The latest: Japanese CONFIRM, covid-vaxx cause ("triggers") "turbo cancers," destroys immune system

[Apollonian]

Japan: Covid Shots Cause Cancer​

Hunter FieldingApril 20, 2024

Link: https://newsaddicts.com/japan-covid-shots-cause-cancer/

[see vid at site link, above]

Japan has just issued an urgent red alert after a major study concluded that Covid mRNA shots cause cancer.
In a sweeping comprehensive study, Japan’s most prominent scientists found that deadly cancers are being “triggered” by the Covid injections to form and rapidly spread.
The researchers found that just one injection is enough to trigger a deadly “turbo cancer” in the recipient.
The alarming findings have led to the Covid mRNA injections being officially labeled as a “class one carcinogen” by the Japanese government.


An article published by world-renowned Australian medical practitioner Professor Ian Brighthope highlights the same Japanese study.
Prof Brighthope writes:

Today, on behalf of my professional friends and medical colleagues, I declare the mRNA vaccines to be class one carcinogens.
mRNA is also a broad-spectrum mutagen.
mRNA must be banned internationally.

He then went on to explain what carcinogens are, the process of carcinogenicity, and how carcinogens are classified before inviting readers to make up their own minds about how carcinogenic mRNA injections are based on the findings of the Japanese study.
Below are some extracts from Prof. Brighthope’s article but we encourage readers to read his informative article in full.

Carcinogens and Carcinogenicity​

Carcinogens are substances, organisms, or agents capable of causing cancer by altering the cellular, genetic, and epigenetic mechanisms within the body, leading to the transformation of normal cells into cancer cells.
These agents can be chemical substances, viruses or even certain types of radiation therapies used to treat cancer.
Carcinogens do not necessarily cause cancer in every case or under all circumstances.
Factors such as the amount and duration of exposure, the individual’s genetic makeup, and exposure to other environmental factors play a significant role in determining whether a person exposed to a carcinogen will ultimately develop cancer.
Moreover, not all mutations caused by carcinogens lead to cancer; only certain mutations in specific genes that regulate cell growth, apoptosis, and DNA repair may result in uncontrolled cell proliferation and cancer.
The process of carcinogenicity, also known as carcinogenesis or tumor genesis, involves multiple stages where normal cells undergo a series of changes at the cellular, genetic, and epigenetic levels, resulting in abnormal cell division and the formation of cancer.

Classification of Carcinogens​

Carcinogens can be classified based on their mode of action into genotoxic and non-genotoxic carcinogens.
Genotoxic carcinogens directly interact with DNA and/or the cellular apparatus, affecting the integrity of the genome.
Non-genotoxic carcinogens exert their effects through mechanisms that do not involve direct DNA damage.

International Agency for Research on Cancer (“IARC”) Classification​

The IARC Monographs identify factors that can increase the risk of human cancer, including lifestyle factors. Interdisciplinary working groups of expert scientists review the published studies and evaluate the weight of the evidence that an agent can increase the risk of cancer.
Agents are then categorized as carcinogenic, probably or possibly carcinogenic, or not carcinogenic to humans, based on the strength of the evidence.
The IARC Working Group also considers the body of evidence as a whole, to reach an overall evaluation of the carcinogenicity of the agent to humans.
The categorization of an agent into one of four groups is a matter of scientific judgment that reflects the strength of the evidence derived from studies in humans and in experimental animals and from mechanistic and other relevant data.
The four IARC groups are:

• • Group 1: Sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity, the highest IARC classification for carcinogenicity. [Agents that are judged to fall into this category are also referred to as “class one carcinogens.”]
• • Group 2A (probably carcinogenic to humans) or Group 2B (possibly carcinogenic to humans): Limited evidence of carcinogenicity, a positive association.
• Group 3: Inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity.
• Group 4: Evidence suggesting lack of carcinogenicity.

World Cancer Research Fund (“WCRF”) and American Institute for Cancer Research (“AICR”) Classification​

The 2007 WCRF and AICR Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity and the Prevention of Cancer: a Global Perspective report and subsequent tumour-specific updates are based on systematic reviews of the scientific literature for food, nutrition, and physical activity.
A WCRF and AICR Panel judged and graded the evidence into five categories: convincing, probable, limited (suggestive evidence), limited (no conclusion) or unlikely to affect cancer risk.

Decide for yourselves the level of carcinogenicity that characterizes mRNA​

After describing how carcinogens are classified, Prof. Brighthope invited readers to judge for themselves how mRNA injections should be classified by sharing the conclusion from the recently published Japanese study:

Statistically significant increases in age-adjusted mortality rates of all cancer and some specific types of cancer, namely, ovarian cancer, leukaemia, prostate, lip/oral/pharyngeal, pancreatic, and breast cancers, were observed in 2022 after two-thirds of the Japanese population had received the third or later dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA-LNP vaccine.
These particularly marked increases in mortality rates of these ERα-sensitive [Estrogen Receptors Alpha-sensitive] cancers may be attributable to several mechanisms of the mRNA-LNP vaccination rather than covid-19 infection itself or reduced cancer care due to the lockdown.

The Japanese study confirms UK Professor Angus Dalgleish’s concerns about mRNA injections causing cancer.
More than a year ago, Professor Dr. Angus Dalgleish, a renowned oncologist practicing in the UK, first published his concerns that his patients with melanoma were relapsing after several years of being in remission.
“I could find none of the usual causes but on further investigation, I realized that they had all had a booster covid vaccine between three weeks and three months before their cancer’s resurgence, the time in which their immune repression fails,” he wrote in The Conservative Woman on Monday.
After raising the alarm that the vaccine boosters could induce cancer relapse, he became aware of literally dozens of people who had not had cancer before developing leukemia and lymphomas after the boosters.
In November 2022, Prof. Dalgleish wrote an open letter to the editor-in-chief of the medical journal The BMJ, urging the journal that harmful effects of Covid injections be “aired and debated immediately” because cancers and other diseases are rapidly progressing among “boosted” people.
A few weeks later, he reported that other oncologists had contacted him to say they were seeing the same phenomenon of the recurrence of cancer in many melanoma patients who had been stable for long periods.
“Since pointing this out publicly I have been contacted by many physicians and patients from all over the globe saying that they are not only seeing the same phenomenon but also an increase in other cancers especially colorectal, pancreatic, renal and ovarian,” he wrote at the beginning of this week.
Many people had covid vaccines against their will, Prof. Dalgleish said.
“Others gave in to the bullying of the NHS and GPs who hounded them with texts and calls (which I myself received regularly) about the importance of having a booster even though they presented no evidence that it could be beneficial.”
Adding, “Having worked in vaccine development for a decade I remembered an adage that if a vaccine needs a booster, it doesn’t work!”
In his latest article, Prof. Dalgleish highlighted several sources of evidence that have proved his concerns to be justified.
One source is the paper from Japan published this week.
“It was available on a pre-publication server last year but now it has been peer-reviewed and published in Cureus.
Titled ‘Increased age-adjusted cancer mortality after the third mRNA lipid nanoparticle vaccine dose during the covid pandemic in Japan’,” he said:

The results are astounding. It shows there was a deficit for all cancers in the year 2020 when the first and second covid waves occurred.
In 2021 there was an excess of deaths of 2.2 per cent and a 1.1 per cent increase in cancers.
However, by 2022 the excess deaths had increased 9.6 per cent and cancer by 2.1 per cent.
This paper was completed and published before the 2023 figures release which will almost certainly be much worse. What is remarkable here is that we are talking mortality, that is deaths from cancer not incidence of it.
So what is the cause of this sudden increase? It is revealed in the title of the paper!

 

[Apollonian]

Heart disease risk skyrockets 13,200% following covid injections, CDC admits

06/21/2023 // Ethan Huff

Link: https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-06-21-heart-disease-risk-13200-percent-covid-vaccination.html/

The top two public health agencies in the United States conducted a joint study showing that the risk of developing autoimmune heart disease among the "fully vaccinated" for the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) is a shocking 13,200 percent higher than it is among the unvaccinated.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) discovered that compared to the background risk in the general population, the risk of myocarditis is 133 times greater in those who took the mRNA injections from either Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna.

Researchers from several top universities and hospitals across America contributed to the study, which was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA).

Using data from the government-run Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the CDC and the FDA identified 1,626 cases of myocarditis, which were cross-checked to ensure the results comply with the CDC's official definition of myocarditis.

Based on this, researchers determined that the most high-risk mRNA jab is the one produced by Pfizer-BioNTech, meaning this one is the most dangerous in terms of potential health effects.

The Pfizer jabs, according to the data provided to VAERS, caused 105.9 cases of myocarditis per million doses after the second injection in the male 16- and 17-year-old age and sex demographic. In the 12-15 age group for males, there were 70.7 cases of myocarditis per million doses following the second shot.

The 18-24 male age group had the highest risk at 52.4 cases per million for Pfizer and 56.3 cases per million for Moderna. The median time to symptom onset was just two days for both jabs.

(Related: Another study out of South Korea found that myocarditis cases among the fully jabbed continue to skyrocket.)

Since VAERS only captures around 1% of vaccine damage, what is the TRUE risk of autoimmune heart disease following covid injection?​

As previous studies have found, the vast majority of covid jab-related heart problems, around 82 percent, occur in males. In the vast majority of cases, around 96 percent, those who became inflicted with myocarditis had to be hospitalized, and in most cases were treated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).

By the time of discharge, 87 percent of those hospitalized saw symptom resolution, at least initially. There is no telling what these people might suffer as the years go by, especially into older age.

Among the most commonly reported symptoms are:

• 
  
• chest pain, pressure, or discomfort (89 percent)
• 
  
• shortness of breath (30 percent)
• 
  
• abnormal ECG results (72 percent)
• 
  
• abnormal cardiac MRI findings (72 percent)

Recognizing the strong and undeniable link between covid jabs and heart disease, the CDC has commenced an active surveillance program for adolescents and young adults to monitor their progress following these post-injection heart-related incidents.

Since the jabs have only been out since late December 2020, and really only started to get into people's bodies well into 2021, there is still no long-term data to evaluate concerning the long-term impact of covid jab-related heart disease.

The American Heart Association (AHA) and the American College of Cardiology (ACC) are both advising that people with myocarditis refrain from competitive sports for three to six months, otherwise they could die suddenly on the field.

Only after normal ECG and other test results start to appear should a person afflicted with covid jab-related heart disease even think about resuming strenuous exercise.

By the way, VAERS only captures as little as one percent of all vaccine-related injuries and deaths. So as shocking as these figures and percentages are, one must multiply them by a lot in order to gain a more accurate picture of the injury and death tolls from these injections.

Want to keep up with the latest news about the injury and death fallout from Operation Warp Speed? You can do so at ChemicalViolence.com.

Sources for this article include:

WND.com

JamaNetwork.com

Newstarget.com

 

[Apollonian]

Cancer risk from covid vaccines; medicine regulators failed the public catastrophically​

BY RHODA WILSON ON APRIL 25, 2024

Link: https://expose-news.com/2024/04/25/cancer-risk-from-covid-vaccines/

---

Cancer occurs when mutations in DNA mean that cell growth is no longer controlled. The body has plenty of safety nets to minimise the risk of cancer developing but the accumulation of damage can reach a tipping point where cancer results. The balance can also be tipped towards cancer if the immune system stops killing the malignant cells.
The so-called covid vaccines can hypothetically contribute to that outcome in multiple ways. In the following, the HART group simply and concisely describes some of the mechanisms through which covid injections can tip the balance towards someone developing cancer.

---

Cancer Concerns: Why are people worried about cancer risk from covid vaccines?​

By Health Advisory & Recovery Team (“HART”)
The covid vaccines skipped safety testing for cancer risk. Pfizer said genotoxicity, carcinogenicity and biodistribution studies were “not considered necessary.” Even while their trial info sheet said: “Due to the urgent need for a vaccine against covid-19, with agreement from the MHRA, some of the tests usually required for a newly manufactured vaccine have been modified, in order to make the vaccine available more quickly for assessment.”
There are numerous reasons to be concerned about a potential cancer risk. Cancer occurs when mutations in DNA mean that cell growth is no longer controlled. The body has plenty of safety nets to minimise the risk of cancer developing but the accumulation of damage can reach a tipping point where cancer results. The balance can also be tipped towards cancer if the immune system stops killing the malignant cells. The whole process can take many years to develop but it needn’t.
The vaccines can hypothetically contribute to that outcome in multiple ways:

• Constant production of a mixture of foreign proteins will lead to chronic inflammation and potentially immune exhaustion.
• Modified nucleotides increase the risk of cancer.
• Spike protein damaging genes that protect cells from cancer.
• Contaminant DNA that can integrate into the recipient’s DNA and damage protective genes or else enhance growth-promoting genes.

Chronic Inflammation And Immune Exhaustion​

Many cancers arise after years of inflammation which increases cell turnover. For those who have continued to produce foreign protein, which will encompass a range of types because of frameshifting, this chronic inflammation would contribute to cancer risk. Where the immune system is overactive there may be immune failures which allow cancers to develop.

Modified Nucleotides​

The modified RNA used in the mRNA products had changes to the nucleic acids designed to shield it from immune attack. Researchers demonstrated using an animal model that the same changes suppress aspects of the immune system that are crucial for preventing cancer development and progression.

Spike Protein Effects​

Our cells are constantly carrying out essential work which prevents cancer. Two genes that are integral to that are p53 and BRCA1. In June 2020, it was shown that spike could hypothetically interact with those genes. The spike protein from the virus has been shown to inhibit this gene making cancer more likely.
In 2021 it was also shown that spike entered the nucleus and blocked 90% of the p53/BRCA repair mechanisms. This paper was retracted after 7 months, partly because it mentioned the “v” word. When the emails of the authors calling for retraction were requested they were denied to protect “trade secrets and commercial or financial information that is privileged and confidential.”
The SV40 promoter region in the Pfizer vaccine also binds directly to p53.
Infection with the virus will have exposed people to spike protein (“spike”) but that would have been predominantly in the cells lining the respiratory tract and for a very limited time and in relatively small quantities. Moreover, vaccinal spike has certain differences from its viral counterpart, the significance of which isn’t fully elucidated. The same is not true for the whole spike proteins that were made by cells after vaccination.

How Long Did Spike Last After Vaccination?​

Manufacturers claimed spike expression would be short-lived. Pfizer stated: “In mice injected with the luciferase mRNA, the absence of expressed protein by 9 days after dosing indicates that mRNA has been degraded.”
Reality says otherwise. There are various ways to test. Most researchers use antibody-based testing but where spike is bound to antibodies the test will fail. Despite this, different approaches have demonstrated spike production for much longer than 9 days in the vaccinated.

1. There were 150 billion circulating spike proteins in 3 out of 13 participants at two weeks.
2. mRNA was found in blood up to at least 28 days when measuring stopped.
3. People injected with Moderna had platelets that produced spike for at least 40 days.
4. mRNA was found in lymph nodes up to at least 8 weeks when measuring stopped.
5. Spike protein expression in endothelial cells in the skin was shown at 3 months.
6. The blood contained fatty bubbles (exosomes) containing spike protein circulating at 4 months when measuring stopped.
7. In 2023, it was demonstrated that half of a group of 20 vaccinees still had circulating spike protein from 69 days to up to 6 months after injection, when the study ended. The authors proposed either that it was integrated into the cell’s DNA or that of bacteria in the gut which became a continuing source of spike protein production. None of the 20 unvaccinated healthy controls or 20 patients ill with covid-19 showed any circulating spike protein.
8. In 2024, spike protein was shown to be present in circulating white blood cells called monocytes in the vaccine injured, for at least 245 days after vaccination.

It is highly unlikely for even modified RNA to remain active for such a length of time. There has therefore been a theoretical claim that spike DNA has integrated into the human cellular DNA. Once in DNA it could then be continually and perpetually made into mRNA and from there into spike protein by a functioning cell apparatus.
Two problems emerge from this if it turns out to be true. First, the presence of spike itself would raise the cancer risk as described above. Second, the presence of spike for this length of time is indirect evidence of DNA integration. It is not clear whether that is integration into human cells or into, perhaps, bacteria in the gut. However, if it is the former that is a cancer risk because the integration itself could damage protective genes or enhance growth-promoting processes. DNA integration is also a cancer risk.

Direct Evidence of DNA Integration​

There is now practical evidence to support the claim that vaccine DNA can integrate into a cell’s DNA. It was already shown that the virus SARS-CoV-2 can, like certain other viruses, integrate into DNA which is why, after testing positive, healthcare workers have to wait 90 days for their mucosal cells to die off before testing again.
The vaccine has been shown to result in a vaccine sequence integrating into the DNA of liver cells in the laboratory within 6 hours. The authors believed this was due to the cell converting the mRNA into DNA first.
Kevin McKernan, a genomics expert, who has been instrumental in exposing the problems of DNA contamination and the true content of the sequences in the vaccine, has again been the first to carry out this critical experiment. He worked with Professor Ulrike Kämmerer to show that cells in a laboratory surrounded by vaccine not only had DNA integration but showed tiny mutations where the DNA has been passed on to daughter cells.

Risk Factors for DNA Integration​

The lipid nanoparticles were originally designed to deliver DNA into the nucleus of the cell for gene therapy. The specific lipid nanoparticles used predominantly delivered material to the cytoplasm. However, there was clear evidence that the nucleus was also entered which would increase the risk of DNA integration. But, small fragments of DNA would not result in continued whole spike protein production.
There are three parts of the vaccine sequence which would increase transportation to the nucleus, called nuclear localisation signals.
Finally, the fact the DNA was fragmented into numerous smaller lengths would also maximise the chance of DNA integration and present a higher cancer risk.
The risk of integration is highest during cell division so any cells that are already growing too fast in a pre-cancerous way would be most at risk.

Failing to Minimise the Risk in the Vaccines​

Kevin McKernan carried out critical work on the presence of DNA in the vaccines and he reported that his work has been replicated in Germany, Japan, France and South Carolina. The evidence was such that regulators had to admit to it but tried to downplay the issue claiming there was no functional consequence of this DNA without evidence to back that up.
In Kevin’s words: “After the regulators had admitted to being deceived they asked the opinion of the party that deceived them ‘how bad was the deception?’ They shockingly believed the answer they were given.”
The trial product did not have the same level of contamination because a “bait and switch” meant that the clean trial product was replaced by a mass-produced product contaminated with endotoxins – from the cell walls of bacteria used in production – and DNA. The pharma companies handed the regulator a genomic map showing the genetic sequence present in the bacterial DNA used as a template. This map was unlabelled from 6 o’clock to 11 o’clock. Kevin points out how odd that was. The annotation software that does such labelling would certainly have labelled a region of sequence which is an SV40 viral promoter and nuclear localisation signal which in McKernan’s words, “moves DNA directly to the nucleus within hours in all cell lines.” Someone must have deleted that label.
McKernan goes on to point out that the regulatory requirement for not exceeding a certain ratio of DNA to RNA in the product was obfuscated. Moderna patents show that DNA contamination was a real issue and that the standard quality control testing using quantitative PCR underestimates the problem. The companies shared with the regulator test results using quantitative PCR which underestimated the DNA levels and then a different test for the RNA to overestimate those levels and thereby hide the extent of the problem. Even with these cheats, the levels are more than ten times higher than the regulators’ limits. Based on PCR testing thresholds, the testing for DNA in the vials showed a million times more sequences present than the number required in a covid test to describe someone as a “case.”
There are good reasons to fear a cancer surge as a consequence of the mRNA vaccines. Those with long-haul vaccine injury symptoms are likely most at risk because of continuing exposure.
The regulators failed the public catastrophically with these novel products.