https://www.howbadismybatch.com/cdcexpiry3.pdf
Why do other batches have no expiry date? Why do the batches with expiry date happen to be the deadly ones? Why does CDC want to keep this list a secret?
The reason is that the batches which contain the mRNA vaccines are the ones that would expire. The batches with the saline are the ones that don't need an expiry date.
Does it mean all the batches other than the deadly ones were actually Saline?
Most of the humanity is actually safe?
Im pretty sure there was more than just Saline in EVERY jab. I don't know a single jabbite (i just made that up) that did not have some kind of reaction post poke. Severities were up and down the scale. Some were laid up for a week, some were down for just a few hours.
That said … I think it is entirely plausible that the ‘expiry batches’ were ‘juiced’.
YES …. My observations are damn near identical except the reaction part. Damn near everyone I know socially and work (@ 150-160) had some kind if reaction. Truthfully most were mild. Probably 20–30% of the three bangers I know are dead or dying. Thats what we would call “statistically significant”
Jeez, we were just talking about this yesterday, and it's frightening that people just accept SADS as NBD.
Very sads....
I know … Its mind boggling. I got a guy I work with got the jab so he could attend his kids graduation or something like that. A week later he was in the ER with heart issues. And again, at least 3 more times after that.
I work with middle schoolers and almost all of them said the second jab was very bad, as well as a lot of teachers who got it. Boosters were even worse.
All said I am around a couple hundred people in my day to day that at least got 2 jabs, many boosted, and only farfetched thing I've seen was a girl who got seizures and collapsed twice (not sure if vaxx related) and an older person who developed a sudden pretty aggressive cancer.
There was one 3rd grader that died, she was sick already and idk of she got vaxxed, probably as this is a very blue area and they were giving 10 dollar clothing vouchers for a children's store with every jab lol. Her health took a sharp turn for the worst, the family didn't expect it.
On the same note, I have never felt any effects from shedding g despite having been around kids in overcrowded stuffy classrooms. Fans weren't even allowed because "covid" so that air was muggy as all hell.
I did "catch covid" and subsequently my whole family (my brother caught it from his friend and we gathered for ma's birthday)
I know there are a subset that say, "It's just the flu bro" but I never got the flu that bad. Short term memory was zapped so bad I couldn't even remember if I had JUST taken a pill. I'd forget what I was saying mid sentence regularly, absurd fatigue, a sharp synthetic feeling very high sinus stuffiness, with more pressure than I ever felt right behind the eyes.
Thankfully I had IVM and when I realized what was going in, got started on it as well as my family. My folks are 2x jabbed, my brother and I aren't. We all came back quick.
No one in my family has had a negative reaction yet, except one who got boosted.
I know a couple who had the first 2 back in April 2021 as well. No side effects. No boosters. The wife has now been randomly blacking out. Maybe it's unrelated?
Yeah, I am inclined to believe this too. Probably the toxins were not biologically active - and hence no need for expiry?
The shit they used as the delivery encapsulate is enuf to make anyone sick:
SM-102, Polyethylene glycol (PEG) 2000 dimyristoyl glycerol (DMG)., 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DSPC)
Fuking SM102 is an industrial solvent. I have a close friend that is the top OSHA guy for a F500 corp. he said that shit is heavily regulated when used in any industrial process … yet for the jab - crickets. The FDA website says 70-80% of the population has some degree of allergy to PEG.
Its fuking insane that people even now don't bother to do a simple search of the PRIMARY shit in every shot. Retards.
SM-102 is not a "solvent." (I mean, everything is a solvent to something, but that's not what "solvent" usually means).
SM-102 is just a amino lipid. Looking at the molecule it looks like it is easily broken down by normal lipid breakdown pathways (beta-oxidation e.g.). It is a relatively simple molecule, with no apparent hot spots. That doesn't mean it can't possibly be toxic, but I see no toxicity signals in the molecule itself (as in none).
It is the solvent that the SM-102 is stored in that is toxic (chloroform), and the reason for the regulation. Extracting the solute (SM-102) from the chloroform is a relatively simple process. It is highly unlikely that substantial amounts of chloroform (if any at all) are in the vaccines after the SM-102 molecules are extracted and then put in an aqueous solution to make the lipid nanoparticle.
SM-102, as far as I can tell, and as far as all the evidence I have seen, is not a danger in any way.
PEG on the other hand can have toxicity issues, but its commonly a function of the length of the molecule (in this case ~2000 monomers of ethylene glycol). Of course the total amount is probably a bigger issue.
It can be broken down by the body however, so it isn't a permanent toxicity, and it isn't a ubiquitous one. I find your statement of 70-80% toxicity highly suspect. It has been used for many years without issue in other applications, though not usually in this amount.
There is likely a genetic predisposition to an allergic reaction, and it would be a simple test to find out before injection (if there were any honest interest in a persons health in the Jabbing process).
It isn't the "primary" shit that's the problem. I have seen no evidence that supports such an assertion. Of course PEG does have issues, but like I said, a simple allergy test would take care of that completely.
Pfizer Fights to Control Secret of $36 Billion Covid Vaccine Recipe
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-pfizer-secret-to-whats-in-the-covid-vaccine/ (Bloomberg, November 14, 2021)
“The secret formula that Bourla [Pfizer’s CEO] is protecting is much more complicated than a simple recipe. Pfizer’s shot has more than 280 materials made by suppliers in 19 countries, many of which are protected in one form or another. For a manufacturer to produce a vaccine, it would have to negotiate multiple licenses to waive protections on everything from lipids to mRNA strands and trade secrets used in the manufacturing process. The waiver proposal could in theory do that in one go.”
Did your healthcare provider who jabbed you with Pfizer’s CV-19 shot inform you of what all the 280 ingredients were in addition to deleterious, immune-suppressive effects of the genome altering spike protein programming mRNA sequence before you gave your consent to be administered the shot?
Did they discuss the potential toxicity of any one of those 280+ materials with you, including what the body-altering mechanism of the experimental gene therapy is?
Did they tell you this injection was life altering, or was in any way possibly life threatening to you?
They didn’t?
Or did your boss say you’d better get jabbed, or you’d be fired?
Or did you get fired for refusing to be medically raped by the jab?
Or did any establishment, school, or government entity require you or your child to produce a “vackz passport” to enter their premises, or to engage in commerce with them?
If so … you might want to be contacting a smart tort lawyer, real soon.
Start here: Siri/Glimstad (NYC): https://www.sirillp.com/aaron-siri/
I'm confused. Why is this a response to me?
Also, How did you make the code block? (The gray part.)
I am a biochemist who has knowledge of and an appreciation for pharmaceutical formulary science. I also know what it typically takes to get new products through FDA review, and their approval for marketing, including necessary inspections of manufacturers and clinical research organiations. I also have significant appreciation for the concept of informed consent. It is apparent to me that there were many corners cut, all of which are impactful on inherenrt product safety.
You write as one who appears to have some familiarity with biomolecules. I could be wrong. The code block came about on its own.
The questions I posed were for anyone to ask themselves, possibly yourself too.
I appreciate your knowledge and expertise. I also have substantial knowledge and expertise in all of the areas you mentioned (biochemistry, FDA approval, biomedical/pharmaceutical marketing, clinical research, informed consent, etc., etc.). In general, knowledge of those qualifications does not enhance (or subtract) from an argument or evidence. The argument or evidence either stands on its own or it doesn't. A persons credentials are completely irrelevant, and thus not worth pointing out. In fact they are generally used to create fallacies in argument; "pro hominem" or "ad hominem" depending on if they are for or against the person speaking, respectively.. If you have specific knowledge, that will be readily apparent in your argument (where "argument" just means the claims made, and the logical connections between them).
More specifically, none of those areas of knowledge change the fact that SM-102 has no apparent difficulties in it's biochemistry of being broken down by the cells when it is incorporated into the cell membrane during fusion of the lipid nanoparticle (made primarily of SM-102) with the cellular lipid bilayer. Since that was the topic of my post, I am confused why your response did not address anything I said directly, but was instead a bunch of unrelated things (all of which I agree with, but were completely irrelevant to my post).
Generally when someone responds to something, it is in agreement (additional corroborating evidence e.g.), or in disagreement (evidence or argument to the contrary of the assertions made). In your case, the Pfizer stuff almost sounded like "it's full of pitfalls and fraud, so SM-102 must be too." I'm not saying that was what you were saying. I was looking for something that fell into an agreement or disagreement category, because otherwise your post could have gone anywhere, instead of in reply to me. There was simply no other connection I could make between what you said, and what I was asserting in my post.
If you just wanted to talk about completely different things than the context of my post, giving me that information in the beginning of your reply would have alleviated the confusion.
Wrt the code block, if you could post that part of your post with a tick (single quote) that should give me the text used to create it. I would really appreciate the effort. I have been trying to figure out how to make a code block for over a year (they are really useful for certain posts). Every time I see one I ask, and no one knows how to make them, but they happen, therefore the interface allows for it. I'm guessing there is a shorthand that people accidentally do.
Excellent point about SM102 … it is completely unstable without cloroform. You cant have SM102 without it. Ergo, the deceptive labeling as SM102, and only SM102.
No worries … you need sauce, have some sauce
PEG allergies derive from its residual persistence in the germ of grains we consume. Hence the mass population being ‘allergic’. Again … SAUCE
MORE SAUCE
EDIT: You are 100% correct about it not being a solvent in the traditional use of the term … it is used in many many solvents.
If it matched wikipedia that is not my fault. I was speaking from experience. People shun wikipedia as if it was some bad source. It isn't, it is an excellent source. The problem with wikipedia is the same problem with any source, it is not to be trusted. The assumption is that other sources are more trustworthy. I assert that is not true. No sources should be trusted. Each should be approached with critical thinking.
You have to understand, my perspective is from a couple decades experience in biochemistry. I am looking at the molecular structure. I am not basing my words on "wikipedia" (which I didn't even read, I only linked it to help you, because it's generally right about chemicals and such thing). I am basing my words on having worked with many similar chemicals for decades. That is where I am coming from.
As for your evidence:
The first one links to the chemical sheets and cries foul. But the chemical sheets are for the chloroform stored lipid. It says it is a "liquid." SM-102 would almost certainly not be a liquid at room temperature. It would be at best like a thick oil, and looking at it, with its quite long straight hydrogenated carbon chains and small head groups, it would almost certainly be more like a wax (at room tempurature). If I had to guess, I'd say it would be a solid(wax like) up to over 100 degrees.. That is why it has to be stored in a solvent like chloroform.
It also says: "highly flammable liquid and vapor."
Sm-102 would not only not be a liquid, it couldn't possibly be a vapor. But Chloroform would be.
She says:
I can't find that anywhere on her list of things, but even if true (and it could be, because I think ethanol would likely be a viable solvent), pure ethanol, is toxic as fuck. A solution of 90% ethanol, if breathed in, could straight up blind you.
Again, SM-102 is just a lipid. I can find all sorts of papers that talk about ethanol toxicity (in pure form). I can't find any that talk about SM-102 toxicity.
Everything she talks about relies on her misunderstanding of the chemical data sheet. Because of the nature of the SM-102 molecule it requires specific solvents (It can't dissolve in water). Those solvents are all toxic. That is why all solutions of the molecule are toxic; because of the solvent.
As for the PEG, I agree that continued exposure may be problematic. It is a very low toxicity molecule however. I think people may have allergies because it is used ubiquitously. It's in so much stuff that we use, which can build up immune responses to it (allergies). Again, a simple test will determine if it will cause such an immune response. If it does not cause an immune response, it is reasonable to assume it is safe to use, because the body breaks it down easily. It has no residual toxicity (at least I have found no evidence to suggest that it does).
This is why the debate is so important. Your sources do not understand chemistry. They are reading a data sheet and not understanding the toxicity of the solvent. These data sheets are about what people get from the manufacturer. That includes the solvent. That is why all that stuff is there. That is why it is so confusing to so many people. For me, if I saw that, I would recognize exactly why it was so toxic. I know the procedures required to extract the lipid (basically a fatty acid, like solid olive oil) called SM-102, from the toxic solvent. I can use the warnings to know what precautions I have to take during that extraction process. THAT is their purpose. If you aren't a chemist, you might not know that. By her words, your source does not seem to understand that either.
I removed that after the fact. That was Bad form on my part. Honestly … I thought I was responding to a handshake account, I looked up right as I was responding to your comment. Still tho. Ur objectivity is necessary to keep the discussions value-added. My retarded comment was an obvious limp ad-hominem. Apologies.
I acquiesce to your obvious expertise with respect to the discussions on SM102. Knife-gunfight paradigm.
I want you to appreciate that I am not saying that SM-102 can't possibly be toxic. I am only presenting an argument against using data for it in solution as evidence of toxicity as a lipid nanoparticle (which can't even be formed until it has been completely removed from solution).
What I mean is, there is no reason to take that and end all suspicions. I am suspicious of everything (though in the case of SM-102 specifically, my suspicions are very low). I will always keep my eyes open for evidence of it's toxicity if such evidence presents itself. I won't however, just believe it is true without digging further, no matter the source.
If this particular molecule is something you want to investigate further because of your own suspicions, I certainly do not want to deter you. 90% of everything I have dug into has a fuckery layer underneath. How deep that goes is only found by investigation. I would never want to discourage any investigation. I only want to discourage our tendency to believe that evidence that supports our bias/beliefs must be Truth.
'the lipid nano particle, owned by Juatin Trudeau,'
PEG is in all kinds of consumer products - especially dental. I always found it amusing with patients that were so concerned about all kinds of toxins in food and water, but took little notice of the toothpastes and mouthwashes they used - all of which are toxic and serve no purpose in advancing dental health - or health in general. I would say that toothpastes are probably the biggest contributor to PEG sensitivity. Sensitivities and allergies both come from repeated exposure. Allergies are developed when a threshold is crossed.
The best thing to use is just plain old baking soda - preferably non aluminum. A drop of Fennel extract is good for balance of microbiome. A body that is in balance should not stink - either from bad breath or body odor. If there are smells, it is because there is a problem with disease or toxicity. Marketing has indoctrinated the public into thinking they need all of these toxic products. They are all contributing to our demise.
Nice. I just stole it.
Try “jabattoir - a place where jabbites are slaughtered… in slow motion”.
On the house. You’re welcome.
Hahahaha
Cant steal what I give u for free 😂😂😂
Good, because I stole it too
i know some. More precisely, i know NOBODY who got side effects. But the thing is that they probably don't recognize them.
Yet. Yet is the operative word.
tHaTs hOw yOu kNoW iTs wOrKiNg
I prefer "Jabberwonky," but jabbite works too.
And I agree. Not that I asked everyone, but the vast majority of people I know had some negative reaction. Some much worse than others.
Either way the jabs don't work.
And the 'mostly safe' wouldn't have worked into their plan. I believe the jabs were 'deadly' or 'not' based on concentration, knowing that the 'less concentrated' would have a delayed impact that would eventually mortally wound recipients with multiple boosters.
The jab formulation is designed to work on the original Covid animal. Per MSM stories (plenty of them out there now). The MSM propaganda (Wash Post most recently) coming out states that the variants are not covered by the original jab, yet, here they are still pushing boosters. Another sign this was not about the 'coof'.
They had to sparce out the damage to prevent major recoil from the normies.
I definitely think they did it in targeted batches. They have a extremely fine line to walk. That’s why covid itself is such a bitch ass weak virus, they couldn’t risk killing all the mammals on earth. They needed their propaganda machine to make covid appear incredibly deadly, but it couldn’t be. With the vaccine, they had to be incredibly careful they didn’t kill too many too soon. I assume the amount of poison in the batches was adjusted as time went on.
I also assume the medical industry was specifically targeted with weak or fake shots. Couldn’t have doctors and nurses getting sick immediately after vax. They want these medical communities to feel that anyone complaining about vaccine injury is a nut job. If a doctor knows his entire hospital got vaxxed, and no one got sick, that’s gonna prejudice them incredibly well.
They didn’t spend billion of dollars and decades of time to leave anything to chance.
Yeah but they definitely made some mistakes early on. Remember Tiffany Dover, the nurse who passed out and died live on camera just minutes after getting the jab?
I had forgotten about this. So I searched her name and these links came up: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tiffany+Dover&ia=web
Most of them say Tiffany "passed out" but is alive and well. Hmmm. But they also made a podcast about her?
I think the official narrative is that she's alive and well, but I have seen several reports claiming she died shortly after passing out, showing her obituary /death certificate, plus she hasn't made a public appearance since the incident.
But placebos sure seem to fix the Covid!
Dude that was like, yesterday!
I remember all of the cryogenic outfitted cargo planes that were being used in the beginning. COVID-19 Vaccine Transport Guidance - https://covid19.ncdhhs.gov/media/3070/download?attachment
Yes, hospitals paid (well, were probably financed) a lot for these really high end freezers for these vaccines.
This seems like a low number of batches on both the VAERS and CDC sides for how many « shots have been given ».
I also find it odd that they only did the side-by-side comparison for the Pfizer lots. J&J is also on the expiry list but it’s not shown with a VAERS comparison. That’s suspect if you’re trying to prove a point.
My niece took the J&J (because only one shot) and she has been ill with different colds, respiratory stuff for weeks at a time, off and on. (24 yo)
The J&J requires a booster, tho.
Sauce?
The VAERS data indicated that only 3% of the batches were the "deadly" batches. So the low number makes sense.
Its probably work in progress. The data is all available for public, and the expiry dates of Moderna lots are in the PDF file. Be a good Anon and do your own digging!
I’m barely surviving at the moment, fren.
If you’d like to solve my financial and familial stressors so I have more time to devote to a project I didn’t start—because I don’t have the bandwidth to take over someone else’s project at this time—I’m all for it.
Just found it odd that they only focused on Pfizer for this publication.
Praying for you fren! Peace & Blessings! 🙏💕
I have long had a theory about this:
If the va.x had the same ingredients across all batches, this website shouldn't exist. But it does.
Therefore, some batches are the real deal, some are saline (as seen on some videos of people getting ahold of some batches and testing them).
This should give many of you who have had it, know people that have had it, or are worried about the people that got it, hope.
Imagine how much money they are looting from all of us by charging for a “vaccine” but only injecting saline. pure profit from bullshit. and bye bye to our tax dollars.
i bet this applies to the flu vaccines too. they figured out a brilliant scam.
I know of 3 people in my circle that have heart issues now. 2 that “discovered” brain tumors. 1 with a double whammy brain, and breast cancer. and one that died a slow burning from the inside out death after the first jab. horrific allergic reaction. i know of a class mate the died on christmas day. we’re solidly Gen X, so “young” in comparison.
a new hire at work died suddenly after being in the job 6 weeks. got a nice “awww shucks, she will be missed” email. she was late 20’s. i didn’t know her. but sus AF.
one of the ones above that is experience the heart issues didn’t want to report via VARES. I suspect there are many more people that don’t want to report it.
so, it’s hard to say. i hope a vast majority got a placebo and their negative reaction was due to the industrial goo someone mentioned here.
if you get knocked out, that means it’s working, right? 🙄
It's the only hope we have.
My fiancee stopped at the second dose and has been fine so far, she was an early one back when healthcare workers were prioritized and we knew almost nothing yet so maybe she got the watered down dose as well.
Interesting find! Hope my family got the undated ones.
Same here, hoping for the best.
Keep praying and hope for the best, all we can do.
Looks like a well designed blind test on the public. And normies still believe they wouldn't do such a thing.
I feel like I need to post this again.
https://phoreveryoung.wordpress.com/2015/05/14/the-worst-cover-up-in-the-history-of-the-world-vaccinations-are-monkey-business/
Understand that the vaxx poisoning of the WORLD has been going on 150 years or more
We’re reaching the peak now
Those of us intelligent enough will NEVER ALLOW the injection of ANYTHING into our system
Unfortunately as we see. 2/3 or so of folks. Even highly enducated. Don’t know history. And biochemistry and physiology
Also. Colloidal silver. Kills ALL bacteria and viruses. It’s free.
Do the jabbed come with an expiry date?
Recently released from Reiner Fullmich, a Pfizer-specific interview with investigative journalist Sonia Elijah: https://odysee.com/@Corona-Investigative-Committee:5/Session-113-Sonia-ElijahOdysee:d
Highlights from his TG channel:
Internal emails from politicians to the EMA (European Medical Agency), including:
-Pfizer chief exec Albert Bourla put pressure on the EMA in available, private emails
-Concerns about vaccine safety were shown to have been suppressed weeks before conditional marketing approval, for fear of political fallout.
-The reduction of production quality standards in order for mRNA injection products to pass.
-The risk of uncontrolled aberrant protein formation by damaged mRNA strands was prev known and not thoroughly assessed.
-Already known about foreign particles in the batches before conditional approval.
-Conflicts of interest as the EMA: Chief was previously chairwoman in pharmaceutical industry.
So. Expiry dates are the tip of a very large, very disturbing iceberg. It is my belief that the jabs are not, and never will be, "safe". I don't think we'll see the last of adverse events for years -- perhaps decades even -- to come. Everyone (and I do mean "everyone") I have met who is jabbed (once, twice, or more) has had an adverse reaction of some kind, including cancer. 😢
So I've taken stats with jab lots and cancer while I work. So the jabs that don't show up high on his radar because they are not listed in VAERS show up in my notes for cancer. Most of these cases are months(to a year) later and neither the doctor nor the patient will connect the two. I am convinced if you got the jab and didn't have immediate adverse effects, within 60 days, you have a high probability of cancer in your very near future, if your jab lot is listed as one that has an expiration date, imo.
How are you getting the notes for cancer? How are you correlating them to the lots?
Anyone else notice the top of the list use the same digits. EKS730 is probably a typo of EK5730, and the top 11 plus a few more down the list are all variations of the top three. Similar issues on the EL list. The bad events are even more concentrated that these lists show.
"This list only applies to USA vaccines before 2nd September 2021 – when the CDC list was last updated."
Maybe those who have had adverse effects can trace the lot they were vax☠xed from and use it to sue their employer.
Willful misconduct.
No immunity.
I can tell you this. The earlier vackscenes (J&J) had a VERY quick expiration date. Like, a matter of months. The later ones (Moderna) have an expiration date that is in the second half of the 21st century.
FWIW.
Operation Warpspeed is still one of the pieces of the plan that I don't quite grasp exactly what was going on.
Was there every a good post I missed that succinctly described the best theories about what that op was truly doing?
Look for an interview of Peter Navarro - 2-3 months ago - and he explains Op warpspeed, which sheds light on what happened.
In the interview I found with Bannon he says like something right out of world war 2. Double meanings exist and in this case I haven't quite gathered what I think the military was actually doing. How much military have you seen in your area delivering vaccines?
Expiration dates on those things? Looks like they ran out of time and Baron Pureblood retires undefeated, admiring my Certificate Of Victory ID hanging here on the wall. Sorry Bill, I guess you just didn't push the product hard enough.
I am telling you, if only he didnt chuckle everytime he mentioned pandemics or people dying, he could have pushed it much harder
God, please let this be true.
Yes but the plan I would bet is rolling expiry dates on the jab.
All the jabs have to be mixed with saline btw. It's one vial spread across six new vials. Why? More obfuscation but mainly the vial has to be kept cold so they don't freeze if there's no water in them. A full vial injected into you would probably be hazardous.
I heard someone say before they took an 'Advocacy Approach'. That would mean that only 1/3 of the first shots were the true formula. Hoping that all injected would advocate the others to get a shot bc 'their shot was safe'. I'm hoping this is true.
what is this?
By Craig Paardekooper (Party pooper?)
Its the pseudonym of the folks who analysed and created the bad batch database.
Enough with the fake names
Wow, this is really good data!