Comment on Conrad Vine Continues to Attack Church Leadership by Sean Pitman.

Here’s an interesting video clip of Dr. Peter McCullough explaining why he believes the mRNA vaccines cause “Turbo Cancer”.

https://x.com/MmisterNobody/status/1803982453565968439

In this clip he cites three mechanisms, describing these three mechanisms as a “multi-hit hypothesis”. These three proposed mechanisms are as follows:

• mRNA can impair DNA repair mechanisms, resulting in cancer
• The mRNA vaccines contain fragments of DNA plasmids from a protooncogene virus known as SV40, which is known to promote cancer growth
• The mRNA vaccines produce the S2 segment of the spike protein, which can interact with the p53 protein and BRCA-1/2 proteins, tumor-suppressor proteins within human cells, resulting in cancer

Now, these particular claims have been investigated in detail by cancer biologists. It turns out that none of these mechanisms or potential “hits” to the genetics of human beings is a valid concern… for the following reasons.

DNA repair mechanisms impaired by mRNA:
This is a very strange argument since DNA is contained within the nucleus of a cell and is decoded by various protein-based machines to produce mRNA. This mRNA is then transported through the nuclear membrane into the cytoplasm of the cell where it is again decoded by protein machines to produce various other proteins – in the cytoplasm. The mRNA used in vaccines works the very same way, except it never enters the nucleus of the cell. It stays in the cytoplasm where it is decoded to produce a modified and stabilized version of the COVID-19 viral spike protein. So, since the mRNA from the vaccine never enters the nucleus of the cell, it cannot be said, then that this mRNA impairs DNA repair mechanisms. That just doesn’t happen – not even in theory.

The mRNA vaccines contain SV40 fragments:
Dr. Robert Malone, who played a role in developing the messenger RNA, or mRNA, technology used in the vaccine, testified that the shot includes a DNA sequence called Simian Virus 40, or SV40. The truth is that tiny non-functional fragments of SV40’s DNA sequence are used as “starting material” in producing the vaccine. Then, even these starting DNA sequences are broken down and removed as part of the manufacturing process. The only thing even theoretically left in the final product are “trace amounts” of very tiny fragments of the SV40 DNA sequence. In other words, no intact or infectious elements of the SV40 virus end up in the human body and the rare minute fragments that happen to get into a cell are rapidly broken down by the cell and do not enter the nucleus or affect a person’s DNA. As Dr. Paul Offit (director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia) points out, “It’s very hard for a DNA fragment to enter a cell, specifically its nucleus, where the DNA resides. Your cytoplasm doesn’t like DNA and has a variety of mechanisms to rid itself of DNA. In addition, for that fragment of DNA to be integrated into your DNA, you also have to have enzymes that disrupt the DNA and allow you to insert that fragment. That’s what gene therapy is all about, and that’s what makes gene therapy so hard to do.” (Link)

In short, there’s not even a theoretical cancer risk here and no real world increases in cancer linked to the mRNA vaccines has been identified. Really, if anyone is concerned here, far far greater amounts of viral genetic material enter the human body and human cells throughout the body via a natural COVID-19 infection as compared to a localized mRNA vaccination in one’s shoulder.

The mRNA suppresses p53:
The claim is based on a paper written by Wafik El-Deiry (Link), an eminent oncologist and cancer biologist the director at Legorreta Cancer Center at Brown University (a big name in p53 research for 30 years) and another paper written by Singh and Singh (June 30, 2020)

So, first off, what did El-Deiry say in his paper? Well, it turns out that he was actually writing about infection by COVID-19 and the effects of infection on human cells. In his paper he argued that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, produced in humans cells during infection, mediates host cell infection and cell-cell fusion that causes stabilization of tumor suppressor p53 protein.

This is very interesting since one would naturally think that the stabilization of a tumor suppressor, like the “guardian of the genome” p53, would result in a suppression of tumor production, not an enhancement of tumor development. El-Deiry seems to be saying is that the spike protein activates p53, not deactivates it – which would be protective against cancer formation. It is also interesting to note that the cell lines used for his investigation were cancer cell lines themselves: human lung cancer cells H460, breast cancer cells MCF7, colorectal cancer cells HCT116 (p53 wild-type or p53-null), and sarcoma cells U2OS with p53-knockout (U2OS-P53KO). El-Deiry goes on to specifically note that, “We have not evaluated normal cells such as airway, muscle, immune, brain or intestinal cells.” So, what did El-Deiry think his study actually showed that was relevant to the possibility of cancer enhancement. Well, in the presence of the viral spike protein, there was decreased expression of p21, which induces cell cycle arrest, in response to p53. So, the suggestion was made that this interference could result in an increased cancer risk for those who already had cancer – since it would make the cancer cells more resistant to chemotherapy treatment.

So, in short, all this paper shows is that, in cell culture, using cancer cell lines, it is possible that SARS-CoV-2 infection might interfere with some forms of p53 tumor suppression activity specifically dealing with those with pre-existing cancer undergoing chemotherapy. What this really means is that an actual COVID-19 infection carries with it a far far greater risk compared to an mRNA vaccination when it comes to actually causing an increased risk of developing cancer to begin with. Consider, for instance, that an actual COVID-19 infection results in elevated levels of chemokines that could also contribute to cancer development, such as increases in chemokines CCL2, CCL4, CXCL8, CXCL9 and CXCL10 that have been found in those infected with COVID-19. These chemokines are known to participate in oncogenesis, the promotion of tumor cell expansion, cancer stem cell proliferation, metastasis, angiogenesis, induction of epithelial-mesenchymal transition, the attraction of myeloid-derived suppressor cells and recruitment of fibroblast (Jafarzadeh et al., 2022). In comparison, the very short-lived vaccine mRNA sequences would have minimal effect – even in theory. Beyond this, no increase in cancer rates for the vaccinated have been identified. It just hasn’t and isn’t happening.

It is also interesting to note that, on his own LinkedIn account, Dr. El Deiry wrote: “Complete loss or mutation of p53 doesn’t cause cancer immediately either in mice or humans…. I will be very clear that this is not anti-vaxx rhetoric and is not intended to discourage anyone from taking a COVID vaccine or booster as recommended by their physician or other health care provider. The COVID vaccine has saved millions of lives and is strongly recommended for the elderly and those with comorbid medical illnesses including patients with cancer.”

But, what about the Singh/Singh 2020 paper that McCullough specifically cites in the video clip linked above? McCullough specifically says that it is the S2 subunit from the mRNA vaccine produced spike protein, not the spike protein for a COVID-19 infection, that interacts with p53 and BRCA-1/2. However, in the actual paper, Singh/Singh counter McCullough’s claim, explaining that, regarding a COVID-19 infection in particular, “We found p53, BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 interact with heptic repeat-2 region of S2 subunit through C- terminal domain.” After all, “the inactive S protein exists as a single peptide, but is activated by cleavage into S1 and S2 by cellular proteases during infection (specifically by “furin in the Golgi apparatus”).” (Link) Nothing was said of the mRNA vaccines in this paper. Also, no direct causal ties with cancer or cancer progression (for this interaction between the S2 protein subunit and p53/BRCA-1/2) was demonstrated in this paper either. The best that can be concluded here is that, if anything, an infection with COVID-19 would be far far more risky compared to an mRNA vaccination with regard to this particular proposed mechanism.

As a relevant aside, there have also been cases where a patient with metastatic carcinoma experienced dramatic tumor regression following mRNA vaccination against COVID-19. (Link)

Sean Pitman Also Commented

Recent Comments by Sean Pitman

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Linkedin

email

Print