Saturday, January 10, 2026

56. CẢNH BÁO ĐỎ: NGUY CƠ TÍCH HỢP GIEN XUYÊN THẾ HỆ

(Click to view English / Vietnamese substack version)

---------------------------------------

RED ALERT: THE RISK OF TRANSGENERATIONAL GENETIC INTEGRATION

Trần Thế Hiệp

Email: tranthehiep@proton.me

Index

1) Three scientific reports from late 2025 reveal: COVID-19 mRNA vaccines possess the potential to infiltrate human sperm, the potential for genetic integration, and the potential for oncogenesis:

=> Global risk of cancer, genetic alteration, and transgenerational impact.

2) In-depth technical documentation: 50 scientific studies.

2.1. Scientific studies on the biodistribution and prolonged persistence of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the body.

2.2. Scientific studies on residual DNA contamination in the vaccine.

2.3. Scientific studies on the risk of genetic integration due to DNA contamination.

2.4. Scientific studies on the risk of cancer due to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

2.5. Biological mechanism chain, Shift in the scientific status quo, and Global biological risk.

3) A call to action.

---------------------------------------

Preface

Since late 2020, mRNA COVID-19 vaccines have been administered to billions of people worldwide. At the present time (early 2026), a number of new studies have emerged, raising significant questions regarding their potential impact on the human genome, an issue that may not cause immediate, visible harm but carries unpredictable, long-term consequences. This article does not claim to provide definitive proof of a disaster; rather, it provides a pharmacovigilance alert regarding a global biological risk that could lead to a widespread increase in cancer and transgenerational genetic integration. This warning is based on the convergence of multiple layers of scientific evidence with over 50 cited sources. As the shift in the scientific status quo becomes visible, via new pieces of the puzzle and a complete biological mechanism chain, a catastrophic picture emerges with stark realism. The signal latency of cancer and genetic alteration explains why large-scale evidence is not yet available. Yet this risk demands serious consideration and immediate action to prevent an irreversible medical error – as happened with the DES and Thalidomide tragedies.

1) Three scientific reports from late 2025 reveal: COVID-19 mRNA vaccines possess the potential to infiltrate human sperm, the potential for genomic integration, and the potential for oncogenesis:

By the end of 2025, numerous scientific studies had been published, revealing a serious issue regarding the biosafety of mRNA COVID vaccines:

i) Scientific Study No. 1, from Israel: detected COVID vaccine mRNA in blood, sperm, and the placenta hundreds of days after injection. (transgenerational risk)

ii) Scientific Study No. 2, from the USA: found a chimeric gene sequence in the patient's tumor DNA, containing both residual gene segments from the COVID vaccine and human genes, fused together. This indicates that mRNA COVID vaccines pose a risk of integrating into the human genome, and could be a plausible cause of cancer.

iii) Scientific Study No. 3, from Japan: Spike protein from the COVID vaccine was found in cancerous tumors hundreds of days after injection, indicating a potential connection to or contribution to the promotion of cancer. (analogous to fingerprints at the scene)

Scientific Warning:

  • The above scientific studies are not theoretical analyses, but laboratory reports. These  empirical reports reveal the pieces of a potential catastrophic picture: (i) COVID-19 mRNA vaccines exhibit abnormal biodistribution and persistence, (ii) pose a risk of genetic alteration that may lead to oncogenesis, and (iii) can result in transgenerational genetic integration if such alterations occur in sperm or the placenta.
  • With billions of doses administered, if these risks become reality, this will be a global catastrophe of cancer and transgenerational genetic alteration, with irreversible consequences. (Part 2 of this article will lay out the complete biological mechanism chain, with the latest studies showing this to be entirely plausible.)

Although the level of risk has not been clearly determined, the severity of the issue is too great to be easily dismissed. Consequently, this report issues a Pharmacovigilance Alert of the highest order:

  • According to the precautionary principle in biosafety, [4] mRNA COVID-19 vaccines must be thoroughly investigated for their safety, specifically regarding the risks of cancer, genetic integration, and transgenerational effects.
  • This risk must be widely communicated and thoroughly investigated to ensure the safety of all of humanity as well as future generations.

The following section with over 50 references will demonstrate the convergence of scientific evidence and the biological mechanism chain leading to genetic integration – thus, clarifying the comprehensive picture of a catastrophe that must be prevented.

2) In-depth technical documentation: 50 scientific studies

The three reports mentioned above are important signals, but they are not the only ones. In this section, the article will present a broad picture with the following aspects:

i) Scientific studies on the biodistribution and prolonged persistence of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the body.

ii) Scientific studies on residual DNA contamination in the vaccine.

iii) Scientific studies on the risk of genetic integration due to DNA contamination.

iv) Scientific studies on the risk of cancer due to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine.

v) Biological mechanism chain, Shift in the scientific status quo, and Global biological risk.

2.1. Scientific studies on the biodistribution and prolonged persistence of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in the body:

Following Pfizer's own biodistribution report, [5] numerous scientific studies have confirmed the presence of mRNA or spike protein in various locations throughout the body, with a persistence time much longer than initially claimed. [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] Most notably:

In October 2025, a study from Israel, conducted by scientists from various universities, institutes, and laboratories, was published. [1a] [1b]

  • The report utilized PCR testing confirmed by Sanger sequencing, detecting vaccine RNA in the blood and placenta of 88% of the vaccinated samples, in the sperm of 100% of the vaccinated samples, and in the semen of 50% of the vaccinated samples.
  • Notably, the detection rate of gene segments was very high even 200 days after injection!
  • The report also noted the detection of small amounts of vaccine RNA in the blood and placenta of unvaccinated individuals, though its origin was not determined. Various hypotheses must be raised for investigation, including “shedding,” which is the transmission of vaccine material from the vaccinated to the unvaccinated—a biological issue mentioned in Pfizer's clinical trial documentation [15] but for which no results have been published!

The prolonged persistence of mRNA and spike protein in the body is also a concerning issue, as a longer duration increases the associated risks.

  • The reality is that the COVID vaccine is not natural mRNA that readily degrades, but rather modified mRNA (m1Ψ), called modRNA, and this modRNA produces a spike protein that is slightly different (2 amino acids) from the natural spike protein in the virus. The study “Long‐lasting, biochemically modified mRNA, and its frameshifted recombinant spike proteins in human tissues and circulation after COVID‐19 vaccination” clearly specifies this issue. [16]
  • Therefore, both the mRNA and the spike protein produced by the vaccine are many times more stable and persistent than what was claimed, and experimental evidence has verified this matter.

These reports show:

  • Finding spike protein in skin cancer cells (Sano report from Japan) is entirely plausible.
  • The fact that gene segments from the vaccine can enter the blood, sperm, and placenta (Israel report) is also plausible.
  • Both the spike protein and mRNA persist abnormally long in the body, and therefore, the risks they carry are higher than normal.

However, the issue does not end there. Prolonged persistence and widespread biodistribution act as a force multiplier for any potential harmful agents within the vaccine, particularly those with the risk of genomic integration. We will examine this issue in the following section.

 

2.2. Scientific studies on residual DNA contamination in the vaccine:

In 2023, Kevin McKernan's research group published the report “Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose”. [17a] [17b]

  • The study discovered a concerning issue: mRNA COVID vaccines contain a significant amount of residual foreign gene fragments – plasmid DNA.

A few months prior, independent investigations and authorization documents showed that: during clinical trials, the Pfizer vaccine was manufactured using one process (Process 1), but when switching to mass production, a different process was used (Process 2). [18] [19]

  • When manufacturing mRNA vaccines according to Process 2, they first use plasmid DNA from bacteria (E. coli), convert it into RNA, and then must purify the remaining residual DNA contaminants. [19] However, the actual purification was not as good as in theory. The result is that instead of being purified, the fragmented residual DNA contamination reached levels of up to thousands of nanograms per dose, hundreds of times higher than the current standards for residual DNA in vaccines! [20] [21]

Following this, there have been many different independent reports confirming the presence of residual DNA contamination in the vaccine. [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26]

  • In September 2023, Prof. Phillip Buckhaults of the University of South Carolina College of Pharmacy testified before the U.S. Congress regarding the discovery of billions of DNA fragments in each vaccine dose, while expressing concern over the risk of gene insertion and cancer. [24] This event included a publicly presented video clip of over 30 minutes that garnered attention in the research community. [27]
  • In 2024, two scientific studies from Germany by leading research groups, Brigitte Koenig and Ulrike Kaemmerer, were officially published. These studies conducted actual experiments and determined that the amount of contaminant DNA residue from the Pfizer vaccine production process exceeded the allowable limits by hundreds of times, with some vials exceeding it by 500 times! [21] [22]

In December 2024, the report “A rapid detection method of replication-competent plasmid DNA from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines for quality control” showed that the amount of residual DNA was 6 to 470 times higher than the allowable limit. [28] It is also noteworthy that the title of the report itself emphasizes that the plasmid DNA is “replication-competent”; this clearly requires thorough examination!

  • This study was conducted at an FDA laboratory, and the news portal of the Ministry of Health of Vietnam also posted this information. [29] This report from an FDA laboratory can be seen as a milestone closing nearly two years of debate. The issue is no longer whether there is residual DNA in the vaccine, but whether it has biological harm and, if so, to what extent?

Because, similar to mRNA, these residual DNAs also have the capability of entering the bloodstream of vaccinees:

  • The report “The bloodstream of mRNA vaccinated individuals (both Pfizer and Moderna) shows DNA expression vector contamination, including SV40 and kanamycin-resistant gene sequences” demonstrated that possibility, based on detailed data from previously published studies!! [30a][30b]

In short, the manufacturing process change resulted in a product different from what was tested in clinical trials. Reports from the FDA's own laboratory show that the actual vaccine contains excessive contaminants – and these contaminants (residual DNA with SV40 sequences) are the crux of the entire issue.

 

2.3. Scientific studies on the risk of genetic integration due to DNA contamination:

Although health authorities constantly reassure the public that mRNA vaccines cannot cause genetic integration, many of the arguments used by health authorities to dismiss the risk are not truly satisfactory.

  • One of the most fundamental arguments is that the vaccine does not contain the reverse transcriptase enzyme, so it cannot convert RNA into DNA for genetic integration. However, the discovery of residual DNA contamination completely changes the issue: the risk of genetic integration no longer stems from the mRNA (the main component of the vaccine), but from residual DNA (contamination from the actual production process). Therefore, this risk is entirely grounded in molecular biology theory, without any need for a reverse transcriptase enzyme in the vaccine.
  • The primary mechanism is: mRNA vaccines contain lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), whose designed function is to deliver RNA into the cell. When residual DNA is present, this DNA is also delivered into the cell by the LNPs. Furthermore, within the residual DNA are SV40 promoter-enhancer sequences known for their ability to facilitate entry into the cell nucleus! [20] [22]  This is the mechanism that makes residual DNA very concerning, with the potential risk of integrating into the human genome and causing cancer (especially circular plasmid DNA, which has high stability).
  • Kevin McKernan, as a leading expert with numerous patents in this field, has provided a series of public technical refutations regarding related issues: the amount of residual DNA, the nature of residual DNA, SV40 promoter-enhancer segments, and their risks… The details of these rebuttals can be found in scientific reports, [20] articles, [31] [32] and recently in a very detailed expert report presented in November 2025 at the South Carolina Senate, USA. [33] [34]
  • And the most concrete theoretical evidence for this entire issue is: Patent No. US10898574B2 regarding mRNA from the vaccine manufacturer Moderna itself, which explicitly states that “introduced DNA can integrate into host cell genomic DNA”. [35]

And below are the experimental reports:

  • The 2023 scientific study in Nature conducted experiments confirming that genetic integration can occur in mice! [36]
  • In February 2024, Ulrike Kaemmerer and McKernan reported that genetic alteration occurred when conducting experiments exposing mRNA vaccines to cancer cells. [37] [38] Dr. Hiroshi Arakawa from the Institute of Molecular Oncology (Italy) also conducted an independent analysis of the obtained data and reconfirmed the above results. [39]
  • On November 25, 2024, Dr. Phillip Buckhaults publicly declared that he had conducted experiments and found that gene insertion/ genetic alteration caused by the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine occurred in normal cells (not just cancer cells)! [40a] [40b]

By early October 2025, the world saw a study on the human body providing the first documented clinical evidence regarding COVID-19 mRNA vaccines causing genetic modification: the scientific report “Genomic Integration and Molecular Dysregulation in Aggressive Stage IV Bladder Cancer Following COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination”. [2a] [2b]

  • The case involves a 31-year-old female with rapidly progressing bladder cancer (extremely rare) reaching Stage IV in just 12 months after receiving 3 doses of COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. Using the liquid biopsy method (ctDNA) to test the patient's blood, scientists found a 20 bp gene segment that matches 100% with a gene segment in plasmid DNA, the material used to produce mRNA vaccines. The report states that the probability of a random 20 bp match is 1 in 1,000,000,000,000,000, which is extremely low.
  • Furthermore, this gene segment does not exist independently but has integrated with a human gene segment, forming a chimeric sequence!! These signs strongly imply the possibility that genetic integration has occurred, rather than a testing error, because testing errors (cross-contamination or artifacts) cannot create a chimeric sequence with such a clear junction point between residual DNA and human DNA.

Thus, these studies clearly show that the risk exists and genetic integration is entirely possible:

  • Manufacturer's documents confirms it.
  • Animal studies confirm it.
  • Laboratory studies (in vitro) confirm it.
  • Live body studies (in vivo) nearing confirmation.

=> The world is only a short step away from the final conclusion!

Consequently, many distinguished molecular biologists worldwide have been strongly issuing warnings about the risk of genetic integration from this residual DNA: Kevin McKernan, Angus Dalgleish, Wafik S. El-Deiry, Phillip Buckhaults, Brigitte Koenig, Ulrike Kaemmerer, Murakami Yasufumi, Hiroshi Arakawa…

  • Reference: Report from 52 experts on the issue of residual DNA contamination, the risk of genetic integration, and cancer (attached to the official Letter to the Prime Minister by MP Broadbent (Australia) requesting the suspension of mRNA vaccines). [41a] [41b]

With residual DNA containing SV40 sequences and the presence of LNP particles, genetic alteration is a real risk, warranting serious consideration.

 

2.4. Scientific studies on the risk of cancer from the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine:

Section 2.3 has demonstrated that residual DNA contaminants in the vaccine pose a risk of genetic alteration. Genetic alteration can lead to cancer (a basic tenet of oncology). Therefore, the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is potentially carcinogenic.

However, genetic alteration is not the only possible cause of cancer. The Sano report from Japan is not the only study on the vaccine and cancer either.

In fact, the scientific community has researched and identified multiple mechanisms by which the COVID vaccine might cause or promote cancer: p53 gene suppression, frameshifting translation errors, spike protein, IgG4... [42] [43] [44] [45] [46] [47] [48a] [49a] [50a] [51] [52] Among these, particularly noteworthy are:

  • A comprehensive review from December 2023 titled “SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and the Multi-Hit Hypothesis of Oncogenesis”, with 255 citations, points out a series of biological mechanisms by which the COVID vaccine can create an environment that promotes cancer. [42]
  • The report “Transfected SARS-CoV-2 spike DNA for mammalian cell expression inhibits p53 activation of p21(WAF1), TRAIL Death Receptor DR5 and MDM2 proteins in cancer cells and increases cancer cell viability after chemotherapy exposure” with an (in vitro) experiment showing that the spike protein can inhibit the p53 tumor suppressor gene (very serious matter), which can lead to genomic instability and oncogenesis. [43]
  • The report “Exploring the possible link between the spike protein immunoglobulin G4 antibodies and cancer progression”, regarding cancer and IgG4 caused by the COVID vaccine. [45]
  • The June 2025 article “Les vaccins ARNm anti-COVID peuvent induire le cancer de 17 manières distinctes selon plus de 100 études”, listing 17 distinct cancer mechanisms with 100 references. [47]
  • The October 2025 report “Synthetic messenger RNA vaccines and transcriptomic dysregulation: Evidence from new-onset adverse events and cancers post-vaccination”, describing clear changes in gene expression regulation and the weakening of the DNA repair system after injection, contributing to the risk of cancer, with a control group of unvaccinated individuals. [48a] [48b]

The latest and most notable is the January 2026 synthesis report “COVID vaccination and post-infection cancer signals: Evaluating patterns and potential biological mechanisms” by two major professors, Wafik S. El-Deiry and Charlotte Kuperwasser. [50a] [50b] This report synthesizes related reports as follows:

  • 56 scientific reports on cancer coinciding in time with COVID vaccination.
  • Population-scale studies showing an increased risk of cancer in vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated individuals: a notable study from South Korea on 8.4 million people with HR ~ 1.25, [51] a report from Italy with 300,000 people, [52] and a report showing an increase in lymphoma cases among 1.3 million U.S. military personnel following vaccination. [53]

·       In addition, a study from Japan with 96 cancer cases showed that vaccination (by inducing an increase in IgG4) was a poor prognostic factor in pancreatic cancer patients, with worse clinical outcomes… [54]

  • (The Oncotarget website was suspiciously taken down by a cyber-attack, around the time this report was published. Professor El-Deiry posted publicly about this.)

The above reports are biological theoretical reports as well as epidemiological signals. Meanwhile, the October 2025 scientific report from Japan (presented in part 1) is concrete histological evidence strongly suggesting the risk of COVID vaccines causing cancer, while simultaneously raising questions about the risk of genetic integration. [3]

  • This is a report of a specific cancer case following COVID vaccination: A tumor appeared three months after the 3rd dose; cancer was diagnosed one month after the 5th dose; followed by metastasis one month after the 6th dose! (This rate of cancer progression is abnormally fast.)
  • The report is not based solely on temporal coincidence; using immunohistochemistry, it specifically found vaccine-produced spike protein within cancer cells (since there was no nucleocapsid, it was not from the virus), detected hundreds of days after injection, and detected not only in the cytoplasm not only in the cytoplasm but also within the cell nucleus. This level of evidence is entirely analogous to finding fingerprints at a crime scene, not vague speculation.
  • And although not asserting it, the report explicitly states a potential serious risk: the possibility of mRNA reverse-transcribing into DNA and being inserted into the patient's genetic code, increasing the malignancy of the cancer! (This risk is plausible as presented in section 2.3.)

The reports above are part of the overall scientific picture of cancer and COVID vaccines today. The risk is very real, with many different mechanisms where the activation of just one could lead to, promote, or reactivate cancer. And when multiple mechanisms occur simultaneously, it is no longer a simple matter of addition!

 

2.5. Biological mechanism chain, Shift in the scientific status quo, and Global biological risk:

a) Biological mechanism chain:

Upon close examination of the new scientific evidence presented in sections 2.1-2.4, we have a complete logical chain:

Vaccine → Residual DNA → Genetic Alteration => Consequences: Cancer & Transgenerational Genetic Integration.

This logical chain can be clarified to prove that it is fully consistent with established biological mechanisms, as follows:

1.    After injection, the vaccine persists for an unusually long time and part of it is distributed to multiple organs throughout the body. Any harmful agents present can cause damage anywhere, with risks that are both prolonged and cumulative with each subsequent dose. (Section 2.1)

2.    The vaccine contains not only mRNA but also residual contaminant DNA - and this is the harmful agent. Moreover, the vaccine also contains LNPs, acting as a delivery system, efficiently carrying this contaminant DNA across the cell membrane. (Sections 2.2 and 2.3)

3.    This contaminant DNA also contains SV40 sequences. These SV40 sequences (promoter, enhancer, and origin) have nuclear localization signals (NLS), which can help contaminant DNA enter the cell nucleus. (Section 2.3)

4.    Inside the cell nucleus, residual DNA carries the risk of integrating into the host DNA (mechanism: NHEJ, MMEJ…). This foreign DNA integration is well-established in the scientific literature. [57] [58] Moreover, the SV40 sequences can increase this risk due to their ability to enhance gene expression. (Section 2.3)

5.    When genetic integration occurs, it can lead to errors in cell division, causing cancer as well as immune-related and other unexplained diseases… Furthermore, inhibition of the p53 tumor suppressor gene and gene‑expression dysregulation block DNA repair, the antibody class switch to IgG4 causes the immune system to overlook cancer cells, and tumor‑microenvironment effects come into play… These different mechanisms synergize to create an ideal condition– a ‘perfect storm’– for the formation and development of cancer! (Section 2.4)

6.    And if genetic alterations occur in germline cells (sperm/egg) or cross the placenta, these genetic alterations do not stop with the vaccinated individual but can be inherited by their offspring. This is precisely the risk of transgenerational genetic integration. (Sections 2.1 and 2.3)

Thus, the new scientific reports are not isolated studies; together, they point out: the starting point (vaccine), the foundation (biodistribution and persistence), the harmful agent (residual DNA), the delivery system (LNP, SV40 sequences), the mechanisms (NHEJ, MMEJ), and the consequences (genetic alteration, cancer, transgenerational inheritance):

Vaccine → Residual DNA → Cell entry → Nuclear entry → Genetic Alteration => Consequences: Cancer & Transgenerational Genetic Integration.

This is a cohesive and complete biological mechanism chain. With this chain, genetic alteration is no longer a vague concern, but has become a tangible risk that demands careful consideration in the new context.

b) Shift in the scientific status quo:

Science is not a collection of fixed statements, but must be reviewed and updated based on reality. The emergence of new scientific evidence across multiple levels (biological mechanisms, in vitro, in vivo, histology, epidemiology…) has demonstrated a shift in the scientific status quo, directly challenging each of the mainstream claims previously used to dismiss the risk of genetic alteration:

·       Claim: “The COVID-19 mRNA vaccine remains localized at the injection site (deltoid muscle).” – Reality: there is systemic biodistribution throughout the entire body. (Section 2.1)

·       Claim: “The COVID-19 mRNA vaccine is short-lived and rapidly cleared.” – Reality: mRNA can be detected in the body months later, while the spike protein can persist for over a year. (Section 2.1)

·       Claim: “The COVID-19 mRNA vaccine lacks reverse transcriptase, thus cannot cause genetic modification.” – Reality: Residual DNA contaminants are capable of direct genomic integration without the need for reverse transcriptase enzymes. (Section 2.3)

·       Claim: “Residual DNA in the vaccine is below safety thresholds," "DNA degrades rapidly," "mRNA/ DNA cannot enter the cell nucleus," "Residual DNA in the vaccine has no biological effect.” – Reality: Residual DNA actually exceeds safety limits, is highly stable in its circular form, is shielded by LNPs for cellular entry, and contains SV40 nuclear localization signals that can facilitate nuclear penetration and enhance gene expression. (Sections 2.2 and 2.3)

·       And many other claims…

Among the mainstream claims, there is a deeply flawed argument, yet widely used to dismiss these risks: 'If this were true, why haven't we seen any issues yet?' 'Billions have been vaccinated, surveillance systems and hundreds of studies show no surge in cancer or genetic changes'.

·       The truth is simple: Genetic alteration and cancer are not acute conditions that can be reported immediately post-injection. A tumor can develop silently over 5 to 20 years; genetic changes can yield long-term issues, and transgenerational risks only yield concrete evidence in future generations.

·       These risks cannot be easily detected within a short time period - just 5 years. This is the objective reality of 'signal latency', let alone the publication lag of studies. This fact invalidates any assumption of 'continued safety' based on outdated statistics. Thus, such flawed reasoning must be set aside to allow for true scientific scrutiny.

When the risk can neither be proven biologically impossible nor dismissed statistically, another flawed defense is raised: “The body has multiple biological barriers, the probability would be very low and would not cause a large-scale disaster.”

·       By invoking 'biological barriers,' they are forcing the vaccinees’ bodies to defend themselves against an existing risk, created by a biological product! This is a violation of the Hippocratic Oath: 'First, do no harm.'

·       In fact, no one knows how 'low' that probability is. This risk was never quantified, as it arose from contaminants resulting from a switch in the manufacturing process. Furthermore, producers and health authorities failed to disclose the risk to the public before mass vaccination, thus there can be no informed consent.

·       Finally, when the issues come to light, revealing that many biological barriers have been breached, yet they still speak of 'low probability,' it means they are going 'all in' gambling with recipients' bodies. They are gambling with the risks of genetic alteration, oncogenesis, and transgenerational integration!

·       In summary: this argument defends an unsafe product, gambles with recipients' health, ignores informed consent, and evades responsibility by those involved.

c) Global biological risk:

Genetic alteration from mRNA COVID-19 vaccines is a risk that has always been dismissed from every debate. However, the convergence of new scientific evidence has refuted the old claims and shown that this is a very real risk – the only questions now are its scale and timing. With billions of people vaccinated, based on the biological mechanism chain presented above and the principle of biological latency, this article projects a comprehensive picture of a global risk, with the following forecasted milestones:

1.    Various types of cancer, autoimmune diseases, and unusual medical conditions could increase dramatically on a global scale. Although the exact rate is unknown, with billions of people having received the mRNA COVID vaccine, each dose containing trillions of residual contaminant DNA molecules, the number of affected individuals could very well reach into the millions! This may become clearly visible in the 2026–2030 period – and from South Korea, the first signs have already been seen.

2.    Children of vaccinated individuals are at risk of having genetic integration from birth, leading to an increase in congenital immune diseases, disabilities, unusual illnesses, and cancer… in young children. If this occurs, it may be observable during 2030–2035.

3.    When this generation of children (F1) grows up and has their own children (F2), the defective gene segment can continue to be inherited. Thus, germline genetic integration could create an irreversible loop; these defective genes risk being perpetuated indefinitely within the human gene pool, causing immeasurable consequences for all future generations!

Thus, the latest scientific research reveals a shift in the scientific status quo, presenting a continuous chain of biological mechanisms, at the end of which emerges a direct threat to the genetic integrity of humanity. The question remains:

“If these are true, what then?”

 

3) A Call to Action:

Dear experts,

The author knows that everyone who has read this far is an expert.

  • In the first part, the article connected three scientific fragments together to point out a chain of continuous risks: the mRNA COVID vaccine poses a risk of causing genetic integration, a risk of causing cancer, and a risk of causing genetic integration in future generations through germline transmission. And when this happens, it is potentially irreversible!
  • In the second part dedicated to the expert community, the article has attempted to encapsulate the overall picture of new scientific studies. While there is not yet enough large-scale evidence due to signal latency, with a shift in the scientific status quo and a complete biological mechanism chain, the author believes that it is more than enough to issue a warning at the highest level.
  • This is a red alert, a biosafety threat at the highest level, analogous to the 20th-century Diethylstilbestrol (DES) tragedy, in which a failure in pharmacovigilance led to millions of exposures causing cancer and congenital malformations in their descendants. Considering the billions of COVID-19 vaccine doses administered globally and the risk of irreversible transgenerational genetic alteration, the potential danger is limitless - far surpassing DES, Thalidomide, or perhaps any disaster known to mankind!
  • In this case, with a plausible biological mechanism and irreversible consequences, the precautionary principle in biosafety must be invoked, even in the absence of absolute proof. [4] A suspension of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines (replaceable with other types, and with the pandemic now over) and a thorough investigation are necessary and must be implemented immediately. Scientific studies have issued warning signals; the responsibility for data transparency and for proving the safety of the biological product lies with health authorities and manufacturers, especially when risks arise from the switch in the manufacturing process.

This is not an "anti-vaccine" article, nor is it a "conspiracy theory." Rather, it is a warning about a very real danger, a global transgenerational disaster for all of humanity and future generations. This warning is founded entirely on a scientific basis, with numerous citations showing that:

  • The fact that modRNA and spike protein are distributed in many places in the body for an abnormally long period of time: well-established.
  • The fact of residual DNA contamination in COVID vaccines exceeding safety limits: clearly documented.
  • The fact that COVID vaccines can cause or promote cancer: a risk that is gradually being confirmed.
  • The fact that COVID vaccines can cause genetic integration due to residual DNA: a plausible risk according to biological theory, and the first evidence has begun to emerge.
  • When pieced together, these new scientific studies reveal a complete biological mechanism chain and a new scientific status quo gradually superseding old assumptions.

Some may be wondering: If what this article states is true, why is this information not being disseminated? Why are so many of these scientific reports not being mentioned?

·       Leading experts in the field have actually spoken up (including the "giant" Wafik S. El-Deiry). But it seems health agencies have ignored them; media outlets do not write about such specialized issues; search engines, social media, and AI have ranking algorithms and filters that make people less likely to see them. As for vaccine manufacturers, they simply cannot admit to the serious risks arising from contaminants in their product – because doing so would mean a full product recall and incalculable levels of compensation…

  • It has been nearly 3 years since Kevin McKernan discovered and issued a warning about residual DNA. To date, the puzzle pieces have become very clear, as pointed out. We have lost too much time, and with each passing day, the risk becomes more severe because it is not being prevented.

Some will dismiss the risk of genetic alteration and heritability, calling it "fear-mongering."

  • But the psychology of fear is precisely the human instinct for self-defense against danger. What needs to be done is to look directly at the risk to analyze and handle it, not to close one's eyes and ignore it.
  • New scientific evidence continues to emerge, and the current "deafening silence" is what is truly terrifying.

The author urgently calls upon all those who have patiently read this far: please act for the future of your children, the children of us all. The stakes are too high to wait or look away.

  • Genetic alteration and cancer both progress in silence. By the time everything becomes clear before our eyes, it will be too late to act. This warning needs to be spread; this risk needs to be clarified and prevented before it is all too late.
  • Please do not let future generations look at us and say,

"How could this be?"

 

Thank you all.

Trần Thế Hiệp, Vietnam, 2026-01-10.

(Version 1.5, last revised 2026-03-06)

 

---------------------------------------

Acknowledgments:

  • Deep gratitude to researcher Kevin McKernan for his groundbreaking discoveries and for sounding the alarm on these critical issues.
  • Heartfelt thanks to researchers along with all the voices of conscience worldwide, for their tireless dedication to speaking out and fighting for the truth over the past years, and for the years to come.


---------------------------------------

References:

1a. Mordechay, L., Baum, G., Gabbay-Benziv, R., Weinberger, H., & Frenkel Morgenstern, M. (2025). Detection of Pfizer BioNTech Messenger RNA COVID-19 Vaccine in Human Blood, Placenta and Semen. Gavin Publishers Journal, 10, Article 2428. https://doi.org/10.29011/2574-7754.102428

1b. https://web.archive.org/web/20251205172931/https:/www.gavinpublishers.com/assets/articles_pdf/Detection-of-Pfizer-BioNTech-Messenger-RNA-COVID-19-Vaccine-in-Human-Blood-Placenta-and-Semen.pdf

2a. John A. Catanzaro, Nicolas Hulscher, Peter A. McCullough (2025). Genomic integration and molecular dysregulation in aggressive stage IV bladder cancer following COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. International Journal of Innovative Research and Modern Science, 10(10), 2130. https://doi.org/10.23958/ijirms/vol10-i10/2130

2b. https://ijirms.in/index.php/ijirms/article/view/2130/1505

3. Sano, S. (2025). A case of metastatic breast carcinoma to the skin expressing SARS‑CoV‑2 spike protein possibly derived from mRNA vaccine. Journal of Dermatological Science, 120(2), 71–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdermsci.2025.09.007

4. Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Text and annexes. Montreal, Canada: Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. https://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cartagena-protocol-en.pdf

5. Pfizer Inc. (2020). SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine (BNT162, PF-07302048): 2.6.4 Summary of pharmacokinetic study. Pfizer confidential document (translated into English). https://www.naturalnews.com/files/Pfizer-bio-distribution-confidential-document-translated-to-english.pdf

6. Nakao Ota, Masahiko Itani, Tomohiro Aoki, Aki Sakurai, Takashi Fujisawa, Yasuaki Okada, Kosumo Noda, Yoshiki Arakawa, Sadahisa Tokuda, Rokuya Tanikawa. Expression of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in cerebral Arteries: Implications for hemorrhagic stroke Post-mRNA vaccination, Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, Volume 136, 2025, 111223, ISSN 0967-5868, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2025.111223 

7. Bornali Bhattacharjee, Peiwen Lu, Valter Silva Monteiro, Alexandra Tabachnikova, Kexin Wang, William B. Hooper, Victoria Bastos, Kerrie Greene,  View ORCID ProfileMitsuaki Sawano, Christian Guirgis, Tiffany J. Tzeng, Frederick Warner, Pavlina Baevova, Kathy Kamath, Jack Reifert, Danice Hertz, Brianne Dressen, Laura Tabacof, Jamie Wood, Lily Cooke, Mackenzie Doerstling, Shadan Nolasco, Amer Ahmed, Amy Proal, David Putrino, Leying Guan,  View ORCID ProfileHarlan M. Krumholz,  View ORCID ProfileAkiko Iwasaki. (2025). Immunological and Antigenic Signatures Associated with Chronic Illnesses after COVID-19 Vaccination. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.18.25322379

8. Jose Alfredo Samaniego Castruita, Uffe Vest Schneider, Sarah Mollerup, Thomas Daell Leineweber, Nina Weis, Jens Bukh, Martin Schou Pedersen, Henrik Westh (2023). SARS-CoV-2 spike mRNA vaccine sequences circulate in blood up to 28 days after COVID-19 vaccination. APMIS, 131(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/apm.13294

9. Stephen J. Kent, Shiyao Li, Thakshila H. Amarasena, Arnold Reynaldi, Wen Shi Lee, Michael G. Leeming, David H. O’Connor, Julie Nguyen, Helen E. Kent, Frank Caruso,  Jennifer A. Juno, Adam K. Wheatley,  Miles P. Davenport,  Yi Ju (2024). Blood Distribution of SARS-CoV-2 Lipid Nanoparticle mRNA Vaccine in Humans. ACS Nano 2024, 18, 39, 27077–27089. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.4c11652

10. Bansal S, Perincheri S, Fleming T, Poulson C, Tiffany B, Bremner RM, Mohanakumar T. Cutting Edge: Circulating Exosomes with COVID Spike Protein Are Induced by BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) Vaccination prior to Development of Antibodies: A Novel Mechanism for Immune Activation by mRNA Vaccines. The Journal of Immunology, 207(10), 2405–2410. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.2100637.

11. Carlo Brogna, Simone Cristoni, Giuliano Marino, Luigi Montano, Valentina Viduto, Mark Fabrowski, Gennaro Lettieri, Marina Piscopo. Detection of recombinant Spike protein in the blood of individuals vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2: Possible molecular mechanisms. Proteomics: Clinical Applications, 17(3), 2300048. https://doi.org/10.1002/prca.202300048

12. Katharina Röltgen, el al. (2022). Immune imprinting, breadth of variant recognition, and germinal center response in human SARS-CoV-2 infection and vaccination. Cell, 185(6), p1025-1040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2022.01.018

13. Fertig, T. E., Chitoiu, L., Marta, D. S., Ionescu, V.-S., Cismasiu, V. B., Radu, E., Angheluta, G., Dobre, M., Serbanescu, A., Hinescu, M. E., & Gherghiceanu, M. (2022). Vaccine mRNA Can Be Detected in Blood at 15 Days Post-Vaccination. Biomedicines, 10(7), 1538. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10071538

14. Bornali Bhattacharjee, Peiwen Lu, Valter Silva Monteiro, Alexandra Tabachnikova, Kexin Wang, William B. Hooper, Victoria Bastos, Kerrie Greene, Mitsuaki Sawano, Christian Guirgis, Tiffany J. Tzeng, Frederick Warner, Pavlina Baevova, Kathy Kamath, Jack Reifert, Danice Hertz, Brianne Dressen, Laura Tabacof, Jamie Wood, Lily Cooke, Mackenzie Doerstling, Shadan Nolasco, Amer Ahmed, Amy Proal, David Putrino, Leying Guan, Harlan M. Krumholz, Akiko Iwasaki (2025). Immunological and Antigenic Signatures Associated with Chronic Illnesses after COVID-19 Vaccination. medRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.18.25322379

15. A PHASE 1/2/3, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, RANDOMIZED, OBSERVER-BLIND, DOSE-FINDING STUDY TO EVALUATE THE SAFETY, TOLERABILITY, IMMUNOGENICITY, AND EFFICACY OF SARS-COV-2 RNA VACCINE CANDIDATES AGAINST COVID-19 IN HEALTHY INDIVIDUALS. C4591001 clinical protocol: Pfizer–BioNTech COVID‑19 vaccine (BNT162, PF‑07302048). Pfizer Inc. https://media.tghn.org/medialibrary/2020/11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020_Pfizer_BioNTech.pdf

16. Boros LG, Kyriakopoulos AM, Brogna C, Piscopo M, McCullough PA, Seneff S. Long-lasting, biochemically modified mRNA, and its frameshifted recombinant spike proteins in human tissues and circulation after COVID-19 vaccination. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2024 Jun;12(3):e1218. https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.1218

17a. Kevin McKernan, Yvonne Helbert, Liam T. Kane, Stephen McLaughlin (2023). Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose. OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/b9t7m

17b. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/sequencing-of-bivalent-moderna-and

18. Block J. Covid-19: Researchers face wait for patient level data from Pfizer and Moderna vaccine trials. BMJ 2022; 378:o1731. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o1731

19. European Medicines Agency. (2021). Comirnaty: EPAR – Public Assessment Report. European Medicines Agency. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/assessment-report/comirnaty-epar-public-assessment-report_en.pdf

20. Speicher, D. J., Rose, J., & McKernan, K. (2025). Quantification of residual plasmid DNA and SV40 promoter‑enhancer sequences in Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna modRNA COVID‑19 vaccines from Ontario, Canada. Autoimmunity, 58, 2551517. https://doi.org/10.1080/08916934.2025.2551517

21. Koenig, B.; Kirchner, J.O. Methodological Considerations Regarding the Quantification of DNA Impurities in the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Comirnaty. Methods Protoc. 2024, 7, 41. https://doi.org/10.3390/mps7030041 

22. Ulrike Kaemmerer, Verena Schulz, Verena Schulz, Klaus Steger. (2025). Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA‑based COVID‑19 injections contain large amounts of residual DNA, including an SV40 promoter‑enhancer sequence. Public Health Policy Journal. https://publichealthpolicyjournal.com/biontech-rna-based-covid-19-injections-contain-large-amounts-of-residual-dna-including-an-sv40-promoter-enhancer-sequence/

23. David J Speicher, Jessica Rose, L. Maria Gutschi, David M Wiseman PhD, Kevin McKernan.. DNA fragments detected in monovalent and bivalent Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna modRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Ontario, Canada: Exploratory dose response relationship with serious adverse events. OSF Preprints 2023. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/mjc97

24. Phillip Buckhaults, presentation for South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs Committee, 12/9/2023. https://web.archive.org/web/20231017192025/https:/www.scstatehouse.gov/CommitteeInfo/SenateMedicalAffairsCommittee/PandemicPreparedness/Phillip-Buckhaults-SC-Senate-09122023-final.pdf

25. Speicher D., 240909 - D Speicher Report: Independent analysis of residual DNA in mRNA vaccines. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/sb20elb520v6a1saxg9lj/240909-D-Speicher-Report.pdf?rlkey=dutcvd85gh80ebfs2ucdmorba&e=7&st=0jpsw84f&dl=0

26. Didier Raoult. Confirmation of the presence of vaccine DNA in the Pfizer anti-COVID-19 vaccine. 2025. https://hal.science/hal-04778576v2

27. USC Professor Dr. Phillip Buckhaults, SC Senate Hearing, September 12, 2023 [Video]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7Qs166xR28

28. Wang, Tyler J, Alex Kim, and Kevin Kim. 2024. “A Rapid Detection Method of Replication-Competent Plasmid DNA from COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines for Quality Control.” Journal of High School Science 8 (4): 427–39. https://doi.org/10.64336/001c.127890.

29. “Phát hiện DNA dư thừa vượt xa giới hạn trong vaccine COVID‑19 của Pfizer”. Báo Sức khỏe và Đời sống 04-01-2025. https://suckhoedoisong.vn/phat-hien-nhiem-ban-dna-trong-vaccine-covid-19-cua-pfizer-169250104121840417.htm

30. Sandeep Chakraborty. The bloodstream of mRNA vaccinated individuals (both Pfizer and Moderna) shows DNA expression vector contamination, including SV40 and kanamycin-resistant gene sequences. OSF Preprints 2024. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/hzyn3

30b. https://typeset.io/pdf/the-bloodstream-of-mrna-vaccinated-individuals-both-pfizer-2fblijtrq7.pdf

31. Kevin McKernan. Fact‑checker response. Anandamide Substack Jan 05, 2024. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/fact-checker-response

32. Kevin McKernan. We eat DNA all the time…and it’s in YOUR BLOOD!!! Anandamide Substack Jan 08, 2026. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/we-eat-dna-all-the-timeand-its-in

33. Kevin McKernan. South Carolina Senate Presentation Nov 18, 2025. https://www.scstatehouse.gov/CommitteeInfo/SenateMedicalAffairsCommittee/McKernan%20Presentation.pdf

34. Kevin McKernan. South Carolina Senate Testimony Nov 18, 2025 [video]. https://x.com/Kevin_McKernan/status/2000277358603805091

35. Antonin de Fougerolles, Sayda M. Elbashir. Moderna Tx Inc. U.S. Patent No. 10,898,574B2: Delivery and formulation of engineered nucleic acids. United States Patent and Trademark Office. https://patents.google.com/patent/US10898574B2/en

36. Lim, S., Yocum, R.R., Silver, P.A. et al. High spontaneous integration rates of end-modified linear DNAs upon mammalian cell transfection. Sci Rep 13, 6835 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-33862-0

37. Ulrike Kaemmerer & Kevin McKernan. Vaccine targeted qPCR of Cancer Cell Lines treated with BNT162b2. Anandamide Substack Feb 25, 2024. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/vaccine-targeted-qpcr-of-cancer-cell

38. Kevin McKernan. Plasmid DNA replication in BNT162b2 vaccinated cell lines. Anandamide Substack Mar 06, 2024. https://anandamide.substack.com/p/plasmid-dna-replication-in-bnt162b2

39. Arakawa, H. (2024). コロナワクチン汚染DNAのヒト細胞株ゲノムへの統合. Note. https://note.com/hiroshi_arakawa/n/na5d608e4fe9d

40a. Buckhaults, P. Tweet November 25, 2024. https://x.com/P_J_Buckhaults/status/1861083163868672204

40b. https://www.coronaheadsup.com/health/vaccine/buckhaults-the-plasmid-dna-that-is-contained-within-mrna-vaccines-can-integrate-into-the-genome-of-normal-cells/

41a. Broadbent, R. (September 25, 2024). Letter to the Hon. Anthony Albanese MP, Prime Minister, calling for suspension of Pfizer and Moderna COVID‑19 vaccines due to synthetic DNA contamination.

https://web.archive.org/web/20260110162012/https://www.nannup.wa.gov.au/council-meetings/ordinary-meeting-of-council/ordinary-council-meeting/131/documents/attachment-1123-exhibit-3-the-hon-russell-broadbent-mp.pdf

41b. https://www.nannup.wa.gov.au/council-meetings/ordinary-meeting-of-council/ordinary-council-meeting/131/documents/attachment-1123-exhibit-3-the-hon-russell-broadbent-mp.pdf

42. Valdes Angues R, Perea Bustos Y (December 17, 2023) SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination and the Multi-Hit Hypothesis of Oncogenesis. Cureus 15(12): e50703. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.50703 

43. Zhang S, El-Deiry WS. Transfected SARS-CoV-2 spike DNA for mammalian cell expression inhibits p53 activation of p21(WAF1), TRAIL Death Receptor DR5 and MDM2 proteins in cancer cells and increases cancer cell viability after chemotherapy exposure. Oncotarget. 2024 May 3;15:275-284. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28582. PMID: 38709242; PMCID: PMC11073320.

44. Alberto Rubio-Casillas, David Cowley, Mikolaj Raszek, Vladimir N. Uversky, Elrashdy M. Redwan, Review: N1-methyl-pseudouridine (m1Ψ): Friend or foe of cancer?, International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, Volume 267, Part 1, 2024, 131427, ISSN 0141-8130, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.131427

45. Raszek M, Cowley D, Redwan EM, Uversky VN, Rubio-Casillas A. Exploring the possible link between the spike protein immunoglobulin G4 antibodies and cancer progression. Explor Immunol. 2024;4:267–84. https://doi.org/10.37349/ei.2024.00140

46. Castrillo, R. P. (2024). Cancer Mortality Surges Post COVID ModRNA Vaccination Ronald Palacios Castrillo. European Journal of Clinical and Biomedical Sciences, 10(2), 23-27. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ejcbs.20241002.11

47. Grace, C. L. (2025, April 7). Plasmid DNA Contamination in mRNA Vaccines: Theoretical Mechanisms of Integration, Latency, Episome Formation, and Oncogenic Transformation. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/bzan3_v1

48. Mathilde Debord (June 19, 2025). Les vaccins ARNm anti-COVID peuvent induire le cancer de 17 manières distinctes selon plus de 100 études. https://lepointcritique.fr/2025/06/19/vaccins-arnm-anti-covid-peuvent-induire-cancer-de-17-manieres-distinctes-selon-plus-de-100-etudes/

49a. Von Ranke NL, Zhang W, Anokhin P, Hulscher N, McKernan K, Mccullough P, Catanzaro J. Synthetic messenger RNA vaccines and transcriptomic dysregulation: Evidence from new-onset adverse events and cancers post-vaccination. World J Exp Med 2025; 15(4): 113869 [PMID: 41497694 http://dx.doi.org/10.5493/wjem.v15.i4.113869]

49b. https://f6publishing.blob.core.windows.net/95c20075-6d7f-4d33-ad95-61ad9d6108f0/WJEM-15-113869.pdf

50. Isidoro, C. SARS-CoV2 and Anti-COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Is There a Plausible Mechanistic Link with Cancer? Cancers 2025, 17, 3867. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17233867

51a. El-Deiry W. S. Hypothesis: HPV E6 and COVID spike proteins cooperate in targeting tumor suppression by p53. Oncotarget. 2026; 17: 30-33. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28823

51b. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1eWSOHavMj2apSSMH2pHbRCgoJEF9c0te/view

52a. Kuperwasser C., El-Deiry W. S. COVID vaccination and post-infection cancer signals: Evaluating patterns and potential biological mechanisms. Oncotarget. 2026; 17: 1-29. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.28824

52b. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RH0f1BEqY9I7ruuPKQPU6bGNVJRyxZxc/view?pli=1

53. Kim, H., Kim, MH., Choi, M. et al. 1-year risks of cancers associated with COVID-19 vaccination: a large population-based cohort study in South Korea. Biomark Res 13, 114 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40364-025-00831-w

54. Acuti Martellucci, C., Capodici, A., Soldato, G., Fiore, M., Zauli, E., Carota, R., … Manzoli, L. (2025). COVID-19 vaccination, all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for cancer: 30-month cohort study in an Italian province. EXCLI Journal, 24, 690–707. https://doi.org/10.17179/excli2025-8400

55. Russell SJ, Mabila SL. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma incidence in active component U.S. service members, 2017-2023. MSMR. 2025 Feb 20;32(2):16-17. PMID: 40019944; PMCID: PMC11933234.

56. Abue, M., Mochizuki, M., Shibuya-Takahashi, R., Ota, K., Wakui, Y., Iwai, W., Kusaka, J., Saito, M., Suzuki, S., Sato, I., & Tamai, K. (2025). Repeated COVID-19 Vaccination as a Poor Prognostic Factor in Pancreatic Cancer: A Retrospective, Single-Center Cohort Study. Cancers, 17(12), 2006. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers17122006

57. Bachu, R., Bergareche, I. and Chasin, L.A. (2015), CRISPR-Cas targeted plasmid integration into mammalian cells via non-homologous end joining. Biotechnol. Bioeng., 112: 2154-2162. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.25629

58. Lomov, N.A., Nikolaev, N.A., Viushkov, V.S. et al. The Role of Non-Homologous End Joining and Microhomology-Mediated End Joining in Chromosomal Rearrangements. Biochemistry Moscow 90, 1468–1483 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1134/S0006297925602102

at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)