.png)
Exploring the Controversy: Does COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Shedding Really Occur?
- Jason Lupo
- Aug 8
- 3 min read
mRNA Vaccine Shedding: What the Evidence Really Shows
When mRNA vaccines were first rolled out, the public was told they could not “shed” because they contained no live virus. However, emerging research and documented experiences now challenge that claim. According to a February 2024 review by the Independent Medical Alliance (IMA Health), shedding from COVID-19 mRNA vaccines is not just possible — it’s observable.
In this post, we’ll unpack the science, the testimonies, and why this matters for public health and personal choice
What Is Shedding?
Traditionally, “vaccine shedding” refers to the release of weakened live virus from someone who has received a live-attenuated vaccine. But mRNA technology is different — and so are the concerns.In the case of COVID-19 mRNA shots, the shedding in question involves spike proteins and other vaccine-related components being released from the body into the environment through:
Breath and respiratory droplets
Sweat and skin contact
Urine and feces
Semen and vaginal fluids
Breast milk
Findings From the IMA Health Review
The IMA Health document compiles over 800 case reports, regulatory filings, and peer-reviewed studies suggesting that mRNA vaccine components — especially spike proteins — are being transferred from vaccinated to unvaccinated individuals.
Key Points from the Review:
Spike Protein Presence Post-Vaccination: Studies have detected spike proteins in vaccinated individuals’ plasma and in breast milk weeks after injection.
Documented Transmission Pathways: Regulatory guidance for gene therapy products — which mRNA vaccines resemble in mechanism — includes assessing “shedding” potential because components can theoretically transfer to others.
Reported Symptoms in the Unvaccinated: These range from menstrual irregularities and headaches to clotting concerns after close contact with recently vaccinated individuals.
Lack of Informed Consent: Most recipients — and their close contacts — were never informed that shedding could occur.
Why This Matters Beyond COVID
Shedding is not limited to direct vaccine recipients. The review warns that unvaccinated people may still be exposed through:
Blood transfusions from vaccinated donors
Organ transplants
Food supply contamination (livestock injected with mRNA products)
If exposure can occur without direct injection, then mRNA technology represents an environmental exposure risk — not just a medical choice.
In our Spiritual Insurgency episode, we discussed how:
mRNA technology lacks precise control over dose, distribution, and fidelity of the proteins it produces.
Spike proteins may continue replicating in the body, turning human biology into a long-term production site.
This technology is being pushed into agriculture, making it even harder to avoid exposure.
If shedding is real — and IMA’s evidence strongly suggests it is — avoiding mRNA entirely may be impossible without major policy changes.
The Bigger Picture
This isn’t just a medical debate — it’s about trust, transparency, and informed consent.
Were regulators aware of shedding potential when authorizing these vaccines?
Why was this information not part of the public rollout?
How should society respond if vaccine-derived components are circulating in the general population?
The IMA Health report calls for urgent further research, transparency in medical and regulatory communications, and immediate protective measures for vulnerable populations.
The claim that mRNA vaccines cannot shed is increasingly at odds with documented evidence. The IMA Health review doesn’t just raise questions — it compiles data, case studies, and regulatory precedents that demand serious attention.
If shedding is happening, then mRNA technology is not just a private medical choice — it is an environmental and public health issue that affects everyone.