Thank you for reading and sharing Bailiwick News by email and social media. To support Bailiwick with a paid subscription: Orientation for new readers; American Domestic Bioterrorism Program Note published May 2, 2025 Some thoughts on whether vaccines and related biological products can feasibly be subjected to clinical tests. Alleged testing for vaccines and other "biological products" has been garbage since 1902, not just since the 1944 Public Health Service Act, not just since the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, not just since the 2005 PREP Act, and not just since the Covid events that entered public view in 2020. There have never been valid scientific tests developed or used to demonstrate the transmissibility or virulence (disease-causing capacity) of alleged communicable-disease-causing particles of matter. There have never been valid scientific tests developed or used to demonstrate the stable composition or predictable, uniform effects of biological products, which are not stable in composition and do not have predictable, uniform effects at the individual recipient level but do have predictable, variable toxic effects at the population-wide level, such as cancer-induction, auto-immune induction, brain-damage-induction, infertility-induction, heart disease-induction, and premature death-induction. Such tests can’t ever be developed or used, although the false illusion of such tests can be projected. There is no determinate disease state for so-called communicable diseases that could be used as a clinical trial start point, and therefore there's no way to design a study that demonstrates clinical endpoints such as infection with a specific disease as caused by a specific particle of matter, or prevention of such infection as an effect caused by previous administration of a product claimed to contain a version of the specific particle of matter. And the products need not, legally, contain or not contain any specific particles of matter.
Note published May 15, 2025 Working on Pt. 2 of series on biological select agents and toxins (BSATs) and following a thread on the "unscheduled discrete organic chemical" class of substances listed as prohibited by the UN Convention on Chemical Weapons and in the Oct. 1998 US implementing law (PL 105-277) except for exempt "discrete organic chemicals" classified as exempt through a May 16, 1997 decision by the Convention of State Parties to the UN chemical weapons convention. The May 16, 1997 decision was issued shortly after the chemical weapons convention entered into force on April 29, 1997. The discrete organic chemicals exempt from prohibition under the UN chemical weapons convention include oligomers and polymers, including proteins, nucleic acids, and other biological macromolecules. By 2014, the OPCW (Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons) scientific advisory board (SAB) had published a report about Convergence of Biology and Chemistry, and the 2014 report was cited in a 2015 OPCW SAB report on verification challenges to make the point that:
Important context to understand: “synthetic biology” and “redesign” of organisms is science fiction, as Sasha Latypova has been explaining, alongside her extensive work explaining the intrinsic and well-known toxicity of non-self biological macromolecules (vaccine components) when injected into the blood of living humans and animals (vaccination), and her more recent work explaining the function of selective breeding activity within BSL [biosafety level] labs in projecting the illusion that dangerous, self-spreading, stable, disease-causing pathogens can be developed in laboratories and leaked to cause pandemics. Links to some of Sasha Latypova’s work on gain-of-function fantasy sci-fi:
All content is free to all readers. All support — reading, sharing and financial — is deeply appreciated.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment