“Covid-19,” Psychological Operations, and the War for Technocracy (Volume 1) by Dr. David A. Hughes, lecturer and program leader in International Relations at the UK’s University of Lincoln, is “dedicated to all who are actively resisting the global technocratic coup.” In the book’s eight chapters—titled “Permanent Counterrevolution, Technocracy, and World War III,” “Shock and Stress,” “Trauma-based Mind Control,” “Fear and Threat,” “Cognitive Attack,” “Weaponised Deception,” “Mass Paranoia and Hysteria: Turning Society Against Itself,” and “The Coming Unrest”—Hughes discusses “a novel, biodigital form of totalitarianism that threatens to lead to the irreversible enslavement of humanity.”
Describing the “wide portfolio” of invisible psychological and neurological weapons that Hughes so ably documents in this book, I remind readers, “The first step to not falling victim is to see these 21st century weapons of war clearly. Hughes’ formidable scholarship helps you to do so.” Another reviewer comments, “Dr. Hughes stands out as a rare, brave academic, who is willing to go where few are willing to tread.”
The entire manuscript and/or individual chapters can legally be downloaded for free and shared by anyone. Please feel free to do so!
If you would like to join Solari in supporting David’s work, you can do so here.
Mounting research suggests a serious side effect of the COVID mRNA jabs could be dementia, and the prions that cause it may be contagious
Frameshifting, as we now know occurs in the COVID shots, can induce prion production and lead to neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD)
Sid Belzberg’s prions.rip website, which collected data on neurological side effects post-jab, found a notably high incidence of diagnosed CJD cases, suggesting an alarming trend
A series of articles highlight biases in clinical trials and observational studies, suggesting COVID-19 vaccines’ safety and effectiveness have been massively overstated
The Global COVID Vaccine Safety Project study — funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — reveals significant side effects, including myocarditis, pericarditis, and blood clots, underscoring the need for reevaluation of COVID vaccine risks and benefits
According to mounting data, one of the more serious side effects of the COVID mRNA jabs appears to be dementia, and worse yet, this previously untransmissible disease may now be “contagious,” transmissible by way of prions.
In my 2021 interview with Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., she explained why she suspected the COVID shots may eventually result in an avalanche of neurological prion-based diseases such as Alzheimer’s. She also published a paper detailing those mechanisms in the May 10, 2021, issue of the International Journal of Vaccine Theory. As she explained in that paper:1
“A paper published by J. Bart Classen (2021) proposed that the spike protein in the mRNA vaccines could cause prion-like diseases, in part through its ability to bind to many known proteins and induce their misfolding into potential prions.
Idrees and Kumar (2021) have proposed that the spike protein’s S1 component is prone to act as a functional amyloid and form toxic aggregates … and can ultimately lead to neurodegeneration.”
In summary, the take-home from Seneff’s paper is that the COVID shots, offered to hundreds of millions of people, are instruction sets for your body to make a toxic protein that will eventually wind up concentrated in your spleen, from where prion-like protein instructions will be sent out, leading to neurodegenerative diseases.
What Are Prions?
The term “prion” derives from “proteinaceous infectious particle.” Prions are known to cause a variety of neurodegenerative diseases in animals and humans, such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) in humans, bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE or “mad cow disease”) in cattle, and chronic wasting disease in deer and elk.
These diseases are collectively referred to as transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). They’re characterized by long incubation periods, brain damage, the formation of holes in the brain giving it a sponge-like appearance, and failure to induce an inflammatory response.
In short, prions are infectious agents composed entirely of a protein material that can fold in multiple, structurally distinct ways, at least one of which is transmissible to other prion proteins, leading to a disease that is similar to viral infections but without nucleic acids.
Unlike bacteria, viruses, and fungi, which contain nucleic acids (DNA or RNA) that instruct their replication, prions propagate by transmitting their misfolded protein state to normal variants of the same protein.
According to the prion disease model, the infectious properties of prions are due to the ability of the abnormal protein to convert the normal version of the protein into the misfolded form, thereby setting off a chain reaction that progressively damages the nervous system.
Prions are remarkably resistant to conventional methods of sterilization and can survive extreme conditions that would normally destroy nucleic acids or other pathogens, which is part of why prion diseases are so difficult to treat.
More Evidence mRNA Shots Can Trigger Dementia
Today, there’s even more evidence to support Seneff’s theory. In August 2022, tech entrepreneur Sid Belzberg wrote2 about prions.rip, a website he’d set up to collect data on the neurological side effects of the jabs. (This site is no longer live.)
Within a few months, the site had received about 15,000 hits and gathered 60 reports from people who got the jab and suffered neurological deficits shortly thereafter, including six cases of diagnosed CJD.
“Normally this disease affects 1 in a 1,000,000 people,” Belzberg wrote.3“To get 6 cases you would need 6,000,000 hits to the site assuming everyone reports. The chances of getting 1 case in 15,000 hits is 1 in 66. To see 6 cases in 1 group of 15,000 is 1/66^6 or 1 in 82,000,000,000, or 20 times more likely to win a Powerball lottery! …
To reiterate, CJD is an exceptionally rare disease that is now a known and established severe adverse reaction (SAE) from the DEATHVAX™. Injecting this slow kill bioweapon can cause ailments that are about as likely to develop in the real word as getting struck by lightning twice. The proof is now irrefutable.”
Frameshifting Can Result in Prion Production
In mid-December 2023, researchers reported4,5,6 that the replacing of uracil with synthetic methylpseudouridine in the COVID shots — a process known as codon optimization — can cause frameshifting, a glitch in the decoding, thereby triggering the production of off-target aberrant proteins.
The antibodies that develop as a result may, in turn, trigger off-target immune reactions. According to the authors, off-target cellular immune responses occur in 25% to 30% of people who have received the COVID shot. But that’s not all.
According to British neuroscientist Dr. Kevin McCairn, this frameshifting phenomenon has also been linked to harmful prion production — and that frame shifted prions, specifically, are infectious and can be transmitted from one person to another. As reported in the Journal of Theoretical Biology in 2013:7
“A quantitatively consistent explanation for the titres of infectivity found in a variety of prion-containing preparations is provided on the basis that the etiological agents of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy comprise a very small population fraction of prion protein (PrP) variants, which contain frameshifted elements in their N-terminal octapeptide-repeat regions …
Frameshifting accounts quantitatively for the etiology of prion disease. One per million frameshifted prions may be enough to cause disease. The HIV TAR-like element in the PRNP mRNA is likely an effector of frameshifting.”
McCairn explained this mechanism in a February 19, 2023, interview with Health Alliance Australia (video above). In it, he noted:
“Mis-folded proteins caused by prions can impact every level organ and tissue system in the body … [They] bioaccumulate and are resistant to degradation, thereby building up …”
Prions may in fact be the primary molecule that is being “shed” by COVID jab recipients, and if those prions are due to frameshifting, that could be very bad news indeed, considering their implication in dementia.
Another doctor who believes we’ll be facing an “epidemic of prion disease” is Dr. David Cartland. In late February 2024, he posted8 13 scientific papers linking the COVID jabs, prion diseases and CJD, noting that was just a “small selection” of what’s available in the medical literature.
Prions Implicated in Long COVID as Well
According to genomics expert Kevin McKernan, Ph.D., prions are also involved in long COVID (or as McKernan calls it, “long vax”).9 In one 2024 study,10 96.7% of long COVID sufferers had received the jab. In an interview with the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), McKernan stated:11
“If you frameshift over the stop codons, you’re going to be making proteins that are spike-mito proteins. When I talk to a lot of the long vax patients I hear of all these things that remind me of my time in the mitochondrial disease sequencing space …”
McKernan claims he tried to publish a paper on this in 2021 with Dr. Peter McCullough, but the editor of the journal “stepped in and torpedoed the paper.”12
World’s Largest Side Effect Analysis Has Been Published
In related news, the largest study13 to date on the side effects of the COVID jabs was published in the journal Vaccine in February 12, 2024, and it confirms what I and many other alternative news sources have been saying all along, namely that the mRNA jabs are the most dangerous medical products to ever hit the market.
The study — performed by the Global COVID Vaccine Safety (GCoVS) Project and funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Public Health Ontario and the Canadian Health Research Institute — evaluated the risk of “adverse events of special interest” (AESI) following COVID-19 “vaccination.”
Data from 10 sites in eight countries (Argentina, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, New Zealand and Scotland) were included, encompassing more than 99 million jabbed individuals.
Of the thousands of side effects Pfizer listed in its confidential report of post-authorization adverse events submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,14 the GCoVS focused on 13 AESIs that fall into three primary categories: Neurological, hematologic (blood-related) and cardiovascular conditions.
They calculated the AESI risk for each of the 13 AESIs based on the number of observed versus expected (OE) incidents occurring up to 42 days after injection. The “expected” number of side effects were based on vaccine adverse event data from 2015 to 2019. These rates were then compared to the adverse event rates observed in those who got one or more of the COVID jabs, either Pfizer’s BNT162b2, Moderna’s mRNA-1273, or AstraZeneca’s ChAdOx1.
Largest Study to Date Confirms COVID Jab Dangers
The analysis15 revealed several concerning side effects, including increased risks of myocarditis, pericarditis, blood clots in the brain, and various neurological conditions. Here’s a quick summary of the findings:
•Myocarditis and pericarditis:
◦Pfizer vaccine — OE ratios for myocarditis were 2.78 and 2.86 after the first and second shots, with the risk remaining doubled after the third and fourth shots.
◦Moderna vaccine — OE ratios for myocarditis were 3.48 and 6.10 after the first and second shots. Doses 1 and 4 also showed OE ratios of 1.74 and 2.64 for pericarditis.
◦AstraZeneca vaccine — OE ratio for pericarditis was 6.91 after the third shot.
•Blood clots in the brain (cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, CVST):
◦An OE of 3.23 for CVST was observed after the first AstraZeneca shot.
◦A significant increase in CVST risk was also noted after the second Pfizer dose.
•Neurological conditions:
◦Guillain-Barré syndrome — An OE ratio of 2.49 was observed following the AstraZeneca jab.
◦Transverse myelitis — Risk nearly doubled with the AstraZeneca shot.
◦Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis — OE ratios of 3.78 (Moderna) and 2.23 (AstraZeneca) were noted.
These findings really underscore the potential for serious side effects from the COVID shots, including conditions that may lead to other consequences in the longer term, such as stroke, heart attack, paralysis and death.
Effectiveness and Safety Was Wildly Exaggerated in Trials
Considering those findings, it’s no surprise to find that effectiveness and safety were exaggerated in clinical trials and observational studies. In a guest post on Dr. Robert Malone’s Substack, Raphael Lataster, Ph.D., writes:16
“An unofficial series of four crucially important medical journal articles, two by me, appearing in major academic publisher Wiley’s Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice reveals that claims made about COVID-19 vaccines’ effectiveness and safety were exaggerated in the clinical trials and observational studies, which significantly impacts risk-benefit analyses.
Also discussed are the concerning topics of myocarditis, with evidence indicating that this one adverse effect alone means that the risks outweigh the benefits in the young and healthy; and perceived negative effectiveness, which indicates that the vaccines increase the chance of COVID-19 infection/hospitalization/death, to say nothing about other adverse effects.”
Summary of Papers
The four papers in question include:
1.“Sources of Bias in Observational Studies of COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness” published in the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice in March 2023, co-authored by BMJ editor Peter Doshi, Ph.D., statistician Kaiser Fung and biostatistician Mark Jones, which concluded that “case-counting window bias” had a significant effect on effectiveness estimates.17
As explained by Lataster, this “concerns the 7 days, 14 days, or even 21 days after the jab where we are meant to overlook jab-related issues, such as COVID infections, for some odd reason as ‘the vaccine has not had sufficient time to stimulate the immune system.’
This may strike you as quite bizarre since all of the ‘fully vaccinated’ must go through the process of being ‘partially vaccinated,’ sometimes even more than once. To make matters worse, the unvaccinated do not get such a ‘grace period,’ meaning that there is also a clear bias at play.
In an example using data from Pfizer’s clinical trial, the authors show that thanks to this bias, a vaccine with effectiveness of 0%, which is confirmed in the hypothetical clinical trial, could be seen in observational studies as having effectiveness of 48%.”
2.“Reply to Fung et. al. on COVID-19 Vaccine Case-Counting Window Biases Overstating Vaccine Effectiveness,” authored by Lataster, which discussed how the counting window bias not only affected effectiveness estimates in observational studies but also safety estimates, suggesting a need for reassessment of vaccine safety.18 The article also addresses “the mysterious rise in non-COVID excess deaths post-pandemic.”19
3.“How the Case Counting Window Affected Vaccine Efficacy Calculations in Randomized Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines,” again co-authored by Doshi and Fung, which detailed how case-counting window issues also overestimated effectiveness in Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials.20
4.A second article by Lataster, in which he highlighted and summarized the evidence showing that clinical trials were affected by adverse effect counting window issues that led to exaggerated safety estimates.21
“Together, these four articles make clear that claims made about COVID-19 vaccines; effectiveness and safety were exaggerated in the clinical trials and observational studies, whilst also finding time to discuss myocarditis and perceived negative effectiveness, meaning that new analyses are very much needed,” Lataster writes.22
Resources for Those Injured by the COVID Jab
Based on data from across the world, it’s beyond clear that the COVID shots are the most dangerous drugs ever deployed. If you already got one or more COVID jabs and are now reconsidering, you’d be wise to avoid all vaccines from here on, as you need to end the assault on your body. Even if you haven’t experienced any obvious side effects, your health may still be impacted long-term, so don’t take any more shots.
If you’re suffering from side effects, your first order of business is to eliminate the spike protein — and/or any aberrant off-target protein — that your body is producing. Two remedies shown to bind to and facilitate the removal of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein are hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. I don’t know if these drugs will work on off-target proteins and nanolipid accumulation as well, but it probably wouldn’t hurt to try.
The Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) has developed a post-vaccine treatment protocol called I-RECOVER. Since the protocol is continuously updated as more data become available, your best bet is to download the latest version straight from the FLCCC website at covid19criticalcare.com.23
For additional suggestions, check out the World Council for Health’s spike protein detox guide,24 which focuses on natural substances like herbs, supplements and teas. Sauna therapy can also help eliminate toxic and misfolded proteins by stimulating autophagy.
So far, children have been largely unfazed by COVID-19 because their interferon pathway works really well. Interferon is an immune molecule that protects cells against invading pathogens
The COVID jab inhibits the type-1 interferon pathway, so mass injecting young children may actually erase the natural herd immunity against COVID-19 that would develop if all children remained unjabbed
Aggressive cancers have exploded among adults who got the shots, even though it’s only been a little over two years since their rollout
Analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) data suggests the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is redesignating cancer deaths as COVID deaths to eliminate the cancer signal, and has been doing so since April 2021
We’ve also seen massive increases in excess mortality from abnormal clotting issues and heart problems since the COVID shots rolled out. If side effects such as cancer, heart disease and stroke are killing working age adults in unprecedented numbers already, what will the excess mortality be, say, 10 years from now if children and teens keep getting mRNA boosters every year?
What will the future hold for people whose exposure to COVID-19 occurs during the first years of life? That question was recently asked by Katherine J. Wu, a staff writer at The Atlantic.1
“To be a newborn in the year 2023 — and, almost certainly, every year that follows — means emerging into a world where the coronavirus is ubiquitous … Beyond a shadow of a doubt, this virus will be one of the very first serious pathogens that today’s infants — and all future infants — meet,” she writes.
“Eventually, the expectation is that the illness will reach a stable nadir, at which point it may truly be ‘another common cold,’ says Rustom Antia, an infectious-disease modeler at Emory.
The full outcome of this living experiment, though, won’t be clear for decades — well after the billions of people who encountered the coronavirus for the first time in adulthood are long gone.
The experiences that today’s youngest children have with the virus are only just beginning to shape what it will mean to have COVID throughout a lifetime, when we all coexist with it from birth to death as a matter of course.”
COVID Jab Prevents Natural Herd Immunity
Wu praises the COVID jab as being part of why we can be hopeful for future generations that have to live with this new virus, but is that really realistic? Right now, everything points to the COVID shot being a disaster, and no one actually knows what the long-term effect will be on children who get it.
Wu highlights the fact that children’s immune systems have the advantage of “marshaling hordes of interferon — an immune molecule that armors cells against viruses.” This is thought to be a primary reason why COVID-19 isn’t nearly as lethal in young children as in older adults.
The problem that Wu completely misses is that the COVID jab inhibits the type-1 interferon pathway,2 so mass injecting young children may actually erase the natural herd immunity against COVID-19 that would develop if all children remained unjabbed. The shots will NOT, as Wu suggests, help us achieve herd immunity at all.
Cancer Rates in Young People Will Likely Rise
Mass injecting children with a drug that impairs their immune system may also (rather predictably) result in exploding cancer rates. Already, aggressive cancers have exploded among adults who got the shots,3 even though it’s only been a little over two years since their rollout.
For example, data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED)4 — historically one of the most well-kept and most heavily relied-upon medical databases in the world — showed that, compared to the previous five-year averages, cancer among Department of Defense (DOD) personnel in 2021 skyrocketed.
Overall, cancers tripled among servicemen and their family members after the rollout of the COVID shots. Breast cancer went up 487%. Exploding cancer rates are also seen elsewhere. Indeed, the explosion of cases is so bad that cancer is now one of the top three leading causes of premature death among young working-age adults — a trend that in turn has driven down U.S. life expectancy by three years.
Cancer Relapses and Metastasis Rates Are Exploding
November 26, 2022, The Daily Sceptic published a letter5,6 to the editor of The BMJ, written by Dr. Angus Dalgleish, professor of oncology at St. George’s University of London, warning that COVID boosters may be causing aggressive metastatic cancers:
“COVID no longer needs a vaccine programme given the average age of death of COVID in the U.K. is 82 and from all other causes is 81 and falling,” Dalgleish wrote. “The link with clots, myocarditis, heart attacks and strokes is now well accepted, as is the link with myelitis and neuropathy …
However, there is now another reason to halt all vaccine programmes. As a practicing oncologist I am seeing people with stable disease rapidly progress after being forced to have a booster, usually so they can travel. Even within my own personal contacts I am seeing B cell-based disease after the boosters.
They describe being distinctly unwell a few days to weeks after the booster — one developing leukemia, two work colleagues Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, and an old friend who has felt like he has had Long COVID since receiving his booster and who, after getting severe bone pain, has been diagnosed as having multiple metastases from a rare B cell disorder.
I am experienced enough to know that these are not coincidental anecdotes … The reports of innate immune suppression after mRNA for several weeks would fit, as all these patients to date have melanoma or B cell-based cancers, which are very susceptible to immune control — and that is before the reports of suppressor gene suppression by mRNA in laboratory experiments. This must be aired and debated immediately.”
In a December 19, 2022, article7 in Conservative Woman, Dalgleish continued discussing the phenomenon of rapidly spreading cancers in patients who were in stable remission for years before receiving their COVID boosters. He noted that after his letter to The BMJ was published, several oncologists contacted him to say they’re seeing the same thing in their own practices.
“Seeing the recurrence of these cancers after all this time naturally makes me wonder if there is a common cause?” he wrote.8“I had previously noted that relapse in stable cancer is often associated with severe long-term stress, such as bankruptcy, divorce, etc.
However, I found that none of my patients had any such extra stress during this time, but they had all had booster vaccines and, indeed, a couple of them noted that they had a very bad reaction to the booster which they did not have to the first two injections.
I then noted that some of these patients were not having a normal pattern of relapse but rather an explosive relapse, with metastases occurring at the same time in several sites … Scientifically, I was reading reports that the booster was leading to a big excess of antibodies at the expense of the T-cell response and that this T-cell suppression could last for three weeks, if not more.
To me, this could be causal as the immune system is being asked to make an excessive response through the humoral inflammatory part of the immune response against a virus (the alpha-delta variant) which is no longer in existence in the community.
This exertion leads to immune exhaustion, which is why these patients are reporting up to a 50% greater increase in Omicron, or other variations, than the non-vaccinated.”
Swedish pathologist, researcher and senior physician at Lund’s University, Dr. Ute Krueger, has also observed an explosion in rapidly advancing cancers in the wake of the COVID shots, with the largest increase occurring among 30- to 50-year-olds.9,10 According to Krueger, tumor sizes are also dramatically larger, multiple tumors in multiple organs are becoming more common, and cancer recurrence and metastasis are both increasing.
Cancer Deaths Are Being Intentionally Hidden
Disturbingly, as detailed in “How Cancer Deaths From the COVID Jabs Are Being Hidden,” analysis of U.S. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) data suggests the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is filtering out and redesignating cancer deaths as COVID deaths to eliminate the cancer signal, and has been doing so since April 2021.
The signal is being hidden by swapping the underlying cause of death with main cause of death. As many as 20% of the weekly so-called COVID deaths are actually cancer deaths.
An Unconscionable Experiment on Humanity
Absolutely no one knows what the long-term ramifications of giving these injections to infants and young children will be. It’s a public health experiment unlike anything we’ve ever seen before. So far, we’ve not seen cancer rates among children skyrocket, but the uptake among young children has also been low.
Since their immune systems are also more robust, children may be protected from cancer for a time even if they do get the jab. The question is how long? The U.S. childhood vaccination schedule now includes the initial series plus an annual COVID booster. How many boosters will it take before a child’s immune system breaks and cancer starts to proliferate?
Excess Mortality Skyrocketing
We’ve also seen massive increases in excess mortality from abnormal clotting issues and heart problems since the COVID shots rolled out. If side effects such as cancer, heart disease and stroke are killing working age adults in unprecedented numbers already, what will the excess mortality be, say, 10 years from now if children and teens keep getting mRNA boosters every year?
I shudder to even think about it. Making matters even worse, drug makers are working overtime to deliver other mRNA-based “vaccines” as well, including one against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV). The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has already fast-tracked it. This, despite the fact that previous attempts to create an RSV vaccine failed because they caused antibody dependent enhancement (ADE).
No Benefit, Massive Cost
Now that we’re more than two years into the COVID injection campaign, the cost-benefit analysis is clearer than ever. The benefit is so small as to be inconsequential, while the costs are enormous. Here’s a quick summary breakdown, based on available evidence:
•Benefit — Short-term (four to six months) protection from severe COVID illness and death.
•Cost — Negative effectiveness after a few months (meaning the risk of infection, hospitalization and death from COVID is higher than before the injection). It also doesn’t prevent infection or spread of the virus, so vaccine-induced herd immunity can never be achieved.
The shots destroy immune function, making people more prone to all types of infections and chronic diseases, which in turn puts pressure on the health care system, raises disability rates and excess mortality, and lowers life expectancy. On top of all that, there’s evidence suggesting the shots have adverse effects on fertility, which could potentially result in a population collapse.
Evidence mRNA Jabs Cause Fertility Problems
By December 2021, at which time the COVID jabs had only been out for one year, reports of surges in menstrual changes and stillbirths were already proliferating. And, while health officials were, and still are, adamant that the COVID shot is safe for pregnant women, the data tell a very different story.
The study11 most widely used to support the U.S. recommendation for pregnant women to get injected was sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) in April 2021. According to this study, the miscarriage rate among COVID jab recipients was 13.9%.
However, there was a MAJOR mistake made in this study, which was highlighted in a rapid communication12 from the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge (IPAK). The authors are Aleisha Brock, Ph.D. of New Zealand, and Simon Thornley, Ph.D., a senior lecturer in the section of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of Auckland.
They explained that the NEJM study “presents falsely reassuring statistics related to the risk of spontaneous abortion in early pregnancy, since the majority of women in the calculation were exposed to the mRNA product after the outcome period was defined (20 weeks’ gestation).”13
When the risk of spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) was recalculated based on the cohort that was injected prior to 20 weeks’ gestation, the incidence of miscarriage was seven to eight times higher than the original study indicated, with a cumulative incidence of miscarriage ranging from 81.9% to 91.2%!
What’s more, 12.6% women who received the jab in the third trimester reported Grade 3 adverse events, which are severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening.
Another 8% also reported a fever of 38 degrees C (100.4 degrees F), which can lead to miscarriage or premature labor.14 Another problem with the NEJM study is that follow-up only continued for 28 days after birth, meaning the long-term effects of prenatal exposure to babies is still unknown.
A Pfizer-BioNTech rat study also showed the injection more than doubled the incidence of preimplantation loss. Birth defects, specifically mouth/jaw malformations, gastroschisis (a birth defect of the abdominal wall) and abnormalities in the right-sided aortic arch and cervical vertebrae, were also observed.15
Transhumanist Cabal Intend to Change Humanity
It’s become quite clear that the technocratic, transhumanist cabal that it trying to seize worldwide control is aggressively trying to genetically alter humanity. But to what end? Considering all the negative effects we’re seeing in adults, just two years in, what will happen to the infants and children who have been jabbed over the next decade or two? Especially if they start getting mRNA boosters every year?
Transhumanism is “sold” as the way of the future — a future in which everyone is in perfect health and can live as long as they want. We already see how the COVID shots are advertised as a simple “software update” for your immune system. The idea is that, eventually, any health issue will be solved this way.
The problem with this utopia is manifold, however. First of all, considering how disastrous this first mRNA injection is, it seems clear the reengineering of an already perfect biological system isn’t as easy as they make it out to be, and I for one doubt they’ll ever perfect it.
Secondly, while they say this transhumanist utopia is for everyone, it’s absolutely not. Do you really believe they want 8 billion people to be in perfect health and live for hundreds of years?
Perfect health means perfect reproductive capacity, so the number of offspring would be staggering. Clearly, they don’t want this, seeing how these same individuals are already complaining that the world is overpopulated. So, perfect health for everyone is a pipedream.
Extreme life extension for the masses also isn’t in the cards. Already, they want people to die as close to retirement age as possible, to minimize payouts. Do you really think they’d be willing to pay billions of people to spend 100 years in retirement?
Even if the retirement age was pushed way back to, say, 150, and the average life span is 175, who’s going to employ all these people? Remember, robots and artificial intelligence are already slated to take over most jobs, making most humans obsolete. There’s simply no incentive to extend the health span and life span of billions of people.
No, the transhumanist utopia is intended to be reserved for a select few, and this is something to keep in mind as they continue these genetic experiments on humanity. They’re not for our benefit.
What Are They Turning Us Into?
In closing, here’s a snippet from a November 22, 2022, Truth Talk article, in which blogger Katrina Wicks ponders the reasons behind the transhumanist push:16
“They make no secret of it, it’s not some wild conspiracy theory and is in fact being implemented in front of us and around us. Changing humans from what we are, into something else. Augmented humans seem to be on the horizon, as well as disrupted, corrupted and spliced humans too …
‘The Island of Dr. Moreau’ … by H.G. Wells … highlights an obsession with making animals more human through ‘medical intervention’ … I wonder if they are trying to do the opposite … to make humans more animal like? …
A certain international organization seems to have a nominated mascot who is the mouthpiece of how they want us to be bio-mechanical beings essentially, being constantly monitored, tested, observed and upgraded. Weird huh? Yet they gleefully put these plans forward and explain how and when. Just not really covering the why, or at least the real reasons for it.
But you can make up your own mind on what their purpose really is … what is out there for everyone to see is that they do want control.
Of your daily activities, thoughts, fears, aspirations … and generally of your future. So that is where you do get to take an active role, unless you already consider your life forfeit and have already accepted their new regime and landscape. But if you do not … and you have chosen to live, then now is the time.”
Background: The COVID-19 period highlights a huge problem that has been developing for decades, the control of science by industry. In the 1950s, the tobacco industry set the example, which the pharmaceutical industry followed. Since then, the latter has been regularly condemned for illegal marketing, misrepresentation of experimental results, dissimulation of information about the dangers of drugs, and considered as criminal. Therefore, this study was conducted to show that knowledge is powerfully manipulated by harmful corporations, whose goals are: 1/financial; 2/to suppress our ability to make choices to acquire global control of public health.
Methods: Pharmaceutical industry techniques for manipulating science and COVID-19 reporting were reviewed. Several sources of official documents were used: PubMed; National Institutes of Health resources; pharmaceutical companies; policy documents; national newspapers and news agencies; and books by prominent professionals (scientific and legal). A few studies have not been published in peer-reviewed journals; however, they have been conducted by reputable scientists in their respective fields.
Results: Since the beginning of COVID-19, we can list the following methods of information manipulation which have been used: falsified clinical trials and inaccessible data; fake or conflict-of-interest studies; concealment of vaccines’ short-term side effects and total lack of knowledge of the long-term effects of COVID-19 vaccination; doubtful composition of vaccines; inadequate testing methods; governments and international organizations under conflicts of interest; bribed physicians; the denigration of renowned scientists; the banning of all alternative effective treatments; unscientific and liberticidal social methods; government use of behavior modification and social engineering techniques to impose confinements, masks, and vaccine acceptance; scientific censorship by the media.
Conclusion: By supporting and selecting only the one side of science information while suppressing alternative viewpoints, and with obvious conflicts of interest revealed by this study, governments and the media constantly disinform the public. Consequently, the unscientifically validated vaccination laws, originating from industry-controlled medical science, led to the adoption of social measures for the supposed protection of the public but which became serious threats to the health and freedoms of the population.
Keywords: Behavior modification; COVID-19; Conflicts of interest; Scientific censorship; Side effects; Vaccination.
With a background in biostatistics, Christine Massey has been using Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests as a research tool, as a diamond drill, to unearth the truth about SARS-CoV-2. As in: Does the virus exist?
Her approach has yielded shocking results.
In a half-sane world, Christine’s work would win many awards, and rate far-reaching coverage. In the present world, more and more people, on their own, are waking up to her findings and completely revising their perception of the “pandemic.”
Here is my recent interview with the brilliant relentless Christine Massey:
Q: You and your colleagues have made many FOIA requests to public health agencies around the world. You’ve been asking for records that show the SARS-CoV-2 virus exists. How did you develop this approach?
A: In 2014, a lady in Edmonton submitted a freedom of information request to Health Canada asking for studies relating to the addition of hydrofluorosilisic acid (industrial waste fluoride acid) to public drinking water (water fluoridation). HealthCanada’s response indicated that they had no studies whatsoever to back up their claims that the practice is safe or effective.
A few years later, some high quality government-funded studies showed that common fluoride exposure levels during pregnancy are associated with lower IQs and increased ADHD symptoms in offspring. Nevertheless, dentists and the public health community continued to promote and defend the so-called “great public health achievement” of forcing this controversial preventative dental treatment onto entire communities, and were dismissive of those studies. So I used freedom of information requests to show that various institutions promoting and defending water fluoridation in Ontario, Alberta and Washington State could not provide or cite even one primary study indicating safety with respect to those outcomes.
So once I learned from people like David Crowe, Dr. Andrew Kaufman, Dr. Stefan Lanka and Dr. Thomas Cowan that the alleged [COVID] virus had never been isolated (purified) from a patient sample and then characterized, sequenced and studied with controlled experiments, and thus had never been shown to exist, I realized that freedom of information (FOI) requests could be used to verify their claims.
Most people are not going to take the time to check all of the so-called “virus isolation” studies for themselves, so FOIs were a way to 1) ensure that nothing had been overlooked, and 2) cut to the chase and back-up what these gentlemen [Kaufman, Cowan, Crowe, Lanka] were saying, if they were indeed correct.
So in May 2020 I began submitting FOI requests for any record held by the respective institution that describes the isolation/purification of the alleged “COVID-19 virus” from an unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient, by anyone, anywhere on the planet.
Q: How many public health and government agencies have you queried with FOIA requests?
A: I have personally queried and received responses from 22 Canadian institutions. These are public health institutions, universities that claim to have “isolated the virus”, and 3 police services – due to their enforcement of “COVID-19” restrictions. I have also personally received responses from several institutions outside of Canada including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). I await responses from a number of additional institutions.
Many people around the world have obtained responses to the same/similar, or related, [FOIA] requests, from institutions in their own countries. One person who has done a lot of work on this in New Zealand and other countries is my colleague Michael S. Also a fellow named Marc Horn obtained many in the UK. A handful of other people obtained several responses, and lots of people have obtained 1 or 2.
I have been compiling all of the responses that are sent to me on my FOI page, and as I type this (October 4, 2021) we have FOI responses from 104 institutions in well over 20 countries all relating to the purification/existence of the alleged virus. Additionally, there are court documents from South Africa and Portugal. In total, 110 instructions are represented at this moment on my website. There are FOI responses from more institutions that I haven’t had a chance to upload yet.
Q: How would you characterize the replies you’ve gotten from these agencies?
A: Every institution without exception has failed to provide or cite even 1 record describing purification of the alleged virus from even 1 patient sample.
Twenty-one of the 22 Canadian institutions admitted flat out that they have no such records (as required by the Canadian legislation). Many institutions outside Canada have admitted the same, including the CDC (November 2, 2020), Australia’s Department of Health, New Zealand’s Ministry of Health, the UK Department of Health and Social Care…
And in some cases, silly excuses were provided. For example, the Norwegian Directorate of Health’s response was that they do not own, store or control documents with information about patients. Public Health Wales told Dr. Janet Menage that they have not produced any such records, and that while they would normally be willing to point her towards records that are in the public domain it would be too difficult in this case.
Brazil’s FDA-like injection-approver, the Health Regulatory Agency (Anvisa), told Marcella Picone that they have no record of virus purification and are not required to by law, thus it is (in their minds) not their obligation to make sure that the virus actually exists.
Q: What is the exact text of your FOIA requests?
The text has varied somewhat over time. For example, in the beginning I used the word “isolation”. But since that term gets abused so badly by virologists, I now stick to “purification”.
In all requests I specified exactly what I meant by isolation/purification (separation of the alleged virus from everything else), and that the purified particles should come directly from a sample taken from a diseased human where the patient sample was not first adulterated with any other source of genetic material (i.e. the monkey kidney cells aka Vero cells and the fetal bovine serum that are typically used in the bogus “virus isolation” studies).
I always clarified that I was not requesting records where researchers failed to purify the alleged virus and instead cultured something and/or performed a PCR test and/or sequenced something. I also clarified that I was requesting records authored by anyone, anywhere – not simply records that were created by the institution in question. And I requested citations for any record of purification that is held by the institution but already available to the public elsewhere.
The latest iteration [of the FOIA request] is posted on a page of my website where I encourage others to submit requests to institutions in their own country: Template for “SARS-COV-2 isolation” FOI requests.
Q: These agencies are all saying they have no records proving SARS-CoV-2 exists, but at the same time some of these agencies sponsor and fund studies that claim the virus does exist. How do you account for this contradiction?
I will address this by way of an example.
The Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) is the only Canadian institution that failed to provide a straightforward “no records” response thus far. Instead, they provided me with what they pretended were responsive records.
The records consisted of some emails, and a study by Bullard et al. that was supported by PHAC and their National Microbiology Laboratory, and by Manitoba Health and Manitoba’s Cadham Provincial Laboratory.
Neither the study nor the emails describe purification of the alleged virus from a patient sample or from anything else. The word “isolate” (or “isolation” / “purify” / “purification”) does not even appear, except in the study manuscript in the context of isolating people, not a virus.
…in the Materials And Methods section we find that these researchers performed PCR “tests” for a portion of the E gene sequence (not a virus), and they incubated patient samples (not a virus) on Vero cells (monkey kidney cells) supplemented with fetal bovine serum, penicillin/streptomycin, and amphotericin B, and they monitored for harm to the monkey cells.
No virus was looked for in, or purified from, the patient samples. No control groups of any kind were implemented in the monkey cell procedures. No virus was required or shown to be involved anywhere in the study, but “it” was blamed for any harm to the monkey cells and “it” was referred to repeatedly throughout the study (I counted 26 instances).
Nevertheless, this was the sole paper provided by the Public Health Agency of Canada.
And although the researchers did not claim to have “isolated” the alleged virus in this paper, they performed the same sort of monkey business / cell culture procedure that is passed off as “virus isolation” by virologists in country after country. (Because virology is not a science.)
…Note the admission in the [study] Abstract: “RT-PCR detects RNA, not infectious virus”.
…So I wrote back to the Public Health Agency of Canada and advised the that none of the records they provided me actually describe separation of the alleged virus from everything else in a patient sample, and that I require an accurate response indicating that they have no responsive records.
In their revised response, the Agency insisted that the gold standard assay used to determine the presence of intact virus in patient samples is visible cytopathic [cell-killing] effects on cells in a cell culture, and that “PCR further confirms that intact virus is present”.
…As you have pointed out to your readers again and again: No one has isolated/purified “the virus”. They simply assume that patient samples contain “it” (based on meaningless PCR tests). They adulterate patient samples with genetic material and toxic drugs, starve the cells, then irrationally blame “the virus” for harm to the cells. They point to something that has never been purified, characterized, sequenced or studied scientifically, in a cell culture and insist “that’s the virus”. They fabricate the “genomes” from zillions of sequences detected in a soup. It’s all wild speculation and assumptions, zero science.
So the people responsible for the blatantly fraudulent claims made by these institutions are either wildly incompetent or intentionally lying.
—end of interview—
To bolster Christine’s final comments, these agencies will respond to FOIA requests with: “we have no records of virus purification”—and then sponsor studies that claim the virus HAS BEEN purified and discovered, because…
The standards for purifying the virus in the studies are no standards at all. They’re entirely irrational.
However, because Christine is very precise and accurate in her FOIA requests, when it comes to what purification means, the agencies are compelled to reply…
“Well, in THAT case, we have no records of virus purification…”
Meaning: There are no records showing the virus has been isolated; there are no records showing the virus exists.
Youtube, under Susan Wojcicki’s leadership, has already removed 130,000 videos for violating their COVID-19 vaccine policies, and the company is now expanding its ban to criticism of other vaccines as well. Despite evidence showing that autism is linked to vaccines, Matt Halprin, the global head of trust and safety at YouTube, said, “The ban will include any media that claims vaccines are dangerous or lead to chronic health outcomes such as autism.” Videos by Robert Kennedy, Jr., and Dr. Joseph Mercola have been removed.-GEG
Today, we’re expanding our medical misinformation policies on YouTube with new guidelines on currently administered vaccines that are approved and confirmed to be safe and effective by local health authorities and the WHO.
[…] Since last year, we’ve removed over 130,000 videos for violating our COVID-19 vaccine policies.
[…] We’ve steadily seen false claims about the coronavirus vaccines spill over into misinformation about vaccines in general, and we’re now at a point where it’s more important than ever to expand the work we started with COVID-19 to other vaccines.
Specifically, content that falsely alleges that approved vaccines are dangerous and cause chronic health effects, claims that vaccines do not reduce transmission or contraction of disease, or contains misinformation on the substances contained in vaccines will be removed. This would include content that falsely says that approved vaccines cause autism, cancer or infertility, or that substances in vaccines can track those who receive them. Our policies not only cover specific routine immunizations like for measles or Hepatitis B, but also apply to general statements about vaccines.
Whopper-doozie alert! This one is so over the top that I simply had to blog about it. It was shared by W.G., whom I thank for bringing to my attention. To be honest, this is such a whopper-doozie that I don’t even know where to start with respect to today’s high octane speculation, and I rather suspect – once readers dive into the article – that it will stimulate your own speculations. I’m presenting three different sources or versions of this story, because it is so unbelievably breathtaking in its implications:
Let’s look at the second article linked above. Consider these breathtaking paragraphs:
Pfizer has been accused of “bullying” Latin American governments in Covid vaccine negotiations and has asked some countries to put up sovereign assets, such as embassy buildings and military bases, as a guarantee against the cost of any future legal cases, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism can reveal.
In the case of one country, demands made by the pharmaceutical giant led to a three-month delay in a vaccine deal being agreed. For Argentina and Brazil, no national deals were agreed at all. Any hold-up in countries receiving vaccines means more people contracting Covid-19 and potentially dying.
Officials from Argentina and the other Latin American country, which cannot be named as it has signed a confidentiality agreement with Pfizer, said the company’s negotiators demanded additional indemnity against any civil claims citizens might file if they experienced adverse effects after being inoculated. In Argentina and Brazil, Pfizer asked for sovereign assets to be put up as collateral for any future legal costs.
One official who was present in the unnamed country’s negotiations described Pfizer’s demands as “high-level bullying” and said the government felt like it was being “held to ransom” in order to access life-saving vaccines. (Boldface emphasis added)
That pretty much sums it up; “Muck Pharmaceuticals” as we like to call Big Pharma here, in the form of Pfizer, is allegedly demanding collateral against potential lawsuits against its “vaccine.” Now my high octane speculation of the day comes in the form of three questions: (1) Why would Pfizer be so concerned about potential lawsuits if it was confident its “vaccine” was safe? (2) why would it ask nations for embassies and military bases? And (3) was the idea of collateralizing embassies and military bases the objective of the planscamdemic/”vaccine” operation one of the goals at the outset of the whole planscamdemic to begin with?
In looking at question one, we gain a bit of a speculative clue: seizing a nation’s embassies and military bases is, from one point of view, a real estate scam, one which anticipates that lawsuits are likely to be both many and costly, which is in its way a tacit admission that there are “problems” with the “vaccines.” The amounts of money are likely to be vast, and thus, hard assets are required in order to minimize Muck Pharmaceutical’s exposure to the risk.
But that brings us to question two: why ask for embassies and military bases? This, in my opinion, means one of two things, and possibly both together: either Pfizer’s action is on behalf of someone else whom it anticipates can buy those assets – and has the money to do so – should lawsuits ensue, or Pfizer itself views itself as a sovereign entity, in need of embassies and military bases to enforce its corporate will, which implies its having plans for a professional corporate military, or its has already developed one. Or, as I already stated, it is some combination of these two. With regard to the first prospect, there are few actors on the world stage that would have the liquidity to buy such hard assets, and use them for their original intended purpose. China would certainly be one primary suspect, and after all, the planscamdemic did originate there in a certain sense. But there could be others as well, including extra-territorial actors.
And that leads us to question three: was this one of the goals (among many others) that Mr. Globaloney wanted to accomplish through the planscamdemic? I suspect it’s a strong possibility, since it is clear that Mr. Globaloney is using the whole farce to further his agenda of control. And control doesn’t work unless one has centers for intelligence operations that are “sovereign territory” (embassies) and a means to enforce its dictates (military bases).
When one considers that there are other effective methods of covid treatment, this draconian effort regarding vaccines seems to make the agenda all too obvious.
Top pathologist Dr. Roger Hodkinson told government officials in Alberta during a zoom conference call that the current coronavirus crisis is “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public.”
Hodkinson’s comments were made during a discussion involving the Community and Public Services Committee and the clip was subsequently uploaded to YouTube.
Noting that he was also an expert in virology, Hodkinson pointed out that his role as CEO of a biotech company that manufactures COVID tests means, “I might know a little bit about all this.”
“There is utterly unfounded public hysteria driven by the media and politicians, it’s outrageous, this is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public,” said Hodkinson.
The doctor said that nothing could be done to stop the spread of the virus besides protecting older more vulnerable people and that the whole situation represented “politics playing medicine, and that’s a very dangerous game.”
Hodkinson remarked that “social distancing is useless because COVID is spread by aerosols which travel 30 meters or so before landing,” as he called for society to be re-opened immediately to prevent the debilitating damage being caused by lockdowns.
Hodkinson also slammed mandatory mask mandates as completely pointless.
“Masks are utterly useless. There is no evidence base for their effectiveness whatsoever,” he said.
“Paper masks and fabric masks are simply virtue signalling. They’re not even worn effectively most of the time. It’s utterly ridiculous. Seeing these unfortunate, uneducated people – I’m not saying that in a pejorative sense – seeing these people walking around like lemmings obeying without any knowledge base to put the mask on their face.”
The doctor also slammed the unreliability of PCR tests, noting that “positive test results do not, underlined in neon, mean a clinical infection,” and that all testing should stop because the false numbers are “driving public hysteria.”
Hodkinson said that the risk of death in the province of Alberta for people under the age of 65 was “one in three hundred thousand,” and that it was simply “outrageous” to shut down society for what the doctor said “was just another bad flu.”
“I’m absolutely outraged that this has reached this level, it should all stop tomorrow,” concluded Dr. Hodkinson.
Hodkinson’s credentials are beyond question, with the MedMalDoctors website affirming his credibility.
“He received his general medical degrees from Cambridge University in the UK (M.A., M.B., B. Chir.) where he was a scholar at Corpus Christi College. Following a residency at the University of British Columbia he became a Royal College certified general pathologist (FRCPC) and also a Fellow of the College of American Pathologists (FCAP).”
“He is in good Standing with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta, and has been recognized by the Court of Queen’s Bench in Alberta as an expert in pathology.”
In case the above video gets deleted by YouTube, a backup via Bitchute is available here.
—Cowan analyzes yet another key document posted by the CDC, in their journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases: “Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States”—
The hits keep coming. The CDC used an arbitrary computer “tinker-toy” process to invent a description of the virus. The virus that no one has proven exists. This is the basic conclusion of Dr. Tom Cowan.
Dr. Cowan: “[The CDC journal article] was published in June 2020 [original publication, March 2020]. The purpose of the article was for a group of about 20 virologists to describe the state of the science of the isolation, purification and biological characteristics of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus, and to share this information with other scientists for their own research. A thorough and careful reading of this important paper reveals some shocking findings.”
“First, in the section titled ‘Whole Genome Sequencing,’ we find that rather than having isolated the virus and sequencing the genome from end to end, they found 37 base pairs from unpurified samples using PCR probes. This means they actually looked at 37 out of the approximately 30,000 of the base pairs that are claimed to be the genome of the intact virus. They then took these 37 segments and put them into a computer program, which filled in the rest of the base pairs.”
In other words, the sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was done by assumption and arbitrary inference. If this is science, a penguin is a spaceship.
Cowan: “To me, this computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud. Here is an equivalency: A group of researchers claim to have found a unicorn because they found a piece of a hoof, a hair from a tail, and a snippet of a horn. They then add that information into a computer and program it to re-create the unicorn, and they then claim this computer re-creation is the real unicorn. Of course, they had never actually seen a unicorn so could not possibly have examined its genetic makeup to compare their samples with the actual unicorn’s hair, hooves and horn.”
“The researchers claim they decided which is the real genome of SARS-CoV-2 by ‘consensus,’ sort of like a vote. Again, different computer programs will come up with different versions of the imaginary ‘unicorn,’ so they come together as a group and decide which is the real imaginary unicorn.”
As I’ve been stating, the “discovery” of the “new virus” was actually the foisting of a PRE-DETERMINED STORY ABOUT A VIRUS. Nothing real or believable about it.
But once the official pattern is laid down, others follow it dutifully.
Dr. Cowan uncovers more insanity in the CDC journal article. Using the ASSUMED new virus, in an UN-ISOLATED STATE, the researchers try to prove it is harmful by injecting it on to several different types of cells in the lab:
Cowan: “The real blockbuster finding in this study comes later, a finding so shocking that I had to read it many times before I could believe what I was reading. Let me quote the passage intact:”
“’Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells [monkey cells]. … Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero [monkey] cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells [human cells] were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection’.”
“What does this language actually mean, and why is it the most shocking statement of all from the virology community? When virologists attempt to prove infection, they have three possible ‘hosts’ or models on which they can test…”
“The third method virologists use to prove infection and pathogenicity — the method they most rely on — is inoculation of solutions they say contain the virus onto a variety of tissue cultures. As I have pointed out many times, such inoculation has never been shown to kill (lyse) the tissue, unless the tissue is first starved and poisoned.”
“The shocking thing about the above [CDC journal] quote is that using their own methods, the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT, I repeat NOT, infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this ‘new coronavirus’ is not infectious to human beings. It is ONLY infective to monkey kidney cells, and only then when you add two potent drugs (gentamicin and amphotericin), known to be toxic to kidneys, to the mix.”
“My friends, read this again and again. These virologists, published by the CDC, performed a clear proof, on their terms, showing that the SARS-CoV- 2 virus is harmless to human beings. That is the only possible conclusion, but, unfortunately, this result is not even mentioned in their conclusion. They simply say they can provide virus stocks cultured only on monkey Vero cells, thanks for coming.”
So first…use a process of genetic sequencing that involves concocting, out of an arbitrary computer program…
The existence and structure of the “new virus”…
And then, taking a soup that the researchers claim contains the virus, in an un-isolated state, inject the soup into several types of cells in the lab…
And discover the prime target—human cells—are not infected by the imaginary virus.
And after this good day’s work, walk away and pretend nothing odd or self-incriminating happened.
And oh yes, lock down the planet based on this “science.”
Naturally, we MUST take a toxic vaccine that prevents non-infection by the non-virus.
CDC says it erroneously posted guidance that said coronavirus spreads through air and travels beyond 6 feet
Key Points
Earlier in the day, the World Health Organization said it contacted the CDC about the guidance change.
The WHO has said Covid-19 primarily spreads through respiratory droplets that pass when an infected person coughs, sneezes or breathes.
A sign informing people to stay 6 feet apart stands on Marina Boulevard at Marina Green in San Francisco, California, U.S., on Wednesday, March 25, 2020.
The updated guidance, posted on the CDC’s website on Friday, also recommended that people use air purifiers to reduce airborne germs indoors to prevent the disease from spreading, according to Reuters.
“A draft version of proposed changes to these recommendations was posted in error to the agency’s official website,” the CDC said Monday. “CDC is currently updating its recommendations regarding airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19). Once this process has been completed, the update language will be posted.”
Earlier in the day, the World Health Organization said it contacted the CDC about the guidance change.
The WHO had not seen any “new evidence” on airborne particles and was checking with the CDC to “better understand” the exact nature of the change, Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of the WHO’s health emergencies program, said during a news conference at the agency’s Geneva headquarters.
watch now
VIDEO01:53
CDC: U.S. should have enough coronavirus vaccine to return to ‘regular life’ by third quarter of 2021
The WHO has said Covid-19 primarily spreads through respiratory droplets that pass when an infected person coughs, sneezes or breathes. Studies have shown that the coronavirus could spread through aerosols in the air, and the WHO has said it is monitoring “emerging evidence” of possible airborne transmission.
The international agency’s position “on this remains the same,” Ryan said, “and we’ve always said going back over months and months about the potential for different kinds of roots of transmission and particularly driven by the context, the proximity, the intensity, the duration and the potential for different forms of transmission.”
Many public health specialists criticized the CDC’s change in testing guidance in August for appearing to play down the significance of testing people who don’t have symptoms but who might be spreading the virus.
Studies have suggested the virus can spread through the air. A study published by researchers at the National Institutes of Health earlier this year found that particles of the coronavirus released by talking can remain in the air for eight to 14 minutes.
A study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that Covid-19 was detectable in aerosols for up to three hours.
In July, the WHO said there is still no “definitive” evidence that indicates the virus is spreading widely by air, although it added that the possibility of airborne transmission in public settings “cannot be ruled out.”
If the coronavirus does primarily spread through the air, masks may prove to be more important than ever.
Both health agencies recommend that people wear face masks. Studies suggest the masks may serve as a helpful barrier to spreading infection.
