It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Biggest Story Not Being Talked About - The Pfizer Whistleblower

page: 2
85
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: atlantiswatusi



Actually what the mainstream media does 24/7 is fear mongering. Whats being done here is independent journalism and aggregation of information. What you're doing is purposely ignoring it to troll or spread disinfo.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

So when Pfizer completed their expedited phase III clinical trial, skipping animal model studies, and doing so within a 6-month window, for something that would normally take 5-10 years, we all waited in anticipation for the miracle cure.



Though I can agree with you 100% on how wrong the draconian way the Goverment is treating all this your statement above is wrong and nothing more than a false statement that plays itself over and over on the net.

First human trials with mRNA was in 2013
Its been around for 30+ years
The way it works they don't need 5 to 10 years as maybe once was in days of old, it isn't 1940 anymore...
Phase 3 trials had about 10 times the people than normal Phase 3 trails...
mRNA isn't a drug, its a natural recurring molecule that only makes protein, nothing more or less, and NOT gene therapy in anyway.
It last 1 day and the protein about 2 weeks tops, so long term effects are rare compared to real drugs.



Thats actually not true. The drug they created last year would normally go through many years of testing. Just because you tested a concept in the past doesn't mean it would count toward a new drug that's been developed. Furthermore ever attempt they made at creating an mRNA drug for the original SARS killed every single animal it was tested on. This was nothing like a normal timeline for clinical trials and even if it was, they faked the data so it doesn't matter how long it was, the data can't be trusted. They already got caught for this in the past. Fool me once...
edit on 23-11-2021 by v1rtu0s0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

Thats actually not true. The drug they created last year would normally go through many years of testing. Just because you tested a concept in the past doesn't mean it would count toward a new drug that's been developed. Furthermore ever attempt they made at creating an mRNA drug for the original SARS killed every single animal it was tested on. This was nothing like a normal timeline for clinical trials and even if it was, they faked the data so it doesn't matter how long it was, the data can't be trusted. They already got caught for this in the past. Fool me once...


Testing isn't about how long it takes, its about the viability of humans in many cases to test. In 2013 mRNA was used for rabies using 100 people with 300 shots, as example of maybe how hard it is to find suitable subjects, but that wasn't the case with COVID as they could find and did use 10,000s in the trails.

mRNA isn't a drug, so why do people keep saying it over and over. The body has like 10,000 different RNA that do simple tasks like make many different kinds of proteins. Its about as natural process as one can get, and in this case the mRNA makes only one protein that the body sees as an invader and reacts to.

The mRNA process for Rabies, Ebola, COVID etc etc all are the same process to produce a protein that the body reacts to so that when the real thing hits the body is ready. Prior to COVID they were testing mRNA on the heavy hitters for over a decade and so switching to COVID is an easy task as the process was already in place for a good while.

The reality is it is very elegant in how it performs compared to actual drugs that can totally screw up your body.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 12:01 PM
link   
a reply to: oddnutz
Do the mrna vanccines contain aluminium? I am not sure about that, but I don't think so.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

But first, let's rewind the clock 12 years. In 2009 Pfizer paid the largest criminal fine in history for paying off doctors, and faking trial results, among other things:

www.justice.gov...



No surprise there and am sure a nice slush fund was set aside for precisely that outcome.




Or that according to a report that was released last summer, the global elite have up to 32 TRILLION dollars stashed in offshore banks around the globe, which can fund lawsuit after lawsuit against the people who are tired of being poisoned.

Who are Really the Top Shareholders of Monsanto?




Just posted this pic over on another thread but thought it deserved a place here.









posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 12:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: zandra
a reply to: oddnutz
Do the mrna vanccines contain aluminium? I am not sure about that, but I don't think so.



Aluminum is a common ingredient in vaccines.

Smart Hydra nano particles, not so much.

New and unproven as to long term safety.
The Hydra is what many people are allergic to.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari
Fear not

They are working on aerosolised vaccines and vaccines in food now.....


God bless us all



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Fauci says otherwise. But I guess he is a liar so you can't believe everything he says anyway.

Fact of the matter is they are doing Trials along side real world subjects. That's not how Trials work, it's either ready for use or still in testing, right now its still in testing and it's the largest human trials in history. Nothing anyone can say will convince me otherwise and if they think you can have a trial for a drug AND distribute that same one to millions of people and label the process differently then those people have some serious issues with logic, you can't do both at the same time, that would be a literal contradiction to what a trial is and what the already tested product is.
edit on 23-11-2021 by jidnum because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: jidnum
a reply to: Xtrozero

Fauci says otherwise. But I guess he is a liar so you can't believe everything he says anyway.



Some pretty eyepopping revelations about the man in this new interview.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: karl 12


Sickening!



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 09:18 PM
link   
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I am normally pro-vax but this is really interesting and sounds as if there was some malfeasance in pushing through the trials and ignoring issues.

Thank you for this. It is one of the few anti-vax stories that seems to have merit.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 09:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero Elegant? Oh, please. If you call out of control inflammation that often targets the heart muscle from an ill conceived and rushed out, stand alone spiked protein that after it’s initial inflammatory cascade then sticks around and invites other naturally occurring proteins in the body to participate in all kinds of autoimmune attacks…elegant! Nothing screwed up about that, lol.



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

You can still, like most of us,
be pro - pre 2021 definition - Vax
-- pro - pre oct 2009 definition - government Pandemic Powers
-- pro - pre June 2020 definition - for Herd immunity

Unfortunately most people didn't get the updated information so are acting on misinformation.

In 2020 People dying with a SARS-COV-2 infection totaled 1.8 million.
Which out of the 59.8 million people that died in total during 2020 isn't many.
A lot of the 59.8 million probably could have been saved if only the money and medical services where mobilized 1/10th of what wealth individuals have been paid to save us from the SARS-COV-2 cases.

How many people could have been feed if we didn't spend the money on testing the asymptomatic?



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 10:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I am normally pro-vax but this is really interesting and sounds as if there was some malfeasance in pushing through the trials and ignoring issues.

Thank you for this. It is one of the few anti-vax stories that seems to have merit.



It's not anti vaxx it's pro truth. The term "anti vaxx" is government propaganda designed to mislead people. Just about everyone has had plenty of vaccinations, but question a new experimental one Thats like saying someone is anti car. You mean a pinto or telsa?

Watch this:

brandnewtube.com...


Here's the peer reviewed study:

www.ahajournals.org...



posted on Nov, 23 2021 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: puzzled2


More people died in the US in 2021 from covid than 2020. In 2020 we had 0% percent vaccination rate, in 2021 we now have 60% in the US. 60% should at least put a dent in that death count. Instead it's increased.



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 01:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

Thats actually not true. The drug they created last year would normally go through many years of testing. Just because you tested a concept in the past doesn't mean it would count toward a new drug that's been developed. Furthermore ever attempt they made at creating an mRNA drug for the original SARS killed every single animal it was tested on. This was nothing like a normal timeline for clinical trials and even if it was, they faked the data so it doesn't matter how long it was, the data can't be trusted. They already got caught for this in the past. Fool me once...


Testing isn't about how long it takes, its about the viability of humans in many cases to test. In 2013 mRNA was used for rabies using 100 people with 300 shots, as example of maybe how hard it is to find suitable subjects, but that wasn't the case with COVID as they could find and did use 10,000s in the trails.

mRNA isn't a drug, so why do people keep saying it over and over. The body has like 10,000 different RNA that do simple tasks like make many different kinds of proteins. Its about as natural process as one can get, and in this case the mRNA makes only one protein that the body sees as an invader and reacts to.

The mRNA process for Rabies, Ebola, COVID etc etc all are the same process to produce a protein that the body reacts to so that when the real thing hits the body is ready. Prior to COVID they were testing mRNA on the heavy hitters for over a decade and so switching to COVID is an easy task as the process was already in place for a good while.

The reality is it is very elegant in how it performs compared to actual drugs that can totally screw up your body.


Refresh my memory here. What cell receptor does this artificially generated spike protein, emulating that which is used by the actual virus, target? Is it ACE2?



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 02:24 AM
link   
so in your medial opinion, why would they seal the files for 75 years ?
a reply to: Xtrozero



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 03:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I am normally pro-vax but this is really interesting and sounds as if there was some malfeasance in pushing through the trials and ignoring issues.

Thank you for this. It is one of the few anti-vax stories that seems to have merit.


You are finally seeing the truth? u do know Pfizer did something in Africa right? and then tried to pass that same thing to Europe a few years back a drug that failed in their trails.

The fact that they want to keep the data for 70+ years is not good look.Its worse that there are some that want to push the mRNA onto other stuff.
edit on 24-11-2021 by HawkEyi because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 07:33 AM
link   

edit on CWed, 24 Nov 2021 07:37:33 -0600am2021-11-24T07:37:33-06:00kamWednesdayam2021-11-24T07:37:33-06:00k by Crackalackin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2021 @ 08:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I am normally pro-vax but this is really interesting and sounds as if there was some malfeasance in pushing through the trials and ignoring issues.

Thank you for this. It is one of the few anti-vax stories that seems to have merit.



It's not anti vaxx it's pro truth. The term "anti vaxx" is government propaganda designed to mislead people. Just about everyone has had plenty of vaccinations, but question a new experimental one Thats like saying someone is anti car. You mean a pinto or telsa?

Watch this:

brandnewtube.com...


Here's the peer reviewed study:

www.ahajournals.org...


Ya pretty much. I get called an anti vaxxer all the time and i'm like bruh, im not anti vax, im just anti new mrna covid shot. I want data and apparently they're still collecting it and I prefer not to be part of that case study aside from being the control group.



new topics

top topics



 
85
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join