The launch of Roferon-A, alpha interferon marked a watershed moment in medicine: the first biotherapeutic to treat cancer, targeting the rare disease hairy-cell leukemia. I remember the packed press conference at The Pierre Hotel in New York City. Thought leaders like Dr. Jerome Groopman inspired awe. Headlines followed. The world paid attention.

That was decades ago. Since then, the biotech sector has evolved from fragile start-up spirit into a multibillion-dollar force. In the eyes of many, what was once miraculous has become mundane. And yet, the science has only grown more awe-inspiring. So why don’t we talk about it that way anymore?

Have we become numb to the very progress that extends and saves lives?

Biotechnology is arguably one of humanity’s most transformative achievements. From precision cancer immunotherapies to gene editing tools like CRISPR, we’ve leapt across medical milestones that were once the stuff of science fiction. CAR-T cell therapy rewrites the body’s immune system; mRNA platforms taught us how to respond to pandemics in real time; and personalized medicine now tailors treatments to the uniqueness of our DNA.

Despite these triumphs, we now face a paradox: the more frequently we succeed, the less exceptional it seems. Biotech, in its reliability, risks becoming background noise.

The danger here isn’t just perception—political, economic, and moral. When we stop being amazed, we stop advocating. And advocacy is essential, because science doesn’t fund itself.

The Birth of a Movement: BIO’s Role in Advancing Innovation

In the early days of this field, the promise of biotech required more than scientific breakthroughs—it demanded an organized, united voice to advocate for science, policy, funding, and public trust. That’s when the Biotechnology (Industry) Innovation Organization (BIO) emerged, uniting a fledgling industry around a shared mission: to promote innovation and ensure that the fruits of biotech reach the people who need them most.

What began as a coalition of pioneers has evolved into one of the most influential global voices for biotechnology. BIO has helped shape legislation, fostered partnerships, supported startups, and advanced equity in access and clinical trials. It has been a tireless advocate for the idea that science serves people—and that innovation without access is innovation incomplete.

As we reflect on biotech’s journey—from niche science to essential public health engine—BIO’s efforts to engage policymakers, educate the public, and convene global stakeholders at events like the annual BIO International Convention, BIO2025 have played a defining role. It’s a reminder that scientific progress is never just about the petri dish. It’s about ecosystems—coalitions of scientists, communicators, investors, and institutions aligned toward a common good.

The Threat of Institutional Apathy

Innovation doesn’t flourish in a vacuum. It requires funding, partnerships, regulatory foresight, and yes, public interest. Today, with DOGE pinching national budgets and partisanship clouding consensus, Federal funding for research is under threat. The National Institutes of Health (NIH), the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research, faces increasingly skeptical eyes and plummeting appropriations.

In parallel, biotech investors—once exuberant—have become cautious. Valuations are down. IPO windows are narrow. Even promising start-ups are forced to downsize or shutter. This isn’t just an economic cycle. It’s a societal test.

If we stop investing in innovation, diseases that could have been conquered will remain entrenched. Rare conditions will stay rare because they’re unprofitable. And the promise of personalized, preventive care will fade back into abstraction. Let’s take stock.

We’ve made incredible strides in HIV, hepatitis C, certain leukemias, and now we see glimpses of progress in previously unyielding diseases like ALS and pancreatic cancer. In some cases, such as HIV, biologics have helped turn some diseases into manageable conditions. Patients who once faced death sentences now live long, productive lives.

But so much work remains. Alzheimer’s disease continues to challenge us. Autoimmune conditions like lupus and Crohn’s demand better solutions. Pediatric rare diseases—often overlooked—leave families desperate for options. And mental health, despite its growing visibility, remains underfunded and underexplored from a biotherapeutic standpoint.

We can’t stop now. The urgency is not over.

Science Needs Storytellers

One of the most potent forces in advancing biotherapeutics isn’t just the lab bench—it’s the lens through which the public sees that bench. This is where communicators come in.

Media, public relations professionals, and advocacy leaders are not passive observers. We are active players in this ecosystem. When we frame scientific progress as human progress, we drive interest, funding, and talent into the field. When we tell stories that connect molecules to people, we give science a face—and a heartbeat.

In the early days of Roferon-A, calls from a young PR pro would turn out a full-room press conference, launching a wave of national interest. Today, the media landscape is fragmented. Clicks compete with credibility, and sensationalism wins over substance.

That only means our responsibility has grown. We must elevate the authentic voices of scientists, patients and advocates. We must cover biotech stories not just as business news, but as human stories, because they convey the struggle and potential.

Bench to Bedside is a Human Endeavor

Behind every molecular breakthrough is a researcher who missed birthdays to run experiments, a trial participant who volunteered without knowing the outcome, and a caregiver hoping that science can offer one more chance. We cannot allow their efforts to be invisible.

Let us remember that biotherapeutics are not just lab products—they are the embodiment of human hope and courage. Each FDA approval to market is a victory for a company and a patient.

And yet, even as we acknowledge this, we must grapple with another complexity: equity.

Not all communities have equal access to these innovations. Biologics are expensive. Insurance structures are slow to adapt, sometimes even resisting. Global disparities persist. If we believe in the power of biotech, we must also commit to making it accessible, advocating for affordability, inclusive clinical trials and compassionate pricing strategies.

Reclaiming the Wonder

So, where do we go from here?

We start by reawakening awe. As communicators, we must use our platforms to remind the world that biotech is not just another industry—it is a movement, a mission.

We must protect the budgets that sustain research, defend the credibility of science against misinformation, and inspire young minds to enter STEM fields not just for jobs but for the opportunity to change lives.

It starts with how we talk. Let’s use language that evokes possibility. Let’s tell stories that illuminate the patient journey. Let’s spotlight scientists with the same reverence we show to athletes or entertainers.

Biotech Without Borders

The original promise of biotechnology was to break boundaries between disciplines, possibilities, and life and death. That promise is still alive, but it needs guardians.

Now more than ever, biotech needs communicators, policymakers, and citizens who care.

I remember the days when biotech press conferences made front pages. Maybe we’ll never go back to that exact moment. But we can choose to go forward—together—into a future where science is again seen not just as data, but as destiny.

Let’s reclaim the wonder. Let’s continue to give scientists a voice, patients hope, start-up enterprises resources, and policymakers direction.

Because what’s at stake is not just the next miracle drug.  What’s at stake is our collective belief that we can still do miraculous things.

The post Biotech Without Borders: Reclaiming the Wonder of Science in a Distracted Age appeared first on Medika Life.

Advocacy for Africa’s potential as a global vaccine production hub has gained significant momentum. The Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), through its Partnership for African Vaccine Manufacturing (PAVM), aspires to achieve 60% self-sufficiency in local vaccine use by 2040. This ambitious yet attainable goal underscores the vital steps necessary for realisation.

BioNTech aims to start mRNA vaccine output in Rwanda

Simultaneously, the African Vaccine Manufacturing Initiative (AVMI), a network of manufacturers, has broadened its role, engaging more deeply with multilateral partners and championing the industry’s interests. For example, BioNTech aims to start mRNA vaccine output in Rwanda in 2025. Additionally, the recent surge in bilateral technology transfer agreements and infrastructural investments with local African producers marks a notable shift in the landscape.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) is playing a role in supporting vaccine manufacturing in Africa by providing financial assistance to governments and businesses involved in the effort. For example, the IMF provided $100 million to Ghana to support the establishment of a vaccine manufacturing facility in the country. The IMF has already worked with African governments to develop harmonised standards and regulations for vaccine manufacturing and provides technical assistance to African governments and businesses on vaccine manufacturing.

Moderna, BioNTech, and the Serum Institute of India (SII) plan to establish vaccine manufacturing facilities in various African countries in 2024. These facilities will initially produce COVID-19 vaccines, but they also have the potential to produce other essential vaccines, such as the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine and the polio vaccine specifically for African populations.

Sustaining Growth

However, sustaining this growth trajectory beyond 2023 necessitates immediate action in three critical areas.

First, ensuring predictable vaccine demand and procurement from African governments is essential. This certainty enables manufacturers to plan effectively and achieve economies of scale. A continental pooled purchasing agreement could guarantee the requisite offtake, providing much-needed stability.

Secondly, a significant increase in financing is crucial. This funding could come from donors, lenders, and public budgets, which are essential to spur ongoing projects and innovation. Initiatives proposed by entities like the Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the African Union are critical starting points that must be actualised. The plans from the combined efforts of SII, Moderna and BioNTech must be maintained and not left to be a ‘health-washing’ exercise.

Lastly, a streamlined and efficient regulatory framework is vital for expediting vaccine development and approval processes. Strengthening national regulatory agencies and fostering an integrated system are underway, with the imminent launch of the African Medicines Agency poised to enhance coordination across the continent.

Thus, 2024 emerges as a pivotal year, a unique opportunity for tangible progress if all parties commit to a shared vision of long-term, sustainable success. The groundwork laid by pioneers has brought the dream of African vaccine independence closer to reality. The key to unlocking this potential lies in decisive actions and implementing mechanisms ready for utilisation by Africa’s emerging vaccine enterprises.

The Stakes are High

The stakes are high, with continental health security and economic growth hanging in the balance. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the risks of dependency on external supply chains. At the same time, a burgeoning pool of local talent in pharmaceutical sciences and biotechnology is eager to address regional health challenges. Decisions made in the next year will determine the pace at which these health and economic benefits can be integrated into the broader economy.

As we face a steady rise in infectious diseases, Africa stands at a crossroads in 2024. It has the opportunity to establish a world-class, integrated vaccine industry that serves its needs and those of the global community. This pivotal moment calls for bold leadership and unwavering commitment. We are at the threshold of a unique opportunity and must mobilise our collective resolve to leverage it effectively. The dawn of Africa’s era of health autonomy and leadership is within grasp, contingent on the essential roles played by key actors.

The post Will 2024 be Africa’s Decisive Year in Vaccine Manufacturing? appeared first on Medika Life.

CAR T therapy, a “living drug,” traditionally involves isolation and purification of T cells outside the body. The cells are then modified with a synthetic receptor and then re-infused into the body for treatment of cancers. Researchers have now successfully demonstrated that T cells can be modified in vivo by mRNA technology, bypassing the need for extraction, chemotherapy and re-infusion. Although this method proves effective in treating mice with scarred hearts, considering fibrosis contributes to over 800,000 deaths worldwide, the study contains great potential for human treatment.

A Damaged Heart 

The heart, flexible yet strong, circulates blood through the body by pumping blood through its chambers. Aging and injury tamper with this function, creating scarred and thickened tissue called fibrosis. Although fibrosis occurs normally when healing, a highly fibrotic heart loses its elasticity; the stiffened tissues and interrupted electrical signaling prevent proper contractions of the heart (see Figure 1). Cardiac fibrosis is highly associated with heart disease and heart failure.

Cardiac fibrosis has no “cure-all” treatment. Early detection improves prognosis, but options dwindle as damage progresses irreversibly. People with advanced cardiac fibrosis may take drugs which antagonize overstimulation of the heart or might even require heart valve replacement.

How CAR T Cells Work

In their study, Rurik et al. explore a new method to directly counter cardiac fibrosis. This method builds upon the basics of CAR T: the use of T cells with a synthetically engineered receptor to target and kill specific cells.

CAR T is approved to treat people with certain lymphomas, leukemias, and multiple myeloma. Figure 2 illustrates this process. In these cases, the desired T cells are extracted from the patient’s body. Synthetic mRNA is inserted into the cell with a retrovirus, a virus commonly used in gene therapy to permanently change other cells’ genomes. The altered and expanded cells are then infused back into the body after preparatory chemotherapy. These T cells target either CD19 or BCMA, two antigens found on malignant B cells.

The benefit of inserting genetic information with a retrovirus lies in its permanence. The CAR T cells can expand and persist in the body for a long time after infusion, continually fighting the cancerous cells they encounter. However, this is of no benefit to researchers hoping to fight cardiac fibrosis. If T cells continuously target fibrotic cells, they would impair normal healing processes and potentially induce autoimmunity. Rurik et al. employ an elegant solution which shortens the CAR T cells’ active duty, thereby circumventing the extraction process altogether.

 New CAR T Cell Design 

The team adapted mRNA delivery technology seen in current COVID-19 vaccines and applied it to basic Chimeric Antigen Receptor design. The mRNA does not integrate into the T cell genome, allowing for temporary transcription of the mRNA and transient expression of the new receptor.

CD5 Lipid Nanoparticles (LNP) 

The authors adopted a strategy to introduce the chimeric receptor to T cells in the body rather than extracting and purifying them outside the body. To accomplish this aim, they first synthesized mRNA that encodes a receptor against fibroblast activation protein (FAP), a protein expressed on activated fibroblasts responsible for fibrosis. They purified the mRNA and packaged the engineered mRNA into standard lipid nanoparticles (LNP).

The team then decorated the lipid nanoparticle surface with CD5 targeting antibodies to direct lipid uptake. The integration of CD5 antibodies allowed the lipid nanoparticles to target antigen CD5 naturally expressed by T cells once injected into the body; the CAR T cells are made after a single shot.

Chimeric Antigen Receptor 

The chimeric antigen receptor contains a single chain variable fragment (scFv) derived from fibroblast activation protein monoclonal antibodies; this recognition domain enables the CAR T cell to target cells which express fibroblast activation protein. The CAR design also includes CD28 and CD3z signaling domains in the cytoplasm. All three components are mouse-specific. Not illustrated in Figure 3 is an added small peptide which prevents immune suppression.

Genetic Integration In Vivo

The team found that lipid nanoparticles could successfully deliver the mRNA package to T cells, as seen in Figure 4. The killer T cell absorbs the lipid nanoparticle by endocytosis. The lipid particle then degrades and the synthetic mRNA releases into the cell. Finally, the cellular machinery reads the genetic instruction and briefly produces the receptor against fibroblast activation protein. This is possible with both animal and human T cell cultures.

Transitory CAR Expression 

Unlike traditional CAR T cells that carry a chimeric receptor encoded by DNA inserted into the genome, these CD5+ T cells carry mRNA only transiently. The mRNA is not integrated into the cell’s genome and remains stuck in the T cell cytoplasm before degrading. This is ideal; fibroblast activation protein receptors must be expressed briefly as longer expression may harm other tissues.

 Results 

The research team assessed the efficacy of the CAR T cells in different conditions. When they treated the cells in tissue culture, more than 80% of T cells expressed the chimeric antigen receptor and could effectively kill target cells with fibroblast activation protein.

The team then tested this model on mice with cardiac fibrosis. The mice received medication to injure the heart and induce scarring. After one week, the team administered the lipid-mRNA injection. Consistent CAR expression was noted 48 hours after injection, and disappeared after one week.

The results were impressive. The function of the heart’s largest chamber improved, in some cases returning to uninjured levels. Similarly, the amount of blood filling the heart normalized to safe volumes. The therapy notably reduced the thickness of the heart. Finally, although the mass of the largest chamber did not normalize, it trended towards improvement.

One caveat in lipid-CAR T cell delivery is that some cells, perivascular fibroblasts, do not express fibroblast activation protein. In consequence, these cells were not impacted by CAR T cells and some fibrosis persisted. No overly toxic side effects were noted.

Trogocytosis

A key observation of effective CAR T therapy is the ability of the modified T cells to take small bites of the target cell—a phenomenon known as trogocytosis. Deriving “trogo” from the Greek word “to bite,” trogocytosis entails one cell nibbling another and, in the process, transferring the surface molecules from one to the other. The researchers found evidence of CAR T cells “nibbling” the activated fibroblasts and retaining the stolen antigens (illustrated in Figure 5), suggesting that the T cells successfully adopted the chimeric antigen receptors in vivo.

Future Implications

CAR T therapy revolutionized cancer treatment with its efficacy and innovation. Combining mRNA technology to this therapy creates a temporary version of this “living drug” that does not sacrifice on quality. The therapy is well tailored to heal mice with damaged and scarred hearts, and widens the possibilities to treat other non-cancerous human ailments. If translated to clinical settings, transient CAR T therapy may be less expensive and more readily available than its traditional counterpart

The post CAR T-mRNA Therapy For Cardiac Fibrosis: A New Way Forward appeared first on Medika Life.

There are more than one hundred ways an RNA molecule can be chemically modified after it is synthesized. The functions of many of these modifications, collectively referred to as the epitranscriptome, are largely unknown.

Here’s the problem with medicine and our genome. We are toddlers, tinkering with a system we barely understand. In much the same way as anyone capable of reading can consume a book on calculus, comprehending what actually stands in the book is another endeavor entirely. We’ve opened the book on the human genome and with our basic comprehension and reading skills we now feel we are qualified to fiddle around with the building blocks of life.

Nothing could be more irresponsible.

Our limited knowledge, coupled with a voracious appetite for exploration and profit, has opened Pandora’s box, and there is no putting the genie back. The pandemic, origins aside, was the key to propelling mRNA technology into the world. Tech that companies like Moderna and others had invested billions of dollars in developing. In point of fact, Moderna’s entire business structure, worth billions, was built on the hopes of mRNA succeeding.

Until the pandemic struck, things looked bleak for both Moderna and mRNA. the treatment had encountered numerous hurdles, no the least of which was the CDC, who restricted the use of untested mRNA technology in trials to end of life patients. If you’re at deaths door, risk becomes irrelevant. Delivery mechanisms (a substance to carry the mRNA into the cell) were another aspect no one in the industry had been able to resolve. Yet, suddenly in 2020, miraculously, a working mRNA Covid treatment was developed in record time.

Not just one, but two, a product from Moderna and another from Pfizer/Biontech. Now call me skeptical, but I have a really hard time believing in miracles, no matter how much money you throw at something. It turns out the miracles came at a heavy price, and unfortunately there does not seem to be a ceiling to this price, as more and more patients report an ever increasing number of side effects from the mRNA vaccines.

As icing on the cake, late last year Moderna conveniently announced an mRNA treatment for heart conditions, the irony of which cannot have been lost on hundreds of thousands of people who’ve suffered heart damage from the first round of mRNA “approved” treatments. You cannot make this up and watching the narrative unfold over the last three years has been nothing short of jaw dropping.

mRNA, in this authors opinion, holds massive promise, possibly 20 years down the line, as a tool to effectively combat diseases like cancer on a genetic level. Why 20 years? Well it is going to take us that long to truly grasp the far reaching implications of tampering with our bodies internal clock. Twenty years of cautious science, uncovering dependencies between systems and how all the dots connect. Right now, we can barely crawl, and yet we are attempting to run. It is costing people their lives.

Altering the human genetic code

Strictly speaking, mRNA vaccines, if they adhere to their licensing protocols, cannot interact with human DNA. DNA based Covid vaccines can, so if you’re worried about having your DNA changed, vaccines from Janssen and others are of far more concern. mRNA cannot alter DNA as far as we know and based on our current understanding of cellular traffic. If you have time and the inclination, an article I wrote in 2021 explains the flow of traffic inside a human cell and like any traffic system, there are rules. RNA affecting DNA is a no-no.

That being said, there are very few hard and fast rules in nature that aren’t, on occasion, broken. Spillage occurs, much like a drunk driver who accidentally ends-up driving against oncoming traffic. So can mRNA do this? It is possible. However unlikely, the contamination of DNA cannot be ruled out. If your goal was to alter our DNA, you would rather opt for a DNA-based vaccine.

mRNA can however effect changes within our bodies on a cellular level, and in many ways, this poses far more risk than DNA manipulation. How? Well, take for instance the Covid vaccines, designed to interact with our ACE2 receptors, receptors that the SARS-COV2 virus targets. It turns out that certain organs within our bodies are more susceptible to having these receptors activated. The testes are a perfect example and reduced semen motility after inoculation with Pfizer BNT162b2 has now been clinically proven as a side effect.

What we don’t know about mRNA therapy

Rather than espousing the risks carried by an unproven medical technology at a cellular and genetic level, I’ve opted for listing a few of the unknowns. Possible effects and interactions with mRNA, other medicines and more. It’s possibly worth mentioning at this point that I believe the technology has huge potential, both for medical advances against disease and for exploitation.

Lets start with mRNA and HIV therapies. This group was not represented in the mRNA Covid clinical trials and we have no idea of the potential interactions between the two therapies or how mRNA will impact HIV in the host. There is prior knowledge of the flu vaccine, for example, waking up HIV and exposing it to the immune system; but it has been unclear whether that was only happening in flu-specific T cells, a known place where HIV hides. Now new evidence suggests mRNA has the ability to wake latent HIV.

mRNA and it’s effects on nursing mothers and infants was completely ignored in the original trials, despite this group being an established part of a vaccine cohort in trials. We know now that mothers can pass the spike protein through their breast milk to the nursing infant.

A growing body of evidence now suggests that there is in fact a large degree of risk to nursing infants from the mRNA vaccine, risk that in some instances results in cardiac related damage or death and new research just published in Jama now recommends mothers do not breastfeed for two days after receiving the mRNA vaccines. This is what they discovered.

Of 11 lactating individuals enrolled, trace amounts of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were detected in 7 breast milk samples from 5 different participants at various times up to 45 hours postvaccination.

Sadly, too late for most mothers, many coerced into the vaccine. We have no idea what the long term medical implications are for the infant, and yet, President Biden and the CDC website still suggests vaccinating 6 month old children, effectively doubling their exposure.

The impact of mRNA on a fetus is also largely unknown, yet we still recommend pregnant mothers be vaccinated, showing no regard for the safety of the fetus. Some emerging data suggests a dramatic increase in stillbirths and miscarriages, where causality is ascribed to lockdowns and lack of access to proper medical care, while an overwhelming spate of recently published research suggest no short term dangers exist to the fetus.

Again, none of this research was done prior to the mRNA being administered in 2020, it is all post 2021. Did we simply get lucky, telling pregnant women there was no risk, when in point of fact, we had no idea? Time will tell.

The untested impact of mRNA on Cancers. Cancer patients were underrepresented in the original Covid trials. While some may argue that as most of Moderna’s work done on mRNA leading up to the so called Covid “vaccine” was based around developing cancer treatments, mRNA poses no risk to this group, the opposite may in fact be true. Cancer cells are responsive to mRNA therapy. What we don’t know is if mRNA therapy intended for a different target, say Covid, will awaken dormant cancel cells.

• New research shows patients with hematologic (cancers of the blood) malignancies appear less likely than those with solid tumors to have detectable immune responses and this extends to patients undergoing chemo.
• This paper in Nature on Cytokine release syndrome in a patient with colorectal cancer after vaccination with BNT162b2

Children as young as six months are the latest guinea pigs in the global clinical trial underway for mRNA technology. Ethically and morally inexcusable and sanctioned by the FDA, CDC and President Biden, you are told it is safe to inject your children with the Covid “vaccines” when in point of fact, we have absolutely no idea about the long term impacts and the trials used to justify the treatments in children are nothing short of laughable and will serve as an embarrassment to science and medicine for generations to come.

Adverse events, and the unknown. With a list of Serious Adverse Events (SAE’s) as long as your arm, all the Covid vaccines, including and especially those utilizing mRNA, came with risks, most of which were down played. Damage to your heart, Myocarditis and Pericarditis (for which Moderna conveniently had another mRNA therapy in the pipeline, released recently), blood clotting, Bells Palsy, the list goes on and on. While we are rapidly discovering the many unknown short term side effects for some of mRNA therapy, we still have no idea of the long term SAE’s. Two questions arise.

Are these effects, both immediate and long term, the result of the mRNA based delivery or the actual spike protein generated by the treatment. Only time and honest research will answer this question satisfactorily and it is one that must be put to bed as new flu shots, cancer treatments and more are rolled out on the back of mRNA technology. All regard for long term, established safety protocols have been thrown out the window.

Unintended consequences and the complex interactions of cellular based medicines on an organism as complex as the human body cannot be calculated, accounted for or anticipated, at least not yet. We have gaps in our knowledge on a biological level and only a minimal understanding of the toys we are tinkering with. if we have no qualms enforcing this on pregnant women, that in itself should give us pause for thought.

The risks for cancer patients in remission is another topic of debate, after recent reports that mRNA has triggered latent cancer cells to resume growth.

What we are discovering about mRNA Covid Therapies, post treatment

A recent study from Cleveland Clinic highlighted a fear that has been raised by a few medical outliers who chose to speak out against the “vaccination regimen” at risk of professional ridicule. Focusing on the bivalent vaccine, it reported a worrying trend. With every successive booster, the patients risk of contracting Covid actually increased.

The risk of COVID-19 varied by the number of COVID-19 vaccine doses previously received. The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19 (graph below)

You can view the full results of the Cleveland Clinic study by following this link. Now while there may be certain problems with this study pertaining to their cohort, their findings are substantiated by findings from two other studies.

Breasts Cancers seem to be on the upswing. Evidence continues to emerge about axillary lymphadenopathy following COVID-19 vaccination and it is now a recommendation that women undergo a breast screening, post vaccination. It is known that the Pfizer vaccine can cause swelling of lymph nodes, often suggestive of breast cancer. However, any enlargement of lymph nodes can potentially indicate cancer, so this symptom should not be ignored.

This creates an ideal environment for misdiagnosis. Ensure your doctors and health providers know you’ve been recently vaccinated, but make sure you a properly screened and that the swellings are not merely dismissed out of hand because of your recent vaccination.

People with gastrointestinal conditions (GI) should be carefully monitored after vaccination for Covid 19, according to a paper published on PubMed entitled Gastrointestinal Complications of COVID-19 Vaccines. Their patient experienced post-vaccination acute diverticulitis and colon micro-perforation following a Moderna booster dose.

Sperm motility in men should be monitored in patients who have received multiple boosters and want to start a family. There appears to be a direct correlation in the reduction of sperm motility and the number of mRNA vaccines administered to a patient. Whilst recovery takes between 10 and 14 days after a second does, research does not exist for third, fourth or fifth doses. You can read the paper, entitled Covid-19 vaccination BNT162b2 temporarily impairs semen concentration and total motile count among semen donors here.

Of course, this above mentioned list of issues is in no way comprehensive, that would require nothing short of a book, but rather is provided to highlight certain ongoing issues.

Getting to the heart of mRNA’s problems

Sudden Death and the hashtag #DiedSuddenly follow you wherever you go on Twitter and other social media platforms. Cardiac related issues experienced by healthy teenagers and young adults are on the increase and many prove fatal. These incidents are matched by the number of videos of people of all ages dropping from an apparent stroke, most performing the same macabre contortions before collapsing to a mostly unknown fate.

To exacerbate mRNA’s headaches, it is being forcibly administered to patients without their consent in hospitals where the patient undergoes surgery. Some hospitals still refuse life saving medical interventions like organ transplants if the patient is not “vaccinated”. A global spike in excess deaths, up by hundreds of percentage points in some countries over the last two years also demands an explanation and vaccines are seen as the most likely culprit.

It would seem that even if mRNA survives it’s rocky introduction to humanity with no further serious long term adverse events, its reputation will have been seriously damaged, perhaps even irreparably. A little ironic justice metered out for the damage it has inflicted on the reputation of actual vaccines.

A spate of Happy Coincidences

If you believe in them. Personally, I don’t, but actually separating fact from fiction around mRNA’s sudden meteoric rise to fame is rapidly becoming an improbable task, as the tangled web surrounding it continues to become more complex. Rather than trying to unpick it, I’ve opted for listing a few interesting, and often overlooked, facts surrounding mRNA in the last three years and earlier.

1. The National Institute for Health (NIH) and Moderna developed the Moderna vaccine in partnership, with patent rights, US Patent Application No. 62/972,886 entitled 2019-nCoV Vaccine filed in June of 2020, residing with the NIH.
2. NIH, alongside the National Institute for Allergies and Infectious disease (NAIAD) and Moderna have researched coronaviruses, like MERS and SARS, for several years, and signed a contract in December of 2019 that stated “mRNA coronavirus vaccine candidates [are] developed and jointly owned” by the two parties.
3. Since 2015, the National Institute for Health (NIH) and the National Institute for Allergies and Infectious disease (NIAID), knowingly provided funding to a specific group of American scientists and their institutions and businesses to perform Gain of Function (GOF) research, despite a moratorium.
4. The publicly stated intent of these scientists, working under the auspices of Peter Daszak, Ph.D and EcoHealth Alliance, Inc was to develop a more infectious version of the coronavirus and to achieve their ends they chose a Chinese scientist working out of a laboratory in Wuhan, China.
5. EcoHealth Alliance is a non-profit group that has received millions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer funding to genetically manipulate coronaviruses with scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
6. During this period, Dr Anthony Fauci was director of NAIAD and Dr. Francis Collins director of the NIH. Jointly they controlled about 10 billion dollars of funding annually, placing them in a position to control and distort the public Covid narrative.
7. The same Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance interfered on numerous occasions with investigations into the origin of the SARS-COV2 virus, creating a narrative contrary to a manufactured laboratory origin for the virus. For those with time and intent, the full list of EcoHealth Alliance emails released under Freedom of Information, can be found here.
8. Dr Fauci, in September of 2022 and only days away from retirement, as a parting gift to EcoHealth Alliance from the NAIAD, awarded a $653,392 grant to the company to analyze “the potential for future bat coronavirus emergence in Myanmar, Laos, and Vietnam.” This despite the company’s failure to produce records pertaining to Wuhan and their involvement in the GOF research undertaken there on their behalf.

In closing, I have no compunctions about leaving you with my impressions of the duplicity of pharma, governments and regulatory bodies foisting unproven medical technology down our throats and sadly, there is no defense that can be raised by any of the parties involved that would excuse their actions.

Hindsight is offered in part to offer comfort to the those who are now being held accountable. It’s easy, they claim, to criticize now, after the facts. That, of course, is complete and utter nonsense. Anyone with a grain of common sense able to follow something to its logical conclusion knew months into the pandemic that we were being manipulated, cajoled, coerced and prepared for amass vaccination campaign. Everyone with an inkling of medical training knew that mRNA was a potential horror story waiting to unfold, and yet, here we are, two years later, recommending we now “get the kids”.

It is the betrayal by science, the community in general and the professionals who undertook oaths to protect their patients that is perhaps the most saddening part of the pandemic shambles. It is this betrayal that will impact medicine for generations to come. “Trust me, I’m a doctor,” the punchline to a pandemic joke coming soon to a stand-up venue near you.

Part 4 of the Covid Files. When is a vaccine not a vaccine?

The post The Covid Global Clinical Trials for mRNA. Thank You for Participating appeared first on Medika Life.

How does mRNA work and what is it?

mRNA medicines are sets of instructions and these instructions direct cells in the body to make proteins to prevent or fight disease. The m stands for messenger and RNA is ribonucleic acid, a part of our DNA. mRNA is a single-stranded molecule that carries genetic code from DNA in a cell’s nucleus to ribosomes, the cell’s protein-making machinery.

Without mRNA, your genetic code would never get used by your body. Proteins would never get made and your body wouldn’t (actually couldn’t) perform its functions. mRNA plays a vital role in human biology, specifically in a process known as protein synthesis. Rather than subjecting you to a long-winded explanation of exactly how mRNA functions, this video provides an excellent overview. 

What really matters is what these mechanisms have to do with medicine and how our mastery of nanoparticles has enabled science to manipulate processes at a level hitherto unachievable. The following is an overly simplified explanation to enable you to appreciate the potential of these new medicines. We don’t know how our cellphones work, but we appreciate the benefits they offer.

mRNA, DNA, and your body

Our DNA is ground zero for our bodies. Everything that happens inside us arguably originates in our DNA. It is the machine that powers our bodies and like all machines, is subject to breakages and manufacturing flaws. These can exhibit as diseases later in life, cancer, etc, or conditions that are genetic and affect a person at birth.

mRNA medicines provide us a mechanism to access the actual DNA machinery that regulates our health. Targetted solutions that can repair and address problems right at the source, at ground zero. 

mRNA medicines depend on really small nanoparticles to deliver the medicine’s payload or instructions. Solid lipid nanoparticles provide transport and measure anywhere from 1 to 1000 nanometres. To give you an idea of their scale, imagine this. 

In the International System of Units, the prefix “nano” means one-billionth; so one nanometer is one-billionth of a meter. It’s difficult to imagine just how small that is, so here are some examples: 

•  A sheet of paper is about 100,000 nanometers thick. 
• A strand of hair is 80,000 –100,000 nanometers in diameter. 
• There are 25,400,000 nanometers per inch. 
• Your fingernails grow about one nanometer per second!

It turns out these solid lipid nanoparticles (SLNP’s) are hugely important to the development of mRNA medicines and we’ve been tinkering with them since the early ’90s. The body easily accepts them without risk of rejection as companies now focus on the use of physiological lipids. They offer the perfect carrier.

The first drug using SLNP’s as a delivery mechanism, Onpattro was approved in 2018. You can read more about their delivery system for this drug here and as we all now know, in late 2020, several life-saving mRNA vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 were released. Moderna’s mRNA-1273 and Pfizer/BioNTech’s BNT162b2, also use lipid nanoparticles for their drug delivery system.

mRNA medicines have finally truly “arrived”. Their development over nearly three decades is a testament to open scientific collaboration, innovation, and sheer perseverance. The question now is what else can we use this novel technology for, and how can we use it to address disease?

Looking to tomorrow

Imagine the potential for being able to address diseases and genetic “glitches” at their root. Unborn children with identified genetic abnormalities could be born as healthy infants, thanks to early interventions made possible with these medicines.

Cancers and other diseases are currently being explored, to see how we can apply these drugs. High on the list are autoimmune disorders, a natural starting point after the success of the vaccine, and the technology’s established ability to impact the immune system. Recently, a team led by Ugur Sahin has designed an mRNA vaccine that can restore tolerance to myelin proteins in mice, reducing the severity of multiple sclerosis-like symptoms, while maintaining the immune response towards other antigens.

On the subject of mRNA Cancer Vaccines, a recent article in PubMed suggests another novel application for mRNA. Apart from being used directly to vaccinate patients, mRNAs can also be used in cellular therapies to transfect patient-derived cells in vitro and infuse the manipulated cells back into the patient. The technology is so rapid and cost-effective that it can be tailored to individual patients and their particular genetic code.

mRNA may be on course to do for modern medicine what Flemming’s penicillin did for healthcare in the early twentieth century. It holds out huge promise that may, for now, only be limited by existing technology and our ability to innovate. Watch this space.

The post Is mRNA Technology the New Penicillin? appeared first on Medika Life.