Covid Vaccines still produce spike proteins after two years
New research shows that Covid vaccines contain considerable proportions of DNA residues capable of permanently integrating into the human genome, causing chronic diseases and cancers.
This could also explain the excess mortality observed since the beginning of the vaccination campaigns.
Act 1: creepy blood tests
The investigation that we present to you began with an intriguing publication by the former Swiss banker Pascal Najadi. The author of a criminal complaint for abuse of power against the President of the Confederation Alain Berset has been vaccinated three times and has turned himself in as many times against the health authorities since an analysis of his blood revealed to him that his body continues to produce the vaccine’s spike protein more than 18 months after its last Pfizer/BioNTech injection.
Contacted, the interested party provided us with the laboratory results as well as a letter from Prof. Sucharid Bhakdi confirming that “the test results clearly indicate that Mr. Najadi is suffering from long-term irreparable effects caused by the injected mRNA product manufactured by PfizerBiontech” (see sources at the end of the article).
A toxic protein
The banker’s blood tests reveal the presence of the spike protein but not the nanolipid capsules found in the injections. For the scientist, this indicates that it is not a spike protein deriving from the administration of a “vaccine” but that it was recently produced by the vaccinated body.
After some research, we find a German lawyer, Me Tobias Ulbrich, representing several clients who also had their blood tested to reach the same conclusions as Pascal Najadi: their bodies are constantly producing spike protein, a toxic substance , and no one can tell them if and when it will stop.
Health authorities unable to give explanations
The former banker had consulted the Federal Office of Public Health in Switzerland on this matter. The latter was unable to give him answers, claiming that he could not comment on a single case. Pascal Najadi had deduced from this that the office did not actually control anything regarding these new vaccine technologies.
The persistence of the presence of the spike protein detected in Najadi and other injected remains officially unexplained and is well beyond the 14 days communicated when the vaccination campaigns against Covid were launched.
Act 2: the role of RNA
Everyone knows DNA, represented by a double helix and containing our genetic code. RNA consists of only a single strand. The cell produces it as needed by reading part of the DNA which will then serve as specifications for the production of a protein.
A dose of messenger RNA Covid “vaccine” contains billions of messenger RNA strands, which will trigger the production of as many spike proteins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the cells they reach. These spike proteins will trigger an immune system response.
In theory and officially – all the health authorities insisted on this to reassure future vaccinated people – the Covid “vaccines” do not contain DNA and there is no permanent alteration of our cells.
As we will see, serious doubts unfortunately cloud the official claims.
The advanced protein has also been presented as a harmless substance during vaccination campaigns when it is known to be toxic to the human body and cause most of the complications of Covid, including inflammatory and allergic reactions.
Act 3: How are the messenger RNA strands found in Covid “vaccines” made?
To communicate, bacteria exchange important genetic “messages” with the help of so-called plasmids. For example, if a bacterium finds a new mechanism that increases its resistance to antibiotics, it encapsulates this information in plasmids, which will be produced and ‘spread’ to other bacteria.
The process of producing the RNA filaments of the Covid vaccines requires precisely to go through the genetic manipulation of bacteria using plasmids, in which the DNA sequence corresponding to the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 will have previously been introduced.
The plasmid is propagated in the bacteria and used as a template for the mass production of messenger RNAwhich will be able to trigger the production of spike proteins in the vaccinated cells. The DNA then has to be removed and the messenger RNA is then mixed with lipids to produce nanoparticles capable of carrying the mRNA into our cells. We will see that this is not the case.
Act 4: The Bug in the Matrix
It should be noted that the health authorities do not check the different batches themselves to ensure the quality of the vaccines. Only the manufacturers are responsible for ensuring the quality of the products they market.
As part of the marketing authorization of the Pfizer vaccine, the European Medicines Agency (EMA) therefore had to settle for consulting the data provided by the manufacturer. EMA expressed surprise to the manufacturer that the final product had not been genetically sequenced to ensure it contained only messenger RNA and no DNA or other residues, German scientist Florian Schilling learns in a presentation (see sources).
Pfizer responded that it had voluntarily opted out of sequencing, admitting that it was certainly not optimal, but that it was justified to reduce costs. Other manufacturers have also waived this genetic sequencing as part of their quality assurance.
Among the alternative product evaluation techniques used by Pfizer is electrophoresis, which counts the elements present in a solution based on their size.
In the documents provided by Pfizer to the WEA, a diagram of which is shown below, the messenger RNA of the vaccine spike protein is represented by a high central peak. The anomaly is the “slopes” on either side of the peak, which represent mysterious genetic “objects” that do not match the size of messenger RNA and should not be present in a purified solution.
Even the EMA had wanted to know more and had requested the raw data from Pfizer. The manufacturer had agreed to supply them but to date they have not yet been delivered.
Act 5: Independent researchers come into play
A group of researchers, particularly concerned about the consequences of Covid injections on young people, decided in early 2023 to take matters into their own hands and sequence batches of “vaccines” from Pfizer and Moderna.
Their whole approach is explained in detail in an initial article and its supplement written by Kevin McKernan, a molecular biologist, specialist in genetic manipulation and sequencing, who participated in the analysis.
Their findings are disturbing in nature:
- Abnormally high amount of DNA – The presence of plasmids containing spike protein DNA has been confirmed in remarkable proportions for Pfizer and Moderna “vaccines”: between 20 and 35 percent, well above the contamination limits set by the EMA (0.033 percent). A single dose therefore contains several billion of these plasmidswhich were used to produce messenger RNA and which would then have to be eliminated. This information is already proof of the non-compliance of these products with current regulations.
- Acceleration of antibiotic resistance – Worryingly, the DNA of these plasmids contains genes that make them resistant to two antibiotics: neomycin and kanamycin. The introduction of billions of antibiotic resistance genes into highly replicable plasmids, enabling the selection of bacteria resistant to these treatments in the microbiome should raise concerns about the acceleration of antibiotic resistance on a global scale. Some experts already estimated before the Covid crisis that by 2050 we would no longer have effective antibiotics.
- High copy error factor – Scientists say the presence of a nucleotide called pseudouridine is of great concern as it is known to have a copy error rate of one in 4000 nucleotides, or between 5 and 8.5 million possible copy errors. copy per vaccine dose. And no one can tell what these errors correspond to since they are unpredictable.
- Permanent and transgenerational integration: vaccine plasmids can reach a bacterium or a human cell.The latter case is considered problematic because it is possible that the DNA strand contained in the plasmid is permanently integrated into the genetic code of the human cell, allowing it to autonomously produce the spike protein of the vaccine at any time, for life. In all likelihood, this is what is happening to Pascal Najadi and Me Ulbrich’s clients in Germany. The teacher. Bhakdi noted that each cell division is an opportunity for this imported DNA to modify the host’s genome. If this integration takes place in a stem cell, egg or sperm, the genetic modification will be passed on to subsequent generations.
This is serious because science today does not offer a tool to remove a gene. More incomprehensibly, the plasmid DNA used by Pfizer contains a sequence (SV 40) that allows it to be transferred into the nucleus even when the cell is not dividing and thus to affect cells.
However, its presence is useless for the production of messenger RNA in bacteria. This sequence is absent from the plasmids used by Moderna.
Johnson & Johnson’s Covid vaccine has an even greater risk of supplementation because it is based on a DNA virus and uses a much more potent promoter than SV 40, called CMV. This carries a much higher risk of oncogenesis and continued production of spike proteins than messenger RNAs, says Marc Wathelet, a molecular biologist and coronavirus specialist we consulted (see interview at the end of the article).
Because the plasmid’s spike protein DNA targets mammalian cells, there’s very little chance it will permanently integrate into the genome of a gut bacterium. By failing to become advanced protein factories, these bacteria – which are not human cells – could instead multiply vaccine plasmids and thus contribute to an increased risk of contamination with human cells, called “bactofection” or “transfection”.
Act 6: the aftermath – cancer risks
Marc Wathelet confirms that if “the risk of bacterial contamination in the microbiome remains low, it is the risks of inflammation and especially of tumors linked to the contamination of the cells of the body of vaccinated people by DNA that are more worrying”.
The expert points out that it is “impossible to quantify this risk”. He finds “an increase in some cancers, but it’s not clear whether it’s due to DNA, mRNA, a weakened immune system, lipids in the nanoparticles, or a combination of these factors.”
Spike protein DNA integration may explain that the effects are not immediate after vaccination but develop over time. Some scientists thus link the excess mortality observed in 2022 in all vaccinated countries with a permanent peak protein production.
An analysis by Jarle Aarstad goes in this direction and shows a disturbing correlation: for each vaccination rate percentage, there is +0.1 percent excess mortality the following year.
Act 7: what to do now?
If we had warned future vaccinated people that we would have injected them with genetic material that would probably integrate into their own genome, how many would have accepted the injection anyway?
Health authorities should be aware of the problem and do genetic analysis in vaccinees to see to what extent this vaccine DNA is integrated into human cells and in which cell types.
Lecturer Sucharit Bhakdi recently said that messenger RNA vaccines are actually gene therapies that should be taken off the market. This is all the more important as, driven by huge profits, the vaccine industry is currently investing in the development of hundreds of new messenger RNA vaccines.
We are still in the experimental phase: Nature says so
Regardless of what the mainstream media and authorities say, science continues to claim that these gene therapies are still in the experimental stage, as evidenced by this extract appearing in Nature in July 2022:
«Although they have several advantages over conventional protein-based approaches, mRNA-based therapies are still in the early stages of development.
The instability of synthetic mRNAs and the immune responses generated against these synthetic molecules have been the main obstacles to the adaptation of this technology» Nature, Scientific Reports, July 2022
Those affected by this permanent peak protein production, such as Pascal Najadi, are currently forced to undergo lifelong treatments to reduce its concentration. Their immune system is constantly killing off its own cells that produce the leftover protein, but these keep multiplying with the genetic modification, making this struggle permanent and exhausting for the body.
Evidences for human liver cancer cells
One study, Alden et al., showed that human liver cancer cells could permanently integrate the genetic material of Pfizer vaccines. Critics said no conclusions could be drawn for healthy cells.
However, these findings should have called into question injecting these products into cancer patients.
Comparison with PCR tests
The silence on the contamination of Covid injections by DNA is all the more striking if we remember that at the time of PCR tests it was enough to detect viral debris in our noses unable to reproduce, with a certain number of work cycles (CT, amplification) near at 40, to be declared positive and quarantined.
The DNA contamination we are talking about here in vaccines is already detectable at a CT of 20. This is a million times higher concentration than that considered critical for SARS-CoV-2 and this integrating DNA is injected beyond defenses of our mucous membranes.
If the PCR tests had also been carried out with a CT of 20, the number of positive Covid cases would have been almost nil and there would not have been so much panic around this pandemic.
See more here vtforeignpolicy.com
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.
Tom
| #
The near perfect murder machine that doesn’t stop.
Reply
VOWG
| #
The five to ten years as a lab rat is starting to seem real to many people.
Reply
Saeed Qureshi
| #
Side effects of mRNA vaccination are possible (in fact, they could be factual and real).
However, claiming them because of spike protein is not possible (in fact, a lie) because there is no evidence of the existence of the protein. Existence can only be shown with a test validated using an isolated/purified spike protein specimen, which is unavailable. Claims of spike protein are scientifically false but an attempt to legitimize a fraudulent science.
In addition, it is a false diagnosis (toxicity of spike protein) and would hinder appropriately addressing or treating the adverse effects of the vaccination.
Reply
Frank S.
| #
Dr. McCullogh recommends nattokinase, bromelain and curcumin to dissolve Spike Protein Also, chelation to adjust levels of beneficial metals, while removing toxic ones.
Reply
Saeed Qureshi
| #
@ “ … to dissolve Spike Protein.”
This statement cannot be true or valid. To validate such a statement, one can do a simple lab experiment by adding the medications to a spike protein (in vitro) solution to establish if ideed THE spike protein dissolves. However, such an experiment cannot be done as no one has THE spike protein specimen. Therefore, all claims in this regard remain false, at least scientifically, until spike protein is shown to exist by isolating and purifying it.
Reply
Frank S.
| #
Please take up your unfounded assertions with the person whom I am referencing, and who has done all of the experimentation: Dr. Peter McCullough.
Reply
VOWG
| #
S Q is correct.
Reply
Gerald Brennan
| #
Frank, chill. SQ has forgotten more about this subject than you’ll ever know. He doesn’t have to argue with McCullough for your benefit. If you were less ignorant on the topic you would see that he has done his homework and paid his dues. Many top researchers share his view.
Reply
Saeed Qureshi
| #
I wish you could share your area of expertise. The short blips you write show that you are not knowledgeable in the area but accepting and promoting others’ sayings and claims, which are simply inaccurate and false. Please, note that physicians are not scientists, researchers, or experimentalists. They are not trained or practiced in science.
Unfortunately, their training is for observations-based opinions and views (mostly unaudited or not appropriately reviewed by a third party) called science, i.e., THEIR science, not actual science.
SARS-COV-2 and COVID-19 are two recent examples of such opinion-based narratives, i.e., there is a virus, and people are sick with it. However, no virus or ill person was found with it. Note vaccines have been developed using healthy human volunteers, not sick (patients) because no one could find the patients. This is not an opinion but a fact. Please consider reading the vaccine development study protocol.
Similarly, vaccines were developed based on opinions that they were safe and effective, with an efficacy rating of 95%+. These were based on opinions, as no study has been conducted on patients. Now, these opinions about safety and effectiveness have generally been (as expected) shown to be incorrect.
Concerning nattokinase use, as per Dr. McCullough:
“Full pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies have not been completed, but several years of market use as an over-the-counter supplement suggests nattokinase is safe with the main caveat being excessive bleeding and cautions with concurrent antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs.” Note market use (not science or experiment based).
Furthermore, “Based on these findings, nattokinase and similar products such as serrapeptase should undergo well-funded, accelerated preclinical and clinical development programs.” He is asking for funding for studying as none has been done.
https://petermcculloughmd.substack.com/p/dissolution-of-spike-protein-by-nattokinase?utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=auto_share&r=14jb45
So, please, consider reading the literature rather than accepting and promoting false information.
Concerning your view, “Please take up your unfounded assertions with the person whom I am referencing, …”, I am happy to debate with anyone on the topic, but they would not because they know there is no scientific and experimental study done on the topics, such as isolation of the virus, link of the virus to infection, RNA, spike protein, etc. These are all hotchpotch opinions fooling trusting people like you.
Reply
Frank S.
| #
Yes, “SQ”, you have taught me that you are controlled opposition by your gathering a posse of cohorts to rally to your defense, while attempting to belittle and bury useful information. I wouldn’t trust your “opinion” that ‘the sky is blue’. As for my own acquired knowledge, I’m quite comfortable here on the right side of history.
Saeed Qureshi
| #
Frank S.
By saying, “Please take up your unfounded assertions with the person whom I am referencing,” you indicated that you are not knowledgeable. However, if I made an error in judgment, please correct me by sharing your “own acquired knowledge” so we can discuss it scientifically and logically to clarify the confusion. That is what I was asking for. Would you accept? Thanks.
Brendan
| #
Do we have the blood test and laboratory analysis results for Pascal Najadi?
Reply
Robert
| #
I have run across some information that I would like to add. First of all Saeed is correct about the spike protein. As I was going over some of the materials data on graphene oxide On La Quinta Column a”s website. There was an article which noted that proteins will adhere to graphene oxide. This is one of its materiel properties.. We know the clots are real and they are not normal calcium based blood clots in the injected people. This is what I think people should be focusing on. If graphene has a positive charge and has proteins stuck to it causing the protein to have a positive charge. This may appear to some to be a so called spike protein or show up on stains as a foreign protein. The question should be how do we get rid of Both the protein and the graphene nano particle. Nat-to Kinase does brake down proteins in normal blood clots. If it brakes down the protein this will help the injected person reduce their clotting risk. The other priority should be to remove the graphene nano particles using some thing that chelates, or maybe clinoptilolite zeolite or something that works for positively charged heavy metals. Just my thoughts on the matter.I like to keep my head on straight and Saeed always helps me do that
Reply
Saeed Qureshi
| #
Hi Robert:
Thank you very much for your kind words about my views and for supporting (with VOWG and Gerald Brennan ) my position on the topic. Feedback on my views and writings motivates me to provide further input, hoping my contribution will make a long-lasting positive impact. Thank you all!
Considering the length of my response, I saved it on my server; you may access it here (https://www.drug-dissolution-testing.com/blog/files/Graphene.pdf).
Like always, I look forward to your feedback.
Reply