Please, I have suggested previously, that you personally stop referring to these death shots as 'vaccines'. They have never met the definition of a vaccine and referring to them as such lends a sort of credibility by association.
I agree & in deference to most people’s understanding that they have been called vaccines by the authorities, I’ve long chosen to term them “vaccines”.
I am not much attracted to arguing about what else they should be called. There’s merit on every side.
I’ve used “gene based treatments/injections/preparations”. This isn’t a particular good descriptive term but it has the merit that its novel, it isn’t wrong & it might get people to pay attention and not immediately shut down, as many have been trained to, if they detect a narrative that might be “anti-vax”. Also, I can carry the description, since I’ve worked with agents very similar to these and can accordingly at least explain what they’re designed to do. This as you indicate is substantially different from what is implied by the word “vaccine”.
I don’t call them “gene therapy”, as some people do, I assume perjoratively. That doesn’t automatically get us anywhere.
I do think “bioweapon” is justified. I’ve been explicit that I am certain they’re intentionally harmful, at very least, knowingly harmful.
To quote Margaret Anna Alice (Substack), “Mistakes Were Not Made”.
Thank you Dr. Yeadon for weighing in. I hope that you and your family are all well.
I agree that these injectables are deliberately harmful. Otherwise, they would have been pulled before they ever were released to the world. The Pfizer trial data revealed the extent of harm. Diabolical is the only word that describes what has happened and continues to happen.
Yes, bioweapons. I wrote my response before reading what anyone else posted as I wanted my words to not be influenced by others. I see that they are right in synch with what you write about bioweapons. Correct that people are primed to run if they think vaccines will be criticized but not sure it makes any difference. I have people around me, lots of graduate degrees and professional work, but they lack total intelligence on health, the medical industry, vaccines and these covid drugs in particular. As soon as they seen the V word on your lips they begin screaming at you and throwing polio in your face. Given this hysteria and Cognitive Dissonance that is so severe, it seems valid to begin to use new terminology to begin educating people on these drugs as not vaccines at all. Thank you for your courage to speak out and expose yourself to all the criticism being levied on you.
Jay Couey has said he used this mRNA method in lab experiments & they were called transfections.. it was known to have fatal effects and only used in animals that were scheduled to be sacrificed after a short period of time & unfit for humans.
Dr. Banoun, and other investigators in the States, highlight important unanswered questions regarding simple facts from current molecular biology and biochemistry…
Most importantly integration into genomic DNA… and affect on breast feed infants… Unfortunately, a very large % of the world have been inoculated with a bioweapon, time will tell. Lord have mercy. God help us!
To the best of my research, the products have been described as gene therapy in SEC filings, as well as in paperwork initially submitted to the FDA. (I hesitate to use the word "therapy" as there does not seem to be anything therapeutic about them when used in this capacity). If they were classified/filed as gene therapy, would not calling them vaccines be considered fraud? Would that not have legal implications?
Yes, indeed. Nothing therapeutic about these drugs. Quite the opposite. The public was an experimental cohort without any knowledge or consent. But worse, they were being primed to accepts totalitarian control using the age old tactic of a foreign/invisible enemy to be feared and some autocratic force promises rescue. Once this has been achieved the WHO One World Treaty will be accepted. Unfortunately the public is not being informed of this effort and is considered in the same category as conspiracy theory, an intentionally demeaning and dismissive term to negate the information about the subject.
Pretty conservative paper as even the term 'gene therapy' has been questioned and rejected by many given the study of these drugs resulting in knowledge they are nanotechnology that can then be used for surveillance and control. Karen Kingston, with a long background in the pharma industry, has been writing about this presenting the science that describes what she says.
One definition not mentioned in this article is that of a bioweapon. The definition I have read is something that does not heal, does not prevent transmission and can cause damage. This is exactly what these drugs are. My concern/criticism is these studies that keep talking about vaccines which these drugs never were. Its focus is actually passe considering the update knowledge we have on these drugs, how they create harm and their use of nanotechnology. Even the Pfizer documents legally mandated release informs us of this information as well as the massive harm they knew would be caused by them. Naomi Wolff's group The War Room has been parsing the Pfizer data and writing summary reports for us who cannot read the 55,000 pp/month being released.
A lady i am seeing has taken 2 pfizer shots in winter/spring of 2022. I took none. Do we have any studies yet suggesting how safe the offspring would be? also, do we have test to determine the level of spike protein blood? thanks. searching for answers without 'being chicken little' calling for the sky to fall.
Please, I have suggested previously, that you personally stop referring to these death shots as 'vaccines'. They have never met the definition of a vaccine and referring to them as such lends a sort of credibility by association.
I agree & in deference to most people’s understanding that they have been called vaccines by the authorities, I’ve long chosen to term them “vaccines”.
I am not much attracted to arguing about what else they should be called. There’s merit on every side.
I’ve used “gene based treatments/injections/preparations”. This isn’t a particular good descriptive term but it has the merit that its novel, it isn’t wrong & it might get people to pay attention and not immediately shut down, as many have been trained to, if they detect a narrative that might be “anti-vax”. Also, I can carry the description, since I’ve worked with agents very similar to these and can accordingly at least explain what they’re designed to do. This as you indicate is substantially different from what is implied by the word “vaccine”.
I don’t call them “gene therapy”, as some people do, I assume perjoratively. That doesn’t automatically get us anywhere.
I do think “bioweapon” is justified. I’ve been explicit that I am certain they’re intentionally harmful, at very least, knowingly harmful.
To quote Margaret Anna Alice (Substack), “Mistakes Were Not Made”.
Thank you Dr. Yeadon for weighing in. I hope that you and your family are all well.
I agree that these injectables are deliberately harmful. Otherwise, they would have been pulled before they ever were released to the world. The Pfizer trial data revealed the extent of harm. Diabolical is the only word that describes what has happened and continues to happen.
Yes, bioweapons. I wrote my response before reading what anyone else posted as I wanted my words to not be influenced by others. I see that they are right in synch with what you write about bioweapons. Correct that people are primed to run if they think vaccines will be criticized but not sure it makes any difference. I have people around me, lots of graduate degrees and professional work, but they lack total intelligence on health, the medical industry, vaccines and these covid drugs in particular. As soon as they seen the V word on your lips they begin screaming at you and throwing polio in your face. Given this hysteria and Cognitive Dissonance that is so severe, it seems valid to begin to use new terminology to begin educating people on these drugs as not vaccines at all. Thank you for your courage to speak out and expose yourself to all the criticism being levied on you.
Jay Couey has said he used this mRNA method in lab experiments & they were called transfections.. it was known to have fatal effects and only used in animals that were scheduled to be sacrificed after a short period of time & unfit for humans.
I agree and with post doc researchers, in my labs, I’ve done similar things.
Some of those junior staff have run me down on social media. Ingrates :)
The So Called vaccine (after the definition was changed after xxx of years)
SEVENTH???? Are people still seriously buying into this?
Dr. Banoun, and other investigators in the States, highlight important unanswered questions regarding simple facts from current molecular biology and biochemistry…
Most importantly integration into genomic DNA… and affect on breast feed infants… Unfortunately, a very large % of the world have been inoculated with a bioweapon, time will tell. Lord have mercy. God help us!
Thank you, Dr. McCullough!
Thank-you for this revealing research. If the public understood what they have been injected with they would keel over from sheer fright.
To the best of my research, the products have been described as gene therapy in SEC filings, as well as in paperwork initially submitted to the FDA. (I hesitate to use the word "therapy" as there does not seem to be anything therapeutic about them when used in this capacity). If they were classified/filed as gene therapy, would not calling them vaccines be considered fraud? Would that not have legal implications?
Yes, indeed. Nothing therapeutic about these drugs. Quite the opposite. The public was an experimental cohort without any knowledge or consent. But worse, they were being primed to accepts totalitarian control using the age old tactic of a foreign/invisible enemy to be feared and some autocratic force promises rescue. Once this has been achieved the WHO One World Treaty will be accepted. Unfortunately the public is not being informed of this effort and is considered in the same category as conspiracy theory, an intentionally demeaning and dismissive term to negate the information about the subject.
Pretty conservative paper as even the term 'gene therapy' has been questioned and rejected by many given the study of these drugs resulting in knowledge they are nanotechnology that can then be used for surveillance and control. Karen Kingston, with a long background in the pharma industry, has been writing about this presenting the science that describes what she says.
One definition not mentioned in this article is that of a bioweapon. The definition I have read is something that does not heal, does not prevent transmission and can cause damage. This is exactly what these drugs are. My concern/criticism is these studies that keep talking about vaccines which these drugs never were. Its focus is actually passe considering the update knowledge we have on these drugs, how they create harm and their use of nanotechnology. Even the Pfizer documents legally mandated release informs us of this information as well as the massive harm they knew would be caused by them. Naomi Wolff's group The War Room has been parsing the Pfizer data and writing summary reports for us who cannot read the 55,000 pp/month being released.
A lady i am seeing has taken 2 pfizer shots in winter/spring of 2022. I took none. Do we have any studies yet suggesting how safe the offspring would be? also, do we have test to determine the level of spike protein blood? thanks. searching for answers without 'being chicken little' calling for the sky to fall.
cc: Peter
So Where Is YOUR Scientific Evidence Malone ?
Ralph Baric Said That "Gain Of Function"
Was "Poised" For Human Emergence. Seriously? Okay:
As I Stand, I Bend My Knees, And I Point To The Sky.
I Am "Poised" To Go To Mars .
-You Can Bet Your Ass I'll Get There Before Baric's
Gain Of Function Can Be Viably Sustained In Our Air.
There Is No Gain Of Function Pathogen In The Air.
That's The Hoax - And A Good One. Ain't It Bob ?