Jessica Rose
speaker
147 appearances
1 recordings
1 series
first heard Nov 2024
last heard Nov 2024
Jessica Rose’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
Maybe soon. So the story develops. So they're using the construct of this Venezuelan equine encephalitis virus because it carries... this gene called RDRP. That's the RNA dependent RNA polymerase that allows that virus to optimize its own survival by being able to copy its own genetic material.
So like I said, instead of the, the, the virus junk and the replication machinery that they take out, they substitute in the spike gene. So that's the stuff that they put into people in Japan. Now, I'll say one more thing and then I'll tell you why I'm worried about this. So on November 11th, the FDA green lighted the phase one trialing of this exact same technology for H5N1 virus.
This is this bird flu virus that they're, they're, they're talking, they're using in the same language or they're using in the same sentence with the word pandemic. It's even in like the word pandemic is even in the title of the phase one study. And what they've done is instead of inserting spike genes, they've inserted the hemagglutinin and the neuraminidase genes from the H5N1.
So that in and of itself is kind of scary. And here's what I'd like everyone to do now as a thought experiment and the reason why I'm concerned. So As part of the phase one trial, there's 200 people in it, 18 to 80. The inclusion criteria list was anemic. They only had three points. The exclusion criteria was also really low.
Basically, anybody who had a serious adverse reaction to the modified mRNA shots is excluded. And the inclusion criteria, this is just a point of interest to make you think, included people who were able to get pregnant If you are of childbearing age, you should protect yourself during the trials. I just want to throw that there.
Nowhere in the inclusion or the exclusion criteria is there any mention of how many shots of the modified mRNA stuff they got, which begs questions about counterindications, or whether or not those people may be carrying replicating alpha viruses. Now we're going into hypothetical land here, but we have to because of something called RNA recombination, which is a real possibility here.
So imagine one of these people is infected with an alpha virus of some kind. All the alpha viruses have this RDRP gene that allows them to photocopy their own genetic material. Let's say they don't have many symptoms for some reason. So they get into the trial, they have some cells, let's say that some cells have active replication going on in them.
And this actually brings us back to that excellent point that Claire made about infection, because unless you have a very high viral load due to a lot of viral replication going on in many cells, you're not really having an infection. So let's just say you have a few cells with viral replication going on. Now, because these
These new self-amplifying RNA guys are encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles. We know that once someone gets injected with this stuff, that it has the potential to traffic everywhere. So let's hypothesize that one of these lipid nanoparticles reaches a cell in the body that has an active replication going on of an alpha virus.
What could potentially happen here, and this is hypothetical, but it could happen, is something called RNA recombination. So during the replication cycle, there's something that the virus can do called template switching.
In the presence of this foreign RNA that's introduced into the cell via the lipid nanoparticle, which is, you know, very efficient Trojan horse way to introduce foreign genetic material, it can swap out the photocopying paper, let's say, if you want to think about it that way, and form chimeric RNA.
Now, there is a possibility if that happens, because it does happen, that you could actually end up with a new virus. Now, whether or not that, like, there are a lot of things that have to line up in order for this to happen. So everybody don't get too scared yet. But the thing about this is, and I'm going back to what you and Claire were talking about, this has to have been tested.
This has to have been done. These questions need to have been answered. way before anybody was injected, because we're dealing with gene-based therapies. And you can't go back from this if we mess this up. And you're actually potentially looking at an actual, you know, biohazard in the making. So it also begs the question, why are they talking about pandemics with H5N1 bird flu all of a sudden?
What do you think? NSF. I certainly think that's a sign that they're messing with the virus. Same with the monkeypox. Why does... I mean, look, we had indigenous dengue fever break out in Southern California from a mosquito in Southern California the first time in history. The press, unconcerned. It was a major, major, major story in my mind. While there was a... about six weeks ago.
I believe there were a couple of cases. Yeah, big, big deal. But in the meantime, a single clade one of monkeypox shows up off a plane from Denmark or something. And oh my God, there's a headline on the front page of every newspaper.
The way this is being reported, the distortions and the lack of understanding of what they're even talking about and what is important and what's not important is making me insane. So I will ask you this question that I asked at the beginning. Why are we not holding the same ethical standards that we would for CRISPR generally? Why don't we? What happened? Is it hysteria?
Is it that just the fact that it's slipped through and being used so widely, they're just kind of leaning into it? What do you surmise? And let's get Dr. Craig in here on that as well. But Jessica, you first.
I think motive has changed dramatically. Yeah, the definitions are changing, the motives have changed. Maybe it has a lot to do with your point about people just not understanding. And I tend to veer toward that because like,
Just to give you an example of a self-amplifying phase one trial, if you even try to explain to the 200 participants what they were being injected with, is there any chance that any of them would understand the implications, the potential devastation even to the environment? Because if something goes wrong, these alpha viruses, they're shared among many mammalian species.
So it's like, we're not just talking about messing up our own, you know, let's say gene pools, I suppose. When you're talking about gene-based therapies, it can translate, pardon the pun, to other people.
Showing 101–120 of 147 · page 6 of 8
← Previous
Next →