Did the “inventor of mRNA” really know the danger of it?
Internet users assure that Robert W. Malone, presented as the scientist behind messenger RNA, would have recognized that the “spike” protein would be “toxic to humans”. This claim is based on a misinterpretation of a study on the subject.
The Verifiers, a fact-checking team shared by the editorial staff of TF1, LCI and LCI.fr
Let’s start by taking an interest in this “inventor of messenger RNA”. In the Institut Pasteur article about this technology and its origins, we read that it was the researchers Jacques Monod and François Jacob who, for the first time, emitted and demonstrated the concept of this mechanism, in an article published in 1961, which won them the Nobel Prize. However, the one who will decide to use this technique for therapeutic purposes is Katalin Kariko.
Born in Hungary in 1955, she was, along with Drew Weissman, the first to have mastered the immune reactions linked to the transcription of messenger RNA. Today it is therefore rather to her that this discovery is attributed. Whether in France or internationally, the media have been numerous to retrace the story of this biochemist and her path strewn with pitfalls.
So what about Robert W. Malone? He was indeed one of the pioneers of this technology, the authorship of which is obviously shared by many researchers. As this paper published in August 1989 attests, he was among those who tried, in the early 1990s, to use RNA so that it could deliver a message to the immune system. If he participated in the development of this technology through his research, he is therefore not “the inventor” the mechanism used for coronavirus vaccines. The only sources that cite him as such are his own website and his own social media profiles.
If he knows a thing or two about mRNA, this “authority argument” is not sufficient on its own. We still have to look at the arguments used by this researcher. This subject, he evokes in two different contents. The published on June 18, in which Robert W. Malone claims that “SARS-CoV-2 spike protein is cytotoxic”, citing a study by the Salk Institute.
As a reminder, this peak protein – “spike” in English – is normally found on the surface of covid-19. However, vaccines using mRNA technology send a genetic instruction to the inoculated person to produce this famous advanced protein.
However, he does not directly say that this protein created through vaccination is also dangerous. But he wonders about the subject, writing that it belongs to the laboratories “the responsibility to demonstrate that their version is not toxic”. Nothing very alarming. The other content is a fifteen-minute video uploaded on June 13. In this intervention, he repeats that the spike protein is “cytotoxic” and “extremely dangerous”.
In both cases, he is not based on his own work, but on this study carried out on hamsters. A document already used in the past to warn about an alleged toxicity of vaccines. However, as we already wrote in a previous article on the subject, this study shows absolutely no dangerousness of the vaccine. It even does the exact opposite. If she clearly shows that the covid-19 peak protein is “cytotoxic”, she specifies that this is not the case for the protein of mRNA vaccines.
The study in fact concludes on the contrary that vaccination makes it possible to guard against this effect. The researchers write that “antibodies generated by vaccination and / or exogenous antibodies” protect not only against infectivity, but also “against endothelial damage caused by the Spike protein”.
As we said in our previous article about this alleged toxicity of the spike protein, there is no reason to fear it at the moment. As summarized by experts from the Digital Health Lab, a consortium of health researchers providing answers related to the coronavirus, “So far, there is no scientific evidence available that suggests the advanced proteins created in our bodies from COVID-19 vaccines are toxic or damage our organs.”
See more here: news.in-24.com
Header image: Zhen Wang / The Epoch Times
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About COVID19
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.
Ray
| #
https://linksharing.samsungcloud.com/nzJjyDBPhxRz
Reply
sir_isO
| #
Absolute bullcrap.
Anyway, when I said “Bye, PSI” I wasn’t quite expecting a qlippoth infestation manifesting so rapidly, but that’s what happens with abandonment.
Reply
dnomsed
| #
This is a pseudo-scientific hit piece. Please delete it.
Reply
Ron
| #
“As we said in our previous article about this alleged toxicity of the spike protein, there is no reason to fear it at the moment… “So far, there is no scientific evidence available that suggests the advanced proteins created in our bodies from COVID-19 vaccines are toxic or damage our organs.”
Am I reading this right? You are on board with the idea that the spike proteins are likely NOT dangerous? Is my comprehension off base here? While I’m no fan of Malone (who said in an interview that we should go easy on Fauci because he’s old), I’m increasingly confused about the purpose and mission of Principia-Scientific. Seems like y’all just publish a bunch of contradictory stuff, one day saying one thing, the next day saying something else.
I think my time here is done. No reason to waste any more of my time on this site.
Reply
Wojt
| #
This site provides all kind of information in order to stay ‘neutral’. And this is what I like about it..lack of ‘orientation’, or ‘bias’ in any direction. You like something..stick to it, you do not? then ignore it.
No need to get upset.
Reply
Howdy
| #
Ditto. Stick around Ron!
Reply
Squidly
| #
I don’t understand, you are looking for an echo chamber? .. or are you looking for debate and truth? .. you can’t get debate and truth from an echo chamber. PSI does a fantastic job of transparency and neutrality. The whole purpose of PSI is to vet all sides of an issue. YOUR job is to read, think critically and formulate a coherent rebuttal. That is the whole purpose of PSI. Instead of getting upset, picking up your ball and going home, you should rip this article to pieces and let everyone else see how you did it. Again, that is the very PURPOSE of PSI !!! .. Don’t go away mad Ron, fight back with TRUTH!!
Reply
Howdy
| #
“The only sources that cite him as such are his own website and his own social media profiles.”
Absolute nonsense! Any web search will show the truth on that one. I looked when his wife submitted a paper recently.
“As we said in our previous article about this alleged toxicity of the spike protein, there is no reason to fear it at the moment.”
Again, Absolute nonsense! The actual data regarding death and injury will show the truth on that one too.
I don’t believe anything the article says.
Reply
Doug Harrison
| #
Science is not about believing; it is about understanding. It is very difficult to understand anything from this article as the writer gives only opinions based on no data whatsoever.
Reply
Howdy
| #
“Science is not about believing; it is about understanding.”
Then why engage in the field of science if there’s nothing to believe in? How can you accept truth about science if you don’t believe it?
“gives only opinions based on no data whatsoever.”
It also makes statements that are not true: “The only sources that cite him as such are his own website and his own social media profiles.”
https://duckduckgo.com/Robert+W.+Malone+citations?ia=web
Busted!
Reply
Michael Williams
| #
There is a difference between being a source and being a parrot repeating what the source claims. Many websites are parrots, not sources.
Reply
Howdy
| #
Then which are which, Michael?
Reply
Doug Harrison
| #
Data is the plural of datum which is an established fact until it can be shown to be wrong.
Reply
Howdy
| #
So when an “established fact” is proven wrong, what does that mean for the future of established facts? It means all “established facts” are not “established facts”. They are just the best we can do with what we have at the time.
I put forward, that that is an established fact. Seems pretty accurate to me anyway. 🙂
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Howdy and PSI Readers,
I came to this article because of your comment “Ditto. Stick around Ron!”. For yesterday I know I did not understand the comments which were being about the article by the various commenters. Now my confusion has been cleared up by rereading what I had read and by reading your comments that have been made between then and now.
Very good work Howdy!!! And I hope other readers of PSI have ‘digested’ what you have written.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply