What is the 'spike' protein?

And where does it come from?

This is an artists impression of the spike proteins of coronaviruses.

An actual electron micrograph of virus-like particles is shown below. Virus-like particles are only ever seen by oxidising and stressing abnormal cells in cell culture; never in patient samples.

The dots in the image are called spikes or knobs and some seem to be on the surface of the virus-like particles while others appear to be hanging around in the surrounding debris. These dots are most likely artefacts of the many stages of the EM preparation and staining process outlined below.

One group of experimenters who claimed they had EM pictures of SARS2 even noted; ‘Following several failures to recover virions with the characteristic fringe of surface spike proteins, it was found that adding trypsin (an enzyme that digests protein) to the cell culture medium immediately improved virion morphology.’!

The so-called ‘spike’ protein of coronaviruses has been detected in unpurified samples since the 1990’s and is produced by stressing abnormal cells in culture. It is said by some researchers to have a molecular weight of 78.3kDa for the subunit S1, others say the S1 subunit weighs 76kDa and the S2 56 kDa (total 132kDa), another 175kDa, another 180kDa and 90 KDa; reflecting uncleaved and cleaved, another 180 kDa with S1 110kDa and S2 70kDa, another 162-164 kDa and finally some reported the ‘spike’ protein had molecular weight between 170- 230KDa. The protein they are all identifying as the ‘spike’ cannot be the same one protein, or even the same polymer.

Viruses themselves, let alone the spike/knob shaped dots near their surface, have not been purified. Their constituent parts cannot therefore be analysed either. It is therefore completely unknown how these researchers claim that these proteins are the ‘spike’ proteins of a virus.

There is no evidence that p132-230 protein comes from a virus nor that it is spike shaped.

Montagnier couldn’t find the ‘HIV’ spike or knob protein gp120 (later found to be a polymer) in his cell culture, nor gp41 which is the alleged nucleocapsid. He could only find p24 (also found in pregnant women, cancers and inflammation) and one antibody that binds with it. A virus with only one protein and one antibody?

It is likely that p132-230 is a protein involved in inducing inflammation and the stimulation of a detox/healing event. During the recovery phase antibodies to it will be produced to bring the body back to homeostasis. Immunoglobulins that bind to and inactivate these cellular inflammatory proteins are produced in titres of up to 30 times during the convalescence phase of detoxification.

If viruses don't exist what about antibodies?

There is no evidence that any clots or cell damage are caused by the spike of a virus. The damage or clotting observed in ‘infected’ people could be caused by 'co-morbidities', obesity, hypertension, CVD, dysbiosis, lack of sleep, medications; statins, metformin, anti-depressants, ACE inhibitors, anti-virals and anti-proteases or flu or other vaccines. All the studies on clots are observational, not controlled studies, the cause cannot be ascribed to any one variable.

The product makers claim to have been able to reverse engineer one of the proteins that have been dubbed the spike protein into an mRNA sequence. This sequence apparently produces a protein of molecular weight between 180-200 KDa, that’s still a huge range for one protein, so it may not always be producing the same protein. p180-200 may bind to and down-regulate the ACE-2 receptor. However it is not known whether the mRNA survives storage and injection nor whether it is translated into the spike proteins allegedly detected in the vaccinated, or whether this is due to the trauma and toxicity of the vaccination itself.

It seems likely that researchers would have tested and observed the inflammatory effects of p180-200 on ACE-2 receptors, lymphocytes, clotting, heart and endothelial cells in vitro; so it is (un)surprising that they still chose it for the mRNA mass testing trial.

Jo

References

1.Gluschankof P, Mondor I, Gelderblom HR, Sattentau QJ. Cell membrane vesicles are a major contaminant of gradient-enriched human immunodeficiency virus type-1 preparations. Virology 1997. 230:125-133. The particles with arrows are also, by their own definition, the wrong size and shape to be ‘HIV’.

2.https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32079-1/fulltext

3)Isolation and rapid sharing of the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS‐CoV‐2) from the first patient diagnosed with COVID‐19 in Australia

Leon Caly, Julian Druce, Jason Roberts, Katherine Bond, Thomas Tran, Renata Kostecki, Yano Yoga, William Naughton, George Taiaroa, Torsten Seemann, Mark B Schultz, Benjamin P Howden, Tony M Korman, Sharon R Lewin, Deborah A Williamson and Mike G Catton

Med J Aust 2020; 212 (10): 459-462. || doi: 10.5694/mja2.50569

4)The trypsin-enhanced infection of porcine epidemic diarrhea virus is determined by the S2 subunit of the spike glycoprotein.Tan Y, Sun L, Wang G, Shi Y, Dong W, Fu Y, Fu Z, Chen H, Peng G.J Virol. 2021 Mar 10;95(11):e02453-20. doi: 10.1128/JVI.02453-20. Online ahead of print.PMID: 33692210 The use of not-blinded ‘mock’ (ie normal serum) controls in this experiment is not good enough. An adequate control must come from a sick patient with pneumonia etc, but SARS2 negative treated in exactly the same way as the test sample, ie adding antibiotics and starving the cells. Even if they show different activity-it still wouldn’t mean a virus was present. It would mean there are different proteins in samples from different animals.

Inexplicably the reason that millions of animals imprisoned together in cramped, dark, dank conditions being fed food unnatural to their nature while standing in the own shit, never being allowed to run, feel grass under foot, interact with their families or see the sun very often develop diarrhoea is assumed to be due to a virus.

5. The activity and replication of viruses can only be shown indirectly. The addition of trypsin (or proteinase K) is also essential to show the desired cytopathic effects (CPE) which proves the ‘virus’ is there. However adding trypsin to uninfected cultures also causes CPE. Immunofluoresence assay (IFA) is another way to show ‘viral activity’. IFA detects the antigens thought to be from the virus eg the glycoprotein of the ‘spike’. The proteins (antigens) are labelled with a fluorescent marker linked to an antibody, thereby making the protein visible. It also requires trypsin which breaks protein links to reveal antigens

Predigestion with trypsin is a vey common lab technique used to break protein links and ‘unmask’ hidden antigens in patient samples. Once they are unmasked the antigens can be labelled with antibodies, such as those used in IFA, so that the antigens can be visualised. In virology world an increase in IFA by addition of trypsin means that the presence of trypsin in a host organism is essential to split the spike protein at the ‘cleavage’ site and facilitate entry of the virus into the cell, where it then replicates, making more copies of the antigen (and more florescence). The lack of activity by not adding trypsin shows that the spike subunit is trypsin dependent (4). To anyone with any sense it would indicate that adding a digestive enzyme to cultures increases CPE’s and IFA by disrupting proteins and unmasking and visualising previously undetected antigens. Not adding any trypsin leaves these proteins masked and undetected. Doing controls would, of course, reveal this, which is why they don’t do them.

6)https://www.genscript.com/protein/Z03501-SARS_CoV_2_Spike_protein_S1_.html

7)https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-15562-9

8)https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7771249/

9)https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2170676/

10)Pinter A, Honnen WJ, Tilley SA, Bona C, Zaghouani H, Gorny MK, Zolla-Pazner S. Oligomeric structure of gp41, the transmembrane protein of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Virol 1989. 63:2674-2679.

11)https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8241425/

12)https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2170676/

13)https://www.creative-diagnostics.com/recombinant-sars-cov-2-s1-277800-335.htm

14)https://www.raybiotech.com/recombinant-sars-cov-2-2019-ncov-spike-protein-s2-subunit/

15)https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.16.994152v1.full.pdf

16) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8786601/

One study showed that after a first injection the p180-200 peaks and falls, implying that the mRNA has been translated, but is not detectable after a second (11); perhaps it is not being translated or antibodies are binding to it. Another study shows p180-200 is still present 60 days after injection (16). Post-mortem studies of mRNA injected people have been shown to have p180-200 on their cells in many parts of the body.

Studies cannot detect the jab mRNA, nor can we know if the p180-200 is produced by the mRNA rather than by the body and its production due to the nanoparticles, the toxins and trauma of the jab or other reasons. Proteins are meant to enter the body though the digestive tract, injecting any protein directly into the blood stream will cause disruption.

Proteins that fall in the range p132-230 have been shown to be involved in inducing inflammation and stimulating the body into detoxification from toxins and the products of stress. Acute inflammation is how the body heals itself. It is chronic inflammation that is the killer.

All vaccinations, all medications, ACE inhibitors, being obese, having diabetes, a dysbiosis or a glutathione deficiency (all risk factors for ‘covid’) and anti-’virals’ all interfere with the body’s finely tuned healing processes. They will affect enzyme production, inhibit the body’s ability to return to balance and will cause pathologies.

Production of ‘antibodies’ that bind to p132-230 in the convalescent phase may dampen down their effects after the detox episode and allow the body to return to balance.

The so called ‘nucleocapsid’ protein has also never been shown to come from a virus. Again it is produced in sick people, healthy people and cell cultures. It is also involved in the process and control of a detoxification event or healing crisis, which explains why those people who have gone through such an event produce antibodies that bind to this protein. These people are mistakenly said to have developed ‘natural immunity’.

Those injected with mRNA instructing the body to make p180-200, and not having gone through such a detox event, would not be expected to have antibodies to the ‘nucleocapsid’ protein. This does not mean that they lack ‘natural immunity’.