Cancer "vaccines" and AI?
Digital Identification, biometrics, IoT (IoE) and quantum finance are all based on this toxic nanotechnology, so they will want to inject this stuff at any cost - under the pretext of a new pandemic, as a cancer treatment vaccine or whatever. Or at least instill it as a PCR test
https://web.archive.org/web/20180219012754/http://irjcs.com:80/volumes/vol4/iss10/03.OCCS10083.pdf NANOBOTS IN MEDICINE, Published: October 2017
A team of scientists from Israel’s Bar-Ilan University started human trials including drug-delivering nanorobots in early 2016.
The bots are made of the specially folded DNA that serves as a vessel for cancer-treating drugs.
Unlike chemotherapy and radiation therapy, which cause damage to healthy and cancerous cells alike, DNA nanorobots attack selectively and precisely.
The alliance for Nanotechnology in Cancer, establishment by U.S. National Cancer Institute, is fostering innovation and collaboration among researchers to resolve some of the major challenges in the application of Nanotechnology to Cancer.
4.2. DISADVANTAGES:
The nanorobot should be very accurate, otherwise harmful effects may occur.
The initial design cost is very high.
The design of this nanorobot is a very complicated one
https://web.archive.org/web/20221118154601/https://pnrjournal.com/index.php/home/article/download/3078/2961 Nanobots: Future and Development, 2022
In order to monitor and provide more detailed information about the human body, nanobot can be equipped with a camera, a nano laser, and a nano chemical (to clean infected area).
Nanobots constructed of DNA were created by Bachelet et al. [19] to act as a vehicle for cancer-treating medications.
The researchers utilized Cadnano, an open-source programme, to develop the nanorobots' structure [22]. They then used DNA origami to construct the bots.
DNA origami is a method of creating intricately structured structures using DNA. [23- 26]
There are 12 locations for attaching payload molecules inside the bots. [21]
A nanorobot has the following substructures:
3. Working of Nanobots
Logic gates with anaptamer encoding are used to control the nanobots. [19] Any kind of nanoparticle can be turned into autonomous bio-computing entities that can carry out Boolean logic gates (NAND, NOT, AND, and OR). Robotics and a wide range of logic circuits have benefited from DNA since it is a natural substrate for computation. [22] The functionality of logic gating is built into DNA, and logic gating is accomplished by input-induced breakdown of DNA structures. [32] DNA-based biocomputing in various forms has already been shown. Now, it has been demonstrated that DNA origami may be utilised to create nanoscale robots that can interact with one another dynamically when placed within the body.
At 20 clottocytes per cubic millimetre of blood, or about 1/10,000th the concentration in the blood stream, the clotting activity of clottocytes is essentially similar to that of natural platelets. [38]
Reliable communication protocols would be necessary to manage multi-device activation radius within the local clottocyte population as well as to coordinate mesh release from neighbouring clottocytes. At human body temperature, oxygen molecules from the air diffuse through serum if the first clottocyte is 75 m from the air serum contact.
Rapid sonic pulses
from this detection were sent to the nearby clottocytes. This enables the carefully planned device-enablement cascade to spread quickly.
5. Properties
Organic materials like polynucleotides and proteins as well as inorganic materials like metals and diamond can be used to make nanobots. [39,40]
General challenges faced in the development of nanorobots, regardless of their applications, involve:
• DNA approach that cannot be employed to develop complex devices, and
• Bacteria-based nanorobots, incorporating bacteria in the building of nanorobots, present a serious challenge, as bacteria is a living organism and therefore inappropriate due to safety reasons.
Performance-wise,
• Positional nano assembly that is inefficient in regards to building nanodevices, and this method does not incorporate nanoelectronics
Central Nervous System (CNS):
Nanobots could be used to treat the cancers in the CNS too.
At times, they themselves could act as implants, replacing damaged neurons in some patients.
Nanobots will also be able to perform neural surgeries as well as surgeries of the brain, with a high success rate. It would also prevent the necessity of today: drilling a hole in the skull to gain access to the brain. Nanobots can also be used to help people suffering from motor neuron diseases, as well as paralysis. Once injected into the patient, they can locate themselves at specific places in the brain, and pick up impulses which would normally be delivered to the body's motor neurons. These impulses can be used to drive external prosthetics, such as a robotic arm. Thus, it would help a lot of people from overcoming their disabilities.
Body surveillance:
Continuous monitoring of vitals and wireless transmission could be possible using nanobots, leading to a quantum leap in diagnostics.
. This would also help in rapid response in case of sudden change in vitals or could warn against a possibility of a risk, such as high blood glucose in case of diabetics. Also multi-functional bots could convert themselves into stents; say to open up a blockage in an artery. The bot itself can be used as a tool, to remove unwanted materials such as blockages in the circulatory system. Nanobots could be used in large quantities inside the body to sense and repair anomalies/abnormalities. Current macroscopic robots are being programmed and tested with what is known as "swarm intelligence" in which they share information available to each one of them, pool it together, and take collective decisions.
Delicate surgeries:
Surgeries such as those of the eye are even today performed successfully only by a few skilled surgeons. Immense risk is involved in these delicate surgeries and they require a steady hand as well as a strong constitution. It may soon be possible to take the human element of risk out of this equation. Micro surgery of the eye as well as surgeries of the retina and surrounding membranes could soon be performed using nanobots. In addition, instead of injecting directly into the eye, nanobots could be injected elsewhere in the body and guided to the eye to deliver drugs, if necessary. Similarly, other difficult surgeries will also benefit from advances in nanorobotics. Foetal surgery, risky even today due to high mortality rate of either the baby or the mother, could soon have a 100% success rate, due to the fact that nanobots can provide better access to the required area inducing minimal trauma.
Cancer treatment:
This is probably the main reason for the development of nanorobotics.
Primary nanobots are sent to the target tissue (tumour) to inflame it. This is partly a machine gun approach; a lot of the bots will be wasted. However, only the tumour is inflamed and not any other tissue in the entire body. Now, a second wave of bots is sent, to target the inflamed tissue. This wave of bots contains the actual chemotherapy drug. It releases its payload i.e. the drug only after sensing the inflamed tissue. Thus, we have a highly concentrated targeted action, with no peripheral impact. We could liken it to a sniper's rifle.
By 2030, nanobots are project to advance towards amazing breakthroughs in healthcare. By then, tiny nanobots will float through our bloodstream on a mission to prevent sickness.
http://www.bmrat.org/index.php/BMRAT/article/download/320/639 DNA origami nanobot for sensitive drug delivery chemotherapy, Published: 2017-09-05
https://www.ijert.org/research/design-development-of-nanobots-for-cancer-cure-applications-in-bio-medical-engineering-IJERTCONV6IS13024.pdf Design & Development of Nanobots for Cancer Cure Applications in Bio-Medical Engineering
A nanorobot can be defined as an artificially fabricated object able to freely diffuse in the human body and interact with specific cell at the molecular level.
Nanotechnology has the potential to radically increase our options for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer.
As a syringe is today used to inject medication into the patient’s bloodstream, tomorrow, nanorobots could transport and deliver chemical agents directly to a target cell.
Nanokiller (i.e., nanorobot) could find and repair damaged organs, detect and destroy a tumor mass. They would be able to communicate their positions, operational statuses, and the success or failure of the treatment as it progresses.
For directing the nanorobots to the cancerous cells we can make use of ultrasonic signals which are emitted by the nanorobot. These ultrasonic waves are detected by ultrasonic sensors.
Another important consideration is the safety of the patient, the system must be able to move the nanorobot around without causing damage to the host.
6. ADVANTAGES OF THE MODERN TECHNOLOGY EMPLOYED
With the help of nanorobots, we can further understand the complexity of human body and brain. The development will further help in performing painless and noninvasive surgeries.
8. MAIN OBJECTIVE OF NANO-ROBOTICS IN MEDICAL FIELDS
To help monitor the patients body continuously and be able detect cancer and other diseases at early stages.
To destroy cancerous cells without affecting the healthy cells.
To reduce the time of recovery for people fighting against cancer and other diseases.
To carry and deliver large amounts of anti-cancer drugs into cancerous cells without harming healthy cells, and thus reducing the side effects related to current therapies.
To repair tissues, clean blood vessels and airways, transform our physiological capabilities,
and even potentially counteract the aging process.
NMR/MRI :
This technique involves the application of a powerful magnetic field to the body, and subsequent analysis of the way in which atoms within the body react to the field. It usually requires a prolonged period to obtain useful results, often several hours, and thus is not suited to real-time applications. While the performance can be increased greatly, the resolution is inherently low due to the difficulty of switching large magnetic fields quickly, and thus, while it may be suited in some cases to the original diagnosis, it is of only very limited use to us at present.
Radioactive dye :
This technique is basically one of illumination. A radioactive fluid is introduced into the circulatory system and its progress throughout the body is tracked by means of a fluoroscope or some other radiation-sensitive imaging system. The major advantage of this technique is that it follows the exact same path that our microrobot would take to reach the operations site. By sufficiently increasing the resolution of the imaging system, and obtaining enough data to generate a three dimensional map of the route, it would provide valuable guidance information for the microrobot.
The active form of this technique would be to have a small amount of radioactive substance as part of the microrobot. This would allow its position to be tracked throughout the body at all times.
Additionally, since the technique would not require the microrobot to use any power, or require a mechanism of any sort, it would greatly simplify the design of the microrobot.
While there are risks from radiation, the amount of radioactive substance used would not be even a fraction of the amount used in radioactive dye diagnosis.
Power from the bloodstream : There are three possibilities for this scenario. In the first case, the microrobot would have electrodes mounted on its outer casing that would combine with the electrolytes in the blood to form a battery. This would result in a low voltage, but it would last until the electrodes were used up. The disadvantage of this method is that in the case of a clot or arteriosclerosis, there might not be enough blood flow to sustain the required power levels. Also, if the electrodes were ever embedded in anything that blocked their access to the blood, power would drop to zero and stay there. This means that a backup would be required
…
https://www.nanorobotdesign.com/
https://web.archive.org/web/20081119152554/http://www.www.foresight.org/
https://web.archive.org/web/20111026173202/http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=2887
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16020-is-nanotechnology-a-health-timebomb.html
Emerging nanomaterials need to undergo urgent testing to assess their effects on health and the environment, the UK’s Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution said in a report released this week.
It says nanotechnology-based products are hitting the market without being properly assessed for safety – and that’s a risk too far.
But there are safety rules for all consumer products, aren’t there?
Yes, but because nanomaterials are often made using chemicals like silver and carbon that are considered safe when used on a macro scale, the commission says they are slipping under the regulatory net when used at the nanoscale – without any consideration of the potentially adverse physical or chemical effects their novel nanostructures may have on people, animals, and the environment.
What does the commission want?
The commission is calling for the European Union to extend its regulatory regime for chemicals (REACH) to properly assess nanomaterials and their unique properties.
In the UK, they want the Department of the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) to develop and undertake tests on products that contain nanomaterials, and develop gadgets that detect, for instance, nanomaterials like carbon nanotubes when they become airborne.
“We have no means of detecting buckyballs or nanotubes in the environment right now,” says John Lawton, the RCEP’s chairman.
Haven’t we been here before?
Yes. But since 2004 when the Royal Society and Royal Academy of Engineering first said that a programme of research was necessary to ensure the safety of nanotech products, the field has moved on in leaps and bounds.
“The rate of nanotechnology innovation now far outstrips our capacity to respond to the risks,” says Lawton.
The RCEP thinks the arrival of products in our high streets means it’s time to reiterate the need for safety tests – as the earlier call fell on deaf ears in government. It also wants to avoid polarising public opinion, as happened with genetic modification.
How many novel technologies are we talking about?
The number of patents filed on nanomaterials worldwide by 2006 reached 1600 – and that growth has continued exponentially. According to the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies in Washington, DC, there are at least 600 products on the global market that claim to contain a nanomaterial as a key ingredient, he adds.
What kind of products contain nanomaterials?
Well, the range is broad – and there could be health and environmental problems with any of them. They include sunscreens, cleaning products, anti-odour treatments for clothes, cosmetics, smart plastics, ceramics, self-cleaning glasses, composites, carbon-fibre-based textiles and other products containing nanotubes and buckyballs.
Which ones are causing concern?
All of them, to some extent.
But the commission singled out two. “Nanosilver” – a bactericide which slows the formation of odour-forming bugs in clothes like socks, underpants and T-shirts.
The second is a textile comprising spun fibres made from carbon nanotubes that could save the clothing industry a fortune by making clothes that don’t need dyes – their thread diameter dictates their colour through refraction effects.
How might these products cause harm?
“Nanosilver is biocidal to a remarkable extent – it’s extremely toxic to microorganisms,” says Lawton. In fact, it will kill twice the number of bacteria that bleach can.
When flushed into water courses, no-one knows what could happen. It could stop the biochemical reactions that make your local sewage-processing plant work. Or it may damage aquatic life – buckyballs have already been shown to cause brain damage in fish.
There have been reports that the carbon fibres in clothing could produce asbestosis-like lung diseases, and that spilled nanotubes could damage ecosystems.
Why not just ban nanotech products?
The RCEP thinks the advantages to society of nanotechnologies are too great to lose. “On balance there are no grounds for a blanket ban,” says Lawton.
Instead, he simply wants a major increase in the amount of testing to assess risk – prioritising the materials that may present the greatest risk to the environment and human health.
“Research gaps need to be addressed urgently, especially given the long lead times involved in developing and putting in place testing arrangements that will inform regulatory and legislative processes,” he says.
https://web.archive.org/web/20070926042217/http://www.rcep.org.uk/novelmaterials.htm
Presented to Parliament by Command of Her Majesty November 2008
“COVID”… 👆 👆 👆 👆 👆 👆 👆
“PCR TEST” and “LONG COVID”… 👆 👇
(High Levels of Possible Carcinogen Found in Face Masks ) https://www.azonano.com/news.aspx?newsID=38732
(https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-06605-w Titanium dioxide particles frequently present in face masks intended for general use require regulatory control | Scientific Reports)
(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353820786_Superhydrophobic_and_Self-Sterilizing_Surgical_Masks_Spray-Coated_with_Carbon_Nanotubes (PDF) Superhydrophobic and Self-Sterilizing Surgical Masks Spray-Coated with Carbon Nanotubes
(https://outraged.substack.com/p/bombshell-studies https://particleandfibretoxicology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12989-014-0059-z The carcinogenic effect of various multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) after intraperitoneal injection in rats | Particle and Fibre Toxicology | Full Text (biomedcentral.com)
Consequently, the mesotheliomas we found in the MWCNT groups of our study at incidences ranging from 40 to 98% must be regarded almost completely as induced by the tested MWCNTs.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10019824/ Primary cardiac mesothelioma presenting with fulminant recurrent pericarditis: a case report
3.86 In summary, these mammalian studies and the ecotoxicological work presented above (3.20-3.56) demonstrate that some manufactured nanomaterials do interact with biological systems and whole organisms to disturb normal function and produce damage.
Environmental reconnaissance and surveillance
3.104 To assess risks posed by manufactured nanomaterials it is necessary to gain an understanding of the potential level of exposure to them in the natural environment. Exposures from air, water, soil or sediment are all plausible, as is exposure via food.
https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2020/en/d0en00570c Environmental and health risks of nanorobots: an early review - Environmental Science: Nano (RSC Publishing)
Two potential hazards are highlighted:
(i) the use of hazardous materials and UV light in nanorobots, and
(ii) the loss of propulsion/targeting control.
Current regulations for medical devices are clearly not adapted to nanorobots and it is even unclear which specific regulations might be applicable.
applied to agricultural land.
https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/vaccines/vaccines-09-00359/article_deploy/vaccines-09-00359.pdf Lipid-Based Nanoparticles in the Clinic and Clinical Trials: From Cancer Nanomedicine to COVID-19 Vaccines
Also, what bacteria were used to make the nanobots (DNA origami) in these “vaccines” against “COVID” and cancer? Escherichia coli bacteria or others? Because:
We further analyzed RNA and DNA contents of these vials and identified large amounts of DNA after RNase A digestion in all lots with concentrations ranging from 32.7 ng to 43.4 ng per clinical dose. This far exceeds the maximal acceptable concentration of 10 ng per clinical dose that has been set by international regulatory authorities. Gene analyses with selected PCR primer pairs proved that residual DNA represents not only fragments of the DNA matrices coding for the spike gene, but of all genes from the plasmid including the SV40 promoter/enhancer and the antibiotic resistance gene.
Conclusion: Our results raise grave concerns regarding the safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine and call for an immediate halt of all RNA biologicals unless these concerns can be dispelled.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8629371/ A brief review on DNA vaccines in the era of COVID-19 - PMC
https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=SYM&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19
Toxoplasmosis 105 cases (0.01%) where Vaccine is COVID19
https://www.livescience.com/65030-usda-kitten-cannibalism-research.html
According to NBC News, the investigation found that more than 400 dogs from Colombia, Brazil and Vietnam, as well as 100 cats from China and Ethiopia, were euthanized for lab food.
Apparently, the lab also breeds kittens in order to carry out research on the parasite Toxoplasma gondii; cats are the only host animal for the parasite's eggs. These cats were fed brain or muscle tissue from intentionally infected cats. This month, lawmakers announced they would introduce legislation to prevent the lab from infecting cats with the parasite and then later euthanizing and incinerating those cats after researchers collected the parasites from the animals' feces, according to another NBC News report.
https://outraged.substack.com/p/nanotechnology-is-toxic?utm_source=publication-search (100) NANOTECHNOLOGY IS TOXIC - by OUTRAGED HUMAN
COVID-19 "VACCINE" COMES WITH ALMOST NO WARNING about side effects! It is actually ADVERTISED AS SAFE AND EFFECTIVE! SAFE FOR PREGNANT AND BREASTFEEDING WOMEN!
Comparing adverse drug reactions of these two drugs: Pembrolizumab (sold under the brand name Keytruda) and COVID-19 “vaccines” (from VAERS reporting: https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=SYM&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19):
Severe and Fatal Immune-Mediated Adverse Reactions:
KEYTRUDA can cause immune-mediated pneumonitis 3.4%
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Pneumonitis 741 - 0.05% and Pneumonia 8,890 - 0.55%
KEYTRUDA can cause severe or life-threatening infusion-related reactions, including hypersensitivity and anaphylaxis, which have been reported in 0.2% of 2799 patients receiving KEYTRUDA.
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Anaphylactic reaction 9,228 - 0.57%, Anaphylactic shock 1,582 - 0.1%, Hypersensitivity 10,478 - 0.65%
KEYTRUDA can cause immune-mediated colitis, which may present with diarrhea: 1.7%
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Diarrhoea 45,305 - 2.81%
KEYTRUDA can cause immune-mediated hepatitis: 0.7%
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Hepatitis 550 - 0.03%
KEYTRUDA can cause primary or secondary adrenal insufficiency: 0.8%
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Adrenal insufficiency 147 - 0.01%
KEYTRUDA can cause immune-mediated hypophysitis. Hypophysitis can present with acute symptoms associated with mass effect such as headache, photophobia, or visual field defects. Hypophysitis can cause hypopituitaris: 0.6%
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Headache 236,221 - 14.64%, Photophobia 4,204 - 0.26%, Visual field defect 949 - 0.06%
KEYTRUDA can cause immune-mediated thyroid disorders. Thyroiditis can present with or without endocrinopathy. Hypothyroidism can follow hyperthyroidism: 0.6%
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Hyperthyroidism 1,118 - 0.07%
KEYTRUDA can cause immune-mediated nephritis: 0.3%
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Nephritis 196 - 0.01%
KEYTRUDA can cause immune-mediated rash or dermatitis. Exfoliative dermatitis, including Stevens-Johnson syndrome, drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, and toxic epidermal necrolysis: 1.4%
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Stevens-Johnson syndrome 167 -0.01%, Toxic epidermal necrolysis 51 - 0%, Dermatitis 1,058 - 0.07%
KEYTRUDA can cause severe or fatal cases for some of these adverse reactions: Cardiac/Vascular: Myocarditis, pericarditis, vasculitis;
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Myocarditis 17,737 - 1.1%, Pericarditis 11,800 - 0.73%, Vasculitis 1,173 - 0.07%
KEYTRUDA can cause severe or fatal cases for some of these adverse reactions: Nervous System: Meningitis, encephalitis, myelitis and demyelination, myasthenic syndrome/myasthenia gravis (including exacerbation), Guillain-Barré syndrome, nerve paresis, autoimmune neuropathy;
COVID-19 “vaccines”: https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=SYM&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19v
KEYTRUDA can cause severe or fatal cases for some of these adverse reactions: Ocular: Uveitis, iritis and other ocular inflammatory toxicities can occur. Some cases can be associated with retinal detachment. Various grades of visual impairment, including blindness, can occur.
COVID-19 “vaccines”: https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=SYM&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19
KEYTRUDA can cause severe or fatal cases for some of these adverse reactions: Gastrointestinal: Pancreatitis, to include increases in serum amylase and lipase levels, gastritis, duodenitis;
COVID-19 “vaccines”: https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=SYM&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19
KEYTRUDA can cause severe or fatal cases for some of these adverse reactions: Musculoskeletal and Connective Tissue: Myositis/polymyositis, rhabdomyolysis (and associated sequelae, including renal failure), arthritis (1.5%), polymyalgia rheumatica;
COVID-19 “vaccines”: https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=SYM&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19
Etc.
Based on its mechanism of action, KEYTRUDA can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman.
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Abortion spontaneous 3,677 - 0.23%, Stillbirth 170 - 0.01%,
KEYTRUDA can result in increased mortality.
COVID-19 “vaccines”: Death 19,276 - 1.19%
https://news.yahoo.com/news/now-trump-says-500-billion-232732788.html
Altman said it was “the most important project of this era” and claimed that diseases from cancers to heart ailments “will be cured at an unprecedented rate.”
If someone still thinks they are doing something for the good of others and not for their own gain, I don't know what they are smoking… a $500 Billion AI Cure for Cancer
The people behind these injections (and technology) are well aware of their ingredients and their toxicity.
They knew the long list of adverse effects, but did not disclose them because they have total immunity from legal liability.
THIS TECHNOLOGY IS TOXIC, DEADLY TOXIC
More on nanobots:
https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/how-do-nanobots-know-what-to-do-siemens
Cause a problem. Offer a solution that accelerates the problem. Make money on the problem and the solution while accomplishing the end goal of depopulation and total control of society’s.
Sounds like a perfect business model to control the world.
Isn’t that what they have been telling us they want to do ???
Propaganda is so tight that people will buy anything. "The common feature of all totalitarian regimes … is that the regime monopolizes what is considered rationality, knowledge, and what is regarded to be truth. ~ Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, MD, Murthy v. Missouri rally, 18 Mar 2024. And I cannot blame anybody, because I fell for it, too. Despite having being silenced as an academician for going against the interests of local cartel, I fell for a radiation treatment as a cancer patient and now I suffer from radiation induced secondary malignancy, much worse than the original one. Luckilly I woke up during Covid and found independent oncologists, like dr Makis. But I do not blame those whom Covid did not wake up, either. When propaganda is so tight, it is hard to find a reason to start asking questions. In my case it was my fear for the safety of my children during Covid, who were immune compromised as a result of childhood vaccination (I believe so now). otherwise I would have had no motive to start looking first for alternative treatments for Covid, next to find out independant information about Covid vaccines. So I have no clue how to wake people up. Do you?