Sometimes a paper on a new method delivers a side punch to current understanding. Nothing in the title hints at this, and the authors deliver the critical blow en passant.
Over a 40-year career in microbiology I’ve met several cases. For example, the scientist who found a problematic type of antibiotic resistance to be extremely prevalent in Pakistan. This exercised him not one jot, despite obvious implications for treatment and for import into the U.K. What motivated Joe, whose name I’ve changed, was perfecting a test to detect bacteria with this resistance. One of his collaborators (a former colleague, I think) just happened to be in Pakistan, which proved – owing to the high prevalence of the resistance – to be the ideal testing ground.
Some scientists don’t want the trouble that comes from a disturbing result, especially when they have a new method to publicise. They fear the opprobrium reserved for heretics and disruptors. At best, controversial observations delay your paper’s publication. At worst, they lead to it being rejected. Why court trouble, especially if you have patents or intellectual property claims? More simply, some, like Joe, just have a ‘techno’ mindset. If they discovered a Roman mosaic whilst digging the garden they’d fixate on how it’d affect the roses.
Now, consider this paper, published a few days ago: ‘Nanocarrier imaging at single-cell resolution across entire mouse bodies with deep learning’ by Luo, J., Molbay, M., Chen, Y. et al in Biotechnol (2025).
The title suggests that it’s a paper for imagers and radiographers. The abstract – where you summarise the main points – outlines how ‘Single Cell Precision Nanocarrier Identification’ visualises the tissue distribution of encapsulated drug formulations, notably including those using lipid nanoparticles (LNPs). Even when dosages are tiny the method can reveal individual cells that the particles reached. The LNPs’ distribution is very wide, and the resolution very impressive. The end of the Discussion – where you reiterate key discoveries – stresses how the method may help pharmaceutical developers identify carriers that distribute only to the desired tissues. Examples are presented.
This is high-quality work, nicely described. Nothing I write here should be construed as a criticism. But, mid-Abstract, there’s the by-the-bye killer punch, describing a step used to validate the method. With my additions in brackets, it reads:
We demonstrate that intramuscularly-injected LNPs (lipid nanoparticles) carrying SARS-CoV-2 spike mRNA reach heart tissue, leading to proteome (i.e., protein expression) changes, suggesting immune activation and blood vessel damage.
The Results tell the detail. Luo et al confirm the wide tissue distribution of LNPs following intramuscular injection of mice. On the positive side, they concentrate in lymph nodes, which should promote an immune response. More concerningly, they also reach the heart. And, once the LNPs were loaded with the relevant mRNA, this prompted production of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, principally by the endothelial cells of the heart capillaries.
When mice were given intramuscular LNPs with no mRNA, 240 capillary endothelial cell proteins were up-regulated and 135 down-regulated. These numbers swelled to 578 and 201, respectively, once the LNPs were loaded with mRNA for SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.
Proteins that were up-regulated or down-regulated only with the spike mRNA present included those involved with protein and RNA metabolism and the immune response. And – more concerningly – those involved in the formation and maintenance of the blood vessels. Some correspond to those which, in humans, are associated with the Vascular Function Score, a predictor of stroke and heart attack risk. More generally, dysfunction of capillary endothelial cells is a marker for cardiac disease and a European Society of Cardiology Working Group describes them as “Sentinels of cardiac health”.
As the present authors put it: “The observed LNP accumulation and proteome changes in heart tissue suggest a potential mechanism by which LNP-based mRNA vaccines could contribute to the reported cardiac complications.”
Quite.
There are caveats. As the authors acknowledge, their LNPs may differ from commercial vaccines, maybe affecting behaviour. Nonetheless, they specifically show that LNPs formed with the ionizable lipid SM-102, as in Moderna’s vaccine, reach the heart as do more standard LNPs, resembling those used by BioNTech.
What the authors omit to explore, but which I will add for them, follows from the fact that they administered a single shot of LNPs containing native mRNA. After six hours or three days they then killed the mice and examined LNP distribution and protein expression, respectively.
Native RNA is readily degraded. It gives a burst of protein synthesis, then is digested and lost. By contrast, human Covid mRNA vaccines use RNA with one of its four component bases, uridine, replaced by methyl-pseudouridine. This increases stability and tolerability. Unlike native mRNA, methyl-pseudouridine-mRNA can persist in tissues for 30 days or longer. And, unlike Dr Luo’s mice, many humans have accepted multiple mRNA boosters, repeating this exposure.
If the damage to capillary endothelial cells reflected direct toxicity from the LNPs’ mRNA, then human vaccines, with modified mRNA, might evade the problem. If, on the other hand, damage is due to the spike protein, translated from the mRNA, then human vaccines are likely to be more harmful, owing to longer and repeated exposure. The latter scenario seems the more likely. When Luo’s LNPs were instead loaded with mRNA encoding EGFP – a useful-for-imaging fluorescent protein from jellyfish – many metabolic proteins again were up- and down-regulated. But, unlike with the spike mRNA, there is no intimation that these included any associated with vascular damage. Moreover, many studies point to the spike protein’s inherent toxicity.
In short, besides developing an elegant method – the focus of their paper – Luo et al show that LNP-encapsulated mRNA reaches the heart. Once there, it causes local production of spike protein. Cardiac endothelial cell damage ensues, most likely owing to the toxicity of the spike protein itself. This tallies with cardiac harm in a proportion of human vaccinees. Human exposure to spike protein is longer than in Luo’s mice and repeated, owing to the use of modified mRNA and to boosting. It is reasonable to fear that this multiplies the risk of cardiac damage.
Many of the vaccine-injured were vaccinated needlessly. They were too young to be at risk from Covid. And since the vaccine didn’t stop them catching Coid, altruistic vaccination by the young did nothing to protect their elderly contacts. The failure to stop transmission was evident by summer 2021, by which time there also were many reports of cardiac harm. Yet the push for universal vaccination, including of children, continued though the autumn and winter, with increasing coercion. The recklessness of these policies is now laid bare, down to the individual cell.
Fortuitously, Lady Hallett’s Covid Inquiry is discussing vaccine harms this very week. Can she, for once, move at the ‘Speed of Science’ and add Luo’s crucial observations to the agenda as an emergency item?
David Livermore was a professor of medical microbiology at the University of East Anglia.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
are the Chinese using traditional technology vaccines that don’t work or are they using new gene therapy technology ‘vaccines’ that don’t work and may seriously injure or even kill you?
further comprehensive information on our amazing new technology ‘vaccines’ can be found here.
https://www.independentinformation.co.uk/resources/articles/covid-vaccines-safe-effective
This is a never ending spiral of evil
Robin Monotti on the No Green Pass movement in Italy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Okarmj2VBew
….. join the peaceful resistance …..
Wednesday 27th October 11:30am
Yellow Boards Event – Stand by the Road
(If we start at 11:30am some people might join on their lunch break.)
Tesco Superstore
17 County Ln, Warfield, Bracknell RG42 3JP
Saturday 30th October 2pm
SPECIAL STAND WINDSOR with Yellow Boards
Alexander Park (near Bandstand) Stand in the Park
Barry Rd/Goswell Rd
Windsor SL4 1QY
Meet in the Park 2pm followed by walk to
Stand in the Town Centre By the Castle
About 2 hours in total.
Stand in the Park Wokingham Sundays 10am
Make friends – keep sane – talk freedom and have a laugh
Howard Palmer Gardens Wokingham RG40 2HD
behind the Cockpit Path car park in the centre of the town
JOIN Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
Either way, there is no justification in jabbing children!
As far as I’m aware they have several (at least three) inactivated virus types (‘New Crown’, ‘BBIBP-CorV’, CoronaVac), one protein-based vaccine ZF2001, and one adenovirus viral vector Ad5-nCoV. Others are in trials stages.
any idea of the efficacy of the first 3
Worldwide madness.
A worldwide, evil, plan!
Shhhh… nobody knows – as Hitler mused, ”luckily they’re too stupid”
“The decision has been made in light of China’s zero-tolerance policy towards any further outbreaks”
Sorry, needs fixing
The decision has been made in light of China’s zero-tolerance policy towards anyone remaining unvaxxed, to prevent further outbreaks of anyone believing covid isn’t a deadly pandemic that requires everyone to be vaxxed continuously, forever”
Presumably these poisons are made in China, like face nappies and bogus testing kits?
Or, The decision has been made in light of China’s previous failed attempts to limit the number of children a couple could have.
For those familiar with the Fermi Paradox, the Plandemic is starting to feel more and more to me like The Great Filter. I’m blaming Franklin, Crick and Watson – as soon as we discovered DNA, I think we were doomed as a species.
Or is it the moment that we as a species, billions of individuals, transition into being just one immense global organism made up of billions of cells under the control of a central nervous system etc, an entity that is capable of leaving this planet, ( in some form, like the adult insect is able to fly away from the remains of the food source it consumed as a larva ), and of perceiving other equally vast organisms that we could not see before, as the larval stage of the insect probably cannot imagine let alone actually see the winged adult insects in flight overhead?
The title of this piece should be:
China’s state propaganda machine tells Westerners that they’re now jabbing 3 year old children..
This tells us nothing about who they’re actually vaccinating and in what numbers.
I’ve long suspected that the CCP just makes stuff up completely. I don’t know why anyone believes a word of it. They “claimed” that the Wuhan outbreak was contained despite four million people leaving the province…
Yup – just like those alleged Chinese CCTV videos of people collapsing in public ‘with covid’. Must have been circus performers because they collapsed very convincingly – well enough to panic gullible western politicians.
This ^^^^
Very astute comment!
It only ends when we so no more!
I’ve been saying no more since March 2020
The only reason China is promoting a Vax for 3 year olds is so that the rest of the world will follow its example. However, where the Chinese Sino Vax is traditionally made and contains the dead or inactive virus or portions thereof, it is not an Adeno or Mrna Vax. So while China administers its likely ineffective Vax, it is not potentially exposing its whole population to what may be the disastrous long term consequences of the Adeno or Mrna Vaxes.
The Chinese play Go while the rest of the world play Checkers.
“the Chinese Sino Vax is traditionally made and contains the dead or inactive virus”
A very clever trick for a virus that doesn’t actually exist.
Are they to be vaccinated with the vaccine that is not a vaccine?
Is it true that the injection they’re using over there is more like a traditional vaccine? Not available here? So we have to have a different one?
We can’t let them have a nuclear/mine shaft/jab gap! Quick, rollout to the babies!
Dr Strangelove seemed sane compared to this mess.
https://youtu.be/H3zN4-n8ZWg?t=450
China has employed lockdowns, quarantines and compulsory testing for the virus throughout the pandemic and has largely stamped out cases of local infection
That people still spout this gibberish nearly two years on is staggering.
What is also staggering is that Western liberals suddenly believe everything the Chinese tell them.
You have to have a grudging respect for the Chinese – they have truly fucked the West.
…without firing a shot.
Maybe they have been reading The Art of War.
Look around your home and see how many items you have bought with Made in China stamped on them, or with Made in China labels.
Now think – who has ‘fucked the West’? “But it was cheap!”
Not pointing the finger at you personally, but the shops are filled with plastic crap from China – even the ‘J-cloths’ in our local shop are Made in China – they are crap, which is why I won’t buy them, but many do (and are disappointed).
Even more of the same to come, all linked to the 4th Industrial Revolution:
https://blog.sinorbis.com/made-in-china-2025
Well, yes, indeed. One has to recognise they have played a blinder. As totalitarians go, they are sadly better at it than some of their recent contemporaries like the Soviet Union and the various European fascist/Nazi states. They realise the need for bread and circuses and they deliver it. They will outlast all of us here on this forum I fear.
Can we stop pretending this has anything to do with a virus? They’re injecting children because they want to inject children, and they won’t stop at 3 yr olds either. New-borns are next target.
That epidural they are offering you might contain more than just a nerve block.
Latest blog from Dr David Grimes
http://www.drdavidgrimes.com/2021/10/covid-19-vitamin-d-2020-2021-nature-and.html
Excellent as usual.
“China has a history of female infanticide spanning 2,000 years”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_infanticide_in_China
‘Vaccinating’ them makes a change from just killing them.
If true hopefully this will lead to the eradication, or at least severe reduction of the chinese population.
Nah: it’s the politicians who need to be terminated (as is true almost everywhere else)!
I think the Chinese are actively trying to increase their population at present. I think I remember reading that, unlike the old days where they limited families to one, then two, they are encouraging parents to have three children.
That was the first thought that crossed my mind when i read the headline.
The Chinese ‘vaccines’ can’t be too bad. They’re going to need those 3 year old’s to be soldiers of the future, to achieve world domination by force or other means.
http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.gab.com%2Fsystem%2Fmedia_attachments%2Ffiles%2F088%2F667%2F192%2Foriginal%2Fecb03541d4013310.mp4%3AwLNlaJjgfsXR9R10JvqAW1yU_Hg&cuid=2800408
Excellent UK Column news today if anyone hasn’t seen it yet https://www.ukcolumn.org/
China can say they are vaccinating which can be true or false, but because China are now saying they are vaccinating infants all the useful idiots elsewhere will demand their own infants are vaccinated. All through this China has driven the response simply by showing dramatic imagery of lockdowns and people falling down ‘dead’ and then saying ‘success’. Last year a Chinese doctor shared a conference with Dr ‘Gain of Function’ Fauci, in China and warned countries not to open up until everyone has been vaccinated, which may take until 2023. This doctor went on to say natural immunity won’t work because it is unscientific and inhuman. For context, China is the country where the Tiananmen Square massacre took place, where the Uyghurs are being persecuted.
So – sacrifice the children for the sake of the world’s perception of the Olympics. Sick. Though I daresay this might just be what they’re SAYING and not DOING – why would they waste money on peasants, after all?