They even say this themselves - but it's buried at the end.
"It's important to emphasize that the process of transfecting... differs from vaccine RNA delivery and... the sequence we used differs from the vaccine sequence (Nucleocapside versus Spike)"
So why did Jaenisch frame this preprint like this?
I don't know, but I think the wording is just a reflection of the fact that no paper will be published that suggests any danger of the mRNA therapies.
Damn - how did I miss this?
What Rudy is telling the world in this paper is that transfection with multiple copies of Spike RNA (via infectious clone, but it doesn't matter) (1) induces LINE-1 (2) induces reverse transcription
The quantity of spike mRNA in the COVID mRNA gene therapy vaccines more resembles the infectious clone transfection used in the study, than N-gene transfection.
Rudy is telling you that this mRNA spike transfection is bad. He's been telling you for 2 years.
For comparison, most low grade infections are associated with a blood vRNA level of less than 6000 copies/ml
And remember also that (1) vaccination doesn't protect against infection - so the amount of vRNA is additive (2) there is a lot of vRNA after vaccination - a helluva lot.
So read this paper again, and read between the lines.
TLDR: the vaccine mRNA is reverse transcribed into DNA in your cells - not least because of the quantity flooding your cells. The virus can not, to any significant extent.
@SECGov @Kevin_McKernan @SabinehazanMD Wow so this company is claiming influence with 11,000 scientists and multiple links lead back to pharma and the gene therapy corporations.
Broad institute. Who could have guessed?
#pubpeergate
@Yale could be up to their necks in the biggest HIPAA scandal since @UChicago
This is how the scam appears to have worked.
Harlan Krumholz owns a patent for managing health data through an app. "Hugo health" was the middle man providing the app to bait people claiming to be vaccine injured to join a study called LISTEN. But it was essentially being run on behalf of Pfizer/Janssen who paid him $3m in "research grants".
Thousands of injured signed up but only 241 patients were used in the "study" of which the publications were irrelevant and showed nothing other than "the vaccines saved millions of lives" bla bla. Nothing helpful for the vaccine injured at all.
But the bombshell - the data that they provided was able to be sold off to anyone they wanted to. It was in the consent form that most people didn't read. The data was held on hugo.health which has now gone. It was NOT HIPAA compliant.
How did we know that hugo.health's servers were not HIPAA compliant?
Yale told the participants in a email in July 2024 (attached).
So where did all that health data go?
Was it sold off to the highest bidder or used in a blackmail campaign against vulnerable people who were vaccine injured and couldn't work? (Like those that have targeted our accounts recently)
We don't know. But you can be damn sure that Yale knows, and took secret action to remedy the situation having already taken millions of dollars from pharma to run studies that undermined the vaccine injured.
That is why there is so much animosity suddenly being directed at the vaccine injured. They want to bury this story.
Yale could be in very big trouble.
They deserve a hashtag.
#YaleGate
@Yale @UChicago For those confused, please understand what a "limited hangout" is here. While you are rejoicing on the scraps of Daily Mail fodder, the pharma companies' new narrative is enshrined by those very articles.
@jsm2334 I have 3 new questions:
1β£ why didn't you appear on the Razzaghi paper using your data?
2β£ is your data synthetic?
3β£ what is the binomial probability that 18/20 of a university's research team come from a group that comprises 2% of the US population, if all groups are equal?
@jsm2334 For those confused... The original thread on #OHDSI - the data curators claiming an impossible 96% efficacy rate for a type-mismatched vaccine against infection - is here.