The New Eugenics Movement – Part 3


by Dr Ah Kahn Syed

This is a deep dive into the possibility that similarities in the design of the genetic COVID vaccines that magically appeared overnight in February 2020 were more than coincidental.

The findings are significant because they imply collusion, not competition, between all the vaccine companies who shared a (yet to be determined) common goal.

Following the revelations a few weeks ago in the article below (which you really, really should read to understand what is going on)….

I went on to investigate something that popped out at me during the writing of that article and the investigation of the vaccine genome sequences. You see, I’m a patterns sort of person. Some people are good at recognising faces, others are good at playing music by ear and I’m not bad at recognising patterns in numbers (or at least, recognising when something is up).

And looking at the COVID vaccine sequences there is definitely something “up”… and it’s something that certain people have been suspicious about for over 2 years.


Now, in case you are already lost “#CoptiGate” was all about the fact that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines completely replicated the original COVID virus spike protein to the exact amino acid of the 1273 amino acid sequence that made up that protein1, but changed the underlying nucleotide sequence that provided the code for that amino acid sequence.

The reason for that will become clear, hopefully, soon.

“CoptiGate” was short for “Codon optimisation gate” (“gate” being, in this context, a scandal).

Codon? What’s a Codon?

A codon is a triplet of nucleotides (genetic code characters selected from C-A-G-T2) that tell the cell which amino acid to add to a chain of amino acids in making a protein as mentioned long long ago in this article.

Proteins are the functional units of the body and without them life on earth would not exist. The “spike protein” of the COVID (SARS-Cov-2) virus is an example and it is made up of 1273 amino acids something like this…

Sample of genomic and amino acid sequence from Pfizer vaccine (top) and Novavax vaccine (bottom). The corresponding amino acids (MVFL..) are labelled above the nucleotides

Now in this diagram the protein sequence is on the top line “MFVFLVLLPL….” and the genome sequence is underneath. The two genome sequences are different yet code for exactly the same amino acids. This is possible because there are 64 combinations of any 3 nucleotides (C-A-G-T, 4^3 = 64) but there are only 20 possible amino acids (M-F-V-L etc3). In the old days we would use a codon wheel to remember which triple of nucleotides coded for which amino acid. It looked something like this:

Amino Acids and DNA and RNA Bases | Computational Chemistry Resources
Codon Wheel. Each triplet of nucleotides are read from the centre of the wheel (marked 5’) outwardly. For instance CAU – bottom left – codes for His (Histidine). U (uracil) is the RNA version of T (thymine) in DNA sequences.

Because there are many more triplet combinations of DNA than there are amino acids that are coded by them, we get redundancy. So for instance the amino acid Alanine can be coded for by GCU, GCC, GCA or GCG – 4 different combinations. Any of those combinations, with some limitations, will produce the exact same amino acid.

So in the example above the Pfizer sequence ATGTTCGT[G]TTC and the Novavax sequence ATGTTCGT[C]TTC code for exactly the same amino acid sequence even though they are different at the nucleotide level. From the point of view of a cell, it probably won’t know the difference.

In fact, the only way that you would notice the difference in most cases is to actually sequence the genetic code – or to perform PCR (because PCR is very, very specific to a genomic sequence).

In a PCR test where the primers are selected for the specific sequence, only one of the two sequences mentioned above would be picked up by PCR (in the case of a PCR test, only one would test positive).

So, why did the vaccine manufacturers change the nucleotide sequence to their own proprietary sequence even though that apparently resulted in the exact same amino acid sequence?

Well, according to them and as specified in this paper from Xia it was “to increase the G-C content to produce more protein”. Except from Xia:

There are two lines of evidence suggesting that CGG is not the optimal codon. The first involves the codon usage of human ribosomal protein genes (“RP” in Table 1) which are known to be highly expressed. These genes prefer CGC codons (Table 1). The second and more direct evidence is from codon usage of genes highly expressed in skeletal muscle cells (which are relevant here because the vaccine mRNA is injected and carried by the lipid nanoparticles into skeletal muscle cells to be translated, although vaccine mRNA could also be carried to some other tissues). …. the CGC codon preferred by ribosomal protein genes are also preferred by highly expressed muscle genes.

These multiple lines of evidence suggest that CGC is a better codon than CGG. The designers of the mRNA vaccines (especially mRNA-1273) chose a wrong codon as the optimal codon.

So let’s just check what the manufacturers actually used for the Arginines in the vaccine sequence, that according to Xia should have been “CGC”. As stated by Xia, Moderna was the worst offender converting nearly all its arginines to CGG. [It is worth noting here that increasing the CG content actually risks the G-quadruplexes that cause prion neurodegenerative disease as noted by Kevin McKernan in 2021].

Here’s the chart (SARSCOV2 is the viral sequence on which the vaccines were supposedly modelled):

Now the very attentive and eagle-eyed of you will notice two things

(1) That Pfizer and Moderna for some reason, not colluding at all, decided to ditch the idea of using a CGC codon for all 42 arginines despite the fact that the CGG that they chose (and AGA for Pfizer) were not the “optimal” codons…


(2) That Novavax didn’t use any CGG codons to code for Arginine, thus completely negating my contention from “The new eugenics movement: Part 2”, which was that all three vaccine manufacturers appear to have colluded to increase the number of instances of CGG in their vaccine sequence.

Well, not so fast – because as always, there’s a twist. Here’s the triplet count I posted in the article. Note that I used the word “Triplet” in the table previous article (reposted below) and the word “Codon” above.

That’s because “codon” means that the sequence actually codes for an amino acid and “triplet” means that it just exists in the sequence. So in the full sequence of 3819 nucleotides there are 3817 triplets (counting any 3 letters from the start to the end), but only 1273 codons (counting in threes from the start).

So putting this all together, it seems obvious that Pfizer and Moderna decided for “independent” reasons to change all their arginines to the “wrong” CGG codon and that contributed to both of them maximising the number of CGG triplets in the sequence. Novavax also “independently” decided not to use CGG codons for arginine yet still managed to massively increase the number of CGG triplets in their sequence.

Smart, but why does it matter?

Well, because all these approaches have the impact of dropping PAM sequences into the code under cover of “codon optimisation” with plausible deniability against the idea that dropping PAM sequences into the code was what they were actually trying to do. Now why would they want to do that?

Just as a reminder:

A PAM sequence is a triplet of CGG (preferred), or any other nGG triplet – irrespective of whether it is in a coding location – that enables an anchor for CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing

“It’s all a conspiracy theory”

Of course. There is no chance that three (or four) “independent” corporations would end up at the same point having taken radically different paths. Is there? No, that would be “conspiracy theory” which is almost always explained by coincidence.

Well buckle up because it’s time for some mathematical probability.

And this is the question:

What is the probability that at least three “independent” corporations managed to maintain a specific sequence in their genomic vaccines if they were all performing different codon optimisations in order to create sufficiently diverse gene sequences that they could claim a patent on their own version, without appearing to have colluded4?

And for that sequence to be a suitable sequence to be a target for CRISPR (Cas9) by being both long enough to act as an anchor and ending in a CGG (PAM) sequence


Well I’m going to answer this for you.

But first let’s take you through this question

How similar are the vaccine sequences?

This is such an important question that gets very little attention. You see, each of the vaccine manufacturers were apparently creating their vaccines “overnight” once the genome sequence of the COVID virus was released in January 2020.

Well of course, this is not possible. It is possible to design a sequence like this in silico (on a computer) but you have no idea whether it will work when put into cells. That’s because some codon sequences will just go “bleh” when introduced to a cell and others might produce the wrong sequence due to instability of the mRNA ass described here:

Although codon optimization of the target sequence can provide certain benefits, it may also result in reduced mRNA stability in solution, which impairs its functionality. Therefore, it is necessary to experimentally confirm the stability of the structure of optimized nucleic acids.

So it’s not just simply a case of “computer says this so let’s go with it”. There are a myriad of options for codon optimisation and all the products needs to be produced, cultured in cells, the protein tested etc etc. That takes weeks if not months. But Pfizer and Moderna did it in one day. Of course. They must have used the Unicorn protocol.

Putting that claim aside we can actually see the result they came up with, and align all the sequences from all the manufacturers. This requires some work because they are not all readily available. Fortunately we have help from people like Kevin McKernan who was the first to actually sequence the vaccine vials to see what was in them. And the publication from Castriuta documented the vaccine sequence as retrieved 28 days after vaccination (remember they said it only lasted a day or two?).

As stated earlier, all the vaccine sequences produced the same protein apart from the small 3-amino acid change in the Novavax sequence. The AstraZeneca vaccine, which was supposed to be different because it was a declared DNA gene therapy from the outset, had an identical amino acid sequence to the other vaccines apart from the fact that it did not use the 2-proline mutation. Strangely its nucleotide sequence was relatively secret and only published in the patent database in August 20235.

Now if we align all these sequences in Ugene we can get a “dissimilarity matrix” which tells you how different all of these sequences are from each other – and from the original Wuhan viral spike that they are meant to copy – at the nucleotide level:

This table might seem complex but it’s not – it just compares how identical each sequence is from each other, with the following noted:

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
1 Comment
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Making Clones obedient to a certain persons Gares Soros and Schwaab the Star Wars movies about those Clones