My first question was why the batches were so different. From the same company and same timeline and their “vaccines” are different from batch to batch. Doesn’t sound like scientific QC to me.
Shut Pfizer down for violating their license and endangering the public.
COVID vaccines the biggest pile of garbage ever made
Still can’t believe so many people bought the lies from both the govt and these pharma companies.
Bunch of sheep.......
Before my wife and I really understood anything about the mRNA vax, we agreed we would not get it. Why? Because it is our policy to take no drugs/medications that haven’t been thoroughly tested AND in wide use for at least 10 years. A real track record is required.
On top of that, it was obvious the hyper speed with which this fake vax came about made it highly suspicious for a couple of old folks who clearly remember the swine flu fiasco.
Add to that the slight of hand in changing the long used definition of a vax to fit this experimental gene therapy and our BS meters were off the charts.
One wonders how many people would have taken it had there been no mandates and fascist coercion and threats.
Is it really contamination if it was added to the jab on purpose?
When is NPR going to start reporting on this?
My first comments are on the study itself. First of all, the article is not indexed in Pubmed, which raises doubts as to its credibility. As for the author Brigitte König, her PhD is in Medical Microbiology and Infectious Immunology; from her publications indexed in Pubmed, it appears that she works using cell biology techniques and that she has little to no experience in molecular biology. The other author only has a comment indexed in Pubmed; this is the scientific version of a letter to the editor.
The lack of expertise in molecular biology is significant. There are things a molecular biology would consider, look for, and control for that someone who is not trained in molecular biology would not even think of. For example, the statement that "DNA target sequence is less than just 1% of the originally added DNA template" is irrelevant. If a template is 20,000 nucleotides long and the PCR target is 1% of that, 200, the target is still specific to that target and no other. Each template molecule contains that target; the quantity of PCR product is, therefore, directly proportional to the quantity of template.
In addition, the article Methodological Considerations Regarding the Quantification of DNA Impurities in the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Comirnaty® contains no "Materials and Methods" section. This is crucial for any scientific research publication, as this is the section which states exactly what the researchers did and which manufacturers supplied their reagents and equipment. This information allows other researchers to duplicate their results. All they did was present some graphs which they claim show the quantity of DNA and RNA measured in each sample, but we really don't know since we don't know their methodology.
Next, the patent does not contain any "admissions" as claimed in the Infowars blog.
Removal of DNA fragments in mRNA production process.
The term "insertional mutagenesis" appears nowhere in the patent. It appears that Infowars used that term to imply that the vaccine is capable of causing mutations in the recipients and that the patent holder is aware of this, but this is not the case. Assuming that some intact plasmid is in the vaccine, the worst that could happen would be that the cell could make a bit more mRNA before destroying the plasmid DNA. The patent does describe various types of mutations, but that's a far cry from describing something that is capable of getting into human cells and altering DNA. (You don't need DNA to alter DNA anyway. Smokers get dosed with DNA-altering chemicals every day. And the UV in sunlight is notorious for altering DNA.)
Finally, as for Infowar's claim that "It had already been discovered that DNA in the mRNA COVID vaccines includes a variety of leftover genetic material, including the simian virus 40 cancer-promoting gene and plasmid DNA sequences from E.coli," this is based entirely on misrepresentation of the science involved.
A plasmid is a small piece of DNA which researchers use to cause cells to produce RNA and proteins they don't normally make. We use E. coli to grow the plasmids. In order for the plasmid to grow in E. coli, it has an antibiotic resistance gene and an "origin" which directs the E. coli to make more copies of the plasmid. We can put a gene into the plasmid; in the case of vaccine, it is a spike protein gene. In order for a gene to function, it must have instructions. One of these instructions is the promoter element, which tells the RNA polymerases (enzymes) to attach and start making RNA. For the vaccine, the SV40 promoter element was used, since it functions in cells with nucleuses (like mammalian cells). The fact that this small instruction came from the SV40 virus does not mean that an oncogene is present. The Infowars blog took a huge and unjustified liberty with language when it called the SV40 promoter a "simian virus 40 cancer-promoting gene." A promoter isn't a gene.
Thanks for posting this.
Link to the study, much to the chagrin of the few remaining FR $hot $hills ...
https://www.mdpi.com/2409-9279/7/3/41
Unreal that ANYONE, here, would even consider pu$hing these dangerous things, anymore.
PING
Close enough for government work.
