are mRNA vaccines causing innate immune suppression?
a look at new work on pathways and proposed areas for research
mRNA vaccines appear to elicit profound, broad based immune suppression
they are structured very differently than live virus and have the equivalent of a biological passkey allow them to proliferate through the body
they persist in tissues for 60 days or more generating synthetic spike protein which is a toxin
and this likely goes a long way toward explaining why the immune response to them is so much more intense and prone to serious, lasting side effects than other vaccines or live virus
mRNA vaccine driven immune suppression has been a topic of great debate and discussion. there have been numerous hypotheses and quite a lot of ominous looking associative data.
it’s been clear for quite a long time that these mRNA vaccines are creating windows of immune suppression. there are also arguments that some of this immune suppression/damage is permanent or, at least, long lasting. there are also some arguments that it’s cumulative. (i’m still making up my mind on those last 2 and, outside of what clearly looks like OAS/hoskins effect driving enhanced infection risk in the vaccinated as leaky vaccines push viral evolution to use antigenic fixation to advantage, i’m just not ready to make a high confidence call yet.)
what has been more elusive (because it’s really hard) is pinning down the actual pathways. immune function is one of the most complex (and least understood) processes in humans. this means we should be both very cautious when gratuitously messing with it absent absolute reams of testing (ahem) but also that we should be careful as we make claims about what we think is going on.
this paper is a strong set of hypotheses and pulls together a great many interesting threads of reasoning and evidence. it also starts to make it look like some of the pathways here are coming onto focus.
it also helps explain why so many people are having long lasting and serious side effects from mRNA, far in excess of covid.
if it’s correct (and we MUST remember to say “IF” here because it’s early days and the data and debate is still emerging and the science is certainly not settled or validated) then a deeply worrying picture is emerging.
and as you can see from the title, this is not exactly the most accessible of subjects.
it took me about a week to read because i kept having to run off and read papers it cited. but, read this whole piece, read the cites, and look up concepts you do not understand, and keep plowing forward until you understand, and this paper is a serious education.
lol. yeah, right, so for the 99% of you who won’t because you lack feline OCD, let’s run through some greatest hits.
this is part one of what will be a multi-part series.
this is the purported smoking gun:
In this paper, we present evidence that vaccination induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signaling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health. Immune cells that have taken up the vaccine nanoparticles release into circulation large numbers of exosomes containing spike protein along with critical microRNAs that induce a signaling response in recipient cells at distant sites. We also identify potential profound disturbances in regulatory control of protein synthesis and cancer surveillance. These disturbances potentially have a causal link to neurodegenerative disease, myocarditis, immune thrombocytopenia, Bell’s palsy, liver disease, impaired adaptive immunity, impaired DNA damage response and tumorigenesis.
i want to be clear a second time that this is a preprint. it’s new data and has not yet been widely debated, picked at, and validated. but, after some pretty good tire kicking, it also looks pretty solid to me and so is very much worthy of such debate being kicked off. that’s how science is done. we’re early stage here so all the caveats of “this is an emerging hypothesis” apply. but it does fit quite a lot of data and seem to empirically validate. so let’s look a bit deeper into what’s being said:
In this paper, we explore the scientific literature suggesting that vaccination with an mRNA vaccine initiates a set of biological events that are not only different from that induced by infection but are in several ways demonstrably counterproductive to both short- and long-term immune competence and normal cellular function. These vaccinations have now been shown to downregulate critical pathways related to cancer surveillance, infection control, and cellular homeostasis.
Differential gene expression analysis of peripheral dendritic cells revealed a dramatic upregulation of both type I and type II interferons (IFNs) in COVID-19 patients, but not in vaccinees. One remarkable observation they made was that there was an expansion of circulating hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) in COVID-19 patients, but this expansion was notably absent following vaccination. A striking expansion in circulating plasmablasts observed in COVID-19 patients was also not seen in the vaccinees. All of these observations are consistent with the idea that the anti-COVID-19 vaccines actively suppress type I IFN signaling,
OK. so, i suspect there are now some eyes glazing over. let’s unpack.
past studies have shown that the immune responses elicited from and trained by mRNA vaccines differ greatly from those by from actual SARSCOV-2 virus. in particular, immune response from live virus carried strong interferon (IFN) response. this was absent in the vaccinated.
this is a big deal for a lot of reasons, not least among them that type 1 IFN is the output of TLR’s (toll like receptors, the front lines of viral response) in myeloid cells. this is the part of your immune system that should be going bananas when seeking to fight a pathogen. think of TLR’s as the spotters looking for enemy aircraft.
IFN plays a big role in the initiation of inflammatory anti-viral immune response. suppressing this could lead to a nasty confluence of masking symptoms (you are not inflamed) but also failing to clear virus (you’re infected and becoming more so).
interferons are a large family of immune modulating proteins. they are bewilderingly varied. type 1 alone (there are 3 types) has two major subtypes which, in turn, have 13 and 17 sub-subtypes. making this even more complex, IFN’s are pleiotropic (each one affects more than one process/site/outcome often in completely unrelated and otherwise unlinked locations, systems, and functional chains.
when you start to play around with these, the results can pop out just about anywhere in incredibly unpredictable and complex ways.
your body regulates this using IRF’s (interferon regulatory factors).
just to be clear, there are vanishingly few people who really understand immune function at pathway levels of function. it’s so staggeringly complex that i know neuroscientists who, having drifted into immunology, just stare at in in awe and have spent months of dedicated work locking down just tiny pieces of it.
i’m now going to draw a (vastly oversimplified) map to try and lay out why IFN matters. this is in crayon, but it lays out a general sense of the signaling pathway.
the reality is magnitudes more complex, but i think i got the key salients correct. the key takeaway is this:
IFNs play a critical role in both controlling viral proliferation and inducing antibody production central to both antiviral and anticancer immunity.
and it looks like mRNA covid drugs are suppressing their expression. specifically:
the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein modifies host cell exosome production. Transfection of cells with the spike protein’s gene and subsequent SARSCoV-2 spike glycoprotein production results in those cells generating exosomes containing microRNAs that suppress IRF9 production while activating a range of pro-inflammatory gene transcripts .
Since these vaccines are specifically designed to induce high and ongoing production of SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoproteins, the implications are ominous.
(exosomes are extracellular vesicles used for cell to cell signaling.)
inhibiting IRF9 will impair all manner of cancer resistance including BRCA2 gene activity. these vaccines also seem to suppress IRF7 and STAT2, which will impair BRCA1. dual impairment of these genes is so dangerous that women who test positive for it genetically often choose to undergo prophylactic dual mastectomy rather than face the risk of breast cancer it entails. BRCA1 suppression also has links to neurodegeneration.
obviously, that’s long term and this may be transient (though long term impacts seem to be an at least somewhat open issue) but this is still serious fire to play with.
there are a couple of very provocative short term outcomes that have been observed here post pfizer jab.
i’m not sure we’re past the anecdote stage and into data, but this sort of thing warrants serious study. we’re into some pretty unpleasant territory and may mean that any latent or undetected cancer could be RAPIDLY amplified by these drugs.
this issue intersects with mRNA vaccine design issues in some unfortunate ways.
one of the keys to unlocking mRNA functionality in humans and stopping your immune system from either over-reacting to or destroying the mRNA before it could elicit immune response was replacing the uridines in the strand with pesudouridine, and later with 1-methylpseudouridine which is what both pfizer and moderna used.
the whole goal here was to prevent response from TLR receptors (which would up regulate IFN-1) and sneak the vaccine in. even so, it requires encapsulation to avoid degradation and the addition of adjuvants to increase immune response (by several orders of magnitude).
but this disguise carries risks with it. it renders your body unable to see the intruder and to effectively deem these mRNA complexes as “self” not “other.” it’s a pass key to run everywhere. and it does. it then undergoes its planned lifecycle of producing large quantities of modified SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoproteins over a long period of time.
A recent early-release study has found that the mRNA in the COVID-19 vaccines is present in germinal centers in secondary lymphoid tissue long after the vaccine is administered, and that it continues to synthesize spike glycoprotein up to at least sixty days post-vaccination . This suggests that immune cells taking up the mRNA in the arm muscle migrate into the lymph system to the lymph nodes
so you’re getting a big load of this for a long time. and it is not confined to injection site. it’s fully systemic. this is likely why immune response is so much greater for vaccines than live virus and why it stays active so much longer and why it can drive such a wide variety of side effects. that alone might lead to all manner of outcome variance from disease itself.
pretty much nobody who gets covid gets dragged through this wringer for 60 days or at this level of intensity, especially while immune suppressed. there is just no predicting where all this is going to accumulate or where it’s going to manifest. fully systemic penetration of a drug that trains cells to generate neurotoxic output for 60 days or more while suppressing something as important and pleiotropic as IFN could set off damn near anything.
the responses will be so varied (and so prone to look like other infections or conditions) that sorting them out and properly attributing them would pose a serious challenge even under the best of conditions.
this is just a small sampler (graphic from the study).
and, obviously, what’s currently going on are not the best of conditions. these are the sorts of questions that should have been studied for years, even decades before giving this to the public. this is WHY vaccine development generally takes 5-10 years, and that’s for traditional modalities that are far safer and far better understood and lack even 5% the potential for biological mischief inherent in mRNA.
jabbing this into a billion people without even having characterized all or really any of this appears to have created a mass drug trial whose only outcomes evaluation will emerge from actuarial tables years from now. the disregard for safety, informed consent, and even voluntary consent at all has been unlike anything i have ever seen.
and we have not yet gotten to what looks like the potentially scary part yet.
stayed tuned for part two of this in coming days…
end note: yet again, i just want to caution that these is research in progress. it may be incomplete or incorrect. treat this as hypothesis, not settled fact. but these questions need asking and these avenues warrant exploration, so i raise them to further such.
obviously, if they were truly doing their jobs, this would be the role of a regulator. perhaps some pointy questions about just what their job description is these days ought be asked as well…
but, if there’s one thing we love here at bad cattitude, its…