Can anyone explain how all-cause mortality in the UK in April 2020 spiked at exactly the same time in every region when travel routes into the UK are overwhelmingly via the South East?
Travel is undertaken by only a fraction of the population at any one time, so the idea that "COVID" could be spread by travel as explanation of this sporadic pattern of worldwide spread seems unlikely.
It should spread locally - predominantly.
Yet there was basically no increase in all-cause mortality outside of Wuhan in mainland China for 2 years.
Which means that the only logical explanation is that the MERS outbreaks - which were "not natural" - were the model for the transmitting "COVID" to the world in such an unnatural manner. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32288979/
The remaining question should be: how could this be obtained with a coronavirus, which can't survive in the water supply or the food supply or in UV light? healthline.com/health/does-uv…
One answer is an infectious clone or vector. Just like the Astrazeneca "vaccine" - you can put a virus into another organism and the other organism can express the virus
The supervising author is Pei-Yong Shi of the UTMB who is (1) affiliated to the PLA-CCP (2) the head of the lab that produced the "neutralising antibody" studies for the Pfizer "vaccine".
No, I'm not kidding.
Here are Pei-Yong Shi's academic networks.
Pfizer.
Novartis.
Gilead.
Chinese Academy of Sciences (PLA-CCP)
What @TheBurninBeard is saying here is that the clinical samples that had "COVID" also had gene signatures of Mycoplasma fermentans, a US military pathogen that can be used as a vector to carry viral clones.
@SabinehazanMD found it too.
🧵
#spraygate @BrokenTruthTV
Can you see that Norman Pieniazek, who headed up the CDC's research division at the time that the @CDCgov sent biological weapons to Iraq to start a war, took himself out of this thread?
Every vaccine scientist will try to convince you that the drop in u25 cancers was due to the vaccine when it was merely due to the change in screening.
But check out the HUGE RISE in 25+ cancers. This pattern is repeated in Scotland and Australia where similar changes to the screening age were made a few years after the introduction of coerced vaccination, obfuscating the figures to hide a scandalous rise in 25-29 age cervical cancers after the vaccine rollout.
For clarity most cancers in this age group are early and detected on screening before they become advanced. Moving the screening age meant that they were diagnosed later and therefore in an older age bracket.
The big red arrow is pointing to the preinvasive diagnoses which tend to mirror the actual cancers - the upper chart was too busy.
Here is the same from the OP with arrows showing both cancer (above) and precancer (below) which both rose significantly after the vaccine rollout
And here is the same data from Cancer Research UK (smoothed) showing a doubling of cancer rates in the over 25s for at least 5 years after the vaccine rollout. cancerresearchuk.org/health-profess…