When Things change, the Thinking has to follow, too
Or: "New Things come with old Issues"
I guess I am a little late to the party. You may have read the following articles in the past. The first one is an article by Dr. Jessica Rose.
And Dr. Rose’s article was in reaction to a tweet and article by Aaron Siri.
I think these two articles give a good amount of background information on the question and discussion around the topic of calling modRNA/LNP drugs “vaccines“ or not.
What I want to do here is a little different. I would like to explore what I think of as a consequence of this new technology that is being used nowadays to deliver immunity against antigens to the masses. Instead of trying to see whether the new drugs based on the modRNA/LNP technology are vaccines or not (some call them prodrugs… and that maybe another interesting route to go down and explore), lets think about “contaminants”.
And just to show how confusing this new technology is, even to the WHO, Lets look at these three pages from the WHO. Lets first look at the following site from 2015. Mind you, it seems the WHO thought it might be important to Europe… and since it is from 2015, as expected, there is no mention of the modRNA/LNP technology. I thought the “common-sense“ principle was a nice touch. Much better than “wait until your lips turn blue and then come in…“.
No lets move on down the timeline to December 8th, 2020. a nicer page with nice pictures and the introduction of the concept, that not only can vaccines contain parts of a pathogen called antigen, but it could also be the case that they contain the “blueprint for producing antigens”. So exactly what the modRNA/LNP looks like.
And last but not least lets look at this brand spanking new page from 2014.
Did you notice that in 2024 we are back to 2015? “However, because vaccines contain only killed or weakened forms of germs like viruses or bacteria, they do not cause the disease or put you at risk of its complications.“. Are you confused? I think the WHO may be…
Now, I know that in the last few years there have been a lot of talk about “contaminants“ in the new drugs. Whether there are things in the new drugs, that should not be in the new drugs, or things that may not have been disclosed to be in the new drugs but ended up being found to be in the drugs. My idea of “contaminants“ is slightly different and I got it after reading this new review.
More specifically what triggered my idea was this passage:
Further studies to gain insight into +1 ribosome frameshifting during translation of 1-methylΨ mRNA using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS/MS) identified a library of six in-frame peptides and nine peptides derived from the mRNA +1 frame. All in-frame peptides were mapped to the N-terminal region of the spike protein, whereas +1 frameshifted peptides were mapped downstream. These data demonstrated that the elongated polypeptide was indeed a chimeric product consisting of in-frame N-terminal residues and +1 frameshifted C-terminal residues. Alongside the above impact on host T cell immunity, the off-target effects of ribosomal frameshifting could include increased production of new B cell antigens with far reaching medical consequences that explain clinically observed increases in muscle inflammation, or the highly significant increase in glucose uptake of heart muscle cells as described above.
Of course the above review is a continuation of the research done by over 40 other scientists, who had first published on the +1 ribosomal frameshift problem of the modRNA used in the new drugs.
Before the discovery of this behavior, one could have believed that drugs like Pfizer’s BNT162b2 or Moderna’s mRNA-1273 are vaccines against SARS-CoV2, now that we know there are other antigens being produced, this is no longer the case.
Remember how the WHO talks about vaccines and how they provide our immune system with the antigen that it needs to learn from, in case later in the future we encounter the real deal? Well, it seems to me, that the new drugs have an issue.
Not that they do not provide the antigen that we and all the regulatory institutions were being told it would. They do. BUT. Apart from that, it very much looks like billions of people have been immunized against other antigens as well. Without they knowledge or consent. As the authors of the review in Pharmacology Research & Perspectives state there could be “far reaching clinical consequences“.
Did anyone tell you, that you potentially would be getting an immunization against the spike protein AND a number of so far unidentified proteins? No? Is there anyone out there that has heard of the FDA recalling the shots, because they may be “contaminated“ with the blueprints for more than half a dozen undisclosed antigens?
Oh and of course those other “blueprints” are unavoidable, which maybe a bit of an issue, too.
Do you think I got this right, or do you think I got this wrong?