were really great lies since the methods and research resulted in my recovery while so many others continue to suffer, but my point still remains the same.
I've seen how these types of interactions bog down conversations here. Feels disingenuous and arguing for arguings sake. Not interested, but thank's for taking the time to try and add to the conversation. It feels you like mean well, but I'm not interested in getting caught up in a back and forth over minutia and I'll move on as this is offering nothing to the main topic.
Of course. If they did say something different to you than what you are conveying here then the disconnect is easy to see. Hopefully that's happened, but hard for me to say since I don't know what they actually said to you. Glad you got some relief in treatment. Lots of people out there around the world studying long covid and its effects. While the latest mutations have become less deadly it still can be really damaging to the body. This is why a lot of people will continue to suggest the vaccine so that damage can be lessened.
Never doubted that the vaccine helps people and saved lives. It went sideways for me and I simply wanted to add that perspective.
Starting to feel like that perspective might not be appreciated as my experience differs from the narrative most people would like to believe. I think i came with receipts for what I've said regarding my experience (let's exclude our side quest into tumor growth as it really doesn't pertain to the overall conversation and was an attempt to explain where some of the conspiratorial ideas might have come from) in disease, compensation/treatment, research. Maybe that's enough and this topic has run its course.
I think real world experiences from people experience are pretty valuable myself. Far more valuable than "this guy I know who said this other dude's sister's brother...." stuff we get way too often. I can't make you believe me, but my questions really are to understand you and what you were told. There's nothing else to them. You said you had the virus and got the vaccines too. Did the doctors ever tell you how they'd determine what part each played? I might have asked that before, but I don't remember. Sorry if it's a repeat.
Ok, I'll bite and we'll see where it goes. Kind of feels like it's just you and me having the conversation at this point, but as long as we can keep things moving along and not get bogged down in minutia that's fine with me.
We did cover this, but I'll answer your question again and go into a bit more detail. First covid infection was in 2020 during the initial wave. I was very sick, all respiratory symptoms, cough, sore throat, ect. Lasted about 2 weeks and i had reduced cardio for a month or 2 after recovery, but other than that all good. Got the first 2 moderna vaccines as soon as they were available and was actually pretty excited to get them and get on with life. First 2 shot were no issue, second had some side effects same as most people and i was fine in a day or two.
I forget what variant we were on in December of 21, but we were hosting the family Christmas and I insisted everyone get boosted or i was going to cancel. Got my booster and you can read my first post to understand how that went.
6 months later i got covid again, ironically from a long covid clinic. Made everything much worse as I mentioned before, probably a lot worse than the booster.
As in the OPs original post researchers were relatively quick to find that PVS and Long Covid aside from cause presented similarly, so much so there wasn't much of a need to differentiate between the two. Treatments that were effective for one would be expected to be effective for the other. Typically infections and vaccines in this sense were labeled as an "exposure". So for me i had a total of 5 exposures, first 3 didn't result in any problems, but the 4th and 5th did. It's the repeated exposures that seemed to cause my issues and that's been kind of expected if you look into the long covid research.
Does this answer your question?