In this case, ‘she’ is civilisation. Let me explain.
We fear death. We fear germs. We fear the invisible disease. Vaccines will save you. Or will they? You can do your own research. But I doubt that you will. This is my research. I thought vaccines were what gave us a healthy disease free life. It must be true because everybody gets vaccinated and only a few crackpots disagree. But truth is not democratic. We can’t vote something to be the truth. Something is not true because everybody believes it — like Sant Claus, God, and the tooth fairy. I had an autistic son. He died at the age of ten from a stroke. I was a maths/science teacher, so I did some homework. Here is my homework, but not in the order of discovery. Let’s start at the top.
We leave it to our politicians to make decisions on our behalf. This is why we vote? But there is something strange. When we vote a politician into parliament, they have no say in party policy. They must ‘tow the party line’. The decisions are coming from far higher up. Those big expensive political advertisements are exactly that — expensive. The money comes from donations — big donations. Who has more say over policy — the voter, the politician, or the corporate donor? And the pharmaceutical industry spends big. Beyond its political spending, it pays out big in fines for fraud. It is not a squeaky-clean industry. They have been repeatedly fined billions of dollars for fraud? Pharmaceutical companies are repeatedly the biggest fraud offenders. I’m not very keen on the idea of criminal organisations funding my politicians. Let’s start with the ‘crime’ bit.
The U.S. Department of Justice ordered GlaxoSmithKline to pay a $3 billion fine for fraud. It was the largest fine of its kind in history. That was not three million as in $3 000 000, it was $3 000 000 000, enough to send almost every company in the world broke — but not a pharmaceutical company. They simply cost the expected fines into their price structure. They treat the fines as a ‘cost of doing business’. Here is a quick list plundered from the depths of Wikipedia, not that I trust Wikipedia, but they can probably be trusted for this data:
|2012||GlaxoSmithKline||$3 billion||Criminal: Off-label promotion, failure to disclose safety data, paying kickbacks to physicians, making false and misleading statements concerning the safety of Avandia, reporting false best prices, underpaying rebates, not providing safety data, promotion of paediatric use.|
|2009||Pfizer||$2.3 billion||Off-label promotion, kickbacks|
|2013||Johnson & Johnson||$2.2 billion||Off-label promotion, kickbacks|
|2012||Abbott Laboratories||$1.5 billion||Off-label promotion|
|2009||Eli Lilly||$1.4 billion||Off-label promotion|
|2001||TAP Pharmaceutical Products||$875 million||Medicare fraud, kickbacks|
|2012||Amgen||$762 million||Off-label promotion, kickbacks|
|2010||GlaxoSmithKline||$750 million||Poor manufacturing practices|
|2005||Serono||$704 million||Off-label promotion, kickbacks, monopolistic practices|
|2008||Merck||$650 million||Medicare fraud, kickbacks|
|2007||Purdue Pharma||$601 million||Off-label promotion|
|2010||Allergan||$600 million||Off-label promotion|
|2010||AstraZeneca||$520 million||Off-label promotion, kickbacks|
|2007||Bristol-Myers Squibb||$515 million||Off-label promotion, kickbacks, Medicare fraud|
|2002||Schering-Plough||$500 million||Poor manufacturing practices|
|2006||Mylan||$465 million||Misclassification under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program|
|2006||Schering-Plough||$435 million||Off-label promotion, kickbacks, Medicare fraud|
|2004||Pfizer||$430 million||Off-label promotion|
|2008||Cephalon||$425 million||Off-label promotion|
|2010||Novartis||$423 million||Off-label promotion, kickbacks|
|2003||AstraZeneca||$355 million||Medicare fraud|
|2004||Schering-Plough||$345 million||Medicare fraud, kickbacks|
You can see that some get massive fines, then continue the fraudulent practices to be fined again to continue again. The fines appear to be a ‘cost of business’ and something they would factor into the prices of their drugs. If I drive my car at speeds seen on Formula One, I loose my license. If I kill someone that was ‘messing’ with my children, I go to jail. But big pharma just gets fines that they can factor into their price structure. Their crimes include illegal promotion of drugs for purposes for which they were not approved, Medicare fraud, and kickbacks. All involved should be in prison for a vey long time, yet they only get fines. In some cases, they promote drugs that have not even been tested on the conditions for they are selling them. If pharmaceutical companies go to these lengths to sell drugs, how trustworthy can the products and the manufactures be? These companies tend to be found guilty time and time again. They are repeat offenders In other words, they know they are operating as criminal enterprises.
Now you might see another conflict. There is more profit in sick people. Health people do not provide income to big pharma. The trick would be to damage health in a way that gave a future health problem but not too soon after the poisoning such that people might spot the cause. What if the injections the young receive constitute a minor poisoning. They do actually contain preservatives that are problematic to humans. And the vaccine component is supposedly a weakened disease. The vaccine gives you the disease before you get the disease. I had an autistic son. They have yet to convince me that autism is unrelated to vaccination. It is about as credible as WMD in Saddam’s hands or ‘Smoking does not cause cancer’ or the lack of logic for other wars or that six million died when there were only four and a half million in German occupied territories and six and a half million survived to claim a permanent ongoing compensation.
Here is a quote on Autism:
“Autism has been characterized as a behavioral disorder since it was first described by Leo Kanner in 1943. The number of autistic children has increased over the last decade. The incidence of autism was 1 in 10000 before the 1970s and has steadily increased to 1 in 150 in 2008 with a male-female predominance of 4:1.” 
Some reports now talk of 6% and they are always in high vaccination rate locations. Here is a graph showing aluminium against autism rates. It is not proof, but it suggests that study is needed and is shows that you cannot dismiss the relation between injections and autism.
So healthy people are not good for business. Well, we do have a lot of sickly people, so being good little detectives, we need to investigate. As a graduate engineer, I am not a trained medical person. But that does not stop me from reading medical reports. Here is a word from a osteopathic medical doctor that does not blindly follow the pharmaceutical industry — Dr. Sherri Tenpenny:
“Vaccines are the backbone of the entire Pharmaceutical Industry. If they can make these children sick from a very early age, they become customers for life. The money isn’t really to be made in the vaccine industry. The money is made by Big Pharma with all of the drugs that are given to treat and address all of the illnesses that are subsequent to the side effects of vaccines.”
According to an article by Tae Kim on CNBC, Goldman Sachs issued a report (by Salveen Richter) that suggested that drug developers were better off not making drugs that too effective:
“The potential to deliver ‘one shot cures’ is one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing. However, such treatments offer a very different outlook with regard to recurring revenue versus chronic therapies…. While this proposition carries tremendous value for patients and society, it could represent a challenge for genome medicine developers looking for sustained cash flow.”
Note that they talk about ‘gene therapy’. The FDA describes:
“Human gene therapy seeks to modify or manipulate the expression of a gene or to alter the biological properties of living cells for therapeutic use.”
And one of the dot points is:
“Introducing a new or modified gene into the body to help treat a disease.”
If Goldman Sachs is correct that curing patients might not be “a sustainable business model.”, we have a dilemma. Their comment:
“…one of the most attractive aspects of gene therapy, genetically-engineered cell therapy and gene editing.”
So, we must be suspicious that these criminal enterprises might just gene modify us in a manner that didn’t cure us or protect us but led us down their chosen path of being a lifelong client requiring booster shots for continued life. It now has an expression that is cropping up in medical reports. Early in 2020, Peter Hotez warned Congress about the problem of ‘antibody-dependent enhancement’, cautioning that it posed a “unique potential safety problem”. Peter Hotez is a Baylor College of Medicine vaccine developer and patent holder. One article in the ‘National Library of Medicine’ has this introduction:
“Antibody-based drugs and vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are being expedited through preclinical and clinical development. Data from the study of SARS-CoV and other respiratory viruses suggest that anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could exacerbate COVID-19 through antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE). Previous respiratory syncytial virus and dengue virus vaccine studies revealed human clinical safety risks related to ADE, resulting in failed vaccine trials.” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32908214/
And another medical paper starts with:
“In some cases, antibodies can enhance virus entry and replication in cells. …… more in-depth research is needed…” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8438590/
Moderna conducted a trial was for an mRNA treatment for cytomegalovirus, “a common virus that is usually kept in check by the body’s immune system and rarely causes problems in healthy people,”. They thus knew that its mRNA vaccine for cytomegalovirus unlikely to ever be lucrative. Note that the immune system of healthy people coped as it should and that their intent was prioritized towards profit. To make a profit, the company wishing treat a disease with mRNA would require frequent doses to ensure a steady stream of income for the company. Single-dose ‘vaccines’ more correctly called gene modification therapies were considered sufficiently lucrative. Multiple dose situations, warranted or unwarranted, have the potential to make their investors very wealthy. Better still are lifetime clients for the pharmaceutical industry. Propaganda and finance takes a greater role than health.
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said that it is possible that people will need to get vaccinated against the coronavirus annually.
“A likely scenario is that there will be likely a need for a third dose, somewhere between six and 12 months and then from there, there will be an annual revaccination, but all of that needs to be confirmed. And again, the variants will play a key role,”Albert Bourla to CNBC’s Bertha Coombs. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/15/pfizer-ceo-says-third-covid-vaccine-dose-likely-needed-within-12-months.html
Johnson & Johnson CEO Alex Gorsky said that people may need to get vaccinated against Covid-19 annually, just like seasonal flu shots. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/15/pfizer-ceo-says-third-covid-vaccine-dose-likely-needed-within-12-months.html
We need to comprehend what they mean by ‘experimental’. The assumption is that it is an experimental vaccine, but this is erroneous, it is an experimental technique. And at that, a technique that has not been used in any previous vaccination program. Considering the sordid history of vaccines, it is remarkable that this experiment was carried out on such a high proportion of the population. If doubting doctors are correct, we may have damaged the reproductive systems of 80% of our females. We may have unvaccinated females searching for unvaccinated sperm. We need to listen to the many medical persons that make comments such as these:
“The entire vaccine program is based on massive fraud.” Dr. Russell L. Blaylock, M.D., “Cancer was practically unknown until the cowpox vaccination began to be introduced. I have seen 200 cases of cancer, and never saw a case in an unvaccinated person.” Dr. W.B. Clark, MD, Indiana, New York Times article, 1909 “Vaccination causes miscarriage. A careful check showed that 47% of women who had been vaccinated in the second or third month of pregnancy, failed to give birth to a normal child.” “Vaccination at Work”, The Lancet P47, 1952-12-06 “My honest opinion is that vaccine is the cause of more disease and suffering than anything I could name.”Dr. Harry R. Bybee
It appears that vaccines may have been ‘experimental’ from the start — an experiment that never worked. This would be why vaccines have always been rife with controversy. The most obvious illogic in the present scenario is — how can unvaccinated people be a risk to vaccinated people if vaccination actually works?
The Medical Dictionary contains the traditional description of vaccination:
“Vaccines are medicines that contain weakened or dead bacteria or viruses. When a person takes a vaccine, his or her immune system responds by producing antibodies—substances that weaken or destroy disease-causing organisms. When the person is later exposed to live bacteria or viruses of the same kind that were in the vaccine, the antibodies prevent those organisms from making the person sick. Vaccines usually also stimulate the so-called cellular immune system as well. In other words, the person becomes immune to the disease the organisms normally cause. The process of building up immunity by taking a vaccine is called immunization.”https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/vaccination
An Australian government site contains:
“All forms of immunisation work in the same way. When someone is injected with a vaccine, their body produces an immune response in the same way it would following exposure to a disease but without the person getting the disease. If the person comes in contact with the disease in the future, the body is able to make an immune response fast enough to prevent the person developing the disease or developing a severe case of the disease.”https://www.healthdirect.gov.au/immunisation-or-vaccination-whats-the-difference
The WHO states:
When you get a vaccine, your immune system responds. It:
“Recognizes the invading germ, such as the virus or bacteria. Produces antibodies. Antibodies are proteins produced naturally by the immune system to fight disease. Remembers the disease and how to fight it. If you are then exposed to the germ in the future, your immune system can quickly destroy it before you become unwell.https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/vaccines-and-immunization-what-is-vaccination
The CDC appears to be trying to change how we understand the concept of vaccinations. At 2021-08-26, they stated:
“Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”
At 2021-09-01, it had been altered to:
“Vaccine: A preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.” https://www.citizensjournal.us/the-cdc-suddenly-changes-the-definition-of-vaccine-and-vaccination/
Vaccination (pre-2015): Injection of a killed or weakened infectious organism in order to prevent disease. Vaccination (2015-2021): The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease. Vaccination (September 2021): The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease.
Vaccines now do not need to provide ‘immunity’ but just ‘protection’. 
When those that have done their homework whinge about ‘human gene therapy’ is not a ‘conspiracy theory’ as it is truth as witnessed by these statements from the FDA website:
“Human gene therapy seeks to modify or manipulate the expression of a gene or to alter the biological properties of living cells for therapeutic use. Gene therapy is a technique that modifies a person’s genes to treat or cure disease. Gene therapies can work by several mechanisms: Replacing a disease-causing gene with a healthy copy of the gene Inactivating a disease-causing gene that is not functioning properly Introducing a new or modified gene into the body to help treat a disease
This medical institution relates it to genetic engineering:
“Gene therapy and genetic engineering are two closely related technologies that involve altering the genetic material of organisms. The distinction between the two is based on purpose.”
Thus, both are genetic engineering. To clarify your knowledge, on the same site, they write:
“The cells of a human being or other organism have parts called “genes” that control the chemical reactions in the cell that make it grow and function and ultimately determine the growth and function of the organism.”
“If genetic engineering is meant in a very broad sense to include any intentional genetic alteration, then it includes gene therapy.”
So, ‘gene therapy’ is a convenient term to hide it from those with concerns about GMO. So, we don’t like to eat GMO, but we allow ourselves to become Geneticaly Modified Organisms requiring endless ‘booster’ shots to maintain our immune system against one variant of a disease. In 17th century China they try ‘Variolation’, the smearing of skin tear with cowpox to attempt immunity to smallpox. But cowpox is not smallpox and an immune system that builds a strength against cowpox is better able to fight smallpox, a different disease entirely. But a covid vaccine does not prevent people getting the current strains and is ineffective against new strains. Covid primarily killed people over eighty that were already unhealthy and effectively did not kill healthy and young people. The vaccine is killing and damaging people of all ages and is not protecting the recipients.
So back to ‘experimental’. A web search for ‘definition of vaccine’ gave me on evidence that ‘genetic modification’, softened to ‘gene therapy’, fits any definition of vaccine. The typical definition “Vaccines are medicines that contain weakened or dead bacteria or viruses.” does not include genetic engineering of cell nuclei and immune cells. The thinking that we are up against is this excitement about genetic modification of humans by ‘scientists’ believing that it is good for the human species:
“The ability to make site-specific modifications to the human genome has been an objective in medicine since the recognition of the gene as the basic unit of heredity. Thus, gene therapy is understood as the ability of genetic improvement through the correction of altered (mutated) genes or site-specific modifications that target therapeutic treatment. This therapy became possible through the advances of genetics and bioengineering that enabled manipulating vectors for delivery of extrachromosomal material to target cells. One of the main focuses of this technique is the optimization of delivery vehicles (vectors) that are mostly plasmids, nanostructured or viruses. The viruses are more often investigated due to their excellence of invading cells and inserting their genetic material. ……. The ability to make local modifications in the human genome has been the objective of Medicine since the knowledge of DNA as the basic unit of heredity. ……. A way to effectively distribute the gene copies to the cells must be available, and the diseases and their strict genetic bonds need to be completely understood. ……. In gene therapy, a normal gene is inserted into the genome to replace an abnormal gene responsible for causing a certain disease. ……. Of the various challenges involved in the process, one of the most significant is the difficulty in releasing the gene into the stem cell. Thus, a molecular carrier called a “vector” is used to release the gene, which needs to be very specific, display efficiency in the release of one or more genes of the sizes necessary for clinical applications, not be recognized by the immune system, and be purified in large quantities and high concentrations so that it can be produced and made available on a large scale.”https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5823056/ Gene therapy: advances, challenges and perspectives by Giulliana Augusta Rangel Gonçalves and Raquel de Melo Alves Paiva.
So, we are being misled. It is not an experimental vaccine. It is an experimental genetic modification which they hope will not have unintended side effects such as reproductive issues.
Let’s have a quick look at vaccine ‘efficacy’, which is the percentage reduction in a disease in a group of people who received a vaccination in a clinical trial. Note ‘clinical trial’. Very little testing was done! Considering almost nobody under eighty died from Covid, one wonders how they came to this statistic. The disease rate has risen in most countries and areas with high vaccination rates which appears to suggest that their figures are as dodgy as their criminal records.
“The efficacy of Pfizer and Moderna for preventing disease or severe disease results 95-87.5% and 94.5-100%, respectively. The efficacy of Astra-Zeneca and Janssen is about 70% and 65%, respectively; in the case of Janssen, it depends on the geographical area ranging from 72% to 57%.”
For example, Pfizer/BioNTech reported an efficacy of 95% for the COVID-19 vaccine. This means a 95% reduction in new cases of the disease in the vaccine group compared with the placebo group. This is what the companies ‘claim’. Do not forget the fraud statistics earlier in this article. Their clinical trials are not due to finish until May 2023. Approval was granted based on just six months of incomplete data. The ‘incomplete’ part were the controls. The FDA’s own regulator Witczak said in the BMJ. “There is no control group after Pfizer offered the product to placebo participants before the trials were completed.” My reasoning is that one cannot calculate the ‘efficacy’ if there is no control group. Reality seems to be telling us another story. Sir Patrick Vallance, the UK’s chief scientific adviser, announced that around forty percent of people being admitted to hospital with Covid in the UK have been vaccinated. Around 15% of those being hospitalised have had two doses of a coronavirus vaccine. Quick to cover their proverbial asses, they claim that this is a different ‘variant’. The Chinese scratched cowpox into the skin to ward off smallpox, which to me is a different ‘variant’. They didn’t scratch cowpox into the skin to prepare for cowpox. If we need a vaccine, we need one that protects us from all variants.
If you are capable of common logic, you will love this lunacy:
“Covid is also growing among the vaccinated because the number of people in the UK who have had both doses is continuing to rise.”
Is that not what a vaccination is supposed to do – protect from a disease? If it doesn’t protect against disease, can we begin to guess what the long-term effects of the Covid jab will be on the immune system, on chronic disease, on fertility, and so on. If there is a problem with fertility, it would seem to be unwise to vaccinate at such high rates. Like the big war memorials in Australia, where rocks have words carved: “Lest we forget”. I always say: “They want us to forget the mob of assholes that sent us to war.” The same mob that sent us to WW1, WW2, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan gave us medical horrors like Thalidomide and DES – experimental drugs that doctors cavalierly doled out like bubble gum until thousands of babies started being born with malformed limbs and young girls started getting rare vaginal cancer years and years after they were exposed to the experiment. The world accepts the Nuremberg Code which said that we as humanity would never coerce people into medical experiments against their will again. So, Joe Biden, Bill Gates, your local political leaders, and Anthony Fauci’s gangs didn’t advertise that the shots were experimental genetic engineering and talk in a manner to make something dangerously experimental sound not-so-experimental. A vaccine for the swine flu pandemic of the 1970s is a considered a public health debacle because hundreds of people developed the neurologically disabling condition, Guillain Barré Syndrome. The lessons of medical mayhem are forgotten quickly. Another 2009 ‘experimental’ swine flu pandemic vaccine led to more than 1,400 documented cases of narcolepsy – a devastating brain disorder that causes its victims to collapse into sleep multiple times throughout the day – mostly among children. In 2017, Sanofi Pasteur was forced to recall its ‘new’ Dengvaxia vaccine off the market after it killed several hundred children by giving them a worse version of dengue fever than if they’d never been vaccinated at all. The Dengvaxia fiasco led to dozens of public health figures being indicted for “reckless imprudence resulting in homicide.” Do you think that will not happen again? This time the stakes are higher as such a high proportion of the world has been vaccinated.
Let us study the recent internal history of Moderna. Pfizer’s vaccine, along with Moderna’s, is based on a ‘new’ experimental technique using messenger RNA (mRNA) that hijacks human cell machinery to produce spike antibodies. The procedure has never been used in humans before. Thus, this vaccine exercise is a monster of an experiment.
The Covid crisis removed hurdles that had prevented Moderna from taking a product to market. It also dragged them out of financial doldrums. From 2016 until the emergence of Covid, Moderna was performing poorly. It was loosing key executives, talented staff, and major investors at an alarming rate. Moderna’s top executive, Stéphane Bancel, had been selling a promise to “revolutionize” medicine. His impressive salesmanship and fund-raising abilities kept the entity afloat. His promises were effectively empty. His pitch was about its potential to make its investors very wealthy. We are talking a significant case of ‘wealth before health’ – Wall Street profits before the health of the people. It was unlikely that Moderna could deliver the ‘revolution’ that he had continually assured investors was just around the corner. Issues with patents and hostile competitors did not help. There was also major problems with its mRNA delivery system which caused them to abandon treatments requiring more than one dose because of toxicity concerns. There is no evidence that Moderna solved the toxicity issue that arose in its multi-dose products. We need to be concerned about their ‘booster’ shots. Some claim that Moderna was a ‘house of cards’ with sky-high valuations that were disconnected from reality. This straw-house could have collapsed by 2020 or 2021. Some countries have banned Moderna’s vaccine’s use in young adults and teens for safety reasons. to stave off collapse, Moderna must keep selling its Covid-19 vaccine for years to come. Without the approval and sales of its booster, Moderna faces a massive financial disaster. Irrespective of Moderna’s funding drive, it had no product on the market six years after its founding. That is what Stéphane Bancel was good at – selling up the company’s image and finances irrespective of its ability to handle the genetic engineering science underpinning the hype. Through this time with Stéphane Bancel at the helm, there were many more key personnel resignations that one would expect, including the head of Research and Development. All concerns about the safety and efficacy of Moderna’s products evaporated when the panic to produce a vaccine that would “end the pandemic”. Moderna had been touting a drug to treat Crigler-Najjar syndrome with a promise that is was using new technology that would create many new drugs within a few years. It had even touted it to the JP Morgan Healthcare Conference, which tells us that wealth was put before health. In 2017, Alexion, a company working with Moderna, ‘blew the whistle’ on the situation stating that it “never proved safe enough to test in humans”. Exacerbating this, Moderna failed to publish data supporting this mRNA technology. Even with this failure to produce, Bancel continued to promise mRNA as an easy way to develop treatments for diseases. He touted that “mRNA is like software: You can just turn the crank and get a lot of products going into development.” Yet his gene therapy had failed because of the ‘lipid nanoparticle delivery system’ it used to transport mRNA into cells. Crigler-Najjar syndrome is caused by one specific genetic defect. If it could not modify or replace this gene, it had little chance in more complex genetic modifications. Media reported it as: “the indefinite delay on the [Moderna] Crigler-Najjar project signals persistent and troubling safety concerns for any mRNA treatment that needs to be delivered in multiple doses”. Former Moderna employees and others at Alexion conceded: “The safe dose was too weak, and repeat injections of a dose strong enough to be effective had troubling effects on the liver in animal studies.” Moderna continued to rely on this Acuitas-licensed technology in further vaccines and other products, including its Covid vaccine. A legal dispute further hampered its ability to use licensed technology to put mRNA into cells. They were forced to resort to single-dose products that were less profitable. Their dollars were put before our health. Moderna’s valuation was based on its claimed ability to create multi-dose products, yet it could only produce single dose products. Investors knew that vaccines are viewed as “low-margin product[s] that can’t generate anywhere near the profits seen in more lucrative fields like rare diseases and oncology.”
Moderna was stuck in a legal stoush over it use of certain intellectual property. Interestingly, other producers of mRNA Covid vaccines, Pfizer and CureVac, also use much the same sourced technology. However, they licensed them in slightly different manner. In 2018-11, in the fine-print of submission to the Securities and Exchange Commission we can find:
“Most of our investigational medicines are formulated and administered in an LNP [lipid nanoparticle] which may lead to systemic side effects related to the components of the LNP which may not have ever been tested in humans. While we have continued to optimize our LNPs, there can be no assurance that our LNPs will not have undesired effects.”(page 33)
We are looking at doubtful ‘science’ under propaganda of ‘believe the science’. Even so, Moderna holds eleven investment banks in its investor line-up. Its ability to make money is more important than its ability to make citizens healthy.
Such is the importance of profit, Moderna’s CEO and other pharmaceutical and biotech leaders attended the World Economic Forum’s 2019 annual meeting in order to “rub elbows with world leaders and one-percenters — and talk about the future of healthcare.” All about the money of course. Also in attendance was World Health Organization, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, and Bill Gates. The latter’s foundation had in 2016 entered into “a global health project framework” with Moderna to “advance mRNA-based development projects for various infectious diseases”. The World Economic Forum had recognized Moderna as “an industry leader in innovative mRNA therapeutics”, which is a bit strange in that none of their mRNA genetic modifiers had been successful. The recognition had given them privileged access to the world’s most powerful business and government leaders. Moderna was part of ‘the club’ with the privilege “to shape global, regional and industry agendas and engage in meaningful exchanges about ways to continue on a sustainable and responsible path of growth.” This consortium of corporations are promoted to “improving the state of the world,” with a commitment to supporting the Forum’s agendas for the global economy and for global governance. Now the plot thickens.
In April 2019, Moderna published information on improvements to its lipid nanoparticles. Followed shortly by positive results for mRNA vaccines for “two potential pandemic influenza strains”. They pressed for government funding through those lobbyists that you and I detest as they circumvent democracy. With fortunate timing, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office, through Robert Kadlec, was conducting a simulation of a global pandemic involving an influenza strain that spreads around the world.
In 2019-09, Moderna claimed to have ‘scientific’ evidence that would prove that its mRNA technology could “turn the body’s own cells into medicine-making factories”. This data involved four initially healthy participants. However, three out of the four had nasty side effects including one which suffered a rapid heart rate and an irregular heartbeat. I’m glad I was not one of their lab mice. Again, this was a single-injection mRNA treatment. They were also upbeat about another trial of an mRNA treatment for cytomegalovirus, “a common virus that is usually kept in check by the body’s immune system and rarely causes problems in healthy people” – a dangerous cure for an unnecessary treatment.
At the 2019 Milken Institute Future of Health Summit, a discussion on ‘universal flu vaccines’ occurred. It was noted that a ‘disruptive’ event would be needed to overcome the ‘bureaucratic vaccine-approval process’ to facilitate the adoption of ‘nontraditional’ vaccines, such as these controversial mRNA concoctions. Speakers included former FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg, scientific advisor to the Gates foundation, as well as Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and Rick Bright of BARDA, who previously worked for the Gates-funded PATH. This discussion took place soon after the ‘pandemic simulation’ called “Event 201”, whose moderators and sponsors had previously been involved in something from 2001 called “Dark Winter”. Michael Specter of the New Yorker — asked the question:
“Why don’t we blow the system up? Obviously, we just can’t turn off the spigot on the system we have and then say ‘Hey! everyone in the world should get this new vaccine we haven’t given to anyone yet,’ but there must be some way.”
Of interest, Michael Specter recanted how vaccine production is antiquated and asked how sufficient “disruption” could occur to prompt the modernization of the existing vaccination development and approval process. Anthony Fauci advised that a better method was “not growing the virus at all, but getting sequences, getting the appropriate protein and it sticking in on self-assembling nanoparticles,” which is the essence of mRNA genetic engineering masquerading as a vaccine. Fauci stated:
“The critical challenge … is that in order to make the transition from getting out of the tried and true egg-growing [method] … to something that has to be much better, you have to prove that this works and then you have got to go through all of the critical trials — phase 1, phase 2, phase 3 — and show that this particular product is going to be good over a period of years. That alone, if it works perfectly, is going to take a decade.”
In reality, he was not talking about better health outcomes but better profit outcomes through cheaper mass production. Propaganda is his solution. He then suggested a need to alter the ‘public’s perception’ that the flu is not a serious disease. The need was for a greater urgency along with an alteration of perception and changes to the existing vaccine development and approval process.
Rick Bright of BARDA said the best way to ‘disrupt’ the vaccine situation in favor of ‘faster’ vaccines would be the creation of “an entity of excitement out there that’s completely disruptive, that’s not beholden to bureaucratic strings and processes.” By ‘faster’ vaccines, he meant mRNA genetically engineered ‘vaccines’. I don’t like to call them vaccines as they do not fit the definition of vaccines. Very soon, their respective organizations, the Bright-led BARDA and the Fauci-led NIAID became the biggest backers of the Moderna Covid GM vaccine. It should be noted that the partnership between Moderna and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to co-develop what would soon become Moderna’s Covid concoction was arranged well before any official recognition of a Covid ‘pandemic’ and before any vaccine was deemed necessary by officialdom. The mRNA Covid modifier (‘vaccine’) corrected Moderna financial situation whist the propagandized ‘pandemic’ that primarily killed over eighty-year-olds that annually succumb to the flu in similar numbers provided the ‘disruptive scenario’ needed to alter public perception of the definition of a vaccine and to eliminate the safeguards and bureaucracy in vaccine approval. Moderna’s Stéphane Bancel, with the aid of Fauci and Gates, had propelled his dodgy outfit that could not keep staff and could not produce product to the forefront of the race to save the world from a killer of eighty-year-olds in nursing homes. To save these eighty-year-olds that die as annually expected, you and I are expected to absorb their dodgy mRNA genetic modification. I, for one, will bet my immune system against big pharma concoctions.
Andy Chalkley https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/Cave-2008-THE-HISTORY-OF-VACCINATIONS-IN-THE-LIGHT-OF-TH.pdf