The #ChatGPT confirms that #FastEddie Edward Holmes and the University of Sydney conspired to cover up an article referencing the PRRA epitope of the #modernagate furin cleavage site - in 2018.
Hold onto your hats!
The DOI referenced by the #ChatGPT does not exist. How so? The Chatbot is sure is exists. It knows everything.
The chat bot gets further confused and redirects to another unrelated paper.
No, I just want the Holmes 2018 article. Where is it?
Now it gets interesting.
"No longer available"?
A journal article?
It doesn't work like that, retracted articles are marked up as retracted but must stay on the record.
Now there is a retraction notice because of "issues with the data presented" but the retraction notice is the same dead link at @NatureMedicine
The access token link is also dead.
How can a retraction notice have been scrubbed?
But the chat bot provides the text that they have seen in the retraction notice (presumably from a cache)
"An investigation was conducted by the University of Sydney and subsequently the authors were unable to provide raw data for the analysis presented in the paper"
No further information, but we know from a previous request that the chat bot directed our mouse informant to this paper (which no longer exists).
The chat bot doesn't like the next question
So #ChatGPT confirms that a paper existed in 2018 published by #FastEddie Holmes and was retracted, yet no record exists of this paper anywhere.
Not pubmed, not google, not duckduckgo.
But a paper that did not exist prompted an investigation by @Sydney_Uni
It's clear from the title that this is a vitally important paper to the origins of the "Pandemic"...
"Spike cleavage fusion peptide motifs"
Just like the #EK1C4 paper from Zengli Shi, was this a peptide inhibitor developed in advance?
If this turns out to be true (which seems highly likely) then there are senior people at the University of Sydney who are covering up for Edward Holmes and are powerful enough to have that paper scrubbed off the internet.
What are the odds that a virus arising in at least 5 different species would all match the same sequence starting at the same point and matching a "newly discovered" human virus from 2001?
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.
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).
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%"?
Debbie's tweet was about her case against @HHSGov when her son developed Type 1 Diabetes after a routine vaccine, when he had a negative glucose test prior.
So it was clearly vaccine linked, but her case was denied.
Not only was the case denied (despite clear evidence of a new diagnosis immediately after vaccination) but the case was used by the "judge" to essentially ban ANY further cases that alleged a link between new diabetes and a routine vaccine.
I'll say it again. The vaccine industry [KNOWINGLY] hijacked cell pathways that cause cancer in order to induce antibody responses so that they can claim that their product "worked" by demonstrating those antibodies - even if they offered zero protection.
To explain, when you induce an immune response you have an immune debt to pay. You can't just keep creating an immune response - or, as in the case of cancer, you will die.
A vaccine creates an artificial immune response...
Which might be fine if it was done every now and again. But what they didn't tell you was that the human body will not respond to an injected antigen alone. It will ignore it (thankfully) and the generic immune system will mop it up, no antibodies required.
Just putting this into context. @DrCatharineY was originally DOD then published on a DARPA grant. One of her few co-authors is Stephanie Petzing of the "Center for Global Health Engagement"
All one big OneHealth family to nudge you into believing this @epiphare slop is real.
For the explanation as to why these "real world data" with "data not available" publications are absolutely junk and shouldn't be accepted to any major journal please see arkmedic.info/p/pharma-hell-…
Dr Young (DARPA/DOD) is clearly now working as an ambassador to cover for the actions of the corrupt Biden regime who we are learning covered up huge amounts of adverse events from their COVID program whilst funding pharma in the "cancer moonshot"
It looks like we found our vector.
They moved from spraying live (cloned) viruses to putting them in drinking water.. which we thought wasn't possible due to chlorine.
Well, it turns out that it is, if you use a stabiliser.
The @NIH told us that they stopped funding GOFROC research but they clearly didn't.
This is a modified live virus. That is, they took a pathogenic influenza and genetically modified it and propagated it using infectious clones (reverse genetics). nature.com/articles/s4154…
"MLVs were diluted in distilled water containing Vac-Pac Plus (Best Veterinary 418 Solutions, Columbus, GA, USA) to neutralize residual chlorine and adjust the pH"