PART II: Implications of plasmid DNA fragments in blood products
Experts say there are significant blind spots in the oversight of blood products, leaving the public in a dangerous state of speculation.
Part I of this investigation examined the findings of researcher Sandeep Chakraborty, who identified unexpected DNA sequences in the blood of individuals vaccinated with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines—sequences that should not have been present.
The detection of gene fragments encoding 'SV40' and 'Kanamycin,' which are specific to the plasmid DNA used in vaccine manufacturing, has now raised significant concerns about the safety of blood products.
If these genetic sequences can persist in the bloodstream after vaccination, and potentially end up in blood products such as fresh frozen plasma, whole blood, or cryoprecipitate, what risks might they pose to recipients?"
Experts in blood safety are now questioning whether Australia’s current blood donation and monitoring systems are sufficiently equipped to manage these potential health risks.
Australia’s Current Approach
The Australian Red Cross Lifeblood recommends waiting three days after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine before donating blood, primarily to ensure donors feel well and exhibit no immediate side effects.
However, the organisation has confirmed it does not track the COVID-19 vaccination status of donors, nor has it tested for these genetic components of mRNA vaccines in donated blood.
In a statement, it said:
Whilst blood services cannot guarantee with absolute certainty that there are no vaccine components in donated blood, in the small chance it was there, it would be at ultra-low levels and there is no evidence of a risk to a recipient.
Richard Davis, a retired anaesthetist and former member of the South Australian Red Cross blood transfusion committee, has questioned the robustness of these assurances.
“If the Red Cross is not documenting the vaccination status of donors, how can it possibly track any harm?” asked Dr Davis.
“Further, the Red Cross should not claim there is no evidence of risk to recipients when such effects may take years to manifest,” he added.
Dr Davis, whose research into safe blood transfusions earned him the Gilbert Brown Prize in 1980 from the Royal Australasian College of Anaesthetists, brings decades of experience in ensuring blood transfusion safety.
Despite assurances of progress over the decades, Dr Davis continues to hear reports from patients who have received blood products, only to discover that no record of the transfusion exists—and it is this lack of oversight that concerns him.
The “Look Back” program
The Australian Red Cross has a "Look Back" program designed to investigate cases where recipients may have been harmed by contaminated blood products within the past 20 years.
However, Dr Davis has raised concerns about the program’s limitations in addressing novel risks like potential DNA contamination in donor blood.
No studies have been conducted to determine whether these genetic sequences impact specific types of donated blood components—red cells, plasma, or platelets.
“If they’re not monitoring the problem of genetic sequences in donor blood, then they won’t be able to follow up on anything if this contamination becomes a problem in the future,” Dr Davis noted.
Historical failures
In the 1980s and 1990s, Australia experienced the ‘tainted’ blood scandal, where thousands of Australians were infected with HIV and Hepatitis C through contaminated blood transfusions.
In 2004, a submission to the Senate review reported that about 80% of those infected were never contacted by the Australian Red Cross about receiving tainted blood, nor were they offered any medical support.
“We cannot afford to repeat those mistakes by ignoring the findings of foreign genetic sequences in blood,” Dr Davis warned. “The organisation has a history of denying there is a problem, until it becomes impossible to ignore.”
The National Blood Authority, responsible for overseeing blood safety in Australia, has not responded to media enquiries.
United States
In the United States, the American Red Cross has taken a more rigid position regarding concerns about potential contaminants in the vaccine ending up in donor blood.
As late as September 2022, the American Red Cross stated on X, “We don’t label blood products as containing vaccinated or unvaccinated blood as the COVID-19 vaccine does not enter the bloodstream.”
However, this assertion that “the COVID-19 vaccine does not enter the bloodstream,” is patently false.
Findings by Chakraborty, data from biodistribution studies in Japanese regulatory documents, and a study published this month in Nature, all clearly show that the vaccine leaves the injection site and circulates widely throughout the body.
This leaves significant blind spots in ensuring transfusion safety and allowing recipients of blood products to fully understand what they are consenting to receive.
Peri-operative blood transfusions carry lower risk, as they are almost exclusively composed of packed red blood cells, which lack a nucleus and therefore cannot produce spike protein or risk DNA integration.
The need for scrutiny
Currently, no authority has announced plans to investigate whether plasmid DNA sequences persist in donated blood or to examine the long-term implications for the safety of blood products.
Could these genetic sequences be transfused into recipients and cause unforeseen health effects? Would recipients have religious or ethical objections to receiving blood products contaminated with plasmid DNA fragments?
“Without data, we are left in a dangerous state of speculation,” Dr Davis said. “It’s critical that we address these uncertainties head-on. Ignoring them now could have serious consequences in the future.”
He added, “In my experience, these organisations appear more focused on preserving public confidence than addressing valid scientific concerns. This lack of transparency is deeply troubling.”
Until further studies are conducted, the implications of plasmid DNA sequences in donor blood remain a troubling unknown for policymakers, healthcare providers, and the public.
See PART I: Blood samples contain DNA sequences from COVID-19 mRNA vaccine
Wilful blindness to protect the Red Cross reputation parallels TGA wilful blindness to protect major funder big pharma Pfizer
And the people must be reminded they cannot question these organisations because going to the media which is that 4th estate we can supposedly use has done a deal via TNI (40 strong MDM/SM international news cabal Trusted News initiate) to flag and not report on certain issues linked to vaccines and treatments and goodness help us even prevention.
BRAVE AND HONEST REPORTING AGAIN MaryAnne thanks…
My understanding is that although a charity the Blood Banks sells donated blood overseas to enable it's overheads to be paid and I'm sure those in upper management are well compensated.