The Vaccine Religion and its Effect on Medical Research
900% increase in vertigo after the Pfizer shot must be discussed only quietly by those walking in the hallowed shrines of the vaccine religion, if blasphemy is to be practiced surreptitiously.

Dr. Colleen Huber
The Metropolitan Cathedral in Mexico City, one of the largest cathedrals in the Americas was built right next to the holiest Aztec shrine, the Templo Mayor, drawing almost all of its stones to construct the cathedral. With the conquest of Mexico by 16th century Spanish explorer Hernán Cortez, the Aztec descendants, who called themselves Mexica, and their capital city Tenochtitlan, did the physical labor of building the Spanish cathedrals in Mexico. They engraved Aztec symbols under and deep inside Mexico City’s largest cathedrals. Many of those cathedrals are built right on top of Aztec ruins, but some number among the cathedral building crews engraved their ancestral symbols in the walls and pillars of the conquerors’ religious shrines.

Unearthing the Aztec past, the destruction of the Templo Mayor
Photo: https://smarthistory.org/unearthing-the-aztec-past-the-destruction-of-the-templo-mayor/
What does this have to do with vaccine research in the era of the vaccine religion?

The prevailing medical philosophy / religion of our era holds vaccine beliefs as core tenets. The notion of immune function conferred by an arbitrarily chosen injected liquid, rather than organized by specialized and synergistic leukocytes (with complex interactions with nutrients), as optimal bulwark against infectious disease, is an 18th century superstition dressed up as contemporary medical sophistication. The crescendo of fervent belief in the vaccine sacrament during the last two hundred years of medical history, and especially over the last half-century, has now left us living through an era of intense vaccine zealotry. Everyone is now expected to accept and receive the many dozens of vaccines on the CDC schedule – some for adults and many more for infants and children - and is expected to not question the bribes and bullying that put all those vaccines, which are liability-free pharma products, into the vaccine catechism.

Consequently, blasphemy against COVID vaccination has been punished even more relentlessly from late 2020 through early 2023 than blasphemy against the so-called childhood vaccines. Critical skeptics and those who refuse vaccines themselves have very often been fired from their jobs and excluded from studying at universities. At this writing in early 2024, an abundance of evidence has shown the harmful effects of the COVID vaccines, mostly the mRNA type, made by Pfizer and Moderna. There are thousands of studies showing injuries from these vaccines. I compiled over 700 of the largest studies and of those showing how the mRNA vaccines cause damage to multiple bodily organs in this book. I cited half as many studies in its earlier edition, which was more widely read, probably for the novelty of its subject matter, while still remaining obscure and little known.

Thus, medical literature showing injuries following COVID vaccination, without overtly announcing vaccine criticism, is a 21st century metaphor for the practice of engraving the contrarian viewpoint surreptitiously in the shadows of the cathedral.

Archiving data in the catacombs under the shrine

It is much easier for an independent researcher such as me to write about vaccine-related harms than it is for institutional researchers who depend on industry-funded grants for their research. If those researchers are to show any findings about vaccine harms, those must be buried deeply enough to survive the peer-review process, and the casual perusal of the reviewers. Their studies must sing the hymns of praise for vaccination that the universal religion requires, and it must extol the fancy gilded façade of the church, while keeping the contradictory evidence well below the surface, revealing the same only to careful students of the data.

This is how epidemic myocarditis was hidden from the public even as the most widely used and most hurriedly deployed vaccine in human history was being injected into billions of people. We learned this week that the CDC knew about myocarditis effects by at least May 25, 2021, but did not want to “appear alarmist” to clinicians and to the public. [1] For context, it had been known since November 2020, before any of the public was injected, that the Pfizer vaccine arrives to the heart, brain and other organs within seconds. By the middle of 2021, myocarditis reports were accumulating throughout injected populations, and cardiac arrest ambulance calls had skyrocketed in heavily injected Israel.

Appearing alarmist has been detrimental to the paychecks of the skeptics, and so many keep silent, until a preponderance of evidence makes the use of free speech less hazardous to employment and college enrollment.

Vaccine effects on the brain

Damaging effects of the COVID vaccines on cognition and other brain function are beginning to emerge. We are likely to see more and more of these studies over 2024 and beyond, especially as researchers have become emboldened by the now overwhelming and irrefutable evidence of cardiovascular injuries and deaths following those injections. Now that the COVID vaccines, especially the mRNA type, are losing their initial luster from the growing negative press regarding cardiovascular risks, it is just a little more acceptable to also expose these vaccines’ other problems than it had been in the peak 2021-2022 vaccine mania heyday.

Here is an example regarding effects of the Pfizer vaccine in Danish adolescents: [2] The study begins by sounding vaguely pro-vaccine, discussing: “ . . . [another] study . . . which showed that BNT162b2 [Pfizer] had an acceptable safety profile, . . . and was effective against SARS-CoV-2,” and goes on to list minor-sounding symptoms, such as pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, chills, etc. Thus begin the dulcet tones of the hymn of praise for vaccines. Is this lullaby to induce sleep in the peer reviewers, to not see the data contained deep inside the report?

What was not mentioned in the Introduction, but is listed very deep in the study’s reporting is the study’s shocking findings in Danish adolescents.

Nine times the “dizziness and giddiness” in girls

“Dizziness and giddiness” in COVID-vaccinated girls occurred at 922% the rate in unvaccinated girls, 57 to 182 days post-Pfizer shot. (Giddiness is usually called vertigo and can include lightheadedness in US medical parlance).

“Unspecified cognitive symptoms” were 92% higher in COVID-vaccinated girls than in unvaccinated girls, and “Syncope” was 418% higher in COVID-vaccinated girls than unvaccinated girls 0-56 days after the Pfizer shot.


S Berg, H Wallach Kildemoes, et al. Symptom-specific hospital contacts in 12-18-year-olds vaccinated against COVID-19: A Danish register-based cohort study. Jun 2023. Vaccines (Basel). 11 (6). 1049. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10301149/#app1-vaccines-11-01049
One might think that a nine times greater rate of “dizziness and giddiness” and four times the syncope, and nearly twice the unspecified cognitive symptoms in vaccinated girls over unvaccinated would be of great concern.

There is an important flaw in this study, which stems from a political artifact. The authors used the term “unvaccinated” 51 times without defining it at all.

In fact, the term “unvaccinated” has been very sloppily defined in the COVID era. Does unvaccinated now mean never having received any vaccines at all, even the earlier childhood vaccines? Or that the Danish teenage girls suffered injury after some of the prior childhood vaccines, and at some point decided to receive no more vaccines? Adding even more confusion, people who had been injected with COVID vaccines less than two weeks earlier were (very dishonestly) called “unvaccinated” at least throughout the U.S. and Europe. This had the grossly misleading effect of sweeping the earliest (Day 0 to 14) vaccine injuries away from official scrutiny. A fourth problem with the term unvaccinated is that those who only received one COVID vaccine dose, but refused a second, were in some places being called “unvaccinated.” And a fifth problem was that those who could not prove in a hospital setting how many COVID vaccines they had were sometimes also lumped in with the “unvaccinated” cohort. So it is anybody’s guess as to the composition of the “unvaccinated” cohort, and the study authors did not even attempt to sort through any of the above problems with vaccination status. Whereas the authors did define their vaccinated cohort as having specifically two doses of Pfizer, > 3 weeks apart, they did not define their unvaccinated cohort.

We do see however, that after two Pfizer mRNA vaccine doses, the Danish girls had almost double the unspecified cognitive symptoms and over nine times the dizziness and vertigo of the presumably unvaccinated girls, even after two months post-vaccine, which was the most striking finding of the study.

Share

Autistic-like behaviors in rats post-Pfizer shot

Another 2023 study showed a significant increase in autism-like behaviors in the offspring of Pfizer-injected rats. [3]

That study begins with, “The COVID-19 pandemic catalyzed the swift development and distribution of mRNA vaccines, including BNT162b2, to address the disease,” but then quickly go into the major problems that the study found post-vaccine.

The researchers discovered profound effects on neurological development including autism-like behaviors and impaired motor performance in male rats after their mothers were vaccinated prenatally.

I wrote of mechanisms of effects on the brain following the COVID vaccines, [4] and prion-like proteins as a likely downstream cause [5] and mitochondrial damage as another likely downstream cause [6] of brain injury after COVID vaccination.

Now that the dam of information is cracking open to reveal myriad and abundant injuries correlated with the COVID vaccines, I think that the last taboo subject, namely cognitive, emotional and psychiatric effects of the COVID vaccines will be explored by researchers in more depth through this new year and beyond.

Is this a place where a suspension of disbelief is encouraged, or is it a citadel of timeless truth, or both? How about PubMed and the universities?


Photo by José Roldan

[1] Z Stieber. Exclusive: Email reveals why CDC didn’t issue alert on COVID vaccines and myocarditis. Jan 25 2024. The Epoch Times. https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/exclusive-email-reveals-why-cdc-didnt-issue-alert-on-covid-vaccines-and-myocarditis-5571675

[2] S Berg, H Wallach Kildemoes, et al. Symptom-specific hospital contacts in 12-18-year-olds vaccinated against COVID-19: A Danish register-based cohort study. Jun 2023. Vaccines (Basel). 11 (6). 1049. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10301149/#app1-vaccines-11-01049

[3] M Erdogan, O Gurbuz, et al. Prenatal exposure to COVID-19 mRNA vaccine BNT162b2 induces autism-like behaviors in male neonatal rats: Insights into WNT and BDNF signaling perturbations. Jul 3 2023. Neurochem Res. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11064-023-04089-2

[4] C Huber. Brain injuries after COVID vaccination. Apr 10 2023. https://colleenhuber.substack.com/p/brain-injuries-after-covid-vaccination

[5] C Huber. Prion risks in the COVID vaccines. May 17 2023. https://colleenhuber.substack.com/p/prion-risks-in-the-covid-vaccines

[6] C Huber. Brain threat from COVID vaccines. Mar 24 2022. https://colleenhuber.substack.com/p/brain-threat-from-covid-vaccines

Share


https://substack.com/home/post/p-141055473


https://donshafi911sars-cov-2.blogspot.com/2024/07/the-vaccine-religion-and-its-effect-on.html

Commentary: Crickets on chicken rice? Eating insects can go from novel to normal in Singapore
SINGAPORE: The first time I chomped on a crispy cricket, it was in Thailand, at a night market in Krabi with American friends. This was 2007 and pre-social media, so I wasn’t doing it for the ‘Gram – I did it to say: “Welcome to Southeast Asia, where we eat everything.”

Perhaps not everything, or at least not yet. Earlier in July, Singapore approved 16 species of insects as food, from house crickets and silkworms to honey bees and the Giant Rhino beetle grub. That scorpion-tarantula-grasshopper skewer I had in Cambodia might have to wait.

My second time was in a Siem Reap restaurant that specialised in bugs. My mum and I sampled the most conspicuously arthropodite dishes on the menu, dreamed up by an ex-Sofitel hotel chef and a French restaurateur. These went onto Facebook with captions like: “SpiderTempura: With great flavour comes great responsibility to eat” and the shocked reactions flowed in.

The next few times, it was usually for a lark while strolling street markets across the region, to show off how unfazed I was by ingesting insects.

DRIED SEA WORMS IN LAKSA?

But I’d like to report that these critters are actually great at conveying flavour.

Flash fried like most street snacks are, their delicate exoskeletons, legs and wings become crispy convoys of seasonings and spices.

The idea of eating insects isn’t completely new to the Singapore food scene. As local foodie folklore goes, hawkers used to enrich laksa gravy with dried sea worms for a powerful punch of umami.

In 2016, the vaunted Native Bar set tongues lapping with its ANTZ elixir: Weaver ants distilled into a concoction of lemongrass gin, coconut yogurt, calamansi and basil, then topped with freeze-dried ants. The drink has since thrilled local and international cocktail connoisseurs, drawing them to the bar for a curious tipple.

NOT SO CREEPY-CRAWLY ON OUR MENUS

Try them once as a fad, they’re this season’s new avocado toast or fried chicken and waffles. Come back because there’ll be more gastronomic creations to delight in as chefs experiment with a new food.

Restaurants are already planning menus to make it deliciously easy to take that first bite.

The House of Seafood restaurant already has about 30 offerings in the works, such as salted egg crab adorned with superworms and cricket-topped sushi. Owner Francis Ng also told local media that he receives five to six calls daily asking about these dishes and expects a 30 per cent revenue increase once they’re on the menu. Insectyumz will launch cricket and mealworm snacks in original and tom yum flavours, and a cricket protein powder.

In our arcadia of haute cuisine and cutting-edge dining institutions, acclaimed and daring chefs can get their Noma on by experimenting with a whole slew of new forms and textures. The (in)famously innovative Copenhagen restaurant was an early pioneer in featuring insects as ultra-modern European gastronomy, introducing fermented cricket paste and crème fraiche with dried ants in 2012.

Some of us may not mind eating insects – say, to nourish both body and eco-conscience – but cannot get over the imagery of creepy crawlies. Some palates clam up, involuntarily clumping these 16 approved insects with undesirable cohorts like cockroaches.

Instead of whole spindly crickets or squishy-looking grub, intrepid chefs are also using them in flour and powder form.

In Europe, the edible insect renaissance has surged consumption of bug-based cereal bars, granola and flour – even creeping into sacred Italian culinary traditions to produce pasta with cricket powder. Just think of how oysters – a decadent status symbol today – used to be scoffed at as ugly, slimy polluted food of the poor in 19th century Britain and America.

Stop thinking reality TV Fear Factor tarantula chomping challenges, lean into the Parts Unknown spirit of the late iconic chef and globe-trotting food lover Anthony Bourdain.

AS LONG AS FOOD IS DELICIOUS AND WALLET-FRIENDLY

Ultimately, people in Singapore will eat most things so long as they’re delicious and wallet-friendly.

Edible insects flit seamlessly into the hearty company of chicken and duck feet, pig’s trotters, fish heads and offal that an outsider might find as gut-churning as insects.

The growing conscious eating movement will also raise the high-protein profile of this antioxidant-packed, more sustainable meat alternative that emits lower greenhouse gases when farmed.

The wellness community will enjoy exploring more gluten-free, low-carb and keto options. According to Brooklyn Bugs founder and chef Joseph Yoon, the cacao taste of mealworms elevates brownies and the nuttiness of cricket powder makes perfect cheesecake sense, so sceptical eaters can let their guards down when insects are disguised into better tasting desserts.

Related:


In the style of food fad frenzies that constantly grip our collective appetites, adventurous eaters and gourmand influencers will tuck in with gusto, and social media chronicles will set off waves of curious epicurean explorations. Perhaps the comforting auras of mala and truffle oil can ease the experience for the slightly-but-not-too-adventurous.

Insect-infused dishes can easily go from novelty to normal. Underground no more, they’ll soar into our food tourism vernacular, whether uplifting hawker favorites or headlining fine dining. Then they’ll settle down, just like Basque burnt cheesecakes and salted egg yolk anything have, and linger on the periphery of menus.

Cricket rice will never knock chicken rice off its throne, but crunchily laced with garlic, a sprinkle of insects would be an aromatic topping to complement that fragrant rice, and give that off-white splay a splash of colour for a picture-perfect platter. Tasty to the palate and tasteful on social media – now, that’s the recipe for a buzzy food fad.

Desiree Koh is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

Source: CNA/yh(ch)


https://www.channelnewsasia.com/commentary/insects-food-singapore-alternative-meat-laksa-cricket-powder-4490986

Dr Peter McCullough Recommends Dodgey Synthetic siRNA Jabs to Counter Effects of Dodgey Synthetic mRNA Jabs
You're in great hands, health freedom movement! Not.

Anthony Colpo

The Medical Freedom Movement is full of suspicious characters. So suspicious you'd almost think the movement has been captured, or even commandeered from the outset, by the same people who brought us the 2020 blockbuster "The Great Culling: This Time, it’s Global!”

There's Steve Kirsch, the DARPA teen protege and Rockefeller-linked buffoon famous for The Most Important Surveys You'll Ever Do!!, big money challenges he has no intention of fulfilling, surveillance state and CBDC technology, and aggressive promotion of the highly toxic, suicide-inducing SSRI fluvoxamine.

There's Robert "Sly" Malone, the self-proclaimed inventor of "mRNA vaccine technology" who cries hard-done-by while swimming around in billion$ of grant money from the US Military (major enablers of the globalist death shot campaign), all while pretending claiming to be an injured vaxxx victim.

There's Brett Weinstein, who helped propel Kirsch and Malone into stardom with his June 11, 2021 Darkhorse Podcast. In this creepy snippet from his Tucker Carlson interview, Weinstein gushes like a lovesick teen over mRNA technology. Such impassioned praise for a technology with a 30-year track record of failure, one that was successfully deployed to trigger accelerated death and disability around the world, is extremely curious for someone presenting as a health freedom fighter.


There's Dr Ryan Cole who, at "the first Conversation on Covid" in Puerto Rico September 2021, emphatically emphasized “Covid is a clotting disease. Covid is a clotting disease. Covid is a clotting disease.”

In case you didn't catch it the first three times, Cole reckons COVID is a clotting disease.

Bollocks. COVID is regular cold, flu and pneumonia renamed and packaged as an uber-deadly new threat. They are not "clotting diseases" but respiratory ailments. What is a clotting disease is the common and now well-documented life-threatening thrombosis caused by the Unsafe and Ineffective gene therapies to treat the renamed COVID caused by the never-isolated Sars-Cov-2. Despite this clotting effect of the vaxxxines being well-established by September 2021, Cole preferred to blame the phenomenon on 'COVID.'

With health freedom heroes like this, who needs villains?


The “remarkable” San Juan “Covid Conversation” where health freedom spokespeople not chosen by you acted as if COVID was real and not a globalist psy-op.
There's Dr Pierre Kory who, at the same star-studded gathering of pandemic shills, described COVID, the artist formerly known as Cold’n’Flu, as "the most complex and most violent disease that I have seen and the most difficult to treat in the ICU.”

COVID: Once a simple cold you sat out with some hot tea, lemon juice and Vaporub, now the most complex and violent thug of a disease the world of medicine has ever seen! If the madicine gig ever stops working out for Kory, he should migrate to Australia and get a job as a SAPOL prosecutor - with such an unbridled capacity for egregious nonsense, he'd fit right in.


Dr Pierre Kory, supposed member of the Health Freedom Movement, pushing the mask farce in uber-mainstream USA Today.
The ‘Respectable’ Face of Pandemic and Gene Therapy Propaganda?

Then there's the movement's smiling enigma, Dr Peter McCullough. Depending on who you listen to, McCullough is either a controlled opposition shill or the most sincere bloke you could ever meet.

Compared to some of the other suspect characters who comprise the upper echelons of the health freedom movement, there's something disarming about McCullough. He doesn't have the grating motor mouth of Kirsch, nor the sinister gaze and evil gnome vibe of Malone.

McCullough appears the polar opposite of Kirsch, who comes off like the tech-nerd version of your obnoxious, balding, know-it-all Uncle Barry. The guy who slurps, farts, belches at family gatherings and blames it on the dog, and challenges his nephews to wrestling matches while drunk then refuses to concede defeat when they repeatedly pin his fat hairy shoulders to the ground.

McCullough seems more like your Uncle Ronald, the successful physician who arrives at family gatherings with your charmingly demure and well-liked Auntie Mary in his late model Jaguar. He doesn't act like a bogan, doesn't antagonize his nephews, and generally presents as a jovial, amicable, clean-living guy.

But from behind McCullough's disarming facade there emanates some very dubious claims. I started to smell the pungent odour of pharma-sponsored allopathic bullpoop, extra-strength version, when McCullough claimed toxic statin drugs reduced the risk of dementia and Alzheimers Disease.

Anyone who even pretends to care about health and medical freedom has no business praising toxic and ineffective garbage like cholesterol-lowering statins.

To make his claim, McCullough had to ignore the substantial volume of clinical trial evidence showing both low cholesterol and cholesterol reduction via statins not only fail to prevent dementia and Alzheimers Disease, but often result in cognitive and neurological harms. Cholesterol is an integral component of your brain and nerve sheaths - claiming you can prevent cognitive and neurological decline by lowering cholesterol is like claiming your car will drive further and longer after you drain half the fuel from the tank. It is an inherently absurd and false thing to claim.

McCullough, however, appears to have no issue with making inherently absurd and false claims. Because the RCT evidence wouldn't support his beloved statins, he instead based his untenable claims entirely upon a a 2022 meta-analysis of epidemiological studies by Italian researchers - two of whom have extensive ties to pharma companies, including cholesterol-lowering drug manufacturers like Pfizer, Merck, Amgen, Servier and Sanofi-Regeneron.

Just brilliant.

No matter how you wish to frame it, McCullough has benefited handsomely from the Big Pharma buy-an-opinion system in which ‘thought leaders’ are lavishly remunerated via speaking fees and ‘consulting’ arrangements. Since 2016, he has received over US $1.6 million in pharma largesse.


While McCullough’s declared pharma funding did decline during the peak years of Covidiocy, this was replaced with a lucrative new career of worldwide COVID speaking engagements and supplement sales. For a guy who was allegedly ‘cancelled,’ McCullough sure got a lot of coverage. Others like Michael Yeadon, the former Pfizer executive with the pelotas to come out and identify the poison prick campaign for what it really was - a mass homicide event predicated upon a non-existent virus - curiously got nowhere near the exposure enjoyed by McCullough (and fellow pandemic shills like Kirsch and Malone).

McCullough enthusiastically pimps what he calls “The McCullough Protocol.” This protocol includes his highly-priced “Spike Support” supplement (US $64.99 for a 60-day supply) which contains the following substances (bold emphases added):

Nattokinase (“a proteolytic enzyme with fibrinolytic (anti-clotting) effects, that may maintain a healthy immune system”)

Dandelion root (“may support cellular defense”)

Selenium (“may help reduce stress, aiding the body repair itself and recover”)

Black sativa extract (“may facilitate cellular repair”)

Green tea extract (“may add defenses at the cellular level through scavenging for free radicals”)

Irish sea moss (“is mineral-rich and may help rebuild damaged tissue and muscle”)

It’s hard to think of a flimsier basis for promoting this motley array of ingredients as a vaxxx detox formula. Using the same rationale for Irish sea moss (“is mineral-rich and may help rebuild damaged tissue and muscle”), one might as well recommend a thick, juicy steak as a “Spike” detox.

None of these ingredients have been shown in anything resembling a controlled scientific study to help ameliorate post-vaxxxine injuries. Green tea extract, in fact, has a solid track record of causing liver toxicity and is a great supplement to avoid the hell out of - a woefully ignored issue I discuss in detail here.

McCullough’s Recent Spike in Dubious Gene Therapy Claims

On April 19, 2023, McCullough posted a brief Substack about a paper by Matthew Halma, Jessica Rose and Theresa Lawrie titled "The Novelty of mRNA Viral Vaccines and Potential Harms: A Scoping Review."

McCullough repeated the paper’s title as headline for his own article, adding his own byline of “mRNA Off to a Bad Start but Future may be Brighter.”


McCullough’s article employed the same “we must keep an open mind, remain balanced, and not paint issues with a broad brush” shtick that he employed in his hopelessly wrong statin article.

I agree it’s good to keep an open mind - but not so open that your brains fall out.

“The Halma paper,” claims McCullough, “points out that safe mRNA products are possible.”

Here’s what the paper actually said:

“If harm can be exclusively and conclusively attributed to the spike protein, then it is possible that future mRNA vaccines expressing other antigens will be safe.” (Bold emphasis added)

McCullough apparently couldn’t find it within himself to neither highlight nor discuss the statement that immediately followed:

“If harms are attributable to the platform itself, then regardless of the toxicity, or lack thereof, of the antigen to be expressed, the platform may be inherently unsafe, pending modification.” (Bold emphasis added)

The McCullough interpretation makes it sound as if safe and effective mRNA drugs are just around the corner; what Halma et al wrote is a far more heavily qualified statement that speculates a possible scenario in which the drugs could be considered safe. If that specific condition isn’t met, they posit that the technology may be inherently dangerous, period.

It’s rather precious to bang on about the importance of maintaining a balanced viewpoint while leaving that key detail out…

So is mRNA technology inherently flawed, or is it a brilliant idea that just needs a few wrinkles ironed out before it starts saving millions of lives?

After more than 30 years of research, mRNA technology failed to produce even a single, safe effective drug that made it through mandatory Phase 3 trials and garnered a New Drug Approval. Heck, none of this junk ever made it past the Phase 2 stage. The only reason the COVID gene therapies made it to market was thanks to the monumental scam known as COVID, which allowed the criminals in charge to declare a sniffles ‘emergency’ and rush the drugs through via the “Emergency Use Authorization” Trojan horse.

The aftermath of the gene therapy rollout has been untold misery, morbidity and a global excess death toll estimated, at last count, between 18 and 35 million people. The kind of body count that would make Genghis Khan and Chairman Mao proud.

To say mRNA is “Off to a Bad Start” is a monumental understatement.

To say the future for mRNA technology may be brighter when that technology is still under the control of the same GloboPedo-Pharma-Military-Industrial Complex that bought us the COVID psy-op and Poison Prick democide fills me with about as much optimism as a family of crackheads moving in next door.

Using Dodgy Novel Gene Therapies to Counter the Effects of Dodgy Novel Gene Therapies

McCullough isn’t letting up on the idea that highly problematic gene therapies could be just what the doctor ordered.

Recently, he and colleagues Nicolas Hulscher and Diane Marotta published a preprint titled “Strategic Deactivation of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines: New Applications for RIBOTACs and siRNA Therapy.”

According to McCullough, Hulscher and Marotta: "The rapid development and authorization of mRNA vaccines by Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) and Moderna (mRNA-1273) in 2020 marked a significant milestone in human mRNA product application, overcoming previous obstacles such as mRNA instability and immunogenicity."

Let's be perfectly clear: The rapid development and authorization of mRNA vaccines was not a triumph over previous developmental obstacles, it was the triumph of untold evil and corruption over the traditional regulatory requirements and safeguards that are supposed to protect us against dangerous and ineffective drugs.

It was a triumph over the last remnants of mainstream investigative reporting, whose practitioners have been almost entirely replaced by unthinking morons who’ll do and write whatever their Globalist-controlled employers tell them to.

It was confirmation that the self-aggrandizing West is not a conglomerate of freedom-protecting democracies, but a centrally-controlled constellation of financially and/or sexually compromised politicians, bureaucrats and billionaire deviants who hold us in sheer contempt and not only wish to remove our freedoms but our very existence on this planet.


A few sentences later, McCullough et al effectively acknowledge that obstacle-crushing mRNA technology isn’t so great after all, when they write:

“The stability of mRNA vaccines, their pervasive distribution, and the longevity of the encapsulated mRNA along with unlimited production of the damaging and potentially lethal Spike (S) protein call for strategies to mitigate potential adverse effects.”

In plain English: “The mRNA gene therapies are dangerous garbage that have caused untold illness and death. We need an effective strategy to treat the poor bastards who have been injected with this poison.”

It seems McCullough’s Spike Support is about as effective as a fishnet condom, because nowhere in their paper do he and his co-authors discuss it as a potential remedy. Instead, the strategies they devote their paper to are gene therapies known as “small interfering RNA” (siRNA) and “ribonuclease targeting chimeras” (RIBOTACs).

Yep, more synthetic RNA technology. Because we all know how well that worked out last time.

These Brave New World genetic concoctions, posit the authors, may help counter the damage done by the small interfering psychopaths and “useless eater”-targeting Chimeras behind The Great Culling (in Greek mythology, the Chimera was a monstrous fire-breathing hybrid creature).

Except McCullough et al don’t acknowledge The Great Culling, because they continue to regurgitate the insulting fairy tale that COVID was a genuine pandemic caused by the never-isolated and non-existent Sars-Cov-2.



Some examples of highly toxic Australian and American fire-breathing Chimeras and small interfering psychopaths.
Silencers: Not Just for Guns Anymore

At this point you’re probably asking, “What the heck are siRNA and RIBOTACs?”

Discovered in 1998, small interfering RNAs, sometimes known as short interfering RNAs or silencing RNAs, are noncoding RNAs with important roles in gene regulation.

The initially double-stranded siRNA gets into cells, becomes part of what is dubbed the RNA-Induced Silencing Complex (RISC), and is unwound to form single stranded siRNA. It's now fit for duty to go out and find a complementary mRNA. Once the single stranded siRNA binds to its target mRNA, it induces mRNA cleavage.

No, it doesn't give the mRNA a breast lift; "cleavage" in the world of science means to cut something up. Don't ask me why they don't just say that outright.

Anyways, once the mRNA is cut, it is recognized as abnormal by the cell. The cell goes into garbage disposal mode and further degrades the mRNA, which prevents translation of the mRNA into amino acids and then proteins. This is what the gene "silencing" and “interfering” terminology refers to. Like a mafia informant who gets brutally shanked and can no longer talk to the feds, siRNA-sliced mRNA can no longer translate its encoded instructions into functioning proteins.

Sorry, that was a somewhat gory analogy. You’ll have to excuse me, I'm back in Australia at the moment, a gray, soulless Masonic pit of substance abuse and mental illness that is run, policed and adjudicated by some of GloboPedo's most enthusiastically obedient deviants.

But I digress.

And RIBOTACs? What the hell are they?

RIBOTACs are a new, man-made class of small molecules that have the potential to target diverse types of RNAs. In 2018, Scripps Institute researchers reported they were able to modify a small molecule to recruit a nuclease to a specific gene transcript, triggering its destruction.

In plain English: Researchers continue to develop ‘novel’ ways to screw around with your genes.

McCullough and co-authors speculate that it might be possible to develop siRNA and RIBOTAC gene therapies that will act as little vaxxx mRNA-munching Pacmen (or Pacpersons/PacTheys/PacThems/ma vaffanculo to all you anally-retentive, pronoun-confused PC-types).

Sounds great, but there’s a wee problem.

Warn the authors, "despite their numerous advantages, substantial obstacles must be surmounted to effectively harness the power of siRNAs. Barriers to the successful implementation of siRNAs as a therapeutic intervention include their susceptibility to degradation by endogenous nucleases in serum, rapid renal clearance, activation of the innate immune system, plasma protein sequestration and entrapment by the reticuloendothelial system (RES), membrane impermeability, endosomal entrapment and off-target effects."

In inglés normal: This strategy is purely speculative and theoretical. There is no actual evidence siRNA and RIBOTACs can effectively treat vaxxx injuries. In fact, when you look at the research closely, there is no solid evidence these technologies can treat anything effectively. To top it all off, these technologies presently have numerous shortcomings that preclude their efficacy and may lead to "off-target effects", which is a polite way of saying nasty-ass side effects.

As proof this fledgling technology could actually work, McCullough and co offer two examples of current siRNA drugs.

Yup, this stuff is already appearing on the market thanks to the industry-funded shonks at the FDA.

The first is Inclisiran (trade name Leqvio®) which has received FDA approval as a treatment for the utter non-disease of hypercholesterolemia. It’s very important to ‘treat’ this non-disease effectively, because studies repeatedly show that in over-60s (the demographic in which most heart attacks occur), people with high cholesterol levels (including the so-called “bad” LDL) outlive those with low levels.

Did you forget there was a Great Culling going on?

The authors write “seven clinical trials have shown this siRNA therapy to be safe and well-tolerated for long-term administration.” It allegedly did this in conflict of interest-riddled studies conducted by original developer Alnylam Pharmaceuticals and Novartis, which licensed the rights to inclisiran from the former.

Mean duration of this "long-term administration" was 2.8 years. During that time, inclirisan completely failed to show any tangible clinical benefit.

Even the hopelessly corrupt FDA, which approved this junk, quietly admits “The effect of Leqvio on cardiovascular morbidity (suffering from a disease) and mortality (death) has not been determined.”

In other words, taking inclirisan means an increased risk of adverse drug effects and no established health benefit. The only people guaranteed to benefit from this product are those who sell it, at a cost of US $6,500 a year.

Every single one of the 11 authors of the post hoc analysis McCullough and co cite as evidence of inclirisan being Safe & Effective™ have lengthy links to Big Pharma. Five, in fact, were employees of Novartis at the time the analysis was performed. All the authors enjoyed financial largesse from an array of drug companies that included … take a big deep breath … Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, The Medicines Company, AstraZeneca, Amgen, Pfizer, DalCor Pharmaceuticals, Kowa, Corvidia Therapeutics, Esperion, Genentech, OMEICOS, Novo Nordisk, LIB Therapeutics, Daiichi-Sankyo, New Amsterdam Pharma, TenSixteen Bio, Berlin-Chemie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Singulex, Abbott, Roche Diagnostics, Dr Beckmann Pharma, Bayer, HLS, Merck/Merck Sharp and Dohme, Aegerion Pharmaceuticals, Cipla, Algorithm, Zuelling Pharma, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Cerenis Therapeutics, Akcea Therapeutics, Silence Therapeutics, Takeda, AbbVie and Resverlogix.

In addition, one of the authors, Gregory G. Schwartz, is co-holder of a patent titled "Methods for Reducing Cardiovascular Risk." The patent revolves around the monoclonal antibody drug alirocumab which, like inclirisan, is a cholesterol-lowering drug whose mechanism of action is inhibition of a gene known as PCSK9.

Like inclirisan, alirocumab does not save lives but comes with all the usual side effects attendant with cholesterol-lowering.

Like inclirisan, alicrocumab is an out-and-out rort. When alirocumab and fellow useless PCSK9 inhibitor evolocumab hit the market in 2015, the retail cost was an absurd $14,000 per year. After many health insurance providers refused to pay for them, their price tag magically dropped by 60%.

The amount of trust I have in such a conflict of interest-plagued panel of pharma-owned researchers when they claim the ineffective inclirisan is “safe and well-tolerated”?

Absolute zero.

Indeed, when you pull up the Supplementary Material and scroll down to page 23, you quickly learn why the all-cause mortality figure wasn’t included in the analysis’ main paper.

During a mean exposure period of 2.8 years, 24 (0.7%) of inclirisan subjects died, compared to 3 (0.2%) of placebo subjects during an average exposure period of 1.35 years. When calculated in terms of "exposure-adjusted incidence rates," the death rates in the inclirisan and placebo groups were 0.24% and 0.11%, respectively.

In other words, the "safe and well-tolerated" inclirisan more than doubled the death rate when compared to placebo.

Patisiran Poppycock

The other drug that McCullough et al put forward as an example of "safe and well-tolerated" siRNA treatment is patisiran (Onpattro®), which received FDA approval in 2018 for the treatment of polyneuropathy in patients with hereditary transthyretin-mediated amyloidosis.

Just like inclirisan, the clinical evidence supposedly showing this drug to be hunky dory is the same old suspicious rot produced by the hopelessly flawed and demonstrably corrupt system in which drug companies conduct their own trials, get approval from their FDA buddies, pay ghost-writing outfits to draft the application and journal papers, while the rest of us are supposed to stick our heads up our keesters and pretend the drug really was shown to be safe and efficacious.

The first published Phase 3 trial claiming safety and efficacy for patisiran appeared in the New World Order England Journal of Medicine in July 2018.

In that paper, Adams et al reported the initial results of the “APOLLO” trial which, of course, was funded by Alnylam Pharmaceuticals. The study's lead author is David Adams, who has received "consulting honoraria from Isis, Alnylam, received fees from Pfizer for participating to symposium, is participating as principal investigator for trials with ISIS and Alnylam."

We learn from the paper’s full text that “The first author and sponsor-employed authors prepared the first draft with editorial assistance provided by Adelphi Communications, under contract with Alnylam Pharmaceuticals.”

Adelphi Communications is one of the countless “communication” outfits contracted by drug companies that do everything from oversee the recruitment and day-to-day operation of clinical trials to ghost-writing journal papers. Like most businesses in the private sector, the success of these companies revolves around pleasing their customers. The way to please drug companies is not by telling the truth about their dangerous and toxic products - it is by chopping and changing the data and writing up journal papers in a manner that portrays these products as safe and effective.

A close read of the paper raises eyebrows.

Partirisan, claim the authors, fared better than placebo on every outcome.

The researchers also claim the incidence of “any adverse event” was identical between groups (97% each). They also claimed a lower rate of adverse cardiovascular events in the partirisan group. Hold that thought - we’ll return to it later.

The most important outcome of all is overall mortality. The researchers report that seven patisiran patients (5%) and six placebo patients (8%) died during the 18-month trial.

In 2020, the APOLLO researchers published another paper reporting on the 225 subjects randomized to receive either patisiran or placebo. In this paper, we are told 6 (4%) patisiran subjects died at 18 months, compared to 4 (5%) of placebo subjects.

In 2022, researchers published results from the HELIOS-A trial. The randomized, Phase 3, open-label (non-blinded) study enrolled 164 patients; 42 received patisiran, 77 served as a control subjects, and 122 received Alnylam's new wonder siRNA concoction called vutrisiran.

By way of remarkable coincidence, patisiran now displayed a near-identical death rate to placebo (7.1% vs 7.8%), and a marginally higher rate of serious and severe adverse events. By way of further remarkable coincidence, the new viturisan with its fresher patent protection produced a mere 1.6% death rate and a far lower rate of adverse events.

Amazing.

Or complete bollocks, depending on how schooled you are in the conduct of Big Pharma and the researchers it owns.

In 2023, the results of the Alnylam-funded "APOLLO-B" trial were published. The main paper states that in the 12-month double-blind period, 4 deaths (2.2%) occurred in the patisiran group and 10 (5.6%) occurred in the placebo group.

It then goes on to say that in the "safety analysis," there were five deaths (3%) in the patisiran group, and eight deaths (4%) in the placebo group.

Seeking an explanation for these disparate figures, I opened up the trial's supplementary data. It was there I learned that in the patisiran group, four patients died during participation in the study and one died after withdrawing from the study. In the placebo group, four patients died during participation in the study and four died after study withdrawal.

In other words, an equal number of patisiran and placebo subjects died while participating in the APOLLO-B trial.

We also learn in the supplementary material that "Hospitalizations for any cause" were virtually identical in the two groups. In contrast to the original APOLLO trial, marginally higher rates of cardiac and cerebrovascular events occurred in the patisiran group.

In summary, the only data claiming patisiran (and vutrisiran) benefits transthyretin amyloidosis patients just happens to come from trials conducted by the drug’s developer, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, and the pharma-friendly researchers on its payroll. The suspect data from these trials fails to show any clear mortality benefit, which makes one wonder what the death data would’ve looked like had the trials been conducted by independent researchers with no vested interest in the results.

Useless inclirisan and doubtful patisiran, it bears reiterating, are the two drugs put forward by McCullough et al as successful examples of siRNA technology.

Lipid Nanopoison

Now here’s the real cracker.

Patisiran, which McCullough et al present as an example of a “safe and well-tolerated” siRNA product, contains lipid nanoparticles (LNPs).

As do the most widely-deployed COVID gene therapies; namely, the Pfizer and Moderna kill shots.

McCullough, you will recall, has made a lucrative name for himself as a staunch anti-mRNA vaxxx commentator. After reading the paper he co-authored with Hulscher and Marotta, I began to wonder if he suffered transient global amnesia (a known statin side effect) when drafting the paper.

That paper lavishes praise upon LNPs and how they admirably transformed the useless and dangerous gene therapies that failed to garner approval into useless and dangerous gene therapies that garnered emergency use authorizations. Okay, that’s not exactly how they described it, but that’s exactly what happened.

Their incessant praise of LNPs as an “adjuvant” that could help do the same for vaxxxMRNA-gobbling siRNA drugs is nothing short of mind-boggling.

“Adjuvant,” by the way, is ScienceSpeak for a toxic substance disguised as an ingredient that allegedly improves the ‘immunogenicity’ of a vaccine. Anyone who believes injecting people with stuff like thimerosal, squalene or polyethylene glycol is truly going to benefit their immunity should probably start shopping around for a brain transplant.

Way back in December 2020, within a week of the Pfizer kill shot being unleashed in the US, the LNP polyethylene glycol (PEG) was named as a likely cause of life-threatening anaphylaxis that occurred after injection with the democide drug.

The issue, of course, has been swept under the carpet and PEG remains in the poison darts. As researchers recently pointed out, no studies have been undertaken to characterize the inflammatory reactions induced by the PEG-containing 'vaccine' platform. So the researchers tested a lipid nanoparticle formula made by Acuitas Therapeutics, who licenses its LNP technology to Pfizer.

They gave mice the Acuitas poison formula, via intradermal and intramuscular injection, which "led to rapid and robust inflammatory responses, characterized by massive neutrophil infiltration, activation of diverse inflammatory pathways, and production of various inflammatory cytokines and chemokines."

In Queen's English: This most questionable substance caused these most unfortunate mice an inordinate amount of physiological bother.

In fact, when the mice were forced to ingest this junk via their snouts, they experienced an inordinate amount of death.

"The same dose of LNP delivered intranasally," noted the researchers, "led to similar inflammatory responses in the lung and resulted in a high mortality rate."

Coming soon: Intranasal vaccines with extra-strength LNP, brought to you by the friendly megalomaniacs at GloboPedo!

In Summary

For a guy who supposedly wants you to be healthy, Peter McCullough has a bizarre habit of recommending toxic pharma junk and awarding praise to dubious gene therapies that are light years away from proving themselves safe and effective.

There are two possible reasons for this.

One is that he is not very good at reading research and, like many doctors and cardiologists, is simply a brainwashed product of the pharma-owned and -operated medical system.

The other possibility is that he is controlled opposition carefully packaged to look like your respectable Uncle Ronald. Instead of calling out the pandemic scam, he in fact helps pave the way for future shamdemics and shambolic gene therapy rollouts by proffering favourable and optimistic commentary on what has so far proven to be a truly nefarious and dangerous field of ‘science.’

For McCullough devotees offended that I dare mention the second possibility, I have this piece of advice: If you don’t want McCullough to be perceived as a possible controlled opposition figure, maybe ask him to stop acting like one.

In the meantime, Mike Yeadon for President! Oh, wait, he’s from the UK. Damnit America, looks like you’re stuck with either Captain Warp Speed or Joe the Kiddy Fondler. As citizen of a country currently led by a vewy angwee* pwime minista who has been known to frequent Thai “Happy Ending” massage parlours to rewieve the stwess of fedwal powitics, I feel your pain.

*PM Elmer Fudd is still vewy angwee dat wascawwy Austwalians voted ovawelmingwee against his pawly expwained “Voice” wefewendum. PM Fudd had a wot widing on dat wefewendum, and his land-gwabbing gwobawist masters are vewy upset dat it fayled.

Share

https://substack.com/home/post/p-145590321

Netizens criticize Calvin Cheng’s controversial ‘wealthy eat meat, masses dine on insects’ remark
Netizens criticized Calvin Cheng for sarcastically suggesting that during a food crisis, the wealthy would eat meat while others would be left with insects. They questioned if he had tried insects himself and criticized his remarks as perpetuating a class divide, implying the wealthy could afford meat while commoners should settle for insects.

Yee Loon12 July 2024

SINGAPORE: Netizens were taken aback by Calvin Cheng, a Singaporean businessman and former Nominated Member of Parliament, for his recent controversial and sarcastic remarks on the Singapore Food Agency’s (SFA) approval of 16 species of insects for consumption in Singapore.

The approved species include crickets, grasshoppers, locusts, mealworms, and silkworms.

In his comment, Mr Cheng suggested that during a food crisis, the wealthy would still have access to meat, while the masses and heartlanders would be left with mealworms at kopitiams and hawker centres, facetiously labelling it as “good news!”

His suggestion that insects could serve as a nutritional source for ordinary Singaporeans, while meat might become scarce during a crisis, was swiftly criticized by netizens.

They questioned whether Mr Cheng had ever tried insects himself and pointed out a perceived sense of entitlement in his statement, which implied a class divide by suggesting that commoners should eat insects while the wealthy enjoy meat.

SFA approves 16 insect species for food

On 8 July, SFA released a statement outlining the new regulatory framework for the import of insects and insect products for both human consumption and as animal feed.

SFA emphasized its commitment to food safety in Singapore, developing specific guidelines due to the emerging insect industry and the novelty of insects as food.

“With immediate effect, SFA will allow the import of insects and insect products belonging to species that have been assessed to be of low regulatory concern. These insects and insect products can be used for human consumption or as animal feed for food producing animals, ” SFA said.

SFA stated that importers or insect farmers must comply with guidelines, verifying insects are farmed in regulated establishments with food safety controls, not harvested from the wild.

Insects not among SFA’s approved 16 species must undergo evaluation to confirm their safety for consumption.

Companies selling pre-packed food containing insects must label their products accordingly, enabling consumers to make informed purchasing decisions.

Insect products will undergo rigorous food safety testing; those failing to meet SFA standards will not be permitted for sale.

Commenting on the latest SFA announcement, Mr. Cheng emphasized the critical need for food self-sufficiency in Singapore, particularly highlighted during crisis.

He pointed out that Singapore faced food shortages during the pandemic when Malaysia halted poultry exports and Thailand ceased rice exports.

Mr Cheng acknowledged that while vertical farming could potentially achieve vegetable self-sufficiency in Singapore, the challenge lies in rearing animals for meat due to limited land availability.

He proposed that insects, rich in protein and easily farmable in Singapore, could serve as an alternative protein source during food crises.

“During a food crisis , the wealthy would still eat meat. But the masses and heartlanders will be able dine on meal worms at kopitiams and hawkers centres. ”

“This is good news !” He wrote.

In response, some netizens questioned whether Mr Cheng’s remark was meant sarcastically.

Criticism also surfaced, suggesting that Mr Cheng implied a class divide by suggesting that only the wealthy would continue consuming meat during a food crisis, thereby perpetuating an economic disparity where affluent individuals can afford traditional protein sources while others are relegated to insect-based diets.





A comment questioned whether Mr Cheng was insinuating that those in high positions are disconnected from the realities faced by ordinary Singaporeans.

This comment implied that such individuals may not fully comprehend or empathize with the challenges encountered by the general population.



Discussions revolved around the cultural and psychological barriers to accepting insects as a food source.

Some highlighted that while insects might be nutritious, overcoming societal aversion to them would pose a significant challenge.

One netizen expressed concerns about the safety of consuming insects.

In response, Mr Cheng advised that insects are healthier than animals and suggested that the public would soon be compelled to adopt insects as a food source.



While netizens acknowledged that insect consumption is common in some countries and that Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) uses insects such as cockroaches, they also suggested exploring alternative protein sources that do not carry the same perceived risks, such as plant-based proteins or lab-grown meat.





Perception of insects as exotic and niche among consumers

A comment made a valid point that insects might be considered exotic and appealing mainly to adventurous eaters.

The netizen believed that the majority of consumers would not willingly spend money on insect-based food.

He suggested using Singapore’s offshore islands to grow crops and rear animals, and mentioned that vertical farming could also be beneficial.

In response, Mr Cheng noted the limitation of space and quipped, “Only insects for the masses.”



https://gutzy.asia/2024/07/12/netizens-criticize-calvin-chengs-controversial-wealthy-eat-meat-masses-dine-on-insects-remark/

Gene Therapy to Correct the Damage Done by Gene Therapy. What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
Dr. Peter McCullough has been a courageous voice shouting out the horrifying dangers of mRNA jabs. Now he wants to play with your RNA to fix messing with your RNA. No, No, No, No!!!!!

Rima E Laibow MD
Something very, very wicked this way comes, supposedly to fix the last wicked thing that this way came.

Share

Dr. Peter McCullough, an early and widely sung hero in calling out the dangers of the Covid mRNA jabs (and a man who paid heavily in his academic and professional life for his bravery) recently (May 29, 2024) submitted a paper called “Strategic Deactivation of mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines: New Applications for RIBOTACs and siRNA Therapy”,

The paper proposes that a special type of modified, engineered and altered micro RNA, also known as “siRNA”, to undo the damage caused by the unexpected persistence and surprisingly wide distribution of the damaging and potentially deadly mRNA of the gene therapy jabs licensed by the FDA and deployed by Pfizer and Moderna. That damage, the paper makes clear, was not fully tested for before approval of the shots, has been clinically observed but only partially studied and is neither, fully understood nor fully characterized.

So, in simple terms, the use of lipid nanoparticles and structural modifications caused the foreign novel mRNA to spread, linger and negatively impact the recipient across a wide and very dangerous spectrum of impacts.

Now, according to Dr. McCullough and his team, there is a wonderful new potential option: make two brand new kinds of modified, engineered and altered mRNA structures and destroyer molecules and stick them into the body and let them fix what the other poorly tested, irrationally dangerous bioweapons do to bodies.

They, too, use lipid nanoparticles and enter the cells but, presumably, not the genetic material (really? Didn’t we hear that before? and didn’t it turn out to be, at the very least, an error? And, in many cases, a disastrous and/or fatal error?)

Leave a comment

On April 19, 2023, Dr. McCullough referenced in his substack, Courageous Discourse, a widely quoted scoping review of the mRNA vaccines called, “The Novelty of mRNA Viral Vaccines and Potential Harms: A Scoping Review”, In it, Drs. Halma, Rose and Lawrie looked at the possible positive uses of mRNA technology even though its first clinical deployment has been a biological disaster.

Dr. McCullough introduced the article by noting, “The Halma paper points out that safe mRNA products are possible. For example, properly designed mRNA coding for normal proteins that are deficient or ones that are sufficiently humanized and not recognized by the body as foreign could indeed become part of the future pharmacopeia. But there is no doubt that the first use of mRNA on a mass, indiscriminate scale has been a disaster with the COVID-19 vaccine campaign.”

On January 7, 2023, Sasha Latypova posted a YouTube video documenting the development of the COVID mRNA vaccines as bioweapons by the Department of Defense. Dr. McCullough has raised the same issues, suggesting that COVID-19 vaccines could be considered as part of a bioweapons program.

Quick disclaimer: I am not a specialist in genetics, virology or immunology. I am a well-educated, iconoclastic critical thinker who has practiced outside the box, drug free psychiatry and medicine for 54 years. My clinical expertise is in understanding connections, root causes and their impacts and then finding ways to fix the basic problem(s) which caused the mis/mal/disfunction in the first place.

That means that my mind works best looking at both the very big, interconnected web sort of picture and, at the same time, the minute, nuts and bolts mechanistic picture, too. So I am both a specialist and a generalist in various areas at the same time.

But there is always a level of deep specialization that I simply have to take on faith.

Highly technical statements about the manufacture and function of these molecules are not ones that I can evaluate with any level of precision so when the article states, for example, “Endogenous mRNA exits the nucleus to localize in the cytosol where the level of gene expression is mediated by rates of mRNA synthesis and degradation. The mRNA decay pathway is initiated via Pan2 Pan3 and Ccr4 Not complex mediated deadenylation. Subsequently, the mRNA can be processed through Xrn1 or exosome mediated degradation. That is, 5’ 3’ degradation occurs when the Lsm1 7/Pat 1 complex binds to the 3’ end and recruits the Dcp1 Dcp2 decapping complex thus exposing the 5’ end to Xrn1 enzymatic activity. Alternatively, 3’ 5’ degradation by the cytoplasmic exosome occurs without decapping. Based upon thousands of transcript decay rates, Yang et al. estimate that the median mRNA half-life in human cells is 10h. Interestingly, both gene function and sequence motifs are correlated with human mRNA decay rates”

I cannot argue with, or agree with, the data and assertions presented here. But I can, as an intelligent and reasonably well-informed scientist and physician, question the premises being set forth here because it is remarkably simple:

The use of the bioweapon jabs, developed to be bioweapons and therefore to damage and kill, which is, after all, what a bioweapon is supposed to do, when these bioweapons were misrepresented as vaccines, commonly understood to prevent damage and death, and authorized as the ONLY treatment or cure for the deadly pandemic threat has resulted in the most successful genocide in human history.

Dr. Dennis Rancourt says that the deployment of these bioweapons has so far killed between 17-20 million people worldwide, at its most conservative number. Dr. James Thorp says that their deployment has, all things considered, resulted in the deaths of about a half a billion people and we are certainly not home yet when it comes to the final count of iatrogenocidal deaths (that is, doctor delivered deaths).

The mRNA bioweapon, specifically, injected into the bodies of billions of people with inadequate testing for a health product, but perfectly adequate testing for a bioweapon, is killing us in ways both known, emerging and unknown.

So, clearly, the antidote, the cure, the fix, for shooting a wildly toxic wild card gene therapy into the disposable population of the planet is to shoot another untested, unknown, cooked-up in a laboratory witches brew of gene therapy nightmares.

What could possibly go wrong? If killing people is the goal, not much.

I do not want to speculate on why Dr. McCullough would be pushing these ideas. The possibilities are very, very upsetting. I cannot believe that as knowledgeable and scientifically sophisticated doctor and researcher as Dr. McCullough would simply assume that another go-round of the world tragedy of a massive disaster in a syringe would somehow turn out just fine.

I cannot believe that he would sincerely advocate for more of the toxin killing vast numbers of people to be injected because it MIGHT do more good than harm.

I cannot believe that he would want to use a potentially helpful, or potentially disastrous genetic manipulation, complete with lipid nano particles and what sounds to me for all the world like a fully or semi-self assembling nano technology innovation on a population already dying from the use of pretty similar technology presented as a boon but which was - and is - really a bioweapon.

Either I have missed something very basic and very important here or Dr. McCullough is working off another agenda than the one that he has positioned himself to be focused on.

I am deeply distressed by this turn of events.

Whichever the case is for Dr. McCullough, the fact is that the bioweapon is part of the strategy of the Death Machine currently arrayed to, quite literally, destroy humanity. That killing machine is a private club of Unelected Nobodies, the United Nations.

And its “health” apparatus, the WHO, is a servomotor, not the driving force of the monster.

Thus, in my opinion, as awful as the WHO is, and it really is quite terrible, it is merely a pimple on the ass of the monster. Instead of trying to empty the pus out of it, how about we kill the damn monster!

Right now, there is a bill before the US Congress called the Disengaging Entirely From the UN Debacle Act of 2023 (HR 6645/ S 3428). And we need to pressure Congress so that they do not dare NOT pass it.

I estimate it will take 10 million people riding their freedom mice using the Https://PreventGenocide2030.org website. It is quick, it is easy and it is essential.

Please go there now, take the action and then make sure you have told everyone not only that you have taken the action, but how they can join the movement to make sure that the US and its allies leave the UIN completely.

When you read the Legal Memo on that page, you will see that no country in the world actually has a valid treaty obligation with the UN Death Machine so what we are supporting with the US’ determination to exit the UN, is critically important in every country around the world.

I have a simple mind. I do not understand how injecting pus and poison into a living thing is supposed to protect the living thing against some disease or other and actually help make you healthier.

But as bad as vaccine practice is, this introduction of a novel mess-around-with-the-basic-operations-of-the-cells-and-genes to make things better that were caused by pretty much the same sort of malfeasance makes no sense to me in any way and scares the living daylights out of me.

So, Dr. McCullough, what am I missing here? Please tell me I am wrong about your focus, your agenda and your intentions. You have been inspirational to me. I would hate to lose you.

1
2
The Novelty of mRNA Viral Vaccines and Potential Harms: A Scoping Review (substack.com)

3
The Novelty of mRNA Viral Vaccines and Potential Harms: A Scoping Review (substack.com)

4
Halma, M.T.J.; Rose, J.; Lawrie, T. The Novelty of mRNA Viral Vaccines and Potential Harms: A Scoping Review. J 2023, 6, 220-235. https://doi.org/10.3390/j6020017

https://substack.com/home/post/p-145884915

PromptPro

Introduction


Question
Are you tired of language models generating repetitive and uninspired responses?

Just like a musician needs a variety of instruments to create a diverse range of melodies, language models require diverse prompts to generate unique and creative responses.
Meet Devin, a Generative Prompt Engineer (GPE) who revolutionizes language models by crafting prompts that encourage diverse and dynamic responses.

"Thanks to Devin's prompt engineering, our language model's responses are more creative and engaging than ever before." - Anissa Thomas

In this blog post, we'll explore how Generative Prompt Engineering can revolutionize language models and how skilled engineers like Devin can make it happen.
Ready to take your language model usage to the next level? Keep reading to learn more about the power of Generative Prompt Engineering (GPE).
Generative Prompt Engineering is a technique used to generate high-quality text using natural language processing (NLP) models.

Question
How can we generate more diverse and interesting responses from language models?

GPE can help by designing prompts that encourage language models to generate more diverse and creative responses. For example, GPE might experiment with using more open-ended prompts, providing more context or background information, or asking more thought-provoking questions.

The Impact of AI on the Future of Work

As artificial intelligence continues to advance, its impact on the labor market is becoming increasingly important to consider.

Diverse and creative responses in language models are critical because they enable the model to produce a range of unique and interesting outputs that are not limited to a single response. Language models that are capable of generating diverse and creative responses have a greater chance of producing outputs that are relevant and engaging to the user, thereby improving the user experience. In this section, we will discuss the importance of diverse and creative responses in language models.
Avoiding Repetitive Response
One of the primary benefits of diverse and creative responses in language models is the ability to avoid repetitive responses. Language models that produce the same or similar responses repeatedly can quickly become boring and uninteresting to the user. This can lead to a lack of engagement and a decrease in user satisfaction. By generating diverse and creative responses, language models can keep the user engaged and interested in the conversation.
Providing a Range of Options
Another benefit of diverse and creative responses in language models is the ability to provide a range of options to the user. This can be especially useful in situations where the user is looking for information or assistance. For example, a language model that is capable of providing multiple solutions to a problem can help the user find the solution that works best for them. By providing a range of options, language models can also help to build trust with the user by demonstrating that they are capable of providing useful and relevant information.
Personalization
Diverse and creative responses in language models can also help to personalize the conversation with the user. By generating responses that are tailored to the user's interests and preferences, language models can create a more engaging and enjoyable conversation. This can also lead to increased user satisfaction and loyalty.
Enhancing Creativity
Finally, diverse and creative responses in language models can help to enhance creativity. Language models that are capable of generating unique and interesting responses can inspire the user to think more creatively and explore new ideas. This can be especially useful in situations where the user is looking for inspiration or new perspectives.
Overall, diverse and creative responses in language models are critical because they can help to avoid repetitive responses, provide a range of options, personalize the conversation, and enhance creativity. By generating unique and interesting responses, language models can keep the user engaged and interested in the conversation, leading to increased user satisfaction and loyalty. As language models continue to evolve, the ability to generate diverse and creative responses will become even more important.

Why You Should Learn About Generative Prompt Engineering
Discover how Generative Prompt Engineering can help you create innovative content, save time and costs, personalize your communication with customers, and advance your career.
Generative Prompt Engineering is an emerging field that combines natural language processing, machine learning, and creativity to generate new and original content based on prompts or cues. The field has been gaining popularity in recent years due to its potential to automate content creation and enable personalized communication with customers. In this blog, we will discuss in detail why you should learn about Generative Prompt Engineering.
Innovative Content Creation
Generative Prompt Engineering is an innovative approach to content creation that can help you create unique and engaging content. Unlike traditional content creation methods, which often involve a lot of manual effort, Generative Prompt Engineering can produce a large amount of content in a short amount of time. The content generated through Generative Prompt Engineering can be used for a variety of purposes, including marketing, advertising, and content creation.
Time and Cost Efficiency
Generative Prompt Engineering can save you time and money by automating content creation tasks that would otherwise be done manually. This can be especially useful if you work in an industry where content creation is a frequent and time-consuming task. With Generative Prompt Engineering, you can produce content faster and at a lower cost, freeing up time and resources to focus on other aspects of your business.
Personalization
Generative Prompt Engineering can help you create personalized content tailored to your audience's interests and preferences. Personalization is becoming increasingly important in marketing and advertising as customers expect a more personalized experience. With Generative Prompt Engineering, you can create content that is relevant and engaging to your audience, which can lead to increased engagement and customer loyalty.
Career Opportunities
Generative Prompt Engineering is an emerging field with a growing demand for skilled professionals. Learning about Generative Prompt Engineering can help you stay ahead of the curve and open up new career opportunities. As more businesses start to adopt Generative Prompt Engineering, there will be a growing need for experts who can develop and implement these technologies.
Advancements in Artificial Intelligence
Generative Prompt Engineering is a prime example of the advancements being made in artificial intelligence and machine learning. Learning about Generative Prompt Engineering can help you understand the potential of these technologies and stay up-to-date with the latest developments. As the field continues to evolve, there will be more opportunities to apply these technologies to new areas and industries.
Learning about Generative Prompt Engineering can provide you with a range of benefits, from innovative content creation and time and cost efficiency to personalization, career opportunities, and a better understanding of artificial intelligence and machine learning. If you are interested in pursuing a career in the tech industry or looking to enhance your skills, learning about Generative Prompt Engineering is a great place to start.

Why Generative Prompt Engineering is an Essential Skill for Content Creators

In a world where content is king, Generative Prompt Engineering can help you create unique, personalized, and engaging content quickly and efficiently.

Generative Prompt Engineering is an innovative approach to content creation that combines natural language processing, machine learning, and creativity to generate new and original content based on prompts or cues. This field is becoming increasingly important as it has the potential to automate content creation and enable personalized communication with customers. Here are some reasons why content creators should learn about Generative Prompt Engineering:
Creating Unique and Engaging Content
Generative Prompt Engineering can help you create unique and engaging content that stands out from the competition. With traditional content creation methods, it can be challenging to come up with new and exciting ideas. Generative Prompt Engineering can produce a large amount of content in a short amount of time, allowing you to explore new ideas and produce content that is original and engaging. For example, if you're a social media marketer, you can use Generative Prompt Engineering to create unique and eye-catching social media posts that will capture your audience's attention.
Time and Cost Efficiency in Content Creation
Generative Prompt Engineering can save you time and money by automating content creation tasks that would otherwise be done manually. With Generative Prompt Engineering, you can produce content faster and at a lower cost, freeing up time and resources to focus on other aspects of your business. For example, if you're a blogger, you can use Generative Prompt Engineering to generate article topics and outlines, allowing you to spend more time researching and writing the actual content.
Personalization for Better Customer Engagement
Generative Prompt Engineering can help you create personalized content tailored to your audience's interests and preferences. Personalization is becoming increasingly important in marketing and advertising as customers expect a more personalized experience. With Generative Prompt Engineering, you can create content that is relevant and engaging to your audience, which can lead to increased engagement and customer loyalty. For example, if you're an email marketer, you can use Generative Prompt Engineering to generate personalized email subject lines and body text based on the recipient's preferences and behavior.
Career Opportunities in the Emerging Field of Generative Prompt Engineering
Generative Prompt Engineering is an emerging field with a growing demand for skilled professionals. Learning about Generative Prompt Engineering can help you stay ahead of the curve and make you a valuable asset to any company looking to improve their content creation process. There are a variety of career opportunities in this field, including positions in content creation, marketing, advertising, and technology. For example, companies like OpenAI and GPT-3 are actively seeking talented individuals with skills in Generative Prompt Engineering.
In full, Generative Prompt Engineering is an essential skill for content creators in today's digital age. It can help you create unique, personalized, and engaging content quickly and efficiently while also providing career opportunities in an emerging field. Whether you're a blogger, social media marketer, or email marketer, learning about Generative Prompt Engineering can help you take your content creation game to the next level.
Generative Prompt Engineering is an emerging field that combines natural language processing, machine learning, and creativity to generate new and original content based on prompts or cues. While the field is relatively new, it has its roots in a long history of research and development in natural language processing and machine learning.

A Moment in Time: Historical Context and Development of Generative Prompt Engineering
The development of natural language processing can be traced back to the 1950s, when researchers first began experimenting with computer algorithms that could understand and process human language. However, progress in this area was slow, and it wasn't until the 1990s that natural language processing began to gain wider attention and recognition.
During the 1990s, the focus of natural language processing research shifted towards statistical approaches and machine learning. This led to the development of algorithms that could analyze large datasets of text and identify patterns and relationships between words and phrases. These algorithms were used to build more sophisticated language models, which could be used to generate new text based on existing data.
In the early 2000s, this approach was further refined with the development of neural language models. These models used artificial neural networks to simulate the way the human brain processes language, and they were able to produce more natural-sounding text than earlier language models. This led to the development of applications like chatbots, virtual assistants, and automated customer service systems.
However, the text generated by these models was often generic and lacked creativity, leading researchers to explore new ways to generate more engaging and original content. This led to the emergence of Generative Prompt Engineering as a field of study and research.
Today, Generative Prompt Engineering is an area of active research and development, with new techniques and approaches being developed and tested all the time. One of the most important recent developments has been the use of generative adversarial networks (GANs) to generate text. GANs are a type of machine learning algorithm that can generate new text based on a set of prompts, and they are becoming increasingly popular in the field of natural language processing.
Overall, the historical context and development of Generative Prompt Engineering can be traced back to a long history of research and development in natural language processing and machine learning. The emergence of this field represents a new frontier in creative content generation, and it holds the potential to revolutionize the way we communicate and interact with technology.

How GPE Can Help in Creating Diverse and Creative Responses
Designing Prompts for Diverse and Creative Responses in GPE
The key to generating diverse and creative responses in language models lies in the design of prompts. In this segment, we will discuss how Generative Prompt Engineers (GPE) can design prompts to encourage language models to produce unique and engaging content.
Understanding the Importance of Prompts
The first step in designing effective prompts is understanding their importance in generating diverse and creative responses in language models. A prompt serves as a cue or stimulus for the language model to generate content. The quality and specificity of the prompt can greatly influence the type of response the model generates. A well-designed prompt can lead to a range of diverse and creative responses, while a poorly designed prompt may limit the model's output.
Using Open-Ended Prompts
Open-ended prompts are a great way to encourage language models to produce diverse and creative responses. These prompts give the model the freedom to generate content without constraints. For example, consider the prompt "Describe your ideal vacation." This prompt allows the language model to generate a variety of responses, from tropical beach getaways to adventurous hiking trips.
Incorporating Novelty and Surprise
Incorporating novelty and surprise into prompts can also lead to more diverse and creative responses. This can be achieved by using prompts that are unexpected or unusual. For example, consider the prompt "Write a story about a giraffe who can fly." This prompt introduces an unexpected element that can lead to unique and engaging responses.
Focusing on Specific Details
Focusing on specific details in prompts can also encourage language models to generate more diverse and creative responses. Specific details can provide context and constraints for the language model, while still allowing for flexibility and creativity. For example, consider the prompt "Describe a day in the life of a firefighter." This prompt provides specific details about the subject matter, while still allowing for a range of responses.
Incorporating User Feedback
Incorporating user feedback can also be a valuable tool in designing effective prompts. User feedback can help GPEs understand what types of prompts lead to the most diverse and creative responses. For example, a GPE can analyze user responses to a set of prompts and use that information to refine and improve their prompt design in the future.
In full, effective prompt design is crucial for generating diverse and creative responses in language models. By using open-ended prompts, incorporating novelty and surprise, focusing on specific details, and incorporating user feedback, GPEs can design prompts that encourage language models to produce unique and engaging content.

Techniques for designing effective prompts in Generative Prompt Engineering
By using open-ended prompts, contextual prompts, and thought-provoking questions, Generative Prompt Engineers can encourage language models to generate diverse and creative responses that can be used for a variety of purposes, including marketing, content creation, and personal communication.
In order to generate diverse and creative responses, Generative Prompt Engineers employ a variety of techniques to design prompts that encourage language models to produce unique and engaging content. Here are some examples of techniques that are commonly used.
Open-Ended Prompts
One technique that Generative Prompt Engineers use is to create open-ended prompts. These prompts encourage language models to generate responses that are not limited by a specific set of parameters. By giving the model more freedom to explore different possibilities, the resulting content can be more diverse and creative. For example, an open-ended prompt might ask the model to generate a story that begins with the phrase "Once upon a time."
Contextual Prompts
Another technique that can be effective is to provide more context in the prompt. This can help guide the language model towards a specific topic or idea while still allowing for creativity. For instance, a prompt asking the model to generate a recipe for a vegan chili would provide more context than simply asking for a recipe, which could lead to a wider range of responses.
Thought-Provoking Questions
Generative Prompt Engineers can also design prompts that provoke thought and inspire the language model to generate more unique and interesting responses. These types of prompts can be especially effective in generating content that is engaging and thought-provoking for the audience. For example, a prompt asking the model to generate a conversation between two characters who have just met on a deserted island could lead to a range of creative responses that explore themes such as survival, isolation, and human connection.
Key Skills for a Generative Prompt Engineer
The ideal candidate for this role will have a strong technical background, excellent problem-solving skills, and the ability to work both independently and as part of a team. Additionally, excellent communication, organization, and time management skills are crucial in order to ensure projects are completed on time and on budget.
Technical Background
A Generative Prompt Engineer must have a strong technical background in natural language processing, machine learning, and programming languages such as Python. Understanding the fundamentals of these fields is essential for designing effective prompts and developing high-quality models. Familiarity with software development tools and platforms is also important for creating and testing models.
Problem-Solving Skills
Problem-solving skills are critical for a Generative Prompt Engineer, as they must be able to identify and address issues that arise during the model development process. They must also be able to analyze data and adjust models to improve their performance. Strong problem-solving skills allow a Generative Prompt Engineer to create models that are accurate, efficient, and effective.
Communication
Effective communication is crucial for a Generative Prompt Engineer, as they often work as part of a team that includes developers, designers, and other stakeholders. Clear communication helps to ensure that everyone is on the same page and working towards the same goals. Additionally, communicating technical concepts to non-technical stakeholders is essential for gaining buy-in and support for projects.
Organization
A Generative Prompt Engineer must be highly organized, as they are often working on multiple projects simultaneously. They must be able to prioritize tasks and manage their time effectively to meet deadlines and ensure that projects are completed on time and within budget. Strong organizational skills allow a Generative Prompt Engineer to be efficient and effective in their work.
Time Management
Time management is essential for a Generative Prompt Engineer, as they must balance multiple competing priorities and deadlines. Effective time management allows them to ensure that they are meeting deadlines, managing their workload, and delivering high-quality work. It also helps them to stay on top of emerging trends and technologies, which is critical in this rapidly evolving field.
Overall, A Generative Prompt Engineer requires a diverse skill set that includes technical knowledge, problem-solving skills, communication, organization, and time management skills. These skills are essential for developing and implementing effective models that generate high-quality, diverse and creative responses.
The Importance of Language Skills in Generative Prompt Engineering
Parsing, Syntax, and Grammar Skills

Tip
Language skills, including parsing, syntax, and grammar, are essential for creating effective prompts in Generative Prompt Engineering, enabling the generation of diverse and creative responses."

Generative Prompt Engineering (GPE) is an interdisciplinary field that combines natural language processing, machine learning, and creativity to generate new and original content based on prompts or cues. As we discussed earlier, GPE is an emerging field with a growing demand for skilled professionals. While technical background, problem-solving skills, communication, organization, and time management skills are important in this field, language skills are also key to success.
In this section, we will discuss the importance of parsing, syntax, and grammar skills in GPE. These language skills are essential for creating effective prompts that can generate diverse and creative responses.
Parsing Skills
Parsing refers to the process of analyzing a sentence to understand its grammatical structure. In GPE, understanding the grammatical structure of a prompt can help the engineer create prompts that are grammatically correct and easy for the language model to understand. For example, consider the prompt "The cat sat on the mat." By parsing this sentence, a GPE can identify the subject ("the cat"), the verb ("sat"), and the object ("the mat"). This understanding can then be used to create similar prompts that are grammatically correct and easy for the language model to understand.
Syntax Skills
Syntax refers to the arrangement of words and phrases to create well-formed sentences. In GPE, understanding syntax is important for creating prompts that are clear and easy to understand. For example, consider the prompt "Write a story about a man with a dog who goes on an adventure." By using proper syntax, a GPE can create a clear and concise prompt that is easy for the language model to understand and generate a creative response.
Grammar Skills
Grammar refers to the rules that govern the use of language. In GPE, understanding grammar is important for creating prompts that are grammatically correct and use proper word choice. For example, consider the prompt "Write a poem about nature." By using proper grammar, a GPE can create a prompt that is clear and easy for the language model to understand, while also encouraging the generation of a creative and engaging response.

Language skills play a critical role in Generative Prompt Engineering as they enable GPEs to create effective prompts that can generate diverse and creative responses. Parsing, syntax, and grammar skills are particularly important for GPEs as they enable them to create prompts that are grammatically correct, clear, and easy for the language model to understand.
These language skills also allow GPEs to identify and address any issues that may arise during the model development process. For example, if a language model generates responses that are not grammatically correct or do not make sense, a GPE can use their parsing, syntax, and grammar skills to identify the issue and adjust the model accordingly.
Furthermore, language skills are essential for creating prompts that are engaging and thought-provoking. By using proper grammar and syntax, GPEs can create prompts that are clear and easy to understand, while also encouraging the generation of creative and engaging responses. For example, a prompt like "Write a story about a man with a dog who goes on an adventure" is more engaging and thought-provoking than a prompt like "Write a story about a man who goes on an adventure."
Lastly, language skills are crucial for GPEs to create effective prompts and ensure the successful completion of projects on time and within budget. By having strong parsing, syntax, and grammar skills, GPEs can create prompts that are grammatically correct, clear, and engaging, which in turn results in the generation of diverse and creative responses.
By combining technical knowledge, problem-solving skills, communication, organization, and time management skills, GPEs can effectively develop and implement models that generate high-quality, diverse and creative responses, while ensuring project completion on time and on budget. Additionally, language skills such as parsing, syntax, and grammar skills are crucial for creating effective prompts that can generate diverse and creative responses, which is a key component of GPE.


Example
Let's say a GPE is working on a project to develop a chatbot that can provide customer service for an e-commerce platform. The GPE would need to have a strong technical background in natural language processing, machine learning, and programming languages such as Python to design effective prompts and develop high-quality models that can accurately understand customer queries and provide helpful responses.

As the GPE works on the project, they may encounter issues such as poor model performance, data quality issues, or unexpected user behavior. Strong problem-solving skills are crucial in such situations as they allow the GPE to quickly identify and address the issues, keeping the project on track and minimizing delays.
Effective communication is also critical for the success of the project. The GPE would need to communicate clearly and effectively with other team members, stakeholders, and clients to ensure everyone is on the same page and working towards the same goals. This would reduce the likelihood of misunderstandings or miscommunication that can lead to project delays or cost overruns. Additionally, clear communication of technical concepts to non-technical stakeholders is essential for gaining their buy-in and support for the project, which can help to secure adequate resources and funding.
As the GPE works on multiple projects simultaneously, effective organization skills would enable them to prioritize tasks and manage their time effectively to meet deadlines and ensure that projects are completed on time and within budget. Good time management skills would help them balance competing priorities and deadlines, allowing them to stay on top of emerging trends and technologies that are critical in this rapidly evolving field.
In full, the combination of technical knowledge, problem-solving skills, communication, organization, and time management skills is crucial for a GPE to effectively develop and implement models that generate high-quality, diverse and creative responses, while ensuring project completion on time and on budget. Language skills such as parsing, syntax, and grammar skills are also important for creating effective prompts that can generate diverse and creative responses, which is a key component of GPE.

The Role of a Generative Prompt Engineer
I'm a skilled Generative Prompt Engineer with a technical background and exceptional problem-solving abilities. My organization, communication, and time management skills set me apart, allowing me to thrive both independently and as part of a team.
What makes me particularly effective is my ability to parse the English language using my knowledge and understanding of syntax and grammar. These tools enable me to craft prompts rapidly and with efficiency, getting swiftly to the heart of the project requirements.
My experience with technical planning and communicating complex requirements make me particularly adept at outlining project scope, goals, and requirements for clients and team members. I'm tenacious when it comes to developing and testing new software and systems, using customer feedback and data to drive iterative improvements.
Collaboration is key for me, and I'm able to communicate effectively and work well with multiple stakeholders, guiding them through the process and keeping them updated as the project evolves. Lastly, staying at the forefront of tech and AI advancements is of utmost importance to me to ensure that I always offer the best solutions to clients.
As a Generative Prompt Engineer, I am skilled in quickly and effectively creating prompts with precision and accuracy. My extensive knowledge of English parsing, syntax, and grammar is instrumental in crafting prompts that are efficient and effective. By understanding the intricacies of language, I am able to ensure that my prompts are grammatically sound and convey the intended meaning.
Additionally, my attention to detail and analytical skills allow me to identify patterns and generate unique and diverse prompts. I am also proficient in using natural language processing tools and techniques to aid in prompt creation. Overall, my skills and expertise make me a valuable asset in the development of intelligent and dynamic prompt systems.
Ultimately, my skills and experience as a Generative Prompt Engineer make me a valuable asset to any team looking to implement intelligent and dynamic prompt systems. With my technical expertise, problem-solving abilities, and communication skills, I can help clients and team members meet their project goals efficiently and effectively. If you are seeking a Generative Prompt Engineer with a passion for language and a dedication to staying at the forefront of technology, look no further than me.

The Importance of English Parsing, Syntax, and Grammar in Crafting Effective Prompts

English parsing, syntax, and grammar are instrumental in crafting effective prompts that resonate with a target audience. With the help of NLP technology, writers can use these tools to generate marketing copy that achieves desired results.

Natural Language Processing (NLP) is a powerful tool that can be used to analyze and generate human language. As an avid user of NLP technology, I have utilized its intelligent algorithms to assist me in writing two books. NLP technology has helped me streamline my writing process, improve my prose, and develop a unique voice. Now, I plan to leverage its capabilities once again to create a marketing campaign that will wow my audience.
Effective prompts are essential for any marketing campaign. They need to be carefully crafted to resonate with the target audience and achieve the desired results. English parsing, syntax, and grammar are critical components of creating effective prompts. Parsing is the process of breaking down a sentence into its component parts to understand its meaning. Syntax refers to the rules for constructing phrases and sentences in a language, while grammar is the set of rules for using language correctly.
By utilizing NLP technology, writers can use these tools to analyze and understand the language used by their target audience. This allows them to craft compelling marketing copy that resonates with their audience and achieves the desired results. NLP technology can even help generate language that is unique, creative, and effective.
In my personal experience, NLP technology has been instrumental in improving my writing process, allowing me to create unique and compelling content that resonates with my readers. It has also helped me in crafting marketing copy that achieves my desired results. By leveraging the power of NLP technology and these essential language tools, writers can create effective prompts that generate high-quality, diverse, and creative responses.

The Role of Analytical Skills and Attention to Detail in Writing Books and Crafting Marketing Campaigns
Analytical skills and attention to detail are crucial in crafting effective writing, whether it be in the form of a book or a marketing campaign. These skills allow the writer to identify patterns, discern important information, and generate unique and diverse prompts that resonate with the intended audience.
In writing the two books, the use of analytical skills and attention to detail helped in developing the plot, identifying plot holes, and creating well-rounded characters. Analyzing character motivations, for example, helped to ensure that each character's actions and decisions were consistent and believable throughout the book. Attention to detail also aided in creating vivid descriptions of the setting, immersing the reader in the story and bringing the fictional world to life.
Similarly, in crafting the marketing campaign, analytical skills and attention to detail played a crucial role in developing a message that resonates with the target audience. Analyzing market trends, consumer behavior, and demographics helped to ensure that the campaign message was tailored to the specific needs and interests of the target audience. Attention to detail was also important in creating effective prompts that engaged the audience and generated interest in the product or service being marketed.
In both cases, the use of analytical skills and attention to detail helped to create writing that was engaging, informative, and effective in achieving its intended purpose.
Conclusion
Generative Prompt Engineers (GPEs) are instrumental in revolutionizing language models by creating diverse and creative responses. With their technical knowledge of natural language processing, machine learning, and programming languages such as Python, GPEs can design effective prompts and develop high-quality models that can accurately understand customer queries and provide helpful responses.
GPEs also need strong problem-solving skills to quickly identify and address issues such as poor model performance, data quality issues, or unexpected user behavior, keeping the project on track and minimizing delays. Effective communication is also critical for the success of the project, as GPEs need to communicate clearly and effectively with other team members, stakeholders, and clients to ensure everyone is on the same page and working towards the same goals.
In addition to technical knowledge and communication skills, GPEs also need strong analytical skills and attention to detail to identify patterns and generate unique and diverse prompts. This is essential for creating effective prompts that can generate compelling marketing copy, resonate with the target audience, and achieve desired results.
Overall, the combination of technical knowledge, problem-solving skills, communication, organization, time management skills, and analytical skills is crucial for a GPE to effectively develop and implement models that generate high-quality, diverse, and creative responses, while ensuring project completion on time and on budget.
Generative Prompt Engineering (GPE) has numerous implications and applications in various fields. Here are some of them:

Language Generation: GPE can revolutionize language generation by creating more diverse and creative responses to prompts. It can be applied in chatbots, virtual assistants, customer service, and other natural language processing (NLP) applications.
Creative Writing: GPE can help writers develop their unique writing voice, streamline their writing process, and generate new ideas. It can be used to create different types of content, including novels, screenplays, and marketing copy.
Marketing: GPE can be applied in marketing to craft compelling and persuasive messages that resonate with the target audience. It can help create unique and diverse copy that grabs the audience's attention and drives conversions.
Education: GPE can be used in education to generate questions and responses for quizzes, exams, and homework assignments. It can help create personalized learning experiences for students and provide them with immediate feedback.
Data Analysis: GPE can be applied in data analysis to generate natural language summaries of data and insights. It can help automate data reporting and make it easier for non-technical stakeholders to understand complex data.
Content Creation: GPE can be applied in content creation to generate content for websites, blogs, and social media. It can help generate diverse and creative content that engages the audience and drives traffic.
Personalization: GPE can help create personalized experiences for users by generating tailored responses based on their preferences and past interactions.

One thing's for sure, Generative Prompt Engineering has significant implications and applications in language generation, creative writing, marketing, education, data analysis, content creation, and personalization. Its potential applications are vast, and it has the potential to transform many industries and fields.
I hope this discussion on Generative Prompt Engineering has inspired you to think about the power of natural language processing and the potential for creating diverse and creative responses. As you reflect on this topic, I challenge you to consider how you can apply this knowledge to your own lifescape.
Perhaps you can take some time to refresh your language and analytical skills, exploring new vocabulary and grammatical structures to improve your own communication. Or maybe you can explore the potential for using natural language processing to improve your own business, writing, or creative projects.
Whatever path you choose, I encourage you to take action and apply your learning to make a positive impact in your life and in the world around you. Let's harness the power of technology and language to create something truly remarkable.
If you're feeling inspired by what you just read, don't just sit there, take action! Leave your comments, give me an upvote, and hit that follow button to stay tuned in for more content that'll uplift your soul. And if you're new to #hive and #ecency, don't worry, sign up is free and easy. Just click the link in the description and you'll be ready to go.
But wait, there's more! If you want to help me out and support my somewhat ok posts, you can make a donation to help me with free giveaways, contests, and airdrops. You can upvote, comment, follow/subscribe, and share on different social media platforms like [HIVE, PublishOx, Medium, Reddit,](<HIVE, PublishOx, Medium, Reddit, or other social media platforms.>) and more. The quickest methods of donation are Cash.App and PayPal, and your contributions and gifts are greatly appreciated.
And hey, I'm not just here to inspire you, I'm here to learn too. I'm looking for advice to help me create new communities on Hive and other platforms, and I need your help. So if you've got some great ideas, or just want to help me pay it forward, hit me up with a tip or two and let's keep making the world a better place.

Disclaimer
Please note that the above-provided information is for general educational purposes only and is not intended to be a substitute for professional advice. It is always best to check with a licensed professional before making any decisions regarding your professional life.

Happy Valentines Day SoMeeFam!
The Song used in this dance skit is a Bisayan Love Song titled
"Gugmang Ga Aso Aso" (Baby Love na Love kita)
The Song is about #LoveConfession. Its about someone confessing how he/she truely feels about somebody ????.
According to #Jeska this is one of her favourite tiktok videos of mine, so I posted it as my way of dedicating this video for her!
Its upbeat music makes it fall under a #Novelty Category. This Song became #viral in the Philippines. A lot of artists made their own dance interpretation of this Song.
I recorded this video while working from home when I had to isolate. Who would think I had #Covid?

Since Jeska has been busy spamming/flooding Somee Timeline with her #TiktokDuets I wanted to join in and annoy you guys more ????
This time I brought my own gang- #NurseLily, #Erlica, and #MamaE
The music used is a #Novelty Bisayan Song from the Philippines ???????? the music is somehow upbeat but its actually a #sortof #lovesong
I wonder when will Jeska and I be able to do a Tiktok Video together. Maybe lets reserve it to the #SoMee Video Feature once its out.????????

each day with its eagerness, each day with its novelty, each day is different, each day is a new beginning and a new ending. happy afternoon.

Ancelotti's team worked at Ciudad Real Madrid.
The squad completed another day of work at Real Madrid City, with the novelty of the presence of Benzema and Alaba. Both joined the rest of the group in this return to training and following the return of the League, scheduled for Friday, December 30th, in Valladolid (20:30 h CEST). Carlo Ancelotti led a session marked by ball control and pressure exercises, and series of physical work.