For the first time, German TV MDR covers DNA contamination in Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine!
We are in a private laboratory in Magdeburg. Professor Brigitte König is examining Corona vaccines here. The result, all samples are contaminated.
„With foreign DNA that should not be in the vaccine in this quantity. From my point of view, the alarming result is that all 5 batches had significant foreign DNA in them, which are well above the limit. It’s about the BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine. 5 batches were given to the Magdeburg laboratory because there was a suspicion.“
Foreign DNA could be contained in the vaccine, and beyond the limit. According to WHO, the limit is a total DNA content of 10 nanograms per dose. It is important that this is not exceeded, because there is a risk that foreign DNA could penetrate human cells.
Brigitte König is an external professor at the medical faculty of the University of Magdeburg. She shows us the result of her privately conducted investigation. All 5 examined batches are contaminated. For the lowest concentration, the limit was exceeded by 83 times. The highest concentration found was 354 times the limit to König.
This is concerning. The client of the analysis is also a private individual. The biologist Dr. Jürgen Kirchner. He has been one of the vocal critics of mRNA vaccines for years. He operates a website called Gene Vaccines. There he also advertises his books written under a pseudonym. His last one is called „Sullied.“ He has also appeared on YouTubers like the controversial Corona critic Paul Brandenburg. And discussed with him his theses on vaccines. Also the findings from Magdeburg. When DNA contaminations are found in a vaccine, that are as far above the limits as we have found, then in my view a special paragraph of the Medicines Act automatically applies, that is paragraph 5. It says if a medicinal product is questionable, then it must be taken off the market. And the biologist tries to achieve this. In September, he was at a hearing in the Bundestag’s Petitions Committee on the topic of pandemic planning. Here he used the opportunity to present the analysis results from Magdeburg. These are gigantic exceedances of a limit for a really very questionable medicinal product. But do the vaccines actually contain foreign DNA? The accusation is not new.
Already in April 2023, American scientists found foreign DNA above the limit in the vaccines from BioNTech and Moderna. Also in this pre-publication of a Canadian study from the end of October, several scientists come to a similar conclusion. The researchers write, our results extend the existing concerns regarding vaccine safety. But are such traces of foreign DNA actually dangerous?
Humans constantly carry foreign DNA in themselves. This can come from food, but also if bacteria enter the lungs. These floating DNA snippets are digested in the gut by enzymes. But there is a difference with the mRNA vaccination. The vaccine contains so-called lipid nanoparticles. They smuggle the mRNA into the cells. They do not differentiate, however, whether they transport mRNA or DNA. Could foreign DNA thereby directly penetrate the cell nucleus?
That is at least the concern of this American researcher, Prof. Dr. Philip Buckhaults. He is a clear proponent of mRNA technology. Yet he too says he found DNA residues in Pfizer vaccine. Here at a hearing in the South Carolina Senate, he explains the potential consequences of DNA. By email he writes us, at the moment no one knows for sure, whether the foreign DNA has caused damage or will cause damage. But there is clearly a justified theoretical risk of genetic damage to long-lived stem cells. We asked several renowned German scientists about this concern.
Only a few reply to our request. Among them is Prof. Emanuel Wyler from the Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, an institute funded by the federal government. He deems it extremely unlikely that the DNA could have negative consequences. Further, he writes, DNA in vaccines is not a new topic and is also tested for, for example, in a flu vaccine. Until now, no one has been interested, or one rightly trusts that the Paul Ehrlich Institute as the responsible authority performs the testing work correctly. In my opinion, this shows that this is not about DNA in vaccines, but either about fundamentally questioning vaccinations, our best weapon against infectious diseases, or about creating a sensation with the issue of Corona.
However, Prof. Gerald Dyker, a chemist at the Ruhr University, does think that negative consequences are conceivable. He writes to us, against the background that one was under extreme time pressure, that the manufacturer decided, either without knowledge or with the acquiescence of supervisory authorities, to release the product with the remaining DNA impurities for mass vaccination. For Prof. Bernd Mühlbauer of the Drug Commission, however, it is still not clear at all, whether the vaccine is actually contaminated to a worrying extent. But he writes that residual amounts of DNA in the case of an mRNA vaccine cannot penetrate the cell nucleus and cause damage. Such experiments, including animal tests over several generations, are necessary and perhaps have already been conducted. And how do the authorities respond to the debate?
The Paul Ehrlich Institute is responsible for the surveillance and safety of vaccines. We want to know, whether they themselves have tested the vaccines for foreign DNA or at least checked the results from Magdeburg. The written response is that parameters such as the residual DNA content in the vaccine are only experimentally tested by the manufacturer. The Institute thus does not test the vaccines themselves for DNA contamination but relies on the manufacturers‘ test protocols. The fact that the authority neither tests itself nor checks the analysis results from Magdeburg causes surprise to Professor Brigitte König.
„I would have expected, or assumed, that the authorities would at least randomly check the end product for contamination and purity. Depending on the product, or if something else is inside. As I said, the authorities can do that. Especially the Paul Ehrlich Institute has the equipment for it.“
The competent Federal Ministry of Health questions the analysis from Magdeburg and points out that some of the tested batches were already expired, according to Dr. Kirchner’s notification. However, for the found foreign DNA this is irrelevant, says the scientist. The DNA in these lipid particles does not multiply. And is more likely to be decomposed. That is, if the vaccine is not expired, we might expect even higher values but not lower ones. The DNA does not multiply in a sterile vaccine.
Since the authorities apparently doubt the investigation results from Magdeburg, we want to have various batches tested ourselves. We contacted more than 20 laboratories, some of them at German universities, but also private providers who can conduct such analyses. From all, we received rejections or no response.
So, we failed to have a DNA analysis conducted independently once again. It would indeed be important to conclusively clarify the question of the DNA content. Because one reason for suspected DNA contamination could be the manufacturing process itself, which is different from the one used during the authorization study.
The vaccine used for the clinical studies was manufactured mechanically without the involvement of microorganisms. This production path is named Process 1 in the documents of the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Pfizer then switched to a different production technique, referred to as Process 2. Only very few subjects in the authorization study received this vaccine. Here, the material was supplied by genetically modified bacteria. This process was apparently less complex.
But did it actually pose a higher risk? That there were differences between the batches of the two different manufacturing processes has been a concern. Questions about comparability, characterization, and clinical suitability were raised. We ask BioNTech why the manufacturing process was changed nonetheless, but we do not receive an answer to this question. Regarding the suspected DNA contamination identified by the Magdeburg scientist, the company writes that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is not contaminated with DNA.
Furthermore, it states that the batches were subjected to comprehensive quality control by the manufacturer. The Magdeburg scientist says that she has now examined additional vaccine batches. Here too, she found foreign DNA.
However, we as an editorial team were not able to conclusively answer whether this analysis is indeed accurate and, most importantly, whether the suspected DNA contamination can cause harm. The most recent act in the debate is this official-looking letter from an association called Medical Treatment Association, which warns doctors about the vaccine. However, as informed by the responsible authorities, this is said to be a false report. ———————————–