Do nanoparticles disrupt the function of ovaries?
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.22.216168v1.full
Dr. Peter McCullough was discussing this paper recently. This was published in 2020, so prior to covid vaccines. However, nanotechnology and graphene oxide are not new to the scene. Nanotechnology has been used prior to covid to treat diseases, especially cancer. Nanotechnology is the ability to take a substance, alter their physical and chemical structure, creating a very small particle with a large surface area. We can manipulate nanostructures to do what we want them to do. For example, in the treatment of cancer, nanotechnology is used to transport a chemotherapy drug directly TO the tumor, rather than systemic spread. The intention of it is not necessarily BAD here……if we target the tumor and not systemic spread of the chemotherapeutic agent, we can reduce side effects such as GI distress and possibly hair loss, but focus the treatment on the tumor target. Radiation acts in the same manner. Focused therapy on the tumor area itself.
The ISSUE with nanotechnology is…….what is the long term consequences of it? What are the negatives from it? Nanotechnology was not something the entire population was exposed pharmaceutically to until the arrival of the covid vaccine. We know the covid vaccine has nanotechnology, graphene oxide, and PEG in it, because the vaccine manufacturers have told us it is in there. Pfizer and moderna.
So previous to covid, certain people with certain cancer tumors with a type of chemo that had nanotechnology available were exposed to it. Small fraction of the population compared to the hundreds of millions given the covid vaccine.
So what makes this 2020 paper important? Well……it discusses the dangers of nanotechnology on ovaries.
The abstract: We demonstrate a 2-fold increase in nanoparticle accumulation in the ovaries during female mouse ovulation compared to the non-ovulatory stage following IV administration of nanoparticles. Accumulation in the reproductive system is more prevalent in nanoparticles smaller than 100 nm. Chemotherapeutic nanoparticles administered during ovulation increased ovarian toxicity and decreased short-term and long-term fertility when compared to the free drug (free drug is the drug that has not gone through nanotechnology manipulation, it is the pure drug prior to nanotechnology changes). Breast cancer treated with nanomedicines during ovulation results in higher drug accumulation in the reproductive system rather than at the site of the tumor, reducing treatment efficacy. Conversely, ovarian cancer treatment was improved by enhanced nanoparticle accumulation in the ovaries during ovulation. Our findings suggest that the menstrual cycle should be considered when designing and implementing nanotherapeutics for females.
This study (broken down in really basic terms here) looked at different sized nanoparticles. 20,50,100,and 200nm sized particles. They found that the larger particles (over 80nm) were not as interfering with the blood vessels around an egg follicle during ovulation. Smaller particles were able to cross the blood barrier to the follicle. Also, depending on WHAT point in the menstrual cycle a woman was in, the tumor target did not get the nanoparticle drug but rather it accumulated in other sex organs, and in different parts of the cycle the uptake of the drug was much getter at the intended target site.
Findings: Our findings show that the menstrual cycle affects the biodistribution of therapeutic nanoparticles towards the female reproductive system. Proper sex considerations in preclinical studies and clinical trials are encouraged, however in the field of nanotechnology these considerations are still nascent. Nanoparticle accumulation during the estrous cycle should be considered in future studies, as it may lead to increased variability in biodistribution and drug efficacy. Our findings on possible ovarian toxicity caused by DOX-nanoparticle compared to free drug-DOX should be taken into consideration when devising a treatment plan for patients in their reproductive age. These findings may also be leveraged for designing targeted treatments of the ovarian follicles for controlled drug release in this essential tissue of life.
So. Knowing the information above. We look at the application to covid vaccines. We know they have nanotechnology and graphene oxide. In 2020, this discusses covid vaccine and nanotechnology, but does not say what size the nanoparticles are in the vaccine. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41565-020-0737-y
In searching for nanoparticle size for the protein sequence in the mRNA vaccine, you cannot get a clear answer. I did find this journal article https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378517321003914 and they state that
“PEG-lipid is used to control the particle size and act as a steric barrier to prevent aggregation during storage. Together with the mRNA, these components form particles of about 60–100 nm in size by using a rapid mixing production technique (Evers et al., 2018). The SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidates nCoVsaRNA and ARCoV, for example, have average particle sizes of 75 nm and 89 nm, respectively.” But, it does not say WHICH vaccine this is.
All we truly know is that yes, the nanoparticles ARE IN the covid vaccine. The original study posted above showed that a chemo drug, Doxyrubicin, in nanoparticle form, concentrated in the ovaries, not the cancer tumor, when administered during certain phases of the menstrual cycle. The free drug with no nanotechnology manipulation had no abnormal ovarian concentration. So by that same logic, COULD the covid vaccine nanotechnology particles concentrate in the ovaries if the covid vaccine is administered at certain points in the menstrual cycle? Could it affect the follicular development of the egg? HOW LONG do these nanoparticle concentrations remain IN the ovary? Does that long term inhibit ovulation?
Remember the post a couple months back where we discussed the organs we found that had high uptake of the covid vaccine? The trials only had 48 hours of data. Nothing after that. But the ovaries definitely had a high affinity for the covid vaccine uptake. This important 2020 paper shows that we suspected nanotechnology modified drugs COULD target reproduction in specific nanotechnology sized molecules. If the molecules are under 80nm, could they be more likely to hyper concentrate in the ovaries, just as the Doxyrubicin nanotechnology med did? Is the nanotechnology nm size drug specific to accumulating in the ovaries or is it purely molecule size regardless of the drug it is transporting?
I think this is at least the beginning of a very important discussion about fertility, ovaries, cycle state, and the impact that nanotechnology PERIOD can have on, lol, periods and fertility. Is there a safer TIME to give a covid vaccine, such as after ovulation that month? How long does the covid nanotechnology hang out in the ovaries? Will it impede ovulation for 30 days? 60? 180? Not at all? I really wish the pfizer study had evaluated the Wistar rat ovaries beyond the 48 hours post vaccine. Because if you recall, the accumulation in the ovaries was still rising at the last 48 hour check before the data went dark and silent.