Tag Archives: DNA

Did Scientists Discover Alien DNA In mRNA Vaccines?!

Did Spanish scientists discover alien DNA in the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19?! Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Scientists Discovered Alien DNA In mRNA Vaccines!

People are sharing an article (archive) by The People’s Voice (formerly NewsPunch), which claimed or suggested that Spanish scientists discovered alien DNA in the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19!

Scientists Discover ‘Alien DNA’ Hidden in Blood of Vaccinated People

Recommended : Blood Smear Video Proves Vaccinated Have Mutated?!

 

Truth : Scientists Did Not Discover Alien DNA In mRNA Vaccines!

This is yet another example of fake news created / promoted by The People’s Voice, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : They Are Old Claims From 2021/2022

Let me start by pointing out that The People’s Voice did not provide any link to shocking study by Ricardo Delgado from Project La Quinta in Spain. However, we know this isn’t new, because the Project La Quinta report only has two reports on the mRNA vaccines.

  • an interim report that Professor Dr. Campra Madrid issued on 28 June 2021, while the final report was issued on 2 November 2021.
  • a report by Ricardo Delgado Martín posted on 14 January 2022.

So why is The People’s Voice promoting a story that appears to be more than 2 years old??? Why didn’t it point out that this is a really old story???

Fact #2 : Reports Said Nothing About Alien DNA / Eggs

The People’s Voice article claimed that Ricardo Delgado and his team found alien DNA hidden in the blood of vaccinated people and/or eggs hatching when the Pfizer mRNA vaccine is placed in a reptile incubator.

That’s utter nonsense, because both reports did not mention anything about alien DNA and/or eggs hatching. They only claimed to have found graphene and/or possible microtechnology in the Pfizer vaccine.

Fact #3 : Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Don’t Contain Alien DNA / Eggs

To be clear – there is no evidence the Pfizer mRNA vaccine contains alien DNA or eggs of any kind, unless they were somehow introduced as contaminants, or sabotage.

In fact, neither Ricardo Delgado Martin, not Professor Dr. Pablo Campra Madrid, found alien DNA in the blood of vaccinated people, or alien or reptilian eggs hatching in the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

They appeared to have only performed optical microscopy of what they claimed were Pfizer mRNA vaccine samples, with or without a Raman spectrometer. Such methods cannot prove the existence of graphene oxide, alien DNA, or alien eggs.

Even Campra Madrid himself acknowledged in his report that the “microscope doesn’t provide conclusive evidence” and that the analysis was based on “a single, limited sample” of unknown origin and traceability.

Recommended : Does COVID Vaccinated Blood Clot In Just 3 Minutes?!

Fact #4 : University of Almería Disavowed Report

The People’s Voice article claimed that “scientists at an elite research unit in Spain” made the discovery. Well, it appears to be only one scientist – Pablo Campra Madrid, a professor of the University of Almería (UAL).

However, Campra Madrid stated that the report was not issued on behalf of the University of Almería (UAL) – in Page 23 of the interim report. Fortunately too, because his university disavowed his report.

On 2 July 2021 – more than 2.5 years ago! – the University of Almería issued a statement on X (formerly Twitter), describing it as an “unofficial report by a university professor about an analysis of a sample of unknown origin with a total lack of traceability“. It also said that it was a “report that this university neither subscribes to nor shares, as the report itself warns.

Fact #5 : The People’s Voice Is Known For Fake News

The People’s Voice is the current name for NewsPunch, which possibly changed its name because its brand has been so thoroughly discredited after posting numerous shocking but fake stories.

Founded as Your News Wire in 2014, it was rebranded as NewsPunch in November 2018, before becoming The People’s Voice. A 2017 BuzzFeed report identified NewsPunch as the second-largest source of popular fake news on Facebook that year.

Its articles have been regularly debunked as fake news, so you should never share anything from NewsPunch / The People’s Voice.  Here are some of its fake stories that I fact checked earlier:

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Cureus Retracts “Peer-Reviewed” COVID-19 Vaccines Paper!

It took them a while, but Cureus finally retracted the controversial “peer-reviewed” article on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines!

Take a look at the controversial article, and find out what Cureus decided to retract it!

 

Cureus Publishes Controversial COVID-19 Vaccines Paper!

Anti-vaccine activists have been excitedly sharing what they call a “peer-reviewed” paper on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, while calling for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to be removed.

The paper in question is called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. which includes anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Unfortunately, it received a patina of legitimacy when it was published in the journal Cureus, with anti-vaccine activists gleefully pointing out that it was a “peer-reviewed” paper.

What many people don’t realise is that Cureus uses “an unusually fast” peer-review process of just “a few days”, and relies heavily on “post-publication peer review”, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication. All that “post-publication” criticism appear to have resulted in its decision to (finally) retract this controversial article.

Recommended : COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned Fact Check!

 

Cureus Finally Retracts “Peer-Reviewed” COVID-19 Vaccines Paper!

On 19 February 2024, one of the article’s co-authors – Steve Kirsch, revealed (archive) that Cureus has decided to retract the article, citing a number of concerns.

Dear authors, 

I hope this email finds you well. I write regarding your article recently published in Cureus entitled, ‘COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign’.

The list of concerns in the Cureus letter is frankly, too short. In my earlier article, I already listed a number of other concerns with the article:

  • unsubstantiated claims that the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials were too short
  • unsubstantiated claims that mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 were not proven safe or effective
  • misleading emphasis on absolute risk (AR) versus relative risk (RR) in understanding vaccine efficacy
  • misleading emphasis on unverified adverse events that were reported after vaccination.
  • unsubstantiated claims that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”

In any case, Cureus officially retracted this “peer-reviewed” article on 26 February 2024, with this statement:

The Editors-in-Chief have retracted this article. Following publication, concerns were raised regarding a number of claims made in this article. Upon further review, the Editors-in-Chief found that the conclusions of this narrative review are considered to be unreliable due to the concerns with the validity of some of the cited references that support the conclusions and a misrepresentation of the cited references and available data.

The authors disagree with this retraction.

One can’t help but wonder if this incident might persuade Cureus to spend a wee bit more time and effort on its peer-review process… or better still, don’t allow such articles to be labelled as “peer-reviewed” until they have at least passed proper, legitimate peer-review.

You can read more about those claims in my fact check article – COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned Fact Check!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned Fact Check!

Let’s take a look at the recent “peer-reviewed” study on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, and find out what the facts really are!

 

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned??

Some people are excitedly sharing a “peer-reviewed” study on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, while calling for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to be removed.

Mary Talley Bowden MD : Peer-reviewed article published in @CureusInc : COVID shots must be pulled off the market. If you are a physician or politician, now is the time to be on the right side of history.

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines Lessons Learned : My Fact Check

Let’s go through the “peer-reviewed” study on the lessons learned about COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, and see what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Cureus Relies On Post-Publication Peer Review

Let me start by pointing out that the journal Cureus relies on “post-publication peer review”.  Even though this paper was marked as “peer-reviewed”, it was an “unusually fast” peer review.

Cureus uses “an unusually fast” peer-review process of just “a few days”, and relies heavily on “post-publication peer review”, as its Editor in Chief John R. Adler explained to Retraction Watch in 2015:

Yes, Cureus has an unusually fast review process, which is an important part of the journal’s philosophy. We believe that post publication peer review, a focus of our journal through commenting and our unique SIQ process, is potentially a more powerful way to discern truth.

In other words – the pre-publication peer review appears to be superficial, and Cureus relies on the scientific community to peer-review the papers after publication.

Fact #2 : It Regurgitates Long-Debunked Claims

The paper in question is called “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign” by Mead et. al. which includes anti-vaccine activists like Jessica Rose, Steve Kirsch, and Peter McCullough.

While it is being heralded as something new, the paper appears to be nothing more than a regurgitation of long-debunked claims about mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Let’s just take a look at a few:

COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trials Were Too Short?!

The paper claimed that no vaccine was permitted for market release without a testing period of at least four years, using the mumps vaccine by Merck as example. That’s not true.

The Mumpsvax (Jeryl Lynn strain) vaccine was developed and approved in a record four years, but its testing did not last four years. The mumps vaccine clinical trial in 1966 (abstract) only lasted 6 months.

This paper gives the results of a large field trial of the vaccine conducted among schoolchildren in North Carolina.

Vaccination was carried out in November 1966, every tenth child receiving a placebo preparation. Serum specimens were obtained at the time of vaccination and 4 weeks later from 556 children representing a cross-section of the total group of participants.

During the 180 days of post-vaccination surveillance, 56 cases of mumps were reported among the study population and 69 cases among non-participants.

There is no requirement by health authorities that testing or assessing any vaccine should last 10 years. The typical vaccine development time of 10-15 years is not a reflection of how much time a clinical trial needs to run, but rather the time it “generally” takes to create a vaccine, gather resources, get approvals, run clinical trials, process the data, file for approval, etc.

COVID-19 vaccines were so quickly developed because scientists all over the world collaborated on the effort, while governments funded their development, and fast-tracked their clinical trials and manufacturing preparations.

The speedy development of COVID-19 vaccines was also enabled by new vaccine platforms using mRNA or DNA technologies, in which genetic information from the new virus only needed to be “plugged in” to produce a new vaccine.

More importantly – the paper provided no evidence that the accelerated development of COVID-19 vaccines has actually resulted in unsafe vaccines.

Recommended : Did COVID-19 Vaccines Cause 17 Million Deaths?!

mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines Were Not Proven Safe / Effective?

The Mead et. al. paper claimed or suggested that the clinical trials did not show that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were safe or effective because too few people in the unvaccinated (placebo) group died from COVID-19.

Well, not only is that a “misunderstanding” of the clinical trial results (see the next section), many studies have been conducted into the safety and efficacy of the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 since they were deployed.

Those real world studies (example, example, example) consistently showed that the mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 are safe and effective.

Low Absolute Risk Shows No Need To Vaccinate?!

The Mead et. al. paper repeats the old trope that the low absolute risk (AR) seen in the mRNA vaccine clinical trials mean there is no need for anyone to get vaccinated. That’s simply not true, and is a (deliberate?) misunderstanding of statistical calculations.

The Absolute Risk Reduction (ARR) will “always appear low” because it depends very much on the “event rate”. As the Meedan Health Desk explained:

Let’s say a study enrolled 20,000 patients into the control group and 20,000 in the vaccine group. In that study, 200 people in the control group got sick and 0 people in the vaccine group got sick.

Even though the vaccine efficacy would be a whopping 100%, the ARR would show that vaccines reduce the absolute risk by just 1% (200/20,000= 1%).

For the ARR to increase to 20% in our example study with a vaccine with 100% efficacy, 4,000 of the 20,000 people in the control group would have to get sick (4,000/20,000= 20%).

Hence, the Relative Risk Reduction (RRR) is used instead to determine a vaccine’s efficacy, because it tells us how much risk is reduced in the vaccinated group, compared to the unvaccinated control group.

To be clear – the clinical trials and post-vaccination monitoring and studies have clearly shown that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective in preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19.

Recommended : Hybrid Immunity Better Than Natural / Vaccine Immunity!

mRNA Vaccines Do Not Prevent Transmission?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that the CDC said that “COVID-19 products would stop transmission”, but in the end “COVID-19 mRNA products do not prevent transmission or infection”. Well, that’s not really true.

For one thing – the CDC never said that COVID-19 vaccines would stop transmission. In fact, the CDC article the paper linked to only said that the vaccines appear to reduce (not stop) transmission:

… a growing body of evidence suggests that COVID-19 vaccines also reduce asymptomatic infection and transmission.

To be clear – the COVID-19 vaccines were primarily designed to reduce or prevent severe disease and death, which is why transmission for not an endpoint for their clinical trials. It would have been a nice bonus to block transmission completely, but partially reducing transmission is not too bad.

mRNA Vaccines Have A Lot Of AESIs?!

The Mead et. al. paper warns us about the many Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESI) reported after COVID-19 vaccinations. The problem is – those AESI are not actual vaccine side effects!

The AESI list for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for example has 9 pages of 1,291 adverse events, but that is not a list of the mRNA vaccine side effects. It is a list of “adverse events” that Pfizer must look for during the post-vaccination monitoring period. Not only are these “adverse events” not specific to the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, they include:

  • diseases like Herpes, MERS, Varicella, and other “communicable disease”,
  • exposure to SARS-CoV-2,
  • manufacturing and lab test issues, and even…
  • product availability and supply issues!

Needless to say – those adverse events are not vaccine side effects, or are any indication of vaccine performance or safety in any way.

Recommended : COVID-19 Vaccine Causes Turbo Skin Cancer – Melanoma?!

Lots Of Deaths + Hospitalisation Were Reported?!

The Mead et. al. paper also claimed that two large drug safety reporting systems in the US and Europe have over 7.8 million reports of adverse events, with “death, hospitalisations, and life-threatening reactions”. It is probably referring to VAERS and EudraVigilance.

The thing is – VAERS / Yellow Card / EudraVigilance data are all unverified, and may contain duplicated information. That’s why they are all prefaced with warnings like:

  • they may contain duplicated information and/or reports
  • the reported event may be caused by an illness, like a COVID-19 infection for example,
  • the reported event may be caused by a different drug taken by the patient at the same time
  • they have not been assessed by health authorities to ascertain if it’s even “biologically plausible”

In addition, open systems like VAERS, or the UK Yellow Card system, are very susceptible to abuse because they allow anyone from anywhere to post anything they want, without evidence or verification.

Anti-vaccination activists can, for example, key in unlimited numbers of adverse reaction reports, even if they never received a single dose of the COVID-19 vaccine!

Autopsy Reports Show Deaths Caused By Vaccines?!

The Mead et. al. paper claimed that “autopsy studies” showed that 74% of deaths were “judged to have been caused by the COVID-19 mRNA products”.

The problem is – the study it referred to was a preprint by one of its own authors – Peter McCullough, that was removed by The Lancet for violating its “screening criteria”.

This preprint has been removed by Preprints with The Lancet because the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology. Preprints with The Lancet reserves the right to remove a paper that has been posted if we determine that it has violated our screening criteria.

Not only was that study just a “review” of autopsy reports, many of the cases had other far more likely causes of death.

Recommended : Did CDC Alter Death Certificates To Remove Vaccine Deaths?!

mRNA Vaccines Are Contaminated By DNA?!

The paper suggested that the mRNA vaccines are contaminated with DNA “orders of magnitude higher than the EMA’s limit”.

The truth is – residual DNA is found in all biological products manufactured using cells, and has not shown any health risk after being studied for many decades.

In any case, the amount of residual DNA in mRNA vaccines were found to be far below regulatory limits.

Pfizer Vaccine Has DNA From SV40 Virus That Causes Cancer?!

The paper also warned about the Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter found in samples of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine. Why? Because it warns – the SV40 virus “induces lymphomas, brain tumors, and other malignancies in laboratory animals”.

First of all – after decades of studies, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

In any case, the SV40 promoter is a DNA sequence that is often used to manufacture mRNA, and is not dangerous. It certainly poses no cancer risk, because the part of the SV40 that can potentially cause cancer – the T-antigen, is not present in the SV40 promoter, or the Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Can Foreign DNA In mRNA Vaccines Change Our DNA?!

Can foreign DNA enter our cells through mRNA vaccines, and change our DNA and humanity forever?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Foreign DNA In mRNA Vaccines Can Change Our DNA!

People are sharing a video clip of Tucker Carlson interviewing Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, which claims or suggestions that foreign DNA can enter our cells through the mRNA vaccines and change our DNA and humanity forever!

Tucker Carlson : Could foreign DNA enter your cells through the mRNA COVID vax and change your DNA — and humanity itself — forever? Sounds nutty. It’s not. “Absolutely that could happen,” says Dr. Joseph Ladapo, the surgeon general of Florida. A shocking conversation.

Recommended : Can Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Change Our DNA?!

 

Truth : Foreign DNA In mRNA Vaccines Cannot Change Our DNA!

Let’s take a closer look at these claims about foreign DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines changing our DNA, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Ladapo Claims Were Refuted By FDA Earlier

First, I should point out that Joseph Ladapo’s claims about foreign DNA fragments changing our DNA have already been refuted by the US Food & Drug Administration (FDA) on 14 December 2023 (PDF).

Here’s a quick summary of what Dr. Peter Marks, Director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research replied to Ladapo’s claims:

  1. After a “thorough assessment of the entire manufacturing process, FDA is confident in the quality, safety, and effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines“.
  2. No safety concerns regarding “residual DNA” were identified after over a billion doses of mRNA vaccines being administered.
  3. Animal studies using the mRNA vaccine with residual DNA demonstrated “no evidence for genotoxicity from the vaccine“.
  4. Pharmacovigilance data from hundreds of millions of vaccinated people also showed “no evidence” of genotoxicity from the mRNA vaccines.
  5. Reproductive toxicology studies to test the possible integration of residual DNA fragments in reproductive cells found “no concerns” with the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

As you can see, the FDA had already addressed Ladapo’s claims about testing the mRNA vaccines for DNA integration.

The FDA reply (PDF) was also succinct – just two pages long, and did not divert to irrelevant topics like “what time the sun sets in China” or “their third cousin’s Bar Mitzvah” as Ladapo claims in the Tucker Carlson interview.

So the question you should be asking is – why is Joseph Ladapo still flogging these claims, when the FDA has clearly stated that tests were conducted on mRNA vaccines, and have shown them to be safe and effective, and that they do not pose any DNA integration (genotoxicity) risks?

Recommended : Are mRNA Vaccines Contaminated With SV40 DNA?!

Fact #2 : FDA Guidelines Were For DNA Vaccines

In the Tucker Carlson interview, Ladapo claimed or suggested that the FDA did not mention its own guidance on DNA contamination. That’s not true.

The FDA letter to Ladapo (PDF) actually addressed his claims, pointing out that the guidance (PDF) only applied to DNA vaccines, not mRNA vaccines. Even the name clearly states that the guidance was meant for DNA vaccines.

In your letter, you raise questions, citing to the 2007 Guidance for Industry: Considerations for Plasmid DNA Vaccines for Infectious Disease Indications. This guidance was developed for DNA vaccines themselves, not for DNA as a contaminant in other vaccines, and is not applicable to the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

DNA vaccines work by introducing a DNA sequence into the cell nucleus, so DNA contamination would be a real concern. In contrast, mRNA vaccines do not enter the cell nucleus, so DNA contamination isn’t a real concern.

It is unknown if Ladapo understands the difference between DNA and mRNA vaccines. But it’s clear that the FDA already informed him that the guidance he quoted was not relevant.

It’s like a bit like quoting the manual for a motorcycle as “evidence” that his diesel truck only needs two wheels, instead of four. So why does he still persist in mentioning the FDA guidance?

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

Fact #3 : Smaller Fragments Are Harder To Filter

Ladapo claims that there are billions to hundreds of billions of foreign DNA fragments in each dose of the mRNA vaccine. That sounds scary, doesn’t it? The truth is – it’s really a red herring.

The DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines are produced as a result of its manufacturing process using a DNA template. After the DNA template creates the mRNA vaccine, DNAse is used to break down the residual DNA into tiny fragments.

Focusing on the number of these DNA fragments is also wrong, as you want the DNAse enzyme to really do a good job and cut up the residual DNA into tiny pieces. Naturally, the more you cut DNA up into smaller fragments, you get more (but smaller) fragments. It is consequently harder to filter these smaller fragments out, but the smaller they are, the less likely they are biologically active.

Think of residual DNA as parts of the mRNA factory that was dismantled once the vaccine was manufactured. If you chop it up real good, you get nothing more than small pieces of scrap metal. Sure, the disposal team may have left a couple of bolts and screws lying on the floor, but can they be used to recreate the factory? No.

Fact #4 : mRNA Vaccines Meet DNA Fragment Limit

Instead of focusing on the “number” of DNA fragments, it makes much more sense to focus on the “total weight” of residual DNA, and the “size” of those fragments.

Currently, the WHO and US FDA guidelines recommend that residual DNA in vaccines and other biological products should not exceed 10 nanograms (ng) per purified dose, and the DNA fragments should be no greater than 200 bp in length.

Even that limit appears to be out of an abundance of caution, as studies have not shown any actual danger from residual DNA, as they are tiny fragments.

In its December 2023 reply (PDF), the FDA actually pointed out to Ladapo that the amount of residual DNA fragments was less than 1/1000 the amount of mRNA in each vaccine dose.

The specification for the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines for residual DNA following DNAse treatment results in the presence of DNA fragments at a quantity that is less than three orders of magnitude lower than the quantity of the RNA dose by weight.

This has been determined (and continues to be determined during production of lots) with a validated quantitative PCR assay.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Fact #5 : DNA Fragments Can’t Integrate With Our Genome

The presence of residual DNA fragments does not mean that they will integrate into our genome. For one thing – these are DNA fragments that have been broken down by the DNase enzyme.

These DNA fragments can only enter the cell nucleus if there is an enzyme called integrase, is not present in any COVID-19 vaccine. So they simply cannot enter the cell nucleus, never mind integrate with DNA.

On top of that, the mRNA vaccines are injected into the muscle, whose cells are “post-mitotic”, which means they are no longer able to change.

Fact #6 : Viruses Integrate With Cell DNA

Viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and HIV-1 (diagram below) integrate their genes with the host cell DNA, to hijack the cell and use it to produce copies of itself.

You can see how a typical RNA virus would infect a host cell, convert its RNA into DNA which is moved into the cell nucleus using the integrase enzyme.

Recommended : Did New Study Show Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Autism?!

HIV-1 virus cell infection, credit : Günther Witzany

Once inside, the viral DNA integrates with the host cell DNA, which gets transcribed into instructions for the cell to produce copies of the virus.

This is the same way how the SARS-CoV-2 virus infects our cells, to produce copies of itself to infect even more cells.

If you are truly worried about anything modifying your cell’s DNA, you should try to avoid viral infections like COVID-19. Better still – vaccinate yourself, and get protected against COVID-19!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Do DNA Fragments In mRNA Vaccines Cause Cancer?!

Are DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines dangerous, and can they cause cancer?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : DNA Fragments In mRNA Vaccines Can Cause Cancer!

People are sharing video clips and articles about Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo calling for a halt to mRNA vaccines as they can possibly cause cancer.

Circulating on WhatsApp, with Fox 35 video clip attached : Florida Surgeon General calls for halt to COVID-19 vaccine, citing possible cancer risks

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

No Evidence DNA Fragments In mRNA Vaccines Cause Cancer!

Let’s take a closer look at these claims about DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines causing cancer, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : Claims Were Made By Joseph Ladapo

First, I should point out that these videos and articles are based on a 3 January 2024 bulletin sent by the Florida Department of Health, in which its Surgeon General Joseph A. Ladapo called for a halt in the use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines over concerns that they could cause cancer.

The Surgeon General outlined concerns regarding nucleic acid contaminants in the approved Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, particularly in the presence of lipid nanoparticle complexes, and Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter/enhancer DNA. Lipid nanoparticles are an efficient vehicle for delivery of the mRNA in the COVID-19 vaccines into human cells and may therefore be an equally efficient vehicle for delivering contaminant DNA into human cells. The presence of SV40 promoter/enhancer DNA may also pose a unique and heightened risk of DNA integration into human cells.

Fact #2 : SV40 Promoter Does Not Cause Cancer

Many people are attempting to link the SV40 promoter to the Simian Virus 40, which was suspected to potentially cause cancer in humans after it was found to have contaminated some polio vaccines manufactured from 1955 to 1963.

Decades later, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

Even so, the SV40 promoter is just a DNA fragment from the SV40 virus, that is now used as a genetic tool. It is similar to how botulinum toxin is a treatment derived from the bacteria, Clostridium botulinum. The SV40 promoter itself cannot cause cancer, because it does not include the SV40 virus portion that can potentially cause cancer – the T-antigen.

It’s just the volume knob that drives high level expression of anything put under its control, which in this case is just an antibiotic resistance marker.

The fear about the SV40 sequences is total nonsense. The vaccine is not going to cause cancer. There is no cancer causing gene in the vaccine.

– Phillip Buckhaults, director of the Cancer Genetics Lab at the University of South Carolina

Recommended : Are mRNA Vaccines Contaminated With SV40 DNA?!

Fact #3 : DNA Fragments Not Limited To mRNA Vaccines

So many articles have been written about the residual DNA fragments in mRNA vaccines that one may think that it’s exclusive to the mRNA vaccine technology. That’s not true.

Residual DNA fragments are found in all vaccines and biological products manufactured in any kind of biological cell. The risk of residual DNA has also been investigated for about 60 years now.

To be clear – residual DNA isn’t new or exclusive to mRNA vaccine technology. It is a byproduct of using biological cells to produce biological products.

Fact #4 : DNA Fragments Shown To Be Harmless

In the beginning, some studies raised potential safety issues with residual DNA. So, the FDA set an upper limit of just 10 picograms of residual DNA per medicinal dose in 1985.

In 1986, a WHO study group looked into new cell substrates that are being used to produce biological products, and concluded that the risk is negligible when the amount of residual DNA is 100 picograms per dose.

Then 10 years later – the WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization (ECBS) increased the limit to 10 nanograms (ng) per purified dose, albeit not for microbial, diploid, or primary cell cultures.

In 1997, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) said that further data of DNA from continuous mammalian cell lines showed that it poses even less risk than previously thought.

Currently, the WHO and US FDA guidelines recommend that residual DNA in vaccines and other biological products should not exceed 10 nanograms (ng) per purified dose, and the DNA fragments should be no greater than 200 bp in length.

Even that limit appears to be out of an abundance of caution, as studies have not shown any actual danger from residual DNA, as they are tiny fragments.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Fact #5 : DNA Fragments Can’t Integrate With Our Genome

The presence of residual DNA fragments does not mean that they will integrate into our genome. For one thing – these are DNA fragments that have been broken down by the DNase enzyme.

Think of them as parts of a factory which were used to build the mRNA vaccine, but dismantled once the vaccine has been manufactured. Sure, the disposal team may have left a couple of bolts and screws lying on the floor, but can they be used to recreate the factory? No.

In addition, these DNA fragments can only enter the cell nucleus if there is an enzyme called integrase, is not present in any COVID-19 vaccine. So they simply cannot enter the cell nucleus, never mind integrate with DNA.

On top of that, the mRNA vaccines are injected into the muscle, whose cells are “post-mitotic”, which means they are no longer able to change.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Protect yourself and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19 and other preventable diseases!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Australian Study Show Spike In Vaccine Excess Deaths?!

Did a new Australian study show a spike in excess deaths from the gene-based COVID-19 vaccine?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Gene-Based COVID-19 Vaccine Linked To Spike In Excess Deaths!

People are sharing an Epoch Health article which claims or suggests that an Australian study by Peter Rhodes and Peter Parry (of the Spikeopathy fame) show a link between “gene-based COVID-19 vaccines” and a “spike in excess deaths”.

Here is an excerpt from the Epoch Health article which is long (archive). Please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

Australian Researchers Call for Pause on Gene-Based COVID-19 Vaccines Amid Spike in Excess Deaths

In one region of Australia, there were 23 times more adverse reactions from COVID-19 vaccines than all other vaccines combined.

Recommended : Hybrid Immunity Better Than Natural / Vaccine Immunity!

 

Truth : mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine Not Linked To Spike In Excess Deaths!

Let’s take a closer look at the various claims in the Epoch Health article, and the Australian study, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : The Article Was Not Peer-Reviewed

Let me start by pointing out that the Peter Rhodes and Peter Parry article can be read in full here (archive).

Its innocuous title – Gene-based COVID-19 vaccines: Australian perspectives in a corporate and global context – does not hint at a vaccine link to excess deaths.

According to Epoch Times / Epoch Health themselves, this paper has not peer-reviewed before its publication in the January 2024 issue of Pathology.

Fact #2 : WAVSS + DAEN Reports Are Unverified

Even though the Epoch Health article suggests that the “authorities” are “reporting high levels of adverse events”, it appears that the Peter Rhodes and Peter Parry article was referring to deaths reported to the Western Australian Vaccine Safety Surveillance (WAVSS) system, and the Database of Adverse Event Notifications (DAEN) system in Australia. There are two big problems with that.

First, adverse events reported to both vaccine safety surveillance systems are not necessarily vaccine side effects. Adverse events are “unfavourable” or “unintended” events that happen after vaccination or taking a drug, like having an anaphylactic reaction or getting into a car accident.

Secondly – both WAVSS and DAEN have explicitly pointed out that those adverse event reports are unverified and have to be investigated to determine if they are even related to the vaccines:

DAEN

  • Inclusion in the DAEN – medicines does not mean that the details of the event have been confirmed, or that the event has been determined to be related to a medicine or a vaccine.‌
  • We encourage people to report suspected side effects (also known as adverse events), even when it is not clear that a medicine or vaccine was the cause. These suspected side effects are listed in the DAEN – medicines and reflect the observations of the person who reported the event.
  • The TGA uses adverse event data, together with other scientific information, to identify and investigate potential safety issues for medicines and vaccines.

WAVSS

An adverse event following immunisation (AEFI) is an unwanted or unexpected event occurring after the administration of a vaccine.

Such an event may be caused by the vaccine or occur by chance after vaccination (that is, it would have occurred regardless of vaccination).

An AEFI may be due to:

  • A person’s response to a vaccine
  • AEFIs also include conditions that may occur following the incorrect handling or administration of a vaccine
  • Coincidence, ie. it would have occurred regardless of vaccination

To be clear – there is no evidence that all of those deaths reported to both vaccine safety surveillance systems have been tied to the COVID-19 vaccines. In fact, the TGA has only determined that 14 of those 983 deaths were linked to any COVID-19 vaccine.

Recommended : Do mRNA Vaccines Increase Risk Of Illnesses In Children?!

Fact #3 : COVID-19 Vaccines Use Spike Protein As Antigen

The Peter Rhodes and Peter Parry article appears to be singling out “Gene-based mRNA and viral vector DNA” vaccines as the cause of excess deaths in Australia, because they are “novel” and “experimental”, where as “traditional [vaccine] technologies” use “viral antigens”.

The truth is – all COVID-19 vaccines, regardless of their underpinning technologies, use the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein as the antigen to trigger our immune system to learn how to defend itself against an actual COVID-19 infection.

Fact #4 : mRNA + Viral Vector COVID-19 Vaccines Are No Longer Experimental

The Peter Rhodes and Peter Parry article appears to claim that the mRNA and viral vector vaccines are still experimental, because their clinical trial work was “incomplete” because they lack a placebo arm.

The truth is – COVID-19 vaccines are no longer experimental after they receive their Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) or full approval.

  • The Pfizer COMIRNATY mRNA vaccine received its EUA on 11 December 2020, and full FDA approval on 23 August 2021.
  • The Moderna Spikevax mRNA vaccine received it EUA on 18 December 2020, and full FDA approval on 31 January 2022.
  • The AstraZeneca viral vector COVID-19 vaccine received its EUA from the UK on 30 December 2020, and from the WHO on 15 February 2021.

To be clear – these COVID-19 vaccines were no longer experimental by the time they were approved. Even after approval by various regulatory agencies across the globe, they continue to be monitored for safety and efficacy.

Fact #5 : Placebo-Controlled Trials Are Sometimes Considered Unethical

I should point out that placebo-controlled trials are generally considered to be unethical whenever there are effective and safe treatments / vaccines. That’s because people on the placebo arm will be placed at risk of death or injury.

For example, in 1954, over 420,000 young children participated in the inactivated polio vaccine trial with 200,000 given a placebo of salt water. At the end of that placebo-controlled trial, 16 children in the placebo group died from polio while another 34 were paralysed.

The decision to “drop” the placebo arm in COVID-19 vaccine trials wasn’t something exceptional, or done as a “special favour” to “special interests”. Back in 2014, a WHO expert panel was convened to address this issue, and they issued their recommendations on the use of placebo controls in vaccine trials.

Recommended : Do COVID-19 Vaccines Cause Long-Term Heart Damage?!

Fact #6 : Viruses Inject Genetic Code Into Our Cells

The Peter Rhodes and Peter Parry article warns about the risk of “genetic code” from mRNA and viral vector vaccines entering our cells:

Genetic code must enter human cells and undergo translation before intended active outcomes unfold. Unintended consequences are thus possible, as recent reviews attest.

The first source of that claim was Spikeopathy – a poorly-cited article (cited by 4 so far) by Peter Parry himself (and other contributors), which I fact checked earlier. It was just a “literature review” which made use of some opinion articles. Even when it cited proper research, its interpretation appears to be misleading.

The second source referenced for this claim is a similarly poorly-cited article (archive, also cited by 4 so far) which argues for a new term called “Post-COVID-19 vaccination syndrome (PCVS)”. However, that second source only suggested that injecting mRNA vaccines into the veins (which is not the correct way) can cause myocarditis, while injecting virus vector vaccines into blood (also not the correct way) can cause “thrombocytopenia and coagulopathy”.

The truth is – the translation of mRNA instructions into proteins, or DNA instructions into mRNA and then into proteins, is a normal process that is undertaken by all of our cells all the time. That is how our cells make proteins!

What the article fails to mention is that viruses like the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus inject their own genetic code to hijack our cells into producing copies of themselves, which are then released to infect even more cells, in an ever expanding chain reaction.

Unlike viruses though, vaccines do not multiply. So, if you are worried about foreign genetic code being injected into your cells, then you should get vaccinated, so the circulating antibodies the vaccine produces can block the COVID-19 virus from infecting your cells!

Recommended : The Spikeopathy Vaccine Spike Protein Scare Explained!

Fact #7 : COVID-19 Vaccines Prevent Death + Hospitalisation

The COVID-19 vaccines were primarily designed to prevent death and hospitalisation, not transmission. That’s why the endpoints of all COVID-19 vaccine trials were their safety and efficacy against death and hospitalisation from severe COVID-19.

Regardless of what politicians and other people may say, blocking transmission was always meant to be a nice bonus if it occurred, but never the endpoint of any COVID-19 vaccine. That’s because the first slew of COVID-19 vaccines were meant to be injected, and the antibodies they produce would circulate in the blood, and would not be able to “block” transmission of virions (the complete virus particle) in the respiratory tract.

In fact, the COVID-19 vaccines were also not designed to block infections. If you look up any COVID-19 vaccine trial, you will notice that one of their endpoints was preventing “symptomatic infections”. That’s because vaccinated people may test positive from swab tests that detect the presence of viruses (virions) in their respiratory tract, but they may not be symptomatic because circulating antibodies (from the vaccine) are blocking the COVID-19 infection from spreading and causing symptoms.

So arguing that the COVID-19 vaccines are a “failure” because they do not “prevent infection or transmission” would be wrong and misleading. They prevent death and hospitalisation from severe COVID-19.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Spikeopathy : The Vaccine Spike Protein Scare Explained!

Did a new Australian study on spikeopathy show that the vaccine spike protein causes “a wide variety of diseases”?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Spikeopathy Study Shows Vaccine Spike Protein Danger!

An Australian study by Peter Parry, Julian Gillespie, et. al. called Spikeopathy claims to show that the vaccine spike protein causes “a wide variety of diseases”.

Here is an excerpt from the study which is pretty long. Please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

‘Spikeopathy’: COVID-19 Spike Protein Is Pathogenic, from Both Virus and Vaccine mRNA

In this narrative review, we examine the solid evidence for a counter-narrative to the ‘safe and effective’ message that has accompanied the novel product COVID-19 vaccines, which were developed at ‘warp speed’ with great hope to end the pandemic.

Recommended : Should Stevens-Johnson Syndrome From Vaccine Worry You?!

 

Truth : Spikeopathy Study Does Not Show Vaccine Spike Protein Danger!

Let’s take a closer look at the various claims in the Spikeopathy study, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : It Was A Narrative Review

Let me start by pointing out that the Peter Parry et. al. “study” is just a “narrative review” or a “literature review” – a fact that was mentioned in the paper not once, but twice.

The paper basically offers an overview of existing research, and therefore, its quality is highly dependent on the research papers it examined.

Fact #2 : Its Conclusions Appear To Be Misleading

Unfortunately, it appears that the Peter Parry et. al. study did not restrict itself to proper research papers, and clinical studies, and made use of opinion articles. Even when it cited proper research, its interpretation appears to be misleading.

Friedemann Weber, Professor and Chair of the Institute for Virology at the Justus Liebig University Giessen, Germany, posted here and here about the problems with the Spikeopathy paper.

I start with the purported connection to prions (like in mad cow disease) Unsuspecting intro (they didn’t bother to add a reference) Vaccinee got Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) just 5 days post-vaccine?

The incubation period for prion diseases is measured in years, if not decades. Of course the authors omitted this uncomfortable fact -> misleading

Reference 39 (left) and 41 (right) are actually not peer-reviewed, but opinion articles from the internet. These do of course not count as a scientific reference. The authors either don’t know or don’t care.

Ref 40, by contrast, is a BMJ article about public investment in development of the vaccines (bmj.com/content/380/bm). However, all it says about safety testing is that vaccines were purchased before testing was completed. Thats quite different from “bypassing”. Purchasing does not mean it was given to people before safety testing was completed. Result so far: misleading

Cited ref 192 is an in silico paper only, i.e. a computer prediction. It has no real-world data on spike binding to these human proteins (https://sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006291X2100499X)
-> misleading

Experimentors of cited reference 217 had pumped 50 μg of peptides containing parts of the spike into mice (so no vaccine). And what the spikeopaths also did not tell is that those mice were ApoE knockout, meaning they have a no blood brain barrier. (https://frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnmol.2023.1177961/full)

That’s a highly artificial and mutant system -> misleading But according to the review authors, spike does disturb the blood-brain barrier! Well, no, that was not shown in the cited ref. All they say in ref 164 is that COVID downregulates a BBB protein. COVID, not the spike. And disturbance of the BBB was also not shown.

And finally, ref 164 authors even emphasise in their abstract that their findings don’t apply to vaccinations. So this BBB/Alzheimer passage from the spikeopathy review is not only misleading, but plain wrong

Recommended : Do mRNA Vaccines Increase Risk Of Illnesses In Children?!

Fact #3 : Spike Protein Not Exclusive To SARS-CoV-2

I should now point out that the spike protein isn’t a special feature of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus that causes COVID-19. Such spike proteins are actually a feature of all coronaviruses!

In fact, the name “coronavirus” is derived from the Latin word, corona, which means “crown” or “wreath” – a reference to its “crown” of spike proteins. To be clear – all coronaviruses have spike proteins on their cell surfaces.

If those spike proteins are cytotoxic or carcinogenic, etc., we would have seen people keeling over from turbo cancer or cardiac arrest after coronavirus infections since time immemorial.

Fact #4 : Viruses Multiply, Vaccines Won’t

I should also point out that if the spike protein is so dangerous, then it is even more important to get vaccinated against COVID-19. After all, viruses multiply, while the vaccines won’t!

Even if we simply look at the mRNA vaccines alone, they contain a limited number of mRNA instructions that encode for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. The mRNA instructions enter a limited number of cells, which then produce and display those spike proteins on their surfaces, to trigger our immune system.

If you are infected by the actual SARS-CoV-2 virus though, it quickly hijacks your cells to produce millions of copies – each covered with spike proteins, which then infect even more cells, in an ever-expanding chain reaction.

Until your immune system learns to stop and defeat the SARS-CoV-2 virus, it will keep producing millions and millions of viruses that will circulate through your body, delivering those nasty spike proteins everywhere.

So if you are really worried about the spike protein, you should really get vaccinated against COVID-19!

Recommended : Did Salk Institute Prove Covid-19 Vaccines Cause Blood Clots?!

Fact #5 : All COVID-19 Vaccines Have Spike Proteins

The Spikeology paper by Peter Parry and Julian Gillespie recommended that mRNA and viral vector vaccines be suspended, and replaced with “safer” recombinant protein, attenuated or inactivated virus vaccines. It appears that they believe that those vaccine technologies do not introduce the “dangerous” spike protein.

The problem is – all those vaccine technologies are based on presenting the spike protein to our immune system, to trigger an immune response!

  • recombinant protein vaccines use another organism to create the spike protein
  • attenuated virus vaccines use a live version of the virus (with spike proteins) that won’t cause an actual infection.
  • inactivated virus vaccines use the killed virus (with spike proteins) to elicit an immune response

Regardless of what vaccine technology is used for COVID-19, the focus is to present the virus spike protein to the immune system, because it is exposed on the cell surface, and presents as a major antigen. Antibodies against the spike protein would also help to block the virus from attaching to our cells, and infecting them.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Do UK Gov Data Show Cancer Deaths From Vaccine?!

Do UK government data show that young people are dying of turbo cancer caused by the COVID-19 vaccine at “explosive” rates?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : UK Gov Data Show Explosive Hike In Cancer Deaths From Vaccine!

People are sharing a Children Health Defense article that appears to suggest that UK government data show that young people are dying of turbo cancer caused by the COVID-19 vaccine at “explosive” rates!

Here is an excerpt from the very long article:

New Report: Young People Dying of Cancer at ‘Explosive’ Rates, UK Government Data Show

Recommended : COVID-19 Vaccine Causes Turbo Skin Cancer – Melanoma?!

 

No Evidence UK Gov Data Show Explosive Hike In Cancer Deaths From Vaccine!

Let’s take a look at the claims, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : It Was Just Statistical Analysis

Firsts, I should just point out that the “study” was just a statistical analysis of data from the UK Office for National Statistics (ONS). This is important to note because it does not actually show a correlation between the “excess deaths” caused by cancer, and mRNA vaccines.

Interestingly, the paper itself does not even mention the words “vaccine” or “mRNA” even once! So why would the Children Health Defense article suggest that the paper showed a link between those deaths and mRNA vaccines?

If there are actually increases in cancer deaths after the COVID-19 pandemic, could they not be caused by a lack of screening, laboratory investigations, or patients seeking diagnosis during the lockdowns?

The paper itself certainly offered no evidence linking any of the cancer deaths to the mRNA vaccines, or any COVID-19 vaccine for the matter.

Fact #2 : UK Data Showed No Increase In Cancer Deaths

On top of that, the UK excess mortality data (link) for the last 3 years (October 2020 to October 2023) showed no increase in deaths from all causes of cancer in the United Kingdom.

In fact, the data showed that weekly cancer deaths (dark grey bars) were generally LOWER than expected (dotted purple line). The light grey bars show cancer patients who died from other causes.

Does that mean that the COVID-19 vaccines were somehow protecting people in the UK from cancer deaths? Of course, not. So why should any excess death be attributed to the COVID-19 vaccines? Think about that.

Recommended : 1 In 4 Americans Know Someone Who Died From Vaccine?!

Fact #3 : mRNA Vaccines Cannot Enter Cell Nucleus

There is zero evidence to back up the claims that mRNA vaccines, or even DNA fragments in those vaccines, can change our DNA.

Let me just point out that messenger RNA (mRNA) cannot enter the nucleus of our cells. Therefore, it cannot possibly change our cell DNA, or deactivate genes that suppress tumours – the basis for claims mRNA vaccines cause turbo cancers.

For that to happen, two things must occur – the mRNA must be “converted” into DNA by a reverse transcriptase enzyme, which does not exist in human cytoplasm (but exists in viruses). Even after that happens, the transcribed DNA cannot enter the cell nucleus without an integrase enzyme (that viruses produce).

Unlike mRNA vaccines, viruses not only insert their genome into our cell nucleus, they literally take over our cells to turn them into virus factories. So anyone who is worried about “alien” RNA / DNA entering our cell nucleus should worry about viruses, instead of mRNA vaccines!

Fact #4 : There Is No Such Thing As Turbo Cancer

There is no such thing as “turbo cancer”, and there is no evidence that any COVID-19 vaccine can cause cancer, or make cancer go “turbo”.

Many cases of cancer go undetected until they become symptomatic. And sometimes, patients ignore those symptoms until they worsen.

Some cancers are also known “silent killers”, because they show no symptoms until they are already in an advanced stage, and have spread to other parts of the body. Such patients often die soon after diagnosis.

Hence, many people that were claimed to have died of turbo cancers were suffering from such “silent killer” cancers, or their cancers were actually diagnosed long before the COVID-19 vaccines were invented.

Ironically, Kirstie Alley refused to get the COVID-19 vaccine. Yet, it did not stop people from claiming that she died from turbo cancer caused by the COVID-19 vaccine!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Don’t forget to protect yourself, and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

Are residual DNA impurities in mRNA vaccines dangerous, and can they integrate into our DNA?!

Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Are Dangerous!

Anti-vaccine activists are sharing and/or promoting an article by The Epoch Times, which claimed / suggested that residual DNA in mRNA vaccines are dangerous, and can potentially integrate into our DNA! Here is an excerpt:

Billions of Copies of Residual DNA in a Single Dose of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine: Preprint

Recommended : Are mRNA Vaccines Contaminated With SV40 DNA?!

 

No Evidence Residual DNA In Vaccines Are Dangerous

Let’s take a closer look at these claims about Residual DNA in vaccines, and find out what the facts really are!

Fact #1 : mRNA Vaccines Were Proven Safe + Effective

First, I should point out that the mRNA vaccines underwent large clinical trials before they received their Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA), and even after that, they continue to be monitored for safety and efficacy.

So health regulators and health authorities are well-aware of how safe and effective the mRNA vaccines are. That’s why new mRNA vaccines continue to be approved by health regulators around the world.

Fact #2 : Residual DNA Is Not New

These papers and articles may suggest that residual DNA is a new kind of contaminant, or one that is only found in mRNA vaccines. Neither are true.

Residual DNA is found in all vaccines and biological products manufactured in any kind of cell. The risk of residual DNA has also been investigated for about 60 years now.

To be clear – residual DNA isn’t new, and it is a byproduct of using cells to produce biologicals, and not part of mRNA vaccine technology.

Recommended : mRNA Vaccines Created Spike Protein In Human Heart?!

Fact #3 : No Evidence Residual DNA Is Dangerous

In the beginning, some studies raised potential safety issues with residual DNA. So, the FDA set an upper limit of just 10 picograms of residual DNA per medicinal dose in 1985.

In 1986, a WHO study group looked into new cell substrates that are being used to produce biological products, and concluded that the risk is negligible when the amount of residual DNA is 100 picograms per dose.

Then 10 years later – the WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization (ECBS) increased the limit to 10 nanograms (ng) per purified dose, albeit not for microbial, diploid, or primary cell cultures.

In 1997, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) said that further data of DNA from continuous mammalian cell lines showed that it poses even less risk than previously thought.

Currently, the WHO and US FDA guidelines recommend that residual DNA in vaccines and other biological products should not exceed 10 nanograms (ng) per purified dose, and the DNA fragments should be no greater than 200 bp in length.

Even that limit appears to be out of an abundance of caution, as studies have not shown any actual danger from residual DNA, as they are tiny fragments.

Fact #4 : Residual DNA Is Fragmented Into Tiny Pieces

The production of mRNA vaccines at scale do not use any animal cells, but is done through in vitro transcription (IVT). The enzyme DNase is then used to destroy the DNA template and polymerase used in the reaction, and further filtration can be performed to reduce the amount of DNA fragments.

In other words – the DNA used to produce the mRNA vaccines are broken into tiny pieces, and most of it is filtered out. Think of the remnants as pieces of scrap metal left over from a dismantled chemical factory.

Sure, the workers left a ton of scrap metal pieces behind, but so what? The scrap metal may be an eyesore, but it’s not going to give you cancer, or turn you into Spiderman!

In short – there is no evidence that these tiny fragments of DNA will integrate into your genome, or cause your cells to become cancerous.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Fact #5 : mRNA Vaccines Meet Residual DNA Limits

The David J Speicher et al. preprint (which has not yet peer-reviewed) actually showed that the amount of residual DNA “contamination” was far below FDA regulatory limits.

As Professor David Gorski noted, the study authors found that the residual DNA in the mRNA vaccines was far below regulatory limits, and used a logarithmic scale to make them appear much closer to the limit than they really are:

Basically, by the authors’ own measurements, the amount of DNA/vial fell below the FDA guidance of 10 ng DNA/dose.

Did you also notice the little trick they did? They used a log scale to make the total DNA appear to be much closer to the FDA-recommended limit than it really is.

For instance, in all the Moderna vials, the amount of DNA isn’t half of the recommended limit, it’s less than one-tenth the recommended limit, and, in the case of the ori sequence, well under 1/100 of the limit.

The abstract itself even notes that the authors found DNA at “0.28 – 4.27 ng/dose and 0.22 – 2.43 ng/dose (Pfizer), and 0.01 -0.34 ng/dose and 0.25 – 0.78 ng/dose (Moderna), for ori and spike respectively measured by qPCR.”

So, from McKernan and Rose’s own data, the vial with the very highest concentration of DNA was one Pfizer vial that had less than one-half the maximum DNA amount recommended by the FDA, while the Moderna vial with the most plasmid DNA contamination had less than one-tenth the maximum recommended by the FDA.

In short – even the much touted Speicher preprint itself showed that the amount of residual DNA in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are far below regulatory limits.

The whole controversy is really much ado about nothing. What a bloody waste of time!

Perhaps that’s why they are repackaging the drama in terms of “billions of copies of residual DNA”, instead of just telling us about the actual quantity they found.

The truth is – there are billions of fragments because the DNA was chopped up pretty damn small to ensure that it would pose no threat. And because the fragments so small, it’s pretty impossible to filter them all out.

Recommended : Did Health Canada Confirm SV40 DNA In Pfizer Vaccine?!

Fact #6 : VAERS Reports Are Unverified

Hilariously, the Speicher et al. preprint suggested that mRNA vaccine vials with higher doses of residual DNA correlated with more adverse reactions, as reported in the Vaccine Adverse Reaction Reports System (VAERS).

As I pointed out many times before, VAERS data is unverified, and notoriously susceptible to abuse, and false reporting. That’s because it’s an open system that anyone – not just doctors, can report anything they want.

In addition, the reports may be duplicated and have not been verified to be related to the vaccine or drug in question. Hence, VAERS specifically warns against using its reports to reach any conclusion about the risks or safety of vaccines / drugs in question.

But that is precisely why anti-vaccination activists love using VAERS data – it’s unverified, and very susceptible to abuse and false reporting.

Fact #7 : Study Showed Fewer Adverse Events With More DNA Fragments!

Even more hilariously, the Speicher et al. preprint actually showed that the detection of more DNA fragments (as determined by Qubit fluorometry) correlated with fewer serious adverse events (SAEs).

In other words – this study has inadvertently “proven” that getting mRNA vaccines with more residual DNA will result in fewer adverse effects!

I meant that only in jest, because the study simply does not prove any correlation. It’s just asinine to even attempt to correlate unverified VAERS reports with quantity of residual DNA fragments in any vaccine.

Recommended : Did EMA Confirm Pfizer Hid SV40 DNA In Vaccine?!

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

Protect yourself and your family, by vaccinating against COVID-19 and other preventable diseases!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Are mRNA Vaccines Contaminated With SV40 DNA?!

Are mRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna contaminated with SV40 virus DNA that can cause turbo cancer and other health problems?!

Take a look at the viral claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : mRNA Vaccines Are Contaminated With SV40 DNA!

Some people are sharing video clips, messages, and articles which claim that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna are contaminated with SV40 virus DNA that can cause turbo cancer and other health problems!

Jikkyleaks : BOOM 💥💥
Yet another lab confirms therapeutic levels of DNA and SV40 contamination of Pfizer and Moderna “vaccines”

This time, @DJSpeicher & @JesslovesMJK show that the DNA contamination correlates to adverse events (and presumably deaths).

Criminal prosecutions are needed

💙Lyndsey, RN🐭 : Do NOT take Pfizer or Moderna as plasmid dna contamination and SV40 found in the vials that were distributed to the population. BUT the dna and sv40 were not found in the trial vials. HUGE REGULATORY ISSUE THERE FOR YOUR BIG MOMMA AND POP POP!

#VaxInjuries #VaxDeaths

Chuck Callesto : BREAKING REPORT: Pfizer accused of NOT DISCLOSING the presence of the Simian Virus 40 [SV40] DNA sequence in its mRNA COV-D-19 vaccine.

The complete SV40 virus was ELIMINATED from Polio vaccines during the 1950s and 1960s because of concerns about its association with CANCER.

Recommended : Did Health Canada Confirm SV40 DNA In Pfizer Vaccine?!

 

Truth : mRNA Vaccines Are Not Contaminated With SV40 DNA!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS created / propagated by anti-vaccine proponents, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : SV40 Promoter Is Not SV40 Virus

First, I should point out that gene promoters are DNA sequences that stimulate gene expression, and have long been used in molecular biology.

The SV40 promoter is a DNA sequence that was derived from the SV40 (Simian Virus 40) virus, and is not the same thing as the SV40 virus DNA. Think of it as a genetic tool obtained from the SV40 virus, just like how botulinum toxin is a treatment derived from the bacteria, Clostridium botulinum.

Finding botulinum toxin in a vial of Botox does not mean there is bacteria in that vial. Similarly, finding the SV40 promoter in the Pfizer vaccine does not mean there is SV40 virus in the vaccine.

According to Professor David Gorski, a professor of surgery and oncology at the Wayne State University School of Medicine, “the SV40 promoter-enhancer is often used in plasmids because it is a very strong promoter that can drive the production of lots of the desired mRNA encoded by the cDNA sequence attached to it.

Fact #2 : SV40 Promoter Is Not Dangerous

Michael Imperiale, a molecular biologist at the University of Michigan Medical School, explained that the SV40 promoter, on its own, can’t cause cancer. The part of SV40 that’s potentially cancer-causing, known as the T-antigen, isn’t present in the vaccine.

Even the scientist whose testimony to the South Carolina Senate has been used to drive this controversy, has come out to dismiss the concerns that the SV40 promoter is dangerous, or can cause cancer:

It’s just the volume knob that drives high level expression of anything put under its control, which in this case is just an antibiotic resistance marker.

The fear about the SV40 sequences is total nonsense. The vaccine is not going to cause cancer. There is no cancer causing gene in the vaccine.

– Phillip Buckhaults, director of the Cancer Genetics Lab at the University of South Carolina

Fact #3 : mRNA Vaccines Are Not Contaminated With SV40 Virus

To be clear – mRNA vaccines do not contain the SV40 virus, because they were manufactured using in vitro transcription (IVT) technology.

The presence of the SV40 virus in some of the polio vaccine manufactured from 1955-1963 occurred because that vaccine was manufactured in monkey kidney cell cultures that were contaminated with the SV40 virus.

Even then, decades later, there is still no conclusive evidence that the SV40 virus can cause cancers in humans. However, out of an abundance of caution, the SV40 virus is considered to potentially cause cancer in humans.

There is no evidence to indicate the presence of SV40, a virus found in monkey kidneys that can potentially cause cancer in humans, in the formulation of COVID-19 vaccines.

– Alessandro Faia, spokesperson for the European Medicines Agency (EMA)

Recommended : Is FDA Refusing To Release Vaccine Myocarditis Results?!

Fact #4 : Health Canada + EMA Confirm Residual DNA Meet Regulations

Health Canada actually wrote a detailed explanation (archive) of why DNA fragments are expected in mRNA vaccine manufacturing, and why the quantity in the vaccines is not a concern.

Plasmids are an essential starting material for the production of mRNA vaccines. During the downstream process in mRNA vaccine manufacturing, the plasmid DNA is digested with enzymes to small fragments, and further removed to a level of not more than 10 ng/human dose, which is in line with the World Health Organization’s recommendation concerning residual DNA in biological drugs. The DNA is digested with enzymes post-transcription.

Health Canada was aware of the presence of residual plasmid DNA as a process-related impurity during review and prior to the authorization of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. In addition, the release testing data for every COVID-19 vaccine lot released into the Canadian market were reviewed and deemed to meet the requirements approved by Health Canada. Furthermore, different assays assessing the same vaccine property, or even the same assay being performed in different laboratories, may generate different results.

It is important to assess the results using the authorized validated assays performed by the vaccine manufacturers to ensure that the quality of commercial vaccine lots are comparable to lots shown to be safe and efficacious in clinical studies.

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) also concurred, stating that the SV40 sequence is considered “a non-functional part” of the DNA plasmid that was used to manufacture the mRNA vaccines:

We can confirm that an SV40 sequence is present in the DNA plasmid. The sequence is not directly relevant for plasmid production in E. coli or for the mRNA production process so it is considered to be a non-functional part of the structure of the source plasmid.

Specific sequences for the non-infectious parts of SV40 are commonly present in plasmids used for manufacturing of biological active substances. The sequence for non-infectious parts of SV40 is only a small fraction of the entire SV40 sequence.

While the full DNA sequence of the plasmid starting material was provided in the initial marketing authorisation application for Comirnaty, the applicant did not specifically highlight the SV40 sequence, as it was considered to be a non-functional part of the plasmid. They have since clarified this information in response to questions raised by EMA.

We would also like to point out that during the manufacturing process, this sequence and other plasmid DNA sequences are broken down and removed. Fragments of the SV40 sequence may only be present as residual impurities at very low levels that are routinely controlled.

In short – the mRNA vaccines meet regulatory limits for residual DNA. This isn’t new or shocking to Health Canada, or the EMA, or other regulatory agencies.

Recommended : Did CDC Say COVID Vaccines Cause AIDS + Cancer?!

Fact #5 : mRNA Vaccines Meet Residual DNA Limits

The production of mRNA vaccines at scale do not use any animal cells, but is done through in vitro transcription (IVT). The enzyme DNase is then used to destroy the DNA template and polymerase used in the reaction, and further filtration can be performed to reduce the amount of DNA fragments.

In Canada, the limit was set at 10 ng of DNA per dose, which is in line with WHO recommendations. According to Health Canada, the mRNA vaccines all comply with this requirement.

The David J Speicher et al. preprint (which has not yet peer-reviewed) actually showed that the amount of residual DNA “contamination” was far below FDA regulatory limits.

As Professor David Gorski noted, the study authors found that the residual DNA in the mRNA vaccines was far below regulatory limits, and used a logarithmic scale to make them appear much closer to the limit than they really are:

Basically, by the authors’ own measurements, the amount of DNA/vial fell below the FDA guidance of 10 ng DNA/dose.

Did you also notice the little trick they did? They used a log scale to make the total DNA appear to be much closer to the FDA-recommended limit than it really is.

For instance, in all the Moderna vials, the amount of DNA isn’t half of the recommended limit, it’s less than one-tenth the recommended limit, and, in the case of the ori sequence, well under 1/100 of the limit.

The abstract itself even notes that the authors found DNA at “0.28 – 4.27 ng/dose and 0.22 – 2.43 ng/dose (Pfizer), and 0.01 -0.34 ng/dose and 0.25 – 0.78 ng/dose (Moderna), for ori and spike respectively measured by qPCR.”

So, from McKernan and Rose’s own data, the vial with the very highest concentration of DNA was one Pfizer vial that had less than one-half the maximum DNA amount recommended by the FDA, while the Moderna vial with the most plasmid DNA contamination had less than one-tenth the maximum recommended by the FDA.

In short – even the much touted Speicher preprint itself showed that the amount of residual DNA in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are far below regulatory limits.

The whole controversy is really much ado about nothing. What a bloody waste of time!

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Fact #6 : Residual DNA Won’t Integrate Into Our Genome

The presence of residual DNA itself does not mean that they will integrate into our genome. For one thing – these are DNA fragments that have been broken down by the DNase enzyme.

Think of them as parts of a factory which were used to build the mRNA vaccine, but dismantled once the vaccine has been manufactured. Sure, the disposal team may have left a couple of bolts and screws lying on the floor, but can they be used to recreate the factory? No.

To be clear – neither the COVID-19 vaccines, not any residual DNA they may contain, can change our genome. On top of that, the vaccines are injected into the muscle, whose cells are “post-mitotic”, which means they are no longer able to change.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Health Canada Confirm SV40 DNA In Pfizer Vaccine?!

Did Health Canada just confirm the presence of SV40 DNA in the Pfizer mRNA vaccine for COVID-19?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Health Canada Confirmed SV40 DNA In Pfizer Vaccine!

Some people are sharing an article by The Epoch Times, which claimed / suggested that Health Canada just confirmed the presence of SV40 (Simian Virus 40) DNA in the Pfizer mRNA vaccine for COVID-19!

Chuck Callesto : BREAKING REPORT: Pfizer accused of NOT DISCLOSING the presence of the Simian Virus 40 [SV40] DNA sequence in its mRNA COV-D-19 vaccine.

The complete SV40 virus was ELIMINATED from Polio vaccines during the 1950s and 1960s because of concerns about its association with CANCER.

Health Canada CONFIRMS Undisclosed Presence of DNA Sequence in Pfizer Shot. -The Epoch TImes

Here is an excerpt from that article by The Epoch Times:

EXCLUSIVE: Health Canada Confirms Undisclosed Presence of DNA Sequence in Pfizer Shot

Recommended : New study shows Cardiac Side Effects of mRNA Vaccines?!

 

Truth : Health Canada Only Confirmed SV40 Enhancer Sequence In Pfizer Vaccine!

Let’s take a closer look at what Health Canada said about the presence of SV40 DNA in the Pfizer mRNA vaccine for COVID-19!

Fact #1 : SV40 Promoter Is Not SV40 Virus

First, I should point out that gene enhancers and promoters are DNA sequences that stimulate gene expression, and have long been used in molecular biology.

The SV40 promoter is a DNA sequence that was derived from the SV40 (Simian Virus 40) virus, and is not the same thing as the SV40 virus DNA. Think of it as a genetic tool obtained from the SV40 virus, just like how botulinum toxin is a treatment derived from the bacteria, Clostridium botulinum.

Finding botulinum toxin in a vial of Botox does not mean there is bacteria in that vial. Similarly, finding the SV40 promoter in the Pfizer vaccine does not mean there is SV40 in the vaccine. To be clear – mRNA vaccines do not contain the SV40 virus:

There is no evidence to indicate the presence of SV40, a virus found in monkey kidneys that can potentially cause cancer in humans, in the formulation of COVID-19 vaccines.

– Alessandro Faia, spokesperson for the European Medicines Agency (EMA)

Fact #2 : Pfizer DNA Plasmid Won’t Integrate With Genome

In response to The Epoch Times‘ question about SV40 plasmids integrating into the genome, Health Canada explained why that is simply not possible (archive):

The Pfizer DNA plasmid used to produce the COVID-19 vaccine is distinct from DNA adenovirus vectors in sequence and biological functions.

Furthermore, the Pfizer plasmid does not contain sequences corresponding to SV40 proteins studied in the paper cited. Therefore, the integration mechanisms described are not applicable.

Recommended : Is FDA Refusing To Release Vaccine Myocarditis Results?!

Fact #3 : Health Canada Confirms mRNA Vaccines Meet Regulatory Limit

Health Canada actually wrote a detailed explanation (archive) of why DNA fragments are expected in mRNA vaccine manufacturing, and why the quantity in the vaccines is not a concern.

Plasmids are an essential starting material for the production of mRNA vaccines. During the downstream process in mRNA vaccine manufacturing, the plasmid DNA is digested with enzymes to small fragments, and further removed to a level of not more than 10 ng/human dose, which is in line with the World Health Organization’s recommendation concerning residual DNA in biological drugs. The DNA is digested with enzymes post-transcription.

Health Canada was aware of the presence of residual plasmid DNA as a process-related impurity during review and prior to the authorization of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. In addition, the release testing data for every COVID-19 vaccine lot released into the Canadian market were reviewed and deemed to meet the requirements approved by Health Canada. Furthermore, different assays assessing the same vaccine property, or even the same assay being performed in different laboratories, may generate different results.

It is important to assess the results using the authorized validated assays performed by the vaccine manufacturers to ensure that the quality of commercial vaccine lots are comparable to lots shown to be safe and efficacious in clinical studies.

In short – the mRNA vaccines approved in Canada meet regulatory limits for residual DNA. This isn’t new or shocking to Health Canada, or other regulatory agencies.

Fact #4 : McKernan Study Is In Dispute

The Epoch Times had earlier written about the McKernan et al. preprint (which has not yet peer-reviewed that fuelled the SV40 promoter DNA in Pfizer vaccine controversy.

The problem though was – the study tested vials of “unknown provenance” which were sent to the authors “anonymously in the mail without cold packs“. Even though they claimed that the vials were “unopened”, it was impossible to know if they were tampered with.

In addition, qualifying residual DNA levels is based on measurements relative to RNA levels. Because the vials were not kept cold, their contents would certainly have been degraded. Since RNA is less stable than DNA and would degrade far more under such conditions, it would likely have resulted in abnormal DNA-RNA levels by the time the tests were conducted.

Finally, the McKernan preprint itself showed that the amount of residual DNA in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are far below regulatory limits. So it was really much ado about nothing!

Recommended : Did CDC Say COVID Vaccines Cause AIDS + Cancer?!

Fact #5 : SV40 Promoter Does Not Cause Cancer

The Epoch Times article suggested that there is a risk of the SV40 promoter causing cancer. That has been refuted by scientists:

It’s just the volume knob that drives high level expression of anything put under its control, which in this case is just an antibiotic resistance marker.

The fear about the SV40 sequences is total nonsense. The vaccine is not going to cause cancer. There is no cancer causing gene in the vaccine.

– Phillip Buckhaults, director of the Cancer Genetics Lab at the University of South Carolina

The SV40 promoter, on its own, can’t cause cancer. The part of SV40 that’s potentially cancer-causing, known as the T-antigen, isn’t present in the vaccine.

– Michael Imperiale, molecular biologist at the University of Michigan Medical School

Fact #6 : mRNA Vaccines Meet Residual DNA Limits

The production of mRNA vaccines at scale do not use any animal cells, but is done through in vitro transcription (IVT). The enzyme DNase is then used to destroy the DNA template and polymerase used in the reaction, and further filtration can be performed to reduce the amount of DNA fragments.

It was the use of an incorrect DNase stock that resulted in a batch of Pfizer vaccines having more residual DNA than usual – 815 ng of DNA per mL of RNA. Other than that one batch, all other batches had at most – 211 ng of DNA per mL of RNA, which was below the “commercial acceptance criterion” of the European Medicines Agency of ≤330 ng of DNA / per mg of RNA.

In Canada, the limit was set at 10 ng of DNA per dose, which is in line with WHO recommendations. According to Health Canada, the mRNA vaccines all comply with this requirement.

Here is the takeaway – any mRNA vaccine that does not meet regulatory limits would not be allowed to be used.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Fact #7 : Residual DNA Won’t Integrate Into Our Genome

The presence of residual DNA itself does not mean that they will integrate into our genome. For one thing – these are DNA fragments that have been broken down by the DNase enzyme.

Think of them as parts of a factory which was used to build the mRNA vaccine, but dismantled once the vaccine has been manufactured. Sure, the disposal team may have left a couple of bolts and screws lying on the floor, but can they be used to recreate the factory? No.

To be clear – neither the COVID-19 vaccines, not any residual DNA they may contain, can change our genome. On top of that, the vaccines are injected into the muscle, whose cells are “post-mitotic”, which means they are no longer able to change.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this fact check article out, and please SUPPORT our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Fact Check | HealthTech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Study Show Pfizer Vaccine Altering Liver DNA?!

Did a Swedish study show that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine altered the DNA of human liver cells in just 6 hours?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Study Show Pfizer Vaccine Altering Liver DNA In 6 Hours!

The Expose is back again, with yet another “fakexpose” on the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. This time, they are recycling a February 2022 fake story that I fact checked earlier.

Here are selected excerpts from their long-winded article. Feel free to skip it, and head to the next section for the facts.

A Swedish study has demonstrated and confirmed that the mRNA in the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid injections infiltrates cells and transcribes its message onto human DNA within 6 hours, altering our own DNA.

The findings come after a previous study published in October 2021 from Sweden found the spike protein enters our cells nuclei and impairs the mechanism cells have to repair damaged DNA.

Read more : Did 800 People Quit Pfizer Vaccine Trial Over Death / Injury?!

 

Truth : Study Did Not Show Pfizer Vaccine Altering Liver DNA In 6 Hours

This is yet another example of vaccine fake news based on the intentional misinterpretation of a single scientific study.

Here is what you really need to know about this Lund University study… and The Expose.

Fact #1 : The Expose Is A Fake News Website

The Expose (formerly Daily Expose) is notorious for creating and propagating fake news on everything from COVID-19 to vaccines and the Ukraine war.

I investigated several articles they wrote, and they were all found to be completely false, or intentionally misleading.

Everything posted by The Expose must be considered fake news, until proven otherwise.

Fact #2 : Study Did NOT Say Pfizer Vaccine Alters Our DNA

First things first – the Lund University study is called Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line, and you can read it in its entirety here.

If you read just the discussion, you will note that the study authors actually pointed out that their study does NOT show that the Pfizer vaccine integrates with the liver cell DNA, or alters it in any way.

At this stage, we do not know if DNA reverse transcribed from BNT162b2 is integrated into the cell genome.

To be clear, the study offers no evidence that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine alters our DNA in any way or form.

Fact #3 : It Was A Laboratory Study

I should also point out the obvious fact that this was an in-vitro study – a laboratory study, not a clinical study.

In-vitro studies are important, but they cannot be extrapolated to make any conclusion about what actually happens in a human body.

For example, in-vitro studies have shown that hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin have an inhibitory effect on the SARS-CoV-2 virus; but once tested in actual human beings – they were shown to have no clinical benefit.

In other words – what works in a laboratory, may not work in an actual human being.

Read more : Study Shows 10X Ivermectin Can’t Prevent Severe COVID-19!

Fact #4 : Study Was Based On Liver Cancer Cells

The casual reader of the Lund University study will not realise that Huh7 (or Huh-7) cells are not ordinary liver cells that you or I have.

Huh7 cells were derived from the liver tumour of a 57 year-old Japanese man, and are special because :

  • they are immortal liver cancer cells that can keep multiplying
  • they are highly-susceptible to Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection
  • they are genetically different, with an abnormal number of chromosomes (between 55 and 63, normal human cells have 46)

The Huh7 cell line is useful for the study of liver cancer and Hepatitis C, as well as drugs that may combat HCV; but it is important to understand that Huh7 cells are not representative of normal human cells.

Fact #5 : Huh7 Liver Cells Were Cultured In Plates

For a “more physiologically relevant study of viruses“, these Huh7 cells have to be cultured in a NASA-designed 3D Rotating Wall Vessel (RWV) bioreactor.

These RWV bioreactors create 3D aggregates of Huh7 cells that are more “similar in structure and function” to their in vivo counterparts, with “completely altered gene expression and differentiation patterns“.

In other words, these RWV-grown Huh7 cells look and behave differently, more like regular human cells compared to plate-cultured Huh7 cells.

For the record, the Lund University study used plate-cultured Huh7 cells, and not RWV-grown Huh7 cells.

There is nothing wrong with that, but we should keep in mind that these cells are not an ideal representation of human cells.

This is what a 24-cell culture plate looks like

Fact #6 : Normal Human Cells Don’t Produce LINE-1 Enzyme

The scientists chose to use these Huh7 cells because like many cancerous cells, they express (produce) the LINE-1 enzyme.

LINE-1 is a reverse transcriptase that converts mRNA into DNA, so it is not surprising that the study would show it converting mRNA from the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine into DNA. That is literally what it is meant to do.

Normal human cells have the LINE-1 gene, but it is not expressed. Normal human cells do not produce the LINE-1 enzyme, which is why they could not use regular human cells in this study.

That is also why it is inappropriate to use the Huh7 cell culture to evaluate how mRNA vaccines would actually work or behave in humans.

Fact #7 : Transcribed DNA Did Not Enter Nucleus

The study only looked at whether mRNA from the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine can be transcribed into DNA by the LINE-1 enzyme.

As the study showed – yes, it can… because that’s what the LINE-1 enzyme does. But the study does not show that the transcribed DNA entered the cell nucleus and altered human DNA.

While that is plausible, it would require another enzyme called integrase, that viruses produce, to move that DNA into the cell nucleus itself.

Without the integrase enzyme, the DNA transcribed by the LINE-1 enzyme will only float outside, and will never integrate with the DNA inside the cell nucleus.

Did Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Combine With DNA In Liver Cells?!

Fact #8 : mRNA Vaccines Do Not Modify Our Genes

An mRNA vaccine only contains a limited number of lipid nanoparticles containing those delicate mRNA instructions. So only a limited number of cells are involved in the vaccination process.

Even if it is somehow possible for the mRNA instructions from the vaccine to enter the cell nucleus and integrate with the DNA inside, it will only affect those cells.

Our cells die and are replaced by new cells all the time, so even if hypothetically the vaccine “infects” and modifies the DNA of a few hundred thousand cells, those cells will eventually die and be replaced by new cells without the modified DNA.

It is simply not possible for mRNA vaccines to modify our genes.

Fact #9 : Viruses Integrate With Cell DNA

Viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and HIV-1 (diagram below) integrate their genes with the host cell DNA, to hijack the cell and use it to produce copies of itself.

You can see how a typical RNA virus would infect a host cell, convert its RNA into DNA which is moved into the cell nucleus using the integrase enzyme.

HIV-1 virus cell infection, credit : Günther Witzany

Once inside, the viral DNA integrates with the host cell DNA, which gets transcribed into instructions for the cell to produce copies of the virus.

This is the same way how the SARS-CoV-2 virus infects our cells, to produce copies of itself to infect even more cells.

If you are truly worried about anything modifying your cell’s DNA, you should try to avoid viral infections like COVID-19. Better still – vaccinate yourself, and get protected against COVID-19!

Everything posted by The Expose must be regarded as FAKE NEWS, until proven otherwise.

Please help us FIGHT FAKE NEWS by sharing this article out, and supporting our work!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Health | Fact Check | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Monkeypox : What You Must Know About This Viral Infection!

zFind out what Monkeypox is all about, and whether it is a new viral infection we have to worry about!

 

Monkeypox : What You Need To Know

People are now worried about the rapid spread of monkeypox globally, with cases in at least 20 countries outside of Africa.

Here are some facts about monkeypox that you should know…

Monkeypox Is Different From COVID-19

First, let me just clearly state this – the monkeypox virus is completely different from the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19.

The monkeypox virus is a double-stranded DNA virus from the Orthopoxvirus genus in the Poxviridae family. It is closely related to the smallpox virus (variola)

The SARS-CoV-2 virus is a single-stranded RNA virus from the Betacoronavirus genus in the Coronaviridae family. It is closely related to the SARS virus (SARS-CoV-1).

Monkeypox Is A Zoonotic Disease

Monkeypox is a zoonotic disease that is primarily carried and spread by animals, especially primates.

It was first discovered in monkeys in 1958, giving rise to the name – monkeypox. The first human case was only reported in 1970.

Monkeypox Is Getting More Common

The monkeypox virus used to be a relatively rare zoonotic virus, with about 400 human infections reported from 1970 to 1986 that were mostly limited to Central and West Africa.

It is becoming more common though, with 2000 cases per year reported between 2011 and 2014. Several small outbreaks in the US (2003 and 2021), UK (2018 and 2021), and Singapore (2019) were also reported.

In the current 2022 outbreak, over 200 confirmed cases of monkeypox have been reported in 21 countries.

 

Monkeypox : Transmission, Mortality + Disease Progression

Monkeypox Transmission

The monkeypox virus are generally transmitted through these methods :

  • animal-to-human : close contact, scratches or bites, or direct contact with bodily fluids
  • human-to-human : respiratory droplets or contact with bodily fluids or fomites (contaminated surfaces)

The virus enters the body through broken skin and the mucous membranes of the eyes, nose and mouth.

Risk factors for human transmission include sharing the same bed or room with an infected person, as well as having sexual intercourse or sharing utensils.

Read more : Monkeypox Outbreak In 20 Countries : Is It A New Pandemic?

Monkeypox Mortality Rate

Monkeypox is not as easily transmitted as COVID-19, but has a significantly higher mortality rate depending on the strain :

  • West African strain : 1% to 3%
  • Central African strain : 10%

Fortunately, the infections in the 2022 monkeypox outbreak are of the less virulent West African strain.

How A Monkeypox Infection Progresses

After infection, the incubation period is usually 7-14 days, but can vary from 5-21 days.

The patient will start experiencing general symptoms like fever, headache, muscle aches, backache, swollen lymph nodes, chills and exhaustion.

Within 1-3 days though, the patient will develop lesions in the mouth, before they appear on the face and then spread to other parts of the body.

  • The first lesions appear on the tongue and in the mouth
  • A macular rash (flat, discoloured) then appears on the face, before spreading to the arms and legs and then hands and feet.
  • The macular rash will typically spread to the entire body within 24 hours, but is most concentrated on the face, arms and legs.
  • By the third day of the rash, the lesions will develop into elevated and palpable papules.
  • By the fourth to fifth day of the rash, the lesions will become fluid-filled vesicles.
  • By the sixth to seventh day, the vesicles will become pustular (filled with pus).
  • The pustules will be round and firm, with a depression in the centre, for the next 5-7 days.
  • By the end of the second week, the pustules will scab over for about a week before falling off.

Only after ALL of the scabs have fallen off is a person considered no longer contagious.

After the scabs have fallen off, the affected skin may appear pale before becoming dark marks, sometimes becoming pitted scars.

 

Monkeypox : Testing, Treatment + Prevention

Monkeypox Testing

Confirmation of a monkeypox infection is based on the detection of its viral DNA through real-time or conventional polymerase chain reaction (PCR).

The doctor will swab the lesions and/or exudate and/or crusts, which is different from how samples are collected for COVID-19 tests.

Monkeypox Treatment

There is currently no proven treatment for monkeypox infections, which will generally resolve over 2-4 weeks.

Patient care is usually supportive in nature (antipyretic medicine, fluid balance and oxygenation), but in severe cases, several antiviral treatments can be attempted :

  • Cidofovir and Brincidofovir (CMX001), which have proven activity against poxviruses in laboratory and animal studies.
  • Tecovirimat (ST-246), which was shown in animal studies to be effective in treating orthopoxvirus-induced disease.
  • Vaccinia Immune Globulin (VIG)

I should point out that none of these antiviral treatments have been proven to work against monkeypox.

Smallpox Vaccine Can Protect Against Monkeypox

The monkeypox virus is so closely related to the (eradicated) smallpox virus, that the smallpox vaccine can protect against monkeypox.

The smallpox vaccine called JYNNEOS (Imvamune / Imvanex) was earlier proven to be at least 85% effective in preventing monkeypox, and was thus licensed for use against monkeypox. Another smallpox vaccine called ACAM2000 may also be used.

The smallpox vaccine can also be given to those who were just exposed to the virus, to reduce its symptoms.

But please do NOT call up your local clinic to ask for the smallpox vaccine. It has not been available in many countries for decades because smallpox was effectively eradicated in 1980.

Other Preventive Measures

In the absence of the smallpox vaccine, the same measures used to avoid COVID-19 can be adopted to also avoid monkeypox :

  • Avoid contact with animals that can harbour the virus, particular animals that are sick or have been found dead
  • Avoid contact with infected monkeypox patients and their close contacts
  • Avoid contact with objects or surfaces that have been in contact with a sick person / animal
  • Use personal protective equipment (PPE) while caring for patients – N95 face mask, face shield, etc.
  • Practice good hand hygiene, washing with soap and water, or an alcohol-based hand sanitiser

Monkeypox Isolation

Monkeypox patients must be isolated either in a hospital or at home, until all lesions are clear with a fresh layer of skin.

Close contact with other people should be avoided until all scabs have dropped off, which usually takes 2-4 weeks.

I hope you found this article useful. Please share it with your family and friends, and support our work! Thank you!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Science |  Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Can Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Change Our DNA?!

Did Swedish scientists just prove that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine changes our DNA?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Changes Our DNA!

Anti-vaccination and ivermectin proponents have gone bananas over the new study from the Lund University in Sweden.

They are sharing it as evidence (finally!) of the Pfizer COVIDS-19 vaccine actually integrating with our DNA, and changing our genome, as they had always claimed.

Let that shock and horror sink in for a minute… and then let me explain to you what the facts really are in the next section…

Recommended : Are Residual DNA In mRNA Vaccines Dangerous?!

 

Truth : Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Did NOT Change DNA At All!

This is yet another example of vaccine fake news based on accidental / intentional misinterpretation of a single scientific study.

Here is what you really need to know about the Lund University study that went viral…

Fact #1 : Study Did NOT Say Pfizer Vaccine Alters Our DNA

First things first – the Lund University study is called Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line, and you can read it in its entirety here.

In the study’s Discussion section, the authors actually pointed out that their study does NOT show that the Pfizer vaccine integrates with the liver cell DNA, or alters it in any way.

At this stage, we do not know if DNA reverse transcribed from BNT162b2 is integrated into the cell genome.

To be clear, the study does NOT show that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine changes our DNA in any way or form.

Fact #2 : It Was A Laboratory Study

I should also point out the salient fact that it was an in-vitro study – a laboratory study, not a clinical study.

In-vitro studies are important, but they cannot be extrapolated to make any conclusion about what actually happens in a human body.

For example, laboratory studies do show that hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin have an inhibitory effect on the SARS-CoV-2 virus; but once tested in actual human beings – they are shown to have no clinical benefit.

In other words – what works in a laboratory, may not work in an actual human being.

Read more : Study Shows 10X Ivermectin Can’t Prevent Severe COVID-19!

Fact #3 : Study Was Based On Liver Cancer Cells

The casual reader of the Lund University study will not realise that Huh7 (or Huh-7) cells are not ordinary liver cells that you or I have.

Huh7 cells were derived from the liver tumour of a 57 year-old Japanese man, and are special because :

  • they are immortal liver cancer cells that can keep multiplying
  • they are highly-susceptible to Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection
  • they are genetically different, with an abnormal number of chromosomes (between 55 and 63, normal human cells have 46)

The Huh7 cell line is useful for the study of liver cancer and Hepatitis C, as well as drugs that may combat HCV; but it is important to understand that Huh7 cells are not representative of normal human cells.

Fact #4 : Huh7 Liver Cells Were Cultured In Plates

For a “more physiologically relevant study of viruses“, these Huh7 cells have to be cultured in a NASA-designed 3D Rotating Wall Vessel (RWV) bioreactor.

These RWV bioreactors create 3D aggregates of Huh7 cells that are more “similar in structure and function” to their in vivo counterparts, with “completely altered gene expression and differentiation patterns“.

In other words, these RWV-grown Huh7 cells look and behave differently, more like regular human cells compared to plate-cultured Huh7 cells.

For the record, the Lund University study used plate-cultured Huh7 cells, and not RWV-grown Huh7 cells.

There is nothing wrong with that, but we should keep in mind that these cells are not an ideal representation of human cells.

Recommended : Are mRNA Vaccines Contaminated With SV40 DNA?!

This is what a 24-cell culture plate looks like

Fact #5 : Normal Human Cells Don’t Produce LINE-1 Enzyme

The scientists chose to use these Huh7 cells because like many cancerous cells, they express (produce) the LINE-1 enzyme.

LINE-1 is a reverse transcriptase that converts mRNA into DNA, so it is not surprising that the study would show it converting mRNA from the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine into DNA. That is literally what it is meant to do.

Normal human cells have the LINE-1 gene, but it is not expressed. Normal human cells do not produce the LINE-1 enzyme, which is why they could not use regular human cells in this study.

That is also why it is inappropriate to use the Huh7 cell culture to evaluate how mRNA vaccines would actually work or behave in humans.

Fact #6 : Transcribed DNA Did Not Enter Nucleus

The study only looked at whether mRNA from the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine can be transcribed into DNA by the LINE-1 enzyme.

As the study showed – yes, it can… because that’s what the LINE-1 enzyme does. But the study does not show that the transcribed DNA entered the cell nucleus and changed human DNA.

While that is plausible, it would require another enzyme called integrase, that viruses produce, to move that DNA into the cell nucleus itself.

Without the integrase enzyme, the DNA transcribed by the LINE-1 enzyme will only float outside, and will never integrate with the DNA inside the cell nucleus.

Recommended : New Study Proves Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Turbo Cancer?!

Did Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Combine With DNA In Liver Cells?!

Fact #7 : mRNA Vaccines Do Not Modify Our Genes

An mRNA vaccine only contains a limited number of lipid nanoparticles containing those delicate mRNA instructions. So only a limited number of cells are involved in the vaccination process.

Even if it is somehow possible for the mRNA instructions from the vaccine to enter the cell nucleus and integrate with the DNA inside, it will only affect those cells.

Our cells die and are replaced by new cells all the time, so even if hypothetically the vaccine “infects” and modifies the DNA of a few hundred thousand cells, those cells will eventually die and be replaced by new cells without the modified DNA.

It is simply not possible for mRNA vaccines to modify our genes.

Fact #8 : Viruses Integrate With Cell DNA

Viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and HIV-1 (diagram below) integrate their genes with the host cell DNA, to hijack the cell and use it to produce copies of itself.

You can see how a typical RNA virus would infect a host cell, convert its RNA into DNA which is moved into the cell nucleus using the integrase enzyme.

Recommended : Did New Study Show Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Causes Autism?!

HIV-1 virus cell infection, credit : Günther Witzany

Once inside, the viral DNA integrates with the host cell DNA, which gets transcribed into instructions for the cell to produce copies of the virus.

This is the same way how the SARS-CoV-2 virus infects our cells, to produce copies of itself to infect even more cells.

If you are truly worried about anything modifying your cell’s DNA, you should try to avoid viral infections like COVID-19. Better still – vaccinate yourself, and get protected against COVID-19!

Now that you know the truth, please help us fight fake news by SHARING this article out!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Health | Fact Check | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Why MAECC Is Wrong About Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Study!

The MAECC is at it again, calling for a pause on the COVID-19 vaccine mandate because of a recent Swedish study on the Pfizer mRNA vaccine!

Let’s take a look at their claims, and find out what the facts really are!

 

MAECC : Pause Vaccine Mandate Over Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Study!

The MAECC (Malaysian Alliance for Effective Covid Control) has issued yet another call for the Malaysia Health Ministry to pause the “vaccine mandate”.

This time, they are using the recently-released Swedish study that allegedly shows the Pfizer mRNA vaccine being converted into DNA.

Their press release is very long, so feel free to skip it and head over to the next section for the facts.

PAUSE ON VACCINE MANDATE IS NECESSARY ON LATEST SCIENTIFIC FINDING

Malaysian Alliance for Effective Covid Control (MAECC) would like to highlight a recently published study that has confirmed the messenger RNA (mRNA) from the Pfizer Covid vaccine is able to enter human liver cells and convert into DNA. From the outset MAECC has been very concerned for the potential long-term adverse effect of the mRNA Covid vaccine, and this includes DNA change. Our fear is now confirmed.

 

Here’s Why MAECC Is Wrong About Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Study!

The MAECC has stridently promoted ivermectin, despite the lack of evidence, and came out strongly against vaccination even though COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective.

Here are the reasons why they are, yet again, wrong about the Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.

Fact #1 : There Is No Vaccine Mandate In Malaysia

First, let me address their title – there is no COVID-19 vaccine mandate in Malaysia.

No one is forced to take the COVID-19 vaccine in Malaysia. Any claim that there is a COVID-19 vaccine mandate is undeniably false.

Heck, Malaysia has no vaccine mandate, period. That’s why children of antivax parents remain unvaccinated, despite the risks to their health.

If they start off with a factually false title, what hope is there that their press release is actually based on facts?

Fact #2 : Swedish Study Did Not Show Pfizer Vaccine Changed DNA

The crux of their new press release is the recently-released Pfizer mRNA vaccine study by the Lund University of Sweden.

The MAECC claimed that their fear that the mRNA vaccine can change our DNA “is now confirmed“. That’s nonsense.

The Swedish researchers themselves pointed out in their study, that :

At this stage, we do not know if DNA reverse transcribed from BNT162b2 is integrated into the cell genome.

To be clear, the study does not show that the Pfizer mRNA vaccine altered our DNA in any way or form.

The study does not even show that the transcribed DNA entered the cell nucleus!

Read more : Did Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Combine With DNA In Liver Cells?!

Fact #3 : Study Findings Did Not Shock Scientists / Physicians

The MAECC claims that the Swedish study findings has “shocked scientists and physicians throughout the world“. That is utter nonsense, unless they mean the few who did not read the study, or actually understand what it stated.

You don’t see health authorities ordering the immediate cessation or pause of mRNA vaccination, as some have done when some real adverse effect was discovered, like the risk of pericarditis / myocarditis.

Instead, the only people calling for mRNA vaccines to be stopped based on this laboratory study are fringe groups like the MAECC.

That’s because everyone else spent their time reading and understanding what the study meant, instead of “accidentally” or intentionally misinterpreting its results to push their own agenda.

If you are interested to know more about what the results of this Swedish study actually mean, please read my article – Did Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Combine With DNA In Liver Cells?!

Fact #4 : Waning Immunity Is Indirect Evidence Of No DNA Change

The waning immunity of COVID-19 vaccines is actually indirect evidence that mRNA vaccines do NOT change our DNA. Here’s why…

mRNA vaccines work by instructing some of our cells to manufacture the SARS-CoV-2 virus spike proteins, and put them on the cell surface to trigger the immune system into action.

If the mRNA vaccine actually integrates into our human DNA, all of our cells would display those spikes and continuously trigger the immune system for lifetime protection. That is not simply not the case.

In fact, it is now known that our COVID-19 antibody levels gradually drop after we are fully-vaccinated, which is why a booster dose is required to boost antibody levels after a few months.

Booster doses would not be necessary if the mRNA vaccine actually integrates with our DNA, making all our cells produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein forever.

Read more : Sinovac Vaccine Efficacy Rapidly Drops After 2 Months!

Fact #5 : mRNA Vaccine Proven Safe + Effective

MAECC claims that bad science is “behind the promotion and coercion of the masses to get the injections“. That’s utter nonsense. They are the ones propagating bad science.

COVID-19 vaccines have undergone the world’s largest clinical trials, collectively involving over hundreds of thousands of volunteers – far more than clinical trials of vaccines and drugs in the past!

All those clinical trials have shown that the approved COVID-19 vaccines are all safe and effective. Even then, these vaccines continue to be monitored for safety issues.

Over 10 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been administered worldwide, and we are already able to confirm rare adverse effects like anaphylaxis and myocarditis with mRNA vaccines.

If it’s true that mRNA vaccines are able to modify our DNA, we would have seen those effects in the real world, not only in a small laboratory study of liver cancer cells.

Don’t risk your life or your family’s lives on the bad science and misinformation promoted by fringe groups like the MAECC.

Please help me fight fake news, by sharing this fact check with your family and friends!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Health | Fact Check | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

Did Pfizer Vaccine Combine With DNA In Liver Cells?!

Did scientists prove that the Pfizer mRNA vaccine combined with the DNA of liver cells?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

 

Claim : Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Combined With DNA In Liver Cells!

Anti-vaccination and ivermectin proponents have gone bananas over the new study from the Lund University in Sweden.

They are sharing it as evidence (finally!) of the Pfizer mRNA vaccine actually integrating with our DNA, and changing our genome, as they had always claimed.

Let that shock and horror sink in for a minute… and then let me explain to you what the facts really are in the next section…

 

Truth : Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Did NOT Combine With DNA In Liver Cells!

This is yet another example of vaccine fake news based on accidental / intentional misinterpretation of a single scientific study.

Here is what you really need to know about this Lund University study…

Fact #1 : Study Did NOT Say Pfizer Vaccine Alters Our DNA

First things first – the Lund University study is called Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line, and you can read it in its entirety here.

If you read just the discussion, you will note that the study authors actually pointed out that their study does NOT show that the Pfizer vaccine integrates with the liver cell DNA, or alters it in any way.

At this stage, we do not know if DNA reverse transcribed from BNT162b2 is integrated into the cell genome.

To be clear, the study offers no evidence that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine alters our DNA in any way or form.

Fact #2 : It Was A Laboratory Study

I should also point out the obvious fact that this was an in-vitro study – a laboratory study, not a clinical study.

In-vitro studies are important, but they cannot be extrapolated to make any conclusion about what actually happens in a human body.

For example, in-vitro studies have shown that hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin have an inhibitory effect on the SARS-CoV-2 virus; but once tested in actual human beings – they are shown to have no clinical benefit.

In other words – what works in a laboratory, may not work in an actual human being.

Read more : Study Shows 10X Ivermectin Can’t Prevent Severe COVID-19!

Fact #3 : Study Was Based On Liver Cancer Cells

The casual reader of the Lund University study will not realise that Huh7 (or Huh-7) cells are not ordinary liver cells that you or I have.

Huh7 cells were derived from the liver tumour of a 57 year-old Japanese man, and are special because :

  • they are immortal liver cancer cells that can keep multiplying
  • they are highly-susceptible to Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection
  • they are genetically different, with an abnormal number of chromosomes (between 55 and 63, normal human cells have 46)

The Huh7 cell line is useful for the study of liver cancer and Hepatitis C, as well as drugs that may combat HCV; but it is important to understand that Huh7 cells are not representative of normal human cells.

Fact #4 : Huh7 Liver Cells Were Cultured In Plates

For a “more physiologically relevant study of viruses“, these Huh7 cells have to be cultured in a NASA-designed 3D Rotating Wall Vessel (RWV) bioreactor.

These RWV bioreactors create 3D aggregates of Huh7 cells that are more “similar in structure and function” to their in vivo counterparts, with “completely altered gene expression and differentiation patterns“.

In other words, these RWV-grown Huh7 cells look and behave differently, more like regular human cells compared to plate-cultured Huh7 cells.

For the record, the Lund University study used plate-cultured Huh7 cells, and not RWV-grown Huh7 cells.

There is nothing wrong with that, but we should keep in mind that these cells are not an ideal representation of human cells.

This is what a 24-cell culture plate looks like

Fact #5 : Normal Human Cells Don’t Produce LINE-1 Enzyme

The scientists chose to use these Huh7 cells because like many cancerous cells, they express (produce) the LINE-1 enzyme.

LINE-1 is a reverse transcriptase that converts mRNA into DNA, so it is not surprising that the study would show it converting mRNA from the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine into DNA. That is literally what it is meant to do.

Normal human cells have the LINE-1 gene, but it is not expressed. Normal human cells do not produce the LINE-1 enzyme, which is why they could not use regular human cells in this study.

That is also why it is inappropriate to use the Huh7 cell culture to evaluate how mRNA vaccines would actually work or behave in humans.

Fact #6 : Transcribed DNA Did Not Enter Nucleus

The study only looked at whether mRNA from the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine can be transcribed into DNA by the LINE-1 enzyme.

As the study showed – yes, it can… because that’s what the LINE-1 enzyme does. But the study does not show that the transcribed DNA entered the cell nucleus and altered human DNA.

While that is plausible, it would require another enzyme called integrase, that viruses produce, to move that DNA into the cell nucleus itself.

Without the integrase enzyme, the DNA transcribed by the LINE-1 enzyme will only float outside, and will never integrate with the DNA inside the cell nucleus.

Did Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Combine With DNA In Liver Cells?!

Fact #7 : mRNA Vaccines Do Not Modify Our Genes

An mRNA vaccine only contains a limited number of lipid nanoparticles containing those delicate mRNA instructions. So only a limited number of cells are involved in the vaccination process.

Even if it is somehow possible for the mRNA instructions from the vaccine to enter the cell nucleus and integrate with the DNA inside, it will only affect those cells.

Our cells die and are replaced by new cells all the time, so even if hypothetically the vaccine “infects” and modifies the DNA of a few hundred thousand cells, those cells will eventually die and be replaced by new cells without the modified DNA.

It is simply not possible for mRNA vaccines to modify our genes.

Fact #8 : Viruses Integrate With Cell DNA

Viruses like SARS-CoV-2 and HIV-1 (diagram below) integrate their genes with the host cell DNA, to hijack the cell and use it to produce copies of itself.

You can see how a typical RNA virus would infect a host cell, convert its RNA into DNA which is moved into the cell nucleus using the integrase enzyme.

HIV-1 virus cell infection, credit : Günther Witzany

Once inside, the viral DNA integrates with the host cell DNA, which gets transcribed into instructions for the cell to produce copies of the virus.

This is the same way how the SARS-CoV-2 virus infects our cells, to produce copies of itself to infect even more cells.

If you are truly worried about anything modifying your cell’s DNA, you should try to avoid viral infections like COVID-19. Better still – vaccinate yourself, and get protected against COVID-19!

Now that you know the truth, please help us fight fake news by SHARING this article out!

 

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Health | Fact Check | Tech ARP

 

Support Tech ARP!

Please support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or donating to our fund. Thank you!

COVID-19 Rapid Tests : What You Need To Know!

Scientists are racing to develop COVID-19 rapid tests, which promise not only to be much cheaper, but also much faster, delivering results in a fraction of the time.

You may have seen some of them for sale too. Are any of these COVID-19 rapid tests the real deal? Let’s find out…

 

COVID-19 Laboratory Tests : How Do They Work?

Laboratory testing for COVID-19, as per WHO recommendations, are Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAAT) using real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR)

They basically use RNA primers to target and cut specific segments of COVID-19 genes, so they can be amplified and then identified by RNA / DNA probes.

Different countries may look for different gene targets :

Country Institute Gene targets
China China CDC ORF1ab and N
Germany Charité RdRP, E, N
Hong Kong SAR HKU ORF1b-nsp14, N
Japan National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Department of Virology III Pancorona and multiple targets, Spike protein
Thailand National Institute of Health N
US US CDC Three targets in N gene
France Institut Pasteur, Paris Two targets in RdRP

Such laboratory tests usually take less than 24 hours to complete, although backlog of tests may result in longer wait times.

 

COVID-19 Rapid Tests : How Do They Work?

COVID-19 rapid tests cut down time and costs by avoiding the need for the cutting and amplification of nucleic acid samples.

Instead of looking for specific viral genes, these rapid tests look for IgM – the first antibodies our body makes to fight a new infection. Some rapid tests also look for IgG – the most abundant antibodies in the body.

That’s why they use blood samples, instead of nasopharyngeal swab (NP) or oropharyngeal swab (OP).

Credit : MBL Life Science Japan

To “fish” for COVID-19 specific IgM and/or IgG antibodies, these rapid test kits use selected parts of the COVID-19 capsule proteins as antigens – bait – which are combined with colloidal gold as a marker.

When you drop a blood sample, COVID-19 antibodies (if present in the blood) will be “attracted” to the “bait” – the COVID-19 capsule proteins in the rapid test.

The antibodies will combine with the antigens, forming a visible, coloured compound which will appear as a red / burgundy line in the test strip.

 

COVID-19 Rapid Tests : What’s Available?

Now, there is no doubt that we will come up with COVID-19 rapid tests. It is what scientists are frantically working on. Look at how many have already been created :

Some are already available for sale online :

They are certainly cheap – much cheaper than private COVID-19 testing available to those who are currently deemed not at risk.

 

COVID-19 Rapid Tests : Should You Use Them?

Now, these tests are no doubt convenient – allowing you to do it at home – and cheap. However, are they accurate and ready for use at home, by the public who are not trained in taking blood samples?

While health authorities are eager for such fast and cheap testing options, they are currently NOT advising people to use these COVID-19 rapid tests.

There will come a time when these COVID-19 rapid test kits are properly tested, and approved for use at home. Until then, it’s best to stay away…

Public Health England

Some manufacturers are selling products for the diagnosis of COVID-19 infection in community settings, such as pharmacies.

The current view by PHE is that use of these products is not advised:

  • some of these products look for virus while others look for the body’s immune response to the virus. Such tests are very rapid and can work on a range of specimens including serum, plasma or finger-prick whole blood
  • there is little information on the accuracy of the tests, or on how a patient’s antibody response develops or changes during COVID-19 infection. It is not known whether either a positive or negative result is reliable
  • currently there is no published evidence about the suitability of these tests for diagnosing COVID-19 infection in a community setting

Peter White, UNSW Virologist

The tests are not always as reliable as those currently being used. Because rapid test kits look for antibodies associated with the virus rather than the virus itself, they could record false negatives if used at the wrong time.

The question is how significant those limitations are. It depends really on how many true cases you detect. Does it detect every positive, or does it miss 5%?

Bill Bowtell, Infectious Disease Expert, Kirby Institute

In the end, anybody with anything to sell is in the market and their interest is to make the biggest claims.

I think that’s the case with a lot of the things that we’ll see coming onto the market. There’s uncertainty because it didn’t come to market after stringent testing, it came to the market because there’s a feeling of ‘my god we need it’.

In normal circumstances you wouldn’t touch it with a barge pole but this is what happens when there’s a crisis.

It is also notable that, as of 9 March 2020, China denied that they approved any COVID-19 test kits for use by the public at home :

The Beijing Medical Products Administration denied rumors that claimed that people can test for the novel coronavirus using a home testing kit and added there was no authorized home version of the test yet.

A so-called home testing kit went viral on WeChat, with the seller claiming the result would be visible 15 minutes after adding a drop of blood from one’s finger to the kit. The product was recommended for office buildings and schools to test those returning and isolated at home who could not access a medical test at the hospital.

According to the administration, samples carried by authorized testing kits can only be tested in polymerase chain reaction (PCR) laboratories or other medical institutes. There is no self-testing device yet and those sold on WeChat are fake.

 

COVID-19 : How To Keep Safe!

Here are a few simple steps to stay safe from COVID-19 :

[adrotate group=”2″]
  • Avoid suspected cases or disease hotpots, like hospitals, if possible!
  • Avoid public events and crowds
  • Keep our hands clean with soap or hand sanitiser
  • Keep our home, office, vehicles, etc. clean
  • If you need to wear a surgical mask, make sure you put it on and remove it properly!
  • Thoroughly cook your food, and boil water before drinking

Recommended : Soap vs Sanitiser : Which Works Better Against COVID-19?
Recommended : Surgical Mask : How To CORRECTLY Wear + Remove!

 

Recommended Reading

Go Back To > Science | Home

 

Support Tech ARP!

If you like our work, you can help support our work by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund. Any help you can render is greatly appreciated!