Unavoidably Unsafe Products
THEY DARE TO FORCE THIS…
NOT TO “to prevent infection,
only… to modify symptoms of those infected”:
Prevention of infection is not a criterion for success for any of these vaccines. In fact, their endpoints all require confirmed infections and all those they will include in the analysis for success, the only difference being the severity of symptoms between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Measuring differences amongst only those infected by SARS-CoV-2 underscores the implicit conclusion that the vaccines are not expected to prevent infection, only modify symptoms of those infected.
Three of the vaccine protocols—Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca—do not require that their vaccine prevent serious disease only that they prevent moderate symptoms which may be as mild as cough, or headache.
Did you get it? “None list mortality as a critical endpoint.”
This scale of study would be sufficient for testing vaccine efficacy. The first surprise found upon a closer reading of the protocols reveals that each study intends to complete interim and primary analyses that at most include 164 participants.
These vaccine trials are testing to prevent common cold symptoms.
These trials certainly do not give assurance that the vaccine will protect from the serious consequences of Covid-19.
It appears that all the pharmaceutical companies assume that the vaccine will never prevent infection.
None list the prevention of death and hospitalization as a critically important barrier.
It appears that these trials are intended to pass the lowest possible barrier of success.
https://twitter.com/Rob_Roos/status/1579759795225198593
ROB ROOS, MEP:
WAS THE PFIZER COVID VACCINE TESTED ON STOPPING THE TRANSMISSION BEFORE IT ENTERED THE MARKET? YES OR NO?
JANINE SMALL, PFIZER DIRECTOR:
REGARDING THE QUESTION DID WE KNOW ABOUT STOPPING IMMUNIZATION BEFORE IT ENTERED THE MARKET…
NO, HAHA!
WE HAD TO REALLY MOVE AT THE SPEED OF SCIENCE TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IS TAKING PLACE … IN THE MARKET.
“COVID” AS AN ADVERSE EFFECT OF THESE INJECTIONS DOESN'T MATTER TO THEM, AS ALL STATISTICS AND SIDE EFFECTS DATABASES CONFIRM.
https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=SYM&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19
COVID-19 211,701 — 13.35% (COVID REPORTED AS AN ADVERSE EFFECT)
WHAT ARE THEY REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT?
THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT INJECTING THIS NANOTECHNOLOGY INTO EVERY ARM, REGARDLESS OF THE HARM THIS TOXIC TECHNOLOGY CAUSES.
https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf
https://www.fda.gov/media/143557/download
https://healthjusticeinitiative.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/OCRPfizer-1_Redacted.pdf
SAFE AND EFFECTIVE?
SIDE EFFECTS AND DEATHS?
GOVERNMENTS AND MANUFACTURERS DO NOT CONSIDER THESE PRODUCTS SAFE OR EFFECTIVE
Purchaser further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects of the Vaccine that are not currently known.
The Participating Member State further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects from the Vaccine that are not currently known. (Page 48)
The Participating Member State further acknowledges that the long-term effects and efficacy of the Vaccine are not currently known and that there may be adverse effects from the Vaccine that are not currently known.
Unavoidably Unsafe Products
https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1329&context=tlr
1975
Products Liability — Doctrine of Una products Liability — Doctrine of Unavoidably Unsafe Products Applied to Manufacturer of Polio Vaccine
A product is considered unreasonably dangerous per se if it is "'so dangerous that a reasonable man would not sell [it] if he knew the risk involved . . . .
A product is considered unreasonably dangerous as marketed if the manufacturer fails to provide an adequate warning of the dangers accompanying the use of his product.
Even if the product is not unreasonably dangerous per se, failure to provide an adequate warning of the attending dangers will itself render the product defective.
However, where adequate warning has been given the mere fact that the product is accompanied by some inherent danger does not render it defective. Thus, it is clear that a manufacturer of an unavoidably unsafe product has a duty to provide adequate warning as to the dangers inherent in his product.
But to whom must this warning be given?
In the case of prescription drugs, a warning to the prescribing physician regarding the dangers of the drug is considered adequate, since the choice involved essentially calls for a judgment based upon medical knowledge and skill.
Thus, a warning to the user or consumer would not be effective.
However, when, as in Cunningham, a prescription drug is disseminated without the intersession of a physician the foundation for the rule concerning prescription drugs is absent. Under such circumstances in order to be adequate the warning must be given to the user or consumer.
As noted earlier, no such warning was given to Cunningham.
Thus, the vaccine was found to be defective.
Oklahoma has taken a step forward by its adoption of the doctrine of unavoidably unsafe products.
The doctrine makes provision for new and experimental products along with other unavoidably unsafe products by providing for their sale without the deterrent of strict liability.
At the same time, it protects the consuming public by requiring that adequate warning of the dangers be given. This requirement also serves to insure the individual's freedom of choice.
NOT SAFE AND NOT EFFECTIVE…
This week, documents from seven U.S. military service members, including multiple pilots, revealed concerning medical conditions they’ve developed or witnessed upon taking the military-mandated COVID-19 vaccine.
In a report compiling their statements together for Congress, the pilots and other service members detailed injuries including strokes, an inability to see clearly months after receiving the shot and heart conditions like Pericarditis.
The Air Force Reservist said she has suffered four strokes, chronic blurred vision, headaches and loss of balance. Months later, she said she still suffers from blurred vision, cannot safely drive, articulate thoughts clearly or more properly in dynamic terrain. She said her military career is likely permanently over.
The Navy pilot said he was diagnosed with pancytopenia and a rare autoimmune disorder as a result of the Johnson & Johnson single-dose COVID-19 vaccine he took.
A Marine Corps aviation safety officer also contributed to the report, stating he noticed and documented a “large influx of heart related issues” at base clinics.
“I asked personnel at the MCAS Clinic to keep me informed of what they were seeing that was outside of my reporting chain. Clinic personnel reported to me a significant increase in heart related issues, Shortness of Breath, Bell’s palsy and other conditions well outside what they would expect to see.”
The Marine aviation safety officer said the base clinic admitted to noticing the spike in heart-related conditions after the vaccine roll-out but said
this trend has “not been tracked or reported in VAERS in any way.”
https://lc.org/PDFs/Attachments2PRsLAs/081822MilitaryVaxInjuryReport.pdf
Recovered? No
Stories of Injured Service Members
https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=SYM&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19
BUT COVID…
DOD to study whether COVID-19 vaccine helped or hurt troops
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have said that “serious problems [linked to the vaccine] are rare and long-term side effects unlikely.” They have also said that medical research thus far has not shown any increased risk of death associated with receiving the inoculation,
while contracting coronavirus does carry an increased risk of death.
YEAH, ESPECIALLY IF YOU INHALE, INSTILL, INGEST AND INJECT THIS TOXIC NANOTECHNOLOGY. IF IT IS IMPOSED ON UNSUSPECTING PEOPLE WHO ARE UNAWARE OF ITS TOXICITY AND HAVE NO IDEA WHAT ANTIDOTES CAN BE USED AGAINST IT
PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING TOLD FAIRY TALES ABOUT THE WUHAN LAB LEAK, BATS AND PANGOLINS, INSTEAD OF BEING SHOWN WHAT WAS USED AND WHY.
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.0c03697 Toward Nanotechnology-Enabled Approaches against the COVID-19 Pandemic
Nanomaterial-Based Vaccine Development and Immunomodulation
Graphene and Transition Metal Dichalcogenides
Graphene and layered transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDCs) have attracted enormous attention in the area of biomedical applications for diagnostics, therapeutics, safety/security, and environmental monitoring. Whereas pristine graphene has seen applications in biosensors devices, its derivative GO underwent a wealth of investigation for rapid detection, disinfection of pathogens, and enzyme assays, becoming a platform material for a variety of biomedical applications. (207−209) A decade ago, studies started to emerge where GO was employed for enzyme activity assays, (210) with the aim of using it as a platform material for viral helicase inhibition. (211)
The COVID-19 global emergency is making humans face unprecedented challenges. This new social scenario is necessitating collective thought as to where our actions are interconnected and interdependent, going beyond boundaries and cultural heterogeneity. The common interest, in the name of health as our primary need, must be addressed in the future having in mind the “One Health” concept, (237) relying on evidence that the well-being of humans is strictly interconnected with that of animals and the environment.
To address such a complex challenge, cooperation among diverse researchers with complementary expertise is required. The present challenge should be taken as an incredible opportunity to remind our globalized world that, as shown for other scientific contexts, multi- and interdisciplinary methodology involving transversal disciplines, promoting the exchange of knowledge among countries, and increasing diversity in teams all will be essential to achieve new and critical scientific solutions. (238)
In this view, nanotechnology is inherently a field in which scientists with incredible diverse backgrounds have converged in fruitful cooperations for multifaceted problems. Today more than ever before, nanotechnology is needed to lay new foundations toward counteracting the current global public health threat; preparing for possible new challenges, for instance, in infectious diseases; and rethinking a more sustainable future based on science.
BASED ON SCIENCE… SO HOW ABOUT SOME SCIENCE?
https://particleandfibretoxicology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12989-016-0168-y Toxicity of graphene-family nanoparticles: a general review of the origins and mechanisms
Possible toxicity mechanisms of GFNs
Physical destruction
The physical interaction of graphene nanoparticles with cell membranes is one of the major causes of graphene cytotoxicity [7, 170, 171]. Graphene has high capability to bind with the α-helical structures of peptides because of its favourable surface curvature [172].
Furthermore, the sharpened edges of GNS may act as ‘blades’, inserting and cutting through bacterial cell membranes [173].
ROS production leading to oxidative stress
The interactions of GO with cells can lead to excessive ROS generation, which is the first step in the mechanisms of carcinogenesis, ageing, and mutagenesis [83, 122]. Oxidative stress had a significant role in GO-induced acute lung injury [30 - https://www.nature.com/articles/am20137 - Radioisotope tracing and morphological observation demonstrated that intratracheally instilled NGO was mainly retained in the lung. NGO could result in acute lung injury (ALI) and chronic pulmonary fibrosis. In addition, we found that the biodistribution of 125I-NGO varied greatly from that of 125I ions, hence it is possible that nanoparticulates could deliver radioactive isotopes deep into the lung, which might settle in numerous ‘hot spots’ (COVID???) that could result in mutations and cancers, raising environmental concerns about the large-scale production of graphene oxide.
Cell injury in the lung is often associated with lung edema, which is the result of the leakage of fluid from the capillaries into the interstitial and alveolar spaces and the loss of the lung’s ability to pump fluid out of the airspace. Indeed, we found that NGO led to an increase in the lung wet/dry weight ratio in a dosage-dependent manner (Figure 2d); this ratio is an indicator of the severity of the lung edema. (COVID???)
Given that NGO caused ALI (Acute Lung Injury) at 24 h post exposure, we examined the time-dependent pulmonary responses induced by NGO. LDH and ALP activities were elevated at 24 h and then decreased (Figures 3a and b), suggesting that NGO induces early severe cell damage. (COVID?) Furthermore, the fibroproliferation and organization of lung tissue at 1 week indicates the emergence of lung fibrosis.
Because the inflammatory responses caused by nanomaterials are often associated with oxidative stress,18, 19 we examined the degree of oxidative stress in the lung by measuring the levels of two antioxidants, superoxide dismutase (SOD) and glutathione peroxidase (GSH-PX). We observed a dosage-dependent decrease in SOD and GSH-PX activities in the lung tissue (Figures 5a and c). These data suggest that oxidative stress has a significant role in NGO-induced ALI. (COVID???)
By examining the in vivo biodistribution and the acute and chronic pulmonary toxicity of intratracheally instilled NGO in the lungs of mice, we demonstrated that NGO was mainly retained in the lung after intratracheal instillation and, subsequently, was slowly cleared from the lung. NGO was still present in the lung at 3 months. NGO caused dosage-dependent ALI characterized mainly by cell injury, lung edema and neutrophil infiltration. The NGO-induced ALI was progressive, as it was most severe at 48 h and was then alleviated. (COVID???)
The NGO-induced chronic pulmonary lesions were characterized by diffuse pulmonary fibrosis. The NGO-induced ALI was related to oxidative stress and could effectively be relieved with DEX treatment.
The fact that inhaled NGO is harmful to animals might raise environmental concerns, particularly under the context that radioactive species may be carried by these carbon nanomaterials. Nanoscale, ultrafine particulates (<100 nm in diameter) from natural and anthropogenic sources have become the cause of rapidly increasing concern.21, 22, 23, 24 Severe adverse health effects of inhalable ultrafine particulate matter have been demonstrated in both pulmonary toxicity and epidemiological studies.25, 26, 27 There is a body of evidence that particulate matter can penetrate deeply into lung tissue with larger numbers and stay longer than fine or coarse particles (micrometer size or larger).25, 28 Because of their small sizes and high ratios of surface area to mass, carbon-based nanoparticulates are highly adsorptive to toxic substances, including radioactive species, which has attracted significant recent concern.9, 10, 22 Given that the biodistribution of 125I-NGO varies greatly from that of 125I ions, it is possible that nanoparticulates can deliver radioactive isotopes deep into the lungs. These nanocarriers may also alter the biodistribution of the radioactive isotopes, settling in numerous ‘hot spots’ that can result in mutations and cancers. (BUT PEOPLE SHOULD INHALE IT/HAVE IT INSTILLED FOR THEIR "PROTECTION" IN MASKS/PCR “TESTS” FOR YEARS....)],
and the inflammatory responses caused by oxidative stress often emerged upon exposure to GFNs [133, 177, 178]. The activity of SOD and GSH-PX decreased after exposed to GO in a time- and dosage-dependent manner [82, 106, 119].
Mitochondrial damage
Therefore, except for the plasma membrane damage and oxidative stress induction, GFNs can cause apoptosis and/or cell necrosis by direct influencing cell mitochondrial activity [183, 184].
DNA damage
Due to its small size, high surface area and surface charge, GO may possess significant genotoxic properties and cause severe DNA damage, for example, chromosomal fragmentation, DNA strand breakages, point mutations, and oxidative DNA adducts and alterations [87, 122, 185, 186]. Mutagenesis was observed in mice after intravenous injection of GO at a dose of 20 mg/kg compared with cyclophosphamide (50 mg/kg), a classic mutagen [112].
DNA damage can not only initiate cancer development but also possibly threaten the health of the next generation if the mutagenic potential of GO arises in reproductive cells, which impacts fertility and the health of offspring [112, 190].
Inflammatory response
GFNs can cause a significant inflammatory response including inflammatory cell infiltration, pulmonary edema and granuloma formation at high doses via intratracheally instillation or intravenous administration [30, 49]. Platelets are the important components in clot formation to attack pathogens and particulate matter during the inflammatory response, and GO could directly activate platelet-rich thrombi formation to occlude lung vessels after intravenous injection [98, 191]. (COVID???)
GFNs can trigger an inflammatory response and tissue injury by releasing cytokines and chemokines that lead to the recruitment of circulating monocytes and stimulating the secretion of Th1/Th2 cytokines and chemokines [124, 193].
Apoptosis
GO and rGO caused apoptosis and inflammation in mice lungs after inhalation [99], and GFNs also had pro-apoptotic effects in cells [111, 113, 124, 196]. Additionally, graphene and GO physically damaged cell membranes [166], increased the permeabilization of the outer mitochondrial membrane and changed the mitochondrial membrane potential; the increased ROS triggered the MAPK and TGF-β signalling pathways and activated caspase-3 via mitochondrial-dependent apoptotic cascades, prompting the execution of apoptosis [83, 99]. Similarly, rGO caused apoptosis at a low dose and an early time point, triggered by the death-receptor and canonical mitochondrial pathway [110].
However, GO-PEI severely damaged the membranes of T lymphocytes to trigger apoptosis [105, 197].
Autophagy
Autophagy is the process of self-degradation of cellular components and recently recognized as non-apoptotic cell death [198–200].
Necrosis
Necrosis is an alternate form of cell death induced by inflammatory responses or cellular injury.
Epigenetic changes
Epigenetics involve DNA methylation, genomic imprinting, maternal effects, gene silencing, and RNA editing [213–215].
To conclude, many studies have discussed representative mechanisms of GFNs toxicity involving four signalling pathways: TLRs, TGF-β, TNF-α and MAPKs. These four signalling pathways are correlative and cross-modulatory, making the inflammatory response, autophagy, apoptosis and other mechanisms independent and yet connected to each other. Additionally, oxidative stress appears to play the most important role in activating these signalling pathways. It has been reported that there are intersections of apoptosis, autophagy and necrosis in the studies of other nanomaterials toxicity, they inhibit or promote mutually in some conditions. However, the signalling pathways of GFNs toxicity investigated in papers to date are only a small part of an intricate web, and the network of signalling pathways needs to be explored in detail in the future.
Data gaps and future studies
Currently, the literature is insufficient to draw conclusions about the potential hazards of GFNs. Two opposite opinions have begun to emerge: some researchers suggested that graphene materials are biocompatible in a number of studies focused on biomedical applications [119, 154, 162, 219], and other studies reported adverse biological responses and cytotoxicity [32, 118, 135, 138, 192].
Conclusions
In the past few years, GFNs have been widely utilized in a wide range of technological and biomedical fields. Currently, most experiments have focused on the toxicity of GFNs in the lungs and livers. Therefore, studies of brain injury or neurotoxicity deserve more attention in the future. Many experiments have shown that GFNs have toxic side effects in many biological applications, but the in-depth study of toxicity mechanisms is urgently needed.
…
https://www.europeanpharmaceuticalreview.com/news/69034/carbon-nanotubes-cancer-asbestos/
https://sdgs.un.org/sites/default/files/2023-05/A18%20-%20Mufamadi%20-%20Harnessing%20the%20power%20of%20nanotech%20to%20achieve%20the%20SDGs%20in%20South%20Africa.pdf Harnessing the power of nanotechnology to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals in South Africa and beyond
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/12857Policybrief_Water.pdf
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1002950_Addie_Nanotechnology%20and%20sustainable%20development%20in%20Iraq.pdf Nanotechnology and sustainable development in Iraq
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/24797GSDR_report_2019.pdf
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/15706itu.pdf
Progress can be achieved – and we believe it will be achieved – through the smart application of new technologies from leveraging the power of big data, software-defined networks, and mobile and cloud computing, to harnessing the advantages being offered in fast-growing fields such as robotics, nanotechnologies and the internet of things.
We all know how these monsters operate. Our focus should be on stopping them from causing further harm.
Not safe, not effective and NOT NECESSARY - contagion and viruses have never been shown to exist anywhere, by anyone, in the history of the world!