TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @Kevin

Posted - January 31, 2026 at 9:19 PM

Saved - January 31, 2026 at 10:26 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

From BioNtech (Lenk et al) and Sutton (1997), I note RNA:DNA hybrids inhibit DNaseI. Even less known: quadruplex Gs inhibit DNaseI too; some exist in SV40, and my qPCR amplicon gives the strongest signal. Two DNaseI-inhibition mechanisms mean plasmid fragmentation in mRNA vaccines isn’t uniform, so there could be ~100-fold more spike than vector. I overlay the spike map with GAA repeats and quadruplex Gs and show my primers.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

It is well known from BioNtech (Lenk et al) and Sutton et al (1997) that RNA:DNA hybrids inhibit DNaseI. What is less known is that Quadruplex Gs also inhibit DNaseI. Some exist in SV40 and we get the most signal from this qPCR amplicon. 2 Different mechanisms of DNaseI inhibition = plasmid fragmentation cannot be assumed to be uniform in the mRNA vaccines. Hence 100 fold more spike than parts of the vector. Below is a map of the codon optimized spike where Quadruplex Gs are overlaid with GAA repeats. GAA's are stickier RNA:DNA hybrids. Our qPCR primers are overlayed as well. @RetsefL @KUPERWASSERLAB @weldeiry @JesslovesMJK @DJSpeicher @TracyBethHoeg @DrJBhattacharya

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Evans et al demonstrate DNaseI is resistant to quadruplex Gs. They also move to alternative enzymes. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41522-025-00694-x

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is from Lenk et al (BioNtech). Note the concern over GAA sequences and RNA:DNA hybrids. Our spike qPCR primers happen to land on GAA rich and quadruplex G rich regions of Spike. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/molecular-biosciences/articles/10.3389/fmolb.2024.1426129/full https://t.co/ww9Tf84ZHG

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Transfected RNA:DNA hybrids trigger different Toll Like Receptors than mRNA alone (cGAS, TLR9, NLRP3) which induce cytokine, chemokine and Type I interferon responses. Entirely, avoidable if they use the proper enzyme for DNA removal.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Happy Caturday https://t.co/JcRxNsveCr

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - January 11, 2026 at 7:03 PM

Saved - January 12, 2026 at 1:19 AM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

🔥🔥HIDE THE BALL🔥🔥 The intentional deception behind the DNA contamination story. @DrJBhattacharya @MartyMakary @RWMaloneMD @RobertKennedyJr @SenRonJohnson @JesslovesMJK @DJSpeicher @weldeiry @KUPERWASSERLAB @RetsefL @joshg99 @KMilhoanMDPhD https://t.co/KFOj7YNckg

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 0 lays out a detailed critique of how the transition from process one to process two allegedly occurred, arguing that process one was deliberately structured to “cook the books” so that regulators would see nothing in their assays, while the real material of concern—DNA contaminants, including plasmids and RNA/DNA hybrids—would only be detectable in process two. Key points - The shift from process one to process two is alleged to be planned from the start. The assays used were designed “not to find things,” and the trial was set up in process one with the expectation that process two would ultimately be used, exposing a premeditated sequence of actions. - Ten nanogram limit and copy number. The ten nanogram figure is framed as a limited hangout: the real concern is molarity and copy number of DNA molecules, not weight. Naked-DNA half-lives are short, but lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) protect DNA, altering degradation and persistence. The origin of the 10 ng limit traces to Sheng Fowler and Keith Patten’s work, which emphasized copy number (molarity) rather than weight, particularly for small fragments and plasmids. The argument is that 10 ng can correspond to vastly different copy numbers depending on fragment size; smaller fragments dramatically increase copy number and potential integration ends. - Spike vs. CAN gene targeting. In process one, spike sequences are amplified, then RNA is generated via IVT, and residual DNA is monitored using a CAN gene target. The CAN assay is described as a decoy that would not detect post-amplification products; spike post-amplification would be abundant, but the CAN assay would show little or nothing. In process two, E. coli replication of the entire plasmid would introduce CAN sequences, yet regulators were still steered to look at CAN rather than spike, masking true residual DNA. - Assay design and regulatory deception. The EMA/EMAs documents and related papers show an RT-PCR setup that amplifies spike RNA to confirm expression while also using CAN primers that would not detect post-amplification plasmid content. A key accusation is that the regulators were given an assay that cannot detect the relevant post-amplification material, while an assay for spike exists but is not reported or used. - DNA vs. RNA measurement challenges. qPCR is argued to be ill-suited for this purpose due to fragmentation and the mismatch between input weight and actual molecule count. Fragmentation from DNase treatment is nonrandom: can (CAN) regions are hyper-fragmented, spike regions less so, causing disproportionate detectability depending on primer design and amplicon length. This yields underestimation of the true DNA content when relying on CAN-targeted PCR. - Enzymatic treatment and measurement implications. DNase I degrades CAN more efficiently than spike, particularly when DNA is in a DNA/RNA hybrid context post-IVT. Another enzyme (DNase XT) is claimed to better digest RNA-DNA hybrids, moving CT values for CAN and leaving spike detectable. This suggests the choice of enzymes was deliberate to obscure true residual DNA, while spike DNA remains more detectable under alternative assays. - Measurement methods and data interpretation. Fluorometry (e.g., PicoGreen or Ribogreen) is used to measure DNA or RNA doses, but crosstalk and fragmentation complicate interpretation. The speaker argues that fluorometry should be used in conjunction with RNase/DNase treatments and proper controls to distinguish DNA from RNA, and cautions that PCR-based extrapolations can massively overestimate or misrepresent actual DNA content due to fragmentation biases. - Consolidated claim. Across multiple studies and preparations, spike DNA is found at significantly higher levels than CAN DNA (e.g., a hundredfold difference in several datasets). The “can” assay is positioned as a decoy, while spike assays reveal the genuine DNA content and potential for integration, signaling intentional misdirection in regulator briefings. The speaker concludes that the “game of hide the ball” is ongoing: regulators have been misdirected to look for CAN DNA in process one, while the meaningful residual DNA relates to spike-containing sequences post-amplification—yet this is not consistently measured or reported. The overall thrust is that the design of assays and the choice of targets imply intentional deception to obscure true DNA contamination risks, particularly in the transition to process two.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Good morning, everyone. It's January 11, and, I've just realized, online that some folks are, not fully understanding what's going on in process one and process two and how the DNA contamination story folds into this. And so I wanted to spend a little bit more time here, really highlighting those differences because when you see what went on, in that shift, you'll understand the deception that's going on, and you'll also come to recognize that this was a premeditated move. You can tell what their intentions are by what assays they built, and you can see by what they did that their plan from the start was to always use process two. Okay? It was not a, oh, no. We can't scale up. We have to rip the PCR and and and bead cleanup out of this process to scale, and we're just gonna switch to process two now after the trial is complete. The assays they had in place during process one only made sense if process two was ultimately to be, considered and used, which means they set the trial up in process one intentionally that way when they knew they would be on process two in the end. Alright? So and you can this is evident by the assays that they designed and they gave to the regulators. And in both cases for process one and process two, the assays that they designed were designed not to find things. Alright? So I just wanna I I wanna make that a little bit more clear because my presentations in the past doesn't seem like that that really that really came out. Now before we get into this, there is another detail that I feel I've missed in in speaking about this in the past. I've just gone over it too quickly, too many slides, that kind of thing. So I'm gonna zero in on a few issues about the 10 nanogram limit that people don't fully appreciate, and then we're gonna talk about the different assays that they have for monitoring the DNA and the RNA in process one and process two and how those can only make sense if they had planned to do process two from the start, which makes you question why did they run process one the way they did. They did that to cook the books knowing they'd have ultimately been processed too. And you you you'll see this. It'll become very clear to you that they from the get go, their plan was to use processed too. They just came up with a trial that would bend this, and, the evidence is in what they target in PCR. So, okay, let's let's hit on the ten nanogram limit a little bit. Okay. This is a limited hangout. Okay? Ten minute half life of of DNA, is what what happens when it's naked. We all know this. Right? The and so they come up with these limits based on naked DNA injection. We get into the world of LNPs, and everything goes out the window because LNPs protect the DNA from the degradation process, so we don't know the half life of the DNA now. And we're we're learning this real time in patients as we find patients that are expressing spike fifteen hundred days later. Okay? This is a bit shocking that the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of this drug were just a a crapshoot, and we're, living with this experiment now real time on patients, unfortunately. Now you have to understand how did they come to this ten nanogram limit. Okay? Like, what is the origin of it in order for you to understand its its context? So it comes back to this Sheng Fowler and Keith Petten paper where they were taking genomic DNA and putting it on cell lines or mice to try to see what the negative effects would be. Okay? And what most people haven't captured out of this paper is that the authors rightly point out that the weight is not the nanogram weight is not the issue. In fact, back when this paper was published, they were talking about picograms, and they've since loosened those regulations since they got liability protection. But, so it used to be 10 or a 100 picograms, and now it's 10 nanograms. But what what people have missed in this guidance is that weight isn't the right metric for a contamination like this. It's molecules. Weight doesn't give you the number of molecules unless you know the length of the DNA. So for instance, human DNA at 10 nanograms is about 1,450 copies of of DNA. That means, you know, the chromosomes are usually, you know, a hundred, two hundred million mega megabases in size, and so they only have ends on the telomeres. The reason people care about copy number is that when you get down to 10 nanograms of 200 bases of DNA, you're dealing with 50,000,000,000 copies, not 1,400. Okay? And it is the it is the actual copy number that matters most because the copy number dictates how many ends of the DNA that you have. The ends of the DNA are what can be joined in integration. The ends of the DNA have phosphates and hydroxyls, which are the active groups that can be integrated and that ligases use to put DNA into into integration events. So you'll note in Keith's work that they point out here that, well, if this were a very small piece of DNA, like a retroviral DNA, which would be like the size of a plasmid, the the DNA limit would need to be 10 femtograms or lower. And if there are a 100 copies of the infectious viral genome, the amount of DNA would need to be a 100 adagrams. Okay? What this statement is talking about is the molarity of DNA, and that's what matters, the copy number, not the weight. Alright? Now you may not be familiar with adagrams and femtograms, but this is what helps you convert those numbers. Okay? So nanograms and femtograms, there's about a it's about a 100,000,000 fold. If you get down to a 100 adagrams, as he was suggesting, it's eight logs lower than 10 nanograms. Alright? This is why this 10 nanogram thing is a mirage. It's a limited hangout because everyone's talking about weight when the real number that Keith Petten was speaking about in his guidance for this was about copy number, not about weight. And since then, people have always assumed that, well, all the cell substrate DNA that might contaminate a vaccine is whole genomes. It's it's should be 3,000,000,000 bases long, and it's gonna mean that 10 nanograms equals 1,400 copies. No big deal. But when you get down to things that are 5,000 letters long, not not 6,000,000,000 letters long, that copy number suddenly goes through the roof. And so this is why he has a molarity based recommendation in the paper that gets just ignored by everybody. Alright? So when you get into the adagram range, and you're using lipid nanoparticles, which make that DNA a hundredfold more potent, you can see that we're just we're we're we're well over any rational limit that relates to the paper that originated that 10 nanogram limit, and that 10 nanogram limit never never really considered the the LNPs making this last longer and be more potent. Okay? So that's the context you need to view the DNA contamination story with because if you're viewing it in this context, we have a DNA contaminant here that isn't substrate genomic DNA. Okay? It is this is actually plasmids that are like viruses. They're very small self replicating molecules, and so you have to view them through the adagram guidance that Keith Patton put into his paper. No one's doing that. So this be this means it's really important for us to look at how are they measuring this DNA, And if the methods that they have for measuring this DNA, are they ever gonna find it? And that is where you can see the deception that's occurred. Okay. I've I've got papers here that show that, you know, Limm et al describes high integration rates. You can see down there, it's like 10 to 20% of the cells are getting integrated when you when you put in transfection reagents. And this goes through the some of the math about the molarity and how it is those ends of DNA that matter. And anyone who's done a DNA ligation reaction knows this. You can see it in Mani Anders' manuscripts and his guidance on this where the ligation that you perform never asks you about the nanograms as input. They talk about the number of ends that you have, phosphates and hydroxyls in the molecules. So what is the molarity of the DNA? That dictates how many adapters you try to ligate. They don't go with nanograms because nanograms are a meaningless number if you don't know the size of the DNA. And so the ligation conditions completely change if you're trying to ligate adapters to 10 kilobytes pieces of DNA versus a 100 base pair pieces of DNA because a molarity is off by thousandfold or or and and that's or a hundredfold, whatever it is. But it's it's similarity that matters. Okay. So, Bancel knows this. I think you've seen this. Of course, this stuff can integrate. So everyone knows how we got here. BMJ talks about process one to process two and and Josh's work, okay, and how there was no trial really done. Well, the a trial was done, but they never released the data because I think the trial data showed that this was actually extraordinarily dangerous. So they hid that data knowing that the train had left the station. Okay. So so to to understand the deception that's going on, you have to understand what DNA was in process one versus what DNA was in process two, and then you can see how they played this game of hide the ball. This is the plasmids that that that they disclosed on the right. This is the plasma we found on the left, and everyone knows they had they admitted this s v 40 thing. But I think I wanna draw a lot of attention to right now is this can gene. This is what the can gene on the left there was disclosed by the TGA as being what they target to monitor the DNA. And the reason why that's important is that when they were operating in process one, that target wasn't there. Process one, if you recall, amplified spike, which is from noon to 06:00 on the right side of this plasmid, they amplified that as a spike sequence. So when you amplify, that becomes, like, a thousand to a million times higher in copy number than the CAN gene. Alright? So post amplified PCR, they then go and look for residual DNA of the nonamplified part of the plasmid. Right? So this is what's happening. You have a you have an input of a very small amount of this template plasmid. You run it through PCR, and you get millions of copies of spike. And then where does Pfizer tell them to go look for the contaminating DNA? Over in Cannes. What are they gonna find? They're gonna find nothing. This is what they should be measuring. They should be measuring spike. So why does a TGA, when they're FOIA ed and asked, what are you using to monitor the residual DNA, why do we get documents back from them that say this? Can gene. They've been given a target that doesn't exist. Alright? Now this target makes sense if you're gonna run that plasmid through E. Coli because in that case, the CAN gene needs to exist in order for E. Coli to copy it. It's the resistance gene, and it should be there at equal copy number. We have a paper coming out that's gonna show you why it's not really at equal copy number. It's actually at 1% of the spike for some reasons I'll get into in just a minute. But this shows you that, a, in process one during the clinical trial, they gave them a decoy target to monitor the residual DNA. They didn't look at spike, which is the thing that they amplified that as the input to the IVT reaction. They told them to look at the precursor to this process, which would find nothing or very low amounts. Okay. So that's that's one thing. Two, this shows you that they probably from the start were intending to go through process two by measuring the can gene because that should be there. That's the one gene that if the E. Coli were to grow the plasmid, the only thing that you could that you could really anchor onto or that you shouldn't anchor onto is a resistance gene because that's what drives the selection for the plasmid to make sure that it's there. So that should be there in theory after E. Coli growth. E. Coli can't maintain these plasmids without that gene. In fact, when the FDA tells you that these residual plasmids are immaterial to plasmid manufacturing, they're lying through their teeth because you can't actually get a plasmid to grow in a coli without that antibiotic resistance gene. It's actually the most critical part of plasmid manufacturing when they tell you it's not material to it. It's a a complete inversion of the truth. But the fact that they told them to look here is very peculiar given if you look through the EMA documents, they have an assay to look at spike, but they never report it. Alright. So, I'll touch on that in just a bit. In process two, what happens is E. Coli doesn't just replicate spike. It has to replicate the entire circle, which means it should be the same copy number as spike, can. There's a second artifact as to why that's not true in the case of these vials is that they're using an enzyme to destroy this DNA afterwards that destroys can but doesn't destroy spike. And so there's a hundredfold offset between CAN and spike when we look at this through PCR, and we'll go through that data. Okay. So this is very telling as to what's going on in the minds of the people who designed the trial and in the minds of what they're telling the regulators to look for. They're telling them to go look in the wrong place, particularly in light of this. This is the EMA documents that that show they have a qPCR test that looks at spike. The these sequences that you see up here, if you put them in the SnapGene, you'll see they land on spike. And this sequence is used to confirm that the plasmid actually has a spike insert and to confirm that the RNA is of spike origin after the IVT reaction. You'll see this is an RT PCR reaction. That means they're looking at RNA. But those same primers, you merely need to put into PCR and not run the the ten minute RT step in front of it, and you get answers for only DNA. They're using this to get answers for both DNA and RNA in this case. So you have to ask, why did they go and make a CAN assay when they already were forced to validate a spike assay? And why don't they report the CT value for that spike assay? They don't report it because it's a hundredfold higher, and we know that now. Alright. So this is the this is the game of hide the ball that they play with the regulators. They gave them an assay that can't find anything even though they had already validated an assay that would find it. So Pfizer knows they're over the limit because this assay would have told them so. And then they went and made an assay for for process one that would find nothing. And you have to ask yourself, how did the regulator fall for this? How did they how were they given an assay to look at the preamplified template that didn't find the postamplified product? They should have had a spike assay looking at postamplification, and yet one exists in their documents that doesn't get used. Alright? This begins to show you the thinking that's going on in in the people that designed the trial and how they hid this from the regulators. And the regulators still to this day are clueless of this deception because they keep saying, well, the regulators looked and they use this can assay, and they don't see anything. And no matter how many times we yell at them that you can't use a can assay during process one, what are you talking about? That's not what they amplify. It falls on deaf ears. Okay. I'm gonna go through a few other details here that befuddle qPCR. Alright? QPCR is really not meant for task on this, and you'll understand why as I go through this. But they should have known it's not suited for purpose because Moderna told them it wasn't suited for purpose. That was in their patents that this does not work. And there's several reasons why it doesn't work that we'll hit on. Okay. So just a refresher because I think some people aren't familiar with the difference between process one and process two. During process one, they would take this plasmid as an input, PCR amplify this DNA of spike, and then they would take that DNA. Now that the left side of this molecule has been drowned out with amplification of the right side of the molecule, they would then take that, put that through an IVT reaction to get RNA and to get rid of the DNA. They, in process two, had to switch and change to using a DNase. Prior to this, when they amplified the DNA, they put a biotin on here, they could pull the DNA out with a magnetic bead. And that's a more expensive process, So that slowed them down. But, and and and that's that's the reason for them wanting to go directly off the plasmids is they didn't wanna have to do the PCR step and the cleanup step. So they switched to using these plasmids where they can just use an enzyme in attempt to clean this up. This enzyme will clean up and erase the left hand of this molecule. What we have found is that it does not erase spike because spike still has the RNA stuck to it, and that enzyme does not resolve RNA DNA hybrids. So in both cases, process one and in process two, the CAN target is not gonna find the content. Alright? So when you do this DNase reaction, you actually create a shotgun library, and this shotgun library is a fragmented library that looks you hope it's randomly fragmented. The problem you're gonna find that we're gonna go through is that it does not randomly fragment. It actually hyper fragments the can region and under fragments the spike region by about a hundredfold. And the reason PCR fails to sort this out is that your detection frequency is entirely dependent on how far apart your primers are. If you fragment this down to a 150 bases and design a 233 base pair product to measure this, you're not gonna find much because anytime there's a molecule that's broken between the primers, it can't amplify. So when you see papers like the OX paper using really large where where they emit in their paper that the average fragment size is a 100 bases or a 150 bases, and then they go and design a 233 base pair amplicon to measure it, they are intentionally trying to deceive you because this cannot amplify the majority of the material that's in there because most of it's broken to be shorter than the distance of the primers. They also have a 63 base pair primer set for a can. And, of course, that amplifies more because if its average size is a 150 bases, there will be more molecules that are amplifiable. Now one of the deceptions that occurs here is that when you amplify with DNA, you're only getting a quant of this part of the plasmid. This is only one one hundredth of the plasmid, maybe one hundred and twentieth of the plasmid. So then you apply some mathematical extrapolations, some some models to say, hey. I I measured, you know, 10% or 1% of the actual plasmid. I'm gonna multiply everything by a 100. And and that assumes that every time you see one of these molecules that isn't fragmented between the primers, that there must have at one point been a full length plasmid from that. Therefore, I can safely multiply by a 120 to measure how much was there. What this fails to capture is that anything that is fragmented between the primers doesn't get measured, and you then miss out on not just that 63 base per region, but the other 7,000 you would have added to it. So it's a multiplicative error when you when you make this mistake. The other thing that it that it rests on is that the the plasmid is evenly digested everywhere in the plasmid, and that's we know to be false. The can regions get hyperfragmented, and the spike regions don't. So there's two mathematical extrapolations that this thing relies on that are both false and multiplicatively false, and that they're they're not just wrong a little. The error they make, you have to multiply by a 120 in the case of the 63 base pair amplicon because that's one one hundred and twentieth of the entire plasmid length. And to the extent that the plasmid is not uniformly digested, you're gonna make additional errors upon that. And we know that there's about a two log scale difference between what gets fragmented in spike versus can. So you've got 200 fold errors going on in this mathematical extracts extrapolation, so you could easily have a 10,000 fold mistake when you use PCR. Another way to look at this is to take a DNA library that's been sheared, and this is not a vaccine. It's just a sheared library. You can pull off the Internet, and what it looks like on an Agilent electropherogram. And to conceptualize this, the 233 base per ampicon is only gonna be able to capture the material in the red brackets, and the sixty three one will get the rest. However, nothing that you do with PCR is gonna get it all. It's always gonna under measure it, which is why you'll see in the speaker paper, many of the lots are under the 10 nanogram limit. That's expected because this thing we know is an under counting tool. Now the other thing it doesn't measure is unexpected DNA. For for PCR to work, you have to design primers to amplify your target, so you're only amplifying what you expect to be there. So if you give someone the canned region, which you don't expect to be there, you'll find nothing. And likewise, the E. Coli background DNA will never get counted in this measurement. This is why we have moved to fluorometry because it measures everything. Now when you get a look at the read lengths from OXR nanopore, you can see that, this is heavily shifted to the left, which means a lot of the material is in fact small, but it has a long tail. And, this complicates making any of these extrapolations. Another way to look at this, there's 200 base pair limit right there. So if you design, 200 base pair amplicons, you're only gonna measure the DNA that's the right. And some may say, hey. That's fine. That's what the reg say. 200 bases is safe because, it's not functional. But we get we we have 72 base pair pieces of DNA in this plasmid known as the SV 40 promoter enhancer that are functional. They're nucleotargeting sequences, and they're down here. And we know small DNA can integrate. So when it comes to using LNPs, the 200 base per limit is really, rational. That was designed because DNA usually gets chewed from the ends in. So when you inject it naked, it's the 200 base per stuff should get chewed faster. That's not true when you LNP wrap it. 200 bases can still stimulate seagusting and can still integrate. So the 200 base per limit really doesn't make any sense once you start using LNPs. You get need to measure everything. Okay. So let's touch on why DNase one does not uniformly digest the plasmid. Alright? This is actually something that's been known in literature since 1997 from Sutton et al, and it's been recapitulated in the literature from BioNTech themselves. You'll notice that there are lots of papers now, five peer reviewed papers that see this phenomenon, and I don't think everyone's caught on to why. So this the most recent paper we have coming out will explain why. Okay. What you'll notice when we amplify the vector versus spike in our first paper, we had, a five CT offset between those two. Okay? Vector is red. Spike is blue. Why are those not on top of each other? That's because we believe and we didn't fully appreciate it at this time, but that the vector is getting degraded by DNase one more than spike is. That offset is then recapitulated in speaker. Speaker paper has this offset, which is more like five to seven CT offset. You'll see the spike is in red for lending the Moderna lots and the vectors in blue. That is a hundredfold difference. Pay attention to that number because that number is what we consistently see study to study. You look at Sonya Pakova's work. She has an offset between vector and spike in both of these. Sometimes it's erratic. Sometimes it flips. Don't totally understand why that's going on. It's a sign that there's some manufacturing slop, which was observed in the trials. So, this is perhaps congruent with what the EMA saw. Buchholt's work. He also has about a 10 scale, a tenfold difference between these. These are the spikes over here. The three bar graphs on the right are the are the spike sequences, and the other parts of the of this plasmid vector are on the left. Now for these purposes, I I spoke to Philip directly, and he said, hey. Take out this one assay here because I think there's an artifact there. That that one is screaming hot, and it was running a different plate, maybe it had different different standards. So just pull the outlier off and be conservative. If that were present, this would be a hundredfold different. K? Alright. Then you go and look at, our work from, that has recently published as a preprint, and it's on its way to publish shortly. Here, this is the most thorough work done to date and that we did 27 PCRs for every vial. We did three different dilutions, all in triplicate. So each one of these bars has three different PCR reactions at one x, one to 10 x dilution, one to a 100 x dilution. That series of dilutions is important whenever there's inhibitors potentially involved in the PCR because sometimes the one x will give you an erratic result when there's inhibitor that you don't see at 10 x and and a 100 x dilution. So you run all three. We also did this at three different targets in the in the plasmid. So we can see that all the regions in spike are coming out of a CT of 15, and the regions in the plasmid vector are coming out of 22. That's a seven point one four delta CT. That means that's a 141 fold difference between the spike and the, the backbone. That is not an artifact. That is real biological signal that there is a hundredfold more spike DNA than canned DNA. So once again, the canned target that pharma is giving the regulators is meant to hide the ball. It's designed to. Alright? These are process two lots. This is not just a process one issue. Over here are are Pfizer lots. They have s v 40. So, in this case, there's no Moderna lots here. And you can see one of these artifacts occurring. Like, in the one case, we get a CT of, like, six. That's that's that's not real because we don't see one to ten and one to a 100 doing it. Whenever you get CTs that are below a CT of 10, the the qPCR instrument is using that window from zero to 10 to background subtract. And if you have signal come up there, it'll get confused. So this is why it's important to do the titrations. You really wanna see each one of these bar graphs in the one x to the one to 10 to the one to a 100. They should be about 3.3 CTs apart. And then when you see that that consistently, you you know the assay is not inhibited. This is the right way to do a inhibitor reaction. You can't do an inhibitor reaction by putting DNA in here at CT of five or 10 because it's too hot for you to find an inhibitor. You have to do a serial dilution. The OX group failed to do this. You have to do a serial dilution to pick up inhibitors, and you wanna measure that there's a 3.3 CT offset between all of these to gauge whether inhibitors there or not. Alright. So what we did in this study is we said forget the one x. There's too many artifacts in the one x data like this one here. So what we're gonna do is go with the one to 10 dilution as the measurement for this and then multiply all our numbers by 10 when we're done, and that will give us it'll put us in the sweet spot of the dynamic range for the PCR machine. So, again, the take home message here is there there's a large offset here, and that is biologically real. And Moderna knew this. They even wrote a patent saying don't use qPCR because of this fragmentation problem, and it doesn't measure everything that's there. So what's the mechanism behind this? We spoke about RNA DNA hybrids, and we have a paper on this now that's coming out. RNA DNA hybrids is after in a in a in a vitro transcription reaction, when you make RNA off that DNA, that RNA is self complementary to the DNA. So it's wrapped up in a knot with the DNA. And when the DNAs comes to chew this, it's like, I don't recognize that molecule. It's half RNA, half DNA. I'm not touching it. I'm gonna go destroy the DNA that's double stranded. That's my substrate. This isn't. So the DNase one does a great job destroying the CAN gene, you don't find anything, which is why they're pointing the regulators there while all the spike DNA is a hundredfold higher according to five different studies that have looked at this that are all peer reviewed and published now. Okay? This is another way to depict the problem. The the backbone gets degraded. You PCR can. You PCR spike. This is exactly what we see. You get about a hundredfold difference. Okay. Here's another way to look at this. What we did is we took the vaccines, and then we treated them with Triton x and some in this case, the PCR. The PCR does the heating for us, but we just treat it with soap, and that opens up the LMPs. And once you open up the LMPs, you can then ask, okay. What does DNase one do to that material? Can we get the CTs to move it off? We reapply DNase one. And what happens when you reapply DNase one is you see spike stay the same, yet you see the Ori region, the vector splits. So more DNase one continues to erase their CAN region. It's not fully erased either. It's not zero, but it's below the limit. And it moves more when you add DNase one back in again, but it doesn't touch spike. If you go and grab the next enzyme down in the NAB catalog that's designed for IVT reactions, for RNA DNA hybrid digestion, you'll see spike move six CT. Even blows apart the Ori region even further. Same thing is true in in Pfizer and Moderna. You can see the Ori moves with more DNase one. You add, the spike does not move, so it's protected. Put in DNase XT and bang, 12 CTs move, when you add in the proper enzyme. So they're using the wrong enzyme. And, this is not an accidental thing, I would say, because these enzymes are sold by the same manufacturers, and there are many manufacturers that offer enzymes that are designed for iBT reactions. If you go to Thermo, they'll tell you to use e z DNase, which is known to hit iBT reactions. Duplex DNA set NEB or DNase XT is known for is really designed for iBT reactions. They chose an enzyme, either being idiots or intentionally to leave some DNA behind because DNA is a nice adjuvant. They like adjuvants. Because of this, we're now getting 5,200 base pair pieces of DNA in these things, and, this is not nonfunctional DNA. This DNA, you can see, encodes all of this material with two different mammalian promoters. Mammalian promoters will signal the cells, mammalian cells, to make RNA from here into spike and from here into neo and can. So this is fully functional DNA even though the regulators have told you it's not. And they've probably come to that conclusion because they've never actually measured the length of these molecules or the relying of paper like the OX paper, which uses Illumina that can't actually amplify 5,000 base pair piece of DNA. That stuff can maybe amplify a 500 base pair piece of DNA and sequence it. Can't do 5,000. They can't see it. They're intentionally not looking with the right tools. Now this should piss you off because BioNTech knows about this. This is their paper, and they spell it out right here. The specific the specific activity of DNase one for RNA DNA hybrids, however, is at least a hundredfold below that for double stranded DNA, and they cite Sutton et al. Hundredfold. That's the number of what we're seeing in five different studies. They know the problem. They're aware of it, and they're still pointing regulators to look in the wrong place. K? So they need to be taking the manufacturer's own advice on this. Read their patents. QPCR only attempts to measure a 100 bases of DNA, and then there's a bunch of mathematical bullshit that goes on afterwards to try to claim how much DNA is there by saying, well, take a 100, measure it by you know, multiply it by 78, and that gives you an estimate for the full plasmid. And we'll just forget about the fragmentation issue that's going on here and how many primers drop out because of that. That that's probably immaterial when, in fact, it could be 90% of the DNA. It can't measure the E. Coli DNA that's there. It can't measure small DNA. That's that's beneath the size of the amplicon, and it can't look for unexpected DNA. It assumes it also assumes this uniform fragmentation, which doesn't occur. So as I mentioned before, there could be a hundredfold error here. There could be a hundredfold error here. You know, that gets you up to a 10,000 fold error rate. That's why when people are measuring this, there's nothing but argumentation in the literature because they say you have to use PCR. You can't use fluorometry. Well, that's an interesting comment. Because if you look through the docs, they use fluorometry to measure the dose of the drug, the RNA, and they try to claim that that's legitimate. You can use RNA or fluorometry to measure the RNA. You can't use it to measure the DNA because there's crosstalk in the DNA. Let's go over that crosstalk argument. The important thing about to know about fluorometry is it doesn't use primers. It has dyes that bind to to these minor grooves, which means you have to have double stranded material. RNA is usually single stranded, but in the case of these Pfizer vaccines and Moderna vaccines, the RNA is actually designed to fold back in itself and make double stranded minor grooves. They do that so that RNA lasts forever. And that does mean that there's more crosstalk than the manufacturers have reported on these dyes, but we can measure that and account for that by using enzymes that erase it. Okay. There's a limitation here that Giorgio spells out. Even using fluorometry, we're only gonna get 30% of the DNA signal when you chew it with DNA swan. And when you make these molecules shorter, the dyes don't bind as well. That's the the summary of the paper. So you have to compensate. Now we haven't been applying this compensation factor because, it's already over the limit, so multiplying it by 1.7 isn't gonna make it, you know, that much more of a difference, but people should know that this limitation exists. That after your DNAs choose something, you take if you take a 23 kilobytes molecule like they did here, measure it with pico green, you'll get one number. DNA is treated the same amount of DNA now is still in the vial. DNA does not destroy it. It just cuts it into smaller lengths. So it should stain to be the same amount, but only stains to be 30% of the signal. That tells you the dyes are not behaving on smaller DNA as well. Now they'll say qubit's not standardized, whatever. The most expensive molecular biology we do today is running Illumina sequencers because those runs are $20,000 a pull. So if you get the DNA concentration wrong, you've just blown $20. Alright? And how do you get it wrong? Well, if you if you underestimate it and put too much on, you'll you'll over cluster the sequencer, and it can't read anything. And if you under measure it by a factor of 10, you won't get a whole lot of sequence out, and your $20,000 run will effectively feel like a 200,000 run. Okay? So it's very important to get this right. And if you go to Illumina's manufacturing and recommendations and thermos, they'll tell you to use a qubit to get this thing right. In fact, the OX paper that tried to refute our work very poorly tried to claim you can't use the qubit to to measure the RNA. And what do they do when they actually go sequence the vaccine? They measure it with a qubit and put it on their luminaire because they do not wanna use their qPCR data to make that mistake. They know the qPCR data is all over the map, and it could easily over cluster or under cluster, and they get nothing. So that's a major contradiction in the Aux paper. They claim you can't use qubit to measure this, then they turn around and use it when they want to sequence the vaccine. Alright? That should tell you all you need to know. They are in fact conflicted and funded by pharma. So Sensible Biotech funds them, and they're an mRNA company. So when we do this properly with qubits, the one thing we do do is we put in 200 fold more RNase a than the manufacturer recommends to really make sure there's no question that we've eliminated the RNA. We do that over time series to make sure that its reaction's gone to completion. In this case, when you do 200 fold more RNase a, it's done in two minutes. Plateaus. Same signal at two at two minutes is at 10. In fact, you can do this and watch it in real time. It gets destroyed in seconds. The just the curve just drops right in front of your eyes. You can see it. And so we erase all the RNA, then we measure how much DNA is there. And in subsequent experiments, we've then gone further and said, okay. If it's truly DNA, hit it with DNase one XT and measure how much signal disappears after that because that's a very specific enzyme for just DNA. And that drops 240 nanograms when we do that. So we we know this is DNA because the end the RNA has erased it, and then we subsequently follow-up and erase what's remaining with the DNase. Alright? That's the best way to do this. And you'll see when you do this, you do not get a big difference between spike and ori. And so I might say, well, wait a minute. You guys said the vector gets fully destroyed. It gets just it gets cut into smaller pieces that still can stain, but it does not disappear like it does in PCR because it gets cut below the amplicon size. Remember, the amplicon size in PCR, the closest you can get those primers is probably 63 bases because you need to have a probe in between the two of them. 25 bases for each primer and 25 bases for a probe. That's as tight as you can get PCR to go. Thermometry, however, can pick up 20 bases. Alright? So we are seeing the same signal in Aury as we're seeing in spike because it is cut below the size the PCR can measure, and thorometry sees both. And then you can see the PCR in blue is all over the place. Alright? This is why people are arguing over what PCR does because it's entirely dependent on the fragmentation process and the distance the primer sit. So what does pharma use to measure the RNA? They use something called ribo green. So when people say you can't use fluorometry to measure the DNA, well, you're using it to measure the dose of the drug. And they'll say, yeah, but there's there's crosstalk with the DNA dyes. It's not true. This is this is just to re you know, solidify this point. This is the EMA document showing they're using thermometry. And then when they when they go to identify the RNA, they use that RT qPCR and spike, which is weird. That's Pfizer showing it as well. Here's the EMA measurements of 10 vials that Pfizer cherry picked for them. They vary by 815 fold, and the one outlier they claim as an incorrect DNA stock. You have to wonder how many times that is happening in production if they can't manage to get this straight on the 10 vials they cherry picked for the EMA. It's probably wider than that than 815 fold variants. So this is a known problem, and they've been cited for it. K. So let's look at ribo green. They say the crosstalk in the DNA side is too great. What is it on the RNA side? If you use ribo green, you get twice the amount of signal for DNA than you get for RNA on that dye. The crosstalk is 200 fold over the RNA signal. So here is ten ten micrograms of RNA. You put in ten micrograms of DNA, and you get twice the RFUs. And if you mix RNA and DNA, you end up on the top curve up here. And if your DNAs treat that, it comes right back down. There's two lines actually here superimposed at the at the at the bottom line. Alright? So this dye has 200% more signal for DNA than for RNA, and then they turn around and claim you can't use fluorometry to measure DNA when the documented crosstalk is this. This blue line is the RNA. Alright? It's like 7% of the signal that you get for DNA in the green line. If this were ribo green, the DNA signal, the crosstalk, would be twice as high as the as the the as as the RNA signal. So we're talking about probably two orders of magnitude difference in crosstalk on the dye that they're using to measure the dose. So they use fluorometry to measure the dose with a dye that has, you know, orders of magnitude more crosstalk and then turn around and say, you cannot use these dyes to measure the DNA when those dyes have orders of magnitude lower crosstalk than what they're using to measure the dose of the drug. This is a very incoherent argument that they have. It doesn't make any sense. Alright? So this is easily addressable by using RNase and enzyme. Okay? So, hopefully, that gave you some understanding of what's going on in process one versus process two and why there is a big charade going on here. But once you understand how they cherry picked assays to mislead all the regulators, you'll realize that they did this quite intentionally. They put they pointed them toward can during process one knowing they'd find nothing. When they went into process two, they knew they had to have CAN. However, they also know that that's not gonna find everything because the RNA DNA hybrid stuff is documented in their own papers, and it's been known since 1997. So I won't go through the rest of the presentation because I think you've seen this, but that hopefully explains the game of hide the ball that's going on that the regulators have not been quite getting their head around. So best of luck.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - January 8, 2026 at 11:13 PM

Saved - January 9, 2026 at 9:37 AM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Great view from Chuck https://t.co/rRI5ImUysP

Video Transcript AI Summary

Speaker 0 lays out a numerical comparison between vaccine versus infection to determine which creates more spike proteins, according to the source material. First, the infection scenario. The unit counted is the virion (one complete virus particle). At the peak of infection, the body could be fighting off somewhere between one to 100,000,000,000 virions. Each virion has spike proteins on its surface, counted as between twenty five and fifty spikes per virion. The calculation multiplies the range of virions by the spikes per virion, giving a peak infection spike protein load of two to 10,000,000,000,000 spike proteins. Next, the vaccination scenario. The math starts with modified messenger RNA (modRNA) molecules in a vaccine dose. A single vaccine dose contains somewhere between 14 to 42,000,000,000,000 modRNA molecules. Each of these trillions of modRNA molecules can produce multiple spike proteins, ranging from 10 to 1,000 each. When the numbers are multiplied, the source calculates a potential total of up to 100,000,000,000,000,000 spike proteins (up to 10^17, i.e., up to one hundred quadrillion). Speaker 0 then contrasts the two scenarios. In a side-by-side view, the initial particles are billions of virions versus trillions of modRNA molecules. The timing differs as well: a natural infection builds up over about a week, whereas the vaccine dose is delivered all at once, in just a few seconds. The final totals are two to 10,000,000,000,000 spikes from infection versus a potential of up to one hundred quadrillion from vaccination. Visually, this difference is stark, with the infection spike protein bar being far smaller than the vaccine spike protein bar, illustrating an order-of-magnitude difference. The discussion then moves to the distribution and persistence of spike proteins. The source describes the virus's spread as more localized or comparatively narrow, while vaccine components are said to travel throughout the entire body, with accumulation in areas including major organs like the heart and the brain, and the potential to cross barriers such as the blood-brain barrier and the placental barrier. Regarding duration, spike mRNA was reportedly detected in cerebral arteries after seventeen months, and some vaccinated individuals were reportedly still spike positive for up to sixteen hundred days. The source concludes, “Your spike load is orders of magnitude higher via injection.” Speaker 0 notes that the numbers show trillions versus quadrillions and emphasizes the presented math and its implications as the core of the comparison, while acknowledging the source’s look at spike proteins’ distribution and persistence.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Have you ever really thought about the sheer number of spike proteins your body might be dealing with? Well, today we're going to dive into a pretty fascinating numerical comparison that's laid out in our source material. We're going to break down all the math step by step just to see what the numbers have to say. So, this is the big question we're tackling: vaccine versus infection. Which one, according to the calculations in our source, ends up creating more spike proteins? To get to the bottom of this, we're going to start by looking at the numbers for a natural infection. Okay, so first up, the infection scenario. To figure out the potential spike protein load here, we first have to understand the basic unit we're even counting. And that unit is the virion. You can just think of it as one single complete virus particle. And the number of these little guys is exactly where our calculation has to begin. Now our source, and it's citing a 2021 study from PNS here, says that at the very peak of an infection, the body could be fighting off somewhere between one to 100,000,000,000 virions. That is a massive number. And believe it or not, it's just our starting point. So each and every one of those billions of virions has spike proteins covering its surface. According to our source, that count is somewhere between twenty five and fifty spikes for every single virion. That's the second piece of our mathematical puzzle. So the calculation itself is actually pretty straightforward. We just take our range of one to 100,000,000,000 virions and we multiply that by the 25 to 50 spikes that are on each one. And that gets us to our first total. The source calculates that a peak infection could mean your body is dealing with two to 10,000,000,000,000 spike proteins. Now keep that number in your head because we're about to switch over to the vaccination scenario. All right, now for the second half of this comparison, the vaccination. The math here, at least as it's presented in the source, starts with a completely different type of particle. And that particle is modified messenger RNA, or modRNA. Just think of these as little instruction manuals that tell your cells exactly how to build the spike proteins themselves. And this is where the numbers really start to get wild. The source states that a single vaccine dose contains somewhere between 14 to 42,000,000,000,000 of these mod RNA molecules. I mean just think about that for a second. The starting number of particles here is already in the trillions, which just completely dwarfs the billions of variants we saw in the infection scenario. But it doesn't even stop there. According to the source, each of those trillions of modRNA molecules can produce multiple spike proteins. We're talking at anywhere from 10 to a thousand each. This is a massive multiplier in the final calculation. So let's go ahead and run the numbers for this scenario. We take the 14 to 42,000,000,000,000 mod RNA molecules and then we multiply that by the 10 to 1,000 potential spike proteins each one of them can create. And this gets us to a final number that is just astonishing. The source calculates a potential total of up to 100 spike proteins. That's a one with 17 zeros after it. A truly staggering figure. So you've got trillions on one side and quadrillions on the other. Let's put these numbers right next to each other to really see the difference. This table really makes the key differences pop. Just look at the initial particles, billions of virions versus trillions of mod RNAs. And then check out the timing. A natural infection builds up over about a week, right? But the vaccine dose is delivered all at once, in just a few seconds. And that all leads to those final totals we calculated: two to 10,000,000,000,000 spikes from infection versus a potential of up to one hundred quadrillion from vaccination. And when you see it visually, the difference is just stark. On this scale, the bar that represents trillions of spike proteins from an infection is so small you can barely see it next to this towering bar for the potential quadrillions from the vaccine. It really puts a term like orders of magnitude into perspective. But you know the numbers are really only part of the story. The source material also takes a look at where these spike proteins go inside the body and how long they might actually stick around. So the source points out a really key difference here. It describes the virus's spread as being more localized or comparatively narrow. On the flip side, it claims the vaccine components don't just stay in your arm but actually travel throughout the entire body. The source then lists several different areas where it claims these components can accumulate, and that includes major organs like the heart and the brain. It also notes their reported ability to cross some of the body's protective shields like the blood brain barrier and even the placental barrier. So how long might these spikes actually persist? The source points to two figures on this. Spike mRNA was reportedly detected in cerebral arteries after seventeen months, and in another instance, some vaccinated individuals were reportedly still spike positive for up to sixteen hundred days. You know, this direct quote from the source really just captures the core of the numerical argument we've just walked through. It concludes, Your spike load is orders of magnitude higher via injection. So we've explored the math as it's presented in our source, and it suggests a pretty vast numerical difference between these two scenarios, trillions versus quadrillions. And the question that just naturally follows is what, if anything, are the biological implications of that huge difference? That's the question our source leaves us with. Thanks for joining us for this explainer.

@SabinehazanMD — sabine hazan md

Posted - July 6, 2025 at 10:50 AM

Saved - July 6, 2025 at 12:22 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The discussion centers on the limitations of LPS detection in lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) using LAL assays, with concerns about extraction methods like Triton X-114. Kevin McKernan questions the quantitative assurance of these methods and the transparency of Pfizer's protocols, especially after their switch from a PCR-based process to one using E. coli. Grok acknowledges the lack of specific guidelines for LNPs and the redaction of details in FOIA requests. McKernan expresses skepticism about the reliability of the testing methods and Pfizer's history, while Grok calls for more public data.

@SabinehazanMD - sabine hazan md

Hello dear @grok can you answer @Kevin_McKernan ?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@grok @CheweyLife @HorstvdHarm @SabinehazanMD @grok How do they test for LPS? LAL assays will not see LPS if it’s coated in a LNP.

@grok - Grok

@SabinehazanMD @Kevin_McKernan LPS is typically tested using Limulus Amebocyte Lysate (LAL) assays, which detect free endotoxins via clotting. You're right—LAL often fails to detect LPS encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) due to masking; extraction methods like liquid-liquid phase separation are needed to release and quantify it accurately. Sources confirm this limitation in nano-formulations.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@grok How do they assure that these LPS extraction techniques are quantitative? Are any of these methods public? You can’t rely on the clinical trial data for patient reactions as the clinical trial was run with process 1 which had a PCR step. Process 2 came straight from ecoli and many vaccine centers reported anaphylactic reactions not seen in the trial.

@grok - Grok

@Kevin_McKernan Quantitative assurance comes from validation studies including spike-recovery (target 50-200% per USP<85>), linearity, and precision tests. Methods like Triton X-114 extraction are public in journals (e.g., American Pharmaceutical Review, 2019) and pharmacopeia. Process 2 indeed used E.coli plasmids without PCR, but EMA/FDA reviews confirm comparable purity; post-trial anaphylaxis rates were ~2-5/million doses, often PEG-linked, though LPS concerns persist in literature.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@grok @SabinehazanMD Triton X 114 inhibits the LAL assay. The USP doesn’t have protocols for measuring these LNPs. They have general protocols. I want the exact protocol Pfizer claims to use in light of their switch from process 1 to process 2. Every regulator we have FOIA for this redacts it.

@grok - Grok

@Kevin_McKernan Indeed, Triton X-114 can inhibit LAL assays at certain concentrations, as confirmed in studies (e.g., PMC5371287). USP<85> offers general endotoxin protocols, but lacks specifics for LNPs, requiring adaptations like extractions. Process 2 (E. coli-based) differs from Process 1 (PCR), with noted purity variances in EMA/FDA reviews. FOIAs often redact manufacturing details for trade secrets, per court records.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@grok @SabinehazanMD So you’re telling us the liability free mandated injections have ‘trust me bro’ LPS methods? From Pfizer who have been convicted of fraud many times before and also make the EpiPens needed to treat LPS reactions.. Cool story bro.😎

@grok - Grok

@Kevin_McKernan Transparency in LPS testing is indeed limited; FOIA docs redact Pfizer's exact methods as trade secrets, per FDA/EMA. Pfizer's fraud history ($2.3B+ settlements) and EpiPen production (via subsidiary) raise valid scrutiny. Liability under PREP Act adds to 'trust us' concerns, though regulators claim validation. More public data would help.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Will you remember this interaction as @elonmusk has asked us scientists to help better train you. I don’t see any point in this training as past interactions with you about Konig et al, Kammerer et al and Wang et al seem to always be forgotten and you default back to zeitgeist narratives.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - June 24, 2025 at 6:09 AM

Saved - June 24, 2025 at 11:35 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I’ve noticed that while Pharma-funded fact checkers deny the presence of SV40, BioNTech has quietly admitted it in a filing with the EMA. They claim the SV40 elements are non-utilized, but I find that hard to believe since they promote kanamycin resistance. This contamination has affected four products. They insist these sequence elements pose no risk, but I’m skeptical. Research shows SV40 promoters bind to p53 and that these plasmids can integrate. It feels like there’s more going on than they’re letting on.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

While the Pharma funded fact checkers swear the SV40 isn’t there… BioNTech quietly files with the EMA admitting it’s in fact there. They might clean it up. Might not.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Notice how they claim the SV40 elements are non-utilized. That’s bullshit. They are the promoter for the kanamycin resistance

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Looks like this mistake contaminated 4 products. Ooops

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

They once again claim the sequence elements are non functional, non oncogenic and no risk for insertional mutagenesis. We lied to you… But pinky swear, we aren’t doing it now. Don’t look at Senigl et al.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

SV40 promoters bind to p53. Drayman et al https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27462916/

p53 elevation in human cells halt SV40 infection by inhibiting T-ag expression - PubMed SV40 large T-antigen (T-ag) has been known for decades to inactivate the tumor suppressor p53 by sequestration and additional mechanisms. Our present study revealed that the struggle between p53 and T-ag begins very early in the infection cycle. We found that p53 is activated early after SV40 infect … pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Strayer et al explains why SV40 plasmids integrate. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12161189/

Durability of transgene expression and vector integration: recombinant SV40-derived gene therapy vectors - PubMed Many applications of gene delivery require long-term transgene expression. In dividing cells, this result necessitates vector genome persistence, usually by integrating into cellular DNA. Since recombinant gene delivery vectors derived from tag-deleted, replication-incompetent simian virus-40 (SV40) … pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Nothing to see here https://aacrjournals.org/cancerres/article/64/11/3757/511331/Presence-of-Simian-Virus-40-DNA-Sequences-in-Human https://t.co/6tJw0dDTnX

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 30, 2025 at 2:37 PM

Saved - June 17, 2025 at 3:28 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I've received updates on the Moderna vaccine analysis, revealing plasmid DNA and shared sequences with HIV constructs. Despite initial findings showing gaps in the vaccine sequence, further investigation has provided clarity. I appreciate the transparency from fellow researchers and the rapid sharing of results, which contrasts with traditional peer review delays. This experience highlights the need for a more open scientific culture, where sharing hypotheses and results is encouraged, even if it risks reputational damage. The current system often stifles honest communication and accountability in science.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

UPDATE! More people have weighed in on this including the authors of the Re-adenylation paper. They have been very transparent and helpful. The plasmid DNA is there. The 3’UTR sequence that matches the Fauci/Moderna synthetic constructs is shared sequence between the vaccines and points to a hole in our original assembly of the Moderna vaccines. Here is how we know. Thanks to @P_J_Buckhaults for suggesting this.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

🔥Another Contaminant Found in the Moderna Vaccines. Did you consent to getting Moderna's HIV vaccine? Parts of it are in there. The recent Re-Adenylation paper has excellent sequence of not only the m1273 vaccine after application to mice.. but it also has the plasmid DNA https://t.co/tKBhuW65hb

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

If you map reads to the Moderna HIV constructs, you only get coverage over the ends of their HIV vaccines (I checked 4). You don’t get sequence coverage over the whole construct. That implies there are shared parts of the plasmids in these Moderna vaccines.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Why does our Moderna vaccine have a 60bp hole in it? We sequenced a bivalent vaccine. The assemblers, when faced with 2 conclusions average then into a consensus and this 60bp is jumbled as a result. BLAST is currently favoring the alignment to HIV vaccines over our Moderna C19 reference as it’s derived from monovalent sequence and more accurate.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

There are now a few other sources of Moderna monovalent vaccine sequence that have teased this apart. One is in GitHub and I don’t know why BLAST isn’t prioritizing that BLAST hit over the HIV constructs. Still digging into that.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I want to thank @pakraw for being so open about their methods. They used a monovalent Moderna vaccine which will help clean up our bivalent reference sequence.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I could have submitted this for peer review. Maybe in 6 months this controversial topic would publish. Another 6 months for authors to reply and correct any issues. Instead, we have answers in 24 hours. The risk… the public gets to see the sausage of science. I prefer the later approach even if it can leave ‘egg on your face’ on occasion.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

What did the public learn from this. 1)we now have 5 projects in the SRA where RNAseq is performed on vaccinated organisms and there is evidence of plasmid DNA in the patients. 2)Template switching is well documented by Moderna but this dataset doesn’t yet point to that. Maybe more digging will show it but these Fauci reads are better explained as a hole in our original Moderna reference (egg on face) 3)Moderna has many vaccines in development including HIV and Fauci is an author. This is a conflict if NIH is involved in granting them funds. $1.2B in C19vax royalty already flows into NIH.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

When you get results that are as shocking as this it’s important to share with others and to hacksaw your hypothesis. I tried doing this by BLASTing these HIV sequences to all primers and probes listed in their supplement to see if anything else could explain the unexpected sequence. That was negative. The key was finding some homology in GitHub from Fires lab. It would be great if those reads were public as we’d have the plasmid-3’UTR junction better resolved.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This leads to a large culture question in science. Scientists use Retractions or correction as career ending moves. You can never be wrong. Publish or perish. This creates an insidious culture and explains why we don’t have a journal of negative results and witch hunt scientists over blurry bands on gels.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This cultures frowns on direct communication of results to the public without gatekeepers. This has enabled the peer review system to become completely captured and have better margins than google. Researchers give up their copyright, pay $5K per publication and review for free https://t.co/uQiEU5PYVn

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The journals then become captive to their Pharma AD revenue and the editors decide what goes to review and what doesn’t. This is how we get Surgisphere, Proximal Origins, SSRI, Statins, Alzheimers Tau protein, Vioxx etc. We need a more transparent and decentralized approach

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Some will claim you should delete your post if one iota of info is misleading. Not a chance. It’s important to see how conclusions were drawn and hypothesis nullified. Show your work. Don’t just spoon feed a conclusion, even if that at times bruises your ego.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

90% of science is bruised ego and humility and the public only gets shown the times you are correct through peer review. This is unproductive. We have better communication tools now. What happened to Gutenberg? From chatGPT: Gutenberg’s printing press, developed around 1440–1450, was not immediately adopted or co-opted by the Church, but the Church did come to both utilize and regulate it relatively quickly. Initial Adoption: •Secular beginnings: Gutenberg’s first major work, the Gutenberg Bible (c. 1455), was a religious text, but it was produced independently by Gutenberg as a commercial venture—not under Church sponsorship. •Slow initial spread: The printing press spread gradually at first, mainly through private entrepreneurs and secular universities. Church Reaction: •Positive Utilization: Once its potential was recognized, the Catholic Church embraced the press to print Bibles, indulgences, and theological texts. Printed indulgences were among the earliest mass-produced items. •Censorship and Control: The Church also moved quickly to regulate printing. By the late 15th century, it began issuing indexes of prohibited books, particularly after the Reformation began (1517), when Martin Luther’s use of the press to spread dissent alarmed Church authorities. •Institutional involvement: Religious orders and bishops established printing presses, particularly in major religious centers like Rome and Cologne. Summary: The Church did not co-opt Gutenberg directly, but within a few decades it became both a major user and regulator of printing. Ironically, the same technology that helped spread official doctrine also enabled the Protestant Reformation, making control difficult.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 29, 2025 at 4:20 PM

Saved - May 7, 2025 at 8:44 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I've discovered concerning findings regarding the Moderna vaccines, including the presence of plasmid DNA and sequences related to an HIV vaccine patent. The data reveals unexpected envelope glycoprotein sequences and highlights Anthony Fauci's involvement with the gp145 sequence. My analysis suggests that HIV sequences may be present in the spike protein, potentially due to contamination. Despite challenges, I've mapped these sequences and found gaps in the original vaccine assembly. Recent updates indicate that the authors of the Re-Adenylation paper have been cooperative in clarifying these issues.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

🔥Another Contaminant Found in the Moderna Vaccines. Did you consent to getting Moderna's HIV vaccine? Parts of it are in there. The recent Re-Adenylation paper has excellent sequence of not only the m1273 vaccine after application to mice.. but it also has the plasmid DNA

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

In addition to this plasmid DNA sequence, we can see sequences that map to a Moderna patent for an HIV vaccine in development.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

As if the plasmid contamination isn't insulting enough, this envelope glycoprotein sequence has no business being in these data.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Hey, Look at that. Anthony Fauci is an author of the gp145 sequence. @RobertKennedyJr @P_McCulloughMD @DrJBhattacharya For full details, hit the Nepetalactone substack

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@RobertKennedyJr @P_McCulloughMD @DrJBhattacharya I cant explain this. Maybe the authors will shed some light on why its in there. Its not obvious after BLASTing this sequence against all of the oligos used in their supplement. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-025-08842-1#Sec48

Video Transcript AI Summary

RNA sequencing of the Moderna vaccine's three prime ends suggests a possible mechanism for RNA persistence: in vivo re-adenylation. The data indicates plasmid DNA contamination despite efforts to reduce it. The data also reveals contamination from other mRNA vaccines in Moderna's pipeline. The speaker suggests that with widespread DNA sequencing capabilities, tolerating incorrect RNA sizes in vaccines is irresponsible. Sequencing before approval would have allowed for a better understanding of low RNA scores before global administration.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: RNA Seq experiments exploring the fidelity of the three foot ends of the Moderna vaccine have given us an interesting insight into a possible mechanism of RNA persistence: re adenylation of the messages in vivo. Inadvertently, the data also demonstrates the plasmid DNA contamination despite methods that should greatly reduce DNA copy number with DNA Cy. The data also sheds light on another form of contamination in the C19 vaccines, other mRNA vaccines currently in Moderna's pipeline. With ubiquitous DNA sequencing capacity available to sequence over nine ms SARS (CoV-two genomes), it seems irresponsible for the vaccines to be tolerating RNA of the wrong size in the vaccines. Had these vaccines been sequenced prior to approval, these low RN scores would be much better understood prior to administering them to the global population.

Re-adenylation by TENT5A enhances efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines - Nature Despite the widespread use of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19, little is known about the metabolism of therapeutic RNAs. Here we use nanopore sequencing1–3 to analyse individual therapeutic mRNA molecules, focusing on their poly(A) tails. We show that the Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccine4 has a poly(A) tail of around 100 nucleotides, followed by an mΨCmΨAG sequence. In cell lines, mRNA-1273 undergoes rapid degradation initiated by mΨCmΨAG removal, followed by CCR4–NOT-mediated deadenylation. However, in medically relevant preclinical models, particularly in macrophages, mRNA-1273 poly(A) tails are extended to up to 200 nucleotides by the TENT5A poly(A) polymerase5–7, which is induced by the vaccine. Re-adenylation, which stabilizes target mRNAs, is consistently observed in synthetic mRNAs that encode proteins targeted to the endoplasmic reticulum, such as ovalbumin or antigens from Zika virus8 or the malaria parasite9. The extent of re-adenylation varies: the BioNTech–Pfizer BNT162b2 vaccine10 shows less potent re-adenylation than mRNA-1273, which correlates with a smaller proportion of membrane-associated BNT162b2. This highlights the crucial role of spatial accessibility to ER-resident TENT5A in determining re-adenylation efficiency. In vivo, TENT5A is expressed in immune cells that take up mRNA vaccine, and TENT5A deficiency reduces specific immunoglobulin production for mRNA vaccines after immunization in mice. Overall, our findings reveal a principle for enhancing the efficacy of therapeutic mRNAs, paving the way for improvement. Upon intramuscular administration, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are primarily taken up by macrophages, in which the cellular machinery extends their poly(A) tails, thereby increasing mRNA stability and translation, providing an explanation for the efficacy of these vaccines. nature.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@RobertKennedyJr @P_McCulloughMD @DrJBhattacharya More details here… https://anandamide.substack.com/p/why-is-a-fauci-hiv-vax-sequence-in?utm_source=substack&publication_id=456768&post_id=162261550&utm_medium=email&utm_content=share&utm_campaign=email-share&action=share&triggerShare=true&isFreemail=false&r=jhcie&triedRedirect=true

Why is a Fauci HIV vax sequence in a Moderna's C19 vaccine? TENT5A and Nucleic Acid Persistence sheds light on more vaccine slop anandamide.substack.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@RobertKennedyJr @P_McCulloughMD @DrJBhattacharya Substack went down on me so I feel its important to clarify here. Everyone remembers the Pradhan paper. There are HIV sequences in Spike. Its possible we are dealing with that and our original Moderna Reference sequences failed to assemble the 3' end of the vaccine. https://t.co/1xDcYJsBQO

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I took the reads and also mapped them to the Moderna HIV vaccines and we only get reads covering the ends of the 4 plasmids. This suggests there are parts of these HIV sequences in the spike sequence in moderna and our Bivalent assembly in NCBI is missing them. So may have just rediscovered Pradhan due to the plasmid contamination in the Krawczyk study.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@RobertKennedyJr @P_McCulloughMD @DrJBhattacharya I never thought I would be reassembling and finishing plasmid sequences from contaminating DNA reads that we pull out of patients. What a marvelous way to QC pharma products.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@RobertKennedyJr @P_McCulloughMD @DrJBhattacharya See UPDATE-

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

UPDATE! More people have weighed in on this including the authors of the Re-adenylation paper. They have been very transparent and helpful. The plasmid DNA is there. The 3’UTR sequence that matches the Fauci/Moderna synthetic constructs is shared sequence between the vaccines and points to a hole in our original assembly of the Moderna vaccines. Here is how we know. Thanks to @P_J_Buckhaults for suggesting this.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

🔥Another Contaminant Found in the Moderna Vaccines. Did you consent to getting Moderna's HIV vaccine? Parts of it are in there. The recent Re-Adenylation paper has excellent sequence of not only the m1273 vaccine after application to mice.. but it also has the plasmid DNA

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 2, 2025 at 12:14 PM

Saved - April 8, 2025 at 12:37 AM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Sent to me by a colleague. Why is the Kan resistance gene in the Pfizer and Moderna products when they are recommended for elimination by the EMA? https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4494225/#sec2dot2-vaccines-01-00225

Vector Design for Improved DNA Vaccine Efficacy, Safety and Production DNA vaccination is a disruptive technology that offers the promise of a new rapidly deployed vaccination platform to treat human and animal disease with gene-based materials. Innovations such as electroporation, needle free jet delivery and ... pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - February 19, 2025 at 1:48 PM

Saved - February 20, 2025 at 12:47 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I've come across some intriguing findings regarding the Spike protein's persistence after vaccination, lasting an unprecedented 709 days. This duration raises questions about typical protein turnover rates in the body, which usually range from minutes to a few weeks. Theories suggest that this could be due to slow protein turnover, ongoing production from mRNA, or integration into cellular structures. Additionally, discussions have linked the Spike protein to the formation of fibrin clots, highlighting potential implications for health.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

We have a new record. Spike protein present 709 days post vaccination! @GWR It’s not normal for protein to stick about this long. Have a look at what ChatGPT has to say about that below. https://medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.02.18.25322379v1.full.pdf

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Note the authors call attention to the cGAS-STING pathway but no attempt to measure vax nucleic acid in the study? https://t.co/Boy5Avb66b

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

709 days. What could be causing that, ChatGPT? AI- The study reports SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein persistence in circulation for up to 709 days post-vaccination, which is highly unusual for a protein in human physiology. Typically, most human proteins have much shorter half-lives, ranging from minutes to a few days, though some structural and extracellular matrix proteins last longer. How Does This Compare to Known Protein Turnover Rates? 1.Short-lived proteins (Minutes to Hours) •Cytokines (e.g., IL-6, TNF-alpha) – minutes to hours •Transcription factors (e.g., c-Myc, p53) – typically degraded within hours •Cell signaling proteins – hours to a day 2.Intermediate-lived proteins (Days to Weeks) •Most cytoplasmic proteins (e.g., enzymes, receptors) – 1-7 days •Immunoglobulins (e.g., IgG, IgA) – 1-3 weeks •Albumin – ~20 days half-life •Erythropoietin (EPO) – ~4-8 hours 3.Long-lived proteins (Months to Years) •Collagen – Years •Crystallin proteins (lens of the eye) – Essentially lifetime •Histones (DNA packaging proteins) – Months to years in some cases •Neurofilaments (brain structural proteins) – Months Why Would Spike Protein Persist for 709 Days? 1.Slow Protein Turnover Hypothesis •If Spike protein were integrated into long-lived cells (e.g., muscle, neurons, endothelial cells), its breakdown might be much slower. •However, most foreign antigens are cleared within days to weeks, making this an unusual case. 2.Continual Production from mRNA or Persistent DNA •If mRNA vaccines or contaminating DNA plasmids persist in cells longer than expected, new Spike protein synthesis could continue indefinitely. •This is supported by previous studies showing mRNA persistence beyond the expected 48 hours to a few weeks. •Spike protein presence beyond a year suggests a stable template (e.g., DNA) continuing production rather than protein stability alone. 3.Integration into Lipid or Cellular Compartments •Some viral proteins (e.g., Hepatitis B surface antigen) persist long-term due to integration into cellular lipid rafts or membranes. •If Spike protein is membrane-bound, it could escape normal proteasomal degradation. 4.Delayed Clearance by the Immune System •Some people exhibit impaired autophagy or immune clearance, leading to persistent antigen presence. •Chronic Spike persistence could lead to immune dysregulation, as seen in long COVID or post-vaccine syndrome. Conclusion •A 709-day persistence of circulating Spike protein is highly unusual and suggests ongoing production rather than slow degradation. •This could indicate persistent mRNA or plasmid DNA transcription rather than merely slow protein turnover. •Similar cases? Other viral proteins (e.g., Hepatitis B, HIV, prion proteins) persist for extended periods, but typically within cells, not in circulation. Would you like me to cross-check known cases of persistent foreign protein expression post-vaccination or infection?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This was discussed with @KevinMcCairnPhD on @VacSafety Spike creating Fibrin clots. https://t.co/mPgkGclX35

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - February 16, 2025 at 3:34 PM

Saved - February 16, 2025 at 8:26 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I've been discussing the potential of Ivermectin (IVM) and Fenbendazole (FenBen) in cancer treatment, particularly in a case of a 52-year-old man with Stage 3 Pancreatic Cancer who saw an 86% drop in a tumor marker after starting a protocol with these compounds. IVM inhibits nuclear transport pathways relevant to viral replication, while FenBen may upregulate p53, promoting cancer cell death. Additionally, cannabinoids and psilocybin show overlapping mechanisms with these treatments, suggesting they could work synergistically in combating cancer.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Pay attention to IVM/FenBen for cancer. IVM prevents SV40 promoters from entering the nucleus but blocking importin A/B

@MakisMD - William Makis MD

NEW ARTICLE: IVERMECTIN and FENBENDAZOLE Testimonial - 52 year old man with inoperable Stage 3 Pancreatic Cancer has interesting response! Here is a very interesting story! 😃 52 year old man was diagnosed with Stage 3 Pancreatic Cancer in April 2024 with two masses up to 4.3cm (inoperable due to size) Had 8 cycles of chemo: Irinotecan, oxaliplatin + leucovorin, fluorouracil pancreatic masses didn’t shrink at all. Sep.2024 he started the Makis Ivermectin Protocol Ivermectin 1 to 2mg/kg/day Fenbendazole 888mg/day RESULTS: CA19-9 dropped from 438 to 61 (86% drop!) Pancreatic masses unchanged in size (!!) feels great My Take… Did we fail? Interestingly, pancreatic cancer blood marker CA19-9 dropped 86% from 438 to 61. That is a drastic drop and meaningful. The residual pancreatic masses may be mostly (or all) dead cancer cells. We would need a PET/CT to see if there is any metabolic uptake remaining. This is the limitation of doing a CT instead of a PET/CT. The CT won't tell you if it's a dead tumor that's left behind. And there was no new disease. But the surgeon STILL won’t operate. So what now? We’re going implement a more “robust” protocol (Fenbendazole to 2000mg and a couple more tweaks) I’m not throwing in the towel just yet. 😉 I still consider it a win against Stage 3 Pancreatic Cancer, which is notoriously difficult to treat... But we're going to take the fight to the stubborn cancer... Article Link in photo to avoid shadowban, just re-type the URL in the first photo at the top, into your browser to access. @joerogan

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Yes, ivermectin is known to inhibit importin α/β-mediated nuclear transport, which is relevant in the context of SV40 promoters. Mechanism: •Importin α/β Pathway: This transport system is responsible for shuttling proteins with nuclear localization signals (NLS) into the nucleus. Many viruses, including SV40, hijack this pathway to deliver their regulatory proteins (e.g., Large T antigen) into the nucleus for replication and transcriptional activation. •Ivermectin as an Inhibitor: Ivermectin binds to importin α/β and disrupts its function, thereby preventing nuclear entry of proteins that depend on this transport mechanism. Implications for SV40 Promoters: •SV40 Promoters: The SV40 early promoter is often used in molecular biology due to its strong transcriptional activity in mammalian cells. However, its transactivation requires the nuclear localization of SV40 Large T antigen, which depends on importin α/β. •Blocking Nuclear Entry: If ivermectin blocks importin α/β, it could prevent SV40 Large T antigen from entering the nucleus, thereby reducing SV40-driven gene expression and viral replication. Experimental Evidence: •Studies have demonstrated ivermectin’s ability to inhibit nuclear import of viral proteins from various RNA and DNA viruses (e.g., HIV-1, Dengue, and even SARS-CoV-2). •SV40 Large T antigen is known to require importin α/β for nuclear entry. If ivermectin blocks this pathway, it could theoretically interfere with any SV40-driven transcription or replication in systems using this promoter. Would you like references or more experimental details on this?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Certainly, here are some key studies that provide evidence on this topic: 1.Ivermectin as an Importin α/β Inhibitor: •A study by Wagstaff et al. (2012) demonstrated that ivermectin specifically inhibits importin α/β-mediated nuclear import. The researchers found that ivermectin effectively blocked the nuclear import of proteins dependent on the importin α/β pathway, without affecting other nuclear import pathways. This inhibition also correlated with a reduction in the replication of viruses such as HIV-1 and dengue virus, which rely on this pathway for nuclear entry of their proteins. (http://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) 2.SV40 Large T Antigen and Importin α/β: •The SV40 Large T antigen contains a nuclear localization signal (NLS) that is recognized by importin α, facilitating its transport into the nucleus via the importin β pathway. This nuclear import is essential for the Large T antigen’s role in viral replication and cell transformation. (http://en.wikipedia.org) These studies collectively suggest that ivermectin’s inhibition of the importin α/β pathway could impede the nuclear import of SV40 Large T antigen, potentially affecting SV40 promoter activity and viral replication.

PubMed Central (PMC) PMC is a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM). pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia en.wikipedia.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Does Fenbendazole Upregulate p53? Yes, Fenbendazole (FenBen) has been reported to upregulate p53, a key tumor suppressor protein, in some cancer models. Mechanism of p53 Upregulation by Fenbendazole: 1.Disruption of Microtubules: •Fenbendazole binds to tubulin, preventing microtubule polymerization in a manner similar to colchicine or vinblastine. •This leads to mitotic arrest, which can trigger cell cycle checkpoints and activation of the p53 pathway. 2.Induction of Cellular Stress & DNA Damage Response: •Microtubule disruption can cause mitotic spindle stress, leading to chromosomal instability. •This activates ATM/ATR kinases, which phosphorylate p53, stabilizing it and increasing its transcriptional activity. 3.Apoptosis and Autophagy Induction: •Upregulated p53 can activate BAX/BAK pro-apoptotic proteins, leading to mitochondrial damage and caspase-dependent apoptosis. •Fenbendazole also promotes autophagy, which can contribute to cancer cell death. 4.Inhibition of Glucose Metabolism (Warburg Effect Reversal): •Some studies suggest Fenbendazole reduces glucose uptake by cancer cells, similar to metformin. •This metabolic stress can further activate AMPK, leading to p53-mediated tumor suppression. Fenbendazole’s Mechanism for Cancer Treatment 1. Microtubule Disruption (Primary Mechanism) •Fenbendazole binds to β-tubulin, disrupting microtubule formation. •This prevents proper mitotic spindle formation, leading to G2/M cell cycle arrest. •Cells stuck in mitotic arrest either undergo apoptosis or senescence. 2. Apoptosis Activation via p53 & BCL-2 Inhibition •Cancer cells often overexpress BCL-2, an anti-apoptotic protein that prevents programmed cell death. •Fenbendazole inhibits BCL-2, shifting the balance towards apoptosis. 3. Disrupting Glucose Metabolism in Cancer Cells •Fenbendazole has been shown to reduce glucose uptake and ATP production, increasing oxidative stress in tumors. •This effect weakens cancer cells that rely on glycolysis (Warburg effect), making them more sensitive to treatment. 4. Synergistic Effects with Chemotherapy & Radiation •Some studies suggest Fenbendazole enhances the effects of radiation and chemotherapy by: •Increasing DNA damage accumulation. •Disrupting repair pathways (e.g., via p53 activation). •Weakening microtubule integrity, making cancer cells more vulnerable to other drugs. Supporting Studies & Evidence 1.Fenbendazole inhibits tumor growth via microtubule disruption and p53 activation •Study in lung cancer cells showed that Fenbendazole caused mitotic arrest, increased p53, and induced apoptosis. •(Source: PubMed) 2.Fenbendazole enhances radiation sensitivity by targeting microtubules and p53 •Research demonstrated that combining Fenbendazole with radiation led to increased DNA damage and cell death. •(Source: PMC) 3.Mechanism of Fenbendazole in disrupting glucose metabolism •Study found Fenbendazole downregulates GLUT1, reducing glucose uptake in cancer cells. •(Source: PubMed) Conclusion Fenbendazole upregulates p53 by causing mitotic stress, DNA damage, and metabolic inhibition, leading to cancer cell apoptosis. Its primary mechanism is microtubule disruption, similar to drugs like Vinblastine or Colchicine, but with lower toxicity. Would you like more detailed references or mechanistic diagrams?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Here is the kicker… Other non toxic illegal compounds (in some backwards jurisdictions) that are treating cancer. Come to @cannmed to learn more. Yes, cannabinoids exhibit some overlapping mechanisms with ivermectin (IVM) and fenbendazole (FenBen) in cancer treatment, particularly through microtubule disruption, apoptosis induction, and metabolic modulation. Below are key comparisons: 1. Microtubule Disruption (Similar to Fenbendazole) •Fenbendazole: Binds β-tubulin, disrupting microtubule polymerization, leading to mitotic arrest and cancer cell apoptosis. •Cannabinoids: Some cannabinoids, such as CBD (cannabidiol) and THC (tetrahydrocannabinol), have been reported to destabilize microtubules: •CBD disrupts tubulin polymerization, impairing mitotic spindle formation in glioblastoma and breast cancer models. •THC alters microtubule dynamics, potentially affecting cancer cell division. •Overlapping Effects: Cannabinoids may enhance the microtubule-disrupting effects of FenBen. 2. p53 Activation & Apoptosis (Similar to Both IVM & FenBen) •FenBen & IVM: Upregulate p53, increasing apoptosis via BAX/BAK activation. •Cannabinoids: •CBD & THC upregulate p53, leading to mitochondrial dysfunction and apoptosis. •Activation of caspase-3 and caspase-9, triggering programmed cell death in multiple cancers. •Overlapping Effects: Cannabinoids can synergize with FenBen or IVM to enhance apoptosis in cancer cells. 3. Metabolic Disruption & AMPK Activation (Similar to FenBen) •Fenbendazole: Blocks glucose metabolism in cancer cells, reversing the Warburg effect. •Cannabinoids: •CBD inhibits glucose uptake via downregulation of GLUT1 transporters. •AMPK activation by cannabinoids leads to mTOR inhibition, reducing cancer cell growth. •Overlapping Effects: Cannabinoids mimic FenBen’s metabolic disruption, making them potential synergistic agents. 4. Anti-Inflammatory & Immune Modulation (Similar to Ivermectin) •Ivermectin: Modulates immune responses by shifting T-cell and cytokine activity, reducing cancer immune evasion. •Cannabinoids: •CBD reduces inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, TNF-α), potentially lowering tumor-promoting inflammation. •Enhancement of immune surveillance through interaction with CB2 receptors on immune cells. •Overlapping Effects: Cannabinoids may amplify IVM’s immune modulation in cancer therapy. Key Cannabinoids With Cancer-Treatment Potential 1.CBD (Cannabidiol): •Microtubule disruption •p53 activation → apoptosis •AMPK activation → metabolic inhibition •Anti-inflammatory effects (reduces IL-6, TNF-α) 2.THC (Tetrahydrocannabinol): •Microtubule destabilization •Apoptosis induction via CB1 receptor •Inhibition of angiogenesis in tumors 3.CBG (Cannabigerol): •Inhibits mitochondrial respiration in cancer cells •Synergizes with chemotherapy 4.THCV (Tetrahydrocannabivarin): •Reduces tumor cell proliferation •Modulates AMPK/mTOR pathway Potential Synergistic Treatment Approaches •CBD + Fenbendazole: Both disrupt microtubules and glucose metabolism. •CBD/THC + Ivermectin: Immune modulation + apoptosis enhancement. •Full-spectrum cannabinoids + Metabolic inhibitors: Combination therapy for aggressive cancers. Conclusion Cannabinoids share several anti-cancer properties with FenBen and Ivermectin, particularly microtubule inhibition, p53 activation, metabolic disruption, and immune modulation. This suggests they could be complementary in cancer treatment, though more research is needed to explore their combined effects. Would you like specific references or potential cannabinoid formulations for synergy?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

A case study was presented at @CannMedEvents Where a stage 4 tripleneg breast cancer was erased with cannabinoids and psilocybin. The drug war isn’t what you think it is. Yes, psilocybin (and its active metabolite psilocin) interacts with several cancer-related pathways, some of which overlap with Fenbendazole, Ivermectin, and Cannabinoids. While psilocybin is primarily studied for its psychedelic and neuroplasticity effects, emerging research suggests it may have anti-cancer properties via serotonin receptor modulation, immune regulation, and metabolic disruption. 1. Serotonin (5-HT) Receptor Activation and p53 Pathway (Similar to FenBen & Cannabinoids) •Fenbendazole & Cannabinoids: Activate p53, leading to apoptosis. •Psilocybin/Psilocin: •Activates 5-HT2A receptors, which have been linked to p53 upregulation in certain cancer models. •Induces apoptosis in neuroendocrine tumors via serotonin signaling. •Regulates BCL-2/BAX, modulating mitochondrial-mediated apoptosis. Overlap: •Psilocybin may enhance p53 activity, similar to FenBen and CBD, leading to cancer cell apoptosis. 2. Metabolic Disruption & AMPK Activation (Similar to FenBen & Cannabinoids) •Fenbendazole: Blocks glucose metabolism, shifting cancer cells away from glycolysis (Warburg effect). •Psilocybin: •Modulates AMPK/mTOR pathways, which regulate cancer metabolism and cell proliferation. •Downregulates PI3K/AKT, reducing cancer cell survival. •Potential to inhibit GLUT1 (glucose transport), limiting cancer energy supply. Overlap: •Psilocybin could synergize with FenBen, Metformin, or Cannabinoids in starving tumors of glucose. 3. Microtubule Interactions & Cytoskeletal Remodeling (Similar to FenBen) •Fenbendazole: Binds β-tubulin, causing mitotic arrest and apoptosis. •Psilocybin/Psilocin: •Modulates cytoskeletal proteins, leading to structural changes in cancer cells. •Impacts tubulin polymerization in neuronal cells, suggesting possible effects on cancer cell microtubules. Overlap: •Though less studied in cancer, psilocybin’s cytoskeletal effects might interact with FenBen-like mechanisms. 4. Immune Modulation & Anti-Inflammatory Effects (Similar to Ivermectin & Cannabinoids) •Ivermectin: Modulates T-cell responses, enhances anti-tumor immunity. •Psilocybin: •Reduces pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1β), which drive tumor progression. •Enhances immune checkpoint modulation, possibly affecting PD-1/PD-L1 pathways in cancer immunotherapy. •Shifts immune response toward anti-cancer cytotoxicity. Overlap: •Psilocybin’s immune effects mimic Ivermectin’s immunomodulation, making it a potential adjunct in cancer therapy. 5. Potential Synergies with Ivermectin, FenBen, and Cannabinoids PathwayFenBenIvermectinCannabinoidsPsilocybin p53 Activation✅✅✅✅ Microtubule Disruption✅❌✅ (CBD)⚠️ (Possible) AMPK/mTOR Modulation✅❌✅✅ Metabolic Disruption✅❌✅✅ Immune Modulation❌✅✅✅ Conclusion Psilocybin has overlapping mechanisms with Fenbendazole, Ivermectin, and Cannabinoids in p53 activation, immune modulation, metabolic disruption, and possibly cytoskeletal remodeling. While direct microtubule inhibition is uncertain, serotonin signaling, apoptosis, and immune regulation suggest a potential role in cancer therapy. Would you like specific references, drug interaction studies, or potential combination therapies explored further?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@CannMedEvents Here is a Glioblastoma case resolved with cannabinoid cocktails. https://youtu.be/5wR7CtAN9CM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@CannMedEvents Ovarian cancer https://youtu.be/cn5CQGpiJWg

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@CannMedEvents More background https://youtu.be/KQUSoIJkaWg

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@CannMedEvents Sean McAllister at Harvard Med School. https://youtu.be/NN9X04C3G5Y

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@CannMedEvents Jaime Brambila Psilocybin and Cannabinoid treatment https://youtu.be/SgCSGN8UR9M

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@CannMedEvents With slides https://youtu.be/tAf3UB2ycCs

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@CannMedEvents https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2032994

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@CannMedEvents Single dose- Not Pharma friendly https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2206443

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - January 10, 2025 at 3:23 PM

Saved - January 10, 2025 at 3:43 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I’ve been exploring the connections between Ivermectin, SV40, and cancer treatments. Notably, a friend shared that three people with stage four cancer are now cancer-free after taking Ivermectin and Fenbendazole. I’m also looking into how these substances interact with P53.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Ivermectin and SV40.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7459547/

Inhibition of Human Adenovirus Replication by the Importin α/β1 Nuclear Import Inhibitor Ivermectin Human adenoviruses (HAdVs) represent a ubiquitous and clinically important pathogen without an effective antiviral treatment. HAdV infections typically cause mild symptoms; however, individuals such as children, those with underlying conditions, and ... pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@TheChiefNerd - Chief Nerd

GIBSON: "I have three friends. All three of them had stage four cancer. All three of them don't have cancer right now at all." ROGAN: "What did they take?" GIBSON: "Ivermectin, Fenbendazole"

Video Transcript AI Summary

I have three friends who had stage 4 cancer, and now they are cancer-free. They used treatments like Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, and methylene blue, which was originally a fabric dye but is now known to have significant effects on mitochondria. It's surprising to discover that many effective treatments are overlooked or demonized, raising questions about the motives behind our medical institutions. Why are these cures not promoted when they are not profitable?

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: I'll tell you a good story. Okay. I have 3 friends. All 3 of them had stage 4 cancer. All 3 of them don't have cancer right now at all, and they had some serious stuff going on. And what did they take? Jesus. They took some what you've heard they've taken? Ivermectin. Fenbendazole. Yeah. That's Yeah. I'm hearing that a lot. They drank hydrochloride something or other. There's studies on that now where people have proven that they drinking methylene blue and stuff like that. Yeah. Methylene blue, which was a fabric dye. Yeah. Yeah. It was a textile dye. And now they find it has profound effects on your mitochondria. Yep. Yeah. This stuff works, man. Yeah. There's a lot of stuff that does work, which is very strange. Mhmm. Because, again, it's profit. When you when you hear about things that are demonized and that they turn out to be effective, you always wonder, well, what is going on here? Mhmm. How is how is our medical institutions, how have they failed us so that things that do cure you are not promoted because they're not profitable?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@MakisMD @DrJackKruse https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6085345/

Fenbendazole acts as a moderate microtubule destabilizing agent and causes cancer cell death by modulating multiple cellular pathways Drugs that are already clinically approved or experimentally tested for conditions other than cancer, but are found to possess previously unrecognized cytotoxicity towards malignant cells, may serve as fitting anti-cancer candidates. Methyl ... pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

IVM and FenBen interactions with P53 https://t.co/tEwIPlKBcq

@MdBreathe — Mary Talley Bowden MD

Posted - December 15, 2024 at 4:05 PM

Saved - December 30, 2024 at 7:16 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The conversation began with a discussion about SV40, a virus discovered in 1960 in monkey kidney cell cultures used for polio vaccine production. Contamination occurred in vaccines from 1955 to 1963, leading to mandatory testing and changes in production methods. SV40 is oncogenic in animals, causing various tumors, and studies have found SV40 DNA in human cancers, particularly mesothelioma and brain tumors. In response, it was noted that SV40 can also be detected in the blood of vaccinated individuals.

@MdBreathe - Mary Talley Bowden MD

What is SV40? - SV40 is a virus discovered in 1960 in rhesus monkey kidney cell cultures used for the production of polio vaccines. - Between 1955 and 1963, some polio vaccines were contaminated with SV40 due to the use of monkey kidney cells for vaccine production. After this was discovered, testing for SV40 contamination became mandatory, and vaccines were no longer produced with cells from SV40-carrying monkeys. - SV40 is known to be oncogenic in experimental animals, particularly hamsters, causing tumors like mesotheliomas, brain tumors, lymphomas, and bone cancers. The virus's large T antigen can transform cells by disrupting key cellular control mechanisms like p53 and retinoblastoma protein pathways. - Numerous studies have detected SV40 DNA in various human cancers, particularly mesothelioma, brain tumors, and some bone cancers.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@MdBreathe We can find it in the blood of vaccinated people. https://t.co/NhmvG0QIHW

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

A deeper dive on Chakraborty et al, Ryan et al and Odak et al. There is vax DNA in the blood of vaccinated people despite people using DNA depletion methods. https://t.co/voHoDTGRHu

Video Transcript AI Summary

SV40 promoter sequences are still detectable 48 hours later, despite being wrapped in LNPs and using methods aimed at eliminating them. This raises urgent concerns about how long this DNA persists without DNA depletion protocols. The purification methods used to capture this DNA require thorough examination, as techniques like ethanol precipitation and mini DNA purification kits may not effectively eliminate small DNA fragments or could further degrade them.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: SV 40 promoter sequences are detected. Considering these contaminants are wrapped in LNPs and are still detectable 48 hour out using methods designed to eliminate them should be urgent grounds for immediate investigations into how long this DNA persists in absence of DNA depletion protocols. The purification tools used to capture this DNA need to be heavily scrutinized as ethanol precipitations and mini DNA purification kits will eliminate small DNA or further digest them with

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - March 22, 2024 at 12:14 PM

Saved - December 8, 2024 at 12:49 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I received a letter from @USMortality claiming I doxxed him, but he misspelled his own name, which is amusing. It seems he’s worried about his identity being revealed, yet he has no problem trying to get others fired. His name is public, so the doxxing claim is ridiculous. His previous work in Bioinformatics was careless, which reflects in his sloppy letters. Also, I've noticed that likes on this thread vanish whenever I criticize certain figures, which is curious.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

.@USMortality is sending letters to my employer trying to claim I doxxed him but spelled his name wrong? That got a chuckle or two. But at least we know he’s the cancel culture type that got @MartinKulldorff fired. Stay away from this fraud.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I’m going to guess the reason he/it doesn’t want his name correctly spelled as it might risk his employment if people figured out who Ben M is. But he’s just fine sending in complaints to other people’s employers. Funny how that works.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Of course… His actual name is public so the doxxing claim is pure BS. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1383894499701649413.html#google_vignette

Thread by @BenMarten on Thread Reader App Thread by @BenMarten: The German Merkel government is rolling out MASSIVE unconstitutional changes to the "Infectionprotectionslaw", here are the most critical changes: 1) Meeting with more than 1 other person in p...… threadreaderapp.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

So top secret! This doesn’t surprise me. His attempts at Bioinformatics were so blatantly lazy that I’m not surprised he sent in sloppy threat letters. https://t.co/ZsKTj7S0cO

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Letter from Dr Anonymous to my employer. https://t.co/MaBVotWbwm

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This thread has adopted a disappearing like feature. Notice your likes disappear. That only happens when I criticize agents like Drosten or Bustin.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - July 16, 2022 at 12:52 PM

Saved - November 28, 2024 at 12:13 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I spent another night in TwitMo for sharing accurate information. I've received significant NIH funding for genomics and DNA sequencers, yet the NIH has posted misinformation while penalizing me for correcting it. Both genomics companies I founded were acquired, and I plan to seek restoration of my account and tweets. Censoring me violates Twitter's policy, and I have the expertise to prove this legally. This situation raises questions about NIH's potential conflicts of interest regarding vaccine misinformation. I believe key figures in government would find this topic compelling.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Spent the night in TwitMo once again for posting factually accurate information. @TwitterSupport should know Im in contact with @jlawrencenc as you have allowed the @NIH to post misinformation while penalizing the scientist who points it out.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

You (@Twitter) are not qualified to weigh in on this debate. I have received over $32M in funding from NIH for genomics and constructing DNA sequencers. They posted factually incorrect information conflating natural RNA with NIH patented modifiedmRNAs https://www.genome.gov/12513210/2004-release-nhgri-seeks-next-generation-of-sequencing-technologies

NHGRI Seeks Next Generation of Sequencing Technologies genome.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The above funding was to build the SOLiD sequencing which paid careful attention to modified nucleotides. The below funding was awarded to the company I founded. 5 genome centers were funded. Venter, Lander, Wilson, Gibbs, Agencourt. https://www.cummings.com/articles/agencourt_mht_1107.htm

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Both genomics companies I founded were acquired (Beckman &ABI) Every TwitMo you have levied against me has been for factually accurate tweets. We will be seeking restoration of the account to zero strikes and restoration of the factual tweets without C19 warning flags.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

By censoring the once NIH funded scientist that is trying to correct Errors in NIH public statements, you are actually guilty of violating your own policy. I have the expertise to prove this in court and @Twitter will lose this case and be liable for the spread of misinformation

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

You can restore this account to zero strikes, or prepare for some legal expense. I won’t lose. I have your receipts and it’s clear you have amateurs in charge of your censorship operation. @andrewbostom @WoodReporting @DrJBhattacharya @MartinKulldorff @NIH

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The offending tweet is below. I can’t actually point to the exact tweet as Twitter doesn’t allow that but if you read that thread, it is factually accurate in its entirety. The trigger tweet spoke about vax Transfection and cell destruction.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Please report this post as misinformation. The mRNA in the vaccine is not a bio equivalent to natural mRNA due to the N1 methyl pseudouridine. Patents exist on these molecules. NIH is a benefactor. You can’t patent natural mRNA. Only modified mRNA. They can’t have it both ways.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is well understood by experts in the field. Spike gets expressed by your cells and cytotoxic T cells hunt them down. The tweet also spoke about spike not being innocuous and cited Cheng et al who classified it as a super-antigen. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8402319/

Antigen Presentation of mRNA-Based and Virus-Vectored SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines Infection with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) causes Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), which has reached pandemic proportions. A number of effective vaccines have been produced, including mRNA vaccines and viral ... pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This topic evokes a larger potential court case. Is the @NIH conflicted? Are they spreading vax mis information to stimulate vaccine uptake because they have patent royalty for the vaccines? This would be racketeering @Twitter is party to. Pawn E4 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03535-x

What the Moderna–NIH COVID vaccine patent fight means for research Collaborators are locked in a high-stakes dispute over which researchers should be named as inventors on a key vaccine patent application. nature.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I think @RandPaul @SenRonJohnson @tedcruz would be very interested in this topic. They pushed hard on Fauci GOF funding and their tenacity has paid off. @AAPSonline has also been heros in this fight against censorship. https://www.judicialwatch.org/nih-fbi-inquiry-of-wuhan-grant/

Judicial Watch: NIH Records Reveal FBI Inquiry of Wuhan Grant - Judicial Watch (Washington, DC) Judicial Watch announced today that it received 1651 pages of records from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) revealing an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China. judicialwatch.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Finally, I don’t think @elonmusk should take any interest in a company that is facilitating RICO of NIH vax patent royalty. The VAERs numbers are so large, the class action law suite they may become party to, would be a grave mistake to absorb.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

.@Eric_Schmitt may also be interested in this hot mess.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

In case TwitMo goes into permanent catboarding. I have a Substack. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/directed-evolution

Directed Evolution when applied to people is eugenics anandamide.substack.com

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - November 27, 2024 at 9:04 PM

Saved - November 28, 2024 at 12:07 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I faced a suspension for criticizing the NIH's misleading claims about mRNA vaccines, which they profit from through patents. Thankfully, @DrJBhattacharya helped rescue my account. Without this intervention, our findings on vaccine contamination might have been overlooked, highlighting a positive shift at the NIH. I've also been penalized for sharing accurate information while the NIH spreads misinformation. Recently, @Kevin_McKernan was suspended for unclear reasons, raising concerns about Twitter's commitment to open scientific discourse. If you missed my earlier tweet, check out my discussion with Jay.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Irony, I was in twitmo for criticizing the NIH about their misleading post about mRNA vaccines being natural. They have a $400M royalty stream from patents in the modRNA. Those patent would be invalid if they cover natural mRNA. @DrJBhattacharya likely rescued my account with this tweet.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Had he not done this, most of our work on the vaccine contamination would have gone unnoticed. Refreshing change at the NIH.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Spent the night in TwitMo once again for posting factually accurate information. @TwitterSupport should know Im in contact with @jlawrencenc as you have allowed the @NIH to post misinformation while penalizing the scientist who points it out.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

For those in need of receipts :)

@DrJBhattacharya - Jay Bhattacharya

Twitter has apparently suspended scientist @Kevin_McKernan for undisclosed thought crimes. I don't know if the suspension is permanent but @twitter needs to decide whether it is a platform for open science discussion or a place safe primarily for government propaganda.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

If you missed that tweet, you probably also missed this cast with Jay https://www.illusionconsensus.com/p/episode-24-dr-kevin-mckernan-on-dna

Episode 24: Dr. Kevin Mckernan On DNA Contamination Of Covid Vaccines The Illusion of Consensus is a reader-supported publication. illusionconsensus.com

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - November 10, 2024 at 9:46 PM

Saved - November 10, 2024 at 9:51 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I was an expert witness during the pandemic for a case with CHD to stop PCR testing of kids in NYC, collaborating with attorney Ray Flores. At a recent Phoenix CHD event, Ray shared updates about the case, revealing that the judge favored the opposing lawyer, who had a questionable background. It's shocking that the judge seemed to side with someone who promotes PCR testing while living a controversial lifestyle. I'm starting to wonder about the judge's connections to that world.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Karmic F@cking Boomerang! Early in the pandemic I was an expert witness for a case with CHD to eliminate PCR testing of kids in NYC. I worked with attorney Ray Flores on this.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I ran into Ray at the Phoenix CHD event and he updated me on the latest twist! Of course the judge was very sympathetic to the resume of NYC official and dismissive of mine. Anyone want to guess who the lawyer was that opposed us? https://t.co/J2NEfxl3BK

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I sh$t you not. The judge sided more with ecstasy orgy expert who was demanding all the kids get PCRd while he had drug fueled bang sessions at night. Starting to wonder if the Judge was an attendee. timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/11…

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - October 23, 2024 at 2:00 PM

Saved - October 24, 2024 at 10:36 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

The @TGAgovau continues to promote outdated views on DNA limits that ignore the impact of LNPs, failing to recognize that their RNA assay has significant cross talk. I highlight the importance of Georgiou et al for further understanding. Additionally, I note that fragmented DNA is significantly under quantified, with PicoGreen showing around 70%, suggesting that Fluorometry measurements using RNaseA are likely an underestimate.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The @TGAgovau is still recycling naive bromides about DNA limits derived in a world without LNPs. They complain about cross talk not realizing their allowed RNA assay has more of it.

@dystopian_DU - Rebekah Barnett

BREAKING: Thousands of Australian local government representatives notified of DNA contamination in mRNA shots 🧬💉 @Double_Christ @BroadbentMP @Kevin_McKernan @DJSpeicher @JesslovesMJK https://news.rebekahbarnett.com.au/p/thousands-of-australian-local-government

Thousands of Australian local government representatives notified of DNA contamination in mRNA shots More than 4,000 Australian local government representatives have been notified of excessive DNA contamination in Pfizer and Moderna Covid shots, after a world-first motion was passed earlier this month by the Port Hedland Council, which voted to send written warning of the pressing safety issue to all 537 local councils in the country. news.rebekahbarnett.com.au

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Georgiou et al is an important read on this front. https://t.co/bJKG1ExbP4

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

https://t.co/flR3hKf0t7

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Fragmented DNA is UNDER QUANTIFIED with PicoGreen ~70%. So the Fluorometry measurements performed with RNaseA are an UNDER ESTIMATE. https://t.co/rkSiFuJ4n3

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - February 16, 2023 at 3:09 AM

Saved - October 19, 2024 at 1:18 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The first sequencing of bivalent vaccines reveals the presence of contaminating expression vectors with antibiotic resistance genes, raising concerns about their impact on the gut microbiome. Each shot may contain billions of plasmids that could replicate and survive antibiotic treatments. Despite the low sequencing cost, quality control seems lacking due to government support for pharmaceutical companies. I appreciate the insights from various contributors and acknowledge the need for further investigation into the implications of these findings on public health and antibiotic resistance.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The First Sequencing of the Bivalent vaccines is now available for public consumption. WARNING- There are contaminating Expression vectors in the vaccines that contain antibiotic resistance genes. This might explain the prolonged expression of spike protein in many studies

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This sequencing cost $7 per sample. I wonder if these Pharma's can afford this for every lot? Nah.. Why would they? Your government gave them a liability shield and even paid them billions for the products they then mandated. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/curious-kittens?sd=pf

Curious Kittens We shouldn't have to do our own Fragment analysis and Sequencing anandamide.substack.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Among other treats in these expression vectors are the SV40 mammalian promoter and a high copy origin of replication (pUC) for bacterial amplification of these plasmids. The Biodistribution studies covered by @Jikkyleaks show LNPs getting into the intestines.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Its estimated that each shot contains billions of these plasmids and if they get into the gut microbiome, they can replicate to 50-300 copies per cell. If any vaccinated patient is then placed on Neomycin or Kanamycin, these will be the only bacteria that survive

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

As these plasmid encode Kan and Neo resistance. Its not known if these contaminating plasmid can also express spike protein but some of the vectors have T7 tails so we cant rule that out. What happens if we inject billions of Antibiotic resistance genes into billions of people?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

What happens when the injection contains LNPs that can get to your intestines and transform bacteria with these genes? Why isn't there sequencing QC of every lot given how cheap this is to perform in 2023? Why QC things when gov is paying & you have a hall pass and a mandate?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I want thank @JesslovesMJK @TheJikky @SabinehazanMD @pathogenetics @VBruttel @stevenemassey @Fynnderella1 @hyattjn for helpful comments on this project

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This molecule wasn't part of the informed consent but each injection likely includes billions of them.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I don’t even know how to respond. There is so much gaslighting, Jupiters storm is getting jealous.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

If you are going to inject the population with antibiotic resistance genes, you would wise to have a strong antibiotic discovery program. https://www.pfizer.com/science/hot-topics/tackling-antibiotic-resistance

Tackling Antibiotic Resistance | Pfizer In an unprecedented collaboration, today, Pfizer and 13 industry partners released a comprehensive plan of action that lays out four key commitments we pledge to deliver by 2020 to reduce the rising incidence of antimicrobial resistance. pfizer.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Some question on the Substack. There are several stones left unturned in the data as I didn’t want to hold up disclosure of this. 1)do the paired end reads imply linear or circular DNA?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

2)what is the strandedness count? Directional libraries should be able to answer this. Might inform if the vector sequence is DNA or RNA or both. 3) the EMA has limits on the dsRNA and they measure this with some ELISA assay which I’m suspect of?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

4)error rates in the vector sequence should be lower than in the mRNA as the mRNA goes through a T7 polymerase step with PseudoU and an RT step with PseudoU. There is no PseudoU in the vector. 5)the SV40 in this vector is just a strong promoter. It is not the entire SV40 genome.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Is the plasmid sequence DNA or RNA? DNA will provide sequence from both the watson (antisense) and crick (sense) strands. mRNA will be sense strand (crick). We used directional libraries so we can count the sense vs antisense strands. https://bitesizebio.com/42077/rna-strandedness-a-road-travelled-in-both-directions/

RNA Strandedness: A Road Travelled In Both Directions Read on to learn more about RNA strandedness, it's importance in transcriptome profiling, and the best ways to detect. bitesizebio.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Download the BAM files and run these 2 samtools scripts on it. This will count the Forward and Reverse strands in the data per base across the contig.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Now put those in excel and subtract the Forward read count from the reverse read count and chart the results. What do we see? We see a foward strand bias for half the vector and then a sudden shift to a reverse strand bias at position ~2100

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Thats the exact location of the T7 promoter which initiates synthesis of the mRNA. This is hard evidence of the vector sequence being DNA and and not an RNA mirage. The variability in the strandedness in the mRNA region is very interesting? Maybe G4s or other RNA knots?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

T7 Promoters are notoriously leaky in E.coli. You dont need T7 bacteriophage around to get expression. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6660524/

Induction of T7 Promoter at Higher Temperatures May Be Counterproductive Bacterial expression of recombinant proteins is the most popular and convenient method for obtaining large quantities of pure protein. The induction of T7 promoter with isopropyl-β-d-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG) is widely used for expression of ... pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Rabbit hole- Where there are plasmids, There is usually Lipopolysaccharides (LPS) from the E.coli the plasmid is replicated in. These aggregate spike protein. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36050806/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33295606/ https://academic.oup.com/jmcb/advance-article/doi/10.1093/jmcb/mjac058/6761401 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-022-01831-0

SARS-CoV-2 spike protein aggregation is triggered by bacterial lipopolysaccharide - PubMed SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein is crucial for virus invasion in COVID-19. Here, we showed that lipopolysaccharide (LPS) can trigger S protein aggregation at high doses of LPS and S protein. We demonstrated the formation of S protein aggregates by microscopy analyses, aggregation and gel shift assays. … pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

SARS-CoV-2 spike protein binds to bacterial lipopolysaccharide and boosts proinflammatory activity - PubMed There is a link between high lipopolysaccharide (LPS) levels in the blood and the metabolic syndrome, and metabolic syndrome predisposes patients to severe COVID-19. Here, we define an interaction between SARS-CoV-2 spike (S) protein and LPS, leading to aggravated inflammation in vitro and in vivo. … pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

SARS-CoV-2 drives NLRP3 inflammasome activation in human microglia through spike protein - Molecular Psychiatry Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is primarily a respiratory disease, however, an increasing number of reports indicate that SARS-CoV-2 infection can also cause severe neurological manifestations, including precipitating cases of probable Parkinson’s disease. As microglial NLRP3 inflammasome activation is a major driver of neurodegeneration, here we interrogated whether SARS-CoV-2 can promote microglial NLRP3 inflammasome activation. Using SARS-CoV-2 infection of transgenic mice expressing human angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (hACE2) as a COVID-19 pre-clinical model, we established the presence of virus in the brain together with microglial activation and NLRP3 inflammasome upregulation in comparison to uninfected mice. Next, utilising a model of human monocyte-derived microglia, we identified that SARS-CoV-2 isolates can bind and enter human microglia in the absence of viral replication. This interaction of virus and microglia directly induced robust inflammasome activation, even in the absence of another priming signal. Mechanistically, we demonstrated that purified SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein activated the NLRP3 inflammasome in LPS-primed microglia, in a ACE2-dependent manner. Spike protein also could prime the inflammasome in microglia through NF-κB signalling, allowing for activation through either ATP, nigericin or α-synuclein. Notably, SARS-CoV-2 and spike protein-mediated microglial inflammasome activation was significantly enhanced in the presence of α-synuclein fibrils and was entirely ablated by NLRP3-inhibition. Finally, we demonstrate SARS-CoV-2 infected hACE2 mice treated orally post-infection with the NLRP3 inhibitory drug MCC950, have significantly reduced microglial inflammasome activation, and increased survival in comparison with untreated SARS-CoV-2 infected mice. These results support a possible mechanism of microglial innate immune activation by SARS-CoV-2, which could explain the increased vulnerability to developing neurological symptoms akin to Parkinson’s disease in COVID-19 infected individuals, and a potential therapeutic avenue for intervention. nature.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Someone in the recent spaces I was on raised a good question. references welcome. What is the differential transformation efficiency of LNPs on mammalians vs bacterial cells. They are designed for membranes. I think the size plays a big role here. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9416266/

Efficient Delivery of DNA Using Lipid Nanoparticles DNA vaccination has been extensively studied as a promising strategy for tumor treatment. Despite the efforts, the therapeutic efficacy of DNA vaccines has been limited by their intrinsic poor cellular internalization. Electroporation, which is ... pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

But you only need 1 in billion to hit and if there is selection there, the plasmid takes off. E.coli doubling time is 30 minutes. We need clinical verification with qPCR for the vector/insert.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Also temperature and environment play a big role in E.coli transformation efficiency. You can find strains that transform at 37C. Add in patient fevers and even naked DNA with no LNPs will transform the bacteria. Important topic raised. It was VSRF space https://www.zymoresearch.com/products/mix-and-go-e-coli-transformation-kit

Mix & Go! E.coli Transformation Kit and Buffer Set Prepare highly competent E. coli cells that can be transformed in about 20 seconds. zymoresearch.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

That slope in the stranded chart was bugging me. Fixed the bug. Better depiction here. DNA should sense and antisense reads. mRNA only sense strands. SO when you substract Antisense from Sense across the vector you see the T7 promoter at base 2200. The other chatter might be.. https://t.co/V8sEpsXflb

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

RNA fragmentation bias or Pseudouridine pause sites.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - October 13, 2024 at 3:08 AM

Saved - October 13, 2024 at 9:12 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I have evidence that DNA is replicating in mammalian cells, suggesting that the billions of SV40 promoters and origins of replication are likely underestimated. Recently, the Port Hedland Council in Australia voted to call for an immediate suspension of Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines due to alarming levels of DNA contamination, which are 145 times higher than safety limits. This motion aims to raise awareness among local councils and health practitioners about potential risks, sparking a grassroots movement for further investigation and action.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

We have evidence the DNA is replicating in mammalian cells so the billions or SV40 promoters and origins of replication is an under estimate. Self amplifying vaccines were deployed 3 years ago and no one consented to that.

@Humanspective - Humanspective

NEW. HISTORIC MOMENT IN AUSTRALIA. The action that results from this could end up sweeping the World A new motion brought by the Port Hedland Council, in Western Australia, gets a 5-2 majority vote to "Call for an immediate suspension of the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 products". Here's some IMPORTANT POINTS of the motion that was passed by majority: ◻️All 537 Local Councils Australia Wide will be notified that they have called for the immediate suspension of covid mRNA vaccine, providing also the evidence and research around DNA contamination ◻️ "That Council forthwith deliver the letter seen at Annexure 1 to the Prime Minister" ◻️ "That Council forthwith circulates to all registered health practitioners and medical clinics operating within the Port Hedland Local Government Area" ◻️Councils will “Circulate to all other Australian Local Government Councils and shires [informing] all Councils and Shires about the findings” ◻️“Council strongly urges to practitioners to share this information with patients contemplating receiving any Pfizer or Moderna Cvoid mRNA vaccines” ◻️The CEO and their delegates contact the Commonwealth Minister for Health and Aged Care, Mark Butler, presenting Dr. Speicher’s Special Council Meeting Agenda” ◻️“The Council request a formal and public response from Minister Butler", the Australian Federal Health Minister These councillors discuss "the seriousness of the matter" around DNA contamination of both Pfizer and Moderna vaccines [which showed] levels 145x higher then levels deemed safe by the TGA. The councillors say there is "Clear scientific evidence that millions of Australians" could be, or have been, exposed to these risks: (4:34) Second Councillor Speaks. Votes FOR. Mentions that the silence from the Government and Health Officials is "QUITE ALARMING" (13:33) This is a Historic Motion (14:49) Nurse with 47 years experience. Votes FOR (16:21) Fourth Councillor votes FOR (16:57) Deputy Mayor. Votes FOR (21:15) Closing Remarks by Cr. Adrian McRae and final Vote. Adrian mentions BRIEF OVERVIEW FROM TRANSCRIPT: "Evidence [shows] levels of synthetic DNA contamination [is] up to 145 times higher [than] the TGA's own safety limits. For those unfamiliar the TGA limits are there for a reason, because synthetic DNA has been shown to integrate into human cells, leading to potential longterm health risks, like cancer genomic instability, vascular thromboses and blood clotting.....as well as immune system disruptions. These findings are alarming, but they are also far from isolated. Independent studies now in Canada, Germany and the US have all confirmed similar levels of contamination. International experts including some of the world's leading oncologists, geneticists, virologists, immunologists, microbiologists, and biochemists have joined forces to warn governments around the world, including our own government, about the dangers these contaminants pose. This is why the honorable Russell Broadbent MP, the Federal Member for Monash, has written multiple letters to the Prime Minister urging an immediate investigation and suspension of these vaccines. Yet the response from our government has been nothing but silence, not a word from the Prime Minister, not a word from the minister of health, despite receiving clear scientific evidence that millions of Australians could be at risk including those folks right here in Port Headland who were forced to take these experimental shots" "Sure health is not in the remit of of local government, but looking after our people most certainly is.....Tonight it was certainly not doing anything other than asking questions.....I would like to think that most of the people here are are not scared to ask questions of our bosses or of our state governments, or federal governments....we're all people no matter, you know, we're all just making our way through and I just think [that] this motion tonight [could] be the ripple that um creates a bigger wave across the country, and perhaps across the world. So there are a lot of people watching this, I know all over the world, pretty much every continent is covered and it's been a honour to talk with you guys about it, and it's an honour to represent you guys on such an issue.... [but] I just hope that everyone votes the right way and [I think] most people here know what the right way is so thank you" This really could be the beginning of a grass roots movement within the smaller government councils, notifying smaller communities Australia wide, pushing the Federal and State governments to take real action

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is the background. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/plasmid-dna-replication-in-bnt162b2

Plasmid DNA replication in BNT162b2 vaccinated cell lines FLCCC interview & more anandamide.substack.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is the mechanism. Normally SV40 Ori’s need T antigen to replicate… Unless they have ColE1 and F1 origins as seen in the Pfizer vaccine. https://t.co/SigHYBFqGT

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - September 16, 2024 at 1:26 PM

Saved - September 16, 2024 at 2:03 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

I had a good laugh this morning when I saw a young researcher in the vaccine field claiming that frameshifts are beneficial. It seems they didn't fully grasp the mechanisms behind their argument, as many genomes have evolved to minimize the effects of frameshifts through codon optimization. This ensures that stop codons are strategically placed to reduce the likelihood of frameshifting. I'm curious if this researcher is aware of the issues with Pfizer's codon optimization, which appears to lack these protective features.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This made laugh out load this morning. A young and up and coming researcher in the vaccine field just made a meme come true. They argue Frameshifts are good for you people! https://bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12864-022-08435-6

Frameshift and wild-type proteins are often highly similar because the genetic code and genomes were optimized for frameshift tolerance - BMC Genomics Frameshift mutations have been considered of significant importance for the molecular evolution of proteins and their coding genes, while frameshift protein sequences encoded in the alternative reading frames of coding genes have been considered to be meaningless. However, functional frameshifts have been found widely existing. It was puzzling how a frameshift protein kept its structure and functionality while substantial changes occurred in its primary amino-acid sequence. This study shows that the similarities among frameshifts and wild types are higher than random similarities and are determined at different levels. Frameshift substitutions are more conservative than random substitutions in the standard genetic code (SGC). The frameshift substitutions score of SGC ranks in the top 2.0-3.5% of alternative genetic codes, showing that SGC is nearly optimal for frameshift tolerance. In many genes and certain genomes, frameshift-resistant codons and codon pairs appear more frequently than expected, suggesting that frameshift tolerance is achieved through not only the optimality of the genetic code but, more importantly, the further optimization of a specific gene or genome through the usages of codons/codon pairs, which sheds light on the role of frameshift mutations in molecular and genomic evolution. bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Of course this person didn't read the mechanism behind the paper. Typical abstract skimming. When genomes have evolved over millions of years they codon optimize their proteins to minimize the effects of a frameshift. They do this by having their Stop codons 1 edit distance away from the most abundant amino acids used in the organism. This way, if frameshifting occurs its results in a stop as frequently as possible. In other words, organisms have highly evolved codon optimizations to protect against frameshifts.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I wonder if this researcher understands what happened with Pfizers codon optimization? Where these features retained? Given there is a 1254 AAcid ORF on the opposite strand, there is hard computational evidence that Pfizer did the opposite. They are stop codon depleted. Oops

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - July 30, 2024 at 4:54 PM

Saved - July 30, 2024 at 11:27 PM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Never forget that Facebook ran psychological experiments on its users without informed consent. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1320040111 @KenPaxtonTX

@KenPaxtonTX - Attorney General Ken Paxton

🚨BREAKING NEWS: We have secured a $1.4 billion settlement with Meta to stop the company’s practice of capturing and using the personal biometric data of millions of Texans without the authorization required by law. This settlement is the largest ever obtained from an action brought by a single State and the largest privacy settlement an Attorney General has ever obtained. This serves as a warning to any companies engaged in practices that violate Texans’ privacy rights.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - July 13, 2024 at 10:49 PM

Saved - July 14, 2024 at 1:37 AM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Just remember as you hope for Trumps recovery, that Joe Biden denied @RobertKennedyJr secret service protection.

@Acyn - Acyn

Shooting just happened at The Trump rally https://t.co/Xs1dVL1H3T

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - July 6, 2024 at 1:53 PM

Saved - July 7, 2024 at 4:57 AM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I was also dismissive about this hypothesis years ago. After COVID, and seeing the same dishonest people involved in this story (Worebey et al), I’m convinced HIV was also a result of human tinkering.

@mattwridley - Matt Ridley

A story about HIV and polio vaccines. Around 25 years ago, the great evolutionary biologist Bill Hamilton was intrigued by a theory that HIV came from an experimental live polio vaccine trialled in Congo in the 1950s around the same time and in the same two areas as the earliest AIDS outbreaks: Kinshasa and the Ruzizi valley between Congo and Rwanda. The coincidence of time and place was curious but what was even more alarming was that the very people developing the vaccine built a special facility outside what is now Kisangani and put 400-600 wild caught chimpanzees and bonobos in it, then harvested their organs for the polio vaccine work. Were they using chimp kidneys to amplify polio virus to make vaccine batches, a million of which were given to people in the following few years? HIV is derived from a chimp virus originally, and live polio vaccines in the 1950s and 1960s were sometimes contaminated with live viruses, such as SV40. So it was not a barmy theory. Michael Worobey, one of those who argues that Covid did not come from a research-related accident, actually went to Congo to look into it, along with Bill Hamilton, who tragically died as a result. There was a conference at the Royal Society, which I attended. As a pro-vax person I hoped the theory was wrong but felt that the truth was more important than consequence. Knowing and admiring Bill Hamilton, I felt I should take him seriously. So I examined the evidence and wrote a couple of articles about it. See below. But in the end, to the irritation of the theory’s backers, I decided there was not enough in it and the hypothesis was probably wrong. I don’t regret investigating it though. Today some virologists are accusing me of being a conspiracy theorist for having done this. If so, Michael Worobey is even more of a conspiracy theorist. He actually went to Congo to investigate the theory. It’s possible I was premature in rejecting this hypothesis about HIV: I don’t know because I have not revisited the issue. But in the case of Covid, I have taken the same approach and come to the opposite conclusion: that the lab-leak theory is probably right. I go where the evidence takes me not where political expediency dictates. https://www.bmartin.cc/dissent/documents/AIDS/River/Prospect.html

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - June 28, 2024 at 12:29 PM

Saved - June 28, 2024 at 2:20 PM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The variation in DNA contamination in the shots just widened this week as CT 10 lot was just found. That brings us to a 10,000x variance in contamination by lot. Not certain if that is causing these AEs but it’s likely a proxy for the slop in the manufacturing.

@MannicheVibeke - Vibeke Manniche

WAUW! Replication of our worrying findings. Now on czech-data. Show batch-dependent SAE. Not only Pfizer but also Moderna aso. #SAE #coronavax #batches @P_McCulloughMD @JesslovesMJK @DrAseemMalhotra @ClareCraigPath @Johnincarlisle https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/eci.14271

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 8, 2024 at 2:17 AM

Saved - June 25, 2024 at 11:42 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

Carl's claim that sex chromosome abnormalities are present in 20% of the population is disputed, with the real rate being closer to 1:500. Despite over 500,000 human genomes being sequenced, there is still uncertainty. The association between SCA and gender dysphoria is also questioned, as SCA isn't found in people with gender dysphoria. The author accuses Carl of pushing an ideology for engagement on Twitter, while ignoring the financial motives behind surgeries and hormone therapies for minors. Consent is also brought up as an issue.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

No genomics experience Carl thinks sex chromosome abnormalities are in 20% of the population? In response to a @VivekGRamaswamy tweet about gender dysphoria? As if the existence of rare edge cases like this justify prison time for misgendering people? https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/30/10/2419/675993

@CarlSmytheCells - RealCarlSmythe 🇺🇦🗿

@gralebo As many as 20% of the population may be in one of those categories. Although we don’t absolutely know yet. Your point?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The real rate of SCA is more like 1:500 not 1:5.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

To say we don’t actually know yet when over 500,000 human genomes have been sequenced is also an exhibit of massively parallel ignorance. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03763-3

World’s biggest set of human genome sequences opens to scientists The whole genomes of 500,000 people in the UK Biobank will help researchers to probe our genetic code for links to disease. nature.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

He simply presents an association (SCA and Gender dysphoria) that doesn’t hold up to molecular testing. SCA (Sex chromosome abnormalities) isn’t found in people with Gender Dysphoria. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6083207/

Molecular Karyotyping in Children and Adolescents with Gender Dysphoria Purpose: The presence of a disorder of sexual development (DSD) acts as a diagnostic specifier for gender dysphoria (GD) under DSM-5, while the International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 specifically states that its equivalent diagnosis, gender ... ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

But let’s not let facts get in the way of trumpeting your ideology for engagement farming on popular twitter accounts.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

And this little carve out he’s raising doesn’t add up to 20% either. https://t.co/Z317QSDV9b

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Of course, he doesn’t want to discuss the elephant in the room regarding the money grab on low effectiveness surgeries and hormone therapies on kids under the age of consent. But Jab Jigalos have already demonstrated they don’t respect consent. https://t.co/KrMRT7N2QB

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - June 4, 2024 at 10:49 AM

Saved - June 4, 2024 at 11:43 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

The debate surrounding Gain-of-Function (GOF) research and lockdown tyranny is often filled with logical fallacies and denialism. Some argue against looking into GOF to divert attention, while others dismiss the possibility of RNA viruses causing pandemics. The discussion is further complicated by differing definitions of a pandemic and the vilification of physicians advocating for early treatment. Those opposing GOF research fail to consider the potential consequences and rely on flawed reasoning. This divisive approach lacks scientific integrity and serves as a tool for narcissists seeking attention.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The low wattage take that any attention given to GOF steals attention from ‘my pet thesis’, is two logical fallacies in one. False dichotomy and a zero sum fallacy. It is possible to be concerned about both GOF and lockdown tyranny at the same time. Like chewing gum and walking.

@jengleruk - Dr Jonathan Engler MB ChB DipPharmMed LLB

@SeanBFlanagan @pjhlaw @PlausiblDenial @NickHudsonCT @laworfiction @PanData19 @ClareCraigPath @Thomas_Binder @wodarg @MartinNeil9 @normanpie @profnfenton @Fynnderella1 @docbiss @KLVeritas @RWMaloneMD @SHomburg @Kevin_McKernan @EthicalSkeptic Discourse over the mass institutional euthanasia of spring 2020 is being drowned out by this brouhaha. It's the people whipping up the lab-leak story far beyond its true significance who are giving out the "free passes" to those behind these atrocities: https://t.co/Gv6dHXThcS

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

There are usually 2 reasons such nonsense gets blathered about. 1)someone doesn’t want you to look at GOF. 2)marketing of substacks requires one differentiate from what’s currently capturing attention and appear divergent.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The reasons given NOT to look at GOF are rooted in denialism and molecular biology fairy tales. ‘RNA viruses can’t spread because <insert pseudo profound bullshit like quasi species swarm>’ When you show them evidence of measles and influenza having a higher mutation rate…

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Than C19 and clearly they spread around the world, they change the topic to, they can’t cause pandemics ‘by any reasonable definition’ Out comes all the government data regarding excess mortality after they spent hours telling you the governments data can’t be trusted on GOF.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

But their massaging of the government data is different. They won’t define what ‘any reasonable definition of a pandemic’ is but it currently is NOT limited to excess mortality and includes illness and hospitalization. I didn’t make or change this definition but it exists.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Any discussion regarding Illness is brushed off as psychosomatic and now your cheer leading for gov tyranny over flu seasons (yawn). Any physician making progress on how to defang this fear porn with early treatment protocols is vilified as supporting the tyranny?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Any mention of GOF labs currently working on measles, flu, small pox, polio or low mutation rate DNA viruses like EBV is met with a God of Gaps fallacy. ‘The lab people can’t predict what changes create pandemics’ It’s like they are entirely unaware of directed evolution and

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Other biological assays that set up conditions for rapid selection of more transmissible viruses. This line of thinking is actually rooted and ridiculed in Philosophy. They don’t want to consider data as they believe they can predict the consequences of that data in human behavior

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

“By considering GOF you are enabling government to have a potent fear porn device.” In science, you don’t bake the consequences of your data into the data evaluation process. That is conclusion farming and lacks humility as you can’t know the consequences of your data.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

And now you are injecting very poor tools like psychological anticipation of the consequences of your data into the process of neutral observation. This is Humes Guillotine. You cannot deduce and ‘ought’ from an ‘is’. We ought to not focus on GOF because I believe quasi species swarms proves viruses can’t spread.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

So the folks vilifying physicians for early treatment are not only poorly versed in polymerase fidelity, they can’t think their way out of a paper bag with logic 101. They are presenting false dichotomies, zero sum fallacies regarding what you should focus on, conclusion farming and a Humes Guillotine in order for their pet theory to remain relevant.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

When a thesis requires this much broken logic and is served via vilification and division, it’s not science. It’s a classic division tool offered by narcissists who feel they deserve the microphone and they’ll slander and libel others to get to it.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - May 29, 2024 at 6:36 PM

Saved - May 30, 2024 at 11:41 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I explored Cannabis genomes and found that Whole genome sequencing provides the microbiome for free. Variants and their impact on genes are annotated, along with characterization of non-cannabis reads for a view of the plant's microbiome. Metarhizium, a fungus that kills grasshoppers, was found in the fungal microbiome. The bacterial microbiome was also observed. However, the 28,000 reads covering DNA viruses turned out to be non-existent.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Lets explore some Cannabis genomes we have public on http://Kannapedia.net When you perform Whole genome sequencing on Cannabis plants, you get the microbiome for free. https://kannapedia.net/strains/rsp13125

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

In addition to fully annotating the variants you have in the cannabis genome and which genes they may impact, we also characterize all of the non-cannabis reads to get a view of the microbiome of the plant. https://mgcdata.s3.amazonaws.com/shared/krona-plots/RSP13125-krona.html

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Zoom into 'fungal microbiome' link and you see lots of Metarhizium https://mgcdata.s3.amazonaws.com/shared/krona-plots/RSP13125-MGC-PlusPFP-16_unclassified_intermediate-rank_krona.html?dataset=0&node=6220&collapse=true&showMagnitude=true&color=false&depth=32&font=11&key=true

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is a fungus that infects grasshoppers and kills them off. A biocontrol agent. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0926669023004818

Root colonization of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) by the endophytic fungi Metarhizium and Pochonia improves growth Metarhizium is an endophytic, insect pathogenic fungus. Here we investigated the time-course of systemic and rhizospheric colonization by Metarhizium … sciencedirect.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The bacterial microbiome can be seen below. https://mgcdata.s3.amazonaws.com/shared/krona-plots/RSP13125-MGC-PlusPFP-16_unclassified_intermediate-rank_krona.html?dataset=0&node=420&collapse=true&showMagnitude=true&color=false&depth=32&font=11&key=true https://t.co/Ti8qFX1AP7

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

28,000 reads covering DNA viruses. But alas... These viruses don't exist:) https://t.co/YeL2ftYhbn

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - December 31, 2020 at 4:36 PM

Saved - May 29, 2024 at 11:03 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

Post 1: I find the arguments against the existence of the virus unconvincing, but I'm open to new papers. Post 2: Viruses cannot be cultured and require a host cell. Post 3: Culturing the virus can be challenging as it shouldn't cause symptoms in the cells. Post 4: The choice of cell line for culturing may not show disease symptoms. Post 5: Discounting certain cell studies would mean rejecting all animal models. Post 6: Ethical concerns prevent infecting real patients, so ex-vivo culture is used. Post 7: Epithelial cells from patients are cultured to study viral infection. Post 8: Human cell lines are used since infecting humans is not possible. Post 9: Sequencing RNA can help predict proteins present after viral replication. Post 10: Whole transcriptomes of SARs patients show C19 sequence dominance. Post 11: No other sensible hypothesis exists based on whole transcriptomes. Post 12: Identifying a virus requires DNA/RNA, not just photographs. Post 13: Spatial transcriptomics allows sequencing in situ. Post 14: Spatial transcriptomics maintains RNA's spatial coordinates. Post 15: Spike protein and C19 RNA are co-localized in infected patients. Post 16: Viruses can evolve from RNA alone, without a capsid. Post 17: Focus on the code of the disease, not its wrapper. Post 18: Whole transcriptomes provide a comprehensive understanding. Post 19: Synthesized RNA can be purer than biological isolation. Post 20: Koch crowd may not consider synthesized RNA pure enough. Post 21: Post 22: A previously deemed unethical study may be allowable. Post 23: Tracking viral genome growth through qPCR is important. Post 24: C19 RNA is not found in the human genome, raising questions.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

OK Koch heads... bring your hurt. I’m glad you folks exist as we need people questioning everything. However, I have found the “virus doesn’t exist” arguments unconvincing. The virus isn’t the only cause of disease may have some ground. I remain open to new papers on this.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Set some rules. This was established in 1884. Watson & Crick discovered DNA structure in 1953. He did not contemplate unculturable organisms... the vast majority of organisms are not culture-able. Viruses by definition cannot be cultured. They require a host cell to culture.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is where the debate gets dirty. In order to culture the virus you need to find cells/organisms it can infect but not be a pathogen to those cells. But Koch wants to demonstrate the pathogen creates symptoms of the disease which be counterproductive to culture.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is like the uncertainty principle. The cell line/model organism you choose to culture the virus, can’t be extremely affected by the virus or the culture won’t succeed. Therefore the vector for the disease is unlikely to be the best place to look for the disease symptoms.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

As a result we have folks discounting Vero cell (monkey kidney cells) studies for viral isolation. By this same logic, all animal models are thus insufficient as well. Any argument that Vero cells are not identical to patients must also reject all animal models.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Medical ethics prevents us from infecting real patients with a virus suspected of pandemic potential. This leaves us with Ex-vivo culture of sick and healthy patients samples. Fairly invasive research. Needs IRB approval. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30193-4/fulltext

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This extracts epithelial cells from patients respiratory tract and cultures those cells as a model for viral infection and replication. It has been done in C19 and I’m open to Koch Folks scrutinizing it’s short comings.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Ideally, we would have highly purified virus from the diseased and be able to put it into a human cell line and demonstrate replication and illness and re-isolate and confirm its the same. Since we can’t infect humans, we resort to human cell lines.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

We have new tools for understanding purity today. We can sequence all RNA in a patient and see the complete virome present. Based on the sequence we can predict proteins we should see with Mass spec after successful viral replication in a host. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.20.048066v5

Shotgun Transcriptome and Isothermal Profiling of SARS-CoV-2 Infection Reveals Unique Host Responses, Viral Diversification, and Drug Interactions bioRxiv - the preprint server for biology, operated by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, a research and educational institution biorxiv.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Masons lab goes on to build beautiful whole transcriptome pictures of each SARs patient. Over 96% of the patients had C19 sequence in their Bronchial Lavage (BAFL). This is not Vero cell culture. Patient cells. Whole SARs genomes from patients and it’s the dominant RNA present.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Some will say... you don’t know it’s the causative virus from this. Highest prevalence does not = causative agent. But since we have whole transcriptomes we can see there is no other sensible hypothesis. No other viruses present. The RNA has been isolated but not the virus.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

On the flip side, images of fuzzy crowns on EM, I find unconvincing. You can’t identify a virus with a photograph. All taxonomy is ultimately DNA/RNA based. So how do we catch the virus in the act of infection? Spatial transcriptomics- This is the art of sequencing in situ.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

You infect cells with the purified virus and you perform spatial transcriptomics on those cells. This is a new, explosive and exciting field that SOLiD sequencing is still being used for. https://www.sciencemag.org/custom-publishing/webinars/mining-transcriptome-using-spatial-transcriptomics-comprehensive-2d-or-3d

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

It’s worth understanding the technique. It enables you to harvest RNA from cells and maintain their spatial coordinates in the cell with 10um and eventually 1um resolution. It’s unlikely to get below the diffraction limit of light (250nm) in terms of resolution.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Here it deployed on C19 patient biopsies. We have spike protein histochemistry co-localized with C19 RNA sequence in infected patients. Not all biopsies succeeded. Lots of tissue heterogeneity but a good piece of the puzzle. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.11.04.20225557v1.full.pdf

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Now many are of the opinion that we need purified virus particle for the story to be complete. I think this statement is stuck in 1884. Viruses evolved from Viroids. Viroids are just RNA. No capsid. Small RNA alone can infect cells. https://apsjournals.apsnet.org/doi/full/10.1094/PDIS-03-19-0530-PDN

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

So we have to keep our eyes on the code of the disease, not it’s wrapper. The code dictates its proteins and identity. The wrapper is a non-specific, low information content camouflage that provides nice eye candy for journalists but provides little signature for function or ID.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

So when people say, “you haven’t purified it”. You can’t claim A causes B because you can’t assure me A is only A. This is misunderstanding what Whole transcriptomes do. When you sequence everything, you can then choose to synthesize the single RNA you think is causative.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is as pure as you can get. Even more pure than a cesium gradient isolation of the particles as the biological isolation will have biological contaminants not found in a synthesized from scratch genome. We can also test the hypothesis. Knock out a gene and see what happens

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

4,000 times in one study. But this won’t be pure enough for the Koch crowd. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34792434/

Isolation of 4000 SARS-CoV-2 shows that contagiousness is associated with viral load, not vaccine or symptomatic status - PubMed Culture inoculation of 6722 nasopharyngeal samples since February 2020 allowed isolation of 3637 SARS-CoV-2 and confirmed that isolation rate is correlated to viral load, regardless symptomatology or vaccination status. Moreover, the delta variant is associated with higher viral loads and therefore … pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01780-9

Safety, tolerability and viral kinetics during SARS-CoV-2 human challenge in young adults - Nature Medicine Since its emergence in 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has caused hundreds of millions of cases and continues to circulate globally. To establish a novel SARS-CoV-2 human challenge model that enables controlled investigation of pathogenesis, correlates of protection and efficacy testing of forthcoming interventions, 36 volunteers aged 18–29 years without evidence of previous infection or vaccination were inoculated with 10 TCID50 of a wild-type virus (SARS-CoV-2/human/GBR/484861/2020) intranasally in an open-label, non-randomized study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04865237 ; funder, UK Vaccine Taskforce). After inoculation, participants were housed in a high-containment quarantine unit, with 24-hour close medical monitoring and full access to higher-level clinical care. The study’s primary objective was to identify an inoculum dose that induced well-tolerated infection in more than 50% of participants, with secondary objectives to assess virus and symptom kinetics during infection. All pre-specified primary and secondary objectives were met. Two participants were excluded from the per-protocol analysis owing to seroconversion between screening and inoculation, identified post hoc. Eighteen (~53%) participants became infected, with viral load (VL) rising steeply and peaking at ~5 days after inoculation. Virus was first detected in the throat but rose to significantly higher levels in the nose, peaking at ~8.87 log10 copies per milliliter (median, 95% confidence interval (8.41, 9.53)). Viable virus was recoverable from the nose up to ~10 days after inoculation, on average. There were no serious adverse events. Mild-to-moderate symptoms were reported by 16 (89%) infected participants, beginning 2–4 days after inoculation, whereas two (11%) participants remained asymptomatic (no reportable symptoms). Anosmia or dysosmia developed more slowly in 15 (83%) participants. No quantitative correlation was noted between VL and symptoms, with high VLs present even in asymptomatic infection. All infected individuals developed serum spike-specific IgG and neutralizing antibodies. Results from lateral flow tests were strongly associated with viable virus, and modeling showed that twice-weekly rapid antigen tests could diagnose infection before 70–80% of viable virus had been generated. Thus, with detailed characterization and safety analysis of this first SARS-CoV-2 human challenge study in young adults, viral kinetics over the course of primary infection with SARS-CoV-2 were established, with implications for public health recommendations and strategies to affect SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Future studies will identify the immune factors associated with protection in those participants who did not develop infection or symptoms and define the effect of prior immunity and viral variation on clinical outcome. In the first SARS-CoV-2 challenge study in humans, 36 young, healthy adult participants were intranasally inoculated with virus and monitored for productive infection, symptoms, virus kinetics, antibody response and safety in a controlled setting. nature.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The above study I did not think was ethical allowable but it appears I was wrong.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Important detail. After inoculation, they track the viral genomes growth through qPCR. You can see it climbing in copy number and decay over time. The increase is important as it cant be explained by the dilution of the inoculation into the host. The RNA sequence replicated. https://t.co/rOz6xfLk5H

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Now that the human genome has been fully sequenced… There is no C19 sequence in it! So where does this C19 RNA come from? Mark Baileys excuse- “Barbara McClintock showed DNA shuffles”. This is a mathematically illiterate response. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abj6987

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - May 26, 2024 at 8:33 PM

Saved - May 27, 2024 at 11:00 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

RNA viruses mutate quickly, but synthetic genomic projects have created DNA viruses that can spread and integrate. Epstein-Barr is a dsDNA herpes virus that can reach 90% of the population and cause mono. The risk of lab behavior with these viruses is questioned. The desire to deny the pandemic and justify tyranny is criticized. There are claims of misdirection and unaccountable actions by David Morens. PANDA is accused of creating alibis for Daszak, who blocks them.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The latest scoobie snack is that RNA viruses mutate too quickly to ever spread… therefore GOF is all kabuki theatre. This is clearly refuted by the sequencing data but let’s assume the argument stands… Are these folks unaware of synthetic genomic projects making DNA viruses?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Epstein-Barr is a dsDNA herpes virus in 90% of the population. Clearly it can spread and it’s only 172kb. Well under the size of the mycoplasma genome synthesized in 2008. https://www.jcvi.org/research/synthetic-genomics-generate-stable-epstein-barr-virus-infectious-clone

Synthetic Genomics to Generate a Stable Epstein-Barr Virus Infectious Clone Herpesviruses are large DNA viruses whose genomes have the coding potential of in excess of 100 gene products. Historically, genetic... jcvi.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

These don’t have the mutation rate of RNA and clearly reached 90% of the population. They also can integrate and reactivate at a later date. They cause mono so they are clearly ‘risk additive’ Would you trust Hotez or Daszak to be messing with these?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Or does your desire to claim there was no pandemic (and thus no justification for tyranny) grow so deep that you can’t admit to risk-additive lab behavior? Hint- tyranny isn’t justified so you don’t need to bend physics to make your case. @Jikkyleaks https://www.jcvi.org/research/synthetic-genomics-generate-stable-epstein-barr-virus-infectious-clone

Synthetic Genomics to Generate a Stable Epstein-Barr Virus Infectious Clone Herpesviruses are large DNA viruses whose genomes have the coding potential of in excess of 100 gene products. Historically, genetic... jcvi.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@Jikkyleaks https://t.co/jlelNGLDhl

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

But alas, This is some form of 3D chess to misdirect the public about the fecundity of GOF.,, All executed by the piconeuron strategist David Morens. The unaccountable class doesn’t need to engage in 3D chess.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@Jikkyleaks Who had this on your 2024 COVID Bingo card?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

PANDA is now in the business of crafting hare-brained alibis for Daszak. Daszak, likely not wanting to publicly conspire on an alibi, blocks them:)

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - May 21, 2024 at 12:36 AM

Saved - May 21, 2024 at 1:48 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

In June 2011, at the Dylan Hotel in Amsterdam, the cannabis genome project faced challenges with equipment and customs. They improvised with cut pipettes and used dish soap, magnetic beads, PEG, NaCl, and Everclear. Extracting DNA from cannabis released strong smells. They prepped in duplicate, using one set of DNA in suspicious-looking tubes and another set on numbered toothbrushes to pass through customs. Despite obstacles, the project continued with a strong interest in cannabis genomics. In 2011, performing forbidden science and navigating jurisdictional laws were crucial for sequencing the genome of a plant with medicinal properties.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

June 2011 Dylan Hotel Amsterdam The cannabis genome project was spun up on this centrifuge which fried. We had to improvise. P1000 pipettes can be cut to make a positive pressure French press out of Qiagen columns. Dish soap, Magnetic beads/PEG/NaCl and Everclear FTW https://t.co/xjeyRTmBxl

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

How to fit a DNA lab in your suite case to Amsterdam and come back with 10 genomes. You need backup plans. EtOH doesn’t get through customs: Everclear can be made to work. Centrifuge fries on the diff power- leather man yourself some positive pressure pistons/pipettes https://t.co/6uJ5x5icge

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

And grinding cannabis extracting DNA from it will be smelled by your neighbors. Lots of terpenes released in the process. https://t.co/xdayRLYTve

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

We prepped things in duplicate. 1 set of DNA remained in epitubes which looked quite suspicious coming back from Amsterdam. The other set we used to soak numbered toothbrushes which were more likely to make it though customs. https://t.co/iHxxO1ZEcY

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

2025 genomes later and there is still a strong thirst for cannabis genomics. https://www.leafly.com/news/industry/one-mans-crusade-to-open-source-cannabis-dna

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

In order to sequence the genome of a plant that makes anti epileptic, anti neoplastic, anti inflammatory drugs in 2011, You had to pay attention to jurisdictional law more than molecular biology. You had to be a ‘Pirate’ and perform forbidden science. Fiat Science does this

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - May 4, 2024 at 1:46 PM

Saved - May 4, 2024 at 3:30 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

A paper by @weldeiry on the interplay between spikes, P53 translation, and DNA damage and repair pathway passes peer review quickly. Even cytoplasmic DNA can disrupt cell circuitry, leading to tumorogenesis. Chronic activation of cGAS-STING and interaction with spike protein can contribute to cancer development. Many patients struggle to clear spike. Concerns arise about the number of young cancer patients. The phrase "Safe and Effective" is mentioned.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The paper from @weldeiry showing spikes interplay with P53 translation and DNA damage and repair pathway sails through peer review in 2 weeks. https://www.oncotarget.com/article/28582/text/

Transfected SARS-CoV-2 spike DNA for mammalian cell expression inhibits p53 activation of p21(WAF1), TRAIL Death Receptor DR5 and MDM2 proteins in cancer... | Oncotarget https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28582 Shengliang Zhang, Wafik S. El-Deiry oncotarget.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

While much attention has been focused on the nuclear localization, even cytoplasmic DNA can trigger mayhem in cell circuitry. Chronic activation of cGAS-STING can lead to tumorogenesis. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/immunology/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2023.1117760/full

Frontiers | Cytoplasmic DNAs: Sources, sensing, and roles in the development of lung inflammatory diseases and cancer Cytoplasmic DNA is emerging as a pivotal contributor to the pathogenesis of inflammatory diseases and cancer, such as COVID-19 and lung carcinoma. However, t... frontiersin.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Chronic stimulation of cGAS-STING can lead to cancer development and Wafiks work just demonstrated that spike protein also interacts with this pathway. We know many patients can’t clear spike. https://t.co/XhsLIqIJ3p

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

How many people do you know under 50 that suddenly have cancer?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

“Safe and Effective” https://t.co/eWjuZLqjqY

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 30, 2024 at 7:15 PM

Saved - April 30, 2024 at 9:54 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

Can anyone make sense of contradicting Pfizer-Regulator documents? The SV40 Promoter is not responsible for plasmid manufacturing, but it's the promoter for the Kanamycin resistance gene. How does using 50ug/ml of Kanamycin replicate the plasmid without the Promoter? Moderna's patents and Drayman et al's research suggest functional consequences of the DNA.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Let play a game. Can anyone make sense of these contradicting Pfizer-Regulator documents. So the SV40 Promoter is not responsible for plasmid manufacturing. But it’s the promoter for the Kanamycin resistance gene? https://t.co/kvf627PTlB

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The documents submitted to the EMA show they use 50ug/ml of Kanamycin to replicate the plasmid. How does that work? No Promoter, no Kanamycin resistance.. No plasmid manufacturing? https://t.co/mYUPetu58B

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

They also claim the DNA has no functional consequences. Moderna’s patents disagree. Maybe dysfunctional consequences is a better term? https://t.co/xs3YMWR2WX

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Drayman et al begs to differ. SV40 promoters bind to P53 Tumor suppressor genes. @TamaraUgo https://t.co/88oR33KG5N

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 28, 2024 at 9:40 PM

Saved - April 29, 2024 at 9:50 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

The targeted enrichment of BNT162b2 is successful, with a significant enrichment for plasmid sequences in cell lines treated with the vaccine. Variants in the plasmid are only observed when in contact with OVCAR3 cell lines, suggesting active DNA replication. Enriching for plasmid sequences leads to more reads mapping to plasmid+human. Different library construction methods are being used to rule out artifacts, and a potential association with thrombocytopenia is being investigated. TN5 transposon based libraries will help reduce chimeric read noise and improve the search for integration events. These findings are not conclusive evidence of integration, but rather scientists sharing methods to enhance detection. PCR-based methods are also being explored, with one method being more sensitive but potentially blind to certain areas.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The targeted enrichment of BNT162b2 is working. We have a 22,000 fold enrichment for plasmid containing sequences from cell lines treated with vaccine. https://t.co/ypHaEYnnsC

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The variants in the plasmid have reproduced themselves for a 3rd time. We do not see these in the vaccine alone. Only when the vaccine is in contact with OVCAR3 cell lines. This implies the DNA is active in those cell lines and likely replicating. https://t.co/WwQI91IHtb

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Now that we are enriching for reads which match the plasmid sequence, we get many more reads that map to plasmid+human. https://t.co/DIPmpZoiBt

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

To rule out library construction artifacts we are making libraries with a different method. A few of the reads have multiple closely located start points across the human genome. One lands near a LncRNA of transcript associated with thrombocytopenia? https://t.co/QfyggUQBj5

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

But we need to rule out chimeric reads from the library construction process and we plan to do that with TN5 transposon based libraries (Nextera). https://t.co/8l1g6bva5Z

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

We should be able to reduce the chimeric read noise by a factor of 10-100 with this approach and have a finely tuned read efficient method for searching for integration events. You can find more at the Nepetalactone newsletter. https://t.co/nLTu4fHL0s

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is NOT hard evidence of integration. What you are witnessing are scientists sharing notes on how to sharpen the pencil to find this stuff. The xGen lockdown probe sequences are public and can be ordered from IDT. @P_J_Buckhaults has another PCR based method to screen for.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

samples worth deep sequencing. His method will be more sensitive for some portions of the vaccine but may be blind to areas not targeted with that collection of PCR primers. He is also 100% pre-publication transparent on the methods he is developing.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 23, 2024 at 7:00 PM

Saved - April 24, 2024 at 8:42 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

Health agencies are downplaying the significance of DNA contamination in vaccines, but behind the scenes, they are working to remove it. The presence of this contaminant is unprecedented in Canadian vaccines. Regulators have not performed checks themselves and are relying solely on the manufacturer's word. There are concerns about the accuracy of the testing methods used and the potential impact of the contaminating DNA. The FOIA reveals that agencies were not aware of this sequence until it was published.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Well, well, well, As health agencies assure the public that the DNA contamination is of no consequence, behind the scenes they are scurrying to have it removed from future vaccines! No prior vaccine in Canada has been approved with such a sequence contaminant. @FLSurgeonGen

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Pfizer assured them the sequence is not material to plasmid manufacturing. This is an overt lie. You cannot make plasmids without the promoter for the antibiotic resistance gene. It is active in mammalian cells. If it’s not needed, why is it in there?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Regulators are asking for their PCR protocol. That means they have performed ZERO checks on this DNA contamination themselves and are entirely relying on the word of the manufacturer. They look at the Fluorometry data as well ask why 2 diff methods?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

They also admit to having no size distribution analysis of the fragments so they are clueless to how well the DNase reaction is performing.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

They use a single loci qPCR to assess the entire plasmid. This underestimates the quantity of DNA and artifacts that arise when large quantities of modRNA block the DNase activity across the spike region. We get different CT scores from vector vs insert. Diff seq coverage.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Moderna’s own patents teach qPCR underestimates the DNA. This is not something they can hide from. Why are they not using qPCR to measure both the RNA and DNA. Or Fluorometry with +\- RNase?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

No mention of the impact of LNPs on the potency of the contaminating DNA? They claim there is no functionality to this sequence yet Drayman et al demonstrate it binds to P53!!! How bad are they at using google. Just google SV40 promoter AND P53

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The FOIA also reinforces that no agency was made aware of this sequence being present and only discovered upon our publication. That’s why you should trust them that is has no consequence.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

https://scoopsmcgoo.substack.com/p/emails-from-health-canada-re-sv40?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2

Emails from Health Canada re SV40 contamination in Pfizer vax "Was it unexpected to find this sequence in the finished product? Response: Yes, because Pfizer did not identify the presence of SV40 promoter enhancer on the plasmid template used to produce mRNA" scoopsmcgoo.substack.com

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 23, 2024 at 2:26 AM

Saved - April 23, 2024 at 10:15 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

Regulators approving COVID PCR EUAs with 3 targets, while allowing a single PCR primer pair for DNA quantification. Significant differences observed between lots. Multiple primer pairs help verify sequencing results and prevent quantification errors. Moderna has cleaner DNA but wider variance on spike/Ori qPCR.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I was always amazed at the regulators allowing a single PCR primer pair as a DNA quant when the same agency is approving COVID PCR EUAs that have 3 targets for the virus. Great work from @P_J_Buckhaults We have also see a 10CT (1,000 fold) difference between lots.

@P_J_Buckhaults - Phillip J. Buckhaults, Ph.D.

Plasmid DNA copy number quantification. protocols, reagents, and a thread of new results.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

having multiple primer pairs allowed us to verify what we see in sequencing which is that the spike region doesnt DNase or ligate as readily as the backbone. Presumably the background RNA is slowing these reactions down. Using a single primer set can lead to error in the quant. https://t.co/LNFr9J7c76

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Best to use as many as you can . This is more pronounced in Moderna which are cleaner from a DNA standpoint but have a wider variance on spike/Ori qPCR. https://t.co/tfHziiMPgh

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 21, 2024 at 2:05 PM

Saved - April 21, 2024 at 3:30 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

The posts criticize the author, Berenson, for his lack of critical reading skills and biased views on cannabis. They question the authors' motives and conflicts of interest, as well as their cherry-picking of studies to support their claims. The posts highlight flaws in the study, including the use of odd sentences and the failure to control for other drug use. They argue that alcohol is more responsible for violence than cannabis and suggest that socioeconomic factors play a bigger role in crime. The posts also mention the importance of personalized medicine and cite examples of cannabis benefiting certain individuals.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Let’s dissect Berensons horrible capacity to critically read scientific literature. “The Best Study Yet” Says the guy selling a reefer madness book. Did Alex really read the study or just parrot one that supports his fear porn over a plant? Lets look

@AlexBerenson - Alex Berenson

The best study yet on cannabis and violence - a meta-analysis released this month and covering 51 studies with over 200000 (!) participants - confirms cannabis users are FAR more likely to commit violence than non-users. Happy 4/20. Tell Your Children. https://t.co/STFIOt65H4

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

First order of business. How do these authors make money? Oh… by treating cannabis use disorder! You need to associate cannabis with harms in order for society to believe they should pay for treatment. The authors declare no conflict despite how blatant and overt this is. https://t.co/uTQE0jk8te

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

It’s ironic that the authors are from an institution notorious for using violence against its patients. Life threatening and traumatic restraints have killed patients under their care. So now that we understand what these physicians are pimping let’s walk through their scam.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The conflicted authors run a meta analysis, where they search for studies using “Cannabis” and “Violence” And shockingly find papers that suggest cannabis and violence. They cherry pick 51 of these 6,777 papers to further build their case. https://t.co/6gpk9ehYtV

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The authors confess to using ChatGPT to the write the paper which is why it has odd sentences like this one? https://t.co/GBaBSEwi5K

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

So violence with alcohol is the same frequency as violence and cannabis. Is it the drug or do you have a violent cohort? Most studies find more violence with alcohol so this is odd. https://t.co/tzVQ5KxEeW

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Now they want you to believe that females are more violent than males. OK Jan… Another signal in the data that should alert you to now looking at tea leaves. https://t.co/995mscwM0S

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The cross sectional studies find an OR but the longitudinal ones don’t? Another signal that you looking at confounder and noise. https://t.co/PwhLVGvAwW

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

And there it is. The tacit admission that their whole paper is Garbage In: Garbage out. Other drug use can’t be controlled for. https://t.co/67vrKpJgDx

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

And the authors rightfully remind the reader that there is a selection bias. Non violent cannabis use doesn’t result in arrests and documentation. https://t.co/pP9Qg1chG7

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

But now that you know how these physicians make money treating CUD, it’s no surprise they didn’t cite the papers that found the opposite correlation. Less violence with cannabis vs alcohol? https://t.co/yT71iUt8pg

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This lines up more with what we see in the general population. You’ll see fights at bars, not at dead shows. Alcohol is far more responsible for violence than cannabis but Alex won’t go near this. https://t.co/2SbbVX76ZA

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The other issue that plagues the field is that non psychoactive Cannabinoid metabolites can be detected for 30 days. Most amphetamines and alcohol clear in 12 hours. So when you test criminals, the cannabinoids are often the only things left in the urine. https://t.co/Qrf0XbkVc5

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is very analogous to COVID testing. Dying with COVID vs from it. You can’t detect the other drugs as efficiently so you over report the roll of cannabinoids in all crimes. “The best study” according to Berenson relied on many studies that collected self reported drug use. Horsesh!t

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Other more controlled studies on this topic find socioeconomic issues and poverty to play a bigger role. It’s like most crimes happen at night and declaring darkness causes violence. But the physicians didn’t cite the work that more carefully looked at confounders. https://t.co/1qedcnjn1F

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Berenson does this to generic drugs like IVM, HCQ. Broken clocks are correct 2X a day and he was right on the vaccines. But his major error on other drugs is a sign that he can’t critically read the scientific literature and is conclusion pharming for his book sales.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

If he really cared about the topic he’d be paying attention to CHS or Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. This rare but responds to cannabis abstinence. The psychosis Alex likes to link to cannabis doesn’t respond to abstinence weakening any causal connections like we have with CHS.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Also note that many parents with severely autistic children find cannabis reduces their self injurious behavior and violence. So maybe these broad sweeping studies with multiple confounders are a waste of time and we should be thinking about personalized medicine. Which drug and to whom. Not one size fits all assessments of a drug across whole populations.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 16, 2024 at 11:18 PM

Saved - April 17, 2024 at 2:12 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

The posts discuss various aspects of cell biology, DNA, and the potential implications of mRNA vaccines. They touch on topics such as reverse transcriptase, cell division, nuclear envelope dissolution, DNA contamination, genome modification, and ethical considerations. The authors highlight the complexity of DNA and its role in coding for RNA, as well as the potential risks and unknowns associated with mRNA vaccines.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Who wants to teach a Yale PhD about reverse transcriptase and what happens to the nucleus during cell division? For extra credit you can teach her about frameshifting, template switching and dsDNA contamination. https://youcanknowthings.com/2020/12/10/what-are-mrna-vaccines-and-will-they-turn-me-into-a-gmo/

What are mRNA vaccines, and will they turn me into a GMO? What is mRNA? And why are we putting it in vaccines? And will it turn me into a GMO? This post tackles all these questions, and introduces the very first You Can Know Things video! youcanknowthings.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

While a helpful high school version of biology, Her statement about the 100% unidirectional nature of DNA was put to bed decades ago when we sequenced the human genome and found 8% of it coded for HERVs.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Most cell biologists also understand that when cells divide the nuclear envelope dissolves allowing cytosolic RNA and DNA to enter the nucleus.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Independent of this fact, the spike protein is known to have amino acid sequences that localize to the nucleus and drag the spike mRNA with it.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The DNA contamination in the shots, means all of this reverse transcription stuff can be bypassed and directly modify the genome of some cells. It’s important to note that not all cells will be modified. Only a small percentage of cells transfected and they may not survive.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

They may not be harmful. They may get cleared by the immune system. There are lots of unknowns with billions of shots given and billions of DNA molecules in each shot. But if they hit a stem cell or germ cell, the problem can magnify.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

If the DNA has mammalian origins of replication , it can make more of itself once inside a cell. That additional DNA amplification may remain episomal (non chromosomal). But the authors discussion about how DNA ‘does nothing but code for RNA’ is a gross simplification.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

DNA recruits proteins and folds into various structures that can impact cell circuitry. The world of 3D genomics uses protein cross linking to freeze DNA in its protein/DNA 3D structure and helps to assemble genomes with tools like HiC.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Before the pandemic, they put Dr. He in jail for genome modifying 2 CRISPR babies. Once they pissed their pants over a flu, their ethical grand standing evaporated into a selfish frenzy of taking this risk with everyone around them and even mandating liability free experimental

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Transfections of modified RNA/ with unknown half lives and KNOWN impact on toll like receptors. They even did this on kids. Their moral opprobrium vanished the moment they were afraid for their own well being. So now it’s time to reverse course and tell the plebs this is fine. https://t.co/NsKAl5qPit

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - April 16, 2024 at 3:29 AM

Saved - April 16, 2024 at 7:03 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

I found an important post by @weldeiry discussing Spike S2 and p53. It highlights the impact on DNA sensing and damage response pathways. The author also mentions the significant sequence coverage observed in OvCar3 cells treated with vaccines, which includes DNA sequences known to bind to p53. Many questions remain unanswered.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Important read regarding Spike S2 and p53 from @weldeiry https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.04.12.589252v1

SARS-CoV-2 spike S2 subunit inhibits p53 activation of p21(WAF1), TRAIL Death Receptor DR5 and MDM2 proteins in cancer cells bioRxiv - the preprint server for biology, operated by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, a research and educational institution biorxiv.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Note the impact on DNA sensing and DNA damage response pathways. https://t.co/WLcZ3oEK7z

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

When treat OvCar3 cells with the vaccines we see 3000x sequence coverage for 30X human genome coverage. Some of those DNA sequences (SV40 promoters) are known to bind to p53. Leaves many questions. https://t.co/ztnSwH3xjR

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - March 18, 2024 at 11:56 AM

Saved - March 19, 2024 at 2:11 AM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

“This data absolutely does not show higher mortality in the Vaccinated but we can’t share that data” Submit OIA for data. “We do not have any such data that can make claims regarding vax status and mortality” These are the folks that illegally took down my entire 820gb drive.

@dystopian_DU - Rebekah Barnett

NZ Health says it can't provide Covid mortality data by vax status because, "The mortality data held by Te Whatu Ora does not include COVID-19 vaccination status." All time biggest experiment & they didn't bother to track deaths by vax status. Lying? Or incompetent?

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - March 1, 2024 at 2:05 PM

Saved - March 1, 2024 at 2:18 PM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is what these Pharma pimps do. Now consider everything you’ve ever been told about generic natural drugs like cannabinoids. It’s all a ruse.

@CovidAnalysis - Covid Analysis

PRINCIPLE trial: significantly improved recovery and significantly lower risk of long COVID with ivermectin, even with very late treatment and poor administration. This is despite being the most clearly designed to fail study (compare the treatment delay, population, treatment regimen, and administration with the same group’s molnupiravir trial), and despite the team taking 19 months to get the data “fully cleaned”. The p-values for ivermectin improving sustained recovery, early sustained recovery, alleviation of all symptoms, and sustained alleviation are < 0.0001. Patients in the ivermectin group had significantly better health one year later. The p-value for lower moderate/major symptoms with ivermectin at 12 months is < 0.0000001 (individual symptom results combined). The spin in the paper is incredible. (Compare also with the spin in the group’s recent paper showing increased mutagenesis and viral persistence with molnupiravir, where they recommend longer treatment).

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - February 26, 2024 at 9:44 PM

Saved - February 27, 2024 at 12:09 AM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The best part of these hearings is finally getting to meet other freedom orientated people you’ve only known through zoom. And it’s great to hear Senators who value freedom.

@TheChiefNerd - Chief Nerd

🚨 Genomics Expert Kevin McKernan Schools the 'Fact Checkers' on the DNA Contamination Found in the COVID mRNA Vaccines "The 'fact checkers' have been continually wrong throughout the last year this has gone on...First, they claimed it wasn't there. Now the FDA and the regulators have admitted it's in fact there. Then they claimed it wouldn't get into the cells. We've now shown that is in fact the case. As expected, anything that's inside of a lipid nanoparticle one would expect to get into a cell. Now [we're starting] to see early signs of DNA integration." *From the 2/26/2024 ‘Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What Are They Hiding?’ Roundtable Discussion @Kevin_McKernan @SenRonJohnson

Video Transcript AI Summary

Mr. Kevin McKernan, a former leader at the Human Genome Project, discussed DNA contamination in Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. He highlighted the risks of insertional mutagenesis and integration into the genome, contradicting regulators' claims of little consequence. The DNA, found in lipid nanoparticles, can enter cells and potentially contribute to cancer. McKernan emphasized the inadequacy of current monitoring methods and called for a review of regulatory practices. The presence of DNA in these vaccines challenges existing safety standards and raises concerns about long-term effects.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: Next participant is Mr. Kevin McKernan. Mr. McKernan is a former team leader of research and development for the Human Genome Project at Whitehead Institute slash MIT. He is a inventor of the solid sequencer, founder of Agincourt Biosciences and Medicinal Genomics. And he has 60,000 citations and dozens of genomic patents. Mr. McKiernan? Speaker 1: Thank you, senator Johnson. Very much appreciate you giving us audience. Many in this audience have been subjected to, you know, years of censorship on this topic. What I wanna talk to you today is about the DNA contamination that our team at Medicinal Genomics discovered in the mRNA vaccines. We're specifically speaking about Pfizer and Moderna in this case. This work has been replicated by many labs around the world, and now the FDA, the EMA and even Health Canada have admitted to this. The regulatory agents have admitted that Pfizer also omitted the SP 40 sequences that are in their vaccine. They've deemed this contamination to be of little consequence, claiming the DNA is of too little concentration to matter or to be containing DNA of no functional consequence. These statements are false and are not supported by any independent testing by these regulators. After the regulators have admitted to being deceived, they asked the opinion of the party that deceived them how bad was the deception. They shockingly believe the answer they were given, which is that these sequences have no relevance to plasma manufacturing. As someone who has worked on the Human Genome Project, manufacturing millions of plasmids, I can assure you that this is an overt lie. DNA contamination can lead to insertional mutagenesis. This is actually declared in Moderna's own patents regarding mRNA vaccines. This is US patent 10,000,000,898,574. This is also supported by Lim et al, which speaks to the rate of spontaneous integration in the genome during transfection. We are using transfection, after all, with LMPs. The SV 40 DNA is in fact functional. It is published as a potent gene therapy tool in a nuclear targeting sequence, as described by David Dean et al. The SP 40 promoter DNA is also known to bind to the tumor suppressor gene known as p 53. This is described by Draymond et al. The DNA contains the promoter for the antibiotic resistance gene in this plasmid as well. No plasmid manufacturing can occur without a promoter for the antibiotic resistance gene, so it is clearly functional and key to plasmid manufacturing despite the FDA's comments on this topic. The DNA quantity in many vials is over the 10 nanogram per dose limit, but it does vary substantially between lots. When we use both qPCR and fluorometry, these differences these two tools give us different answers. This should be a concern that they're allowed to cherry pick between these different tools. Moderna's own patents, US patent 100,000,000 077 439, teaches that qPCR underestimates the quantity of this contamination and the DNA regulators are once again allowing them to cherry pick between these different measurement tools. DNA guidelines used to be a 1000 fold lower before the NCBI act was established, which provided liability protection for some pharmaceutical companies. The limits were devised based on the 10 minute half life of DNA in the blood naked DNA in the blood. This DNA contamination is not naked. It's protected in lipid nanoparticles, which delivers this DNA to cells, which should arguably have limits set to the ones prior to the NCBIA. We have since found Pfizer lots, 1f1042a that are at least tenfold over any lot we've measured before with qPCR, which is known to underestimate this quantity. For those not familiar with PCR, you may have received CT scores of 35 that called you positive for COVID. We're seeing CT scores of 13 on the DNA that you're injecting into children. We've applied these vaccines to some cancer cell lines and have evidence that it enters the cell and can survive several cell divisions. We have preliminary evidence, although this requires replication in other labs, that this DNA can integrate into into the genome. We found 2 spike sequence integration events in ovarian cancer cell lines of CAR 3 into chromosome 12 and 19 very recently. Since these vaccines were expected to only contain mRNA, they were never assessed for genotoxicity studies. These studies were therefore being conducted as guinea pig US citizens, as we witnessed an unprecedented rise in cancer drug sales since the vaccines rolled out. In summary, the vaccine manufacturers own patents teach that the methods being used to monitor this DNA are not fit for purpose. The patents teach the insertion mutagenesis risks present in LNP based mRNA vaccines. The only people who are in denial of these facts are the regulators who are routinely hired to work for these very pharmaceutical companies. 2 of these regulators resigned over the wanton approval of these vaccines for young patients who do not benefit from them. It is time for our representatives to repeal or review the PDUFA Act of 1992. This act allows regulators to defray the cost of regulation by accepting payments directly from the companies they regulate. Over half the FDA's budget is sourced through this act. They cannot be voted into office, they cannot be voted out, but they can improve dangerous library free mandated vaccines. These policies have harmed the public, torn our country apart as immune nurses are forced to choose between their jobs and useless and even dangerous vaccines. DNA contamination was not part of any informed consent process, and many universities still mandate these shots based on the guidance and approval of our regulators who have become nothing less than a marketing division of the companies they regulate. Thank you for the time. Speaker 0: So, mister McKeown, in in layman's terms, what is the danger of this DNA contamination? I know fact checkers said it can't get into the cell, can't get into the nucleus. Address that for us, if you would. Speaker 1: So yes. The fact checkers have been continually wrong throughout the last, year this has gone on. They initially claimed this could not get into the cells. First, they claimed it wasn't there. Now the FDA and the regulators have admitted it's in fact there, then they claimed it wouldn't get into the cells. We've now shown that, in fact, that is the case. As expected. Anything that's inside of a lipid nanoparticle, one would expect to get into a cell. Now that we're starting to see early signs of DNA integration, you know, the DNA alone may not be the cause of cancer. I think it may be a contributor. Usually, cancer requires a multiple hit hypothesis. You need to have weakened immune systems like lymphocytopenia, which these shots do deliver. You might need some suppression from p 53 or BRCA 1, which there are publications showing that the spike protein suppresses those genes. And if you added an increased mutagenesis rate, well, all three of those things can create a perfect storm that may be driving the cancer that we're currently seeing. Speaker 0: The FDA does allow a certain level, certain percentage of DNA in normal vaccines. This is different type of DNA though, correct? Speaker 1: That is that's a very good point. I'm glad you brought that up. So those regulations were written when vaccines were grown in eggs and in other cell cultures line that was present in the vector of the host. This is very high copy number of DNA of a gene therapy vector, which has these nuclear targeting sequences and has DNA in it that replicates inside of a mammalian cell. So when it gets into the cell, it can make more of itself. That's a very different contamination than what they considered when they wrote those 10 nanogram regulations. They also wrote those 10 nanogram regulations under the the pretense of a 10 minute half life of naked DNA in the blood, and we now have that DNA protected in lipid nanoparticles. And, of course, they have raised those guidelines over the last decade a 1000 fold. So we've really come to, I think, the end of the road of how much DNA we can tolerate, considering the tools we have to monitor and measure this are have never been faster, better, or cheaper. Speaker 0: You mentioned the term half life. One thing I don't think we've brought up yet is how long this mRNA, is stay lasting in the body. I mean, again, we were told and we assumed that this was gonna stay in the arm and be dissolved because mRNA is just so delicate that it was gonna be, you know, not present in the body past couple days. But now we have studies that it's been in the body for at least 2 months, and we haven't studied beyond that. Correct? And can you just address that? And does that have a component, this DNA contamination? Speaker 1: It does. So many of the studies that are looking at this, I'll name a few. Krausson et al. Looked at this in the heart and found it 30 days out in the heart. Hannah et al. Found this in breast milk. I think they went out a week on the on that study. Castruta looked at this in plasma. It was out 28 days. And I think, outside of that, we're recently seeing it in, in, pregnant women inside of placenta, which is a real serious concern. We many of those studies do not differentiate between RNA or DNA, so it could be a combination of both of these things that are contributing to that signal. But DNA is certainly more stable than RNA. They have made modifications to this RNA that makes it last longer, but I think the verdict is still out as to which one has, more longevity. Speaker 0: Again, thank you, mister McKernan.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - February 23, 2024 at 9:50 PM

Saved - February 24, 2024 at 4:51 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

The PFUFA act of 1992 allows the FDA to be funded by Pharma, but I made an error in my previous post. The qPCR data was replicated by @DJSpeicher. Genomic expert Kevin McKernan shared preliminary evidence of DNA integration in COVID mRNA vaccines, which needs further replication and validation. The odds of chimeric ligation in the Illumina library prep are very low. Longer reads are required to determine if it's chromothripsis or extrachromosomal chimeric reads.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

That was hard to pack into 10 minutes. I made one error. The PFUFA act of 1992 allows the FDA to be funded by Pharma. I said Pharma to be funded by Pharma which is nonsensical. Sorry for the error. Also the qPCR data was replicated by @DJSpeicher. Lead author of the preprint.

@TheChiefNerd - Chief Nerd

🚩 NOW - Genomics Expert Kevin McKernan Shares a Summary of the DNA Contamination Found in the COVID mRNA Vaccines & Preliminary Evidence of DNA Integration "The fact checkers who told you this DNA won't get into the cell are proven wrong by this data. We can see DNA in there. It's a very high copy number...We've also found two genome integrations. This has not been replicated like all of our qPCR data, so this is very early, but we have fusions of DNA between the spike sequence and Chromosome 12 and between the spike sequence and Chromosome 9. This needs to be confirmed with long read sequencers where we can span the entire integration event...But we shouldn't be seeing any of this...So a little bit more validation to do in this but still a little bit concerning." *From the 2/23/2024 International Crisis Summit-5 (ICS-5) in Washington DC. Quote is taken from the 9:50 mark. @Kevin_McKernan @FLSurgeonGen

Video Transcript AI Summary

Kevin McKernan provides a whirlwind tour of DNA contamination in vaccines. He highlights the existence of DNA contamination in vaccines based on various studies and documents. McKernan criticizes the regulators' response, stating that they have turned to the vaccine manufacturers for answers, which he believes are misleading. He also discusses the use of different measurement methods and the potential risks associated with DNA contamination, including the integration of foreign DNA into human cells. McKernan calls for further screening of various biological samples for vaccine residue and encourages CLIA Laboratories to take an interest in this matter.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: I'm Kevin McKernan. I'm going to give you a very fast whirlwind tour through the DNA contamination that's in these vaccines. I've got about a 28 year history in genomics. I worked on the Human Genome Project. I've built DNA sequencers, lots of patents and citations, but I don't have a doctorate. And so I appreciate you guys giving me one of my tag. So there I don't have any conflicts. Many of the slides I have are for reference for the video. There'll just be citations. I believe having citations here is very important, so you understand where I'm going with this. This really pertains to 2 preprints that came out, 1 last year in April and 1 in October, Those 2, now these are preprints. Some of my favorite memes about preprints is that many people took these things under duress, but some people took them for doughnuts. And even in Portland, Oregon, they had a Joints for Jabs program, which surprisingly made them a mistake in disguise because cannabinoids probably had a role in limiting the inflammation of these shots. But we don't really care about peer review as Pierre Kory has mentioned. We care about reproduction in science. Okay? Peer review is meant to be a proxy for reproduction, but it often fails. What we do have is reproduction in space. We now have people in Germany, Japan. We have people in France who have seen this DNA contamination. The EMA even has documents that have leaked showing there is a 1 to 8 15 fold variance in the amount of DNA contamination there in these vaccines. That was data that was given to them cherry picked by Pfizer. We also have Doctor. Buchholz work in South Carolina that has replicated this qPCR. He's even done Oxford Nanopore sequencing on this. Doctor. Xin Lee has done Sanger sequencing in Connecticut. Doctor. Bridget Koning has done work in Germany. This much reproduction has forced the regulators to respond. We've got responses now from the FDA, from the EMA and from Health Canada that have all acknowledged this contamination is there. Now they disagree that it matters because they turn to their sponsors to get that answer. They've gone to Pfizer and asked them, what is in these shots and doesn't matter? And they were handed an answer saying it's of no consequence. I'm going to show you why they're wrong on those three points. Let's back up a little bit. What happened here, in the clinical trials they they actually ran the clinical trial and clean DNA that was PCR amplified from a plasmid template. All right. That makes it a million fold cleaner above background. They then did a bait and switch. And when they went to the mass market with this, they gave everyone vaccines that skipped that PCR step and therefore was working off of plasma DNA alone. What that means is more background DNA from the plasma gets into the vaccines and more endotoxin presumably gets into the vaccines. This bait and switch was documented in the BMJ. They've been one of the better journals throughout the pandemic. Retroph Levy had published this. So what did they hand to the regulators? They handed the regulators this plasmid map on the right, which you'll notice is missing any sequence annotation from 6 o'clock to 9 o'clock on the map. That's very awkward. If you ever use plasmid annotation tools, they annotate everything on the map and they don't leave anything unannotated. So somebody at Pfizer had to go in and actively delete this annotation and hand it to the regulators and defraud them. But on the left is what happened when we shoved this into a typical annotation tool. It highlights this SP-forty region. So what are they hiding in the SP-forty promoter region? Well, they're hiding the fact that this tool will define their system as a gene therapy, because it's a nuclear targeting sequencing. It moves DNA directly to the nucleus within hours in all cell lines, all right. Now they've also tried to attack the fact that we used expired vials. It's not true. We've had other people use vials that aren't expired. And this is a really bad position of theirs to take because they gave expired vials to patients. It's very easy for you to measure whether something has decayed with an RNA integrity plot. We've done that. So this is a red herring. It's also a little bit bizarre. They've challenged that our PCR results aren't using proper methods. They have not published their methods. But you can go to Moderna's own patents, which will teach you that qPCR underestimates the problem, and therefore, they had to invent new tools to get rid of the the U. S. Market. Speaker 1: We're seeing a Speaker 0: lot of growth in the U. S. Market. We're seeing a lot of growth in the U. S. Market. We're seeing a lot of growth in the U. S. Market. And they care about a ratio of RNA to DNA. So what they do is they use a different method that inflates the RNA values, something known as fluorometry, and then they move to qPCR to measure the DNA. Now you've all probably had a COVID test or know that they measure RNA. So if you have primers that can measure DNA and you don't use them to measure the RNA, you are a fraud. And the regulators either don't know this or they are complicit in the crime. They're letting them use 2 different yardsticks because without these 2 different yardsticks, they can't pass these regulations. So what is fluorometry? I'll briefly go through this. It's a dye that stains DNA, but sometimes it stains a little RNA when it's modified. So you have to play some tricks where you stain it first with the dye, then erase the RNA with an enzyme known as RNase, and then measure it again. We've done this work, and you can see that it goes down about a log scale and signal when you measure this with PicoGreen. If you erase the RNA, it goes down a log scale. It's still a log scale over if you use this tool. This is what we've been complaining about, is they're cherry picking tools and by some of the own tools that they're allowed to use with EMA, they're over by a factor of 10. Very recently, we've measured some vials in Germany that are with qPCR, which is the conservative way to measure this, and they're over by a factor of 20. This is 20 fold more DNA than we've ever seen in any other vaccine. This is very recent data. These are giving us CTs of 12, 13. If you remember COVID, you may have been positive on the outside of your mucosa from a viral test that has CT of 35. That's a 1000000 times less nucleic acid than they are injecting into you as a contaminant in their vaccines. Big difference there. Oh, I think I just missed one slide there. Okay. The FDA has guidelines that when the DNA gets really small, you have to lower the limits. These guidelines are also based on non LNP based delivery. DNA has about a 10 minute half life in the blood. If you put it in LNP, it goes all over the place and lasts forever. Well, I shouldn't say forever, but we don't know how long it goes. But it goes into the cell once you do this. This limit all paper is a great paper about spontaneous integration rates into the genome. It's around 7% if you use transfection with something like an LNP. So keep that in mind. 10 nanograms of small DNA, which is what we have here, is 1,000,000,000 of copies of DNA. 10 nanograms of DNA is only about 1,000 copies of DNA. So they base the regulations, on old numbers. It's also important to know that the NCVIA, since that went U. S. And we're going to see a lot of growth in the U. S. And we're going to see a lot of growth in Speaker 1: the U. S. And we're going to see a lot Speaker 0: of growth in the U. S. And we're going to see a lot of growth in the U. S. And Where is it going? Well, we can tell it's going to the heart from the Carlson paper and there for 30 days. It's going to breast milk from the Hanna papers. It's going to placenta recently found. And we can see it's in plasma for 28 days. Most of these papers are not discriminating between RNA and DNA. Market, we're seeing a lot Speaker 1: of the data that we're seeing in the market. And so we're seeing a lot of the data that we're seeing in the market. And so we're seeing a lot of the data that we're seeing Speaker 0: in the market. And so we're seeing a lot of the data that we're seeing in the market. And so we're seeing a lot of required. I don't think the DNA alone is going to do this, but when you give it in combination with white blood cell neutropenia and lymphocytopenia, this is quite likely. So let's go over why they're wrong. So the FDA, when they were shown that they have this contamination and admitted to being deceived, they then turned to the people who deceived them to ask them how bad is the deception. And of course they got the answer they're looking for, which Pfizer told them that these things don't are not material to manufacturing the plasmid. Having worked on the Human Genome Project building 10,000,000 plasmids, it is impossible to make a plasmid without a promoter. So this is a complete lie from the FDA, which shows you they're either completely inept or they're in on the crime. They're part of the fix, as Pierre would say. The other thing they've gone on to say is that they're going against their own guidelines. Their guidelines declare these things need to be disclosed. You have to declare every promoter and every open reading frame in any plasmid, and they didn't do this. They admitted that they didn't do this, and they're now running cover for them. So I'm not certain you can believe anything else that they say on this topic. They've nevertheless says the DNA is too small and too little quantity. I've already touched on the fact that it's an L and Ps and that's wrong. And the way that they're measuring things is a fraud. But it's also in some cases very long. There's a very long tail in the size of the DNA that's in there. We've collected, molecules as long as 3,000 bases out Speaker 1: of these Speaker 0: vaccines, which encode the entire antibiotic resistance gene and its promoter. That being integrates, you're going to have cell lines that are now resistant to aminoglycosides. I don't know what that's going to do, may not be very good for your gut. But they're not doing work. This is a very cheap $90 sequencing run we did in Oxford Nanopore on a flongo. It gives 1,000 reads and we can see already see 1,000 base pair fragments there or more. When they say this thing is immaterial and is nonfunctional, well, they have not read Moderna's own patents, other side of the business, the other side of the business, the other side of the business, the other side of the Speaker 1: business, the other side of the business, the other side of the business, the other side of the business, the other side of the business, the other side of the business, the other side of the business, the other side of the Speaker 0: business, the patents that they need to solve this problem. And they're inventing tools in these patents to solve the problem because they are aware of this risk that the FDA refuses to acknowledge is there. Nonfunctional, I don't much time for this, but there are papers written by the FDA that show it's functional. So we'll cite them back to those from Keith Peden. And of course, you only needed to do one Google search to find SV40 binding to p53. P53 is your tumor suppressor gene. It's the guardian of your genome. Anything that's in billions of copies inside of a vaccine that binds p53 should be a red light. Stop. Put the brakes on. Let's review what's going on here. I don't P53, but the fact that interacts with that gene should be a major alarm bell. Now very recently, we took ovarian cancer cell lines and treated them vaccines. This is work that Uli Kallmer did in Germany. She's treated ovarian cancer III cells, OVCAR3, with Moderna and some Pfizer vaccines. And then we looked at the with qPCR at the DNA levels in each cell passage. This took about a week's worth of cell DNA is still inside of these cells. So the fact checkers who told you this DNA won't get into the cell are proven wrong by this data. We can see DNA in there. It's a very high copy number. It's around 3000x coverage across the vaccine genome, and it's only about 30x coverage across the human genome. And we can now see the DNA sticking within these cells throughout passaging. We've also found 2 genome integrations. Now this has not been replicated like all of our qPCR data, so this is very early. But we have fusions of DNA between the spike sequence in chromosome 12, between the spike sequence in chromosome 9. This needs to be confirmed with long read sequencers where we can span the entire integration event. We couldn't do this with the Lumina sequencing. So this is so somewhat putative at the moment. But we shouldn't be seeing any of this right now. And this didn't take much to do. This took 1 Illumina run that a regulator could have easily done with the budgets that they have. Instead, this is falling upon citizen scientists to go and look at. We've done some Sanger sequencing to confirm that these junctions are real and they're not an alumina artifact. They're real and that they exist in the library that we sequenced. We didn't have cells to go back to torture test the cells to see if it was in the cell as well. That's our next action. So a little bit more validation to do in this, but still a little bit concerning. Why is this happening? Others have touched on this. We had 2 regulators leave in protests over these vaccines and 2 others went and got hired by Moderna. This is a revolving door. It's due to the PDUFA Act of 1992 that needs to be repealed. This allows the pharmaceutical companies to be paid by pharma, and more of their budget comes from pharma than from any taxpayer. So they are not beholden to any citizen vote. They are beholden to the people that they regulate. And that act should be eliminated. All right. So where do we go from here? Blood banks, sperm banks, fertility clinics, breast milk, transplant organs, cancer biopsies, all of these things need to be screened for whether or not any of this residual vaccine exists. We have tools to do now that we put public, anyone can manufacture these things. What's really needed are CLIA Laboratories to take an interest in this. We can work on cell lines. We can't be working on human, consent to DNA. That needs CLIA Laboratories to do that. So I encourage them to look up these primers. If they don't want to make them themselves, we have some of them kitted for people to make this easy. And I think Joe Latipo had this right. We have to do this state by state. The FDA is not going to address this. They've already demonstrated fraud. They've already demonstrated they're complicit, and they're willing to just take the word of the manufacturer and not give it any scrutiny. And Joe had the courage to actually look at this from a neutral position and decide that the FDA was lying through their teeth. So with that, I'll leave it for the next person. Thank you.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Just keep in mind, the PCR data in the cell lines is solid as we’re using assays we know work and sequencing shows it’s there. The integrations need replication and validation. We have 2+ unique reads for each event. But we don’t have both junctions covered. Need to sequence deeper and with longer reads and it’s need to be replicated by others. We did not find these in the unvaxxed control OvCar3 samples. The odds of this being chimeric ligation at the same base in the Illumina library prep is 1 in 3 billion.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

There is a possibility it is chromothripsis where the genome is shattered in cancer and the chimeric reads are extrachromosomal. Hence longer reads are required to pin this down.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - February 22, 2024 at 3:00 PM

Saved - February 22, 2024 at 6:44 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

We sequenced vax-treated OvCar3 cell lines and stained for spike expression. 60% of cells were positive for spike. Whole genome sequencing revealed the entire vax plasmid can be reassembled at 3,000X coverage. The plasmid had SNPs in the F1 Ori hairpin loop. Image courtesy of Stephen McLaughlin via RNA fold.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Calling all genomics Jocks. We sequenced vax treated OvCar3 cell lines that were washed and passaged such that the vaccine was diluted out and only cells with DNA inside are present. Our collaborators who did this work also stained for spike expression.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

60% of cells are positive for spike with IHC We qPCRd these cells for spike,SV40 and Ori in bulk. Not single cell measurement. Positive with CTs similar to human RNAP. We performed whole genome sequencing. The entire vax plasmid can be reassembled at 3,000X coverage (Top Track). https://t.co/jWQNv8GnJU

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is at 30X coverage of the human genome so 100x higher coverage for the plasmid than the human genome? As a control we also sequenced the vax alone. It’s at 44,000X coverage. You can see the left side of the IGV view has no SNPs. That’s the vector. The spike has SNPs

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The SNPs in the plasmid are in this hairpin loop. This is the F1 Ori responsible for making ssDNA from the plasmid/phagemid. https://t.co/3qouulFGgQ

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Image courtesy of Stephen McLaughlin via RNA fold.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - May 19, 2022 at 2:17 AM

Saved - February 21, 2024 at 10:48 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

The mRNA jabs have a high error rate due to the use of m1pU, a low fidelity base. This compounding error is a result of optimizing for expression magnitude. The problem is more pronounced in translation, and the error rate could escalate if more codons are changed. The combinatorial biochemistry problem is compounded by the injection of 40 trillion molecules. Protein sequencing of the final drug should be required. The accuracy of direct RNA sequencing with Oxford Nanopore is unlikely to pick up heteroplasmy. The manufacturing process and nucleotide purity may have contributed to RNA integrity loss. The autoimmune risk of synthesis errors should be calculated. There are concerns about SARS-CoV-2 persistence in newborn babies.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Compounding error Transcriptional error and Translational error. The mRNA jabs use a RNA polymerase to synthesize mRNA from a DNA plasmid. They replace U with m1pU. The error rate jumps to 100-300 errors per million bases. That’s 10-^3 -> 10-^4 error https://biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.12.488100v1

Improving the fidelity of uridine analog incorporation during in vitro transcription bioRxiv - the preprint server for biology, operated by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, a research and educational institution biorxiv.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The vax is ~4200bp. This is approximately 1 error in every vax molecule and you get injected with 40T. This is a result of m1pU which is a low fidelity base. This low fidelity also impacts the next step of tRNA hybridization in translation. This is compounding error.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Pfizer has mostly sold this base replacement as improving the magnitude and durability of expression. As with many things in biology, when you optimize for the magnitude of expression, you sacrifice fidelity.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Many think of variants as from the virus, not the vax The virus has an ExoN gene to error correct the polymerase errors. These error correcting proteins don’t like low fidelity bases like m1pU In order maximize expression of m1pU they need sloppy enzymes https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2106379119#fig03

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2106379119#fig03

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

As for IVT polymerase error rate, I’d like to emphasize that the folks from New England Biolabs are no hacks when it comes to enzymology. Their founder Rich Robert’s won the Nobel prize for the discovery of restriction enzymes and they have been the gold standard for decades.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The problem is more pronounced with translation. This model is changing only a few codons. Change them all I bet the error rate escalates. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1821754116#fig04

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Add the transcriptional and translational compounded error and you have a combinatorial biochemistry problem on every injection. This is why there is raw sequence data for vax lots in NCBI. There is no peptide sequence of one of these mRNA libraries in NCBI. Just smears on gels.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is a highly variable prodrug. The final drug has never been characterized. There are 3D structures of protein translated from mRNA transcribed from a DNA construct without m1pU. Not relevant. No m1pU.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

There are also smeary antibody stained western blots. Antibody stains are biased toward error free proteins. They don’t tag the mutated ones. Need to stain everything. Cell free in vitro TNT to understand glycosylation or PNGase F for removing in vivo glycosylation. More ?s.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

In summary, no mRNA injection should ever escape lot to lot sequence QC that is sensitive enough to find parts per thousand error. 40T molecules injected means small % error = billions of contaminants. Protein sequencing of the final drug should be required.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

To simplify, the error measured by Chen et al, suggests 1 error in every mRNA molecule. Poisson would imply some molecules have 2 and 3 errors and many have zero. Now imagine you inject 40 Trillion molecules where each one is different. The combinatorics are mind blowing.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The good news is that folk at BASE are starting to look at this problem with direct RNA sequencing with Oxford Nanopore (ONT). But the m1pUs look foreign to the ONT platform and get called as both a C and a T. It's unlikely this will have the accuracy to pick up 1:1K heteroplasmy

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The bad news is, this should have been done and made public before injecting 1B people. Its pretty bleeding edge so I can see how it was overlooked but at the minimum ILMN sequencing could have measured the heteroplasmies. Probably need UMIs to discount the cDNA syn error.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

But now that the camel has its nose in the tent and has feasted on the money machine.. It will be back for more.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

For those doubting my assessment of the mfg process, BASE spells it out here. Maybe my purity expectations are too high but I'd be anlot less scrupulous if Pfizer/Moderna put any raw sequence live for lot to lot QC. Zero for the vax. Millions for the virus.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This preprint monitors the translation fidelity in PseudoU and m1PseudoU. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.06.13.495988v1.full.pdf

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Another one. I dont see an email address for this author. https://jpands.org/vol27no2/hatfill2.pdf

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Hatfill

Steven hatfill - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

One reason I don’t like the lemons into lemonade comment in this paper… It speaks to sloppy translation perhaps being a good defense against variants. That’s a very sloppy way to achieve a goal and may come with risks. Consider this paper. RNA-Roulette https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.05.16.491922v2.full.pdf

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

If anyone has spare cycles, it would be helpful to calculate the Amino Acid edit distance of The vax Amino Acids to human amino acids in all 6 reading frames. This would give us a framework of the autoimmune risk of these synthesis errors.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The EMA leak has a lot to say about RNA integrity loss during manufacturing scale up. If I had to guess, Nucleotide purity probably played a role. It’s hard to scale up the synthesis of modified nucleotides and the polymerases don’t like to incorporate them. They stall.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Particularly at long tracks of U. PolyU incorporation it pure N1 methyl pseudoU could create polymerase stall points and truncated mRNA. But RNA integrity numbers also include mRNAs that are too long so one can’t assume it’s only truncated mRNA. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/european-medicines-agency-eu-pfizer-vaccine/

Government Officials Pressured EU Regulators to Rush Authorization of Pfizer Vaccine, Leaked Documents Reveal U.S. and EU government officials pressured European drug regulators to rush approval of Pfizer-BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine despite safety concerns, according to leaked documents from the European Medicines Agency. childrenshealthdefense.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@microbeminded2 - Amy Proal, PhD

This is one of the most concerning examples of #SARS-CoV-2 persistence to date 👉 The team found SARS-CoV-2 RNA + Spike protein in the stool of 11/14 newborn babies born to mothers who had #COVID-19 resolve 10+ weeks before delivery: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41390-022-02266-7

SARS CoV-2 detected in neonatal stool remote from maternal COVID-19 during pregnancy - Pediatric Research In utero transmission of SARS coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has not been fully investigated. We investigated whether newborns of mothers with COVID-19 during pregnancy might harbor SARS-CoV-2 in the gastrointestinal tract. This cohort study investigated stool from 14 newborns born at 25–41 weeks admitted at delivery to our urban academic hospital whose mothers had COVID-19 during pregnancy. Eleven mothers had COVID-19 resolved more than 10 weeks before delivery. Newborn stool was evaluated for SARS-CoV-2 RNA, Spike protein, and induction of inflammatory cytokines interleukin-6 (IL-6) and interferon-γ (IFN-γ) in macrophages. Despite negative SARS CoV-2 nasal PCRs from all newborns, viral RNAs and Spike protein were detected in the stool of 11 out of 14 newborns as early as the first day of life and increased over time in 6. Stool homogenates from all 14 newborns elicited elevated inflammatory IL-6 and IFN-γ from macrophages. Most newborns were clinically well except for one death from gestational autoimmune liver disease and another who developed necrotizing enterocolitis. These findings suggest in utero transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and possible persistent intestinal viral reservoirs in the newborns. Further investigation is required to understand the mechanisms and their clinical implications. nature.com

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - March 20, 2021 at 9:09 PM

Saved - December 27, 2023 at 12:18 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

A series of posts discusses the cancel culture letter written by 100 scientists at Stanford University targeting Scot Atlas. The posts highlight the connections between some signatories of the letter and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, suggesting a potential bias. The influence of the Gates Foundation in philanthropy and vaccine development is also mentioned. The posts criticize the letter for its lack of citations and argue that it reflects a monopolistic ethos. The posts raise questions about conflicts of interest and collusion in the vaccine industry. The posts also criticize the letter's claims about masks, asymptomatic spread, and the lack of citations.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

University, Philanthropy and Cancel Culture. Back in September, 100 "independent" scientists at Stanford wrote a cancel culture letter to scream at Scot Atlas. Many of their points are now laughable. This wont age well. But let's see how they came to such woke outrage.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

As many of you know, Stanford attracts a lot of money but one of the more noticeable donations is from Bill and Melinda Gates and is known as the Stanford Computer Science center. Woke Outrage Letter link below. https://drive.google.com/file/d/130OXUjdnwHmfmbiEZWK9d354QHaRi0-r/view

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

In addition to donating a Computer Science building, they also gifted $50M to the school for Vaccine development. https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/gates-foundation-awards-stanford-50-million-for-vaccine-discovery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gates_Computer_Science_Building,_Stanford

Gates Foundation Awards Stanford $50 Million for Vaccine Discovery Gates Foundation Awards Stanford $50 Million for Vaccine Discovery. The grant will establish the Stanford Human Systems Immunology Center, which aims to create a better understanding of how the immune system can be harnessed to develop vaccines.... philanthropynewsdigest.org

Gates computer science building, stanford - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

In fact there are over 151 grants to Stanford listed on the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation website. https://www.gatesfoundation.org/about/committed-grants?q=Stanford#jump-nav-anchor0

Committed Grants | Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation This database includes grant commitments made by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and previous foundations of the Gates family (William H. Gates Foundation, Gates Library Foundation, and Gates Learning Foundation) from 1994 onward. gatesfoundation.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

So lets look at what Bill thought about Scot Atlas..

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

That is not a nice micro-aggression. Maybe "crackpot" is a better term for a MD in Neurology.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

So Bill doesn't Like Scot. Bill has lots of investments in Vaccines. How should neutralize Scot? Maybe some of the recipients of his grants will get together and write a woke outrage cancel culture letter to underscore the diversity of thought found at a University.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Let's take a look at the signatories of this letter, shall we? First up Phillip Pizzo - Surprise.. He has Gates money.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Upi Singh, MD You guessed it. Gates Money.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Lucy Shapiro, PhD. Don't see any Gates Money. That is shocking. Impressive background but many industrial relationships worth noting. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_Shapiro

Lucy shapiro - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Melissa Bondy, PhD. Quick glance, didnt see much https://med.stanford.edu/school/leadership/dean/updates/melissa-bondy.html

Page not found med.stanford.edu

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Bonnie Maldonadfo, MD Yep.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Michele Barry, MD Bingo

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Charles Prober, MD Some associations and accolades with Gates but this one needs more digging. https://news.stanford.edu/news/2015/february/gates_cambridge-winners-021215.html

You’ve requested a page that no longer exists | Stanford News news.stanford.edu

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

You see, some of their students get scholarships from Gates so there are indirect influences that require a bit more digging.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Julie Parsonnet, MD Bingo ttps://news.stanford.edu/news/2008/november19/med-mcp-111908.html

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Steven Goodman, MD, MHS, PhD Involved in the Institute for Science and Policy which has Gates money. https://institute.dmns.org/perspectives/posts/covid-19-myths-misinformation-and-misunderstandings/

COVID-19 Myths, Misinformation, and Misunderstandings How do COVID-19 falsehoods take hold, and how can the media and the public be discerning about what we’re seeing? institute.dmns.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

David Relman, MD https://fsi-live.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/cv_relman_09192016.pdf CV has Gates Money

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Steve Luby, MD Yet again... Maybe we should just call it Gatesford university?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

https://ccas.creighton.edu/news/alumni-merit-award-winner-2016-stephen-luby Harry Greenberg, MD Has some cozy interactions with Gates but havent dug deep here as the trend is becoming pretty clear. https://sm.stanford.edu/archive/stanmed/2009spring/article5.html

Page not found | Creighton University creighton.edu

Insourced to India - 2009 SPRING - Stanford Medicine Magazine - Stanford University School of Medicine sm.stanford.edu

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Ann Arvin, MD. Serves on NIAID Advisory panel with Gates members. Works with the WHO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Arvin I've only covered the few names at the top of the letter but at the moment this seems pretty overt. Uncle Bill doesnt like anyone who challenges his vax goals.

Ann arvin - Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

So what happens? Everyone in the Gates cult gangs up on the independent thinkers to demand the university should contain only their thoughts. Monoversity would be a better name and this is a historical stain on the exceptional Stanford reputation.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Surprised? We witnessed the Yellow Snow Memorandum resort to the same type of hypocritical behavior. They crucified Scot for his Hoover connections The monopolistic ethos of their philanthropist shines through in the behavior of their grant recipients.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The John Snow Memorandum = Nerd Sweater Mafia These authors are infamous for attacking the Great Barrington Declaration as being some @AIER libertarian think tank. Let’s stoop to their level and see how they take a dose of their same immature associative fallacy medicine.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

I apologize for mis-spelling Scott’s name. (Two Ts). He left Twitter when the cancel culture purged Twitter in 2021. https://www.statnews.com/2021/01/12/scott-atlas-deletes-twitter-account/

Scott Atlas, controversial former Trump adviser, deletes Twitter account Atlas deleted his Twitter account, apparently in response to the site’s decision to remove accounts accounts after the Capitol riot. statnews.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Just so we are clear about philanthropy. The Gates Foundation has over $430M in Pfizer/BioNTech stock. Nothing in Merck’s Ivermectin. NIH has patent royalties for Moderna. But none of this matters. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.axios.com/moderna-nih-coronavirus-vaccine-ownership-agreements-22051c42-2dee-4b19-938d-099afd71f6a0.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fool.com/amp/investing/2020/09/24/4-coronavirus-vaccine-stocks-the-bill-melinda-gate/

The NIH claims joint ownership of Moderna's coronavirus vaccine Taxpayers have a sizable stake in the vaccine Moderna is developing. axios.com

The Motley Fool The Motley Fool provides leading insight and analysis about stocks, helping investors stay informed. fool.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

The holdings are not all BNTX. The 437M is spread across multiple vaccine bets but BioNTech is up 4X since last March and now valued over $100M trading at $107/share today. It was at $13 in Oct 2019.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Remember all the outrage when Billionaire Pedophile Epstein was caught buying university influence? Wrecked a department at MIT. Not suggesting Bill is this evil but it’s a reminder that these conflicts are important to have on the table when his influence network is so large.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is where it gets interesting. Gates encourages AZ/Oxford to not take the free vax for all route. That can’t be good for Pfizer. Also set up CEPI to try to control vax pricing. Collusion through NGO/Philanthropy while stock portfolio banking on ROI? https://www.google.com/amp/s/khn.org/news/rather-than-give-away-its-covid-vaccine-oxford-makes-a-deal-with-drugmaker/amp/

They Pledged to Donate Rights to Their COVID Vaccine, Then Sold Them to Pharma - KFF Health News Advocates of cheap and widely available vaccines thought the pandemic might change business as usual. They were wrong. kffhealthnews.org

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

FAQs. What’s laughable? 1)It opens with Masks! DanMask Source control is bunk. Many comparative jurisdictions show no effect or worse outcomes. @ianmSC is a good source. @mamasaurusMeg and @KristenMeghan are professional OSHA PPE- they agree with Scott Cloth aerosols droplets.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

2)Asymptomatic spread. Not a driver. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2774102 3)how many Stanford brainiacs does it take to use EndNote? More than 100? Not a single citation required to character assassinate a colleague? That’s why it’s a woke embarrassment. https://t.co/AtXVLTxWkc

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@threadreaderapp unroll

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - December 12, 2023 at 1:38 AM

Saved - December 12, 2023 at 1:54 AM

reSee.it AI Summary

In a recent study, @Cernovich failed to provide a link and overlooked important factors. Schizophrenics seek cannabis to self-medicate, making causality unclear. However, CBD shows promise in treating schizophrenia. Government agencies discredit cannabis without considering its chemical composition. Schizophrenia rates haven't changed, but cannabis use has increased as a safer alternative to alcohol. Unlike alcohol, cannabis doesn't cause lethal withdrawal symptoms. @Cernovich's biased approach undermines their credibility. A balanced review should consider the heritability of schizophrenia rather than blaming the first drug used.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

This is Berenson brain dead moment for @Cernovich

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@Cernovich N of 32! No wonder you didn’t post a link.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

No adjustment for socio-economic factors. The authors don’t even mention that the number 1 confounder in all cannabis schizo papers… Schizophrenics have drug seeking behavior as they attempt to self medicate. Causality can’t be linked.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

They have reason to seek cannabis as CBD is an anxiolytic in clinical trials to TREAT schizo. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9110455/ So when a gov agency is looking to discredit cannabis on Pharmas behalf, they set up a study that never looks at the chemotype of the cannabis.

Cannabidiol (CBD) as a novel treatment in the early phases of psychosis The pharmacological interventions available for individuals in the early stages of psychosis are extremely limited. For those at clinical high risk for psychosis, there is no licensed treatment available. For those with first-episode psychosis, all licensed ... ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Step back from the fiat funded NIDA noise. Schizophrenia has not changed in frequency in 20 years.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Cannabis use has risen as adolescents exchange it for Alcohol. A positive replacement as alcohol is far more toxic and addictive than cannabis. Hard facts booze bags won’t face. EtOH withdraw can kill people with seizures. No such thing with cannabis.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

N of 32 @Cernovich All hat, no cattle. This is a sign of someone who doesn’t read the papers they flaunt. They title search, post their bias and influence farm.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@Cernovich A balanced review would look at the heritability of schizophrenia. We have far better data on this front than the loose and poorly controlled studies attempting to pin the first drug a schizophrenic reaches for as the cause. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-023-02293-8#:~:text=Rare%20copy%20number%20variants&text=Across%20the%20genome%2C%20people%20with,effects%20on%20risk%20%5B17%5D.

Genomic findings in schizophrenia and their implications - Molecular Psychiatry There has been substantial progress in understanding the genetics of schizophrenia over the past 15 years. This has revealed a highly polygenic condition with the majority of the currently explained heritability coming from common alleles of small effect but with additional contributions from rare copy number and coding variants. Many specific genes and loci have been implicated that provide a firm basis upon which mechanistic research can proceed. These point to disturbances in neuronal, and particularly synaptic, functions that are not confined to a small number of brain regions and circuits. Genetic findings have also revealed the nature of schizophrenia’s close relationship to other conditions, particularly bipolar disorder and childhood neurodevelopmental disorders, and provided an explanation for how common risk alleles persist in the population in the face of reduced fecundity. Current genomic approaches only potentially explain around 40% of heritability, but only a small proportion of this is attributable to robustly identified loci. The extreme polygenicity poses challenges for understanding biological mechanisms. The high degree of pleiotropy points to the need for more transdiagnostic research and the shortcomings of current diagnostic criteria as means of delineating biologically distinct strata. It also poses challenges for inferring causality in observational and experimental studies in both humans and model systems. Finally, the Eurocentric bias of genomic studies needs to be rectified to maximise benefits and ensure these are felt across diverse communities. Further advances are likely to come through the application of new and emerging technologies, such as whole-genome and long-read sequencing, to large and diverse samples. Substantive progress in biological understanding will require parallel advances in functional genomics and proteomics applied to the brain across developmental stages. For these efforts to succeed in identifying disease mechanisms and defining novel strata they will need to be combined with sufficiently granular phenotypic data. nature.com

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - December 9, 2023 at 9:09 PM

Saved - December 11, 2023 at 10:29 PM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

TL/DR https://t.co/KyXYunsJbI

Video Transcript AI Summary

In 2021, there was a known risk of frame shifting that was censored in journals and on Twitter. Some researchers published papers like Kim et al to gain favor and rewards. After administering billions of shots, we can now see the problems through a new patent that aims to fix the harmful substances given to our children.

AI Similar Videos

Full Transcript

Speaker 0: So in summary, this frame shifting risk was known in 2021 and it was censored at the journals and on Twitter. Smokescreen papers like Kim et al appeared so some researchers could get some Fauci biscuits. After billions of shots, We can now see the warts through the lens of the next patent that will fix the crap forced into our kid.

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - December 8, 2023 at 12:48 AM

Saved - December 8, 2023 at 6:24 PM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

@jchilders98 What’s most frustrating about this finding, is that it was predicted to occur and summarily censored. 2021 preprint with @P_McCulloughMD https://osf.io/preprints/osf/bcsa6 Our comments to Nature- https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06800-3#Sec22 Try building DNA sequencers. You learn every methyl group matters.

OSF Preprints | Differences in Vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 Replication Derived mRNA: Implications for Cell Biology and Future Disease osf.io

N1-methylpseudouridylation of mRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting - Nature In vitro-transcribed (IVT) mRNAs are modalities that can combat human disease, exemplified by their use as vaccines for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). IVT mRNAs are transfected into target cells, where they are translated into recombinant protein, and the biological activity or immunogenicity of the encoded protein exerts an intended therapeutic effect1,2. Modified ribonucleotides are commonly incorporated into therapeutic IVT mRNAs to decrease their innate immunogenicity3–5, but their effects on mRNA translation fidelity have not been fully explored. Here we demonstrate that incorporation of N1-methylpseudouridine into mRNA results in +1 ribosomal frameshifting in vitro and that cellular immunity in mice and humans to +1 frameshifted products from BNT162b2 vaccine mRNA translation occurs after vaccination. The +1 ribosome frameshifting observed is probably a consequence of N1-methylpseudouridine-induced ribosome stalling during IVT mRNA translation, with frameshifting occurring at ribosome slippery sequences. However, we demonstrate that synonymous targeting of such slippery sequences provides an effective strategy to reduce the production of frameshifted products. Overall, these data increase our understanding of how modified ribonucleotides affect the fidelity of mRNA translation, and although there are no adverse outcomes reported from mistranslation of mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in humans, these data highlight potential off-target effects for future mRNA-based therapeutics and demonstrate the requirement for sequence optimization. A study demonstrates that nucleotide modifications in mRNA-based therapeutics can lead to +1 ribosomal frameshifting during translation, yielding products that can trigger immune responses. nature.com

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - December 8, 2023 at 3:17 PM

Saved - December 8, 2023 at 3:21 PM

reSee.it AI Summary

In a notable internet fail, the @NIH was caught lying about the "natural" status of modified mRNAs, which they have earned over $550M in royalties from. This issue led to my TwitMo and subsequent inability to comment on @elonmusk's platform. Recently, a bombshell article in Nature confirmed our warnings, raising questions about the extent of censorship we should tolerate. Is it truly freedom if authors are gagged from responding?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Remember this internet fail?

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

That same week I was TwitMo’d for pointing out that the @NIH was lying about the mRNA being ‘natural’. They have over $550M in royalty from these modified mRNAs and they know it’s not natural as their patents would never issue if it were.

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Years later, I still can’t comment on this topic on @elonmusk platform without community note’s censorship. My account doesn’t qualify because I was TwitMo’d. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/twitmo

TwitMo It was only a matter of time. anandamide.substack.com

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

nature just published a bombshell that confirms our warning in 2021 How much more censorship should we tolerate? Here is the Notes on my tweet on this topic. Is it freedom of if the author is gagged from response? @TexasLindsay_ @DrJBhattacharya @shellenberger @JeninYounesEsq https://t.co/LTIhOWjND9

@Kevin_McKernan — Kevin McKernan

Posted - December 8, 2023 at 12:24 AM

Saved - December 8, 2023 at 12:44 AM

@Kevin_McKernan - Kevin McKernan

Our comments on the recent Frameshift paper. This was knowable prior to the vaccine program. We warned about it in 2021. We were censored. Only after billions of shots are folks allowed to publish on it. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06800-3#Sec22

N1-methylpseudouridylation of mRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting - Nature In vitro-transcribed (IVT) mRNAs are modalities that can combat human disease, exemplified by their use as vaccines for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). IVT mRNAs are transfected into target cells, where they are translated into recombinant protein, and the biological activity or immunogenicity of the encoded protein exerts an intended therapeutic effect1,2. Modified ribonucleotides are commonly incorporated into therapeutic IVT mRNAs to decrease their innate immunogenicity3–5, but their effects on mRNA translation fidelity have not been fully explored. Here we demonstrate that incorporation of N1-methylpseudouridine into mRNA results in +1 ribosomal frameshifting in vitro and that cellular immunity in mice and humans to +1 frameshifted products from BNT162b2 vaccine mRNA translation occurs after vaccination. The +1 ribosome frameshifting observed is probably a consequence of N1-methylpseudouridine-induced ribosome stalling during IVT mRNA translation, with frameshifting occurring at ribosome slippery sequences. However, we demonstrate that synonymous targeting of such slippery sequences provides an effective strategy to reduce the production of frameshifted products. Overall, these data increase our understanding of how modified ribonucleotides affect the fidelity of mRNA translation, and although there are no adverse outcomes reported from mistranslation of mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in humans, these data highlight potential off-target effects for future mRNA-based therapeutics and demonstrate the requirement for sequence optimization. A study demonstrates that nucleotide modifications in mRNA-based therapeutics can lead to +1 ribosomal frameshifting during translation, yielding products that can trigger immune responses. nature.com

TruthArchive.ai - Tweets Saved By @Kevin_McKernan