"The S protein generated by or incorporated into vaccines is an effective immunogen but does not alter DNA, does not induce infertility or pass through breast milk, and is not a toxin."
I was permanently suspended by Twitter in February 2021 for warning of COVID vaccine toxicity. Now I am suing Twitter and the Biden administration for collusion to violate the 1st Amendment, and resulting widespread morbidity and mortality, for suppressing my warnings.
Here I showed the mechanisms of the shots' cardiotoxicity:
guess this means that the veracity of a statement gets decided by the identity of the speaker and how it affects the dominant narrative. it is essentially punitive enforcement of the pack, nothing matters more than marching in lockstep and displaying loyalty to the larger cause: that cause of course being our rulers and their sycophant class maintaining their exalted status.
you would think this mountain of lies and social damage would be too enormous to cover up, but dont worry it will be.
conformity and inertia plus it being better to be an insider w egg on your face (a la Iraq) than to be a weird outsider will snuff most of it.
Meanwhile, there are now ads for treatments for child myocarditis, because that's just a thing that sort of happens now, apparently commonly enough that it's worth making ads about, but no biggie, don't ask questions:
I'm reading *Raven* because of the column you wrote about it. I'm up to January 1978. I don't know if you recall the part in September 1977 when Reiterman (working for the *Examiner* at this point) interviews Joyce Shaw (Bob Houston's widow, who has left the cult) and Phyllis Houston (Bob Houston's ex-wife, who is still in the cult, but living in San Francisco). Both teen daughters of the Houstons are in Jonestown, Guyana, 6000 miles away from their mother. Their father is dead (mysterious railroad accident). Phyllis tells Reiterman that the girls like it there and could come home if they wanted to, and he can't decide whether something bad is going on.
A lot of terrible things happen in part because journalists and their editors are reluctant to believe that something truly awful is true. Nobody wants to be the first to say the terrible, world-rocking thing out loud, so the general public doesn't find out until it's too late, and 900 people are dead (or in the case of mRNA shots, tens of thousands).
I say this as a journalist who has written about bad stuff that I wish weren't true.
Thank you for documenting another solid example. 20 years ago I had faith in the CDC as a body of experts arriving at scientific consensus. But the last few years only show lies and deceit constructed to manipulate Americans. They and the MSM and the gov't writ large have lied so often and so vociferously that only a fool would believe them now.
I wonder how demented the spin will have become by the time the wheels finally fall off. I sense they will try to redirect the avalanche of rage at the unvaccinated, but how? Could their narrative suddenly turn ultra weird, once the bodies pile up high enough? I'm talking "you-unvaxxed-are-all-literally-witches" weird?
Did you catch the weasel wording in the fact check? "There is no evidence the spike protein causes a toxin to be produced..." The spike protein IS the toxin, it doesn't produce one. So the fact check is technically correct. They're playing with people's lives by playing with words.
Don't you love that Politico mentions Bridle by name but those refuting him are anonymous "experts"? It's details like that everyone should be on lookout for when reading or watching so called news.
“Everything in medicine is about taking the choice that puts you at lowest risk. Whether that's the surgery you're about to get or medicine you're about to take. There are no risk-free choices,"
Agreed...except federal and local governments and many businesses didn’t want it to be a choice, they wanted a mandate. That’s a different risk equation.
I refused to get the jab. Not enough research in my opinion and heard of many people feeling very bad after the 1st injection. I was in good health and having NO comorbidities felt even at 69, I would take the risk. Strong immune system- that's the key. My husband and I both got the Omicron variant (wasn't tested), but I would decribed as a mild cold with a fever. Please, now pushing a booster for that! It's all about the money and retaining control.
The extent to which the taxpayer funded "experts" have gone to suppress true, informed and non-hysterical opinions based on FACT, is astounding! Given an opportunity, they would have suppressed any and all information on the Vaccine Adverse Reaction Data Base, which reports only a fraction of the adverse effects (as estimated by Harvard University) . This is super scary indeed. Thanks again, Chris for taking on the "Fact Checkers" writing about it in such an entertaining and readable form!
Sadly Chris, once again you’re underestimating the importance of being RIGHT! Irrespective of ever evolving facts, one must NEVER admit that one wasn’t RIGHT all along. The corollary, of course, is that anyone who was unfortunate enough not to be RIGHT initially (i.e, wrong), will, always and forever, be unable to achieve that state of grace otherwise known as...RIGHT-ness.
An interviewee in the June 7 article also states: "What people have to understand is....if you look at COVID-19, the myocarditis that the disease gives you occurs at about 30 times higher frequency. So, yes, it's true that the vaccine has a rare adverse event of myocarditis, and we and others are trying to understand how it occurs and how to avoid it[.]" It's important to be clear as to what they are claiming about relative myocarditis risks whether one agrees or not. I don't know if this claim is true but it is certainly relevant.
The great thing about the internet: five years from now, they can "edit" that story and put it in paragraph 2 and pretend it was there all along.
There is a reason why the California bill penalizes doctors acting on or giving information "contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus." It's not that you're acting in an anti-science (little s) way. It's that you're acting in an anti-Science(TM) way against the "consensus" of a bunch of people with self-serving motives and no regard for human life.
The Football Moves Again
Here's the attack on Bridle by his own colleagues in July of 2021:
https://www.wormsandgermsblog.com/files/2021/07/20210706-VaccineSafety_UoGuelph.pdf
"The S protein generated by or incorporated into vaccines is an effective immunogen but does not alter DNA, does not induce infertility or pass through breast milk, and is not a toxin."
I was permanently suspended by Twitter in February 2021 for warning of COVID vaccine toxicity. Now I am suing Twitter and the Biden administration for collusion to violate the 1st Amendment, and resulting widespread morbidity and mortality, for suppressing my warnings.
Here I showed the mechanisms of the shots' cardiotoxicity:
https://colleenhuber.substack.com/p/is-it-possible-to-avoid-heart-damage
guess this means that the veracity of a statement gets decided by the identity of the speaker and how it affects the dominant narrative. it is essentially punitive enforcement of the pack, nothing matters more than marching in lockstep and displaying loyalty to the larger cause: that cause of course being our rulers and their sycophant class maintaining their exalted status.
you would think this mountain of lies and social damage would be too enormous to cover up, but dont worry it will be.
conformity and inertia plus it being better to be an insider w egg on your face (a la Iraq) than to be a weird outsider will snuff most of it.
Meanwhile, there are now ads for treatments for child myocarditis, because that's just a thing that sort of happens now, apparently commonly enough that it's worth making ads about, but no biggie, don't ask questions:
https://twitter.com/anish_koka/status/1571186794644873217
I'm reading *Raven* because of the column you wrote about it. I'm up to January 1978. I don't know if you recall the part in September 1977 when Reiterman (working for the *Examiner* at this point) interviews Joyce Shaw (Bob Houston's widow, who has left the cult) and Phyllis Houston (Bob Houston's ex-wife, who is still in the cult, but living in San Francisco). Both teen daughters of the Houstons are in Jonestown, Guyana, 6000 miles away from their mother. Their father is dead (mysterious railroad accident). Phyllis tells Reiterman that the girls like it there and could come home if they wanted to, and he can't decide whether something bad is going on.
A lot of terrible things happen in part because journalists and their editors are reluctant to believe that something truly awful is true. Nobody wants to be the first to say the terrible, world-rocking thing out loud, so the general public doesn't find out until it's too late, and 900 people are dead (or in the case of mRNA shots, tens of thousands).
I say this as a journalist who has written about bad stuff that I wish weren't true.
Thank you for documenting another solid example. 20 years ago I had faith in the CDC as a body of experts arriving at scientific consensus. But the last few years only show lies and deceit constructed to manipulate Americans. They and the MSM and the gov't writ large have lied so often and so vociferously that only a fool would believe them now.
Please tell me this ends without bloodshed.
I wonder how demented the spin will have become by the time the wheels finally fall off. I sense they will try to redirect the avalanche of rage at the unvaccinated, but how? Could their narrative suddenly turn ultra weird, once the bodies pile up high enough? I'm talking "you-unvaxxed-are-all-literally-witches" weird?
Did you catch the weasel wording in the fact check? "There is no evidence the spike protein causes a toxin to be produced..." The spike protein IS the toxin, it doesn't produce one. So the fact check is technically correct. They're playing with people's lives by playing with words.
Don't you love that Politico mentions Bridle by name but those refuting him are anonymous "experts"? It's details like that everyone should be on lookout for when reading or watching so called news.
Hi Chris,
Thank-you! Your articles are great.
From the reuters article
“Everything in medicine is about taking the choice that puts you at lowest risk. Whether that's the surgery you're about to get or medicine you're about to take. There are no risk-free choices,"
Agreed...except federal and local governments and many businesses didn’t want it to be a choice, they wanted a mandate. That’s a different risk equation.
I refused to get the jab. Not enough research in my opinion and heard of many people feeling very bad after the 1st injection. I was in good health and having NO comorbidities felt even at 69, I would take the risk. Strong immune system- that's the key. My husband and I both got the Omicron variant (wasn't tested), but I would decribed as a mild cold with a fever. Please, now pushing a booster for that! It's all about the money and retaining control.
The extent to which the taxpayer funded "experts" have gone to suppress true, informed and non-hysterical opinions based on FACT, is astounding! Given an opportunity, they would have suppressed any and all information on the Vaccine Adverse Reaction Data Base, which reports only a fraction of the adverse effects (as estimated by Harvard University) . This is super scary indeed. Thanks again, Chris for taking on the "Fact Checkers" writing about it in such an entertaining and readable form!
Sadly Chris, once again you’re underestimating the importance of being RIGHT! Irrespective of ever evolving facts, one must NEVER admit that one wasn’t RIGHT all along. The corollary, of course, is that anyone who was unfortunate enough not to be RIGHT initially (i.e, wrong), will, always and forever, be unable to achieve that state of grace otherwise known as...RIGHT-ness.
Oh, what a world we live in...whoda’ thunk?
An interviewee in the June 7 article also states: "What people have to understand is....if you look at COVID-19, the myocarditis that the disease gives you occurs at about 30 times higher frequency. So, yes, it's true that the vaccine has a rare adverse event of myocarditis, and we and others are trying to understand how it occurs and how to avoid it[.]" It's important to be clear as to what they are claiming about relative myocarditis risks whether one agrees or not. I don't know if this claim is true but it is certainly relevant.
The great thing about the internet: five years from now, they can "edit" that story and put it in paragraph 2 and pretend it was there all along.
There is a reason why the California bill penalizes doctors acting on or giving information "contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus." It's not that you're acting in an anti-science (little s) way. It's that you're acting in an anti-Science(TM) way against the "consensus" of a bunch of people with self-serving motives and no regard for human life.