Smoking Gun: Vascular And Organ Damage Induced By mRNA Vaccines: Irrefutable Proof Of Causality

a reply to: TheRedneck

Your posts remind me of someone screaming at a qualified lawyer and slagging off their educated status whilst hiding behind a semantic barrier saying "oh noes, I'm not insulting your intelligence".

When you plainly are.

So, what's your forte, m'learned friend?.

Matey?

I'm all ears.

a reply to: TheRedneck

More insults?

Oh dear.

Who is out of their "forte"?

That would be you.

Unless you have any professional qualifications?

Well, do ya, punk?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Yes, it's what passes in your world as a lawyer.

Thank you for the reply, and I will admit that is impressive.

I know my way round stacks of medical records and evidence.

There is a difference between understanding the legal requirements of medicine and understanding the research side of medicine.

But I'd defer to your learned opinion. If you've got one?

I have posted it many times before, and to be honest my opinion changes as I learn more about the mechanisms involved. However, I will post the gist of my opinion again for your convenience.

Thus far, I believe there is a statistically significant number of people who appear to have a predisposition to adverse effects with the spike protein. Previous research I have seen indicates it can produce an over-reaction in certain areas of the body, similar but not completely identical to an allergic reaction. One of these areas is the heart. That explains two of the early discoveries about the virus itself: the more severe symptoms (with the lone exception of post-infection pneumonia) occurred primarily in patients with weakened lungs, often after being placed on a ventilator. Ventilators provide pressure inside the lungs, which can force virus particles into the blood supply if the lungs are having internal bleeding.

The spike protein activates the ACE-2 receptors, the primary pathway the virus uses to enter the cell. Inflammation is known to occur in the body when there is a surplus of ACE-1nreceptors with respect to ACE-2 receptors; this both explains why the occurrence of post-infection pneumonia in the lungs and the inflammation issues with the heart after the virus or spike protein has been introduced into the blood supply. I will assume you have already my explanation of aspiration being needed in earlier posts.

This is one mechanism; there may be others.

Bottom line is that the vaccinations have been grossly over-recommended without proper medical guidance and even mandated in some cases; this is reckless and criminal IMO. I am not opposed to the use of mRNA technology for vaccinations (except that the continual presence of the spike protein for so long afterwards could indicate a problem that desperately needs addressing), but rather the properties of the spike protein appear to have not been sufficiently researched and are leading to cases of injury and even death. I believe the vaccinations are a definite health risk, in many cases moreso than the virus itself, and should be subjected to additional testing at least.

That is my opinion, based entirely on research that I have seen and that I have personally vetted with my own knowledge of how the body responds to outside invaders. What is yours?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

"There is a difference between understanding the legal requirements of medicine and understanding the research side of medicine."

Not at all.

I have to understand both.

Obviously?

I'm not a muppett.

You have no idea of my experience in this field and I object to your previous insults.

I do not wish to experience further insults, especially from a mod, so if you wish to engage with me, lose the attitude?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Who is out of their "forte"?

I'm just saying, when I needed open heart surgery, I went to a medical professional, not legal counsel, for the operation.

Maybe things are different where you are.

My qualifications? Electrical research engineer, worked for/with NASA in the EUSO project designing and implementing controls for various sensors. 45 years in the field, mostly private R&D. Got my Bachelors from one of the top engineering universities in the country, magna cum laude, with additional honors and was one thesis shy of my Masters in Control Systems/Communication when the heart attacks started. Strong background in advanced mathematics, physics, and chemistry. I own and run my own R&D lab now after I became unable to work; present projects involve electromagnetic phenomena in various applications.

I also am personal friends with a dozen or so practicing medical researchers. We talk regularly, and many of them are actively researching the Chinese virus. You might say I have a bit of an inside track.

I base my views on the vaccine not on my own imagination, but on principles that apply through all branches of science and on information from both personal conversations with medical researchers and medical reports I find online. I am quite capable of understanding and analyzing the mechanisms that are responsible for various issues.

I see that as somewhat different than accepting conclusions based on a preponderance of evidence.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

"There is a difference between understanding the legal requirements of medicine and understanding the research side of medicine."

Not at all.

I have to understand both.

Then demonstrate your expertise in the research side. Thus far you have avoided any questions as to actual mechanisms of action, save for one time when you simply refused to answer. That is not impressing me.

You have no idea of my experience in this field

This is true; I can only operate on what I see from your posts.

I do not wish to experience further insults, especially from a mod, so if you wish to engage with me, lose the attitude?

I normally do not comment on such a statement; it is well known on this website that Staff members are prohibited from acting in their official role in any thread they are engaged in; I post as a member in good standing, not as a Staff member in an official role. Such comments are typically used as some sort of last resort to insult the member who is posting as a member. This one time, I will make an exception.

As someone who is so proud of their status as a Solicitor (aka an attorney), you certainly seem unable to grasp the concept of official and unofficial roles. I do not say that as an insult (although I recognize it can be taken as one), but rather as an observation. I find it incredulous that a Solicitor, especially a Solicitor to the Supreme Court (the equivalent of a Supreme Court Attorney here) would make such a mistake.

I do not dispute your position by the above; I see it as indicative that you are far from unbiased in this matter and are operating from a position of extreme emotional distress rather than one based on any form of science. Which was the original reason I challenged your opinion, incidentally.

If you want me to lose the attitude, lose your own.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I really blame the greed and political agendas. If not for them, a more transparent and open conversation about mRNA would have been possible and we could have perfected the process. As usual, politics tried to involve itself in science and screwed up both. Every time I hear the phrase "follow the science" now, it makes me want to slap someone repeatedly about the head and shoulders.

I read everything you write. And I'm always impressed. But here's
my thought process I stick to basics, form a conclusion, concede when
I'm mentally outgunned without admitting I'm incorrect. ThenI
just watch my conclusion surface as the truth. In this case it's the
M in mRNA. The messenger to what is being messeged? The DNA.

PERIOD, STOP, WOE, WAIT A MINUTE, BACK THE F UP, WHAT?

The sign post up ahead you've just crossed over into THE TWILIGHT ZONE.

You're in Gods Territory now. The Big GT. You've just gone from
the level playing field that medical man can play on. To some weird
dimension of what to us are completely distorted physicalities ideas
and out of control unpredictable results. Some would call it "THE SPIRIT
WORLD. Well so now what? Well the way that manifests is possibly
going to be depending on the spiritual environment the vaccine is

!. Created

2. Administered

3. Received

4 Observed.

How does the Medical Field explain it when they've opened Pandoras Box?

They don't because they want to keep going.

What's gonna happen? Well you know the story.

Hell on Earth!

Archaic doesn't make it wrong.

a reply to: TheRedneck

"I.do not dispute your position by the above; I see it as indicative that you are far from unbiased in this matter and are operating from a position of extreme emotional distress rather than one based on any form of science. Which was the original reason I challenged your opinion, incidentally.

If you want me to lose the attitude, lose your own."

There you go again.

I'm operating from a "position of extreme emotional distress"?

Where do you get this crap from?

I give up.

You just make this crap up about me.

a reply to: Randyvine2

Well, you need to understand that, at this very moment, there are millions of mRNA molecules inside you, covering a wide, vast even, array of proteins that have to be manufactured to keep you alive. In the time it took you to read that, millions more mRNA molecules were produced. Every one came from your own DNA and yet, your DNA remains unchanged... and that includes the millions more mRNA molecules that were produced in the time it took you to read that.

In contrast, the mRNA molecule in the vaccine is not even produced by your DNA. It is produced in a laboratory. mRNA molecules, so far as we can tell, only exit the cellular nucleus; they never enter it. So the mRNA molecule in the vaccine never touches the DNA.

Besides, if DNA is altered, that is the equivalent of rewriting a bunch of random commands in a computer program. It will not cause the computer program to do weird things... it will not even run! Any alteration of cellular DNA leads to one of two things: cancer or cell death. It will not lead to inflammation, which is what we are seeing in a minority of the cases where there is an issue with the vaccine.

I just don't see this report as indicative of DNA alteration. I instead see it as indicative of some failure in the expected mechanism of operation of the spike protein itself. If, for instance, the mRNA was not destroyed upon completion of the protein synthesis, then it could create another instance of the spike protein... and another... and another... it would amount to a continual light infection which could, over time, easily create major inflammation issues.

That's my working hypothesis right now, anyway. I suppose it is possible that we missed something in the mRNA process, but I personally consider the chances of that to be quite small.

It's going to take a lot for me to completely give upon the mRNA process. The potential is astronomical. But I will of course give up on it if the reasoning behind the spike protein remaining in the body cannot be shown to be a result of the spike protein and not the mRNA process itself.

I'm not so sure we even have the ability to interfere with the spirit... I recently had some guy I didn't know crack me open like a walnut using a Skilsaw, disconnect my heart, practice his needlepoint on it while I was laying there dead, put it back in, hook it back up, jump start me back to alive again, wire me back together using fancy baling wire and zip-ties, and charge me a lot of money for the privilege (I think I could have found people who would have paid me for that privilege, personally)... and my spirit is just fine.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

I'm operating from a "position of extreme emotional distress"?

It appears so. Recall that I admitted I have nothing to go on except your posts.

Let me ask you this? What harm does it do anyone to research reported issues with a vaccine that has the shortest historical record of any vaccine ever publicly administered? What harm does it do to anyone to make that information publicly available? If I go off your posts, it is some sort of sin against humanity to even question the safety of the vaccine.

That is not a logical position. It is an emotional position.

Where do you get this crap from?

From your posts.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I pray you a long and healthy life brother in Jesus name.

But all the clinical documentation anyone can read doesn't
cut it for me when the telling of that little m is reality.

And the documentation is simply all they might be telling
us. Obviously I have some big trust issues with anything
that says I must put my faith in man. I think science is messing
around where it shouldn't be. And the results will manifest
thru how they begin tweaking this concoction. So I will concede
without admitting I'm wrong.

a reply to: Randyvine2

I pray you a long and healthy life brother in Jesus name.

As do I you.

I do suggest you do some reading up on the mRNA process. The 'm' does stand for "messenger," but those messages come from the DNA, not go to it. In the case of an mRNA vaccine, they neither come nor go to/from the DNA.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I do suggest you do some reading up on the mRNA process.

I read that the process can be altered. Your thoughts when you have the time?
No rush brother.

a reply to: Randyvine2

Sure... do you have an explanation or link as to how it can be altered?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Hmmm I've gone back in my history and well Alex Jones.

Not saying he's wrong but I know where that leads. lol

Side note: I think Carpy mght be a little to thenithitive for this site.

So I did how ever in the interest of being totally unbiased find this.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Randyvine2

I pray you a long and healthy life brother in Jesus name.

As do I you.

I do suggest you do some reading up on the mRNA process. The 'm' does stand for "messenger," but those messages come from the DNA, not go to it. In the case of an mRNA vaccine, they neither come nor go to/from the DNA.

TheRedneck

The mRNA in the quackzines uses pseudouridine instead of urindine, specially allowing them to last way longer than regular mRNA.

That in combination with the fact it can be reverse transcribed to DNA should be concerning, considering the spike proteins have been observed been produced at least 9 months after a shot. Could it be permanent?

a reply to: Randyvine2

Yeah, he's saying the same thing in that video that I have been trying to explain. The mRNA does not affect the DNA; it's the other way around. At certain times and certain positions in the DNA molecule, for reasons we do not fully understand yet, the DNA "unzips" along a small segment. This allows mRNA to form along that "unzipped" section. Then the DNA recloses and the mRNA molecule floats away out of the nucleus and into one of the mitochondria. There, it is transcribed into a protein that the cell needs and destroyed.

All the mRNA vaccine does is to hijack the final part of that process. Instead of mRNA being produced from the DNA in the cell nucleus, this mRNA enters using a disguise: the lipid covering. Cells use lipids for food, so the lipid can enter easily and be digested, transporting the mRNA from the vaccine into the cell. It's sort of like giving a dog medicine; have you ever had to crush a pill up in a dog's food? Same principle... dog eats food, medicine in the food winds up inside dog.

That's all the lipid does. It's cellular food.

Then the mRNA migrates to the nearest mitochondria which sees it as just another mRNA molecule and makes a protein from it. That's the real magic part: the mRNA can instruct the mitochondria to make pretty much any protein based on its molecular structure. The mRNA in the vaccines are built to get the mitochondria to make the spike protein. Once that is done, one might as well have gotten a shot of spike proteins. The result is the same, and the DNA is never touched.

So why use mRNA? First of all, it can be encased in the lipid so it is insulated from the environment. That keeps it intact. In the second place, some proteins are simply so fragile they will break down before they can be injected. With mRNA, the proteins do not exist until they are created in the body. And finally, the process to create mRNA is much faster and cheaper than the process used to create a protein itself (or a portion of a virus) and this means medication can be produced faster and cheaper.

In short, mRNA means we can instill many different proteins into the body, quicker and cheaper, that we were unable to inject before. That's more diseases that can be countered.

TheRedneck

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Pseudouridine, as I understand it, is used instead of urindine to prevent intra-cellular immune responses to the mRNA itself. The result is the exact same molecule as would have resulted from urindine-based mRNA.

The mRNA process works; that is one thing that has been proven with the mRNA vaccines. The very fact that some people may have reactions to the vaccine is that proof: if the mRNA process did not work, the protein produced would not be the spike protein and would not cause the damages we are hearing of; it would be a different protein, or in the case of a complete failure, no protein at all. This is one case where two separate paths of study complemented each other: the spike protein has been shown to itself be responsible for many of the cardiac/vascular issues, while at the same time the mRNA development produced that spike protein as it was designed to do.

Randyvine2's link above is quite apt to the concern over reverse transcription into DNA. The fellow in it is very good at explaining the science... probably moreso than I am, since my main focus is not medical. I urge you to watch it (or read the transcript).

The thing is, there are other ways the spike protein can continue to be made besides altering DNA. Recall from my previous posts that the mRNA is broken down once the spike protein is created; for every mRNA molecule in the vaccine, there should be one and only one spike protein produced. However, if the breakdown process were to be interrupted, a single molecule of mRNA could conceivably be reused over and over again, continually producing spike proteins for a very long time. That is what I believe may be happening.

There is actually a parallel in the body. My heart issues are a result of very high cholesterol levels (500+ untreated). As part of an attempt to get my cholesterol levels down, my doctor at one point prescribed Repatha, a home-injectable medication that I was taking every two weeks. Well, as usual, I looked up this new medicine before taking it, as I wanted to see the mechanism involved.

Repatha works by introducing antibodies against a protein that the body makes in the liver. Liver cells have special receptor ports on their membranes to accept cholesterol molecules (primarily LDL). An LDL molecule is absorbed through one of these receptors and transported into the cell where it is disassembled. A protein in the cell then breaks down the receptor; if no protein breaks it down, the same receptor can transport many LDL molecules. Repatha contains antibodies against that specific protein, which my body apparently makes too much of. After about three months on Repatha, my cholesterol went from over 500 to 77. After a full year it went dangerously low, showing a total cholesterol level of 16. I got off Repatha at that point, but I maintain a prescription in case my cholesterol rises too far again.

There may be a similar mechanism involved in the breakdown of mRNA molecules, one that is not working as is expected. That would easily account for the continuing expression of the spike protein. And it may be the pseudouridine instead of urindine that is the cause... that is for medical researchers to look into. But I do not believe the mRNA is reverse-transcribing itself into our DNA. If it were, the results would likely be many times as serious as we are seeing.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I have a hard time understanding how Rybonucleic acid and Dioxyrybonucleic acid
two acids can come together and remain ineffectual of each other. It would make
more sense if there were some type of detriment. Oh and I am trying reading up
on the process. It just gets so clinical.

Now how is this not supposed to sound supernatural or like some
kind of invisible force is working like magic. That to me is highly
suspect in my defense. I know how I sound and I appreciate your
time greatly. At the same time hoping you find some interest in
what the mechanisms I find highly compelling in regards to how
I'm thinking. Which would have everything to do with "What we
don't understand yet".

Then the DNA recloses and the mRNA molecule floats away out of the nucleus and into one of the mitochondria. There, it is transcribed into a protein that the cell needs and destroyed.

For the unseen part of this world is surely
going to have a great deal to do with the accessing of other
unseen worlds. This whole world is made up of an unseen world
is it not? Even if I'm wrong you have to admit it's a lot of fun to
think about.


Oh Also I was aware that RNA and DNA exist in the human body.
I was not aware that DNA and RNA and mRNA all exist in the
human body. That wasn't in my science class that I remember.
But that was admittedly a long tome ago.