Animal vaccines Part 3

I recently talked to Jane Ruby on her show about animal mRNA/DNA vaccines and it includes a lot of material that I wanted to include into my Part 3 of the series:

Part 1 and Part 2 of the animal vaccines series.

There has been no need to vaccinate farm animals for about 6,000 years, yet in the current century the number of vaccines pushed by phrama has exploded both on CDC schedule and on USDA schedule.

DNA vaccines as vaccines in general are pushed as a method to control the uncontrollable – illness/death of animals due to intense commercial farming methods:

• Overcrowding, unnatural and stressful conditions

• Pollution with biologic and chemical waste

• False “diagnosis” of disease with PCR when there is no actual illness present - false claims of “asymptomatic infection”

• Mass slaughter of farm animals without any reason other than manufactured PCR-demics

This is accompanied by intense lobbying to avoid GMO regulations, re-categorize products/animals which are GMO by previous definitions as non-GMO.

Several DNA and RNA vaccines have been already approved for market:

• 2005, APEX-IHN (Novartis/Elanco) for Atlantic salmon against Infectious Hematopoietic Necrosis Virus (IHNV), British Colombia.

• West Nile Innovator - DNA (Fort Dodge Animal Health/Pfizer) for West Nile virus in condors and horses.

• Oncept (Merial) against dog melanoma.

• In 2017, CLYNAV (Elanco), a polyprotein-encoding DNA vaccine against Salmon Pancreas Disease Virus (SPDV) infection in Atlantic salmon was authorized by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

• Sequivity (Merck) in swine (2017) – Emergency use in Canada, fully licensed in US (USDA, 2021). “Platform” for making farm-specific injections based on RNA-particle technology. This one is particularly problematic, has horrific “safety” profile (not safe at all), and I have discussed it in detail in Part 1.

Most of the “older” genetic vaccines in fish are based on injections of DNA plasmids - circular DNA code, grown externally in e.coli cells, then purified (or so it is claimed). The code in plasmids includes genes for antibiotic resistance (so that they can be “found” after e.coli cells are killed with antibiotics), and can include genetic code for all sorts of other things. It is useful to read these papers to understand just how screwed up this whole approach is! They write more truthfully about what is going on in these papers because you see, we are talking about fish in 2011. We are not talking about you or your child being forced to inject DNA plasmids with SV40 and other undeclared components under pretenses of “FDA-approved mRNA vaccines” to save grandma, or to have a job, or to go to school in 2023. No, no, in 2011 talking about this would be considered a totally crazy conspiracy fabricated by anti-vaxxers!

While researching DNA plasmid vaccines for fish, I came across this gem - a paper cheerfully titled “Development of a suicidal DNA vaccine for infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV)”. In it we find that DNA plasmids do in fact integrate into the genome (of animals or humans), that regulators in Europe were concerned about these effects (until these regulators were bought off, blackmailed or replaced by the psychopaths that would have no such concerns), and that “strategies” were needed to drive public acceptance of this dangerous junk in regions “highly concerned with safety”:

To date, no experimental evidence has shown that integration in the host genome or stimulation of anti-DNA antibodies, which could cause autoimmune disease, can occur after DNA vaccination. At present, there are very few studies investigating the fate of DNA vaccines after injection into the fish nor of the potential environmental effects caused by the environmental distribution of DNA vaccines [7], [8]. Due to uncertainties with regard to whether DNA vaccines persist degradation and are stored in compartments in the fish, the Norwegian Gene technology Act, for example, currently views an animal injected with plasmid DNA as being genetically modified for as long as the added DNA is present in the animal [9]. Regulating a DNA-vaccinated animal as genetically modified creates both regulatory and practical challenges and affects consumer acceptance to buy DNA-vaccinated fish. Improved safety, driven by continuous development of vaccination strategies of fish, as well as wide public acceptance is required for the potential of DNA vaccines to be fully recognized in regions highly concerned with safety, as it occurs in Europe.

By “suicidal” genetic vaccine the authors from Oregon State University, Taiwan and Hawaii, mean that the cells that have been transfected with DNA plasmids would be programmed to self-destruct after they expressed whatever antigens they were programmed to express. Note that the transfection by DNA plasmids and incorporation into the cell genome is not treated as hypothetical or unproven but as a given. The paper was published in 2011, meaning that 12 years ago it was already proven that plasmids transfect cells and integrate into the genome. The fact-checkers assigned by the intel agencies to run covid vax campaigns seem to be not aware of this. But here is what our brave scientists from Oregon have to say about “self-destructing” genetic messages delivered via plasmid injections:

Strategies for suicide gene transfer have been used efficiently in a variety of circumstances, ranging from cancer treatment to the control of viral infections [10], [11], [12]. Especially useful in the development of DNA vaccines containing an inducible “suicidal” gene that can be eliminated at virtually any time from vaccinated animals destined for human consumption. Previously, we demonstrated that the IHNV viral gene encoding the matrix or M protein can be transfected into fish cells and its synthesis leads to apoptosis or programmed cell death in the transfected cells [13]. Immunofluoresce confocal microscopy revealed the fragmented nuclei and the morphological changes associated with apoptosis in the M-transfected cells. Thus, we sought to incorporate this gene into our plasmid DNA vaccine to develop a “suicidal” DNA vaccine, i.e. one that would kill the cell containing foreign DNA after the immunization process. The suicidal DNA vaccine pIRF1A-G-pMT-M contains two operons: i) the inducible IRF1A promoter driving the expression of the IHNV G gene that induces protection and ii) the metal-inducible metallothionein-B (MT) promoter driving the expression of the IHNV matrix or M gene that induces apoptosis. The suicidal DNA vaccine results first in the synthesis of the IHNV G protein and immunization; and at a later time, the expression of the M protein can be turned on to kill specifically those cells carrying the plasmid DNA. A schematic representation of the proposed mechanism of action for the suicidal vaccine and its genomic structure are shown in Fig. 1. In the present study, we tested pIRF1A-G-pMT-M as a vaccine in fish, evaluated the effect of induction of the apoptotic gene in fish cell lines and in injected fish and analyzed the effect of apoptosis on the persistence of the plasmid DNA in vaccinated fish.

Now, how would one go about weaponizing this programming of cells for suicide? Of course, all of this is written only with fish in mind. Not humans. No-no. There is absolutely no way to put DNA plasmids into human mRNA vaccines (or just “forget” to remove them from finished mRNA product), not declare them on the labels or regulatory filings (because no truthful disclosure is enforceable for EUA Countermeasures) and “program” them to self destruct. Everything is possible, kids! Dream big!

Interestingly, these authors call “vaccination” with DNA plasmids “infection”, and detect those plasmids 120 days from injection, meaning that the fish do get transfected and become GMO for all practical purposes:

DNA vaccines remain in rainbow trout at least 120 days after infection

In the present study, we assess whether the pCMV-G DNA vaccine persisted in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) after vaccination. Total DNA was extracted from muscle tissue of 5 vaccinated animals and used as template for the amplification of a 1512 bp fragment of the IHNV G gene. The results of the PCR amplifications are shown in Fig. 2. Using the polymerase chain reaction we were able to detect episomal (non-integrated) plasmid DNA in the muscle tissue of vaccinated fish as long as 120 days…

In another study from Italy DNA plasmids were detected in fish 320 days after vaccination:

Both, genetic vaccines and their recipients (animals and humans) can be considered GMO

According to science, BOTH vaccine and its recipients could become GMO, if product designed for genetic/biome integration… As discussed by Collins et al, “DNA Vaccines in Fish and Aquaculture” https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2018.07.012

What happens if the product was not designed for genome integration, but somebody “forgot” the genome integrating DNA plasmids in it, and also “forgot” SV40 promoter in the plasmids, and then “forgot” some other undisclosed components that just all completely accidentally and coincidentally happen to be genome integrating machinery?

Speaking of fish - was mRNA in Poison-19 shots a proverbial red herring?

Was it simply a façade, a non-functional unstable molecule, which would fracture into little nucleic acid shards right after manufacture? Was it only necessary as a diversion, a scientific hubris playing the role of a vehicle into which “contaminants” could be introduced at will (under legal cover of unregulated EUA Countermeasure)?

Were genome integrating, damaging, cancer-causing DNA plasmids the real purpose of these injections?

Please consider a one-time donation via ko-fi:

Art for today: Still Life with Fish, oil on linen, 20x20 in.