Bombshell findings from an FDA-supervised group of young American scientists
Future research is warranted to address DNA presence in COVID product vials
A group of incredibly talented high school students have published an article that demonstrates excessive amount of DNA in tested vials of COVID products. It was published in a journal called the Journal of High School Science and entitled: “A rapid detection method of replication-competent plasmid DNA from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines for quality control” by Wang, Kim and Kim, accepted for publication on December 28, 2024.
You can read about it here by clicking on the photo:
These students were under the guidance and support of the FDA (they provided technical support and provided materials) and the work was done Centreville High School. Again, it bears repeating that it is excellent work indeed. Well done Centreville, and to the FDA’s Drs. S. Liu, P. Selvaraj and Wang, for providing a resource-rich learning environment in order to allow the pertinent research interests of these youth of America to be explored.
The students used a technique that involved extracting any existing DNA from ‘biosimilar’ Pfizer and Moderna products, Pfizer and Moderna lots and in-house mRNA preps. They ligated (glued together) the DNAs into plasmid forms (when possible - ie: when they had a bacterial replication origin (ORI) and the antibiotic resistance marker), and then transformed them into E. coli (DH5-a) bacteria. The goal was to see if they this process would yield culturable bacterial colonies, thus implying replication-competent DNA. Their experiments yielded precisely that in the case of the Pfizer ‘biosimilar’ product. I have questions about these ‘biosimilar products’.
These students demonstrate innovative thinking, fantastic deployment of their ideas, and excellent writing and figure-production skills. To me, their work demonstrates a far higher quality level than we have seen emerge from other labs - including exceedingly well (pharma)-funded labs - and this begs a very important question.
If these high school students can easily demonstrate DNA in commercial product vials (and these included XBB vials - later production) that were injected into billions of people, why can’t the manufacturers and regulators seem to after 3 years?
And furthermore, when the regulators (HC, TGA, specifically) were apprised of these findings from a multitude of labs from around the world, why did they underplay the importance and relevance of replication-competent foreign DNA in the vials, especially when SV40 promoter/enhancer is among them? The TGA in fact referred to our work as “misinformation”.
Perhaps the most damning point here - beyond the kids’ ingenious methods and findings that confirm current fundings on this subject matter - is that the FDA as an agency chose not to make these findings public. The students were under the supervision of FDA employees. I mean, I can’t imagine that if they were indeed being provided technical support and materials that their work was not being monitored and supervised by the cited FDA members. I am not pointing specific fingers (I do understand that there is pressure to be “quiet” and I applaud the FDA members cited in the paper for allowing this study to be done!), but if these were my students, I would have brought these findings to the FDA head, and if I was ignored, I would have brought it to the non-legacy media.
This is an issue that involves all of us and it could have serious implications. Or perhaps not. But the only way to find out whether we are dealing with a serious problem is to first:
admit there’s a problem and then
tackle the problem by further investigating the problem.
The people have a right to know.
We need to follow-up on these findings. We need to test people’s cells for stable integration. We need to test biopsies from tumors in people post injection. We need proper controls. We don’t have a working methodology to determine whether or not a rabid stage 4 cancer, for example, was the by-product of someone being introduced to billions of fragments of foreign DNA from the modRNA-LNP injections. We need to establish such a methodology. We need the regulatory bodies - or rather, the non-compromised individuals left working for these agencies - to step up and do their jobs. And we need to impose a moratorium on this platform immediately, prior to any more injection regimens going ahead that involve them.
Follow in the footsteps of these kids and support their futures and work!
If students can do such stellar work under FDA supervision, the we can surely depend on this agency to make this work known to the public for further scrutiny, as suggested by these fine youngsters.
They write:
Future research is warranted to address such a concern.
Yes. It is.
Maryanne Demasi’s article on this paper can be found here and a big thank you to her for bringing this paper to our attention:
Kevin McKernan’s peer review of the paper is coming soon. I will post here when it’s published.
As promised:
NR-59449
BEI Resources Catalog: NR-59449 is listed within the Biodefense and Emerging Infections Research Resources Repository managed by BEI Resources. However, the specific details about this item are not directly provided in the search results, suggesting it could be a reagent or biological material used in research related to infectious diseases or biodefense.
Contextual Use: Given that BEI Resources is known for distributing materials for studying priority pathogens, NR-59449 might be associated with such research, but without explicit details, we can only speculate on its exact nature or application. It could potentially be anything from a strain of a pathogen, a nucleic acid sequence, an antibody, or another research tool.
General Information:
Availability: Would be available to registered researchers, typically for free minus shipping costs.
Purpose: Likely used in academic, governmental, or industry research labs studying infectious diseases.
NR-59450
BEI Resources Catalog: Similarly, NR-59450 is part of the BEI Resources catalog, but specific details are not detailed in the provided context. Like NR-59449, it would be a reagent or material for research purposes.
Potential Use: Without direct information, NR-59450 could be involved in similar research areas as NR-59449, focusing on pathogens, vaccines, or diagnostic tools.
General Information:
Distribution: Through BEI, which manages quality control and distribution to ensure researchers have access to necessary tools.
Research Application: Likely part of studies aimed at understanding or combating infectious diseases.
Note:
Both items are cataloged by BEI Resources, which implies they are part of the broader effort to support research in infectious diseases. However, for precise details about what these items specifically are (e.g., specific pathogen, type of reagent), one would need to consult BEI Resources' catalog directly or contact them for more information.
The lack of detailed information in the provided context means we cannot give specifics without further inquiry or access to BEI Resources' database or documentation.
For both NR-59449 and NR-59450, any researcher interested in obtaining these materials would need to register with BEI Resources, ensuring they meet the criteria for distribution which includes having the appropriate biosafety measures in place for handling such materials.
Interesting.
thank you Jess and Maryanne,
Centreville High School has outdone the FDA
.. why?
Centreville High School is not on the pharma payroll
incredible work Tyler Wang, Alex Kim, and Kevin Kim .. and many Thanks