TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The Office of Gene Technology Regulator is questioned about gene therapies and the mRNA vaccines. The speaker presents evidence from Pfizer's website, the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy, and the TGA's non-clinical report to argue that mRNA vaccines are gene therapy. The regulator deflects responsibility for testing genotoxicity and claims that the Gene Technology Act does not apply to manufacturing in other countries. The speaker disagrees, citing Pfizer's acknowledgment of transfection as part of gene therapy. The regulator disputes the definition of gene therapy. The conversation ends without resolution.

Health authorities and the media have been accused of misleading the public about the safety of COVID injections, with evidence suggesting they concealed adverse event data. Recent emails from Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) reveal that officials acknowledged the potential for DNA fragments from mRNA vaccines to integrate into human genomes, contradicting their public statements. Despite this, the TGA focused on dispelling public fears rather than investigating risks. Concerns have been raised about the lack of testing for DNA integration and the overall safety of the vaccines. Senator Gerard Renick criticized the TGA for its poor quality assurance and lack of accountability, highlighting the need for greater scrutiny of vaccine safety and the political failures that allowed these issues to persist. The situation reflects broader frustrations with government transparency and public health decisions in Australia.

The speaker presents evidence from Pfizer's website, the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy, and the TGA's report to argue that mRNA vaccines are a form of gene therapy. They question why the mRNA vaccine was not tested for genotoxicity and why the Office of Gene Technology Regulator did not consider it as gene technology. The regulator responds that the question of genotoxicity should be directed to the Therapeutic Goods Administration, and explains that since the mRNA vaccines were imported into Australia and not manufactured there, they are not responsible for checking gene therapy. The speaker disagrees, citing Pfizer's statement about transfection being a part of gene therapy. The regulator suggests a difference in the definition of gene therapy.

The Office of Gene Technology Regulator is questioned about gene therapies and the mRNA vaccines. The speaker presents evidence from Pfizer's website, the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy, and the TGA's non-clinical report to support the claim that mRNA vaccines are gene therapy. The regulator deflects responsibility for testing genotoxicity and manufacturing processes conducted in other countries. The speaker highlights the contradiction in the regulator's statements and the disagreement with Pfizer's definition of gene therapy. The regulator argues that the definition of gene therapy is subjective. The conversation ends without a resolution.

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines contain fragments of DNA, which can integrate into the genomic DNA of cells and become a permanent part of the cell. This poses a potential risk of autoimmune attacks and future cancer. The DNA contamination occurred during the production process, where a plasmid vector was used to scale up the production of the RNA template. The regulatory threshold for DNA in vaccines is outdated and not suitable for this new type of vaccine. The speaker believes that DNA sequencing should be done on vaccinated individuals' stem cells to determine if this theoretical risk has occurred. Informed consent is necessary, and the lack of transparency regarding the DNA contamination is concerning.

Before the emergency use authorization of the vaccines, significant concerns were already known. The Pfizer technical document revealed that these vaccines caused widespread distribution of the encoded protein in major tissues and were associated with inflammatory reactions due to lipid nanoparticles. It was understood that these nanoparticles could deliver RNA and DNA into cells, and the use of pseudo uridine was intended to enhance the immune response and prolong the product's effectiveness. However, critical investigations regarding potential shedding, reproductive toxicity, and the presence of contaminants were not conducted. These omissions are concerning, especially considering previous FDA regulations that recognized the risks of genotoxicity related to manufacturing processes.

The speaker questions whether the mRNA complexes in the vaccines meet the definition of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) under Australian legislation. The response states that mRNA technology is not gene therapy and does not alter human DNA. The speaker insists on knowing if the possibility was examined, but the response reiterates that the vaccines are not GMOs. The speaker then asks if Pfizer has notified its underwriters about potential litigation, but the response is uncertain and requests further investigation. Another speaker presents a document from Pfizer's website stating that gene technology includes a process used in the COVID vaccine. The committee agrees to review the document and suggests sending additional questions to Pfizer.

Thank you, Senator Johnson. I want to address the DNA contamination found in Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines, which has been confirmed by multiple labs and acknowledged by regulatory agencies like the FDA and EMA. They downplay the significance of this contamination, claiming it has no functional consequences, which is misleading. DNA contamination can lead to insertional mutagenesis, as noted in Moderna's patents. The contamination levels vary significantly between lots, and current measurement methods allow for selective reporting. We have evidence that this DNA can integrate into the genome, raising concerns about genotoxicity, especially given the rise in cancer drug sales since the vaccine rollout. Regulatory practices need to be reviewed, particularly the PDUFA Act, which allows regulators to accept funding from the companies they oversee, creating conflicts of interest. Informed consent processes have not addressed this contamination issue, yet mandates persist based on flawed regulatory guidance. Thank you.

Many labs, including Medicinal Genomics, found DNA contamination in Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines. Regulators like the FDA and EMA admitted to this, but downplayed its significance. The SP 40 sequences omitted by Pfizer are crucial. DNA contamination can cause insertional mutagenesis, as stated in Moderna's patents. Regulatory agencies were deceived and failed to properly address the issue. This poses a serious risk that cannot be ignored.

The Office of Gene Technology Regulator is questioned about gene therapies and the mRNA vaccines. The speaker presents evidence from Pfizer's website, the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy, and the TGA's non-clinical report to argue that mRNA vaccines are gene therapy. The regulator deflects responsibility for testing genotoxicity and claims that since the mRNA vaccines were imported into Australia, they were not manufactured there. The speaker disagrees, stating that transfection still occurs in Australian citizens. The regulator disagrees with the definition of gene therapy and the reliance on the manufacturer's statements. The conversation ends without a resolution.

Pfizer's own document, the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy, and the TGA all acknowledge that mRNA vaccines are a form of gene therapy. The speaker questions why the mRNA vaccine wasn't tested for genotoxicity and why the Office of Genetic Therapeutics didn't consider it as gene technology. The response states that the TGA is responsible for approving the vaccine and the question of genotoxicity should be directed to them. It is clarified that the mRNA vaccines were imported into Australia and not manufactured there. The speaker disagrees, citing Pfizer's admission that transfection is part of gene therapy. The response disagrees with the speaker's interpretation.

The Office of Gene Technology Regulator is questioned about gene therapies and the mRNA vaccines. The speaker presents evidence from Pfizer's website, the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy, and the TGA's non-clinical report to support the claim that mRNA vaccines are gene therapy. The regulator deflects responsibility for testing genotoxicity and manufacturing processes conducted in other countries. The speaker highlights the contradiction in the regulator's statements and emphasizes that transfection, a part of gene therapy, occurs in Australian citizens. The regulator disagrees and questions the definition of gene therapy. The speaker concludes by relying on the manufacturer's statements.

The Pfizer vaccine may contain DNA in addition to mRNA, according to a scientist who sequenced the vaccine in their lab. The DNA is a vector used in the production of the mRNA. The scientist examined vials of the vaccine from a local vaccination program and found DNA in them. This DNA could potentially be linked to rare but serious side effects, such as death from cardiac arrest. It has the ability to integrate into the genomic DNA of cells, potentially causing long-term effects. The presence of this DNA raises concerns about the regulatory process that allowed it to be included in the vaccine. There is a theoretical risk of autoimmune reactions and future cancer development. Further investigation is needed to determine the extent of these risks.

I'm Philippe Boucalt, a cancer genomics researcher at the University of South Carolina. I've sequenced the DNA in the Pfizer vaccine and found that it contains fragments of DNA. This DNA could potentially cause rare but serious side effects, such as cardiac arrest and future cancer risks. The regulatory process that allowed this contamination is concerning. The DNA could integrate into long-lived somatic cells and potentially cause autoimmune attacks or disrupt tumor suppressors. To produce the vaccine, they cloned the PCR product into a plasmid vector, which led to the contamination. We can easily measure the amount of this substance in the vaccine and should conduct further studies to understand its implications. The FDA should require Pfizer to remove the DNA from the vaccine.

In April 2022, the OGTR stated their role in assessing the risk of gene technology. In February 2023, Senator Renick asked if they had received any requests for advice on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines. The OGTR responded that they had not because mRNA vaccines were not regulated as they did not involve genetic modification. However, in October 2023, Senator Renick quoted information from Pfizer's website, stating that gene therapies involve introducing new genetic material, which the mRNA vaccines do. The American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy also classified mRNA vaccines as gene therapy. The TGA's documents confirmed the use of DNA in the manufacturing process. This contradiction suggests that the mRNA vaccines are gene technology and are being transported and administered without proper licensing, posing a significant problem.

I've been involved in over 50 vaccines, including mRNA vaccines. mRNA is like DNA, giving cells instructions to make proteins. This technology was originally for gene therapy, now used for vaccines. It's a new, experimental technology never used in humans before COVID. Animal studies were skipped for COVID vaccines, a novel approach.

"Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasma DNA. It's not just mRNA." "This DNA is the DNA vector that was used as the template for the in vitro transcription reaction when they made the mRNA." "I sequenced it in my own lab." "The vials of Pfizer vaccine that were given out here in Colombia, one of my colleagues was in charge of that vaccination program in the College of Pharmacy." "And for reasons that I still don't understand, he kept every single vial." "So he had a whole freezer full of the empty vials." "And I checked these two batches, and I checked them by sequencing." "It's surprising that there's any DNA in there." "This DNA, in my view, it could be causing some of the rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest."

The speaker presents evidence from Pfizer's website, the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy, and the TGA's report to argue that mRNA vaccines are a form of gene therapy. They question why the mRNA vaccine was not tested for genotoxicity and why the Office of Gene Technology Regulator did not consider it as gene technology. The regulator responds that the TGA is responsible for approving vaccine products and addressing genotoxicity concerns. They explain that since the mRNA vaccines were imported into Australia and not manufactured there, the Gene Technology Act does not apply. The speaker disagrees, citing Pfizer's statement about transfection being a part of gene therapy. The regulator suggests a difference in the definition of gene therapy.

The Pfizer vaccine may contain DNA in addition to mRNA, according to a scientist who sequenced the vaccine in his lab. He obtained empty vials from a colleague and found DNA in them. This DNA could potentially cause serious side effects and integrate into the genomic DNA of cells, leading to long-term effects. The scientist is concerned about the regulatory process that allowed this to happen and warns of the risks of genome modification and autoimmune attacks. While the risk of cancer is believed to be rare, it is not zero. Further investigation is needed to determine the extent of these risks.

Pfizer and Moderna used two processes to create their vaccines. Initially, they used PCR to amplify and create the DNA for clinical trials. However, when they received approval, they needed to produce billions of copies, so they used circular bacterial DNA plasmids. Unfortunately, this led to contamination with junk DNA. Researchers in Ontario, Canada tested 27 mRNA vials from 12 different lots and found billions to hundreds of billions of DNA molecules per dose, exceeding FDA and WHO guidelines by 188 to 509 times. This is a significant amount, far beyond what is considered acceptable.

Alden and colleagues found that Pfizer's genetic code can be integrated into the human genome within an hour in a cancerous cell line. This suggests that Pfizer and Moderna's genetic material might become a permanent part of human DNA. There is no study confirming or denying this possibility. The concern is that if eggs or sperm incorporate this genetic code, it could be passed on to future generations. This lack of research is seen as reckless and worrisome.

The Pfizer vaccine contains not only mRNA but also plasma DNA from the vector used in its production. I sequenced samples from two batches of the vaccine in Colombia and found this DNA, which raises concerns about potential health risks. This DNA could integrate into the genomic DNA of cells, leading to permanent changes. Such integration poses theoretical risks, including autoimmune responses and cancer, depending on where the DNA inserts itself in the genome. While these risks may be rare, they warrant investigation to understand their implications better.

Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use two processes. The first process involves using PCR to amplify and create DNA for clinical trials. Once approved, they use circular bacterial DNA plasmid to replicate billions of mRNA DNA sample copies. However, this resulted in contaminated vaccines with junk DNA. A study found DNA fragments in Pfizer and Moderna vaccines in Ontario, Canada. Researchers tested 27 mRNA vials from 12 different lots and discovered billions to 100 billions of DNA molecules per dose, exceeding FDA and WHO guidelines by 188 to 509 times. This is a significant amount, far beyond what is acceptable.

The Pfizer vaccine may contain DNA in addition to mRNA, according to a researcher who sequenced the vaccine in their lab. The DNA is a vector used in the production of the mRNA. The researcher expressed concern about the potential consequences of this, including rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest. The DNA could integrate into the genomic DNA of cells and become a permanent part of them, posing a risk of genome modification and autoimmune attacks. There is also a theoretical risk of future cancer depending on where the foreign DNA lands in the genome. The researcher believes further investigation is needed to determine if these risks are occurring.

The Pfizer vaccine contains DNA contamination in addition to mRNA. The DNA comes from the DNA vector used as a template for making the mRNA. Sequencing analysis of the vaccine revealed the presence of DNA, which could potentially cause serious side effects and integrate into the genomic DNA of cells. This poses risks such as autoimmune attacks and potential future cancer. The DNA contamination likely occurred during the production process. It is important to investigate if this DNA has integrated into the genomes of vaccinated individuals. The FDA should require Pfizer to remove the DNA from future versions of the vaccine. The regulatory limit for DNA in vaccines is outdated and not suitable for this type of vaccine. It is necessary to address this oversight and ensure the safety of the vaccine.