There are a lot of different theories floating about on the use of the mRNA vaccines, some include that the government(s) have an agenda to change up our DNA to create so called "Stepford Wives" compliance out of the masses to a vast conspiracy to slowly kill off the population in a bid to initiate population control or to create an environment of governmental tyranny.
After watching this video of Tal Zaks, Moderna's Chief Medical Officer, it became, at least to me, that mRNA was just an opportunity that was just to good to pass up. After years of painstakingly giving Little Jonathan speeches across the globe to rid the world of the moral and ethical implications of using gene therapies to fix what ailed the world the corona virus outbreak was essentially a gift horse. One can argue all day whether it was an intentionally planned gift horse but for the sake of this post we'll just use the consideration that it was happenstance.
In this video, taken in 2017, shows us just how far gone the conclusion was that mRNA "anything" let alone a vaccine was going to be breaking headlines. If it was he'd had way more to talk about other than potential upcoming trials, waiting preliminary results of using mRNA on cancer cells and for development of a vaccine for H10N8 and H7N9 influenzas mRNA vaccine. Developing influenzas vaccines isn't an inevitability more so than time consuming from development to mass production. With nothing to grand stand on there's nothing they have developed into fruition that is convincing enough to overcome the moral and ethical concerns, that pretty much leaves one at the mercy of pulling at the heartstrings about the poor little Jonathans of the world.
So I started my professional life about thirty years ago as a nurse in the pediatric intensive care unit and I remember this one infant lets call him Jonathan, who came in really, really ill. Seem to have a rare genetic defect but in those days gene diagnosis was still in it's infancy so we really couldn't figure out what was wrong with him. In the years since as I've trained as a physician scientist we've been living this phenomenal digital scientific revolution. And I am her today to tell you that we're actually hacking the software of life and it's changing the way we think abut prevention and treatment of disease.
If you think about what it is we are trying to do, we've taken information and our understanding of that information and how that information is transmitted in a cell and taking our understanding of medicine to make drugs and we're fusing the two. We think of it as information therapy.
We've proven this true with the flu vaccine. The traditional approach has protein floating around your cells, and mRNA approach has the cells themselves in your own body making the vaccine. Flu vaccine where we get a injection in our arm, we get a piece of the virus that teaches our immune system to recognize the virus. Now imagine if instead we give the proteins we give the body the instructions on how to make the proteins, how they can make its own vaccine...that's an MRA vaccine.
Now I am no scientist, I couldn't even qualify as an aid to a nurse's aid, lol, that's how bad it is....but this is pretty much double speak as the body already makes it own antibody proteins to fight infection, it is it's own vaccine producer so to speak. You get an infection the body recognizes it as an invader and starts pumping out antibody proteins. So what's the problem here? It's sort of an assorted bag. One is that in any given situation of a dangerous unknown pathogen it takes time to develop a vaccine. Two is the people like the little Jonathans of the world who are missing something within their cells and having the ability to replace that something with something other than a transplant of whatever organ in your body is not functioning properly. Third is, basically taking the cells known to fight the most vigorously against cancer and somehow enabling them not to be so called run over by the cancerous cells.
Now the latter two you could see a potential to overcome the moral and ethical concerns of messing with the bodies own cell mechanism given the severity of the disease(s) involved especially if in the long run death is of a consequence when everything conventional fails.
The first one though was based on a hypothesis, or was before this current viral explosion of covid, expediency, convenience or monetary gain. When you think about it pre-covid what this basically would have entailed is saying to the populace that we'd like to inject you with every known pathogen (most like genetically made if lacking a protein) we can think of so that in the evitability it should somehow cross over into humans your body will automatically know how to defend against. Now we know just about how far they'd gotten with that given that the last major wide spread pandemic happened a hundred years ago, people would have been like what's the chances of that happening in my lifetime, no thanks. So lets knock that one out of the ballpark for now. What else is there then regarding viruses that would be so compelling to push for gene therapy? Basically the answer is what is or has been holding up the wet dreams of the Bill Gates of this world, easily affordable, transportable genetically made vaccines anywhere in the world. Vaccines of this nature can be made without being cultured in eggs or other what I call eye of newts (whatever animal or fetus required) then easily stored or frozen for eons readily available at any time to be moved into any potential hot spots. To prove their theory worked they used the H10N8 and H7N9 influenza virus, in one they lacked a live viral component so they went the eye of newt route and used a quail protein to make the virus, it's probability rating in comparison was ninety nine percent. Meaning using the quail protein they were able to make one of the influenza virus's to a ninety nine percent exact ratio.
So you see where they were at with this, they could prove their theory worked, they've known for a long time they can make a virus in a petri dish to almost a hundred percent certainty but going to people and saying let us try to this on you, well unless you were dying or staring down a pandemic they were pretty much stuck with Dr Frankensteining on the little Jonathans of the world or those facing no other alternative but death.
I am not saying this is the reason for the current pandemic, though many speculate ulterior motives and one was hamstrung there really couldn't be much of a better reason if you are looking for one. Maybe they did reach that level of desperation. Regardless, desperation or sheer luck of an opportunity to hard to pass up the known consequences of their actions need to be called into question.
Let's take a hard look at another paragraph he presented in his presentation:
Now we can go see what's screwed up in a patience and we can use that information to make a vaccine. We take that information, say a patient with lung cancer, we take a biopsy, we figure out the sequence, we figure out their immune system, that all becomes information that goes up into the cloud that combines an algorithm then automatically makes a vaccine that we administer to try wake their immune system. Now the challenge, of course, is that everybody's cancer is different. Mutations happen by random chance so in order to do this you have to make it personalized. So this is me, (silhouette pops up on a screen), but if every patient is different (silhouette's in different colors pops up behind him) what we're going to have to do is make a personalized vaccine for every patient.
Now let's reword that:
Now we can take a person who is sick and we can use that information to make a vaccine. We take that information, say a patient with covid, we take blood, we figure out the sequence, we figure out their immune system, that all becomes information that goes up into the cloud that combines an algorithm then automatically makes a vaccines that we administer to try and wake their immune system. Now the challenge, of course, is that everybody's immune system is different. Mutations happen by random chance so in order to do this you have to make it personalized. So this is me, (silhouette pops up on a screen), but if every patients is different (silhouette's in different colors pops up behind him) what we're going to have to do is make a personalized vaccine for every patient.
If the first paragraph describes the processes of how mRNA vaccines work then we should be able to swap out the words and apply those processes to all mRNA vaccines. Looking to critique the significance as it applies to viruses I got a little help from Tucker Carlson this week when on Tuesday when he did a looking out for you segment while simultaneously running cover for the pharmaceutical companies and the government concerning the pause on the Johnson and Johnson vaccine. Which I'll give more on later in the discussion.
I've spent hours trying to decipher how our immune system works in relations to getting a vaccine. The best way to describe it would be like a war game. Your body has what we will term scouts, those scouts continuously travel through your body looking for signs of infection. They are what you'd call or label your B cell regiments. Further back in the line of defenses are what you'd call your T cell regiments. Your B cell regiments relay information back to the T cell regiments what they have encountered and the severity of that encounter, if they start to become overrun then the T cells are called in for backup. Just like in any regiments of war you have your chains of command. Your B cells and T cells are made up similarly. So lets say that you are missing someone(s) or something that make up that chain of command within those cells but depending upon the mission that doesn't necessarily negate their ability to do their job. It would only surmise then that if a large(r) number of missing troop members was encountered then an analysis of the overall situation to determine the strengths of any weakness to, well basically, engage in any fight. So say in any given cell structure you are missing someone, he was lazy and always caught sleeping on the job but hardly enough to have an effect on the overall performance of the regiment so he goes basically unnoticed unless someone else points him out as missing, now if his bad habits starts to spread among that particular rank then you have a noticeable problem that needs diagnosis, even some adjustments to quell the problem but at that point you become well aware of a weak point among your ranks. Your enemy on the other hand he may not even notice there's a lazy troop member missing but if you are at a point where you haven't noticed yet that that lazy troop members bad habits are spreading that leaves an opportunity to be taken advantage by the enemy if he notices before you do. Next thing you know the enemy has broken through your first line of defenses and is ready to engage your second line. Now your second line of defenses, your t cells, has every member along the line, chances are that not only will they win the fight but they are going to write it in their history books to forever be remembered. The only way this could go down any differently is if say that before hand you were already painfully aware that you had a significant amount of desertions among your troops member or that nearly all of them were missing in action, you wouldn't even consider engaging in any fight, at least not willingly.
Now I could sit here and tell you that your B cell regiment ranks, that among those ranks you have regiment ABC, DEF, HIJ, similar with your T cell regiments, instead of putting in simplistic terms for simplicities sake. Just as I could sit and throw in terms like antigen, antibodies, wanted and unwanted immununogencity, immunocompetant, immunocompromised, mutagenesis, paradoxical effect, adverse effects, mutants, variants or a whole host of other words but that's just going to leave you as confused as I was before having to spend hours sorting them all out and what they mean. What these words all amount to is basically telling you what I described above, you have a full regiment among your ranks or you don't. Missing ranks member depending upon how many are missing is going to determine your strength. To many not observed missing is going to open your ranks to be infiltrated. Going into battle knowing you are missing troop members is likely going to result in your defeat. Once defeated you have succumbed to the enemy and he has overrun your ranks and in some cases have brought in heavier artilleries to ensure you stay defeated.
In a nutshell that's how our immune system works against viruses. That's how formidable an enemy a virus can be upon the immune system response which brings me back to the conversation Tucker Carlson had with immunologist Dr Hooman Noorechashm who said it's a major mistake to assume you can apply this vaccine in a blanket approach. I will type that full conversation below because within it lies subtle hints that the conversation over the Johnson and Johnson vaccine goes beyond just that discussion and hints upon other vaccine safety issues, something the link I just posted doesn't really hit on and I cannot find a video link to the discussion. Pointing that out is crucial to the conversation about vaccine safety overall and the reason why doctors, researchers and others fear speaking out, it comes down to the ability of Dr Fauci to ruin careers. I highly recommend watching that video because it doesn't just touch on the fears of doctors to speak out but speaks of Dr. Fauci's involvement with gain of function research. I recommend doing it before it disappears off the web like the video Steve Hilton did into Facui's involvement documented through pin numbers assigned to research grants and traced back to Fauci.
Before I came across this, what I'll call bonus material from Fox News this week, I watched Dr Tal Zaks video many times over. Sometimes when it comes to crucial issues I don't feel are being addressed I want to try and find evidence that will back up my opinion. That lead to hours of reading stuff I could barely comprehend therefore leading me to spend hours trying to define what I was reading. Along the way though I found articles that within them pretty much aligned with my opinion, that being that the immune system plays an integral part of how vaccines work. When it comes to mRNA vaccines it's an actual part of the algorithms, that Dr Zaks speaks of that, according to his own words, encompasses what an mRNA vaccine is. So the big question that lurked in my mind was that if everyone's immune system is different and they have to make a vaccine that is personalized then how is it that we can skip this critical step. The answer is we simply can't. This goes way beyond the question involved with J&J brought up by Dr Noorchashm, it's a serious concern vaccinating those with recent or current infections, anyone following the data on vaccine development for corona viruses knows that a recombinant vaccine has never been successful, if they had there'd never been a need for mRNA vaccines, recombinant and other viral vector vaccines have led to serious side effects when encountered by the wild caught virus. Why this is so crucial in a mass vaccination of the populace is how I described it above. Some people may not even be aware they have some troop members missing, over the course of their lifetime their troops may or may not diminish to the point whereas they need medical attention. Getting a vaccine may or may not push that time forward depending upon if the virus finds a weak point to infiltrate the immune system and how strong their second line of defense is. Depending upon the weaknesses of the first line of defense the second line of defense could have an overwhelming immune response leading to what is termed a cytokine storm. It doesn't even have to be that you are missing any of your lines of defenses but they are busy battling any number of infections in the body, some of which you haven't became aware of quite yet or others who are fully aware like this man who autoimmune disease when he caught the virus and ended up with eight different mutations forming within his body. In this article they mention, based on all the variables of people immune systems, that vaccine rollouts need to be done on an equitable basis to alleviate the potential for variants or mutant virus occurrence. In this article though they imply the importance of post vaccination tracking instead of pre vaccination testing regiment. We find that similarly among this quote in another article:
This study does not allow direct conclusions to be drawn concerning potential selection pressures which shape the mutational landscape of CD8+ T cell epitopes. This would invariably involve accounting for the HLA genotype of all individuals from whom SARS-CoV-2 genomes were sequenced. Moreover, how CTL escape mutations are maintained during transmission between individuals with differing HLA subtypes and how viruses carrying epitope mutations affect disease severity requires further investigation.
After taking that into consideration you'd ask yourself why aren't we being proactive instead of post active. It's like they are standing around saying this is what happens when you stick this in this person and this is what happens with this person, if each person is different and each person's immune system is different and that's a vital component to this technology than why are we skipping this vital step. Could it just be many will be sacrificed to accumulate the data to fine tune the technology for a variety of medical research. When it comes to some who have had covid or been recently infected the conversation on Tucker Carlson gives some insight into how vital it is to ask these questions.
Before I wrap this up and type out the conversation Tucker Carlson had with Dr. Noorchshm, I want to bring your attention to the end of the Ted talk Tal Zaks gave as I find it pertinent to a final conclusion:
I started by telling you about Jonathan and thirty years ago when I was a nurse in the intensive care unit. I worked two night shifts and Jonathan came in when he was about twelve months old and really quickly became dependent on a ventilator and for the next fifteen months or so every time I came into the unit he was my patient to care for, bathe, feed, treat, play with, he couldn't talk he was on a ventilator but he was very much alive. You could tell, you could play with him, his eyes would follow me after awhile he would recognize me until one day I came into my shift and he was no longer there, he had died because of an infection in between shifts. Imagine a world where we just don't diagnosis but we can use the information to create vaccines to wake up the immune system to cancer and to fix the missing part for children with diseases like Jonathan so they can leave the ICU and live a healthy life.
So in conclusion I want to announce that Tal Zak will be leaving Moderna in September this year, just about the same time they will likely announce to the world similarly what they found in studies with mice using their mRNA vaccine to replace the missing proteins of the little Jonathans of the world. That being a life of repeated injections of the vaccine to maintain the protein required to keep the little Jonathans alive the same will be required of covid. Now one can't argue that it'd be better to get repeated booster shots than to die but we also have to acknowledge, that in this case this has never been actually studies on the little Jonathans of the world. mRNA vaccines though have been studied on rabies and over the long term of those studies it was found that injectable shots would not be permissible due to serious side effects but oral vaccines worked well thus far but haven't fostered into an actually approved vaccine. Studies on Zika and HIV using mRNA technology are still being performed and the Jonathans? They were approved to move forward with human trails, were in the process of accepting applicants but the study was dropped in November 2020 due to a business decision and not out of safety and efficacy concerns. ($$$covid$$$) In essence there has never been one approved vaccine using mRNA vaccine technology. Skipping vital components to that technology is coming with a heavy price to pay, thousands have been injured and died as a result, Tal Zak could care about as less as he does of the dying little Jonathans he's left behind, he no longer needs to stand in a room full of people using bleeding heart stories to convince people to rise above the moral and ethical concerns of his new technology, he never had any himself to begin with, he knows full well the consequences that would entail overlooking vital components to this technology, and in particular concern when applying an unknown technology to a virus. The death toll will be pale in comparison to the little Jonathans he left behind. He not only got wealth he's got a wealth of data to improve upon his technology, it's just to bad he lacked the moral fortitude to consider the path of dead bodies he's going to leave behind, that's just the interim of it, society could face dealing with this for years to come.
**The conversation between Tucker Carlson and Dr. Noorchaghm. When someone is going to stand up against the status quo it's vital to encompass that conversation as a whole, they are trying their best to, without severe consequences of being ruined, to warn people of the potential dangers and when those dangers have reached a peaked and need to be called out.
Tucker introduces the doctor and describes in brief the conversation(s) they've had concerning the safety and efficacy in the population that has been infected with covid, recently infected and vaccinated. Tucker emphasizes they are going to look at if the vaccines are safe and they effective.
He has been sounding the alarm over the dangers of blood clotting which he said can occur in people who have already gotten infected or they already gotten the vaccine.
Doctor: Well thanks again for having here tonight. I think this is a really good sign up until this moment these vaccines have been the epitome of safety and efficacy and here we are, you know, eh, pulling the Johnson and Johnson vaccine off the market because of a safety concern. So clearly I think there's a clear communications disaster at the FDA and CDC where folks are not really putting safety and efficacy on the same par and this is why safety of the vaccine has eroded. I actually think it's a good sign that the FDA is taking complications seriously. I don't think there are going to be isolated and I frankly think that they are missing similar problems and complications with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine. It's just I don't know why it is that this cluster has effected J&J there certainly other examples of problem events in Pfizer & Moderna that have been entered into their system so...
Tucker: So we have a fascinating conversation on Fox Nation, but in which you made the point and I thought very compellingly these vaccines are great, you had high confidence in them but there not necessarily for everyone if you have a high level of antibodies from previous infection maybe you shouldn't take them, is the government taking that warning seriously now do you think?
Doctor: Well I haven't seen any evidence they are taking it seriously frankly and you know I think again I want to reiterate as we have before the most unprecedented thing that we are doing is in this vaccine campaign is that we are deploying discriminately into folks who have been recently or previously infected, and I think we shouldn't underestimate the effect of what a vaccine driven immune response is on the tissue if individuals who have been previously infected and literally the antigenic foot print of the virus persist in the tissues of the previously infected so it's not far stretch of the imagination that those tissues like the inner lining of the blood vessel would be targeted by the vaccine immediate immune response. No I haven't seen any evidence frankly of thee FDA or CDC taking this seriously, and in fact this is a very easy thing to evaluate for, you know there's the immune response of the naturally infected actually mounts a response against something called nucleic captive protein of the virus, as a matter of fact these six young women unfortunately had these severe adverse reactions, I would really challenge the FDA and CDC to inform the American people as to whether or not these individuals had nucleic captive antibodies in their blood. Because if they were naturally infected and that association is going to be very critical and I think it's a major mistake to assume you can put this vaccine into people who have been recently or currently infected and expect that no complications will result so we can stick our heads in the and on this thing if we want to but clearly here we are one of the major manufacturers has now halted distribution of the vaccine the question is were these six people previously or recently infected.
Tucker: I am just so baffled by this because your making a science based sensible argument that we don't typically give vaccines to people who have already been infected with the illness the vaccine protects them from. Doing it now would be really simple to test people for antibodies before vaccinated but we're not doing that why?
Doctor: Well I think, the problem I think is that that folks are concerned about slowing down the vaccination process. Which you know may or may not be true but I think that common sense, common sense, the logical science tells us that if we put a vaccine into individuals who had a recent infection we may actually create a adverse reaction. In fact, in addition, the data being published out of the UK so...
**
Now that, hopefully, this post gives a simplistic example of how are immune system plays more of a crucial role then we'd otherwise have ever felt to be informed about in relation to what is transpiring now. I may do another post on how using therapeutics and how a naturally acquired immune response would have been the better route to go.
Invites for comments or discussion with those I've touched based with on this topic.
