25 Comments
Oct 28Liked by Anandamide

I’m not in your field and I struggle to follow some of your posts, but given your recent ones, are you intimating that the SV40 promoter was included for future use of things like CRISPR gene therapy? If so, that seems like we would need to find out who exactly (or which company successfully lobbied/bribed )inserted the SV40 promoter (which last I checked, also compromises p53). This all concerns me very much because I had cancer during the covid period and I was petrified that they would require me to take the jabs. I honestly think I’m only here because I didn’t.

Expand full comment

I know several cancer survivors who took the jabs and then had a recurrence of their cancers. Most are dead. You were wise to avoid them.

Expand full comment

Kevin, who needs enemies when the larger spectrum of people who don't want vaccines, are always potshotting each other? Talk about own goals. This has afflicted all of us asking questions, since whenever we started. For me, that was in 1984.

This is a fraction of the whole list, and only covers pertinent discussion around the moment. Let's assume that SV40 is a given. And regulators can't say that just because the T antigen isn't in the plasmid it doesn't matter, because in the country I live in, between 1955 and (at least) 1963, the Salk and Sabin vaccine had the whole SV40 in it along with a whole raft of others not yet defined and classified. And most NZers had three Salks and three Sabins, so six opportunities to encounter SV40.

Technically this nation is completely seeded with T Antigen, because SV40 also spreads vertically and horizontally, which could explain part of why this country has one of the highest cancer rates in terms of brain tumours, mesotheliomas, melanomas - the list goes on. This country also uses glyphosate and other toxic compounds like 1080 in gluttonous ways, that few other countries do as well.

So this is a small list of people who have slagged, do slag or will slag one another off. There are others not mentioned. But these were or are, all people who consider that their theory is the ONLY one that matters:

1) It's just the thimerasol.

2) No, it's the aluminum.

3) No, the MMR is swimming with bovine diarrhea viruses and others from the fetal bovine serum.

4) What are you? A dummy? There are no viruses and you are just brainwashed and captured by an industry that has lied for centuries.

5) No, it's all just snake toxins (or name your toxin of choice) and they are also putting it/them in the air, the water and...

6) Don't you know all infections are just consciousness disorders, or the body house-cleaning, and that you've been captured by the lies of mass germ formation. There are no viruses, and contagion is a myth. Sort your sh#t out lady...!

7) No, its just where the needle lands.

8) no it's just the LNP's

9) You're all just shills making money off misinformation, disinformation and lies.

10) You're all controlled opposition depriving people of the ultimate truth.

After 40 years in this, I've seen it all.

The topic of what is wrong with vaccines and why every person responds differently to them, is so complex, with so many confounders and complexities, and to think that any one thing is going to be the ultimate answer is naive.

The reason I support your work Kevin, is that I know exactly who Bernice Eddy was, what she did, what she thought, when she thought it. I also know a lot more than that... I know the people who worked with her. I know that the story of simian viruses is way deeper than anyone living is telling, because if they told it all, it would scare every hair off every person's skin cells body wide. And I'm not just talking about what Dr Jack Kruze says about it. What he says can easily be found in key published books, like Ed Haslam's "Dr Mary's monkey". And yes, there was a very good reason why Ed's father told him to seriously consider whether or not he should open his mouth on the topic.

Just as someone might have told you that if you "go there", you will not only open a pandora's box in terms of possibilities, but every person who considers their directive to be the prime one, will toss bricks and bombs into your comment sections, and that is what I've seen from the start.

It goes with the territory and always has.

If people understood what happened to Bernice Eddy, Anthony J Morris, and others in the DBS in the 60's and later in the FDA in the 70's they would realise anyone who steps on anyone else's toes, is going to pay a price. However, today, unfortunately, it's not "Us and them." Since 2020, "someone" (whoever that is) has carefully sown seeds which means that we can't even know that our own "side" has our backs.

You are absolutely correct in staying in your lane, because every jig-saw puzzle has key pieces that pull everything else together. Yours is one of several key pieces. And as you say, the FACT is that Pfizer deliberately removed all SV40 sequences from the EMA schematic and chose not to tell any regulators.

THAT FACT alone, tells me that they knew that this was a potential game changer. If everyone worked diligently on their own puzzle pieces and worked out how it all meshed together, we'd be a lot better off.

However the regulators have not changed their spots. Their reaction to you, and everyone else pointing this out is EXACTLY the same as it was to Bernice Eddy in 1958. It was only when Sweet and Hilleman from Merck published their findings, that any limited discussion was even allowed.

And the medical literature about SV40 is seriously whacked, because so-called follow up studies were a joke, and funding was only ever allocated by U-No-Hoo to people like Keerti Shah who would always say what the regulators wanted them to say. Anyone who dared to say anything else found it almost impossible to get published and their lives were also made extremely difficult, while at the same time, SV40 totally revived the researchers ability to "go where no man had gone before" .... which leads us right here... to Pfizer.

Anyway, that is a tome enough.

Expand full comment
Oct 29Liked by Anandamide

Mitochondrial Odysee. Been there. Done that already.

Expand full comment

Not wishing to lower the tone intellectually but are you saying that there is evidence for DNA changes from the covid vaccines.

If this is true then the immunity from prosecution for the pharmaceutical companies will be invalid as they specifically denied it.

Expand full comment

The answers to your question, are in previous substacks.

Expand full comment

Thank you for the extension of that topic, I wrote about that in 2022, at the very begin of my substack setup:

https://mejbcart.substack.com/p/the-many-ways-which-lead-to-fauci

that NIH patent is important....

Expand full comment

Such a great substack mejbcart. Indeed many ways, and those are only the ways we know, not the ones still undefined....

Expand full comment

Thank you;) Many like-minded scientists should come together and fight, fight, fight, like Trump and his new coalition....

Expand full comment

Totally agree. We all know what is stopping them though, and that is a sad indictment of the medical profession's cranial and golden handcuffs.

Expand full comment

Take home: Let’s figure out if the risk of DNA integrations into the genome are worth the oncogenic risks before injecting billions of people.

Addresses cancer risk from lenti-virus mediated gene therapy for a terminal disease, vs. jabs used to prevent a usually non-fatal infection.

Expand full comment

This goes beyond health freedom. The government orchestrated a deliberate attack on the human population. This is a war that is not over.

Expand full comment

Great interview!

One question, the SV40 replicating in the cancer biopsy, how do you know it's from the vaccine and not some other source of SV40?

Expand full comment
author

We have spike reads that are unique to Pfizer’s codon optimization and ColE1 sequence also from their vector.

Expand full comment
author

But we’ll know more shortly.

The spike isn’t completely intact.

Expand full comment

A big university has been studying blood samples from shot injured people. They have their conclusions. Hopefully when ready it doesn’t get forcefully retracted.

Expand full comment

"...Nevertheless, I cannot find evidence of SV40 Enhancers or promoters in the sequence listed in the trial documents or supplements of this paper (welcome any correction here)...."

Skysona promoter is called MNDU3

Empty lentiviral backbone with the MNDU3 promoter

https://www.addgene.org/81071/

https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/new-england-journal-of-medicine-study

Expand full comment
author

Yes.. But the trial data doesnt list that AddGene vector.

Expand full comment

I assumed this was showing the Add Gene vector?

In the paper there is a reference 37.

37. SKYSONA prescribing information. September 2022 (https://www.fda.gov/ media/161640/download).

"..SKYSONA contains human blood cells that are genetically modified with replication-incompetent,

self-inactivating Lenti-D lentiviral vector (LVV)... ..The cancers appear to be the result of the SKYSONA lentiviral vector, Lenti-D, integration in proto-oncogenes.."

https://www.fda.gov/media/161640/download

I can send you the paper if you like.

Expand full comment

Kevin, do you know if the material (FFPE block, etc) from the biopsy is still available? Sorry if I missed it if you answered that. I think it’d be interesting to get spatial transcriptomics data on it, to even hone in further on if there is a specific location of the putative integration.

Expand full comment
author

I would love to get spatial transcriptomics data. I dont know how good the RNA is and I think we need normal tissue to perform this comparison. If the RNA is too ragged, I'm also interested in DNA methylation signals that could inform on if this was a stem cell hit. Most stem cells in the GI are not immunoprivileged but perhaps the they still evade destruction with certain integration events.

Expand full comment
author

ChatGPT prompt

How could transfection of SV40 Enhancers and Promoters evade an immune response and lead to cancer?

The **transfection of SV40 enhancers and promoters** into cells has the potential to evade immune detection and contribute to **carcinogenesis (cancer development)** through several mechanisms. **SV40 (Simian Virus 40)** is a polyomavirus known for its ability to induce transformation in cells. The SV40 **enhancer** and **promoter** elements are powerful genetic regulatory sequences that can dramatically increase the expression of genes. When transfected into cells, especially chronically, these elements can contribute to oncogenesis through both **direct and indirect mechanisms** involving immune evasion and cellular transformation.

### 1. **Evading Immune Detection**:

For cancer or transformed cells to develop, immune evasion is critical. The immune system typically detects abnormal or infected cells through mechanisms that rely on **antigen presentation** and recognition of stress signals (like **foreign proteins** or **cytosolic DNA**). However, there are ways that transfection of SV40 enhancer and promoter sequences might evade these immune mechanisms:

- **No Foreign Protein Expression**:

- SV40 **enhancers and promoters** themselves are **non-coding** DNA sequences; they do not encode for a protein that could be recognized as "foreign" by the immune system. T cells, specifically **CD8+ cytotoxic T cells**, generally recognize foreign proteins presented on **MHC class I molecules**. If the transfection does not produce an antigenic protein, **T cells** may fail to recognize the transfected cells as abnormal.

- Without an immunogenic peptide being produced, the immune system may **overlook** cells that have been transfected with these regulatory sequences.

- **Immune Privileged Tissues**:

- If the transfection occurs in **immune-privileged sites**, such as certain parts of the **CNS** or even **stem cell niches** in some tissues (like intestinal stem cells), the immune system might not adequately surveil these areas. Cells in immune-privileged environments may have **reduced MHC expression** or evade T cell-mediated immune responses.

- **Subtle Changes in Gene Regulation**:

- The SV40 enhancer and promoter sequences are known for their ability to strongly activate **transcription** of genes. In some cases, this can be a slow and insidious process where **small changes** in the expression of proto-oncogenes or **silencing of tumor suppressor genes** may initially go unnoticed by the immune system. Over time, this altered gene expression could lead to a **pre-cancerous state** without triggering an immediate immune response.

### 2. **Chronic Activation of Cellular Pathways**:

Chronic transfection with SV40 enhancer and promoter elements could cause long-term dysregulation of cellular pathways, potentially leading to **oncogenesis**:

- **Chronic Activation of Oncogenes**:

- SV40 **enhancer elements** are potent regulators that increase the expression of nearby genes. If these sequences are integrated near **proto-oncogenes** (genes that, when activated, promote cell growth and division), they could lead to chronic **overexpression** of these oncogenes, pushing the cell into an uncontrolled **proliferative state**. This is a key step in the development of cancer.

- **Oncogenes** like **MYC**, **RAS**, or **CCND1** could be aberrantly expressed due to the SV40 regulatory sequences, leading to **uncontrolled cell division**, and **tumor formation**.

- **Disruption of Tumor Suppressor Genes**:

- If the SV40 sequences integrate into regions of the genome controlling **tumor suppressor genes** (like **p53** or **RB1**), this could lead to a reduction in the activity of these critical gatekeepers of the cell cycle. Tumor suppressor genes act to prevent uncontrolled growth, and their disruption removes a key safeguard against cancer development.

- **Interference with Apoptosis**:

- SV40 regulatory elements could also increase the expression of genes that inhibit **apoptosis** (programmed cell death). If cells lose their ability to undergo apoptosis in response to DNA damage or abnormal growth, they may continue to divide even when damaged, leading to cancer.

### 3. **cGAS-STING Pathway and Immune Evasion**:

- **Intermittent or Low-Level Activation**:

- Chronic transfection with DNA fragments, including SV40 enhancers and promoters, can activate the **cGAS-STING pathway**, which normally detects cytosolic DNA as a danger signal. However, **chronic, low-level activation** of this pathway can lead to **immune tolerance** rather than a robust immune response. Over time, the immune system may adapt to the persistent presence of transfected DNA and reduce its inflammatory response.

- If this pathway becomes **downregulated or suppressed** (which happens in some cancer cells), the immune system might stop recognizing the transfected cells as a threat. This immune evasion could allow cells with oncogenic mutations to **proliferate unchecked**, leading to tumor development.

- **Suppressing Immune Surveillance**:

- Chronic activation of the cGAS-STING pathway might also trigger the release of immunosuppressive cytokines (such as **IL-10** or **TGF-β**) that dampen the overall immune response. These cytokines can suppress **T cell** activation and prevent effective **tumor surveillance**, allowing transformed cells to escape detection.

### 4. **DNA Damage and Genomic Instability**:

Chronic exposure to foreign DNA sequences, such as the **SV40 regulatory elements**, could contribute to **genomic instability**, a hallmark of cancer:

- **DNA Integration and Mutagenesis**:

- Transfected SV40 elements may **integrate into the host genome** at random locations. This integration can lead to **insertional mutagenesis**, where the insertion of the foreign DNA disrupts normal gene function, leading to cancerous transformations. For example, integration into a tumor suppressor gene could inactivate it, promoting uncontrolled growth.

- **Induction of DNA Damage Responses**:

- Chronic transfection and the presence of exogenous DNA can trigger **DNA damage responses** (DDR), which can lead to mutations or chromosomal aberrations if not properly repaired. Over time, this accumulation of DNA damage can lead to the development of **genetic mutations** that drive cancer.

### 5. **Chronic Inflammation and Cancer Risk**:

- **Chronic Inflammatory Environment**:

- Persistent activation of **immune pathways**, such as **cGAS-STING**, can create a **chronic inflammatory environment**. Chronic inflammation is a well-known risk factor for cancer, as it can lead to the production of **reactive oxygen species (ROS)**, DNA damage, and an environment that promotes cell proliferation and survival.

- If the SV40 enhancer/promoter transfection leads to chronic **low-grade inflammation**, this could increase the risk of mutations and, ultimately, cancer.

### Summary of How SV40 Enhancers and Promoters May Lead to Cancer and Evade Immune Detection:

- **Immune evasion** occurs because SV40 enhancers and promoters are **non-coding sequences**, and without the expression of a foreign protein, the immune system may not recognize the transfected cells as abnormal.

- **Chronic activation** of proto-oncogenes or disruption of tumor suppressor genes through the potent regulatory action of SV40 elements can lead to **uncontrolled cell growth** and **genomic instability**.

- **Immune tolerance** may develop through low-level, chronic activation of the **cGAS-STING** pathway, reducing the immune system’s ability to eliminate the transfected cells.

- The result can be the development of **tumors** due to both immune evasion and **cellular transformation** driven by the continuous dysregulation of gene expression.

This process highlights the potential risks associated with the **repeated transfection** of cells with regulatory elements like the **SV40 enhancer** and **promoter** without proper immune or genetic control mechanisms in place.

Expand full comment

Martenson has been my go-to cov guy. I now thank him for introducing me to you.

I've now listened to this interview 4 times.

The first 40 min are completely over my head, but from there on, I find the analysis and conclusions compelling.

Expand full comment

Top shelf intel.

Is there anything those that were deceived into taking gene therapy can do to restore their immune systems ? 🙏

Expand full comment

Personally, I haven't taken a vaccine in more than 20 years, and I never, ever will. As for DNA contamination, endotoxins, nanotech, whatever, it is all moot to me. And if there is ever a future mandate, I will either get that exemption again, or get another job or be homeless. At least I will be alive, enjoying my oxygen.

Expand full comment