The So-called COVID-19 "Vaccine" is really a dangerous experimental gene therapy by Dr. Steven Hotze
(www.bitchute.com)
? DEM PANIC ?
Comments (11)
sorted by:
I listened to the first couple minutes of this. I agree with everything he said up to the point I stopped, but it is important to note, him calling it a "gene therapy" is false. By definition a gene therapy alters a persons genome. The mRNA vaccines do not alter a persons genome. Cytosolic mRNA CANNOT alter a persons genome.
If I could only stop doctors (who are generally misinformed on cell and molecular biology) from calling this a gene therapy maybe this "you become a GMO" disinformation would stop.
You don't say what your qualifications are and you don't link to anything. It sounds like your statements are truisms about naturally occurring mRNA. Who is to say how a synthetic mRNA might affect a person's DNA, particularly if the creator of the synthetic mRNA wants it to write itself into a person's DNA thereby changing their genome? Skepticism is a reasonable response when prior mRNA vaccine development for SARS-CV-1 was halted when all the test animals died when later exposed to coronavirus in the wild. I see no reason to take anybody's word that these mRNA injections are harmless when there have been no long-term human studies and no published animal studies.
I am a cell biologist and bio-nanotechnology researcher.
Fair enough, however, it is also basic cell biology. To a cell biologist it is as obvious as 1+1=2 to a mathematician. To an experienced cell biologist it has been verified by hundreds or thousands of personally performed experiments.
Then they would do it another way. They would include all the technology required to get it into the nucleus, get it into stem cell niches, get it to actually express the required proteins to actually write to the DNA, etc., etc.
There are MUCH BETTER technologies to write to DNA (actual gene therapies). There are NO WAYS to do it with the ingredients listed in the mRNA vaccines. If these vaccines are altering DNA they are not what they say they are. All evidence supports the assertion they are what they say they are. What they say they are is bad enough.
Yes, but pathogenic priming has absolutely nothing to do with altering DNA (exclusively).
I NEVER implied they were harmless. On the contrary, I spend most of my day writing, talking, researching, or analyzing how not harmless they are.
You also should not take my word for anything. Ask me questions. If I know the answers I will give them. If I can provide resources I will do so.
Think of it this way. Our cells have tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of mRNA in each cell at all times throughout our entire lives, constantly changing over (average lifespan before degradation is about 10 hours). This means trillions of mRNA are in the cytosol throughout the lifespan of some cells. If mRNA was able to write to DNA our DNA would be a complete and utter shitshow in every cell of every body of every lifeform on the planet. Life would cease to exist. In truth, life would have NEVER existed if mRNA wrote to DNA in any meaningful way.
Your statement seemed to be in response to me saying "Cytosolic mRNA cannot alter a persons genome". This is a true statement that is less a "the science is settled" attitude and more of a "millions of experiments support this assertion" attitude.
Its also important to note its not strictly true, but it is true enough that it has to be said that way because the exceptions to the statement are way too complicated and are guaranteed to confuse the issue.
In answer to the question, "Can the vaccine change my DNA?" the answer is strictly "No." And it is strictly "no" because any other answer is more confusing and less true than "no."
Never is my mind closed to new opportunities to learn. On the contrary, my life is dedicated to the task of proving myself and every other scientist who has ever lived wrong.
That is the nature of true science. We are always trying to prove ourselves wrong. This is the only path towards the truth. But in many cases, to answer a question from someone with insufficient background knowledge we have to take a firm stance because the whole truth as it is known in any present moment is FAR too complicated (and in this case also FAR too rare) to answer any other way.
Dare me ask, what’s bad about this vaccine in your opinion then? Besides obvious points that no info for the public. But from your professional observation, what is going to happened to those who took them?
I'm not sure exactly what you want here.
I think the vast majority will be fine. As I said, about 1:10,000 to 1:20,000 seem to die, and 1:200 or so have a serious effect. Only some of those "serious effects" are permanent (blindness, paralysis, coma, heart damage, lung damage, brain damage, etc. (all of these have happened to many people, though I don't have the count off the top of my head)). That is if we assume the data isn't too far off (hopefully).
If there is a pathogenic priming effect, the next "SARS season" could be pretty brutal if these vaccines follow previous vaccines patterns (5% of all recipients die). This pathogenic priming effect likely gets diminished with time, and almost certainly gets diminished by not being vitamin deficient, so this problem may be reduced.