Graphene is used in many products even though research into graphene’s toxicity is very limited

This story is about graphene materials and philosophy. Graphene! Graphene! Graphene is here, at last! We the people, meaning, we the lowly peasants, can sigh a sigh of relief. Can you hear our celebratory breath? Sorry probably not behind our masks but trust us, we are celebrating, and following the science.

I mean, what took them so long to give us a wonder material enabling those wonderful futuristic sensors that will let us connect to the Internet of Bodies and have our caring, wise masters monitor our biological state and nudge us to do the right thing, for our own good – not to mention the good of the community and the collective grandmas?

We know, this material has not really been tested for biological safety in a meaningful way but we are used to it by now, and we’ve trained ourselves to not worry our little heads about such silly things. As long as they show us at least ten shiny commercials saying that it’s safe, our bodies will replace their outdated chemistry with the contents of the new commercials. Science!

Laws of nature? Forget them, we are above … meaning, our masters are above, we are below, but below is above. Kind of like, we are not engineers, so we can’t really decide the directions. And what matters to the peasants is that we’re in this together, and we have been waiting and waiting and drumming our fingers for someone to connect us to a really important network of computers to monitor our bodies with care … and our wait is finally over! We are in this together!

We – and we are speaking for all the lowly peasants – are feeling very good and grateful that we can now count on the masters to monitor our biological functions, as opposed to empowering our own immune systems that have only been around for millions of years. So, we are truly relieved by all this Fourth Industrial Revolution and other related progress. Phew!

Thank you, our super wealthy, caring masters! Thank you! Please monitor us harder! Harder! Harder! (We are feeling a little ecstatic!)

Oh, and about that self-heating graphene wallpaper (that may or may not shed little particles that may or may not damage our bodies … sorry for an obviously selfish and irresponsible train of thought … sorry sorry)? Yes, please also give us the self-heating graphene wallpaper! And please give us a big glass of glyphosate to drink while we are at it!

Being one with the system is totally worth it since what’s good for Monsanto is good for our bodies! And may we also please request another safe 5G tower next to our bedroom?

We may live a shorter life as a result but who cares, at least we’ll have meaning, and a sense of belonging granted by our masters for being zombies, and “community values”! And please keep monitoring and controlling us harder!

On a side note, how we’ve managed to survive to this day without multiple 5G towers and self-heating wallpaper is a mystery to us peasants. It must be all the glyphosate in our food that kept us going. We just love the progress, and we just love love love marching in line with anything the masters give us for our good and their profits.

Wait … we are feeling weird … our brains … our hearts … the room is swirling … we may be collapsing … we are not pretending … we think we are dying … why are those other people still laughing, clapping and screaming to continue the show?

Keep reading

Biden Admin. pressured Amazon to censor books about vaccine safety risks during Covid

White House officials pressured Amazon in 2021 to censor and minimize access to books on its online site that questioned the safety or efficacy of vaccines, according to e-mails released earlier this month by House Judiciary Committee Chairman, U.S. Representative Jim Jordan of Ohio.

The campaign to curtail any vaccine-related book sales during the height of the pandemic was led by President Biden’s Senior Advisor for Covid-19 Response, Andrew Slavitt, and sought to avoid the spread of “propaganda and misinformation.”

“Who can we talk to about the high levels of propaganda and misinformation and disinformation of [sic] Amazon?” Slavitt wrote to Amazon in a Mar. 2, 2021, e-mail.

In initial discussions, Amazon officials discouraged “a manual intervention” to censor or remove certain book titles from populating in search results, concerned that it would be too obvious and lead to further criticism. “We will not be doing a manual intervention today,” one e-mail between Amazon executives read. “The team/PR feels very strongly that it is too visible, and will further compound the Harry/Sally narrative (which is getting the Fox News treatment today apparently), and won’t fix the problem long-term … because of customer behavior associates.”

The Amazon officials, whose names were redacted from the e-mails, reveal that another individual at the company “gave very direct guidance to the teams to be boring and not do anything that is visible and will draw more attention.”

Keep reading

The 2024 Santa Monica Film Festival was chock full of red-pilled conspiracy content

The 18th annual Santa Monica Film Festival, which held in-person screenings on Saturday, February 3 and which is running online screenings through February 28, chose to feature and then give awards to some dangerous right-wing conspiracy theories masquerading as “documentary” films.

The festival awarded “Best Documentary Feature” to The Great Awakening, the third film in anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist Mikki Willis’ Plandemic series. The Santa Monica Film Festival website describes the film:

The Great Awakening is the third installment of the ‘Plandemic’ series. This documentary experience assembles forbidden puzzle pieces to reveal the big picture of what’s really happening in America and beyond. The Great Awakening is intended to be a lighthouse to guide us out of the storm and into a brighter future.

 The Plandemic website also provides a description of the film:

Witness the culmination of truth-seeking as PLANDEMIC 3: The Great Awakening unravels the layers of corruption and unveils a path towards a brighter future. Prepare to be inspired, awakened, and empowered to take a stand for liberty.

After the screening, the audience was treated to a Q&A with Rizza Islam, anti-vaccine conspiracy theorist and member of the Center for Countering Digital Hate’s disinformation dozen.

The first installment of Plandemic was released May 4, 2000, and was largely responsible for the viral spread of COVID-19 conspiracy theories and vaccine disinformation. The New York Times explained in 2020 that nothing in the pandemic had gone as viral as the 26-minute short film, “a slickly produced narration that wrongly claimed a shadowy cabal of elites was using the virus and a potential vaccine to profit and gain power. The video featured a discredited scientist, Judy Mikovits, who said her research about the harm from vaccines had been buried.”

Keep reading

Shingles Vaccine May Increase Risk of Ocular Shingles Recurrence

Getting the recombinant zoster (shingles) vaccine (RZV), or Shingrix, if you have had an ocular shingles event, may increase your risk of experiencing a second event, a recent study shows.

Ocular shingles refers to all shingles that manifest in the eye area. Milder cases of ocular shingles typically occur near the eyelids, while more severe cases may cause inflammation inside the eyes and potentially lead to blindness.

Researchers at the University of California (UC)–San Francisco found that, compared to unvaccinated people with a history of ocular shingles, those who receive the RZV have a 93 percent higher rate of developing ocular shingles again.

“It’s not a huge increased risk,” lead author Dr. Nisha Acharya, director of the Uveitis and Ocular Inflammatory Disease Service at UC–San Francisco, told The Epoch Times. “To my knowledge, it’s the first data that we have on risks of reactivation following zoster vaccination for this patient population who already have the disease. I think it raises some questions,” she said.

Keep reading

Bill Gates Partner GAVI Vaccine Alliance Targets Online Memes

An international group promoting vaccines with ties to the Gates Foundation in going after memes. Whatever could make more sense?

But things here aren’t as haphazard as they might seem. Bill Gates is known, and rich, for two things: as the founder of one of the most oppressive (in terms of design, security, and historically predatory toward free-as-in-freedom competing technology) companies ever – Microsoft.

And the other is Gates – now as a billionaire – reinventing himself through his “uncanny valley” philanthropic efforts, centered and emanating from his Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and focusing by and large on all sorts of vaccines, and – agriculture.

One of those involved, the GAVI Vaccine Alliance (that gets money from Gates) now wants to reframe memes – internet’s succinct expression of humor and satire – as “health disinformation super-spreaders.”

And we’ve heard this one before – this genre, that, in the digital age, might as well be considered as any other artistic format in previous times, is said to be capable of evading “fact checkers and content moderators” (i.e., censors).

In previous eras and authoritarian states, that would get the books with imagery and words characteristic of memes banned or burned.

So what could be the solution in the current era? And what does the big picture amount to?

Keep reading

Study of Nearly 100 Million COVID-19 Vaccine Recipients Reveals a Host of Adverse Events

A multinational study of over 99 million vaccinated people has identified higher incidences of neurological, cardiovascular, and blood disorder complications than what the researchers expected.

The peer-reviewed observational cohort study, published in the Vaccine journal on Feb. 12, aimed to evaluate the risk of 13 adverse events of special interest (AESI) following COVID-19 vaccination. The AESIs spanned three categories—neurological, hematologic (blood), and cardiovascular.

It reviewed data collected from more than 99 million vaccinated people from eight nations—Argentina, Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, New Zealand, and Scotland—looking at risks up to 42 days after getting the shots.

The study looked at three vaccines—Pfizer and Moderna’s mRNA vaccines as well as AstraZeneca’s viral vector jab.

Researchers found higher than expected cases that they deemed met the threshold to be potential safety signals for multiple AESIs, including for Guillain-Barre syndrome (GBS), cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST), myocarditis, and pericarditis. A safety signal refers to information that could suggest a potential risk or harm that may be associated with a medical product.

  • GBS is a disorder in which a body’s immune system attacks the nerves, and can eventually paralyze the whole body. Most people with the condition require hospitalization. A “statistically significant increase” in GBS cases was observed after the first AstraZeneca shot. The researchers had expected 76 GBS events in the observational cohort study but ended up identifying 190.
  • Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) is a condition that typically occurs after a bacterial or viral infection. It causes inflammation of the central nervous system. Two cases were expected. However, the study identified seven events after the first Moderna jab.
  • Bell’s palsy is a weakness or paralysis of facial muscles. Higher than expected Bell’s palsy cases were identified after the first dose of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.
  • CVST is a condition in which blood clots form in the brain, blocking the blood from draining out. This can end up causing a hemorrhage. While 21 events were expected, researchers identified over three times the number of cases at 69 following the first dose of AstraZeneca vaccine. CVST cases were also higher than expected after the first and second Pfizer shots.
  • Myocarditis is inflammation of the heart muscle. Higher than expected cases of myocarditis that met the threshold for “prioritized safety signals” for the condition were “consistently identified following a first, second, and third dose of mRNA vaccines,” both Pfizer and Moderna, according to the study.
  • Pericarditis is an inflammation of the outer lining of the heart. The number of pericarditis cases exceeded expectations following “all doses of all the three vaccines,” researchers wrote.

Keep reading

US Officials Concede No Active Surveillance On Long-Term Effects Of COVID-19 Vaccines

In a Feb. 15 hearing by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, U.S. health officials side-stepped a question when asked whether the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is actively conducting extended safety surveillance on those who received early COVID-19 vaccines.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis (R-N.Y.) asked Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, whether the FDA is conducting active surveillance and if there are any specific health markers they’re studying that may signal trends requiring further inquiry.

“Every time we go through and do the safety surveillance, we start back, and it goes back to 2020. In some cases where we’re looking for certain things, we might use a different window, but indeed, we have to look from the beginning of the period of surveillance. I can turn it over to Dr. Jernigan because he can speak for CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] in that regard,” Dr. Marks said.

“So with regard to myocarditis, we certainly have been monitoring the issue with various different data systems. I think the most recent data really demonstrates that you’re about eight times less likely to get myocarditis if you’re vaccinated compared to those that are unvaccinated,” Dr. Daniel Jernigan, director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at the CDC responded.

Rep. Malliotakis told Jernigan she wanted to know about “everything,” not just myocarditis.

Dr. Jerrigan asked her to repeat the question, and she asked again whether the FDA was conducting extended safety surveillance on early recipients of COVID-19 vaccines.

Most of the reports that we get of adverse events are in the few weeks following the vaccination,” Jernigan said. In terms of monitoring these over time, Jernigan said the agency has “vaccine effectiveness” systems in place at the CDC.

Neither Jernigan nor Marks referenced any active surveillance initiatives being undertaken by their agencies to monitor people who received the original COVID-19 vaccines for long-term health effects.

There is no system in place for long-term vaccine safety surveillance in this country,” Ms. Liz Willner, founder of OpenVAERS, told The Epoch Times.

Keep reading

BREAKING: FIRST LOOK AT THE “FREE-TEXT” COVID VACCINE SAFETY DATA THE CDC WANTED TO HIDE

When the CDC created V-Safe as a way to track individuals who received the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines,” the agency vowed to be completely transparent. Remember—despite forcing millions of frightened human beings to take the jab—there were subpar clinical trials. One recipient shared, “The only reason I took this b******* vaccination is because my job gave me two choices. Sign a waiver or get the shot. I [got] the shot in fear of losing any benefits.” So it makes sense, and seems mandatory, that the CDC create a system for individuals to share how they feel after receiving the experimental, mRNA-driven “vaccines.” To build trust in that system, the CDC touted V-Safe as “the most intensive safety monitoring effort in U.S. history.” Yet, as severe adverse events, including death, rapidly ascended following the EUA-pushed jabs, the CDC failed to be transparent with the data, releasing, when ordered by the Court in 2022, only superficial details. But persistence paid off. Last month, a federal judge ordered the CDC to release all 7.8 million detailed “free-text” data entries over the next 12 months. The “free-text” section is the only place in V-Safe for participants to potentially report serious adverse events. Yesterday, the CDC released the initial batch of data containing symptoms reported after being injected. The eye-opening entries are telling.

The free-text entries are critical because, shockingly, despite having an index of “adverse events of special interest” listed in its protocol, V-Safe entirely omitted those same adverse events from being tracked. As explained by ICAN, instead of asking V-safe participants about whether, for example, they experienced things such as anaphylaxis, myocarditis, or coagulopathy after taking an entirely experimental “vaccine” based on technology never before used, the CDC carelessly only asked about minor and generalized reactions, such as “chills,” “headache,” “fatigue or tiredness,” and “vomiting.” Thus, for users who may have wanted to report more serious adverse events, they must use the “free-text” field, which allows up to 250 characters. This data is crucial to understanding the safety profile of the COVID-19 “vaccines.” The fact the CDC had not thus far voluntarily released this critical data is indicative of the overall failure of the federal government’s responsibility to protect the health of Americans.

ICAN’s initial win in two previous lawsuits opened the door to obtaining V-Safe data. However, the taxpayer-funded CDC argued that producing the “free-text” entries was too burdensome an endeavor for them to be responsible for. Nevertheless, the Court strongly disagreed, noting that the “Production of the free-text data will permit independent researchers to put the government agencies to their proof by considering all of the available data.” Reporting on this outstanding victory  brought by the lawyers that regularly represent ICAN on behalf of the Freedom Coalition of Doctors for Choice, ICAN explained the Court recognized that:

“The development and distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine was one of the greatest endeavors in recent history. Predictably, the American public now seeks access to COVID-related papers to ensure that relevant government policies were — and still are — supported and justified by the available data. That is precisely what FOIA contemplates and facilitates.”

Indeed, District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s ruling is a huge win for transparency, and yesterday’s first production of at 390,000 entries outlining what users experienced in the first two days of receiving the “vaccine” is telling. And unfortunately, it’s indicative of what’s to follow. Indeed, the “free-text” data, which is available here, has an overall theme of uneasiness. Users reported “anaphylaxis”—a severe, potentially life-threatening allergic reaction—numerous times, detailing experiences such as, “Emergency room visit for anaphylaxis … went to the ER … I had repeat facial swelling.” One user wrote, “Anaphylaxis within 10 min. of being vaccinated. Throat swollen almost shut.” Another user wrote:

“After receiving the shot (within 15 mins) I had an allergic reaction (tightening of the throat, dizziness, confusion, elevated heart rate) and was taken to the ER. Received steroid shot, Benadryl shot, and ephephrine shot. Was released to go home.” The user later wrote, “Feeling of mild allergic reaction in the throat. Elevated heart rate.”

Interestingly, thousands of users reported an odd “metallic taste” in their mouth, often accompanied by a tingling feeling in their tongue, lasting anywhere from a few minutes to hours or longer. Equally as many people—in the thousands—experienced rapid and concerning heart rates. Likewise, in addition to ongoing feelings of intense anxiety, numbness, dizziness, stiffness, fatigue, and diarrhea, thousands went to the emergency room within 24 to 48 hours of receiving the “vaccine.” One user described their experience at the ER, stating, “3 to 5 days after my shot, I experienced a rash around my eye that was painful and burning. I reported to the emergency room on Thursday, 12/24, diagnosed with shingles/herpes zoster, which I’ve never had before, so I’m just suspicious if that could have been a result of my first dose of the COVID vaccine.” Sadly, over 600 users specifically noted they were pregnant when they received the shot. Did the CDC monitor them more closely? They should have. Twenty-two users reported having a miscarriage that coincided with receiving the “vaccine.” One such user wrote:

“I had a miscarriage. I should’ve been 8 weeks pregnant but the baby stopped  growing at 6 weeks which would’ve been very close to when I received my vaccine.”

It will take weeks to sift through the disturbing “free-text” entries detailing the myriad of troubling symptoms users experienced within the first couple of days after getting the “vaccine.” The 390,000 initial entries emphasize the potential for more serious adverse event symptoms like myocarditis that may be revealed as more “free-text” data files are released. Despite the unsettling entries, given the disaster that has been the COVID-19 “vaccine” campaign, reviewing the data is a massive step in the right direction. ICAN remarked, “This ruling sends a clear message to our federal agencies: we are not moving on and forgetting about the pandemic or the actions they took. ICAN will not stop until ALL the data is released to the public and there is true transparency and accountability around COVID-19.”

Keep reading

Conspiracy Theory Debunker Finds Real Conspiracies

The 2023 book Misbelief by Dan Ariely belongs to a genre I would label “debunking Covid conspiracy theories.” The book is meant to explore the thought process of people who subscribe to conspiracy theories, especially about Covid and the Covid vaccines. 

Thus I was surprised to encounter in the book two stories in which the author uncovered real conspiracies to hide information about Covid from the public. 

Ariely, a professor of psychology at Duke University, played a bit part in promoting Covid lockdowns around the world. By his own description, he worked 

…on projects related to Covid-19 with the Israeli government and a bit with the British, Dutch, and Brazilian governments as well…I was mostly working to try to get the police to use rewards to incentivize good mask-wearing behavior and observance of social distancing instead of using fines… (p. 4) 

The first genuine conspiracy he describes involved the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) manipulating data in the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).

The second involved a newspaper editor-in-chief refusing to report about vaccine side effects observed by a hospital. The author reports these situations matter-of-factly, and even gives the conspirators the benefit of the doubt, saying maybe they did the right thing! 

Let’s look at the VAERS conspiracy (recounted on pp. 274-276). Ariely says he got this information directly from a person who works “in the information technology department of the FDA.” The agency, according to the story, determined that: 

…foreign powers, mostly Russian and Iranian, had found a way to spread disinformation using VAERS. So when the FDA identified cases that had clearly come from such sources, it removed them from the system…

Not only did it delete this data, but it did so silently. Ariely only found out by accident: Parents of vaccine-injured children maintained their own copy of the VAERS data, downloaded from the FDA site. They noticed that cases appearing in their downloaded data later disappeared from the government copy of the database, and they told Ariely about this. 

Supposedly the FDA tried to keep these actions secret because it “did not want to announce to the foreign powers that it was onto them,” the FDA employee told him. But to anyone reasonably well-versed in information technology, keeping such acts secret is an obvious mistake. The bad guys will figure out what is going on; the folks we are trying to protect are left in the dark about possible mischief affecting data they rely on. And that’s the most charitable assessment of their actions. It could be worse: the FDA might have removed valid information inadvertently (putting aside possible nefarious intentions at this point). How might that come about? 

Keep reading

COVID Vaccine Shedding Is ‘Real,’ FDA and Pfizer Documents Are Proof: Clinicians

The topic of COVID-19 vaccine shedding has long been controversial; now, some doctors say it is real.

“Shedding is unfortunately real,” said Dr. Pierre Kory at the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) conference in Phoenix, Arizona, in early February. “The FDA (U.S. Food and Drug Administration) knows that.”

Dr. Kory is a co-founder of the FLCCC, a non-profit advocacy group founded by physicians for the treatment of COVID-19, long COVID, and postvaccine syndromes. He is also the co-founder of the Leading Edge Clinic and has treated over a thousand long-COVID and postvaccine patients.

Mainstream fact-checkers have largely denied shedding on the basis of definition. The commonly cited definition comes from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) website, which defines shedding as the release of viruses, bacteria, and their components from live vaccines.

While mRNA and adenovirus vaccines are not live vaccines, they function similarly to gene therapy products.

All gene therapy products pose a risk of shedding, according to the FDA.

Keep reading