I find this arena all very interesting, but at the same time I feel like it's a lot of dead ends and conjecture. We do have to remember that pharmaceutical and biotech companies will patent anything under the sun. Also, we would need to address the sequence not being divisible by 3 and so is the entire sequence an insertion, or is only a fragment of it. And that's more of a superficial take. This type of stuff requires a lot more investigation and more conclusive evidence.
I'm a bit concerned that people may be more focused on starting with a lead and then finding evidence to validate it, rather than looking for information and seeing how they fit together. All of us are rightly concerned about the origins of COVID as well as how safe these vaccines are, but I also feel like this will eventually lead people down routes that lead nowhere.
We should not be so quick to evoke "because Moderna" or "because the Great Reset" for anything that seems out of line. We all need sensible ideas, especially when the environment is willing to find any way to attack dissenters or those who may stray from the mainstream narrative.
Also, thank you for adding my post! It was heavily truncated and there's so much more I could ramble on about but it was already quite excessive. I hope several people weigh in and provide their own opinions!
Presumably codons were knocked out of adjacent words, or there was some kind of double-insert with an HIV strand that happened to be X3 -1, I can't really parse what it is that the "theory" wants to claim actually went down. There were some bars and arrows. I also can't figure out why it wasn't reversed, unless Moderna patented an antisense DNA strand, but maybe that's a noob misunderstanding on my part (edit: it was. I am horrendous at rotating things in my head).
So much of the "this demands further investigation" papers seem to overlap with the "this looks like it was inserted just to insert something and scare people with papers about it" parts of the virus, which makes me suspicious of the papers.
We're saying the right things, but we're not saying them to the right people, or not the right way. Pockets of resistance on substack won't win the war. Rational arguments aren't working. Malone's March on DC didn't make any difference. Do we need to change our tactics, or head for the hills?? Maybe if we get the right people in congress in january they can end the madness. Maybe litigation will work. If that doesn't work, expect hard times ahead.
And Igor's posts are excellent. But irrelevant. Doesn't really matter where it came from if it's safe and effective. It's not. Origin is a distraction, to be adjudicated after we win the war, Nuremberg style. The war needs to focus on whether the benefits exceed the risks Apparently not. We need to focus on whether governments or their commercial agents can coerce people to take an injection they don't need and wouldn't want if they knew the risks. We need to focus on whether governments and their agents can withhold information needed to make that decision, or to prohibit competing therapies. We need to focus on showing the world the failures of governments and the medical industry, prosecute the perpetrators, and reform them to ensure it doesn't happen again. Anything else, and it will happen again. Probably worse.
It is relevant in at least one specific sense: as someone who had covid, and no vax, should I start worrying about cancers more than I should otherwise?
If the motif came from a mirrored (but not actually reversed, which I am still having trouble figuring out; (edit: never mind, this was just my perpetual difficulty with mentally rotating things) MSH3 gene, the resulting motif is nonetheless very common-place: three Rs in one place, with smaller surrounding residues. Though, the motif is also backward (edit: this one was not a mistake - https://academic.oup.com/peds/article/17/1/107/1571475 - I can at least tell when four letters are backward), which no one seems to be commenting on - but backward or not, putting a lot of Rs in one place is a common theme in activating cleavage. Rs are giant dangling positive charges. Just one is enough to get the point across, multiple leads to cleavage. Again this is already routine in loads of the proteins we form all the time, otherwise we wouldn’t have any idea of what the motif does because nature is often much more subtle.
If the modified R spelling (which is carried over in the virus code) has an effect, then that would be a separate issue - but considering how much else the virus is doing - like destroying cells and pumping out a billion spikes - a few odd nucleotide swaps in the mRNA probably has no measurable effect to the host. If the mRNA leaves the infection site it is degraded. This isn’t like the injections where the factory has inserted modRNA, the virus is made in other host cells and followed the normal transcription process.
Again as far as the MSH3’s natural role, it already has the residue sequence that potentially spells a partial furin cleavage, depending on spelling choices on both ends. So does probably every other coding gene. Once you put human codon spelling changes on both ends, you can create a double-R reflection out of anything.
Cancer is usually a slow motion problem, so we probably won't know for a while whether this episode, either virus or vax, increases cancers. But we're getting better at treating them so they seem likely to become less of a problem. A day at the beach or a burger and fries is probably more cancer risk than infections in healthy people. Some people have genetic predispositions so it's probably useful to get a gene test. Even if you're safe, the reports are fun.
But that's exactly the point. The coincidence is built in - furin cleaves when there are three Rs in a sequence of 4 residues. The codons in question add two R's next to an existing one to satisfy the requirements, exactly where S1 and S2 require cleavage to enable the spring-loaded heptad repeats to perform cell fusion - exactly where nature would put a furin cleavage site, and exactly where a human editing the code would as well. But the code is not "signed" by nature - it doesn't have the virus's preferred spelling of R.
So you can either conclude that a human put some R's there on purpose (and maybe made them resemble an existing patent), or that a human put some R's there by miraculous accident while writing a patent that is the size of an encyclopedia. Which is actually more likely?
I have yet to see where there is any actual MSH3 mutation, though again I was unsuccessful in my efforts to verify / debunk the same. Moderna's patent is for mRNA - if you shoot mRNA for MSH3 into cells, they will make MSH3. The mutations in the patent concern mRNA modification, in other words modRNA, as is already acknowledged to be in the injections with totally unknowable long term harms.
*Non*-mutated MSH3 mRNA can actually be carcinogenic on its own, really (because MSH3 is supposed to "leave room" for MSH2 to get first dibs at dimerizing with MSH6, because short DNA errors are more common than long ones) - so to say that "mutated MSH3 could be carcinogenic" is a bit redundant.
So, it's all semi-redundant. The virus appears engineered, the injections appear engineered AND deadly. I think there is some sort of concerted effort to make it look like the engineering of the virus was an "accident" because otherwise we would look at results so far and say, "so *this* is all they could come up with for a super-virus"?
Bancel was asked about it several times on CNBC and didn’t outright deny it or laugh it off, instead he repeated a noncommittal answer that he had scientists looking into it. Very strange.
Feb 25, 2022·edited Feb 25, 2022Liked by Brian Mowrey
From what I could see, Moderna went patent mad when they got some cash injections and registered anything and everything.
Patent trolls make money without making any products, and Moderna hadn't made a viable product at the time of the patent registrations, so it made sense right?
It did look very suss though, and I can imagine given the tenor of the times, that finding boogie men is easy to do / believe in.
The patent just literally lists everything that is known about mMRNA and/or drug delivery. "And maybe we'll put a virus gene in if there's no 5'cap but remember the virus gene will be synthetic nucleotides and who knows maybe we'll beam it into people with satellites"
I find this arena all very interesting, but at the same time I feel like it's a lot of dead ends and conjecture. We do have to remember that pharmaceutical and biotech companies will patent anything under the sun. Also, we would need to address the sequence not being divisible by 3 and so is the entire sequence an insertion, or is only a fragment of it. And that's more of a superficial take. This type of stuff requires a lot more investigation and more conclusive evidence.
I'm a bit concerned that people may be more focused on starting with a lead and then finding evidence to validate it, rather than looking for information and seeing how they fit together. All of us are rightly concerned about the origins of COVID as well as how safe these vaccines are, but I also feel like this will eventually lead people down routes that lead nowhere.
We should not be so quick to evoke "because Moderna" or "because the Great Reset" for anything that seems out of line. We all need sensible ideas, especially when the environment is willing to find any way to attack dissenters or those who may stray from the mainstream narrative.
Also, thank you for adding my post! It was heavily truncated and there's so much more I could ramble on about but it was already quite excessive. I hope several people weigh in and provide their own opinions!
Presumably codons were knocked out of adjacent words, or there was some kind of double-insert with an HIV strand that happened to be X3 -1, I can't really parse what it is that the "theory" wants to claim actually went down. There were some bars and arrows. I also can't figure out why it wasn't reversed, unless Moderna patented an antisense DNA strand, but maybe that's a noob misunderstanding on my part (edit: it was. I am horrendous at rotating things in my head).
So much of the "this demands further investigation" papers seem to overlap with the "this looks like it was inserted just to insert something and scare people with papers about it" parts of the virus, which makes me suspicious of the papers.
We're saying the right things, but we're not saying them to the right people, or not the right way. Pockets of resistance on substack won't win the war. Rational arguments aren't working. Malone's March on DC didn't make any difference. Do we need to change our tactics, or head for the hills?? Maybe if we get the right people in congress in january they can end the madness. Maybe litigation will work. If that doesn't work, expect hard times ahead.
I have a feeling my future self is going to be really tired of explaining what tap water was again, one day.
Well, I was going to say exactly the same thing as Igor, so I won't.
Hold on before dismissing it.
The moderna sequence is not in some forsaken and random place on the Sars-Cov-2 genome amidst piles of genomic rubbish.
Quite the opposite, that sequence occupies the most important site -- around and including the "furin cleavage site".
The damage caused by the MSH3 mutation is similar to the damage caused by spike protein entering cell nuclei.
I wrote three substack posts about it. This information does not lead to certain conclusions, but it does raise important questions.
And Igor's posts are excellent. But irrelevant. Doesn't really matter where it came from if it's safe and effective. It's not. Origin is a distraction, to be adjudicated after we win the war, Nuremberg style. The war needs to focus on whether the benefits exceed the risks Apparently not. We need to focus on whether governments or their commercial agents can coerce people to take an injection they don't need and wouldn't want if they knew the risks. We need to focus on whether governments and their agents can withhold information needed to make that decision, or to prohibit competing therapies. We need to focus on showing the world the failures of governments and the medical industry, prosecute the perpetrators, and reform them to ensure it doesn't happen again. Anything else, and it will happen again. Probably worse.
It is relevant in at least one specific sense: as someone who had covid, and no vax, should I start worrying about cancers more than I should otherwise?
If the motif came from a mirrored (but not actually reversed, which I am still having trouble figuring out; (edit: never mind, this was just my perpetual difficulty with mentally rotating things) MSH3 gene, the resulting motif is nonetheless very common-place: three Rs in one place, with smaller surrounding residues. Though, the motif is also backward (edit: this one was not a mistake - https://academic.oup.com/peds/article/17/1/107/1571475 - I can at least tell when four letters are backward), which no one seems to be commenting on - but backward or not, putting a lot of Rs in one place is a common theme in activating cleavage. Rs are giant dangling positive charges. Just one is enough to get the point across, multiple leads to cleavage. Again this is already routine in loads of the proteins we form all the time, otherwise we wouldn’t have any idea of what the motif does because nature is often much more subtle.
If the modified R spelling (which is carried over in the virus code) has an effect, then that would be a separate issue - but considering how much else the virus is doing - like destroying cells and pumping out a billion spikes - a few odd nucleotide swaps in the mRNA probably has no measurable effect to the host. If the mRNA leaves the infection site it is degraded. This isn’t like the injections where the factory has inserted modRNA, the virus is made in other host cells and followed the normal transcription process.
Again as far as the MSH3’s natural role, it already has the residue sequence that potentially spells a partial furin cleavage, depending on spelling choices on both ends. So does probably every other coding gene. Once you put human codon spelling changes on both ends, you can create a double-R reflection out of anything.
Cancer is usually a slow motion problem, so we probably won't know for a while whether this episode, either virus or vax, increases cancers. But we're getting better at treating them so they seem likely to become less of a problem. A day at the beach or a burger and fries is probably more cancer risk than infections in healthy people. Some people have genetic predispositions so it's probably useful to get a gene test. Even if you're safe, the reports are fun.
But that's exactly the point. The coincidence is built in - furin cleaves when there are three Rs in a sequence of 4 residues. The codons in question add two R's next to an existing one to satisfy the requirements, exactly where S1 and S2 require cleavage to enable the spring-loaded heptad repeats to perform cell fusion - exactly where nature would put a furin cleavage site, and exactly where a human editing the code would as well. But the code is not "signed" by nature - it doesn't have the virus's preferred spelling of R.
So you can either conclude that a human put some R's there on purpose (and maybe made them resemble an existing patent), or that a human put some R's there by miraculous accident while writing a patent that is the size of an encyclopedia. Which is actually more likely?
I have yet to see where there is any actual MSH3 mutation, though again I was unsuccessful in my efforts to verify / debunk the same. Moderna's patent is for mRNA - if you shoot mRNA for MSH3 into cells, they will make MSH3. The mutations in the patent concern mRNA modification, in other words modRNA, as is already acknowledged to be in the injections with totally unknowable long term harms.
*Non*-mutated MSH3 mRNA can actually be carcinogenic on its own, really (because MSH3 is supposed to "leave room" for MSH2 to get first dibs at dimerizing with MSH6, because short DNA errors are more common than long ones) - so to say that "mutated MSH3 could be carcinogenic" is a bit redundant.
So, it's all semi-redundant. The virus appears engineered, the injections appear engineered AND deadly. I think there is some sort of concerted effort to make it look like the engineering of the virus was an "accident" because otherwise we would look at results so far and say, "so *this* is all they could come up with for a super-virus"?
This might be helpful?
https://twitter.com/jikkykjj/status/1497070475494637582?s=21
https://twitter.com/jikkykjj/status/1497070481563783171?s=21
Bancel was asked about it several times on CNBC and didn’t outright deny it or laugh it off, instead he repeated a noncommittal answer that he had scientists looking into it. Very strange.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcgE-5a1Ztc
From what I could see, Moderna went patent mad when they got some cash injections and registered anything and everything.
Patent trolls make money without making any products, and Moderna hadn't made a viable product at the time of the patent registrations, so it made sense right?
It did look very suss though, and I can imagine given the tenor of the times, that finding boogie men is easy to do / believe in.
The patent just literally lists everything that is known about mMRNA and/or drug delivery. "And maybe we'll put a virus gene in if there's no 5'cap but remember the virus gene will be synthetic nucleotides and who knows maybe we'll beam it into people with satellites"