The Truth Is Out There

Posts tagged ‘genetics’

NIAID Funds Creation of Chimeric H5N1 Bird Flu Viruses With Modified Cleavage Sites and Enhanced Mammalian-Cell Expression: ‘npj Vaccines’


Amid worries of a coming avian influenza pandemic.

A new study preprint published last week in the journal npj Vaccines describes a multinational research program that designed, engineered, and tested synthetic versions of the H5N1 bird flu virus’s hemagglutinin protein—one of the key components that allows the virus to infect cells.

The scientists altered these genetic sequences, delivered them into animals using advanced DNA and lipid-nanoparticle (LNP) technologies, and then conducted lethal challenge experiments with highly pathogenic H5N1 viruses inside a Canadian government biocontainment facility.

This means researchers created synthetic versions of a dangerous flu component, injected them into mice using vaccine-style technologies, and then exposed the animals to very deadly strains of H5N1 to test how well the constructs worked.

The study is authored by a large team from the United States, Canada, and Europe, including researchers from the Wistar Institute, the University of Pennsylvania, the Public Health Agency of Canada, and the University of Bologna.

Funding Sources

The research was funded primarily by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) through its Collaborative Influenza Vaccine Innovation Centers (CIVIC) program under contract 75N93019C00051.

This is a federal vaccine-development initiative said to be designed to prepare the U.S. for future influenza outbreaks using rapidly adaptable genetic platforms.

But the creation of new viruses raises national security concerns.

Congress, the White House, the Department of Energy, the FBI, the CIA, and Germany’s Federal Intelligence Service (BND) have confirmed that the COVID-19 pandemic was likely the result of lab-engineered pathogen manipulation.

Additional support came from the W.W. Smith Charitable Trust Distinguished Professorship in Cancer Research and The Jill and Mark Fishman Foundation.

In other words, the work was paid for by the same federal agencies responsible for pandemic vaccine programs, along with private biomedical foundations.

Institutions Involved

The experiments were carried out by a coordinated network of laboratories:

  • The Wistar Institute (Philadelphia) designed and built the synthetic H5N1 DNA constructs, performed immune studies, and conducted structural modeling using AlphaFold 3.
  • The University of Pennsylvania assisted with lipid-nanoparticle formulation and microbiology methods.
  • The Public Health Agency of Canada’s National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg performed the live H5N1 infections and lethal challenge experiments, including tests using a recombinant H5N1 virus constructed from synthetic gene segments.
  • The University of Bologna contributed additional biotechnology expertise.

The U.S. labs designed and built the engineered genetic materials, and the Canadian government lab carried out the dangerous live-virus testing.

The authors include: Ebony N. Gary, Nicholas J. Tursi, Casey E. Hojecki, Robert Vendramelli, Martina Tomirotti, Bryce Warner, Cory Livingston, Thang Truong, Yangcheng Gao, Sachchidanand Tiwari, Norbert Pardi, Darwyn Kobasa, and senior author David B. Weiner.

What Is Scientifically Alarming

Several aspects of this research stand out as high-risk from a biodefense perspective, even though the work is framed as vaccine development.

1. Synthetic Genetic Engineering of H5N1 Components

The team did not merely study existing viruses.

They engineered new synthetic versions of the H5N1 hemagglutinin gene, including codon optimization (which boosts expression in human cells) and deliberate modification of the protease cleavage site, a region strongly linked to H5N1’s virulence.

They edited the part of the virus that helps determine how dangerous it is.

2. Construction of a Recombinant H5N1 Virus From Synthesized Gene Segments

The researchers created a chimeric H5N1 virus by combining gene segments that were commercially synthesized and assembled from cloned DNA.

They then rescued this artificial virus using reverse-genetics techniques.

This means they built a new lab-made version of H5N1, piece-by-piece, using artificial DNA.

3. Use of LNP Delivery and Electroporation to Express Viral Genes Inside Animals

The study delivered the synthetic HA genes using LNPs (the same technology used in COVID-19 mRNA vaccines) and electroporation, a technique that uses electrical pulses to force genetic material into cells.

Both approaches greatly increase how efficiently engineered genetic material can spread through tissues.

These tools make it much easier for lab-designed genetic material to take hold inside the body.

4. Lethal Challenge Work Using High-Dose H5N1

Mice were exposed to 10 times the lethal dose (10 LD50) of highly pathogenic H5N1 strains—including both natural isolates and the lab-built recombinant virus.

They infected animals with very large amounts of a deadly virus to test whether the synthetic constructs gave protection.

5. Corporate Ties of the Senior Author

The senior scientist, David B. Weiner, discloses paid relationships with Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Sanofi, Inovio, Flagship, and others.

This means the research directly intersects with large pharmaceutical companies that develop genetic vaccines and related technologies, raising conflicts of interest worries.

Why This Matters for Policymakers

This study demonstrates that federal funding is supporting research with clear dual-use potential, meaning it could advance vaccines or, if misapplied, enable the construction or enhancement of dangerous influenza viruses.

The same techniques used to create synthetic vaccine antigens—codon optimization, cleavage-site modification, LNP delivery, and recombinant virus assembly—can also be used to create novel viral strains with properties that do not currently exist in nature.

The technical sophistication is notable, especially the deliberate editing of cleavage sites and the full reconstruction of an H5N1 virus from cloned fragments, which is uncommon outside of specialized influenza-engineering programs.

This work shows that laboratories funded by the U.S. government and partnered with foreign agencies are actively engineering pieces of dangerous bird flu viruses and testing them in high-security facilities.

The stated goal is to develop better vaccines, but the methods overlap with techniques traditionally associated with gain-of-function research, which can create new biological risks if not tightly controlled.

Category:

Uncategorized

Tagged with:

32% of COVID ‘Spike Protein’ Matches Human Genes—Suggesting Either Contamination or Intentional Chimeric Design: BLASTp Analysis


One-third of the so-called SARS-CoV-2 spike protein was assembled from human genetic material, not viral RNA—raising urgent questions about the origins of the sequence used in mRNA vaccines.

3D print of a spike protein on the surface of SARS-CoV-2—also known as 2019-nCoV, the virus that causes COVID-19. Spike proteins cover the surface of SARS-CoV-2 and enable the virus to enter and infect human cells. For more information, visit the NIH 3D Print Exchange at 3dprint.nih.gov. Credit: NIH/Wikimedia Commons under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license. Image saturation, vibrace, color, and temperature have been altered in Canva Pro.

The most critical sequence in modern medical history—the “spike protein” of SARS-CoV-2—may never have existed in nature at all.

As a new research paper explains, A 32% Human-Derived Mosaic in the In Silico-Assembled SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein: Accidental Contaminant Misincorporation or Intentional Functional Chimeric Design?, the Wuhan “spike” was never isolated from a virus.

It was digitally stitched together—in silico (in a computer)—from fragments of RNA found in the lung fluid of one patient in China by Chinese researchers in early January 2020.

The genetic information was rapidly disseminated through databases such as GenBank and GISAID.

The foundational publication by Wu et al. in Nature in February 2020 represented the first peer-reviewed article presenting the full genome sequence of the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2), including its spike protein sequence.

That synthetic model then became the blueprint for the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA vaccines injected into over five billion people worldwide.

This raises a critical question: if the Wuhan team’s “virus” was assembled from a sick man’s lung fluid, why does its defining spike protein contain extensive human genetic material—was this simply contamination from the patient’s own RNA, or evidence that the sequence was artificially constructed using human genes?

To identify the human components of that digital construct, I used the NCBI BLASTp tool—a government-hosted bioinformatics search engine that compares protein sequences against the entire global database of known organisms—to systematically test the Wuhan spike protein for matches to human proteins, revealing extensive alignments to human endogenous retroviruses and cellular genes that are absent in any bat or pangolin coronavirus.

The full research article, along with all six NCBI BLASTp run raw data files and their reproducible Request IDs, has been publicly archived on Zenodo (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.17583428), ensuring complete transparency and independent verification of every alignment reported.

You can also read and download the research article below:

A 32% Human Derived Mosaic In The In Sil…724KB ∙ PDF file
Download

Key Findings

  • 32% of the spike protein—416 amino acids—matches human genetic material.
    The overlaps include sequences from human endogenous retroviruses (HERV-K, HERV-H, HERV-W) and cellular proteins linked to immune modulation, fusion, and intracellular trafficking.
  • No comparable overlaps exist in bat or pangolin coronaviruses.
    These human alignments appear only in the SARS-CoV-2 spike, not in its supposed animal precursors.
  • Six independent NCBI BLASTp runs confirm the findings.
    Each run produced reproducible, statistically significant human alignments—with probabilities of random occurrence as low as one in 10²⁰.
  • Critical overlaps occur in known functional domains:
    • HERV-K envelope homology in the S2 fusion region, which controls cell-to-cell syncytia.
    • HERV-H alignment at the furin cleavage site, already linked to a patented human gene (MSH3).
    • HERV-W (MSRV) match in the N-terminal domain, associated with neuroinflammation.
    • Additional matches with human lysosomal, mitochondrial, and zinc-finger proteins that govern energy metabolism and DNA regulation.

Why It Matters

If one-third of the spike’s code came from human sources, two explanations remain:

  1. Accidental misassembly—contamination from human RNA in the original Wuhan sample (BALF), which was never purified before computational assembly; or
  2. Intentional inclusion—deliberate use of human sequences to enhance infectivity, persistence, or immune modulation.

Both possibilities challenge the official story that the SARS-CoV-2 genome was a “naturally emerging” virus.

Independent Validation

Multiple clinical studies now confirm that these same HERV sequences are biologically active in COVID-19 patients:

  • Petrone et al., 2023: HERV-K and HERV-W upregulated in nasal mucosa; expression levels predict hospitalization.
  • Temerozo et al., 2022: HERV-K found in lung aspirates of deceased ICU patients.
  • Guo et al., 2022: HERV activation triggers interferon and inflammation via cGAS-STING.
  • Balestrieri et al., 2023: HERV-W linked to pediatric MIS-C and Kawasaki-like syndromes.
  • Wang et al., 2023: HERV-K expression correlates with pulmonary hypertension.
  • Wu et al., 2025: SARS-CoV-2 directly transactivates HERV-K, producing retrovirus-like particles that drive senescence and neurodegeneration.

Together, these findings corroborate that the “human” portions of the spike aren’t computational noise—they’re functionally active biological components.

Bottom Line

The official reference spike (YP_009724390.1)—used worldwide in vaccine development—is a digital, computationally assembled sequence derived from patient RNA rather than from a purified viral protein.

This sequence contains hundreds of human gene fragments precisely placed within key functional domains impacting viral fusion, immune evasion, and inflammation pathways.

While standard re-assembly of the original raw sequencing data (SRR10971381) excluding human reads has been performed, no published study has conducted an independent, viral-only de novo assembly focusing specifically on the spike region to test for potential human contaminant incorporation.

Thus, the origin of this 32% human mosaic—whether due to accidental laboratory contamination or intentional chimeric engineering—remains unresolved and requires targeted re-analysis.

Category:

Uncategorized

Tagged with:

U.S., South Korea Lab-Engineer Chimeric Bird Flu Virus 100% Fatal in Mammals, Infects Human Blood Cells, Attacks Brain: Journal ‘Science Advances’


Study confirms lab-made hybrid H5N1 strain invades immune cells, replicates in human blood, spreads to the brain, and kills every mammal tested.

A September Science Advances paper confirms that U.S. and South Korean researchers have engineered a “Frankenstein” chimeric bird flu virus that is said to be 100% fatal in mammals, infect human immune cells, and spread throughout the body—including into the brain.

The international team—led by Young Ki Choi of the Korea Virus Research Institute and Richard J. Webby of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee—rebuilt and genetically modified the North American H5N1 avian influenza strain A/Lesser Scaup/Georgia/W22-145E/2022 (GA/W22-145E/22).

The Korean government-funded experiments raise national security concerns, as Congress, the White House, the Department of Energy, the FBI, and the CIA have confirmed that the COVID-19 pandemic was likely the result of lab-engineered pathogen manipulation.

Are governments intentionally or accidentally creating the next pandemic?

A Lab-Made Chimera

The new bird flu virus wasn’t natural.

The U.S. and South Korean team used an eight-plasmid reverse-genetics system, a gain-of-function technique that allows scientists to synthesize an entire virus genome from DNA plasmids, assemble it inside human and animal cells, and recover a fully infectious pathogen.

“The eight gene segments of A/Lesser Scaup/Georgia/W22-145E/2022 (GA/W22-145E/22) (NCBI accession nos. OP470788, OP470787, OP470786, OP470785, OP470784, OP470783, OP470782, and OP470781), genes were synthesized, and A/Common Teal/Korea/W811/2021 (KR/W811/21) (GISAID accession nos. EPI1950412, EPI1950413, EPI1950414, EPI1950415, EPI1950416, EPI1950417, EPI1950418, and EPI1950419) were amplified and cloned into the pHW2000 plasmid vector using a plasmid-based RG system),” the authors explained.

“To evaluate the PB2I478V and NPN450S substitution, the GA/W22-145E/22- PB2478V, GA/W22-145E/22-NP450S, and GA/W22-145E/22-PB2478V/ NP450S viruses were generated by site-directed mutagenesis (Invitrogen, A13282). Recombinant GA/W22-145E/22, KR/W811/21, GA/ W22-145E/22-PB2478V, GA/W22-145E/22-NP450S, and GA/W22- 145E/22-PB2478V/NP450S viruses were generated using an eight plasmid RG system, as previously described.”

The paper itself explains that the North American H5N1 lineage is already a reassortant—a genetic mix of Eurasian and North American bird flu viruses:

“The reassortment of EA 2.3.4.4b H5N1 viruses with North American Low Pathogenicity Avian Influenza (LPAI) viruses led to the emergence of previously unidentified genotypes containing PB2, PB1, PA, and NP segments of NAm origin”

In other words, the starting material was a hybrid of two separate influenza families.

This hybrid genome formed the basis for further laboratory engineering.

Researchers then introduced new synthetic mutations to alter the virus’s behavior—creating a true chimera: a recombinant virus stitched together from multiple genetic sources and enhanced in the lab.

The Engineered Mutations & What They Did

The researchers focused on two specific genetic changes—PB2-478I and NP-450N—that together made the virus far more aggressive, able to infect a wider range of cells, and capable of spreading throughout the body instead of staying in the lungs.

These two mutations were placed in the virus deliberately using genetic engineering tools.

They are each said to affect a different part of the virus’s internal machinery:

  • PB2-478I is a mutation in the polymerase gene—the enzyme complex the virus uses to copy its RNA. This particular spot (called the cap-binding domain) helps the virus hijack a human cell’s own messages to start manufacturing more virus.
    → In plain terms: this change let the virus steal the host cell’s genetic “on switch” more efficiently, speeding up replication inside any cell it entered.
  • NP-450N is a mutation in the nucleoprotein, which wraps and protects the viral genome and helps it move in and out of the cell nucleus.
    → This change made the virus better at copying and transporting its genetic material, meaning each infected cell could pump out more viral particles before dying.

When both mutations were present together, the results were extreme.

The virus showed what scientists call increased host-cell tropism—meaning it could infect many different kinds of cells and tissues, not just the respiratory tract.

It multiplied inside immune cells (T cells, B cells, macrophages, and monocytes), spread through the bloodstream, crossed into organs, and even invaded the brain.

“PB2-478I and NP-450N function synergistically to enhance polymerase activity, vRNA synthesis, and replication efficiency … across multiple host species,” the authors wrote.

When the same virus was “fixed” by reversing those mutations back to their original, non-aggressive forms (PB2-478V and NP-450S), the difference was striking:
the virus stopped spreading through the body, stayed confined to the lungs, and none of the test animals died.

“Ferrets infected with the double mutant … survived the study period, indicating significantly reduced virulence,” the paper confirmed.

The authors also warned that these two mutations—PB2-478I and NP-450N—are now showing up in the wild.

100% Fatal in Mammals

All 24 ferrets infected with the engineered GA/W22-145E/22 strain died within seven days, while those given the Eurasian comparison strain survived the full 14-day study.

“All ferrets infected with GA/W22-145E/22 succumbed to infection by 7 days postinfection,” the study reads.

Post-mortem analysis showed viral replication in nearly every organ—including lungs, liver, spleen, kidneys, intestines, lymph nodes, and brain—with viral RNA reaching deep cortical tissue by day 4.

Infecting Human Blood Cells

In follow-up tests, the engineered chimera replicated efficiently in human peripheral-blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and THP-1 monocytes, proving it could infect human immune cells directly:

“[H]uman peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) infected with GA/W22-145E/22 showed significantly greater replication evidenced by higher cRNA, mRNA, and vRNA levels than those infected with KR/W811/21.”

This finding means the virus can use the body’s own immune system to amplify and disseminate—an unusual and hazardous feature for influenza.

Neuroinvasion: Virus Found in the Brain

Microscopic imaging revealed viral RNA spreading beyond the olfactory bulb into the cortex, confirming brain infection:

“Viral RNA signals extended beyond the olfactory bulb into the cortex … indicating extensive cerebral replication.”

Immune-cell markers inside brain tissue showed that the virus used infiltrating immune cells as carriers to breach the blood–brain barrier.

A Frankenstein-Style Gain-of-Function Virus

In summary, the project:

  • Reconstructed an influenza genome from plasmids,
  • Mixed Eurasian and North American gene segments,
  • Inserted new mutations that amplified polymerase activity and virulence, and
  • Demonstrated human-cell infection, systemic dissemination, and neuroinvasion.

That combination fits the scientific definition of a chimeric gain-of-function virus—a deliberately engineered hybrid designed to exhibit new, more dangerous traits.

Bottom Line

The Science Advances paper documents the deliberate construction of a lab-made chimeric H5N1 “Frankenstein” virus that:

  • Killed 100% of mammals tested,
  • Infected and replicated in human blood cells,
  • Spread systemically through immune cells, and
  • Invaded the brain.

The authors themselves conclude that these engineered mutations “drive immune cell–mediated systemic spread, neuroinvasion, and potential vertical transmission.”

In plain terms: this was not natural evolution—it was the intentional creation of a cross-species, human-cell-infecting, mammal-lethal hybrid virus inside a laboratory, presented under the banner of “pandemic preparedness.”

Category:

Uncategorized

Tagged with:

AI Bioweapon Blueprints Could Be Ordered Through DNA Vendors—Screening Failed 75% of the Time: Journal ‘Science’


Microsoft-led study shows AI can design tens of thousands of toxin variants—including ricin and botulinum—that DNA company safety checks don’t catch, raising fears they could be purchased undetected.

A peer-reviewed Science study has revealed that artificial intelligence (AI) can design lethal toxin blueprints that slip past the safety systems used by DNA vendors—the very safeguards intended to stop bad actors from ordering genetic material for bioweapons.

Science published an article explaining the study’s findings, confirming: “DNA vendors typically use screening software to flag sequences that might be used to cause harm. But the researchers report that this software failed to catch many of their AI-designed genes—one tool missed more than 75% of the potential toxins.”

In simple terms, if someone today submitted an order to a gene synthesis company for one of these AI-designed toxin sequences, the system that’s supposed to block it would likely approve it.

The top gene synthesis companies with a major U.S. presence include Twist Bioscience, Integrated DNA Technologies (IDT), GenScript, Thermo Fisher Scientific’s GeneArt division, Azenta/Genewiz, ATUM (formerly DNA2.0), and Eurofins Genomics.

Twist Bioscience Spins ‘Leadership’ After Embarrassing Failure

In the wake of the Science revelations, one of the largest U.S. DNA synthesis companies, Twist Bioscience, rushed out a press release attempting to frame the debacle as proof of its “leadership” in biosecurity.

The company admitted the study was a “first-of-its-kind” red-team exercise showing that AI-designed toxins escaped detection by standard biosecurity screening software.

But instead of highlighting the alarming 75% failure rate, Twist described its role as “a proactive approach to safeguard public health, providing an example for other industries to follow.”

CEO Emily Leproust tried to reassure investors, insisting: “For known proteins and sequences, industry best practices for biosecurity screening are robust and highly effective. However, as AI capabilities evolve, screening practices must evolve just as quickly.”

That is the tell.

These screening systems only work against already-known toxins—the very ones that AI is now mutating into endless new forms.

In other words, the locks on the door are sturdy only if the burglar is polite enough to knock with a familiar key.

Microsoft’s own chief scientist Eric Horvitz admitted the problem plainly: “AI advances are fueling breakthroughs in biology and medicine, yet with new power comes the responsibility for vigilance and thoughtful risk management.”

The subtext is clear—these are weapons-grade blueprints, and the systems meant to stop them have failed.

Twist wants the public to believe that private “collaboration” with tech giants is enough to protect the world.

But the hard fact, buried beneath their press release optimism, is that the same study they co-authored proved their industry’s defenses could not prevent lethal toxin sequences from slipping through.

Instead of taking accountability, Twist shifted the narrative to “responsible innovation,” downplaying the reality that thousands of bioweapon blueprints could still be ordered undetected today.

How the Experiment Worked

The Science study was led by Microsoft bioengineer Bruce Wittmann.

“Wittmann and his Microsoft colleagues wanted to know what would happen if they ordered the DNA sequences that code for these proteins from companies that synthesize nucleic acids,” the article explains.

They designed more than 70,000 DNA sequences that mimicked notorious toxins like ricin, botulinum, and Shiga.

“Computer models suggested that at least some of these alternatives would also be toxic.”

Wittmann admitted: “The knowledge that I had access to, and stewardship over these proteins was, on a human level, a notable burden.”

Translation: with only AI tools, a single research team generated tens of thousands of potential bioweapon recipes—knowing some could be lethal if produced.

The Screening Failure

The group then tested whether DNA companies’ order-screening software would flag these toxin blueprints.

The results were devastating.

“The tools failed to flag many of these sequences as problematic. Their performance varied widely. One tool flagged just 23% of the sequences.”

That means nearly 8 out of 10 AI-engineered poisons could have been ordered and delivered without anyone noticing.

Even the most effective tool caught just 70%.

“One of the screening tools flagged 70% of the sequences, and its developer chose not to make any changes to improve the software.”

The others took months to quietly patch their systems.

“We were all very quiet about it,” said one expert quoted in the paper.

The ‘Fix’—But Still Failing

After upgrades, detection improved but remained incomplete.

“The systems flagged 72% of Wittmann’s AI-generated sequences, on average, including 97% of the sequences that models rated most likely to generate toxins.”

But that still leaves thousands of engineered toxin blueprints invisible to safeguards.

Even a 3% failure rate equals over 2,000 AI-generated poison sequences slipping through undetected.

A Gaping Hole in the Supply Chain

Even more alarming, the article confirms: “Some DNA vendors, accounting for perhaps 20% of the market, don’t screen their orders at all.”

That means nearly a quarter of global synthetic DNA sellers may approve any order, no questions asked.

Expert Warnings

Jaime Yassif of the Nuclear Threat Initiative said: “It’s just the beginning. AI capabilities are going to evolve and be able to design more and more complex living systems, and our DNA synthesis screening capabilities are going to have to continue to evolve to keep up with that.”

In other words: AI is moving faster than the safeguards.

Stanford researcher Drew Endy went further: “I wish people would wake up a little bit… Today, nations are accusing one another of having offensive bioweapons programs… This is the historical pattern that happened 100 years ago that led to actual bioweapons programs. We have to de-escalate this.”

That’s a blunt warning that this is not just about terrorists—it’s about governments running clandestine bioweapons labs.

What It Means

The authors did not physically manufacture the toxins.

“That would have required ordering the genes from DNA vendors and inserting them into bacteria or yeast to produce the proteins of interest. And doing so could be considered a violation of the Biological Weapons Convention,” the article explains.

But the point is clear: if Microsoft researchers could design and slip tens of thousands of toxin blueprints past DNA vendor safeguards, others could too—and they might not stop at the design stage.

Bottom Line

The Science paper proves the locks on the door of biosecurity are broken.

  • AI can mass-generate toxin blueprints.
  • DNA vendors’ screening software fails up to 75% of the time.
  • Some companies don’t screen orders at all.

The implications are stark: ordering DNA for a custom-made bioweapon may already be possible through legitimate commercial suppliers, and the public would never know until it was too late.

Category:

Uncategorized

Tagged with:

AI’s Frankenstein Phages: Designer Viruses to Slay Bacteria – But What If They Turn on Us All?


Oh, brother, if there’s one thing that screams “we never learn” louder than a lab leak cover-up, it’s the mad scientists firing up AI to cook up brand-new viruses designed to hunt bacteria like microscopic terminators – phages so novel they’ve never existed in nature, promising to zap superbugs but risking a rogue evolution that could spell doom for humanity. We’re talking September 2025 breakthroughs where bioengineers used generative AI to dream up synthetic bacteriophage genomes, slapped them into bacteria, and watched the critters replicate and kill E. coli in lab dishes like it’s no big deal. This isn’t sci-fi; it’s happening now, with revelations warning of “extreme caution” as these AI-born killers could mutate beyond control, turning a “cure” into a curse. America First means slapping the brakes on this hubris before it bites us – because labs are “secure” until they’re not, and playing God with viruses is a gamble we can’t afford.

The AI Phage Revolution: From Code to Killer

It all kicked off with advancements in 2023-2024, but the real bombshell dropped in September 2025 when researchers announced the world’s first fully AI-designed bacteriophages – viruses that infect and destroy bacteria – capable of replicating and slaying resistant strains like E. coli in tests. These aren’t tweaks to existing phages; they’re entirely new creations, with AI proposing genetic codes that scientists synthesized and inserted into host cells, watching the viruses assemble, burst out, and infect targets.

How does it work? AI analyzes massive datasets of phage genomes – like the 10,000 sequenced by 2024 – to predict sequences that bind to specific bacteria, then generates novel ones that nature never made. Once designed, labs synthesize the DNA, insert it into bacteria, and let the phages self-assemble, replicating to form armies that latch onto targets, inject their code, and burst the cells open – a precision kill without antibiotics’ broad wipeout. Effectiveness? Lab tests from September 2025 showed these AI phages wiping out resistant E. coli strains in hours, with success rates over 90% in controlled settings.

The Dark Side: Evolution Risks and Unintended Mayhem

But here’s the nightmare fuel – these designer viruses are uncharted territory, and we have zero clue how they’ll evolve once unleashed. Revelations from genome pioneers in September 2025 warn of “extreme caution,” noting that AI phages could mutate in the wild, jumping hosts or turning virulent like a bad sci-fi plague. Unlike natural phages that co-evolved with bacteria over eons, these lab-born beasts lack those checks – a single tweak could let them infect humans or animals, sparking outbreaks we can’t predict. Think COVID’s origins: Man-made viruses don’t play by nature’s rules, and with phages replicating in minutes, evolution could spin out of control faster than you can say “gain-of-function.

“Worse, they’re being touted as “precision medicine” for superbugs, but revelations from a November 25, 2024, study show AI tools already predicting phage efficacy for E. coli with 85% accuracy, paving the way for widespread use. By May 22, 2025, startups were deploying AI-designed lysins – proteins from phages that punch holes in bacterial walls – to kill multidrug-resistant infections, but full phages amp the risk – they could spread unchecked, mutating to target beneficial bacteria or worse.

Lab Safety: “Secure” Until It’s Not

Sure, these labs are “as safe as possible” – BSL-3 or 4 levels with airlocks, suits, and protocols – but revelations from a January 6, 2025, real-world study on adverse events remind us accidents happen, like the 2023 Wuhan whispers or U.S. lab mishaps in 2022 that released engineered bugs. No containment is foolproof – human error, earthquakes, or sabotage could release these AI phages, and once out, they’re self-replicating time bombs. A 2020 commentary warned of “postantibiotic era” risks, but AI speeds it up, with no way to “recall” a rogue virus. The left’s “trust the science” mantra rings hollow here – we never learn from past lab leaks, and these viruses put all humanity on the line.

America First rejects this hubris – why risk humanity for “designer” fixes when natural phages already exist? Polls from August 2025 show 58% of Americans distrust AI in biotech, with 65% fearing lab leaks. We never learn – from COVID to this – and it’s time to pull the plug before the monsters escape.

Category:

Uncategorized

Tagged with:

Pfizer and Moderna Distract With Reverse Transcription Debate at ACIP Meeting—Plasmid DNA Integration Is the Real Threat


The reverse transcription debate is a decoy, while the real risk is DNA fragments built to integrate into your genome.

At the recent ACIP meeting, Dr. Evelyn Griffin rightly raised the alarm about mRNA reverse transcription—pointing to published studies showing nucleic acids in Pfizer’s mRNA COVID-19 shot can be integrated into human DNA, namely human liver cells under lab settings.

But Pfizer’s Dr. Kayvon Modjarrad quickly dismissed the concern:

“RNA cannot reverse transcribe to DNA [because that] requires a set of molecules and enzymes that don’t exist in humans and are largely reserved for retroviruses.”

Moderna chimed in, citing FDA reviews of “hundreds of millions” of doses and claiming “no indication of genotoxicity.”

The public was left thinking: case closed.

But this article will show that the real risk isn’t rare reverse transcription at all—it’s the integration of plasmid DNA contaminants into the human genome, a pathway every cell in the body is equipped to carry out.

Pfizer and Moderna are technically wrong that reverse transcription “can’t happen,” but they also know it’s rare—so they lean on that half-truth to keep the spotlight off plasmid DNA integration, which is far more likely and far more dangerous.

It’s a sleight of hand—a bait-and-switch.

Emergency room director Dr. Richard Bartlett told this website that the real scandal isn’t reverse transcription at all, but the hidden plasmid DNA contamination that provides the mechanism for Pfizer’s genetic code to be incorporated into human DNA and causes disease.

“Pfizer and Moderna are distracting from the smoking gun of plasmid DNA contamination in their COVID-19 mRNA shots,” Dr. Bartlett said. “In 2022, investigators worked with the information they had, but that information was not complete. The fact that Pfizer’s genetic code was incorporated into human host DNA is irrefutable. And the most likely mechanism that it got there is plasmid DNA, not mRNA reverse transcription. Pfizer knows this. Moderna knows this. They hid the damning information from investigators and doctors in 2022. That is why investigators misinterpreted DNA integration as reverse transcription. I am convinced that Pfizer’s genetic code found in human cells did not come from the mRNA, but from plasmid DNA contamination. This is catastrophic.”

You can watch a clip of the exchange, posted by Dr. Mary Talley Bowden, below:

The Bait-and-Switch

This is the inside baseball play: Pfizer and Moderna want the debate stuck on reverse transcription.

Why?

Because they can plausibly argue it’s rare.

The enzyme required for reverse transcription—LINE-1—is typically absent from the vast majority of human cells, with only modest expression detected in specialized cell types like epithelial cells, and higher activity mainly in tumors and with aging.

That makes reverse transcription possible, but not systemic.

They know this, and they exploit it.

But focusing there keeps eyes off the much bigger danger.

The study Dr. Griffin cited made the best assumption it could with the cherry-picked information the manufacturers released—but what it could not account for, because Pfizer and Moderna hid the evidence and still refuse to admit it, is the smoking gun: plasmid DNA contamination, the very mechanism by which foreign DNA can be incorporated into the human genome after injection, kept from researchers and the public and denying true informed consent.

Plasmids are routinely used in the industry to incorporate foreign DNA into host DNA.

The Bigger Threat: Plasmid DNA Integration

The COVID-19 mRNA shots are manufactured using DNA plasmids—the very genetic engineering tools designed to insert code into genomes.

By definition, plasmids are integration-competent.

They can stitch themselves into human DNA.

Independent labs have confirmed that Pfizer’s vials contain toxic levels of plasmid DNA.

  • A French government-funded study led by Didier Raoult (Nov 2024) found 5,160 ng of plasmid DNA per dose—516 times higher than the FDA/EMA safety limit.
  • A December 2024 peer-reviewed paper in Science, Public Health Policy & the Law found 227–334% more DNA contamination than WHO limits, including the cancer-linked SV40 promoter/enhancer.
  • A September 2025 peer-reviewed study in Autoimmunityconfirmed both Pfizer and Moderna’s shots are contaminated with billions to hundreds of billions of DNA fragments per dose—up to 627 times higher than FDA/WHO limits—with Pfizer uniquely carrying the SV40 promoter-enhancer, a cancer-linked sequence designed to drive foreign DNA into human cell nuclei.

This isn’t speculation.

The contamination is proven.

What’s Inside Pfizer’s Plasmid

Pfizer’s plasmid doesn’t just contain bacterial DNA and the SV40 cancer-promoting gene sequence.

It also carries three human gene fragments used as regulatory elements:

  • α-globin (blood/cardiovascular): regulates red blood cell gene expression.
  • AES/TLE5 (immune): regulates transcriptional control in immune pathways.
  • MT-RNR1 (neurological/mitochondrial): tied to mitochondrial function and neurological disorders.

An October 2023 Nature npj Vaccines paper confirmed these sequences are part of Pfizer’s design:

“Pfizer-BioNTech’s 5’ UTR sequence is derived from the human hemoglobin α-globin (HBA1) gene… For the 3’ UTR, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine combines one segment from a human mRNA encoding amino-terminal enhancer of split (AES) and another from mitochondrial 12 S rRNA (mtRNR1).”

These are not inert.

They are regulatory DNA codes.

Alignment With the Injury Signal

Here’s where it gets damning.

Two independent safety reviews (2022, 2024) found that serious adverse events after Pfizer’s mRNA shot cluster into three categories:

  • Cardiac/blood: myocarditis, clotting, thrombocytopenia.
  • Immune: anaphylaxis, hypersensitivity, autoimmune flares.
  • Neurological: Guillain–Barré, seizures, facial paralysis.

Pfizer’s own 5.3.6 safety report confirms the same triad:

  • 25,957 neurological events
  • 1,050 immune/autoimmune cases
  • 932 blood/hematological disorders

Now line it up:

  • Plasmid fragment: α-globin → blood
  • Plasmid fragment: AES/TLE5 → immune
  • Plasmid fragment: MT-RNR1 → neurological

The plasmid blueprint and the injury clusters align perfectly—making the case plain without muddying the waters with debates over mRNA reverse transcription.

In other words, the match between Pfizer’s plasmid design and the injury clusters is exact, and it stands on its own—no need to get lost in the reverse transcription smokescreen.

Every Cell Has the Machinery

Unlike reverse transcription, which relies on rare LINE-1 enzymes, plasmid DNA doesn’t need anything special.

Every human cell carries DNA repair systems—like Non-Homologous End Joining (NHEJ)—that can integrate foreign DNA into chromosomes.

These pathways are active everywhere because they’re required for basic genome maintenance.

That means plasmid integration is not rare.

It’s possible in virtually every cell.

The Silence Is Deafening

Pfizer and Moderna keep ACIP fixated on reverse transcription—a long shot they can safely dismiss—while saying nothing about plasmid DNA contamination, which is systemic and inescapable.

And yet their own blueprint, their own fragments, and their own safety data all point to the same conclusion: integration risk matches the injury signal.

Bottom Line

  • Reverse transcription is real but rare.
  • Plasmid DNA integration is universal—all cells have the machinery.
  • Pfizer’s plasmid carries human DNA fragments regulating blood, immune, and neurological systems.
  • Those are the exact systems showing up in serious vaccine injuries, confirmed by independent reviews and Pfizer’s own report.

This is not coincidence—it’s alignment.

The unavoidable question is whether Pfizer’s plasmid design itself is driving the blood, immune, and neurological injuries dominating the safety signal.

Until regulators investigate, the only responsible course is to pull these shots from the market.

That’s why the focus must shift off the apparently rare possibility of mRNA reverse transcription and onto the far greater danger—plasmid DNA integration—a risk built into every cell and written into Pfizer’s own blueprint.

Category:

Uncategorized

Tagged with:

COVID-19 mRNA Shot Plasmids Contain 3 Human DNA Segments Capable of Integrating Into the Human Genome—Matching 3 Main Post-Vaccine Side Effect Categories


Pfizer’s plasmid carries human DNA fragments regulating blood, immune, and neurological functions—the very systems most often harmed after injection, suggesting the blueprint may cause the injuries.

The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are built using DNA plasmids.

By definition, plasmids are integration-competent DNA molecules—they are the very tools genetic engineers use when they want to insert new code into a genome.

In other words, plasmids can integrate into human DNA.

Independent labs have confirmed that residual plasmid DNA fragments remain in Pfizer’s finished vaccine vials.

A French government-funded study led by Dr. Didier Raoult (Nov 2024) confirmed that Pfizer’s vaccine contains 5,160 ng of plasmid DNA per dose—516 times higher than the FDA and EMA’s safety limit of 10 ng.

The contamination included sequences from the vaccine’s manufacturing plasmid such as a bacterial origin of replication, a kanamycin resistance gene, and an SV40 initiation factor—a sequence historically linked to oncogenesis (the process of tumor formation or the induction of tumors).

A December 2024 peer-reviewed study in Science, Public Health Policy and the Law found that Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot contained 227–334% more DNA contamination than WHO limits, including the cancer-linked SV40 promoter/enhancer sequence, and urged an immediate moratorium on mRNA vaccines.

As the article reveals:

  1. These residual plasmid DNA fragments carry three human genetic sequences.
  2. And the systems those sequences regulate—blood/cardiovascular, immune, and neurological—are exactly the same systems most often injured after the shot.

Meaning the very blueprint Pfizer used to mass-produce its mRNA shot is built from human DNA control codes—and the same biological systems those codes regulate are the ones showing up again and again in the most serious vaccine injuries.

The unavoidable question is whether this overlap is accidental—or whether regulators have ignored the possibility that Pfizer’s plasmid design itself is contributing to the very injuries now dominating the safety signal.

Peer-Reviewed Evidence on Adverse Events

The 2022 Systematic Review

A 2022 systematic review published in Archives of Academic Emergency Medicine synthesized 74 published studies on COVID-19 mRNA vaccine adverse events.

Severe AEs were classified into five groups: cardiac, allergic/immune, neurological, pregnant, and immunocompromised.

Among these, the majority of serious AEs were cardiac, immune, and neurological.

The review concluded: “Most of the reported severe adverse events were related to cardiac events,” and emphasized that allergic/immune and neurological complications also dominated the literature.

The 2024 Review

A 2024 review in Pharmacology Research & Perspectives confirmed the same pattern.

It found that the main serious adverse events reported after COVID-19 vaccination were:

  • Cardiac: myocarditis, pericarditis, tachyarrhythmias, clotting disorders—with highest risk after Pfizer in young men.
  • Immune/allergic: anaphylaxis, hypersensitivity, immune dysregulation linked to lipid nanoparticles and PEG.
  • Neurological: Guillain–Barré Syndrome, Bell’s palsy, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, seizures, neuroinflammation.

The authors stressed these three categories as the primary clusters of serious outcomes in both clinical and post-marketing data.

What’s Inside Pfizer’s Plasmid

Pfizer’s vaccine is produced from a DNA plasmid template.

That plasmid doesn’t just contain bacterial sequences.

It carries human untranslated regions (UTRs) said to be chosen to stabilize the synthetic RNA and make it behave like a high-output human transcript.

These include:

  • α-globin 5′UTR (blood/cardiovascular): In native biology, the 3′UTR of α-globin is the canonical stabilizer of mRNA during red blood cell development. But researchers have shown that the α-globin 5′UTR can be repurposed in synthetic constructs to boost translation efficiency in mammalian cells. In either case, the sequence is drawn from human blood biology, tying the plasmid design to the cardiovascular system — the single strongest AE signal.
  • AES/TLE5 3′UTR fragment (immune system): The AES/TLE5 gene family encodes transcriptional co-repressors involved in various developmental and signaling pathways, including immune functions. Its 3′UTR fragment was selected in mRNA engineering screens for its ability to extend RNA half-life and increase protein yield. By making spike RNA persist longer and produce more antigen inside antigen-presenting cells, this sequence indirectly drives heightened immune activation. That aligns directly with the allergic/immune AE category flagged in safety reviews.
  • MT-RNR1 fragment (neurological): MT-RNR1 encodes the mitochondrial 12S rRNA, essential for mitochondrial protein synthesis. Variants in MT-RNR1 are linked to hearing loss, drug-induced ototoxicity, and neurological mitochondrial syndromes. While MT-RNR1 is not an mRNA and lacks a natural 3′UTR, researchers have repurposed fragments of it in synthetic mRNA technology as stabilizers to enhance RNA persistence and translation. Its inclusion in Pfizer’s plasmid therefore borrows from a gene with direct neurological relevance, aligning with the neurological AE category consistently documented after vaccination.

The presence of these three human genetic sequences is confirmed in an October 2023 Nature npj Vaccines publication:

“Pfizer-BioNTech’s 5′ UTR sequence is derived from the human hemoglobin α-globin (HBA1) gene, an efficient expressor… For the 3′ UTR, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine combines one segment from a human mRNA encoding amino-terminal enhancer of split (AES) and another from mitochondrial 12 S rRNA (mtRNR1).”

This means it is not speculation—Pfizer’s own blueprint borrows directly from human blood, immune, and neurological genes.

And these happen to be the very systems most often injured in patients.

By their nature, these fragments are regulatory code.

If plasmid DNA fragments enter the nucleus of human cells, they are integration-competent and capable of altering gene regulation.

That means the very systems from which these sequences were borrowed—blood, immune, and neurological—could be dysregulated.

The Overlap No One Wants to Talk About

  • Adverse events: Independent reviews in 2022 and 2024 both concluded that the dominant serious side effects after Pfizer’s mRNA shot are cardiac, immune, and neurological.
  • Plasmid design: Pfizer’s plasmid carries human DNA fragments that regulate blood, immune, and neurological systems.
  • Plasmid nature: By definition, plasmids are capable of genomic integration.

This isn’t coincidence.

It’s alignment.

The design choices in Pfizer’s plasmid template mirror the very domains where the worst vaccine injuries concentrate.

Evidence of Plasmid DNA Integration

Independent researchers have already presented evidence that vaccine-derived plasmid DNA can integrate into human cells.

  • Nature Scientific Reports Study (2023): A peer-reviewed paper demonstrated that when linear DNA fragments were introduced into human cells, between 1–10% of the transiently transfected cells became stably transfected, and in some constructs integration reached 10–20%. Junction sequencing confirmed the foreign DNA had been incorporated into the host genome. The authors concluded: “All of the forms of linear DNA resulted in a high fraction of the cells being stably transfected—between 10 and 20% of the initially transfected cells”
  • Kevin McKernan’s Study (2024): In February 2024, McKernan and colleagues published a preprint showing that plasmid DNA from Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) integrated into the genome of human ovarian cancer cell lines (OVCAR3) in vitro. Using qPCR and DNA sequencing, they detected plasmid-specific sequences—including the spike gene and SV40 cancer promoter (yes, that’s in the plasmids, too)—persisting in the genomic DNA of exposed cells, indicating integration. Importantly, this was shown in a cancer cell line, not normal human cells, and there is no direct in vivo evidence in humans. The study demonstrates integration in this controlled lab model but does not prove it occurs in vaccinated people.
  • Phillip Buckhaults’ Findings (2024). McKernan’s warning was later echoed by Dr. Phillip Buckhaults, a cancer genomics expert at the University of South Carolina. In November 2024, Buckhaults presented results from normal human epithelial stem cells (colon organoids) exposed to mRNA vaccines. Using qPCR, his lab detected persistent plasmid DNA sequences—including the spike gene, SV40 promoter, and NeoKanR gene—in the genomic DNA of these cells one month later. This evidence of integration in non-cancerous cells addressed the main criticism of McKernan’s earlier study.
  • Intracellular Reverse Transcription Study (2022). A peer-reviewed paper in the Journal of Genetics and DNA Research found that Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine (BNT162b2) was reverse transcribed into DNA inside human liver cells (Huh7) within 6–48 hours of exposure. This study was said to deal with the vaccine’s mRNA component rather than plasmid contamination, but it reinforces the principle that nucleic acid from the shot can be copied into DNA inside human cells—complementing the plasmid integration evidence reported later.
  • Mechanistic Review on Genome Integration (2022). A review in the Journal of Neurological Disorders (Kyriakopoulos, McCullough, Nigh, Seneff) outlined plausible pathways for mRNA vaccine sequences to integrate into the human genome, citing LINE-1 retrotransposons and polymerase θ as mediators. The authors noted that spike-induced DNA damage and engineered mRNA stability (via methylpseudouridine and long poly(A) tails) may increase the likelihood of integration during DNA repair. While not experimental proof, the review concluded that genome interference by vaccine mRNA is “more than a theoretical possibility.”

Together, these findings underscore that integration is not just a hypothetical risk.

Published studies and independent genomic analyses now show plasmid DNA from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines can, under certain conditions, insert into human DNA.

Bottom Line

This is not claiming causation.

What it is showing is an investigative match:

  • Three human DNA sequences in the plasmid → blood, immune, neurological regulation.
  • Two independent peer-reviewed reviews (2022, 2024) → cardiac, immune, neurological injuries are the main serious AEs.

When the blueprint and the outcome line up this closely, the question is not whether the overlap exists.

It does.

The question is why no regulator has demanded a forensic accounting of whether integration of these human DNA fragments is occurring in patients—and whether this design is partly responsible for the most serious injuries tied to Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

And we don’t even know the full picture—because Pfizer has never publicly disclosed the complete plasmid sequence, leaving unanswered what other genetic elements may have been built into the blueprint.

Category:

Uncategorized

Tagged with: