Covid vaccine Questions -2021-3-11

Hello Dr. Hinshaw,
I wanted to take this opportunity to ask some very important questions, and to seek your responses on these concerns.
I am concerned that the mRNA injections are being classified as vaccines, and that they are being uniformly stated to be safe and effective.
These do not meet the definition of a vaccine. In Canada, regulation for vaccines categorizes them as biological drugs, which come from living organisms, isolated or manufactured by using living organisms. The mRNA is a synthetic one, and therefore in this way does not meet the criteria. It is a piece of genetic code, and as Moderna states, it’s like an “operating system” and “the software of life”. There is scientific research articulating these can definitely be gene altering, they are genetic modification technology. (Moderna: ).
As well, the “vaccines” have not been approved by Health Canada, but instead have been “authorized” under emergency use. Many in the public do not know they are still experimental, and that if they have an injury from the injections (including the adenovirus ones), many would not be covered by their health insurance companies because these are considered experimental. There are a small number of individuals who have become aware of this, and are calling their insurance companies to follow up with this.
In light of that, I am wondering what informed consent is being given to recipients and/or their family members who make decisions in certain situations?
Also, it is stated that “individuals with known allergies to any of the components of the vaccine should not receive it.” The ingredients are then listed, and some are proprietary (ex. Moderna), so it is not fully disclosed on what they are. I’m wondering how are people being fully and transparently informed? As well, these injections are still part of the pharmaceutical’s study trials, which goes to 2023 (known as a post marketing surveillance clinical trial), so we do not know the robust and potential negative effects these may/will have on the general population, and since we do not have this information yet, I wonder why they are being called “safe and effective”?
It is known in research that mRNA gets unstable when it gets into people’s bodies, and we don’t have the long-term safety data on the effects. ( ). The PEG lipid nanoparticles (a form of nanotechnology) drug delivery system that surrounds it has never before been used in injections for humans, and there’s also no safety data on this. The lipid nanoparticles can potentially travel anywhere in the body and the potential is also that they can travel into the nuclei of our cells, and incorporate the mRNA with the byproducts in the cells and alter the genetic code of the host. This would make people who receive it genetically modified. We know that the lipid nanoparticles are designed to bypass the immune system and easily enter cells, so this would be a very real concern to investigate further.
The synthetic mRNA is said to produce the spike protein, which goes into the body, and our ribosomes read that mRNA code, which is then expressed as the protein, and that can integrate permanently into the DNA through transfection. As well, our bodies naturally produce reverse transcriptase enzyme (there are numerous scientific articles describing this process), which can take that code, take it up to the nucleus and become a stable or permanent integration. Therefore, although mRNA does not directly change DNA, it definitely can through the indirect process, and we do not have any studies showing this is definitively not the case.
The synthetic mRNA would generate autoimmune disease, called antibody dependent enhancement. When people are getting the mRNA, the immune system is targeted against the viral mRNA coding protein. The mRNA of a viral gene is expressed, and our immune systems recognize it as foreign and wants to get rid of it, but because the mRNA/spike protein is in the cells of our bodies, the immune system then attacks our own cells. Instead of a vaccine that would elicit a protective immune response, it instead targets our own immune systems and attacks the cells in our organs, setting up chronic immune issues – autoimmunity. So depending on where it targets within the body, we are seeing and will see the effects, ex: heart attacks, organ failure, strokes, neurological impacts, etc. ( and… ).
We know through research that in those previous animal studies using mRNA injections, so many of them got sick and died when introduced to another coronavirus after administration, in challenge studies. So when another circulating virus comes later this year or next year, when people who have had the injections are exposed, it will trigger an over-reaction of the immune system (pathogenic priming). There would also be a high potential for a cytokine storm because of an immune suppressing effect of the antibodies, which inactivate the macrophage type 2, while the macrophage type 1 continues to create the cytokines. The type 2 cannot do their job and shut off the type 1 due to antibody suppression, and so many people would get very sick and some would die, especially those who have comorbidities. Therefore, these would be delayed and directly correlated adverse events from the injections.
When reporting AEFI, it “cannot be contributed to a pre-existing condition”. The mRNA and also the adenovirus injections would directly impact those comorbidities.
I think it is also important to communicate the natural and harmless ways to build up people’s immune systems. All Albertans deserve to be fully informed of the natural immune boosting options. As well, full and transparent informed consent is crucial when discussing the gene modification technology in the mRNA, as well as CoviShield (AstraZeneca is using CRISPR technology) with all who would choose to go forward with any injection.
These are just some of my concerns surrounding the mRNA injections, and a brief touch on of the CoviShield injections. There are still other concerns I did not mention, such as effects on fertility due to syncytin-1, and the use of fetal cell lines in each of the development processes.
I know there are many peer reviewed studies and articles that discuss the details I have articulated in this email, but I will just include one very recent article for review. I am asking for a call to action to research and share what scientists, doctors, immunologists, microbiologists, virologists, etc. are saying when they are publishing warnings about each of the vaccines and injections that are currently available. I am asking for transparency in all aspects regarding informed consent for the public who are yet to get the injections, as this builds trust with the public. We cannot say people are “vaccine hesitant or anti-vax” when there are legitimate, scientifically validated concerns being voiced by other experts who are not in agreement with the “safe and effective” messaging that is being heralded.
I look forward to your response, and thank you for your attention to my concerns.
~Nanae Henry A concerned Canadian