Making Vaccines

Patrick Quanten MD


Vaccines are currently produced in a variety of ways. Scientists maintain that the choices they make about how to produce vaccines are based on information about the microbe. The following are the most frequently used types of vaccines.

Attenuated Vaccines. Here live but weakened micro-organisms are used. This is the preferred method for viruses. They don’t “kill” the viruses because scientists know that viruses are not alive. To “weaken” the virus it is passed through a series of cell cultures, usually animal embryos such as fertilised chicken eggs. This may be done up to 200 times and has the effect that the virus loses its ability to “work” in human cells. This indicates that it has changed and is no longer the same virus which is believed to cause the disease. This method does not work for bacteria and the method cannot be used in people who have their immune systems compromised as in very sick people, people treated with any kind of anticancer therapy, immunosuppressant therapy, corticosteroids.

Inactivated Vaccines. Here the micro-organisms are killed by chemicals, heat or radiation. These vaccines are more stable and require less adjuvants. However, they are also said to produce a lesser immune response. In effect, there is no proof most human systems react at all to exposure to the vaccine.

Subunit Vaccines. Instead of the entire microbe, subunit vaccines include only the antigens that stimulate the immune system. As there is no scientific way to evaluate an immune response, there is no method to measure what this vaccine does in terms of immunity. In laboratories they manufacture these antigens by stimulating another organism, such as a fungus, to produce masses of specific antigens completely dissociated from the micro-organism that is believed to cause the disease.

Toxoid Vaccines. For bacteria that secrete toxins or harmful chemicals vaccines are produced to stimulate the system to specifically react to the toxin. These toxins are “inactivated” by treating them with formalin or formaldehyde and then injected into people. These are themselves, of course, toxic products to any living system.

Conjugate Vaccines. Some bacteria produce an outer coating of sugar molecules, called polysaccharides, that disguises the antigen. The body does not recognise the antigens because it doesn’t come in touch with it. Scientists are now making sure that the system comes in touch with the antigen by linking the antigen from another microbe to the polysaccharides. Now your system is reacting to the different antigen in order for it to reject the polysaccharides to which this antigen is attached. This is a vaccine!

DNA Vaccines. Once the genes from a microbe have been analysed they attempt to make a DNA vaccine.One can wonder about this wonder! Our cells don’t normally come in contact with the DNA of another organism as this resides inside the nucleus of the organism, well hidden from any outside contact. The only natural way our cells meet pieces of foreign DNA is when those micro-organisms have already completely been broken down. In other words, when the micro-organism has died and is nothing more than debris our system clears up the mess. This proves that at that time our system is already in full control of the situation. Who needs a vaccine at this point?

And still they keep looking for different ways to make new types of vaccines effective, meaning invoking a response of the immune system. A response from the immune system in turn means being able to pin a particular interpretation on the results of some very narrow testing.

The company Rockville Novavax Inc. is developing a new flu vaccine without the hassle of having to deal with the flu virus and the repeated incubations in fertilised chicken eggs. They propose to use virus-like particles with which they want to elicit a similar immune response in people. This is good marketing as there are a lot of problems with the more traditional flu vaccine production. An outbreak of flu could put eggs in short supply, for instance. In addition, vaccine-makers that use eggs cannot begin developing new vaccines until the Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (USA) creates a viral reference strain. In other words, government laboratories first produce a very specific strain, of which they say it causes a specific outbreak but which is different from the one “found” in infected cases!

Novavax, instead, uses information the CDC posts in the Global Initiative on Sharing Avian Influenza Data (GISAID) database, launched in 2006. So, it uses old information on “bits” of the virus they believe we need protection against. It is these bits they use to create an immune response in the body. How specific can this response be if there isn’t even a correlation between the new outbreak, the cause of the outbreak and the particles our system is, so called, reacting to? On the other hand, the advantage is that the vaccine can be made rapidly and in huge quantities, which allows for huge profits. So far, the only virus-like particle based vaccine to hit the market is Merck & Co.’s Gardasil, which won FDA approval as preventative against human papillomavirus which they have made responsible for cervical cancer. This unproven link combined with the easy way to produce a vaccine that may have a vague relationship with a virus has boost the vaccine making business enormously, as they now know their vaccines can be approved, can be given a license to print money.

And then there is the team led by Kuniaki Nerome, director of a biological resources centre in Nago, who are trying to make flu vaccines by using the genetic information of silkworms. Of course this method is less costly and quicker, otherwise they wouldn’t have developed it. Here again, the major component is a protein that exists on the surface of the virus. They have identified this protein and have now discovered a way of producing lots of these proteins. What we forget is that there is a limited number of proteins in the universe. The diversity of living material comes from the various combinations that can be made with the available proteins. This means that no protein can ever be “specific” for a particular virus or for any other living structure. So, whenever you try to focus a reaction on a specific protein or other particle you must, per definition, target a wide range of structures in which those proteins or particles occur.

Do you also know how they harvest the protein they have produced in these silkworms? They crush the worms and “purify” the powder. First of all, every protein that makes up the worm is present in the mix. Secondly, what does this purification process entail? Does it mean that they throw away a lot of stuff, stuff they have decided they don’t want? On what basis are these decision made? I would like to remind you that this is exactly the method used that puts us on the wrong track with regards the meaning and function of the DNA. It is by looking at what we had thrown out – in this case, the protein coating of the genetic information – that we began to understand that a gene could never be responsible for one single expression, such as blue eyes or breast cancer. The result of that initial mistake is a disaster, as sixty years on medical semi-science is still wasting billions every year on inappropriate research into genetic therapy. Back to the poor worms and the work of a genius.

Here is a stroke of luck! They found that the structure of the particles is similar to that of flu viruses! Similar. Nobody says it is the same. No, but “similar” is all we can have. “Similar” is what others work with, so that will do for us. It is always “similar”; it is never the same. What links one to the other is the belief that when they are similar they must be the same!

The team is now looking to drastically reduce the production cost which will make this method, ultimately, the preferred method of vaccine making. Cheap, producing the best possible results: huge profits.

As a doctor, my intelligence has been seriously challenged when I heard about vaccines against cancer. Vaccines, so I was told, were supposed to create a response from the immune system in an effort to set up an early detection system for foreign invaders. As I understood it, cancer was a disease that happened inside the system. How can you set up an early detection system for your own cellular structure? It didn’t make sense. It still doesn’t but I have now comprehended what they want to do. Here is the reasoning.

We can’t cure cancer. In fact, one hundred years of the same treatment only shows disastrous figures. The likelihood is that people might just cotton on to that fact and start refusing our treatment. We need another approach. Look here, vaccination makers have pretty much the same problem; they don’t get any of the predicted results either. But they have found ways of keeping their costs down and in doing so they produce vaccines that have no longer anything to do with invading micro-organisms. They produce similar effects in the immunity test results even when the stuff they vaccinate with is artificially produced and has nothing whatsoever to do with microbes. They use proteins and particles to “stimulate” the immune system in order to “prevent” the infection from happening. We could do the same and pretend it prevents a disease from happening. That would keep us busy for another decade or more. What do we need? We need a story that links proteins to a disease. And we need a vaccine against those proteins. Done and dusted!

We can’t cure cancer but we can prevent it through vaccinating you against a protein.

We don’t make enough profit producing vaccines, not even with the enormous quantities that are required worldwide, but we can cheaply produce proteins and base our vaccines on them.

We can, in the nearby future, vaccinate you against every known protein, and that would be an absolute winner if we can convince you that all those proteins are responsible for all your ailments.

Making vaccine is making money.

Making vaccine is making up stories.

Making vaccine is making my head spin.

July 2014



Patrick Quanten has been a general practitioner since 1983. The combination of medical insight and extensive studies of Complementary Therapies have opened new perspectives on health care, all of which came to fruition when it blended with Yogic and Ayurvedic principles. Patrick gave up his medical licence in November 2001.
Patrick also holds qualifications in Ayurvedic Medicine, Homeopathy, Reiki, Ozon Therapy and Thai Massage. He is an expert on Ear Candling and he is also well-read in the field of other hard sciences. His life's work involves finding similarities between the Ancient Knowledge and modern Western science.

Order your copy