Some Folks Will Do Anything for a Large Enough Cash Incentive

On the news about Novavax cash and toy incentives for enrolling infants into a new anti-Covid-19 product’s clinical trials:

This is evil.

And particularly so since

1. they have had abundant evidence from the beginning that infants up through young adults almost never get Covid-19 and,

2. if they do, the chances of it being fatal are infinitesimal,

3. they know that C19 viral mRNA products are incapable of preventing death due to C19

4. they know that those products are incapable of preventing reinfection (meaning developing a clinical case, since not even a genuine vaccine ever prevents any infection), which means initiating a state of being infectious.

5. By now they know that viral mRNA products inflict a wide variety of harms, starting with the invasion and infection of healthy cells with viral genes and everything proceeding from that, up to and including death, literally from all causes (viz the increase since the start of 2021 of all-cause mortality amongst both genders, all age groups, all preexisting states of health among all nationalities in every country around the world IF they were part of one other population: recipients of ANY form of viral mRNA product (regardless of which of the 3 of 7 standard cell transfection reagents used to introduce it)*

Especially egregious is the reasoning offered in response to the criticism that those kids and infants have no need of that product (or even a viral protein version—which didn’t work either): “Oh, it’s not to protect them but to protect the vulnerable elderly.”

Yeah, caring is sharing the death jab.

But what’s so outrageous about that justification?

Here’s what:

1. If infants or children DID happen to contract C19, they would be over and done with it, most likely without even knowing it, and then be robustly protected against ever developing a clinical case and would never pose any risk to any elderly or immune compromised people.

2. Infants and children (and everyone else) getting shot up with C19 viral mRNA products DO suffer repeated clinical cases of C19. Meaning?

Unlike those in 1 who are infectious a single time, those in 2 are infectious multiple times.

And since no C19 viral mRNA product prevents death due to a C19 infection and since deaths due to C19 infection are almost exclusively amongst the very sick elderly with anergic adaptive immune response, then companies giving people of all ages a product that, compared to a single bout of actual C19 infection, guarantees they will become infected with C19 multiple times and be infectious each time are radically increasingly the likelihood of death by C19 amongst those of the most vulnerable population who, incidentally, do not respond well to real vaccines of any kind due to their age-related anergic adaptive immune system.

And the irony?

In exchange for being made into multiple C19 time bombs for the population most vulnerable to death by common cold, what does everyone else get out of it?

They suffer increased risk from being in the group that comprises all-cause mortality (recipients of viral mRNA products) AND increased risk of developing any of those conditions which, singly or in combination, if exacerbated sufficiently (such as repeated exposure to the agent causing the insult, any viral mRNA product) will lead to death.

So, because of all that, the continued insistence by those who comprise Covid Inc on injecting ever more people at ever younger ages with ever more varieties of C19 viral mRNA products, planning to do the same with every other existing pathogen protein vaccine, and planning to make novel mRNA products against diseases for which no successful pathogen protein vaccine has ever been created should tell you at least one of three things:

A. They are insane

B. They are evil

C. They are trying to facilitate some larger plan that is both insane and evil.

________

*nanoparticle (Pfizer), a lipid moiety (Moderna and Johnson&Johnson), or a replication-disabled adenovirus (AstraZeneca), and is it any wonder those companies chose the cheapest, most easily-administered (a shot), and most easily adaptable to outpatient administration (compared to single cell micro-injection, electroporation, ultrasound, or magnetic field) forms to do it?

Though, if anyone considers the matter, isn’t it more than just a little weird that a number of different companies in different countries should have independently come up with three different methods using at least 40 year old cell transfection reagents/methods to introduce exactly the same viral gene directly into healthy cells and do it all in a way that could help their products—that are not and never have been vaccines, that have nothing in common with viral protein vaccines, that contain no viral antigens— to escape the strictures of vaccine approval?

Well, at least until the first ones will result in near automatic approval of others wearing a fig leaf of “testing” designed to NOT uncover anything COVID Inc doesn’t want found.

_________