« First « Previous Comments 5,617 - 5,656 of 5,736 Next » Last » Search these comments
With viral infection:
When a respiratory virus infects a healthy person, all the heavy lifting in terms of the immune response takes place in the mucosa lining the respiratory tract.
This system is highly evolved and extremely efficient as it needs to act as a barrier between the outside world and our bodies and hence be able to deal with a constant assault by pathogens or toxins.
It is capable of destroying infected cells very rapidly, hence limiting viral replication promptly.
Our immune system rapidly takes care of any systemic cells infected with virus.
The threat is normally neutralised within a few days.
Any respiratory mucosal cells destroyed by the immune system are rapidly replaced - sacrificing these cells to protect the rest of the body is part of their function.
With mRNA injection:
The lipid nanoparticles carrying the mRNA become rapidly and widely distributed around the body1 to multiple organ systems.
Throughout the body cells then become “transfected” by mRNA, which instructs them to express the spike protein on their surface.
The immune system destroys any such cells and, unlike respiratory mucosal cells, not all cell types transfected are able to regenerate (eg myocardial cells of the heart).
This happens very rapidly so that a large amount of spike protein is expressed at the same time.
This process was meant to last a very short period of time, but there is substantial evidence that it last for months in a significant proportion of people. Nobody knows if there is an off switch.
The amount of spike protein created from different injections varies hugely because each of the following stages introduces substantial variability: manufacture, storage, distribution, injection technique, and inherent biological characteristics of the recipient.
Hence one injection into one person could produce a thousand fold or more spike protein than another.
It’s not even the same protein though.
There are substantial differences between “viral spike” and “vaccine spike”:
In the mRNA vaccinal spike, 2 proline molecules have been coded for as described here, with the intention of improving the “stability” of the protein created - this has become known as the “2p substitution”2.
A process called codon3 optimisation has been utilised in the vaccine; this means that the letters in the code have been altered to optimise protein translation in human cells. This is meant to not change the protein being created, but substantial concerns exist around this process.
Of those 2 changes, Codon optimization is by far the better understood; a critique of the dangers (which have been known for a long time) of this can be found here. It is well-established that this process can alter the folding characteristics of the protein created. The effects of these are unknown but what is known is that the way proteins fold is central to their functional characteristics, especially in relation to immunogenicity. Concerningly, “misfolding” of proteins is also a characteristic of “prion” disease such as Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease4, a signal for which is present in VAERS. ...
Again the harms we see are broad ranging, and in some cases overlapping with other products called vaccines.
In no particular order, and this is a non-exhaustive list, other harms (proven or potential) of these products include:
Class switch towards excessive production of IgG4 (inducing immunological tolerance) over other antibody classes.
DNA contamination - to levels far exceeding limits previously imposed by regulators - with unknown effects.
Toxicity of the LNPs themselves - especially of an inflammatory nature.
Toxicity of other adjuvants.
Antigenic fixation from inducing the immune system to focus on one viral antigen which likely adversely affects the flexibility of the immune system to deal with variants of the original virus encountered; linked to more severe illness following repeat infection.
Immune exhaustion from dealing with constant and excessive antigen production.
Endothelial damage, as that is where most transfection rapidly occurs.
Other harms consequent to the immune system rapidly attacking and destroying transfected cells. In this respect it is important to note that this would occur regardless of the actual protein being expressed.
Why is this so important?
The “it’s all about spike” trope serves the perpetrators of the debacle of the past few years in 2 ways:
It embeds into people’s psyche that any and all the harms now coming to the fore following the ghastly experiments of the last few years could also be from “covid” (“maybe I had it asymptomatically and it still harmed me?”) rather than from vaccine injury.
It suggests that the mRNA platform can be “fixed” in future simply by having it make a different protein, whereas in fact hijacking cells throughout the body and making them uncontrollably express foreign proteins is quite simply one of the dumbest and most dangerous designs ever. ...
In his final paper with Perez, Montagnier predicted prion disease. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367167725_Emergence_of_a_New_Creutzfeldt-Jakob_Disease_26_Cases_of_the_Human_Version_of_Mad-Cow_Disease_Days_After_a_COVID-19_Injection
https://timothywiney.substack.com/p/the-stigma-of-water
you need to promote Rin as hero of the counterforce to the scandemic.
Moderna, having run out of any salable drugs at all, yet still trying to hype its meme stock, is allegedly working on ten new mRNA-based drugs. One of them is a new HIV treatment. It will use mRNA to force patients’ bodies to make a kind of super-antibody, bnAbs, which has been found in people who successfully tolerate HIV infections. Of course, Moderna’s mRNA payload provokes hijacked cells into unnaturally making part of the HIV virus.
What could go wrong?
Small early trials initially showed promise in producing the antibody, but then 1 out of 6 trial participants developed difficult skin problems—including urticaria (hives), pruritus (itching), and dermatographism (welts after scratching). Baffling. We’ve seen similar dermatological problems after the covid shots, too; but until now, those side effects have been unacknowledged. But guess what?
"The company’s original COVID-19 mRNA vaccine used the same dose and has also been linked to skin problems, although at much lower frequencies, of 1% to 3%. The Pfizer-BioNTech collaboration’s COVID-19 vaccine, also based on mRNA but given at a 70% lower dose, triggers skin problems, too."
Ah, so they do know about the dermatological adverse reactions. Hmm. What do covid jabs and new HIV shots have in common? It’s not the particular protein that the mRNA is making, obviously. And … the article shut down any further speculation right there.
I know a lot of people who got jabbed to "get back to normal" or "travel" or "keep their job" or, most popular, "to protect other people".
"Can it be proven this guy actually said that?"
What, exactly, has been pulled off the market and where?
« First « Previous Comments 5,617 - 5,656 of 5,736 Next » Last » Search these comments
I know a few and they sound like absolute shit, and both feel like absolute crap.
Anyone else?
Why the fuck are people injecting themselves with a non-FDA approved biological agent?
And what the fuck are people afraid of, when this covid has a 99.97% survival rate?
I don't understand this level of retardedness... Or maybe I am just super, over the top, fucking retarded, that I can't understand this shit.