9 Comments

Err... what am I missing here? These graphs simply show that vaccinating the parents, especially the mother, protected the offspring from exhibiting a clinical sign of infection (weight loss) following viral challenge.

Is this protection from alteration of the pups' DNA, or is it from colostral immunity? The fact that vaccination of the mother was far more influential than vaccination of the father suggests that passive transfer of maternal antibodies (i.e., immunoglobulins in colostrum) could explain these results. When the mum wasn't vaccinated, her babies lost weight when challenged with the flu virus. Looks like plain ol' colostral protection to me. What am I missing?

Expand full comment

Love the question - don't you wish the TGA and John Skerritt asked the same question from the perspective of the "First do no harm principle"

To see if you are missing anything (Especially the risks and red flags) here is a link to the Paper

http://tribeqr.com/v/mrnainherited

After reading this paper through and given what is on the line when rolling this new and simply untested technology (with respect to so many areas including Genotoxicity, cancer , fertility, innate immune system disruption) , would you make the call to roll this out to infants through to the elderly independent of risk stratification and given the known safe and effective early treatments that now abound (Though many are STILL blocked by the TGA headed by John Skerritt)

see: https://aapsonline.org/covidpatientguide/

Its nice to hope that the effects seen on the conferred immunity to the offspring is simply through breast feeding because this would allow for the possibility of advising mRNA vaccinated mothers not to breast feed to avoid the Pandora's box that comes with these mRNA-LNP vaccines including inhibition of the adaptive immune responses.

But better we don't "hope" and better when asking "Am I missing anything" it comes from the perspective of I better be damn sure I am not before I unleash a Novel technology Gene based mRNA medication on an entire population; especially when there ARE safe and effective tested treatments and especially when it does not stop transmission and especially when such warning signs abound

Expand full comment

Indeed. I'm not defending these diabolical shots in any way. I have avoided them like the plague and will continue to do so. That said, the graphs shown in this article don't, in themselves, support a conclusion of intergenerational harm. Rather, they simply show that vaccinating the dams protected the pups from weight loss during viral challenge. The fact that the protection persists even into the fourth litter doesn't mean very much in a species that produces another litter every 3 minutes. Well, not quite, but the gestational length and the interval between litters is very short in mice -- shorter than the half-life of vaccinal antibodies. It is entirely plausible that what these graphs show is that vaccinating the mother protects her offspring from that particular pathogen (assuming, of course, that a vaccine is use which is protective). Another issue here is that this study investigated an influenza vaccine, not a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Those are two very different animals.

Expand full comment

Chris when looking at the charts of fig 6 within a study focusing on much more than the weight loss of litters 1,2 and 4 you might be right; but you might be wrong and you are definitely not focusing on the bigger picture.

Can you explain away the loss of innate immunity against fungal infection in this study and can you even begin to claim to know what a synthetic messenger RNA might do within the cytoplasm of a cell bombarded with Lipid Nanoparticles (LNP) that in themselves are causing inflammation and inhibiting the immune response (EMPTY LNP).

Its fine to want to highlight a tiny bit of light you may be able to shed on the picture (or may not) and its great you knew to steer clear of the Covid19 vaccines.

However, its super important to reinforce the precautionary principle and make sure the argument is not how the Vaccines might not be causing harm while they are in circulation but rather we need to take them out of circulation until it can be proved they will not cause harm.

It would be good if you went through the paper in its entirety and highlight the areas of the study that cause you the most concern.

If you want to just focus on the conferred immunity and your theory that it may simply be immunoglobulins in colostrum then perhaps you should focus on litter 2 results where statistically significant less body weight is lost by the litter with the Dad and the Mum being immunized as compared to the litter with just the Mum (something not seen in the 1st or 4th litter)

The key to the focus should be that they are playing with fire here and it calls for an immediate halt.

Expand full comment

My problem with using these graphs in an editorial-type article is this very real risk that they may be misinterpreted. I have not read the study; I read your article describing the study, which should be able to stand on its own and save your readers the trouble of reading the source article, unless we are interested enough and have enough time to do so ourselves.

The graphs you used to illustrate your point do not (make your point). They are about a different vaccine, against a different virus, in a species other than our own,* and on their own they illustrate a normal and expected phenomenon (passive transfer of immunity to the neonate via colostrum).

[* The list of differences between mice and humans is long, and the list of failure to translate from murine lab studies to human clinical practice is even longer.]

We are up against a huge credibility challenge - at every turn. It's essential that our scientific arguments be unassailable. I first commented on this study shortly after reading the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's "fact check" of the movie, Died Suddenly. Some of their strikes were bullseyes. How can Stew Peters have been so careless?!! The entire movie is discredited by some easily avoidable errors (e.g., citing sudden deaths on Google that were completely unrelated to COVID shots, such as a car accident).

Our scientific arguments must be solid if we are to prevail. Using these graphs of weight loss in mouse pups whose parents were variably vaccinated against influenza is stretching the limits of credibility. They do not make your argument, at least to this one scientist's satisfaction - and I'm already sold on the fact that these COVID shots are a travesty!

Expand full comment

Re Fact Checkers - be aware the major factcheckers are very compromised:

see:

https://marktaliano.net/conflict-of-interest-reuters-fact-checks-covid-related-social-media-posts-but-fails-to-disclose-ties-to-pfizer-world-economic-forum-by-meghan-redshaw/

Re: Stew Peters - All to quickly you accepted from the fact checkers that car accidents were completely unrelated to COVID shots.

I encourage you to read the substack:

tribeqr.com/v/vaccinatedpilots

Within that substack is a link to an attachment listing the DAENS reported Adverse effects in categories that would be devastating if they occurred at the wrong time

http://tribeqr.com/v/jhol1attachment

Scroll down to the tables of the startling number of actually reported Adverse Effects of Australians where these categories of adverse events could prove disastrous if affecting a Pilot at the wrong time

With a Majority vaccinated Driving population and given there are no co-pilot controls for cars its pure common sense that you are going to see an uptick in car accidents (sudden death from car accidents that can't otherwise be explained).

Just as there is likely an uptake in a vaccinated elderly falling (which is often fatal for them).

Small side note ; Israel lost a lot of busses to Terrorist ; now their is a huge uptick in fatal bus crashes - I wonder who the terrorist is in this case...

Important - we need to embrace assailable arguments and not fall into the leftist and woke way of thinking that our arguments are unassailable (Impossible to dispute or disprove; undeniable). The most credible arguments are the ones that can be open to dispute and debate.

The process brings to the table what people can assess for themselves given the time they give to it and then understand better what is happening to them and the world around them; perhaps give insight into what they can do about it.

Hopefully for the people that want to restore humanity and a moral compass in the face of what appears to be a WEF agenda driven goal to remove individual divinity and replace it with groupthink headed by a small number of unelected elite and powerful.

Expand full comment

I refer you to a Pfizer document submitted to the TGA and extracted through a FOI request.

https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-2389-06.pdf

and easier document to navigate has some mark ups

http://tribeqr.com/v/tgapfizerinfo01

In Ascending order of Magnitude there is a table of the Biodistribution of the LNP

This where these inflammatory LNP particles are reaching and ACCUMULATING ; entering into the cells of these areas.

Brain

Eyes

Spinal cord

Prostate (males)

Adipose tissue

Muscle

Stomach

Skin

Salivary glands

Testes (males)

Thymus

Bladder

Kidneys

Whole blood

Uterus (females)

Blood : plasma ratio

Heart

Pancreas

Bone (femur)

Pituitary gland

Lymph node (mandibular)

Plasma

Thyroid

Lung

Large intestine

Lymph node (mesenteric)

Small intestine

Bone marrow (femur)

Ovaries (females)

Adrenal glands

Spleen

Liver

Note Pfizer stop measuring or stopped reporting at only 48 hours even when they could see staggering and dangerously increasing concentration in the Ovaries.

Chris , this is a potentially species challenging phenomenon !

Then add to this that in the Covid19 Vaccines these LNPs are filled with an Antigen (as described by Pfizer); the Spike Protein. That Antigen is further enhanced for longevity of an unknown extra time with additional nucleotides.

So if you do read the paper that this substack referred to take a look at what JUST the empty LNP can do and then think about what that means in the context of this submission from Pfizer to our TGA

Expand full comment

Chris your focus appears to create a smoke screen and can not take away from the real and present dangers.

The possible misinterpretation of a graph pales into total insignificance with jeopardizing the human species with gene therapy with known unknowns.

Without getting bogged down in the specifics of your reply which appears still naïve of actually reading the study;

a) Your argument about different species and the difference between mice and humans is better put towards Pfizer and the health regulators who relied on such studies to declare the vaccines as safe; without genotoxicity testing, without testing effects on fertility ,without testing on the elderly etc...

b) Your point on a different virus being used also shows you have not read the paper and the alarm that it raises with respect to impact on the innate immune system eve when testing with LNP WITHOUT mRNA vaccine; that is likely because the LNP themselves cause inflammation deep within the cell membrane and possible within its nucleus. That the immunity conferred from one generation to the other (in the absence of passive transfer of immunity to the neonate via colostrum as demonstrated clearly beyond statically relevant doubt with litter 2)

occurred indicates the strong possibility that changes to the inherited genes is more than a tiny possibility; and ANY clinical trial vaccine that has more than a tiny possibility of impacting the human genes in known unknown ways should A) Never have been Allowed; B) be halted immediately.

I welcome your input as it is indeed a good test to the credibility of evidence presented that must be considered when gambling with the Human race.

Don't fall into the trap of promoting the idea that there are unassailable (Impossible to dispute) arguments; that's exactly what leftist and woke try to promote and therefore give themselves the excuse not to look into anything that challenges their position. We want debate and opinions that give rise to the opportunity to go into the details and then make decisions based on both the knowns , the unknowns and the risks.

To get a broader picture of just what fire these Pfizer Mengele's are playing with when dealing with mRNA delivered with LNP platforms with Gene therapies

I encourage you to look into the document Pfizer submitted to the TGA in January 2021 (Link provided after the note):

Note that the paper that this substack referred to clearly demonstrated how the innate immune system is negatively effected by ONLY the LNP themselves.

Add to this the Russian-Roulette-magnifying-factor of loading these LNPs with a known antigen - the Spike Protein.

AND then consider that the loaded Antigen into the LNP has been "enhanced" with inserted nucleotides to make it last longer (how much longer is still now known) !!

The Link (with hyperlinks for quick navigation and added comments)

http://tribeqr.com/v/tgapfizerinfo01

The Original Link to the untouched document on the TGA website

https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/foi-2389-06.pdf

FOI is short for Freedom Of Information and this had to be "extracted from the TGA using FOI regulations.

Chris; Jump to the LNP distribution that our TGA knew about

They also knew that Pfizer stopped taking readings even when readings were continuing to climb significantly in critical areas of the body (The most alarming to me personally being in the Ovaries :

In increasing order of LNP penetration LNP was found in:

Brain

Eyes

Spinal cord

Prostate (males)

Adipose tissue

Muscle

Stomach

Skin

Salivary glands

Testes (males)

Thymus

Bladder

Kidneys

Whole blood

Uterus (females)

Blood : plasma ratio

Heart

Pancreas

Bone (femur)

Pituitary gland

Lymph node (mandibular)

Plasma

Thyroid

Lung

Large intestine

Lymph node (mesenteric)

Small intestine

Bone marrow (femur)

Ovaries (females)

Adrenal glands

Spleen

Liver

Further post on this to come...

Final note:

Be very wary of any Fact Checkers see

https://marktaliano.net/conflict-of-interest-reuters-fact-checks-covid-related-social-media-posts-but-fails-to-disclose-ties-to-pfizer-world-economic-forum-by-meghan-redshaw/

You quickly accepted their view that citing car accidents was completely unrelated to COVID shots

I encourage you to read the following substack

tribeqr.com/v/vaccinatedpilots

Here’s a Link to that attachment

http://tribeqr.com/v/jhol1attachment

Scroll down to the tables of the startling number of actually reported Adverse Effects of Australians where these categories of adverse events could prove disastrous if affecting a Pilot at the wrong time.

It would be foolhardy not to expect more road accidents from a majority vaccinated driving population; Just as you would expect more falls than normal from the vaccinated elderly - the ways this Mengele like LNP-mRNA experiment plays out are not always obvious but the all cause mortality and reduced birth rates along with the temporal relationship of the vaccine rollouts form part of a strong but not unassailable argument.

Very few will take the time to read this response and likely you will not look at the full details of this response, yet it all helps tp document what can and will be judged by people looking for answers to help them understand what is happening around them and what they might be able to do to bring back the human and moral compass.

Expand full comment

Sorry, I should have mentioned that I'm a veterinarian. Vaccinating the mother to protect the foal, calf, puppy, kitten, etc. is standard practice in domestic animals. These graphs are unremarkable to me, as they are what I would expect to see with colostral protection (passive transfer of maternal immunity via the colostrum).

Expand full comment