In order to find something to stain "spike protein" with, you first need an isolated spike protein to develop or find a staining marker such as a specific anti-body against it. There is no evidence that anti-bodies are specific. The body will make proteins against foreign substances but they are not specific. You can take any foreign substance such as found in the goo of Vero6 cell cultures experiments and insert parts of it into an animal and that animal will make proteins against the goo. That is not evidence that there ever were spike proteins in that goo or that the proteins made against the goo are specific for any one thing in that goo. For more information watch Dr. Tom Cowan's explanation here: bitchute.com/video/w5QV0j6dPJ9A
So called antibodies used in autopsy were made by injecting Vero6 cell goo into animals and then the proteins they made against the goo were "identified as anti Spike protein antibodies" and then used for such autopsy staining.
I assume you are referring to the work of now deceased pathologist Dr. Arne Burkhardt. He spoke about employing immuno-histochemistry methods which utilized what were alleged to be specific antibodies to spike protein but as far as I am aware, never indicated how those antibodies were originally produced/obtained (I think he listed the company from which they were procured without any discussion of the materials/methods employed).
I recall raising this issue at the time (when Dr. Burkardt first began presenting his limited autopsy series), for reasons you discuss above (although not in the detail you have). Some of the slides he produced were very convincing with respect to the pulmonary pathology allegedly demonstrating spike protein in autopsy specimens when subjected to the method he described. I would love to know what those spike protein/antibody complexes in pulmonary autopsy specimens actually represented.
This raises the disturbing question with respect to how far the fraud in science/medicine actually extends.
That’s exactly the problem. The details aren’t given but from all the studies I combed through I saw that the standard was to take a genetic sequence from a database claimed to code for the spike protein and inserting a plasmid with that sequence into a bioreactor and producing this protein. Then they injected the protein into an animal and filtered out the so called antibody to that protein. The gene sequence in the database is fantasy thus everything that follows from that is fantasy too.
I have noticed that those who are often the most well-known proponents of the existence/validity of the Sars-Cov-2 novel virus, are unwilling to discuss any of the alleged supporting evidentiary material in public or in any degree of detail. I find that extremely suspicious. Perhaps the Cardiologist you mentioned above is an example. There are many others, unfortunately. This has meant we can never get to the actual issues in dispute (in a public venue). I see this as a purposeful diversion intended to maintain the fraudulent basis for the entire scheme. It is also IMHO why there will never be a transparent, public debate about the existence of viruses as contagious pathologic entities.
I have followed with great interest the work of the others you mentioned above. The GFN issue is one which has a great deal of evidentiary and basic science validity. The fact that there is so little evidence of nitrogen and phosphorus in many of the tested specimens is extremely problematic (no evidence of biological material). Worse yet is the fact that it is illegal to test them. That fact alone, belies any legitimacy the products might be alleged to possess. There is no way to reconcile all of this as anything other than an intentionally harmful global crime.
I understand exactly what you are saying but, I am not a basic science researcher. I learned microbiology decades ago and we were not told about or taught the original methods utilized to prove the existence of viruses. It was presented as well-accepted/proven science. There was so much to learn, we did not have the time or inclination to question every assertion made in the basic medical sciences. This has turned out to be a huge problem in light of the last 4 years of obvious fraud.
As you know, the details of gross anatomy in a lab setting, can be demonstrated easily by/for students to see if they agree with what is found in textbooks. The same cannot be said of virology. It requires special expertise and equipment as well as hands-on experiential knowledge. This clearly works to the advantage of anyone attempting to perpetrate a massive fraud.
Without getting into the issue of whether any viruses exist as entities that can cause disease and can be transmitted from one human to another, it now seems incontestable that no isolation/purification/characterization of a human biological sample was ever performed with respect to the alleged Sars-Cov-2 virus. If that is really true, there can be no antibodies to any portion of it, including the notorious spike protein, as you have said. That is monumentally important. It means that all the papers that refer to this entity are necessarily false as a matter of basic logic. The implications are staggering.
I tend to agree with your larger conclusions above as well. Needless to say, if true, we are in a world of hurt.
With respect to your statement above: "The body will make proteins against foreign substances, but they are not specific." I'm not sure I understand exactly what you are saying there. I was taught that antigens can incite a very specific antibody response in the form of IgM and later IgG. Presumably, the proteins that make up antigens have specific structural features having to do with their quaternary conformations such that the antibodies formed as a result of the immunological reaction to them are very specific and complementary to them as well. At least, that is what I understood to be the case. Are you saying that the immunological reaction to foreign (i.e., non-self) antigens is not specific in that sense or have I misunderstood what you wrote?
I have no dived deeply into the antibody theory but Dr Tom Cowan mentions an original study that shows the antibodies not to be specific but a general reaction of the body to foreign substances. In the sense that the same antibodies aka proteins can bind to multiple substances.
I agree that the scientists doing the studies rely on the materials they purchase and have trust that their origin is clear and proven. They also rely on the information they received during their education. I don't blame them. I refer to Dr. Tom Cowan regarding Dr. Burkhardt's work. He states that the origin of the antibodies used to bind the spike protein is in question. To be clear, Dr. Burkhardt did phenomenal work exposing the dangers of the jabs.
Thank you for your comments. I admire your work and your enormous courage! You are a shining light on the planet.
We get seasonal influenza when our cells build up too many environmental toxins from what we ingest or inject. We cyclically create exosomes (we don’t “catch” viruses), to purge these toxins from our body, which brings the electromagnetic frequency (EMF) of our cells into balance with the changing EMF patterns in our environment. The catalysts are: 1) Seasonal earth tilt 2) EMF tech 3) Ingested/injected toxins https://talknet.substack.com/p/vaxx-to-killdisable-billions-over
I am just really happy for both intravenous EDTA & Vitamins C & B-12 with a gluthione bag for 10 treatments and then switching back to plaquex for 10 treatments. My wife and I feel great and sleep well knowing that our blood is in great shape! Thank you, Professor Anita Baxas. I enjoyed reading your revised Plaquex book as well!
I am not a scientist, but I am trying to understand the why behind all the subterfuge. I understand that the “isolation” method is basically a made up process using a goo mixture in order to find whatever you want to find, and then finalized with a computer modeled sequencing of what they say is the “virus” causing all the harm. So essentially this allows the perpetrators to create whatever they want as far as an inflammatory response agent / poison that they can then put into a “vaccine” and inject into people?…am I getting the gist of the hoax game they are playing to poison the human race? Or am I simplifying it too much?
But then, they are saying it’s the spike proteins that are dismantling the ace2 receptors…and that’s what’s causing “COVID”…but Covid doesn’t even exist, and the spike narrative is created as cover for the very real inflammatory response of the graphene in the shots? And the graphene is the needed link between synthetic biology and the internet of bodies to use emf technology to control the human mind…in order for the NWO to create the hive mind / mind controlling the perceptions of the masses (as David Icke describes). Very much looking forward to your reply. Thanks again. I am very active in my community here in Ventura California. We are a surf town and many in the surfing community have woken up to all these things and we are speaking up and pushing back.
Thank you for replying to me. I have another question, I think know the answer, but here goes: So ultimately the entire Covid virus pandemic plot was one big global transhuman agenda experiment on the human race; to see how the various countries’ peoples’ bodies would respond to graphene being injected into them…because that’s what they need for the fourth Industrial Revolution to move forward? …and they knew a certain cross-section of people would have adverse reactions, some even leading to sudden death I.e. the strokes and myocarditis and heart attacks (as seen by athletes and tv commentators dropping unconscious - so they scaled it back after these initial obvious effects showed themselves) and turbo cancers ensuing as a result of the body’s natural immuno response towards the synthetic p.e.g. Liponanoparticle which houses graphene amongst other nanotechs? So it’s primarily a transhuman experiment, but the perpetrators don’t mind at all if it also happens to kill a large number of people (short term or long term effects), because the perpetrators are also Malthusians?
You put it right. Except we are not entirely sure what causes turbo cancers. Graphene in any case can cause it, but I believe there is more to it than that. Many vials did contain mRNA but nobody know what it is coding for. Possible altering the human genome can cause cancer? Possibly the potentiation of EMF by the graphene, metals and self assembled nanotech is causing it? Since they want to hook us up to a central AI cloud computer and create a hive mind, they can then dictate and control our emotions to give them the loosh they need. Thus the would no longer need so many of us. If they can make everybody feel despair and fear, the get all the energetic food they feed on without needing all of us.
Ok yes that makes sense. It seems like Dr. Yeadon’s work regarding the differing experiments based on the differing lots / batches of vaccines distributed will come more and more into play as things continue to uncover. The SV40 seems to be a turbo cancer promoter, so the lots containing that in the sequence could be linked as well possibly. I’m going to try and attach a lecture from a guy named James Giordano, of DARPA and military neuroscience background. I’m not sure if you’ve heard of this guy, he teaches at the U.S. military academy’s but this particular lecture attached is very illuminating regarding the capabilities of nanotech being used to influence the brain and perception. It is tedious, but worth a watch through. It’s coming from the place of influencing the brain as the battlefield of the future against foreign enemies in a warfare setting. But if it were to be used against the domestic populous, it is pretty much the blueprint laid out for the hive mind / emf / nanotech world they are currently rolling out.
You may have seen the posts I did nearly two years ago on a number of proteins that are critical to life preservation. These proteins are on the 1st 3 lines of the Pfizer adverse effects release document. I originally went as far as I could go with p53 which led me to consider specifically what was known to be in the Pfizer serum.
The variety of ailments post injection are not the whole gambit, neither can they be when you consider what happens post translation with N1-Methyl-Pseudouridine. There is a reason the synthetic product is favoured over naturally occurring uridine. Consider the lifecycle of a cell. There are 70,000 changes to each cell in your body in a single day. That is a huge amount of activity. This activity involves the clean up of dead cells (a fascinating process) suffice to say the N1-Methyl-Pseudouridine survives and is recycled to affect the next protein requiring the uridine amino (it’s longevity is as yet unknown). Now, this may not be considered an issue until you look at all of the bodies tissue, membrane, and nervous system that is heavily reliant on uridine. Then the penny drops. Heart and arteries blood vessels, anything that expands, collapses, and flexes. These have the largest uridine dependency. Now: Consider the list of known effects, Research the organs requiring the most uridine and you will see the most likely candidate causing these effects. I have more on this. But will leave you to digest for now.
In order to find something to stain "spike protein" with, you first need an isolated spike protein to develop or find a staining marker such as a specific anti-body against it. There is no evidence that anti-bodies are specific. The body will make proteins against foreign substances but they are not specific. You can take any foreign substance such as found in the goo of Vero6 cell cultures experiments and insert parts of it into an animal and that animal will make proteins against the goo. That is not evidence that there ever were spike proteins in that goo or that the proteins made against the goo are specific for any one thing in that goo. For more information watch Dr. Tom Cowan's explanation here: bitchute.com/video/w5QV0j6dPJ9A
So called antibodies used in autopsy were made by injecting Vero6 cell goo into animals and then the proteins they made against the goo were "identified as anti Spike protein antibodies" and then used for such autopsy staining.
Thank you for this very provocative piece.
I assume you are referring to the work of now deceased pathologist Dr. Arne Burkhardt. He spoke about employing immuno-histochemistry methods which utilized what were alleged to be specific antibodies to spike protein but as far as I am aware, never indicated how those antibodies were originally produced/obtained (I think he listed the company from which they were procured without any discussion of the materials/methods employed).
I recall raising this issue at the time (when Dr. Burkardt first began presenting his limited autopsy series), for reasons you discuss above (although not in the detail you have). Some of the slides he produced were very convincing with respect to the pulmonary pathology allegedly demonstrating spike protein in autopsy specimens when subjected to the method he described. I would love to know what those spike protein/antibody complexes in pulmonary autopsy specimens actually represented.
This raises the disturbing question with respect to how far the fraud in science/medicine actually extends.
That’s exactly the problem. The details aren’t given but from all the studies I combed through I saw that the standard was to take a genetic sequence from a database claimed to code for the spike protein and inserting a plasmid with that sequence into a bioreactor and producing this protein. Then they injected the protein into an animal and filtered out the so called antibody to that protein. The gene sequence in the database is fantasy thus everything that follows from that is fantasy too.
Exactly right.
I have noticed that those who are often the most well-known proponents of the existence/validity of the Sars-Cov-2 novel virus, are unwilling to discuss any of the alleged supporting evidentiary material in public or in any degree of detail. I find that extremely suspicious. Perhaps the Cardiologist you mentioned above is an example. There are many others, unfortunately. This has meant we can never get to the actual issues in dispute (in a public venue). I see this as a purposeful diversion intended to maintain the fraudulent basis for the entire scheme. It is also IMHO why there will never be a transparent, public debate about the existence of viruses as contagious pathologic entities.
I have followed with great interest the work of the others you mentioned above. The GFN issue is one which has a great deal of evidentiary and basic science validity. The fact that there is so little evidence of nitrogen and phosphorus in many of the tested specimens is extremely problematic (no evidence of biological material). Worse yet is the fact that it is illegal to test them. That fact alone, belies any legitimacy the products might be alleged to possess. There is no way to reconcile all of this as anything other than an intentionally harmful global crime.
I understand exactly what you are saying but, I am not a basic science researcher. I learned microbiology decades ago and we were not told about or taught the original methods utilized to prove the existence of viruses. It was presented as well-accepted/proven science. There was so much to learn, we did not have the time or inclination to question every assertion made in the basic medical sciences. This has turned out to be a huge problem in light of the last 4 years of obvious fraud.
As you know, the details of gross anatomy in a lab setting, can be demonstrated easily by/for students to see if they agree with what is found in textbooks. The same cannot be said of virology. It requires special expertise and equipment as well as hands-on experiential knowledge. This clearly works to the advantage of anyone attempting to perpetrate a massive fraud.
Without getting into the issue of whether any viruses exist as entities that can cause disease and can be transmitted from one human to another, it now seems incontestable that no isolation/purification/characterization of a human biological sample was ever performed with respect to the alleged Sars-Cov-2 virus. If that is really true, there can be no antibodies to any portion of it, including the notorious spike protein, as you have said. That is monumentally important. It means that all the papers that refer to this entity are necessarily false as a matter of basic logic. The implications are staggering.
I tend to agree with your larger conclusions above as well. Needless to say, if true, we are in a world of hurt.
In my remarks, I stated that I hold harmless most of the users of these fake reagents and kits (including immunostaining and antibodies).
I’ve been in their shoes. If others use Catalogue Item #12345, stated to be highly specific to “spike protein”, I’d have probably used it, too.
In the Materials & Methods section of your manuscript, you state correctly where you obtained your reagents.
I have no difficulty with Dr Burkhardt’s work.
With respect to your statement above: "The body will make proteins against foreign substances, but they are not specific." I'm not sure I understand exactly what you are saying there. I was taught that antigens can incite a very specific antibody response in the form of IgM and later IgG. Presumably, the proteins that make up antigens have specific structural features having to do with their quaternary conformations such that the antibodies formed as a result of the immunological reaction to them are very specific and complementary to them as well. At least, that is what I understood to be the case. Are you saying that the immunological reaction to foreign (i.e., non-self) antigens is not specific in that sense or have I misunderstood what you wrote?
I have no dived deeply into the antibody theory but Dr Tom Cowan mentions an original study that shows the antibodies not to be specific but a general reaction of the body to foreign substances. In the sense that the same antibodies aka proteins can bind to multiple substances.
I agree that the scientists doing the studies rely on the materials they purchase and have trust that their origin is clear and proven. They also rely on the information they received during their education. I don't blame them. I refer to Dr. Tom Cowan regarding Dr. Burkhardt's work. He states that the origin of the antibodies used to bind the spike protein is in question. To be clear, Dr. Burkhardt did phenomenal work exposing the dangers of the jabs.
Thank you for your comments. I admire your work and your enormous courage! You are a shining light on the planet.
We get seasonal influenza when our cells build up too many environmental toxins from what we ingest or inject. We cyclically create exosomes (we don’t “catch” viruses), to purge these toxins from our body, which brings the electromagnetic frequency (EMF) of our cells into balance with the changing EMF patterns in our environment. The catalysts are: 1) Seasonal earth tilt 2) EMF tech 3) Ingested/injected toxins https://talknet.substack.com/p/vaxx-to-killdisable-billions-over
I am just really happy for both intravenous EDTA & Vitamins C & B-12 with a gluthione bag for 10 treatments and then switching back to plaquex for 10 treatments. My wife and I feel great and sleep well knowing that our blood is in great shape! Thank you, Professor Anita Baxas. I enjoyed reading your revised Plaquex book as well!
Thank you for your comments and compliment . I’m glad you’re doing so well!
Thank you for this piece Professor Baxas.
I am not a scientist, but I am trying to understand the why behind all the subterfuge. I understand that the “isolation” method is basically a made up process using a goo mixture in order to find whatever you want to find, and then finalized with a computer modeled sequencing of what they say is the “virus” causing all the harm. So essentially this allows the perpetrators to create whatever they want as far as an inflammatory response agent / poison that they can then put into a “vaccine” and inject into people?…am I getting the gist of the hoax game they are playing to poison the human race? Or am I simplifying it too much?
But then, they are saying it’s the spike proteins that are dismantling the ace2 receptors…and that’s what’s causing “COVID”…but Covid doesn’t even exist, and the spike narrative is created as cover for the very real inflammatory response of the graphene in the shots? And the graphene is the needed link between synthetic biology and the internet of bodies to use emf technology to control the human mind…in order for the NWO to create the hive mind / mind controlling the perceptions of the masses (as David Icke describes). Very much looking forward to your reply. Thanks again. I am very active in my community here in Ventura California. We are a surf town and many in the surfing community have woken up to all these things and we are speaking up and pushing back.
You wrote a wonderful summary of exactly what is going on. You got it!
Thank you for replying to me. I have another question, I think know the answer, but here goes: So ultimately the entire Covid virus pandemic plot was one big global transhuman agenda experiment on the human race; to see how the various countries’ peoples’ bodies would respond to graphene being injected into them…because that’s what they need for the fourth Industrial Revolution to move forward? …and they knew a certain cross-section of people would have adverse reactions, some even leading to sudden death I.e. the strokes and myocarditis and heart attacks (as seen by athletes and tv commentators dropping unconscious - so they scaled it back after these initial obvious effects showed themselves) and turbo cancers ensuing as a result of the body’s natural immuno response towards the synthetic p.e.g. Liponanoparticle which houses graphene amongst other nanotechs? So it’s primarily a transhuman experiment, but the perpetrators don’t mind at all if it also happens to kill a large number of people (short term or long term effects), because the perpetrators are also Malthusians?
You put it right. Except we are not entirely sure what causes turbo cancers. Graphene in any case can cause it, but I believe there is more to it than that. Many vials did contain mRNA but nobody know what it is coding for. Possible altering the human genome can cause cancer? Possibly the potentiation of EMF by the graphene, metals and self assembled nanotech is causing it? Since they want to hook us up to a central AI cloud computer and create a hive mind, they can then dictate and control our emotions to give them the loosh they need. Thus the would no longer need so many of us. If they can make everybody feel despair and fear, the get all the energetic food they feed on without needing all of us.
Ok yes that makes sense. It seems like Dr. Yeadon’s work regarding the differing experiments based on the differing lots / batches of vaccines distributed will come more and more into play as things continue to uncover. The SV40 seems to be a turbo cancer promoter, so the lots containing that in the sequence could be linked as well possibly. I’m going to try and attach a lecture from a guy named James Giordano, of DARPA and military neuroscience background. I’m not sure if you’ve heard of this guy, he teaches at the U.S. military academy’s but this particular lecture attached is very illuminating regarding the capabilities of nanotech being used to influence the brain and perception. It is tedious, but worth a watch through. It’s coming from the place of influencing the brain as the battlefield of the future against foreign enemies in a warfare setting. But if it were to be used against the domestic populous, it is pretty much the blueprint laid out for the hive mind / emf / nanotech world they are currently rolling out.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=James+Giordano&t=iphone&iax=videos&ia=videos&iai=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DN02SK9yd60s
You may have seen the posts I did nearly two years ago on a number of proteins that are critical to life preservation. These proteins are on the 1st 3 lines of the Pfizer adverse effects release document. I originally went as far as I could go with p53 which led me to consider specifically what was known to be in the Pfizer serum.
The variety of ailments post injection are not the whole gambit, neither can they be when you consider what happens post translation with N1-Methyl-Pseudouridine. There is a reason the synthetic product is favoured over naturally occurring uridine. Consider the lifecycle of a cell. There are 70,000 changes to each cell in your body in a single day. That is a huge amount of activity. This activity involves the clean up of dead cells (a fascinating process) suffice to say the N1-Methyl-Pseudouridine survives and is recycled to affect the next protein requiring the uridine amino (it’s longevity is as yet unknown). Now, this may not be considered an issue until you look at all of the bodies tissue, membrane, and nervous system that is heavily reliant on uridine. Then the penny drops. Heart and arteries blood vessels, anything that expands, collapses, and flexes. These have the largest uridine dependency. Now: Consider the list of known effects, Research the organs requiring the most uridine and you will see the most likely candidate causing these effects. I have more on this. But will leave you to digest for now.
Thank you for this. This is a very interesting aspect of what is happening.
Might this explain the deteriorating health of those "vaccinated"?
As in, the slow cumulative damage from the synthetic uridine?
Never isolated- I can thank Jon Rappoport for enlightening me on that one.
It’s what happens when you have Malthusian Transhumanists carrying out experiments on the global populous.
Surely you know that the Amazing Polly @fringeviews on X has been doinf an extensive deep dive into the Wellness Company and it's owners.
And she is under attack from all of them.
That proves her point and mine.
https://rumble.com/v4dflnk-proof-dod-and-fda-crimes-against-humanity.html
More evidence for folks to stop taking any vaccines period.
Finally! Some sense into this "spiked" hoax! CHEERs! :)
How or what are the stained so called spike proteins found in the autopsied victims? Is this just more misleading information?
That’s precisely what my long post which Prof Baxis included in her piece was referring to.
It may be difficult to follow, but I’m saying we’ve no idea what is being detected.
It’ll be whatever the perpetrators intended.
The reagents (tools) that potentially innocent researchers are using are not necessarily detected what’s claimed for them.
Now there are companies making mint using fraud pcr for urine, wound, and throat cultures.
Thank you for this excellent summary.