01/03/2026
Educational Info about pet wellness. Pets in our lives and homes can be carriers of illness, parasites, bacteria and now THIS. Make informed decisions for your pets and the implications for your family!
Lori Flynn
The USDA has quietly approved an experimental new class of injections for dogs and cats—sold as routine vaccines, but relying on self-amplifying genetic technology that allows mRNA into our homes, our pets, and even our bodies—without public knowledge or consent.
As Merck’s Nobivac NXT shots are rolled out for rabies, flu, and feline leukemia, supporters are describing it as “next-generation innovation.” However, in reality, it represents something far more troubling: the normalization of genetic intervention technologies in household pets with little public debate, zero long-term safety data, and no informed consent.
At the heart of the concern is the claim that Nobivac NXT uses a self-amplifying mRNA (samRNA)–based platform, a technology critics argue behaves very differently from traditional vaccines.
https://twitter.com/NicHulscher/status/2005703679995740319
“Not Your Old Rabies Shot”
According to Merck’s own promotional language, Nobivac NXT is not a conventional inactivated or attenuated vaccine. Instead, it is marketed as a platform technology designed to instruct cells to produce specific antigens internally.
Critics argue this distinction matters — a lot.
Self-amplifying mRNA, they warn, is designed to replicate itself inside the body, theoretically increasing protein production while using smaller initial doses. While proponents say this makes the technology more efficient, skeptics argue it also makes it harder to control, harder to stop, and harder to predict.
“These are not one-and-done injections,” claims one independent researcher familiar with mRNA platforms. “The concern is persistence — how long it lasts, where it goes, and what it does over time.”
Shedding: A Question Regulators Aren’t Addressing
One of the most controversial claims circulating online is the idea that pets injected with samRNA-based products shed biological material that affect humans — especially children, immunocompromised individuals, or pregnant women.
“If shedding is impossible,” one critic asks, “why not publish comprehensive, third-party studies proving it?”
Perhaps most disturbing to critics is the claim that many veterinarians themselves do not fully understand the underlying technology they are administering. Several pet owners report being told the injections are “just like traditional vaccines,” with no mention of genetic platforms, self-amplification, or novel delivery systems.
A Slippery Slope into the Home
Dogs and cats are not livestock. They sleep in beds. They lick faces. They live inches from infants and toddlers.
That intimacy is precisely why critics believe veterinary biotech deserves more scrutiny, not less.
This isn’t just about animal health It’s about how experimental technologies are quietly moving closer to the human household — one injection at a time.
Baxter Dmitry_
thepeoplesvoice.tv
