BREAKING NEWS: Slovak Government Official Claims DNA in Vaccines

[Maxmars]

So what?

The definition of "vaccine" has always been changing, as our scientific and technological understanding of Biology has improved.  The first vaccine was a live Cowpox virus used to provide some level of immunity to the more deadly Smallpox virus, adopted in Europe about 300 years ago.  The name "vaccine" derives from the Variolae vaccinae (smallpox of the cow).  Other types of vaccines developed over the years (before the mRNA types) include: inactivated viruses, live-attenuated viruses, subunit, recombinant, polysaccharide, and conjugate vaccines, toxoid vaccines, and viral vector vaccines.  Most of these have come along in the last 75 years or so because the understanding of DNA as the genetic code of life didn't occur until about  1952.  Once that happened our understanding of molecular biology exploded exponentially. 

Is there some good reason we should ignore 300 years of scientific progress?

While you make your point about technological progress, you fail to address what makes it "experimental."

And why, as an experimental RNA "treatment" for a specific 'novel' virus type, it was hailed as an unadulterated success, while they obliterated data to the contrary, misrepresented what data there was, and engaged in virtue politics over personal health choices... as if that were the problem at hand.

Perhaps you don't recall, or never faced, the definition of 'what is a vaccine?' before social media got a hold of it.

It was about engendering an immune system to recognize disease and thus be prepared to produce produce appropriate antigens, et. al.

This new sort-of "vaccine" however is not like any before it...
it is (or rather was) untried and untested technology applied to human biology...
tested en masse over billions of people...
for which the executors were paid well, by the way...
and we preemptively immunized them against any... infectious 'liability.'

I suppose that might qualify as a manner of "so what."

Perhaps it doesn't matter, what they decide to include in the definition and why they change it... but most people I know assume it was a vaccine... you know... just like any other... some of them don't feel well served by the way the establishment chose to pretend it was all 'safe and effective' while simultaneously berating anyone who recognized the "sudden and unexpected" it often turned out to be. 

Then they came for the records, curating the data collection parameters, skewing metrics, culling unwanted entries... it was a genocide of science data.  To this day, no one knows about any data regarding regular flu during the COVID "event."  Why?... because everything was COVID, all data and material served COVID, almost like it was a product.  Any competition was squelched out in the market and even in the scientific community.

Whatever happened, the collection of data about anything other than COVID was discouraged in reporting.  COVID became grant candy... sucking fuel for other research away because.... it's COVID...

I suppose that too might qualify as a manner of "so what."

But I'm actually not sure whether in the end it doesn't really matter... we seem - as a population of humans - hell bent on doing this to ourselves... and making up excuses why it's "OK."

[chr0naut]

Did you miss that part on reverse transcriptase? A natural process where RNA is written back into the DNA sequence. It is a rare process that does not happen all the time, but when getting injected with billions of gene sequences it is no surprise that some people have become a permanent spike protein factory.

Reverse transcriptase is not in the vaccines. In nature, it is pretty much limited to retroviruses.

[chr0naut]

So you are saying that using a cancerous cell line for a cheep mass production of spike protein cannot cause cancer from the genetic contamination present in the manufacturing process?

SV40 is a virus. It has no cell of its own (and therefore no cell-line).

And the mRNA vaccines should not have cells in them. They are supposed to be mRNA strands encased in a nano-scale lipid shell, suspended in purified water.

Nor do the mRNA vaccines contain the spike protein itself. They carry the mRNA sequence that codes for the protein, but not the protein itself.

This does not fit with the reports of an increase in cancers, including more aggressive cancers at a younger ages.

Can you post links to these reports of an increase in cancers? As far as I know, the number of reported cancers dropped massively during the pandemic, and has gradually been trending back towards normal pre-pandemic levels, in recent years.

Changes Over Time: All Types of Cancer

[chr0naut]

While you make your point about technological progress, you fail to address what makes it "experimental."

And why, as an experimental RNA "treatment" for a specific 'novel' virus type, it was hailed as an unadulterated success, while they obliterated data to the contrary, misrepresented what data there was, and engaged in virtue politics over personal health choices... as if that were the problem at hand.

If they did do that, how could you possibly know?

From what data could you draw such a conclusion? LOL.

Perhaps you don't recall, or never faced, the definition of 'what is a vaccine?' before social media got a hold of it.

It was about engendering an immune system to recognize disease and thus be prepared to produce produce appropriate antigens, et. al.

That works for me as a definition. Do you think that mRNA vaccines don't do just that?

This new sort-of "vaccine" however is not like any before it...
it is (or rather was) untried and untested technology applied to human biology...
tested en masse over billions of people...
for which the executors were paid well, by the way...
and we preemptively immunized them against any... infectious 'liability.'

RNA viruses have been injecting mRNA sequences into cells for millions of years.

I suppose that might qualify as a manner of "so what."

Perhaps it doesn't matter, what they decide to include in the definition and why they change it...

Yes, a change in a dictionary definition of a word does not have much physical effect.

Did you know that 'awful' and 'awesome' were once synonyms?

Awful used to refer to something that 'filled one with awe'. In the light of that, them dictionary definitions are quite 'rubbery', aren't they?

I wouldn't get too bitter and twisted about changes in dictionary definitions, that'd just be silly.

but most people I know assume it was a vaccine... you know... just like any other... some of them don't feel well served by the way the establishment chose to pretend it was all 'safe and effective' while simultaneously berating anyone who recognized the "sudden and unexpected" it often turned out to be. 

Honestly, it's years later. There have been no megadeaths, and, considering the tens of billions of doses administered, there haven't particularly been many adverse reactions noted, either.

Pretty much all the alleged 'cardiac issues' in the time-frame are explicable by a particularly bad virus that was going around at the time, and that had already been causing deaths, from those very 'cardiac issue' conditions, before the vaccines became available.

Then they came for the records, curating the data collection parameters, skewing metrics, culling unwanted entries... it was a genocide of science data.  To this day, no one knows about any data regarding regular flu during the COVID "event." 

Of course they have that data. It just happened to be a mild couple of seasons. Possibly even milder than in the 2011-2012 season.

Here's the data you suggest doesn't exist: United States influenza statistics by flu season

Of course, now they report into a database (FluSurv-NET.) which allows for better data-mining than simple table did.

Why?... because everything was COVID, all data and material served COVID, almost like it was a product.  Any competition was squelched out in the market and even in the scientific community.

Nope.

Whatever happened, the collection of data about anything other than COVID was discouraged in reporting.  COVID became grant candy... sucking fuel for other research away because.... it's COVID...

I suppose that too might qualify as a manner of "so what."

But I'm actually not sure whether in the end it doesn't really matter... we seem - as a population of humans - hell bent on doing this to ourselves... and making up excuses why it's "OK."

Nah, don't believe the disinformation sources, which have all been fairly well debunked for years, but the disinfo agents will always keep churning out the same garbage anyway (most of them make money out of their doom-porn BS).

People died because they were advised by idiots to abstain from protecting themselves, or to take poisonous snake-oil alleged 'cures'. Those same disinfo agents are still making dime off their misinformation. In a fairer world they should be held responsible for the deaths they have, and are, causing.

Talk to a real doctor or academic with a stake in the research and/or lived clinical experience, and find out the truth.

[Kwaka]

Reverse transcriptase is not in the vaccines. In nature, it is pretty much limited to retroviruses.

Reverse transcriptase is a genetic feedback mechanism. As for what exactly triggers it gets hazy. Every cell in your body with DNA has a potential to perform it. This is why some people are still testing positive to spike protein despite their last injection being years ago.

 

SV40 is a virus. It has no cell of its own (and therefore no cell-line).

More technically, SV40 is a genetic sequence. A virus has a cell wall around the genetic material. SV40 can be a part of a virus, bacteria or anything with a genetic sequence. In humans, this genetic sequence is well known to suppress cancer fighting mechanisms and increase cancer rates.

In drug production, cancer is a good thing to keep an immortal cell line of fine tuned drug production cells alive. With things like CRISPER, they can be tuned to make many things, like the RNA sequence for the spike protein as one example.

The initial batches of COVID products developed used a PCR method to copy the mRNA. This method has less genetic contamination. Will still be some misreads and broken fragments. It is also more expensive to perform on mass scale. It got it through the 'safe & effective' stamp.

For mass production, a different production process was used and tagged behind the 'safe & effective' stamp. The process is similar to brewing a batch of alcohol, pour in your yeast, some sugar and come back in a week or two. As for how good the distillation process was to only capture the spike mRNA at the end? A lot of room for improvement.



How is that data around Barry Young from New Zealand going? Maybe one reason you ani't seeing any data about the negative side of the vaccinations is that you need some better sources not as afraid or compromised.

[Byrd]

There's ethanol in my vodka!

It's a mRNA vaccine that uses plasmids to synthesize the mRNA, no one should be surpised by this, and why wouldn't there be DNA fragments? All you have to do is look up "how vaccines are made." These aren't intact proteins that can alter the DNA, and if they are, and can incorporate into the DNA of or mutate the individual in some way, we've actually just made a major breakthrough in gene therapy unintentionally.

You can't be surprised there's DNA fragments in a partial DNA vaccine

In other news: The counter order to progressive order is set. So shall it be that USA, Russia, Belarus, Hungary, and Slovakia form an alliance to all be bat shit crazy conspiracy theorists together.

Thank you.  I came here to yell "IT'S A FREAKIN' RNA VACCINE!!!  AND BY THE WAY, THERE'S DNA IN YOUR STEAKS, YOUR SALADS, EVERY BIT OF FOOD YOU EAT!"

[chivo]

Whenever I encounter the big pharma goons and their flawed logic, I get frustrated. Believing that your body soul and spirit is ok with talking drugs and vaccines it's such a reverse of what is true, worse part is that they spread this mental disease to other unwitting victims. That's not nice.
But then right afterwards I remember that natural selection is real and it works very efficiently so I have nothing to worry much.
Guys, just for the sake of anything that is good, do not harass children with this, you are responsible for ruining their lives.

[Sirius]

I have had my DNA modified by the Fey, aliens, gods, trauma, meditation, big pharma and countless viruses and through it all I have developed no horns.

[quintessentone]

[Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkozvjDZTHo]

Dr John Campbell goes through one study that has found very high levels of DNA contamination, including SV40.

Good to hear more governments are waking up to the reality of the situation.

Not Dr. Campbell again - the veterinarian. (facepalm)

Also where did that Slovak physician get his data from? did he do lab experiments himself? I doubt it, he's an MP in government, that's his job. He's also an orthopaedist? What is an orthopaedist you ask? It is a medical specialist focusing on the musculoskeletal system, including bones, muscles, joints, and soft tissues, treating injuries and diseases related to these areas, so how in hell can he make a correct interpretation from a study from a different field of medical science? He is unqualified to do so.
 

Slovak MP Peter Kotlár has submitted a pandemic review report, which the government is expected to discuss. Kotlár’s report features controversial claims which have sparked a backlash from doctors, scientists, the opposition, and some government members.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/health-...formation/

These mouthpieces have no there there.

[Kwaka]

Not Dr. Campbell again - the veterinarian. (facepalm)

Have you got a side gig as a Wikipedia editor? Are you still on the Ivermectin is only for horses psyop? What happens to the fact that there has been billions of doses used on humans for decades for a range of conditions? You got a hole in your head or something? How do you live with such a contradictory world view? Glad I am not in your shoes.

So you don't like John, I don't agree with all of his opinions and conclusions. As for keeping up with the evolving medical data, kicking more goals than many others.

For a different source, here is the evidence from the Port Headland Council used when suspending the Pfizer and Moderna Covid products:

Special Council Meeting Agenda - 11 October 2024 Attachments

4 other local councils have joined in similar action so far in Australia. In America a similar waking up is also happening:

Map Reveals States and Counties Pushing Back Against COVID Vaccinations