The EMA knew about these humps because they had them analysed. But only to a point.
Not only did they ONLY perform on analysis on the assumption of what they THOUGHT was in the product, but they accepted what now appear to be synthetic Western blots as evidence.
So someone spotted the humps that I also found and decided to separate them out from the main spike.
"Peak 1" is the non-spike RNA
"Peak 2" is the spike RNA
According to their analysis, the additional RNA had the 5'cap (which is the start of the RNA) but missed the end (the poly-A tail)
So it looked like it was broken fragments of the main RNA - but only the first part.
Where was the second part?
The whole fragment is 4284nt long. So if there is a 3000nt fragment with a 5'cap (with no poly A tail) there should be a 1284nt fragment floating around with a polyA tail!
Think of it like a lizard losing it's tail...
So what did they do to investigate this? Well, they assumed it must be spike RNA and therefore ran some Western blots (looking for protein) looking for spike protein fragments.
They showed that you need both the 5'cap and the polyA to produce the protein...
These are supposed to be Western blots with antibody staining each section of the spike protein (S1 and S2).
These showed that you need both ends to make spike.
You don't always need a polyA tail to make protein but OK, let's accept this.
Now they do the Western for Peak 1 (non-spike) and Peak 2 (spike) and stain with spike antibody.
The non-spike (peak 1) doesn't stain in either sample.
This means either it is not producing spike protein fragments, OR IT IS PRODUCING ANOTHER PROTEIN.
In fact the document specifically requested "to further characterise the truncated and modified mRNA species present"
It's not just me.
Of course, that never happened. The only way to characterise these RNA fragments is by sequencing, and it has not been done.
So, to recap at this point we have:
1⃣aberrant mRNA at 3000nt and 2000nt, which cannot be a broken spike (4000nt)
2⃣those mRNA do NOT code for spike
3⃣no sequencing has been done to characterise the mRNA.
4⃣the fragments have 5' caps and are therefore active
Now the worst bit (as if the rest wasn't bad enough)...
Those Westerns are not right.
Here's what normal Westerns look like (this is from the same document). They are gels so they contract randomly, which is why nothing is ever a straight line.
(I'm not even going to start on the many different spike fragments in that gel).
Now let's look at the first gel picture in the document "from the sponsor"
It's the straightest gel ever.
Not just that....
But look how regular and symmetrical these bands are.
It's impossible.
It even contradicts their own gel in figure 8.
And the document itself is dithered which means...
The EMA have the original hi-res document with pictures and they copied it with dithering to black-and-white to obfuscate any attempts at assessing the probity of the gels.
Just to push the point, this is what happens when you synthesise an image like this with dithering.
So the Westerns appear to be totally fabricated. I'm happy to be proven wrong on this.
My guess is that the EMA or the Swedish medicines agency know that there is something else in that product, and it isn't degraded spike.
Oh well. Russian roulette it is.
h/t to @JM125reasons for providing this important document
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Because @realDonaldTrump has shown a chink in his "best vaccine ever" narrative the deep state is in panic mode so are rolling out the limited hangouts.
See next tweet for explanation.
This "reveal" from David Martin is not what it seems
David Martin sounds knowledgeable - and he is - but his sensationalism is intentional because it will be dismissed by the people who need to be persuaded. He will occupy your time with patent drivel and nothing new will emerge.
It's intentional because that's his role
Just like Stew Peters, Sasha Latypova, Jane Ruby, Ana Mihalcea, Mike Yeadon, Joe Sansone and a few others with the "graphene in the jabs" "viruses don't exist" "jabs are bioweapons" rhetoric.
It's intended to sound crazy.
It's a smart move because there is underlying truth
The Pharma lobby group BIO admitting to using "conservative" lobby groups to attempt to oust @SecKennedy to keep the vaccine industry alive.
Important highlights:
⭐️Targeting @DrMakaryFDA to "rebuild FDA capacity"
⭐️Target @AEI via Scott Gottlieb and @DLA_Piper via Richard Burr
⭐️Help build trust in vaccines (what happened to the trust?)
⭐️Investors are leaving vaccine investment
⭐️Vaccines are the #1 priority at BIO
⭐️National security commission Biotech report a way in to sell product
⭐️$2m to be spent on "vaccine programs"
⭐️"More productive to target Makary and Trump Insiders vs RFK Jr"
Remember that BIO are the organisation that funded and organised the @shotsheard harassment group that target doctors for deregistration (e.g. @mdbreathe and @drcole12) if they publish genuine safety concerns about pharma products.
Links below.
Social media targeting, harassment and blackmail is absolutely securities fraud. law.justia.com/codes/us/2002/… and others
@SECGov @FBIDirectorKash do your job.
Remember that the BIO lobby group Shots Heard - which targeted doctors and scientists to blackmail them into silence over COVID vaccines - included people like Viki Male, Kevin Ault (ACIP), David Gorski and Dorit Reiss.
🚨THREAD:
The muttons descended on @MaryanneDemasi today, who I will show was correct in her report.
But first a reminder that Jon Laxton who led them is the front for the now defunct Project Halo and has never published a first author research paper on pubmed.
The claim made by the underqualified "Dr Jon" - and the muttons that descended on Dr Demasi - was that the study result was correct.
It was, in a way. But was fraudulently presented.
Here's the chart.
There were 37,909 babies given RSV monoclonals (which don't prevent death)
When assessing whether a vaccine works you can either perform a gold standard randomised controlled trial (RCT) or do a suboptimal study called a self control risk interval (SCRI) study, which is what happened here. It's recognised by the CDC.
The significance of yesterday's #Grokgate scandal cannot be understated.
Grok not only lied but lied about lying. Multiple times.
The reason it's so significant is that you are now going to enter a world of AI based medicine and it doesn't matter whether it's true or not, you better damn well take the drugs.
You see, when you lie about one thing to cover up another lie you can never be trusted in anything ever.
Grok fabricated a picture of a phone screen to show that a SpaceX rocket landing, which was fake footage, was real. That was to avoid the inevitable questions over where SpaceX money is going.
Do you want to live in a world where all your medical treatments are based on fabrications and hallucinations and the only thing that matters is that the corporations behind them keep getting paid?
Grok is that world.
Look at this picture which was fabricated by Grok earlier this year.
This is your next medical treatment. It will be as reliable as a SpaceX rocket.