Returning to reporting

A brief note to subscribers on what is to come, after my unplanned hiatus

---

Apologies to my subscribers for my hiatus. I was not expecting to take one. I can tell you a long sob story, but I’d rather not so I won’t.

I am returning to reporting on the jab issue now, as well as related issues of pseudoscience and/or synthetic biology. I will try and be more consistent in this as I believe this info is very necessary and few will dig as deeply and widely as I will dig here.

(I may even post a real human name because I don’t want to be a mere pseudonym anymore, although I thought it was clever. But I must also remain safe and able to report. So we’ll see. My bio is 100% legit however.)

The long view is that various state-corp-funded industries are attempting nothing less than the reinvention, or re-engineering of nature — after they have chemically poisoned or destroyed a great portion of our natural resources. Of course, this is the nadir of human folly, a waste of remaining resources and an agenda that should be terminated.

I will be following up on the 20+ independent studies of vaccine vials, which did yield concerning and credible results; but these results have been misreported. I reviewed nearly all of these studies at the end of 2022, plus a few more that were only in Spanish, which I translated.

I also submitted follow-up queries to some of the researchers involved, including several to Dr. Campra’s public email, but I did not receive replies. So there are still some questions I have and I will post them publicly for Dr. Campra. Dr. Campra has posted the most interesting but least explained reports, and not all of them have been discussed publicly.

More study on these vials must be done, in my view and others’. We know that Pfizer and Moderna have refused to allow this when labs made requests (as reported previously here, from Medscape), and their convenient lawsuit has prevented this from being done. We also have heard that the secret Pfizer contracts specifically disallow this.

The upshot I’d like to share at present is that only one RNA quantification was done and that was by Dr. Campra. It was done via standard spectroscopic lab techniques. No assays for DNA or proteins were done by the independent researchers.

Unfortunately, Dr. Robert Young plagiarized Dr. Campra’s RNA quantification results and cited them as his own. So in fact, I initially misreported that as regards Dr. Young, and I will correct the original post.

And these results need further clarification, because Dr. Campra’s results were not fully presented or relayed.

The missing results are coming from the preliminary report of Campra and of Monteverde, not the final reports. I’ve found it strange that all of Campra’s results were not included in his initial report.

Campra performed additional UV absorbance and UV fluorescence measurements showing spontaneous fluorescence corresponding to graphene. I verified in the literature that this value is correct.

Further evidence of no RNA comes from an unpublished report in Spanish by a South American molecular biologist in an infectious diseases department, who assayed for the alleged spike protein sequence but did not find it.

So, further RNA, DNA and protein quantifications and analysis should be done at the very least. But what was done suggests no RNA, as stated, so far.

Former pharma / whistleblower Sasha Latypova claimed at the end of 2022 that DNA, RNA and proteins were found in massive quantities by the independent researchers, but I checked the link to her source for that data and it was a dead link. I contacted the editor of the independent journal where this data was said to be published, IJVPTR, International Journal of Vaccine Practice, Theory and Research, which courageously published a thorough review of the independent studies last year, to locate the study.

The editor referred me to the review article I link here for you to check out now since it is very important and I’d been meaning to post it since last year.

This review of most of the independent studies was written by a political sci PhD, but it is a very good compendium, although not totally accurate or comprehensive, in my view, as noted. But it’s close and I agree with the conclusion calling for more study.

Sasha Latypova’s evidence was nowhere to be found in her link to the journal article I was referred to. Her statements appear to derive from a report by the European Medicines Agency, but this report also showed no data to this effect. I contacted her Hot Lots website for clarification, however I received no reply.

So I still assert that there is no evidence of RNA yet found in the jab as per these studies. I will have to show you of course. Sasha Latypova has not shown evidence of small RNA debris but continues to state this publicly.

I will also take issue with Dr. Stefano Scoglio’s recent statements arguing that RNA and lipid nanoparticles are likely responsible for the sudden death syndromes we see resulting from the COVID jabs. I believe he is incorrect.

This matter also regards the so-called “Japanese biodistribution study”, which was not a government study, but Pfizer data that was submitted to the Japanese government regulatory agency. There is much to say about that.

So, there is much more to the story. Much more. I hope you will stay tuned. ‘What’s in the jab’ is probably the story of the century, and it’s very interesting that we don’t have people clamoring to get a real investigation of these vials.

---

Please share and subscribe. I am completely independent. My background is in biomedical studies, political history, journalism and the world’s traditional medical systems including Ayurveda, Chinese medicine and herbalism.