Over 100 studies now confirm that mRNA COVID vaccines are driving an unprecedented surge in “turbo cancers,” with French oncologists reporting a tsunami of rapid, aggressive cases, especially among young people, as warned by scientists since May 2021. This alarming trend, linked directly to mass vaccination, contradicts earlier claims and exposes a growing health crisis with no clear explanation.
Two years ago, a group of French oncologists published an article firmly denying any connection between COVID-19 vaccines and increased cancer rates, asserting no evidence of rapid cancer progression post-vaccination. Now, faced with an overwhelming wave of cases, these same experts admit bewilderment, unable to rationally account for the aggressive cancers proliferating among vaccinated populations, fueling suspicions of a vaccine-related catastrophe.
The Critical Point reports:
BYPASS THE CENSORS
Sign up to get unfiltered news delivered straight to your inbox.
We have a dramatic increase in pancreatic cancer without the slightest idea why. Did something happen? We don’t know. The whole world, the entire cancer research community worldwide, is asking this question. […] The system that allows us to understand cancer is failing.Professor Khayat, co-founder of InCA
If Professor Khayat is consistent, he cannot theoretically exclude that vaccination could be at the origin of this explosion of cancer cases since it is (1) extremely recent if we refer to his previous interventions, (2) it affects the entire planet – in particular populations who have been forced to inject themselves to maintain a social life or who have aggressively promoted vaccination (influencers in particular) –, and (3) it seems to respond to an unprecedented logic. As would a substance used for the first time in humans, of which we only know part of the composition and whose impact on cancer was not evaluated before its massive deployment [1] .
Mossad Insider Reveals Epstein Is Alive in Israel and Blackmailing U.S. Politicians
Last March, epidemiologist Nicolas Huscher listed 10 ways in which anti-COVID mRNA injections can cause cancer. This list, from a study [2] published in December 2023 in the journal Cureus, can now be extended to 17 items based on (non-exhaustive) more than 100 studies .
1. Genome instability
The risk of vaccine RNA integration into the genome of vaccinated individuals was confirmed in 2021 by a series of studies [3] , [4] , [5] . Insertional mutagenesis induced by DNA integration causes frameshift mutations that induce the production of aberrant proteins leading to cancer.
The European Medicines Agency still claims that vaccine mRNA cannot penetrate the nucleus of cells, as this integration requires the use of an enzyme (reverse transcriptase) which, according to it, is absent from human cells. However, this claim, which is not based on any evidence , was refuted in June 2021. This phenomenon was observed in July 2023 in mice, where a single injection of mRNA induced a genetic modification [6] . More recently, vaccine Spike protein was found in tumors of vaccinated patients [7] , suggesting that it can integrate into the genome, the first feared consequence of such integration being the development of cancer.
This hypothesis was revived in mid-April by scientists from a biomolecular research laboratory (Neo7Bioscience) and researchers from the University of North Texas [8] . The molecular data they collected suggest that vaccine-derived RNA could be reverse-transcribed into the host genome , permanently altering gene regulation. They also reveal carcinogenic signs and immune collapse.
2. Immune escape
Spike protein (S2) inhibits several tumor suppressor genes (p53, BRCA1/2, RB1) [9] , [10] , [11] , to which it binds, allowing cancer cells to escape detection and destruction by the immune system. Epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher calls this an “oncogenic reversal.”
The first study demonstrating this interference of the Spike protein with the p53 protein, also called the “guardian of the genome,” was published in October 2021 [12] by Jiang et al. The study was retracted in May 2022 on the orders of Anthony Fauci’s NIH . A request to publish the email exchanges concerning this retraction was filed under the Freedom of Information Act, but the NIH still refuses to release the 490 pages of communications . These results were confirmed in vitro by Zhang and El Deiry [13] in 2024 and a month later in vivo [14] .
3. Impaired DNA repair mechanism
The vaccine Spike protein induces genomic alterations and inhibits the DNA repair system (Jiang, Zhang and El Deiry). This mechanism is normally put in place in the event of an attack on the body, to prevent mutations that can promote the appearance of cancers, repair errors affecting oncogenes or tumor suppressor genes. Its alteration induces immunodeficiency which is ” a direct route to cancer [15] “.
The strategic sequence of the Spike protein patented in 2016 by Stéphane Bancel, CEO of Moderna, would make it possible to target a gene (MSH3) [16] whose modification leads to a deficit in DNA repair [17] . The pathways by which the Spike protein inhibits this mechanism are listed in the article by Başaran et al. [18] published last April.
4. Chronic inflammation
Lipid nanoparticles [19] , [20] used to transport vaccine mRNA induce a massive secretion of inflammatory proteins [21] , [22] , [23] , [24] (cytokine storm) paving the way for the emergence of cancer stem cells. These cells are likely to develop in all organs (including blood stem cells [25] ) given the widespread biodistribution of the Spike protein [26] , [27] , whose pathogenicity is described in detail in three literature reviews [28] , [29] , [30 ] and in more than 320 studies . This inflammation can result in exhaustion of T cells, which are then no longer able to eliminate cancer cells.
Grok AI confirms that the injections cause acute inflammation, but that it resolves within a few days ( Bergamaschi , Ogata ) and is comparable to that of other vaccines. He states that chronic inflammation requires prolonged stimulation, whereas ” the production of vaccine Spike is limited in time (mRNA is degraded within a few days, Spike within a few weeks), making chronic inflammation unlikely .” This statement is contradicted by a series of studies [31] , including four recent studies where the Spike protein was found in blood plasma up to 709 days after an injection [32] ( 245 days [33] or 12 months [34] according to other studies), and up to 17 months [35] in the tissues and organs of Japanese patients, particularly the brain. More than four years after the first injections, no one actually knows if the body stops producing it.
5. Dysregulation of the immune system
mRNA vaccination results in suppression of T cells (lymphopenia) [36] and type I interferon responses [37] , which plays a crucial role in cancer surveillance and proliferation. These changes lead to impaired innate immunity [38] , [39] , [40] , [41] and reprogramming of the adaptive immune response [42] , [43] . Dysregulation of the immune system in the central nervous system has also been reported [44] .
In the context of COVID-19 vaccination, this inhibition ensures proper spike protein synthesis and reduced immune activation. There is evidence that the addition of 100% N1-methyl-pseudouridine (m1′) to the mRNA vaccine in a melanoma model stimulated cancer growth and metastasis, while vaccines without mRNA modification did not induced opposite results, thus suggesting that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines may aid cancer development.Rubio-Casillas et al. Review: N1-methyl-pseudouridine (m1Ψ): Friend or foe of cancer? https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.131427 .
Grok cites a 2020 study [45] by BioNTech CEO Ugur Sahin, which argues that mRNA vaccines induce robust, persistent CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses detected as early as the first few days post-vaccination, which would contradict the idea of widespread and sustained immunosuppression. Pfizer’s own clinical data, on the contrary, demonstrates a decline in T cells 6 to 8 days after vaccination in 45% to 46% of participants [46] which is now known to worsen over time.
6. RNA Disruption
Vaccine mRNA is an mRNA modified to increase its longevity and production. The technique used by Pfizer and Moderna (codon optimization) disrupts microRNAs, which are essential players in cell proliferation and death, including cancer cells [47] , [48] . A study showed in 2021 [49] that the vaccine Spike protein is transported in vesicles (exosomes) containing microRNAs through which it will prevent the functioning of interferons and therefore inhibit natural immunity, disrupting cellular processes such as proliferation or tumor surveillance .
7. Activation of oncogenic pathways
Spike protein is suspected of indirectly activating several pathways that play a crucial role in tumor growth, proliferation and cell survival (MAPK, PI3K/AKT/mTOR [50] , [51] , [52] ), and of increasing the level of interleukin 6 (IL-6), a proinflammatory marker involved in immunity, inflammation, tumor growth, progression of metastases or even resistance to immunotherapy. Its chronic elevation is associated with inflammation that may promote cancer in certain contexts .
Grok again points out that no study formally establishes a link between these disturbances and cancer, but a recent study [53] found metabolic evidence of activation of certain oncogenic pathways, including the PI3K/mTOR pathway in patients who developed leukemia in the weeks following a second or third Pfizer injection.
8. Tumor microenvironment
Lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) accumulate in tissues via the Enhanced Permeability and Retention (EPR) effect , which is characterized by increased permeability of tumor blood vessels and prolonged retention of nanoparticles in tumor tissue. LNPs thus cause a faster spread of cancer cells [54] [55] which can explain the “turbo cancer” phenomenon described by pathologists and oncologists and observed in a study on mice [56] . Is such an acceleration of a pathogenic process valid for other diseases induced by the Spike protein? Swedish researchers demonstrated in 2023 that the Spike protein could not only induce Alzheimer’s disease but that it would reduce the incubation time of the disease by 80% [57] , thus causing a new form of “turbo Alzheimer’s disease”.
9. Awakening dormant cancers
Changes induced in the tumor microenvironment by COVID-19-associated inflammation or vaccination may affect cancer reawakening and metastatic relapse [58] .
Patients who have been cancer-free for many years are suddenly relapsing with aggressive, explosive cancers shortly after receiving booster doses of the COVID-19 vaccine. These cases show very rapid tumor growth after the booster. These turbocharged cancers appear faster and with greater virulence than we expected in patients, even those who have been stable for years. Public health authorities are reluctant to acknowledge this correlation. This phenomenon is occurring everywhere in the world where mRNA vaccines have been administered.Professor Ian Brighthope. The Great Debate: Port Hedland vs. the Prime Minister . 29 Nov. 2024
The ability of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein to fuse multiple cells [59] , [60] , [61] may help explain the cascade of complications of COVID-19, including cancer. The formation of syncytia resulting from this fusion could indeed contribute to the development or progression of cancer, particularly in the case of a pre-existing lesion, but also to the formation of metastases and the recurrence of cancers in remission, according to a former professor at Yale University, Yuri Lazebni [62] .
To be precise, ivermectin, whose effectiveness against COVID-19 has been confirmed to date by more than 100 studies , has numerous antitumor effects [63] (inhibition of tumor stem cells, proliferation, metastases and angiogenic activity, acceleration of programmed death of cancer cells, reversal of multidrug resistance), including its ability to inhibit the formation of syncytia induced during cell fusion mediated by the Spike protein [64] . Ivermectin, awarded the Nobel Prize in 2006, has an exceptional level of safety, including in children and pregnant women, making it an essential molecule according to the WHO. Why was it not authorized when nothing was known about the efficacy, safety and carcinogenic potential of mRNA injections? The question will have to be asked sooner or later.
10. Alteration of immune surveillance
The modified mRNA makes tumor cells “invisible” by blocking the activation of the immune system’s front-line receptors (Toll-like receptors, or TLRs).
Karikó and Weissman, the two researchers behind Pfizer’s COVID vaccine, explained in 2005 [65] that synthetic modification of RNA by adding m1Ψ (for which they received the Nobel Prize in Medicine), partially removed this shield by blocking the ability of natural RNA to activate primary dendritic cells. One of the functions of these cells is to recognize or “signal” pathogens, particularly cancer cells, and induce a targeted immune response.
These results were confirmed in 2015 [66] and 2016 [67] . The 2016 study also demonstrates that the use of synthetic mRNA is no more effective than natural RNA, although it increases its toxicity (elevated cytokines, neutrophilia), particularly by activating myeloid cells in the blood and spleen, which may reflect a carcinogenic process.
A 2021 study [68] confirms that Toll-like receptors can act as a double-edged sword and “ enhance the pathology ” they are intended to prevent when TLR responses are dysregulated.
11. Frameshift
The modified mRNA in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines produces an aberrant immune response when translated. In a third of cases, the vaccine mRNA produces a “nonsense” or unknown protein, other than the Spike protein for which it is programmed. The study [69] was published in January 2024. The authors agree that if these translation errors are not resolved with the next generation of COVID-19 vaccines, they will pose a major safety concern . However, they believe that this discovery does not call into question the safety of the technology. Another team of researchers [70] issued a much more severe diagnosis last June on this major failure of the mRNA platform :
The modified mRNAs […] are not suitable for clinical use due to their long-lasting, potentially permanent, and immunostimulatory nature. […] The persistent nature of the mRNA encoding the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein results in dangerously long exposure to an unlimited dose of this pathogenic protein, and therefore needs to be re-evaluated for continued use in humans.
12. Multiple injections
Repeated exposures to synthetic mRNA and vaccine spike lead to exhaustion of the immune system [71] . This immunosuppression, which is probably explained by codon optimization and the antibody-dependent facilitation (ADE) mechanism [72] , [73] , suspected from clinical trials , is marked by a change in antibody class (IgG4) [74] , [75] , [76] which is now massively documented and supported by a series of studies demonstrating the negative efficacy of injections . The Peter McCullough Foundation has identified seven to date [77] , [78] , [79] , [80] , [81] , [82] , [83] . This catastrophic modification of the immune response, not observed after heterologous vaccination or with DNA vaccines (Irrgang), leads to immune tolerance (pathogens cease to be recognized as such) which favors reinfections [84] , [85] and susceptibility to cancer [86] , [87] , [88] , [89] .
13. DNA contamination of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines
The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines contain fraudulent plasmid DNA [ 90] , [91] , [92] , [93] , whose shape (double-stranded circular) makes it “replication competent” , meaning that it can theoretically integrate into the genome, and thus induce cancer in vaccinees . We have written numerous articles on this discovery, confirmed to date by ten teams of researchers [94] worldwide, the latest being a molecular geneticist (Dr. Soňa Peková) [95] commissioned by the Slovak government. The quantities reported are staggering, reaching up to 500 times the ceiling set by the European Medicines Agency, which implies that integration into the genome can occur spontaneously , maximizing the risk of cancer.
14. Oncogenic SV40 DNA sequences in Pfizer injection
The addition of strategic SV40 sequences, used in genetics to “hack” the cell nucleus [96] , increases tenfold the ability of mRNA to integrate into the genome.
Its use, prohibited by the FDA, was finally granted by Pfizer , but the laboratory maintains that it does not present any health risk. Its carcinogenicity , already abundantly documented, was nevertheless confirmed last October by a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine [97] . The possibility that it could cause cancer is also suggested by a recent study [98] involving Pfizer and Moderna vaccinated subjects, where tumor antigens were found exclusively in the blood of Pfizer vaccinees .
According to Dr. McKernan, who made this discovery, all Pfizer vaccines (adult, pediatric, monovalent, bivalent) would be affected by this fraud, the origin of which is attributed to the change in production method [99] made after the approval of the injections to meet industrial constraints linked to the pandemic context. Professor Angus Dalgleish , one of the most eminent oncologists in the world, recalled in this context that SV40 is the substance that cancer researchers inject into mice to induce cancer when they want to test chemotherapy. Could the Pfizer laboratory, which now occupies a near monopoly position on the market for anti-cancer treatments, have ignored it? No, and it has not changed its formula despite the collapse in demand for vaccines.
15. Deregulation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS)
The vaccine spike protein causes the overactivation of a key receptor (AT1R) of the renin-angiotensin system , which notably controls cell multiplication. This overactivation promotes vascularization, and therefore the proliferation of tumors, and generates oxidative stress that is harmful to cells. Dr. Jean-Marc Sabatier [100] warned in March 2020 about the consequences of this physiological imbalance, which causes an imbalance between the innate and acquired immune response, and which he predicted could lead to numerous cancers.
16. Destruction of the microbiota
mRNA “vaccines” destroy bifidobacteria present in the microbiota (intestinal flora), which plays a key role in cancer regulation and responses to anticancer therapies . A groundbreaking study published by Dr. Sabine Hazan [101] showed in 2022 that mRNA vaccination against COVID decimates bifidobacteria present in the intestinal microbiota, where this loss was observed in patients with invasive cancer. The deleterious impact of injections on the microbiota seems confirmed today by the discovery of Spike protein in a colon tumor biopsy from a Pfizer vaccinated patient.
17. Increased resistance to treatments
The viral and potentially vaccine-derived Spike protein prolongs cancer cell survival after exposure to chemotherapy. This finding was highlighted in 2024 by S. Zhang and W. S. El-Deiry. Although the evidence is limited to the viral Spike protein, the authors believe that this disruption of the immune response, which is closely correlated with p53 gene inhibition and impaired DNA damage response, may be facilitated by repeated injections, administered as boosters, and the astronomical quantities of Spike protein produced.
To this catastrophic picture [102] could be added the probable presence of hidden genes in the injections, the impact of which on health no one can predict. Unfortunately, no evidence can be cited of the safety of the injections, since their carcinogenicity has not been evaluated in any trial, and no study demonstrates, to our knowledge, that the injections cannot induce, awaken or accelerate cancer.
A large-scale clinical trial launched in 2021 in Australia aimed to answer this question. It was abruptly halted without explanation by Australian authorities, who are preparing to illegally destroy the millions of biological tissue samples collected for this purpose. Another deeply troubling development is the fact that several countries have reported the existence of highly toxic Pfizer batches, suggesting that the laboratory developed products with three different toxicity levels. Cancer clusters have recently occurred in several hospitals in the United States and Australia. However, the vaccine administered to one of the nurses involved came from one of these high-risk batches, which corresponds to the one where the largest quantities of DNA were found.
Was the current global epidemic, the reality of which no one disputes any longer, anticipated in order to test the technology on which the industry has massively bet despite its catastrophic failure [103] and in which it has already invested dizzying sums that today prohibit it from going back? This is what the husband of a nurse thinks, who died of cancer a few months after being vaccinated to avoid losing her job, and whose husband is filing a complaint for premeditated poisoning .
References
[1] Acevedo-Whitehouse K, Bruno R. Potential health risks of mRNA-based vaccine therapy: A hypothesis. Med Hypotheses. 2023 Feb;171:111015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2023.111015 .
[2] Valdes Angues R, Perea Bustos Y. SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and the multi-hit hypothesis of oncogenesis Cureus. 2023 Dec 17;15(12):e50703. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.50703 .
[3] Aldén M, Olofsson Falla F, Yang D, Barghouth M, Luan C, Rasmussen M, et al. Intracellular reverse transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 in vitro in human liver cell line. Curr Issues Mol Biol. 2022 Feb 25;44(3):1115-26. https://doi.org/10.3390/cimb44030073 .
[4] Chandramouly G, Zhao J, McDevit S, Rusanov T, Hoang T, Borisonnik N, et al. Polθ reverse transcribes RNA and promotes RNA-templated DNA repair. Sci Adv. 2021 Jun 11;7(24):eabf1771. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abf1771 .
[5] Zhang L, Richards A, Barrasa MI, Hughes SH, Young RA, Jaenisch R.. Reverse-transcribed SARS-CoV-2 RNA can integrate into the genome of cultured human cells and can be expressed in patient-derived tissues. PNAS. 2021 May 25;118(21):e2105968118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2105968118 .
[6] Breda L, Papp TE, Triebwasser MP, Yadegari A, Fedorky MT, Tanaka N, et al. In vivo hematopoietic stem cell modification by mRNA delivery. Science. 2023 Jul 28;381(6656):436-443. https://www.doi.org/10.1126/science.ade6967 .
[7] Dr. McKernan made this discovery by analyzing a colon cancer biopsy from a person who had received four injections of Pfizer mRNA. Japanese MP and former minister Kazuhiro Haraguchi publicly stated in late May that vaccine spike protein had also been found in the cancer cells of his malignant lymphoma.
[8] https://x.com/tatiann69922625/status/1931708697379480010 . This discovery was discussed with epidemiologist Nicolas Hulscher: https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/breaking-reverse-transcription-cancer .
[9] Singh N, Singh AB. S2 Subunit of SARS-nCoV-2 interacts with tumor suppressor protein p53 and BRCA: an in silico study. Transl Oncol. 2020 Oct;13(10):100814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranon.2020.100814 . The results of this study were published on June 30, 2020.
[10] Chen X, Zhang T, Su W, Dou Z, Zhao D, Jin X, et al. Mutant p53 in cancer: from molecular mechanism to therapeutic modulation. Cell Death Dis. 2022 Nov 18;13(11):974. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-022-05408-1 .
[11] According to Valdes Angues et al., “ Cancers associated with TP53 mutations include breast cancer, bone and soft tissue sarcomas, brain tumors, and adrenocortical carcinomas. Other less common cancers include leukemia, gastric cancer, and colorectal cancer . Cancers associated with altered BRCA1 activity include breast, uterine, and ovarian cancer in women, prostate and breast cancer in men, and a modest increase in pancreatic cancer in both men and women. The most frequently reported cancers with BRCA2 mutations include pancreatic, prostate in men, and melanoma .”
[12] Jiang H, Mei YF. SARS-CoV-2 spike odd DNA damage repair and inhibits v(d)j recombination in vitro. Viruses. 2021;13(10):2056. https://doi.org/10.3390/v13102056 . Link to the study in French: https://www-mdpi-com.translate.goog/1999-4915/13/10/2056?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=fr&_x_tr_hl=fr&_x_tr_pto=wapp .
[13] Zhang S, El-Deiry WS. SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein inhibits tumor suppressor p53 and creates a vulnerability to cancer. bioRxiv (preprint). 2024 Apr 15. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.12.589252 .
[14] Zhang S, El-Deiry WS. 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 cells and increases cancer cell viability after chemotherapy exposure. Oncotarget. 2024 May 3;15:275-284. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28582 .
[15] Seneff S, Nigh G, Kyriakopoulos AM, McCullough PA. Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs. Food Chem Toxicol. 2022 Apr 15;164:113008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113008 .
[16] Ambati BK, Varshney A, Lundstrom K, Palú G, Uhal BD, Uversky VN, et al. MSH3 homology and potential recombination link to SARS-CoV-2 furin cleavage site. Front Virol. 2022 Feb;2:834808. https://doi.org/10.3389/fviro.2022.834808 .
[17] http://genatlas.medecine.univ-paris5.fr/fiche.php?symbol=MSH3 .
[18] Başaran N, Szewczyk-Roszczenko O, Roszczenko P, Vassetzky Y, Sjakste N. Genotoxic risks in patients with COVID-19. Infect Genet Evol. 2025 Apr;129:105728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2025.105728 .
[19] Kedmi R, Ben-Arie N, Peer D. The systemic toxicity of positively charged lipid nanoparticles and the role of Toll-like receptor 4 in immune activation. Biomaterials. 2010 Sep;31(26):6867-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.05.027 .
[20] Turni C, Lefringhausen A. Covid-19 vaccines: An Australian review. J. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 2022 Sep 21;7(3):491-508. https://blog.fdik.org/2023-03/covid19-vaccinesan-australian-review.pdf .
[21] Ndeupen S, Qin Z, Jacobsen S, Bouteau A, Estanbouli H, Igyártó BZ.The mRNA-LNP platform’s lipid nanoparticle component used in preclinical vaccine studies is highly inflammatory. iScience. 2021 Dec 17;24(12):103479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.103479 .
[22] Alameh MG, Tombácz I, Bettini E, Lederer K, Sittplangkoon C, Wilmore JR, et al. Lipid nanoparticles enhance the efficacy of mRNA and protein subunit vaccines by inducing robust T follicular helper cell and humoral responses. Immunity. 2021 Dec 14;54(12):2877-2892.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2021.11.001 .
[23] Theoharides TC. Potential association of mast cell activation by the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein with cancer progression. Med Hypoth. 2022;160:110774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2022.110774 .
[24] Sagala G. Apparent cytotoxicity and intrinsic cytotoxicity of lipid nanomaterials contained in a COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine. IJVTPR. 2023 Oct 16;3(1):957-72. https://doi.org/10.56098/ijvtpr.v3i1.84.
[25] Estep BK, Kuhlmann CJ, Osuka S, Suryavanshi GW, Nagaoka-Kamata Y, Samuel CN, et al. Skewed fate and hematopoiesis of CD34 + HSPCs in umbilical cord blood amid the COVID-19 pandemic. iScience. 2022 Dec 22;25(12):105544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.105544 .
[26] Jahankhani K, Ahangari F, Adcock IM, Mortaz E. Possible cancer-causing capacity of COVID-19: Is SARS-CoV-2 an oncogenic agent? Biochemistry. 2023 May 23;S0300-9084(23)00136-0. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biochi.2023.05.014 .
[27] Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). Nonclinical evaluation report: BNT162b2 [mRNA] COVID-19 vaccine (COMIRNATY TM ). 2021 Jan. p. 45. https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-2389-06.pdf#page=45 .
[28] Trougakos IP, Terpos E, Alexopoulos H, Politou M, Paraskevis D, et al. COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-induced adverse effects: unwinding the unknowns. Trends Mol Med. 2022 Oct;28(10):800-802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmed.2022.07.008 .
[29] Parry PI, Lefringhausen A, Turni C, Neil CJ, Cosford R, Hudson NJ, Gillespie J. ‘Spikeopathy’: COVID-19 spike protein is pathogenic, from both virus and vaccine mRNA. Biomedicines. 2023 Aug 17;11(8):2287. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines11082287 .
[30] Posa A. Spike protein-related proteinopathies: A focus on the neurological side of spikeopathies. Ann Anat. 2025 Apr 18;260:152662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2025.152662 .
[31] Petrosin S, Matende N. Elimination/Neutralization of COVID-19 Vaccine-Produced Spike Protein: Scoping Review. Mathews J Nutr Diet. 2024;7(2):1-23. https://doi.org/10.30654/MJND.10034 .
[32] Bhattacharjee B, Lu P, Monteiro VS, Tabachnikova A, Wang K, Hooper WB, et al. Immunological and antigenic signatures associated with chronic illnesses after 1 COVID-19 vaccination. MedRxiv (preprint). 2025 Feb 25. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.18.25322379 .
[33] Patterson BK, Yogendra R, Francisco EB, Guevara-Coto J, Long E, Pisa A, et al. Detection of S1 spike protein in CD16+ monocytes up to 245 days in SARS-CoV-2-negative post-COVID-19 vaccine syndrome (PCVS) individuals. Hum Vaccine Immunother. 2025 Dec;21(1):2494934. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645515.2025.2494934 .
[34] Alghamdi A, Hussain SD, Wani K, Sabico S, Alnaami AM, Amer OE, et al. Altered circulating cytokine profile among mRNA-vaccinated young adults: A year-long follow-up study. Immune Inflamm Dis. 2025 Apr;13(4):e70194. https://doi.org/10.1002/iid3.70194 .
[35] Ota N, Itani M, Aoki T, Sakurai A, Fujisawa T, Okada Y, et al. Expression of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in cerebral arteries: Implications for hemorrhagic stroke post-mRNA vaccination. J Clin Neurosci. 2025 Jun;136:111223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2025.111223 .
[36] Valdes Angues R, Perea Bustos Y. SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and the multi-hit hypothesis of oncogenesis Cureus. 2023 Dec 17;15(12):e50703. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.50703 .
[37] Rubio-Casillas A, Cowley D, Raszek M, Uversky VN, Redwan EM. Review: N1-methyl-pseudouridine (m1Ψ): Friend or foe of cancer? Int J Biol Macromol. 2024 May;267(Pt 1):131427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.131427 .
[38] Ivanova EN, Shwetar J, Devlin JC, Buus TB, Gray-Gaillard S, Koide A, et al. mRNA COVID-19 vaccine elicits potent adaptive immune response without the acute inflammation of SARS-CoV-2 infection. iScience. 2023 Nov 24;26(12):108572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.108572 .
[39] Seneff S, Nigh G, Kyriakopoulos AM, McCullough PA. Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs. Food Chem Toxicol. 2022 Apr 15;164:113008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113008 .
[40] Liu J, Wang J, Xu J, Xia H, Wang Y, Zhang C, et al. Comprehensive investigations revealed consistent pathophysiological alterations after vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines. Cell Discov. 2021 Oct 26;7(1):99. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41421-021-00329-3 .
[41] Ning W, Xu W, Cong X, Fan H, Gilkeson G, Wu X, et al. COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 induces autoantibodies against type I interference in a healthy woman. J Autoimmune. 2022 Oct;132:102896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaut.2022.102896 .
[42] Qin Z, Bouteau A, Herbst C, Igyártó BZ. Pre-exposure to mRNA-LNP inhibits adaptive immune responses and alters innate immune fitness in an inheritable fashion. PLoS Pathog. 2022 Sep 2;18(9):e1010830. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1010830 .
[43] Föhse FK, Geckin B, Zoodsma M, Kilic G, Liu Z, Röring RJ, et al. The BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 reprograms both adaptive and innate immune responses. Clin Immunol. 2023 Oct;255:109762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clim.2023.109762 .
[44] Abramczyk H, Brozek-Pluska B, Beton K. Decoding COVID-19 mRNA vaccine immunometabolism in central nervous system: human brain normal glial and glioma cells by Raman imaging. Biovrix. 2022 Mar 2. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.03.02.482639 .
[45] Sahin U, Muik A, Derhovanessian E, Vogler I, Kranz LM, Vormehr M, et al. COVID-19 vaccine BNT162b1 elicits human antibody and T H 1 T cell responses. Nature. 2020 Oct;586(7830):594-599. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2814-7 .
[46] Mulligan MJ, Lyke KE, Kitchin N, Absalon J, Gurtman A, Lockhart S, et al. Phase I/II study of COVID-19 RNA vaccine BNT162b1 in adults. Nature. 2020 Oct;586(7830):589-593. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2639-4 .
[47] Raisch J, Darfeuille-Michaud A, Nguyen HT. Role of microRNAs in the immune system, inflammation and cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 May 28;19(20):2985-96. https://doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i20.2985 .
[48] Han Z, Estephan RJ, Wu X. MicroRNA regulation of T-cell exhaustion in cutaneous T cell lymphoma. J Invest Dermatol. 2022 Mar;142(3 Pt A):603-612.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jid.2021.08.447 .
[49] Mishra R, Banerjea AC. SARS-CoV-2 spike targets USP33-IRF9 axis via exosomal miR-148a to activate human microglia. Front Immunol. 2021 Apr 14;12:656700. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2021.656700 .
[50] Kyriakopoulos AM, Nigh G, McCullough PA, Seneff S. Mitogen activated protein Kinase (MAPK) activation, p53, and autophagy inhibition characterize the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spike protein induced neurotoxicity. Cureus. 2022 Dec 9;14(12):e32361. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.32361 .
[51] Barreda D, Santiago C, Rodríguez JR, Rodríguez JF, Casasnovas JM, Mérida I, et al. SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and its receptor binding domain promote a proinflammatory activation profile on human dendritic cells. Cells. 2021 Nov 23;10(12):3279. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10123279 .
[52] Chaudhary JK, Yadav R, Chaudhary PK, Maurya A, Roshan R, Azam F, et al. Host cell and SARS-CoV-2-associated molecular structures and factors as potential therapeutic targets. Cells. 2021 Sep 15;10(9):2427. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10092427 .
[53] Erdoğdu B, Kaplan O, Fidan BB, Çelebier M, Malkan ÜY, Haznedaroglu IC. Metabolomic profiling of leukemic hematopoiesis: effects of BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine administration. Curr Mol Med. 2025 Jun 3. http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/0115665240361878250601074746 .
[54] Omo-Lamai S, Wang Y, Patel MN, Essien EO, Shen M, Majumdar A, et al. Lipid nanoparticle-associated inflammation is triggered by sensing of endosomal damage: Engineering endosomal escape without side effects. BioRxiv (preprint). 2024 Apr 18. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.16.589801 .
[55] Ko M, Quiñones-Hinojosa A, Rao R. Emerging links between endosomal pH and cancer. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2020 Jun;39(2):519-534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10555-020-09870-1 .
[56] Eens S, Van Hecke M, Favere K, Tousseyn T, Guns PJ, Roskams T, Heidbuchel H. B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma following intravenous BNT162b2 mRNA booster in a BALB/c mouse: A case report. Front Oncol. 2023;13:1158124. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2023.1158124 . See our article: https://lepointcritique.fr/2023/07/19/une-souris-decede-dun-turbo-cancer-deux-jours-apres-avoir-recu-une-deuxieme-dose-de-vaccin-pfizer/ .
[57] Larsson J, Hellstrand E, Hammarström P, Nyström S. SARS-CoV-2 Spike amyloid fibrils specifically and selectively accelerates amyloid fibril formation of human prion protein and the amyloid β peptide. 2023 Sep 1. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.09.01.555834 .
[58] Francescangeli F, De Angelis ML, Baiocchi M, Rossi R, Biffoni M, Zeuner A. COVID-19–induced modifications in the tumor microenvironment: Do they affect cancer reawakening and metastatic relapse? Forehead. Onco l. 2020 Oct 26. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.592891 .
[59] Theuerkauf SA, Michels A, Riechert V, Maier TJ, Flory E, Cichutek K, et al. Quantitative assays reveal cell fusion at minimal levels of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein and fusion from without. iScience. 2021 Feb 9;24(3):102170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.102170 .
[60] Ou X, Liu Y, Lei X, Li P, Mi D, Ren L, et al. Characterization of spike glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 on virus entry and its immune cross-reactivity with SARS-CoV. Nat Commun. 2020 Mar 27;11(1):1620. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-15562-9 .
[61] Nguyen HT, Zhang S, Wang Q, Anang S, Wang J, Ding H, et al. Spike glycoprotein and host cell determinants of SARS-CoV-2 entry and cytopathic effects. J Virol. 2021 Feb 10;95(5): e02304-20 https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.02304-20 .
[62] Lazebnik Y. Cell fusion as a link between the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, COVID-19 complications, and vaccine side effects. Oncotarget. 2021 Dec 7;12 (25):2476-2488. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28088 .
[63] Tang M, Hu X, Wang Y. Ivermectin, a potential anticancer drug derived from an antiparasitic drug. Pharmacol Res. 2021 Jan;163:105207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2020.105207 .
[64] Braga L, Ali H, Secco I, Chiavacci E, Neves G, Goldhill D, et al. Drugs that inhibit TMEM16 proteins block SARS-CoV-2 spike-induced syncytia. Nature. 2021; 594:88–93. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03491-6 .
[65] Karikó K, Buckstein M, Ni H, Weissman D. Suppression of RNA recognition by Toll-like receptors: the impact of nucleoside modification and the evolutionary origin of RNA. Immunity. 2005 Aug;23(2):165-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2005.06.008 .
[66] Andries O, Mc Cafferty S, De Smedt SC, Weiss R, Sanders NN, Kitada T. N(1)-methylpseudouridine-incorporated mRNA outperforms pseudouridine-incorporated mRNA by providing enhanced protein expression and reduced immunogenicity in mammalian cell lines and mice. J Control Release. 2015 Nov 10;217:337-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconrel.2015.08.051 .
[67] Kauffman KJ, Mir FF, Jhunjhunwala S, et al. Efficacy and immunogenicity of unmodified and pseudouridine-modified mRNA delivered systemically with lipid nanoparticles in vivo. Biomaterials. 2016 Dec;109:78-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biomaterials.2016.09.006 .
[68] Kayesh MEH, Kohara M, Tsukiyama-Kohara K. An overview of recent insights into the response of TLR to SARS-CoV-2 infection and the potential of tlr agonists as SARS-CoV-2 vaccine adjuvants. Viruses. 2021 Nov 18;13(11):2302. https://doi.org/10.3390/v13112302 .
[69] Mulroney TE, Pöyry T, Yam-Puc JC, Rust M, Harvey RF, Kalmar L, et al. N 1 -methylpseudouridylation of mRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting. Nature. 2024 Jan;625(7993):189-94. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06800-3
[70] Boros LG, Kyriakopoulos AM, Brogna C, Piscopo M, McCullough PA, Seneff S. Long-lasting, biochemically modified mRNA, and its frameshifted recombinant spike proteins in human tissues and circulation after COVID-19 vaccination. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2024 Jun;12(3):e1218. https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.1218 .
[71] Benitez Fuentes JD, Mohamed Mohamed K, de Luna Aguilar A, Jiménez García C, Guevara-Hoyer K, Fernandez-Arquero M, et al. Evidence of exhausted lymphocytes after the third anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccine dose in cancer patients. Front Oncol. 2022 Dec 20;12:975980. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.975980 .
[72] Lacout A, Lesgards JF, Lounnas V, Azalbert X, Perronne C, Zizi M. Dealing with COVID-19 vaccine related antibody-dependent enhancement: A mini review. Arch Microbiol Immunol. 2024 Jun;8(2): 233-8. https://www.doi.org/10.26502/ami.936500170 .
[73] Igyártó BZ, Qin Z. The mRNA-LNP vaccines – the good, the bad and the ugly? Front Immunol. 2024 Feb 8;15:1336906. https://www.doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1336906 .
[74] Uversky VN, Redwan EM, Makis W, et al. IgG4 Antibodies induced by repeated vaccination may generate immune tolerance to the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein. Vaccines. 2023 May 17;11(5):991. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11050991 .
[75] Irrgang P, Gerling J, Kocher K, et al. Class switch toward noninflammatory, spike-specific IgG4 antibodies after repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Sci Immunol. 2023 Jan 27;8(79):eade2798. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798 .
[76] Selva KJ, Ramanathan P, Haycroft ER, Reynaldi A, Cromer D, Tan CW,Preexisting immunity restricts mucosal antibody recognition of SARS-CoV-2 and Fc profiles during breakthrough infections. JCI Insight. 2023 Sep 22;8(18):e172470. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.172470 .
[77] Eythorsson E, Runolfsdottir HL, Ingvarsson RF, Sigurdsson MI, Palsson R. Rate of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection during an omicron wave in Iceland. JAMA Network Open. 2022 Aug 1;5(8):e2225320. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.25320 .
[78] Shrestha NK, Shrestha P, Burke PC, Nowacki AS, Terpeluk P, Gordon SM. Coronavirus disease 2019 vaccine boosting in previously infected or vaccinated individuals. Clin Infect Dis. 2022 Dec 19;75(12):2169-77. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciac327 .
[79] Chemaitelly H, Ayoub HH, Tang P, Coyle P, Yassine HM, Al Thani AA, et al. Long-term COVID-19 booster effectiveness by infection history and clinical vulnerability and immune imprinting: a retrospective population-based cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2023 Jul;23(7):816-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(23)00058-0 .
[80] Nakatani E, Morioka H, Kikuchi T, Fukushima M. Behavioral and health outcomes of mRNA COVID-19 vaccination: A case-control study in Japanese small and medium-sized enterprises. Cureus. 2024 Dec 13;16(12):e75652. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.75652 .
[81] Feldstein LR, Ruffin J, Wiegand R, Grant L, Babu TM, Briggs-Hagen M, et al. Protection From COVID-19 vaccination and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection among children aged 6 months-4 years, United States, September 2022-April 2023. J Pediatric Infect Dis Soc. 2025 Jan 20;14(1):piae121. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpids/piae121 .
[82] Ioannou GN, Berry K, Rajeevan N, Li Y, Yan L, Huang Y, et al. Effectiveness of the 2023-to-2024 XBB.1.5 COVID-19 vaccines over long-term follow-up: A target trial emulation. Ann Intern Med. 2025 Mar;178(3):348-359. https://doi.org/10.7326/ANNALS-24-01015 .
[83] Martín Pérez C, Ruiz-Rius S, Ramírez-Morros A, Vidal M, Opi DH, Santamaria P, et al. Post-vaccination IgG4 and IgG2 class switch associates with increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infections. J Infect. 2025 Apr;90(4):106473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2025.106473 .
[84] Shrestha NK, Burke PC, Nowacki AS, Simon JF, Hagen A, Gordon SM. Effectiveness of the coronavirus disease 2019 bivalent vaccine. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2023 Apr 19;10(6):ofad209. https://doi.org/10.1001/10.1093/ofid/ofad209 .
[85] Yamamoto K. Adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines and measures to prevent them. Virol J. 2022 Jun 5;19(1):100. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12985-022-01831-0 .
[86] Raszek M, Cowley D, Redwan EM, Uversky VN, Rubio-Casillas A. Exploring the possible link between the spike protein immunoglobulin G4 antibodies and cancer progression. Explor Immunol. 2024;4:267-84. https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00140 .
[87] Cavanna L, Grassi SO, Ruffini L, Michieletti E, Carella E, Palli D, et al. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma developed shortly after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination: report of a case and review of the literature. Medicine (Kaunas). 2023 Jan 12;59(1):157. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59010157 .
[88] Goldman S, Bron D, Tousseyn T, Vierasu I, Dewispelaere L, Heimann P, et al. Rapid progression of angioimmunoblastic T cell lymphoma following BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine booster shot: a case report. Front Med (Lausanne). 2021 Nov 25;8:798095. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.798095 .
[89] Sekizawa A, Hashimoto K, Kobayashi S, Kozono S, Kobayashi T, Kawamura Y, et al. Rapid progression of marginal zone B-cell lymphoma after COVID-19 vaccination (BNT162b2): a case report. Front Med (Lausanne). 2022 Aug 1;9:963393. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2022.963393 .
[90] McKernan K. Pfizer and Moderna bivalent vaccines contain 20-35% expression vector and are transformation competent in E. coli. 2023. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/pfizer-and-moderna-bivalent-vaccines .
[91] McKernan K (Medicinal Genomics, US), Nitta T (Tokyo Univ, Japan), Buckhaults PJ (University of South Carolina, US), König B and Kirchner JO (MMD Indep Lab, Magdeburg, Germany), Speicher DJ (University of Guelph, Canada) and McKernan K (Medicinal Genomics, US), Speicher DJ (University of Guelph, Canada), Raoult D (IHU Marseille, France), Kämmerer U (Univ. Hospital of Würzburg, Germany), Wang TJ, Kim A and Kim K, (FDA scientists, Centerville High School, US, executed at FDA White Oak Campus). Results in: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gJj3GSrM-UJR9c6Lrcn1k8_buQkQznuUVSKuMR8_2lU/edit?gid=0#gid=0 .
[92] Speicher DJ. Full Detailed Report. 2024 Sep 9. https://russellbroadbent.com.au/wp-content/uploads/David-Speicher-Report-2.pdf .
[93] Kämmerer U, Schulz V, Steger K. BioNTech RNA-Based COVID-19 Injections Contain Large Amounts of Residual DNA including an SV40 Promoter/Enhancer Sequence. Public Health Policy Law. 2024 Mar 12. https://publichealthpolicyjournal.com/biontech-rna-based-covid-19-injections-contain-large-amounts-of-residual-dna-including-an-sv40-promoter-enhancer-sequence/ .
[94] Wang TJ, Kim A, Kim K. A rapid detection method of replication-competent plasmid DNA from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines for quality control. J High School Sc. 2024;8(4):427-39. https://jhss.scholasticahq.com/article/127890-a-rapid-detection-method-of-replication-competent-plasmid-dna-from-covid-19-mrna-vaccines-for-quality-control .
[95] Peková S. Quantitative Multiplex Real-Time PCR analysis of Moderna (Spikevax) and Pfizer (BNT162b2) vaccines. 2025 Mar 8. https://www.10letters.org/CzechResearch.pdf .
[96] Dean DA, Dean BS, Muller S, Smith LC. Sequence requirements for plasmid nuclear import. Exp Cell Res. 1999 Dec 15;253(2):713-22. https://doi.org/10.1006/excr.1999.4716 .
[97] Duncan CN, Bledsoe JR, Grzywacz B, Beckman A, Bonner M, Eichler FS, et al. Hematologic cancer after gene therapy for cerebral adrenoleukodystrophy. N Engl J Med. 2024 Oct 10;391(14):1287-1301. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa2405541 . See our article: https://lepointcritique.fr/2024/10/14/nouvelle-preuve-inedite-cancerogenicite-injections-anti-covid-pfizer/ .
[98] Hickey TE, Mudunuri U, Hempel HA, Kemp TJ, Roche NV, Talsania K, et al. Proteomic and serologic assessments of responses to mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 vaccines in human recipient sera. Front Immunol. 2025 Jan 27;15:1502458. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2024.1502458 .
[99] OpenVaet, Syed KA, Guetzkow J, Cobalt J, Kunadhasan J, Jackson B. Pfizer/BioNTech C4591001 Trial – Audit Report – v1 (2024-05-31) Reanalysis of the data and anomalies inventoried. 2024 May 31. https://openvaet.substack.com/p/pfizerbiontech-c4591001-trial-audit?open=false#%C2%A7evidence-the-planned-comparison-of-processes-and-was-never-conducted .
[100] Fajloun Z, Sabatier JM. The unsuspected role of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS): Could its dysregulation be at the root of all non-genetic human diseases? Infect Disord Drug Targets. 2024;24(1):e140923221085. https://doi.org/10.2174/1871526524666230914114524 .
[101] Hazan S, Dave S, Barrows B, Borody T. Messenger RNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines affect the gut microbiome. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022 Oct;117(10S):e162. https://doi.org/10.14309/01.ajg.0000857548.07509.09 .
[102] Beaudoin CA, Bartas M, Volná A, Pečinka P, Blundell TL. Are There Hidden Genes in DNA/RNA Vaccines? Front Immunol. 2022 Feb 8;13:801915. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.801915 .
[103] Beyond the failure of the anti-COVID injections, which were approved on the laboratories’ conviction that they could ” probably prevent new pandemic waves and thus considerably reduce mortality due to the disease ” (p. 14 of the evaluation report of the Pfizer/BioNTech Comirnaty vaccine), geneticist Alexandra Henrion Caude reports that in the space of twenty years, none of the 70 clinical trials in which this technology was tested, on 17 different diseases, has passed the phase 1-2 stage ( Les Apprentis Sorciers , p. 84). See the presentation of her book to the European Parliament, on April 18, 2023: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HH5IyccJNk .
Latest Video
Source link