In 2017 science has now found the lymphatic drainage pathway in the brain.
Encephalopathy/encephalitis is a common and court recognized side effect
We know inflammation in the brain can cause damage especially in fetuses and infants
We still don’t know if the immune system is actually attacking itself (autoimmunity) or if there’s a whole population that has “non-self” genes in various areas.
We now know that vaccines do not stay at the injection site.
We now know macrophages can and do deliver vaccine ingredients to the brain.
We have so many people with immune system dysregulation and know its relativity to neurologically and other chronic inflammatory signals.
We now know that chronic inflammation at the cellular level doesn’t allow hormones to properly doc (hello insulin resistance, thyroid hormone resistance, etc).
We know no doctor has the time to teach this and that’s even if they’ve ever looked into it. (It’s easy to see their medical school curriculum).
And now that we all can admit that these vaccines are not safety tested the way the authorities convey they are and that a lot of doctors haven’t looked at vaccines…because why would they when they’re told they’re “safe and effective” “benefits outweigh the risks” “injuries are 1:1” “I’ve never seen a vaccine injury” but they commonly tell you eczema, allergies, neurological delays, etc are common but most certainly aren’t caused by vaccines (even though they admit they don’t know what could be causing them).
What are we going to do with this information? Keep it to yourself or share it because informed consent is the decent thing?
"Encephalopathy/encephalitis is a common and court recognized side effect"
Though I was very young at the time, IIRC this is what happened to my brother in the 1950s due to encepahlitis, had an extended hospital stay and life long neurological issues.
It’s definitely a thing and awful…sadly many caretakers have been to prison for shaken baby syndrome…wonder how many of those were really encephalopathy caused by vaccines?
The stats on it indicate that it happens extremely rarely, maybe in one case in a million or less for live viral vaccines. In immunocompromised individuals it may be higher (but live viral vaccination is contraindicated in this vulnerable group, since any viral infection, even a blunted, attenuated vaccine strain virus, might cause clinical problems).
To be specific, that is done after a brain biopsy. It can be inferred after a spinal tap. Obviously we don't do brain biopsies in a controlled trial to actually determine the incidence of encephalitis following a vaccine. If we did do brain biopsies to actually find the true incidence, then we could institute a grading system for the severity of the encephalitis. IMO, the vast majority of vaccine induced encephalitis is subclinical...Most physicians don't even consider it nor are they taught to consider it. (we are taught it is just normal reaction to the vaccine)..Looking back, I have seen enough babies in my career that were post vaccine that undoubtedly had a form or encephalitis I treated with Tylenol and Ibuprofen. I have no doubt that all those babies that go to the urgent care or the ED w high fevers and lethargy/irritability/inability to console after their vax, probably had/have a form of encephalitis that never gets diagnosed.
I've also seen my fair share of encephalitis cases, and yes, requiring brain biopsy is rather radical but one can infer the diagnosis from a combo of MR/EEG/CSF/clinical features.
I still would say it is not common, but exceedingly rare following vaccination.
The lymphatic drainage system is throughout the body beginning at the collar bone for opening it up. I like the order Dr Perry Nicholson the lymph doc teaches called the big 6 on YouTube. The gut solar plexus is often a mess.
Regarding the way outdated guidance on DNA in vaccines.
When authoritative sources say vaccines undergo “rigorous safety testing,” what exactly has been tested — and what explicitly has not?
Parents are often reassured that vaccines are thoroughly evaluated for long-term safety. Yet when you read the vaccine package inserts themselves, many state in Section 13 (Nonclinical Toxicology), typically 13.1, that the product has not been evaluated for carcinogenic potential, mutagenicity, impairment of fertility, or genomic integration.
That language is not hidden. It is part of the manufacturer’s own regulatory disclosure.
This creates a disconnect that parents are noticing:
How can something be described as rigorously safety tested when certain long-term biological outcomes — including cancer risk, fertility effects, and DNA insertion — are explicitly not evaluated?
The answer isn’t that regulators ignored safety.
It’s that safety conclusions in these areas were inferred, not directly tested — based on biological assumptions developed decades ago.
The residual DNA safety limits used in vaccines today were developed in the mid-1980s, discussed internationally in the late 1980s, and codified in U.S. regulatory guidance in the early 1990s. Those limits were based on the best biological understanding available at the time — but that understanding has since changed dramatically.
Back then, regulators assumed:
• Only long, intact DNA posed risk
• Fragmented DNA was biologically inert
• Mammalian cells did not readily uptake naked DNA
• DNA integration required viral machinery
• Stem cells were not uniquely permissive
• Limiting amount + fragment size was sufficient
• Residual DNA at low levels was a theoretical, not practical, concern
Those assumptions were reasonable in 1989.
They are no longer fully accurate in 2025.
Modern biology has shown that:
• Fragmented DNA is biologically active
• Cells — including stem and progenitor cells — can uptake DNA fragments
• DNA sensing and repair pathways interact with extracellular DNA
• Integration without viral integrase is rare but mechanistically plausible
• Inflammation, cell division, and tissue repair increase DNA interaction probability
By ~2015, several of the foundational assumptions used to justify residual DNA safety were scientifically outdated — even though they remain embedded in vaccine guidance.
Why delivery context matters
Vaccines are commonly delivered intramuscularly, during deliberate immune activation — sometimes in the presence of live attenuated viruses or replicating antigen. Intramuscular injection plus immune activation creates:
• Local inflammation
• Increased endocytosis and cell permeability
• Upregulated DNA repair pathways
• Recruitment of immune cells and progenitor cells
• Lymphatic drainage and systemic biodistribution
Modern gene-therapy guidance treats IM delivery, biodistribution, persistence, and co-delivery context as risk-relevant variables. Vaccine residual-DNA guidance largely does not — because it was written before this biology was understood.
If the original assumptions were wrong, what could that actually mean?
Not certainty.
Not proof.
But real-world biological possibilities that have never been ruled out.
If residual DNA behaves differently than assumed in the 1980s, potential impacts could include:
• Rare genomic integration events, especially during early development
• Increased cancer risk in very small subsets that would evade population studies
• Autoimmune activation, where foreign genetic material is persistently recognized as non-self
• Chronic or delayed inflammatory signaling, particularly in the nervous system
• Neurological vulnerability during critical periods of brain development
• Sex-mismatched DNA effects, where opposite-sex genetic material interacts with developing stem cells in ways that were never evaluated
These outcomes would likely be:
• Rare
• Non-uniform
• Developmentally timed
• Not immediately visible
• Difficult to detect epidemiologically
Which is exactly why absence of proof is not proof of absence.
Another unexamined variable is sex-mismatched DNA exposure. Modern biology recognizes that sex-specific genetic material can be biologically recognized as non-self and that stem cells are more permissive during development. Whether trace residual DNA originating from the opposite sex, introduced during early childhood immune activation, has any biological relevance has never been directly evaluated — because earlier models assumed it could not matter.
None of this proves harm.
None of this says vaccines don’t work.
It says something simpler — and far more reasonable:
Current residual DNA safety conclusions are based on inference from 1980s biology, not direct testing using modern genomics, stem-cell science, biodistribution studies, or DNA-repair knowledge.
Parents are not rejecting science by asking these questions.
They are asking for science to catch up with itself.
In every other field involving genetic material — gene therapy, viral vectors, cell therapies — regulatory frameworks evolved to reflect modern biology. Vaccines are the exception.
Asking whether legacy assumptions should be re-validated is not anti-vaccine.
It is pro-scientific rigor.
Wonder if the people who profit from vaccines will allow the science to be done by HHS? Then wonder how long until assumptions are updated, regulatory (safety) guidance is updated, and then how long they’ll allow manufacturers to adopt to new standards? Wonder if your grandchildren will get safer vaccines. I sure hope I’m still alive when the product is fitting to the science. Wonder if gender dysphoria, autoimmune conditions, or chronic brain inflammation and subsequent damage will still be around?
I also have an 80 yr old aunt with lifelong neurological issues stemming from encephalitis when she was a baby. As soon as I awakened during Covid, I had an aha moment & have reasoned she was most likely vaccine-injured in the late 1940s. The neurological damage from a high neonatal fever evolved into varied health issues (autoimmune (psoriasis) & IBS, grand mal seizures beginning in her 30s which required intensive medication for decades. Aside from the obvious quality of life issues, these issues stunted her intelligence and maturity potential, the seizures prevented her from driving, and eventually gave her early-onset dementia.
Look no further than the Amish for the control group on vaccines, which also tells you why Gov. Shapiro in PA is trying to mandate vaccines on their community with no religious exemption allowed in order to make them persona non grata in his state. Of course, he is heavily funded by vaccine manufacturers and is doing their bidding. They need to eradicate the vaccine-free subset of the population before anyone connects the dots.
You have made several assumptions, but these are invalid or are misleading...
"Fragmented DNA is biologically active"
With DNA, the term "Biologically active" usually means capable of expressing a gene or manufacturing a protein. Short DNA fragments (200 base pairs long) cannot do this. A typical human gene requires thousands to tens of thousands of base pairs.
The tiny kernel of truth about biological activity comes from the fact that small DNA fragments inside a body can trigger cellular sensors (like TLR9 or STING) that recognise foreign material and signal the innate immune system. However, this immune recognition does not mean the fragment can take over a cell, alter human genetics, or cause disease, which is what many will mistakenly understand by your use of the term "biologically active".
"Cells can uptake DNA fragments"
This is technically true, but Irrelevant. Cells uptake microscopic fragments of extracellular material through natural processes like endocytosis all the time.
If a cell absorbs a naked DNA fragment via endocytosis, the fragment is trapped inside a bubble called an endosome, which quickly merges with a lysosome. The lysosome acts as the cell's disposal unit, filled with acid and enzymes (DNases) that completely digest the DNA into simple, harmless nucleic acid building blocks.
"DNA sensing and repair pathways interact with extracellular DNA"
This is partially correct/misleading. As I mentioned above, "DNA sensing pathways" (like STING) detect extracellular DNA fragments to alert the immune system to pathogens. This is a normal immune protection mechanism. DNA *repair* pathways, however, operate only inside the cell nucleus on the cell's own native genome, and not on extracellular DNA floating outside in blood or muscle tissue.
"Integration without viral integrase is rare but mechanistically plausible"
Again, this is a distorted perception of the reality. While theoretical integration without viral enzymes can occur under extreme, artificial laboratory conditions (like direct nuclear microinjection or using electroporation to punch holes in cell membranes), it requires an intact, functional sequence of DNA. Also the DNA has to somehow bypass degradation in the cytoplasm and then enter the cell's nucleus. It would require a concurrent double-stranded break in the host cell's DNA for integration to occur. It's unlikely that this sequence of events would occur.
Short, 200-base-pair non-functional DNA fragments injected into subcutaneous or muscle tissue face aggressive extracellular DNase enzymes, endosomal destruction, and the nuclear membrane barrier.
There is no evidence in the public/research domain that fragmented residual vaccine DNA integrates into recipient genomes.
Scare stories about vaccine DNA need to be taken in context. We are exposed to vastly more foreign fragmented DNA every day than we could ever be exposed to through vaccination. A single bite of food introduces multi-gram quantities of short, fragmented plant and animal DNA into our bodies. Our immune systems and metabolic enzymes handle this extracellular DNA continually, and we suffer no ill effects.
Your explanation reflects an older, simplified model of extracellular DNA handling that modern nonviral gene-delivery research has moved well beyond. There’s an entire section of gene editing that has found ways around the barriers you describe as if they were set in stone decades ago.
Modern nonviral gene therapy is specifically the science of getting DNA into cells without viral integrase. It studies the exact steps you’re dismissing:
extracellular DNA → cellular uptake → endosomal escape → cytoplasmic survival → nuclear entry → interaction with DNA-repair machinery.
Yes, most naked DNA is degraded. Yes, delivery is inefficient. But “inefficient” does not mean “completely destroyed” or “cannot happen.”
Naked DNA injected into skeletal muscle has been shown for decades to enter cells and produce gene expression without viruses or nuclear microinjection.
Short DNA fragments also do not need to contain an intact functional gene to matter biologically. They can activate DNA sensors, reach intracellular compartments, and potentially be captured during DNA repair.
Your statement that integration requires an “intact, functional sequence” is also incorrect. Modern genome-editing methods use short pieces of foreign double-stranded DNA that can be incorporated at DNA double-strand breaks by the cell’s own repair machinery, including non-homologous end joining.
And DNA repair machinery does not distinguish a DNA end as “foreign” and automatically refuse to join it.
I am not claiming residual vaccine DNA has been proven to integrate and cause disease.
I am saying the absolute claims — “completely digested,” “cannot reach the nucleus,” “requires viral machinery,” or “must contain a functional gene” — do not reflect modern nonviral gene-delivery and DNA-repair science.
That distinction is exactly why older assumptions should be re-tested against modern biology rather than treated as settled fact.
Did anyone study whether residual fetal DNA activates innate immunity differently in children with compromised methylation, allergic burden, and primed microglia? I know the answer, so this is rhetorical. No, never properly studied. Aaron, thank you for this article/your continued work on a flawed system based on priming the arm of an immune system in babies and children which shouldn't be primed. I published this article today which you might find interesting: https://michelleperromd337477.substack.com/p/do-vaccines-cause-autism.
And people like myself, a legal immigrant, have without consent been injected with this stuff. 10 vaccines in 7 injections. And after a first rejection, after going back to my country of origin, again 4 jabs - without consent and without even knowing what I have been injected with. No one tells use, of consent no one ever heard.
This is Children of God for life vaccine chart identifying tainted vaccines. They also have a document that identifies all the details about the original aborted children that created the cell lines used today. I have followed them for several decades. An excellent, honest and well documented resource. Here is their chart. https://cogforlife.org/charts/
It is so simple... just use your common sense ( that which is really not common to us all!). All this crap that is put into these 'so-called' vaccines, is nothing but experimentation on man. Those, in fear, will follow and they become the fodder. Big Pharma is, and always was, out of control however now it is in our faces and NOT hidden! I laugh (and am revolted at the same time) at these commercials for new pharmaceuticals in which you don't even know what malady it is for. Sometimes it looks like they are just making it up as they go along. And the side effects..........death is put somewhere in the middle just to make it look like it is no big deal!! Create convenience and you will have followers........take no personal responsibility for your actions and see where you will wind up........I never heard of pneumococcal pneumonia until I saw the commercial... and did you know that I am at risk? After all I am 73 and everyone past 51 is at risk! I'm so scared, Pfizer! Albert Bourla, (on your 20 million $ yacht) please help me!!
Take personal responsibility for your life and your health. You will be much better off!!
There are no 14-week or 3-month embryos. The embryo stage lasts until 12 weeks, after which the fetus is a fully formed and recognizable human being. That is the distinction between an embryo and a fetus.
So an injection is like a modern day Congressional Bill. It is meant to solve a problem, but superfluous and devious, adding unwanted material into and onto the unsuspecting public.
‘Murder By Injection’ and Dr. Moulden’s work tried to tell us.
We ask the bodies of even DAY ONE newborns to mount a defense to HepB and we give them SYNTHETIC vitamin K. Then we ask their bodies to mount a defense against measles,
mumps,
rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus,
etc.
HOW does their tiny body know to mount a defense against HepB— or whatever and NOT also mount a defense against… bodies? If we have fragments of DNA / bodies of MRC-5 “Marc” and WI-38, “Winnie” in each vial, HOW are
they supposed to know to mount a defense against THIS ingredient but not against THAT ingredient?
They don’t and food for thought. Some of the top childhood allergens are food proteins in the injections. Casein (dairy) soy, dextrose (corn), yeast (bread), and eggs. Gee I wonder if injecting those proteins made them mount an immune response against the foreign proteins?
The adaptive immune system does not recognise vague concepts like "bodies" or "ingredients." It targets specific, unique molecular shapes called antigens, which are proteins or glycoproteins. There is a "lock and key" mechanism for molecular recognition and structural binding of the antigens to an "epitope". The immune response to different antigens can be highly specific and directed at a single antigen on different organisms like Hepatitis (eg to the surface and core antigens on Hep B).
The immune system generates antibodies against proteins and complex glycoproteins, but not naked double-stranded or single-stranded human DNA fragments.
You just said the immune system generates antibodies against proteins…so are you agreeing that foreign food proteins injected IM can initiate an immune response? Isn’t it the job of the adjuvant to instigate an acute, prolonged and untargeted response? Dr Stanley Plotkin (Godfather of vaccines…who wrote the manual) explains it in his deposition by Aaron Siri.
There is a quantitative threshold that needs to be breached for foreign proteins to initiate a serious/deleterious allergic immune response. The trace concentrations of proteins in the vaccines are well below this threshold.
This is why you can still give vaccines with traces of egg albumin to those with a history of a severe allergy to eggs, for example.
However there is the possibility a different type of response might be triggered through molecular mimicry, where an injected protein or glycoprotein antigen shares an epitope with some type of host tissue (leading to autoimmune side effects like GBS for example).
But these seem to be very uncommon. And here too there is a threshold in place… this is a three stage threshold mechanism which requires all 3 signals to be active in order for damaging T cell responses to be activated.
First “signal” is the antigen. Second signal is a PAMP response which is a costimulatory trigger required to allow the APCs to express co-stimulatory surface proteins (such as CD80/CD86). Finally you need proinflammatory cytokine production before the T cells can transform into activated killer or CD4 helper cells, which orchestrate the damaging autoimmune response.
If all you have is the first antigen signal without the added input of PAMPS/cytokines, the T cells are essentially anergic.
There seems to be a lot of research into the amplitude of responses generated to vaccine adjuvants in this regard in the literature. I need to look at this more, as clearly the research base on adjuvants has expanded considerably since I last familiarised myself with it some 10 or more years ago. Fascinating.
The two primary human fetal cell lines used in the development, testing, or production of COVID-19 vaccines are HEK-293 and PER.C6.1. HEK-293 (Human Embryonic Kidney)Origin: Derived from the kidney tissue of a fetus aborted in the Netherlands in 1972.AstraZeneca / Oxford Vaccine: Used this cell line during the actual production and manufacturing process to grow the viral vector.Pfizer-BioNTech & Moderna Vaccines: Used this cell line strictly for early laboratory proof-of-concept testing to verify that the mRNA generated the correct spike protein. It was not used to manufacture or produce either mRNA vaccine.2. PER.C6 (Human Embryonic Retinal)Origin: Derived from the retinal tissue of a fetus aborted in the Netherlands in 1985.Janssen / Johnson & Johnson Vaccine: Used this proprietary cell line during the manufacturing process to scale and grow the specific virus needed for the vaccine.
You will find many conflicting statements online. I will try to get back with more proof later tonight.
¨Film Exposes Motives Behind Mass HPV Vaccinations and Deadly Side Effects
A substantial new documentary film released online to audiences in the UK and across Europe this week, questions claims made by UK, Danish and Spanish health authorities that widespread administering of the HPV vaccine is both safe and a guaranteed means of preventing cervical cancer. It comes at a time when – flying in the face of independent science – UK and European medical experts are proposing to extend the vaccine’s use from teenage girls, adding teenage boys and children below the age of puberty. 'Manufactured Crisis: What they're not telling you about the HPV Vaccine' exposes cases of severe, life-changing adverse reactions experienced by girls and young women following doses of the commercial HPV vaccines Gardasil or Cervarix – cases from which the public has previously been shielded. Recorded adverse reactions include severe disability, paralysis and even death. Throughout Manufactured Crisis, victims and their families tell their own, often heartrending, stories.¨
So, we consider immoral unbiblical fornication to be perfectly ok among mostly little teenie agers and twenty somethings (99% of all murder/abortions), and we fight to keep murder/abortions a woman's "right", so big PharmAss can make genetically corrupted vaccinations and cause all sorts of disease states and autism AND make billions off of suffering.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Points to Consider in the Characterization of Cell Lines Used to Produce Biologicals. FDA/CBER, 1993.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Characterization and Qualification of Cell Substrates and Other Biological Materials Used in the Production of Viral Vaccines for Infectious Disease Indications. FDA/CBER, 2010.
World Health Organization. Requirements for the Use of Animal Cells as In Vitro Substrates for the Production of Biologicals. WHO Technical Report Series 878, 1998.
World Health Organization. Annex 3: Recommendations for the Evaluation of Animal Cell Cultures as Substrates for the Manufacture of Biological Medicinal Products and for the Characterization of Cell Banks. WHO Technical Report Series 978, 2013.
Rogers, Michael B., et al. “Illegitimate Recombination in Mammalian Cells.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 92, no. 19, 1995, pp. 9127–9131.
Holmgren, Lars, et al. “Horizontal Transfer of DNA by the Uptake of Apoptotic Bodies.” Blood, vol. 93, no. 11, 1999, pp. 3956–3963.
Mittra, Indraneel, et al. “Circulating Nucleic Acids Damage DNA of Healthy Cells by Integrating into Their Genomes.” Journal of Biosciences, vol. 40, no. 1, 2015, pp. 91–111.
Ishikawa, Hiroki, and Glen N. Barber. “STING Is an Endoplasmic Reticulum Adaptor That Facilitates Innate Immune Signaling.” Nature, vol. 455, no. 7213, 2008, pp. 674–678.
Sun, Li, et al. “cGAS Is a Cytosolic DNA Sensor That Activates the Type I Interferon Pathway.” Science, vol. 339, no. 6121, 2013, pp. 786–791.
Kowalczykowski, Stephen C. “An Overview of the Molecular Mechanisms of Recombination.” Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology, vol. 7, no. 11, 2015.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Control (CMC) Information for Human Gene Therapy Investigational New Drug Applications (INDs). FDA, 2020.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Nonclinical Biodistribution Considerations for Gene Therapy Products. FDA, 2023.
Feschotte, Cédric, and Ellen J. Pritham. “DNA Transposons and the Evolution of Eukaryotic Genomes.” Annual Review of Genetics, vol. 41, 2007, pp. 331–368.
Brazhnik, Kateryna, et al. “Extracellular DNA Uptake and Its Biological Implications.” Trends in Cell Biology, vol. 30, no. 5, 2020, pp. 381–394.
I just posted this article online. Thank you. A man wants to argue these aren't fetal cells bc they are kept alive in the lab. I hadn't heard that excuse before.
My thoughts…
So since the safety guidance…
In 2017 science has now found the lymphatic drainage pathway in the brain.
Encephalopathy/encephalitis is a common and court recognized side effect
We know inflammation in the brain can cause damage especially in fetuses and infants
We still don’t know if the immune system is actually attacking itself (autoimmunity) or if there’s a whole population that has “non-self” genes in various areas.
We now know that vaccines do not stay at the injection site.
We now know macrophages can and do deliver vaccine ingredients to the brain.
We have so many people with immune system dysregulation and know its relativity to neurologically and other chronic inflammatory signals.
We now know that chronic inflammation at the cellular level doesn’t allow hormones to properly doc (hello insulin resistance, thyroid hormone resistance, etc).
We know no doctor has the time to teach this and that’s even if they’ve ever looked into it. (It’s easy to see their medical school curriculum).
And now that we all can admit that these vaccines are not safety tested the way the authorities convey they are and that a lot of doctors haven’t looked at vaccines…because why would they when they’re told they’re “safe and effective” “benefits outweigh the risks” “injuries are 1:1” “I’ve never seen a vaccine injury” but they commonly tell you eczema, allergies, neurological delays, etc are common but most certainly aren’t caused by vaccines (even though they admit they don’t know what could be causing them).
What are we going to do with this information? Keep it to yourself or share it because informed consent is the decent thing?
"Encephalopathy/encephalitis is a common and court recognized side effect"
Though I was very young at the time, IIRC this is what happened to my brother in the 1950s due to encepahlitis, had an extended hospital stay and life long neurological issues.
It’s definitely a thing and awful…sadly many caretakers have been to prison for shaken baby syndrome…wonder how many of those were really encephalopathy caused by vaccines?
I'd say all!
Certainly most…
Encephalitis after vaccination is NOT "common".
The stats on it indicate that it happens extremely rarely, maybe in one case in a million or less for live viral vaccines. In immunocompromised individuals it may be higher (but live viral vaccination is contraindicated in this vulnerable group, since any viral infection, even a blunted, attenuated vaccine strain virus, might cause clinical problems).
The problem is in how you define "encephalitis".
To be specific, that is done after a brain biopsy. It can be inferred after a spinal tap. Obviously we don't do brain biopsies in a controlled trial to actually determine the incidence of encephalitis following a vaccine. If we did do brain biopsies to actually find the true incidence, then we could institute a grading system for the severity of the encephalitis. IMO, the vast majority of vaccine induced encephalitis is subclinical...Most physicians don't even consider it nor are they taught to consider it. (we are taught it is just normal reaction to the vaccine)..Looking back, I have seen enough babies in my career that were post vaccine that undoubtedly had a form or encephalitis I treated with Tylenol and Ibuprofen. I have no doubt that all those babies that go to the urgent care or the ED w high fevers and lethargy/irritability/inability to console after their vax, probably had/have a form of encephalitis that never gets diagnosed.
I've also seen my fair share of encephalitis cases, and yes, requiring brain biopsy is rather radical but one can infer the diagnosis from a combo of MR/EEG/CSF/clinical features.
I still would say it is not common, but exceedingly rare following vaccination.
Tell the author then, this was a quote from the article. That's why it's in quotes.
which article? Sorry but I couldn't see one mentioned.
Share.
I try to share but few listen, mega followers no dough...
The lymphatic drainage system is throughout the body beginning at the collar bone for opening it up. I like the order Dr Perry Nicholson the lymph doc teaches called the big 6 on YouTube. The gut solar plexus is often a mess.
Regarding the way outdated guidance on DNA in vaccines.
When authoritative sources say vaccines undergo “rigorous safety testing,” what exactly has been tested — and what explicitly has not?
Parents are often reassured that vaccines are thoroughly evaluated for long-term safety. Yet when you read the vaccine package inserts themselves, many state in Section 13 (Nonclinical Toxicology), typically 13.1, that the product has not been evaluated for carcinogenic potential, mutagenicity, impairment of fertility, or genomic integration.
That language is not hidden. It is part of the manufacturer’s own regulatory disclosure.
This creates a disconnect that parents are noticing:
How can something be described as rigorously safety tested when certain long-term biological outcomes — including cancer risk, fertility effects, and DNA insertion — are explicitly not evaluated?
The answer isn’t that regulators ignored safety.
It’s that safety conclusions in these areas were inferred, not directly tested — based on biological assumptions developed decades ago.
The residual DNA safety limits used in vaccines today were developed in the mid-1980s, discussed internationally in the late 1980s, and codified in U.S. regulatory guidance in the early 1990s. Those limits were based on the best biological understanding available at the time — but that understanding has since changed dramatically.
Back then, regulators assumed:
• Only long, intact DNA posed risk
• Fragmented DNA was biologically inert
• Mammalian cells did not readily uptake naked DNA
• DNA integration required viral machinery
• Stem cells were not uniquely permissive
• Limiting amount + fragment size was sufficient
• Residual DNA at low levels was a theoretical, not practical, concern
Those assumptions were reasonable in 1989.
They are no longer fully accurate in 2025.
Modern biology has shown that:
• Fragmented DNA is biologically active
• Cells — including stem and progenitor cells — can uptake DNA fragments
• DNA sensing and repair pathways interact with extracellular DNA
• Integration without viral integrase is rare but mechanistically plausible
• Inflammation, cell division, and tissue repair increase DNA interaction probability
By ~2015, several of the foundational assumptions used to justify residual DNA safety were scientifically outdated — even though they remain embedded in vaccine guidance.
Why delivery context matters
Vaccines are commonly delivered intramuscularly, during deliberate immune activation — sometimes in the presence of live attenuated viruses or replicating antigen. Intramuscular injection plus immune activation creates:
• Local inflammation
• Increased endocytosis and cell permeability
• Upregulated DNA repair pathways
• Recruitment of immune cells and progenitor cells
• Lymphatic drainage and systemic biodistribution
Modern gene-therapy guidance treats IM delivery, biodistribution, persistence, and co-delivery context as risk-relevant variables. Vaccine residual-DNA guidance largely does not — because it was written before this biology was understood.
If the original assumptions were wrong, what could that actually mean?
Not certainty.
Not proof.
But real-world biological possibilities that have never been ruled out.
If residual DNA behaves differently than assumed in the 1980s, potential impacts could include:
• Rare genomic integration events, especially during early development
• Increased cancer risk in very small subsets that would evade population studies
• Autoimmune activation, where foreign genetic material is persistently recognized as non-self
• Chronic or delayed inflammatory signaling, particularly in the nervous system
• Neurological vulnerability during critical periods of brain development
• Sex-mismatched DNA effects, where opposite-sex genetic material interacts with developing stem cells in ways that were never evaluated
These outcomes would likely be:
• Rare
• Non-uniform
• Developmentally timed
• Not immediately visible
• Difficult to detect epidemiologically
Which is exactly why absence of proof is not proof of absence.
Another unexamined variable is sex-mismatched DNA exposure. Modern biology recognizes that sex-specific genetic material can be biologically recognized as non-self and that stem cells are more permissive during development. Whether trace residual DNA originating from the opposite sex, introduced during early childhood immune activation, has any biological relevance has never been directly evaluated — because earlier models assumed it could not matter.
None of this proves harm.
None of this says vaccines don’t work.
It says something simpler — and far more reasonable:
Current residual DNA safety conclusions are based on inference from 1980s biology, not direct testing using modern genomics, stem-cell science, biodistribution studies, or DNA-repair knowledge.
Parents are not rejecting science by asking these questions.
They are asking for science to catch up with itself.
In every other field involving genetic material — gene therapy, viral vectors, cell therapies — regulatory frameworks evolved to reflect modern biology. Vaccines are the exception.
Asking whether legacy assumptions should be re-validated is not anti-vaccine.
It is pro-scientific rigor.
Wonder if the people who profit from vaccines will allow the science to be done by HHS? Then wonder how long until assumptions are updated, regulatory (safety) guidance is updated, and then how long they’ll allow manufacturers to adopt to new standards? Wonder if your grandchildren will get safer vaccines. I sure hope I’m still alive when the product is fitting to the science. Wonder if gender dysphoria, autoimmune conditions, or chronic brain inflammation and subsequent damage will still be around?
I also have an 80 yr old aunt with lifelong neurological issues stemming from encephalitis when she was a baby. As soon as I awakened during Covid, I had an aha moment & have reasoned she was most likely vaccine-injured in the late 1940s. The neurological damage from a high neonatal fever evolved into varied health issues (autoimmune (psoriasis) & IBS, grand mal seizures beginning in her 30s which required intensive medication for decades. Aside from the obvious quality of life issues, these issues stunted her intelligence and maturity potential, the seizures prevented her from driving, and eventually gave her early-onset dementia.
Look no further than the Amish for the control group on vaccines, which also tells you why Gov. Shapiro in PA is trying to mandate vaccines on their community with no religious exemption allowed in order to make them persona non grata in his state. Of course, he is heavily funded by vaccine manufacturers and is doing their bidding. They need to eradicate the vaccine-free subset of the population before anyone connects the dots.
Right, and how do they define "rigorous"?
You have made several assumptions, but these are invalid or are misleading...
"Fragmented DNA is biologically active"
With DNA, the term "Biologically active" usually means capable of expressing a gene or manufacturing a protein. Short DNA fragments (200 base pairs long) cannot do this. A typical human gene requires thousands to tens of thousands of base pairs.
The tiny kernel of truth about biological activity comes from the fact that small DNA fragments inside a body can trigger cellular sensors (like TLR9 or STING) that recognise foreign material and signal the innate immune system. However, this immune recognition does not mean the fragment can take over a cell, alter human genetics, or cause disease, which is what many will mistakenly understand by your use of the term "biologically active".
"Cells can uptake DNA fragments"
This is technically true, but Irrelevant. Cells uptake microscopic fragments of extracellular material through natural processes like endocytosis all the time.
If a cell absorbs a naked DNA fragment via endocytosis, the fragment is trapped inside a bubble called an endosome, which quickly merges with a lysosome. The lysosome acts as the cell's disposal unit, filled with acid and enzymes (DNases) that completely digest the DNA into simple, harmless nucleic acid building blocks.
"DNA sensing and repair pathways interact with extracellular DNA"
This is partially correct/misleading. As I mentioned above, "DNA sensing pathways" (like STING) detect extracellular DNA fragments to alert the immune system to pathogens. This is a normal immune protection mechanism. DNA *repair* pathways, however, operate only inside the cell nucleus on the cell's own native genome, and not on extracellular DNA floating outside in blood or muscle tissue.
"Integration without viral integrase is rare but mechanistically plausible"
Again, this is a distorted perception of the reality. While theoretical integration without viral enzymes can occur under extreme, artificial laboratory conditions (like direct nuclear microinjection or using electroporation to punch holes in cell membranes), it requires an intact, functional sequence of DNA. Also the DNA has to somehow bypass degradation in the cytoplasm and then enter the cell's nucleus. It would require a concurrent double-stranded break in the host cell's DNA for integration to occur. It's unlikely that this sequence of events would occur.
Short, 200-base-pair non-functional DNA fragments injected into subcutaneous or muscle tissue face aggressive extracellular DNase enzymes, endosomal destruction, and the nuclear membrane barrier.
There is no evidence in the public/research domain that fragmented residual vaccine DNA integrates into recipient genomes.
Scare stories about vaccine DNA need to be taken in context. We are exposed to vastly more foreign fragmented DNA every day than we could ever be exposed to through vaccination. A single bite of food introduces multi-gram quantities of short, fragmented plant and animal DNA into our bodies. Our immune systems and metabolic enzymes handle this extracellular DNA continually, and we suffer no ill effects.
Your explanation reflects an older, simplified model of extracellular DNA handling that modern nonviral gene-delivery research has moved well beyond. There’s an entire section of gene editing that has found ways around the barriers you describe as if they were set in stone decades ago.
Modern nonviral gene therapy is specifically the science of getting DNA into cells without viral integrase. It studies the exact steps you’re dismissing:
extracellular DNA → cellular uptake → endosomal escape → cytoplasmic survival → nuclear entry → interaction with DNA-repair machinery.
Yes, most naked DNA is degraded. Yes, delivery is inefficient. But “inefficient” does not mean “completely destroyed” or “cannot happen.”
Naked DNA injected into skeletal muscle has been shown for decades to enter cells and produce gene expression without viruses or nuclear microinjection.
Short DNA fragments also do not need to contain an intact functional gene to matter biologically. They can activate DNA sensors, reach intracellular compartments, and potentially be captured during DNA repair.
Your statement that integration requires an “intact, functional sequence” is also incorrect. Modern genome-editing methods use short pieces of foreign double-stranded DNA that can be incorporated at DNA double-strand breaks by the cell’s own repair machinery, including non-homologous end joining.
And DNA repair machinery does not distinguish a DNA end as “foreign” and automatically refuse to join it.
I am not claiming residual vaccine DNA has been proven to integrate and cause disease.
I am saying the absolute claims — “completely digested,” “cannot reach the nucleus,” “requires viral machinery,” or “must contain a functional gene” — do not reflect modern nonviral gene-delivery and DNA-repair science.
That distinction is exactly why older assumptions should be re-tested against modern biology rather than treated as settled fact.
Nice job! You should be a fact checker for CNN so that they could get it right! ;)
Did anyone study whether residual fetal DNA activates innate immunity differently in children with compromised methylation, allergic burden, and primed microglia? I know the answer, so this is rhetorical. No, never properly studied. Aaron, thank you for this article/your continued work on a flawed system based on priming the arm of an immune system in babies and children which shouldn't be primed. I published this article today which you might find interesting: https://michelleperromd337477.substack.com/p/do-vaccines-cause-autism.
And people like myself, a legal immigrant, have without consent been injected with this stuff. 10 vaccines in 7 injections. And after a first rejection, after going back to my country of origin, again 4 jabs - without consent and without even knowing what I have been injected with. No one tells use, of consent no one ever heard.
Is there DNA from aborted fetal tissue in any of the c0vid injections?
Yes.
Do you have a resource or study to share?
This is Children of God for life vaccine chart identifying tainted vaccines. They also have a document that identifies all the details about the original aborted children that created the cell lines used today. I have followed them for several decades. An excellent, honest and well documented resource. Here is their chart. https://cogforlife.org/charts/
As I understand it, there isn't fetal tissue, but there are stray bits of DNA in the COVID vaccines. A doctor who independently examined the COVID vaccines did a presentation before Congress that is no longer available on youtube. There is a transcript here: Senate Hearing On Dangerous and Potentially Fatal Errors Within The Methods of Vaccine Distribution https://arvozylo.medium.com/senate-hearing-on-dangerous-and-potentially-fatal-errors-within-the-methods-of-vaccine-distribution-8de70e51b237
A great resource is the Children of God for Life organization (cogforlife.org).
It is so simple... just use your common sense ( that which is really not common to us all!). All this crap that is put into these 'so-called' vaccines, is nothing but experimentation on man. Those, in fear, will follow and they become the fodder. Big Pharma is, and always was, out of control however now it is in our faces and NOT hidden! I laugh (and am revolted at the same time) at these commercials for new pharmaceuticals in which you don't even know what malady it is for. Sometimes it looks like they are just making it up as they go along. And the side effects..........death is put somewhere in the middle just to make it look like it is no big deal!! Create convenience and you will have followers........take no personal responsibility for your actions and see where you will wind up........I never heard of pneumococcal pneumonia until I saw the commercial... and did you know that I am at risk? After all I am 73 and everyone past 51 is at risk! I'm so scared, Pfizer! Albert Bourla, (on your 20 million $ yacht) please help me!!
Take personal responsibility for your life and your health. You will be much better off!!
There are no 14-week or 3-month embryos. The embryo stage lasts until 12 weeks, after which the fetus is a fully formed and recognizable human being. That is the distinction between an embryo and a fetus.
This is a child nonetheless, embryo or fetus. Vile.
Of course. I was just pointing out the lies by the companies who provide this tissue.
So they call it a foetus to make it seem less human. That's not just a swerve, that's deliberate.
So an injection is like a modern day Congressional Bill. It is meant to solve a problem, but superfluous and devious, adding unwanted material into and onto the unsuspecting public.
‘Murder By Injection’ and Dr. Moulden’s work tried to tell us.
We ask the bodies of even DAY ONE newborns to mount a defense to HepB and we give them SYNTHETIC vitamin K. Then we ask their bodies to mount a defense against measles,
mumps,
rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus,
etc.
HOW does their tiny body know to mount a defense against HepB— or whatever and NOT also mount a defense against… bodies? If we have fragments of DNA / bodies of MRC-5 “Marc” and WI-38, “Winnie” in each vial, HOW are
they supposed to know to mount a defense against THIS ingredient but not against THAT ingredient?
Seriously asking.
They don’t and food for thought. Some of the top childhood allergens are food proteins in the injections. Casein (dairy) soy, dextrose (corn), yeast (bread), and eggs. Gee I wonder if injecting those proteins made them mount an immune response against the foreign proteins?
The adaptive immune system does not recognise vague concepts like "bodies" or "ingredients." It targets specific, unique molecular shapes called antigens, which are proteins or glycoproteins. There is a "lock and key" mechanism for molecular recognition and structural binding of the antigens to an "epitope". The immune response to different antigens can be highly specific and directed at a single antigen on different organisms like Hepatitis (eg to the surface and core antigens on Hep B).
The immune system generates antibodies against proteins and complex glycoproteins, but not naked double-stranded or single-stranded human DNA fragments.
You just said the immune system generates antibodies against proteins…so are you agreeing that foreign food proteins injected IM can initiate an immune response? Isn’t it the job of the adjuvant to instigate an acute, prolonged and untargeted response? Dr Stanley Plotkin (Godfather of vaccines…who wrote the manual) explains it in his deposition by Aaron Siri.
There is a quantitative threshold that needs to be breached for foreign proteins to initiate a serious/deleterious allergic immune response. The trace concentrations of proteins in the vaccines are well below this threshold.
This is why you can still give vaccines with traces of egg albumin to those with a history of a severe allergy to eggs, for example.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23176882/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23021881/
Thresholds hold true for allergic type reactions.
However there is the possibility a different type of response might be triggered through molecular mimicry, where an injected protein or glycoprotein antigen shares an epitope with some type of host tissue (leading to autoimmune side effects like GBS for example).
But these seem to be very uncommon. And here too there is a threshold in place… this is a three stage threshold mechanism which requires all 3 signals to be active in order for damaging T cell responses to be activated.
First “signal” is the antigen. Second signal is a PAMP response which is a costimulatory trigger required to allow the APCs to express co-stimulatory surface proteins (such as CD80/CD86). Finally you need proinflammatory cytokine production before the T cells can transform into activated killer or CD4 helper cells, which orchestrate the damaging autoimmune response.
If all you have is the first antigen signal without the added input of PAMPS/cytokines, the T cells are essentially anergic.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC15114/
There seems to be a lot of research into the amplitude of responses generated to vaccine adjuvants in this regard in the literature. I need to look at this more, as clearly the research base on adjuvants has expanded considerably since I last familiarised myself with it some 10 or more years ago. Fascinating.
The Vaccine Holocaust: Laura Hayes - “Why Is This Legal?”
"We cannot, and should not, defend that which is indefensible, and that includes the barbaric and reprehensible practice of vaccination. " Laura Hayes
https://catyoung.weebly.com/home/the-vaccine-holocaust-laura-hayes-why-is-this-legal
The Vaccine Holocaust: Laura Hayes - “Why Is This Legal?” 1:23:43
https://rumble.com/v4lotxx-laura-hayes-why-is-this-legal.html
Laura Hayes's Powerful Speech : NO ON SB277 Sacramento at The Capitol on April 8, 2015
https://youtu.be/7WWEiEPUWSU
According to the NIH:
The two primary human fetal cell lines used in the development, testing, or production of COVID-19 vaccines are HEK-293 and PER.C6.1. HEK-293 (Human Embryonic Kidney)Origin: Derived from the kidney tissue of a fetus aborted in the Netherlands in 1972.AstraZeneca / Oxford Vaccine: Used this cell line during the actual production and manufacturing process to grow the viral vector.Pfizer-BioNTech & Moderna Vaccines: Used this cell line strictly for early laboratory proof-of-concept testing to verify that the mRNA generated the correct spike protein. It was not used to manufacture or produce either mRNA vaccine.2. PER.C6 (Human Embryonic Retinal)Origin: Derived from the retinal tissue of a fetus aborted in the Netherlands in 1985.Janssen / Johnson & Johnson Vaccine: Used this proprietary cell line during the manufacturing process to scale and grow the specific virus needed for the vaccine.
You will find many conflicting statements online. I will try to get back with more proof later tonight.
This is all beyond vile.
MANUFACTURED CRISIS
¨Film Exposes Motives Behind Mass HPV Vaccinations and Deadly Side Effects
A substantial new documentary film released online to audiences in the UK and across Europe this week, questions claims made by UK, Danish and Spanish health authorities that widespread administering of the HPV vaccine is both safe and a guaranteed means of preventing cervical cancer. It comes at a time when – flying in the face of independent science – UK and European medical experts are proposing to extend the vaccine’s use from teenage girls, adding teenage boys and children below the age of puberty. 'Manufactured Crisis: What they're not telling you about the HPV Vaccine' exposes cases of severe, life-changing adverse reactions experienced by girls and young women following doses of the commercial HPV vaccines Gardasil or Cervarix – cases from which the public has previously been shielded. Recorded adverse reactions include severe disability, paralysis and even death. Throughout Manufactured Crisis, victims and their families tell their own, often heartrending, stories.¨
https://vaccineimpact.com/2018/manufactured-crisis-film-exposes-motives-behind-mass-hpv-vaccinations-and-deadly-side-effects/
Manufactured Crisis - The documentory :
https://vimeo.com/277078546/7812e25bb1
So, we consider immoral unbiblical fornication to be perfectly ok among mostly little teenie agers and twenty somethings (99% of all murder/abortions), and we fight to keep murder/abortions a woman's "right", so big PharmAss can make genetically corrupted vaccinations and cause all sorts of disease states and autism AND make billions off of suffering.
Sources:
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Points to Consider in the Characterization of Cell Lines Used to Produce Biologicals. FDA/CBER, 1993.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry: Characterization and Qualification of Cell Substrates and Other Biological Materials Used in the Production of Viral Vaccines for Infectious Disease Indications. FDA/CBER, 2010.
World Health Organization. Requirements for the Use of Animal Cells as In Vitro Substrates for the Production of Biologicals. WHO Technical Report Series 878, 1998.
World Health Organization. Annex 3: Recommendations for the Evaluation of Animal Cell Cultures as Substrates for the Manufacture of Biological Medicinal Products and for the Characterization of Cell Banks. WHO Technical Report Series 978, 2013.
Rogers, Michael B., et al. “Illegitimate Recombination in Mammalian Cells.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 92, no. 19, 1995, pp. 9127–9131.
Holmgren, Lars, et al. “Horizontal Transfer of DNA by the Uptake of Apoptotic Bodies.” Blood, vol. 93, no. 11, 1999, pp. 3956–3963.
Mittra, Indraneel, et al. “Circulating Nucleic Acids Damage DNA of Healthy Cells by Integrating into Their Genomes.” Journal of Biosciences, vol. 40, no. 1, 2015, pp. 91–111.
Ishikawa, Hiroki, and Glen N. Barber. “STING Is an Endoplasmic Reticulum Adaptor That Facilitates Innate Immune Signaling.” Nature, vol. 455, no. 7213, 2008, pp. 674–678.
Sun, Li, et al. “cGAS Is a Cytosolic DNA Sensor That Activates the Type I Interferon Pathway.” Science, vol. 339, no. 6121, 2013, pp. 786–791.
Kowalczykowski, Stephen C. “An Overview of the Molecular Mechanisms of Recombination.” Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology, vol. 7, no. 11, 2015.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Control (CMC) Information for Human Gene Therapy Investigational New Drug Applications (INDs). FDA, 2020.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Nonclinical Biodistribution Considerations for Gene Therapy Products. FDA, 2023.
Feschotte, Cédric, and Ellen J. Pritham. “DNA Transposons and the Evolution of Eukaryotic Genomes.” Annual Review of Genetics, vol. 41, 2007, pp. 331–368.
Brazhnik, Kateryna, et al. “Extracellular DNA Uptake and Its Biological Implications.” Trends in Cell Biology, vol. 30, no. 5, 2020, pp. 381–394.
I just posted this article online. Thank you. A man wants to argue these aren't fetal cells bc they are kept alive in the lab. I hadn't heard that excuse before.