“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
This thread will be used for testing only. Site members please refrain from commenting here, as I work with plugin developers on the YouTube embedding problem and the manual video embedding problem. If and when I need your assistance to help provide examples, I will ask for it.
Thank you!
Wolf
PS, Developers – please note that I will need to approve your first comments as “guests” – I can also register you on the site on an as-needed basis. Don’t worry if your first post falls into moderation – I will approve it, and you should be OK to post comments after that.
I will provide some embedding examples in both posts and comments.
YouTube by URL (attempted embed – unconverted to link)
YouTube by URL (attempted embed – converted to link)
And we’re finally serving a NORMAL DRINK tonight. Even though it’s a SECOND ROUND.
STAY TUNED…..
While our beloved REAL bartender takes a needed break of unknown duration, we continue to ENDEAVOR TO PERSEVERE.
and what time of year is it now???
Christmas Spirit
We continue our WAAAAAY too-long celebration of Christmas by noting that some of our neighbors STILL have their lights and decorations up.
We saw a nice red Christmas bow laying in somebody’s yard by their driveway.
We ourselves just got rid of our tree.
And TODAY is the 25th of the month. That’s VERY “Christmassy”.
So yeah. Given that there are a few daysweeks months AFTER Christmas where it’s STILL Christmas, that means we have a few more weeks left. Riiiiiiight?
Sure! So have some hot CHRISTMAS chocolate!
And now, the rules of the pub.
HOUSE RULES
God bless us, every one! Tiny Tim had such a beautiful soul. He hadn’t a mean bone in his body…unlike most of us. But in keeping with Christmas, we promise to honor Wolf’s rules and keep Scrooge at bay. The Utree is where the Ghost of Christmas Present will conduct you should you need to rattle some chains. Another option, should all hell break loose is here.
Now, back to business.
AMEN!
Free the January Brothers!
Current Art On The Wall
We’re just gonna segue into the next item with our selection, if that’s OK.
This gets a bit “planetary”…..
Venus and Mercury Instructing CupidChristiaan Huygens, Saturn, and SomethingRaindrops on Titan
…..which was based off of an FDA alert (sketchy link)…..
…..which actually links back to a different CDC alert (even sketchier link)…..
WHATEVER.
Here is that final CDC alert. Only the top 3 paragraphs are important here.
Let me quote the text of those first 3 paragraphs for Zoe. I will make BOLD what is important.
Dear Partners in Prevention,
December 20, 2021
I’m writing to share the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) alert sent to clinical laboratory staff and health care providers about a syphilis test. The alert reports that false reactivity, or “false-positive,” Rapid Plasma Reagin (RPR; non-treponemal) test results, when using the Bio-Rad Laboratories BioPlex 2200 Syphilis Total & RPR kit, can occur in some people who received a COVID-19 vaccine and includes recommendations for addressing these potential false positives.
Historically, false-reactive RPR test results have been observed in people with systemic infections unrelated to syphilis, such as tuberculosis, rickettsial diseases, and endocarditis.False-reactive RPR testing also has been previously observed following immunization (specifically following smallpox vaccine). False reactivity with RPR can also occur during pregnancy.
Per CDC’s 2021 STI Treatment Guidelines, reactive RPR results should always be confirmed with treponemal testing (e.g., Treponema pallidum particle agglutination, TP-PA). This is, in part, because of the above-mentioned issue: false-positive nontreponemal test results can be associated with multiple medical conditions and factors unrelated to syphilis. According to FDA’s alert, treponemal testing for syphilis does not appear to be impacted by this issue.
Allow me to translate.
It turns out that “being vaccinated for COVID-19” throws off an ANTIBODY-BASED SYPHILIS TEST, and can give false positives.
The reason is that these are a sort of antibodies against substances released from cells attacked by certain diseases and conditions. Thus, they’re not exclusively the downstream product of syphilis.
Normally, certain diseases, certain vaccines, and pregnancy can all throw off this more rapid but less conclusive syphilis test, and that is part of the reason why people are supposed to follow up this easier test, with a test that looks for the actual organism which causes syphilis.
Thus, we have added one more cause for the test to be thrown off.
This is not the same as the HIV test that was thrown off by a particular Australian vaccine, because the antigen in the vaccine actually contained an HIV protein (gp41) as part of the vaccine, and created antibodies against HIV. I talked about that last week. That was a much more direct test interference, easily expected.
How a Psycho Vaccine Marrying the Infamous COVID Spike Protein to HIV’s Neurotoxic gp41 Was [Allegedly] Canned by a Mere Testing SNAFU How Australia Dodged The First Mad Vax Bullet of the WEF Scamdemic / Plannedemic Darwin Award Vaccine Featured Insane Merger of HIV and COVID But Failed Due to Buggering of AIDS Tests, NOT …
What I find interesting is that one of the things that normally sets off the syphilis test is endocarditis.
Endocarditis, which is inflammation of the inner surfaces of the heart, is one of the three main heart inflammations, thus being pretty damned close to myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) and pericarditis (inflammation of the outer sac), both of which have very prominent correlations to the jabs.
So while this means that – NO – the shots are not giving people syphilis – the shots ARE basically acting like an illness, and very much like a known cardiac illness.
You were warned.
Now – while I was researching syphilis, I became interested in the treatment with compounds of mercury.
Traditional mercury-based pastes were used in cures. Whilst this was partially effective, the toxic side effects of the mercury probably outweighed any advantages.
This is actually a HUGE understatement.
It turned out that arsenic was considerably better.
It wasn’t too long after that success, that penicillin took over as the real cure for syphilis.
I will come back to MERCURY in a future post, because I found something quite amazing in its history.
But if you look ONE COLUMN TO THE LEFT and TWO ROWS UP…..
COPPER is also bacteriostatic and algicidal – and at concentrations below where it is a health risk. And THAT leads back to a DRINK that Grandmaintexas introduced us to……
Moscow Mule Revisited
Based upon my reading of Grandma’s post on the subject, the Moscow Mule simply is not a proper Moscow Mule unless it is served in copper vessels.
The health effects of COPPER are about as debatable as the effects of mercury – although, in general, copper is much less toxic, so when it’s being “not good for you”, it’s a lot less “not good for you” than lead. At the same time, copper is much MORE toxic to things like algae, fungi, plant roots, and other “pests”, than it is to us, and that is why it is found among the gardening pesticides in hardware stores. The antimicrobial activity of copper is extremely well-documented, but appears to be complex. Simply having copper in the household or workplace environment seems to have health benefits – and this was particularly noted back in the days of less sanitary environments. Water passing through copper fixtures tended not to spread disease.
We tend to forget about OLD SCIENCE, so we can’t put new things into good perspective.
LEAD and other CHEMICAL ADVANCES saved us from the horrible BIOLOGICAL diseases and maladies of the uncivilized life.
Did they have chemical consequences? Yes. The TRICK is REMEMBERING AND ADMITTING OLD RISKS AND BENEFITS while also DISCOVERING AND ADMITTING NEW RISKS AND BENEFITS, then BALANCING HONESTLY with the PROPER PRIORITIES which put PEOPLE FIRST.
It is VERY easy to see where CDC went off the rails with the COVID-19 vaccines, being unable to admit old benefits (of lasting immunity to caught and treated diseases), while also being unable to admit new risks (of vaccines using untested and immature technologies).
Likewise, looking back, it is easy to see that basic sanitation – not vaccination – REALLY conquered diseases. Vaccines came in, mopped up, and took all the credit, by design, because bad people realized that vaccines in the hands of a technological elite, combined with an ignorant populace they can essentially murder and experiment on at will, allow them to basically FARM HUMANITY.
Sorry, Bill Gates. We understand your social engineering of us. We know your M.O. We know your real intentions. Including for the “people of color” you pretend to care about.
You will note that, in general, the further down the periodic table one goes, the more toxic the metals. Surprisingly, the second-lightest one – beryllium – is quite toxic, but even lightweight aluminum simply isn’t all that bad, in the big picture (but you’ve got to keep it on the OUTSIDE). In contrast, if you get down and heavy there with mercury, thallium and lead, or even as far down the table as cadmium and indium, the metals can be quite toxic.
Lead used to be used for plumbing – enough to lend its name to the profession. Copper then took over – before plastic began to displace copper. Nevertheless, copper is still highly valued for plumbing, as well as for electrical wiring.
As noted above, copper in drinking water is an interesting beast. Lead and copper in drinking water are controlled by the EPA under something called the Lead and Copper Rule, or LCR. Note that the linked document, which talks about the most recent “upgrade” to the rule, is over 400 pages. Yeah – there is a MESS of goofiness outside the actual rule there. Most of the concern is about lead, which is now highly restricted. Here is all that is said about copper’s toxicity in the linked explainer:
Acute copper exposure causes gastrointestinal distress. Chronic exposure to copper is particularly a concern for people with Wilson’s disease because they are prone to copper accumulation in body tissue, which can lead to liver damage, neurological, and/or psychiatric symptoms. For a more detailed explanation of the health effects associated with copper see Appendix E of the final rule Economic Analysis (USEPA, 2020). EPA did not propose revisions to the copper requirements; thus, the final rule does not revise the copper requirements.
Copper is basically off the hook at 1.3 ppm or below. That number has not been upgraded. Why is that level important? In my opinion, it’s because copper is bacteriostatic and algicidal in practice at between 0.1 and 1.0 ppm. Thus, one can SAFELY DRINK water which is being purified against microorganisms with copper.
And THAT would include the Moscow Mule, depending upon how long it sits.
I refer you now to an excellent article, which relies on a breathless scaremongering headline, but actually DOES provide a balanced set of viewpoints on both the DANGERS and BENEFITS of dietary copper.
Sipping This Popular Cocktail Is a “Health Hazard,” Experts Say
AFTER 27 MINUTES, YOU MAY BE AT RISK OF HEAVY METAL POISONING.
First of all, copper isn’t really a “heavy metal” IMO, but whatever. It’s heavier than some.
You will note, after reading at the link, that you have to drink a ton of Moscow Mules, or a few that have sat around for a very long time, to MAYBE get sickened by them.
In general, avoid drinking acidic things that have been in contact with copper for a long time, and you will be OK.
Remember – most household water has sat around in copper pipes for quite a while at neutral pH, and it’s simply not toxic (due to copper). You DO get less lead if you flush your water 30 seconds before getting drinking water, but again – we’re talking about levels that would make Romans, Victorians, and even people from 70 years ago howl with laughter at our prissy over-concern – even knowing the science.
Perspective is very important – as you are about to see in a beautiful example of the failure of modern science, thanks to CCP socialism infecting both global science and science publishing.
Failure of Socialized Science and Peer Review Exposed in a JAMA-Published Ivermectin Study
The fact that Pierre Kory now calls JAMA “PHAMA” is a nice short way of saying that medicine has been utterly taken over by the pharmaceutical industry, and IMO set back several thousand years. Hippocrates would be HORRIFIED by what has happened to medicine – and I say that as somebody OUTSIDE medicine, and a lot closer to the pharmaceutical industry.
IMO it’s too late to save the pharmaceutical industry from scandalous criminal survival – but it’s not too late to save the profession of medicine from utter moral death. And thus, you will be treated to my following scientific opinion.
Steve Kirsch doesn’t play defense. He saw how JAMA (the Journal of the American Medical Association) completely FUMBLED an ivermectin paper, and how Pierre Kory picked it up off the ground, taking complete control, but more or less just standing there, lamenting the bad refs and horrible cheating. So Kirsch did the only thing he does. He grabbed the ball from Kory and ran it back for a touchdown.
“New JAMA paper show Ivermectin blows the COVID vaccines out of the water”
This is an utter reversal of the conclusion of the paper.
All because some guy in the stands named “Massimaux” spotted the free ball and yelled “FUMBLE!!!”
If you understand science, and science publishing, then you will see that what Kirsch did here was BRUTAL. And I’m gonna show you where all the bruises and black eyes are.
I almost feel sorry for JAMA, but not enough to miss this opportunity to LEAP ONTO THE DOGPILE and give AMA’s hare-brained PC leadership a good WEDGIE.
Don’t worry about the AMA. They’re protected by Pfizer, Biden, and the media. And just like any good mafia arrangement, as long as AMA keeps saying the right things, and not saying the wrong things, everything is gonna be OK.
Everything but science. But that’s OK, too.
We’ll take care of things. Just like we did here.
Here is the Kirsch gab that grabbed my attention.
Repeating for Zoe, as well as our silicon friends…..
“Wait a second. I thought there was some paper just out that Alex Berenson said was basically the end of ivermectin, although scientifically, I know that’s pretty much impossible. I know there is SOME explanation for why this paper (which I have not read yet) has to be deviating in some way from the MANY papers that show limited but solid efficacy – and especially against DEATH – just like HCQ. But this CANNOT be the same paper. No way! Kirsch would not be saying this unless the results were stunningly IN FAVOR of ivermectin, and there is no WAY that some authors with a NEGATIVE-LEANING study would be……. I mean….. WHAT THE HELL????”
SO – I just stopped to see what in the hell paper Kirsch was talking about.
Now we’ve discussed (in the comments on this site) Berenson’s very weird attack on Robert Malone when they appeared together on Fox News, which didn’t make sense THEN, but which does NOW – and I will explain that momentarily. But first, back to Kirsch.
Kirsch explains that – YES – this paper states in BOTH its abstract and its conclusion the following:
“The study findings do not support the use of ivermectin for patients with COVID-19.”
However, that is NOT what the data says.
Certainly not to everybody.
Certainly not to me.
In other words, DIFFERENT scientists (like Kirsch, Kory, me, and an anonymous Twitter poster names Massimaux, who found the key issue) have looked at the data, and see something quite different.
Kory goes into a rather long analysis of the whole war against ivermectin, but Kirsch digs into Kory’s article and then finds and elucidates the key nugget – discovered by Massimaux – that just ends the arguments.
It helps to read this in Kirsch’s article, but if you’re going to be lazy, I’ll explain here.
Here is Massimaux’s tweet:
In the I-TECH study, of 490 patients, 241 got Ivermectin and 331 were vaccinated.
Can we compute the vaccine effectiveness AGAINST DEATH and Ivermectin effectiveness AGAINST DEATH? Yes, we can! See the figure.
Look at the bottom line in the two tables and compare. Not only is ivermectin CLEARLY better than the vaccine at preventing death – the significance of the result is significantly greater.
If the efficacy of ivermectin against death is not true, then very little else in the study is true.
This data says that ivermectin is exactly what we’ve been saying it is. It’s not a miracle cure, but it WORKS – particularly in preventing DEATH – its only real purpose. That result is IN THE PAPER. It is IN THE DATA. And if the authors want to argue that it’s not in the data, because it’s not significant enough, then nothing ELSE is in the data, because most everything else is even LESS significant.
Now it’s very important to realize that this nice little pair of tables FROM THE DATA is not due to the original authors – it’s due to a POST-PUBLICATION “peer review” by somebody who looked at the very same data, and PROVED using the authors’ own data that they were WRONG to say that the data didn’t support use of ivermectin.
So why did the authors tack on that wrong statement?
Did the EDITORS make them tack on that statement? Did the AUTHORS tack it on to get the paper to publish? Or is the “peer bias” against ivermectin, mostly due to the media, SO STRONG that scientists didn’t even look through their own data to see a conclusion they didn’t want to see?
Or is it a combination of ALL of these?
It is clearly in the data that ivermectin is three times as effective as the vaccines in preventing death. Even more importantly, if you add in what is known OUTSIDE the paper in question – namely the adverse effects of the vaccine and the safety of ivermectin, then it’s a no-brainer to NOT take the vaccine and to just use ivermectin. And Kirsch explains THAT rather nicely.
The data LITERALLY justify our position.
This was my hunch all along, and as vaccine side effects loomed larger and larger, and ivermectin proved to be rather shockingly harmless, even at antiviral doses comparable to large-animal systemic antiparasitic doses. All ivermectin had to do was prevent death to some moderate extent, and it was a no-brainer that people should take it.
To conclude anything else, based on the data, is murderous folly, in my opinion.
When I was a young lad – a mere student – but also one who WROTE PAPERS (because I had a great professor who TRAINED US to be full-blooded scientists), we EXPECTED to be CRITICIZED in peer review by people exactly like Steve Kirsch, Pierre Kory, and myself. We expected that others would look at data and see it completely differently.
And we would then have to ACKNOWLEDGE the alternative interpretations, or convince the editors that the criticism was not even worth acknowledging (a VERY rare occurrence in any legitimately contested field).
My lab had PRACTICE criticizing other people’s work – and we expected it in return. I personally found quite a few errors in the literature. Most were small – mostly problems of the writing – but some were huge and affected the science. Sometimes the big errors would only partially alter the author’s conclusions, but other times they had a significant impact.
However, I have to admit that I never ran into data which PROVED THE OPPOSITE of the authors’ main conclusion – even if only to the critic – and THAT is what we have here.
PEER REVIEW is designed to subject a paper to (hopefully at least TWO) critical readers who will very likely DEMAND improvements. Those improvements often mean acknowledging DIFFERENT views of the data as being possible and maybe even reasonable.
That kind of QUALITY peer review was VERY OBVIOUSLY not done here.
What we have RIGHT HERE is a demonstration that HERD REVIEW is much more important than PEER REVIEW.
PEER REVIEW is subject to BIAS. It is subject to SUBVERSION and GAMING.
I go back to the Zhang mask paper, for crying out loud.
To me, this will always remain a horrifying example of “fitting the data to the theory”, rather than looking to see what the data says. You can just look at this graph and see the crime.
I lay this stuff SQUARELY at the feet of SOCIALISM, which has politicized science and removed control of science from the people of science themselves, investing much of it in a media which WILL NOT question government narratives. People raised under socialism who become “go-alongers” – and so SOME degree that is everybody – stop questioning things that need to be questioned.
I have WATCHED and I have SEEN how WEF and CCP corruption have degraded science everywhere.
They’re not going to fix this stuff – at least not yet.
But until then, know this:
Ivermectin WORKS, and it was just proven by people who said it doesn’t work.
Thanks to HERD REVIEW.
One last point.
Why did Alex Berenson not see this?
IMO, it’s because Berenson is simply not a scientist – he’s an investigative journalist. Thus, his virtue-signaling attack on Malone was meant to show “journalistic balance”, NOT that he himself had deeply researched the history of the topic, in which case he (Berenson) would have likely said “Yes, Malone really is the most foundational of the founding fathers of the tech.”
But let’s not blame Alex too hard. THE AUTHORS OF THIS STUDY – that’s right – the authors themselves – didn’t see it, either.
See what I’ve always said? Real science is contentious.
But it has a good heart.
It wants the TRUTH.
ENJOY THE SHOW.
Thank you all for being here. Have a great weekend.
Is Persistent Reverse Transcription a Hidden Virus/Vaccine Objective?
Gloating Pre-Preface
There are few feelings of satisfaction like opening up the NEWS and knowing one’s theories and understandings are WORKING even better than one thought.
Let’s see if they use this one for damage control, and get the “new science” out before the STORY OF THE SCAM gets ahead of them. CDC is lying to us so badly. SO badly.
It’s all good, people. I’m on these bastards like BLACK on TAR.
Notice that the governor’s WIFE also tested positive later. But most importantly, notice how the news never asks the RIGHT QUESTIONS connecting the vaccine to the positive test. Instead, we get LIES.
The FAKE NEWS is going along with this crap. They are so deep in this.
Yes, we are now in peak MITHRIDATISM that they wanted to turn into the MIDAS TOUCH of SPIKE PROTEIN.
Such a SCAM.
In my opinion, the CDC should be CLOSED as a CRIME SCENE.
Thank you, Greg. You are a SCIENTIST, and when you felt SYMPTOMS you forced them into coughing up the DATA that reveals how badly they SCAMMED us, and how badly they continue to scam us.
I think Fauci knows exactly what I know. He could tell you EXACTLY why this happened. And once Rand Paul reads this, he’ll know, too. Somebody needs to start cornering Fauci on all this crap.
It ALL goes somewhere.
LOOSE SCIENCE that you know and everybody else doesn’t is a MAGIC ACT. BAD FAUCI!
I’m seeing into the psy-op, people. I’m seeing so deeply.
THE SPIKE MUST FLOW. AND FLOW AND FLOW AND FLOW. It’s the KEY to the SCAM.
Once you see the spike protein CORRECTLY, you see why they do everything they do.
How much you want to bet Bill Gates is wise to this stuff?
Real Preface
I have come to the conclusion that something is very wrong with COVID-19 and the vaccines thereof, and I think I’ve finally put my finger on the scientific macguffin that ties all the skeevy, sketchy stuff together – reverse transcription.
That would be that little red arrow back to DNA from RNA.
It turns out that reverse transcription, and vaccines for diseases that might code for it, are very “Fauci”.
Learn to code. It’s KEY.
Too many things “political, organizational, governmental, and media” have not added up about the phony “plague”. Going beyond that, too much SCIENCE about the “novel coronavirus” and vaccines being offered for them, simply did not add up.
At least, not until now.
It’s not my inner conspiracy theorist which is finding a problem here – it’s my inner scientist. I am having great difficulties rationalizing certain seemingly careless choices which have resulted in some of the most problematic and badly framed medical offerings since “eye of newt” and “really large leeches for anemia“.
I am having a scientific problem with TESTING that is so bad – so intentionally bad – that it borders on the freaking Ouija Board.
And FAUCI KNEW.
It’s all the result of DISHONEST SCIENCE.
Background: “Science Is Real”
I’m not exactly anti-science, having worked in science all my life. I’m not even opposed to “transhumanism”, which I don’t think is inherently and necessarily BAD. The idea of expanding my memory without putting Google or Facebook or anybody else in charge of it? Talk to me. I’m listening.
I’ve ALWAYS gotten the flu vaccine – ALWAYS. I NEVER miss it. That’s not exactly transhumanism, but it shows that, for most of my life, I had great TRUST in medical science. In fact, I would even say I still do. Generally speaking.
I’ve had vaccines for everything I could get – even the RABIES vaccine, when I was bitten by a bat. The rabies vaccine is, in fact, one of the STRONGEST defenses of vaccination in medical history. No vaccine opponent WILL or SHOULD turn down the rabies vaccine – it is a HUGE success story in medicine. If you get bitten by a rabid animal, the rabies vaccine promptly administered against that SLOW virus will SAVE YOUR LIFE. Some vaccines are of arguable worth, but the rabies vaccine is not one of them.
Indeed, I consider myself to be something of a gourmet, or at the very least a connoisseur of vaccines. Previous “reviews” of vaccines on this site have featured my lovely assistant, Miss Direction, néeRetroculture, who helps me convince people that vaccines weren’t always questionable, and might even be good for people.
Hey, it’s not every day that I get to post something that’s not only about the unspeakable issue of vaccines, but is both PRO-VAX and ANTI-VAX at the same time. I mean, what’s the use of FREE SPEECH if we can’t use it to troll EVERYBODY – including PENCILNECK? Whoops – WRONG PENCILNECK. Let’s try …
Perhaps you recall my PREVIOUS correspondence and “review” of the new, two-shot shingles vaccine, Shingrix – or more specifically, my review of the FIRST SHOT. Wolf’s Hot Date With Retrosynthetic Dinopox Hey, it’s not every day that I get to post something that’s not only about the unspeakable issue of vaccines, but is both PRO-VAX and …
I was anticipating getting one of the new coronavirus vaccines – and was holding out for the first one PROVEN to be safe for recoverees from COVID-19, one of whom I happen to be.
My lungs aren’t that good anymore – not after COVID-19 seared them like some kind of biological chlorine gassing on the front lines in France. I have to be very careful. Another case of COVID, or pulmonary / vascular coronavirus vaccine side effects of comparable severity, might actually “finish me off”.
So – I’m SHOPPING. And I mean SMART SHOPPING. I’ve been paying a LOT of attention to the new vaccines, and trying to understand their technologies, their benefits, their risks, and the science behind them. I simply can’t afford to make a mistake on side effects. Not if I want to enjoy the retirement for which I worked LONG and HARD.
I already knew quite a bit of the science behind COVID and the new vaccines – enough that it has been easy for me to follow the scientific news about these things. I’m not a virologist, an epidemiologist, a vaccine expert, or a molecular biologist, but I’ve worked with such people for much of my life. I picked up a few key ideas in the process. I’ve also come up with a few scientific ideas and principles of my own, but that is largely because I’m a devotee of the history of science, which gives perspective on science.
If you don’t think science can be WRONG, and that large numbers – HERDS – of scientists therein, can go OVER A CLIFF, just take a look at Planet Vulcan, Lysenkoism, The Great Leap Forward, and science in the Third Reich – a seminar on the latter having been quite instructive in my youth. It was not simple how the scientific masses in Germany were led astray, once socialist politics DRAGGED, PUSHED, and SCARED them away from “Jewish Science”. The top echelons of German science, filled with Jews and their friends and spouses, were forced into horrible choices, as some of the best science and scientists were politically rejected over a real social stupidity which fractured and destroyed what was arguably the leading scientific nation on the planet.
None of that had to happen – but it did.
Don’t think we’re immune from scientific debacle. We’re not. Socialism is the greatest “hold my beer” knucklehead that science ever green-lighted into a dysfunctional relationship. He’s always coming back on Saturday night with roses and cherry vodka, after the “last” last time he wrecked Science’s cute little sports car.
Science normally checks itself for errors – and it is my contention that the checking needs to be extensive – all the way out to society as a whole – including stakeholder scientists, non-stakeholder scientists, and even the non-scientific public at large. Sure, you can skip the non-stakeholders and the public, but is it wise? Hardly, in my opinion. The smaller the group needing to be fooled, the easier it is to accomplish things which society simply does not want, or which have vast intended or unintended consequences.
Yuri Geller proved that scientists are easy to fool. James Randi made that point even more strongly. And I have my own take on it, which adds pushy and manipulative politics of any kind as a RISK to science. The same “sale by urgency” which works for salesmen at the appliance store, works in science. Many of us – particularly those of us with historical perspective – saw this problem in climate science. Now, we see it in COVID and vaccines. We are being rushed into something, for some reason. The questions are WHAT and WHY.
I’m going to assume that most people reading this, have started to grasp enough of the basics of viruses and vaccines, and particularly the new mRNA and DNA vaccines, that they don’t need “the way things are supposed to work” explained to them. Indeed, if you go out, and absorb all the “mainstream” journalism on COVID – science sites – mainstream media – cable networks – your favorite non-conspiratorial “science guys” – fact checkers – explaining the way things are SUPPOSED TO WORK, you will be thoroughly and smartly educated by excellent science.
If you want, try this great link courtesy of Ethical Skeptic, one of my favorite “dissident scientists” out there, pulling us back from the current “woke Lysenkoism” we seem to be in.
Good summary of the unique structure of the Spike Protein mRNA vaccine and how it differs from the Coronavirus' Spike Protein RNA in pseudouridylyl Ψ and synonymous codon stealth.
See? Yeah, I’m a grade-A conspiracy theorist, because I told you to look at Snopes, and not some clickbait site saying these vaccines are injecting nanobots into you to turn you into something non-human.
The PROBLEM with the conspiracy theories on vaccination isn’t so much DIRECTION as it is MAGNITUDE. It’s all over-reach. Silly, perhaps well-intended, but self-discrediting overreach. Much of it is clickbait or psy-op. A lot of it is actually true – at some small level – often orders of magnitude less dramatic than the headline claims. I can talk to the consumers of such in terms they will understand, and I’m generally talking them DOWN and BACK to what are more scientifically grounded problems with the new vaccines. And there are some. Which is the POINT of this entire piece.
In this essay, I am now talking primarily to what might be called “vaccination normies”, who are – like me – normally rather trusting of vaccines, but perhaps feel like there’s something not quite right about the current situation. These are people who have SOME vaccine hesitancy, but are likewise leery of TRULY baseless skepticism of science.
I’m talking about the people who put “SCIENCE IS REAL” yard signs out in front of their houses. There is a side of me that likes that. However, there is a side of me that wants to put out a sign that drops LOVE IS LOVE (Pedo? No way!) and all the rest, and sticks to what I know about science from the inside:
SCIENCE IS REAL
SCIENTIFIC FRAUD IS REAL
SCIENTIFIC GREED IS REAL
SCIENTIFIC BIAS IS REAL
SCIENTIFIC ERROR IS REAL
SCIENTIFIC DECEPTION IS REAL
SCIENTIFIC SELF-DECEPTION IS REAL
SCIENCE IS REALLY MESSED UP
SCIENCE IS STILL BEAUTIFUL
You see what I’m sayin’? You want SCIENCE, you get the whole, lovely, crazy, smart, dumb, dysfunctional bimbo who thinks she can handle SOCIALISM, and ends up on some frat party lawn in a lab coat and a mini-skirt, throwing her shoes at strangers, demanding somebody take her home, and SHE’S NOT DRUNK.
Yeah. I knew that crazy, wonderful bitch.
Wolf’s Take on Coronavirus Vaccines
You can check out my posting history here to follow the chronology of my thinking on coronavirus vaccines, but I’ll try to recap toward my current thinking, and what seems to be wrong with them. I am going to lead you up to my last post on the vaccines, where I almost saw what I’m seeing now, plus a whole bunch of other stuff.
PREFACE I thought that I might withhold this post on Easter Sunday, and then I changed my mind, thanks to Deplorable Patriot, Trump, Gab and Jesus. If anybody ever FOUGHT on Easter Sunday, it was Christ. It’s time to FOLLOW POINT. The Branch Covidians have taken a toll, but the WAR is turning, and – …
The first news that really grabbed me was about Inovio – a DNA vaccine – a “Bill Gates” vaccine (almost all are, TBH) – and thus one of what I will refer to as genetic vaccines. Such vaccines are not supposed to work by modifying one’s genes or genome, despite the word genetic. They simply exploit cellular biochemical processes CLOSER to the genes, using the known biology of genetic expression. They dump DNA or messenger RNA (or a close facsimile thereof, to be more precise) into existing cellular processes, to “fool” the processes into creating – in the case of the current coronavirus vaccines – a stabilized form of the spike protein of the virus.
At the time, I noticed that these would be THE FIRST genetic vaccines being tested in or deployed successfully in humans. And this is where things get “iffy”. Just a little bit.
The next vaccine to get into the news in a big way was Moderna – an mRNA vaccine, again using a full and slightly stabilized spike protein as the antigen, but created in vivo via the mRNA genetic instructions thereof. While Moderna seemed to be successful in its first clinical trials, the side effects were noteworthy, frequent, and fairly significant – even compared to the notoriously “spicy”, arm-reddening-and-bicep-swelling, shingles vaccine, Shingrix. As one respected “pro-vax” scientist of my old acquaintance put it, they would have to kill him to give him the Moderna vaccine. He was definitely thinking the same thing I was thinking. Rush job, problems, keep looking.
My initial hopes quickly moved toward Novavax. Novavax is NOT an mRNA or DNA vaccine. It uses the same full stabilized spike protein strategy as the others, but it provides the spike protein AS spike protein, using a nifty little nanochemical “pincushion” to hold the spikes in an outwardly facing array, thus to engage receptors properly and at LOW DOSAGE. This is an excellent strategy that AVOIDS the unknowns of mRNA vaccines like Moderna, or DNA vaccines like Inovio or Russia’s Sputnik V.
The most significant risks of spike protein vaccines like Novavax are the risks of the spike protein itself, NOT of abusing the genetic processes to CREATE the spike protein in vivo, like Moderna. Indeed, Moderna scientists admitted in one of their first papers on their vaccine, that there ARE unknown potentials for long-term side effects with mRNA vaccines. Go find the paper – it’s there. They couch the admission in gentle and somewhat obscuring language, but the disclaimer is there. It has to be. They’re being honest.
mRNA vaccines in animals have not been uniformly free of side effects, to put it VERY kindly. We can argue about the severity of those side effects, and whether they extrapolate to humans, but I suppose we will find out now. The risks are there, and they tend to be long-term. So – in full disclosure – there are RISKS to mRNA vaccines. The older you are, the less the long-term risks matter, and conveniently, the higher the risks of COVID-19 itself. That’s a good thing. It means we only have to take the risks with those patients who can most likely afford them.
On the flip side, why the hell we want to take huge, unnecessary risks to vaccinate children is beyond me, but I’ll save those arguments for another essay. Or look at my LAST essay. Those arguments are, in part, subtle “history of vaccination” propositions that would bog us down right now.
In contrast, Novavax doesn’t take those risks. It’s a more conservative vaccine. This is why it jumped to the top of my list. An entire class of risks – the genetic processing ones – were automatically removed. As a “nothing can go wrong or I’m likely DEAD” vaccine recipient, I appreciated my better chances with Novavax.
BUT as a “real” scientist, I am not just swayed by THEORY – I love the results of EXPERIMENT. Thus, when Pfizer’s clinical trial results came out, I was IMPRESSED by the excellent antibody levels and the almost minimal side-effects. Far from being an arm-burner like Moderna, Pfizer was looking to be much milder on short-term side-effects, with stronger adverse effects being downright RARE. The large population of test subjects also implied that a recoveree LIKE ME was likely in the study by accident – and NO deaths or severe reactions occurred – definitely a GOOD SIGN for my case.
This not only bode well for lower likelihood of some kind of lethal short-term reaction due to my recoveree status – the smart scientific position would be that lower short-term risk very likely reflects lower long-term risk – and this supposition is completely absent ANY “knowing” causative reason to connect them.
Thus, Novavax and Pfizer were at the top of my list. Things were looking GOOD to take a vaccine, even if I didn’t get an explicit study on safety in recoverees.
And THEN reality started to hit.
Yes – when millions of doses of a vaccine go out, there are going to be deaths and injuries. We have a system in place – let’s be honest – which tries to HIDE the minority reports on vaccine adverse events, in order to keep buy-in on vaccine compliance. That doesn’t mean people should stop getting vaccines, any more than reports on horrible vehicle accidents OR the “hiding” of such accidents on the back pages of newspapers, mean that we should stop driving.
Nevertheless, my scientific curiosity was piqued. We DO have COVID vaccine problems now, and MORE than seemed to have been revealed by the vaccine trials.
WHY NOT DO SOMETHING ABOUT THEM?
I repeat. Differently. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH BETTER VACCINES.
Taking stock of the many positives and negatives associated with THREE VACCINES which gained the most initial experience – Moderna, Pfizer, and Oxford/AstraZeneca – I noted three things, one from each.
Moderna – side effects sometimes REMARKABLY resembled COVID-19 itself – even up to SEVERITY.
Pfizer – nursing home patients were testing positive AFTER vaccination – some dying of COVID symptoms
AstraZeneca – hematological problems reminded me of another protein hemotoxin – snake venoms
I could go into deep details about these observations, but in TWO of the cases, it was VIDEOS where the “light-bulb” finally went on. So let’s look at some videos.
Moderna: Ben Stein’s vaccination experience
As I was listening to Ben, I was stunned. He was describing COVID-19 – at least from my perspective. This was not coincidence – this was SPIKE PROTEIN.
WHOA, NELLY!!!
Note that Ben is still “pro-vax” here – he’s just CAUTIONING people about REALITY.
Pfizer: Nursing Home CNA describes correlation of vaccination to later positive diagnosis and death
This man, a CNA in a nursing home, reported online what he had observed, amidst great personal anguish about “whistle-blowing”. He observed that he had protected his elderly patients for all of 2020, but when they finally got the Pfizer vaccine, many of them just started “testing positive” and DYING. He was NOT buying the management line that there was a super-spreader – if you listen to him, he’s fully contemptuous of the idea. He was CERTAIN it was the vaccine.
I agreed with this guy – a TRUSTED SCIENTIFIC REPORTER, in my opinion. His GUT was telling him that the chronology was one of correlation. He was very likely seeing in his mind a pattern in a delay over TIME, integrated over cases, that could only be explained by the vaccine itself. He was NOT accepting the management excuse of a “super-spreader” fortuitously infecting the vaccinated, to give that same result. THIS GUY is my kind of scientist. SKEPTICAL of ad hoc, contrived, politically correct explanations that don’t explain all the facts and observations in a clean, natural fashion.
AstraZeneca: Rare but serious clotting reactions are enough to evoke CONCERN from medical professionals
I think THESE DOCTORS in the following video represent my position extremely well – the problems with the AstraZeneca vaccine are RARE, but we KNOW there is a correlation, and it is our DUTY to stop and fix the problems, weighing in particular the relatively lower risks of COVID-19 itself in younger patients, where these events are occurring.
The difference between IGNORING the rare thrombocytopenia incidences and FIGURING THEM OUT is the difference between Stalinism and responsible popular government.
I truly admire these front line doctors for their SCIENTIFIC BALANCE. Frankly, I consider front line doctors to be scientists of the highest order, just like that CNA in the video above. PRACTICE is what matters – not DEGREES.
Now in this latter case, the AstraZeneca vaccine, I dragged in what I consider a very useful analogy to hemotoxic snake venoms, but I didn’t really see WHY this would be happening – until I found something that explains ALL of these problems.
I just didn’t realize I was holding an ACE.
The Macguffin – Reverse Transcription
In March of 2021, I reacquainted myself with a paper that I had noted when it came out, in December of 2020, but had not fully grasped the significance. The authors clearly knew that what they had found was a big deal, and worded the title appropriately, but even then, I don’t think they dared consider the possible deeper significance of their finding.
Nobody can FIRE ME from retirement, so I’m quite willing to say what needs to be said. Could it be wrong? Maybe. But if it’s RIGHT, there are issues that need to be dealt with. So let’s go there.
SARS-CoV-2 RNA reverse-transcribed and integrated into the human genome
Liguo Zhang, Alexsia Richards, Andrew Khalil, Emile Wogram, Haiting Ma, Richard A. Young, Rudolf Jaenisch doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.12.12.422516
I will refer to this paper at “the Jaenisch paper” – after the main author to whom correspondence is written – not because I don’t want to credit the fortunate and likely excellent first co-author Zhang in this instance, but because there is another paper I talk about all the time, dealing with masks, that I call “the Zhang paper“.
THAT one – the mask paper – in an embarrassingly good journal – is a piece of crap – some of the worst “political science” ever – designed to virtue signal to the CCP-DNC narrative of election-fraud-assisting masks, in utter contradiction to the very data presented by the authors.
The Jaenisch paper, in contrast, opens up a barn door that I am sure both industry and “in bed” government wants closed, Closed, CLOSED.
Stated very bluntly, the paper says that the virus behind COVID-19 actually “changes the genome” of victims – similarly to, though not exactly like, HIV.
You know – that OTHER disease for which Fauci was so interested in creating a vaccine.
And not only that – the COVID-19 virus does it enough to throw off those damn PCR tests that Kary Mullis warned us about for the exact same reason. In fact, the solution of that aspect of testing – the way “test-triggering fragments” just hung on and on and on in recoverees – is one of the BEAUTIES of the Jaenisch paper. The conclusions of the paper explain very neatly certain OBSERVATIONS and scientific conundrums that were first found by Korean scientists, who were very very persistent in proving that their COVID patients were NOT getting reinfected, as the fear-mongering American media “wanted”, but were still testing POSITIVE while being NON-INFECTIOUS.
Now we have a wonderful explanation. Excellent scientific work. THIS is why I signed up for science!
The THREE-TRILLION DOLLAR QUESTION that nobody wants to ask, however, is whether the genetic vaccines based on mRNA or DNA of the viral spike protein do the same thing – meaning get incorporated into the genomes of recipients. Well, do they?
Ever? Sometimes? Always? Or even just enough to make a difference?
It’s a great question! That deserves a CLOSE LOOK with MUCH SIDE-EYE.
I will say this. Even if these vaccines only get incorporated sometimes, that would make the “crazy people” yelling “OMG THESE CORONAVIRUS VACCINES ARE GENETIC MODIFICATION!” become suddenly – oddly – scandalously – CORRECT.
I find that incredibly ironic.
BUT WAIT – THERE’S MOAR. And then, there is EVEN MOAR STILL.
The Spike Must Flow
I had set the Jaenish paper aside in my mind in January 2021, as I was busy being pursued by the FBI as an “insurrectionist”, having wanted to see “fellow dissident scientist” Dr. Simone Gold speak at the Capitol Building on January 6, 2021. Rather luckily, I never found her, or realized where she was. Had I found her, I would have likely been arrested and all that nonsense, since she wandered, far too trustingly, into the interior of the Capitol building.
This old wolf, too wary to go into buildings – too old to play tug-of-war games – too injured to stand up to direct pepper spray – settled for singing the Star Spangled Banner at over 100 decibels with tens of thousands of patriots outside – which was an absolutely surreal experience.
But back to the story.
When I began seeing more and more vaccine problems by March of 2021, some of the possible answers seemed to point to the WHOLE SPIKE PROTEIN being the BAD ACTOR. The trouble was, I needed disease-producing levels of it. How might THAT be happening?
Look at Ben Stein. He was injected with only a small amount of COVID spike protein mRNA, but had disease like I did, when, in my case, the virus ran wild making BOTH spike protein AND more virus from it, in my cells.
The vaccine does NOT create any new virus. It does NOT have the full virus instructions. JUST the main one – the spike protein that provides a significant part of the viral shell.
Thus, the vaccine cannot create an EXPONENTIAL GROWTH of the spike protein, which the VIRUS does. The full virus creates more and more virus, meaning more and more spike protein, until something – immune response – shuts it all down.
The vaccine creates a few “fountains” of spike protein – basically “vaccine-infected” cells – but these get shut down as immunity builds. It never really gets out of control. Or at least, not normally.
So, for Ben Stein to have a powerful, disease-like experience, he needs cells that are cranking out far more spike protein than we would normally expect with the vaccine.
Well, if the INSTRUCTIONS for spike protein – in some people – got a bit upstream of just “slipping them into the print shop queue”, to where entire new print queues of spike protein and substantial, chimeric, problematic chunks thereof were being repeatedly ordered from DNA central operations, it would explain a whole lotta spike protein and associated chimeric junk being produced – more than anticipated.
And – I think I would be remiss if I didn’t consider the possibility that some of these bogus DNA instructions might be hard to shut down completely, thus providing an explanation of “long haulers” and “immunocompromised variant generators” beyond their known suffering of what can be rightly regarded as “simply” chronic damage from initial infection.
But let’s move on the to Pfizer nursing home case, and many other reported cases like it.
If we’re getting genetic incorporation of vaccine spike protein instructions at the DNA level by reverse transcription, like the Jaenish paper, perhaps in older individuals who are more susceptible to this problem, then it explains them testing positive later – and in some cases – if they can’t shut it off – DYING LATER.
Now – here is where KINETICS comes in. Kinetics is basically process flow rates. I talked about KINETICS in my LAST RANT on COVID-19, in which I began to put all this stuff together, but didn’t really put forth the totality of things until the comments section at the end of the post. I mentioned in the body of the post that the kinetics of viral interference didn’t seem to explain the nearly complete disappearance of flu while COVID was still significantly above herd immunity levels. It just felt to me that BOTH of these would shut down with greater similarity, if viral interference was the sole explanation. In that case, CDC lying to us about flu vaccine efficacy, understating the success to increase compliance, COMBINED with viral interference, provides a nicer (IMO) explanation of the observed kinetics.
Now, in the case of partial genetic incorporation, the kinetics of interest would be how fast the body shuts down spike protein production by cells without genetic incorporation, versus shutting down cells where there WAS genetic incorporation. If cells with significant production of spike protein due to genetic incorporation were not just sources of more spike protein and more symptoms, but also harder to shut down than “unincorporated” cells, and elderly people were increasingly subject to genetic incorporation with age, we might actually see the AGE-VACCINE DANGER relationship that is being seen in nursing homes, where the most elderly patients are at significantly greater and AGE-INCREASING risk from the mRNA vaccines – something we absolutely don’t want.
Are you starting to see why this explanation works for me?
Genetic incorporation of symptom-producing protein instructions by mRNA vaccines of the FULL SPIKE PROTEIN seems like a REAL WORKHORSE OF AN EXPLANATION.
And, if you’re following my reasoning, you can see that this can also explain the odd cases of thrombocytopenia in some younger patients getting the AstraZeneca vaccine.
In the AstraZeneca case, we would be seeing rare cases where spike protein production after genetic incorporation was just cranking away at levels reminiscent of hemotoxic envenomation by crotalids – or in English, snakebite, which is also (in certain snakes with certain proteins) characterized by thrombocytopenia.
I will tell you right now – there MAY be very similar cases in older patients – maybe not – but I suspect that such cases are less “systemically identifiable” in older patients where thrombosis is more “normal”, and will be more likely attributed to age and NOT the vaccine.
And here is the kicker. In all of these cases, because of the chimeric nature of the fragments noted in the Jaenisch paper, there is a certain RANDOMNESS which could be responsible for the random responses seen in different individuals and different vaccines, which by using significantly different mRNA vectors, may result in significantly different levels and exact circumstances of genetic incorporation in different individuals.
NOW – if it turns out that there IS genetic incorporation of vaccine-origin stabilized spike protein mRNA or DNA as genomic DNA, like the virus itself, then one of the first suspects for reverse transcriptase activity or induction thereof, would be the spike protein itself.
And THAT, my friends, opens up a REAL can of worms.
The Full Spike Protein Monty
Let me ask a really impertinent but really obvious question – something that Tucker Carlson is famous for.
Why are we vaccinating people with the WHOLE spike protein, or more precisely, stabilized analogs thereof?
OK – now I’m being a LAWYER here. I am asking questions to which I ALREADY know the answers, and in particular, the answers that Tony Fauci might give. Here is my argument on behalf of Fauci.
“We don’t really know EXACTLY where on the spike protein, might be the BEST place for antibodies to attack. Also, we don’t really have time to start guessing, when we can just use the whole thing. Most of the labs are modelling the whole molecule, and sharing data. It just makes sense that everybody sticks to the same model, so that any advances that one lab makes, can be quickly adopted by the other labs and researchers. If we begin using fragments of the spike protein, then results are going to be harder to interpret from lab to lab. There will be fragmentation of the science as well, and this will slow our response time tremendously. Comparison of results will be much more difficult. The timeline to a vaccine could be extended by months – even years. Maybe never……..”
See how that works? I would make a fantastic lying science bureaucrat – I know all the tricks already, because I used to negotiate compromises that result in the status quo in fake science in other ways.
Now – HERE is the superior counterargument that will LOSE because Tony Fauci is in control. For this argument, I’m a FRONT-LINE DOCTOR. Maybe I’m even Simone Gold, or one of the various doctors I followed back during the HCQ Wars.
“Yes, that’s all fine and good. But we are doctors, administering a VACCINE to patients. Adverse effects are real, and we want to minimize them. The spike protein is almost certainly the cause of much of the endothelial damage by this virus. Anything we can do to avert that damage is smart, including NOT using the full spike protein or analogs thereof. If we know the primary sites that antibodies need to attack, which we actually do, we can just use shorter peptide sequences or protein fragments constituting those sites. Modeling can make sure these fragments present the same, active, pre-fusion conformation. We can stabilize as needed to prevent immune enhancement, just like in the full spike protein. This shorter peptide approach has been successful in hepatitis vaccines. These peptides can be created quickly and formulated as vaccines in roughly the same time as the full protein. In fact, vaccine expert Winfried Stoecker has already done this, using the receptor binding domain of the spike protein, and creating a short peptide based on it. Since this technology is well-known, we don’t have to take any of the risks of messenger RNA or DNA technology. Nor do we have to use adenoviral vectors or new lipid nanodroplet technologies. Likewise, all of the advances in stabilizing pre-fusion conformation in the full spike protein can be used for the RBD peptide, so the risks of immune enhancement will be just as low. So, unless you can give us a reason to stick with the toxic spike protein, I’d say this is a no brainer.”
At least, that’s the way it looks to me.
Now, here are some interesting facts.
First, EVERYBODY is doing the full spike protein. The ONLY party that made a vaccine using less, was Prof. Stoecker, and he got in trouble for it, with the German government, because he wasn’t properly authorized, even though – well – normally he just does vaccine work and that’s that.
Second, you should note that – IF the spike protein has any reverse transcriptase (RT) activity, that activity would likely have been LOST by switching to a small peptide dropping most of the molecule.
Third, you should note that – by switching to a small peptide, there is no mRNA or DNA corresponding TO that peptide, so there is no chance it will be genetically incorporated.
By now, it is VERY clear to me, that the industry picked the vaccine technologies that it did, precisely because they were modern and untested, and they needed an “emergency” to get these technologies into use, in preparation for their big goal – actual gene therapy. But – AND LOGIC here – that does not preclude there being even MORE motivation here. The more I see this “event”, the more I see everybody getting bought in by SOME new aspect of the scam.
Using a more conservative approach would have been SAFER, but it would not have advanced the technologies that were groomed to be advanced. Even the Novavax protein-based vaccine, fairly conservative, tests the novel use of nanoparticles to assemble the pseudo-spike proteins into cell-infective starburst patterns. It, too, is full spike protein.
But again, THIS. Everybody is ALL about the full spike protein.
Let’s ask WHY.
A Feature – Not a Bug
Now – if the Jaenisch work is good – and I think it is – and if genetic incorporation of vaccine mRNA into genomic DNA also occurs – and I strongly suspect it does – and if the spike protein itself is responsible to at least SOME degree in causing genetic incorporation – which I also think is very likely – then I am of the opinion that Fauci knew exactly what he was doing in pushing mRNA and DNA vaccines that code for the full spike protein, and that he did so as a sneaky way to get a reverse transcription promoter into the human genome.
Why? I don’t really know. Not yet. But this whole thing just seems intentional in its ELEGANCE.
This is easily expressed in logical hacking terms. Fauci uploaded a stealthy FTP uploading tool into humanity’s genetic account. FIRST as a problem, with China’s help. THAN as a solution, with the industry’s help.
The idea of “uploading an uploader surreptitiously” is just elegant. It’s HACKING. Any person who ever had to “learn to code” has to admire it. And it’s doubly elegant by doing it TWICE.
Stated in biological terms:
Create a genetic vaccine for a same-same disease, both containing the genetic sequence of a reverse-transcription promoter, such as a reverse transcriptase, as a way of creating a persistent or at least consistently available presence of a reverse transcription activator in humans.
And the beauty of this scam, is that it’s “WHOOPS” played TWICE. VIRUS, then VACCINE.
Let’s enjoy it! Scenic route…….
FIRST the disease – OH, NO, LOOK WHAT BAT SOUP DID!
The ChiComs are masters of psychology on Americans. First they whip up the cultural WTF.
THEN they whip up the OTHER side of Americans saying “don’t hate on Asian cultural differences!”
THEN they pull the whole offering back, with everybody left high and dry on CCP zoonotic transfer garbage narratives, minus “bat soup”, but including pangolin “look squirrels”, when the REALITY is that humanized animal models are almost all that is actually used for this kind of viral research any more (thanks to Mary Morse for this fantastic point).
Wuhan lab. Put ALL your chips on it.
MASTERFUL MANIPULATION, and many American academic scientists fell for it like soldiers on leave in a brothel district.
THEN the cure – the vaccine – which uses the SAME genetics to get MOAR of the uploader installed in MOAR people.
And if they get caught….”OMG, DID WE DO THAT? WE JUST FOLLOWED THE SCIENCE AND THE DISEASE! FULL SPIKE PROTEIN FOR THE WIN! IT’S *** SCIENCE *** !!!”
Introduction You have GOT to see the video I’m going to show you. It’s not just what they’re talking about. It’s WHERE IT LEADS. Most of the people who watch Rand Paul go after Fauci here, are concentrating on MASKS, because that is the TOP LAYER of the argument. But THAT is the small potatoes. …
Something is going on here, and it seems too purposeful to be mere incompetence.
SO – Does Wolf Take the Faucipox Vaccine?
Now – I’m gonna tell you – CRISPR-Cas9 vaccines are coming, and THOSE are straight-up genetic engineering. Save some ammunition for that fight. But right now, I think it’s worth bringing up some PRETTY TOUGH QUESTIONS about the current vaccines.
Simply stated – aren’t things with reverse transcription activity a RISK, like HIV, and why would we court that risk in a SOLUTION like a vaccine?
And what’s with all the LIES to keep people from noticing that the VACCINE causes positive tests in recipients, “because spike protein, sequences, PCR, and [COUGH] maybe a little incorporation”.
C’mon. This is so obvious now, it’s PAINFUL. CDC is not even looking foolish. They know this stuff isn’t the disease – it’s the vaccines. They’re LYING.
Sheesh. The whole thing is an outrage.
So. Am I going to take one of the current vaccines?
Not if I think there is a reverse transcription activator coded for in the mRNA or DNA, or even if it’s just in there as PROTEIN.
I’m quite good with my natural immunity, which sadly may ALREADY include some uploading of the uploader. I have no idea if I have any genetic incorporation from the virus already, but if I do, I know exactly where any future positive PCR test is coming from.
Anyway, thank you, Kary. You were right all along. They ABUSED your work.
