BioDistribution, the Big Illusion

LNP presence is not synonymous with transfection! Endothelial surface exposure is a much more logical way to assess where nanoparticles end up, consistent with observed adverse events.

Summary:
A brief article to bring a different perspective on the Bio-Distribution debate. I have gone down that rabbit hole and came out long ago. Beyond the disbelief of realising “It stays in the muscle!” was a big fat lie, one needs to observe the clinical data of adverse events, and admit it is absolutely not aligned with this distribution. And indeed LNP Presence isn’t indicative of Transfection: LNPs can simply be stored idle.

Herein I reiterate one big tenet of the Bolus Theory which is that - given the distributive nature of the vascular system - LNPs, once in the bloodstream, will be evenly distributed like any other content in the blood, and thus endothelial surface exposure is likely the best proxy for distribution, and for adverse event localisation. In other words, we never needed a bio-distribution study, if infused, the vaccine particle end up across the entire body evenly as any other material.

Bio-Distribution: The Great Illusion

---

With the new release of Australia’s TGA bio-distribution document, many are discovering now how apparently the Pfizer vaccine nanoparticles (LNP) distribute in the body. Most are reacting as we all did - nearly 2 years ago - when Pr. Byram Bridle shared the results of his FOIA request to the Japanese authorities: confusing LNP presence and LNP transfection, and thus focusing on the Liver, the Spleen and Ovaries.

For a prior article, I had created the following map of the distribution from the difficult-to-read tables of the Acuitas Therapeutics study.

One obvious observation from this simplified distribution map is that the blood and its filtering organs host the vast majority of nanoparticles: I even had to add a Log scale to be able to distinguish the total amount of LNPs as well as their concentrations in the rest of the organs.

Low Transfection Yield

With hindsight, this should not come as a surprise. Nanoparticle up-take by cells is neither simple nor very effective. For the record, some use electroporation⚡️as a way to transfect more effectively (electroporation is a short localised electrocution to briefly open up cells and let in vaccine particles).

Probabilistically, the main reason for that low yield is the surface-to-volume ratio in blood vessels: at any moment in time, between 98%-99.5% of the nanoparticles are away from the endothelial walls inside the blood flow, and therefore the probability of transfection in that zone is effectively zero…

In the active zone (green line above), when these LNPs face, touch or scratch the inner lining of our blood vessels, they don’t always penetrate. They can often get swirled away in the opposite direction. Sometimes they miss the endothelial wall and get delivered into the tissue where - we know from the intramuscular shot leakage - very few transfect especially without seringue plunger pressure.

Say 1 out of 10 actually penetrate the endothelial wall, which likely is generous, that means there’s probably a lower than a 1 in 1,000 chance of transfection before the first filtering in the Liver trap. And that explains perfectly the decision by vaccine manufacturers to include such a gigantic number of nanoparticles in these vaccines (10 billion for Pfizer, 40 billion for Moderna).

After a first cycle in the circulatory system, many particles are rapidly stopped and filtered for processing by the Liver or the Spleen, or to a lesser extent inside muscle tissue or other organ tissue with limited opportunity to transfect.

Context makes a huge difference in the way one can interpret this Bio-Distribution data. I have outlined 4 different scenarios which change the perspective one might have on the map above:

1. PASSIVE IN THE TISSUE: we can deduce from the data that, in the muscle tissue, a vast majority of the particles stay idle for hours and end up leaking back into the blood stream via the lymphatic system. Hence, there’s no reason to believe that in other organs particles would behave otherwise. And so, in many organs, most noteworthy muscles, the apparent lipid nanoparticles are simply idly stored in tissue, to then trickle back to the bloodstream via the lymphatic system.

2. IDLE IN NATURAL RECEPTACLES: If a particle falls into a receptacle-like organ (liver, spleen, lymph node), it can be permanently or temporarily trapped there, with limited transfection opportunity to the possible exception of immune cells. In the liver and the spleen, it is very likely the vast majority gets processed for destruction.

3. SHEDDED AWAY: In organs exchanging with the outside world (skin, lungs or intestines) a portion of nanoparticles can possibly escape the body, even if the size of nanoparticles makes it difficult.

4. SHIELDED BY A TIGHT BLOOD-TISSUE BARRIER: Here, the map is probably closest to reality: mostly transfected endothelial cells. Contrary to what scare mongers have been stating, the distribution data shows the LNPs aren’t crossing the BBB in any significant numbers. That’s very clear. On the contrary, the peak of 0.02% of LNPs at 2 hours post-injection, and the 0.09% after 48 hours likely shows even in the brain some particle are idle and haven’t transfected. At a maximum, we know 0.02% of the dose could have transfected the brain endothelium: 2 million nanoparticles since we are talking of the Pfizer vaccine.

What can we take away?

The brain is supposedly composed of 650 kilometers of blood vessels, essentially capillaries. Based on the Pfizer data, at worse, these vaccine when injected intravenously would transfect once every 32,5 cm, possibly once every 72 cm. Though 2 million hits seems considerable, I doubt it’s much worse than the impact of a good glass of whisky.

The human organism is quite capable of dealing with an “unhealthy” cell to scuttle every 32cm of capillary.

The biological process is quite mundane: the immune system will target and destroy that apparently “infected” cell, one of the neighbouring cells will split and replicate, filling in the gap, as it is done constantly throughout the body. In other words:

1. The blood vessel integrity should absolutely not be at stake here. The endothelial layer would be intact. And the underlying smooth muscle layer would remain away from the blood flow, and be preserved. Remember it takes 60,000 nanoparticles in the same space to hit and be up-taken by the endothelial wall of the aorta to poke a 1cm diameter hole! This clearly a probabilistic impossibility.

2. No coagulation cascade, thrombosis or necrosis would occur given the very limited harm done at a local level as per my last article.

   Could the Geometry of Blood Vessel Wounds Be the True Trigger Behind Vaccine-induced Thrombosis?

I have come to that conclusion a long time ago: in normal conditions, the Pfizer vaccine cannot harm, and this is why I went to look for other factors, and discovered the Bolus Theory or the harm caused by an inadvertent intravascular injection.

The Pfizer distribution data isn’t telling us where the transfection is happening, but where the LNPs are located. The true gem hidden in that distribution data is the approximate data on LNPs present in the brain. Despite the fact the brain is highly vascularised, and likely because of the tight blood-brain barrier, very limited transfection is occurring there compared to the incredible amount of particles in each dose of these vaccine.

This is the very good news from the detailed analysis of the bio-distribution data: Many vaccinated have avoided major adverse events simply because of a proper injection that infused progressively the product via the muscle. I call that the “Bullet-Proof Vest” Effect.

I will write another article in the coming days explaining how endothelial exposure is a much better way to understand adverse events, more consistent with the type of pathologies, but also with the number of accidents. I hope you enjoyed this content.