MRNA DEBATE

THE MRNA VACCINE DEBATE

Far be it from me to be considered and expert on the subject, I did make a number of observations on the handling of the administration of the intervention. Many people that I know went along to the first centers that popped up. When I asked them about the protocol being used to administer injections it was explained to me by all that they had to identify themselves before receiving the injection. This indicated to me that there was an opportunity thereafter for the administrators to choose from a selection of different kinds of solution to administer. There could have been a number of different types of solutions and vaccines available at the centers, and according to the demographic of the individual, certain types of vaccines were administered to certain people. 

The time scale also leads me to question the production of the vast number of doses that were delivered to the public. Re-labeling  of products is common practice these days, something which I have first hand experience of whilst working in the food production sector. Not only that but the question that arose in my mind at the time was " is there a possibility that there will be a percentage of the doses that are merely saline solution"? My automatic answer being, "Yes".

Of course that was a possibility, and also  the possibility of old stock of other vaccines being re-labeled or re-packaged was equally strong. This could suggest that many people did not receive an MRNA vaccine, but instead received a harmless saline placebo. It could also suggest that many people may have received an alternative dose of a re-packaged Hep'B vaccine or a MMR vaccine or something of that nature.

The obvious fallout from the mass rollout of vaccination programs and it's correlation with an increase of excess deaths, both locally and worldwide, has been a talking point for many journalists and independent researchers for the past few years. The practice of asking for identity before the administration of injections seems very suspicious to me from the perspective of the aforementioned  alternatives and practices.

The root of all the fakery.

Back in early 2020 I uncovered a company that has seldom ever been mentioned in the debate. I have waited a long time to mention it because I have been waiting patiently for some of the better known alternative journalists to do that. I have a long history of internet publishing, but I have been in hibernation/observation mode since 2002. I've just been too busy with other projects to devote any time to publishing until now.

One of the missing links in the debate, the one that I have just mentioned can be found here: https://www.beiresources.org/ 

This is where you can find information on the company that claimed to have the first samples of  SARS cov2. They also claimed to have the data collected from the first alleged victim to be identified in the UK, plus a few others. The waybackmachine.org may offer you better detail than what is available on the BeiResources.org website currently.

Freedom of information request from March 2021, submitted to the NHS by me.