• Home

  • About SeeTVNews

  • All News

  • Australian News

  • World News

  • Business

  • Sports News

  • Health

  • Videos

  • Crypto Currency

  • Precious Metals

  • Genral Information

  • Contact

  • Advertise

  • More

    Use tab to navigate through the menu items.
    imageonline-co-transparentimage (6).png

    News, Business, Sport and Opinion Blogs

    • YouTube
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
    • All Posts
    • Australian News
    • US News
    • Victoria
    • Business
    • Politics
    • Our View
    • Podcasts
    • Sport
    • Health
    • Videos
    • Informational Video
    • Opinion Pieces
    • Sports News
    • Futsal_Serie_A Women
    • Latest News From Europe
    • World News
    • Crypto Currency
    • Precious Metals, Gold & Silver
    • General Information
    • Formula 1
    • Serie A
    • Football
    • Survival
    Search
    • Michael Moore
      • Nov 23, 2020
      • 2 min read

    Medical References

    Michael Moore 24 November 2020


    Medical references disproving the narrative on COVID with regard to vaccines and masks.


    Some people have gone about asking, “Who am I to comment on COVID and the medical evidence disproving the narrative?”


    Well I am not a medical practitioner or scientist. A virologist or epidemiologist. But, as a researcher, I DO READ their papers and I accept what they say on the assumption they are professionals in their field. My presumption is based on the idea that professionals in the field have more authority than the mainstream media.


    Here is a list of SOME of the statements and papers I have read. Feel free to read any of them and make up your own mind.


    We start with three eminent epidemiologists from the three most prestigious universities in the world, Harvard, Oxford and Stanford.


    https://gbdeclaration.org/

    https://lockdownsceptics.org/

    https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-6817

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PM C4868614/

    https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-tips-to-avoid-maskne-skin-irritation

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_bovine_serum#:~:text=Fetal%20bovine%20serum%20(FBS)%20comes,cell%20culture%20of%20eukaryotic%20cells.

    https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/10/what-is-in-vaccines-fact-sheet.pdf

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#Use_of_adjuvants

    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41573-020-00073-5

    https://iamnaturalnana.wordpress.com/2019/11/07/mrc-5-know-what-that-is/

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31604-4/fulltext


    Burgess A, Horii M. Risk, ritual and health responsibilisation: Japan’s ‘safety blanket’ of surgical face mask-wearing. Sociol Health Illn 2012;34:1184–98. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

    Beck U. Risk society: towards a new modernity. London: Sage Publications; 1992. [Google Scholar]


    Belkin NL. The evolution of the surgical mask: filtering efficiency versus effectiveness. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1997;18:49–57. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


    Spooner JL. History of surgical face masks: the myths, the masks, and the men and women behind them. AORN J 1967;5:76–80. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


    Larson EL, Liverman CT, editors. Preventing transmission of pandemic influenza and other viral respiratory diseases: personal protective equipment for healthcare workers: update 2010. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2010. [Google Scholar]


    MacIntyre CR, Cauchemez S, Dwyer DE, et al. Face mask use and control of respiratory virus transmission in households. Emerg Infect Dis 2009;15:233–41. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


    Cowling BJ, Chan KH, Fang VJ, et al. Facemasks and hand hygiene to prevent influenza transmission in households: a cluster randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:437–46. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


    Smith JD, MacDougall CC, Johnstone J, et al. Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ 2016. Mar. 7 [Epub ahead of print]. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]


    Annex M: Public health measures. In: Canadian pandemic influenza preparedness: planning guidance for the health sector. Ottawa: Public Health Agency of Canada; 2006. [modified 2016 Feb. 12]. Available: www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/cpip-pclcpi/ann-m-eng.php (accessed 2016 Feb. 22). [Google Scholar]


    Frequently asked questions — pandemic influenza preparedness. Ottawa: Public Health Agency of Canada; 2012. Available: www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/influenza/pp-faq-eng.php (accessed 2016 Feb. 22). [Google Scholar]

    • Health
    122 views0 comments
    • Michael Moore
      • Nov 18, 2020
      • 4 min read

    What Is In a Vaccine?

    Updated: Jul 22, 2021

    Michael Moore 18 November 2020

    Support us by sharing and subscribing

    Few know what is contained within a vaccine and they might be surprised and even a little disturbed to find out what some of the ingredients are.

    It is always a good idea to ask your medical practitioner or health advisor what the ingredients are in the vaccine he or she is encouraging you to take so here is a typical breakdown of the ingredients you may find in a vaccine.

    MMR (MMR-II) 2/2020 (Vaccine for Measles or Rubella) for example may contain:

    • Vitamins.

    • amino acids. Amino acids are organic compounds that contain amine (–NH2) and carboxyl (–COOH) functional groups, along with a side chain (R group) specific to each .

    • fetal bovine serum. Fetal bovine serum (FBS) comes from the blood drawn from a bovine fetus via a closed system of collection at the slaughterhouse. Fetal bovine serum is the most widely used serum-supplement for the in vitro cell culture of eukaryotic cells. In other words blood from an unborn or recently born calf.

    • Sucrose, Sugar

    • Glutamate. A thickener

    • Recombinant human Albumin (Human) 5% is a sterile, liquid preparation of albumin derived from large pools of human plasma or blood.

    • Neomycin, an antibiotic

    • Sorbitol, less commonly known as glucitol is a sugar alcohol

    • hydrolyzed gelatin, Hydrolyzed gelatin is the result of gelatin in hydrolysis. The act of hydrolyzing something means to break it down by using water. It should be noted that most gelatine comes from the bones of animals.

    • Sodium phosphate, a type of salt

    • Sodium. Salt

    Other vaccines contain similar ingredients. A few will contain Mercury (not so common these days) in the form of Thimerosal which is a form of mercury ‘considered’ safe due to the small amount used.


    Also Formaldehyde (Formaldehyde is a colorless, strong-smelling gas used in making building materials and many household products. It is used in pressed-wood products, such as particleboard, plywood, and fiberboard; glues and adhesives; permanent-press fabrics; paper product coatings; and certain insulation materials. Ingestion of formaldehyde can be fatal, and long-term exposure to low levels in the air or on the skin can cause asthma-like respiratory problems and skin irritation such as dermatitis and itching. Concentrations of 100 ppm are immediately dangerous to life and health (IDLH)) is used in some vaccines (especially Polio vaccines)


    Apart from the chemicals used, with the contents including ingredients from animals and humans, this would be of concern to:


    1. Some religions and there adherences, such as Hindus, Sikhs’ Jehovah’s witness to name but a few.

    2. Vegetarians and Vegans.

    3. Anyone who objects to having injected into their body the blood of animals and humans.


    They may exercise the right to refuse on religious or health grounds.


    In addition, the apparent urgency of rapid development and production of a vaccine for the COVID‑19 pandemic is likely to increase the risks and failure rate of delivering a safe, effective vaccine. One study found that between 2006 and 2015, the success rate of obtaining approval from Phase I to successful Phase III trials was 16.2% for vaccines, and CEPI indicates a potential success rate of only 10% for vaccine candidates in 2020 development. Seems to be a very poor result for a blanket medication of an entire population.


    NOW, the ingredients for a COVID-19 Vaccination have emerged as listed on the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine and include:

    ChAd0x1-s Recombinant. Recombinant DNA molecules are DNA molecules formed by laboratory methods of genetic recombination to bring together genetic material from multiple sources, creating sequences that would not otherwise be found in the genome.

    Another ingredient listed by AstraZeneca is MRC-5. For the uninitiated MRC-5 (Medical Research Council cell strain 5) is a diploid human cell culture line composed of fibroblasts, originally developed from research deriving lung tissue of a 14-week-old aborted Caucasian male fetus.

    “The Italian vaccine research and advocacy organization Corvelva recently released new data regarding the use of aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines.

    The research reports the results produced from the MRC 5 cell line analysis, particularly the one contained in GlaxoSmithKline’s tetravalent measles-mumps-rubella-chickenpox (MMRV) vaccine.

    1. The Corvelva team summarized their findings as follows:

    2. The fetal cell line was found to belong to a male fetus.

    3. The cell line presents itself in such a way that it is likely to be very old, thus consistent with the declared line of the 1960s.

    4. The fetal human DNA represented in this vaccine is a complete individual genome, that is, the genomic DNA of all the chromosomes of an individual is present in the vaccine.

    5. The human genomic DNA contained in this vaccine is clearly, undoubtedly abnormal, presenting important inconsistencies with a typical human genome, that is, with that of a healthy individual.

    6. 560 genes known to be associated with forms of cancer were tested and all underwent major modifications.

    7. There are variations whose consequences are not even known, not yet appearing in the literature, but which still affect genes involved in the induction of human cancer.


    What is also clearly abnormal is the genome excess showing changes in the number of copies and structural variants.…the DNA contained in these vaccines is potentially TUMORIGENIC… Corvelva notes that, according to the guidelines (which are found in the report), the presence of fetal DNA from cell lines MRC-5 and WI-38, as diploids, does not provide for upper limits: there is no limit to the amount they can find inside a vaccine. The motivation lies in the fact that these lines are not considered tumors because they have a “finite” (not immortalized) replicative cycle.” Naturtalnana website. MRC-5: What is that?


    Something that would be of concern to certain philosophies and religions as well as vegetarians and vegans and contains many ethics issues of concern.


    References:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_bovine_serum#:~:text=Fetal%20bovine%20serum%20(FBS)%20comes,cell%20culture%20of%20eukaryotic%20cells.

    https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2020/10/what-is-in-vaccines-fact-sheet.pdf

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine#Use_of_adjuvants

    https://www.nature.com/articles/d41573-020-00073-5

    https://iamnaturalnana.wordpress.com/2019/11/07/mrc-5-know-what-that-is/

    https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31604-4/fulltext

    • Australian News
    • •
    • Health
    216 views0 comments
    • Michael Moore
      • Nov 4, 2020
      • 6 min read

    Kevin Mckernan and the Live-Dead qRT-PCR Problem

    Updated: Nov 14, 2020

    Kevin is the CSO and Founder of Medicinal Genomics and has pioneered the genomics of cannabis and hemp to build a stronger scientific environment (Kannapedia.net) for the study of cannabis based therapeutics and blockchain technologies for tracking and verifying cannabis genetics. Previously, Kevin was the CSO of Courtagen Life Sciences, Inc., and was Vice President and Director of R&D of Life Technologies where he managed the development of Life.


    Technologies next generation SOLiD sequencing technology. Integral to the SOLiD R&D process, Kevin oversaw over 100 research collaborations exploring the new biological frontiers with next generation sequencing and saw particular excitement and traction in human tumour sequencing. Kevin initiated an R&D project to investigate chemFET semiconductor based DNA sequencing and spearheaded a process to acquire the DNA sequencing company Ion Torrent for $350M. These collaborations resulted in hundreds of publications and 7 Journal covers from Science Translational Medicine to Nature.


    Kevin was the President and CSO of Agencourt Personal Genomics, a startup company he co-founded in 2005 to invent revolutionary sequencing technologies that dropped the cost of sequencing a human genome from $300M to $3,000; a 100,000-fold improvement in sequencing speed and cost in a few years. In 2000, Kevin Co-Founded Agencourt Biosciences Corporation and acted as the CSO until it was acquired by Beckman Coulter. Kevin also managed the R&D for the Human Genome Project at Whitehead Institute/MIT resulting in several patents for nucleic acid purification. Kevin holds a B.S. in Biology from Emory University with a focus on cloning and expressing Norepinephrine Transporters. When not decoding DNA and unravelling the mysteries of cannabis medicine, Kevin enjoy boating, skiing, and gardening.



    Cannabis Genome Project,2011. Developed the SOLiD sequencer. R&D lead Human Genome Project at MIT/WIBR












    Non public CQ values on qPCR is like having public discussions about earthquakes while hiding the Richter scale.


    The Live-Dead qRT-PCR problem, the testing industrial complex and its impact on society. I never thought the work I did for the human genome project would be weaponized to lock down society. We are now ruled by qPCR right and the transparency on the process is shameful.


    I hope to convey the need to push for public transparency on the CQ values being utilized to count “case” #'s. I also hope to convey the need for home testing and how this regains our medical privacy. It is clearly required for any personalized medicine dream to materialize.

    Why listen to me? I’ve done a lot of PCR (25 yrs). Below is factory floor our R&D team designed, programmed, and maintained at The Whitehead Institute/MIT Center for Genome Research. It processed 40M Sanger sequencing reactions/year (a more complicated version of linear PCR)


    What is the live dead PCR problem? PCR doesn’t count infectious virus. It counts RNA molecules which can be from live or dead virus. Initial infections contain lots of live virus but as you clear the virus the Live-dead ratio shifts more towards the dead.

    Jaafar et al addressed this by correlating CQ levels in qPCR with Plaque Forming units (PFUs) on Vero cells. Plaques form only when virus is infectious. Dead Virus forms no plaques.

    But culturing virus on Vero cells takes too much time to track pandemics and is hazardous to lab employees as you are replicating live virus.


    Jaafar et al. showed that Cqs after 33 were mostly dead. Most testing facilities report a positive result if under CQ 40 (but this should be verified in your jurisdiction). Due to many diff qPCR tests in the market , one cannot simply lift Jaafar et al equation onto your test but its an important data point. Cqs are an inverse Log2 scale. Each Cq digit is a factor of 2 so a Cq of 10 is twice as much RNA as a CQ of 11. There are ~3.3 Cqs for every factor of 10. One would use 2^7 or 128 fold to estimate how much difference there is for 7 Cq offset from 33 to 40.

    LODs Limit of Detection. Take RNA, perform a serial dilution in qPCR and measure how low you can go. Most tests crap out 50 copies of SARs RNA at around 37 cycles. Calling positives past your Limit of detection is shady. I think there is a lot of this going on. This can create False positives that can transform a pandemic into a “case-ademic”. There are a few papers circulating that demonstrate this effect on other outbreaks that have occurred in the past. Please post them to this thread if you have them at your fingertips. LODs are measured putting RNA straight into the qPCR. Reality requires qPCR of a nasal swab usually soaked into 1ml of fluid and no-one PCRs the whole milliliter. They take 1/25th - 1/50th of this into the qPCR. If you have 1 copy on that swab and you only take 1/50th of the volume into qPCR.. you have a poisson sampling problem are unlikely to find the single molecule unless 50 tests are performed. This can create false negatives. SNPs under primers can create false negatives as well. SNPs under primers are something we need to watch as the virus mutates. I think this is a smaller problem right now but needs to be considered when looking at re-infection data. To understand these have a look at an EUA for the Roche qPCR assay. FDA RUO for Roche as an example. FDA EUA links and a few studies comparing different kits performance in the market place. https://fda.gov/media/136049/download… https://jcm.asm.org/content/58/6/e00599-20


    These FP rates may be low but when the disease prevalence is low, the FPs become a higher % of the total number of positive tests. 1% population disease prevalence with a 1% FP rate would deliver 10 FPs and 10TP out of 1000 tests but you wouldn’t know which of the 20 are T or F. For some tests the FP rate must be below 1:1000 as we see positivity rates like this at some universities. See Northeastern university rates (150/~300,000). If you assume those NE tests are FPs, this is an upper bounds on the FP rate. Reality is they are probably a mixture but public transparency on the FPs and FN of the test being run is sorely lacking. This is clinically irresponsible. Why Live-Dead matters. The majority of the time a patient is qPCR positive (<40Cq) is the tail end of the disease where the virus is shedding and more dead than alive RNA. I call this the lower infectivity long tail. People detected in this window are usually non-infectious. These poor folks are quarantined, track & traced, medical privacy violated, constitution nullified and shamed from society. But this creates a lot more testing volume! I doubt there is motivation to tighten the dial, despite there being cheap old-school tools which address this.



    Everyone caught in the long tail create a chain reaction of contact tracing testing and when these people are young and have less risk than the flu... Great Barrington Declaration...

    @aier

    A good paper on this.https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3862

    How does one address this? Does every test need a Jaafar correlation curve? Maybe. There is another Maniatis/Sambrook trick one could use. This is getting old school, open source and cheap. Viruses evolved from viroids. They differ in that viruses evolved protein coats to protect the RNA from nucleases. Life has evolved many tools to target and destroy naked viroids and one of them are RNases. These digest RNA into smaller non-functional pieces.



    RNases are cheap and as ubiquitous as chalk in a classroom in the genomics field. They are easily used and deactivated with RNase blockers. A person skilled in the art would be tempted to RNase treat the nasal sample prior to phage lysis to resolve the non-infectious RNA from the infectious RNA. qPCR could be performed before and after this treatment to measure total RNA and RNA that is nuclease resistant. Figure 13 in our manuscript makes an attempt at this. It needs more validation with a Jaafar like calibration but derisks much of this approach. https://biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.06.06.112474v1


    With the proper internal controls this assay would provide a ratio of Live-Dead viral RNA and provide more clarity on who to retest 24 hours later. Testing 2 days apart can inform you if the total load is going up or going down and rule out FPs and FNs on the first test. 2X the testing but significantly reduce # of people trapped in the long tail and vacuuming in all of their contacts map into a testing frenzy. Net:Net, this would probably mean less testing and I suspect that is why this simple and obvious Live-Dead trick is being ignored. Here is a paper from Quest Diagnostics looking at testing multiple time points. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.21.20217042v1

    Now that I have your attention regarding Costs... This video from @ThomasEWoods is a must watch.

    https://www.medicinalgenomics.com/team/kevin-mckernan/



    Please subscribe and share - help us expose the corruption from local,

    state to federal government. We want our state and country back because

    it belongs to the people of Australia

    • Health
    45 views0 comments
    5678
    9

    Back to Top

    Subscribe to Our Newsletter 

    Thanks for Subscribing!

    • YouTube
    • Twitter
    • LinkedIn
    JulienAssange25.png

    SEE TV NETWORK

    By becoming a member of www.seetvnetwork.com you are helping free Julian Assange as 25% of your Membership will go directly to Save Julian Assange fund. Membership is only $4.95 Per Month with over 20000 hours of content from Movies, TV Series, Documentaries, Podcasts European Football and much more!

     

    All proceeds go directly to Julian Assange Fund please type in the code JulianAssange25

    • Home

    • About SeeTVNews

    • All News

    • Australian News

    • World News

    • Business

    • Sports News

    • Health

    • Videos

    • Crypto Currency

    • Precious Metals

    • Genral Information

    • Contact

    • Advertise

    • More

      Use tab to navigate through the menu items.

       Privacy Statement     Liability Statement     Terms of Service

      © 2021 by SeeTVNews. All rights reserved