New Research Shows Pfizer’s mRNA Vaccine Can Instruct Cells To Produce ‘off-target’ Proteins

In addition to spike protein, Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine can instruct cells to produce other ‘off-target’ proteins, which are foreign to the immune system.

Set Your Pulse: Take a breath. Turn your attention to your body and release any tension. Breathe slowly into the area of your heart for 60 seconds, focusing on feeling a sense of ease. Stay connected to your body as you read. Click here to learn why we suggest this.

---

Since the rollout of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, experts and academics from around the world have been raising numerous short-term and long-term safety concerns. One of these deals with the spike protein that the human cell is instructed to generate as a result of the shot, and how it differs from the spike protein that’s generated from a natural infection.

A “pseudouridine” molecule has been added to the mRNA to give it a longer half-life than normal mRNA. Therefore, the production of spike protein within the cell, of those who have been vaccinated, is not being turned off. The implications of this are not well understood, and it is unknown for how long spike protein production continues within the cell.

This is concerning because multiple studies have shown that the vaccine induced spike protein can leak outside of the cell and enter into the blood- stream. This is one possible mechanism of action in which vaccine injuries are occurring.

Hindsight is always interesting. Writing about this I think back to an article published in the British Medical Journal by one of their senior editors, Dr. Peter Doshi. In it, he raised concerns about the bio-distribution of the vaccine. Bio-distribution refers to the examination and study of where the vaccine and its ingredients go once injected into the body. This article was published in May 2021.

“Pfizer and Moderna did not respond to The BMJ’s questions regarding why no biodistribution studies were conducted on their novel mRNA products, and none of the companies, nor the FDA, would say whether new biodistribution studies will be required prior to licensure.”

But studies quickly emerged. A May 2021 study was published showing that spike protein could be detected in the blood of 11 of the 13 participants following vaccination with the Moderna mRNA vaccine.

A study by Röltgen et al. published in early 2022 found that the vaccine mRNA can persist in the body for up to 60 days, with 60 days being the end point of their study. It would be interesting to see a study up to one year post-vaccination, but even 60 days is concerning.

A March 2022 study published in the journal Cell, showed that vaccine-derived spike protein and mRNA persist for up to two months in the germinal centres of lymph nodes.

During an autopsy of a vaccinated person who had died after mRNA vaccination, it was found that the vaccine disperses rapidly from the injection site and can be found in nearly all parts of the body. These findings were published in June 2021 in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases.

Pharmacokinetics data provided by Pfizer to the European Medicines Agency (EMA) also showed that the contents of the vaccine did not stay at the injection site, and that one major site of distribution was the liver. As a result, the animals that received the Pfizer injection experienced adverse effects. The vaccine contents are distributed by what are called Lipid Nanoparticles (LNP), and it has been shown that empty LNP without mRNA does not result in any significant liver injury.

In a study published on January 3, 2023, in the journal Circulation, the authors describe how “free spike antigen” was “detected in blood of adolescents & young adults who developed post-mRNA vaccine myocarditis, advancing insight into the potential underlying cause” of vaccine induced myocarditis.

The researchers collected blood from 16 patients who were hospitalized at Massachusetts General for Children or Boston Children’s Hospital for myocarditis shortly after COVID-19 vaccination. The collection was done from January 2021 through February 2022, and their results were compared with those of 45 healthy, asymptomatic, age-matched vaccinated control subjects.

The spike protein was detected in the blood of adolescents and young adults who developed post-mRNA vaccine myocarditis, but not in the healthy control subjects who didn’t.

Perhaps this is why these companies didn’t respond to the BMJ at the time?

But the main point of this article is the fact that the spike protein generated from mRNA shots is not the same as that of natural infection, and what problems this may cause. With the genetic vaccines, our body is getting a code to manufacture a “fake” version of the COVID-19 spike protein. It’s being manufactured inside cells, inside the cytoplasm. Again, the amount of spike protein that’s being generated as a result of this is unknown. There are so many concerns with this that require further study.

Professor Nikolai Petrovsky from Flinders University in South Australia, who developed a protein-based vaccine called COVAX-19 (or Spikogen) which received emergency use authorization in Iran, explains,

“With the genetic vaccines, the spike protein is being manufactured inside cells (in the cytoplasm) and the amount of spike protein being made is unknown. This spike protein may interfere with normal cellular functions and also may go to the nucleus. After all this is what the virus itself does, which is to express spike protein inside your cells as part of its takeover of your cellular machinery.”

Early last year Dr. Bonnie Mallard, Professor, BSc, MSc, PhD from the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, was one of many experts in the field to explain that there are differences between natural spike protein and the one generated from the shots.

“This spike protein may interfere with normal cellular functions and also may go to the nucleus. After all this is what the virus itself does, which is to express spike protein inside your cells as part of its takeover of your cellular machinery.

These are genetic vaccines, and so you get the recipe for the spike, you don’t get the spike protein, and so you’re given the recipe. And each individual, man woman or child, has their own metabolism, their own genetics and they will produce different amounts of spike. So, clearly, when you take a drug that you did not know what dose you were taking, and that every person was getting some different dose, I don’t think so.

And nobody knows that, and that’s the problem. So one, you don’t know the dose and it’s in lipid nano particles which we know deliver the message for spike throughout the body. And so normally for vaccines you want them to stay in the muscles and draining lymph-nodes. You don’t want the foreign protein to go everywhere and be widely distributed, particularly when the spike protein is not the same as the spike protein on the virus, it’s being modified, it’s synthetic and it has different characteristics and one of the characteristics it now seems that we’re coming to understand is that it stays in the circulation and in certain cells such as exosomes, little bubbles which allow communication between cells and non classical monocytes.“

In that interview, she explained that as we go further, we will find out more.

The Latest Research

So what do we know today? The latest research comes from a study, published last December in Nature. The study, conducted by UK researchers, found that in addition to spike protein, Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine can instruct cells to produce other ‘off-target’ proteins, which are foreign to the immune system.

This concerning issue, again, seems to be a result of how the mRNA in the vaccine has been genetically modified, which, again, instructs our cells to manufacture the spike protein.

The researchers say that ribosomes, which are responsible for decoding the mRNA in cells, can slip and misread the coded instructions about 8% of the time - known as “ribosomal frameshifting.” This also has to do with the ‘N1-methyl pseudouridine’ that was mentioned earlier in the article.

This study made some noise, the BBC even covered it, characterizing the discovery as completely harmless when it comes to mRNA gene translation.

A press briefing was held and the study researchers insisted there were no safety concerns, and that their findings did not indicate the mRNA vaccines were unsafe.

Science.org covered the story. They said there was “nothing alarming” about the study, and interviewed experts who reiterated the absence of adverse events associated with these off-target proteins.

But big media only seems to be covering one perspective here. And work on these issues cannot be published in reputable journals unless the premise of “safe and effective” is always mentioned. This is the politicization of science, we see it with climate science as well. Here’s one great example I recently wrote about.

Dr. David Wiseman, a PhD Research Bioscientist with a background in pharmacy, pharmacology, immunology and experimental pathology who was one of the top 66 research scientists at Johnson & Johnson where he headed up research and development, was interviewed about the issue by Maryanne Demasi:

“I’m very concerned. This raises more questions about the long-term safety of the mRNA vaccines.

Well, these researchers asked a simple question – are the instructions contained within the mRNA of the vaccines being faithfully carried out.  Or put another way, does the body make the spike protein it’s supposed to make, as instructed by the mRNA’s code.

It’s like saying here’s a recipe with instructions on how to make a cake – it’s grandma’s cake recipe. These researchers wanted to know if the mRNA could accurately give instructions on how to make Grandma’s cake or whether it would produce a corrupted version of grandma’s cake.

These researchers obviously knew from the literature that modifying some of the bases in the vaccine’s RNA - as was the case for the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines – that it might cause misreads of different kinds. It’s known as ‘frameshifting.’”

You can read the rest of the interview here for more depth and understanding. Wiseman and some of his colleagues also left a response/comment on the paper

The point is that concerns are being raised, and looking into these concerns is important to figure out why so many COVID vaccine injuries around the world have been reported compared to previous vaccines.

This article specifically focuses on the natural spike protein compared to the genetically modified one our cells are instructed to make from the shot. This could be the core of some of the problems and vaccine injuries that we have been seeing.

Approximately 50 percent of vaccine injuries reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) in the last 30 years have all been from COVID products.

Concerning autopsy results have also been published. It’s quite clear something very serious about these shots is and has been ignored.

“Our legacy media has not done a good job in providing balanced coverage about the vaccines" and that "we're not getting the information we need to make better choices and to have a more informed understanding of risk and benefit.

“It was very unfortunate, that from the beginning, what was presented to us by public health officials was a picture of great certainty…but the reality was that there were extremely important unknowns. We entered a situation where essentially the stakes became too high to later present that uncertainty to people...I think that's what set us off on the wrong foot. Public officials should have been a lot more forthright about the gaps in our knowledge

They should immediately be warning people about this safety signal that we found, and they should immediately be replicating our analysis -- the data are indicating there’s increased risk at a level that is much higher than has previously been realized.”

Dr Peter Doshi, Senior Editor at the British Medical Journal