5 Filters

Three excellent videos on the Covid vaccines (+ Ivermectin)

Covid
,
#1

I’ve watched a few videos now on whether the spike protein created by the various covid vaccines are dangerous, and whether they accumulate in (for example) the ovaries in women.

Here are a couple of videos by Dr Mobeen Syed which, in my opinion, are far and away the best explanations of how the vaccines work and whether or not they are dangerous. He seems very clear (albeit pretty technical) and, to me at least, very convincing.

Just to be clear, he comes to the conclusion that the spike proteins generated by the vaccines are not dangerous, and that there is really no evidence that they accumulate in the ovaries (or anywhere else). I went and rewatched some of the Dark Horse podcasts (the Weinstens) on this issue, and notice that they refer to the same Nature article that Dr Syed uses below and the same japan data, but they carefully avoid understanding the implications that are clearly laid out in the paper. They also make the same elementary error of confusing lipid nanoparticles with the spike protein even though they both have PhDs in biology. I find that interesting…

1 - Spike Protein Cytotoxicity

An excellent introduction into the spike protein generated by the vaccines

2 - SARS-COV-2 Spikes in Ovaries?

A review of the data from Japan that was discussed (for example) on the recent Brett Weinsten podcast. Apparently the data show only the accumulation of lipid nanoparticles, and have nothing to say about accumulation of spike proteins

3 - The view from Israel on vaccines, and Ivermectin

An interesting discussion of what the view from Israel (the most vaccinated country in the world so far) is, and a discussion of a recent double-blind, randomised placebo controlled study of Ivermectin (hint - Ivermectin works, of course). An interesting throw-away from this discussion is that Merck arguing against Ivermectin (which they make) has led to Merck getting a 1.2 billion USD payout from the US for a new drug that might have some benefit in treating Covid. Fuckers.

1 Like
More Pfizer perfidy
One year anniversary of 5-Filters
#2

Technocrat defends technology shock horror.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/mobeen-syed-8ab9312/

#3

Indeed. However he didn’t author the three published papers in Nature on the vaccines, the Japan data on the nanoparticles, or the Ivermectin study. And he does a far better job of understanding and explaining those papers than anyone else I’ve seen so far.

Like or don’t like the presenter, but at least have a look at the data the he presents.

#4

Hi @KarenEliot , I couldn’t see anything on the site I’m obviously not linked in!

cheers

#5

Hi @PontiusPrimate , thanks for the links - to be honest my ceiling is not high enough to allow the number of cold towels I would need to take this stuff on board.
My impression is that this whole business of the vaccines is not settled science - it seems clear from the limited official data in the US, UK and Europe that the side effects are in the millions and that deaths are in the tens of thousands, so something is wrong, surely.
Two things struck me :

  • these are uncensored Youtube videos, at the moment I find it difficult to find any anti-vaccine material on this platform
  • I got up to 25 minutes in the third video and I got the impression that the questions put to Schwartz were softball generalisations for which a pro-vaxer could easily respond anecdotally - not in my experience! His reference to vaccine success in stopping the epidemic and non-transmission of the virus were pro-vaxx comments where perhaps correlation bears no resemblance to causation! I stopped watching when Schwartz started talking about injecting pregnant women ( seemingly on the basis of one example of someone dying from covid - presumably not treated with an HCQ, zinc etc. programme) and children on the basis that some people have to suffer in a pandemic for the “greater good” - with spurious references to child exposure to death or damage from the virus at 1 in 1000 which has never been logged in all the studies I’ve seen. Did I hear correctly that myocarditis was reversed in most cases - and yet others have commented that injury to the heart muscle can never be reversed?

I wonder why Pharma didn’t come out with this stuff as soon as the spike protein issue was raised.

I will try and view the rest later.

cheers

1 Like
#6

I watched about ten minutes of the second one, enough to get a flavour of the Fact Check approach being taken. Which is when I got bored and researched the presenter himself.

I’d rather read the papers and come to my own conclusions.

As far as LinkedIn goes @CJ1 this is a fairly crappy ‘social media for professionals’ platform that went even further downhill when Microsoft took it over a few years back. they also spun off one of their other acquisitions as LinkedIn Learning. It’s primarily a collection of training videos for linear thinking normies. Dr Beans or whatever his name is is exactly the sort of smartarse with no substance who thrives there.

1 Like
#7

Well, Dr. Mobeen is offering an alternative narrative. I don’t know which one is right, but I sure know which one seems to conform most closely to actual events, as seen so far. As far as I can follow it, he seems to be swimming against a large current of medics and other appropriately-qualified people, who say that the spikies do get everywhere, and do cause damage. That certainly seems to be more intuitively likely. The same doubt goes for Dr. Eli’s assertion that previous vaccines have caused no damage. Oh really? That is obvIous BS. At least he’s aware of the useful help of Ivermectin though.

Mobeen says at one point that the previous speakers in favour of HCQ+ were just “some people who made up some stories.” Really, Didier Raoult and Vladimir Zelenko, amongst all the others? That’s all they did? Made up some stories? All those frontline-cured patients didn’t happen?

I don’t see anything in these vids that alters my basic - tentative - estimate that the poison-stabs are indeed poison-stabs. And the basic assessment still stands: that they are unnecessary, ineffectual, and dangerous. Like most vaccines, I suspect.

Despite these vids. it still seems to me that the basic truths are likely to turn out to be thus:

*There is no pandemic, as normally understood: masses of people all going down at once with a severe illness, and a huge, steep uptick in deaths; the ‘bodies-in-the-street’ syndrome. That’s just not happening.

*There’s a nasty new flu, seasonal as usual, which kills perhaps a few more than usual, but maybe not even that. Death from flu-pneumonia is horrible, and endemic. That’s not in question. It happens every year - to a small, vulnerable minority. This past two years that pattern has continued. Not pandemically, though.

*The PCR ‘test’ is a blatant fraud, deliberately maintained by the people who are instrumentalising it to push the scam forward, despite the comprehensive evidence that it doesn’t work. Thus having absolute-zero credibility - apart from the quite different purpose for which Kary Mullis invented it; with a further considerable doubt about any of the other alleged tests.

*These false ‘tests’ are being used as the main drive of what is - quite obviously - a huge criminal scam, wilfully driven by a lying terror campaign.

*Despite many claims about having samples of the - alleged - virus, none seem to survive detailed inspection. So, still no-one appears to have any purified physical - rather than imagined - samples of this pathogen, whatever it is. Thus, all claims of treatments based on having the pathogen’s complete genetic profile are basically gigo-suspect, in-silico guesses.

*The poisons-stabs damned-well are killing, maiming and making ill, respectively thousands, more thousands, and - already - millions, despite the apparent fact that they’re no use for anything except making lots of loot for gangsters. Unnecessary, ineffectual, and dangerous!

These two guys, Mobeen and Eli, seem to me to be two of the millions (including lots of appropriately-qualified professionals) who are still swept up in the global TDS trance-world, seriously detached from reality, which the lies campaign created, and is now being used to maintain.

Once again it’s necessary to say: wait and see what happens in zionistan over the next few years. Since they’ve gone overboard for stabbing everyone (jewish) in Palestine as far as possible, the feared bad side-effects should be showing up pretty thickly. The mainly non-stabbed Palestinians should make up a pretty useful control population, against which to test comparative outcomes for the jewish recipients. We’ll see.

1 Like
#8

I’ve said this over on OffG, but maybe it’s pertinent to repeat it here:

Some anecdotal evidence here: my cousin’s daughter – the daughter is in her 20s – is now in hospital with blood clots on the brain; this after receiving her second jab.

I also have an elderly aunt in her 80s who has recently been taken into hospital – again, after taking the jabs (my aunt was in reasonable health). I’ve told my aunty to get out of that hospital ASAP.

Both cases I cite are in the UK.

3 Likes
#9

Going straight to the papers is probably a great idea. I thought Dr Syed’s descriptions were very clear, but that’s obviously subjective and depends on how each of us learn new info.

The papers are linked beneath the YouTube videos. The two basic points that he draws or from these issues are

  • the spike protein created by the vaccine is created and stabilised in a prefusion state (a point that the Weinstein’s seen to have totally missed)

  • the study from Japan looks at the distribution of two specific lipid nanoparticles, once an mRNA vaccine is admitted. This is misconstrued by Kirsch, Malone (!!!) and Brett Weinstein as being a study of where the spike protein accumulates post vaccine.

The papers seem pretty clear about those facts.

Happy reading!
PP

EDIT: Of course, of it turns out that Syed is wrong about the way he explains the papers then please do point that out - my goal is to try and get the best understanding on this issue that I can.

#10

Hi RG

I thought quite a lot of what Prof Schwarz had to say was interesting. Including what he had to say about cycle times for PCR, the use of culturing virus to determine actual infectivity, the usefulness of ivermectin and the hypocrisy of Merck. I also found his opinions on the state of play of the vaccine interesting, given his obvious and decades long experience in the issue.

As far as the other videos go, I find the description of how the spike protein in the vaccines work and how the lipid pieces of the mRNA vaccine are ultimately excreted from the body to be interesting too.

Finally, I also found it interesting how the Weinstein’s, Steve Kirsch and even Dr Malone were clearly unable to understand the basics of these papers. I’m going to say that it wasn’t a lack of biological knowledge.

Sadly, I’ve just found out that the Dark Horse podcast of Brett, Steve and Robert that you linked to the other day had now been deleted… It just goes to show that this site remains one of the very few places where we can have a discussion of both sides of this issue.

So strange to have ended up in the situation…

Cheers

1 Like
#11

(EDIT following reponse.
Hi PP. Having highlighted some confusion I added to it by giving a wrong link (now corrected). It was TrialSiteNews (who Syed mentions) not Huffington Post. Note to self - NEVER post more than one link after 7pm :). I’ve edited the post to at least mean what I meant to say. )

Hi PP. Thanks for these links. I think there is some confusion somewhere. Syed is correct that the Pfizer Japanese biodistribution study showed the vaccine mRNA travels outwith the site and didn’t directly mention the spike protein doing this (though as the purpose of the vaccine is to produce spike proteins the onus would reasonably be on the industry to show this does not happen). I don’t think the Japanese ‘Biodistribution study’ is the source of this claim. Some may be saying that because it’s nevertheless a very obvious risk, if the mRNA travels.
Syed cited Byram Bridle and admits uncertainty over Bridle’s source, saying that if he isn’t referring to the Japanese study it must be another and he doesn’t know which one.

But the study Bridle refers to is the Ogato study. This was reported in a (Edit) Lifesitenews article:

“Bridle cited the recent study which detected SARS-CoV-2 protein in the blood plasma of 11 of 13 young healthcare workers that had received Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, including three with detectable levels of spike protein.”
Link to (Edit) Lifesitenewss article: Vaccine researcher admits ‘big mistake,’ says spike protein is dangerous ‘toxin’ | News | LifeSite

The study referred to is Ogata et al where you can find this statement:

“Here, we provide evidence that circulating SARS-CoV-2 proteins are present in the plasma of participants vaccinated with the mRNA-1273 vaccine.”

I also saw a fact check where they attributed the spike protein claim to “Bridle and his proponents”.
I think Syed is being disingenuous as he must know of the Ogato study.
The so-called fact-check is the usual misleading dark craft. In fact it went to a lot of effort to appear to debunk Bridle - even setting up a site using his name to hijack the google searches!
Here it is:
https://byrambridle.com/

which just links to the bad fact-check which is mainly trying to discredit Byram Bridle, a professor of viral immunology.

Bridle may have mis-referred somewhere verbally. But he has written all this up, it’s contained in a 200 page document, where he states his source, referring to Ogata:

" Notably, the spike protein, (or the portion of it that binds to ACE2 receptor), could be found in the circulation in 3 out of the 13 people (and in 11 out of the 13 people), respectively"

Hope helpful. Cheers
ED

1 Like
#12

Just ran across yet another medic, who sees the stabs, with their spike-generating propensity, as a serious no-no:

#13

Thanks for the links ED. The long link doesn’t work unfortunately, but I’ll take a look at the others. I’m curious if the spike protein found was in the prefused state or not. Incidentally, the point that Syed is making isn’t that the mRNA gets lose, but rather the lipid nanoparticle shell - the “box” that transported the mRNA - does. According to the paper that Syed extensively cites, the mRNA is expected to be destroyed inside the cell it enters after doing it’s job and isn’t further investigated in that study. That might be a false assumption, as Syed is clear about, but it is the assumption of the paper.

I’ve not come across Bridle before. I’ll have a read. Perhaps Dr Syed got his hands on the wrong “Japanese study” after all. He seems active on Reddit, so I’ll probably be able to let him know if that’s the case.

EDIT 1: the Ogato paper you link to cannot be what people (like Kirsh etc on trialsite) are referring to as the Japanese study. I think Syed is actually reading the correct paper when referring to those critics. Right, I’ll have a read of Ogato’s paper

EDIT 2: So, I’ve read the paper by Ogato et al. and it dovetails very nicely with exactly what Syed has so clearly described in the first two links I posted (I did say that I thought Syed’s videos were very good!). As the authors themselves say, it’s more or less exactly what we expect the vaccine to do. It doesn’t say anything about accumulation of the spike protein in the ovaries (claimed by Hirsh and co, who seemingly confused spike protein with lipids) and it doesn’t really say anything other than “it looks like the vaccine is doing it’s job”.

I also read the HuffPo article that SC2 might infect the brain, which was interesting. But, again, as Syed explained so well in his videos the spike protein in a wild coronavirus (or even pseudovirus) behaves quite differently to that produced by the vaccine, including the ability to bind to ACE2 and subsequently fuse with a cell, so I’m not sure what the connection is between the vaccine and the HuffPo article.

Syed was specifically addressing two concerns (1) does the spike protein accumulate in the ovaries, and (2) is the spike protein produced by the vaccine toxic? I don’t know if these are things that Bridle says or not, but if you can find a link to a paper or article I’ll def have a look. Nothing in the links I could access above say either of those things, so right now we are talking at cross purposes I think. The (now removed) Dark Horse podcast did say both of those things, and did clearly refer to the Japanese study that Syed is looking through.

Cheers

#14

Thanks, RG. At least he seems to be taking about the correct biological object :wink:

I’ll have a listen

#15

Hi CJ1

sorry I missed your post yesterday. Yes, there is a lot to take in, and I am only inching my way over the material, so my understanding is definitely very limited. I did find the explanatory videos of Syed to be very helpful in furthering my understanding, though, hence the reason I shared them. Others might find them similarly helpful.

I don’t think Syed is saying that there are no side effects of the vaccine (serious or otherwise). In fact he clearly says the opposite. The questions as to how many side effects there are does seem to be, as you suggest, an open question. He really limits himself to two specific questions that have been proposed by some vaccine opponents - (1) does the spike protein created by the vaccine go on to accumulate somewhere in the body (the ovaries perhaps)? And (2) is the spike proteing created by the vaccine toxic to the body in the same way that it is beginning to look like that of the actual virus is? He answers those questions pretty well I think.

As for your other points, I agree with you about the censoring on YouTube, and from a personal perspective, I actually found the vaccine Q & A with Schwarz very interesting. Schwarz’s responses also correlated with other Q & As I’ve heard with vaccine specialists in the UK, so I didn’t find his observations off. I think a consensus of anecdotal reports is emerging as hundreds of millions of people are vaccinated across the globe now. And finally, yes Schwarz did say that the majority of myocarditis cases caused by the vaccine were reversed in a few days. I’d be interested to read something that shows Schwarz to be telling porkies (wait - is that antisemitic??) on that.

Cheers
PP

#16

Incidentally, RG, do yo have a cast-iron, unrefutable source of this statement somewhere?

Please don’t point me to any databases or government sources or statistics or frontline doctors to support this. As you have pointed out to me endlessly, these sources are unreliable in the extreme.

But any other cast-iron, definite, unquestionably solid sources for this claim would be welcome!

:stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

#17

Hi PP.

Yeah, it’s courting trouble to refer to ‘the Japanese study’ in a country twice our population - is our colonial past haunting us!? :slightly_smiling_face:

Syed may well have found people who have quoted the wrong study but Prof. Bridle, the source of the story, didn’t. As far as the narrative relating to vaccine risks is concerned, we don’t need to dwell on later errors in transcribing or citation. The right or corrected narrative is that it is being proposed (Ogata) that the spike protein of the vaccine may move around much more than thought. Bridle has outlined one possibility - clearly marked as speculation - that this could lead to auto-immune disease in the ovaries. I’m sure there are many others in his 200-page document (appended at the bottom of this post), which was written for the public.

The political dynamics are interesting here. Opponents have to give examples of risks but any that they give are leapt on as not being ‘established’.

Cross purposes? - maybe…I’m thinking of your brother here PP, Precautionary Principle :slight_smile: .The onus has changed - opponents need to prove something that is definitely dangerous is definitely happening - in a vaccine that the powers want to foist on the entire human race as quickly as possible.

Especially given the scale and speed of the rollout, it should be considered noteworthy that a professor in this field is pointing out evidence that a ‘vaccine’ that is supposed to stay at the locality is going round the body, and that studies suggest that some of the components look a bit dangerous. That alone means the safety testing was inadequate. Should that not be ‘the story’ ? If so that would mean that Syed’s focus is too narrow to address the wider concerns that Bridle etc are expressing.
Cheers
ED

Here is what Bridle says regarding ovaries in the 200-page document COVID-19 Vaccines and Children:A Scientist’s Guide for Parents:

“A concern beyond circulating spike proteins: the potential for induction of autoimmunitySome scientists have proposed that the spike protein from SARS-CoV-2 might have portions that are very similar to proteins in our own bodies47. If true, inducing immunity against the spike protein could theoretically promote autoimmune disorders. Indeed, two researchers found there was cross-reactivity between antibodies induced against the spike protein and several ‘self’ proteins48. This led to the recommendation almost one year ago to avoid targeting the entire spike protein in vaccines and instead target only portions of the protein that are not Blood function and composition | HealthEngine Blog
Page 27 of 37similar to proteins in our own bodies. Unfortunately, autoimmune diseases can be insidious and take years for symptoms to become apparent.The broad distribution of an mRNA vaccine throughout the body implicates other mechanisms that could lead to autoimmune disease. First, the mRNA vaccines promote robust inflammation. This is why many people have sore shoulders after being immunized. Promotion of inflammation in critical tissues, such as the ovaries, after being seeded with the vaccine could have dire consequences. Tissues like the ovaries are not supposed to become inflamed. This is because inflammation causes a lot of bystander damage to normal tissues, which is unwanted in an organ designed for reproduction. Also, the vaccine-encoded spike protein is designed to remain anchored on the surface of the cell that has manufactured it. If antibodies are present, such as would be the case several days after vaccination or natural infection, they could bind to the spike proteins on cells throughout our body, resulting in their destruction. Let’s take the ovaries, again, as a theoretical scenario. If they were to undergo any type of tissue destruction, there is the possibility of proteins being released that the immune system has never seen before. This is because our immune systems learn to tolerate ‘self’ at a very young age. However, organs like the ovaries and testes start to express new proteins during puberty that the immune system has not been tolerized against. If these get released due to tissue damage, this could provide the same two signals that a vaccine needs to activate the immune system; signal 1 (target protein) and signal 2 (damage-associated danger signals). This could result in an autoimmune response against the organ. In this example (ovaries), such damage might not become apparent until years later when attempting to have a baby. This is speculation but is based on a huge body of scientific literature looking at how autoimmune diseases get started. Notably, this could potentially happen in any of the tissues seeded with the vaccine if they start to express the spike protein.This is certainly worthy of investigation before the mass vaccination of children, adolescents, and young adults of child-bearing age.”

Link: https://cdn1.collective-evolution.com/assets/uploads/2021/06/2021-06-15-Children-and-COVID-19-Vaccines-full-guide_-FINAL.pdf

Later on he quotes from the Japanese biodistribution study (I think)

“Over 48 hours, distribution was mainly observed to liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries, with maximum concentrations observed at 8-48 hours post-dose”

Maybe he has been stressing the ovaries as a scary example but it’s really just the one picture.
ED

1 Like
#18

Thanks ED. I’m totally lost. The questions under discussion are (1) does the spike protein from the vaccine accumulate in the ovaries? And (2) is the spike protein from the vaccine toxic?

Syed seems to have given pretty clear answers to those questions.

Cheers
PP

#19

Oh well maybe we have got to cross purposes. Bridle’s narrative seemed to have been altered. Your Q2 was my question as well but with the onus on the other side - as I say, I think the onus should not be on people proving it is dangerous as it’s being forced onto everyone everywhere, when the original safety basis seems to have been scuppered! There should be a retreat to ‘It has to be shown safe’.

I didn’t finish the videos because of the narrow premise (there are a few directions of risk it would need to have closed down). Just as you won’t want to read the 200-page guide that Bridle wrote that Syed ignored.
I think when criticizing the specifics of what people have said or written it needs to be in writing.
It’s maybe just me but videos don’t sit well with me - I find myself looking for all the references and trying to note down precisely what was said at key points. They are really for the choir, who will readily forgive a certain level of laxity. I wish someone would start a transcript service… :upside_down_face:
We can agree to disagree!
Cheers
ED

#20

:laughing: Touche!

I call as my first, second, third, fourth…etc. witnesses all the people currently appearing on social media and the non-lamestream news outfits to describe the deaths and bad effects they or their loved-ones have suffered immediately after taking the stabs. Quite enough on their own, simple anecdotals though they are, to get the poison-stabs programme halted, in more normal times. Yet the gics behind the scam simply blank the plebs’ alarm calls and double down on their hell-for-leather stabbing campaign. Interesting…?

As you will know, P, even the lamestream commentators have to admit that reports of adverse events that actually make it to VAERS/Yellow Card/EUdraVigilance agencies are a small fraction of what’s actually happening, so of course we’re not going to trust their figures, are we? :wink: Yet even they are reporting the sort of figures that I outlined. When I spoke of thousands and millions, it’s just those agencies’ sheepish official admissions which I outline. I’m not actually sketching the probable real, much larger, disaster. And of course I don’t expect the whore media to say a word about it that they can avoid saying. They’re well in hand.

But, understanding as we do that the official agencies are not to be trusted - because of the pall of fear and windy line-toeing that the scam has cast over everything - and are reporting on the lowest side possible, then common sense suggests that the real numbers are much higher. As I said, it’s a guesstimate. But I’d put good money on it.

When ALL sources of information have to be treated with a bucket of salt, flying over the whole field, trying to suss real trends by looking for gestalten is the best tool we have, in practice. My summation in my earlier post on this thread, of where I see conclusions to be pointing, is the result of using this one actually available tool. I know we intelligentsia are all supposed to be devoted to hard evidence in the form of studies, peer-reviewed papers, well-cleansed statistics and such. But since we’re in this pretty unprecedented situation where there seems to be a big coup attempt going on, and both public and private agencies of all kinds seem to have fallen under a general cloud of untrustworthiness, then the gestalt-seeking is about all the average punter has left.

And… you know, that sort of street savvy - prone though it is to wild rumours - nevertheless usually gets a good sound picture of what’s really going on, eventually. That’s the approach on which I feel obliged to trust now. Can’t post evidence any harder than the anecdotal testimonies; but confident to put solid stakes on my bets, up to and including my life and the lives of my nearests. Cheers! :slight_smile: