Gryphon Scientific Gain of Function Review Irreducible Uncertainty & Unknowns
Virology & vaccinology Off Track Betting Pseudo-Science ~ "Collective elements of uncertainty significantly compromise predictive value" p322
One of the most challenging things to do is separate what we know for certain and what we believe is true from a lifetime of teaching reinforced by trusted sources.
If we have curiosity adulthood opens a world of things grown ups told us that were untrue. They run the spectrum from Santa to Reefer Madness and the awakening differs for each of us, but we all land in a place where we know for certain we were badly misinformed about subjects by sources who shaped our vision of the world.
Gain of Function is the name given to the creation of synthetic clones which are the basis for all the virology & vaccinology models that do NOT reflect reality
Risk and Benefit Analysis of Gain of Function Research
This work was conducted under NIH Contract# HHSN263201500002C with Gryphon Scientific from March 20, 2015 to December 15, 2015. Revisions were made until April 2016.
** see p 284 below
Brilliantly summarized by Toby Rogers and perfect preamble to be an informed, articulate analysis of the reality behind the professional virus cult. My comment paired two parts of the full piece but the link goes to the post text. He said it so well Amen was all I could add and encourage folks to read this and other work.
"But immunology makes money by pretending to know everything (when they actually know less than nothing) so that they can inject toxic products into people and make them chronically ill. At this point I don’t even think we can call immunology and vaccinology a science anymore. Instead they are a horrifying, barbaric mix of business and politics masquerading as science. "
What follows is a collection of screenshots from 1,000+ page Gryphon Scientific 2016 Report on Gain of Function Risks and Benefits with my highlights to make scanning for key points is easy. The goal is to expose the Gain of Function virus myth and fear of RNA molecules as lurking, invisible enemies humans lack power to defend against without Big Pharma models, measurements & profitable panaceas to protect us.
Wayback has full document and the most fun way to go through it is to search for terms like “however“ or “uncertainty“ to find summary notes that petrie dish and animal models with synthetic clones may not translate to real world possibilities or human immune system responses. Top buck way to say wild ass guess!
Other fun search terms are “ferretts” “mice“ “serial passage“ “models“ “animal models“ “vaccine“ “wild type virus“ “transgenic“ “Spike“ “CoV Spike“ “Spike Swapping“ “MERS-CoV“ “pandemic“ “downstream decisions“ “pre-pandemic vaccines”
It’s all about the money and stakeholders means money makers.
CVV means Candidate Vaccine Virus.
https://web.archive.org/web/20161206155142/http://www.gryphonscientific.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Risk-and-Benefit-Analysis-of-Gain-of-Function-Research-Final-Report.pdf
9.7.1.2 Benefits of GoF That Enhances Pathogenicity to Surveillance p.343 pdf
Benefit 1- However, the success of this approach is subject to significant advancements in the state of knowledge about mechanisms underlying pathogenicity.
Benefit 2- However, the success of this approach is subject to significant advancements in the state of knowledge the mechanistic basis of pathogenicity, and predictions must be experimentally validated.
Benefit 3- However, the success of this approach is subject to significant advancements in the state of knowledge the mechanistic basis of pathogenicity, and predictions must be experimentally validated.
wtf
Bingo, they failed with crispr they failed with the genome project they failed with vaccines, we got nothing of benefit. Cancer went up, autism increased, auto immune issues skyrocketed.... To stop the "virus" and that "virus". If they only knew this.... All through history transmissibility tests have failed.
https://controlstudies.substack.com/p/scientists-tried-to-give-people-covidand?
They bring out new tech which has new issues. The new issues get "solved" later by newer tech that doesn't work like the last one and causes more issues.
After all, even Goldman Sachs said that cures are not profitable.
What is profitable is a circle jerk of treatment and new symptoms. Give em another different one and rinse and repeat.
Who else would think remdesevir is a good thing even when it was the second worst drug against "ebola"?
The same people that promoted AZT, a FAILED chemo drug that somehow magically worked on HIV. If it failed chemo trials how the fk did it become a safe treatment?!?
TRUST THE $CIENCE
Well done. Thank you for sharing this monumental work!
It's wonderful they've left such beautiful trails for those of us who love patterns and symbols. Add a dash of curiosity and a 'hunch' can be proven!