Bad Cattitude | 13 Aug 2022
and bolsters concerns about mRNA and cancer
when assessing the filings of anything from companies to pharmaceuticals much of the interesting information is conveyed in the changes. what has been added? what has been taken out?
you catch a company taking text out of a 10-K in some friday night filing and you know they wanted to bury it.
well buckle up, because the CDC just dramatically changed their claims about mRNA vaccine safety and this one is a doozie.
this is the current claim. it can be found HERE.
but if we rewind to late july using the wayback machine, we get THIS. notice anything that used to be in this “facts” assemblage but that has been “disappeared”?
a helpful internet feline has added a red box here to assist you.
this is a BIG deal as a large part of the safety claim around these drugs was initially predicated on the ideas that
- they remained localized around the injection site.
- they were rapidly cleared by the body and did not stick around to generate lasting effects.
this was all in service of the basic claim that systemic effects from mRNA innoculant injection would be minor and transitory.
point 1 has long been proven to be false and was known (but not disclosed) from animal data that predates EUA and was never even tested in humans pre-approval despite dire need. it was rapidly abandoned.
point 2 has long been shown to be false as well and it appears that even the CDC is no longer willing to make this attestation.
this is a very big deal because the spike protein produced by these vaccines is FAR more dangerous in a great many ways than the spike from covid itself and this is even more true today when compared to more moderate variants like omicron.
the vaccines are highly CG enriched and this is a strong reason to presume that having them linger around for long periods will increase the risk of, accelerate, or outright cause cancer, heart damage, and a number of other extreme ill effects.
the other day, i wrote about the manner in which mRNA vaccines look to be suppressing not only innate immune function, but also the mechanisms by which pathogens and cancers are detected. this piece a…Read more3 months ago · 660 likes · 472 comments · el gato malo
lots of folks have been standing on chairs screaming about this for ages. it seems implausible that the CDC has not heard them.
unfortunately, it looks increasingly plausible that the CDC is trying to prevent the data from getting out as they try to step away from their claims of systemic safety.
the CDC has stopped reporting on cancers (malignant neoplasms) and a variety of heart disorders.
it’s been 71 days since this “went offline” for “system upgrades.”
Ethical Skeptic ☀ @EthicalSkepticDay 7⃣0⃣ of the System Upgrade data compromise MMWR Week 30 posting (due 10 Aug) is late… We saw in spades yesterday that an ACAN problem exists in American Citizen health right now, wrt Cancer and Conductive Heart Disorders. I think the CDC knows we have a problem. August 12th 2022186 Retweets504 Likes
and now, they pull the claim that mRNA and spike proteins from the vaccines (the exact thing that would cause this) are rapidly cleared from the body.
that’s a worrying confluence and starts to feel like an agency whose credibility is already in deep trouble playing “hide the ball.”
this sure seems like the folks that would have the data changing their tune but not telling anyone why.
how is this not suppressing information and staring right at the floorboards where the body is buried?
enquiring gatos would like to know.
the CDC has made claim after claim about these products that has been proven false.
they will stop transmission and be a dead end for the virus. injected material stays local. side effects are minor and transitory. 2 doses is fully vaccinated. the list goes on and on.
sure, mRNA therapeutics have been studied for decades, but we also failed to adopt any.
we did not use them because they were so ineffective and so dangerous.
these products were literally abandoned as oncology treatment because they were too toxic.
this idea that some longstanding body of work that makes them well characterized and safe in humans has been untrue since the beginning and most of it was rank speculation on the basis of NO studies, especially around bio-distribution to organs and duration of residence in them and the rest of the body which is, of course, a big part of cancer, heart, liver, ovary, testes, and auto-immune risk.
the CDC have ignored a clear immune suppression window post dosing, manipulated records to make vaccines look as though they stop covid and/or mitigate severity, and ignored strong, credible data that the vaxxed and boosted are getting covid at multiples the rate of the unvaxxed.
and honestly, as gatopal™ and fellow anthropomorphic animal kbirb outlines here, claims about “does not penetrate/effect cell nucleus” may be yet another domino to fall.
the fact that nearly 2 years after launch this question is not well answered is an appalling outcome that speaks to incredibly dangerous corners being cut.
(to be clear, i’m not convinced i know the answer here, but i am convinced that genuine grounds for debate and research exist.)
KBirb @birb_kOne of these can’t be true: 1) CDC: “mRNA “produces a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein” that “sits on the cell surface”. 2) U of Stockholm Study: “SARS–CoV–2 Spike Impairs DNA Damage Repair and Inhibits V(D)J Recombination In Vitro”. Let’s look at both… 1/November 11th 20211,530 Retweets3,029 Likes
the CDC keep getting it wrong and in response have:
- refused to even assess the VAERS data for risk as required by their own mandate
- quietly removed key safety claims from their website
- stopped reporting cancer and heart data that seems directly related to that claim
- and kept doubling down on the need to vaccinate and claims of safety despite so many other governments and health agencies stepping back from booster claims, admitting they made a mistake ever vaccinating children at all, and banning future jabs for under 18’s.
this is not public health, it’s public manipulation.
and some seriously pointy questions about “just whose side is this agency on?” and “precisely what role are they trying to fulfill these days?” appear more than warranted.
they appear vital.