Might mRNA ‘vaccines’ actually cause cancer ?



The statement

‘There’s a secret layer of information in your cells called messenger RNA, that’s located between DNA and proteins, that serves as a critical link. Now, in a medical shocker to the whole world of vaccine philosophy, scientists at Sloan Kettering found that mRNA itself carries cancer CAUSING changes – changes that genetic tests don’t even analyze, flying completely under the radar of oncologists across the globe.

So now, it’s time for independent laboratories that are not vaccine manufacturers (or hired by them) to run diagnostic testing on the Covid vaccine series and find out if these are cancer-driving inoculations that, once the series is complete, will cause cancer tumors in the vaccinated masses who have all rushed out to get the jab out of fear and propaganda influence. Welcome to the world of experimental and dirty vaccines known as mRNA “technology.”

The source

Derek Knauss, on the Prepareforchange.net  website, on March 31st, 2021

               ( https://prepareforchange.net/2021/03/31/scientists-at-sloan-kettering-discover-mrna-inactivates-tumor-suppressing-proteins-meaning-it-can-promote-cancer/

The original research article on which it was apparently based, “Widespread intronic polyadenylation inactivates tumor suppressor genes in leukemia”, was published in Nature in August 2018. 


My take on it

First, some definitions:

What is an intron?

Introns are noncoding sections of an RNA transcript, or the DNA encoding it, that are spliced out before the RNA molecule is translated into a protein. The sections of DNA (or RNA) that code for proteins are called exons. Following transcription, new, immature strands of messenger RNA, called pre-mRNA, may contain both introns and exons. The pre-mRNA molecule thus goes through a modification process in the nucleus called splicing during which the noncoding introns are cut out and only the coding exons remain. Splicing produces a mature messenger RNA molecule that is then translated into a protein. Introns are also referred to as intervening sequences.

What is polyadenylation?

Polyadenylation is part of the process that produces mature mRNA for translation. In particular it is the addition of a poly(A) tail to an RNA transcript, typically a messenger RNA (mRNA).  The poly(A) tail is important for the nuclear export, translation and stability of mRNA.

So intronic polyadenylation is a naturally occurring part of the process of replicating DNA via mRNA in the cell nucleus. Indeed it is widespread:

               ‘mRNA polyadenylation and pre-mRNA splicing are two essential steps for the maturation of most human mRNAs.’

With that introduction, here is the abstract from the research paper in Nature, with some emphases added by myself:

‘DNA mutations are known cancer drivers. Here we investigated whether mRNA events that are upregulated in cancer can functionally mimic the outcome of genetic alterations. RNA sequencing or 3′-end sequencing techniques were applied to normal and malignant B cells from 59 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL)1,2,3. We discovered widespread upregulation of truncated mRNAs and proteins in primary CLL cells that were not generated by genetic alterations but instead occurred by intronic polyadenylation. Truncated mRNAs caused by intronic polyadenylation were recurrent (n = 330) and predominantly affected genes with tumour-suppressive functions. The truncated proteins generated by intronic polyadenylation often lack the tumour-suppressive functions of the corresponding full-length proteins (such as DICER and FOXN3), and several even acted in an oncogenic (cancer-causing, AD) manner (such as CARD11, MGA and CHST11). In CLL, the inactivation of tumour-suppressor genes by aberrant mRNA processing is substantially more prevalent than the functional loss of such genes through genetic events. We further identified new candidate tumour-suppressor genes that are inactivated by intronic polyadenylation in leukaemia and by truncating DNA mutations in solid tumours4,5. These genes are understudied in cancer, as their overall mutation rates are lower than those of well-known tumour-suppressor genes. Our findings show the need to go beyond genomic analyses in cancer diagnostics, as mRNA events that are silent at the DNA level are widespread contributors to cancer pathogenesis through the inactivation of tumour-suppressor genes.


I am not a doctor, let alone an oncologist. I have endeavoured to unpack the academic presentation so that you can have a clearer understanding of what the researchers discovered.

In brief, research focus has been on DNA, but some concerning events are happening routinely at the mRNA level that are not visible at the DNA level. Theses events include both the suppression of naturally-occurring tumour suppression mechanisms, and the promotion of cancer-generating mechanisms.

For a scientist it is a logical extension of this finding to ask what would happen to foreign mRNA that is injected into our bodies and is designed to find its way into our cells. Would it reduce our natural resistance to cancer? Might it even promote the onset of cancer?

In my mind it is just one more reason to decline what I believe to be an unnecessary and unsafe injection.

mRNA ‘vaccine’? Yes, it’s a clinical trial

The statement

“A Study to Determine the Safety and Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccine CVnCoV in Adults for COVID-19”

The source

The (NIH) US National Library of Medicine Clinical Studies web site

( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04652102 )


My take on it

Clinical trials, including this one, require informed consent. The challenge is that there are widely differing views as to the nature, safety and prospectivity of these treatments. What then constitutes informed consent?

(I use the term ‘treatments’ advisedly. These mRNA ‘vaccines’ do not match the conventional nature and definition of a vaccine (see eg the CDC’s own web site) and they are described by some experts as more in the nature of gene therapy.

According to the CDC, ‘mRNA vaccines have been held to the same rigorous safety and effectiveness standards as all other types of vaccines in the United States. The only COVID-19 vaccines the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will make available for use in the United States (by approval or emergency use authorization) are those that meet these standards.’

Is this not a circular claim? The purpose of the study is ‘to Determine the Safety and Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccine’. These mRNA vaccines are indeed being made available for use in the United States, by emergency use authorisation; prior to them being proven safe or effective.

The web site contains its own caution: “The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Know the risks and potential benefits of clinical studies and talk to your health care provider before participating.” 

If ever there was a case to do your own research, this is one.

Lockdowns: Unconstitutional, rules German Court

The Statement

A LANDMARK legal decision declared that regional containment policies – including lockdowns, social distancing, prohibitions on gatherings by family or friends) are  UNCONSTITUTIONAL. The judge called the lockdowns a “catastrophically wrong political decision with dramatic consequences for almost all areas of people’s lives.”

The judge ruled that the government violated the “inviolably guaranteed human dignity” under basic German law.


In the long term, containment-related excess mortality will likely be significantly larger than the death toll from COVID 19.

Since the containment policy in Thuringia is part of a general policy of almost all western industrialized countries, this damage is the indirect consequence also attributable to the pro rata and is therefore in principle linked to the examination of proportionality .

For this reason alone, the standards to be assessed here do not meet the requirement of proportionality. Added to this are the direct and indirect restrictions on freedom, gigantic financial damage, immense damage to health and spiritual damage.

The word ” disproportionate  ” is too colorless to indicate the dimensions of what happened. The containment policy implemented by the Land government in the spring (and today again), of which the general ban on contact was (and remains) essential, is a catastrophic political error, with dramatic consequences for almost all sectors of human life, for society, for the State and for the countries of the South of the whole world ”.

The source

The Alliance for Human Protection, January 2021

( https://ahrp.org/german-court-in-weimar-declares-lockdown-unconstitutional )

My take on it

You might like to do what I did – take a quick look at the relevant parts of the German basic Law (https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/chancellor/basic-law-470510) . Here are the Preamble, and Articles 1 and 2:


Conscious of their responsibility before God and man,

Inspired by the determination to promote world peace as an equal partner in a united Europe, the German people, in the exercise of their constituent power, have adopted this Basic Law.

Germans in the Länder of Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Berlin, Brandenburg, Bremen, Ham-burg, Hesse, Lower Saxony, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, North Rhine-Westphalia, Rhineland-Palatinate, Saarland, Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, Schleswig-Holstein, and Thuringia have achieved the unity and freedom of Germany in free self- determination. This Basic Law thus applies to the entire German people.

I.  Basic Rights

Article 1 [Human dignity]

(1) Human dignity shall be inviolable. To respect and protect it shall be the duty of all state authority.
(2) The German people therefore acknowledge inviolable and inalienable human rights as the basis of every community, of peace and of justice in the world.
(3) The following basic rights shall bind the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary as directly applicable law.

Article 2 [Personal Freedoms]

(1) Every person shall have the right to free development of his personality insofar as he does not violate the rights
of others or offend against the constitutional order or the moral law.
(2) Every person shall have the right to life and physical integrity. Freedom of the person shall be inviolable. These
rights may be interfered with only pursuant to a law.

The German Basic Law dates from 1949. It was a provisional formulation by the Western Allies pending the reunification of Germany, and therefore the term ‘Constitution’ was avoided; but when reunification happened (in 1990) the German Basic Law remained in place, although it was never submitted to a popular vote.

The German Basic Law reflects the same high view of individual sovereignty that is reflected in the US Constitution and in the Constitution of Portugal (see my earlier post).

The Court found that the Administration had taken upon itself an authority reserved to the legslators.

The Court also found that (in any case) the data did not support the pretext put forward by government to justify the lock-down (and related measures). Indeed the judgment is worth reading just for the detailed data analysis on which the Court based its judgment.

The Court further found that the harmful effects of the government’s lock-down (and related) policies greatly outweighed any claimed benefit: “There is no doubt that the number of deaths attributable to the measures of the containment policy exceeds by several times the number of deaths avoided by it.”

No doubt.


Vaccine Passports? Not for EU

The statement

On 27 January, the Council of Europe signed Resolution 2361, which states that vaccinations in EU Member States should not be mandatory. Furthermore, persons who have not been vaccinated may not be discriminated against in any way. This effectively stops the notion of “vaccine passports”.

The Source


My take on it.

‘The Council of Europe is an intergovernmental European cooperation organization with 47 Member States, which, despite its name and the same flag, is separate from the EU. Its resolutions are not legally binding, but recommendations to Member States are almost always complied with.’


‘The resolution goes so far as to order member states such as Sweden to actively inform citizens of these rights. The resolution has been ignored by mainstream politicians and the media.’

Surprise, surprise.