I'm calling bullshit. Article is very vague on the source of the "unvaccinated blood", and the precise differences of vaxxed vs truly unvaxxed. How much contact did this "unvaxxed" person have with vaxxed? What would we see in the blood if this experiment had been run 4 years ago?
Here's my overall take: If the jabs weren't necessary to get this stuff into people, there wouldn't have been such a huge push. If they can get it into us through geoengineering or through our food that's always going to be the preferred route.
If you are unvaxxed you still have a lot to be thankful for. This article, even if legit, doesn't change that.
That's assuming the point of the jabs was to inject us with stuff. It may have just been psychological warfare; a typical marxist demoralisation campaign.
WAY too many people have died soon after the jab, or Died Suddenly in the months following, or suffered sometimes horrifying symptoms of one sort or another, for the jabs to be saline and "just psychological warfare."
Psychological warfare is certainly part of it, but actual and purposefully harmful and deadly effects of whatever is being injected into people is undeniable.
I think a lot of the shots were placebo or very little of anything that mattered. We have the whole died suddenly to no effect on extended family that were vaxxed...hard to know, really.
Several batches of the jab have been analyzed and the contents of the vials, even in a single batch, have ranged from near-saline to heavily contaminated with all sorts of things -- both poor quality control and purposeful variation have been observed. That's surely one reason for the variable response to the "vaccines."
Another reason is, for example, that whether the tip of the needle ends up IN A BLOOD VESSEL or just in muscle fiber determines whether the toxins etc get immediately pumped all around the body or not.
Some of the vaxxed may never have any damage from the shot; those who got saline would clearly have no negative or positive effect. But the statistical evidence for toxicity of the "vaccine" is overwhelming. Not everyone got the same concoction but millions of people got enough of something bad that life insurance companies, embalmers and funeral home owners, the VAERS database, government database info from other nations, and a whole LOT of other sources show dramatic and far-beyond-chance elevations in excess deaths, in cancer (including very aggressive cancers), in heart disease and strokes, in neurological damage, and more. See Steve Kirsch and Jessica Rose (among many others) for past and ongoing details.
I'm calling bullshit. Article is very vague on the source of the "unvaccinated blood", and the precise differences of vaxxed vs truly unvaxxed. How much contact did this "unvaxxed" person have with vaxxed? What would we see in the blood if this experiment had been run 4 years ago?
Here's my overall take: If the jabs weren't necessary to get this stuff into people, there wouldn't have been such a huge push. If they can get it into us through geoengineering or through our food that's always going to be the preferred route.
If you are unvaxxed you still have a lot to be thankful for. This article, even if legit, doesn't change that.
That's assuming the point of the jabs was to inject us with stuff. It may have just been psychological warfare; a typical marxist demoralisation campaign.
WAY too many people have died soon after the jab, or Died Suddenly in the months following, or suffered sometimes horrifying symptoms of one sort or another, for the jabs to be saline and "just psychological warfare."
Psychological warfare is certainly part of it, but actual and purposefully harmful and deadly effects of whatever is being injected into people is undeniable.
I think a lot of the shots were placebo or very little of anything that mattered. We have the whole died suddenly to no effect on extended family that were vaxxed...hard to know, really.
Several batches of the jab have been analyzed and the contents of the vials, even in a single batch, have ranged from near-saline to heavily contaminated with all sorts of things -- both poor quality control and purposeful variation have been observed. That's surely one reason for the variable response to the "vaccines."
Another reason is, for example, that whether the tip of the needle ends up IN A BLOOD VESSEL or just in muscle fiber determines whether the toxins etc get immediately pumped all around the body or not.
Some of the vaxxed may never have any damage from the shot; those who got saline would clearly have no negative or positive effect. But the statistical evidence for toxicity of the "vaccine" is overwhelming. Not everyone got the same concoction but millions of people got enough of something bad that life insurance companies, embalmers and funeral home owners, the VAERS database, government database info from other nations, and a whole LOT of other sources show dramatic and far-beyond-chance elevations in excess deaths, in cancer (including very aggressive cancers), in heart disease and strokes, in neurological damage, and more. See Steve Kirsch and Jessica Rose (among many others) for past and ongoing details.