“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert.” –J. Robert Oppenheimer
The above chart listing is from a Pfizer-BioNTech document obtained via FOIA, showing the IgG binding results of a few of the C4591001 human test subjects for the company’s “flagship” COVID-19 “vaccine”, BNT162b2. The document was given to the FDA on 19 September 2020. BNT162b2 was granted the initial EUA for use in the United States in December 2020.
This series on the disaster of COVID-19 and the COVID-19 “vaccines” is dedicated to Yours Truly’s cousin Bill, who “died suddenly and unexpectedly” in September 2023.
Today’s offering will present and discuss some aspects of the emergence of “turbo-cancers” that appear in people who get injections of the COVID-19 “vaccines” (actually, gene therapy shots.) Today’s presentation is not an “magnum opus” compilation, but rather an adjunct to more understanding of the issue. It will not discuss the presence of the SV40 cancer promoter code that was discovered recently in the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” — that is an issue to be addressed in another post. What will be presented today is the role of IgG4-engendered cancer onset and/or relapse due to “vaccination” by the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines.”
Without “wearying by recitals”, the story begins with a short presentation on the Ig system of the human body. This system consists of five different Ig cell types: IgM; IgD; IgA; IgE, and IgG. IgA and IgG cells can be divided into subclasses. What are called “subclass switches” within the IgA class and IgG class are regulated via interaction with the T cells of the human body. The Ig system is basically an infection-fighter system. It needs to be in balance in order for this work to be successfully performed. Imbalances of the Ig system can result in the incidence of various medical disease conditions, such as autoimmune diseases and asthma. Some people have inherited imbalances of their Ig system. Today’s offering will confine itself to the IgG class.
The IgG class of cells can be divided into four separate subclasses: IgG1; IgG2; IgG3; and IgG4. Robert H. Pointer wrote the following regarding the IgG class in general: “Firstly, IgG neutralizes pathogens such as viruses and bacteria by binding to key pathogen surface proteins and preventing interaction of the pathogen with host cells. In doing so, the antibody [of the IgG cell] neutralizes the ability of the pathogen to enter host cells and replicate.” (Encyclopedia of Immunology, Second Edition, 1998, “Immunoglobulin G” chapter; bolding is mine.)
Please read those two sentences above by Prof. Pointer again. Now look again at the chart at the top of today’s offering, which shows the high binding ability of the Pfizer-BioNTech modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine”, BNT162b2, to the cells of the human subjects who took this “vaccine” in the C4591001 clinical trial of said “vaccine.” This is the same BNT162b2 “vaccine” formula that was granted the initial EUA by the FDA in December 2020 for use in the United States. It is also the same BNT162b2 “vaccine” formula (under both the name, “Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine” and under the name, “COMIRNATY”) that was used in the United States until the spring of 2023, at which time it was removed from use in this country and was substituted with the “2023-2024 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine” by the same company. BNT162b2 is still used in other countries. It appears that two of the main goals of BNT162b2 (a modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine”) were, and are (both in the BNT162b2 “vaccine”, AND in the basic formulation of the current “2023-2024 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine”),to evade the “vaccine” recipient’s natural IgG class cells’ “detection and fight” capability; and, to compromise the “vaccine” recipient’s natural IgG class cells’ ability to DENY ACCESS tothe “vaccine” into the cells of the recipient’s body (this, via the use of the lipid nanoparticles ALC-0159 and ALC-0315 in these “vaccines.”),
Yours Truly now turns to https://jessicar.substack.com/p/igg4-and-cancer-a-mechanism-of-action, “IgG4 and cancer – a mechanism of action for cancer relapse and onset”, published on 30 December 2022. Dr. Rose describes how IgG4 class cells can, by “class switching” (also called “Fab Arm Exchange”) due to chronic exposure to an antigen, literally “turn around” their normal antibody function of tumor suppression into tumor progression. Dr. Rose then goes on to discuss this phenomenon in light of the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” and how these injections introduce “highly immunogenic protein” into the body of the “vaccine” recipient, which then induces “continuous antigen stimulation by the injectables’ contents and their by-products” (Italics mine.) She ends her article with: “My take home message: This could be potentiating relapses of cancers previously in remission and also new and rare cancer appearances.” In my opinion, this is particularly troubling, since nobody really knows how long the modRNA, the spike protein, and the ALC-0159 and ALC-0315 lipid nanoparticles remain in the “vaccine” recipient’s body; especially if that “vaccine” recipient continues to get modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine booster shots” to “complete a catch-up series”, or the “2023-2024 Formula COVID-19 Vaccine” made by Pfizer-BioNTech and also by Moderna.
We now turn to the work of Dr. Ryan Cole, the pathologist. He has been sounding the alarm over the presence of turbo-cancers in his modRNA COVID-19 “vaccinated” patients for over a year (and for which, he is now fighting the “professional misconduct charges” that were served against him by the Washington State medical licensing board. Please refer to https://vigilantnews.com/post/turbo-death-from-turbo-cancers-were-in-trouble-says-dr-ryan-cole, from 10 October 2023. Dr. Cole makes it clear that the “vaccines” do not actually cause cancer; they “cause immune suppression. They cause a disruption and a dysregulation of your immune system that normally is what would fight cancer.” (Another way, in my opinion, of saying the IgG4 “class switch” induced by the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” that turns this class of cells’ normal function of fighting tumors into, instead, allowing tumors to grow.)
The “Vidarsson paper” from 2014 describes the IgG subclasses, what they do, and what can happen when one or more of these subclasses are either deficient or increased too much: www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2014.00520/full, “IgG subclasses and allotypes: from structure to effector functions”, Gestur Vidarsson et al. Please see the section “IgG4” about how the IgG4 subclass works; and the section “IgG4 Fab Arm Exchange.”
IgG4 cells will also change in the unborn child and in its pregnant mother due to modRNA COVID-19 “vaccination.” Here is a graphic showing these changes:
The above graphic is from here: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.05.01.538955, “Diverging maternal and infant cord antibody functions from SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination in pregnancy”, Emily H. Adhikari, et al. From the Introduction: “After mRNA vaccination [of the pregnant mother], the primary form of immunity transferred to the fetus is antibodies, specifically IgG.” (Bolding mine)
Two blog posts by Igor Chudov provide more information. The first is from 21 October 2022: www.igor-chudov.com/p/cancer-rates-are-increasing-and-may, “Cancer Rates are Increasing — and May Get Much Worse.” In this post, Mr. Chudov discusses the 9-sigma increase in cancer rates in the United States and a similar rise in the UK. At the time of this post (a little over one year ago), there was suspicion regarding the reason why the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” were engendering an increase in cancer diagnoses: the suspicions rested on the use of the “faux” pseudouridine in the “vaccines”; the discovery of “loose DNA” in the “vaccines”; and the genotoxicity of the spike protein itself. By December, 2022, Mr. Chudov was on the trail of the IgG4-induced immune system damage engendered by the “vaccines”: www.igor-chudov.com/p/booster-caused-immune-tolerance-explains, “Booster-Caused IgG4 Immune Tolerance Explains Excess Mortality and “Chronic Covid.” Here, the following paper was referenced regarding the IgG4 “class switch”: www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798, “Class switch towards non-inflammatory, spike-specific IgG4 antibodies after repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination”, Pascal Irrgang et al. (In other words, a “class switch” to the “tolerate but don’t clear” IgG4 cells.) The latest post by Mr. Chudov on the issue, that is very specific, is from 26 November 2023: www.igor-chudov.com/p/hyperprogressive-cancers-due-to-covid, “‘Hyperprogressive’ Cancers Due to COVID-Vaccine-Caused IgG4 Antibodies.” The take away from this post: “…IgG4 drives malignancy and aggressiveness of the real-life cancers they observed.” Here is a graphic from Mr. Chudov’s post, taken from this paper: https://jitc.bmj.com/content/8/2/e000661, “An immune evasion mechanism with IgG4 playing an essential role in cancer and implication for immunotherapy”, Hui Wang et al.
Finally, there is this: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2023.111015, “Potential health risks of mRNA-based vaccine therapy: A hypothesis”, by K. Acevedo-Whitehouse and R. Bruno, published on 25 January 2023. It appears that an important key to understanding the mechanisms of the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” that can induce sufficient immune system suppression in the “vaccinated” person’s body it that these “vaccines” employ N1-methylpseudouridine. (This ingredient “evades” the body’s natural “immune system defense mechanism.”) The paper also discusses “other contaminants” in the “vaccines” that “…could further alter immune recognition and deregulate immune signalling pathways,…it is not unreasonable to assume that mRNA-based vaccines could induce sustained inflammation and a persistent anti-viral cellular state in various tissues.” (Italics mine) Yours Truly is including a graphic from the paper of what the synthetic RNA “vaccines” do to the cells of the “vaccine” recipient:
Now, as to the COVID-19 virus itself: There are elements within the virus itself that can cause immune system damage; that can change, damage, or destroy B-cells and CD-class cells in the body of the person who contracts a case of the virus; and may have other elements that can pave the way for cancer tumor onset or relapse. Yours Truly refers to this paper, from September 2020 (this was when BNT162b2 was in “clinical trials”): https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abc8511, “Deep immune profiling of COVID-19 patients reveals distinct immunotypes with therapeutic implications”, Divij Matthew et al. Prof. Matthew and his colleagues demonstrate concerning changes in B-cells and CD8 cells in certain COVID-19 infected patients. Certain immunotypes among the patients studied were more affected than others. From the Abstract: “Whereas immunoglobulin G (IgG) levels reportedly drop slightly ~8 weeks after symptom onset (24, 25), recovered patients maintain high spike protein-specific IgG titers (6, 26).” (Bolding mine)
Another view of the toxic properties of the COVID-19 virus itself, especially regarding the inducement of cancer, is here: https://wmcresearch.substack.com/p/sars-cov-2-the-spike-protein-and, “SARS-CoV-2, the Spike Protein and Oncogenesis”, published on 2 November 2023. Walter M. Chesnut discusses his conclusion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself, plus its spike protein, change ALL the following body functions: DNA Repair; Cell Division; Apoptosis (natural cell death); Cellular Differentiation; and Cell-Cell Contact/Communication.
So, if the COVID-19 virus itself and its spike protein have properties that can engender the circumstances for cancer tumor onset, growth, and/or relapse, what makes the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” even more dangerous in this regard? One will point to the use of the ALC-0159 and ALC-0315 lipid nanoparticles in these “vaccines”, which facilitate entry of the “vaccine” ingredients to every cell of the recipient’s body; and, to the use of the N1-methylpseudouridine in these “vaccines” which “evade” the natural “enemy detection and destruction” processes of the “vaccine” recipient’s body.
In Yours Truly’s opinion, it took time, effort, and detailed investigation, to lab-create the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) virus itself and its spike protein; and, it took time, effort, and detailed investigation, to lab-create and assemble the ingredients (including the COVID-19 virus itself, and its spike protein) that were, and are, present in the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines.” The FDA knew, back in the summer of 2020, and certainly on 30 April 2021, how dangerous the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine” BNT162b2 was, and is. Please refer to: www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf, FDA time-stamped on 30 April 2021. In fact, the FDA, on that date, knew that at least one IgG4 “class switch” condition was occurring in BNT162b2 “vaccinated” persons — Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (an IgG4 autoimmune disease), listed on page 38 of the report.
Of course, cancer can, and does, occur for other reasons than being engendered by COVID-19 “vaccination” or infection. There are many contributing factors — from genetic predisposition to smoking to accumulated immune system dysfunction, among others. However, while it can be fairly argued that the COVID-19 virus itself, with its spike protein, AND the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” based on said virus and its spike protein can, and do, engender cancer tumor growth and/or relapse — the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” are more dangerous in this regard. One can posit that it may be valuable for people to learn about family members have/had cancer; what history of cancer “runs in the family”, if any; about family members who have/had immune system issues; and so on. It is absolutely valuable for all people to be in, and remain in, the best physical shape and the best mental-health shape possible. It is absolutely valuable to follow a COVID-19 prevention/prophylaxis protocol.
The painting is by Albert Touchemolin of French army recruits getting vaccinated against smallpox, circa 1895.
This series of posts regarding COVID-19 and the COVID-19 “vaccines” is dedicated to the memory of Yours Truly’s cousin Bill, who “died suddenly and unexpectedly” in September, 2023.
The reader will find a compendium of papers, articles, and posts about the COVID-19 virus itself, and about the mRNA (modRNA) COVID-19 “vaccines”, at the end of this post. However, before the compendium begins, Yours Truly will present some information concerning what may be called “COVID-19 vaccination by proxy” — in other words, COVID-19 “vaccine shedding.” (By the way, Yours Truly has accumulated over 1,600 hours over the past 3 1/2 years in studying “everything COVID-19” — from reading over 100 papers to poring over Pfizer-BioNTech documents obtained through FOIA to watching dozens of hours of testimony and interviews. While this does not make Yours Truly an expert on the matter, it does furnish information that can be shared.)
Human beings “shed” certain things every day — examples are: sweat; tears; dead skin particles; hair; saliva (including by coughing); and aerosols (sneezing.) Certain things that human beings “shed” every day can also carry elements or germs — examples are: cold or flu germs; and bacteria of various types. Human beings who have been “vaccinated” with mRNA (modRNA) COVID-19 “vaccines” can “shed” elements of these “vaccines.”
There is no paper that Yours Truly has found as of yet which gives a definitive answer regarding how long the elements of the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” are active in the body of the “vaccine” recipient. The longest study so far indicates that the modRNA and the spike protein are active in the “vaccine” recipient’s body for 180 days post-injection. There is anecdotal evidence of modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine”-induced damage lingering as long as two years post-injection. On the other hand, assuming that a person decides to get the “latest COVID-19 vaccine booster shot”, that “starts the clock again” for that at-least 180-day period. For “un-vaccinated” people who decide to get the injections, there is a separate “vaccination” protocol to get them “caught up.” For immuno-compromised people, there is a separate “vaccination” protocol to “keep them up-to-date” due to their condition(s.) All these things complicate the at-least 180-day “possible COVID-19 vaccine shedding” window. www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/child-adolescent.html and www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedules/hcp/imz/adult.html. In both cases, scroll down the page to “COVID-19 vaccination” and from there, click on “Routine vaccination” and “Special situations.”
Of course, nobody is suggesting that people (including “un-vaccinated” people) just avoid being around other human beings. How, then, do people (including “un-vaccinated” people who decide to remain so) cope with the possibility that a “vaccinated” person can “shed” elements of the “vaccine?” In Yours Truly’s opinion, this boils down to things such as: hand-washing; following a COVID-19 “vaccine” mitigation protocol like the ones outlined at FLCCC (https://covid19criticalcare.com/); regular mild to moderate exercise; stress reduction; having a positive connection with a Higher Power or Supreme Being; taking individually-appropriate daily amounts of vitamin C, vitamin D, Zinc, Quercetin, NAC, nattokinase and/or lumbrokinase; and having a supply of Ivermectin or Hydroxycholorquine on hand (to add to the above vitamins and supplements) in case one gets symptoms of the virus. Note: Individuals should speak with their healthcare provider before making any changes to vitamin, supplement, and/or herbal use (increasing, decreasing, starting, or stopping; this is in addition to letting them know of Ivermectin and/or Hydroxychloroquine use.)
Now, regarding the COVID-19 virus itself: Here, Yours Truly turns to one particular website, that of Walter M Chesnut: https://wmcresearch.substack.com/. Mr. Chesnut is an independent researcher into the COVID-19 virus and the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines.” (Lest anyone question Mr. Chesnut’s “bona fides”, let it be stated that he co-authored a paper with the late Dr. Luc Montagnier.) From reading the articles that Mr. Chesnut contributes to his Substack, it is becoming increasingly clear that that the COVID-19 itself is a lab-created, “cobbled together” mixture of protein fragments and DNA insertions from various types of animals, combined with lab experimentation on how these elements induce changes to, or destruction of, body tissues and mechanisms. From there, these “ingredients” were mixed with the dangerous lipid nanoparticles ALC-1059 and ALC-0315, plus other items (such as the SV40 cancer promoter code from the African Green Monkey), and manufactured (using the infamous “Process 2” method) to be marketed as the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines.” Whereas, the COVID-19 virus itself can have a real and negative impact on the person who contracts a case of it — in my opinion, the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” are, by definition, much more dangerous than a case of the virus itself.
And now, to any healthcare professionals who are reading this post, Yours Truly asks, with all respect, the following: Did you do your due diligence to investigate the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” before you recommended them to your patients? Do you have any understanding of the dangers of the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” in terms of the “vaccine”-induced illnesses, disabilities, and deaths they engender? Do you have any understanding of the danger that you yourself, and anyone else you know (family, friends, patients, colleagues) are in if these “vaccines” are in your body or in theirs? Yours Truly is not an “anti-vaxxer.” There are vaccines, such as the Tetanus vaccine, that are valuable. However, it is becoming manifestly clear that the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines” are not “safe and effective.”
The compendium follows. It is not exhaustive. It can be regarded as a start for people who are interested in learning the truth of the COVID-19 virus itself, and of the modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines.”
“Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:32)
https://doi.org/10.1002/iid3.807 “Adverse events following COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: A systematic review of cardiovascular complication, thrombosis, and thrombocytopenia” Farah Yasmin, et al.
https://kirschsubstack.com/ Steve Kirsch’s Substack: information and statistics related to COVID-19 “vaccine”-induced illnesses, disabilities, and deaths.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEWHhrHiiTY The testimony of Prof. Dr. Phillip Buckhaults before the South Carolina Senate regarding plasmid DNA contamination in the Pfizer-BioNTech modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine.” (Note: this link may have already been disabled; in which case, one will need to do an internet search to find the video.)
www.phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf This report, given by Pfizer-BioNTech to the FDA, contains an “Appendix” at the end which lists over 1,000 medical diseases or conditions that were reported to have been observed in people who took the company’s modRNA COVID-19 “vaccine”, BNT162b2 (the one used in the United States until the spring of this year, and the basic “ingredients” of which are present in all later versions of the company’s modRNA COVID-19 “vaccines.”)
This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread remains open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KAG/KMAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both).
Just grabbing stuff I’ve never heard off YouTube….
A version of Copperhead Road like you’ve never heard….
Aw, heck – let’s make that country rock just a bit!
So what ever happened to Gretchen Wilson? She’s had a few scrapes and close calls, but as of June 2023, she’s apparently still out there!
https://youtu.be/QnfEp9OmAMs
Let’s try something REALLY weird – Carrie Underwood x Joan Jett
Field Report
The crazy realpolitik world continues to be interesting. The battlefield landscape on Ohio Amendment Issue No. 1 seems to be shifting as people realize that this amendment serves the interests of pedophiles and groomers, resulting in parent-free sex-change of kids. I cannot predict which way the vote will go now. Passage and defeat are both possible.
And then Random Nuisance vetoes a state groomer bill in California? What’s up with that? Is he reading the tea leaves? Hmmmmmm.
Happy that Carl is back, and YUGE thanks to Gail for helping out Deplorable Patriot in this time of trouble. Prayers for DePat and family. May God shelter and comfort them.
The bottom line is that I have simply checked the gene sequences of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, and verified that they BOTH contain nucleic acid code that translates to the shorter PRRARSV protein code, which is a kind of “hall pass” into the cell nucleus.
Thus, BOTH of these vaccines produce a spike protein which science would predict has the same ability as the virus spike protein, to (1) get into the cell nucleus, and furthermore (2) schlep its own mRNA along with it into the cell nucleus, and finally (3) as proven by experiment on the Pfizer vaccine, integrate the spike protein gene sequence into the human cellular genome.
That’s it. If you want all the gory details, stay tuned. Otherwise, that’s the BLUF (bottom line up front). Have a great day! -Wolf
Introduction
OK – I have an important update to the whole topic of mRNA vaccines messing with people’s genes, and in particular, with a part of the COVID-19 spike protein mRNA sequence called the PRRARSV nuclear translocation signal. This “key” within the whole sequence is like an ID card for the cell nucleus. It was identified in the natural COVID-19 spike protein, and now it appears to remain in both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.
I have posted on this topic – the PRRARSV Nuclear Translocation Signal – THREE times before.
First, I posted when I discovered the Mehedi paper, and realized how important it is.
The Mehedi paper explains WHY there is genomic incorporation of the COVID-19 spike protein – specifically, because the spike protein has what is essentially a key to the cell nucleus.
This is SO HUGE. I must explain this to you. TL;DR – The spike protein not only contains a special sequence that allows it into the cell nucleus – it also has an ability to bring its own spike mRNA sequence with it. Both features appear to be unique among coronaviruses. The features explain genomic …
The next time I posted, was the moment that I realized that the murdered American scientist Bing Liu had been directing his research focus to the EXACT SAME SPOT in the SARS-CoV-2 gene sequence – the PRRARSV sequence – when he was conveniently murdered by a crazed acquaintance who was apparently contending with him over a lover.
To me, this murder absolutely REEKED of MKULTRA. Bing Liu had a plausible weakness and it was exploited. Not all people realize how dangerous the science world can be. Not so this cowboy – I’ve been through a lot of weird, evil bullshit in Scienceville, over the years.
Bing apparently recognized that this sequence is found in snake venoms and other, more deadly viruses, and was thus potentially close to realizing that this part of the sequence was behind certain aspects of the pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2, as well as those other things.
Stated another way – maybe nuclear translocation is WHY those other things are so bad.
Joe Biden didn’t win. This is our Real President: AND our beautiful REALFLOTUS. This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread remains open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KAG/KMAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both). …
Finally, at a certain point I realized that any “accidental” explanation of the presence of a working translocation signal which not only violates the central promise of mRNA vaccine technology, but installs the violation itself in the nucleus, was simply too incongruous to be an accident. It’s a BLOODY HACK. There was no way that – on the very first roll-out of a genetic vaccine – the technology which was PRIZED for making the technology safe against genetic incorporation, instead caused genetic incorporation OF the very instructions for genetic incorporation.
I mean, think about it. What are the chances? It’s almost as crazy as the sinking of the “unsinkable” Titanic.
You see what I’m sayin’? This outrageously excellent attack simply cannot be a case of “whoops”. The TRICK is not the “AW SHUCKS, THAT’S LIFE” which sells as stage two to the hubris of the chumps. That’s just the getaway. The TRICK is the LIE – the PROMISE that is actively worked against from the very beginning, and intentionally not delivered.
Ask yourself a simple question. Why should the very first examples of mRNA vaccines for humans violate the most important safety standard of the mRNA platform? Why would the vaccines do exactly what they PROMISED US the vaccines would not do? TL;DR – They didn’t just lie to us about the spike mRNA not going …
I wrote that last post with a certain sense of frustration. NOBODY in COVID Dissident World seemed to understand the importance of this whole “nuclear translocation signal” thing. Either that, or they were utterly afraid to speak of it. Indeed, our RDS is one of the few people who has dared to shine a light on the topic.
I set it aside for a while and basically gave up.
The other side did not give up. During that time, I was seriously shadow-banned on Twitter. Elon’s FEDS are busy little beavers, damming up the truth.
But now, something interesting has happened. On Twitter.
A Tale of Two Acronyms: PRRARSV and SV40
RDS posted a comment that included a tweet of a translated video of the brave Japanese professor who publicly challenged the Japanese Ministry of Health over the crappy vaccines.
Here, Murakami is discussing contaminating plasmid DNA (little circles of DNA) which were found in very significant quantity in expired vials of the Pfizer vaccine. It’s easier to watch the video on Twitter.
This SV40 stuff also gets into a shocker about nuclear incorporation, but this is not the same shocker as the PRRARSV stuff. This is ANOTHER ANGLE on a different path into the nucleus.
Are you starting to believe me now about intent? Read on.
Japanese professor, Murakami of Tokyo University of Science made an amazing finding.
The Pfizer's vaccine contains the SV40 sequence which is known as a promoter of the cancer virus. The SV40 sequence is completely unnecessary to produce the mRNA vaccine. https://t.co/RtnbCUHAmJpic.twitter.com/gZx5ycf1L9
The translation is as follows. It is a conversation between Professor Murakami (M) and another person (P). I may have gotten a couple of assignments mixed up, when both are talking, but have done my best to attribute statements properly, based on what I can discern.
Commentary by Professor Murakami
(M) It is now possible to read the DNA sequences present in the vaccines. This is the DNA read from the Moderna vaccine.
(P) It may be difficult for the general public to understand, but this sequence is in the form of a ring. Plasmid DNA is in the form of a ring, and the DNA sequence is described in this ring. Spike proteins are encoded in this part of the DNA sequence.
(M) This part of the DNA sequence shows the spike gene. The Moderna’s vaccine has a vector sequence that is often present in Escherichia coli. However, the Pfizer’s vaccine has a staggering problem. I have made an amazing finding. This figure is an enlarged view of Pfizer’s vaccine sequence. As you can see, the Pfizer’s vaccine sequence contains part of the SV40 sequence here. This sequence is known as a promoter. Roughly speaking, the promoter causes increased expression of the gene. The promoter is a sequence that is essential for gene expression. The problem is that the sequence is present in a well-known carcinogenic virus. The question is why such a sequence that is derived from such a cancer virus is present in the Pfizer’s. There should be absolutely no need for such a carcinogenic virus sequence in the vaccine. This sequence is totally unnecessary for producing the mRNA vaccine. It is a problem that such a sequence is solidly contained in the vaccine. This is not the only problem. If a sequence this is present in the DNA, the DNA is easily migrated to the nucleus. So it means that the DNA can easily enter the genome. The problem is that if such a sequence remains intact, the DNA is easily migrated to the nucleus. It means that the DNA can easily enter the nucleus. These are such alarming problems.
(P) Does it mean that the SV40 promoter also contains sequences that can be migrated to the nucleus?
(M) Yes, that’s what I mean.
(P) So you are saying that the DNA can go to the nucleus easily?
(M) It means that the DNA contains sequences that can easily go to the nucleus. This is a well-known fact. This fact has already been documented in a number of scientific literature. It is essential to remove such sequences. The sequences have to be removed. However, Pfizer produced the vaccines without removing the sequences.
(P) This is outrageously malicious.
(M) That’s right. Pfizer retained the SV40 promoter sequence which is completely unrelated to the in vitro synthesis of the messenger.
(P) This issue should be questioned. Why such a promoter sequence is present in the DNA? This kind of promoter sequence is completely unnecessary for the production of the mRNA vaccine. In fact, SV40 is a promoter of cancer viruses.
(M) Yes, SV40 is well known.
(P) The sequence that promotes the cancer virus is present in the DNA for some reasons. As we know, we use this SV40 promoter sequence in various experiments. However, the question is why the promoter sequence is present in this mRNA vaccine.
Do YOU have some questions at this point? I sure as hell do. And the presence of multiple PHARMA TROLLS on Twitter, muddying the water with disingenuous excuses and throw-away coddles, makes things look even more suspicious.
RDS and I discussed this at some length in Saturday’s open. I urge interested readers to follow the above link, repeated here, to see our talk about this video, but it is not necessary for the following discussion.
I then proceeded to Twitter, and got caught up in a variety of arguments between the awesome Jikkyleaks and various “defenders of the narrative”, to put it kindly.
Many of these people (I will avoid calling them “pharma trolls”) shoot from the hip, and – despite sometimes being what should be experts in their fields, seem to have no grasp of basic logic applied to basic principles of biology. They are perfect, however, for defending scientific orthodoxy in a somewhat religious manner.
Meanwhile, sharper people in biotech who understand the basic WTF (like the presence of extraneous DNA in an RNA vaccine being an actual problem) are literally running toward the enemy with the downfall of the original vaccine sales narrative.
I should add, at this point, that SOMEBODY at Twitter is desperately covering all of this up. Twitter uses a stealthy way of “downgrading replies” to hide really important pharma stuff, without overtly banning content. It’s rather ingenious, but it’s VERY frustrating.
First of all, these Twitter IC people are fooling the hell out of Elon Musk – or maybe they aren’t. Either way, some of the most important biology about the vaccines is being hidden, and IMO it sucks big-time.
Thus, it was nearly impossible for me to find the following conversation again. Twitter had hidden my comments so effectively, that I myself could not find them in my own timelines of Tweets and Replies. But with persistence, I did find them.
This conversation and the interspersed commentary explains the how and why of my verifying that the nuclear translocation signal IS in fact in the two main mRNA vaccines – and in my opinion, intentionally so.
Enjoy.
We begin with a Pharm Boy attacking Murakami’s analysis.
Hello, this is false. The plasmid does not contain the entire SV40 gene, just the ori of replication, poly(A) signal, and a promoter. None of these sequences allow for translocation into the nucleus. That sequence is contained in the VP2 region, which is not in this plasmid
The abstract, with the relevant text in BOLD, is here:
ABSTRACT
One of the steps that limit transfection efficiency in non-viral gene delivery is inefficient nuclear import of plasmid DNA, once it has been delivered into the cytoplasm. Recently, via microinjection into the cytoplasm and in situ hybridizations into a few cell types, it was shown that a region of Simian virus 40(SV40), specifically a c. 372-bp fragment of SV40 genomic DNA encompassing the SV40 promoter-enhancer-origin of replication (SV40 DTS), could enable the nuclear import of a plasmid carrying these sequences (Dean D.A. Exp. Cell Res. 230 (1997) 293). In this report, we address the issue of the suitability of the SV40 DTS for cationic lipid-mediated gene delivery, and its capacity to improve the efficiency of the transfection process. For this study, we used transient reporter gene expression assays on various cell types. The gene expression from the plasmid constructs carrying the SV40 DTS varied with cell type and plasmid construct used. Such cell-type and plasmid-construct dependency on gene expression from plasmids containing the SV40 DTS suggests that the gene expression from plasmids is not entirely dependent on its ability to enhance the nuclear import of said plasmids.
The smarmy Taylor responds to this, as follows.
Lmaoooo the plasmid doesn’t contain the enhancer region genius. Just the origin of rep, promoter, and poly(A) signal.
Can you link something saying that using only these three regions that transport into the nucleus is facilitated? Take your time
McKernan does not respond to this, and I don’t know whether Taylor’s point is valid, but assuming that it is correct, the point stands – is the fragment included sufficient to enable nuclear translocation?
This is where I decided to “inject” the fact that there already IS a nuclear translocation signal present (in the lipid nanoparticle) in the spike protein mRNA, so that RNA may be covering for DNA transport as well. But I wanted to make sure that McKernan saw it – I don’t particularly care about Taylor. So I answered directly to McKernan, on the same tweet that Taylor used. I included a link to the Mehedi paper, which is sorely under-exposed.
Is any of this influenced by the simultaneous presence of a translocation signal in the spike protein itself, which does appear to assist translocation of spike mRNA?https://t.co/q2oocDy5eU
I figured that Taylor would respond, and he/she/it did immediately.
[SIDEBAR – I would not be surprised if Twitter insiders are helping these pharma bots by – e.g. – making sure that Taylor Ray and fellow “influencers” can see my input, but that my fellow free scientists, including Kevin McKernan, cannot.]
This paper is about the actual spike protein from the virus, not the spike generated from mRNA vaccines, whose binding site is inactivated.
Taylor’s comment, beginning with “this paper is about something else”, betrays a kind of battered science syndrome that keeps science exactly where the Cabal wants it – defending its own orthodoxy – never questioning by looking off the plantation. It is based on exactly the kind of authority-and-orthodoxy-defending, “teacher’s pet” science that I detest.
Yes, there is a very legitimate question about “virus versus vaccine” – that a VIRUS result is not exactly the same as a VACCINE result. However, if you’re looking at the same or similar things happening for both, and one has a shared culprit, what does logic say?
The entire vaccine paradigm is built on the idea of virus-vaccine symmetry, so if you’re not looking honestly at “virus predicts vaccine” as your FIRST STEP of analysis, you’re never going to predict anything.
Which, by the way, is exactly what the Cabal wants.
This is a perfect example of “unethical skepticism”, as The Ethical Skeptic teaches us.
Taylor at least has the decency of adding a weak and wobbly excuse for a difference – “whose binding site is inactivated”.
This is chaff and countermeasures, as Sundance likes to say. See if you can put that together from my measured, friendly response.
Yes, it's true that Mehedi's work was done on the viral spike mRNA and protein. Likewise, it is true that the full spike pseudo-mRNA in the vaccines has a few seq changes such as prolines to lock conformation, etc. Those don't address whether a functioning NT signal remains.
What I’m saying here implies that the “inactivated binding site” in the vaccine (which itself implies possible changes in the total sequence) does not necessarily affect the presence of a nuclear translocation signal (NTS). These are two different features in the protein. Bringing that up is CHAFF.
Notice that I am not backing down on the idea that data from the virus can and likely is predictive of the vaccines. I am just waiting for Taylor to assert openly that they are not.
Taylor, instead of challenging me, tries a very sneaky deflection.
A quick BLAST search should resolve this as the NLS sequence in the COVID spike is from aa residue 682 to 685.
This gets into bioinformatics. BLAST is a search engine of gene and protein sequences, which allows people to quickly find matching sequences – OR TO MISS THEM.
For sensitive operations, I simply don’t trust BLAST. It’s like Google. It’s a great place to look if you’re willing to throw your cares onto somebody else’s software, but it’s easy to miss things.
The SNEAKY move by Taylor is to MISLEAD me away from PRRARSV into a BAD SEARCH. The suggestion is to use an overly broad search of only 4 amino acids (682-683-684-685). Sorry, Charlie. No dice. I am interested in exactly what I said – PRRARSV – seven amino acids.
Instead, I decided to look for the sequences of the vaccines, and then use simple tools to check for the presence of the PRRARSV signal in them.
To begin with, note that there are TWO kinds of sequences I can potentially get for the vaccines.
the actual sequences, obtained by analyzing the vaccines
the “official” sequences, released by Pfizer and Moderna, the FDA, or somebody else
I tried to get official versions, but simply could not find them. So I found a link in the broader discussion of the results which Murakami was looking at.
The first thing you will note is that this is not likely to contain PRRARSV in it, because it’s all G, T, C, and A, like GATTACA.
This code needs to be translated from DNA/RNA to AMINO ACID, and for that, I need TEXT – not an image. So I looked for a different GitHub upload of the data, with text instead of images, and I found one.
Plugging in the sequences from the paper on GitHub, it’s straightforward. Here are the two vaccines, translated to amino acids, as both images and text.
In each vaccine, there is one and only one instance of the full PRRARSV nuclear translocation signal mentioned by Mehedi, which I have marked in BOLD.
So what does all this mean?
This means that there is no question – the same nuclear translocation signal which gets natural spike protein into the cell nucleus, and natural spike protein messenger RNA into the nucleus, BOTH as demonstrated by Mehedi, is in the vaccine spike proteins.
Do I have to spell it out any more than that? Are the members of the Pfizer Defense Legion so incurious as to what this might mean, that they have to fight the obvious truth every step of the way?
Watch what happens next.
Thank you. You prompted me to do the work. The full nuclear translocation signal (PRRARSV) cited by @masfique appears to be intact in both the actual Pfizer and Moderna sequences. Here is Pfizer.
Taylor’s response was interesting, and I didn’t expect it.
Wonder if the inactivated binding side negates this as it doesn’t allow the vaccine spike to be taken up by the cell. But thank you for doing your due diligence, this is good information
This response actually set me up to explain why the binding site issue is largely irrelevant. First my reply, then the explanation.
Thanks! Even assuming that cell surface binding/entry inactivation reduces direct secondary toxicity of the vaccine-produced spike to new cells, the NTS still means that primary genotoxicity of the Ψ-mRNA+spike may occur for any cell affected by LNP-enabled uptake of Ψ-mRNA.
TRANSLATION: Even if the vaccine-produced spike protein is “inactivated” toward some unspecified binding interaction in some unspecified way [which is contrary to the use of the largely unchanged full spike protein for immunogenic reasons, but let’s just ignore that point], so that the spike does not engage in some alleged “binding” in some way [I provide a plausible example], it doesn’t mean that the spike is not doing exactly what the viral spike has been proven to do, in terms of getting into the cell nucleus, AND bringing in its own mRNA at the same time.
Twitter’s character limits forced me to make that reply too jargon-filled for most, and possibly even for Taylor, who seemed not to have understood the full life cycle of the vaccine.
Allow me to explain in even more detail what I said, which was designed to clarify the issue for Taylor.
Let’s assume that the vaccine spike is somehow “inactivated” in its interaction with cell surface receptors. This would mean that new vaccine spike created by cells, would not interact with new cells in the same way as new disease spike protein, whether that spike was alone or part of a virus particle. I refer to that as “secondary toxicity”.
What I’m pointing out is that this is irrelevant to a “primary” toxicity concern – in fact a “genotoxicity”. This is the risk that spike protein produced in a cell, due to that cell ingesting a lipid nanoparticle of vaccine, might then get into the nucleus, and change the nature of that cell in a more fundamental way.
Now it is understood that the vaccine is “supposed to” lead to the death of infected cells, when those cells produce a bunch of spike protein, and are attacked by the immune system. The problem is that this doesn’t always happen, and indeed may not even be the primary fate of cells which take in the vaccine nanoparticles. What happens if the bell curve of vaccine intake creates a large number of cells which are damaged but not dead – which are not cleaned up by the immune system – and which have injured nuclei? There are lots of ways for things to go wrong.
What I am basically saying is that if the Mehedi results apply to vaccinated cells that are not cleaned up, we have a “bad cell problem”, and the problem isn’t just the spike – it’s in the nucleus. The cell’s problems have just become more “permanent”.
And that’s where things are. That fight is over, but I’m fighting over the De Marinis paper on another part of Twitter. That one is interesting, too.
STAY TUNED FOR MORE.
W
Title: CAREY TREATMENT, THE ¥ Pers: COBURN, JAMES / AUBREY, SKYE ¥ Year: 1972 ¥ Dir: EDWARDS, BLAKE ¥ Ref: CAR019AF ¥ Credit: [ MGM / THE KOBAL COLLECTION ]
During my recent absence, I was blessed with great health. However, 3 days after my return, something that is NOT COVID showed up. Definitely NOT COVID. But three days – that’s about right for some kind of exposure to a virus. I’m taking care of things nicely, but remain curious what this infection might be. Very likely a cold, but still – it would be nice to know what it is.
Beyond that, I’m very curious what’s happening out there, in the COVID, flu, and RSV worlds, as well as with all the other ILIs (influenza-like illnesses) that are vying for our respiratory systems.
Thus, I provide this thread as a dumping ground for all thoughts, opinions, and facts that you wish to report on the topic of transmissible illnesses currently making the rounds. In particular, ground reports of cases in your world are desirable.
Ask yourself a simple question. Why should the very first examples of mRNA vaccines for humans violate the most important safety standard of the mRNA platform? Why would the vaccines do exactly what they PROMISED US the vaccines would not do?
TL;DR –
They didn’t just lie to us about the spike mRNA not going into the nucleus and not changing human DNA – the whole purpose was very likely to do exactly what they did – to open the cell nucleus and keep it open, so that we as a species can start changing population genomics in a huge way, using a variety of technologies.
The central dogma of molecular biology. They shilled the blue arrows to the masses as lies about safety, while hiding the special red arrow and actually working to open it up for business.
Show-Time (Introduction)
I have finally realized that I need to spell out, in as many ways as needed, what is really going on with SARS-CoV-2 and these derived mRNA vaccines.
I had hoped that people would see the implications of the science which is now open to us, with the publication of first the Jaenish paper, then the De Marinis paper, and finally the Mehedi paper. I have commented extensively on each one of these papers, including very recently on the Mehedi paper, which really makes things obvious. I had thought that somebody more notable than me would try to make the point I am about to make. Sadly, nobody has, so it looks like I’m going to have to do it.
These vaccines are designed to BEGIN to change us on a fundamental level which is not exactly the same as the “transhumanism” that constitutes most of the “clickbait” against the vaccines. It’s similar, but it’s not the same. What we see in the clickbait is a distraction from the actual danger, which is not strange and distant and unbelievable, but is in fact right here, and right now, and very believable, once you understand it.
The truth is a lot more like GATTACA, and a lot less like Transcendence.
It’s already starting, and the infrastructure is being set up. The first step has actually been accomplished, and it was in many ways a HUGE success.
Humans ARE being engineered right in front of our eyes. I hope that you can see this point by the end of this article.
They (meaning WEF and its backers) hacked the human cell nucleus on a population genome level. They created a “Trojan” virus that appears to have “zero-dayed” the human cell nucleus. Artfully, the hack is a lot like state-level “APT” (advanced persistent threat) computer hacks, in that it gets in and holds the door open. Of course, better models can be created, but the self-replicating crowbar for the cell nucleus has obviously arrived, and its imperial version of SPQR is PRRARSV.
THAT is the fundamental advance that was achieved here.
I have to say, it was ingenious and “admirable”, in several senses – scientific, military, and criminal. Of course, your mileage may vary on “admirable”. Many will consider it “diabolical”.
What we are facing is the immediate REAL danger of biological engineering and eugenics, which was employed in a fantasy way, as a technical MacGuffin, in various episodes and productions in the Star Trek universe.
This is a scene from Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. These two people are “superhumans” who (according to the story) proved to be disastrous for Earth, during our current century (more or less). The one on the right is “Khan” – obviously in homage to Genghis Khan and his relatives, who ruled much of Asia for centuries.
Don’t get lost in the fantasy stuff. THAT is not the big danger. Stick around for an explanation of the reality which is actually upon us.
Here is how Wikipedia describes Khan, but more importantly, where he CAME FROM.
Khan had controlled more than a quarter of the Earth during the Eugenics Wars of the 1990s.[1] After being revived from suspended animation in 2267 by the crew of the Starship Enterprise, Khan attempts to capture the starship but is thwarted by James T. Kirk and exiled to Ceti Alpha V, where he has the chance to create a new society with his people. In Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, set fifteen years after “Space Seed”, Khan escapes his exile and sets out to exact revenge upon Kirk.
In Star Trek Into Darkness, set in the alternate continuity established in Star Trek (2009), Khan is awakened almost a decade before the events of “Space Seed“. Khan is given the false identity John Harrison and coerced by Admiral Marcus into building weapons for Section 31 and Starfleet in exchange for the lives of Khan’s crew. He ultimately rebels and comes into conflict with the crew of Enterprise.
OK – so what are the “Eugenics Wars”?
Back to Wikipedia…..
When the original series of Star Trek was produced, the 1990s were several decades away, and so various elements of the backstory to Star Trek are set in that era, particularly the Eugenics Wars. The references to the Eugenics Wars and to a nuclear war in the 21st century are somewhat contradictory.
The episode “Space Seed” establishes the Eugenics Wars, and has them lasting from 1992 to 1996. The Eugenics Wars are described as a global conflict in which the progeny of a human genetic engineering project, most notably Khan Noonien Singh, established themselves as supermen and attempted world domination. Spock calls them “the last of your so-called World Wars”, and McCoy identifies this with the Eugenics Wars.
OK – don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying it’s EXACTLY like Star Trek, although I do subscribe to the folk notion that Star Trek is a VERY good predictor of things that are likely to happen.
What I AM saying is that genetic engineering of humanity has already started, and now I’m going to explain why this is so.
We will take a brief tour into the PAST, before we return to the future. If a light bulb comes on, keep it lit!
You cannot uninvent the genetic Tommy-gun, nor the gun moll who knows how to code.
Bonnie & Clyde of the Nucleus
BANKS make a really great analogy of the cell nucleus.
they’re common and everywhere
they contain valuable stuff that needs to be protected yet dispersed
they have high security
things need to traffic securely in and out of them
Breaking into a bank with very high security is a lot like what the spike protein does. But the spike protein doesn’t do it alone. THAT is an important point from the three papers I keep mentioning. The spike protein has a PARTNER who has all the plans.
OK – just for the record – this is going to deviate a little bit from the ACTUAL story of Bonnie and Clyde. Just warning you – it will get weird.
The spike protein and the spike protein mRNA are a PAIR, and together, they are able to not only break into the bank, but to totally take it over, and keep it taken over. And then to take over more banks.
Here is how it works.
The spike protein is Clyde. He’s got a gun, and he causes all kinds of trouble with it. He’s the “action” guy. He knows how to break into banks, mostly because he has a phony ID that always gets him in. The phony ID says PRRARSV in big letters on it, which makes all the bank guards at Cell Nucleus Bank and Trust say “Why, welcome, Mr. Barrow! We’re pleased to see you at the bank today! Come right on in!”
Or, to use a different analogy…..
These bank guards are such chumps, but it works every time.
Well, here is the problem for the bank. When Clyde goes in, he always brings his partner Bonnie. And SHE is trouble. She’s not so good with a gun or a fake ID, but she is a real scam artist, who knows how to get into the bank and embezzle the hell out of it.
Bonnie gets into the cell nucleus bank, and with some help from Clyde, she gets a permanent job there. Bonnie and Clyde are set for life. None of this “grab the cash, run out, get caught, and die in a hail of bullets” shit. No sir! THIS Bonnie and Clyde are smart.
Bonnie trains many of the new girls at the bank – and like the pod people in “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”, she turns every last one of them into exact copies of HERSELF. NASTY! So all these fresh Bonnies are trained by the bank and sent out to get into new banks.
But wait! Bonnie can’t get into banks. Bonnie doesn’t have a gun or a fake ID! How can she get into more banks?
Easy! Bonnie and all her Bonnie clones have the power of multiplication – not just to make more copies of each one herself, but to make more Clydes. Bonnie makes more copies of herself while she’s IN the bank, and she makes copies of Clyde while she’s OUT of the bank.
So every Bonnie that leaves the bank, creates hundreds of new Clydes on the outside. The next time Bonnie wanders near a bank, there are bound to be dozens of Clydes just hanging around, ready to escort her, and maybe even other gals[important], into the bank. If no Bonnie is already working there, she gets a job, and the process starts over.
The KEY POINT is that BONNIE makes the CLYDES who can get her, or women like her, into the next bank.
Bonnie can’t get into the bank, and Clyde can’t get a job in the bank, but together, they can make a living by embezzling banks.
Side Note: This is a beautiful example of a contradiction in the Marxist sense. Proteins and nucleic acids can’t do certain things alone, and thus NEED EACH OTHER.
Once Bonnie is on the payroll, this fact introduces a permanent security problem in the bank, and for all other banks.
And why is that?
Once Bonnie is on the payroll, you can’t get rid of her.
She will just create more Bonnies and more Clydes, and they will scam more banks.
In terms of banks, banks can resist just Clyde or just Bonnie, but they can’t resist the pair.
In terms of the cell nucleus, it can resist the spike protein or the spike mRNA, but it cannot resist both of them together.
Which pair, oddly, is exactly what the vaccines create.
WHAT ARE THE CHANCES?
We can use other analogies, using banks, which emphasize the spike protein more.
Imagine a bank that was convinced to crank out KEYS TO THE BANK, and to send out these keys. Imagine thousands of keys to the bank being sent out by the bank into the community, perhaps in a really stupid PR stunt.
God knows WHO is going to get into the bank now.
God knows WHAT is going to get into the genome now.
Are you starting to see what they did?
Fact Checking the Fact Checkers on DNA Change
The absolute best way for me to convince you that they really said these vaccines could not do what they are now proven to be doing, is to simply play back the words of the “fact checkers”.
See if you can spot how many LIES are told in this video.
If you’re not spotting the lies, read THIS ARTICLE.
AND – by the way – this video is a GREAT explanation of the way things NORMALLY work. It’s totally out to lunch on the way things ACTUALLY work.
Did you spot the lies? Tell me what you found in the comments.
There are also hundreds if not thousands of articles of a similar nature. I’m just going to pick one of them – the one that happened to have the graphic I used above. That article is dated from MARCH of 2021 – right when the authorities were hard-selling the “vaccines”.
mRNA Covid-19 vaccines: Facts vs Fiction
MARCH 10, 2021
By: Maria Elisa Almeida Goes Editing: Offspring Magazine Editorial Team Images: Nina Lautenschläger.
Interestingly, this archive was made only 5 months ago. It was very likely archived by Wikipedia or somebody else who is shilling the false explanation, when faced with the emerging science showing nuclear translocation and genomic incorporation. But it’s perfect for me to preserve evidence.
As an aside, I find it terribly sad that this particular lover of “Max Planck” era scientific history, lived to see one of Planck’s namesake organizations lying about science on a grand scale, but yet here we are.
Let me just pull out the most relevant section. I was planning on highlighting ALL of the lies, fibs, evasions, etc., but there are so many, I decided to only highlight or [comment on] the most horrible and ironic.
mRNA vaccines will not alter your DNA, this is why:
Concerns about the effects mRNA vaccines over the integrity of our DNA also exist. Thankfully, you do not need to worry about this. Such an event would challenge everything scientists know about basic cell biology, and is so improbable, that one can actually call it impossible.
The main reason for that is that, besides being chemically and structurally different from DNA, mRNA is located in a different cellular compartment. While DNA is enclosed in the nucleus, mRNA is produced in the nucleus, but is quickly exported to the cytoplasm with a one-way ticket: it does not come back. In fact, only specific proteins carrying “nuclear localization signals” are able to migrate from the cytoplasm into the nucleus, and mRNA vaccines definitely do not include such molecular instruction.Thus, because mRNA cannot spontaneously be trafficked to the nucleus, it cannot modify your DNA sequence. Additionally, the RNA molecule is charged and carries the same charge as the nucleus, so as our 6th grade physics taught us, like charges repel, and hence the RNA molecule is physically repelled by the nucleus. [Note added by Wolf – WHAT THE HELL???]
One might also argue [HA! You TOADS! Yes, one “might”!] that there are mechanisms through which RNA can be integrated into the genome – HIV viruses being the classic example. The key differences here are that such viruses (1) express special enzymes which are able to code DNA back into RNA and (2) can associate with proteins that can traffic them into the nucleus. Neither scenario is applicable to the mRNA vaccines. [OH, THE IRONY]
For the same reasons, mRNA vaccines cannot affect your unborn children. This would require genomic mutations [oh, really!] in the reproductive cells – sperm and egg – since only these could potentially be transmitted to the next generation. [AND???!!!]
Speaking of children, you might have heard that Covid-19 vaccines would cause infertility in women [why don’t you just stop there, and not go on to one bad hypothesis?] because antibodies against the spike protein could mistakenly attack placenta cells, due to an alleged similarity with a placental protein called syncytin-1. There is no scientific evidence supporting this claim – and, in fact, the two proteins are barely similar, sharing only 4 sequential amino acids out of 538. [This did seem to be a bit of a miss. Nevertheless, what new hypothesis explains all the pregnancy problems?]
Still, you might want to ask why pregnant women are excluded from the vaccination campaigns [wait a minute….not in the US], and why, during clinical trials, women are asked to use contraceptive methods that will avoid pregnancy [because there might be a problem?]. Again, this is not a red flag. Any clinical trial for a potential vaccine or drug will exclude children, pregnant women, old people and people with specific underlying conditions. Initially, trials are designed to obtain major insights whether the developed pharmaceutical product works at all, in healthy adults. Once safety and efficacy are determined [read what you just said before that, where you excluded safety as a motive], tests are expanded to smaller groups that at first were set aside. Excluding pregnant women from trials only shows that trials are being done systematically and following standard protocols. [I’m sorry, but this sounds like happy horseshit, lady.]
Let’s concentrate on the lies most relevant to this discussion. I’ll isolate them and respond to each one.
In fact, only specific proteins carrying “nuclear localization signals” are able to migrate from the cytoplasm into the nucleus, and mRNA vaccines definitely do not include such molecular instruction.
This is EXACTLY what was found with the spike protein that was produced by the full spike mRNA. What a coincidence! See De Marinis for proof that it happens, and Mehedi for WHY. OH – because there’s a nuclear location signal! Was it a “known” one, and if so, who knew it and who didn’t? If some people knew, and others didn’t, wouldn’t that make it like a “zero day” on the nucleus?
Thus, because mRNA cannot spontaneously be trafficked to the nucleus, it cannot modify your DNA sequence.
OH! But isn’t that SO STRANGE that the Mehedi work shows that the spike protein LITERALLY “traffics” the spike protein mRNA into the nucleus? WELL AHHHHH’LLLLL BE! So maybe this explains the nuclear DNA modification that is seen in the De Marinis results. Yes? Maybe? Come on, girl – you’re a scientist at a prestigious institute. Put on your big girl pants and hypothesize with me! You can do it! This is undergraduate, “smart-alec guy in the back of introductory class raises his hand” stuff! And when you were in that class, you thought the same sorts of things but didn’t raise your hand. Maybe it’s time to be brave!
One might also argue that there are mechanisms through which RNA can be integrated into the genome – HIV viruses being the classic example.
This should have been your really big hint, girl. Our local accountant named cthulhu realized that Fauci’s HIV interests and his bat virus interests had remarkable similarities, both in what he himself did, and in what he was studying. “This isn’t Fauci’s first rodeo.” Ask yourself – why was Fauci interested in this? Could it have been the same reason that Doudna was so interested in CRISPR-Cas9? The desire for WRITE PERMISSIONS on the genome?
The key differences here are that such viruses (1) express special enzymes which are able to code DNA back into RNA and (2) can associate with proteins that can traffic them into the nucleus. Neither scenario is applicable to the mRNA vaccines.
Thank you, my lying lady. You have just provided me with a huge clue, by the process of “liar subtraction” – a form of deductive reasoning. We know from De Marinis that genomic incorporation and modification is a fact. We know from Mehedi that “nuclear trafficking” (your point 2) is a fact. This means that it is almost certain that the spike protein ALSO acts as a promoter of reverse transcription (your point 1). You said it – not me. That sure seems convenient, doesn’t it? My question is now – DID YOU KNOW THIS? Were you part of the plot? Or was the person who reminded you of these things part of the plot? Or were we all part of the plot, when I, too, mindlessly parroted the “central dogma” as a defense of mRNA vaccines?
I’m willing to confess that I was wrong. I will admit to my part in promoting the conspiracy. Will you?
But their defenses get worse.
There are now MSM “fact checks” which specifically try to walk back the implications of both the Jaenisch and De Marinis papers, and you can bet there will be similar fact checks on Mehedi’s paper. There has likewise been pressure on those authors to DOWNPLAY the significance of their own works. To me, this is the height of bullshit.
Jaenisch Paper Downplay
Fact Check-Controversial MIT study does not show that mRNA vaccines alter DNA
Rather than take these arguments apart myself, I ask you all to take a first crack at the different techniques used, by clicking the links and observing the UNETHICAL SKEPTICISM. Much of this does not require a science background.
In particular, knowing what we know now, after the Mehedi work, I think it should be very clear how much the media went to bat for the vaccines without honestly questioning the “authorities”.
I will confirm your findings in the comments, and catch any straggler sins of science.
To me, this media mendacity is all simple, stupid, and predictable.
“Nothing to see here!”
Frankly, it changes nothing for me, if any of these authors get talked into walking back their own work, because push-back on critical work is a common phenomenon in the history of science. Not all scientists are capable of weathering the storm. Here are TWO that did. Both got Nobel prizes, by the way.
A classic case, emphasizing a field aversion among an establishment group to a field solution emerging from deductive reasoning, was Van’t Hoff and tetrahedral carbon. Basically, a doctoral candidate in an applied science school had the temerity to take an old hypothesis and revive it as the solution to a very significant current problem. The guy was good – he went on to win a Nobel prize for other work. However, many chemists, especially older ones, rejected the idea, in my opinion by not prioritizing explanatory power over their own abstract philosophical preconceptions. The fact that important people rejected an elegant solution of remarkable utility and truth shows how bad group-think problems can be in science.
Another case was Rick Smalley and C60 (buckminsterfullerene). The linked article accurately describes the initial skepticism that people had for “soccer ball carbon” or “bucky balls”.
The Nature letter describing C60 was attractive and logical, but seeing a line in a mass spectrum did not convince all scientists of the discovery of a new allotrope of carbon. During the period 1985-1990, the Curl/Smalley team at Rice and Kroto at Sussex managed to amass a wide range of circumstantial evidence to support the fullerene structure proposal. Full acceptance came when Wolfgang Krätschmer of the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics in Heidelberg, Germany, and Donald Huffman of the University of Arizona, with their students Konstantinos Fostiropoulos and Lowell Lamb, succeeded in synthesizing C60 in sufficient quantities to allow structural characterization.
I personally remember colleagues assuring me that Smalley was loony, demented, senile, past his prime, or at best something along the lines of “a nice guy, but clearly deluded and obsessed with an error.” The doubt about C60 as reality – particularly as a stable reality – ran thick. And that doubt was WRONG from the very beginning.
Scientists right now are NOT THINKING, and they’re letting the MEDIA push them around.
Scientists are also letting guys like Anthony FAUCI push them around, mainly by the horrible federal grant system, and by the psychology of woke universities, both designed to control science.
And that doesn’t even begin to address other malign interests altering science and medicine in dishonest ways.
Some Actual Speculation – Why Would They Push These Clearly Defective Shots So Hard?
You want some actual “conspiracy theorizing”? Here it is.
Let me go back to my “TLDR” again…..
They didn’t just lie to us about the spike mRNA not going into the nucleus and not changing human DNA – the whole purpose was very likely to do exactly what they did – to open the cell nucleus and keep it open, so that we as a species can start changing population genomics in a huge way, using a variety of technologies.
There are reasons to suspect depopulation as a motive for these vaccines, and both Gail Combs and I have written extensively about this. I continue to believe that this is part of the motivation of the “complex event” we have been undergoing, between virus and vaccine.
Likewise, there are many other motives, ranging from mercenary profits, to promoting gene therapy, to “Covid communism”, and beyond. Many of these roads lead back to WEF – the World Economic Forum. One of those roads may be an actual attempt to commit humanity to a future of genetic engineering as a kind of fait accompli.
Just listen to Yuval Noah Harari talk about changing humanity. A few times he talks about “we”, “I”, “me”, “my”, and “our” programs of genetic engineering of humanity. It’s not just creepy and megalomaniacal – it seems quite self-assured.
WEF’s interest in genetic transformation of humanity cannot be understated. You will note in the above video, the presence of Jennifer Doudna – the Nobel laureate who (IMO) was most responsible for pushing CRISPR gene editing technology forward. Here is the full video.
This is a particularly good explanation for those who want to dig into the science a little.
So how does CRISPR-Cas9 connect to the spike protein?
I have mentioned that the spike not only is proven to have nucleus-opening properties and cell nuclear mRNA-trafficking properties, but it likely has reverse-transcribing properties as well. Thus, it may have utility in facilitating certain varieties of genomic incorporation of genetic material beyond its own spike mRNA. I’m leaving that open very broadly. We don’t really know how far the “nuclear translocation of mRNA” capabilities of the spike protein actually go.
But even just the incorporation of its own instructions into the cellular genome, makes the spike protein highly relevant to CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing technology.
We can’t REALLY be sure what happens if the spike protein code gets into egg or sperm DNA, and goes on to be a “feature” of every human cell of a “spike baby”, but I can say one thing – if that gene can be REMOVED during in vitro fertilization (IVF) by CRISPR-Cas9 technology, to the betterment of the child, then it’s very likely going to be demanded by elite parents, to assure a healthy baby.
So – I ask again – WHAT ARE THE CHANCES?
What are the chances, that people who are gung-ho on the “solution” of genetic modification of humanity – you know – like WEF – would have anything to do with releasing a virus and promoting a vaccine that would almost FORCE us into that future?
I think that this era is a lot like the chemical revolution of the late 1800s, precisely when Van ‘t Hoff was dealing with chemical theory. Figures like Malone and Doudna operate in the time of our own biological revolution. Remember Rockefeller, and what he did to science and medicine back during the chemical revolution. Well, now we have Gates and what HE did to science and medicine during the biological revolution.
Personally, I think it’s high time for us to stop taking shit from the corporate media – and particularly the “fact checkers” like Reuters and the AP – as they LIE to our faces about science – as they deny reality on behalf of the corporate titans behind them.
These mRNA vaccines are DEFECTIVE relative to how they were sold to us – very likely by intention – and the media and media organizations have LIED to us about those vaccines in the most scurrilous ways. The media has defended LIES and defrauded all of us.
You don’t have to be FOR or AGAINST gene editing per se, to be against LYING, DEFRAUDING, and FORCING IT ON THE WORLD by a criminal conspiracy.
We need to demand TRUTH about the vaccines, or the SHUTTERING of these “media” companies and organizations, which have cosigned onto crimes against humanity.
Demand no less. TRUTH or BREAK-UP. Media that lies and conceals is USELESS and a hindrance to REAL SCIENCE.
You may or may not recall my earlier post in defense of the basic idea that viruses are real things, substantially as described, and are not merely a counterfeit construct of the now-obvious fake science, which is clearly inflicted upon us by the liars in charge.
That post was made in response to what I believe is a discreditation campaign of “there is no virus”, which has been promoted within the community of COVID and vaccine skeptics, as well as within the good company of those highly observant election skeptics (see Patrick Gunnels), by the DNC, CIA, CCP, WEF and other corrupt globalist organizations.
This idea of pushing us too far, as skeptics, is very much like what they did to protesters on January Sixth. Pushing the enemy too far is a “go-to” principle in their arsenal of shameful abuse of science, media, and social media. It is an affront to truth and God, but they don’t care.
If you are not familiar with my prior rebuttal of the key points of the there is no virus campaign, I am including the entire article by reference, and urge you to read it – either now, or later, in case you have any doubts about the discrete reality, ready separability, and PHYSICAL ISOLATION of viruses.
I will try to keep this brief – although that is hard, because I’m fighting against people’s “feelings” instead of facts. When the other side LIES all the time, it creates a “feeling” that they’re lying about everything. Yes, they ARE lying about everything – but the lies are often very sophisticated, being composed of …
The “there is no virus” campaign followed shortly on the heels of several other discreditation operations, including the highly successful “magnetic vaccines” campaign. Having an actual scientific interest in magnetism, I spent a couple of weeks debunking this campaign, which involved my actually taking it very seriously as a starting point. The whole experience of basic scientific discovery was refreshing and fun, and led me to a great understanding of how the enemy works. Several posts resulted.
Wherein we examine, in something like “MythBusters” style, the dubious “Magnet Challenge”, without relying (too much) on the anti-scientific crutch of scientific authority First, a confession. The main reason I am attracted to these videos of people sticking magnets to the COVID vaccination injection sites on their shoulders, is that I love to watch normal …
Wherein we look at how the COVID scammers are now using “magnetic” disinformation to try to escape justice for REAL abuse of liposome biotechnology to achieve [most likely contraceptive] vaccine persistence and migration. TL;DR – after mRNA vaccine persistence and anatomical migration were revealed in leaked Pfizer data, explaining “shedding” via persistent liposomes, the COVID …
This is for the historical record. I hope that this analysis gets to the “dissident scientists” involved, but even if it never does, future historians will get a powerful look at what I call “Fake Science” – the establishment’s phony, deceptive and controlled scientific complex – and how infiltration, control, and discreditation of dissident populist …
OK. Something is definitely going on. Hat tip to RF121 for finding this. Somebody call Dr. Tenpenny’s lawyer. The Daily Mail may actually owe Dr. Tenpenny and Stew Peters an apology. Just in case Twitter deletes that tweet, here’s an image. So – is this REAL? YES. Most of this story is in Japanese, but …
I also did a post on why FREE SPEECH needs to be tolerant of people who purvey “disinformation”, and particularly those who are under frequent and active discreditation attacks.
I will try to keep this short. I was very shocked, recently, to find that Dr. Sherry Tenpenny was banned from Truth Social for calling the mRNA COVID vaccines “bioweapons”. Dr. Tenpenny commented back. Let’s take a closer look at that! I can tell you this – by the time I saw this, Dr. Tenpenny …
Thus, don’t get me wrong – I will protect the free speech of both the malicious and innocent purveyors of “misinformation”, “disinformation”, “malinformation”, or whatever – where “whatever” frequently includes TRUTH NOT YET RECOGNIZED. And when there is no truth to be recognized, I find it very important that free speech REMAIN ONLINE, if only to serve as a REFERENCE FOR CORRECTION.
So in the spirit of loving correction of my “no virus” friends, let me begin.
In November of 2022, our wonderful champion of truth in medicine, Dr. Peter McCullough – his nose constantly in the scientific literature – noticed and wrote a post (image below) about a FANTASTIC paper, fully capable of putting to rest the “no virus” position for most honest skeptics.
McCullough even included a handy image, which I reproduce here, in fair use, for your learned examination.
This entire paper is worth digging into. For the benefit of the low-vision, I recommend going directly to the paper (title included below) at these links:
The basic idea of the paper is that the researchers FROZE a liquid suspension of the isolated (yes) virus, and then did a very advanced form of electron microscopy on it, completely analogous to the CAT scan they do on you in the hospital, using X-rays. In this fashion, they got amazing PICTURES OF THE VIRUS.
One of the great things that happened here, which absolutely STINKS of real science, is that the researchers didn’t find what everybody expected.
The Earth may be “round”, but the virus is FLAT.
Literally. The virus is only round in two of its three dimensions. It’s shaped like a TABLET, not a sphere.
Hamburger patties. Hamburgers. Oreos. Or even my namesake, MOON PIES.
But consider the ABSTRACT of the paper, and in particular, what I’ve put in BOLD:
SARS-CoV-2 is a lipid-enveloped Betacoronavirus and cause of the Covid-19 pandemic. To study the three-dimensional architecture of the virus, we perform electron cryotomography (cryo-ET) on SARS-Cov-2 virions and three variants revealing particles of regular cylindrical morphology. The ribonucleoprotein particles packaging the genome in the virion interior form a dense, double layer assembly with a cylindrical shape related to the overall particle morphology. This organisation suggests structural interactions important to virus assembly.
A “double layer assembly”?
So that means a DOUBLE-LAYER MOON PIE!
OK – maybe without the middle layer of CARDBOARD that is clearly what moon pies are made of, but still – TWO LAYERS of RNA (or more accurately RNA + nucleoprotein) in the middle.
Coiled up badly flat like a damned garden hose in a round box. Who’da thunk?
Now – I urge you all to click on THE LINK FOR THE PAPER and skim through it. You will spot ALL of the following listed things, and it will give you a chance to practice reading the scientific literature for yourselves.
In no particular order or location (look everywhere), you will find that…..
isolation of the virus is described
agreement with prior work is described
disagreement with prior work is described
how the spike protein is distributed is described
a proof that the viruses were not “squooshed” flat is given
a way to make the viruses “lay flat” is described
several different variants are compared
the attachment of the spike protein was found to be ########
the size of the spike protein was verified (how?)
the porcupines stay the same size, while the number and type of quills may vary
there is speculation about WHY the structure is what it is
the work was done in #######
the peer review was done by at least some number of people
different proteins that make up the structure are named
There is a lot more, but I’m going to let YOU discover that.
Now – I am not saying that all skeptics of good faith will be convinced by this evidence, but I believe that most WILL be convinced.
I go back to what Dr. McCullough posted.
The objections to the reality of viruses are referenced in bold; McCullough’s reasoning to the contrary is briefly given in italics, and his final argument in shown in BOTH.
The endless frustrations of the SARS-CoV-2 crisis and pandemic response has led some to push back denying existence of the virus altogether.Laboratory methods in virology are well accepted and utilize a series of experiments to demonstrate cellular invasion, replication, transfer and repeated infection. Whole genomic sequencing has aided in identification of variants and subvariants and helped greatly in forecasting what is coming next. The CDC Nowcast system is an excellent application of targeted sequencing of viral samples.[i]Nonetheless, some have said if SARS-CoV-2 cannot be cultured like a bacteria and “isolated” then it does not exist.I have always responded that the principles of laboratory virology, sequencing, and the mass production of viruses such as that done by the Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems are concrete processes that rely on the presence of the virus.[ii] My understanding from the body of medical literature and firsthand clinical experience are consistent with the conclusion that COVID-19 is indeed a unique illness distinguishable from influenza and other viral infections. I have always been impressed with the absence of bacterial superinfection and micro- and macro-thrombosis being features that separate COVID-19 from influenza and other viral syndromes. Calder, et al, at the Francis Crick Institute has gone a step farther with advanced forms of electron microscopy to see the virus up close and personal. A picture speaks a thousand words and should help even the most skeptical “viral denier” come onto the rational team that is trying to treat high risk patients, end ridiculous contagion control measures, and bring our world back to normal.
Now, I will join the “deniers” in objecting to the life-saving “virtue signal” that good Dr. McCullough uses to conclude his argument, but I will agree completely – the pictures, supported by an excellent description of how they were gotten, is convincing – at least to me.
IF one is willing to accept the reality of the virus, then there is a huge bonus that comes with it. We now have strong reason to believe that the World Economic Forum(WEF) – a nation-controlling cult of transhumanism – is behind the virus and the vaccines, in pursuit of their bizarre dream of “hacking the genome“. I will be posting a deep dive on that conspiracy very soon. You can get previews on my Twitter timeline. When you read that post, strongly consider getting fully on the “there really is a virus” train, because it does lead somewhere, and helps to explain why WEF did what they did.
Until then, stay skeptical, stay ethical, and most of all, stay ethically skeptical!
W
NOT A VIRUS! They’re homemade pomegranate moon pies!
TL;DR – The spike protein not only contains a special sequence that allows it into the cell nucleus – it also has an ability to bring its own spike mRNA sequence with it. Both features appear to be unique among coronaviruses. The features explain genomic incorporation found for both the virus and the vaccines. The special key and the mRNA shepherding can be considered to be defects in any spike vaccine that has them.
Also, NONE of the “bigs” are talking about this, but it is HUGE, if only people will read the paper.
By sheer luck, I was alerted to this new development ASAP on Twitter.
A follower of mine, who I had followed back, posted on Twitter the link to a paper with this title:
Nuclear translocation of spike mRNA and protein is a novel feature of SARS-CoV-2
I immediately realized what this was about.
It’s about how the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID) virus spike protein and its mRNA get into the cell nucleus – an extremely important point which WSB has been hitting on over and over. It’s very important, because THAT is how “genomic incorporation” happens. And genomic incorporation is what HIV does – what retroviruses do. They “get into” the DNA and leave cookies, so to speak.
Sometimes, they leave enough cookies, that the whole virus comes back out, fully functional, and ready to infect. Sometimes, they only leave enough junk in the DNA to cause some damage. Sometimes, they leave enough to change us – and that is why human DNA is filled with “viral leftovers”.
In principle, mRNA technology should NOT do this. We were TOLD that mRNA technology could not do this. But somebody LIED TO US. And not only that – NOBODY – from Bill Gates on down – ever apologized to us about lying, or even about just “being mistaken”.
We’ll get to that later.
You will recall that there are two papers I love to mention.
One is the “Jaenisch paper”, which describes how the SARS-CoV-2 virus manages to get some of its genetic instructions for the spike protein into the DNA of cells.
The other is the “De Marinis paper”, which describes how the Pfizer vaccine did the same thing to human liver cells in vitro – meaning that in an experiment using cells in culture, the Pfizer vaccine got its mRNA sequences into the DNA genetic material of human liver cells, and it did so in a matter of minutes.
McCullough got in a lot of trouble with Twitter for posting this, even though it was utterly true. Now we know that the government was trying to shut it down. They likely used the technicality of McCullough’s very VALID speculation (stated as speculation and concern), which turned out to be correct, IMSO.
These papers explain ALMOST everything. When I saw the Jaenisch paper, I predicted that we would see the De Marinis paper. MEANING – when I saw that the virus could get mRNA into the DNA, I predicted that the vaccine might get its mRNA into the DNA, too. And yes, I was right. Clearly others thought the same thing, and decided to investigate.
Now, after the De Marinis paper, it seemed very obvious to me that one did not need any kind of special conditions or reverse transcription promoters to get the vaccine mRNA to incorporate.
That bothered me, and I suspected, at the time, that MAYBE – just maybe – the spike protein ITSELF was somehow causing genomic incorporation – that it functioned as a kind of reverse transcription promoter.
Well, it sure looks like that is the case.
According to the discoveries revealed in the new paper, which I have taken to calling the “Mehedi paper”, there is a special sequence in the spike protein that acts like a “key to the nucleus” – and this sequence is found in NO other coronavirus spike protein.
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes severe pathophysiology in vulnerable older populations and appears to be highly pathogenic and more transmissible than other coronaviruses. The spike (S) protein appears to be a major pathogenic factor that contributes to the unique pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2. Although the S protein is a surface transmembrane type 1 glycoprotein, it has been predicted to be translocated into the nucleus due to the novel nuclear localization signal (NLS) “PRRARSV,” which is absent from the S protein of other coronaviruses. Indeed, S proteins translocate into the nucleus in SARS-CoV-2-infected cells. S mRNAs also translocate into the nucleus. S mRNA colocalizes with S protein, aiding the nuclear translocation of S mRNA. While nuclear translocation of nucleoprotein (N) has been shown in many coronaviruses, the nuclear translocation of both S mRNA and S protein reveals a novel feature of SARS-CoV-2.
Let me put that in plainer English.
COVID-19 really hurts old people and seems to be both deadlier and easier to catch than other coronaviruses. The spike protein seems to be why. Although the spike protein is a surface protein that normally would not do this, it might be predicted to get into the cell nucleus because it has a special sequence “PRRARSV,” a known key to the nucleus which appears in no other coronavirus. Sure enough, the COVID spike protein gets into the nucleus of infected cells. What’s more, the mRNA for COVID spike protein also gets into the nucleus. What happens is that the spike mRNA collects near the spike protein, which helps it get in. While a different protein called the “nucleoprotein” of many coronaviruses is known to get into the nucleus of cells, the penetration of the cell nucleus by BOTH the spike protein AND the mRNA for it, seems to be a unique new feature of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Once you read it in plain English, it’s much more mind-blowing.
Now – I really recommend that you read the rest of the paper, but it’s really just technical details about what was mentioned in the abstract. Those details can help you gauge the expectedness or unexpectedness of things, but I have tried to do that as best as I could in the translation.
At this point, you should have all kinds of questions.
could this defect of the vaccines have been predicted?
should it have been predicted?
did the Chinese know this when they sent us the sequence?
did we know it when we got the sequence?
would NOT using the full spike protein have prevented this?
if so, why did we use the full spike protein anyway?
would the “forbidden” Winfried Stöcker RBD vaccine have avoided this?
if so, why was his vaccine suppressed by the German government?
does this affect the Peter Hotez vaccine, Corbevax?
if not, why didn’t his vaccine get promoted through the process quicker?
is nuclear penetration a common problem with mRNA technology?
how did this “key” get into the sequence? Naturally or not?
could “directed evolution” of the spike have yielded this?
why wasn’t this clear from the moment we got the sequence?
did people know this and hide the information?
were key people like Bill Gates (their side) and Robert Malone (our side) aware of this possibility?
The last question is a gift to WSB and her virologist friend. I am by default a defender of Dr. Malone, but WSB and her friend are long-time skeptics of the technology, and thus of Dr. Malone. In all fairness, I think we have to ask EVERYBODY the same questions.
Did people KNOW that mRNA technology had this vulnerability?
Does this look any more like an engineered bioweapon, designed to get into the nucleus?
Was this thing made by nature, by people, or by somebody with more advanced technology?
What is the purpose of getting into the nucleus, if it is designed to do that?
That should be enough. I will leave some links to prior comments I have made, in an appendix, hopefully added later.
Thank you.
W
John Fink and James Coburn discuss case in a scene from the film ‘The Carey Treatment’, 1972. (Photo by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer/Getty Images)
I will try to keep this brief – although that is hard, because I’m fighting against people’s “feelings” instead of facts.
When the other side LIES all the time, it creates a “feeling” that they’re lying about everything.
Yes, they ARE lying about everything – but the lies are often very sophisticated, being composed of a matrix of solid and hard-won truths, held together by crafty lies.
If you’re going to FIGHT BACK, then I say FIGHT BACK SMART.
Buckle up.
INTRO
There has been a very successful strain of disinformation used to make our side seem very unconvincing to normies (to put it mildly).
That strain is the “there is no virus” deception.
Many times we tolerate this, because we don’t want to discourage our “fellow skeptics”, but it is critical that we refute nonsense on our own side.
In the past I’ve devoted occasional comments to putting down disinformation to the tune of “there is no virus” and “the virus was never isolated”, but after this last time, meaning yesterday, I’ve decided to just GUT this beast right on the dissection table, under the glaring lights of its own post, so that the “debunking” has its own URL, suitable for posting in response to well-meaning people on our side, who think “no virus” is a tenable position.
NO. It is not tenable. You are being BAITED into nonsense, so that you are no longer effective. You are being baited into becoming a “FEELZ” person, like reliable Democrats.
The “there is no virus” position is basically the “new flat earth” of biology. You’ll see why momentarily.
An Example of “There Is No Virus / Isolation”
I want to thank Canadian Guest for bringing an example of this disinformation to the board for my consideration. Bringing some FRESH RATS to this SCIENCE HAWK is always appreciated.
This is why I don’t restrict the bringing of “propaganda” and potential disinformation here. We’re adults. We can DEAL with it – and often very usefully. I get more truth out of Russian “propaganda” than out of most MSM “explainers”. Funny how that works.
WE will be the judge of truth – NOT “them”.
Here is the video. Watch if you want – particularly after reading this.
There are some tells OTHER than what I’m going to talk about, that this is an interesting construction designed to derail critics of the vaccines. Tell me what you think “smells” like targeted disinformation in the comments.
Did CIA or FIB make this? Did Chinese intelligence? Who are these people?
Koch’s Postulates
One of the centerpieces of “disproving” that viruses exist, is to engage in passive-aggressive science using what are called “Koch’s postulates”.
Koch’s postulates were a brilliant set of standards from the beginning of microbiology, designed to help prove that an illness was actually caused by a microbe, rather than a bodily dysfunction of some kind.
The microorganism must be found in abundance in all organisms suffering from the disease, but should not be found in healthy organisms.
The microorganism must be isolated from a diseased organism and grown in pure culture.
The cultured microorganism should cause disease when introduced into a healthy organism.
The microorganism must be reisolated from the inoculated, diseased experimental host and identified as being identical to the original specific causative agent.
Wikipedia has an excellent and quick presentation about Koch’s postulates AND the problems therein.
You would be very smart to notice something on the LAST slide.
“It is sometimes impossible to satisfy all of Koch’s postulates.”
One of the ways in which this happens, is that “pure culture” (stated in the second postulate) varies between a laboratory vacuum and a jungle floor. If you’re a “purist”, nothing will pass the postulates. If you’re laissez-faire about things, everything will pass. If you’re SMART about things, and demand a SMARTLY PURE culture, you will get great results, and Koch’s postulates will continue to work for even crazy things like viruses, prions, etc.
What’s up with viruses?
The problem is that viruses are not microbes in the same sense as bacteria, protozoans, and similar microorganisms which are well-handled by Koch’s original postulates, where “pure cultures” were “biologically sterile, but molecularly fertile” mixtures.
Viruses are, quite literally, molecular parasites. The transmission of viruses is both more demanding and less demanding on the nature of a “pure medium”, than is transmission of bacteria. Viruses transmit in a different way.
Viruses need almost nothing to survive in, but they need CELLS to reproduce in. Viruses do not grow in simple chemical brews. They need CELLS. Cells not only contain a lot of stuff of “their own” – they also contain a lot of viruses, AND the encoding for these and other viruses.
If you demand a “cell-free medium” for growth of a virus, you have basically sabotaged science “under the color of science”.
See how that works?
The history of Koch’s postulates, and the upgrading of Koch’s original postulates to take care of things like viruses, prions, etc., is discussed in THIS article:
SO – you will almost always see some kind of reference to Koch’s postulates, in “there is no virus” disinformation. Koch’s postulates are the perfect “medium” for passive-aggressive anti-science.
BUT WAIT! There’s MOAR!
“BUT MUH NON-ISOLATION!”
The next, and actually essential part of the disinformation, is the allegation that the virus behind COVID-19 was never isolated.
HOGWASH!
BULLSHIT!
LIES!
It was not only isolated early and often – it is ROUTINELY isolated, all over the world, in order that genetic studies OF THE VIRUS can be done.
Think of all the hundreds of thousands of scientists who gather “clout” in molecular biology by analyzing the RNA of a single virus, and thereby look for small changes in that RNA – meaning a few nitrogenous bases among hundreds of thousands. How do they “isolate” the RNA of the virus from samples taken from people? How do they NOT get a bunch of human nasal RNA, plus the RNA of all our OTHER embedded viruses, AND nasal bacteria, mixed up in the sample, screwing up the results?
It’s simple. They GROW THE VIRUS in a NONINFECTED cellular medium that LOVES the virus. They filter and separate the budding and “transmitting” virus from the cells. And then they check the RNA of the filtered virus.
WHICH LOOKS LIKE THIS!
“Pictures or it didn’t happen.”
You can even see the damn spikes! Of course, they didn’t really need to do this – the RNA is the real convincer – the FINGERPRINT – but a picture is helpful for the doubters.
Sure sounds like “isolation” to me!
One of the best ways to demonstrate this to you, is to simply READ YOU THE PAPER where the pictures came from – back in the early days of COVID-19.
This paper was “e-published” back in March of 2020, when “Wuhan Coronavirus” had just been renamed to “SARS-CoV-2” because of China and Democrats (more on that later). The paper was actually received in February, around the time I was recovering from the original Wuhan strain of COVID-19, or something immediately descended from it.
This is from a Japanese group located in Tokyo. This is not by any means the earliest research on SARS-CoV-2 virus. It’s an IMPROVEMENT paper. These guys are saying “Hey! It’s easier to isolate this damn virus using OUR new method!”
Here is a text version of the paper, emphasizing the abstract.
Enhanced isolation of SARS-CoV-2 by TMPRSS2-expressing cells
A novel betacoronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which caused a large respiratory outbreak in Wuhan, China in December 2019, is currently spreading across many countries globally. Here, we show that a TMPRSS2-expressing VeroE6 cell line is highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2 infection, making it useful for isolating and propagating SARS-CoV-2. Our results reveal that, in common with SARS- and Middle East respiratory syndrome-CoV, SARS-CoV-2 infection is enhanced by TMPRSS2.
As a bit of an aside, you will note that the editor is a Chinese researcher at an American university. The CCP has no problem pushing on the “social” buttons of American science, AND IT DOES. There was no way that the name “Wuhan coronavirus” was going to last. Think about it. This is subtle, but it’s the way things are now.
There are some nice graphics in the paper, too, including pictures of the virus.
(A) Expression of TMPRSS2 in total cellular RNA (0.2 µg) of indicated cells was compared with that in human lung RNA (catalog no. 636524; Clontech) by quantitative real-time PCR. ND, not detectable. (B) SARS-CoV-2–infected VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. Cell rounding (black arrows) and syncytium formation (white arrows) (C). Electron micrograph showing isolated virus particles with negative staining. (Scale bar, 200 nm.) (D) Viral RNA multiplication in various cells at 48 h postinoculation with the viral specimen, as determined by real-time RT-PCR using E and N primer/probe sets (9). Cq, quantitation cycle. (E) Real-time RT-PCR amplification plot using the E primer/probe set, corresponding to the data in C. RFU, relative fluorescence units. (F) Comparison of cell susceptibility to the isolated virus, detected with a patient’s serum and Alexa 488-conjugated goat anti-human IgG. Nuclei were stained with DAPI.
It is EXTREMELY helpful to simply READ what the authors say, in recounting what they did.
I’ve put in BOLD what they DID.
Seven clinical specimens (throat swabs or sputum) obtained from seven SARS-CoV-2 infection cases were inoculated into VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells, which were monitored daily for cytopathic effect (CPE). These clinical specimens were deidentified prior to use, and this study was approved by the ethics committee of the National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Japan (approval no. 1091). Informed consent was obtained from all participants, from which the subjects were obtained, or their legally acceptable representatives for sample donation. In five cases among the seven, clear CPE with detachment/floating (black arrows, Fig. 1B) and syncytium formation (white arrows, Fig. 1B) developed at 2 or 3 d postinfection (p.i.) (Table 1).The virus titers in culture supernatants of the five cases at 3 d p.i. were 4.6 × 106 to 6.8 × 107 median tissue culture infectious dose (TCID50) per mL (Table 1).Typical coronavirus particles were detected by electron microscopy (Fig. 1C).Next-generation sequencing (NGS) of case Wk-521 detected the nearly full-length genome sequence from SARS-CoV-2 with >99.9% homology (1, 2) (GISAID database ID EPI_ISL_408667). Unexpectedly, the NGS data showed contaminated mycoplasma sequences (Mycoplasma hyorhinis and Mycoplasma arginini) from VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. CPE in VeroE6 cells persistently infected with SARS-CoV was enhanced by infection with Mycoplasma fermentans (8), but whether a similar situation exists for SARS-CoV-2–related CPE in this cell line is unclear.
The viral RNA copies in the clinical specimens used for virus isolation were estimated by real-time RT-PCR (9, 10). As expected, viral RNA copies in the clinical specimens in which CPE developed within 2 d p.i. were greater than those in the other specimens (Table 1).
VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells are superior to other cell lines tested in this study for SARS-CoV-2 isolation. Consistent with previous reports (2, 4), the amount of SARS-CoV-2 RNAs in the culture supernatants of Vero, Calu-3, and A549 cells 48 h p.i. was low and was measurably higher when VeroE6 cells were used. However, the viral RNA copies in the VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cell culture supernatants were >100 times greater than those from VeroE6 cells (Fig. 1 D and E). Data for SARS-CoV show that TMPRSS2 enhances its entry efficiency (5, 11). VeroE6 and VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells were infected with 10-fold serially diluted SARS-CoV-2 samples, and the infected cells were visualized by indirect immunofluorescent assays (Fig. 1E). The results showed that VeroE6/TMPRSS2 displayed ∼10-fold greater number of SARS-CoV-2–infected cells than the parental VeroE6 cells. These data suggest that, in common with SARS-CoV, TMPRSS2 may also play an important role in SARS-CoV-2 cell entry.
Pay special attention to THIS PART which is not highlighted above, but which shows the level of ATTENTION that was paid to the results.
Unexpectedly, the NGS data showed contaminated mycoplasma sequences (Mycoplasma hyorhinis and Mycoplasma arginini) from VeroE6/TMPRSS2 cells. CPE in VeroE6 cells persistently infected with SARS-CoV was enhanced by infection with Mycoplasma fermentans (8), but whether a similar situation exists for SARS-CoV-2–related CPE in this cell line is unclear.
See what I was talking about with a “pure medium”? These mycoplama are very common contaminants of cell cultures. Note that these scientists are not HIDING the presence of contaminants in their “pure” medium. On the contrary, they’re saying they spotted the contamination, and are accounting for it.
The bottom line is that these people know exactly what they are doing, dealing with the tricky nature of Koch’s postulates under the realities of working with viruses – some of the hardest biology that can be done.
And THAT brings me to a personal observation.
On Difficult Technology
Science is a game that everybody CAN play, and I would go so far as to say it’s a game that everybody SHOULD play. You should be teaching your kids science and art, in exactly the way you should teach them football, baseball, and ice skating.
And just like with PROFESSIONAL SPORTS, in which people who you respect make errors that you call out, it helps to RESPECT the pros of science – EVEN AS YOU POINT OUT THEIR ERRORS, WHICH YOU SHOULD.
We don’t believe professional athletes are “always right” – why should you believe the same things about scientists?
Back in my laboratory days, I had a couple of “lucky insights” connected by a lot of hard work, and they demonstrate how science gets past obstacles, including in particular other scientists.
Dissatisfied with my seemingly unexciting assigned research project, I was in the perfect mood when a colleague of mine drew something very interesting on the blackboard with a big chalk “X” through it.
“Why doesn’t this work?” was my question.
My colleague gave a reason that didn’t seem right to me, and then stated that he was abandoning that project. I asked if he minded if I tried it. He didn’t mind – he had already gotten a new assignment from our boss.
I picked up the gauntlet, and got things to work the very first time. The big chalk “X” was wrong. My insight was correct.
Happy that the abandoned research project was back in play, our boss allowed me to take it over and pursue it.
Pushing the idea through on a small scale, I actually got the entire project to work – but not to the satisfaction of skeptics. We didn’t have “clincher” proof. We needed to scale up to get that level of proof.
Scaling it up, however, failed. It took a lot of very interesting science to understand the whole process, and scale it up to the level that was necessary to convince the skeptics.
The problem was, not ALL of the skeptics were convinced. One skeptic, at the last minute, needed proof that would require even MORE scaling up.
The problem THERE is that NOT EVERYBODY could do the work.
When others could not duplicate my results, I was forced to do the even bigger scale-up myself, AND to do it under intense scrutiny, to figure out why *I* could do it and others could not.
The result was obvious proof that I had gotten it to work. The skeptic’s harassment had led to a magnificent NEW proof that neither we nor the skeptic had fully predicted. We had exceeded the level of proof that the skeptic demanded.
HOWEVER, this left open a subject that nobody really wanted to talk about.
Why weren’t others able to duplicate my results?
The sad fact is, science is filled with people who do not practice the habits necessary for success. They are not PERSISTENT when they need to be. They are not INSIGHTFUL in trying to get around problems. Even more importantly, they are not HOPEFUL that they CAN get around problems. This failure to have hope in overcoming obstacles is a HUGE problem in science. But likewise, many are not sufficiently DUBIOUS in trying to spot thousands of small potential problems, and doing what is necessary to prevent them. We have to be SKEPTICAL, too.
Even when we’re skeptical, sometimes we’re not skeptical enough. An excellent example is provided by the tragic death of Karen Wetterhahn, who died of dimethylmercury poisoning, when a few droplets of dimethylmercury splashed on and penetrated one of the thin latex gloves she was wearing. This was the level of protection recommended at the time, but it was not enough.
Karen had protected her coworkers by doing the work herself, instead of exposing THEM to the danger. She did the work “to code”, but it was still not enough. Part of her legacy is the habit of scientists in later years to use two or even three layers of gloves, when handling dangerously toxic and reactive substances. Many will use “one more than recommended” of just about any safety measure.
We have to LEARN and RETAIN thousands and thousands of such habits just to do some of the simplest scientific operations, like weighing out a substance properly.
The boss who I mentioned above loved to say “All the easy stuff has been done.” It’s SO true, even though it’s obviously an exaggeration. That is why there are amazing recent discoveries – every once in a while – of things that COULD have been discovered many years prior, and which were simply missed or overlooked. But for the most part, it’s true. Almost all of the easy and obvious stuff has been done.
So what is my point?
The point is, science is HARD – and yet you are allowed to criticize it – AND YOU SHOULD.
The trick is, criticizing it and BEING RIGHT. And you do NOT have to be an “expert”, or even a scientist, to be right.
But you may have to be persistent, insightful, hopeful, and skeptical.
How a Psycho Vaccine Marrying the Infamous COVID Spike Protein to HIV’s Neurotoxic gp41 Was [Allegedly] Canned by a Mere Testing SNAFU
How Australia Dodged The First Mad Vax Bullet of the WEF Scamdemic / Plannedemic
Darwin Award Vaccine Featured Insane Merger of HIV and COVID But Failed Due to Buggering of AIDS Tests, NOT Because of the Obvious Risks
Was It Ever Really For COVID? The gp41 HIV Protein is a TOP Target For AIDS Vaccines
How Science Monetization and Corruption Has Broken All Vaccine Safety Mechanisms and Made Sneaky Liars Out of Scientists
Mood Music
Intro – Prepare To Be Shocked
This is one of the craziest stories your either never heard, or barely heard. I am certain of the following. Nobody ever spelled out to you how NUTS this failed vaccine really was. This absolutely bonkers vaccine, that was almost used on all Australians.
The fact that nobody even followed this story, shows that the captured corporate media is absolutely not doing its job. Either THAT, or their job is to help deceive us.
And you know where my money is on that.
Surely, in the past, both journalists and scientists might have said something to the effect of “Hey – marrying a cardiovascular pathogenic bat virus spike protein and a neurotoxic AIDS protein in a vaccine to prevent a cold seems a little weird.”
BUT NO. NOT NOW.
And yet, some of us, few as we might be, might still have some questions.
We assume – ASSUME – as in ASS / U / ME – that all people in all of science are acting in all of our best interests all the time.
I have been completely broken of this spell, and I can tell you – what I can see now is not pretty.
I need to prepare you for what I’m about to tell you.
State of Corruption of Vaccine Science
First, a fantastic interview of Dr. Robert Malone by Tucker Carlson. It’s very folksy and long – a bit over an hour – but it will absolutely cure you of any idea that science in 2022 has not been almost totally corrupted by money, power, and SECRET AGENDAS.
This guy Malone is as close to a Moderna insider / honest outsider as you’re gonna get, and he clearly sees the dirty play from the Moderna point of view.
Hat tips to FG&C and GA/FL for keeping this video in play. Gail has been pumping this video, too. EVERYBODY need to watch this.
Indeed, let’s just save that tweet as an image, in case Twitter decides Jack is becoming too much of a liability.
One of the biggest BOOMS dropped in the video, IMO, is the fact that Robert Malone WARNED the FDA about the toxicity of the spike protein, and they SHRUGGED IT OFF.
Yes. Malone gave them documentation, as asked, and they came back to him and said everything was OK. And THAT is when he started to think something was very wrong.
We’re about to do it AGAIN – only I’m not the first – I’m just rediscovering an obvious “why the heck are they doing THAT” point.
But we’ll get to that in a minute. We need to broaden our list of corrupt suspects.
You see, corporate “science” isn’t the only bad actor here. What about governments that conspire with the corporations to “mandate” their products for a mutual PAYOFF?
It turns out that both Justin Trudeau and the Canadian government have a very large incentive in mandating the broken, dubious, and just plain BAD Moderna and Pfizer “vaccines”.
When you realize that Justin Trudeau is not only following his mandate madness for WEFfian ideological reasons, and for Papa Fidel power, but also for CASTRO CASH, you understand what’s REALLY going on.
SO – now that you realize THESE PEOPLE care more about other things, than they care about us, the following will make more sense.
The Frankenvax That Almost Was
So just today, FG&C posted THIS TWEET which made me go WTF…..
Basically, an Australian COVID vaccine that falsely triggers AIDS / HIV tests was recalled. The vaccine was NOT sent out for use by the public, because it gave people positive AIDS tests.
GREAT, but…..
WHY did the vaccine do this? And by the way….
Didn’t this happen BEFORE – like over a year ago?
I could have SWORN this happened before.
Is this OLD NEWS or a DIFFERENT VACCINE?
Or did they bring the SAME vaccine BACK?
Or even worse….. AND logic…..
You see, I remember something just like this bit of news, over a year ago. It was some vaccine from an Australian university that accidentally triggered AIDS tests.
Well, when I looked closer at this, it turned out to be THE SAME NEWS. Meaning that this recent tweet was just OLD NEWS.
HOWEVER – I happen to know a lot more now, a year later, so I dug DEEPER and FOUND MORE.
And now I want to explain to you, exactly what is going on.
Because this monster AIN’T DEAD.
VolksWackcine 451
Let’s begin by looking at the actual announcement that all this news came from. The paragraph in BOLD is the critical one. If you’re going to TL;DR past all the rest, read THAT paragraph.
Friday, 11th December, 2020: The University of Queensland (UQ) and CSL today announce that the Phase 1 trial of the UQ-CSL v451 COVID-19 vaccine has shown that it elicits a robust response towards the virus and has a strong safety profile. There were no serious adverse events or safety concerns reported in the 216 trial participants. However, following consultation with the Australian Government, CSL will not progress the vaccine candidate to Phase 2/3 clinical trials.
The University of Queensland commenced a Phase 1 trial of their COVID-19 vaccine candidate – v451 – in July 2020, to assess safety and immunogenicity in healthy volunteers. CSL was working towards taking responsibility for the Phase 2/3 clinical trial and large-scale manufacture of the vaccine, upon completion of successful trials.
The Phase 1 data also showed the generation of antibodies directed towards fragments of a protein (gp41), which is a component used to stabilise the vaccine. Trial participants were fully informed of the possibility of a partial immune response to this component, but it was unexpected that the levels induced would interfere with certain HIV tests.
There is no possibility the vaccine causes infection, and routine follow up tests confirmed there is no HIV virus present.
With advice from experts, CSL and UQ have worked through the implications that this issue presents to rolling out the vaccine into broad populations. It is generally agreed that significant changes would need to be made to well-established HIV testing procedures in the healthcare setting to accommodate rollout of this vaccine. Therefore, CSL and the Australian Government have agreed vaccine development will not proceed to Phase 2/3 trials.
The Phase 1 trial will continue, where further analysis of the data will show how long the antibodies persist, with studies so far showing that levels are already falling. The University of Queensland plans to submit the full data for peer review publication.
UQ Vice-Chancellor, Professor Deborah Terry, said while the outcome was disappointing, she was immensely proud of the UQ team who had shouldered a heavy burden of responsibility while the world watched on. “I also want to thank our many partners, our donors – including the Federal and Queensland Government – and of course the 216 Queenslanders who so willingly volunteered for the Phase 1 trials.”
UQ vaccine co-lead, Professor Paul Young, said that although it was possible to re-engineer the vaccine, the team did not have the luxury of time needed. “Doing so would set back development by another 12 or so months, and while this is a tough decision to take, the urgent need for a vaccine has to be everyone’s priority.”
“I said at the start of vaccine development that there were no guarantees, but what is really encouraging is that the core technology approach we used has passed the major clinical test. It is a safe and well-tolerated vaccine, producing the strong virus-neutralising effect that we were hoping to see.
So we will continue to push forward and we are confident that with further work the Molecular Clamp technology will be a robust platform for future vaccine development here in Australia and to meet future biosecurity needs.
Dr Andrew Nash, Chief Scientific Officer for CSL said “This outcome highlights the risk of failure associated with early vaccine development, and the rigorous assessment involved in making decisions as to what discoveries advance.”
“This project has only been made possible by the innovative science developed by world-class scientists at The University of Queensland and the strong collaboration between our organisations, and many others, over the last 10 months. CSL and Seqirus are committed to continuing our work to protect the Australian population against COVID-19. Manufacture of approximately 30 million doses of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine candidate is underway, with first doses planned for release to Australia early next year. In addition, CSL has agreed at the request of the Australian Government to manufacture an additional 20 million doses.”
UQ and CSL acknowledge the support of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) in partnering to enable the rapid development of the vaccine candidate through clinical trials.
So what they’re saying is that this vaccine – which uses the HIV protein gp41 – sets off HIV tests. And THAT made the test unacceptable to move forward. The remaining phase II and phase III trials were cancelled, while the phase I trials continued to finish collecting data.
And WHILE they say that the phase I testing showed that the vaccine was safe and effective, if you look more closely, they only tested it on 216 people.
We KNOW from the Moderna and Pfizer tests, that even after HUGE phase II and phase III trials, using thousands or tens of thousands of participants, there are serious side effects that are STILL not discovered until actual roll-out to the public, when millions receive the shot.
And that does NOT include long-term effects. We know NOW that this determination can be critical in many cases.
And one more point for the record. As you can see by the statement at the end of the press release, this vaccine was supported by the Bill Gates organization CEPI.
Yeah, that CEPI, and THAT Bill Gates.
Like I say, CEPI is how Gates gets TWO VOTES, and GAVI is how he gets THREE.
So the bottom line – this vaccine was killed because it set off AIDS tests.
But let’s dig a little deeper into that.
So What’s With HIV and the COVID Vaccines?
When I first heard about this particular Australian vaccine (UQ-CSL v451, or v451 hereafter) triggering HIV tests, my immediate thought was that this might be proof that the Indian researchers were CORRECT – that the spike protein really contained those four inserts from HIV, and that THIS was setting off tests for HIV.
Later, I heard that – no – there was actually some segment of HIV protein being used in the v451 vaccine INTENTIONALLY. Thus, the whole problem seemed stupid, the use of the HIV protein seemed short-sighted, and I promptly forgot about it. No smoking gun – just a stink bomb.
However, a year’s time changed all that.
Think how different the perspective is now.
virus almost certainly came out of a biowarfare lab in China with PLA/NIH ties
Fauci, Dazsak and minions now known to have LIED about origins
Fauci gang also lied when pooh-poohing the Indian HIV insert hypothesis
mRNA vaccines seem to be producing immune deficiency, a.k.a. “VAIDS”
there are working hypotheses now which explain immune deficiency
Fauci’s history with HIV mirrors current history with COVID – lies and hidden agenda
Fauci seems to be obsessed with immunodeficiency and vaccines
Fauci promoted bad killer drugs as treatments in both cases (AZT, remdesivir)
Fauci seems to have an agenda clearly counter to truth as we know it, and is likely serving something beyond the increasing “fake” science which the public believes is operant in the world, but which is very likely a “reduced set” intended to deceive us
Thus, with all that WEIRD background, it NOW seems a bit “par for the course” that somebody in that world would want to bring HIV into the COVID equation.
But is that a good idea?
Now – before I go talking about why this might be a BAD idea, I want to give you plenty of references as to why they SAY it was a good idea.
Let’s start with a good explanation of why the false positives occurred. This article includes a lot of information on the v451 vaccine itself.
The article mentions, without too much detail, that the HIV protein is part of a “molecular clamp” – a trimeric molecular “holder” of spike protein molecules. This holder allows three molecules of any attached spike-type protein to stay locked into a rigid, parallel conformation, which will remain in the desirable pre-fusion (with a cell) configuration, and not change into the useless post-fusion configuration.
The article also links to a scientific paper on the technology:
Prior to 2020, the threat of a novel viral pandemic was omnipresent but largely ignored. Just 12 months prior to the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic our team received funding from the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) to establish and validate a rapid response pipeline for subunit vaccine development based on our proprietary Molecular Clamp platform. Throughout the course of 2019 we conducted two mock tests of our system for rapid antigen production against two potential, emerging viral pathogens, Achimota paramyxovirus and Wenzhou mammarenavirus. For each virus we expressed a small panel of recombinant variants of the membrane fusion protein and screened for expression level, product homogeneity, and the presence of the expected trimeric pre-fusion conformation. Lessons learned from this exercise paved the way for our response to COVID-19, for which our candidate antigen is currently in phase I clinical trial.
Here is part of a really good graphic from the paper.
You can see how it’s possible to produce a spike protein with the “molecular clamp” attached, and then simply let this recombinant construction TRIMERIZE (form a triple, side to side) around the three molecular clamps, and thereby stabilize the three spike protein molecules next to each other.
This is a bit like a “motif” within an actual virus, where spike proteins, sticking out next to each other, protect each other’s sides. THAT is the basic idea of this thing.
Remember how Novavax assembles a bunch of spikes via modified ass ends into a kind of antigenic cloved apple, to create a kind of fake virus? Same very basic principle.
Indeed, the molecular clamp is even a bit like TWO motifs, since gp41 serves a somewhat similar purpose in the HIV virus, being the root of a stalk to an attack mechanism.
HIV-1 fusion process. It involves both subunits of the envelope spike complex. Notably, gp41 is shown in green with its transmembrane region buried in the virion membrane, both segments of heptad repeats (CHR closer to the virus and NHR closer to the host cell) before and after conformational changes, and the N-terminal end of the ectodomain in gray. In the last two panels pointed out by the red arrows, gp41 is observed following penetration of the host cell and following a conformational change resulting in the six-helix bundle which brings the viral and cell membranes into close proximity.
So – in a very real sense – this whole “vaccine” thingie is a literal marriage of HIV and coronavirus – the simplest possible one.
And they didn’t tell you ANY of this shit – did they?
So all of that WORKS, but the problem is that antibodies don’t just form to the attached spike protein – they ALSO form to the “molecular clamp”, meaning to the gp41 protein.
And what does that mean?
An AIDS Vaccine in Disguise?
The people who made the v451 vaccine say they didn’t expect there to be so much antibody response to the gp41 parts of the vaccine, thus triggering HIV tests.
You know what?
I don’t believe them.
I think they were gaslighting us all along.
Part of this is due to the fact that I’ve seen gp41 named numerous times as a potential basis for subunit vaccines against HIV. In fact, in one reference, I saw it named as THE BEST HOPE for an AIDS vaccine.
They didn’t mention that? LOL. OH, REALLY.
So WHY would anybody be using gp41 as part of an antigen, and not expect it to generate antibodies?
In fact, one might almost look at this v451 vaccine and regard it as an HIV vaccine, with spike proteins tacked onto gp41 as a kind of “nasty adjuvant” to initiate the immune response to the HIV protein.
Seriously – which is the real target here – COVID or HIV? Or BOTH?
This looks to me like a perfect example of…..
WAIT FOR IT….
“REVERSO”.
But let’s just set that aside for now, and pretend that the thing which COULD be a vaccine for EITHER ONE of the two things they stuck in it, is REALLY a vaccine for the fakey-fake cold that we don’t need a vaccine for, and NOT a vaccine for the sexual disease that stands in the way of Luciferian scum creating their polyamorous sexual paradise of literal epic random phuckery.
OMG, these people have just lied, and lied, and lied again. And they will KEEP lying.
But we’ll pretend they’re not lying, for just a little while longer.
So if we have an actual COVID vaccine here…..
…..is it a good idea to include the HIV gp41 protein subunit?
Well, after what we’ve seen with the spike protein, I was thinking maybe it wouldn’t be.
And it turns out, I wasn’t the first person who thought of this.
Doorless Carp’s Suspicious Cat In A Box
When I went looking for the toxicity of the gp41 protein, one of the first things that came up was some guy or gal who appears to have been actively suppressed on Twitter, eventually banned to Gab, and whose substack article on the topic has only two likes – ONE OF THEM MINE.
Doesn’t mean the article’s not important. And I think it’s about to get a few more hits.
This is a wonderful article that is simply SKEPTICAL of the entire “it was pulled because of triggering AIDS tests” reasoning.
DoorlessCarp read the same press release I cited above, and pokes and prods it from the point of view of somebody who knows a heck of a lot about HIV and AIDS, and doesn’t buy what (s)he’s reading in that press release. Something doesn’t sniff right to “them”, and “they” spell out the issues.
I will attempt to summarize DoorlessCarp’s concerns (noted as “DLC” hereafter).
First, DLC admits to actually being led to the problem by one of those Fake News “straw man fact checks”, which attempt to either “debunk” facts or mislead scandals by setting up an adjacent strawman and knocking it down. OBSERVE.
“Fact check: An Australian vaccine trial did not give trial participants HIV”
LOL. No. The truth they’re protecting is that the “COVID vaccine” gave them HIV antibodies, and it was very likely the whole point.
To quote DLC about the Aussie vaccine researchers: “I wouldn’t let these clowns dispense aspirin, let alone design fast tracked vaccines.“
DLC then makes this statement, noting that there is a curious skew between the reality of HIV testing and the idea that there is some kind of a problem here.
Interesting rapid response to the effect that antibody only HIV tests have long since been debunked as a diagnostic tool on their own due to cross reactivity from other antibodies. They don’t tell you anything useful.
DLC then quotes extensively from this letter which explains why HIV testing via antibodies is actually a rather horrible mishmash of false positives and negatives, ultimately requiring a clinical diagnosis and “validation by lifestyle facts”.
Which leads to the next section, which I quote:
So what was the real reason for pulling the Australian trial, was it the gp41 toxicity?
The antibody problem raises more questions than it answers as spike S2 has homology to P24, GP41 and GP120.
This is dark stuff, P24 has been ported straight across from HIVs capsid to the spike protein. Here’s the proof, at least as far as what specific antibodies are telling us, which don’t lie:
What is p24 antigen?
“One distinctive HIV antigen is a viral protein called p24, a structural protein that makes up most of the HIV viral core, or ‘capsid’. High levels of p24 are present in the blood serum of newly infected individuals during the short period between infection and seroconversion, making p24 antigen assays useful in diagnosing primary HIV infection.”
suspects the real reason for pulling the vaccine was the toxicity of gp41
notes that the spike protein already has potentially dangerous homologies to three HIV proteins, p24, gp41 and gp120
p24 is basically the nucleocapsid protein of HIV
p24 tends to be detected early in the AIDS process, before antibodies to it form
DLC then cites several papers demonstrating that there is already a lot of understanding of antibody cross-talk between the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and either (1) original SARS-CoV proteins, and (2) HIV-1 proteins.
In the latter case, there is specific interaction with gp41.
References given:
The SARS CoV-2 spike directed non-neutralizing polyclonal antibodies cross-react with Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV-1) gp41 (Dec. 2021)
DLC then lays the hammer down on the fact that gp41 is responsible for the dementia of AIDS.
I’m including the whole thing here.
Pathology:
Accumulation of β-Amyloid Precursor Protein in Axons Correlates with CNS Expression of SIV gp41 (2002)
“In this study, a strong association (p = 0.005) was identified between elevated axonal β-APP levels and the amount of SIV gp41 present in white matter, implicating HIV/SIV gp41 as a mediator of axonal damage.“
Mechanisms and Structural Determinants of HIV-1 Coat Protein, gp41-Induced Neurotoxicity (1999)
Abstract
Of the individuals with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection, 20–30% will develop the neurological complication of HIV-associated dementia (HAD). The mechanisms underlying HAD are unknown; however, indirect immunologically mediated mechanisms are theorized to play a role. Recently, the HIV-1 coat protein gp41 has been implicated as a major mediator of HAD through induction of neurocytokines and subsequent neuronal cell death. Using primary mixed cortical cultures from neuronal nitric oxide synthase (NOS) null (nNOS−/−) mice and immunological NOS null (iNOS−/−) mice, we establish iNOS-derived NO as a major mediator of gp41 neurotoxicity. Neurotoxicity elicited by gp41 is markedly attenuated in iNOS−/− cultures compared with wild-type and nNOS−/− cultures. The NOS inhibitor l-nitroarginine methyl ester is neuroprotective in wild-type and nNOS−/− cultures, confirming the role of iNOS-derived NO in gp41 neurotoxicity. Confirming that iNOS−/− cultures lack iNOS, gp41 did not induce iNOS in iNOS−/− cultures, but it markedly induced iNOS in wild-type and nNOS−/− cultures. We elucidate the region of gp41 that is critical for iNOS induction and neuronal cell death by monitoring iNOS induction with overlapping peptides spanning gp41. We show that the N-terminal region of gp41, which we designate as the neurotoxic domain, induces iNOS protein activity and iNOS-dependent neurotoxicity at picomolar concentrations in a manner similar to recombinant gp41 protein. Our experiments suggest that gp41 is eliciting the induction of iNOS through potential cell surface receptors or binding sites because the induction of iNOS is dose dependent and saturable and occurs at physiologically relevant concentrations. These data confirm that the induction of iNOS by gp41 and the production of NO are primary mediators of neuronal damage and identify a neurotoxic domain of gp41 that may play an important role in HAD.
“I wouldn’t let these clowns dispense aspirin, let alone design fast tracked vaccines.“
Is gp41 a danger? It may well be. And nobody is asking the question, because (IMO) the neural pathogenic initiator that gp41 is, was passed off as a “molecular clamp” instead of the REAL ANTIGEN.
If they’re going to resurrect this weirdo COVID-HIV vaccine – and YES, they’re thinking about it – then there needs to be some examination FIRST of what the HELL is going on.
So What The Heck Is Going On Here?
When I was a young lad in the old days of science, there was lying, misrepresentation, and thievery, but it was on a much smaller scale.
We used to joke very cynically, back in the ’70’s, that every natural product being synthesized in a laboratory cured cancer, because we all knew that was not true.
We knew that these substances were really being synthesized merely because the molecules were a synthetic challenge, and a way for professors to make a name for themselves in synthetic chemistry. Almost NONE of these substances would EVER be used to treat cancer, and most would wash out very soon upon investigation. Almost none of them would ever even LEAD to a useful cancer drug. But LYING about their importance was how people got money for their labs. Every structurally interesting new molecule was always the next savior – until it wasn’t.
I used to think that the people giving out the money were fools about this, but not any more. I am beginning to think that the “givers” have always been just as corrupt as the “takers” – they’re just the “insiders” who turn on the spigots for their fellow “outsiders”.
I have no reason to think that vaccines are any different.
I think that a false crisis was used as a massive MONEY-BOMB – a global pile-on of the giddiest and most corrupt kind.
Probably the biggest one in 20 years.
I think that an AIDS vaccine was passed off as a COVID vaccine, by plausibly passing off the natural function of the HIV subunit as a new tool for other things, because – well – it IS such a new tool – just like every new interesting molecule MIGHT actually be some amazing new drug that cures cancer.
They lie skillfully, and they lie with truth, and it’s almost impossible to PROVE that the secondary “oh by the way” was actually the primary motivation.
We have changed from white lies that everybody understood WERE lies, to much more devious lies where scientists engage in fooling not just the public, but even other scientists.
I do think we have to wake up now. We can no longer afford the luxury of pretending not to know.
If I have to thank Joe Biden and his puppetmasters, including his “handler” Obama, for anything, it is for WAKING ME UP with these stupid mandates.
Nothing worked so well, to show us that the NEW WORLD ORDER is a direct threat to humanity, and needs to be stopped.
Science can be good again. But it must never, ever, abandon TRUTH.
(@JackPosobiec) 
