The dangerous assumption people are making about the COVID shots
An awful lot of people are making a very dangerous assumption about the COVID-19 jabs: that the manufacture of them is pristine. Everyone seems to tacitly accept that every vial of a given jab is perfect and identical to every other vial of the same thing and that it is delivered to the injection site in perfect condition. I don't think so.
There are press reports of localized clusters of bad jab reactions, such as a huge spike in stillbirths in Scotland. See here and here. Scotland is not the only place. The U.S. has the same issues in some areas.
Japan had some real issues with the jab, and there was no way to talk about it without admitting there was a "bad batch."
Moderna said Wednesday that tainted batches of its COVID-19 vaccine sent to Japan were contaminated with stainless steel particles[.] ... The US biotech firm is facing major setbacks in Japan, with hundreds of thousands of doses suspended following reports of foreign substances detected in vials.
Moderna had the gall to minimize this incident:
Stainless steel is routinely used in heart valves, joint replacements and metal sutures and staples. As such, it is not expected that injection of the particles identified in these lots in Japan would result in increased medical risk.
An apology would have been more appropriate — or better, a return to the drawing board.
Distribution is sketchy
Ingredients that constitute the jab itself come from many sources, but it is clear to everyone that these jab vials were produced in a big hurry. Among other logistical issues, for two of the RNA-based jabs, the completed vials needed to be shipped at -75 degrees Celsius. The manufacturer quickly invented a solution.
In less than six months, the [Belgian] team designed a thermal shipping box the size of a carryon suitcase that would keep the vaccine ultra-cold when packed with dry ice.
So we are dealing with small batches, manufactured with a new process, shipped to sites all over the world that had no experience in handling anything like this. What could go wrong?
Even assuming the best intentions by the jab-makers, there are a lot of humans involved in handling this stuff. There are also a lot of variables in the way the actual shot is physically administered. Consistent supervision is out of the question at this scale. Even if the jab vials were pristine and identical to start with, it is at least iffy that would be the case by the time it got to a distant arm.
Africa is having serious problems with distribution, even with the two jabs that do not require excessive refrigeration.
In May Malawi burned nearly 20,000 doses. At least seven other African countries have destroyed some 450,000 doses in all[.] ...
The AstraZeneca shot is viable for just six months — and early donations to Africa often arrived with little time left. A batch of 191,000 AstraZeneca vaccines rejected by South Africa and reallocated to South Sudan in March arrived there just two weeks before their expiry date; 59,000 were destroyed as a result.
Nigeria destroyed 1 million doses.
Production is questionable
Now it turns out that the Japanese bad batch experience is not necessarily an outlier.
German pathologists presented an analysis of the coronavirus "vaccine" during a shocking press conference in September. A clip of the conference, which has been translated exclusively for RAIR Foundation USA, reveals foreign objects in the vaccine, as well as in the blood of those who have taken the vaccine.
Some of the foreign objects were described as "accurately constructed" and also — shockingly — worms that were hatched from eggs.
This article contains horrifying pictures of some of the "objects." These tests were done on "leftover" samples, meaning the bulk of them had been injected into uninformed arms.
More testing is needed.
What if we assume less than good intentions by parties involved in the jab's creation? What if this is the all-time biggest medical experiment on the human race? Would they really not try different formulas in different quantifiable groups? I'll bet the vaccine passports include the lot number from which the bearer's jab came.
Those thoughts notwithstanding, there is enough evidence to realize that the quality of any single jab cannot be guaranteed, even if mounting concerns about the content of the injection were set aside. This variable alone should exempt anyone from involuntary participation in the jab program. Due to a variety of factors, the jabbed are woefully uninformed about risk prior to participation. Considering that getting jabbed is an irrevocable decision, this is just not right.
If you include natural immunity, we are already at herd level. It's time to stop the mandates. We need more testing on the content and manufacturing of these products. This illness is only 2.5 years old (that we know of) and has mutated substantially from its first appearance. The unvaxxed are being told to get a jab they don't want, is risky, and is designed to counter a disease that basically no longer exists. More importantly, there is no way the jab, including its delivery system, could have been properly tested in the lifetime of a five-year-old.
We need to learn more before we risk butchering the immune systems, fertility, heart function, and survival of our children.