Continuation after biodistribution including transfection, translation and excretion of the LNP components; and just a little ranting. OK a lot of ranting.
Re: GP120 variable loop inserts. I thought I would test my hypothesis about cleaved S1 trafficking. This adds a few more concerns!
Extracellular Vesicles Carry HIV Env and Facilitate Hiv Infection of Human Lymphoid Tissue
...Here, we found that a significant number of EVs (exosomes) released by HIV-1 infected cells carry gp120 (Env), a viral protein that mediates virus attachment and fusion to target cells, and also facilitates HIV infection in various indirect ways. Depletion of viral preparations of EVs, in particular of those that carry gp120, decreases viral infection of human lymphoid tissue ex vivo. Thus, EVs that carry Env identified in our work seem to facilitate HIV infection and therefore may constitute a new therapeutic target for antiviral strategy.
...Biogenesis of these EVs inside the cells resembles that of retroviruses, in particular of HIV, and as a result, EVs share with these viruses many chemical and physical properties3. It is now understood that since EVs are released by HIV-infected cells, any HIV preparation is in fact a mixture of virions and EVs.
What a superb article. Well done. In Australia they are tackling it from the importation point of view ( ie they didn't not declare Pfz as a biological agent (AZ did!))
As always, thank you. Thank you for also raising the environmental issue. I have been ranting about this for years now, e.g. complaining to ENSSER (European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility). While I briefly mentioned the risks via exosomes getting into the environment in my book, it was only later that I realized we really don't know the effects of all the short RNAs ("micro RNAs") transfecting the microbiome in both humans and the environment and anything in between. I need to read your important article more carefully. From what I gather, things could be very nasty for the environment as well - effectively taken there and then gene-manipulating various victim species with stuff that does not break down easily....
Thank you. Great write-up. I remember when I was writing my book. Once I realized the danger of the microRNAs, all hell seemed to break loose..... (Springer had given me a deadline, and I ended up working day and night). They have all those different names but have similar mutagenic potential etc. I ended up writing chapters on that serious issue. Thank you and Maria for raising awareness of this. I mean, there is a lot of fuss, and some discussion at least, about gene-editing in plants but then the same is likely going on in an unrecognized way in humans as a result of the "vaccines."
Paper is so disturbing if you think about how I linked RAS to the membrane as essential signaling protein triggered by this crap in a way it should not...
Very predictable, yes. Plus evidence with a similar product Onpattro and finally the Bansal article. Why was discussion about "shedding" shut down? Even Bansal had to issue a clarification and they thought exosomes were a GOOD idea in vaccination.
I think it was because the people got the product to save others from harm. If they knew they armed those they wanted to save by taking it, this would have been a problem.
If the Exosomes are being shed... how likely is it that they transfect gut biome? Especially those nice DNA plasmids should not be problematic for your own E. coli? It would mean people would not be shitting bricks, but shitting E. coli with copies of how to make spike protein... could also be important for the 'new' way of testing communities for prevalence of SARS-CoV2... just now they could be getting spike protein from shitty bacteria...
I, too, will be giving this a second read to cement it all in my mind. Much to consider.
I think autocorrect got you - about halfway down, it reads: "the pH of the endoscope is about 5, allowing protonation of the LNPs," - and there is a second iteration of "endoscope" a little later. Presumably this was meant to be endosome?
A really, really deep dive into unknowns of the clot shots. Thank you so much. And even more thanks for showing me that I don't do what I do as a nerd for no reason.
https://genervter-substack-com.translate.goog/p/die-phospholipide-doppelschicht-und?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp
Autotranslation should help a bit. :-)
Thank you NarfGB
I was just about to let Maria know about this feature. I also needed it to read your work.
Thank you (insert 'deep bow of gratitude' emoji here), thank you...one and all.
Maria, I have wondered why so much colon cancer. I'm also stunned by those still walking around after 5 or more shots.
Re: GP120 variable loop inserts. I thought I would test my hypothesis about cleaved S1 trafficking. This adds a few more concerns!
Extracellular Vesicles Carry HIV Env and Facilitate Hiv Infection of Human Lymphoid Tissue
...Here, we found that a significant number of EVs (exosomes) released by HIV-1 infected cells carry gp120 (Env), a viral protein that mediates virus attachment and fusion to target cells, and also facilitates HIV infection in various indirect ways. Depletion of viral preparations of EVs, in particular of those that carry gp120, decreases viral infection of human lymphoid tissue ex vivo. Thus, EVs that carry Env identified in our work seem to facilitate HIV infection and therefore may constitute a new therapeutic target for antiviral strategy.
...Biogenesis of these EVs inside the cells resembles that of retroviruses, in particular of HIV, and as a result, EVs share with these viruses many chemical and physical properties3. It is now understood that since EVs are released by HIV-infected cells, any HIV preparation is in fact a mixture of virions and EVs.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-01739-8
What a superb article. Well done. In Australia they are tackling it from the importation point of view ( ie they didn't not declare Pfz as a biological agent (AZ did!))
As always, thank you. Thank you for also raising the environmental issue. I have been ranting about this for years now, e.g. complaining to ENSSER (European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility). While I briefly mentioned the risks via exosomes getting into the environment in my book, it was only later that I realized we really don't know the effects of all the short RNAs ("micro RNAs") transfecting the microbiome in both humans and the environment and anything in between. I need to read your important article more carefully. From what I gather, things could be very nasty for the environment as well - effectively taken there and then gene-manipulating various victim species with stuff that does not break down easily....
The ERA requirement for COVID-19 vaccines was waived for the EU. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2020/07/14/vaccine-against-covid-19-council-adopts-measures-to-facilitate-swift-development/
We knew at least that the modRNA-miR interactions would be alterated in compare with original spike-RNA:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6350232/
See also:
https://genervter-substack-com.translate.goog/p/der-weg-richtung-himmel-oder-holle?_x_tr_sl=de&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp
Thank you. Great write-up. I remember when I was writing my book. Once I realized the danger of the microRNAs, all hell seemed to break loose..... (Springer had given me a deadline, and I ended up working day and night). They have all those different names but have similar mutagenic potential etc. I ended up writing chapters on that serious issue. Thank you and Maria for raising awareness of this. I mean, there is a lot of fuss, and some discussion at least, about gene-editing in plants but then the same is likely going on in an unrecognized way in humans as a result of the "vaccines."
https://watermark.silverchair.com/can-23-0296.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAA2YwggNiBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggNTMIIDTwIBADCCA0gGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMzaOF9NjZFU937jM4AgEQgIIDGcdQWGVDHyrUrSxoRMJLoAtF4mAuT2qKGbsV3pf4Zg9YONnD25SDlJGniomMDfHyplxhedc0ARBimkSlxjSsnk72c9TZG9c0OC2uECZo8L64eOXf93t6wY8dxhsEtALxwxFTHUCwW21jw-WXIPLo60gCuUgupu0n2rJ1-pVpJT1HDxHRBb1MINDIOmISy9BRYzvQN0Uj7ggqqTEyEM1Xz0OAzn3g5zgQe2_cfGPV3q150ai_67SBjqySQnOYfwPPRqlozH9PuYZ6sRArYKTxJGWmoQ5b8EtjdeOFMYI-HsYbqSqxvdTuBKU4SqaGKnri9FjwZFRV4bVfiTjxwLYvzqoOjNUeouVg28ibiARbDYDZAWRIcd8YKU542CudPLwnDlHC3toqB3in86Aty8tv1lZ-pJIgvvc8rgGn0bONT2w0Zubb0qkWdZHcWsEM1QMKShVLegDXRYwrAJhOnbHLircNk5oYYO1mCmmneQl5mFe-6a7mB1W0-TeSsnfZ-iHkJYXZTfB2XwHf2NZrZtRElzmiILUh_BQLW7foP2x-eY45-8vIGQqZU06KM7QVMQGWo1P4DAfV0KQ1_8z0Kvow2q9Siuo0bFgesI4Frjhyo85GrnhT7EkW1gFvsHWwVOCrkQfL8tsaYryLyrDo7WvIJiR3CfEMieAYezcEu4ce5E-13LGl6c6-wX2Q8KFd6RY1tOGJZc1FF25fHwJaBRDmvEkagOrhUxerD7VAtv6uQtgkh3Ea6ijOwpQbUJFjFUf-uTFBiw3OEG-D1sS2UqjqhHqYDq8NPuDR6R827OCcFZO03_aQYRgyJ7sqkB5P-N8eiVDrVRQBKF7tm4blzWYQSE4rz89p9uVUUs5TCPUKlu7M9G9JB-YDDLSy33elkhdBkDwj-Abxhjp4ka8-zQ5nsvOID3BvLtSoUjY55sCFm89K6RGTpTAGCl9UuiaXXu2DKh6Kq7UELWLpyRYFJ1xCcsOILByiSNMJJtj21sMZVaGrDxkYwWhg9E303KS-i6DdRT78bU0DRv591fUKQYqKZTb8rIKZBoKy73c
Paper is so disturbing if you think about how I linked RAS to the membrane as essential signaling protein triggered by this crap in a way it should not...
I am afraid the link does not work. Can you please send me the title of it? Thank you.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36946612/
Sorry. This one should work.
If you look into the foia documents, the spike is produced in the rER, thus shedding via Exosomes was predictable on the textbook level: https://drbine.substack.com/p/was-wusste-biontech-daruber-dass
Very predictable, yes. Plus evidence with a similar product Onpattro and finally the Bansal article. Why was discussion about "shedding" shut down? Even Bansal had to issue a clarification and they thought exosomes were a GOOD idea in vaccination.
I think it was because the people got the product to save others from harm. If they knew they armed those they wanted to save by taking it, this would have been a problem.
If the Exosomes are being shed... how likely is it that they transfect gut biome? Especially those nice DNA plasmids should not be problematic for your own E. coli? It would mean people would not be shitting bricks, but shitting E. coli with copies of how to make spike protein... could also be important for the 'new' way of testing communities for prevalence of SARS-CoV2... just now they could be getting spike protein from shitty bacteria...
I, too, will be giving this a second read to cement it all in my mind. Much to consider.
I think autocorrect got you - about halfway down, it reads: "the pH of the endoscope is about 5, allowing protonation of the LNPs," - and there is a second iteration of "endoscope" a little later. Presumably this was meant to be endosome?
Also - it's Niemann-Pick (not Newman-Pick).
arghhh. Yes I caught one of those autocorrect but missed the others. Was getting tired. Same with Niemann-Pick which autocorrected as well.
I thought the idea of LNP toxicity similar to lysosomal storage disorders a very interesting hypothesis and something that could be tested.
A really, really deep dive into unknowns of the clot shots. Thank you so much. And even more thanks for showing me that I don't do what I do as a nerd for no reason.
In which document can I find the Onpattro exosome half-life 60-80 days?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7187331/pdf/JCPH-60-573.pdf
start at bottom of page 571
ooops 581
If you look into the foia documents, the spike is produced in the rER, thus shedding via Exosomes was predictable on the textbook level: https://drbine.substack.com/p/was-wusste-biontech-daruber-dass