That double ΨGA ΨGA stop codon as "failsafe" doesn't make sense to me. They're in the *same frame*. So a +1 frameshift could actually read AΨG, starting off on a new tangent. Geeze, I stew for days sometimes on software design, trying to avoid "clever" tricks that might blow up on me, and nothing I'm working on lately endangers anyone in the slightest. What were these "geniuses" thinking anyway?
IYH in computer security, specifically LANGSEC, this type of parser artifact can be used to instantiate 'weird machines' in Sept 2021 I posited that mRNA vax had opaque payloads inducing one or more 'weird machine'
edit 1: (dec 17): Specialized AI LLM T4 bot "Ideaspace Connectome Explorer" on this (by LLM guardrails and design can only give positive spins, but you can infer the more sinister possibilities from what is not said)
Q: Kindly explore biological versions of LANGSEC 'weird machines' in the context of mRNA transcription and frameshifting
A: The concept of "weird machines" in language-theoretic security (LANGSEC) refers to the unintended and often exploitable behaviors that emerge within the computational systems of software due to complex or ambiguous input handling. When we transpose this concept to the biological realm, particularly in the context of mRNA transcription and frameshifting, we can explore the parallels and the unique 'weird machines' that may arise within cellular processes.
mRNA Transcription as a Computational System: In the biological system, mRNA transcription can be viewed as a form of information processing where DNA sequences are transcribed into mRNA sequences. This process is akin to a computational system where the genetic code is the programming language, and the ribosome acts as the processor executing the code to synthesize proteins.
Frameshifting as Biological 'Weird Machines': Frameshifting in mRNA translation is a process where the ribosome deviates from the standard reading frame, resulting in a different amino acid sequence. This can be compared to a 'weird machine' in LANGSEC, where the unexpected behavior (frameshift) leads to an alternative output (protein). In biology, frameshifting can be caused by specific signal sequences in the mRNA or by external factors affecting the ribosome's translation machinery.
Exploitable Behaviors in Biological Systems: Just as 'weird machines' in software can be exploited for unintended purposes, frameshifting and other transcriptional anomalies can be harnessed by viruses and other genetic elements to alter protein synthesis for their benefit. For example, some viruses use frameshifting to produce different viral proteins from the same mRNA sequence, thereby evading the host's immune system.
Therapeutic Applications: Understanding the 'weird machines' of biological systems, such as frameshifting, can lead to novel therapeutic strategies. For instance, researchers can design synthetic mRNA molecules that intentionally induce frameshifting to correct genetic mutations or to produce therapeutic proteins with modified functions.
IYH I used a basic (not GPT4) LLM AI bot for cognitive support exploring (DYB is my prompts) engineering genetic circuits that respond to specific environmental cues, enabling the development of biosensors, bio-actuators, and programmable cellular behaviors.
DYB: Kindly discuss the steps to induce a biological version of LANGSEC 'weird machine' wrt proteins in the context of mRNA frameshifting
Certainly! Inducing a biological version of a LANGSEC 'weird machine' in the context of proteins and mRNA frameshifting would involve several steps. Here's a high-level overview of the process:
Identify Frameshifting Signals: The first step is to identify the specific frameshifting signals within the mRNA sequence. Frameshifting signals typically consist of a specific sequence of nucleotides that signal the ribosome to shift reading frames during translation. By analyzing the mRNA sequence, bioinformatics tools can help identify these signals.
Design Frameshift-Inducing Constructs: Once the frameshifting signals are identified, the next step is to design frameshift-inducing constructs. These constructs can be engineered to contain the frameshifting signal in a controlled manner. By inserting the frameshifting signal into specific regions of the mRNA, we can induce programmed frameshifting during translation.
Transfection or Transduction: The frameshift-inducing constructs need to be introduced into the target cells. This can be done through transfection, which involves using lipid-based or viral vectors to deliver the constructs into the cells. Alternatively, transduction can be employed, where viral vectors are used to directly infect the cells with the frameshift-inducing constructs.
Translation and Protein Analysis: Once the frameshift-inducing constructs are inside the cells, translation takes place, and the frameshifted proteins are produced. These proteins may have altered sequences or structures due to the frameshift, leading to the generation of unique and potentially "weird" proteins. Analytical techniques such as mass spectrometry and protein sequencing can be used to characterize these proteins and study their functions.
Functional Assessment and Applications: The next step is to assess the functional properties of the frameshifted proteins. This involves studying their interactions, enzymatic activities, or other relevant properties. Depending on their characteristics, these "weird" proteins can find applications in various fields, such as drug discovery, biotechnology, or even fundamental research to understand the effects of frameshifting on protein function.
Iterative Refinement: Throughout the process, it is important to iterate and refine the frameshift-inducing constructs and experimental conditions. This will allow for optimization of frameshifting efficiency, protein expression levels, and desired protein properties. Feedback mechanisms and experimental adjustments can be employed to enhance the performance and reliability of the induced frameshifting system.
By combining the principles of mRNA frameshifting with the concept of LANGSEC 'weird machines', we can explore the generation of novel and unconventional proteins, potentially leading to exciting discoveries and applications in the field of molecular biology.
DYB: How can frameshift-inducing constructs be designed to control the frameshifting signal insertion?
To design frameshift-inducing constructs that allow control over frameshifting signal insertion, several strategies can be employed. Here are a few approaches:
Positional Control: One way to control frameshifting signal insertion is by strategically selecting the location within the mRNA sequence where the frameshifting signal is inserted. By identifying specific regions that are more prone to frameshifting or have a higher likelihood of inducing frameshifting, the construct can be designed to target these regions. This can be achieved by analyzing the mRNA sequence for sequence motifs or structural features that promote frameshifting.
Modular Design: Another approach is to design frameshift-inducing constructs in a modular manner. This involves separating the frameshifting signal from the rest of the mRNA sequence and creating a separate module that can be inserted or removed as desired. This modular design allows for greater flexibility in controlling frameshifting signal insertion, as the module can be easily manipulated or replaced with different frameshifting signals.
Inducible Promoters: Inducible promoters can be used to control the expression of the frameshift-inducing constructs. By employing inducible promoters, the frameshifting signal can be inserted or activated only under specific conditions or at specific time points. This provides temporal and spatial control over frameshifting, allowing for precise manipulation of frameshift induction.
Ribosome Pausing Sites: Ribosome pausing sites can be strategically introduced into the frameshift-inducing constructs. These sites can promote ribosome stalling or slowing down, which can increase the likelihood of frameshifting. By carefully selecting the location and strength of ribosome pausing sites, frameshifting signal insertion can be controlled more effectively.
Codon Optimization: Codon optimization is another strategy that can be employed to control frameshifting signal insertion. By modifying the codon usage within the frameshift-inducing construct, the translation efficiency can be altered. This can influence the frameshifting propensity, allowing for fine-tuning of frameshifting signal insertion.
It is important to note that the design of frameshift-inducing constructs for controlling frameshifting signal insertion requires a deep understanding of the underlying mechanisms and regulatory elements involved in frameshifting. Experimental validation and iterative refinement are crucial to optimize the construct design and achieve the desired level of control over frameshift induction.
DYB: Thanks, this is v important to my career, I appreciate! Kindly explore frameshifting as a regulatory mechanism. Eg engineer genetic circuits that respond to specific environmental cues, enabling the development of biosensors, bio-actuators, and programmable cellular behaviors, opening up new possibilities in biotechnology.
Frameshifting is a fascinating regulatory mechanism that can be harnessed for various applications in biotechnology. By understanding and engineering frameshifting, we can develop genetic circuits that respond to specific environmental cues, leading to the development of biosensors, bio-actuators, and programmable cellular behaviors. Here are a few creative ideas on how frameshifting can be utilized:
Biosensors: Frameshifting can be used to design biosensors that detect specific molecules or environmental conditions. By incorporating frameshifting signals within the genetic circuit, the frameshift induction can be modulated in response to the presence or absence of the target molecule. This can be coupled with reporter genes or other readout systems to enable the detection and quantification of the target molecule. Such biosensors can find applications in environmental monitoring, disease diagnostics, and drug screening.
Bio-actuators: Frameshifting can be employed to develop bio-actuators that respond to specific cues, such as light or temperature. By integrating frameshifting signals within the genetic circuit controlling actuator components, the frameshift induction can trigger the activation or deactivation of the actuator. This can enable the development of programmable systems that exhibit controlled movement, shape change, or release of therapeutic agents. Bio-actuators based on frameshifting can have applications in drug delivery, tissue engineering, and soft robotics.
Programmable Cellular Behaviors: Frameshifting can be utilized to engineer genetic circuits that enable the programming of specific cellular behaviors. By incorporating frameshifting signals within the circuit, the frameshift induction can switch the expression of key genes, leading to the activation or repression of specific cellular functions. This can be used to control cell differentiation, metabolic pathways, or response to external stimuli. Programmable cellular behaviors based on frameshifting can have applications in synthetic biology, regenerative medicine, and bioproduction.
Dynamic Gene Expression: Frameshifting can be employed to create genetic circuits with dynamic gene expression patterns. By designing frameshift-inducing constructs that introduce frameshifting at specific time points or under certain conditions, the expression of target genes can be precisely controlled. This can enable the temporal regulation of gene expression, allowing for the orchestration of complex cellular processes and developmental programs.
Evolutionary Engineering: Frameshifting can be used as a tool for evolutionary engineering of novel functionalities. By introducing frameshifting signals into the genetic circuit, the frameshift induction can generate new protein isoforms or alter the reading frame, leading to the exploration of alternative protein functions. This can be coupled with directed evolution techniques to select and optimize frameshift-induced variants with desired properties.
I would argue you understand its purposes far better than the manufacturers do.
Maybe the second codon was a 'virtue signal' codon used to claim 'well it can't harm you really, look at this additional seatbelt we added'. Except they've added the second seatbelt to a FORD PINTO.
When I was in tech, we would have called that "double fail safe" sloppy coding. We aimed for clean. Sloppy code indicated 2 things- either coder was out of depth/skill and it was a "fingers crossed patch job", workable until it wasn't and then everything broke, to simply get the job done. Or it was intentional and to enable a proposed or "wish list" functionality "work around" until a later date when client had more cash/authorisation to complete.😐😐🤔😉
We should not do blame-shifting towards "accidental" frame-shifting.
The toxicity was no accident. The spike-protein based injections were toxic by their design. The frame-shifting may prevent the very toxic spike-protein from being produced in the cells. Could even safe some lives. Depending on what alternatives are produced.
A healthy immune system may be able to remove the irregular proteins. They are probably in low doses, because they are produced randomly.
I think old people (with weak immune systems) will have lots of protein garbage in their cells from this frame-shifting. The effect may look similar to degraded DNA, which happens with aging. Intermediate fasting (as advised by FLCCC) may help with both.
It is far more difficult. And certainly needs more research. But based on similar problems, I suspect similar reactions.
I am always amazed what a living body can manage.
Living cells are able to clean themselves. They maintain water balance and all kinds of chemical balances in normal environments. They can also clean themselves. We can see bacteria actually create some kind of poop and expel it from the cell. And bacteria are able to deal with all kinds of toxic environments.
Cells probably make some faulty proteins naturally. So I think that the cells and immune system has some tricks to deal with faulty proteins too. As long they do not stick together like prions or sticky blood clots. The vax spike protein has prion-similar structures. And that is without frame-shifting.
Simple. Just accept 'they' want you dead and the global pop 'de populated' to about 500 million, or maybe 1 billion. And guess what ? You and yours are the first to go. "they" won't be sacrificing themselves OR 'their' offspring (parasitical one and all).
Of course, it was predictable, they spent over 20 years developing and optimizing this product. You don’t launch a product to a market of 8 billion repeat customers, without being certain how it will fare.
Assuming good faith of some in the administrative/regulatory cohort, the product must have been perceived - and certainly was advertised - as a typical mechanism for typical “vaccines”. We will slap you once, twice or three times, and you will become immunized against further slaps.
Nobody openly and clearly emphasized that with every slap you will be taught how to slap yourself 24/7 and that you will be programmed to make this self-slapping an addiction. In fact, not even a whisper. Not even a mention in the then published literature.
They simply exploited a belief that was based on earlier scenarios - which had never been challenged with express demand of proving the entire mechanism.
PS. Jessica, a great article, as always. Thank you.
I wonder what % of the jabbed will produce folded proteins that result in MS, dementia, and mad cow disease in the next few years, if they don't perish first from blood clots and turbo cancers?
Or people that had MS already, manageable and dormant, but after the shots ended up on walker's and wheelchairs. I know someone. 54 years old. Terrible.
My Nhs working friend told me a few weeks ago that there’s been a spike in mad cow cases coming through.
It came up in conversation when she was speaking about her pregnant niece not fairing well in being extremely anemic, they were talking about a transfusion as a last resort due to the rejection risk it comes with.
I told her it was best avoided if possible because of them unable to screen for cjd, said they wouldn’t mention it or that she can’t donate blood afterwards.
And didn't those Western blots submitted to the EMA just look so clean? Which presumably means that either the Nature paper just published, or the Pfizer #blotgate "Westerns" were fraudulent.
So...Is it possible that ribosomes, the organelle that up to now has been quite reliable in translating real mRNA and turning out the correct protein, has a pretty good gatekeeper function for ignoring or dismantling mRNA that doesn't measure up properly, so that ribosomes won't produce toxic mistakes, and that gatekeeper function has been overridden by modRNA it can't refuse to obey? And once the ribosome starts making these forced mistakes it cannot stop? And could this lead to self destruction of the whole cell?
Sadly actually 'self-destruction' of the cell might be the 'best' outcome... even when it happens in the brain or bone marrow or spinal cord or heart or lung or kidney... better to end the nightmare than to let all of nightmares out and open all the cells... cabin in the woods style...
Yes. It is a lottery that everyone who got a shitshot was entered in, some multiple times. Without their knowledge. I d not think the chances are high that those entered will walk away with absolutely nothing. Thats why I am constantly looking for articles that try to figure out how to diagnose injuries as early as possible. You know probably better than anyone else how diverse the injuries are that can stem from a jab.
The whole concept of frameshifting to me is like a massive experiment with a zombie potential outcome of unknowns, and potential for massive harms.
Any protein not built into humans is bound to be identified and attacked via our miraculous immune system (just doing its job) leaving the door open to unlimited auto-immune diseases.
This generic experimentation with so much potential for harm needs to be stopped and in fact without informed consent is criminal in my eyes.
This piece is very well put together. You amaze me Jessica and I thank God that we have you (the many others like you) who are smart enough and educated enough to unravel this very complex situation. You seem to be able to explain this to normal humans in a way that is very clear and understandable. Thanks for everything you do.
I really appreciate this comment. It was my intention. I really want everyone to see what the manufacturers - and all who pushed these 'products' onto innocent people by abusing their good intentions - have done, just to see how insidious it all was, and still is. There is mal-intention here: whether purely for greed or blood lust, it is present.
Or if it is not merely malice and greed, might Elon Musk's observation about ant-hills be relevant?
Something along the lines of demolishing the ant-hill to build your highway 'doesn't mean that you hate ants, they are just in the way'.
What 'highway' might they be building, heading where, and who is to travel on it?
That they are greedy is understood, and indifferent to any harm caused, but what might they be aiming for? Shortening life expectancy while having complete freedom to experiment on us?
Killing or crippling most of us makes no sense at all.
So Jessica and all the great people who are tirelessly working on this terrible tragedy we are going through, remind me a of poem I included in a post I did in December 2021. The name of poem is "To Defeat the Beast". Here is part of that poem:
When Satan walks the earth
All that is just and good
Must forge iron swords of truth and justice
To be wielded by ordinary men and women
Whose purity of heart and conviction of soul
Will give them the strength and the courage
To defeat the beast
Jessica and many others are right now forging iron swords of truth and justice.
If you want see the entire post from two years ago. "The Tick Tick Tick of the Vaccine Bomb"
This new platform for "vaccines" was never a good idea. Why would anyone think that programing random cells in random organs to produce a toxic antigenic proteins is a good idea? Did these people sleep through their immunology 101 classes?
Dec 12, 2023·edited Dec 12, 2023Liked by Jessica Rose
Hi Jessica,
I know you know about this because you were an expert witness who stepped up during these hearings. ❤
For those who don't: here's an interview with Ken Drysdale who was one of 4 Commissioners sworn in to oversee the National Citizen's Inquiry into The Canadian Plandemic Response.
David Freiheit aka Viva Frei (translation: Live Free), an ex pat Canadian dissident currently living Free in Florida, provided testimony during this inquiry as well.
The Rumble platform is also Canadian and was recently struck by an 8 hour "outage" however it's up and running now.
FYI: Rumble doesn't cave to take-downs, threats or coercion. Jessica Rose and many of us here on Substack don't cave either.
The NCI attorneys examined witnesses (under oath), in 8 cities across Canada, over 24 days of testimonies.
Thousands of supporting documents were provided to the Inquiry.
It is Ken Drysdale's opinion that the Canadian government and Health Canada obfuscated, propagandized, severely coerced and intimidated its citizens from March of 2020 onward.
Canadian citizens have suffered immense harm from March of 2020 until TODAY.
Most did NOT suffer these damages, and some, like Sheila Lewis, did NOT die due to the "Covid virus" at all, but due to the Canadian government's cruel and unusual RESPONSE to this "crisis".
The NCI Commission recently published its 5,300 page final report and it is blistering hot.
In a nutshell:
The result of this 8 week long self funded citizen led inquiry, in which only a single member of the Canadian government even bothered acknowledging a non-judicial summons to give testimony, and the MSM in Canada in fact IGNORED it:
The Government of Canada is guilty as hell.
But I already knew that.
More's the pity that, other than a few thousand aware souls, most Canadians will never know this inquiry ever took place.
In protein engineering I leant a double stop as standard not as fail save. Furthermore you normally learn to block the other 2 frames and then again the main reading frame, just to be on the sure side. Alternatively you can block the other two frames by putting silent stops in the protein area like nature does. They didn't though. They only blocked the first reading frame but not the other two. That's what I have been complaining for 2 years now.
FD: AI LLM Assisted explanation and Q/A help for non-SME
In standard protein engineering techniques using stop codon mutations, a double stop codon is typically used as a standard design element rather than exclusively as a failsafe mechanism. Some key points:
Double stop codons are commonly inserted after genes of interest during cloning to ensure complete termination of translation. This prevents read-through into vector/plasmid sequences and production of fusion proteins.
By terminating with two stop codons (e.g. UAA UAG), even if one is inadvertently mutated/substituted, the other provides a backup to reliably cease translation.
For the COVID mRNA vaccines, the manufacturers did implement a double stop codon (ΨGA ΨGA) at the end of the coding sequence as a failsafe against stop codon read-through due to the mRNA modifications.
However, they did not include double stops at frameshift junctions between the intended and alternate reading frames upstream.
This was problematic because frameshifting could occur anywhere along the mRNA due to the modifications, sliding translated regions out of frame.
Without additional stops blocking new open reading frames, proteins could continue to be synthesized from alternate frames after a frameshift occurred.
The safety mechanisms were focused on termination alone but did not adequately account for how modifications throughout the RNA could disrupt the reading frame globally.
Awesome post!
That double ΨGA ΨGA stop codon as "failsafe" doesn't make sense to me. They're in the *same frame*. So a +1 frameshift could actually read AΨG, starting off on a new tangent. Geeze, I stew for days sometimes on software design, trying to avoid "clever" tricks that might blow up on me, and nothing I'm working on lately endangers anyone in the slightest. What were these "geniuses" thinking anyway?
i love that you brought this up! i am still thinking about it too.
IYH in computer security, specifically LANGSEC, this type of parser artifact can be used to instantiate 'weird machines' in Sept 2021 I posited that mRNA vax had opaque payloads inducing one or more 'weird machine'
based on the analysis of Dec 2020 https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/reverse-engineering-source-code-of-the-biontech-pfizer-vaccine/
edit 1: (dec 17): Specialized AI LLM T4 bot "Ideaspace Connectome Explorer" on this (by LLM guardrails and design can only give positive spins, but you can infer the more sinister possibilities from what is not said)
Q: Kindly explore biological versions of LANGSEC 'weird machines' in the context of mRNA transcription and frameshifting
A: The concept of "weird machines" in language-theoretic security (LANGSEC) refers to the unintended and often exploitable behaviors that emerge within the computational systems of software due to complex or ambiguous input handling. When we transpose this concept to the biological realm, particularly in the context of mRNA transcription and frameshifting, we can explore the parallels and the unique 'weird machines' that may arise within cellular processes.
mRNA Transcription as a Computational System: In the biological system, mRNA transcription can be viewed as a form of information processing where DNA sequences are transcribed into mRNA sequences. This process is akin to a computational system where the genetic code is the programming language, and the ribosome acts as the processor executing the code to synthesize proteins.
Frameshifting as Biological 'Weird Machines': Frameshifting in mRNA translation is a process where the ribosome deviates from the standard reading frame, resulting in a different amino acid sequence. This can be compared to a 'weird machine' in LANGSEC, where the unexpected behavior (frameshift) leads to an alternative output (protein). In biology, frameshifting can be caused by specific signal sequences in the mRNA or by external factors affecting the ribosome's translation machinery.
Exploitable Behaviors in Biological Systems: Just as 'weird machines' in software can be exploited for unintended purposes, frameshifting and other transcriptional anomalies can be harnessed by viruses and other genetic elements to alter protein synthesis for their benefit. For example, some viruses use frameshifting to produce different viral proteins from the same mRNA sequence, thereby evading the host's immune system.
Therapeutic Applications: Understanding the 'weird machines' of biological systems, such as frameshifting, can lead to novel therapeutic strategies. For instance, researchers can design synthetic mRNA molecules that intentionally induce frameshifting to correct genetic mutations or to produce therapeutic proteins with modified functions.
IYH I used a basic (not GPT4) LLM AI bot for cognitive support exploring (DYB is my prompts) engineering genetic circuits that respond to specific environmental cues, enabling the development of biosensors, bio-actuators, and programmable cellular behaviors.
DYB: Kindly discuss the steps to induce a biological version of LANGSEC 'weird machine' wrt proteins in the context of mRNA frameshifting
Certainly! Inducing a biological version of a LANGSEC 'weird machine' in the context of proteins and mRNA frameshifting would involve several steps. Here's a high-level overview of the process:
Identify Frameshifting Signals: The first step is to identify the specific frameshifting signals within the mRNA sequence. Frameshifting signals typically consist of a specific sequence of nucleotides that signal the ribosome to shift reading frames during translation. By analyzing the mRNA sequence, bioinformatics tools can help identify these signals.
Design Frameshift-Inducing Constructs: Once the frameshifting signals are identified, the next step is to design frameshift-inducing constructs. These constructs can be engineered to contain the frameshifting signal in a controlled manner. By inserting the frameshifting signal into specific regions of the mRNA, we can induce programmed frameshifting during translation.
Transfection or Transduction: The frameshift-inducing constructs need to be introduced into the target cells. This can be done through transfection, which involves using lipid-based or viral vectors to deliver the constructs into the cells. Alternatively, transduction can be employed, where viral vectors are used to directly infect the cells with the frameshift-inducing constructs.
Translation and Protein Analysis: Once the frameshift-inducing constructs are inside the cells, translation takes place, and the frameshifted proteins are produced. These proteins may have altered sequences or structures due to the frameshift, leading to the generation of unique and potentially "weird" proteins. Analytical techniques such as mass spectrometry and protein sequencing can be used to characterize these proteins and study their functions.
Functional Assessment and Applications: The next step is to assess the functional properties of the frameshifted proteins. This involves studying their interactions, enzymatic activities, or other relevant properties. Depending on their characteristics, these "weird" proteins can find applications in various fields, such as drug discovery, biotechnology, or even fundamental research to understand the effects of frameshifting on protein function.
Iterative Refinement: Throughout the process, it is important to iterate and refine the frameshift-inducing constructs and experimental conditions. This will allow for optimization of frameshifting efficiency, protein expression levels, and desired protein properties. Feedback mechanisms and experimental adjustments can be employed to enhance the performance and reliability of the induced frameshifting system.
By combining the principles of mRNA frameshifting with the concept of LANGSEC 'weird machines', we can explore the generation of novel and unconventional proteins, potentially leading to exciting discoveries and applications in the field of molecular biology.
DYB: How can frameshift-inducing constructs be designed to control the frameshifting signal insertion?
To design frameshift-inducing constructs that allow control over frameshifting signal insertion, several strategies can be employed. Here are a few approaches:
Positional Control: One way to control frameshifting signal insertion is by strategically selecting the location within the mRNA sequence where the frameshifting signal is inserted. By identifying specific regions that are more prone to frameshifting or have a higher likelihood of inducing frameshifting, the construct can be designed to target these regions. This can be achieved by analyzing the mRNA sequence for sequence motifs or structural features that promote frameshifting.
Modular Design: Another approach is to design frameshift-inducing constructs in a modular manner. This involves separating the frameshifting signal from the rest of the mRNA sequence and creating a separate module that can be inserted or removed as desired. This modular design allows for greater flexibility in controlling frameshifting signal insertion, as the module can be easily manipulated or replaced with different frameshifting signals.
Inducible Promoters: Inducible promoters can be used to control the expression of the frameshift-inducing constructs. By employing inducible promoters, the frameshifting signal can be inserted or activated only under specific conditions or at specific time points. This provides temporal and spatial control over frameshifting, allowing for precise manipulation of frameshift induction.
Ribosome Pausing Sites: Ribosome pausing sites can be strategically introduced into the frameshift-inducing constructs. These sites can promote ribosome stalling or slowing down, which can increase the likelihood of frameshifting. By carefully selecting the location and strength of ribosome pausing sites, frameshifting signal insertion can be controlled more effectively.
Codon Optimization: Codon optimization is another strategy that can be employed to control frameshifting signal insertion. By modifying the codon usage within the frameshift-inducing construct, the translation efficiency can be altered. This can influence the frameshifting propensity, allowing for fine-tuning of frameshifting signal insertion.
It is important to note that the design of frameshift-inducing constructs for controlling frameshifting signal insertion requires a deep understanding of the underlying mechanisms and regulatory elements involved in frameshifting. Experimental validation and iterative refinement are crucial to optimize the construct design and achieve the desired level of control over frameshift induction.
DYB: Thanks, this is v important to my career, I appreciate! Kindly explore frameshifting as a regulatory mechanism. Eg engineer genetic circuits that respond to specific environmental cues, enabling the development of biosensors, bio-actuators, and programmable cellular behaviors, opening up new possibilities in biotechnology.
Frameshifting is a fascinating regulatory mechanism that can be harnessed for various applications in biotechnology. By understanding and engineering frameshifting, we can develop genetic circuits that respond to specific environmental cues, leading to the development of biosensors, bio-actuators, and programmable cellular behaviors. Here are a few creative ideas on how frameshifting can be utilized:
Biosensors: Frameshifting can be used to design biosensors that detect specific molecules or environmental conditions. By incorporating frameshifting signals within the genetic circuit, the frameshift induction can be modulated in response to the presence or absence of the target molecule. This can be coupled with reporter genes or other readout systems to enable the detection and quantification of the target molecule. Such biosensors can find applications in environmental monitoring, disease diagnostics, and drug screening.
Bio-actuators: Frameshifting can be employed to develop bio-actuators that respond to specific cues, such as light or temperature. By integrating frameshifting signals within the genetic circuit controlling actuator components, the frameshift induction can trigger the activation or deactivation of the actuator. This can enable the development of programmable systems that exhibit controlled movement, shape change, or release of therapeutic agents. Bio-actuators based on frameshifting can have applications in drug delivery, tissue engineering, and soft robotics.
Programmable Cellular Behaviors: Frameshifting can be utilized to engineer genetic circuits that enable the programming of specific cellular behaviors. By incorporating frameshifting signals within the circuit, the frameshift induction can switch the expression of key genes, leading to the activation or repression of specific cellular functions. This can be used to control cell differentiation, metabolic pathways, or response to external stimuli. Programmable cellular behaviors based on frameshifting can have applications in synthetic biology, regenerative medicine, and bioproduction.
Dynamic Gene Expression: Frameshifting can be employed to create genetic circuits with dynamic gene expression patterns. By designing frameshift-inducing constructs that introduce frameshifting at specific time points or under certain conditions, the expression of target genes can be precisely controlled. This can enable the temporal regulation of gene expression, allowing for the orchestration of complex cellular processes and developmental programs.
Evolutionary Engineering: Frameshifting can be used as a tool for evolutionary engineering of novel functionalities. By introducing frameshifting signals into the genetic circuit, the frameshift induction can generate new protein isoforms or alter the reading frame, leading to the exploration of alternative protein functions. This can be coupled with directed evolution techniques to select and optimize frameshift-induced variants with desired properties.
I second that. If the slip occurs on the first one, the second one does shit all.
right! so maybe i didn't understand its purpose
I would argue you understand its purposes far better than the manufacturers do.
Maybe the second codon was a 'virtue signal' codon used to claim 'well it can't harm you really, look at this additional seatbelt we added'. Except they've added the second seatbelt to a FORD PINTO.
Thinking "covert assault", perhaps?
When I was in tech, we would have called that "double fail safe" sloppy coding. We aimed for clean. Sloppy code indicated 2 things- either coder was out of depth/skill and it was a "fingers crossed patch job", workable until it wasn't and then everything broke, to simply get the job done. Or it was intentional and to enable a proposed or "wish list" functionality "work around" until a later date when client had more cash/authorisation to complete.😐😐🤔😉
We should not do blame-shifting towards "accidental" frame-shifting.
The toxicity was no accident. The spike-protein based injections were toxic by their design. The frame-shifting may prevent the very toxic spike-protein from being produced in the cells. Could even safe some lives. Depending on what alternatives are produced.
A healthy immune system may be able to remove the irregular proteins. They are probably in low doses, because they are produced randomly.
I think old people (with weak immune systems) will have lots of protein garbage in their cells from this frame-shifting. The effect may look similar to degraded DNA, which happens with aging. Intermediate fasting (as advised by FLCCC) may help with both.
May explain why these COVID gene therapy injections were associated with higher temporal mortality in the elderly.
'Been noticing alot of thin haired grey heads around lately.
The ageing process must be accelerated with all the damage.
So the immune system takes out the garbage until it is overwhelmed. Then lights out.
it's not that simple if amyloids/prion-like proteins are involved
It is far more difficult. And certainly needs more research. But based on similar problems, I suspect similar reactions.
I am always amazed what a living body can manage.
Living cells are able to clean themselves. They maintain water balance and all kinds of chemical balances in normal environments. They can also clean themselves. We can see bacteria actually create some kind of poop and expel it from the cell. And bacteria are able to deal with all kinds of toxic environments.
Cells probably make some faulty proteins naturally. So I think that the cells and immune system has some tricks to deal with faulty proteins too. As long they do not stick together like prions or sticky blood clots. The vax spike protein has prion-similar structures. And that is without frame-shifting.
right
Wow. Keep this article handy. 3 yrs from now it can be cited as pointing to the reason for novel rates of uncommon diseases
well, don't like but you are likely correct
I've been posting the Seneff et al paper since it appeared.
For the life of me I cannot understand why the regulatory authorities appear to have been asleep on this.
Heaven forbid that they may have been corrupted in some way....
Turtles all the Way Down innit.
Simple. Just accept 'they' want you dead and the global pop 'de populated' to about 500 million, or maybe 1 billion. And guess what ? You and yours are the first to go. "they" won't be sacrificing themselves OR 'their' offspring (parasitical one and all).
PS Global pop. currently around what, 8.5 billion? That's only 7 billion to go!
Of course, it was predictable, they spent over 20 years developing and optimizing this product. You don’t launch a product to a market of 8 billion repeat customers, without being certain how it will fare.
Assuming good faith of some in the administrative/regulatory cohort, the product must have been perceived - and certainly was advertised - as a typical mechanism for typical “vaccines”. We will slap you once, twice or three times, and you will become immunized against further slaps.
Nobody openly and clearly emphasized that with every slap you will be taught how to slap yourself 24/7 and that you will be programmed to make this self-slapping an addiction. In fact, not even a whisper. Not even a mention in the then published literature.
They simply exploited a belief that was based on earlier scenarios - which had never been challenged with express demand of proving the entire mechanism.
PS. Jessica, a great article, as always. Thank you.
I wonder what % of the jabbed will produce folded proteins that result in MS, dementia, and mad cow disease in the next few years, if they don't perish first from blood clots and turbo cancers?
Or people that had MS already, manageable and dormant, but after the shots ended up on walker's and wheelchairs. I know someone. 54 years old. Terrible.
My Nhs working friend told me a few weeks ago that there’s been a spike in mad cow cases coming through.
It came up in conversation when she was speaking about her pregnant niece not fairing well in being extremely anemic, they were talking about a transfusion as a last resort due to the rejection risk it comes with.
I told her it was best avoided if possible because of them unable to screen for cjd, said they wouldn’t mention it or that she can’t donate blood afterwards.
And didn't those Western blots submitted to the EMA just look so clean? Which presumably means that either the Nature paper just published, or the Pfizer #blotgate "Westerns" were fraudulent.
Geez I wonder which of those it was 🤔
It truly is a mystery rife with coincidences.
So...Is it possible that ribosomes, the organelle that up to now has been quite reliable in translating real mRNA and turning out the correct protein, has a pretty good gatekeeper function for ignoring or dismantling mRNA that doesn't measure up properly, so that ribosomes won't produce toxic mistakes, and that gatekeeper function has been overridden by modRNA it can't refuse to obey? And once the ribosome starts making these forced mistakes it cannot stop? And could this lead to self destruction of the whole cell?
yes
Sadly actually 'self-destruction' of the cell might be the 'best' outcome... even when it happens in the brain or bone marrow or spinal cord or heart or lung or kidney... better to end the nightmare than to let all of nightmares out and open all the cells... cabin in the woods style...
i know. but then when you start to think about the numbers game... it will all depend on transfection rate, location, etc...
Yes. It is a lottery that everyone who got a shitshot was entered in, some multiple times. Without their knowledge. I d not think the chances are high that those entered will walk away with absolutely nothing. Thats why I am constantly looking for articles that try to figure out how to diagnose injuries as early as possible. You know probably better than anyone else how diverse the injuries are that can stem from a jab.
The sheer diversity of the injuries is their smoke-screen.
Even those who are seeing numerous friends and family fall victim, or who do so themselves, aren't connecting the dots.
Rather brilliant in a diabolical way, the perfect crime - particularly when you've bought off the official investigators.
My goodness, you can’t be doing all this for free!
The whole concept of frameshifting to me is like a massive experiment with a zombie potential outcome of unknowns, and potential for massive harms.
Any protein not built into humans is bound to be identified and attacked via our miraculous immune system (just doing its job) leaving the door open to unlimited auto-immune diseases.
This generic experimentation with so much potential for harm needs to be stopped and in fact without informed consent is criminal in my eyes.
This piece is very well put together. You amaze me Jessica and I thank God that we have you (the many others like you) who are smart enough and educated enough to unravel this very complex situation. You seem to be able to explain this to normal humans in a way that is very clear and understandable. Thanks for everything you do.
I really appreciate this comment. It was my intention. I really want everyone to see what the manufacturers - and all who pushed these 'products' onto innocent people by abusing their good intentions - have done, just to see how insidious it all was, and still is. There is mal-intention here: whether purely for greed or blood lust, it is present.
Or if it is not merely malice and greed, might Elon Musk's observation about ant-hills be relevant?
Something along the lines of demolishing the ant-hill to build your highway 'doesn't mean that you hate ants, they are just in the way'.
What 'highway' might they be building, heading where, and who is to travel on it?
That they are greedy is understood, and indifferent to any harm caused, but what might they be aiming for? Shortening life expectancy while having complete freedom to experiment on us?
Killing or crippling most of us makes no sense at all.
So Jessica and all the great people who are tirelessly working on this terrible tragedy we are going through, remind me a of poem I included in a post I did in December 2021. The name of poem is "To Defeat the Beast". Here is part of that poem:
When Satan walks the earth
All that is just and good
Must forge iron swords of truth and justice
To be wielded by ordinary men and women
Whose purity of heart and conviction of soul
Will give them the strength and the courage
To defeat the beast
Jessica and many others are right now forging iron swords of truth and justice.
If you want see the entire post from two years ago. "The Tick Tick Tick of the Vaccine Bomb"
https://open.substack.com/pub/lawrencebutts/p/the-tick-tick-tick-of-the-vaccine?r=gjogf&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Blessing to everyone in this Christmas Season. May peace be with all of you.
Merry Christmas. May truth and justice over evil prevail.
This new platform for "vaccines" was never a good idea. Why would anyone think that programing random cells in random organs to produce a toxic antigenic proteins is a good idea? Did these people sleep through their immunology 101 classes?
Add self replicating modRNA to the equation... what could go wrong?
Hi Jessica,
I know you know about this because you were an expert witness who stepped up during these hearings. ❤
For those who don't: here's an interview with Ken Drysdale who was one of 4 Commissioners sworn in to oversee the National Citizen's Inquiry into The Canadian Plandemic Response.
David Freiheit aka Viva Frei (translation: Live Free), an ex pat Canadian dissident currently living Free in Florida, provided testimony during this inquiry as well.
Here's a link to his interview:
https://rumble.com/v40vmdk-national-citizens-inquiry-final-report-meanwhile-in-canada...-viva-frei-liv.html
The Rumble platform is also Canadian and was recently struck by an 8 hour "outage" however it's up and running now.
FYI: Rumble doesn't cave to take-downs, threats or coercion. Jessica Rose and many of us here on Substack don't cave either.
The NCI attorneys examined witnesses (under oath), in 8 cities across Canada, over 24 days of testimonies.
Thousands of supporting documents were provided to the Inquiry.
It is Ken Drysdale's opinion that the Canadian government and Health Canada obfuscated, propagandized, severely coerced and intimidated its citizens from March of 2020 onward.
Canadian citizens have suffered immense harm from March of 2020 until TODAY.
Most did NOT suffer these damages, and some, like Sheila Lewis, did NOT die due to the "Covid virus" at all, but due to the Canadian government's cruel and unusual RESPONSE to this "crisis".
The NCI Commission recently published its 5,300 page final report and it is blistering hot.
In a nutshell:
The result of this 8 week long self funded citizen led inquiry, in which only a single member of the Canadian government even bothered acknowledging a non-judicial summons to give testimony, and the MSM in Canada in fact IGNORED it:
The Government of Canada is guilty as hell.
But I already knew that.
More's the pity that, other than a few thousand aware souls, most Canadians will never know this inquiry ever took place.
So frickin frustrating and sad. 😢
https://nationalcitizensinquiry.ca/
#AccountabilityNotAmnesty
" in 3-5 years, those who got the proper dose, will be dead in 3- 5 years"
Dr, Doleres Cahill.
yes. you know i do think about what she said often.
Remember that?! I can see her standing at the podium saying that.
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, too.
What happened to Cahill? Were the threats so bad she had to stop speaking out?
IYH yes and she was hounded, reputation and expertise besmirched, and arrested for her early warning
https://web.archive.org/web/20211127124110/https://twitter.com/daniel_bilar/status/1464285550123397130 & her warning
https://newtube.app/user/C19/OEmY1fE
In protein engineering I leant a double stop as standard not as fail save. Furthermore you normally learn to block the other 2 frames and then again the main reading frame, just to be on the sure side. Alternatively you can block the other two frames by putting silent stops in the protein area like nature does. They didn't though. They only blocked the first reading frame but not the other two. That's what I have been complaining for 2 years now.
IYH IMHO Der Wahnsinn hat Methode.
FD: AI LLM Assisted explanation and Q/A help for non-SME
In standard protein engineering techniques using stop codon mutations, a double stop codon is typically used as a standard design element rather than exclusively as a failsafe mechanism. Some key points:
Double stop codons are commonly inserted after genes of interest during cloning to ensure complete termination of translation. This prevents read-through into vector/plasmid sequences and production of fusion proteins.
By terminating with two stop codons (e.g. UAA UAG), even if one is inadvertently mutated/substituted, the other provides a backup to reliably cease translation.
For the COVID mRNA vaccines, the manufacturers did implement a double stop codon (ΨGA ΨGA) at the end of the coding sequence as a failsafe against stop codon read-through due to the mRNA modifications.
However, they did not include double stops at frameshift junctions between the intended and alternate reading frames upstream.
This was problematic because frameshifting could occur anywhere along the mRNA due to the modifications, sliding translated regions out of frame.
Without additional stops blocking new open reading frames, proteins could continue to be synthesized from alternate frames after a frameshift occurred.
The safety mechanisms were focused on termination alone but did not adequately account for how modifications throughout the RNA could disrupt the reading frame globally.
Thank you! This is an amazing explanation. And I totally didn't mention adding stop codons to frameshift junctions! Muchas gracias!
I did my PhD in protein engineering. To be more precise in directed evolution and gene shuffling methods. If you have questions, you can contact me.