Rejoice! The vaccine is nearly ready!
In case you didn't see the big news this week, Pfizer has announced that the preliminary results from the "Phase 3, late-stage study" of their COVID-19 vaccine sho... View MoreRejoice! The vaccine is nearly ready!
In case you didn't see the big news this week, Pfizer has announced that the preliminary results from the "Phase 3, late-stage study" of their COVID-19 vaccine show that it is "more than 90% effective in preventing COVID-19 in participants without evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection in the first interim efficacy analysis."
Yay! As Dissembler-in-Chief Trump notes, this is a BIG WIN that was only made possible thanks to his COURAGEOUS LEADERSHIP in helping to WARP SPEED the wonderful vaccines directly into everyone's veins (with the help of the US military, of course):
STOCK MARKET UP BIG, VACCINE COMING SOON. REPORT 90% EFFECTIVE. SUCH GREAT NEWS!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 9, 2020
Oh yes, Mr. President, sir! SUCH GREAT NEWS!
. . . Except for just a couple of teensy-weensy little problems. Like the fact that this announcement is just that: an announcement. There is no data to scrutinize here, nothing presented for public review (let alone peer review). This is a press release, literal corporate PR and nothing more.
And the fact that, as even their own "trust us, it works" statement goes on to note (buried 310 words into this lesson in propaganda), "As the study continues, the final vaccine efficacy percentage may vary." In other words: "We're irresponsibly releasing preliminary results that don't tell us anything because they make our future product look good and will generate a lot of excited media headlines in the mainstream corporate media that we fund with our advertising dollars."
And there's the fact that right after the announcement (and subsequent media extravaganza) Pfizer's CEO and executive vice president both sold millions of dollars worth of stock in the company. Nothing suspicious at all here, you crazy conspiracy theorists!
And then there's the fact that the coronavirus vaccine trials themselves are a documented sham. As I discussed with James Evan Pilato on New World Next Week recently, the vaccine candidates are not even being measured on the basis of whether or not they can prevent infection, but whether they can reduce symptoms such as coughs and headaches in patients who have already tested positive. As even Forbes.com contributor Walter Hasseltine notes: "These trials seem designed to prove their vaccines work, even if the measured effects are minimal."
But disregarding all of that, there's one other major issue that has been glossed over in all the breathless coverage of this new miracle cure that is about to deliver us from the COVID plague: This "vaccine" is not a vaccine in the traditional sense. It is an experimental injectable technology that has never been used before in humans.
You see, the Pfizer/BioNTech "vaccine"—dubbed "BNT162b2"—is an mRNA vaccine.
Alright, let's start at the ground floor: What is an mRNA vaccine?
Excellent question! Here's how the New York Times describes this little miracle of modern science:
"Pfizer’s vaccine consists of genetic material called mRNA encased in tiny particles that shuttle it into our cells. From there, it stimulates the immune system to make antibodies that protect against the virus."
If, after reading that, you're left wondering exactly what any of that means, why it's important, or how it's different from an ordinary vaccine, don't worry; you didn't miss anything. They just didn't tell you.
To understand what's really happening here, it's important to understand that the terms "inoculation," "immunization," "vaccination" and "mRNA vaccination" tend to be used interchangeably by laymen, but they are in fact distinct concepts.
Historically speaking, the word "inoculation" is used to describe the process of deliberately infecting someone with smallpox virus in order to achieve immunity from that disease. The practice originated in China several centuries ago, where dried out scabs of lightly infected smallpox sufferers were powdered and then blown up the nostrils of healthy people. The procedure infected the patient with a (hopefully mild) strain of smallpox, thus conferring immunity on them. This practice was brought over to Europe via Turkey and was eventually adopted around the world.
"Vaccination" was originally used to refer to a slightly different process. It was developed in the late 18th century by Edward Jenner, who discovered that those who had been exposed to cowpox—a less virulent relative of smallpox—were themselves immune from smallpox. He "vaccinated" a boy with a cowpox vesicle from a milkmaid and then inoculated him with smallpox two months later. The boy did not develop smallpox, and the procedure was hailed as a breakthrough of medical science. The term "vaccination," derived from the Latin word for cow, eventually came to refer to the general process of introducing immunogens or attenuated infectious agents into the body in order to stimulate the immune system to fight infections.
"Immunization," meanwhile, refers to any process by which the immune system is stimulated in order to achieve immunity to an infectious disease. Of course, this is generally done today by vaccination, but the concept of "immunization" refers to the broader idea of inducing an immune response in order to acquire immunity to a given pathogen.
So now we arrive at mRNA vaccines. In contrast to vaccination, which involves introducing an immunogen into the body, mRNA vaccines seek to introduce messenger RNA into the body in order to "trick" that body's cells into producing immunogens, which then stimulate an immune response. In order to understand any of this, you need to know about chromosomes, DNA strands, genes, RNA polymerase, ribosomes, amino acid and protein production.
Luckily, this is the 21st century and there are no shortage of handy-dandy visual guides to the whole process on the controlled information platforms and mainstream government science sites. Long story short: ribosomes synthesize proteins in your cells by "reading" free-floating messenger RNA. So where does this mRNA come from? In nature, this mRNA is created inside your cells' nucleus using your genes as a blueprint. In essence, your mRNA is reflective of who you are as a genetically unique individual.
All of this led scientists to a "What could possibly go wrong" idea: if we artificially insert mRNA into a cell, we can get that cell to produce a specific protein! Thus, if we want to train your body how to fight the dreaded SARS-CoV-2, we insert the mRNA that will cause your own cells to start producing the infamous "spike" protein that makes this "killer" virus so unbelievably "deadly." Your immune system will then learn to recognize and defend against these proteins so that when you're exposed to flying bat AIDS your body will be able to fight it off and you won't develop COVID-19.
Or, that's the narrative, anyway. Regardless of how much of that story you believe, the underlying mechanism is there: Pfizer and its Big Pharma brethren are going to start sticking mRNA into you in the hopes of tricking your own cells into producing proteins that are foreign to your system.
Hmmm. What could possibly go wrong?
But wait! Things get even creepier!
You may have heard good old Bill Gates himself in his many interviews on the subject of experimental vaccines referring not only to RNA vaccines, but DNA vaccines.
DNA vaccines, as the name might suggest, involves injecting not mRNA but DNA into the body. Once the DNA is taken up, the cells' natural metabolic processes begin synthesizing proteins based on the genetic code contained in the DNA.
Even mainstream science admits that there are potentially catastrophic risks to this process, however.
First, the DNA has to make it all the way into the nucleus, so DNA vaccines require more invasive means of delivery, such as jet injection (which may cause "Significant shearing of DNA after high-pressure expulsion") and liposome-mediated delivery, which may be toxic or itself cause disease.
Second, Wikipedia lists one of the potential adverse effects of DNA vaccines as "inducing antibody production against DNA" which from my (admittedly laymen's) perspective sound rather severe.
And last but not least, even the Gates-championed, Gavi-supported Moderna admit in their own materials that "DNA vaccines have a risk of permanently changing a person’s DNA."
Yes, these DNA and RNA vaccines are the incredible new technologies being touted by esteemed microbiologists like Bill Gates as the way to "warp speed" these "vaccines" directly into our arms in a matter of mere months.
But make no mistake: these are not your grandma's vaccines (let alone your great-great-great-grandma's inoculations).
And guess what? This is only the beginning. As radical as these "vaccine" technologies are, they represent only the thin edge of the wedge of what will soon be injected into our bodies in the name of saving us from the next killer (or utterly banal) virus that is unleashed from the government's laboratories.
So, what else do they have in store for the future of what we commonly (but erroneously) refer to as "vaccines?" Good question. I have a lot more to say about that in a report that will be appearing in the near future. For now, perhaps these research articles will give you a sense of where this is all going.
Microneedle coronavirus vaccine triggers immune response in mice https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/microneedle-coronavirus-vaccine-triggers-immune-response-mice
Viral assembly of oriented quantum dot nanowires https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC165810/
Engineering tailored nanoparticles with microbes: quo vadis? https://europepmc.org/article/MED/26271947
Ordering of Quantum Dots Using Genetically Engineered Viruses https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11988570/
With a ‘hello,’ Microsoft and UW demonstrate first fully automated DNA data storage https://www.washington.edu/news/2019/03/21/first-fully-automated-dna-data-storage/
Intrigued? Stay tuned.
Brief background: My readers know I’ve presented a complete case to show the SARS-CoV-2 virus was never proved to exist in the first place. So the whole idea of a vaccine is a non-sequitur, an absurdi... View MoreBrief background: My readers know I’ve presented a complete case to show the SARS-CoV-2 virus was never proved to exist in the first place. So the whole idea of a vaccine is a non-sequitur, an absurdity. Likewise, the PCR test for “the virus” is a fraud on several levels [11]:
For example, the number of “cycles” for which the test is set is a key factor. Each cycle is a huge amplification of the tissue sample taken from the patient.
When you blow up that tissue sample above 34 cycles, you get gigantic numbers of false-positive results, even by the standards of the test. Fauci has admitted it. I’ve pointed out that FDA guidelines nevertheless recommend doing the test at up to 40 cycles. This alone explains reports of “rising COVID case numbers.”
Let’s say Pfizer and then Moderna win FDA approval to release their vaccines in the US. With the military doing the logistics of shipping, millions of doses move out, and soon, an extraordinary number of Americans are lining up to take the shot.
After a suitable period of time, the elite medical planners will change the way the PCR test is done. The number of cycles will be drastically reduced. That order will go out to labs in the US.
What does this mean? It means that far fewer positive test results will occur.
Therefore, the trend of “new COVID cases” will stop rising. It will level off, and then it will fall.
This rigging will be heralded as proof that that vaccine is producing a victory over the virus.
How They Will Make the COVID Vaccine Appear to be Working
This does not address the genetic aspects of the vaccines, merely the psy-op for convincing people it works.
Committee Chair and Bill Sponsor Admit “Imminent” COVID-19 Vaccine Is Reason for Sudden Push to Eliminate Parental Rights
DC Bill B23-0171 Allowing Children 11 Years and Older to Be Vaccinated Without Parental Knowledge or Consent Advances
Legislation proposed by the District of Columbia’s City Council would allow children as young as 11 years of age to get vaccinated without parental knowledge or consent.
South Korean’s Medical Association Urges Government to Suspend Flu Shot Program After 25 People Die
One of the interesting side effects of the COVID Plandemic, and the rush to bring to market a new, untested COVID vaccine, is that many people around the world have become more skeptical of vaccines,
Please explore the articles and references on the vacciNATION page.
Key Points
Question: Is prenatal acetaminophen exposure measured in meconium associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and is the association mediated by changes in functional br... View MoreKey Points
Question: Is prenatal acetaminophen exposure measured in meconium associated with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and is the association mediated by changes in functional brain connectivity?
Findings: In this birth cohort study of 345 children, acetaminophen exposure detected in meconium was associated with increased odds of ADHD and altered brain connectivity between the frontoparietal and default mode networks to sensorimotor cortices. Altered frontoparietal-sensorimotor cortex connectivity mediated an association of prenatal acetaminophen exposure with hyperactivity.
Meaning: The findings that ADHD and related brain phenotypes are associated with prenatal acetaminophen exposure measured directly in meconium suggest that the safety of the drug’s use during pregnancy should be reevaluated.
Abstract
Importance: Despite evidence of an association between prenatal acetaminophen exposure and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in offspring, the drug is not contraindicated during pregnancy, possibly because prior studies have relied on maternal self-report, failed to quantify acetaminophen dose, and lacked mechanistic insight.
Objective: To examine the association between prenatal acetaminophen exposure measured in meconium (hereinafter referred to as meconium acetaminophen) and ADHD in children aged 6 to 7 years, along with the potential for mediation by functional brain connectivity.
Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective birth cohort study from the Centre Hospitalier Université de Sherbrooke in Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada, included 394 eligible children, of whom 345 had meconium samples collected at delivery and information on ADHD diagnosis. Mothers were enrolled from September 25, 2007, to September 10, 2009, at their first prenatal care visit or delivery and were followed up when children were aged 6 to 7 years. When children were aged 9 to 11 years, resting-state brain connectivity was assessed with magnetic resonance imaging. Data for the present study were collected from September 25, 2007, to January 18, 2020, and analyzed from January 7, 2019, to January 22, 2020.
Exposures Acetaminophen levels measured in meconium.
Main Outcomes and Measures Physician diagnosis of ADHD was determined at follow-up when children were aged 6 to 7 years or from medical records. Resting-state brain connectivity was assessed with magnetic resonance imaging; attention problems and hyperactivity were assessed with the Behavioral Assessment System for Children Parent Report Scale. Associations between meconium acetaminophen levels and outcomes were estimated with linear and logistic regressions weighted on the inverse probability of treatment to account for potential confounders. Causal mediation analysis was used to test for mediation of the association between prenatal acetaminophen exposure and hyperactivity by resting-state brain connectivity.
Results Among the 345 children included in the analysis (177 boys [51.3%]; mean [SD] age, 6.58 [0.54] years), acetaminophen was detected in 199 meconium samples (57.7%), and ADHD was diagnosed in 33 children (9.6%). Compared with no acetaminophen, detection of acetaminophen in meconium was associated with increased odds of ADHD (odds ratio [OR], 2.43; 95% CI, 1.41-4.21). A dose-response association was detected; each doubling of exposure increased the odds of ADHD by 10% (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.19). Children with acetaminophen detected in meconium showed increased negative connectivity between frontoparietal and default mode network nodes to clusters in the sensorimotor cortices, which mediated an indirect effect on increased child hyperactivity (14%; 95% CI, 1%-26%).
Conclusions and Relevance Together with the multitude of other cohort studies showing adverse neurodevelopment associated with prenatal acetaminophen exposure, this work suggests caution should be used in administering acetaminophen during pregnancy. Research into alternative pain management strategies for pregnant women could be beneficial.
Association of Prenatal Acetaminophen Exposure With Risk of ADHD
This birth cohort study examines the association between prenatal acetaminophen exposure measured in meconium and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children aged 6 to 7 years, along with the
It has come to our attention that a second participant in AstraZeneca’s Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine trials has come down with a serious neurological condition that the company claims is not a... View MoreIt has come to our attention that a second participant in AstraZeneca’s Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine trials has come down with a serious neurological condition that the company claims is not at all related to the volunteer getting vaccinated.
Just like the first participant, who we reported developed severe spinal inflammation, this second one also manifested the exact same disease, which AstraZeneca claims is “rare” and unrelated to its clinical trials.
After facing a barrage of criticism for its failure to disclose the details of its ongoing human trials, AstraZeneca reluctantly released data suggesting that transverse myelitis is a potential negative outcome of getting vaccinated for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19).
Second AstraZeneca trial participant develops rare neurological condition following COVID-19 vaccination
It has come to our attention that a second participant in AstraZeneca’s Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine trials has come down with a serious neurological condition that t
Drug maker GlaxoSmithKline may need to slaughter half a million sharks to harvest squalene, an oil made in shark livers to make a new line of COVID jabs. Glaxo mixes squalene with a witches’ brew of p... View MoreDrug maker GlaxoSmithKline may need to slaughter half a million sharks to harvest squalene, an oil made in shark livers to make a new line of COVID jabs. Glaxo mixes squalene with a witches’ brew of proprietary surfactants to produce its controversial AS03 vaccine adjuvant.
Scientific studies have linked squalene adjuvants to Gulf War syndrome and to a wave of debilitating neurological disorders including epidemics of narcolepsy caused by Glaxo’s H1N1 Pandemrix vaccine during the 2009 swine flu “pandemic.” One study showed a 13-fold increased risk of narcolepsy in children who received Pandemrix.
The devastating cascade of brain injuries to children and health care workers forced the termination of that Glaxo vaccine after European governments used only a small fraction of the jabs they had purchased from Glaxo. A recent study links squalene to carcinomas. In a bizarre and reckless twist, Glaxo has revived the dangerous adjuvant as its hall pass to the COVID-19 money orgy.
The company said it would manufacture a billion doses of this adjuvant for potential use in coronavirus vaccines. Around 3,000 sharks are needed to extract one ton of squalene.
READ MORE
Half a Million Sharks Could Be Killed to Make Vaccine • Children’s Health Defense
1/2 million sharks may be killed to harvest squaline for known harmful vaccine adjuvant
page=2&callback_module_id=pages&callback_item_id=162&year=&month=
View More
McGuire likes this. 
Tim BrownFounder