There's a lot of confusion over the animal trials, which were hard to distinguish. I had to make several tours, and I might still not have it totally straight.
Far as I can tell, the animal trials that went bad (what the Texas Committee mentioned) were the attempts to make a vaccine for Zika, Dengue and SARS (more than 10 years ago). The …
There's a lot of confusion over the animal trials, which were hard to distinguish. I had to make several tours, and I might still not have it totally straight.
Far as I can tell, the animal trials that went bad (what the Texas Committee mentioned) were the attempts to make a vaccine for Zika, Dengue and SARS (more than 10 years ago). The animals didn't live past 2 months because they were euthanized for autopsy - or necropsy, as they call it in animal cadavers - to find out how they weathered the virus challenge after being vaxxed.
The researchers discovered that ADE, antibody dependent enhancement, had taken over in the inoculated animals. This happened regardless of the vax delivery system (conventional or gene therapy) - it seemed related to the flexibility of the corona virus. The spikey beast can come in from the wild and hypnotize the domestic (vaccine-produced) antibodies to work for them instead of against them. (my imagery, not the researchers')
I found a good paper from sept/2020, which warned of the jab-driven and enhanced infection waves that we see today - and it linked the earlier animal studies showing why it can happen.
One study showed that ferrets had high neutralizing antibodies against SARS (CoV-1, ancestor of our current invader, which is CoV-2) after being jabbed with a "recombinant MVA" (another gene therapy) that also used the corona spike protein. BUT the jabbed animals paid for it with "enhanced hepatitis" (dying liver cells). That was revealed in 2004.
With the Pfizer-Moderna horror show, the story was different. And worse. A Reuters 'fact check', whose purpose was to discredit that comment in the Texas Senate hearing, kind of gave away the store (emphasis added):
"These claims, however, are false. Reuters found no evidence of the three COVID-19 vaccines [Pfizer, Moderna, J&J] skipping animal trials due to the animals dying or otherwise.... Due to time constraints and the urgency to find a vaccine for COVID-19, ***Moderna and Pfizer did receive approval to run animal testing and early trials on humans at the same time,*** as opposed to fully completing animal trials before moving on to human trials."
The "approval" for Pfizer was based on "preclinical" results from testing their stuff on a grand total of 12 monkeys -- none of which were tracked longer than 21 days before being euthanized to check their lungs. Convenient.
In short, no animal study was even attempted to check for a connection between mRNA shots and the development of ADE or inflammatory responses, much less autoimmune diseases or cancer or fertility issues.
Oddly, the animal "preclinical" study that exempted them from responsible animal studies didn't get into peer-reviewed publication until Feb/2021... two months AFTER Pfizer and their enablers had already started pumping it into people.
By then, any further animal studies running "at the same time" would have been pointless.
And I suspect that was part of the scheme. They expected to learn everything they want to know from their human guinea pigs.
There's a lot of confusion over the animal trials, which were hard to distinguish. I had to make several tours, and I might still not have it totally straight.
Far as I can tell, the animal trials that went bad (what the Texas Committee mentioned) were the attempts to make a vaccine for Zika, Dengue and SARS (more than 10 years ago). The animals didn't live past 2 months because they were euthanized for autopsy - or necropsy, as they call it in animal cadavers - to find out how they weathered the virus challenge after being vaxxed.
The researchers discovered that ADE, antibody dependent enhancement, had taken over in the inoculated animals. This happened regardless of the vax delivery system (conventional or gene therapy) - it seemed related to the flexibility of the corona virus. The spikey beast can come in from the wild and hypnotize the domestic (vaccine-produced) antibodies to work for them instead of against them. (my imagery, not the researchers')
I found a good paper from sept/2020, which warned of the jab-driven and enhanced infection waves that we see today - and it linked the earlier animal studies showing why it can happen.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7550622/
One study showed that ferrets had high neutralizing antibodies against SARS (CoV-1, ancestor of our current invader, which is CoV-2) after being jabbed with a "recombinant MVA" (another gene therapy) that also used the corona spike protein. BUT the jabbed animals paid for it with "enhanced hepatitis" (dying liver cells). That was revealed in 2004.
With the Pfizer-Moderna horror show, the story was different. And worse. A Reuters 'fact check', whose purpose was to discredit that comment in the Texas Senate hearing, kind of gave away the store (emphasis added):
"These claims, however, are false. Reuters found no evidence of the three COVID-19 vaccines [Pfizer, Moderna, J&J] skipping animal trials due to the animals dying or otherwise.... Due to time constraints and the urgency to find a vaccine for COVID-19, ***Moderna and Pfizer did receive approval to run animal testing and early trials on humans at the same time,*** as opposed to fully completing animal trials before moving on to human trials."
The "approval" for Pfizer was based on "preclinical" results from testing their stuff on a grand total of 12 monkeys -- none of which were tracked longer than 21 days before being euthanized to check their lungs. Convenient.
In short, no animal study was even attempted to check for a connection between mRNA shots and the development of ADE or inflammatory responses, much less autoimmune diseases or cancer or fertility issues.
Oddly, the animal "preclinical" study that exempted them from responsible animal studies didn't get into peer-reviewed publication until Feb/2021... two months AFTER Pfizer and their enablers had already started pumping it into people.
By then, any further animal studies running "at the same time" would have been pointless.
And I suspect that was part of the scheme. They expected to learn everything they want to know from their human guinea pigs.