Nostr Web Client

Leo Wandersleb 2y ago

Mind Boggling!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IEWHhrHiiTY

TL,DW:

* Pfizer vaccines did not contain DNA during the trials

* the final vaccine did contain DNA

* billions of snippets of DNA per vial

* quantities were almost within the legal limits for such "contamination" - some samples above, some samples below

* legal limits were established for un-coated DNA, not for stuff that was coated with lipid nano particles to get into cells - a standard that according to the professor was later found to be overly cautious for un-coated DNA that would get eliminated in the body anyway but a completely different thing for coated DNA

* DNA looks like chopped up standard tool to mass produce custom RNA - a contaminant Pfizer apparently tried to eliminate by chopping it up

* Chopped up means more pieces with each piece getting a chance of getting integrated in a vital spot of the cell's DNA, which could break the DNA and in the worst case cause cancer (he did talk abut DNA storing information for thousands of years but not specifically mentioned eggs or sperms being affected as his concern)

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Hoshi 2y ago

good summary!

The sequencing (that he also talks about and wants to habe funded) of random cells from random people to look for tiny pieces of DNA that could come from the vaccines sounds like a waste of resources without chance of success. Most cells have not come into contact with the vaccine. Many S-protein producing cells should have be killed by the immune system while they produced it. If he find an affected cell it must contain a characteristic piece of DNA that could not have been there naturally.

His answer to the publication question was weird. He easily could publish his vaccine vial sequencing results. He might have got the question wrong but that still leaves the question. Why did he not try to publish?