One thing I want to throw on the mix regards the idea of "placebo". Traditionally big pharma plays a rigged game ...esp with regards to "vaccines". They have never practiced the gold standard of using inert placebo in any trials. They typically either use the adjuvant without the antigen as their "placebo, or they will use a different already approved vaccine as their "placebo". So could the deaths and SAEs actually have been caused by placebos that indeed were not just saline , but rather other vax or some other toxic soup.that just dod not contain the mRNA for spike protein?
Yes, it seems fair to question the term "placebo" with any of the pharmaceuticals now given what Aaron Siri and Del have recently uncovered with their lawsuit. There has never been a placebo group WITH ANY 'VACCINE' they have been pumping in to our arms for decades. Do placebos exist for anything? We now have to question everything they've ever done and can likely assume it's been nothing but lies from the start. Truly incredible where we are today. I wouldn't put it past these sociopaths to put something else in every so-called placebo for more of their sick experiments on humanity. I long for justice.
🎯 Thank you RJ Jamieson. This is important and explains AE’s in the yellow dots. So the claim of yellow dot as ‘placebo’ can be most certainly be made. Those involved or complicit with these ‘vaccine industry placebo’ protocols would expect to see some AE’s from the yellow dots lots.
The whistleblower on the Pfizer trials, Brook Jackson, talks about the use of placebo, or rather misuse. They treated the two sets of patients differently as far a handling of symptoms and testing, and the trial in general was apparently very careless about letting the trial subjects know if they were placebo or not. There is no indication that I can recall from her description that the placebo in the trial wasn't true placebo. But very soon into the trials, they gave the placebo trial subjects a choice to be administered with the 'real' product, so they wiped out any possible findings using double-blind.
Even with a true placebo trial using just saline there are adverse events. An injection is an assault on the body and bodies can and will react differently to it.
I put my thought into this article . It goes to the basic assumption that there are no true placebos in "Vaccine Science" because there is conflicting guidance. In other words, no rules. https://www.activistpost.com/2023/07/the-false-placebo.html
There should have been several placebos in the original study. Sham shot (saline), the "empty" genetic construct alone (if this is possible), and the genetic construct coding for human serum albumin (the most common protein in the blood). This would tell us if for some reason ANY mRNA could induce immunity. My guess is the answer is yes, that the empty and albumin-coding mRNA (plus all the trimmings) induce generalized immunity that lasts for a month or two (the duration of vaccine efficacy). That's how I would have designed the "experiment." That would explain the AEs in the yellow group.
I think it was Ryan Cole who postulated that some of the less harmful batches may be due to defective manufacture, such that they are almost inert, but not quite placebo as you say. And Sasha Latypova pointed out how complex the manufacturing process is, and how difficult it would have been to ensure any kind of quality control, especially given the scale and speed of production.
Do we have any idea where the different batches were made?
I suspect the production, distribution and logistics were intentionally made complex. Basically, the left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing.
I also note the military (DoD) was actually running this vaccine production and distribution show. And everything is Triple Top Secret with those people.
If I remember correctly Craig Pardekooper (howbadismybatch.com) found that the particularly bad batches had a shorter expiry date and a different letter at the start of the batch number, which would indicate someone in the system knew they were different.
I worked in a pharmaceutical research facility many years ago and witnessed the difficulty mixing process for normal medications, saw many batches get dumped because of mixing errors, all these technicians weren't even BMS employees they were young sub contractors hoping to get a full time job for the pharmaceutical company doing contract work for , I am sure during the height of the pandemic with the shortage of workers in this specialized field they were putting anybody on the mixing floor and in the sampling of the batches in the LAB , just to get the product out, imagine the corners cut in that short 1 year window, all from the almighty dollar and pressure from the world's government's!
Another hypothesis (from Australian data) is that the "bad batches" were past their optimum use-by date and so contained more wild card mRNA, producing wild card proteins.
Jessica, nice analysis. I sent you the number of doses data for Denmark. The number of doses was not equal between the lots, far from it. There are 2 issues. The lots in EU were split and distributed to different countries in unequal numbers of doses per each lot number. They did the same in the US across different states. The second issue is that as in the US, the "toxicity" of lots for THE SAME lot number looks very different depending on the location (country/state). The only explanation I can come up with - they are fraudulently marked as "the same" lot but produced on different production lines, possibly active ingredients coming from different locations. That's why same lot looks very different depending on the country/US state. In fact in the US, in the shipment data that Aaron Siri FOIAed it is clear that toward later time period "one lot" of product is not one production run. Today Pfizer has switched to "continuous manufacturing" so lot numbers are meaningless. This can also be the difference between the "early" and "late" lots - early were the single production runs and later ones are a mixture of many production runs from multiple locations/lines. It's not the age of the recipient. Even if there is a difference in the median - the vertical dispersion of the batches that you see on your graph - that's gigantic and not explained by age.
You are right. I spoke to Vibeke and she says the blue dot people were all under 70. So it's very possible that 'the same' lots were simply not 'treated' the same way - as per production. What a stupid shit show this is.
Thanks for your comment. When did Pfizer start "continous manufacturing"? Are you sure that means a batch is not produced all at one time in one place and each vial should be the same? If what you said is true, what about this Denmark report?
This reminds me of the DTP vaccine before 1986. Back then they had "lots" which were like batches. One lot was distributed in one geographical area. Sometimes there was a "hot" lot that caused a lot of injuries. Lawsuits were possible back then. It was kind of obvious some lots were causing way more injuries. So the vaccine makers then started splitting up the lots, and distributing them all over the country. For them, the problem was solved.
This is one of the best things I've learned from Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center. https://www.nvic.org She has a son with a pretty severe vaccine injury.
I don't know when exactly they switched to continuous, but they did. There are batches now of 12 million doses (900 liters of mRNA!) which are produced over 6 months and have several manufacture and expiration dates.
Exactly, nothing can be trusted. Meaningless lot numbers makes perfect sense if hiding the truth is the goal. There are millions of dead bodies as a result of this, and no formal and open inquiries as to why. I have to conclude this is a well designed attack on the human race by our own governments.
Some people must spend a lot of time figuring out how to subvert good pharmaceutical practices so that it becomes impossible to figure out anything about lot safety.
I did read that they spread the lot doses across different locations to bury the adverse reactions which would be more visible if they were clustered closely.
Hi Sasha. Could “transport hygiene” be a factor provoking different outcomes from the same batch number? Remember all the initial chatter about storage at much lower temperatures than the vaccine transport chain was traditionally used to? I think I recall ideal transport temps being around -50C? Then the MSM and the Science (TM) went strangely quite on this....
I don't think so. The low temps were not really necessary - in tech documentation stability testing described that the vials could be stored in regular fridge or even at room temp for quite a while, up to several days. So this would not be a big factor in my opinion. The FDA also removed the deep freezing requirement without explanation later.
Seems to me that a medical artefact used for medical ends should be made up of the same parts all over the treated landscape, not vary between batches at all. If it varies between batches like the Danes have proved, now that is proof of experimentalism, isn´t it? And yet one more argument against the Pfizer et consortes handling of the covid injections, inserted in humanity all over the world by now. It must be wonderful for a med company to have free access to the biggest of the human populations, namely the whole planet, with possibly the most sinister implications. This says something more of the enormous crime in front of our eyes, hardly to be understood, but which must very soon these days be taken to international court for finding and punishing the vilains behind.
That was the main point of the original study: the apparent quality variability. The whole placebo thing came from one remark of one of the German scientists in the video: "Evil tongues would remark, however, that this is also how placebos would look." Everybody jumped on the word "placebo".
And another thing: whoever thinks that placebo's don't generate complaints is wrong. The placebo-effect is very powerful, also in a negative sense (nocebo). If there are 200.000 injections (dramatic intervention!) without any entries in VAERS, I suspect a registration hiccup. Even a sugar pill made people puke when they were severely warned that vomiting was a possible side effect (real experiment).
Besides that: an average age of 50 and an average age of 37... would that really give such a sharp distinction with no mans land inbetween? There must have been quite some overlap of people in their fourties in both groups. Where are the intermediate lots, for example 300.000 doses generating 3000 suspected side effects? Pfizer has some serious explaining to do.
When I first saw the data that Team Enigma analyzed, the first thought I had was that the graphs looked like an LD50 experiment (when 50% of the experimental population dies). As I've posted before in many places, that experimental population is usually rats, mice, ferrets, monkeys...but not humans.
Well, that may very well be the idea too. I think we know enough by now to realize the worst of intents on the globalist side, real evil stuff, so we need to get together and stand up for t he life of humanity and the planet itself! Very hard considering the media are all bought up, so are also the governments, but the numbers are on the right side never to forget, the fearful numbers....just watch the French ongoing protestations, not only about pension age, but certainly also regarding mr Macron and the WEF polidies behind him. France after all is nuclear and a big European nation, so is Germany hosting lots of uprisings too. So may we expect some US marches, catching speaches or more...?
Great work. I am not surprised the yellow dots are not placebos, as logistically the only way for that to happen would be saline which is clear. The jabs are cloudy and have a bit of viscosity due to the sucrose in them.
However, could the explanation of the AE's in the early batches be due to age alone? That is Denis Rancourt's position, though I think these early batches are distinctly more toxic than latter batches. That the explanation for toxicity and AEs are due to age primarily? That differences in batches are not the reason for AEs, age is?
The early Pfizer batches in particular were known to have major issues with the stability of the LNPs. Upon freezing, the pH would change and become slightly more acidic due to the PBS buffer (electrolytes) they used. Increased acidity causes agglomeration, aggregation and eventual destruction of the LNPs. They get bigger and there is a chemical reaction with the mRNA and the LNPs making adducts. Larger nanoparticles have a different biodistribution patterns, and are more directly toxic to blood components and can cause CARPA. Maybe lots of anaphylactoid reactions? This is the reason Pfizer switched to Tris buffer which provided stability during the freeze/thaw process.
I think you are absolutely SPOT ON with regard to LNP size. This is something I have started to investigate. It could 'splain a whole whakkamole of things.
It only works, being logged in. So I don't want to use it any more. One cannot link to any twitter tweed, if it is only accesable for logged in users. If they don't fix that I'll be off there.
yes. it is a general problem. Once in the while I'll go there, but I think this policy should be opposed. Its all about data grab and limited access to information.
I agree with you on that: the difference is extreme, especially given the average ages of 50 and 37. For example, there must have been a substantial overlap of people in their fourties. If the blue had been exclusively 80+ or 90+, it would have been more plausible.
please watch or read the whole interview. you'll find the links here:https://helendunkel.substack.com/p/dossier-of-some-protagonists-paul "the blue" appeared later on. their whole statements are worth a listen. I am stunned people focus on suposedly placebo allegedlly harmless instead on all the other topics, is this kind of hope? or deliberate distraction by parts of the alternative media? Healthcare and more got the jabs early on as well (january?) This graphic cannot be generalized! The two chemists are going to court because of many unanswered questions. If interested, I did some substack about the Paul Ehrlich Insititute. Which is the most important institution in the EU regarding BioNTech and supposedly for the other products as well. Thank you
Totally agree. Focus on the underlying problems: quality control, way of testing, in fact the questions that the Danes pose in their study. The 'placebo or not' matter is highly distracting.
Yes I have. I've followed this group for a while. It's the physicochemical properties of the formulation that is causing some of these AEs imho and these chemists explain it well. And the answers from the regulators are shall we say....ridiculous. Thanks
They did mention in the video, that placebo does not mean saline solution. It could mean product without the active ingredient in this case being the mRNA encoding for the spike. Unless we can be absolutely 100% certain that the LNPs ingredients themselves, which have never before been given permission to be injected in hundreds of millions of people, can not lead to the adverse events you found in VAERS, I would still be willing to entertain the idea of "Placebo".
There is also the fact that the "actors" like Fauci and the Candian prime-asshole got their moments in the limelight of getting injected. I am pretty sure they would have not consented to the actual product. Especially not Fauci. Unless they also got special theatre prop shots.
No reason to think the definition of "placebo" isn't changed by Big Pharma. Maybe the yellow dot is more a control that doesn't have a component. Spike proteins seem to stick around, so would be useful to check recipients for these and other traces of the jab.
Typically pHARMa has NEVER used inert placebo (meaning gold standard trial protocols). Fir all orevious vax, they do not use inert placebo in control group. They use either other already "approved" vax, or they'll use a concoction of all the adjuvant just minus the antigen. It is anything but gold standard science. I suspect their "placebos" were not completely inert!
"It is my opinion that we have still only seen the tip of the iceberg with regard to the harms imposed by these modified mRNA COVID injections. For the younger individuals, who started off strong and healthy, it will be a longer road to pathology and it is quite likely that a very small proportion of these individuals will even report their condition to VAERS because let’s face it, who’s going to associate a cancer they ‘get’ a year or two out from their latest Pfizer shot? "
Like for many others, cancer has invaded our sphere of interpersonal relationships with a heavy bias amongst the mRNA injected.
An ordinary, trusting person would assume a placebo would be saline solution made from pure water, and he/she would thus assume placebos are inert and harmless. But in the vaccine industry/cult, a placebo can contain all the same ingredients as another vaccine as long as the pathogen or pathogen fragment is missing. This is a ghastly deception if adjuvants in most vaccines, such as aluminum, cause injuries or adverse reactions.
Using this deceptive definition of placebo would allow placebos to have all manner of ingredients and contaminants including PEG, ALC-0315, and remnants of mRNA manufacturing processes. Placebos may therefore produce nearly as many adverse effects as the vaccines themselves.
Another explanation might be that the yellow dot batches were Big Pharma's version of placebo: just the nanoparticles with no mRNA. We know that many of the immediate jab reactions were most likely to the PEG (polyethylene glycol), which is a known allergen for many people. There are also other ingredients in the shots apart from mRNA, that are also of concern. If this were the case, you would expect that the "placebo" group would show more adverse events than an injection of saline (which, let's face it, has never been used as a placebo for any vaccine), but nowhere near the level that the mRNA (& generated spike protein) would cause.
I struggle to understand why a placebo group had ANY "related adverse events"!
Anyway, the point is that placebos are not harmless, apparently.
Secondly, from the row descriptions on that page 11 of the CCCA report, it looks like "severe" = life altering and "serious" = life threatening. I have been representing severe and serious in this way, I want to stop if I am wrong!
On a (slightly) unrelated note - I do not understand why the elderly and infirm, with weak to non-existent immune systems should be injected first - or at all - there can be no "blood out of a stone" response from a non-existent or weak immune system? Showing my ignorance of medical matters probably!
Lastly, do you have a view on whether the a rebalancing of IgG1-3 antibodies is a good idea (Jikkyleaks stuff showing dominance of IgG4 post injection - (but not C19?.
As always, kudos to you - the Lord owes you some great waves! haha
Fred Mrozek has a good explanation above as to why 'placebos', in vaccine trials anyway, are not harmless. Not that this is a 'vaccine' by any stretch of the imagination.
The stronger immune responses in the young made them vulnerable to the 1918 pathogen, whereas the elderly were hit relatively lightly. It could certainly explain why the immune attacks on mRNA infected cells are much more severe in the healthy young. Even so, these things are deadly to the elderly since it often only takes a small amount of damage to tip a morbid older person from life to death.
The placebo effect is quite powerful. In trials, people unknowingly on the placebo will often have amazing results purely because they *think* they are getting actual treatment. It even extends to surgery - a surgeon was suspicious about the actual benefits of arthroscopic knee surgery for osteoarthritis so for some patients they just made an incision and sewed it up so they thought they'd had the full treatment - the patients improved at the same rate as the group that had the actual surgery. (Google "knee surgery placebo study", it's fascinating stuff)
There's also a thing called the nocebo effect where if you believe a medication will harm you, it's likely you'll be right. Belief is a pretty powerful force. There's also coincidence - it's quite likely some people were going to have a bad health event anyway and if it happened in the week after the jab they might associate it with that, and send in a report. A friend who's a pharmacist had an elderly lady booked to come in for her jab but she missed her appointment, he found out later she had died the day after. If she had gotten the jab, gone home and died the next day, doubtless her family would have suspected the jab was to blame - but no, just coincidence.
Anyway my point is that even if it was a placebo I would totally expect there to still be some adverse events.
True, but in early 2021 I doubt there were many in Denmark that thought the shots might have any negative effects. They were not told there was any possibility of that. But Denmark did limit the shots eventually, not pushing them on children like the U.S. has.
One thing I want to throw on the mix regards the idea of "placebo". Traditionally big pharma plays a rigged game ...esp with regards to "vaccines". They have never practiced the gold standard of using inert placebo in any trials. They typically either use the adjuvant without the antigen as their "placebo, or they will use a different already approved vaccine as their "placebo". So could the deaths and SAEs actually have been caused by placebos that indeed were not just saline , but rather other vax or some other toxic soup.that just dod not contain the mRNA for spike protein?
Yes, it seems fair to question the term "placebo" with any of the pharmaceuticals now given what Aaron Siri and Del have recently uncovered with their lawsuit. There has never been a placebo group WITH ANY 'VACCINE' they have been pumping in to our arms for decades. Do placebos exist for anything? We now have to question everything they've ever done and can likely assume it's been nothing but lies from the start. Truly incredible where we are today. I wouldn't put it past these sociopaths to put something else in every so-called placebo for more of their sick experiments on humanity. I long for justice.
DITTO!!!!!
🎯 Thank you RJ Jamieson. This is important and explains AE’s in the yellow dots. So the claim of yellow dot as ‘placebo’ can be most certainly be made. Those involved or complicit with these ‘vaccine industry placebo’ protocols would expect to see some AE’s from the yellow dots lots.
The whistleblower on the Pfizer trials, Brook Jackson, talks about the use of placebo, or rather misuse. They treated the two sets of patients differently as far a handling of symptoms and testing, and the trial in general was apparently very careless about letting the trial subjects know if they were placebo or not. There is no indication that I can recall from her description that the placebo in the trial wasn't true placebo. But very soon into the trials, they gave the placebo trial subjects a choice to be administered with the 'real' product, so they wiped out any possible findings using double-blind.
That's an excellent point.
Even with a true placebo trial using just saline there are adverse events. An injection is an assault on the body and bodies can and will react differently to it.
Absolutely!
I put my thought into this article . It goes to the basic assumption that there are no true placebos in "Vaccine Science" because there is conflicting guidance. In other words, no rules. https://www.activistpost.com/2023/07/the-false-placebo.html
There should have been several placebos in the original study. Sham shot (saline), the "empty" genetic construct alone (if this is possible), and the genetic construct coding for human serum albumin (the most common protein in the blood). This would tell us if for some reason ANY mRNA could induce immunity. My guess is the answer is yes, that the empty and albumin-coding mRNA (plus all the trimmings) induce generalized immunity that lasts for a month or two (the duration of vaccine efficacy). That's how I would have designed the "experiment." That would explain the AEs in the yellow group.
I think it was Ryan Cole who postulated that some of the less harmful batches may be due to defective manufacture, such that they are almost inert, but not quite placebo as you say. And Sasha Latypova pointed out how complex the manufacturing process is, and how difficult it would have been to ensure any kind of quality control, especially given the scale and speed of production.
Do we have any idea where the different batches were made?
I suspect the production, distribution and logistics were intentionally made complex. Basically, the left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing.
I also note the military (DoD) was actually running this vaccine production and distribution show. And everything is Triple Top Secret with those people.
If I remember correctly Craig Pardekooper (howbadismybatch.com) found that the particularly bad batches had a shorter expiry date and a different letter at the start of the batch number, which would indicate someone in the system knew they were different.
Pardekooper did outstanding work.
yes. i am sure we do.
According to the NYT article the dna is produced in MO and then flown to MA and Germany for rna processing.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/health/pfizer-coronavirus-vaccine.html
Don’t believe anything other than fashion from the NYT
Not even that!!
Good recipes.
Agree on the NYT, what I was simply trying to show is that all the batches appear to have been made at the same plants.
I worked in a pharmaceutical research facility many years ago and witnessed the difficulty mixing process for normal medications, saw many batches get dumped because of mixing errors, all these technicians weren't even BMS employees they were young sub contractors hoping to get a full time job for the pharmaceutical company doing contract work for , I am sure during the height of the pandemic with the shortage of workers in this specialized field they were putting anybody on the mixing floor and in the sampling of the batches in the LAB , just to get the product out, imagine the corners cut in that short 1 year window, all from the almighty dollar and pressure from the world's government's!
Another hypothesis (from Australian data) is that the "bad batches" were past their optimum use-by date and so contained more wild card mRNA, producing wild card proteins.
Jessica, nice analysis. I sent you the number of doses data for Denmark. The number of doses was not equal between the lots, far from it. There are 2 issues. The lots in EU were split and distributed to different countries in unequal numbers of doses per each lot number. They did the same in the US across different states. The second issue is that as in the US, the "toxicity" of lots for THE SAME lot number looks very different depending on the location (country/state). The only explanation I can come up with - they are fraudulently marked as "the same" lot but produced on different production lines, possibly active ingredients coming from different locations. That's why same lot looks very different depending on the country/US state. In fact in the US, in the shipment data that Aaron Siri FOIAed it is clear that toward later time period "one lot" of product is not one production run. Today Pfizer has switched to "continuous manufacturing" so lot numbers are meaningless. This can also be the difference between the "early" and "late" lots - early were the single production runs and later ones are a mixture of many production runs from multiple locations/lines. It's not the age of the recipient. Even if there is a difference in the median - the vertical dispersion of the batches that you see on your graph - that's gigantic and not explained by age.
You are right. I spoke to Vibeke and she says the blue dot people were all under 70. So it's very possible that 'the same' lots were simply not 'treated' the same way - as per production. What a stupid shit show this is.
I posted an example of an elderly lady in Denmark
89-year-old victim of Lot EJ6134 second dose after EJ6797
Both Blue Dot Lots
She Died 23 February 2021 in Denmark
Thanks for your comment. When did Pfizer start "continous manufacturing"? Are you sure that means a batch is not produced all at one time in one place and each vial should be the same? If what you said is true, what about this Denmark report?
This reminds me of the DTP vaccine before 1986. Back then they had "lots" which were like batches. One lot was distributed in one geographical area. Sometimes there was a "hot" lot that caused a lot of injuries. Lawsuits were possible back then. It was kind of obvious some lots were causing way more injuries. So the vaccine makers then started splitting up the lots, and distributing them all over the country. For them, the problem was solved.
This is one of the best things I've learned from Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center. https://www.nvic.org She has a son with a pretty severe vaccine injury.
I don't know when exactly they switched to continuous, but they did. There are batches now of 12 million doses (900 liters of mRNA!) which are produced over 6 months and have several manufacture and expiration dates.
Exactly, nothing can be trusted. Meaningless lot numbers makes perfect sense if hiding the truth is the goal. There are millions of dead bodies as a result of this, and no formal and open inquiries as to why. I have to conclude this is a well designed attack on the human race by our own governments.
Some people must spend a lot of time figuring out how to subvert good pharmaceutical practices so that it becomes impossible to figure out anything about lot safety.
I did read that they spread the lot doses across different locations to bury the adverse reactions which would be more visible if they were clustered closely.
Hi Sasha. Could “transport hygiene” be a factor provoking different outcomes from the same batch number? Remember all the initial chatter about storage at much lower temperatures than the vaccine transport chain was traditionally used to? I think I recall ideal transport temps being around -50C? Then the MSM and the Science (TM) went strangely quite on this....
I don't think so. The low temps were not really necessary - in tech documentation stability testing described that the vials could be stored in regular fridge or even at room temp for quite a while, up to several days. So this would not be a big factor in my opinion. The FDA also removed the deep freezing requirement without explanation later.
Fifty year olds are not 'elderly'; that would be me at 82.
Nonetheless, this is a useful and informative study, thank you!
I would likely be dead had I not resisted enormous pressure to get the vaxx...
Glad you resisted.
simple question:
Joe took 2 doses, one "yellow", another "blue".
Are both lots associated with Joe's report on VAERS?
Is this another possible confusion factor?
oooh good one... possibly
Well all I know is that I will NEVER get another injection of anything Pharma and neither will my cats.
The seemingly careless way the "authorities" insisted it was was just great to mix and match any of the kinds of shots was yet another red flag.
DING DING
Not likely since the dates given are 7+ months difference between "blue" and "yellow".
True for these two batches. But there are many others.
Seems to me that a medical artefact used for medical ends should be made up of the same parts all over the treated landscape, not vary between batches at all. If it varies between batches like the Danes have proved, now that is proof of experimentalism, isn´t it? And yet one more argument against the Pfizer et consortes handling of the covid injections, inserted in humanity all over the world by now. It must be wonderful for a med company to have free access to the biggest of the human populations, namely the whole planet, with possibly the most sinister implications. This says something more of the enormous crime in front of our eyes, hardly to be understood, but which must very soon these days be taken to international court for finding and punishing the vilains behind.
yes
That was the main point of the original study: the apparent quality variability. The whole placebo thing came from one remark of one of the German scientists in the video: "Evil tongues would remark, however, that this is also how placebos would look." Everybody jumped on the word "placebo".
And another thing: whoever thinks that placebo's don't generate complaints is wrong. The placebo-effect is very powerful, also in a negative sense (nocebo). If there are 200.000 injections (dramatic intervention!) without any entries in VAERS, I suspect a registration hiccup. Even a sugar pill made people puke when they were severely warned that vomiting was a possible side effect (real experiment).
Besides that: an average age of 50 and an average age of 37... would that really give such a sharp distinction with no mans land inbetween? There must have been quite some overlap of people in their fourties in both groups. Where are the intermediate lots, for example 300.000 doses generating 3000 suspected side effects? Pfizer has some serious explaining to do.
When I first saw the data that Team Enigma analyzed, the first thought I had was that the graphs looked like an LD50 experiment (when 50% of the experimental population dies). As I've posted before in many places, that experimental population is usually rats, mice, ferrets, monkeys...but not humans.
Well, that may very well be the idea too. I think we know enough by now to realize the worst of intents on the globalist side, real evil stuff, so we need to get together and stand up for t he life of humanity and the planet itself! Very hard considering the media are all bought up, so are also the governments, but the numbers are on the right side never to forget, the fearful numbers....just watch the French ongoing protestations, not only about pension age, but certainly also regarding mr Macron and the WEF polidies behind him. France after all is nuclear and a big European nation, so is Germany hosting lots of uprisings too. So may we expect some US marches, catching speaches or more...?
And who the hell does that to innocent animals
Great work. I am not surprised the yellow dots are not placebos, as logistically the only way for that to happen would be saline which is clear. The jabs are cloudy and have a bit of viscosity due to the sucrose in them.
However, could the explanation of the AE's in the early batches be due to age alone? That is Denis Rancourt's position, though I think these early batches are distinctly more toxic than latter batches. That the explanation for toxicity and AEs are due to age primarily? That differences in batches are not the reason for AEs, age is?
The early Pfizer batches in particular were known to have major issues with the stability of the LNPs. Upon freezing, the pH would change and become slightly more acidic due to the PBS buffer (electrolytes) they used. Increased acidity causes agglomeration, aggregation and eventual destruction of the LNPs. They get bigger and there is a chemical reaction with the mRNA and the LNPs making adducts. Larger nanoparticles have a different biodistribution patterns, and are more directly toxic to blood components and can cause CARPA. Maybe lots of anaphylactoid reactions? This is the reason Pfizer switched to Tris buffer which provided stability during the freeze/thaw process.
I think you are absolutely SPOT ON with regard to LNP size. This is something I have started to investigate. It could 'splain a whole whakkamole of things.
More on particles in E series lots
https://twitter.com/FluoridePoison/status/1675998583945048064
Cannot access.
Working for me
It only works, being logged in. So I don't want to use it any more. One cannot link to any twitter tweed, if it is only accesable for logged in users. If they don't fix that I'll be off there.
Have you tried using a "private" browsing window?
yes. it is a general problem. Once in the while I'll go there, but I think this policy should be opposed. Its all about data grab and limited access to information.
I successfully viewed in the 'Brave' browser regularly and in private mode.
Twitter issues.
Do you mean I am shadow banned?
I am not on Twitter. I cannot always access it. I read you on Substack.
I agree with you on that: the difference is extreme, especially given the average ages of 50 and 37. For example, there must have been a substantial overlap of people in their fourties. If the blue had been exclusively 80+ or 90+, it would have been more plausible.
please watch or read the whole interview. you'll find the links here:https://helendunkel.substack.com/p/dossier-of-some-protagonists-paul "the blue" appeared later on. their whole statements are worth a listen. I am stunned people focus on suposedly placebo allegedlly harmless instead on all the other topics, is this kind of hope? or deliberate distraction by parts of the alternative media? Healthcare and more got the jabs early on as well (january?) This graphic cannot be generalized! The two chemists are going to court because of many unanswered questions. If interested, I did some substack about the Paul Ehrlich Insititute. Which is the most important institution in the EU regarding BioNTech and supposedly for the other products as well. Thank you
Totally agree. Focus on the underlying problems: quality control, way of testing, in fact the questions that the Danes pose in their study. The 'placebo or not' matter is highly distracting.
Yes I have. I've followed this group for a while. It's the physicochemical properties of the formulation that is causing some of these AEs imho and these chemists explain it well. And the answers from the regulators are shall we say....ridiculous. Thanks
They did mention in the video, that placebo does not mean saline solution. It could mean product without the active ingredient in this case being the mRNA encoding for the spike. Unless we can be absolutely 100% certain that the LNPs ingredients themselves, which have never before been given permission to be injected in hundreds of millions of people, can not lead to the adverse events you found in VAERS, I would still be willing to entertain the idea of "Placebo".
There is also the fact that the "actors" like Fauci and the Candian prime-asshole got their moments in the limelight of getting injected. I am pretty sure they would have not consented to the actual product. Especially not Fauci. Unless they also got special theatre prop shots.
No reason to think the definition of "placebo" isn't changed by Big Pharma. Maybe the yellow dot is more a control that doesn't have a component. Spike proteins seem to stick around, so would be useful to check recipients for these and other traces of the jab.
Typically pHARMa has NEVER used inert placebo (meaning gold standard trial protocols). Fir all orevious vax, they do not use inert placebo in control group. They use either other already "approved" vax, or they'll use a concoction of all the adjuvant just minus the antigen. It is anything but gold standard science. I suspect their "placebos" were not completely inert!
What a brilliant surfer scientist you are Jessica Rose.
Kudos & keep giving them hell, no apologies.
#AccountabilityNotAmnesty
"It is my opinion that we have still only seen the tip of the iceberg with regard to the harms imposed by these modified mRNA COVID injections. For the younger individuals, who started off strong and healthy, it will be a longer road to pathology and it is quite likely that a very small proportion of these individuals will even report their condition to VAERS because let’s face it, who’s going to associate a cancer they ‘get’ a year or two out from their latest Pfizer shot? "
Like for many others, cancer has invaded our sphere of interpersonal relationships with a heavy bias amongst the mRNA injected.
An ordinary, trusting person would assume a placebo would be saline solution made from pure water, and he/she would thus assume placebos are inert and harmless. But in the vaccine industry/cult, a placebo can contain all the same ingredients as another vaccine as long as the pathogen or pathogen fragment is missing. This is a ghastly deception if adjuvants in most vaccines, such as aluminum, cause injuries or adverse reactions.
Using this deceptive definition of placebo would allow placebos to have all manner of ingredients and contaminants including PEG, ALC-0315, and remnants of mRNA manufacturing processes. Placebos may therefore produce nearly as many adverse effects as the vaccines themselves.
Very true, very sad.
Another explanation might be that the yellow dot batches were Big Pharma's version of placebo: just the nanoparticles with no mRNA. We know that many of the immediate jab reactions were most likely to the PEG (polyethylene glycol), which is a known allergen for many people. There are also other ingredients in the shots apart from mRNA, that are also of concern. If this were the case, you would expect that the "placebo" group would show more adverse events than an injection of saline (which, let's face it, has never been used as a placebo for any vaccine), but nowhere near the level that the mRNA (& generated spike protein) would cause.
Sucking the juice for multiple jabs out of one vial should be cause for alarm.
Shake well before using.....
indeed
This guy also wrote something about it
https://geoffpain.substack.com/p/urgent-please-remove-all-reference
thanks will have a look
Good work!
A couple of observations.
From page 11 - as an example - the placebo group in the trials had severe and serious adverse events.
https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/The-COVID-19-Inoculations-More-Harm-Than-Good-REV-Dec-16-2021.pdf
I struggle to understand why a placebo group had ANY "related adverse events"!
Anyway, the point is that placebos are not harmless, apparently.
Secondly, from the row descriptions on that page 11 of the CCCA report, it looks like "severe" = life altering and "serious" = life threatening. I have been representing severe and serious in this way, I want to stop if I am wrong!
On a (slightly) unrelated note - I do not understand why the elderly and infirm, with weak to non-existent immune systems should be injected first - or at all - there can be no "blood out of a stone" response from a non-existent or weak immune system? Showing my ignorance of medical matters probably!
Lastly, do you have a view on whether the a rebalancing of IgG1-3 antibodies is a good idea (Jikkyleaks stuff showing dominance of IgG4 post injection - (but not C19?.
As always, kudos to you - the Lord owes you some great waves! haha
Indeed. Empty LNPs would be a disaster depending on size and distribution.
Fred Mrozek has a good explanation above as to why 'placebos', in vaccine trials anyway, are not harmless. Not that this is a 'vaccine' by any stretch of the imagination.
The stronger immune responses in the young made them vulnerable to the 1918 pathogen, whereas the elderly were hit relatively lightly. It could certainly explain why the immune attacks on mRNA infected cells are much more severe in the healthy young. Even so, these things are deadly to the elderly since it often only takes a small amount of damage to tip a morbid older person from life to death.
There were no unhealthy under 18's or over 65's in the clinical trials - or any pregnant women?
The placebo effect is quite powerful. In trials, people unknowingly on the placebo will often have amazing results purely because they *think* they are getting actual treatment. It even extends to surgery - a surgeon was suspicious about the actual benefits of arthroscopic knee surgery for osteoarthritis so for some patients they just made an incision and sewed it up so they thought they'd had the full treatment - the patients improved at the same rate as the group that had the actual surgery. (Google "knee surgery placebo study", it's fascinating stuff)
There's also a thing called the nocebo effect where if you believe a medication will harm you, it's likely you'll be right. Belief is a pretty powerful force. There's also coincidence - it's quite likely some people were going to have a bad health event anyway and if it happened in the week after the jab they might associate it with that, and send in a report. A friend who's a pharmacist had an elderly lady booked to come in for her jab but she missed her appointment, he found out later she had died the day after. If she had gotten the jab, gone home and died the next day, doubtless her family would have suspected the jab was to blame - but no, just coincidence.
Anyway my point is that even if it was a placebo I would totally expect there to still be some adverse events.
Death?
True, but in early 2021 I doubt there were many in Denmark that thought the shots might have any negative effects. They were not told there was any possibility of that. But Denmark did limit the shots eventually, not pushing them on children like the U.S. has.