Masterpiece of BioNTech & Pfizer
Regarding BioNTech patent US2023/0183769A1 I previously posted, which admittedly increases the residual DNA, I would like to emphasize another point here.
Please compare the descriptions of the patent and the EMA document as reproduced below. The two documents say almost same thing, but ''something'' is missing from the EMA document.
In parallel, small scale studies were conducted to understand the impact of a wider range of CTP and ATP, since ATP was identified as the next potential limiting nucleotide. Results showed that increasing the volumes of both CTP and ATP not only mitigated these nucleotide limitations, as measured at the end of the proteinase K step, but also increased integrity and yield and decreased dsRNA. Therefore, ATP and CTP volumes were identified as CPPs prior to the Pfizer PPQ3 batch. As a result of the small scale studies, acceptable ranges for ATP and CTP volumes were widened at the higher end from 99.0 to 143.8 mL/L starting IVT volume for CTP and 99.0 to 135.1 mL/L starting IVT volume for ATP.…
[0437]
The present example demonstrates additional exemplary assessment of IVT reactions mixtures. FIG. 16 summarizes exemplary IVT reaction mixtures assessed and exemplary characterization of produced RNAs when CTP in the IVT reaction mixture is increased. Both RNA yield and integrity increased with higher CTP starting concentrations, while dsRNA content decreases with higher CTP concentration. Residual DNA was increased with higher CTP starting concentration (FIG. 16 ). Without wishing to be bound by any one theory, residual DNA may have increased with higher CTP starting concentration due to activity of DNAse I being decreased from, for example, lower free magnesium cation levels.
Pfizer (BioNTech) states in the EMA document the benefits of improving the RNA yield and integrity and decreasing the dsRNA by increasing CTP and ATP concentrations. Despite this, Pfizer (BioNTech) concealed the fact that "residual DNA increases" in it.
Remember that the preferable concentration ranges of CTP and ATP disclosed in this patent are consistent with the acceptable ranges shown in the EMA document.
In the EMA document, comparing the batch C501 with the previous batches C101 to C401, it can be seen that the residual DNA amount has increased nearly 10 times. However, from only the EMA document, it is not possible to understand whether this was due to the variations between batches or whether this was just coincidentally increased.
However, by touching this patent disclosure, it can be understood that this increase in the residual DNA is the intended result based on the design of Pfizer (BioNTech).
Why is the residual DNA amount of the Pfizer higher than that of the Modelna?
One of the answers may be the fact that they concealed in the EMA document.
They already knew that the residual DNA would be high at the time of manufacturing. And knowing this, they introduced the vaccine into the society and vaccinated many citizens.
If they had conscientious moral principles based on the medical philosophy, then they would have designed the product to minimize the residual DNA. But not only did they not do that, they concealed the fact in the EMA document.
The qPCR they employed to measure the residual DNA amount underestimates it by its nature. That is, with the qPCR, they underestimated the increased residual DNA due to the manufacturing process.
Their actions like this are truly a masterpiece of craftsmanship.
This kind of the attitude from a pharmaceutical company should not be tolerated, and EMA should also be blamed for its thoughtless attitude in overlooking this.
There are many researchers who oppose the mRNA but do not address the issue of the residual DNA for some reasons. Despite they cannot deny the possibility that the residual DNA may cause fatal side effects, they have even refused to call for verification of the risks posed by the residual DNA.
They are neglecting everything they should be doing now. If this continues, they may end up stating in the future, just like pharmaceutical companies, "I did not anticipate that the residual DNA would cause major harm." Or they may state "I thought the risk or probability was small."
In any case, these statement are supporting the evidence that current research in the mRNA is insufficient, and thus there does not become a reason not to publicly call for verification of the problems hidden in the mRNA.
The multiple risks due to the residual DNA, such as oncogenesis, insertional mutagenesis, integration into the genome, and inheritance to offsprings, have been discussed since the 1970s, judging from trends in the standard values for residual DNA. This is a problem that anyone in this field have already been aware of now.
To make matters worse, this mRNA has a design concept that allows the residual DNA to be wrapped in LNP and promptly delivered into cells. It goes without saying that such technology increases the risk of the residual DNA, which has been discussed so far, and is a far cry from what has been discussed so far.
This patent should be understood as one piece of evidence that determines that BioNTech and Pfizer are dishonest to citizens and an unethical company, and this concept should be shared by as many people as possible.
The documents disclosed by BioNTech and Pfizer are in full of deceptive and not trustworthy. Therefore, there is no reason for us citizens to put our trust in such companies, and their actions must be strictly investigated.
The government and pharmaceutical companies should immediately disclose to the public the fact that the mRNA vaccines are contaminated with the residual DNA and make them aware of the risks.
If they fail to do this, they will only increase the number of sleeping lions in vain.
Thank you.
Reference lists
US20230183769A1 (USPTO)
https://image-ppubs.uspto.gov/dirsearch-public/print/downloadPdf/20230183769
US20230183769A1 (Google)
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20230183769A1/en?oq=US2023%2f0183769A1
EMA document
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K-dWmwzH-gbsPstj3bTfYgS1DUTEqIn1uA2T5-4jZr0/edit
PDA Journal
Thanks, catching up, I have referenced you work here:
https://geoffpain.substack.com/p/production-of-the-pfizer-biontech