Click here for Exit the Cuckoo's Nest's posting standards and aims.
Click here to sign the People's Proclamation and send it to everyone you know.
Source: Unfleshed Substack
The Widespread Gene Therapy Problem
Sometime in the (Possible) Near Future
You wake to the sound of your alarm. Not the normal pleasant tune, but the blaring, PTSD triggering one. The one that you know will announce that you need an update. You slowly crawl out of bed to get to your “Mediface” before the alarm gets progressively louder and eventually painful.
You scan into your portal and some government official (you can’t remember who anymore, as they change too often) tells you that there has been another “emergence.” Somewhere in Argentina this time. It never matters where it comes from anymore. The response is the same. Crack the code, update your implant (which we just call the “plant”), push the button, take the ride.
It feels like it hasn’t even been a month since the last emergence. They happen more and more often now. They say it’s from poverty and climate change, making the people and animals sicker.
How would you know? You haven’t been out of the city in years.
“I hope I don’t get the shakes from this one like I did last time”, you tell yourself. The Mediface A.I. politely tells you that scientists aren’t really sure why it happens, but there is a course of pills you can take to make it manageable. They make you nauseous and a little dizzy.
 |
“Damn… I have a date next week and I’m not current on my intimacy protection shots. I’m gonna have to double-boost. I hate double-boosting.
“I wish my fiancee was still here. Then I wouldn’t have to go through all this just to date. It’s been a year now. I can’t understand how she just died one day… out of the blue. They wouldn’t even do an autopsy because the ‘plant didn’t record any abnormalities and they said it would be a waste of resources to do one.
“I just wish I knew what happened…
The tears start to come.
The Mediface pipes up again, “Your hormone levels have shifted out of normal ranges, would you like an adjustment?”
“No.”
Don’t dwell, there’s nothing that can be done now anyway. Try to remember the good times. She would’ve wanted you to move on and live life well. Take comfort in the common string of thoughts to help get through the pain and grief. Sometimes it works.
You push the button and a familiar feeling comes on, almost electric. You immediately move on to something else to draw your thoughts away. You’re hungry and want to make an omelet, but ever since the last avian flu emergence, the eggs all taste off. I’m grateful they were able to beat the virus with their aggressive vaccination campaign, but something definitely changed. “Any eggs are better than no eggs, I suppose.”
You skip breakfast and decide to get ready to leave for work. Today is different. You have a pass to travel outside of your 15-minute “Hab-Zone” to meet with the sister-team for your project. On the way out the door, you start to feel a little shaky. Looks like the double was a little aggressive. Should’ve rescheduled the date. Well, that’s why you’ve got pills and the Epi-Defib pack, right? You grab them off the wall next to the Mediface and put them in your bag, just in case...
The Problem
We are in the middle of a perilous transition point in human history. The metastasis of gene therapy treatments from risky, last-ditch solutions for rare genetic abnormalities to mass population experimentation, with minimal safety testing, is staggering to behold. “Pandemic” countermeasures aside, the future being planned for us will likely include the deployment of these interventions for countless human diseases/conditions, livestock “health,” plant life and various novel applications. Because the risks for these myriad applications of genetic manipulation aren’t yet well understood, we could very well be setting up for a population-wide disaster.
Question: What would happen if a ubiquitous mutagen were introduced worldwide? Would you see higher rates of cancer? Would you see more neurological pathologies? Would you see a rise in ill-defined sickness and death? What else would you anticipate?
You may be thinking, “why do we have to worry about these mRNA/DNA shots still? Hardly anyone is continuing to take them,” and you’d be mostly correct. At the time of writing this article, there has been relatively low uptake of the first bivalent mRNA vaccines. Unfortunately, this campaign was only the foot in the door needed to produce myriad different “vaccines” and therapeutics, all based on accelerated safety trials and dubious data. I am not terribly concerned with new shots being mandated for adults, but I am very worried that millions of children will be routinely subjected to relatively high-risk shots without informed consent (more on that later), in order to attend schools and college
The CDC just placed the Covid-19 mRNA vaccines on the routine childhood schedule (under the false virtue of the Vaccines for Children Program) which now allows states to mandate these shots if they choose. I’m also worried that the low level of safety testing will translate to even lower levels of safety for animals and anything else it is applied to.
The following examples will better illustrate the depth and breadth of the problem. I’ll begin with an illustration of clearly fallacious ideology that blends magical thinking with narcissism.
This is Jane Metcalfe, unironically exhibiting scientific hubris by promoting the “transform(ation of) our own species” using our “godlike technologies”.
Source:
If you didn’t figure it out for yourself while watching this clip, I’ll spell it out for you; Jane Metcalfe is a propagandist for scientism. She co-founded Wired magazine and is now pushing transhumanism to save the human race, while making a steady profit I’m sure. If you pay attention to the terms and speaking style she uses, you’ll notice she is speaking less like a scientist and more like a public relations agent or member of the clergy.
Ivan Illich had a few words of warning about just this kind of false salvation by scientism:
“Today the medical establishment is about to reclaim the right to perform miracles. Medicine claims the patient even when the etiology is uncertain, the prognosis unfavorable, and the therapy of an experimental nature. Under these circumstances the attempt at a “medical miracle” can be a hedge against failure, since miracles may only be hoped for and cannot, by definition, be expected. The radical monopoly over health care that the contemporary physician claims now forces him to reassume priestly and royal functions that his ancestors gave up when they became specialized as technical healers.
“The medicalization of the miracle further provides insight into the social function of terminal care. The patient is strapped down and controlled like a spaceman and then displayed on television. These heroic performances serve as a rain-dance for millions, a liturgy in which realistic hopes for autonomous life are transmuted into the delusion that doctors will deliver health from outer space.”
We have witnessed 1:1 examples of these predictions, from claiming the “miraculous” nature of the vaccines, to lighting Fauci prayer candles signifying the new clergy, and don’t forget, the wonderful performance pieces from our celebrities, influencers, and politicians promoting the shots or getting vaccinated on camera. All this in the promise of beating death and suffering. All this to ease fears. The fear campaigns will only increase in intensity over time out of necessity, as feeding the insatiable beast will continue unless stopped or bypassed entirely.
“Miracle Technology”
Let’s look at some of the proposed technologies on the horizon.
First up, a Nature article where the authors go over a multitude of possible applications for the mRNA based gene therapies. I have a challenge for you: in the early portion of the article, the authors claim there is no risk of insertional mutagenesis using this mRNA tech. The authors even cite a source! Try to find the actual proof of this claim, and in doing so, you’ll begin to see what I experienced over several months worth of correspondence, asking for proof of this from the CDC. The only evidence that is ever offered is a frustratingly circular argument that basically ends with a “because it just doesn’t”.
mRNA drugs have yielded numerous inspiring treatments for refractory or previously incurable diseases, including infectious diseases, genetic diseases, cancers, and cardiovascular diseases. In particular, the mRNA vaccine has shown a strong advantage in the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection and may also be a potential approach against the infection of other viruses and pathogenic microorganisms, including malaria, respiratory syncytial virus, and HIV."
-Nature, “mRNA-based therapeutics: powerful and versatile tools to combat diseases”
Scientism isn’t science, and these gene therapy “vaccines” are only the most recent abuse of a trusting public by criminal pharma corporations and their crony government officials.
For the sake of time, I’m going to quickly show off some “miraculous” implementations of our favorite new technology. Away we go!
The mRNA Gravy Train
Aerosolized mRNA Vaginal Douche
Worried about AIDS? We’ve got a miracle on the horizon for that!
One possible future for HIV “protection”, an mRNA douche….
Doesn’t that sound lovely ladies?
Nothing says “smart and sexy” like spraying an mRNA gene therapy vaccine into your womb. Summer’s Eve should take a hard pass on this one.
Cattle Experiments
Care for a little market expansion? Here are some gene therapy “vaccines” for the food supply…
Don’t miss the little detail about implantables delivering continuous mRNA for antigen production: an idiotic idea that would almost assuredly lead to constant inflammation, autoimmunity, and likely worse. Think of the recently exposed, tortuous beagle experiments, only this time using cows, and putting immunogenic/mutagenic particles into the poor animal, continuously, until it dies or is euthanized.
Non Technical Summary
Bovine respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a significant viral pathogens of young cows that is a key component of the respiratory disease complex and often leads to secondary bacterial pneumonia. Prefusion F has recently shown to be highly efficacious in barrier housed RSV challenged cows. However, the difficulty in generating prefusion F along with the cost of its production are a hurdle for adoption to the farm. RSV immunity also tends to wane quickly and given the complications of field or pen raised cattle and their stressors and other circulating diseases, and aprotein vaccine may not prove highly efficacious in the real world. Here, we will test a novel mRNA vaccine system we have developed that substantially lowers the price point for production animals and may lead to more thermal stable transcripts compatible with vaccinating on the farm. The use of an alternative delivery system rather than lipid nanoparticles will also lower the vaccine costs. We expect to demonstrate efficacy of the vaccine platform using mice at first as proof of principle before switching to a full cow vaccination and challenge system in year 2. Our overall goal is to test a novel mRNA system for inducing immunological protection from bovine RSV infection. We hypothesize that a prefusion F mRNA delivered continuously by vaccine implant will lead to prolonged and robust cellular and antibody immunity. Here, we will optimize our vaccine further and then test for potential correlates of protection to examine for in eventually challenged cows.
If you thought the fish were going to be safe, you would be wrong.
A range of computational techniques were used in this work to find possible T- and B-cell epitopes in V. harveyi hemolysin protein, which were finally stitched into a multi-epitope mRNA vaccine… Based on our findings, we believe that developing a vaccine against the etiological agent of the V. harveyi outbreak in fish should begin with the vaccine candidate. In addition, the possible epitopes discovered in this study can be employed in future research. Nevertheless, more testing is needed to show that our designed vaccine is an effective preventive against V. harveyi infection in fish species.
If you think going vegan will keep mRNA tech out of your food chain? Think again.
 |
“Ideally, a single plant would produce enough mRNA to vaccinate a single person,” said Juan Pablo Giraldo, an associate professor in UCR’s Department of Botany and Plant Sciences who is leading the research, done in collaboration with scientists from UC San Diego and Carnegie Mellon University.
“We are testing this approach with spinach and lettuce and have long-term goals of people growing it in their own gardens,” Giraldo said. “Farmers could also eventually grow entire fields of it.”
I also recommend a great recent podcast by James Corbett of The Corbett Report exhibiting more gene therapy tech being implemented in the food supply.
Trust the $cience
Most of these studies will likely be carried out by industry sponsored or employed scientists. As we have seen with the current batch of vaccines, data manipulation and favorable interpretation is the order of the day, not the exception. This is an old practice, and it can get worse if the propagandists are allowed to maintain media supremacy, shouting down dissenting voices and likening skeptics to terrorists.
As an example of data manipulation, I will quote an article by the BMJ’s Peter Doshi regarding the seminal release of the Pfizer phase 3 trial data that should be sufficient.
“All attention has focused on the dramatic efficacy results: Pfizer reported 170 PCR confirmed covid-19 cases, split 8 to 162 between vaccine and placebo groups. But these numbers were dwarfed by a category of disease called “suspected covid-19”—those with symptomatic covid-19 that were not PCR confirmed. According to FDA’s report on Pfizer’s vaccine, there were “3410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1816 in the placebo group.”
With 20 times more suspected than confirmed cases, this category of disease cannot be ignored simply because there was no positive PCR test result. Indeed this makes it all the more urgent to understand. A rough estimate of vaccine efficacy against developing covid-19 symptoms, with or without a positive PCR test result, would be a relative risk reduction of 19% (see footnote)—far below the 50% effectiveness threshold for authorization set by regulators. Even after removing cases occurring within 7 days of vaccination (409 on Pfizer’s vaccine vs. 287 on placebo), which should include the majority of symptoms due to short-term vaccine reactogenicity, vaccine efficacy remains low: 29%.”
This was never addressed appropriately, and the precedent it set is yet another step in the wrong direction. These data weren’t ignored on accident. The mRNA platform is too valuable.
In light of the recent moves by federal government agencies (led by industry of course) to make the covid-19 shots a yearly occurrence, I will point out that this was always the plan, as is the development of a massive library of “vaccines” for future pandemic prevention, all developed, produced, and marketed at our expense of course. Here is an article from the December 7, 2020 issue of New York Magazine titled “We Had The Vaccine The Whole Time”.
Here are some quotes for hindsight:
“None of the scientists I spoke to for this story were at all surprised by either outcome — all said they expected the vaccines were safe and effective all along. Which has made a number of them wonder whether, in the future, at least, we might find a way to do things differently — without even thinking in terms of trade-offs. Rethinking our approach to vaccine development, they told me, could mean moving faster without moving any more recklessly. A layperson might look at the 2020 timelines and question whether, in the case of an onrushing pandemic, a lengthy Phase III trial — which tests for efficacy — is necessary. But the scientists I spoke to about the way this pandemic may reshape future vaccine development were more focused on how to accelerate or skip Phase I, which tests for safety. More precisely, they thought it would be possible to do all the research, development, preclinical testing, and Phase I trials for new viral pandemics before those new viruses had even emerged — to have those vaccines sitting on the shelf and ready to go when they did. They also thought it was possible to do this for nearly the entire universe of potential future viral pandemics — at least 90 percent of them, one of them told me, and likely more.”
‘“We do this every year for influenza,” Rasmussen says. “We don’t know which influenza viruses are going to be circulating, so we make our best guess. And then we formulate that into a vaccine using essentially the same technology platform that all the other influenza vaccines are based on.” The whole process takes a few months, and utilizes a “platform” that we already know is basically safe. With enough funding, you could do the same for viral pandemics, and indeed conduct Phase I trials for the entire set of possible future outbreaks before any of them made themselves known to the public. In the case of a pandemic produced by a new strain in these families, you might want to do some limited additional safety testing, but because the most consequential adverse effects take place in the days right after the vaccine is given, that additional diligence could be almost immediate.
One more point on this neverending mRNA campaigns: a short clip from a recent VRBPAC meeting (3/7/2023) where Dr. Jay Portnoy expressed the idea of new vaccines being used for influenza, where repeated licensing is no longer needed and the assumption would be that any “update” could happen without the previous level of regulatory scrutiny because?…. You guessed it, the Covid vaccines have been allowed to do so!
Are you starting to see the many angles of profit motive and deregulation that are inherent here? Historically, what happens when there are incredible profits to be made and very little regulation and accountability involved? (Don’t forget the cartelesque protections afforded by the government)?
6:25:32-6:26:17
The Intelligencer article, perhaps more than any I’ve read, embodies the idea illustrated by Ivan Illich’s prescient 1976 work “Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health”. Here is a short excerpt that will sound grotesquely familiar:
“Once a society organizes for a preventative disease-hunt, it gives epidemic proportions to diagnosis. This ultimate triumph of therapeutic culture turns the independence of the average healthy person into an intolerable form of deviance.
In the long run the main activity of such an inner-directed systems society leads to the phantom production of life expectancy as a commodity. By equating statistical man with biologically unique men, an insatiable demand for finite resources is created. The individual is subordinated to the greater “needs” of the whole, preventative procedures become compulsory, and the right of the patient to withhold consent to his own treatment vanishes as the doctor argues that he must submit to diagnosis, since society cannot afford the burden of curative procedures that would be even more expensive.”
Illich, “Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health”, pg 33
Illich’s idea of medical hubris bringing about a medical nemesis, a divine retribution that would see most of us punished, seems to be manifesting in our time. He suggests that a balancing would eventually come. I recommend reading his work and the solutions he put forth.
Another example showing that the expansion of gene therapy experiments and treatments have been well planned and game-theorized is Pfizer’s response to the recent work by Project Veritas “exposing” directed evolution, which may at times fall into the realm of dual-use research, A.K.A. bioweapons research. In their response, Pfizer mentioned that “these studies are required by U.S. and global regulators for all antiviral products”, which is the schoolyard equivalent of teasing the slow, fat kid in a game of tag, while they seethe with impotent rage at losing to the more agile peers… sorry, too personal.
My point is, they are plainly saying they are protected by big daddy government, and that there is nothing we can do about it if they were doing directed evolution for research purposes. Protection was part of the deals made. That’s how crime syndicates operate.
One of the reasons why “directed evolution” can be seen as taboo is because it has the potential to create variants of unknown pathogenicity. This was always one of the main problems with these spike protein-only vaccines. Life evolves, and if you didn’t have a way to stop the spread of infection and transmission through the vaccines, there would always be a risk of rapid evolution and evasion of the antibodies. This is another example of how “the speed of science” is a cover for dangerously negligent actions.
I like to use pro-vaccine sources to back up my claims, so here’s another; This is professor Vincent Racaniello of Columbia University answering a question on spike protein based vaccines.
“Why’d they use spike? Because they decided that would be a quick one, right, just one protein, mRNA based or vectored, plus you make antibodies against the spike, they’re gonna block attachment to the cell, right, so that’s gonna block infection. The weakness is it puts a lot of pressure on the spike and that’s why we’re getting variants. What saved us, have been T-cells...”
Timestamp: 1:59:10-1:59:51 (click here to watch from this timestamp)
Bypassing the System
So now that we know definitively that the antibodies don’t block infection, and that they do contribute to increased variant creation, why are we continuing with these vaccines at all, considering that most people at this point will have some form of T-cell cross-reactivity?
I’d expect a great deal of mental gymnastics at this point to explain that one.
The more you look, the more you will see that the gene therapy biotech gold rush is upon us. All they needed was an excuse to bypass the standard regulations involved with gene therapy. This was done by changing the definitions used to describe these technologies. It was taking entirely too long to get gene therapies like mRNA or vectored DNA approved through the standard processes, so someone had a bright idea: change the target, change the treatment and the safety standards. If the shot produces a protein that your body needs but can’t produce, it’s still gene therapy. If the shot produces a protein that elicits a desired immune response (like antibodies to a virus), it’s now called a vaccine. The technology is the same, but the regulatory processes are very different. As a contrast, some gene therapies have been in trials for over a decade, while the hepatitis B vaccine given to one-day old babies only needed a trial that lasted 5 days. And don’t get me started on the amount of aluminum that is in that shot, this article is long enough as it is.
To finish off this point with a bang, I’ll use a quote from everyone’s favorite bow-tied scientismo, Dr. Peter Hotez, who will now likely deem me a terrorist for writing this article.
“The companies that are in this are not traditional vaccine companies; Biontech, Moderna, Astrazeneca, and the attraction I think for a lot of those companies was this was a way to accelerate their new technologies and they also got, in some cases, got a lot of support to do that. It also provided a mechanism to get through the regulatory hurdles, and I don’t think it’s so much the financial incentive for Covid-19 vaccines but now they’ll be able to apply that mRNA technology to cancer vaccines, to vaccines for (neurodegenerative) disease...”
Timestamp: 49:55-50:45
Oh, those altruistic big pharma companies, always subverting their profits for safety. That sounds historically accurate right? ESPECIALLY when the government or Department of Defense is involved! That would be blasphemous!
I will now annihilate that notion:
I’ll start with Johnson & Johnson as they’re one of the manufacturers involved with the gene therapy based vaccines. J&J knew and hid the fact that there was asbestos in their baby powder (BABY POWDER, the kind you expose BABIES to)
Eventually, even the FDA had to come clean about the dangers of Johnson & Johnson baby powder.
J&J had another massive fraud case where they had to pay out $2.2 BILLION for having “jeopardized the health and safety of patients and (having) damaged the public trust”. I wonder how damaged the public trust will be after a genomic integration is found?
 |
Everybody remember the thalidomide babies? Seemed like government officials “dropped the ball” again. I wonder why it keeps happening when no one is punished?
“F.D.A. investigators referred their findings in July 1963 to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution. Agency lawyers listed 24 counts under which Richardson-Merrell violated the law, including that the company had marketed an unapproved drug and claimed that it was safe.
But in September 1964, the Department of Justice concluded that ‘criminal prosecution is neither warranted nor desirable’.”
Speaking of being unaccountable, was anyone ever punished for the Tuskegee syphilis experiment which was conducted by a federal agency?
How about Ranitidine from Glaxo exposing its consumers to carcinogenic NDMA for 40 years, when people in the company knew the risks and chose not to disclose them?
Then the scientists at Glaxo Laboratories created a molecule they called ranitidine, and in 1978 the company was granted a US patent. The molecule was new, but not novel. The scientists had, as scientists sometimes do, looked for a way to mimic the success of an established drug—in this case, one that healed ulcers and could be used to treat heartburn. They developed ranitidine quickly, and the US Food and Drug Administration reviewed it quickly. Glaxo gave it the brand name Zantac…
In GSK’s telling, Rosenberg’s review of 13 epidemiological studies found no connection between ranitidine and any cancer. But that’s not quite right: She reviewed 11 studies, and four of them found an association that the scientists said merited further research. Many of the studies Rosenberg evaluated had examined overall cancer risk. Wisner says an analysis combining epidemiological studies that contain bladder cancer data, including some considered by Rosenberg, shows “a statistically significant elevated risk if you take ranitidine.”
Mercury is another complex topic in pharmaceutical malfeasance. From feeding toxic calomel to babies to “soothe” them, to directly injecting it (and still doing so) into hundreds of millions of arms yearly in various vaccines, mercury has stood the test of time for continual use with minimal benefit and potentially serious risk. It has a fascinating history, but it should have been ubiquitously replaced long ago.
Mercury, in all its forms, is one of the most toxic metals on Earth. First used in the 1930s and 1940s to kill bacteria in antiseptic products and used inside vaccines to prevent needle puncture contamination, thimerosal was tested in rabbits and later in humans, and though the subjects died days after being given high doses of the compound, mercury was deemed safe.
One more item to consider: whenever the DOD is involved (as DARPA was in the development of these technologies), expect disclosure of safety risks to be less than forthcoming. There are many examples, but one of the most relevant is the connection between fluoride, aluminum, and the development of the atomic bomb.
Government secrecy protections, powerful corporations and lobbies combined to hide the dangers of fluoride and aluminum processing for decades, and are still doing so. Please reference the work and litigation done by the Fluoride Action Network as well as Christopher Bryson’s informative book “The Fluoride Deception”. The battle for disclosure is still ongoing, and the mRNA vaccines are running in the same vein. There will be no disclosure of risk and damages without a fierce fight.
There are more examples but I believe the point has been made regarding pharma fraud and mass harm.
There is another potential danger that may come from these platforms, one that may use the excuse of preventing the zoonosis of emerging diseases or potential pandemic pathogens. These would be the incredibly risky self-spreading gene therapy based vaccines, the kind that would mimic infectious spread and bypass any pretense of informed consent (and also be extremely difficult to monitor for safety and efficacy. Perfect for statistical manipulation).
“But that would be illegal” is what a sane person would say. Sane, but uninformed, as this type of law has already been passed in a nation, regardless of how it would affect people globally. This is an excerpt from the German Protection Against Infection Act (translation courtesy of Robert Koch Institute)
Section 21 Vaccines
In the case of a vaccination stipulated by law, one required under the provisions of this Act, a vaccination recommended to the general public by the supreme health authority of the Land or a vaccination pursuant to section 17 paragraph 4 of the Act on Soldiers (Soldatengesetz), vaccines containing micro-organisms which can be excreted by the vaccinated person and taken up by others, may be employed. The basic constitutional right to physical integrity (Article 2 paragraph 2 sentence 1 of the Basic Law) shall be limited in this respect.
-Protection against Infection Act (Infektionsschutzgesetz, IfSG)
I shouldn’t need to elaborate at this point how dangerous a concept this is, or how ironic it would be to use an infectious agent to prevent another infectious agent, possibly spreading both around at the same time which would amplify the harm done, not reduce it.
One last piece of condemnation for these false miracles, the manufacturing of these products has been poor from the beginning (that happens when your liability protection is almost all-encompassing and absolute).
Aside from Brook Jackson’s lawsuit against Ventavia (see TLAV coverage) and other obvious problems like metallic particles found in the vials in a shipment to Japan and mRNA integrity issues, there is also the danger of genetic remnants of the manufacturing process being found in the mRNA vaccine.
Please see the recent work of Kevin McKernan regarding this potential risk of random mutagenesis and harmful antibiotic resistance at the Nepetalactone Newsletter on Substack:
.
Fortunately, I believe there is a solution, although it will be in incredibly difficult to achieve, and possibly dangerous, considering the amount of profit on the line.
More to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment