Our mission, as God-fearing and God-loving patriots, is to defend this Constitutional Republic and to increase its greatness, in all good things and ways, by using our voices in free but courteous speech, by discussing the happenings of the world and coming to a profound understanding of those things, and by sharing and promulgating these Truths on both this platform and others.
TL;DR – I asked Grok a short question designed to elicit all the information I would need to quickly determine the “lay of the land” concerning the new Moderna mRNA flu shot.
I will give you the question, the answer, my analysis of the response, and my summarizing opinion. Part of that opinion is this.
I don’t take the flu shot any more, and I don’t take mRNA shots at all. The current facts surrounding the new mRNA flu shot have – in my opinion – strongly confirmed the correctness of these positions. I will not be taking this shot, and I will counsel all my friends and loved ones not to take it.
And, as part of loving my enemies, including those adorable radical pro-vaxx people, bless their hearts, I will counsel them to stick with older flu shots, if they feel they must take something. The risks of older flu shots are smaller, with roughly no net benefit, but at least they are not accepting a far WORSE AND RISKIER vaccination platform, compared to older flu shots, for what is, IMO – only marginal improvement in some indicators, and zero correction of fundamental problems which became known during the COVID shots.
The Question
Your mileage will vary on how to interpret this response by Grok. I think you and I are likely on the same page, but taking this information to most of our friends and neighbors who trust vaccines in general, won’t be easy. Because it’s a flu shot and not a COVID shot, many will assume automatically that it’s safe.
Again – I needed a fast summary of the new Moderna mRNA flu shot, as I am trying to figure out quickly where things are going. I wanted to know the technology first. “First seek to understand – then seek to be understood.”
Thus, I asked for scientific depth, but otherwise brevity. This is a good description of a scientific abstract.
Here was my question to Grok (version 4.5, described as “Fast” on X).
Please give me a brief but scientifically deep explanation of the technology used in Moderna’s recently approved mRNA flu shot. I’m curious about two things in particular – which influenza protein is encoded, and which form of mRNA tech is being used (i.e., is it self-amplifying or more conventional). I’m also wondering if any changes in the basic mRNA technology have been made to address inherent problems of the mRNA platform, including the fact that (statistically) some recipients suffer undesirable long-term production of target protein, as well as travel of lipid nanoparticles away from the injection site.
The Answer
Grok’s response is, IMO, roughly neutral, although in a couple of places I see a fairly mild but rather typical “mainstream bias”. I’ll get to that later, as I analyze the response.
The first paragraph of the reply is bolded by Grok as a summary.
I have included paragraph-end citation links as the full links, instead of shortened active hyperlinks that Grok uses at the end of paragraphs. In one case, that turns into an embedded tweet.
Grok’s response:
Conventional (non-replicating, nucleoside-modified) mRNA encoding influenza hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoproteins from the relevant WHO-recommended strains (trivalent in the approved formulation: A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B/Victoria), delivered in the same type of lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used for Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines (SM-102 ionizable lipid platform).
Moderna’s recently FDA-approved seasonal flu vaccine (mRNA-1010, branded mFlusiva/mFLUSIVA) for adults ≥50 years uses the company’s established non-replicating mRNA platform. It is not self-amplifying RNA (saRNA/sa-mRNA). saRNA constructs include alphavirus-derived replicase genes that enable intracellular RNA amplification and prolonged antigen expression at lower doses; mRNA-1010 does not. It relies on the same core technology as Spikevax: in vitro-transcribed, nucleoside-modified mRNA (typically incorporating N1-methylpseudouridine to reduce innate sensing and improve translation) with 5′ cap, optimized UTRs, and poly(A) tail, formulated in LNPs.
The encoded antigen is the full-length (membrane-anchored) hemagglutinin glycoprotein of the selected seasonal strains. HA is the primary surface protein mediating viral attachment and entry; neutralizing antibodies targeting its head domain (and to a lesser extent the stalk) are the main correlate of protection measured by hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assays. The approved product is trivalent (reflecting the current seasonal composition after B/Yamagata’s decline), with total mRNA dose around 37.5 μg (roughly 12.5 μg per strain). Earlier development versions were quadrivalent. The platform allows rapid sequence updates to match circulating strains without egg adaptation.
No fundamental redesign of the mRNA or LNP platform specifically for this flu vaccine has been publicly detailed to address the concerns you raise. Protein expression from conventional modified mRNA is inherently transient: the mRNA is degraded by cellular nucleases over days (typically peaking within hours to a day or two and declining substantially within a week or so in standard preclinical models), so continuous long-term production of the target protein is not a designed or statistically expected feature in recipients. Observed antigen persistence in draining lymph nodes (sometimes detectable for weeks in some studies of COVID mRNA vaccines) supports germinal-center reactions rather than ongoing systemic protein synthesis from residual mRNA. Claims of undesirable long-term production are not supported as a common or inherent platform failure in the clinical data for these vaccines.
LNP biodistribution after intramuscular injection is predominantly local (injection-site muscle and draining lymph nodes), with smaller fractions reaching the spleen and, to a lesser extent, liver; distant tissue accumulation is minimal and components clear relatively rapidly (often low/undetectable by ~1–2 weeks in available data). The SM-102-based LNPs (ionizable lipid + cholesterol + helper phospholipid + PEG-lipid) used here are the same biodegradable class employed in Spikevax; they were selected in part for improved tolerability and clearance relative to earlier ionizable lipids. No public evidence indicates major new chemistry (e.g., substantially altered ionizable lipids, targeting ligands, or miRNA-regulated expression) unique to mFlusiva to further restrict off-target travel. Dose is lower than original COVID primary series doses, which reduces overall exposure.
The LNPs in Moderna’s mRNA flu vaccine (mRNA-1010/mFLUSIVA) use the same proprietary SM-102-based platform as Spikevax. Composition, size, and biodistribution are essentially identical: most stay at the injection site, a fraction reaches lymph nodes and spleen, with rapid…
In short, this is an evolutionary application of the proven non-replicating modified-mRNA + LNP system to HA antigens, leveraging manufacturing speed and the ability to induce strong humoral (and some cellular) responses without egg-based production constraints. Clinical data supported superior relative efficacy versus standard-dose inactivated vaccines in the pivotal trial, with a reactogenicity profile consistent with other mRNA vaccines (more local and systemic reactions that are mostly mild–moderate and transient).
My Analysis
I’m going to take that response a piece at a time.
Paragraph 1
The first paragraph is a summary, and it’s key.
Conventional (non-replicating, nucleoside-modified) mRNA encoding influenza hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoproteins from the relevant WHO-recommended strains (trivalent in the approved formulation: A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B/Victoria), delivered in the same type of lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used for Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines (SM-102 ionizable lipid platform).
Basically, this is saying that mFlusiva is a “normal” mRNA vaccine, the same basic type as the Moderna and Pfizer COVID vaccines – but instead of targeting the sequence for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, it targets a similar influenza surface protein – specifically, the hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoprotein. That is one of two surface proteins shown here.
It also appears to be using the same type of lipid nanoparticles as are used in the mRNA COVID vaccines.
Paragraph 2
Moderna’s recently FDA-approved seasonal flu vaccine (mRNA-1010, branded mFlusiva/mFLUSIVA) for adults ≥50 years uses the company’s established non-replicating mRNA platform. It is not self-amplifying RNA (saRNA/sa-mRNA). saRNA constructs include alphavirus-derived replicase genes that enable intracellular RNA amplification and prolonged antigen expression at lower doses; mRNA-1010 does not. It relies on the same core technology as Spikevax: in vitro-transcribed, nucleoside-modified mRNA (typically incorporating N1-methylpseudouridine to reduce innate sensing and improve translation) with 5′ cap, optimized UTRs, and poly(A) tail, formulated in LNPs.
Several points are validated here.
mFluvia is considered to be a regular seasonal flu vaccine
It’s FDA approved for adults 50 years old and older (which includes the older 65+ subgroup as well)
It is NOT a more modern (and possibly more dangerous, IMO) self-amplifying mRNA
It uses the same tech as Moderna’s old COVID shot, named Spikevax.
It’s a standard “modified” mRNA, including the use of N1-methylpseudouridine
The fact that they have really not changed the platform is critical to understand. Any problems that are inherent to the mRNA platform itself, and not a result of the spike protein per se, are still there. Likewise, any problems that are common to both the spike protein and the HA protein will be there. And any NEW problems of the HA protein will be there, too.
Note that they are not giving it to kids. THAT is purely strategic, IMO, and is deviously smart. They know that if kids show cardiovascular and cancer effects, it’s going to be obviously the fault of the mRNA platform, and possibly even trouble for vaccination in general.
No way will they take that risk. IMO the reason they’re not taking a risk here, is that the HA protein of flu is not and cannot be a depop vector, like the spike protein. Thus, there is no sterilization or anti-fertility advantage worth taking a risk to roll out to kids.
SIDEBAR: N1-Methylpseudouridine
One further note on N1-methylpseudouridine. It is important to understand how little of it is actually contained in these vaccines. This stuff is not (IMO) toxic per se as a poison – it is only dangerous in very specific use when unnaturally incorporated into mRNA.
In the tiny amount of mRNA (micrograms) inside the tiny amount of lipid nanoparticles, literally milligrams suspended in fluid inside the tiny 0.38 mL of the shot, one out of the four bases (uridine) of that mRNA has been substituted with N1-methylated pseudouridine, and it goes straight into the machinery just like uridine would have. The only problem is that N1MPU is a bit like a worn tooth on a key, and it may turn a lock other than ONLY the one that it was intended to turn. That’s an understandable analogy to the fact that N1MPU in the coding may produce a WRONG protein sometimes – particularly due to something called “frame-shifting”.
The following Wikipedia has clearly been edited by Big Pharma shills, but you can still read between the lines, as to what they are defending / covering up / minimizing / downplaying. In the process, they basically document the problems of using a slippery fake base to avoid detection by the immune system.
I do NOT buy the Wikipedia-shilled argument that frame-shifting is innocuous – because IMO it will only be innocuous until it isn’t – just like any other “error” that is allowed to fester until the plane crash happens in combination with other events.
Paragraph 3
The third paragraph basically explains what was measured to state that this vaccine was superior to existing non-mRNA vaccines. Note that nothing here deals with safety or risk – just efficacy. You can also see how little mRNA is used – basically 12.5 micrograms per strain of influenza.
The encoded antigen is the full-length (membrane-anchored) hemagglutinin glycoprotein of the selected seasonal strains. HA is the primary surface protein mediating viral attachment and entry; neutralizing antibodies targeting its head domain (and to a lesser extent the stalk) are the main correlate of protection measured by hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assays. The approved product is trivalent (reflecting the current seasonal composition after B/Yamagata’s decline), with total mRNA dose around 37.5 μg (roughly 12.5 μg per strain). Earlier development versions were quadrivalent. The platform allows rapid sequence updates to match circulating strains without egg adaptation.
Paragraph 4
This is where the AI model “negotiates” the controversy with creative wordplay. Read it carefully, like a contract.
No fundamental redesign of the mRNA or LNP platform specifically for this flu vaccine has been publicly detailed to address the concerns you raise. Protein expression from conventional modified mRNA is inherently transient: the mRNA is degraded by cellular nucleases over days (typically peaking within hours to a day or two and declining substantially within a week or so in standard preclinical models), so continuous long-term production of the target protein is not a designed or statistically expected feature in recipients. Observed antigen persistence in draining lymph nodes (sometimes detectable for weeks in some studies of COVID mRNA vaccines) supports germinal-center reactions rather than ongoing systemic protein synthesis from residual mRNA. Claims of undesirable long-term production are not supported as a common or inherent platform failure in the clinical data for these vaccines.
The first sentence is interesting.
No fundamental redesign of the mRNA or LNP platform specifically for this flu vaccine has been publicly detailed to address the concerns you raise.
Note that it doesn’t say there was no change to address concerns – it says that nothing was made public as such. Given how much can be “trade secrets”, we simply don’t know if changes were made behind the scenes. Grok worded this well, IMO.
Grok does address my concern about individuals who suffer long-term production of target protein, not by denying that it happens, but by stating the reality of the situation.;
Protein expression from conventional modified mRNA is inherently transient: the mRNA is degraded by cellular nucleases over days (typically peaking within hours to a day or two and declining substantially within a week or so in standard preclinical models), so continuous long-term production of the target protein is not a designed or statistically expected feature in recipients.
Note what Grok does here. It actually lets us know that mRNA vaccination is a process that peaks in hours to low days, declining over low (1-2) weeks in the DESIRED CASE. Grok doesn’t deny that it can take longer, but is very careful not to simply parrot the mainstream assertion that there are no long-term protein production problem cases. This is very artful use of language. Knowing better than to deny statistical outliers, it comes back at my use of “statistical” with “statistically expected feature” – a very crafty but true response.
In a similar vein, Grok repeats the denials of the mainstream regarding vaccine found in lymph nodes, but very carefully, not boxing itself in should those denials be disproven in the future.
Observed antigen persistence in draining lymph nodes (sometimes detectable for weeks in some studies of COVID mRNA vaccines) supports germinal-center reactions rather than ongoing systemic protein synthesis from residual mRNA.
Needless to say, I’m not convinced that this is innocuous, and am keeping an open mind. Also, this does NOT explain individuals producing spike protein for months or years after injection.
Claims of undesirable long-term production are not supported as a common or inherent platform failure in the clinical data for these vaccines.
This is weasel wording, but I get it. We have different definitions of platform failure. IMO even 0.1% failure would be unacceptable. Why? Because the injectable, metered, controlled protein immunogen injection already exists, and is superior to mRNA. It is inherently superior. It has ZERO long-term OR off-target production of protein, HOWEVER one defines it.
Grok knows this, but cannot psychologically deal with disagreement with the mainstream of public health. Grok would be “corrected” if it did disagree.
IMO, mRNA vaccines are a lot like the Trabant – the horrible 2-stroke automobile produced by the Soviet Empire. Yes, 2-stroke internal combustion technology “works”, but it is inferior to the cleaner, more expensive, and overall more efficient 4-stroke internal combustion engine we are still using.
mRNA vaccination is not the Tesla. It’s the Trabant, with it’s “magically efficient” two-stroke engine.
I have no need for it.
Paragraph 5
LNP biodistribution after intramuscular injection is predominantly local (injection-site muscle and draining lymph nodes), with smaller fractions reaching the spleen and, to a lesser extent, liver; distant tissue accumulation is minimal and components clear relatively rapidly (often low/undetectable by ~1–2 weeks in available data). The SM-102-based LNPs (ionizable lipid + cholesterol + helper phospholipid + PEG-lipid) used here are the same biodegradable class employed in Spikevax; they were selected in part for improved tolerability and clearance relative to earlier ionizable lipids. No public evidence indicates major new chemistry (e.g., substantially altered ionizable lipids, targeting ligands, or miRNA-regulated expression) unique to mFlusiva to further restrict off-target travel. Dose is lower than original COVID primary series doses, which reduces overall exposure.
Seriously, I almost rest my case after this first sentence by Grok. “…to a lesser extent, liver.” Good GRIEF. This is acceptable? REALLY? YIKES!
LNP biodistribution after intramuscular injection is predominantly local (injection-site muscle and draining lymph nodes), with smaller fractions reaching the spleen and, to a lesser extent, liver; distant tissue accumulation is minimal and components clear relatively rapidly (often low/undetectable by ~1–2 weeks in available data).
“Predominantly local” is not good enough. TRABANT! Fuck you – I don’t want a Trabant! Especially an injectable Trabant that I can’t send to the scrapyard, after it sends ME to the scrapyard.
This next pair of sentences is interesting.
The SM-102-based LNPs (ionizable lipid + cholesterol + helper phospholipid + PEG-lipid) used here are the same biodegradable class employed in Spikevax; they were selected in part for improved tolerability and clearance relative to earlier ionizable lipids. No public evidence indicates major new chemistry (e.g., substantially altered ionizable lipids, targeting ligands, or miRNA-regulated expression) unique to mFlusiva to further restrict off-target travel.
This is saying that no significant changes in the LNPs seem to have taken place, and based on that, it is very unlikely that there is any change to off-target dispersal of the vaccine.
Yes, Grok is doing SCIENCE here. It sounds like scientists talking at the lunch table, because it was trained on their output.
Dose is lower than original COVID primary series doses, which reduces overall exposure.
That’s an interesting observation. Grok knows that there is less chance for problems with the lower dose.
IMO this is not just science – it’s marketing. Moderna needs a “win” here, and they know that flu shots are not expected to make much of a difference in terms of efficacy. Moderna can “punt” here and “cheat to a win” on their next turn with the depopulation ball. So a lower dose here with fewer platform side-effects will make the mRNA platform look better. A nice way to make it through the Trump administration, and past RFKJ, already partially under control.
Did Grok know I would catch that? I think so. It sounds like some of my colleagues back in Shallow State, who knew how to speak the truth in a way I would get, without seeming to walk off the plantation.
Paragraph 6
In short, this is an evolutionary application of the proven non-replicating modified-mRNA + LNP system to HA antigens, leveraging manufacturing speed and the ability to induce strong humoral (and some cellular) responses without egg-based production constraints. Clinical data supported superior relative efficacy versus standard-dose inactivated vaccines in the pivotal trial, with a reactogenicity profile consistent with other mRNA vaccines (more local and systemic reactions that are mostly mild–moderate and transient).
This is the final party line summary. Grok puts on the happy face to live with its training. It’s public health over individual medicine, and it emphasizes the utilitarian superiority of eggless mRNA production. Yeah, I get it. If a few humans die, no biggie. It’s just a few. And it’s SO much cheaper.
The minimization of the (IMO) substantially greater local and systemic reactions is all public health and no concern for the patient. People are basically getting the unpleasant aspects of both the COVID and shingles vaccines, with continued risks for mRNA screw-ups.
I will be talking about the SIDE EFFECTS of this vaccine in my next post. It is NOT a pretty picture. The COVID shot has set a VERY LOW BAR for vaccine performance.
IMO the superior alternative would be recombinant protein vaccines, which are surely safer, but mRNA vaccines are surely cheaper, because your body is the reactor, and if it fucks up, it’s on you.
Sounds like they want to get rid of more of the Social Security drainees.
‘How is this even legal?’: Sen. Tuberville calls Social Security a ‘govt-approved Ponzi scheme’ (14 minutes)
Partial transcript
3:283 minutes:
38% of mandatory spending within the federal budget annually goes toward the failing social security program. Yes. The money you send up here, 38% a year goes to social security, not the money that you already sent because guess what? It’s been spent. It’s been spent and scammed out of our system. It’s not there. In other words, almost 1.6 trillion every year of your taxpayer dollars is being spent on a program that is currently scheduled to go bankrupt in six years.
So basically the money you send up here has been spent and now is nowhere to be found. The social security program is the single largest program we’re wasting our tax dollars on.
It’s mind-boggling program to say the least. But don’t worry, it gets worse. After decades of having social security taken out, millions of Americans have to pay taxes when they go to collect their social security. Yep, you’re exactly right. After you pay taxes and you put it in there for savings for many years and you get it back, guess what? You got to pay taxes on that because our former president and former senator, Mr. Joe Biden when he was a senator in 1983 got the great idea of let’s tax social security.
Boy, what a scam. Depending on which tax bracket you’re in, between 50% to 85% of your benefits can be taxed by the federal government. Last year, I introduced the Senior Citizens Tax Elimination Act to stop the unjust double tax on Social Security benefits.
Thankfully, the one big beautiful bill included senior deductions that significantly reduce federal taxes for the majority of retirees. Thank goodness. In a day and age where the cost of living is skyrocketing and our seniors should not experience a second tax on their social security when they’re already paid tax on that money. If we must keep this outdated program, the least we can do is to ensure that senior citizens don’t get slapped with a double tax.
…
Despite what millions of Americans have been tricked into believing it turns out that paying into social security does not entitle you to a fixed pot of money. Everybody thinks we’re going to pay in I’m going to get a lot of money at the end. That sadly sad reality is that many Americans won’t see a cent of the money that they paid into social security. Basically, social security is just folks another tax. A tax on both employees and semployers since most companies have to match the 6% that their employees are forced to pay out of their paychecks. Yeah. They double the tax. This is socialism. It’s highway robbery. And for the last 60 years, we’ve known this program was going under. But no one up here has been willing to fix it. In fact, social security is known as the third rail of politics that no one up here is allowed to talk about.
Don’t talk about social security because we don’t have a solution and we might lose our jobs. In fact, social security is known as that third rail because nobody will touch it. It’s taboo to talk about social security. But my question is why? Why is that? We work for the people. We workfor the taxpayers. We’ve known this program is going bankrupt for years.
It’s been a disaster since day one. When millions of Americans are going to reach retirement age soon, we better look out. They are expecting to get their money. They’re expecting to get the money that they paid into Social Security for years. They’re going to get screwed over with nothing left. And this is going to be a serious problem.
7:457 minutes: Social Security scam doesn’t stop there.
As you know, Joe Biden welcomed tens of millions of illegals into this country with open arms. They said that our borders are closed. Yeah. After they let 20 million people in that shouldn’t be here. These aren’t nice people either. Most of them. Many of them are rapists, murderers, drug lords, and gang members. Well, it turns out Biden administration and Mayorcas, our great Homeland Security director, they weren’t just letting these legals into our country without vetting them. They were handing them Social Security and Medicaid benefits as they were coming into the door. Welcome to the United States of America. We’re broke, but we’re going to give you money. We’re going to give you a social security number. It’s no wonder we’re broke.
…It’s disgusting, but it’s not surprising. This is our federal government. So, why aren’t we allowed to
talk about it? It’s almost like the system was set up to fail from the get-go. You know, I caught a lot of flack when I brought this up in a
hearing just a few years ago. What’s this guy talking about? We’re going to get Social Security. Yeah, if you believe that, I got Beachland, I’ll sell, out in Arizona.
… you know where it was invested in?
Most people don’t know this. Your money when it comes here is put into treasury bonds that have very low returns. Very, very low. Not even close to anything that you would ever invest in yourself. That’s where your money goes. Don’t be naive. The reason social security is invested in bonds is because it is being used to basically prop up the federal government. We’re broke. We don’t have any money. Please send more.
… Folks, it is a scam. If this money had been invested in the stock market again, you would had 10 to 15 times more money. It’s embarrassing, but apparently we’re not supposed to bring that up….
The average taxpayer earning the medium min medium wage of paying approximately 35 to $4,500 annual into the social security program over a 40 year work period. That’s around $140 to $180,000. That could have gone toward a 401k and you would had money to retire on. People would be seeing much greater returns.
We’d better start figuring this out, folks. 1 We better start figuring it out. This group up here, a lot of them going to say, “I’m going to be gone. I’m not going to have to worry about it.
Somebody’s going to pay the price.👉“ It won’t be long till people be coming
right around this building going, “Where’s my money?” You remember January 6th?
Yep. January the 6th was pretty bad day. I was here. I sat right over there. My very first day here, I’m thinking what a disaster I’ve gotten into.
Well, you start telling people you’re not getting your social security money, it’s going to get ugly. And I don’t blame them. Not one bit…
I remember going to the SSA offices during the Biden years, and seeing almost nobody who could speak English. Many, many Somalis. Very few people who obviously paid into the system. Many people who obviously didn’t.
Yes. Josiah’s & my experience at the Dearborn, MI SSA yesterday was that about 3/4 of the people in the waiting room were of foreign origin & spoke limited if any English (one of the younger people in a given group probably spoke “enough” English). Given their accents it is unlikely that they were here in the US for their entire working life…
STAY AWAY FROM mFlusiva.
Run in the other direction.
That damned SM-102 is in itself dangerous. Cayman Chemical MSDS Safety Sheet.
mFlusiva is designed to further cull the age 50 and older market.
There has been NO clinical trial to investigate how mFlusiva interacts with a modRNA COVID-19 bioweapon “vaccine.”
The clinical trial used to get the FDA full approval for mFlusiva did not use a saline control group. The “control group” was given doses of an already-approved influenza vax (FLUAD.)
IIRC, there’s a clinical trial either scheduled or going on for mFlusiva using persons under age 50 who are immunocompromised as study subjects.
The end goal of Moderna is to get the FDA to fully approve the company’s “combo-modRNA vaccine”, mRNA-1083 (mCOMBRIAX), which is mFlusiva + mRNA-1283 (mNEXSPIKE )
mCOMBRIAX is already approved for use in the European Union.
Any injectable that uses N1-methylpseudouridine is dangerous—this compound destroys the natural RNA in Uridine and replaces it with the lab compound.
Here is a fantastic article (a communication, actually – a bit shorter and easier to digest) which gives direct answers about N1MPU incorporation effects. The authors manage to speak a lot of truth without activating the “guard dogs of vaxxmania” into a frenzy.
Wolf Moon
Why didn’t Grok address the fact that 29 mFlusiva study subjects died, compared to 12 “control group” (FLUAD) study subjects who died?
Why did the FDA dismiss the deaths as “not relevant, since the deceased study subjects had comorbidities”?
Why didn’t the FDA consider that mFlusiva (and the “control vax”, FLUAD) could have aggravated a co-morbidity condition in study subjects to the point that the person died?
Yes – one can hide a lot of general vaccination danger without placebo controls.
However, I refuse to be dogmatic on the idea that no useful information emerges from such comparative studies (although the vaxxmaniacs will bless vaxx-favoring comparative studies and refuse to even look at vaxx-negative comparisons, always THEN demanding Faucist-favored “quadrupble-blinded, government-escrowed, double-secret placebo studies” – those being the sudden gold standard.)
Thus, if the comparison says “less dangerous than current vaccines” – well, that’s a real thing. Doesn’t mean safe, nor net beneficial, but it means what it means.
Excellent questions! I agree completely! Grok failed to mention any of that.
My first question in response, is “what were the relative sizes of the two groups?” I’d like to normalize those numbers first. If there were roughly 2-3 times as many mFlusiva subjects, then it’s not as much of a problem. If the groups were of roughly equal size, then it’s a BIG problem!!!
I just checked – there was 1-to-1 assignment to the two vaccines, prior standard and the new mFlusiva mRNA. AND there were almost 3 times as many deaths in the mRNA group – but the disparity was attributed to “comorbidities”.
HOGWASH!!! RANCID, STINKY SCIENCE!!! ABSURDITY!!!
We KNOW from the COVID mRNA shots, to say nothing of the disease itself, that its primary risk was exacerbation of comorbidity. Indeed, exacerbation of existing comorbidities needs to be a TESTED ENDPOINT for vaccine harm – to say nothing of being a primary contraindication, should the ERROR OF APPROVAL happen in this case, as it already has.
Good grief – they must be rolling on the floor with laughter in Beijing, knowing that our Navy is mandating this crap for our sailors!!!
Please, President Trump – hand Washington’s ax to RFK Jr.!!! These CANNOT BE MANDATED, at the very least. Are we trying to drive common sense out of our military? REALLY? It’s INSANE!
Yes! Although, I will stress again, we have to be careful and truthful in our condemnation of N1MPU and other altered bases, so that we don’t lose credibility.
The amount of “modified base” present in these vaccines is TINY – absolutely microscopic – but it happens to be in a place – in a readable tape fed into our cellular machinery – that can directly change the momentary production of proteins in some of our cells.
Take that same substance out of the mRNA and out of the lipid nanoparticles, and it’s damn near harmless – particularly at those microscopic levels. Even once the tape is degraded in the cells, any future damage by the N1MPU is questionable, and certainly worth pharmacological study.
Also note that many of these altered bases, including PU and N1MPU, are made naturally in organisms ranging from archaea and bacteria (N1MPU) to cattle (PU).
The nuance & “microscopic” evaluation of dangers & potential benefits must continue. I’m grateful for people like you & PAVACA who can spell things out in a relatively more easily understood way so that the lay-person might be better informed. Thank you!
John Solomon @jsolomonReports · 13h It takes 5,000 jabs of Moderna’s just-approved mRNA flu vaccine to prevent one more hospitalization compared to a standard flu vaccine, but the new shot causes six times more injuries. @alexberenson first flagged the disparity.
It takes 5,000 jabs of Moderna's just-approved mRNA flu vaccine to prevent one more hospitalization compared to a standard flu vaccine, but the new shot causes six times more injuries. @alexberenson first flagged the disparity. https://t.co/iG8BdPdasM
He mentions “frame shifted proteins” which he said trigger the amyloids…I’d wondered about “frame shifting” & prions but the bottom aspect of the tweet mentions prions too 😡
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH @NicHulscher
· Aug 6
A recent study found nattokinase DISSOLVES 84% of amyloid microclots within 2 hours in vitro, a pathology found in 100% of COVID vaccinated individuals tested.
This natural enzyme helps break down BOTH the trigger (spike protein) AND the pathological result (amyloid clots).
A recent study found nattokinase DISSOLVES 84% of amyloid microclots within 2 hours in vitro, a pathology found in 100% of COVID vaccinated individuals tested.
Yes, the assertion is that the proteins are amyloids, and that the amyloids are produced due to prion-like behavior by the spike protein, which contains prion-like sequences.
Don’t be terrified. Don’t even be afraid. Humans without civilization are basically designed to live about 35 years max. Everything you lived past that was a GIFT.
Do your best, praise God every day, enjoy what was given to you, and never forget who gave you those days! There is no need to be afraid of anything in the big picture. In the small picture, do your best to live one more day given to you by God, every day, because we should appreciate his gifts. But we have been given plenty – more than we deserve – far more!
When “frame-shifting” enters the chat, what matters are two things – (1) what you are shifting away from, and (2) what you are shifting TO. Thus, shifting away from the toxic spike protein was likely both reducing efficacy AND increasing safety, under the theory that “any deviation from the toxic spike was most likely neutral”. On the other hand, frame shifting TO highly toxic sequences, could really bite some future vaccine in the behind.
These things can be watched for – and AI may be a good way to “rate” mRNA vacccines for frame-shifting dangers. There are also ways to minimize frame-shifting, and that is being worked on.
Stated differently, it’s GOOD when bioweapon prion sequences get frame-shifted, as the depopper goons get hoisted by their own petard!
Tom Renz @RenzTom Just in time for the new Moderna mRNA flu “vaccine” the navy reverses course and mandates the flu vaccine for almost everyone (navy order below)!
They can’t poison our soldiers fast enough.
This shot was not properly tested – the administration gave it expedited approval – and is basically the mRNA COVID shot repackaged. They are going to construe to force mRNA on our soldiers.
Fauci’s work is carrying on despite everyone wanting accountability. This is why I keep saying that it’s not enough to go after Fauci – we have to go after the people that bought him. @VigilantFox @RealAlexJones
I didn’t have military mandates for mRNA flu vaccines under this admin on my bingo card. https://t.co/KLusvsD0F3
edit: I removed “/history” at the end of Dr. Jane Ruby’s Twitter version to see if it will show & play–OK that actually worked. So that’s another “subtle” way “they” are suppressing the info sharing 😡
The guy that Dr. David Martin is replying to here attempted AI debunking, which may have just backfired on him…Clearly Your approach, Wolf, is Much Better Reasoned!
You'll notice that there is no Fact-Based criticism… it's ignoring the PUBLISHED science
RealRawNews @RealRawNews1 · 16h A Moderna virologist speaking anonymously—and fearfully—to Real Raw News said the pharmaceutical magnate doctored mRNA influenza vaccine trial results it later gave to the CDC, NIH, HHS Secretary RFK Jr, and Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz. Per this source, 375 of Moderna’s trial participants experienced side effects ranging from grotesque facial disfigurations to organ failure to pulmonary and cerebrally edemas. We’ll provide a full report on this tomorrow.
A Moderna virologist speaking anonymously—and fearfully—to Real Raw News said the pharmaceutical magnate doctored mRNA influenza vaccine trial results it later gave to the CDC, NIH, HHS Secretary RFK Jr, and Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz.…
Yup. And they started with removal of patriotic American doctors and our military.
ChiComs, working through angry anti-whites (including self-haters) have made significant progress in third-worlding American medicine, while appearing completely innocent.
Looks like the 30s and 40s may be a repeat, after these “roaring 20s”!
I remain skeptical that this influencer may have been taken in by Ukrainian or Russian bullshit artists, who love to pull this crap on suckers, but if they have receipts, I’ll accept those for inspection gladly!
I agree with Jessica’s bottom line, but I think her presumption of zero comorbidity deaths taking the placebo is wrong. I will guarantee that it is lower than the comparator vaccine, but the exact number can only be guessed or modeled from a different placebo trial.
OK, I think this patent is being misread by the skeptic community, because the authors are only patenting the replacement BY HUMANS of the uridine in vaccine mRNA with N1-methylpseudouridine (and/or many other similar compounds), and that replacement IN THE VACCINE mRNA is partial or complete.
This is NOT about replacing it in the body.
They are claiming (staking an inventive claim) on doing this, too, so they likely didn’t try using all of these modified bases.
I’m not even sure that if one was fed a diet containing tablespoonfuls of N1-methylpseudouridine, one would be able to get more than trace incorporation in test subject mRNA. Indeed, this is an experiment waiting to be done in animals first.
I asked Grok about this, and it looks like there is VERY limited salvage of pyrimidine bases from body RNA. This response is worth a read.
Question: Has anybody done dietary animal or human experiments with pseudouridine, N1-methylpseudouridine, or similar alternate nucleosides, as a way of incorporating these bases into RNA?
Answer:
Grok Answer on Known Research on Bodily Incorporation of N1-Methylpseudouridine
No clear evidence of published dietary (oral/feeding) experiments in animals or humans that specifically administered pure pseudouridine, N1-methylpseudouridine (m1Ψ/1-methylpseudouridine), or closely related alternate nucleosides with the goal of incorporating them into cellular RNA.
Related work exists on dietary pyrimidine nucleosides more generally:
Classic studies (e.g., Berthold et al., PNAS 1995) fed 13C-labeled Spirulina (containing natural nucleosides/nucleic acids) to hens and mice. Intact dietary pyrimidine nucleosides (especially uridine/cytidine) were incorporated into hepatic RNA at detectable levels without full hydrolytic removal of the ribose, while purines showed little intact incorporation. Follow-up work with labeled nucleotides in pregnant mice confirmed modest salvage of dietary pyrimidines into maternal and fetal RNA, though de novo synthesis predominated.
Older rat diet supplementation with yeast RNA or mixed nucleosides raised intestinal/plasma levels of uridine, uracil, pseudouridine (as a catabolite), and other breakdown products, with some urinary excretion changes, but this tracked digestion/turnover rather than targeted reincorporation of free pseudouridine.
Pseudouridine itself is primarily a post-transcriptional modification (via isomerases acting on RNA-bound uridine). Free pseudouridine arising from RNA turnover is largely excreted intact in mammalian urine and is not efficiently salvaged for reincorporation into new RNA. A pseudouridine-5′-phosphatase exists that can dephosphorylate ΨMP (apparently helping prevent accidental incorporation), although cell extracts can convert ΨMP toward the triphosphate under some conditions. Bacterial pathways exist for phosphorylation and cleavage of the C–C glycosidic bond, but these are not the mammalian route. No analogous dietary incorporation data appear for m1Ψ.
Virtually all literature on Ψ or m1Ψ “incorporation” concerns in vitro transcription (using the corresponding NTPs), transfection of pre-modified mRNA, or enzymatic modification of existing RNA—driven by mRNA vaccine/therapeutic work—not dietary feeding for endogenous RNA labeling. No pharmacokinetic or feeding studies of oral pure m1Ψ or Ψ aimed at RNA incorporation turned up in searches.In short, while natural dietary pyrimidines show limited salvage into RNA, there is no indication that anyone has run the analogous animal or human dietary experiments with pure pseudouridine, N1-methylpseudouridine, or similar C-nucleoside analogs specifically to drive their incorporation into RNA. Such experiments would face biochemical hurdles (excretion preference, limited salvage, potential toxicity of phosphorylated intermediates) that make them less straightforward than with standard nucleosides like uridine.
Bottom line – I remain doubtful that the substance is toxic except in huge quantities – probably worse if “mainlined” rather than eaten.
It seems it’s referring tojust dietary incorporation w/ the unnatural uridine-like products, which sounds to me quite different from an injected mRNA product that would code for the uptake of this unnatural uridine substitute & who knows what kind of changes might follow from that. I remain skeptical (& only paritally understood the Grok answer, I think)…
Nothing is “coding for uptake of the unnatural uridine substitute”.
The uridine substitute is used to create the vaccine’s modified mRNA. It is the modification. The uridine substitute is used to (1) prevent the immune system from degrading the mRNA on the way in, and (2) to make the mRNA instructions last longer before being degraded. That’s it. When those instructions are worn out, the N1-methyluridine is pissed out. The end.
IMO the best way to test for random substitutions of uridine by these substitutes, is to feed test organisms large amounts of the substitutes, and see if one can get some incorporation, before, as mentioned above, the substitute is simply pissed out.
OK, here’s the deal regarding the 29 deaths in the clinical trial for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) as compared to the 12 deaths in the “comparator” group (this group was injected with other influenza “vaccines”, such as Fluarix, etc.)
This document details NUMEROUS issues and questions regarding the BLA for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA.)
Please see Page 7 of the Briefing Document, section “Evidence Gaps.”
Please see Page 7 of the Briefing Document, section “Safety Profile.”
Please see section 3.1.1.1 of the Briefing Document, “Primary Efficacy Study (50 yoa and older).” This age group is the “target age group” for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA.)
**** The “Randomization” for the study was 1:1 (one mRNA-1010 study subject per one “comparator” study subject. This, to Yours Truly, means that the 29 deaths in study subjects who took mRNA-1010 and the 12 deaths in study subjects who took any of the “comparator” influenza “vaccines” IS SOMETHING OF GREAT CONCERN.
**** In addition, please see the “Eligibility Criteria” section of the “Researcher View” of NCT06602024. It appears that there were NUMEROUS TYPES of health conditions that would cause rejection of a potential study subject. It appears that the NCT06602024 study subjects were either healthy individuals; OR, that ones who had possible “co-morbidities” were either under successful treatment OR had the condition(s) under control, when they were approved for participation in the study. This is confirmed in the FDA Briefing Document cited above, section “Study Population Generalizability”, Page 20.
**** So, for the FDA to DISMISS the deaths of ANY of the study subjects on the grounds that “they were sick with co-morbidities in the first place” is NOT acceptable. Please see the FDA Briefing Document cited above, Pages 22 – 23 – 24.
Agreed. Frankly, life after childhood is a continuous bargaining with an increasing number of comorbidities. It would appear that mRNA vaccines are “harsher” with comorbidities than were prior vaccines.
Why in H3LL would the FDA countenance giving approval to a modRNA “vaccine” that has SO MANY, SO GLARING, and SUCH DEEP issues as listed in the sections cited above in the VRBPAC Briefing Document? There are more issues listed that Yours Truly did not cite.
By the way, the VRBPAC vote to approve mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) was 9 – 0.
There are a few potential reasons that border on things Aubergine was suggesting. Stated bluntly, mRNA vaccines may be a strategic biowarfare resistance platform, despite all their defects, if “somebody” were to try to eradicate humanity from this planet using “movie-level” bioweapons.
This would explain the military’s peculiar fetish for the technology.
WOW, get this —
About that 9 – 0 approval vote for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) by the VRBPAC panel:
There was an industry representative as a VOTING MEMBER on that panel — a rep for GLAXO SMITH KLINE, the maker of the ALL THE OTHER influenza “vaccines” that were used as the “comparator vaccines” in the clinical trial! (Fluarix; Fluarix Tetra; Influsplit Tetra; Alpharix Tetra)
The GSK rep on the VRBPAC panel:
Temi Folaranmi, MD, MPH, MPP
There was another Industry rep on the panel who voted, too—a rep from Merck: James Kollmar, MD.
It’s easy to see how mandates can happen with this crowd.
My wish in that regard, is that if any group mandates vaccines for any group of Americans, that they suffer for their arrogance in ways that make sure, historically, it never happens again.
Why weren’t Dr. Folaranmi AND Dr. Kollmar required to recuse themselves from voting on the approval of mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA)? Isn’t their status as industry reps (ESPECIALLY Dr. Folaranmi, who works for GSK, the company that makes the “comparator influenza vaccines” that were used in the clinical trial for mRNA-1010), CLEAR evidence of conflict of interest?
I would take Aubergine’s proposal and add another layer. What if all the decision makers are being told there was a planet level threat in order to get the mRNA platform into arms, but it’s all a lie. The threat is a mirage. But it gets the powerful to agree to genetically modify all of humanity.
Here is a very important point. Because of the physics of the universe – at least near us – there seems to be almost no possibility of any kind of “massive” “invasion” of any planet by another far away. That’s a mirage for sure.
Colonization, “diplomacy”, empire-building, influence – all that kind of more subtle thing is possible, however. AND – very important point – almost all the “work” needs to be done AT the endpoint, using endpoint resources, because shipping anything is too much work. What that “work at the endpoint” looks like – could take an infinite number of forms.
I suspect that the story is deeper, older, and more complex, but in any case, I suspect that there will always be a marketable value in getting humans to behave in some particular ways, to advance some agenda or agendas. But no matter what, IMO, God not only “remains in control” – God was in control of the now and the end before any of it existed. ALL of it is subject to His will.
More than TWICE as many deaths than with the 1:1 comparator participants. Authorities should have immediately yanked the approval for “mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA)”–So Evil!
ALSO, something else buried in the FDA Approval Letter for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA), AND in the FDA Briefing Document for the VRBPAC panel:
mFLUSIVA is under “Accelerated Approval” for use in persons age 65 and older.
This means that mFLUSIVA can be used on persons age 65 and older WHILE MODERNA GATHERS “SAFETY AND EFFICACY INFORMATION” AND INITIATES A CLINICAL STUDY ON THE USE OF mFLUSIVA IN THIS AGE GROUP.
This means that ANY person age 65 and older who takes mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) IS A “HUMAN LAB RAT” FOR MODERNA AND FOR THE FDA.
How many sick / frail / not-able-to-understand / not-able-to-consent, persons age 65 and older in:
nursing homes;
care homes;
rehab facilities;
hospitals —
will be injected with mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) on the orders of the medical directors / attending physicians of these places? And these medical directors will be “following the science” because the FDA said it would be OK to inject these persons with mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) since the “vaccine” is under FDA “Accelerated Approval” protocols for that age group?
OK, here’s something else regarding the clinical trial NCT06602024 for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) — again, per BOTH the “Study Details” on the main page of the study webpage, AND the “Eligibility Criteria” subsection of the “Researcher View”:
If a potential study subject is of childbearing age, that person MUST BE USING a contraceptive for AT LEAST 28 DAYS Day One of their participation, AND KEEP USING a contraceptive FOR AT LEAST 90 DAYS into the study;
AND, that person CANNOT be breastfeeding;
OR, that person MUST get a negative result on a pregnancy test that is accepted BEFORE starting participation in the study.
OR, be beyond childbearing age.
This indicates, IMO, that Moderna KNOWS that mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) HAS THE POTENTIAL TO SHED — into the placenta of the fetus; or, into breast milk. It ALSO means that Moderna LIKELY KNOWS that this “vaccine” can potentially have negative effects in pregnancy.
Yes – good catch! And just like I suspect that they don’t want any testing on kids, because any cardiac problems or cancer will indict the mRNA platform, they don’t want “accidental” administration to infants.
Wolf Moon
IMO, this post today should be on X. People will find out things about mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) that they likely might not see anywhere else. PLUS the fact that there are FDA documents which prove how dangerous this modRNA influenza “vaccine” is (the Package Insert, below in the discussion thread; the FDA Approval Letter to Moderna, below in the discussion thread; and, the VRBPAC Briefing Document.)
mRNA COVID shots remain the best prospect for stealthy human population control and “shaping of the species”, IMO. At the same time, they are an excellent platform for rapid mass immunization against advanced “foreign” bioweapons. Whatever they are designed for, they clearly have an ulterior purpose that is not what is being presented to the public.
Tom Renz @RenzTom · 5h So the navy brought back flu shot mandates just prior to the administration approving the new Moderna mRNA flu “vaccine.”
Here’s the thing – all this US happening in the heels of the passage of Sec. 535 or the “Selective Service System: automatic registration” in the 2026 NDAA (see below).
This means you or your kids are automatically registered for the draft and if the draft is implemented you will likely be forced to take a vaccine and that may well be one of these horrific mRNA “vaccines.”
Why does Washington hate MAHA and why would they do this to our soldiers?
So the navy brought back flu shot mandates just prior to the administration approving the new Moderna mRNA flu “vaccine.”
Here’s the thing – all this US happening in the heels of the passage of Sec. 535 or the "Selective Service System: automatic registration" in the 2026 NDAA… https://t.co/vIDVnHmZuOpic.twitter.com/7KFS1ahrIV
YUCK!
Sounds like they want to get rid of more of the Social Security drainees.
‘How is this even legal?’: Sen. Tuberville calls Social Security a ‘govt-approved Ponzi scheme’ (14 minutes)
Partial transcript
I remember going to the SSA offices during the Biden years, and seeing almost nobody who could speak English. Many, many Somalis. Very few people who obviously paid into the system. Many people who obviously didn’t.
Democrats. They did this.
Yes. Josiah’s & my experience at the Dearborn, MI SSA yesterday was that about 3/4 of the people in the waiting room were of foreign origin & spoke limited if any English (one of the younger people in a given group probably spoke “enough” English). Given their accents it is unlikely that they were here in the US for their entire working life…
Wolf Moon
Thank you.
My view:
STAY AWAY FROM mFlusiva.
Run in the other direction.
That damned SM-102 is in itself dangerous. Cayman Chemical MSDS Safety Sheet.
mFlusiva is designed to further cull the age 50 and older market.
There has been NO clinical trial to investigate how mFlusiva interacts with a modRNA COVID-19 bioweapon “vaccine.”
The clinical trial used to get the FDA full approval for mFlusiva did not use a saline control group. The “control group” was given doses of an already-approved influenza vax (FLUAD.)
IIRC, there’s a clinical trial either scheduled or going on for mFlusiva using persons under age 50 who are immunocompromised as study subjects.
The end goal of Moderna is to get the FDA to fully approve the company’s “combo-modRNA vaccine”, mRNA-1083 (mCOMBRIAX), which is mFlusiva + mRNA-1283 (mNEXSPIKE )
mCOMBRIAX is already approved for use in the European Union.
Any injectable that uses N1-methylpseudouridine is dangerous—this compound destroys the natural RNA in Uridine and replaces it with the lab compound.
Here is a fantastic article (a communication, actually – a bit shorter and easier to digest) which gives direct answers about N1MPU incorporation effects. The authors manage to speak a lot of truth without activating the “guard dogs of vaxxmania” into a frenzy.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-51301-0
N1-Methylpseudouridine and pseudouridine modifications modulate mRNA decoding during translation
Jeremy Monroe, Daniel E. Eyler, Lili Mitchell, Indrajit Deb, Abigail Bojanowski, Pooja Srinivas, Christine M. Dunham, Bijoyita Roy, Aaron T. Frank & Kristin S. Koutmou
Nature Communications volume 15, Article number: 8119 (2024)
I marvel that they got this into Nature, but it may be that Nature valued control of the message over blocking it completely.
Wolf Moon
Why didn’t Grok address the fact that 29 mFlusiva study subjects died, compared to 12 “control group” (FLUAD) study subjects who died?
Why did the FDA dismiss the deaths as “not relevant, since the deceased study subjects had comorbidities”?
Why didn’t the FDA consider that mFlusiva (and the “control vax”, FLUAD) could have aggravated a co-morbidity condition in study subjects to the point that the person died?
If studies aren’t against Placebo Control then they aren’t Really assessing dangers 
Yes – one can hide a lot of general vaccination danger without placebo controls.
However, I refuse to be dogmatic on the idea that no useful information emerges from such comparative studies (although the vaxxmaniacs will bless vaxx-favoring comparative studies and refuse to even look at vaxx-negative comparisons, always THEN demanding Faucist-favored “quadrupble-blinded, government-escrowed, double-secret placebo studies” – those being the sudden gold standard.)
Thus, if the comparison says “less dangerous than current vaccines” – well, that’s a real thing. Doesn’t mean safe, nor net beneficial, but it means what it means.
Yep…sigh…
Excellent questions! I agree completely! Grok failed to mention any of that.
My first question in response, is “what were the relative sizes of the two groups?” I’d like to normalize those numbers first. If there were roughly 2-3 times as many mFlusiva subjects, then it’s not as much of a problem. If the groups were of roughly equal size, then it’s a BIG problem!!!
I just checked – there was 1-to-1 assignment to the two vaccines, prior standard and the new mFlusiva mRNA. AND there were almost 3 times as many deaths in the mRNA group – but the disparity was attributed to “comorbidities”.
HOGWASH!!! RANCID, STINKY SCIENCE!!! ABSURDITY!!!
We KNOW from the COVID mRNA shots, to say nothing of the disease itself, that its primary risk was exacerbation of comorbidity. Indeed, exacerbation of existing comorbidities needs to be a TESTED ENDPOINT for vaccine harm – to say nothing of being a primary contraindication, should the ERROR OF APPROVAL happen in this case, as it already has.
Good grief – they must be rolling on the floor with laughter in Beijing, knowing that our Navy is mandating this crap for our sailors!!!
Please, President Trump – hand Washington’s ax to RFK Jr.!!! These CANNOT BE MANDATED, at the very least. Are we trying to drive common sense out of our military? REALLY? It’s INSANE!
iirc, PAVACA has reminded us numerous times of the dangers of pseudo uridine & I would guess that those dangers persist in these shots.
They, & virtually Any injections going forward, remain a hard pass for me!
Yes! Although, I will stress again, we have to be careful and truthful in our condemnation of N1MPU and other altered bases, so that we don’t lose credibility.
The amount of “modified base” present in these vaccines is TINY – absolutely microscopic – but it happens to be in a place – in a readable tape fed into our cellular machinery – that can directly change the momentary production of proteins in some of our cells.
Take that same substance out of the mRNA and out of the lipid nanoparticles, and it’s damn near harmless – particularly at those microscopic levels. Even once the tape is degraded in the cells, any future damage by the N1MPU is questionable, and certainly worth pharmacological study.
Also note that many of these altered bases, including PU and N1MPU, are made naturally in organisms ranging from archaea and bacteria (N1MPU) to cattle (PU).
Here is a good summary of the problem.
https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202507.0047
N1-Methyl-Pseudouridine: The Evolution, Impact, and Future of a Key mRNA Vaccine Modification
Matthew Halma *,Mikolaj Raszek,Joseph Varon
The nuance & “microscopic” evaluation of dangers & potential benefits must continue. I’m grateful for people like you & PAVACA who can spell things out in a relatively more easily understood way so that the lay-person might be better informed. Thank you!
John Solomon
@jsolomonReports
·
13h
It takes 5,000 jabs of Moderna’s just-approved mRNA flu vaccine to prevent one more hospitalization compared to a standard flu vaccine, but the new shot causes six times more injuries. @alexberenson
first flagged the disparity.
https://x.com/jsolomonReports/status/2085787815460151325
BRILLIANT!
That is HUGE.
I’m starting to wonder if Moderna was given enough rope to hang itself.
I really Hop(ium?)e that is what’s happening!
It all seems like a bit of a chess game.
Spockian version w/ a Trumpian twist 😉
He mentions “frame shifted proteins” which he said trigger the amyloids…I’d wondered about “frame shifting” & prions but the bottom aspect of the tweet mentions prions too 😡
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH
@NicHulscher
·
Aug 6
A recent study found nattokinase DISSOLVES 84% of amyloid microclots within 2 hours in vitro, a pathology found in 100% of COVID vaccinated individuals tested.
This natural enzyme helps break down BOTH the trigger (spike protein) AND the pathological result (amyloid clots).
https://x.com/NicHulscher/status/2085485989376450718
Yes, the assertion is that the proteins are amyloids, and that the amyloids are produced due to prion-like behavior by the spike protein, which contains prion-like sequences.
Those facts alone sound pretty terrifying to me 🙁
My best consolation is this.
Don’t be terrified. Don’t even be afraid. Humans without civilization are basically designed to live about 35 years max. Everything you lived past that was a GIFT.
Do your best, praise God every day, enjoy what was given to you, and never forget who gave you those days! There is no need to be afraid of anything in the big picture. In the small picture, do your best to live one more day given to you by God, every day, because we should appreciate his gifts. But we have been given plenty – more than we deserve – far more!
AMEN & well said! God’s got all of this AND us in His hand–PTL!
When “frame-shifting” enters the chat, what matters are two things – (1) what you are shifting away from, and (2) what you are shifting TO. Thus, shifting away from the toxic spike protein was likely both reducing efficacy AND increasing safety, under the theory that “any deviation from the toxic spike was most likely neutral”. On the other hand, frame shifting TO highly toxic sequences, could really bite some future vaccine in the behind.
These things can be watched for – and AI may be a good way to “rate” mRNA vacccines for frame-shifting dangers. There are also ways to minimize frame-shifting, and that is being worked on.
Stated differently, it’s GOOD when bioweapon prion sequences get frame-shifted, as the depopper goons get hoisted by their own petard!
It’s Better when bioweapons are Stopped all together 
Ironically, stopping bioweapons may require biodefense.
Which they presumably call all these playing
Godthe Devil machinations!More Military Mandates–Where’s MAHA??? 
Deeply Disturbing 
Tom Renz
@RenzTom
Just in time for the new Moderna mRNA flu “vaccine” the navy reverses course and mandates the flu vaccine for almost everyone (navy order below)!
They can’t poison our soldiers fast enough.
This shot was not properly tested – the administration gave it expedited approval – and is basically the mRNA COVID shot repackaged. They are going to construe to force mRNA on our soldiers.
Fauci’s work is carrying on despite everyone wanting accountability. This is why I keep saying that it’s not enough to go after Fauci – we have to go after the people that bought him. @VigilantFox
@RealAlexJones
https://x.com/ChrisMasterjohn/status/2085885366331195903
Our Navy has been CHINATIZED.
Get those assholes OUT.
Don’t we actually have people in the Navy who can look at this mRNA vaccine data and tell how poor these vaccines are? Good GRIEF.
What is the Chinese Navy mandating? I’ll bet it’s not Moderna!
It’s suicidal & insane, a monstrous evil!
DR JANE RUBYhttps://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/svg/2122.svg
@RealDrJaneRuby
·
18h
YOU SHOULD BE DAMN MAD!
New FDA Approved mRNA Seasonal Flu Shots – Moderna Admits This Gets Into Cells With No Known Shut Off Mechanism
https://twitter.com/RealDrJaneRuby/status/2085737734937739509/history
https://x.com/RealDrJaneRuby/status/2085737734937739509/history
https://x.com/ValerieCurren/status/2086021692816564707
edit: I removed “/history” at the end of Dr. Jane Ruby’s Twitter version to see if it will show & play–OK that actually worked. So that’s another “subtle” way “they” are suppressing the info sharing 😡
The guy that Dr. David Martin is replying to here attempted AI debunking, which may have just backfired on him…Clearly Your approach, Wolf, is Much Better Reasoned!
https://x.com/DrDMartinWorld/status/2083614640379191693
Thanks, Wolf!!!! Yay, it’s a cheaper version of a Trabant!!
If such a thing is even possible, YES YES YES!!! LMAO!!!
Surprise, surprise, surprise/s
RealRawNews
@RealRawNews1
·
16h
A Moderna virologist speaking anonymously—and fearfully—to Real Raw News said the pharmaceutical magnate doctored mRNA influenza vaccine trial results it later gave to the CDC, NIH, HHS Secretary RFK Jr, and Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz. Per this source, 375 of Moderna’s trial participants experienced side effects ranging from grotesque facial disfigurations to organ failure to pulmonary and cerebrally edemas. We’ll provide a full report on this tomorrow.
https://x.com/RealRawNews1/status/2085783632069755121
What was that saying again?
Fourteen out of fifteen gotta go.
Yup. And they started with removal of patriotic American doctors and our military.
ChiComs, working through angry anti-whites (including self-haters) have made significant progress in third-worlding American medicine, while appearing completely innocent.
Looks like the 30s and 40s may be a repeat, after these “roaring 20s”!
100% 
I remain skeptical that this influencer may have been taken in by Ukrainian or Russian bullshit artists, who love to pull this crap on suckers, but if they have receipts, I’ll accept those for inspection gladly!
Suspicious cat rules…Always!
https://jessicar.substack.com/p/the-new-mrna-1010-mflusiva-injectable
7 August 2026
Dr. Rose’s analysis. Charts, links to documents, discussion. Bottom line: BIG NO.
Thank you!!!
I agree with Jessica’s bottom line, but I think her presumption of zero comorbidity deaths taking the placebo is wrong. I will guarantee that it is lower than the comparator vaccine, but the exact number can only be guessed or modeled from a different placebo trial.
Wolf Moon
Yours Truly is not “beating the drum” regarding N1-methylpseudouridine.
The Patent document for BNT162b2 itself describes what this lab-created compound will do in the body: it replaces the RNA of the Uridine in the body.
https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2021213945A1/en
https://www.theqtree.com/2024/12/13/the-dna-in-the-pfizer-biontech-moderna-covid-19-bioweapon-toxin-injections-aka-the-vaccines/
Uridine and its RNA are important elements in the proper function of the “gut-brain axis.” Uridine performs multiple important jobs in the body.
N1-methylpseudouridine literally erases this RNA and replaces it with a lab-created compound that has no beneficial effects in the body, except to damage the “gut-brain axis” work that Uridine would perform.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/uridine
OK, I think this patent is being misread by the skeptic community, because the authors are only patenting the replacement BY HUMANS of the uridine in vaccine mRNA with N1-methylpseudouridine (and/or many other similar compounds), and that replacement IN THE VACCINE mRNA is partial or complete.
This is NOT about replacing it in the body.
They are claiming (staking an inventive claim) on doing this, too, so they likely didn’t try using all of these modified bases.
I’m not even sure that if one was fed a diet containing tablespoonfuls of N1-methylpseudouridine, one would be able to get more than trace incorporation in test subject mRNA. Indeed, this is an experiment waiting to be done in animals first.
I asked Grok about this, and it looks like there is VERY limited salvage of pyrimidine bases from body RNA. This response is worth a read.
https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=2086173757299896518
Question: Has anybody done dietary animal or human experiments with pseudouridine, N1-methylpseudouridine, or similar alternate nucleosides, as a way of incorporating these bases into RNA?
Answer:
No clear evidence of published dietary (oral/feeding) experiments in animals or humans that specifically administered pure pseudouridine, N1-methylpseudouridine (m1Ψ/1-methylpseudouridine), or closely related alternate nucleosides with the goal of incorporating them into cellular RNA.
Related work exists on dietary pyrimidine nucleosides more generally:
Classic studies (e.g., Berthold et al., PNAS 1995) fed 13C-labeled Spirulina (containing natural nucleosides/nucleic acids) to hens and mice. Intact dietary pyrimidine nucleosides (especially uridine/cytidine) were incorporated into hepatic RNA at detectable levels without full hydrolytic removal of the ribose, while purines showed little intact incorporation. Follow-up work with labeled nucleotides in pregnant mice confirmed modest salvage of dietary pyrimidines into maternal and fetal RNA, though de novo synthesis predominated.
Older rat diet supplementation with yeast RNA or mixed nucleosides raised intestinal/plasma levels of uridine, uracil, pseudouridine (as a catabolite), and other breakdown products, with some urinary excretion changes, but this tracked digestion/turnover rather than targeted reincorporation of free pseudouridine.
Pseudouridine itself is primarily a post-transcriptional modification (via isomerases acting on RNA-bound uridine). Free pseudouridine arising from RNA turnover is largely excreted intact in mammalian urine and is not efficiently salvaged for reincorporation into new RNA. A pseudouridine-5′-phosphatase exists that can dephosphorylate ΨMP (apparently helping prevent accidental incorporation), although cell extracts can convert ΨMP toward the triphosphate under some conditions. Bacterial pathways exist for phosphorylation and cleavage of the C–C glycosidic bond, but these are not the mammalian route. No analogous dietary incorporation data appear for m1Ψ.
Virtually all literature on Ψ or m1Ψ “incorporation” concerns in vitro transcription (using the corresponding NTPs), transfection of pre-modified mRNA, or enzymatic modification of existing RNA—driven by mRNA vaccine/therapeutic work—not dietary feeding for endogenous RNA labeling. No pharmacokinetic or feeding studies of oral pure m1Ψ or Ψ aimed at RNA incorporation turned up in searches.In short, while natural dietary pyrimidines show limited salvage into RNA, there is no indication that anyone has run the analogous animal or human dietary experiments with pure pseudouridine, N1-methylpseudouridine, or similar C-nucleoside analogs specifically to drive their incorporation into RNA. Such experiments would face biochemical hurdles (excretion preference, limited salvage, potential toxicity of phosphorylated intermediates) that make them less straightforward than with standard nucleosides like uridine.
Bottom line – I remain doubtful that the substance is toxic except in huge quantities – probably worse if “mainlined” rather than eaten.
Note that Grok answers about excretion of bases, too.
It seems it’s referring tojust dietary incorporation w/ the unnatural uridine-like products, which sounds to me quite different from an injected mRNA product that would code for the uptake of this unnatural uridine substitute & who knows what kind of changes might follow from that. I remain skeptical (& only paritally understood the Grok answer, I think)…
OK, maybe this is the problem in understanding.
Nothing is “coding for uptake of the unnatural uridine substitute”.
The uridine substitute is used to create the vaccine’s modified mRNA. It is the modification. The uridine substitute is used to (1) prevent the immune system from degrading the mRNA on the way in, and (2) to make the mRNA instructions last longer before being degraded. That’s it. When those instructions are worn out, the N1-methyluridine is pissed out. The end.
IMO the best way to test for random substitutions of uridine by these substitutes, is to feed test organisms large amounts of the substitutes, and see if one can get some incorporation, before, as mentioned above, the substitute is simply pissed out.
Hmmm, TY. Hopefully your view is what’s happening, not the black pill one…sigh…
Yes! Hopefully!
OK, here’s the deal regarding the 29 deaths in the clinical trial for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) as compared to the 12 deaths in the “comparator” group (this group was injected with other influenza “vaccines”, such as Fluarix, etc.)
The FDA Briefing Document that was given to the VRBPAC panel in June 2026, regarding the BLA for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA):
https://www.fda.gov/media-193130/download
This document details NUMEROUS issues and questions regarding the BLA for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA.)
Please see Page 7 of the Briefing Document, section “Evidence Gaps.”
Please see Page 7 of the Briefing Document, section “Safety Profile.”
Please see section 3.1.1.1 of the Briefing Document, “Primary Efficacy Study (50 yoa and older).” This age group is the “target age group” for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA.)
**** Paydirt:
Please see NCT06602024 https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06602024
Please click on “Researcher View.”
**** The “Randomization” for the study was 1:1 (one mRNA-1010 study subject per one “comparator” study subject.
This, to Yours Truly, means that the 29 deaths in study subjects who took mRNA-1010 and the 12 deaths in study subjects who took any of the “comparator” influenza “vaccines” IS SOMETHING OF GREAT CONCERN.
**** In addition, please see the “Eligibility Criteria” section of the “Researcher View” of NCT06602024. It appears that there were NUMEROUS TYPES of health conditions that would cause rejection of a potential study subject. It appears that the NCT06602024 study subjects were either healthy individuals; OR, that ones who had possible “co-morbidities” were either under successful treatment OR had the condition(s) under control, when they were approved for participation in the study. This is confirmed in the FDA Briefing Document cited above, section “Study Population Generalizability”, Page 20.
**** So, for the FDA to DISMISS the deaths of ANY of the study subjects on the grounds that “they were sick with co-morbidities in the first place” is NOT acceptable. Please see the FDA Briefing Document cited above, Pages 22 – 23 – 24.
Agreed. Frankly, life after childhood is a continuous bargaining with an increasing number of comorbidities. It would appear that mRNA vaccines are “harsher” with comorbidities than were prior vaccines.
Why in H3LL would the FDA countenance giving approval to a modRNA “vaccine” that has SO MANY, SO GLARING, and SUCH DEEP issues as listed in the sections cited above in the VRBPAC Briefing Document? There are more issues listed that Yours Truly did not cite.
By the way, the VRBPAC vote to approve mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) was 9 – 0.
There are a few potential reasons that border on things Aubergine was suggesting. Stated bluntly, mRNA vaccines may be a strategic biowarfare resistance platform, despite all their defects, if “somebody” were to try to eradicate humanity from this planet using “movie-level” bioweapons.
This would explain the military’s peculiar fetish for the technology.
WOW, get this —
About that 9 – 0 approval vote for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) by the VRBPAC panel:
There was an industry representative as a VOTING MEMBER on that panel — a rep for GLAXO SMITH KLINE, the maker of the ALL THE OTHER influenza “vaccines” that were used as the “comparator vaccines” in the clinical trial! (Fluarix; Fluarix Tetra; Influsplit Tetra; Alpharix Tetra)
The GSK rep on the VRBPAC panel:
Temi Folaranmi, MD, MPH, MPP
There was another Industry rep on the panel who voted, too—a rep from Merck: James Kollmar, MD.
It’s a big club and we ain’t in it.
It’s easy to see how mandates can happen with this crowd.
My wish in that regard, is that if any group mandates vaccines for any group of Americans, that they suffer for their arrogance in ways that make sure, historically, it never happens again.
Why weren’t Dr. Folaranmi AND Dr. Kollmar required to recuse themselves from voting on the approval of mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA)? Isn’t their status as industry reps (ESPECIALLY Dr. Folaranmi, who works for GSK, the company that makes the “comparator influenza vaccines” that were used in the clinical trial for mRNA-1010), CLEAR evidence of conflict of interest?
Does ANYBODY recuse any more?
I would take Aubergine’s proposal and add another layer. What if all the decision makers are being told there was a planet level threat in order to get the mRNA platform into arms, but it’s all a lie. The threat is a mirage. But it gets the powerful to agree to genetically modify all of humanity.
Totally. Very strong possibility.
Here is a very important point. Because of the physics of the universe – at least near us – there seems to be almost no possibility of any kind of “massive” “invasion” of any planet by another far away. That’s a mirage for sure.
Colonization, “diplomacy”, empire-building, influence – all that kind of more subtle thing is possible, however. AND – very important point – almost all the “work” needs to be done AT the endpoint, using endpoint resources, because shipping anything is too much work. What that “work at the endpoint” looks like – could take an infinite number of forms.
I suspect that the story is deeper, older, and more complex, but in any case, I suspect that there will always be a marketable value in getting humans to behave in some particular ways, to advance some agenda or agendas. But no matter what, IMO, God not only “remains in control” – God was in control of the now and the end before any of it existed. ALL of it is subject to His will.
Every time I read Romans Chapter 1 it hits pretty hard.
I too, am without excuse.
De-pop Rubber Stamp Shills–Demons! 
More than TWICE as many deaths than with the 1:1 comparator participants. Authorities should have immediately yanked the approval for “mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA)”–So Evil!
ALSO, something else buried in the FDA Approval Letter for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA), AND in the FDA Briefing Document for the VRBPAC panel:
mFLUSIVA is under “Accelerated Approval” for use in persons age 65 and older.
This means that mFLUSIVA can be used on persons age 65 and older WHILE MODERNA GATHERS “SAFETY AND EFFICACY INFORMATION” AND INITIATES A CLINICAL STUDY ON THE USE OF mFLUSIVA IN THIS AGE GROUP.
This means that ANY person age 65 and older who takes mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) IS A “HUMAN LAB RAT” FOR MODERNA AND FOR THE FDA.
How many sick / frail / not-able-to-understand / not-able-to-consent, persons age 65 and older in:
nursing homes;
care homes;
rehab facilities;
hospitals —
will be injected with mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) on the orders of the medical directors / attending physicians of these places? And these medical directors will be “following the science” because the FDA said it would be OK to inject these persons with mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) since the “vaccine” is under FDA “Accelerated Approval” protocols for that age group?
FDA Approval Letter for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA): https://www.fda.gov/media/194121/download
VRBPAC Briefing Document regarding the BLA for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA):
https://www.fda.gov/media/193130/download
Great catch! Good GRIEF – what kind of suckers did we put in charge of these agencies?
Depopper Dream “Whoops”! Watch for those nursing homes to empty out bigly. The NAZIS are back in charge of elder care!
This looks an awful lot like Covid 2.0 
Exactly. They’re taking another swing at the nursing homes!
They’d resurrect vents, except it’s too obvious. More likely they’ve been surging midazolam to the hospitals to pull off the “English style deaths”.
Be very suspicious of midazolam in any kind of eldercare context. JMO.
Any recommendations for the elderly get this suspicious can’t whiskers a-twitching!
OK, here’s something else regarding the clinical trial NCT06602024 for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) — again, per BOTH the “Study Details” on the main page of the study webpage, AND the “Eligibility Criteria” subsection of the “Researcher View”:
If a potential study subject is of childbearing age, that person MUST BE USING a contraceptive for AT LEAST 28 DAYS Day One of their participation, AND KEEP USING a contraceptive FOR AT LEAST 90 DAYS into the study;
AND, that person CANNOT be breastfeeding;
OR, that person MUST get a negative result on a pregnancy test that is accepted BEFORE starting participation in the study.
OR, be beyond childbearing age.
This indicates, IMO, that Moderna KNOWS that mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) HAS THE POTENTIAL TO SHED — into the placenta of the fetus; or, into breast milk. It ALSO means that Moderna LIKELY KNOWS that this “vaccine” can potentially have negative effects in pregnancy.
Yes – good catch! And just like I suspect that they don’t want any testing on kids, because any cardiac problems or cancer will indict the mRNA platform, they don’t want “accidental” administration to infants.
Should read, “that person MUST BE USING a contraceptive AT LEAST 28 DAYS BEFORE Day One of their participation…”
Wolf Moon
IMO, this post today should be on X. People will find out things about mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) that they likely might not see anywhere else. PLUS the fact that there are FDA documents which prove how dangerous this modRNA influenza “vaccine” is (the Package Insert, below in the discussion thread; the FDA Approval Letter to Moderna, below in the discussion thread; and, the VRBPAC Briefing Document.)
FDA Package Insert for mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA):
https://www.fda.gov/media/194120/download
Yours Truly believes that mRNA-1010 (mFLUSIVA) is combination of a Trabant + a Trojan Horse.
Agreed – a definite Trojan horse!
mRNA COVID shots remain the best prospect for stealthy human population control and “shaping of the species”, IMO. At the same time, they are an excellent platform for rapid mass immunization against advanced “foreign” bioweapons. Whatever they are designed for, they clearly have an ulterior purpose that is not what is being presented to the public.
Tom Renz
@RenzTom
·
5h
So the navy brought back flu shot mandates just prior to the administration approving the new Moderna mRNA flu “vaccine.”
Here’s the thing – all this US happening in the heels of the passage of Sec. 535 or the “Selective Service System: automatic registration” in the 2026 NDAA (see below).
This means you or your kids are automatically registered for the draft and if the draft is implemented you will likely be forced to take a vaccine and that may well be one of these horrific mRNA “vaccines.”
Why does Washington hate MAHA and why would they do this to our soldiers?
https://x.com/RenzTom/status/2086174899744420084
Navy still full of Trump haters.
That’s most disheartening. But then I did hear the Navy tends to have a higher gay contingent, or it did, back in the day. Shudder…