Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
@Jikkyleaks
Jan 17, 2023 • 19 tweets • 10 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
New Cheese 🧀🧀🧀on #Blotgate - The emerging scandal that keeps on giving.
The EMA and FDA reviews of the Pfizer BNT162b2 molecular biology assays were not independent reviews at all.
Pfizer wrote their documents.
@chrismartenson

The paper that David is referring to is published as a "peer reviewed" paper in @JPharmSciences

Except it wasn't that at all, it was a submission by Pfizer in response to the EMA and FDA questions posed in relation to their gene therapy product.
[PDF: jpharmsci.org/action/showPdf…]
It has simply been reconstituted as a "peer reviewed" manuscript.

These are the claims in the paper but they are not shown to be true.

Let's ignore the "safe and effective" claim for obvious reasons
The claims are that
(1) the mRNA has been isolated and characterized.

This is not true as no sequencing has been performed on the mRNA - the same mRNA "extras" identified in #humpgate

These humps with big red arrows
@Kevin_McKernan
and (2) that no additional (off-target) proteins are made because the mRNA that is in the product is truncated and unable to produce a protein product.

Again, not true based on this published data.
We saw this in #blotgate
So this paper - just published in January 2023 - is the exact same document as in the submissions to the EMA and FDA seen in the earlier threads.

Here is the #humpgate graph - the exact same one as the EMA document.
And the comedy Western blots are also the same. These as we saw are not Western blots at all but AWBs or "virtual blots". These are computer reconstructions that are easy to fake.

That's why papers are not normally accepted just based on AWBs.

This one was.
Those blots are meant to show that no other protein is made but simply show that no truncated spike protein is made (because they were only looking for spike protein fragments).

They did NOT exclude a different protein altogether.
There was in fact one genuine-looking Western blot in the whole paper, that was meant to show that no other proteins were being produced.

This one: https://jpharmsci.org/article/S0022-3549(23)00009-6/fulltextEMA Type II group of variations assessment report EMEA/H/C/0
The only problem is that the negative and positive controls were not specified, and there was only ever one of these produced - from one "special" batch not seen anywhere else.

They were meant to repeat this with 3 more batches. They didn't
So who was it exactly that produced this "peer reviewed paper"?

It was a Pfizerfest.
All Pfizer employees. Every single one.
The first author, Himakshi K Patel has no history on pubmed.gov so likely doesn't have a PhD.
The supervising author, Thomas F Lerch had a handful of first author papers prior to moving to Pfizer.

There are no university affiliations at all and no independent oversight of this paper.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=lerch%2C…
Which means that Pfizer wrote their own holiday brochure.

Nobody checked the hotel.
And it's not just me - the EMA said they need to "further characterize the mRNA" in July 2021.

No further characterisations were done.
We said so, so it's true.

The paper was published in January 2023.
Which is interesting, because this paper was approved on the day of the submission of the revised document.

Which was two days after we first exposed #humpgate

What are the odds?
Of course, you should trust Pfizer to make the product, investigate the product, write the assessors' brochure for the product and monitor their own clinical trial for the product.

Why wouldn't you?
justice.gov/opa/pr/justice…

@JesslovesMJK @MidwesternDoc
More on this from @JesslovesMJK ....
For reference this is the EMA document
files.catbox.moe/sg745z.pdf

And here is the Pfizer (BioNtech) FDA response document
files.catbox.moe/egah0n.pdf

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Jikkyleaks 🐭

Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Jikkyleaks

Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Jul 14
Just a reminder that Sam Neill had exactly the same "rare" T-cell lymphoma that Michel Goldman developed after his COVID vaccines.

Goldman published his own case report. After the backlash he was forced to falsely claim that the vaccines "had saved millions" - yet he stopped taking the COVID vaccines that gave him lymphoma and he is still alive.

Sam Neill's death is being weaponised by vested interests to claim that the experimental CAR-T gene therapy that was used for him "worked".

If you see someone claiming that CAR-T therapy "works" remember to ask them whether they have vested interests in it. Most media accounts that are pushing it do. It is a high risk gene therapy that has no proven and verified success in the treatment of cancers.

Meanwhile it is also important to remember that these very lymphomas were predicted to be a consequence of spike producing vaccines - because independent research showed it. But that research was quashed by the @NIH. People died as a consequence and are still dying.

RIP Sam Neill. We tried.

@JesslovesMJK @Fynnderella1 @RWMaloneMD @stkirsch @AaronSiriSG @Kevin_McKernan @BrokenTruthTV

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34901098/Image
Michel Goldman and the p53 lymphoma scandal in context:

arkmedic.info/p/philadelphia…
The only journalist who was prepared to cover this story is @BrokenTruthTV

He is still waiting for the @NIH to release the 490 pages of emails that they refused to release that contained information on the suppression of this scandal.

#NIHgate
brokentruth.tv/p/nihgate
Read 5 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Jul 10
I was taught for years that @DrAndyWakefield had committed fraud - it was not true.

His prior paper - written with @PeterDaszak - showed that measles virus was a contributor to Crohn's.

The Lancet paper showed that bowel disease was a feature of severe disability after vaccination.

Wakefield had to be destroyed to protect the vaccine industry or it would have collapsed in 1998.

That is how the pharma industry works, but they can't do it alone.

In the case of the Wakefield saga, they were aided by the @bmj_latest who commissioned Brian Deer to fabricate a fake story about "fraud" because they were being paid by GSK and Merck - the very vaccine makers who stood to be eviscerated by the truth about their product's safety.

All this is documented (thread below).

The children in the paper were permanently disabled by the MMR vaccine and never, ever, got recognition. They are on track to die without ever having their vaccine disability recognised.

This is the worst travesty of the medical industry ever committed - because it was done for money.

@MaryanneDemasi @DrJulieSladden @PGtzsche1 @AaronSiriSG @stkirsch @RWMaloneMD @Fynnderella1
Measles and Crohn's disease - Daszak and Wakefield.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9215145/
Measles vaccine is live measles virus.
arkmedic.info/p/would-you-li…
Read 8 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Jun 18
This is a false statement by omission.

It should say that cervical cancer deaths fell to zero in young women irrespective of vaccination status.

That is multifactorial due to change in screening and under-age sexual activity in the UK.

No RCT has shown a reduction in cancer
Teenage pregnancies are a surrogate for underage sexual activity (which drives cervical cancer rates in the under 25s). In the UK they fell off a cliff in 2007 - the year the iphone came out and the HPV vaccine rollout started.

At the same time there was a large rise in cervical cancer incidence in the older age group who were given the HPV vaccine in the "catch up" program.

It is a fallacy to say that it only works in underage girls.

Read 6 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
May 12
Absolutely not @quay_dr.

The "Swiss patient" sequence you provided not only has 2% dissimilarity from any known hanta sequence but BLASTing into the patent database gets us here.

"No name" virus.
Really?

The people running the @DeptofWar need to start going to jail.

@JesslovesMJK @Kevin_McKernan @open_vaet @Fynnderella1 @AGHuff @RepThomasMassie @BlackTomThePyr8 @FeeRedfern @artisbrutal2021Image
Image
Oof.. Jay Hooper
USAMRIID.



@FeeRedfern @RWMaloneMD @JesslovesMJK @carl_jurassic @open_vaet
@FeeRedfern @RWMaloneMD @JesslovesMJK @carl_jurassic @open_vaet Oh what a pretzel we weave when we try to deceive...

x.com/i/grok/share/d…Image
Read 4 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Feb 23
💥BOOM 💥
This post attracted hundreds of abusive pharma trolls, including an attempt to community note the post.

It was just a reply to another post and got over 1000 likes but 100s of trolls.

Why?

I am going to tell you in the next post. And it will shake your world.
You were lied to about the Merck measles vaccine develop in the 60s. When injected into babies it caused fevers, rashes, diarrhoea and febrile convulsions.

Why?

I'm going to show you.
@SecKennedy @RetsefL @MaryanneDemasi @DrJulieSladden @RWMaloneMD
Merck claimed that the "measles vaccine" was an "attenuated version of measles" giving the impression that it was a virus that was made safe.

That was a lie.

It was just measles, passaged in cells in a lab.

We injected our babies with actual measles.
How do I know?
Read 11 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Feb 10
💥💥💥BOOM💥💥💥

Recently released Australian Road Deaths data confirm that the @epiphare study claiming that COVID vaccination reduced road deaths by 32% was, as suspected, a complete fake.

See next tweet for the analysis and sources.
Paper: jamanetwork.com/journals/jaman… x.com/sudokuvariante…https://www.bitre.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/road-trauma-australia-2024.pdf
Here are the actual road deaths data plotted from the Australian BITRE data repository using a trendline for 2000-2019 (excluding 2020 as it was a quiet year)

The pink area shows the inflection and increase in road deaths over the predicted number.

Note that road deaths have a downward trend despite an increase in population (due to safety measures and slowing of traffic).Image
So the question becomes...
"what is the probability that - if the @epiphare study was real (showing a 32% reduction in road deaths after vaccination) - the Australian road deaths (where nearly 100% of the adult population was vaccinated) would increase by 36%"?
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(