There appears to be a constant disconnect between the consumer and an industry that is bringing products to the market for consumption. Whether we are talking about Genetically Engineered (GE) food, utilities, or pharmaceutical products, that void is always there. Thankfully we have government regulatory agencies that were created to protect us, the consumers, from very real risks of these products. But, what happens when the consumer is not informed of the risks being discussed between regulatory agencies and the industry? What we end up with is a governing body that determines the risk-to-benefit ratio for us without fully disclosing the actual risks involved. 

My intention here is to bring to light one of these risks as it applies to the development of biological products for consumption, whether via injection or ingestion. This is a task that calls for critical thinking: “the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment.” Critical thinking requires an ability to ask pertinent questions and have full access to information in order to connect the dots to form the bigger picture.

On September 19th, 2012, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had a meeting to discuss Cell Lines Derived from Human Tumors for Vaccine Manufacture. The briefing document and transcript of the meeting can be found here (FDA Briefing Document - Cell Lines Derived from Human Tumors for Vaccine Manufacture 2012.pdf) and here (FDA Briefing Document Transcript.pdf). Much of the discussion presented in this article will revolve around the admissions found in these documents.

In section 4.1.1 of the briefing document, it is explained that “adventitious agents are defined as microorganisms that are not intended to be present in a biological product and include bacteria, fungi, mycoplasma / spiroplasma, mycobacteria, rickettsia, protozoan parasites, transmissible spongiform encephalopathy agents, and viruses.” At what point in the history of vaccine production did they determine what an adventitious agent was and could be? How long did it take them to realize that these things may be present in a vaccine? How many people and animals suffered or will suffer as a result of not knowing? We are fully dependent upon advances in technology to detect the presence of these agents as we shall see in the emerging science presented in this article.

The briefing document continues in 4.1.1 to expand on adventitious agents: “The use of human tumor-derived cell lines poses added safety concerns regarding the potential presence of unexpected and unknown viruses. These include viruses that may be present in the cell line due to their existence in the patient tissue such as oncogenic, latent DNA viruses (e.g., adenovirus, hepadenoviruses, herpesviruses, papillomaviruses, polyomaviruses) and endogenous retroviruses (ERVs), which exist normally in a quiescent state in the host cell DNA of all species…”

Latent and quiescent state means these viruses are sleeping and inactive, currently not expressing, and have the full potential to cause infection if they are woken from this sleep. These quiet and sleeping viruses can only be detected in the cells used to make vaccines if they are activated making their presence, and therefore, their detection is quite problematic. This is an issue for all cell strains used to make vaccines and is not unique to human tumorigenic cells discussed in the FDA document.

In section 4.2.1 of the briefing document we learn that “small amounts of residual cell substrate DNA unavoidably occur in all viral vaccines as well as other biologics produced using cell substrates. There are several potential ways DNA could be a risk factor. DNA can be oncogenic or infectious; in addition, it can cause insertion mutagenesis through integration into the host genome.” Since all vaccines contain residual DNA that has a potential to be oncogenic (causing cancer), mutagenic (changing your genetic code), and infectious, isn’t it of major concern that section 13 of every vaccine package insert states that the product has not been evaluated for carcinogenic (causing cancer) or mutagenic effects? 

Dr. Theresa Deisher earned her PhD from Stanford University in the Department of Molecular and Cellular Physiology and has looked into the aspects of insertion mutagenesis. Her particular area of interest is the residual human DNA that remains in all vaccines derived from human diploid cell strains which includes female WI-38 and male MRC-5. Vaccines that contain human residual DNA include chickenpox (VARIVAX); combination measles, mumps, rubella; varicella (ProQuad); measles, mumps, rubella (MMRII); hepA (Havrix and Vaqta); combination hepA and hepB (Twinrix); rabies (Imovax); adenovirus; combination diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio (Quadracel); and combination diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Pentacel).  Dr. Deisher’s research concludes:“Not only damaged human cells, but also healthy human cells can take up foreign DNA spontaneously. Foreign human DNA taken up by human cells will be transported into nuclei and be integrated into host genome, which will cause phenotype change.” So here we have proof that the human DNA in the above-mentioned vaccines has the potential to cause genetic changes in every child who receives them. According the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and depending on the products used, a child has the potential to receive up to 6 separate injections that contain residual human DNA by the time they are 2 years old.

The safety aspect of residual DNA in vaccines is part of the discussion in the above linked transcription of the FDA meeting. It is suggested that by reducing the size and quantity of the DNA particles they can reduce the potential of insertion mutagenesis and infection. Dr. Peden, Chief of the Laboratory of DNA Viruses at the FDA, is noted as saying “...it depends on the mechanism of transformation.  For example, mutations, chromosome rearrangements, translocations, retrotranspositions, et cetera, all involve DNA.  Therefore, reducing the size and amount of the DNA should mitigate this risk.”

The conclusion that DNA size will reduce the risk of mutagenesis and infection is based on nothing more than a belief. There is nothing in the discussion that provides beyond a reasonable doubt that the presence of DNA is safe. Research is showing us that in mammals, such as humans, the genetic code is highly repetitive meaning it is homologous. As we can see in this study, small fragments of DNA are used to achieve genetic modification in a therapeutic manner. It is not much of a stretch to assume this same observation occurs in a non-therapeutic manner as well."Homologous Replacement is used to modify specific gene sequences of chromosomal DNA in a process referred to as "Small Fragment Homologous Replacement", where DNA fragments replace genomic target resulting in specific sequence changes."

Furthermore, it appears it is a matter of an individual's genetics that increases their risk and susceptibility to the infectious nature of DNA and insertion mutagenesis:

“Residual DNA (rDNA) is comprised of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) fragments and longer length molecules originating from the host organism that may be present in samples from recombinant biological processes. Although similar in basic structural base pair units, rDNA may exist in different sizes and physical forms. Interest in measuring rDNA in recombinant products is based primarily on demonstration of effective purification during manufacturing, but also on some hypothetical concerns that, in rare cases, depending on the host expression system, some DNA sequences may be potentially infectious or oncogenic (e.g., HIV virus and the Ras oncogene, respectively).”

Dr. Peden is also noted to say “in primary cells and diploid cells there are no limits for the amount of DNA in vaccines”. That means these safety measures to limit the amount of residual DNA does not apply to live virus vaccines grown in human diploid cells such as MMRII and VARIVAX.

Beyond the absolute abomination of genetically modifying our children through insertion mutagenesis of male and female human diploid cell strain DNA without disclosure, is the other elephant in the room, the presence of human endogenous retrovirus K (HERV-K) that was found in MMRII and VARIVAX. It is important to note it was the WI-38 and MRC-5 cell strains that contain this contaminant and as such, any and all products used with these cell lines will contain HERV-K.

Human endogenous retrovirus (HERV) is associated with a myriad of chronic disease states as can be seen in this study:

“Several mechanisms by which HERVs could produce pathological effects have been proposed, including generation of new variants of HERVs, insertional mutagenesis, and protein toxicity. In this regard, HERV activation appears to influence the aggressiveness of different cancers, including seminoma, melanoma, leukemia, hepatocellular carcinoma, sarcoma, prostate, breast and colon cancer. Likewise, the pathologic process of rheumatic disorders, systemic lupus erythematosus, multiple sclerosis, autism spectrum disorders, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, psoriasis, type I diabetes, and systemic sclerosis shows a correlation with HERV activity.”

Childhood cancers are on the rise and we cannot underestimate the role directly injecting HERV-K has on this observation. Especially when it is directly associated with leukemia as can be seen here: 

“In patients with leukemia, the presence of antibodies against HERV-K has been identified, which could suggest increased expression of HERV-K in leukemic cells.”

And here:

“Antibody response against HERV-K peptides has been reported in leukemia patients, suggesting a possible overexpression of this sequence in leukemic cells.”

Here we see that herpesviruses are shown to reactivate HERV, “Herpesviruses may also be a significant trigger of HERV expression in the CNS. Multiple reports have detected EBV, herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1), varicella-zoster virus (VZV), and human herpesvirus type 6 (HHV-6) in MS patient samples; all these herpesviruses have also been demonstrated to trigger the expression of HERVs.” 

It should be highly concerning to all that we find HERV-K in the presence of a live herpesvirus, as is the case with VARIVAX (varicella-zoster).  

Given the above information, it seems that all vaccines are inherently dangerous and each individual, not a government agency, should be making their own risk-to-benefit analysis for using these products. It also means that we are all participating in an experiment to which we did not consent and from which we are still learning about the unintended consequences of consuming such products. It is not a secret -- although rarely discussed by various media

outlets and medical professionals we entrust with our children -- that the infections we have vaccines for were acute, self-limited, common, childhood infections, as can be seen here in this very well-researched article.

Prior to vaccination your risk of dying from these infections was still less than your risk of dying from a lightning strike, choking, or falling in the shower.

It was uncommon for a child to experience an adverse outcome from these infections. Just like it is uncommon for a child to experience an adverse outcome with vaccination, perhaps we have exchanged one genetically susceptible child with another? Dr. James Lyons-Weiler said it best when he said “if we as a society enjoy collective benefit from protection from infectious diseases due to vaccines, then we as a society share the collective responsibility to protect those who are the greatest risk of harm from vaccines. Enough with the propaganda that says there is no risk, enough. Genetics and careful attention to reliable risk factors will play a fundamental role in protecting those among us who are most susceptible…”. 

As we witness an explosion in chronic disease states of our youth, including neurodevelopmental disorders, seizure disorders, severe allergies, autoimmune conditions, and cancer, we begin to realize that if you have a healthy child you are now a minority. Perhaps it is time to return to our roots and embrace natural medicines. Perhaps it is time to stop putting faith in pharmaceuticals and the doctors who exclusively prescribe them. Perhaps it is time we separate pharma and state.

Michelle Cotterman, RN APP is a co-founder of Health Freedom Ohio. She is the mother of two naturally raised children. Her continuing education focuses on Holistic Health and includes Polarity Therapy, Homeopathy, and Herbalism. Michelle has been studying the science behind vaccines and the vaccine industry since 2010.