Embalmers Baffled After Finding Long, Fibrous Clots Inside Corpses

originally posted by: ntech
There's a picture of the clots extracted from bodies here.

This one is instantly debunked by the picture at the top. The picture simply does not show a set of long fibrous clots. Might as well just put a picture of a cat up there and claim that it shows that dogs like sleeping in the sun.

It's also not something that an embalmer would remove as you'd need to basically slice and dice the cadaver in order to get it out. That's a destructive process that the embalmer would by necessity want to avoid. Embalmers aren't morticians, they don't conduct autopsies. They'd go around or through an obstruction, not remove it like this.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AaarghZombies
It's the questions you did not answer from this thread:
Mark Steyn Questions Why Young Healthy People Are Dying Across The UK, page 10
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Click on the link to see the entire post....3 posts from the bottom.

I have asked 4 times now.

You also answered the question yourself 4 times, in the same comment, so I'd just be repeating what you had already said. Meaning that your question was rhetorical and that you wanted to make a statement rather than to actually get an answer.

From your own comment:

Pregnant women were first offered the vaccine in December 2020, if they were health or care workers or in an at risk group. Since April 2021, pregnant women have been offered the vaccine as part of the standard age based rollout of the vaccination programme.

Link

Since you don't seem to have understood what you posted, I'll elaborate.

Britain had two vax programs, one for high priority people and one for the genral populace.

Pregnant women were considered part of the general populace as there was no evidence at the time that covid was a greater risk to them, so they went into the second tier.

Women who were pregnant and were care assistants, etc, were put into the first tier, because the risk of them transmitting covid to other people was considered greater, not because there was any greater or lesser risk to them.

If you were desperate for an actual answer you you'd be better placed simply DMing me. Once a thread has been debunked I don't usually go back to it unless it's substantially bumped.

a reply to: AaarghZombies
Yet.....

the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), which advises the UK government, published a report on Dec. 3 saying it does not currently advise COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy, and that only children at very high risk of exposure and serious outcomes should be offered vaccination (here).

There are no data as yet on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy, either from human or animal studies. Given the lack of evidence, JCVI favours a precautionary approach, and does not currently advise COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy,” the report says.

Who was telling pregnant women to be injected with no animal or human studies.......telling them it's safe and then doing the studies in the field?

You are missing the point.....it has nothing to do with whether covid was a risk to pregnant women...... it's about whether the vaccine was safe for pregnant women and the babies they were carrying.

originally posted by: madmac5150
Our doctor told us to avoid the shot, like it was the plague. My wife and I both have acquired immunity (we got a little sick during the initial outbreak)... we have had zero problems since.

Neither one of us are in great shape. I have multiple sclerosis, my wife has her own problems as well.

Meanwhile, world class athletes have been dropping like flies... and you can't compete in this world anymore without the vaxx... ask Novak Djokovic...

YOU have a GOOD Doctor.

a reply to: chr0naut

umm, if your embalming fluid isn't traversing the veins and arteries correctly, it could very well require additional checking that could lead to the discovery, nothing illegal or untoward has to be taking place to discover something like this.

Jaden

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: chr0naut

umm, if your embalming fluid isn't traversing the veins and arteries correctly, it could very well require additional checking that could lead to the discovery, nothing illegal or untoward has to be taking place to discover something like this.

Jaden

He doesn't care, he's strategically trying to derail the thread. Just ignore.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: ntech
There's a picture of the clots extracted from bodies here.

This one is instantly debunked by the picture at the top. The picture simply does not show a set of long fibrous clots. Might as well just put a picture of a cat up there and claim that it shows that dogs like sleeping in the sun.

It's also not something that an embalmer would remove as you'd need to basically slice and dice the cadaver in order to get it out. That's a destructive process that the embalmer would by necessity want to avoid. Embalmers aren't morticians, they don't conduct autopsies. They'd go around or through an obstruction, not remove it like this.

Everything you say is instantly debunked.

elongated clots in veins/arteries

since end of WW2 and-or Korea War...the USA food supply is too much 'processed' foods/meats especially

Also consider a potential source for these artery dwelling clots to be the years long injection ofchem-trails into upper atmosphere for some Dark-ops reason --- a under-skin ailment called Morgellions was deemed to be caused by the unknown substances in 'chem-trails spraying operations'...


the under-skin metallic fibers just grew from nowhere but perhaps the balls of twisted fibers dug through muscle to invade blood vessels & grow into elongated clots ??

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AaarghZombies
Yet.....

the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), which advises the UK government, published a report on Dec. 3 saying it does not currently advise COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy, and that only children at very high risk of exposure and serious outcomes should be offered vaccination (here).

There are no data as yet on the safety of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy, either from human or animal studies. Given the lack of evidence, JCVI favours a precautionary approach, and does not currently advise COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy,” the report says.

Who was telling pregnant women to be injected with no animal or human studies.......telling them it's safe and then doing the studies in the field?

You are missing the point.....it has nothing to do with whether covid was a risk to pregnant women...... it's about whether the vaccine was safe for pregnant women and the babies they were carrying.

Remind me a gain, what year was this written?

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: ntech
There's a picture of the clots extracted from bodies here.

This one is instantly debunked by the picture at the top. The picture simply does not show a set of long fibrous clots. Might as well just put a picture of a cat up there and claim that it shows that dogs like sleeping in the sun.

It's also not something that an embalmer would remove as you'd need to basically slice and dice the cadaver in order to get it out. That's a destructive process that the embalmer would by necessity want to avoid. Embalmers aren't morticians, they don't conduct autopsies. They'd go around or through an obstruction, not remove it like this.

Everything you say is instantly debunked.

You do realize that in order to debunk something you need content or an argument, or both. You never give either because you refuse to say anything that could be fact checked.

So, once more, source on literally anything that you've said.

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: chr0naut

umm, if your embalming fluid isn't traversing the veins and arteries correctly, it could very well require additional checking that could lead to the discovery, nothing illegal or untoward has to be taking place to discover something like this.

Jaden

Why would a mortician remove them rather than simply going round or through them?

It would take considerably longer to remove them, and you'd need to slice and dice the corpse, which wouldn't go down well with most American families. Removing them make absolutely no sense.

a reply to: chr0naut

Correct. Dissected, no. Removed, observed, weighted, recorded, replaced. Sewn up.

originally posted by: madmac5150

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: misterE12

The embalming process does not require the dissection of corpses.

I would suggest that these people are doing something illegal.

The embalming process does not require dissection, however, all of the blood is removed from the corpse. Embalmers nationwide have been reporting this phenomena... initial tests indicate that these clots are devoid of normal clotting agents... and the clots lack normal clotting minerals.

These people are not doing anything illegal, beyond reporting issues that contradict the narrative.

About 1-3 hours after death, and also in thromboses where blood stops circulating, blood begins to separate into lighter clearish pale yellow plasma fraction (about 55% of blood volume) and heavier corpuscle fraction. The heavier blood fraction sinks to the bottom of blood vessels and the lighter fraction migrates to the top. This causes lividity (reddish-blue discoloration) of the skin in the places where the corpuscle fraction pools (if a body is moved postmortem, this can be an indicator).

In the Biblical account of Christ's crucifixion, the spear wound to his abdomen produced first 'water' (plasma), and then blood, which indicates that his heart had stopped some hours previously, and the blood had separated, but that the blood had not yet coagulated.

Between 6-6 hours after death, the pooling of corpuscular fraction causes a thickening (coagulation) of the blood in the areas where the corpuscle fraction is concentrated. It is not proper clotting (which is granular and quite mechanically 'hard'), but produces long rubbery 'casts' that follow the venation.

Postmortem Changes - NCBI

As these are not true clots, the blood cells shrink and separate later as they die (usually more than 24 hours later?) and the blood once again liquefies in many cases.

During embalming, blood is replaced by preservative embalming fluids, which are introduced at pressure by a large bore needle in an artery and the blood from the body is pushed out, exiting via an incision (also usually in an artery).

It is totally unremarkable that the blood ejected via the embalming process contains the fibrous and rubbery 'casts' produced by the settling and thickening of hemoglobin.

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: misterE12

The embalming process does not require the dissection of corpses.

I would suggest that these people are doing something illegal.

Injecting people with that crap that does this should be illegal.

Normal necrotic process does this. It is entirely natural.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: chr0naut

There you go again, embalmers can't get the fluid in if the vein is blocked so they pull it out, only it is long and fibrous, probably due to inflammation as they are full of calcium.

There are kilometers of blood vessels in the human body. An attempt to mechanically remove coagulated material from every vein, artery, and capillary, in a human body would leave that body in the consistency of mincemeat, and is probably not even possible.

When embalming fluid is injected into the body it dissolves fats and the physical pressure pushes the blood and coagulates out of the exit incision/s. It is not possible for that to push out significant clots because of the solidity of clotted blood, compared to coagulated blood.

Your idea that they 'pull' out blood clots is ridiculous. Have you observed clotted blood on a wound?

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: chr0naut

umm, if your embalming fluid isn't traversing the veins and arteries correctly, it could very well require additional checking that could lead to the discovery, nothing illegal or untoward has to be taking place to discover something like this.

Jaden

Clotted blood bonds to the walls of veins. That is how it works. Clots that are unbound to venation, and are in the blood, are very dangerous to the organism.

Generally, fluids such as blood are removed from the body prior to the injection of embalming fluid.

Embalmers use massaging techniques to ensure even spread.

a reply to: misterE12

And they are Not Tape Worms ...............Hmm........

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: ntech
There's a picture of the clots extracted from bodies here.

This one is instantly debunked by the picture at the top. The picture simply does not show a set of long fibrous clots. Might as well just put a picture of a cat up there and claim that it shows that dogs like sleeping in the sun.

It's also not something that an embalmer would remove as you'd need to basically slice and dice the cadaver in order to get it out. That's a destructive process that the embalmer would by necessity want to avoid. Embalmers aren't morticians, they don't conduct autopsies. They'd go around or through an obstruction, not remove it like this.

Everything you say is instantly debunked.

By what?

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: misterE12

The embalming process does not require the dissection of corpses.

I would suggest that these people are doing something illegal.

Injecting people with that crap that does this should be illegal.

Normal necrotic process does this. It is entirely natural.

Keep your boosters up to date. Dont stop believing. Hang onto that feeling!

a reply to: chr0naut

Yes I agree with you as far as blood clots go, but these are not blood clots they are white fibrous tissue that has grown to the shape of the vein and has the observed similarities to calamari.