They want it all on a particular time frame, to be done and dusted by a particular date endpoint.🤔
HIV- people can live decades before the immune system succumbs. Particularly if they are actively pursuing lifestyle habits that support the immune system.
Likewise with cancers. These shots are carcinogenic and likely contain HIV modifications, as gain of function suggests.
If you want to maximise your profits, over a long-term, for treatments. Then you want a continuous stream of patients that don't die in the short term, but need continuous therapeutics.
If you want that, but also want to bankrupt the financial system to change to a new one, then those therapeutics need to be justifiably expensive.
If you want all that, PLUS you want to install a global government with a global "healthcare" system, all regulated and run by a select few, then you need a lot of people to be sick and suffering, all around the world, for a short while, but you need a series of planned events to culminate in a scheduled mass tragedy, to allow the installation, "for the good of all".
Hence, the accelated aging.
🤔
Hmmmmmm......let me think, W.H.O could organise all that....
So why does the vaxx mRNA upregulate LINE-1 expression? Lots of questions raised in the paper but this one seems really important. In the discussion section the authors talk around it in a very long paragraph with all sorts of handwaving but they never really address the point directly. They end with, "The exact regulation of LINE-1 activity in response to BNT162b2 merits further study." Ya think?
These guys don't seem dumb and I get the impression they are dodging the question. Might be worth contacting the authors directly and asking them as they may have thoughts they weren't willing to publish.
supposition: staining intensity of Cytosol + Nucleus = total area
Conclusion: either the supposition is false or it is a linear scale.
For each exposure level if you add the top data point in Cytosol and Nucleus it appears to match the top datapoint in Total area. This wouldn't be the case if they were log scales and the supposition was true.
A metaphor you may find useful for your further analyses. If you set out to build a tank, you design it to employ the most lethal, portable guns in your arsenal.
"Lovely! Shouldn’t these studies have been performed by Pfizer, Moderna, NIH, EMA before the jabs were administered? And the results made widely available and discussed? Rhetorical questions at this point, but worth asking nonetheless. “WTH!” - to put it mildly.
The study does not test whether thus reverse-transcribed DNA actually integrates into the human chromosomes."
Those studies actually have been undertaken, they're just classified.
From Moderna Patent US10272150B2 Combination PIV3/hMPV RNA Vaccines:
"With this technique however comes potential problems, including the possibility of insertional mutagenesis, which could lead to the activation of oncogenes or the inhibition of tumor suppressor genes."
So what is insertional mutagenesis?
"Insertional mutagenesis is the phenomenon by which an exogenous DNA sequence integrates within the genome of a host organism."
The challenge for us non specialists is understanding the jargon sufficient to make a judgement about plausibility of what the paper is arguing. For example I notice there is a letter appended to the paper which argues alternative explanations for all the phenomena observed by the authors. Other than a knee jerk “they would say that wouldn’t they” reaction, on what basis can we judge the plausibility of this letter? This whole debate requires experienced dedicated scientists from both ‘sides’ to debate these findings dispassionately and without fear of loss or reprisal. Fat chance.
Oh my,. It's all I got left in me today. Thank you for the further analysis Andreas. Still wished I had my MS Genomics alma mater to talk to but they All drank the Purple Kool Aid and are now working on variants with a $500,000.00 NIH grant.
Its speeding up aging within the cells. 😐
Its not enough to tag and bag them as they occur.
They want it all on a particular time frame, to be done and dusted by a particular date endpoint.🤔
HIV- people can live decades before the immune system succumbs. Particularly if they are actively pursuing lifestyle habits that support the immune system.
Likewise with cancers. These shots are carcinogenic and likely contain HIV modifications, as gain of function suggests.
If you want to maximise your profits, over a long-term, for treatments. Then you want a continuous stream of patients that don't die in the short term, but need continuous therapeutics.
If you want that, but also want to bankrupt the financial system to change to a new one, then those therapeutics need to be justifiably expensive.
If you want all that, PLUS you want to install a global government with a global "healthcare" system, all regulated and run by a select few, then you need a lot of people to be sick and suffering, all around the world, for a short while, but you need a series of planned events to culminate in a scheduled mass tragedy, to allow the installation, "for the good of all".
Hence, the accelated aging.
🤔
Hmmmmmm......let me think, W.H.O could organise all that....
Holy shit, that was chunky and tangible. Great research and input.
So why does the vaxx mRNA upregulate LINE-1 expression? Lots of questions raised in the paper but this one seems really important. In the discussion section the authors talk around it in a very long paragraph with all sorts of handwaving but they never really address the point directly. They end with, "The exact regulation of LINE-1 activity in response to BNT162b2 merits further study." Ya think?
These guys don't seem dumb and I get the impression they are dodging the question. Might be worth contacting the authors directly and asking them as they may have thoughts they weren't willing to publish.
Typo:
Lovely! Shouldn’t these studies have been performed by Pfizer, Moderna, NIH, EMA before the **jabbs** were administered?
I get the impression we need to be able to have done kind of testing available . And we should
Also see how the infected non vaxx show on testing as well
supposition: staining intensity of Cytosol + Nucleus = total area
Conclusion: either the supposition is false or it is a linear scale.
For each exposure level if you add the top data point in Cytosol and Nucleus it appears to match the top datapoint in Total area. This wouldn't be the case if they were log scales and the supposition was true.
A metaphor you may find useful for your further analyses. If you set out to build a tank, you design it to employ the most lethal, portable guns in your arsenal.
One thing I'd like to add.
"Lovely! Shouldn’t these studies have been performed by Pfizer, Moderna, NIH, EMA before the jabs were administered? And the results made widely available and discussed? Rhetorical questions at this point, but worth asking nonetheless. “WTH!” - to put it mildly.
The study does not test whether thus reverse-transcribed DNA actually integrates into the human chromosomes."
Those studies actually have been undertaken, they're just classified.
From Moderna Patent US10272150B2 Combination PIV3/hMPV RNA Vaccines:
"With this technique however comes potential problems, including the possibility of insertional mutagenesis, which could lead to the activation of oncogenes or the inhibition of tumor suppressor genes."
So what is insertional mutagenesis?
"Insertional mutagenesis is the phenomenon by which an exogenous DNA sequence integrates within the genome of a host organism."
Cancer gene discovery: exploiting insertional mutagenesis, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3836224/
I'm personally sick and tired of having to show mechanisms for things staring us in the face... like we have to prove what they admit?!
The challenge for us non specialists is understanding the jargon sufficient to make a judgement about plausibility of what the paper is arguing. For example I notice there is a letter appended to the paper which argues alternative explanations for all the phenomena observed by the authors. Other than a knee jerk “they would say that wouldn’t they” reaction, on what basis can we judge the plausibility of this letter? This whole debate requires experienced dedicated scientists from both ‘sides’ to debate these findings dispassionately and without fear of loss or reprisal. Fat chance.
Oh my,. It's all I got left in me today. Thank you for the further analysis Andreas. Still wished I had my MS Genomics alma mater to talk to but they All drank the Purple Kool Aid and are now working on variants with a $500,000.00 NIH grant.
A French geneticist & RNA expert also had some doubts - https://twitter.com/CaudeHenrion/status/1498216372391890948
"Lovely! Shouldn’t these studies have been performed by Pfizer, Moderna, NIH, EMA before the jabs were administered?' Very droll...