Am not sure why we focus on this irrelevant issue. Pardon the bluntness.
Opposition will use this against us to demonstrate we are biased, anti-vax and looking at irrelevant details.
Even Kevin says it's not major. Hear me out.
It seem quite obvious that the cost and/or the technical capacity makes it impossible for Pfizer to filter out the DNA. That means that billions have had it, including you btw, and billions are fine.
There is zero reproductibility of the DNA being the cause of harm. Zero.
Moreover panicking people on this isn't exactly ethical, and on top, people will say who cares if GMP [General Manufacturing Practices] aren't in compliance with FDA regulation if it doesn't harm.
So we'll lose people willing to listen, anchoring them further in their belief that there's no real problem.
DNA is neither the cause of cancers (cats have cancer with rabbies vaccines! horses have cancer with influenza
vaccines...none have DNA or SV40) , nor the cause of the vascular disorders (the MoH is Tcell mediated in line with the MoA of the vaccine! Totally unrelated to DNA ) and frankly the germ integration will be so minute in terms of people only pple transfected in testis immune peivileged stem cells!! ) that injured people will think it's a joke we are focusing on such irrelevant and conjectural AE when so many real AEs are documented.
We lost valuable time on an easily falsifiable spikeopathy theory for 24 months! Now we've wasted another 6 months on this...?
Why are we not addressing the only theory that proves it all, the only theory that explains harmed and unharmed, the only theory that is reproducible multiple times in animals and humans, the only theory that is explained and validated (almost) from A to Z, the only theory in line with the clinical signs of harm, etc...? Why ?
Are we collectively unintelligent? Are we being controlled from within? Is our camp blind to the exception of John Campbell?
"That means that billions have had it, including you btw, and billions are fine."
Your last two words should have been: "so far."
How many of the dead and crippled teens were "fine" right up until they 'died suddenly'? How many went to bed "fine" and never woke up? "Being fine" is NOT sufficient. What was that recent study of heart damage -- and 100% of the folks HAD heart damage, even though they had no clinical signs at all? They WERE in fact "fine"? Well, except for having heart damage...
This SV40 thing is -- yes -- minor. But, you move a mountain one grain of sand at a time! Heaping up proof after proof after proof DOES make a dent in the sheepies... Deciding NOT to tell them this one contaminant in the shots may be 'small potatoes' -- but ever heard the tale of stone soup?
Notice, too, you're arguing as a man of science TO a man of math and science. Notice next that our enemies, who made and spread this poisons, NEVER bothered with science -- they made all their shit up specifically to scare the hell out of the sheep -- and are STILL trying to scare them! Pointing out (to the sheep!) that "here's yet ANOTHER lie from the people you believed" is MUCH more likely to get them to look around than, "well yes, SV40 DOES seems to increase cancers, but the numbers are slight! (Cancer being the scary word for the sheep!) Why you could ALMOST call SV40 "safe and effective" too, couldn't you?
So I think (and hope sincerely bc he is a friend) he's out if the woods.
My work is that oo an engineer, and so I have identify the MoHs, most AEs are visible very fast, some like aneurysm take 4-6 months, heart scarring/calcification can indeed happen.
Cancer is immediate with varying degrees of aggressiveness, the more aggressive the more numerous
And Alzheimer's and Parkinson's can wait decades ifthe immune system does its cleaning up work.
I've never understood why this logic (billions of people have gotten vaccine and billions are fine) only applies to vaccines. Why doesn't it apply to Covid? Why do some smokers live into their 80s and some die of lung cancer in their 50s? Why didn't everyone who took Vioxx have a heart attack? Why are some able to take prescription pain pills no problem and others become addicted?
I don't agree that this is irrelevant. From a regulatory and security engineering perspective this is a big problem. Government agencies allowed a company to omit key information about a product that was then pushed on the public. They are still doing nothing about it. Let's say you are right about the DNA issue. That doesn't mean the problems with government oversight goes away. There is a major vulnerability in how regulators are handling these products. Will they behave in the same manner with medical devices, chemicals, etc?
They didn't look into reports of actual deaths of millions of people, and ten of millions of maimed for 40 years... And they are accelerating, so I don't really care about GMP.
I am sorry. Doubt legally it'll break the contract, am sure their lawyers put a clause saying they are being forced to accelerate, and will commit to doing their best, and are not liable for Anything.
Where is the onus today? First and foremost on the FDA who had 221 deaths in VAERS on January 15, 2021, and over 40,000 serious AEs and double/triple downed.
So either the FDA iss corrupt politically (executive order) or financially (by Pfizer
+ Moderna).
But the liability lies there, first.
But I want to stop hurting the kids with the other vaccines and they dangerous delivery.
So Marc, why don't you spell out what you mean by "the only theory that proves it all"? It would be nice to know what you are referring to.
And also, why is John Campbell the "exception"? Because he is a trained medical person who has come to the conclusion that he's been hoodwinked? i think there are a lot of such folks around. What do you mean?
Well, I actually did see that one. Your picture here looks different so I thought you were someone different. Here's another question: How about the Danish study that shows 1/3 of folks apparently received inert material and had no ill effects, another 1/3 had moderate side effects, and the final 1/3 had more serious effects? And the timing of these shots showed that the more serious effects came early in the vaccination effort. I don't see how your bolus theory, though possibly correct in general, also accounts for the Danish study results. And didn't they have the policy of routine aspiration in Denmark. How would that fit into your theory
The author explained it I believe on John campbell. Not sure where I saw it, but I believe other people found accidents for these lots in other countries.
The lot theory can be falsified in various ways anyhow.
(1) lot theory doesn't explain why all the wounds are concentrated. That's not related to poison.
(2) poison doesn't trigger a Tcell attack, the vaccine does. It's its MoA.
(3) if the poison is in the LNP, it would change absolutely nothing, since the LNPs are cytotoxic by proxy (they get the Tcell to attack see 2). Adding poison to poison doesn't change.
(4) if poison were in the LNP, likely it would destroy the mRNA and the cell before it can produce spike. Vaccine injured are loaded with spike...
(5) if poison is outside the LNP, why no necrosis at the injection site, why T-cell+spike in the wounds?
(6) people wouldn't have antibodies if it was placebo and it would show. I have yet to hear of anyone not having Abs post-vaccine. How does a majority of people ger placebo and antibodies? It's a shameful joke.
Hi Steve,
Hope you are well, my friend.
Am not sure why we focus on this irrelevant issue. Pardon the bluntness.
Opposition will use this against us to demonstrate we are biased, anti-vax and looking at irrelevant details.
Even Kevin says it's not major. Hear me out.
It seem quite obvious that the cost and/or the technical capacity makes it impossible for Pfizer to filter out the DNA. That means that billions have had it, including you btw, and billions are fine.
There is zero reproductibility of the DNA being the cause of harm. Zero.
Moreover panicking people on this isn't exactly ethical, and on top, people will say who cares if GMP [General Manufacturing Practices] aren't in compliance with FDA regulation if it doesn't harm.
So we'll lose people willing to listen, anchoring them further in their belief that there's no real problem.
DNA is neither the cause of cancers (cats have cancer with rabbies vaccines! horses have cancer with influenza
vaccines...none have DNA or SV40) , nor the cause of the vascular disorders (the MoH is Tcell mediated in line with the MoA of the vaccine! Totally unrelated to DNA ) and frankly the germ integration will be so minute in terms of people only pple transfected in testis immune peivileged stem cells!! ) that injured people will think it's a joke we are focusing on such irrelevant and conjectural AE when so many real AEs are documented.
We lost valuable time on an easily falsifiable spikeopathy theory for 24 months! Now we've wasted another 6 months on this...?
Why are we not addressing the only theory that proves it all, the only theory that explains harmed and unharmed, the only theory that is reproducible multiple times in animals and humans, the only theory that is explained and validated (almost) from A to Z, the only theory in line with the clinical signs of harm, etc...? Why ?
Are we collectively unintelligent? Are we being controlled from within? Is our camp blind to the exception of John Campbell?
{shrug} You left out part of this sentence:
"That means that billions have had it, including you btw, and billions are fine."
Your last two words should have been: "so far."
How many of the dead and crippled teens were "fine" right up until they 'died suddenly'? How many went to bed "fine" and never woke up? "Being fine" is NOT sufficient. What was that recent study of heart damage -- and 100% of the folks HAD heart damage, even though they had no clinical signs at all? They WERE in fact "fine"? Well, except for having heart damage...
This SV40 thing is -- yes -- minor. But, you move a mountain one grain of sand at a time! Heaping up proof after proof after proof DOES make a dent in the sheepies... Deciding NOT to tell them this one contaminant in the shots may be 'small potatoes' -- but ever heard the tale of stone soup?
Notice, too, you're arguing as a man of science TO a man of math and science. Notice next that our enemies, who made and spread this poisons, NEVER bothered with science -- they made all their shit up specifically to scare the hell out of the sheep -- and are STILL trying to scare them! Pointing out (to the sheep!) that "here's yet ANOTHER lie from the people you believed" is MUCH more likely to get them to look around than, "well yes, SV40 DOES seems to increase cancers, but the numbers are slight! (Cancer being the scary word for the sheep!) Why you could ALMOST call SV40 "safe and effective" too, couldn't you?
I am not good at scaremongering.
Steve had his shots almost 3 years ago.
So I think (and hope sincerely bc he is a friend) he's out if the woods.
My work is that oo an engineer, and so I have identify the MoHs, most AEs are visible very fast, some like aneurysm take 4-6 months, heart scarring/calcification can indeed happen.
Cancer is immediate with varying degrees of aggressiveness, the more aggressive the more numerous
And Alzheimer's and Parkinson's can wait decades ifthe immune system does its cleaning up work.
I've never understood why this logic (billions of people have gotten vaccine and billions are fine) only applies to vaccines. Why doesn't it apply to Covid? Why do some smokers live into their 80s and some die of lung cancer in their 50s? Why didn't everyone who took Vioxx have a heart attack? Why are some able to take prescription pain pills no problem and others become addicted?
I don't agree that this is irrelevant. From a regulatory and security engineering perspective this is a big problem. Government agencies allowed a company to omit key information about a product that was then pushed on the public. They are still doing nothing about it. Let's say you are right about the DNA issue. That doesn't mean the problems with government oversight goes away. There is a major vulnerability in how regulators are handling these products. Will they behave in the same manner with medical devices, chemicals, etc?
I am sorry, I prioritize differently.
They didn't look into reports of actual deaths of millions of people, and ten of millions of maimed for 40 years... And they are accelerating, so I don't really care about GMP.
I am sorry. Doubt legally it'll break the contract, am sure their lawyers put a clause saying they are being forced to accelerate, and will commit to doing their best, and are not liable for Anything.
Where is the onus today? First and foremost on the FDA who had 221 deaths in VAERS on January 15, 2021, and over 40,000 serious AEs and double/triple downed.
So either the FDA iss corrupt politically (executive order) or financially (by Pfizer
+ Moderna).
But the liability lies there, first.
But I want to stop hurting the kids with the other vaccines and they dangerous delivery.
So Marc, why don't you spell out what you mean by "the only theory that proves it all"? It would be nice to know what you are referring to.
And also, why is John Campbell the "exception"? Because he is a trained medical person who has come to the conclusion that he's been hoodwinked? i think there are a lot of such folks around. What do you mean?
The Bolus Theory explains all the adverse events observed, including cancer.
John Campbell interviewed me 7 months ago, and completely bought into the theory. He qualified my work as"superb" and as "an impressive body of work".
I thought I had seen all of Mr. Campbell's videos but I guess I missed yours.
I'll go back and view it. Thank you.
Well, I actually did see that one. Your picture here looks different so I thought you were someone different. Here's another question: How about the Danish study that shows 1/3 of folks apparently received inert material and had no ill effects, another 1/3 had moderate side effects, and the final 1/3 had more serious effects? And the timing of these shots showed that the more serious effects came early in the vaccination effort. I don't see how your bolus theory, though possibly correct in general, also accounts for the Danish study results. And didn't they have the policy of routine aspiration in Denmark. How would that fit into your theory
That was debunked. There was delayed reporting from whqt I understand. In other countries these lots had harmed the same .
Can you provide a citation for that? I thought the Danes could be counted on to have reliable information
The author explained it I believe on John campbell. Not sure where I saw it, but I believe other people found accidents for these lots in other countries.
The lot theory can be falsified in various ways anyhow.
(1) lot theory doesn't explain why all the wounds are concentrated. That's not related to poison.
(2) poison doesn't trigger a Tcell attack, the vaccine does. It's its MoA.
(3) if the poison is in the LNP, it would change absolutely nothing, since the LNPs are cytotoxic by proxy (they get the Tcell to attack see 2). Adding poison to poison doesn't change.
(4) if poison were in the LNP, likely it would destroy the mRNA and the cell before it can produce spike. Vaccine injured are loaded with spike...
(5) if poison is outside the LNP, why no necrosis at the injection site, why T-cell+spike in the wounds?
(6) people wouldn't have antibodies if it was placebo and it would show. I have yet to hear of anyone not having Abs post-vaccine. How does a majority of people ger placebo and antibodies? It's a shameful joke.