I’m convinced that there are always a small number of insiders in all our public institutions that know the narratives pushed are BS.
In 2021 my husband did some work for a retired Senior pharmaceutical executive, who lives in our neighbourhood. The conversation got round to the Covid vaccines and my husband lamented that he’d foolishly taken one, despite my warning him of the dangers.
This old chap recounted some of his career in the industry and how he had travelled the world over decades and never taken a single vaccine and had been super careful to avoid medical interventions wherever possible. He was the father of four completely unvaccinated adult children and knew immediately that the Covid jabs would kill and injure many, as that is their intention.
He also knows of at least two GPs in our local community that share this view and further that the whole virus as a cause of disease to be an industry generated marketing strategy and one that the medical community found a super useful diagnosis when they didn’t know what else to say to their “poorly” patients.
My guess is he isn’t alone Andrew, there are many insiders, especially those educated and trained before the current cohort, that would be right behind you on the fraud of virology and like more besides.
How to reach them and how do we encourage them to speak out and support your findings? Dr Mike Yeadon is a shining example and I hope others will follow his example in speaking out.
Very likely in most cases, they have much to lose from speaking out publicly.
But from the experience my husband had, this gentleman didn’t shy away from discussing the Convid situation and it would seem he was interested enough to advise my husband to “listen to your wife in future”.
He could have just kept quiet and not mentioned anything but he was clearly moved to speak out and encouraged my family to avoid all further vaccinations.
I’m confident there are others and perhaps it would be helpful if there were a “safe space” where people from these industries could reveal their concerns. It’s such a hot topic right now, it must be a very heavy cross to bear especially for those reaching the end of the days.
I feel like Jamie Andrews and esc key just had a baby together. The incredibly important aspect to this particular article lies in its elaboration of enforcement rails tied to ISO compliance (black box standards) and conditional funding/accreditation.
I almost jazzed in my pants.
I think we are getting the band back together.
Robert Malone and all those limited hangout nuff buffs better get busy. Shroedingers cat is alive now we are looking at it and it ain't goin back in that fucking bag.
Knowing exactly how a crime is committed does not bring justice to the afflicted. For that we depend on enforcement officers. The problem we now face is those officers are part of the system which perpetrates the crime and their allegiance is to the Crown, not the people.
This is something that Esc Key refuses to understand.
Your description of false negative "virus culture" 'Xperiments' (rituals) is astonishing, even after all I had read before. So these "scientists" never in any published study provide step by step details for ANY of their control studies? They promise they have successfully done a "mock infection" study, but CHOOSE to withhold the important details of that study? So no one knows in detail what they did or did not do in their promised control study? And to get their precious cytopathic effect in culturing of nonhuman tissue, they CHOOSE to withhold enough fetal serum to induce starvation in non-inoculated "control study" tissues that then produce dying tissues--no "viruses" needed. The LOL line is their CHOOSING to withhold ALL fetal bovine serum from flu-inoculated samples to GUARANTEE their desired outcome.
I have known about this fallacious procedure for a long time and in some depth, but your description still makes my hair stand up.
What impressive scientists. I'd follow them anywhere.
I can't resist adding that your intense mind-numbing description of layers and layers of COERCIVE REGULATIONS and MANDATES constitute the "marketplace" for virologists, pharamceutical companies, virus and bacteria test makers and everyone else involved in the "medical marketplace." Of course, there is no "market" in the foregoing, because an actual free market involves freedom of choice among people who choose to buy and sell, to innovate and produce, and to FREELY DISCRIMINATE between the rational and the good, as opposed to the irraational and the bad.
Yet so many persist in calling state "public health" tyranny corporate or market totalitarianism. As though this malfeasance were somehow the product of free market capitlalism. Ha.
Hey, yes that is correct. This is "symptomatic" within most of modern science, but especially within Virology and Genetics that they never document the method for the control. It gives them plausible deniability. They will argue blue in the face that they all conduct them legitimately yet when we carry out their legitimate control it fails.
There are certainly a handful of virologists that KNOW this and carry on regardless.
I am less forgiving than you are. If one chooses to become a virologist, it thereby should become one's first priority to know what is true or false in one's field of expertise.
How many times have people heard " it's dog eat dog " " it's a hard life " LAW of the jungle "
If any professional following legislation or guidelines they are just following their experts , experts people have accepted as more educated than them , experts the people voted for...
If people except the experts how are the experts wrong as it's down to the individual to look after themselves...if people accept another person's claim it's technically not the experts fault.
If people have consented to other people looking after them , they are finished ,they accepted the alternative universe .
I sold a car which was black , but told the customer it's blue , the customer accepted it was blue ...how the hell is it my problem what the customer thinks is true .
Interaction with the other party is probably required. One virologist correctly described the negative control as a standard procedure and incorporated it into the IQC. IQC is part of ISO 15189. Since he did not document the control, in the next study he did it in a modified way but still showing images of the supposed sars-cov-2 and EVs that look identical. He described the difference with a slightly darker image for sars-cov-2 lol. And of course PCR positivity.
This means that if the method described contains 10% FBS or 2% FBS for "infection" experiment, then this also applies to the control: The correspodence with a virologist: "The control experiment is coducted as described for our infection experiment (see Methods section of the paper), except adding the diluted stock virus suspension to the medium."
So, it is not mandatory that they document the control exactly if they have documented the "infection" experiment and defined the control (in correspodence, lol)
I think somewhere in that ISO it says that methods can be changed in laboratories, that is, that it is the laboratories that generate/define/modify their standard procedure. LOL
Thank you for this latest memorialization of your important research and reasoning. This is a great rebuttal to the question you were asked on Doc Malik's show. I'm disgusted but not surprised to hear how money and power have yet again been carefully placed against us to wreak havoc.
I’m convinced that there are always a small number of insiders in all our public institutions that know the narratives pushed are BS.
In 2021 my husband did some work for a retired Senior pharmaceutical executive, who lives in our neighbourhood. The conversation got round to the Covid vaccines and my husband lamented that he’d foolishly taken one, despite my warning him of the dangers.
This old chap recounted some of his career in the industry and how he had travelled the world over decades and never taken a single vaccine and had been super careful to avoid medical interventions wherever possible. He was the father of four completely unvaccinated adult children and knew immediately that the Covid jabs would kill and injure many, as that is their intention.
He also knows of at least two GPs in our local community that share this view and further that the whole virus as a cause of disease to be an industry generated marketing strategy and one that the medical community found a super useful diagnosis when they didn’t know what else to say to their “poorly” patients.
My guess is he isn’t alone Andrew, there are many insiders, especially those educated and trained before the current cohort, that would be right behind you on the fraud of virology and like more besides.
How to reach them and how do we encourage them to speak out and support your findings? Dr Mike Yeadon is a shining example and I hope others will follow his example in speaking out.
If they are not speaking, no amount of encouragement will make them do it. They are well compensated for their silence.
Very likely in most cases, they have much to lose from speaking out publicly.
But from the experience my husband had, this gentleman didn’t shy away from discussing the Convid situation and it would seem he was interested enough to advise my husband to “listen to your wife in future”.
He could have just kept quiet and not mentioned anything but he was clearly moved to speak out and encouraged my family to avoid all further vaccinations.
I’m confident there are others and perhaps it would be helpful if there were a “safe space” where people from these industries could reveal their concerns. It’s such a hot topic right now, it must be a very heavy cross to bear especially for those reaching the end of the days.
A guilty conscious is a strange beast.
I feel like Jamie Andrews and esc key just had a baby together. The incredibly important aspect to this particular article lies in its elaboration of enforcement rails tied to ISO compliance (black box standards) and conditional funding/accreditation.
I almost jazzed in my pants.
I think we are getting the band back together.
Robert Malone and all those limited hangout nuff buffs better get busy. Shroedingers cat is alive now we are looking at it and it ain't goin back in that fucking bag.
Knowing exactly how a crime is committed does not bring justice to the afflicted. For that we depend on enforcement officers. The problem we now face is those officers are part of the system which perpetrates the crime and their allegiance is to the Crown, not the people.
This is something that Esc Key refuses to understand.
Your description of false negative "virus culture" 'Xperiments' (rituals) is astonishing, even after all I had read before. So these "scientists" never in any published study provide step by step details for ANY of their control studies? They promise they have successfully done a "mock infection" study, but CHOOSE to withhold the important details of that study? So no one knows in detail what they did or did not do in their promised control study? And to get their precious cytopathic effect in culturing of nonhuman tissue, they CHOOSE to withhold enough fetal serum to induce starvation in non-inoculated "control study" tissues that then produce dying tissues--no "viruses" needed. The LOL line is their CHOOSING to withhold ALL fetal bovine serum from flu-inoculated samples to GUARANTEE their desired outcome.
I have known about this fallacious procedure for a long time and in some depth, but your description still makes my hair stand up.
What impressive scientists. I'd follow them anywhere.
I can't resist adding that your intense mind-numbing description of layers and layers of COERCIVE REGULATIONS and MANDATES constitute the "marketplace" for virologists, pharamceutical companies, virus and bacteria test makers and everyone else involved in the "medical marketplace." Of course, there is no "market" in the foregoing, because an actual free market involves freedom of choice among people who choose to buy and sell, to innovate and produce, and to FREELY DISCRIMINATE between the rational and the good, as opposed to the irraational and the bad.
Yet so many persist in calling state "public health" tyranny corporate or market totalitarianism. As though this malfeasance were somehow the product of free market capitlalism. Ha.
Thank you for this great expose.
Hey, yes that is correct. This is "symptomatic" within most of modern science, but especially within Virology and Genetics that they never document the method for the control. It gives them plausible deniability. They will argue blue in the face that they all conduct them legitimately yet when we carry out their legitimate control it fails.
There are certainly a handful of virologists that KNOW this and carry on regardless.
I am less forgiving than you are. If one chooses to become a virologist, it thereby should become one's first priority to know what is true or false in one's field of expertise.
If I can figure this out, why can't they?
Oh boy does this dovetail with esc s work.
Accredited accreditors
Same patterns everywhere.
How many times have people heard " it's dog eat dog " " it's a hard life " LAW of the jungle "
If any professional following legislation or guidelines they are just following their experts , experts people have accepted as more educated than them , experts the people voted for...
If people except the experts how are the experts wrong as it's down to the individual to look after themselves...if people accept another person's claim it's technically not the experts fault.
If people have consented to other people looking after them , they are finished ,they accepted the alternative universe .
I sold a car which was black , but told the customer it's blue , the customer accepted it was blue ...how the hell is it my problem what the customer thinks is true .
FBS is used to create FBS - F'ing Bull S't. Good work, Jamie.
"For controls, always include a negative control of uninfected Vero/hSLAM during virus isolation attempts." https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/a2ef3e46-cd92-4553-a247-acdee005d710/content
Interaction with the other party is probably required. One virologist correctly described the negative control as a standard procedure and incorporated it into the IQC. IQC is part of ISO 15189. Since he did not document the control, in the next study he did it in a modified way but still showing images of the supposed sars-cov-2 and EVs that look identical. He described the difference with a slightly darker image for sars-cov-2 lol. And of course PCR positivity.
This means that if the method described contains 10% FBS or 2% FBS for "infection" experiment, then this also applies to the control: The correspodence with a virologist: "The control experiment is coducted as described for our infection experiment (see Methods section of the paper), except adding the diluted stock virus suspension to the medium."
So, it is not mandatory that they document the control exactly if they have documented the "infection" experiment and defined the control (in correspodence, lol)
I think somewhere in that ISO it says that methods can be changed in laboratories, that is, that it is the laboratories that generate/define/modify their standard procedure. LOL
Thank you for this latest memorialization of your important research and reasoning. This is a great rebuttal to the question you were asked on Doc Malik's show. I'm disgusted but not surprised to hear how money and power have yet again been carefully placed against us to wreak havoc.