COVID-19
'Vaccines' Are Gene Therapy
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
September 13, 2021 (1)
Story at-a-glance
* mRNA “vaccines” created by Moderna
and Pfizer are gene therapies. They fulfill all the definitions of gene
therapy and none of the definitions for a vaccine. This matters because
you cannot mandate a gene therapy against COVID-19 any more than you
can force entire populations to undergo gene therapy for a cancer they
do not have and may never be at risk for
* mRNA contain genetic instructions for making various proteins. mRNA
“vaccines” deliver a synthetic version of mRNA into your cells that
carry the instruction to produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, the
antigen, that then activates your immune system to produce antibodies
* The only one benefiting from an mRNA “vaccine” is the vaccinated
individual, since all they are designed to do is lessen clinical
symptoms associated with the S-1 spike protein. Since you’re the only
one who will reap a benefit, it makes no sense to demand you accept the
risks of the therapy “for the greater good” of your community
* Since mRNA “vaccines” do not meet the medical and/or legal definition
of a vaccine — at least not until the CDC redefined “vaccine” —
marketing them as such is a deceptive practice that violates the law
that governs advertising of medical practices
* SARS-CoV-2 has not even been proven to be the cause of COVID-19. So,
a gene therapy that instructs your body to produce a SARS-CoV-2 antigen
— the viral spike protein — cannot be said to be preventive against
COVID-19, as the two have not been shown to be causally linked
Contents
Introduction
As calls for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination grow around the world, it's
becoming ever more crucial to understand what these injections actually
are. The mRNA "vaccines" created by Moderna and Pfizer are in fact gene
therapies.
Interestingly enough, mainstream media, fact checkers and various
industry front groups insist the gene therapy claim is bogus, even
though every single detail about the vaccines shouts otherwise. Why are
they spreading this disinformation? Why do they not want you to know
what these injections actually are?
Back to Contents
mRNA 'Vaccines' Fulfill None of
the Criteria for a Vaccine
To start, let's take a look at some basic definitions of words. When
these gene therapies were introduced, the definition of vaccine
according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, was: (#1)
* "A product that stimulates a person's
immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the
person from that disease."
Immunity, in turn, was defined as:
* "Protection from an infectious
disease," meaning that "If you are immune to a disease, you can be
exposed to it without becoming infected."
That's the CDC's medical definition, which was effective until
September 1, 2021 — a detail I'll go into in the next section. The
legal definition, in the few cases where it has been detailed, is
equally unequivocal:
* Iowa code (#2) — "Vaccine means a
specially prepared antigen administered to a person for the purpose of
providing immunity."
* Washington state code (#3)
(#4) — "Vaccine means a preparation of a killed or
attenuated living microorganism, or fraction thereof …" The statute
also specifies that a vaccine "upon immunization stimulates immunity
that protects us against disease ..."
These definitions, both medical and legal, present problems for mRNA
"vaccines," since:
* mRNA injections do not impart
immunity. Moderna and Pfizer both admit that their clinical trials
aren't even looking at immunity. As such they did not fulfill the CDC's
medical and/or legal definition of a vaccine.
* They do not inhibit transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 infection. As such
they do not fulfill the medical and/or legal definition of a vaccine —
that is, until the CDC changed its definition of vaccine.
Back to Contents
Dictionaries and the CDC Attempt
to Rewrite Medical Terms
We should not be fooled by attempts to condition the public to accept
redefined terms. As of February 2019, Merriam-Webster defined (#5) "vaccine" as "a
preparation of killed microorganisms, living attenuated organisms, or
living fully virulent organisms that is administered to produce or
artificially increase immunity to a particular disease." By February
26, 2021, they had updated the definition of "vaccine" to: (#6)
"A
preparation that is administered (as by injection) to stimulate the
body's immune response against a specific infectious disease:
a:
an antigenic preparation of a typically inactivated or attenuated ...
pathogenic agent (such as a bacterium or virus) or one of its
components or products (such as a protein or toxin)
b:
a preparation of genetic material (such as a strand of synthesized
messenger RNA) that is used by the cells of the body to produce an
antigenic substance (such as a fragment of virus spike protein)"
Let's be clear. Merriam-Webster does not dictate medical terminology.
It can be used, however, to confuse people. For now, all medical
dictionaries still show the traditional definition of vaccine, (#7) as Merriam-Webster did
up until this year. That said, I would not be surprised if changes are
made there as well, eventually, if the misrepresentation of COVID-19
mRNA vaccines is allowed to stand.
On the other hand, months after Merriam-Webster's change, the CDC
decided to change its definition of vaccine (#8) in such a way that it
better matches what mRNA gene therapies do. Coincidentally, the CDC
made that revision just a week after the FDA gave full approval for
Pfizer's gene therapy, now called Comirnaty. (#9)
Now, as of September 1, 2021, the CDC's definition of a vaccine is a
"preparation that is used to stimulate the body's immune response
against diseases."
The differences in the definitions are subtle but distinct: The first
one defined a vaccine as something that will "produce immunity." But,
since the COVID-19 vaccines are not designed to stop infection but,
rather, to only lessen the degree of infection, it becomes obvious that
the new definition was created specifically to cover the COVID gene
therapies.
Back to Contents
mRNA Therapy Doesn't Satisfy
Public Health Measure Directive
There's also the issue of whether a gene therapy can be mandated, and
this may hinge on it being accepted as a vaccine. The 1905 Supreme
Court ruling in Jacobson v. Massachusetts (#10) essentially
established that collective benefit supersedes individual benefit.
Since mRNA therapies do not render person immune, and do not inhibit
transmission of the virus, they cannot qualify as a public health
measure capable of providing collective benefit that supersedes
individual risk, and therefore cannot be mandated.
Put another way, the ruling argues (although legal experts diverge on
some of the finer details of its interpretation) that it's acceptable
for some individuals to be harmed by a public health directive as long
as it benefits the collective. However, if vaccination is a public
health measure meant to protect and benefit the collective, then it
would need to accomplish two things:
1. Ensure that the vaccinated person is
rendered immune from the disease.
2. Inhibit transmission of the disease from the vaccinated person to
other individuals.
We're now back to the original problem that mRNA therapies for COVID-19
do not accomplish either of these things. Since these gene therapies do
not render the person immune, and do not inhibit transmission of the
virus, they cannot qualify as a public health measure capable of
providing collective benefit that supersedes individual risk.
On the contrary, the only one benefiting from an mRNA "vaccine" is the
individual receiving the gene therapy, since all they are designed to
do is lessen clinical symptoms associated with the S-1 spike protein.
In other words, they won't keep you from getting sick with SARS-CoV-2;
they are only supposed to lessen your infection symptoms if or when you
do get infected. So, getting vaccinated protects no one but yourself.
Since you're the only one who will reap a benefit (less severe COVID-19
symptoms upon infection), the justification to accept the risks of the
therapy "for the greater good" of your community is blatantly
irrational.
Back to Contents
Marketing mRNA Therapy as Vaccine
Violates Federal Law
Since mRNA "vaccines" do not meet the medical and/or legal definition
of a vaccine that imparts immunity, referring to them as vaccines, and
marketing them as such, is a deceptive practice that violates (#11) 15 U.S. Code Section
41 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, (#12) the law that governs
advertising of medical practices.
The lack of completed human trials also puts these mRNA products at
odds with 15 U.S. Code Section 41. Per this law, (#13) (#14) it is unlawful
to advertise "that a product or service can prevent, treat, or cure
human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific
evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical
studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are
made."
Here's the problem: The primary end point in the COVID-19 "vaccine"
trials is not an actual vaccine trial end point because, again, vaccine
trial end points have to do with immunity and transmission reduction.
Neither of those was measured.
What's more, key secondary end points in Moderna's trial include
prevention of severe COVID-19 disease (defined as need for
hospitalization) and prevention of infection by SARS-CoV-2, regardless
of symptoms. (#15) (#16)
However, Moderna did not actually measure rate of infection, stating
that it was too "impractical" to do so.
That means there's no evidence of this gene therapy having an impact on
infection, for better or worse. And, if you have no evidence, you
cannot fulfill the U.S. Code requirement that states you must have
"competent and reliable scientific evidence … substantiating that the
claims are true."
Making matters worse, both Pfizer and Moderna are now eliminating their
control groups by offering the real vaccine to any and all placebo
recipients who want it. (#17)
The studies are supposed to go on for a full two years, but by
eliminating the control group, determining effectiveness and risks is
going to be near impossible.
Back to Contents
What Makes COVID Vaccines Gene
Therapy?
Alright. Let's move on to the definition of "gene therapy." As detailed
on MedlinePlus.gov's "What Is Gene Therapy" page: (#18)
"Gene
therapy is an experimental technique that uses genes to treat or
prevent disease … Researchers are testing several approaches to gene
therapy, including: … Introducing a new gene into the body to help
fight a disease …
Although gene therapy is a promising
treatment option for a number of diseases (including inherited
disorders, some types of cancer, and certain viral infections), the
technique remains risky and is still under study to make sure that it
will be safe and effective. Gene therapy is currently being tested only
for diseases that have no other cures."
Here, it's worth noting that there are many different treatments that
have been shown to be very effective against COVID-19, so it certainly
does not qualify as a disease that has no cure. For example, research
shows the antiparasitic ivermectin impairs the SARS-CoV-2 spike
protein's ability to attach to the ACE2 receptor on human cell
membranes. (#19)
It also can help prevent blood clots by binding to SARS-CoV-2 spike
protein. This prevents the spike protein from binding to CD147 on red
blood cells and triggering clumping. (#20)
It makes sense, then, that gene therapy should be restricted to
incurable diseases, as this is the only time that taking drastic risks
might be warranted. That said, here's how the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration defines gene therapy: (#21)
"Human
gene therapy seeks to modify or manipulate the expression of a gene or
to alter the biological properties of living cells for therapeutic use.
Gene therapy is a technique that modifies a person's genes to treat or
cure disease. Gene therapies can work by several mechanisms:
• Replacing a disease-causing gene
with a healthy copy of the gene
• Inactivating a disease-causing gene
that is not functioning properly
• Introducing a new or modified gene
into the body to help treat a disease"
November 17, 2020, the American Society of Gene + Cell Therapy (ASGCT)
announced "COVID-19 Vaccine Candidates Show Gene Therapy Is a Viable
Strategy," noting that: (#22)
"Two
COVID-19 vaccine trials, both of which use messenger RNA (or mRNA)
technology to teach the body to fight the virus, have reported efficacy
over 90 percent.
These findings, announced by Moderna
on Nov. 16 and by Pfizer and its partner BioNTech on Nov. 9 …
demonstrate that gene therapy is a viable strategy for developing
vaccines to combat COVID-19.
Both vaccine candidates use mRNA to
program a person's cells to produce many copies of a fragment of the
virus. The fragment then stimulates the immune system to attack if the
real virus tries to invade the body."
Back to Contents
mRNA Deliver New Genetic
Instructions
[Video
not available in this archive]
As explained in the ASGCT's video above, mRNA are molecules that
contain genetic instructions for making various proteins. mRNA
"vaccines" deliver a synthetic version of mRNA into your cells that
carry the instruction to produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, the
antigen, that then activates your immune system to produce antibodies.
Then there's Moderna's trial website, (#23) where they describe
their technology thus:
"Typical
vaccines for viruses are made from a weakened or inactive virus, but
mRNA-1273 is not made from the SARS-CoV-2 virus. It is made from
messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA), a genetic code that tells cells how
to make protein, which help the body's immune system make antibodies to
fight the virus."
November 18, 2020, Wired magazine made a big deal about COVID-19
vaccines being "genetic vaccines," noting: (#24)
"The
active ingredient inside their shot is mRNA — mobile strings of genetic
code that contain the blueprints for proteins. Cells use mRNA to get
those specs out of hard DNA storage and into their protein-making
factories. The mRNA inside Pfizer and BioNTech's vaccine directs any
cells it reaches to run a coronavirus spike-building program."
Importantly, as reported by David Martin, Ph.D., (#25) (#26) "Moderna …
describes its product not as a vaccine, but as 'gene therapy
technology' in SEC filings. This is because neither Moderna nor Pfizer
… make any claims about their products creating immunity or preventing
transmission." Additionally, Moderna's SEC filings specifically state
that "Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA,"
as well. (#27)
Back to Contents
mRNA Is 'Proven Form of Gene
Therapy'
In a February 2021 article, MIT Technology Review reviewed the history
of mRNA technology in general, and Moderna's in particular, stating: (#28)
"Vaccines
were not their focus. At the company's founding in 2010, its leaders
imagined they might be able to use RNA to replace the injected proteins
that make up most of the biotech pharmacopoeia, essentially producing
drugs inside the patient's own cells from an RNA blueprint. 'We were
asking, could we turn a human into a bioreactor?' says Noubar Afeyan,
the company's cofounder …"
Bloomberg, in August 2020, reported (#29) that the Moderna
vaccine would seek to transform your body into "a vaccine-making
machine." The New York Times was more to the point. In May 2020, they
reported (#30)
that "Researchers at two Harvard-affiliated hospitals are adapting a
proven form of gene therapy to develop a coronavirus vaccine." Read it
again — A proven form of gene therapy.
So, to summarize: The definition of "genetic" is something relating to
genes, and the definition of "therapy" is the medical treatment of a
disease. The definition of "gene therapy" is the process of modifying
or manipulating the expression of a gene, or altering the biological
properties of living cells.
mRNA are snippets of genetic code that instruct cells to produce
proteins. mRNA COVID-19 therapies "deliver genetic instructions into
your cells," thereby triggering your body to produce a fragment of the
virus (the spike protein). So, mRNA vaccines ARE gene therapy. There's
simply no way around this. They fulfill all the definitions of gene
therapy and none of the definitions for a vaccine.
Back to Contents
Defining 'COVID-19'
There's yet one more potential problem with the "COVID-19 vaccine"
narrative as a whole, which Martin unpacked in a January 25, 2021,
interview on the Wise Traditions podcast (above). (#31) In it, he explains:
"COVID-19
is not a disease. It is a series of clinical symptoms. It is a giant
umbrella of things associated with what used to be associated with
influenza and with other febrile diseases.
The problem that we have is that in
February [2020], the World Health Organization was clear in stating
that there should not be a conflation between [SARS-CoV-2 and
COVID-19]. One is a virus, in their definition, and one is a set of
clinical symptoms. The illusion in February was that SARS-CoV-2 caused
COVID-19.
The problem with that definition, and
with the expectation, is that the majority of people who test positive
using the RT-PCR method for testing, for fragments of what is
associated with SARS-CoV-2, are not ill at all. The illusion that the
virus causes a disease fell apart. That's the reason why they invented
the term asymptomatic carrier."
In short, SARS-CoV-2 has yet to be definitively proven to be the actual
cause of COVID-19. So, a gene therapy that instructs your body to
produce a SARS-CoV-2 antigen — the viral spike protein — cannot even be
touted as a preventative against COVID-19, as the two have not been
shown to be causally linked.
"They
have been willfully lying since the inception of this," Martin says in
the interview. "There is not a causal link between these things … It
has never even been close to established.
We have a situation where the
illusion of the problem is that people say, 'I don't want to get
COVID-19.' What they mean is they don't want to get infected with a
virus. The problem is those two things are not related to each other. A
viral infection hasn't been documented in the majority of what is
called cases.
There is no basis for that conflation
other than the manipulation of the public. That's the first half of the
problem. The second half of the problem is that what is being touted as
a vaccination … is not a vaccine. This is gene therapy …
What is this doing? It's sending a
strand of synthetic RNA into the human being and is invoking within the
human being, the creation of the S1 spike protein, which is a pathogen
… A vaccine is supposed to trigger immunity. It's not supposed to
trigger you to make a toxin …
It's not somewhat different. It's not
the same at all … It's not a prohibiting infection. It's not a
prohibiting transmission device. It's a means by which your body is
conscripted to make the toxin that then, allegedly, your body somehow
gets used to dealing with, but unlike a vaccine — which is to trigger
the immune response — this is to trigger the creation of the toxin."
Back to Contents
Why the Misrepresentation?
As for why drug companies are
misrepresenting this technology, Martin suspects "it's done exclusively
so that they can get themselves under the umbrella of public health
laws that exploit vaccination."
Experimental gene therapies do not have financial liability shielding
from the government, but pandemic vaccines do, even in the experimental
stage, as long as the emergency use authorization is in effect. This is
indeed a major incentive to make sure this technology is perceived as a
vaccine and nothing else, particularly after the FDA grants final
approval.
So, by maintaining the illusion that COVID-19 is a state of emergency,
when in reality it is not, government leaders are providing cover for
these gene therapy companies so that they are insulated from any
liability until that final approval is made.
Back to Contents
Experimental Gene Therapy Is a
Bad Idea
I've written many articles detailing the potential and expected side
effects of these gene therapy "vaccines."
The take-home message here is that these injections are not vaccines.
They do not prevent infection, they do not render you immune and they
do not prevent transmission of the disease. Instead, they alter your
genetic coding, turning you into a viral protein factory that has no
off-switch. What's happening here is a medical fraud of unprecedented
magnitude, and it really needs to be stopped before it's too late for a
majority of people.
If you already got the vaccine and now regret it, you may be able to
address your symptoms using the same strategies you'd use to treat
actual SARS-CoV-2 infection. And, last but not least, if you got the
vaccine and are having side effects, please help raise public awareness
by reporting it. The Children's Health Defense is calling on all who
have suffered a side effect from a COVID-19 vaccine to do these three
things: (#32)
Back to Contents
Source and
References
(1) Analysis
by Dr. Mercola 13-Sep-2021 (only available in the original site for
48
hours after publication date)
(2) References as quoted in the
original source:
#1 CDC
Web Archive August 26, 2021
#2 Rules.iowa.gov
ARC 4096C
#3 SOS.wa.gov
Initiative No. 1300 October 29, 2020
(PDF)
#4 SOS.wa.gov
Initiative No. 1234 August 17, 2020 (PDF)
#5 Merriam-Webster
Definition of Vaccine Archived
February 6, 2019
#6 Merriam-Webster
Definition of Vaccine Archived
February 26, 2021
#7 The
Free Dictionary, Listing of medical dictionary
definitions of vaccine
#8 CDC
September 1, 2021
#9 FDA
August 23, 2021
#10 Justia
Jacobson v. Massachusetts 1905
#11, #25 G.
Edward Griffin’s Need To Know January 19, 2021
#12 Cornell
University 15 US Code Subchapter 1: Federal
Trade Commission
#13 FTC.gov
Warning Letter
#14 FTC
Act, 15 U.S.C. § 41 e
#15 Moderna
Clinical Study Protocol (PDF)
#16 CIDRAP
July 27, 2020
#17 NPR
February 21, 2021
#18 Medline
Plus What Is Gene Therapy?
#19 In
Vivo September-October 2020; 34(5): 3023-3026
#20 The
Journal of Antibiotics June 15, 2021 DOI:
10.1038/s41429-021-00430-5
#21 FDA.gov
What Is Gene Therapy?
#22 ASGCT.org
November 17, 2020
#23 Moderna
COVE Study
#24 Wired
November 18, 2020
#26 David
Martin Transcript (PDF)
#27 US
SEC Moderna June 30, 2020
#28 MIT
Technology Review February 5, 2021
#29 Bloomberg
August 11, 2020
#30 New York
Times May 4, 2020, updated May 7, 2020
(Archived)
#31 Weston
Price January 25, 2021
#32 The
Defender January 25, 2
© Copyright by Dr. Joseph Mercola.
However, since August 2021 he declared: "Again
I will still be writing my daily articles that I started 25 years ago
BUT they will only be available for 48 hours before they are removed.
In this way I hope to continue my mission to help you take control of
your health – but it's up to you to download, share and repost this
content. I will not be enforcing my
copyright on this information so that you may freely share it."