By Jeanne A. Rungby, medical specialist. Drawing by Lars Bo Appel.
Dr. David J. Speicher, a Canadian independent virologist, recently examined three Australian vials of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines for residual plasmid DNA content.
The plasmid DNA is synthetically altered genetic material that comes from laboratory-grown E-coli bacteria used in the mass production of these COVID-19 mRNA vaccines (process 2).
Dr. Speicher found that all the vials contained measurable levels of DNA, which in some cases exceeded the regulatory limits by up to 145 times the permissible content of 10 ng./dose, as set by the TGA, the Australian Medicines Agency(1).
This investigation was initiated at the behest of Attorney Ashby-Koppens, who is assisting Member of Parliament (MP) Russell Broadbent, who on 25 September 2024 wrote a letter to the Australian Prime Minister Mr. Albanian.
M.P. Russell Broadbent tells the Prime Minister that convincing evidence has been found that the excessive amounts of synthetic DNA wrapped in Lipid Nanoparticles (nanoparticles) can integrate into human cells, potentially causing genetic instability, cancer, disruption of the immune system and changes in the genetic makeup .
The letter is certified by a large number of researchers and specialists who have special knowledge within the subject.
M.P. Russell Broadbent is calling on Prime Minister Albanese to immediately suspend the rollout pending an urgent investigation. A study that allows free and independent scientific discussion to clarify the true facts(2).
Dr. Speicher also found the presence of a specific SV40 subsequence in Pfizer's vials (not in Moderna's vials). This subsequence of Simian monkey virus of 72 base pairs is normally used in gene therapy, for example in otherwise incurable cancer, to draw synthetically produced DNA into cell nuclei, where it causes changes in the human genetic material(3, 4).
The plasmid DNA can be integrated into the human genome using this SV40 subsequence. SV40 (both whole virus and partial sequences) is known to promote cancer because it increases the risk of integrating foreign DNA into the human genome(5, 6, 7). SV40 can also hinder the body's natural defenses against tumor formation by binding to the tumor suppressor P53. The worrying thing is that the content of the SV40 partial sequence was not openly declared to various health authorities (11). I wonder if these so-called vaccines would have been conditionally approved if Pfizer had clearly declared this partial content of SV40, which is historically associated with the development of delayed cancer after, among other things, polio vaccines(5, 6, 7).
Dr. Speicher's findings are consistent with - and thus confirm - other previous studies which also found the same types of residual DNA in other vials (8, 9, 10). He notes that further studies are needed to get closer to the potential risk associated with this plasmid DNA content for humans.
Limit values:
Dr. Speicher's analysis reveals that the 3 tested COVID-19 mRNA vials from Pfizer and Moderna from Australia contained levels of residual DNA that exceeded the limit value of 10 ng./dose. In practice, this means that each vial examined contains trillions of synthetic DNA in varying sizes.
This limit value of 10 ng./dose has been recommended by the WHO since the 80s and is based on the content of naked DNA (from foreign host cells), which is quickly broken down in the blood by the immune system. This limit value is used by the following pharmaceutical authorities: The Danish Medicines Agency (LMST), The European Medicines Agency (EMA), the American Medicines Agency (FDA), the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and the Canadian Medicines Agency and probably more.
However, the DNA found in these tested COVID-19 vials is synthetic and wrapped in petroleum-like fatty membranes, nanolipids, which protect them from immune attack while being transported from the injection site via the bloodstream to cells in the body's organs, where the fatty membrane fuses with the cell membrane, which is fat soluble. This empties the contents of DNA/mRNA into the cell fluid. The presence of just 3 – 10 pcs. SV40 gene sequences can potentially draw the DNA into the cell nucleus (Dean et al (1999) 3, 17).
The difference between naked host cell DNA and nanolipid-wrapped plasmid DNA is multiple: The naked DNA cannot penetrate the cell membrane. The nanolipid-wrapped DNA can easily enter the cell. When this DNA has entered the cell, it in itself poses a risk of integration into dividing cells, partly because this DNA contains active sequences. In non-dividing cells it is more difficult unless SV40 or other nuclear localizing sequences are present. (2, 11). The applicable limit values are thus outdated, because the pharmaceutical authorities do not take into account both the type of DNA and the packaging in nanolipids according to McKernan(11).
What do the Danish Medicines Agency and the Minister of Health say about the DNA contamination?
In November 2023, I wrote an open letter of concern regarding this DNA contamination to Minister of Health Sophie Løhde. The letter was - despite my wish - not posted on the Danish Parliament's website, so it was visible to the entire Danish Parliament.
The Danish Medicines Agency (LMST) has written the following about the limit values in response to my letter of concern to Nov. 2023.
"We can understand that it may be new to people in general, but it is not new to professionals that there may be small DNA residues in medicines where DNA or other biological material is used in the manufacture, including in the manufacture of vaccines. It has been known since biological medicines began to be manufactured in the mid-1980s. Many years ago, the WHO and the pharmaceutical authorities introduced maximum limits for how much residual DNA may be in a vaccine/drug dose. The companies that manufacture medicines must be able to document that their manufacturing process can remove DNA residues to a very low level (below a set limit). As part of the manufacturing process, there must also be active controls that demonstrate that the accepted DNA limits are being met. The Danish Medicines Agency can also note that both the manufacturer's tests and the subsequent control of the vaccine at an EU authority laboratory (OMCL batch release) show that all tests are within the set limit" (19 December 2023, 15)
It is thus evident that the limit values do not take into account the content of DNA packed in nanolipids and the simultaneous presence of the SV40 partial sequence. Repeated injections of this content in the form of multiple boosters are also not taken into account(1). The same applies to the risk of integration of very small DNA fragments (7bp to 200 bp), which are not detected with the methods used by the manufacturers for quantifying DNA (1, 16).
The question is why the limit values are not adapted to today's technology.
Risk of integration into the human genome:
The nanolipids transport their mRNA and DNA to all the body's organs including the brain, heart, liver, ovaries and testicles (2). The injected material therefore does not stay in the shoulder muscle.
RNA can be transcribed into DNA. This means that, even if DNA contamination was not present in these vials, transcription into DNA via reverse transcriptase would be possible. This was shown by the Swedish researcher Alden already in 2022 (12). Thus, irrespective of the content of DNA, these are potentially gene-altering products.
Since then, it has been proven in a collaboration between Dr. McKernan and the German cancer researcher and molecular biologist Professor Ulrike Kämmerer, that adding the wind team from the COVID-19 mRNA vials from Pfizer to human cells (OvCar3 cell lines) in the laboratory actually integrates into chromosome no. 12 and possibly also chromosome no. 9 ( 11)
It has been proven in vitro that the DNA contamination from these vaccines not only penetrates completely into the cell nucleus, but also survives several cell divisions (13).
Kevin McKernan states: "If anything, this work has put to bed the question regarding if this contaminant DNA gets into the cell, and the chimeric human and contaminant spike DNA sequences imply it has entered the nucleus," (13)
Several scientists such as Dr Phillip Buckhaults from the University of South Carolina, and Dr Wafik El-Diery, from the Cancer Center at Brown University, in addition to Kevin McKernan, have expressed their concern that plasmid DNA fragments could trigger serious side effects, autoimmune diseases and cancer in some patients ( 14).
The question is whether these changes in the human genome can be inherited. It is decisive whether the gene changes are extra-chromosomal (not part of a chromosome) or chromosomal (part of a chromosome). If the changes are extra chromosomal, they are less likely to be inherited to the next generation. Chromosomal changes, on the other hand, can be inherited in connection with cell division. Another type of DNA, Mitochondrial DNA, can be inherited, but only from the mother's side(13). It is thus far unclear whether the potential gene changes are hereditary.
What do the Danish Medicines Agency and the Minister of Health say about the possibility of integration?
The content of SV40 and nanolipids in combination with even minimal amounts of both small and large DNA residues does not seem to worry the Minister of Health, despite the obvious risk of integration into the human genome in the long term, even if outdated limit values had to be observed.
Regarding The Danish Medicines Agency, on behalf of the Minister of Health, has given the following answer to the content of SV40:
"It is correct that the DNA plasmid used in Pfizer's vaccine contains a very small "section" of an SV40 virus. It must be emphasized that there is a big difference between a small "section" of a virus and a whole virus. If you have the entire genetic code of SV40 virus, or the virus itself, there is speculation that it will be able to damage our DNA, but it is only a very small part of the total SV40 virus material that is in the DNA plasmid ( in which the code for the spike protein is inserted). It is unlikely that the SV40 fragments used in Pfizer's plasmid can in any way behave like the full SV40 virus, and these fragments of SV40 therefore pose no risk of developing cancer, nor will they be able to insert change in the human genome. This means there is no risk of inheritance to the next generation either.”
This response from the Danish Medicines Agency is either an expression of a worryingly low professional level in relation to the understanding of the discovery of exactly the active SV40 sequence of 72 base pairs found in these products from Pfizer. However, it can also be a simple explanation and an attempt to control the extent of the damage.
Both are very unfortunate if it turns out that my concerns, which are shared by many scientists worldwide, are real. That this content of residual DNA incl. SV40 poses a serious danger to the population.
This response, according to McKernan, is a reminder of the naivety of regulations that do not take into account the type of DNA contaminating the vaccine(11).
He states: " Small amounts of contamination can be amplified inside the cell, making the current gap in DNA regulation large enough to drive a truck through" (11).
McKernan adds that it has long been known that the SV40 sequence in Pfizer's binds to the body's tumor suppressor p53, known as the " Guardian of the Genome" . Billions of SV40 sequences will act as a diversion for P53 and thereby prevent it from protecting against cancer(11).
The answers of the Minister of Health and the Danish Medicines Agency are in no way reassuring.
In the DNA, there are gene sequences that code for antibiotic resistance.
According to McKernan, the SV40 partial sequence is linked to a resistance gene for aminoglycosides (antibiotics)(11).
According to toxicologist Dr. Janci Lindsay Contamination with whole intact plasmid DNA can infect the intestinal E-Coli bacteria and thereby transfer all the synthetic DNA to these, which will then act as continuous "spike protein factories" as they are self-propagating (rapidly dividing) as well as being antibiotic resistant . The accompanying antibiotic resistance can cause commonly used antibiotics to no longer work on the intestinal bacteria(17).
If this scenario happens – or perhaps has long since happened – wastewater studies will be able to identify these DNA sequences, which, by sequencing, can potentially be misinterpreted as virus variants, which is why authorities recommend additional mRNA vaccines(18).
A negative circle of stupidity and misinformation.
Spreading antibiotic resistance can lead to deaths due to lack of treatment response in cases of severe infections requiring treatment. It should be obvious.
The health and not least the environmental consequences of this are/can be incalculable and, on the whole, an expression of an indescribable level of irresponsibility on the part of our authorities and the manufacturers.
What concerns are associated with these mRNA injections:
The SV40 partial sequence, synthetic DNA and modified RNA, all packaged in nanolipids are the ingredients in the vials that together pose a serious risk of the following:
· Increased incidence of cancer.
· Inactivation of P53, which protects against cancer.
· A weakened immune system, as a result of:
· Persistent production of the toxic spike protein and other off-target proteins (19) from the modified RNA and the DNA integrated cells (17) leading to multiple diseases and a change in the immune system towards more tolerance to future viral and bacterial infections .
· DNA integration in the human genetic material.
· Alteration of germ cells, sperm cells and egg cells, with an unclear impact on the ability to have children.
· Health-related and sex-determining changes in future children of vaccinated parents.
· Promotion of antibiotic resistance through faeces.
· Generally increased mortality.
· Increased incidence of cardiovascular diseases, autoimmune disorders, skin disorders and neurological disorders.
Future research and the task of the regulatory authorities should clarify:
What are the long-term consequences for humans of the use of this mRNA technology with potential integration of DNA into the human genome?
Have the authorities planned studies on primary human cells to confirm or refute the findings made in cell cultures to date by independent laboratories?
What are the consequences of repeated injections of mRNA “vaccines” that contain residual DNA?
And until then, this whole mRNA technology must of course be completely banned, since the problem of purification for DNA is an apparently insoluble problem, which will also apply to the planned so-called vaccines of the future.
Sources:
1. Speicher's report
3. Dean et al : Sequence Requirements for Plasmid Nuclear Import Experimental Cell Research Volume 253, Issue 2, 15 December 1999, Pages 713-722.
8. Speicher DJ, Rose J, Gutschi LM, et al. DNA fragments detected in monovalent and bivalent Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna modRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Ontario, Canada: Exploratory dose response relationship with serious adverse events. https://osf.io/preprints/osf/mjc97
9. McKernan K, Helbert Y, Kane LT, et al. Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose. https://osf.io/preprints/osf/b9t7m
10. South Carolina Senate. SC Senate Hearing - USC Professor Dr. Phillip Buckhault's 2023 [updated 2023-09-13. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEWHhrHiiTY .
14. https://umbrellanews.com.au/health/2023/10/contamination-in-mrna-shots-serious-regulatory-oversight/
Comments