Your DNA is safe, your immune system is not.
- Creator of mRNA vaccine technology was injured by the vaccines
- Reports dangerous modification of his technology
- Insertion of added ingredient prevents normal break down of mRNA in the body
- Inability to rid body of mRNA associated with severe side effects
- Side effects include an AIDS like breakdown of the immune system
- Affected cells too, spread out for targeted treatment
- DNA strongly protected from attempts to change it
None other than the original inventor of mRNA vaccine technology, Professor Robert Malone, MD, is sounding the alarm about a dangerous modification to his technology.
Inventor himself injured
Dr. Malone began heavily researching the mRNA COVID vaccines only after he himself suffered "irregularities of heartbeat, incredible hypertension, pot syndrome, narcolepsy, and restless leg syndrome" following two doses of Moderna's mRNA vaccine. VAERS and data from whistleblowers would later reveal millions of adverse events including tens of thousands of deaths following administration of the mRNA vaccines.
With his personal experience and mounting evidence of a global disaster, the pioneering Harvard Medical School fellow with some 100 scientific publications and over 12,000 citations, who has sat on or served as chairperson on HHS and DoD medical committees and served as a professor of pathology and surgery, set out to answer this fundamental question:
How did the technology I developed turn so dangerous?
Not the whole story
Dr. Malone found "many short-cuts, database issues, obfuscation and frankly, lies told in the development of the Spike protein-based genetic vaccines," including his summary of a whistleblower's report on the manipulation of safety data "at the level of checking the data and reconciling the data and deciding which things go into the database."
These unethical manipulations of safety data explained the lack of warning of the vaccines' dangerous side effects, but not their magnitude.
mRNA expected to be safer
The global clinical research scholar felt that there must be more to the vaccine injuries because mRNA shouldn't stick around long enough to cause blood clots, strokes and swollen hearts. In his new article, When is mRNA not really mRNA?, Malone explains how quickly the body should rid itself of newly injected mRNA.
mRNA is typically degraded quite rapidly once manufactured or released into a cell. mRNA stability is regulated by a number of genetic elements including the length of the "poly A tail", but typically ranges from ½ to a couple of hours.
Malone was thus not, at first, doubtful of vaccine safety claims and, as mentioned above, even took two doses himself, explaining,
if natural or synthetic mRNA which is degraded by the usual enzymes is introduced into your body, it should only last for a very short time. And this has been the answer which Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna have provided to physicians when asked "how long does the injected mRNA last after injection".
Government officials and academics repeated this line, specifying that our cells break down and eliminate mRNA within a few days after vaccination.
Despite prior experience with quickly degenerating mRNA, alarming findings now indicate that the mRNA from "the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines… canpersist in lymph nodes for at least 60 days after injection."
Not really mRNA
Malone attempts to solve the dilemma of the long lasting mRNA; it's sticking around so much longer than expected because it's no ordinary mRNA.
This is not natural, and this is not really mRNA. These molecules have genetic elements similar to those of natural mRNA, but they are clearly far more resistant to the enzymes which normally degrade natural mRNA, seem to be capable of producing high levels of protein for extended periods, and seem to evade normal immunologic mechanisms for eliminating cells which produce foreign proteins which are not normally observed in the body." [Emphases added].
Pfizer and Moderna souped up the mRNA in their vaccines by incorporating within them pseudouridine (Ψ), a synthetic nucleotide which is actually prevalent, and harmless, in our natural mRNA, listed as "the most abundant of >150 nucleoside modifications in RNA".
So what's different when pharmaceutical companies, instead of our bodies, add it to mRNA? Malone tells us,
This modification [the addition of pseudouridine to mRNA] occurs naturally in the cells of our body, in a highly regulated manner. This is in sharp contrast to the random incorporation of synthetic pseudouridine which occurs with the manufacturing process used for producing the Moderna and Pfizer/BioNTech (but not CureVac) COVID-19 "mRNA" vaccines. [Emphases added].
. . . the random and uncontrolled insertion of pseudouridine into the manufactured "mRNA"-like molecules administered to so many of us creates a population of polymers which may resemble natural mRNA, but which have a variety of properties which distinguish them in a variety of aspects which are clinically relevant.
While researchers have been adding pseudouridine to mRNA for more than a decade, and noted in 2020 the possibility that this addition, "controls mRNA metabolism in response to changing cellular conditions," i.e., prevents mRNA degradation, Malone has connected these studies with the above finding of vaccine mRNA persistence in lymph nodes and with adverse event data.
The extensive random incorporation of pseudouridine into the synthetic mRNA-like molecules used for the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna SARS-CoV-2 vaccines may well account for much or all of the observed immunosuppression, DNA virus reactivation, and remarkable persistence of the synthetic "mRNA" molecules observed in lymph node biopsy tissues.
The above referenced immunosuppression is,
observed after multiple mRNA vaccine boosters [and] is increasingly referred to as an acquired immunodeficiency syndrome or AIDS disease.
While the exact nature of the side effects created by mRNA vaccines could not have been known in the absence of long-term safety studies, the fact that there was a great risk for side effects resulting from pseudouridine incorporation should have been, as Dr. Malone concludes,
The question that most troubles and perplexes me at this point is why the biological consequences of these modifications and associated clinical adverse effects were not thoroughly investigated before widespread administration of random pseudouridine-incorporating "mRNA"-like molecules to a global population.
Biology, and particularly molecular biology, is highly complex and matrix-interrelated. Change one thing over here, and it is really hard to predict what might happen over there. That is why one must do rigorously controlled non-clinical and clinical research.
Once again, it appears to me that the hubris of "elite" high status scientists, physicians and governmental "public health" bureaucrats has overcome common sense, well established regulatory norms have been disregarded, and patients have unnecessarily suffered as a consequence.
What if I already got the jab?
I get asked all the time "what can I do to eliminate the RNA vaccines from my body", to which I have to answer – nothing. There is no technology that I know of which can eliminate these synthetic "mRNA-like" molecules from your body. The same is true for any of the many "gene therapy" methods currently being used.
You just have to hope that your immune system will attack the cells that have taken up the polynucleotides and degrade (chew up) the offending large molecule that causes your cells to manufacture the toxic protein.
Targeting damaged cells would be like looking for a needle in a haystack.
Since virtually all current "gene therapy" methods are inefficient, and essentially deliver the genetic material randomly to a small subset of cells, there is no practical way to surgically remove the scattered, relatively rare transgenic cells.
Clearance of genetically modified cells by the cellular immune system (T cells) is the only currently viable method to remove cells that have taken up the foreign genetic information ("transfection" in the case of mRNA or DNA, or "transduction" in the case of a viral vectored gene).
Good news – Pfizer may injure its customers, but it still can't play God with them
The good news in Dr. Malone's report is that we don't need to worry about our DNA being changed by the vaccines.
Can you efficiently get genetic material ("polynucleotides") into the nucleus of the majority of cells in the human body so that any genetic defects (or transhuman genetic improvements) can be made?
In short, no. Human cells [have] many, many different mechanisms to resist modification by external polynucleotides. Otherwise we would already be overrun by various forms of parasitic DNA and RNA, viral and otherwise.
This remains a major technical barrier, one which the "transhumanists" continue to overlook in their enthusiastic but naïve rush to play god with the human species.