The Solution

as I see it

The Solution

Willful misconduct is the only legal basis left under the PREP ACT with which victims can sue covered persons (manufacturers, government planners, health care providers, etc.) effectively bypassing the negligent Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) and actually holding people or entities accountable for what they do. The emergency declaration demands an incredibly high burden of proof however. Fortunately, I believe there is one cause of action, and one alone, that I believe will stand as proof of willful misconduct: Genomic integration of the specific vaccine spike sequence.

They’ve made it very difficult, but it would be provable in court that the CDC, FDA, pharmaceutical companies, and individuals in relevant positions intended to deceive the public regarding inherent risks due to retroposition/integration from the mRNA/DNA “vaccines” respectively.

A quick definition:

“Willful misconduct generally means a knowing violation of a reasonable and uniformly enforced rule or policy. It means intentionally doing that which should not be done or intentionally failing to do that which should be done, knowing that injury to a person will probably result or recklessly disregarding the possibility that injury to a person may result. The term is applied in various legal contexts, such as employment and, torts, and public offices.”

(https://definitions.uslegal.com/w/willful-misconduct/)

Imagine you produce vehicles. You have made a vehicle where a certain percentage of all finished products had a brake line failure before 500 miles of travel. You don’t know this and sell as many cars as possible. Many people are harmed but there was no intent. Theoretically, this is the type of liability protected by the PREP ACT and it includes essentially every single adverse event possible even including improper administration. Under normal circumstances, the manufacturer would typically be liable for any resulting damages.

Now imagine you DID know about the brake failures. Any investigations into the brake lines were suppressed and you even organized a marketing campaign promoting how safe your brake lines were, stating a failure was impossible. You chose to not inform any customer of these specific risks inherent to your vehicle. You profit monetarily and in reputation, while people who relied on your information suffer and some die. THESE ACTIONS ARE NOT PROTECTED UNDER THE PREP ACT. I believe this is what is happening with the gene therapy vaccines. Again, I am proposing there is one instance, and one alone, where proof of foreknowledge and direct harm caused by the vaccine can be demonstrated: genomic integration.

I originally believed constructive fraud would be the preferred cause of action as the elements don’t require proof of intent, and it may still be for non-emergency approved vaccines, depending on how broadly fraud is interpreted under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. Unfortunately for all those injured by these novel vaccines, the PREP Act has granted almost perfect immunity for even the most egregious of crimes. Intent must be proven. A difficult task but not impossible. I believe it can be done with a series of actions I will now present and explain to the best of my ability.

Step 1. Solve logistical concerns with obtaining and sequencing tissues that may have full or partial vaccine-specific spike sequence integrated.

Step 2. Begin a media campaign to search for post-vaccination, new-onset cancer victims until an oncogenic integration is found and the person is willing to enter litigation.

Step 3. Initiate litigation under CICP, subsequently withdrawing from the compensation program in order to file the willful misconduct suit in the D.C. court.

Step 4. Present irrefutable evidence of the integrated tissue and the foreknowledge of the risk of integration/retroposition that was purposefully misconstrued to the public.

Step 5. Whether litigation is successful or not, organize to have the use of large-scale, widespread gene therapy tech banned. (A discussion of appropriate uses on a case by case basis can be had after the fact)

Let’s now take a look at the basic elements of willful misconduct outlined in the PREP ACT.

The covered person acted:

1. Intentionally to achieve a wrongful purpose;

2. Knowingly without legal or factual justification and;

3. In disregard of a known or obvious risk that is so great as to make it highly probable that the harm will outweigh the benefit.

This is the only cause of action available to bypass the CICP process and PREP protections of “covered persons” and actually hold people accountable, however, there are additional requirements that must be met. These include, having first sought compensation under the CICP and subsequently rejecting any possible compensation (not as risky as it sounds given how many are simply ignored, underpaid, or denied anyway {as of 4/1/’23 there have only been 3 compensations out of 11,425 claims filed regarding Covid-19 and there have been 684 denials out of 706 decisions [source: http://www.hrsa.gov/cicp/cicp-data]}). Also, the injured party can only sue in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (potential problems?). The injured party must also prove willful misconduct with “clear and convincing evidence”, which is terminology that ups the burden of proof beyond typical civil cases. The bar is set high, but moments of great strife demand excellence and perseverance.

One potential benefit of the PREP Act is the 7 day window for reporting that allows for willful misconduct to either proceed or be thrown out. A covered person is required to report the injury caused by the covered countermeasure to a health authority within 7 days if they want to avoid being sued for willful misconduct, provided they followed all applicable guidelines. This places the covered person in a dilemma of either admitting causation, or being liable for the damages, a win-win for the plaintiff.

The final hurdle to be overcome is the enforcement action requirement set out in the act. It states that if the act or omission is subject to regulation under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act or Public Health Act, then an enforcement action must be brought by the Secretary or Attorney General.

As far as I know is no guideline or regulation that recommends omission of potential or known risks from being disclosed to a consumer. If the officials were needed to bring an enforcement action first, there would need to be a massive pressure campaign, based on the public outrage of being experimented on with gene therapy potentially causing wide-spread, long-term harm, all for an ineffective vaccine.

Source: PREP Act- https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2021-title42/pdf/USCODE-2021-title42-chap6A-subchapII-partB-sec247d-6d.pdf

I am fully aware of the long-shot nature of what I have described, however, this is more important than just winning a lawsuit. This is also about proving the genetic rape of a large portion of the world, and correcting course before it’s too late. We were told this was impossible, by everyone involved EXCEPT the companies themselves. If anyone can find a single representative of Pfizer, Biontech, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, Janssen, or Astrazeneca who have outright claimed integration or DNA alteration was an impossibility, I’d love to see it. If integration is impossible, and people were worried about it, wouldn’t you want to address their concerns directly? This glaring omission, while seemingly anyone with even the tiniest soapbox were condescendingly claiming integration from these vaccines is impossible, demonstrates exactly how big business uses government cronies and propaganda outlets to shield themselves from having to make false claims to sell their product. Why lock yourself into a lie when you can stay quiet and let others lie for you? Some will even do it without the need to reward them. The vacuous praise after virtue signaling is enough for them. Others will require a cushy job or “consulting” fees, and pharma certainly has enough money to pursuade the less than ethical. Think on the numerous promotional propaganda campaigns pushed out for the covid-19 vaccines. How many were conducted by the pharma companies themselves? Who pushed the idea that vaccines were safe for pregnant women before they had the data to say so? Sometimes they’re called trusted messengers, or community leaders, or it maybe even celebrities like esteemed rapper Juvenile telling you to “vax that thang up”. Whatever gets shots in arms. The campaign lying about integration is no different, and the manufacturers want as little harmful evidence available against them in a future law suit as possible.

Look into Pfizer’s criminal fraud conviction for illegally promoting certain drugs off-label and you’ll see how the shell game works. Pfizer should never have been able to legally receive a single dollar from the government after the criminal conviction, but they were basically deemed “too big to fail” and their subsidiary, Pharmacia & Upjohn Co, Inc, was sacrificed instead. Another point revealed as a result of discovery was “an internal marketing plan (that) called for training physicians ‘to serve as public relations spokespeople.’” Sound familiar? This is the public-private corruption we’re dealing with. These people don’t care if they lie and you or your loved ones get hurt. The fines they pay are part of the deals they make behind closed doors.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement-its-history

https://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/04/02/pfizer.bextra/index.html

What the pharmaceutical companies and their lackeys need is the mRNA and advector platforms to keep going, and I would like to throw a big wrench in the cogs. Very few people will want to take these therapies and “vaccines” if they actually know the risks of integration events. I would hope for a successful lawsuit, but I am also realistic about the state of corruption we are living in. We must decide our own fate now and not rely on bureaucrats.

Intentional Deception for Monetary Gain Selling Unproven Vaccines With Known Insertional Mutagenesis Risks

When I first saw the claim on the CDC’s website stating all the COVID-19 vaccines do not change or interact with your DNA in any way, I was highly incredulous. Not only were the claims false at the time, but provably false due to prior studies demonstrating the fallacies of their statements. After months of searching for evidence proving this risk was impossible, as they claimed, all I could find were studies confirming risk, and the unpredictable outcomes that could occur. I had decided to contact the CDC and asked them specifically for their data that could prove their statement. I was only ever provided studies with circular claims that never proved anything except that scientists can reference each other in papers without any primary sources, reinforcing “consensus science” statements.

THE CLAIMS:

From the CDC’s website

“FACT: COVID-19 vaccines do not change or interact with your DNA in any way.

Both messenger RNA (mRNA) and viral vector COVID-19 vaccines work by delivering instructions (genetic material) to our cells to start building protection against the virus that causes COVID-19.

After the body produces an immune response, it discards all the vaccine ingredients just as it would discard any information that cells no longer need. This process is a part of normal body functioning.

The genetic material delivered by mRNA vaccines never enters the nucleus of your cells, which is where your DNA is kept. Viral vector COVID-19 vaccines deliver genetic material to the cell nucleus to allow our cells to build protection against COVID-19. However, the vector virus does not have the machinery needed to integrate its genetic material into our DNA, so it cannot alter our DNA.”

I will start with evidence of deception and omission given by Janssen Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson submitted during their application for Emergency Use Authorization. Please reference the slide below to see the only written reference to integration I could find in their applications and fact sheets. They are using non-binding FDA guidance documentation to “classify” their adenovirus vector therapy as non-integrating. I believe all of the manufacturers are using this deception.

Source: Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) Application for Ad26.COV2.S

VRBPAC February 26, 2021

https://www.fda.gov/media/146265/download slide #14

On the referenced slide, the phrase “classified as non-integrating” means one of two things regarding “propensity to modify (the) genome” and applies to both advector and mRNA therapies:

“1. Based on product design (i.e., lack of any known mechanism to facilitate integration or genome editing), as well as cumulative preclinical and clinical evidence suggesting that a GT product does not integrate into or edit the genome or integrates in/modifies the genome at very low frequencies.”

Also of note, per the guidelines, both the advector and mRNA therapies are not recommended for long term follow-up unless the following occurs:

“2. Specific circumstances that indicate persistent expression of the transgene, in the absence of integration or genome editing, may be the basis for a conclusion that LTFU observations are recommended to mitigate long term risks to subjects receiving these vectors. This would depend on additional criteria, such as the transgene expressed or clinical indication, as described in this section”

In other words, integration pathologies will never be investigated because there is no guideline for it and they are not monitoring for persistent expression of the transgene in tissue samples.

I would like to make a very important point here. The guidance for long-term follow-up changed during the 14 years in between the guidance publishings regarding adeno-associated virus (AAV) vector therapies. Why? My guess is that the AAV’s were finally studied appropriately and were seen to cause long term issues like liver cancer in mice. Have they made the same mistake in the guidelines for advectors and mRNA therapies only to find the problem in the future... or did they learn a lesson to simply not do the studies? The total lack of federal funding for Vitamin D studies in regards to Covid-19 suggests the latter. For an infuriating comparison, Remdesivir has received federal funding 24 times to date. If the goal is making money, you don’t ask the appropriate questions or do the necessary studies because you might leave free money on the table.

Source 2020: Long Term Follow-Up After Administration of Human Gene Therapy Products-Guidance for Industry

https://www.fda.gov/media/113768/download pg. 14

Previous version source 2006: Guidance for Industry Gene Therapy Clinical Trials – Observing Subjects for Delayed Adverse Events

https://downloads.regulations.gov/FDA-2015-D-3399-0005/content.pdf

On the subject of false claims, here’s a quick clip of FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research Director Peter Marks directly lying about the mRNA vaccines, just in case we get the chance to hold individuals accountable.

Marker at 37:18-39:25

Marks happens to fall under the “covered persons” category and should be held accountable for willful misconduct.

“(6) Program planner

The term ‘‘program planner’’ means a State or local government, including an Indian tribe, a person employed by the State or local government, or other person who supervised or administered a program with respect to the administration, dispensing, distribution, provision, or use of a security countermeasure or a qualified pandemic or epidemic product, including a person who has established requirements, provided policy guidance, or supplied technical or scientific advice or assistance or provides a facility to administer or use a covered countermeasure in accordance with a declaration under subsection (b).”

Source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2021-title42/pdf/USCODE-2021-title42-chap6A-subchapII-partB-sec247d-6d.pdf

The claims made by representatives of the CDC and FDA regarding integration, and the omission of the manufacturers clearly stating integration occurs at ANY frequency, creates the false inference that their vaccines do not integrate. The manufacturers have a responsibility to correct these false claims instead of using the agencies and propagandists to sell more product. This is the epitome of captured agencies protecting pharmaceutical companies profits over the people’s safety.

False Claims Revealed

After having some frustrating correspondence with the CDC regarding the issue of inadvertent integration in early 2021, I finally told them they should remove the claim that they could offer no proof of. Needless to say, I got no further response after that. Also, I never received a response from J&J, Biontech, Pfizer, or Moderna regarding proof of claim of non-integration. At that point, I contacted a legal firm. Fortunately, they were already on it. It felt good to know the issue was now being pursued legally. After a little more than a year, the CDC finally responded, and the good people over at Siri and Glimstad LLP made it public:

“Dear Mr. Siri: This letter is in final response to your Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (CDC/ATSDR) Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request of April 28, 2021, for: All documents relied upon by CDC to claim the following statements:

1. “They [COVID-19 viral vector vaccines] do not affect or interact with our DNA in any way”;

2. “The genetic material delivered by the viral vector does not integrate into a person’s DNA.”;

3. “They [COVID-19 mRNA vaccines] do not affect or interact with our DNA in any way”; and

4. “mRNA never enters the nucleus of the cell, which is where our DNA (genetic material) is kept.”

A search of our records failed to reveal any documents pertaining to your request. The National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases (NCIRD) conducted a search of their records and found no records related to your request. Please note, CDC is a public health organization. CDC increases the health security of our nation.”

Source: https://icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/1188-Final-Response-Letter.pdf

This was not surprising to me at the time and the admission didn’t go nearly as viral as I had hoped, however, it was a big win in regards to a willful misconduct case being successfully pursued by a victim. I believe this was a calculated risk made in agreement between the pharmaceutical companies and the federal agencies and individuals involved. As stated by Stefen Oelrich of Bayer Pharmaceuticals “if we had surveyed two years ago, in the public, ‘would you be willing to take gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body?’, we would’ve probably had a 95% refusal rate”. Reading between the lines, this means that, through the messaging, propaganda, definition changes, and censorship of dissent over the past three years, the ability to sell gene therapy as a common pharmaceutical intervention for prevention or treatment is now possible for the medical marketplace. The only risk they have is someone proving that integration of these gene therapy products actually occurs, a difficult thing to do. I presume they lied because they believed it would be the only way to skip standard gene therapy regulatory hurdles and get the mRNA/DNA platforms into mainstream medical practice (as well as for myriad other applications), and that the inherent harm done would be so difficult to prove, that they would have many years of massive profits before it became known (kind of like J&J burying evidence of asbestos in baby powder for decades, or like Merck hiding the risk of heart damage from Vioxx, or Pfizer unethically promoting the painkiller Bextra, or Bayer knowingly selling HIV tainted blood product, et cetera ad nauseam).

Oelrich quote:

THE FOREKNOWLEDGE AND MATERIAL FACTS

Proving foreknowledge of risk is critical considering the protections offered by the PREP Act (as well as the 1986 legislation). My initial skepticism of the warp speed vaccine development drove me to look closer at the shots, and in doing so, I came across a blatant lie that any biology 101 student could spot if given the chance. The lie was “the mRNA vaccines never enter the cell’s nucleus and cannot interact with your DNA in any way”. It’s a lie because cells that undergo mitosis/meiosis will dissolve the nuclear membrane during the process and build it back up later. The whole process varies in time but is around 260 minutes from start to finish, during which time, molecules may interact with anything normally contained within the nucleus. This is a long-established reality and is even exploited by Maloney Murine Leukemia Virus, as non-dividing cells show no genetic integration after infection (the normal goal of infection by that virus) whereas dividing cells will show integration.

Source: viral entry in mitosis paper: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8491198/

This is likely another reason why another false statement was made in the beginning; “the vaccines stay in the arm” had no basis in fact and was actually known to be false, as biodistribution studies of similar molecules showed before the pandemic. Fundamentally, basic biology also shows that injections like these will enter the interstitial fluid which will inevitably drain to the nearest lymph duct and subsequent nodes before then passing into the circulatory system.

A quick speculation: Were highly active/young people (efficient lymphatic systems) more susceptible to having a larger and more damaging amount of vaccine particles reach their hearts? Muscle movement helps drive flow of fluid through the lymphatic system. Also consider, being young, they tend to have less arterial plaque built up, which may eliminate a physical barrier for gaining entry to heart tissue.

After having my interest piqued by such a blatant lie, I decided to research further into the non-integration claims that were made. Another misleading statement typically given for both the mRNA and viral vector vaccines is that they don’t have the “machinery” necessary for integration. While true about what is injected, it’s also not needed for integration to occur as the “machinery” can be ENDOGENOUS (already inherently inside our cells) or simply not necessary (as with an inadvertent integration with DNA, also called random nonhomologous recombination). Humans have endogenous reverse transcriptase encoded into LINE-1 (Long Interspersed Nuclear Element 1) which allows for any mRNA to be potentially reverse transcribed into cDNA and possibly integrated into the cellular DNA (reference the Domazet-Loso article for a more in depth explaination). Fortunately, the inadvertent integration of adenovirus vectored DNA has much more public data to access. Despite the claims that the transduced DNA remains epichromosomal, not all of it does, even if most of it remains in place. Integration occurs at a relatively stable rate, and even if it’s uncommon, it likely happens in every shot.

Read these studies to see that foreknowledge existed AND is still being observed regarding similar therapies, but is being ignored by regulators and downplayed by those who know it occurs, but believe it’s not an issue.

• Past papers showing integration using advectors.

  • https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20686029/

  • https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18773501/

• Recent pape r showing integration using advectors.

  • https://www.nature.com/articles/s41434-021-00278-2

Be prepared for detractors of this theory to say “even if it did integrate, the body deals with these issues all the time and the immune system clears the cells out”. This is not a valid argument for many reasons. Aside from the deception, wasn’t the whole point to vaccinate and protect the vulnerable, the elderly, the immune compromised? These groups were always placed first in line for the shots but not used in the initial safety trials. When your immune system is deficient, then you increase the workload by shoving foreign genetic material into your body, your risk of an integration event likely goes up, as do the pathologies that can accompany such an event (oncogenesis, latent expression, truncated gene expression, etc.).

Destroying Dogmas: Retroposition

The process that takes any mRNA in our cells and potentially integrates it back into DNA is generally called retroposition. The discovery of reverse transcriptase (RT), which translates RNA back into DNA, destroyed the theory of The Central Dogma. Retroposition took things one step further and demonstrated that this process happens within our own genome. The main understanding I want to convey is that this process occurs in all of us and is part of normal evolution, although I implore you to read the referenced studies here to really understand what is going on. Also, don’t fall for the false beliefs offered by some scientists that say they’ve got it all figured out. There’s an immense amount we don’t understand in biology and genetics. Doing anything at “warp speed” regarding permanent alterations to the immune system is hubristic at best, suicidal at worst. Having a technology doesn’t mean you have to use it. When humans first discovered fire, how long did it take before we could handle it safely? Before we could direct it effectively?

An open question: Why would a known evolutionary mechanism be exploited in a substantial portion of a population?

The earliest published example I can find regarding knowledge and estimated event rate of retroposition comes from a 1995 study by Maestre using HELA cells. His estimate would assume retroposition-mediated integration events occur in every mRNA vaccine administered. I’m hoping that the rate is lower in the current application as the following information is less optimistic for me. Relatively recently, “a team from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology in Plön and the Zoological Institute of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing now reports that this process was previously underestimated by at least a factor of one thousand.” This estimate does not account for the current modified mRNA in use, which may increase or decrease the chances of retroposition. The precautionary principle would assume an increase or equivalency until proven otherwise. Also of note in the article provided, one of the scientists, Diethard Tautz, is quoted as stating "Presumably, all mRNAs in a cell are continuously integrated into the genome. We can also assume that the mRNA of viral proteins are integrated into the genome during viral infections. However, given the abundance of endogenous mRNAs, this is unlikely to be significant. Since the germ cells are usually not affected by the integration of external mRNA, such mutations are usually not inherited”. Quite a statement given the propaganda regarding non-integration of these vaccines, especially considering that nothing in biology has fundamentally changed, save for the extra lying.

Original Planke article: https://www.mpg.de/16370408/0202-limn-the-underestimated-mutation-potential-of-retrogenes-153345-x

Original Planke paper: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2013043118

Original Maestre study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8557053/

This Is the most comprehensive explanation of how retroposition occurs and why it’s important in the current context. Please take the time to read the paper.

mRNA Vaccines: Why Is the Biology of Retroposition Ignored?

By Tomislav Domazet-Lošo

Abstract

The major advantage of mRNA vaccines over more conventional approaches is their potential for rapid development and large-scale deployment in pandemic situations. In the current COVID-19 crisis, two mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been conditionally approved and broadly applied, while others are still in clinical trials. However, there is no previous experience with the use of mRNA vaccines on a large scale in the general population. This warrants a careful evaluation of mRNA vaccine safety properties by considering all available knowledge about mRNA molecular biology and evolution. Here, I discuss the pervasive claim that mRNA-based vaccines cannot alter genomes. Surprisingly, this notion is widely stated in the mRNA vaccine literature but never supported by referencing any primary scientific papers that would specifically address this question. This discrepancy becomes even more puzzling if one considers previous work on the molecular and evolutionary aspects of retroposition in murine and human populations that clearly documents the frequent integration of mRNA molecules into genomes, including clinical contexts. By performing basic comparisons, I show that the sequence features of mRNA vaccines meet all known requirements for retroposition using L1 elements—the most abundant autonomously active retrotransposons in the human genome. In fact, many factors associated with mRNA vaccines increase the possibility of their L1-mediated retroposition. I conclude that is unfounded to a priori assume that mRNA-based therapeutics do not impact genomes and that the route to genome integration of vaccine mRNAs via endogenous L1 retroelements is easily conceivable. This implies that we urgently need experimental studies that would rigorously test for the potential retroposition of vaccine mRNAs. At present, the insertional mutagenesis safety of mRNA-based vaccines should be considered unresolved.

Source: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4425/13/5/719

WHAT ARE THE POTENTIAL DAMAGES OR INJURY?

Now that we’ve done some light reading on retroposition and how it was “ignored”, we’ll should briefly venture into one of the ways it can lead to disease.

“It is well-established that retrotransposition can occasionally result in human genetic disease. Of late there has been a great effort to determine whether these selfish genetic elements may contribute to complex diseases such as cancer, autoimmunity, and neuropsychiatric disorders.

LINE-1’s and cancer

Genomic instability is a hallmark of cancer [199]. Notably, one of the first disease-causing insertions reported was an LINE-1 insertion into the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene of a colon cancer patient described by Nakamura and colleagues [200]. That insertion was somatic as it was absent in normal colon from the patient. Likewise, a very short somatic LINE-1 insertion (112 bp) was identified from exome data using TranspoSeq analysis in exon 6 of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) of an endometrial carcinoma [201]. Two new reports further indicate that cancer can be initiated by retrotransposition-mediated gene inactivation. The first example is a full-length LINE-1 insertion located in intron 14 of the tumor-suppressor retinoblastoma 1 (RB1) which results in retinoblastoma in the proband and his father [202]. The authors’ determined that this insertion was de novo, as it was absent from the father’s parents and the proband’s brother. The insertion causes aberrant RB1 splicing due to its precise integration into the splice acceptor site.”

Source: https://mobilednajournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13100-016-0065-9

While there are many different types of diseases that may arise, we would want to pursue cancer and oncogenesis as the tissue is easier to isolate and provide a control. Note that the likelyhood of a persistant integration may still be very rare due to proper immune function clearing out defective cells, but it is also an unknown because of the “modified and optimized” nature of the synthetic mRNA.

How To Prove Vaccine Integration

The irrefutable proof we need is a cancer victim that has the specific vaccine spike sequence provably integrated into their cancer cells genome. The key lies in the “stabilizing” mutation. The description of the products goes something like this:

“The Pfizer–BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, BNT162b2, is an mRNA vaccine encoding a P2 mutant spike protein (PS 2) and formulated as an RNA–lipid nanoparticle of nucleoside-modified mRNA (modRNA)”

From WHO’s “Background document on the mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) against COVID-19”

WHO reference number: WHO/2019-nCoV/vaccines/SAGE_recommendation/BNT162b2/background/2021.1

What this actually looks like in code (pardon the delusional praise portion):

“The actual Spike protein

The next 3777 characters of the vaccine RNA are similarly ‘codon optimized’ to add a lot of C’s and G’s. In the interest of space I won’t list all the code here, but we are going to zoom in on one exceptionally special bit. This is the bit that makes it work, the part that will actually help us return to life as normal:

                  *   *
          L   D   K   V   E   A   E   V   Q   I   D   R   L   I   T   G
Virus:   CUU GAC AAA GUU GAG GCU GAA GUG CAA AUU GAU AGG UUG AUC ACA GGC
Vaccine: CUG GAC CCU CCU GAG GCC GAG GUG CAG AUC GAC AGA CUG AUC ACA GGC
          L   D   P   P   E   A   E   V   Q   I   D   R   L   I   T   G
           !     !!! !!        !   !       !   !   !   ! !              

Here we see the usual synonymous RNA changes. For example, in the first codon we see that CUU is changed into CUG. This adds another ‘G’ to the vaccine, which we know helps enhance protein production. Both CUU and CUG encode for the amino acid ‘L’ or Leucine, so nothing changed in the protein.

When we compare the entire Spike protein in the vaccine, all changes are synonymous like this.. except for two, and this is what we see here.

The third and fourth codons above represent actual changes. The K and V amino acids there are both replaced by ‘P’ or Proline. For ‘K’ this required three changes (’!!!’) and for ‘V’ it required only two (’!!’).”

Source: https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/reverse-engineering-source-code-of-the-biontech-pfizer-vaccine/

Finding this specific coding sequence integrated into human cancer tissue DNA gives the incontrovertible proof of harm caused by the vaccine in the way that also proves false claims were made regarding integration.

I’d hope punitive damages will apply as well due to the unprecedented nature of being genomically violated.

A recap:

1. There was intentional deception regarding integration for monetary gain and a logical understanding that less vaccines would be sold and used as a result of full disclosure of risk.

2. There was no legal precedent to introduce genetic therapy vaccines for a novel respiratory infection, nor any factual data that it would be more beneficial than harmful over time.

3. There was total disregard of integration/retroposition, and even promotion of non-integration as a sales point that used no factual data, and would always carry the risk of insertional mutagenesis and possible oncogenesis as well as other pathologies. The probability of integration/retroposition events occurring in every dose is almost guaranteed, and no one can accurately tell you how damaging that may be over time.

In my previous article I outlined the fast approaching maelstrom of inherently mutagenic therapies being introduced into our world, all riding on the false “success” of these gene therapy based vaccines. “Safe and effective” has become a Goebbelesque incantation that would make Orwell’s INGSOC party proud. Safety had never been properly established. Current observed rates of subclinical myocarditis range from around 0.62-2.3% in various risk groups and the relatively easy to perform study that Pfizer (the mRNA shot with lower myocarditis risk) was ordered to submit to the FDA by December 2022 has been granted an extension, even though this was an established adverse event in May 2021. Who cares if around 1% of all recipients has some heart damage after a shot right? What could possibly go wrong?

Thai myocarditis study in adolecents: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36006288/

4^th dose myocarditis study: https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC9538001

When I asked the CDC to conduct this study themselves via a tweet in July of 2022, I was permanently suspended from the platform, likely a tactic of government censorship through Twitter. Also of note, Twitter was running promoted advertisements from Pfizer at the time of my suspension. Seems like a massive conflict of interest and collusion to silence safety concerns for profits. There’s a very good reason why the public was never given all of the raw data from the “Twitter files”.

I sincerely hope that I’m wrong about the dangers of vaccine-related integration events. This level of corruption, greed, incompetence, and malice is not a pleasant reality to sit in, but I believe it to be true. I don’t know what the future will hold, but I hope we can make it better than what is being projected, and I believe my proposal is worth pursuing to accomplish this.

A word of caution. Pursuing this may be dangerous. These platforms could be worth trillions over time. I shouldn’t have to say any more than that.

Thank you for reading, and good luck to us all.

Edit: Dates were changed on the previous FDA guideline on long-term follow-up to reflect accuracy. 5/29/2023