If 'FRAMESHIFTING' negatively impacts the way that the mRNA code is read & interpreted by the ribosomes in the cytoplasm, due to the inclusion of the methyl pseudo-uridine instead of 'uridine', then

instead of that nucleoside, can we use a natural base? To bring the correct amino acid into configuration for the translated spike protein to be built? If uridine caused attacks by the immune system,

& methylated pseudo-uridine causes frameshifting (even destroying the usual ‘stop’ triplet codon message to tell the ribosome to stop making protein and thus spike or nonsense proteins being produced 24/7 in our cells technically the rest of our lives) and thus nonsense garbled proteins that could even go rogue (garbage non-functional or mis or disfunctional proteins), then would a substitution with a natural base be more optimal? I in no way at this time (needs 50 to 80 more years of safety research) supports mRNA technology or vaccines, in no way and IMO this was near criminal, but if the hyper-inflammatory immune response is traced in large part to the ‘frameshifting’ and thus the messed-up triplet codon code, then why not a simple fix? Is this the reason for the hyper-inflammatory immune response? That the immune system cannot make any sense of the nonsense translated proteins and as such attacking any and all cells/tissues making the synthetic foreign spike protein?

Why have the inventors and vaccine makers (or mRNA technology and vaccine) not addressed this? Why have they sat on this? If this was known, why was the vaccine not stopped and this fixed in lab?

The mRNA technology and vaccine was never ready for prime time and has not been proven effective or safe. It must be withdrawn en toto and if there is interest, we need 50 to 80 more years of research. With proper ethical debates, to show it is completely safe and effective. None of that has ever occurred.