Pyramid Comment

This journal takes an alternative view on current affairs and other subjects. The approach is likely to be contentious and is arguably speculative. The content of any article is also a reminder of the status of those affairs at that date. All comments have been disabled. Any and all unsolicited or unauthorised links are absolutely disavowed.

Friday, December 18, 2020

Vaccine (COVID-19) - update (30 .04.2021)





Missing in Action


There are many claims to have isolated

the virus, specifically...


SARS-CoV-2


Warning - Safety

The Future of Vaccines

Dr. Anthony Fauci, “deadly” vaccines

 

Government-sanctioned indemnity has been given to the 'vaccine' developers to offset any comeback if all goes pear-shaped. It's immoral to 'force' people to have an untested 'vaccine' and then deny them any legal redress if there are 'unexpected' serious adverse effects by the avoidance of any safety studies. A clinical trial on a global scale is being actively conducted to show that the untested method (mRNA) actually works. Are those who have the 'vaccine' aware that they are taking part in an experiment? Have they agreed and given their consent in full knowledge of the risks (surely, if they knew, they'd refuse to take part in such a plan - DA)? Or do they waive 'any-fault' liability?
There will be minimal costs in future product development (if the technology is shown to be 'successful'). Research into mRNA 'vaccines' is a new technology. The mRNA is claimed to have no effect on the cell. It theoretically works by using the cell to make the alleged 'spike' protein. A virus high-jacks the cell 'machinery' to copy itself rather than using it to synthesise the 'spike' protein. The immune system will then create antibodies to disable the 'spike' protein so preventing the virus particle from entering and infecting the cell. The 'spike' protein is effectively the key to the cell door. An antigen needs to be identified for a specific 'vaccine'. But are there any common factors that all apply to the technology in a general sense? The theory behind this approach appears reasonable - on the drawing board. But...

 

... it is (a wicked plan - DA) being tried
out in a 'live' human experiment
to find if it actually works


The thalidomide tragedy (1962) soon after led to an ultimately
safer and more robust medicinal drug development protocol. This
use of an experimental drug having such disastrous consequences
through the failure to conduct adequate testing MUST act as a
WARNING today. The NEW mRNA EXPERIMENTAL
'vaccine' (deliberate misrepresentation? - DA) runs
along parallel lines. The thalidomide tragedy
was the first major disaster in...


A molecule that has two chiral isomers


The 'vaccines' used in 2021 have a precedent
(58 years earlier) for potential but very real outcomes
(probable, Louis - DA) and have been indemnified
by the UK Government (is this tantamount to a criminal
act? - DA). Any conspiracy would be enacted by the collusion
of government with BIG Pharma (Bill Gates - 07.03.2020). In the
thalidomide case, it was discovered that all the teratogenic
properties existed in one isomer only. Unless chemically
separated, the drug was clearly dangerous. Such
procedures add considerable cost to a
drug's development as the purity must be
close to 100% to ensure there can be no known
adverse effects. An optically active drug intended
for human use must have its enantiomers (completely)
separated. The active enantiomer will have been thoroughly
tested to identify any negative properties. Efficacy but most
importantly product safety must be proven. Such thorough
testing is completely absent with the COVID-19 'vaccines'
(2021). The very real potential consequences will be
absolutely appreciated yet the 'vaccine' was STILL
approved for human use and has been given
indemnity against any
adverse effect...

like death?
 
FDA investigators referred their findings in July 1963 to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution. Agency lawyers listed 24 counts under which Richardson-Merrell violated the law, including that the company had marketed an unapproved drug and claimed that it was safe. But in September 1964, the Department of Justice concluded that “criminal prosecution is neither warranted nor desirable”.

Chimpanzees and bonobos (and humans) have 98.8% shared DNA. There are differences. The 1.2% missing DNA must account for the human's advanced brain. Ultimately Man's intelligence. Much of the physiology is (like most mammals) very similar. All organisms survive in an almost identical way and the brain manages ('looks after') everything. Two eyes, two ears, two nostrils (sniffing in stereo allows the detection of chiral molecules each having a different odour), one mouth, four limbs, five fingers/claws, digestion of food for energy. Muscles and nerves operate in a similar way and breathing oxygen while expelling carbon dioxide demonstrates cellular similarities. The human is an omnivore by being able to use both meat (carnivore) and vegetation (herbivore). Both bonobos and chimpanzees will eat meat if necessary. There is evidence of cannibalistic behaviour in the chimpanzee and bonobo species.

My questions, Louis, are that if the similarities are so many, and the harmless-to-humans virus that will produce a cold (chill) in a chimpanzee forms the basis of the AstraZeneca 'vaccine', why should the human common cold not offer the same protection to humans without a 'vaccine'? And how is a 'vaccine' going to prepare humans for the 'next pandemic'? If such a 'pandemic' were to be a virus, why should the COVID-19 'vaccine' be effective?

DA

Re-infections with 'variant' (15.02.2020)

Maintain the fear - it's in the script

They think it's all over


Nobody could predict the source of any virus and what it might be - unless it was an engineered virus that could be released at any suitable time. It doesn't even need to exist. Conditioning has made people believe in it. It makes no sense and any inconsistency in the 'narrative' strongly indicates another agenda. Why is it so critical to ensure that all humans are 'offered' a 'vaccine'?


Mandating inoculation is on its way


The cause of the alleged problem has not even been proven to exist (20.12.2020). A current search (15.02.2021) of the internet using the Google search engine finds 'debunking' and conspiracy theory links only. Other search engines behave normally. This constitutes absolute proof that Googe actively censors the internet.

People do unfortunately die from all age groups for many diverse (pre-existing) conditions. Respiratory issues need not be an infection. This could be COAD, heart failure or some similar problem. There needs to be real evidence not simply "it must be the COVID-19, then. It is proof." How absurd. That's 'proof' of nothing. The roll-out of an alleged vaccine (AstraZeneca) or the gene therapy (aka a 'vaccine')...

gene therapy is when DNA is introduced into a patient to treat a genetic disease. The new DNA usually contains a functioning gene to correct the effects of a disease-causing mutation

 

mRNA gene therapy can change the DNA

"correct the effects of a

disease-causing mutation"

 

...that could harm/kill people is unnecessary. There is no compelling reason to run any risk. The 'vaccines' are all not proven safe. Pfizer's long-term phase 3 clinical trials will not be complete until 2023 (reported 18.11.2020). It is an ongoing trial started on 27.07.2020. The 'concluded' must refer to the (interim) primary efficacy endpoint. This claims to be following FDA protocols for EUA.


The Phase 3 clinical trial of BNT162b2

began on July 27

and has enrolled 43,661


It is not possible to 'know' it's safe after less than 4 months (27.07.2020 - 18.11.2020) and the efficacy determination is a gross misrepresentation. Infections in a 'vaccinated' group = 8 and in a placebo (control) group = 162. Infections of 8/170 vs 162/170 = 4.7% vs 95.3% and this converts into an efficacy = 95.3% (162/170). But there were a total of 43,661 volunteers. The infections = 170/43,661 = 0.389% and no deaths.


This defines an emergency


Is this a license to kill? - DA


Clinical trial costs have been avoided by contracting
years to months before the sale of a new product and
reaping profit - almost immediately. Conventional safety
protocols mean that years down the clinical trial path a potential
new product could fail due to any adverse reactions that begin to
show. The reduction to several months before a sale is for a product
that has yet to show any long-term adverse effects. The product could
be unsafe/dangerous but this could not be known for years. The
outlay that would be lost (years of investment) is a redundant issue.
BIG-Pharma has provided itself with a win-win solution to the high
development cost but raises the risk for the end-user. The very
high cost of risk attached to potential new 'vaccines' for as yet
unknown future needs (but planned, Louis? - DA). A new
approach to 'managing' illness (not curing it) appears to
Development costs will be vastly reduced.
The risks are being evaluated on a global clinical
trial on the back of the COVID-19 'pandemic'. Has this
been created or is it simply exploiting the situation?
The timing is perfect. A pandemic and a new
technology (by definition a theoretical
process) that might work.


Well, do an unannounced

global clinical trial...

TO FIND OUT


Louis, are you suggesting that illness can be managed

by using 'vaccine' as opposed to a conventional

drug ('therapy')? Physiological imbalance can be

'fixed' by antibodies? Government indemnity

does point to another agenda other than

the purely commercial 


Population control by causing infertility?


No evidence has been found that shows Pfizer Covid-19

vaccine affects women's fertility - DA

Pregnancy

This was The UK Government's own advice upon emergency approval (authorisation, Louis - DA) of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine:

there are no or limited amount (sic) of data from the use of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2. Animal reproductive toxicity studies have not been completed. COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is not recommended during pregnancy. For women of childbearing age, pregnancy should be excluded before vaccination. In addition, women of childbearing age should be advised to avoid pregnancy for at least 2 months after their second dose (2 months? Based on what evidence - DA).

Breastfeeding

It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is excreted in human milk. A risk to the newborns/infants cannot be excluded. COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 should not be used during breast-feeding.

Fertility

It is unknown whether COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 has an impact on fertility.

It is because of this advice released by the UK Government that we were so shocked to see in the first released report of adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines, using data inputted to the MHRA Yellow Card Scheme up to the 24th January 2021 a total of 4 women had suffered a miscarriage as a result of having the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine.

Why were pregnant women vaccinated? It implies (illegal)

uninformed consent was obtainedDA

It is important to know that no study to date has specifically evaluated the coronavirus vaccine in pregnant and lactating women, though there have been a few pregnant women who were inadvertently enrolled in the vaccine trials. Preliminary developmental and reproductive toxicity studies do not indicate any adverse effects (VAERS) on reproduction or fetal development.

 

...inadvertently enrolled...

 (uninformed consent? - DA)

 

The Defender (02.04.2021) - Children's Health Defense

 

Number of COVID Vaccine Injuries

 Reported Surpasses 50,000

 

CDC vaccine safety is described:

(31.03.2021) 

 

safe & effective

 

According to the CDC 50,000 adverse effects

 means these COVID-19 vaccines are

 

safe & effective


PLAGUE.INFO

The latest Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s (MHRA) Yellow Card Scheme report, dated 09.12.2020 - 07.03.2021, reveals a whopping 366% increase in the rate of miscarriage thanks to Chinese-virus jabs

 

Miscarraige - experimental vaccines

Unless 366% and pregnancy are included as search keywords, none of the following is found. Only the 'fact-checked' hits: it's all going swimmingly well and there is a lot of misinformation. These are the usual crude attempts at silencing warnings. It's nasty and demonstrates the wilful attempt at inciting people to harm themselves. The psychological effects caused by a miscarriage are awful enough but to encourage someone to be vaccinated in the knowledge that the risk of miscarriage is greatly enhanced is pure evil in its intent.

 

Fact-checker (who is this 👿 ?)

Arthur Brice 

It's nauseating hypocrisy

 

"The claims by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny and other

 vaccine opponents lack rigorous

 scientific testing to prove

 their validity"

 

Just like the vaccines, then. Vaccine 'opponents' (all professional doctors and scientists) are simply clarifying what should be obvious. Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) - not approval has allowed these untested products to be unleashed on a global scale. Indemnification for the manufacturers and anybody instrumental in a human assault (uninformed consent) against any legal action (citing injury or death) should alone validate serious concerns about these 'vaccines'. The EUA has also allowed the never-before-approved gene therapy (mRNA 'products' are not vaccines). There can be no doubt about that whatever 'fact-checkers' may claim. It is abundantly clear that these 'fact-checkers' [journalists are part of the (MSM + Big Pharma) censorship machine]. The new description for debunking ('conspiracy theory') those who are (minimally) skeptical about possible misinformation (aka lies and deceit. Smoke and mirrors).

 

It very clearly shows that

'fact checked' = misinformation

and must be disregarded

 

The UK Government (to 'restore' confidence)...

 

...develop trusted sources, 'fact-checking' and respond

 to misinformation through dedicated dashboards are

 some of the strategies suggested to manage

 infodemics like snopes.com which appears

 to be a very cynical 'fact checker' 


Extreme caution - DA 

 



366% increase in miscarriages

 within 6 weeks of vaccination (30.03.2021)

Miscarriages Skyrocket

 366% in Six Weeks due to Covid Vaccines (01.04.2021)

Miscarriages skyrocket

 366% in six weeks due to Covid vaccines (30.03.2021)

 Miscarriages skyrocket

 366% in six weeks due to Covid vaccines (30.03.2021)

Miscarriages skyrocket

 366% in six weeks due to Covid vaccines (29.03.2021)

Oh My God: Miscarriages Skyrocket

 366% in Six Weeks due to Covid Vaccines (31.03.2021)

Number of Pregnant Women suffering Miscarriage

 after having Covid Vaccine increases by

 483% in just 7 weeks (05.04.2021)

Vaccine Reactions & Deaths Are Just The Tip Of The Iceberg

David Icke (05.04.2021)

CDC (03.03.2021) - one month out-of-date. This is inexcusable - and appears deliberate to avoid reporting the very real dangers of miscarriage. Currently, the CDC claims that there is no evidence that vaccines cause any problems with pregnancy including the development of the placenta (this means that there is no evidence that it doesn't cause problems - DA). The CDC then goes on: however, data are limited about the safety of the vaccines for pregnant women. Self-conflicting. The FDA has authorised their use.

COVID-19 vaccines currently authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should not be withheld from pregnant individuals who choose to receive the vaccine.

Selection of the older group could be a calculated (cynical) ploy to cover any infertility properties of the mRNA 'vaccines'. Postmenopausal women could never reveal this. Only that these people (women and men) simply die as expected from all the other pre-existing conditions that will now become important. Those that were suppressed until the demand for a vaccine was satisfied. People will actually die from old-age and the raft of other serious physical medical conditions (and dementia). Care home or front-line staff are unlikely to fall pregnant anyway. Those few women who do want to start a family will not consider infertility (male or female) for some while. And even then it would possibly only lead to in-vitro procedures. It is also very unlikely that any personal concerns about failing to become pregnant will be circulated on a wide scale. The population control issue will not become apparent. Ever. At least not until it reaches the target child-bearing-age women in those countries where the birth-rate is high with multiple births to a single woman. A vaccinated (with what? - DA) woman is claimed a healthy woman and a large family of healthy (vaccinated) children is unnecessary.


Bill Gates 😈 + 'vaccine' = the solution


No 'evidence' that has been looked for.

The absence of evidence doesn't mean there isn't any.

'Trials' could have never 'discovered' this.

There is virtually no safety data at all.

Limited trials can find very little

 

It's the reason for 'vaccine' indemnity - DA

 

Menopausal women (+70) could never

provide this information


Don't look... don't find 

Louis Brothnias


Indemnity wouldn't be necessary if...


...the virus does not exist (naturally) how else could the genome be 'read' unless a pure laboratory-made virus had been prepared (Wuhan)? And why should the Chinese announcement be true? Are the Chinese renowned for such instant (non-requested) co-operation - with the USA or elsewhere? Even after the alleged number of deaths caused by COVID-19 (unproven), there has not been one official complaint made to China. Death is still assumed to be caused by the non-existent virus. No definitive proof has ever been recorded. The global downward spiral is all accepted by only...

 

assumption


The challenge to the 'official' global narrative is

growing by the... day. It's unstoppable

(does that means evermore draconian

'restrictions' are on way then, Louis?

And I'm supposed to be the bad guy! - DA)


Warning


   “We have the virus in a dish in the lab. The soup in the dish contains human cells, animal cells, chemicals, toxic drugs, and other materials. However, we know the virus is there and growing because it is killing the cells…”

 

Wrong

 

   There is more than sufficient non-viral toxic substance in the soup that could be doing the cell-killing. Further, the cells in the dish are being starved of nutrients. That factor alone could produce cell death. And obviously, “the virus” in the dish is surrounded by this mix of materialThat is far from isolated. The SARS-Cov-2

 

 Virus Was Never Proved to Exist

 (02.12.2020)

 This report explains many issues and

should be read in its entirety

 

CDC + Fauci + coronavirus patents

 the rabbit hole opens up.

 Dr David Martin explains

 

CDC and FDA under investigation 



A vaccine will not stop the spread of a virus.

It will not prevent infection but can only protect against

developing the disease from which the vaccine

is supposed to give immunity.


Not immunity from infection but only the

symptoms of a disease


Seasonal 'flu


x5 more deaths from 'flu and pneumonia

than coronavirus (12.08.2020)


Hi, I’m Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and I’m the Chairman of the Children’s Health Defense and I made this video primer because in a dozen states across America today, state legislatures and governors are considering passing vaccine mandates and the facts in this video are facts that every political leader who’s trying to decide whether to vote for or against those mandates ought to understand.

The reasoning behind herd immunity is flawed. There is no scientific evidence that it is anyway near a reality but is the main justification for mass vaccination. This process is claimed to be not immediate and take an unspecified time. The symptoms of COVID-19 will not manifest. The individual will be asymptomatic. If the vaccine does (only - DA) what it is alleged to do, the individual should be protected against developing COVID-19. In time, the more people who are vaccinated decreases the opportunity for an ever-dwindling viral load. Unless vaccinated individuals self-isolate, 'the spread of the virus' can continue. Those who have been innoculated can still become infected and pass on the 'virus'. A period of self-isolation would ensure any infection is destroyed. People can easily be lulled into a false sense of personal security by getting 'vaccinated'.

   The assumption is that there is near-immediate protection, rendering the individual to being no threat to society. The Government has not enforced this as it would be interpreted as punishment for 'doing the right thing' and 'saving lives and protecting the NHS (page 16)which is complicit by PCR 'testing' with a cycle-count = 45 inflating the apparent number of infections and fuelling the scare of potential death. Playing on peoples' fears. The very same tactic that is claimed as being used by anyone who dares to voice an opinion that differs from the Government narrativevaccination 'is the only way out of this (manufactured - DA) pandemic' - so goes the mantra. The lie that conditions people into accepting the 'new normalwithout complaint.

 

Louis, I don't understand this. If an infection can still be

acquired after vaccination and this is then dealt with by the

human immune system why can't it do the same

without vaccination?

 DA 

   This assumes the virus is a real entity. In theory this should effectively stop the 'spread of the virus' over an indefinite period. However, the PCR is mixed up in all this. What scrutiny of 'test' records is possible so to examine the veracity of individual 'tests'? 'Test' samples can become confused and the result of an individual wrongly assigned. Records must be available (the 'test' results themselves) to allow a retrospective review otherwise everything thing relies on trust. The opportunity to 'massage' figures is huge. There does not need to be an actual 'test' just a randomised recorded positive/negative verdict given. The numbers could very easily be adjusted to suit the needs of the day. Numbers up or down. The R-number up or down. It would not be possible to know the truth. The vaccine does not need to be effective either. Does the specific virus exist? How could the specific strain ever be identified and proven to exist?


Certainly not by using PCR


Only a fragment of 'a' coronavirus can be detected (grossly over-amplified). This could be nothing more than debris from an earlier coronavirus infection. The numbers game can change according to the requirements of any particular day. It's written in the script. The roll-out of 5G is imminent. It has happened in Wuhan already - the alleged source of the 'pandemic'. If the effects of radiation are as expected, people will present with breathing problems and ... the justification will be COVID-19. Perhaps even a new strain (the idea of a variant has already introduced people to how things can appear to change - very quickly). How was this identified? Explanations are always absent. Is the vaccine effective and for how long (about a year Louis so you'll need a booster vaccine annually - DA)?

The urgency of mass inoculation could escalate as the script demands. As does the fear level as there are delays in vaccine availability. Manufacturing. Raw materials. Glass bottles. Needles. Syringes. The list goes on. And on. And ... The infection rate can be adjusted as necessary to cover any reaction to 5G. The symptoms of the alleged COVID-19 disease or 5G radiation poisoning are indistinguishable. Blood oxygen (%SpO2 = +94%) could drop (<90%). Everything relies on trust. The communication of truth. By the media and Government. If the belief is that everyone is being honest by circulating 'lies' about the 'spread of the virus' then the war is lost. And it is a war. BIG business (the elite) against the entire global population. And the control of the masses. Behaviour has changed so much that people (the 'herd' = lambs to the slaughter) are compliant in nearly every way.


Herd immunity = compliance


But there is a growing number of disbelieving people who have not been tricked into false beliefs. Ramping up and massaging figures will do nothing to deflect those clear-headed enough who do not believe authoritarian (totalitarian?- DA) versions of their truth. Of course, if anyone 'fails' to get vaccinated, then they are labelled 'selfish'. And stupid. Not being sensible and understanding that the alleged 'vaccine' is not a 'vaccine' - gene therapy with mRNA. When has the Government ever bothered to explain what that is? Just accuse those skeptical of Government truth (! - DA) being ignorant and selfish. Demonised (hey, Louis. Leave me out of this - DA).


Just believe us when we say it's safe

We wouldn't lie to you, would we?

Well, we might but you're so stupid

and you always do as you're told.

You are afraid, aren't you? Good



America 'holds fire' on

mandating inoculation


There is hope and it rests with the minority

The 'conspiracy theorists'


There are claims that mass testing will stop the spread of the non-existent virus (anyone that dares to say the virus doesn't exist will be denounced as a 'conspiracy theorist' - the standard rebuff - it comes from only one person. The Durham councillor is clearly mad. This is not 'official' Government Truth - DA). The spread would not stop: there would be a...


non-verified 'spike'


as a result of irresponsible advice. The opportunity to press on with the LIE is unlikely to be missed (BBC sponsored? - DA). But the...


The spread of LIES will continue and the

 MSM will suppress the TRUTH


BBC Panorama ran a dangerously misleading program (14.12.2020). The vaccine chosen for 'examination' had been well-tested and had no side-effects (COVID-19). It described the AstraZeneca vaccine as safe and effective (60% - 70%). Conventional (tried and tested) vaccine technology is employed whereby a non-active form of a virus is used. An infection triggers an immune response.

AstraZeneca - scandals (Bill Gates)

AstraZeneca - eugenics

The 'only' problem is that the product to be rolled out in mass-inoculations is the Pfizer, BioNTech vaccine. Bill Gates 😈 connection. The mRNA technology comes from this collaborator with Pfizer. An earlier agreement had been entered into between these two companies concerning influenza.


We are collaborating with Pfizer to develop 

mRNA‐based vaccines for the

prevention of...


influenza


The agreement was announced on

August 16th, 2018

For more information on the platform click here

(This could just be a fortuitous business position

and nothing sinister, Louis - DA)


AstraZeneca update (29.12.2020)

AstraZeneca vaccine not ready for quick European approval


AstraZeneca update (30.12.2020)


Approved for use in UK


This appears to be at odds with the fast-tracked Pfizer vaccine which has a new technology that is untested and has never before been approved for human use (gene therapy, not 'vaccine' - misrepresentation - DA). No earlier-phase animal studies have been undertaken and the 'vaccine' has gone directly into humans. The Pfizer product sailed through the approval procedure even though full (long-term) safety data on a novel type of 'vaccine' was not yet available (would it ever be? - DA).

 

Safety data on the new technology is

not the same thing as safety data on the

specific entity, Louis - DA


COVID-19 Vaccine Lawsuit to Block

FDA’s Approval of Pfizer and Moderna’s

 "Genetic Therapies" 


***


Moderna (Modified RNA)

Approved in UK - 08.01.2021

Authorised DOES NOT = Approved


In the United States, all eyes are on Pfizer and Moderna. The topline efficacy results from their experimental COVID-19 vaccine 'trials' are astounding - at first glance. Pfizer says it recorded 170 COVID-19 cases (in 44,000 volunteers), with a remarkable split: 162 in the placebo group versus 8 in the vaccine group. Meanwhile, Moderna says 95 of 30,000 volunteers in its ongoing trial got COVID-19: 90 on placebo versus 5 receiving the vaccine, leading both companies to claim around 95% (relative) efficacy.


Pfizer: (170 - 8)/170 = 95.3%

Moderna: 90/95 = 94.7%

Actual infections:


170/44,000 = 0.386% (Pfizer)

95/30,000 = 0.317% (ModeRNA)


The efficacy figures for both appear

to be encouraging but the

infection level is almost non-existent


My question, Louis:


If the infection rate is less than 0.4% 

why is a vaccine necessary at all? - DA


BBC Panorama (15.02.2021). This time on vaccines - again. As would be expected the mantra: misinformation, false claims, conspiracy theories, myth... and not a shred of evidence to support such outrageous claims.The arrogance and hypocrisy are nauseating. Statements without any supportive evidence and in the same breath simply stating that the 'propaganda' from doctors and other medical professionals is terrible misinformation. These doctors are not actors - Dr. Vernon Coleman is a known British GP (retired). Also review Dr. John Campbell. 

The only redeeming part of this 'documentary' is that some people will start to question Government 'authority' and the disinformation it has constantly regurgitated for almost an entire year. The 'anti-vaxx' (thosen who question vaccination - never in denial) video in question is just 27 minutes. Compared to one year this is somewhat disproportionate and without any evidence to condemn such a video. It is not a campaign to wreck Government 'plans' (more BBC hypocrisy - the Government can chunder lies) and rather than confusing people it could just save their lives with truth. Any confusion has been caused by the Government's 'emergency'-engineering to coerce people into accepting (uninformed consent) an uneccessary 'vaccine' and the inccessant lies and half-truths. Absolutely no truth has come from Government in a year and the BBC has the effrontary to announce false claims and disinformation without any supportive evidence. The BBC attempted to rubbish one individual who stated that as he was young and healthy was less likely to be infected. Albert Bourla (CEO Pfizer) made the very same claim and has not been vaccinated (14.12.2020) with his company's own product. That's acceptable? This speaks volumes. That the BBC produces a constant barrage of lies is easily proven by just a little personal research. A warning though, don't use the Google search engine - it censors the internet and many legitimate 'hits' are never discovered. Compare the search results from coronavirus + not + exist using Google Chrome and Firefox.

 

Facebook

 

This 'social media' platform has its many faults but the 'false claims' (allegedly 'fact checked'. Who checks the fact checkers, Louis? - DA) are reaching millions. People are discouraged from questioning the 'false claims' for themselves. People then accept that the 'official' Government narrative must be true.

 

If a provable fact that challenges the accepted 'the science is settled' mantra is claimed to be false, against what criteria are the facts checked to verify 'truth'? Only supportive (cherry-picked) sources?

 

Brian Monteith eloquently argues the toxicity of CEO Mark Zuckerberg. This platform censors any posting that challenges the 'science is settled' view. Shutting down debate and only allowing propaganda. The truth according to Zuckerberg. The Government propaganda machine has been so successful in 'brainwashing' people that the carefully selected 'doubters' (viewers) had all changed their mind and had been vaccinated. They were convinced that the BBC case of misinformation had been 'proven' by simply stating their version of the truth.

The MSM (mainstream media and the BBC is only one - the Government mouthpiece) does not ever allow any alternative debate. Never is there any mention of the most important information and the internet has been cleared of any information that condemns the PCR 'test' as 'unfit for purpose'. The PCR 'test' that has enabled the pandemic and the Emergency Use Authorisation of unproven-safe 'vaccines' - that CAN CHANGE YOUR DNA - to be rolled out to millions of the most vulnerable. The BBC rubbishes this claim without even the slightest effort - geneticists know how mRNA 'vaccines' work but continue to bury the collective head in the sand and deny what is known. Fact, not fiction. The PCR procedure was never designed (probably the most significant invention of the 20th century) as a diagnostic tool. It cannot diagnose infection/disease but is molecular cloning. Amplifying a fragment (trace) of DNA/RNA to detectable amounts. The mRNA 'vaccines' could not have any of its components identified - only possibly suggested. A future use of the PCR 'test'?

Albert Bourla Pfizer CEO

 As of December 18thACIP reported 112,807 people had received the Pfizer vaccine in the US, with 3150 “health impact events, defined as “unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work, required care from a doctor or health care professional”. This comes to a staggering 2.7%, far beyond similar metrics for Covid itself. This is also only after the first dose, and two doses of the Pfizer Covid vaccine are intended.

Although Pfizer is a BIG player on the global scene (ranked 57 on the 2018 Fortune 500 list), it is a 'profit-making' business that should be tied to an ethical code. The implication does not mean that its own conduct is necessarily ethical. Pfizer does not have a squeaky clean record (concealing safety risks).


$486 million? So, Pfizer has done this before and so

possibly regard a share of $32 billion is worth the

risk of repeating the earlier experience. They

might have even calculated that they'd

get away with it because of the...


'emergency'


that has been

'created' - DA


The UK Government has much to answer for. The in-depth analysis presented here leads to only one compelling conclusion. Even being generous, the conclusion remains the same. At the local level, any supportive comments concerning the entire 'pandemic narrative' cannot be made because of the underhand, incomplete, and inaccurate propaganda (it would make even George Orwell proud - DA) of the UK Government.


THE CRIME OF VACCINATION


DEPOPULATION



Bill Gates 😈, FOX News & Profitable



Manslaughter


Bill Gates has stated that global population control is essential. The method would be to mass vaccinate third world countries where general ill-health promotes a higher birth-rate. The specious justification is that a healthier population would translate into a lesser need to procure more children. It would take some time (years?) before people became confident of a greater survival rate. A vaccine that caused women to become infertile would happen very quickly. What proof would there be that the vaccine delivered to the US/Europe is the same as that sent to these other countries with a high birth-rate? Other cultures also have large families.

 

The PCR 'test' has been widely (ab)used without any attempted explanation as to what it is (molecular cloning = copying) and how works. A single strand of RNA is copied (amplified) and produces millions of molecules. This cannot be used to identify a specific entity. The test was never intended to be a diagnostic tool. Dr. Kary Mullis shared the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 1993 with Michael Smith (died 2000) for the discovery and development of this test, which was hailed as one of the most significant advancements of the 20th century. Dr. Mullis died of heart and (ironically) respiratory failure on 7th August 2019 and therefore neither was alive to denounce its inappropriate use (that was very convenient, Louis - DA). If the testing protocol was abused, the smallest trace of anything could be found. This has happened. The signal from the sample was outrageously amplified to generate many, many false positives. The extent of any overall population infection (with what, Louis? - DA) has been grotesquely overstated. The entire nation has been terrified into submission and into accepting a 'vaccine'.

Processing the elevated 45 cycles (2^45) compared to around 20 cycles (2^20), the amplification difference is x35 million (35 trillion/1 million), and whatever the level in the original sample, the result will always be x 35 million.

Viral load = 1 --> 2^20 = 1 million 


1 million (20 cycles) <<<< 35 trillion (45 cycles) = 35 million
34 million (25 cycles) <<< 35 trillion (45 cycles) = 1 million
1 billion (30 cycles) << 35 trillion (45 cycles) = 35000
34 billion (35 cycles) < 35 trillion (45 cycles) = 1000

Doubling the Viral load halves the Ct (threshold) value

Viral load = 2 --> 4^10 = 1 million
Viral load = 4 --> 16^5 = 1 million

The threshold is when negative --> positive and in the example,
if the threshold was 1 million Ct would be = 25 cycles
Any value of Ct > 25 would yield excessive copies

   There is no defined 'standard' number of cycles. A testing facility can choose any number of cycles it pleases. The results from one 'laboratory' cannot be compared with another. Results are meaningless.


Worse than useless but

dangerously deceiving

The consequence of this flawed test is that a non-contagious trace amount (harmless and no need to self-isolate) becomes over-amplified to the dangerous and artificially (massively) elevated positive (contagious) result. The greater the number of cycles, the greater the skew of the 'test'. Crucially, the most important thing to keep in mind is that this test can only determine a fragment of RNA present and not identify SARS-CoV-2 as a specific strain.

 

Louis, surely, if this is the case then an earlier infection

from any coronavirus

would give a false positive result - DA

 


Dr. Kary Mullis - inventor of PCR test dies (7th August 2019)

Vaccine - link describes conventional technology - tried and tested. Clinical trials should take from several months up to 10 years. The Pfizer vaccine is a new technology completely, yet safety has been claimed after only a minimum of a few months.

  The UK Government quickly approved a vaccine that is the least tested. And it's expensive. It must be maintained at an ultra-low temperature [solid carbon dioxide ('dry ice') at -70degC] and has a useable lifespan of 6 months. If kept at the ultra low T. Once opened, cold storage at 2 - 8degC will survive up to 5 days (allegedly). Most facilities will not be able to guarantee to have a fresh vaccine sample before it can degrade to something else (certainly not the claimed effective and safe vaccine - DA). It has novel technology that has not before been approved. Any safety data is essentially unknown. There is no long-term data available. None can be collected until after it is rolled out.

GPs claim to be able to provide the vaccine at their surgery. A GP is not a specialist in handling such sensitive materials at low T. The provision of a guaranteed pure sample (as received from a Pfizer distribution site) is in great doubt.


Assuming the product is safe

after such short 'trials'


How can such a sensitive product be handled in any facility that will only have (at best) refrigerators? The distribution cold box must be opened and the contents will instantly be compromised. Pfizer may be able to guarantee the quality of the unopened vaccine packages but once opened this could possibly be no longer legally enforceable. Indemnity against any injuries of an untested new technology in humans is one thing, but to show that the product or its mishandling caused injury would be a legal nightmare. All medicines and vaccines require some type of temperature control. Some need to be kept at room temperature, others refrigerated, and some must be frozen. The packaging is designed to protect the product on its journey, from the moment it comes off the manufacturing line to the time it arrives at its destinationFDA approval does not guarantee safety. Each drug and biologic has the potential to cause life-altering and even life-threatening side effects. Many people suffer severe side effects - and some have died - because drug manufacturers fail to adequately warn of the risks associated with the medicines they market.

 

Pfizer CEO Albert Boula has not been vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine. The justification being that a single extra inoculation would mean one other person could go without. Bourla is 59 and in relatively good health and it would 'not be entirely appropriate' to receive it (out of 50 million? The PR gain would be off the scale. It suggests that the vaccine is not necessary. Not a good business decision and a disastrous message to send to customers and shareholders - DA). On the day that the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine was announced, Bourla sold $5.6 million shares. Pfizer claims that this was automated under a plan set up in August. (Is that 2018 or 2019? - DA). On 16th August 2018, Pfizer signed a collaboration agreement with BioNTech to develop mRNA‐based vaccines for the prevention of influenzaCOVID-19 and Influenza are caused by different viruses but both are respiratory diseases. Are there any common features with respect to mRNA‐based vaccines?


The Bill Gates 😈 web gets bigger (net gets tighter? - DA)

BioNTech (Bill 😈 & Belinda Gates Foundation)
AstraZeneca - eugenics
Bill Gates 😈 - eugenics
SPAC = Special Purpose Acquisition Company


   What if COVID-19 was simply another name for influenza. Or a very bad cold (coronavirus)? The PCR test could not distinguish between the alleged SARS-CoV-2 and any coronavirus. Symptoms could simply be confused and a misdiagnosis made. People nearly always recover from a cold (but not always the very old or infirm. The PCR test is being abused to generate false positives so could easily 'cover' the 'misdiagnosis' (are you suggesting using the PCR test to deliberately allow the misdiagnosis, Louis - DA). It also suggests that the 'pandemic' was expected, Pfizer and BIG Pharma had advanced warning, and products had entered clinical trials many months earlier. Nobody would know - protocols would be followed and a product for something proved safe and effective - against influenza. They managed something similar with the -

 

 Apollo Moon Landings (Capricorn One)

 

   Only a few key people are needed to make something like this work. Most of those involved are not implicated in the conspiracy. They are just doing their job - following orders down the chain of command from the top (elite). Some outsiders question and analyse in great detail but for the majority, anything but the official 'narrative' is simply not conceivable. It's all conspiracy theory and MUST be ignored. It's in the instructions. The philosophical question - is there a God? To believe a fiction (it cannot be a fact as nothing can be proven). It's too difficult to even attempt an answer, so accept the belief. A definition of 'living in a box'.


Unpalatable concepts live

outside the box


This means an engineered

plandemic, Louis - DA


   Albert Bourla sold 132,508 shares at $41.94 a share, equivalent to 62% of his shareholding in Pfizer, according to filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This is close to the $41.99 peak the share price hit on Monday(That IS good business. On a personal level - 5 cents short of from peak share price DA)

The initial group in the use of an 'experimental' vaccine is the most vulnerable. The non-infected and elderly. This is the population of old people least able to survive any adverse reactions that to date are completely unknown.

A Mexican female doctor (32) was hospitalised after receiving the COVID-19 'vaccine' (Pfizer/BioNTech). If a young person suffers any adverse reaction then what are the survival chances of the elderly. With other pre-existing health issues? No contact with Pfizer was successful...


are you kidding, Louis? An untested technology

(gene therapy) caused the hospitalisation

of a 32-year old Mexican female

and nobody from Pfizer could

be contacted? - DA


Science Behind The Historic

mRNA 'Vaccine'


No animal testing has been done so the only life-form to be inoculated is human. Elderly human. This is an experiment being conducted. A 'clinical trial'. If old people start dying then no doubt a 'spike' will be found using the discredited PCR test (not fit for this purpose).


If used for its intended purpose, the PCR test

was probably the most important

innovation of the 20th century


The global panic created by this subterfuge has resulted in the early launch of a vaccine. Indemnity for the manufacturers against any injuries/damage has been 'given' and was possibly not asked for. The only way that any ethical pharmaceutical business could be 'persuaded' to release a product. The premature approval of this vaccine is monstrous. The massively distorted infection rate and the spin-doctored 'case' figures appear to have engineered this situation. The release into the community of an inadequately safety-tested vaccine. It is still essentially an experimental product.

The mode of action is novel, unproven, and untested (mRNA). Side-effects can be considerable ('severe hangover', migraine, fever...). The public is being misled. The vaccine they expect will not be the one they get. And therefore will (probably - DA) not be aware of the indemnity Pfizer has been given by the Government which absolves Pfizer from any blame (lawsuit) if the vaccine causes injury.

Pfizer claims to be an ethical pharmaceutical company. It has a long list of world-class drugs. Its origins go way back to 1849. The UK Government gave indemnity to Pfizer and this would effectively release Pfizer from the ethical code...


...ought to be held to a higher standard

than those in other industries

due to their role in serving the public good


Animal testing has been side-stepped [not a bad thing but the 'urgency' has been so escalated by clearly (spin) doctoring statistics concerning death that it appears death is caused by COVID-19. And so it is recorded. Rather than death with an alleged and unconfirmed infection by SARS-CoV-2]. It has not yet conclusively been established that death is caused by the alleged and assumed infection.

The rules for cremation have been changed so that a death certificate is not required for an assumed COVID-19 death. Almost certainly cremation will be used to destroy the alleged viral infection - and any evidence in case a post-mortem was to be later ordered. There is no body to exhume.

 



The initial 'jab' must be repeated after 3 weeks with a second 'jab'. It will possibly make an individual feel very ill (but only after the second one - DA). If people were aware of the deceit they may not have the inoculation. It is (probably, Louis - DA) an engineered crisis, though. When a film is made it can only be assumed that an actual vaccination is viewed. It may be stage-managed. Scenes in a 'busy' intensive care facility are not necessarily genuine. This is after-all the BBC. The Government mouthpiece. Part of the propaganda machine (The Ministry of Truth, Louis - DA). If people knew what could happen then they would possibly decline to have the vaccine.

 

  • Indemnity for health service activity:



The AstraZeneca vaccine can be stored in conventional 'fridges and for a longer period than the Pfizer vaccine. It is also cheaper than the Pfizer vaccine, which has a maximum 'shelf-life' of 30 days - if kept at -70degC. Only hospitals are equipped with such storage facilities. Personnel who are not experienced in handling such sensitive materials could easily and unwittingly make an error. How is the vaccine stored locally and made ready for use (warmed to ambient temperature)?

A vaccine does not render an individual immune from getting infected with SARS-CoV-2, only controlling the symptoms of such an alleged coronavirus infection. If someone is vaccinated and becomes infected, they would not know of an infection. Almost certainly they would be exempted from being tested after vaccination using the flawed PCR test. They could be a carrier and be asymptomatic and would test positive. Not testing would keep this fact hidden. How long would such a person be infectious before the vaccine rendered them coronavirus 'clean'? The 'spread of the virus' could potentially continue. It is more logical for a person to self-isolate for a minimum of one week until they can no longer infect others. The 'urgency' has been dramatically 'ramped up' to 'encourage' a high uptake of vaccinations.

The question is: why is it so absolutely necessary for everyone to be vaccinated? If there is no virus then the vaccine will be deemed very effective - there is nothing to do. The 'vaccine' could just be a saline solution placebo.

It must be borne in mind that medication (drug) is meant for anyone who is already ill. The vaccine is being rolled out to well people who may become ill (what about long-term if this is just after vaccination, Louis - DA) because of it.

The entire sequence of events (since March 2020) has been to scare people into having a vaccine. The product of choice uses an unapproved mRNA vaccine technology. The Coronavirus Act 2020 (UK) had been pre-prepared (this takes months) and was waiting in the wings to be activated just 3 days (19.03.2020) after the first lockdown (16.03.2020).

The AstraZeneca vaccine has undergone more extensive testing and is a traditional vaccine but indemnity was still required. The Pfizer vaccine is experimental with new and untested technology. Handling and distribution/storage also present considerable constraints yet the Government has rushed ahead with the plans for mass vaccination using the more contentious product. Pfizer may have been indemnified but the Government has not. Clearly, the Government considers a perceived infection (maybe 'a' non-existent virus, Louis - DA) a higher risk than the possibility of death or injury caused by an untested and non-validated technology. Assuming no other serious pre-existing health conditions.

At last, Louis! The authorities are now taking in to account the most important issue. It'll be age next. But they are 'inoculating' the very old first. The most vulnerable. Those who are least likely to survive a 'nasty' vaccination - DA.


Cost of vaccines

 

Pfizer/BioNTech2 x $19.50 ($39) 100 million doses

 

$1.95 billion (mRNA)

 

Moderna2 x $25 - $37 ($50 - $74) 100 million doses

 

$2.5 - $3.7 billion (mRNA)

 

AstraZeneca2 x $3 - $4 ($6 - $8) 100 million doses

 

$300 - $400 million (mRNA)

 
CDC (US Centres for Disease Control) recently updated (down-dated, Louis - DA) the estimated infection-fatality rates for COVID-19. Holding fire on the mass vaccination program is clearly indicated. The risks of injury by vaccination then disappear (but so does the profit, Louis - DA).


The UK Government is

pressing on regardless


Here are the updated survival rates by age group:


0-19: 99.997%
20-49: 99.98%
50-69: 99.5%
70+: 94.6%


Even in the 70+ age range,

the chance of fatality


after


infection is only just over 5%


the likelihood of HIV


Alarm Bells!!!

 

Health Secretary Matt Hancock

said it was a "brilliant milestone"

but warned "the battle is not yet over"

 

Not everyone in the UK has been vaccinated. YET.

And has Hancock been

('doctored') vaccinated? YET - DA


A vaccine can be 'designed' in days. However, small scale manufacture must provide material for preclinical studies to see if a product actually works. Government massaging of statistics has successfully 'demonstrated' the 'urgent' need for a vaccine as there is no other known 'solution'. Animal studies should be done but they have been avoided and testing a novel technology is directly into humans. The long-term trial will be a 'live' one monitoring (really - DA) inoculated people. The result is there can be no prior knowledge of safety or long-term damage caused by an untested technology.

There are three antibodies (IgA mouth and nose membranes, IgG in the blood, and IgM - the spleen is the major production site of this large antibody) that should be considered. The IgA antibody is important in the detection of the disease COVID-19.

How can any diagnostic 'kit' that allegedly tests for three different viruses (influenza A, influenza B, and SARS-CoV-2) allow any one infection to be distinguished from any of the other two? How can SARS-CoV-2 be specifically identified? At what level does the viral load need to be for detection? (Is it possible to be positive yet just have 'flu, Louis? - DA)
Vaccine Passport

The vaccine passport device has enabled any guilt about 'not doing the right thing' and saving lives, protecting the NHS...to be lifted. Actually, this is illusory. The Government introduced the term 'asymptomatic' to justify testing more people and ramping up the numbers of false positives by using the 'loaded gun' of the doctored/fixed PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) 'test'. PCR is not a 'test' but molecular cloning. Copying and converting a tiny trace of DNA into larger quantities. A procedure more applicable to forensic science and crime scene analysis.

PCR cannot be used to diagnose illness and certainly not identify a virus. SARS-CoV-2 has never been isolated or proven to exist. No standardisation of cycle numbers has been determined to reach the threshold over which non-infectious becomes infectious. An on/off, red/green light, binary (0 or 1), positive/negative... illogical concept. A reference of the virus is necessary for each manufacturer to correctly calibrate the product(s) it sells. The 'testing' procedure clearly cannot work but nevertheless the number of 'cases' is claimed to be constantly increasing to some outrageous (mythical) figure. A 'vaccine' - 'is the only thing that can save us'. The 'untested' and not proven-to-be-safe 'vaccines' (and the mRNA gene therapy - a medical device) have all been 'authorised' for use and have never been 'approved' as medicinal products. As far as The Government is concerned...


Authorised = approved

This is a monstrous lie. No product can ever be 'approved' without substantial (long-term) clinical trial data to support any claim made. Except under the:

 

Medical Devices

During the COVID-19 Pandemic

 

A fake pandemic has been engineered to enable the use of potentially dangerous untested chemical agents intended for human use that otherwise could never be used for several years. Such clinical trial data does not exist. It won't until at the earliest - 2023. Even commercial products cannot be sold to the public without robust data to support any claims made. Otherwise, people would be tricked into buying fake and ineffective, and potentially dangerous, products.

  The 'vaccine passport' will be used to demonstrate an individual has been 'vaccinated' (with something). The ridiculous notion is that these people are 'safe' and present no problem to society. Anyone who has not been vaccinated is, by definition, a considerable risk. But only to other non-vaccinated people. Anyone who is inoculated should just be protected from the effects (symptoms) of a SARS-Cov-2 infection. But this will not stop the 'spread of the virus'. A seasonal 'flu infection can still happen - even if the seasonal 'flu vaccine has been given. The 'flu jab may have been attenuated to make it less effective or totally ineffective. 'Flu-like symptoms can still be experienced even after a COVID-19 'vaccine'.

  This is the 'elephant in the room'. Efficacy of ~95% is a lie based on pseudo truth. Of 170 people who were 'infected' with the assumed COVID-19 ('flu-like symptoms - it was most likely 'flu even if they had been given the alleged seasonal 'flu jab), 162 had not been 'vaccinated' and 8 had been 'vaccinated'. Efficacy = 162/170 = 95.3%. These 170 'infections' were from a total of 44,000 volunteers. 'Infections': 170/44,000 = 0.386%. This means that for 5% of the vaccinated population, the 'vaccine' will not work. This 5% is not known and will be given a 'vaccine passport' but they will not know if they are protected (but not necessarily infectious) until they acquire an infection and exhibit 'flu-like symptoms. This may be 'flu but will be assumed to be COVID-19 if non-vaccinated or suffering a 'flu infection if vaccinated. A 'vaccinated' individual (assuming the 'vaccine' does what it is claimed to do - it doesn't have to, though) will not be aware of a COVID-19 infection, though can show 'flu-like symptoms. It will be 'flu. Watch for the seasonal 'flu vaccine being 'offered' now that the vaccination 'effort' is well-advanced. A proper strength vaccine so that...

 

'flu-like symptoms (assumed COVID-19) disappear

 

The vaccine is clearly working. Then the calls to mandate COVID-19 'vaccination', so the COVIDiots don't spoil the scam.

   There are possibly two agendas working here simultaneously. The theft of $trillions over several years from the very people being 'saved'. This defines sustainability and means COVID-19, COVID-21 (variant), COVID-22... will be with us for years.

 

Masks mandated to ensure poor health - more deaths.

More vaccines. COVID-X, of course. Restrict movement


   And a New World Government (WEF + UN + WHO) so that there is a 'combined force' co-operating to deal with the next pandemic. When? Ask Bill Gates.

   The viral ('flu) disease decreased to almost zero as COVID-19 infections increased - almost proportionately. It does not mean an asymptomatic person is not infected. They just wouldn't know. So, mixing with other inoculated people (clubs, pubs, cinemas, theatres, restaurants...) should present no noticeable problems. The claim will be made that the 'vaccines' are effective. These asymptomatic people can still spread the alleged virus. If they come into contact with someone who has not been vaccinated, and there are many reasons why some people cannot be or are ill-advised (!) to be 'vaccinated', they could (unknowingly) infect that someone. The track-and-trace (03.07.2020) -


BILL GATES 😈 NEGOTIATED $100 BILLION

TRACK AND TRACE PROGRAM

6 MONTHS BEFORE PANDEMIC

 

system would be completely redundant. All those with a 'vaccine passport' could not possibly be the cause. But what could possibly be the source? Another way to create fear: the virus is still spreading so get vaccinated. It's the variants!

Tuberculosis is an infectious disease usually caused by mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria. Tuberculosis generally affects the lungs, but can also affect other parts of the body. Most infections show no symptoms, in which case it is known as latent tuberculosis.

   Samples of sputum are examined. This mucus comes from the lung. Why can't the SARS-CoV-2 sample be coughed up from the lung as sputum? It is in the lung that infection will be found. Is it that a viral particle in nose/throat is only a sign of potential infection? Only when the virus is taken down into the lung can symptoms be noted. Obviously, a cough could eject a viral particle as an aerosol (social distancing cannot prevent infection and a mask is totally useless for preventing the virus entering the nose/mouth. Even the mask wearer is placed at risk not only by inhaling poor quality air but potentially re-inhaling and taking the particle deep into the lungs. It may have stayed in the upper areas or been ejected but a - damp mask enables deeper lung access).

 

The Dynamics of Infection

 

 The following reasoning is purely speculative

but is based on logical deduction. Entry of a 'virus'

into the body to cause infection must

follow a complex pathway

 

The viral load is the quantity of a virus, be it particle (dry) or contained in water droplets. The amount floating free in the air may be less than if someone sneezed nearby and didn't contain all the expelled (wet) breath. Water droplets will have different sizes and densities. Less dense droplets may travel further as wind-bourne globules (aerosols) and heavier ones will not travel very far before falling downwards under the influence of gravity (a really believable 'fact', Louis - DA). Should a wet or dry viral load enter the body through the nose or mouth most will be trapped in the upper airways by mucus secretions. Some may even travel further down into the lungs (probably as a water droplet). If the fingers have touched a surface that is smeared in water or mucus droplets contaminated with a virus, it may enter the body through the eye tear ducts if the contaminated finger is moved to the eye. It will be necessary for the finger to touch the tear duct for transmission to occur.

   A nasopharyngeal swab that is used to collect a sample of someone's secretions, is inserted horizontally to access the deeper linings of the nasal airways. Or via the mouth and around the tonsil area near the top of the airways that feed into the lungs. That an active virus (it is not 'alive'will be found here (if inhalation of particles has taken place) is evidence that most, if not all, of any potential infection source, has not entered the lungs. If a virus remains here there will be no infection. A virus must enter the blood to circulate and reach the body cells that will ultimately be hijacked by the virus to copy itself (replicate). Early on, after inhaling a viral particle (water-based droplet) the virus will not be in the bloodOxygen (or the carbon dioxide in expelled breath containing high levels of this gas is re-inhaled by wearing a facemask) in the air must first enter the lungs to be passed into the blood (alveoli). A person can be asymptomatic but still have a potential infection source if inhalation has recently occurred and before any droplets have been passed into the lungs.

 

The slow ingress down the oesophagus past

 the epiglottis and into the lungs could only then

 facilitate transmission into the bloodstream

and onward to infect cells


   Consequently, a vaccine will be ineffective if the virus hasn't entered the bloodstream. An individual may be asymptomatic but nevertheless 'test' positive as the result of a nasopharyngeal swab sample. The viral load could never be quantified. If a PCR procedure was run with Ct = 45, the tiniest trace of any coronavirus will be detected. This could be from any number of human coronavirusesPCR cannot identify disease or any specific viral particle.

   A (effective) vaccine can only neutralise (in time) a systemic infection - in the blood. Any active virus in the mucus lining the deep in the nasal passages and throat cannot be accessed by the intramuscular delivery of a chemical agent, the composition of which is completely unknown. A Government that has consistently lied and not mentioned anything counter to the COVID-19 narrative and coercing people into accepting - without informed consent - a 'vaccine' that has not been proven to be neccesary and its safety totally unknown. The entire situation has been created on trust that is actually betrayal.

  Nasopharangyal swabs could be used in another way to artificially inflate the 'case' numbers of 'confirmed' COVID-19 infections. By introducing an inactive (harmless) coronavirus virus into the passages using a contaminated swab and then withdrawing the 'pre-infected' swab directly would produce a positive result (PCR: Ct - 45). If every tenth swab during manufacture was infected, then a 10% increase in numbers of COVID-19 'cases' would be expected. Such people may show only mild symptoms (it is after all nothing more than a cold) or no symptoms at all but by using the corrupted PCR instrument ('not fit for purpose' - 27.11.2020) as the 'test' procedure (it is not a 'test' - it is DNA copying = molecular cloning) confirms COVID-19. It may only be a trace fragment of an inactive (harmless) coronavirus though the 'interpretation' is definitely (and without question) another confirmed 'case' of COVID-19 even though no symptoms manifested. This means the individual is asymptomatic and this alone justifies testing more and more and... it gets absurd. The number of contaminated swabs could easily be adjusted as appropriate for the 'scare of the day'. A useful experiment would to take several randomly chosen swabs and 'test' them directly without human contact (use pure water as required). If a single 'positive' result was obtained it would constitute damning proof of contamination.

   There is another source for an historical 'clean' DNA sample that could used (convicted criminals have their DNA retained). A routine PCR analysis (Ct = 45) using these samples should all be negative but any coronavirus fragment would show positive. Long before the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus.


Why is it so critically important to get people vaccinated

that The Government deliberately misinforms

and blatantly lies to coerce people into

harming themselves?

 

   It will not stop the 'spread of the virus' (existence unproven). It cannotWhat is in this 'vaccine'? What will be the effects of 5G microwave irradiation?

   MSM has... 

 

failed to report ANYTHING

 

...counter-narrative. And there is a great deal of it. The real science part of the open debate that is completely absent (it's been closed down, Louis - DAbut that everyone needs to know. No sane person would willingly - without informed consent - be innoculated with any untested and novel treatment the safety of which (to the human system - long term) is completely unknown. The UK Government pontificates about how safe they are yet knows the truth (especially about the non-vaccine Pfizer-modeRNA gene therapy products).

 

Hancock and Whitty

 

know the truth

 

   The people are not being informed globally. They are being 'advised' to accept a...

 

highly suspect chemical agent

 

   They have been and still are being misinformed. They trust (!!! - DA) Government and would rather believe Hancock (not a scientist - no medical training - like Bill Gates 😈) and Whitty who knows about the PCR 'test' being 'unfit for purpose', but has kept silent, than real doctors and true scientists. The warnings (truth) are not being communicated.

 

Stating the obvious

 

The safety of these 'products' is totally

unknowable but they are STILL...

 

declared safe

 

an absolute lie

 

   The Pfizer-modeRNA gene therapy has never-before been approved but the chemical agents have been aggressively pushed as 'vaccines'. It is not known (there are no studies) if a mix and match of these 'vaccines' with other technologies for 1st/2nd doses is safe. The completely uknown effects of products that are declared safe but cannot be known to be safe.

   Vaccine passports must delude people into believing they are safe from infection - of what? That they will not be responsible for the spread of a 'virus(only the non-vaccinated (healthy) 'COVIDiots' can do that, Louis. If you believe the 'narrative'!!! - DA). They can be both self-righteous and still highly infectious (with some mysterious pathogen). A (claimed - no evidence) variant (now there are many variants) will make any 'vaccine' non-effective (no surprises there, Louis - DA)Seasonal 'flu has been sold for several years with the belief that an ever-changing 'flu virus can only be managed by using an...

 

annual 'vaccine'

 

   A variant MUST and can ONLY be dealt with by having an...

 

annual vaccination

 

The whole issue of the seasonal 'flu...

 

 COVID-X 'cases' increase while

'flu incidence decreases


 is now in greater doubt than ever before