“ People who claimed the “Jab” could make permanent changes to the DNA of the patients, were harshly criticized and ridiculed for their lack of “scientific knowledge”, some on this very forum.
It appears now that the claimants were right, and their critics were wrong. I suppose that is vindication.”
This doesn’t claim that at all, though.
You are correct, however, it does open the possibility for it to be the case that the shots can change DNA, and is certainly an unexpected problem to the researcher going the testing.
Still early in the investigation process which is why your statement is correct, currently. But finding DNA at much larger levels than is acceptable, is very troubling to be sure.
I think the smoke will eventually show that the fire is also present.
The article does not make a direct claim of permanent DNA changes caused by the "Jab". It makes a direct claim that there is a gross amount of DNA that should not be in the compound. Why is it there and what is it doing?
The obvious point of inference left unsaid is that DNA inserted into a cell by the same mechanism that inserts RNA into the cell will make permanent changes to the cell. or there is some mechanism by which the RNA is creating the DNA.
Which was a basic point made by "ransomnote" and many others a long time ago - that previously unknown pathways would be discovered which allow reverse transcription of the spike-generator RNA of the Pfizer treatment into the cell nucleus and permanently alter the function of the cell - and all of its' descendants.
RNA is supposed to be a consumable, with a lifespan of hours to days. That spike protein generation was supposed to turn itself off after a period of time.
If the reverse transcription, or DNA contamination ideas are true, then people who took the defective (?) "hot" forms of the mRNA treatment are absolutely screwed for the rest of their lives. Their infested tissues will continue to generate toxic spike proteins as long as they live.
Does that vindicate "ransomnote" and all the others. I don't know.
I cannot find any satisfaction or vindication in another "I told you so" condition. I am more a fan of "Rope, lamppost, some assembly required" for the perpetrators. For dammed sure, we aren't going to see any justice from our "legal system".
"Everyone who participated in, everyone who benefited from it..." (Man on Fire).