Host: Dr. Ryan Cole Guests: Kevin Mckernan, Dr. Jessica Rose, and Dr. David J. Speicher
It started as a fringe concern—now it’s peer-reviewed science: DNA contamination has been confirmed in Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccine vials, at levels far exceeding regulatory limits. In this timely webinar, we speak with the authors of the study that brings nearly three years of independent investigation to a head.
Host Dr. Ryan Cole is joined by Dr. Jessica Rose, Kevin McKernan, and Dr. David J. Speicher to walk through the methods, results, and urgent implications of their new peer-reviewed paper—including the detection of high levels of residual DNA and the presence of SV40, a gene sequence linked to cancer. They’ll break down the study’s methodology, key findings, and the regulatory implications everybody needs to understand.
They told us the COVID shots were pure. Sterile. Safe.
But behind the regulatory curtain, independent scientists discovered something else entirely: significant DNA contamination—far above FDA and WHO safety limits, dose after dose.
In this crucial webinar, Dr. Ryan Cole sits down with fellow whistleblowers and lead researchers Kevin McKernan, Dr. Jessica Rose, and Dr. David Speicher to break down the now-replicated study at the heart of the controversy. Together, they lay out what was found, why it matters, and what the regulators didn’t do.
This isn’t just about thresholds and tolerances. It’s about cancer, autoimmunity, and the future of informed consent.
“If we’re right about this… maybe this is why there’s so much more cancer in the world,” – Dr. Jessica Rose
The paper has now been cited thousands of times. But the authors still face blacklisting, censorship, and attacks—not just on the science, but on their credibility. This webinar reveals why… and what they want the public to understand before it’s too late.
Meet the Scientists Behind the Study
The DNA contamination study was spearheaded by a team of independent scientists committed to open-source research, transparency, and scientific rigor. Among them:
- Kevin McKernan, a genomics researcher and former team leader for the Human Genome Project at MIT, first raised the alarm about DNA fragments in the mRNA vaccine vials in early 2023. His lab’s sequencing technology detected unexpected signals — what he later confirmed to be residual plasmid DNA, including SV40 promoter sequences.
- Dr. David Speicher, a molecular virologist and bioinformatician with expertise in synthetic biology, joined McKernan in expanding and validating the initial findings. Dr. Speicher also holds extensive experience in gene therapy development, making him uniquely positioned to evaluate the implications of DNA contaminants delivered via lipid nanoparticles.
- Dr. Jessica Rose, IMA Senior Fellow, an immunologist and biostatistician known for her independent analyses of vaccine adverse event data, provided statistical support and helped interpret the findings in light of emerging safety signals.
This team, operating without corporate or institutional backing, prioritized transparency over prestige, releasing their full sequencing data publicly and inviting replication. Their work has now been replicated by multiple labs, though it continues to face resistance from journal gatekeepers and public health agencies.
What Was Actually Tested—and What Was Found
Dr. David Speicher personally tested 44 COVID-19 mRNA vaccine vials using multiple methods, including qPCR and nanopore sequencing, to detect and quantify plasmid DNA and SV40 enhancer/promoter sequences. His team included Kevin McKernan, a former lead on the Human Genome Project at MIT.
“All of the vials contained large amounts of plasmid DNA… All of Pfizer’s contained an SV40 enhancer/promoter.” – Dr. Speicher
Their findings:
- Every vial contained plasmid DNA.
- Every Pfizer vial contained the SV40 promoter/enhancer.
- DNA persisted even after RNA was enzymatically degraded.
- DNA appeared to be co-packaged inside the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs).
“The DNA is actually in the lipid nanoparticles—it’s traveling with the RNA.” – Kevin McKernan
This last point carries serious implications. If the DNA is indeed riding along inside the LNP “delivery bubbles,” as McKernan described them, then the exposure potential is far greater than regulators assumed when they set limits for “naked” DNA floating freely in solution. Those limits, the authors argue, are outdated when you consider that these are not typical vaccines. In fact, they are not “vaccines” at all, rather they are gene therapy injections that should have different regulatory requirements entirely.
Learn more about the study details:
Why This Study Faced Significant Resistance
Before it was finally published in September, 2025, this study encountered fierce resistance. According to Dr. David Speicher, the team submitted their findings to six different journals, with delays stretching into years. Even now, the panel notes, many institutional voices still push back—challenging either the methods, the findings, or their significance.
What the detractors say:
Critics have attempted to downplay the findings in multiple ways:
- Claiming the detected DNA is within or near legacy mass limits
- Arguing RNA contamination may have inflated DNA estimates
- Asserting that SV40 is irrelevant because it’s not a full virus
- Suggesting that if the findings were valid, regulators would have acted already
But the authors reject those claims—and they came prepared.
“Yes, RNase lowers the signal about 10-fold, but it still left 10–100× over the FDA limit in many cases.” — Kevin McKernan
What the authors say:
- The DNA signal persisted even after RNA digestion with RNase—proving it wasn’t just leftover RNA confusing the instruments.
- SV40 enhancer/promoter elements are functionally active regulatory sequences used in gene therapy tools—not inert scraps.
- Regulators have known about the issue for years. The EMA discussed SV40 elements in Pfizer vials as early as May 2021, yet liability shields allowed rollout to continue.
“It’s wild to me how the regulators do know about this… and they’re still pushing it. This could potentially be a cancer existential crisis—we don’t know; we have to find out.” — Dr. Jessica Rose
Even after overcoming gatekeeping in peer review, the team has faced targeted censorship and reputational attacks—adding urgency to their core message: let the science speak, no matter how uncomfortable the findings.
“I don’t think the public knows how corrupt the scientific journals are… most of the reviewers weren’t doing review; they were getting fact-checked.” — Kevin McKernan
How Manufacturing Choices Shaped Risk
The study’s findings aren’t just about what was detected, but how it got there in the first place. According to the panel, the DNA contamination stems directly from the manufacturers’ decisions—specifically, the shift in how vaccine components were produced at scale.
During clinical trials, the mRNA was transcribed from PCR-amplified DNA templates, which are relatively clean and easy to purify. But in commercial production, manufacturers used E. coli plasmids—bacterial DNA loops that are harder to strip clean. That switch may have saved time and money, but it came at a cost: residual DNA, especially tiny fragments, are harder to remove and easier to miss with older detection methods.
“The original trial batches were made with PCR—cleaner input. Then they switched to E. coli plasmids for scaling up. That’s where the contamination risk increased.” — Kevin McKernan
These decisions, made behind closed doors, were never clearly communicated to doctors, patients, or even regulators. And yet they change the risk profile entirely.
The Recall That Didn’t Happen
If DNA contamination were found in a food product or baby formula, it would be pulled from shelves immediately. But when similar concerns surfaced about mRNA vaccine vials, no recall came. No warning. Just silence—or worse, active dismissal.
“We hear it all the time—foods get pulled for contamination. Instead, here they’re still telling people to ‘get your booster,’ and no one’s pulling the product.” — Dr. Ryan Cole
The panel argues that this lack of action stems not from lack of evidence, but from liability shields and a regulatory system unwilling—or unable—to respond. With emergency use authorization (EUA) protections still in place, regulators have little incentive to investigate or intervene.
Dr. Jessica Rose highlighted the hypocrisy:
“It’s wild to me how the regulators do know about this… and they’re still pushing it. This could potentially be a cancer existential crisis—we don’t know; we have to find out.” — Dr. Jessica Rose
Science Needs Transparency, Access, and Better Review
The panel didn’t just sound the alarm; they proposed practical reforms to improve how science is evaluated and shared.
Kevin McKernan called for a reputation-based review system—comparing it to Uber, where reviewers themselves could earn credibility and visibility over time. This would break the monopoly of hidden peer review and reward transparency.
“You need pricing signals and transparency—let great reviewers rise; let bad ones be avoided.” — Kevin McKernan
Open access was another point of friction. In this case, the authors paid $3,000 to keep the study public. Otherwise, most people would have to pay $50 just to read it. This underscores how cost becomes a barrier to both accountability and public awareness.
And though peer-reviewed publication took months, the preprint version of the study had already been cited 27 times before then. Most published papers will be cited a total of 3 times. This raises a question: what really drives credibility in science today? The authors argue that visibility and reproducibility should outweigh establishment endorsement.
A Better Path Forward
This study raised serious questions. Not just about what’s in the vials, but about how oversight failed. Even now, regulators and manufacturers have yet to acknowledge the presence of DNA fragments or SV40 sequences in COVID-19 mRNA shots. For many, it’s too late to undo the damage.
But no matter the injuries caused in the past, IMA is focused on the future. We are building tools for healing and accountability — resources forged by the very scientists and doctors leading this research.
Explore our growing library of trusted protocols and guides:
🔹 Post-Vaccine Injury Treatment Protocol
A comprehensive guide for individuals experiencing lingering symptoms after mRNA vaccination
🔹 Study: Mechanisms of Turbo Cancer
New insights into post-mRNA cancer trends, DNA damage, and immune suppression
🔹 Cancer Care Monograph (Free Full Book Download)
In-depth strategies for cancer care, written by IMA CSO Dr. Paul Marik
🔹 Guide: Stopping the 10 Deadliest Cancers
How to identify risks and deploy repurposed strategies
🔹 Guide: The Approach to Repurposed Drugs for Cancer
Our step-by-step strategy for evaluating and applying non-toxic treatments
More on: COVID Vaccines | Dr. David J. Speicher | Dr. Jessica Rose | Dr. Ryan Cole | Kevin McKernan | Vaccine Safety
