Quote:
(OSORIOartist/Shutterstock)
Health Viewpoints
Contagious Vaccines: A Warning
BY Aaron Kheriaty TIMEJune 17, 2022 PRINT

0:002:45


Commentary
For two decades scientists have been quietly developing self-spreading contagious vaccines. The NIH funded this research, in which either DNA from a deadly pathogen is packaged in a contagious but less harmful virus, or the deadly virus’s lethality is weakened by engineering it in a lab.
The resultant “vaccines” spread from one person to the next just like a contagious respiratory virus. Only five percent of regional populations would need to be immunized; the other ninety-five percent would “catch” the vaccine as it spread person-to-person through community transmission.
This technology bypasses the inconvenience of recalcitrant citizens who may refuse to give consent. Its advocates highlight that a mass vaccination campaign that would ordinarily take months of expensive effort to immunize everyone could be shortened to only a few weeks.
Scientists have already shown proof of concept in animal populations: in 2000, Spanish researchers injected seventy rabbits with a transmissible vaccine and returned them to the wild, where they quickly passed the vaccine on to hundreds more, reportedly stopping a viral outbreak. European countries are now testing the technology on pigs.

In the wake of the covid pandemic, about a dozen research institutions in the United States, Europe, and Australia are investigating the potential human uses for self-spreading vaccines. The federal Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), for example, is examining this technology for U.S. military to protect against the West Africa lassa fever, a virus spread by rats to humans. This project, it should be noted, does not require the consent of our military service men and women.
In 2019 the UK government began exploring this technology to address the seasonal flu. A research paper from Britain’s Department of Health and Social Care advised that university students could be an obvious target group:

Quote:They do not work so [vaccinating them] will not cause much economic disruption and most have second homes to go to, thereby spreading the vaccine.

Researchers admitted a contagious vaccine for an attenuated flu virus would cause some deaths but estimated these would be less than the original influenza virus. As the UK government report described:

Quote:Self-spreading vaccines are less lethal but not non-lethal: they can still kill. Some people will die who would otherwise have lived, though fewer people die overall.

As the saying goes, you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. Or in Lenin’s formulation, if you are going to chop down a forest then wood chips will fly. Contagious vaccines are in our future, their champions claim, and are no different than putting fluoride in drinking water. Plus, for those who find jabs unpleasant there are fewer needles required.
Government-funded research of lab-engineered viruses to create contagious self-spreading vaccines that bypass the consent of citizens. What could go wrong?

(06-18-2022, 12:46 PM)727Sky Wrote:

Quote:
(OSORIOartist/Shutterstock)
Health Viewpoints
Contagious Vaccines: A Warning
BY Aaron Kheriaty TIMEJune 17, 2022 PRINT

0:002:45


Commentary
For two decades scientists have been quietly developing self-spreading contagious vaccines. The NIH funded this research, in which either DNA from a deadly pathogen is packaged in a contagious but less harmful virus, or the deadly virus’s lethality is weakened by engineering it in a lab.
The resultant “vaccines” spread from one person to the next just like a contagious respiratory virus. Only five percent of regional populations would need to be immunized; the other ninety-five percent would “catch” the vaccine as it spread person-to-person through community transmission.
This technology bypasses the inconvenience of recalcitrant citizens who may refuse to give consent. Its advocates highlight that a mass vaccination campaign that would ordinarily take months of expensive effort to immunize everyone could be shortened to only a few weeks.
Scientists have already shown proof of concept in animal populations: in 2000, Spanish researchers injected seventy rabbits with a transmissible vaccine and returned them to the wild, where they quickly passed the vaccine on to hundreds more, reportedly stopping a viral outbreak. European countries are now testing the technology on pigs.

In the wake of the covid pandemic, about a dozen research institutions in the United States, Europe, and Australia are investigating the potential human uses for self-spreading vaccines. The federal Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), for example, is examining this technology for U.S. military to protect against the West Africa lassa fever, a virus spread by rats to humans. This project, it should be noted, does not require the consent of our military service men and women.
In 2019 the UK government began exploring this technology to address the seasonal flu. A research paper from Britain’s Department of Health and Social Care advised that university students could be an obvious target group:

Quote:They do not work so [vaccinating them] will not cause much economic disruption and most have second homes to go to, thereby spreading the vaccine.

Researchers admitted a contagious vaccine for an attenuated flu virus would cause some deaths but estimated these would be less than the original influenza virus. As the UK government report described:

Quote:Self-spreading vaccines are less lethal but not non-lethal: they can still kill. Some people will die who would otherwise have lived, though fewer people die overall.

As the saying goes, you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. Or in Lenin’s formulation, if you are going to chop down a forest then wood chips will fly. Contagious vaccines are in our future, their champions claim, and are no different than putting fluoride in drinking water. Plus, for those who find jabs unpleasant there are fewer needles required.
Government-funded research of lab-engineered viruses to create contagious self-spreading vaccines that bypass the consent of citizens. What could go wrong?

https://lists.youmaker.com/links/eRYyAobo2/sPLsIDpr1R/aa2an41Ga/5CQYZie8E

Quote:Government-funded research of lab-engineered viruses to create contagious self-spreading vaccines that bypass the consent of citizens. What could go wrong?

Quote:Georgia State University scientists have created gene-edited hamsters for studies of social neuroscience and have found that the biology behind social behavior may be more complex than previously thought.
A team of Georgia State University researchers led by Regents' Professor of Neuroscience H. Elliott Albers and Distinguished University Professor Kim Huhman used CRISPR-Cas9 technology to eliminate the actions of a neurochemical signaling pathway that plays a critical role in regulating social behaviors in mammals. Vasopressin and the receptor that it acts on called Avpr1a regulates social phenomena ranging from pair bonding, cooperation, and social communication to dominance and aggression. The new study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), finds that knocking out the Avpr1a receptor in hamsters, and thus effectively eliminating vasopressin's action on it, dramatically altered the expression of social behavior in unexpected ways.
"We were really surprised at the results," Albers said. "We anticipated that if we eliminated vasopressin activity, we would reduce both aggression and social communication. But the opposite happened."
Instead, the hamsters without the receptor showed much higher levels of social communication behavior than did their counterparts with intact receptors. Even more interesting, the typical sex differences observed in aggressiveness were eliminated with both male and female hamsters displaying high levels of aggression towards other same-sex individuals.

Quote:Australian law and medical practice recognises that individuals have the right to make informed decisions about their medical treatment. Legally, a practitioner who touches a patient or performs a procedure or treatment on them without their permission may have committed an assault. If the patient gives permission but has not been given sufficient information about the procedure and associated risks, they may bring a claim of medical negligence against the practitioner.

The duty to disclose information to patients is part of the overall duty of a medical practitioner to exercise reasonable skill and care. Failure to disclose information or to obtain proper consent can also give rise to a professional conduct complaint.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

An effective consent process needs to address three elements: 

• Capacity — who can give informed consent?
  
• Disclosure — what information do patients need?
  
• Voluntariness — are they giving consent freely?
  

Quote:BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL No 7070 Volume 313: Page 1448, 7 December 1996. Introduction The judgment by the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down 10 standards to which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects in a new code that is now accepted worldwide. This judgment established a new standard of ethical medical behaviour for the post World War II human rights era. Amongst other requirements, this document enunciates the requirement of voluntary informed consent of the human subject. The principle of voluntary informed consent protects the right of the individual to control his own body. This code also recognizes that the risk must be weighed against the expected benefit, and that unnecessary pain and suffering must be avoided. This code recognizes that doctors should avoid actions that injure human patients. The principles established by this code for medical practice now have been extended into general codes of medical ethics. The Nuremberg Code (1947) Permissible Medical Experiments The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts: 1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

Quote:Author

Aaron Kheriaty
Aaron Kheriaty, former Professor of Psychiatry at the UCI School of Medicine and Director, Medical Ethics at UCI Health, is a Senior Scholar of the Brownstone Institute.

(06-18-2022, 01:32 PM)NightskyeB4Dawn Wrote: In other words, they are doing exactly what they used to do when I was a child.

If a kid came down with the measles, chicken pox, or the mumps, every kid in the community had to go hug and kiss them, so they would be exposed and develop natural immunity.

May be why they are trying so hard to ignore natural immunity. They want to get us to buy it, in a shot.

No thanks. I will take my chances with the old fashioned God solution.

(06-18-2022, 01:32 PM).NightskyeB4Dawn Wrote: In other words, they are doing exactly what they used to do when I was a child.

If a kid came down with the measles, chicken pox, or the mumps, every kid in the community had to go hug and kiss them, so they would be exposed and develop natural immunity.

May be why they are trying so hard to ignore natural immunity. They want to get us to buy it, in a shot.

No thanks. I will take my chances with the old fashioned God solution.

(06-18-2022, 04:02 PM)Michigan Swamp Buck Wrote: I haven't read the sources, but I assume they are merely engineering a new virus. Even if they call it something else (and they will) it is a contagious GM pathogen developed in a laboratory for the expressed purpose of releasing it on the public. I predicted something like this on Nov 4th, 2021 in a thread at ATS called "Question - Will the next phase be a GMO corona virus that acts as a vaccination?"

What they propose is IMO a biological attack at worst or an unregulated, uncontrolled non consensual  experiment on the entire human population at the least. Nuremberg should be applied if this is attempted and those who would do this be made clearly aware of this and put under heavy surveillance for the remainder of their lives.

(06-18-2022, 06:51 PM)Ninurta Wrote: BUT - it looks to not be a "natural immunity" at all, rather an immunity to an engineered virus instead of the natural one. Nothing natural about it at any step in the process. AND the thing is, when you start tinkering with the genetics, there is no way of knowing what untended consequences will follow. When you change genes, which work in tandem with other genes, entirely unexpected results can follow from the new mixture. Think baking - when you are baking a cake, if you accidentally include two cups of salt instead of two cups of sugar, it may look the same in the end, but it's gonna be an entirely different experience when eaten even though only one ingredient was changed.

.

(06-18-2022, 08:10 PM)NightskyeB4Dawn Wrote: You are right. There is nothing, natural about it.

And they are not interested in doing anything to save us. They are experimenting with our children and they are willing to risk the lives of the majority of the people on this planet. No doctor that cares about his patients is going to give a perfectly healthy child some, manufactured experimental concoction, for some unknown, disease that they claim they don't know enough about. But admits that it has a less than 1% chance of killing you, and is very likely to be no more harmful than a common cold or the flu.

And nobody in their right mind would allow their child to be used in such a manner.

So what in the hell is the real goal? There is some real shady stuff going on, and people better freaking wake up.

They don't give a damn about any of us. So why the charade? Maybe there really are aliens among us. Because the people in positions of authority on this planet, sure as hell are not human.

(06-18-2022, 08:10 PM)NightskyeB4Dawn Wrote:

(06-18-2022, 06:51 PM)Ninurta Wrote: BUT - it looks to not be a "natural immunity" at all, rather an immunity to an engineered virus instead of the natural one. Nothing natural about it at any step in the process. AND the thing is, when you start tinkering with the genetics, there is no way of knowing what untended consequences will follow. When you change genes, which work in tandem with other genes, entirely unexpected results can follow from the new mixture. Think baking - when you are baking a cake, if you accidentally include two cups of salt instead of two cups of sugar, it may look the same in the end, but it's gonna be an entirely different experience when eaten even though only one ingredient was changed.

.

You are right. There is nothing, natural about it.

And they are not interested in doing anything to save us. They are experimenting with our children and they are willing to risk the lives of the majority of the people on this planet. No doctor that cares about his patients is going to give a perfectly healthy child some, manufactured experimental concoction, for some unknown, disease that they claim they don't know enough about. But admits that it has a less than 1% chance of killing you, and is very likely to be no more harmful than a common cold or the flu.

And nobody in their right mind would allow their child to be used in such a manner.

So what in the hell is the real goal? There is some real shady stuff going on, and people better freaking wake up.

They don't give a damn about any of us. So why the charade? Maybe there really are aliens among us. Because the people in positions of authority on this planet, sure as hell are not human.

Quote:The classic Chiffon ads from the D'Arcy Masius Benton & Bowles advertising agency[8] ran during the 1970s and into the 1980s, featuring character actress Dena Dietrich as the iconic character Mother Nature.[9]

She likes Chiffon and identifies it as "my delicious butter!" The narrator (voiced by character actor Mason Adams) then tells her: "That's Chiffon margarine, not butter ... Chiffon's so delicious it fooled even you, Mother Nature." Vexed at the trickery, Mother Nature responds by uttering, in increasingly scornful tones, her signature line "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature", quickly followed by a flash of lightning, a peal of thunder, and occasionally an additional threat (such as silently commanding an elephant to charge the camera). The advertisements were typically closed by a jingle containing the lyrics, "If you think it's butter, but it's not: it's Chiffon."[2]

(07-07-2022, 01:33 PM)Michigan Swamp Buck Wrote: I seems obvious to me that NO ONE who promotes manipulating nature in this way, meaning tinkering around with genetics to create something unnatural, is actually interested in the making things better for man, beast or the world.

If I am a tree hugging liberal that claims to be interested in saving the natural world, manipulating biology at the genetic level is not natural in any way. The problem humanity has with nature is our constant manipulation of the environment to suit our desires. Our desires do not align with living in harmony with nature. We want things to be comfortable, easy, stress free, instantly on demand, whatever it is we want, we want it now with little to no effort on our part.

This does not benefit humanity and it is esp. bad for nature. Mankind would rather change the environment to suit his desires and beliefs than adapt in a natural way. We must allow nature to mold us into the beings that are best adapted to survive whatever nature throws at us. Instead we try to make "improvements" to nature based on our accumulated knowledge of how to interfere with it, rather than improve ourselves by learning how to actually live harmoniously with nature.

It's our egos that is the big problem. We know better than God and these "intellectuals" have something better, "the science" that only seems to prove that we know just enough to fuck things up entirely and make our human condition worse by our misguided manipulation of nature. To make things far worse, it is greed that feeds our egos with unnatural products and ultimately destructive policies made possible with "the science".

Consider this popular advertisement from the 1970s.

Quote:The classic Chiffon ads from the D'Arcy Masius Benton & Bowles advertising agency[8] ran during the 1970s and into the 1980s, featuring character actress Dena Dietrich as the iconic character Mother Nature.[9]

She likes Chiffon and identifies it as "my delicious butter!" The narrator (voiced by character actor Mason Adams) then tells her: "That's Chiffon margarine, not butter ... Chiffon's so delicious it fooled even you, Mother Nature." Vexed at the trickery, Mother Nature responds by uttering, in increasingly scornful tones, her signature line "It's not nice to fool Mother Nature", quickly followed by a flash of lightning, a peal of thunder, and occasionally an additional threat (such as silently commanding an elephant to charge the camera). The advertisements were typically closed by a jingle containing the lyrics, "If you think it's butter, but it's not: it's Chiffon."[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiffon_margarine

The company that produces Chiffon margarine is admitting that mother nature doesn't approve of mankind creating fake butter and will punish us with the forces of nature if we succeed in making the perfect faked natural product like Chiffon margarine. They made Mother Nature into a joke to sell a chemically synthetic food product that was promoted as being better than what nature could do. IMO they totally admit all this in their advertising.

Now genetics. We as humans foolishly believe that we know better than Mother Nature. We have come to believe our IQ is high enough to make our beliefs better than reality, that we are smarter and better than God the creator. God is dead, we are all gods and will make ourselves into what ever image we can think up. That is the very basis of Satanic beliefs, an ego that is bigger than God, with the pride and arrogance to rebel and place ourselves above our creator.

Nature will teach us a lesson we can only learn when it kills us off and our species goes extinct. Another failed experiment conducted by nature, but she has the time and space to come up with something better long after we have returned to the dust we were created from.

Quote:Prof Sir Jonathan Van-Tam hails colleagues at knighthood ceremony

'Prof Sir Jonathan Van-Tam said he was "standing on the shoulders of others" after being knighted
for his public health work during the pandemic. Prof Van-Tam, nicknamed JVT, became known for
delivering Covid updates in light-hearted ways, sometimes employing football analogies.


The scare-mongers.

He had joined the Department of Health and Social Care on secondment from the University of
Nottingham in 2017. He was knighted at Buckingham Palace by the Duke of Cambridge...'

Quote:'...He was recognised alongside former colleague Dr Dame Jenny Harries, who like the professor is a
former deputy chief medical officer for England and was made a Dame Commander for her role
supporting the health of the nation and making broadcasts...'

(07-07-2022, 04:14 PM)BIAD Wrote: As a side-note, I see Professor Johnathon Van-Tam received his knighthood... along with fellow-doom-projector Dr Jenny Harries.

Quote:Prof Sir Jonathan Van-Tam hails colleagues at knighthood ceremony

'Prof Sir Jonathan Van-Tam said he was "standing on the shoulders of others" after being knighted
for his public health work during the pandemic. Prof Van-Tam, nicknamed JVT, became known for
delivering Covid updates in light-hearted ways, sometimes employing football analogies.


The scare-mongers.

He had joined the Department of Health and Social Care on secondment from the University of
Nottingham in 2017. He was knighted at Buckingham Palace by the Duke of Cambridge...'

Quote:'...He was recognised alongside former colleague Dr Dame Jenny Harries, who like the professor is a
former deputy chief medical officer for England and was made a Dame Commander for her role
supporting the health of the nation and making broadcasts...'

BBC: