It's my belief, from the very beginning, that the annual flu was rebranded as "COVID-19". I'm currently quite ill with an upper respiratory infection. I needed an antibiotic because I believe my illness is bacterial, not viral. I called my doc and asked him to prescribe an antibiotic for me. All normal, I would think, until my doc asked me if I was ever tested for COVID. This is an excellent doctor, in my opinion, that fell hook, line and sinker for that entire COVID BS and now three years later STILL believes it. I told him "I was never tested and would never allow to be tested".
When the COVID BS was hot and running, he told me I should get the COVID vaccines. I politely declined. He said, "aren't you afraid this virus can kill you"? I told him "I'm more afraid those vaccines will kill me". I do wonder of all the people he convinced should get the vaccine, if any of them are alive today.
Come on, lots of people are still alive who got the vaccine - although, of course, we don't know how many of the alleged vaccines were placebo, do we?, even vaccines under the same label don't all contain the same stuff as indicated by all the batch anomalies.
I did seem to notice that my former doctor's practice eased off on the vaccine availability advice and I wonder how many patients at that practice suffered ill-effects.
[part 2] - same sort of reasoning but for the virus itself. I know you, and many others, don't believe that sars-cov2 is or was ever a thing, but leave that to one side for the moment, as I'm not going into all the scientific and logistical arguments here, or we'll be here all day.
But if I were unleashing this 'pandemic', and I needed it to be simultaneous and therefore on a global level, with guaranteed sufficient harm to convince enough people, then I would design a biochemical weapon, perhaps a modified coronavirus, and unleash it across the world. It wouldn't need to be deadly, just sufficient to provide pretext to do part 2, which is the lockdowns and then mRNA jabs etc.
But I would also take the opportunity to design a wide range of batches, and also - especially - I would want to test ethnicity-specific weapons (for example against Russians, Chinese, Iranians/Persians, (North) Koreans, Arabs, and so on). You can understand how useful such data would be I'm sure?
I know a lot of people go for the 'fake binary' idea that 'they're all in it together', but I don't fully go with that hypothesis. Mainly because of the limitations of the social cognition number (Dunbar's number), and thus tribal loyalties. There are certainly 'factions', however, and my faction would definitely want to test potential weapons against the rival factions. This would, ironically, explain why the likes of China and Russia appeared to go along with the whole pandemic, if they were worried that the American Empire would use Covid as a cover to inflict a genuine biochemical weapon attack. It's certainly something I would consider if I were in the CIA.
Remember also that even if you, personally, don't believe that viruses are a thing, I'm sure you do accept the existence of biochemistry, and that some biochemicals can be harmful. What we call 'contagion', is simply one person passing a biochemical to another person, with various potential methods of transmission. Human reproduction, for example, is a form of contagion, in this sense.
Airborne contagion can happen of course, as you would know if you've ever been a room with other people smoking. 'Smoke' is simply chemical molecules which come from one person, and then can be ingested by a second person. So I do find myself laughing at people who dismiss the whole idea of contagion. They are either monumentally stupid, or they are lying...
The manufactured perception that there was any event whatsoever is an artifact of mass media manipulation, behavioral conditioning techniques and social engineering. All of this made possible through institutional programming and accelerated media messaging disallowing basic cognitive processes and eliminating critical thinking possibilities.
You should also remember the sheer number of cognitive infiltrators (i.e. spooks) out there nearly all of whom are pushing the 'sars-cov2 never existed' idea. Seeing as we know these people are cognitive infiltrators, it is entirely justified to ask 'why do they want people to disbelieve in the existence of sars-cov2' or even 'why do they want people to disbelieve in viruses'.
Could it possibly be that they are attempting to cover up the existence of a genuine biochemical weapon, which can, naturally, be unleashed again? Or even of biochemical weapons themselves, if they can convince people that neither viruses nor contagion really exist.
And targeting the 'conspiracy theory subculture' itself with this essentially means that when they subject everyone the next time to a genuinely deadly biochemical weapon, masquerading as a naturally occurring contagion, the conspiracy theorists will disbelieve it, certainly not take any 'vaccine', and so they will very likely die. That's a very clever way to eliminate all those pesky dissidents. If I were the bad guys, it's definitely a cunning method I would choose and it would be exceptionally pleasing to see them all dropping like flies. It would make me smile broadly, for sure.
Impugning motives and speculation are irrelevant. All that matters is hard evidence and you have provided none.
Could it be possible that flying monkeys are about to surround us?
People have been convinced through years of social engineering to believe that the things they see on screens represent biological reality.
The “genomic sequencing” for SARS-CoV-2 is yet another example of this fraud. The Corman-Drosten team developed the test for Covid-19 based on an In-silico Genetic Sequence (from a computer simulation).
They did not have any Viral Isolates of Covid-19 available, nor any clinical samples of anyone sick with the alleged new disease. Simply based on that, the test is invalid.
A new medical test must be validated against a 'Gold Standard", that is, a test which is 100% accurate.
The Corman-Drosten team, used the SARS sequence from 2003 (which itself was never properly purified or isolated), they then used the PCR primer related to that sequence, amplified it using PCR, sequenced that they amplified (they did this multiple times) and used the sequences that were different from the SARS sequence to develop primers for their diagnostic test. As there were no purified samples or Isolates of any kind, this entire experiment was made up.
It turns out, when you input the sequences that are being tested for, to show a positive case, the sequences show up 93 times in the human genome, and approx. 91 times from Bacteria/Fungi (Microbes). These supposed "New" sequences show up in nature and are not new at all.
Never mind, you cannot possibly say these sequences are coming from a "new virus" if you don't have the virus in the first place.
The team then sent this test to China, to test for this "Novel" virus that they created a test for, with none of the "Novel" virus at their disposal.
The Chinese scientists, who work for the WEF/Pharma Cartel BTW, "found" these sequences in their 'Atypical Pneumonia" patients with non-specific respiratory symptoms, (obviously being that these sequences show up in humans), and they create an entire "Genome" based off of 1 Clinical Sample.
In order to create a Genome correctly, you would need hundreds upon thousands of samples to develop an actual accurate "Viral Genome", they took 1 person that tested positive with a PCR test created without any virus.
They then took a clinical sample from a PCR + person's lung fluid, with symptoms consistent with "Atypical Pneumonia". They take only the short RNA strands from the clinical sample, and put them into computer programs- Megahit and Trinity.
These two programs assembled a bunch of Contigs (Possible Genome structures) made up of all the short RNA strands from the person, which number 56 Million.
The Trinity computer came up with 1,329,960 Contigs ranging from 201-11,760 base pairs, the Megahit computer came up with 384,096 Contigs ranging from 200-30,474 base pairs. In layman terms, the computer generated almost 2 million possible Genome Structures.
The longest Contig (30,474 base pairs) was chosen, simply because it was the longest one. Upon further investigation, this genome was only 80% similar to SARS-COV 1 bat-like sequence. They then add some Sars 1 sequences to make it look more like a SARS virus.
Can anyone not see at this point they are simply making shit up as they go to reach their pre-ordained conclusion?
80%, is less similar than what humans are to house cats. The claim was the Genome totaled 29,903 bases long, which negates 571 bases from the Contig. If those weren't valid how do we know this entire Contig is valid?
The Contig chosen, was created out of 123,613 different pieces of short RNA from the clinical genetic sample.
They don't know where these sequences are coming from, they don't know if the genome is real, they don't know the amount of error in the process, they don't know how many "reads" were correct, this entire thing is theoretical and computer generated.
Then come thousands of papers and studies and reports all based on the original in-silico sorcery and deceptions...Turtles All The Way Down.
The trouble is Allen most people are very stupid. You underestimate your own intelligence and ability to reason. For example someone wrote in an earlier comment about the number of spooks out there and stated that most of them are pushing the no virus narrative. That is so obviously wrong it's ridiculous. We have had imaginary viruses shoved down our throats, non stop, by these people for my entire life. The entire mainstream media, education, Hollywood, pharma etc.
There is a tiny group (compared to the entirety of the pharmaceutical industry and mass media) that was assigned the no virus task for covid.
The evidence against the existence of contagious pathogenic viruses was well and truly settled more than a century ago.
BUT most completely simple minded humans will agree that either the 'spooks' or 'nut jobs' are pushing the no virus agenda. And not realise their job is to backwash and control that part of the narrative.
The bigger issue (if people being conned by our Lord's is an issue at all, honestly it's probably better than the alternative but that's another discussion) is that truthers go down the road of 'I see the controlled opposition are pushing this agenda (wether it be no viruses, the moon landings are fake, or people should bleed if they get shot in a terror attack...) and assume they can make a rational decision on the veracity of the subject based on what these controlled opposition are saying.. When all they have to do is examine the evidence, examine virology itself. No one (with a good level of intelligence) has ever examined the evidence for viruses and come to the conclusion that they are even close to real. No one ever. It is a few days work and you know it's a complete snow job. Yet most people won't do it.
Instead stupid people, nearly every single peasant, make their judgements based on what is said and done by the very people whose jobs it is to trick them. Then these very same stupid people think they are intelligent for doing so.
The other observation which occurs to me is how you are misrepresenting viral isolation and genome sequencing and especially subsequent papers and studies.
It's your use of this word 'in-silico' which deceives people, I've noticed. It makes people think the whole thing is just some computer simulation, which it isn't. It starts off with real samples and real chemistry. PCR, polymerase chain reaction, for example, is chemistry, not computer simulation. It is, as I am sure you know, used to produce lots of copies of a particular protein sequence (RNA/DNA) which can then be subject to a variety of chemical experiments. For example with various aspect of the human immune system, starting with Interferon and then leading to various downstream pathways. This cannot be done 'in-silico', it requires chemical experimentation.
Further, for you to cite 'humans and cats' is disingenuous. But even so, humans and cats share a massive amount of similarity, which an 80% similar result will show, namely they are from the same family, namely mammals. They have very similar internal organs which perform the same functions, same basic sensory organs, same sense-input brain processing functions, and so on.
But they have billions of base pairs. Scaling down to a nanoscopic coronavirus with only 30k base pairs, an 80% similarity definitely proves they have a common ancestor. We're dealing with a very simple organism here. Each of its 30-odd parts can be tested against various aspects of a human immune system and indeed synthetic drugs, like Ivermectin. This is how we know Ivermectin is effective against sars-cov2 on multiple pathways, including against the S-protein. It's also how we know sars-cov2 has the ability to evade the innate immune response by preventing the interferon trigger leading to a downstream cascade. This lasts about 10 days, which is how you get 'asymptomatic transmission'.
You might be able to fool laypeople with your 'it's all in-silico fraud' rubbish, but not someone like me who has actually had to study medical science for a living.
Fortunately, however, you'll be pleased to know I've got better things to do with my time than to rehash all this stuff that I've had to point out to virus-deniers far too many times already. It gets boring, ultimately.
I'm afraid you've just blown your own foot off here, as opposed to just shooting it, with what, to a layperson, might sound impressive and knowledgeable and scientific but actually it's bollocks.
You are suggesting this is some randomly selected sample/result from several million options.
Ok, if that's true, then this would negate the possibility entirely of reproducibility of results. What this means is that if you are the perpetrator of this non-existent made-up fraud/virus, then you have to actively prevent every histopathology lab in the world, and every other lab capable of genome sequencing, from ever testing any suspected sample of alleged sars-cov2. Either that, or you have to make sure their results match up every single time.
In other words, this 'fraudulent isolation' you speak of must be replicated precisely a million more times. And I mean precisely.
If you were planning on subjecting the world to a pandemic then faking it is simply not logistically possible. It's more than too hard work. The easiest way to go about it really is to have a real virus. Then you can let people do tests to their hearts' content, they all come out with the same results each time, and you make virus-deniers look stupid.
Perhaps also you think, hmm, that's not a bad idea actually. Let's have someone do a 'debunkable test' then get our cognitive infiltrators to bang on about it, infect the truth movement with it, and hey, we've just fucked brilliantly with them. It's definitely what I would do.
This is why I say you're talking bollocks. Because your reasoning might be sound if there is only ever going to be one sample and one genome sequencing, which is NEVER repeated anywhere in the world.
In order to prove your point you need to prove that EVERY case of genome sequencing of a suspected sars-cov2 sample was not just a fraud, but EXACTLY THE SAME fraud. And you can't do that, can you?
This is the killer argument, by the way - reproducibility of results. It's called science.
Whilst 'manufactured perception' is obviously a part of it, it's not the whole story. The 'manufactured perception' is about the perceived danger of it, not whether or not it exists.
The reason why there had to be 'something' is because of basic biochemistry, and the fact that there are thousands upon thousands of biochemistry laboratories all over the world, and dozens of people who work in those labs, performing biochemical/histopathology assays every day.
So we're probably talking at least a million people here. It simply isn't logistically possible to get every one of those people to lie all the time. most of them are 'normal people' who are simply not involved in any mad conspiracy to fool the world about some non-existent thing. The scientific issue here is 'reproducibility of test results'. If biochemical assays (i.e. viral isolation or antibody tests) produced 'junk proteins' all the time, then by definition those 'junk proteins' would not be exactly the same each time. This could hardly go unnoticed!
In order to overcome this problem, there needed to be 'something' that could be subjected to tests and produce the same result each time. i.e. the presence of either viral coronavirus proteins or antibodies to coronavirus.
This is notwithstanding the fact that most adults will already have antibodies to coronaviruses from having contracted colds at some point in their lives. They would probably have cross-resistant antibodies to a variant like sars-cov2. Likewise, I can accept that this would greatly inflate the numbers of positive tests, because if they had a recent corona-cold which they didn't even notice because of their immunity, then they may well still test 'positive' on a PCR, which amplifies the number of protein chains/nucleotides, even if those nucleotides are the result of antibodies shredding up the coronavirus infection and the body hasn't gotten around to fully clearing out the system yet.
There are many, many problems with your assertions here and numerous logical fallacies but putting all of those issues aside the simple fact is that you haven't provided any evidence for your claims.
There was no pandemic "unleashed" anywhere but prove me wrong and give me details of where it happened, how it happened and who was impacted. If you can't provide specifics don't bother.
Does 'they' here include the million normal people who work in histopathology laboratories around the world? Can you prove to me that all of them were lying about the test results?
Stupid people don't need to lie smart people know how to trick them. I once came across some one who actually believed that a positive PCR test for a virus meant there was a virus present (hard to believe anyone could be that dumb but it's true). It's no different to testing for witches. Stupid people believed the tests were real. They were not lying. Once a stupid person believes something no (almost) amount of evidence can convince them otherwise. Most times they will refuse to examine any real evidence against their beliefs. Instead desperately searching, usually unknowingly, for the controlled opposition whose job it is to keep them in the dark.
You yourself still refuse to examine the PCR tests or virology itself. Have you ever asked yourself why? With all the time you have spent building straw men you could have discovered the truth but you refuse to even look.
I've already examined it at length, which is why I can't be bothered to trot it all out again.
Also, you misrepresent what I said. I never said PCR is a diagnostic tool. Of course it isn't. Kary Mullis said as much. It is, however, scientifically valid, and proven by endless use, as a tool for replicating protein chains. Polymerase is an enzyme (chemical catalyst) which provokes the biochemical reaction required to manufacture more copies of a nucleotide. It is a real, genuine chemical molecule, not some made up thing. Same as reverse transcriptase. Ironically, one can infer that viruses exist simply by virtue of these two enzymes existing. If they didn't exist, viruses wouldn't exist. Neither would RNA or DNA or life itself. That's called biochemistry.
If you want to try and convince stupid people of BS, then you need to improve your targeting ability. Never pick on someone who obviously has extensive and intelligent knowledge on a subject. You'll only make yourself look the stupid person.
I wasn't implying all vaccine receivers died. I happen to know quite a number of them are still alive, but I believe they're ticking time bombs. Would be kind of stupid for the vaccine to kill instantly.
You have fallen for the con. The injections of various poisons known as covid vaccines, although toxic, were minimally so. They are simply what it says on the ingredients list (mostly). That should be enough for any intelligent person to leave them alone. But as usual the controlled opposition got out there pushing all sorts of crap.
Now is the time White Eagle to say to yourself, I was tricked, I am going to go back and revise my opinions on this subject.
There have been lots of times in my life I have been fooled there will be lots more. Examine what, why, when, how it happens and move on. Try do better next time.
Do not feel shame in getting things wrong. Realising you are wrong is something stupid people struggle the most with and intelligent people find much easier. It sounds dumb but the faster someone can admit they are wrong the more intelligent they are. The more they stick to their guns despite overwhelming evidence.......
From the (admittedly not exhaustively comprehensive - at least not yet anyhow) research I've done I am fairly certain there were a range of batches, rather than just 'either the mRNA or the placebo'. If I were designing this (assume I don't have a conscience and I'm a psychopath) what amounts to a massive global drug trial, then I would definitely have a wide range of different batches so long as I could track each one. I can then do comparative analyses etc.
Remember also that 'placebo' is an unscientific thing to test against as a control, because the effect is generated from a particular part of the brain (I forget which and am too lazy to look it up), and is extremely variable in strength from individual to individual. They also have to factor in the nocebo effect from scaring people about 'covid', and we do know the nocebo is stronger than the placebo.
So the real 'control' group are in fact the 'unvaccinated', in the same way that treatments should be tested not against placebo, but against no-treatment.
Anyway, having said that I would need to have a placebo batch, partly for those designated as 'important' people, but also because I need to disguise the toxicity of the jabs, otherwise it'll become obvious how dangerous they are. So I would probably have about 30-50% placebos.
I would then not necessarily have simply different degrees of harm/lethality with the rest of the batches, but I'd want to test different kinds of mRNA. Yes, there would definitely be a batch (say, 5%) which is designed to be short-term lethal (they'd want to pass these deaths off as covid anyway remember, to achieve the required numbers; plus depopulation). Then, say, 15% designed to be medium-term lethal, then another 15% long-term lethal. The rest would be 'moderate to severe', but specifically designed to impact particular bits of the body (also, profit can be made from people with chronic conditions).
For the depopulation, though, I'd certainly want all the effective batches to impair the reproductive system.
It would be possible to test this hypothesis by extrapolating the 'side effects' (i.e. intended effects) data, but to really drill down we'd need to be able to geographically know which batches went where and what the local side effects rates were in each given location. I don't know whether that sort of info is publicly available though. Maybe if you had the right kind of medical assessor job or something, I don't know.
I hope at least that you managed to get the antibiotic from your doc or some other doc. If the docs won't oblige, perhaps a dentist will be more understanding. Tell them you have a gum infection and can feel the little bacterial buggers working below the surface. They will usually prescribe some penicillin or one of its cousins, like amoxicillin.
I remember well that in many places COVID-19-related pneumonia was judged to be not treatable with antibiotics and so protocols withheld this simple treatment, condemning countless unfortunates to needlessly early and painful deaths. I will never forget or forgive the medical profession's role in that.
In the US flu and pneumonia deaths are combined in a single cause of death, and it increased 8% in 2020--in addition to all the deaths attributed to Covid. It did reduce somewhat in 2021 and 2022. There were also excess deaths in other areas such as diabetes and liver disease. You can see these numbers on the first page of Chap 5 of my book, available free here: https://www.virginiastoner.com/first-page-of-every-chapter
Interesting how our two countries show quite different statistics. Our 2020 covid figure seems to make no sense. If the flu numbers dropped so ludicrously to transform into covid figures and, in addition, they applied covid to deaths where co-morbidities applied then the covid figure should be higher ... and as that is what they seemed to be aiming for globally it just doesn't make sense.
There is no convincing needed, all one had to do was read the 'Emergency Use Authorization Letter'
In that letter at the bottom of the longest paragraph was a sentence that had nothing to do with the above paragraph that stated ... "It is an Investigational Vaccine, Not Licensed for any Indication"
Search that sentence.
The EUA is still in effect by the way.
Ask your doctor about that sentence!
Now who reads that EUA and then takes the shot?
Now who actually read the EUA at all?
Who is stupid enough to take "an investigational Vaccine"
Who is stupid enough to take a vaccine that is "not licensed for any Indication"
Who is stupid enough to tell you to take the vaccine?!?!? A Doctor?
Sadly there is nothing that can be done for those people, they have willfully committed a deed other wanted them to without the knowledge of why. That certainly is not going to have me calling that person out for being intelligent.
and as far as the covid B/S why is it that the so called annual flu is not b/s?
I have not been sick, ill in over ten years. This coincides with a complete change of habits and has allowed me to conclude I will not get sick as long as I am HEALthy. I no longer fear being around people who have the so called flu or anything else considered infectious.
This is what people must do for themselves. in fact it is all you can do
I didn't have to read the Emergency Use Authorization letter. In April 2020, I saw a graph that was put out by the CDC. That graph showed the death numbers of the flu (very low) as being used as the baseline, with the COVID deaths shooting into the stratosphere. With that graph, I realized they hijacked the flu, as being COVID. I knew all that followed was pure BS and a means of Totalitarian control of the populace. Unfortunately, far too many people fell for it and masked up and rolled up their sleeves.
Why should I read about something I already know? I knew it was all BS so didn't get the shot! I also refused to wear the mask! A store called the cops on me...I had an old guy ram his grocery cart into me because I wasn't wearing one. You're wasting your time on me.
There WAS a package insert...but it was BLANK! THAT itself should have alerted the doctors administering the JAB or trying to convince their patients to get it. I think it's clear they either never checked what the insert had to say (it was BLANK anyway) or was told you WILL advise your patients to get it.
and you are correct....there was no informed consent, but there was still consent and all one had to do was read the EUA's "It is an Investigational vaccine, not licensed for any indication" so as to never give consent, but we all know how the story goes...........
They blew up the world and psychologically terrorized the populace to ramrod their racketeering scheme into everyone's lives.
Crime of the century.
Not many are talking about the mass murder done for money in hospitals and nursing homes or the massive multi-trillion dollar bailouts that were all part of the covid crimes.
Moderator Michael Specter at “The Future of Health Summit” held at the Milken Institute on Oct. 28-29, 2019.
"Why don’t we blow the system up? I mean obviously, we can’t just turn off the spigot on the system we have and then say, hey everyone in the world should get this new vaccine that we haven’t given to anyone yet. But there must be some way…"
From this dilemma arose the second theme of the discussion, the “need” for something new and more frightening to emerge, as the flu no longer created enough fear in the population to warrant such a “universal vaccine” and a wholesale change in the current system.
Rick Bright responds:
“But it is not too crazy to think that an outbreak of a novel avian virus could occur in China somewhere. We could get the RNA sequence from that to a number of regional centers if not local, if not even in your home at some point..."
March 24, 2020 US CDC sends out Alert 2: New ICD code introduced for COVID-19 deaths, a follow-up from their Alert 1 on March 4, 2020.
If a decedent’s death certificate was marked probably or suspected COVID-19, any uncertainty will automatically be deemed COVID-19 and they stated “it is not likely that NCHS will follow up on these cases”.
94% of deaths will be shown by CDC data to have on average four additional "comorbidities.".
The CARES ACT, signed into law 3 days later, will incentivize hospitals and physicians to include COVID-19 on death certificates and discharge papers, increasing Medicare payments to hospitals treating COVID-19 victims.
April 12, 2020 Self proclaimed health expert and “global health” philanthropist Bill Gates is interviewed on BBC Breakfast:
“Once you have a safe and effective vaccine, and get that out to almost all of the people on the planet” then....
“We will go back to normal, and economies will recover.”
“the thing that will get us back to the world that we had before coronavirus is the vaccine and getting that out to all 7 billion people”
Bill Gates:
“…so we’re going to have to take something that usually takes 5 to 6 years [to develop] and get it done in 18 months. There is an approach called an RNA vaccine…that looks quite promising…unfortunately the schedule for the [conventional vaccine approach] will probably not be as quick as the RNA platform, that we’ve been funding directly and through CEPI over the last decade.”
A naughty little relative of mine was supposed to submit a covid test. So he tested a piece of fruit - an orange, as I remember - and submitted that. The unfortunate citrus had covid.
'Bout says it all. although...
You would think that with all the resources and opportunities for fakery they wouldn't need to swap flu stats for covid stats. Is it possible the globsters fake so clumsily on purpose? To ridicule? To test thresholds?
I think I agree with so many of the comments here. First of all, it is mainly a perception control operation. In that vein, of course the disappearance of the seasonal flu, explained away conveniently by lockdowns, was a sleight of hand to 'reveal' the covid illusion.
AnyOne who still thinks that "covid" was a bug making People sick have not looked at the data. The fact that neither viruses nor contagion have honestly been proven. The fact that deaths mostly were in the normal range, and where they differed there was likely some 5G going on...
But surely not at the levels the "news" suggested.
I suspect the whole 5g thing is also overblown in conspiracy circles. Obviously it's not good for us, like injections of various poisons.
By overselling the immediate dangers initially it helps to prevent or delay the proper investigation of longer term harm. Like your microwave, no one is dying by standing next to it for 2 minutes to heat their lunch. Long term all day every day.......... Different results.
We have seen the animal studies on mobile phone use, well before 5g and they were damming. The question even in mainstream scientific circles isn't if this stuff is harmful. Every single experiment ever finds this is harmful. It is how bad is it and the exact nature and time frame of the harm.
It is conceivable that the 5G thing has been miscast as more of an immediate villain than it is… But… Why were They putting up the towers so avidly in the middle of the plannedemic lockdowns…? They have some motive, and it’s not in Our best interest for those towers.
Be that as it may… We might want to solve for the moneyed psychopaths in control on Our planet.
I don't think much of Agent whatsisnumber's article btw. It's a classic ad hominem fallacy or discredit by association. What I mean is, just because there was some guy called Jenner who can be outed as a bad man, this doesn't, logically, invalidate the entire science of virology and immunology. Logically, it only concludes that there was a bad man called Jenner.
The predicate is in the subject, in other words.
More people should study basic philosophy and critical thinking. Then they wouldn't fall for these logical fallacies.
It doesn't necessarily discredit the entire science of virology and immunology but we have to ask why his work itself isn't entirely discredited in the mainstream and why the point in history when supposed genuine vaccination started hasn't been established. The supposed science of vaccinology discredits itself by treating him as its father.
From AI
Edward Jenner is widely known as the "father of vaccination" for his pioneering work in developing a smallpox vaccine in 1796. He discovered that inoculating individuals with the cowpox virus could provide immunity against the related, more dangerous smallpox virus.
Here's a more detailed look at his work:
Observation and Experimentation:
Jenner observed that milkmaids infected with cowpox, a milder disease, were immune to smallpox. He hypothesized that cowpox could provide protection against smallpox and conducted experiments to test this hypothesis.
The First Vaccine:
In 1796, Jenner inoculated an 8-year-old boy, James Phipps, with matter from a cowpox blister on a milkmaid's hand. Phipps became infected with cowpox but recovered, and then Jenner exposed him to smallpox, but he remained immune. This successful experiment demonstrated the effectiveness of vaccination.
Public Acceptance:
While his work was initially met with skepticism, Jenner's discovery eventually gained widespread acceptance and led to the eradication of smallpox.
Enduring Legacy:
Jenner's work not only revolutionized medicine but also laid the foundation for modern immunology and vaccination programs. His legacy continues to inspire advancements in disease prevention and public health.
I think you may have answered your own opening question there. When you say vaccinology kind of discredits itself by citing him as a founder you have to remember that the vast majority of people are entirely unaware of this darker side of his biography. It only discredits it to the so-called 'conspiracy theorists'. I.e., a minority.
If the situation were reversed, and everyone was aware, then the majority would feel the entire idea of vaccines and immunology etc. should be discredited. So this is the reason they have to maintain the myth. They don't want everyone becoming conspiracy theorists, remember!
Would be great fun though wouldn't it! Having, like, only 5-10% or whatever of the population thinking conspiracy theorists are loonies. There is such a cool idea for a story or TV show in this. Obviously it would have to be some parallel world thing (I like parallel worlds, no kidding!).
I often get these great fun ideas but alas, they usually never amount to anything.
Agents job is to make sure he convinces no one. Do you understand how controlled opposition works? His job is to set up easy to knock down straw men so that the real evidence is ignored. That way people can stick with their current beliefs, falsely believeing they have investigated something rather than looking at the actual virology studies. The best way to make sure people keep believing is by having the controlled opposition referenced by those who know viruses (or moon landings, terror attacks etc) aren't real and then investigated by those who still believe. The believers then discover the straw men placed by the controlled opposition and consider their investigation complete and stick with their old views, which they are desperate to hold onto. It is all very simple, well designed and effective
"Agent's job is to make sure he convinces no one."
This is clearly a false statement. We know that lots of people believe things because of what agents tell them - me included. I have such a vivid memory of learning about the Five Dancing Israelis caught in a roadblock with explosives dust and thinking, "Oh, I see, they got OUTSIDERS to do the dastardly deed of bringing down the buildings instead of US citizens who would be loath to do that to their fellow countrymen."
But regardless of whether we agree on their purpose or not we are always left with the simple fact that the agents have not said a single word of truth on the ML and ABSOLUTELY NO DISBELIEVER HAS NOTICED. That is a salient fact, can you not understand that?
They are very good at inserting red herrings into their events. I'm remembering the controlled demolition van on 7/7 of course, which was eagerly seized upon by their agent 'Muad dib' or whatever his stupid name was, then happily focussed on in a BBC debunking documentary.
Here is the template, agent so and so. Now rinse and repeat.
Hmm. So it doesn't occur to you that the idea that 'viruses don't exist' is that actual straw man here?
Designed to make 'conspiracy theorists' look like idiots (same way they used to do with the moon landings, and more recently Bill Gates microchipping everyone, or Icke droning on about a reptilian simulation hypothesis). Then every conspiracy theory, true or not, can be discredited by association. The Marianna Springs of this world simply present the appropriate image of 'a typical conspiracy theorist' to the world 'look, they don't even think viruses are real', the general public laugh at them, go back to sleep, and then job done.
See, if viruses didn't exist then there would've been a much more prominent 'conspiracy theory' about it decades ago and it would've been discussed by thousands of biomedical scientists (immunologists especially), in the same way that 'climate change' as a false hypothesis has indeed been discussed and dismissed by thousands of climate scientists. My point being, with an epistemological scientific subject like virology or immunology you can't maintain a fraud of that scale without generating so many thousands of people pointing out the fraud. You would then have to do the same ostracism as they do to climate 'sceptics'. If you look at the historical record, you simply don't see that.
Aside from perhaps a few cranks here and there, this manufactured (by cognitive infiltrators) 'viruses don't exist' theory only sprang up when the pandemic got going. Go figure.
"Designed to make 'conspiracy theorists' look like idiots...."
Kind of taken out of the entire context but anyway.
Since you're talking about the viruses and anybody skeptical about the germ theory in general, don't you think 200 years of the theory and experimenting should have produced some irrefutable, hard proof for it? Yet there is still none. I'm sorry, but the real straw man in this case is talking about the virus=poison while having no proof for it.
You may have been stuck within your belief system, since you're unable to justify your physical experience with illness in any other meaningful way, but that doesn't make your belief accurate or true. It is rather a reflection of the fact that you're not ready to learn about the reality of the so-called science of virology.
Since I know you're into Mathisian physics, I want you to think about the conjecture with the virology. As much as you thought you knew about the physics up to a point, it all changed once you've learned about the charge (aka unified theory). It is the same with virology - it is full of imaginative things nobody can see, yet they want you to believe they're true. For every instance of a quasi-particle or a messenger photon etc. in MS physics, there's one unicorn in virology.
You're admittedly not into the discourse and criticism of the germ theory or else you would have known that GT has been criticized from its inception. Many of the renowned scientist have lost their academic careers over legitimate criticism in the last 100+ years. You don't know their names, but Naessens or Rife have proven there's much more to be considered while theorizing about illness before jumping into the unicorn land, for which they paid with exclusion and ridicule.
Your conclusion about the pandemic and "no virus theory" is coincidental. I can dig out tens of papers or books, per annum, since early 1900's on the topic of GT criticism.
Honestly, I would've expected a bit more from you on the subject. Like I said publicly to Miles - if you want to properly criticize any subject, you have to learn about it.
It's my belief, from the very beginning, that the annual flu was rebranded as "COVID-19". I'm currently quite ill with an upper respiratory infection. I needed an antibiotic because I believe my illness is bacterial, not viral. I called my doc and asked him to prescribe an antibiotic for me. All normal, I would think, until my doc asked me if I was ever tested for COVID. This is an excellent doctor, in my opinion, that fell hook, line and sinker for that entire COVID BS and now three years later STILL believes it. I told him "I was never tested and would never allow to be tested".
When the COVID BS was hot and running, he told me I should get the COVID vaccines. I politely declined. He said, "aren't you afraid this virus can kill you"? I told him "I'm more afraid those vaccines will kill me". I do wonder of all the people he convinced should get the vaccine, if any of them are alive today.
Come on, lots of people are still alive who got the vaccine - although, of course, we don't know how many of the alleged vaccines were placebo, do we?, even vaccines under the same label don't all contain the same stuff as indicated by all the batch anomalies.
I did seem to notice that my former doctor's practice eased off on the vaccine availability advice and I wonder how many patients at that practice suffered ill-effects.
[part 2] - same sort of reasoning but for the virus itself. I know you, and many others, don't believe that sars-cov2 is or was ever a thing, but leave that to one side for the moment, as I'm not going into all the scientific and logistical arguments here, or we'll be here all day.
But if I were unleashing this 'pandemic', and I needed it to be simultaneous and therefore on a global level, with guaranteed sufficient harm to convince enough people, then I would design a biochemical weapon, perhaps a modified coronavirus, and unleash it across the world. It wouldn't need to be deadly, just sufficient to provide pretext to do part 2, which is the lockdowns and then mRNA jabs etc.
But I would also take the opportunity to design a wide range of batches, and also - especially - I would want to test ethnicity-specific weapons (for example against Russians, Chinese, Iranians/Persians, (North) Koreans, Arabs, and so on). You can understand how useful such data would be I'm sure?
I know a lot of people go for the 'fake binary' idea that 'they're all in it together', but I don't fully go with that hypothesis. Mainly because of the limitations of the social cognition number (Dunbar's number), and thus tribal loyalties. There are certainly 'factions', however, and my faction would definitely want to test potential weapons against the rival factions. This would, ironically, explain why the likes of China and Russia appeared to go along with the whole pandemic, if they were worried that the American Empire would use Covid as a cover to inflict a genuine biochemical weapon attack. It's certainly something I would consider if I were in the CIA.
Remember also that even if you, personally, don't believe that viruses are a thing, I'm sure you do accept the existence of biochemistry, and that some biochemicals can be harmful. What we call 'contagion', is simply one person passing a biochemical to another person, with various potential methods of transmission. Human reproduction, for example, is a form of contagion, in this sense.
Airborne contagion can happen of course, as you would know if you've ever been a room with other people smoking. 'Smoke' is simply chemical molecules which come from one person, and then can be ingested by a second person. So I do find myself laughing at people who dismiss the whole idea of contagion. They are either monumentally stupid, or they are lying...
They didn't do any of that or need to.
The manufactured perception that there was any event whatsoever is an artifact of mass media manipulation, behavioral conditioning techniques and social engineering. All of this made possible through institutional programming and accelerated media messaging disallowing basic cognitive processes and eliminating critical thinking possibilities.
and fraudulent tests
You should also remember the sheer number of cognitive infiltrators (i.e. spooks) out there nearly all of whom are pushing the 'sars-cov2 never existed' idea. Seeing as we know these people are cognitive infiltrators, it is entirely justified to ask 'why do they want people to disbelieve in the existence of sars-cov2' or even 'why do they want people to disbelieve in viruses'.
Could it possibly be that they are attempting to cover up the existence of a genuine biochemical weapon, which can, naturally, be unleashed again? Or even of biochemical weapons themselves, if they can convince people that neither viruses nor contagion really exist.
And targeting the 'conspiracy theory subculture' itself with this essentially means that when they subject everyone the next time to a genuinely deadly biochemical weapon, masquerading as a naturally occurring contagion, the conspiracy theorists will disbelieve it, certainly not take any 'vaccine', and so they will very likely die. That's a very clever way to eliminate all those pesky dissidents. If I were the bad guys, it's definitely a cunning method I would choose and it would be exceptionally pleasing to see them all dropping like flies. It would make me smile broadly, for sure.
Impugning motives and speculation are irrelevant. All that matters is hard evidence and you have provided none.
Could it be possible that flying monkeys are about to surround us?
People have been convinced through years of social engineering to believe that the things they see on screens represent biological reality.
The “genomic sequencing” for SARS-CoV-2 is yet another example of this fraud. The Corman-Drosten team developed the test for Covid-19 based on an In-silico Genetic Sequence (from a computer simulation).
They did not have any Viral Isolates of Covid-19 available, nor any clinical samples of anyone sick with the alleged new disease. Simply based on that, the test is invalid.
A new medical test must be validated against a 'Gold Standard", that is, a test which is 100% accurate.
The Corman-Drosten team, used the SARS sequence from 2003 (which itself was never properly purified or isolated), they then used the PCR primer related to that sequence, amplified it using PCR, sequenced that they amplified (they did this multiple times) and used the sequences that were different from the SARS sequence to develop primers for their diagnostic test. As there were no purified samples or Isolates of any kind, this entire experiment was made up.
It turns out, when you input the sequences that are being tested for, to show a positive case, the sequences show up 93 times in the human genome, and approx. 91 times from Bacteria/Fungi (Microbes). These supposed "New" sequences show up in nature and are not new at all.
Never mind, you cannot possibly say these sequences are coming from a "new virus" if you don't have the virus in the first place.
The team then sent this test to China, to test for this "Novel" virus that they created a test for, with none of the "Novel" virus at their disposal.
The Chinese scientists, who work for the WEF/Pharma Cartel BTW, "found" these sequences in their 'Atypical Pneumonia" patients with non-specific respiratory symptoms, (obviously being that these sequences show up in humans), and they create an entire "Genome" based off of 1 Clinical Sample.
In order to create a Genome correctly, you would need hundreds upon thousands of samples to develop an actual accurate "Viral Genome", they took 1 person that tested positive with a PCR test created without any virus.
They then took a clinical sample from a PCR + person's lung fluid, with symptoms consistent with "Atypical Pneumonia". They take only the short RNA strands from the clinical sample, and put them into computer programs- Megahit and Trinity.
These two programs assembled a bunch of Contigs (Possible Genome structures) made up of all the short RNA strands from the person, which number 56 Million.
The Trinity computer came up with 1,329,960 Contigs ranging from 201-11,760 base pairs, the Megahit computer came up with 384,096 Contigs ranging from 200-30,474 base pairs. In layman terms, the computer generated almost 2 million possible Genome Structures.
The longest Contig (30,474 base pairs) was chosen, simply because it was the longest one. Upon further investigation, this genome was only 80% similar to SARS-COV 1 bat-like sequence. They then add some Sars 1 sequences to make it look more like a SARS virus.
Can anyone not see at this point they are simply making shit up as they go to reach their pre-ordained conclusion?
80%, is less similar than what humans are to house cats. The claim was the Genome totaled 29,903 bases long, which negates 571 bases from the Contig. If those weren't valid how do we know this entire Contig is valid?
The Contig chosen, was created out of 123,613 different pieces of short RNA from the clinical genetic sample.
They don't know where these sequences are coming from, they don't know if the genome is real, they don't know the amount of error in the process, they don't know how many "reads" were correct, this entire thing is theoretical and computer generated.
Then come thousands of papers and studies and reports all based on the original in-silico sorcery and deceptions...Turtles All The Way Down.
It's all fraud piled on top of fraud.
What you have written Allen is correct.
The trouble is Allen most people are very stupid. You underestimate your own intelligence and ability to reason. For example someone wrote in an earlier comment about the number of spooks out there and stated that most of them are pushing the no virus narrative. That is so obviously wrong it's ridiculous. We have had imaginary viruses shoved down our throats, non stop, by these people for my entire life. The entire mainstream media, education, Hollywood, pharma etc.
There is a tiny group (compared to the entirety of the pharmaceutical industry and mass media) that was assigned the no virus task for covid.
The evidence against the existence of contagious pathogenic viruses was well and truly settled more than a century ago.
BUT most completely simple minded humans will agree that either the 'spooks' or 'nut jobs' are pushing the no virus agenda. And not realise their job is to backwash and control that part of the narrative.
The bigger issue (if people being conned by our Lord's is an issue at all, honestly it's probably better than the alternative but that's another discussion) is that truthers go down the road of 'I see the controlled opposition are pushing this agenda (wether it be no viruses, the moon landings are fake, or people should bleed if they get shot in a terror attack...) and assume they can make a rational decision on the veracity of the subject based on what these controlled opposition are saying.. When all they have to do is examine the evidence, examine virology itself. No one (with a good level of intelligence) has ever examined the evidence for viruses and come to the conclusion that they are even close to real. No one ever. It is a few days work and you know it's a complete snow job. Yet most people won't do it.
Instead stupid people, nearly every single peasant, make their judgements based on what is said and done by the very people whose jobs it is to trick them. Then these very same stupid people think they are intelligent for doing so.
The other observation which occurs to me is how you are misrepresenting viral isolation and genome sequencing and especially subsequent papers and studies.
It's your use of this word 'in-silico' which deceives people, I've noticed. It makes people think the whole thing is just some computer simulation, which it isn't. It starts off with real samples and real chemistry. PCR, polymerase chain reaction, for example, is chemistry, not computer simulation. It is, as I am sure you know, used to produce lots of copies of a particular protein sequence (RNA/DNA) which can then be subject to a variety of chemical experiments. For example with various aspect of the human immune system, starting with Interferon and then leading to various downstream pathways. This cannot be done 'in-silico', it requires chemical experimentation.
Further, for you to cite 'humans and cats' is disingenuous. But even so, humans and cats share a massive amount of similarity, which an 80% similar result will show, namely they are from the same family, namely mammals. They have very similar internal organs which perform the same functions, same basic sensory organs, same sense-input brain processing functions, and so on.
But they have billions of base pairs. Scaling down to a nanoscopic coronavirus with only 30k base pairs, an 80% similarity definitely proves they have a common ancestor. We're dealing with a very simple organism here. Each of its 30-odd parts can be tested against various aspects of a human immune system and indeed synthetic drugs, like Ivermectin. This is how we know Ivermectin is effective against sars-cov2 on multiple pathways, including against the S-protein. It's also how we know sars-cov2 has the ability to evade the innate immune response by preventing the interferon trigger leading to a downstream cascade. This lasts about 10 days, which is how you get 'asymptomatic transmission'.
You might be able to fool laypeople with your 'it's all in-silico fraud' rubbish, but not someone like me who has actually had to study medical science for a living.
Fortunately, however, you'll be pleased to know I've got better things to do with my time than to rehash all this stuff that I've had to point out to virus-deniers far too many times already. It gets boring, ultimately.
I'm afraid you've just blown your own foot off here, as opposed to just shooting it, with what, to a layperson, might sound impressive and knowledgeable and scientific but actually it's bollocks.
You are suggesting this is some randomly selected sample/result from several million options.
Ok, if that's true, then this would negate the possibility entirely of reproducibility of results. What this means is that if you are the perpetrator of this non-existent made-up fraud/virus, then you have to actively prevent every histopathology lab in the world, and every other lab capable of genome sequencing, from ever testing any suspected sample of alleged sars-cov2. Either that, or you have to make sure their results match up every single time.
In other words, this 'fraudulent isolation' you speak of must be replicated precisely a million more times. And I mean precisely.
If you were planning on subjecting the world to a pandemic then faking it is simply not logistically possible. It's more than too hard work. The easiest way to go about it really is to have a real virus. Then you can let people do tests to their hearts' content, they all come out with the same results each time, and you make virus-deniers look stupid.
Perhaps also you think, hmm, that's not a bad idea actually. Let's have someone do a 'debunkable test' then get our cognitive infiltrators to bang on about it, infect the truth movement with it, and hey, we've just fucked brilliantly with them. It's definitely what I would do.
This is why I say you're talking bollocks. Because your reasoning might be sound if there is only ever going to be one sample and one genome sequencing, which is NEVER repeated anywhere in the world.
In order to prove your point you need to prove that EVERY case of genome sequencing of a suspected sars-cov2 sample was not just a fraud, but EXACTLY THE SAME fraud. And you can't do that, can you?
This is the killer argument, by the way - reproducibility of results. It's called science.
Whilst 'manufactured perception' is obviously a part of it, it's not the whole story. The 'manufactured perception' is about the perceived danger of it, not whether or not it exists.
The reason why there had to be 'something' is because of basic biochemistry, and the fact that there are thousands upon thousands of biochemistry laboratories all over the world, and dozens of people who work in those labs, performing biochemical/histopathology assays every day.
So we're probably talking at least a million people here. It simply isn't logistically possible to get every one of those people to lie all the time. most of them are 'normal people' who are simply not involved in any mad conspiracy to fool the world about some non-existent thing. The scientific issue here is 'reproducibility of test results'. If biochemical assays (i.e. viral isolation or antibody tests) produced 'junk proteins' all the time, then by definition those 'junk proteins' would not be exactly the same each time. This could hardly go unnoticed!
In order to overcome this problem, there needed to be 'something' that could be subjected to tests and produce the same result each time. i.e. the presence of either viral coronavirus proteins or antibodies to coronavirus.
This is notwithstanding the fact that most adults will already have antibodies to coronaviruses from having contracted colds at some point in their lives. They would probably have cross-resistant antibodies to a variant like sars-cov2. Likewise, I can accept that this would greatly inflate the numbers of positive tests, because if they had a recent corona-cold which they didn't even notice because of their immunity, then they may well still test 'positive' on a PCR, which amplifies the number of protein chains/nucleotides, even if those nucleotides are the result of antibodies shredding up the coronavirus infection and the body hasn't gotten around to fully clearing out the system yet.
There are many, many problems with your assertions here and numerous logical fallacies but putting all of those issues aside the simple fact is that you haven't provided any evidence for your claims.
There was no pandemic "unleashed" anywhere but prove me wrong and give me details of where it happened, how it happened and who was impacted. If you can't provide specifics don't bother.
Please provide a counterargument to the 'reproducibility of results' issue.
as an aside (on why yawning, and the flu, seems to be contagious) - https://denisrancourt.substack.com/cp/163067637
lol!
So they told you "we're all in this together" and you just didn't listen?
Does 'they' here include the million normal people who work in histopathology laboratories around the world? Can you prove to me that all of them were lying about the test results?
Always more straw men.
Stupid people don't need to lie smart people know how to trick them. I once came across some one who actually believed that a positive PCR test for a virus meant there was a virus present (hard to believe anyone could be that dumb but it's true). It's no different to testing for witches. Stupid people believed the tests were real. They were not lying. Once a stupid person believes something no (almost) amount of evidence can convince them otherwise. Most times they will refuse to examine any real evidence against their beliefs. Instead desperately searching, usually unknowingly, for the controlled opposition whose job it is to keep them in the dark.
You yourself still refuse to examine the PCR tests or virology itself. Have you ever asked yourself why? With all the time you have spent building straw men you could have discovered the truth but you refuse to even look.
I've already examined it at length, which is why I can't be bothered to trot it all out again.
Also, you misrepresent what I said. I never said PCR is a diagnostic tool. Of course it isn't. Kary Mullis said as much. It is, however, scientifically valid, and proven by endless use, as a tool for replicating protein chains. Polymerase is an enzyme (chemical catalyst) which provokes the biochemical reaction required to manufacture more copies of a nucleotide. It is a real, genuine chemical molecule, not some made up thing. Same as reverse transcriptase. Ironically, one can infer that viruses exist simply by virtue of these two enzymes existing. If they didn't exist, viruses wouldn't exist. Neither would RNA or DNA or life itself. That's called biochemistry.
If you want to try and convince stupid people of BS, then you need to improve your targeting ability. Never pick on someone who obviously has extensive and intelligent knowledge on a subject. You'll only make yourself look the stupid person.
No. No. So??
I wasn't implying all vaccine receivers died. I happen to know quite a number of them are still alive, but I believe they're ticking time bombs. Would be kind of stupid for the vaccine to kill instantly.
" ... if any of them are alive today."
Yes, that was a question I had...what's the number that are still alive...if any?
I think the "if any" implies that they might all have died but if you simply mean "how many are still alive" ok.
You have fallen for the con. The injections of various poisons known as covid vaccines, although toxic, were minimally so. They are simply what it says on the ingredients list (mostly). That should be enough for any intelligent person to leave them alone. But as usual the controlled opposition got out there pushing all sorts of crap.
Now is the time White Eagle to say to yourself, I was tricked, I am going to go back and revise my opinions on this subject.
There have been lots of times in my life I have been fooled there will be lots more. Examine what, why, when, how it happens and move on. Try do better next time.
Do not feel shame in getting things wrong. Realising you are wrong is something stupid people struggle the most with and intelligent people find much easier. It sounds dumb but the faster someone can admit they are wrong the more intelligent they are. The more they stick to their guns despite overwhelming evidence.......
From the (admittedly not exhaustively comprehensive - at least not yet anyhow) research I've done I am fairly certain there were a range of batches, rather than just 'either the mRNA or the placebo'. If I were designing this (assume I don't have a conscience and I'm a psychopath) what amounts to a massive global drug trial, then I would definitely have a wide range of different batches so long as I could track each one. I can then do comparative analyses etc.
Remember also that 'placebo' is an unscientific thing to test against as a control, because the effect is generated from a particular part of the brain (I forget which and am too lazy to look it up), and is extremely variable in strength from individual to individual. They also have to factor in the nocebo effect from scaring people about 'covid', and we do know the nocebo is stronger than the placebo.
So the real 'control' group are in fact the 'unvaccinated', in the same way that treatments should be tested not against placebo, but against no-treatment.
Anyway, having said that I would need to have a placebo batch, partly for those designated as 'important' people, but also because I need to disguise the toxicity of the jabs, otherwise it'll become obvious how dangerous they are. So I would probably have about 30-50% placebos.
I would then not necessarily have simply different degrees of harm/lethality with the rest of the batches, but I'd want to test different kinds of mRNA. Yes, there would definitely be a batch (say, 5%) which is designed to be short-term lethal (they'd want to pass these deaths off as covid anyway remember, to achieve the required numbers; plus depopulation). Then, say, 15% designed to be medium-term lethal, then another 15% long-term lethal. The rest would be 'moderate to severe', but specifically designed to impact particular bits of the body (also, profit can be made from people with chronic conditions).
For the depopulation, though, I'd certainly want all the effective batches to impair the reproductive system.
It would be possible to test this hypothesis by extrapolating the 'side effects' (i.e. intended effects) data, but to really drill down we'd need to be able to geographically know which batches went where and what the local side effects rates were in each given location. I don't know whether that sort of info is publicly available though. Maybe if you had the right kind of medical assessor job or something, I don't know.
Hope you get better soon. Did you get the antibiotic?
Yes, I did get the antibiotic I needed. Thank you for your concern:)
I hope at least that you managed to get the antibiotic from your doc or some other doc. If the docs won't oblige, perhaps a dentist will be more understanding. Tell them you have a gum infection and can feel the little bacterial buggers working below the surface. They will usually prescribe some penicillin or one of its cousins, like amoxicillin.
I remember well that in many places COVID-19-related pneumonia was judged to be not treatable with antibiotics and so protocols withheld this simple treatment, condemning countless unfortunates to needlessly early and painful deaths. I will never forget or forgive the medical profession's role in that.
Yes, I did get the antibiotic I needed:) Thank you for your concern:) Very kind!
In the US flu and pneumonia deaths are combined in a single cause of death, and it increased 8% in 2020--in addition to all the deaths attributed to Covid. It did reduce somewhat in 2021 and 2022. There were also excess deaths in other areas such as diabetes and liver disease. You can see these numbers on the first page of Chap 5 of my book, available free here: https://www.virginiastoner.com/first-page-of-every-chapter
Interesting how our two countries show quite different statistics. Our 2020 covid figure seems to make no sense. If the flu numbers dropped so ludicrously to transform into covid figures and, in addition, they applied covid to deaths where co-morbidities applied then the covid figure should be higher ... and as that is what they seemed to be aiming for globally it just doesn't make sense.
There is no convincing needed, all one had to do was read the 'Emergency Use Authorization Letter'
In that letter at the bottom of the longest paragraph was a sentence that had nothing to do with the above paragraph that stated ... "It is an Investigational Vaccine, Not Licensed for any Indication"
Search that sentence.
The EUA is still in effect by the way.
Ask your doctor about that sentence!
Now who reads that EUA and then takes the shot?
Now who actually read the EUA at all?
Who is stupid enough to take "an investigational Vaccine"
Who is stupid enough to take a vaccine that is "not licensed for any Indication"
Who is stupid enough to tell you to take the vaccine?!?!? A Doctor?
Sadly there is nothing that can be done for those people, they have willfully committed a deed other wanted them to without the knowledge of why. That certainly is not going to have me calling that person out for being intelligent.
and as far as the covid B/S why is it that the so called annual flu is not b/s?
I have not been sick, ill in over ten years. This coincides with a complete change of habits and has allowed me to conclude I will not get sick as long as I am HEALthy. I no longer fear being around people who have the so called flu or anything else considered infectious.
This is what people must do for themselves. in fact it is all you can do
I didn't have to read the Emergency Use Authorization letter. In April 2020, I saw a graph that was put out by the CDC. That graph showed the death numbers of the flu (very low) as being used as the baseline, with the COVID deaths shooting into the stratosphere. With that graph, I realized they hijacked the flu, as being COVID. I knew all that followed was pure BS and a means of Totalitarian control of the populace. Unfortunately, far too many people fell for it and masked up and rolled up their sleeves.
Actually you did need to read the EUA, everybody should have.
People need to know the vaccine was investigational and not licensed for any indication .....meaning it was not for covid/Sars-cov2.
The EUA was a warning to not take the shot, that was what the EUA was....is....and most people never read it.
Why should I read about something I already know? I knew it was all BS so didn't get the shot! I also refused to wear the mask! A store called the cops on me...I had an old guy ram his grocery cart into me because I wasn't wearing one. You're wasting your time on me.
there were no package inserts for the vaxx. there was no informed consent.
There WAS a package insert...but it was BLANK! THAT itself should have alerted the doctors administering the JAB or trying to convince their patients to get it. I think it's clear they either never checked what the insert had to say (it was BLANK anyway) or was told you WILL advise your patients to get it.
and you are correct....there was no informed consent, but there was still consent and all one had to do was read the EUA's "It is an Investigational vaccine, not licensed for any indication" so as to never give consent, but we all know how the story goes...........
The EUA was not a package insert, it was given upon request when lining up for the vaccine.
The EUA could also be read online then as it can be today.
Search "It is an Investigational Vaccine, Not Licensed for any indication"
They blew up the world and psychologically terrorized the populace to ramrod their racketeering scheme into everyone's lives.
Crime of the century.
Not many are talking about the mass murder done for money in hospitals and nursing homes or the massive multi-trillion dollar bailouts that were all part of the covid crimes.
Moderator Michael Specter at “The Future of Health Summit” held at the Milken Institute on Oct. 28-29, 2019.
"Why don’t we blow the system up? I mean obviously, we can’t just turn off the spigot on the system we have and then say, hey everyone in the world should get this new vaccine that we haven’t given to anyone yet. But there must be some way…"
From this dilemma arose the second theme of the discussion, the “need” for something new and more frightening to emerge, as the flu no longer created enough fear in the population to warrant such a “universal vaccine” and a wholesale change in the current system.
Rick Bright responds:
“But it is not too crazy to think that an outbreak of a novel avian virus could occur in China somewhere. We could get the RNA sequence from that to a number of regional centers if not local, if not even in your home at some point..."
March 24, 2020 US CDC sends out Alert 2: New ICD code introduced for COVID-19 deaths, a follow-up from their Alert 1 on March 4, 2020.
If a decedent’s death certificate was marked probably or suspected COVID-19, any uncertainty will automatically be deemed COVID-19 and they stated “it is not likely that NCHS will follow up on these cases”.
94% of deaths will be shown by CDC data to have on average four additional "comorbidities.".
The CARES ACT, signed into law 3 days later, will incentivize hospitals and physicians to include COVID-19 on death certificates and discharge papers, increasing Medicare payments to hospitals treating COVID-19 victims.
April 12, 2020 Self proclaimed health expert and “global health” philanthropist Bill Gates is interviewed on BBC Breakfast:
“Once you have a safe and effective vaccine, and get that out to almost all of the people on the planet” then....
“We will go back to normal, and economies will recover.”
“the thing that will get us back to the world that we had before coronavirus is the vaccine and getting that out to all 7 billion people”
Bill Gates:
“…so we’re going to have to take something that usually takes 5 to 6 years [to develop] and get it done in 18 months. There is an approach called an RNA vaccine…that looks quite promising…unfortunately the schedule for the [conventional vaccine approach] will probably not be as quick as the RNA platform, that we’ve been funding directly and through CEPI over the last decade.”
It's beyond horrific.
A naughty little relative of mine was supposed to submit a covid test. So he tested a piece of fruit - an orange, as I remember - and submitted that. The unfortunate citrus had covid.
'Bout says it all. although...
You would think that with all the resources and opportunities for fakery they wouldn't need to swap flu stats for covid stats. Is it possible the globsters fake so clumsily on purpose? To ridicule? To test thresholds?
Who knows? Maybe they're just bloody thick.
I think I agree with so many of the comments here. First of all, it is mainly a perception control operation. In that vein, of course the disappearance of the seasonal flu, explained away conveniently by lockdowns, was a sleight of hand to 'reveal' the covid illusion.
AnyOne who still thinks that "covid" was a bug making People sick have not looked at the data. The fact that neither viruses nor contagion have honestly been proven. The fact that deaths mostly were in the normal range, and where they differed there was likely some 5G going on...
But surely not at the levels the "news" suggested.
Thank You for these details!!!
I suspect the whole 5g thing is also overblown in conspiracy circles. Obviously it's not good for us, like injections of various poisons.
By overselling the immediate dangers initially it helps to prevent or delay the proper investigation of longer term harm. Like your microwave, no one is dying by standing next to it for 2 minutes to heat their lunch. Long term all day every day.......... Different results.
We have seen the animal studies on mobile phone use, well before 5g and they were damming. The question even in mainstream scientific circles isn't if this stuff is harmful. Every single experiment ever finds this is harmful. It is how bad is it and the exact nature and time frame of the harm.
It is conceivable that the 5G thing has been miscast as more of an immediate villain than it is… But… Why were They putting up the towers so avidly in the middle of the plannedemic lockdowns…? They have some motive, and it’s not in Our best interest for those towers.
Be that as it may… We might want to solve for the moneyed psychopaths in control on Our planet.
Ethical Anarchy (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/ethical-anarchy
Just a little aside on 33 - the number of instances of 33 cases is truly extraordinary.
https://youtu.be/ROfUnmbOBxo
no such thing as "RNA injections" - CovidHoax generated >200,000 original academic research publications 😳
Petra this link
www.abs.gov.au/statistics/health/causes-death/causes-death-australia/2020
seems to take me to CDC page about covid symptoms. That's not intended, right?
No it's not. Thanks for that, it's correct now. I should always check my links in posts because invariably one is wrong.
I don't think much of Agent whatsisnumber's article btw. It's a classic ad hominem fallacy or discredit by association. What I mean is, just because there was some guy called Jenner who can be outed as a bad man, this doesn't, logically, invalidate the entire science of virology and immunology. Logically, it only concludes that there was a bad man called Jenner.
The predicate is in the subject, in other words.
More people should study basic philosophy and critical thinking. Then they wouldn't fall for these logical fallacies.
It doesn't necessarily discredit the entire science of virology and immunology but we have to ask why his work itself isn't entirely discredited in the mainstream and why the point in history when supposed genuine vaccination started hasn't been established. The supposed science of vaccinology discredits itself by treating him as its father.
From AI
Edward Jenner is widely known as the "father of vaccination" for his pioneering work in developing a smallpox vaccine in 1796. He discovered that inoculating individuals with the cowpox virus could provide immunity against the related, more dangerous smallpox virus.
Here's a more detailed look at his work:
Observation and Experimentation:
Jenner observed that milkmaids infected with cowpox, a milder disease, were immune to smallpox. He hypothesized that cowpox could provide protection against smallpox and conducted experiments to test this hypothesis.
The First Vaccine:
In 1796, Jenner inoculated an 8-year-old boy, James Phipps, with matter from a cowpox blister on a milkmaid's hand. Phipps became infected with cowpox but recovered, and then Jenner exposed him to smallpox, but he remained immune. This successful experiment demonstrated the effectiveness of vaccination.
Public Acceptance:
While his work was initially met with skepticism, Jenner's discovery eventually gained widespread acceptance and led to the eradication of smallpox.
Enduring Legacy:
Jenner's work not only revolutionized medicine but also laid the foundation for modern immunology and vaccination programs. His legacy continues to inspire advancements in disease prevention and public health.
I think you may have answered your own opening question there. When you say vaccinology kind of discredits itself by citing him as a founder you have to remember that the vast majority of people are entirely unaware of this darker side of his biography. It only discredits it to the so-called 'conspiracy theorists'. I.e., a minority.
If the situation were reversed, and everyone was aware, then the majority would feel the entire idea of vaccines and immunology etc. should be discredited. So this is the reason they have to maintain the myth. They don't want everyone becoming conspiracy theorists, remember!
Would be great fun though wouldn't it! Having, like, only 5-10% or whatever of the population thinking conspiracy theorists are loonies. There is such a cool idea for a story or TV show in this. Obviously it would have to be some parallel world thing (I like parallel worlds, no kidding!).
I often get these great fun ideas but alas, they usually never amount to anything.
Agents job is to make sure he convinces no one. Do you understand how controlled opposition works? His job is to set up easy to knock down straw men so that the real evidence is ignored. That way people can stick with their current beliefs, falsely believeing they have investigated something rather than looking at the actual virology studies. The best way to make sure people keep believing is by having the controlled opposition referenced by those who know viruses (or moon landings, terror attacks etc) aren't real and then investigated by those who still believe. The believers then discover the straw men placed by the controlled opposition and consider their investigation complete and stick with their old views, which they are desperate to hold onto. It is all very simple, well designed and effective
"Agent's job is to make sure he convinces no one."
This is clearly a false statement. We know that lots of people believe things because of what agents tell them - me included. I have such a vivid memory of learning about the Five Dancing Israelis caught in a roadblock with explosives dust and thinking, "Oh, I see, they got OUTSIDERS to do the dastardly deed of bringing down the buildings instead of US citizens who would be loath to do that to their fellow countrymen."
But regardless of whether we agree on their purpose or not we are always left with the simple fact that the agents have not said a single word of truth on the ML and ABSOLUTELY NO DISBELIEVER HAS NOTICED. That is a salient fact, can you not understand that?
They are very good at inserting red herrings into their events. I'm remembering the controlled demolition van on 7/7 of course, which was eagerly seized upon by their agent 'Muad dib' or whatever his stupid name was, then happily focussed on in a BBC debunking documentary.
Here is the template, agent so and so. Now rinse and repeat.
Hmm. So it doesn't occur to you that the idea that 'viruses don't exist' is that actual straw man here?
Designed to make 'conspiracy theorists' look like idiots (same way they used to do with the moon landings, and more recently Bill Gates microchipping everyone, or Icke droning on about a reptilian simulation hypothesis). Then every conspiracy theory, true or not, can be discredited by association. The Marianna Springs of this world simply present the appropriate image of 'a typical conspiracy theorist' to the world 'look, they don't even think viruses are real', the general public laugh at them, go back to sleep, and then job done.
See, if viruses didn't exist then there would've been a much more prominent 'conspiracy theory' about it decades ago and it would've been discussed by thousands of biomedical scientists (immunologists especially), in the same way that 'climate change' as a false hypothesis has indeed been discussed and dismissed by thousands of climate scientists. My point being, with an epistemological scientific subject like virology or immunology you can't maintain a fraud of that scale without generating so many thousands of people pointing out the fraud. You would then have to do the same ostracism as they do to climate 'sceptics'. If you look at the historical record, you simply don't see that.
Aside from perhaps a few cranks here and there, this manufactured (by cognitive infiltrators) 'viruses don't exist' theory only sprang up when the pandemic got going. Go figure.
"Designed to make 'conspiracy theorists' look like idiots...."
Kind of taken out of the entire context but anyway.
Since you're talking about the viruses and anybody skeptical about the germ theory in general, don't you think 200 years of the theory and experimenting should have produced some irrefutable, hard proof for it? Yet there is still none. I'm sorry, but the real straw man in this case is talking about the virus=poison while having no proof for it.
You may have been stuck within your belief system, since you're unable to justify your physical experience with illness in any other meaningful way, but that doesn't make your belief accurate or true. It is rather a reflection of the fact that you're not ready to learn about the reality of the so-called science of virology.
Since I know you're into Mathisian physics, I want you to think about the conjecture with the virology. As much as you thought you knew about the physics up to a point, it all changed once you've learned about the charge (aka unified theory). It is the same with virology - it is full of imaginative things nobody can see, yet they want you to believe they're true. For every instance of a quasi-particle or a messenger photon etc. in MS physics, there's one unicorn in virology.
You're admittedly not into the discourse and criticism of the germ theory or else you would have known that GT has been criticized from its inception. Many of the renowned scientist have lost their academic careers over legitimate criticism in the last 100+ years. You don't know their names, but Naessens or Rife have proven there's much more to be considered while theorizing about illness before jumping into the unicorn land, for which they paid with exclusion and ridicule.
Your conclusion about the pandemic and "no virus theory" is coincidental. I can dig out tens of papers or books, per annum, since early 1900's on the topic of GT criticism.
Honestly, I would've expected a bit more from you on the subject. Like I said publicly to Miles - if you want to properly criticize any subject, you have to learn about it.