https://x.com/RifeTechnology/status/...391820898?s=20
Printable View
Elon amplifies the signal
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1706676593261785178?s=20
Sure does! AstraZeneca is old news though, so this amplification puts old news louder than new news. Incidentally his Neuralink human trials have just started: cross thread post.Quote:
Posted by mountain_jim
Vigilant Fox may be repackaging some of these videos into smaller bites, so there may be some duplication in his posts...
https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/170...701724019?s=20
The Vax Doesn't Just Atteck The Body, It Can Control The Mind! My Interview With Dave Hodges On The Common Sense Show
ANA MARIA MIHALCEA, MD, PHD
SEP 26
From:anamihalceamdphd@substack.com
https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/pr...ef_912x175.png
"This was a great conversation with Dave Hodges from the Common Sense Show on C19 bioweapon Nanotechnology and Mind Control Capabilities. We discuss CIA Mind Control research and ELF frequencies in brain targeting.
Here is the link for the MP3:
https://buildonline-studeo-productio...1695714607.mp3
Isreali companies is developing a system to give mRNA vaxxes to ..... shrimp. :facepalm:
ViAqua Therapeutics Announces $8.25M Investment Led by S2G Ventures to Scale RNA-Based Solutions in Aquaculture
HAIFA, Israel, Sept. 5, 2023 /PRNewswire/ -- ViAqua Therapeutics, a biotechnology company and developer of an orally administered RNA-particle platform to promote and improve animal health in aquaculture, announced it has completed a US$8.25M round led by S2G Ventures with participation from Rabo Ventures, The Trendlines Group Ltd., Agriline Limited, Nutreco, I-Lab Angels and Circle Investments LLC.
Aquaculture is essential for improving food security, providing a healthy and sustainable food source, and protecting wild fish stocks in the face of growing demand for marine protein. But disease management is currently the biggest issue facing the aquaculture industry, resulting in more than $8.5 billion in economic impact for the shrimp industry alone, according to an analysis from Kontali.
To address this problem, ViAqua has developed a biotechnology-based oral delivery platform for the targeted administration of RNA-based solutions to improve disease resistance in aquaculture.
continues at: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...m_medium=email
Upping the ante again ... I hope pregnant women will refuse the "vaccination"
POSTED BY RICHARD WILLETT - MEMES AND HEADLINE COMMENTS BY DAVID ICKEPOSTED ON 26 SEPTEMBER 2023
‘Risky [Calculated] Strategy’: Cult-Owned CDC Signs Off on Cult-Owned Pfizer RSV Vaccine for Pregnant Women
Cardiologist Peter McCullough, M.D., M.P.H., told The Defender, “Vaccination of the mother for passive immunization of the infant is an unnecessary and risky strategy that will undoubtedly lead to fetal loss or premature deliveries when deployed on a large scale.”
An advisory committee to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) last week recommended a new vaccine for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) — the first such vaccine for pregnant women designed to target newborns, NBC News reported.
In an 11-1 vote on Friday, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) endorsed Pfizer’s Abrysvo. The vote was followed by a formal recommendation by CDC Director Mandy Cohen, completing the final regulatory step before distribution of the vaccine to the public can begin.
Cohen praised the new vaccine, calling it “another new tool we can use this fall and winter to help protect lives.” Cohen encouraged parents to talk to their doctors about “how to protect their little ones against serious RSV illness.”
But doctors who spoke to The Defender took a different view. Cardiologist Peter McCullough, M.D., M.P.H. said:
“Vaccination of the mother for passive immunization of the infant is an unnecessary and risky strategy that will undoubtedly lead to fetal loss or premature deliveries when deployed on a large scale.
“As a clinician, my greatest concern with any vaccination in pregnancy is provocation of fever, which is one of the most common determinants of preterm labor and in some cases fetal loss or premature delivery.”
The CDC’s formal approval of Abrysvo comes just weeks after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the vaccine.
Abrysvo will be administered to pregnant women during the third trimester of pregnancy, Reuters reported. According to ACIP members, vaccination late in pregnancy “is likely to reduce a possible risk of preterm births and complications that might arise from taking it earlier.”
According to NBC News, “The single-dose shot … spurs the production of antibodies in the mother that transfer through the placenta.” Referencing clinical trial data published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), NBC News said Abrysvo’s “protection lasts through their first six months.”
According to Reuters, ACIP member Dr. Katherine Poehling, a professor of pediatrics and epidemiology and prevention at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, said, “RSV throughout my career has been a difficult disease with just supportive care treatment because there have been no options so today is an exciting day.”
Read More: ‘Risky Strategy’: CDC Signs Off on Pfizer RSV Vaccine for Pregnant Women to Protect Newborns
https://davidicke.com/2023/09/26/ris...regnant-women/
How the Original Polio Vaccine Was Made
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
September 26, 2023
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...rid=1921802810
https://media.mercola.com/ImageServe...s-made-pdf.pdf
"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
During the 1950s, the inactivated polio vaccine created by Jonas Salk was made using rhesus monkeys that were infected with simian virus 40 (SV40), a monkey virus that was later linked to cancer in humans
While Salk’s polio vaccine was considered a medical triumph of its time, its manufacturing process involved the use of not only virus-contaminated monkey kidneys but also toxic compounds such as asbestos and formaldehyde
After mass vaccination began, reports of paralysis and death emerged, and improperly inactivated vaccine had released live virus into 100,000 doses
SV40 has been linked to cancers in humans; brain tumors and mesotheliomas appear to be the most common tumors associated with SV40, with some studies showing a positivity rate of up to 60%
SV40 promotors have also been detected in mRNA COVID-19 shots
During the 1950s, the inactivated polio vaccine created by Jonas Salk was made using rhesus monkeys that were infected with simian virus 40 (SV40), a monkey virus1 that was later linked to cancer in humans.2
From 1955 to 1963, hundreds of millions of people worldwide — in North and South America, Canada, Europe, Asia and Africa — received the vaccines,3 which at the time were heralded as a medical breakthrough. In the archived 1956 video above, you can see a propaganda piece from that era, showing just how the ill-fated vaccine was made.
“Few back then grasped that these vaccines might also be a huge, inadvertent, uncontrolled experiment in interspecies viral transmission,” a 2004 article in The Lancet noted.4
1950s’ Propaganda Reveals How Polio Vaccine Was Made
While Salk’s polio vaccine was considered a medical triumph of its time, its manufacturing process leaves much to be desired. “Welcome to modern vaccinology. A hilariously unscientific process predicated on insane barbarism, rife with fraud and immense hubris,” Inversionism wrote on X, formerly Twitter.5 The investigative journalist detailed the polio vaccine’s manufacturing process outlined in the video as follows:6
1.“Put all the glassware inside a hot steam bath or sterilize it.
2.Import Macaca mulatta monkeys from India for the experiments.
3.Prepare a mixture called "medium 199" — containing 2% calf serum, 200 units/ml penicillin, 200 g/ml dihydrostreptomycin and 50 units/ml Mycostatin (nystatin Squibb); the pH of the medium was brought to 7.0 by the addition of a NaHCO3 solution.
4.Euthanize the monkeys, remove their kidneys, and then place the kidney into a tube and hand mince it with scissors into small bits.
5.After the kidney tissue was weighed and decapsulated, they put the tissue in a centrifuge tube where they washed it in a phosphate buffered saline and placed in a trypsinization flask. Trypsin enzymes break down the proteins, which were then centrifuged at 800-1000 RPM for 10 minutes to separate the tissue and cells.
6.The kidney cells are then mixed with the medium 199 and incubated (fermented, rotted essentially) at 37C for 6-8 days. By the end of the 6-8 day period, the bottles and tubes were covered with a "confluent sheet of cell growth."
7.Once the medium 199 is exhausted, half is siphoned off to be replaced by fresh medium 199.
8.They then add the "polio virus" for the first time. 3 different strains supposedly, with no other details on source, isolation process, or genome determination.
9.The bottles continue to rock for 4 days in the solution culturing, fermenting, decaying, and then it's ready for harvesting.
10.Scientists then visually look at the vials under a microscope to do a "titration test" to discern how much live virus is in the solution, hand counting particles that could be ANYTHING. (very scientific ...)
11.Next is filtration, the most egregious part. They filter the solution first through porcelain filters (heavy metal risk), and then through MULTIPLE SHEETS OF ASBESTOS to drain out any kidney tissue or stray bacteria.
(This part of the process is not disclosed in the video, but is detailed in the original paper on the polio vaccine process. They made multiple trivalent vaccine pools, with some having additional additives like sodium bisulfite, along with parabens, a known carcinogen and endocrine disruptor).
12.Now rabbits, monkeys, guinea pigs, and chickens are injected with the "live virus" vaccine solutions7 … to ensure it's free of other pathogens.
13.Now the "climax" of the process as they call it, inactivation. This is where they mix the vaccine solution with formaldehyde, and then let it sit together for 66-68 hours. The narrator then hilariously says "then what remains can only do good, can provide humans with protection of paralytic polio." "The enemy of man can now become his servant."
14.Then the process of mass distribution. They get these massive tanks and mix in all the solutions, adjuvants, chemicals, and ingredients for mass production and "preservation".
15.Before mass administration, they do a couple experiments on mice and monkeys to ensure the vaccine is creating enough "polio fighting antibodies" in humans.
16.The remainder of the process details the various "tests" they do as the vaccine lots are distributed, before really turning up the propaganda and showing President Eisenhower's son receiving the polio vaccine.”
Paralyzed Children, Deaths Reported Following Vaccination
By 1954, a large-scale study of Salk’s polio vaccine, which included 1 million children, took place. April 12, 1955, Salk declared the shots to be safe and effective. In addition to being given widely throughout the U.S., by 1959, 90 countries were using it.8 But there were signs of problems from the start.
After mass vaccination began, some subjects became paralyzed in the limb where the vaccine was given. Recalls of 250 cases of the shots from two laboratories ensued following the reports of parasitic illness.
“There were also reports of paralysis and death in several children,” Singapore Medical Journal reported. “Investigations showed that improperly inactivated vaccine had released live virus into more than 100,000 doses of the vaccine.”9 As explained in The Lancet:10
“When Salk developed his vaccine, instead of using human tissues, as did the scientists who won a Nobel Prize for first growing poliovirus in tissue culture, he used minced-up rhesus macaque monkey kidneys, which were remarkably efficient poliovirus factories.
Those who sought to supplant Salk's formaldehyde-inactivated vaccine with live, attenuated oral vaccine also used monkey kidney cultures. Despite a manufacturing problem that, at best, left six children who received the vaccine paralyzed in the arm, and despite concerns about wild simian viruses, Salk's shots were declared safe and effective after 1954 field trials.
The next year, after grudging approval by skeptical government regulators, free Salk shots were made available throughout the USA. By 1960, scientists and vaccine manufacturers knew that monkey kidneys were sewers of simian viruses.”
Americans Kept in the Dark About Monkey Virus in Polio Shots
It was 1959 when the late Bernice Eddy, a researcher at the National Institutes of Health, conducted a study, injecting hamsters with the rhesus monkey kidney substrate used to make the polio vaccines. The majority of them developed tumors.11
“Eddy's superiors tried to keep the discovery quiet, but Eddy presented her data at a cancer conference in New York. She was eventually demoted, and lost her laboratory,” The Atlantic reported,12 but soon after researchers with Merck pharmaceutical company identified the cancer-causing virus in rhesus monkey kidney cells, naming it SV4013 because it was the 40th monkey virus discovered.
According to Barbara Loe Fisher, co-founder and president of the National Vaccine Information Center, in a presentation before the U.S. House of Representatives in 2003:14
“Sadly, the American people were not told the truth about this in 1960. The SV40 contaminated stocks of Salk polio vaccine were never withdrawn from the market but continued to be given to American children until early 1963 with full knowledge of federal health agencies.
Between 1955 and early 1963, nearly 100 million American children had been given polio vaccine contaminated with the monkey virus, SV40.”
Did SV40 in Vaccines Cause Cancer?
While there wasn’t an “epidemic” of cancers that followed the widespread administration of polio vaccines contaminated with SV40, which suggests the virus alone may not be causing the cancers, researchers noted “it seems possible that SV40 may act as a cofactor in the pathogenesis of some tumors.”15
As further reported in Oncogene, at least three independent scientific panels agreed “there is compelling evidence that SV40 is present in some human cancers and that SV40 could contribute to the pathogenesis of some of them.”16 Brain tumors and mesotheliomas appear to be the most common tumors associated with SV40, with some studies showing a positivity rate of up to 60%.17
For instance, research published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1992 revealed that half the choroid plexus tumors and most of the ependymomas studied contained a segment of T-antigen gene related to SV40. “These results suggest that SV40 or a closely related virus may have an etiologic role in the development of these neoplasms during childhood,” the researchers wrote.18
In 2002, meanwhile, The Lancet published evidence showing SV40 is significantly associated with some types of non-Hodgkin lymphoma after detecting it in 42% of non-Hodgkin lymphomas tested.19 And in a 2004 review of the then-available evidence, it’s noted:20
“Persuasive evidence now indicates that SV40 is causing infections in humans today and represents an emerging pathogen.
A meta-analysis of molecular, pathological, and clinical data from 1,793 cancer patients indicates that there is a significant excess risk of SV40 associated with human primary brain cancers, primary bone cancers, malignant mesothelioma, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.”
What Else Is Lurking in Vaccines?
While the SV40 polio vaccine contamination occurred decades ago, the controversy continues, as does the potential for present-day vaccines to be contaminated.
Research by cellular and molecular biologist Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., showed that many of our vaccines are contaminated with gammaretroviruses.21 How did this happen? In short, vaccine viruses were replicated and grown in animal cell cultures that were already contaminated with retroviruses. In other words, the root of the problem stems from the use of contaminated cell culture lines, similar to the problems with the original polio vaccine.
Meanwhile, microbiologist Kevin McKernan — a former researcher and team leader for the MIT Human Genome project22 — assessed the nucleic acid composition of four expired vials of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 shots. “DNA contamination that exceeds the European Medicines Agency (EMA) 330ng/mg requirement and the FDAs 10ng/dose requirements” was found.23
In addition to the spike protein and mRNA in COVID-19 shots, McKernan’s team discovered SV40 promotors.24 McKernan explains that in many cases, when tumors are sequenced they’re found to contain sequences from SV40 and other viruses, which can integrate into your genome, causing disruptions and instability that can trigger the cell line to grow out of control.25
In the case of COVID-19 shots, he says, “The concern is if this DNA integrates the genome, one portion of the SV40 sequence is an SV40 promoter, a very strong promoter, which means it drives transcription wherever it lands in the genome.
If this happens to drop itself in front of a proto-oncogene [a gene that has the potential to cause cancer] and drives a lot of expression off of a gene that's known, if you hyper-express it and turn the cell cancerous, then we have a concern that DNA is in fact doing that.”26
McKernan and colleagues have tried to spread the word about SV40 promotor and components in COVID-19 shots, but the media continue to try to discredit their findings,27 much like occurred with SV40 in the original polio vaccines. Further, as for why the SV40 promoter and enhancer are in COVID-19 shots in the first place, it’s again related to the plasmid growth medium, which in this case is E. coli.28
Since many types of cells continue to be used as growth mediums during vaccine production, including animal cell strains29 from chickens, dogs, monkeys, hamsters30 and insects,31 as well as cells from bacteria or yeast, and vaccines continue to be fast-tracked to market, it’s more important than ever for scientists and manufacturers to ensure that the treatment or preventative isn’t causing more harm than good."
Sources and References
1, 3 Front Oncol. 2019; 9: 670, Epidemiology of SV40 Infections in Human Populations
2, 15 Expert Rev Respir Med. 2011 Oct; 5(5): 683–697
4, 10, 11, 13, 17 The Lancet July 31, 2004
5, 6 Twitter, Inversionism August 23, 2023
7 Bull. Wld Hlth Org. 1957, 17, 101-1023
8, 9 Singapore Med J. 2019 Jan; 60(1): 9–10
12 The Atlantic February 2000
14 NVIC September 10, 2003
16 Oncogene. 2003 Aug 11;22(33):5173-80. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1206552
18 N Engl J Med. 1992 Apr 9;326(15):988-93. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199204093261504
19 The Lancet March 9, 2002
20 Clinical Microbiology Reviews 2004 Jul; 17(3): 495–508
21 Bitchute, Dr. Mercola & Judy Mikovits May 1, 2020
22 The Healthcare Channel May 22, 2023
23, 24 OSF Preprints April 10, 2023
25, 26 American Thought Leaders, Jekielek/McKernan Transcript, Page 2
27 American Thought Leaders, Jekielek/McKernan Transcript, Page 20
28 American Thought Leaders, Jekielek/McKernan Transcript, Page 4
29 Vaccine Ingredients
30 FDA.com Shingrix (PDF)
31 Medpage Today December 22, 2017
ILLEGALS EXEMPT FROM BIDEN’S NEW CONTACT TRACING PROGRAM/COVID SHOTS
September 28, 2023
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/ill...m-covid-shots/
""The Biden administration has reimplemented contact tracing for citizens returning to the United States, a source attempting to enter the country via a major US-based airline has confirmed.
However, the illegal aliens coming across the border are not and will not be subject to forced-vaccination or to contact tracing, because the UN says they don’t want to be held liable for any adverse events stemming from the shots.
Alex Jones says: “In national studies and polls, it’s the number one thing that makes them know that this whole COVID thing was garbage, out of all the lies we’ve been told: Illegal aliens coming into the United States don’t have to take the shots, because the UN said they don’t want the liability of them giving an experimental, dangerous shot. That’s AP and Reuters, Folks. That’s a fact.
“The illegal aliens don’t have to take it but they try to intimidate us and make us take it. Now, they’ve backed off and said, “Nobody ever tried to make you take it – even though they fired 70-something thousand nurses and people in New York, alone.
“Same thing happened all over the world. So, Ladies and Gentlemen, the illegal aliens don’t have to do it. Now, the illegal aliens’ kids in New York and other areas, they don’t have to take shots and go to school but they use color-of-law to intimidate citizens to take it.
“So, they’re literally an elite class being protected by the Globalists, because they’re bringing them in to vote, they’re bringing them in to be signed up on Welfare, where the Democratic lawyers skim money off the top, same thing’s done in Europe. Juat like they control and farm homeless, then these NGOs make massive money per homeless person. It’s the same story over and over again.
“This is the bureaucrats, the social workers, taking over – and I’m not saying all social workers are bad but this is new rollout, this new Globalist NGO operation.
“So let that sink in. They want to grope you, they want to ask you questions, they want to contact trace you, they want to put you in a body scanner, they want to do all this crap flying inside the country or flying from outside in but the borders are wide open and they’re not going to be contact-tracing any illegal aliens and they’re not going to be giving them any of the shots and their kids are exempt and they’re getting driver’s licenses and Blue cities are letting them vote everywhere.
“But if Trump tweets that illegal aliens voted in Georgia, he gets indicted for it, even though they’re passing laws everywhere that illegal aliens can vote and be police and rule over us.
“The global social engineers don’t want there to be anything to keep the Third World from coming here. So they promise them free Welfare and jobs and medicine and everything so they can be brainwashed and turned into a permanent political underclass – and at the same time, this is very, very important – they’re training the American People, like dogs going through these TSA checkpoints and all of the rest of these systems, setting us up for the world ID, the ESG, the social credit score.
“And once they bankrupt us all, the Universal Basic Income and then, you will eat the bugs! This is all a global, concerted effort, in your face, tying into to COVID, the contact tracing, the quarantine camps, everything.” "
Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v3ilywm/?pub=ijro7
mRNA Detected in Breast Milk After COVID-19 Vaccination Can Be Passed on to Infants: New Study
A new study found lactating women recently vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine had detectible mRNA in breastmilk that can potentially transfer to their infant.
A new Lancet study adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that the mRNA from COVID-19 vaccines does not remain at the injection site but “spreads systemically” throughout the body and can even end up in breast milk passed on to infants by their vaccinated mothers.
Study Found mRNA in 70 Percent of Breast Milk Samples
In the Lancet paper published in September, researchers detected mRNA in 70 percent of women who provided breast milk samples up to 45 hours following vaccination. Although the mRNA detected was largely fragmented and retained only 12 to 25 percent of its original integrity, the researchers said further studies are needed to determine the minimum amount of mRNA that could trigger an immune response in newborns.
Researchers collected breast milk samples from 13 healthy postpartum, lactating women before vaccination and at least twice daily for five days after vaccination. Seven mothers provided breast milk samples after receiving their first and second vaccine doses, resulting in 20 total vaccine exposures and 154 breast milk samples.
Vaccine mRNA was then examined in whole breast milk and breast milk extracellular vesicles. Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are small delivery vehicles released by cells that carry biomolecules such as protein, lipids, noncoding RNA, microRNA, messenger RNA, and DNA. Breast milk contains large amounts of EVs that regulate gene expression, immune function, development, and infant growth.
Of the 13 lactating women who received either the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine, trace mRNA amounts were detected in 10 of 20 exposures up to 45 hours following vaccination. According to the study, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein was not expressed.
Before breast milk collections, all participants tested negative for COVID-19, and prevaccination samples were negative for COVID-19 vaccine mRNA. Although all women were instructed to provide samples of 5 milliliters or greater, actual amounts were often below the threshold, hindering the experiment.
“Our proposed model suggests that after intramuscular administration, the vaccine mRNA enclosed in lipid nanoparticles is transported to the mammary glands through either hematogenous or lymphatic pathways,” the researchers wrote. “Within the mammary cells’ cytosol, a portion of the released vaccine mRNA is recruited and packaged into the developing extracellular vesicles, which are then released into the breast milk.”
Safety Assessment of Future mRNA-Based Therapies Needed
The researchers said the significance of their research extends beyond the scope of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and offers “valuable insights into the transport and presence of vaccine mRNA in breast milk, which can be relevant for assessing the safety and efficacy of future mRNA-based therapies administered to lactating women.”
Lead author Dr. Nazeeh Hanna, chief of the division of neonatology at NYU Langone Hospital and professor of pediatrics at NYU Long Island School of Medicine, told The Epoch Times in an email that it’s unfortunate so many people have overlooked the real value of the study.
Read More: mRNA Detected in Breast Milk After COVID-19 Vaccination Can Be Passed on to Infants: New Study
https://davidicke.com/2023/09/28/mrn...nts-new-study/
OSHA Head Now Says ‘We Didn’t Demand That Anyone Be Fired’ and Denied Issuing a Vaccine Mandate for 84 Million Americans
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...t-demand-that/
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
September 29, 2023
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...rid=1924472160
https://media.mercola.com/ImageServe...ir-vax-pdf.pdf
"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Yale University researchers have developed an airborne method for delivering mRNA right to your lungs
In a study on mice, the scientists created polymer nanoparticles to encapsulate mRNA, making it inhalable
Researchers say this “new method of delivery could ‘radically change the way people are vaccinated,’” making it easier to vaccinate people in remote areas or those who are afraid of needles
An airborne mRNA product could be used to rapidly vaccinate the masses, without their knowledge or consent
Academic endorsement exists for the use of compulsory, covert bioenhancements, including drugs and vaccines, on the public; the U.S. government also has a history of covert bioweapon experiments
Yale University researchers have developed a new airborne method for delivering mRNA right to your lungs.
The team has also used the method to vaccinate mice intranasally,1 opening the door for human testing in the near future.
While scientists are hailing the creation as an easy way to vaccinate the masses, critics wonder if the development of an airborne vaccine could be used for nefarious purposes, including covert bioenhancements,2 which have already been recommended in academic literature.3
Yale Team Develops Airborne mRNA, Delivers It to Lungs
In a study on mice, Yale scientists created polymer nanoparticles to encapsulate mRNA, making it inhalable so it can reach the lungs. Courtney Malo, editor with Science Translational Medicine, which published the study, explained:4
"The ability to efficiently deliver mRNA to the lung would have applications for vaccine development, gene therapy, and more. Here, Suberi et al. showed that such mRNA delivery can be accomplished by encapsulating mRNAs of interest within optimized poly(amine-co-ester) polyplexes [nanoparticles].
Polyplex-delivered mRNAs were efficiently translated into protein in the lungs of mice with limited evidence of toxicity. This platform was successfully applied as an intranasal SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, eliciting robust immune responses that conferred protection against subsequent viral challenge. These results highlight the potential of this delivery system for vaccine applications and beyond."
The team, led by cellular and molecular physiologist Mark Saltzman, explained that the inhalable mRNA vaccine successfully protected against SARS-CoV-2, which "opens the door to delivering other messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics for gene replacement therapy and other treatments in the lungs."5
For the study, mice received two intranasal doses of nanoparticles carrying mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, which proved to be effective in the animals. In the past, lung-targeted mRNA therapies had trouble making it into the cells necessary to express the encoded protein, known as poor transfection efficiency.6
"The Saltzman group got around this hurdle in part by using a nanoparticle made from poly(amine-co-ester) polyplexes, or PACE, a biocompatible and highly customizable polymer," a Yale University news release explained.7 In a previous study, Saltzman had tried a "prime and spike" system to deliver COVID-19 shots, which involved injecting mRNA shots into a muscle, then spraying spike proteins into the nose.8
It turned out the injection portion may be unnecessary, and Saltzman has high hopes for the airborne delivery method, beyond vaccines:9
"In the new report, there is no intramuscular injection. We just gave two doses, a prime and a boost, intranasally, and we got a highly protective immune response. But we also showed that, generally, you can deliver different kinds of mRNA. So it's not just good for a vaccine, but potentially also good for gene replacement therapy in diseases like cystic fibrosis and gene editing.
We used a vaccine example to show that it works, but it opens the door to doing all these other kinds of interventions."
Air Vax Could ‘Radically Change’ How People Are Vaccinated
Saltzman says this "new method of delivery could ‘radically change the way people are vaccinated,’" making it easier to vaccinate people in remote areas or those who are afraid of needles.10 But that’s not all. An airborne vaccine makes it possible to rapidly disseminate it across a population.
By releasing the vaccine in the air, there’s no need to inject each person individually — which is not only time-consuming but difficult if an individual objects to the shot. This isn’t the case with an airborne vaccine, which can be released into the air without consent or even the public’s knowledge.
A similar strategy is being used with mRNA in shrimp, which are too small and numerous to be injected individually. Instead, an oral "nanovaccine" was created to stop the spread of a virus. Shai Ufaz, chief executive officer of ViAqua, which developed the technology, stated:11
"Oral delivery is the holy grail of aquaculture health development due to both the impossibility of vaccinating individual shrimp and its ability to substantially bring down the operational costs of disease management while improving outcomes ..."
While the Yale scientists are targeting an intranasal mRNA product, the outcome is the same — get as many exposed as possible with the least amount of cost and effort. According to the Yale study:12
"An inhalable platform for messenger RNA (mRNA) therapeutics would enable minimally invasive and lung-targeted delivery for a host of pulmonary diseases. Development of lung-targeted mRNA therapeutics has been limited by poor transfection efficiency and risk of vehicle-induced pathology.
Here, we report an inhalable polymer-based vehicle for delivery of therapeutic mRNAs to the lung. We optimized biodegradable poly(amine-co-ester) (PACE) polyplexes [nanoparticles] for mRNA delivery using end-group modifications and polyethylene glycol. These polyplexes achieved high transfection of mRNA throughout the lung, particularly in epithelial and antigen-presenting cells.
We applied this technology to develop a mucosal vaccine for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and found that intranasal vaccination with spike protein–encoding mRNA polyplexes induced potent cellular and humoral adaptive immunity and protected susceptible mice from lethal viral challenge. Together, these results demonstrate the translational potential of PACE polyplexes for therapeutic delivery of mRNA to the lungs."
US Government Has History of Bioweapons Release
When you put the pieces of the puzzle together, a disturbing picture emerges. As reported by The Epoch Times, we have a history of the U.S. government taking extreme measures to mandate and promote COVID-19 shots to the public. Now, researchers have developed an airborne mRNA vaccine, offering a vehicle by which to rapidly vaccinate the masses without their knowledge or consent.13
Is there proof that the government or another entity has plans to covertly release an air vax on the population? No. But there is a history of it carrying out secret bioweapon simulations on Americans. In 1950, the U.S. Navy sprayed Serratia marcescens bacteria into the air near San Francisco over a period of six days.
Dubbed "Operation Sea Spray," the project was intended to determine how susceptible the city was to a bioweapon attack. Serratia marcescens turns whatever it touches bright red, making it easy to track. It spread throughout the city, as residents inhaled the microbes from the air. While the U.S. military initially thought Serratia marcescens wouldn’t harm humans, an outbreak occurred, with some developing urinary tract infections as a result.
At least one person died "and some have suggested that the release forever changed the area's microbial ecology," Smithsonian Magazine reported.14 This wasn’t an isolated incident, as the U.S. government carried out many other experiments across the U.S. over the next 20 years.15 So, while it’s disturbing to think of an air vax experiment being conducted on an unsuspecting public, it’s not unprecedented.
Bioethics Study Promotes Covert, Compulsory Bioenhancement
Adding to the story is academic endorsement of the use of compulsory, covert bioenhancements. Writing in the journal Bioethics,16 Parker Crutchfield with Western Michigan University, Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine, discusses moral bioenhancements, which refers to the use of biomedical means to trigger moral improvements.
Drug treatments, including vaccines, and genetic engineering are potential examples of bioenhancements.17 Further, according to Crutchfield:18
"It is necessary to morally bioenhance the population in order to prevent ultimate harm. Moral bioenhancement is the potential practice of influencing a person’s moral behavior by way of biological intervention upon their moral attitudes, motivations, or dispositions.
The technology that may permit moral bioenhancement is on the scale between nonexistent and nascent, but common examples of potential interventions include infusing water supplies with pharmaceuticals that enhance empathy or altruism or otherwise intervening on a person’s emotions or motivations, in an attempt to influence the person’s moral behavior."
Some argue that moral bioenhancements should be compulsory for the greater good. Crutchfield believes this doesn’t go far enough. He also wants them to be covert:19
"I take this argument one step further, arguing that if moral bioenhancement ought to be compulsory, then its administration ought to be covert rather than overt. This is to say that it is morally preferable for compulsory moral bioenhancement to be administered without the recipients knowing that they are receiving the enhancement."
He even goes so far as to suggest "a covert compulsory program promotes values such as liberty, utility, equality and autonomy better than an overt program does."20 So here we have evidence of academic support for covertly releasing drugs and other bioenhancements onto the public. This, combined with the creation of an airborne mRNA vaccine and the government’s history of experimenting on the public, paints an unsettling picture of the future.
Problems With mRNA COVID Shots Persist
Aside from the concerns of airborne delivery, mRNA COVID-19 shots are associated with significant risks — no matter how you’re exposed. People ages 65 and older who received Pfizer’s updated (bivalent) COVID-19 booster shot may be at increased risk of stroke, according to an announcement made by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration.21
Further, a large study from Israel22 revealed that Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,23 leading to the condition at a rate of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 persons.24 Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.25
At least 16,183 people also say they’ve developed tinnitus after receiving a COVID-19 shot.26 The reports were filed with the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database. But considering only between 1%27 and 10%28 of adverse reactions are ever reported to VAERS, the actual number is likely much higher.
It's because of risks like these that informed consent is essential for any medical procedure, including vaccinations. The development of airborne mRNA jabs, however, makes the possibility of informed consent being taken away all the more real."
- Sources and References
1, 4 Science Translational Medicine August 16, 2023, Vol 15, Issue 709
2, 13 The Epoch Times September 5, 2023
3 Bioethics. 2019 Jan;33(1):112-121. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12496. Epub 2018 Aug 29
5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Yale School of Engineering & Applied Science, News & Events August 16, 2023
10 Bitchute, Truther’s Lair September 5, 2023, 5:09
11 Fish Farmer September 5, 2023
12 Science Translational Medicine August 16, 2023, Vol 15, Issue 709, Abstract
14, 15 Smithsonian Magazine July 6, 2015
16, 18 Bioethics. 2019 Jan;33(1):112-121. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12496. Epub 2018 Aug 29., Intro
17 Topoi volume 38, pages 1–5 (2019)
19, 20 Bioethics. 2019 Jan;33(1):112-121. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12496. Epub 2018 Aug 29., Abstract
21 U.S. FDA January 13, 2023
22, 24, 25 The New England Journal of Medicine August 25, 2021
23 MedPage Today August 25, 2021
26 NBC News April 23, 2023
27 Harvard Pilgrim Health Care report submitted to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2011, Page 6
28 BMJ 2005;330:433
Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v3d7day/?pub=ijro7
The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday passed an amendment to the agricultural appropriations bill that prohibits funding for human and animal vaccines grown in genetically engineered plants. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who introduced the amendment, said he is concerned “we could really contaminate a lot of our food supply with unknown doses of vaccines that would deliver unknown dosages.”
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...ible-vaccines/
The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday passed an amendment that would prohibit funding for transgenic edible vaccines — vaccines grown in genetically engineered plants for consumption by humans or animals.
The amendment, introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) to the agricultural appropriations bill H.R. 4368, would bar the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from funding the vaccines for fiscal year 2024.
A vote on the full bill in the House is still pending as of this writing.
In an interview with The Defender, Massie said he introduced the amendment after learning about a recent project in California, funded by a $500,000 grant from the National Science Foundation, that involves growing lettuce and trying to get the lettuce to produce mRNA vaccines that are intended to be consumed by humans who eat the lettuces.
Massie said he is concerned “that plants cross-pollinate and pollen from these modified plants, food-producing plants, could carry in the wind to other fields and contaminate them. And we could really contaminate a lot of our food supply with unknown doses of vaccines that would deliver unknown dosages.”
“Plants release pollen and it can go anywhere with the wind or with insects, and I just think it’s a bad idea,” he added.
“Rep. Massie is right to be concerned,” Claire Robinson, managing editor of GMWatch, told The Defender. “Genetically engineering a potent immunogen into food plants is irresponsible in the extreme.” She added:
‘Either they don’t work, or they are not safe, or both’Quote:
“All the usual risks of GM [genetically modified] plants — the DNA-damaging effects of the GM transformation process leads to changes in gene expression and biochemistry of the plant, which can include the production of toxins or allergens — apply to these vaccine-producing plants, with additional risks on top.
“In the case of vaccine-producing plants, you are intentionally engineering a plant to elicit an immune reaction. This increases the level of risk exponentially.”
According to a 2013 scientific paper, transgenic edible vaccines “are prepared by introducing selected desired genes into plants and inducing these genetically modified plants to manufacture the encoded proteins.”
Such vaccines offer “several potential advantages” to conventional vaccine production techniques according to the paper, including a potentially lower cost of production that would be suitable for developing countries.
Efforts to develop transgenic edible vaccines are not new — scientific literature on the topic dates back to at least 1999.
What is new with some current attempts to develop transgenic edible vaccines is that they would be geared to deliver mRNA vaccines orally.
“These are all genetically modified crops,” Massie said. “They’ve been injected with mRNA or spliced with DNA, with the intent of creating copies of that RNA or DNA. The plants are pretty effective at that.”
Robinson said this approach is not new. “Scientists have been trying to produce edible vaccines in plants for many years and some testing has occurred in animals and humans.”
However, she added, “Thus far, not one plant-produced vaccine has been approved anywhere, as far as I know. What does that tell us? Either they don’t work, or they are not safe, or both,” Robinson said.
California project is ‘utter madness’
The California lettuce project that drew Massie’s attention, conducted by scientists at University of California (UC), Riverside, is described as an effort to develop “The future of vaccines,” which “may look more like eating a salad than getting a shot in the arm” via turning “edible plants like lettuce into mRNA vaccine factories.”
“The project’s goals … are threefold,” according to UC Riverside. “Showing that DNA containing the mRNA vaccines can be successfully delivered into the part of plant cells where it will replicate, demonstrating the plants can produce enough mRNA to rival a traditional shot, and finally, determining the right dosage.”
This may help overcome challenges currently facing mRNA vaccine technology, namely, “that it must be kept cold to maintain stability during transport and storage.”
Plant-based mRNA vaccines “could overcome this challenge with the ability to be stored at room temperature,” university researchers said.
Juan Pablo Giraldo, Ph.D., an associate professor at UC Riverside’s Botany and Plant Sciences Department, is leading this research project alongside scientists from UC San Diego and Carnegie Mellon University. He said, “Ideally, a single plant would produce enough mRNA to vaccinate a single person.”
“We are testing this approach with spinach and lettuce and have long-term goals of people growing it in their own gardens,” he added. “Farmers could also eventually grow entire fields of it.”
Robinson called such efforts “utter madness,” telling The Defender:
Francis Boyle, J.D., Ph.D., a bioweapons expert and professor of international law at the University of Illinois who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, said that such research may also violate international law and globally recognized ethical standards.Quote:
Scientists are talking about people growing vaccine-containing plants in their gardens and farmers growing them in their fields. It is utter madness to propose to release such plants into uncontrolled conditions in this way.
“Vaccines are medicines, and their use and dosage must be carefully controlled. With any medicine, only the target patient should be treated, with their informed consent. How will these safeguards be in place if people are growing vaccines in food crops in their gardens and open fields?”
“The deployment of these transgenic edible vaccines would involve a gross violation of the Nuremberg Code on Medical Experimentation, and thus constitute a crime against humanity,” he said. “Their release into the environment would violate the Precautionary Principle of customary international environmental law. They would also be subject to the same human health objections to GMO foods that are too numerous for me to list.”
“What about cross-pollination and cross-contamination?” Robinson questioned. “People will ingest immunogens without their consent or knowledge.”
Risk of prion diseases, ‘dangerous immune reactions’
Robinson said there may also be several other unintended consequences for human health from the use of transgenic edible vaccines.
She said:
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, prion diseases “are progressive neurodegenerative disorders that affect both humans and animals,” and include Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, Gerstmann-Straussler-Scheinker disease, fatal familial insomnia, kuru and, in animals, chronic wasting disease.Quote:
“Plant-produced vaccines will have what is known as post-translational modifications to the intended protein product. You will not end up with just the desired protein product as it exists in its native form in the pathogen. These post-translational modifications will be specific to the plant, and in humans or other animals they will produce dangerous immune reactions.
“Even the responses to the desired protein product — the ‘vaccine’ — will vary from person to person because people respond differently to different proteins. Also, you can end up with proteins that are toxic or that are not folded properly, with the latter property meaning that they could cause prion diseases.”
“In addition, it’s possible that the novel proteins will sensitize people to other things, such as foods,” Robinson said. “In an age where food allergies are increasing rapidly, do we really want to risk worsening that trend?”
Massie said there are other ways in which the human food supply could be contaminated by plant-based vaccines, noting that animals could eat plants and “that could eventually contaminate food that humans eat.”
“How do you control the dosage when you put it in food?” Massie asked. “I think it’s just a really bad idea. Even if you’re not against vaccines in general, I just think this is a really bad way to deliver vaccines to people or animals,” he said.
He added:
Quote:
“I think we should have learned our lesson. If we believe that COVID-19 was a lab escape and the result of human experiments, which I do and most Americans do, then I think you should be concerned about these outdoor labs … Here we’re talking about greenhouses or open fields.”
article continues at: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/d...ible-vaccines/
DNA Contamination & Monkey Virus SV40 - Kevin McKernan/What's Actually in the COVID-19 Vaccines
September 30, 2023
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...rid=1925279699
https://media.mercola.com/ImageServe...accine-pdf.pdf
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
"Microbiologist Kevin McKernan and colleagues discovered simian virus 40 (SV40) promoters in COVID-19 shots that, for decades, have been suspected of causing cancer in humans
The media were quick to “fact check” the finding, with the AP publishing a rebuttal titled, “No, ‘Monkey Virus DNA’ Was Not Found in COVID Vaccines”
McKernan points out again that they never stated the entire SV40 virus is in the shots, just the SV40 promoter and enhancer, which is also cause for concern
While there are limits on how much DNA can be in a vaccine due to concern over DNA integration, the guidelines don’t consider lipid nanoparticles and other factors in COVID-19 shots that could enhance how much DNA can enter a cell
Not only do COVID-19 shots contain SV40 promoters, they also contain a 72 base pair insertion that makes the promoter much more aggressive and also drives the sequence into the nucleus of the cell, raising additional health risks
Jan Jekielek, senior editor with The Epoch Times and host of "American Thought Leaders," spoke with microbiologist Kevin McKernan — a former researcher and team leader for the MIT Human Genome project1 — about DNA contamination in COVID-19 shots.2
In a preprint study McKernan and colleagues assessed the nucleic acid composition of four expired vials of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots. "DNA contamination that exceeds the European Medicines Agency (EMA) 330ng/mg requirement and the FDAs 10ng/dose requirements" was found.3
So, in addition to the spike protein and mRNA in COVID-19 shots, McKernan’s team also discovered simian virus 40 (SV40) promoters that, for decades, have been suspected of causing cancer in humans, including mesotheliomas, lymphomas and cancers of the brain and bone.4 The media were quick to "fact check" the finding, with the AP publishing a rebuttal titled, "No, ‘Monkey Virus DNA’ Was Not Found in COVID Vaccines.’"5
Speaking with Jekielek, McKernan took issue with the AP’s fact check article, noting their paper "never said that the entire virus was present in the vaccines. We said that the promoter and the enhancer and the origin was in there, along with the polyA signal. It seems as if the AP has erected a strawman argument where they are trying to debunk something that was never said."6
Could DNA Contamination in COVID Shots Cause Cancer?
The AP and other media outlets also downplayed the notion that DNA contamination in COVID-19 injections could contribute to cancer. "They are trying to make claims that this is not cancer-causing," McKernan says, but "there are limits on how much DNA can be in a vaccine precisely because of the concern over DNA integration."7
Such guidelines were based on research by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s molecular biologist Keith Peden,8 but when he evaluated how much DNA could "safely" exist in vaccines, he didn’t consider lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) and other factors that could enhance how much DNA could enter a cell. McKernan explains:9
"Here are two additional things going on that mean the DNA in these vaccines is more likely to get to the nucleus and integrate into the genome than the information they had at that time. When they came to those regulations, they were assuming the previous DNA in the shots were host cell DNA, like maybe you grew the vaccine in some type of monkey kidney cell.
As a result of this, there's background monkey DNA, or background human DNA, due to whatever host cell line they use. We have something very different going on here. We have a well-known promoter that's used in gene therapy that's inside the vaccines that's getting injected through an LNP that makes it very effective at transecting cells. Then it has a signal in there that drives that DNA into the nucleus.
I don't think Keith Peden had anticipated that when he came up with these 10 nanogram limits of DNA. I'd say the verdict is still out as to whether or not they can be cancer-causing, but the risk is certainly elevated from what the FDA's guidelines have been constructed off of."
How SV40 Promoters in COVID Shots Could Drive Disease
McKernan explains that in many cases, when tumors are sequenced, they’re found to contain sequences from SV40 and other viruses, which can integrate into your genome, causing disruptions and instability that can trigger the cell line to grow out of control.10
In the case of COVID-19 shots, he says, "The concern is if this DNA integrates the genome, one portion of the SSV40 sequence is an SV40 promoter, a very strong promoter, which means it drives transcription wherever it lands in the genome.
If this happens to drop itself in front of a proto-oncogene [a gene that has the potential to cause cancer] and drives a lot of expression off of a gene that's known, if you hyper-express it and turn the cell cancerous, then we have a concern that DNA is in fact doing that."11
But not only do COVID-19 shots contain SV40 promoters, they also contain a 72 base pair insertion that makes the promoter much more aggressive and also drives the sequence into the nucleus of the cell. "And they're right next to each other," McKernan says. "If this DNA moves into the nucleus and it drags a promoter with it, and that integrates in front of a gene, it can disrupt gene regulation and potentially lead to the oncogenesis."12
At the same time, a Pfizer trial showed that the shots may induce lymphocytopenia and neutropenia, or low concentrations of white blood cells. This could further allow for cancerous changes to proliferate. "After vaccination, patients have lower white blood cells, which you need to clear out cells that are misbehaving, like cancer cells," McKernan adds.13
He’s also seen research showing that the spike protein from COVID-19 shots can enter the nucleus and disrupt regulation of p53 and BRCA1 genes:14
"People are probably familiar with BRCA1 because of breast cancer genes, but p53 is also another guardian of the genome. These are genes that clean up genomes that have been broken or have integration events ...
If you have all three of those potentially increased integration risks happening, with white blood cell reduction and spike protein inhibiting the genes that are meant to clean up this type of problem, the combination of those things could certainly be tied to the rise in cancer that we're currently seeing."
COVID Shots’ Lipid Nanoparticles Could Also Be Toxic
Another concerning compound in COVID-19 shots are the lipid nanoparticles, or LPNs. Because natural mRNA is easily broken down, this means the gene therapy needs a special delivery system to make it to the body’s cells. Moderna and Pfizer used lipid nanoparticles that contain polyethylene glycol (PEG)15 for this purpose.
The mRNA is wrapped in lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) that carry it to your cells, and the LNPs are "PEGylated" — that is, chemically attached to PEG molecules to increase stability.16 In their corporate prospectus17 released in 2018 at the time of their stock market launch, Moderna acknowledged that their LNPs carried risks.18 Among them, Moderna stated:
"Most of our investigational medicines are formulated and administered in an LNP which may lead to systemic side effects related to the components of the LNP which may not have ever been tested in humans."19
"While we have continued to optimize our LNPs, there can be no assurance that our LNPs will not have undesired effects. Our LNPs could contribute, in whole or in part, to one or more of the following: immune reactions, infusion reactions, complement reactions, opsonation reactions, antibody reactions including IgA, IgM, IgE or IgG or some combination thereof, or reactions to the PEG from some lipids or PEG otherwise associated with the LNP."20
Meanwhile, the shot trials didn’t include a control to show what happens if you just expose people to LNPs without mRNA. McKernan says:21
"What happens to people in that case? We don't know the answer to that ... a year from now, there will be more of a scientific consensus that spike protein was a bad idea, and that maybe we should switch this to a different protein or maybe we should use this platform to hit RSV [respiratory syncytial virus] or flu. If we don't know the toxicity of the LNPs alone, that might be just as dangerous of an approach.
We really do need to understand if this transfection is a good way to fend off a respiratory virus. Many people have argued that this is a horrible way to thwart off a respiratory virus because you're building immunity in the wrong compartment of the body.
You really need immunity in the nasal mucosa, and you're not going to get very effective nasal mucosa immunity through injection. You take on all of these injection risks where you're sending LNPs through the entire body and it's not very targeted."
What Happens if Shot Particles Enter the Ovaries?
There are concerns that shot particles are traveling throughout the body with unknown effects. Pfizer’s biodistribution study, which was used to determine where the injected substances go in the body, showed the spike protein from the shots accumulated in "quite high concentrations" in the ovaries.22
A Japanese biodistribution study for Pfizer’s jab also found that vaccine particles move from the injection site to the blood, after which circulating spike proteins are free to travel throughout the body, including to the ovaries, liver, neurological tissues and other organs.23 According to McKernan:24
"We know from the biodistribution study that some of these LNPs are getting to the ovaries, so that's a huge concern. If 1% of these LNPs get to the ovaries, there's 40 billion in each shot, we're getting down to 400 million that go to the ovaries. Now you're starting to really concern yourself.
If there's only 300,000 oocytes in each female, and there are 400 million LNPs down there, these numbers are worrisome. What are we doing to the germline in the future generation?"
Already, a study published in Obstetrics & Gynecology — and funded by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Research on Women's Health — confirmed an association between menstrual cycle length and COVID-19 shots.25
The implication is that the shots could be having an effect on fertility. As the Obstetrics & Gynecology researchers noted, "Menstrual cyclicity is an overt sign of health and fertility."26
‘There Is Residual DNA in Both Shots’
As for why the SV40 promoter and enhancer is in COVID-19 shots in the first place, it’s related to the plasmid growth medium, which is E. coli. McKernan explains:27
"It's [SV40 promoter] a common tool used in the biotech industry to drive very aggressive expression of a gene. In this case, Pfizer has it in front of a neomycin resistance gene, which drives resistance for neomycin. The reason they want it there is so that they can grow this plasmid in E. coli.
E. coli doubles every 30 minutes, so you can grow E. coli overnight and get gobs of this DNA. You then have to purify it from E. coli to make RNA out of it.
There is some risk that if you don't fully purify it from E. coli, you can leave behind what's known as endotoxin or lipopolysaccharides, usually abbreviated as LPS. This is an additional risk that Pfizer took on. Moderna's doing a very similar thing, although they don't have SV40 in there. They are using E. coli to amplify their plasmid DNA, and it comes with some of this risk.
What we do know is there is residual DNA in both shots, and this DNA is either right above the regulatory limit or tenfold higher ... When looking at RNA to DNA ratios, it's even worse. The actual outcome is that there is more like a 17- to 80-fold gap from what is required in the regulations, as best we can tell."
According to McKernan, Pfizer also used two different tools to measure RNA versus DNA. This allowed them to "cook the books," inflating the amount of RNA and depressing the amount of DNA so "they can squeak through these regulatory requirements without anyone really understanding what's going on."28 Further, Pfizer didn’t disclose its SV40 information to the European Medicines Agency, which McKernan believes was intentional:29
"They did that because they know the SV40 region is a very controversial base in its history in the vaccine field. The polio vaccines were contaminated with the full virus, not just these little components, but the full virus.
The full virus has over 5,000 bases. The components we have are about 466 bases of the virus, but they're arguably the most functional aspects of the virus's genome for replicating and for gene expression. The fact that they hid that this is in there from the EMA is a concern."
While McKernan and colleagues continue to spread the word about SV40 promotor and components in COVID-19 shots, the media continues to try to discredit their findings. McKernan points out again that they never stated the SV40 virus is in the shots — but that doesn’t make their study any less worrisome:30
"We said there was an SV40 promoter and some of the components. We were very clear about that, but it quickly got associated with, ‘These guys are claiming there's something there that isn't there.’ Then everyone missed the point that there are components of SV40 that are actually quite functional that we need to be concerned about.
They are in these vaccines because they've been studied as being gene therapy tools ... They are perhaps not as frightening as what happened in the polio vaccine, which some people have attributed to causing some cancers in the past. It's still a controversy in that field, but there's still things that we need to know about.
... There does seem to be a tendency for them [media] to either erect a strawman, or flood the zone with alternate information, so that an average person is just confused on what to believe, because there's a mixture of messages coming through the media that are meant to drown out the real signal."
Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v3c905g/?pub=ijro7
https://www.reuters.com/business/hea...rk-2023-10-02/
full text
The Vigilant Fox 🦊
@VigilantFox
🚨Study Finds Spike Protein Circulating 180 Days After COVID Vaccination
A recent study by Brogna and colleagues used mass spectrometry to identify a distinct amino acid signature of the vaccine-derived spike protein. Alarmingly, they found it circulating in the body for 180 days in approximately 50% of vaccine recipients.
"That means 50% of people who took the shots walking around out there. Every six months, they take a shot. They'll have continually circulating spike protein," remarked Dr. Peter McCullough.
https://x.com/jsolomonReports/status...390397755?s=20
https://correlation-canada.org/covid...rn-hemisphere/
CORRELATION has published a new report entitled “COVID-19 vaccine-associated mortality in the Southern Hemisphere” authored by Denis G. Rancourt, Marine Baudin, Joseph Hickey, and Jérémie Mercier
The paper is based on 17 countries in the Southern Hemisphere and equatorial region. A definite causal link is shown between many peaks in all-cause mortality and rapid vaccine rollouts. The authors quantify the fatal toxicity risk per injection, which is exceedingly large in the most elderly.
The authors conclude that governments should immediately end the policy of prioritizing elderly people for COVID-19 injection.
Kim Iversen interviews Jeffrey Sachs about the origins of COVID. Sachs was asked by the British Medical Journal to head a committee to investigate the origins of COVID. Sachs selected people like Peter Daszak on the committee, who, at the time, seemed well qualified for the task. At first, they concluded that the virus was of natural origin. However, Sachs started to hear other notable people question the origins of the virus, and also started to realize the conflicts of interest that many people on this committee had. Sachs is now fully convinced that the virus is man made, there was a lab leak, and a conspiracy to cover this up. At the end he lays out a number of scenarios as to why this may be.
==EDIT==I did not watch the full video, but the full video is here.
Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v3hd5k0
September 28, 2023
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/the...re-everywhere/
(Hopefully there will be a transcript for this conversation, because it's well worth knowing what Ardis has to say, even if you don't have 2&1/2 hours to listen. For one thing, I think it settles the whole argument as to whether COVID is actually a virus or not. Plus a shocking expose of rampant malpractice--Fauci, NIH, CDC, etc. with the detailed references to prove it.)
""Watch this explosive interview with Dr Bryan Ardis and Jason Shurka exposing the truth, origin, and unexpected antidote for C19 that ravaged the world.
Dr Bryan Ardis is a renowned doctor and researcher who has been at the forefront of uncovering the origins of C19 and finding ways to counter its effects. Despite facing resistance from major pharmaceutical companies, Dr Ardis remains steadfast in his mission to unearth the truth.
Jason Shurka has been closely monitoring Dr Ardis’s progress over the past year and supports his efforts to disseminate this vital information to a global audience. This interview serves to bring his valuable insights to the forefront."
Source: https://www.rumble.com/video/v3jbpg5/?pub=ijro7