We have the likes of Theranos too, valued in the billions for fraudulent products and zero actual tech.
Moderna were developing the twofer: the bioweapon Covid and the more dangerous "vax".
Pseudouridine lasts far longer than 2mins after it interacts with the ribosome, and Moderna et al. always knew that. They are inducing endogenous spike printing indefinitely, even if at waning efficacy, thus the boosters are the perfect ploy to restart the more robust spike production and compound the cytotoxic issues. This is a bio horror show.
Long read but all the questions and points are well covered. I hope I am still alive when the truth is revealed not only in a court of law, but in the eyes of the general public. Their furor over the decades of lies will be far harsher than any legally imposed sentence.
Not commonly known—Moderna had a coronavirus vaccine trial that was initiated before January 11, 2020. The trial was conducted under the name of a sister company in California. The trial was disastrous and had to be terminated before the first plane load of Americans returning from Wuhan landed at March ARB. Too many trial participants were ending up in local hospitals. The CEO of the so-called sister company dumped his stock in the company around February-March of 2020, jumped the sinking ship, and turns up later working for Moderna. When Moderna got an EUA in September of 2020 there were those of us in the healthcare community that were quite shocked. We remembered the trial and wondered if Moderna was able to get an EUA on the same vaccine that was making everyone sick. All reference to this trial seems to be scrubbed. I can no longer find copies of the original articles from local newspapers. I’ve heard through the Pharma grapevine that were at least two other trials of a coronavirus vaccine taking place about that time, one in the United States and another in Germany.
Great piece. I'm not an evil genius or anything (although if I were, I'd probably not admit it would I?🤔😉), but if I was worried about the future and wanting to test the "in progress" effects of a controlled, systematic destruction of health experiment, that involved multiple populations and genotypes, from cradle to grave......Then yeah. I'd probably bank roll a startup out the gate as both the vehicle and the (should it be required) patsy.😉
Especially, if it was also allowing me to test a new weapon, lay groundwork for future opportunities and take out most of my enemies or maximise confusion through collateral damage....then yep. If I was DARPA and worried about future employment...I mean an evil genius!😐😐
Originally published on 11 January 2007, Biosafety Bites #21 describes an incident involving a genetically engineered cross of H5N1 ("bird flu") and H3N2 influenza that occurred in a BSL-3 lab at the University of Texas at Austin (UT) on 12 April 2006. It is based upon UT records, specifically, UT's incident report of 13 April 2006, biosafety committee minutes, e-mails, and letters acquired under the Texas Public Information Act.
The Bird Flu Lab Accident that Officially Didn't Happen, or How the University of Texas at Austin Could Have Caused the Next Influenza Pandemic, but Everybody Lived to Cover It Up
Don't ask the National Institutes of Health (NIH) about the genetically engineered influenza pandemic that might have started in Austin, Texas in April 2006. That's because until NIH reads this Biosafety Bites, they almost certainly haven't heard anything about it. And that shows yet again that the US biotechnology and laboratory safety oversight system is a dangerous failure.
NIH's Office of Biotechnology Activities (OBA) doesn't enforce biosafety rules, so the University of Texas (UT) didn't report the unsettling Bird Flu accident. UT must have reasoned: Why draw attention to a lab accident when there's no cost for burying such incidents? It surely wouldn't be the first time such an event has been swept under the rug.
One of the better timelines I’ve read. There is so much wheeling and dealing and inadequacy and heaven only knows what all it just makes my head swim. Anyway, thank you.
Excellent piece on the many components of the vaccine, the biowarfare industry and human health. I trust we live in a time when the world population has the fortitude to face what has actually happened and remedy the situation with a swift and steady hand.
The contracts between US government/DOD/BARDA and Moderna do make sense, viewed through the lens of the biodefense countermeasures R&D legal frameworks they set up.
In April 2003, in a Congressional hearing, Rep. Henry Waxman was asking Fauci, McClellan and others about the proposed Project Bioshield Act, which Congress passed about a year later.
Waxman expressed some concern about the “blank check” funding and lack of Congressional or judicial oversight, even for contracts and budgets.
Proponents of the bill specifically framed the problem as pharmaceutical corporations’ reluctance to engage in research and development on things like new antibiotics and antivirals, due to the poor prospects for return on investment. For example, antibiotic resistant strains are a big problem, but for a small number of patients, relatively speaking. So there’s no money for the companies in trying to find solutions.
The fix was for Congress to provide massive, no-strings funding. Waxman stated: “What justifies government intervention to support countermeasures is that the market fails to encourage their development on its own. This rationale also applies to the development of treatments for potential public health emergencies.”
This is the same rationale used to insert similar language regarding EUA declarations by HHS.
One of the factors to be considered by HHS secretary in making determinations about EUA products (qualified security countermeasures) and use of Special Reserve Fund/Strategic National Stockpile appropriations to procure them is "whether there is a lack of a significant commercial market for the product at the time of procurement, other than as a security countermeasure." See 42 USC 247d-6b (c)(5)(B)(iii).
I don’t think those are the true reasons for the massive government funding of Moderna, Pfizer and so forth. I think it’s actually a domestic bioterrorism program with the original intent, and current effect, of injuring and killing a lot of people, for reasons related to the transition from human workers being a net productive government asset, to a net expensive government liability sometime around 1980, and also the shift from human to AI/robotics, etc.
But that is the rationale they used to get the programs through Congress and signed by presidents and ignored by courts — at least so far — without raising eyebrows.
They framed the problem as natural and weaponized biological threats, and massive government investment in private, financial-risk-free R&D as the solution.
I was trying to understand the innate immune system more clearly yesterday. It seems the innate immune system is in the nasal passages, but not only there. Innate immune system cells have toll like receptors (as do other cells).
Are toll like receptors one of the main ways that our innate immune system in the nasal passages recognize foreign material? Would the jab in the arm negatively effect the innate immune system in the nasal passages via the TLRs?
"« Twist Bioscience is a leading and rapidly growing synthetic biology company that has developed a disruptive DNA synthesis platform to industrialize the engineering of biology. The core of the platform is a proprietary technology that pioneers a new method of manufacturing synthetic DNA by “writing” DNA on a silicon chip. Twist is leveraging its unique technology to manufacture a broad range of synthetic DNA-based products, including synthetic genes, tools for next-generation sequencing (NGS) preparation, and antibody libraries for drug discovery and development. Twist is also pursuing longer-term opportunities in digital data storage in DNA and biologics drug discovery. Twist makes products for use across many industries including healthcare, industrial chemicals, agriculture and academic research. »
« With their insight and intelligence, the members of Mérieux Equity Partners provide more than critical financing to high-tech companies. They guide us in our strategic positioning and share their development and commercialization experience to ensure our success. They anticipate industry changes and help companies achieve their goals. »
I am convinced that there are backdoor technology transfers between Mérieux and BGI.
There is such a complex network that it is almost impossible to follow all the influences. However, I can often see the hand of Mérieux. He is the one who said : "If you want to work in China, you have to become chinese". Indeed, the power has shifted to China.
Jun 17, 2022·edited Jun 17, 2022Liked by Spartacus
Technical point about the 2018 paper "...Safety Evaluation of Lipid Nanoparticle...". This paper evaluated a previous generation of cationic lipid "MC3" (aka "D-Lin-MC3-DMA") while Moderna now uses "SM-102". "SM-102" more closely resembles the one used by Pfizer ("ALC-0315"). The inflammatory properties of the Pfizer LNPs are here: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.103479
We have the likes of Theranos too, valued in the billions for fraudulent products and zero actual tech.
Moderna were developing the twofer: the bioweapon Covid and the more dangerous "vax".
Pseudouridine lasts far longer than 2mins after it interacts with the ribosome, and Moderna et al. always knew that. They are inducing endogenous spike printing indefinitely, even if at waning efficacy, thus the boosters are the perfect ploy to restart the more robust spike production and compound the cytotoxic issues. This is a bio horror show.
Long read but all the questions and points are well covered. I hope I am still alive when the truth is revealed not only in a court of law, but in the eyes of the general public. Their furor over the decades of lies will be far harsher than any legally imposed sentence.
Not commonly known—Moderna had a coronavirus vaccine trial that was initiated before January 11, 2020. The trial was conducted under the name of a sister company in California. The trial was disastrous and had to be terminated before the first plane load of Americans returning from Wuhan landed at March ARB. Too many trial participants were ending up in local hospitals. The CEO of the so-called sister company dumped his stock in the company around February-March of 2020, jumped the sinking ship, and turns up later working for Moderna. When Moderna got an EUA in September of 2020 there were those of us in the healthcare community that were quite shocked. We remembered the trial and wondered if Moderna was able to get an EUA on the same vaccine that was making everyone sick. All reference to this trial seems to be scrubbed. I can no longer find copies of the original articles from local newspapers. I’ve heard through the Pharma grapevine that were at least two other trials of a coronavirus vaccine taking place about that time, one in the United States and another in Germany.
Great piece. I'm not an evil genius or anything (although if I were, I'd probably not admit it would I?🤔😉), but if I was worried about the future and wanting to test the "in progress" effects of a controlled, systematic destruction of health experiment, that involved multiple populations and genotypes, from cradle to grave......Then yeah. I'd probably bank roll a startup out the gate as both the vehicle and the (should it be required) patsy.😉
Especially, if it was also allowing me to test a new weapon, lay groundwork for future opportunities and take out most of my enemies or maximise confusion through collateral damage....then yep. If I was DARPA and worried about future employment...I mean an evil genius!😐😐
I concur absolutely. No, things definately do not add up.
Fun blast from the past as historic context to lab leaks, oversight failure & pandemic profiteering..
Bird Flu: A Corporate Bonanza for the Biotech Industry ~ Tamiflu, Vistide and the Pentagon Agenda
by F. William Engdahl ~ November 6, 2005
https://web.archive.org/web/20051204091119/http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=ENG20051106&articleId=1190
The Sunshine Project -
Originally published on 11 January 2007, Biosafety Bites #21 describes an incident involving a genetically engineered cross of H5N1 ("bird flu") and H3N2 influenza that occurred in a BSL-3 lab at the University of Texas at Austin (UT) on 12 April 2006. It is based upon UT records, specifically, UT's incident report of 13 April 2006, biosafety committee minutes, e-mails, and letters acquired under the Texas Public Information Act.
The Bird Flu Lab Accident that Officially Didn't Happen, or How the University of Texas at Austin Could Have Caused the Next Influenza Pandemic, but Everybody Lived to Cover It Up
Don't ask the National Institutes of Health (NIH) about the genetically engineered influenza pandemic that might have started in Austin, Texas in April 2006. That's because until NIH reads this Biosafety Bites, they almost certainly haven't heard anything about it. And that shows yet again that the US biotechnology and laboratory safety oversight system is a dangerous failure.
NIH's Office of Biotechnology Activities (OBA) doesn't enforce biosafety rules, so the University of Texas (UT) didn't report the unsettling Bird Flu accident. UT must have reasoned: Why draw attention to a lab accident when there's no cost for burying such incidents? It surely wouldn't be the first time such an event has been swept under the rug.
https://web.archive.org/web/20070504154021/http://www.sunshine-project.org/ibc/bb21.html
One of the better timelines I’ve read. There is so much wheeling and dealing and inadequacy and heaven only knows what all it just makes my head swim. Anyway, thank you.
yeah well, how come moderna got so much money without having no product, and getting approved by DJT under EAU ... just lucky i guess ...
on other news ... here is something from the plague in europe ... something never change ...
https://samim.io/p/2021-12-23-this-week-we-time-travel-to-1530-and-geneva/
Excellent piece on the many components of the vaccine, the biowarfare industry and human health. I trust we live in a time when the world population has the fortitude to face what has actually happened and remedy the situation with a swift and steady hand.
The contracts between US government/DOD/BARDA and Moderna do make sense, viewed through the lens of the biodefense countermeasures R&D legal frameworks they set up.
In April 2003, in a Congressional hearing, Rep. Henry Waxman was asking Fauci, McClellan and others about the proposed Project Bioshield Act, which Congress passed about a year later.
Waxman expressed some concern about the “blank check” funding and lack of Congressional or judicial oversight, even for contracts and budgets.
Proponents of the bill specifically framed the problem as pharmaceutical corporations’ reluctance to engage in research and development on things like new antibiotics and antivirals, due to the poor prospects for return on investment. For example, antibiotic resistant strains are a big problem, but for a small number of patients, relatively speaking. So there’s no money for the companies in trying to find solutions.
The fix was for Congress to provide massive, no-strings funding. Waxman stated: “What justifies government intervention to support countermeasures is that the market fails to encourage their development on its own. This rationale also applies to the development of treatments for potential public health emergencies.”
https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/april-4-2003-rep-henry-waxman-questioning
This is the same rationale used to insert similar language regarding EUA declarations by HHS.
One of the factors to be considered by HHS secretary in making determinations about EUA products (qualified security countermeasures) and use of Special Reserve Fund/Strategic National Stockpile appropriations to procure them is "whether there is a lack of a significant commercial market for the product at the time of procurement, other than as a security countermeasure." See 42 USC 247d-6b (c)(5)(B)(iii).
I don’t think those are the true reasons for the massive government funding of Moderna, Pfizer and so forth. I think it’s actually a domestic bioterrorism program with the original intent, and current effect, of injuring and killing a lot of people, for reasons related to the transition from human workers being a net productive government asset, to a net expensive government liability sometime around 1980, and also the shift from human to AI/robotics, etc.
But that is the rationale they used to get the programs through Congress and signed by presidents and ignored by courts — at least so far — without raising eyebrows.
They framed the problem as natural and weaponized biological threats, and massive government investment in private, financial-risk-free R&D as the solution.
Thanks for this great article. 👍🏽💕
I was trying to understand the innate immune system more clearly yesterday. It seems the innate immune system is in the nasal passages, but not only there. Innate immune system cells have toll like receptors (as do other cells).
Are toll like receptors one of the main ways that our innate immune system in the nasal passages recognize foreign material? Would the jab in the arm negatively effect the innate immune system in the nasal passages via the TLRs?
Excellent well-researched article as usual. Will be linking as usual @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/
oh hi, nov2019, dec2019 documents here RE Ukraine, so it wasn't just Wuhan. RICO.
https://expose-news.com/2022/05/18/us-dod-covid-research-contract-nov-2019/
This is an answer to your previous post too:
You should be interested in TwistBioscience.
"« Twist Bioscience is a leading and rapidly growing synthetic biology company that has developed a disruptive DNA synthesis platform to industrialize the engineering of biology. The core of the platform is a proprietary technology that pioneers a new method of manufacturing synthetic DNA by “writing” DNA on a silicon chip. Twist is leveraging its unique technology to manufacture a broad range of synthetic DNA-based products, including synthetic genes, tools for next-generation sequencing (NGS) preparation, and antibody libraries for drug discovery and development. Twist is also pursuing longer-term opportunities in digital data storage in DNA and biologics drug discovery. Twist makes products for use across many industries including healthcare, industrial chemicals, agriculture and academic research. »
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20191030005324/en/
Emily Leproust, CEO, studied in Lyon and is closed to Merieux.
https://www.merieux-partners.com/fr/case-study-twist-bioscience
« With their insight and intelligence, the members of Mérieux Equity Partners provide more than critical financing to high-tech companies. They guide us in our strategic positioning and share their development and commercialization experience to ensure our success. They anticipate industry changes and help companies achieve their goals. »
https://www.merieux-partners.com/fr/node/313
She has a web page at the WEF: https://www.weforum.org/people/emily-leproust
Twist Bioscience works with BGI (Beijing Genomics Institute).
https://investors.twistbioscience.com/news-releases/news-release-details/twist-bioscience-provide-target-enrichment-products-mgi-europe
BGI has flooded western countries with machines for the covid tests. A lot of informations and useful links here (in French):
https://www.ege.fr/sites/ege.fr/files/media_files/PredationdonneessantelecasBGI.pdf
I am convinced that there are backdoor technology transfers between Mérieux and BGI.
There is such a complex network that it is almost impossible to follow all the influences. However, I can often see the hand of Mérieux. He is the one who said : "If you want to work in China, you have to become chinese". Indeed, the power has shifted to China.
Spartacus, this song reminds me of your stack
Sean Rowe - "To Leave Something Behind"
Technical point about the 2018 paper "...Safety Evaluation of Lipid Nanoparticle...". This paper evaluated a previous generation of cationic lipid "MC3" (aka "D-Lin-MC3-DMA") while Moderna now uses "SM-102". "SM-102" more closely resembles the one used by Pfizer ("ALC-0315"). The inflammatory properties of the Pfizer LNPs are here: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2021.103479