What are your thoughts on this?

I'm finding the people who bill themselves as the most empathetic are the ones who paradoxically are becoming the most tyrannical and calling for more and more controls in society - big government and big tech. The collective good has been weaponised that it now threatens to devour the individual and leave nothing in his/her place.
People that are content as part of the 'in-the-know-crowd', take the easy way and go with the flow, "life is my oyster and I am here to crack it" mentality. It was relatively easy to live within the system without expending much thought or effort. "... life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". It's ingrained in our cultural DNA! Lol. Consumerism, be a 'consumer' and eventually get consumed by the 'system'.

People get so caught up in the drama of their lives, especially now. where's the curiosity about things? Castenada's Don Juan talks about how things are really just "folly", in some aspect, which seems to certainly apply coincidently to the current antics of our global leaders.

A warrior has no honor, no dignity, no family, no name, no country; he has only life to be lived, and under these circumstances, his only tie to his fellow men is his controlled folly. In order to become a man of knowledge one must be a warrior. One must strive without giving up, without a complaint, without flinching, until one sees, only to realize then that nothing matters. You’re too concerned with liking people or with being liked yourself. A man of knowledge likes, that’s all. He likes whatever or whoever he wants, but he uses his controlled folly to be unconcerned about it.

Thus a man of knowledge endeavours, and sweats, and puffs, and if one looks at him he is just like any ordinary man, except that the folly of his life is under control. Nothing being more important than anything else, a man of knowledge chooses any act, and acts it out as if it matters to him. His controlled folly makes him say that what he does matters and makes him act as if it did, and yet he knows that it doesn’t; so when he fulfills his acts, he retreats in peace, and whether his acts were good or bad, or worked or didn’t, is in no way part of his concern. A warrior may choose to remain totally impassive and never act, and behave as if being impassive really mattered to him; he would be rightfully true at that too, because that would also be his controlled folly. A warrior takes responsibility for his acts, for the most trivial of his acts. An average man acts out his thoughts, and never takes responsibility for what he does.

Normalcy bias sort of interweaves with everything else as the viewing audience drifts into Lala land... with junk food. The world is not an amusement park it seems.
 

This is chilling. I think this is being translated into fact without the majority of the people of the world knowing anything about it. Would they do anything if they did know...?

Bill Gates Global Takeover Is Official​

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked
  • December 26, 2022

Story at-a-glance​

  • The World Health Organization has become extraordinarily conflicted, primarily through its funding, and by serving corporate masters, it fails miserably at promoting global health
  • The WHO will form the foundation for a one world government, under the auspice of coordinating and ensuring global biosecurity. This becomes evident when you review the proposed amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) and the WHO Pandemic Treaty
  • The proposed IHR amendments will erase the concepts of human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms from the equation. The first principle in Article 3 of the 2005 IHR states that health regulations shall be implemented “with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons.” The amendment strikes that sentence
  • Instead, international health regulations will be based on “principles of equity, inclusivity and coherence” only. This means they can force you to undergo whatever medical intervention they deem to be in the best interest of the collective
  • The IHR amendments grant dictatorial powers to the WHO director-general and unelected regional directors. The WHO’s “recommendations” will be legally binding by all member states, and will supersede all national and state laws, including the U.S. Constitution

What is the World Health Organization, and what is it for, really? In the Children's Health Defense (CHD) video above, Dr. Meryl Nass interviews investigative journalist James Corbett of The Corbett Report about the weaponization of the WHO. Nass also published a Substack with additional background information for this episode.

The WHO is actually a specialized agency within the United Nations. It was initially established in 1948 to "further international cooperation for improved public health conditions," but we can now see that the long-term goal of the WHO is to serve as a foundation or hub for a one world government under the auspice of coordinating and ensuring global biosecurity.

This becomes self-evident when you review the proposed amendments1 to the existing International Health Regulations (IHR) and the new pandemic treaty, which Nass and Corbett review in the featured video.

I also provided details about the treaty in "What You Need to Know About the WHO Pandemic Treaty." Below, I will primarily focus on the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR).

Health Regulation Amendments Will Legalize Tyranny​

In a December 16, 2022, Substack article,2 James Roguski also reviewed how a temporary crisis (the COVID-19 pandemic) — which, by the way, is long since over — is being used by the WHO to seize permanent power.

The WHO's 'recommendations' are legally binding by all member states, and supersede all national and state laws, including the U.S. Constitution.

Here's a quick overview of some of the most dangerous and egregious IHR amendments they intend to implement, and what it will mean for you and I. For additional details, see the three references listed here:3,4,5

Eliminating the concepts of respect for human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms — The first principle in Article 3 of the original IHR states that health regulations shall be implemented "with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons."

The proposed amendment to this Article will strike "with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons." Now, health regulations will be based on "principles of equity, inclusivity and coherence" only.

What does that mean? Think "You must wear a mask/social distance/isolate/get jabbed to protect others," even if you're not sick, or for whatever reason don't want to do any of those things.

Autonomy over your body will be eliminated. You'll have no right to make personal health decisions. Even if you suspect you might die from the intervention, you have to comply because it's all about what's "best" for the collective.

Individuals won't matter. Human dignity will not be taken into consideration. Human rights will not be taken into consideration, and neither will the concept that human beings have fundamental freedoms that cannot be infringed.

Another amendment is that public health measures will no longer be aimed at achieving "the appropriate level of health protection." Instead, the new objective will be to attain the "highest achievable level of health protection" without any consideration of proportionality. It's easy to see how this amendment will be used as justification for the removal of individual rights and freedoms.
Dictatorial powers will be given to the director-general of the WHO — The director-general will have sole power to declare the beginning and end of a public health emergency of international concern (PHEI), and the sole power to dictate responses (including travel restrictions, mask mandates, lockdowns, business closures and vaccine requirements), and the allocation of resources to that PHEI, including funding and what drugs are to be manufactured and used.

These dictates will override and overrule any and all national laws within member states, including the U.S. Constitution.
The obligations under the amended IHR are legally binding, and any member nation that refuses the director-general's recommendations can be punished through a variety of mechanisms, including economic sanctions and embargoes. Note that the term "recommendation" is defined as "legally binding," which means they're actually dictates, not suggestions.
Dictatorial powers will be given to unelected regional directors of the WHO — Similarly, appointed (not elected) regional directors will have the power to determine what constitutes a public health emergency of regional concern (PHERC), and their decisions will also overrule all other laws and Constitutional rights.
Eliminating privacy rights — One of the amendments (page 25) authorizes the disclosure of private and personal data, including genomic data, "where essential for the purposes of assessing and managing a public health risk," i.e., contact tracing and related efforts.
Expanding censorship — The WHO will "strengthen capacities to … counter misinformation and disinformation" at the global level. In other words, censorship of information will be expanded. The WHO will dictate what "truth" is, and since its decisions are legally binding, countries must enforce compliance.
Mandating vaccine passports and digital IDs globally — The IHR amendments will also give the WHO the power to mandate the use of "health certificates,"6 i.e., vaccine passports. The vaccine passport, in turn, will operate as your digital identification, which will be tied to every aspect of your life, including your bank accounts and social credit score.

In short, it will usher in a surveillance and forced compliance system. The G20 also recently declared that digital vaccine passports standardized by the WHO will be part of international pandemic prevention and response moving forward.

The Trail of Corruption​

Ever since its founding in 1948, the WHO has been infiltrated by industry. From Big Tobacco to the nuclear industry and pharmaceuticals, industry has historically dictated the WHO's global agenda and continues to do so in the present day, putting profits and power ahead of public health.7

In April 2020, then-President Donald Trump suspended U.S. funding to the WHO,8 but then directed the U.S. funding for WHO to GAVI, which is a Gates controlled charity that likely just sent the funds to WHO. President Joe Biden restored U.S. funding once he took office.9
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation even before Trump pulled funding was still the WHO's No.1 funder, as Gates contributes via multiple avenues, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the vaccine alliance GAVI, the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts (SAGE), UNICEF and Rotary International.

Gates contributes such a large portion — currently about $1 billion of the WHO's $4.84 billion biennial budget10 — that Politico in 2017 wrote a highly-critical article11 about his undue financial influence over the WHO's operations, which Politico said was causing the agency to spend:

"… a disproportionate amount of its resources on projects with the measurable outcomes Gates prefers … Some health advocates fear that because the Gates Foundation's money comes from investments in big business, it could serve as a Trojan horse for corporate interests to undermine WHO's role in setting standards and shaping health policies."
Indeed, as noted by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in his book "Vax-Unvax,"12 "The sheer magnitude of his foundation's financial contributions has made Bill Gates an unofficial — albeit unelected — leader of the WHO." And, in that role, Gates is able to ensure that the decisions the WHO makes end up profiting his own interests and those of his Big Pharma partners.

A 'One World' Health Plan​

In October 2022, the WHO announced a new initiative called One Health Joint Plan of Action. The plan was launched by the Quadripartite, which is made up of:
  1. The WHO
  2. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
  3. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)
  4. The World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH)
Beyond the amendments to the IHR, this initiative will also expand the WHO's powers. The One Health Joint Plan of Action combines multiple globalist organizations and synchronizes their plans, while at the same time combining their resources and power to create a centralized global superpower.

Decentralized health care and pandemic planning make sense, as both medicine and government work best when individualized and locally oriented. As it stands, however, the opposite global agenda is being implemented.

While the Pandemic Treaty and the IHR amendments expand and centralize power over human health with the WHO, the One Health Joint Plan expands the WHO's power to also address "critical health threats" to animals, plants and the environment.

When you add that together with the planned elimination of human rights, you can see how the One Health Joint Plan can be used to enforce climate lockdowns, for example, or travel restrictions to protect wildlife or the environment. To learn more about this plan, see my previous article, "WHO Assembles Superpowers With 'One Health Plan.'"

Jeremy Farrar Selected To Be WHO's Chief Scientist​

December 13, 2022, the WHO announced that Sir Jeremy Farrar, head of the Wellcome Trust, has been chosen as its new chief scientist.13 The announcement came mere days after the publication of Dr. Anthony Fauci's deposition transcript,14 which showed he and Farrar colluded to suppress discussion about SARS-CoV-2 origin.

In an op-ed for I News, columnist Ian Birrell warns that with Farrar as chief scientist for the WHO, our chances of ever getting to the truth about SARS-CoV-2's origin becomes vanishingly small:15

"From the start, the world was failed by the World Health Organization. This UN body — run by a former minister in a repressive Ethiopian regime elected with Beijing's help — praised China for 'protecting the people of the world' despite the dictatorship silencing whistleblowers, declining to share data and delaying to warn about human transmission …
It kowtowed to China with its ludicrous probe of the origins … Now the body has appointed Sir Jeremy Farrar … as next chief scientist. This is a scandalous decision given his central role in trying to seemingly stifle suggestions that SARS-CoV-2 … might not be a natural disease.
Science relies on openness. Yet the more that has emerged in emails, freedom of information requests, leaks and books exposing Farrar's actions, the less confidence we can have in him holding a world-leading scientific role for all his undoubted expertise and political skills …
There are two issues in the origins debate … The first is the core question of the cause … The second issue smacks of something darker: a bid to cover up any possibility that controversial 'gain of function' research to boost infectivity — carried out in Wuhan, aided by Western funding — might lie behind the pandemic …
Gradually, drip by drip, it emerged that Farrar was helping lead a group of experts who colluded to crush suggestions the virus might be linked to research.
Less than a fortnight after China confirmed human transmission, the Wellcome chief hosted a teleconference at the behest of the American presidential adviser Anthony Fauci. It included … several participants who feared COVID might be tied to research.
Suddenly their views shifted from fearing the virus might be manufactured to dismissing such possibilities, despite lack of fresh data or firm evidence … [The] WHO is further undermining its credibility by handing such an influential post to a man embroiled in allegations of tarnishing the integrity of science on such an important quest."

The Evil Genius of Pandemic Planning​

At the same time the WHO is working on its power grab, Gates and other Great Reset allies are planning another pandemic to ensure that transition of power takes place. As you may recall, Event 201 was a pandemic table top exercise that "predicted" exactly what would happen during the real-world COVID pandemic that began three months later.

October 23, 2022, Gates, Johns Hopkins and the WHO cohosted yet another exercise, this one dubbed "Catastrophic Contagion,"16,17 which involved a novel pathogen called "severe epidemic enterovirus respiratory syndrome 2025" (SEERS-25) that primarily kills children.

With that, we can already begin to predict what this next pandemic will revolve around. The COVID narrative was that we must obey irrational health rules so as not to kill grandma. The next round will likely involve getting children vaccinated with whatever new gene-based concoction they come up with.

Seeing how the COVID jab is now on the U.S. childhood vaccination schedule, we can also assume that the COVID jab will be increasingly pushed at the same time, in the name of "protecting our children."

Of course, by the time the next pandemic is declared, the IHR will have been amended to eliminate human rights, freedoms and privacy from consideration, and the WHO Pandemic Treaty will have been signed, both of which grant the WHO absolute power to control pandemic declarations and responses worldwide.

The WHO can then, through its pandemic powers, implement the next phases of The Great Reset and Fourth Industrial Revolution, which are rebranded terms for technocracy and the old "New World Order," melded with the transhumanist (previously known as eugenicist) movement.

The WHO Is Tasked With Ushering in The Great Reset​

As explained in "What You Need to Know About 'The Great Reset,'" technocracy is an economic system of resource allocation that revolves around technology — in particular artificial intelligence, digital surveillance and Big Data collection — and the digitization of industry and government.

This in turn allows for the automation of social engineering and social rule, thereby doing away with the need for democratically elected leadership. While the real plan is to usher in a tech-driven dystopia free of democratic controls, they speak of this plan as a way to bring us back into harmony with nature and saving the planet (i.e., the Green agenda and Agenda 2030).

In "We Will Be Sacrificed for Global Standardization of Systems," I review the self-proclaimed "ruling elite's" plan to control everything on earth, from land, water and minerals to plants, animals, food, energy, information and human beings. This plan is known as the Agenda for the 21st Century, or simply Agenda 21.

This roadmap for global totalitarianism was agreed to by 179 nations, including the U.S., at the 1992 Sustainable Development conference, and we've seen various facets of this agenda being implemented throughout the last three years, under the cover of biosecurity and the global COVID-19 pandemic.

Agenda 21 is based on the ideology of "communitarianism," which argues that "an individual's rights should be balanced against rights of the community." Community, however, in the mind of the globalists, is made up of NGOs, corporations and government, which are to dictate what happens around the world. The people are not really part of the equation.

So, the communitarianist philosophy of Agenda 21 and the IHR amendment that removes human rights and freedoms come together like two pieces of a puzzle. The WHO's biosecurity powers can then be used to pave the way for the more freedom-robbing aspects of Agenda 21.
 
BY the way, is there a real reason why the Gauls were afraid about the sky falling on their heads or is it just a comics thing?
I found this explanation, seems to be a very old pattern:


The Gauls in Asterix fear only one thing: that the sky will fall on their heads. But where does this idea come from?

By Toutatis! In Asterix's village, the Gauls are not afraid of anything, especially not the Romans, who have subjugated all of Gaul. All of it? No, because a small village is still resisting the invaders. The only thing Asterix and his companions fear is that the sky will fall on their heads.

But where does this idea come from? One would expect to find it in the Commentaries on the Gallic War, written by Julius Caesar himself. Well no, it's not: let's go and have a look at Arrien of Nicomedia, a contemporary historian of Plutarch and Tacitus (1st / 2nd century AD).

In his Anabasis of Alexander, Arrien tells the exploits of Alexander the Great, from the moment he acceded to the throne of Macedonia in 336 BC until his death in 323. Before launching the extraordinary military expedition which will lead it to the doors of India, Alexander must ensure its backs, in particular on the side of the turbulent people who occupy the Balkans. Thus in 335, it enters in contact with Triballes (a people of the basin of the Danube) and with Celts who are in Italy, at the mouth of the Po. Alexander will not cross the Adriatic, but it receives all the same Celtic ambassadors, in other words Gauls.

"It is then that ambassadors came to find Alexander: they came from various independent people who live close to Istros [Danube], sent in particular by Syrmos, king of Triballes. And there came delegates of the Celts who were established on the Gulf of Ionia [Adriatic Sea].

The Celts have a great size, and also a high opinion of themselves; however they all declared that they were there because they sought the friendship of Alexander. The latter gave them all pledges of confidence, and he received some from them.

Alexander also asked the Celts what they feared most in the human world. He expected that his reputation would have reached the Celts and beyond, and that they would say that it was he whom they feared most.

The answer of the Celts thwarted his expectation: because they were established far from Alexander and the country which they lived was of an access difficult. As they noted that Alexander launched his attack in another direction, they declared that they feared that the sky fell on their head. As for Alexander, they admired him and did not come to him as an ambassador either out of fear or interest.

Alexander declared that they were friends and made them his allies before letting them go home; he added nevertheless that the Celts were boasts."

[Arrien Anabasis 1.4.6-8]

The Gauls who are afraid that the sky will fall on their heads do not live in Armorica, but in Italy. As for the potential enemy they despise, it is not Julius Caesar, but Alexander the Great.

In fact, this story is just a version of a narrative motif that has been used over and over again: a very proud king comes into contact with a person or group of humble condition; he expects to be flattered; on the contrary, the response underlines the vanity of his supposed power. This is what happened to King Croesus when he was visited by the Athenian Solon; and Alexander himself received a similar response from the philosopher Diogenes, who preferred to sunbathe in the sun rather than rise to honor the king.

Arrien's account had been circulating for quite some time: the geographer Strabo (1st century BC) told more or less the same story, while specifying that it went back to Ptolemy, one of Alexander's companions. This does not mean that the Celts were not brave warriors. During Alexander's lifetime, Aristotle already mentioned the legendary bravery of this people.

"Among the individuals whose character presents excesses, there is no name for the one who is not afraid (...). But he might be called 'mad' or 'insensible to suffering' if he feared nothing, or if he feared 'neither earthquake nor waves' as we say about the Celts."

[Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics 3 (1115b.24-29)

Scholars of Celtic civilization will no doubt add that the bravery of this people is echoed as far back as ancient Ireland: in the oaths sworn by the ancient inhabitants of this remote island, they swore to maintain a friendship, "unless the sky collapsed, the earth was shaken, and the sea moved". So there may be some truth in the statements made by Asterix and his companions.

To return to Arrien, we can see that Alexander seems a little offended by the answer given to him by these Gauls from Italy who are not even afraid of the king of Macedonia. That does not prevent him from noting another truth which our French friends could not deny: their ancestors the Gauls were boasts.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
 
New ad by the French government to promote the vaccine:

"New vaccine booster ad “A repeated gesture always ends up paying off” The new flagship phrase of their ad, one wonders what they mean by ending up paying"

C'est incroyable. I have to say this in French. What brainwashing to the population. Since when, a vaccine is not any more good with time? They made us believe that the Tetanus vaccine need to be taken every 2 years, or something like that.

Oh, I am so mad when I see things like this.
 
I found this explanation, seems to be a very old pattern:


Yeah but that do not explain the source of their believe. Damage control explanation which want us to believe they just found a good word in the "This was such fun guys" way. :-)

Alexander also asked the Celts what they feared most in the human world. He expected that his reputation would have reached the Celts and beyond, and that they would say that it was he whom they feared most.

The answer of the Celts belied his expectation: for they were established far from Alexander and the country they inhabited was of difficult access. As they saw that Alexander was launching his assault in another direction, they declared that they feared the sky would fall on their heads.

Thanks for your find Maat.
 

This is making the rounds on multiple platforms, perhaps it's been mentioned already but I'll post it just so nobody misses it. Another nail in the coffin of the "safe and effective" vaccines. This is just insane.


Booster-Caused IgG4 Immune Tolerance Explains Excess Mortality and "Chronic Covid"

Rintrah Radagast posted a very important article yesterday. It shows us a potential explanation of why excess mortality is related to COVID boosters, why the association of Covid vaccines with mortality strengthens as time goes on instead of declining, and why boosted people take the longest to clear Covid-19.

Check Rintrah’s article out. It is brilliant and very disturbing.



The trainwreck of all trainwrecks: Billions of people stuck with a broken immune response – Rintrah
Rintrah is discussing a very important scientific study that answers a question: what exactly are those antibodies that Covid-boosted people are developing?

This study answering that question is here:



https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798
Rintrah explains:

After mRNA vaccination the immune response against Spike is shifting to IgG4, which is how your body responds after repeat exposure to stuff it needs to tolerate, like bee venom, pollen or peanut proteins.

What is IgG4?

Our immune systems are complicated. We do need to fight dangerous replicating pathogens, such as viruses or bacteria. At the same time, we also face harmless inert substances, such as tree pollen, that sometimes cause inflammatory reactions called allergies.

To deal with these harmless substances, our immune system has a particular class of antibodies, called IgG4, that do the opposite of what we are used to hearing: they bind to allergens and tell our immune cells to ignore them rather than cause inflammation.

mRNA Shots Work Like Allergen Shots

I had many pollen allergies. Every spring was unpleasant. I decided to go to an allergist and take allergy shots, which amounted to repeatedly injecting allergens into me. As a result of these repeat antigen shots, my immune system developed non-inflammatory IgG4 antibodies, which mark pollen as a harmless substance to the rest of my immune system and prevent allergic inflammation and nasty symptoms.

There is something important, though: pollen does not replicate.

It is a good idea not to have inflammation in response to pollen. It is a bad idea, however, to train our immune system to ignore replicating pathogens such as Sars-Cov-2.

How would “immune tolerance,” induced by repeat antigen shots such as mRNA injections, look like when the person is infected with Sars-Cov-2?

It would look like a “mild” infection without a serious fever that would last much longer than necessary and cause organ damage. The sufferer may say, for the first week, that they are thankful for vaccines and boosters making their symptoms mild. Then they start wondering why the infection is not going away.

Such tolerance may explain why boosted people are the slowest to clear Covid-19:

Igor’s Newsletter
Study: Boosted People Slowest to Clear COVID-19
A new study just came out: It looked at how long “culturable virus” (that is, virus capable of infecting people) is present in Covid patients after the first positive test. The authors literally cultured swabs of patients, on various days past-diagnosis, and counted how many patients, by vaccination status, are still carrying live, replication-competent …
Read more
6 months ago · 433 likes · 451 comments · Igor Chudov

So: IgG4 antibodies have the opposite effect to all other types of antibodies and make our immune system ignore the particular antigen they are trained to detect.

You do not want to ignore a replicating virus — so the IgG4 antibody class would be inappropriate for viruses. Pollen, however, is a perfect case for IgG4 to prevent immune reaction and inflammation.

Switching to IgG4 binding against a viral agent is like opening your house doors wide for robbers and ignoring them as they ruffle through your drawers. The robbery will be “mild” - but the thieves will take away your stuff. And they will come back again.

Rintrah Explains Study Findings

Now that you know what IgG4 antibodies are, let’s follow Rintrah’s explanation of the study findings. The scientists followed several subjects who underwent repeated mRNA vaccinations and subsequent infections and tracked the composition of their antibodies.

You already know the story: After the second shot, IgG4 begins to show up. This gets worse with the breakthrough infections, then it gets worse again with the third shot. Now we have updated findings from breakthrough infections after the third shot. And this will shock you, but it gets worse again:


On average, the four who had a breakthrough infection after their booster are now at 42.45% IgG4. The cohort as a whole is at 19.27%, up from just 0.04%, so the ones who haven’t had a breakthrough infection yet will end up at a similar position: A response that is entirely IgG4 dominated.
IgG4 isn’t really meant for neutralization. Out of the IgG’s, IgG3 is the excellent virus neutralizer. What IgG3 does in the case of SARS2, is that they have their tails bind together. This means that out of all the four subclasses, IgG3 is showing 50-fold stronger neutralization than the other three subclasses against SARS2.
… Look at what happens to IgG3 after three shots:


There is some IgG3 left in some people after the second shot, but by the time they get the third shot, they’re all universally down to a flat zero.
So, Rintrah explains that the immunology study shows depletion of all-important, virus-fighting IgG3 antibodies and their replacement (class switch) with useless IgG4 antibodies. Those turn Covid infection to be needlessly “mild” but fail to clear the virus promptly.

We have fevers for a reason!

Again, if you have not read Rintrah’s article and have spare 30 minutes, take a look.

Other Discussions of IgG4 and Immune Tolerance

I mentioned immune tolerance last June, referring to a surprisingly lucid Internet prediction from Sep 2021 (archive link) that was coming true epidemiologically:

Igor’s Newsletter
Vaccine-Induced Tolerance to Spike Protein ...
In the last section of my post from yesterday, I asked, why doesn’t Paxlovid work for vaccinated people. Try to stop and think for a minute. Ask yourself a question: why, exactly, is Paxlovid not working in the vaccinated? The problem is not with Paxlovid, it is the same medication as given to the unvaccinated. The problem is with the immune systems of th…
Read more
6 months ago · 349 likes · 355 comments · Igor Chudov

The famous science substacker Brian Mowrey posted a great post last July. He introduces us to IgG4 and immune tolerance and gives us a great introduction:

Unglossed
Tolerance Cometh: IgG4 After Multiple-mRNA Doses
Spike-overload finally seems to be showing a concrete effect in the repeat-injected: B Cells in two separate cohorts were found to be self-switching to IgG4 class antibodies, associated with tolerance and anti-inflammatory response, after the 3rd dose…
Read more
5 months ago · 97 likes · 64 comments · Brian Mowrey

I will mention a few of my related posts in the links below.

What Does Immune Tolerance Do?

  • Immune tolerance prevents rapid clearance of the infection, making boosted people the slowest to clear Covid-19.
  • It prevents the formation of lasting neutralizing immunity, thus making affected people suffer from repeat reinfections. In other words, forget herd immunity.
The utter absence of herd immunity can be seen in this Santa Clara County, California chart of Sars-Cov-2 in wastewater:



Rintrah shows the same type of picture for his highly-vaccinated motherland Netherlands:



Immune Tolerance is a Biological Time Bomb

Could repeat Covid infections, caused by immune tolerance, lead to increased mortality? Absolutely! This Singapore study suggests that most excess deaths in Singapore happen within 90 days of a Covid infection. A lot of such deaths, unfortunately, are not recorded as Covid deaths. They could be recorded as “sudden deaths” from “unknown cause.”

The disease may seem mild if immune tolerance fails to elicit a strong reaction and stop viral replication. The virus, proliferating unopposed, damages the cardiovascular system more than in those who can mount a vigorous immune reaction. One such victim is Gwen Casten, a 17-year-old daughter of vaccine-loving congressman Sean Casten. Gwen died suddenly in her sleep in June of 2022 after suffering a “very mild” Covid infection.



It takes time for immune tolerance to develop after boosting. As the Immunology article says:

These three individuals experienced the infection with the largest time difference to the last vaccination, at 95, 201 or 257 days after the second vaccination, while in the other nine patients the infection took place between 25 and 78 days after the second mRNA shot. This supports the hypothesis that the switch to IgG4 is a consequence of ongoing GC maturation and that it takes several months until IgG4-switched memory B cells appear.
This “taking months to develop” is a biological time bomb placed into the immune systems of boosted people! It takes the germinal centers months after the third injection to switch to the useless IgG4.

Therefore, many months after the booster dose, a Covid infection is met with worthless, forgiving, and disease-ignoring IgG4 antibodies. The infection seems mild; the virus replicates unopposed due to the IgG4 switch; the cardiovascular system is damaged; the risk of sudden death multiplies!

A while ago, I asked: why does the strength of the statistical association between vaccines and excess deaths increase over time?



Immune tolerance developing MONTHS after booster shots perfectly explains the strange delayed effect seen in excess mortality - and why vaccination rates explain more and more excess deaths as time passes.

What have we done?

Perhaps we should not have conducted vaccine trials at Warp Speed?

What will happen to all of us if we cannot get herd immunity and many people develop dangerous immune tolerance?
 
Amazing Polly just come out with a new video where she makes a very interesting discovery -- that a relatively unknown person by the name of Christine Grady RN PhD, who happens to chair the Department of Bioethics and the NIH Clinical Center -- is also Anthony Fauci's wife. Talk about a 'conflict of interest'...
Elon Musk is providing such info for others to see.
Had seen at twitter people posting what was censored mostly last year.


Add: Follow the thread down
 
Maybe they knew this from the beginning, as it seemed to be common knowledge among scientiets - no successful vax for any type of coronavirus had ever been developed despite many attempts.

This is dated April 19, 2020:

And these, also from April 2020:

 
Eight days and still on YouTube. Dr. Scott Jensen suspects link between vax and heart trouble. He is cautious with his words, but clear.
"When a young person suffers a cardiac arrest, in the absence of any significant plumbing problems... this why there's been so much concern about young, fit, athletic people having abrupt deaths... When a person collapses with no preceding symptoms... something truly unable to be predicted is happening, and that is why I think we've seen people come out and say 'we've got to start talking about it.'"
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom