Distribution to organs etc does not mean the LNPs will transfect, or product large amounts of spike protein. Don't think the muscles make a lot of protein. Biodistribution, transfection, protein production is NOT a linear process.
Also, cationic lipids were dropped because of toxicity (like DOTAP), instead ionic lipids were made
Apr 4, 2023·edited Apr 4, 2023Liked by Brian Mowrey
"Obviously, a few thousand volunteers should be chaotically rush-injected and almost immediately unblinded before then, just like in a proper vaccine trial."
Apr 3, 2023·edited Apr 3, 2023Liked by Brian Mowrey
Speculation regarding mechanisms of harm due to COVID injections is interesting but I'm most impressed by what has happened within my rather small circle of acquaintances. Three previously healthy, robust people I know have suffered serious health problems subsequent to injection. Two women developed serious blood clotting problems and one man a serious heart problem. I can't think of any other such cases among people I've known over the decades prior to COVID injections, other than very elderly people late in their lives. While I understand the sample size is small and cause isn't certain if the harm done to my friends is any indication of that done by mRNA COVID injections widely the consequent global health catastrophe almost defies comprehension.
Ionizable vs cationic is confusing me. In the vax there is the "cationic" lipid, DSPC and the pegylated lipid, ALC 0159. Are they both considered ionizable?
Is the toxiiciy additive? Why doesn't Stve Kirsch stop with the stupid miillion dollar dares and just fund a study on LNPs. Is it the taxi driver (mRna), maybe he was drunk, or is the car (LNPs), maybe the brakes were bad, that caused the accident?
You can say ionizable or "ionizable cationic," but if you say "cationic" then that loses the distinction that these lipids are neutral at normal pH. Only turn positive in low pH. What the mRNA vaccines have is lipids that only turn positive at low pH. None of these terms are perfect, just like how there are different ways to define "acid." But most people using "cationic" mean just "positive" and this isn't accurate. The team here show a clear difference in a property when you actually put a cationic lipid in the mix, so it's not the same as what is in there in the injections.
The first picture here, the graphical abstract, shows how the LNPs are believed to be organized
"The LNPs in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines consist of four main components (cf. Table 1): a neutral phospholipid, cholesterol, a polyethylene-glycol (PEG)-lipid, and an ionizable cationic lipid. The latter contains positively charged ionizable amine groups (at low pH) to interact with the anionic mRNA during particle formation and also facilitate membrane fusion during internalization"
"These lipids can improve nanoparticle properties, such as particle stability, delivery efficacy, tolerability and biodistribution" - with three citations. I can't find the source for biodistribution for this statement outside of a paywall.
"PEG-lipid, typically the least abundant lipid in the LNP formulation, affects the properties of LNPs in several ways. First, the amount of incorporated PEG-lipid dictates the particle size [217], although excessive PEGylation hinders transfection [218]. Second, PEG-lipids prevent destabilization and aggregation [217,219]. Third, PEG-lipids prevent rapid uptake of LNPs, and reduce opsonization by serum proteins and reticuloendothelial clearance, improving LNP circulation lifetime [220]. Finally, the hydrophilic coating of PEG may be beneficial in navigating viscous media such as lung mucus"
So PEG is breakdown-evasive, which in a way is intrinsically pro-biodistribution. Again paywall on 220. I don't mind paying for knowledge but these citations could just lead to more citations. I haven't seen a study anywhere saying "biodistribution of LNPs with PEG and without." Overall, PEG seems to just be a "helper" lipid that doesn't get much attention for biodistribution.
2. This is the other function of PEG that you may never have heard about (but those who have followed mRNA vaccine technologies have known about for many years): It helps the LNPs avoid the immune system to promote wide-spread dissemination throughout the body. Yes, you read that correctly. But, don’t take my word for it. Check out this published peer-reviewed science as a few examples:
Watters, R.J., Kester, M., Tran, M.A., Loughran, T.P. & Liu, X. Chapter five - Development and Use of Ceramide Nanoliposomes in Cancer. In: Düzgüneş, N. (ed). Methods in Enzymology, vol. 508. Academic Press, 2012, pp 89-108
Suk, J.S., Xu, Q., Kim, N., Hanes, J. & Ensign, L.M. PEGylation as a strategy for improving nanoparticle-based drug and gene delivery. Advanced drug delivery reviews 99, 28-51 (2016)
Gabizon, A. & Martin, F. Polyethylene glycol-coated (pegylated) liposomal doxorubicin. Rationale for use in solid tumours. Drugs54 Suppl 4,15-21 (1997)
Papahadjopoulos, D. et al. Sterically stabilized liposomes: improvements in pharmacokinetics and antitumor therapeutic efficacy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 88, 11460-11464 (1991) Check out this quote: “This effect is substantially greater than that observed previously with conventional liposomes and is associated with a more than 5-fold prolongation of liposome circulation time in blood.”
Systemic distribution of LNPs was needed to try to replace genes in cells throughout the body, including the brain in order to treat things like Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease.
Basically same as the "store brand" ratio in Peng et al.
If Bridle is convinced, he is convinced. I find the literature vague and it doesn't seem like there is any firm understanding of what PEG does IRL (besides structure / aggregation).
It's certainly possible that accidental IV injection is quite different from the slow transport, even if both have broad bio distribution. The AEs may mostly result from blobs of the stuff hitting a small area in a high concentration, doing more localized damage that causes severe localized inflammation or structural damage to the epithelium. But the variable amount of full length RNA and variation in contaminants could also be part of the story.
Agree. Essentially, a lot of different stuff is possible and not enough has been researched to conclude what is really going on. You would need to random-sample a lot of vials in a lot of regions (and with a time machine) to even get an idea of what should be researched as far as RNA payload, to begin with.
I was curious if this would be an actual "radiolabel the AL-0315/mRNA" study but unfortunately it does seem like they relied on luciferase/luciferin.
I think it's interesting that this validates the information that was released as you mentioned so it suggests they had some information that biodistribution of some sort was happening. Personally, I've moved away from an LNP model back to something spike-related but all of this is certainly something to think about.
I think a biodistribution/tropism model should infer higher rates of specific adverse reactions. If the liver seems to be a main target, as well as the adrenal gland, then VAERS data or other sources may hopefully corroborate this suggestion, although even that itself is not clear. I think I even recall Bret and Heather commenting once about whether the shoulder that was jabbed may be related to myocarditis based on the access to the heart, but I think it was commented on passively.
I think there's a lot of missing pieces in the biodistribution such as uptake. It's the same issue I have with a shedding model as well in which it's never quite explained if the process is occurring outside of a hypothetical model.
It doesn't seem like a big possibility that all of their cationic lipid-having vehicles are going all over but not being taken up by cells and making protein for some reason, but the injection site cells can take up LNP and make protein just fine. So luciferase expression should match LNP distribution. Unlike Study 185350 they aren't dissecting tissues, the results they show for "liver" are really just a proxy for "giant blob of glowy all over the whole mouse."
Livers are designed to take a beating, so I don't think there's a specific timeline we can expect for AEs to manifest there. Like maybe you just lose those ten great years of hard drinking that you would have had later before it kicks out. Adrenal glands, well, it wouldn't be surprising if cancers kicked off in 2021/22 just get noticed this year, when it's too late. Let's hope that doesn't happen.
Girardot's latest - well, the Chinese study obliterates that, doesn't it. IM injection, systemic protein expression. It's not LNP "storage." Done.
Understandable that the luciferase is acting as a proxy for "glowy spike" and so we can infer a correlation between spike production via luciferase, although the use of luciferin and timing raises some questions. I'm curious if many things just end up getting shuttled to the liver due to its detoxifying capacity or because of high cellular replication. The argument over shuttling luciferase would probably be made moot since we would assume that we should see full glowy mice if luciferase is being moved around rather than LNP landing in the liver and getting processed there.
With the adrenal cancer and other pathologies I'm curious whether there is a predisposition in certain people. Genomic testing doesn't seem to be occurring and I'd wonder if these certain people are inclined for these issues some time in the future. I know that "turbo cancer" likely includes this aspect, but I think most people refer to turbo cancer as sudden, acute cancer formation rather than cancer formation in those who may be predisposed but may be appearing early due to a lowered threshold.
I cited Girardot's work more for the idea that biodistribution should be paired with some idea of tropism- either all tissues are affected or several tissues would be selectively affected like the liver, but I think this "lack of transfection" also misses critical information i.e. no citation for this lack of transfection.
Apr 1, 2023·edited Apr 1, 2023Liked by Brian Mowrey
Not sure if you watched the video link Brian posted, Dr Campbell is discussing the report with one of Australia’s most eminent immunologists (Dr Robert Clancy). He goes into detail about why he is concerned about the details (or lack of detail) contained in the report. Well worth a listen if you haven’t already.
I didn't watch the video because it seemed as if it was covering information that was already released several months prior. I covered two of the LNP studies in posts from last year:
Apr 2, 2023·edited Apr 2, 2023Liked by Brian Mowrey
Modern Discontent is right there probably isn’t anything new that’s hasn’t already been covered. But, you might be interested in his speculation on the mechanisms of action. I find him very knowledgeable and enjoyable to listen to. Dr Campbell has had him on a few times to just shoot the breeze about immunology and I have always enjoyed his take on immunology and early treatment. Admittedly, I’m a bit of a Dr Clancy fan boy. 😀
Here’s a taste of his style in a radio interview that looks to start out as an attack piece on his reputation for supporting the use HCQ just before the jab was rolled out in Australia. I especially like the bit at 9:47 when he’s asked about people claiming he’s Australias’s most senior immunologist.
—————-
Interviewer: Do you agree with Craig Kelly’s (a conservative politician who is generally portrayed as a crack pot conspiracy theorist by the MSM) claim that you’re Australia’s most senior immunologist?
Dr Clancy: (Laughing) I am the oldest. (more laughing)
(…)
I started clinical immunology with two other guys ‘cause it didn’t exist …
————-
He’s no johnny-come-lately to immunology or the covid debate.
I'll take a look and see what mechanisms you're referring to. I do like my MOAs so if he provides an interesting perspective I'd like to see it. A big issue is that the LNPs are in such a grey area that it's sort of become indicative to just infer anything nefarious to them. Like I mentioned to Brian I'm personally leaning towards a spike-specific concern with secondary autoantibody issues.
Yes, I've watched at least one of his interviews with Campbell. I would love to hear him discuss the transition between "traditional" vaccines which were actually rather poorly trialed before deployment, and this myth we have now where vaccines take "X" years to develop. Seems like he would know when and why that myth came about.
I’ve seen a bunch of his videos and don’t recall him talking about that specifically. I think he’s got a 2 part video somewhere where he goes through the history of immunology he might cover it there. I haven’t watched it yet it’s long and a lot of the detail goes over my head. He’s quite open about what worked or didn’t work, things that were misunderstood and what is known and what’s still a sketchy in some of his other videos.
"they have shown we can expect that almost everyone injected with the Covid vaccines had LNPs escape the injection site, regardless of whether they were spared accidental intravenous injection. "
Ugur Sahin bragged in front of a bunch of investors or so, that they designed the stuff to reach lymph nodes very well. He wasn't lying there, apparently.
I.e. they _wanted_ it that way.
"It remains counter-intuitive that increasing positive charge could make LNPs safe. Even if safer, due to elimination of systemic biodistribution,"
with all those funky extra ingredients, helper substances, to morph things more towards the _slightly_ idealized pharma brochure picture of how things supposedly work more towards reality - in some aspects, ...
I'm not sure how it would likely be a health enhancing act to put any of that foreign stuff into anyone, esp, on a more regular basis.
Seems more like, tyrants say what the priorities have to be, in what direction all of us have to make compromises, how we have to weight values. Not like those should come organically from The People or something. Because reasons. Obey.
"Permanent cationic (positive charge-having) lipids (presumably) block the taxi drivers."
Great article! Did you know that the population of India routinely uses fenbendazole and has 1/3 the rate of cancer as the US? Now it is sudden death, soon, very soon, it will be longer, painful, suffering death. The cancers that result from the covid vaxxes are incubating and brewing now. All the preclinical research regarding how fenbendazole eradicates cancer is consistent with its effects in practice. Learn how to protect yourself and loved ones from cancer with fenbendazole, a safe, inexpensive, off patent, otc drug. So far it saved two people (make that THREE) close to me. Read the detailed Case Reports https://fenbendazole.substack.com its all free.
I can’t remember if I’ve told you about her before, but have you heard of Christie Laura Grace who had a great substack called Recombinant Reflections? She was a lipid nanoparticle expert having worked in the industry and she explained that the particles could have different charges and that would decide where in the body they would go and what effects they might have. She thought she could explain the long stringy fibrinogen-y clots as well as aneurysms and other recognised side effects.
Unfortunately she has scrubbed her substack and Twitter so you can’t read the articles anymore - judging by her most recent substack emails I received, I would guess that she is suffering from a psychiatric illness leading to paranoia and erratic behaviour, but her scientific writing made sense at the time.
Here is an interview she did a couple of months ago which is very respectable
Also, do you read A Midwestern Doctor’s substack- he has a very different way of looking at things? Here is an article with links to videos of Andrew Moulden where he describes the zeta potential and the bad consequences of positively charged ‘things’ getting into our bloodstream.
And here is the latest from Marc Girardot in which he says something about LNPs but I’m not sure I follow his point. I recently suggested to him that he look at Christie’s work but he had a Breggin/Malone type reaction to my mentioning her and swore never to have anything to do with her!
I did watch some of the McCairn Grace interview, regarding LNPs and then it seemed like they were going into culture stuff so I dropped off... And the AMD theory about blood sludging is very cool. But if Peng, et al.'s study is correct, the positive charge would keep LNPs from entering the bloodstream to begin with. Then you have the toxicity for cells, but transfected cells are fated to die to begin with, so who knows.
It still sounds like a bad idea. The more important part is showing why the ionizable-only ones escape the injection site.
RE Girardot's latest post, anything discussing LNP distribution that has zero finds for "fenestration" is probably missing an important ingredient. Liver, kidneys, and glands are designed to exchange larger particles with blood via capillary fenestration. So you have different capillary-tissue surface area but also different porousness. And then you have stochastic / random loads of full length RNA, with possibly most LNPs just being "blanks" if truncated RNAs (or leftover plasmid DNA) are not even expressed, so maybe most tissues are ok unless they win the lottery of getting multiple full-length RNA-having LNPs, and then you have an immune cascade leading to myocarditis, clotting, etc.
Heh - no, same pdf as has been hosted for open access by Australian gov for 18 months. Some content censored but mostly a full expose of how Pfizer knew next-to-nothing about what the shots would really do in the body
I know this post is about the mRNA shots but does anyone here understand how the J&J vector shot works? We know someone who got it and ended up with a heart attack. I was wondering if he's still in danger not counting the damage to his heart and the stent he needed (which I understand is basically useless anyway). We knew another person who was having nightmares and wasn't feeling right.
With the mRNA shots, those people are now "manufacturing plants" of spike proteins. But what about the J&J shot? What does that one do to the body?
"Ok Brian (and Dr. Campbell), so LNPs are indeed winding up in places where they don't belong--IN MICE. That doesn't mean the same phenomenon can happen (or is happening) in humans. So, there's nothing see here. Move along. These aren't the droids you're looking for."
Realising I am not in your list of people, but if stuff in mice doesn't apply to humans, the omicron booster trial by Pfizzzzer - conducted in 8 mice - must be less than useless as well, right?
I think it's healthy to make such an argument. Many animal models don't translate well into humans. I've mentioned on my Substack that drugs delivered to the CNS generally fail clinical trials because you can find drugs that easily pass into the brain of mice and primates that end up not occurring in humans because our blood-brain barrier is structured differently.
Generally, you can consider a dose-response relationship. If the dose of a compound is intended to be comparable to what is used in humans then you can infer that biodistribution for us would be to a smaller degree given the size difference acting as a large dilution factor.
Right, but that's the value of Peng, et al. - it means we know that the design/platform being used in humans intrinsically favors biodistribution in mice. So until there is a study in humans it remains that humans are being injected with the platform that favors distribution in mice, and so the best guess is that it is happening in humans. Besides that, there aren't any obvious biological differences to worry about besides dosage relative to body mass, and the difference between cationic and ionizable suggests protein conjugation is the mechanism for distribution which means dose/saturation shouldn't be relevant to proportional systemic distribution / escape.
Wasn't there a FOIA report in Japan in early 2021 that it did biodistribute? The table showed that there were spike proteins or LNPs (I'm not sure now - I'd have to look it up) that were in every organ but more heavily in the ovaries and heart. It's been a while so I can't remember very clearly all the details.
Right, that's nonclinical 'Study 185350.' After Japan, Australia released the results, and it has been online at https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-2389-06.pdf for 18 months, and this is the document being reviewed by Campbell this week. This new study from China replicates and elucidates the findings - injection site escape is because of ionizable-only lipid design.
I think I downloaded the pdf. I do have the Brett Weinstein video with Steve Kirsch and malone where they showed it. I then looked if up to see if it was for real. That was one of the first videos that I saw that I was completely shocked. Before that it was David Martin telling Reiner Feullmich that the "virus" was actually patented code dating back to the late 1990s or early 2000s. So many videos, substack posts, and articles later and we're back talking about the same thing.
Mar 31, 2023·edited Mar 31, 2023Liked by Brian Mowrey
Cationic is not safer overall - it was more risky directly to anything in the body. We aren’t supposed to have positive charges roaming around loose. The switch to the ionizable was to bypass the dangers of cationic. But clearly that has other problems.
The sad thing is they are still pushing this as if they CoV jab EUA proves the technique okay.
The overall includes biodistribution, so as long as removing systemic distribution tilts the scales, it will be "safer" - even if not "safe." In vitro is another story because biodistribution doesn't come into the equation.
Distribution to organs etc does not mean the LNPs will transfect, or product large amounts of spike protein. Don't think the muscles make a lot of protein. Biodistribution, transfection, protein production is NOT a linear process.
Also, cationic lipids were dropped because of toxicity (like DOTAP), instead ionic lipids were made
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6062336/#:~:text=The%20toxicity%20of%20cationic%20lipids,linker%20bond%20and%20hydrophobic%20domain.
So not sure how these will be tolerated in humans. I read mice are more resistance to the inflammatory activities of LNPs somewhere.....
Right, but whereas Study 185350 used labeled lipids, this one looks for the expressed luciferase, so presumably is showing the output of transfection.
Nduepen et al. showed an ionizable lipid LNP to be inflammatory in mice https://unglossed.substack.com/i/71561323/lnp-as-an-adjuvant
especially when given intranasally, Yikes. But I cant tell if they were cationic or ionic lipids
This is an excellent article on how to measure biodistribution of LNPs.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169409X22001260
and this shows how transfection and protein production are not related
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11095-022-03166-5
"Obviously, a few thousand volunteers should be chaotically rush-injected and almost immediately unblinded before then, just like in a proper vaccine trial."
<mechanised breathing>
The Science in strong with this one...
<mechanised breathing>
Speculation regarding mechanisms of harm due to COVID injections is interesting but I'm most impressed by what has happened within my rather small circle of acquaintances. Three previously healthy, robust people I know have suffered serious health problems subsequent to injection. Two women developed serious blood clotting problems and one man a serious heart problem. I can't think of any other such cases among people I've known over the decades prior to COVID injections, other than very elderly people late in their lives. While I understand the sample size is small and cause isn't certain if the harm done to my friends is any indication of that done by mRNA COVID injections widely the consequent global health catastrophe almost defies comprehension.
Ionizable vs cationic is confusing me. In the vax there is the "cationic" lipid, DSPC and the pegylated lipid, ALC 0159. Are they both considered ionizable?
Is the toxiiciy additive? Why doesn't Stve Kirsch stop with the stupid miillion dollar dares and just fund a study on LNPs. Is it the taxi driver (mRna), maybe he was drunk, or is the car (LNPs), maybe the brakes were bad, that caused the accident?
You can say ionizable or "ionizable cationic," but if you say "cationic" then that loses the distinction that these lipids are neutral at normal pH. Only turn positive in low pH. What the mRNA vaccines have is lipids that only turn positive at low pH. None of these terms are perfect, just like how there are different ways to define "acid." But most people using "cationic" mean just "positive" and this isn't accurate. The team here show a clear difference in a property when you actually put a cationic lipid in the mix, so it's not the same as what is in there in the injections.
The first picture here, the graphical abstract, shows how the LNPs are believed to be organized
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378517321003914
"The LNPs in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines consist of four main components (cf. Table 1): a neutral phospholipid, cholesterol, a polyethylene-glycol (PEG)-lipid, and an ionizable cationic lipid. The latter contains positively charged ionizable amine groups (at low pH) to interact with the anionic mRNA during particle formation and also facilitate membrane fusion during internalization"
Doesn't PEG also play a role in enhancing biodistribution throughout the body? Wasn't LNP technology originally designed to not stay put?
PEG is meant to enable biodistribution is a claim that I have heard. Schoenmaker et al. just mention a role in LNP form / non-aggregation
"PEG-lipid is used to control the particle size and act as a steric barrier to prevent aggregation during storage"
In https://www.nature.com/articles/s41578-021-00358-0 ,
"These lipids can improve nanoparticle properties, such as particle stability, delivery efficacy, tolerability and biodistribution" - with three citations. I can't find the source for biodistribution for this statement outside of a paywall.
In https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169409X20302933 ,
"PEG-lipid, typically the least abundant lipid in the LNP formulation, affects the properties of LNPs in several ways. First, the amount of incorporated PEG-lipid dictates the particle size [217], although excessive PEGylation hinders transfection [218]. Second, PEG-lipids prevent destabilization and aggregation [217,219]. Third, PEG-lipids prevent rapid uptake of LNPs, and reduce opsonization by serum proteins and reticuloendothelial clearance, improving LNP circulation lifetime [220]. Finally, the hydrophilic coating of PEG may be beneficial in navigating viscous media such as lung mucus"
So PEG is breakdown-evasive, which in a way is intrinsically pro-biodistribution. Again paywall on 220. I don't mind paying for knowledge but these citations could just lead to more citations. I haven't seen a study anywhere saying "biodistribution of LNPs with PEG and without." Overall, PEG seems to just be a "helper" lipid that doesn't get much attention for biodistribution.
When I had looked at the amounts of the lipids, I had thought I had seen that the PEG lipid was actually the most abundant lipid in the LNP.
this is from Byram Bridle's substack https://viralimmunologist.substack.com/p/a-moratorium-on-mrna-vaccines-is
2. This is the other function of PEG that you may never have heard about (but those who have followed mRNA vaccine technologies have known about for many years): It helps the LNPs avoid the immune system to promote wide-spread dissemination throughout the body. Yes, you read that correctly. But, don’t take my word for it. Check out this published peer-reviewed science as a few examples:
Watters, R.J., Kester, M., Tran, M.A., Loughran, T.P. & Liu, X. Chapter five - Development and Use of Ceramide Nanoliposomes in Cancer. In: Düzgüneş, N. (ed). Methods in Enzymology, vol. 508. Academic Press, 2012, pp 89-108
Suk, J.S., Xu, Q., Kim, N., Hanes, J. & Ensign, L.M. PEGylation as a strategy for improving nanoparticle-based drug and gene delivery. Advanced drug delivery reviews 99, 28-51 (2016)
Gabizon, A. & Martin, F. Polyethylene glycol-coated (pegylated) liposomal doxorubicin. Rationale for use in solid tumours. Drugs54 Suppl 4,15-21 (1997)
Papahadjopoulos, D. et al. Sterically stabilized liposomes: improvements in pharmacokinetics and antitumor therapeutic efficacy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 88, 11460-11464 (1991) Check out this quote: “This effect is substantially greater than that observed previously with conventional liposomes and is associated with a more than 5-fold prolongation of liposome circulation time in blood.”
Systemic distribution of LNPs was needed to try to replace genes in cells throughout the body, including the brain in order to treat things like Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease.
Table 1 in Schoenmaker et al. (the first link) gives Pfizer's ratio as
Molar lipid ratios (%)
ionizable cationic lipid : neutral lipid : cholesterol : PEG- ylated lipid
46.3 : 9.4 : 42.7 : 1.6
Basically same as the "store brand" ratio in Peng et al.
If Bridle is convinced, he is convinced. I find the literature vague and it doesn't seem like there is any firm understanding of what PEG does IRL (besides structure / aggregation).
It's certainly possible that accidental IV injection is quite different from the slow transport, even if both have broad bio distribution. The AEs may mostly result from blobs of the stuff hitting a small area in a high concentration, doing more localized damage that causes severe localized inflammation or structural damage to the epithelium. But the variable amount of full length RNA and variation in contaminants could also be part of the story.
Agree. Essentially, a lot of different stuff is possible and not enough has been researched to conclude what is really going on. You would need to random-sample a lot of vials in a lot of regions (and with a time machine) to even get an idea of what should be researched as far as RNA payload, to begin with.
I was curious if this would be an actual "radiolabel the AL-0315/mRNA" study but unfortunately it does seem like they relied on luciferase/luciferin.
I think it's interesting that this validates the information that was released as you mentioned so it suggests they had some information that biodistribution of some sort was happening. Personally, I've moved away from an LNP model back to something spike-related but all of this is certainly something to think about.
I think a biodistribution/tropism model should infer higher rates of specific adverse reactions. If the liver seems to be a main target, as well as the adrenal gland, then VAERS data or other sources may hopefully corroborate this suggestion, although even that itself is not clear. I think I even recall Bret and Heather commenting once about whether the shoulder that was jabbed may be related to myocarditis based on the access to the heart, but I think it was commented on passively.
To that, I'm curious if you saw this article:
https://covidmythbuster.substack.com/p/biodistribution-the-big-illusion
I think there's a lot of missing pieces in the biodistribution such as uptake. It's the same issue I have with a shedding model as well in which it's never quite explained if the process is occurring outside of a hypothetical model.
It doesn't seem like a big possibility that all of their cationic lipid-having vehicles are going all over but not being taken up by cells and making protein for some reason, but the injection site cells can take up LNP and make protein just fine. So luciferase expression should match LNP distribution. Unlike Study 185350 they aren't dissecting tissues, the results they show for "liver" are really just a proxy for "giant blob of glowy all over the whole mouse."
Livers are designed to take a beating, so I don't think there's a specific timeline we can expect for AEs to manifest there. Like maybe you just lose those ten great years of hard drinking that you would have had later before it kicks out. Adrenal glands, well, it wouldn't be surprising if cancers kicked off in 2021/22 just get noticed this year, when it's too late. Let's hope that doesn't happen.
Girardot's latest - well, the Chinese study obliterates that, doesn't it. IM injection, systemic protein expression. It's not LNP "storage." Done.
Understandable that the luciferase is acting as a proxy for "glowy spike" and so we can infer a correlation between spike production via luciferase, although the use of luciferin and timing raises some questions. I'm curious if many things just end up getting shuttled to the liver due to its detoxifying capacity or because of high cellular replication. The argument over shuttling luciferase would probably be made moot since we would assume that we should see full glowy mice if luciferase is being moved around rather than LNP landing in the liver and getting processed there.
With the adrenal cancer and other pathologies I'm curious whether there is a predisposition in certain people. Genomic testing doesn't seem to be occurring and I'd wonder if these certain people are inclined for these issues some time in the future. I know that "turbo cancer" likely includes this aspect, but I think most people refer to turbo cancer as sudden, acute cancer formation rather than cancer formation in those who may be predisposed but may be appearing early due to a lowered threshold.
I cited Girardot's work more for the idea that biodistribution should be paired with some idea of tropism- either all tissues are affected or several tissues would be selectively affected like the liver, but I think this "lack of transfection" also misses critical information i.e. no citation for this lack of transfection.
Not sure if you watched the video link Brian posted, Dr Campbell is discussing the report with one of Australia’s most eminent immunologists (Dr Robert Clancy). He goes into detail about why he is concerned about the details (or lack of detail) contained in the report. Well worth a listen if you haven’t already.
I didn't watch the video because it seemed as if it was covering information that was already released several months prior. I covered two of the LNP studies in posts from last year:
https://moderndiscontent.substack.com/p/preliminary-examination-of-biontech?s=w
https://moderndiscontent.substack.com/p/more-on-biontechs-lipid-nanoparticle
I'll take a listen when I have the chance but I would be surprised if they discuss anything different that many people have already covered.
Didn't watch either, for same reasons. They can't create information that isn't already in the pdf.
Modern Discontent is right there probably isn’t anything new that’s hasn’t already been covered. But, you might be interested in his speculation on the mechanisms of action. I find him very knowledgeable and enjoyable to listen to. Dr Campbell has had him on a few times to just shoot the breeze about immunology and I have always enjoyed his take on immunology and early treatment. Admittedly, I’m a bit of a Dr Clancy fan boy. 😀
Here’s a taste of his style in a radio interview that looks to start out as an attack piece on his reputation for supporting the use HCQ just before the jab was rolled out in Australia. I especially like the bit at 9:47 when he’s asked about people claiming he’s Australias’s most senior immunologist.
—————-
Interviewer: Do you agree with Craig Kelly’s (a conservative politician who is generally portrayed as a crack pot conspiracy theorist by the MSM) claim that you’re Australia’s most senior immunologist?
Dr Clancy: (Laughing) I am the oldest. (more laughing)
(…)
I started clinical immunology with two other guys ‘cause it didn’t exist …
————-
He’s no johnny-come-lately to immunology or the covid debate.
https://www.abc.net.au/newcastle/programs/drive/robert-clancy-hydroxychloroquine/13127348
I'll take a look and see what mechanisms you're referring to. I do like my MOAs so if he provides an interesting perspective I'd like to see it. A big issue is that the LNPs are in such a grey area that it's sort of become indicative to just infer anything nefarious to them. Like I mentioned to Brian I'm personally leaning towards a spike-specific concern with secondary autoantibody issues.
Yes, I've watched at least one of his interviews with Campbell. I would love to hear him discuss the transition between "traditional" vaccines which were actually rather poorly trialed before deployment, and this myth we have now where vaccines take "X" years to develop. Seems like he would know when and why that myth came about.
I’ve seen a bunch of his videos and don’t recall him talking about that specifically. I think he’s got a 2 part video somewhere where he goes through the history of immunology he might cover it there. I haven’t watched it yet it’s long and a lot of the detail goes over my head. He’s quite open about what worked or didn’t work, things that were misunderstood and what is known and what’s still a sketchy in some of his other videos.
Vaxxing ain’t easy.
"they have shown we can expect that almost everyone injected with the Covid vaccines had LNPs escape the injection site, regardless of whether they were spared accidental intravenous injection. "
Ugur Sahin bragged in front of a bunch of investors or so, that they designed the stuff to reach lymph nodes very well. He wasn't lying there, apparently.
I.e. they _wanted_ it that way.
"It remains counter-intuitive that increasing positive charge could make LNPs safe. Even if safer, due to elimination of systemic biodistribution,"
with all those funky extra ingredients, helper substances, to morph things more towards the _slightly_ idealized pharma brochure picture of how things supposedly work more towards reality - in some aspects, ...
I'm not sure how it would likely be a health enhancing act to put any of that foreign stuff into anyone, esp, on a more regular basis.
Seems more like, tyrants say what the priorities have to be, in what direction all of us have to make compromises, how we have to weight values. Not like those should come organically from The People or something. Because reasons. Obey.
"Permanent cationic (positive charge-having) lipids (presumably) block the taxi drivers."
And then he be like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QWL-FwX4t4&t=55s
Ha - I was going to throw in a screen capture from TD but it would have been too disruptive.
Great article! Did you know that the population of India routinely uses fenbendazole and has 1/3 the rate of cancer as the US? Now it is sudden death, soon, very soon, it will be longer, painful, suffering death. The cancers that result from the covid vaxxes are incubating and brewing now. All the preclinical research regarding how fenbendazole eradicates cancer is consistent with its effects in practice. Learn how to protect yourself and loved ones from cancer with fenbendazole, a safe, inexpensive, off patent, otc drug. So far it saved two people (make that THREE) close to me. Read the detailed Case Reports https://fenbendazole.substack.com its all free.
That’s it, thanks
I can’t remember if I’ve told you about her before, but have you heard of Christie Laura Grace who had a great substack called Recombinant Reflections? She was a lipid nanoparticle expert having worked in the industry and she explained that the particles could have different charges and that would decide where in the body they would go and what effects they might have. She thought she could explain the long stringy fibrinogen-y clots as well as aneurysms and other recognised side effects.
Unfortunately she has scrubbed her substack and Twitter so you can’t read the articles anymore - judging by her most recent substack emails I received, I would guess that she is suffering from a psychiatric illness leading to paranoia and erratic behaviour, but her scientific writing made sense at the time.
Here is an interview she did a couple of months ago which is very respectable
https://discernable.io/lipid-nanoparticles-the-real-danger-of-mrna-vaccines/
And here is one stream she did with Kevin McCairn, so you know what kind of chat to expect! - start about minute 15!
https://rumble.com/v29aw68-lipid-nanoparticle-toxicity-christie-laurie-grace.html
Also, do you read A Midwestern Doctor’s substack- he has a very different way of looking at things? Here is an article with links to videos of Andrew Moulden where he describes the zeta potential and the bad consequences of positively charged ‘things’ getting into our bloodstream.
https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/why-does-every-vaccine-often-cause
And here is the latest from Marc Girardot in which he says something about LNPs but I’m not sure I follow his point. I recently suggested to him that he look at Christie’s work but he had a Breggin/Malone type reaction to my mentioning her and swore never to have anything to do with her!
https://covidmythbuster.substack.com/p/biodistribution-the-big-illusion
I did watch some of the McCairn Grace interview, regarding LNPs and then it seemed like they were going into culture stuff so I dropped off... And the AMD theory about blood sludging is very cool. But if Peng, et al.'s study is correct, the positive charge would keep LNPs from entering the bloodstream to begin with. Then you have the toxicity for cells, but transfected cells are fated to die to begin with, so who knows.
It still sounds like a bad idea. The more important part is showing why the ionizable-only ones escape the injection site.
RE Girardot's latest post, anything discussing LNP distribution that has zero finds for "fenestration" is probably missing an important ingredient. Liver, kidneys, and glands are designed to exchange larger particles with blood via capillary fenestration. So you have different capillary-tissue surface area but also different porousness. And then you have stochastic / random loads of full length RNA, with possibly most LNPs just being "blanks" if truncated RNAs (or leftover plasmid DNA) are not even expressed, so maybe most tissues are ok unless they win the lottery of getting multiple full-length RNA-having LNPs, and then you have an immune cascade leading to myocarditis, clotting, etc.
Apparently the document that Dr Campbell is talking about was heavy redacted until recently.
According to some this is the case, I couldn’t say whether this is true or not.
Heh - no, same pdf as has been hosted for open access by Australian gov for 18 months. Some content censored but mostly a full expose of how Pfizer knew next-to-nothing about what the shots would really do in the body
I see, thanks.
I know. There is so much to read and learn and have a bit of a personal life. : )
Interesting questions. I appreciate your open mindedness
I know this post is about the mRNA shots but does anyone here understand how the J&J vector shot works? We know someone who got it and ended up with a heart attack. I was wondering if he's still in danger not counting the damage to his heart and the stent he needed (which I understand is basically useless anyway). We knew another person who was having nightmares and wasn't feeling right.
With the mRNA shots, those people are now "manufacturing plants" of spike proteins. But what about the J&J shot? What does that one do to the body?
Playing devil's advocate here....
"Ok Brian (and Dr. Campbell), so LNPs are indeed winding up in places where they don't belong--IN MICE. That doesn't mean the same phenomenon can happen (or is happening) in humans. So, there's nothing see here. Move along. These aren't the droids you're looking for."
What say you?
Realising I am not in your list of people, but if stuff in mice doesn't apply to humans, the omicron booster trial by Pfizzzzer - conducted in 8 mice - must be less than useless as well, right?
I think it's healthy to make such an argument. Many animal models don't translate well into humans. I've mentioned on my Substack that drugs delivered to the CNS generally fail clinical trials because you can find drugs that easily pass into the brain of mice and primates that end up not occurring in humans because our blood-brain barrier is structured differently.
Generally, you can consider a dose-response relationship. If the dose of a compound is intended to be comparable to what is used in humans then you can infer that biodistribution for us would be to a smaller degree given the size difference acting as a large dilution factor.
Right, but that's the value of Peng, et al. - it means we know that the design/platform being used in humans intrinsically favors biodistribution in mice. So until there is a study in humans it remains that humans are being injected with the platform that favors distribution in mice, and so the best guess is that it is happening in humans. Besides that, there aren't any obvious biological differences to worry about besides dosage relative to body mass, and the difference between cationic and ionizable suggests protein conjugation is the mechanism for distribution which means dose/saturation shouldn't be relevant to proportional systemic distribution / escape.
Wasn't there a FOIA report in Japan in early 2021 that it did biodistribute? The table showed that there were spike proteins or LNPs (I'm not sure now - I'd have to look it up) that were in every organ but more heavily in the ovaries and heart. It's been a while so I can't remember very clearly all the details.
Right, that's nonclinical 'Study 185350.' After Japan, Australia released the results, and it has been online at https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-2389-06.pdf for 18 months, and this is the document being reviewed by Campbell this week. This new study from China replicates and elucidates the findings - injection site escape is because of ionizable-only lipid design.
I believe that is correct.
Yes, so this finding isn't new.
I do not remember who posted the paper. There were micrographs. I may have kept a hard copy. I’ll look
I think I downloaded the pdf. I do have the Brett Weinstein video with Steve Kirsch and malone where they showed it. I then looked if up to see if it was for real. That was one of the first videos that I saw that I was completely shocked. Before that it was David Martin telling Reiner Feullmich that the "virus" was actually patented code dating back to the late 1990s or early 2000s. So many videos, substack posts, and articles later and we're back talking about the same thing.
Cationic is not safer overall - it was more risky directly to anything in the body. We aren’t supposed to have positive charges roaming around loose. The switch to the ionizable was to bypass the dangers of cationic. But clearly that has other problems.
The sad thing is they are still pushing this as if they CoV jab EUA proves the technique okay.
The overall includes biodistribution, so as long as removing systemic distribution tilts the scales, it will be "safer" - even if not "safe." In vitro is another story because biodistribution doesn't come into the equation.
I understand your point now.
I was adding what I had learned about why they didn't use it.