That means that anyone can be punished for the crimes they committed in other countries, when their Bioscans prove, they were guilty of their crimes, recorded on foreign CCTV camera's.
when I think of DIGITAL ID I think of animals before slaughter and their digital ID in their ears. I also think of the Jews and Gypsys in Hitlers concentration camps with digital ID tattooed on their arms and chests. It seems that owners of mammals love nothing more than to number their herds before slaughter. Fact. IBM stuck with Hitler throughout the war keeping track of the genocide and making sure the trains of victims and war materials were properly recorded and accounted for. Thomas Watson, who was the CEO of IBM, visited Germany in 1937 and met with Hitler, who was then the Chancellor of Germany. Watson was impressed by Hitler’s leadership and the two men developed a close relationship. IBM launched the microsoft operating system and had a close relationship with BIll Gates. Bill Gates has a patent on a digital tracking system fur humans using micro dot metallic ink fired under the skin. It is an electronic tattoo for all intents and purposes.
Biocompatible near-infrared quantum dots delivered to the skin
Wow, all news to me, thanks for your input. There is no way i'm ever going to volunteer for a biometrics face print, not much good anyway, as I don't have a mobile phone
This is the setup! I view Australia as proxy state to experiment all of this social engineering. I am like wow. This is the prison system with the technology as the warden. I wrote this in my next book Humanistry July 2024. This is the beginning of the end. Folks got to step up and say no!!!!!!
Well, we are of a like mind on that. Interesting times ahead for Australia then. I don't think it is possible to stop it now, because once vaccinated, the vaccines can't be taken out again, as was discussed in the article I posted to that effect - so the final outcome was done, when the vaccines were input and that's that - it is just a matter of letting time do its job and the end result predetermined, unfortunately, not just in Australia, but everywhere and amongst all who "volunteered" to have their vaccines which is emphasized here, in case you missed it: Covid Vaccines Are DUD'S CLAIM VACCINES ARE THE WORLD’S BEST STUDIED PRODUCT DIES
The world’s leading vaccinologist, Dr. Stanley Plotkin, and company have just capitulated…
Aaron Siri
Jul 10
Wow. After decades of Dr. Stanley Plotkin and his vaccinologist disciples insisting vaccines are the most well studied products on the planet, they just penned an article admitting precisely the opposite.
They just admitted vaccines are not properly studied—neither pre-licensure nor post-licensure. They admitted, for example, “prelicensure clinical trials have limited sample sizes [and] follow-up durations” and that “there are not resources earmarked for postauthorization safety studies.”
That is an incredible reversal. But let me provide context so nobody is fooled at what they are clearly up to:
For decades, the medical community insisted vaccines are the most thoroughly studied product ever; for example, Dr. Paul Offit said, "I think we should be proud of vaccines as arguably the safest, best tested things we put in our body.”
For decades, parents of vaccine injured children, vaccine injured adults, and other stakeholders contested these claims only to be shunned and attacked by the medical community and health agencies.
In 2018, I had the unprecedented opportunity to depose the architect of our vaccination program and the Godfather of Vaccinology, Dr. Plotkin, and lay bare the evidence that showed what these authors are now finally admitting about the utter lack of vaccine safety trials and studies. See https://thehighwire.com/ark-videos/the-deposition-of-stanley-plotkin/.
After this deposition is made public, Dr. Plotkin goes on a tirade, making demands that FDA add “missing information on safety and efficacy” in vaccine package inserts and that CDC exclude harms from its Vaccine Information Sheets, “lobbying the Gates Foundation to support pro-vaccine organizations,” working to have WHO list vaccine hesitancy as a global threat, lobbying AAP, IDSA and PIDS to “support training of witnesses” to support vaccine safety, etc. See https://icandecide.org/article/dr-stanley-plotkin-the-godfather-of-vaccines-reaction-to-being-questioned/.
The problem is, it doesn't work. It doesn’t work because, at bottom, there are no proper safety studies. So, there is no safety data to add to the FDA package inserts, and hiding harms by removing them from CDC inserts doesn’t make them go away. Parents and other adults don’t simply stop believing what they have seen with their own eyes because CDC, WHO, the Gates Foundations, etc., won’t acknowledge them, or worse, they attack them.
That brings us to the present in which Plotkin and his disciples realize they can’t cast voodoo on the public. They can’t hide the truth. So, their only option is to try and co-op the truth they have lied about for decades by now admitting that the studies to show vaccines are safe do not exist. But in making that admission, they conveniently fail to admit that for decades they lied, gaslit, defrauded (and I don’t use that word lightly) the public by claiming that vaccines are probably the most thoroughly safety tested products on the planet and that people should rest assured, no stone on vaccine safety was left unturned.
Thus, in their article just published, they pretend they never lied about vaccine safety. They pretend they are now just pointing out vaccine safety has never really been conducted, as if that was not known to them before.
Don’t be fooled. Their real agenda is plain, and it is not to study vaccine safety, but rather to confirm that which they already believe. This is crystal clear from the fact that, while their article admits the studies have not been done, they write in the same breath that serious vaccine harms are “rare.” But if the studies have not been done, how do they know that? The answer is, they don’t, and they don’t care to know the truth. Their goal is to protect the products they have spent their careers defending and worshipping and that have brought them fame and riches.
They also ignore the mountain of studies and data which already exist that clearly show serious vaccine harms. Just take a moment to review the large body of science around one of the adjuvants used in vaccines which multiple studies show can cause serious harm. See https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38788092/.
Finally, just look at their proposed solution. After making the a priori conclusion that harms are “rare,” ignoring all the existing studies showing harm, these folk have the audacity to want to raid the federal vaccine injury compensation fund to presumably pay themselves and their compatriots hundreds of millions of dollars to conduct the studies that would, no doubt, seek to confirm their prior conclusion that vaccine harms are “rare,” while ignoring the studies that already show serious harm.
So, with that in mind, and sorry for the long wind-up, here are the things they admit in this article for maybe the very first time:
“[T]he widespread vaccine hesitancy observed during the Covid-19 pandemic suggests that the public is no longer satisfied with the traditional safety goal of simply detecting and quantifying the associated risks after a vaccine has been authorized for use.”
Comment: The parents of vaccine injured children, vaccine injured adults, and others were never “satisfied” with seeking to assess “risks after a vaccine has been authorized.”
“Postauthorization studies are needed to fully characterize the safety profile of a new vaccine, since prelicensure clinical trials have limited sample sizes, follow up durations, and population heterogeneity.”
Comment: Let me translate: the clinical trials relied upon to license childhood vaccines are useless with regard to safety since they virtually never have a placebo control, typically review safety for days or weeks after injection, and often have far too few participants to measure anything of value, just see www.icandecide.org/no-placebo; amazingly, I just had a dispute with a Plotkin disciple not long ago in which they were clearly still not ready to admit the above truth https://x.com/AaronSiriSG/status/1673483027618623489.
“It is critical to examine adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) that have not been detected in clinical trials, to ascertain whether they are causally or coincidentally related to vaccination.”
Comment: No shit and you have been claiming for decades this was being done!
“When they are caused by vaccines (vaccine adverse reactions), the risk attributable to vaccination and the biologic mechanism must be ascertained. That science becomes the basis for developing safer vaccines, if possible, and for determining contraindications to vaccination and the compensation that should be offered for AEFIs.”
Comment: Again, no shit, and you have also been claiming for decades this was being done!
“Currently in the United States, when the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends a new routine vaccine, the only automatic statutory resource allocations that follow are for vaccine procurement by Vaccines for Children (VFC) and for the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). Although the ACIP acknowledges the need, there are currently no resources earmarked for postauthorization safety studies beyond annual appropriations, which must be approved by Congress each year.”
Comment: Again, no shit! But nice of you to finally admit it after decades of gaslighting.
“Progress in vaccine-safety science has understandably been slow — often depending on epidemiologic evidence that is delayed or is inadequate to support causal conclusions and on an understanding of biologic mechanisms that is incomplete — which has adversely affected vaccine acceptance.”
Comment: More gaslighting because had a proper clinical trial been conducted pre-licensure, we would know the safety before it is unleashed on babies and we wouldn’t need to rely on confounded-biased-conflicted-post-authorization “epidemiolocal” studies you now want to conduct which you make clear you only suggest because you want to avoid “public concern and consequent decreases in immunization coverage,” not because you actually care about safety.
“In 234 reviews of various vaccines and health outcomes conducted from 1991 to 2012, the IOM found inadequate evidence to prove or disprove causation in 179 (76%) of the relationships it explored, illustrating the need for more rigorous science.”
“Identifying the biologic mechanisms of adverse reactions — how and in whom they occur — is critical for developing safer vaccines, preventing adverse reactions by expanding contraindications, and equitably compensating vaccinees for true adverse reactions.”
Comment: Shameless to pretend you have not for decades ignored or attacked those calling for these studies while pretending a mountain of such studies showing the foregoing don’t already exist.
“[T]he budget for vaccine-safety monitoring at the CDC (which is responsible for the majority of U.S. federal efforts) has remained stagnant … at about $20 million per year” which they write is an “inadequate level of funding.”
Comment: Again, shameless to pretend parent groups have not been yelling about this issue for decades only to be ignored and attacked.
“The public [now] also wants public health authorities to mitigate and prevent rare but serious adverse events – which no longer seem rare when vaccines are given to millions or billions of people.”
Comment: They have always been given to millions or billions of people, and the studies showing the harms they cause are not rare and they already exist, but you don’t really care about that reality as vaccine safety is not really the goal.
If they are really interested in the truth about what injuries vaccines cause and the rate at which these injuries occur, then they should welcome convening a bipartisan panel which could first review all the very concerning studies and hard data that already exists on this topic (often by scientists not on pharma’s doll) and we could design additional studies together and have them run in the open so everybody has to live with the result.
(Among other reasons to demand the study be conducted in the open is that I have witnesses firsthand what happens when a study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children in large multi-million person datasets, using historical insurance data, showed vaccinated children had multiple times the rate of numerous chronic diseases – the study gets buried hence the need to do it in the open.)
Plotkin and company should welcome studies which can show vaccines have not contributed to the rise in chronic childhood disease (many of which are immune mediated diseases) from 12% of children in the early 1980s (when CDC recommended 7 routine childhood injections) to over 50% of children now (when CDC recommends over 90 routine childhood injections).
And I think they do welcome such studies if they can assure that the outcome would show vaccines do not cause these harms. Alas, the reality is that (as they know) studies showing vaccines contribute to this rise already exist. But their goal, in any event, is not to really study safety. Rather it is to prove their prior assumption that vaccines are safe and harms are “rare.” This approach is how they designed VAERS, V-SAFE, VSD, and every other “safety” system.
As is transparent from their article, the only reason they even pretend to care about vaccine safety is that they want to avoid reduction in vaccine uptake – not actually assure safety.
That all said, if they are really well-meaning, I would welcome collaborating. To be fair, I will email all four of them to request a meeting to review existing science and design studies mutually agreed upon. If they are really interested in vaccine safety, they should welcome that (I have no hard feelings despite their attacks on me and I hope they can rise above any hard feelings they have for the sake of protecting children). Most importantly, I'm willing to live with the results of those studies. Are they?
The whole idea of the vaccine is now a gaslight. The medical industrial complex tied with Pharma does heal you. It keeps you on their product. They do not heal the individual. They are not healers. We must start from there also. If the job is to keep you on their product then this means it was a gaslight from the outset. Much of what is called peer review is a gaslight. We are going through a major reevaluation in front of our eyes. We just have to realize that and not be afraid!
Gaslight: “What they did is, they said, ‘We’re going to inject into the arms of billions of people the instructions to turn each individual into a bioweapons factory’ … Every single person that took the shot became the manufacturer of a synthetic spike protein associated with the coronavirus model.
There are TWO elements to this Bio Weapon because the "Not natural mRNA - but ModRNA DNA synthetic, created in a laboratory and patented "injected trillions of LNP viral vectors"
1) Biological Weapons: “The difference between this and everything that’s been done before is really simple.
Not natural mRNA - but ModRNA DNA synthetic, created in a laboratory and patented: there are two distinctions that are absolutely unique to the covid pandemic.
Number 1, we are actually creating the mechanism to instruct the body to manufacture a toxin …
Number 2, the response is actually a ‘hopeful’ response that failed to consider two very critical things: the lipid nanoparticle in which the shot is delivered actually is also a toxin … and then the worst part about it is that we introduced a thing called pseudouridine.”
Pseudouridine was published in 2018 to be a pro-cancer agent. What this means is that “it shuts down the body’s response to how we recognise tumours and suppress tumours,” Dr. Martin explained. Pseudouridine has been included in mRNA injections to stabilise the mRNA so it stays in the human body longer to achieve its effect, he said = MS40?
Dr. Masanori Fukushima, pointed out that “turbo cancers,” a kind “previously unseen by doctors” that progress extremely quickly and are typically in stage four by the time they are diagnosed, have started to appear after the jab rollouts. These “turbo cancers” are emerging along with excess mortality due to cancer in general, which Dr. Fukushima says cannot be explained only by lost opportunities for screenings or treatment during the COVID outbreak.
The Moderna contains 40*10^12 LNPs, to the best of my knowledge (Pfizer 12*10^12). This equates to 40/12 trillion in short scale. AZ has 50*10^9, which would be 1 milliard in long scale. I believe these numbers to be correct (https://evolutionaryhealthplan.info/#_Ref83404023 )
2) Weapons of Mass Destruction: Secondly there is the US Army Weapon which they are not telling anyone about, because it is a MILITARY SECRET. You don't want your enemy to know you can kill them with a 5G transmission, do you?
Dr Noack: They show that it is not graphene oxide, but rather graphene hydroxide. I would like to explain what this graphene hydroxide is. It is mono-layer activated carbon. There are C6 rings. He found it in all samples. Every corner is a carbon atom. This is on a nanoscale.
I’ll cut this up a bit here. If it is 50nm long, there are 500 rings in a row. These are hydroxy groups (OH). In graphene oxide you have double bonded oxygen, and in graphene hydroxide you have an OH group. The electrons are delocalised (fully mobile). The piece is 50nm long but only 0.1 nm thick. These C6 structures are extremely stable. You can make brake pads out of this. It is not biologically decomposable.
These nanoscale structures can best be described as razor blades. These razor blades are injected into the body. Nano-scale, tiny razor blades. Only one atom layer thick. Relatively wide and high. They are razors, biologically not decomposable. The OH (hydroxy) groups can split off a proton. When the proton is split off, they gain a negative charge spread out over the whole system.
It is basically an acid. It suspends well in water because of the negative charge. So these are razor blades spread homogenously in the liquid. This is basically Russian roulette. You can see it very clearly in this woman. It cuts the blood vessels. The blood vessels have epithel cells as their inner lining. The epithel is extremely smooth. like a mirror. And it is cut up by these razor blades. That is what’s so dangerous.
If you inject the vaccine into a vein, the razors will circulate in the blood and cut up the epithel. The mean thing is that toxicological tests are done in Petri dishes. And there you will not find anything. These are the sharpest imaginable structures because they are only one atom layer thick.
This is a huge molecule which is extremely sharp. I am a specilist in activated carbon. In my doctoral thesis, I have converted graphen oxide to graphene hydroxide. I joined the world’s leading activated carbon manufacturer. After a year I was in charge of new activated carbon products. We bought a small company in Durham, near Newcastle, England. I was in charge of “new carbon products”, Europe-wide. I was in application scouting.
If you perform an autopsy on the victims, you will not find anything. Toxicologists do their tests in Petri dishes. They can’t imagine that there are structures that can cut up blood vessels. There are pictures of coagulated blood coming out of the nose. People bleed to death on the inside. Especially the top athletes who are dropping dead have fast flowing blood. The faster the blood flows, the more damage the razors will do.
"It is my thought" that the carbon particles are inert and that only by 5G transmission can they be activated, when the Trillions of inert Carbon Particles are changed into Carbon Hydroxide, which are minature razors, too small to see without an Electron Microscope, which in turn chop up your insides and inside your Organs shutting them down and killing you, possibly over 4 days and the reason for your new MAC address:
Find your MAC address with Apple: BT Explorer. Android: Inpersona - or both with Bluetooth.
SO - those behind these vaccines can implement them whenever they like and there is nothing we can do to stop them, except publish these bio weapons, their intention and hold those behind them to ransom - if you do this, we will do that to you, because we know who you are and where you live.
Thus the Great Reset was a huge success, because once in, the vaccine contents can't be taken out again can they?
Yes, I get news on how the biometrics push is going on throughout the world and Australia too and occasionally I see something worthy of a comment in my opinion, so I copy and post it on, with my thoughts on the subject concerned. I read that 10 Senators had written to your Albo asking that the Aussie Biometrics thing be stopped, because they could see it as being a control compliance weapon in the future - but Albo seems dead set on continuing with it, whatever his Senators think - but its the same everywhere and around the world.
when I think of DIGITAL ID I think of animals before slaughter and their digital ID in their ears. I also think of the Jews and Gypsys in Hitlers concentration camps with digital ID tattooed on their arms and chests. It seems that owners of mammals love nothing more than to number their herds before slaughter. Fact. IBM stuck with Hitler throughout the war keeping track of the genocide and making sure the trains of victims and war materials were properly recorded and accounted for. Thomas Watson, who was the CEO of IBM, visited Germany in 1937 and met with Hitler, who was then the Chancellor of Germany. Watson was impressed by Hitler’s leadership and the two men developed a close relationship. IBM launched the microsoft operating system and had a close relationship with BIll Gates. Bill Gates has a patent on a digital tracking system fur humans using micro dot metallic ink fired under the skin. It is an electronic tattoo for all intents and purposes.
Biocompatible near-infrared quantum dots delivered to the skin
Wow, all news to me, thanks for your input. There is no way i'm ever going to volunteer for a biometrics face print, not much good anyway, as I don't have a mobile phone
This is the setup! I view Australia as proxy state to experiment all of this social engineering. I am like wow. This is the prison system with the technology as the warden. I wrote this in my next book Humanistry July 2024. This is the beginning of the end. Folks got to step up and say no!!!!!!
Well, we are of a like mind on that. Interesting times ahead for Australia then. I don't think it is possible to stop it now, because once vaccinated, the vaccines can't be taken out again, as was discussed in the article I posted to that effect - so the final outcome was done, when the vaccines were input and that's that - it is just a matter of letting time do its job and the end result predetermined, unfortunately, not just in Australia, but everywhere and amongst all who "volunteered" to have their vaccines which is emphasized here, in case you missed it: Covid Vaccines Are DUD'S CLAIM VACCINES ARE THE WORLD’S BEST STUDIED PRODUCT DIES
The world’s leading vaccinologist, Dr. Stanley Plotkin, and company have just capitulated…
Aaron Siri
Jul 10
Wow. After decades of Dr. Stanley Plotkin and his vaccinologist disciples insisting vaccines are the most well studied products on the planet, they just penned an article admitting precisely the opposite.
They just admitted vaccines are not properly studied—neither pre-licensure nor post-licensure. They admitted, for example, “prelicensure clinical trials have limited sample sizes [and] follow-up durations” and that “there are not resources earmarked for postauthorization safety studies.”
That is an incredible reversal. But let me provide context so nobody is fooled at what they are clearly up to:
For decades, the medical community insisted vaccines are the most thoroughly studied product ever; for example, Dr. Paul Offit said, "I think we should be proud of vaccines as arguably the safest, best tested things we put in our body.”
For decades, parents of vaccine injured children, vaccine injured adults, and other stakeholders contested these claims only to be shunned and attacked by the medical community and health agencies.
In 2018, I had the unprecedented opportunity to depose the architect of our vaccination program and the Godfather of Vaccinology, Dr. Plotkin, and lay bare the evidence that showed what these authors are now finally admitting about the utter lack of vaccine safety trials and studies. See https://thehighwire.com/ark-videos/the-deposition-of-stanley-plotkin/.
After this deposition is made public, Dr. Plotkin goes on a tirade, making demands that FDA add “missing information on safety and efficacy” in vaccine package inserts and that CDC exclude harms from its Vaccine Information Sheets, “lobbying the Gates Foundation to support pro-vaccine organizations,” working to have WHO list vaccine hesitancy as a global threat, lobbying AAP, IDSA and PIDS to “support training of witnesses” to support vaccine safety, etc. See https://icandecide.org/article/dr-stanley-plotkin-the-godfather-of-vaccines-reaction-to-being-questioned/.
The problem is, it doesn't work. It doesn’t work because, at bottom, there are no proper safety studies. So, there is no safety data to add to the FDA package inserts, and hiding harms by removing them from CDC inserts doesn’t make them go away. Parents and other adults don’t simply stop believing what they have seen with their own eyes because CDC, WHO, the Gates Foundations, etc., won’t acknowledge them, or worse, they attack them.
That brings us to the present in which Plotkin and his disciples realize they can’t cast voodoo on the public. They can’t hide the truth. So, their only option is to try and co-op the truth they have lied about for decades by now admitting that the studies to show vaccines are safe do not exist. But in making that admission, they conveniently fail to admit that for decades they lied, gaslit, defrauded (and I don’t use that word lightly) the public by claiming that vaccines are probably the most thoroughly safety tested products on the planet and that people should rest assured, no stone on vaccine safety was left unturned.
Thus, in their article just published, they pretend they never lied about vaccine safety. They pretend they are now just pointing out vaccine safety has never really been conducted, as if that was not known to them before.
Don’t be fooled. Their real agenda is plain, and it is not to study vaccine safety, but rather to confirm that which they already believe. This is crystal clear from the fact that, while their article admits the studies have not been done, they write in the same breath that serious vaccine harms are “rare.” But if the studies have not been done, how do they know that? The answer is, they don’t, and they don’t care to know the truth. Their goal is to protect the products they have spent their careers defending and worshipping and that have brought them fame and riches.
They also ignore the mountain of studies and data which already exist that clearly show serious vaccine harms. Just take a moment to review the large body of science around one of the adjuvants used in vaccines which multiple studies show can cause serious harm. See https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38788092/.
Finally, just look at their proposed solution. After making the a priori conclusion that harms are “rare,” ignoring all the existing studies showing harm, these folk have the audacity to want to raid the federal vaccine injury compensation fund to presumably pay themselves and their compatriots hundreds of millions of dollars to conduct the studies that would, no doubt, seek to confirm their prior conclusion that vaccine harms are “rare,” while ignoring the studies that already show serious harm.
So, with that in mind, and sorry for the long wind-up, here are the things they admit in this article for maybe the very first time:
“[T]he widespread vaccine hesitancy observed during the Covid-19 pandemic suggests that the public is no longer satisfied with the traditional safety goal of simply detecting and quantifying the associated risks after a vaccine has been authorized for use.”
Comment: The parents of vaccine injured children, vaccine injured adults, and others were never “satisfied” with seeking to assess “risks after a vaccine has been authorized.”
“Postauthorization studies are needed to fully characterize the safety profile of a new vaccine, since prelicensure clinical trials have limited sample sizes, follow up durations, and population heterogeneity.”
Comment: Let me translate: the clinical trials relied upon to license childhood vaccines are useless with regard to safety since they virtually never have a placebo control, typically review safety for days or weeks after injection, and often have far too few participants to measure anything of value, just see www.icandecide.org/no-placebo; amazingly, I just had a dispute with a Plotkin disciple not long ago in which they were clearly still not ready to admit the above truth https://x.com/AaronSiriSG/status/1673483027618623489.
“It is critical to examine adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) that have not been detected in clinical trials, to ascertain whether they are causally or coincidentally related to vaccination.”
Comment: No shit and you have been claiming for decades this was being done!
“When they are caused by vaccines (vaccine adverse reactions), the risk attributable to vaccination and the biologic mechanism must be ascertained. That science becomes the basis for developing safer vaccines, if possible, and for determining contraindications to vaccination and the compensation that should be offered for AEFIs.”
Comment: Again, no shit, and you have also been claiming for decades this was being done!
“Currently in the United States, when the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends a new routine vaccine, the only automatic statutory resource allocations that follow are for vaccine procurement by Vaccines for Children (VFC) and for the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). Although the ACIP acknowledges the need, there are currently no resources earmarked for postauthorization safety studies beyond annual appropriations, which must be approved by Congress each year.”
Comment: Again, no shit! But nice of you to finally admit it after decades of gaslighting.
“Progress in vaccine-safety science has understandably been slow — often depending on epidemiologic evidence that is delayed or is inadequate to support causal conclusions and on an understanding of biologic mechanisms that is incomplete — which has adversely affected vaccine acceptance.”
Comment: More gaslighting because had a proper clinical trial been conducted pre-licensure, we would know the safety before it is unleashed on babies and we wouldn’t need to rely on confounded-biased-conflicted-post-authorization “epidemiolocal” studies you now want to conduct which you make clear you only suggest because you want to avoid “public concern and consequent decreases in immunization coverage,” not because you actually care about safety.
“In 234 reviews of various vaccines and health outcomes conducted from 1991 to 2012, the IOM found inadequate evidence to prove or disprove causation in 179 (76%) of the relationships it explored, illustrating the need for more rigorous science.”
End Of Part One
Part Two Of Above: Comment: Again, no shit, and I would appreciate if you would please properly cite to the ICAN white paper from 2017 from which you have plainly lifted this point https://icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/VaccineSafety-Version-1.0-October-2-2017-1.pdf.
“Identifying the biologic mechanisms of adverse reactions — how and in whom they occur — is critical for developing safer vaccines, preventing adverse reactions by expanding contraindications, and equitably compensating vaccinees for true adverse reactions.”
Comment: Shameless to pretend you have not for decades ignored or attacked those calling for these studies while pretending a mountain of such studies showing the foregoing don’t already exist.
“[T]he budget for vaccine-safety monitoring at the CDC (which is responsible for the majority of U.S. federal efforts) has remained stagnant … at about $20 million per year” which they write is an “inadequate level of funding.”
Comment: Again, shameless to pretend parent groups have not been yelling about this issue for decades only to be ignored and attacked.
“The public [now] also wants public health authorities to mitigate and prevent rare but serious adverse events – which no longer seem rare when vaccines are given to millions or billions of people.”
Comment: They have always been given to millions or billions of people, and the studies showing the harms they cause are not rare and they already exist, but you don’t really care about that reality as vaccine safety is not really the goal.
If they are really interested in the truth about what injuries vaccines cause and the rate at which these injuries occur, then they should welcome convening a bipartisan panel which could first review all the very concerning studies and hard data that already exists on this topic (often by scientists not on pharma’s doll) and we could design additional studies together and have them run in the open so everybody has to live with the result.
(Among other reasons to demand the study be conducted in the open is that I have witnesses firsthand what happens when a study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children in large multi-million person datasets, using historical insurance data, showed vaccinated children had multiple times the rate of numerous chronic diseases – the study gets buried hence the need to do it in the open.)
Plotkin and company should welcome studies which can show vaccines have not contributed to the rise in chronic childhood disease (many of which are immune mediated diseases) from 12% of children in the early 1980s (when CDC recommended 7 routine childhood injections) to over 50% of children now (when CDC recommends over 90 routine childhood injections).
And I think they do welcome such studies if they can assure that the outcome would show vaccines do not cause these harms. Alas, the reality is that (as they know) studies showing vaccines contribute to this rise already exist. But their goal, in any event, is not to really study safety. Rather it is to prove their prior assumption that vaccines are safe and harms are “rare.” This approach is how they designed VAERS, V-SAFE, VSD, and every other “safety” system.
As is transparent from their article, the only reason they even pretend to care about vaccine safety is that they want to avoid reduction in vaccine uptake – not actually assure safety.
That all said, if they are really well-meaning, I would welcome collaborating. To be fair, I will email all four of them to request a meeting to review existing science and design studies mutually agreed upon. If they are really interested in vaccine safety, they should welcome that (I have no hard feelings despite their attacks on me and I hope they can rise above any hard feelings they have for the sake of protecting children). Most importantly, I'm willing to live with the results of those studies. Are they?
Aaron Siri
The whole idea of the vaccine is now a gaslight. The medical industrial complex tied with Pharma does heal you. It keeps you on their product. They do not heal the individual. They are not healers. We must start from there also. If the job is to keep you on their product then this means it was a gaslight from the outset. Much of what is called peer review is a gaslight. We are going through a major reevaluation in front of our eyes. We just have to realize that and not be afraid!
Gaslight: “What they did is, they said, ‘We’re going to inject into the arms of billions of people the instructions to turn each individual into a bioweapons factory’ … Every single person that took the shot became the manufacturer of a synthetic spike protein associated with the coronavirus model.
There are TWO elements to this Bio Weapon because the "Not natural mRNA - but ModRNA DNA synthetic, created in a laboratory and patented "injected trillions of LNP viral vectors"
1) Biological Weapons: “The difference between this and everything that’s been done before is really simple.
Not natural mRNA - but ModRNA DNA synthetic, created in a laboratory and patented: there are two distinctions that are absolutely unique to the covid pandemic.
Number 1, we are actually creating the mechanism to instruct the body to manufacture a toxin …
Number 2, the response is actually a ‘hopeful’ response that failed to consider two very critical things: the lipid nanoparticle in which the shot is delivered actually is also a toxin … and then the worst part about it is that we introduced a thing called pseudouridine.”
Pseudouridine was published in 2018 to be a pro-cancer agent. What this means is that “it shuts down the body’s response to how we recognise tumours and suppress tumours,” Dr. Martin explained. Pseudouridine has been included in mRNA injections to stabilise the mRNA so it stays in the human body longer to achieve its effect, he said = MS40?
Dr. Masanori Fukushima, pointed out that “turbo cancers,” a kind “previously unseen by doctors” that progress extremely quickly and are typically in stage four by the time they are diagnosed, have started to appear after the jab rollouts. These “turbo cancers” are emerging along with excess mortality due to cancer in general, which Dr. Fukushima says cannot be explained only by lost opportunities for screenings or treatment during the COVID outbreak.
The Moderna contains 40*10^12 LNPs, to the best of my knowledge (Pfizer 12*10^12). This equates to 40/12 trillion in short scale. AZ has 50*10^9, which would be 1 milliard in long scale. I believe these numbers to be correct (https://evolutionaryhealthplan.info/#_Ref83404023 )
2) Weapons of Mass Destruction: Secondly there is the US Army Weapon which they are not telling anyone about, because it is a MILITARY SECRET. You don't want your enemy to know you can kill them with a 5G transmission, do you?
Dr Noack: They show that it is not graphene oxide, but rather graphene hydroxide. I would like to explain what this graphene hydroxide is. It is mono-layer activated carbon. There are C6 rings. He found it in all samples. Every corner is a carbon atom. This is on a nanoscale.
I’ll cut this up a bit here. If it is 50nm long, there are 500 rings in a row. These are hydroxy groups (OH). In graphene oxide you have double bonded oxygen, and in graphene hydroxide you have an OH group. The electrons are delocalised (fully mobile). The piece is 50nm long but only 0.1 nm thick. These C6 structures are extremely stable. You can make brake pads out of this. It is not biologically decomposable.
These nanoscale structures can best be described as razor blades. These razor blades are injected into the body. Nano-scale, tiny razor blades. Only one atom layer thick. Relatively wide and high. They are razors, biologically not decomposable. The OH (hydroxy) groups can split off a proton. When the proton is split off, they gain a negative charge spread out over the whole system.
It is basically an acid. It suspends well in water because of the negative charge. So these are razor blades spread homogenously in the liquid. This is basically Russian roulette. You can see it very clearly in this woman. It cuts the blood vessels. The blood vessels have epithel cells as their inner lining. The epithel is extremely smooth. like a mirror. And it is cut up by these razor blades. That is what’s so dangerous.
If you inject the vaccine into a vein, the razors will circulate in the blood and cut up the epithel. The mean thing is that toxicological tests are done in Petri dishes. And there you will not find anything. These are the sharpest imaginable structures because they are only one atom layer thick.
This is a huge molecule which is extremely sharp. I am a specilist in activated carbon. In my doctoral thesis, I have converted graphen oxide to graphene hydroxide. I joined the world’s leading activated carbon manufacturer. After a year I was in charge of new activated carbon products. We bought a small company in Durham, near Newcastle, England. I was in charge of “new carbon products”, Europe-wide. I was in application scouting.
If you perform an autopsy on the victims, you will not find anything. Toxicologists do their tests in Petri dishes. They can’t imagine that there are structures that can cut up blood vessels. There are pictures of coagulated blood coming out of the nose. People bleed to death on the inside. Especially the top athletes who are dropping dead have fast flowing blood. The faster the blood flows, the more damage the razors will do.
"It is my thought" that the carbon particles are inert and that only by 5G transmission can they be activated, when the Trillions of inert Carbon Particles are changed into Carbon Hydroxide, which are minature razors, too small to see without an Electron Microscope, which in turn chop up your insides and inside your Organs shutting them down and killing you, possibly over 4 days and the reason for your new MAC address:
Find your MAC address with Apple: BT Explorer. Android: Inpersona - or both with Bluetooth.
SO - those behind these vaccines can implement them whenever they like and there is nothing we can do to stop them, except publish these bio weapons, their intention and hold those behind them to ransom - if you do this, we will do that to you, because we know who you are and where you live.
Thus the Great Reset was a huge success, because once in, the vaccine contents can't be taken out again can they?
Thanks for pointing this out Christine. Albanese's a moron, but the opposition are pushing more or less same agenda.
Yes, I get news on how the biometrics push is going on throughout the world and Australia too and occasionally I see something worthy of a comment in my opinion, so I copy and post it on, with my thoughts on the subject concerned. I read that 10 Senators had written to your Albo asking that the Aussie Biometrics thing be stopped, because they could see it as being a control compliance weapon in the future - but Albo seems dead set on continuing with it, whatever his Senators think - but its the same everywhere and around the world.