Dr. Robert Malone, Inventor of mRNA technology discusses the Spike Protein | Interview

Dr. Robert Malone, Inventor of mRNA technology discusses the Spike Protein.

Dr. Erin Stair discusses with Dr. Robert Malone about the COVID-19 Spike Protein vs the Spike Protein produced by the COVID-19 Vaccines and more.

Referenced Articles:
Salk Institute Paper | https://www.salk.edu/news-release/the-novel-coronavirus-spike-protein-plays-additional-key-role-in-illness/
Canadian physicians FOIA | https://trialsitenews.com/did-pfizer-fail-to-perform-industry-standard-animal-testing-prior-to-initiation-of-mrna-clinical-trials/
Reuters Fact Check | https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaccine-safe/fact-check-no-evidence-spike-proteins-from-covid-19-vaccines-are-toxic-idUSL2N2NX1J6
Circulating SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Antigen Detected in the Plasma of mRNA-1273 Vaccine Recipients | https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciab465/6279075


  1. OK so let’s do a break down of what we know and how Dr Malone’s comments fit into it.
    1. Dr Malone says that the spike protein is cytotoxic and yet it’s been fact checked as not true. Let’s explore where the misunderstanding can arise. Two papers including one from SALK have shown that an empty virus (cannot replicate, no viral RNA present) expressing the coronavirus spike protein can cause changes in enothelial cells on binding to ACE2. This then triggers various changes in the cell which cause mitochondrial damage and redcution in NO. This in turn causes inflammation and can produce cell death. However this effect is entirely dependant on spike protein binding the ACE2 receptor. This is a major issue in live infection as the quantity of spike protein binding to ACE2 is vast in comparison to a vaccine and can account for a lot of the vascular problems, including blood clots (typical i.e. not the same as those caused by the AZ vaccine). Dr Malone claims that this means that if free spike protein exists after vaccination this is also damaging to cells. We’ll cover if this is so further down.

    2. Free spike protein after vaccination has been found in the blood of 13 nurses after vaccination. The quantities are extremely small, but they are there. Dr Malone suggests this is the tip of the iceberg. I’ll discuss that next. In the meantime it has been suggested that the presence of spike protein in the blood after vaccination is unexpected. Well, not really. When the mRNA vaccine is injected the mRNA enters the target cells. (The early work on HOW TO GET mRNA INTO THE CELL is the work Dr Malone participated in). This has been developedand refined by many others since. Once in the cell, the mRNA is used by the cell to manufacture spike protein, as it would do normally. Cells do not release protein unless damaged or are specialised cells for excreting protein. These are typically found in cells producing hormanes, digestive enzymes, serum production and nerve cells, for example. Even so, in order to be excreted the protein is tagged so the cell knows this protein needs to be excreted and to leave all the other proteins in the cell. Spike protein is not tagged for excretion. The cell recognises the protein as foreign and breaks the protein into small pieces which are then presented by the MHC molecules (type I or type II depending on the cell type) so that immune cells can identify it and produce an immune response. So there is very little whole spike protein in the cell at any one time. What there is, is that which has just been produced and hasn’t been degraded yet. So where does the free spike protein found in the nurses blood come from? When the spike protein pieces are detected by the immune system two types of immunity are triggered. One produces antibodies, memory cells and other types of cells primarily focused towards catching entering virus during infection. The other side of the immune response is to detect cells that are infected. What to do with infected cells? Well, kill them of course, to stop the virus multiplying. This is what happens and, during this process, whole spike protein which has not been degraded yet can escape. It won’t be on the run for too long because unsuprisingly our clever bodies have a way of rmoving this protein but during the time it takes to achieve this free protein is circulating. So to say the escaped spike protein is just the tip of the iceberg is misleading. It is in fact the release of a very small proportion of the spike protein during the normal immune response. Your body doing its job. The cell isn’t producing and excreting the spike protein ad libitum. It also isn’t presenting whole spike protein on the cell wall which can then be ‘cleaved’, also simplied by Dr Malone. so the spike protein we see in the blood of the nurses can be explained by normal moleular behaviour of the cell and is NOT the tip of the iceberg.

    3. So what about this ‘free’ spike protein? surely if it’s floating around it can bind to ACE2 and cause the deleterious effects caused by the spike protein in the SALK paper. Well, not exactly. The spike protein from the vaccine has been altered. It is not the same spike protein found in the coronavirus causing Covid. It has been altered in some really key ways. The recepeptor binding domain which Dr Malone describes has not been altered in the way he implies. It has actually been replicated. twice or even three times. This is to provide more ‘antigen’ or foreign material for our immune systems to recognise. By raising antibodies to this site the body removes the ability of the virus to bind during infection. Remember that the protein is broken down into pieces before it is presented to the immune system? Multiplying the receptor binding domain (S1) means for every spike protein manufactured by the cell there are more binding domains, multiplying the amount presented to the immune system. Doesn’t multiplying the receptor binding domain mean any free spike protein binds better? Well probably not. Adding extra domains can change the slight presentation of the receptor binding domain such that is reduces binding, binding doesn’t happen at all, or it may stay the same. We don’t know, this hasn’t been studied yet. In addition all the vaccines have incorporated ways, through introducing small changes to the spike protein S2 domain, of preventing the vaccine spike protein of behaving in the normal way. This means that even if the spike protein that escapes into the blood does bind to ACE2 receptors, it does not have its normal function. Does this affect the damage caused by the spike protein? Well, probably yes, but we don’t know. It hasn’t been tested.

    4. So let’s imagine the worse case scenario. The free spike protein from the vaccine does bind to ACE2 and it does cause the changes seen with native spike protein. Isn’t this an indication that the vaccine is dangerous. Well, no it doesn’t. You have to consider the considerable power of the body to repair itself. When damage happens in small amounts (as in the release of very small quantities of vaccine produced spike protein) the body can cope with this perfectly happily. Damage is occuring to your cells ALL THE TIME. You body has ways of recognising damaged cells, removing and then replacing them. I can’t stress enough, this happens all the time. the problem when you have Covid is that the amount of damage is HUGE because the virus is replicating and producing ever increasing amounts of spike protein which causes cell damage. So even at a stretch whilst it’s possible to say that native spike protein triggers cell death and is therefore cytotoxic in endothelial cells, we just don’t know about the vaccine produced spike protein. But this has been intelligently anticipated and the alterations made to the protein should keep us very safe. the safety data supports this.

    5. So is it the tip of the iceberg? Well, no. If we imagine a full blown covid infection is a glacier, the amount of spike protein produced by the vaccine barely merits the term iceberg, and the amount of spike protein free in the blood after vaccination is probably more akin to a half melted ice cube. And it’s been altered so it’s not even the same as the protein causing cellular damage.

    Who am I? I’ve a qualified biochemist and molecular biologist. I didn’t write up my PhD but I studied for it for 4 years and had enough to pass. I’ve worked in the realms of receptor binding in the blood vessles. You can check me out by looking for Prof Martin Humphries former students and you’ll find me there in the mid 90’s. since then I’ve been passionate about science and have worked to perfect my literature interpretatio skills and presenting science to non-scientific people. I’m more than happy to go further in my discussion of this subject. I have been vaccinated three times with Pfizer (am immunocompromised). Any side effects are being thoroughly tracked. Your dr may not do what you want them to do, but that’s why they studied so hard and for so long. To know more than you and be better at making medical decisions.

    Why do I have a problem large enough with Dr Malone’s explanations to go to the degree of writing this response? Because his language is emotive. It’s not OK to say your are for vaccination and then present science inaccurately with huge holes in the explanation to give the impression of reasons for concern.

    1. I really appreciate your response. You have explained it in a way I understood. Hearing experts like Dr Malone say such negative things about the vaccine makes me nervous.

  2. Please provide an email sharing option on all your articles as both twitter n facebook ban sharing of such articles n block our accounts.

  3. OK so two drs so let’s talk science. Dr Malone you mention that the spike protein is cyctotoxic. By which mechanism? Cytotoxicity refers to either unprogrammed cell death (necrosis) or programmed cell death (apoptosis). Which one is it? The research I’ve read is that the spike protein produces cellular changes but not that it causes cytotoxicity. Happy to read literature you can cite. So whilst we’re spiltting hairs… you’re claiming to be the inventor of mRNA vaccines. In science we all stand on the shoulders of others. You certainly played a role in developing the technology. However, isn’t that a bit like the person who first mixed flour, butter, sugar and eggs together claiming to have invented the Christmas cake. There’s been nothing in your published papers since the early 20’s linked to this, well I certainly can’t find anything during a lit search anyway. So on the surface it appears you are claiming to have far more knowledge than the other scientists who’ve been working on this for at least 20 years since you last did. Please correct me if I’m wrong. Regarding finding the spike protein after the first vaccination elsewhere in the body. Well, let’s get this into proportion shall we? We’re talking about a miniscule amount of spike protein in a vaccine in comparison to a SARS2 infection. And then we’re talking about a miniscule amount of vaccine spike protein being found away from the injection site. So my qualified biochemist’s question is “so what?” Digitalis (from foxgloves) can kill you in a very short period of time. However, at the right dose it’s saved millions of people from dying of heart issues. Deadly nightshade can, well the clue is in the name, kill you and yet the same compounds responsible for death, including atropine, are used effectivley at medical doses in modern medicine, again saving lives. So even if we follow your, in my opinion, flawed description of the spike protein as being cytotoxic my question has to be so what? The fact is that the vaccine is saving millions and you want to argue that because of (list of emotive words starts here) long covid, incomplete scientific understanding, cytotoxicity, lack of full transparency, incomplete studies (don’t agree with you here either) etc etc that there’s a smouldering scandal. You state you are for vaccination and yet your tenacity at trying to stoke a scientific scandal where none exists is stopping people from having that exact same preventative treatment. You don’t discuss, when you’re talking about risks, the risk of new variants because vaccine take up is slow, in balancing your opinion. And that’s just one of the risks you don’t mention. You also don’t discuss the excellent science taking place by thoroughly qualified scientists with far more relevant and up-to-date experience who do not agree with you on the ‘cytotoxicity’ of the spike protein or vaccine safety. You use the right combination of scientific terms that will be poorly understood by the vast majority to push your own agenda. Don’t even get me started on your use of the explanation of ‘equilibrium’ as meaning they are only studying the tip of the iceberg (completely unqualified and factually untrue but sounds impressive) So, let’s see if my comments get taken down. Science is humble and one of the things that attracted me to it in the beginning is the recognition one gives to others and the willingness to admit when you’re not the right person to be giving an opinion. Having great previous work does not make you the expert you claim to be now. As a biochemist and molecular biologist I know how to check these things out, unfortunately others don’t.

    1. @termine Your comments seem well informed (to this layperson). It may be helpful if you were to step out from behind your pseudonym and introduce yourself. Frankly, given the importance of the discussions taking place at TrialSiteNews, comments should only be allowed from persons willing to provide proof of identity (imho). The internet is rife with ad hominem and anonymity seems to be a foundational mechanism.

      1. Really Ken, OK I’m Sally O’Neill, studied biochemistry and molecular biology for 8 years at uni to PhD level. I’ve presented at the following conferences; Oxford, Bristol and Cold Spring Harbour. You will see that I don’t use Dr as I had to step away from my PhD right at the end, but if you’d like to verify my status you can search for Prof. Martin Humphries, Manchester University and look at his former staff and students and you’ll find me there in the late 90’s.

    2. The fact is that the vaccine is saving millions and you want to argue that because of (list of emotive words starts here) long covid, incomplete scientific understanding, cytotoxicity, lack of full transparency, incomplete studies (don’t agree with you here either) etc etc that there’s a smouldering scandal.

      The vaccines are saving lives of many people and ruining the lives of some. The lives saved are the elderly and obese who are at most risk of dying of COVID. The lives ruined – judging by VAERS, studies, stories from our personal network, and reports of our doctors – are uniform across demographics. In spite of low COVID risk among the young and healthy or previous infection, government, media, corporations, and pharmaceutical companies , are pushing for all demographics to be vaccinated. This is not a scientific approach that balances risk against reward.

      The spike protein may not be responsible for vaccine injury at all, but this is irrelevant to the fact that people are getting injured at much higher rates than seasonal flu vaccines.

      1. This is the biodistribution graph created from the Pfizer data obtained via Byram Bridle FOIA request to help you visualize where the vaccine is going in your child’s body (most likely applies to adults also), This shows you the the sites where it cranks out the toxic spike protein; the higher the line, the greater the production of spike protein that can cause damage to blood vessels and cause inflammation.
        Biodistribution of lipid nanoparticles which carry the mRNA show that the ovaries get the highest concentration. This turns the ovaries into a very large manufacturing plant to turn out toxic spike protein. Accumulation in the bone marrow is likely not good either. What are the long term implications of that?
        Go to this link and you can read more about the spike.

        Scandal of the rushed rollout: Censored vaccine expert speaks out
        -Here are some of the highlights he revealed in the interview. Firstly, Dr Malone stated: ‘In the Security and Exchange Commission filings for both Pfizer and Moderna, there’s explicit statements that acknowledge that these are gene therapy-based (vaccines) and the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) perceives them as such.’

        He brilliantly explained the science behind the vaccines by using the metaphor of an industrial robot used to build cars. The RNA in this metaphor is the code that a hacker is inserting into the bit stream to make these robots (your cells) make something they would not have otherwise made. In this case, it’s the spike protein that’s recognised by the immune system triggering a response.

        ‘In a conventional vaccine you can precisely calculate how much protein goes into your shoulder because it’s fixed and predictable, but in the case of these genetic vaccines you can’t,’ he warned.

        ‘You can’t calculate how long it produces this protein and how much protein it makes and exactly what cells in your body the protein goes into. Conventional vaccines go around your cell, but for these gene therapy-based vaccines the target is your cell.’

        When I asked whether he thought the UK (which was the first country in the world to approve the Pfizer vaccine on December 2, 2020) rushed through their approval of it, Dr Malone quickly responded: ‘I wouldn’t say maybe, I would say they did. You can’t take a process that normally takes a decade and push it down into nine months and not cut corners.’

        1. As I’ve explained at length the protein produced by the vaccine is not the same as the protein caused by the infection. Dr Malone is technically correct in saying we can’t quantify the amount of spike protein produced by this method, and yet he was happy to put this down as a use of his technology. What we do know if that mRNA does not remian in the cell for a long time. This has been known for years. The efficacy of the mRNA vaccine is probably exactly due to this amplification of the altered spike protein produced. Dr Malone is using scientific fact presented in a way which is misleading to cause alarm. He is presenting himself as the only person who might have considered this. You can’t take a process that normallt takes 10 years and compress it into nine months. Er, well yes you can. the ten years does not come about because we have to study the vaccine for ten years. It takes that long because a certain number of people have to be vaccinated, followed and the data analysed. The vast amount of money used and the scientists working flat out in hugely larger numbers than ever before are why this has been possible. Scientists have been coming out of retirement to help. I have a friend who works to analyse the AZ numbers and he hasn’t taken a day off since the pandemic started. The UK were revolutionary in their approach. Unfortunately not so with their control methods but on the vaccine they got it right. The question to ask Dr Malone is this: If you had to get results that normally take ten years in less than a year how would you do it? Anything is possible. The vaccine is not preserved in the body and neither is the mRNA long term. The vast majority of side effects of vaccination are know to take place in 6 weeks. Numbers not time in getting this done in 9 months.

      2. Untrue. You are interpreting the risk of Covid to the different generations as you see fit. I have a very fit friend currently in hospital with covid and another non-elderly adult left in a wheelchair with long covid. These are anecdotal but the figures back my claims. Cite your source for injuries compared to flu vaccine please. In numbers maybe but that’s due to the vast number being vaccinated. Please cite and I’ll be happy to look at it.

    3. Being a non medical person. But with B.Sc. and M.Sc. engineering:
      My impression was that short-cuts were taken and the studies should be redone properly.
      I did not get the impression that the mRNA vaccines are necessarily harmful.
      I don’t think its a lot to ask for full testing and full disclosure.

      1. You can see my answer above, but let’s take an example you might feel more comfortable with. It’s World War 3 and the country needs a new tank to deal with very specific problems never encountered before. It normally take 2-3 years to get a new tank developed. How would you achieve what your country needs within the time limits. Hire more engineers, more testers, more statisticians, more analysts, more production staff? Maybe build new factories as well. All this was done for the vaccines. The safety data is huge.

    4. If you truly believe in science, you would focus less on the “credentials” of whose speaking and more on what they are saying. Claims, supported by facts and evidence not letters past one’s name.

      Stop “believing” people and start thinking for yourself.

    5. The U.S. CDC released more data today in their Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a U.S. Government funded database that tracks injuries and deaths caused by vaccines, and they added more than 2000 deaths following COVID-19 shots over what they reported last week.

      Last week they were reporting 6,985 deaths, and this week that number jumped up to 9,048.

      This is by far the largest increase of recorded deaths in one week since they started reporting deaths following COVID-19 shots.

      Besides the 9,048 deaths, there are 7,463 permanent disabilities, 56,971 Emergency Room visits, 26,818 Hospitalizations, and 7,822 Life Threatening injuries following the COVID-19 injections.

      To put this into perspective, there are now 30% more deaths recorded in 7 months since the launch of the COVID-19 shots in December of 2020, than during the entire 31-year history of VAERS recording deaths following vaccines since it started in 1990.

      1990 to November 2020: 6,145 deaths following ALL VACCINES. -https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=AGE&DIED=Yes&VAX_YEAR_LOW=1990&VAX_YEAR_HIGH=2020&VAX_MONTH_HIGH=11
      December 2020 to July 2, 2021: 9,048 deaths from COVID-19 shots only.- https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=CAT&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19

      Last week we reported 622 deaths of unborn children when the pregnant mother received a COVID-19 injection. Using the same search parameters, that number increased to 803 cases this week. -https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=AGE&EVENTS=ON&PERPAGE=200&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+%2810000210%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+complete+%2810061614%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+early+%2810052846%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+incomplete+%2810000217%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+induced+%2810000220%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+late+%2810052847%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+missed+%2810000230%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+of+ectopic+pregnancy+%2810066266%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+spontaneous+%2810000234%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+spontaneous+complete+%2810061616%29&SYMPTOMS[]=Abortion+spontaneous+incomplete+%2810061617%29&VAX=COVID19

      Of the 9,048 deaths the CDC recorded, 3,073 of those deaths are listed as age “unknown.” The CDC is supposed to be looking at the age group via the reports submitted in the 12-17 age group.

      Is the gentic vaccine or gene theap sving lives or is it just putting off problems that will manifest in the future. Is there a study that proves the vax is saving lives because in order for that to be true people who have taken the vax have to be challenged with the virus itself and I’ve not seen any proof along those lines. Do you have any. Simple english please.

  4. Organ transplantation from deceased donors with vaccine-induced thrombosis and thrombocytopenia. Am J Transplant. 2021 Jul 2. doi: 10.1111/ajt.16735. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 34214257.

    The above puts in perspective. Death is a binary event. “shireking gorski” should explain why there are so many organ donors after vaccination that peer reviewed papers are being accepted and published.

    1. @kevinnt I don’t have (free) access to your cited article, and the abstract is uninformative. How many is “so many,” and what percentage of vaccine recipients do these adverse events represent?

    2. Right. The spike protein produced by the vaccines may not be creating the vaccine injuries we’re seeing, but so what? Shrieking Gorski has inadequately accounted for massive VAERS signal. The CDC’s one slide saying there is no signal relative to the background rate of these phenomena is inadequate because background rates fluctuate and the CDC did not show its math. I’m concerned with my risk vs. reward. I’m even more concerned with the risk/reward for my children.

    1. Inflammation. We all respond differently, some have very rare reactions. The general good is always taken into consideration. Thrombosis and myocarditis are treatable. Thrombosis caused by vaccination is not the same as thrombosis due to covid. It is now recognised and certainly in the UK no deaths have accurred after triage processes were put in place to detect on admission and treatment ois very effective. It’s important the problem was identified, and solutions have been found. It’s still better than millions more dying.