• The WHO Pandemic Agreement: A Guide
    By David Bell, Thi Thuy Van Dinh March 22, 2024 Government, Society 30 minute read
    The World Health Organization (WHO) and its 194 Member States have been engaged for over two years in the development of two ‘instruments’ or agreements with the intent of radically changing the way pandemics and other health emergencies are managed.

    One, consisting of draft amendments to the existing International health Regulations (IHR), seeks to change the current IHR non-binding recommendations into requirements or binding recommendations, by having countries “undertake” to implement those given by the WHO in future declared health emergencies. It covers all ‘public health emergencies of international concern’ (PHEIC), with a single person, the WHO Director-General (DG) determining what a PHEIC is, where it extends, and when it ends. It specifies mandated vaccines, border closures, and other directives understood as lockdowns among the requirements the DG can impose. It is discussed further elsewhere and still under negotiation in Geneva.

    A second document, previously known as the (draft) Pandemic Treaty, then Pandemic Accord, and more recently the Pandemic Agreement, seeks to specify governance, supply chains, and various other interventions aimed at preventing, preparing for, and responding to, pandemics (pandemic prevention, preparedness and response – PPPR). It is currently being negotiated by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB).

    Both texts will be subject to a vote at the May 2024 World Health Assembly (WHA) in Geneva, Switzerland. These votes are intended, by those promoting these projects, to bring governance of future multi-country healthcare emergencies (or threats thereof) under the WHO umbrella.

    The latest version of the draft Pandemic Agreement (here forth the ‘Agreement’) was released on 7th March 2024. However, it is still being negotiated by various committees comprising representatives of Member States and other interested entities. It has been through multiple iterations over two years, and looks like it. With the teeth of the pandemic response proposals in the IHR, the Agreement looks increasingly irrelevant, or at least unsure of its purpose, picking up bits and pieces in a half-hearted way that the IHR amendments do not, or cannot, include. However, as discussed below, it is far from irrelevant.

    Historical Perspective

    These aim to increase the centralization of decision-making within the WHO as the “directing and coordinating authority.” This terminology comes from the WHO’s 1946 Constitution, developed in the aftermath of the Second World War as the world faced the outcomes of European fascism and the similar approaches widely imposed through colonialist regimes. The WHO would support emerging countries, with rapidly expanding and poorly resourced populations struggling under high disease burdens, and coordinate some areas of international support as these sovereign countries requested it. The emphasis of action was on coordinating rather than directing.

    In the 80 years prior to the WHO’s existence, international public health had grown within a more directive mindset, with a series of meetings by colonial and slave-owning powers from 1851 to manage pandemics, culminating in the inauguration of the Office Internationale d’Hygiene Publique in Paris in 1907, and later the League of Nations Health Office. World powers imposed health dictates on those less powerful, in other parts of the world and increasingly on their own population through the eugenics movement and similar approaches. Public health would direct, for the greater good, as a tool of those who wish to direct the lives of others.

    The WHO, governed by the WHA, was to be very different. Newly independent States and their former colonial masters were ostensibly on an equal footing within the WHA (one country – one vote), and the WHO’s work overall was to be an example of how human rights could dominate the way society works. The model for international public health, as exemplified in the Declaration of Alma Ata in 1978, was to be horizontal rather than vertical, with communities and countries in the driving seat.

    With the evolution of the WHO in recent decades from a core funding model (countries give money, the WHO decides under the WHA guidance how to spend it) to a model based on specified funding (funders, both public and increasingly private, instruct the WHO on how to spend it), the WHO has inevitably changed to become a public-private partnership required to serve the interests of funders rather than populations.

    As most funding comes from a few countries with major Pharma industrial bases, or private investors and corporations in the same industry, the WHO has been required to emphasize the use of pharmaceuticals and downplay evidence and knowledge where these clash (if it wants to keep all its staff funded). It is helpful to view the draft Agreement, and the IHR amendments, in this context.

    Why May 2024?

    The WHO, together with the World Bank, G20, and other institutions have been emphasizing the urgency of putting the new pandemic instruments in place earnestly, before the ‘next pandemic.’ This is based on claims that the world was unprepared for Covid-19, and that the economic and health harm would be somehow avoidable if we had these agreements in place.

    They emphasize, contrary to evidence that Covid-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2) origins involve laboratory manipulation, that the main threats we face are natural, and that these are increasing exponentially and present an “existential” threat to humanity. The data on which the WHO, the World Bank, and G20 base these claims demonstrates the contrary, with reported natural outbreaks having increased as detection technologies have developed, but reducing in mortality rate, and in numbers, over the past 10 to 20 years..

    A paper cited by the World Bank to justify urgency and quoted as suggesting a 3x increase in risk in the coming decade actually suggests that a Covid-19-like event would occur roughly every 129 years, and a Spanish-flu repetition every 292 to 877 years. Such predictions are unable to take into account the rapidly changing nature of medicine and improved sanitation and nutrition (most deaths from Spanish flu would not have occurred if modern antibiotics had been available), and so may still overestimate risk. Similarly, the WHO’s own priority disease list for new outbreaks only includes two diseases of proven natural origin that have over 1,000 historical deaths attributed to them. It is well demonstrated that the risk and expected burden of pandemics is misrepresented by major international agencies in current discussions.

    The urgency for May 2024 is clearly therefore inadequately supported, firstly because neither the WHO nor others have demonstrated how the harms accrued through Covid-19 would be reduced through the measures proposed, and secondly because the burden and risk is misrepresented. In this context, the state of the Agreement is clearly not where it should be as a draft international legally binding agreement intended to impose considerable financial and other obligations on States and populations.

    This is particularly problematic as the proposed expenditure; the proposed budget is over $31 billion per year, with over $10 billion more on other One Health activities. Much of this will have to be diverted from addressing other diseases burdens that impose far greater burden. This trade-off, essential to understand in public health policy development, has not yet been clearly addressed by the WHO.

    The WHO DG stated recently that the WHO does not want the power to impose vaccine mandates or lockdowns on anyone, and does not want this. This begs the question of why either of the current WHO pandemic instruments is being proposed, both as legally binding documents. The current IHR (2005) already sets out such approaches as recommendations the DG can make, and there is nothing non-mandatory that countries cannot do now without pushing new treaty-like mechanisms through a vote in Geneva.

    Based on the DG’s claims, they are essentially redundant, and what new non-mandatory clauses they contain, as set out below, are certainly not urgent. Clauses that are mandatory (Member States “shall”) must be considered within national decision-making contexts and appear against the WHO’s stated intent.

    Common sense would suggest that the Agreement, and the accompanying IHR amendments, be properly thought through before Member States commit. The WHO has already abandoned the legal requirement for a 4-month review time for the IHR amendments (Article 55.2 IHR), which are also still under negotiation just 2 months before the WHA deadline. The Agreement should also have at least such a period for States to properly consider whether to agree – treaties normally take many years to develop and negotiate and no valid arguments have been put forward as to why these should be different.

    The Covid-19 response resulted in an unprecedented transfer of wealth from those of lower income to the very wealthy few, completely contrary to the way in which the WHO was intended to affect human society. A considerable portion of these pandemic profits went to current sponsors of the WHO, and these same corporate entities and investors are set to further benefit from the new pandemic agreements. As written, the Pandemic Agreement risks entrenching such centralization and profit-taking, and the accompanying unprecedented restrictions on human rights and freedoms, as a public health norm.

    To continue with a clearly flawed agreement simply because of a previously set deadline, when no clear population benefit is articulated and no true urgency demonstrated, would therefore be a major step backward in international public health. Basic principles of proportionality, human agency, and community empowerment, essential for health and human rights outcomes, are missing or paid lip-service. The WHO clearly wishes to increase its funding and show it is ‘doing something,’ but must first articulate why the voluntary provisions of the current IHR are insufficient. It is hoped that by systematically reviewing some key clauses of the agreement here, it will become clear why a rethink of the whole approach is necessary. The full text is found below.

    The commentary below concentrates on selected draft provisions of the latest publicly available version of the draft agreement that seem to be unclear or potentially problematic. Much of the remaining text is essentially pointless as it reiterates vague intentions to be found in other documents or activities which countries normally undertake in the course of running health services, and have no place in a focused legally-binding international agreement.

    REVISED Draft of the negotiating text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement. 7th March, 2024

    Preamble

    Recognizing that the World Health Organization…is the directing and coordinating authority on international health work.

    This is inconsistent with a recent statement by the WHO DG that the WHO has no interest or intent to direct country health responses. To reiterate it here suggests that the DG is not representing the true position regarding the Agreement. “Directing authority” is however in line with the proposed IHR Amendments (and the WHO’s Constitution), under which countries will “undertake” ahead of time to follow the DG’s recommendations (which thereby become instructions). As the HR amendments make clear, this is intended to apply even to a perceived threat rather than actual harm.

    Recalling the constitution of the World Health Organization…highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition.

    This statement recalls fundamental understandings of public health, and is of importance here as it raises the question of why the WHO did not strongly condemn prolonged school closures, workplace closures, and other impoverishing policies during the Covid-19 response. In 2019, WHO made clear that these dangers should prevent actions we now call ‘lockdowns’ from being imposed.

    Deeply concerned by the gross inequities at national and international levels that hindered timely and equitable access to medical and other Covid-19 pandemic-related products, and the serious shortcomings in pandemic preparedness.

    In terms of health equity (as distinct from commodity of ‘vaccine’ equity), inequity in the Covid-19 response was not in failing to provide a vaccine against former variants to immune, young people in low-income countries who were at far higher risk from endemic diseases, but in the disproportionate harm to them of uniformly-imposed NPIs that reduced current and future income and basic healthcare, as was noted by the WHO in 2019 Pandemic Influenza recommendations. The failure of the text to recognize this suggests that lessons from Covid-19 have not informed this draft Agreement. The WHO has not yet demonstrated how pandemic ‘preparedness,’ in the terms they use below, would have reduced impact, given that there is poor correlation between strictness or speed of response and eventual outcomes.

    Reiterating the need to work towards…an equitable approach to mitigate the risk that pandemics exacerbate existing inequities in access to health services,

    As above – in the past century, the issue of inequity has been most pronounced in pandemic response, rather than the impact of the virus itself (excluding the physiological variation in risk). Most recorded deaths from acute pandemics, since the Spanish flu, were during Covid-19, in which the virus hit mainly sick elderly, but response impacted working-age adults and children heavily and will continue to have effect, due to increased poverty and debt; reduced education and child marriage, in future generations.

    These have disproportionately affected lower-income people, and particularly women. The lack of recognition of this in this document, though they are recognized by the World Bank and UN agencies elsewhere, must raise real questions on whether this Agreement has been thoroughly thought through, and the process of development been sufficiently inclusive and objective.

    Chapter I. Introduction

    Article 1. Use of terms

    (i) “pathogen with pandemic potential” means any pathogen that has been identified to infect a human and that is: novel (not yet characterized) or known (including a variant of a known pathogen), potentially highly transmissible and/or highly virulent with the potential to cause a public health emergency of international concern.

    This provides a very wide scope to alter provisions. Any pathogen that can infect humans and is potentially highly transmissible or virulent, though yet uncharacterized means virtually any coronavirus, influenza virus, or a plethora of other relatively common pathogen groups. The IHR Amendments intend that the DG alone can make this call, over the advice of others, as occurred with monkeypox in 2022.

    (j) “persons in vulnerable situations” means individuals, groups or communities with a disproportionate increased risk of infection, severity, disease or mortality.

    This is a good definition – in Covid-19 context, would mean the sick elderly, and so is relevant to targeting a response.

    “Universal health coverage” means that all people have access to the full range of quality health services they need, when and where they need them, without financial hardship.

    While the general UHC concept is good, it is time a sensible (rather than patently silly) definition was adopted. Society cannot afford the full range of possible interventions and remedies for all, and clearly there is a scale of cost vs benefit that prioritizes certain ones over others. Sensible definitions make action more likely, and inaction harder to justify. One could argue that none should have the full range until all have good basic care, but clearly the earth will not support ‘the full range’ for 8 billion people.

    Article 2. Objective

    This Agreement is specifically for pandemics (a poorly defined term but essentially a pathogen that spreads rapidly across national borders). In contrast, the IHR amendments accompanying it are broader in scope – for any public health emergencies of international concern.

    Article 3. Principles

    2. the sovereign right of States to adopt, legislate and implement legislation

    The amendments to the IHR require States to undertake to follow WHO instructions ahead of time, before such instruction and context are known. These two documents must be understood, as noted later in the Agreement draft, as complementary.

    3. equity as the goal and outcome of pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, ensuring the absence of unfair, avoidable or remediable differences among groups of people.

    This definition of equity here needs clarification. In the pandemic context, the WHO emphasized commodity (vaccine) equity during the Covid-19 response. Elimination of differences implied equal access to Covid-19 vaccines in countries with large aging, obese highly vulnerable populations (e.g. the USA or Italy), and those with young populations at minimal risk and with far more pressing health priorities (e.g. Niger or Uganda).

    Alternatively, but equally damaging, equal access to different age groups within a country when the risk-benefit ratio is clearly greatly different. This promotes worse health outcomes by diverting resources from where they are most useful, as it ignores heterogeneity of risk. Again, an adult approach is required in international agreements, rather than feel-good sentences, if they are going to have a positive impact.

    5. …a more equitable and better prepared world to prevent, respond to and recover from pandemics

    As with ‘3’ above, this raises a fundamental problem: What if health equity demands that some populations divert resources to childhood nutrition and endemic diseases rather than the latest pandemic, as these are likely of far higher burden to many younger but lower-income populations? This would not be equity in the definition implied here, but would clearly lead to better and more equal health outcomes.

    The WHO must decide whether it is about uniform action, or minimizing poor health, as these are clearly very different. They are the difference between the WHO’s commodity equity, and true health equity.

    Chapter II. The world together equitably: achieving equity in, for and through pandemic prevention, preparedness and response

    Equity in health should imply a reasonably equal chance of overcoming or avoiding preventable sickness. The vast majority of sickness and death is due to either non-communicable diseases often related to lifestyle, such as obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus, undernutrition in childhood, and endemic infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, malaria, and HIV/AIDS. Achieving health equity would primarily mean addressing these.

    In this chapter of the draft Pandemic Agreement, equity is used to imply equal access to specific health commodities, particularly vaccines, for intermittent health emergencies, although these exert a small fraction of the burden of other diseases. It is, specifically, commodity-equity, and not geared to equalizing overall health burden but to enabling centrally-coordinated homogenous responses to unusual events.

    Article 4. Pandemic prevention and surveillance

    2. The Parties shall undertake to cooperate:

    (b) in support of…initiatives aimed at preventing pandemics, in particular those that improve surveillance, early warning and risk assessment; .…and identify settings and activities presenting a risk of emergence and re-emergence of pathogens with pandemic potential.

    (c-h) [Paragraphs on water and sanitation, infection control, strengthening of biosafety, surveillance and prevention of vector-born diseases, and addressing antimicrobial resistance.]

    The WHO intends the Agreement to have force under international law. Therefore, countries are undertaking to put themselves under force of international law in regards to complying with the agreement’s stipulations.

    The provisions under this long article mostly cover general health stuff that countries try to do anyway. The difference will be that countries will be assessed on progress. Assessment can be fine if in context, less fine if it consists of entitled ‘experts’ from wealthy countries with little local knowledge or context. Perhaps such compliance is best left to national authorities, who are more in use with local needs and priorities. The justification for the international bureaucracy being built to support this, while fun for those involved, is unclear and will divert resources from actual health work.

    6. The Conference of the Parties may adopt, as necessary, guidelines, recommendations and standards, including in relation to pandemic prevention capacities, to support the implementation of this Article.

    Here and later, the COP is invoked as a vehicle to decide on what will actually be done. The rules are explained later (Articles 21-23). While allowing more time is sensible, it begs the question of why it is not better to wait and discuss what is needed in the current INB process, before committing to a legally-binding agreement. This current article says nothing not already covered by the IHR2005 or other ongoing programs.

    Article 5. One Health approach to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response

    Nothing specific or new in this article. It seems redundant (it is advocating a holistic approach mentioned elsewhere) and so presumably is just to get the term ‘One Health’ into the agreement. (One could ask, why bother?)

    Some mainstream definitions of One Health (e.g. Lancet) consider that it means non-human species are on a par with humans in terms of rights and importance. If this is meant here, clearly most Member States would disagree. So we may assume that it is just words to keep someone happy (a little childish in an international document, but the term ‘One Health’ has been trending, like ‘equity,’ as if the concept of holistic approaches to public health were new).

    Article 6. Preparedness, health system resilience and recovery

    2. Each Party commits…[to] :

    (a) routine and essential health services during pandemics with a focus on primary health care, routine immunization and mental health care, and with particular attention to persons in vulnerable situations

    (b) developing, strengthening and maintaining health infrastructure

    (c) developing post-pandemic health system recovery strategies

    (d) developing, strengthening and maintaining: health information systems

    This is good, and (a) seems to require avoidance of lockdowns (which inevitably cause the harms listed). Unfortunately other WHO documents lead one to assume this is not the intent…It does appear therefore that this is simply another list of fairly non-specific feel-good measures that have no useful place in a new legally-binding agreement, and which most countries are already undertaking.

    (e) promoting the use of social and behavioural sciences, risk communication and community engagement for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.

    This requires clarification, as the use of behavioral science during the Covid-19 response involved deliberate inducement of fear to promote behaviors that people would not otherwise follow (e.g. Spi-B). It is essential here that the document clarifies how behavioral science should be used ethically in healthcare. Otherwise, this is also a quite meaningless provision.

    Article 7. Health and care workforce

    This long Article discusses health workforce, training, retention, non-discrimination, stigma, bias, adequate remuneration, and other standard provisions for workplaces. It is unclear why it is included in a legally binding pandemic agreement, except for:

    4. [The Parties]…shall invest in establishing, sustaining, coordinating and mobilizing a skilled and trained multidisciplinary global public health emergency workforce…Parties having established emergency health teams should inform WHO thereof and make best efforts to respond to requests for deployment…

    Emergency health teams established (within capacity etc.) – are something countries already do, when they have capacity. There is no reason to have this as a legally-binding instrument, and clearly no urgency to do so.

    Article 8. Preparedness monitoring and functional reviews

    1. The Parties shall, building on existing and relevant tools, develop and implement an inclusive, transparent, effective and efficient pandemic prevention, preparedness and response monitoring and evaluation system.

    2. Each Party shall assess, every five years, with technical support from the WHO Secretariat upon request, the functioning and readiness of, and gaps in, its pandemic prevention, preparedness and response capacity, based on the relevant tools and guidelines developed by WHO in partnership with relevant organizations at international, regional and sub-regional levels.

    Note that this is being required of countries that are already struggling to implement monitoring systems for major endemic diseases, including tuberculosis, malaria, HIV, and nutritional deficiencies. They will be legally bound to divert resources to pandemic prevention. While there is some overlap, it will inevitably divert resources from currently underfunded programs for diseases of far higher local burdens, and so (not theoretically, but inevitably) raise mortality. Poor countries are being required to put resources into problems deemed significant by richer countries.

    Article 9. Research and development

    Various general provisions about undertaking background research that countries are generally doing anyway, but with an ’emerging disease’ slant. Again, the INB fails to justify why this diversion of resources from researching greater disease burdens should occur in all countries (why not just those with excess resources?).

    Article 10. Sustainable and geographically diversified production

    Mostly non-binding but suggested cooperation on making pandemic-related products available, including support for manufacturing in “inter-pandemic times” (a fascinating rendering of ‘normal’), when they would only be viable through subsidies. Much of this is probably unimplementable, as it would not be practical to maintain facilities in most or all countries on stand-by for rare events, at cost of resources otherwise useful for other priorities. The desire to increase production in ‘developing’ countries will face major barriers and costs in terms of maintaining quality of production, particularly as many products will have limited use outside of rare outbreak situations.

    Article 11. Transfer of technology and know-how

    This article, always problematic for large pharmaceutical corporations sponsoring much WHO outbreak activities, is now watered down to weak requirements to ‘consider,’ promote,’ provide, within capabilities’ etc.

    Article 12. Access and benefit sharing

    This Article is intended to establish the WHO Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System (PABS System). PABS is intended to “ensure rapid, systematic and timely access to biological materials of pathogens with pandemic potential and the genetic sequence data.” This system is of potential high relevance and needs to be interpreted in the context that SARS-CoV-2, the pathogen causing the recent Covid-19 outbreak, was highly likely to have escaped from a laboratory. PABS is intended to expand the laboratory storage, transport, and handling of such viruses, under the oversight of the WHO, an organization outside of national jurisdiction with no significant direct experience in handling biological materials.

    3. When a Party has access to a pathogen [it shall]:

    (a) share with WHO any pathogen sequence information as soon as it is available to the Party;

    (b) as soon as biological materials are available to the Party, provide the materials to one or more laboratories and/or biorepositories participating in WHO-coordinated laboratory networks (CLNs),

    Subsequent clauses state that benefits will be shared, and seek to prevent recipient laboratories from patenting materials received from other countries. This has been a major concern of low-and middle-income countries previously, who perceive that institutions in wealthy countries patent and benefit from materials derived from less-wealthy populations. It remains to be seen whether provisions here will be sufficient to address this.

    The article then becomes yet more concerning:

    6. WHO shall conclude legally binding standard PABS contracts with manufacturers to provide the following, taking into account the size, nature and capacities of the manufacturer:

    (a) annual monetary contributions to support the PABS System and relevant capacities in countries; the determination of the annual amount, use, and approach for monitoring and accountability, shall be finalized by the Parties;

    (b) real-time contributions of relevant diagnostics, therapeutics or vaccines produced by the manufacturer, 10% free of charge and 10% at not-for-profit prices during public health emergencies of international concern or pandemics, …

    It is clearly intended that the WHO becomes directly involved in setting up legally binding manufacturing contracts, despite the WHO being outside of national jurisdictional oversight, within the territories of Member States. The PABS system, and therefore its staff and dependent entities, are also to be supported in part by funds from the manufacturers whom they are supposed to be managing. The income of the organization will be dependent on maintaining positive relationships with these private entities in a similar way in which many national regulatory agencies are dependent upon funds from pharmaceutical companies whom their staff ostensibly regulate. In this case, the regulator will be even further removed from public oversight.

    The clause on 10% (why 10?) products being free of charge, and similar at cost, while ensuring lower-priced commodities irrespective of actual need (the outbreak may be confined to wealthy countries). The same entity, the WHO, will determine whether the triggering emergency exists, determine the response, and manage the contracts to provide the commodities, without direct jurisdictional oversight regarding the potential for corruption or conflict of interest. It is a remarkable system to suggest, irrespective of political or regulatory environment.

    8. The Parties shall cooperate…public financing of research and development, prepurchase agreements, or regulatory procedures, to encourage and facilitate as many manufacturers as possible to enter into standard PABS contracts as early as possible.

    The article envisions that public funding will be used to build the process, ensuring essentially no-risk private profit.

    10. To support operationalization of the PABS System, WHO shall…make such contracts public, while respecting commercial confidentiality.

    The public may know whom contracts are made with, but not all details of the contracts. There will therefore be no independent oversight of the clauses agreed between the WHO, a body outside of national jurisdiction and dependent of commercial companies for funding some of its work and salaries, and these same companies, on ‘needs’ that the WHO itself will have sole authority, under the proposed amendments to the IHR, to determine.

    The Article further states that the WHO shall use its own product regulatory system (prequalification) and Emergency Use Listing Procedure to open and stimulate markets for the manufacturers of these products.

    It is doubtful that any national government could make such an overall agreement, yet in May 2024 they will be voting to provide this to what is essentially a foreign, and partly privately financed, entity.

    Article 13. Supply chain and logistics

    The WHO will become convenor of a ‘Global Supply Chain and Logistics Network’ for commercially-produced products, to be supplied under WHO contracts when and where the WHO determines, whilst also having the role of ensuring safety of such products.

    Having mutual support coordinated between countries is good. Having this run by an organization that is significantly funded directly by those gaining from the sale of these same commodities seems reckless and counterintuitive. Few countries would allow this (or at least plan for it).

    For this to occur safely, the WHO would logically have to forgo all private investment, and greatly restrict national specified funding contributions. Otherwise, the conflicts of interest involved would destroy confidence in the system. There is no suggestion of such divestment from the WHO, but rather, as in Article 12, private sector dependency, directly tied to contracts, will increase.

    Article 13bis: National procurement- and distribution-related provisions

    While suffering the same (perhaps unavoidable) issues regarding commercial confidentiality, this alternate Article 13 seems far more appropriate, keeping commercial issues under national jurisdiction and avoiding the obvious conflict of interests that underpin funding for WHO activities and staffing.

    Article 14. Regulatory systems strengthening

    This entire Article reflects initiatives and programs already in place. Nothing here appears likely to add to current effort.

    Article 15. Liability and compensation management

    1. Each Party shall consider developing, as necessary and in accordance with applicable law, national strategies for managing liability in its territory related to pandemic vaccines…no-fault compensation mechanisms…

    2. The Parties…shall develop recommendations for the establishment and implementation of national, regional and/or global no-fault compensation mechanisms and strategies for managing liability during pandemic emergencies, including with regard to individuals that are in a humanitarian setting or vulnerable situations.

    This is quite remarkable, but also reflects some national legislation, in removing any fault or liability specifically from vaccine manufacturers, for harms done in pushing out vaccines to the public. During the Covid-19 response, genetic therapeutics being developed by BioNtech and Moderna were reclassified as vaccines, on the basis that an immune response is stimulated after they have modified intracellular biochemical pathways as a medicine normally does.

    This enabled specific trials normally required for carcinogenicity and teratogenicity to be bypassed, despite raised fetal abnormality rates in animal trials. It will enable the CEPI 100-day vaccine program, supported with private funding to support private mRNA vaccine manufacturers, to proceed without any risk to the manufacturer should there be subsequent public harm.

    Together with an earlier provision on public funding of research and manufacturing readiness, and the removal of former wording requiring intellectual property sharing in Article 11, this ensures vaccine manufacturers and their investors make profit in effective absence of risk.

    These entities are currently heavily invested in support for WHO, and were strongly aligned with the introduction of newly restrictive outbreak responses that emphasized and sometimes mandated their products during the Covid-19 outbreak.

    Article 16. International collaboration and cooperation

    A somewhat pointless article. It suggests that countries cooperate with each other and the WHO to implement the other agreements in the Agreement.

    Article 17. Whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches

    A list of essentially motherhood provisions related to planning for a pandemic. However, countries will legally be required to maintain a ‘national coordination multisectoral body’ for PPPR. This will essentially be an added burden on budgets, and inevitably divert further resources from other priorities. Perhaps just strengthening current infectious disease and nutritional programs would be more impactful. (Nowhere in this Agreement is nutrition discussed (essential for resilience to pathogens) and minimal wording is included on sanitation and clean water (other major reasons for reduction in infectious disease mortality over past centuries).

    However, the ‘community ownership’ wording is interesting (“empower and enable community ownership of, and contribution to, community readiness for and resilience [for PPPR]”), as this directly contradicts much of the rest of the Agreement, including the centralization of control under the Conference of Parties, requirements for countries to allocate resources to pandemic preparedness over other community priorities, and the idea of inspecting and assessing adherence to the centralized requirements of the Agreement. Either much of the rest of the Agreement is redundant, or this wording is purely for appearance and not to be followed (and therefore should be removed).

    Article 18. Communication and public awareness

    1. Each Party shall promote timely access to credible and evidence-based information …with the aim of countering and addressing misinformation or disinformation…

    2. The Parties shall, as appropriate, promote and/or conduct research and inform policies on factors that hinder or strengthen adherence to public health and social measures in a pandemic, as well as trust in science and public health institutions and agencies.

    The key word is as appropriate, given that many agencies, including the WHO, have overseen or aided policies during the Covid-19 response that have greatly increased poverty, child marriage, teenage pregnancy, and education loss.

    As the WHO has been shown to be significantly misrepresenting pandemic risk in the process of advocating for this Agreement and related instruments, its own communications would also fall outside the provision here related to evidence-based information, and fall within normal understandings of misinformation. It could not therefore be an arbiter of correctness of information here, so the Article is not implementable. Rewritten to recommend accurate evidence-based information being promoted, it would make good sense, but this is not an issue requiring a legally binding international agreement.

    Article 19. Implementation and support

    3. The WHO Secretariat…organize the technical and financial assistance necessary to address such gaps and needs in implementing the commitments agreed upon under the Pandemic Agreement and the International Health Regulations (2005).

    As the WHO is dependent on donor support, its ability to address gaps in funding within Member States is clearly not something it can guarantee. The purpose of this article is unclear, repeating in paragraphs 1 and 2 the earlier intent for countries to generally support each other.

    Article 20. Sustainable financing

    1. The Parties commit to working together…In this regard, each Party, within the means and resources at its disposal, shall:

    (a) prioritize and maintain or increase, as necessary, domestic funding for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, without undermining other domestic public health priorities including for: (i) strengthening and sustaining capacities for the prevention, preparedness and response to health emergencies and pandemics, in particular the core capacities of the International Health Regulations (2005);…

    This is silly wording, as countries obviously have to prioritize within budgets, so that moving funds to one area means removing from another. The essence of public health policy is weighing and making such decisions; this reality seems to be ignored here through wishful thinking. (a) is clearly redundant, as the IHR (2005) already exists and countries have agreed to support it.

    3. A Coordinating Financial Mechanism (the “Mechanism”) is hereby established to support the implementation of both the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the International Health Regulations (2005)

    This will be in parallel to the Pandemic Fund recently commenced by the World Bank – an issue not lost on INB delegates and so likely to change here in the final version. It will also be additive to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and other health financing mechanisms, and so require another parallel international bureaucracy, presumably based in Geneva.

    It is intended to have its own capacity to “conduct relevant analyses on needs and gaps, in addition to tracking cooperation efforts,” so it will not be a small undertaking.

    Chapter III. Institutional and final provisions

    Article 21. Conference of the Parties

    1. A Conference of the Parties is hereby established.

    2. The Conference of the Parties shall keep under regular review, every three years, the implementation of the WHO Pandemic Agreement and take the decisions necessary to promote its effective implementation.

    This sets up the governing body to oversee this Agreement (another body requiring a secretariat and support). It is intended to meet within a year of the Agreement coming into force, and then set its own rules on meeting thereafter. It is likely that many provisions outlined in this draft of the Agreement will be deferred to the COP for further discussion.

    Articles 22 – 37

    These articles cover the functioning of the Conference of Parties (COP) and various administrative issues.

    Of note, ‘block votes’ will be allowed from regional bodies (e.g. the EU).

    The WHO will provide the secretariat.

    Under Article 24 is noted:

    3. Nothing in the WHO Pandemic Agreement shall be interpreted as providing the Secretariat of the World Health Organization, including the WHO Director-General, any authority to direct, order, alter or otherwise prescribe the domestic laws or policies of any Party, or to mandate or otherwise impose any requirements that Parties take specific actions, such as ban or accept travellers, impose vaccination mandates or therapeutic or diagnostic measures, or implement lockdowns.

    These provisions are explicitly stated in the proposed amendments to the IHR, to be considered alongside this agreement. Article 26 notes that the IHR is to be interpreted as compatible, thereby confirming that the IHR provisions including border closures and limits on freedom of movement, mandated vaccination, and other lockdown measures are not negated by this statement.

    As Article 26 states: “The Parties recognize that the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the International Health Regulations should be interpreted so as to be compatible.”

    Some would consider this subterfuge – The Director-General recently labeled as liars those who claimed the Agreement included these powers, whilst failing to acknowledge the accompanying IHR amendments. The WHO could do better in avoiding misleading messaging, especially when this involves denigration of the public.

    Article 32 (Withdrawal) requires that, once adopted, Parties cannot withdraw for a total of 3 years (giving notice after a minimum of 2 years). Financial obligations undertaken under the agreement continue beyond that time.

    Finally, the Agreement will come into force, assuming a two-thirds majority in the WHA is achieved (Article 19, WHO Constitution), 30 days after the fortieth country has ratified it.

    Further reading:

    WHO Pandemic Agreement Intergovernmental Negotiating Board website:

    https://inb.who.int/

    International Health Regulations Working Group website:

    https://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/index.html

    On background to the WHO texts:

    Amendments to WHO’s International Health Regulations: An Annotated Guide
    An Unofficial Q&A on International Health Regulations
    On urgency and burden of pandemics:

    https://essl.leeds.ac.uk/downloads/download/228/rational-policy-over-panic

    Disease X and Davos: This is Not the Way to Evaluate and Formulate Public Health Policy
    Before Preparing for Pandemics, We Need Better Evidence of Risk
    Revised Draft of the negotiating text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement:

    Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
    For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.

    Authors

    David Bell
    David Bell, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a public health physician and biotech consultant in global health. He is a former medical officer and scientist at the World Health Organization (WHO), Programme Head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) in Geneva, Switzerland, and Director of Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in Bellevue, WA, USA.

    View all posts
    Thi Thuy Van Dinh
    Dr. Thi Thuy Van Dinh (LLM, PhD) worked on international law in the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Subsequently, she managed multilateral organization partnerships for Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund and led environmental health technology development efforts for low-resource settings.

    View all posts
    Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work.

    https://brownstone.org/articles/the-who-pandemic-agreement-a-guide/

    https://www.minds.com/donshafi911/blog/the-who-pandemic-agreement-a-guide-1621719398509187077
    The WHO Pandemic Agreement: A Guide By David Bell, Thi Thuy Van Dinh March 22, 2024 Government, Society 30 minute read The World Health Organization (WHO) and its 194 Member States have been engaged for over two years in the development of two ‘instruments’ or agreements with the intent of radically changing the way pandemics and other health emergencies are managed. One, consisting of draft amendments to the existing International health Regulations (IHR), seeks to change the current IHR non-binding recommendations into requirements or binding recommendations, by having countries “undertake” to implement those given by the WHO in future declared health emergencies. It covers all ‘public health emergencies of international concern’ (PHEIC), with a single person, the WHO Director-General (DG) determining what a PHEIC is, where it extends, and when it ends. It specifies mandated vaccines, border closures, and other directives understood as lockdowns among the requirements the DG can impose. It is discussed further elsewhere and still under negotiation in Geneva. A second document, previously known as the (draft) Pandemic Treaty, then Pandemic Accord, and more recently the Pandemic Agreement, seeks to specify governance, supply chains, and various other interventions aimed at preventing, preparing for, and responding to, pandemics (pandemic prevention, preparedness and response – PPPR). It is currently being negotiated by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB). Both texts will be subject to a vote at the May 2024 World Health Assembly (WHA) in Geneva, Switzerland. These votes are intended, by those promoting these projects, to bring governance of future multi-country healthcare emergencies (or threats thereof) under the WHO umbrella. The latest version of the draft Pandemic Agreement (here forth the ‘Agreement’) was released on 7th March 2024. However, it is still being negotiated by various committees comprising representatives of Member States and other interested entities. It has been through multiple iterations over two years, and looks like it. With the teeth of the pandemic response proposals in the IHR, the Agreement looks increasingly irrelevant, or at least unsure of its purpose, picking up bits and pieces in a half-hearted way that the IHR amendments do not, or cannot, include. However, as discussed below, it is far from irrelevant. Historical Perspective These aim to increase the centralization of decision-making within the WHO as the “directing and coordinating authority.” This terminology comes from the WHO’s 1946 Constitution, developed in the aftermath of the Second World War as the world faced the outcomes of European fascism and the similar approaches widely imposed through colonialist regimes. The WHO would support emerging countries, with rapidly expanding and poorly resourced populations struggling under high disease burdens, and coordinate some areas of international support as these sovereign countries requested it. The emphasis of action was on coordinating rather than directing. In the 80 years prior to the WHO’s existence, international public health had grown within a more directive mindset, with a series of meetings by colonial and slave-owning powers from 1851 to manage pandemics, culminating in the inauguration of the Office Internationale d’Hygiene Publique in Paris in 1907, and later the League of Nations Health Office. World powers imposed health dictates on those less powerful, in other parts of the world and increasingly on their own population through the eugenics movement and similar approaches. Public health would direct, for the greater good, as a tool of those who wish to direct the lives of others. The WHO, governed by the WHA, was to be very different. Newly independent States and their former colonial masters were ostensibly on an equal footing within the WHA (one country – one vote), and the WHO’s work overall was to be an example of how human rights could dominate the way society works. The model for international public health, as exemplified in the Declaration of Alma Ata in 1978, was to be horizontal rather than vertical, with communities and countries in the driving seat. With the evolution of the WHO in recent decades from a core funding model (countries give money, the WHO decides under the WHA guidance how to spend it) to a model based on specified funding (funders, both public and increasingly private, instruct the WHO on how to spend it), the WHO has inevitably changed to become a public-private partnership required to serve the interests of funders rather than populations. As most funding comes from a few countries with major Pharma industrial bases, or private investors and corporations in the same industry, the WHO has been required to emphasize the use of pharmaceuticals and downplay evidence and knowledge where these clash (if it wants to keep all its staff funded). It is helpful to view the draft Agreement, and the IHR amendments, in this context. Why May 2024? The WHO, together with the World Bank, G20, and other institutions have been emphasizing the urgency of putting the new pandemic instruments in place earnestly, before the ‘next pandemic.’ This is based on claims that the world was unprepared for Covid-19, and that the economic and health harm would be somehow avoidable if we had these agreements in place. They emphasize, contrary to evidence that Covid-19 virus (SARS-CoV-2) origins involve laboratory manipulation, that the main threats we face are natural, and that these are increasing exponentially and present an “existential” threat to humanity. The data on which the WHO, the World Bank, and G20 base these claims demonstrates the contrary, with reported natural outbreaks having increased as detection technologies have developed, but reducing in mortality rate, and in numbers, over the past 10 to 20 years.. A paper cited by the World Bank to justify urgency and quoted as suggesting a 3x increase in risk in the coming decade actually suggests that a Covid-19-like event would occur roughly every 129 years, and a Spanish-flu repetition every 292 to 877 years. Such predictions are unable to take into account the rapidly changing nature of medicine and improved sanitation and nutrition (most deaths from Spanish flu would not have occurred if modern antibiotics had been available), and so may still overestimate risk. Similarly, the WHO’s own priority disease list for new outbreaks only includes two diseases of proven natural origin that have over 1,000 historical deaths attributed to them. It is well demonstrated that the risk and expected burden of pandemics is misrepresented by major international agencies in current discussions. The urgency for May 2024 is clearly therefore inadequately supported, firstly because neither the WHO nor others have demonstrated how the harms accrued through Covid-19 would be reduced through the measures proposed, and secondly because the burden and risk is misrepresented. In this context, the state of the Agreement is clearly not where it should be as a draft international legally binding agreement intended to impose considerable financial and other obligations on States and populations. This is particularly problematic as the proposed expenditure; the proposed budget is over $31 billion per year, with over $10 billion more on other One Health activities. Much of this will have to be diverted from addressing other diseases burdens that impose far greater burden. This trade-off, essential to understand in public health policy development, has not yet been clearly addressed by the WHO. The WHO DG stated recently that the WHO does not want the power to impose vaccine mandates or lockdowns on anyone, and does not want this. This begs the question of why either of the current WHO pandemic instruments is being proposed, both as legally binding documents. The current IHR (2005) already sets out such approaches as recommendations the DG can make, and there is nothing non-mandatory that countries cannot do now without pushing new treaty-like mechanisms through a vote in Geneva. Based on the DG’s claims, they are essentially redundant, and what new non-mandatory clauses they contain, as set out below, are certainly not urgent. Clauses that are mandatory (Member States “shall”) must be considered within national decision-making contexts and appear against the WHO’s stated intent. Common sense would suggest that the Agreement, and the accompanying IHR amendments, be properly thought through before Member States commit. The WHO has already abandoned the legal requirement for a 4-month review time for the IHR amendments (Article 55.2 IHR), which are also still under negotiation just 2 months before the WHA deadline. The Agreement should also have at least such a period for States to properly consider whether to agree – treaties normally take many years to develop and negotiate and no valid arguments have been put forward as to why these should be different. The Covid-19 response resulted in an unprecedented transfer of wealth from those of lower income to the very wealthy few, completely contrary to the way in which the WHO was intended to affect human society. A considerable portion of these pandemic profits went to current sponsors of the WHO, and these same corporate entities and investors are set to further benefit from the new pandemic agreements. As written, the Pandemic Agreement risks entrenching such centralization and profit-taking, and the accompanying unprecedented restrictions on human rights and freedoms, as a public health norm. To continue with a clearly flawed agreement simply because of a previously set deadline, when no clear population benefit is articulated and no true urgency demonstrated, would therefore be a major step backward in international public health. Basic principles of proportionality, human agency, and community empowerment, essential for health and human rights outcomes, are missing or paid lip-service. The WHO clearly wishes to increase its funding and show it is ‘doing something,’ but must first articulate why the voluntary provisions of the current IHR are insufficient. It is hoped that by systematically reviewing some key clauses of the agreement here, it will become clear why a rethink of the whole approach is necessary. The full text is found below. The commentary below concentrates on selected draft provisions of the latest publicly available version of the draft agreement that seem to be unclear or potentially problematic. Much of the remaining text is essentially pointless as it reiterates vague intentions to be found in other documents or activities which countries normally undertake in the course of running health services, and have no place in a focused legally-binding international agreement. REVISED Draft of the negotiating text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement. 7th March, 2024 Preamble Recognizing that the World Health Organization…is the directing and coordinating authority on international health work. This is inconsistent with a recent statement by the WHO DG that the WHO has no interest or intent to direct country health responses. To reiterate it here suggests that the DG is not representing the true position regarding the Agreement. “Directing authority” is however in line with the proposed IHR Amendments (and the WHO’s Constitution), under which countries will “undertake” ahead of time to follow the DG’s recommendations (which thereby become instructions). As the HR amendments make clear, this is intended to apply even to a perceived threat rather than actual harm. Recalling the constitution of the World Health Organization…highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition. This statement recalls fundamental understandings of public health, and is of importance here as it raises the question of why the WHO did not strongly condemn prolonged school closures, workplace closures, and other impoverishing policies during the Covid-19 response. In 2019, WHO made clear that these dangers should prevent actions we now call ‘lockdowns’ from being imposed. Deeply concerned by the gross inequities at national and international levels that hindered timely and equitable access to medical and other Covid-19 pandemic-related products, and the serious shortcomings in pandemic preparedness. In terms of health equity (as distinct from commodity of ‘vaccine’ equity), inequity in the Covid-19 response was not in failing to provide a vaccine against former variants to immune, young people in low-income countries who were at far higher risk from endemic diseases, but in the disproportionate harm to them of uniformly-imposed NPIs that reduced current and future income and basic healthcare, as was noted by the WHO in 2019 Pandemic Influenza recommendations. The failure of the text to recognize this suggests that lessons from Covid-19 have not informed this draft Agreement. The WHO has not yet demonstrated how pandemic ‘preparedness,’ in the terms they use below, would have reduced impact, given that there is poor correlation between strictness or speed of response and eventual outcomes. Reiterating the need to work towards…an equitable approach to mitigate the risk that pandemics exacerbate existing inequities in access to health services, As above – in the past century, the issue of inequity has been most pronounced in pandemic response, rather than the impact of the virus itself (excluding the physiological variation in risk). Most recorded deaths from acute pandemics, since the Spanish flu, were during Covid-19, in which the virus hit mainly sick elderly, but response impacted working-age adults and children heavily and will continue to have effect, due to increased poverty and debt; reduced education and child marriage, in future generations. These have disproportionately affected lower-income people, and particularly women. The lack of recognition of this in this document, though they are recognized by the World Bank and UN agencies elsewhere, must raise real questions on whether this Agreement has been thoroughly thought through, and the process of development been sufficiently inclusive and objective. Chapter I. Introduction Article 1. Use of terms (i) “pathogen with pandemic potential” means any pathogen that has been identified to infect a human and that is: novel (not yet characterized) or known (including a variant of a known pathogen), potentially highly transmissible and/or highly virulent with the potential to cause a public health emergency of international concern. This provides a very wide scope to alter provisions. Any pathogen that can infect humans and is potentially highly transmissible or virulent, though yet uncharacterized means virtually any coronavirus, influenza virus, or a plethora of other relatively common pathogen groups. The IHR Amendments intend that the DG alone can make this call, over the advice of others, as occurred with monkeypox in 2022. (j) “persons in vulnerable situations” means individuals, groups or communities with a disproportionate increased risk of infection, severity, disease or mortality. This is a good definition – in Covid-19 context, would mean the sick elderly, and so is relevant to targeting a response. “Universal health coverage” means that all people have access to the full range of quality health services they need, when and where they need them, without financial hardship. While the general UHC concept is good, it is time a sensible (rather than patently silly) definition was adopted. Society cannot afford the full range of possible interventions and remedies for all, and clearly there is a scale of cost vs benefit that prioritizes certain ones over others. Sensible definitions make action more likely, and inaction harder to justify. One could argue that none should have the full range until all have good basic care, but clearly the earth will not support ‘the full range’ for 8 billion people. Article 2. Objective This Agreement is specifically for pandemics (a poorly defined term but essentially a pathogen that spreads rapidly across national borders). In contrast, the IHR amendments accompanying it are broader in scope – for any public health emergencies of international concern. Article 3. Principles 2. the sovereign right of States to adopt, legislate and implement legislation The amendments to the IHR require States to undertake to follow WHO instructions ahead of time, before such instruction and context are known. These two documents must be understood, as noted later in the Agreement draft, as complementary. 3. equity as the goal and outcome of pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, ensuring the absence of unfair, avoidable or remediable differences among groups of people. This definition of equity here needs clarification. In the pandemic context, the WHO emphasized commodity (vaccine) equity during the Covid-19 response. Elimination of differences implied equal access to Covid-19 vaccines in countries with large aging, obese highly vulnerable populations (e.g. the USA or Italy), and those with young populations at minimal risk and with far more pressing health priorities (e.g. Niger or Uganda). Alternatively, but equally damaging, equal access to different age groups within a country when the risk-benefit ratio is clearly greatly different. This promotes worse health outcomes by diverting resources from where they are most useful, as it ignores heterogeneity of risk. Again, an adult approach is required in international agreements, rather than feel-good sentences, if they are going to have a positive impact. 5. …a more equitable and better prepared world to prevent, respond to and recover from pandemics As with ‘3’ above, this raises a fundamental problem: What if health equity demands that some populations divert resources to childhood nutrition and endemic diseases rather than the latest pandemic, as these are likely of far higher burden to many younger but lower-income populations? This would not be equity in the definition implied here, but would clearly lead to better and more equal health outcomes. The WHO must decide whether it is about uniform action, or minimizing poor health, as these are clearly very different. They are the difference between the WHO’s commodity equity, and true health equity. Chapter II. The world together equitably: achieving equity in, for and through pandemic prevention, preparedness and response Equity in health should imply a reasonably equal chance of overcoming or avoiding preventable sickness. The vast majority of sickness and death is due to either non-communicable diseases often related to lifestyle, such as obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus, undernutrition in childhood, and endemic infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, malaria, and HIV/AIDS. Achieving health equity would primarily mean addressing these. In this chapter of the draft Pandemic Agreement, equity is used to imply equal access to specific health commodities, particularly vaccines, for intermittent health emergencies, although these exert a small fraction of the burden of other diseases. It is, specifically, commodity-equity, and not geared to equalizing overall health burden but to enabling centrally-coordinated homogenous responses to unusual events. Article 4. Pandemic prevention and surveillance 2. The Parties shall undertake to cooperate: (b) in support of…initiatives aimed at preventing pandemics, in particular those that improve surveillance, early warning and risk assessment; .…and identify settings and activities presenting a risk of emergence and re-emergence of pathogens with pandemic potential. (c-h) [Paragraphs on water and sanitation, infection control, strengthening of biosafety, surveillance and prevention of vector-born diseases, and addressing antimicrobial resistance.] The WHO intends the Agreement to have force under international law. Therefore, countries are undertaking to put themselves under force of international law in regards to complying with the agreement’s stipulations. The provisions under this long article mostly cover general health stuff that countries try to do anyway. The difference will be that countries will be assessed on progress. Assessment can be fine if in context, less fine if it consists of entitled ‘experts’ from wealthy countries with little local knowledge or context. Perhaps such compliance is best left to national authorities, who are more in use with local needs and priorities. The justification for the international bureaucracy being built to support this, while fun for those involved, is unclear and will divert resources from actual health work. 6. The Conference of the Parties may adopt, as necessary, guidelines, recommendations and standards, including in relation to pandemic prevention capacities, to support the implementation of this Article. Here and later, the COP is invoked as a vehicle to decide on what will actually be done. The rules are explained later (Articles 21-23). While allowing more time is sensible, it begs the question of why it is not better to wait and discuss what is needed in the current INB process, before committing to a legally-binding agreement. This current article says nothing not already covered by the IHR2005 or other ongoing programs. Article 5. One Health approach to pandemic prevention, preparedness and response Nothing specific or new in this article. It seems redundant (it is advocating a holistic approach mentioned elsewhere) and so presumably is just to get the term ‘One Health’ into the agreement. (One could ask, why bother?) Some mainstream definitions of One Health (e.g. Lancet) consider that it means non-human species are on a par with humans in terms of rights and importance. If this is meant here, clearly most Member States would disagree. So we may assume that it is just words to keep someone happy (a little childish in an international document, but the term ‘One Health’ has been trending, like ‘equity,’ as if the concept of holistic approaches to public health were new). Article 6. Preparedness, health system resilience and recovery 2. Each Party commits…[to] : (a) routine and essential health services during pandemics with a focus on primary health care, routine immunization and mental health care, and with particular attention to persons in vulnerable situations (b) developing, strengthening and maintaining health infrastructure (c) developing post-pandemic health system recovery strategies (d) developing, strengthening and maintaining: health information systems This is good, and (a) seems to require avoidance of lockdowns (which inevitably cause the harms listed). Unfortunately other WHO documents lead one to assume this is not the intent…It does appear therefore that this is simply another list of fairly non-specific feel-good measures that have no useful place in a new legally-binding agreement, and which most countries are already undertaking. (e) promoting the use of social and behavioural sciences, risk communication and community engagement for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. This requires clarification, as the use of behavioral science during the Covid-19 response involved deliberate inducement of fear to promote behaviors that people would not otherwise follow (e.g. Spi-B). It is essential here that the document clarifies how behavioral science should be used ethically in healthcare. Otherwise, this is also a quite meaningless provision. Article 7. Health and care workforce This long Article discusses health workforce, training, retention, non-discrimination, stigma, bias, adequate remuneration, and other standard provisions for workplaces. It is unclear why it is included in a legally binding pandemic agreement, except for: 4. [The Parties]…shall invest in establishing, sustaining, coordinating and mobilizing a skilled and trained multidisciplinary global public health emergency workforce…Parties having established emergency health teams should inform WHO thereof and make best efforts to respond to requests for deployment… Emergency health teams established (within capacity etc.) – are something countries already do, when they have capacity. There is no reason to have this as a legally-binding instrument, and clearly no urgency to do so. Article 8. Preparedness monitoring and functional reviews 1. The Parties shall, building on existing and relevant tools, develop and implement an inclusive, transparent, effective and efficient pandemic prevention, preparedness and response monitoring and evaluation system. 2. Each Party shall assess, every five years, with technical support from the WHO Secretariat upon request, the functioning and readiness of, and gaps in, its pandemic prevention, preparedness and response capacity, based on the relevant tools and guidelines developed by WHO in partnership with relevant organizations at international, regional and sub-regional levels. Note that this is being required of countries that are already struggling to implement monitoring systems for major endemic diseases, including tuberculosis, malaria, HIV, and nutritional deficiencies. They will be legally bound to divert resources to pandemic prevention. While there is some overlap, it will inevitably divert resources from currently underfunded programs for diseases of far higher local burdens, and so (not theoretically, but inevitably) raise mortality. Poor countries are being required to put resources into problems deemed significant by richer countries. Article 9. Research and development Various general provisions about undertaking background research that countries are generally doing anyway, but with an ’emerging disease’ slant. Again, the INB fails to justify why this diversion of resources from researching greater disease burdens should occur in all countries (why not just those with excess resources?). Article 10. Sustainable and geographically diversified production Mostly non-binding but suggested cooperation on making pandemic-related products available, including support for manufacturing in “inter-pandemic times” (a fascinating rendering of ‘normal’), when they would only be viable through subsidies. Much of this is probably unimplementable, as it would not be practical to maintain facilities in most or all countries on stand-by for rare events, at cost of resources otherwise useful for other priorities. The desire to increase production in ‘developing’ countries will face major barriers and costs in terms of maintaining quality of production, particularly as many products will have limited use outside of rare outbreak situations. Article 11. Transfer of technology and know-how This article, always problematic for large pharmaceutical corporations sponsoring much WHO outbreak activities, is now watered down to weak requirements to ‘consider,’ promote,’ provide, within capabilities’ etc. Article 12. Access and benefit sharing This Article is intended to establish the WHO Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System (PABS System). PABS is intended to “ensure rapid, systematic and timely access to biological materials of pathogens with pandemic potential and the genetic sequence data.” This system is of potential high relevance and needs to be interpreted in the context that SARS-CoV-2, the pathogen causing the recent Covid-19 outbreak, was highly likely to have escaped from a laboratory. PABS is intended to expand the laboratory storage, transport, and handling of such viruses, under the oversight of the WHO, an organization outside of national jurisdiction with no significant direct experience in handling biological materials. 3. When a Party has access to a pathogen [it shall]: (a) share with WHO any pathogen sequence information as soon as it is available to the Party; (b) as soon as biological materials are available to the Party, provide the materials to one or more laboratories and/or biorepositories participating in WHO-coordinated laboratory networks (CLNs), Subsequent clauses state that benefits will be shared, and seek to prevent recipient laboratories from patenting materials received from other countries. This has been a major concern of low-and middle-income countries previously, who perceive that institutions in wealthy countries patent and benefit from materials derived from less-wealthy populations. It remains to be seen whether provisions here will be sufficient to address this. The article then becomes yet more concerning: 6. WHO shall conclude legally binding standard PABS contracts with manufacturers to provide the following, taking into account the size, nature and capacities of the manufacturer: (a) annual monetary contributions to support the PABS System and relevant capacities in countries; the determination of the annual amount, use, and approach for monitoring and accountability, shall be finalized by the Parties; (b) real-time contributions of relevant diagnostics, therapeutics or vaccines produced by the manufacturer, 10% free of charge and 10% at not-for-profit prices during public health emergencies of international concern or pandemics, … It is clearly intended that the WHO becomes directly involved in setting up legally binding manufacturing contracts, despite the WHO being outside of national jurisdictional oversight, within the territories of Member States. The PABS system, and therefore its staff and dependent entities, are also to be supported in part by funds from the manufacturers whom they are supposed to be managing. The income of the organization will be dependent on maintaining positive relationships with these private entities in a similar way in which many national regulatory agencies are dependent upon funds from pharmaceutical companies whom their staff ostensibly regulate. In this case, the regulator will be even further removed from public oversight. The clause on 10% (why 10?) products being free of charge, and similar at cost, while ensuring lower-priced commodities irrespective of actual need (the outbreak may be confined to wealthy countries). The same entity, the WHO, will determine whether the triggering emergency exists, determine the response, and manage the contracts to provide the commodities, without direct jurisdictional oversight regarding the potential for corruption or conflict of interest. It is a remarkable system to suggest, irrespective of political or regulatory environment. 8. The Parties shall cooperate…public financing of research and development, prepurchase agreements, or regulatory procedures, to encourage and facilitate as many manufacturers as possible to enter into standard PABS contracts as early as possible. The article envisions that public funding will be used to build the process, ensuring essentially no-risk private profit. 10. To support operationalization of the PABS System, WHO shall…make such contracts public, while respecting commercial confidentiality. The public may know whom contracts are made with, but not all details of the contracts. There will therefore be no independent oversight of the clauses agreed between the WHO, a body outside of national jurisdiction and dependent of commercial companies for funding some of its work and salaries, and these same companies, on ‘needs’ that the WHO itself will have sole authority, under the proposed amendments to the IHR, to determine. The Article further states that the WHO shall use its own product regulatory system (prequalification) and Emergency Use Listing Procedure to open and stimulate markets for the manufacturers of these products. It is doubtful that any national government could make such an overall agreement, yet in May 2024 they will be voting to provide this to what is essentially a foreign, and partly privately financed, entity. Article 13. Supply chain and logistics The WHO will become convenor of a ‘Global Supply Chain and Logistics Network’ for commercially-produced products, to be supplied under WHO contracts when and where the WHO determines, whilst also having the role of ensuring safety of such products. Having mutual support coordinated between countries is good. Having this run by an organization that is significantly funded directly by those gaining from the sale of these same commodities seems reckless and counterintuitive. Few countries would allow this (or at least plan for it). For this to occur safely, the WHO would logically have to forgo all private investment, and greatly restrict national specified funding contributions. Otherwise, the conflicts of interest involved would destroy confidence in the system. There is no suggestion of such divestment from the WHO, but rather, as in Article 12, private sector dependency, directly tied to contracts, will increase. Article 13bis: National procurement- and distribution-related provisions While suffering the same (perhaps unavoidable) issues regarding commercial confidentiality, this alternate Article 13 seems far more appropriate, keeping commercial issues under national jurisdiction and avoiding the obvious conflict of interests that underpin funding for WHO activities and staffing. Article 14. Regulatory systems strengthening This entire Article reflects initiatives and programs already in place. Nothing here appears likely to add to current effort. Article 15. Liability and compensation management 1. Each Party shall consider developing, as necessary and in accordance with applicable law, national strategies for managing liability in its territory related to pandemic vaccines…no-fault compensation mechanisms… 2. The Parties…shall develop recommendations for the establishment and implementation of national, regional and/or global no-fault compensation mechanisms and strategies for managing liability during pandemic emergencies, including with regard to individuals that are in a humanitarian setting or vulnerable situations. This is quite remarkable, but also reflects some national legislation, in removing any fault or liability specifically from vaccine manufacturers, for harms done in pushing out vaccines to the public. During the Covid-19 response, genetic therapeutics being developed by BioNtech and Moderna were reclassified as vaccines, on the basis that an immune response is stimulated after they have modified intracellular biochemical pathways as a medicine normally does. This enabled specific trials normally required for carcinogenicity and teratogenicity to be bypassed, despite raised fetal abnormality rates in animal trials. It will enable the CEPI 100-day vaccine program, supported with private funding to support private mRNA vaccine manufacturers, to proceed without any risk to the manufacturer should there be subsequent public harm. Together with an earlier provision on public funding of research and manufacturing readiness, and the removal of former wording requiring intellectual property sharing in Article 11, this ensures vaccine manufacturers and their investors make profit in effective absence of risk. These entities are currently heavily invested in support for WHO, and were strongly aligned with the introduction of newly restrictive outbreak responses that emphasized and sometimes mandated their products during the Covid-19 outbreak. Article 16. International collaboration and cooperation A somewhat pointless article. It suggests that countries cooperate with each other and the WHO to implement the other agreements in the Agreement. Article 17. Whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches A list of essentially motherhood provisions related to planning for a pandemic. However, countries will legally be required to maintain a ‘national coordination multisectoral body’ for PPPR. This will essentially be an added burden on budgets, and inevitably divert further resources from other priorities. Perhaps just strengthening current infectious disease and nutritional programs would be more impactful. (Nowhere in this Agreement is nutrition discussed (essential for resilience to pathogens) and minimal wording is included on sanitation and clean water (other major reasons for reduction in infectious disease mortality over past centuries). However, the ‘community ownership’ wording is interesting (“empower and enable community ownership of, and contribution to, community readiness for and resilience [for PPPR]”), as this directly contradicts much of the rest of the Agreement, including the centralization of control under the Conference of Parties, requirements for countries to allocate resources to pandemic preparedness over other community priorities, and the idea of inspecting and assessing adherence to the centralized requirements of the Agreement. Either much of the rest of the Agreement is redundant, or this wording is purely for appearance and not to be followed (and therefore should be removed). Article 18. Communication and public awareness 1. Each Party shall promote timely access to credible and evidence-based information …with the aim of countering and addressing misinformation or disinformation… 2. The Parties shall, as appropriate, promote and/or conduct research and inform policies on factors that hinder or strengthen adherence to public health and social measures in a pandemic, as well as trust in science and public health institutions and agencies. The key word is as appropriate, given that many agencies, including the WHO, have overseen or aided policies during the Covid-19 response that have greatly increased poverty, child marriage, teenage pregnancy, and education loss. As the WHO has been shown to be significantly misrepresenting pandemic risk in the process of advocating for this Agreement and related instruments, its own communications would also fall outside the provision here related to evidence-based information, and fall within normal understandings of misinformation. It could not therefore be an arbiter of correctness of information here, so the Article is not implementable. Rewritten to recommend accurate evidence-based information being promoted, it would make good sense, but this is not an issue requiring a legally binding international agreement. Article 19. Implementation and support 3. The WHO Secretariat…organize the technical and financial assistance necessary to address such gaps and needs in implementing the commitments agreed upon under the Pandemic Agreement and the International Health Regulations (2005). As the WHO is dependent on donor support, its ability to address gaps in funding within Member States is clearly not something it can guarantee. The purpose of this article is unclear, repeating in paragraphs 1 and 2 the earlier intent for countries to generally support each other. Article 20. Sustainable financing 1. The Parties commit to working together…In this regard, each Party, within the means and resources at its disposal, shall: (a) prioritize and maintain or increase, as necessary, domestic funding for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, without undermining other domestic public health priorities including for: (i) strengthening and sustaining capacities for the prevention, preparedness and response to health emergencies and pandemics, in particular the core capacities of the International Health Regulations (2005);… This is silly wording, as countries obviously have to prioritize within budgets, so that moving funds to one area means removing from another. The essence of public health policy is weighing and making such decisions; this reality seems to be ignored here through wishful thinking. (a) is clearly redundant, as the IHR (2005) already exists and countries have agreed to support it. 3. A Coordinating Financial Mechanism (the “Mechanism”) is hereby established to support the implementation of both the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the International Health Regulations (2005) This will be in parallel to the Pandemic Fund recently commenced by the World Bank – an issue not lost on INB delegates and so likely to change here in the final version. It will also be additive to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria, and other health financing mechanisms, and so require another parallel international bureaucracy, presumably based in Geneva. It is intended to have its own capacity to “conduct relevant analyses on needs and gaps, in addition to tracking cooperation efforts,” so it will not be a small undertaking. Chapter III. Institutional and final provisions Article 21. Conference of the Parties 1. A Conference of the Parties is hereby established. 2. The Conference of the Parties shall keep under regular review, every three years, the implementation of the WHO Pandemic Agreement and take the decisions necessary to promote its effective implementation. This sets up the governing body to oversee this Agreement (another body requiring a secretariat and support). It is intended to meet within a year of the Agreement coming into force, and then set its own rules on meeting thereafter. It is likely that many provisions outlined in this draft of the Agreement will be deferred to the COP for further discussion. Articles 22 – 37 These articles cover the functioning of the Conference of Parties (COP) and various administrative issues. Of note, ‘block votes’ will be allowed from regional bodies (e.g. the EU). The WHO will provide the secretariat. Under Article 24 is noted: 3. Nothing in the WHO Pandemic Agreement shall be interpreted as providing the Secretariat of the World Health Organization, including the WHO Director-General, any authority to direct, order, alter or otherwise prescribe the domestic laws or policies of any Party, or to mandate or otherwise impose any requirements that Parties take specific actions, such as ban or accept travellers, impose vaccination mandates or therapeutic or diagnostic measures, or implement lockdowns. These provisions are explicitly stated in the proposed amendments to the IHR, to be considered alongside this agreement. Article 26 notes that the IHR is to be interpreted as compatible, thereby confirming that the IHR provisions including border closures and limits on freedom of movement, mandated vaccination, and other lockdown measures are not negated by this statement. As Article 26 states: “The Parties recognize that the WHO Pandemic Agreement and the International Health Regulations should be interpreted so as to be compatible.” Some would consider this subterfuge – The Director-General recently labeled as liars those who claimed the Agreement included these powers, whilst failing to acknowledge the accompanying IHR amendments. The WHO could do better in avoiding misleading messaging, especially when this involves denigration of the public. Article 32 (Withdrawal) requires that, once adopted, Parties cannot withdraw for a total of 3 years (giving notice after a minimum of 2 years). Financial obligations undertaken under the agreement continue beyond that time. Finally, the Agreement will come into force, assuming a two-thirds majority in the WHA is achieved (Article 19, WHO Constitution), 30 days after the fortieth country has ratified it. Further reading: WHO Pandemic Agreement Intergovernmental Negotiating Board website: https://inb.who.int/ International Health Regulations Working Group website: https://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/index.html On background to the WHO texts: Amendments to WHO’s International Health Regulations: An Annotated Guide An Unofficial Q&A on International Health Regulations On urgency and burden of pandemics: https://essl.leeds.ac.uk/downloads/download/228/rational-policy-over-panic Disease X and Davos: This is Not the Way to Evaluate and Formulate Public Health Policy Before Preparing for Pandemics, We Need Better Evidence of Risk Revised Draft of the negotiating text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement: Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. Authors David Bell David Bell, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a public health physician and biotech consultant in global health. He is a former medical officer and scientist at the World Health Organization (WHO), Programme Head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) in Geneva, Switzerland, and Director of Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in Bellevue, WA, USA. View all posts Thi Thuy Van Dinh Dr. Thi Thuy Van Dinh (LLM, PhD) worked on international law in the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Subsequently, she managed multilateral organization partnerships for Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund and led environmental health technology development efforts for low-resource settings. View all posts Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work. https://brownstone.org/articles/the-who-pandemic-agreement-a-guide/ https://www.minds.com/donshafi911/blog/the-who-pandemic-agreement-a-guide-1621719398509187077
    BROWNSTONE.ORG
    The WHO Pandemic Agreement: A Guide ⋆ Brownstone Institute
    The commentary below concentrates on selected draft provisions of the latest publicly available version of the draft agreement that seem to be unclear or potentially problematic.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 28725 Views
  • Food for thought.

    The licensing rules for a Medical Doctor (MD) forbid them from applying natural medicines to heal the human body. If they do, they will loose their license!
    MD’s are internationally beholden to Pharma just like a medical mafia.

    There’s multiple kinds of Naturopathic Doctors (ND) and laws vary significantly from state to state, and country to country.
    Some ND’s are licensed to do limited invasive treatments such as prescribe limited pharmaceutical drugs such as antibiotics.

    I am an ND who uses only natural medicines and non-invasive treatments. I can identify the root cause of disease easily, without invasive diagnostics tools. This is how I was trained. Most ND’s can’t do this and MD’s… well forget about it.

    In my experience, invasive treatments are only necessary in limited extreme situations, like if someone needs a saline drip to rehydrate, for example. 98% of surgical procedures are totally unnecessary but MD’s won’t tell you that or they’ll be out of business.

    To my horror, I have observed ND’s do things they should be jailed for, like recommending EDTA pills containing the Pfizer patent. So please use your discernment.


    https://t.me/drloveariyana/2622
    Food for thought. The licensing rules for a Medical Doctor (MD) forbid them from applying natural medicines to heal the human body. If they do, they will loose their license! MD’s are internationally beholden to Pharma just like a medical mafia. There’s multiple kinds of Naturopathic Doctors (ND) and laws vary significantly from state to state, and country to country. Some ND’s are licensed to do limited invasive treatments such as prescribe limited pharmaceutical drugs such as antibiotics. I am an ND who uses only natural medicines and non-invasive treatments. I can identify the root cause of disease easily, without invasive diagnostics tools. This is how I was trained. Most ND’s can’t do this and MD’s… well forget about it. In my experience, invasive treatments are only necessary in limited extreme situations, like if someone needs a saline drip to rehydrate, for example. 98% of surgical procedures are totally unnecessary but MD’s won’t tell you that or they’ll be out of business. To my horror, I have observed ND’s do things they should be jailed for, like recommending EDTA pills containing the Pfizer patent. So please use your discernment. https://t.me/drloveariyana/2622
    T.ME
    Dr. Ariyana Love
    Food for thought. The licensing rules for a Medical Doctor (MD) forbid them from applying natural medicines to heal the human body. If they do, they will loose their license! MD’s are internationally beholden to Pharma just like a medical mafia. There’s multiple kinds of Naturopathic Doctors (ND) and laws vary significantly from state to state, and country to country. Some ND’s are licensed to do limited invasive treatments such as prescribe limited pharmaceutical drugs such as antibiotics. I am an ND who uses only natural medicines and non-invasive treatments. I can identify the root cause of disease easily, without invasive diagnostics tools. This is how I was trained. Most ND’s can’t do this and MD’s… well forget about it. In my experience, invasive treatments are only necessary in limited extreme situations, like if someone needs a saline drip to rehydrate, for example. 98% of surgical procedures are totally unnecessary but MD’s won’t tell you that or they’ll be out of business. To my horror, I…
    0 Comments 0 Shares 2388 Views
  • SV40, a DNA Altering, Carcinogenic Contaminant, found in Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccines
    The ExposéMarch 17, 2024
    It’s not just the spike protein and the mRNA that are a problem. Both Pfizer and Moderna covid injections also have DNA contamination and Pfizer’s covid injection contains SV40 promoters.

    Microbiologist Kevin McKernan pioneered research on testing some of the covid vaccine vials and discovered unacceptable levels of double-stranded DNA plasmids floating around. This is DNA contamination. He found the contamination in Pfizer and Moderna vials.

    During an interview with Peter Sweden, Sasha Latypova said that DNA contamination is “a huge problem because this is replication competent plasmid, it can then invade human cells, it can invade the bacterial cells that live in your gut. So, they go into the bacteria they replicate there, they replicate antibiotic-resistant genes…it can cause sepsis, it can cause cancer, all sorts of issues.”

    The World Council for Health (“WCH”) stated that a red line has been crossed. “DNA contamination of mRNA ‘vaccines’ poses a risk to everyone on the planet,” WCH said. “Replicable DNA, so-called plasmids, in both the monovalent and bivalent vaccines, which should not be there at all … We can only speculate how it will end, but what needs to happen today after the publication of the paper by McKernan et al (2023) is an immediate stop of the ‘covid-19 vaccine’ program.”

    In Pfizer’s mRNA injection, McKernan also discovered Simian Virus 40 (“SV40”) promoters which are tied to cancer development in humans. He emphasised that the SV40 found is a viral piece, it is not the whole virus. However, it still presents a risk of driving cancer.

    SV40 or Simian Virus 40 was the 40th virus found in rhesus monkey kidney cells when these cells were used to make the polio vaccine. This virus contaminated both the inactivated polio vaccine (“IPV”) and the oral or “live” polio vaccine (“OPV”) developed by Dr. Albert Sabin. When it was discovered that SV40 was an animal carcinogen that had found its way into the polio vaccines, a federal law was passed in 1961 that required that no vaccines contain this virus.

    Kanekoa The Great tweeted two audio/video transcripts. One of a recent interview with McKernan explaining his discoveries and another of a Japanese professor expressing his concerns about these discoveries. We have republished these transcripts below.

    Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…

    DNA Contamination and SV40 Discovered

    McKernan joined Conservative Review with Daniel Horowitz on Friday to warn that there is no quality control in the manufacturing process of these vaccines. If his findings turn out to be widespread, it could portend an even greater risk for anaphylaxis, blood clotting, developing resistance to antibiotics, gene integration risk, and long-term production of spike protein within the body. You can listen to an audio of the interview on Apple podcasts HERE.

    During the interview, McKernan said:

    “It’s in both Moderna and Pfizer. We looked at the bivalent vaccines for both Moderna and Pfizer and only the monovalent vaccines for Pfizer because we didn’t have access to monovalent vaccines for Moderna. In all three cases, the vaccines contain double-stranded DNA contamination. If you sequence that DNA, you’ll find that it matches what looks to be an expression vector that’s used to make the RNA…

    “Whenever we see DNA contamination, like from plasmids, ending up in any injectable, the first thing people think about is whether there’s any E. coli endotoxin present because that creates anaphylaxis for the injected. And, of course, your viewers and listeners are probably aware there’s a lot of anaphylaxis going on, not only on TV but in the VAERS database. You can see people get injected with this and drop. That could be the background from this E. coli process of manufacturing the DNA…

    “At least on the Pfizer side of things, it has what’s known as an SV40 promoter. This is an oncogenic virus piece. It’s not the entire virus. However, the small piece is known to drive very aggressive gene expression. And the concern that people, even at the FDA, have noted in the past whenever injecting double-stranded DNA is that these things can then integrate into the genome. If you’re not careful with how you manufacture these things, and you have excess amounts of this DNA, your concern for genome integration goes up…

    “If you get an SV40 promoter in front of an oncogene, you will end up with a high expression of a gene that can drive cancer, it will be a very rare event, but you don’t need many of these cells to be hit with something like this for it to take off. SV40 actually plagued, granted it was the full viral genome, not just the promoter, but this has plagued previous vaccine programs. The polio vaccine is one of them that they were concerned that this may have contributed to cancer from that vaccine. So, there’s a history of being concerned over SV40.

    “Having the promoter inside some of these vectors isn’t necessary. It seems to be superfluous oversight they could have eliminated, yet it’s still there because they ran this out the door so quickly, they didn’t really have time to get rid of superfluous parts of the plasmid. So, that piece of DNA is something we really need to pay attention to. We’ve made quantitative PCR assays to hunt for this. So several researchers around the globe are now running these assays to look for how much of this DNA is floating around after people have been vaccinated.”

    Further reading:

    Sequencing the Pfizer monovalent mRNA vaccines also reveals dual copy 72-bp SV40 Promoter, Anandamide (Kevin McKernan), 12 April 2023
    dsDNA variance in Pfizer Docs, Anandamide (Kevin McKernan), 20 May 2023
    McKernan, K., Helbert, Y., Kane, L. T., & McLaughlin, S. (2023, April 10). Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/b9t7m
    Plasmid DNA is a Known Pfizer Ingredient – NOT a Contaminant, Karen Kingston, 14 April 2023
    Japanese Professor Expresses Concern

    Japanese Professor Murakami of Tokyo University expressed his concerns over the alarming discovery of SV40 promoters McKernan had made. He said:

    “The Pfizer vaccine has a staggering problem. I have made an amazing finding. This figure is an enlarged view of Pfizer’s vaccine sequence. As you can see, the Pfizer vaccine sequence contains part of the SV40 sequence here. This sequence is known as a promoter. Roughly speaking, the promoter causes increased expression of the gene. The problem is that the sequence is present in a well-known carcinogenic virus.

    “The question is why such a sequence that is derived from a cancer virus is present in Pfizer’s vaccine. There should be absolutely no need for such a carcinogenic virus sequence in the vaccine. This sequence is totally unnecessary for producing the mRNA vaccine. It is a problem that such a sequence is solidly contained in the vaccine. This is not the only problem. If a sequence like this is present in the DNA, the DNA is easily migrated to the nucleus.

    “So, it means that the DNA can easily enter the genome. This is such an alarming problem. It is essential to remove the sequence. However, Pfizer produced the vaccine without removing the sequence. That is outrageously malicious. This kind of promoter sequence is completely unnecessary for the production of the mRNA vaccine. In fact, SV40 is a promoter of cancer viruses.”


    https://expose-news.com/2024/03/17/sv40-a-dna-altering-carcinogenic-contaminant-found-in-pfizers-covid-19-vaccines/
    SV40, a DNA Altering, Carcinogenic Contaminant, found in Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccines The ExposéMarch 17, 2024 It’s not just the spike protein and the mRNA that are a problem. Both Pfizer and Moderna covid injections also have DNA contamination and Pfizer’s covid injection contains SV40 promoters. Microbiologist Kevin McKernan pioneered research on testing some of the covid vaccine vials and discovered unacceptable levels of double-stranded DNA plasmids floating around. This is DNA contamination. He found the contamination in Pfizer and Moderna vials. During an interview with Peter Sweden, Sasha Latypova said that DNA contamination is “a huge problem because this is replication competent plasmid, it can then invade human cells, it can invade the bacterial cells that live in your gut. So, they go into the bacteria they replicate there, they replicate antibiotic-resistant genes…it can cause sepsis, it can cause cancer, all sorts of issues.” The World Council for Health (“WCH”) stated that a red line has been crossed. “DNA contamination of mRNA ‘vaccines’ poses a risk to everyone on the planet,” WCH said. “Replicable DNA, so-called plasmids, in both the monovalent and bivalent vaccines, which should not be there at all … We can only speculate how it will end, but what needs to happen today after the publication of the paper by McKernan et al (2023) is an immediate stop of the ‘covid-19 vaccine’ program.” In Pfizer’s mRNA injection, McKernan also discovered Simian Virus 40 (“SV40”) promoters which are tied to cancer development in humans. He emphasised that the SV40 found is a viral piece, it is not the whole virus. However, it still presents a risk of driving cancer. SV40 or Simian Virus 40 was the 40th virus found in rhesus monkey kidney cells when these cells were used to make the polio vaccine. This virus contaminated both the inactivated polio vaccine (“IPV”) and the oral or “live” polio vaccine (“OPV”) developed by Dr. Albert Sabin. When it was discovered that SV40 was an animal carcinogen that had found its way into the polio vaccines, a federal law was passed in 1961 that required that no vaccines contain this virus. Kanekoa The Great tweeted two audio/video transcripts. One of a recent interview with McKernan explaining his discoveries and another of a Japanese professor expressing his concerns about these discoveries. We have republished these transcripts below. Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox… DNA Contamination and SV40 Discovered McKernan joined Conservative Review with Daniel Horowitz on Friday to warn that there is no quality control in the manufacturing process of these vaccines. If his findings turn out to be widespread, it could portend an even greater risk for anaphylaxis, blood clotting, developing resistance to antibiotics, gene integration risk, and long-term production of spike protein within the body. You can listen to an audio of the interview on Apple podcasts HERE. During the interview, McKernan said: “It’s in both Moderna and Pfizer. We looked at the bivalent vaccines for both Moderna and Pfizer and only the monovalent vaccines for Pfizer because we didn’t have access to monovalent vaccines for Moderna. In all three cases, the vaccines contain double-stranded DNA contamination. If you sequence that DNA, you’ll find that it matches what looks to be an expression vector that’s used to make the RNA… “Whenever we see DNA contamination, like from plasmids, ending up in any injectable, the first thing people think about is whether there’s any E. coli endotoxin present because that creates anaphylaxis for the injected. And, of course, your viewers and listeners are probably aware there’s a lot of anaphylaxis going on, not only on TV but in the VAERS database. You can see people get injected with this and drop. That could be the background from this E. coli process of manufacturing the DNA… “At least on the Pfizer side of things, it has what’s known as an SV40 promoter. This is an oncogenic virus piece. It’s not the entire virus. However, the small piece is known to drive very aggressive gene expression. And the concern that people, even at the FDA, have noted in the past whenever injecting double-stranded DNA is that these things can then integrate into the genome. If you’re not careful with how you manufacture these things, and you have excess amounts of this DNA, your concern for genome integration goes up… “If you get an SV40 promoter in front of an oncogene, you will end up with a high expression of a gene that can drive cancer, it will be a very rare event, but you don’t need many of these cells to be hit with something like this for it to take off. SV40 actually plagued, granted it was the full viral genome, not just the promoter, but this has plagued previous vaccine programs. The polio vaccine is one of them that they were concerned that this may have contributed to cancer from that vaccine. So, there’s a history of being concerned over SV40. “Having the promoter inside some of these vectors isn’t necessary. It seems to be superfluous oversight they could have eliminated, yet it’s still there because they ran this out the door so quickly, they didn’t really have time to get rid of superfluous parts of the plasmid. So, that piece of DNA is something we really need to pay attention to. We’ve made quantitative PCR assays to hunt for this. So several researchers around the globe are now running these assays to look for how much of this DNA is floating around after people have been vaccinated.” Further reading: Sequencing the Pfizer monovalent mRNA vaccines also reveals dual copy 72-bp SV40 Promoter, Anandamide (Kevin McKernan), 12 April 2023 dsDNA variance in Pfizer Docs, Anandamide (Kevin McKernan), 20 May 2023 McKernan, K., Helbert, Y., Kane, L. T., & McLaughlin, S. (2023, April 10). Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/b9t7m Plasmid DNA is a Known Pfizer Ingredient – NOT a Contaminant, Karen Kingston, 14 April 2023 Japanese Professor Expresses Concern Japanese Professor Murakami of Tokyo University expressed his concerns over the alarming discovery of SV40 promoters McKernan had made. He said: “The Pfizer vaccine has a staggering problem. I have made an amazing finding. This figure is an enlarged view of Pfizer’s vaccine sequence. As you can see, the Pfizer vaccine sequence contains part of the SV40 sequence here. This sequence is known as a promoter. Roughly speaking, the promoter causes increased expression of the gene. The problem is that the sequence is present in a well-known carcinogenic virus. “The question is why such a sequence that is derived from a cancer virus is present in Pfizer’s vaccine. There should be absolutely no need for such a carcinogenic virus sequence in the vaccine. This sequence is totally unnecessary for producing the mRNA vaccine. It is a problem that such a sequence is solidly contained in the vaccine. This is not the only problem. If a sequence like this is present in the DNA, the DNA is easily migrated to the nucleus. “So, it means that the DNA can easily enter the genome. This is such an alarming problem. It is essential to remove the sequence. However, Pfizer produced the vaccine without removing the sequence. That is outrageously malicious. This kind of promoter sequence is completely unnecessary for the production of the mRNA vaccine. In fact, SV40 is a promoter of cancer viruses.” https://expose-news.com/2024/03/17/sv40-a-dna-altering-carcinogenic-contaminant-found-in-pfizers-covid-19-vaccines/
    EXPOSE-NEWS.COM
    SV40, a DNA Altering, Carcinogenic Contaminant, found in Pfizer’s COVID-19 Vaccines
    It’s not just the spike protein and the mRNA that are a problem. Both Pfizer and Moderna covid injections also have DNA contamination and Pfizer’s covid injection contains SV40 promoters. Mic…
    0 Comments 0 Shares 6626 Views
  • Carmen Leitch - A Tropical Fruit With a Antimicrobial Effects:

    https://www.labroots.com/trending/microbiology/26800/tropical-fruit-antimicrobial-effects

    #BlighiaSapida #Okpu #TropicalFruit #Antimicrobial #AntibioticResistance #Antibiotic #Disease #Pathogenicity #Medicine #PlantBiology #Microbiology #Biology
    Carmen Leitch - A Tropical Fruit With a Antimicrobial Effects: https://www.labroots.com/trending/microbiology/26800/tropical-fruit-antimicrobial-effects #BlighiaSapida #Okpu #TropicalFruit #Antimicrobial #AntibioticResistance #Antibiotic #Disease #Pathogenicity #Medicine #PlantBiology #Microbiology #Biology
    WWW.LABROOTS.COM
    A Tropical Fruit With a Antimicrobial Effects | Microbiology
    Tens of thousands of people die from antibiotic resistant infections very year, and these pathogenic microbes present a growing threat to public health. | Microbiology
    0 Comments 0 Shares 1560 Views
  • PINE NEEDLE OIL (science)

    Unlike Ivermectin, Pine needle oil can be used continuously. It's safe for the human body and is classified as an essential food.
    Pine needle oil surrounds all parasite varieties and suffocates them to death.
    Pine oil is a treatment against influenza A, a potent anti-bacterial, anti-fungal and a natural antibiotic. It’s an effective blood thinner, anticoagulant, antimalarial, antitumor, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, and a powerful antioxidant with five times the amount of vitamin C than oranges.

    Pine needle oil is one of the top meta nutrients known to man. It turbo charges immunity and repairs cellular damage. Pine oil absorbs into every cell of your body in just 20 minutes. Pine oil treats pain of all kinds because it bypasses your nervous system and treats nerves directly, something truly rare in medicine!

    Pine oil remedies depression, chronic PTSD and reverses the memory of trauma in cells. There is no replacement for pine oil, which is essential in every protocol.

    Read more:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7278015/

    Read more:
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6920849/
    PINE NEEDLE OIL (science) Unlike Ivermectin, Pine needle oil can be used continuously. It's safe for the human body and is classified as an essential food. Pine needle oil surrounds all parasite varieties and suffocates them to death. Pine oil is a treatment against influenza A, a potent anti-bacterial, anti-fungal and a natural antibiotic. It’s an effective blood thinner, anticoagulant, antimalarial, antitumor, antimicrobial, anti-inflammatory, and a powerful antioxidant with five times the amount of vitamin C than oranges. Pine needle oil is one of the top meta nutrients known to man. It turbo charges immunity and repairs cellular damage. Pine oil absorbs into every cell of your body in just 20 minutes. Pine oil treats pain of all kinds because it bypasses your nervous system and treats nerves directly, something truly rare in medicine! Pine oil remedies depression, chronic PTSD and reverses the memory of trauma in cells. There is no replacement for pine oil, which is essential in every protocol. Read more: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7278015/ Read more: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6920849/
    WWW.NCBI.NLM.NIH.GOV
    Antiviral Activities of Compounds Isolated from Pinus densiflora (Pine Tree) against the Influenza A Virus
    Pinus densiflora was screened in an ongoing project to discover anti-influenza candidates from natural products. An extensive phytochemical investigation provided 26 compounds, including two new megastigmane glycosides (1 and 2), 21 diterpenoids (3–23), ...
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 3103 Views
  • ‘Operation Al-Aqsa Flood’ Day 129: Israel bombards Rafah, killing more than 60 in a night
    67 Palestinians, including babies and children, were killed Sunday night as Israel intensified bombing in Rafah, where over 1 million Palestinians are sheltering, in preparation for a ground invasion that experts warn would amount to genocide.

    Leila WarahFebruary 12, 2024
    A Palestinian man inspects the rubble of a building destroyed in an Israeli airstrike in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip
    Palestinians inpect the damage in the rubble of a building where two Israeli captives were reportedly held before being extracted in an operation by Israeli forcess in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip on February 12, 2024. Israeli bombardments on Rafah on the 12th killed more than 60 Palestinians. (Bashar Taleb/ APA Images)
    Casualties:

    28,340+ killed* and at least 67,984 wounded in the Gaza Strip.
    380+ Palestinians killed in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem
    Israel revises its estimated October 7 death toll down from 1,400 to 1,147.
    566 Israeli soldiers killed since October 7, and at least 3,221 injured.**
    *This figure was confirmed by Gaza’s Ministry of Health on Telegram channel. Some rights groups put the death toll number closer to 35,000 when accounting for those presumed dead.

    ** This figure is released by the Israeli military, showing the soldiers whose names “were allowed to be published.”

    Key Developments:

    Hamas’ military wing says Israeli bombing kills two Israeli captives and wounds of eight others, it is unclear where the attacks took place.
    CENTCOM: US carries out “self-defense strikes” in Yemen.
    UNICEF: Civilians in Rafah must be protected as they have nowhere to go.
    UN: At least 395 displaced people killed in UNRWA shelters since October 7
    100 Palestinian bodies recovered from Gaza City after Israeli troops withdrew, most killed by sniper bullets.
    Israel says two captives rescued from Rafah in southern Gaza, claims they are in good medical condition.
    In the last 24 hours, Israeli forces killed 164 people and injured 200 in Gaza, a ministry statement on Telegram said.
    At least 67 Palestinians killed in overnight Israeli airstrikes in Rafah, says the Palestinian Ministry of Health.
    Israeli forces kill Palestinian man in occupied West Bank
    In four months, 17 settlement plans for over 8,400 housing units were advanced in occupied East Jerusalem.
    Israel spends at least 7 million dollars on zionist Super Bowl advertisement.
    Dutch court orders Netherlands to halt delivery of F-35 jet parts to Israel.
    US Senator Bernie Sanders: “No one in Congress” should support the Biden administration sending military aid to Israel, Netanyahu’s “war machine” is responsible for an “unprecedented humanitarian disaster.”
    Military expert: Israeli army invasion of Rafah would lead to genocide, considering over a million Palestinians are living in 60 square kilometers, reported Al Jazeera
    Dutch court orders government to halt delivery of F-35 fighter jet parts used by Israel in its attacks on Gaza, saying there is a “clear risk” that the parts being exported by the Netherlands are being used in “serious violations of international humanitarian law”.
    Israel ‘deports’ 51-year-old Palestinian journalist from occupied West Bank to Gaza Strip.
    Israel bombards Rafah ahead of planned ground invasion

    The Israeli military has ramped up its attacks on Rafah in southern Gaza as it prepares for a possible ground offensive on the Palestinian city, which has become one of the most densely populated areas in the world.

    Advertisement

    Watch now: NOURA ERAKAT on Witnessing Palestine with Frank Barat
    Rafah, which borders Egypt, is the last key city that Israeli troops have yet to enter. The area was once designated a “safe zone,” although it has been subjected to constant air attacks since Israel’s offensive began.

    Overnight on Sunday, the military intensified their air raid on the city, killing at least 67 Palestinians, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, including babies and children.

    The strikes have resulted in significant destruction in Rafah, damaging homes, businesses, and mosques, which, according to Al Jazeera, are hosting 1.4 million Palestinians.

    Hamas has condemned the latest Israeli air strikes on Rafah in southern Gaza, saying they represent an “expansion of the scope of the massacres it is committing against our people,” in a press release, reported Al Jazeera.

    “The Nazi occupation army’s attack on the city of Rafah tonight” the group said, “is considered a continuation of the genocidal war and the attempts at forced displacement it is waging against our Palestinian people,” the group continued.

    Similarly, the Palestinian Foreign Ministry has “condemned in the strongest terms the mass massacres” the Israeli forces continue to commit against Palestinians, especially displaced people.

    “Israel is officially continuing to target civilians and transfer the war to Rafah to push the population to get displaced under bombardment,” it said in a statement released on X.

    “The recent massacres of the occupation are evidence of the validity of international warnings and fears of catastrophic results of the expansion of the war to Rafah,” the ministry added.

    The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has warned of “dire consequences” of an Israeli military assault on the southern city.

    “Egypt reiterates its complete rejection of statements by top Israeli officials about launching a military operation on Rafah, warning of its dire consequences, in light of the humanitarian catastrophe it threatens to deepen,” the ministry said in a statement.

    “Egypt called for the necessity of uniting all international and regional efforts to prevent the targeting of the Palestinian city of Rafah,” it added.

    Military expert Wassef Erekat has told Al Jazeera that an Israeli army invasion of Rafah would lead to genocide, considering over a million Palestinians are living in 60 square kilometers.

    “It would be another tragedy befalling the Palestinian people, a catastrophe of epic proportions,” he said.

    Erekat added that in the eyes of Netanyahu, a war without an invasion of Rafah would mean an admission of defeat.

    “An invasion has dangerous and disastrous repercussions. Any number of scenarios can unfold: allowing the displaced back into the central and northern Gaza Strip, pushing them into [Egypt’s] Sinai, or merely bombing them further,” Erekat added.

    The evacuation of Rafah would be ‘unlawful’, human rights experts warn

    The majority of those in Rafah have been forcibly displaced several times since October due to Israel’s offensive, which has gradually expanded its invasion across the besieged enclave.

    The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) “estimates that in total at least 395 IDPs [internally displaced persons] sheltering in UNRWA shelters have been killed and at least a further 1,379 injured” since October 7, it said in a statement.

    Nadia Hardman, researcher at Human Rights Watch, has said that people are already struggling to survive in the small area where they have been pushed and displaced.

    Hardman told Al Jazeera that people she spoke with, some of whom have been displaced up to 10 times, say they are fearful of a ground invasion of the area.

    “The one question they continue to ask is ‘Where do we go?’ They have fled from areas that were once considered safe. Israel’s promise to provide safe passage must be analyzed in light of the fact that it has consistently failed to do this,” Hardman said.

    “This evacuation would be unlawful if it is ordered,” she added.

    The Executive Director of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Catherine Russell, has said that the civilians in Rafah must be protected no matter what.

    “Civilians are pushed into a corner, living on streets or in shelters. They must be protected. They have nowhere safe to go,” Russell posted on X, adding that the area is teaming with children and families.

    “Rafah already has nearly half of Gaza’s population. Since the beginning of the war in Gaza, people have been fleeing to Rafah following Israeli evacuation orders.” Nebal Farsakh, the Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) spokesperson, told Al Jazeera.

    “There is no safe place at all, and there is no way to evacuate. On top of that, there is a complete destruction of the infrastructure, and the lack of transportation as well makes it impossible for people to make their way anywhere,” Farsakh added.

    “We are asking to stop war because it has continued for so long,” he concluded.

    Healthcare system in Gaza continues to suffer

    Medical care all across the besieged enclave has been severely affected by Israel’s deliberate attacks on medical personnel and facilities. With the looming ground invasion of Rafah, Medical professionals are apprehensive about how the ground operation would further debilitate the already collapsed health system in the area.

    Jamal al-Hams, a doctor at the Kuwaiti Hospital in Rafah, told Al Jazeera that an Israeli attack on the southern city would cause endless suffering for Palestinians.

    “We are suffering a lot during these days because of the huge number of people who have been displaced from the northern and middle areas of the Gaza Strip towards Rafah,” al-Hams said.

    “Secondly, we [already] have a huge number of injured people and patients with chronic diseases and acute illnesses who have been collected from all over the Gaza Strip [to Rafah]. We are suffering from the shortage of medical disposables and drugs. Most of the antibiotics and analgesics are not available.”

    “We have changed the admission beds to emergency beds. The Najjar Hospital has a bed capacity of 70, and they changed it to 200 but that is still not enough,” al-Hams continued.

    “I don’t know what is coming but I am sure that we will suffer very much,” al-Hams concluded.

    “There would be no place for more injured people. There will be no bed capacity, not even for one, because all hospitals [in the south] – the European, Najjar, and Kuwaiti – are all at full capacity.”

    World Health Organization (WHO) chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has described the reports of Israel’s looming offensive as “extremely worrying”.

    “Proceeding with the plans could have gravely devastating consequences for the 1.4 million people who have nowhere else left to go, and who have almost no place left to seek health care,” he posted on X.

    Moreover, the WHO chief said hospitals in Rafah in the Gaza Strip were “overwhelmed and overflowing.”

    “In the rest of the Strip, a majority of hospitals are either minimally or non-functional,” he added.

    Meanwhile, in Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, sewage water has flooded the emergency department of the medical complex, hindering medical staff from providing life-saving medical care.

    The Palestinian Ministry of Health is calling for the protection of the hospital’s technical staff to repair the sewage network in the medical courtyard, where seven people have been shot dead by Israeli snipers and 14 others injured.

    Both al Nasser and Al Amal hospital in Khan Younis have been under military siege for over two weeks and subjected to constant Israeli attacks.

    PCRS has once again called on the international community to protect healthcare professionals after Israeli forces killed two PRCS paramedics in an airstrike on their way to rescue six-year-old Hind Rajab, who was also killed by Israel a few meters away.

    “According to international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions, the direct targeting and deliberate killing of PRCS crews and volunteers is considered a war crime,” the group said in a statement on X.

    “[T]he contracting parties that signed the Geneva Conventions and are obligated to enforce respect for international humanitarian law must take the necessary measures to suppress, rebuke and punish the perpetrators.”

    Francesca Albanese, the United Nations rapporteur on Palestine, has also said that Israel’s escalation in Gaza has led to hundreds of casualties, more devastation, and forced displacement, defying the terms the International Court of Justice imposed on Israel, including ending incitement to genocide and improving the supply of humanitarian aid.

    “Israel is obligated to adhere to the court’s order and states must act decisively to prevent further atrocities,” she said.

    Despite growing international calls, U.S. won’t tell Israel not to invade Rafah

    Despite the growing international concern regarding the plans to invade Rafah, Israel is determined to go forward with the attack. Meanwhile, the US has put little to no pressure on Israel to halt their plans, aside from a verbal request, with no material pressure, to protect civilian lives.

    The White House released a readout after Biden’s call with Netanyahu, where the US president said: “a military operation in Rafah should not proceed without a credible and executable plan for ensuring the safety of and support for more than one million people sheltering there.”

    The readout added that Biden stressed “the need to capitalize on progress made in the negotiations to secure the release of all hostages as soon as possible.”

    Mustafa Barghouti of the Palestinian National Initiative told Al Jazeera that the fact that the United States president did not call for an immediate ceasefire represents a regression in US policy vis-a-vis the war on Gaza.

    “What I expected to hear from Biden [is something] we will never hear. His comments about the imminent Israeli attack on Rafah should have been accompanied by the United States supporting a ceasefire,” he said.

    “Rafah is the only area that is not destroyed completely in Gaza. Israel never gave up on its plan to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian population into Egypt. That’s what the US president should have opposed. But he doesn’t. The US is a participant in this attack,” Barghouti continued.

    “For days, United States officials have been suggesting that this potential Rafah military operation would be disastrous and that it can’t go ahead, but now we have the conditions for the Rafah operation to go ahead, despite the 1.5 million people there,” Al Jazeera’s Shihab Rattansi pointed out.

    As the US funded Israel’s increasing attacks, the American public tuned into the Super Bowl, where Israel spent at least 7 million dollars on zionist propaganda to be shown during the football game advertisements.

    Australian Senator David Shoebridge has decried the bombardment on Rafah and questioned the timing while viewers in the United States watch the Super Bowl.

    “The attack on Rafah happening at 2am Gaza time while the US is watching the Superbowl is utterly horrific and devastating,” said Shoebridge.

    “Our hearts are with the Palestinian people now more than ever,” he added.

    BEFORE YOU GO – At Mondoweiss, we understand the power of telling Palestinian stories. For 17 years, we have pushed back when the mainstream media published lies or echoed politicians’ hateful rhetoric. Now, Palestinian voices are more important than ever.

    Our traffic has increased ten times since October 7, and we need your help to cover our increased expenses.

    Support our journalists with a donation today.

    https://mondoweiss.net/2024/02/operation-al-aqsa-flood-day-129-israel-bombards-rafah-killing-more-than-60-in-a-night/


    https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/operation-al-aqsa-flood-day-129-israel.html
    ‘Operation Al-Aqsa Flood’ Day 129: Israel bombards Rafah, killing more than 60 in a night 67 Palestinians, including babies and children, were killed Sunday night as Israel intensified bombing in Rafah, where over 1 million Palestinians are sheltering, in preparation for a ground invasion that experts warn would amount to genocide. Leila WarahFebruary 12, 2024 A Palestinian man inspects the rubble of a building destroyed in an Israeli airstrike in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip Palestinians inpect the damage in the rubble of a building where two Israeli captives were reportedly held before being extracted in an operation by Israeli forcess in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip on February 12, 2024. Israeli bombardments on Rafah on the 12th killed more than 60 Palestinians. (Bashar Taleb/ APA Images) Casualties: 28,340+ killed* and at least 67,984 wounded in the Gaza Strip. 380+ Palestinians killed in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem Israel revises its estimated October 7 death toll down from 1,400 to 1,147. 566 Israeli soldiers killed since October 7, and at least 3,221 injured.** *This figure was confirmed by Gaza’s Ministry of Health on Telegram channel. Some rights groups put the death toll number closer to 35,000 when accounting for those presumed dead. ** This figure is released by the Israeli military, showing the soldiers whose names “were allowed to be published.” Key Developments: Hamas’ military wing says Israeli bombing kills two Israeli captives and wounds of eight others, it is unclear where the attacks took place. CENTCOM: US carries out “self-defense strikes” in Yemen. UNICEF: Civilians in Rafah must be protected as they have nowhere to go. UN: At least 395 displaced people killed in UNRWA shelters since October 7 100 Palestinian bodies recovered from Gaza City after Israeli troops withdrew, most killed by sniper bullets. Israel says two captives rescued from Rafah in southern Gaza, claims they are in good medical condition. In the last 24 hours, Israeli forces killed 164 people and injured 200 in Gaza, a ministry statement on Telegram said. At least 67 Palestinians killed in overnight Israeli airstrikes in Rafah, says the Palestinian Ministry of Health. Israeli forces kill Palestinian man in occupied West Bank In four months, 17 settlement plans for over 8,400 housing units were advanced in occupied East Jerusalem. Israel spends at least 7 million dollars on zionist Super Bowl advertisement. Dutch court orders Netherlands to halt delivery of F-35 jet parts to Israel. US Senator Bernie Sanders: “No one in Congress” should support the Biden administration sending military aid to Israel, Netanyahu’s “war machine” is responsible for an “unprecedented humanitarian disaster.” Military expert: Israeli army invasion of Rafah would lead to genocide, considering over a million Palestinians are living in 60 square kilometers, reported Al Jazeera Dutch court orders government to halt delivery of F-35 fighter jet parts used by Israel in its attacks on Gaza, saying there is a “clear risk” that the parts being exported by the Netherlands are being used in “serious violations of international humanitarian law”. Israel ‘deports’ 51-year-old Palestinian journalist from occupied West Bank to Gaza Strip. Israel bombards Rafah ahead of planned ground invasion The Israeli military has ramped up its attacks on Rafah in southern Gaza as it prepares for a possible ground offensive on the Palestinian city, which has become one of the most densely populated areas in the world. Advertisement Watch now: NOURA ERAKAT on Witnessing Palestine with Frank Barat Rafah, which borders Egypt, is the last key city that Israeli troops have yet to enter. The area was once designated a “safe zone,” although it has been subjected to constant air attacks since Israel’s offensive began. Overnight on Sunday, the military intensified their air raid on the city, killing at least 67 Palestinians, according to the Palestinian Ministry of Health, including babies and children. The strikes have resulted in significant destruction in Rafah, damaging homes, businesses, and mosques, which, according to Al Jazeera, are hosting 1.4 million Palestinians. Hamas has condemned the latest Israeli air strikes on Rafah in southern Gaza, saying they represent an “expansion of the scope of the massacres it is committing against our people,” in a press release, reported Al Jazeera. “The Nazi occupation army’s attack on the city of Rafah tonight” the group said, “is considered a continuation of the genocidal war and the attempts at forced displacement it is waging against our Palestinian people,” the group continued. Similarly, the Palestinian Foreign Ministry has “condemned in the strongest terms the mass massacres” the Israeli forces continue to commit against Palestinians, especially displaced people. “Israel is officially continuing to target civilians and transfer the war to Rafah to push the population to get displaced under bombardment,” it said in a statement released on X. “The recent massacres of the occupation are evidence of the validity of international warnings and fears of catastrophic results of the expansion of the war to Rafah,” the ministry added. The Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has warned of “dire consequences” of an Israeli military assault on the southern city. “Egypt reiterates its complete rejection of statements by top Israeli officials about launching a military operation on Rafah, warning of its dire consequences, in light of the humanitarian catastrophe it threatens to deepen,” the ministry said in a statement. “Egypt called for the necessity of uniting all international and regional efforts to prevent the targeting of the Palestinian city of Rafah,” it added. Military expert Wassef Erekat has told Al Jazeera that an Israeli army invasion of Rafah would lead to genocide, considering over a million Palestinians are living in 60 square kilometers. “It would be another tragedy befalling the Palestinian people, a catastrophe of epic proportions,” he said. Erekat added that in the eyes of Netanyahu, a war without an invasion of Rafah would mean an admission of defeat. “An invasion has dangerous and disastrous repercussions. Any number of scenarios can unfold: allowing the displaced back into the central and northern Gaza Strip, pushing them into [Egypt’s] Sinai, or merely bombing them further,” Erekat added. The evacuation of Rafah would be ‘unlawful’, human rights experts warn The majority of those in Rafah have been forcibly displaced several times since October due to Israel’s offensive, which has gradually expanded its invasion across the besieged enclave. The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) “estimates that in total at least 395 IDPs [internally displaced persons] sheltering in UNRWA shelters have been killed and at least a further 1,379 injured” since October 7, it said in a statement. Nadia Hardman, researcher at Human Rights Watch, has said that people are already struggling to survive in the small area where they have been pushed and displaced. Hardman told Al Jazeera that people she spoke with, some of whom have been displaced up to 10 times, say they are fearful of a ground invasion of the area. “The one question they continue to ask is ‘Where do we go?’ They have fled from areas that were once considered safe. Israel’s promise to provide safe passage must be analyzed in light of the fact that it has consistently failed to do this,” Hardman said. “This evacuation would be unlawful if it is ordered,” she added. The Executive Director of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Catherine Russell, has said that the civilians in Rafah must be protected no matter what. “Civilians are pushed into a corner, living on streets or in shelters. They must be protected. They have nowhere safe to go,” Russell posted on X, adding that the area is teaming with children and families. “Rafah already has nearly half of Gaza’s population. Since the beginning of the war in Gaza, people have been fleeing to Rafah following Israeli evacuation orders.” Nebal Farsakh, the Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) spokesperson, told Al Jazeera. “There is no safe place at all, and there is no way to evacuate. On top of that, there is a complete destruction of the infrastructure, and the lack of transportation as well makes it impossible for people to make their way anywhere,” Farsakh added. “We are asking to stop war because it has continued for so long,” he concluded. Healthcare system in Gaza continues to suffer Medical care all across the besieged enclave has been severely affected by Israel’s deliberate attacks on medical personnel and facilities. With the looming ground invasion of Rafah, Medical professionals are apprehensive about how the ground operation would further debilitate the already collapsed health system in the area. Jamal al-Hams, a doctor at the Kuwaiti Hospital in Rafah, told Al Jazeera that an Israeli attack on the southern city would cause endless suffering for Palestinians. “We are suffering a lot during these days because of the huge number of people who have been displaced from the northern and middle areas of the Gaza Strip towards Rafah,” al-Hams said. “Secondly, we [already] have a huge number of injured people and patients with chronic diseases and acute illnesses who have been collected from all over the Gaza Strip [to Rafah]. We are suffering from the shortage of medical disposables and drugs. Most of the antibiotics and analgesics are not available.” “We have changed the admission beds to emergency beds. The Najjar Hospital has a bed capacity of 70, and they changed it to 200 but that is still not enough,” al-Hams continued. “I don’t know what is coming but I am sure that we will suffer very much,” al-Hams concluded. “There would be no place for more injured people. There will be no bed capacity, not even for one, because all hospitals [in the south] – the European, Najjar, and Kuwaiti – are all at full capacity.” World Health Organization (WHO) chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has described the reports of Israel’s looming offensive as “extremely worrying”. “Proceeding with the plans could have gravely devastating consequences for the 1.4 million people who have nowhere else left to go, and who have almost no place left to seek health care,” he posted on X. Moreover, the WHO chief said hospitals in Rafah in the Gaza Strip were “overwhelmed and overflowing.” “In the rest of the Strip, a majority of hospitals are either minimally or non-functional,” he added. Meanwhile, in Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, sewage water has flooded the emergency department of the medical complex, hindering medical staff from providing life-saving medical care. The Palestinian Ministry of Health is calling for the protection of the hospital’s technical staff to repair the sewage network in the medical courtyard, where seven people have been shot dead by Israeli snipers and 14 others injured. Both al Nasser and Al Amal hospital in Khan Younis have been under military siege for over two weeks and subjected to constant Israeli attacks. PCRS has once again called on the international community to protect healthcare professionals after Israeli forces killed two PRCS paramedics in an airstrike on their way to rescue six-year-old Hind Rajab, who was also killed by Israel a few meters away. “According to international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions, the direct targeting and deliberate killing of PRCS crews and volunteers is considered a war crime,” the group said in a statement on X. “[T]he contracting parties that signed the Geneva Conventions and are obligated to enforce respect for international humanitarian law must take the necessary measures to suppress, rebuke and punish the perpetrators.” Francesca Albanese, the United Nations rapporteur on Palestine, has also said that Israel’s escalation in Gaza has led to hundreds of casualties, more devastation, and forced displacement, defying the terms the International Court of Justice imposed on Israel, including ending incitement to genocide and improving the supply of humanitarian aid. “Israel is obligated to adhere to the court’s order and states must act decisively to prevent further atrocities,” she said. Despite growing international calls, U.S. won’t tell Israel not to invade Rafah Despite the growing international concern regarding the plans to invade Rafah, Israel is determined to go forward with the attack. Meanwhile, the US has put little to no pressure on Israel to halt their plans, aside from a verbal request, with no material pressure, to protect civilian lives. The White House released a readout after Biden’s call with Netanyahu, where the US president said: “a military operation in Rafah should not proceed without a credible and executable plan for ensuring the safety of and support for more than one million people sheltering there.” The readout added that Biden stressed “the need to capitalize on progress made in the negotiations to secure the release of all hostages as soon as possible.” Mustafa Barghouti of the Palestinian National Initiative told Al Jazeera that the fact that the United States president did not call for an immediate ceasefire represents a regression in US policy vis-a-vis the war on Gaza. “What I expected to hear from Biden [is something] we will never hear. His comments about the imminent Israeli attack on Rafah should have been accompanied by the United States supporting a ceasefire,” he said. “Rafah is the only area that is not destroyed completely in Gaza. Israel never gave up on its plan to ethnically cleanse the Palestinian population into Egypt. That’s what the US president should have opposed. But he doesn’t. The US is a participant in this attack,” Barghouti continued. “For days, United States officials have been suggesting that this potential Rafah military operation would be disastrous and that it can’t go ahead, but now we have the conditions for the Rafah operation to go ahead, despite the 1.5 million people there,” Al Jazeera’s Shihab Rattansi pointed out. As the US funded Israel’s increasing attacks, the American public tuned into the Super Bowl, where Israel spent at least 7 million dollars on zionist propaganda to be shown during the football game advertisements. Australian Senator David Shoebridge has decried the bombardment on Rafah and questioned the timing while viewers in the United States watch the Super Bowl. “The attack on Rafah happening at 2am Gaza time while the US is watching the Superbowl is utterly horrific and devastating,” said Shoebridge. “Our hearts are with the Palestinian people now more than ever,” he added. BEFORE YOU GO – At Mondoweiss, we understand the power of telling Palestinian stories. For 17 years, we have pushed back when the mainstream media published lies or echoed politicians’ hateful rhetoric. Now, Palestinian voices are more important than ever. Our traffic has increased ten times since October 7, and we need your help to cover our increased expenses. Support our journalists with a donation today. https://mondoweiss.net/2024/02/operation-al-aqsa-flood-day-129-israel-bombards-rafah-killing-more-than-60-in-a-night/ ☝️https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/operation-al-aqsa-flood-day-129-israel.html
    MONDOWEISS.NET
    ‘Operation Al-Aqsa Flood’ Day 129: Israel bombards Rafah, killing more than 60 in a night
    67 Palestinians, including babies and children, were killed Sunday night as Israel intensified bombing in Rafah, where over 1 million Palestinians are sheltering, in preparation for a ground invasion that experts warn would amount to genocide.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 14549 Views
  • The COVID-19 Vaccine Antigen Is ANTHRAX
    Dr. Ariyana Love
    By Dr. Ariyana Love

    Covid-19 vaccines use self-replicating, programmable nanotechnology and synthetic, modified RNA (modRNA) otherwise known as Spike Protein.

    We are told that a vaccine antigen is used in the Covid-19 technology to “evoke an immune response” but what if the Covid-19 vaccine antigen is ANTHRAX?

    “…hardly any natural pathogens are really well suited to being biowarfare agents from a military point of view. Such a bioweapon must fulfill a variety of demands: it needs to be produced in large amounts, it must act fast, it must be environmentally robust, and the disease must be treatable… only a minority of natural pathogens are suitable for military purposes. “Anthrax is of course the first choice because the causative agent, B. anthracis, fulfills nearly all of these specifications.”

    Anthrax was developed by Russia in 1950. According to the NIH, the USSR’s ‘invisible anthrax’ was created by introducing an “alien gene” into the highly deadly Bacillus Anthracis bacteria. This means that Cross-Species-Genomics capability was acquired by governments before 1950. A lethal bacterium and an alien gene were genetically altered and blended together to produce the deadly bioweapon known as Anthrax. Russia’s Anthrax could be treated with antibiotics even several days after exposure, and thus it met the requirements under the Biological Weapons Convention.

    A bioweapon of choice, Anthony Fauci decided to increase Anthrax lethality and the NIH began genetic attenuation before 2006. Through GAIN-and-LOSS-of-Function the NIH produced a more drastic and deadly Anthrax that’s resistant to antibiotics and more.

    According to a University of Minnesota publication, the United States D.O.D smuggled shipments of live B anthracis spores from the Army’s Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, to other labs in the United States and abroad (Source: USA Today). The U.S. Army sent shipments of live samples of Anthrax to 86 labs outside the U.S. over a period of 10 years (Source: The Daily Beast).

    Transfers of samples of live B anthracis and the H5N1 influenza bioweapon were sent from CDC labs to other labs. CDC correspondence released under the Freedom of Information Act shows that labs studying bioterror pathogens “have failed over and over to comply with important safety and security regulations.”

    The D.O.D. tried to cover for the CDC, claiming “system failure” was to blame for the lab leaks, but we already know that the D.O.D spearheaded this “Covid-19 vaccine” roll-out.


    Please see: Aerosolized inoculation of Anthrax – Aerosolized Intratracheal Inoculation of Recombinant Protective Antigen (rPA) Vaccine Provides


    In 2007, Anthony Fauci created the H7N9 bioweapon, otherwise known as the “influenza vaccine.” The NIH, CCP and the Israeli state collaborated through GAIN-and-LOSS-of-Function to produce the H7N9 “flu vaccine” and the new and improved “Aerosolized Anthrax Vaccine”.

    Ofir Israeli from the Israel Institute of Biological Research, sequenced the Bacillus anthracis V770-NP1-R Strain in 2014, creating a synthetic chemical bioweapon. The Israeli state oversaw the animal trials for the Anthrax “vaccine” and told us it was safe and effective. Meanwhile, the Israeli company called Sanofi Pasteur developed the first H7N9 “vaccine” and trialed it for the NIH in 2014. Also in 2014, the NIH developed the H7N9 “influenza vaccine” to be droplet transmissible.

    Simultaneously, in 2014 China achieved a 99% transmissibility of the H7N9 “flu vaccine”. China also trialed the first aerosolized intratracheal Anthrax “vaccine” on mice. The study revealed severe side effects.


    PLEASE SEE: NIH Using DEAD CORPSES To Make “Virus”; Gain Of Function Weaponized Dead Corpses


    The Israeli state, NIH and China turned their new and improved Anthrax bioweapon into an attenuated antigen to be used in vaccines under the guise of “evoking an immune response” and “vaccine immunity.” The nations have been intentionally poisoned with biowarfare.

    In March 2022, the Russian military discovered that the Covid-19 bioweapons are being developed in U.S. biolabs in Ukraine. This includes the plague, Ebola, Filoviruses’, Anthrax and more. Anthrax causes hemorrhaging. So does Ebola and Marburg.

    Ebola is used in the J&J and Sinovax jabs, while Filovirus is used in Moderna. Ebola and Marburg are both Anthrax. H7N9 is used in all “flu vaccines” while Anthrax is being used as a “vaccine adjuvant” in all Covid-19 jabs and swabs.

    Through Loss-Of-Function, genetic deletions were performed inside the B. anthracis bacteria to improve replication of the bacteria in vivo. This ensured hospital protocols would not work to stop the Anthrax from replicating inside the human body after inoculation due to it being antibiotic resistant.

    The B. anthracis bacteria was also genetically modified to survive in insect hosts so as not to sporulate before it’s injected into the human host by a Bill Gates GMO mosquito which is part of DARPA’s weaponized insect project called The Sentinels.

    Incidentally, the CDC owns the Anthrax isolate patent that was funded by the U.S. Government. This is treason. The CDC also says that a bioterrorist attack would most likely be Anthrax.

    Please see: Malaria Parasites In “Vaccines” Target Placenta, Kill Babies In Utero

    SPIKE PROTEIN IS AEROSOLIZED ANTHRAX

    There are 232 B. anthracis genomes that are currently available in the GenBank database. There’s an Anthrax “vaccine” for cattle and two strains are licensed for use in humans. There exist two patents for an “Aerosolized Anthrax Vaccine.”

    The first Anthrax “vaccine” patent for humans is partly owned by the U.S. Government. The second is a “Recombinant Anthrax Vaccine”.

    “The spores of the toxigenic, nonencapsulated B. anthracis STI-1 strain and the cell-free PA-based “vaccines” consisting of aluminum hydroxide-adsorbed supernatant material from cultures of the toxigenic, nonencapsulated B. anthracis strain V770-NPI-R or alum-precipitated culture filtrate from the Sterne strain. Each of these Anthrax toxins are being used for “cellular entry in humans“. The LF is a metalloprotease recently shown to cleave the amino termini of the mitogen-activated protein kinase kinases 1 and 2, which results in their inactivation.”

    The above quote from the Recombinant Anthrax Vaccine patent reveals that the poisonous Anthrax “antigen” is being used to genetically modify the genome of humans (cellular entry into humans). By cleaving to the amino termini, protein kinases 1 and 2 are inactivated. This is accomplished by genetic deletions.

    The molecular basis of Anthrax “vaccines” includes “spores and DNA plasmids” that are entering human cells.

    The following quote about the Anthrax “protective antigen” is particularly revealing:

    “PA (protective antigen) is the common receptor binding domain of the toxins and can interact with the two different effector domains, EF and LF, to mediate their entry into target cells (14).”

    Anthrax is being used to “regulate gene expression by binding to DNA sequences and modulating transcriptional activity through their effector domains”.

    Pharma has essentially found a way to encode any synthetic proteins into the human genome from any species they want, including bacteria. The “Aerosolized Anthrax Antigen” is being encoded into target cells to make those cells produce the chemical drug called Anthrax. This is how the Anthrax “vaccine” is aerosolized. Once a person is inoculated with the Covid-19 bioweapon through subcutaneous injection or nasopharyngeal delivery with contaminated PCR swabs, the weapon system will begin genetic deletions and encoding the genome of target cells with the Anthrax spike protein. A person begins producing the toxic spike protein and shedding Anthrax into the air, exposing everyone to Inhalation Anthrax. It’s a weapon system that is intentionally aerosolized.

    This study admits that the Anthrax spores from B. anthracis STI-1 strain and B. anthracis strain V770-NPI-R used in the “aerosolized Anthrax vaccines” are toxigenic. The Sterne strain which is used to inoculate our food supply (animals) is also genotoxic.

    This NIH study explains how a “replicon” of the Bacillus anthracis bacteria was cloned into an Escherichia coli (E. coli) “vector” using cross-species-genomics. These two bacteria were synthetically fused together to enhance lethality.

    ALHYDROGEL

    According to the “aerosolized Anthrax vaccine” patents, the so-called “vaccine adjuvant” used is a DARPA weapon system called Alhydrogel.

    Hydrogel technology was developed over many years during a collaboration between DARPA and Profusa, a private biotech company specializing in the development of tissue-integrated biosensors. In 2018, DARPA published a video revealing their intention to use this biosensing technology for both military and public health.

    In the Alhydrogel invention, Anthrax was fused together into a nanogel called Alhydrogel, consisting of fibrous nanoparticles (Nanofibers) that are “antigen specific to CD4+ T cells”.

    In layman’s terms, the nanorobots are intentionally programmed to target and alter the genome of CD4-T cells, inducing cell death. This essential part of our immune system (T-cells) stop foreign invaders from entering our cells. Destroying our T-cells enables the government’s operating system to take root in the body and quicken death.

    Alhydrogel is infused with 750 μg of aluminum, making it magnetic. Nanofibers are used for self-assembly and electrospinning, for tissue engineering and delivery of drugs and chemicals into the brain. Being magnetic and nanotech based, the Alhydrogel can replicate everywhere in the body and wire a new neural network.

    Astonishingly, Alhydrogel is already the most widely used vaccine adjuvant! There are many Alhydrogel patents that contain toxic cocktails that will overwhelm anyone’s immune system.

    This Alhydrogel patent demonstrates it’s use of the B anthracis bacteria, E. coli, N. gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia, Staphylococcus, TB and more. It also contains the H5N1 influenza bioweapon, RNA, DNA synthesis and Polysorbate 80 for Blood Brain Barrier (BBB) permeability. This begs the question, where do venereal diseases come from?

    This Nature article reveals that 2% Alhydrogel is used in all Covid-19 “vaccines”. Previously, aluminum salts were the only adjuvants licensed for vaccine use in humans in the U.S. In recent decades, nanoparticle adjuvants in hydrated gels were introduced. The article continues by saying that the “influenza vaccine” was the first to use Alhydrogel.

    “Aluminum salt-based adjuvants such as alhydrogel have been a mainstay of vaccines for decades” boasts Christopher B. Fox and colleagues at the Infectious Disease Research Institute in Seattle, USA.

    Both nanoparticles and Anthrax have been used in vaccines for decades already, without the Informed Consent of the public.

    Alhydrogel was improved and transformed into the Nanoalum adjuvant.

    Here, we introduce a top-down manufacturing process—high-pressure microfluidization—to generate aluminum oxyhydroxide nanoparticles, hereupon referred to as nanoalum, using the clinically approved Alhydrogel adjuvant as the precursor.

    Alhydrogel is also carried in the lipid coating of nanoparticles.

    The “Aerosolized Anthrax Vaccines” also contain SEQ ID NO: 1 which is owned by the Pirbright Institute (Bill & Melinda Gates). SEQ ID NO: 1 contains the world’s most deadly genetically modified parasites.


    Please see: MEGA BOMBS! GMO Parasites Are The mRNA Vector!


    ANTHRAX SYMPTOMS AND TREATMENT

    Anthrax has been deployed on the population by three methods; injection, inhalation and skin penetration. The mortality rate for Anthrax varies depending on the method of exposure. It’s approximately 20% fatality for cutaneous Anthrax and 25–75% for Gastrointestinal Anthrax. Inhalation Anthrax is by far the worst with a fatality rate that is 80% or higher. Inhalation Anthrax is what we’re all being exposed to from the Covid-19 jabs and contaminated PCR swabs.

    Antibiotics constitute the mainstay of treatment against Anthrax, despite the fact that they won’t work to stop its replication due to the NIH, China and Israel’s GAIN-and-LOSS-of-Function enhancements (antibiotic resistance).

    Pharmaceutical experimental genotoxic drugs such as Oblitoxaximab and Raxibacumab are being touted as Anthrax treatments but these are monoclonal antibodies. We know from the monoclonal antibody patents that they’re also the “mRNA vaccine” weapon system. Anytime you inject recombinant proteins or modRNA into humans, it’s extremely toxic and will be rejected by our immune system 100% of the time.


    Please read: Monoclonal Antibodies Is mRNA Gene Knockdown Tech, Encoding HIV – Patent Review


    Pharma wants us to believe that the only known effective “prevention” against Anthrax is the Anthrax “vaccine”. However, the Anthrax “vaccine” inoculation given to U.S. military troops was a horrific disaster. U.S. Army statistics that were never published, show the Anthrax “vaccine” induces turbo cancers.

    The toxicological harms of Anthrax are many. It causes severe heart issues. Could this be a contributing factor to Myocarditis and Pericarditis?

    Anthrax also coagulates the blood.

    “Pathophysiological changes associated with anthrax lethal toxin included loss of plasma proteins, decreased platelet count, slower clotting times, fibrin deposits in tissue sections, and gross and histopathological evidence of hemorrhage. These findings suggest that blood vessel leakage and hemorrhage lead to disseminating intravascular coagulation and/or circulatory shock as an underlying pathophysiological mechanism.”

    Read more here and here.

    Anthrax induces hemorrhaging. So this explains all the excessive bleeding people have experienced over the last 4 years, following Covid-19 inoculation and from aerosolized exposure, otherwise known as the “shedding” phenomenon. This is a result of Inhalation Anthrax.

    It becomes clear that the newly dubbed “White Lung Syndrome” and the Chinese ‘pneumonia’ outbreak is none other than Inhalation Anthrax. Mycoplasma pneumonia is on the rise, and it’s listed on Pfizer’s internal documentation as a known Adverse Effect of the Covid-19 inoculation.


    This study reveals that Mycoplasma Pneumonia is aerosolized. WHO also confirms this phenomenon is Mycoplasma Pneumonia.

    All naturally occurring bacterium have cell walls. Mycoplasmas are spherical to filamentous cells with no cell walls. It’s genetically manipulated in a laboratory by GAIN-of-Function for the purpose of enhancing replication inside the human body, making it more lethal.

    Mice “treated” with anthrax lethal toxin (LT) exhibit hemorrhage and liver damage. Monocyte procoagulant responses to anthrax peptidoglycan are reinforced by proinflammatory cytokine signaling and histological lesions in the spleen.

    Anthrax has already been tested on the public. According to the NIH, Anthrax spores were intentionally released into “some environments” in NYC during 9/11. According to the NIH, the FBI launched an investigation called “Amerithrax”. It was “one of the largest and most complex (investigation) in the history of law enforcement”, according to the FBI.

    Heroine users in Europe have been tested with Injection Anthrax.

    Our skies are sprayed with smart dust and chemicals daily. Our governments have launched an all-out war against their constituents. We are being poisoned in a myriad of ways, so please keep this in mind:

    “Anthrax is easy to produce in large quantities, highly lethal, relatively easy to develop as a weapon, easily spread over a large area, easily stored and dangerous for a long time. Given appropriate weather and wind conditions, 50 kilograms of aerosolised anthrax spores released from an aircraft along a 2 kilometer line could create a lethal cloud of anthrax spores that would extend beyond 20 kilometers downwind. The aerosol cloud would be colorless, odorless and invisible following its release. Given the small size of the spores, people indoors would receive the same amount of exposure as on the street. There are currently no atmospheric warning systems to detect an aerosol cloud of anthrax spores. The first sign of a bioterrorist attack would most likely be patients presenting with symptoms of inhalation anthrax. A 1970 analysis by World Health Organization concluded that the release of aerosolized anthrax upwind to a population of 5,000,000 could lead to an estimated 250,000 casualties, of whom as many as 100,000 could be expected to die. A later analysis, by the Office of Technology Assessment of the U.S. Congress estimated that 130,000 to 3 million deaths could occur following the release of 100 kilograms of aerosolized anthrax over Washington D.C., making such an attack as lethal as a hydrogen bomb.”

    TREATMENT

    If you have been inoculated with Covid-19 or PCR swabbed, and you are suffering from heart pain, unusual bleeding, skin rashes and abrasions, it could be Injection Anthrax. If you are “unvaccinated” and hemorrhaging from being around “vaccinated”, then you may have been exposed to Inhalation Anthrax.

    Many doctors, including myself, have documented persistent bleeding rectally, violent bleeding vaginally, nasally and in the eyes. Since October 4th, I have received many reports of a red eye syndrome where the entire eye is blood-red. This makes sense because eye tissue is more sensitive. If you have been exposed to Inhalation Anthrax, you may feel hot and severely flushed, and you may break out in big, red splotches on your skin, followed by a completely red eye in the morning.

    Although they don’t get much attention, “anti-toxins have long been considered an essential ‘adjunctive’ therapy, and remain so”, according to the NIH. Anti-toxins are the natural medicines that detox poisons. In other words, you need an effective natural medicine detox protocol.

    I have been successfully detoxing people from the Covid-19 bioweapons for three years. Since I began treating people presenting with Anthrax poisoning with strong antibacterials, my clients are experiencing quicker detox results. If you would like to schedule a consultation with me, please do so through my online booking system.

    Please follow me on Telegram @drloveariyana and X @drloveariyana.

    If you would like to donate to my research, please do so here.


    UPDATE: My Anthrax article is now fully edited and published on Substack. Please review and SHARE.

    The Covid-19 Vaccine Antigen Is ANTHRAX

    Read more:
    https://open.substack.com/pub/drloveariyana/p/the-covid-19-vaccine-antigen-is-anthrax?r=2juwfo&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true


    https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/the-covid-19-vaccine-antigen-is-anthrax.html
    The COVID-19 Vaccine Antigen Is ANTHRAX Dr. Ariyana Love By Dr. Ariyana Love Covid-19 vaccines use self-replicating, programmable nanotechnology and synthetic, modified RNA (modRNA) otherwise known as Spike Protein. We are told that a vaccine antigen is used in the Covid-19 technology to “evoke an immune response” but what if the Covid-19 vaccine antigen is ANTHRAX? “…hardly any natural pathogens are really well suited to being biowarfare agents from a military point of view. Such a bioweapon must fulfill a variety of demands: it needs to be produced in large amounts, it must act fast, it must be environmentally robust, and the disease must be treatable… only a minority of natural pathogens are suitable for military purposes. “Anthrax is of course the first choice because the causative agent, B. anthracis, fulfills nearly all of these specifications.” Anthrax was developed by Russia in 1950. According to the NIH, the USSR’s ‘invisible anthrax’ was created by introducing an “alien gene” into the highly deadly Bacillus Anthracis bacteria. This means that Cross-Species-Genomics capability was acquired by governments before 1950. A lethal bacterium and an alien gene were genetically altered and blended together to produce the deadly bioweapon known as Anthrax. Russia’s Anthrax could be treated with antibiotics even several days after exposure, and thus it met the requirements under the Biological Weapons Convention. A bioweapon of choice, Anthony Fauci decided to increase Anthrax lethality and the NIH began genetic attenuation before 2006. Through GAIN-and-LOSS-of-Function the NIH produced a more drastic and deadly Anthrax that’s resistant to antibiotics and more. According to a University of Minnesota publication, the United States D.O.D smuggled shipments of live B anthracis spores from the Army’s Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, to other labs in the United States and abroad (Source: USA Today). The U.S. Army sent shipments of live samples of Anthrax to 86 labs outside the U.S. over a period of 10 years (Source: The Daily Beast). Transfers of samples of live B anthracis and the H5N1 influenza bioweapon were sent from CDC labs to other labs. CDC correspondence released under the Freedom of Information Act shows that labs studying bioterror pathogens “have failed over and over to comply with important safety and security regulations.” The D.O.D. tried to cover for the CDC, claiming “system failure” was to blame for the lab leaks, but we already know that the D.O.D spearheaded this “Covid-19 vaccine” roll-out. Please see: Aerosolized inoculation of Anthrax – Aerosolized Intratracheal Inoculation of Recombinant Protective Antigen (rPA) Vaccine Provides In 2007, Anthony Fauci created the H7N9 bioweapon, otherwise known as the “influenza vaccine.” The NIH, CCP and the Israeli state collaborated through GAIN-and-LOSS-of-Function to produce the H7N9 “flu vaccine” and the new and improved “Aerosolized Anthrax Vaccine”. Ofir Israeli from the Israel Institute of Biological Research, sequenced the Bacillus anthracis V770-NP1-R Strain in 2014, creating a synthetic chemical bioweapon. The Israeli state oversaw the animal trials for the Anthrax “vaccine” and told us it was safe and effective. Meanwhile, the Israeli company called Sanofi Pasteur developed the first H7N9 “vaccine” and trialed it for the NIH in 2014. Also in 2014, the NIH developed the H7N9 “influenza vaccine” to be droplet transmissible. Simultaneously, in 2014 China achieved a 99% transmissibility of the H7N9 “flu vaccine”. China also trialed the first aerosolized intratracheal Anthrax “vaccine” on mice. The study revealed severe side effects. PLEASE SEE: NIH Using DEAD CORPSES To Make “Virus”; Gain Of Function Weaponized Dead Corpses The Israeli state, NIH and China turned their new and improved Anthrax bioweapon into an attenuated antigen to be used in vaccines under the guise of “evoking an immune response” and “vaccine immunity.” The nations have been intentionally poisoned with biowarfare. In March 2022, the Russian military discovered that the Covid-19 bioweapons are being developed in U.S. biolabs in Ukraine. This includes the plague, Ebola, Filoviruses’, Anthrax and more. Anthrax causes hemorrhaging. So does Ebola and Marburg. Ebola is used in the J&J and Sinovax jabs, while Filovirus is used in Moderna. Ebola and Marburg are both Anthrax. H7N9 is used in all “flu vaccines” while Anthrax is being used as a “vaccine adjuvant” in all Covid-19 jabs and swabs. Through Loss-Of-Function, genetic deletions were performed inside the B. anthracis bacteria to improve replication of the bacteria in vivo. This ensured hospital protocols would not work to stop the Anthrax from replicating inside the human body after inoculation due to it being antibiotic resistant. The B. anthracis bacteria was also genetically modified to survive in insect hosts so as not to sporulate before it’s injected into the human host by a Bill Gates GMO mosquito which is part of DARPA’s weaponized insect project called The Sentinels. Incidentally, the CDC owns the Anthrax isolate patent that was funded by the U.S. Government. This is treason. The CDC also says that a bioterrorist attack would most likely be Anthrax. Please see: Malaria Parasites In “Vaccines” Target Placenta, Kill Babies In Utero SPIKE PROTEIN IS AEROSOLIZED ANTHRAX There are 232 B. anthracis genomes that are currently available in the GenBank database. There’s an Anthrax “vaccine” for cattle and two strains are licensed for use in humans. There exist two patents for an “Aerosolized Anthrax Vaccine.” The first Anthrax “vaccine” patent for humans is partly owned by the U.S. Government. The second is a “Recombinant Anthrax Vaccine”. “The spores of the toxigenic, nonencapsulated B. anthracis STI-1 strain and the cell-free PA-based “vaccines” consisting of aluminum hydroxide-adsorbed supernatant material from cultures of the toxigenic, nonencapsulated B. anthracis strain V770-NPI-R or alum-precipitated culture filtrate from the Sterne strain. Each of these Anthrax toxins are being used for “cellular entry in humans“. The LF is a metalloprotease recently shown to cleave the amino termini of the mitogen-activated protein kinase kinases 1 and 2, which results in their inactivation.” The above quote from the Recombinant Anthrax Vaccine patent reveals that the poisonous Anthrax “antigen” is being used to genetically modify the genome of humans (cellular entry into humans). By cleaving to the amino termini, protein kinases 1 and 2 are inactivated. This is accomplished by genetic deletions. The molecular basis of Anthrax “vaccines” includes “spores and DNA plasmids” that are entering human cells. The following quote about the Anthrax “protective antigen” is particularly revealing: “PA (protective antigen) is the common receptor binding domain of the toxins and can interact with the two different effector domains, EF and LF, to mediate their entry into target cells (14).” Anthrax is being used to “regulate gene expression by binding to DNA sequences and modulating transcriptional activity through their effector domains”. Pharma has essentially found a way to encode any synthetic proteins into the human genome from any species they want, including bacteria. The “Aerosolized Anthrax Antigen” is being encoded into target cells to make those cells produce the chemical drug called Anthrax. This is how the Anthrax “vaccine” is aerosolized. Once a person is inoculated with the Covid-19 bioweapon through subcutaneous injection or nasopharyngeal delivery with contaminated PCR swabs, the weapon system will begin genetic deletions and encoding the genome of target cells with the Anthrax spike protein. A person begins producing the toxic spike protein and shedding Anthrax into the air, exposing everyone to Inhalation Anthrax. It’s a weapon system that is intentionally aerosolized. This study admits that the Anthrax spores from B. anthracis STI-1 strain and B. anthracis strain V770-NPI-R used in the “aerosolized Anthrax vaccines” are toxigenic. The Sterne strain which is used to inoculate our food supply (animals) is also genotoxic. This NIH study explains how a “replicon” of the Bacillus anthracis bacteria was cloned into an Escherichia coli (E. coli) “vector” using cross-species-genomics. These two bacteria were synthetically fused together to enhance lethality. ALHYDROGEL According to the “aerosolized Anthrax vaccine” patents, the so-called “vaccine adjuvant” used is a DARPA weapon system called Alhydrogel. Hydrogel technology was developed over many years during a collaboration between DARPA and Profusa, a private biotech company specializing in the development of tissue-integrated biosensors. In 2018, DARPA published a video revealing their intention to use this biosensing technology for both military and public health. In the Alhydrogel invention, Anthrax was fused together into a nanogel called Alhydrogel, consisting of fibrous nanoparticles (Nanofibers) that are “antigen specific to CD4+ T cells”. In layman’s terms, the nanorobots are intentionally programmed to target and alter the genome of CD4-T cells, inducing cell death. This essential part of our immune system (T-cells) stop foreign invaders from entering our cells. Destroying our T-cells enables the government’s operating system to take root in the body and quicken death. Alhydrogel is infused with 750 μg of aluminum, making it magnetic. Nanofibers are used for self-assembly and electrospinning, for tissue engineering and delivery of drugs and chemicals into the brain. Being magnetic and nanotech based, the Alhydrogel can replicate everywhere in the body and wire a new neural network. Astonishingly, Alhydrogel is already the most widely used vaccine adjuvant! There are many Alhydrogel patents that contain toxic cocktails that will overwhelm anyone’s immune system. This Alhydrogel patent demonstrates it’s use of the B anthracis bacteria, E. coli, N. gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia, Staphylococcus, TB and more. It also contains the H5N1 influenza bioweapon, RNA, DNA synthesis and Polysorbate 80 for Blood Brain Barrier (BBB) permeability. This begs the question, where do venereal diseases come from? This Nature article reveals that 2% Alhydrogel is used in all Covid-19 “vaccines”. Previously, aluminum salts were the only adjuvants licensed for vaccine use in humans in the U.S. In recent decades, nanoparticle adjuvants in hydrated gels were introduced. The article continues by saying that the “influenza vaccine” was the first to use Alhydrogel. “Aluminum salt-based adjuvants such as alhydrogel have been a mainstay of vaccines for decades” boasts Christopher B. Fox and colleagues at the Infectious Disease Research Institute in Seattle, USA. Both nanoparticles and Anthrax have been used in vaccines for decades already, without the Informed Consent of the public. Alhydrogel was improved and transformed into the Nanoalum adjuvant. Here, we introduce a top-down manufacturing process—high-pressure microfluidization—to generate aluminum oxyhydroxide nanoparticles, hereupon referred to as nanoalum, using the clinically approved Alhydrogel adjuvant as the precursor. Alhydrogel is also carried in the lipid coating of nanoparticles. The “Aerosolized Anthrax Vaccines” also contain SEQ ID NO: 1 which is owned by the Pirbright Institute (Bill & Melinda Gates). SEQ ID NO: 1 contains the world’s most deadly genetically modified parasites. Please see: MEGA BOMBS! GMO Parasites Are The mRNA Vector! ANTHRAX SYMPTOMS AND TREATMENT Anthrax has been deployed on the population by three methods; injection, inhalation and skin penetration. The mortality rate for Anthrax varies depending on the method of exposure. It’s approximately 20% fatality for cutaneous Anthrax and 25–75% for Gastrointestinal Anthrax. Inhalation Anthrax is by far the worst with a fatality rate that is 80% or higher. Inhalation Anthrax is what we’re all being exposed to from the Covid-19 jabs and contaminated PCR swabs. Antibiotics constitute the mainstay of treatment against Anthrax, despite the fact that they won’t work to stop its replication due to the NIH, China and Israel’s GAIN-and-LOSS-of-Function enhancements (antibiotic resistance). Pharmaceutical experimental genotoxic drugs such as Oblitoxaximab and Raxibacumab are being touted as Anthrax treatments but these are monoclonal antibodies. We know from the monoclonal antibody patents that they’re also the “mRNA vaccine” weapon system. Anytime you inject recombinant proteins or modRNA into humans, it’s extremely toxic and will be rejected by our immune system 100% of the time. Please read: Monoclonal Antibodies Is mRNA Gene Knockdown Tech, Encoding HIV – Patent Review Pharma wants us to believe that the only known effective “prevention” against Anthrax is the Anthrax “vaccine”. However, the Anthrax “vaccine” inoculation given to U.S. military troops was a horrific disaster. U.S. Army statistics that were never published, show the Anthrax “vaccine” induces turbo cancers. The toxicological harms of Anthrax are many. It causes severe heart issues. Could this be a contributing factor to Myocarditis and Pericarditis? Anthrax also coagulates the blood. “Pathophysiological changes associated with anthrax lethal toxin included loss of plasma proteins, decreased platelet count, slower clotting times, fibrin deposits in tissue sections, and gross and histopathological evidence of hemorrhage. These findings suggest that blood vessel leakage and hemorrhage lead to disseminating intravascular coagulation and/or circulatory shock as an underlying pathophysiological mechanism.” Read more here and here. Anthrax induces hemorrhaging. So this explains all the excessive bleeding people have experienced over the last 4 years, following Covid-19 inoculation and from aerosolized exposure, otherwise known as the “shedding” phenomenon. This is a result of Inhalation Anthrax. It becomes clear that the newly dubbed “White Lung Syndrome” and the Chinese ‘pneumonia’ outbreak is none other than Inhalation Anthrax. Mycoplasma pneumonia is on the rise, and it’s listed on Pfizer’s internal documentation as a known Adverse Effect of the Covid-19 inoculation. This study reveals that Mycoplasma Pneumonia is aerosolized. WHO also confirms this phenomenon is Mycoplasma Pneumonia. All naturally occurring bacterium have cell walls. Mycoplasmas are spherical to filamentous cells with no cell walls. It’s genetically manipulated in a laboratory by GAIN-of-Function for the purpose of enhancing replication inside the human body, making it more lethal. Mice “treated” with anthrax lethal toxin (LT) exhibit hemorrhage and liver damage. Monocyte procoagulant responses to anthrax peptidoglycan are reinforced by proinflammatory cytokine signaling and histological lesions in the spleen. Anthrax has already been tested on the public. According to the NIH, Anthrax spores were intentionally released into “some environments” in NYC during 9/11. According to the NIH, the FBI launched an investigation called “Amerithrax”. It was “one of the largest and most complex (investigation) in the history of law enforcement”, according to the FBI. Heroine users in Europe have been tested with Injection Anthrax. Our skies are sprayed with smart dust and chemicals daily. Our governments have launched an all-out war against their constituents. We are being poisoned in a myriad of ways, so please keep this in mind: “Anthrax is easy to produce in large quantities, highly lethal, relatively easy to develop as a weapon, easily spread over a large area, easily stored and dangerous for a long time. Given appropriate weather and wind conditions, 50 kilograms of aerosolised anthrax spores released from an aircraft along a 2 kilometer line could create a lethal cloud of anthrax spores that would extend beyond 20 kilometers downwind. The aerosol cloud would be colorless, odorless and invisible following its release. Given the small size of the spores, people indoors would receive the same amount of exposure as on the street. There are currently no atmospheric warning systems to detect an aerosol cloud of anthrax spores. The first sign of a bioterrorist attack would most likely be patients presenting with symptoms of inhalation anthrax. A 1970 analysis by World Health Organization concluded that the release of aerosolized anthrax upwind to a population of 5,000,000 could lead to an estimated 250,000 casualties, of whom as many as 100,000 could be expected to die. A later analysis, by the Office of Technology Assessment of the U.S. Congress estimated that 130,000 to 3 million deaths could occur following the release of 100 kilograms of aerosolized anthrax over Washington D.C., making such an attack as lethal as a hydrogen bomb.” TREATMENT If you have been inoculated with Covid-19 or PCR swabbed, and you are suffering from heart pain, unusual bleeding, skin rashes and abrasions, it could be Injection Anthrax. If you are “unvaccinated” and hemorrhaging from being around “vaccinated”, then you may have been exposed to Inhalation Anthrax. Many doctors, including myself, have documented persistent bleeding rectally, violent bleeding vaginally, nasally and in the eyes. Since October 4th, I have received many reports of a red eye syndrome where the entire eye is blood-red. This makes sense because eye tissue is more sensitive. If you have been exposed to Inhalation Anthrax, you may feel hot and severely flushed, and you may break out in big, red splotches on your skin, followed by a completely red eye in the morning. Although they don’t get much attention, “anti-toxins have long been considered an essential ‘adjunctive’ therapy, and remain so”, according to the NIH. Anti-toxins are the natural medicines that detox poisons. In other words, you need an effective natural medicine detox protocol. I have been successfully detoxing people from the Covid-19 bioweapons for three years. Since I began treating people presenting with Anthrax poisoning with strong antibacterials, my clients are experiencing quicker detox results. If you would like to schedule a consultation with me, please do so through my online booking system. Please follow me on Telegram @drloveariyana and X @drloveariyana. If you would like to donate to my research, please do so here. UPDATE: My Anthrax article is now fully edited and published on Substack. Please review and SHARE. The Covid-19 Vaccine Antigen Is ANTHRAX Read more: https://open.substack.com/pub/drloveariyana/p/the-covid-19-vaccine-antigen-is-anthrax?r=2juwfo&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/the-covid-19-vaccine-antigen-is-anthrax.html
    Angry
    1
    1 Comments 1 Shares 20821 Views
  • Here is why I don't support Ivermectin (part 1):

    Ivermectin is basically an antibiotic = anti-life. It is suppressive, which means when you have DETOX symptoms aka a cold or flu, this type of drug STOPS the body from doing so, giving the ILLUSION you are "better" when really it buries the expression deeper into organ tissues causing long-term damage and shortening of life (if the person is lucky, it will express along the same pattern, which means the mechanism has not been broken). Then people claim it is "miraculous" because their symptoms went away, but really they just killed their own pleomorphic microbes (who arrived at the scene of the toxicity to clean it up and remove the wastes aka to help the body heal) and caused more damage.

    The worst part about this drug currently is the propping up of FAKE COVID, and the FAKE COVID PANDEMIC: helping to support the lie of a virus that doesn't exist, the germ theory, which is false and supporting a pandemic that never happened while encouraging people into actually doing self-harm... staying in ignorance (and also supporting the Rockefeller medical cartel that persecuted natural practitioners who carried the knowledge of the methods of proper prevention, healing and cleansing with vibrational therapies, natural remedies and nutrition).

    It kills parasites and heartworm, malaria, river blindness, which means it kills life. In Countries where people are starving and dying of malnutrition and exposed to greater amounts of parasites due to wastes in the environment and in their bodies, nor having the nutritional capacity to cleanse the body properly, suppressive, poisonous drug like ivermectin are often needed, as there is no education or support for proper healing or the use of the thousands of natural medicines available to us.

    The trade off is a shorter life or other health losses (intelligence, coping skills, fertility, resilience, youthfulness, etc). This is why they use other suppressive antibiotics like methylene blue (originally designed as a dye for cotton), for example, which I found in most poor Countries when I was traveling. I was alarmed seeing young babies and children with dark blue tongues, my own intuition was telling me this was not the way. Ignorance is truly the greatest disease.

    These are chloride based drugs that are pro-oxidant. If you want a gentle pro-oxidant for emergencies that will not suppress, try MMS/chloride dioxide therapy or hydrogen peroxide therapy, these methods support cellular communication via electron donation and do not kill per se, they upregulate the detox mechanisms to hasten the clean up, without killing everything in sight. If you want these to work even better, pair it with DMSO (dimethyl sulfoxide, to increase blood flow and manage run away inflammation aka further tissue damage).

    Our goal is not to kill these organisms in the body who are only there because we have food inside of us for them, usually metals. The goal is to chelate the metals and upregulate the organs of elimination (emunctories). Of course ignorance and disease states plague this world, so suppressive drugs and antibiotics are considered "heroes" by those who are still wandering through the germ theory illusion, but when these life forms are killed, the toxins they were eating spill out into the body, increasing the toxic load. Ideally, you wish to starve them, so they leave with all the toxins they ate from you still inside them.

    Again, the symptoms may temporarily decrease, but this is an illusion as the toxins are still present for "reinfection" of more parasites inviting new disease states that ignorant people and doctors seem unable to figure it out: there is nothing new, just deeper damage with a new constellation of symptoms.
    Here is why I don't support Ivermectin (part 1): Ivermectin is basically an antibiotic = anti-life. It is suppressive, which means when you have DETOX symptoms aka a cold or flu, this type of drug STOPS the body from doing so, giving the ILLUSION you are "better" when really it buries the expression deeper into organ tissues causing long-term damage and shortening of life (if the person is lucky, it will express along the same pattern, which means the mechanism has not been broken). Then people claim it is "miraculous" because their symptoms went away, but really they just killed their own pleomorphic microbes (who arrived at the scene of the toxicity to clean it up and remove the wastes aka to help the body heal) and caused more damage. The worst part about this drug currently is the propping up of FAKE COVID, and the FAKE COVID PANDEMIC: helping to support the lie of a virus that doesn't exist, the germ theory, which is false and supporting a pandemic that never happened while encouraging people into actually doing self-harm... staying in ignorance (and also supporting the Rockefeller medical cartel that persecuted natural practitioners who carried the knowledge of the methods of proper prevention, healing and cleansing with vibrational therapies, natural remedies and nutrition). It kills parasites and heartworm, malaria, river blindness, which means it kills life. In Countries where people are starving and dying of malnutrition and exposed to greater amounts of parasites due to wastes in the environment and in their bodies, nor having the nutritional capacity to cleanse the body properly, suppressive, poisonous drug like ivermectin are often needed, as there is no education or support for proper healing or the use of the thousands of natural medicines available to us. The trade off is a shorter life or other health losses (intelligence, coping skills, fertility, resilience, youthfulness, etc). This is why they use other suppressive antibiotics like methylene blue (originally designed as a dye for cotton), for example, which I found in most poor Countries when I was traveling. I was alarmed seeing young babies and children with dark blue tongues, my own intuition was telling me this was not the way. Ignorance is truly the greatest disease. These are chloride based drugs that are pro-oxidant. If you want a gentle pro-oxidant for emergencies that will not suppress, try MMS/chloride dioxide therapy or hydrogen peroxide therapy, these methods support cellular communication via electron donation and do not kill per se, they upregulate the detox mechanisms to hasten the clean up, without killing everything in sight. If you want these to work even better, pair it with DMSO (dimethyl sulfoxide, to increase blood flow and manage run away inflammation aka further tissue damage). Our goal is not to kill these organisms in the body who are only there because we have food inside of us for them, usually metals. The goal is to chelate the metals and upregulate the organs of elimination (emunctories). Of course ignorance and disease states plague this world, so suppressive drugs and antibiotics are considered "heroes" by those who are still wandering through the germ theory illusion, but when these life forms are killed, the toxins they were eating spill out into the body, increasing the toxic load. Ideally, you wish to starve them, so they leave with all the toxins they ate from you still inside them. Again, the symptoms may temporarily decrease, but this is an illusion as the toxins are still present for "reinfection" of more parasites inviting new disease states that ignorant people and doctors seem unable to figure it out: there is nothing new, just deeper damage with a new constellation of symptoms.
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 8140 Views
  • Health benefits of the Sun: Vitamin D can reduce the risk of cancer by as much as 67%
    Rhoda WilsonDecember 28, 2023
    Vitamin D is involved in the biology of all cells in your body, including your immune cells. A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of cancer.

    Most recently, researchers found vitamin D and calcium supplementation lowered participants’ overall cancer risk by 30%.

    Having a serum vitamin D level of at least 40 ng/ml reduces your risk for cancer by 67% compared to having a level of 20 ng/ml or less; most cancers occur in people with a vitamin D level between 10 and 40 ng/ml.

    Higher Vitamin D Levels Lower Cancer Risk

    By Dr. Joseph Mercola

    This article was originally published on 10 April 2017.

    Thousands of studies have been done on the health effects of vitamin D, and research shows it is involved in the biology of all cells and tissues in your body, including your immune cells. Your cells actually need the active form of vitamin D to gain access to the genetic blueprints stored inside.

    This is one of the reasons why vitamin D has the ability to impact such a wide variety of health problems – from foetal development to cancer. Unfortunately, despite being easy and inexpensive to address, vitamin D deficiency is an epidemic around the world.

    It’s been estimated that as many as 90% of pregnant mothers and newborns in the sunny Mediterranean region are even deficient in vitamin D,1 thanks to chronic Sun avoidance. A simple mathematical error may also deter many Americans and Canadians from optimising their vitamin D.

    The Institute of Medicine (“IOM”) recommends a mere 600 IUs of vitamin D per day for adults. As pointed out in a 2014 paper,2 the IOM underestimates the need by a factor of 10 due to a mathematical error, which has never been corrected.

    Grassroots Health has created a petition for the IOM and Health Canada to re-evaluate its vitamin D guidelines and correct this mathematical error.3 You can help further this important cause by signing the petition on ipetitions.com.

    More recent research 4 suggests it would require 9,600 IUs of vitamin D per day to get a majority (97.5%) of the population to reach 40 nanograms per millilitre (ng/ml). The American Medical Association uses of 20 ng/ml as sufficient, but research shows 40 ng/mL should be the cutoff point for sufficiency in order to prevent a wide range of diseases, including cancer.

    Research Again Concludes Vitamin D Lowers Cancer Risk

    A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of cancer.

    Most recently, a randomised clinical trial 5 by researchers at Creighton University, funded by the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”), found vitamin D and calcium supplementation lowered participants’ overall cancer risk by 30%.6,7,8

    The study, which included more than 2,300 postmenopausal women from Nebraska who were followed for four years, looked at the effects of vitamin D supplementation on all types of cancer.

    Participants were randomly assigned to receive either 2,000 IUs of vitamin D3 in combination with 1,500 mg of calcium, or a placebo for the duration of the study. Blood testing revealed that 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels were significantly lower in those who did develop cancer.

    Joan Lappe, Ph.D., professor of nursing and associate dean of research at Creighton University’s College of Nursing, and lead author of the study, said:

    The study provides evidence that higher concentrations of 25(OH)D in the blood, in the context of vitamin D3 and calcium supplementation, decrease risk of cancer … While people can make their own vitamin D3 when they are in the Sun near mid-day, sunscreen blocks most vitamin D production.

    Also, due to more time spent indoors, many individuals lack adequate levels of vitamin D compounds in their blood. The results of this study lend credence to a call for more attention to the importance of vitamin D in human health and specifically in preventing cancer.

    Vitamin D Status Is Strongly Correlated with Cancer Risk

    Previous research has shown that once you reach a serum vitamin D level of 40 ng/ml, your risk for cancer diminishes by 67%, compared to having a level of 20 ng/ml or less.9,10,11,12,13,14,15

    Most cancers, they found, occurred in people with a vitamin D blood level between 10 and 40 ng/ml. The optimal level for cancer protection was identified as being between 40 and 60 ng/ml. Another study 16 published in 2015 found women with vitamin D concentrations of at least 30 ng/ml had a 55% lower risk of colorectal cancer than those who had a blood level below 18 ng/ml.

    Even earlier research, 17 published in 2005, showed women with vitamin D levels above 60 ng/ml had an 83% lower risk of breast cancer than those with levels below 20 ng/ml! The Health and Medicine Division of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (formerly IOM) has also reported an association between vitamin D and overall mortality risk from all causes, including cancer.18,19

    Vitamin D also increases your chances of surviving cancer if you do get it,20,21 and this includes melanoma. 22

    Access Sun Exposure as Much as Possible and Get Your Vitamin D Level Checked

    The UVB in sunlight is what triggers your body to produce vitamin D. I firmly believe getting regular, sensible Sun exposure is the ideal way to not only optimise your vitamin D level but maximise your health as well because sunlight also has many other important health functions. I’ll review some of these in another section below.

    Regular Sun exposure provides over 1,500 different wavelengths, and we’re just now rediscovering the value of many of these other wavelengths besides UVA and UVB. For example, we now know that red and infrared light helps your body form structured water, which is important for cellular function.

    Many do not appreciate that red, near, mid and far-infrared have many important biological functions. One of them is to improve mitochondrial function, especially the 660 nm and 830 nm wavelengths, as cytochrome C oxidase in mitochondria uses these wavelengths to produce ATP more efficiently.

    Vitamin D3 supplements are a poor second resort, but if you’re unable to get sufficient Sun exposure, then it’s better than nothing. As demonstrated in the featured study – which specifically looked at the effects of supplementation – they do have some benefits.

    Also, while not addressed in this study, I strongly recommend taking your vitamin D3 with vitamin K2 and magnesium as well, since all three work in tandem. A primary consideration when it comes to vitamin D is to get your level checked, ideally twice a year, in the middle of the summer and winter, when your level is at its highest and lowest.

    What you’re aiming for is a level between 40 and 60 ng/ml year-round. Grassroots Health offers vitamin D testing at a great value through its D*Action study.

    Read more: Harness the Power of the Sun for Health (Infographic)

    How to Minimise Your Risk of Skin Cancer from Sun Exposure

    Many avoid Sun exposure for fear of melanoma, an aggressive and potentially lethal form of skin cancer. However, it’s important to realise that melanoma occurs among those with minimal Sun exposure as well.

    An important risk factor for melanoma is overexposure to UV radiation. Baking in the Sun for hours on end on a weekend here and there is not a wise choice.

    To minimise your skin cancer risk, you want to avoid sunburn at all costs. If you’re going to the beach, bring long-sleeved cover-ups and a wide-brimmed hat, and cover up as soon as your skin starts to turn pink.

    Following are some general guidelines for sensible Sun exposure. If you pay close attention to these, you can determine, within reason, safe exposure durations.

    Know your skin type based on the Fitzpatrick skin type classification system. The lighter your skin, the less exposure to UV light is necessary. The downside is that lighter skin is also the most vulnerable to damage from overexposure.
    For very fair-skinned people and those with photodermatitis, any Sun exposure may be unwanted and they should carefully measure vitamin D levels while ensuring they have an adequate intake of vitamin D, vitamin K2, magnesium and calcium.
    For most people, safe UV exposure is possible by knowing your skin type and the current strength of the Sun’s rays. There are several apps and devices to help you optimise the benefits of Sun exposure while mitigating the risks. Also, be extremely careful if you have not been in the Sun for some time. Your first exposures of the year are the most sensitive, so be especially careful to limit your initial time in the Sun.
    Vitamin D Influences Your Health in Many Ways

    The benefits of vitamin D are not restricted to cancer prevention. In fact, the list of health benefits of vitamin D is exceedingly long. As noted earlier, researchers have now realised that vitamin D affects virtually every cell and tissue in your body, so it might be easier to list what it will not affect, rather than what it will impact.

    Compelling evidence suggests that optimising your vitamin D can reduce your risk of death from any cause, 23 making it a foundational component of optimal health. Mega doses of vitamin D have also been shown to decrease the length of time critical care patients must remain hospitalised.24 Those who received 250,000 IUs for five days were released after an average of 25 days, compared to the average of 36 days for those receiving a placebo.

    Patients who received 500,000 IUs of vitamin D for five days were released after an average of just 18 days, effectively cutting their hospital stay in half. The health care savings in this instance alone are tremendous. When you add in all possible diseases and ailments vitamin D can prevent and/or ameliorate, the savings could potentially tally into the trillions each year.

    Certainly, for the average person, optimising your vitamin D level is one of the least expensive preventive care strategies at your disposal. If you suffer from any of the following ailments and still haven’t checked your vitamin D level, now may be the time to go ahead and do so, as research 25 into vitamin D has found it can help prevent and/or address:

    Osteoporosis, osteomalacia (bone softening) and hip fractures Type 1 and type 2 diabetes
    Cancer, including cancers of the breast, colon, prostate, ovaries, oesophagus and lymphatic system. Adding vitamin D to the conventional treatment for pancreatic cancer may also boost the effectiveness of the treatment 26 Hypertension (high blood pressure), cardiovascular disease and heart attacks – (According to vitamin D researcher Dr. Michael Holick, deficiency can raise your risk of heart attack by 50%. What’s worse, if you have a heart attack while vitamin D deficient, your risk of dying is nearly guaranteed)
    Obstructive sleep apnoea – In one study, 98% of patients with sleep apnoea had vitamin D deficiency, and the more severe the sleep apnoea, the more severe the deficiency27 Multiple sclerosis28 (“MS”) – Research shows MS patients with higher levels of vitamin D tend to experience fewer disabling symptoms
    Rheumatoid arthritis Reduced immune function
    Autoimmune diseases, including psoriasis Infections, including influenza
    Depression, 29 Seasonal Affective Disorder and psychiatric conditions such as schizophrenia Neurological disorders, including autism, dementia and Alzheimer’s 30
    Health Benefits of Sun Exposure Beyond Vitamin D

    There’s overwhelming evidence to suggest the human body evolved to obtain health benefits from, and to thrive in, sunlight. As previously noted in The Daily Mail:31

    Even taking the skin cancer risk fully into account, [scientists] say that getting a good dose of sunshine is statistically going to make us live longer, healthier and happier lives.

    One significant mechanism by which sunlight helps optimise your health is by triggering the release of nitric oxide (“NO”) when sunlight strikes your skin. 32 NO is a powerful blood pressure-lowering compound that helps protect your cardiovascular system, cutting your risk for both heart attacks and stroke.

    According to one 2013 study, 33 for every single skin cancer death, 60 to 100 people die from stroke or heart disease related to hypertension. So, your risk of dying from heart disease or stroke is on average 80 times greater than your risk of dying from skin cancer.

    Importantly, while higher vitamin D levels correlate with lower rates of cardiovascular disease, oral vitamin D supplements do not appear to benefit blood pressure, and the fact that supplements do not increase NO may be the reason for this. According to researcher Dr. Richard Weller:

    We suspect that the benefits to heart health of sunlight will outweigh the risk of skin cancer. The work we have done provides a mechanism that might account for this, and also explains why dietary vitamin D supplements alone will not be able to compensate for lack of sunlight.

    To get a thorough understanding of how UV light affects your cardiovascular function, read Weller’s paper, ‘Sunlight Has Cardiovascular Benefits Independently of Vitamin D’. 34 Research also shows that UV light:

    Helps treat and prevent the spread of diseases like tuberculosis. 35
    Helps anchor your circadian rhythm, helping you sleep better.
    Helps kill and prevent the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. UV light at 254 nanometres acts as a potent bactericidal, killing drug-resistant strains of S. aureus and E. faecalis in as little as 5 seconds. 36
    Reduces your risk of myopia (short-sightedness). As reported by The Daily Mail: 37 “[R]esearchers believe that the neurotransmitter dopamine is responsible. It is known to inhibit the excessive eyeball growth that causes myopia. Sunshine causes the retina to release more dopamine.”
    Helps treat seasonal affective disorder and major depression. 38 Schizophrenia has also been linked to maternal lack of Sun exposure during pregnancy. 39
    Boosts men’s libido by increasing testosterone. Research reveals men’s testosterone levels rise and fall with the seasons. Researchers have also linked low vitamin D with an increased risk for erectile dysfunction. 40
    Helps maintain vitamin D status in elderly people at a lower cost than that of using oral vitamin D supplementation. 41 Not only could UV lamps help improve nursing home patients’ physical health, but they could also help relieve symptoms of depression.
    Lowers all-cause mortality. In one study,42,43 women who avoided Sun exposure had double the all-cause mortality rate of those who got regular Sun exposure. Another 54-month-long study, 44 involving more than 422,800 healthy adults, found that those who were most deficient in vitamin D had an 88% increased mortality risk.
    Embrace Sensible Sun Exposure as a Health-Promoting Habit

    Safe exposure to sunshine is possible by understanding your skin type, the UV strength at the time of exposure, and your duration of exposure. My advice has been clear: Always avoid sunburn. Once your skin develops the slightest tint of pink, cover up with clothing to avoid further exposure.

    The most important part of the equation is to pay close attention to your vitamin D level. Ideally, get your vitamin D tested during the peak of summer and at the end of winter to help guide your UV exposure and vitamin D supplementation. The evidence is overwhelming: You really do need sensible Sun exposure for optimal health.

    Since few foods contain any significant amount of vitamin D, and your body certainly was not designed to get its vitamin D from supplements, which are a modern invention, the only rational conclusion is that Sun exposure is the ideal way to raise your vitamin D level.

    Research has shown just how beautifully your body has been designed to use the Sun’s UV rays to promote health. It even has built-in “fail-safes” and self-regulatory processes to ensure you cannot produce too much vitamin D from Sun exposure. Plus, the vitamin D produced by UVB rays actually helps counteract the skin damage caused by UVA. It’s an intricate dance that simply cannot be fully duplicated with a supplement.

    Sources and References

    1 Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis v.8(4); 2016 Aug
    2 Nutrients 2014; 6(10): 4472-4475
    3 ipetitions.com
    4 Anticancer Research 2011 Feb;31(2):607-11
    5 JAMA 2017;317(12):1234-1243
    6 Lab Manager March 30, 2017
    7 Newswise March 28, 2017
    8 Time March 28, 2017
    9 PLOS ONE 2016; 11 (4): e0152441
    10 PR Web April 6, 2016
    11 UC San Diego Health April 6, 2016
    12 Science World Report April 13, 2016
    13 Oncology Nurse Advisor April 22, 2016
    14 Tech Times April 11, 2016
    15 Chrisbeatcancer.com, Vitamin D
    16 Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2015 Aug;8(8):675-82
    17 European Journal of Cancer 2005 May;41(8):1164-9
    18 Institute of Medicine, Committee to Review Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin D and Calcium, Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D
    19, 44 J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2013;98:2160-2167
    20 Anticancer Research February 2011: 31(2); 607-611
    21 UC San Diego Health System Press Release March 6, 2014
    22 Cancer Therapy Advisor March 23, 2016
    23 New York Times November 24, 2014
    24 Medical Press May 27, 2015
    25 Harvard T.H. Chan. Vitamin D
    26 Salk. FAQ on Pancreatic Cancer and Vitamin D
    27 Bel Marra Health May 3, 2016
    28 Mayo Clinic. Vitamin D and MS: Is There Any Connection?
    29 J Nutr Health Aging 1999;3(1): 5-7
    30 Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Dec 21;24(1):87. Vitamin D in Neurological Diseases
    31, 37 Daily Mail May 2, 2016
    32 Medical News Today May 8, 2013
    33 BBC News May 7, 2013
    34 Sunlight Institute January 18, 2016
    35 Science Daily March 17, 2009
    36 Ostomy Wound Management 1998 Oct;44(10):50-6
    38 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 1991 May; 52(5): 213-6
    39 BBC News July 20, 2001
    40 New Hope Network May 2, 2016
    41 Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2001 Aug;17(4):168-71
    42 Journal of Internal Medicine 2014 Jul;276(1):77-86
    43 Business Insider May 7, 2014
    About the Author

    Dr. Joseph Mercola is the founder and owner of Mercola.com, a Board-Certified Family Medicine Osteopathic Physician, a Fellow of the American College of Nutrition and a New York Times bestselling author. He publishes multiple articles a day covering a wide range of topics on his website Mercola.com.




    Why do you think the satanic oligarchs, who want us sick, weak and gone, are blocking our sun from healing us?

    Health benefits of the Sun: Vitamin D can reduce the risk of cancer by as much as 67%

    Vitamin D is involved in the biology of all cells in your body, including your immune cells. A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of cancer...

    https://expose-news.com/2023/12/28/health-benefits-of-the-sun

    T.me/AgentsOfTruth
    T.me/AgentsOfTruthChat
    Health benefits of the Sun: Vitamin D can reduce the risk of cancer by as much as 67% Rhoda WilsonDecember 28, 2023 Vitamin D is involved in the biology of all cells in your body, including your immune cells. A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of cancer. Most recently, researchers found vitamin D and calcium supplementation lowered participants’ overall cancer risk by 30%. Having a serum vitamin D level of at least 40 ng/ml reduces your risk for cancer by 67% compared to having a level of 20 ng/ml or less; most cancers occur in people with a vitamin D level between 10 and 40 ng/ml. Higher Vitamin D Levels Lower Cancer Risk By Dr. Joseph Mercola This article was originally published on 10 April 2017. Thousands of studies have been done on the health effects of vitamin D, and research shows it is involved in the biology of all cells and tissues in your body, including your immune cells. Your cells actually need the active form of vitamin D to gain access to the genetic blueprints stored inside. This is one of the reasons why vitamin D has the ability to impact such a wide variety of health problems – from foetal development to cancer. Unfortunately, despite being easy and inexpensive to address, vitamin D deficiency is an epidemic around the world. It’s been estimated that as many as 90% of pregnant mothers and newborns in the sunny Mediterranean region are even deficient in vitamin D,1 thanks to chronic Sun avoidance. A simple mathematical error may also deter many Americans and Canadians from optimising their vitamin D. The Institute of Medicine (“IOM”) recommends a mere 600 IUs of vitamin D per day for adults. As pointed out in a 2014 paper,2 the IOM underestimates the need by a factor of 10 due to a mathematical error, which has never been corrected. Grassroots Health has created a petition for the IOM and Health Canada to re-evaluate its vitamin D guidelines and correct this mathematical error.3 You can help further this important cause by signing the petition on ipetitions.com. More recent research 4 suggests it would require 9,600 IUs of vitamin D per day to get a majority (97.5%) of the population to reach 40 nanograms per millilitre (ng/ml). The American Medical Association uses of 20 ng/ml as sufficient, but research shows 40 ng/mL should be the cutoff point for sufficiency in order to prevent a wide range of diseases, including cancer. Research Again Concludes Vitamin D Lowers Cancer Risk A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of cancer. Most recently, a randomised clinical trial 5 by researchers at Creighton University, funded by the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”), found vitamin D and calcium supplementation lowered participants’ overall cancer risk by 30%.6,7,8 The study, which included more than 2,300 postmenopausal women from Nebraska who were followed for four years, looked at the effects of vitamin D supplementation on all types of cancer. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either 2,000 IUs of vitamin D3 in combination with 1,500 mg of calcium, or a placebo for the duration of the study. Blood testing revealed that 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels were significantly lower in those who did develop cancer. Joan Lappe, Ph.D., professor of nursing and associate dean of research at Creighton University’s College of Nursing, and lead author of the study, said: The study provides evidence that higher concentrations of 25(OH)D in the blood, in the context of vitamin D3 and calcium supplementation, decrease risk of cancer … While people can make their own vitamin D3 when they are in the Sun near mid-day, sunscreen blocks most vitamin D production. Also, due to more time spent indoors, many individuals lack adequate levels of vitamin D compounds in their blood. The results of this study lend credence to a call for more attention to the importance of vitamin D in human health and specifically in preventing cancer. Vitamin D Status Is Strongly Correlated with Cancer Risk Previous research has shown that once you reach a serum vitamin D level of 40 ng/ml, your risk for cancer diminishes by 67%, compared to having a level of 20 ng/ml or less.9,10,11,12,13,14,15 Most cancers, they found, occurred in people with a vitamin D blood level between 10 and 40 ng/ml. The optimal level for cancer protection was identified as being between 40 and 60 ng/ml. Another study 16 published in 2015 found women with vitamin D concentrations of at least 30 ng/ml had a 55% lower risk of colorectal cancer than those who had a blood level below 18 ng/ml. Even earlier research, 17 published in 2005, showed women with vitamin D levels above 60 ng/ml had an 83% lower risk of breast cancer than those with levels below 20 ng/ml! The Health and Medicine Division of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (formerly IOM) has also reported an association between vitamin D and overall mortality risk from all causes, including cancer.18,19 Vitamin D also increases your chances of surviving cancer if you do get it,20,21 and this includes melanoma. 22 Access Sun Exposure as Much as Possible and Get Your Vitamin D Level Checked The UVB in sunlight is what triggers your body to produce vitamin D. I firmly believe getting regular, sensible Sun exposure is the ideal way to not only optimise your vitamin D level but maximise your health as well because sunlight also has many other important health functions. I’ll review some of these in another section below. Regular Sun exposure provides over 1,500 different wavelengths, and we’re just now rediscovering the value of many of these other wavelengths besides UVA and UVB. For example, we now know that red and infrared light helps your body form structured water, which is important for cellular function. Many do not appreciate that red, near, mid and far-infrared have many important biological functions. One of them is to improve mitochondrial function, especially the 660 nm and 830 nm wavelengths, as cytochrome C oxidase in mitochondria uses these wavelengths to produce ATP more efficiently. Vitamin D3 supplements are a poor second resort, but if you’re unable to get sufficient Sun exposure, then it’s better than nothing. As demonstrated in the featured study – which specifically looked at the effects of supplementation – they do have some benefits. Also, while not addressed in this study, I strongly recommend taking your vitamin D3 with vitamin K2 and magnesium as well, since all three work in tandem. A primary consideration when it comes to vitamin D is to get your level checked, ideally twice a year, in the middle of the summer and winter, when your level is at its highest and lowest. What you’re aiming for is a level between 40 and 60 ng/ml year-round. Grassroots Health offers vitamin D testing at a great value through its D*Action study. Read more: Harness the Power of the Sun for Health (Infographic) How to Minimise Your Risk of Skin Cancer from Sun Exposure Many avoid Sun exposure for fear of melanoma, an aggressive and potentially lethal form of skin cancer. However, it’s important to realise that melanoma occurs among those with minimal Sun exposure as well. An important risk factor for melanoma is overexposure to UV radiation. Baking in the Sun for hours on end on a weekend here and there is not a wise choice. To minimise your skin cancer risk, you want to avoid sunburn at all costs. If you’re going to the beach, bring long-sleeved cover-ups and a wide-brimmed hat, and cover up as soon as your skin starts to turn pink. Following are some general guidelines for sensible Sun exposure. If you pay close attention to these, you can determine, within reason, safe exposure durations. Know your skin type based on the Fitzpatrick skin type classification system. The lighter your skin, the less exposure to UV light is necessary. The downside is that lighter skin is also the most vulnerable to damage from overexposure. For very fair-skinned people and those with photodermatitis, any Sun exposure may be unwanted and they should carefully measure vitamin D levels while ensuring they have an adequate intake of vitamin D, vitamin K2, magnesium and calcium. For most people, safe UV exposure is possible by knowing your skin type and the current strength of the Sun’s rays. There are several apps and devices to help you optimise the benefits of Sun exposure while mitigating the risks. Also, be extremely careful if you have not been in the Sun for some time. Your first exposures of the year are the most sensitive, so be especially careful to limit your initial time in the Sun. Vitamin D Influences Your Health in Many Ways The benefits of vitamin D are not restricted to cancer prevention. In fact, the list of health benefits of vitamin D is exceedingly long. As noted earlier, researchers have now realised that vitamin D affects virtually every cell and tissue in your body, so it might be easier to list what it will not affect, rather than what it will impact. Compelling evidence suggests that optimising your vitamin D can reduce your risk of death from any cause, 23 making it a foundational component of optimal health. Mega doses of vitamin D have also been shown to decrease the length of time critical care patients must remain hospitalised.24 Those who received 250,000 IUs for five days were released after an average of 25 days, compared to the average of 36 days for those receiving a placebo. Patients who received 500,000 IUs of vitamin D for five days were released after an average of just 18 days, effectively cutting their hospital stay in half. The health care savings in this instance alone are tremendous. When you add in all possible diseases and ailments vitamin D can prevent and/or ameliorate, the savings could potentially tally into the trillions each year. Certainly, for the average person, optimising your vitamin D level is one of the least expensive preventive care strategies at your disposal. If you suffer from any of the following ailments and still haven’t checked your vitamin D level, now may be the time to go ahead and do so, as research 25 into vitamin D has found it can help prevent and/or address: Osteoporosis, osteomalacia (bone softening) and hip fractures Type 1 and type 2 diabetes Cancer, including cancers of the breast, colon, prostate, ovaries, oesophagus and lymphatic system. Adding vitamin D to the conventional treatment for pancreatic cancer may also boost the effectiveness of the treatment 26 Hypertension (high blood pressure), cardiovascular disease and heart attacks – (According to vitamin D researcher Dr. Michael Holick, deficiency can raise your risk of heart attack by 50%. What’s worse, if you have a heart attack while vitamin D deficient, your risk of dying is nearly guaranteed) Obstructive sleep apnoea – In one study, 98% of patients with sleep apnoea had vitamin D deficiency, and the more severe the sleep apnoea, the more severe the deficiency27 Multiple sclerosis28 (“MS”) – Research shows MS patients with higher levels of vitamin D tend to experience fewer disabling symptoms Rheumatoid arthritis Reduced immune function Autoimmune diseases, including psoriasis Infections, including influenza Depression, 29 Seasonal Affective Disorder and psychiatric conditions such as schizophrenia Neurological disorders, including autism, dementia and Alzheimer’s 30 Health Benefits of Sun Exposure Beyond Vitamin D There’s overwhelming evidence to suggest the human body evolved to obtain health benefits from, and to thrive in, sunlight. As previously noted in The Daily Mail:31 Even taking the skin cancer risk fully into account, [scientists] say that getting a good dose of sunshine is statistically going to make us live longer, healthier and happier lives. One significant mechanism by which sunlight helps optimise your health is by triggering the release of nitric oxide (“NO”) when sunlight strikes your skin. 32 NO is a powerful blood pressure-lowering compound that helps protect your cardiovascular system, cutting your risk for both heart attacks and stroke. According to one 2013 study, 33 for every single skin cancer death, 60 to 100 people die from stroke or heart disease related to hypertension. So, your risk of dying from heart disease or stroke is on average 80 times greater than your risk of dying from skin cancer. Importantly, while higher vitamin D levels correlate with lower rates of cardiovascular disease, oral vitamin D supplements do not appear to benefit blood pressure, and the fact that supplements do not increase NO may be the reason for this. According to researcher Dr. Richard Weller: We suspect that the benefits to heart health of sunlight will outweigh the risk of skin cancer. The work we have done provides a mechanism that might account for this, and also explains why dietary vitamin D supplements alone will not be able to compensate for lack of sunlight. To get a thorough understanding of how UV light affects your cardiovascular function, read Weller’s paper, ‘Sunlight Has Cardiovascular Benefits Independently of Vitamin D’. 34 Research also shows that UV light: Helps treat and prevent the spread of diseases like tuberculosis. 35 Helps anchor your circadian rhythm, helping you sleep better. Helps kill and prevent the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. UV light at 254 nanometres acts as a potent bactericidal, killing drug-resistant strains of S. aureus and E. faecalis in as little as 5 seconds. 36 Reduces your risk of myopia (short-sightedness). As reported by The Daily Mail: 37 “[R]esearchers believe that the neurotransmitter dopamine is responsible. It is known to inhibit the excessive eyeball growth that causes myopia. Sunshine causes the retina to release more dopamine.” Helps treat seasonal affective disorder and major depression. 38 Schizophrenia has also been linked to maternal lack of Sun exposure during pregnancy. 39 Boosts men’s libido by increasing testosterone. Research reveals men’s testosterone levels rise and fall with the seasons. Researchers have also linked low vitamin D with an increased risk for erectile dysfunction. 40 Helps maintain vitamin D status in elderly people at a lower cost than that of using oral vitamin D supplementation. 41 Not only could UV lamps help improve nursing home patients’ physical health, but they could also help relieve symptoms of depression. Lowers all-cause mortality. In one study,42,43 women who avoided Sun exposure had double the all-cause mortality rate of those who got regular Sun exposure. Another 54-month-long study, 44 involving more than 422,800 healthy adults, found that those who were most deficient in vitamin D had an 88% increased mortality risk. Embrace Sensible Sun Exposure as a Health-Promoting Habit Safe exposure to sunshine is possible by understanding your skin type, the UV strength at the time of exposure, and your duration of exposure. My advice has been clear: Always avoid sunburn. Once your skin develops the slightest tint of pink, cover up with clothing to avoid further exposure. The most important part of the equation is to pay close attention to your vitamin D level. Ideally, get your vitamin D tested during the peak of summer and at the end of winter to help guide your UV exposure and vitamin D supplementation. The evidence is overwhelming: You really do need sensible Sun exposure for optimal health. Since few foods contain any significant amount of vitamin D, and your body certainly was not designed to get its vitamin D from supplements, which are a modern invention, the only rational conclusion is that Sun exposure is the ideal way to raise your vitamin D level. Research has shown just how beautifully your body has been designed to use the Sun’s UV rays to promote health. It even has built-in “fail-safes” and self-regulatory processes to ensure you cannot produce too much vitamin D from Sun exposure. Plus, the vitamin D produced by UVB rays actually helps counteract the skin damage caused by UVA. It’s an intricate dance that simply cannot be fully duplicated with a supplement. Sources and References 1 Ther Adv Musculoskelet Dis v.8(4); 2016 Aug 2 Nutrients 2014; 6(10): 4472-4475 3 ipetitions.com 4 Anticancer Research 2011 Feb;31(2):607-11 5 JAMA 2017;317(12):1234-1243 6 Lab Manager March 30, 2017 7 Newswise March 28, 2017 8 Time March 28, 2017 9 PLOS ONE 2016; 11 (4): e0152441 10 PR Web April 6, 2016 11 UC San Diego Health April 6, 2016 12 Science World Report April 13, 2016 13 Oncology Nurse Advisor April 22, 2016 14 Tech Times April 11, 2016 15 Chrisbeatcancer.com, Vitamin D 16 Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2015 Aug;8(8):675-82 17 European Journal of Cancer 2005 May;41(8):1164-9 18 Institute of Medicine, Committee to Review Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin D and Calcium, Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D 19, 44 J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2013;98:2160-2167 20 Anticancer Research February 2011: 31(2); 607-611 21 UC San Diego Health System Press Release March 6, 2014 22 Cancer Therapy Advisor March 23, 2016 23 New York Times November 24, 2014 24 Medical Press May 27, 2015 25 Harvard T.H. Chan. Vitamin D 26 Salk. FAQ on Pancreatic Cancer and Vitamin D 27 Bel Marra Health May 3, 2016 28 Mayo Clinic. Vitamin D and MS: Is There Any Connection? 29 J Nutr Health Aging 1999;3(1): 5-7 30 Int J Mol Sci. 2022 Dec 21;24(1):87. Vitamin D in Neurological Diseases 31, 37 Daily Mail May 2, 2016 32 Medical News Today May 8, 2013 33 BBC News May 7, 2013 34 Sunlight Institute January 18, 2016 35 Science Daily March 17, 2009 36 Ostomy Wound Management 1998 Oct;44(10):50-6 38 Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 1991 May; 52(5): 213-6 39 BBC News July 20, 2001 40 New Hope Network May 2, 2016 41 Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 2001 Aug;17(4):168-71 42 Journal of Internal Medicine 2014 Jul;276(1):77-86 43 Business Insider May 7, 2014 About the Author Dr. Joseph Mercola is the founder and owner of Mercola.com, a Board-Certified Family Medicine Osteopathic Physician, a Fellow of the American College of Nutrition and a New York Times bestselling author. He publishes multiple articles a day covering a wide range of topics on his website Mercola.com. Why do you think the satanic oligarchs, who want us sick, weak and gone, are blocking our sun from healing us? Health benefits of the Sun: Vitamin D can reduce the risk of cancer by as much as 67% Vitamin D is involved in the biology of all cells in your body, including your immune cells. A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of cancer... https://expose-news.com/2023/12/28/health-benefits-of-the-sun T.me/AgentsOfTruth T.me/AgentsOfTruthChat
    EXPOSE-NEWS.COM
    Health benefits of the Sun: Vitamin D can reduce the risk of cancer by as much as 67%
    Vitamin D is involved in the biology of all cells in your body, including your immune cells. A large number of studies have shown raising your vitamin D level can significantly reduce your risk of …
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 1 Shares 12478 Views
  • No antibiotics, no hormones. Just dairy. A new completely lactose-free dairy. Dairy without the cows? Um, how does that work?
    No antibiotics, no hormones. Just dairy. A new completely lactose-free dairy. Dairy without the cows? Um, how does that work?
    Like
    1
    0 Comments 0 Shares 974 Views
  • I did not know this. I have local honey in my tea. Alway using a metal spoon
    Did you know that one of the world's first coins had a bee symbol?
    Did you know that honey contains live enzymes?
    Did you know that in contact with a metal spoon, these enzymes die? The best way to eat honey is with a wooden spoon; if you can't find one, use a plastic spoon.
    Did you know that honey contains a substance that helps the brain work better?
    Did you know that honey is one of the few foods on earth that alone can sustain human life?
    Did you know that bees saved people from starvation in Africa?
    That a spoonful of honey is enough to keep a man alive for 24 hours?
    Did you know that propolis produced by bees is one of the most powerful natural antibiotics?
    Did you know that honey has no expiry date?
    Did you know that the bodies of the world's greatest emperors were buried in gold coffins, then covered in honey to prevent putrefaction?
    Did you know that the term "Honeymoon" (honeymoon) comes from the fact that the bride and groom consumed honey for fertility after their marriage?
    Did you know that a bee lives less than 40 days, visits at least 1000 flowers and produces less than a teaspoon of honey, but for her it is the work of a lifetime.
    Thank you precious bees!
    I did not know this. I have local honey in my tea. Alway using a metal spoon 🥄 Did you know that one of the world's first coins had a bee symbol? Did you know that honey contains live enzymes? Did you know that in contact with a metal spoon, these enzymes die? The best way to eat honey is with a wooden spoon; if you can't find one, use a plastic spoon. Did you know that honey contains a substance that helps the brain work better? Did you know that honey is one of the few foods on earth that alone can sustain human life? Did you know that bees saved people from starvation in Africa? That a spoonful of honey is enough to keep a man alive for 24 hours? Did you know that propolis produced by bees is one of the most powerful natural antibiotics? Did you know that honey has no expiry date? Did you know that the bodies of the world's greatest emperors were buried in gold coffins, then covered in honey to prevent putrefaction? Did you know that the term "Honeymoon" (honeymoon) comes from the fact that the bride and groom consumed honey for fertility after their marriage? Did you know that a bee lives less than 40 days, visits at least 1000 flowers and produces less than a teaspoon of honey, but for her it is the work of a lifetime. Thank you precious bees!
    Like
    Love
    4
    1 Comments 0 Shares 5424 Views


  • BOMBSHELL! Inside mRNA Vaccines a Human Molecule Diabolically Altered | VT Foreign Policy
    donshafi911
    BOMBSHELL! Inside mRNA Vaccines a Human Molecule Diabolically Altered | VT Foreign Policy

    January 6, 2024

    VT Condemns the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINIANS by USA/Israel
    $ 280 BILLION US TAXPAYER DOLLARS INVESTED since 1948 in US/Israeli Ethnic Cleansing and Occupation Operation; $ 150B direct "aid" and $ 130B in "Offense" contracts

    Source: Embassy of Israel, Washington, D.C. and US Department of State.

    In the cover image, the Canadian researcher Jessica Rose, author of an excellent biochemical analysis of an article from the University of Cambridge commenting a study by some of its researchers on the toxicity of manipulated human nucleoside in mRNA genetic sera

    by Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio

    VERSIONE IN ITALIANO

    «Well of course! Now that we know that billions of people’s cells might be making aberrant proteins, for unknown periods of time, we can simply sweep these people under the rug, ‘fix’ the product, and keep on makin’ money. Let’s go slidin’ down the slippery sequence slope of gene therapy straight to the Gates of hell».

    With this phrase to be engraved in the history of the massive Covid vaccination campaign, the esteemed Canadian researcher, biochemist, immunologist and molecular biologist Jessica Rose (Source 1), author of multiple fundamental discoveries on the contamination of mRNA genetic sera, best describes the disturbing importance of an article published by University of Cambridge in relation to an enlightening scientific research which confirmed to the global scientific community the dangerous experimental use in the Pfizer-Biontech and Moderna mRNA vaccines of what we do not hesitate to define as the “Diabolical Molecule” because it is a biological human component modified twice in the laboratory. (Source 1).

    UPDATE! Florida State Surgeon General Calls for Halt of mRNA Vaccines due to Dangerous, Oncogenes DNA Fragments
    Author of multiple fundamental discoveries on the contamination of mRNA genetic sera, best describes the disturbing importance of an article published by University of Cambridgein relation to an enlightening scientific research which confirmed to the global scientific community the dangerous experimental use in the Pfizer-Biontech and Moderna mRNA vaccines of what we do not hesitate to define as the “Diabolical Molecule”because it is a biological human component modified twice in the laboratory.

    Billions of Dangerous Spike DNA’s Molecules inside Covid mRNA Vaccines. They can Reproduce the Toxic Protein in Human Cells for a Long Time
    This is the double alteration of Uridinetransformed into Pseudourine with the first synthetic biochemical alteration and then into N1-methylpseudouridine initialed “m1Ψ” as an acronym for N1-methyl-Ψ in which the Greek letter “Psi” was used to name Psueudoridine .

    Uridine is an organic compound, nucleoside,made up of the coupling of a molecule of ribose and one of uracil. Uracil is one of the two pyrimidine nitrogenous bases that form the nucleotides of RNA nucleic acid.



    This manipulation was designed by the Hungarian biochemist Katalin Karikó,awarded the 2023 Nobel Prize for Medicine precisely for having laid the foundations of mRNA vaccines, in order to “deceive” human cells into recognizing the synthetic mRNA as harmless human RNA …

    I apologize to the biochemistry experts for any transcription mistakes I may make trying to translate from a difficult chemical language the portentous scientific essence of the abundant technical quotations in the article published by Rose on her Substack, from which we will only extrapolate its introduction.

    Bombshell from US! FDA “Hides” Toxicity on DNA Fragments inside mRNA Vaccines despite Danger of Cancer Highlighted in its Guidance too
    Martin: “Pseudouridine Killer in the Vaccines for Depopulation”
    This analysis comes surprisingly providential as on Gospa News International we have just reported the summary of a conference by the famous patent expert David E. Martin in which he narrated in recent weeks the story of SARS-Cov-2 as a bacteriological weapon built in 58 years of military research on coronaviruses and that of mRNA vaccines, in his opinion, knowingly spread in a mass experiment for the search for vaccines against HIV-AIDS and cancer but also aimed at global depopulation.

    WUHAN-GATES – 73. Half of Century of Covert Bioweapon Development Leading to Fauci’s SARS-Cov-2 and to mRNA Lethal Vaccines
    In a very detailed article the American osteopath doctor Joseph Mercola wrote that «Martin points out that even if they don’t unleash any other bioweapons, the desired death toll may still be achieved, because they used pseudouridine in the mRNA shots, which is causing “turbo cancers”».

    Because: «Pseudouridine suppresses cancer-controlling agents and promotes oncogenic activity in the body, and this has been known since 2018, so its inclusion was hardly an accident. It’s a conspiracy, alright. But not a conspiracy theory in the dismissive sense. It’s a global conspiracy by identifiable agents who have, for nearly 60 years, plotted to commit, and profit from, the greatest genocide the world has ever seen, while hiding behind the false veneer of “public health.”».
    Well today, both the University of Cambridge and other authoritative scientists from around the world implicitly confirm that all those vaccinated with Covid mRNA with Moderna’s Spikevax and Pfizer-Biontech’s Comirnaty have been and continue to be unpaid and, above all, unaware human guinea pigs.

    Precisely because of this altered nucleoside…

    The Disturbing Article from Cambridge University
    The comment by the researcher Rose that we reported in the incipit of the article referred to the text of the University of Cambridge(Source 2) in relation to the study “N1-methylpseudouridylation of mRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting” by Mulroney et al.published on December 6, 2023 by Nature after more than a month of review.



    «Researchers redesign future mRNA therapeutics to prevent potentially harmful immune responses» is the eloquent title of the scientific text published by the British university.

    «The latest developments, led by biochemist Professor Anne Willis and immunologist Dr James Thaventhiran from the MRC Toxicology Unit at the University of Cambridge, build upon previous advances to ensure the prevention of any safety issues linked with future mRNA-based therapeutics. Their report is published today in the journal Nature» we read in the unsigned article.

    «The researchers identified that bases with a chemical modification called N1-methylpseudouridine – which are currently contained in mRNA therapies – are responsible for the ‘slips’ along the mRNA sequence» adds the university website.
    In collaboration with researchers at the Universities of Kent, Oxford and Liverpool, the MRC Toxicology Unit team«tested for evidence of the production of ‘off-target’ proteins in people who received the mRNA Pfizer vaccine against COVID-19. They found an unintended immune response occurred in one third of the 21 patients in the study who were vaccinated – but with no ill-effects, in keeping with the extensive safety data available on these COVID-19 vaccines».

    SCIENCE Magazine Finally Admitted the mRNA Vaccines Dangerous Side Effects! Shots linked to Long Covid, Neurologic Damages and POTS
    Despite disturbing the article already appears biased as it is aimed at “minimizing” the adverse reactions, even lethal one, that are accumulating in pharmacovigilance systems around the world, which have been confirmed by an alarming article in the journal Science, by the regulatory bodies from all over the world (EMA, FDA, etc.) and which led Moderna and Pfizer-Biontech to include the risk of lethal myocarditis in the information leaflets of their genetic drugs…

    7 EURODEPUTATI CHIEDONO IL RITIRO DEI VACCINI COVID. Per Miocarditi Letali, Malori Improvvisi e Sicurezza Incerta nei Fragili
    British Study: “Incorrect mRNA Translation may Increase Toxicity”
    But it is the same authors of the study whose first signatory is Thomas E. Mulroney (Source 3), associate researcher of the Toxicology Unit of the MRC in Cambridge, who wrote the shocking considerations from a biochemical point of view in the conclusions.

    «We show that 1-methylΨ is a modified ribonucleotide that significantly increases +1 ribosomal frameshifting during mRNA translation and that cellular immunity to +1 frameshifted products can occur following vaccination with mRNA containing 1-methylΨ. To our knowledge, this is the first report that mRNA modification affects ribosomal frameshifting. Alongside this impact on host T cell immunity, the off-target effects of ribosomal frameshifting could include increased production of new B cell antigens».




    And they further add:

    «These findings are of particular importance to our fundamental understanding of how ribonucleotide modification affects mRNA translation, and for designing and optimizing future mRNA-based therapeutics to avoid mistranslation events that may decrease efficacy or increase toxicity».
    We will not delve further into the technical references but return to the analysis published by Jessica Rose in her Substack, making an extreme summary of it and advising professionals to read the text full of important images.

    Billions of DNA Fragments of Toxic Spike Protein and SV40 gene in the mRNA Vaccines. New Study: “They may Cause Turbo-Cancer”
    Let’s start with the comment added under the research published by Nature by her together with David Wiseman, L. Maria Gutschi, David J. Speicher, Kevin McKernan.

    Alongside the Canadian biologist they were already co-authors of the study “DNA fragments detected in the monovalent and bivalent Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna modRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Ontario, Canada: exploratory dose-response relationship with serious adverse events” which induced the EMA to confess that Pfizer hid the use of the very dangerous SV40 gene in its vaccine, which can cause tumors.

    The same research encouraged the bioimmunologist Robert Malone to denounce the presence of the antibiotic resistance gene in the Moderna one, pointing out also that the pharmaceutical company was aware of the tumor risks of mRNA biotechnology as reported in its own patent.

    Bomba Mondiale! “NEI VACCINI COVID GENE DI RESISTENZA AGLI ANTIBIOTICI”. Studio Spagnolo lo Conferma. Ministro Schillaci lo CELA nell’Allarme Morti AMR
    We have written extensively about these topics in three investigations, one of which – on antibiotic resistance gene – is a world exclusive.

    Alarm of American Scientists for the New Research
    Let us therefore see the content of the comment by Rose and colleagues (Source 1)on Cambridge’s research:

    The paper provides evidence for the formation “off-target” or unintended proteins following vaccination with BNT162b2 due to frameshifting. Given the proposed mechanism, a similar problem is likely to exist for the Moderna product.
    While the authors have not isolated samples of these proteins from vaccinated patients or animals, their existence is evidenced by the specific cellular immune responses elicited to frameshifted proteins the authors synthesized. It is not clear why B cell – antibody responses were not studied.
    The authors state that “Although there is no evidence that frameshifted products in humans generated from BNT162b2 vaccination are associated with adverse outcomes.”
    BOMBSHELL: mRNA COVID jabs can Damage Children’s Immune Response to OTHER Viruses as well, Study finds
    It is unclear how it is possible to make this statement, given:
    • The small number of vaccinated subjects (n=21) providing samples.
    • This was not a controlled trial.
    • None of these subjects had reported undue effects of vaccination. Accordingly, the sample is subject to selection bias.
    • The toxicology of these unintended proteins must be studied.
    • The authors acknowledge the misdirected immunity “has huge potential to be harmful.”
    Translated into simpler words, no one has verified the selection methods of the samples which may have been chosen precisely because they did not have serious adverse reactions.

    SPIKE-DEMIC among Vaccinated: 83 % hit by PCVS Syndrome. Indian Study confirmed Gates, Big Pharma’s Health Disaster
    Furthermore, in the interests of expertise we read that the two Cambridge scientists Thomas E. Mulroney and Anne E. Willis «are inventors of a pending patent application (2305297.0) relating to mRNA technology» while in the information on the authors it is discovered that Alexander J Mentzer works at the Wellcome Center for Human Genetics, University of Oxford.

    Wellcome, with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum, is among the founders of the Ngo CEPI(Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations) which has already launched the SKYCovion vaccine together with the London-based GSK, managed by CEO Emma Walmsley who is also director of Microsoft, and SK Bioscience.

    WUHAN-GATES – 73. BILL III A CACCIA DI CAVIE UMANE PER VACCINO COVID COREANO. “Genotossicità non Studiata” ma OMS & UK danno OK a SkyCovione con Spike Tossica e Adiuvante GSK da Pericoloso Squalene
    But let’s go back to the analysis made by Jessica Rose on the Cambridge researchers’ study: «The authors write that N1-methylpseudouridine affects the fidelity of mRNA translation via ribosome stalling that induces frameshifting. Frameshifting results in the production multiple, unique and potentially aberrant proteins».

    «The modified mRNAs for use in the COVID-19 products were codon-optimized for maximal protein expression in humans. Codon optimization, or synonymous codon replacement, rests on the idea that one can induce mutations throughout a gene of interest (like spike) based on an organism’s (like humans) codon usage bias, to increase translational efficiency and protein expression without altering the sequence of the protein. But, it is well-known that codon-optimization can lead to protein conformation, folding and stability problems».
    COVID: SCOPERTA LA PROTEINA CHE RIVELA I LETALI COAGULI DI SANGUE. Ma Nessuno Indaga sulla Correlazione coi Vaccini
    The Canadian immunologist further notes:

    «Codon optimization could affect protein conformation, folding and stability, change post-translational modification sites and even affect protein function.Different rates of translation by different tRNAs, including those that exhibit wobble base-pairing (a tRNA that can recognize multiple synonymous codons) may actually be critical for determining the rate of translation. The ribosome may slow and pause during elongation which may actually be necessary for proper protein folding. Therefore, codon optimization may disrupt the fine-tuned timing of translation and ultimately protein function».
    The Prophetic Seneff Study on Autoimmune and Neurocerebral Damage
    He then refers to other studies that had reported the dangers of this biochemical manipulation (Source 1):

    «Codon optimization can also lead to misfolding of mRNAs due to increased Guanine/Cytosine (GC content). Please read McKernan et al.’s preprint, Xia et al.’s paper and Seneff et al.’s paper to learn more about potential problems relating to codon optimization and GC content changes. The latter group write: Synonymous codon replacement also results in a change in the multifunctional regulatory and structural roles of resulting proteins».
    ONE in THREE Covid Vaccinated with Neurological Complications. Alarming Study from Italian National Research Council
    The risks to the human organism are clearly highlighted:

    «There is, in fact, a significant enrichment of GC content (17% and 25% enrichments as per Pfizer and Moderna, respectively, as compared to SARS-CoV-2) as a result of the codon optimization that was done, and this can lead to “dysregulation of the G4-RNA-protein binding system and a wide range of potential disease-associated cellular pathologies including suppression of innate immunity, neurodegeneration, and malignant transformation”. Increased GC content significantly alters mRNA secondary structure as well, and this can also lead to ribosomal pausing or stalling».
    These considerations were expressed in a study published by illustrious scientists such as Stephanie Seneff, Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA, Greg Nigh, Immersion Health, Portland, OR, USA, Anthony M. Kyriakopoulos, Nasco AD Biotechnology Laboratory, Department of Research and Development, Piraeus, Greece and Peter A. McCullough, for Health Foundation, Tucson, AZ, USA, which was the subject of enormous censorship by specialized medical journals but we published in Gospa News thanks to an excellent summary by Dr. Mercola.

    Dangerous RNA Manipulation with N1-methyl-Ψ
    Below are the quotes from Seneff et al.(Source 4) useful for understanding the connection with uridine modified in N1-methyl-Ψ: «The utilization of mRNA vaccines in the context of infectious disease has no precedent. The many alterations in the vaccine mRNA hide the mRNA from cellular defenses and promote a longer biological half-life and high production of spike protein».

    «However, the immune response to the vaccine is very different from that to a SARS-CoV-2 infection. In this paper, we present evidence that vaccination induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signaling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health. Immune cells that have taken up the vaccine nanoparticles release into circulation large numbers of exosomes containing spike protein along with critical microRNAs that induce a signaling response in recipient cells at distant sites. We also identify potential profound disturbances in regulatory control of protein synthesis and cancer surveillance».
    The COVID Jabs’ Mechanisms of Injury: Sudden Death, Blood Cloths, Human Mad Cow and Autoimmune Diseases
    In the study entitled “Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs” the scientists added:

    «These disturbances potentially have a causal link to neurodegenerative disease, myocarditis, immune thrombocytopenia, Bell’s palsy, liver disease, impaired adaptive immunity, impaired DNA damage response and tumorigenesis. We show evidence from the VAERS database supporting our hypothesis. We believe a comprehensive risk/benefit assessment of the mRNA vaccines questions them as positive contributors to public health».
    The late biologist Luc Montagnier, in a study published posthumously by his research friends Jean-Claude Perez and Claire Moret-Chalmin with a review contribution from Seneff biophysics, proved without a shadow of a doubt the correlation between killer prions caused by vaccines and rapid deaths for neurocerebral Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease, human mad cow disease.

    PRIONS as KILLERS: 25 Deaths due to a New Mad-Cow from Covid Vaccines. Shocking Research by Montagnier (RIP), Perez & Moret-Chalmin on CJD Brain Damages
    In detail Seneff and the other scientists also refer to specific alterations:

    «Impaired type I IFN signaling is linked to many disease risks, most notably cancer, as type I IFN signaling suppresses proliferation of both viruses and cancer cells by arresting the cell cycle, in part through upregulation of p53, a tumor suppressor gene, and various cyclin- dependent kinase inhibitors (Musella et al., 2017; Matsuoka et al., 1998). IFNα also induces major histocompatibility (MHC) class 1 antigen presentation by tumor cells, causing them to be more readily recognized by the cancer surveillance system (Heise et al., 2016)».
    They then delve into the problem of the uridine molecule.

    To understand its importance we report a note from Rose: «Pseudouridines (Ψs) are a normal and essential part of our biology. They have been called the 5th nucleotide, in fact, and “are a ubiquitous constituent of structural RNA (transfer, ribosomal, small nuclear (snRNA) and small nucleolar), and present in coding RNA, across the three phylogenetic domains of life”and “accounts for about 1.4% of all bases in human rRNAs”».

    “mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines are Like Gene Therapy Products” French Study highlighted Omitted Controls on Genotoxicity
    Here’s what Seneff and his colleagues wrote about vaccines:

    «A breakthrough came when it was discovered experimentally that the mRNA coding for the spike protein could be modified in specific ways that would essentially fool the human cells into recognizing it as harmless human RNA. A seminal paper by Karikó et al. (2005) demonstrated through a series of in vitro experiments that a simple modification to the mRNA such that all uridines were replaced with pseudouridine could dramatically reduce innate immune activation against exogenous mRNA».

    Cancer Risk pointed out by the Nobel Inventor of mRNA Vaccines
    Precisely for this discovery, Hungarian researcher Katalin Karikó, long-time at Biontech, recently received the Nobel Prize for Medicine together with her American colleague Drew Weissman, although both warned of the dangers of the new mRNA biotechnology.

    Medicine Nobel to mRNA Covid Vaccines’ Scientists, both Sponsored by Gates, Fauci and Zuckerberg
    In particular, on January 6, Karikó declared to the German newspaper Welt (Source 5):

    «Every day I receive many emails from people who write to me about their experiences. One woman wrote to me that two days after the vaccination she developed a large lump in her breast. Vaccination caused cancer, it was her conclusion. But the cancer was already there, only vaccination gave an extra boost to the immune system, so that the immune defense cells rushed in large numbers towards the enemy».



    The Gospa News investigations on Turbo-Cancer based now on seven published scientific studies have highlighted a very strong correlation between mRNA gene sera and the appearance or reactivation of tumor phenomena with abnormal degeneration resulting in lethal outcomes.

    TURBO-CANCER – 2. Many Lethal/Serious Cases and New Researches on Covid mRNA Vaccines Risks. Melatonin Hope…
    Karikó herself adds: «Vaccination provides a strong boost to the immune system. It can happen that a dormant infection breaks out in people with an already weakened immune system. The extent to which this is the case for shingles will need to be examined more closely».

    Gospa News did so by discovering 27 thousand cases of Herpes Zoster, in the European Union only, as adverse reactions to vaccines reported by EMA pharmacovigilance database even in children, who are more exposed to damage to the natural immune system as confirmed by recent research.

    Esclusivo! EPIDEMIA DI HERPES DOPO I VACCINI COVID. 27mila Casi nell’UE: 31 Morti da Zoster. Lo Studio: “Per danni al Sistema Immunitario”
    Let’s go back to Seneff’s conclusions:

    «Andries et al. (2015) later discovered that 1-methylpseudouridine as a replacement for uridine was even more effective than pseudouridine and could essentially abolish the TLR response to the mRNA, preventing the activation of blood-derived dendritic cells. This modification is applied in both the mRNA vaccines on the market (Park et al., 2021)».
    To put it simply, the dendritic cell plays the role of sentinel and if it senses the presence of a pathogen in the body, it stimulates the immune response of B and T lymphocytes, specific against that antigen. If its action is limited or suppressed, it may become incapable of dealing with viral or bacterial enemies but also tumor dangers.

    Critical Role of Pseudouridine in mRNA Vaccines
    A study published by Pedro Morais, Director (Pseudouridylation Technology) ProQR Therapeutics, Leiden, Netherlands, and by Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Center for RNA Biology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, US, entitled “The Critical Contribution of Pseudouridine to mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines” highlighted the fundamental role of the laboratory alteration of this protein in the Comirnaty and Spikevax genetic sera (source 6).

    «Both consisted of N1-methyl-pseudouridine-modified mRNA encoding the SARS-COVID-19 Spike protein and were delivered with a lipid nanoparticle (LNP) formulation. Because the delivery problem of ribonucleic acids had been known for decades, the success of LNPs was quickly hailed by many as the unsung hero of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines».
    “European Medicines Agency Knew Toxicity of Pfizer Covid Vaccine”. Bombshell Study Published in US by an Italian BioChemist on Dangers mRNA-LNPs
    But the scholars, one of whom has a clear conflict of interest because he is director of the Pseudouridylation Technology project, have highlighted another very interesting fact:

    «However, the clinical trial efficacy results of the Curevac mRNA vaccine (CVnCoV) suggested that the delivery system was not the only key to the success. CVnCoV consisted of an unmodified mRNA (encoding the same spike protein as Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech’s mRNA vaccines) and was formulated with the same LNP as Pfizer-BioNTech’s vaccine (Acuitas ALC-0315).However, its efficacy was only 48%. This striking difference in efficacy could be attributed to the presence of a critical RNA modification (N1-methyl-pseudouridine) in the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines (but not in CVnCoV)».
    “Toxic Nanoforms inside Pfizer-Biontech Covid Vaccine”. Vital Study by Italian Biochemist on US Journal of Virology highlights an Alleged Crime
    However, the same researchers highlight a significant note:

    «The intrinsic immunogenicity of non-modified mRNA was once considered a potential advantage for its use in vaccines(Ishii and Akira, 2005) as it would encode the antigen and concomitantly serve as an adjuvant while permitting a low dose. In fact, the unmodified COVID-19 mRNA vaccine candidate in late-stage clinical trials (CVnCoV, developed by Curevac) had a maximum dose of 12 µg».
    Curevac was developed by Curevac NV of Tubingen, together with the Ngo CEPI founded by Bill Gates with Wellcome and WEF, which initiated an authorization process before the CHMP committee of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) but withdrew it due to its low efficacy on October 12, 2021 (source 7) in view of the arrival of a new pharmacological product developed with GSK financed by Gates himself.

    MINISTRO SCHILLACI SPECULA SU BIG PHARMA FINANZIATA DA GATES. €700mila Investiti in Biomediche USA che Testano anche Vaccini DNA Covid
    Here is another cryptic phrase in which we talk about the “safety” of vaccines, implicitly implying that it is not clear in the current vaccines which therefore make all those who take them into “human guinea pigs”from the laboratory as the immunologist Rose clearly highlights in her final bioethical considerations.

    Rose: “Unpredictable Health Effects of Manipulated Codons”
    «Ehden Biber also wrote a great article about the pitfalls of codon optimization that you can read here. In a Nature article published in 2011 entitled: “Breaking the silence”, the author writes on the potential danger of fiddling with codons in therapeutic proteins whereby it “could have unpredictable effects on people’s health”»

    Rose wrote in her comment on the Cambridge research quoting many sentences by scientific journalist Alla Katsnelson which we report below.

    Bombshell! Texas Attorney General sues Pfizer on Covid Vaccine Efficacy and Conspiring
    In detail, the Canadian researcher adds:

    «She points to a study where the authors show that a synonymous codon change found in the most common form of cystic fibrosis results in mRNA misfolding. (Keep this in mind.) She also points out that in the context of the multi-drug resistance 1 gene (MDR1) (the gene that encodes P-glycoprotein), that a codon change may interfere with the pauses that characterize RNA passing through the ribosome, thereby changing how the growing amino acid chain folds».

    «But perhaps the most timely and spine-tingly relevant statement in this article is found at the end, and I quote: “At the moment, companies developing recombinant therapies must verify that the DNA sequence designed by their scientists is the one that’s producing their proteins, but they aren’t required to note how different that is from the native genetic code”».
    European Regulator: Pfizer Hid Dangerous Cancer Gene! It Kept Secret the SV40 DNA Sequence In COVID-19 Vaccine
    We do not have any guidance with regard to the [DNA] sequence,” Kimchi-Sarfaty notes.

    While it was the Italian bioimmunologist Mauro Mantovani who demonstrated how the “double Proline” inserted in mRNA vaccines makes the toxic Spike protein dangerously persistent in the human body.

    «That’s one piece of data that could be tracked by the system she is proposing. Such knowledge, in turn, could ultimately help define better strategies for optimization and possibly even make biologic drugs safer for people» adds Alla Katsnelson while the immunologist asks herself a question:

    «I wonder if the FDA ever took her advice to track the differences in codons and the resulting potential adverse effects?»
    Covid Vaccines Killer Pathologies in a Name Only: Spikeopathy! Huge, Chilling Study on mRNA Genic Serums’ Serious Adverse Reactions
    Therefore Rose quoted the article which we analyzed before:

    «In addition to our comment on the Nature paper, a University of Cambridge write-up entitled: Researchers redesign future mRNA therapeutics to prevent potentially harmful immune responses was penned. They make it clear that the most relevant conclusion from the Nature paper is that we can make more products similarly insanely dangerous as the ones pumped into billions of bodies because we can simply ‘reduce the production of frameshifted products’ by ‘synonymous targeting of slippery sequences’».

    So she wrote her milestone sentence:

    «Well of course! Now that we know that billions of people’s cells might be making aberrant proteins, for unknown periods of time, we can simply sweep these people under the rug, ‘fix’ the product, and keep on makin’ money. Let’s go slidin’ down the slippery sequence slope of gene therapy straight to the Gates of hell».
    Moderna AWARE that mRNA Jabs cause CANCER due to DNA Fragments. Malone Unveils Patent
    The Canadian molecular biologist concludes before going into detail about a biochemical analysis that is too technical for non-experts:

    «The manufacturers might have thought to explore options to prevent potentially harmful responses from their products prior to injecting billions of people with them. It is criminal that these products continue to be forced onto newborns and infants by mandate, to this day».
    And then she report an emblematic quote about the risks of “Fooling with Mother Nature” by an evolutionary cell biologist at the University of Chicago: “Please do not monkey with these sites; they are optimized for some reason”, in reference to codon bias in mammals.

    Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio

    © COPYRIGHT GOSPA NEWS

    prohibition of reproduction without authorization

    follow Fabio Carisio Gospa News director on Twitter

    follow Gospa News on Telegram

    MAIN SOURCES

    SOURCE 1 – JESSICA ROSE – That Substack about N1-methylpseudouridines and frameshifting

    SOURCE 2 – UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE – Researchers redesign future mRNA therapeutics to prevent potentially harmful immune responses

    SOURCE 3 – NATURE – N1-methylpseudouridylation of mRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting

    SOURCE 4– PUBMED – Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs

    SOURCE 5 – WELT – “Das ist der wirkliche Grund, warum man unter neuen Varianten nicht mehr so krank wird“

    SOURCE 6 – FRONTIERS IN – The Critical Contribution of Pseudouridine to mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines

    SOURCE 7 – EMA ends rolling review of CVnCoV COVID-19 vaccine following withdrawal by CureVac AG

    Fabio G. C. Carisio

    Fabio is investigative journalist since 1991. Now geopolitics, intelligence, military, SARS-Cov-2 manmade, NWO expert and Director-founder of Gospa News: a Christian Information Journal.

    His articles were published on many international media and website as SouthFront, Reseau International, Sputnik Italia, United Nation Association Westminster, Global Research, Kolozeg and more…

    Most popolar investigation on VT is:

    Rumsfeld Shady Heritage in Pandemic: GILEAD’s Intrigues with WHO & Wuhan Lab. Bio-Weapons’ Tests with CIA & Pentagon

    Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio, born on 24/2/1967 in Borgosesia, started working as a reporter when he was only 19 years old in the alpine area of Valsesia, Piedmont, his birth region in Italy. After studying literature and history at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan, he became director of the local newspaper Notizia Oggi Vercelli and specialized in judicial reporting.

    For about 15 years he is a correspondent from Northern Italy for the Italian newspapers Libero and Il Giornale, also writing important revelations on the Ustica massacre, a report on Freemasonry and organized crime.

    With independent investigations, he collaborates with Carabinieri and Guardia di Finanza in important investigations that conclude with the arrest of Camorra entrepreneurs or corrupt politicians.

    In July 2018 he found the counter-information web media Gospa News focused on geopolitics, terrorism, Middle East, and military intelligence.

    In 2020 published the book, in Italian only, WUHAN-GATES – The New World Order Plot on SARS-Cov-2 manmade focused on the cycle of investigations Wuhan-Gates

    His investigations was quoted also by The Gateway Pundit, Tasnim and others

    He worked for many years for the magazine Art & Wine as an art critic and curator.

    VETERANS TODAY OLD POSTS

    www.gospanews.net/





    ATTENTION READERS
    We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed

    In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.



    About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy

    Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.







    https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/01/bombshell-inside-mrna-vaccines-a-human-molecule-diabolically-altered/
    BOMBSHELL! Inside mRNA Vaccines a Human Molecule Diabolically Altered | VT Foreign Policy donshafi911 BOMBSHELL! Inside mRNA Vaccines a Human Molecule Diabolically Altered | VT Foreign Policy January 6, 2024 VT Condemns the ETHNIC CLEANSING OF PALESTINIANS by USA/Israel $ 280 BILLION US TAXPAYER DOLLARS INVESTED since 1948 in US/Israeli Ethnic Cleansing and Occupation Operation; $ 150B direct "aid" and $ 130B in "Offense" contracts Source: Embassy of Israel, Washington, D.C. and US Department of State. In the cover image, the Canadian researcher Jessica Rose, author of an excellent biochemical analysis of an article from the University of Cambridge commenting a study by some of its researchers on the toxicity of manipulated human nucleoside in mRNA genetic sera by Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio VERSIONE IN ITALIANO «Well of course! Now that we know that billions of people’s cells might be making aberrant proteins, for unknown periods of time, we can simply sweep these people under the rug, ‘fix’ the product, and keep on makin’ money. Let’s go slidin’ down the slippery sequence slope of gene therapy straight to the Gates of hell». With this phrase to be engraved in the history of the massive Covid vaccination campaign, the esteemed Canadian researcher, biochemist, immunologist and molecular biologist Jessica Rose (Source 1), author of multiple fundamental discoveries on the contamination of mRNA genetic sera, best describes the disturbing importance of an article published by University of Cambridge in relation to an enlightening scientific research which confirmed to the global scientific community the dangerous experimental use in the Pfizer-Biontech and Moderna mRNA vaccines of what we do not hesitate to define as the “Diabolical Molecule” because it is a biological human component modified twice in the laboratory. (Source 1). UPDATE! Florida State Surgeon General Calls for Halt of mRNA Vaccines due to Dangerous, Oncogenes DNA Fragments Author of multiple fundamental discoveries on the contamination of mRNA genetic sera, best describes the disturbing importance of an article published by University of Cambridgein relation to an enlightening scientific research which confirmed to the global scientific community the dangerous experimental use in the Pfizer-Biontech and Moderna mRNA vaccines of what we do not hesitate to define as the “Diabolical Molecule”because it is a biological human component modified twice in the laboratory. Billions of Dangerous Spike DNA’s Molecules inside Covid mRNA Vaccines. They can Reproduce the Toxic Protein in Human Cells for a Long Time This is the double alteration of Uridinetransformed into Pseudourine with the first synthetic biochemical alteration and then into N1-methylpseudouridine initialed “m1Ψ” as an acronym for N1-methyl-Ψ in which the Greek letter “Psi” was used to name Psueudoridine . Uridine is an organic compound, nucleoside,made up of the coupling of a molecule of ribose and one of uracil. Uracil is one of the two pyrimidine nitrogenous bases that form the nucleotides of RNA nucleic acid. This manipulation was designed by the Hungarian biochemist Katalin Karikó,awarded the 2023 Nobel Prize for Medicine precisely for having laid the foundations of mRNA vaccines, in order to “deceive” human cells into recognizing the synthetic mRNA as harmless human RNA … I apologize to the biochemistry experts for any transcription mistakes I may make trying to translate from a difficult chemical language the portentous scientific essence of the abundant technical quotations in the article published by Rose on her Substack, from which we will only extrapolate its introduction. Bombshell from US! FDA “Hides” Toxicity on DNA Fragments inside mRNA Vaccines despite Danger of Cancer Highlighted in its Guidance too Martin: “Pseudouridine Killer in the Vaccines for Depopulation” This analysis comes surprisingly providential as on Gospa News International we have just reported the summary of a conference by the famous patent expert David E. Martin in which he narrated in recent weeks the story of SARS-Cov-2 as a bacteriological weapon built in 58 years of military research on coronaviruses and that of mRNA vaccines, in his opinion, knowingly spread in a mass experiment for the search for vaccines against HIV-AIDS and cancer but also aimed at global depopulation. WUHAN-GATES – 73. Half of Century of Covert Bioweapon Development Leading to Fauci’s SARS-Cov-2 and to mRNA Lethal Vaccines In a very detailed article the American osteopath doctor Joseph Mercola wrote that «Martin points out that even if they don’t unleash any other bioweapons, the desired death toll may still be achieved, because they used pseudouridine in the mRNA shots, which is causing “turbo cancers”». Because: «Pseudouridine suppresses cancer-controlling agents and promotes oncogenic activity in the body, and this has been known since 2018, so its inclusion was hardly an accident. It’s a conspiracy, alright. But not a conspiracy theory in the dismissive sense. It’s a global conspiracy by identifiable agents who have, for nearly 60 years, plotted to commit, and profit from, the greatest genocide the world has ever seen, while hiding behind the false veneer of “public health.”». Well today, both the University of Cambridge and other authoritative scientists from around the world implicitly confirm that all those vaccinated with Covid mRNA with Moderna’s Spikevax and Pfizer-Biontech’s Comirnaty have been and continue to be unpaid and, above all, unaware human guinea pigs. Precisely because of this altered nucleoside… The Disturbing Article from Cambridge University The comment by the researcher Rose that we reported in the incipit of the article referred to the text of the University of Cambridge(Source 2) in relation to the study “N1-methylpseudouridylation of mRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting” by Mulroney et al.published on December 6, 2023 by Nature after more than a month of review. «Researchers redesign future mRNA therapeutics to prevent potentially harmful immune responses» is the eloquent title of the scientific text published by the British university. «The latest developments, led by biochemist Professor Anne Willis and immunologist Dr James Thaventhiran from the MRC Toxicology Unit at the University of Cambridge, build upon previous advances to ensure the prevention of any safety issues linked with future mRNA-based therapeutics. Their report is published today in the journal Nature» we read in the unsigned article. «The researchers identified that bases with a chemical modification called N1-methylpseudouridine – which are currently contained in mRNA therapies – are responsible for the ‘slips’ along the mRNA sequence» adds the university website. In collaboration with researchers at the Universities of Kent, Oxford and Liverpool, the MRC Toxicology Unit team«tested for evidence of the production of ‘off-target’ proteins in people who received the mRNA Pfizer vaccine against COVID-19. They found an unintended immune response occurred in one third of the 21 patients in the study who were vaccinated – but with no ill-effects, in keeping with the extensive safety data available on these COVID-19 vaccines». SCIENCE Magazine Finally Admitted the mRNA Vaccines Dangerous Side Effects! Shots linked to Long Covid, Neurologic Damages and POTS Despite disturbing the article already appears biased as it is aimed at “minimizing” the adverse reactions, even lethal one, that are accumulating in pharmacovigilance systems around the world, which have been confirmed by an alarming article in the journal Science, by the regulatory bodies from all over the world (EMA, FDA, etc.) and which led Moderna and Pfizer-Biontech to include the risk of lethal myocarditis in the information leaflets of their genetic drugs… 7 EURODEPUTATI CHIEDONO IL RITIRO DEI VACCINI COVID. Per Miocarditi Letali, Malori Improvvisi e Sicurezza Incerta nei Fragili British Study: “Incorrect mRNA Translation may Increase Toxicity” But it is the same authors of the study whose first signatory is Thomas E. Mulroney (Source 3), associate researcher of the Toxicology Unit of the MRC in Cambridge, who wrote the shocking considerations from a biochemical point of view in the conclusions. «We show that 1-methylΨ is a modified ribonucleotide that significantly increases +1 ribosomal frameshifting during mRNA translation and that cellular immunity to +1 frameshifted products can occur following vaccination with mRNA containing 1-methylΨ. To our knowledge, this is the first report that mRNA modification affects ribosomal frameshifting. Alongside this impact on host T cell immunity, the off-target effects of ribosomal frameshifting could include increased production of new B cell antigens». And they further add: «These findings are of particular importance to our fundamental understanding of how ribonucleotide modification affects mRNA translation, and for designing and optimizing future mRNA-based therapeutics to avoid mistranslation events that may decrease efficacy or increase toxicity». We will not delve further into the technical references but return to the analysis published by Jessica Rose in her Substack, making an extreme summary of it and advising professionals to read the text full of important images. Billions of DNA Fragments of Toxic Spike Protein and SV40 gene in the mRNA Vaccines. New Study: “They may Cause Turbo-Cancer” Let’s start with the comment added under the research published by Nature by her together with David Wiseman, L. Maria Gutschi, David J. Speicher, Kevin McKernan. Alongside the Canadian biologist they were already co-authors of the study “DNA fragments detected in the monovalent and bivalent Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna modRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Ontario, Canada: exploratory dose-response relationship with serious adverse events” which induced the EMA to confess that Pfizer hid the use of the very dangerous SV40 gene in its vaccine, which can cause tumors. The same research encouraged the bioimmunologist Robert Malone to denounce the presence of the antibiotic resistance gene in the Moderna one, pointing out also that the pharmaceutical company was aware of the tumor risks of mRNA biotechnology as reported in its own patent. Bomba Mondiale! “NEI VACCINI COVID GENE DI RESISTENZA AGLI ANTIBIOTICI”. Studio Spagnolo lo Conferma. Ministro Schillaci lo CELA nell’Allarme Morti AMR We have written extensively about these topics in three investigations, one of which – on antibiotic resistance gene – is a world exclusive. Alarm of American Scientists for the New Research Let us therefore see the content of the comment by Rose and colleagues (Source 1)on Cambridge’s research: The paper provides evidence for the formation “off-target” or unintended proteins following vaccination with BNT162b2 due to frameshifting. Given the proposed mechanism, a similar problem is likely to exist for the Moderna product. While the authors have not isolated samples of these proteins from vaccinated patients or animals, their existence is evidenced by the specific cellular immune responses elicited to frameshifted proteins the authors synthesized. It is not clear why B cell – antibody responses were not studied. The authors state that “Although there is no evidence that frameshifted products in humans generated from BNT162b2 vaccination are associated with adverse outcomes.” BOMBSHELL: mRNA COVID jabs can Damage Children’s Immune Response to OTHER Viruses as well, Study finds It is unclear how it is possible to make this statement, given: • The small number of vaccinated subjects (n=21) providing samples. • This was not a controlled trial. • None of these subjects had reported undue effects of vaccination. Accordingly, the sample is subject to selection bias. • The toxicology of these unintended proteins must be studied. • The authors acknowledge the misdirected immunity “has huge potential to be harmful.” Translated into simpler words, no one has verified the selection methods of the samples which may have been chosen precisely because they did not have serious adverse reactions. SPIKE-DEMIC among Vaccinated: 83 % hit by PCVS Syndrome. Indian Study confirmed Gates, Big Pharma’s Health Disaster Furthermore, in the interests of expertise we read that the two Cambridge scientists Thomas E. Mulroney and Anne E. Willis «are inventors of a pending patent application (2305297.0) relating to mRNA technology» while in the information on the authors it is discovered that Alexander J Mentzer works at the Wellcome Center for Human Genetics, University of Oxford. Wellcome, with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum, is among the founders of the Ngo CEPI(Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations) which has already launched the SKYCovion vaccine together with the London-based GSK, managed by CEO Emma Walmsley who is also director of Microsoft, and SK Bioscience. WUHAN-GATES – 73. BILL III A CACCIA DI CAVIE UMANE PER VACCINO COVID COREANO. “Genotossicità non Studiata” ma OMS & UK danno OK a SkyCovione con Spike Tossica e Adiuvante GSK da Pericoloso Squalene But let’s go back to the analysis made by Jessica Rose on the Cambridge researchers’ study: «The authors write that N1-methylpseudouridine affects the fidelity of mRNA translation via ribosome stalling that induces frameshifting. Frameshifting results in the production multiple, unique and potentially aberrant proteins». «The modified mRNAs for use in the COVID-19 products were codon-optimized for maximal protein expression in humans. Codon optimization, or synonymous codon replacement, rests on the idea that one can induce mutations throughout a gene of interest (like spike) based on an organism’s (like humans) codon usage bias, to increase translational efficiency and protein expression without altering the sequence of the protein. But, it is well-known that codon-optimization can lead to protein conformation, folding and stability problems». COVID: SCOPERTA LA PROTEINA CHE RIVELA I LETALI COAGULI DI SANGUE. Ma Nessuno Indaga sulla Correlazione coi Vaccini The Canadian immunologist further notes: «Codon optimization could affect protein conformation, folding and stability, change post-translational modification sites and even affect protein function.Different rates of translation by different tRNAs, including those that exhibit wobble base-pairing (a tRNA that can recognize multiple synonymous codons) may actually be critical for determining the rate of translation. The ribosome may slow and pause during elongation which may actually be necessary for proper protein folding. Therefore, codon optimization may disrupt the fine-tuned timing of translation and ultimately protein function». The Prophetic Seneff Study on Autoimmune and Neurocerebral Damage He then refers to other studies that had reported the dangers of this biochemical manipulation (Source 1): «Codon optimization can also lead to misfolding of mRNAs due to increased Guanine/Cytosine (GC content). Please read McKernan et al.’s preprint, Xia et al.’s paper and Seneff et al.’s paper to learn more about potential problems relating to codon optimization and GC content changes. The latter group write: Synonymous codon replacement also results in a change in the multifunctional regulatory and structural roles of resulting proteins». ONE in THREE Covid Vaccinated with Neurological Complications. Alarming Study from Italian National Research Council The risks to the human organism are clearly highlighted: «There is, in fact, a significant enrichment of GC content (17% and 25% enrichments as per Pfizer and Moderna, respectively, as compared to SARS-CoV-2) as a result of the codon optimization that was done, and this can lead to “dysregulation of the G4-RNA-protein binding system and a wide range of potential disease-associated cellular pathologies including suppression of innate immunity, neurodegeneration, and malignant transformation”. Increased GC content significantly alters mRNA secondary structure as well, and this can also lead to ribosomal pausing or stalling». These considerations were expressed in a study published by illustrious scientists such as Stephanie Seneff, Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA, Greg Nigh, Immersion Health, Portland, OR, USA, Anthony M. Kyriakopoulos, Nasco AD Biotechnology Laboratory, Department of Research and Development, Piraeus, Greece and Peter A. McCullough, for Health Foundation, Tucson, AZ, USA, which was the subject of enormous censorship by specialized medical journals but we published in Gospa News thanks to an excellent summary by Dr. Mercola. Dangerous RNA Manipulation with N1-methyl-Ψ Below are the quotes from Seneff et al.(Source 4) useful for understanding the connection with uridine modified in N1-methyl-Ψ: «The utilization of mRNA vaccines in the context of infectious disease has no precedent. The many alterations in the vaccine mRNA hide the mRNA from cellular defenses and promote a longer biological half-life and high production of spike protein». «However, the immune response to the vaccine is very different from that to a SARS-CoV-2 infection. In this paper, we present evidence that vaccination induces a profound impairment in type I interferon signaling, which has diverse adverse consequences to human health. Immune cells that have taken up the vaccine nanoparticles release into circulation large numbers of exosomes containing spike protein along with critical microRNAs that induce a signaling response in recipient cells at distant sites. We also identify potential profound disturbances in regulatory control of protein synthesis and cancer surveillance». The COVID Jabs’ Mechanisms of Injury: Sudden Death, Blood Cloths, Human Mad Cow and Autoimmune Diseases In the study entitled “Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs” the scientists added: «These disturbances potentially have a causal link to neurodegenerative disease, myocarditis, immune thrombocytopenia, Bell’s palsy, liver disease, impaired adaptive immunity, impaired DNA damage response and tumorigenesis. We show evidence from the VAERS database supporting our hypothesis. We believe a comprehensive risk/benefit assessment of the mRNA vaccines questions them as positive contributors to public health». The late biologist Luc Montagnier, in a study published posthumously by his research friends Jean-Claude Perez and Claire Moret-Chalmin with a review contribution from Seneff biophysics, proved without a shadow of a doubt the correlation between killer prions caused by vaccines and rapid deaths for neurocerebral Creutzfeldt-Jacob disease, human mad cow disease. PRIONS as KILLERS: 25 Deaths due to a New Mad-Cow from Covid Vaccines. Shocking Research by Montagnier (RIP), Perez & Moret-Chalmin on CJD Brain Damages In detail Seneff and the other scientists also refer to specific alterations: «Impaired type I IFN signaling is linked to many disease risks, most notably cancer, as type I IFN signaling suppresses proliferation of both viruses and cancer cells by arresting the cell cycle, in part through upregulation of p53, a tumor suppressor gene, and various cyclin- dependent kinase inhibitors (Musella et al., 2017; Matsuoka et al., 1998). IFNα also induces major histocompatibility (MHC) class 1 antigen presentation by tumor cells, causing them to be more readily recognized by the cancer surveillance system (Heise et al., 2016)». They then delve into the problem of the uridine molecule. To understand its importance we report a note from Rose: «Pseudouridines (Ψs) are a normal and essential part of our biology. They have been called the 5th nucleotide, in fact, and “are a ubiquitous constituent of structural RNA (transfer, ribosomal, small nuclear (snRNA) and small nucleolar), and present in coding RNA, across the three phylogenetic domains of life”and “accounts for about 1.4% of all bases in human rRNAs”». “mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines are Like Gene Therapy Products” French Study highlighted Omitted Controls on Genotoxicity Here’s what Seneff and his colleagues wrote about vaccines: «A breakthrough came when it was discovered experimentally that the mRNA coding for the spike protein could be modified in specific ways that would essentially fool the human cells into recognizing it as harmless human RNA. A seminal paper by Karikó et al. (2005) demonstrated through a series of in vitro experiments that a simple modification to the mRNA such that all uridines were replaced with pseudouridine could dramatically reduce innate immune activation against exogenous mRNA». Cancer Risk pointed out by the Nobel Inventor of mRNA Vaccines Precisely for this discovery, Hungarian researcher Katalin Karikó, long-time at Biontech, recently received the Nobel Prize for Medicine together with her American colleague Drew Weissman, although both warned of the dangers of the new mRNA biotechnology. Medicine Nobel to mRNA Covid Vaccines’ Scientists, both Sponsored by Gates, Fauci and Zuckerberg In particular, on January 6, Karikó declared to the German newspaper Welt (Source 5): «Every day I receive many emails from people who write to me about their experiences. One woman wrote to me that two days after the vaccination she developed a large lump in her breast. Vaccination caused cancer, it was her conclusion. But the cancer was already there, only vaccination gave an extra boost to the immune system, so that the immune defense cells rushed in large numbers towards the enemy». The Gospa News investigations on Turbo-Cancer based now on seven published scientific studies have highlighted a very strong correlation between mRNA gene sera and the appearance or reactivation of tumor phenomena with abnormal degeneration resulting in lethal outcomes. TURBO-CANCER – 2. Many Lethal/Serious Cases and New Researches on Covid mRNA Vaccines Risks. Melatonin Hope… Karikó herself adds: «Vaccination provides a strong boost to the immune system. It can happen that a dormant infection breaks out in people with an already weakened immune system. The extent to which this is the case for shingles will need to be examined more closely». Gospa News did so by discovering 27 thousand cases of Herpes Zoster, in the European Union only, as adverse reactions to vaccines reported by EMA pharmacovigilance database even in children, who are more exposed to damage to the natural immune system as confirmed by recent research. Esclusivo! EPIDEMIA DI HERPES DOPO I VACCINI COVID. 27mila Casi nell’UE: 31 Morti da Zoster. Lo Studio: “Per danni al Sistema Immunitario” Let’s go back to Seneff’s conclusions: «Andries et al. (2015) later discovered that 1-methylpseudouridine as a replacement for uridine was even more effective than pseudouridine and could essentially abolish the TLR response to the mRNA, preventing the activation of blood-derived dendritic cells. This modification is applied in both the mRNA vaccines on the market (Park et al., 2021)». To put it simply, the dendritic cell plays the role of sentinel and if it senses the presence of a pathogen in the body, it stimulates the immune response of B and T lymphocytes, specific against that antigen. If its action is limited or suppressed, it may become incapable of dealing with viral or bacterial enemies but also tumor dangers. Critical Role of Pseudouridine in mRNA Vaccines A study published by Pedro Morais, Director (Pseudouridylation Technology) ProQR Therapeutics, Leiden, Netherlands, and by Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Center for RNA Biology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, US, entitled “The Critical Contribution of Pseudouridine to mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines” highlighted the fundamental role of the laboratory alteration of this protein in the Comirnaty and Spikevax genetic sera (source 6). «Both consisted of N1-methyl-pseudouridine-modified mRNA encoding the SARS-COVID-19 Spike protein and were delivered with a lipid nanoparticle (LNP) formulation. Because the delivery problem of ribonucleic acids had been known for decades, the success of LNPs was quickly hailed by many as the unsung hero of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines». “European Medicines Agency Knew Toxicity of Pfizer Covid Vaccine”. Bombshell Study Published in US by an Italian BioChemist on Dangers mRNA-LNPs But the scholars, one of whom has a clear conflict of interest because he is director of the Pseudouridylation Technology project, have highlighted another very interesting fact: «However, the clinical trial efficacy results of the Curevac mRNA vaccine (CVnCoV) suggested that the delivery system was not the only key to the success. CVnCoV consisted of an unmodified mRNA (encoding the same spike protein as Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech’s mRNA vaccines) and was formulated with the same LNP as Pfizer-BioNTech’s vaccine (Acuitas ALC-0315).However, its efficacy was only 48%. This striking difference in efficacy could be attributed to the presence of a critical RNA modification (N1-methyl-pseudouridine) in the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines (but not in CVnCoV)». “Toxic Nanoforms inside Pfizer-Biontech Covid Vaccine”. Vital Study by Italian Biochemist on US Journal of Virology highlights an Alleged Crime However, the same researchers highlight a significant note: «The intrinsic immunogenicity of non-modified mRNA was once considered a potential advantage for its use in vaccines(Ishii and Akira, 2005) as it would encode the antigen and concomitantly serve as an adjuvant while permitting a low dose. In fact, the unmodified COVID-19 mRNA vaccine candidate in late-stage clinical trials (CVnCoV, developed by Curevac) had a maximum dose of 12 µg». Curevac was developed by Curevac NV of Tubingen, together with the Ngo CEPI founded by Bill Gates with Wellcome and WEF, which initiated an authorization process before the CHMP committee of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) but withdrew it due to its low efficacy on October 12, 2021 (source 7) in view of the arrival of a new pharmacological product developed with GSK financed by Gates himself. MINISTRO SCHILLACI SPECULA SU BIG PHARMA FINANZIATA DA GATES. €700mila Investiti in Biomediche USA che Testano anche Vaccini DNA Covid Here is another cryptic phrase in which we talk about the “safety” of vaccines, implicitly implying that it is not clear in the current vaccines which therefore make all those who take them into “human guinea pigs”from the laboratory as the immunologist Rose clearly highlights in her final bioethical considerations. Rose: “Unpredictable Health Effects of Manipulated Codons” «Ehden Biber also wrote a great article about the pitfalls of codon optimization that you can read here. In a Nature article published in 2011 entitled: “Breaking the silence”, the author writes on the potential danger of fiddling with codons in therapeutic proteins whereby it “could have unpredictable effects on people’s health”» Rose wrote in her comment on the Cambridge research quoting many sentences by scientific journalist Alla Katsnelson which we report below. Bombshell! Texas Attorney General sues Pfizer on Covid Vaccine Efficacy and Conspiring In detail, the Canadian researcher adds: «She points to a study where the authors show that a synonymous codon change found in the most common form of cystic fibrosis results in mRNA misfolding. (Keep this in mind.) She also points out that in the context of the multi-drug resistance 1 gene (MDR1) (the gene that encodes P-glycoprotein), that a codon change may interfere with the pauses that characterize RNA passing through the ribosome, thereby changing how the growing amino acid chain folds». «But perhaps the most timely and spine-tingly relevant statement in this article is found at the end, and I quote: “At the moment, companies developing recombinant therapies must verify that the DNA sequence designed by their scientists is the one that’s producing their proteins, but they aren’t required to note how different that is from the native genetic code”». European Regulator: Pfizer Hid Dangerous Cancer Gene! It Kept Secret the SV40 DNA Sequence In COVID-19 Vaccine We do not have any guidance with regard to the [DNA] sequence,” Kimchi-Sarfaty notes. While it was the Italian bioimmunologist Mauro Mantovani who demonstrated how the “double Proline” inserted in mRNA vaccines makes the toxic Spike protein dangerously persistent in the human body. «That’s one piece of data that could be tracked by the system she is proposing. Such knowledge, in turn, could ultimately help define better strategies for optimization and possibly even make biologic drugs safer for people» adds Alla Katsnelson while the immunologist asks herself a question: «I wonder if the FDA ever took her advice to track the differences in codons and the resulting potential adverse effects?» Covid Vaccines Killer Pathologies in a Name Only: Spikeopathy! Huge, Chilling Study on mRNA Genic Serums’ Serious Adverse Reactions Therefore Rose quoted the article which we analyzed before: «In addition to our comment on the Nature paper, a University of Cambridge write-up entitled: Researchers redesign future mRNA therapeutics to prevent potentially harmful immune responses was penned. They make it clear that the most relevant conclusion from the Nature paper is that we can make more products similarly insanely dangerous as the ones pumped into billions of bodies because we can simply ‘reduce the production of frameshifted products’ by ‘synonymous targeting of slippery sequences’». So she wrote her milestone sentence: «Well of course! Now that we know that billions of people’s cells might be making aberrant proteins, for unknown periods of time, we can simply sweep these people under the rug, ‘fix’ the product, and keep on makin’ money. Let’s go slidin’ down the slippery sequence slope of gene therapy straight to the Gates of hell». Moderna AWARE that mRNA Jabs cause CANCER due to DNA Fragments. Malone Unveils Patent The Canadian molecular biologist concludes before going into detail about a biochemical analysis that is too technical for non-experts: «The manufacturers might have thought to explore options to prevent potentially harmful responses from their products prior to injecting billions of people with them. It is criminal that these products continue to be forced onto newborns and infants by mandate, to this day». And then she report an emblematic quote about the risks of “Fooling with Mother Nature” by an evolutionary cell biologist at the University of Chicago: “Please do not monkey with these sites; they are optimized for some reason”, in reference to codon bias in mammals. Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio © COPYRIGHT GOSPA NEWS prohibition of reproduction without authorization follow Fabio Carisio Gospa News director on Twitter follow Gospa News on Telegram MAIN SOURCES SOURCE 1 – JESSICA ROSE – That Substack about N1-methylpseudouridines and frameshifting SOURCE 2 – UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE – Researchers redesign future mRNA therapeutics to prevent potentially harmful immune responses SOURCE 3 – NATURE – N1-methylpseudouridylation of mRNA causes +1 ribosomal frameshifting SOURCE 4– PUBMED – Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes, and MicroRNAs SOURCE 5 – WELT – “Das ist der wirkliche Grund, warum man unter neuen Varianten nicht mehr so krank wird“ SOURCE 6 – FRONTIERS IN – The Critical Contribution of Pseudouridine to mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines SOURCE 7 – EMA ends rolling review of CVnCoV COVID-19 vaccine following withdrawal by CureVac AG Fabio G. C. Carisio Fabio is investigative journalist since 1991. Now geopolitics, intelligence, military, SARS-Cov-2 manmade, NWO expert and Director-founder of Gospa News: a Christian Information Journal. His articles were published on many international media and website as SouthFront, Reseau International, Sputnik Italia, United Nation Association Westminster, Global Research, Kolozeg and more… Most popolar investigation on VT is: Rumsfeld Shady Heritage in Pandemic: GILEAD’s Intrigues with WHO & Wuhan Lab. Bio-Weapons’ Tests with CIA & Pentagon Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio, born on 24/2/1967 in Borgosesia, started working as a reporter when he was only 19 years old in the alpine area of Valsesia, Piedmont, his birth region in Italy. After studying literature and history at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan, he became director of the local newspaper Notizia Oggi Vercelli and specialized in judicial reporting. For about 15 years he is a correspondent from Northern Italy for the Italian newspapers Libero and Il Giornale, also writing important revelations on the Ustica massacre, a report on Freemasonry and organized crime. With independent investigations, he collaborates with Carabinieri and Guardia di Finanza in important investigations that conclude with the arrest of Camorra entrepreneurs or corrupt politicians. In July 2018 he found the counter-information web media Gospa News focused on geopolitics, terrorism, Middle East, and military intelligence. In 2020 published the book, in Italian only, WUHAN-GATES – The New World Order Plot on SARS-Cov-2 manmade focused on the cycle of investigations Wuhan-Gates His investigations was quoted also by The Gateway Pundit, Tasnim and others He worked for many years for the magazine Art & Wine as an art critic and curator. VETERANS TODAY OLD POSTS www.gospanews.net/ ATTENTION READERS We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion. About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT. https://www.vtforeignpolicy.com/2024/01/bombshell-inside-mrna-vaccines-a-human-molecule-diabolically-altered/
    WWW.VTFOREIGNPOLICY.COM
    BOMBSHELL! Inside mRNA Vaccines a Human Molecule Diabolically Altered
    In the cover image, the Canadian researcher Jessica Rose, author of an excellent biochemical analysis of an article from the University of Cambridge commenting a study by some of its researchers on the toxicity of manipulated human nucleoside in mRNA genetic sera by Fabio Giuseppe Carlo Carisio VERSIONE IN ITALIANO «Well of course! Now that we know that...
    Like
    1
    1 Comments 1 Shares 26976 Views
  • Do You Know What’s in a Vaccine? Chemical Ingredients
    Addendum to the Childhood Vaccination Series


    All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name.

    To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here.

    Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

    ***

    Over the last few decades, the number of chemicals added to foods and other products has skyrocketed. Chemicals are added to “enhance flavor”, make fruits and vegetables look fresh, extend the shelf life of packaged foods and for other invented reasons. A cornucopia of chemicals are also found in lotions and beauty products with the ostensible reason that these chemicals make beauty products feel, look, and smell nice.

    Along with this increase in heavily processed foods has come increased skepticism about the necessity of inserting chemical additives into everything we touch and taste. A significant and growing segment of the US population are beginning to examine the health consequences of ingesting and absorbing these chemical-laden products.

    This growing awareness about the adverse effects of ingesting and absorbing synthetic ingredients and the public’s understanding of the attendant health benefits of consuming products free from synthetic chemicals has prompted consumers to seek out organic ingredient-based items in their foods and skin lotions.

    More people are showing interest in knowing about the ingredients in their food and striving to ‘eat clean.’ This increased awareness is evidenced in the steady growth of the organic food industry and trends in the natural and organic cosmetic industry where demand is higher than ever.

    This same level of concern has begun to seep into the public conscience regarding a certain medical product that has mostly avoided scrutiny – the vaccine.

    Having been trained to accept that this product is a customary aspect of everyday life, most people haven’t given much thought to what’s inside the vaccine vials. Rarely will the vaccine ritual in the doctor’s office include a discussion about the ingredients which are about to be injected into the patient’s body. It’s highly likely the physicians and nurses themselves don’t know the ingredients of each vaccine.

    So what’s in that vial? What’s coming through that needle?

    A Partial List of Ingredients

    Aluminum: Aluminum salts are used in some vaccine formulations as an adjuvant. An adjuvant is a substance added to vaccines to ostensibly enhance the immune response. Examples of aluminum salts in some vaccines are aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, alum (potassium aluminum sulfate) or mixed aluminum salts.

    In a 2011 study Canadian scientists Professor Christopher Shaw and Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic stated the following:

    “Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. In particular, aluminum in adjuvant form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications and may thus have profound and widespread adverse health consequences.”

    Multiple studies have shown that the intramuscularly injected aluminum vaccine adjuvant is absorbed into the systemic circulation and travels to different sites in the body, such as the brain, joints, and the spleen, where it accumulates and is retained for years post-vaccination.

    Mercury (thimerosal): Thimerosal is an ethyl mercury-based preservative used in vials that contain more than one dose of a vaccine (multi-dose vials) to prevent germs, bacteria and/or fungi from contaminating the vaccine. While in decline some flu vaccines and childhood vaccines in multi-dose vials still utilize thimerosal.

    Mercury is known to be a genotoxic agent, even in minute concentrations, which can damage the genetic information within a cell causing mutations, which may lead to cancer.

    A meta-analysis epidemiological study suggested thimerosal containing vaccines significantly increased the risk of neurodevelopmental disorders.

    A 2011 study suggested there may be higher rates of blood and brain mercury levels in monkeys exposed to vaccines containing thimerosal.

    The American Academy of Pediatrics and the U.S. Public Health Service (1999) published a joint statement that urged “all government agencies to work rapidly toward reducing children’s exposure to mercury from all sources.”

    Gelatin: Gelatin is used as a stabilizer in some vaccines licensed in the U.S. Stabilizers are added to vaccines to protect the active ingredients from degrading during manufacture, transport and storage.

    Gelatin is a protein obtained from cows or pigs and produced by the partial hydrolysis of collagen extracted by boiling animal parts such as cartilage, tendons, skin, bones and ligaments in water. Some people might have a severe allergic reaction to it.

    Certain vaccine viruses are grown on gelatin derived from the ligaments of pigs fed heavy doses of glyphosate in their feed. Gelatin comes from collagen which has lots of glycine.

    Gelatin is one of the most commonly identified causes of allergic reactions to vaccines.

    A 1999 Japanese study showed most anaphylactic reactions and some urticarial reactions to gelatin-containing measles, mumps, and rubella monovalent vaccines were associated with gelatin allergy. Based on these findings Japan removed gelatin from vaccines in 2000.

    Formaldehyde: Formaldehyde is used during the manufacture of some vaccines to inactivate viruses (like polio and hepatitis A viruses) or bacterial toxins (like diphtheria and tetanus toxins).

    Formaldehyde is a human carcinogen based on evidence from cancer studies in humans and is listed as aknown to be human carcinogen in the National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) Twelfth Report on Carcinogens(2011).

    Phenol/Phenoxyethanol: Phenoxyethanol is used in vaccines and biologics as a preservative to prevent microbial growth.

    A 2010 study, The relative toxicity of compounds used as preservatives in vaccines and biologics, assessed the relative cytotoxicity of the levels of the compounds commonly used as preservative in US licensed vaccines and found that for phenoxyethanol it was 4.6-fold, for phenol 12.2-fold and for Thimerosal >330-fold.

    They concluded, “None of the compounds commonly used as preservatives in US licensed vaccine/biological preparations can be considered an ideal preservative, and their ability to fully comply with the requirements of the US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for preservatives is in doubt.”

    Case reports (here, here and here) have suggested a link between phenoxyethanol and urticaria (hives), eczema and anaphylaxis.

    Triton X-100: Triton X –100 or octylphenol ethoxylate (OPE) is a surfactant (reducing the surface tension of liquids) and stabilizer present in some influenza vaccines.

    OPEs are endocrine disruptors and break down relatively easily into Octylphenols (OPs), which are more harmful. Endocrine disruptors can alter reproductive function, increase incidences of breast cancer, affect growth patterns and neurodevelopment in children and change immune function.

    Squalene: Squalene is a naturally-occurring substance derived primarily from shark liver oil. When combined with other ingredients it becomes an adjuvant, which, like aluminum, is added to vaccines to elicit a stronger immune response from the body.

    A 2000 study demonstrated that one intradermal injection of squalene adjuvant produced arthritis in rats.

    Some believe that Gulf War Syndrome was linked to the presence of squalene in certain lots of the anthrax vaccine.

    Beta-propiolactone: Beta-propiolactone (BPL) is a commonly used reagent for the inactivation of viruses for use in vaccine preparations. It has recently been used in the development of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine preparation.

    Beta-propiolactone is a known carcinogen. Local sarcomas have been produced by subcutaneous injection of beta-propiolactone in rats. In the laboratory sarcomas and squamous papillomas in mice were produced by a single subcutaneous injection of a minute amount of beta-propiolactone.

    Polysorbate 80: Polysorbate 80 is present in some vaccines to stop the vaccine from separating into its component parts. In a PubMed study Polysorbate 80 was described as, “a ubiquitously used solubilizing agent that can cause severe nonimmunologic anaphylactoid reactions.”

    In a pharmacological study on mice and rats Polysorbate 80 produced, “mild to moderate depression of the central nervous system with a marked reduction in locomotor activity and rectal temperature, exhibited ataxia and paralytic activity and potentiated the pentobarbital sleeping time.”

    The results of that study concluded, “The results of the present study indicate that polysorbate 80 can neither be used as a solvent for isolated tissue experiments nor when considered for intravenous administration.”

    Another study from the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) suggested the dietary emulsifier polysorbate 80 may induce low-grade inflammation which may contribute to metabolic diseases and increase the potential for development in colon cancer.

    Genetically modified yeast: S. cerevisiae, a species of yeast, is used in vaccines in a variety of ways. It is used as an adjuvant and now through genetic manipulation it is being used to create artificial antibodies

    Studies have suggested that genetically engineered yeast used in vaccines may be a contributing factor to autoimmune disorders.

    Monosodium Glutamate (MSG): Monosodium Glutamate is used in small amounts in some vaccines to keep them stable and protect them from losing potency even when exposed to heat and light.

    In a study that looked at rat fertility and MSG consumption the authors found there was a negative impact on the rats’ fertility.

    In another study it was noted that chronic MSG intake caused kidney dysfunction and renal oxidative stress in the animal model.

    Cells From Aborted Fetus: Fetal cell lines are used to grow viruses which are then collected from the cell cultures and processed further to produce the vaccine itself.

    The cell lines are propagated from lung tissue of mature aborted and used in the current manufacture of a number of routine vaccines, including measles, mumps and rubella (MMRV), diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio, (DTaP-IPV), Hepatitis A and chickenpox.

    Aborted fetal cells are listed on vaccine package inserts as “Human Fetal Diploid Cells.” Two aborted fetal cell lines, WI-38 and MRC-5, have been grown under laboratory conditions since the 1960s. Diploid cells (WI-38, MRC-5) vaccines have their origin in induced abortions.

    The use of such cell lines can be profoundly objectionable to segments of the population who hold certain religious and/or philosophical beliefs.

    The Italian vaccine research and advocacy organization Corvelva released a study in 2019 regarding the use of aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines.

    In their summary they highlighted the following:

    The human genomic DNA contained in this vaccine is clearly, undoubtedly abnormal, presenting important inconsistencies with a typical human genome, that is, with that of a healthy individual.
    560 genes known to be associated with forms of cancer were tested and all underwent major modifications.
    There are variations whose consequences are not even known, not yet appearing in the literature, but which still affect genes involved in the induction of human cancer.
    What is also clearly abnormal is the genome excess showing changes in the number of copies and structural variants.
    Serum From Aborted Calf Fetus Blood: The purpose for the fetal bovine serum is to provide a nutrient broth for viruses to grow in cells.

    Humane Research Australia describes the process of how the blood is collected, “The blood is collected after the slaughter of a mature female cow, the mother’s uterus containing the calf fetus is removed during the evisceration process and transferred to the blood collection room. A needle is then inserted between the fetus’s ribs directly into its heart and the blood is vacuumed into a sterile collection bag.

    Only fetuses over the age of three months are used otherwise the heart is considered too small to puncture. Once collected, the blood is allowed to clot at room temperature and the serum separated through a process known as refrigerated centrifugation.”

    Beyond certain ethical considerations scientists have found that different bovine tissues contain different amounts of the BSE agent.

    Antibiotics: Antibiotics are used during the manufacturing process of some vaccines to stop bacteria growing and contaminating the vaccine.

    Antibiotics found in some vaccines include neomycin, streptomycin, polymyxin b, gentamicin and kanamycin.

    Polymyxin B comes with a warning that, “This medicine has not been fully studied in pregnant women. This medicine may cause kidney problems. This medicine may cause nerve problems”, as well as a laundry list of side effects.

    Similar warnings are found with streptomycin, neomycin, gentamicin, and kanamycin.

    A study out of Finland raised concerns about excessive antibiotic use in early childhood which may lead to weight gain and altered gut bacteria.

    What Else Could be in That Needle?

    The list above is not a complete account of all the ingredients found in various vaccine cocktails. A comprehensive manufacturers’ catalog of ingredients can be found here, here and here.

    The reality is that even a complete list issued by the producer doesn’t tell the entire story of what is found in vaccines.

    Using an Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope equipped with an X-ray microprobe a group of Italian scientists examined 44 samples of 30 different vaccines and found dangerous contaminants, including metal toxicants in 43 of the 44 samples tested.

    In the study, published in the International Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination, the researchers detected lead, chromium, nickel and other metals in every adjuvant sample tested.

    Additional metal contaminants identified in 25 of the human vaccines included platinum, silver, bismuth, iron, and chromium. Foreign impurities such as zirconium, hafnium, strontium, tungsten, antimony, bismuth, cerium and were also detected in many of the vaccines tested.

    The researchers commenting on their unexpected findings reported:

    The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us. In most circumstances, the combinations detected are very odd as they have no technical use, cannot be found in any material handbook and look like the result of the random formation occurring….In any case, whatever their origin, they should not be present in any injectable medicament, let alone in vaccines, more in particular those meant for infants. [Emphasis added]

    When interviewed lead scientist Dr. Antonietta Gatti, of the National Council of Research of Italy and Scientific Director of Nanodiagnostics, explained that the discovery of vaccine impurities shocked the researchers:

    Those particles should not have been there. We had never questioned the purity of vaccines before. In fact, for us the problem did not even exist. All injectable solutions had to be perfectly pure and that was an act of faith on which it seemed impossible to have doubts. For that reason, we repeated our analyses several times to be certain. In the end, we accepted the evidence.

    Speculating on the potential consequences of these foreign impurities Dr. Gatti stated:

    The particles, be they isolated, aggregated or clustered, are not supposed to be there… Our tissues perceive these foreign bodies as potential enemies…Unfortunately, though, the particles we found in vaccines, are not biodegradable. So, all the macrophages’ efforts will be useless, and depending on the exact chemicals involved, the particles may be especially toxic. Cytokines and pro-inflammatory substances in general are released and granulated tissue forms, enveloping the particles. This provokes inflammation which, in the long run, if locally persistent, is known to be a precursor to cancer.

    Along with unlisted metal contaminants another unlisted contaminant was noted in some vaccines when a preliminary screening result from Microbe Inotech Laboratories Inc. detected glyphosate in the childhood vaccines they tested.

    Merck’s MMR II vaccine had 2.671 parts per billion (ppb) of glyphosate, Sanofi Pasteur’s DTap Adacel vaccine had 0.123 ppb, Novartis’ Influenza Fluvirin had 0.331 ppb, Glaxo Smith Kline’s HepB Energix-B vaccine had 0.325 ppb, Merck’s Pneumococcal Vax Polyvalent Pneumovax 23 had 0.107 ppb of glyphosate.

    These findings prompted Moms Across America to send a letter to the FDA, CDC, EPA,NIH and California Department of Health requesting that they test vaccines for glyphosate and recall contaminated vaccines.

    MIT scientist Dr. Stephanie Seneff remarked on the route by which glyphosate could get into vaccines:

    Collagen is a protein found in large amounts in the ligaments of cows, and these ligaments are often used in the production of gelatin. The MMR vaccine and flu vaccine viruses are grown as live cultures on gelatin sourced from cows fed high concentrations of glyphosate in their GMO Roundup­Ready feed.

    What to Do?

    Given the complex nature of the composition of vaccines and the paucity of information volunteered to the public on the manufacturing processes and ingredients that go into these products, how does one go about navigating this subject?

    Conventional wisdom might suggest, “Ask your doctor.” But how independent are these doctors?

    Where do you turn when you discover physicians and pediatricians, who have a legal duty to fully inform patients about vaccine risks and side effects, have ideological and material incentives to avoid presenting specific information that might cause a parent to question a vaccine?

    What about educational materials and advice from the agencies tasked with protecting public health? Can we trust the FDA and the CDC to provide detailed and unbiased information when it is known that they get substantial amounts of money from vaccine manufacturers?

    Informed consent is a principle in medical ethics and medical law that a patient must have sufficient information and understanding before making decisions about their medical care.This includes being given a thorough account of the risks and benefits of treatments, alternative treatments, the patient’s role in treatment, and their right to refuse treatment.

    Informed and individualized health care decisions about any product one puts into their or their children’s body starts with being fully informed with what is in that product.

    *

    Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

    This article was originally published on Health Freedom Defense Fund.

    Featured image is from HFDF



    https://www.globalresearch.ca/do-you-know-what-vaccine/5839377
    Do You Know What’s in a Vaccine? Chemical Ingredients Addendum to the Childhood Vaccination Series All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name. To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here. Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles. *** Over the last few decades, the number of chemicals added to foods and other products has skyrocketed. Chemicals are added to “enhance flavor”, make fruits and vegetables look fresh, extend the shelf life of packaged foods and for other invented reasons. A cornucopia of chemicals are also found in lotions and beauty products with the ostensible reason that these chemicals make beauty products feel, look, and smell nice. Along with this increase in heavily processed foods has come increased skepticism about the necessity of inserting chemical additives into everything we touch and taste. A significant and growing segment of the US population are beginning to examine the health consequences of ingesting and absorbing these chemical-laden products. This growing awareness about the adverse effects of ingesting and absorbing synthetic ingredients and the public’s understanding of the attendant health benefits of consuming products free from synthetic chemicals has prompted consumers to seek out organic ingredient-based items in their foods and skin lotions. More people are showing interest in knowing about the ingredients in their food and striving to ‘eat clean.’ This increased awareness is evidenced in the steady growth of the organic food industry and trends in the natural and organic cosmetic industry where demand is higher than ever. This same level of concern has begun to seep into the public conscience regarding a certain medical product that has mostly avoided scrutiny – the vaccine. Having been trained to accept that this product is a customary aspect of everyday life, most people haven’t given much thought to what’s inside the vaccine vials. Rarely will the vaccine ritual in the doctor’s office include a discussion about the ingredients which are about to be injected into the patient’s body. It’s highly likely the physicians and nurses themselves don’t know the ingredients of each vaccine. So what’s in that vial? What’s coming through that needle? A Partial List of Ingredients Aluminum: Aluminum salts are used in some vaccine formulations as an adjuvant. An adjuvant is a substance added to vaccines to ostensibly enhance the immune response. Examples of aluminum salts in some vaccines are aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, alum (potassium aluminum sulfate) or mixed aluminum salts. In a 2011 study Canadian scientists Professor Christopher Shaw and Dr. Lucija Tomljenovic stated the following: “Aluminum is an experimentally demonstrated neurotoxin and the most commonly used vaccine adjuvant. In particular, aluminum in adjuvant form carries a risk for autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation and associated neurological complications and may thus have profound and widespread adverse health consequences.” Multiple studies have shown that the intramuscularly injected aluminum vaccine adjuvant is absorbed into the systemic circulation and travels to different sites in the body, such as the brain, joints, and the spleen, where it accumulates and is retained for years post-vaccination. Mercury (thimerosal): Thimerosal is an ethyl mercury-based preservative used in vials that contain more than one dose of a vaccine (multi-dose vials) to prevent germs, bacteria and/or fungi from contaminating the vaccine. While in decline some flu vaccines and childhood vaccines in multi-dose vials still utilize thimerosal. Mercury is known to be a genotoxic agent, even in minute concentrations, which can damage the genetic information within a cell causing mutations, which may lead to cancer. A meta-analysis epidemiological study suggested thimerosal containing vaccines significantly increased the risk of neurodevelopmental disorders. A 2011 study suggested there may be higher rates of blood and brain mercury levels in monkeys exposed to vaccines containing thimerosal. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the U.S. Public Health Service (1999) published a joint statement that urged “all government agencies to work rapidly toward reducing children’s exposure to mercury from all sources.” Gelatin: Gelatin is used as a stabilizer in some vaccines licensed in the U.S. Stabilizers are added to vaccines to protect the active ingredients from degrading during manufacture, transport and storage. Gelatin is a protein obtained from cows or pigs and produced by the partial hydrolysis of collagen extracted by boiling animal parts such as cartilage, tendons, skin, bones and ligaments in water. Some people might have a severe allergic reaction to it. Certain vaccine viruses are grown on gelatin derived from the ligaments of pigs fed heavy doses of glyphosate in their feed. Gelatin comes from collagen which has lots of glycine. Gelatin is one of the most commonly identified causes of allergic reactions to vaccines. A 1999 Japanese study showed most anaphylactic reactions and some urticarial reactions to gelatin-containing measles, mumps, and rubella monovalent vaccines were associated with gelatin allergy. Based on these findings Japan removed gelatin from vaccines in 2000. Formaldehyde: Formaldehyde is used during the manufacture of some vaccines to inactivate viruses (like polio and hepatitis A viruses) or bacterial toxins (like diphtheria and tetanus toxins). Formaldehyde is a human carcinogen based on evidence from cancer studies in humans and is listed as aknown to be human carcinogen in the National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) Twelfth Report on Carcinogens(2011). Phenol/Phenoxyethanol: Phenoxyethanol is used in vaccines and biologics as a preservative to prevent microbial growth. A 2010 study, The relative toxicity of compounds used as preservatives in vaccines and biologics, assessed the relative cytotoxicity of the levels of the compounds commonly used as preservative in US licensed vaccines and found that for phenoxyethanol it was 4.6-fold, for phenol 12.2-fold and for Thimerosal >330-fold. They concluded, “None of the compounds commonly used as preservatives in US licensed vaccine/biological preparations can be considered an ideal preservative, and their ability to fully comply with the requirements of the US Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for preservatives is in doubt.” Case reports (here, here and here) have suggested a link between phenoxyethanol and urticaria (hives), eczema and anaphylaxis. Triton X-100: Triton X –100 or octylphenol ethoxylate (OPE) is a surfactant (reducing the surface tension of liquids) and stabilizer present in some influenza vaccines. OPEs are endocrine disruptors and break down relatively easily into Octylphenols (OPs), which are more harmful. Endocrine disruptors can alter reproductive function, increase incidences of breast cancer, affect growth patterns and neurodevelopment in children and change immune function. Squalene: Squalene is a naturally-occurring substance derived primarily from shark liver oil. When combined with other ingredients it becomes an adjuvant, which, like aluminum, is added to vaccines to elicit a stronger immune response from the body. A 2000 study demonstrated that one intradermal injection of squalene adjuvant produced arthritis in rats. Some believe that Gulf War Syndrome was linked to the presence of squalene in certain lots of the anthrax vaccine. Beta-propiolactone: Beta-propiolactone (BPL) is a commonly used reagent for the inactivation of viruses for use in vaccine preparations. It has recently been used in the development of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine preparation. Beta-propiolactone is a known carcinogen. Local sarcomas have been produced by subcutaneous injection of beta-propiolactone in rats. In the laboratory sarcomas and squamous papillomas in mice were produced by a single subcutaneous injection of a minute amount of beta-propiolactone. Polysorbate 80: Polysorbate 80 is present in some vaccines to stop the vaccine from separating into its component parts. In a PubMed study Polysorbate 80 was described as, “a ubiquitously used solubilizing agent that can cause severe nonimmunologic anaphylactoid reactions.” In a pharmacological study on mice and rats Polysorbate 80 produced, “mild to moderate depression of the central nervous system with a marked reduction in locomotor activity and rectal temperature, exhibited ataxia and paralytic activity and potentiated the pentobarbital sleeping time.” The results of that study concluded, “The results of the present study indicate that polysorbate 80 can neither be used as a solvent for isolated tissue experiments nor when considered for intravenous administration.” Another study from the American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) suggested the dietary emulsifier polysorbate 80 may induce low-grade inflammation which may contribute to metabolic diseases and increase the potential for development in colon cancer. Genetically modified yeast: S. cerevisiae, a species of yeast, is used in vaccines in a variety of ways. It is used as an adjuvant and now through genetic manipulation it is being used to create artificial antibodies Studies have suggested that genetically engineered yeast used in vaccines may be a contributing factor to autoimmune disorders. Monosodium Glutamate (MSG): Monosodium Glutamate is used in small amounts in some vaccines to keep them stable and protect them from losing potency even when exposed to heat and light. In a study that looked at rat fertility and MSG consumption the authors found there was a negative impact on the rats’ fertility. In another study it was noted that chronic MSG intake caused kidney dysfunction and renal oxidative stress in the animal model. Cells From Aborted Fetus: Fetal cell lines are used to grow viruses which are then collected from the cell cultures and processed further to produce the vaccine itself. The cell lines are propagated from lung tissue of mature aborted and used in the current manufacture of a number of routine vaccines, including measles, mumps and rubella (MMRV), diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and polio, (DTaP-IPV), Hepatitis A and chickenpox. Aborted fetal cells are listed on vaccine package inserts as “Human Fetal Diploid Cells.” Two aborted fetal cell lines, WI-38 and MRC-5, have been grown under laboratory conditions since the 1960s. Diploid cells (WI-38, MRC-5) vaccines have their origin in induced abortions. The use of such cell lines can be profoundly objectionable to segments of the population who hold certain religious and/or philosophical beliefs. The Italian vaccine research and advocacy organization Corvelva released a study in 2019 regarding the use of aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines. In their summary they highlighted the following: The human genomic DNA contained in this vaccine is clearly, undoubtedly abnormal, presenting important inconsistencies with a typical human genome, that is, with that of a healthy individual. 560 genes known to be associated with forms of cancer were tested and all underwent major modifications. There are variations whose consequences are not even known, not yet appearing in the literature, but which still affect genes involved in the induction of human cancer. What is also clearly abnormal is the genome excess showing changes in the number of copies and structural variants. Serum From Aborted Calf Fetus Blood: The purpose for the fetal bovine serum is to provide a nutrient broth for viruses to grow in cells. Humane Research Australia describes the process of how the blood is collected, “The blood is collected after the slaughter of a mature female cow, the mother’s uterus containing the calf fetus is removed during the evisceration process and transferred to the blood collection room. A needle is then inserted between the fetus’s ribs directly into its heart and the blood is vacuumed into a sterile collection bag. Only fetuses over the age of three months are used otherwise the heart is considered too small to puncture. Once collected, the blood is allowed to clot at room temperature and the serum separated through a process known as refrigerated centrifugation.” Beyond certain ethical considerations scientists have found that different bovine tissues contain different amounts of the BSE agent. Antibiotics: Antibiotics are used during the manufacturing process of some vaccines to stop bacteria growing and contaminating the vaccine. Antibiotics found in some vaccines include neomycin, streptomycin, polymyxin b, gentamicin and kanamycin. Polymyxin B comes with a warning that, “This medicine has not been fully studied in pregnant women. This medicine may cause kidney problems. This medicine may cause nerve problems”, as well as a laundry list of side effects. Similar warnings are found with streptomycin, neomycin, gentamicin, and kanamycin. A study out of Finland raised concerns about excessive antibiotic use in early childhood which may lead to weight gain and altered gut bacteria. What Else Could be in That Needle? The list above is not a complete account of all the ingredients found in various vaccine cocktails. A comprehensive manufacturers’ catalog of ingredients can be found here, here and here. The reality is that even a complete list issued by the producer doesn’t tell the entire story of what is found in vaccines. Using an Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope equipped with an X-ray microprobe a group of Italian scientists examined 44 samples of 30 different vaccines and found dangerous contaminants, including metal toxicants in 43 of the 44 samples tested. In the study, published in the International Journal of Vaccines and Vaccination, the researchers detected lead, chromium, nickel and other metals in every adjuvant sample tested. Additional metal contaminants identified in 25 of the human vaccines included platinum, silver, bismuth, iron, and chromium. Foreign impurities such as zirconium, hafnium, strontium, tungsten, antimony, bismuth, cerium and were also detected in many of the vaccines tested. The researchers commenting on their unexpected findings reported: The quantity of foreign bodies detected and, in some cases, their unusual chemical compositions baffled us. In most circumstances, the combinations detected are very odd as they have no technical use, cannot be found in any material handbook and look like the result of the random formation occurring….In any case, whatever their origin, they should not be present in any injectable medicament, let alone in vaccines, more in particular those meant for infants. [Emphasis added] When interviewed lead scientist Dr. Antonietta Gatti, of the National Council of Research of Italy and Scientific Director of Nanodiagnostics, explained that the discovery of vaccine impurities shocked the researchers: Those particles should not have been there. We had never questioned the purity of vaccines before. In fact, for us the problem did not even exist. All injectable solutions had to be perfectly pure and that was an act of faith on which it seemed impossible to have doubts. For that reason, we repeated our analyses several times to be certain. In the end, we accepted the evidence. Speculating on the potential consequences of these foreign impurities Dr. Gatti stated: The particles, be they isolated, aggregated or clustered, are not supposed to be there… Our tissues perceive these foreign bodies as potential enemies…Unfortunately, though, the particles we found in vaccines, are not biodegradable. So, all the macrophages’ efforts will be useless, and depending on the exact chemicals involved, the particles may be especially toxic. Cytokines and pro-inflammatory substances in general are released and granulated tissue forms, enveloping the particles. This provokes inflammation which, in the long run, if locally persistent, is known to be a precursor to cancer. Along with unlisted metal contaminants another unlisted contaminant was noted in some vaccines when a preliminary screening result from Microbe Inotech Laboratories Inc. detected glyphosate in the childhood vaccines they tested. Merck’s MMR II vaccine had 2.671 parts per billion (ppb) of glyphosate, Sanofi Pasteur’s DTap Adacel vaccine had 0.123 ppb, Novartis’ Influenza Fluvirin had 0.331 ppb, Glaxo Smith Kline’s HepB Energix-B vaccine had 0.325 ppb, Merck’s Pneumococcal Vax Polyvalent Pneumovax 23 had 0.107 ppb of glyphosate. These findings prompted Moms Across America to send a letter to the FDA, CDC, EPA,NIH and California Department of Health requesting that they test vaccines for glyphosate and recall contaminated vaccines. MIT scientist Dr. Stephanie Seneff remarked on the route by which glyphosate could get into vaccines: Collagen is a protein found in large amounts in the ligaments of cows, and these ligaments are often used in the production of gelatin. The MMR vaccine and flu vaccine viruses are grown as live cultures on gelatin sourced from cows fed high concentrations of glyphosate in their GMO Roundup­Ready feed. What to Do? Given the complex nature of the composition of vaccines and the paucity of information volunteered to the public on the manufacturing processes and ingredients that go into these products, how does one go about navigating this subject? Conventional wisdom might suggest, “Ask your doctor.” But how independent are these doctors? Where do you turn when you discover physicians and pediatricians, who have a legal duty to fully inform patients about vaccine risks and side effects, have ideological and material incentives to avoid presenting specific information that might cause a parent to question a vaccine? What about educational materials and advice from the agencies tasked with protecting public health? Can we trust the FDA and the CDC to provide detailed and unbiased information when it is known that they get substantial amounts of money from vaccine manufacturers? Informed consent is a principle in medical ethics and medical law that a patient must have sufficient information and understanding before making decisions about their medical care.This includes being given a thorough account of the risks and benefits of treatments, alternative treatments, the patient’s role in treatment, and their right to refuse treatment. Informed and individualized health care decisions about any product one puts into their or their children’s body starts with being fully informed with what is in that product. * Note to readers: Please click the share button above. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles. This article was originally published on Health Freedom Defense Fund. Featured image is from HFDF https://www.globalresearch.ca/do-you-know-what-vaccine/5839377
    WWW.GLOBALRESEARCH.CA
    Do You Know What’s in a Vaccine? Chemical Ingredients
    All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name. To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here. Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share …
    0 Comments 0 Shares 21580 Views
  • Deadly superbugs are on the rise while antibiotics are becoming obsolete. #health
    Deadly superbugs are on the rise while antibiotics are becoming obsolete. #health
    WWW.NATURALBLAZE.COM
    What On Earth is "Antibiotic Stewardship"?
    Antibiotic stewardship aims to curb the misuse of antibiotics that drives bacteria to develop resistance in the first place.
    Like
    3
    0 Comments 0 Shares 970 Views
  • https://cota.org/campaigns/COTAforCassidyG/blog/our-story
    Aloha all, this is my friend’s daughter, Cassidy, who was recently flown to Stanford Medical for the 2nd time due to liver failure caused by an antibiotic. Just wanted to raise awareness on this antibiotic. It’s called minocycline which is the less preferred antibiotic to doxycycline. It is often prescribed and pushed by docs to help with acne, but has a contraindication of liver failure! The past 6 months have been hard on this family and they tried really hard to stay away from Go Fund Me type posts, but when they learned about COTA and their daughter’s chance of having a liver transplant right away, they hopped on quickly to tell her story! She has yet to find a match because mom & dad don’t qualify, as well as relatives over 55. Please take time to read her story. Mucho Mahalo!
    https://cota.org/campaigns/COTAforCassidyG/blog/our-story Aloha all, this is my friend’s daughter, Cassidy, who was recently flown to Stanford Medical for the 2nd time due to liver failure caused by an antibiotic. Just wanted to raise awareness on this antibiotic. It’s called minocycline which is the less preferred antibiotic to doxycycline. It is often prescribed and pushed by docs to help with acne, but has a contraindication of liver failure! The past 6 months have been hard on this family and they tried really hard to stay away from Go Fund Me type posts, but when they learned about COTA and their daughter’s chance of having a liver transplant right away, they hopped on quickly to tell her story! She has yet to find a match because mom & dad don’t qualify, as well as relatives over 55. Please take time to read her story. Mucho Mahalo!
    Like
    6
    1 Comments 0 Shares 1122 Views
More Results