Did you know that Pfizer (the "sponsor") manipulated images of spike protein in the nucleus when they submitted their shiny brochure to the @TGAgovau, and the TGA didn't care?
Check this out, thread to follow.
Here's the original plate
In the original plate (the one submitted to the TGA), you should be able to see that the S1 image shows a bright signal to the top left of the "two fried eggs"
The "fried eggs" are the nuclei, stained blue in the left column
Original plate again. Ignore the merge column.
In the left column the nuclei have a dark circle (like an egg yolk), which is the nucleolus.
In the S1 image the nuclei look bigger, which reduces the impact of the signal in the nucleus.
There should be NO GREEN in the nucleus
But there is green in the nucleus.
You can see it, but I've labelled it just in case
@JesslovesMJK
Now the twist.
Even scientists I know with lab experience didn't notice the nuclear staining in the Pfizer document until it was pointed out. Why?
Because the sponsor (Pfizer) pulled a trick.
They manipulated the brightness of the image.
Here's the original again
Now let's change the shadows and highlights of the whole plate in the same way and see if any of the subplates look different.
Bingo.
The S1 vaccinated plate background (and the merge) have been altered in comparison to the Hoechst plates.
So let's try and reverse this correction and see what we get
Well that looks pretty convincing.
The nucleus is flooded with green.
Because the spike protein is flooding the nucleus.
And if you're not convinced here is the corrected view against the original view.
Subtle, but enough for scientists at the TGA to say "nothing to see here, let's approve this and get our posh nosh"
@double_christ @TonyNikolic10
And you might ask..
"Why does it matter if the spike protein gets in the nucleus?"
Well, because it destroys the body's cancer defence mechanisms via suppression of p53, which is the body's main defence against cancer.
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?
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.
Here is the clip from the (decent) interview with Pelle Neroth Taylor of @RealTNTRadio.
In it Boyle is asked whether the mRNA vaccines are themselves biological weapons and he explains that because "in your system, it generates the COVID-19 cells" they would be.
But of course that's incorrect, because mRNA vaccines don't recreate the COVID virus (the biological weapon - assuming as we now know that it was synthetic not natural).
So his explanation was incorrect because he misunderstood that the mRNA only provides the spike protein and he would have been destroyed on this point in court.
Of course he never got to court. And never gave an affidavit for the Dutch court - confirmed here (8/3/25):
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.