Anthony Pena’s Fight for Informed Consent

There is growing evidence that the spike protein from the original SARS-CoV-2 virus that was used in the mRNA vaccines is causing harm and even death in many individuals. The internet is flooded with information about a myriad of mild to severe symptoms and outcomes from COVID-19 mRNA jabs. It has been a significant legal challenge to find an efficient and effective way to halt the production and delivery of these mRNA “vaccines.”

It is an information war that has challenged the legal community. It is still early in the process of getting to the truth of COVID and the mRNA vaccines. Citizens, doctors, scientists, researchers, and lawyers are now looking for ways to stop the vaccines until there is more settled information about their potential harm. It is now well-known that mRNA jabs do not prevent transmission or disease and are not vaccines. There really is no health-related justification for their use, especially in light of the safe and effective early treatment protocols that are now widely used to help with recovery. These mRNA vaccines are more accurately defined as therapeutics—a somewhat ironic descriptor given their seemingly harmful effects.

Even by European standards it is clear that – while misusing the term ‘vaccine’ and marginalizing any harmful side-effects – the mRNA ‘vaccine is actually a technology (medical device). According to this European Commission press release in 2020:

“…The BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine is based on messenger RNA (mRNA) technology. This allows cells to manufacture harmless fragments of viral proteins that the human body uses to build an immune response to prevent or fight subsequent, natural infection. When a person is given the vaccine, their cells will read the genetic instructions and produce fragments of the ‘spike protein’, a protein on the outer surface of the virus which it uses to enter the body’s cells, to replicate, and cause disease. The person’s immune system will then treat this protein as foreign and produce natural defences — antibodies and T cells — against it.”

The toll brought on by the circulating spike protein is consequential. An estimated 30 to 40 percent of COVID cases become post-acute COVID-19 sequelae (PASC), more commonly known as long-haul COVID. While it may be too early to tell, a growing body of evidence suggests the mRNA shots themselves may be causing Long COVID. The hypothesis for that conclusion stems partly from the fact that all mRNA technology platforms (vaccines) contain instructions to force the human body to create the most pathogenically toxic part of the original virus, the S1 subunit of the spike protein. The Adenovirus vaccine also utilizes the spike protein as its therapeutic target.

One citizen, Anthony Pena, aka DocKek on the QuiteFrankly podcast, has spent the last two years trying to force the removal of the vaccines. His work on the subject of informed consent and the toxicity of the spike protein is prolific. Kevin McCairn, Ph.D., has been a pivotal mentor for Pena, reviewing and advising on his research. Pena’s focus has been on the toxicity of the S1 subunit of the spike protein as an uncomplicated pathway to exploit available legal loopholes at the state level that would pressure the removal of mRNA vaccines.

It should be noted that Pena is well aware there are other pathogenic pathways in the spike protein such as the S2 subunit. However, this column is not a deep dive scientific discussion of the nuances of the pathogenic components of the spike. That information is more fulsomely discussed in Pena’s writings. The purpose of this column is to discuss Pena’s belief that the S1 subunit can be highlighted as a biological agent, essentially a bioweapon, in service of a legal avenue to fight the continuation of these mRNA shots. In the end, he believes he doesn’t need to prove all causes of disease if he can prove one. And there is little doubt at this point that the spike is toxic to humans.

The parallel analogy would be the fight for election integrity. One does not have to prove intention to right the wrongs of a poorly run election. One only has to prove that voters have been disenfranchised. In the case of the mRNA vaccines, Pena argues he only has to prove that one component of the vaccines causes harm and/or disease to spark legal action that would take these harmful shots off the market. Pena’s compelling legal loophole is that once the S1 subunit is listed as a biological agent, states’ public health departments and their agents have a legal duty to investigate.

Informed Consent and the Right to Know What is Being Injected

Pena noticed that informed consent has been perplexingly absent in the COVID-19 universe. Informed consent has long been the gold standard and is an important “ethical and legal requirement for medical treatment.” Working alone, Pena filed a lawsuit in Virginia courts and fought for months. His original writ of mandamus sought to use informed consent as an “avenue to getting the spike protein labeled a biologic agent.” His case was ultimately dismissed. Pena concluded that informed consent is all but dead.

Spike Protein Should Be Designated as a Biological Toxin

Pena’s months-long struggle led him to a more direct way to stop the shots. He now believes citizens and attorneys should focus on existing health-related statutes and codes to stop mRNA vaccines. Pena researched state and federal codes that would require public health agencies to designate the spike protein, choosing the S1 subunit the dangerous pathogen of interest as a simple target to inform patients of their potential harm. Pena’s mission is to help Americans clearly understand that there is already a compulsory legal framework in place to stop these vaccines. Pena says:

“As it turns out, there’s a more direct approach to getting the spike protein labeled a biologic agent, and that is by compelling these public agencies and the executive to realize and designate the S1 subunit of the spike protein as a biologic toxin directly. And after citizens have that admission, they can use the statutes and administrative codes” to ultimately remove the experimental mRNA technology from the shelves.

For example, Virginia Code 32.1-35 requires reporting of toxic substances and pathogens:

When such pathogens are reported, state agencies like the Virginia Department of Health have a duty to investigate in the interest of public well-being. As an aside, federal agencies like the CDC and the FDA must investigate. Under Section 564, which is a subsection of the 2004 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), there is a clause that states that, as it relates to the vaccines, individuals have the right to be informed of “the significant known and potential benefits and risks of such use, and the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown.” Also relevant, Section 564(e)(1)9A)(ii)(lll) directs the FDA to impose conditions on an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) “designed to ensure that individuals to whom the product is administered are informed…of the option to accept or refuse administration of the product, of the consequences, if any, of refusing the administration of the product, and of the alternatives to the product that is available and of their benefits and risks.” Paired with sturdy informed consent, individuals can make more informed decisions.

The Virginia Code also leaves an opening for action because of state legislative decisions about the use of sovereign immunity. Remarkably, the Virginia state legislature waived sovereign immunity in statute VA Code 2.2-4002 line item 22, even during an emergency. Pena explains:

“Sovereign immunity is the legal doctrine pertaining to the idea that the state, its agents or agencies, or officers cannot be sued without its consent. So you often see the state or state actors claiming sovereign immunity for everything, but there are sometimes specific exclusions.

In the case of Virginia, the state legislature waived sovereign immunity, and if they waive it, it means that you can sue the state’s agents, agencies, and officers, including during an emergency, because this is beyond the discretion of the executive branch. The whole thing about having this waiver is that they don’t care about what you do or what you think is happening. It’s about the reality of what is. And the state, at least in Virginia, does not have sovereign immunity to ignore the dangerous diseases and pathogens under 32.1-35.”

Quick Look: Pena’s Research on Spike Proteins and S1 Subunit

As Pena wrote in his American Foundation for Informed Consent article, “Coronavirus disease 2019 is caused by a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2, which plays a key role in the receptor recognition and cell membrane fusion process, is composed of two subunits, S1 and S2.” Pena contends, based on his reading and research, that the S1 subunit of the spike protein is most likely one of the main “causative biologic agents of long COVID and that long COVID would not exist without it.”

The original Wuhan Alpha strain B.1.1.7 was the virus that caused the worldwide “pandemic” and ensuing emergency declarations that shut down much of the world for many months. Pena’s extensive research since 2021 seems to suggest that scientists, in his words, “took the most pathogenic part of that virus, encoding it in its totality into every single vaccine on the market. The S1 subunit specifically has been provided as the therapeutic target used by pharma and big government and upon which research is based to develop the mRNA “vaccines.” They took the S1 subunit,” he continues, “And made it a feature of the vaccine to target the virus. They somehow reasoned within themselves that vaccines made with the most pathogenic part of the virus” should be used as a vehicle to save people. In fact, it may be producing the exact opposite outcome. Notably, scientists were looking at the use of the spike protein as a “target for the development of vaccines” after the original SARS-CoV outbreak. They have also known since 2015 that vaccines for coronaviruses solely based on the spike protein were doomed to fail. Ralph Baric himself said so

Pena’s basis for believing Long COVID is a result of the mRNA vaccines is based partly on the well-respected work of Dr. Bruce Patterson, a trained pathologist. Patterson was the medical director of diagnostic virology at Stanford University’s hospitals and clinics. Pena sent Patterson’s lecture at Georgetown to the Virginia Department of Health. Pena says, “after they reviewed it, they agreed with me that the S1 subunit is closely related to the cause of long COVID.” Patterson’s work on immune dysregulation is seen as “a radical paradigm shift” in the approach to Long COVID and other diseases.

I spoke with Pena on Monday to discuss his current mindset. He says while he didn’t win, his lawsuit unearthed other ways to force public health agencies to declare the spike protein a biological toxin and enforce informed consent. He believes the pharmaceutical companies and the public are beginning to awaken to the realities of the mRNA vaccines:

“Look at Pfizer’s press release—that came out because of Project Veritas. They have a list of unusual things that can happen. Unusual and persistent irritability, poor feeding, fatigue, lack of energy, cool pale skin. These are unusual occurrences from a virus that caused a public health threat, right? I consider those symptoms long COVID.

I also consider all of those unusual symptoms to be directly related to the S1 subunit of the spike protein for SARS Co V2, the original one which caused the whole emergency to be called in the first place. The S1 subunit is the most pathogenic part of that virus. And it is also the cause of long COVID.

Long COVID is seen publicly as a virus, as direct sequelae of COVID-19, which is a disease of public health threat. Long COVID is defined by the Department of Health and Human Services, our own government, as a disability. So the spike protein? Being the causative agent of Long COVID means that the spike protein necessarily causes disabilities.

For some reason, they are not allowing public disclosure of the risks. Whether they know it or not, it is a risk. It’s above 0.01% because of the S1 subunit. The vaccines use the S1 subunit as a therapeutic target in its totality. It is strange to see these vaccines used as the foundation for public health. It is strange to see our public health agencies push vaccines as something people need within their bodies in order to qualify as health.” 

One of the more terrifying thoughts shared by Pena is the possibility that our government may have known how toxic the spike protein is and decided to deploy it in the form of vaccines anyway. Pena says it is hard to believe they weren’t or aren’t “doing it on purpose.” Pena also believes China is not the only country at fault for the pandemic.

“Our own government,” said Pena, “is effectively spreading this super toxic process in our country. And whether it’s in cahoots with China or not doesn’t matter. They’re making an existing problem worse on purpose.” Pointing to the recent censorship lawsuit, Biden v. Missouri, and the Twitter files, Pena believes public health agencies and the media have, at a minimum, suppressed important information to the detriment of the public. Pena said, “it is time to use the laws available” to correct the egregious harm imposed on the American people. “This is the cleanest way—outside of Jesus,” continued Pena, “Fifth-generation warfare can only exist as long as their secrets are untold, and the chief secret that must be disclosed is that the S1 subunit causes long COVID. We can use that as a weapon against the entire public health establishment. I’m looking at taking the laws as they exist right now and putting them to use.” Pena continued:

“They cannot play this misinformation, disinformation b.s. game. They cannot continue. They do not have sovereign immunity to ignore it. Doctors can help by reporting injuries and deaths. Doctors can report the S1 subunit as a causative agent for disease. We must go state by state and take them to court.”

Source –