Pfizer Officially Confirms: SV40 DNA Elements in Comirnaty - What Does This Mean for Millions of Vaccinated?#

Published September 18, 2025 | Source: Prof. Klaus Steger

In a groundbreaking revelation, official Pfizer approval documents have confirmed what was long dismissed as “conspiracy theory”: The COVID-19 vaccine Comirnaty actually contains SV40 promoter-enhancer sequences and residual DNA packaged together with modRNA in lipid nanoparticles. This disclosure raises fundamental questions about the safety and transparency of a vaccine administered to millions worldwide.

The Explosive Confirmation#

Although most of the document is redacted, Pfizer officially confirms that SV40 elements are contained in the final product Comirnaty. Even more significant: The residual DNA is certainly packaged together with the modRNA in lipid nanoparticles (LNP), making the current limit values for free DNA obsolete.

What are SV40 Sequences?#

SV40 (Simian Virus 40) is a DNA virus that originally infects monkeys. SV40 promoter-enhancer sequences are genetic elements that can strongly promote gene expression in eukaryotic cells - including human cells. These sequences are particularly potent and can dramatically enhance gene activation.

Why is this problematic?

  • SV40 sequences can have oncogenic (cancer-causing) properties
  • They can promote unintended gene activation
  • Their presence in a therapeutic product was never fully disclosed

The Critical Statement from Chapter 8#

Another explosive statement that wasn’t completely redacted is found in Chapter 8 on page 16 of Pfizer’s approval documents. This not only confirms the presence of SV40 sequences but also reveals that the “multipurpose plasmid” used contains additional elements that can be active in eukaryotes and thus also in human cells.

The Fundamental Question#

Since the entire manufacturing process of Comirnaty takes place in E. coli - bacteria and thus prokaryotes - the fundamental question arises: What are gene sequences that allow active gene regulation in human cells doing in this modRNA vaccine?

This discrepancy between the bacterial manufacturing process and eukaryotic gene regulation sequences suggests a deliberate decision to include elements specifically designed to become active in human cells.

Scientific Implications#

DNA Packaging in Lipid Nanoparticles#

The confirmation that residual DNA is packaged together with modRNA in lipid nanoparticles has far-reaching consequences:

Enhanced Cell Penetration:

  • Lipid nanoparticles are optimized to penetrate cell membranes
  • DNA in LNPs has significantly higher probability of cellular uptake
  • Usual limits for “free DNA” become irrelevant

Potential Genome Integration:

  • DNA in cells can, under certain circumstances, integrate into the genome
  • SV40 sequences can promote this process through their enhancer properties
  • Long-term effects are completely unresearched

The Threshold Problem#

Prof. Steger correctly points out that packaging residual DNA in lipid nanoparticles makes current free DNA limits obsolete. These limits are based on the assumption that DNA exists freely in the vaccine and is therefore more difficult for cells to uptake.

Why this is critical:

  • LNP-packaged DNA has 100-1000 times higher uptake efficiency
  • Risk assessment is based on completely different assumptions
  • Regulatory agencies haven’t considered this reality

Regulatory Failures#

EMA and the Code of Silence#

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) had access to this information but didn’t fully inform the public. The extensive redaction of documents suggests additional explosive information is being withheld.

Questions for Regulators:

  • Why wasn’t this information proactively disclosed?
  • What additional risk assessments were performed?
  • How do different safety standards justify themselves?

The Conspiracy Theory Narrative#

Particularly problematic is that scientists who pointed out the presence of SV40 sequences were systematically defamed as “conspiracy theorists.” This confirmation by Pfizer itself exposes this discrediting strategy as deliberate public deception.

Potential Health Risks#

Oncogenic Potential#

SV40 sequences have been linked to various cancers:

Scientifically Documented Risks:

  • Mesotheliomas (lung cancer from asbestos often SV40-contaminated)
  • Certain brain tumors
  • Lymphomas and other hematological malignancies

Cancer Development Mechanisms:

  • SV40 can inactivate tumor suppressor genes like p53
  • Promotion of uncontrolled cell division
  • Chromosomal instability

Autoimmune Reactions#

Unintended gene activation by SV40 enhancers could trigger autoimmune reactions:

Possible Mechanisms:

  • Activation of normally silent genes
  • Production of foreign proteins triggering immune reactions
  • Molecular mimicry with body’s own structures

The Role of Lipid Nanoparticles#

Target Tissues and Distribution#

Studies have shown that lipid nanoparticles don’t just accumulate at injection sites but distribute throughout the body:

Preferred Target Organs:

  • Liver (highest concentration)
  • Spleen and lymph nodes
  • Ovaries in women
  • Bone marrow

Implications for SV40 DNA:

  • Potential integration into stem cells
  • Long-term activation in various organs
  • Unpredictable gene expression

Scientific Demands#

Transparency and Further Investigation#

Prof. Steger rightfully demands complete disclosure and scientific evaluation:

Necessary Studies:

  • Long-term genome stability studies
  • Investigation of actual DNA integration
  • Assessment of SV40 enhancer activity in various tissues
  • Epidemiological studies on long-term effects

The Role of “Real Experts”#

The call to “real experts” at the laboratory journal is justified. The scientific community must face this challenge and conduct independent evaluations.

International Perspective#

Comparable Findings Worldwide#

The SV40 problem isn’t limited to Germany. International research groups have reported similar findings:

Global Confirmations:

  • Japanese researchers found SV40 sequences in Pfizer batches
  • Canadian scientists confirmed high DNA contamination
  • US laboratories replicated the findings

Regulatory Reactions#

While most regulatory agencies remain silent, some are beginning to ask questions:

Initial Reactions:

  • Individual parliamentarians demand clarification
  • Independent scientists increase pressure
  • Patient groups demand transparency

Ethical Implications#

The non-disclosure of SV40 sequences raises serious questions about informed consent:

Ethical Problems:

  • Patients weren’t informed about all ingredients
  • Risks weren’t fully communicated
  • Long-term effects remained unknown

Trust in Science#

This revelation sustainably damages trust in scientific institutions and regulatory authorities.

Liability Issues#

Confirmation of undeclared, potentially risky components could have legal consequences:

Possible Lawsuits:

  • Product liability for undisclosed risks
  • Violation of regulatory requirements
  • Public deception

Political Demands#

Immediate Measures#

  1. Complete disclosure of all approval documents without redactions
  2. Independent investigation of safety implications
  3. Transparent communication with the public
  4. Review of approval procedures for future products

Long-term Reforms#

  • Strengthening regulatory agency independence
  • Improved post-market surveillance
  • Increased transparency requirements for pharmaceutical companies

International Comparisons#

Similar Cases Globally#

The SV40 revelation in Comirnaty follows a pattern of incomplete disclosure in vaccine development:

Historical Context:

  • The original SV40 contamination of polio vaccines (1955-1963)
  • Undisclosed adjuvants in various vaccines
  • Post-market discovery of unexpected ingredients

Regulatory Responses Worldwide:

  • FDA (USA): Limited response, emphasis on benefit-risk balance
  • Health Canada: Some acknowledgment, calls for further study
  • TGA (Australia): Minimal public communication
  • MHRA (UK): Focus on overall vaccine safety profile

The Scientific Community’s Response#

Academic Institutions#

The response from academic institutions has been mixed:

Supportive Voices:

  • Independent researchers calling for transparency
  • Molecular biologists questioning the necessity of SV40 sequences
  • Epidemiologists demanding long-term studies

Institutional Silence:

  • Major universities avoiding public statements
  • Research institutions dependent on pharmaceutical funding remaining quiet
  • Professional associations issuing cautious statements

Publishing and Peer Review#

The challenge of publishing research critical of approved vaccines:

Obstacles to Publication:

  • Peer reviewers with conflicts of interest
  • Journal editorial policies favoring establishment positions
  • Researchers facing career pressures

Technical Deep Dive#

Manufacturing Process Questions#

The presence of SV40 sequences in a bacterial manufacturing system raises technical questions:

Process Anomalies:

  • Why include eukaryotic regulatory sequences in prokaryotic production?
  • What is the intended function of these sequences?
  • Were they intentionally included or manufacturing remnants?

Quality Control Failures#

The residual DNA issue highlights quality control concerns:

Manufacturing Standards:

  • Inadequate DNA removal processes
  • Insufficient characterization of final product
  • Regulatory acceptance of contaminated product

Public Health Implications#

Population-Level Effects#

With billions of doses administered globally, even small risks become significant:

Statistical Considerations:

  • Rare adverse events become numerous at population scale
  • Long-term effects may take years to manifest
  • Vulnerable populations may be disproportionately affected

Surveillance Systems#

Current pharmacovigilance systems may be inadequate:

Limitations:

  • Passive reporting systems miss many events
  • Long-term effects difficult to attribute
  • Lack of specific monitoring for genetic effects

Future Research Directions#

Essential Studies#

The scientific community must prioritize:

Molecular Studies:

  • DNA integration analysis in vaccinated individuals
  • SV40 enhancer activity measurement
  • Long-term gene expression monitoring

Epidemiological Research:

  • Cancer incidence studies in vaccinated populations
  • Autoimmune disease surveillance
  • Reproductive health monitoring

Regulatory Reform Needs#

Enhanced Oversight#

This case demonstrates the need for regulatory reform:

Proposed Changes:

  • Mandatory complete ingredient disclosure
  • Independent safety monitoring boards
  • Enhanced post-market surveillance
  • Whistleblower protections for scientists

International Coordination#

Global vaccine safety requires international cooperation:

Collaborative Approaches:

  • Standardized safety protocols
  • Shared adverse event databases
  • Coordinated research initiatives

The Path Forward#

Scientific Integrity#

The scientific community must recommit to its core principles:

Fundamental Values:

  • Transparency in research and publication
  • Independence from commercial interests
  • Open debate about safety concerns
  • Rigorous peer review processes

Public Trust Restoration#

Rebuilding public trust requires:

Concrete Actions:

  • Acknowledgment of past failures
  • Complete transparency about vaccine contents
  • Independent safety assessments
  • Responsive regulatory systems

Conclusion: A Turning Point for Science#

Pfizer’s official confirmation of SV40 DNA elements in Comirnaty marks a turning point in the COVID-19 vaccine debate. What was dismissed as “conspiracy theory” proves to be documented reality. This raises questions not only about vaccine safety but also about the integrity of the entire approval process.

The Responsibility of Science#

The scientific community faces the task of honestly evaluating these findings and drawing necessary consequences. Silence or downplaying would further undermine trust in science.

A Call for Transparency#

Prof. Steger’s analysis underscores the necessity of complete transparency in medical research. The public has the right to all relevant information about medicines administered to them.

The time for half-truths and concealment is over. Science must return to its fundamental principles of truth and transparency.

Global Implications#

This revelation extends beyond individual vaccine safety to fundamental questions about:

  • Regulatory Integrity: How can agencies regain public trust?
  • Scientific Ethics: What standards must guide future research?
  • Public Health Policy: How should authorities respond to safety concerns?
  • Democratic Accountability: How can citizens ensure transparent governance?

The SV40 confirmation in Comirnaty may be remembered as the moment when the traditional vaccine safety paradigm was forced to evolve. Whether this evolution leads to better science and safer products depends on the courage of scientists, regulators, and policymakers to face uncomfortable truths.

The health of millions depends on getting this right.

Sources:

  1. Pfizer Approval Documents - European Medicines Agency (EMA)
  2. Laboratory Journal - Scientific Journal for Life Sciences
  3. MWGFD.org - Doctors and Scientists for Health, Freedom and Democracy
  4. Prof. Klaus Steger - Analysis from September 18, 2025

This analysis is based on available scientific data and official documents. Further investigation is necessary to understand the complete implications.