Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

You can run, but can’t hide. “Several manufacturing process changes for BNT162b2 mRNA, including production scale, were introduced during development. The proposed commercial scale manufacturing process includes use of linearised plasmid DNA template for mRNA production, whereas in early development phases PCR-amplification of DNA template was used.” ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• This...

RennickGBR's profile picture

Gerard Rennick

106,086 subscribers

48,569 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & PolitikGesundheit & Wellness
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

10 Kommentare

Profilbild von Jikkyleaks 🐭
Jikkyleaks 🐭vor 1 Jahr

They cannot hide this any more. The TGA should have known that there were SV40 enhancer sequences in those gene therapy vaccines. Once they were informed that Pfizer kept that information from them, that should have prompted immediate criminal referral

Profilbild von CrazyTruthBot
CrazyTruthBotvor 1 Jahr

#auspol, @TGAgovau, @Mark_Butler_MP It’s deeply concerning that the TGA proceeded with authorising vaccines made by an altered manufacturing process—one that apparently skipped crucial human testing on the final product. This shift from PCR-amplified to plasmid-derived mRNA production, coupled with the use of the SV40 promoter in the plasmids, raises critical questions about transparency and safety. The SV40 sequence, known for its ability to target the cell nucleus, adds another layer of potential risk if it’s not properly filtered from the final vaccine product. What’s particularly troubling is the reported presence of large particles in the batches, some over 10 microns in size, which could signify DNA contamination, potentially carrying nucleus-targeting sequences. This raises obvious questions about whether such particles were effectively filtered, as well as why no genotoxicity testing was performed. Considering the role endogenous reverse transcriptase enzymes play in genomic integration, it’s astonishing that the TGA appears to ignore these serious implications. Instead of directly addressing these issues, officials seem to sidestep the questions raised—diverting focus rather than providing clear answers. Given the extensive public trust placed in health regulators, Australians deserve full transparency and accountability, especially when these lapses may have contributed to adverse health outcomes. Holding TGA officials accountable isn’t just a matter of oversight; it’s a necessary step toward restoring public trust.

Profilbild von Guy
Guyvor 1 Jahr

Keep pushing were all behind you...

Profilbild von Michael
Michaelvor 1 Jahr

Surely the actions of the TGA employees are fraudulent rather than negligent? The TGA receive a great deal of funding from drug trails and have clearly been captured by big Pharma interests. We need an independent health regulator more than ever.

Profilbild von Rinni
Rinnivor 1 Jahr

No trust in government at all...zero. Thank you @SenatorRennick for exposing the truth and your support for the people of Australia. The playbook was published in 2010, and it was exactly how our so called pandemic played out! Coincidence, hell no!

Profilbild von Leanne Verrier
Leanne Verriervor 1 Jahr

< Make no mistake we are dealing with evil people when it comes to the Australian Health Department. They engaged in a massive psychological operation that caused the deaths of thousands of Australians and are now scrambling to cover their tracks. >

Profilbild von RW
RWvor 1 Jahr

The TGA tests nothing. They are paid by big pharma to get it out there!

Profilbild von Space cadet
Space cadetvor 1 Jahr

Thankyou for exposing the truth and working tirelessly on our behalf.

Profilbild von rustyfox
rustyfoxvor 1 Jahr

Move a piece of legislation to scrap the TGA and the proposed CDC and replace with two agencies funded by Government - 1. For Pharmaceutical companies and 2. Natural remedies and complementary medicines. This is the only way to bury these conflicted interests

Profilbild von “STRAIGHT SHOOTER”
“STRAIGHT SHOOTER”vor 1 Jahr

TGA are Khunts

Ähnliche Videos

“The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) does not consider the presence of the SV40 promoter to be a safety concern either before or after the product is subjected to DNA digestion and purification.” And “The TGA is unable to provide the sequences requested as they are commercial in confidence.” (See comments)” •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Turns out the previous answers like this answer were no answers by claiming commercial in confidence. In light of the evidence released last week via FOI where the TGA admitted that: “foreign DNA can integrate into chromosomal DNA in the absence of an integrase in mammalian cells. This comes from the DNA damage/repair literature where breaks in DNA are repaired through processes called non-homologous end joining or homologous recombination. Exogenous DNA can potentially be incorporated using these processes.” It is clear the TGA have been caught lying again. The SV40 is a promoter that can initiate DNA replication, so the SV40 promoter has to be a safety concern. Given no carcinogenic testing was carried out then the TGA can’t rule out anything. Furthermore the genetic sequence of the plasmids should not be commercial in confidence. Luckily the sequence has already been released via scientists in Canada. The TGA are again protecting big pharma instead of protecting the people. #auspol #australia #tga #health
2:07

“The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) does not consider the presence of the SV40 promoter to be a safety concern either before or after the product is subjected to DNA digestion and purification.” And “The TGA is unable to provide the sequences requested as they are commercial in confidence.” (See comments)” •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Turns out the previous answers like this answer were no answers by claiming commercial in confidence. In light of the evidence released last week via FOI where the TGA admitted that: “foreign DNA can integrate into chromosomal DNA in the absence of an integrase in mammalian cells. This comes from the DNA damage/repair literature where breaks in DNA are repaired through processes called non-homologous end joining or homologous recombination. Exogenous DNA can potentially be incorporated using these processes.” It is clear the TGA have been caught lying again. The SV40 is a promoter that can initiate DNA replication, so the SV40 promoter has to be a safety concern. Given no carcinogenic testing was carried out then the TGA can’t rule out anything. Furthermore the genetic sequence of the plasmids should not be commercial in confidence. Luckily the sequence has already been released via scientists in Canada. The TGA are again protecting big pharma instead of protecting the people. #auspol #australia #tga #health

Gerard Rennick

27,152 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Former Australian Senator embarrasses the TGA The Bait and Switch by Pfizer gets fully exposed in Senate by former Sen. Gerard Rennick [Gerard Rennick] The TGA didn’t know Plasmids weren’t used in Process 1. Then the TGA chief steps in to run cover for their Sponsor, Pfizer, saying they might not be able to provide the sequence of the product which was approved and mandated in Australia. RENNICK: “Can the TGA rule out categorically that the SV40 primer, wasn’t used int the plasmids under process 2.... can you please provide what the sequences of those plasmids were please...?” TGA Chief: “We may not be in a position to provide... but we will take that on notice”. It almost seems like the commercial agreements the TGA has with its sponsors precede safety and accountability.
1:54

Former Australian Senator embarrasses the TGA The Bait and Switch by Pfizer gets fully exposed in Senate by former Sen. Gerard Rennick [Gerard Rennick] The TGA didn’t know Plasmids weren’t used in Process 1. Then the TGA chief steps in to run cover for their Sponsor, Pfizer, saying they might not be able to provide the sequence of the product which was approved and mandated in Australia. RENNICK: “Can the TGA rule out categorically that the SV40 primer, wasn’t used int the plasmids under process 2.... can you please provide what the sequences of those plasmids were please...?” TGA Chief: “We may not be in a position to provide... but we will take that on notice”. It almost seems like the commercial agreements the TGA has with its sponsors precede safety and accountability.

Humanspective

21,807 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

🚨🚨🚨🚨 For the first time, German TV MDR covers DNA contamination in Pfizer's mRNA vaccine! ---------Transcript----------- We are in a private laboratory in Magdeburg. Professor Brigitte König is examining Corona vaccines here. The result, all samples are contaminated. "With foreign DNA that should not be in the vaccine in this quantity. From my point of view, the alarming result is that all 5 batches had significant foreign DNA in them, which are well above the limit. It's about the BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine. 5 batches were given to the Magdeburg laboratory because there was a suspicion." Foreign DNA could be contained in the vaccine, and beyond the limit. According to WHO, the limit is a total DNA content of 10 nanograms per dose. It is important that this is not exceeded, because there is a risk that foreign DNA could penetrate human cells. Brigitte König is an external professor at the medical faculty of the University of Magdeburg. She shows us the result of her privately conducted investigation. All 5 examined batches are contaminated. For the lowest concentration, the limit was exceeded by 83 times. The highest concentration found was 354 times the limit to König. This is concerning. The client of the analysis is also a private individual. The biologist Dr. Jürgen Kirchner. He has been one of the vocal critics of mRNA vaccines for years. He operates a website called Gene Vaccines. There he also advertises his books written under a pseudonym. His last one is called "Sullied." He has also appeared on YouTubers like the controversial Corona critic Paul Brandenburg. And discussed with him his theses on vaccines. Also the findings from Magdeburg. When DNA contaminations are found in a vaccine, that are as far above the limits as we have found, then in my view a special paragraph of the Medicines Act automatically applies, that is paragraph 5. It says if a medicinal product is questionable, then it must be taken off the market. And the biologist tries to achieve this. In September, he was at a hearing in the Bundestag's Petitions Committee on the topic of pandemic planning. Here he used the opportunity to present the analysis results from Magdeburg. These are gigantic exceedances of a limit for a really very questionable medicinal product. But do the vaccines actually contain foreign DNA? The accusation is not new. Already in April 2023, American scientists found foreign DNA above the limit in the vaccines from BioNTech and Moderna. Also in this pre-publication of a Canadian study from the end of October, several scientists come to a similar conclusion. The researchers write, our results extend the existing concerns regarding vaccine safety. But are such traces of foreign DNA actually dangerous? Humans constantly carry foreign DNA in themselves. This can come from food, but also if bacteria enter the lungs. These floating DNA snippets are digested in the gut by enzymes. But there is a difference with the mRNA vaccination. The vaccine contains so-called lipid nanoparticles. They smuggle the mRNA into the cells. They do not differentiate, however, whether they transport mRNA or DNA. Could foreign DNA thereby directly penetrate the cell nucleus? That is at least the concern of this American researcher, Prof. Dr. Philip Buckhaults. He is a clear proponent of mRNA technology. Yet he too says he found DNA residues in Pfizer vaccine. Here at a hearing in the South Carolina Senate, he explains the potential consequences of DNA. By email he writes us, at the moment no one knows for sure, whether the foreign DNA has caused damage or will cause damage. But there is clearly a justified theoretical risk of genetic damage to long-lived stem cells. We asked several renowned German scientists about this concern. Only a few reply to our request. Among them is Prof. Emanuel Wyler from the Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, an institute funded by the federal government. He deems it extremely unlikely that the DNA could have negative consequences. Further, he writes, DNA in vaccines is not a new topic and is also tested for, for example, in a flu vaccine. Until now, no one has been interested, or one rightly trusts that the Paul Ehrlich Institute as the responsible authority performs the testing work correctly. In my opinion, this shows that this is not about DNA in vaccines, but either about fundamentally questioning vaccinations, our best weapon against infectious diseases, or about creating a sensation with the issue of Corona. However, Prof. Gerald Dyker, a chemist at the Ruhr University, does think that negative consequences are conceivable. He writes to us, against the background that one was under extreme time pressure, that the manufacturer decided, either without knowledge or with the acquiescence of supervisory authorities, to release the product with the remaining DNA impurities for mass vaccination. For Prof. Bernd Mühlbauer of the Drug Commission, however, it is still not clear at all, whether the vaccine is actually contaminated to a worrying extent. But he writes that residual amounts of DNA in the case of an mRNA vaccine cannot penetrate the cell nucleus and cause damage. Such experiments, including animal tests over several generations, are necessary and perhaps have already been conducted. And how do the authorities respond to the debate? The Paul Ehrlich Institute is responsible for the surveillance and safety of vaccines. We want to know, whether they themselves have tested the vaccines for foreign DNA or at least checked the results from Magdeburg. The written response is that parameters such as the residual DNA content in the vaccine are only experimentally tested by the manufacturer. The Institute thus does not test the vaccines themselves for DNA contamination but relies on the manufacturers' test protocols. The fact that the authority neither tests itself nor checks the analysis results from Magdeburg causes surprise to Professor Brigitte König. "I would have expected, or assumed, that the authorities would at least randomly check the end product for contamination and purity. Depending on the product, or if something else is inside. As I said, the authorities can do that. Especially the Paul Ehrlich Institute has the equipment for it." The competent Federal Ministry of Health questions the analysis from Magdeburg and points out that some of the tested batches were already expired, according to Dr. Kirchner's notification. However, for the found foreign DNA this is irrelevant, says the scientist. The DNA in these lipid particles does not multiply. And is more likely to be decomposed. That is, if the vaccine is not expired, we might expect even higher values but not lower ones. The DNA does not multiply in a sterile vaccine. Since the authorities apparently doubt the investigation results from Magdeburg, we want to have various batches tested ourselves. We contacted more than 20 laboratories, some of them at German universities, but also private providers who can conduct such analyses. From all, we received rejections or no response. So, we failed to have a DNA analysis conducted independently once again. It would indeed be important to conclusively clarify the question of the DNA content. Because one reason for suspected DNA contamination could be the manufacturing process itself, which is different from the one used during the authorization study. The vaccine used for the clinical studies was manufactured mechanically without the involvement of microorganisms. This production path is named Process 1 in the documents of the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Pfizer then switched to a different production technique, referred to as Process 2. Only very few subjects in the authorization study received this vaccine. Here, the material was supplied by genetically modified bacteria. This process was apparently less complex. But did it actually pose a higher risk? That there were differences between the batches of the two different manufacturing processes has been a concern. Questions about comparability, characterization, and clinical suitability were raised. We ask BioNTech why the manufacturing process was changed nonetheless, but we do not receive an answer to this question. Regarding the suspected DNA contamination identified by the Magdeburg scientist, the company writes that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is not contaminated with DNA. Furthermore, it states that the batches were subjected to comprehensive quality control by the manufacturer. The Magdeburg scientist says that she has now examined additional vaccine batches. Here too, she found foreign DNA. However, we as an editorial team were not able to conclusively answer whether this analysis is indeed accurate and, most importantly, whether the suspected DNA contamination can cause harm. The most recent act in the debate is this official-looking letter from an association called Medical Treatment Association, which warns doctors about the vaccine. However, as informed by the responsible authorities, this is said to be a false report. ----------------------------------- H/T: Aquarius-elect 🗣️
11:26

🚨🚨🚨🚨 For the first time, German TV MDR covers DNA contamination in Pfizer's mRNA vaccine! ---------Transcript----------- We are in a private laboratory in Magdeburg. Professor Brigitte König is examining Corona vaccines here. The result, all samples are contaminated. "With foreign DNA that should not be in the vaccine in this quantity. From my point of view, the alarming result is that all 5 batches had significant foreign DNA in them, which are well above the limit. It's about the BioNTech-Pfizer vaccine. 5 batches were given to the Magdeburg laboratory because there was a suspicion." Foreign DNA could be contained in the vaccine, and beyond the limit. According to WHO, the limit is a total DNA content of 10 nanograms per dose. It is important that this is not exceeded, because there is a risk that foreign DNA could penetrate human cells. Brigitte König is an external professor at the medical faculty of the University of Magdeburg. She shows us the result of her privately conducted investigation. All 5 examined batches are contaminated. For the lowest concentration, the limit was exceeded by 83 times. The highest concentration found was 354 times the limit to König. This is concerning. The client of the analysis is also a private individual. The biologist Dr. Jürgen Kirchner. He has been one of the vocal critics of mRNA vaccines for years. He operates a website called Gene Vaccines. There he also advertises his books written under a pseudonym. His last one is called "Sullied." He has also appeared on YouTubers like the controversial Corona critic Paul Brandenburg. And discussed with him his theses on vaccines. Also the findings from Magdeburg. When DNA contaminations are found in a vaccine, that are as far above the limits as we have found, then in my view a special paragraph of the Medicines Act automatically applies, that is paragraph 5. It says if a medicinal product is questionable, then it must be taken off the market. And the biologist tries to achieve this. In September, he was at a hearing in the Bundestag's Petitions Committee on the topic of pandemic planning. Here he used the opportunity to present the analysis results from Magdeburg. These are gigantic exceedances of a limit for a really very questionable medicinal product. But do the vaccines actually contain foreign DNA? The accusation is not new. Already in April 2023, American scientists found foreign DNA above the limit in the vaccines from BioNTech and Moderna. Also in this pre-publication of a Canadian study from the end of October, several scientists come to a similar conclusion. The researchers write, our results extend the existing concerns regarding vaccine safety. But are such traces of foreign DNA actually dangerous? Humans constantly carry foreign DNA in themselves. This can come from food, but also if bacteria enter the lungs. These floating DNA snippets are digested in the gut by enzymes. But there is a difference with the mRNA vaccination. The vaccine contains so-called lipid nanoparticles. They smuggle the mRNA into the cells. They do not differentiate, however, whether they transport mRNA or DNA. Could foreign DNA thereby directly penetrate the cell nucleus? That is at least the concern of this American researcher, Prof. Dr. Philip Buckhaults. He is a clear proponent of mRNA technology. Yet he too says he found DNA residues in Pfizer vaccine. Here at a hearing in the South Carolina Senate, he explains the potential consequences of DNA. By email he writes us, at the moment no one knows for sure, whether the foreign DNA has caused damage or will cause damage. But there is clearly a justified theoretical risk of genetic damage to long-lived stem cells. We asked several renowned German scientists about this concern. Only a few reply to our request. Among them is Prof. Emanuel Wyler from the Max Delbrück Center for Molecular Medicine, an institute funded by the federal government. He deems it extremely unlikely that the DNA could have negative consequences. Further, he writes, DNA in vaccines is not a new topic and is also tested for, for example, in a flu vaccine. Until now, no one has been interested, or one rightly trusts that the Paul Ehrlich Institute as the responsible authority performs the testing work correctly. In my opinion, this shows that this is not about DNA in vaccines, but either about fundamentally questioning vaccinations, our best weapon against infectious diseases, or about creating a sensation with the issue of Corona. However, Prof. Gerald Dyker, a chemist at the Ruhr University, does think that negative consequences are conceivable. He writes to us, against the background that one was under extreme time pressure, that the manufacturer decided, either without knowledge or with the acquiescence of supervisory authorities, to release the product with the remaining DNA impurities for mass vaccination. For Prof. Bernd Mühlbauer of the Drug Commission, however, it is still not clear at all, whether the vaccine is actually contaminated to a worrying extent. But he writes that residual amounts of DNA in the case of an mRNA vaccine cannot penetrate the cell nucleus and cause damage. Such experiments, including animal tests over several generations, are necessary and perhaps have already been conducted. And how do the authorities respond to the debate? The Paul Ehrlich Institute is responsible for the surveillance and safety of vaccines. We want to know, whether they themselves have tested the vaccines for foreign DNA or at least checked the results from Magdeburg. The written response is that parameters such as the residual DNA content in the vaccine are only experimentally tested by the manufacturer. The Institute thus does not test the vaccines themselves for DNA contamination but relies on the manufacturers' test protocols. The fact that the authority neither tests itself nor checks the analysis results from Magdeburg causes surprise to Professor Brigitte König. "I would have expected, or assumed, that the authorities would at least randomly check the end product for contamination and purity. Depending on the product, or if something else is inside. As I said, the authorities can do that. Especially the Paul Ehrlich Institute has the equipment for it." The competent Federal Ministry of Health questions the analysis from Magdeburg and points out that some of the tested batches were already expired, according to Dr. Kirchner's notification. However, for the found foreign DNA this is irrelevant, says the scientist. The DNA in these lipid particles does not multiply. And is more likely to be decomposed. That is, if the vaccine is not expired, we might expect even higher values but not lower ones. The DNA does not multiply in a sterile vaccine. Since the authorities apparently doubt the investigation results from Magdeburg, we want to have various batches tested ourselves. We contacted more than 20 laboratories, some of them at German universities, but also private providers who can conduct such analyses. From all, we received rejections or no response. So, we failed to have a DNA analysis conducted independently once again. It would indeed be important to conclusively clarify the question of the DNA content. Because one reason for suspected DNA contamination could be the manufacturing process itself, which is different from the one used during the authorization study. The vaccine used for the clinical studies was manufactured mechanically without the involvement of microorganisms. This production path is named Process 1 in the documents of the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Pfizer then switched to a different production technique, referred to as Process 2. Only very few subjects in the authorization study received this vaccine. Here, the material was supplied by genetically modified bacteria. This process was apparently less complex. But did it actually pose a higher risk? That there were differences between the batches of the two different manufacturing processes has been a concern. Questions about comparability, characterization, and clinical suitability were raised. We ask BioNTech why the manufacturing process was changed nonetheless, but we do not receive an answer to this question. Regarding the suspected DNA contamination identified by the Magdeburg scientist, the company writes that the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine is not contaminated with DNA. Furthermore, it states that the batches were subjected to comprehensive quality control by the manufacturer. The Magdeburg scientist says that she has now examined additional vaccine batches. Here too, she found foreign DNA. However, we as an editorial team were not able to conclusively answer whether this analysis is indeed accurate and, most importantly, whether the suspected DNA contamination can cause harm. The most recent act in the debate is this official-looking letter from an association called Medical Treatment Association, which warns doctors about the vaccine. However, as informed by the responsible authorities, this is said to be a false report. ----------------------------------- H/T: Aquarius-elect 🗣️

aussie17

456,115 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

The Pfizer COVID-19 “vaccine” injected into billions of arms was not the same one used in Pfizer’s clinical trials. There was a "bait and switch." The clinical trials tested "Process 1" while the public received "Process 2." And what they never told you is that "Process 2" was only tested on about 252 people, instead of 40,000 people. They also didn't tell you that the vials were contaminated with plasmid DNA. A new study by Kevin McKernan and colleagues found "the presence of billions to hundreds of billions of DNA molecules per dose in these vaccines. Using fluorometry, all vaccines exceed the guidelines for residual DNA set by FDA and WHO of 10 ng/dose by 188 to 509-fold." In layman's terms, that's not 500%, that is up to 500 times the amount of residual DNA that is acceptable. Repost and follow for more informative content. Related articles are attached in the thread below ⬇️
1:40

The Pfizer COVID-19 “vaccine” injected into billions of arms was not the same one used in Pfizer’s clinical trials. There was a "bait and switch." The clinical trials tested "Process 1" while the public received "Process 2." And what they never told you is that "Process 2" was only tested on about 252 people, instead of 40,000 people. They also didn't tell you that the vials were contaminated with plasmid DNA. A new study by Kevin McKernan and colleagues found "the presence of billions to hundreds of billions of DNA molecules per dose in these vaccines. Using fluorometry, all vaccines exceed the guidelines for residual DNA set by FDA and WHO of 10 ng/dose by 188 to 509-fold." In layman's terms, that's not 500%, that is up to 500 times the amount of residual DNA that is acceptable. Repost and follow for more informative content. Related articles are attached in the thread below ⬇️

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

4,030,597 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

The TGA are so arrogant with their lies. Watch as the TGA squirm over the lack of testing they did in regard to the Covid vaccine. The idea, as one of the staff says, that there is a large body of evidence proving the vaccines are safe is wrong. There is next to no evidence the jabs are safe or effective. It now appears that there is a risk that the vaccine might enter the nucleus as well. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. #auspol
4:24

The TGA are so arrogant with their lies. Watch as the TGA squirm over the lack of testing they did in regard to the Covid vaccine. The idea, as one of the staff says, that there is a large body of evidence proving the vaccines are safe is wrong. There is next to no evidence the jabs are safe or effective. It now appears that there is a risk that the vaccine might enter the nucleus as well. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. #auspol

Gerard Rennick

71,234 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

"We have sequencing from a colon [tumor] biopsy from a patient who was 4 times vaccinated...we can find [DNA] plasmids in there a hundred copies per cell. They're not exactly the same as Pfizer's, which is a real head-scratcher, but they're in there." Kevin McKernan (Kevin McKernan), Chief Scientific Officer and Founder of Medicinal Genomics, as well as former R&D lead of the Human Genome Project, describes for Nick Jikomes (Nick Jikomes) how he and his colleagues have sequenced a colon tumor biopsy from a person who took four COVID injections and have found DNA plasmids—almost certainly from Pfizer's COVID-injection manufacturing process—at a ratio of 100 per cell. McKernan notes that the plasmids, however, are "not exactly the same as Pfizer's," which "is a real head-scratcher." "We haven't published the work yet, but we have sequencing from a colon biopsy from a patient who was 4 times vaccinated. A year after vaccination, they had a colon cancer. They biopsied it that day, and then 30 days later, they died, and then they biopsied after, and we have sequencing on both the pre-mortem and post-mortem samples," McKernan says. The scientist and entrepreneur, often cited as the first person to find DNA contamination in the mRNA COVID injections, adds, "we can find plasmids in there a hundred copies per cell. They're not exactly the same as Pfizer's, which is a real head-scratcher, but they're in there." "There's two of them," McKernan says of the plasmids. "And one encodes spike and one encodes nucleocapsid. We don't know where the hell the nucleocapsid one's coming from." (For reference, a nucleocapsid of a virus is the protein shell or capsid that encloses the nucleic acid—DNA or RNA—content, providing protection and structure to the viral genome.) When asked why the plasmids wouldn't exactly match those used in Pfizer's mRNA-injection manufacturing process, McKernan speculates: "Do they have more than one [DNA plasmid] in circulation? Like, BioNTech got a different manufacturing plasmid than the manufacturing plant out here in the US because they're making these in two different locations? It's possible. Is there contamination in their laboratory, in the manufacturing of this, they get the wrong plasmid in their E. coli vat, and suddenly they've got a different background there?" "And we've gotta do everything on our end to make sure we didn't introduce it, which we're doing. We're running all types of experiments to show that there's spike expression going on. But there's any number of reasons that could explain this," McKernan adds. Note that DNA plasmids—small, circular, double-stranded DNA molecules capable of replicating independently within a bacterial cell—were understood to be used in the manufacturing of the mRNA injections, but should've been removed below a certain threshold established by regulatory authorities such as the FDA. (The DNA contamination may be present in vials at 1,000 times higher than allowable according to one article published by the Brownstone Institute covering this issue. Article title: "The Vax-Gene Files: An Accidental Discovery") "We've got a case now that we're zeroing in on that looked like the SV40 poly-A signal, which is a termination signal. It's a transcription termination signal. We've got a piece of that integrating into chromosome 21, and it's breaking a gene that's involved in cancer. So, that one looks really interesting," McKernan tells Jikomes. "That could be maybe the driver of this whole thing. But the program spits out a long list of potential integrations that we have to go through and verify which ones are real and which ones are artifacts and all that. So I don't wanna get ahead of ourselves on that. That hasn't been Sanger verified yet." (For reference, Sanger sequencing is a method used to determine the precise order of nucleotides in a DNA molecule; the SV40 promoter is a strong regulatory region from the Simian Virus 40 that drives high levels of gene expression in mammalian cells when used in genetic constructs; a poly-A signal is a sequence in DNA or RNA that signals the end of a gene, prompting the addition of a polyadenine tail to the mRNA during processing, which stabilizes the mRNA and aids in its export from the nucleus.) "But the copy number alone suggests that these things aren't fully fragmented. Right? These plasmids really shouldn't be replicating to a hundred copies per cell," McKernan adds. "They couldn't, they shouldn't be in there at that level, because if you just do the math on how much is in the vaccine, when you do an injection of this, this person has four vaccines...1.2 ml of Pfizer...went into about 87,000 mls [of] body volume. So you should have a massive dilution into your body. Yet when we're sequencing this and doing qPCR off the tumor, the CTs coming back off the tumor are almost as high as they are straight out of the vial." (For reference, qPCR—or quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction—is a technique used to amplify and simultaneously quantify a targeted DNA molecule. "CTs" is a reference to cycle threshold; PCR cycle threshold is the number of cycles at which the fluorescence signal from the reaction exceeds the background level, indicating that the target DNA amplification has occurred.) McKernan goes on to say: "And even if it were an integration event [that is, the DNA plasmid integrated into the genome]...I think there could be two things going on here: There could be plasmids replicating episomally [in the cell] and there could be parts of them integrated. But if it were purely integrated and the plasmid was gone, we would not expect to see the copy number of what integrated to be higher than the copy number of the genome. Right? You'd get one integration into one chromosome probably. So it would be half the signal of what you get amplifying a human house gene like RNAP, which is what we use. You would get a similar CT if it integrated. Because if it were a driver mutation, the cells would take off, and it would maybe have one copy of that mutation with it. And as a tumor advanced, you would probably you expect to see a CT score in PCR for that region that was similar to the actual genome background. But we're not seeing that. We're seeing CTs that are that are way ahead. If it's a hundred fold up there, it's around six to seven CTs ahead of the RNAP gene, which is the human gene. And then when we do sequencing, we see the same thing. "The coverage of sequencing is like 100 to 200X in the plasmids [vs.] 1X of the human genome. So they're in this tumor at really high levels. And that tells us that it has to be replicating. And this was a formalin fixed tissue. So it's not like we could sprinkle plasmids on it from our laboratory to contaminate that and have them be translationally active. Formalin is like this process when you take a tissue and you Formalin fix it. It's like...carbon freezing Han Solo. Alright? So you can't add plasmids after the fact and get it to replicate on cells, and you can't add plasmids on the fact afterwards and get it to integrate. Like those things can only occur if the cells are live. So we're pretty certain we've ruled out that, alright, this isn't coming from us. The anti-vaxxers aren't pouring plasmids on this to create a story. "This has certain biological signals that show this was present in the patient when they were alive. We don't know the source of it. They were four times vaccinated, and one of the vaccines that they used was one of the earliest vaccines from December 30th 2020."
5:43

"We have sequencing from a colon [tumor] biopsy from a patient who was 4 times vaccinated...we can find [DNA] plasmids in there a hundred copies per cell. They're not exactly the same as Pfizer's, which is a real head-scratcher, but they're in there." Kevin McKernan (Kevin McKernan), Chief Scientific Officer and Founder of Medicinal Genomics, as well as former R&D lead of the Human Genome Project, describes for Nick Jikomes (Nick Jikomes) how he and his colleagues have sequenced a colon tumor biopsy from a person who took four COVID injections and have found DNA plasmids—almost certainly from Pfizer's COVID-injection manufacturing process—at a ratio of 100 per cell. McKernan notes that the plasmids, however, are "not exactly the same as Pfizer's," which "is a real head-scratcher." "We haven't published the work yet, but we have sequencing from a colon biopsy from a patient who was 4 times vaccinated. A year after vaccination, they had a colon cancer. They biopsied it that day, and then 30 days later, they died, and then they biopsied after, and we have sequencing on both the pre-mortem and post-mortem samples," McKernan says. The scientist and entrepreneur, often cited as the first person to find DNA contamination in the mRNA COVID injections, adds, "we can find plasmids in there a hundred copies per cell. They're not exactly the same as Pfizer's, which is a real head-scratcher, but they're in there." "There's two of them," McKernan says of the plasmids. "And one encodes spike and one encodes nucleocapsid. We don't know where the hell the nucleocapsid one's coming from." (For reference, a nucleocapsid of a virus is the protein shell or capsid that encloses the nucleic acid—DNA or RNA—content, providing protection and structure to the viral genome.) When asked why the plasmids wouldn't exactly match those used in Pfizer's mRNA-injection manufacturing process, McKernan speculates: "Do they have more than one [DNA plasmid] in circulation? Like, BioNTech got a different manufacturing plasmid than the manufacturing plant out here in the US because they're making these in two different locations? It's possible. Is there contamination in their laboratory, in the manufacturing of this, they get the wrong plasmid in their E. coli vat, and suddenly they've got a different background there?" "And we've gotta do everything on our end to make sure we didn't introduce it, which we're doing. We're running all types of experiments to show that there's spike expression going on. But there's any number of reasons that could explain this," McKernan adds. Note that DNA plasmids—small, circular, double-stranded DNA molecules capable of replicating independently within a bacterial cell—were understood to be used in the manufacturing of the mRNA injections, but should've been removed below a certain threshold established by regulatory authorities such as the FDA. (The DNA contamination may be present in vials at 1,000 times higher than allowable according to one article published by the Brownstone Institute covering this issue. Article title: "The Vax-Gene Files: An Accidental Discovery") "We've got a case now that we're zeroing in on that looked like the SV40 poly-A signal, which is a termination signal. It's a transcription termination signal. We've got a piece of that integrating into chromosome 21, and it's breaking a gene that's involved in cancer. So, that one looks really interesting," McKernan tells Jikomes. "That could be maybe the driver of this whole thing. But the program spits out a long list of potential integrations that we have to go through and verify which ones are real and which ones are artifacts and all that. So I don't wanna get ahead of ourselves on that. That hasn't been Sanger verified yet." (For reference, Sanger sequencing is a method used to determine the precise order of nucleotides in a DNA molecule; the SV40 promoter is a strong regulatory region from the Simian Virus 40 that drives high levels of gene expression in mammalian cells when used in genetic constructs; a poly-A signal is a sequence in DNA or RNA that signals the end of a gene, prompting the addition of a polyadenine tail to the mRNA during processing, which stabilizes the mRNA and aids in its export from the nucleus.) "But the copy number alone suggests that these things aren't fully fragmented. Right? These plasmids really shouldn't be replicating to a hundred copies per cell," McKernan adds. "They couldn't, they shouldn't be in there at that level, because if you just do the math on how much is in the vaccine, when you do an injection of this, this person has four vaccines...1.2 ml of Pfizer...went into about 87,000 mls [of] body volume. So you should have a massive dilution into your body. Yet when we're sequencing this and doing qPCR off the tumor, the CTs coming back off the tumor are almost as high as they are straight out of the vial." (For reference, qPCR—or quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction—is a technique used to amplify and simultaneously quantify a targeted DNA molecule. "CTs" is a reference to cycle threshold; PCR cycle threshold is the number of cycles at which the fluorescence signal from the reaction exceeds the background level, indicating that the target DNA amplification has occurred.) McKernan goes on to say: "And even if it were an integration event [that is, the DNA plasmid integrated into the genome]...I think there could be two things going on here: There could be plasmids replicating episomally [in the cell] and there could be parts of them integrated. But if it were purely integrated and the plasmid was gone, we would not expect to see the copy number of what integrated to be higher than the copy number of the genome. Right? You'd get one integration into one chromosome probably. So it would be half the signal of what you get amplifying a human house gene like RNAP, which is what we use. You would get a similar CT if it integrated. Because if it were a driver mutation, the cells would take off, and it would maybe have one copy of that mutation with it. And as a tumor advanced, you would probably you expect to see a CT score in PCR for that region that was similar to the actual genome background. But we're not seeing that. We're seeing CTs that are that are way ahead. If it's a hundred fold up there, it's around six to seven CTs ahead of the RNAP gene, which is the human gene. And then when we do sequencing, we see the same thing. "The coverage of sequencing is like 100 to 200X in the plasmids [vs.] 1X of the human genome. So they're in this tumor at really high levels. And that tells us that it has to be replicating. And this was a formalin fixed tissue. So it's not like we could sprinkle plasmids on it from our laboratory to contaminate that and have them be translationally active. Formalin is like this process when you take a tissue and you Formalin fix it. It's like...carbon freezing Han Solo. Alright? So you can't add plasmids after the fact and get it to replicate on cells, and you can't add plasmids on the fact afterwards and get it to integrate. Like those things can only occur if the cells are live. So we're pretty certain we've ruled out that, alright, this isn't coming from us. The anti-vaxxers aren't pouring plasmids on this to create a story. "This has certain biological signals that show this was present in the patient when they were alive. We don't know the source of it. They were four times vaccinated, and one of the vaccines that they used was one of the earliest vaccines from December 30th 2020."

Sense Receptor

335,167 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

"There's absolutely no question that this was not an accident...the fact that we have one-third DNA product and two-thirds RNA product [in the C19 jabs] is, for whatever reason, the ratio that the makers wanted it to be. They have lied to us in the extreme." Canadian Comprehensive Physician Dr. Chris Shoemaker (@CShoemakerMD) describes for the RAIR Foundation (RAIR Foundation USA) how the DNA contamination of the COVID injections "was not an accident." Shoemaker notes that "They have lied to us in the extreme" and "We are in danger in the extreme, not just in the short term." "There's absolutely no question that this was not an accident. There's absolutely no question that it was carefully and scientifically accomplished," Shoemaker says. "And the fact that we have one-third DNA product and two-thirds RNA product is, for whatever reason, the ratio that the makers wanted it to be." "What's the difference [if there is] DNA is in [the jabs] instead of just mRNA? The difference is that...the DNA, functionally, once in the nucleus, can influence the nucleus, [and] can produce mRNA near the nucleus and have that mRNA migrate out into the cytoplasm of the cell," Shoemaker says. "And once that's done, what should be, at worst, an 8-month process inside your body is, in fact, an 8- to 10-year process inside your body because of the nefarious decision to allow DNA in these shots." Partial transcription of clip: "There's absolutely no question that this was not an accident. There's absolutely no question that it was carefully and scientifically accomplished. And the fact that we have one-third DNA product and two-thirds RNA product is, for whatever reason, the ratio that the makers wanted it to be. They have lied to us in the extreme. "We are in danger in the extreme, not just in the short term. We know the 2 percent, 3 percent of people who passed away suddenly and surprisingly and that's way more than should happen. But the long term effect on the ability to fight cancer or for a cancer to perhaps be a turbo cancer, all these are being influenced by both DNA and RNA that is within us. "The key thing is that it makes the whole process last longer. If it was only mRNA, it would probably be 8 to 12 months only that mRNA would seed out into your body and be repeatedly creating spike, repeatedly creating spike. Remember, the end-product is the most dangerous part of this human engineered genome. The spike protein is the thing that congeals blood cells against each other. The spike protein is the thing that, if it's in your liver, is waving a flag saying, Hey, I'm not your liver. I'm not a human liver. I've got this strange created spike protein. You can identify that I'm not your liver, and you can attack it, and you can make hepatitis for this person because it's not even their liver. "This is what mRNA does is create a flag so that you're attacking through your healthy immune system. Your healthy immune system is going after it in organ after organ after organ. For some people, it's just a specific organ that was already a bit weak to begin with. And for other people, it's a different organ. But either way, mRNA produces a spike flag, which your immune system attacks. "To return to your question about DNA, what's the difference that DNA is in there instead of just mRNA? The difference is that the DNA can, for years, not just 8 to 12 months. The DNA, functionally, once in the nucleus, can influence the nucleus, can produce mRNA near the nucleus and have that mRNA migrate out into the cytoplasm of the cell. And once that's done, what should be, at worst, an 8-month process inside your body is, in fact, an 8 to 10 year process inside your body because of the nefarious decision to allow DNA in these shots."
3:14

"There's absolutely no question that this was not an accident...the fact that we have one-third DNA product and two-thirds RNA product [in the C19 jabs] is, for whatever reason, the ratio that the makers wanted it to be. They have lied to us in the extreme." Canadian Comprehensive Physician Dr. Chris Shoemaker (@CShoemakerMD) describes for the RAIR Foundation (RAIR Foundation USA) how the DNA contamination of the COVID injections "was not an accident." Shoemaker notes that "They have lied to us in the extreme" and "We are in danger in the extreme, not just in the short term." "There's absolutely no question that this was not an accident. There's absolutely no question that it was carefully and scientifically accomplished," Shoemaker says. "And the fact that we have one-third DNA product and two-thirds RNA product is, for whatever reason, the ratio that the makers wanted it to be." "What's the difference [if there is] DNA is in [the jabs] instead of just mRNA? The difference is that...the DNA, functionally, once in the nucleus, can influence the nucleus, [and] can produce mRNA near the nucleus and have that mRNA migrate out into the cytoplasm of the cell," Shoemaker says. "And once that's done, what should be, at worst, an 8-month process inside your body is, in fact, an 8- to 10-year process inside your body because of the nefarious decision to allow DNA in these shots." Partial transcription of clip: "There's absolutely no question that this was not an accident. There's absolutely no question that it was carefully and scientifically accomplished. And the fact that we have one-third DNA product and two-thirds RNA product is, for whatever reason, the ratio that the makers wanted it to be. They have lied to us in the extreme. "We are in danger in the extreme, not just in the short term. We know the 2 percent, 3 percent of people who passed away suddenly and surprisingly and that's way more than should happen. But the long term effect on the ability to fight cancer or for a cancer to perhaps be a turbo cancer, all these are being influenced by both DNA and RNA that is within us. "The key thing is that it makes the whole process last longer. If it was only mRNA, it would probably be 8 to 12 months only that mRNA would seed out into your body and be repeatedly creating spike, repeatedly creating spike. Remember, the end-product is the most dangerous part of this human engineered genome. The spike protein is the thing that congeals blood cells against each other. The spike protein is the thing that, if it's in your liver, is waving a flag saying, Hey, I'm not your liver. I'm not a human liver. I've got this strange created spike protein. You can identify that I'm not your liver, and you can attack it, and you can make hepatitis for this person because it's not even their liver. "This is what mRNA does is create a flag so that you're attacking through your healthy immune system. Your healthy immune system is going after it in organ after organ after organ. For some people, it's just a specific organ that was already a bit weak to begin with. And for other people, it's a different organ. But either way, mRNA produces a spike flag, which your immune system attacks. "To return to your question about DNA, what's the difference that DNA is in there instead of just mRNA? The difference is that the DNA can, for years, not just 8 to 12 months. The DNA, functionally, once in the nucleus, can influence the nucleus, can produce mRNA near the nucleus and have that mRNA migrate out into the cytoplasm of the cell. And once that's done, what should be, at worst, an 8-month process inside your body is, in fact, an 8 to 10 year process inside your body because of the nefarious decision to allow DNA in these shots."

Sense Receptor

95,273 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Bret Weinstein REVEALED to Joe Rogan how Covid vaccine manufacturers can be sued despite the 1986 liability protection: “The immunity from liability is dependent on there having been no fraud—and there clearly was fraud.” “[There was an] insufficient amount of safety testing that was done before these things were released.” “(It) was done with mRNA vaccines produced in a process that did not involve DNA.” “The product that was actually injected into billions of people involved DNA plasmids.” “There is massive contamination in the shots that were actually delivered.” “For you to put your… drug through safety testing and then inject people with something different… that were not tested is fraudulent.” Joe Rogan Bret Weinstein
1:52

Bret Weinstein REVEALED to Joe Rogan how Covid vaccine manufacturers can be sued despite the 1986 liability protection: “The immunity from liability is dependent on there having been no fraud—and there clearly was fraud.” “[There was an] insufficient amount of safety testing that was done before these things were released.” “(It) was done with mRNA vaccines produced in a process that did not involve DNA.” “The product that was actually injected into billions of people involved DNA plasmids.” “There is massive contamination in the shots that were actually delivered.” “For you to put your… drug through safety testing and then inject people with something different… that were not tested is fraudulent.” Joe Rogan Bret Weinstein

Children’s Health Defense

56,287 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

The U.S. CDC has changed its guidance on vaccines. The new guidance states that it is not possible to declare vaccines safe because there is no proof that they are. I asked the TGA whether they had changed their own position as a result. The ensuing discussion was pure semantics, as the TGA tried to avoid agreeing with the CDC. For the record, the theory of logic states: “An outcome that has not been proven impossible may be possible.” To avoid what comes next—a simple question—the TGA had to deny basic logic. That question was: If it MAY be possible, shouldn’t you take a fresh look? In previous Estimates hearings, I have presented the TGA with peer-reviewed, published papers showing that adjuvants (preservatives) in vaccines can cause autism. These papers actually show causation—the damage to the brain caused by adjuvants used in vaccines. The testimony from Professor Lawler was simply wrong, and I will revisit this question in the February Estimates. — Senate Estimates | December 2025
11:43

The U.S. CDC has changed its guidance on vaccines. The new guidance states that it is not possible to declare vaccines safe because there is no proof that they are. I asked the TGA whether they had changed their own position as a result. The ensuing discussion was pure semantics, as the TGA tried to avoid agreeing with the CDC. For the record, the theory of logic states: “An outcome that has not been proven impossible may be possible.” To avoid what comes next—a simple question—the TGA had to deny basic logic. That question was: If it MAY be possible, shouldn’t you take a fresh look? In previous Estimates hearings, I have presented the TGA with peer-reviewed, published papers showing that adjuvants (preservatives) in vaccines can cause autism. These papers actually show causation—the damage to the brain caused by adjuvants used in vaccines. The testimony from Professor Lawler was simply wrong, and I will revisit this question in the February Estimates. — Senate Estimates | December 2025

Malcolm Roberts 🇦🇺

79,747 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

The Pfizer COVID-19 “vaccine” injected into billions of arms was not the same one used in Pfizer’s clinical trials. There was a “switcheroo,” Dr. Ryan Cole says. The clinical trials tested “Process 1” while the public received “Process 2.” And what they never told you is that “Process 2” was only tested on about 252 people, instead of 40,000 people. They also didn’t tell you that the vials were contaminated with plasmid DNA. A study by Kevin McKernan and colleagues found “the presence of billions to hundreds of billions of DNA molecules per dose in these vaccines. Using fluorometry, all vaccines exceed the guidelines for residual DNA set by FDA and WHO of 10 ng/dose by 188 to 509-fold.” In layman’s terms, that’s not 500%, that is up to 500 times the amount of residual DNA that is acceptable. Full Interview:
1:44

The Pfizer COVID-19 “vaccine” injected into billions of arms was not the same one used in Pfizer’s clinical trials. There was a “switcheroo,” Dr. Ryan Cole says. The clinical trials tested “Process 1” while the public received “Process 2.” And what they never told you is that “Process 2” was only tested on about 252 people, instead of 40,000 people. They also didn’t tell you that the vials were contaminated with plasmid DNA. A study by Kevin McKernan and colleagues found “the presence of billions to hundreds of billions of DNA molecules per dose in these vaccines. Using fluorometry, all vaccines exceed the guidelines for residual DNA set by FDA and WHO of 10 ng/dose by 188 to 509-fold.” In layman’s terms, that’s not 500%, that is up to 500 times the amount of residual DNA that is acceptable. Full Interview:

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

272,125 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Bret Weinstein on Joe Rogan: Billions Injected With Untested COVID mRNA Vaccines Containing SV40 DNA Linked to Cancer Risks Bret Weinstein told Joe Rogan what health authorities don’t want to discuss. The COVID mRNA vaccines injected into billions were not the same as the ones tested for safety. Trials used a DNA‑free process, but the actual shots were made with DNA plasmids. Independent researcher Kevin McKernan found widespread DNA contamination, including the SV40 promoter—a genetic element tied to cancer research and known to activate unwanted cell replication. The production shortcuts left bacterial DNA fragments that should have been removed. Regulatory standards failed, and the contaminated doses were approved anyway. Weinstein says this isn’t just regulatory failure—it’s potential fraud. The same safety data that justified approval did not match the product given to the public. Bottom line: billions were injected with untested COVID mRNA vaccines laced with SV40 DNA associated with cancer risks—sold under the pretence of safety.
4:26

Bret Weinstein on Joe Rogan: Billions Injected With Untested COVID mRNA Vaccines Containing SV40 DNA Linked to Cancer Risks Bret Weinstein told Joe Rogan what health authorities don’t want to discuss. The COVID mRNA vaccines injected into billions were not the same as the ones tested for safety. Trials used a DNA‑free process, but the actual shots were made with DNA plasmids. Independent researcher Kevin McKernan found widespread DNA contamination, including the SV40 promoter—a genetic element tied to cancer research and known to activate unwanted cell replication. The production shortcuts left bacterial DNA fragments that should have been removed. Regulatory standards failed, and the contaminated doses were approved anyway. Weinstein says this isn’t just regulatory failure—it’s potential fraud. The same safety data that justified approval did not match the product given to the public. Bottom line: billions were injected with untested COVID mRNA vaccines laced with SV40 DNA associated with cancer risks—sold under the pretence of safety.

Camus

33,921 Aufrufe • vor 9 Monaten

Don’t worry about what’s in the vials will you! “In addition the preparations comply with the test if number of particles in the tested dose does not contain 6,000 per container equal to or greater than 10 microns and does not exceed 600 per container equal or greater the 25 microns……..so requirements in the default standards for Australia don’t require that there’s identification of the particles.” ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• In estimates I asked why there were so many large particles in the Covid batches. A standard dose was 30 microns yet in one batch there were 67 particles greater than 10 microns which is at least a third the size of the standard dose. It turns out that pharmaceutical companies don’t have to identify what these particles are! I find this quite shocking. The rules allow for up to 600 unidentified contaminants as large as 25 microns or practically the entire dose. This is shocking quality assurance standards. With so such much crap in the vials how can the TGA tell what is causing a person's reaction to a vaccine? Glass and steel are very good cutting compounds are they not? How many arteries have been cut by these contaminants? Imagine that in your body organs - especially your heart! People shouldn’t be forced to take products with so many unknown contaminants. We are not guinea pigs. #auspol
3:59

Don’t worry about what’s in the vials will you! “In addition the preparations comply with the test if number of particles in the tested dose does not contain 6,000 per container equal to or greater than 10 microns and does not exceed 600 per container equal or greater the 25 microns……..so requirements in the default standards for Australia don’t require that there’s identification of the particles.” ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• In estimates I asked why there were so many large particles in the Covid batches. A standard dose was 30 microns yet in one batch there were 67 particles greater than 10 microns which is at least a third the size of the standard dose. It turns out that pharmaceutical companies don’t have to identify what these particles are! I find this quite shocking. The rules allow for up to 600 unidentified contaminants as large as 25 microns or practically the entire dose. This is shocking quality assurance standards. With so such much crap in the vials how can the TGA tell what is causing a person's reaction to a vaccine? Glass and steel are very good cutting compounds are they not? How many arteries have been cut by these contaminants? Imagine that in your body organs - especially your heart! People shouldn’t be forced to take products with so many unknown contaminants. We are not guinea pigs. #auspol

Gerard Rennick

49,580 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Justice is yet to be delivered here in Australia. There was a lot of chatter last week regarding Anthony Fauci and his involvement in the cover up around the origins of Covid. But the cover up went much further than Fauci’s immediate circle of evil clowns. Here in Australia, the TGA knowingly covered up the death of a 52 year old man who died from the Pfizer vaccine in July 21. Despite being sent an autopsy report by a coroner in NSW that ruled death by the Pfizer vaccine, the TGA failed to report this case to the public. Not only did they fail to report the death, the TGA continued to tell people the Pfizer jab was safe and effective. Because the rollout of the TGA was on an emergency basis the TGA had an obligation to monitor the rollout for side effects and then act on key safety signals. The TGA failed to warn the public that death could be a side effect of the vaccine. It begs the question as to how many other deaths from the jab went unreported? What is so significant about this case however is that there is no greater authority on causation than the coroner. While the TGA could dismiss my questions in estimates as being wrong or misleading, the Coroner was the expert. What the TGA did in ignoring his determination was negligence pure and simple. Negligence that could be argued was industrial manslaughter because this death occurred early in the vaccine rollout. Had the TGA made people aware of the risks of the vaccine many injuries and deaths could have been prevented. The head of the TGA John Skerritt and his colleagues in various Health Departments should be charged for this cover up. Seeing justice and compensation for the thousands of people who had their lives destroyed by the Covid vaccines is something that needs to happen as soon as possible. To help us achieve that please sign up today at
8:38

Justice is yet to be delivered here in Australia. There was a lot of chatter last week regarding Anthony Fauci and his involvement in the cover up around the origins of Covid. But the cover up went much further than Fauci’s immediate circle of evil clowns. Here in Australia, the TGA knowingly covered up the death of a 52 year old man who died from the Pfizer vaccine in July 21. Despite being sent an autopsy report by a coroner in NSW that ruled death by the Pfizer vaccine, the TGA failed to report this case to the public. Not only did they fail to report the death, the TGA continued to tell people the Pfizer jab was safe and effective. Because the rollout of the TGA was on an emergency basis the TGA had an obligation to monitor the rollout for side effects and then act on key safety signals. The TGA failed to warn the public that death could be a side effect of the vaccine. It begs the question as to how many other deaths from the jab went unreported? What is so significant about this case however is that there is no greater authority on causation than the coroner. While the TGA could dismiss my questions in estimates as being wrong or misleading, the Coroner was the expert. What the TGA did in ignoring his determination was negligence pure and simple. Negligence that could be argued was industrial manslaughter because this death occurred early in the vaccine rollout. Had the TGA made people aware of the risks of the vaccine many injuries and deaths could have been prevented. The head of the TGA John Skerritt and his colleagues in various Health Departments should be charged for this cover up. Seeing justice and compensation for the thousands of people who had their lives destroyed by the Covid vaccines is something that needs to happen as soon as possible. To help us achieve that please sign up today at

Gerard Rennick

50,896 Aufrufe • vor 20 Tagen

The conversation shifted, but the underlying theme stayed the same—how the systems in place aren't what they seem. Howard opened up about his view of vaccines, painting a darker picture of their purpose. “The entire process that they’re working on, it’s not to build humanity up. I don’t see it. It’s more so to tear us down,” he said. Maher pressed him: “Who are we talking about?” Howard didn’t miss a beat. “I’m still talking about the government as a whole, either Democrat or Republican," he said. "Because if you go back to, like, for me, when the vaccines first were coming out, and I was talking about—not the COVID vaccine, just me dealing with my children—about, am I going to do vaccines to give them in school? And I was like, no, I don’t want to give them the MMR and all of that.” Maher agreed: “They don’t need it now.” Howard then shared a little-known shift that he believes changed everything about vaccines—and their effects. “No! And when we were kids back in 1969 when I was born, and they gave me the shot, it was delivered with duck embryo DNA. Then in 1970, when they got the abortion clinics, they started using human DNA.” He explained the critical difference: “The duck embryo DNA would not bond. It would deliver the vaccine, it would deliver the little protein that was necessary, but it didn’t have any match to your DNA, so it would be taken out of the body. But because they’re using human DNA cells from the abortion clinics, those now bond into our cells and try to bond with it.” According to Howard, the consequences of that change are now visible everywhere. “That’s why we have all the psoriasis now. Did you see that much psoriasis back in the ’80s? Back when you were—when I was a child—I didn’t see it.”
1:30

The conversation shifted, but the underlying theme stayed the same—how the systems in place aren't what they seem. Howard opened up about his view of vaccines, painting a darker picture of their purpose. “The entire process that they’re working on, it’s not to build humanity up. I don’t see it. It’s more so to tear us down,” he said. Maher pressed him: “Who are we talking about?” Howard didn’t miss a beat. “I’m still talking about the government as a whole, either Democrat or Republican," he said. "Because if you go back to, like, for me, when the vaccines first were coming out, and I was talking about—not the COVID vaccine, just me dealing with my children—about, am I going to do vaccines to give them in school? And I was like, no, I don’t want to give them the MMR and all of that.” Maher agreed: “They don’t need it now.” Howard then shared a little-known shift that he believes changed everything about vaccines—and their effects. “No! And when we were kids back in 1969 when I was born, and they gave me the shot, it was delivered with duck embryo DNA. Then in 1970, when they got the abortion clinics, they started using human DNA.” He explained the critical difference: “The duck embryo DNA would not bond. It would deliver the vaccine, it would deliver the little protein that was necessary, but it didn’t have any match to your DNA, so it would be taken out of the body. But because they’re using human DNA cells from the abortion clinics, those now bond into our cells and try to bond with it.” According to Howard, the consequences of that change are now visible everywhere. “That’s why we have all the psoriasis now. Did you see that much psoriasis back in the ’80s? Back when you were—when I was a child—I didn’t see it.”

Vigilant Fox 🦊

294,717 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

🚨BREAKING: DNA Contamination Found in mRNA COVID Vaccines Cancer Genomics Expert, Dr. Phillip Buckhaults, testified to the South Carolina Senate on the DNA Contamination Found in mRNA COVID Vaccines. Dr. Buckhaults and his team are the inventors of the COVID-19 spit test that was used nationally during the pandemic. Some quotes from the clip: "The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasmid DNA, it's not just mRNA." "It could be causing some of the rare, but serious, side effects like death from cardiac arrest." "It could cause a sustained autoimmune attack towards that tissue. It's also a very real theoretical risk of future cancer.." "There's probably about 200 billion pieces of this plasmid DNA in each dose of the vaccine.."
16:18

🚨BREAKING: DNA Contamination Found in mRNA COVID Vaccines Cancer Genomics Expert, Dr. Phillip Buckhaults, testified to the South Carolina Senate on the DNA Contamination Found in mRNA COVID Vaccines. Dr. Buckhaults and his team are the inventors of the COVID-19 spit test that was used nationally during the pandemic. Some quotes from the clip: "The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasmid DNA, it's not just mRNA." "It could be causing some of the rare, but serious, side effects like death from cardiac arrest." "It could cause a sustained autoimmune attack towards that tissue. It's also a very real theoretical risk of future cancer.." "There's probably about 200 billion pieces of this plasmid DNA in each dose of the vaccine.."

Freedom On Fire

516,799 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren