Thank you for bringing this report to my attention. It was very informative.

I think it has some flaws. I disagree with some of the specific conclusions about the biology, but not complete disagreement, more a disagreement of degree or scope, or really nitty gritty stuff. The overall biology was excellent and I learned a lot, especially about the specifics of the physiological effects of the virus that were not related to the spike protein.

There were other areas where the author went off on speculation that is not sufficiently backed by evidence, and is too easy to refute. That doesn't make the statements wrong, but they are not valuable as a redpill and can be a turn off if someone who digs into it has specific knowledge. For those without specific knowledge it turns into fear mongering (with insufficient evidence) instead of informing. In either case though, it is minimal enough within the biology part, that I wouldn't worry about it.

I don't know what effect this whole report will have on someone without a decent knowledge of biology (at least a year or two of undergrad). I mean, its a ton of good information with decent sources from what I looked at. I didn't look at them all though, not even close. To really get into it would take a lot of time I don't have atm. I really wish they had hyperlinks to the specific references within the text, though the annotated bibliography is very useful for some of the more important things. If I were going to use this and it was really important I would probably go through all the references and either add hyperlinks, or add numerical citation references within the text.

I kinda wish they had left out the taking over the brain stuff. While it is good info, there is no evidence that ties those ideas to this vaccine, even if it is not hard to find that information as part of a larger agenda. The Great Reset stuff wasn't so bad though they could have done without it. That's important info imo, and probably easier to swallow than the mind control, though its probably better suited to a "part 2".

For anyone who understands biology, I think this is an excellent redpill. Probably the best I've seen. Unfortunately that excludes most doctors and almost everyone else who aren't already awake. For critical thinkers, it is also probably really good, though as I said, probably better without mind control. I don't want to keep harping on that. Except for tying it to the vaccine they do a pretty good job, but the relationship between the two has way too little evidence and doesn't help the case, possibly discrediting the rest of the evidence for someone not quite ready for that level of exposure.

Those are my thoughts. You could absolutely do worse than send that to people as a redpill. Overall I think it will be effective for anyone who is willing to read it. Most of the best stuff is in the beginning, so that builds credibility for when he goes full NWO.

Every redpiller knows you never go full NWO. (At least not on a first date.)

Thank you for bringing this report to my attention. It was very informative.

I think it has some flaws. I disagree with some of the specific conclusions about the biology, but not complete disagreement, more a disagreement of degree or scope, or really nitty gritty stuff. The overall biology was excellent and I learned a lot, especially about the specifics of the physiological effects of the virus that were not related to the spike protein.

There were other areas where the author went off on speculation that is not sufficiently backed by evidence, and is too easy to refute. That doesn't make the statements wrong, but they are not valuable as a redpill and can be a turn off if someone who digs into it has specific knowledge. For those without specific knowledge it turns into fear mongering (with insufficient evidence) instead of informing. In either case though, it is minimal enough within the biology part, that I wouldn't worry about it.

I don't know what effect this whole report will have on someone without a decent knowledge of biology (at least a year or two of undergrad). I mean, its a ton of good information with decent sources from what I looked at. I didn't look at them all though, not even close. To really get into it would take a lot of time I don't have atm. I really wish they had hyperlinks to the specific references within the text, though the annotated bibliography is very useful for some of the more important things. If I were going to use this and it was really important I would probably go through all the references and either add hyperlinks, or add numerical citation references within the text.

I kinda wish they had left out the taking over the brain stuff. While it is good info, there is no evidence that ties those ideas to this vaccine, even if it is not hard to find that information as part of a larger agenda. The Great Reset stuff wasn't so bad though they could have done without it. That's important info imo, and probably easier to swallow than the mind control, though its probably better suited to a "part 2".

For anyone who understands biology, I think this is an excellent redpill. Probably the best I've seen. Unfortunately that excludes most doctors and almost everyone else who aren't already awake. For critical thinkers, it is also probably really good, though as I said, probably better without mind control. I don't want to keep harping on that. Except for tying it to the vaccine they do a pretty good job, but the relationship between the two has way too little evidence and doesn't help the case, possibly discrediting the rest of the evidence for someone not quite ready for that level of exposure.

Those are my thoughts. You could absolutely do worse than send that to people as a redpill. Overall I think it will be effective for anyone who is willing to read it. Most of the best stuff is in the beginning, so that builds credibility for when he goes full NWO.

Every redpiller knows you never go full NWO.

Thank you for bringing this report to my attention. It was very informative.

I think it has some flaws. I disagree with some of the specific conclusions about the biology, but not complete disagreement, more a disagreement of degree or scope, or really nitty gritty stuff. The overall biology was excellent and I learned a lot, especially about the specifics of the physiological effects of the virus that were not related to the spike protein.

There were other areas where the author went off on speculation that is not sufficiently backed by evidence, and is too easy to refute. That doesn't make the statements wrong, but they are not valuable as a redpill and can be a turn off if someone who digs into it has specific knowledge. For those without specific knowledge it turns into fear mongering (with insufficient evidence) instead of informing. In either case though, it is minimal enough within the biology part, that I wouldn't worry about it.

I don't know what effect this whole report will have on someone without a decent knowledge of biology (at least a year or two of undergrad). I mean, its a ton of good information with decent sources from what I looked at. I didn't look at them all though, not even close. To really get into it would take a lot of time I don't have atm. I really wish they had hyperlinks to the specific references within the text, though the annotated bibliography is very useful for some of the more important things. If I were going to use this and it was really important I would probably go through all the references and either add hyperlinks, or add numerical citation references within the text.

I kinda wish they had left out the taking over the brain stuff. While it is good info, there is no evidence that ties those ideas to this vaccine, even if it is not hard to find that information as part of a larger agenda. The Great Reset stuff wasn't so bad though they could have done without it. That's important info imo, and probably easier to swallow than the mind control, though its probably better suited to a "part 2".

For anyone who understands biology, I think this is an excellent redpill. Probably the best I've seen. Unfortunately that excludes most doctors and almost everyone else who isn't already awake. For critical thinkers, it is also probably really good, though as I said, probably better without mind control. I don't want to keep harping on that. Except for tying it to the vaccine they do a pretty good job, but the relationship between the two has way too little evidence and doesn't help the case, possibly discrediting the rest of the evidence for someone not quite ready for that level of exposure.

Those are my thoughts. You could absolutely do worse than send that to people as a redpill. Overall I think it will be effective for anyone who is willing to read it. Most of the best stuff is in the beginning, so that builds credibility for when he goes full NWO.

Every redpiller knows you never go full NWO.

Thank you for bringing this report to my attention. It was very informative.

I think it has some flaws. I disagree with some of the specific conclusions about the biology, but not complete disagreement, more a disagreement of degree or scope, or really nitty gritty stuff. The overall biology was excellent and I learned a lot, especially about the specifics of the physiological effects of the virus that were not related to the spike protein.

There were other areas where the author went off on speculation that is not sufficiently backed by evidence, and is too easy to refute. That doesn't make the statements wrong, but they are not valuable as a redpill and can be a turn off if someone who digs into it has specific knowledge. For those without specific knowledge it turns into fear mongering (with insufficient evidence) instead of informing. In either case though, it is minimal enough within the biology part, that I wouldn't worry about it.

I don't know what effect this whole report will have on someone without a decent knowledge of biology (at least a year or two of undergrad). I mean, its a ton of good information with decent sources from what I looked at. I didn't look at them all though, not even close. To really get into it would take a lot of time I don't have atm. I really wish they had hyperlinks to the specific references within the text, though the annotated bibliography is very useful for some of the more important things. If I were going to use this and it was really important I would probably go through all the references and either add hyperlinks, or add numerical references within the text.

I kinda wish they had left out the taking over the brain stuff. While it is good info, there is no evidence that ties those ideas to this vaccine, even if it is not hard to find that information as part of a larger agenda. The Great Reset stuff wasn't so bad though they could have done without it. That's important info imo, and probably easier to swallow than the mind control, though its probably better suited to a "part 2".

For anyone who understands biology, I think this is an excellent redpill. Probably the best I've seen. Unfortunately that excludes most doctors and almost everyone else who isn't already awake. For critical thinkers, it is also probably really good, though as I said, probably better without mind control. I don't want to keep harping on that. Except for tying it to the vaccine they do a pretty good job, but the relationship between the two has way too little evidence and doesn't help the case, possibly discrediting the rest of the evidence for someone not quite ready for that level of exposure.

Those are my thoughts. You could absolutely do worse than send that to people as a redpill. Overall I think it will be effective for anyone who is willing to read it. Most of the best stuff is in the beginning, so that builds credibility for when he goes full NWO.

Every redpiller knows you never go full NWO.

Thank you for bringing this report to my attention. It was very informative.

I think it has some flaws. I disagree with some of the specific conclusions about the biology, but not complete disagreement, more a disagreement of degree or scope, or really nitty gritty stuff. The overall biology was excellent and I learned a lot, especially about the specifics of the physiological effects of the virus that were not related to the spike protein.

There were other areas where the author went off on speculation that is not sufficiently backed by evidence, and is too easy to refute. That doesn't make the statements wrong, but they are not valuable as a redpill and can be a turn off if someone who digs into it has specific knowledge. For those without specific knowledge it turns into fear mongering (with insufficient evidence) instead of informing. In either case though, it is minimal enough, within the biology part, that I wouldn't worry about it.

I don't know what effect this whole report will have on someone without a decent knowledge of biology (at least a year or two of undergrad). I mean, its a ton of good information with decent sources from what I looked at. I didn't look at them all though, not even close. To really get into it would take a lot of time I don't have atm. I really wish they had hyperlinks to the specific references within the text, though the annotated bibliography is very useful for some of the more important things. If I were going to use this and it was really important I would probably go through all the references and either add hyperlinks, or add numerical references within the text.

I kinda wish they had left out the taking over the brain stuff. While it is good info, there is no evidence that ties those ideas to this vaccine, even if it is not hard to find that information as part of a larger agenda. The Great Reset stuff wasn't so bad though they could have done without it. That's important info imo, and probably easier to swallow than the mind control, though its probably better suited to a "part 2".

For anyone who understands biology, I think this is an excellent redpill. Probably the best I've seen. Unfortunately that excludes most doctors and almost everyone else who isn't already awake. For critical thinkers, it is also probably really good, though as I said, probably better without mind control. I don't want to keep harping on that. Except for tying it to the vaccine they do a pretty good job, but the relationship between the two has way too little evidence and doesn't help the case, possibly discrediting the rest of the evidence for someone not quite ready for that level of exposure.

Those are my thoughts. You could absolutely do worse than send that to people as a redpill. Overall I think it will be effective for anyone who is willing to read it. Most of the best stuff is in the beginning, so that builds credibility for when he goes full NWO.

Every redpiller knows you never go full NWO.