or so. Good evening ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the show. This is Gigaohm
Biological, a high-resistance low-noise information brief brought to you by
a biologist. My name is Jonathan Couey. I'm coming to you live from Pinsirig,
Pennsylvania, from the back of my garage. That's why you hear a heater blowing
right now. It's a self-contained room back here, not attached to the rest of
the house. And that's why I can be loud and obnoxious even at night. It is the
23rd of December, 2023. We are in the dark days before Christmas. And my lungs
are recovering. I didn't cough very much today. I probably should have drank a
little more water than I did. And so maybe there's definitely still some
crud to come out of there, but I'm feeling a lot better than I was yesterday.
This is, again, Gigaohm Biological, the safest way to get biology in your head.
A good friend of mine, Jeff from Earth, recently had some stuff removed from his
skull. And that little flap there that you see cut in the shape of an Ohm symbol
is something that he actually requested from his doctor because of this show. So
I'm very honored that Jeff decided to carve his head like that. I'm not asking
anyone else to do that. I'd actually just, if you could share my work somewhere
where I don't normally get to share it, that would be quite enough. There are
also ways to subscribe and that kinds of stuff. But for now, we're not talking
about that because we have some really hot wood on the fire. There's some really
big momentum. But the train is pulling into the station and college kids and
your neighbors. They're all still planning on getting on the train when it
stops in the station. We cannot let them get on that train. That train is this
faith in a novel virus, the idea that we've defeated disease in the past,
especially epidemics using vaccination, the idea that novel coronaviruses can
jump from one species to another and really wreck one. The idea that PCR is
useful and that asymptomatic transmission is a real thing, not only for
coronavirus, but lots of other stuff. Variants, all this other nonsense, all
the way up to the mythology of gain of function viruses, we cannot let our
children grow up with this mythology. That's the goal is to not let them get
on that train. I've been arguing for almost three years now with this
program, in particular, the biology is the way out. I think number one, if you
want to crack the facade, start off with what do you think about the vaccine
schedule in the United States? And if they kind of flinch, and then say,
have you ever compared the vaccine schedule in the United States to any
other Western country? And you go from there, because this is the argument
that nobody wants to have, nobody wants to discuss. And actually, I think a lot
of these faux dissident people are actually working to protect, not just
the faith in a novel virus, but a faith in the vaccine schedule and the ritual
that it represents. So advocate for strict liability for all pharmaceutical
products that would include vaccines and strict liability. I'm trying to spread
that phrase because that means everything to a lawyer. And so if you, you
know, research that term and learn to understand it well, you'll get why it
cuts right to the chase. You don't have to mention any laws or any any
particular acts or sections of acts or whatever you just say, I want to restore
strict liability to all pharmaceutical products, including vaccines. And then
with regard to investigating the pandemic, I think it's very important to
investigate in the correct direction, first being adequately tally up the
deadly protocols that were used, the absurd protocols that are still being
used, remdesivir, etc. to cause mass casualty events in early 2020. It could
be that we'll find ventilators did it. We could be that we find ventilators
that hooked up to the internet, or did it, we could find that there is another
explanation that we're not yet aware of. And then we have to learn how these
mass casualty events in combination with transfection in as few as five
patients was used to create the illusion of the pandemic. And by that illusion, in
particular, for number four, what I'm referring to is the molecular biology of
the pandemic, the sequences that were found around the world, that were able to
be cultured in some capacity in the current virology lingo. So that a
sequence could be generated and then a clone generated so that forever after
they could be used as reference samples. And it's that little bridge from the
sequence to the clone from the cultured virus to the sequence to the clone that
they try to make as gray as possible, because they want you to believe that
from the patient, Sohomish County man, they got a sample sent into the CDC, and
then the CDC is culturing it and distributing it around the world, or has
allocated it into such small amounts that they have infinite quantities of it.
When in reality, it is a sequence that has been made into a clone and then that
clone is manufactured and distributed.
And so reclaim sovereignty over our bodies and those of our children and
withdraw from the who in the UN entirely, there are people who are more expert on
the last one than I am, but I think it's a generally good way to think about
things for now. Try to bring your government local. In the end, your state
government should be very much under your control. And you should understand
it very well how it works. And you should be focused on it. And the federal
government should, for the most part, not be in our hair. And our local
government should be something that we are very aware of in participating in
all capacities. And it's actually inverted right now. They have our all of
our attention on national races, none of our attention on state races or local
races, where the real levers of power for our own lives really are are or
potentially could be. And so I want to just start again with this because I'm
going to add a slide to this explanation. And so I think it's important to roll
up the hill from the beginning, even if you know you've you've driven this part
of the of the ride before. So they've misled us about the pandemic potential
that's found in laboratories and in the wild and in genetic stitching. And the
idea for this has been brewing for a very, very long time. And I'm going to make
the argument tonight that a lot of the scientific investigations that have
incurred over the last 20 years with regard to coronaviruses were all part
of this illusion, creating this idea that there is a there is a coronavirus
out there with potential for a pandemic. And it's worth looking for it. And we
have looked for it. And this is how we look for it. And this is what we found
in the past, et cetera. Even those papers should be considered potentially
fraudulent, as has been declared by people like the farewell to virology
authors. And I'm sure Stephen Lanka and these people who preceded them. And so
it is without a doubt now that the main hypothesis on the table should be that
these people have gone through all these motions for so long with the idea of
indoctrinating or or or cementing this idea of viruses in our culture in our
ideas, in our movies, in our mythology, so that when deployed as it was in 2020,
that nobody would be wise enough to to snap out of that to question it. No,
no, really, I mean, come on, no, really, you know, nobody's going to say that.
And again, the few that did were sufficiently.
I don't know what the right word is, but they were sufficiently.
What is the right word? I mean, they were not argumentative, not standoffish, not
a little bit of everything so that you couldn't really there was they were they
weren't even there really to help anybody. They weren't even there to say,
okay, so what's the solution? They were just to be naysayers about the fact that
there was no virus and went on and on and on about it's really extraordinary.
I don't want to waste any time with that idea just to say that it's extraordinary
how long and how much damage that the management of that idea did. It was as
important as any other part of this narrative control. And so I've been
plugging Bobby's book because I've gotten quite a few excerpts in there.
I've already read to over the last couple days about infectious clones.
I'm not going to get one out today because that actually went upstairs.
Oh, no, well, that doesn't matter. We'll read one again in a few days.
How the pandemic was created to have I have been trying to explain it as a
Scooby-Doo. I've been trying to explain it as a mystery that we were enticed
into solving a mystery that we were enticed into solving by
people's dramatic oration in the Senate and argumentative behavior and testimony
where Rand Paul and Tony Fauci went at each other and then all the news
programs covered it. The Fox angle and the MSNBC angle, the view angle and the
daily wire angle. And this went on and on and on until it just became
almost impossible for any of us not to get sucked into this idea that wait,
wait, wait, you know, even biologists started to think that, well, you know,
a natural coronavirus is really not probably not going to do a pandemic,
but a laboratory one could. And in fact, Alina Chan's paper, the, the, the
illustrious Alina Chan who wrote one of those books back there, didn't we have
a book by her there? Oh, no, I didn't put that on there because I'm jaded about
her because at the beginning of the pandemic, when she was coming out with
these beautiful preprints about the sequence of the virus being so stable
compared to the sequence, temporal sequence of sequences that we got from
the first SARS virus, they varied quite a bit with each sequence that was
reported. There was lots of changes. And in this case, um, is comparatively,
you know, changing very, very, very slowly more compared to the end of the
pandemic than the beginning of the pandemic, which is really curious now if
you think about it. But that preprint came out and everybody was really
excited about it. And she got her book deal and she got put at the Broad
Institute and, you know, got a permanent position or something like that,
working on chromosomes or artificial chromosomes. But lo and behold, that
preprint just disappeared. The idea that the sequences were, were changing
much more rapidly for SARS-CoV-1 than SARS-CoV-2 and how interesting that
was that that paper's never been published. And so it's actually very
strange because that paper that preprint was very convenient for outlining
this narrative of, wow, this virus is super stable. And also this Australian
guy, Petrovsky, put out a paper that said, Oh, wow, look at how enriched the
fear the the ACE2 receptor homology or affinity is. It's like 11 times higher
than the next closest one. Super. I mean, it it's way unnatural. And so there was
this collective synchrony between papers that people were publishing and and
preprints coming out that even though they were completely different ways of
looking at the virus, they seem to point to the same thing. Oh my gosh, it's very
stable and it's highly high affinity. And it's got this all these little funny
parts to it that seem to have homology to all kinds of stuff, depending on who
you talk to. Well, it can't be any other thing than a, than a lab leak.
And that's actually what they wanted you to think, right? That's actually what
they wanted you to think. So how was the pandemic created? How did they get us
to solve this mystery? How, how were we set up over the last two decades or
more? Well, first they were seeding the gain of function narrative with
scientific programs like EcoHealth Alliance and the program and Ralph
barracks lab. And seeding the gain of function narrative with scientific
programs and peer reviewed publications from those programs for years before
the pandemic. And some of them could be legitimate investigations into these
RNA signals that are found in the wild. They could be legitimate investigations
using PCR, but the way that it's represented as pandemic potential is
definitely, it's definitely story writing, it's definitely potential creating
it's not that they haven't found any, they haven't demonstrated it. But
they have written papers about it. They have written grants about it. They've
given secret meetings about it and, and, and conferences about them. And over
many, many years, conduct regular upper level exercises, drilling the
response to a gain of function pandemic crisis. Well, you know, they've done
that. Not just event 201, but the list is gigantic. The best one is the
spars pandemic from 2017, the one that basically tells the story of where we
are right now, even with vaccine injury having to be admitted. Reluctantly,
after about four or five years after the original rollout or something like
that, it's a spectacularly creepy story about an outbreak of a virus in
2025. And then by 2028, they have to admit that the vaccine caused injuries.
And so it's a very detailed document about all the stages from declaration
to moving onward. And they've been doing this for decades. We know that look
at look up Tara tool and how many, how many of these has she run or been a
part of? Seating the mass casualty events with complications expected for
transfections. So here we are at the beginning of the pandemic. And here is
one of the biggest plans is to seed the mass casualty events with complications
expected for the transfection. And then this is more complicated than this
that because they're also going to make sure that the statements that the
doctors and the hospital administrators make to the to the news programs that
they give to the newspapers that they give to the news outlets, say the right
things. Cardiac, kidney failure, multi organ failure, all these things
attributed to COVID-19. I'm, I'm starting to understand as things that
were seeded in the complications of the mass casualty events on purpose,
paid attention to on purpose, because they were anticipated consequences of
the rollout of transfection. And so what better way to do it than to have a
common thread between the virus and the transfection, which is the antigen,
the spike protein. And so if you can attribute these, these multi organ
failures, these neural pathic events, these, these kidney failures, and
cardiac cardiac disease, all to the spike protein and call it a Swiss Army
knife. And then you put that Swiss Army knife into the transfection, you can
actually easily see how logically the skilled TV watchers are going to follow
this and say that I understand. And so seating the narrative of T
Morse case scenario, those medlers in the background, seating them with a
narrative that had complications in it that were expected from the
transfection, like amyloidosis, like prion disease. What a perfect plan.
Just a little bit better than the spars pandemic plan where they rolled out of
XC, it didn't work out that well, and then they had to admit the damages that
were done. Now here, if done correctly, according to this plan, they won't
have to admit that the vaccine did anything this spike protein will have
done it. The biological toxin that they didn't understand well enough. And so
they used it as an immune engine, but it didn't work out because sometimes
well, it's got this bad stuff going on with it. And Peter McCullough told us
not even two days ago on a stream that the spike protein is the reason why
transfection does all the damage that it does. And I would say that's wrong. I'm
not saying that the spike protein is or isn't toxic. I'm saying the
transfection of any foreign protein would cause lots of the damage that we
are seeing now. And most if not all of it.
Making the response to the dedicated declared crisis, a national security
operation to restrict open discussion of response by narrative directing
participants, I'm going to read that one more time, making the response to the
declared crisis, a national security operation to restrict open discussion of
the response by narrative directing participants. So as health and human
services, and I don't know who, but whoever was conducting this and making
sure that these mass casualty events happened and happened with the right
outcomes and the right interpretation. Whoever these people are, some of them
were then co-opted. You know, people that really ran into the fire may have been
co-opted. You show up, you see something you're not supposed to see. It's not
what you thought you were going to find when you showed up in New York City.
And then you get pulled aside. Maybe by somebody in in camouflage, I have no
idea. But you get pulled aside and you get told that this is the way it's going
to be. This is how it's going to happen. And you need to go along with it
because this is a national security issue because because we don't know how far
this is going to go. We don't know how bad it's going to be. Thank you very
much. And these people thinking that they were helping thinking that they
were getting on board with something that they wanted and needed to get on
board with it was even more serious than they thought it was going to be when
they got in their car and drove to New York. We're co-opted. We're given a
choice. You can just forget what you saw here. You can walk out the door or you
can help us do this. And if they told you that the vaccine was a new vaccine
that we just needed to get it in all the arms and we would be invincible as a
country, would you really disbelieve them? How many people would have the
courage or the strength of the wherewithal in February of 2020 to disbelieve a
military colonel and his lieutenant. I don't know if those those ranks mean, you
know, I don't know if you would ever have that together. Maybe a colonel and his
captain. I don't know what it would be. No, it would be lieutenant, right? I don't
know. Anyway, major. How about that? Colonel and the major. But what what I
guess what I'm saying is is that we are at a stage now if you acknowledge that
it was a national security issue, a national security priority, then well,
whoever was involved in making sure that the response went off as it should,
according to the rehearsed, because that's another thing you need to consider.
You know, this is just me throwing stuff out there. That's another thing you need
to consider if we know of how the event 201 and dark winter and the spars
pandemic and crimson contagion and all the other countless tabletop exercises,
those are the ones that weren't secret.
Those are the ones that weren't classified. Those are the ones that didn't
happen in the military and go on reported. Those aren't the ones that
happened behind closed doors. Those are the ones that were filmed for release.
And so it's important to understand that whatever plan was executed, there's no
other way to look at it other than a plan. You can rewind to 2020 and realize
that a lot of us thought that it was a spontaneous calamity for which we were
spontaneously reacting, but three years later, sorry, four years later, you can't
possibly think that anymore. Not when all of these things down through that four
years line up so nicely. Everyone's behavior, everyone's words, everyone's
lack of forward progress lines up perfectly if you know which people to look
at. And that's not by accident.
It's because people have been put in place to direct the narrative and those
people are definitely not involved in an open discussion about the response.
They are in a controlled limited spectrum of debate because they are
narrative directing participants.
And so the toxicity of the virus and the transfection are confounded to allow
the pandemic to prove transfection successful.
And there's the plan.
You got Peter Desak and Tony Fauci working on number one for about 20 years
along with a lot of people at NIH and ID and Nathan Wolf and all these kinds of
clowns. Then you're conducting these exercises in in government and you got
all these people running those things. Those things are take a long time to put
together. Then you are seeding the mass casualty events at the beginning of the
pandemic with complications. You tell people to be careful. Watch out for do
not resuscitate those people that have heart attacks because you might spread
the virus and then blame all those heart attacks on the virus blame all those
cardiac arrests on the virus.
And now cardiac arrest from the transfection can be blamed on the virus or
the spike protein. Same thing with seeding the narrative with a team of worst
case scenario clowns that are out there telling a billion people are going to
die and encouraging people to stay home and make masks for their friends.
People that are used to working doing surgery on monkeys doing light
microscopy with contaminated vials of old un unrefrigerated vaccine.
And then after you have worst team worst case scenario out there telling you that
people are going to be able to make this stuff in their garage even a person with a
high school biology book.
Now making the response to the declared crisis and national security operation
means that people can't talk. People have to just take their book deal or their
sub stack or their three topic assignment and shut their mouth.
You don't get to talk about everything you only can talk about bears and every
once in a while please mention the spike protein.
And you can only talk about bears and every once in a while you can mention the spike
protein and you you should talk about amyloidosis and the spike protein.
And you should get really hot about hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin and then
after about two months just drop hydroxychloroquine and stick on Ivermectin.
That's going to be your plan and at the end you'll be able to write a book about
that.
It doesn't matter you know really anymore.
It matters that people wake up and it matters that we snap out of it.
I don't want to blame anybody or say who did what.
I just need people to realize that we have been had.
Some of our friends have been had.
Some of our allies have been had.
Some of them know.
Some of them don't.
But we need to start saying it plainly.
This has been planned for a very long time.
There's a lot of people who are actively participating in the plan knowing that
it's kind of a combination of not looking away or looking away and not
looking away kind of thing.
There was a novel virus.
Millions have died and millions more were saved from came from gain of function
because gain of function is real and a virus will come again.
This is the Christmas story they want us telling.
This is the Christmas story they want us discussing.
The Christmas Carol they want us singing.
Four years ago ladies and gentlemen we found ourselves on this road where
there was a coronavirus leak in China circulating in China.
And right away from the very beginning there were people that were ready to
give us a ride.
Dan Sarotkin was right there.
A bunch of different people in the group drastic on Twitter were right there
to give you a ride in a car.
Tony Fauci was there right away to give you a ride in a car.
And so it goes.
Joe Rogan was there.
He could give you a ride with Mike Ulsterhome.
And so all of us got picked up on this ride by different people at different
times jumping in and out of the car that we're riding in that's supposed to
get us out of here back to the city.
Somewhere are you gas station where you can.
Call for a ride.
And most of these people were medlers.
With just one message.
One idea.
One solution.
One certainty and everything else.
I'm not really sure about that.
I don't know about that stuff.
That's not my specialty.
I didn't really look into that.
Wow.
That's cool.
I think somebody else does that.
And so they've really changed the way we think.
We had changed the way young people think.
That's the scariest part.
But I've got guests in the house now for a few days that are also very much
trapped in this right now.
Very, very much trapped in this right now.
And it's not a.
It's not a small thing.
It's a very complicated place to be.
And we've got to start to try very hard to have more sympathy and
understanding for these people so that we can find a way in.
Because we don't want to go in with everybody.
Rough and tumble.
We want to go in with compassion.
I want to find a way to talk to these people.
It's literally turning into worst case scenario.
Worst case scenario.
It's literally turning into worst case scenario.
In 2020.
It was worst case scenario.
And everybody that was pushing worst case scenario in 2020 was part of the
reason why so many people took the shot.
Why so many people went to the hospital and got put on a protocol that killed
them.
Anybody that was pushing the worst case scenario.
The red dragon event.
The laboratory leak.
The deadly virus made by gain of function.
The most contagious virus in history.
Anybody that was pushing that is responsible for people going to the
hospital and getting put out a deadly protocol and is responsible for
enabling billions of people.
To be injected with a lipid nanoparticle RNA DNA concoction medicine.
Then in the best case scenario.
Transfected them with a protein that somebody intended.
That's the best case scenario.
The worst case scenarios are are a bouquet.
And so I still am kind of having a hard time understanding how it is
that we aren't breaking free quite yet.
But it's because people are still just riding in the car.
And they're still listening to the people that are in the car with
them and they haven't paid enough attention in order to know that
these people are manipulating them that these people are misleading
them that we are being taken.
And we have been taken because it is we are going into the fifth year
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024.
I didn't think it's I didn't think it would be possible.
I'm afraid that the latest data tells us that we.
Oh, I didn't change that scenario.
I'm afraid.
I'm afraid that the latest data tells us that we're dealing with
essentially a worst case scenario.
I'm afraid that I mean, what does this mean?
Doesn't this tell you something doesn't this mean?
Doesn't this mean something?
Is this a glitch in the matrix?
Is this a what's going on here?
What could this be other than an obvious sign that we have been
manipulated?
An obvious sign that there are hucksters and medlers around who
maybe have been paid.
I don't know.
And I don't know by who.
To seed a worst case scenario to make sure that the fear
uncertainty and doubt and the confusion that comes from those
three would be present long enough to run the clock out.
And what are we running the clock out on the control group,
of course?
The people who can show you that the
transfection caused those problems, not the virus, but the
transfection.
And the unfortunate thing is, is that they really planned not to
have a control group at this stage.
They really planned not to have a control group at this stage.
They thought they'd at least get you.
They thought they'd at least get you with a flu vaccine.
But it's over now.
And if we keep the steady pressure on, it will end.
I don't know why the heater's running for so long.
Go turn it off.
No more free fries with the booster.
I mean, it's a total rip off now.
And so the latest sort of wackiness going on with Dr.
Robert Malone, undisputed inventor of the RNA vaccines,
chief disambiguation wizards, bioethics, expert
vaccinologist, virologist, immunologist, clinical trial
specialist, and grant consultant.
Robert Malone responded to a random account on Twitter,
at least as far as I know, a random account, who was
replying to a previous tweet of Robert Malone's and saying
that not Trump, but Kennedy needs to be elected.
And with all due respect,
I believe you know this.
And Robert Malone replied, nope, with not a capital N,
does not have the necessary management skills.
Exhibit one with not a capital E, C-H-D.
Now, it's quite extraordinary, really, because as I understand
the story, when Robert Malone first came out, you know,
and pulled the shoot on his, on his multi decade career
in vaccinology, immunology, virology, bioethics, disambiguation
and vaccine invention,
after he pulled the rip cord on that shoot on his shoot
and ditched that career in order to try and save the world.
One of the first people that he contacted or the first
organizations that he contacted was Children's Health Defense.
Hey.
Hey, man.
One of the first places he contacted was C-H-D.
Children's Health Defense.
Legend has it that Robert Malone sat Bobby down
and said that he had to watch my stream,
the stream that I did in the beginning of January,
2022, with Charles Rixi.
Legend has it that Robert Malone was vetted at his farm
over a couple days and C-H-D decided that he was a good guy.
Brought him into the fold.
I think he had some contact with Bobby,
some communication with Bobby, even maybe helped with some
of the early drafting of the book.
And so it's very strange because Robert Malone
was also at Bobby's announcement in Boston.
And Mark Koolack has done a nice video.
We were kind of surprised.
I didn't realize that Robert Malone and Meryl Nast
were such good friends, but it became very obvious
when Robert Malone was there and Meryl kind of circled
out through the crowd and met Robert Malone in the middle
of the aisle.
And they shared a hug that you don't give somebody
that you don't know very well and respect a hug like that.
I've never gotten a hug from Meryl Nast.
I mean, I'm not saying that I expect a hug from Meryl Nast,
but this was a hug that you give to your friend.
And so for whatever it's worth,
Robert Malone is close with Meryl and presumably was close
with Bobby and with other people in the organization.
And so for him to say so callously, nope,
you know, the implication he is here, Bobby does not have
the necessary management skills to be president.
And exhibit number one is CHD, children's health defense.
That's a pretty extraordinary statement.
Now I'm not saying yes or no, whether I think CHD is a Swiss
clock of an organization or a court's digital clock.
I don't know how I would characterize the organization.
It's a very large organization that I just joined.
I can tell you for absolute certain that some of the best
people and most dedicated people in the universe work at CHD.
And it just seems like an extraordinary thing to say
about an organization that as I understand it was one of the
first places where he sought refuge and support and found it.
It's just something to note.
I mean, really, you know, what can I say?
I've been pestering him for a while.
And so I just would like to understand really what's going
on here because I think there's something weird with regard
to affiliation.
Oftentimes it feels as though there's the implication that
he's a Republican or he's a conservative or,
and he says those words a lot like I'm a conservative
or a libertarian or I'm for freedom or something like that.
But I think his previous history is basically democratic.
I think all of their previous sort of online signature is kind
of more or less democratic.
And his good friend Steve Kirsch is a very large donor
to the Democratic National Committee or with DNC or whatever.
So it's hard for me to see congruence
here.
I don't know what's going on, but I know that this is a very
feels like it's a very off-tech tweet.
We'll just see what we'll see what happens after this.
You know, Jesse Ventura might call Bobby and run for president.
And then, you know, a couple months later he could get,
you know, somehow taken out of the picture and then Bobby could
become president just like his chapter 13 in his book called
Don't Start the Revolution Without Me.
That was funny last night, right?
So the bad idea is keep spreading.
And Henry Kissinger's idea keeps spreading very well.
This manner of governing is working very well, especially with the
Internet and the algorithms turned against us.
This is an interesting video that I thought you'd just be
interested in hearing.
This was like last night.
If he had wanted to argue that he could not get a fair trial in
Washington, then the legal system is such that he could have made
that argument.
He did.
They said no.
And they said no.
Listen, this is interesting.
There's going to be a civil war in this country.
You're saying there's going to be?
I think it is an absolute fact.
And I'll tell you.
So you think that the law is being weaponized against everybody
having anything to do with January 16 years?
Oh, oh, oh.
So first, did you know that there are people who are acquitted on
January 6 because they showed up.
Open sidewalks, no gates.
Police fanned them in and opened the doors.
And then when they went to court, they said, Your Honor, here's a
video of the cop welcoming me in.
The cop said you're right.
Case dismissed.
Did you know that?
It should be.
Could not get a fair trial in Washington.
Then the legal system is such that he could have made that
argument.
He did.
They said no.
And they said no.
Listen, this is interesting.
There's going to be a civil war in this country.
You're saying there's going to be?
I think it is an absolute fact.
It is not going to be a civil war in this country.
If Tim Poole's talking about himself and people like him, they
can use these terms and they can play those video games, but they've
got no idea.
They couldn't even go camping for a long weekend, I don't think.
And maybe I'm talking a little too much smack.
Maybe Tim Poole can backpack for three weeks and he's a, he's a
total outdoorsman, but I'm doubting it.
I'm doubting it.
And so this whole talk of civil war, what does that really mean?
Like people tweeting from their houses at each other until they
starved to death.
Like I don't, I don't really understand what he means by a civil
war.
People just going to go confront random people in the street and
ask them what team they're on and then shoot at them if they're not on
their team.
I mean, I don't get it.
I don't know what that means.
I don't know what a civil war in the United States really means.
Other than something that would be necessarily orchestrated by the
state.
Because nobody in Pittsburgh is going to rise up against their
neighbors or it's just not going to happen.
And anybody that, that tried to do some of those things.
I mean,
24 21% of the people in, in Pennsylvania concealed carry.
I don't know what to tell you.
I, I, I think this is all hype.
I think it's all stuff to scare you.
And I think it's all stuff to take away focus from the things that
we need to focus on.
Tim Poole's never going to talk about the vaccine schedule that you
can be assured of.
Because that's not part of the limited spectrum of debate that
he's in charge of.
Not the, the, the shiny distractions that he's responsible for
putting in people's heads.
That's what's interesting about the limited spectrum of debate.
You know,
there's also just a limited amount of debate that anybody can do.
One approximation is somewhere around 39,000 thoughts per day you
can have.
And so if you let your phone or Twitter or Facebook decide what
you're going to think about,
then you surrender a certain number of those 30,000 thoughts to
the algorithm, to YouTube, to the TV, to college basketball.
To a good book.
But you only have 30,000 thoughts every day from when you wake up
when you go to sleep.
And so the more of those thoughts are pleasant, are constructive,
are motivating, are not depressed or backwards looking or, you know,
et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
It's really important to see that this limited spectrum of debate is
so powerful because you only have a limited time to think.
And so if you go down your Twitter's feed and you watch five
dumb videos that take a total of five minutes, then you've given up
a certain amount of those 39,000 thoughts that you have per day
and you can never get them back.
That's the danger of not spending time together.
That's why I think I like doing it live because I at least feel like
I'm not, I'm not missing that.
You know, I'm just going along with it.
I'm trying to really communicate to that person and to that person.
Because it is really important to understand that we need to take
back our thoughts, our daily thoughts, what we spend our time on.
If you spend your time six hours with a stream with somebody like
Rixie and McCare and what can possibly happen there other than
you surrendering thousands of your thoughts and your consciousness
is prime real estate.
I wasn't sure if it was on the screen.
I had to look.
And so we have had the sense that free thinking is going on when
we've listened to Brett Weinstein.
We've had the sense that free thinking is going on when we listen
to Robert Malone, but it is an illusion that very few of us
could see through, but we did.
And it's starting to spread now.
It's starting to crack now because they were supposed to run out the clock.
But the clock is running out faster than they thought it would.
We've gotten farther down the fuse than they thought we would.
They thought they could delay us with the DNA.
They thought they could delay us with the with the frame shift.
It didn't delay us at all.
It wasn't a story at all.
It went away immediately because people aren't buying it anymore.
The only thing they have left is to make sure that we don't find out
how many of us are actually awake.
That's what's most frightening right now because I think it's even
possible that most of us are in America, especially in places like
Pittsburgh, there are almost no one on board anymore.
With the exception of those people that are really, you know,
working at the universities, working in the schools.
That sounds terrifying when I speak it out loud, but those are the people
that are still in.
Everybody else isn't even the people that work there as janitors
and service people they're not in.
They have to pretend they're in, but they're not in.
These people are pretending they're in, but they're not in.
That's what happened at the beginning of the pandemic.
That's what Jordan Peterson did almost four months into the
pandemic.
He told us to wait six months more.
And so that's right.
This new world order is just continuing to go on.
That's why Catholic did come out.
That's for sure why he came out.
They need to run out the clock.
So they called in for a sub a ref sub sub ref.
And Catholic has come in now to add a little bit of, you know,
twist to the sandwich, but it's the same.
It's the same hamburger.
The lettuce is now on the bottom.
That's all.
Because it's the same story that it came from a lab that that
potential is real that we had to do something that all these people
have been preparing for this and look at came.
But then we did stuff wrong.
It's the worst of the narratives.
Because that's the one that's the closest to becoming the truth.
That's the lie that's closest to becoming the truth right now.
There are six books that I can had on the screen 15 minutes ago
that all categorize and characterize and tell that story.
It's crazy.
But Bobby's book has the other biology in it.
Bobby's book has the other side in it.
Bobby's book has the text in it that can you, you can see it.
We got it in there.
A lot of people aren't happy with what got in there.
I don't know what to say other than, you know, I didn't write the book.
And there may be another one.
Because we don't want the lie to become truth.
We need people to understand what the truth really is.
I think we're really close to being able to speak it out loud.
And the challenge really is to get people to understand that it was,
it was pantomime.
So much of it was pantomime so much about the debate in the beginning.
The arguments in the beginning was pantomime.
And I can't stress enough how I think one of the most important pantomimes to understand is
hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin.
Two substances probably that could be expected reasonably well not to do any harm and maybe even have some
general benefits given the poor health of the American population.
And they were applied as part of a narrative where there was a novel virus that needed novel treatments.
And these treatments were almost always deployed with antibiotics and steroids, azithromycin and dexamethasone.
And so the representation of Ivermectin as being effective and prophylactically useful by Brett Weinstein was likely part of this.
He doesn't ever need to know that that's what he did.
But that's probably what he was set up to do, asked to do.
Maybe he just thought that doing it was the right thing to do given that Robert Malone and some of these other people, you know, they're there.
I don't know who manipulated who.
I don't know who misled who.
I just know that in the end, people were convinced to participate in a train stopping and starting.
Pantamine.
And not just one guy, but hundreds of them along this train to make it look like they were really stopping and really starting it.
And really trying to fight for our freedom. You know, we're in this hot tub for you guys.
We're taking pictures of our fancy shoes because we're doing this for you guys.
We're flying all around the world for COVID summits because we want to save you guys.
We're donating all of our money from our sub stack to no, sorry.
I'm raising money for. Oh, yeah.
And so we've been converting this. I think I'm going to stop here though. I was supposed to actually stop one pack here. Yeah, I want to stop right here because.
Not only are we told this, but these these.
We'll come back to the mystery viruses because what I really would like to play is this. I got this video up here.
I think. Yeah.
It is a video by a Spanish.
A Spanish molecular biologist, a Spanish chemist.
I think he will introduce his his background hits a rather.
I'm going to speed up the film a little bit. It should take us about 30 minutes.
And what I would like you to recall.
I'm sorry. This is such a broken up show.
I would I would like you to recall the lipid nanoparticle preparation expert that was on the McCann broadcast a number of times by the name of Christine Grace.
She also presented at this Vay John health three day long COVID.
Thing with with a German dude who was selling supplements.
And that German dude has actually been streaming with McCann lately, which is very interesting.
As you know, Peter McCulloch is the chief scientific officer of the wellness company, another supplements company.
So it's interesting to think about kind of the money that's moving around why it's moving around and what roles these people would play in moving that money around or or creating the momentum for those products to be sold.
And of course, all the detox to the spike protein.
It really feeds into this idea that the spike protein was toxic.
This spike protein was toxic for the virus and for the shot and confuses people on that as a connection between the cause and effect or an illusion of cause and effect that's actually not there and divorces that from blaming it on transfection.
And that's really the fundamental enchantment that they are casting here.
Besides the preservation of the vaccine schedule in general as the main ritual of public health.
But with regard to transfection, it is especially important to see that they still are basically in the same place where they're trying to say that the virus did bad things, including multi system inflammatory syndrome and all kinds of other stuff that the.
Transfection was expected to do.
And I think this is the biggest trick that they pulled on us. It's absolutely what they did and what they would have done if they would have planned this appropriately.
They not only seeded the mass casualty events with a predisposition to create cardiac events in order to be able to blame cardiac events on a spike protein of the virus.
And therefore the cardiac events expected to occur after transfection can also be blamed on that spike protein rather than on transfection.
And they also seeded a team of worst case scenario artists that from the very beginning were already seeding the toxicity of the spike protein as a gain of function virus gain a function protein and capable of generating amyloidosis or pre on disease.
Knowing full well or unwittingly these people incorrectly tied that to a non circulating protein.
A protein that was only reported and found in a couple patients according to them.
Attributing it to that protein so that they could protect the idea that the transfection would cause those maladies.
And so now if and when I don't know that it will happen, but if and when pre on disease from transfection should arise or amyloidosis should increase in those people that have been transfected.
These people will be horribly disingenuous about where it comes from and horribly uncurious about whether these people are vaccinated or not.
I assure you, transfected or not. Excuse me.
That's where we are. We are we are actually a couple dominoes ahead.
That's why we're able to read this, but without a doubt that's where we are.
And they need to try and stay ahead of what is expected to happen with repeated transfection.
That's why this idea was seeded already long ago by the same exact people who are still seeding it now who are still saying it now.
And it will slowly trickle up the chain until before you know it, Robert Malone will say that pre on disease and amyloidosis are rising and it might be the shot.
But it could have been the virus too. Maybe it's this nasty spike protein.
It's coming, ladies and gentlemen. We are now ahead. We can see it.
And so if it doesn't come, they're responding to this show right here. Oh, wow. That's a giant, giant ego. Please deflate.
They're not responding to this show.
Nobody responds to this show except for Mark Kulacz. Mark Kulacz is the only guy who watches and responds to this show.
So kudos to Mark. Yo, yo. Here we go. I'm going to play this thing.
I might have to adjust the speed as we're going here. Yeah, this will be good.
I think you're going to like it a lot. And remember, when I got off track there, Christine Grace told us about the lipid nanoparticles.
And so I wonder if you learned anything from Christine Grace and whether or not what you learned from Gabrielle Segella is going to help you with that or vice versa.
Okay, let's do speed here. Hold on. Get this speed up.
Full screen. We're a speed.
Hold on here.
My name is Gabrielle Segella. I am an independent research biochemist, specialized in chemistry of microemulsions and colloidal systems.
The numerous controversies that have recently arisen around the Pfizer-BioNTech community vaccine have led me out of scientific curiosity, but also from an ethical standpoint, to examine in-depth several chemical, physical and toxicological.
I'll slow it down just a little more. Sorry about that. I know this is not the best way to do it, but let's put a number in it.
What are you doing here? Oh, I'm not up there.
What is going on?
Oh, I don't have anything playing. Is that what's happening here? Sorry, guys. This is really annoying.
Seriously? What are you doing here, demon? There we go.
My name is Gabrielle Segella. I am an independent research biochemist, specialized in chemistry of microemulsions and colloidal systems.
The numerous controversies that have recently arisen around the Pfizer-BioNTech community vaccine have led me out of scientific curiosity, but also from an ethical standpoint, to examine in-depth several chemical, physical and toxicological aspects, which I consider very important, regarding the composition of this medicinal preparation.
The results of my scientific research have been published in Italy by the journal ND Disinfection, and also published in peer review by the American International Journal of Vaccine Theory Practice and Research, with the title Chemical Physical Criticality and Toxicological Potential of Lipid Nanomaterials contained in an mRNA vaccine.
With this video, we will attempt to convey an understanding even among non-exposed of the subject, but most of all, to simplify several aspects of my investigation that are, in my opinion, fundamental and most significant.
The Pfizer-BioNTech medicinal product, called Community COVID-19 mRNA BNT162B2, was placed on the European market with a conditional authorization issued by the European Medicines Agency, the EMA, on the 21st of December 2020, while the first EMA assessment report was released on the 19th of February 2021.
What is it? Here you can see the qualitative-quantitative composition. First of all, let's say that it is a colloidal suspension. What is a colloidal suspension? Simplifying the concept as much as possible, I'll show you an example. This is a suspension which we chemists define as isotropic. That is to say, homogeneous.
Of solid particles that are suspended homogeneously throughout the liquid mass. We can see in the entire liquid phase, in all directions, the homogeneity of this suspension.
When, on the other hand, the colloidal suspension loses its stability, phenomena occur that are described in chemistry under the category of coalescence.
What does this mean? It is that phenomenon occurring after a loss of stability of the suspension, by which the particles dispersed in the colloidal suspension join each other, begin to aggregate and agglomerate, giving rise to the formation of larger particles. That is to say, of aggregates.
And this is the phenomenon that you see represented in this slide. In the suspension that was previously homogeneous, you notice now the appearance of particles. It is not homogeneous anymore.
These aggregates, these larger droplets of various sizes, which you can observe, are in fact the aggregates and agglomerates, resulting from the loss of stability of the colloidal suspension.
The formulation of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Here is the qualitative-quantitative composition of the medicinal preparation. You can see, first on the list, the active ingredient. That is to say, the mRNA strand,
called with the code name BNT162B2. It is the ingredient that will lead to the codification of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, in the cell of the host organism. Then we notice four components, which are lipids, the so-called functional lipids. That is, those substances that have a particular importance for the formation, the structuring,
as we will see later, of the nanoparticles that are created, and which incorporate the active component, the mRNA. Two of these are functional lipids, the other two are structural lipids, which therefore participate in the structuring of the nanomaterial that will then be formed.
But let's focus for a moment on the first two, ALC0315 and ALC0159, because they are substances that have never been registered in pharmacopeia, and so we can say they are totally unknown.
They are defined novel excipients by the EMA, and it must be underlined that they have never been used before in a medicinal preparation.
Then we note the presence of four other components, which constitute the so-called pH buffer. That is to say, that set of substances that serve to maintain the pH of the whole composition at a value as close as possible to the physiological value of the human organism, which is 7.4.
These components of the pH buffer are, as you can see, electrolytic components. What does electrolyte mean? An electrolyte is a substance which, in aqueous solution, undergoes the division into ions, that is to say, in ionic compounds, electrically charged, and therefore able to conduct electric current.
Electrolyte, as the etymology of the term indicates, is a substance capable of conducting electricity. Water, for example, which, in the absence of electrolytes, would not conduct electricity, instead, with the presence of these ionic compounds, is able to conduct electricity. In the formulation we are considering, the electrolytes are made of inorganic salts, that is, inorganic minerals.
At this point, a question arises. The Pfizer-BioNTech mRNA vaccine is made of lipid nanoparticles. What are they? Let's try to schematize, to simplify everything.
The typical structure of such a nanoparticle is quite complex. You can see it represented in this slide. It has an envelope that is composed of and held together by those structural functional lipids mentioned before.
Within this envelope, there is the mRNA strand that should be conveyed inside the host cell, etc., etc.
How could we represent the complexity of this structure, so as to make it very easy to understand?
First of all, let's clarify the terminology that we will be using.
First of all, the nanometric dimension. What is meant by nanometer?
An nanometer is an extremely microscopic measurement.
An nanometer corresponds to a billionth of a meter, or a millionth of a millimeter.
We are therefore talking about a measure tens of thousands of times smaller than the diameter of a human hair.
To schematize, we could compare it to a bicycle. Imagine a bicycle, obviously nanometric in size, whose length, in this case, is less than 100 nanometers.
And the frame of this bicycle is made up of those functional and structural lipids that we saw before in the composition of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.
You see here the ALC-0315, which is the most important, and the ALC-0159, the two functional lipids, and the other two structural lipids.
Well, the nanobicycle is guided by, or more exactly, it incorporates in itself the mRNA strand, which constitutes the real cyclist, the thing which must be used.
It must be conveyed, and which is hooked to the bicycle, thanks to its negative charge.
In other words, the fact that the mRNA strand is negatively charged allows a better association, a better connection to the positively charged nanobicycle.
Once completed the whole pattern of the nanobicycle, our bike is now able to run, thanks to all of its components.
Remember that the purpose of all this is to convey the cyclist, the mRNA, inside the host cell.
Once inside the host cell, the nanobicycle, having reached its final destination, gives rise, after the release of the mRNA, to the coding of the component of SARS-CoV-2, known as spike protein.
So, I don't know how far he's going to get in his explanation, so I want to stop it here for a second.
If we go back a little bit to that picture of the nanoparticle, number one thing to realize is that those are all the little bicycles there, right?
This isn't the bicycle.
The bicycles are all inside the larger particle.
It's the small bicycles that they're talking about.
Now, he does say that this is all the whole nanoparticle, but when he talks about nanobicycles, he's talking about this.
These little configurations here where the negative little RNA molecule is completely surrounded by positive headed lipids, that at the right pH are fine.
In the right combination of cholesterol and peg and whatever they're fine.
The cold enough temperature, they're fine.
But they're not stable, they're colloidal suspensions.
Colloidal suspensions that depend on the pH and the charge of all of those molecules remaining stable and not being changed by the solution in which they're floating.
What you need to see them as is a very ionically magnet on the table, some of which might be electromagnets, and if you change the magnetic fields in the room, then they might jump apart and go different ways and whatever.
This is what you're dealing with here.
This is what he's trying to describe from a chemical perspective.
These nanobicycles are a combination of semi rigid molecules that when mixed in the right way result in this combination of RNA being negative surrounded by these lipid nanoparticles or these lipids, excuse me, and these other structural lipids functional and structural.
And the reason why they're functional is because if their charge changes, then they will let the RNA go.
And that's what makes them functional.
They stay encapsulating the RNA until a certain pH change occurs and then they release the RNA and that's where he's going to get now.
I've just started over wherever it is because he's such a good explainer.
It's nice to hear it again.
If the zeta potential is too low, it's in itself the mRNA strand, which constitutes the real cyclist, the thing which must be conveyed and which is hooked to the bicycle thanks to its negative charge.
In other words, the fact that the mRNA strand is negatively charged allows a better association.
A better connection to the positively charged nanobicycle.
Once completed the whole pattern of the nanobicycle, our bike is now able to run thanks to all of its components.
Remember that the purpose of all this is to convey the cyclist, the mRNA, inside the host cell.
Once inside the host cell, the nanobicycle, having reached its final destination, gives rise after the release of the mRNA to the coding of the component of SARS-CoV-2, known as spike protein.
Now, that's annoying in a way because, of course, nobody seems to be able to tell the whole story.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not seeing Gabrielle as a bad guy.
I'm just saying that it would be awesome, wouldn't it, if he would just insert in here that we don't know what happens because the protein or the RNA and DNA and what they made for RNA, assuming that the RNA does what they see.
If you say it does, it's supposed to make the spike protein. That's how he should say it.
But instead, he states it very normally like, no, no, it's going to make the spike protein for sure, but the lipid nanoparticles are what he knows about.
Just see it that way.
Another extremely important parameter in this representation is what is called the zeta potential.
The concept of zeta potential could be compared to the pressure of the tires of the nanobicycle.
If the tire pressure is excessive, then the zeta potential is too high.
The tires could explode, and therefore, the bicycle would not function anymore.
If the zeta potential is too low, the tires are too deflated, and also in this case, the bicycle would no longer be able to carry out its task, which is to say, to convey the mRNA.
Etcetera, etcetera. Another extremely important parameter is that of the bicycle track.
The track in this case is regulated by the pH, that is to say, by the buffer that guarantees a certain pH value corresponding to the physiological pH of the human organism, which is 7.4.
Well, this positive charge of the nanobicycle, however, has been reported and is known as having high toxicity, as we can read here.
Unfortunately for liposomes, which are other forms of nanomaterials, are a little larger than the lipid nanoparticles we are talking about, and for lipid nanoparticles,
elevated toxicity has been reported, which can be a problem for the application of such preparations as pharmaceutical products.
Well, who says so? Who says this? BioNTech itself says this.
The very manufacturer of the vaccine of Pfizer BioNTech.
In a patent granted on November 26, 2019, that is to say, just over a year before the authorization granted by the EMA.
The manufacturer of this composition, a year earlier in one of his patents, declared that that preparation with that structure was not indicated.
Was not suitable for use as a pharmaceutical product.
What would happen if I added a pH buffer containing electrolytes to a cationic nanoparticle system, such as the one we've been talking about?
Well, first of all, for the purpose of our scheme attization, we can represent an electrolyte as a nail, a nail that has a positively charged head and negatively charged tip.
What happens if I throw these nails representing the components of the PBS buffer, which is the buffer used by Pfizer BioNTech, on the cycle track where nanobicycles are transiting, the track that had been regulated on a physiological pH, as we said, etc.
What can happen to the nanobikes on the track, traveling toward the inoculation?
Well, some nanobicycles may very well avoid the nails.
But suppose that one of these nanobicycles runs over a nail.
Well, what would happen? What would happen is simply that the zeta potential, symbolized by the nanobicycles' tire pressure, would immediately crash.
The nanobike running over the nail would get its tires flattened and ruined. It would fall apart.
But you say it's only one nanobicycle, no big deal.
However, we must consider that billions of other nanobicycles are traveling on that cycle track, some of which could very well collide with the nanobicycle that is broken down, and lead to the formation of clusters of various sizes of nanobicycles.
That is, agglomerations, if they are larger, or aggregations, if they are smaller.
This is confirmed as well by what you can read here in this slide, in the presence of the pH buffer called PBS, the one used by Pfizer BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles with a positive charge ratio, like those we have seen, form larger particles, which is to say, aggregations.
And agglomerations. As a consequence, the whole composition loses its homogeneity. And who says that? It is said once again by BioNTech, the manufacturer itself, in the same patent, granted one year earlier.
Oh, you dummy. And the reason why that is, right, is because the electrolytes that are found in the pH buffer cause the fine nanoparticles to change their chemical composition, changing their charge.
And zeta potential, as best as I can understand it, is the potential for particles to come together or stay apart.
So it's kind of a charge stability kind of thing. And so the higher the potential is, the more likely it is that when the charge is released, or when the charge situation is disrupted, that they'll all come together.
And it's kind of like, you know, if you have a perfect colloidal suspension of all positively charged on the inside, wrapped around a negatively charged thing, then they're fine.
But the moment one starts breaking down, they all start breaking down. It all goes very quickly. And that's kind of a high zeta potential.
If you have a low zeta potential or neutral, then there's not much tendency for them to come together. Something like that, I'm probably getting it wrong.
But it's supposed to describe the sort of way that these particles behave and either come together in agglomerations and aggregations or not.
It actually also has to do with the pKa or the apparent pKa of these compounds. And so he'll probably talk about that next.
And your factor of this composition, what happens if I'm apart?
Gregations, if they are smaller.
This is confirmed as well by what you can read here in this slide. In the presence of the pH buffer called PBS, the one used by Pfizer-BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles with a positive charge ratio, like those we have seen, form larger particles, which is to say, aggregations and agglomerations.
As a consequence, the whole composition loses its homogeneity. And who says that? It is said once again, by BioNTech, the manufacturer itself, in the same patent, granted one year earlier, on November 26, 2019.
They say that using that pH buffer containing those electrolytes, what we have just said happens. Larger particles are formed.
And what can happen then if this composition is administered parentially, that is, in this case, intramuscularly, that is, through an intramuscular inoculation.
Let's imagine that this is a highway. We will call it the parentero highway. The transit for bikes should be forbidden. It's not a bike track. And so what if that composition say, what if that group of nanobicycles was to run on this highway?
Well, it is easy to imagine, in the presence of those nails, they would immediately cause accidents of the kind that we have defined, aggregations, agglomerations, floculations, which are just more serious precipitation phenomena, as they are actual flakes of various particulates.
Coalescence is, calculations, and phase separations. A bit like what happens with rancid milk, where the two phases separate. The fat phase separates from the aqueous phase. And this is also confirmed by what you read here.
The use of a pH buffer, often necessary for pharmaceutical applications, and the presence of ionic compounds, can lead to aggregation of lipid nanoparticles, which makes them unsuitable for parental application to patients.
They literally state that they are unsuitable for applications such as the intramuscular inoculation of a vaccine. Who says that? Once again, BioNTech, the manufacturer itself, in the same patent, dated November 26, 2019. That is to say, one year before the authorization granted by the EMA to market the vaccine, produced, manufactured by Pfizer BioNTech.
And we also read, in the presence of the pH buffer called PBS, the same effect, which is to say the formation of these aggregations, these agglomerations, these floculations, these coagulations, is more prominent.
Lipid nanoparticles with a positive charge ratio, form larger particles. This is what BioNTech says in the same patent one year before the authorization was granted.
Well now, to sum up, we have a patent. A patent granted on November 26, 2019 to BioNTech.
In this patent, several principles are asserted. The different characteristics that a preparation intended for immunotherapy, that is, vaccination, must have.
What is asserted in this patent?
Substantially, we read that an mRNA-based composition intended for immunotherapy, one, should not contain in its formulation, an ionic buffer such as PBS, in order to prevent phenomena of aggregation, agglomeration, floculation of lipid nanoparticles,
with all the toxicological consequences that we have hypothesized.
Two, should not contain in its formulation ionic compounds such as sodium chloride.
Present in the composition of the Pfizer BioNTech medicinal preparation,
in order to prevent aggregation, agglomeration, floculation of lipid nanoparticles, with all the related toxicological consequences.
Three, it should not be injected parentially due to its instability when it is in the physiological conditions of the extracellular district.
This, I repeat, is stated in BioNTech's 2019 patent. A little over a year later, BioNTech was granted a conditional marketing authorization for a preparation,
namely, the medicinal preparation community, PBS sucrose, by Pfizer BioNTech, which, one, contains an ionic buffer such as PBS based on inorganic electrolytes that may promote the phenomena of aggregation, adlomeration, floculation of lipid nanoparticles, with all the related toxicological consequences.
Two, contains ionic compounds such as sodium chloride, which may promote the phenomena of aggregation, agglomeration, floculation of lipid nanoparticles, with all the related toxicological consequences.
Three, it is inoculated parentially, with the risk of causing instability of the composition,
when it is placed after inoculation in the physiological conditions of the extracellular district.
In other words, on one hand, we have a patent of the manufacturer BioNTech entitled RNA formulation for immunotherapy, containing very strict and specific indications and recommendations such as
avoid electrolytes, avoid adding electrolytic ionic compounds into the composition of a vaccine based on mRNA and lipid nanomaterials.
On the other hand, we have a composition authorized by the EMA on December the 21st, 2020, which says
everything okay, nothing to object about the presence of electrolytes.
And furthermore, in the patent dated November the 26th, 2019 of BioNTech, it is asserted
that type of composition is not suitable for intramuscular inoculation.
In the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine authorized by the EMA on December the 21st, 2020, it is said that it is suitable for intramuscular inoculation.
Among the main adverse effects that can be associated to the formation of aggregations, coagulations, agglomerations, floculations, coalescences within the host organism,
in the organism in which this composition is inoculated, it is plausible to contemplate and enumerate the following reactions that epidemiological statistics are confirming.
You find, for example, allergic or anaphylactic reactions, cardiovascular disorders, myocarditis, pericarditis, thrombotic phenomena, ischemic stroke, peristhesius, sudden metastases, autoimmune diseases, skin reactions of various kinds, alterations of the menstrual cycle, activation of herpes zoster, neurological and hepatic diseases.
Thy diseases, thyroid diseases, sudden deaths, etc. One wonders, why? Why a formulation that is obviously admittedly unstable and therefore careless, incautious, dangerous, imperfect is marketed and administered to billions of individuals around the world?
How is this possible? Why? We will try to understand some more, moving on.
Now, let's find out how Pfizer-BioNTech tried to solve the obvious stability problems of its medicinal preparation.
In other words, how to solve the transport and storage problems of a thermodynamically unstable colloidal system?
Easy, brilliant idea. Bring it to some glacial temperatures. That is to say, 72 degrees below zero centigrade.
Here the reason for the freezing, the medicinal preparation called, community by Pfizer-BioNTech, is an aqueous suspension of thermodynamically unstable lipid nanomaterials, which must be frozen at 72 degrees below zero centigrade.
This suspension, after the thawing and dilution phases, becomes the finished product intramustually injectable.
Once it arrives at its destination, the vial of the concentrated vaccine must be thawed. That is to say, brought back to room temperature of about 25 degrees centigrade.
Once brought to room temperature, the vaccinating operator will have to proceed with a further phase, the dilution phase of the concentrate.
The dilution phase is done by adding to the volume a 0.9% solution of sodium chloride, which means another electrolyte.
After completing the dilution phase, there is the mixing phase, which must take place according to precise instructions of the manufacturer.
Namely, gently invert the diluted dispersion 10 times. Do not shake, stirred, but not shaken.
The diluted vaccine should appear as a whitish dispersion, with no visible particles. If particles are present, or if discoloration occurs, do not use the diluted vaccine.
At this point, finally, the phase of intramuscular inoculation can take place, during which the colloidal suspension, already destabilized by the addition of another dose of electrolyte solution, undergoes a further thermal shock,
passing from room temperature to the temperature of 37 degrees centigrade of the human body, for a total temperature difference of 109 degrees centigrade.
The phases of thawing and dilution therefore imply, on the one hand, a heating.
And on the other, the addition of an extra amount of an electrolyte.
It is important to note that this can increase the risks of further destabilization of the colloidal structure.
That is, the well-known coagulation phenomena, as reported in the Tregani encyclopedia, where you find the definition of coagulation in chemistry.
Coagulation can be caused by heating, but above all, by the action of chemical agents, in particular electrolytes, that alter the ionic strength of the solution, and therefore further destabilize it.
On the 18th of October, 2021, the EMA announced on its website that the CHMP, Committee for Human Medicinal Products in Europe, had approved a ready-to-use formulation of community.
This formulation does not require dilution prior to administration.
It will be available in packs of 10 vials, 60 doses, can be stored at 2 to 8 degrees centigrade for up to 10 weeks.
According to the singular announcement, the new community formulation, ready for inoculation, no longer requires dilution, with obvious advantages of storage, transport, and logistics.
And on page 14 of the EMA report of the 14th of October, 2021, the new formulation is revealed.
And with it, some details that tend to prove, both on a chemical, physical, and toxicological level, the evident instability and potential danger of the previous composition.
In fact, in the new formulation of community, called Tris Sucrose Finish Product, containing the same active, chemically modified mRNA, etc., etc.,
the same functional lipids, the same supporting excipients at the same concentrations, all the electrolytes that were present in the previous electrolytic formulation, have disappeared.
In the occasion, the original product was renamed as PBS Sucrose, where PBS stands for Phosphate Buffered Saline.
And on page 15 of the report, it is clear that the original cuminate PBS Sucrose vaccine, injected in billions of doses worldwide, has been modified.
Not only for greater ease of handling, for logistical and storage reasons, but also, first and foremost, to improve its stability.
This, finally, is the first evident admission, although partial and swamped by logistical justifications.
It is the first clear admission that the previous PBS Sucrose electrolytic version was not sufficiently stable, and consequently presented greater toxicological risks than the non-electrolitic version Tris Sucrose, later formulated by Pfizer BioNTech, and promptly authorized by the EMA.
So, at this point, a normal sentient human being, operating within the framework of logic, and having in mind the community interests, would think, well, the manufacturer, Pfizer BioNTech, although with some delay, had repented, had changed its mind, and had corrected the previous formulation.
The previous imperfect, wrong, dangerous formulation was replaced with a less unstable, and perhaps less dangerous, composition without electrolytes. Not at all.
The electrolyte version, unstable, needing dilution before inoculation, remains surprisingly, on the market.
Characterized by a purple cap with the instructions, dilution required for subjects aged 12 years and older, next to the new one with a grey cap, dilution not necessary, but also for subjects aged 12 years and older.
Both versions are, however, authorized for marketing in Europe, always with the formula, authorization subject to conditions.
What is now proven and irrefutable, is that the community PBS Sucrose vaccine is, one, unstable, two, ineffective, three, insecure, and therefore, it is what can be defined an imperfect medicine.
And what is meant by imperfect medicine?
Article 443 of the Italian Penal Code explains it to us.
Anyone who holds for trade, markets, or administers, defective or imperfect medicines, is punished with imprisonment from six months to three years, and with a fine of not less than 103 euros.
In the notes of Article 443 of the Penal Code, the definition of imperfect medicinal product says,
the medicinal product qualifies as defective or imperfect, if its therapeutic efficacy is lacking or significantly diminished.
As for example, in cases where it has expired, or there has been an error in production, or it is devoid of necessary components or contains active ingredients that are not correctly dosed.
To conclude, we can simply presume that the several risk factors that we have examined, and that are reported in greater detail in my study, have inevitably compromised the stability, shelf life, functionality,
and consequent toxicological potential of the medicinal product called community PBS Sucrose of Pfizer BioNTech, causing a heterogeneity of adverse effects, potentially variable from batch to batch,
from bio to vial, from vaccinator to vaccinator, from vaccinated subject to vaccinated subject.
In a sort of, ineluctible, uncontrollable, and indecipherable, Russian roulette.
Okay, so I think that's a pretty good study there by Gabriella.
I'm a little hesitant to speak too much about it, because there are some parts of it that I'm a little annoyed with.
Again, he's making the argument that the reformulation is potentially more stable, but it's still a transfection, it's still being manufactured.
It's still a colloidal suspension, which has inherent instability and still will be returned to put in a place where there are plenty of electrolytes put in a place where there are the pH is not going to be stabilized by the buffer that it's sitting in or by the
trace anymore.
And so what happens to those positively charged lipids is that after they release their RNA, because they get inside of an endosome of a cell, presumably, and the pH inside of an endosome is sufficiently low, that the lipids will release the RNA,
then those lipids, when they get outside of that endosome, those lipids are like reactive oxygen species because their pKa is so high.
And so they can really destroy things inside of the cell, they can disrupt the electron transport chain, they can do all kinds of really crazy things that because of their nature, because of their extreme pKa, which is their ability to kind of pull
protons away from other molecules, it's really bad news, or pull electrons, I guess it would be, so pull negative charge.
A reactive oxygen species know they're pulling positive things, so they create them though, they create reactive oxygen species and that's the problem.
And again I'm not a chemist, I play with chemistry and so I'm still trying to understand this chemistry, it could be that Christine Grace knows this chemistry very well and is just not a very good presenter, but I got a lot more from Gabrielle's presentation
that I ever got from listening to hours of Christine Grace talk with McCarron and Rixie, or even the presentation that she did at that conference which should have had some degree of content in it and it really didn't.
Although I did hear the word zeta potential and I did hear the word positively charged lipids a few times during and she listed things that could happen, which weren't that different from what Gabrielle talked about, but again his explanation is a lot more understanding
and more understandable it cites the colloidal suspension and the inherent instability of it.
It also highlighted the idea that they didn't use the cold to stabilize the RNA.
They told us this the whole time that the RNA had to be at minus 70 because RNA, RNA and the lipid nanoparticles are protecting the RNA.
We had to store it at minus 72 because the colloidal suspension needed to be stored at minus 72. Do you see how deceptive that is?
And so now this new formulation doesn't need to supposedly, doesn't need to be stored up to 10 weeks at two to eight degrees C.
It's a very different mixture apparently, a very different colloidal suspension that's far more stable, no dilution necessary.
Not sure what to think about that. But anyway, that's where we are.
You can look up his last name and you can find that paper pretty easy. You just see it there and look for lipids and maybe one other keyword and you'll definitely, definitely, definitely find it.
So yes, I think all intramuscular injection needs to be ended.
We do not want our children getting on this train.
I'm just going to just going to snap it out here right now and make sure that we we ended on a good note.
So that one should have that. That should be there. Yeah, we're just going to do it. That's good enough.
So I really think it's important to think in solutions, even though I hate that, you know, it comes from a management class or something like that, but biology is the way out.
And I think the way out is to force everyone challenge everyone to admit that the vaccine schedule has to be bunk.
It has to be a criminal enterprise. There's no other explanation for it.
And in some other Western countries, it's basically a scam, but in America, the contrast, the number of shots, how early they come.
It's just an abomination and we need to speak out about it and anyone in the movement, anyone in the movement who came during COVID and hasn't figured that out yet is got to be.
We've got to be on them.
You can't have come out and thrown away your career and fought for medical freedom and figured out that the whole system was against you and figured out that everything was twisted and then not come to the conclusion that the vaccine schedule is a criminal enterprise.
Stop lying.
Advocate for strict liability for all pharmaceutical products investigate the use of deadly protocols to cause mass casualty events investigate the use of mass casualty events and transfection to create the illusion of a pandemic.
Claim sovereign claim sovereignty over our bodies and those of our children and withdraw from the who and the UN for now.
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen for joining me.
This has been Giga on biological a high resistance low noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
I'm very, very happy to say that we are going to continue well into 2024 until this illusion is broken.
I say into 2024 because I think there's a small, tiny ray of sunshine coming in under the crack of the door that suggests that maybe 2024 is going to be a little more special than we thought.
There is a possibility that mistakes are being made, that the facade is cracking and that people are going to start to understand what it means when we say that intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
They're going to start to understand what it means when we say the transfection healthy humans has to be criminally negligent.
They knew they knew about the lipid nanoparticles.
They knew they couldn't control where they went.
Peter Cullis told us that we knew that the transfection would never ever be able to interface with the body and augment the immune system.
They knew it.
It is criminally negligent and they all darn well knew it.
And viruses aren't patterned integrity.
We don't have to say that viruses aren't real.
We need to be more sophisticated in that.
I think they aren't.
I think the viruses in the cartoons are definitely not real.
But the way that the no-virus people have gotten us here is something they all need to cop to.
But they're right.
There wasn't a coronavirus and it wasn't isolated and they killed people in hospitals.
And the part about killing people in the hospitals somehow never got into any of the discussions.
In fact, the no-virus people set the layer of debate exclusively to no-virus isolation and purification.
You couldn't talk about anything else.
And that's how you know that they weren't playing the game fair.
They weren't trying to win.
They weren't trying to find common ground.
And now we're trying to find common ground.
We're trying to find common ground about transfection, common ground about the vaccine schedule, common ground about our sovereignty.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much for joining me.
I'll see you again tomorrow night.