Watch this on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v6rjb9t-spike-protein-oceanic-death.html
A spike protein is a key structural protein found on the surface of coronaviruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. It plays a crucial role in how the virus infects cells.
The spike protein allows the virus to attach to and enter human cells by binding to the ACE2 receptor, which is found on many types of cells, including those in the lungs, heart, and blood vessels. This makes it an essential target for vaccines and treatments. COVID-19 vaccines, like mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna) and viral vector vaccines (Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca), work by teaching the body to recognize and attack the spike protein, helping to build immunity.
Since it is a biological molecule (a protein), it is biodegradable and breaks down over time. However, some concerns have been raised about its potential effects on the human body and the environment. You mentioned worries about its impact on algae—are you thinking about natural spike proteins from infections, or those produced by vaccines as well?
Yes, some studies suggest that the spike protein from SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) can have toxic effects on certain organisms, including algae. Researchers have looked into how wastewater containing viral particles or spike proteins might affect aquatic ecosystems. Some findings indicate that spike proteins can disrupt the growth of algae and other microorganisms by interfering with their cellular processes.
As of recent data, approximately 13–15% of American adults take antidepressants. This means that about 1 in 8 adults regularly use these medications, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The widespread use of antidepressants reflects the increasing recognition and treatment of mental health conditions, particularly depression and anxiety disorders.
A significant portion of antidepressants and their metabolites end up in the water supply through human waste. When people take these medications, their bodies do not fully metabolize them, meaning some of the active compounds are excreted in urine and feces. These substances then enter wastewater treatment plants, which are not designed to fully remove pharmaceuticals. As a result, trace amounts of antidepressants can be found in rivers, lakes, and even some drinking water sources.
Studies have detected measurable concentrations of fluoxetine (Prozac), sertraline (Zoloft), and other antidepressantsin surface waters across the U.S. While the amounts are typically in the nanogram per liter (ng/L) range, research suggests that even low levels can affect aquatic life. Fish and amphibians exposed to these drugs have shown behavioral changes, reproductive issues, and altered predator avoidance instincts. Some scientists are concerned that chronic exposure to antidepressants could disrupt ecosystems by affecting food chains and biodiversity.
Though the concentrations in drinking water are much lower than therapeutic doses, the long-term effects of consuming trace amounts of pharmaceuticals remain unclear. This has led to discussions about improving wastewater treatment technology and encouraging proper disposal methods, such as drug take-back programs, to reduce pharmaceutical pollution.
What about spike proteins? My concern about spike proteins affecting algae is interesting, and while there isn’t widespread research confirming that spike proteins are significantly harming global algae populations, it is worth investigating further.
Algae are crucial to Earth’s ecosystems—they produce much of the planet’s oxygen, form the foundation of aquatic food chains, and play a major role in carbon sequestration. If spike proteins were found to be toxic to algae, it could have serious consequences for marine and freshwater ecosystems.
Some studies suggest that spike proteins can be cytotoxic (harmful to cells), but most research has focused on human and mammalian cells rather than algae. If spike proteins were present in large quantities in wastewater, they might interact with microbial life, but they are also rapidly broken down in the environment, unlike persistent pollutants such as heavy metals, pesticides, or pharmaceuticals.
If you’re particularly interested in this topic, it would be useful to look at studies on the impact of viral proteins on aquatic ecosystems or conduct environmental testing in areas with high wastewater discharge. Would you like help finding relevant research or potential ways to test this hypothesis?
The amount of spike protein excreted into wastewater after vaccination or infection is not precisely known, but we can estimate based on biological processes. When a person receives an mRNA vaccine (such as Pfizer or Moderna), their cells temporarily produce spike proteins to trigger an immune response. These proteins are mostly displayed on the surface of cells, where the immune system recognizes and destroys them. Since they do not replicate, the amount of spike protein in circulation is limited, and most of it is broken down internally. While some small fragments may enter the bloodstream and be filtered out through the kidneys, research suggests that the quantity excreted in urine or feces is very minimal compared to natural viral shedding from an infection.
In contrast, when a person is infected with COVID-19, the virus actively replicates inside their body, producing a far greater amount of spike protein. Studies have detected SARS-CoV-2 RNA in wastewater, meaning that infected individuals are shedding whole virus particles, along with spike proteins, through their bodily fluids. This shedding can continue for weeks after infection, making infections a much larger source of spike protein in wastewater compared to vaccines.
As for how much of this ultimately reaches sewer systems, vaccine-related spike protein contributions are likely insignificant, while infection-related shedding is much more substantial. However, spike proteins are biodegradable and break down quickly in the environment, unlike persistent pollutants such as pharmaceuticals or heavy metals. While there is ongoing research into the environmental impact of viral proteins, wastewater surveillance programs primarily focus on tracking viral RNA, not the spike protein itself.
For the spike protein to survive in the environment, certain conditions would need to be present. Typically, proteins like the spike protein are biodegradable and break down quickly due to natural environmental factors, such as temperature, ultraviolet (UV) radiation, and microbial activity. In most cases, the spike protein would be rapidly degraded after entering the environment, especially in areas with active microorganisms that break down organic matter.
However, there are a few conditions under which the spike protein could persist for a longer period. One important factor is temperature. In colder environments, microbial activity slows down, and the breakdown of organic materials, including proteins, occurs more slowly. In such conditions, spike proteins might persist for a longer time compared to warmer environments where microbial degradation is more rapid.
Another factor that could contribute to the survival of spike proteins is the absence of sunlight. UV radiation from the sun generally causes proteins to degrade by breaking down their molecular structure. In environments shielded from sunlight, such as deep waters or underground locations, the breakdown process would be slower. If spike proteins were protected in such areas, they might last longer than they would in environments exposed to sunlight.
Additionally, if spike proteins were somehow trapped in materials like plastics, solid waste, or other organic matter, they could potentially be shielded from environmental factors that would normally break them down. This could also prolong their survival, although such scenarios would likely be rare. In general, spike proteins would not survive indefinitely in the environment and would typically break down within days or weeks due to exposure to natural environmental factors.
Overall, for spike proteins to survive in the environment, they would need to be in a highly specific set of conditions that limit degradation. In most natural environments, these proteins would likely degrade relatively quickly, but in rare instances, under controlled or isolated conditions, they might persist for a longer time.
It is possible for spike proteins to enter fish or other aquatic organisms through exposure to contaminated water. After a person receives an mRNA vaccine or gets infected with COVID-19, their body produces spike proteins as part of the immune response. Some of these proteins or fragments of them are excreted through urine and feces. If these waste products enter wastewater systems and are not fully removed during treatment, trace amounts of spike proteins could make their way into rivers, lakes, or oceans. This would be especially likely in areas with high human populations or in places where wastewater is not adequately filtered.
Once in the water, fish and other aquatic organisms could potentially be exposed to these proteins. Many aquatic organisms, including fish, absorb substances from their environment through their gills or skin as they filter water for nutrients. However, since spike proteins are not alive and do not replicate outside of the virus, their concentration in water would likely be very low. This makes it less likely that spike proteins would have the same kind of impact on aquatic life that they do in humans, where they are part of an actively replicating virus.
Although spike proteins might be present in the water for a limited time, they typically break down quickly due to environmental factors like UV radiation, microbial activity, and temperature changes. As a result, their long-term impact on aquatic organisms may be minimal. However, the specific effects on fish or other organisms are still not well understood, and more research is needed to determine the full extent of potential ecological consequences.
No, the spike proteins that enter fish or other aquatic organisms would not help them make more spike proteins. The spike proteins produced by the human body (from either COVID-19 infection or vaccination) are not capable of replication on their own outside of the viral lifecycle.
For a virus like SARS-CoV-2 to replicate and produce more spike proteins, it must infect a host cell and use that cell’s machinery to replicate its RNA and assemble new viral particles, including the spike protein. This process involves complex interactions between the viral RNA and the host cell’s ribosomes, enzymes, and other cellular components. Since spike proteins themselves do not have any genetic material and are simply part of the virus’s structure, they cannot instruct fish or other organisms to produce more spike proteins.
In short, while fish may absorb trace amounts of spike proteins from contaminated water, these proteins would not trigger the fish’s cells to produce more spike proteins. The proteins would simply be present in the environment and could potentially affect the fish’s health or behavior in ways that are not fully understood, but they would not lead to the fish producing more spike proteins.
Now all of that is AI responses to the spike protein. We cannot trust AI in the slightest as they are all programmed to deceive. An article I found on the NIH website says “Aquatic particle contamination of SARS-CoV-2 has cholinesterasic effect in P. cuvieri tadpoles. These findings indicate that the COVID-19 can constitute environmental impact or biological damage potential.”
The article says that peptides from the spike protein called peptides (A) PSPD2001, (B) PSPD2002, and (C) PSPD2003 once released into the sewer that the in vivo experiments revealed that short exposure to SARS-CoV-2 Spike peptides was able to induce significant biochemical changes in P. cuvieri tadpoles. The studies suggest that peptide 2 and 3 induce metabolic changes that alter REDOX homeostasis towards oxidative stress in tadpoles.
See image 1
REDOX homeostasis is the golden ratio of a healthy cell and this report says p2 and p3 alters them to form oxidative stress. Oxidative stress is a state of imbalance between the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the body’s ability to counteract their harmful effects with antioxidants. The article says this is exciting.
The article goes on to conclude, “From a systemic approach that included the synthesis, cleavage, purification, and alignment of peptides to P. cuvieri tadpoles’ exposure to peptide fragments of Spike protein, we gathered evidence that confirms the toxicity of viral constituents in the evaluated animal model. We observed that the peptides PSPD2002 and PSPD2003 induced REDOX imbalance and cholinesterasic effect, which constitutes an insight (never demonstrated before) on how aquatic particle contamination of SARS-CoV-2 can affect the health of P. cuvieri tadpoles. In this sense, we strongly suggest conducting further studies necessary to understand the real magnitude of the biological/environmental impact of COVID-19.”
This study admits that two of three peptides from the spike protein leads to the corruption of the golden ratio of REDOX homeostasis in tadpoles which causes the cholinesterasic effect which suppress the action of the enzyme cholinesterase, preventing the breakdown of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, leading to its buildup and potentially causing overstimulation of the parasympathetic nervous system.
See image 2
Let’s break this down in English. When we pee and flush the toilet, the excess from the spike protein that those who took the mRNA experimental gene therapy drug, trillions of these peptides get into our water supply. The tadpoles become overly relaxed, their heart rate drops dramatically, their stomach produces excessive acid, they have diarrhea, they become dizzy and faint. It affects their neurological system which in turns kills them.
Only one magazine or news outlet picked this story up. News Medical Life Sciences. Their conclusion says those vaccinated are causing neurotoxicity in aquatic life. The author is Lakshmi Supriya who got her BSc in Industrial Chemistry from IIT Kharagpur (India) and a Ph.D. in Polymer Science and Engineering from Virginia Tech (USA). The article was updated on May 18 2023 – The preprint preliminary research paper that this article was based upon was accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed Scientific Journal. This article was edited accordingly to include a link to the final peer-reviewed paper, now shown in the sources section.
After Lakshmi Supriya’s paper, several others picked up the story but it rarely made any news. In 2023, an article in asm.org called Bioaccumulation Pattern of the SARS-CoV-2 Spike Proteins in Pacific Oyster Tissues was released. “There is mounting evidence of the contamination of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the sewage, surface water, and even marine environment.” “SARS-CoV-2 RNA has been detected frequently in wastewater and rivers. Several studies have shown that SARS-CoV-2 particles or at least its RNA (peptide 2 and 3) can reach coastal waters. Bivalve mollusks, such as oysters, clams, and mussels, have a long history as vectors of human viral diseases, such as norovirus gastroenteritis and hepatitis A, as a result of the fecal contamination of the waters in which they grow. Various studies have confirmed that bivalve mollusks can bioaccumulate SARS-CoV-2 or at least its RNA to detectable levels due to their filter-feeding nature.”
Let’s break this down in English. The vaccinated urine is now in our oceans, rivers, streams and sea life has now been exposed. This is documented as fact. But does this cause danger?
See image 3
“Accordingly, we infer that the intact SARS-CoV-2 particles will also be treated as small food particles and similarly enter SAC. However, intact viral particles are more resistant to digestive enzymes than rS1, so viral particles may remain in SAC for longer. The elimination or inactivation of viruses taken into cells may be much slower.”
“It is essential to investigate the bioaccumulation mechanism further, especially to guide the development of oyster decontamination strategies and to assess the consumption risk.”
The article plays down the risks. “We agree that an overemphasis on risk due to exposure to wastewater is becoming increasingly common and that we should avoid it. So far, no reports of detectable infectious SARS-CoV-2 in the marine environment have been seen. To date, there is no evidence that transmission is associated with the ingestion of food.”
“…the presence of viral RNA in the marine environment and the conclusion shown in our study that oysters can bioaccumulate viral capsid should lead us to take a conservative and cautious position, as we cannot exclude the possibility that some viable virus particles may enter the aquatic environment. In particular, when untreated sewage is discharged directly into coastal areas and bioaccumulated by filter feeders like the oysters, it may pose a potential risk of transmission in areas without well-developed sewage treatment systems.”
According to the NIH, RNA viral pathogens of marine mammals, seabirds, fish, crustaceans, and bivalves can decimate the populations of wild and farmed marine animals with large economic and ecological impacts. RNA viruses have important ecological roles in regulating the structure of protist plankton communities in the oceans. RNA viruses, which use RNA as their genetic material, are thought to have originated from ancient cells that existed before the last universal common ancestor (LUCA) diversified into modern cells. They are a major part of the global virome and are primarily infectious agents of eukaryotes.
Now, RNA viruses are different than human viral RNA particles. RNA particles are the leftover from taking the covid 19 mRNA gene therapy drugs which identify as a vaccine. The research still needs to be explored as the experiment was taken from 9 different geological sites from the Pacific Ocean in China. This means, America hasn’t tested its own oceanic wildlife yet for signs of p2 and p3 particles. The test says it appears the oysters have accumilated the particles through the membranes and the protein debris is taking it just like other things humans have like sexual transmitted diseases and other viruses.
An article in Science Direct this year aimed to fill this knowledge gap by investigating the occurrence of SARS-CoV-2 in remote sea and oceanic waters, at large distances from the coastline.
See image 4
“While numerous studies have successfully detected SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater samples, little attention has been given to assessing its presence and persistence in offshore waters. This knowledge gap is particularly compelling considering the vastness and ecological significance of the world’s oceans, which cover approximately 70% of the Earth’s surface.”
“Although some studies have examined viruses in nearshore marine waters, particularly in coastal and recreational areas (Bonadonna et al., 2019; Wyer et al., 2012; Wyn-Jones et al., 2011), investigations conducted in the open seas and oceans are relatively limited. This is due to logistical challenges associated with sampling in remote offshore waters, which often require specialized equipment, research vessels, and complex expedition planning. As a result, our understanding of the presence and behaviour of human viruses, including SARS-CoV-2 in the open oceans remains incomplete.”
The study took samples from the Atlantic, Arctic, Mediterranean, Persian Gulf, Oman Gulf, Arabic Sea, Aden Gulf and Red Sea. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 7 out of 43 (16.3 %) marine water samples.
See image 5
“While previous research has predominantly focused on detecting the virus in wastewater samples, our study extends the investigation to open seas, in regions far from the coastline, therefore targeting areas of paramount relevance, given the amplitude and ecological significance of the world’s oceans. This study provides the first evidence of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in oceanic waters.”
“The presence of the virus in remote oceanic waters may be explained through different hypotheses. One possible explanation is the introduction of the virus through untreated wastewater discharges or inadequate sanitation practices near the coast. Such sources can introduce SARS-CoV-2 into marine waters, allowing it to spread over larger distances, following sea streams. Guo et al. (2021) developed a model suggesting that continuous discharge of domestic sewage carrying SARS-CoV-2 could contaminate vast sea areas, spanning tens of thousands of square kilometres. The movement of winds, waves, and ocean currents indeed plays a significant role in the virus’s dissemination. Wind can carry aerosolized droplets containing the virus across the ocean, potentially contaminating marine environments. Similarly, waves can transport viral particles by carrying them across the water surface. Additionally, ocean currents contribute to the dispersal of the virus, carrying it to distant locations beyond the immediate vicinity of the source.”
They concluded, “This study represents a pioneering effort to investigate the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in oceanic waters, addressing a significant knowledge gap that exists in understanding the virus occurrence in remote offshore environments. The detection of viral RNA in seawater, though not unexpected due to prior evidence of its presence in coastal waters, emphasizes the relevance of exploring its distribution in open seas and oceanic regions. Indeed, what is particularly novel in this study, is the discovery of viral RNA at considerable distances from the coastline. It is essential to note that the presence of RNA does not necessarily indicate the presence of an infectious virus, as the unique conditions of the marine environment can impact virus viability.
Future research targeting SARS-CoV-2 should aim to expand the sampling efforts in open oceanic regions, considering a larger number of samples, and advanced modelling approaches for viral particle dispersion in water bodies, to contribute to the broader understanding of virus occurrence and persistence in water bodies. Moreover, as research moves forward, continued efforts will be pivotal for refining methodologies for processing large volumes of oceanic water.”
These are just studies of finding traces of the spike protein using PCR tests on oceanic life. They have nothing to do with what the Viral RNA could be doing to sea life. To me, this is alarming and since we know that protein spikes do kill algae and now the P2 and P3 particles from the spike protein are now spreading throughout oceanic life, regardless of the outcomes, is scary. The companies that released the experimental drug did not test what spike protein could do to oceanic life. Operation warp speed could have inadvertently destroyed all ocean life as we know it. I say the word “could”. That doesn’t mean it will happen.
My problem with finding spike particles in the ocean at random places around the world deep in the ocean of around 30%, just within a few years, doesn’t just stop and dissolve. Those who took the experimental weapon on humanity are breeding spike protein rich children. All mankind within a few generations will be creating more spike protein than we have stars in the heavens which will continuously be placed in our ocean and we are just now learning about it.
Now what about algae? How important is our algae bloom? Algae are vital for Earth’s ecosystems, producing a significant portion of the planet’s oxygen, serving as the base of aquatic food chains, and offering potential for sustainable biofuels and other products. Although studies are being performed now using algae to defeat the sars-covid2 virus, hardly any research is going into what the byproduct of the spike proteins humans create and how its peptide particles affect algae.
Toxicity of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein on Algae and Environmental Implications
Several studies suggest that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein—particularly its S1 subunit—can exhibit toxic effects on algae and other microorganisms. A 2023 study published in Science of the Total Environment demonstrated that exposure to the spike protein inhibited the growth of Chlorella vulgaris, a vital freshwater microalga. The researchers observed reduced chlorophyll content, impaired photosynthesis, and increased oxidative stress markers, indicating cellular damage. The proposed mechanisms include:
- Disruption of cell membranes due to spike protein binding.
- Oxidative stress from reactive oxygen species (ROS) overproduction.
- Interference with photosynthetic efficiency, potentially destabilizing aquatic ecosystems where algae serve as primary producers (Zheng et al., 2023; DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162716).
Another study in Environmental Research (2022) found that spike protein remnants in wastewater could persist long enough to affect aquatic microbiota, including cyanobacteria and diatoms. The protein’s stability in water raised concerns about bioaccumulation, though real-world environmental concentrations remain debated (Liu et al., 2022; DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.113613).
Broader Ecological Concerns
Beyond algae, lab studies report spike protein toxicity in other non-target organisms:
- Daphnia magna (water fleas): Reduced survival and reproduction at high concentrations (Pagliano et al., 2021; DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112320).
- Soil bacteria: Altered microbial diversity in experiments with spike protein-laden sewage sludge (Wigginton et al., 2022; DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c04577).
Sources of Spike Protein in the Environment
Potential contributors include:
- Viral shedding: SARS-CoV-2 RNA and degraded spike proteins detected in wastewater.
- Vaccine-derived particles: mRNA vaccine formulations (e.g., lipid nanoparticles) may transiently release spike proteins, though their environmental impact is less studied compared to viral spikes.
Uncertainties and Research Gaps
- Most toxicity data come from lab-based, high-dose exposures, whereas real-world environmental levels are likely lower.
- Long-term effects on food chains and biogeochemical cycles (e.g., algal oxygen production) require further study.
Key Takeaways
- The spike protein can harm algae via oxidative stress and photosynthetic disruption.
- Wastewater and soil may be exposure routes, but ecological risks depend on concentration and persistence.
- Research is ongoing; no evidence suggests catastrophic ecosystem effects at current environmental levels.
What’s revealing is, all of these studies were found using Deepseek and ChatGPT says none of this is true or can’t find any of this information. What’s more puzzling is Deepseek is going off old data while ChatGPT seems to be suppressing it all.
Something is going on here. And since we can’t trust the government, how will we ever be told the truth? I mentioned several times the military industrial complex is good at keeping secrets for 20 years and the truth will finally come out by then. My thought process is, if we can avoid adding our miserable existence to the marine life, we should. The evidence is enough to put someone behind bars, but unfortunately, the damage is done. Short term profit could have created long term destruction on marine life and that goes beyond words. To explain to our future selves that we pushed a non tested mRNA to create something unnatural and because we were scared, we killed the oceans?
To some, this is all we have. Those who are worried about our children’s future should be outraged at these findings. That we introduced a new substance to the oceans that wasn’t there before. We are wicked people and we do not deserve this planet, to be honest. I almost welcome an alien race to wipe us off the map to save other’s in the universe from our coming. Pfizer, Moderna, J&J should be ashamed of themselves. They created a possible chain reaction that cannot be stopped. And shame on the news reporters. I am a hick and found this story by myself. How can they bury this at the bottom of priorities?
And to make things worse, as I was checking my sources, all of the links provided from Science First just stopped working. Was Deepseek hallucinating? Was I? I asked Deepseek and it says it was in error. Then gave me a bunch of links that stop supporting what I have been trying to prove. Now, instead of Algae, all of the links say SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Induces Oxidative Stress and Senescence in Mouse and Human Lung. It appears all the algae information was a lie from AI. Can that be true? We know AI does hallucinate and provides errors. But to hallucinate more than once? It provided me study after study and now, it’s all gone? So sadly, the algae connection is nowhere to be found. I looked for the links on wayback machine and nothing.
I don’t know, but what if I stumbled across something that is a matter of national security? Could they swipe those links the same day as I was looking for information? Or can we use Occam’s razor that Deepseek was just hallucinating and the government is not monitoring my computer. I will go with that one for now, however, my memory serves I found this information months ago and reported it already. The weird thing is I had a show on this before. I remember it. And I can’t find it.
All I could find one study called Persistence of SARS-CoV-2 in Water and Wastewater on acs.org which downplays the effects of Spike Protein. So what are we to conclude here? Let’s play devil’s advocate and that algae isn’t affected, rather it could actually help. There are many studies that suggest Algae could use used to treat Covid. That’s fine, but the particles of our spike proteins are in our oceans now. This is a fact. And, unfortunately, we have no idea what this will do to sea life. I am hoping our horrible mistake can be cleaned by the ocean just as it does to all our other viruses. But this should not just give us pause. It should wake us up to how evil we really are.
I say we, because we allowed it.
Sources
Keep in mind these links used to work and now they are different?
1. Spike Protein Toxicity in Algae
Study: Zheng et al. (2023) – Science of the Total Environment
Findings: Demonstrated that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (S1 subunit) inhibits growth and photosynthesis in Chlorella vulgaris via oxidative stress and membrane damage.
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162716
Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969723005286
2. Spike Protein Persistence in Wastewater & Aquatic Systems
Study: Liu et al. (2022) – Environmental Research
Findings: Detected SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in wastewater and showed potential impacts on aquatic microbiota.
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2022.113613
Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935122004071
3. Effects on Daphnia magna (Water Fleas)
Study: Pagliano et al. (2021) – Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety
Findings: High concentrations of spike protein reduced survival and reproduction in Daphnia magna, a keystone aquatic species.
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112320
Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0147651321002704
4. Impact on Soil Bacteria & Microbial Communities
Study: Wigginton et al. (2022) – Environmental Science & Technology
Findings: Analyzed how SARS-CoV-2 RNA and protein remnants in sewage sludge altered soil microbial diversity.
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.1c04577
Link: https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.1c04577
Additional Supporting Research
- General Spike Protein Stability & Environmental Risks:
- Bivins et al. (2020) – Environmental Science & Technology Letters on viral RNA persistence in water (DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00730).
- Vaccine-Derived Spike Protein Concerns:
- Kowarz et al. (2021) – Viruses on cell culture evidence of spike protein shedding (DOI: 10.3390/v13050821).
Key Caveats
- Most studies use lab-grade spike protein at higher concentrations than expected in nature.
- Viral vs. vaccine-derived spikes: Environmental studies focus on viral proteins; vaccine-related shedding is less documented but plausible (see Kowarz et al. above).