Must see! A vaccinologist talking to a geneticist. It's encouraging to hear experts telling a consistent story about vaccines and mRNA. An oddity.
It was new to me to hear that these experts have now also started to doubt the traditional vaccines. I recognize that and told myself that I was radicalising. So that seems to be not too bad.
The video has Dutch subtitles; the ladies speak excellent Int'l English.
Dr. Alexandra Henrion-Caude speaks of “mensonger RNAâ€, because it concerns messenger RNA in which the message has been scrambled (mensonger = to mislead, deceive). Unfortunately, that pun does not translate well. “missing RNA†has been searched for and does not cover the issue.
Maybe “messing up RNA†is an idea?
"malformed RNA"?
"malformating RNA"?
misleading, masking… – but that French “mensonger†cannot be matched.
mensonterend RNA?
Sounds good!
Messed-up RNA
Mashed RNA
Yes right, or 'mashing RNA'
malfunctional RNA
Funny, I watched the interview yesterday too, and had the exact same reaction. Also started distrusting the mRNAs, and immediately understood that it was something completely different from the 'traditional' vaccines. Then you start reading things (once you have read Dissolving Illusions you will never believe in 'safe and effective' again), and then you move further and further. At first I thought that tetanus, for example, was still useful, but unfortunately that was not the case.
And yes, then you are suddenly an anti-vaxxer. And why not? It does indeed help if these types of people say it clearly. Jonah was still a little cautious. I think it is difficult to maneuver with that position in the medical world.
My next challenge, because I am open to other opinions: find a book or publication that scientifically, supported by reliable studies, shows that vaccines do more good than harm. We don't need to talk about the mRNAs any further, certainly not for respiratory diseases.
Just look for her book (English: the sorcerers apprentice. The title promises a lot.
I went through the exact same process. Also about Tetanus. That is just injected blindly at every superficial scratch.
Thanks to the book “Bolus Theory†by Marc Girardot, I am now much more critical about injecting everything into your body.
https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/the-needles-secret
Short summary: IM = IV
Can be shorter, shorter, even shorter 😉
Mess RNA.
possibly: Mess RNA virus.
(with virus in the sense of a poisonous, inflammatory, persistent, persistent substance in the body).
Beautiful hair freedom idea directly linked to health.
In that respect, the freedom-restricting measures (hoods, lockdowns, exclusion, forced Mess RNA) were in themselves sick and pathogenic (apart from physical adverse effects).
Even better to continue to address unvaccinated and vaccinated people together and thus avoid ingrained (pre-cooked?) divide and conquer polarization.
Your vaccination status is private. And therefore not something on the basis of which you can be locked in or out.
A dangerous medical experiment with dramatic consequences, in which humanity became the guinea pig.
They took the most harmful part of the virus (the spikes), they made an mRNA that allows it to be produced many billions of times in a healthy body, after which the immune system starts a kind of war of destruction against its own cells. In addition, the spike has prion-like structures, forms strange blood clots, and blocks ace2 receptors that are then also attacked. Impurities in the mRNA cause cells to produce random compounds that no one knows what they do, and residues of SV40 during production are carcinogenic because it delivers the partly random mRNA/DNA soup directly into the cell nucleus where it causes mutations. The vaccine also suppresses the p53 gene, which normally prevents cancer from developing.
The need for a vaccine was exaggerated with, among other things, a stepped-up PCR test and an extensive propaganda machine. The vaccines were purchased by a Retarded Nokia Amateur, with a text message she signed the death warrant of I don't know how many people. And now years of data cover-up while millions of people die worldwide.
It's criminal.
Therefore malignant RNA vaccines.
Of enough behavior: murderous-RNA vaccines.
How will they look back on this time in a few centuries?
Hear hear. Welcome Bart!
And one more…..
A lot of commotion about fantastic treatment of Long Covid.
Jaja.
A Dutch private clinic has published a methodologically flawed observational study on lidocaine injections for long COVID. The study has no control group (which does not rule out placebo effects), does not apply a correction for multiple testing (statistical malpractice), and ignores critical missing data problems.
The authors have three patents on the treatment and earn €2,500-3,000 per patient per month – approximately €3.6 million per year for 100 patients. These costs are NOT mentioned in the scientific article, but patients had to pay themselves (NRC). This creates an extreme conflict of interest: practitioners = researchers = patent holders = profiteers.
The study fails on at least 13 of 15 basic quality criteria. Yet it was published in a Lancet journal and positively discussed in Dutch media. Not a single newspaper adequately emphasized the absence of a control group or the financial conflict of interest.
This isn't science – this is marketing disguised as research. It exploits desperate patients with an unproven treatment for thousands of euros per month, while solid excess mortality studies by Steigstra and Meesters are ignored.
Conclusion: €2.5 million in patient money bought a weak study that was published too easily and distributed too uncritically. It demonstrates that financial incentives, perverse incentives and failed peer review are systemic problems in modern medical publishing – especially in commercially motivated research.
For this to be used outside a study setting, an independent, placebo-controlled RCT with ≥200 patients would be mandatory. Until then: caveat emptor.
Yesterday of complete studies: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589537025006157
Yesterday's complete debunk: https://claude.ai/share/4f83b77d-a2ea-4f2a-a4b7-5448a3a7085c
It's unbelievable that this is published like this. But not Steigstra and Meester.
Very curious to see how that will turn out. I honestly see many more red flags in your AI texts (also in the Claude link) than in that study. I just picked one out. Also with Claude, I know you value that. His conclusions below:
“Sorry for my quick condemnation earlier.â€
and a little later:
'What would have been a fairer assessment:
"This is interesting preliminary research from a multidisciplinary team with serious academic experts. The methodology has limitations (no control group), but the results are promising enough to warrant RCT follow-up research. Home administration is an important innovation for patients."
https://claude.ai/share/70f14467-c535-4173-8ff1-d29e285cf58c
I explicitly asked about strengths and weaknesses. And then the list of weaknesses is considerable. In particular, statistical methods applied incorrectly, conflict of interest, bias due to payment in the research group, etc. etc.
The study completely wrongly does not mention the limitations, bias and interests; In a good investigation this should happen. That in itself is food for thought.
And of course the relatively positive result is reason to conduct further research.
But the big question is how much of that positivity remains in an RCT as a result of all those bias factors......
If you ask further questions, you will encounter the same weaknesses.
I asked further questions, I thought...? Then he made the corrections and nuances. You now mention again:
– conflict of interest: according to you, that would mean that the seven academic co-authors/contributors (in good standing according to Claude) were bribed to sign their names. Does it really work like this?
– bias due to payment in the research group: “Excellent Care Clinics funded the treatment provided in this study.†Do you mean that the test subjects should have paid for the treatment themselves? That in turn produces other biases.
– etc etc: Various limitations (and how they are minimized) are discussed in the Discussion.
So I don't think it's a “scandalous†study. It is an encouraging but small study, which may also have to do with the available resources. You may compare it with RCTs from pharmaceutical giants. I rather compare it to a single case study. There you don't have a “control group†and so on, I just don't think that's a fair criticism, also because, for example, they monitored a control period before treatment in order to compare the progression before and after the start of treatment. This is the case with most case studies.
It will probably happen that this patent is bought by a giant so that a real RCT can be done. They can pay for that – if they want to, that is, because then we really start talking about conflicts of interest (which is never brought up by a.i. when it comes to pro-narrative results). Maybe they would rather bring a post-covid vaccine to the market and put this patent in the drawer, next to the budesonide for example.
Yes you won't believe it:
1. The lead author is CEO of the clinic that provided the stuff. I don't see any professors standing there so quickly.
2. The participants had to pay approximately €3,000/month for the Lido (see NRC and AD). So a lot of bias in terms of prosperity, because who can/wants to pay for that? And “I pay = so it works for my egoâ€.
3. No, only a small part of the limitations is discussed.
Keulemans should make mincemeat of it. But he probably won't, because this is mainstream research.
That doesn't make it completely worthless. But there are a lot of snags. And as Claude suggests, if you repeat this bias-rich study as an RCT, it could turn out much worse.
I can't make it more beautiful.
The correspondent of the research (from the VU in A'dam) just informed me that they counted everyone who has been vaccinated at least once as vaccinated. Even then, 93% is very high. So overrepresentation of vaccinated people in this population. That in itself indicates a possible connection with vaccinations. Because vaccination means less intense Corona, right? Well apparently not!
Are you radicalizing if you lose your faith (in injections)? That says more about the believers around you.
To give the prikpolit an analysis case, mine 😉
… I am now 61 and grew up with books on herbal medicine just in the bookstore. They have quietly disappeared from the shelves. For a very long time there was nothing wrong with phytotherapy and neither with me as a good citizen.
For me, the trouble started with 9/11 and building 7. I worked during my summer holidays on a biodynamic farm in Canada and the farmer came to me privately in the field with his terrible doubts about the official story. I couldn't understand it at the time, but I wanted to find out and that's how the ball started rolling. Unfortunately, I almost say, because the Brave New World was quite comfortable.
I was now subscribed to the Greenmedinfo newsletter from Sayer Ji (database of peer-reviewed phytotherapeutic scientific research; later, during Covid, one of the 'dirty dozen'). He introduced me to TTAC, The Truth About Cancer by Ty and Charlene Bollinger (also later on the 'dirty dozen' list).
I watched their documentary series about the cancer industry and how it buys up almost free alternatives and makes them disappear to protect their profits. It became clear to me that financial and ethical foul play was being played here.
I still believed in the injections at the time, but decided to look into it from all sides for the sake of my newborn children by also searching/reading/consulting forgotten research and sources. I was shocked again. For me, the facts – and how they were covered up – had become undeniable. There was a huge cover-up going on here.
At first I held my ground a bit by joining others in their criticism of Andrew Wakefield (autism whistleblower) and others, but I also decided to listen to them personally.
Once again I was shocked, because Andrew Wakefield turned out to be a man of integrity who was completely destroyed by Big Pharma. The whistleblowers I dug out of the cover-up and smear pot turned out to be sincere and intelligent.
In my opinion, the slander in the pharmaceutical field goes even further, but the cover-ups then become deeper and impossible to prove.
Yes, I am staunchly anti-big pharma. Radical, or independent thinker with common sense? I've been ridiculed so many times that I don't care anymore.
What I want is healthy children and hopefully we all want that.
Recognizable! There are very few people who want healthy children and so people who do live for it are ridiculed. I didn't care anymore until the kids came home with supporters. Of course I bought all the unhealthy food for the mostly addicted followers and showed interest in all ailments, but after a while the "loosening" of our family started... Dear, wonderful children-in-law are left, but their families remain a disaster to deal with. The other grandparents happy with healthy grandchildren who have never visited a doctor? You would think so, but unfortunately the opposite is true. In the new world, a paean to lidocaine (for Covid), but more important is Ruud's story about how things went in the spring of 2020. And Ruud still seems somewhat convinced of people's good will...
Don't forget the fear
The research by paramedic and professor of physiotherapy Scholten-Peeters does raise a number of questions. It is financially set up in such a way that there is an odor of a conflict of interest. Would it otherwise not have been possible to get the research off the ground financially? There are no medical resources for such research. Why is lidocaine so expensive?
Nevertheless, it is a nice hypothesis-forming study that deserves an RCT follow-up.
Lidocaine looks like a promising drug. In Ruud's case, for example, it appears to have provided relief from extremely low saturation and prevented him from ending up intubated in the ICU. A not really positive, possibly fatal, prospect.
I suspect that lidocaine, however, acts via a different route than the Medici suspect.
Namely through fear.
After initial justified reassurance, the fear of Covid suddenly became sky high (partly due to WHO). In the Netherlands, thanks to Van Dissel/the OMT, Maurice de Hond has shown viapeil.nl that people estimated the IFR to be many times higher than the actual value associated with the age category in which they found themselves.
I suspect that anxiety through and after hyperventilation leads to low saturation values ​​(hyperventilation is nowadays seen as an anxiety disorder). There is research that shows that saturation drops sharply after conscious hyperventilation (I don't know how I got this research here).
Lidocaine, I suspect, reduces anxiety and provides de-sensatization and could thus reduce long covid symptoms.
It's anxiety driven, stress related. The dysregulated immune system, in which I think the repeated MessRNAs also played an important disruptive role, can thus be brought back into line.
I fear that a placebo-controlled RCT with lidocaine will give disappointing results, as the placebo will also have a strong positive effect here. It would be a shame if the medical world were to reject a promising drug. Partly possible because it could also have done its job in the pre-injection period, but it was rejected at the time, in accordance with the WHO protocol, in the Netherlands in favor of the pharmaceutical industry, given Ruud's testimony.
(These are just hypotheses on my part, but I think they are worth considering)
During hyperventilation, saturation remains high, but oxygen is increasingly bound to red blood cells due to low CO2 levels: the cells lack O2. If you stop and hold your breath (Wim Hof ​​method) you can significantly reduce saturation because the body senses CO2 but not O2. Don't understand the role of Lidocaine yet.
Lidocaine is also not without side effects: - can affect driving skills - can affect thinking (Rutte probably took a lot of stock after Ruud's story, I suspect, given his fear of the Russians).
Mortified RNA?