An amazing thing is happening.
The Jerusalem Post is actually becoming a conduit for useful information about all this COVID-19 plandemic stuff.
Not thanks to the journalists, of course, who are still churning out awful, lying propaganda 24/7.
But thanks to an increasing number of commenters who are using the Jpost’s platform to spread some real information.
If you go HERE, you’ll get to this article on the Jpost, from this morning:
Of course, the article itself is all made up.
But in the comments section – truth is starting to sprout! Abundantly!
One of the commentators left a link to a dossier of leaked information about the clinical trials of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines.
That link is here:
[I’ve downloaded it, and virus scanned it, and it seems to be OK, but please scan it yourselves, I don’t want to take out anyone’s hard-drive.]
I’m currently going through it, but here’s what I’ve already learned, from comments that are going up on the Jpost, HERE (and which I’ve screenshotted).
These vaccines contain nano-technology:
“The drug substance, BNT162b2, of the COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine is a modified messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) encoding for a mutated full-length variant of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein. In the drug product the RNA is encapsulated into lipid nan0particles, which protect the RNA from degradation and enable transfection of the RNA into host cells after intramuscular injection for vaccination.”
2. The vaccines only have a shelf life of 6 months – which is part of the reason the government is trying to force everyone to get the jabs so fast.
3. It was based on the ‘spike protein’ of the SARS-Cov2 found in Wuhan – which suggests there is no protection for the inevitable 4,000 ‘variations’ and ‘mutations’ of the coronavirus (which remember, causes flu and colds…)
“The Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 undergo mutations, and it thus critically important to investigate the biological significance of these variants in relation to the development of Spike-based covid-19 vaccine candidates.
For example, Korber et al. 2020 present evidence that there are now more SARS-CoV-2 viruses circulating in the human population globally that have the G614 form of the Spike protein versus the D614 form that was originally identified from the first human cases in Wuhan, China.
Further, Li et al., states that as of May 6, 2020, 329 naturally occurring variants in Spike protein have been reported in the public domain.
The applicant is asked to discuss how the chosen Spike antigen variant in BNT162b2 relates to the Spike variants currently on the dominant SARS-CoV-2 viruses circulating in the human population ([confidential information deleted]). References: Korber et al., 2020: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7332439/ Li et al., 2020: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.07.012″
4. The assessor states that the study done to test this mRNa in Rhesus Monkeys (more on that in a moment) was:
“[C]onsidered insufficient to demonstrate efficacy against the disease.”
“Overall, the challenge study is suboptimal as it comes with a number of uncertainties.
“The limitations can be listed regarding the model: absence of sars-cov2-clinical signs in control and challenged NHP, use of juveniles NHP, lack of females NHP, one out of three age-matched saline control-immunized (n=3) male rhesus macaques not responding to challenge (no viral RNA neither in the BAL and nasal swab), low numbers of animals with a low statistical significance, questionable selection of titer of the viral challenge (1.05. 106 PFU).
“Moreover, some important data are missing to date like the absence of cytokines measurement in the NHP BAL. The applicant is asked to discuss all these limitations and should provide further scientific information on the NHP model relevance. ”
Although the model is considered adequate to demonstrate immunogenicity, and viral clearance, it is considered insufficient to demonstrate efficacy against the disease (OC).”
5. That study on Rhesus Monkeys was carried out on a very small group of animals, all young, all healthy and ALL MALE:
“It can be noted that in the primary proof-of-concept study, the use of juvenile rhesus monkeys with no or only mild clinical symptoms for the preclinical efficacy testing has limitations in its value as a disease animal model for human Covid-19 (which is a clearly age stratified disease, mostly affecting the elderly).
“In addition, the low number of animals of the male sex only that were studied only for a short time period weakens the conclusiveness of the study. However, due to species differences in the immune system between animal model species and humans, the final call on whether this candidate vaccine will work sufficiently well in humans will entirely rely on the clinical outcome.“
I.e: They’ll only really know what’s going on once they’ve conducted a mass human experiment.
6. No tests were carried out on how these ‘vaccines’ might contribute to the recipients developing a serious auto-immune disorder, despite the fact that they have been designed to artificially stimulate the immune system:
The humoral and cellular immune response following IM administration of BNT162b2 (V9) was investigated in mice and nonhuman primates but a more in depth discussion on the suitability of these pharmacological animal models has not been provided (e.g. susceptibility for SARS-CoV-2 infection; potential bias for Th1- or Th2-skewed responses has been well characterized for certain mice strains) and the relevance of the immunogenicity data for the clinic (e.g. only single immunisation in mice).
Also, no or limited attention to the induction of long-term memory responses nor immunogenicity and protection in aged animals has been paid (OC). That being said, the induction of virus neutralizing antibodies in both mice (VSV-SARS-CoV-2 S) and primates (SARS-CoV-2) indicated that BNT162b2 immunization has the potential to induce neutralizing antibodies also in humans.
Thus, vaccination with modRNA is expected to induce robust neutralising antibodies and a concomitant T cell response to achieve protective immunity.
Nevertheless, no further discussion was provided regarding the possibility of autoimmune responses induced by the ModRNA. The Applicant is invited to further discuss the risk that the mRNA vaccine can trigger potential autoimmune responses and how they plan to possibly evaluate their occurrence (OC).”
I’m quoting things at length here, so no-one can accuse me of picking and choosing.
But let’s do a quick sum up of the points above:
- The mRNA vaccines contain nanoparticles, and amongst other things, those nanoparticles have been designed to prevent the synthetic mRNA in these ‘vaccines’ from breaking down naturally in the body.
- The mRNA vaccines have a shelf-life of 6 months, and that is presumably part of the reason the government is in such a mad rush to vaccinate everyone, as per the terms of the real contract they signed with Pfizer.
- The mRNA vaccine is based on the spike protein found in the Wuhan strain of SARS-COV2. There is no proof it works against any of the other 4,000 strains of coronavirus.
- The study done with the mRNA vaccines on Rhesus monkeys was: “[C]onsidered insufficient to demonstrate efficacy against the disease.”
- That study on Rhesus monkeys was done on a very small group of young, health, ALL MALE animals, that were only studied for a short period of time (I think something like 28 days, but I have to double-check).
- No tests were carried out on how these ‘vaccines’ might contribute to the recipients developing a serious auto-immune disorder, despite the fact that they have been designed to artificially stimulate the immune system.
That last point segues into the discussion we had over on this post:
If you’re interested and want to make your own mind up, go to the link and download the material for yourself.
The hard evidence is all around us, that things with this ‘vaccine’, with this ‘plandemic’, with this world, are not really how they appear.
Or, you can keep your head in the sand if you want.
But there are consequences for doing that.
And you’ll have to live with them.
You might also like this article: