Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Liberty2012's avatar

Were these mistakes the result of shocking ignorance on the part of the lead scientists, inventors, and regulators of these “vaccines,” or was intention in the form of “willful negligence” at play?

Why can't anybody just come right out and say the obvious?

Neither "shocking ignorance", nor "willful negligence". Third option = "Intentional evil". They were designed to kill, in ways that are hard to prove. On purpose., for plausible deniability.

As long as week keep believing politicians are stupid, pharma is making mistakes, we will never get to the point. These are kill shots.

Expand full comment
modarn_life's avatar

they used the shitty biontech optimization in triple dose for study 38166, then magically came up with consensus b2v9.

quote from my article: Another very interesting smidgen of information from the EMA leak (quality report p56) is another hint concerning the differences between BNT162b2v8 and v9: a footnote in a diagram states that “RBP020.1 and RBP020.2 code for the same antigen, but with variations in the used codons, thus, they differ slightly in the nucleotide sequence. Codon optimization has been performed either via a BioNTech proprietary algorithm (RBP020.1) or with a published algorithm (Raab et al. 2010; RBP020.2).”

RBP020.1 is b2 v8, RBP020.2 is b2 v9, which ended up being Comirnaty. v9 elicited 3-5x more antibodies than v8. BioNTech must suck if their proprietary codon-optimization got absolutely wrecked by an open-source program. Absolute shenanigans when you think about it: they exploited their own “incompetence” to get well codon-optimised modRNA into humans without a prior tox study; 38166 used BNT162b2v8, and the repeat-dose tox study for BNT162b2v9, 20256434, started the same day Phase 3 dosing in C4591001 began. Did they codon-optimize BNT162b2v8 “wrong” on purpose, in order to have the consensus optimal sequence be much better and skip the line into human trials?

https://modarnlife.substack.com/p/the-pre-2020-bnt162-development-program

anyway i was blown away by your presentation, the very competent interviewer really coaxed the information out of you in a way that worked extremely well, just an amazingly coherent and instructive, information packed, bundled insight. and you even include sources! as you kept repeating the point "this is common knowledge, it's right there just read it" i was reminded several times of this paper osf.io/uwx32 since published in mdpi, its a fantastic read but especially the first two pages, where domaszet-loso outlines that nobody ever really checked to see whether mRNA can integrate, it's a hollow interconnecting web of citations.

great job and thank you for speaking out!

Expand full comment
16 more comments...

No posts