New Study Finds The mRNA Platform Was Never Proven To Be Safe For Any "Vaccines"

Do you ever get a strange feeling in your stomach when things seem off? It's a lot like when a used car salesman is trying to persuade you that the 2018 civic with low miles is a steal and hes giving a significant discount. Perhaps your intuition tells you the car is a lemon, or maybe it had a dead body in it. Whatever the case, there are times when peoples gut tells them that something is wrong even if they can't quite put their finger on exactly what it is. That's how I and many others felt when they first started pushing these experiment shots. We all knew intuitively that something was off, and to avoid them at all costs.

If you've purposely been ignoring all the evidence and data pouring out from independent sources, let me simplify it for you: the vaccines were not effective, and definitely not safe by any definition of the word. The problem is, the burden of proof seems to be on the non-captured scientific community to prove its not safe instead of the people who produced and approved it to prove that it was safe.

Dr. Tess Lawrie along with 3 other researchers from the World Council for Health recently published a paper in Multidisplinary Scientic Journal that sought to determine what research had previously been done to prove the safety of the mRNA platform, which they described as "unusual" platform for vaccine delivery. For the last few years it has been spoon fed to the global population that this was the future of vaccine technology. As it turns out, not all doctors or scientists felt this statement was true, especially as the novel technology was rapidly deployed to billions with inadequate evidence of safety of efficacy. The information most people were exposed to was part of a massive billion dollar advertising campaign funded by tax dollars and promoted by HHS to push the covid shot with tenacity as a used car salesman.

The review focuses on the mRNA platform and does not consider the potential harms caused by the other components of the covid “vaccines.”

“We found that there was no evidence prior to global deployment to suggest that the covid ‘vaccines’ developed, using an mRNA platform, would be safe,” Dr. Lawrie said.

1) It is already known that a proportion of people are allergic to Polyethylene Glycol (“PEG”). The mRNA platform relies on lipid nanoparticles (“LNPs”) that contain PEG to evade the body’s innate immune system. Not only is this a hazard to people who are allergic to PEG, but it can also cause an inflammatory or allergic response with repeated injections among others.

2) mRNA uses host cell apparatus to produce proteins and this protein too can generate an antibody response, which may be associated with inflammation, clotting or autoimmunity. The latter occurs if the body recognises its own proteins as non-self, due to similarities with the mRNA-induced cell-made foreign proteins, and attacks them too.

3) Vaccines against coronaviruses have never been proven safe enough to be used outside of clinical trials. We identified 10 very small human trials of assorted other coronavirus vaccines, but they were all in the early phases (Phase I or II) of testing. None had been proven to work, nor did they have safety data beyond a few weeks.

4) Animal studies of coronavirus vaccines have shown high levels of serious side effects and often failed to provide immunity.

5) RNA platforms that have been attempted for non-covid “vaccine” applications prior to covid, such as for rabies, influenza and zika viruses, have little published and verifiable safety data. Data that are available suggest very high rates of serious side effects. Notably, with regard to RNA “vaccines,” the totality of evidence on the use of the mRNA platform for the purpose of vaccination from human studies involved a mere 285 people prior to trials for covid-19 “vaccines.”

So what is the purpose of this strange mRNA platform that was never proven to be safe? Is it possible there is another agenda at play here based on the evidence we have gathered in the last 2 years? Allow your instinct to guide you instead of the "authorities."

LINK TO STUDY

LINK TO ARTICLE

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

My comment in the thread right below yours is very fitting here as well. I will copy and drop it right in here. I feel very strongly just like you do on this subject, and am amazed that some people refuse to take off the blinders to see the truth.

My dad warned my sisters and I right away when the mRNA injections came out not to accept. I believed him and obeyed him for several reasons. He had been very provax for 90 years, due to what he saw in his youth.(polio) He attended 8 colleges, including Stanford, where he went to become a Bacteriologist. He did his internship at Franklin hospital in San Fracisco, then at Kaiser in Oakland, then down to Los Angeles hospitals where he was always in charge of the Labs. He is also a Chemist, and a Microbiologist, studied Parasitology, he is an Engineer, and was Director of Research for a Fortune 500 company. He was summoned to the White House in the 70s to meet with the Vice President about a method he discovered to detect bacterium.

He told me "Do not accept this vaccine. They are not following protocol and established safety standards. Something is wrong". My sisters and I followed his instruction and are glad. He will be 97 this year, and never got sick. My younger sister and I got sick like a bad flu and that was it. My father-in-law got sick for a week and was fine, until someone talked him into getting the vax. He died 3 days later. My best friend and mentor got the vax and died 3 weeks later. Another friend died last year, and I believe he got the vax. Massive heart attack. My daughter's friend died after getting the vax. My daughter went to the hospital after being around two other girls that were just vaxxed. My daughter was bleeding profusely, and close to losing consciousness, even though she hadn't been vaxxed. Her friends were shedding protein spikes.

Anyway, that is my story, and it will always remain the same, because it is the truth. I believe the covid-19 virus is a bioweapon that was developed and released, and the vax is about the same or likely far worse in the long run. I think it is a depopulation attempt.

It is the worlds biggest mass medical experiment. Maybe if they could get the mRNA tech right there is some super solider and other medical applications available. As for getting it wrong, oops, sorry about that.

With the Pfizer report of +1000 different side effects, looks like more work needs to be done on the delivery system. I have not come across any study saying mRNA tech is safe.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Hell no it wasn't. Completely experimental and untested. That was evident from the very start.

That's why I passed on it.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

They just needed an "event" to make the switch to MRNA technology. Fauci told us that was his plan in October 2019. Enlightening video:

cspan

originally posted by: Antimony
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

They just needed an "event" to make the switch to MRNA technology. Fauci told us that was his plan in October 2019. Enlightening video:

cspan

Good video. Yes, and just like Event 201, they always seem to be able to "predict" what's going to happen next.

It was always "experimental" and was never approved. If you took it, you took it voluntarily as part of the "experiment". Even the "experts" are now saying "you are responsible for what you put into your body, we never forced you to take it".

Most of what was said in that box is what I have been saying for a long time about the vaccine technology not being adequate for approval. This information was all shown in research conclusions early on in the pandemic.

I am allergic to propylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, and polysorbate eighty. I also seem to be somewhat intolerant to many emulsifying chemistries. And I have had bad reactions to the flu shot witnessed by doctors and in my records...I love eggs, so an egg allergy is not the cause even though the egg is a kind of emulsifier. I also cannot eat some foods that contain double acting vanilla or liquid smoke which contain lotsw of propylene glycol. I can tolerate a little real vanilla, but not much in foods possibly because of it's glycol compouds.

I sure as hell was not going to take the vaccine....especially when right from the start they mentioned not to take it if you were intolerant to any vaccines in the past or had a prob lem with any of the ingredients.

I Agree and i did not take the Clot Shot either.
I also think that this Bunch of Idiots in Charge should
be brought to Trial for Mandating this crap on the Military.
Criminals in Charge.

a reply to: panoz2177

originally posted by: rickymouse
Most of what was said in that box is what I have been saying for a long time about the vaccine technology not being adequate for approval. This information was all shown in research conclusions early on in the pandemic.

I am allergic to propylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, and polysorbate eighty. I also seem to be somewhat intolerant to many emulsifying chemistries. And I have had bad reactions to the flu shot witnessed by doctors and in my records...I love eggs, so an egg allergy is not the cause even though the egg is a kind of emulsifier. I also cannot eat some foods that contain double acting vanilla or liquid smoke which contain lotsw of propylene glycol. I can tolerate a little real vanilla, but not much in foods possibly because of it's glycol compouds.

I sure as hell was not going to take the vaccine....especially when right from the start they mentioned not to take it if you were intolerant to any vaccines in the past or had a prob lem with any of the ingredients.

Even without these allergies, would you have trusted such a strange new technology when you knew the virus wasn't that deadly?

I guess this is where we separate those who fell for the virus being so dangerous from those whose common sense told them otherwise. Now we know the numbers were inflated by lumping in nearly any death possible and labeling it as a covid death (that includes dying within 30 days of a postive covid test from anything). Then there was the murder for money scheme of using remdesivir or medazolam and ventilators which gave the hospitals 10's of thousands when the patient dies. So you get money for killing the patient but not saving them? Then people like the governor of new york were throwing covid positive in nursing homes which were the most vulnerable population and yet if they were positive for influenza it would have had the same effect.

Of course it took all this fear mongering to convince people it was dangerous enough to take a strange new technology for, and this is when a lot of people are already skeptical of "vaccines" that have been around for decades.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Great post! I sent you a PM. Let me know what you think!

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
Do you ever get a strange feeling in your stomach when things seem off? It's a lot like when a used car salesman is trying to persuade you that the 2018 civic with low miles is a steal and hes giving a significant discount. Perhaps your intuition tells you the car is a lemon, or maybe it had a dead body in it. Whatever the case, there are times when peoples gut tells them that something is wrong even if they can't quite put their finger on exactly what it is. That's how I and many others felt when they first started pushing these experiment shots. We all knew intuitively that something was off, and to avoid them at all costs.

If you've purposely been ignoring all the evidence and data pouring out from independent sources, let me simplify it for you: the vaccines were not effective, and definitely not safe by any definition of the word. The problem is, the burden of proof seems to be on the non-captured scientific community to prove its not safe instead of the people who produced and approved it to prove that it was safe.

Dr. Tess Lawrie along with 3 other researchers from the World Council for Health recently published a paper in Multidisplinary Scientic Journal that sought to determine what research had previously been done to prove the safety of the mRNA platform, which they described as "unusual" platform for vaccine delivery. For the last few years it has been spoon fed to the global population that this was the future of vaccine technology. As it turns out, not all doctors or scientists felt this statement was true, especially as the novel technology was rapidly deployed to billions with inadequate evidence of safety of efficacy. The information most people were exposed to was part of a massive billion dollar advertising campaign funded by tax dollars and promoted by HHS to push the covid shot with tenacity as a used car salesman.

The review focuses on the mRNA platform and does not consider the potential harms caused by the other components of the covid “vaccines.”

“We found that there was no evidence prior to global deployment to suggest that the covid ‘vaccines’ developed, using an mRNA platform, would be safe,” Dr. Lawrie said.

1) It is already known that a proportion of people are allergic to Polyethylene Glycol (“PEG”). The mRNA platform relies on lipid nanoparticles (“LNPs”) that contain PEG to evade the body’s innate immune system. Not only is this a hazard to people who are allergic to PEG, but it can also cause an inflammatory or allergic response with repeated injections among others.

2) mRNA uses host cell apparatus to produce proteins and this protein too can generate an antibody response, which may be associated with inflammation, clotting or autoimmunity. The latter occurs if the body recognises its own proteins as non-self, due to similarities with the mRNA-induced cell-made foreign proteins, and attacks them too.

3) Vaccines against coronaviruses have never been proven safe enough to be used outside of clinical trials. We identified 10 very small human trials of assorted other coronavirus vaccines, but they were all in the early phases (Phase I or II) of testing. None had been proven to work, nor did they have safety data beyond a few weeks.

4) Animal studies of coronavirus vaccines have shown high levels of serious side effects and often failed to provide immunity.

5) RNA platforms that have been attempted for non-covid “vaccine” applications prior to covid, such as for rabies, influenza and zika viruses, have little published and verifiable safety data. Data that are available suggest very high rates of serious side effects. Notably, with regard to RNA “vaccines,” the totality of evidence on the use of the mRNA platform for the purpose of vaccination from human studies involved a mere 285 people prior to trials for covid-19 “vaccines.”

So what is the purpose of this strange mRNA platform that was never proven to be safe? Is it possible there is another agenda at play here based on the evidence we have gathered in the last 2 years? Allow your instinct to guide you instead of the "authorities."

LINK TO STUDY

LINK TO ARTICLE

I remember reading that previous mrna technology was very dangerous in it’s trials .
Well , they got one hell of a set of data points on mrna now don’t they ?

And meanwhile, stories like this are starting to pop up more and more in MSM. This poor girl already had an underlying issue with her heart, but why were there no exemptions allowed? How could this girl's doctor or the person who injected her not raise red flags? How could so many people allow these horrible mandates forced upon even those with underlying conditions, just so she could keep working and go to campus to be among people? Disgusting.

Link

Of course they try to give the lowest estimate possible for the amount of deaths, but if it took down this poor girl, you just know it took down many more! Including people that might not have been aware of underlying medical conditions. So many deaths that happen due to so called "other" complications, well this girl's death alone is a serious red flag, because there are MANY people all over the place who already have these secondary issues and many of them were also coerced to get the jab. It's just basic logic and common sense at this point, with the evidence slowly slipping through all the cracks appearing.

Also, scroll down to the picture with the Moderna bottle in focus, on the bottle itself it literally says "emergency use authorization." It's right there IN OUR FACE.

This vaccine was never safe, for ANYONE!

Was it even mrna?
Here's the new story coming down the pipes.
The hospital deaths are being blamed on rogue nurses and doctors with fake credentials from Fl.
JFC
link
gov link

originally posted by: Mandroid7
Was it even mrna?
Here's the new story coming down the pipes.
The hospital deaths are being blamed on rogue nurses and doctors with fake credentials from Fl.
JFC
link
gov link

I saw this and it's a red herring when it comes to the global increase in all cause mortality.

Proof that the Vaccines Were a Military-Backed Countermeasure

“Vaccine” contract and amendments that specifies R&D projects that the US Government ordered and paid for. Note that in Pfizer’s case no R&D activities were ordered or paid for by the US Government, as these were excluded from the scope of the contract.
“Manufacturing” contract(s) that ordered a large-scale manufacturing. This is different from Pfizer manufacturing contracts as the words “demonstration” and “prototype” are not used. I believe this is because OTA contracts must be for prototypes but FAR contracting doesn’t have to be.

Take note of the reasons for redactions, tells one all they need to know.


How were BILLIONS of perfect Genetic Modification Doses ready to go overnight. Doses requiring deeply specific transportation protocols, injection requirements, temps, etc. coming from a company that had produced nothing, whose history (see anthrax vax) is beyond dubious, transported WW without a problem?

Fun Fact, the chemicals were meant to stay in the muscle, but a quick tour of arms, needles and the silly locations were people got themselves injected shows there was no possible consistency between needle, delivery person, arm fat, etc. to to put it in the correct spot.

It is not, and never was a Vaccine, but when this FACT made it out into the world, the CDC and the rest changed the definition of Vaccine to reflect DNA modification as the same. Also changed were the rules on Informed Consent.






In fairness to "them" all of this information was available at the time, albeit VERY hard to find - though much could be found here among the spamming, so if folks really cared they could have bothered to look beyond TV for their information. 50% took the jab without questioning or coercion of any sort. Fun Related Fact: 50% of the population has No Inner Diaglogue = you to the math.

I remember the military testing mRNA technology in the early 2000's and it did not going well. As soon as I heard that was the method they planned to immunize everyone with I immediately started warning my friends and family.

The real bioweapon is the shot not the virus. The virus was the means to get you to willingly take the shot so we can't hold them criminally accountable for creating a genocide.

So everyone gets wrapped up in the mRNA part, it is not doing anything in your bodies DNA, zero. The mRNA is how the vaccine was created and like all vaccines it is trying to invoke response, protein's etc, from your bodies immune system that will make you immune from a disease. Least that is their goal.
In this case, it did not work. I did not take them, but it had nothing to do with the mRNA part.

There is good reason it usually takes years and lots of testing to bring any drug, vaccine, etc to market. Safety...

You get that safety from testing, rigorous testing over time. Why would anyone take something they created in two months and did zero test with lol.

My sister took two, she has been deathly ill and wished she never took them. Wife and I both had COVID, I had it twice but nothing immune system could not handle.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I read the information on this technology and looked at the statistics on coronavirus vaccines and mrna testing early on. No, I would not have taken the vaccine even if I did not have the issues with the polyethylene glycol and polysorbate 80 based on the research I did before the vaccine was approved. The testing was not conducted correctly on this vaccine in my opinion.

It took me a lot of observation to identify my problems with polyethylene glycol, polysorbate 80. and propylene glycol over the last ten years to verify they were a problem for me. I had that intolerance figured out at least three years before the SARS-CoV2 was a threat. I had eliminated foods and soaps personally for a few years before this event. There was no way in hell I was going to inject those things in my body.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: rickymouse
Most of what was said in that box is what I have been saying for a long time about the vaccine technology not being adequate for approval. This information was all shown in research conclusions early on in the pandemic.

I am allergic to propylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, and polysorbate eighty. I also seem to be somewhat intolerant to many emulsifying chemistries. And I have had bad reactions to the flu shot witnessed by doctors and in my records...I love eggs, so an egg allergy is not the cause even though the egg is a kind of emulsifier. I also cannot eat some foods that contain double acting vanilla or liquid smoke which contain lotsw of propylene glycol. I can tolerate a little real vanilla, but not much in foods possibly because of it's glycol compouds.

I sure as hell was not going to take the vaccine....especially when right from the start they mentioned not to take it if you were intolerant to any vaccines in the past or had a prob lem with any of the ingredients.

Even without these allergies, would you have trusted such a strange new technology when you knew the virus wasn't that deadly?

I guess this is where we separate those who fell for the virus being so dangerous from those whose common sense told them otherwise. Now we know the numbers were inflated by lumping in nearly any death possible and labeling it as a covid death (that includes dying within 30 days of a postive covid test from anything). Then there was the murder for money scheme of using remdesivir or medazolam and ventilators which gave the hospitals 10's of thousands when the patient dies. So you get money for killing the patient but not saving them? Then people like the governor of new york were throwing covid positive in nursing homes which were the most vulnerable population and yet if they were positive for influenza it would have had the same effect.

Of course it took all this fear mongering to convince people it was dangerous enough to take a strange new technology for, and this is when a lot of people are already skeptical of "vaccines" that have been around for decades.

I don’t trust mrna at all & it has a bad track record in previous trials.
The world has become the largest mrna testing trial ever & it looks like mrna causes heart issues in our youth ?
I went with one shot of J&J myself a naturally vectored vaccine like Russia & China used .
Phizer & Moderna can shove it .