Geez Louise, Wily Coyote-Genius, thanks for posting this handy term "DARVO"! I've never heard it before but look forward to using it all over the place, as appropriate! So brief, so distinctive, so easy to holler!
There's a clever medical maxim which goes "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Lovely little saying, don't you think?
I've made a bit of a hobby out of examining the studies that show "no evidence" that MMR vaccines cause autism. It's amazing and amusing to see how many different ways people can *not look for evidence* while making a big show of *looking for evidence.*
The same "safe and effective" propaganda blitz was pushed across Western countries, like Australia. That indicates that the push was coming from a supranational source, i.e. that government employees were serving a foreign power, not their own citizens. That's treason.
The same blocking of all the exits was pushed across all Western countries: no alternatives (ivermectin/hydroxychloriquine/zinc/VitD etc), no exemptions, no appeals, no criticism, doctors were gagged.
These taxpayer-paid liars did not have data to support their claim that these experimental substances were safe. The did not have long term data. They did not have data for human fertility and carcinogenesis. Their scant data was provided by the pharma companies, like Pfizer with its already billions of dollars of fines for scientific fraud.
"Safe and effective" it is not, and was not. Crimes against humanity and treason, it is.
“Safe and effective” is marketing jargon. As someone who has spent entire career in advertising and marketing, the system has brilliantly captured this phrase. It is time, the public assumes “unsafe” until proven safe especially with new medicines and technologies.
Great post and kudos to your new tool to capture the changing “safe and effective” narrative. It will be studied for decades to come (at least, I hope).
This layperson has done a deep dive in the pandemic experience because of all the transpired events totally absent of logic. So many shocking discoveries to be shared, it is difficult to isolate any. The medical corruption is seeded with philanthropic trusts that use their tax free mobility to buy curriculum and influence from medical training institutions to Government. Rockefeller & Gates are examples. Regarding "vaccines", we should all remind ourselves that most all major pharmaceutical entities are habitual repeat convicted felons. Not suspected of nor charged with felons, but convicted of same. What could possibly go wrong with giving convicted felons the liability immunity uniquely attached to "vaccines" ? Is it possible the definition of a "vaccine" was unceremoniously changed to provide that liability immunity to gene therapy drugs ? I give credit to Dr. Ryan Cole for "92 years of flu vaccines and we still have flu".
The AZ injections were still used. They stopped promoting it here in UK but shipped it to India to be used there. Also they didn't take it pull it from the market (they made this very specific point) they just said to use Pfizer and Moderna instead. Those who received AZ in India after it was no longer used here should be very angry about this.
They then in UK made sure that people had a different brand of covid shot. Even at the time I wrote that this was a ploy to make it difficult to show liability against a particular manufacturer.
Sadly the public interprets the meaningless statement, “a lack of evidence”, to mean that no evidence for, or could exist about the intended subject being discussed. The fallacy is that the lack of evidence is not evidence itself.
The correct maxim is "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." (I've seen this credited to more than one person, and perhaps the first person to have said it isn't even known at this point?)
Same thing with the J&J (the makers of cancer causing baby powder) covid shots in the US. After a rash of major clotting deaths and disorders they just pulled it with zero acknowledgement of the injured and dead.
So in the USA, 50% of the magical safe and effective products disappeared in less than a year and never a word about it. Probably because the remaining two brands are an obvious bloodbath as well.
I just wrote a comment along the same lines. Not logical in any way to pull some of the dangerous injections and not others. There’s clearly an alternative motive.
I theorized they pulled the J&J because it wasn’t killing as many as the mRNA?! I know at least 6 people who took the J&J and none have had any side effects. The mRNAs side effects however, are numerous & horrifying.
The mRNA product is not a vaccine as we know vaccines - its has a totally different mode of operation and is far more invasive than what we know as vaccines. We have bought the vaccine sales talk hook line and sinker. Perhaps the first step to recover the situation is to stop using the word vaccine.
Righto, Brian Finney. I've heard the mRNA injections called a variety of things... pseudovaccines/pseudovax, clot-shots, spikeshots, kill-shots. Clot-shots seems to be the most popular and it's quite a good term, I think, because it's a constant reminder of one of the best-known potentially fatal adverse effects.
"Transfection is a procedure that introduces foreign nucleic acids into cells to produce genetically modified cells. Transfection is a powerful analytical tool for study of gene function and regulation and protein function. The introduced genetic materials (DNAs and RNAs) exist in cells either stably or transiently depending on the nature of the genetic materials "
Thanks for this information. It clarified the definition for me. Also, I hadn't known that transfection is used to study gene function and regulation, or protein function. Calling the mRNA shots "vaccines" was a lie and a way to exploit decades of successful propaganda that "Vaccines are safe and effective" - which is a lie in itself as I learned the hard way when my child was left disabled by two doses of vaccine (HepB and DTaP).
I was thinking more of a name that would better describe effect of the the mRNA product, but I don't have the relevant knowledge is it DNA modifier ? In the absence of that what about mRNA product, to use a non technical name would lead to ridicule, and there are plenty about that would ridicule
Another option to consider: "mRNA transfection injections." I like this term better than "mRNA gene therapy injections" because "therapy" has positive, pleasant connotations, while I think "transfection" will (justfiably) alarm people, as in "What do you mean, transfection? What am I being transfected with? Is this like an infection?"
also by not including " vaccine" or any effects, there can't be denial that it is actually a brand new liquid.
people know where it was put. and alot of people know what it does. maybe its a gentle way to lift the stone.
they think they " know" it was rigorously tested however. and " science" creates useful brand new liquids. But effects are apparent. The term isn't something that triggers immediate pushback and opposition, therefore allowing thought. And questios about a "brand new liquid" to surface. About what is actually happening in experience.
OK, but sticking with mRNA because Moderna has a plant in UK to produce future mRNA product what is a technical name for mRNA product, that could be used other than vaccine?
I usually refer to it as "Pfizer crap" or "Moderna garbage". Those two companies pumped out the mRNA poison death shots.
The Johnson & Johnson jabs used the same technology as AZ. I call them the JJ toxic shots. I know several people seriously injured by their trash jabs.
The AZ Vaccine didn't in fact disappear completely in mid 2021, it was pulled from the EU and the UK for the reasons given in the article, (and never available in America despite one of the manufacturing sites being in Maryland at "Emergent Biosolutions", the same factory as the (similar) J&J 'vaccine') but afterwards I believe it was continued to be manufactured at various sites around the world and shipped out for use in what AZ referred to as "mid and lower income countries". To hell with those people eh?
Well, Pete Wright, shipping vaccines "not safe enough to use in U.S." to third world countries for use there is a well-established nasty habit of U.S. vaccine makers. The whole cell pertussis vaccine that brain-damaged too many U.S. babies is an example. Another example is the live attenuated polio vaccine that caused paralytic polio too often. So why not do the same sort of thing with the AstraZeneca clotshots?
I agree but it predates the 1900s. From the very, very beginning - from Jenner and Pasteur - mass vaccination was associated with outbreaks of the underlying disease and riots and other unrest were common Asa result. The City of Leicester in the mid-late Victorian era refused to comply with smallpox vaccine mandates - they were mandated in the U.K. up to the 1940s - because they viewed the cure as worse than the disease and instead implemented strict hygiene and quarantine rules when cases were discovered. They were told repeatedly over 30 or 40 years by the usual mix of doctors, health officials and do-gooders that they would soon be consumed by an apocalyptic outbreak, which of course never came. It is startlingly reminiscent of the current era - the arguments, the language used and the threats. Plus ca change.
As an aside, I believe (I read) that it was Pasteur who, being a very clever man, first came up with the trick of lumping the vaccinated with the unvaccinated for 14 days post-vax, one assumes for the same reason as they do it today, viz. to disguise vaccine injury and manipulate the efficacy data.
This is my personal theory of why Astrazenica and J&J were taken off the market. In my mind, this was an attempt to accomplish two things. 1. To make it appear that there was some sort of oversight and safety precautions taking place to quell fears from the growing injuries and deaths overall and 2. To corral everyone into the mRNA technology.
The Astazenica and J&J were clearly not safe. But neither were any of the other “vaccines”, so why target these two? My conclusion above is the best explanation I can think of. I’m open to other theories or explanations though.
National Citizens Enquiry Canada /Rumble may help in your endeavours. Really eye opening information you have here. Thanks for the TRUTH about this fraud.Appreciate all your hard work! You Sir are on the right side of humanity.
It's called DARVO in psychological terms. Deny, Attack, Reverse victim and offender. It's a way to gaslight people. It is a real thing
Geez Louise, Wily Coyote-Genius, thanks for posting this handy term "DARVO"! I've never heard it before but look forward to using it all over the place, as appropriate! So brief, so distinctive, so easy to holler!
Lack of evidence proves nothing.
Lack of evidence is not evidence to the contrary.
Lack of evidence is of no consequence whatsoever.
Lack of evidence is very easy to come by. You simply don't look for any evidence.
There's a clever medical maxim which goes "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Lovely little saying, don't you think?
I've made a bit of a hobby out of examining the studies that show "no evidence" that MMR vaccines cause autism. It's amazing and amusing to see how many different ways people can *not look for evidence* while making a big show of *looking for evidence.*
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
That is absolutely true. Thanks for sharing.
I majored in archaeology 40 years ago. My Professor quoted that axiom constantly.
The same "safe and effective" propaganda blitz was pushed across Western countries, like Australia. That indicates that the push was coming from a supranational source, i.e. that government employees were serving a foreign power, not their own citizens. That's treason.
The same blocking of all the exits was pushed across all Western countries: no alternatives (ivermectin/hydroxychloriquine/zinc/VitD etc), no exemptions, no appeals, no criticism, doctors were gagged.
These taxpayer-paid liars did not have data to support their claim that these experimental substances were safe. The did not have long term data. They did not have data for human fertility and carcinogenesis. Their scant data was provided by the pharma companies, like Pfizer with its already billions of dollars of fines for scientific fraud.
"Safe and effective" it is not, and was not. Crimes against humanity and treason, it is.
“Safe and effective” is marketing jargon. As someone who has spent entire career in advertising and marketing, the system has brilliantly captured this phrase. It is time, the public assumes “unsafe” until proven safe especially with new medicines and technologies.
Great post and kudos to your new tool to capture the changing “safe and effective” narrative. It will be studied for decades to come (at least, I hope).
This layperson has done a deep dive in the pandemic experience because of all the transpired events totally absent of logic. So many shocking discoveries to be shared, it is difficult to isolate any. The medical corruption is seeded with philanthropic trusts that use their tax free mobility to buy curriculum and influence from medical training institutions to Government. Rockefeller & Gates are examples. Regarding "vaccines", we should all remind ourselves that most all major pharmaceutical entities are habitual repeat convicted felons. Not suspected of nor charged with felons, but convicted of same. What could possibly go wrong with giving convicted felons the liability immunity uniquely attached to "vaccines" ? Is it possible the definition of a "vaccine" was unceremoniously changed to provide that liability immunity to gene therapy drugs ? I give credit to Dr. Ryan Cole for "92 years of flu vaccines and we still have flu".
Thank you what you are doing will be invaluable.
The AZ injections were still used. They stopped promoting it here in UK but shipped it to India to be used there. Also they didn't take it pull it from the market (they made this very specific point) they just said to use Pfizer and Moderna instead. Those who received AZ in India after it was no longer used here should be very angry about this.
They then in UK made sure that people had a different brand of covid shot. Even at the time I wrote that this was a ploy to make it difficult to show liability against a particular manufacturer.
Can we call it murder yet?
Sadly the public interprets the meaningless statement, “a lack of evidence”, to mean that no evidence for, or could exist about the intended subject being discussed. The fallacy is that the lack of evidence is not evidence itself.
If I went looking for pig shit in a sty with my eyes closed then I’d find none.
Same principles have been used to dart people to death, they don’t know what folk have died from they declare but they know it’s not the junk jabs.
The correct maxim is "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." (I've seen this credited to more than one person, and perhaps the first person to have said it isn't even known at this point?)
Same thing with the J&J (the makers of cancer causing baby powder) covid shots in the US. After a rash of major clotting deaths and disorders they just pulled it with zero acknowledgement of the injured and dead.
So in the USA, 50% of the magical safe and effective products disappeared in less than a year and never a word about it. Probably because the remaining two brands are an obvious bloodbath as well.
I just wrote a comment along the same lines. Not logical in any way to pull some of the dangerous injections and not others. There’s clearly an alternative motive.
I theorized they pulled the J&J because it wasn’t killing as many as the mRNA?! I know at least 6 people who took the J&J and none have had any side effects. The mRNAs side effects however, are numerous & horrifying.
Thank you Phil
What a service to humanity
The mRNA product is not a vaccine as we know vaccines - its has a totally different mode of operation and is far more invasive than what we know as vaccines. We have bought the vaccine sales talk hook line and sinker. Perhaps the first step to recover the situation is to stop using the word vaccine.
I call it The Injection
Righto, Brian Finney. I've heard the mRNA injections called a variety of things... pseudovaccines/pseudovax, clot-shots, spikeshots, kill-shots. Clot-shots seems to be the most popular and it's quite a good term, I think, because it's a constant reminder of one of the best-known potentially fatal adverse effects.
mRNA shots are technically transfections. That is an actual biological term for a procedure that has been around for many years - (see link from 2010 ) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2911531/
"Transfection is a procedure that introduces foreign nucleic acids into cells to produce genetically modified cells. Transfection is a powerful analytical tool for study of gene function and regulation and protein function. The introduced genetic materials (DNAs and RNAs) exist in cells either stably or transiently depending on the nature of the genetic materials "
Sold as "vaccines".
Thanks for this information. It clarified the definition for me. Also, I hadn't known that transfection is used to study gene function and regulation, or protein function. Calling the mRNA shots "vaccines" was a lie and a way to exploit decades of successful propaganda that "Vaccines are safe and effective" - which is a lie in itself as I learned the hard way when my child was left disabled by two doses of vaccine (HepB and DTaP).
So sorry about your child 😞
Thank you.
I call them the junk jabs and refer to those who took them as darted.
"Junk jabs" and "darted"
Perfect!
Lol
I was thinking more of a name that would better describe effect of the the mRNA product, but I don't have the relevant knowledge is it DNA modifier ? In the absence of that what about mRNA product, to use a non technical name would lead to ridicule, and there are plenty about that would ridicule
Some of the docs are calling the Pfizer and Moderna products "the mRNA gene therapy injections."
Therapy. Interesting abuse of the English language. mRNA genotoxin is more accurate.
Yeah, I grit my teeth when I hear the clot-shots aka spikeshots called "gene therapy."
"mRNA genotoxin injections" - Wow, very good, I like it! Accurate, and sounds like a civilized person talking.
I myself, being uncivilized, was thinking last night that a good replacement for "mRNA gene therapy" would be "mRNA gene f*ckery."
Oh I'm with you Kayla. When I'm talking to friends and family your expression will be the one I'll use.
Thanks Kayla, that is just what I had in mind, but wasn't sure it was gene therapy. I shall use the words for now!
Another option to consider: "mRNA transfection injections." I like this term better than "mRNA gene therapy injections" because "therapy" has positive, pleasant connotations, while I think "transfection" will (justfiably) alarm people, as in "What do you mean, transfection? What am I being transfected with? Is this like an infection?"
I usually call them experimental gene therapy injections when I can be bothered typing all that
" brand new liquid" might reframe away from any notion of sameness to anything either injected or not, ever..
also by not including " vaccine" or any effects, there can't be denial that it is actually a brand new liquid.
people know where it was put. and alot of people know what it does. maybe its a gentle way to lift the stone.
they think they " know" it was rigorously tested however. and " science" creates useful brand new liquids. But effects are apparent. The term isn't something that triggers immediate pushback and opposition, therefore allowing thought. And questios about a "brand new liquid" to surface. About what is actually happening in experience.
But the AZ jab was technically a bit different from the mRNA jabs. Uses DNA with an ape adenoviral vector. Still lethal though.
OK, but sticking with mRNA because Moderna has a plant in UK to produce future mRNA product what is a technical name for mRNA product, that could be used other than vaccine?
mRNAids.
I usually refer to it as "Pfizer crap" or "Moderna garbage". Those two companies pumped out the mRNA poison death shots.
The Johnson & Johnson jabs used the same technology as AZ. I call them the JJ toxic shots. I know several people seriously injured by their trash jabs.
The AZ Vaccine didn't in fact disappear completely in mid 2021, it was pulled from the EU and the UK for the reasons given in the article, (and never available in America despite one of the manufacturing sites being in Maryland at "Emergent Biosolutions", the same factory as the (similar) J&J 'vaccine') but afterwards I believe it was continued to be manufactured at various sites around the world and shipped out for use in what AZ referred to as "mid and lower income countries". To hell with those people eh?
https://www.astrazeneca.com/what-science-can-do/topics/technologies/pushing-boundaries-to-deliver-covid-19-vaccine-accross-the-globe.html
Right. We ship our toxic jabs to Africa and India and then wonder why they don't trust us.
Well, Pete Wright, shipping vaccines "not safe enough to use in U.S." to third world countries for use there is a well-established nasty habit of U.S. vaccine makers. The whole cell pertussis vaccine that brain-damaged too many U.S. babies is an example. Another example is the live attenuated polio vaccine that caused paralytic polio too often. So why not do the same sort of thing with the AstraZeneca clotshots?
The Gates Foundation is also very fond of using developing countries to test new vaccines and drugs (with devastating results of course). :(
AZ was made in Australia. It would be interesting to know the timeline use there.
Good article, thank you. I'd like to add that no vaccines, not one of them, is or ever have been 'safe and effective'. We have been slowly poisoned since the early 1900's when our healing protocols were coopted by the filthy rich. https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:6771cd2c-a24a-4371-89f4-8e52b751379c
I agree but it predates the 1900s. From the very, very beginning - from Jenner and Pasteur - mass vaccination was associated with outbreaks of the underlying disease and riots and other unrest were common Asa result. The City of Leicester in the mid-late Victorian era refused to comply with smallpox vaccine mandates - they were mandated in the U.K. up to the 1940s - because they viewed the cure as worse than the disease and instead implemented strict hygiene and quarantine rules when cases were discovered. They were told repeatedly over 30 or 40 years by the usual mix of doctors, health officials and do-gooders that they would soon be consumed by an apocalyptic outbreak, which of course never came. It is startlingly reminiscent of the current era - the arguments, the language used and the threats. Plus ca change.
As an aside, I believe (I read) that it was Pasteur who, being a very clever man, first came up with the trick of lumping the vaccinated with the unvaccinated for 14 days post-vax, one assumes for the same reason as they do it today, viz. to disguise vaccine injury and manipulate the efficacy data.
Yes, well put. I have another article that addresses Pasteur's manipulating the efficacy data. Medical data has been skewed forever hasn't it? https://acrobat.adobe.com/id/urn:aaid:sc:VA6C2:4b9126ec-66d0-44c6-af8b-4ab9d69305df
This is my personal theory of why Astrazenica and J&J were taken off the market. In my mind, this was an attempt to accomplish two things. 1. To make it appear that there was some sort of oversight and safety precautions taking place to quell fears from the growing injuries and deaths overall and 2. To corral everyone into the mRNA technology.
The Astazenica and J&J were clearly not safe. But neither were any of the other “vaccines”, so why target these two? My conclusion above is the best explanation I can think of. I’m open to other theories or explanations though.
National Citizens Enquiry Canada /Rumble may help in your endeavours. Really eye opening information you have here. Thanks for the TRUTH about this fraud.Appreciate all your hard work! You Sir are on the right side of humanity.
Great to have you back, Phil!
Welcome back! And thank you!
I'm so glad you are safe and, undoubtedly, effetive!