It's been a long time since we heard about the toxicity of different vaccine batches. Here's a clip on that. It would have been good to keep track of this over the years to see how people are doing who got the different batches.
Stories of Covid vaccination side effects or worse
- Thread starter Aeneas
- Start date
Huila
Padawan Learner
Addressing the Bluetooth Mac tag after Vaccination or PCR Testing.
An obscure team claim to have found a way to stop the MAC address emitting from people. They named their protocol/ solution Masterpiece. The team appear on crrow777radio podcast in Episode 643- Inner Spring-Cleaning Year-Round - Speak Easy or Talk Sick.
They might have a video released of their experiment or findings; for they speak of working with David Ickes' 'independent' production team. During their research they found a way to differentiate between a MAC address that is emitting from an appliance to one from a human being. The bluetooth from a human is low powered (suspected to be located in the brain -for power). It operates in similar fashion to the Apple Find application. The signal isn't constant- it beeps at regular intervals.
The host of the podcast asks what the signatures to the MAC codes are- where are they being sent to? For there is a way to determine the makers of these appliances. The Masterpiece team are cautious of revealing this information and agree to tell them off the record.
You can still use the BLE Scanner on cellphone devices to trace for Human Bluetooth emitting MAC addresses near by. Though the Masterpiece team did use other stronger devices and antennes for their research and experiments. They were able to map out bluetooth emitting individuals onto maps- to trace their movements in real time.
Some people that only did Swab Testing where found to emit MAC addresses too; so where some unvaccinated people (that did however have partners that got vaccinated- suggesting transmission of some kind).
An obscure team claim to have found a way to stop the MAC address emitting from people. They named their protocol/ solution Masterpiece. The team appear on crrow777radio podcast in Episode 643- Inner Spring-Cleaning Year-Round - Speak Easy or Talk Sick.
They might have a video released of their experiment or findings; for they speak of working with David Ickes' 'independent' production team. During their research they found a way to differentiate between a MAC address that is emitting from an appliance to one from a human being. The bluetooth from a human is low powered (suspected to be located in the brain -for power). It operates in similar fashion to the Apple Find application. The signal isn't constant- it beeps at regular intervals.
The host of the podcast asks what the signatures to the MAC codes are- where are they being sent to? For there is a way to determine the makers of these appliances. The Masterpiece team are cautious of revealing this information and agree to tell them off the record.
You can still use the BLE Scanner on cellphone devices to trace for Human Bluetooth emitting MAC addresses near by. Though the Masterpiece team did use other stronger devices and antennes for their research and experiments. They were able to map out bluetooth emitting individuals onto maps- to trace their movements in real time.
Some people that only did Swab Testing where found to emit MAC addresses too; so where some unvaccinated people (that did however have partners that got vaccinated- suggesting transmission of some kind).
Liliea
The Living Force
New investigation into contaminated vaccines Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna modRNA.
Kevin McKernan is co-author of the new peer-reviewed paper exposing DNA contamination in Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccine vials. McKernan was a significant contributor to the Human Genome Project (HGP), serving as Leader of Research and Development at the Whitehead Institute. In the HGP focused on "developing methods for nucleic acid purification, resulting in several patents. His efforts helped advance the project’s goal of sequencing the 3 billion base pairs of the human genome."In this context, former CNN journalist Sharyl Attkisson interviews him, discussing a troubling case study of a person who died after receiving four Pfizer mRNA injections. Kevin McKernan describes an impressive chain of events that led to the discovery of Pfizer vaccine sequences in a cancer biopsy:
For those who want to follow the interview:
Another co-author of this report and research, David J Speicher PhD DTM@DJSpeicher, publishes the report:
View the entire manuscript:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08916934.2025.2551517#d1e271
This is a very brief and perhaps superficial summary of the importance of this abstract, but even so:
+The methods used to purify synthetic DNA for replication can have dramatic differences in the amount and type of residual DNA in vaccines, as genetically modified DNA is packaged in a lipid nanoparticle (LNP) and injected directly into a living host - where it could cause insertion mutagenesis and activation of oncogenes or inhibition of tumor suppressor genes.
+Pfizer changed its manufacturing process (purification) to that used by Moderna (see details) and there is likely to have been a large increase in residual DNA in the final drug product.
+It follows that Pfizer's clinical trial contains background DNA, which is very different from the vaccines administered to the public.
+ Pfizer and Moderna use a vector capable of replicating in both bacteria and mammals through replication, enhancers, promoters, and SV40 polyA signals. There was an excess of these residual components in the DNA, and they were absent from the disclosures required in the EMA regulatory documents.
+ The data from the study samples covers Lots from December 17, 2020, to October 6, 2023.
+Fluorometer-based measurements (e.g. Qubit®) of the vaccines showed that the Moderna vials consistently had a much greater amount of total DNA than the Pfizer vials (Figure 3).
+The vials with the highest DNA concentration were from two lots of Pfizer monovalent purple top vials with a PBS formulation and require dilution before administration.(...)The reason for this difference is not known, but the use of PBS buffer resulted in visible particles in the final drug product which may be associated with toxicities including microemboli and inflammatory reactions [Citation30].
+Pfizer vials show an inconsistent manufacturing process related to impurities in the process and in the product.
+The objective of this research was to verify the presence and amount of residual plasmid DNA and the SV40 promoter-enhancer in Pfizer and Moderna's COVID-19 mRNA vaccine and to compare the results with adverse events (AEs) reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
+
The Truth continues to surface more and more:
highly likely the Covid vaccines have been a significant factor in the cancer of members of the Royal family
highly likely the Covid vaccines have been a significant factor in the cancer of members of the Royal family
Brewer
Jedi Council Member
Had a meeting with the super the other day regarding my return to work almost two years ago. Had a conversation about the whole vax debacle and he largely agreed. Got on the subject of flu shots, he and at least 3 other colleagues got shingles after their flu shots. He also had the shingles shot too. That's quite the cluster, talking to my colleague at drill last night, he's asking the doctor for an exemption, fingers crossed!
Ruth
The Living Force
Just more bad news I'm afraid, concerning genomic integration, which caused very rare stage IV cancer in under a year. (video approx 30 minutes - interesting opening animations).
www.thefocalpoints.com
mRNA "Vaccine" Genomic Integration: Visualized in Hyper-Realistic Detail
Sentinel case of a young stage IV bladder cancer patient reveals a vaccine-derived Spike gene sequence embedded in chromosome 19 with a perfect 20/20 bp match.
www.thefocalpoints.com
Didier Raoult gave an interview about Covid injections and cancer. The interview reflect somewhat what is said in previous posts. If you're interested by the details, read the full transcription bellow.
Here is the key points (produced by AI and corrected by BI (Biological Intelligence: myself
)).
Source
Here is the key points (produced by AI and corrected by BI (Biological Intelligence: myself
)).- Questionable Vaccine Origins: Raoult raises concerns about the initial origins of the vaccines, manufactured first with chemical DNA with long-term production difficulties. He suggests changes to the manufacturing process due to change of production scale, introduced problems that weren’t detected during initial testing. He give details about the process.
- Genetic Modification & Risk: He emphasizes that the vaccines involve genetic modification, potentially dangerous for cells and capable of leading to cancer. He mentions that spike protein was effectively found in cancerous cells.
- Increased Cancer Cases Post-Vaccination: Significant increase in cancer cases, specifically pancreatic cancer (over 150% increase), following vaccination, especially booster shots. A Korean study show a 37% cancer rate among the vaccinated.
- Pharmaceutical Funding & Bias: Large pharmaceutical companies own or finance all medical publication journals so all is biased. Kennedy warn to no longer publish in Lancet, Jama, New England, Nature Springer... They cheat.
- Data Analysis Difficulties: Denmark have good data, they must release the data. In France it's more difficult to analyze the real impact of vaccines on health, due to the large number of false vaccinated people.
- Mortality trends in France: An analysis of mortality shows a steady increase, attributed to the ageing of the population, but without a return to previous levels, which raises questions about the underlying causes.
- Cocaine consumption by decision-maker: Can some decisions made by decision-makers about the vaccine, be influenced by cocaine use? He explain that "Cocaine makes you feel stupid as you go along, excites you a little at first, makes you lose your memory and makes you impulsive". As it is said this substance is circulating in the world of decision-makers, it's concerning.
Interviewer: On souhaiterait vous entendre sur certaines études inquiétantes d'ailleurs, qui sont parues dernièrement, italiennes d'abord, sud-coréennes ensuite, concernant le lien que l'on peut faire entre les injections Covid-19 et les cancers et le risque accru de cancers suite à ces injections, suite au rappel.[/ISPOILER]
D. Raoult: Comment se fait ce vaccin d'ARN ? En réalité, pour pouvoir le produire, au début, ce qui a été testé, d'ailleurs, c'est de l'ARN qui a été fait de manière chimique. Et puis, dans un deuxième temps, ce n'est pas possible de produire, et donc, c'est souvent le problème. D'ailleurs, dans les grandes aventures comme ça de millions ou de milliards de doses, on change d'échelle. Et quand on change d'échelle, on change de méthode. Et quand on a testé une méthode, on n'a pas testé la dernière méthode, celle qui a permis de délivrer des milliards de doses. Et celle qui a permis de délivrer des milliards de doses, c'est quelque chose qui a été fait sur des bactéries recombinantes, c'est-à-dire des bactéries dans lesquelles on a fait rentrer le plasmide. Sur ce plasmide, c'est-à-dire un morceau d'ADN qui va rentrer et qui va être reproduit par la bactérie, dans lequel on met une séquence de la spike que maintenant tout le monde connaît, un peu modifiée, mais qui garde son immunogénicité, avec un facteur d'initiation qui vient du singe. Et on fait cracher ça à la bactérie. Ensuite, on prend le jus de la bactérie. Théoriquement, on détruit tout l'ADN. Théoriquement. Dont d'autres, en réalité, il y a maintenant une dizaine d'études, impubliables. Moi, je vous assure, j'ai mis ça heureusement sur Al, mais c'est impubliable. Il n'y a pas un journal qui veut publier ça. En réalité, il y a de l'ADN qui reste. Donc, vous n'avez pas réussi à tout détruire. Il reste de l'ADN.
Deuxièmement, vous mettez tout ça qui n'est en pratique que de l'ARN, vous le mettez dans une petite bille de lipides pour qu'elle rentre de force dans la cellule. Donc, vous mettez l'ARN dans la cellule. D'accord ? Et vous mettez de l'ADN dedans aussi, dans la cellule. Et quand vous mettez de l'ADN dans la cellule, vous savez, le passage qui fait que de l'ADN, vous passez dans le cytoplasme de la cellule, dans la cellule, au noyau de la cellule, vous savez, c'est juste une question de chance. C'est un phénomène mécanique habituel, banal.
Donc, on savait bien, je l'avais dit d'ailleurs, à partir du moment où vous avez de l'ADN dedans, il faut que vous ayez une certification des vaccins sur le fait que c'est pur en termes d'ADN, parce que nous, ce qu'on a analysé, deux vaccins, deux échantillons, en réalité, ça ne correspond pas aux normes qui étaient censés être les normes efficaces. Depuis, il y a un article qui a été publié qui a montré que dans un cas de cancer avec des métastases, ils ont trouvé la spike à l'intérieur du noyau des cellules cancéreuses. Donc, on sait que c'est rentré dedans. on ne sait pas à quel moment c'est rentré dedans, mais la preuve de concept, c'est que, un, il y a de l'ADN, que l'ADN rentre dans la cellule parce qu'on l'oblige à rentrer dedans, et que dans un certain nombre de cas, il s'intègre au génome.
Et ça, bien entendu, ça fait se poser la question, mais c'est comme ça, c'est ces modifications génétiques, en fonction de l'endroit où ça va se passer, vous allez déréguler la cellule, vous allez empêcher de se freiner, en particulier, c'est comme ça qu'arrivent les cancers, et vous aurez des cancers. Et donc, ce qui s'est passé, c'est qui a été rapporté, alors moi j'ai demandé aux gens de m'envoyer des données, parce qu'il y avait un Italien qui avait dit, écoutez, c'est très particulier, on a très souvent, après ces vaccinations, des ganglions, soit sous le bras, soit dans le cou, puisque c'est là. Et donc, assez tôt, il y a un Italien qui a publié, tiens, moi j'ai un info, mais un cancer des ganglions juste apparu après que les gens aient eu des ganglions, après injection. Très bien. Je lui ai écrit, je lui ai dit « Vous êtes d'accord pour que je l'analyse, que je regarde s'il y a des séquences ? ». Il m'a dit « Oui, mais je dois demander ». « On m'interdit de le faire ». Je ne l'ai pas eu, je le regrette. Donc, il y a un mouvement d'anti-science actuellement, de choses qu'on n'a pas le droit de faire, qu'on n'a pas le droit de publier.
Et vous voyez qu'effectivement, aux États-Unis, ce biais a été maintenant identifié par Kennedy, qui a dit qu'il ne fallait plus publier dans le Lancet, le groupe Nature Springer, parce que le JAMA et le New England, parce qu'ils biaisaient les données, ils trichent. Et donc, je pense que d'ailleurs, tous les journaux qui soit appartiennent aux grands groupes pharmaceutiques, soit qui sont financés majoritairement par les grands groupes pharmaceutiques, c'est-à-dire ceux qui publient des essais thérapeutiques, en réalité sont financés par l'industrie pharmaceutique et donc n'appartiennent qu'à l'industrie pharmaceutique. Donc, ils ne peuvent pas ne pas être biaisés. C'est raisonnable.
Et donc, maintenant, comment ça sortira ? Ça ne s'arrêtera plus. Des études qui disent, écoutez, on ne voit pas. Vous voyez, si vous regardez le nombre de morts, vous devez demander ça à Chat GPT parce que vous aurez des difficultés à trouver ça sur les sites français. Mais si vous demandez, il y a Human Health, c'est un site, vous pouvez le faire analyser, et dedans, vous regardez le nombre de morts, c'est vrai que le nombre de morts augmente tout le temps en France, parce que la population vieillit, puisqu'il y a de plus en plus de monde, donc ce n'est pas non plus une surprise, mais il ne redescend pas. Vous ne pouvez pas dire, vous pouvez dire effectivement, si vous regardez le nombre de morts dans le détail, peut-être un petit peu plus de morts en 2021-2022, mais ça ne redescend pas. Donc il y a quelque chose qui se passe. Alors, c'était quoi un hasard ? Qu'est-ce qui s'est passé ?
Donc, il y a des gens qui regardent, qui s'intéressent à ça en particulier, en sachant que la preuve de concept qu'il est qu'il est bien possible qu'on ait une dérégulation des cellules qui amène éventuellement à des cancers, amène à réfléchir. Donc, il y a une première étude qui a été faite en Italie sur 300 000 personnes qui a montré une augmentation très significative des cancers chez les vaccinés par rapport aux non-vaccinés. Puis, il y a un papier que je vous ai fait passer là, des Coréens, qui montre qu'il y a une augmentation de 37% des cancers chez les vaccinés par rapport aux non-vaccinés. Ce n'est pas une petite étude, c'est toute la population coréenne. C'est 8,5 millions d'habitants. C'est énorme. 8,5 millions d'habitants. Et donc, il y a une augmentation des cancers. Une surprise pour moi. J'avais bien compris, bien analysé, j'avais dit que quand même avec le vaccin ARN dans lequel il reste de l'ADN et qu'on injecte dans les cellules, il était bien possible de faire des cancers, mais il montre qu'avec une injection, c'est l'AstraZeneca qui donne le plus de cancers. Ça, honnêtement, ce n'était pas prédit. Tant mieux, c'est la preuve que c'est vrai. Quand on ne prédit pas les choses et qu'elles se passent, c'est que c'est vrai. Donc, ça, c'est une chose. Et la deuxième chose qu'il voit, c'est la flambée des cancers après booster, c'est-à-dire après revaccination.
Interviewer: Alors voilà, la dose de rappel.
D. Raoult: Après la dose de rappel. Et donc, ce qu'on voit là, alors on voit exploser quelque chose dont on commence à percevoir par différents signaux, c'est-à-dire l'augmentation des cancers du pancréas, et là, après...
Interviewer: Plus de 150%, je crois.
D. Raoult: 150% d'augmentation des cancers du pancréas. Donc ça, quand même, c'est quelque chose. Et donc, moi, je souhaite que notre pays regarde. Au bout d'un moment, on ne peut pas passer son temps à se mettre les mains devant les yeux pour ne pas regarder les choses. Je suis à peu près convaincu qu'après s'être fait un peu tirer l'oreille le Danemark sera bien obligé, parce que le Danemark a toutes les données, dans les pays scandinaves, en particulier le Danemark, ils ont 100% des données médicales, des gens. Donc, ils sont parfaitement capables de faire la proportion des gens qui ont fait des cancers, qui n'ont pas fait des cancers. Alors, il y aura des menteurs, mais peut-être que ce sera plus difficile en France. Il y a peut-être plus de menteurs en France qu'au Danemark, parce qu'il y a beaucoup de gens qui ont dit qu'ils étaient vaccinés, qui n'ont pas été vaccinés, en réalité. Donc, c'est compliqué de dire simplement ce truc, il est vacciné, lui il peut être vacciné, lui, il n'est sûrement pas vacciné. Pour les deux groupes, j'espère qu'il y aura une différence suffisamment significative pour que les menteurs, si vous voulez, ne soient pas... ne faussent pas le résultat.
On avait les données immédiatement dans un bateau de croisière japonais qui a eu la première épidémie dans le bateau, ils ont testé 100% des gens, ils ont gardé 100% des gens, donc on savait qu'elle était la sévérité de la maladie. On savait qu'il n'y avait que les gens de plus de 70 ans qui faisaient des formes graves et éventuellement mortelles. Il y avait deux morts pour 700. Donc, on savait très bien ce qui se passait. Et donc, cette espèce d'affolement général qui est arrivé, qui est en partie dû au fait que, il faut dire la vérité, les politiques qui ont géré ça, d'abord, n'ont pas de nerfs. C'est un premier point. Ils sont trop nerveux.
Peut-être parce qu'ils prennent de la cocaïne, j'en sais rien. Je pense qu'un des plus grands problèmes de la santé, ce n'est pas de trouver de nouveaux médicaments, c'est d'empêcher ces ravages actuels de la cocaïne et puis du fentanyl et de la crise des opiacés. C'est-à-dire que l'Occident est en train de se détruire. Ce que vous voyez dans la rue, la plupart des SDF sont des gens qui ont été détruits par la drogue. Et quand on voit le niveau dont il est dit que cela circule dans le monde des décisionnaires, c'est très inquiétant parce que, vous savez, la cocaïne, ça rend bête au fur et à mesure, ça excite un peu au départ, ça fait perdre de la mémoire, ça entraîne de l'impulsivité et peut-être que ça vous rappelle un certain nombre de choses que l'on est en train de voir sur les écrans quand même. Il faut faire attention, si vous voulez, de ne pas être gouverné par des cocaïnomanes. Ce n'est pas bien. C'est une très mauvaise idée. donc je ne sais pas qui c'est, je n'en sais rien, mais en tout cas je sais qu'il y en a beaucoup. La consommation à Paris de cocaïne, Paris étant différent du reste de la France de ce point de vue-là, est considérable, et donc il faut faire attention, il n'y a pas que dans les quartiers, c'est la pseudo-élite parisienne qui consomme beaucoup de cocaïne, et c'est elle qui tient les ficelles, et c'est très inquiétant.
D. Raoult: Comment se fait ce vaccin d'ARN ? En réalité, pour pouvoir le produire, au début, ce qui a été testé, d'ailleurs, c'est de l'ARN qui a été fait de manière chimique. Et puis, dans un deuxième temps, ce n'est pas possible de produire, et donc, c'est souvent le problème. D'ailleurs, dans les grandes aventures comme ça de millions ou de milliards de doses, on change d'échelle. Et quand on change d'échelle, on change de méthode. Et quand on a testé une méthode, on n'a pas testé la dernière méthode, celle qui a permis de délivrer des milliards de doses. Et celle qui a permis de délivrer des milliards de doses, c'est quelque chose qui a été fait sur des bactéries recombinantes, c'est-à-dire des bactéries dans lesquelles on a fait rentrer le plasmide. Sur ce plasmide, c'est-à-dire un morceau d'ADN qui va rentrer et qui va être reproduit par la bactérie, dans lequel on met une séquence de la spike que maintenant tout le monde connaît, un peu modifiée, mais qui garde son immunogénicité, avec un facteur d'initiation qui vient du singe. Et on fait cracher ça à la bactérie. Ensuite, on prend le jus de la bactérie. Théoriquement, on détruit tout l'ADN. Théoriquement. Dont d'autres, en réalité, il y a maintenant une dizaine d'études, impubliables. Moi, je vous assure, j'ai mis ça heureusement sur Al, mais c'est impubliable. Il n'y a pas un journal qui veut publier ça. En réalité, il y a de l'ADN qui reste. Donc, vous n'avez pas réussi à tout détruire. Il reste de l'ADN.
Deuxièmement, vous mettez tout ça qui n'est en pratique que de l'ARN, vous le mettez dans une petite bille de lipides pour qu'elle rentre de force dans la cellule. Donc, vous mettez l'ARN dans la cellule. D'accord ? Et vous mettez de l'ADN dedans aussi, dans la cellule. Et quand vous mettez de l'ADN dans la cellule, vous savez, le passage qui fait que de l'ADN, vous passez dans le cytoplasme de la cellule, dans la cellule, au noyau de la cellule, vous savez, c'est juste une question de chance. C'est un phénomène mécanique habituel, banal.
Donc, on savait bien, je l'avais dit d'ailleurs, à partir du moment où vous avez de l'ADN dedans, il faut que vous ayez une certification des vaccins sur le fait que c'est pur en termes d'ADN, parce que nous, ce qu'on a analysé, deux vaccins, deux échantillons, en réalité, ça ne correspond pas aux normes qui étaient censés être les normes efficaces. Depuis, il y a un article qui a été publié qui a montré que dans un cas de cancer avec des métastases, ils ont trouvé la spike à l'intérieur du noyau des cellules cancéreuses. Donc, on sait que c'est rentré dedans. on ne sait pas à quel moment c'est rentré dedans, mais la preuve de concept, c'est que, un, il y a de l'ADN, que l'ADN rentre dans la cellule parce qu'on l'oblige à rentrer dedans, et que dans un certain nombre de cas, il s'intègre au génome.
Et ça, bien entendu, ça fait se poser la question, mais c'est comme ça, c'est ces modifications génétiques, en fonction de l'endroit où ça va se passer, vous allez déréguler la cellule, vous allez empêcher de se freiner, en particulier, c'est comme ça qu'arrivent les cancers, et vous aurez des cancers. Et donc, ce qui s'est passé, c'est qui a été rapporté, alors moi j'ai demandé aux gens de m'envoyer des données, parce qu'il y avait un Italien qui avait dit, écoutez, c'est très particulier, on a très souvent, après ces vaccinations, des ganglions, soit sous le bras, soit dans le cou, puisque c'est là. Et donc, assez tôt, il y a un Italien qui a publié, tiens, moi j'ai un info, mais un cancer des ganglions juste apparu après que les gens aient eu des ganglions, après injection. Très bien. Je lui ai écrit, je lui ai dit « Vous êtes d'accord pour que je l'analyse, que je regarde s'il y a des séquences ? ». Il m'a dit « Oui, mais je dois demander ». « On m'interdit de le faire ». Je ne l'ai pas eu, je le regrette. Donc, il y a un mouvement d'anti-science actuellement, de choses qu'on n'a pas le droit de faire, qu'on n'a pas le droit de publier.
Et vous voyez qu'effectivement, aux États-Unis, ce biais a été maintenant identifié par Kennedy, qui a dit qu'il ne fallait plus publier dans le Lancet, le groupe Nature Springer, parce que le JAMA et le New England, parce qu'ils biaisaient les données, ils trichent. Et donc, je pense que d'ailleurs, tous les journaux qui soit appartiennent aux grands groupes pharmaceutiques, soit qui sont financés majoritairement par les grands groupes pharmaceutiques, c'est-à-dire ceux qui publient des essais thérapeutiques, en réalité sont financés par l'industrie pharmaceutique et donc n'appartiennent qu'à l'industrie pharmaceutique. Donc, ils ne peuvent pas ne pas être biaisés. C'est raisonnable.
Et donc, maintenant, comment ça sortira ? Ça ne s'arrêtera plus. Des études qui disent, écoutez, on ne voit pas. Vous voyez, si vous regardez le nombre de morts, vous devez demander ça à Chat GPT parce que vous aurez des difficultés à trouver ça sur les sites français. Mais si vous demandez, il y a Human Health, c'est un site, vous pouvez le faire analyser, et dedans, vous regardez le nombre de morts, c'est vrai que le nombre de morts augmente tout le temps en France, parce que la population vieillit, puisqu'il y a de plus en plus de monde, donc ce n'est pas non plus une surprise, mais il ne redescend pas. Vous ne pouvez pas dire, vous pouvez dire effectivement, si vous regardez le nombre de morts dans le détail, peut-être un petit peu plus de morts en 2021-2022, mais ça ne redescend pas. Donc il y a quelque chose qui se passe. Alors, c'était quoi un hasard ? Qu'est-ce qui s'est passé ?
Donc, il y a des gens qui regardent, qui s'intéressent à ça en particulier, en sachant que la preuve de concept qu'il est qu'il est bien possible qu'on ait une dérégulation des cellules qui amène éventuellement à des cancers, amène à réfléchir. Donc, il y a une première étude qui a été faite en Italie sur 300 000 personnes qui a montré une augmentation très significative des cancers chez les vaccinés par rapport aux non-vaccinés. Puis, il y a un papier que je vous ai fait passer là, des Coréens, qui montre qu'il y a une augmentation de 37% des cancers chez les vaccinés par rapport aux non-vaccinés. Ce n'est pas une petite étude, c'est toute la population coréenne. C'est 8,5 millions d'habitants. C'est énorme. 8,5 millions d'habitants. Et donc, il y a une augmentation des cancers. Une surprise pour moi. J'avais bien compris, bien analysé, j'avais dit que quand même avec le vaccin ARN dans lequel il reste de l'ADN et qu'on injecte dans les cellules, il était bien possible de faire des cancers, mais il montre qu'avec une injection, c'est l'AstraZeneca qui donne le plus de cancers. Ça, honnêtement, ce n'était pas prédit. Tant mieux, c'est la preuve que c'est vrai. Quand on ne prédit pas les choses et qu'elles se passent, c'est que c'est vrai. Donc, ça, c'est une chose. Et la deuxième chose qu'il voit, c'est la flambée des cancers après booster, c'est-à-dire après revaccination.
Interviewer: Alors voilà, la dose de rappel.
D. Raoult: Après la dose de rappel. Et donc, ce qu'on voit là, alors on voit exploser quelque chose dont on commence à percevoir par différents signaux, c'est-à-dire l'augmentation des cancers du pancréas, et là, après...
Interviewer: Plus de 150%, je crois.
D. Raoult: 150% d'augmentation des cancers du pancréas. Donc ça, quand même, c'est quelque chose. Et donc, moi, je souhaite que notre pays regarde. Au bout d'un moment, on ne peut pas passer son temps à se mettre les mains devant les yeux pour ne pas regarder les choses. Je suis à peu près convaincu qu'après s'être fait un peu tirer l'oreille le Danemark sera bien obligé, parce que le Danemark a toutes les données, dans les pays scandinaves, en particulier le Danemark, ils ont 100% des données médicales, des gens. Donc, ils sont parfaitement capables de faire la proportion des gens qui ont fait des cancers, qui n'ont pas fait des cancers. Alors, il y aura des menteurs, mais peut-être que ce sera plus difficile en France. Il y a peut-être plus de menteurs en France qu'au Danemark, parce qu'il y a beaucoup de gens qui ont dit qu'ils étaient vaccinés, qui n'ont pas été vaccinés, en réalité. Donc, c'est compliqué de dire simplement ce truc, il est vacciné, lui il peut être vacciné, lui, il n'est sûrement pas vacciné. Pour les deux groupes, j'espère qu'il y aura une différence suffisamment significative pour que les menteurs, si vous voulez, ne soient pas... ne faussent pas le résultat.
On avait les données immédiatement dans un bateau de croisière japonais qui a eu la première épidémie dans le bateau, ils ont testé 100% des gens, ils ont gardé 100% des gens, donc on savait qu'elle était la sévérité de la maladie. On savait qu'il n'y avait que les gens de plus de 70 ans qui faisaient des formes graves et éventuellement mortelles. Il y avait deux morts pour 700. Donc, on savait très bien ce qui se passait. Et donc, cette espèce d'affolement général qui est arrivé, qui est en partie dû au fait que, il faut dire la vérité, les politiques qui ont géré ça, d'abord, n'ont pas de nerfs. C'est un premier point. Ils sont trop nerveux.
Peut-être parce qu'ils prennent de la cocaïne, j'en sais rien. Je pense qu'un des plus grands problèmes de la santé, ce n'est pas de trouver de nouveaux médicaments, c'est d'empêcher ces ravages actuels de la cocaïne et puis du fentanyl et de la crise des opiacés. C'est-à-dire que l'Occident est en train de se détruire. Ce que vous voyez dans la rue, la plupart des SDF sont des gens qui ont été détruits par la drogue. Et quand on voit le niveau dont il est dit que cela circule dans le monde des décisionnaires, c'est très inquiétant parce que, vous savez, la cocaïne, ça rend bête au fur et à mesure, ça excite un peu au départ, ça fait perdre de la mémoire, ça entraîne de l'impulsivité et peut-être que ça vous rappelle un certain nombre de choses que l'on est en train de voir sur les écrans quand même. Il faut faire attention, si vous voulez, de ne pas être gouverné par des cocaïnomanes. Ce n'est pas bien. C'est une très mauvaise idée. donc je ne sais pas qui c'est, je n'en sais rien, mais en tout cas je sais qu'il y en a beaucoup. La consommation à Paris de cocaïne, Paris étant différent du reste de la France de ce point de vue-là, est considérable, et donc il faut faire attention, il n'y a pas que dans les quartiers, c'est la pseudo-élite parisienne qui consomme beaucoup de cocaïne, et c'est elle qui tient les ficelles, et c'est très inquiétant.
Interviewer: We would like to hear your thoughts on some worrying studies that have recently come out, first Italian and then South Korean, concerning the link between Covid-19 vaccinations and cancer, and the increased risk of cancer following these vaccinations, especially after a booster shot.
D. Raoult: How is this mRNA vaccine made? In reality, at the beginning, what was tested was chemically made RNA. Then, in a second step, it's not possible to produce it that way, and so, it's often the problem. Besides, in these big adventures of millions or billions of doses, we change scale. And when you change scale, you change method. And when you have tested one method, you haven't tested the last method, which is the one that allowed for the delivery of billions of doses. And the one that allowed for the delivery of billions of doses was something that was done on recombinant bacteria, that is to say bacteria into which we introduced the plasmid. On this plasmid, that is to say a piece of DNA that goes in and is reproduced by the bacterium, in which we put a sequence of the spike that everyone now knows, slightly modified, but which keeps its immunogenicity, with an initiation factor that comes from a monkey. And we make the bacterium spit it out. Then we take the juice of the bacterium. Theoretically, we destroy all the DNA. Theoretically. But others, in reality, there is DNA left. So you haven't managed to destroy everything. There is DNA left.
Secondly, you put all that, which is actually only RNA, into a small lipid bead so that it forces its way into the cell. So you put the RNA into the cell. Okay? And you also put DNA in the cell. And when you put DNA in the cell, you know, the passage from DNA to the cytoplasm of the cell, inside the cell, to the nucleus of the cell, you know, it's just a matter of chance. It's a habitual, banal mechanical phenomenon.
So we knew very well, I had said anyway, that from the moment you have DNA in it, you need certification of the vaccines on the fact that it is pure in terms of DNA, because what we analyzed, two vaccines, two samples, in reality, did not correspond to the effective norms. Since then, an article has been published showing that in a case of cancer with metastases, they found the spike inside the nucleus of the cancerous cells. So we know it got in there. We don't know at what point it got in there, but the proof of concept is that, one, there is DNA, that the DNA gets into the cell because we force it to get in there, and that in a certain number of cases, it integrates into the genome.
And that, of course, raises the question, but that's how it is, these genetic modifications, depending on where they occur, you will deregulate the cell, you will prevent it from being stopped, especially that's how cancers happen, and you will have cancers. And so what happened was reported, well I asked people to send me data because there was an Italian who said, listen, it's very particular, we often have, after these vaccinations, lymph nodes, either under the arm or in the neck, since that's where they are. And so quite early on, there was an Italian who published, look, I have some info, but a cancer of the lymph nodes just appeared after people had lymph nodes, after injection. Very well. I wrote to him, I said "Are you okay for me to analyze it, to see if there are sequences?" He said "Yes, but I have to ask." "They forbid me to do it." I didn't get it, I regret it. So there is a current anti-science movement, of things that we are not allowed to do, that we are not allowed to publish.
And you see that effectively, in the United States, this bias has now been identified by Kennedy, who said that we should no longer publish in The Lancet, the Nature Springer group, because the JAMA and the New England, because they bias the data, they cheat. And so I think that anyway, all the journals that are either owned by the big pharmaceutical groups or are mainly financed by the big pharmaceutical groups, that is to say those that publish therapeutic trials, in reality are financed by the pharmaceutical industry and therefore cannot help but be biased. It's reasonable.
And so now, how will it come out? It won't stop. Studies that say, listen, we don't see anything. You see, if you look at the number of deaths, you should ask Chat GPT because you will have difficulty finding that on French sites. But if you ask, there is Human Health, it's a site, you can have it analyzed, and in it, you look at the number of deaths, it's true that the number of deaths increases all the time in France, because the population is aging, since there are more and more people, so it's not surprising either, but it doesn't go down. You can't say, you can say effectively, if you look at the number of deaths in detail, maybe a little more death in 2021-2022, but it doesn't go down. So something is happening. Was it by chance? What happened?
So there are people who are looking into this in particular, knowing that the proof of concept is that it is quite possible that we have a deregulation of cells that leads to cancers, which makes you think. So there was a first study done in Italy on 300,000 people that showed a very significant increase in cancers among the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. Then there is a paper that I had you pass along there, from Koreans, showing an increase of 37% in cancers among the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. It's not a small study, it's the entire Korean population. It's huge. 8.5 million inhabitants. It's enormous. 8.5 million inhabitants. And so there is an increase in cancers. A surprise for me. I had well understood, well analyzed, I had said that anyway with the mRNA vaccine in which there remains DNA and which we inject into cells, it was quite possible to make cancers, but it shows that with one injection, it's AstraZeneca that gives the most cancers. That's honest, that wasn't predicted. All the better, it's proof that it's true. When you don't predict things and they happen, it's because it's true. So that's one thing. And the second thing it sees is the flare-up of cancers after boosting, that is to say after revaccination.
Interviewer: So here is the booster dose.
D. Raoult: After the booster dose. And so what we see there, well we see something exploding which we begin to perceive through different signals, that is to say the increase in pancreatic cancers, and then after...
Interviewer: More than 150%, I believe.
D. Raoult: 150% increase in pancreatic cancers. So that's something. And so I hope that our country looks into it. At some point, you can't spend your time putting your hands over your eyes to avoid looking at things. I am almost convinced that after being a little pushed Denmark will be obliged, because Denmark has all the data, in the Scandinavian countries, especially Denmark, they have 100% of people's medical data. So they are perfectly capable of doing the proportion of people who got cancer, who didn't get cancer. Although there will be liars, but maybe it will be more difficult in France. There are probably more liars in France than in Denmark, because a lot of people said they were vaccinated when they weren't really vaccinated. So it's complicated to simply say just that thing, he is vaccinated, him he can be vaccinated, him, he is surely not vaccinated. For the two groups, I hope there will be a significant enough difference for the liars, if you want, not to falsify the result.
We had the immediate data in a Japanese cruise ship that had the first epidemic on the ship, they tested 100% of the people, they kept 100% of the people, so we knew what the severity of the disease was. We knew that only people over 70 had severe forms and potentially fatal cases. There were two deaths for 700. So we knew very well what was happening. And so this general panic that occurred, which is partly due to the fact that, you have to tell the truth, the politicians who managed it, first of all, don't have nerves. That's the first point. They are too nervous.
Maybe because they take cocaine, I don't know. I think one of the biggest problems in health is not finding new drugs, it's preventing these current ravages of cocaine and then fentanyl and the opioid crisis. That is to say that the West is destroying itself. What you see in the street, most of the homeless are people who have been destroyed by drugs. And when you see the level at which it is said that this circulates among decision-makers, it's very worrying because cocaine makes you stupid over time, it excites a little at first, it makes you lose your memory, it leads to impulsivity and maybe that reminds you of a certain number of things that we are seeing on the screens anyway. You have to be careful not to be governed by cocaine addicts. It's not good. It's a very bad idea. So I don't know who it is, I don't know anything about it, but in any case I know that there are many of them. Cocaine consumption in Paris is considerable, Paris being different from the rest of France in this regard, and so you have to be careful, there are probably more liars in France than in Denmark, because a lot of people said they were vaccinated when they weren't really vaccinated. So it's complicated to simply say just that thing, he is vaccinated, him he can be vaccinated, him, he is surely not vaccinated. For the two groups, I hope there will be a significant enough difference for the liars, if you want, not to falsify the result.
We had the immediate data in a Japanese cruise ship that had the first epidemic on the ship, they tested 100% of the people, they kept 100% of the people, so we knew what the severity of the disease was. We knew that only people over 70 had severe forms and potentially fatal cases. There were two deaths for 700. So we knew very well what was happening. And so this general panic that occurred, which is partly due to the fact that, you have to tell the truth, the politicians who managed it, first of all, don't have nerves. That's the first point. They are too nervous.
Maybe because they take cocaine, I don't know. I think one of the biggest problems in health is not finding new drugs, it's preventing these current ravages of cocaine and then fentanyl and the opioid crisis. That is to say that the West is destroying itself. What you see in the street, most of the homeless are people who have been destroyed by drugs. And when you see the level at which it is said that this circulates among decision-makers, it's very worrying because cocaine makes you stupid over time, it excites a little at first, it makes you lose your memory, it leads to impulsivity and maybe that reminds you of a certain number of things that we are seeing on the screens anyway. You have to be careful not to be governed by cocaine addicts. It's not good. It's a very bad idea. So I don't know who it is, I don't know anything about it, but in any case I know that there are many of them. Cocaine consumption in Paris is considerable, Paris being different from the rest of France in this regard, and so you have to be careful, there are probably more liars in France than in Denmark, because a lot of people said they were vaccinated when they weren't really vaccinated. So it's complicated to simply say just that thing, he is vaccinated, him he can be vaccinated, him, he is surely not vaccinated. For the two groups, I hope there will be a significant enough difference for the liars, if you want, not to falsify the result.
D. Raoult: How is this mRNA vaccine made? In reality, at the beginning, what was tested was chemically made RNA. Then, in a second step, it's not possible to produce it that way, and so, it's often the problem. Besides, in these big adventures of millions or billions of doses, we change scale. And when you change scale, you change method. And when you have tested one method, you haven't tested the last method, which is the one that allowed for the delivery of billions of doses. And the one that allowed for the delivery of billions of doses was something that was done on recombinant bacteria, that is to say bacteria into which we introduced the plasmid. On this plasmid, that is to say a piece of DNA that goes in and is reproduced by the bacterium, in which we put a sequence of the spike that everyone now knows, slightly modified, but which keeps its immunogenicity, with an initiation factor that comes from a monkey. And we make the bacterium spit it out. Then we take the juice of the bacterium. Theoretically, we destroy all the DNA. Theoretically. But others, in reality, there is DNA left. So you haven't managed to destroy everything. There is DNA left.
Secondly, you put all that, which is actually only RNA, into a small lipid bead so that it forces its way into the cell. So you put the RNA into the cell. Okay? And you also put DNA in the cell. And when you put DNA in the cell, you know, the passage from DNA to the cytoplasm of the cell, inside the cell, to the nucleus of the cell, you know, it's just a matter of chance. It's a habitual, banal mechanical phenomenon.
So we knew very well, I had said anyway, that from the moment you have DNA in it, you need certification of the vaccines on the fact that it is pure in terms of DNA, because what we analyzed, two vaccines, two samples, in reality, did not correspond to the effective norms. Since then, an article has been published showing that in a case of cancer with metastases, they found the spike inside the nucleus of the cancerous cells. So we know it got in there. We don't know at what point it got in there, but the proof of concept is that, one, there is DNA, that the DNA gets into the cell because we force it to get in there, and that in a certain number of cases, it integrates into the genome.
And that, of course, raises the question, but that's how it is, these genetic modifications, depending on where they occur, you will deregulate the cell, you will prevent it from being stopped, especially that's how cancers happen, and you will have cancers. And so what happened was reported, well I asked people to send me data because there was an Italian who said, listen, it's very particular, we often have, after these vaccinations, lymph nodes, either under the arm or in the neck, since that's where they are. And so quite early on, there was an Italian who published, look, I have some info, but a cancer of the lymph nodes just appeared after people had lymph nodes, after injection. Very well. I wrote to him, I said "Are you okay for me to analyze it, to see if there are sequences?" He said "Yes, but I have to ask." "They forbid me to do it." I didn't get it, I regret it. So there is a current anti-science movement, of things that we are not allowed to do, that we are not allowed to publish.
And you see that effectively, in the United States, this bias has now been identified by Kennedy, who said that we should no longer publish in The Lancet, the Nature Springer group, because the JAMA and the New England, because they bias the data, they cheat. And so I think that anyway, all the journals that are either owned by the big pharmaceutical groups or are mainly financed by the big pharmaceutical groups, that is to say those that publish therapeutic trials, in reality are financed by the pharmaceutical industry and therefore cannot help but be biased. It's reasonable.
And so now, how will it come out? It won't stop. Studies that say, listen, we don't see anything. You see, if you look at the number of deaths, you should ask Chat GPT because you will have difficulty finding that on French sites. But if you ask, there is Human Health, it's a site, you can have it analyzed, and in it, you look at the number of deaths, it's true that the number of deaths increases all the time in France, because the population is aging, since there are more and more people, so it's not surprising either, but it doesn't go down. You can't say, you can say effectively, if you look at the number of deaths in detail, maybe a little more death in 2021-2022, but it doesn't go down. So something is happening. Was it by chance? What happened?
So there are people who are looking into this in particular, knowing that the proof of concept is that it is quite possible that we have a deregulation of cells that leads to cancers, which makes you think. So there was a first study done in Italy on 300,000 people that showed a very significant increase in cancers among the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. Then there is a paper that I had you pass along there, from Koreans, showing an increase of 37% in cancers among the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated. It's not a small study, it's the entire Korean population. It's huge. 8.5 million inhabitants. It's enormous. 8.5 million inhabitants. And so there is an increase in cancers. A surprise for me. I had well understood, well analyzed, I had said that anyway with the mRNA vaccine in which there remains DNA and which we inject into cells, it was quite possible to make cancers, but it shows that with one injection, it's AstraZeneca that gives the most cancers. That's honest, that wasn't predicted. All the better, it's proof that it's true. When you don't predict things and they happen, it's because it's true. So that's one thing. And the second thing it sees is the flare-up of cancers after boosting, that is to say after revaccination.
Interviewer: So here is the booster dose.
D. Raoult: After the booster dose. And so what we see there, well we see something exploding which we begin to perceive through different signals, that is to say the increase in pancreatic cancers, and then after...
Interviewer: More than 150%, I believe.
D. Raoult: 150% increase in pancreatic cancers. So that's something. And so I hope that our country looks into it. At some point, you can't spend your time putting your hands over your eyes to avoid looking at things. I am almost convinced that after being a little pushed Denmark will be obliged, because Denmark has all the data, in the Scandinavian countries, especially Denmark, they have 100% of people's medical data. So they are perfectly capable of doing the proportion of people who got cancer, who didn't get cancer. Although there will be liars, but maybe it will be more difficult in France. There are probably more liars in France than in Denmark, because a lot of people said they were vaccinated when they weren't really vaccinated. So it's complicated to simply say just that thing, he is vaccinated, him he can be vaccinated, him, he is surely not vaccinated. For the two groups, I hope there will be a significant enough difference for the liars, if you want, not to falsify the result.
We had the immediate data in a Japanese cruise ship that had the first epidemic on the ship, they tested 100% of the people, they kept 100% of the people, so we knew what the severity of the disease was. We knew that only people over 70 had severe forms and potentially fatal cases. There were two deaths for 700. So we knew very well what was happening. And so this general panic that occurred, which is partly due to the fact that, you have to tell the truth, the politicians who managed it, first of all, don't have nerves. That's the first point. They are too nervous.
Maybe because they take cocaine, I don't know. I think one of the biggest problems in health is not finding new drugs, it's preventing these current ravages of cocaine and then fentanyl and the opioid crisis. That is to say that the West is destroying itself. What you see in the street, most of the homeless are people who have been destroyed by drugs. And when you see the level at which it is said that this circulates among decision-makers, it's very worrying because cocaine makes you stupid over time, it excites a little at first, it makes you lose your memory, it leads to impulsivity and maybe that reminds you of a certain number of things that we are seeing on the screens anyway. You have to be careful not to be governed by cocaine addicts. It's not good. It's a very bad idea. So I don't know who it is, I don't know anything about it, but in any case I know that there are many of them. Cocaine consumption in Paris is considerable, Paris being different from the rest of France in this regard, and so you have to be careful, there are probably more liars in France than in Denmark, because a lot of people said they were vaccinated when they weren't really vaccinated. So it's complicated to simply say just that thing, he is vaccinated, him he can be vaccinated, him, he is surely not vaccinated. For the two groups, I hope there will be a significant enough difference for the liars, if you want, not to falsify the result.
We had the immediate data in a Japanese cruise ship that had the first epidemic on the ship, they tested 100% of the people, they kept 100% of the people, so we knew what the severity of the disease was. We knew that only people over 70 had severe forms and potentially fatal cases. There were two deaths for 700. So we knew very well what was happening. And so this general panic that occurred, which is partly due to the fact that, you have to tell the truth, the politicians who managed it, first of all, don't have nerves. That's the first point. They are too nervous.
Maybe because they take cocaine, I don't know. I think one of the biggest problems in health is not finding new drugs, it's preventing these current ravages of cocaine and then fentanyl and the opioid crisis. That is to say that the West is destroying itself. What you see in the street, most of the homeless are people who have been destroyed by drugs. And when you see the level at which it is said that this circulates among decision-makers, it's very worrying because cocaine makes you stupid over time, it excites a little at first, it makes you lose your memory, it leads to impulsivity and maybe that reminds you of a certain number of things that we are seeing on the screens anyway. You have to be careful not to be governed by cocaine addicts. It's not good. It's a very bad idea. So I don't know who it is, I don't know anything about it, but in any case I know that there are many of them. Cocaine consumption in Paris is considerable, Paris being different from the rest of France in this regard, and so you have to be careful, there are probably more liars in France than in Denmark, because a lot of people said they were vaccinated when they weren't really vaccinated. So it's complicated to simply say just that thing, he is vaccinated, him he can be vaccinated, him, he is surely not vaccinated. For the two groups, I hope there will be a significant enough difference for the liars, if you want, not to falsify the result.
Source
