1. The story that the unvaccinated are "Variant Factories" is a lie that must be answered.
Technically, every infected individual is a variant factory, but such a statement is misleading in the extreme...
2. Point mutations occur at random in viruses, all the time, constantly. Most mutations either result in nonviable progeny, or progeny that is no more (and potentially less) harmful. That's > 99.99999% of such progeny.
3. So, it does not matter that there is greater diversity among surviving mutated strains among the unvaccinated. According to Muller's ratchet, selection continues to less harmful survivors, no matter how diverse.
4. What matters is that the result of vaccination is a screening process for progeny---a sieve! The process of passing through the sieve selects specifically for those mutations that evade defenses. By definition!
(Sorry for my bad art)
5. This means that the vaccinated are "factories that select for immune evasion", while the unvaccinated are "factories of random, mostly nonsensical, but diverse mutations that almost always die out quickly while crowding out those that might evade mutation"!
6. The greatest risk is a variant that evades evasion, carrying with it spike protein in a form not specific enough for existing antibodies to recognize, then potentially to be enhanced in interaction. This tempts the ADE result we hope not to see.
1. Yesterday on @BretWeinstein's podcast, Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA vaccine, told the world that the spike protein is indeed opening up the blood brain barrier. This should lead to a redefinition of both COVID-19 and vaccine adverse events. I will explain...
2. Coronaviruses never previously caused all the kinds of damage we have seen. It seems almost certain now that the spiked protein is itself responsible for much of what we call C19 and also vaccine adverse events.
3. We should then be talking about something like COVID-type-1 and COVID-type-2 illnesses. The SARS-CoV-2 virus causes both, but those that overlap with the vaccines might be defined as the type 2.
I'm "most common masks do very little for an aerosolized virus one-two-thousands the size of the pores" and "there really are trade-offs of health and communication" and "harassing people over this seems crazy".
I'm not "anti-vaxx".
I'm "I'd like to know the long term risks both for my person and also existential risks such as leaked evolutionary pressure that might make this thing go 'Spanish flu' for real this time" and "give me a cost-benefit analysis first" and "kids? Really?!"
55. I feel strongly enough about the weirdness of "anti-vaxxer" shaming people who don't want to be part of a mass human trial that I'm including this in the thread of threads.
There is a strangely organized rumor going around that the AMA passed a resolution recognizing the efficacy of HCQ and calling on a reversal of its suppression. Unfortunately, that resolution was not passed, but I suggest the story is more interesting than that...
When you think about it, the resolution never had a chance of passing. Intuitively, we all know this. The AMA and Pharma are far too intertwined, and further with the government. Suggesting that the resolution could pass would be to suggest there was no opposition to begin with.
But here is the interesting part: Almost nobody, save for the few of us doing broad levels of research on the topic, knew to step in and correct the mistake. What does that mean?