LIVE NASAL COVID VIRUS from sprayable vaccine can be SHED, exposing pregnant women, children and immunocompromised to GMO viral “particles”
By sdwells // 2025-07-14
Copy
 
Here we go again. A new sprayable COVID-19 vaccine, known as CVXGA1, has raised major safety and ethical concerns following the results of its first human trial. Published in Science Advances, the study revealed that the intranasal shot uses a live, replicating virus capable of shedding — potentially exposing unvaccinated individuals, including vulnerable populations like children, pregnant women and the immunocompromised, to genetically modified viral material without their consent.
  • Self-Spreading Intranasal COVID Shot Raises Alarms: The CVXGA1 intranasal COVID vaccine, which uses a live, replicating virus, has cleared its first human trial — but critics warn it can be shed through breathing and speaking, potentially exposing unvaccinated people without their consent, including children, pregnant women, and the immunocompromised.
  • Viral Shedding Confirmed but Not Studied: Researchers found high levels of viral shedding in nasal swabs just one day post-vaccination but did not study whether the virus can infect others, prompting serious safety concerns from independent scientists and journalists.
  • Study Criticized for Major Design Flaws: Experts point out the trial lacked a control group, involved only 72 participants, and monitored adverse events for a short duration. No investigation was conducted into whether the virus can spread between individuals.
  • Ethical and Biosecurity Concerns Mount: The shot delivers the spike protein directly to the respiratory tract — raising risk of severe reactions — while researchers prepare to expand the trial to 10,000 people. Experts warn this could lead to involuntary exposure to gene-based therapies, undermining informed consent and medical freedom.

New sprayable COVID shot shows viral shedding in human trial

Unlike traditional injected vaccines, CVXGA1 is delivered through the nose and directly enters the respiratory system. The platform is based on parainfluenza virus type 5, a known communicable respiratory virus. According to the trial data, viral shedding was clearly detected in nasal swabs just one day after administration, with viral loads reaching thousands of particles per milliliter. Yet researchers failed to study whether this shedding could result in actual transmission to others. Critics, including scientists and health freedom advocates, have sounded alarms over what they call a dangerous oversight. Dr. Karl Jablonowski of Children’s Health Defense noted the live-virus nature of the shot makes it “self-spreading” and bypasses informed consent protocols, potentially infecting others without their knowledge. Dr. Karina Acevedo Whitehouse, a microbiologist at the Autonomous University of Querétaro, agreed there is a high likelihood of persistent shedding, citing similar outcomes in earlier intranasal vaccine studies. These warnings come amid broader criticism over the necessity and safety of another COVID vaccine. Existing mRNA shots, like those from Pfizer and Moderna, have faced widespread scrutiny over adverse events including myocarditis, blood clots, immune suppression, and neurological symptoms. With many studies showing that the efficacy of COVID vaccines wanes within months, experts question the rationale behind developing an intranasal version that could pose new and unstudied risks. The clinical trial itself had several critical flaws, experts say. It enrolled just 72 participants — an insufficient sample size to detect rare but serious side effects. Additionally, there was no unvaccinated control group, no long-term safety tracking, and no analysis of whether the shed virus could infect others. Despite these limitations, researchers plan to expand the trial to 10,000 participants in the next phase. Particularly troubling is the delivery of the spike protein — the same one implicated in heart and clotting issues in prior vaccines — directly into the respiratory system, which could result in more severe reactions. Experts warn this method introduces the genetic material straight to the lungs, rather than containing it in muscle tissue as with injected vaccines. Health freedom advocates argue that this could mark the beginning of “self-spreading” vaccine technology, which may be used to bypass consent entirely. Dr. Jessica Rose emphasized that such technologies, if normalized, could pave the way for gene-based therapies administered via air — an alarming prospect for those concerned with bodily autonomy and medical ethics. Instead of experimental interventions, experts urge individuals to support their immune systems naturally through proven methods such as optimizing vitamin D, maintaining gut health, consuming immune-boosting nutrients like vitamin C and zinc, reducing toxic exposure, and managing stress. As public concern mounts over the ethical and safety implications of self-spreading vaccines, the debate over medical consent, risk transparency, and natural immunity is far from over. Bookmark Vaccines.news to your favorite independent websites for updates on experimental gene therapy injections and toxic nasal vax “technology” that leads to the spread of disease, early death, infertility, turbo cancer and Long-Vax-Syndrome. Sources for this article include: Pandemic.news NaturalNews.com NaturalHealth365.com Science.org
Copy