Coronavirus Crisis: Main Thread

[stickdog99]

Revisiting the claim that “myocarditis is more common after covid than after the vaccine”

What is the evidence for these assertions?

This is a statement often made in response to concerns raised about the incidence of myocarditis after the mRNA injections. The source of this has been a number of deeply flawed papers, the most recent of which was a “systematic review and meta-analysis” published in Frontiers. This claimed a 7-fold difference between myocarditis risk after infection vs mRNA vaccine.

The claim – which contradicts several other studies, including this massive Nordic study covering 23m subjects published in JAMA– has been expertly analysed in [this Twitter thread by @sborg40](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1582 ... 81377.html), an account with a profile of “Retired Infectious Disease Physician”.) – has been expertly analysed in this Twitter thread by @sborg40, an account with a profile of “Retired Infectious Disease Physician”.

A meta-analysis is a method whereby the data from many different studies are combined into one analysis. The idea is that by increasing the number of subjects covered, the results are more reliable and representative and hence statistically more powerful. However, the outcome of such an analysis is entirely dependent on (amongst other things) the studies which are used, and in fact the main criticisms of the Frontiers paper relate to the specific studies selected.

For the paper, the authors found 763 potentially relevant studies but whittled these down to only 22 (3%) for inclusion in the analysis. The Twitter thread lists the shortcomings identified which we do not intend repeating here, but in brief some of the issues @sboprg40 found with the studies which were considered for the analysis were:

* 3 of the 10 studies of myocarditis after covid had evidence of bias compared to none of the 12 studies after vaccination
* One study was conducted by the CDC without peer review, this study looking only at the hospitalised and failing to examine all those infected
* Some studies were conducted in the elderly, in ITU patients and severe covid with accompanying non-specific cardiac damage
* Myocarditis diagnoses were accepted by authors without specific diagnostic criteria, in one study diagnoses were merely “probable”
* Covid diagnoses were not consistent and reliable

Overall therefore, this meta-analysis contributes little to answering the core question of interest: does mRNA vaccination in the healthy young population increase the risk of myocarditis at all, and if it does how does it compare to the risk from a covid infection?

One of the most comprehensive studies looking at the risk of myocarditis after covid infection was this study out of Israel (which has an advanced and comprehensive electronic medical records system), covering a large population of nearly 200k subjects.

The authors “did not observe an increased incidence of either pericarditis or myocarditis in adult patients recovering from COVID-19 infection”. Heath Advisory and Recovery Team: Myocarditis began with vaccine rollout

This is, of course, entirely consistent with what is the strongest (and also simplest) evidence against the core claim, which is that numerically an increase in myocarditis cases simply wasn’t a feature of 2020, but rather this started in 2021.

Figure 1: Incidence of myocarditis across 40 hospitals in USA



https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2782900

...

Heath Advisory and Recovery Team: Myocarditis began with vaccine rollout

More data to back up myocarditis concerns

There are two key points regarding post vaccination heart issues that HART have been raising concerns about since early 2021.

* Myocarditis is attributable to injection not infection
* What has been diagnosed may represent wider harm that is yet to be properly measured

...

Many people have claimed that it is the virus that is the underlying cause for myocarditis rather than the vaccinations. There are several ways to check this hypothesis. The obvious one is to compare the rate of myocarditis after infection in:

a) uninjected uninfected

b) uninjected infected

c) injected uninfected

d) injected infected

Although there have been several epidemiological analyses of myocarditis, that simple comparison is never made. Where uninjected people are looked at specifically, there is no evidence of an increase in incidence. HART has previously summarised the data after infection in the injected compared to the uninjected.

An alternative approach is to look at how common myocarditis is over time. Did the incidence increase with the arrival of covid in 2020 or the arrival of injections in 2021?

There are now several sources of data to answer that question and they all concur.

...

All three studies demonstrate a far higher rate of subclinical harm from injection than the rate measured when only looking at hospitalisations that result in a myocarditis or pericarditis diagnosis.

...

Heath Advisory and Recovery Team: Myocarditis concerns grow

HART has been trying to raise awareness for over two years.

A new study performed on adolescents in Hong Kong who suffered myocarditis after mRNA injection in Circulation appears to be generating quite a lot of discussion over how common it is, and what the long-term outcomes are for those unfortunate enough to suffer from this side effect.

Broadly speaking, the more we learn, the worse it looks.

...

Since then, we have also written about further worrying data emerging, especially regarding subclinical cases which are only found by measuring troponin levels systematically. This is logistically simple to perform, so it is criminal that it wasn’t done as soon as the signal of potential harm emerged.

...

[stickdog99]

COVID Vaccines Damage ALL Hearts, Study Finds | Radiology Tests Detect Myocardial Damage in Covid-vaccinated patients

"Conclusions: Focal myocardial 18F-FDG uptake seen on oncologic PET/CT indicates a significantly increased risk for multiple myocardial abnormalities."

A new scientific study by Nakahara et al. tested COVID-vaccinated people to see if they have “silent” changes in heart muscle function that standard radiology tests could detect. The study shows very unsettling results.

...

Scientists measured myocardial 18Fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) uptake. F-FDG has molecular similarity to glucose. However, 18F-FDG does not metabolize like glucose. Therefore, PET scans could detect it, and its presence shows the heart muscle’s abnormally high demand for glucose, indicative of abnormal cardiac function. ...

Conclusions: Focal myocardial 18F-FDG uptake seen on oncologic PET/CT indicates a significantly increased risk for multiple myocardial abnormalities.

Indeed, this is what the Nakahara study finds:

Results

The study included 303 nonvaccinated patients (mean age, 52.9 years; 157 females) and 700 vaccinated patients (mean age, 56.8 years; 344 females). Vaccinated patients had overall higher myocardial FDG uptake compared to nonvaccinated patients (median SUVmax, 4.8 vs median SUVmax, 3.3 ; P < .0001). Myocardial SUVmax was higher in vaccinated patients regardless of sex (median range, 4.7-4.9 ) or patient age (median range, 4.7-5.6) compared to corresponding nonvaccinated groups (sex median range, 3.2-3.9; age median range, 3.3-3.3; P range, <.001-.015). Furthermore, increased myocardial FDG uptake was observed in patients imaged 1-30, 31-60, 61-120, and 121-180 days after their second vaccination (median SUVmax range, 4.6-5.1) and increased ipsilateral axillary uptake was observed in patients imaged 1-30, 31-60, 61-120 days after their 2nd vaccination (median SUVmax range, 1.5-2.0) compared to the nonvaccinated patients (P range, <.001-<.001).

This was not supposed to happen! The COVID vaccine is not supposed to affect the heart in any way. It was promised to “stay in the arm.”

The explosive findings of the study are discussed in the editorial that the editor of the magazine, Dr. Bluemke, felt obliged to publish.

Dr. Bluemke’s editorial is somewhat apologetic, and he gives faint praise for COVID vaccines.

>The development of messenger RNA (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccines is a remarkable biotech story. While traditional vaccines took 5-10 years to develop, the COVID-19 vaccines took less than a year. By comparison, the fastest conventional vaccine previously developed was the mumps vaccine, on a timescale of 4 years.

Dr. Bluemke also does not mince words. He explains that the findings are not due to chance:

>The main results: asymptomatic patients vaccinated for COVID-19 before PET had about 40% greater radiotracer activity in the myocardium than unvaccinated individuals. The P value was low, less than .0001. This translates to only 1 time out of 10 000 that these results would occur by chance.

The editorial states that there is no rational way to ignore and explain away the negative findings of myocardial inflammation by Takahara et al.:

Vaccine manufacturers are aware of the adverse effects of mRNA vaccines. These adverse effects lead to vaccine hesitancy. The study results by Nakahara et al suggest that mild asymptomatic myocardial inflammation could be more common than we ever expected. This in turn would support a hypothesis of more severe systemic inflammation related to mRNA vaccination in some patients who present with symptoma-c myocarditis.

...

[stickdog99]

JAMA STUDY BY US FDA REPORTS RECORD-BREAKING 50-FOLD INCREASED RISK OF MYOCARDITIS, 10-FOLD INCREASED RISK IN 5-11

They did not stratify the results by gender & dropped 75% of the cases due to lack of medical records. Relative risks reported? 10.19, 10.26, 22.44, 8.72, 18.65, 10.29, and 50.01!

Safety of the BNT162b2 COVID-19 Vaccine in Children Aged 5 to 17 Years | Pediatrics | JAMA Pediatrics | JAMA Network

One of the authors of the study is from the US Food and Drug Administration.

From the article:

Question Does active monitoring detect potentially elevated risk of health outcomes after BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in the US pediatric population aged 5 to 17 years?

Findings In this cohort study of more than 3 million children (aged 5-17 years) who received BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination through mid-2022 using data from 3 US commercial claims databases, only myocarditis or pericarditis met the statistical threshold for a signal after BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination via near–real-time monitoring.

Meaning Results from near–real-time monitoring of health outcomes after BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination are consistent with current evidence and provide additional evidence of vaccine safety in the pediatric population.

An epidemiologist asks the right questions.

JAMA Peds publishes myo/peri study on kids - without stratifying for male/female? And threw out 75% of cases due to not having medical records to review?

She then also asks: “The rates appear to be based on 37 of 153 cases. Would there be signals for other events if cases were not discarded due to lack of medical records for review? Do we distrust the codes in these active surveillance databases that much? Or is this convenient to reduce the signal?”

Here’s some text from the study:

“Of the 153 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis among children aged 12 to 17 years, medical record review was conducted for a sample of 37 cases whose records were obtainable. Twenty-seven of these cases (73.0%) were confirmed as true cases of myocarditis or pericarditis, of which 25 patients were male, and 19 were hospitalized with a mean length of hospital stay of 2.8 days (median, 2 days). The mean time from vaccination to presentation for care for myocarditis or pericarditis was 6.8 days (median, 3 days).”

92% of confirmed cases were males. So she’s quite right. Where are the gender-stratified results?

The authors also wrote:

“We did not detect a signal for myocarditis or pericarditis in younger children (aged 5-11 years), which is consistent with reports from other surveillance systems.”

Close inspection shows that one of the high relative risk values JPEG:



, which for one database for one age group was a record-breaking RR = 50.01, was in fact elevated in 5-11 year-old vaccinees.

RR = 3.49 and 10.29???

They did not find these results?

Dropping the 75% without medical records no doubt reduced the statistical power, the same trick used by the infamous Destefano et al study (2004) to make the association between on-time MMR vaccines and autism go away after rigorous p-hacking.

I found it.

You can see it.

...

[stickdog99]

The Ultimate List: mRNA Vaccines + Myocarditis | The evidence is now OVERWHELMING - a very real risk to kids, young adults and possibly all ages.

...

...

First our quick one-liner summaries for your tweeting pleasure: FDA finally admits in its own report on 65+ mRNS recipients: Risk of lung clots up 50% - Risk of heart attacks up 40%+ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 0X22014931

Jan 2022, JAMA study found myocarditis risk increased in multiple age, sex groups after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, highest in young men. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/f ... le/2788346

Study of VAERS data between Jan-Jun 2021 found highest rate of myocarditis in young boys 12-15 after dose 2 of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/eci.13759

This slide presentation to the CDC and FDA on myocarditis should have rung some IMMEDIATE alarms bells - but we went on vaxxing the young lads anyway. https://fda.gov/media/159007/download

Study in Nature found increased risks of myocarditis and pericarditis in France after Covid-19 mRNA vaccines, particularly after 2nd dose and in age 18-24 yrs, both male and female were affected. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31401-5

CDC report 2022 found 14 cases of myocarditis or pericarditis among 102,091 males aged 16-17 who received Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine, significant departure from reported rates in 2021, showing concerns labeled as misinformation are real. https://thefederalist.com/2022/09/09/cd ... are-legit/

Study found myocarditis/pericarditis as rare side effect of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, disproportionately affects young male adolescents, commonly after 2nd dose of primary series and 1st booster. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M22-2274

The estimated MMRRs and SMR were about 4 times higher than the MMRRs and SMR. The study concludes that the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine is associated with a higher risk of myocarditis death in all age groups, including the elderly. The risk may be 4 times or higher than the apparent risk of myocarditis death. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... 1.full.pdf

Markedly elevated levels of full-length spike protein were detected in the plasma of individuals with post-vaccine myocarditis, whereas no free spike was detected in asymptomatic vaccinated control subjects. It suggests that the cause of myocarditis may be linked with spike antigen. https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161 ... 122.061025

The risk ratio for the mRNA vaccines combined is 1.43 which means that recipients are 43% more likely to have a serious adverse event. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 0X22010283

You’re going to have to vax 35K young adults to prevent one hospitalization and in doing so you’re going to send nearly 20 of these folks into a serious adverse reaction from the vax. https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2022/ ... 022-108449

...

[stickdog99]

[stickdog99]

According to a just released KFF poll, 70% of Democrats still plan to get the new, completely untested COVID-19 monovalent booster, compared to just 24% of Republicans

What will it take for these braindead partisans not to keep quintupling down on their previous idiotic medical choices?

If you are actually still considering getting yet another completely untested booster that does nothing to protect you from getting or transmitting COVID-19 even after you have gotten multiple vaccinations as well as multiple COVID infections in the past, why?

Note that all the data shows that the spike proteins that these vaccines instruct your cells to make keep circulating in the body months after vaccination in a significant plurality of recipients. This causes the body to treat the COVID virus as if it were an allergy, which results in an increased risk of infection. Every study that has examined the data shows that the more injections people get, the more likely it becomes that these individuals will get infected with COVID. So how many of these injections are you willing to line up for?

Are you really committing to get every new completely untested mRNA shot they come up with every few months for the rest of your life? Have you thought this through?

I am just trying to understand this recently reported remaining enthusiasm for these injections. Assuming that you are currently healthy enough that you are not scared of getting a cold or the flu, what is your rational argument for getting yet another spike protein manufacturing instruction injection?

[stickdog99]

Interview with Kevin McKernan, scientist who discovered DNA contamination in mRNA shots


Kevin McKernan is the genomics scientist who first discovered plasmid DNA contamination in the mRNA Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccines (trending as #plasmidgate). McKernan has been working in his field for 25 years, having managed R&D for the Human Genome Project at Whitehead Institute/MIT, and now heading up cannabis and hemp science company Medicinal Genomics as founder and Chief Science Officer.

I originally conducted this interview with McKernan in August for my article, COVID vaccines and your DNA: What the science tells us (and what it doesn’t), and had the intention of writing up the interview in full at the time. I then fell quite ill and was out for the count for a few weeks, during which time #plasmidgate developed, with new labs confirming McKernan’s findings of DNA contamination in the mRNA vaccines.

Then, in September, South Carolina scientist Dr Phillip Buckhaults testified about the DNA contamination in a state Senate hearing, and the story gained momentum. At the end of the month, Spectator Australia was the first outlet to take #plasmidgate somewhat mainstream with the publication of my article, Scientists ‘shocked’ and ‘alarmed’ at what’s in the mRNA shots. The article got 34 million views in the first three days. (See my reaction to the news in my Spectator TV interview with Alexandra Marshall, here. My interview is first up, and it’s free to watch.)

As #plasmidgate unfolded, McKernan and I continued our back and forth. Below is a collated and lightly edited selection from our conversations, organised by topic. McKernan’s candour on this hot-button topic is a breath of fresh air.

On the discovery of the DNA contamination in the mRNA vaccines

McKernan: I wasn't actually looking for it. People had sent me some of these vials anonymously because I had published a paper with Dr. Peter McCullough on potential mistranslations of the vaccine, and how different the vaccine RNA might be from the actual virus.

So people sent these vials to me and I put them in the freezer. We were doing another RNA sequencing experiment in the cannabis field trying to track down some pathogens in that space and it wasn’t behaving, so someone suggested ‘Hey, why don’t you spike in an RNA that you know works.’ I realised I had some of these vials in the freezer and pulled them out to use as controls.

They worked, but what I was shocked by was that there was DNA in there. And that's when I started writing all these Substacks and preprints to try to inform people of the fact that there's DNA in these things and they're forcing them to pregnant women and children, and that wasn't disclosed in informed consent, so the world doesn’t know about it.

On publishing findings in preprint form & the importance of replication over peer review
McKernan: We knew it was controversial. Putting the data public was the right thing to do, but the more important thing is to make it very easy for someone else to reproduce and verify the results because peer review can take a year and for something politicised like this it may never occur.

So we spent time to develop a quantitative PCR assay that could confirm this. You're probably familiar with PCRs in that some people were calling these things [Covid infection] out a CT of 35 or 40. But we're finding the DNA contaminant at a CT of like 15 to 16.

DDU: Meaning that there must be a lot of DNA contamination in there?

McKernan: Yeah, a million times more than what you might call someone for having a virus in their nose. They're injecting a million times more contaminant in every shot. So it's it's not a small amount.

DDU: And has this been replicated?

McKernan: Yes, a few others have reproduced this work, which is what's most important. More important than peer review is that someone can reproduce this. Half the stuff that gets into peer review isn't reproducible.

[Others who have reproduced McKernan’s findings include aforementioned Dr. Buckhaults, Dr. Sin Hang Lee, Prof. Dr. König and Dr. Kirchner]

...

[stickdog99]

[Belligerent Savant]

.
Trolls/Gaslighters running the show at the NYT.

[stickdog99]

[stickdog99]

[stickdog99]

[stickdog99]

NBC News: Many vaccinated people have now gotten Covid at least 5 times

Nearly four years after Covid’s emergence, plenty of people have tested positive at least twice. But an unlucky group has been hit with reinfection after reinfection. “I’ve seen a few patients with five infections,” said Dr. Grace McComsey, vice dean for clinical and translational research at Case Western University. “Sadly, they were immunized and they still got Covid five times.”

Reanna Sunford Clark, a 47-year-old day care teacher in Portland, Oregon, says she has gotten Covid six times. “It does make me concerned that I have this predisposition to it,” Clark said. ...

Clark is one of five people interviewed by NBC News who described what it has been like to get Covid at least five times. All five either tested positive at home, received a positive antibody test later or were diagnosed by a health care provider each time. They provided images of test results, medical records or correspondence with friends or family as verification. Overall, they said, the experiences have left them confused and curious about the reasons for their frequent illnesses.

...

Brenda Keele, a 38-year-old resident of Casper, Wyoming, said her symptoms got worse with each round of Covid. Keele recently endured her fifth and most severe coronavirus infection, which she said caused body aches and trouble breathing. At the height of that illness, she said, Keele could barely walk and felt “like every single one of my lymph nodes in my body is swollen and painful.”

In the two weeks since she stopped testing positive, her symptoms have improved, though she still has lingering congestion, Keele said.

Although each reinfection should theoretically be milder than the previous one for most people, doctors said, cases like Keele’s do happen. McComsey estimated that about 20% to 25% of her patients report that their reinfections are more severe. Keele has chronic heart failure and adrenal insufficiency, so she takes medications that compromise her immune system. Her heart condition has declined over the last year and a half, she said, but doctors aren’t sure if Covid is responsible.

*****

Wow! What could possibly be making these individual so susceptible to COVID infection?

*****

Keele was vaccinated but did not get booster shots. The others interviewed each said they got at least one booster after their original vaccines.

[stickdog99]

So the newest CDC study just dropped. From January to June 2023, just 159 total patients over 65 were hospitalized with COVID-19 as their primary health issue who were not on record as having been fully vaccinated against COVID-19!

That's a whopping 0.53 patients per state per month!

The study itself

During January 1–July 8, 2023, weekly rates of COVID-19–associated hospitalization among adults aged ≥65 years decreased 86%, from a high of 42.2 to 5.9 per 100,000, the lowest level since July 2021. Rates then increased to 6.8 for the week ending July 15 and continued to increase during subsequent weeks, to 16.4 for the week ending August 26, 2023.

From January to June, the grand total number of patients over 65 in the entire nation who were even hospitalized for COVID-19 was whopping 1,133, including a grand total of 176 ICU admissions, and a grand total of 63 in-hospital deaths.

Nearly all hospitalized patients (1,112 [98.5%; 95% CI = 97.4%–99.2%]) had at least one underlying condition and most (1,015 [90.3%; 95% CI = 87.2%–92.8%]) had two or more.

Overall, 159 (15.9%; 95% CI = 12.4%–19.9%) of sampled patients aged ≥65 years had not been vaccinated against COVID-19 at the time of hospital admission, 703 (58.6%; 95% CI = 53.7%–63.4%) had received only a monovalent vaccine, and 240 (23.5%; 95% CI = 19.5%–27.7%) had received
≥1 bivalent COVID-19 dose.

Chart source: https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/133298

Chart text:

Adults who had no record of receiving any COVID-19 vaccination were considered unvaccinated.

This report provided no breakdown whatsoever of ICU admissions or deaths of these patients by vaccination status.

Here is an accurate headline for this study that we will not be seeing anywhere in corporate media anytime soon:

From January to June 2023, Just 159 Total Patients Nationwide (15.9%) Were Hospitalized For COVID Who Either Were Never Vaccinated Against COVID-19 Or For Whom No Vaccination Records Exist.**

This is compared to the 943 who were on record as fully vaccinated, including 240 who were on record as bivalent boosted.

[stickdog99]

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defe ... amination/

‘Probably the Most Important Topic of Our Time’: DNA Contaminants in COVID Shots Can Trigger Cancer, Alter Human Genome

A World Council for Health panel of international scientists revealed that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are contaminated with plasmid DNA from the manufacturing process. This not only can cause inflammation and cancers but can damage DNA, perhaps even pass genetic alterations to children. Experts say regulators ignored the risks and urge a recall of all mRNA vaccines.

The World Council for Health on Monday convened an international panel of scientists and medical experts to discuss recent revelations that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are contaminated with bacterial DNA plasmids that can harm human health.

Describing the findings as “probably the most important topic of our time,” the panelists addressed “#PlasmidGate” and its implications “for all people of the world.”

The hearing addressed the discovery of bacterial DNA left over from the microscopic plasmids used for multiplying DNA in the mRNA vaccine manufacturing process. One of the gene therapy tools discovered in COVID-19 vaccines is SV40, which is known to be cancer-promoting.

These foreign substances may also be responsible for the high numbers of severe adverse events and deaths following COVID-19 vaccines — but health regulators across the world have thus far ignored the connection, participants said.

...

Bhakdi told The Defender, “We feel that the plasmid discovery could be the game-changer,” because genome alteration leads to the creation of genetically modified humans, which he said “will not be tolerated by the world.”

“Physicians around the globe face the decision whether they want to save themselves or go down in history as accomplices in the greatest crime against humanity. We believe that here lies a real chance,” Bkahdi said.

Data and testimony presented Monday centered around McKernan’s finding, replicated by other researchers, that up to 35% of the content of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines consists of DNA plasmids.

Plothe described plasmids as “a circular ring of DNA in which elements, via genetic modifications, have been put in, in order to produce the mRNAs.”

“Logically, [plasmids] should not be in the vaccine, because they’re the production sites of mRNA and you certainly don’t want them to be lasting in your body,” Plothe said, adding that such plasmids contribute to antibiotic resistance.

...

The COVID vaccine ‘bait and switch’

McKernan noted that vials of COVID-19 vaccine used in clinical trials and later approved “are not the vials that were given to the public.”

The clinical trial administered a vaccine made with “process one,” which used PCR to make the DNA that was then turned into the RNA to make the spike protein, McKernan explained.

However, “Once the trial was complete, they [performed] a big bait and switch,” he said. “They moved to a production process that manufactured this DNA in E. coli.”

“With that comes a different risk,” McKernan said. “When they switched to scale this up, … now you had to get the DNA out of E. coli and not have any of the parts of E. coli come with it.”

McKernan explained that parts of E. coli are known endotoxins that can cause anaphylaxis, a severe allergic reaction.

Bhakdi said, “Contamination of mRNA vaccines with plasmid DNA … must be expected to be the rule and not the exception.”

SV40 DNA ‘the most striking revelation’

McKernan discussed “the most striking revelation”: SV40 cancer-promoting components found in the Pfizer monovalent vaccines. These were “not disclosed to the regulators,” he said.

This is important, McKernan said, because “SV40 is a well-published tool for gene therapy. If you want to get DNA into the nucleus, this is the shuttle that you use to get it done.”

According to McCullough, SV40 stands for Simian Virus 40. “These are known commercial enhancers to upregulate the production of a gene in E. coli to produce a product,” he said.

The SV40 genetic code is well-known to be taken up into human cells and to potentially cause cancer. “It promotes proto-oncogenes to turn on and actually become cancerous within cells,” McCullough said.

Lindsay called SV40 a “super promoter,” explaining that SV40 is “great at driving gene expression and if that should sit above an oncogene, of course you could have an explosion of an amplification in a cancer gene.”

McKernan added, “If you have lipid nanoparticles that are encapsulating this material, you now have a Trojan horse to get into the cells.”

mRNA vaccines ‘by any and all definitions are gene therapies’

According to Bridle, documentation revealed last week by Health Canada through a Freedom of Information request showed that plasmid DNA is not listed as an ingredient in mRNA vaccines.

“Anybody who’s received plasmid DNA in these shots, they have never given informed consent for that,” he said. “Those of us who know the manufacturing process … were assured that there would not be plasmid DNA present.”

Bridle said this should have been easy for regulators to notice. He described serving on the advisory committee of a master’s student working on producing a preclinical messenger RNA-based vaccine. “One single rookie scientist” had “no problem getting rid of these bacterial DNA contaminants,” he said.

“There’s no excuse [for] companies like Pfizer and Moderna, with all of their money and all of their expert scientists” to leave the plasmid DNA in the vaccines,” Bridle said. “The fact that they didn’t get rid of this is egregious.”

Rose said that since we have evidence that there is DNA in the COVID-19 modified mRNA injections, “then these products, because there is a likelihood of integration via nuclear location sequences, by any and all definitions, qualify as gene therapies.”

“Even if this wasn’t the intended design, this is the result that we’re facing right now,” she said, adding that “The potential for cancer is clear here, and given the rise in reporting rate in VAERS over the past 3 years combined with the decrease in shot administration number, we really must investigate the possible relationship between this rise in cancer reporting in the context of the COVID injections and the DNA contamination. Injected individuals should have their stem cells and other cells checked for contaminant components.”

“What happens when the plasmid DNA from these plasmids, broken up or intact, gets into the nucleus of the cell?” Lindsay asked. “You can get DNA mutation and that can occur through substitutions, through deletions.”

much more ...