A strategy for defeating the COVID narrative/ COVID vaccine, lab mistake, gene researcher

 

COVID vaccine, lab mistake, gene researcher

by Jon Rappoport

(To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Last week at the world famous XXXX lab, a widely published gene researcher, Dr. XXXX, wandered into the wrong room and inhaled an experimental truth serum spray, under development by the CIXXXX.

I caught up with him a few hours later at a small restaurant in rural Virginia. We were the only customers. We sat at back table, ate oysters with mercury sauce, and talked for an hour:

---Doctor, why are you doing experiments aimed at producing single-sex litters of animals?

Isn’t it obvious? You want to eliminate a group of animals or people? You knock out procreation as an option. You perform genetic alterations, so all future members of that group are male or female.

Could you comment on a phrase often applied to genetic technology---“unintended consequences?”

Yes. You see, we know what we’re doing. But we don’t know what we’re not doing.

I’m not sure I understand.

We have a procedure. We follow it. But OFTEN the outcome of that procedure isn’t what we thought it would be. We wanted to make a fish glow, but instead the fish grew an extra eye. Or he did glow, but he also wriggled on to a beach and started eating sand.

And why did these unexpected changes occur?

Ripple effect. Down the line from where we edited a gene or inserted a gene or deleted a gene, other genes shifted. They turned on or off. They moved. They became cranky. That sort of thing.

And this was beyond your control.

There’s always something beyond our control. The question is, is it trivial or important?

What’s the answer?

We have no idea. What looks trivial today could become disastrous six months or six years from now. It’s roulette. A crapshoot.

That’s not comforting.

Think of it this way. You strike a simple chord on a piano and let go. A few seconds later, other keys on the piano press down and make sounds on their own. You walk out of the house and while you’re gone, five more keys make sounds. A year later, during the night, the piano plays seven chords.

So why do you keep on with this research?

Why does a dog obey his master?

What about CRISPR, the latest and greatest gene-editing tool?

For starters, it’s like having a pair of scissors. You cut out a section in a long genetic string. But then you have two ends in the middle of the string. When they grow back together, you get genetic distortions.

There are lots of amateurs and professionals playing around with CRISPR.

Yes. Those who are deeply dissatisfied with human beings as they are and want to reduce them, and enthusiastic utopians who believe genetic paradise is just over the hill. They cut and splice. They’re having a field day with the technology.

Is the RNA COVID vaccine a form of genetic treatment?

Of course. What else could it be? You inject a piece of RNA into a person’s arm. The theory is, nanoparticles of this RNA get into the body’s cells and make the cells produce a protein. That protein is similar to a protein in [fictitious] SARS-CoV-2. The immune system takes a mug shot of the new protein, thus preparing to meet the actual [fictitious] SARS-CoV-2 on the battlefield, if it comes along later. That’s gene therapy. Why would the cells produce a new protein? Because genes in the body are receiving genetic instructions from the injected RNA.

Can anything go wrong?

You’re kidding, right? All sorts of things can go wrong. The cells could produce a few dozen new proteins. Or they could stop making a vital protein. The immune system could go haywire. It could attack organs of the body. We’re not talking precision here. Get that through your head. With new genetic inputs, organisms will radically change their former behavior.

Some people say genetic engineering of plants is dangerous, but those general processes applied to humans are safe.

And some people say nuclear bombs are a global threat, but nuclear reactors that produce electricity like Fukushima are fine and dandy.

Have you taken the COVID vaccine?

I have a certificate that says I did.

Someone told me the RNA in the COVID vaccine doesn’t actually initiate a genetic change.

Really? You think the RNA operates like a grain of sand that irritates the oyster into making a pearl? If cells of the body suddenly make a new protein they would never otherwise manufacture, some genetic information and instruction are being given and received.

Can anyone prove the COVID vaccine is forcing the cells to make the one desired S-protein?

Didn’t we just cover that? Listen, we could take five thousand people who just had the Pfizer shot, and we could extract cells samples from them, and we could actually see what’s happening and not happening in the area of protein production. It might be quite shocking. But we won’t do that. We never do large-scale studies that could refute our own central claims.

Those central claims are the holy of holies?

You bet. In those instances, we have to be right, especially when we’re wrong. If not, our whole house of cards collapses.

So when people analyze the COVID vaccine for huge adverse effects…bleeding, miscarriages, heart failure, coma, death…

They should never overlook the genetics. It’s a gene shot. A GMO shot in the arm. If I make genetic changes in your brain right now, and an hour later you think you’re Magellan circumnavigating the globe, where should people start looking to figure out what happened to you?

Genetics is playing chess without understanding the rules?

It’s three-dimensional chess---actually four-dimensional, because unpredictable alterations happen over time. We understand a few of the rules, and then we assume we know a great deal more than we actually do. If we just stuck to what we knew, we’d be doing experiments in the back room of a dry cleaners. The truth doesn’t get you funding. Hype does.

The military is very interested in---

They want to create super-soldiers. Doing that through gene therapy is the pot of gold at the end of their rainbow. My guess is eventually they’ll come up with some very strong human robots. After a time of rigidly obeying orders, the robots will go crazy and attack their masters.

Have you ever considered changing your profession?

A couple of years ago, I met with a few political consultants. I was mulling a run for public office. But I couldn’t figure out which lies to tell, in order to win an election. In my lab, I know exactly which lies to tell, to keep my job.

~~~

(The link to this article posted on my blog is here.)

(Follow me on Gab at @jonrappoport)

 

 

A strategy for defeating the COVID narrative

by Jon Rappoport

(To read about Jon's mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

---Memo to attorneys and political leaders who want to destroy the COVID narrative that has been used to justify the lockdowns, masks, economic destruction, mandates---

As you well know, the PCR test is at the heart of the narrative. A positive test supposedly equals a “COVID case.” Many COVID cases equal: “we must clamp down on the citizenry; we must lock them up, close businesses; roll out a vaccine…”

I’ve spent a year dissecting the PCR test and its MANY terminal flaws and problems. In short, the test is complete fraud.

Here I want to highlight just ONE major scandal.

The one I’ve chosen, if pursued, will make a devastating case. It’s simple; stark; startling; the public can grasp it easily; and even if a court filing doesn’t fly, the exposure of facts can be built into a hurricane of a story.

There is an open secret in the professional PCR testing community: DIFFERENT LABS COME UP WITH CONFLICTING TEST RESULTS FOR THE SAME SAMPLE.

A nasal swab taken from John Jones, sent to six different labs, will frequently come back POSITIVE, NEGATIVE, POSITIVE, NEGATIVE, INDETERMINATE, NEGATIVE…

Therefore, there is no reliable result. There is no standard. There is no way to ascertain whether the test should read “COVID” or “NON-COVID.”

This basic variable is on the order of an engineer saying, “I’ve finished the design of the bridge, my experts all disagree on whether the design is viable, and therefore we can’t build the bridge.”

So how do you apply this irreparable horror story when it comes to the PCR test?

You choose five people. In the space of one day, you send each person’s swab sample to six different labs for analysis. You document this process, so there is no argument about “chain of custody.”

When the results come back on the five people from all the labs, and you see the conflicting findings---COVID, NOT COVID---you have the case. You have the evidence. You have the truth. You have the story.

This is not complicated. You don’t need to compose a 500-page filing for the court.

And as I say, even if a sold-out or dumb-as-a-rock judge tosses your case, you have a hell of a revelation.

If you happen to be political leader---I’m thinking of you, Governor DeSantis---you can launch your court case from on high. You can use your state attorney general to force the case into court and make it a mountainous public scandal.

As a bonus, I have another strategy.

As I’ve documented, mainstream experts agree that the PCR test should be run at 35 cycles or lower; otherwise the result is meaningless and unusable.

However, FDA/CDC guidance recommends running the test at 40 cycles. Therefore, labs comply.

This in itself is a major scandal.

But there is more. Labs are not required (except in Florida) to report how many cycles they deploy in their PCR tests. Therefore, the labs don’t report this essential factor to the patient or his doctor.

So…you have a client who has been ordered to take the test say, “Sure, I’m willing. But first, I’ll need the lab to state in writing how many cycles they’re using to process my sample.”

If the government official or corporate employee refuses to pass the request to the lab, sue him.

If he does forward the request, and the lab refuses to state how many cycles they’re using, sue the lab.

If the lab states it’s using more than 35 cycles, sue the lab.

Sue all connected parties.

Here is background supporting these two strategies---

ONE: CONFLICTING LAB TEST RESULTS

In a half-sane world, the PCR test would have been validated, decades ago, before its original release for use.

I’m talking about a large study of, say, five thousand volunteers. From each volunteer, take a tissue sample and send that sample to a dozen different labs, with the instruction to look for a particular microbe.

When the results come back for all 5000 volunteers, check them for consistency.

THIS TEST OF THE TEST, THIS STUDY HAS NEVER BEEN DONE.

The uniformity of test-lab findings has never been established.

The study has never been done, because the “experts” knew what the results would be, and the prospect of exposure as frauds terrified them.

The FDA has never demanded a serious validation of the PCR test.

TWO: THE TEST-CYCLE PROBLEM

July 16, 2020, podcast, “This Week In Virology”: Tony Fauci makes a point of saying the PCR COVID test is useless and misleading when the test is run at “35 cycles or higher.” A positive result, indicating infection, cannot be accepted or believed.

Here, in techno-speak, is an excerpt from Fauci’s key quote (starting at about the 4-minute mark): “…If you get [perform the test at] a cycle threshold of 35 or more…the chances of it being replication-competent [aka accurate] are miniscule…you almost never can culture virus [detect a true positive result] from a 37 threshold cycle…even 36…”

Each “cycle” of the test is a quantum leap in amplification and magnification of the test specimen taken from the patient.

Too many cycles, and the test will turn up all sorts of irrelevant material that will be wrongly interpreted as relevant.

That’s called a false positive.

What Fauci failed to say on the video is: the FDA, which authorizes the test for public use, recommends the test should be run up to 40 cycles. Not 35.

Therefore, all labs in the US that follow the FDA guideline are knowingly or unknowingly participating in fraud. Fraud on a monstrous level, because…

Millions of Americans are being told they are infected with the virus on the basis of a false positive result, and…

The total number of COVID cases in America---which is based on the test---is a gross falsity.

The lockdowns and other restraining measures are based on these fraudulent case numbers.

Let me back up and run that by you again. Fauci says the test is useless when it’s run at 35 cycles or higher. The FDA says run the test up to 40 cycles, in order to determine whether the virus is there. This is the crime in a nutshell.

Here are two chunks of evidence. First, we have a CDC quote on the FDA website, in a document titled: “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel For Emergency Use Only.” See page 35. This document is marked, “Effective: 07/21/21.” That means, even though the virus is being referred to by its older name, the document is still relevant as of July 2021. “For Emergency Use Only” refers to the fact that the FDA has certified the PCR test under a traditional category called “Emergency Use Authorization.”

FDA: “…a specimen is considered positive for 2019-nCoV [virus] if all 2019-nCoV marker (N1, N2) cycle threshold growth curves cross the threshold line within 40.00 cycles ([less than] 40.00 Ct).”

Naturally, testing labs reading this guideline would conclude, “Well, to see if the virus is there in a patient, we should run the test all the way to 40 cycles. That’s the official advice.”

Then we have a New York Times article (August 29/updated September 17, 2020) headlined: “Your coronavirus test is positive. Maybe it shouldn’t be.” Here are money quotes:

“Most tests set the limit at 40 [cycles]. A few at 37.”

Set-the-limit would mean, We’re going to look all the way to 40 cycles, to see if the virus is there.

The Times: “This number of amplification cycles needed to find the virus, called the cycle threshold, is never included in the results sent to doctors and coronavirus patients.” That’s the capper, the grand finale. Labs don’t or won’t reveal their collusion in this crime.

So…attorneys and sane political leaders, do you want to make moves whose upsides are enormous, in the cause of freedom?

~~~

(The link to this article posted on my blog is here -- with sources.)

(Follow me on Gab at @jonrappoport)