Keywords: mRNA vaccines; innate immunity; IFN I response; exosomes; G-quadruplexes; microRNAs; epitranscriptomic interference; cancer; myocarditis; thrombocytopenia.
Introduction
Vaccination is an endeavor to utilize non-pathogenic material to mimic
the immunological response of a natural infection, thereby conferring
immunity in the event of pathogen exposure. This goal has been primarily
pursued through the use of both whole organism and attenuated virus
vaccines. Use of fragments of virus or their protein products, referred
to as “subunit vaccines,” has been more technically challenging
[1]. In any event, an implicit assumption behind the deployment of
any vaccination campaign is that the vaccine confers the effects of a
‘benign infection,’ activating the immune system against future
exposure, while avoiding the health impacts of actual infection.
Much of the literature on this related to COVID-19 suggests that the
immune response to mRNA-based vaccination is similar to natural
infection. A preprint study found “high immunogenicity of BNT162b2
[Pfizer] vaccine in comparison with natural infection.” The authors
found there to be many qualitative similarities though quantitative
differences [2]. Jhaveri (2021) suggests that mRNA vaccines do what
infection with the virus does: “The protein is produced and presented
in the same way as natural infection” [3]. The U.S. Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) makes the case based upon antibody
titers generated by prior infection vs. vaccination, in addition to
production of memory B cells, to argue that the immune response to
vaccination is analogous to the response to natural infection [4].
It is this similarity in the humoral immune response to vaccination vs
natural infection, paired with both trial and observational data
demonstrating reduced risk of infection following vaccination, that
stands as the justification for the mass vaccination campaign.
In this paper we explore the scientific literature suggesting that
vaccination with an mRNA vaccine initiates a set of biological events
that are not only different from that induced by vaccination but are in
several ways demonstrably counterproductive to both short- and long-term
immune competence and normal cellular function. These vaccinations have
now been shown to downregulate critical pathways related to cancer
surveillance, infection control, and cellular homeostasis. They
introduce into the body highly modified genetic material. A medRxiv
preprint has revealed a remarkable difference between the
characteristics of the immune response to an infection with SARS-CoV-2
as compared with the immune response to an mRNA vaccine against COVID-19
[5]. Differential gene expression analysis of peripheral dendritic
cells revealed a dramatic upregulation of both type I and type II
interferons (IFNs) in COVID-19 patients, but not in vaccinees. One
remarkable observation they made was that there was an expansion of
circulating hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPCs) in COVID-19
patients, but this expansion was notably absent following vaccination. A
striking expansion in circulating plasmablasts observed in COVID-19
patients was also not seen in the vaccinees. All of these observations
are consistent with the idea that the vaccines actively suppress type I
IFN signaling, as we will discuss below. In this paper we will be
focusing extensively, though not exclusively, on vaccination-induced
type I IFN suppression and the myriad downstream effects this has on the
related signaling cascade.
Since long-term pre-clinical and Phase I safety trials were combined
with Phase II trials, then phase II and III trials were combined
[6]; and since even those were terminated early and placebo arms
given the injections, we look to the pharmacosurveillance system and
published reports for safety signals. In doing so, we find that that
evidence is not encouraging. The biological response to mRNA vaccination
as it is currently employed is demonstrably not like natural
infection. In this paper we will illustrate those differences, and we
will describe the immunological and pathological processes we expect are
being initiated by mRNA vaccination. We will connect these underlying
physiological effects with both realized and yet-to-be-observed
morbidities. We anticipate that implementation of booster vaccinations
on a wide scale will make all of these problems only more acute, and it
will serve to further erode antiviral immune competence and innate
cancer surveillance and protection for the global population subjected
to these repeated boosters.
The mRNA vaccines manufactured by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna have been
viewed as an essential aspect of our efforts to control the spread of
COVID-19. Countries around the globe have been aggressively promoting
massive vaccination programs with the hope that such efforts might
finally curtail the ongoing pandemic and restore normalcy. Governments
seem reticent to consider the possibility that these injections might
cause harm in unexpected ways, and especially that such harm might even
surpass the benefits achieved in protection from severe disease. It is
now clear that the antibodies induced by the vaccines fade in as little
as 3 to 10 weeks after the second dose [7], such that people are
being advised to seek booster shots at regular intervals [8]. It has
also become apparent that rapidly emerging variants such as the Delta
and now the Omicron strain are showing resistance to the antibodies
induced by the vaccines, through mutations in the spike protein [9].
Furthermore, it has become clear that the vaccines do not prevent spread
of the disease, but can only be claimed to reduce symptom severity
[10]. A study comparing vaccination rates with COVID-19 infection
rates across 68 countries and 294 counties in the United States in early
September, 2021, found no correlation between the two, suggesting that
these vaccines do not protect from spread of the disease [11].
Regarding symptom severity, even this aspect is beginning to be in
doubt, as demonstrated by an outbreak in an Israeli hospital that led to
the death of five fully vaccinated hospital patients [12].
Similarly, Brosh-Nissimov et.al. (2021) reported that 34/152 (22%) of
fully vaccinated patients among 17 Israeli hospitals died of COVID-19
[13].
The increasing evidence that the vaccines do little to control disease
spread and that their effectiveness wanes over time make it even more
imperative to assess the degree to which the vaccines might cause harm.
That SARS-CoV-2 modified spike protein mRNA vaccinations have biological
impacts is without question. Here we attempt to distinguish those
impacts from natural infection, and establish a mechanistic framework
linking those unique biological impacts to pathologies now associated
with vaccination. We recognize that the causal links between biological
effects initiated by mRNA vaccination and adverse outcomes have not been
established in the large majority of cases.