Jikkyleaks 🐭 Profile picture
Jan 17 19 tweets 10 min read
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.

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
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.

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?

@JesslovesMJK @MidwesternDoc
For reference this is the EMA document

And here is the Pfizer (BioNtech) FDA response document

• • •

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!


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

Jan 19
Every lie will eventually be revealed.

@VikiLovesFACS and @kevinault have been pushing untested COVID vaccines for #pregnancy on the basis of a reduction in preterm labour risk.

It was a lie.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P… Image
This has happened with every paper looking at 3+ doses. When you look at the 2-dose patients in those studies, the claimed benefit disappears.

It's because the original findings were just an artefact. The benefit was fake.
This is literally the definitive debunk of the first COVID vaccine study - the Dagan study.

All the "efficacy" was just miscategorisation bias because all cases prior to 5 weeks post-jab were counted as "unvaccinated"

Read 4 tweets
Jan 17
.@elonmusk this is not OK

The engagement on this account is high, twitter blue is enabled and there are 40K followers

This important tweet was suppressed within 2 hours of its posting, having had 100 RT within minutes
I have been at this long enough to know when a tweet is gaining traction organically and when it is being suppressed.

This one has been suppressed and the shadowban is in place.

You asked for $8(US) a month - fine so I agreed. Nowhere in the T&C does it say...
That you could or would (under set circumstances) shadow ban the account.

Nothing in these tweets is false, misleading or offensive (except maybe to people who make false claims about things that they are selling).

You even said this
help.twitter.com/en/using-twitt… Image
Read 5 tweets
Jan 14
WHOA... this looks like #surgisphere the sequel

The claim that statins improve the outcome of #COVID was proven fake when the original authors made it.

Now you miraculously found another database?

No way.
@Inspiteofmysel1 @chrismartenson
This is the ASA abstract.

If this data is published without the data set for analysis it should be immediately stamped with an expression of concern

There are red flags all over this. This is EXACTLY what #surgisphere claimed.

"The Institutional review boards said this was exempt"

It doesn't work like that.
Where is the IRB reference?

You can't just give up 90,000 patients' personal data without ethics approval.
Read 24 tweets
Jan 14

Why does FOI 3717 not appear on the TGA's disclosure log?

Why did the TGA know that at least two young men had dropped dead 48 hours after a #Moderna vaccine and did not inform the public?

We don't want none of that "vaccine hesitancy" do we Dr Nissen?
Luckily the ABC weren't interested in asking the TGA any awkward questions
Do you understand what your job is?

You have one job. It is to independently assess whether a drug is safe and to let the public know if it is not.

It is NOT your job to decide the morality or otherwise of a "vaccine rollout"
Read 8 tweets
Jan 13
PSA: If you received any of the mRNA vaccines and have noticed early morning wakening with your heart pounding over the last few weeks please comment below.

We have an idea of what might be going on and would like your help to stop this epidemic.

Thank you
#LisaMariePresley twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
@DiedSuddenly_ @Parsifaler @chrismartenson @DoorlessCarp @fynn_fan @canceledmouse @P_McCulloughMD Please understand that this is a conversation in evolution.

We have reasonably good evidence that the circadian rhythm disturbance induced by the mRNA therapies (via #microRNA) in addition to subclinical myocarditis may be prompting these events..

But they might be preventable
For technical background please see DC's article here with references, and look up @parsifaler's contributions to the subject too.

Read 5 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!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!