Peer-reviewed evidence: Pfizer mRNA vaccines contain DNA contamination

[quintessentone]

Yep 1000%

At the very least with the Pfizer (and others) mRNA vaccines, they and all of us were learning as we went along, but the medical community then and still today say that the benefits outweigh the side effects but it is up to a person's doctor to determine the risk(s) for their individual patient. No broad brush strokes with this one.

Article on effectiveness in nursing home residents:

https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/11...51/7591274

The report says that for all conclusions that do not establish a causal link, future studies that estimate effects more precisely or that better minimize bias and confounding variables could lead to a different finding.
 
“Despite a large body of evidence from extraordinary efforts by investigators around the world, our committee found that in many cases, if not most, evidence was insufficient to accept or reject causality for a particular potential harm from a specific COVID-19 vaccine,” said committee vice chair Anne Bass, professor of clinical medicine, Weill Cornell Medicine, and a rheumatologist at the Hospital for Special Surgery and New York Presbyterian Hospital. “In other cases, we did find sufficient evidence to favor rejection, favor acceptance, or establish causality. It is important to note, however, that identifying a harm does not mean that it occurs frequently. Harms associated with vaccines are rare.”
-----
“Given that the studies we reviewed were performed shortly after vaccines were available, the information in this report is a snapshot in time, and new vaccines will be developed and more research conducted,” said George Isham, senior fellow, HealthPartners Institute, and chair of the committee that wrote the report. “For example, the evidence does not address the real-world use of the COVID-19 vaccines in which many individuals received a ‘mix and match’ sequence of them. Many people vaccinated for COVID-19 also received other vaccines, such as influenza, simultaneously.”

https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2...accination

[Karl12]

Yeah too many to mention but the Oxycontin being highly addictive and not telling anyone is at the top of the list.

That we know of mate - funny how the Rockefellers are the lead family directly behind 'cancer research' ..and yet despite all the billions donated it's literally worse than ever (everybody gave up smoking so it should be down).

Also funny how the same family are depopulationists (is that even a word lol?) actively inspired Hitler and actively funded Memgle and the SS.

Scroll down:

https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/artic...i-eugenics


Also a bit weird how the same family (with the Morgans) are now the largest vaccine combine on the planet.

Call me paranoid but the more you look into these guys the worse it gets.

Nelson Rockefeller got busted for hanging with Nazis in South America in the 1970's - Nelson Rockefeller is Bill Gates uncle.

Will bite my tongue but there is literally tonnes more (really recommend both vids in this post).

Cheers.

[quintessentone]

That we know of mate - funny how the Rockefellers are the lead family directly behind 'cancer research' ..and yet despite all the billions donated it's literally worse than ever (everybody gave up smoking so it should be down).

Also funny how the same family are depopulationists (is that even a word lol?) actively inspired Hitler and actively funded Memgle and the SS.

Scroll down:

https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/artic...i-eugenics


Also a bit weird how the same family (with the Morgans) are now the largest vaccine combine on the planet.

Call me paranoid but the more you look into these guys the worse it gets.

Nelson Rockefeller got busted for hanging with Nazis in South America in the 1970's - Nelson Rockefeller is Bill Gates uncle.

Will bite my tongue but there is literally tonnes more (really recommend both vids in this post).

Cheers.

Well I've also asked that question...what is going on with cancer research after all that money during all those decades?

But one cancer researcher/doctor said she is tackling 'the beast' in a different way because it is a tricky beast that mimicks our DNA and thus evades destruction. So, I have accepted her take on it.

[TzarChasm]

Pfizer has paid one of the largest criminal fine in history!

When the only consequence for caught breaking the law is paying a fee to make the courts stop hassling you, it sends a message. A very bad message.

[Karl12]

Well I've also asked that question...what is going on with cancer research after all that money during all those decades?

But one cancer researcher/doctor said she is tackling 'the beast' in a different way because it is a tricky beast that mimicks our DNA and thus evades destruction. So, I have accepted her take on it.

Without sounding like a cynical nutjob check her Rockefeller background mate (bet she's got one).

The clan at their Hasting's centre (with the WEF future council and Ezekiel) have now rebranded eugenics into 'bioethics' and if I could ever recommend just one video it would be the lead one here (Fauci's wife is also a major 'bioethicist').

Just actually look at what they are proposing and equate it to the wrong side of WW2.

Cheers.

[chr0naut]

Groundbreaking peer-reviewed evidence confirms Pfizer's mRNA vaccines contain bacterial plasmid DNA—including the potentially harmful SV40 viral element.

More scientists now calling for the suspension of mRNA shots and accountability due to this contamination. In this video, we break down the evidence, risks, and implications for public health.

[Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9tlqUjwAvg]

Fair warning, I am going to debunk this video and the paper behind it.

First thing, some science.

- Injecting DNA into a cell does not genetically modify that cell. Traditional vaccines containing attenuated or killed whole pathogens often contain that pathogen's DNA packaged up into it. Getting foreign DNA into a cell most usually kicks-off the immune processes that will ultimately destroy and remove that foreign DNA. That is how traditional vaccines work.

- The SV40 virus, a DNA virus, can be dangerous for humans and chimps, but the genomic promoter sequence , first identified in SV40 (and that exists in many other natural sources), is harmless and isn't the SV40 virus. A good real-world indicator is that no-one is suggesting that people injected with the mRNA immunizations are contracting SV40, because they just aren't. The paper and the vlogger keep saying that promoter sequence is dangerous, when we know from decades of experience, it is benign.

- To modify DNA, inserting sequences into the host cell's DNA, you require the presence of a reverse transcriptase enzyme, something pretty much only found in retroviruses. If you have a retrovirus as well as an injection containing DNA, then any immunization side effects are the least of your worries, because you have a retrovirus.

Now on to the paper:

Firstly, it is published by a known dubious publisher, who will apparently publish anything and claim peer review, if you pony up their publishing fee:

HELP! Is this journal a scam? First time publisher. - AskAcademia post on Reddit

The reviewing editor for the paper was James Lyons-Weiler, PhD, an ecologist - does that qualify him as a 'peer' for a paper about genomics and biochemistry?

Next, we will look at the authors:

Ulrike Kämmerer is an ObGyn (what would an ObGyn be doing publishing research papers in genomics and biochemistry?), but, in her role of professor at University Hospital Würzburg, she has published a suspiciously high number of papers (258 at last count). This could be because she gets paid by the number of papers she publishes, and so she puts her name on all her students papers (this also explains the widely disparate specialties covered in her papers). Also, I suspect that she publishes them all with the same publisher.

Ulrike Kämmerer- Researchgate

Verena Schulz does not appear to have any recognised credential, and is possibly a social media studies and marketing manageress, but I can't be sure due to her absence of qualifications.

Klaus Steger is a urologist at Justus Liebig University Giessen, and who also has an unusually high number of published papers (265). Interestingly, a large number of those papers also list Ulrike Kämmereras co-author.

Klaus Steger - ResearchGate

So, none of the authors are credentialled in either biochemistry or genomics (the subject matter of the paper).

The DNA contamination BS largely owes itself to Phillip Buckhaults appeared before a South Carolina state panel in September 13, 2023. The paper is just repeating an anti-vaxxer trope that has been thoroughly debunked for years.

The anachronistic nature of the paper is best indicated by the fact that they rarely mention the proper name of the immunization, 'Comirnaty', despite it having been named so for three years prior to authorship. I suspect that this is a re-write of a previous paper that never went past peer review (I vaguely recall seeing a similar paper that is now withdrawn).

But there is so much in the paper that is just wrong. Probably the primary problem is that the fluorescent dye they used to identify the DNA, also binds to RNA and RNA fragments just as easily, so they were detecting RNA residue and calling it DNA.

Addressing misinformation about excessive DNA in the mRNA vaccines

Now on to the vlogger. He claims to be a geneticist but clearly doesn't know his stuff.

Can you help me debunk this YouTube channel 'Merogenomics' claims about covid vaccines?

And one look at the topics of the videos he presents identifies that he is clearly an anti-vaxxer and COVspiracy nut, rehashing all the previously debunked anti-vax and conspiracy topics, no matter how stupid. He talks about almost nothing else since the pandemic started.

Back in 1798, Edward Jenner took some scrapings from cowpox lesions, and injectyed it, DNA and all, directly into people to immunize them against smallpox. It has become the most successful vaccine in history. Over those last 227 years, no-one injected with cow DNA and cowpox DNA has ever turned into either a cow or a virus.

[UltraBudgie]

But there is so much in the paper that is just wrong. Probably the primary problem is that the fluorescent dye they used to identify the DNA, also binds to RNA and RNA fragments just as easily, so they were detecting RNA residue and calling it DNA.

Forgive me if I've missed something, but this appears to be the only actual criticism of methodology or results in your debunking, and it seems to me as though it's addressed in the paper:

To exclude the possibility that the kits used, contrary to their claim that they are dsDNA-specific, do partially detect RNA in the presence of high amounts of RNA, the same samples that were previously measured in Figure 2B were subsequently treated with RNase A (Table 4). Within 3 min, the DNA readings dropped dramatically and remained stable for the remaining 30 min of incubation suggesting that a) the intercalating dyes indeed do react with RNA and b) RNase treatment sufficiently deleted all interfering RNA with no remaining RNA being present in the samples at the end of the treatment. Again, there was only minimal variation within the triplicates analyzed independently. It is interesting to note that the measurement with AccuBlue from the untreated samples showed the lowest DNA level and with RNase-A treatment the highest content reflecting the lowest interaction with RNA of the three test systems used. It seems that AccuBlue shows the least cross talk with RNA when measuring DNA concentrations, which fits to the observation described by others [34]. From this data, it can be assumed that the DNA values obtained after RNase-A treatment represented the real DNA concentration in the vials without interfering RNA.

[emphasis added]

Did you read that?

And I'll just leave this here for reference:

[chr0naut]

Forgive me if I've missed something, but this appears to be the only actual criticism of methodology or results in your debunking, and it seems to me as though it's addressed in the paper:

Did you read that?

And I'll just leave this here for reference:

[Image: https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_au...0x786.jpeg]

The paper has more than methodological errors, it draws the conclusions that the promoter sequence is dangerous, and also that somehow injected DNA will get merged into our DNA, both of which are obviously false presumptions.

But, in regard to the use of fluorescent dyes not giving true assays of DNA quantities in high RNase concentrations:

Presence of RNase A causes aberrant DNA band shifts

False-Positive Results and Contamination in Nucleic Acid Amplification Assays: Suggestions for a Prevent and Destroy Strategy

How Severely Is DNA Quantification Hampered by RNA Co-extraction?

Pitfalls of DNA Quantification Using DNA-Binding Fluorescent Dyes and Suggested Solutions

You are assuming that the authors of the paper were not attempting to commit academic fraud. The fact that they had no expertise in genomic or biochemical research just adds plausible deniability should they be accused of fraud.

Remember there were numerous 'studies' that proved that smoking doesn't cause cancer. They were studies designed to come to a particular predefined conclusion.

Science is a body of knowledge, it does not hang on a single paper. It is also sceptical and tests and retests results.

[LightAngel]

Remember that time Bayer were intentionally infecting people with HIV?

Intentionally people were infected from HIV for profit by Big Pharmaceutical Company? | PharmaTutor

Can you please post some more information about this?

EDIT: I couldn't open that page, but now I can.

[LightAngel]

Hey mate just for the record Naomi Wolf has got a new book out on authenticated internal Pfizer documents - I'm sure it's all nonsense.

:beer:

Thanks for sharing. :beer: