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?
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?
Jul 3, 2023·edited Jul 3, 2023Liked by Jessica Rose
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.
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.
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.
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.
"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
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?
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?
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.
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...
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.....
This guy also wrote something about it
https://geoffpain.substack.com/p/urgent-please-remove-all-reference
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