Ten mRNA Facts You Probably Didn’t Know About and Ten Nonsenses

Unexpected facts and fictions on mRNA vaccines

There’s still a lot of nonsense that circulates about the Covid mRNA vaccines. Hidden amongst this noise are indisputable facts relating to these treatments, some interesting, some troublesome and others, well, you decide. Here then are 10 actual lesser known facts on mRNA technology and the so called “Covid Vaccines” interspersed by 10 bits of spectacular misinformation.

Before we dive in it is worth taking cognizance of the following. mRNA technology offers massive promise for the treatment of cancers, rare genetic diseases and yes, once perfected, even vaccines that can actually prevent diseases. If we can perfect these medicines, we could well see cancers and conditions like cystic fibrosis defeated. The technology is relatively cheap and can be genetically modified to accommodate an individual patient’s specific DNA. mRNA is in many ways, the Holy Grail of modern medicine.

The Covid mRNA treatments were however rushed to market, are fraught with serious adverse effects (SAE’s) and controversy, and it is my fervent hope that these products will not taint the potential of this life-sustaining technology. For those who want an honest appraisal of the technology, pre-Covid vaccine,, here is an excellent summation.


The mRNA treatments marketed by Moderna and Pfizer as vaccines are, in point of fact, not vaccines at all! They do have a beneficial protective effect as immunizations. They do not prevent the patient from developing Covid, the disease that results from infection by the SARS-COV2 virus. Anyone who argues this fact, has a poor understanding of what actual vaccines are and how they operate. At best, these treatments should be considered therapeutics.

Take for instance the Polio or Measles vaccine. Once administered, the patient is protected against these diseases. In fact, these vaccines work so well that we had almost completely obliterated these diseases, until, thanks to misinformation, parents decided to stop vaccinating their children. Now these diseases have once again gained a foothold across the globe.

The mRNA treatments or therapeutics offered no protection against infection and only offered middling to poor protection against developing serious Covid symptoms. They did, however, offer a lifeline to the aged and those with co-morbidities most at risk of dying from Covid by reducing severity. So no, referring to these treatments as vaccines is both wrong and disingenuous to vaccines in general. The mRNA treatments have neither stopped nor reduce transmission of the SARS-COV2 virus.

Comments made by well respected figures in the medical community, like Dr. Robert Amler, dean of New York Medical College School of Health Sciences and Practice and a former CDC chief medical office to Healthline are typical of the manipulation of words used to enforce the “vaccine” effect. His statement, made to Healthline in June of 2021 is below.

“Through vaccination, smallpox has been eradicated worldwide. Through vaccination, polio has been eliminated from the Western Hemisphere, Europe, and Oceania, with only a few pockets left in a few countries. And through mass vaccination, COVID-19 rates have declined dramatically in the second quarter of 2021,”

Yes, it is possible to build functional vaccines utilizing mRNA technology that adhere to our understanding of a vaccine, however we have yet to achieve this. Multiple mRNA based vaccine products are currently in development, you can find out more about these further into the article.


mRNA vaccines contain trackers that allow the governments and other agencies to track you. There are no trackers built into the Covid treatments or any other vaccines, no RFID chips or nano-particles designed to emit specific frequencies that allow Big Brother to track your movements. No one is really that interested in what you do and if this technology existed (which it doesn’t) they could simply bundle it with your cornflakes. This is Orwellian nonsense that is put to rest with simple logic.

You couldn’t be personally identified from technology like this and no one is interested in tracking a random bunch of dots. Why bother when you already have a cellphone grafted onto your hand? It is the de facto method of monitoring your behavior. Consider that the next time you are posting pandemic disinformation on Twitter and Facebook from your cell.


Prior to 2020, mRNA treatments were reserved for use in “end of life” patients or in groups who, because of the advanced state of their medical conditions, stood to benefit from the treatments, despite unquantified risk. People who were terminally ill with cancers, for instance, could use the new and experimental treatments in the hopes of delaying the inevitable. This restriction was put in place by none other than the FDA, who considered the mRNA treatments untested and unsafe for use on the general population. However, the potential applications for mRNA technology promised much, warranting trials that were restricted to the aforementioned groups for safety reasons..


The Covid treatments were developed to control the global population by slowly killing off billions across the planet. Even more insane than the tracker theory, the people who have bought into this fiction believe that Bill Gates and others have conspired to reduce the worlds population through the Covid treatments. This is of course a complete nonsense that again, a little common sense can disprove.

Any treatment that were to induce death on a scale that would affect our global population would decimate our health care systems and destroy work forces, economies and global trade, effectively bringing our current civilization to a standstill. Individuals seeking power and wealth on large scale require a functional society to achieve their goals. No one is this stupid.

Deaths and reported serious adverse events (SAE’s) arising from the vaccine, although numbering well into the millions, are a drop in the global population ocean and are the result of poorly trialed medicines being released to the general public, rather than a nefarious attempt to destroy mankind.


India refused to purchase either of the Covid mRNA treatments. The reason? The Indian government, in a prescient moment of brilliance, decided that the indemnity required by both Pfizer and Moderna against any and all claims arising from the use of their ” Covid vaccines” was beyond the pale of acceptability. This ‘blanket immunity” sought by both Pfizer and Moderna from purchasing governments was a prerequisite for supply. India rightly declined.

As an interesting aside, in August of this year India’s drug regulator approved Gennova’s mRNA Covid vaccine (locally produced) for restricted use in emergency situations in adults.


Covid Vaccines have proven mRNA treatments are safe and well tolerated. Absolutely not! Here’s why. There is no long term data yet on the effect of the mRNA treatments administered for Covid and varying results from different data collected from various clinical trials over the last year and a half further muddy the waters. Some seem to indicate substantial levels of SAE’s and little reduction in mortality rates from Covid, while others suggest the treatments were effective.

It will take another three to four years and far more intense scrutiny of data to ascertain how safe these treatments were. In addition, the Covid mRNA treatments utilized a very specific mechanism of action (MOA) to deliver the SARS-COV2 spike protein. Many of the other mRNA treatments in development rely on different MOA’s to deliver their payload, most untested in a clinical setting. In vitro and animal studies often do not translate in vivo with human subjects and initial success can be met with later failure.

An excellent example in point is the Cystic Fibrosis trial run by Translate Bio for their mRNA prospect MRT5005. Phase I results in 2019 indicated promising results from a single dosage and yet, increased dosages failed to show any improvement in lung function in a small trial concluded in 2021. An expensive fail and a return to the drawing board.


Lactating mothers were not included in the original Covid trials run for the mRNA treatments. Despite this, healthcare professionals still advised lactating mothers that there was no risk to either themselves or their child and healthcare bodies (Government or otherwise) underwrote the stance. This bears repeating. Advice relating to the safety of nursing babies and mRNA treatments was based on assumptions, not one shred of clinical evidence. This advice is still in place and can be described as nothing short of criminal.

You can argue lactating mothers had a choice, but sadly, in most instances this wasn’t true as they risked losing their jobs, access to government buildings and basic services without a valid vaccine card. Not even naturally acquired immunity was considered. Forced coercion to ensure compliance. We are still engaging in this reprehensible practice.

Doctors from the WHO publicly encouraged breastfeeding women to get vaccinated, despite any scientific evidence to suggest the mRNA vaccines were safe for the babies of lactating mothers. Some of this medically and scientifically unfounded advice still can be found on the WHO website. Here is an example in point from Dr Soumya Swaminathan.

Even UNICEF engages in the this reckless advice, claiming to base their advice on the SAGE working group. You can view the UNICEF page here.

This advice exists on the CDC webpage. “CDC recommends COVID-19 vaccines for everyone ages 6 months and older, including people who are pregnant, breastfeeding, trying to get pregnant now, or might become pregnant in the future and getting boosters, if eligible.”

More worrying, is that on the same page, the CDC confirms that it in fact has no data on which to make any assumptions relating to the safety of breastfed infants. Here is the exact text, lifted directly from the page. Bold text added by author.

“Clinical trials for the COVID-19 vaccines currently used in the United States did not include people who were breastfeeding. Therefore, there are limited data (actually a nice way of saying zero data) available on the

  • Safety of COVID-19 vaccines in people who are breastfeeding
  • Effects of vaccination on the breastfed baby
  • Effects on milk production or excretion”

This raises two serious questions. What other Covid advice has the CDC decided to issue without supporting data and how, in a sane world, is anyone supposed to trust a healthcare institution that is so glib with human life?

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.


Receiving the mRNA vaccines protects you against getting Covid. If you do contract Covid after you’ve been jabbed, even numerous times, it is a “breakthrough infection”. Horse twaddle. At no point have either company suggested the mRNA treatments would prevent infection. This false perception of the so called “vaccines” is in large part due to people’s understanding of how a vaccine works and may very well be why the terminology was used to describe these therapeutics. Words have power.

Even main stream media did little to dispel this falsehood, a falsehood still believed by many patients. The mRNA treatments and all other Covid “vaccines” will not prevent you contracting Covid. They merely reduce the risk of you developing serious symptoms.


We do not know yet what the long-term effects of mRNA treatments will be. In a real-world scenario, treatments classed as vaccines are required to undergo rigorous trials over the duration of five years or more to allow for the development of unforeseen side effects. We do know that expectant mothers who received the mRNA treatments while pregnant passed on the mRNA spike protein to their children in utero. There is also irrefutable evidence that children conceived of vaccinated parents will, in most instances, carry the mRNA instruction.

Again, according to information offered by the CDC

“A recent small study found that at 6 months old, the majority (57%) of infants born to pregnant people who were vaccinated during pregnancy had detectable antibodies against COVID-19, compared to 8% of infants born to pregnant people who had COVID-19 during pregnancy.”


mRNA technology used in these vaccines is new and untested. This is patently untrue. Most people are not aware that interest and development in mRNA medicines stretches back three decades. In 1990, University of Pennsylvania scientist Katalin Karikó suggested using mRNA as an alternative to DNA-based gene therapy. Despite serious challenges in the field Karikó forged ahead anyway and, with her colleague Drew Weissman, made a game-changing discovery in 2005.

The researchers replaced one of mRNA’s four chemical building blocks, a nucleoside called uridine, with a slightly modified nucleoside called pseudo-uridine. Amazingly, the modified mRNA evaded immune sensors, one of the greatest hurdles faced by mRNA introduced into the human body. (Immunity 2005, DOI: 10.1016/j.immuni.2005.06.008).

“We submitted that for a patent, and that was the birth of therapeutic RNA,”

Drew Weissman

There is some truth in the fact that no mRNA products have been adequately trialed but the technology is well established and companies have invested billions into developing the technology. It is only a question of time until mRNA medicines abound in the industry.


By 2018, mRNA’s potential had spurred several major vaccine collaborations: The U.S. government and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation invested in Moderna’s mRNA vaccine programs for diseases caused by viruses like Zika and HIV; Sanofi partnered with Translate Bio to develop infectious disease mRNA vaccines; and Pfizer in August of 2018 teamed up with BioNTech to develop mRNA flu vaccines.

Fact or Fiction?

Its okay to mix and match vaccines for boosters and second shots. Again, I call fiction. From a risk perspective (SAE’s) this is horrendous advice. Each Covid vaccine, including the mRNA vaccines comes with a very long and specific list of Serious Adverse Effects, and some were only discovered after the products were approved for Emergency Use. Some of these SAE’s overlap, but many are specific to an individual manufacturer.

If, for arguments sake, you’ve received a shot of Moderna and not experienced any adverse reactions, then it is relatively safe to assume your system can tolerate that particular treatment. Why then, on God’s green earth, would you stretch your luck and try another manufacturers product, effectively doubling your risk of suffering an SAE? Try three and you’ve just trebled your risk.

There is no data on the correlation between the use of different vaccines and the increased risk of suffering adverse events. When no data exists, ALWAYS err on the side of caution, an established principal the medical industry left by the wayside when the pandemic hit.


In 2020, prior to COVID-19 vaccine rollout, the Brighton Collaboration created a priority list, endorsed by the World Health Organization, of potential adverse events relevant to COVID-19 vaccines. This list was then adapted by this study to evaluate serious adverse events of special interest observed in mRNA COVID-19 vaccine trials. The list was based upon the specific vaccine platform, adverse events associated with prior vaccines in general, theoretical associations based upon animal models and COVID-19-specific immunopathogenesis. The resultant stats are shown below and the SAE’s are listed in the image below.

Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95 % CI −0.4 to 20.6 and −3.6 to 33.8), respectively. Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 2.1 to 22.9); risk ratio 1.43 (95 % CI 1.07 to 1.92). The Pfizer trial exhibited a 36 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group; risk difference 18.0 per 10,000 vaccinated (95 % CI 1.2 to 34.9); risk ratio 1.36 (95 % CI 1.02 to 1.83). The Moderna trial exhibited a 6 % higher risk of serious adverse events in the vaccine group: risk difference 7.1 per 10,000 (95 % CI –23.2 to 37.4); risk ratio 1.06 (95 % CI 0.84 to 1.33). Combined, there was a 16 % higher risk of serious adverse events in mRNA vaccine recipients: risk difference 13.2 (95 % CI −3.2 to 29.6); risk ratio 1.16 (95 % CI 0.97 to 1.39).


The mRNA treatments will make you sterile. If you believe this, it probably wouldn’t be the greatest loss to mankind if we were spared your prodigy. Here is a link to children currently being born globally. If you assume that as we require nine months to bake a baby, then it is fair to assume that by now more than 50% of these expectant mothers would have been inoculated prior to doing the deed. This would result in plummeting birth rates. Data suggests exactly the opposite, no doubt still as a result of extended lockdowns.

Photo courtesy of the ThwWorldCounts

You only need to sit and watch the number of births climbing by the thousands every minute to appreciate that no, we probably haven’t all been sterilized. The UN estimates that around 385,000 babies are born each day around the world (140 million a year). Most of these children will carry some form of natural immunity to Covid. The mother may have had the disease and acquired natural immunity and/or have been vaccinated.

During the Pfizer vaccine tests, 23 women volunteers involved in the study became pregnant, and the only one who suffered a pregnancy loss had not received the actual vaccine, but a placebo. That is conclusive proof that the spike protein used does not affect fertility in women.


Aside from the Covid treatments, no other mRNA treatments have been approved or fully licensed by the FDA or other regulatory bodies. The AZD8601 EPICCURE Clinical trials run jointly by Moderna and AstraZeneca serve as an excellent example of the caution with which regulators views these treatments and just how long properly conducted clinical trials take. In 2012/13 Moderna injected mRNA encoding a protein called vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) directly into the hearts of mice.

Scientists had long suspected that VEGF could repair heart tissue damaged during a heart attack, but VEGF proteins don’t stick around long enough, so simply injecting the proteins doesn’t work. The VEGF-encoding mRNA, however, hung about in cells, making enough of the protein to improve the animals’ survival and health after a heart attack (Nat. Biotechnol. 2013, DOI: 10.1038/nbt.2682).

A collaboration with AstraZeneca followed on these results in 2013 that included a $240 million investment. After replicating the VEGF experiment in mice and pigs, AstraZeneca launched a study to test the therapy in people who recently had heart attacks. How far has the treatment come since then? Nearly ten years later you can view the results from Phase II of the EPICURE trials run in 2021 here and learn more about AZD8601’s journey in an excellent summary from Nature.


The COVID-19 vaccine enters your cells and changes your DNA. Biologically this is impossible. Cells enjoy very specific traffic flow and you can read more about this in an article I wrote months ago explaining exactly how the flow of traffic works in cells and why RNA cannot influence DNA. The messenger RNA from the two Covid vaccines does enter cells, but not the nucleus of the cells where DNA resides. The mRNA instructs the cell to make protein to stimulate the immune system and do not affect your DNA.


The mRNA genie is truly “out of the bottle” now, with Moderna boasting more than 24 new vaccines and treatments in the pipeline for targeting genetic diseases, influenza, HIV, heart disease, and cancer. BioNTech is even more ambitious with 32 products in their pipeline. You can view the full range and scope of their development by following the link.


Covid vaccines, including mRNA vaccines, provide better protection against Covid than natural infection. This is a highly controversial statement and one that even CDC’s Dr. Anthony Fauci cannot in good conscience repeat as he is on record, prior to the pandemic, stating that no medical vaccines can offer better protection than naturally acquired immunity. I call this out as fiction and believe that most in the medical community support this opinion.

As to claims that you are safer getting the vaccine than risking contracting Covid, I would also question the statistics backing up this statement. Very few healthy people who did not exhibit comorbidities actually died from Covid. In fact, the number was so low it almost statistically insignificant. Again, risk matters in health and for a healthy individual to risk the far higher odds of SAE’s from a vaccine, mRNA or other, makes no sense. Elderly populations and those patients exhibiting co-morbidities could easily justify this risk equation.


Reported efficacy of the mRNA vaccines was misrepresented, most probably to intentionally encourage people to be vaccinated. Why do I say this? For the following simple reason.

The original trials revealed that a person was 95% ‘less likely’ to catch the autumn 2020 variant of COVID-19. This is known in medical speak as “relative risk reduction”, but to know the true value of any treatment one needs to understand for that person, by how much is their individual risk reduced by the intervention – that is, the “absolute individual risk reduction”. This is where the medical industry (pharma in particular) took absolute advantage of a trusting public and even pulled the wool over the eyes of doctors who probably should have known better, but chose to trust their regulatory bodies and the general media.

That was a huge mistake. The concept is complicated to explain and this pre-print article by Dr. Aseem Malhotra does the job admirably. For those of you who prefer to read on here, he explains it as follows.

It turns out that the trial results suggest that the vaccine was only preventing a person from having a symptomatic positive test, and the absolute risk reduction for this was 0.84% (0.88% reduced to 0.04%). In other words, if 10 000 people had been vaccinated and 10 000 had not, for every 10 000 people vaccinated in trial 4 would have tested positive with symptoms compared to 88 who were unvaccinated. Even in the unvaccinated group, 9912 of the 10 000 (over 99%) would not have tested positive during the trial period.

Another way of expressing this is that you would need to vaccinate 119 people to prevent one such symptomatic positive test. Hardly protection. This absolute risk reduction figure (0.84%) is extremely important for doctors and patients to know but how many of them were told this when they received the shot?

Contrary to popular belief, what the trial did not show was any statistically significant reduction in serious illness or COVID-19 mortality from the vaccine over the 6-month period of the trial, but the actual numbers of deaths (attributed to COVID-19) are still important to note. There were only two deaths from COVID-19 in the placebo group and one death from COVID-19 in the vaccine group. Looking at all-cause mortality over a longer period, there were actually slightly more deaths in the vaccine group (19 deaths) than in the placebo group (17 deaths).

Also of note was the extremely low rate of COVID-19 illness classed as severe in the placebo group (nine severe cases out of 21 686 subjects, 0.04%), reflecting a very low risk of severe illness even in regions chosen for the trial because of perceived high prevalence of infection.


We’ll end on an absolute favorite of mine, simply for the brazenness of the claim. The mRNA vaccines make you magnetic, and thus more susceptible to the influence of 5G cell towers. Speaking from personal experience, I live in an area with terrible cell coverage and was looking forward to the boost in my phone’s reception. Sadly, post vaccine, I still get a terrible connection. Must be my tinfoil hat blocking the signal!



Medika Life has provided this material for your information. It is not intended to substitute for the medical expertise and advice of your health care provider(s). We encourage you to discuss any decisions about treatment or care with your health care provider. The mention of any product, service, or therapy is not an endorsement by Medika Life

Robert Turner, Founding Editor
Robert Turner, Founding Editorhttps://medkoin.health
Robert is a Founder of Medika Life. He is a published author and owner of MedKoin Healthcare Solutions. He lives between the Philippines and the UK. and is an outspoken advocate for human rights. Access to basic healthcare and eradicating racial and gender bias in medicine are key motivators behind the Medika website and reflect Robert's passion for accessible medical care globally.
More from this author