Take it with a pinch of salt, as per usual, this still a product of MIT.

Worse Than the Disease? Reviewing Some Possible Unintended Consequences of the mRNA Vaccines Against COVID-19

Stephanie Seneff1 and Greg Nigh – Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, MIT, Cambridge MA, 02139, USA, E-mail: seneff@csail.mit.edu / Naturopathic Oncology, Immersion Health, Portland, OR 97214, USA


Operation Warp Speed brought to market in the United States two mRNA vaccines, produced by Pfizer and Moderna. Interim data suggested high efficacy for both of these vaccines, which helped legitimize Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by the FDA.

However, the exceptionally rapid movement of these vaccines through controlled trials and into mass deployment raises multiple safety concerns. In this review we first describe the technology underlying these vaccines in detail.

We then review both components of and the intended biological response to these vaccines, including production of the spike protein itself, and their potential relationship to a wide range of both acute and long-term induced pathologies, such as blood disorders, neurodegenerative diseases and autoimmune diseases.

Among these potential induced pathologies, we discuss the relevance of prion-protein-related amino acid sequences within the spike protein. We also present a brief review of studies supporting the potential for spike protein “shedding”, transmission of the protein from a vaccinated to an unvaccinated person, resulting in symptoms induced in the latter.

We finish by addressing a common point of debate, namely, whether or not these vaccines could modify the DNA of those receiving the vaccination. While there are no studies demonstrating definitively that this is happening, we provide a plausible scenario, supported by previously established pathways for transformation and transport of genetic material, whereby injected mRNA could ultimately be incorporated into germ cell DNA for transgenerational transmission.

We conclude with our recommendations regarding surveillance that will help to clarify the long-term effects of these experimental drugs and allow us to better assess the true risk/benefit ratio of these novel technologies.


Unprecedented. This word has defined so much about 2020 and the pandemic related to SARS-CoV-2. In addition to an unprecedented disease and its global response, COVID-19 also initiated an unprecedented process of vaccine research, production, testing, and public distribution (Shaw,

2021). The sense of urgency around combatting the virus led to the creation, in March 2020, of Operation Warp Speed (OWS), then-President Donald Trump’s program to bring a vaccine against COVID-19 to market as quickly as possible(Jacobs and Armstrong, 2020). OWS established a few more unprecedented aspects of COVID-19.

First, it brought the US Department of Defense into direct collaboration with US health departments with respect to vaccine distribution (Bonsell, 2021).

Second, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) collaborated with the biotechnology company Moderna in bringing an unprecedented type of vaccine against infectious disease to market, one utilizing a technology based on messenger RNA (mRNA) (National Institutes of Health, 2020).

The confluence of these unprecedented events has rapidly brought to public awareness the promise and potential of mRNA vaccines as a new weapon against infectious diseases into the future. At the same time, events without precedent are, by definition, without a history and context against which to fully assess risks, hoped-for benefits, safety, and long-term viability as a positive contribution to public health.

In this paper we will be briefly reviewing one particular aspect of these unprecedented events, namely the development and deployment of mRNA vaccines against the targeted class of infectious diseases under the umbrella of “SARS-CoV-2.

”We believe many of the issues we raise here will be applicable to any future mRNA vaccine that might be produced against other infectious agents, or in applications related to cancer and genetic diseases, while others seem specifically relevant to mRNA vaccines currently being implemented against the subclass of corona viruses. While the promises of this technology have been widely heralded, the objectively assessed risks and safety concerns have received far less detailed attention. It is our intention to review several highly concerning molecular aspects of infectious disease-related mRNA technology, and to correlate these with both documented and potential pathological effects.


Many aspects of Covid-19 and subsequent vaccine development are unprecedented for a vaccine deployed for use in the general population.

Some of these includes the following.

  1. First to use PEG (polyethylene glycol) in an injection (see text)

2. First to use mRNA vaccine technology against an infectious agent

3. First time Moderna has brought any product to market

4. First to have public health officials telling those receiving the vaccination to expect an adverse reaction

5. First to be implemented publicly with nothing more than preliminary efficacy data (see text)

6. First vaccine to make no clear claims about reducing infections, transmissibility, or deaths

7. First coronavirus vaccine ever attempted in humans

8. First injection of genetically modified polynucleotides in the general population

Vaccine Development

Development of mRNA vaccines against infectious disease is unprecedented in many ways. In a 2018 publication sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, vaccines were divided into three categories: Simple, Complex, and Unprecedented (Young et al., 2018). Simple and Complex vaccines represented standard and modified applications of existing vaccine technologies.

Unprecedented represents a category of vaccine against a disease for which there has never before been a suitable vaccine. Vaccines against HIV and malaria are examples. As their analysis indicates, depicted in Figure 1, unprecedented vaccines are expected to take 12.5 years to develop. Even more ominously, they have a 5% estimated chance of making it through Phase II trials (assessing efficacy) and, of that 5%, a 40% chance of making it through Phase III trials (assessing population benefit). In other words, an unprecedented vaccine was predicted to have a 2% probability of success at the stage of a Phase III clinical trial. As the authors bluntly put it, there is a “low probability of success, especially for unprecedented vaccines.” (Young et al., 2018)

Figure 1.Launching innovative vaccines is costly and time-consuming, with a low probability of success, especially for unprecedented vaccines (adapted from Young et al, 2018).

With that in mind, two years later we have an unprecedented vaccine with reports of 90-95% efficacy (Baden et al. 2020). In fact, these reports of efficacy are the primary motivation behind public support of vaccination adoption (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2020). This defies not only predictions, but also expectations.

The British Medical Journal(BMJ) may be the only prominent conventional medical publication that has given a platform to voices calling attention to concerns around the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines. There are indeed reasons to believe that estimations of efficacy are in need of re-evaluation. Peter Doshi, an associate editor of the BMJ, has published two important analyses (Doshi 2021a, 2021b) of the raw data released to the FDA by the vaccine makers, data that are the basis for the claim of high efficacy. Unfortunately, these were published to the BMJ’s blog and not in its peer-reviewed content. Doshi, though, has published a study regarding vaccine efficacy and the questionable utility of vaccine trial endpoints in BMJ’s peer reviewed content (Doshi 2020).

A central aspect of Doshi’s critique of the preliminary efficacy data is the exclusion of over 3400 “suspected COVID-19 cases” that were not included in the interim analysis of the Pfizer vaccine data submitted to the FDA. Further, a low-but-non-trivial percent of individuals in both Moderna and Pfizer trials were deemed to be SARS-CoV-1-positive at baseline despite prior infection being grounds for exclusion. For these and other reasons the interim efficacy estimate of around 95% for both vaccines is suspect.

A more recent analysis looked specifically at the issue of relative vs. absolute risk reduction. While the high estimates of risk reduction are based upon relative risks, the absolute risk reduction is a more appropriate metric for a member of the general public to determine whether a vaccination provides a meaningful risk reduction personally. In that analysis, utilizing data supplied by the vaccine makers to the FDA, the Moderna vaccine at the time of interim analysis demonstrated an absolute risk reduction of 1.1% (p= 0.004), while the Pfizer vaccine absolute risk reduction was 0.7% (p<0.000) (Brown 2021).

Others have brought up important additional questions regarding COVID-19 vaccine development, questions with direct relevance to the mRNA vaccines reviewed here.

For example, Haidere, et. al. (2021) identify four “critical questions” related to development of these vaccines, questions that are germane to both their safety and their efficacy:

•Will Vaccines Stimulate the Immune Response?

•Will Vaccines Provide Sustainable Immune Endurance?

•How Will SARS-CoV-2 Mutate?

•Are We Prepared for Vaccine Backfires?

Lack of standard and extended preclinical and clinical trials of the two implemented mRNA vaccines leaves each of these questions to be answered over time. It is now only through observation of pertinent physiological and epidemiological data generated by widescale delivery of the vaccines to the general public that these questions will be resolved. And this is only possible if there is free access to unbiased reporting of outcomes –something that seems unlikely given the widespread censorship of vaccine-related information because of the perceived need to declare success at all cost.

The two mRNA vaccines that have made it through phase 3 trials and are now being delivered to the general population are the Moderna vaccine and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.

The vaccines have much in common. Both are based on mRNA encoding the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Both demonstrated a relative efficacy rate of 94-95%. Preliminary indications are that antibodies are still present after three months. Both recommend two doses spaced by three or four weeks, and recently there are reports of annual booster injections being necessary (Mahose, 2021). Both are delivered through muscle injection, and both require deep-freeze storage to keep the RNA from breaking down. This is because, unlike double-stranded DNA which is very stable, single-strand RNA products are apt to be damaged or rendered powerless at warm temperatures and must be kept extremely cold to retain their potential efficacy (Pushparajah et al., 2021).

It is claimed by the manufacturers that the Pfizer vaccine requires storage at -94 degrees Fahrenheit (-70 degrees Celsius), which makes it very challenging to transport it and keep it cold during the interim before it is finally administered. The Moderna vaccine can be stored for 6 months at -4 degrees Fahrenheit (-20 degrees Celsius), and it can be stored safely in the refrigerator for 30 days following thawing (Zimmer et al., 2021).

Two other vaccines that are now being administered under emergency use are the Johnson & Johnson vaccine and the AstraZeneca vaccine. Both are based on a vector DNA technology that is very different from the technology used inthe mRNA vaccines.

While these vaccines were also rushed to market with insufficient evaluation, they are not the subject of this paper so we will just describe briefly how they are developed. These vaccines are based on a defective version of an adenovirus, a double-stranded DNA virus that causes the common cold.

The adenovirus has been genetically modified in two ways, such that it cannot replicate due to critical missing genes, and its genome has been augmented with the DNA code for the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. AstraZeneca’s production involves an immortalized human cell line called Human Embryonic Kidney (HEK) 293, which is grown in culture along with the defective viruses (Dicks et al., 2012).

The HEK cell line was genetically modified back in the 1970s by augmenting its DNA with segments from an adenovirus that supply the missing genes needed for replication of the defective virus (Louis et al., 1997).

Johnson & Johnson uses a similar technique based on a fetal retinal cell line. Because the manufacture of these vaccines requires genetically modified human tumor cell lines, there is the potential for human DNA contamination as well as many other potential contaminants.

The media has generated a great deal of excitement about this revolutionary technology, but there are also concerns that we may not be realizing the complexity of the body’s potential for reactions to foreign mRNA and other ingredients in these vaccines that go far beyond the simple goal of tricking the body into producing antibodies to the spike protein.

In the remainder of this paper, we will first describe in more detail the technology behind mRNA vaccines. We devote several sections to specific aspects of the mRNA vaccines that concern us with regard to potential for both predictable and unpredictable negative consequences.

We conclude with a plea to governments and the pharmaceutical industry to consider exercising greater caution in the current undertaking to vaccinate as many people as possible against SARS-CoV-2.



Experimental mRNA vaccines have been heralded as having the potential for great benefits, but they also harbor the possibility of potentially tragic and even catastrophic unforeseen consequences.

The mRNA vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have been implemented with great fanfare, but there are many aspects of their widespread utilization that merit concern. We have reviewed some, but not all, of those concerns here, and we want to emphasize that these concerns are potentially serious and might not be evident for years or even transgenerationally.

In order to adequately rule out the adverse potentialities described in this paper, we recommend, at a minimum, that the following research and surveillance practices be adopted:

•A national effort to collect detailed data on adverse events associated with the mRNA vaccines with abundant funding allocation, tracked well beyond the first couple of weeks after vaccination.

•Repeated autoantibody testing of the vaccine-recipient population. The autoantibodies tested could be standardized and should be based upon previously documented antibodies and autoantibodies potentially elicited by the spike protein. These include autoantibodies against phospholipids, collagen, actin, thyroperoxidase (TPO), myelin basic protein, tissue transglutaminase, and perhaps others.

•Immunological profiling related to cytokine balance and related biological effects. Tests should include, at a minimum, IL-6, INF-α, D-dimer, fibrinogen, and C-reactive protein.

•Studies comparing populations who were vaccinated with the mRNA vaccines and those who were not to confirm the expected decreased infection rate and milder symptoms of the vaccinated group, while at the same time comparing the rates of various autoimmune diseases and prion diseases in the same two populations.

•Studies to assess whether it is possible for an unvaccinated person to acquire vaccine-specific forms of the spike proteins from a vaccinated person in close proximity.

•In vitro studies to assess whether the mRNA nanoparticles can be taken up by sperm and converted into cDNA plasmids.

•Animal studies to determine whether vaccination shortly before conception can result in offspring carrying spike-protein-encoding plasmids in their tissues, possibly integrated into their genome.

•In vitro studies aimed to better understand the toxicity of the spike protein to the brain, heart, testes, etc.

Public policy around mass vaccination has generally proceeded on the assumption that the risk/benefit ratio for the novel mRNA vaccines is a “slam dunk.” With the massive vaccination campaign well under way in response to the declared international emergency of COVID-19, we have rushed into vaccine experiments on a world-wide scale. At the very least, we should take advantage of the data that are available from these experiments to learn more about this new and previously untested technology. And, in the future, we urge governments to proceed with more caution in the face of new biotechnologies.

Finally, as an obvious but tragically ignored suggestion, the government should also be encouraging the population to take safe and affordable steps to boost their immune systems naturally, such as getting out in the sunlight to raise vitamin D levels (Ali, 2020), and eating mainly organic whole foods rather than chemical-laden processed foods (Rico-Campà et al., 2019). Also, eating foods that are good sources of vitamin A, vitamin C and vitamin K2 should be encouraged, as deficiencies in these vitamins are linked to bad outcomes from COVID-19 (Goddek, 2020; Sarohan, 2020).


This research was funded in part by Quanta Computers, Inc., Taiwan, under the auspices of the Qmulus project.Competing interests

The authors have no competing interests or conflicts to declare.

To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them



Seriously?! Do people still have any self-preservations instincts left if a tsunami wave is already casting shadow on their beach and they’re debating the future of sand castle architecture on social media? Are we still functional human beings or just furless panda bears?


Covidiots say they didn’t see that coming, but they were waiting at the wrong gate.

UPDATE JULY 13 2021:


A Singapore Airlines flight from Copenhagen to Singapore Changi was forced to divert to Moscow after a crew member had a “hypertensive crisis” or a stroke.

The Airbus A350-900, with registration 9V-SMO, departed Copenhagen at 13:37 local time as flight SQ351 on Saturday and was scheduled to arrive at Changi Airport at 06:20 local time the following day.

However, after the cabin crew was taken ill, the pilots requested a landing at Moscow’s Domodedovo Airport. The pilots requested for the emergency landing at around 18:00 local time and landed in Moscow after three hours and 23 minutes of flight time.

After leaving the crew member in Russia, the aircraft departed from Moscow at 20:01 later the same day and arrived at Changi Airport at 10:46 local time on Sunday.

The crew member was met by a medical team and was later taken straight to a nearby hospital, where doctors assessed him.

According to an airline spokesperson, he was discharged after his condition stabilised, and the airline has made all necessary arrangements to fly him back to Singapore.

What if your pilot starts answering with a 404 error too?

This piece started out as an investigation in the airlines personnel crisis and vaccine, but ended up a step or two further. Because I have this good habit of zooming out and contextualizing. And what I’ve seen when I did that is obviously bigger than the devil in details.

So I’m not going to rehash too much of what’s been already well covered by a wide range of independent and even mainstream media. My unique contribution to this has already been published a few days ago and it’s a good preamble to this discussion.

Long before that I’ve published another article that anticipated the HR crisis as they disable people, without the specific details that later came up, of course.

It all falls in line coherently. And then there’s a perpendicular line in the sand no one wants to cross.

My reasoning is simple and obvious, but previously untold:

About 80% of British commercial airline pilots got jabbed and they fall like flies hit with Raid, whistle-blowers claim.

Meanwhile, in America:

Internal documents obtained by Dr. Jane Ruby illustrate catastrophe waiting to happen! Airline pilots are dropping dead at alarming rates after being forced to take the jab, or face losing their careers. This is a MAJOR concern for hundreds of thousands of daily air travelers, and it’s only getting worse! – Stew Peters

Maybe it’s only 60% or 40% of them, you’d be insane to take a 1% chance.

When it doesn’t land well, everyone else is applauding louder.

Is that limited to UK?
“C’mon, maaaan!”.
I mean if you really looked for it, you’re flooded with reports coming from all over the place that this industry is precisely screwed. Let’s not waste our time, I could list 20 solid links like nothing. We miss time more than base here.

Last updated March 2021. Not quite recently. Source

Five Jet Blue Airlines pilots are confirmed dead, current Jet Blue pilot whistleblower confirms push for jab continues.

As Thyme mentioned, it’s not just airline pilots, terrestrial transportation is affected too. And there’s a consistent number of car-crashes reported right after vaccination. It even started to show on VAERS too, commentators say, I didn’t verify this detail.

Magnetovaxxers, as I like to call vaxxers with a special magnetism, are no myth either, I alone, have crushed that topic already and there’s thousands others. Explain it as you please, it happens, besides a host of other strange phenomena that are potentially dangerous to others in some situations.
What if one of these meat stickers touch sensitive lab equipment and life-support equipment, or…?


Hell, even athletes collapse on the game field!

You’ve seen them falling like flies in the waiting room, in their car outside the clinic, everywhere.

Did I mention the spike protein sheds?

We have to extrapolate in order to anticipate.

We have to zoom in for the inner workings and zoom out for the general conclusions:

How can it be only about cars and transportations?! They’d love that, they’ve been trying to kill tourism and uncontrolled population movements for decades, it’s in the books. But whatever logic applies to pilots applies to everyone who has lives depending on him!

So, the past couple of weeks have cemented not one, but two evidences:

The Covid mRNA treatments sold as vaccines can incapacitate or even kill anyone, anytime, especially people genetically or professionally susceptible of blood clotting, heart inflammations or similar circulatory problems. Ergo:


Which inescapably draws another evidence that is bafflingly not shouted out loud yet:

The danger extends to the people whose lives / health / destiny depend on these genetically-modified dupes.


Oh, sorry, Kev, are you already on the beach and this isn’t the reading you’re looking for there?

What if your life-guard rushed to work and collapses when a current pulls your kid?

If you’re so life-hesitant, you definitely can bear 0,xx% death-risk from a virus that China sent only by e-mail and, so far, no one has isolated, not even Chinese.

But sane people can’t afford the risk mRNA-inoculated covidiots pose in many of the positions they occupy.


To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

Our Great Awakening looks more and more like a snooze button lately, few people really get up and make progress. We are still too “shy” to even look truth in the face say it like it is. So I will try, because silence can be murder, genocide and even extinction now. And I don’t want my hands bloodied like any normie’s.

Here’s a bunch of premises I find to be factual:

1. We can’t trust any of their reports, but we can observe that a massive chunk of society has been injected with artificial mRNA technology. By the order of hundreds millions. Even if this graph is 100% exaggerated…

In other words:

If your nightmare is not Covid, but covidiots with their insane genetic modification and transhumanist spree…

The Centers for Disease Control define an epidemic as “an increase, often sudden, in the number of cases of a disease above what is normally expected in that population in that area.”

If mRNA jabbing is infection to you, as it is to me, the current campaign is an extinction level event.

2. All COVID-19 vaccines are in the clinical trial stage, and, according to the ethical principles of clinical research, subjects of experimental medical treatments cannot be blood donors.
For blatantly obvious reasons:

“Experimental Medication or Unlicensed (Experimental) Vaccine is usually associated with a research study, and the effect on the safety of transfused blood is unknown” – Mayo Clinic


Prion diseases can be transmitted by blood transfusion: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12388826/

RNA based vaccines and risk of prion diseases: https://scivisionpub.com/pdfs/covid19-rna-based-vaccines-and-the-risk-of-prion-disease-1503.pdf

3. Despite some reality-denialists, RNA modification does alter our genetics and can program more genetic modifications, there’s a whole field of science dealing with just that, as I’ve already reported.

And we can’t even guess what new effects on our genetics will be discovered in the future. This is just the earliest phase of the trials. We’re on uncharted territory, the data they have collected so far is jack-shit compared to the infinite range of possibilities ahead, basically few sci-fi scenarios are excluded now.
They needed 10-20 years for a traditional vaccine, and they still kept coming out disastrous. This one is not just a new type of injection, it’s a whole new science in which they’ve just made first baby-steps. They’re toddlers crying and begging to compete in the grown-ups Olympics. No can do!


The spike protein that altered humans will produce non stop is already proven or suspected to cause several types of damage; most importantly, in my view:

The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alters barrier function in 2D static and 3D microfluidic in-vitro models of the human blood–brain barrier

SARS-CoV-2 spike protein alone may cause lung damage

The spike protein produced by the new COVID-19 vaccines may also affect the host cells. We should monitor the long-term consequences of these vaccines carefully, especially when they are administered to otherwise healthy individuals. Further investigations on the effects of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein on human cells and appropriate experimental animal models are warranted.”

Scientists reveal the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing COVID-19, creates long-lasting changes to human gene expression.”

3. The mRNA technology is transmissible in more than one way, and it will be made even more contagious, they’re already priming us for that. “Second hand vaccination” has been a thing for over 50 years, under different names. Now it’s set for a turbo-boost.


Either this or “vaccines don’t shed”. You can’t have both.

ALL OF THE 7 FACT-CHECKERS dealing with the mRNA jab shedding that I’ve read discuss VIRAL shedding only. IDGAF about that, we’re talking about shedding modified DNA / RNA and the spike protein, So, as per usual, they debunk jack shit, just their own straw men.


Even sex with mutants is risky:


4. There are more methods available right now for contaminating people who refuse vaccination and they will use them if they need to, they are on a self-authorization spree.

COVID-19 cure: Scientists plan to develop ‘self-spreading’ coronavirus vaccine



Even test swabs are very likely to have been used for contamination. If they haven’t, they can be.

Yes, they CAN vaccinate us through nasal test swabs AND target the brain (Biohacking P.1)

5. The only significant difference between the Walking Dead and our lives right now is that our lives also have Star Trek elements, such as the Borg that assimilates everyone and subjugates them to its program.
Un-funnily enough, one of the main methods for the Borg to take over other organisms was a DNA-altering injection which also served as a communication device with the hive-mind (cloud / Internet of All Things ). I’ve started to wonder if The Borg wasn’t predictive programming too. Regardless, the Borg is here and it’s covidiotic. There’s really a lot to learn from this parable.

Later edit: I’m not alone lol

Quite a good vid, actually, click to watch!

I thought I’m starting to divagate here, but quite the opposite is true. Plazma hit me back later with more goodies, he is a very aware guy, and he’s gonna blow your mind even beyond this.

At least the Walking Dead were free and independent, subjugated only by their thirst for blood.

6. Denial of reality is what brought us here. No citation.

From the verifiable premises above, I infer:

Altered genetics are already so widespread, as of May 2021, that no conceivable scenario can stop them from 100% contamination. Quite the opposite.

Half a billion mutants are only encouraged to infect more. This is beyond any movie script we’ve ever seen.

What’s slowed the Great Resetters down so far is that the people who don’t test also don’t vaccinate. But they were prepared for this.

There is nowhere to hide, there is no “outside” anymore, there is no antidote and no alternative option. Not for plebs like myself anyway.

Blood and organ banks for transfusions are compromised too.
No one has tried to prevent contamination in these banks and I’m afraid now it’s too late, another fundamental rule has been broken. Another genie that can’t be shoved back in the lamp.
They haven’t even shown consideration to the thought of giving us an option here.
Any transfusion or transplant is a Russian roulette now.

The afore-mentioned reality-denialism is also on steroids, not trending favorably to Mother Nature.

An mRNA jab, like any vaccine, but to a deeper extent, has no undo button.
And there’s no “detox”.
Once you did that, we don’t know who you are anymore, the old you has been fundamentally altered, for ever. Whatever follows may turn out better or worse, but the persona before the shot gets discontinued. This may not be detectable in many, may happen gradually over a long time span, or may be attributed to something else, any option is on the table. So many options that this technology turns lottery.

Even if we find a way to protect natural humans from mutagens, mutants will terminate us “manually” eventually, because we will be a reminder of everything they’ve lost.

I’d love to hear about any viable antidote, but I’m afraid the virus is in more heads than vaccinated, it’s ideologic.

We have already crossed the Rubicon, and only covidiots await on the other side

And it’s not like we haven’t been warned.

Now we can only make the best of what we have left. Let’s do just that!

At least that…

PS: This is taking steam. The least we can do

more info



(I will update it soon adequately)

More resources:

“Vaccine Shedding”



Spike Protein







Self-Spreading Vaccines




Self-Amplifying mRNA Vaccines










Spike Protein





To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

If this scamdemic was possible, then our dream is possible too

Later edits:


The Okanagan Valley in British Columbia, Canada is typically best known for its wineries, fruit orchards, and beautiful Okanagan Lake. But this week it’s making headlines based on a misguided misinterpretation of how the Covid-19 vaccines work. Steve Miller, owner of Sun City Silver and Gold Exchange, in the Okanagan city of Kelowna, spoke to Global News earlier this week: “We would rather not be exposed to people who have been vaccinated and who could shed the virus…Shedding is real, it’s a problem now and it is going to be a bigger problem as more and more people line up for these experimental vaccines.” There is also a sign banning mask-wearing inside the store. According to the city’s risk manager, the store is operating without a business license, and is promoting orders against those stated by local and regional public health officials.

Where does this notion of viral shedding after vaccination stem from, and is there any validity to this? As detailed in Victoria Forster’s recent Forbes piece, not only can’t you contract Covid-19 infection from the Covid-19 vaccine, you also cannot spread or shed virus from receiving the vaccine. This goes for any of the currently available Covid-19 vaccines, including those made by Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, and AstraZeneca.

Historically, and in some instances currently, some vaccines were made with either a reduced amount of live virus, such as smallpox, chickenpox, or measles, mumps rubella (MMR) or a small amount of inactivated/killed virus, such as hepatitis A, flu, or polio. Other vaccines, such as hepatitis B, human papillomavirus (HPV), and shingles (herpes zoster) use a tiny piece of a protein or sugar fragment from the pathogen. Still others are what’s know as toxoids, and are much shorter acting, as they provide only a miniscule amount of a toxin from the germ. Toxoid vaccines include diphtheria and tetanus, which last only five to ten years and require regular booster shots.

Both mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) as well as both adenovirus-vector DNA vaccines (Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca) provide protection by enabling the recipient’s cells to produce the now infamous spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, or Covid-19. None of these vaccines enable the recipient to internally manufacture a virus. None of them. As Dr. Forster explained, “It’s like four tires on the starting grid of a racetrack, you know that they are car parts, but there’s no way someone can drive them around without the rest of it.” Spike proteins alone do not make a virus. The virus is comprised of RNA at its core, nucleoproteins, and the critical viral envelope, which protects it when it’s floating around looking for a host cell to grab onto with those spikes. Picture the image below with just the red spikes. They would fall to the bottom, as if a toddler smashed a well-constructed Lego set after you’ve already thrown out the instruction book, and managed to throw out a random number of critical pieces.

They debunk the viral shedding, NOT the spike protein shedding or other genetically modified compounds!
All fact-checkers I’ve read, about seven of them, play the same trick.
They’re pulling coins from covidiot ears.

Here’s A DOCTOR not accepting vaxxed patients!

 Miami school said that it wouldn’t allow vaccinated teachers in its classrooms, its founder cited “vaccine shedding” as her main concern.

At least one private school to place restrictions on teachers who are vaccinated before the end of the school year, as The New York Times reported, and even to threaten teachers who receive the vaccine over the summer:

“Even among our own population, we have at least three women with menstrual cycles impacted after having spent time with a vaccinated person,”
In the letter, Ms. Centner gave employees three options:

  • Inform the school if they had already been vaccinated, so they could be kept physically distanced from students;
  • Let the school know if they get the vaccine before the end of the school year, “as we cannot allow recently vaccinated people to be near our students until more information is known”;
  • Wait until the school year is over to get vaccinated.

Teachers who get the vaccine over the summer will not be allowed to return, the letter said, until clinical trials on the vaccine are completed, and then only “if a position is still available at that time” — effectively making teachers’ employment contingent on avoiding the vaccine.

Here’s one of those utter retards who can’t (or don’t want to) get we’re talking spike protein shedding, not viral shedding:

More citizens and doctors discussing the covid bioweapon effects on UNVAXXED PEOPLE

I am actually an early supporter of vaxxtards who insist on marking themselves with bracelets and other forms of yellow stars, makes them much easier to avoid, which is all I wish from the new emerging world!
If you volunteer for Auschwitz ad yellow stars, maybe that’s your vocation and you shouldn’t be stopped.
We also shouldn’t crowd your space with people like myself, who hate it to be around.


To be continued?
Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous readers and we want to keep this way.
We hardly made it before, but this summer something’s going on, our audience stats show bizarre patterns, we’re severely under estimates and the last savings are gone. We’re not your responsibility, but if you find enough benefits in this work…
Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!

! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them

We gave up on our profit shares from masks, if you want to help us, please use the donation button!
We think frequent mask use, even short term use can be bad for you, but if you have no way around them, at least send a message of consciousness.
Get it here!