We have already written on this topic at Vaccine Injuries Part 4: Pathology – How The Vaccine Harms. On 10 December Doctors 4 Covid Ethics held their fifth public symposium, live streamed on UK Column (the recording begins at 15m). The first two presentations discuss the biological mechanisms of action leading to mRNA vaccine harm.

MD and Professor of microbiology/virology/immunology, Dr Sucharit Bhakdi begins at 21m with an impassioned plea to medical and scientist colleagues, to return to their medical textbooks and revise basic immunology. His presentation is followed by MD and toxicologist Dr Michael Palmer, who presents evidence to support the mechanisms and basic principles introduced by Dr Bhakdi. Their presentations are based on the information available at an October 2022 article, Gene-based vaccination – quo vadis?

Mechanism of mRNA Vaccine Harm

For full detail please refer to the links above. For a brief summary, see below.

1. Vaccine-induced antibodies circulating in the bloodstream are not able to prevent inhaled viruses from entering the cells lining the respiratory tract as the defenses needed for protection are antibodies called secretory IgA and T-cells, neither of which are stimulated by the mRNA injection. The vaccine was never going to stop infection or transmission!
2. T-cell lymphocytes are paramount in recognising protein fragments such as different parts of the virus including, but not limited to, spike protein. From birth these T-cells (part of the innate immune system) can differentiate between “self” and “non-self” protein fragments, meaning they can attack foreign proteins such as viruses without attacking “self” proteins such as from our own cells.
3. Once a T-cell is activated to attack a “non-self” protein such as a virus, then specialised immune cells called B cells which are part of the adaptive immune system, are recruited to locate the foreign protein and make antibodies. The antibodies learn to recognise and block different bits of the whole virus (as opposed to the limited protein fragment coded by the mRNA) thus joining a multipronged immune response to a ‘natural infection’ with the pathogen.
4. The mRNA that instructs the body to make spike protein is encased by an envelope made of artifical lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) which protect it from degrading and transport it through the blood after injection. LNPs can themselves cause inflammation and are highly toxic.
5. LNPs travel to various organs where they release the mRNA into the cell. The mRNA then instructs the cell to make spike protein, which then expresses itself onto the cell surface.
6. Adverse effects vary based on which organ is involved in spike protein production.
7. Following the injection, the body responds to the mRNA and makes spike protein.  Usually the body only makes “self” proteins but in this case it is making a foreign protein. This protein then appears on the surface of the cells. The immune system recognises it as a foreign (“non-self”) protein and attacks it, so the immune attack also damages the person’s own cells and if ongoing this is called an autoimmune condition. How did the cleverest guys in the room not predict this likely outcome?

This can all lead to a multitude of possible vaccine harms, including but not limited to:

• sloughing of the blood vessel lining which causes blood clotting and cell death due to lack of oxygen;
• inflammation and weakness of blood vessels leading to aneurysms which may then burst;
• attack on surrounding tissue, causing an array of auto-immune injuries (including cardiac, neurological and vascular conditions);
• attack on immune cells, causing a reduction in immune function and a susceptibility to infectious disease and cancer.

Since most blood goes to the brain, nerves and muscle (especially the heart), most life-threatening effects involve cardiac inflammation or even cardiac arrest, blood clots in major vessels, and brain damage.

For a detailed report of the possible vaccine harms caused by the mRNA injections, see Appendix 1 of Pfizer’s document 5.3.6 Post-Marketing Experience, released by court order and published at Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency, provided below for download.

Similarities between long covid and post-vaccine harm are explained well by the Frontline Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance i-Recover Long Covid Treatment Protocol Clinical Companion document. Both conditions are thought to be due to damage to cells by circulating spike protein and the resultant immune reaction. Refer to this page for their range of treatment protocols including i-Recover Post-Vaccine Treatment protocol and Clinical Companion as well as prevention, early treatment and hospital protocols.

It is also important to note that the detail of many potential vaccine harms remain unknown, such as the possible causal link between mRNA vaccines and specific T-cell lymphoma outlined in this case study. We discussed this further in our recent article An Accelerated Cancer Catastrophe, highlighting the increasing opposition to Covid-19 vaccines by oncologists. Long term vaccine harms remain unknown, as do secondary harms such as the potential for contaminated blood bank supplies, or problems with transplantation of organs donated by vaccinated donors, but there is a plethora of safety signals to suggest we have reasons for deep concern.

NZDSOS has a very important caveat to all this. We are part of an international group assessing vial contaminants, and other very unusual findings are being reported worldwide. These include dramatic variability in deaths and injuries between different batches, and in some vials the complete absence of any messenger RNA at all! Is this due to the impossibility of scaling up production to get billions of arms injected, or deliberate dosing/toxicity studies as the experiment progresses, or some other nefarious agenda?  After all, it would seem those capable of ignoring the proof of ‘vaccine’ failure and toxicity and forcing their agenda onwards would be capable of any atrocity. 

Even so, if we accept the conventional view that Pfizer et al are telling at least some truths about the contents, then asking the body to make a foreign protein was never going to be a sensible idea.  Predicting that there would be no side-effects is close to ludicrous and pre-2020 would be considered professional, if not criminal, negligence.  It is hard to fathom that the army of experts that stated “safe and effective” did not have any idea of harms.  Did they know, look away and lie?