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).
And yes, it’s Monday…again.
But we WILL get through it!
We will always remember Wheatie,
Pray for Trump,
Yet have fun,
and HOLD ON when things get crazy!
We will follow the RULES of civility that Wheatie left for us:
Wheatie’s Rules:
- No food fights.
- No running with scissors.
- If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone.
And while we engage in vigorous free speech, we will remember Wheatie’s advice on civility, non-violence, and site unity:
“We’re on the same side here so let’s not engage in friendly fire.”
“Let’s not give the odious Internet Censors a reason to shut down this precious haven that Wolf has created for us.”
If this site gets shut down, please remember various ways to get back in touch with the rest of the gang:
- Our backup site, The Q Tree 579486807, https://theqtree579486807.wordpress.com/
- Our old alternative site, The U Tree, where civility is not a requirement
- Our Gab Group, which is located at https://gab.com/groups/4178
- Our various sister sites, listed in the Blogroll in the sidebar
Our beloved country is STILL under DIRECT THREATS by hostile forces – notably COMMUNISTS – and they’re HERE IN AMERICA.
Daily outrage and commie phuckery still abound.
We can give in to despair…or we can be defiant and fight back in any way that we can.
Commies won’t win!
And we will keep saying COMMIES OUT until we get their FRAUD and INSANITY out of our country!
THE STUFF
Let’s Talk About Virus, Vaccine, and Protein Shedding
I have noticed something very interesting about the “shedding” phenomenon.
The “vaxxes can do no wrong” side doesn’t like to talk about shedding. They don’t bring shedding up, and they frequently change the subject when an argument about shedding gets started.
It’s easy to dismiss “shedding” as a conspiracy theory, but once one sees actual Pfizer documentation on the topic (link now dead, curiously), the reality of “shedding” in the vaccine world hits one square in the face. Media shills for vaccines may be crowing on TV that “shedding” is all a big lie, but when the vaccine manufacturer is testing the vaccine, suddenly it’s the greatest danger of the study, and test participants find themselves separated if not isolated from spouses, infants, relatives and friends. Yet another reason people cannot stand the lying fake news media.
The most disingenuous current deflection of the problem in vaccines, is that the FDA has a HUGE concern with the shedding of “gene therapy” products – which often use mRNA in lipid nanoparticles – but then says that it’s not a problem in mRNA vaccines because they’re not classified as gene therapy products. Robert Malone has always been highly critical of this teenager-level dodge of responsibility, and frankly I think anybody involved in that scandal needs to be fired from government and possibly prosecuted for fraud. It’s the same weak chutzpah as the 17-year-old murderer of his parents, demanding first leniency as an orphan, and then prosecution as a juvenile, when the initial lunacy doesn’t prevail.
I recall the first time I read documentation of how shedding of a vaccine was to be guarded against in a major vaccine clinical trial, by significant restrictions of the participants from close contact with other people during the observation period.
“So – you mean shedding is REAL?” Oh yes. It’s real. The FDA has always had significant discussions of it. The big question is this – what is being shed? THAT makes all the difference.
Shedding of Viruses
Shedding of a virus – why – that’s just DISEASE. Communicable disease. We are all familiar with THAT.
Well, vaccines can be a virus – including weakened and incompletely deactivated viruses. It can even be a normal but less pathogenic virus, like cowpox, used as a literal vaccine against a more dangerous virus like smallpox. A weak but “live” virus may be difficult to transmit, but in many cases, transmission is still possible.
Shedding of a virus per se is the most potentially dangerous form of shedding, but it’s also the most well-known, and the easiest to understand. A limited number of viral particles is all that is necessary to start a disease in a new host. Being a victim of viral shedding is literally catching a disease. This is reality – something that happens all the time with common colds and influenza-like diseases (ILIs). Catching a shed virus is vaccination against catching the exact same form again – but not against sufficiently mutated forms. We are familiar with THAT from COVID-19.
So when people catch a communicable viral disease, they catch a shed virus, start constructing the virus, and then shed the virus again. Simple, and very real. But the outcome of viral infection is very uncertain, and that unpredictability ends up being a liability of using sheddable viruses as vaccines.
There is a reason I’m harping on this form of shedding. One needs to keep shedding of vaccine in perspective with the more dangerous, more likely, and more consequential shedding of virus. If you suddenly experience symptoms of a disease, including symptoms of the protein produced by that disease, then it is far more likely that you are a victim of shedding of the actual virus, than shedding of the vaccine. This is a simple reality, which I believe has led many patriots, including Deplorable Patriot, astray, in losing focus on relative risks. It is important to keep ALL forms of shedding in mind.
Shedding of Proteins
At the other end of danger, is the shedding of viral proteins, but not the virus itself. Let’s consider that.
Viral proteins can’t reproduce, but they CAN show all the bad properties of other nasty, dangerous, pathogenic proteins.
For example, the spike proteins of corona viruses are notoriously pathogenic, and when they are administered to test animals in an aerosol, they create immediate pulmonary disease, and can even kill the test animals. Yes, it’s shocking.
Example: https://faseb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1096/fasebj.2021.35.S1.04183
Still not convinced that a small amount of “shed” protein can be dangerous? Let’s talk about snake venoms.
Snake venoms are mostly dangerous because of pathogenic proteins, and these proteins are often very similar to bacterial or viral proteins, or arthropod venoms, as well as powerful digestive enzymes.
The thing is – and you likely didn’t know this – venomous snakes “shed” not only their skin, but also their VENOM. That fact is why people who care for venomous reptiles need to wear gloves and respirators when they clean cages. Shake venom gets into the cage dust, and cleaning it out exposes workers to skin and respiratory dangers pretty much like test animals breathing corona virus spike proteins in an aerosol.
So, again, shedding of pathogenic proteins can be real.
The only questions are, what viral protein is it, how is one being exposed to it, and how much of it is one being exposed to.
I’ve discussed this in the past, when we talked about the possibility of shed spike protein having the potency to cause symptoms in a person being shed upon. You can refresh yourself with the discussion in the following post and other linked posts here.
Or this one…..
But if you go a bit too far and think that maybe they’re putting snake venom in the water supply, take a look here…..
How much exposure to pathogenic protein is allowable? That is a HUGE question – and between the extremes of total neglect and total fear, lies something called “exposure and immunity”. Including “natural immunity”. We’ll return to that topic later.
Shedding of Vaccines
In between the shedding of intact viruses, and the shedding of viral proteins, lies an intermediate possibility – the shedding of what in nature are called “virus-like particles”, or what in medicine are called “lipid nanoparticles”.
These are mRNA or DNA enclosed in something like a lipid nanoparticle, or the outer shell of a different virus.
These are, bluntly, mRNA vaccines.
In terms of both danger and safety, lipid nanoparticle vaccines are intermediate between live viral vaccines (always dangerous, IMO) and protein vaccines (least dangerous, IMO). Why is this? Well, bluntly, viruses propagate as a chain reaction, and have very little control over outcome. In contrast, a metered amount of a dead protein has great control over the outcome. mRNA vaccines are in between. They don’t reproduce, but they do create a greater but unpredictable amount of viral protein.
Pierre Kory has a very nice article about vaccine shedding, which I invite you to read.
LINK: Shedding of COVID mRNA Vaccines
By the time you finish that, you will understand that there is some need to address this issue now.
As a bit of an aside, you should note that Cory is AGAINST the use of nicotine patches for treatment of spike protein toxicosis, believing (as I do) that it probably has far more risks than benefits. This is highly relevant for DePat’s case.
Technical Approaches to Prevention of Shedding Injury
It is my belief that any good method to deal with both mRNA vaccine shedding and corresponding protein shedding should have the following characteristics.
- Prevention is preferred to treatment
- Treatment can be separate from prevention
- Earlier is better for both prevention and treatment
- Vaccine is more dangerous than protein, and is thus a priority
The final point needs some explanation.
While the protein can be dangerous at high enough levels, one of the greatest dangers of the vaccine is that it produces large quantities of the protein, and is thus automatically orders of magnitude more dangerous than the protein alone. This is not even considering the dangers of the mRNA technology itself.
Destroy the mRNA vaccine, and there is no protein made, nor any mRNA mechanism allowed to function badly.
Thus, targeting the shed vaccine FIRST makes sense.
THAT makes things easy, because the vaccine can be destroyed easily, provided that it has not yet entered the body.
The mRNA vaccines utilize lipid nanoparticles (a.k.a. liposomes) to enter cells. While these little particles are exceedingly dangerous at a cellular level, they have an intrinsic weakness – their easy destructibility by surfactants – meaning soaps and other cleaning agents.
I posed a research question to Grok, regarding this approach, and got a VERY satisfactory answer.
THE QUESTION
Grok, please give me a list of substances (ranging from specific chemical compounds to branded products) that are known to rapidly disrupt, break up, absorb, and/or inactivate liposomes, including liposomes that are referred to in the mainstream press as “lipid nanoparticles”. I am interested in both surface treatments (cleaning agents, topical medicines, skin washes, soaps, lotions, etc.) as well as things which can be taken internally (oral or injectable), as medicines, that are more specific for disrupting liposomes in the bloodstream, for example as an antidote to an inappropriately administered lipid nanoparticle vaccine, e.g., given mistakenly to an allergic patient.
THE ANSWER
BEGIN GROK
Surfactants/detergents (most effective and commonly documented disruptors of liposomes and lipid nanoparticles/LNPs), organic solvents, cyclodextrins, and certain other agents can solubilize or destabilize lipid bilayers. These work primarily by intercalating into the bilayer, extracting lipids/cholesterol, forming mixed micelles, or increasing permeability/leakage until the vesicle structure collapses. Effects are concentration-, composition-, and condition-dependent (lipid type, cholesterol content, PEG coating, temperature, pH, etc.). LNPs used in mRNA vaccines share similar phospholipid/cholesterol/PEG-lipid components and are susceptible in vitro to the same classes of agents. pubs.acs.org +2
There is no established, safe, specific medical antidote that rapidly and selectively disrupts circulating LNPs (e.g., after mistaken administration of an mRNA vaccine to an allergic patient). LNPs are designed to be temporary and are cleared primarily via the mononuclear phagocyte system (liver/spleen), with natural degradation of the lipids. Systemic attempts to force rapid disruption with the agents below would generally be highly toxic (hemolysis, cell membrane damage, organ injury) and are not clinically used or recommended for this purpose. Allergic/anaphylactic reactions are managed with standard emergency care (epinephrine, antihistamines, corticosteroids, supportive measures), not LNP disruption.
Surface treatments / topical / cleaning agentsThese are relevant for cleaning residues, skin washes, or external inactivation:
- Anionic, nonionic, and other surfactants/detergents: Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS/SLS), Triton X-100, Tween 20 (polysorbate 20), Brij surfactants, Zwittergent 3-14, quaternary ammonium compounds, and commercial soaps/detergents containing these. They saturate bilayers then convert liposomes/LNPs into mixed micelles. Used in lab assays (e.g., RiboGreen for mRNA release from LNPs) and industrial cleaning of LNP residues. Alkaline formulated detergents (e.g., potassium hydroxide-based) are effective for equipment cleaning of LNP residues at elevated temperature/contact time. pharmtech.com +2
- Bile salts (sodium cholate, deoxycholate, taurocholate, etc.): Strong solubilizers of phospholipid bilayers; well-studied for vesicle-to-micelle transitions. Present in some digestive/intestinal contexts and used experimentally.
- Alcohols and organic solvents: Ethanol, isopropanol, methanol (typically high concentrations). Disrupt hydrophobic interactions; improve solubility of lipids for cleaning but raise flammability/handling issues. pharmtech.com
- Cyclodextrins (especially methylated or randomly methylated β-cyclodextrin / RAMEB / DMe-β-CD, and to varying degrees α-, β-, HP-β-CD): Extract cholesterol and phospholipids from membranes, increasing permeability, leakage, or causing collapse at sufficient concentrations. Effects depend on CD type, dose, and membrane cholesterol content. link.springer.com +2
- Other noted factors: High concentrations of certain kosmotropic salts (e.g., ammonium sulfate) can aggregate/precipitate PEGylated liposomes; extreme pH, heat, or oxidation can destabilize; some nanoparticles or polymers can tear or fragment membranes under specific conditions.
Branded/consumer products that contain the above (many soaps, dish detergents, hand washes, some lotions or topical cleansers with surfactants/alcohols) can disrupt lipid structures on surfaces. Efficacy varies widely with formulation and contact conditions.
Internal (oral or injectable) agents
- The same surfactants, bile salts, solvents, and high-dose cyclodextrins that work in vitro or on surfaces are generally not safe or selective for bloodstream use against LNPs. They disrupt host cell membranes (including red blood cells) at effective concentrations.
- Bile salts occur physiologically in the intestine and can destabilize orally administered liposomes, but systemic (bloodstream) levels for intentional LNP disruption are not a therapeutic approach.
- Cyclodextrins have pharmaceutical uses (e.g., solubilizing agents) and can interact with membranes, but high systemic doses for rapid LNP inactivation are not established as safe or effective antidotes and carry risks.
- No specific medicines or injectables are approved or routinely described as LNP-disrupting antidotes for vaccine mishaps. Research on LNP fate focuses on clearance, protein corona, MPS uptake, and formulation stability rather than forced rapid inactivation in blood. nature.com
Important caveats: Literature on disruption is largely from in vitro biophysics, pharmaceutical formulation/stability studies, cleaning validation, or drug-delivery research—not clinical antidote development for circulating LNPs. “Rapid” disruption typically requires relatively high local concentrations of surfactant relative to lipid. PEG coatings or cholesterol content can modulate stability. Self-experimentation or off-label use of detergents, solvents, or high-dose agents internally is dangerous and not supported.
For any real-world allergic reaction or medical concern involving a vaccine or LNP product, seek immediate professional medical care; do not attempt chemical disruption. If this is related to laboratory work, cleaning protocols, or formulation science, consult primary literature or specialists for concentration- and condition-specific details.
END GROK
Let me translate all of that.
As long as the shed vaccine is still on the surface of your skin, on clothing, on a mask, or on a surface in your house, the vaccine can be destroyed by all sorts of cleaning products, including surfactants, soaps of all kinds, alcohols, oxidizing agents, bile salts, cyclodextrins, and probably anything useful for cleaning.
Further, any lotions or surface treatments which do not aid in skin penetration (like DMSO), but which do sweep things away from direct contact with your cells, are likely to be helpful in delaying, dissolving, and degrading lipid nanoparticles. Imagine spilled chemical on your skin – it’s the same principle. Diluting the vaccine and/or washing it off make sense.
It is a much different story once a lipid nanoparticle vaccine is inside you – be that from prolonged skin contact, breathing, swallowing, or any other route into your body (like the mRNA jab). None of these things work, once the vaccine is inside you, or in the bloodstream. In fact, these cleaning agents are just as dangerous to your internal cellular machinery (lipid-coated droplets) as they are to the lipid nanoparticles. However, as long as the shed vaccine doesn’t get into your bloodstream (a lower probability than a surface reaction), you don’t have to worry as much about that, as about vaccine damage to skin or mucus membranes where shed vaccine made contact.
Thus, the best time to fight shedding, IMO, is soon after contact. Washing, application of lotions or alcohols, etc., should inactivate shed vaccine. Washing away or denaturing shed protein is also likely to work at the same time.
Again, it is important to remember is that systemic problems from shedding are much less likely than surface problems.
A Realistic Program Against Shedding
This is my opinion. Others may differ. That’s OK. I am just offering my perspective. YMMV.
My first concern remains shedding of virus.
If I am not accepting the trade-offs of the vaccine itself, then my protection is my immune system. My immune system has worked very nicely over the years, against colds, flu, and flu-like illnesses, including all forms of COVID as well as non-COVID coronaviruses. There are appropriately long gaps between infections, and the infections (except for OG Wuhan) have not been debilitating, indicating a functioning immune system.
My immune system is always supplemented with plenty of vitamin D, because vitamin D levels are extremely highly correlated with immunity to viruses. The relationship is stark, and backed by the strongest science. Rates of viral infections almost disappear at high serum levels of vitamin D. There are probable mechanisms for this, but I literally don’t care what they are. Without knowing the causation, the correlation still works. I cannot recommend vitamin D enough. You need to be supplementing it, and maintaining maximum exposure to sunlight. Better still, a measurement of serum levels, but it’s not cheap and your doctor likely won’t recommend it.
Doesn’t matter. Supplementation is cheap and easy and not dangerous, so why not just make sure you are taking a few thousand IUs daily? Just do it. When you notice an appropriately long time between colds and flu, you know you’re taking enough.
Likewise, I make sure that I am not deficient in any vitamin or mineral. Vitamin C, magnesium, selenium and zinc are very important.
However, THIS is even more important.
Avoiding crowded events is critical to reducing exposure to shed viruses. I can link almost every case of influenza or coronavirus infection in recent years to a specific event where there were lots of people crowded together.
In other words, shedding. Viral shedding. As in, viral shedding by people in close proximity.
Thus, avoid crowded public events, particularly in the wintertime, when viruses are maximally spread.
After viral shedding, my next concern is vaccine shedding.
IMO casual vaccine shedding from strangers in momentary close proximity, but not direct physical contact, is far, far less of a problem than living with a vaxxed person for that week after vaccination. Even worse, sleeping with that person who just had a vax.
You should note that my concerns here are EXACTLY what the pharmaceutical industry is concerned about in vaccine trials. That includes live virus AND gene therapy products (even if they don’t call them gene therapy products).
My recommendation is to avoid close contact with vaxxed people for at least 2 days after vaccination, and better a full week. Two weeks should be more than enough, always.
Why? Because the vaccine itself degrades. Even if a person take the vaccine, and shows all sorts of disease symptoms for weeks if not months (please pray for them if this is the case) due to vax-initiated protein production that won’t shut off, they are unable to transmit the vaccine to you, because it is no longer there. The vaccine is degraded, but protein production may still be running.
What about shed vaccine when we can’t avoid being around an individual?
This is when to use soaps, alcohol-based gels, and other skin products. This is when to wash your hands after that oily, wet handshake from some just-jabbed joker, sweating profusely due to their mRNA jab. This is when to stand back from people who can’t “say it” without the need to “spray it”. And note that all of this works even better for VIRUS.
IMO, the vaccine is a far greater danger to you, than the protein these poor victims are now producing. YOU don’t want to be inappropriately producing the protein.
And HERE is where my opinion is likely to differ with yours.
My final concern, about exposure to environmental viral protein, is largely not a concern.
Why? Because this is the natural way in which we build immunity.
Even against a bioweapon. I repeat. Even against a bioweapon – as either a virus or a vaccine.
I literally don’t care if the neighbor sheds small amounts of spike protein or flu proteins on me, because THAT is the vaccination that I prefer – the one for which I am designed. Likewise, I am unconcerned with exposure to dead virus, because THAT is basically how we are naturally prepared for exposure to live virus.
Do I want to inject a protein or dead virus vaccine into me? Maybe – but more likely not. I am now very cautious about vaccines, given that I have lost much trust in the current “vaccine cult” in science. I still trust God and His natural evolutionary reality, however, so I am far more likely to simply trust a combination of pre-exposure of my healthy immune system to proteins, followed by full natural immunity from a well-tolerated episode of the disease.
Rabies? That’s a different story. I’ll take the vaxx, as long as it’s not mRNA. I’ve already done so, once before. I would ONLY take an mRNA rabies vaccine if the animal was confirmed to be rabid, because then it’s a “lesser of two confirmed evils” situation.
I am not going to get pregnant any time soon, and I’ve already had COVID and influenza several times each, so I’m not terribly concerned about exposure to proteins from new variants. In fact, I am at the point of “keeping up” with the latest versions.
SO – some jabbie wants to expose me to the latest spike protein in a non-infective way? Please! Not a problem. Go right ahead. Flu proteins? Be my guest. But I won’t let them expose me to the Soviet Trabant two-stroke mRNA vaccine which I very intentionally decided NOT to take.
And again, my final point. Even if the vaccine AND the protein it produces are “bioweapons” – guess what? I want to be immune to it. I want my system to adapt to its presence. I want natural immunity to all this shit – whether it’s purely “old natural” or “the new natural” that includes stupid human gain-of-function scientific error.
Do you see what I’m saying? GOD has this situation – ALREADY. Let go and let God – just do it at the right time and place.
I hope this helps. If you have questions, feel free to ask.
W
And remember…….
Until victory, have faith!
And trust the big plan, too!
And as always….
ENJOY THE SHOW
W
