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
Oct 17
When "real world" data is this complete and the findings are too good to be true - contradicting those from the @CDCgov's own V-safe registry...

It's likely to be synthetic, until proven otherwise.

There is ZERO reason to restrict this data.
jamanetwork.com/journals/jaman… x.com/jsm2334/status…Image
BINGO.

In France in 2021 only 25% of women received a COVID vaccine during pregnancy and most of those were second trimester.

Therefore it's not possible that 25% of the French pregnancy registry received 1st trimester vaccination.

Image
Image
This is also strange.
The Quentin registry study shows a big jump in vaccination rate by age group but the Bernard study doesn't show the same.
This is more like what a synthetic data set might show based on assumed characteristics of the underlying data.

There are possible explanations for all of these anomalies, but this is the problem with secret registry data:
It's not credible when it conveniently matches a narrative and nobody is allowed to see it.

Bernard jamanetwork.com/journals/jaman…
Quentin registry
sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
@franklin_reeder @chrismartensonImage
Read 7 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Oct 15
I'm going to explain why this chart is so important and why @jsm2334 is being disingenuous by ignoring it - whilst making points that undermine the "real world vaccine data" industry.

It's a Kaplan-Meier curve and it obliterates Jeffrey's argument.

THREAD response🧵below Image
Just to go over it... the lines show what proportion of subjects (children) ended up without chronic disease up to 10 years after being studied.

It's called a survival analysis because it's used for cancer survival.

If the red line was a cancer drug it would be a blockbuster Image
It shows that by the end of the 10 year follow-up, of those that they could still follow up (who stayed in the study) 57% (100-43%) of vaccinated kids had chronic disease (e.g. asthma) and 17% (100-83%) of unvaccinated kids did.

A huge difference not explainable by chance. Image
Read 17 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Oct 4
HOLY 🧀

The lead of the WHO steering committee - that stopped your elderly relative getting antibiotics for COVID - was Janet Diaz.

But Fiona Godlee, who lied about @DrAndyWakefield, and lied about the @bmj_latest being paid by Merck, was on the committee https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/be027488-3a45-4ba2-b413-6914d198714f/content
Janet Diaz was the person that led the #MAGICApp guideline committees that stopped your grandma getting antibiotics for her post-viral pneumonia, leading to her death.

But she did this with the help of @pervandvik who deleted his account

Image
Diaz here tells you that COVID kills you by an overreacting immune response, but that was never true.

She was an intensivist recruited by the WHO in 2018.

None of this was true, but it sold a LOT of drugs and killed a LOT of people
Read 9 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Sep 26
Hey @Grok...

Which US govt organisation blew a hole in the ozone layer in 1958 by sending atomic bombs to the troposphere over the Antarctic in operation Argus - then blaming the resulting destruction of ozone on CFC's?

When was DARPA created?
nuke.fas.org/control/ctr/ne… x.com/grok/status/19…
#Groklighting
#ArgusGate
Read 4 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Sep 25
🚨THREAD:
At first glance this is a non-story as Moderna will claim that what they said was a mistake.

BUT @RWMaloneMD must know something as he states clearly that Pfizer manipulated the biodistribution images.

Why did they want to hide that it went to the ovaries?
👇👇 Image
It wasn't just Pfizer that hid the fact that the mRNA-LNP complex went to the ovaries (where it could not possibly provide its declared function in the lung).

Other "scientists" - acting on behalf of Pfizer - were mobilised to hide this scandal
arkmedic.info/p/whats-your-a…
The AMH drop (ovarian reserve) after vaccination was later shown by the Manniche paper after being denied by the Kate Clancy and Viki Males of the world.

mdpi.com/2076-393X/13/4…
Read 14 tweets
Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Sep 19
Laura Wilson of @tandfonline can either choose to uphold scientific integrity.

Or choose to be an accessory in the biggest securities fraud scandal of our time.

I wonder what she will choose.

@STMAssoc is sponsored by @Silverchairnews

@Kevin_McKernan
#pubpeergate Image
Image
Can you see how it works?

Institutes like the @STMAssoc get their money from the journals who get their money from pharma.

And Bill Gates.

All controlled by big money interests.

Laura has no chance.
Unless she blows the whistle to the @SECGov

But this time the Arnold foundation's @RetractionWatch have not only revealed with their "exclusive" that they were directly involved in trying to get this important paper retracted...

But are trying to make Wilson the fall guy.

stm-assoc.org/people/laura-w…Image
Image
Read 10 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!

:(