23 Replies to “Safe and Effective™”

  1. Not in this world or the next.

    You will recall this is the very issue Dr Byram Bridle raised the alarm about as the bio-distribution showed the highest concentrations in the ovaries & bone marrow.

    Cheers
    C in C
    1st St Nicolaas Army
    Army Group True North

  2. But … they are saying this is a good thing because it proves they can use mRNA technology to treat unborn babies who have problems.

    Problems like being off spring of those unfit to reproduce perhaps?

        1. You’re right. Go ahead and insult. Kate’s made these threats before and has never done anything.

          1. A threat! A threat! Man, you’re easier to threaten than Warren Kinsella. Way to insult the hostess, though, Mr. Class.

    2. He missed commenting on two previous articles that were not exactly laudatory in their outcome.

    1. I was able to get up the pre-proof version of the study by clicking the link.

      They mention two previous studies that didn’t find what they did, and explain the difference in methodology that likely led to that discrepancy.

      2. I believe I got the same one the same way before the pay wall went up. If so, the authors crowed happily about how this means they can now start figuring out how to use the mRNA transmission through the placenta mechanism to treat unborn babies. Assuming they don’t have something in mind like getting the pathogenic spike protein across the placenta this could in fact be a good thing. It could also result in changing the genome of the unborn for good or bad.

        The whole premise of mRNA failed technology in the 90s was all about how it was going to revolutionize medicine allowing us to fix everything wrong with our genes. It was also going to result in developing vaccines against cancer. It is sort of like splitting the atom. You can use it to make electricity or you can use it to level a city. Given the incredible damage done to date by the so called “safe and effective” mRNA vaccines I am leaning towards the “leveling an entire city’s worth of human beings” outcome and I am extremely skeptical anything good is going to come of this except for the fans of depopulation and democide.

  5. Still shaking my head over Nurse Campbell’s theory that the problem was that medical people suddenly forgot to aspirate the needle. That ridiculous theory started me wondering if he was a more subtle pharma shill; I realize that I’m in a tiny minority position here.

    1. I questioned a friend, who as a pharmacist, has given hundreds of mRNA shots to people. (And flu shots over the
      last few decade) She indicated that she never aspirated the needle and did not even consider it an issue.

      1. “did not even consider it an issue”
        Maybe that is a problem. Is this pharmacist claiming that an inter muscular injection will never inadvertently hit a blood vessel? What are the consequences of a vaccine intended to be localized but almost instantly distributed throughout the body? Could be the reason for the small but significant percentage of people having bad reactions to the covid vaccines.

    1. That was well determined in Pfizer’s own data which showed a heavy concentration in ovaries. People should be hanged for this

    2. Rusty,
      We were told early on that the mRNA component would do its job (train immunity to spike protein) in short order and then be degraded by the body. The public has been gas-lighted ever since.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation