According to some aeronautical engineers the bumblebee can't fly, but the bumblebee doesn't read their publications and flies anyway.
According to Pfizer & C. the messenger RNA (mRNA) 'vaccine' cannot modify the human genome, however the 'vaccine' does not read Pfizer's press releases and ...
First of all let’s clarify that:
1. A century ago Antoine Magnan (1) and other scholars wrote that the bumblebee (Bombus terrestris) could not fly, based on their aerodynamic studies.
2. The paradox is not a paradox, in fact Magnan had to correct his studies rather than the bumblebees.
3. the so-called 'bumblebee paradox' has become proverbial to indicate the presumption of many sorcerer's apprentices who try to force Nature into their ultra-simplified vision of reality.
With these premises, I propose to illustrate why and how an mRNA vaccine can behave like a bumblebee, ignoring Pfizer releases.
To develop this topic, I propose to continue with a trial fiction:
A (the prosecuting lawyer): I call to testify dr. Leopoldo Salmaso... Please, doctor, briefly illustrate your skills, in particular to make us understand your position regarding to vaccines.
S (Salmaso): I am a doctor, specialized in Infectious Diseases and Public Health. I have been employed full time at the University Hospital of Padua in the period 1976-2011. I have always supported and enhanced the vaccination activities of my hospital. I also coordinated a seroepidemiological survey on vaccination coverage in the schools of the Veneto region. Between 1983-85, as an Expert of the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, I coordinated a pilot project in the region of Dodoma (Tanzania) which then resulted in the National Vaccination Plan of that country. Also in Tanzania, including the period 1978-80, I have coordinated the control of various epidemics such as Cholera, Polio, Abdominal Typhus. Both in Veneto and in Tanzania I was one of the top referents for HIV-AIDS. For about 20 years I gave lectures in the European TropEd circuit (2) as a teacher of Doctors With Africa (3). I am a founding member of the No-Grazie association (4), equivalent to No-Free-Lunch (5).
A: With such a career, may we count you among the YES-VAX?
S: Nowadays the terms YESVAX and NOVAX refer to two radical, opposing groups of fans. It is not serious, let alone scientific, to make a bundle of every herb.
A: Let me rephrase my question: do you believe that vaccinations are an important tool of public health?
A: Do you believe that mRNA vaccines are an important tool of public health?
A: Why not?
S: Because their benefit/risk ratio is clearly unfavorable.
A: Pfizer and Moderna say their mRNA vaccines have so many pros and very few cons.
S: No wonder: they are like hosts who want to sell their wine. On the other hand, I am seriously concerned because WHO, EMA (European Medicines Agency) and AIFA (the Italian Agency) act like host's wives instead of food and drugs policemen. In Europe the main responsibility for authorization and control lies with EMA (6, 7). EMA granted mRNA vaccines a 'conditional authorization' (8). The crucial matter is summarized in this table:
EMA - Pfizer's conditional authorization for Covid-19 vaccine
... To put it simply: EMA has authorized the host to sell his wine, provided that by December 2023 the host himself (regularly paying the collaboration of EMA experts and other 'independent controllers') provides 'proof' that his wine is good. Obvious conclusion: in these three years whoever takes that 'wine' is the guinea pig in an experiment with obvious business bias.
A: Official sources deny that these vaccines are experimental and that humans are being used as guinea pigs.
S: I am well aware of going against the dogma advocated by illustrious colleagues, up to AIFA, ISS, EMA and WHO. All of them dictate precise restrictions against the threat of GMO foods for the environment and human health, but they do not blink an eye while facing the danger of transforming vaccinated people into GMOs! However, their embarrassment, if any, is not seen because the mainstream keeps trumpeting to the rescue of the strongest...
A: Please leave the closing arguments to me. You just set out facts.
S: I'm sorry. Here is the documentation to be included in the relevant points of my last statement (9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15). In particular, the European legislation on GMOs, Article 1, begins just like this: "In compliance with the precautionary principle, this directive aims to approximate the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States and to protect human health and the environment ..."
A: Let's start with the benefits. What do you object to the claims of the pharmaceutical companies?
S: Just at theoretical level, the expected benefits of any vaccine directed against such variable viruses as coronaviruses are very poor (16). Influenza viruses are also highly variable and the studies on influenza vaccines confirm little if any efficacy for the general population, while granting some favorable margins only for a few groups with specific risk factors (17). The flu should teach us a lot ...
A (interrupts him): Thanks, please tell us about the risks from mRNA vaccines.
S: The mother of all risks lies in the fact that, in spite of precise obligations and proclaims, little or nothing is being done for the ACTIVE surveillance of unwanted effects from mRNA vaccines. In Italy we are performing best at least with PASSIVE surveillance, in the rest of Europe it’s even worse!
Eudravigilance PASSIVE data collection on adverse events of Covid vaccines
If there is no active surveillance, and if science is not independent from finance and politics (18), we are left to trust what the host claims about his wine.
A (thoughtfully): Forget the minor risks and focus on the GMO risk from mRNA vaccines.
S: Those who deny the risk of GMOs consider viruses as electronic boards and cells as numerical control machines. This is an ultra-simplified, mechanistic view of biology, while Life is much more complex.
A: Do you mean that, if I put an mRNA vaccine into a cell, that cell might not carry out the vaccine's instructions?
S: I argue that much worse can happen. To start with, we don't have just one type of immunocompetent cell, but populations of cells with different specializations, both complementary and antagonistic. First come the macrophages (a sort of scavenger cells) that eliminate everything that is even minimally 'out of place' (non-self). This type of gross immunity was the first to evolve, with the appearance of the prokaryotes and multicellular organisms about 1.5 billion years ago, and is still prevalent in thepopulations of poor countries ... "
... Then come the granulocytes that we could compare to the scavengers of separate waste collection; then there are various populations of lymphocytes, a sort of policemen specialized in "searching" everything that imitates the 'self' (for example cells infected with viruses or cells with cancer mutations); again, there are subpopulations that can be compared to various branches of secret services, specialized in targeted killings but also in inducing the programmed suicide of 'anarchist' cells, or ‘presumed anarchist' cells. This last notion has become popular thanks to HIV-AIDS, where the real anarchists are the secret services, indeed.
A: All you say is very suggestive, but please go back to the mRNA vaccine: what happens after it has been injected?
S: A lot more can happen than what is shown in the animated videos of the pharmaceutical companies, where the complex reality is cleaned up, sweetened and bent for commercial purposes.
A: But simplification helps disseminate to the large public. We understand your reservations, but can you tell the jury if what the pharmaceutical companies are saying about their vaccines is substantially true or not?
S: I have no particular objections to what the pharmaceutical companies say. The real problem lies in what they do NOT say, indeed, in what they categorically exclude against any scientific logic (19). And, I repeat, the most serious problem of all lies in what the Authorities in charge of authorizations and controls DO NOT object.
A: Then you tell us what others don't say.
S: Okay, with a premise: I'm going to expose a series of events that CAN occur. No one can say that such events will really happen, but still less can anyone rule they out; the essence of the precautionary principle lies precisely in preventing events that science considers possible.
A: All right, carry on.
S: Once injected, a large part of the vaccine remains in place thanks to the local inflammatory response, while a little goes into circulation, reaching all parts of the body. But even the immunocompetent cells, after having incorporated the ‘vaccine’, are distributed in all districts, brain included. Therefore the game between vaccine and cells is played in every district of the body.
A: Pfizer and Moderna argue that the mRNA, once it enters the cell, dictates the instructions for only the SARS-CoV-2 'spike' protein to be assembled, after which the mRNA is destroyed. They deny that mRNA is capable of integrating into the cell's genome.
S: This is a simplistic illusion, as if the mRNA were an electronic board, the cell were a numerically controlled machine, and nothing else existed. Instead, each cell is a living universe (20) in which everything interacts, including RT enzymes that transcribe the mRNA and send feed back information to the nucleus where that information is compared with the original program. If even slightly different, countermeasures are triggered (and the information is stored as a DNA sequence, the genetic code in fact). Pfizer says its 'vaccine' cannot transfer its own code into the nucleus, but the RTs don't read Pfizer's manuals and continue to do business as usual. As if that were not enough, it is known that many of us live peacefully with other 'common' coronaviruses. In fact, peaceful coexistence is the rule with all infectious agents, while disease is the exception (21). Well, if a cell has to do with the 'vaccine' and with a common coronavirus, it may well happen that a chimera is assembled, therefore clones of chimeras that will go into the environment and that sooner or later our laboratories will register as' variants’ of SARS-CoV-2.
A: Are you describing science or science fiction scenarios?
S: You don't need to be a scientist to admire the infinite and harmonious richness of Life, created by the original Genetic Engineering, that of Nature, through the co-evolution of each and all organisms. Our genetic engineering is a stammering attempt to imitate that of Nature; too often in our laboratories apprentice sorcerers operate whose presumption clashes with real science. They barely statter the first letters of the Alphabet of Life and, since they do not understand the other letters, they say that the alphabet of life is made up of A and B alone (0 and 1 as in PCs) while everything else is 'junk alphabet' (22). So, to answer your question, who describes science scenarios, and who science fiction ones?
A: Are there any other possible dangers that Pfizer & C. underestimate or even exclude?
S: When cells run a program, a specific code appears on their membrane, like the sign at the entrance to a shop. If everything goes smoothly, then the 'vaccine' works: the cells carry on undisturbed, they assemble the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, so that the immune system will file it and later on will be able to promptly eliminate any intruders who exhibit that protein. But if that sign is interpreted as 'anomalous', the host's immunity reacts against its own 'anarchic' cells. This determines a very violent and disseminated inflammation, including the fateful 'cytokine storm' with intravascular coagulation and severe organ damages, up to the patient’s death.
A: We are exceeding the time of today's session ... Please tell us one last thing, doctor: why should we believe a few like you, instead of the many more emblasoned ones?
S: Because those many make the wrong bet: we few bet that, rolling a die, any number from 1 to 6 can come up. Those many exclude that 1 can come out.
3. Doctors With Africa
5. No Free Lunch
6. EMA speeds up its OK to Covid vaccines
7. UK: OK to mRNA vaccines
8. EMA conditioned authorization to Pfizer 'vaccin'
10. AIFA: questi vaccini non possono causare malattie
11. ISS: il vaccino non può causare Covid
12. EMA ignores its own prescriptions for GMO
13. WHO: environmental risk of GMO vaccines
14. Repubblica: è una bufala che ci renda OGM
15. Il Giornale: smontata la bufala novax
16. The anti-Corona vaccines will not work
17. Pandemic or PANICdemic?
18. RSS su Piano Nazionale Vaccini
19. Due nessi due misure
20. Resettare Covid-19
21. Coronavirus: se li conosci li inviti?
22. I'll show you the junk DNA