Unintended Consequences: Dirty Genes in Vaccines

Unintended Consequences: Dirty Genes in Vaccines

What happens when our government regulatory agencies tasked with protecting the public’s health fails to disclose the risks known by the industry?

In the case of viruses and DNA in vaccines, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has internally noted1 that “small amounts of residual cell substrate DNA unavoidably occur in all viral vaccines as well as other biologics produced using cell substrates. There are several potential ways DNA could be a risk factor. DNA can be oncogenic or infectious; in addition, it can cause insertion mutagenesis through integration into the host genome.”

Since all vaccines contain residual DNA that has a potential to be oncogenic (causing cancer), mutagenic (changing your genetic code), and infectious, isn’t it of major concern that section 13 of every vaccine package insert2 states that the product has not been evaluated for carcinogenic (causing cancer) or mutagenic effects?

The FDA continues3: “The use of human tumor-derived cell lines poses added safety concerns regarding the potential presence of unexpected and unknown viruses. These include viruses that may be present in the cell line due to their existence in the patient tissue such as oncogenic, latent DNA viruses (e.g., adenovirus, hepadenoviruses, herpesviruses, papillomaviruses, polyomaviruses) and endogenous retroviruses (ERVs), which exist normally in a quiescent state in the host cell DNA of all species…”

This suggests that these viruses are sleeping and inactive, currently not expressing, and have the full potential to cause infection if they are woken from this sleep. These quiet and sleeping viruses can only be detected in the cells used to make vaccines if they are activated making their presence; and then their detection is quite problematic. This is an issue for all cell strains used to make vaccines and is not unique to human tumorigenic cells.

Genetic engineer Dr. Theresa Deisher, a PhD in Molecular and Cellular Physiology from Stanford University with over 20 years experience in biotechnology, reports that “not only damaged human cells, but also healthy human cells can take up foreign DNA spontaneously. Foreign human DNA taken up by human cells will be transported into nuclei and be integrated into host genome, which will cause phenotype change.”

So here we have proof that the human DNA in the following vaccines has the potential to cause genetic changes in every child who receives them:

  1. Measles, Mumps, Rubella vaccine/MMR
  2. Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Poliomyelitis vaccine (DTaP/TdP)
  3. Varicella (Chickenpox) Vaccine & Shingles (zoster) vaccine
  4. Hepatitis A vaccine
  5. Rabies vaccine
  6. Polio vaccine
  7. Haemophilus influenzae

According the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and depending on the products used, a child has the potential to receive up to six separate injections that contain residual human DNA by the time they are two years old.

The FDA goes on to discuss the safety aspect of residual DNA in vaccines: Dr. Peden, Chief of the Laboratory of DNA Viruses at the FDA, states that “it depends on the mechanism of transformation. For example, mutations, chromosome rearrangements, translocations, retrotranspositions, etc., all involve DNA. Therefore, reducing the size and amount of the DNA should mitigate this risk(bold emphasis added).

The conclusion that DNA size will reduce the risk of mutagenesis and infection is based on nothing more than a belief. Research shows us4 that in mammals, such as humans, the genetic code is highly repetitive, meaning it is homologous (similar in structure). Small fragments of DNA are used to achieve genetic modification in a therapeutic manner. It is not much of a stretch to assume this same observation occurs in a non-therapeutic manner as well: “Homologous Replacement is used to modify specific gene sequences of chromosomal DNA in a process referred to as ‘Small Fragment Homologous Replacement’, where DNA fragments replace genomic target resulting in specific sequence changes.”

Studies show that it is a matter of an individual’s genetics5 that increases their risk and susceptibility to the infectious nature of DNA and insertion mutagenesis (bold emphasis added):

“Residual DNA (rDNA) is comprised of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) fragments and longer length molecules originating from the host organism that may be present in samples from recombinant biological processes. Although similar in basic structural base pair units, rDNA may exist in different sizes and physical forms. Interest in measuring rDNA in recombinant products is based primarily on demonstration of effective purification during manufacturing, but also on some hypothetical concerns that, in rare cases, depending on the host expression system, some DNA sequences may be potentially infectious or oncogenic (e.g., HIV virus and the Ras oncogene, respectively).”

Dr. Peden goes on to say that in primary cells and diploid cells there are no limits for the amount of DNA in vaccines”. That means these safety measures to limit the amount of residual DNA does not apply to live virus vaccines grown in human diploid cells such as the MMR and varicella.

In addition to the abomination of genetically modifying our children through insertion mutagenesis of male and female human diploid cell strain DNA without disclosure, is the other elephant in the room: the presence of human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K) that was found in MMRII and VARIVAX.6 It is important to note it was the WI-38 and MRC-5 cell strains that contain this contaminant and as such, any and all products used with these cell lines will contain HERV-K.

Human endogenous retrovirus (HERV) is associated with a myriad of chronic disease states7: “Several mechanisms by which HERVs could produce pathological effects have been proposed, including generation of new variants of HERVs, insertional mutagenesis, and protein toxicity. In this regard, HERV activation appears to influence the aggressiveness of different cancers, including seminoma, melanoma, leukemia, hepatocellular carcinoma, sarcoma, prostate, breast and colon cancer. Likewise, the pathologic process of rheumatic disorders, systemic lupus erythematosus, multiple sclerosis, autism spectrum disorders, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, psoriasis, type I diabetes, and systemic sclerosis shows a correlation with HERV activity.”

Childhood cancers8 are on the rise and we cannot underestimate the role directly injecting HERV-K has on this observation. Especially when it is directly associated with leukemia9 as can be seen here: “In patients with leukemia, the presence of antibodies against HERV-K has been identified, which could suggest increased expression of HERV-K in leukemic cells.”

And here10: “Antibody response against HERV-K peptides has been reported in leukemia patients, suggesting a possible over-expression of this sequence in leukemic cells.”

Here we see that herpesviruses are shown to reactivate HERV,11 “Herpesviruses may also be a significant trigger of HERV expression in the CNS. Multiple reports have detected EBV, herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1), varicella-zoster virus (VZV), and human herpesvirus type 6 (HHV-6) in MS patient samples; all these herpesviruses have also been demonstrated to trigger the expression of HERVs.”

It should be highly concerning to all that we find HERV-K in the presence of a live herpesvirus, as is the case with VARIVAX (varicella-zoster).

Given the above information, it seems that all vaccines are inherently dangerous and each individual, not a government agency, should be making their own risk-to-benefit analysis for using these products. It also means that we are all participating in an experiment to which we did not consent and from which we are still learning about the unintended consequences of consuming such products. It is not a secret—although rarely discussed by various media outlets and medical professionals we entrust with our children—that the infections we have vaccines for were acute, self-limited, common, childhood infections, as can be seen here in this very well-researched article.12

Prior to vaccination your risk of dying from these infections was still less than your risk of dying from a lightning strike, choking, or falling in the shower. It was uncommon for a child to experience an adverse outcome from these infections. Just like it is uncommon for a child to experience an adverse outcome with vaccination, perhaps we have exchanged one genetically susceptible child with another?

Dr. James Lyons-Weiler said it best13: “If we as a society enjoy collective benefit from protection from infectious diseases due to vaccines, then we as a society share the collective responsibility to protect those who are the greatest risk of harm from vaccines. Enough with the propaganda that says there is no risk; enough. Genetics and careful attention to reliable risk factors will play a fundamental role in protecting those among us who are most susceptible…”.

Now that 54% of our children14 suffer from at least one of 20 chronic illnesses, including neurodevelopmental disorders, seizure disorders, severe allergies, autoimmune conditions, and cancer, we begin to realize that if you have a healthy child you are now a minority. Perhaps it is time to return to our roots and embrace natural medicines. Perhaps it is time to stop putting faith in pharmaceuticals and the doctors who exclusively prescribe them. Perhaps it is time we separate pharma and state.


Note: This article was reprinted with the author’s permission. It was originally published by IPAK Modern Medicine and Health News. Michelle Cotterman, RN APP is a co-founder of Health Freedom Ohio. She is the mother of two naturally raised children. Her continuing education focuses on Holistic Health and includes Polarity Therapy, Homeopathy, and Herbalism. Michelle has been studying the science behind vaccines and the vaccine industry since 2010.

This article or commentary provides referenced information and perspective on a topic related to vaccine science, policy, law or ethics being discussed in public forums and by U.S. lawmakers. The websites of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) provide information and perspective of federal agencies responsible for vaccine research, development, regulation and policymaking.

References:

1 U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Briefing Document. Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting September 19, 2012: Cell Lines Derived from Human Tumors for Vaccine Manufacture. National Technical Reports Library 2012
2
FDA. Vaccines Licensed for Use in the United States. FDA.gov May 9, 2019.
3
FDA. Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research: Meeting of The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC). Sept. 19, 2012.
4
Luchetti A, Filareto A, Sanchez M, Ferraguti G, Lucarelli M, Novelli G, Sangiuolo F, Malgieri A. Small fragment homologous replacement: evaluation of factors influencing modification efficiency in an eukaryotic assay system. PLoS One 2012.
5
Wang X, Wang G, Morgan DM, Mozier NM. Residual DNA analysis in biologics development: Review of measurement and quantitation technologies and future directions. Biotechnology and Bioengineering February 2012; 109(2): 307-17.
6
Victoria JG, Wang C, Jones MS, Jaing C, McLoughlin K, Gardner S, Delwart EL. Viral Nucleic Acids in Live-Attenuated Vaccines: Detection of Minority Variants and an Adventitious Virus. Journal of Virology June 2010, p. 6033–6040.
7
Balestrieri E, Argaw-Denboba A, Gambacurta A, Cipriani C, Bei R, Serafino A, Sinibaldi-Vallebona P, Matteucci C. Human Endogenous Retrovirus K in the Crosstalk Between Cancer Cells Microenvironment and Plasticity: A New Perspective for Combination Therapy. Front Microbiol July 2, 2018.
8
Number of Diagnoses. CureSearch for Children’s Cancer.
9
Januszkiewicz-Lewandowska D, Nowicka K, Rembowska J, Fichna M, Żurawek M, Derwich K, Nowak J. Env gene expression of human endogenous retrovirus-k and human endogenous retrovirus-w in childhood acute leukemia cells. Acta Haematol 2013; 129(4): 232-7.
10
Depil S, Roche C, Dussart P, Prin L. Expression of a human endogenous retrovirus, HERV-K, in the blood cells of leukemia patients. Leukemia February 2002; 16(2): 254-9.
11
Douville RN, Avindra N. Human endogenous retroviruses and the nervous system. Handb Clin Neurol 2014; 123: 465–485.
12
Medium.
13
Lyons-Weiler J. Latest Book: Environmental and Genetic Causes of Autism (Skyhorse). JamesLyonsWeiler.com.
14
Bethell CD, Kogan MD, Strickland BB, Schor EL, Robertson J, Newacheck PW. A National and State Profile of Leading Health Problems and Health Care Quality for US Children: Key Insurance Disparities and Across-State Variations. Academic Pediatrics May-June 2011; 11(3): S22-S33.

13 Responses to "Unintended Consequences: Dirty Genes in Vaccines"

  1. INGRID C DURDEN   May 16, 2019 at 7:49 am

    So true. Instead of pumping all kinds of chemicals into the body, why not use the tried and true herbal medicine, that in some case has been around for thousands of years ? Pharmacopee exist from long time ago, until recently there was no chemical medicine. These things work ! For most prescription, it is so recent there is not even an evaluation of how it works on people. I do not want to be the lab mouse on which the med is tested ! I use herbal med. Have been for a long time. Only in cases I cannot solve myself I go to the doctor. Haven’t been to doctor in 10 years. Doctor’s office is where all the sick people are. I do not want to get sick !

    Reply
  2. Terry   May 16, 2019 at 7:53 am

    Can this article be shared on facebook? This article may help those prone to cancers as well as auto-immune disease take pause. I wonder if vaccines are to more protect those with illnesses that are supported by medications that lower immune system function, rather than healthier persons who can or could very well tolerate childhood illness & develop a more reliable permanent immunity such as most born before 1957? If some one has low IgG.IgA and low IgM I believe they may have lower response to vaccines, as well experience more short term or long term side affects including auto-immune diseases such as increasing allergies, cancers, joint issues, chronic fatigue. Where is the science?

    Reply
  3. Hannah   May 16, 2019 at 12:05 pm

    Reference number 12 is not accessible. Is this yet another example of media censorship of the government’s sacred cow? Can you please give us a more detailed reference so we can access with Wayback. Thank you!

    Reply
    • Lori Workinger   August 6, 2019 at 5:11 pm

      That’s because it doesn’t reference anything lol..

      Reply
  4. SK   May 16, 2019 at 12:41 pm

    You listed DTap and TdP as having Poliomyelitis in it. It does not. Only Tdap-IPV does.

    Reply
  5. Susan   May 16, 2019 at 2:02 pm

    A very good article. Needs to be disseminated. As a child, I had measles, mumps, chicken pox etc. No harm done whatsoever and not really sick. All my classmates had the same and no one died or was out of school for more than 3 days. All this Chicken Little politics and Big Pharma are trying to unwarranted fear to manipulate people into spending more on meds. They benefit considerably if the victim contracts a really serious disease so our ill-health is their upside and our downside. A very dysfunctional system.

    Reply
  6. Paula Bona   May 16, 2019 at 3:22 pm

    I hope these kinds of researched articles are being shared with media and perhaps sooner than later journalists will have the courage to learn more and report more accurately regarding why more of the public is becoming concerned about the number, necessity, and safety of vaccines flooding the market!!

    Reply
  7. Jas   May 16, 2019 at 5:22 pm

    ““Residual DNA (rDNA) is comprised of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) fragments and longer length molecules originating from the host organism that may be present in samples from recombinant biological processes. Although similar in basic structural base pair units, rDNA may exist in different sizes and physical forms. Interest in measuring rDNA in recombinant products is based primarily on demonstration of effective purification during manufacturing, but also on some hypothetical concerns that, in rare cases, depending on the host expression system, some DNA sequences may be potentially infectious or oncogenic (e.g., HIV virus and the Ras oncogene, respectively).”

    This concern is tempest in teapot. Yes, cellular debris is everywhere in our bodies. Fragments of DNA, dead cells, killed virus etc….all part of it and non-issue. PCR could detect them but why? No point. They’re a non-threat. Oncogenic? No. Gene mutation only happens after aneuploidy. and then cell is non-viable. Until and when, enough toxin/carcinogen (not DNA virus as is claimed now in Cancer of cervix) is involved that a new cell karyotype (species) survives and initiates cancer. Gene camp won’t give up their claim that mutation causes cancer. It doesn’t hold due to Kochs Postulates. Damaged genes are repaired quickly.

    “Human endogenous retrovirus (HERV) is associated with a myriad of chronic disease states7: “Several mechanisms by which HERVs could produce pathological effects have been proposed, including generation of new variants of HERVs, insertional mutagenesis, and protein toxicity. In this regard, HERV activation appears to influence the aggressiveness of different cancers, including seminoma, melanoma, leukemia, hepatocellular carcinoma, sarcoma, prostate, breast and colon cancer. Likewise, the pathologic process of rheumatic disorders, systemic lupus erythematosus, multiple sclerosis, autism spectrum disorders, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, psoriasis, type I diabetes, and systemic sclerosis shows a correlation with HERV activity.”

    HERV? Really? This is all conjecture, dissembling, (ignorance?) guesswork etc… All this has been settled long ago in NIxons Cancer Virus Program. Retrovirus have been know to be a part of tumors in chickens (Rous RV) and were studied because of that as a catalyst for anaplasia in humans. Unsuccessful. No causation in humans. Retrovirus are harmless passenger or associated virus long known to science. They are RNA meaning when they enter a cell they bind rna first thus the name retro. They do not kill the cell (non-cytotoxic) and thus the thought that they could be cause of cancer in humans. Funding dried up, CDC looking for $$….wha la! HIV!! Another harmless retrovirus gets the blame for a misdiagnosed disease. HERV, a ridiculous acronym, as endogenous only means within the body. There are millions-billions of retrovirus within us. Blaming them for disease is scientific obfuscation and effort to keep research money flowing.

    Overall this article conflates and confounds readers in it’s presenting of all childhood diseases as likely a cause of “contaminated” vaccines. Yes I agree vaccines can harm but gene susceptibility, DNA fragments and retrovirus has nothing to do with it.

    Reply
    • cnico   June 17, 2019 at 12:42 am

      Jas… you say “Yes, cellular debris is everywhere in our bodies. Fragments of DNA, dead cells, killed virus etc….all part of it and non-issue.” Yes, that is true… but it is OUR DNA.

      In addition to fetal cell DNA, vaccines contain insect, cow, chicken, and swine DNA. That is a lot different than our DNA detritus, wouldn’t you agree?

      The FDA states, “DNA can be oncogenic or infectious; in addition, it can cause insertion mutagenesis through integration into the host genome.””

      Don’t you agree that the foreign human, animal and insect DNA can insert themselves into our DNA strands? Doesn’t that give you some concern? Thank you.

      Reply
  8. Melinda   May 17, 2019 at 7:47 am

    Wow! Very well written. Thank you for explaining all of that!

    Reply
  9. Lara   June 29, 2019 at 12:26 pm

    Thank you

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.