The Problem With mRNA Vaccines

Executive Summary

  • Using mRNA for vaccines is much more problematic than generally understood.
  • We cover some of these complications.


The response was highly optimistic when it was announced that untested mRNA technology would be used to create vaccines for covid. However, there are many problems with mRNA vaccines.

Was the Design of the mRNA Vaccines Incompetent?

Not only are the vaccines dangerous, but their overall design appears to make little sense, as explained in the following quotation.

Against the background of this well-known toxicity, it is very peculiar that all of the current gene-based vaccines, including mRNA-1273, were designed to induce the expression of functionally active spike protein in the cells of our bodies1 rather than of a “toxoid,” that is, an immunogenic but innocuous derivative of the toxic protein. Toxoids can be produced with simple means and have been successfully used as vaccines for a long time, for example with diphtheria and tetanus, whose eponymous toxins can be rendered non-toxic by facile chemical modification. With modern methods of molecular biology, it should have been easy enough to create a non-toxic spike protein derivative for vaccination. The concerns about vaccine-induced spike protein toxicity are not at all merely hypothetical. Blood plasma levels of S1 detected in vaccinated persons are comparable to those observed in severe cases of the viral infection [50, 57]. Aside from the direct toxicity of the spike protein, we must expect additional harm due to immune reactions against it. If the protein is expressed within vascular endothelial cells—the innermost cell layer of the blood vessels—then an immune reaction to it can destroy these cells. Aside from the direct toxicity of the spike protein, we must expect additional harm due to immune reactions against it. If the protein is expressed within vascular endothelial cells—the innermost cell layer of the blood vessels—then an immune reaction to it can destroy these cells. Direct spike protein toxicity is significant because it does not involve an immune reaction and therefore can be triggered right away even in persons without pre-existing immunity. The immune attack mechanism will be particularly dangerous in persons with pre-existing immunity. Such immunity can arise from infection with the SARS-CoV- 2 virus or from a previous injection of vaccine. In addition, cross-immunity induced by other coronaviruses (see Section 1.1.5) may also promote cell destruction through immune attack. – Doctors 4 Covid Ethics

This is the first test of mRNA technology, and the company Moderna, which made one of the vaccines, has been lying about and exaggerating mRNA technology for years. They had never had a product before their vaccine and lived off continual investments. With their vaccine effectiveness being zero, they still have never developed an effective outcome.

The Problems With Managing mRNA

mRNA vaccines are highly experimental. This is explained in the following quotation.

AstraZeneca’s production involves an immortalized human cell line called Human Embryonic Kidney (HEK) 293, which is grown in culture along with the defective viruses (Dicks et al., 2012). The HEK cell line was genetically modified back in the 1970s by augmenting its DNA with segments from an adenovirus that supply the missing genes needed for replication of the defective virus (Louis et al., 1997). Johnson & Johnson uses a similar technique based on a fetal retinal cellline. Because the manufacture of these vaccines requires genetically modified human tumor cell lines, there is the potential for human DNA contamination as well as many other potential contaminants.The media has generated a great deal of excitement about this revolutionary technology, but there are also concerns that we may not be realizing the complexity of the body’s potential for reactions to foreign mRNA and other ingredients in these vaccines that go far beyond the simple goal of tricking the body into producing antibodies to the spike protein.

Two major obstacles for mRNA are its transient nature due to its susceptibility to breakdown by RNAses, as well as its known power to invoke a strong immune response, which interferes with its transcription into protein.

The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines are based on very similar technologies, where a lipid nanoparticle encloses an RNA sequence coding for the full-length SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. In the manufacturing process, the first step is to assemble a DNA molecule encoding the spike protein. This process has now been commoditized, so it’s relatively straightforward to obtain a DNA molecule from a specification of the sequence of nucleotides (Corbett et al., 2020).

The field has blossomed in part because of the ease with which specific oligonucleotide DNA sequences can be synthesized in the laboratory without the direct involvement of living organisms. This technology has become commoditized and can be done at large-scale, with relatively low cost. Enzymatic conversion of DNA to RNA is also straightforward, and it is feasible to isolate essentially pure single-strand RNA from the reaction soup (Kosuri and Church, 2014). – International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research

That was an interesting background. However, another quote I will present in a moment is highly problematic. But because it deals with the innate versus the adaptive immune system, let us first review the definition of the natural and adaptive immune system.

There is more on this topic from the article The Military’s Anthrax Vaccine Appears to Have Been a Beta Test for COVID-19.

Consider the following quotes from this recent 2016 article where Moderna’s CEO was interviewed:

“It’s highly risky. Big pharma companies had tried similar work and abandoned it because it’s exceedingly hard to get RNA into cells without triggering nasty side effects.”

“Delivery — actually getting RNA into cells — has long bedeviled the whole field. On their own, RNA molecules have a hard time reaching their targets. They work better if they’re wrapped up in a delivery mechanism, such as nanoparticles made of lipids. But those nanoparticles can lead to dangerous side effects, especially if a patient has to take repeated doses over months or years.

“Novartis abandoned the related realm of RNA interference over concerns about toxicity, as did Merck and Roche [Merck and Roche are amongst the worst offenders for putting toxic but profitable drugs on the market].”

“I would say that mRNA is better suited for diseases where treatment for short duration is sufficiently curative, so the toxicities caused by delivery materials are less likely to occur,” said Katalin Karikó, a pioneer in the field who serves as a vice president at BioNTech [which is Pfizer’s vaccine].

While COVID vaccine toxicity is typically linked to the spike protein it produces, the high reactogenicity and cytotoxicity of its lipid nanoparticles was also proposed as a potential safety issue.

Isn’t it interesting how it has been well-known that mRNA technology is very risky and requires normally toxic adjuvants — but as soon as the government gets behind mRNA vaccines — none of these issues are explained?