I remember I had stumbled onto a blog site where scientists of different backgrounds were discussing excitedly about the mRNA injections, this was in 2020. Pulmonary Hypertension condition popped up among several other diseases as a "rare" possibility of the injections and even at that date they were casually talking about the "remote" possibility of the injections breaching the blood brain barrier. They said they would just have to "wait and see" I knew then that nothing could convince me to take this injection, they are not fit to be given to humans or animals.
That's very interesting....I wonder what they think of the fact that widespread distribution was entirely predictable, yet has never yet even been admitted.
"The bulky muscles have good vascularity, and therefore the injected drug quickly reaches the systemic circulation and thereafter into the specific region of action, bypassing the first-pass metabolism."
It was a very poorly written sentence - sorry!! (I do clarify it below.)
I meant that regulators must know that the assurances given (that there was not widespread distribution) was false (and in my opinion they either did know that throughout or certainly ought to have known it), but that to date no regulator anywhere has admitted this error and stated "we were wrong, it gets widely distributed".
The reason for not admitting that is that it completely undermines the entire basis of many of the justifications they proffered for many of the decisions taken by regulators in terms of which studies needed to be performed and which didn't.
(Not that I believe there was any justification for any of the vaccines at all - since there was never any need for any of them.)
And yes, totally agree that physiologically there is absolutely no justification for assuming that an injected product would not become widely circulated.
Yes, it was indeed a poor sentence, written in haste! What I meant was that presumably, those people who were blogging those concerns were probably mostly mollified by assurances from regulators and governments that the substance was broken down in the arm.
Of course, many of us realized full well that this was not true, and never could have been true. So my question was, I wonder how they felt when they realized that what they had been told was a lie. Probably the most crucial lie of all, because it is so central to the entire regulatory framework applying to the authorizations.
"The bulky muscles have good vascularity, and therefore the injected drug quickly reaches the systemic circulation and thereafter into the specific region of action, bypassing the first-pass metabolism."
PAH was one of the first major side effects of the vaccines predicted. There was a lot of early research on it. I would not be remotely surprised if we start to see incidence sky rocket.
That's the open access journal article cited in this piece. So much for your brainwaves
Brand new open access journal, Volume-1, Issue-1
And you happened to read it at that time? I'm sure you did. And you were going to buy UTHR because they make tadalifil and treprostinil. What about the other marketed products and devices.
I remember I had stumbled onto a blog site where scientists of different backgrounds were discussing excitedly about the mRNA injections, this was in 2020. Pulmonary Hypertension condition popped up among several other diseases as a "rare" possibility of the injections and even at that date they were casually talking about the "remote" possibility of the injections breaching the blood brain barrier. They said they would just have to "wait and see" I knew then that nothing could convince me to take this injection, they are not fit to be given to humans or animals.
That's very interesting....I wonder what they think of the fact that widespread distribution was entirely predictable, yet has never yet even been admitted.
What do you mean, "never yet been admitted"?
"The bulky muscles have good vascularity, and therefore the injected drug quickly reaches the systemic circulation and thereafter into the specific region of action, bypassing the first-pass metabolism."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556121/
It was a very poorly written sentence - sorry!! (I do clarify it below.)
I meant that regulators must know that the assurances given (that there was not widespread distribution) was false (and in my opinion they either did know that throughout or certainly ought to have known it), but that to date no regulator anywhere has admitted this error and stated "we were wrong, it gets widely distributed".
The reason for not admitting that is that it completely undermines the entire basis of many of the justifications they proffered for many of the decisions taken by regulators in terms of which studies needed to be performed and which didn't.
(Not that I believe there was any justification for any of the vaccines at all - since there was never any need for any of them.)
And yes, totally agree that physiologically there is absolutely no justification for assuming that an injected product would not become widely circulated.
I wonder what that mangled sentence if yours is trying to express.
Yes, it was indeed a poor sentence, written in haste! What I meant was that presumably, those people who were blogging those concerns were probably mostly mollified by assurances from regulators and governments that the substance was broken down in the arm.
Of course, many of us realized full well that this was not true, and never could have been true. So my question was, I wonder how they felt when they realized that what they had been told was a lie. Probably the most crucial lie of all, because it is so central to the entire regulatory framework applying to the authorizations.
It's injected IN ORDER to enter the blood stream and elicit systemic immune responses. That doesn't happen in the arm.
Anything interpreted as some sort of reassurance otherwise would have been a mistaken interpretation.
"The bulky muscles have good vascularity, and therefore the injected drug quickly reaches the systemic circulation and thereafter into the specific region of action, bypassing the first-pass metabolism."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556121/
Do we have any idea of the time profile of hazard from these injections ?
You might like
https://geoffpain.substack.com/p/endotoxin-in-jabs-causes-pulmonary
PAH was one of the first major side effects of the vaccines predicted. There was a lot of early research on it. I would not be remotely surprised if we start to see incidence sky rocket.
Please cite your sources.
Thank you.
We are talking 2+ years ago! I didn’t save them, but remember thinking might be a good time to buy United Therapeutics stock.
I’d have to do a lit search now, but it shouldn’t be that hard for you to look if you’re interested.
I was trying to be helpful. Won’t bother in future
Being a dick to me isn’t going to unvaccinate you, you know.
Though I had a brainwave on how to find it:
J. Respir. 2021, 1(1), 40-48;
This paper written end 2020 highlighted the risk. Now being evidenced.
That's the open access journal article cited in this piece. So much for your brainwaves
Brand new open access journal, Volume-1, Issue-1
And you happened to read it at that time? I'm sure you did. And you were going to buy UTHR because they make tadalifil and treprostinil. What about the other marketed products and devices.
The other article here reports two cases.