COVID-19
Florida Surgeon General’s Call to Halt Use of the Vaccines Sparks Debate
Dr Joseph Ladapo, Florida’s Surgeon General at the microphone
From the Brownstone Institute
On January 3, 2024, Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo called for a halt in the use of the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines after US health agencies failed to adequately address his concerns about DNA contamination in the products.
In a statement on X, Ladapo accused the FDA and CDC of always playing it “fast and loose” with Covid-19 safety, but their failure to test whether DNA fragments in the vaccine could integrate into a person’s genome was “intolerable.”
As I and others have pointed out on numerous occasions, the FDA’s own guidance on regulatory limits for residual DNA in vaccines states “there are several potential mechanisms by which residual DNA could be oncogenic [cause cancer], including the integration and expression of encoded oncogenes or insertional mutagenesis following DNA integration.”
In a letter, Ladapo had also asked the two agencies if they’d carried out any risk assessment regarding the presence of the “SV40 promoter” in the vaccines, which is thought to enhance DNA integration into host cells.
But the FDA’s top vaccine official Peter Marks responded to Ladapo’s demand for answers with intransigence and obfuscation.
Similar to how the FDA shut down my previous enquiries into this matter, the agency failed to provide Ladapo with any evidence that it had even conducted tests to address the risk of genomic integration.
In fact, Marks had the temerity to imply that ongoing discussion about this topic was perpetuating misinformation “which results in vaccine hesitancy that lowers vaccine uptake.”
Ladapo explained;
DNA integration poses a unique and elevated risk to human health and to the integrity of the human genome, including the risk that DNA integrated into sperm or egg gametes could be passed onto offspring of mRNA Covid-19 vaccine recipients. If the risks of DNA integration have not been assessed for mRNA Covid-19 vaccines, these vaccines are not appropriate for use in human beings.
He also recommended that providers concerned about health risks of Covid-19 should prioritise patient access to non-mRNA Covid-19 vaccines and treatment.
Quick to dismiss Ladapo’s concerns was Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Centre at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, who serves on the FDA’s vaccine advisory committee.
Offit hit back in a video published on MedPage Today saying, “It is hard to believe that Dr Ladapo actually issued that statement…[DNA fragments] can’t possibly do harm. So scaring people unnecessarily like this has been hard to watch.”
Professor Paul Offit, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia
Unfortunately, Offit’s video contains a series of erroneous statements that exposes his fundamental misunderstanding of the manufacturing and regulation of Covid vaccines.
For example, Offit says it’s unlikely that DNA fragments enter the cytoplasm of cells, or survive, once they’re inside.
“Our cytoplasm hates foreign DNA and it has a variety of mechanisms, including innate immunological mechanisms and enzymes, to destroy foreign DNA,” says Offit.
“That DNA, which would never survive the cytoplasm, would have to then cross the nuclear membrane into the nucleus, which would require a nuclear access signal that these DNA fragments don’t have…So the chance that DNA could affect your DNA is zero,” he adds.
But this statement is disingenuous on multiple fronts.
Offit talked about DNA fragments as if they were not encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles, which specifically ferry the genetic material into the cell cytoplasm. Indeed, without the lipid nanoparticles, the vaccines would never have made it to market.
A recent publication in Nature found that within hours, around 7% of cells are integrated when mixed with a transfection solution containing linear pieces of DNA.
Offit also said that DNA wouldn’t cross into the cell’s nucleus, but scientists have known that foreign DNA can be delivered into mammalian cells to modify a host cell’s genetic makeup in a process called “DNA transfection.”
It also ignores the fact that the DNA fragments contain the “SV40 promoter” which includes a nuclear targeting signal (NTS) to aid its entry into the nucleus.
A full critique of Offit’s commentary was recently published by Dr Robert Malone who pioneered some of the early work into mRNA technology.
Phillip Buckhaults, a cancer genomics expert, and professor at the University of South Carolina, has confirmed the presence of DNA fragments in the vaccines after replicating the work of McKernan et al.
Buckhaults has welcomed Ladapo’s announcement.
“I’m glad Dr Ladapo is taking a firm leadership stance to protect the people under his care. I think he is taking a lot of heat over genuinely looking out for others. I think he is acting in good faith and that is to be respected,” says Buckhaults.
Professor Phillip Buckhaults, University of South Carolina
He also believes that Ladapo’s stance on the mRNA vaccines is “based on solid scientific reasoning” because the long-term genomic safety has not been demonstrated for fragments of DNA that are encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles.
However, rather than completely halting the vaccines, Buckhaults says he would err on the side of caution and still “recommend the vaccine to select populations who are at high risk for death from [Covid-19].”
Buckhaults hopes that Ladapo can use his authority to compel the FDA to request an extra “cheap and easy step” in the processing of the vaccines to remove the vast majority of DNA from upcoming batches.
“Then we would not even need to have this argument about DNA anymore. The risk of the DNA would be essentially gone and the crisis in confidence in leadership would be addressed,” he says.
Buckhaults has testified before a South Carolina Senate hearing about his alarm over the “very real hazard” that these fragments of foreign DNA can insert themselves into a person’s genome and become a “permanent fixture of the cell.”
He has also discussed with me at length the potential harms to people’s health caused by DNA contamination in the mRNA vaccines. Last year, Buckhaults notified the FDA of his concerns via email but never received a response.
Supplementary information: reading:
FDA shuts down enquiries about DNA contamination in [Covid] vaccines
EXCLUSIVE: An interview with Buckhaults about DNA contamination in [Covid] vaccines
Republished from the author’s Substack
Author
From LifeSiteNews
A study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause mortality after Pfizer vaccination compared to Moderna
A new study of 1.47 million Florida adults by MIT’s Retsef Levi and Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo finds significantly higher all-cause, cardiovascular, and COVID-19 mortality after Pfizer vaccination.
The study titled “Twelve-Month All-Cause Mortality after Initial COVID-19 Vaccination with Pfizer-BioNTech or mRNA-1273 among Adults Living in Florida” was just uploaded to the MedRxiv preprint server. This study was headed by MIT Professor Retsef Levi, with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo serving as senior author:
Study Overview
- Population: 1,470,100 noninstitutionalized Florida adults (735,050 Pfizer recipients and 735,050 Moderna recipients).
- Intervention: Two doses of either:
- BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech)
- mRNA-1273 (Moderna)
- Follow-up Duration: 12 months after second dose.
- Comparison: Head-to-head between Pfizer vs. Moderna recipients.
- Main Outcomes:
- All-cause mortality
- Cardiovascular mortality
- COVID-19 mortality
- Non-COVID-19 mortality
All-cause mortality
Pfizer recipients had a significantly higher 12-month all-cause death rate than Moderna recipients — about 37% higher risk.
- Pfizer Risk: 847.2 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 617.9 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +229.2 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.37 (i.e., 37% higher mortality risk with Pfizer) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.384 (95% CI: 1.331–1.439)
Cardiovascular mortality
Pfizer recipients had a 53% higher risk of dying from cardiovascular causes compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 248.7 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 162.4 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +86.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.53 (i.e., 53% higher cardiovascular mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.540 (95% CI: 1.431–1.657)
COVID-19 mortality
Pfizer recipients had nearly double the risk of COVID-19 death compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 55.5 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 29.5 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +26.0 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.88 (i.e., 88% higher COVID-19 mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.882 (95% CI: 1.596–2.220)
Non-COVID-19 mortality
Pfizer recipients faced a 35% higher risk of dying from non-COVID causes compared to Moderna recipients.
- Pfizer Risk: 791.6 deaths per 100,000 people
- Moderna Risk: 588.4 deaths per 100,000 people
- Risk Difference:
➔ +203.3 deaths per 100,000 (Pfizer excess) - Risk Ratio (RR):
➔ 1.35 (i.e., 35% higher non-COVID mortality risk) - Odds Ratio (Adjusted):
➔ 1.356 (95% CI: 1.303–1.412)
Biological explanations
The findings of this study are surprising, given that Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine contains approximately three times more mRNA (100 µg) than Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine (30 µg). This suggests that the higher mortality observed among Pfizer recipients could potentially be related to higher levels of DNA contamination — an issue that has been consistently reported worldwide:
The paper hypothesizes differences between Pfizer and Moderna may be due to:
- Different lipid nanoparticle compositions
- Differences in manufacturing, biodistribution, or storage conditions
Final conclusion
Florida adults who received Pfizer’s BNT162b2 vaccine had higher 12-month risks of all-cause, cardiovascular, COVID-19, and non-COVID-19 mortality compared to Moderna’s mRNA-1273 vaccine recipients.
Unfortunately, without an unvaccinated group, the study cannot determine the absolute increase in mortality risk attributable to mRNA vaccination itself. However, based on the mountain of existing evidence, it is likely that an unvaccinated cohort would have experienced much lower mortality risks. It’s also important to remember that Moderna mRNA injections are still dangerous.
As the authors conclude:
These findings are suggestive of differential non-specific effects of the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines, and potential concerning adverse effects on all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. They underscore the need to evaluate vaccines using clinical endpoints that extend beyond their targeted diseases.
Epidemiologist and Foundation Administrator, McCullough Foundation
Please consider following both the McCullough Foundation and my personal accounton X (formerly Twitter) for further content.
Reprinted with permission from Focal Points.
Fr0m LifeSiteNews
A Department of Health memo warns that Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program will exceed its $75 million budget due to high demand, with $16 million already paid out.
COVID vaccine injury payments are expected to go over budget, according to a Canadian Department of Health memo.
According to information published April 28 by Blacklock’s Reporter, the Department of Health will exceed their projected payouts for COVID vaccine injuries, despite already spending $16 million on compensating those harmed by the once-mandated experimental shots.
“A total $75 million in funding has been earmarked for the first five years of the program and $9 million on an ongoing basis,” the December memo read. “However the overall cost of the program is dependent on the volume of claims and compensation awarded over time, and that the demand remains at very high levels.”
“The purpose of this funding is to ensure people in Canada who experience a serious and permanent injury as a result of receiving a Health Canada authorized vaccine administered in Canada on or after December 8, 2020 have access to a fair and timely financial support mechanism,” it continued.
Canada’s Vaccine Injury Support Program (VISP) was launched in December 2020 after the Canadian government gave vaccine makers a shield from liability regarding COVID-19 jab-related injuries.
While Parliament originally budgeted $75 million, thousands of Canadians have filed claims after received the so-called “safe and effective” COVID shots. Of the 3,060 claims received to date, only 219 had been approved so far, with payouts totaling over $16 million.
Since the start of the COVID crisis, official data shows that the virus has been listed as the cause of death for less than 20 kids in Canada under age 15. This is out of six million children in the age group.
The COVID jabs approved in Canada have also been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young, healthy men.
Additionally, a recent study done by researchers with Canada-based Correlation Research in the Public Interest showed that 17 countries have found a “definite causal link” between peaks in all-cause mortality and the fast rollouts of the COVID shots as well as boosters.
Interestingly, while the Department of Health has spent $16 million on injury payouts, the Liberal government spent $54 million COVID propaganda promoting the vaccine to young Canadians.
The Public Health Agency of Canada especially targeted young Canadians ages 18-24 because they “may play down the seriousness of the situation.”
The campaign took place despite the fact that the Liberal government knew about COVID vaccine injuries, according to a secret memo.
In Defeat, Joe Tay’s Campaign Becomes a Flashpoint for Suspected Voter Intimidation in Canada
Carney’s budget is worse than Trudeau’s
Governments in Alberta should spur homebuilding amid population explosion
History in the making? Trump, Zelensky hold meeting about Ukraine war in Vatican ahead of Francis’ funeral
Yet another struggling soldier says Veteran Affairs Canada offered him euthanasia
Nine Dead After SUV Plows Into Vancouver Festival Crowd, Raising Election-Eve Concerns Over Public Safety
Low oil prices could have big consequences for Alberta’s finances
-
Business2 days agoTrump’s bizarre 51st state comments and implied support for Carney were simply a ploy to blow up trilateral trade pact
-
Alberta1 day agoAlberta’s future in Canada depends on Carney’s greatest fear: Trump or Climate Change
-
Business2 days agoNew federal government plans to run larger deficits and borrow more money than predecessor’s plan
-
Business2 days agoScott Bessent says U.S., Ukraine “ready to sign” rare earths deal
-
International2 days agoJavier Millei declassifies 1850+ files on Nazi leaders in Argentina
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy1 day agoTrust but verify: Why COVID-19 And Kamloops Claims Demand Scientific Scrutiny
-
Bjorn Lomborg2 days agoHow Canada Can Respond to Climate Change Smartly
-
Agriculture1 day agoLiberal win puts Canada’s farmers and food supply at risk