Discover more from All Facts Matter
Houston, We Have A BIG Problem With mRNA "Vaccines"
Creating Random DNA Strands Is Never A Good Idea
Score yet another win for “conspiracy theorists”. Despite the categorical denial by the CDC that mRNA “vaccines” do not rewrite DNA, this past week has seen the publication of research showing that the Pfizer mRNA “vaccine” BNT162b2 in fact does “reverse transcribe" RNA sequences into DNA.
Our study is the first in vitro study on the effect of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 on human liver cell line. We present evidence on fast entry of BNT162b2 into the cells and subsequent intracellular reverse transcription of BNT162b2 mRNA into DNA.
This is not supposed to happen. That it does presents a huge obstacle to the continued use of BNT162b2, to put it mildly.
What Is “Reverse Transcription”?
Reverse transcription is a process by which a strand of RNA produces a strand of DNA. It is termed “reverse transcription” because for most routine cellular processes, DNA strands are used to produce RNA strands.
Ribonucleic acid, or RNA is one of the three major biological macromolecules that are essential for all known forms of life (along with DNA and proteins). A central tenet of molecular biology states that the flow of genetic information in a cell is from DNA through RNA to proteins: “DNA makes RNA makes protein”. Proteins are the workhorses of the cell; they play leading roles in the cell as enzymes, as structural components, and in cell signaling, to name just a few. DNA(deoxyribonucleic acid) is considered the “blueprint” of the cell; it carries all of the genetic information required for the cell to grow, to take in nutrients, and to propagate. RNA–in this role–is the “DNA photocopy” of the cell. When the cell needs to produce a certain protein, it activates the protein’s gene–the portion of DNA that codes for that protein–and produces multiple copies of that piece of DNA in the form of messenger RNA, or mRNA. The multiple copies of mRNA are then used to translate the genetic code into protein through the action of the cell’s protein manufacturing machinery, the ribosomes. Thus, RNA expands the quantity of a given protein that can be made at one time from one given gene, and it provides an important control point for regulating when and how much protein gets made.
Reverse transcription is, in and of itself, a normal cellular mechanism. Sperm cells, for example, express an enzyme, telomerase, which is part of a reverse transcription process to lengthen the end markers, or telomeres, which delineate DNA strands as individual chromosomes.
Telomeres are 5′-TTAGGG-3′ repeat sequences that cap the ends of chromosomes to give the genome protection and stability from progressive shortening after DNA replication caused by the incomplete replication of the 5′ end by DNA polymerase . The progressive shortening of telomeres due to the end-replication problem can be mitigated by the enzyme telomerase; it maintains telomeres by the addition of new repeats. Containing both a protein (TERT) and an RNA template (TERC), the enzyme functions as a reverse transcriptase synthesizing a single strand of telomeric DNA complementary to TERC onto the 3′ overhang.
If reverse transcription is a normal cellular mechanism, why is it a problem? As with most diseases and disorders, the normal mechanism becomes a problem when it gets hijacked for a purpose other than normal cell functions. The most dramatic example of this is the replication mechanism of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), which uses reverse transcription to create a DNA copy of itself and then inserts that DNA copy into the chromosomes within the nucleus of a cell.
Reverse transcription enzymes are also highly active in cancer cells. A 2021 study of a particular reverse transcription enzyme, Polymerase θ, suggested it might be an attractive target for future cancer drug research.
Polymerase θ (Polθ) is a unique DNA polymerase-helicase fusion protein in higher eukaryotes whose A-family polymerase domain evolved from Pol I enzymes (Fig. 1A) (1, 2). However, contrary to most Pol I enzymes, Polθ is highly error-prone and promiscuous (3–6), performs translesion synthesis (TLS) opposite DNA lesions (3, 7, 8), and facilitates microhomology-mediated end-joining (MMEJ) of double-strand breaks (DSBs) by extending partially base-paired 3′ single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) overhangs at DSB repair junctions (5, 9–12). Polθ is not expressed in most tissues but is highly expressed in many cancer cells, which corresponds to a poor clinical outcome (13, 14). Furthermore, Polθ confers resistance to genotoxic cancer therapies and promotes the survival of cells deficient in DNA damage response pathways (11, 13–16). Thus, Polθ represents a promising cancer drug target.
While reverse transcription is a normal cellular process, it is also a process that can easily veer off course into deadly disease.
What Reverse Transcription Is Not: Editing Genes
An important distinction must be made: reverse transcription is not, in and of itself, the rewriting of either individual genes or the restructuring of the entire genome. Reverse transcription is simply the creation of a strand of DNA from a strand of RNA.
The HIV infographic above illustrates the distinction. As that graphic illustrates, HIV—an RNA virus—reverse transcribes a copy of itself into a DNA strand, and that strand then enters the nucleus to be incorporated into chromosomal DNA—aka, the genes. Altering genes is thus a two step process: create a DNA strand, then weave that strand into chromosomal DNA. Reverse transcription is the first step.
What Did The Study Find?
This latest research was occasioned by an earlier study which found that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was capable of reverse transcription and genomic insertion.
Prolonged detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) RNA and recurrence of PCR-positive tests have been widely reported in patients after recovery from COVID-19, but some of these patients do not appear to shed infectious virus. We investigated the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 RNAs can be reverse-transcribed and integrated into the DNA of human cells in culture and that transcription of the integrated sequences might account for some of the positive PCR tests seen in patients. In support of this hypothesis, we found that DNA copies of SARS-CoV-2 sequences can be integrated into the genome of infected human cells. We found target site duplications flanking the viral sequences and consensus LINE1 endonuclease recognition sequences at the integration sites, consistent with a LINE1 retrotransposon-mediated, target-primed reverse transcription and retroposition mechanism. We also found, in some patient-derived tissues, evidence suggesting that a large fraction of the viral sequences is transcribed from integrated DNA copies of viral sequences, generating viral–host chimeric transcripts. The integration and transcription of viral sequences may thus contribute to the detection of viral RNA by PCR in patients after infection and clinical recovery. Because we have detected only subgenomic sequences derived mainly from the 3′ end of the viral genome integrated into the DNA of the host cell, infectious virus cannot be produced from the integrated subgenomic SARS-CoV-2 sequences.
Remember Rochelle Walensky's admission in December that PCR testing detects viral fragments? Reverse transcription and genomic integration offer one explanation for why PCR tests are finding viral fragments for an extended period postinfection—host cells are literally carrying those fragments around in their chromosomal DNA.
What we are seeing now is that the mRNA “vaccines” are also capable of reverse transcription. The study authors did not explore the possibility of genomic integration, although they explicitly acknowledge it is a possibility.
Our study shows that BNT162b2 can be reverse transcribed to DNA in liver cell line Huh7, and this may give rise to the concern if BNT162b2-derived DNA may be integrated into the host genome and affect the integrity of genomic DNA, which may potentially mediate genotoxic side effects. At this stage, we do not know if DNA reverse transcribed from BNT162b2 is integrated into the cell genome.
The study also notes that a potential avenue for reverse transcription, the LINE-1 enzyme, is expressed in the cell nucleus.
A possible mechanism for reverse transcription is through endogenous reverse transcriptase LINE-1, and the nucleus protein distribution of LINE-1 is elevated by BNT162b2.
In the assessment report on BNT162b2 provided to EMA by Pfizer, the pharmacokinetic distribution studies in rats demonstrated that a relatively large proportion (up to 18%) of the total dose distributes to the liver.
Does this mean that BNT162b2 is in fact hepatoxic? Not exactly. What the data shows is that BNT162b2 likes liver, and that reverse transcription does happen in the liver. The extent to which this can result in liver damage is beyond the scope of this study.
What is not beyond the scope of this study is the pace at which this takes place. BNT162b2 uptake in hepatic cells and reverse transcription begins to occur in as little as 6 hours.
BNT162b2 mRNA is reverse transcribed intracellularly into DNA as fast as 6 h after BNT162b2 exposure.
Apparently, unlike little children, BNT162b2 really likes liver!
We Were Told This Was Impossible
What makes this research especially troubling is that the CDC, along with most medical “experts”, have maintained all along that reverse transcription was impossible—that not only was it not happening, but that it could not happen.
According to the CDC, the mRNA “vaccines” triggers an immune response against the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and then just disappears,
After the body produces an immune response, it discards all the vaccine ingredients just as it would discard any information that cells no longer need. This process is a part of normal body functioning.
The genetic material delivered by mRNA vaccines never enters the nucleus of your cells, which is where your DNA is kept. Viral vector COVID-19 vaccines deliver genetic material to the cell nucleus to allow our cells to build protection against COVID-19. However, the vector virus does not have the machinery needed to integrate its genetic material into our DNA, so it cannot alter our DNA.
We now have evidence that elements of BNT162b2 are not discarded, but are in fact retained. We have indications that BNT162b2 does in fact enter the nucleus. Finally, we have a reminder that neither mRNA nor viral vector “vaccines" need to possess the “machinery” for genomic insertion, as it is already naturally occurring within cells.
The CDC's “facts", in true Faucist fashion, are the myths.
Nor is it just the CDC promoting these falsehoods. The corporate media has been quite faithful to its Faucist role as a Ministry of Misinformation, presenting presumed experts to put forth claims that are simply not true, such as this quote by Dr. Graham Snyder, UPMC Medical Director of Infectious Disease:
Basically, mRNA is a short piece of genetic instruction that teaches your body how to make the spike proteins seen on the outside of the coronavirus, which then helps to boost your protection.
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center officials said it does not change your DNA. In fact, it never even enters the part of the cell where your DNA is located.
“What’s amazing about these vaccines is the mRNA, that even the vaccine is gone within hours because it doesn’t last very long. It breaks down very quickly in the body and, in fact, the protein that instructs our bodies may also … doesn’t last for very long. All that’s left is our immune system’s ability to recognize the virus. It’s amazing,” Dr. Graham Snyder, UPMC Medical Director of Infectious Disease, said.
Simply put, the evidence rejects Dr Snyder's assertion. It is false and he is wrong; the “vaccine” and the protein have the wherewithal to remain long after their purpose is accomplished.
Doctors do not conduct gene therapy, modification of a person's genetic code to treat or cure disease, by injection of mRNA. Dr. Lawler explained to Lead Stories why the vaccines do not alter the function of DNA.
“The mRNA vaccines don't make DNA. It (mRNA) is a distinct type of molecule that does not enter into the nucleus of the (human cell.) Your DNA is in the nucleus, its own walled off area. The mRNA from the vaccine remains in the cytoplasm. It gets turned into protein by your cells' own mechanisms. It is impossible for humans to turn RNA into DNA because we don't have the enzyme that is able to do that. Only certain retroviruses have the ability to turn RNA into DNA. That enzyme is not in the vaccine and is not part of the coronavirus."
Dr. James Lawler is a board-certified expert on infectious disease who is apparently unaware of the existence of telomerase, of Polymerase θ, or any other normally occurring reverse transcription enzyme which, as I have documented above, “turn RNA into DNA”. The enzymes are not “in the vaccine” because they are already in our cells, put there by Mother Nature.
Let that sink in.
Even social media has been a party to these Faucist festivities. LinkedIn has this quaint bit of medical fiction from another “qualified person”, Christian van den Bos:
So, what keeps mRNA from behaving like DNA? Simple. The purpose of mRNA in mammalian cells is to ensure that the translation of DNA into functioning proteins is a one-way street. That is, mammalian DNA stays in the nucleus, while mRNA interacts with cellular machinery in the cytosol to make proteins. There is no mechanism to transform mRNA into DNA and there is no means for mRNA to move close to DNA. In fact, the nuclear wall is a physical barrier that tightly regulates the flow of molecules in and out of the nucleus and mRNA is never ferried in.
But wait. There are retroviruses. They have enzymes to reverse transcribe RNA into DNA. What if a retrovirus infection occurs at the same time as the administration of an mRNA vaccine? Could that enable the immunization to disrupt the host’s genome?
The answer is a resounding no. In addition to a network of virus-specific mechanisms that must be triggered for reverse transcription to occur, the machinery of a retrovirus must encounter distinct sequence patterns in RNA in order to transform it into DNA. None of this works with the synthetic mRNAs used in the vaccines.
Again, the “machinery” of reverse transcription, reverse transcriptase, is already part of a cell. As research shows, reverse transcription is not limited to retroviruses, is apparently leveraged by the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself, and now we see evidence that it occurs with mRNA “vaccines” as well.
No wonder LinkedIn wanted me gone. I ruined their narrative with facts.
While the evidence of it actually happening may be recent, the base research showing that it is possible is not. For the CDC, the corporate media, and the aforementioned “experts” (and these are hardly the only examples) to ignore the extant research and make a patently false—blatantly false—assertion is Faucist propaganda of the first degree.
This Is Why Faucism Is Dangerous
As I have argued previously, this ideological perversion of science by ignoring actual factual evidence to promote demonstrable falsehoods is dangerous. It damages the public health. It costs lives.
I do not know, and this latest research does not say, if the liver cells of the vaccinated have had their chromosomal DNA rewritten by BNT162b2. I do not know, and this latest research does not say, if the reverse transcribed DNA is in any way toxic or dangerous.
I do know that the potential for reverse transcription has always existed, and that any who claim to be conversant with the available literature surely must know this, lest their claim of familiarity be deemed suspect.
I also know that, given the already known potentials, this research should have been done long before even an Emergency Use Authorization was granted. That it was not is grim testimony to the death grip Faucism has on our healthcare infrastructures.
Note: I use quotes around the word “vaccines" to underscore the reality that the historical definitions of the term do not apply to the COVID-19 mRNA preparations. Elsewhere on social media I have also described them as “inoculations” for the same reason.
TechnoFog has an excellent expose on how the CDC has willfully bastardized the term which I encourage everyone to read.