Sausage making at FDA: How human cancer cells got into vaccines

www.lewrockwell.com...

The vaccine industry controls the FDA, which is no surprise to the well informed, but the details are probably worse than one would think.

The Covid vaccine will be a disaster I think.

a reply to: Salander

We are thinning the herd without a vaccine...

The vaccine will thin the herd.

Calculated risk is still risk.

That article is a little dramatic, cell lines are derived from all kinds of sources for specific research purposes. Vaccines cannot fit whole cells into them and their points on methylation are a little one sided and probably taken out of context. When activators and regulatory sequences bind to and initiate a replication fork, the DNA is copied from each strand, one in 5’ to 3’ direction and the other in 3’ to 5’ direction in fragments. The two are then cross referenced and need to be complimentary to one another as a daughter and parent strand bind to one another. When this is not happening the DNA is packaged into structures that wrap it around balls like yarn and condense it to protect it.

Methylation and incorporation of DNA the way they explain it is mixing up DNA replication to make new DNA and DNA transcription to create RNA. Gene expression can be altered with methylation and other methods through modifying histones (cores) or packaging chromatin tighter or looser in DNA storage. We are far more likely to have a replication error through non-homologous end joining when a section of DNA is missed and just removed rather than rebuilding it.

A transposable element can be incorporated in rare circumstances in certain situations and if that happens it will most likely be silenced in heterochromatin which is very tightly packed DNA.

You also have to remember that if DNA remnants are in the vaccine they are most likely going to be broken down and unable to be recognized as DNA because of ingredients and temperatures.

Goodie. On top of the Biden great depression we're going to have a Biden cancer epidemic. 2022 looks really bad from here. I wonder how many other things are going to be "Bidened" by 2024?

Hmmm. Using human tumor cells in a vaccine, with an adjuvant? That sounds insane. Half the tumors out there are cells from other organs that are growing in the wrong place. Lung cells growing in the liver and stuff like that. So, making the body target liver cells or lung cells would trigger autoimmune problems.

I do not know if the information in that article is even close to correct, hopefully it isn't.

a reply to: rickymouse

The article is kind of nuts. They also combine steps, completely skip entire processes that are kind of important and then use random quotes from really smart people. Plus, as long as the tumor cells aren’t your own cancerous cells with familiar antigen, you should be good to go. Well, as long as you aren’t missing a thymus or T-cells. Then you could be in trouble....

originally posted by: TheAMEDDDoc
a reply to: rickymouse

The article is kind of nuts. They also combine steps, completely skip entire processes that are kind of important and then use random quotes from really smart people. Plus, as long as the tumor cells aren’t your own cancerous cells with familiar antigen, you should be good to go. Well, as long as you aren’t missing a thymus or T-cells. Then you could be in trouble....

But that would also possibly stimulate the immune system to attack the blood cells from blood added during operations if you need to get blood...wouldn't it?

a reply to: rickymouse

Only if it’s not a typing match. In a pinch you can deviate from the standardized process of blood typing and it’s the repeat exposures that are more life threatening. What’s weird though is getting into HLA matching and even with the same or similar blood type over and over again, a reaction may occur eventually.

T cells are a major contributor of why cancer isn’t contagious, plus there is a huge array of communication between cells to prevent issues.

Articles get held up on stuff like this because we use immortal cells which can be cancer cells, stem cells (which we can induce) or fetal cells. But from your line of work you know how important it is to have specific immortal lines of cells to test our methods and it gives us absolute control of the variables in vitro. Just because a cell was at one time derived from a cancerous cell does not mean it’s going to give you cancer. There also shouldn’t be DNA changes either because our cells package and protect it unless it’s being replicated or transcribed into RNA. It would be like saying because a vaccine is grown in monkey cells you’re going to change into a non-human primate.

Now an RNA vaccine could cause autoimmune issues because your own cells produce and express the viral proteins, it’s why I’m waiting a bit on those vaccines.

originally posted by: rickymouse
Hmmm. Using human tumor cells in a vaccine, with an adjuvant? That sounds insane. Half the tumors out there are cells from other organs that are growing in the wrong place. Lung cells growing in the liver and stuff like that. So, making the body target liver cells or lung cells would trigger autoimmune problems.

I do not know if the information in that article is even close to correct, hopefully it isn't.

But what if it is reasonably correct?

It was not by accident that vaccine manufacturers lobbied Congress to pass the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Compensation Act which President Reagan signed into law in 1986.

That law granted immunity to vaccine manufacturers for defective products. Naturally, the US taxpayers were put on the hook for injuries caused by dangerous products.

a reply to: Salander

I think that act was more of a regulatory guideline and arbitration process established to promote development and reduce conflict of interest while standardizing reporting issues. The law will also not protect them from gross misconduct, not sure about emergency authorization though. Another example from that period is the Bayh-Dole act which allowed research institutions to benefit from scientific development rather than the government which would just lock away intellectual property that could benefit society.

The 80s were huge with the passage of laws to benefit scientific research and development. The primary goal of scientific integrity is to benefit society. It’s also supposed to reduce bias and researchers are required to declare conflicts of interest. We also must prevent any appearance of conflict of interest, even if there is none. It’s also why you should take those 90-95% effectiveness reports from the media that are confusing effectiveness and efficacy with a grain of salt. Plus, these companies paid for the research and products so they can promote their work in their controlled studies with variables that they set and control. Of course they’re going to look good.

You are correct that a poorly prepared vaccine can be extremely dangerous. Just not exactly in the ways described in the article. What stinks is that children are often one of the last groups to go through clinical trials and for good reason. They can also respond completely differently to a vaccine when compared to an adult.

originally posted by: TheAMEDDDoc
a reply to: rickymouse

Only if it’s not a typing match. In a pinch you can deviate from the standardized process of blood typing and it’s the repeat exposures that are more life threatening. What’s weird though is getting into HLA matching and even with the same or similar blood type over and over again, a reaction may occur eventually.

T cells are a major contributor of why cancer isn’t contagious, plus there is a huge array of communication between cells to prevent issues.

Articles get held up on stuff like this because we use immortal cells which can be cancer cells, stem cells (which we can induce) or fetal cells. But from your line of work you know how important it is to have specific immortal lines of cells to test our methods and it gives us absolute control of the variables in vitro. Just because a cell was at one time derived from a cancerous cell does not mean it’s going to give you cancer. There also shouldn’t be DNA changes either because our cells package and protect it unless it’s being replicated or transcribed into RNA. It would be like saying because a vaccine is grown in monkey cells you’re going to change into a non-human primate.

Now an RNA vaccine could cause autoimmune issues because your own cells produce and express the viral proteins, it’s why I’m waiting a bit on those vaccines.

According to my DNA I am supposed to have a certain match on my blood if I get blood added. I am supposedly an AA type, but some kind of Bombay markers which makes it a little different than a standard blood. How many blood types are there now? Was it fifty six different combos when considering all these markers for a good match? I don't know how that effects adding blood, so I will only opt for plasma if I need it.

My Son in law and some of my grandkids have a certain marker from his mother I think, She is from Guatamals. I guess this marker is present in many hispanic people, but I think it is from the natives down there, not the Spanish or Italian lineages. My daughter he is married to has AA, he has one A for sure which makes him A I think even though he has that other marker....seems to me it is M or something like that. But My grandaughter had her blood tested and they have it on record that she is AB....something sounds weird about that. I hope they test before they give her blood again, there could be a mistake in her records. DNA shows she is definitely their kid so it does not seem possible. My other daughter is AO or A because I am AA and my second wife is O. That O on my daughters recessive allele does give some beneficial properties though from what I have read. She cannot be OO because mine was tested at AA years ago by a doctor who was curious while trying to check out my inherited tacychardia. He knew I was in Medical school and wanted me to go do residence with him when I finished, but I dropped out because I did not like what I was finding out. Back then they knew nothing about all those other strange blood markers but knew about the recessive markers on blood and tests for that were not much more expensive. So he did it. I don't know how they do it though, how to tell the difference.

Do you know much about this kind of stuff, I am a little perplexed by what it all means. I know Bombay markers mean that there is an H antigen on blood cells, but not why one copy does not mean you have the disease, only that it Can be a problem under some circumstances.

a reply to: rickymouse

I don’t remember much about immunology and Bombay blood types except I think they need that specific rare blood type in transfusions because they produce a response to all blood types. Kind of like how Os will react to A and B, a Bombay will react to O, A and B.

One of my immunology books says it’s autosomal recessive and you need to be homozygous recessive (hh) to produce the type. If you are heterozygous (Hh/hH) it says the dominant gene will take over. But you can still be a carrier and pass it on. Most blood types have H antigen on them. So O has that H antigen, A and B add sugar to those antigens and it changes the structure. They are backward compatible though with simple H antigen. Bombay’s don’t even have the H antigen and need blood without it or they produce a response because they produce antibodies to the other major blood groups.

That’s about the limit for me now, I know genetic and protein expression issues can occur and I think there are up to a few dozen blood types. Most of my focus now is molecular medicine, microbiology and immunology with a specialty in infectious disease. Maybe we have a hematologist lurking around or a genetic expert. Sometimes in rare circumstances weird things can happen with genetics too but it’s always safe to test and be sure. Is he AB? Or is the M referring to another antigen they test for in certain blood types?

a reply to: TheAMEDDDoc

I am taking a few classes at Future Learn right now, one is on the relationship with diet to mood and mental health and the other is diet to health. I took twenty six medical classes there over the last three or four years....they are free so what the hell. I learned most of my stuff by reading research and studying interpretations of the research but the classes helped me to convert what I know to the way they were taught, basically I learned to understand how they comprehend things. I can discuss things with these healthcare people better now because I know how they have been conditioned to think. My stuff is kind of different than what they know, so when contradicting consensus of the time I provide evidence along with what I feel is relevant if I comment. They have been taught to think in the box, I never learned to live in that box, I look at things from multiple points of view. I learn from them, they learn from me...as long as I am civil they do listen and follow the links to research I provided.

These are mostly continuing education classes for healthcare professionals, not whole classes....but they are free and I do have a hard time finding people who have done as much research with to discuss things with.

a reply to: rickymouse

Continuing education is hugely important and props to you for doing it. Many of us click and go through the motions just so we get that certificate. A ton of employers don’t advertise it but have subscriptions to certificate programs like CITI modules and other CEU systems. If your employer is large, they may even allow you to start pumping out technologist certs. My graduate program makes us read one or two journal articles a week that break down specific processes, many are about Covid and that’s where most of my knowledge comes from, besides learning the core concepts from coursework and my job. UniProt is another really good site, you can plug in the numbers and letters for genes and it breaks them down in every imaginable way and gives you research journals to read.

One of the largest weaknesses of western medicine is not incorporating the beliefs of the patient and multiple avenues of treatment. It’s been proven that positive patient outcomes result from evidence based techniques that incorporate patient beliefs and feelings in the decision making process, making it a joint venture. One example I have is arguing with a neurologist and their team about my son. They think autism and epilepsy, I think autoimmune encephalitis with an unrecognized antibody. Now they’re finally starting to agree and they are growing proteins from his genome to see what’s going on.

What really stinks in our field is if we have a Bachelors, we get stuck in technologist and junior scientist roles. Don’t get me wrong it’s not a bad thing and average pay in our field at that level is easily $35-$45 an hour depending on location. What is unfortunate is no one takes us seriously until we get a masters or PhD. Even though many have significant real world knowledge. So I’m stuck paying $1400 a credit to hopefully keep moving up.

a reply to: TheAMEDDDoc

It was hard when I started reading research, different words are used than in our normal language. If you look those words up, there is a little difference in what the word means based on the science that is being used to test....which should not be the case. So medical experts translate it and it turns out not correct so the articles written off the research are often flawed and because those people interpreting the research may have different beliefs than those who did the research. I usually go back to the research article, read the parameters, identify the limitations of use, check out the actual numbers and how they are determined. That way I can check if the interpretations are correct, to no surprise, they are making mountains out of mole hills a lot of time in medicine.

If one out of a thousand people get a disease, and a chemical increases the risk factor by half, that means the evidence can only be used on the one out of a thousand susceptible to the disease, one and a half people get the disease with a fifty percent increase in risk factor. That often is because of metabolic susceptibility which is not aplicable to the nine hundred ninety eight people who do not get the disease because they do not have the genetic factors to get the disease.

This kind of crap is exploited in Fad Nutrition. They are poisoning people all over because they are spreading rumors of disease risk most people can't even get. Not all chemicals added to food are bad for us. But some of them are and they add chemistry that is similar to medicine to treat the masses, which actually is being done through the FDA and this chemistry can negatively effect people who do not have the problem. The best classes I took were metabolomics and metabolism because it is pertinent to the differences between people. I do not care what credentials a person has, Credentials can actually make them believe they are right and beliefs can sway interpretations of science to fit their beliefs. Since I have no prestige to protect or license to jeopordize, I can say what I am seeing and all I have to protect is my reputation, so I make sure to try to make sure that the determinations I make are fairly accurate as applied to what I am applying it to. If anything frustrates me it is that the search engine sometimes just shows you what you already looked at which leads you down your original path. I like to investigate multiple paths so have to shut down the browser and clear things with CCleaner and then go back. Remember CCleaner also puts directional software on the computer, but that does not so far seem to effect my researching food and pharma chemistry too much.

a reply to: TheAMEDDDoc

Yes, the Bayh-Dole Act is another piece of specious legislation that serves the Medical Industrial Complex. It helps unethical individuals within feather their nest.

The NCVICA is simply about protection of the industry, an essential part of a fascist reality.

Who on earth is ever going to charge them with gross misconduct? Look at what just happened with the Sackler Family and Purdue Pharma. As we saw in that case and with Epstein, the rot comes from within. The few good prosecutors are left holding the bag.

The fix has been in for a very long time. These 2 acts are simply clues for the curious as to how bad it really is.