Posted on 06/16/2022 12:06:16 PM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
A renowned virologist and vaccine creator has issued a warning that the experimental gene-based COVID-19 vaccine campaigns will cause an emergence of a new highly virulent and infectious COVID-19 variant within “the next two months” which will serve to “crash” the health care system.
Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche, whose résumé includes roles as a former senior officer of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, as well as a senior program manager for the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), has been considered one of the most talented vaccine creators in the world.
In a May 18 interview with Australian journalist Maria Zeee, Vanden Bossche said, “that in the next two months, I expect an explosion [of this virulent variant] in one of these highly vaccinated countries. And then it will go very, very fast.”
According to his theory, the resulting suppression of innate immunity in the many individuals who have been injected with these experimental products—which neither eradicate nor prevent transmission of the virus—will lead to “immune escape.”
This concept proposes that vaccinated people will continue to be infected with and shed the virus, which due to the “pressure” exerted by experimental COVID-19 vaccines, will accumulate large numbers of mutations, in turn creating variants which are far more virulent and can no longer be controlled by the vaccines…
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
And all the rest are different.
Yeah, sure. Right.
A good example of how a lack of intellectual
and scientific curiosity has become the norm in some circles on FR.
It’s not exactly a badge of honor.
I prefer PEOPLE doctors.
_________________
They take the same courses in pre-med and some of the same courses in med school, plus the vets learn the anatomy/patho-physiology/biochem of many species.
Because they deal with herds and flocks, their training in epidemiology is top tier, above most *people* doctors.
Most vets do surgery several times a week, often on a small animal in the clinic and sometimes on a large animal in the field. Those large animals are valuable and get better care than many people. Some MDs never do any surgery.
I have a good, long-term friend who is a vet, have MDs and APRNs in my family and am friends with MDs and APRNs. The vets know how and are willing to teach theory and practice to *civilians*. I have learned more from my vet friend and watched him treat wounds & amputations more thoroughly than I experienced in a human ER.
He was also the designated medic in his Ranger group, which is really Emergency Medicine under difficult circumstances.
Most MDs will refer to a set protocol from their administrator and then consult a PDR before writing a script or setting up a consult with a specialist. Vets are usually private practice, develop their own protocols from experience and will often direct a compounding pharmacy to make exactly the medication they prescribe.
The heads of the big pharma companies are often veterinarians.Public Health officials are ofter veterinarians. Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche was head of the EU equivalent of CDC. He has a 2nd PhD in virology, for which he was required to do original work. He has tirelessly written and given clear explanations on video that went into detail on the immune system, epidemics and viruses. He is not only highly credentialed, renowned and professionally experienced, he has been proven right over and over since this entire virus/vaxx mess began.
The people doctors followed orders.
...peer review...
_______
Have you researched the amount of cronyism and outright fraud being discovered and discussed concerning peer review and medical journals? It is a worthwhile investigation.
...too precise, if he doesn’t care to sound like he knows it’s being designed.
_____
Has nothing to do with designed vs natural origin. It is a mathematical calculation based on intimate knowledge of viruses and the manner in which they evolve and spread. The size of the population involved and the time it takes to do so, modified by the evolutionary pressures present or absent are all considerations.
But you went for the cheap shot because you have no idea what is involved at all.
Elections are coming!
...disgruntled employees and scientists going on anti vaccine crusades. One was a senior somebody at Pfizer. Another a scientist butthurt that he wasn’t given credit for creating mRNA technology - who now makes the rounds on various sites predicting doom. And this former employee of Bill & Melinda Gates.
________________________
Not disgruntled employees.
VP in charge of a division (can’t recall which one) at Pfizer, Mike Yeadon had an long career and an amicable retirement. He started his own successful company and sold it for lots and lots of $$. He speaks out because he is financially secure and not beholden to anyone for employment. He has been proven correct and his speculations of late that this entire episode has nefarious goals is well-supported by facts, Pfizers own documents, and whistleblowers.
Dr. Robert Malone was duly accorded credit with his name on numerous patents for the initial discoveries of the composition & uses of mRNA as a drug delivery system. He had a long and untarnished career with the DOD and became an expert on how the funding/grant/peer review process works. He received the infamous cancellation process from the government and pharma via the legacy state media as soon as he voiced any doubts. The patents still exist unaltered.
Originally, he was cautious. He was *removed* from internet articles as a co-discoverer of mRNA and a woman scientist with leftist credentials was substituted. This is just the same way the government accuses people with no evidence and forces them to spend themselves into bankruptcy to prove their innocence....at which point they drop charges and move on. Only done to political and agenda opponents.
Malone has moved on from predicting anything. He is gathering facts and is fighting back. His predictions all happened. He writes for far more prestigious outlets and has been extensively interviewed by seriously knowledgeable peers than just *making the rounds* on *various sites*.
Geert Van Der Bossche was head of the EU equivalent of the CDC. He left the BMG foundation. You cannot use employment by Gates as evidence of some sort of shenanigans when that former employee is actively teaching about the facts of viral evolution. You are damning him for 2 contradictory actions at the same time.
Your dismissals are weird for a libh8ter.
And I’m not a woman but I have a d**k…
It’s all relative these days.
Or they’re trying to explain a statistically significant mysterious increase in all cause mortality on something other than the vaxxes.
It still does not detract from the point that he is unwilling to submit his “opinion” his “hypothesis” for peer review.
___________________
His work is published. It is mathematical, informed by his knowledge of virology.
Any scientific peer (it’s a small group) could debate him publicly, write a detailed refutation and, given that the basic constructs are well known and the equations available, review and confirm or refute the conclusions.
Waiting.
Except that’s not how it works.
No matter.
Oh?
*Peer Review*, already exposed as cronyistic/controlled/corrupt cannot be done outside the controlled format?
Why not?
Who says?
It does appear to matter, since you harped on it, so explain to us why no peer of GVDB can simply set up a debate, write a refutation or challenge Geert?
At his level, there are not a lot of peers.
More and more questions arise when all critiques become dismissive.
It’s almost....controlled.
It’s easily lazy to dismiss ALL peer review such as you do with your statement.
Some peer review has reviewers and journals which push normative science, and emphasize shaping narratives. They’re wrong.
But there are plenty of journals and reviewers that take their roles seriously and do a good job.
Peer review is the traditional way to submit research for evaluation. GVDB knows that. He made a choice.
Why would a peer of GVDB not set up an alternate way to review the research of GVDB? Probably because there is already a way to review the research - which GVDB has chosen not to do.
Yeah....nah
...”hiding behind a process of “peer review” by friendly fellow woo-woo aficionados to exclude debate and criticism from outsiders and pantomime adversarial assessment is just woo on top of woo. it generates the appearance of fact checking but is really its antithesis. only the guild gets to decide what can be approved and spoken of and these bodies exist to defend ideology and careers, not to pursue truths and paradigm shifts
“and this is why the future will continue to be incredibly unkind to the siloed orthodoxies of self-anointed expertdom.
“because the future is interdisciplinary.
“the future lies in cross-pollination, not in protecting the genetic purity of the fragile hothouse flowers of academia.
“and that means the future is ours.
“the speed with which the crowd sourced public health and epidemiology movement coalesced out of 20 different disciplines finding and building off of one another was nothing short of dazzling.
“it was inspiring.
“this field made more progress in 2 years than in the prior 50.
“a whole new underpinning in reality was generated for a debased antiquated discipline in nothing flat.
“and credibility has shifted drastically.
“we dropped the woo-woo and learned what worked for real.
“now imagine what this can do in every other discipline.
“and how bright that future could be.
“and THAT is why we must be absolutists about reclaiming the public square and the freewheeling and adversarial discourse of progress.
“collaborative media must be defended as an agora open to ALL ideas.”
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/why-public-health-experts-never-want?s=r
why public health “experts” never want to fight “the amateurs”
Lots of broad brush statements.
Unable to find any evidence of this claim:
“ this field made more progress in 2 years than in the prior 50.”
Based on what measure?
His article sounds nice but it’s one person’s opinion without the benefit of a lot of data underpinning is claims.
The traditional methods are so corrupted that *the data* is untrustworthy and the proof is the monstrous cluster-f*<x we are living in.
We have all seen for ourselves that the *experts* are at best frauds and at worst, genocidal. Instead of the vaunted and controlled *peer review* in tightly-fenced & guarded *journals* supported by Pharma, the creative and accomplished are collaborating and all the professionals that have been lauded by toadies and followed by the lazy are rightly being ignored.
Perhaps bean counters, politicians, and those with management experience and no real world accomplishments beyond the ability to suck up to wokeness (I am being kind, here) and pocketing undisclosed royalties and a percentage of crony-mediated grants are being replaced. Teams of real clinicians, real bench scientists, real, on the ground, field scientists are exchanging information and knowledge in order to rectify the mess of errors and craft workable approaches for the future.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating. We can all stay tuned. But, there are published results of the early interventions with repurposed, safe and truly effective medications. Published studies disproving the public health approaches (masks/mandates/lockdowns/distancing, extreme disinfection) abound. Data exists showing the disaster arising from hospital protocols of dangerous, poorly-trialed drugs and ventilation.
Paper after paper from across the globe documents the ghastly results of the mRNA treatments. I’m sure the data from sources derided by Pharma and authoritarian state actors led by unelected technocrats bound and determined to inflict their ideology on the entire planet will not move anyone so hidebound as to insist on continuing with failed protocols just because they are *traditional*.
Doesn’t matter. The tide has turned and alternative systems are being created and implemented. Most people took notice when Pfizer admitted to fraud, then exonerated itself because it was in league with government and so, could not have defrauded government. Both are now distrusted and reviled around the globe because they defrauded us all. Government only exists as representatives of the people, who are the only source of its legitimacy & revenue.
The best trait of humanity is adaptability. We are all adapting, improvising and overcoming. Malone (Bench scientist and management/clinical trial expert),Van Den Bossche (DVM epidemiologist, virologist, experienced public health administrator), McCollough (clinician, journal editor, highly published & cited in his field of cardiology), Yeadon (bench scientist, pharma executive, entrepreneur), Kirsch (tech entrepreneur, MIT graduate with buildings bearing his name, IT engineer) & Weinstein (evolutionary biologist, field scientist, author, teacher, iconoclast) are publishing. (There are others, all accomplished, all publishing) Look for their work. It is available without the overhearing imprimatur of the ossified technocratic self-designated *elite*.
The powers that be tried to bury these people, all accomplished in their separate fields. Instead, they came together, shared their expertise, shared protocols outside the artificial academic silos, created workable systems that are attracting clients and patrons but are not even discussed in the controlled and corrupted legacy state media and became literal seeds now sprouting.
It takes individual effort to discern the future harvest from a young, hybrid plant. It will not be available prepackaged and predigested.
We can only hope that this sorely-needed effort is not met with a totalitarian purge, but if it is killed, it will create so many martyrs that they will inspire generations of innovators.
errata:
...available without the overhearing imprimatur...
should be:
...available without the overbearing imprimatur...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.