“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert.” –J. Robert Oppenheimer
Joe Biden never won. This is our Real President – 45, 46, 47.
AND our beautiful REALFLOTUS.
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).
Our various sister sites, listed in the Blogroll in the sidebar
Our beloved country is under Occupation by hostile forces.
Daily outrage and epic phuckery abound.
We can give in to despair…or we can be defiant and fight back in any way that we can.
Joe Biden didn’t win.
And we will keep saying Joe Biden didn’t win until we get His Fraudulency out of our White House.
Wolfie’s Wheatie’s Word of the Week:
placeholder
noun
a dummy post on The Q Tree
other definitions we don’t care about
still more definitions we don’t care about
Used in a sentence
A placeholder is not the same as the command to place Holder under arrest.
Shown in a picture
Shown in a video
MUSIC!
Placeholder!
THE STUFF
Well, it looks like we have a placeholder for a nuclear clock!
Thorium. Useful stuff.
Just sayin’!
And remember…….
Until victory, have faith!
And trust the big plan, too!
And as always….
ENJOY THE SHOW
W
NOTE:
What you see above is essentially the “Monday Placeholder”. If you see nothing more, and no different, then you are seeing the placeholder.
If I have time and the inclination, I may swap in a new Word of the Week, some new videos, and possibly even an added topic.
Today, I will leave the placeholder alone, for reference, but I will add a topic. Thanks!
W
The Strategy I See Behind the New “Universal Vaccine Platform”
Some of you have to be asking yourselves why Robert F. Kennedy Jr. seems to have gone from being an opponent of vaccines, to being a proponent of them. I will try to explain.
To begin with, it helps to read the following document (H/T to PAVACA for producing these images). You can use this link, or the images below it.
HHS, NIH Launch Next-Generation Universal Vaccine Platform for Pandemic-Prone Viruses
It is hard for me to put into words, how much of a change this really is. But let me give you a quick “TL;DR” list of the big-ticket items.
Big Pharma is completely cut out of this platform – it’s US government owned and driven.
The vaccines are designed to be resistant to evolution of the pathogens they protect against. The vaxxes themselves are immune to “scariants”.
The vaccines completely abandon mRNA, cDNA, recombinant antigen, spike protein, lipid nanoparticle, and all genetic and related technologies.
The vaccines abandon Fauci’s always-failing strategy of targeting current variants, and instead seek to handle both current and future variants.
The result is fewer and less frequent shots. The better the shot, the more this is true.
The vaccines must pass rigorous safety standards, or otherwise fail to be approved.
The vaccines change direction and focus, from smaller subunits to whole-virus immunity.
The vaccines are potentially capable of inhibiting transmission.
IMO this is not just about changing the vaccines – it’s about changing minds in government science.
Most scientists, sadly, are sheep. They have neither the courage nor the inclination to challenge anything in the current scientific narrative – particularly as reported by our toxic media. If the media says “most scientists believe X”, then most scientists think this is true, and won’t bother to check, much less actively disagree.
The evil media has trained us all to believe certain myths.
There will be more and more exotic diseases coming at us from nature
There will need to be more and more vaccines, and more and more injections of them
Vaccines get better by using newer technology, not by working better for people
Vaccine hesitancy is a bad thing, and must be prevented at all costs
Vaccines are all safe, and rumors that any are bad, are dangerous
Apparently, despite the iron fist of Faucism, somebody in NIAID was thinking in ways that lead in the opposite direction from where Pfizer was taking us. I suspect that these forces sat tight, waited for “reinforcements to arrive” (Trump, RFKJ, and Dr. Jay), and had their proposal working up the chain of command as soon as Trump won.
Will this vaccine approach work? IMO it will work better than mRNA. Whether it works well enough to pass Kennedy’s new standard, based on comparison to placebos and true controls, is another question.
For the sake of those who still want vaccines, I hope so.
I suspect that these vaccines will be safer than mRNA, but not completely safe – particularly with a pathogen like COVID. As long as these vaccines are not mandated, I’m OK with their existence. In any case, the vaccines will have to prove themselves safe and effective.
Antique London’s photographs: Goldsmith Hall, The Assay Office
The above free vintage image of a laboratory is courtesy of iStock and Google Images.
Health Friday is a series devoted to information regarding Big Pharma, vaccines, general health, and associated topics.
There are Important Notifications by 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 offering for any AI-generated content. To the best of her knowledge and belief, there is none. If readers wish to post anything in the discussion thread for today’s post that is AI-generated, they must cite their source. Thank you.
Due to the nature of today’s topic, there will be two separate posts. Part One, today’s offering, starts here: https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/hhs-nih-announces-generation-gold-standard.html, “HHS, NIH Launch Next-Generation Universal Vaccine Platform for Pandemic-Prone Viruses”, 1 May 2025. Please see the following screenshots from the announcement:
Notice the risks associated with inhalation of beta-propiolactone (which is being used in the development and testing of the “new Gold Standard” intranasal version of the “new Universal Pandemic Vaccine”, BPL-1357.)
Note the language regarding irritations of various types; of damage to the corneas; convulsions; and “extreme acute toxicity.”
Note the language about cancer being induced in lab rats and mice by the use of beta-propiolactone, but no information being available regarding the inducement of cancer in humans by the use of beta-propiolactone.
Both Dr. Memoli and Dr. Taubenberger have been with the NIH / NIAID for years. Also, note the tiny subject pool of 45 adult subjects in the Phase 1 study of BPL-1357.
On a “tangential point”, there is this FDA announcement of 10 April 2025: https://www.fda.gov.media/186092/download, “Roadmap to Reducing Animal Testing in Preclinical Safety Studies”, by new FDA Director Dr. Marty Makary. Sasha Latypova analyzed the announcement here: https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/you-didnt-want-that-mrna-vax-tested, “You didn’t want that mRNA vax tested only on 8 mice? Marty Makary, FDA, has a solution — no more mice!”, 28 April 2025.
That’s right. Dr. Makary wants to reduce, then end, animal testing for vaccines in the preclinical stage, and to substitute testing them instead by using in silico models; then, to move to human subject testing; and, even to NOT have ANY human subject clinical trials at all in “certain circumstances.” Please see the screenshots below from the Latypova article:
Yours Truly understands that the use of animals in lab experiments must be done in the most humane manner possible — no more of the “Fauci tortured Beagles” situations. However, one is of the opinion that there is a place for using animals in lab experiments — to study physical reactions and/or reproductive issues related to the drug or injectable under investigation before human tests begin: something that an in silico model or an AI model cannot do. And, the part about no clinical trials at all in “certain circumstances”:
Note: the red text in the screenshots above link to other articles and information from the Latypova article. Also, recall that Ms. Latypova worked in medical and pharmaceutical techology for years before retiring from the field.
This is the same Dr. Marty Makary who recommended that pregnant women get COVID-19 “vaccinated”:
To finish today’s Part One offering, Yours Truly presents the involvement of United States Defense Department in the use of the “AFLQ adjuvant” that is going to be tested in clinical trials for BPL-1357: https://hivresearch.org/hiv-research/alf-adjuvants. This is the United States military research program into “Military HIV.” This article had a link that led to the following press release by the United States Army, from 2021: https://wrair.health.mil/News-Media/Press-Releases/Article/3166852/phase-1-clinical-trial-of-wrair-developed-covid-19-vaccine-begins/, 5 April 2021. The clinical trial is NCT04784767, that began with 29 subject enrollees on 5 April 2021, and had an “Estimated Study Completion Date” of 30 October 2023 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04784767.) The title of the clinical trial: “SARS-CoV-2 Spike Ferritin Nanoparticle Vaccine with ALFQ Adjuvant for Prevention of COVID-19 in Healthy Adults.” Below is a screenshot of the WRAIR article (WRAIR stands for Walter Reed Army Institute of Research):
Note the statement by Dr. Modjarrad that this “US Army COVID-19 Vaccine” would “pave the way for a universal vaccine to protect against not only the current virus, but also counter future variants…” — “universal vaccine” — sound familiar? “Who is driving this bus?” comes to mind.
The above image from an old medical-scientific journal is from PeopleImages, via Google Images.
This post is part of Health Friday, a series of offerings related to Big Pharma, vaccines, general health, and associated topics. The discussion is not limited to what is presented today; it is an Open Thread. However, since this presentation is about a COVID-19 “vaccine”, the post is dedicated to the memory of Yours Truly’s cousin Bill, who died “suddenly and unexpectedly” in September 2023.
To begin, there are Important Wolf Moon Notifications, with a couple of extra items:
Free Speech is practiced here: “Use it or lose it.”
The following are alternate Q Tree sites for certain circumstances:
The U Tree is for “argue it out” interactions. There is a “Featured” article at this site for use as a “Rescue Thread.”
The “third site”, in case the above two are inaccessible.
Civil discussion is practiced here. The excellent and timely Rules of our late, good Wheatie prevail:
One: No food fights.
Two: No running with scissors.
Three: If you bring snacks, bring enough for everyone.
Please follow the added Guidelines from Wolf Moon. Please do not give the modern-day version of Cato the Elder the opportunity to show “enmity” to the board.
The extra items: What Yours Truly presents in this series, as in her other blog posts to this board, is not medical advice — the are opinions and hypotheses based on her over 4 1/2 years (and continuing) of reading about, researching out, and writing about “all things COVID”, Big Pharma, and other health topics. Readers are encouraged to consult a healthcare practitioner regarding health concerns or conditions.
The Health Friday post today concerns the impending Retraction of a peer-reviewed and published paper that details long-term COVID-19 “vaccine”-induced injuries in North India. The paper was submitted to Springer for review and publishing on 9 January 2024; it was accepted (it had passed the peer-review process); and it was published on 13 May 2024. Here is a free-access version (to read the entire paper on Springer, one has to either access through an institution, or to pay for a copy): www.qeios.com/read/JK7IBA/pdf, “Long-Term Safety Analysis of the BBV152 Coronavirus Vaccine in Adolescents and Adults: Findings from a 1-Year Prospective Study in North India”, Upinder Kaur, et al., 13 May 2024. The study was conducted at Banaras Hindu University in India. BBV152 is another name for the COVAXIN COVID-19 “vaccine”, developed by Bharat BIotech of India in cooperation with Indian Council on Medical Research (ICMR) – National Institute of Virology. ICMR receives “royalty payments” for each dose of COVAXIN that is administered, as does Bharat Biotech (Sound familiar? — as in, the co-development, co-ownership of patents, and sharing of “royalty payments” between the NIAID and Moderna for the modRNA COVID-19, mRNA-1273?)
The Kaur, et al., paper referenced above was published by Springer on 13 May 2024. Almost immediately, the attacks began on the paper, the authors, and the publisher — with articles like this one: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/1-in-3-covaxin-recipients-hit-by-adverse-events-study/articleshow/110187284.cms, “1 in 3 Covaxin recipients hit by adverse events: Study”, 17 May 2024. On 18 May 2024, the ICMR demanded that Springer retract the paper (Yours Truly: nothing like causing panic in a government agency when the truth is published about a “vaccine” that the agency is pushing as “safe and effective,” especially when that agency is also getting “royalty payments” for the use of the “vaccine”, is there?). But, the attack on Springer and the authors didn’t end there. In July 2024, Bharat Biotech filed a lawsuit against Springer and the authors (some of the authors are students), demanding retraction of the paper and the payment of damages to Bharat Biotech of $600,000 US dollars (50 million Indian rupees.) In addition, the lawsuit accused the paper’s authors of defamation against the company, included with a demand for separate damages to be paid to the company for defamation. Despite sworn statements from the authors that no defamation was intended or written into the paper; and, despite the fact that Nitin Joshi, the editor of the Springer journal (Drug Safety) in which the study appeared, was one of the reviewers who approved the study for publishing, it was Joshi who notified the authors on 28 August 2024 that he was going to have the paper retracted. He confirmed this decision in an email to the authors on 17 September. However, as the defamation lawsuit is now in court, the study is still available on the internet.
What is BBV152/COVAXIN? It is an “inactivated whole virion vaccine” (whole virus vaccine) for “active immunization” against COVID-19. It is not an mRNA-based/modRNA-based COVID-19 “vaccine”, although it does use an “ancestral wave strain” of the original Wuhan Hu1 SARS-CoV-2 virus (in other words, a strain from the Wuhan Hu1 virus that occurred before the Beta, Delta, or Omicron strains.) The Package Insert for COVAXIN is here: www.bharatbiotech.com/images/covaxin/covaxin-pack-insert.pdf. Below is an image from the Package Insert:
Per Wikipedia, 363,774,435 persons in India had been “vaccinated” with at least one dose of COVAXIN as of 4 March 2023.
However, the COVAXIN Package Insertdoes not actually describe how the “vaccine” works (the “Mechanism of Action.”) Yours Truly found something along the lines of the necessary information here: www.clinicaltrialsarena.com/projects/covaxin-bbv152-for-the-treatment-of-covid-19/?cf-view&cf-closed, “COVAXIN (BBV152) for the Treatment of Covid-19, India”, 28 June 2022. Below is a screenshot from this article:
But, COVAXIN has been hailed by the Indian government about being “the first indigenous COVID-19 vaccine in India” (www.bharatbiotech.com/covaxin.html.) Why is ViroVax involved? (More on this later in the post.) Back to the Package Insert for COVAXIN. Below is a screenshot of the ingredients used in this “vaccine”:
Looking further into the ingredients list, starting with the NIV-2020-770 strain of SARS-CoV-2: please refer to this paper: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7825810/, “Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, BBV152: a double-blind, randomised Phase 1 trial”, Krishna Mohan Vadrevu, et al., May 2021. It appears that NIV-2020-770 (the “inactivated whole virion”) is part of the Asp614Gly variant chain of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The Asp614Gly variant itself is apparently part of the “ancestral wave” of the original Wuhan Hu1 SARS-CoV-2 virus; and, it is “not as serious” as the Beta or the Delta waves of the virus. Please refer to this article: www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/langlo/PIIS2214-109X(22)00199-1.pdf, Vol.10, July 2022, a Comment “Decoding the next SARS-CoV-2 variant”, by Jeremy Nel and WD Francois Venter. Below is a screenshot of a portion from the Comment:
Thus, BBV152/COVAXIN cannot be considered to be one of the “most recent” types of COVID-19 “vaccines”, as it does not include any elements before the Beta, Delta, or Omicron variants.
The Aluminium Hydroxide Gel in the ingredients (it is an “excipient” [“adjuvant]”): this is also called “Algel-IMDG” and “Alhydroxiqium-II” — in other words, it is a hydrogel. It was invented by ViroVax LLC of Lawrence, Kansas, under the aegis of the EpscoR Idea Foundation (part of the National Science Foundation in the United States), and with funding by the NIAID. This is the ViroVax / United States government connection. Here is a screenshot from an article by the EpscoR Idea Foundation on this “success story” (www.epscorideafoundation.org/success-stories/kansas-adjuvant-developed-with-nih-funding-enhances-efficacy-of-indias-covid-19-vaccine):
Note that Alhydroxiqium-II targets the lymph nodes of the person who takes COVAXIN. So, while this excipient is not exactly a lipid nanoparticle (LNP), it, in Yours Truly’s opinion, basically functions like an LNP in targeting the lymph nodes for delivery of the “vaccine payload” of COVAXIN; and, by “stimulating” the “vaccinated” person’s natural immune system to go and “search” for invading pathogens. By the way, Aluminium Hydroxide Gel is not to be used in foods, drugs pesticides, or “biocidal” products — see the screenshot below, from the search on Fisher Scientific (ThermoFisher) about this chemical, Page 1:
HOWEVER, it appears that FisherScientific had a “change of heart” since December 2021 regarding the “Uses advised against” for Aluminium Hydroxide — below is their MSDS Safety Sheet as of February 2024, Page 1:
Here is another source for an MSDS Safety Sheet, this one specifically for Aluminium Hydroxide Gel:www.oxfordlabfinechem.com/msds/ALUMINIUMHYDROXIDEGEL.pdf. Please see section 3Hazards Identification; and section 11Toxicological Information Special Remarks on Other Toxic Effects on Humans. Below is part of the Special Remarks portion of section 11:
The TLR7/8 excipient (adjuvant) in COVAXIN: This one is used in immunotherapy, including in the treatment of HIV-1. Please see: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1033448, “Novel TLR7/8 agonists promote activation of HIV-1 latent reservoirs and human T and NK cells”, Yangyang Li, et al., 26 January 2023. This begs the question, Why is an HIV-1 immunotherapy treatment element being used in a COVID-19 “vaccine?” This also, in Yours Truly’s opinion, removes any consideration of COVAXIN to be labeled a “vaccine” — it is actually a gene therapy/immunotherapy injectable.
And, the 2-Phenoxyethanol excipient (adjuvant) in COVAXIN. Below is a screenshot portion of the Fisher Scientific (ThermoFisher) MSDS Safety Sheet for this chemical, Page 1:
The Kaur, et al., paper, goes into detail regarding the types of reported serious adverse events that affected the study subject pool who took COVAXIN. Three pages of the Supplementary Table 1. from the paper are below. Note that these are details from subjects one year after “vaccination” with COVAXIN. Note also that another paper from December 2020 (by different authors) shows that the S1 protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus itself crosses the Blood-Brain Barrier.
If Yours Truly is reading about this situation correctly, it appears that one of the “problems” with the Kaur, et al., paper, is that the subject pool of COVAXIN-“vaccinated” persons in North India who reported serious adverse events following “vaccination” to the study authors was “small.” One has to ask: How many COVAXIN-“vaccine”-induced serious adverse events would need to be reported before they would be considered “relevant” by the Indian government and by Bharat BioTech? — say, a “minimum” of 3 million adverse events reports? Is it “within acceptable limits” that COVAXIN-“vaccinated” persons in North India suffer a stroke or a heart attack after “vaccination” with this product? Is this another situation of “the known and potential benefits outweigh the known and potential risks” of taking a COVID-19 “vaccine”, which is the “official” position of the CDC and the FDA in the United States?
Yours Truly has gone into detail regarding the situation with BBV152/COVAXIN for several reasons: First, to enumerate the multiple potentials for “vaccine”-induced serious adverse effects from this COVID-19 “vaccine” product; Second, to highlight the persecution of the authors of a paper who sought to study and write about these potentials; Third, to highlight the persecution of the journal that peer-reviewed, approved, and published the paper;Fourth, to bring to light the involvement of the United States government (via the NSF and the NIAID) in the funding and development of an ingredient (excipient/adjuvant) in this “vaccine” intended for use in a foreign country; and, Fifth, to again emphasize how important it is that consumers “do their own due diligence” regarding information on drugs and/or injectables that they put into their bodies.
