First a trickle....Now a flood

[Goddess]

 

 

[Goddess]

Possible toxicity of chronic carbon dioxide exposure associated with face mask use, particularly in pregnant women, children and adolescents – A scoping review - ScienceDirect

“Fresh air has around 0.04% CO2, while wearing masks more than 5 min bears a possible chronic exposure to carbon dioxide of 1.41% to 3.2% of the inhaled air.

US Navy toxicity experts set the exposure limits for submarines carrying a female crew to 0.8% CO2 based on animal studies which indicated an increased risk for stillbirths. Additionally, mammals who were chronically exposed to 0.3% CO2 the experimental data demonstrate a teratogenicity with irreversible neuron damage in the offspring.

There is circumstantial evidence that popular mask use may be related to current observations of a significant rise of 28% to 33% in stillbirths worldwide and a reduced verbal, motor, and overall cognitive performance of two full standard deviations in scores in children born during the pandemic.”

 

Atmospheric CO2 going up to 0.04%: Oh My God!! Climate change!  Everyone panic!!

Breathing 3% CO2 with face masks: that's perfectly fine, let's mandate it for everyone.

[Goddess]

 

 

[Goddess]

Class action lawsuit against BC's Bonnie Henry begins today.  Watch here:

Hearing Videos — CSASPP (covidconstitutionalchallengebc.ca)

This class action lawsuit, which was brought by the Canadian Society for the Advancement of Science in Public Policy (CSASPP), challenges the very premise of the emergency declaration. To be clear, the basis of this class action lawsuit is whether or not the emergency declaration was legal or reasonable. The rational is that without an emergency, there can be no basis for extraordinary executive powers used by the government.

What is really interesting about this case is that Dr. Bonnie Henry must personally submit to answering questions while under oath. Parties have estimated that the questioning will be 3 weeks! So they will have 3 weeks to get to the bottom of why Dr. Henry made the decisions she made and based on what evidence. All Canadians have a right to these answers.

 

[Goddess]

10 myths told by COVID experts -- now debunked (nypost.com)

In the final analysis, public health officials actively propagated misinformation that ruined lives and forever damaged public trust in the medical profession.

 

To be clear, public health officials were not wrong for making recommendations based on what was known at the time.

That’s understandable. You go with the data you have.

No, they were wrong because they refused to change their directives in the face of new evidence.

When a study did not support their policies, they dismissed it and censored opposing opinions.

At the same time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention weaponized research itself by putting out its own flawed studies in its own non-peer-reviewed medical journal, MMWR.

What’s most amazing about all the misinformation conveyed by CDC and public health officials is that there have been no apologies for holding on to their recommendations for so long after the data became apparent that they were dead wrong.

 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

Hearing Videos — CSASPP (covidconstitutionalchallengebc.ca)

All Canadians have a right to these answers.

 

From your link;

Quote

CSASPP is not responsible for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of information on this website. CSASPP makes no warranties of any kind, express or implied (including warranties of fitness for a particular purpose) and shall not be liable for any loss arising out of use of this information, including without limitation any indirect or consequential damages.

So CCSAPP thinks people should be held responsible for the damage their information causes? Just not themselves.

Quote

Vaccine hesitancy, COVID conspiracies led to thousands of deaths, high cost for health care system, report finds

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-report-the-high-human-cost-of-misinformation/

You people should be rounded up and held accountable.

Edited April 24, 2023 by eyeball

[Goddess]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

You people should be rounded up and held accountable.

The biggest purveyors of misinformation have been "you people."

See NYTimes article above. 

[Goddess]

I understand that some of you are angry because you've been wrong about literally everything and have loudly supported lies and misinformation that has resulted in long-term damages for a lot of people. 

But why be angry at me because I followed the right people and didn't buy into the lies?

Your anger and hatred is misplaced. You should be angry, very angry, at the people who lied and misled you.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

But why be angry at me because I followed the right people and didn't buy into the lies?

Because you support an organization that doesn't accept any responsibility for the information it puts out - an organization that was formed for the purpose of holding other organizations responsible for the information they put out.

That's some kind of special hypocrisy.

[Goddess]

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Because you support an organization that doesn't accept any responsibility for the information it puts out - an organization that was formed for the purpose of holding other organizations responsible for the information they put out.

That's some kind of special hypocrisy.

Oh, Honey, let me explain this slllllooooowwwwllllyyyy for you.

It's not the ORGANIZATION that is not accepting responsibility for the info. It's the WEBSITE.

Quote

"CSASPP is not responsible for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of information on this website. "

This is a pretty standard disclaimer for WEBSITES to make, as sometimes things change quickly or unexpectedly and websites don't get updated immediately.

You are getting so desperate to defend the crumbling narrative, you're making a fool of yourself.

Do you really wanna talk hypocrisy? 

You support an ORGANIZATION  (Pfizer) that truly accepts no responsibility.

Edited April 25, 2023 by Goddess

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

Oh, Honey, let me explain this slllllooooowwwwllllyyyy for you.

It's not the ORGANIZATION that is not accepting responsibility for the info. It's the WEBSITE.

"CSASPP is not responsible for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of information on this website. "

This is a pretty standard disclaimer for WEBSITES to make, as sometimes things change quickly or unexpectedly and websites don't get updated immediately.

Sure, and you'd be cackling your head off if anyone put up a link extolling the virtues of vaccines and measures that had a similar disclaimer.

This may be a standard disclaimer for run off the mill websites but this organization is making a very pointed effort to hold other people accountable for the information they put out.  I think that behooves them to be a lot more diligent about appearing to be more reliable.

 

 

[Goddess]

Today:

 

The Receipts:

 

 

 

[Goddess]

7 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I think that behooves them to be a lot more diligent about appearing to be more reliable.

No one updates their website in real time, the second there's a change in information.

I figured you wouldn't be able to grasp what is being said here.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

You are getting so desperate to defend the crumbling narrative, you're making a fool of yourself.

No as usual I'm merely pointing out the lame-assed attempts being made to establish your counter-narrative.

If you're suggesting there should be some sort of penalty or compensation paid by people and organizations who deliberately spread misinformation, I'm with you on that.

As the article I posted pointed out there are studies that indicate thousands unnecessarily died and billions of dollars were wasted in Canada as a result of the anti-vaccine anti-measure misinformation you're responsible for spreading.

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, Goddess said:

No one updates their website in real time, the second there's a change in information.

I figured you wouldn't be able to grasp what is being said here.

I figured the same thing about you so...go figure.

[Goddess]

So, I waited until the kerfuffle over this paper died down to post about it:

COVID-19 Evidence Alerts from McMaster PLUS | Final Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Two-Arm, Parallel Clinical Trial of Proxalutamide for Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Multiregional, Joint Analysis of the Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV Trial. (plus-mcmaster-ca.translate.goog)

 

And here it is on Pub Med:

Final Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Two-Arm, Parallel Clinical Trial of Proxalutamide for Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Multiregional, Joint Analysis of the Proxa-Rescue AndroCoV Trial - PubMed (pubmed-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.translate.goog)

Dr. Flavio Cadegiani, physician, scientist and lead author of research on proxalutamide to treat COVID-19, found it was very effective in treating covid and greatly lowered mortality - by 80%.

He is known as "Brazil's greatest living scientist."

Quote

Conclusion: Proxalutamide increased recovery rate, reduced mortality rate and shortened hospital stay in hospitalized COVID-19 patients.

The reason I hesitated to post this study was because Dr. Cadegiani was ATTACKED MERCILESSLY by the pro-vax maniac crowd.  

They did not want and still do not want ANY treatments for covid.

Accusations on himself and this study included:

• that he did not comply with Code of Medical Ethics (ironic, I know)
• that he deliberately poisoned the placebo arm to inflate deaths
• that the study was conducted in some place other than where it was purported to have been
• that he was connected to the Pharma industry (ironic, I know)
• that he was promoting untrue information
• that he was, in actuality, a smuggler of the drug (his home & office were raided)

Amazingly, it was McMaster University, here in Canada, that confirmed the results and integrity of the study and cleared the good doctor's name.

Brazil's greatest living scientist is unanimously acquitted by medical councils (medicospelavidacovid19-com-br.translate.goog)

 

Throughout the "pandemic", I'm astonished (and dismayed) at how utterly DESPERATE the coronamaniacs are suppress treatments.

 

I mean, the Pharma companies did it for money, the governments did it for power and money.....but WHY are ones like Eyeball, Dialamah, Hardner, Contrarian, et al......so desperate to suppress treatments for covid, unless it's an experimental injection, using experimental lipid nanoparticles?

 

It's baffling.

 

[Goddess]

42 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I figured the same thing about you so...go figure.

I "get" that you are trying to imply that the group of lawyers questioning Bonnie Henry today are withholding information or spreading misinformation by not updating their website in real time, but it's a real stretch, darling.

And where was your outrage when Pfizer wanted to withhold the trial data for 75 years?  Or when the CDC spread misinformation about the injections safety and efficacy?

Oh yeah.  Not a peep from you then.

Edited April 25, 2023 by Goddess

[Goddess]

Doctor told wife Covid jab was safe. Days later he died (thetimes.co.uk)

Widow urges openness about vaccination risks after inquest records fatal side-effect

Stephen Wright, 32, died 10 days after the vaccination in January 2021. An inquest decided on Wednesday that it was due to “unintended complications of the vaccine”.

 

At 3.30am the hospital called Mrs. Wright to say her husband was being moved to specialist care at King’s College Hospital in south London. His condition rapidly worsened with a combination of a brainstem infarction and bleed on the brain.

At 10am a doctor from King’s called Charlotte to say her husband’s blood platelet level was too low for brain surgery. He died when his life support machine was switched off shortly after she arrived at the hospital.

Mrs. Wright said that she was assured by a neurologist that his death was “absolutely not” linked to the vaccine. The death certificate recorded it was a result of “spontaneous” natural causes.

“I want to let people know, if you have someone who has something as minor as a headache after the vaccine, get them to the hospital. If my husband had not gone to work that morning and had instead gone to hospital it could have been different.”

Mrs. Wright said she was invited to appear on a leading morning television show to talk about her husband’s death but was cancelled at the last minute, being told it would break rules on deterring people from taking the vaccine. Journalists were unwilling to report her case.

“Nobody would listen, nobody would let me speak,” she said. “I was at home with two young children and unemployed. As a doctor’s window I had to go to a food bank to feed my children.”

Dr Wright’s inquest was held days after the widower of the BBC presenter Lisa Shaw, who also died from coronavirus vaccine complications, announced he is taking legal action against AstraZeneca.

Shaw, 44, a mother of one died, from “vaccine-induced thrombotic thrombocytopenia” in May 2021, about a week after receiving her first Covid jab. Her husband, Gareth Eve, who is vaccinated himself, said the lawsuit was not about “whether somebody is anti-vax” but about those who lost loved ones and have been “made to feel like it’s a dirty secret”.

[OftenWrong]

It should be noted that in the past, before everything became lies, any death within 4 weeks of a vaccine injection (any vaccine) was considered suspicious and worth investigating.

[Goddess]

Reverse Transcription

Reverse transcription was one of the very major hurdles that the mRNA technology was unable to overcome and why it was never brought to market.

Your DNA is in the nucleus of your cells and uses messenger RNA to take that information out into the body of the cell in order to create  proteins. It's supposed to be a 1-way trip.

Reverse transcription is when that messenger RNA gets pushed back into the nucleus of the cell and gets incorporated into the DNA -  the DNA then copies it and it then becomes a genetic issue that is passed down through generations.

Viruses are the only known life-forms that can use RNA as their genetic material. To propagate itself, each virus makes a copy of the information in its genetic material to pass onto its ‘daughter’ viruses. Some viruses contain the machinery to make copies of their RNA, but they don’t have a DNA component. The influenza, Hep C and SARS-CoV-2 viruses are in this category. These viruses also deviate from the central dogma only slightly: there is no DNA - but the information flows from the RNA to proteins.

However, in 1970, some viruses were found to be the exception to this.  Called "retroviruses", these ones could make a DNA copy with their RNA - using an enzyme called reverse transcriptase, in a process called reverse transcription. A virus then mixes this DNA with the DNA of its host, thus becoming part of the host forever. This process violates the central dogma because information FIRST flows from RNA to DNA, and then from the DNA BACK to the RNA, then to proteins.

Viruses like HIV and Rous sarcoma belong to this family.

This process of reverse transcription was first seen in the SARS-CoV 2 virus in 2020, but with an interesting twist - it uses it's OWN protein to convert and mix the DNA.

Quote

My own note:  Now that we know for near certainty that the covid virus was engineered in a lab, it explains why this is the only virus that does this.

But the experiments and interpretations in 2020 were not convincing at the time, although they were within the realm of possibility.  Suggestions flooded in from scientists around the world, with ways to conduct further experiments in order to extract the correct data (or lack of it).

Now - keep in mind that the above information applies to viruses - and the covid virus - themselves.  This can happen if you catch the virus naturally.

The question for scientists became - does this process of reverse transcription happen when we purposely inject the virus and especially the spike protein into humans?  If it happens, is the process mitigated by the injections or made worse?

We were assured that this could NOT happen with the injections, however:

mRNA Vaccines: Why Is the Biology of Retroposition Ignored? - PMC (nih.gov)

This shortage of relevant studies is reflected in numerous reviews [4,5,6,9,10,14,15,16,17,18], book chapters on the mRNA vaccines [13,19,20,21,22] and documents of international organizations [23,24,25], which often state that mRNA vaccines do not pose the risk for genome integration but do not cite any references in support of this idea. Occasionally, some citations are embedded, e.g., [15,22,26,27], but unfortunately, they are circular as they point to similar unsupported statements [6,10,21,28,29,30]. This signals that the idea of vaccine mRNA’s resistance to genome integration behaves like a meme that self-replicates in the literature and, therefore, it should not be considered reliable scientific information. Undoubtedly, there is always a possibility that my literature search missed some important work; however, other researchers also notice, although without going into details, the shortage of studies that explicitly deal with the possibility of vaccine mRNA genome integration [13,31,32,33,34]. In the absence of such studies, statements such as “In addition, IVT mRNA-based therapeutics, unlike plasmid DNA and viral vectors, do not integrate into the genome and therefore do not pose the risk of insertional mutagenesis.” [10], “First, safety: as mRNA is a non-infectious, non-integrating platform, there is no potential risk of infection or insertional mutagenesis.” [6] or “mRNA-based vaccines avoid the risk of integration with the host cell genome …” [24,25] obviously go against sound scientific epistemology.

Besides the lack of references, the argumentation line for the claim that the genome integration of vaccine mRNA molecules is not possible, or is negligible, is rather limited in the vast majority of papers. Many of them simply state that vaccine mRNA cannot integrate into the host genome without explaining why this is not possible.

Quote

Again, we see scientific assertions being made and announced to the public (that the injections do not interfere with or alter with human DNA) - with no basis in scientific fact.

The next part of that paper describes how this retroposition activity takes places in humans as a result of "unfunctional remnants of evolutionary turnover, termed processed pseudogenes"

And that this retroposition activity is actually quite high in both humans and mice.  So, humans and mice are uniquely suited to being vulnerable to the reverse transcription process. 

Quote

Thus why mice are often used to simulate human reactions in scientific experimentation.

The paper then goes on to describe the actual mechanisms for how this takes place, but this is established science, so for lay people like us, we can just accept that reverse transcription happens with many viruses, with the SARS-CoV2 virus in particular, and that humans are especially vulnerable to the process.

The above paper, from May, 2022, concludes:

Quote

L1 = Line 1 in the RNA - this is where the reverse transcription happens.

Whether the current vaccine mRNAs could integrate into the genome, and by which frequency, has to be ultimately demonstrated using experiments. However, it remains puzzling why and how the mRNA vaccinology field neglected the retroposition biology of L1 retroelements and its theoretical links to possible vaccine mRNA retroposition, especially when one considers the volume, visibility and significance of the L1 [44,45,60,83,84,85,117,131] and retroposition research [36,37,38,39,40,41,45,46,49,60,66,68,77,80]. The mRNA vaccinology field started its development more than 30 years ago [11,31] and L1 retroelements in humans have been studied for more than 40 years [205,206] but obviously without any crosstalk between the two fields. This awkward silo effect points to the fact that, on some occasions, the structural drawbacks of contemporary science, despite its amassment, globalization and unprecedented dissemination, are deeper than we are willing to admit. Unfortunately, all of this creates an impression that L1-driven retroposition is a kind of taboo topic in mRNA vaccinology.

I conclude that the broadly reiterated statement that mRNA-based therapeutics could not impact genomes is an unfounded assumption of unclear origin. This implies that the current mRNA vaccine evaluations, which lack studies that specifically address genome integration, are insufficient to declare their genome integration safety. We should not forget that mRNAs are information-bearing molecules that can, in principle, encode any information [207]. From this perspective, an mRNA vaccination could be viewed as a sort of “molecular tattooing”.

The scary part, besides the fact that they forced everyone to inject something that they have NO IDEA what it's doing to your genetic makeup or that of your future children, is this:

It is, therefore, important that the exact nucleotide sequences of mRNA vaccines are disclosed and easily publicly accessible, including product information documents [208,209], to allow for unambiguous and independent tracking of possible vaccine mRNA integration in the somatic and germinative genomes of already vaccinated people and their progeny.

Got that?????

Pfizer has  not released the genomic sequences of the RNA used in the injections, nor the product information SO THAT THIS CAN BE STUDIED!!

Quote

So every time you people keep saying "Oh, we know EXACTLY what's in these vaccines!".........Ummmmm, NO!  We do not.

This process of reverse transcription has been identified in many studies now, as happening  with these mRNA injections.  The mRNA, coded to produce the toxic spike protein, is being reverse transcribed back into the cell nucleus and now you are genetically programmed to produce spike protein continually.  This process of reverse transcription is how the spike is being found now in many organs of the body, but particularly in the liver, ovaries and testes.

CIMB | Free Full-Text | Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line (mdpi.com)

^^^ Notice that it is settling in the liver??  ^^^

Now - go back and watch Dr. Jessica Rose's testimony at the NCI Hearings that I posted a few days ago and you'll see why this is BAD.  And how it ties into specific adverse reactions we are seeing.

SARS-CoV-2 RNA reverse-transcribed and integrated into the human genome - PubMed (nih.gov)

Reverse-transcribed SARS-CoV-2 RNA can integrate into the genome of cultured human cells and can be expressed in patient-derived tissues - PubMed (nih.gov)

 

 

 

[Goddess]

The above is just SOME of the scientific information that we "anti-vaxxers" have been following and discussing since 2020.

Do you think there is enough in just that one subject - reverse transcription - that would make a thinking person hesitant about taking these experimental shots?  Especially if they were pregnant or might want to get pregnant one day?  Or might want to pass some undamaged genes onto the future children?

Now do you see why so many people refused them?

While some of you were running around like chickens with your heads cut off, squawking about MASKS!!!  and  6  FEET APART!!!!  and STAND ON THE ARROW!!  and CASESCASESCASES!!!  and   WE'RE ALL GONNA DIIIIIIIIIEEEEEE!!!!!.......

........some of the rest of us were calmly noting that there was a 99.5 percent survival rate for anyone not very elderly or already terminally ill.

While some of you were repeating cliches like "My mask protects you and your mask protects me" and accusing others of wanting to kill grannies.......

......some of the rest of us were actually reading the science.  Or trying to, when it wasn't getting censored.

THIS.....

Is the science that those truckers you called "yokels" and "rednecks" (that's just some of the nicer names) were following and why they wanted Tam to publicly meet with the doctors and scientists who wrote the papers I'm posting here.

And you come at me with a CBC headline and think I"M the stupid one?

[myata]

There is one key question that needs to be answered. The data is there but it has to be reviewed and confirmed by a trusted independent body. Unfortunately one take, factually, from these events is that formal organizations; media and the government sources cannot always be trusted.

The question is this: did the Covid epidemics carry significantly higher health risks for a healthy population outside of severe preexisting condition and aged group, compared to known infection conditions?

The answer to this simple and direct question will be an important factor in the evaluation of government responses.

I consider trusted one of the two options: a commission of U.S. Senate; or a broad citizen's inquiry.

[Goddess]

3 hours ago, myata said:

a broad citizen's inquiry.

Have you watched any of the National Citizen's Inquiry that I have been posting about?

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, Goddess said:

I "get" that you are trying to imply that the group of lawyers questioning Bonnie Henry today are withholding information or spreading misinformation by not updating their website in real time, but it's a real stretch, darling.

I doubt they're as stupid as the rubes who've pitched in to pay for their time. They'll simply say what they've been paid to say with the same caveats to that are contained in the rubes website disclaimer. 

My contempt is reserved for the CSASPP who own the website and the disclaimer.  I bet the first thing their lawyers did was tell them to put that up immediately.  It sticks out like a big fat wart on a nose.  It's not just talking about inaccuracies due to updating in real time, its disavowing itself of any responsibility for its information "CSASPP is not responsible for the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of information on this website."

Quote

And where was your outrage when Pfizer wanted to withhold the trial data for 75 years?  Or when the CDC spread misinformation about the injections safety and efficacy?

Oh yeah.  Not a peep from you then.

You mean when the FDA requested that Pfizer's data be withheld for 75 years - data the FDA used to licence the vaccine they'd authorized the manufacture of.  I'm sure Pfizer would have preferred that too for their own proprietary reasons.

I've been a little miffed at how big corporations and huge governments have been conducting themselves for decades now. Its great to see you're all woke to that now - better late than never I guess.     

[myata]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

Have you watched any of the National Citizen's Inquiry that I have been posting about?

I think the information is there. At this point's not about more evidence. Someone has to take it, review and summarize and state the conclusion. It may have been a significantly higher risk unprecedented epidemics. Or it was not. Based on facts. We don't need any more heat and emotions at this time.