Five different ways Plasmid DNA in Pfizer and Moderna jabs can enter cell nuclei
Covid injections contain therapeutic levels of DNA – this is the definition of gene therapy
When Pfizer and Moderna said that they produced an “RNA vaccine” and that an “RNA vaccine” meant that anything they injected into you would have a short-lived (days) effect at most, it was a lie.
When the media, the regulators and the government said it “isn’t gene therapy” without knowing what was actually in the product, that was also a lie.
To call the mRNA covid injections a “vaccine” is a lie. They are not vaccines they are gene therapy. This is the crux of Plasmidgate.
In addition to the declared mRNA, plasmid DNA has now been found in the mRNA injections by 6 laboratories. This DNA, and the RNA that is made from it, have special properties.
Below, Dr. Ah Kahn Syed explains five different mechanisms for that DNA-RNA-protein combination to take that DNA into the nucleus of our cells.
By now I sincerely hope that you have all been watching the exposure of the #PlasmidGate scandal unfold on Twitter and various other platforms. If you haven’t, I’m going to summarise it for you as briefly as I can:
When Pfizer and Moderna said that they produced an “RNA vaccine” and that an “RNA vaccine” meant that anything they injected into you would have a short-lived (days) effect at most, it was a lie.
When the media, the regulators and the government said it “isn’t gene therapy” without knowing what was actually in the product, that was also a lie.
The primary reason that this is now proven to be a lie is that multiple laboratories around the world have proven that those covid vaccines contain therapeutic levels of plasmid DNA. DNA lasts forever and if it integrates into your genome, you will produce its product forever. There is no definition of gene therapy anywhere in the world that this process would be excluded from.
This is #PLASMIDGATE
For more details on #Plasmidgate outside of Twitter I would refer you to the original Substack from Kevin McKernan HERE and the whole testimony of Dr. Phillip Buckhaults HERE.
Note: Just for background, it’s important to know what plasmid DNA is – it’s the lab-based circular DNA particles that is replicated in big vats of poo and then used to create the mRNA that goes into your “short-lived” vaccine.
It’s a lab tool so should never be in a drug injected into a human. It’s not allowed to be there. It’s like having a drug that requires arsenic as a substrate to make it, and then throwing the leftover arsenic into the actual drug that gets injected into you.
But this article is not directly about the discovery of plasmid DNA in the Pfizer and Moderna injections (that has been now verified by 6 laboratories worldwide).
It’s about the special properties of the contents of that DNA and the RNA that is made from it, combined with the RNA that accompanies it (the injections have the stated RNA in them as well as the stowaway DNA).
You see, it turns out that there are at least 5 different mechanisms for that DNA-RNA-protein combination to take that DNA into the nucleus of your cells. And that wasn’t on the advertising brochure, was it?
Don’t believe me? See what Dr. Phillip Buckhaults has to say about the Buckshot. [The video below begins at] the most important part [of] his speech to the South Carolina (“SC”) Senate hearing and the most important bit of the most important bit is this:
During the process they chopped them [the DNA plasmids] up to try to make them go away but they actually increased the hazard of genome modification.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEWHhrHiiTY&t=560s
Wait, what?
They did something that increased the risk of genome modification?
Now why would they do that, surely that’s an accident.
And now we are here. Phillip quotes Hanlon’s razor, viz:
And I am going to show to you why the makers of the Pfizer and Moderna “mRNA vaccine” must be really, really, stupid if Hanlon’s Razor applies. It’s because in this one product there are at least 5 ways in which the product design and manufacture ended up with mechanisms that increase the risk of DNA going into the nucleus of your cells, thus modifying your genome.
In other words, if they wanted to skin this particular cat, they managed to find 5 separate ways to do it and throw them into the same product.
1: The Lipid Nanoparticles
I have addressed the lipid nanoparticles (“LNPs”) previously in THIS article from last year which has attracted 23,000 reads to date.
Note: The important point is that the LNP is a transfectant medium. The lipid acts as something that takes the nucleic acid product (DNA or RNA) into the cell and potentially onto the nucleus. That’s what transfection agents do.
Don’t take my word for it of course. Here 1 is the Pfizer-BioNTech official document that tells you that the product transfects cells and that the LNP is more effective than the commercially available transfection kit (Ribojuice™, which is designed for RNA rather than DNA).
In other words, those lipid nanoparticles are designed to get DNA into the nucleus of cells, and do that job with both DNA and RNA better than a commercially available transfectant product.
When I say that the LNP (which are cationic) are intended to deliver DNA into the nucleus this is not some random claim. It’s well known. HERE from 2017:
It has been reported that DNAs delivered by Lipofectamine® 2000 reach the nucleus with a high frequency only after 4 h incubation.
What that means is that if the LNPs (or lipofectamine or any other cationic lipid particle) hang around for a few hours they will transfect (bring DNA into) the nucleus of any cell that it is in contact with.
And in the case of humans in which LNP-mRNA [2020] LNP-mRNA-DNA complexes are administered, thank God it doesn’t accumulate in the ovaries, right?
Yeah, about that. The LNP exceeds the 4 hours easily in the ovaries, and remember that the study stopped recording this data at 48 hours even though they claimed that the animals were monitored for up to 9 days.
And we knew that the distribution of LNPs to the ovaries was not only known about but was an intentional design back from a study in 2013 HERE. No “conspiracy theories” required. But I bet you didn’t see this mentioned in the consent form, did you?
Check the date on this tweet:
Now method one of skinning our cat is over, let’s move on to method two
2: Linearised plasmid DNA
So, what on earth is that I hear you say? Let’s break it down: Linearised – Plasmid – DNA.
Well DNA is what shouldn’t be in the product. It’s not RNA (which is the stuff that is meant to last for a few minutes and then get degraded, but that’s not what this article is about). It’s the nucleic acid type that makes up your genome, the stuff that is the blueprint for you.
RNA is derived from DNA and makes the proteins that enable you to live.
This is called the “Central Dogma of Molecular Biology.”
The bottom line being that, in general, if you want to have an effect on an organism (e.g., a person) using genetic methods, you can do this temporarily with RNA – which will then produce protein and should then degrade so it doesn’t produce any more.
But if you want to make it more permanent you would use DNA and integrate it into the genome. Then when called on it will produce RNA which will produce protein. That process could happen for ever under the right circumstances.
The step for RNA to produce protein usually happens immediately when RNA is produced (or introduced) in the cell. But for DNA to enact this process (to induce transcription and then translation) requires the DNA to have a signal to act.
This is usually from a promoter which can respond to local signals and start the transcription process (it needs to be regulated so that it is not switched on all the time).
There are multiple mechanisms for the regulations of RNA transcription and the elements that regulate (increase, decrease, start, stop) transcription don’t even need to be in the same area of the gene being regulated. It’s a complex process that we don’t know everything about for every gene.
The point is that, if foreign DNA gets into your genome all hell can break loose – the most notable risk being cancer. This is because cancer is, in general, a situation where the control of cell growth and replication is disturbed.
And cell growth and replication is a tightly controlled and complex system so any disturbance of it is either going to make cells grow more or less. Growing more cells without control is what gives you cancer.
And this is known about in the field of gene therapy (where nucleic acid material is introduced to a person in order to correct a deficiency) such that one of the first gene therapies was stopped for this reason.
This is “insertional oncogenesis” where cancer is caused by the insertion of additional fragments of DNA into areas of the DNA that interrupted the regulation mechanisms of that DNA.
Read more: Insertional oncogenesis in gene therapy: how much of a risk? Gene Therapy, 18 March 2004
In fact, all you need to create a cancer risk in a cell is for there to be enough “buckshot” (the term used by Phillip Buckhaults) for one of the pellets to stick itself where it doesn’t belong. And the more “buckshot” you have the higher the chance.
When it comes to this particular buckshot, we are talking about billions of copies of random DNA fragments. That’s a problem as discussed also here: Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose, OSF Preprints.
And here: Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose, Anandamide, 11 April 2023
And here: With Large Numbers, Low Probability Becomes Guaranteed, The Daily Beagle, 28 September 2023
So that is the “DNA” bit but what about the other bits – “Linearised Plasmid.”
Well, the plasmid is the circular loop of DNA that is used to transfect the E.Coli – the bacteria that make up the biggest constituent of poo. This is what a diagram of it looks like (actually, this is what Kevin McKernan found on sequencing because the original diagram from Pfizer had a lot of components hidden).
This form of DNA is very good at getting into bacteria and getting them to produce what you need, which is the process that was used in “Process 2” of the Pfizer vaccine production. That is the one that was rolled out to the world – now designated #Poojabs because of the way it was produced.
This was not explicitly declared to the public, by the way, and required the infamous Freedom of Information law suit to uncover as published by Josh Guetzkow HERE.
However, plasmid DNA is not normally that dangerous to humans because it is readily destroyed by circulating enzymes. The problem comes when the plasmid DNA is encapsulated in a lipid nanoparticle.
Then it doesn’t get destroyed and whichever organism it gets injected into may react in a similar way to the #poojabs bacteria it was intended for. The mere presence of this lab-tool in a medicinal product for which it was not intended is therefore a regulatory no-no for this and other reasons as outlined in the EMA guidelines HERE.
So, having lab-plasmid DNA intended for bacteria (which includes antibiotic resistance genes that you really don’t want injected into you) contaminating your “RNA therapy” is shocking enough, but what is Phillip saying about the small fragments?
Well, he says “little bitty lines” and that what he found was small fragments of DNA from the plasmid that they “tried to chop up” with enzymes. But it didn’t remove the lab-tool DNA at all, merely chopped it into little pieces.
And do you know what happens when you chop a circular plasmid DNA into little pieces? It’s not circular anymore. It’s linear and that’s a problem.
This is taken from a long document. Read the rest here expose-news.com
Header image: Anadolu Agency / Getty Images
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About Covid 19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Wisenox
| #
The video is UN produced garbage and so is the article. It’s just one more article presenting bogus findings to get you riled up over the wrong reasons. The vaccines are more than capable of altering DNA, it’s in the patents, but neither the fake UN video nor the article mention it.
The mechanisms of action are in the patents, but they don’t want you knowing what’s in them.
Reply