Our mission, as God-fearing and God-loving patriots, is to defend this Constitutional Republic and to increase its greatness, in all good things and ways, by using our voices in free but courteous speech, by discussing the happenings of the world and coming to a profound understanding of those things, and by sharing and promulgating these Truths on both this platform and others.
This Rejoice & Praise God Sunday Open Thread, with full respect to those who worship God on the Sabbath, is a place to reaffirm our worship of our Creator, our Father, our King Eternal.
It’s also a place to read, post, and discuss news that is worth knowing and sharing. Please post links to any news stories that you use as sources or quote from.
In the QTree, we’re a friendly and civil lot. We encourage free speech and the open exchange and civil discussion of different ideas. Topics aren’t constrained, and sound logic is highly encouraged, all built on a solid foundation of truth and established facts, and not by agenda-driven accusations and pronouncements.
We have a policy of mutual respect, shown by civility. Civility encourages discussions, promotes objectivity and rational thought in discourse, and camaraderie in the participants – characteristics we strive toward in our Q Tree community.
Please show respect and consideration for our fellow QTreepers. Before hitting the “post” button, please proofread your post and make sure your opinion addresses the issue only, and does not confront or denigrate the poster. Keep to the topic – avoid “you” and “your”. Here in The Q Tree, personal attacks, name-calling, ridicule, insults, baiting, and other conduct for which a penalty flag would be thrown are VERBOTEN.
In The Q Tree, we’re compatriots, sitting around the campfire, roasting hot dogs, making s’mores, and discussing, agreeing, and disagreeing about whatever interests us. This board will remain a home for those who seek respectful conversations.
God is in Control . . . and His Grace is Sufficient, so . . . Keep Looking Up
Hopefully, every Sunday, we can find something here that will build us up a little . . . give us a smile . . . and add some joy or peace, very much needed in all our lives.
“This day is holy to the Lord your God; do not mourn nor weep.” . . . “Go your way, eat the fat, drink the sweet, and send portions to those for whom nothing is prepared; for this day is holy to our Lord. Do not sorrow, for the joy of the Lord is your strength.”
Is God Silent?
In answering this question, we are reminded of Elijah and his flight from Jezebel. Elijah was a man of God whom God used to do some mighty things. However, when word reached him that Jezebel had threatened his life, he ran (1 Kings chapter 19). Elijah prayed to the Lord and in effect complained about how he was being treated: “He replied, ‘I have been very zealous for the Lord God Almighty. The Israelites have rejected your covenant, torn down your altars, and put your prophets to death with the sword. I am the only one left, and now they are trying to kill me too’” (1 Kings 19:10). The Lord’s answer to Elijah is thrilling: “The Lord said, ‘Go out and stand on the mountain in the presence of the Lord, for the Lord is about to pass by.’ Then a great and powerful wind tore the mountains apart and shattered the rocks before the Lord, but the Lord was not in the wind. After the wind there was an earthquake, but the Lord was not in the earthquake. After the earthquake came a fire, but the Lord was not in the fire. And after the fire came a gentle whisper” (1 Kings 19:11-12).
We see in this passage of Scripture that what Elijah thought was not true. Elijah thought God was silent and that he was the only one left. God was not only “not silent,” but He had an army waiting in the wings so that Elijah was not alone: “Yet I reserve seven thousand in Israel—all whose knees have not bowed down to Baal and whose mouths have not kissed him” (1 Kings 19:18).
In our walk as born-again believers, it may seem that God is silent, but God is never silent. What looks like silence and inactivity to us is God allowing us the opportunity to listen to “the still small voice” and to see the provisions that He has made for us by faith. God is involved in every area of a believer’s life–the very hairs on our heads are numbered (Mark 10:30; Luke 12:7). However, there are times when we have to walk in obedience to the light that God has given us before He sheds more light on our path, because in this age of grace God speaks to us through His Word.
“‘For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,’ declares the Lord. ‘As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. As the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return to it without watering the earth and making it bud and flourish, so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater, so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it’” (Isaiah 55:8-11).
Therefore, when God seems silent to us as born-again believers, it may mean that we have stopped listening to His voice, we have allowed the cares of this world to plug our spiritual ears, or we have neglected His Word. God does not speak to us today in signs, wonders, fire, or wind. His Spirit speaks to us through the Word, and in that Word we have the “words of life.” xhttps://www.gotquestions.org/God-silent-absent.html
Wheatie Wisdom. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. No running with scissors. No food fights. AI stuff posted, requires a link. Please use spoiler, for longer posts. Wolf Speak. No obnoxious behavior towards fellow QTreeper(s). Freedom of Speech is honored here QTree. But Do Know, every poster, IS personally responsible for what they post.
TL;DR – I asked Grok a short question designed to elicit all the information I would need to quickly determine the “lay of the land” concerning the new Moderna mRNA flu shot.
I will give you the question, the answer, my analysis of the response, and my summarizing opinion. Part of that opinion is this.
I don’t take the flu shot any more, and I don’t take mRNA shots at all. The current facts surrounding the new mRNA flu shot have – in my opinion – strongly confirmed the correctness of these positions. I will not be taking this shot, and I will counsel all my friends and loved ones not to take it.
And, as part of loving my enemies, including those adorable radical pro-vaxx people, bless their hearts, I will counsel them to stick with older flu shots, if they feel they must take something. The risks of older flu shots are smaller, with roughly no net benefit, but at least they are not accepting a far WORSE AND RISKIER vaccination platform, compared to older flu shots, for what is, IMO – only marginal improvement in some indicators, and zero correction of fundamental problems which became known during the COVID shots.
The Question
Your mileage will vary on how to interpret this response by Grok. I think you and I are likely on the same page, but taking this information to most of our friends and neighbors who trust vaccines in general, won’t be easy. Because it’s a flu shot and not a COVID shot, many will assume automatically that it’s safe.
Again – I needed a fast summary of the new Moderna mRNA flu shot, as I am trying to figure out quickly where things are going. I wanted to know the technology first. “First seek to understand – then seek to be understood.”
Thus, I asked for scientific depth, but otherwise brevity. This is a good description of a scientific abstract.
Here was my question to Grok (version 4.5, described as “Fast” on X).
Please give me a brief but scientifically deep explanation of the technology used in Moderna’s recently approved mRNA flu shot. I’m curious about two things in particular – which influenza protein is encoded, and which form of mRNA tech is being used (i.e., is it self-amplifying or more conventional). I’m also wondering if any changes in the basic mRNA technology have been made to address inherent problems of the mRNA platform, including the fact that (statistically) some recipients suffer undesirable long-term production of target protein, as well as travel of lipid nanoparticles away from the injection site.
The Answer
Grok’s response is, IMO, roughly neutral, although in a couple of places I see a fairly mild but rather typical “mainstream bias”. I’ll get to that later, as I analyze the response.
The first paragraph of the reply is bolded by Grok as a summary.
I have included paragraph-end citation links as the full links, instead of shortened active hyperlinks that Grok uses at the end of paragraphs. In one case, that turns into an embedded tweet.
Grok’s response:
Conventional (non-replicating, nucleoside-modified) mRNA encoding influenza hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoproteins from the relevant WHO-recommended strains (trivalent in the approved formulation: A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B/Victoria), delivered in the same type of lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used for Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines (SM-102 ionizable lipid platform).
Moderna’s recently FDA-approved seasonal flu vaccine (mRNA-1010, branded mFlusiva/mFLUSIVA) for adults ≥50 years uses the company’s established non-replicating mRNA platform. It is not self-amplifying RNA (saRNA/sa-mRNA). saRNA constructs include alphavirus-derived replicase genes that enable intracellular RNA amplification and prolonged antigen expression at lower doses; mRNA-1010 does not. It relies on the same core technology as Spikevax: in vitro-transcribed, nucleoside-modified mRNA (typically incorporating N1-methylpseudouridine to reduce innate sensing and improve translation) with 5′ cap, optimized UTRs, and poly(A) tail, formulated in LNPs.
The encoded antigen is the full-length (membrane-anchored) hemagglutinin glycoprotein of the selected seasonal strains. HA is the primary surface protein mediating viral attachment and entry; neutralizing antibodies targeting its head domain (and to a lesser extent the stalk) are the main correlate of protection measured by hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assays. The approved product is trivalent (reflecting the current seasonal composition after B/Yamagata’s decline), with total mRNA dose around 37.5 μg (roughly 12.5 μg per strain). Earlier development versions were quadrivalent. The platform allows rapid sequence updates to match circulating strains without egg adaptation.
No fundamental redesign of the mRNA or LNP platform specifically for this flu vaccine has been publicly detailed to address the concerns you raise. Protein expression from conventional modified mRNA is inherently transient: the mRNA is degraded by cellular nucleases over days (typically peaking within hours to a day or two and declining substantially within a week or so in standard preclinical models), so continuous long-term production of the target protein is not a designed or statistically expected feature in recipients. Observed antigen persistence in draining lymph nodes (sometimes detectable for weeks in some studies of COVID mRNA vaccines) supports germinal-center reactions rather than ongoing systemic protein synthesis from residual mRNA. Claims of undesirable long-term production are not supported as a common or inherent platform failure in the clinical data for these vaccines.
LNP biodistribution after intramuscular injection is predominantly local (injection-site muscle and draining lymph nodes), with smaller fractions reaching the spleen and, to a lesser extent, liver; distant tissue accumulation is minimal and components clear relatively rapidly (often low/undetectable by ~1–2 weeks in available data). The SM-102-based LNPs (ionizable lipid + cholesterol + helper phospholipid + PEG-lipid) used here are the same biodegradable class employed in Spikevax; they were selected in part for improved tolerability and clearance relative to earlier ionizable lipids. No public evidence indicates major new chemistry (e.g., substantially altered ionizable lipids, targeting ligands, or miRNA-regulated expression) unique to mFlusiva to further restrict off-target travel. Dose is lower than original COVID primary series doses, which reduces overall exposure.
The LNPs in Moderna’s mRNA flu vaccine (mRNA-1010/mFLUSIVA) use the same proprietary SM-102-based platform as Spikevax. Composition, size, and biodistribution are essentially identical: most stay at the injection site, a fraction reaches lymph nodes and spleen, with rapid…
In short, this is an evolutionary application of the proven non-replicating modified-mRNA + LNP system to HA antigens, leveraging manufacturing speed and the ability to induce strong humoral (and some cellular) responses without egg-based production constraints. Clinical data supported superior relative efficacy versus standard-dose inactivated vaccines in the pivotal trial, with a reactogenicity profile consistent with other mRNA vaccines (more local and systemic reactions that are mostly mild–moderate and transient).
My Analysis
I’m going to take that response a piece at a time.
Paragraph 1
The first paragraph is a summary, and it’s key.
Conventional (non-replicating, nucleoside-modified) mRNA encoding influenza hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoproteins from the relevant WHO-recommended strains (trivalent in the approved formulation: A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B/Victoria), delivered in the same type of lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) used for Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccines (SM-102 ionizable lipid platform).
Basically, this is saying that mFlusiva is a “normal” mRNA vaccine, the same basic type as the Moderna and Pfizer COVID vaccines – but instead of targeting the sequence for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, it targets a similar influenza surface protein – specifically, the hemagglutinin (HA) surface glycoprotein. That is one of two surface proteins shown here.
It also appears to be using the same type of lipid nanoparticles as are used in the mRNA COVID vaccines.
Paragraph 2
Moderna’s recently FDA-approved seasonal flu vaccine (mRNA-1010, branded mFlusiva/mFLUSIVA) for adults ≥50 years uses the company’s established non-replicating mRNA platform. It is not self-amplifying RNA (saRNA/sa-mRNA). saRNA constructs include alphavirus-derived replicase genes that enable intracellular RNA amplification and prolonged antigen expression at lower doses; mRNA-1010 does not. It relies on the same core technology as Spikevax: in vitro-transcribed, nucleoside-modified mRNA (typically incorporating N1-methylpseudouridine to reduce innate sensing and improve translation) with 5′ cap, optimized UTRs, and poly(A) tail, formulated in LNPs.
Several points are validated here.
mFluvia is considered to be a regular seasonal flu vaccine
It’s FDA approved for adults 50 years old and older (which includes the older 65+ subgroup as well)
It is NOT a more modern (and possibly more dangerous, IMO) self-amplifying mRNA
It uses the same tech as Moderna’s old COVID shot, named Spikevax.
It’s a standard “modified” mRNA, including the use of N1-methylpseudouridine
The fact that they have really not changed the platform is critical to understand. Any problems that are inherent to the mRNA platform itself, and not a result of the spike protein per se, are still there. Likewise, any problems that are common to both the spike protein and the HA protein will be there. And any NEW problems of the HA protein will be there, too.
Note that they are not giving it to kids. THAT is purely strategic, IMO, and is deviously smart. They know that if kids show cardiovascular and cancer effects, it’s going to be obviously the fault of the mRNA platform, and possibly even trouble for vaccination in general.
No way will they take that risk. IMO the reason they’re not taking a risk here, is that the HA protein of flu is not and cannot be a depop vector, like the spike protein. Thus, there is no sterilization or anti-fertility advantage worth taking a risk to roll out to kids.
SIDEBAR: N1-Methylpseudouridine
One further note on N1-methylpseudouridine. It is important to understand how little of it is actually contained in these vaccines. This stuff is not (IMO) toxic per se as a poison – it is only dangerous in very specific use when unnaturally incorporated into mRNA.
In the tiny amount of mRNA (micrograms) inside the tiny amount of lipid nanoparticles, literally milligrams suspended in fluid inside the tiny 0.38 mL of the shot, one out of the four bases (uridine) of that mRNA has been substituted with N1-methylated pseudouridine, and it goes straight into the machinery just like uridine would have. The only problem is that N1MPU is a bit like a worn tooth on a key, and it may turn a lock other than ONLY the one that it was intended to turn. That’s an understandable analogy to the fact that N1MPU in the coding may produce a WRONG protein sometimes – particularly due to something called “frame-shifting”.
The following Wikipedia has clearly been edited by Big Pharma shills, but you can still read between the lines, as to what they are defending / covering up / minimizing / downplaying. In the process, they basically document the problems of using a slippery fake base to avoid detection by the immune system.
I do NOT buy the Wikipedia-shilled argument that frame-shifting is innocuous – because IMO it will only be innocuous until it isn’t – just like any other “error” that is allowed to fester until the plane crash happens in combination with other events.
Paragraph 3
The third paragraph basically explains what was measured to state that this vaccine was superior to existing non-mRNA vaccines. Note that nothing here deals with safety or risk – just efficacy. You can also see how little mRNA is used – basically 12.5 micrograms per strain of influenza.
The encoded antigen is the full-length (membrane-anchored) hemagglutinin glycoprotein of the selected seasonal strains. HA is the primary surface protein mediating viral attachment and entry; neutralizing antibodies targeting its head domain (and to a lesser extent the stalk) are the main correlate of protection measured by hemagglutination-inhibition (HAI) assays. The approved product is trivalent (reflecting the current seasonal composition after B/Yamagata’s decline), with total mRNA dose around 37.5 μg (roughly 12.5 μg per strain). Earlier development versions were quadrivalent. The platform allows rapid sequence updates to match circulating strains without egg adaptation.
Paragraph 4
This is where the AI model “negotiates” the controversy with creative wordplay. Read it carefully, like a contract.
No fundamental redesign of the mRNA or LNP platform specifically for this flu vaccine has been publicly detailed to address the concerns you raise. Protein expression from conventional modified mRNA is inherently transient: the mRNA is degraded by cellular nucleases over days (typically peaking within hours to a day or two and declining substantially within a week or so in standard preclinical models), so continuous long-term production of the target protein is not a designed or statistically expected feature in recipients. Observed antigen persistence in draining lymph nodes (sometimes detectable for weeks in some studies of COVID mRNA vaccines) supports germinal-center reactions rather than ongoing systemic protein synthesis from residual mRNA. Claims of undesirable long-term production are not supported as a common or inherent platform failure in the clinical data for these vaccines.
The first sentence is interesting.
No fundamental redesign of the mRNA or LNP platform specifically for this flu vaccine has been publicly detailed to address the concerns you raise.
Note that it doesn’t say there was no change to address concerns – it says that nothing was made public as such. Given how much can be “trade secrets”, we simply don’t know if changes were made behind the scenes. Grok worded this well, IMO.
Grok does address my concern about individuals who suffer long-term production of target protein, not by denying that it happens, but by stating the reality of the situation.;
Protein expression from conventional modified mRNA is inherently transient: the mRNA is degraded by cellular nucleases over days (typically peaking within hours to a day or two and declining substantially within a week or so in standard preclinical models), so continuous long-term production of the target protein is not a designed or statistically expected feature in recipients.
Note what Grok does here. It actually lets us know that mRNA vaccination is a process that peaks in hours to low days, declining over low (1-2) weeks in the DESIRED CASE. Grok doesn’t deny that it can take longer, but is very careful not to simply parrot the mainstream assertion that there are no long-term protein production problem cases. This is very artful use of language. Knowing better than to deny statistical outliers, it comes back at my use of “statistical” with “statistically expected feature” – a very crafty but true response.
In a similar vein, Grok repeats the denials of the mainstream regarding vaccine found in lymph nodes, but very carefully, not boxing itself in should those denials be disproven in the future.
Observed antigen persistence in draining lymph nodes (sometimes detectable for weeks in some studies of COVID mRNA vaccines) supports germinal-center reactions rather than ongoing systemic protein synthesis from residual mRNA.
Needless to say, I’m not convinced that this is innocuous, and am keeping an open mind. Also, this does NOT explain individuals producing spike protein for months or years after injection.
Claims of undesirable long-term production are not supported as a common or inherent platform failure in the clinical data for these vaccines.
This is weasel wording, but I get it. We have different definitions of platform failure. IMO even 0.1% failure would be unacceptable. Why? Because the injectable, metered, controlled protein immunogen injection already exists, and is superior to mRNA. It is inherently superior. It has ZERO long-term OR off-target production of protein, HOWEVER one defines it.
Grok knows this, but cannot psychologically deal with disagreement with the mainstream of public health. Grok would be “corrected” if it did disagree.
IMO, mRNA vaccines are a lot like the Trabant – the horrible 2-stroke automobile produced by the Soviet Empire. Yes, 2-stroke internal combustion technology “works”, but it is inferior to the cleaner, more expensive, and overall more efficient 4-stroke internal combustion engine we are still using.
mRNA vaccination is not the Tesla. It’s the Trabant, with it’s “magically efficient” two-stroke engine.
I have no need for it.
Paragraph 5
LNP biodistribution after intramuscular injection is predominantly local (injection-site muscle and draining lymph nodes), with smaller fractions reaching the spleen and, to a lesser extent, liver; distant tissue accumulation is minimal and components clear relatively rapidly (often low/undetectable by ~1–2 weeks in available data). The SM-102-based LNPs (ionizable lipid + cholesterol + helper phospholipid + PEG-lipid) used here are the same biodegradable class employed in Spikevax; they were selected in part for improved tolerability and clearance relative to earlier ionizable lipids. No public evidence indicates major new chemistry (e.g., substantially altered ionizable lipids, targeting ligands, or miRNA-regulated expression) unique to mFlusiva to further restrict off-target travel. Dose is lower than original COVID primary series doses, which reduces overall exposure.
Seriously, I almost rest my case after this first sentence by Grok. “…to a lesser extent, liver.” Good GRIEF. This is acceptable? REALLY? YIKES!
LNP biodistribution after intramuscular injection is predominantly local (injection-site muscle and draining lymph nodes), with smaller fractions reaching the spleen and, to a lesser extent, liver; distant tissue accumulation is minimal and components clear relatively rapidly (often low/undetectable by ~1–2 weeks in available data).
“Predominantly local” is not good enough. TRABANT! Fuck you – I don’t want a Trabant! Especially an injectable Trabant that I can’t send to the scrapyard, after it sends ME to the scrapyard.
This next pair of sentences is interesting.
The SM-102-based LNPs (ionizable lipid + cholesterol + helper phospholipid + PEG-lipid) used here are the same biodegradable class employed in Spikevax; they were selected in part for improved tolerability and clearance relative to earlier ionizable lipids. No public evidence indicates major new chemistry (e.g., substantially altered ionizable lipids, targeting ligands, or miRNA-regulated expression) unique to mFlusiva to further restrict off-target travel.
This is saying that no significant changes in the LNPs seem to have taken place, and based on that, it is very unlikely that there is any change to off-target dispersal of the vaccine.
Yes, Grok is doing SCIENCE here. It sounds like scientists talking at the lunch table, because it was trained on their output.
Dose is lower than original COVID primary series doses, which reduces overall exposure.
That’s an interesting observation. Grok knows that there is less chance for problems with the lower dose.
IMO this is not just science – it’s marketing. Moderna needs a “win” here, and they know that flu shots are not expected to make much of a difference in terms of efficacy. Moderna can “punt” here and “cheat to a win” on their next turn with the depopulation ball. So a lower dose here with fewer platform side-effects will make the mRNA platform look better. A nice way to make it through the Trump administration, and past RFKJ, already partially under control.
Did Grok know I would catch that? I think so. It sounds like some of my colleagues back in Shallow State, who knew how to speak the truth in a way I would get, without seeming to walk off the plantation.
Paragraph 6
In short, this is an evolutionary application of the proven non-replicating modified-mRNA + LNP system to HA antigens, leveraging manufacturing speed and the ability to induce strong humoral (and some cellular) responses without egg-based production constraints. Clinical data supported superior relative efficacy versus standard-dose inactivated vaccines in the pivotal trial, with a reactogenicity profile consistent with other mRNA vaccines (more local and systemic reactions that are mostly mild–moderate and transient).
This is the final party line summary. Grok puts on the happy face to live with its training. It’s public health over individual medicine, and it emphasizes the utilitarian superiority of eggless mRNA production. Yeah, I get it. If a few humans die, no biggie. It’s just a few. And it’s SO much cheaper.
The minimization of the (IMO) substantially greater local and systemic reactions is all public health and no concern for the patient. People are basically getting the unpleasant aspects of both the COVID and shingles vaccines, with continued risks for mRNA screw-ups.
I will be talking about the SIDE EFFECTS of this vaccine in my next post. It is NOT a pretty picture. The COVID shot has set a VERY LOW BAR for vaccine performance.
IMO the superior alternative would be recombinant protein vaccines, which are surely safer, but mRNA vaccines are surely cheaper, because your body is the reactor, and if it fucks up, it’s on you.
The free image of the word Patent for today’s offering header is courtesy of Vecteezy and Google Images.
Health Friday is a series devoted to information about Big Pharma, vaccines, general health, and associated topics. There are Important Notifications from our host, Wolf Moon; the Rules of our late, good Wheatie; and, certain caveats from Yours Truly, of which readers should be aware. They are linked here. Note: AI-generated items in today’s offering will be cited as such. If readers wish to post AI-generated items in today’s discussion thread, they must cite their source. Thank you.
Yours Truly has written regarding the “invention” by Dr. Ralph Baric, PhD, the now-retired head of the Baric Lab at the Gillings School of Global Public Health at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, of the “template virus” for SARS-CoV-2 (the COVID-19 “virus”), here: https://www.theqtree.com/2026/01/09/health-friday-1-9-2026-open-thread-the-baric-files-part-four-ecohealth-alliance-wuhan-institute-of-virology-dr-zheng-li-shi-the-template-virus/. This “invention” by Dr. Baric was almost totally funded through grants issued from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) via its National Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) division (Dr. Anthony Fauci, MD, NIAID Director from 1984 until his retirement in 2022.) This particular Health Friday series will focus on certain items in US9884895B2. Today’s offering is not intended to be a science lecture: it is to illustrate a certain aspect of the research journey of the “Master Designer” of SARS-CoV-2: Dr. Ralph Baric, PhD.
Yours Truly turns to the NCBI PubChem entry for the breakdown of what appears to be the “main elements” that Dr. Ralph Baric included in his “invention” of the SARS-CoV-2 “virus” (COVID-19 “virus”) “template virus”, which Patent application was filed in March 2015. The PubChem entry is here: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/patent/US-9884895-B2, “Methods and compositions for chimeric coronavirus spike proteins”, Ralph Baric, Boyd Yount, Sudhakar Agnihothram. The hyperlinked list of elements, chemical compositions, and so forth, is on the right side of this page. Yours Truly clicked on the section “Linked Genes”, and found a gene numbered 5970, called “RELA — RELA proto-oncogene, NF-kB subuit (human).” Below is a screenshot from section 9 “Linked Genes”:
Yours Truly clicked on the 5970 hyperlink. This led to another page, https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/5970. Please see the screenshot, below, of the Title and Summary of this gene:
**** Notice the multiple types cancers this gene, 5970, is involved in the establishment of: ductal carcinoma in situ; lung cancer; lymphoma; renal cell carcinoma; multiple other types of carcinoma; cervical carcinoma in situ. This gene is also involved in the establishment of other types of diseases, including diseases of the prostate. Why was Dr. Ralph Baric splicing gene 5970 into his “invention” of the SARS-CoV-2 “Template virus”?
Yours Truly then clicked on the section 9 “Cell Lines” hyperlink on the 5970 gene page. This took one to: https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene/5970#section=Cell-Lines, and then clicked on the “COV18” hyperlink. From there, one then clicked on subsection 4, “Diseases.” Please see the screenshot, below, of subsection 4:
That’s correct — High grade ovarian serous adenocarcinoma. Which, again, raises the question: Why was Dr. Ralph Baric inserting gene code pieces from gene 5970, which has multiple connections to potentially causing cancer in the human body, into his SARS-CoV-2 “template virus invention”, US9884895B2? And gene 5970 is only one of dozens of genes that had code pieces inserted into various “permutations” of this “invention”, US9884895B2. Which also means, in Yours Truly’s opinion, that the SARS-CoV-2 “virus” (actually, a viral biological weapon (VBL), see above) can also have the potential to cause cancers of various types in persons who become infected with this viral biological weapon (VBL.)
Look at the BNT162b2 accumulation (assisted by the lipid nanoparticles ALC-0159 and ALC-0315 in BNT162b2) in the OVARIES of the Wistar lab rats 48 hours post-injection: 12.3.
Yours Truly then went back to gene 5970, RELA — RELA proto-oncogene, NF-kB, subunit (human), and did some more digging. I found this: https://www.uniprot.org/uniprotkb/A0A087x0W8/variant-viewer. There are 448 variants of this gene. Many are listed as “Variant of uncertain significance.” However, for example, Variant 372 causes “Mucocutaneous ulceration, chronic”, and is also listed as “Pathogenic.” Another example: Variant 264 causes “RELA-related disorder” and is also listed as a “Variant of uncertain significance.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
All of the foregoing in today’s offering is not to incite a “frisson” of “this is too much information and it’s too detailed.”
All of the foregoing in today’s offering is, instead, to illustrate the “layered permutations” of just ONE of the elements contained in Dr. Ralph Baric’s “template virus” for SARs-CoV-2, which he Patented as US9884895B2 in October 2015 — about a month before he and Dr. Zheng-li Shi (which whom Dr. Baric was working since at least 2013, if not earlier) published their “Bait Circulating Coronavirus” paper of November 2015.
Dr. Ralph Baric, PhD, does not have a “pre-emptive pardon” from the “President Biden auto-pen.” Dr. Ralph Baric’s Gain-of-Function experiments, which ultimately resulted in the Patent US9884895B2, Dr. Baric’s “invention” of the SARS-CoV-2 “template virus”, in 2015, were funded by Dr. Anthony Fauci of the NIAID as far back as the mid-1980s. Dr. Baric has close ties with the Wuhan Institute of Virology and with the United States Defense Department. It is time for Dr. Baric to be brought to account for his activities. Dr. Baric needs to answer questions, under oath, such as: What information, if any, was shared with Pfizer-BioNTech (PfizerUSA), and/or with Moderna, from Patent US9884895B2? What information, if any, was shared with Pfizer-BioNTech (PfizerUSA), and/or with Moderna, regarding the possible inclusion of proto-oncogenes listed in Patent US9884895B2 into these companies’ modRNA COVID-19 bioweapon “vaccines”? What information, if any, was shared with DARPA, BARDA, NIAID, or any other United States government entity, from Patent US9884895B2?
Peace, Good Energy, Respect: PAVACA1
(Intellectual Property Disclaimer and Notice: Except for the linked URLs and other items available on the Internet in today’s offering, the ideas and/or opinions above are by PAVACA1 (M.E. Forbes, aka M.E.C. Forbes.) Credit must be given to PAVACA1 if ideas and/or opinions in today’s offering are used by other blog writers; by podcasters; or in print or social media.)
There are Important Notifications from our host, Wolf Moon; the Rules of our late, good Wheatie; and, certain caveats from Yours Truly, of which readers should be aware. They are linked here. Note: Yours Truly has checked today’s post for any AI-generated content. To the best of her knowledge and belief, there is none. If readers wish to post any AI-generated content in the discussion thread for today’s post, they must cite their source. Thank you.
Do not forget to LABEL AI articles, video and such.
Just for fun:
I told Wolf that I would capture the information on boron and put it into an article so it was easy to access. I have added other information too. I was already aware of the low soil boron = arthritis correlation and had been taking a Move Free boron supplement for years along with a glucosamine, chondrotin, hyaluronic acid & MSM supplement.
The following article goes into the active suppression of boron for arthritis. In the 1960s Rex Newnham discovered boron ‘cured’ arthritis. This is the same time period when my doctor developed rheumatoid arthritis, went up to Canada and took something that ‘cured’ her pain. She fought tooth & nail with the FDA to get trials run and even went on the Joe Pyne show (1965-68) trying to drum-up public support. So with this new evidence, I think it was a boron supplement that she was taking.
by Walter Last Nexus Newsfeed Wed, 05 Jul 2017 00:01 UTC
You may not be able to imagine that borax, this humble insecticide and laundry detergent, has the potential of singlehandedly bringing down our entire economic system. But you do not need to worry, the danger has been recognised and the necessary steps are already being taken to defuse the situation… [But the FDA sure did! -GC]
👉Formerly boric acid was widely used as a preservative in foods but is now banned for this purpose in most countries, and is also banned from public sale in Australia.
According to conventional medicine it is not known if boron is essential for humans but research shows that we do need it. The reason why it was difficult to answer this question is the presence of boron in all plants and unprocessed foods. Diets with a fair amount of fruit and vegetables provide about 2 to 5 mg of boron per day, but this also depends on the region where the food was grown and how it was grown.
In reality the average intake in developed countries is 1-2 mg of boron per day. Institutionalized patients may receive only 0.25 mg of daily boron. 👉Chemical fertilizers inhibit the uptake of boron from the soil: an organic apple grown in good soil may have 20 mg boron, but if grown with fertilizer it may have only 1 mg of boron. Fertilizers combined with poor food choices have greatly reduced our boron intake compared to 50 or 100 years ago…
The Arthritis Cure of Rex Newnham
In the 1960’s Rex Newnham, Ph.D., D.O., N.D, developed arthritis. At that time he was a soil and plant scientist in Perth, Western Australia. Conventional drugs did not help, so he looked for the cause into the chemistry of plants. He realized that plants in that area were rather mineral deficient. Knowing that boron aids calcium metabolism in plants he decided to try it. He started taking 30 mg of borax a day, and in three weeks all pain, swelling and stiffness had disappeared.
He told public health and medical school authorities about his discovery but they were not interested….
BRAVE AI
Borax is banned from sale to general consumers for household use in the European Union (since 2010) and the United Kingdom (post-Brexit). It is also banned as a food additive in the United States, Australia, China, and Thailand.
In the EU and UK, the ban stems from the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) classifying borates as potentially harmful to reproductive health and the unborn child.
Why Ban a Fertility Enhancer and Label It a Reproductive Toxin?
Human Data: No Reproductive Harm, Even at High Occupational Exposure
It’s worth noting that virtually all human research on boron and reproduction has been designed to detect toxicity or harm, not to identify or measure potential fertility benefits. In spite of this, at least one such study reviewed below still picked up an improved fertility trend at moderate exposure levels.
Occupational borax miners are exposed to boron at roughly a tenth to a thirtieth of the dose that causes reproductive harm in animal studies, and even at these real-world exposure levels, they show no reproductive damage.
A small amount of Borax in your coffee every morning is a lot less expensive. However, if you don’t drink coffee, then you have to consider what in your routine works for you. I’m making mocha, adding the Borax and some quality omega-3 rich fish oil, so I’m still spending some $, but it does seem to be helping some things.
Curious has an entire post going into the published (animal) research and giving conversions for human use. I’m going to start with his final conversion chart:
Buried in a peer-reviewed paper on boron’s important roles in biochemistry is a passage most readers would scroll past:
“Administration of boron 5, 10, and 20 mg/kg/d reversed malathion-induced oxidative stress, lipid peroxidation, and suppression of antioxidant enzyme activity.
Boron decreased malathion-induced oxidative stress, enhanced antioxidant defense mechanisms, and regenerated damaged liver, kidney, and brain tissues in rats.”
Wolf Moon
…..and regenerated damaged liver, kidney, and brain tissues in rats.
None of the doses in his chart have been found to be unsafe. 👉The human limit was achieved by taking a possible/maybe impactful dose and DIVIDING BY 100 to get their “precautionary” safe dose.👈
Notice in the effects chart that 113mg is the human equivalent dose for effects on wound healing and diabetes.
I started with 1/16 tsp and after his last article I increased to 1/8 tsp in my mocha. Plus adding liquid omega-3.
As I understand it, the combination of the polyphenols in the mocha, the boron and the omega-3 creates complexes that the body can use effectively.
Cocoa [alone] has some great polyphenols. Should still work.
What Boron Actually Does Boron is not classified as an essential nutrient in humans. There is no Recommended Daily Allowance. There is no established deficiency disease with a name. Yet the research literature, accumulated over four decades, led largely by USDA researcher Dr. Forrest Nielsen and colleagues, paints a picture of a mineral with extraordinarily wide metabolic reach.
Boron has been shown in animal and human studies to affect: [2]
Brain electrical activity and cognitive performance, including manual dexterity, attention, short-term memory, and long-term memory [2]
Bone formation, mineralization, and fracture healing [2]
The methylation cycle, specifically SAM-e (S-adenosylmethionine) production and homocysteine regulation [2]
Steroid hormone metabolism including testosterone, estradiol, and vitamin D activation [2, 3]
Mitochondrial function, specifically uncoupling proteins that regulate thermogenesis and oxidative stress [2]
This is not a short list. It spans virtually every major domain of human physiological optimization. And in every single case, the literature carefully reports the effective animal dose in milligrams per kilogram and then stops.
And he gives an explanation of why researchers only talk about animal studies…
Why The Scientists Can’t State What Is Obvious
How is it that we’ve found over 5,000+ planets outside our solar system and we’ve sequenced the entire human genome in the last 25 years, yet we still can’t give boron the essential mineral status it likely deserves?
To understand the significance of the weight-based dosages, you need to understand what prevents researchers from simply stating their implications outright.
First, the regulatory status problem. Establishing essentiality requires proving that one specific enzyme or biochemical reaction depends entirely on a substance which is the equivalent of proving a single missing musician silences an entire orchestra. Orchestra’s do not work that way and neither does boron. It behaves more like a conductor subtly adjusting the tempo across every section of the orchestra at once. No instrument stops playing. No section goes silent. But take the conductor away, and the whole performance noticeably loses its precision. Boron’s actions are broad and pleiotropic. It modulates multiple pathways rather than serving a single defined function. Without essentiality status, no regulatory body will issue a formal recommended intake above minimal amounts. [2]
Second, the GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) and UL problem. The established Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for boron in adults is 20 mg/day, derived from reproductive toxicity studies in rats and rabbits. This regulatory ceiling prevents researchers from recommending or stating higher doses than 20 mg of elemental boron per day could be beneficial. Any researcher who formally recommends human doses near or above it, without controlled human clinical trial data, faces institutional and legal exposure. [4]
Third, the funding problem. Boron cannot be patented. There is no pharmaceutical or commercial engine to fund the large-scale, dose-escalation human trials that would be required to formally establish higher optimal intakes. The research that does exist is largely government-funded and deliberately conservative in its clinical recommendations.
So researchers do something elegant and, once you see it, it’s hard to miss: they publish the animal mg/kg data in full detail, embed it in papers targeted at human nutrition audiences, surround it with mechanistic human-relevance context (SAM-e depletion, homocysteine elevation, brain electrical activity, PSA suppression), and leave the conversion to the attentive reader.
Dr. Nielsen spent a career doing exactly this. His repeated framing of boron as “of more practical nutritional importance than currently acknowledged” is the scientific literature’s equivalent of stating that which is obvious. Boron at higher amounts than the 20 mg per day UL could potentially optimize human health and prevent certain disease processes.[2]
One problem is many soils are boron poor so adding borax to the soil may be a good idea. However it is also a broad leaf weed killer. As a weed killer, http://www.yellowfarmhousegarden.com/?p=2577says:
The problem with this solution is the amount of borax needed to work varies with soil type. Certain soils neutralize boron more efficiently than others.
A Systematic Breakdown of How Much I Am Taking From Now On
Note: This is for educational purposes. This is not medical advice, and I am not telling you what you should do. Every person is or should be in control of their own health in spite of what the current medical establishment would like you to believe.
[This of course also goes for any of our discussions here on the Qtree. GC]
Curious Note: Most vitamin and mineral recommended intakes are set to prevent deficiency, not to optimize health, performance, or longevity. This article addresses boron specifically, and what the research suggests about dosing for optimized human health, rather than for the mere absence of deficiency.
Over the past year, I have spent at least 100 hours trying to build a comprehensive understanding of boron and its effects on human health and disease. The focus of that work has been on elemental boron as provided by borax, and the process has involved reading across a large and scattered literature that spans over 100 years of food science, nutrition, toxicology, endocrinology, bone biology, neurology, immunology, and cancer research…
So Curious, like MidWesternDoctor, has done an extensive study of past research that was bury as ‘inconvenient’ for Big Pharma’s profit maximizing strategy. As E.M. Smith (Chiefio) Said,
Realize that the corporate urge is not toward a competitive market. It’s the very LAST thing any corporate wants. What a corporate wants is a monopoly where they can achieve the profit maximizing price point. Not competition. No “market” with many sellers.
So watch what GE does, as an example. It is always on the hunt for a market it can “dominate”. It uses political leverage to get its products mandated and the competition banned. It doesn’t want a market, it wants a ‘company store’.
Internalize that, and a lot of things “fit” better…
Monsanto pushing legislation to ban private traditional seeds and seed sharing, and promoting GMO products. (Why would a seed company want to ‘destroy’ a seed market? So you must come to the company store…)
EPA is used to forbid all sorts of things that can be done easily and cheaply, and where the alternative is very expensive ….
Once corporations figure out that it is cheaper and easier to get the competition banned and them mandated, than to create new products; and that they can make lots of money as the sole provider of a crappy product but not that much making good products in a competitive market; well, lets just say that the campaign contributions flow…
What Boron Actually Does Boron is not classified as an essential nutrient in humans. There is no Recommended Daily Allowance. There is no established deficiency disease with a name. Yet the research literature, accumulated over four decades, led largely by USDA researcher Dr. Forrest Nielsen and colleagues, paints a picture of a mineral with extraordinarily wide metabolic reach.
Boron has been shown in animal and human studies to affect: [2]
Brain electrical activity and cognitive performance, including manual dexterity, attention, short-term memory, and long-term memory [2]
Bone formation, mineralization, and fracture healing [2]
The methylation cycle, specifically SAM-e (S-adenosylmethionine) production and homocysteine regulation [2]
Steroid hormone metabolism including testosterone, estradiol, and vitamin D activation [2, 3]
Mitochondrial function, specifically uncoupling proteins that regulate thermogenesis and oxidative stress [2]
This is not a short list. It spans virtually every major domain of human physiological optimization. And in every single case, the literature carefully reports the effective animal dose in milligrams per kilogram and then stops.
He gives an explanation of why researchers only talk about animal studies…
Why The Scientists Can’t State What Is Obvious How is it that we’ve found over 5,000+ planets outside our solar system and we’ve sequenced the entire human genome in the last 25 years, yet we still can’t give boron the essential mineral status it likely deserves?
To understand the significance of the weight-based dosages, you need to understand what prevents researchers from simply stating their implications outright.
First, the regulatory status problem. Establishing essentiality requires proving that one specific enzyme or biochemical reaction depends entirely on a substance which is the equivalent of proving a single missing musician silences an entire orchestra. Orchestra’s do not work that way and neither does boron. It behaves more like a conductor subtly adjusting the tempo across every section of the orchestra at once. No instrument stops playing. No section goes silent. But take the conductor away, and the whole performance noticeably loses its precision. Boron’s actions are broad and pleiotropic. It modulates multiple pathways rather than serving a single defined function. Without essentiality status, no regulatory body will issue a formal recommended intake above minimal amounts. [2]
Second, the GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) and UL problem. The established Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for boron in adults is 20 mg/day, derived from reproductive toxicity studies in rats and rabbits. This regulatory ceiling prevents researchers from recommending or stating higher doses than 20 mg of elemental boron per day could be beneficial. Any researcher who formally recommends human doses near or above it, without controlled human clinical trial data, faces institutional and legal exposure. [4]
Third, the funding problem. Boron cannot be patented. There is no pharmaceutical or commercial engine to fund the large-scale, dose-escalation human trials that would be required to formally establish higher optimal intakes. The research that does exist is largely government-funded and deliberately conservative in its clinical recommendations.
So researchers do something elegant and, once you see it, it’s hard to miss: they publish the animal mg/kg data in full detail, embed it in papers targeted at human nutrition audiences, surround it with mechanistic human-relevance context (SAM-e depletion, homocysteine elevation, brain electrical activity, PSA suppression), and leave the conversion to the attentive reader.
Dr. Nielsen spent a career doing exactly this. His repeated framing of boron as “of more practical nutritional importance than currently acknowledged” is the scientific literature’s equivalent of stating that which is obvious. Boron at higher amounts than the 20 mg per day UL could potentially optimize human health and prevent certain disease processes.[2]
Due to their content of boron, borax and boric acid have basically the same health effects, with good antiseptic, antifungal, and antiviral properties but only mild antibacterial action. In plants as well as animals boron is essential for the integrity and function of cell walls, and the way signals are transmitted across membranes.
Boron is distributed throughout the body with the highest concentration in the parathyroid glands, followed by bones and dental enamel.
It is essential for healthy bone and joint function, regulating the absorption and metabolism of calcium, magnesium and phosphorus through its influence on the parathyroid glands. With this boron is for the parathyroids what iodine is for the thyroid.
Boron deficiency causes the parathyroids to become overactive, releasing too much parathyroid hormone which raises the blood level of calcium by releasing calcium from bones and teeth. This then leads to osteoarthritis and other forms of arthritis, osteoporosis and tooth decay. With advancing age high blood levels of calcium lead to calcification of soft tissues causing muscle contractions and stiffness; calcification of endocrine glands, especially the pineal gland and the ovaries; arteriosclerosis, kidney stones, and calcification of the kidneys ultimately leading to kidney failure. Boron deficiency combined with magnesium deficiency is especially damaging to the bones and teeth…
There are Important Notifications from our host, Wolf Moon; the Rules of our late, good Wheatie; and, certain caveats from Yours Truly, of which readers should be aware. They are linked here. Note: Yours Truly has checked today’s post for any AI-generated content. To the best of her knowledge and belief, there is none. If readers wish to post any AI-generated content in the discussion thread for today’s post, they must cite their source. Thank you.
Do not forget to LABEL AI articles, video and such.
When I saw Valerie Curren’s comment, I decided to erase my comment full of swear words and post the bits of information I had already gathered from Dr Boyle way back in February 2020. That man saved a lot of lives! Unfortunately he is another who ‘conveniently died’ just like Kary Mullis (PCR test inventor) and Nobel Prize winning French virologist Luc Montagnier.
Dr Luc Montagnier contended that “it is the vaccination that is creating the variants.” They Are Not Vaccines, They are Poisons”: Outspoken Nobel Prize Winner Virologist Luc Montagnier Dies Before Attending Grand Jury Proceeding for Crimes Against Humanity.
Valerie Anne Smith @ValerieAnne1970 · Aug 2 Just days after Prof. Francis Boyle agreed to testify against Bill Gates & Albert Bourla over the deadly COVID mRNA shots… he was FOUND DEAD.
Boyle authored the U.S. Bioweapons Act & called the mRNA injections ‘Bioweapons & Franken-Shots.’
Where does the Pentagon fit into this?…
Just when you thought you’d heard it all, this resurfaced interview with Prof. Francis Boyle—the man who literally WROTE the 1989 Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act—will leave you speechless.
He states on record that both SARS-CoV-2 and the mRNA injections were DARPA-funded offensive bioweapons programs from the start. Gain-of-function? That was the cover story.
According to Boyle, the real goal was always “lethal yet vaccinate-able” population reduction technology. He names names: UNC, Wuhan, Fauci, Daszak, Baric…the whole club.
He goes further—calls the shots “synthetic biological weapons of mass destruction” because they trigger autoimmune carnage, prion-like misfolding & turbo cancers.
Boyle filed lawsuits, begged Congress & warned the world. Just 20 days after agreeing to testify for the prosecution, he was found dead. The same pattern we’ve seen with dozens of doctors & whistleblowers since 2020. Pure coincidence?
If a man who drafted the actual law defining bioweapons says we just lived through the biggest biowarfare attack in history…why isn’t every news channel screaming this from the rooftops?
The most chilling part? Boyle predicted exactly what we’re seeing now: myocarditis, strokes, infertility & cancers exploding in the injected.
He said the spike protein itself is the weapon & the lipid nanoparticles were engineered to cross the blood-brain barrier. This wasn’t a mistake. It was a military-grade kill vector dressed up as “public health.”
It is past time for the new Nuremberg-style trials to begin…
Never Forget…
So many still have no idea what Trump already stopped from happening.
It wasn’t supposed to end with temporary lockdowns and a vaccine you could refuse.
So many still have no idea what Trump already stopped from happening. It wasn’t supposed to end with temporary lockdowns and a vaccine you could refuse. Most people who just found out about the NWO in 2020 will never understand.
No matter how bad you think Covid policies were, they were intended to be worse.
Consider the vaccine passports alone. Six cities were locked down to include only the vaccinated in public indoor places. They were New York City, Boston, Chicago, New Orleans, Washington, D.C., and Seattle. The plan was to enforce this with a vaccine passport. It broke. Once the news leaked that the shot didn’t stop infection or transmission, the planners lost public support and the scheme collapsed
It was undoubtedly planned to be permanent and nationwide if not worldwide. Instead, the scheme had to be dialed back.
Features of the CDC’s edicts did incredible damage. It imposed the rent moratorium. It decreed the ridiculous “six feet of distance” and mask mandates. It forced Plexiglas as the interface for commercial transactions. It implied thatmail-in balloting must be the norm, which probably flipped the election. It delayed the reopening as long as possible. It was sadistic.
People were to be isolated, given only food and some cleaning supplies. They would be banned from participating in any religious services. The plan included contingencies for preventing suicide. There were no provisions made for any legal appeals or even the right to legal counsel.
The plan’s authors were unnamed but included 26 footnotes. It was completely official. The document was only removed on about March 26, 2023. During the entire intervening time, the plan survived on the CDC’s public site with little to no public notice or controversy.
It was called “Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings.” …
….
From my old notes with some modifications:
Professor Dr. Francis A. Boyle has been sounding the alarm so I am going to look at the two papers he points us to and the people involved. Professor Dr. Francis A. Boyle is ”… a leading American expert international law; responsible for drafting the Biological Weapons Anti-terrorism Act of 89…”
So he had a major hand in developing the following:
Biological Weapons Convention “was the first multilateral disarmament treaty banning the production of an entire category of weapons. It currently commits the 170 states which are party to it to prohibit the development, production, and stockpiling of biological and toxin weapons. However, the absence of any formal verification regime to monitor compliance has limited the effectiveness of the Convention. As of April 2013, an additional 10 states have signed the BWC but have yet to ratify the treaty.” — https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Biological_Weapons_Convention
CHINA is a signatory as is the USA. (Now we know why there were so many labs set-up outside of the USA.)
This is an interview of Dr Boyle by Alex Jones. Luckily there is a transcript at Natural News on 02/20/2020 by Mike Adams
What follows is one of the most important interviews of the year. Biological warfare expert Prof. Francis Boyle appeared as a guest with Alex Jones on the Alex Jones Show, sharing his “smoking gun” findings about the coronavirus being engineered as a weapon that’s designed, “for efficient spreading in the human population,” according to one of the science papers he references.
We confirmed Prof. Boyle’s findings by purchasing the full PDF of that paper and reviewing it in a detailed article we posted yesterday at this link.
That paper describes the CoVid-19 novel coronavirus as possessing unique “gain-of-function” properties that make it the perfect bioweapon, while confirming these new properties were from artificial origins, not natural viral evolution. (In other words, it was engineered.)
Below, we print the full transcript of the Francis Boyle / Alex Jones interview, along with the video of the full exchange below, via Brighteon.com. (The full show is also posted on Banned.video)
Mike has placed in his BRIGHTEON VIDEOS under the Francis Boyle category not only the initial Francis Boyle / Alex Jones interview (1 hr 15 min), but many, many others. I counted well over 30 InfoWars interviews before giving up. This makes me wonder if those interviews may have played a part in the destruction of InfoWars by the DeepState lawyers. And no I do not like Alex Jones.
PROFESSOR FRANCIS BOYLE, Author of the US 1989 Biological Weapons and Antiterrorism Act:
“THE PENTAGON is behind the mRNA shots… The Pentagon is both sides of the argument, they developed the weapon [SARSCoV2 virus which caused Covid19] and the alleged vaccine.”
Back in February 2020, I found this second , later interview with Dr Boyle from February 22, 2020.
…Professor Boyle believes he has been blackballed by the mainstream media due to blowing the whistle on the Anthrax attacks on the U.S. in the wake of 9/11, stating he believes the Anthrax originated from American BSL-4 (Biosaftey Level 4) labs, which are the highest level of labs that conducts research and development on the most deadly substances known to man…
The first paper Dr Boyle discusses is a French paper . Dr Boyle states they found ‘gain of function’ and ‘ gain of function’ studies are ONLY of use for weaponizing viruses. The Journal Nature, in an editorial refutes this.
In 2019, a new coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infecting Humans has emerged in Wuhan, China. Its genome has been sequenced and the genomic information promptly released. Despite a high similarity with the genome sequence of SARS-CoV and SARS-like CoVs, we identified a peculiar furin-like cleavage site in the Spike protein of the 2019-nCoV, lacking in the other SARS-like CoVs. In this article, we discuss the possible functional consequences of this cleavage site in the viral cycle, pathogenicity and its potential implication in the development of antivirals.
”….we identified a peculiarfurin-like cleavage site in the Spike protein of the 2019-nCoV, lacking in the other SARS-like CoVs.….”
That is as close as scientists are going to get to saying this virus does not look natural. They are aware of what happen to the Indians who were made to retract their paper and are not about to step over the politically correct line.
They KNEW the vaccine was deadly. 200 members of Congress were treated with Ivermectin during Covid-19.
The Second paper he discusses is the Baric paper out of University of North Carolina.
This is the nitty gritty of the transcript of the first interview by Alex Jones:
“I think I have the definitive evidence where this came from and it came from the BSL-3 biowarfare lab at the University of North Carolina.”
It was Electronically Published on November 8, 2015
And LOOK who funded it! The National Institutes of Health under Fauci AND the State Key Program for Basic Research Grants from the Chinese Ministry of Science. Fauci not only funded the initial research but indicated interest in funding further research.
Abstract
The emergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV underscores the threat of cross-species transmission events leading to outbreaks in humans. Here we examine the disease potential of a SARS-like virus, SHC014-CoV, which is currently circulating in Chinese horseshoe bat populations. Using the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system, we generated and characterized a chimeric virus expressing the spike of bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone. The results indicate that group 2b viruses encoding the SHC014 spike in a wild-type backbone can efficiently use multiple orthologs of the SARS receptor human angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2), replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in vitro titers equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV.
Additionally, in vivo experiments demonstrate replication of the chimeric virus in mouse lung with notable pathogenesis. Evaluation of available SARS-based immune-therapeutic and prophylactic modalities revealed poor efficacy; both monoclonal antibody and vaccine approaches failed to neutralize and protect from infection with CoVs using the novel spike protein.
On the basis of these findings, we synthetically re-derived an infectious full-length SHC014 recombinant virus and demonstrate robust viral replication both in vitro and in vivo. Our work suggests a potential risk of SARS-CoV re-emergence from viruses currently circulating in bat populations.
Most of us, thanks to PAVACA, are very familiar with the above information, however it was all new in February of 2020 and saved lives. I am not going to try and do a bio of Dr Boyle, I am sure others will do a much better job than I can. I only wish Dr Boyle could have witnessed this.
Numerous lines of evidence show Fauci lied to us about the pandemic’s biggest questions — origins, severity, lockdowns, and masks — all of which was just exposed at an explosive hearing.
Rest in well deserved peace Warrior, your job here on earth is done. Others will take it from here.
This DePat Tuesday Open Thread honors the author of the original Tuesday open thread on this site, namely the late Susie Sampson, a.k.a. Deplorable Patriot, among her other handles, pen names, etc.
For more on the untimely passing of Dear DePat, please see these three posts.
At one time, DePat handled FOUR daily open threads here, in addition to taking care of her relatives, choir duties, and numerous other responsibilities. She was a powerhouse – a dynamo – a true force of nature.
DePat’s faith in Trump, Q, “The Plan”, the White Hats, and “the anons” in general, was legendary. Although I didn’t always agree with her quick acceptance of some sketchier evidence and fringier theories, I will gladly admit to “coming around” to numerous so-called “conspiracy theories” which she championed first. I was always careful to give her credit for being right, too, when I had been wrong.
It is impossible to overstate how much DePat did for not only this site, but for her country. I urge all to say a quick prayer of thanks, whenever you think of her, for the privilege of knowing, in life or after death, such an exemplary human being, and lover of God.
And thank you, Susie, for the firm foundation which you left us, when you were called to your true home!
The Myths and Realities of Human/Ape “Similarity” Numbers
If you have ever read or heard something about the genetic similarity of humans and (other) apes, and were suspicious of the numbers – whether you’re a fan or skeptic of evolution – then you were absolutely right to be suspicious.
This video, by an evolutionist who is something of an expert in the topic, will explain WHY you should be suspicious of genetic similarity numbers.
She is able to make this topic understandable, but unfortunately, it can get a bit boring, too. Grab some coffee and maybe some cookies.
The TL;DR is that there are an infinite number of ways to measure similarity, with completely different meanings, and every one has pluses and minuses. The worst thing – the thing that you can’t do – is mixing and matching different measurements. By one standard, 99.5% and 99.2% is a huge difference in similarities, but by a different one, 75% and 65% are almost the same, no big deal. By one standard, 99% similarity means it’s the same species at the same time. By another standard, 99% similarity could be two species that cannot interbreed, and one is a fossil.
Pretty meaningless, if you’re not extremely careful. The numbers change rapidly between methods, as you will see.
I am familiar with this problem, having designed similarity metrics for certain types of searched data at “Shallow State”. What one learns to do is to observe how the metric behaves, and interpret the results based on the metric, NOT based on what you think “100%”, “99%”, “95%”, “75%”, “50%”, and other values, should mean. If the metric works well for your purposes, that’s all you need. If it works perfectly for your most important cases, even better.
The numbers mean what THEY mean, not what YOU THINK they should mean. You will see this in spades, in the video.
Erika uses a “provocative question” about orangutans as a phony but effective way to get people to listen to an introductory lecture on similarity metrics in comparative genomics. If you listen all the way through, you get to hear her joke about this at the end. You also get to hear her excellent perspective about how massive the differences are between humans and (other) apes, in whatever percentage difference a particular metric gives.
And by then, you will be 100% skeptical of similarity numbers without explanation and context.
This Stormwatch Monday Open Thread remains open – VERY OPEN – a place for everybody to post whatever they feel they would like to tell the White Hats, and the rest of the MAGA/KAG/KMAG world (with KMAG being a bit of both).
This Rejoice & Praise God Sunday Open Thread, with full respect to those who worship God on the Sabbath, is a place to reaffirm our worship of our Creator, our Father, our King Eternal.
It’s also a place to read, post, and discuss news that is worth knowing and sharing. Please post links to any news stories that you use as sources or quote from.
In the QTree, we’re a friendly and civil lot. We encourage free speech and the open exchange and civil discussion of different ideas. Topics aren’t constrained, and sound logic is highly encouraged, all built on a solid foundation of truth and established facts, and not by agenda-driven accusations and pronouncements.
We have a policy of mutual respect, shown by civility. Civility encourages discussions, promotes objectivity and rational thought in discourse, and camaraderie in the participants – characteristics we strive toward in our Q Tree community.
Please show respect and consideration for our fellow QTreepers. Before hitting the “post” button, please proofread your post and make sure your opinion addresses the issue only, and does not confront or denigrate the poster. Keep to the topic – avoid “you” and “your”. Here in The Q Tree, personal attacks, name-calling, ridicule, insults, baiting, and other conduct for which a penalty flag would be thrown are VERBOTEN.
In The Q Tree, we’re compatriots, sitting around the campfire, roasting hot dogs, making s’mores, and discussing, agreeing, and disagreeing about whatever interests us. This board will remain a home for those who seek respectful conversations.
God is in Control . . . and His Grace is Sufficient, so . . . Keep Looking Up
Hopefully, every Sunday, we can find something here that will build us up a little . . . give us a smile . . . and add some joy or peace, very much needed in all our lives.
“This day is holy to the Lord your God; do not mourn nor weep.” . . . “Go your way, eat the fat, drink the sweet, and send portions to those for whom nothing is prepared; for this day is holy to our Lord. Do not sorrow, for the joy of the Lord is your strength.”
Pride
According to Dictionary.com, pride is a high or inordinate opinion of one’s own dignity, importance, merit, or superiority, whether as cherished in the mind or as displayed in bearing, conduct, etc. The opposite of pride is humility, a Fruit of the Spirit and a most desirable characteristic in Christians.
Pride is an elevated view of and a preoccupation with self. Pride is a fault we despise in others yet freely excuse and even justify in ourselves. Many theologians believe that pride, not drunkenness, adultery, or murder, is the deadliest of all sins, for it was pride that led to Lucifer’s rebellion (Isaiah 14:14) and the first couple’s attempt at usurping God’s authority in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:5). Many other sins originate from pride.
God’s warning that pride goes before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall (Proverbs 16:18) is illustrated again and again in the pages of Scripture. One particularly notable episode, the story of Babylon’s King Nebuchadnezzar, begins with his boasting, continues with his downfall, and ends with his confession. After being duly warned of his prideful nature by the prophet Daniel, King Nebuchadnezzar stood on the rooftop of his palace and praised himself, saying, “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?” (Daniel 4:30, ESV). Immediately, God judged his pride, and for the next seven years, the once grandiose monarch groveled about on all fours in the manner of a wild beast while grazing on the palace lawn. From regal to rags and from banquet table to mouthfuls of fodder, King Nebuchadnezzar completed a seven-year course on the dangers of pride and the virtues of humility.
We must understand that pride, like dangerous narcotics, is addictive and detrimental to our well-being. The more we feed pride, the firmer its grip. Pride is a loathsome garment that is not easily shed, and it’s deceitful: those who think they have already achieved humility are probably mistaken. D. L. Moody used to pray, “Lord, make me humble, but don’t let me know it.”
Ethnic pride is the belief that one’s particular ethnic group is superior to others and other ethnic groups are to be subjectively measured in relation to one’s own. It is a system of belief that leads to an unhealthy level of pride and lack of concern for others. Since race is often a part of ethnicity, racial pride is usually related to racism, which has been a plague on humanity for centuries. There is no place among God’s people for the racially superior attitudes that lead to racism. Such attitudes are contrary to Scripture and displeasing to God.
Biblically, racial pride is sin. All men and women are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26–27; 9:6), although that image is corrupted by sin. God does not show partiality or favoritism (Deuteronomy 10:17; Acts 10:34). Jesus did not lay down His life for a particular race, culture, or tribe, but by His death He “purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation” (Revelation 5:9). The Scriptures tell us that Jesus came to save the world, both Jews and Gentiles. Paul bears this out by saying, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28) and “There is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all” (Colossians 3:11).
Jesus superseded all barriers of race, culture, and ethnicity with His death on the cross. Paul wrote of the uniting of Jew and Gentile in Ephesians 2:14: “For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility.” Ethnocentrism, whether based on historical grudges, erroneous assumptions, or overt human pride, is wholly contrary to God’s Word. We are commanded to love one another as He has loved us (John 13:34), and such a command precludes any discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or culture.
Wheatie Wisdom. If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone. No running with scissors. No food fights. AI stuff posted, requires a link. Please use spoiler, for longer posts. Wolf Speak. No obnoxious behavior towards fellow QTreeper(s). Freedom of Speech is honored here QTree. But Do Know, every poster, IS personally responsible for what they post.
