by – L. Richardson
The insidious rise of mRNA contamination in natural food sources has sparked grave concerns among health advocates and conscious consumers. [1] Pushed by biotech firms under the guise of scientific progress, this disturbing trend threatens to disrupt the delicate balance of our diets and jeopardize human well-being on an unprecedented scale. [1] [2] As mRNA technology surreptitiously invades livestock production and agriculture, we must demand transparency in food labeling to expose the hidden risks of veterinary mRNA vaccines, biotech deception in food manufacturing, and the critique of lax regulations enabling genetic tampering across the entire food chain. [1] [2]
Alarmingly, this overreach of mRNA interference extends far beyond the much-debated COVID-19 vaccine rollout. Evidence suggests food animals were subjected to these experimental injections for years before the pandemic. The looming dangers of mRNA contamination of natural food sources, threats of biotech overreach in agriculture, and hazards of unchecked genetic engineering in our sustenance are not just potential risks but alarming realities that can no longer be ignored as consumer opposition mounts against this grave health risk. [1] [2]
Exposing mRNA Technology in Food Production
Understanding the Mechanisms
The future of vaccines may look more like eating a salad than getting a shot in the arm. Scientists at U.C. Riverside are exploring the possibility of turning edible plants like lettuce into mRNA vaccine factories [12]. 3 Messenger RNA (mRNA) technology, used in COVID-19 vaccines, teaches our cells to recognize and protect us against infectious diseases. 3 One of the challenges with this new technology is that it must be kept cold to maintain stability during transport and storage. If this new project succeeds, plant-based mRNA vaccines — which can be eaten — could overcome this challenge by storing them at room temperature [13]. 3
The key to making this work is chloroplasts, small organs in plant cells that convert sunlight into energy the plant can use. “They’re tiny, solar-powered factories that produce sugar and other molecules that allow the plant to grow,” said Juan Pablo Giraldo, an associate professor leading the research [13]. “They’re also an untapped source for making desirable molecules [13].” 3 3 In the past, Giraldo has shown that chloroplasts can express genes that aren’t naturally part of the plant by sending foreign genetic material into plant cells inside a protective casing [14]. 3
Unveiling the Motivations
The project’s goals, made possible by a $500,000 grant from the National Science Foundation, are threefold: showing that DNA containing the mRNA vaccines can be successfully delivered into the part of plant cells where it will replicate, demonstrating the plants can produce enough mRNA to rival a traditional shot, and finally, determining the correct dosage [15]. 3 “Ideally, a single plant would produce enough mRNA to vaccinate a single person,” said Giraldo [16]. 3 3
For this project, Giraldo teamed up with Nicole Steinmetz, a U.C. San Diego professor of nanoengineering, to utilize nanotechnologies engineered by her team to deliver genetic material to the chloroplasts. “Our idea is to repurpose naturally occurring nanoparticles, namely plant viruses, for gene delivery to plants,” Steinmetz said. “Some engineering goes into this to make the nanoparticles go to the chloroplasts and render them non-infectious toward the plants [17].” 3 4
Although U.C. Riverside’s project is still in the early research stage, this idea has sparked questions about creating and approving plants with vaccines and concerns about how this method could impact the state’s food supply. 5 There are challenges and limitations in consistency and methodology, such as plants having equal dosage, the appropriate dosage, and serving sizes based on the varying needs of children and adults. 5 Cross-contamination from farm to farm is an additional concern because strict greenhouse production could be expensive. 5 Receiving vaccines orally also has the potential to damage protein components in stomachs for digestion. 5 All hosting plants need to be eaten raw to fully receive the genes grown in the food, but spoilage of bananas, for example, happens quickly. 5
The Assault on Natural Nutrition by mRNA
Health Risks Unfolded
Introducing mRNA technology into our food supply poses grave health risks that cannot be ignored. Anaphylaxis, antibody-dependent enhancements, and deaths comprise the most severe side effects, albeit occurring in sparing numbers. 4 Anaphylaxis was reportedly seen in 2.5 cases per million doses administered within 15 minutes in 90% of the cases, with the reaction being to the inactive ingredients or excipients, not the active ingredients. 4 Orofacial adverse effects such as edema of the face, lips, and tongue have been reported in 1 in 1,000 cases, with facial edema more commonly observed in those with dermatological fillers, particularly with the Moderna Vaccine. 4
Bell’s palsy was also reported at a frequency 3.5–7 times higher than in the general population. 4 Antibody-dependent enhancement resulting from mRNA vaccines has ensured the exclusion of immunocompromised patients and those on immunosuppressant therapies from vaccine trials. The neutralizing antibodies resulting from vaccination set off immunological cascades in the host, which may further deteriorate the patient’s general medical condition and increase the risk of viral infection [18]. 4 Infections are the most common cause of death in the immunocompromised, and both variants of the mRNA vaccines are avoided.
The Natural vs. Modified Debate
Even though the genes being transferred occur naturally in other species, there are unknown consequences to altering the natural state of an organism through foreign gene expression [19]. 6 After all, such alterations can change the organism’s metabolism, growth rate, and response to external environmental factors. These consequences influence not only the genetically modified organism (GMO) itself but also the natural environment in which that organism is allowed to proliferate [19]. It’s crucial to ensure that this technology is used responsibly and with proper oversight to prevent unintended consequences.
Potential health risks to humans include the possibility of exposure to new allergens in genetically modified foods and the transfer of antibiotic-resistant genes to gut flora [19]. 6 Horizontal gene transfer of pesticide, herbicide, or antibiotic resistance to other organisms would not only put humans at risk but also cause ecological imbalances, allowing previously innocuous plants to grow uncontrolled, thus promoting the spread of disease among plants and animals [19]. 6
Furthermore, even with thorough testing for safety, some people would still resist consumable GMOs because of personal or religious beliefs. 6 The ethical issues surrounding GMOs include debate over our right to “play God,” as well as the introduction of foreign material into foods that are abstained from for religious reasons. Some people believe that tampering with nature is intrinsically wrong, and others maintain that inserting plant genes in animals, or vice versa, is immoral [19]. 6
Case Studies: The Real-World Impact of mRNA in Our Meals
Industry Examples:
In some cases, users have misrepresented the limited use of RNA-based vaccines in animals. 5 In reality, there are no COVID-19 mRNA vaccines licensed for animals, according to Marissa Perry, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Department of Agriculture [20]. 5 Some animals, particularly those in zoos considered susceptible, have received vaccines against COVID-19. Still, those immunizations do not rely on mRNA technology [20]. 5
Some RNA-based vaccines are licensed for animals, such as the customizable vaccine against the flu and other viruses in pigs offered by the pharmaceutical company Merck. 5 However, this approach predates the advent of human COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, and the technology is different. The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association has emphasized that there are no mRNA vaccines for any disease being used in cattle in the U.S. [20]. 5
The notion that an mRNA vaccine could be transmitted to humans through eating meat is not rooted in science [20]. 5 Besides the mRNA breaking down quickly, it’s unlikely it would survive the cooking process to be passed along to consumers hypothetically [20]. 5 There is also no evidence to support the notion that COVID-19 vaccines are being added to produce [20]. 5
Public Backlash:
Claims regarding COVID-19 vaccines “in your salad” have persisted online and recirculated due to misreadings or misinterpretations of several press releases or scientific research [21]. 7 Using Medicago as an example of an edible vaccine, as myriad anti-vaccine websites have, is misguided for several reasons — most notably the fact that their product was an injected vaccine and in no way edible [21]. 7
Using Medicago as an example of mRNA technology is equally problematic, as Medicago’s product in no way utilized or contained mRNA [21]. 7 Medicago aimed to produce a Virus Particle (VLP) vaccine that introduces materials that mimic portions of a virus to train the immune system to fight the actual virus [21]. 7
While the concept of edible vaccines containing mRNA is being researched, it is still in its infancy. 7 The bottom line is that plants that can produce vaccine ingredients are a research topic. Still, the idea is not to create edible food but to use plants to create active ingredients from food [21]. 7
The Hidden Agenda Behind the mRNA Push
Corporate Gain Over Public Health:
The relentless push for mRNA technology in our food supply is driven by the insatiable greed of biotech corporations, who prioritize profits over public health and safety. 8 These companies have captured regulatory agencies, manipulating them to serve their financial interests rather than protecting consumers. 8 The widespread belief that special interests have infiltrated regulation and that neither the government nor the public can prevent this understandably erodes public trust. It suggests that our political system cannot address such challenges. 8
Despite claims of scientific progress, the true agenda behind the mRNA push is to create a monopoly on food production, granting biotech giants unprecedented control over our sustenance. 8 By genetically modifying crops and livestock with mRNA technology, these corporations aim to patent and own the very building blocks of life, rendering farmers and consumers dependent on their proprietary products. 8
Regulatory Capture:
The phenomenon of regulatory capture, where agencies tasked with safeguarding the public interest become beholden to the industries they are meant to regulate, has played a significant role in the mRNA assault on our food supply. 8 Biotech firms have exploited lax regulations and captured regulatory bodies, ensuring that their profit-driven agenda takes precedence over scientific scrutiny and consumer safety. 8
Despite their proven safety and effectiveness, the FDA’s stubborn refusal to approve alternative, non-mRNA vaccines like Corbevax exemplifies this regulatory capture. 9 By demanding unnecessary and prohibitively expensive clinical trials, the FDA effectively blocks access to affordable, non-mRNA options, perpetuating the monopoly of pharmaceutical giants and their mRNA products. 9
Moreover, the FDA’s resistance to approving Corbevax through bridging studies, a standard practice for mRNA boosters from Moderna and Pfizer, exposes the agency’s double standards and bias toward mRNA technology. 9 This preferential treatment for mRNA vaccines, even when comparable protein-based alternatives like Novavax exist, raises serious questions about the FDA’s commitment to public health over corporate interests. 9
Strategies to Champion Natural Nutrition
Empowering Advocacy:
Amidst the relentless assault of mRNA technology on our food supply, a growing movement of conscious consumers and health advocates is rising to champion natural nutrition. 3 5 These grassroots efforts aim to empower individuals and communities to reclaim their right to pure, unadulterated sustenance, free from the insidious influence of biotech giants.
At the forefront of this movement are organizations dedicated to educating the public about the hidden risks of mRNA contamination and the deceptive practices of the food industry. 3 Through awareness campaigns, community outreach, and lobbying efforts, these advocates strive to expose the truth behind the mRNA push and rally support for stricter regulations and transparency in food labeling.
Furthermore, consumer advocacy groups are urging policymakers to develop a positive national strategy for biotechnology research and development that prioritizes public health over corporate interests. 5 They demand an open and frank dialogue with all stakeholders, ensuring that the voices of concerned citizens are heard and their concerns addressed. Only through collective action and unwavering resistance can the tide be turned against the mRNA assault on our natural food sources.
Reviving Traditional Agriculture:
As the battle against mRNA contamination rages on, a parallel movement is gaining momentum – reviving traditional, regenerative farming practices. 10 11 Indigenous communities and forward-thinking farmers are embracing ancient wisdom and sustainable agricultural methods that have stood the test of time, offering a viable alternative to the destructive path of genetic tampering.
Traditional Hawaiian farmers, for instance, are leading the charge by reviving ancestral practices that harmonize with the natural rhythms of the land. 10 Guided by lunar cycles, wind patterns, and oral traditions, they cultivate food forests free from pesticides, synthetic fertilizers, and harmful interventions. Their approach fosters a sustainable relationship between community and agriculture, reconnecting culture with the land.
Similarly, the principles of regenerative agriculture, rooted in indigenous knowledge, are gaining traction worldwide. 11 By emphasizing cover crops, crop rotation, composting, and minimal tillage, regenerative farmers nurture soil health, promote nutrient cycling, and combat climate change through carbon sequestration. 11 This holistic approach not only ensures food security but also fosters biodiversity and ecosystem resilience, offering a sustainable alternative to the destructive practices of industrial agriculture.
As the mRNA assault intensifies, the revival of traditional, regenerative farming practices emerges as a beacon of hope. It reminds us of our deep-rooted connection to the land and the wisdom of our ancestors. By embracing these time-honored methods, we can reclaim our food sovereignty, safeguard our health, and preserve the natural bounty of our planet for generations to come.
Conclusion
The intrusion of mRNA technology into our food supply represents a grave threat to public health and natural nutrition. The relentless pursuit of corporate profits has overshadowed ethical concerns and scientific scrutiny, paving the way for the genetic tampering of our sustenance. As conscious consumers, we must resist this assault on our food sovereignty and champion the revival of traditional, regenerative farming practices.
The path forward lies in empowering advocacy efforts that expose the hidden risks of mRNA contamination and the deceptive practices of the biotech industry. By rallying support for stricter regulations, transparency in food labeling, and a national strategy that prioritizes public health over corporate interests, we can reclaim our right to pure, unadulterated nourishment. Together, we must embrace the wisdom of our ancestors and foster a sustainable relationship between community and agriculture, safeguarding the natural bounty of our planet for generations to come.
FAQs
1. Is the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act still operational today?
Yes, the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act and its many amendments continue to serve as the legal foundation for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s regulation of all foods, drugs, biological products, cosmetics, medical devices, tobacco, and radiation-emitting devices.
2. What were the shortcomings of the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906?
The main issue with the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 was that it did not mandate government approval before new drugs could be marketed. Companies were allowed to sell new medicines without proving their safety or effectiveness. Due to these shortcomings, significant efforts were made to amend and strengthen the law by the mid-1930s.
3. Why was the Pure Food and Drug Act passed by Congress without significant opposition?
The Pure Food and Drug Act was quickly passed by Congress mainly due to public outrage sparked by Upton Sinclair’s 1906 novel, “The Jungle,” which exposed food adulteration and unsanitary practices in meat production. This public outcry led to a demand for federal oversight of public health and welfare.
4. What was the primary goal of enacting the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act?
The 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act, signed into law by President Theodore Roosevelt, aimed to ensure the safety and integrity of various consumer products by prohibiting the “manufacture, sale, or transportation of adulterated or misbranded or poisonous or deleterious food, drugs, medications, and liquors [22] [23].”
References
[1] – https://www.wolfoakfarm.com/blog/what-do-mrna-vaccines-mean-for-our-meat-and-dairy-supply
[2] – https://www.deseret.com/business/2024/03/20/mrna-covid-vaccine-food-supply-meat-pork/
[3] – https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/grow-and-eat-your-own-vaccines
[4] – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8611574/
[5] – https://tnfarmbureau.org/mrna-vaccines-as-edible-vaccines
[7] – https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mrna-entered-the-food-supply/
[9] – https://cepr.net/the-market-is-rigged-to-give-all-the-money-to-the-rich-the-case-of-covid-boosters/
[12] – We will grow to plant vaccines to eat | Shortly, https://en.futuroprossimo.it/2021/09/coltiveremo-vaccini-da-mangiare/
[13] – Edible Messenger-RNA – EIRENE YMIN. https://eireneymin.org/edible-messenger-rna/
[14] – U.S. Scientists Embark on Developing Edible Plant-based Vaccines- Crop Biotech Update (September 22, 2021) | Crop Biotech Update – ISAAA.org. https://www.isaaa.org/kc/cropbiotechupdate/article/default.asp?ID=19023
[15] – Edible Messenger-RNA – EIRENE YMIN. https://eireneymin.org/edible-messenger-rna/
[16] – Researchers from the University of California Riverside Investigate Plant-Based mRNA Vaccines. https://www.biopharminternational.com/view/researchers-from-the-university-of-california-riverside-investigate-plant-based-mrna-vaccines
[17] – Edible Messenger-RNA – EIRENE YMIN. https://eireneymin.org/edible-messenger-rna/
[18] – Vaccine-Associated Enhanced Disease. https://www.donnieyance.com/vaccine-associated-enhanced-disease/
[19] – Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) | Learn Science at Scitable. https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/genetically-modified-organisms-gmos-transgenic-crops-and-732/
[20] – Amid conspiracy theories circulating online, experts confirm COVID vaccines are not in the food supply – The Boston Globe. https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/04/28/nation/experts-confirm-covid-vaccines-are-not-food-supply/
[21] – Has Vaccine mRNA Entered the Food Supply via GMO Plants or Vaccinated Livestock? | Snopes.com. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mrna-entered-the-food-supply/
[22] – Everything You Need to Know About The Food Drug and Cosmetic Act. https://www.industries.veeva.com/blog/the-food-drug-and-cosmetic-act
[23] – (1934). Government Services. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1934.02750040044019
[24] – https://www.infowars.com/posts/are-there-vaccines-in-our-food-supply/
[25] – https://brownstone.org/articles/are-there-vaccines-in-our-food-supply/
[26] – https://brownstone.org/articles/food-corruption-fake-meat-gmos-and-beyond/
[27] – https://brownstone.org/articles/their-strategy-in-the-war-on-food/
[28] – https://brownstone.org/articles/the-enemies-of-food-freedom/
[29] – https://brownstone.org/articles/part-one-diet-injections-and-injunctions/
[30] – https://www.drugs.com/vet/porcine-epidemic-diarrhea-vaccine-rna.html
[32] – https://portal.nifa.usda.gov/web/crisprojectpages/1027610-novel-mrna-vaccine-technology-for-
[33] – https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fvets.2021.654289/full
[34] – https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/veterinary-science/articles/10.3389/fvets.2021.654289/full
[37] – https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/11/3/673
[38] – https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/2796427
[39] – https://archive.ph/z4qLk
[42] – https://www.livestockresearch.ca/uploads/cross_sectors/files/Final-D-Vaccines-White-Paper1.pdf
Critical Thinking Dispatch 
Leave a comment