35:00 Viruses can carry Nanotechnology via Liquid crystals, man made and natural (think tobacco mosiac virus).
Bill Gates Explains that the Covid Vaccine will Use Experimental Technology and Permanently Alter Your DNA
Inactivated and live vaccines are what we consider “traditional” approaches. There are a number of COVID-19 vaccine candidates of both types, and for good reason: they’re well-established. We know how to test and manufacture them.
The downside is that they’re time-consuming to make. There’s a ton of material in each dose of a vaccine. (CDC vaccine excipients) Most of that material is biological, which means you have to grow it. That takes time, unfortunately.
That’s why I’m particularly excited by two new approaches that some of the candidates are taking: RNA and DNA vaccines. If one of these new approaches pans out, we’ll likely be able to get vaccines out to the whole world much faster. (For the sake of simplicity, I’m only going to explain RNA vaccines. DNA vaccines are similar, just with a different type of genetic material and method of administration.)
Here’s how an RNA vaccine works: rather than injecting a pathogen’s antigen into your body, you instead give the body the genetic code needed to produce that antigen itself. When the antigens appear on the outside of your cells, your immune system attacks them—and learns how to defeat future intruders in the process. You essentially turn your body into its own vaccine manufacturing unit.
Because RNA vaccines let your body do most of the work, they don’t require much material. That makes them much faster to manufacture. There’s a catch, though: we don’t know for sure yet if RNA is a viable platform for vaccines. Since COVID would be the first RNA vaccine out of the gate, we have to prove both that the platform itself works and that it creates immunity. It’s a bit like building your computer system and your first piece of software at the same time.” ~ Bill Gates
COMMENT: So, the rushed Covid-19 vaccine will not be a traditional vaccine. It will not be tested in any significant or standard capacity given the present state of emergency. It will be administered by the military, and it everyone on the planet will have to take it.
VLA Comment: Not mentioned is that the new Covid-19 vaccine will include a nanotechnology delivery
MIT chemical engineers have now developed a new series of lipid nanoparticles to deliver such vaccines. They showed that the particles trigger efficient production of the protein encoded by the RNA, and they also behave like an “adjuvant,” further boosting the vaccine effectiveness
Science daily paper Health Risks Of Nanotechnology: How Nanoparticles Can Cause Lung Damage, And How The Damage Can Be Blocked.
Excerpt from the Science Daily
The US government safety research states nanomaterials may interact with the human body in different ways than more conventional materials, due to their extremely small size. For example, studies have established that the comparatively large surface area of inhaled nanoparticles can increase their toxicity. Such small particles can penetrate deep into the lungs and may move to other parts of the body, including the liver and brain. (https://www.ohsrep.org.au/nanotechnology_-_a_new_hazard)
VLA COMMENT: Is the Covid-19 virus itself enriched with nanoparticles? Is that why we are seeing damage in the lungs…fibrosis, thombosis and the non effective drive to use ventilators.
For more on the possibility that both the vaccine and the manipulated Covid-19 virus contains nanobiological technolocy see:
What are the possible dangers of nanotechnology?
Although most of the press coverage has been on the dangers of ‘nano-goo’ such as self-replicating particles that get out of control, or ‘nano-robots’, the real risks are much more simple, and real. The miniature size of nanomaterials and the way their surfaces are modified to increase the ease with which they can interact with biological systems – the very characteristics that make them attractive for applications in medicine and industry – makes nanomaterials potentially damaging for humans and the environment.
Nanoparticles are likely to be dangerous for three main reasons:
Nanoparticles may damage the lungs. We know that ‘ultra fine’ particles from diesel machines, power plants and incinerators can cause considerable damage to human lungs. This is both because of their size (as they can get deep into the lungs) and also because they carry other chemicals including metals and hydrocarbons in with them.
Nanoparticles can get into the body through the skin, lungs and digestive system. This may help create ‘free radicals’ which can cause cell damage and damage to the DNA. There is also concern that once nanoparticles are in the bloodstream they will be able to cross the blood-brain barrier.
The human body has developed a tolerance to most naturally occurring elements and molecules that it has contact with. It has no natural immunity to new substances and is more likely to find them toxic.
The danger of contact with nanoparticles is not just speculation. As more research is undertaken, concerns increase. Here are some of the recent findings:
- some nanoparticles cause lung damage in rats. Several studies have shown that carbon nanotubes, which are similar in shape to asbestos fibres, cause mesothelioma in the lungs of rats (see below)
- other nanoparticles have been shown to lead to brain damage in fish and dogs
- a German study found clear evidence that if discrete nanometer diameter particles were deposited in the nasal region (in rodents in this case), they completely circumvented the blood/brain barrier, and travelled up the olfactory nerves straight into the brain
- inhaled carbon nanotubes can suppress the immune system by affecting the function of T cells, a type of white blood cell that organises the immune system to fight infections.
- Dangerous coronavirus experiments led by Dr. Anthony Fauci went on in the U.S. until 2014 when President Obama ordered the work to stop due to safety violations at three biolabs. Fauci then moved the operations to the Wuhan lab in China and continued coronavirus
- experiments right up until the time that the COVID-19 pandemic occurred
- The COVID-19 pandemic may have been generated to ensure that dangerous coronavirus research would continue and receive fresh funding
- To accelerate a virus’ evolution, you grow it in several types of animal tissue, such as pangolin kidney tissue followed by feral monkey kidney cells and mouse brain tissue
- Each time you transfer the virus to another animal tissue, mutations occur. There’s also evidence showing these animal cell lines are contaminated with coronaviruses and retroviruses, which end up contaminating the vaccines grown in them
- Coronavirus vaccine development has proven very difficult over the past 30 years, as the vaccines create very robust antibody response, but when the patient encounters the wild virus, they become severely ill and often die — a reaction known as paradoxical immune response or paradoxical immune enhancement
VLA Comment: An important point in this video that needs to be magnified…THE BAYH-DOLE ACT. Please read…
The Law of Unintended Consequences by Clifton Leaf (2005)
VLA COMMENT: Enacted on December 12, 1980, the Bayh-Dole Act created a uniform patent policy among the many federal agencies that fund research, enabling small businesses and non-profit organizations, including universities, to retain title to inventions made under federally-funded research programs. In other words, heretofore, any research paid for by Grants belonged to the taxpayer. The Bayh Dole act gave the royalties to the Universities and the researchers with a requirement that they find a pharmaceutical company to market it. Thus, the pharmaceutical companies now had FREE research and development arms paid for by the taxpayer. And what more…the universities and the researches greedily coveted their findings no longer open sharing with other universities and scientists to find real cures and advance for humanity. It is all about the money.
A clear-sighted judge chose to read the law and saw that NY law clearly gives physicians the right to issue a medical exemption to vaccines and other procedures. NY DoH had issued a directive and a form to physicians which appeared to compel them to follow the vaccine exemption guidelines of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). As it happens, only people with prior anaphylactic reactions to vaccines qualify according to ACIP.
Unvaccinated people are automatically disqualified (no prior vaccine reaction is possible in the absence of any vaccination), as are those with other reasons for medical exemptions, such as genetic mutations, Gillian Barre Syndrome, etc., etc.
Gates’ obsession with vaccines seems to be fueled by a conviction to save the world with technology.
Promising his share of $450 million of $1.2 billion to eradicate Polio, Gates took control of India’s National Technical Advisory Group on Immunization (NTAGI) which mandated up to 50 doses (Table 1) of polio vaccines through overlapping immunization programs to children before the age of five. Indian doctors blame the Gates campaign for a devastating non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP) epidemic that paralyzed 490,000 children beyond expected rates between 2000 and 2017. In 2017, the Indian government dialed back Gates’ vaccine regimen and asked Gates and his vaccine policies to leave India. NPAFP rates dropped precipitously.
In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) reluctantly admitted that the global explosion in polio is predominantly vaccine strain. The most frightening epidemics in Congo, Afghanistan, and the Philippines, are all linked to vaccines. In fact, by 2018, 70% of global polio cases were vaccine strain.
In 2014, the Gates Foundation funded tests of experimental HPV vaccines, developed by Glaxo Smith Kline (GSK) and Merck, on 23,000 young girls in remote Indian provinces. Approximately 1,200 suffered severe side effects, including autoimmune and fertility disorders. Seven died. Indian government investigations charged that Gates-funded researchers committed pervasive ethical violations: pressuring vulnerable village girls into the trial, bullying parents, forging consent forms, and refusing medical care to the injured girls. The case is now in the country’s Supreme Court.
In 2010, the Gates Foundation funded a phase 3 trial of GSK’s experimental malaria vaccine, killing 151 African infants and causing serious adverse effects including paralysis, seizure, and febrile convulsions to 1,048 of the 5,949 children.
During Gates’ 2002 MenAfriVac campaign in Sub-Saharan Africa, Gates’ operatives forcibly vaccinated thousands of African children against meningitis. Approximately 50 of the 500 children vaccinated developed paralysis. South African newspapers complained, “We are guinea pigs for the drug makers.” Nelson Mandela’s former Senior Economist, Professor Patrick Bond, describes Gates’ philanthropic practices as “ruthless and immoral.”
In 2010, Gates committed $10 billion to the WHO saying, “We must make this the decade of vaccines.” A month later, Gates said in a Ted Talk that new vaccines “could reduce population”. In 2014, Kenya’s Catholic Doctors Association accused the WHO of chemically sterilizing millions of unwilling Kenyan women with a “tetanus” vaccine campaign. Independent labs found a sterility formula in every vaccine tested. After denying the charges, WHO finally admitted it had been developing the sterility vaccines for over a decade. Similar accusations came from Tanzania, Nicaragua, Mexico, and the Philippines.
A 2017 study (Morgenson et. al. 2017) showed that WHO’s popular DTP vaccine is killing more African children than the diseases it prevents. DTP-vaccinated girls suffered 10x the death rate of children who had not yet received the vaccine. WHO has refused to recall the lethal vaccine which it forces upon tens of millions of African children annually.
Global public health advocates around the world accuse Gates of steering WHO’s agenda away from the projects that are proven to curb infectious diseases: clean water, hygiene, nutrition, and economic development. The Gates Foundation only spends about $650 million of its $5 billion dollar budget on these areas. They say he has diverted agency resources to serve his personal philosophy that good health only comes in a syringe.
In addition to using his philanthropy to control WHO, UNICEF, GAVI, and PATH, Gates funds a private pharmaceutical company that manufactures vaccines, and additionally is donating $50 million to 12 pharmaceutical companies to speed up development of a coronavirus vaccine. In his recent media appearances, Gates appears confident that the Covid-19 crisis will now give him the opportunity to force his dictatorial vaccine programs on American children.