Japan begins trial for gene therapy drug to grow new teeth in people who have missing teeth

We already know it is unsafe as proved by a siRNA injection that was approved for use in 2018 in the USA, and which is shockingly now being suggested for use in mRNA COVID vaccine-injured people.

December 21, 2024

A clinical trial is underway in Japan to test the safety of a drug that grows new teeth in people with missing teeth. It has been described as an “antibody treatment.”

This is disingenuous because it uses siRNA, a gene therapy technology.

Although it is claimed that the siRNA is locally administered, after the misinformation that the covid “vaccines” stayed at the site of the injection when in reality it was widely distributed throughout the body, should we trust them?

What is siRNA technology? Do we need trials to test if it is safe? No.

We already know it is unsafe as proved by a siRNA injection that was approved for use in 2018 in the USA, and which is shockingly now being suggested for use in mRNA covid vaccine-injured people.

Clinical Trials For Drug That Replaces Missing Teeth Underway

The following is a summary of an article published by Science Alert yesterday. You can read the full article HERE.

Japanese dentists, led by Katsu Takahashi, head of oral surgery at the Medical Research Institute Kitano Hospital in Osaka, are conducting clinical trials for a pioneering drug that aims to grow new teeth in people with missing teeth.

The drug works by blocking a protein called USAG-1, which is believed to awaken the dormant buds of a third generation of teeth hidden underneath the gums, a concept that challenges the widely accepted idea that humans only grow two sets of teeth.

The clinical trials, launched at Kyoto University Hospital in October, are administering the experimental medicine to adult test subjects with the primary goal of testing the drug’s safety, rather than its effectiveness.

The researchers are initially prioritizing patients with six or more permanent teeth missing from birth, a hereditary condition that affects around 0.1 percent of people and can cause severe trouble chewing.

The drug is aimed primarily at children, and the researchers hope to make it available as early as 2030, which could be a game-changer for those with the congenital disorder.

In a paper published in March 2023, the Japanese team said their “antibody treatment in mice is effective for tooth regeneration and can be a breakthrough in treating tooth anomalies in humans.”

Angray Kang, a dentistry professor at Queen Mary University of London, notes that the Takahashi group is leading the way in using antibodies to regrow or repair teeth, and that an antibody drug targeting a similar protein is already being used to treat osteoporosis.

Chengfei Zhang, a clinical professor in endodontics at the University of Hong Kong, describes Takahashi’s method as “innovative and holds potential,” but cautions that outcomes observed in animals do not always directly translate to humans.

The researchers are confident that the location of a new tooth in a mouth can be controlled by the drug injection site, and that if it grows in the wrong place, it can be moved through orthodontics or transplantation.

The trial participants are healthy adults who have lost at least one existing tooth, and while tooth regeneration is not the express goal of the trial, there is a slim chance that it could happen to subjects anyway, which would be a medical triumph.

If successful, the technology could directly extend the healthy life expectancy of people, particularly in Japan, which has the second-oldest population in the world, with over 90 per cent of people aged 75 or older having at least one tooth missing.

Except for teeth growing in the wrong place and needing transplantation, Science Alert makes it all sound so wonderful. But is it?

How Does the Tooth Regeneration Drug Work?

The Science Alert article claimed “The benefit of the approach is that teeth growth is being triggered in a natural way, through a process known as bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) signaling. Our bodies are naturally doing the work, without any complicated engineering of stem cells required.”

But is it “natural”?

Apart from mentioning the drug uses antibodies to grow teeth, the article doesn’t give details on how the drug works.

However, it provides a hyperlink to a Science Alert article in August 2023 titled ‘A Drug For Regrowing Teeth Could Be Available Within The Next Decade’.

This article highlighted a 2021 study on mice by Japanese researchers, once again without giving any details on how the drug works.

According to the study, Usag-1 siRNA might promote tooth regeneration in RUNX2-deficient mice. The researchers used cationised gelatine hydrogel as the system to deliver the drug, chemically modified siRNA, into cells.

The researchers used a combination of in vitro and in vivo experiments, including renal capsule transplantation of mouse mandibles treated with Usag-1 siRNA, to investigate the potential of Usag-1 inhibition for tooth regeneration.

We are once again reminded that experimentation on animals is cruel.

The authors said:

RNAi relies on siRNAs that target mRNAs based on high sequence specificity, with their use holding great promise for developing therapeutics directed against targets otherwise not addressable using current methods.

However, problems exist with the local administration of siRNAs in vivo: it is difficult to transfer siRNAs into target cells, it is difficult to sustain the effects through increased biostability, and an appropriate DDS [drug delivery system] is needed for selective delivery.

In the present study, we achieved RNAi using Stealth siRNAs, which are chemically modified to eliminate off-target effects. [Emphasis added]

We don’t understand enough of the science to be able to interpret the paragraph above in the context of the study as a whole, but, with a layman’s eye, the admission that problems exist with local administration of siRNAs in vivo (a living organism) and it is difficult to transfer siRNAs into target cells doesn’t sound like they should be allowed to experiment with siRNAs on humans.

The statement “an appropriate DDS is needed for selective delivery” should make anyone question whether the administration will be “local” as hoped.

If you’re wondering where or when the siRNA injection for humans began being described as an “antibody treatment,” the March 2023 paper mentioned in Science Alert’s article yesterday began the process of relabelling it.

The paper described the 2021 study on mice as: “the [ ] team reported using an antibody and siRNA against USAG-1 for tooth regeneration in mouse models.”

The next sentence dropped reference to the siRNA. It reads: “This team is currently validating the efficacy of USAG-1 antibody treatment in other mammalian models of tooth agenesis before beginning a phase 1 clinical trial.”

“Antibody treatment” sounds harmless compared to siRNA, doesn’t it?

Especially when we discover what siRNA is.

What is SiRNA?

siRNA, or small interfering RNA, is a class of double-stranded non-coding RNA molecules, typically 20-24 base pairs in length, that operate within the RNA interference (RNAi) pathway.

It interferes with the expression of specific genes by degrading messenger RNA (mRNA) after transcription, preventing translation.

In other words, it silences genes. It is gene therapy.

The video below, published 13 years ago, is a little more technical but demonstrates how complex and finely tuned processes within cells are.

After watching the video below would you let anyone inject you with anything that disrupts or changes any of these processes? We wouldn’t.

Nature Video: RNA interference (RNAi), 16 December 2011 (5 mins)

Yet in Agilent Technologies’ promotional video below, made two years ago, they are going full steam ahead on finding ways to silence our genes, develop gene-editing platforms and develop “vaccines” and gene replacements.

Agilent Technologies: Purification Your Way: siRNA to mRNA, 12 May 2022 (2 mins)

What is Usag-1?

Usag-1 is a secreted protein involved in various biological processes. It is involved in regulating tooth development and morphogenesis.

It is also expressed in other tissues including the kidney, dermal papilla and mammary gland, where it regulates cellular proliferation, differentiation and apoptosis (programmed cell death) in several biological processes (such as dentary morphogenesis, embryo implantation in the endometrium, and healing of bone fractures).

What is RUNX2?

RUNX2 (Runt-related transcription factor 2) is a crucial protein for osteogenesis, the process of bone formation.

It is a master transcription factor, meaning it regulates the expression of multiple genes involved in osteoblast differentiation and bone development. It plays a primary role in:

• regulating the expression of genes involved in osteoblast differentiation, including those encoding collagen type I, osteocalcin, and bone sialoprotein;

• cartilage hypertrophy as it is essential for the hypertrophy of cartilage at the growth plate, a process critical for bone development;

• regulating the expression of genes involved in cell migration and vascular invasion of bone; and,

• bone remodelling as it is involved in the regulation of bone remodelling, a process that maintains bone homeostasis.

A 2007 study found that RUNX2 may function as a tumour suppressor in some cell types and have oncogenic potential in others.

Considering it has been proved that the contents of the COVID injections did not stay at the site of injection and instead were distributed all over the body, do you trust siRNA products to be any different?

Will the siRNA affect not only teeth but also bones, kidneys and mammary glands, for example?

If you thought tooth regeneration was the first use of siRNA, you’d be wrong.

In August 2018, the US Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approved Onpattro (patisiran), a siRNA for the treatment of polyneuropathy, a rare genetic disease characterised by the buildup of abnormal amyloid protein.

READ MORE: New Class of Drugs Fulfils Promise of RNA-based Medicine, US Food and Drug Administration, 14 August 2018

Get Familiar With mRNA Vaccine Technology Technical Terms

Yesterday, Dr. Paul Alexander reposted an article he first published in September and has republished four times this month, given its significance. In it, he warned, “Get familiar with these mRNA technology vaccine-related technical terms for they will rule humanity long-term whether you like it or wanted it!”

The following is Dr. Alexander’s article with the lengthy title: ‘CRISPR/Cas9 (clustered interspaced short palindromic repeats; DNA editing, point mutation-gene insertion), mRNA technology vaccines (Malone Bourla Weissman et al.), siRNA (small interfering RNA), RNA helicase enzymes, ribonuclease targeting chimaeras (RIBOTACs) … these entities, especially CRISPR, siRNA, mRNA technology vaccines (encapsulated lipid-nano particle/LNP platform); get to know them.’ After his comments he republished an article posted by Sasha Latypova in June.

They are bringing a fake fraud avian bird flu, PCR manufactured, just like COVID. Be warned!

Is the vaccine efficacious or effective (proven in ideal and real-world settings), is it safe (proven safe where harms have been excluded via the proper duration of follow-up studies/RCTs etc.) and is it needed (is it something society demands or wants or can use or has value-added)? No, no, no.

These demons in pharma etc. do not care if you need it. They are giving it to you.

There is a line between good and evil, and we are at the line and crossed over into “evil.” These mRNA madmen and madwomen!

They must be called out, dragged into courts with judges and juries, examined under oath and if shown caused harm and deaths, as declared by judges and juries, then they must be jailed or executed.

mRNA gene-based technology vaccines were imposed on society, mandated, as part of OWS (the crown jewel of OWS) with no safety testing, nothing, despite out of the box showing the vaccine did not stop infection or transmission (thus non-sterilising) and thus was moot, dead, without care for the long-term implications and you could not stop them during covid.

The “powers at be” decided what they were going to do in order to gain power, control and money.

If a vaccine does not stop transmission, it cannot be mandated as confers no societal benefit. Period! Yet that did not stop the evil beasts we confronted at the CDC and FDA and HHS and NIH etc.

Did not stop our corrupt inept, academically lazy, intellectually sloppy, specious, non-sensical medical doctors, our scientists … no, no, no … they were power-drunk and money-craven.

And we are off the cliff now with this mRNA technology and it is bumping into AI (artificial intelligence) and the dangers AI poses.

The makers of AI, their intended uses. As soon as humanity discovered atomic or nuclear fission, what did we do? We invented the atomic bomb to kill people.

And we did. Human beings take technology and advancements and somehow figure out how to harm with it first and the problem with mRNA technology is that it gets at the very core of humanity and civilization, this being the human genome, DNA. And interferes with it. And we have no understanding of the long-term implications.

Yet we know one thing thus far:

The OWS mRNA vaccines (and DNA viral vector platforms that were also made) did not work, never worked, and caused tremendous harms and death. Still are!

I am going to study this further (while I have a decent enough understanding) and I wish to read Hulscher’s paper on siRNA (small interfering RNAs) and RIBOTACs as well as Sasha Latypova’s rebuttal that raises serious and key questions.

Latypova’s questions are really simple, and they are mine which is, all of the implications of present mRNA technology and vaccine, all of the drawbacks and harms, apply to siRNA technology etc. Also not studied on populations, not studied for harms, not studied for long-term implications on DNA and the human genome.

In short, based on the molecular tools (all surrounding manipulation in some manner of human DNA or genetic material) I describe below, and their evil intentions (the makes), our daily lives will be changed forever with this mRNA (RNA) technology.

This is their intention, big business, Big pharma, big evil, big cabal, big globalists, which is to make perpetual money, never-ending, and at our expense.

They do not care about your well-being. This is about money. These beelzebub beasts have no care for our safety and survival. Just their fame, money, power and control. Worse.

If we do not get on top of this now, if we do not understand this and have the urgent necessary discussions societally, then this Malone, Bancel et al. mRNA technology and gene-based vaccine and platform, it’s unison with CRISPR, siRNA etc., then we will be in serious harm trouble, from a humanity point of view.

Yet it is happening “while you sleep.”

The “powers at be” are rolling this out and mainstreaming it, and we seem powerless. But if we do not stop this now, our lives will be changed negatively forever – for there have never been the proper clinical studies and particularly study that could “exclude” harms.

No study has been or is slated to demonstrate safety in this era of mRNA technology. Moreover, as of now, the evidence clearly shows this technology is problematic and dangerous.

The Operation Warp Speed (“OWS”) mRNA covid vaccines were not needed, did not work and showed a dangerous prior safety history in all attempts to study it or apply it, and have been a catastrophic failure.

Yet the merchants of death, the modern-day Mengeles, Klaus Barbies, Hesses etc. with their mRNA technology, will not stop.

What do we do? Well, we have to stop them! So, who will be the mRNA technology Pretorians? The Vanguards to safeguard humanity?

What Robert Malone, the late Moncef Slaoui, Albert Bourla, the late Stéphane Bancel, Ugur Sahin, Katalin Karikó, Drew Weissman, General Perna, Ozlem Tureci et al, these people, have done to the world with a safety untested mRNA technology and the Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech vaccine is monstrous. Monstrous.

READ MORE: Radical Muslim Operation Warp Speed Architect Hanged at GITMO

READ MORE: Military Arrests Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla. (Captured in Newport Beach California on August 7, 2023 upon his return to the United States from ATHENS, Greece)

READ MORE: Moderna CEO Hanged at GITMO

I continue to call for a complete ban, not a study of, not a review, but a 100% ban on all RNA products, any mRNA product, lipid nanoparticle (“LNP”) product, or any such OWS “countermeasure” product as part of any human vaccines e.g. the current mRNA covid-related vaccines must be stopped in full.

All the evidence to date shows these mRNA gene-based technology vaccines to be ineffective (negative effectiveness, non-sterilising or non-neutralising) and harmful, deadly. Must be stopped in toto. And if I can get it back into the genie box, then forever! It has no place.

mRNA vaccines under OWS were not needed, never needed and did not work! Anyone who said they worked and that they saved lives … lied to you! Deceived you!

Complete and now! There is no evidence anywhere in the entire world showing the synthetic mRNA (on its own) technology or as part of the LNP (delivery platform) is safe or effective.

It must be stopped! It has shown itself to be just too harmful. There are no – not one, none, zero – randomised clinical trials and no proper comparative effectiveness research studies that have shown that any of the OWS mRNA technology gene-based vaccines (in adults or children) worked to reduce hospitalisations, intensive care unit (“ICU”), severe harms or deaths. Not one! As of today!

And all of this work remains on emergency use (“EUA”) because the FDA knows if they put these through their proper regulatory assessment framework, their BLA process, that they will fail. So, these must remain on EUA. Imagine that!

We have been set up as a society, as people by evil people.

I might be willing to consider that these entities (listed above) will all need to be taken back to the laboratory for at least 100 more years of bench research using all types of animal models etc. (harms completely excluded) and with the proper ethical debate before ever brought back in front of the population to consider in a vaccine and always, in 100 years, based on proper benefit versus risk-informed consenting.

A vaccine maker making something does not mean the population has to accept it. Or will accept it? 100 years before we look at this again and a core aspect is it must be shown that it does not and cannot interface or re-integrate or interfere in any manner, with the underlying human DNA. Conclusively shown.

Exhaustive definitive evidence of safety with harms excluded, remains a basic ingredient for us to even look at this in 100 years and no sooner.

For us to discuss, not for us to implement. The population must be core to any debate as to if they want it. A religious component is key also.

I have tabled the key molecular entities here within this new deadly arena of mRNA technology platform vaccines (created by Malone, Bourla, Bancel, Sahin, Weissman, Katalin, Karikó et al. and disastrously used in the fake fraud PCR-created covid non-pandemic yet positioning to become part of your daily life replacing all therapeutics) that include the CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing platform and siRNA.

We are entering into a very dangerous arena now, that will transform our lives. We argue catastrophically. Many involved seek to make money. Period.

mRNA technology researchers, vaccine makers like Pfizer, Moderna etc. They do not care about the ethics of this or the safety of this. Just money! Thus far mRNA vaccines have proven ineffective and deadly.

These molecular entities and tools e.g. CRISPR/Cas9 (clustered interspaced short palindromic repeats; DNA editing, point mutation-gene insertion), mRNA technology vaccines (Malone, Bourla, Weissman et al), siRNA (small interfering RNA), RNA helicase enzymes, ribonuclease targeting chimaeras (RIBOTACs) are changing and about to radically transform our lives.

In terrible ways, given the harms we know so far. Moreover, the type of ethics debates needed are not happening.

Not because pharma can create something means we the population want it or desire it.

So, these molecular tools and entities I have named above now must be studied and discussed, and Hulscher et al. and Sasha Latypova now centres the debate.

I thank them.

My first blush tells me that it is outrageous to consider an mRNA vaccine (siRNA etc.) to fix or detoxify or suppress or de-activate the existing mRNA technology vaccine (created by Malone, Bourla, Bancel, Sahin, Weissman, Katalin, Karikó et al).

We need proper oversight of all of this insanity.

“Pre-medication,” or how to sell $50 worth of generic drugs for $600,000!

The curious case of Onpattro, siRNA in lipid nanoparticles now being considered by some as a potential treatment for mRNA injuries.

By Sasha Latypova, 17 June 2024

A couple of weeks ago, many of us were rather shocked by the following publication ‘BREAKING Publication – Strategic Deactivation of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccines: New Applications for siRNA and RIBOTAC Therapy’ by Dr. Peter McCullough:

As the world is waking up to nearly two-thirds with potential future disease and disability from the long-lasting mRNA coding for the dangerous Wuhan Spike protein, the search is on for ways to stop this molecular monster from doing more damage.

In their review paper, Huschler, McCullough and Marotta proposed that treatment of mRNA-induced vaccine injury may be mitigated with small interfering RNA (“siRNA”) and ribonuclease targeting chimaeras (“RIBOTACs”).

Quoting from the Substack post by Dr. McCullough:

It may seem unfathomable for doctors to inject more RNA to deactivate Pfizer and Moderna synthetic mRNA that has accumulated in the body after multiple injections. However, siRNA used today in my practice (patisiran, inclisiran) appears to be safe and well-tolerated only notable for injection site reactions.

I am one of the people for whom this idea is unfathomable and I would like to provide some reasons as to why. I am not accusing anyone of anything. I believe that there is important information missing from this review, which I am going to discuss here.

While proposing siRNA as a treatment for mRNA injury, the paper does not discuss the current on-market siRNA drugs (patisiran – Onpattro, and inclisiran- Leqvio) in detail.

To address Leqvio briefly: it is administered by subcutaneous injection that targets the liver, has many severe counterindications, is known to cause foetal damage, has warnings for cardiovascular adverse events (while being indicated to presumably improve cardiac condition!), and it has never been shown to improve any real health outcomes.

As many “new-new-science” drugs on the market, it treats test results, flowcharts, “standards of care” and income statements, not real humans.

It is designed to “modify lipids,” i.e. make your cholesterol test look better in the eyes of the establishment or government medicine. The label states that “the effect of inclisiran on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality has not yet been determined.”

This article will focus on Onpattro, as it is similar to the covid injections, being a synthetic RNA (albeit a much smaller strand vs mRNA), encapsulated in LNP containing polyethylene glycol (“PEG”) – a known extremely toxic substance, which may account for a large percentage of known covid injection toxicities.

Onpattro (patisiran) is an injectable small interfering RNA that may be used to treat polyneuropathy (multiple nerve damage) caused by hereditary transthyretin-mediated amyloidosis (“ATTR”) in adults.

ATTR occurs when the liver produces faulty transthyretin (“TTR”) proteins and TTR deposits accumulate in organs and tissues, most commonly the peripheral nerves. While I have not delved into ATTR, when exactly it was discovered and what evidence makes it hereditary, I strongly suspect that it is yet another bullsh*t new “rare genetic disease” made up as a cover for vaccine and/or environmental toxicity.

The mechanism of action for Onpattro is described as breaking down mutant and wild-type transthyretin (“TTR”) proteins through RNA interference.

TTR is a protein primarily produced by the liver, that carries the thyroid hormone thyroxine and retinol (vitamin A) throughout the body.

Onpattro was FDA-approved on 10 August 2018. Reviewing the FDA-approved label, I was immediately struck by the following (p.1, Dosage and Administration):

Premedicate with a corticosteroid, acetaminophen, and antihistamines

All patients should receive premedication prior to ONPATTRO administration to reduce the risk of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) [see Warnings and Precautions (5.1)]. Each of the following pre-medications should be given on the day of ONPATTRO infusion at least 60 minutes prior to the start of infusion:

• Intravenous corticosteroid (e.g., dexamethasone 10 mg, or equivalent)

• Oral acetaminophen (500 mg)

• Intravenous H1 blocker (e.g., diphenhydramine 50 mg, or equivalent)

• Intravenous H2 blocker (e.g., ranitidine 50 mg, or equivalent)

Pre-medication here is a requirement and involves 4 generic drugs, including a steroid, a known big “fire extinguisher” for any inflammatory symptoms.

It is not something that should be used long-term. Yet, here we have prescribed chronic use of it, for life.

Long-term side effects of steroids include:

• Osteoporosis (bone loss).

• Aseptic necrosis (death of bone tissue).

• Adrenal insufficiency (reduced adrenal gland function).

• Cataracts.

• Glaucoma.

• Increased risk of infections.

• Mood disorders (depression, anxiety, psychosis).

• Reduced libido.

• Weight gain and obesity.

• Skin thinning and easy bruising.

• Hair loss.

• Increased risk of diabetes.

• High blood pressure.

• Cardiovascular disease.

Other risks:

• Withdrawal symptoms when stopping steroid use, such as fatigue, muscle weakness and joint pain.

• Increased risk of developing osteoporosis and fractures.

• Reduced immune system function.

• Increased risk of infections, including pneumonia and tuberculosis.

• Increased risk of gastrointestinal problems, such as stomach ulcers and bleeding.

Was Onpattro, the first-ever synthetic RNA product approved for market, ever studied alone, without the use of 4 “pre-medications”? Turns out, no!

I found the published Phase 3 study for Onpattro, based on which it received the FDA approval. In my opinion, the study has a lot of highly questionable design features. I am not a clinical trial statistician, so I can’t provide a re-analysis and I am not sure it is possible from the information given in the paper.

I am just going to list what I find very concerning:

1. The study was small (~225 patients enrolled, 193 completed the study), and the number of clinical sites is very large 44 in 19 countries.

This means, on average, 1 clinical trial site handled ~4-5 patients in the period of ~3+ years it took to complete the study.

A small study divided among a large number of international sites is a recipe for large variability in a small dataset, and also an easy scenario for data manipulation.

This is also a market-capture strategy. Pay lavish fees to every “key” doctor in a particular disease area to participate in the clinical trial where they might have to see a couple of patients a year and they become your devoted sales team.

They get to be co-authors of the prestigious NEJM paper discussing “first,” “breakthrough,” “innovative” tech that Elon Musk says will cure cancer one day!

Who cares about little things like data variability, we are saving the world here!

2. While using 5 (!!!) drugs in the study regimen (4 “pre-medications” + Onpattro), none of them are studied alone. Onpattro is never studied alone.

The 4 pre-meds are not studied alone in this patient population either! We have no idea what each drug does by itself in this patient population.

There are only 2 arms in the study – “pre-meds”+ saline IV and “pre-meds”+Onpattro.

This is not a valid clinical trial design for a new medicine, and remember that this was the first and only “real” approval of RNA+LNP therapeutic. So, we are not just talking new medicine, but an entirely new medicine class.

3. siRNA (just as mRNA products) is a pro-drug! It makes your liver act in a certain way and produce the medicinal effect (allegedly).

Again, combining a pro-drug with 4 drugs – who knows what interactions are happening? Nobody does.

4. The patients in the treatment arm were allowed to leave the study if the treatment didn’t work for them. Reasonable for severely ill people.

However, this of course creates a bias for the study results, similar to what happens to your GPA if you are allowed to drop a course that you know you are going to fail. It is not explained in the paper whether this bias was properly handled in the statistics.

5. The study was not entirely blinded. Due to infusion reactions, which were far more numerous and characteristic in the active group of the study, it is likely that the investigators became unblinded after the first visit where a patient experienced a particular reaction.

There was no mention of how this potential bias was handled.

6. The rate of adverse events was a staggering 97% in both placebo and active groups, but there was a much higher rate of severe and serious adverse events in the placebo group (4 generics + IV saline) vs the treatment group.

The frequency of severe adverse events (28% in the patisiran group and 36% in the placebo group) and serious adverse events (36% and 40%, respectively).

Adverse events leading to discontinuation of the trial regimen occurred more frequently with placebo (14%) than with patisiran (5%).

Death occurred in seven patients (5%) in the patisiran group and in six patients (8%) in the placebo group. All seven deaths in Onpattro group were cardiac arrests or failure.

All deemed “unrelated”! This is absolutely staggering – 7 deaths in 18 months in 140 people who all received “new, innovative, breakthrough, we-are-going-to-Mars” medicine. Same cause of death.

At best, I would consider this study inconclusive.

The study proclaims that Onpattro is efficacious and similarly “safe” as the placebo regimen. However, from the presented data, a conclusion can be made that the 4 generic drugs in the “placebo” regimen are dangerous for this patient population.

In addition, a conclusion can also be made that the apparent “efficacy” of Onpattro is simply due to the study design that favoured those in whom the 4 generics produced an improvement (steroids will make some people feel much better) to complete the Onpattro group of the study.

In other words, the $50 regimen can be now marketed for $600K!

Another reason that I think siRNA is not a great idea to treat the mRNA injury: the covid jabs already contain (in addition to the toxic PEG) synthetic siRNA and miRNA in unpredictable quantities!

Therefore, it is possible that covid vaccine injuries at least in some people are DUE TO these substances, and thus proposing the same as treatment is like pouring gasoline on a fire.

I have reported on this eons ago. At the time of issuing the EUA for these injections, the manufacturers could not demonstrate that they were able to make mRNA-LNP products even close to the specification.

The RNA is supposed to be a certain length of molecule to “instruct” your cells to make the specific antigen, remember? It’s supposed to be the mRNA for the “Wuhan variant” or for “Omicron” or for “RSV” and those are quite different mRNAs!

However, the ability to make such precise molecules reliably has never been demonstrated, by anyone.

The regulators simply changed the prior standard of acceptance of RNA conformity to 50% of the batch being approximately the weight that the specified molecule should have and the rest could be shards and pieces of RNA, including siRNAs and miRNAs.

All of this was of course based solely on manufacturer self-certification, no independent analysis of batches was done by regulators.

However, we have a lot of data from independent vial tests since then. One such analysis was done by Vanessa Schmidt-Kruger in Germany in 2022, and here are her results for RNA composition by weight (length) in a Pfizer vial.

The first line is what was supposed to be found for RNA sequence in a Pfizer vial which is claimed to induce the cells to make a very specific protein against the “Wuhan” variant of SARS-Cov-2 (should be 4,300 nucleotides in length).

The rest of the lines are what was actually found.

Detail:

None of the findings correspond to what is supposed to be there for mRNA molecule composition. There are some strands that would pass the weight (length) test set by the FDA’s fake-acceptance criteria, but none have the composition that is claimed to produce some specific protein!

There are many shorter clusters of RNA which would further degrade into shorter components such as siRNA or miRNA. It is important to emphasise, that all these designations are models.

There isn’t even a consensus on what the model of miRNA should be.

Side note: if you need another confirmation that it is not possible to make weaponised pandemic-causing viruses via gain-of-function molecular engineering in a laboratory, this is it.

You are looking at the current, technological cutting-edge, state-of-the-art precision capabilities of making RNA viruses in labs!

The gain-of-function uses the same non-functioning biomanufacturing tools to allegedly build even larger very precise RNA constructs (full genome SARS-CoV is ~30K base pairs), reproducibly, in quantity, without a single error!

They can’t make an RNA strand of ~4000 nucleotides to specification, even when it’s stabilised and encased in LNP, yet the fear porn producers tell you they can certainly make a “live virus” with scary-sounding features like “HIV insert” and “furin cleavage site.”

This is when even 1 nucleotide error/change renders a potentially lethal virus into a dud. Yet, we must believe this is a world-ending scenario and demand banning this dangerous activity everywhere, but conveniently forgetting Fort Dietrick, because they are just poor confused soldiers following orders from late Antony Fauci and also forgetting that this activity is already internationally banned. I agree, let’s ban this some more.

READ MORE: Chronology of Deep State Assets executed by the US Military (Part XXIV – Anthony Fauci)

Finally, let’s examine the financial model.

In the United States, the cost of Onpattro is around $10,313 for a supply of 5 millilitres, depending on the pharmacy. The annual cost is estimated to be around $451,430 to $677,145 per patient, depending on the patient’s weight.

Inclisiran (Leqvio), an add-on therapy to other LDL-lowering drugs (statins and monoclonal antibodies), is priced at $3,250/dose. I could not find annual cost estimates.

In case you didn’t know this, Medicare is not allowed to negotiate drug prices and all private insurers follow Medicare’s pricing lead paying whatever price is demanded by pharma companies.

Additionally, insurers are NOT interested in lowering the costs of healthcare in general or drugs in particular. That is because their business model is based on charging a “premium,” which is dependent on the prior years’ cost increases.

The more costs increase, the higher the “premium,” and thus profit.

Finally, your doctor is also not interested in treating you with cheap generic medicines or things that make no profit at all, like lifestyle and diet changes.

That is because the “physician charge” component for generics is zilch, while a $600,000/year treatment will have a pretty hefty allowance in the physician’s bill for the in-office infusion. Yes, they are all in on it.