Is it Nobel or Noble Lies?
This confirms that my/PSI predictions on the lack virus or COVID-19 and the vaccines’ ineffectiveness and toxicity were 100 percent accurate
What is a Noble Lie?
Definition:
A “noble lie” refers to a falsehood or deception that is propagated for what is considered to be a greater good or a beneficial purpose.
The term is commonly associated with the realm of ethics and political philosophy, where it is debated whether lying, even for a purportedly noble reason, is justifiable.
Origin:
The concept of the “noble lie” is often traced back to Plato’s “Republic,” specifically in Book III and Book V, where Plato discusses the idea of propagating myths for the sake of social harmony and the benefit of the state.
In the text, these myths are meant to instill values and social cohesion among the citizens, thereby serving a “noble” purpose.
Denis Rancourt is getting better and better at telling the story.
In the recent discussion with McCullough, hosted by Couey, he does a great 25-minute section on explaining what his research team’s data is telling us (video in the masthead).
The full video with some preamble and post McCullough discussion with Couey is here.
He thankfully covers one of my favourite talking points; that about the virus not crossing borders.
I addressed that point when covering his research in July. But it is worth repeating.
A virus without a visa
In fact, the very notion of “spread” during the COVID period is rigorously disproved by the temporal and spatial variations of excess all-cause mortality, everywhere that it is sufficiently quantified, worldwide.
For example, the presumed virus that killed 1.3 million poor and disabled residents of the USA did not cross the more-than-thousand-kilometer land border with Canada, despite continuous and intense economic exchanges.
Likewise, the presumed virus that caused synchronous mortality hotspots in March-April-May 2020 (such as in New York, Madrid region, London, Stockholm, and northern Italy) did not spread beyond those hotspots.
This is possibly my favourite section.
The virus didn’t spread across national borders. It couldn’t get its visa stamped.
This is proven by countless studies of the “progression and spread” of the virus. Which is proof positive that it was policy and not virus that killed people.
At one point, around 17.30, McCullough makes a very important point I hadn’t heard made before, and he is saying it in relationship to at least three dozen countries that have the data:
“there is not a single country that will merge the vaccine administration data with the death data.”
Countries all over the world have assaulted, maimed, and killed their citizens and they will do everything in their power to hide that fact.
The conversation ends with the recent award of the Nobel Prize, and that’s the thread that I’m going to run with here.
mRNA discovery that paved way for COVID-19 vaccines wins Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine
Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman honored for showing that modifications of mRNA could lead to a new kind of vaccine
As Senger tweeted:
The Vice Chair of the Nobel Prize Committee told Science Magazine the prize for Medicine was given to mRNA researchers in part to increase COVID vaccine uptake.
“Giving a Nobel Prize for this COVID-19 vaccine may make hesitant people take the vaccine.”
Yes, you read that right. They think this will reduce vaccine hesitancy.
Someone should tell the 98.7 percent who have not taken the latest booster.
NEW: Trust in mRNA “Vaccines” Plunge to an All-Time Low: Less Than 2% Uptake of New Booster
“On October 4, 2023, Reuters indicated that uptake of the new but already outdated XBB.1.5 boosters was a paltry 1.3 percent. It is now very likely that word-of-mouth on vaccine injuries,…
Seeing that we get our truth from comedians nowadays, let’s see what Jimmy has to report on the matter.
Key Takeaways:
1. The Irony of Masks: The hosts point out the irony of the Nobel Prize winners for the mRNA vaccine wearing masks during the ceremony, suggesting a lack of faith in their own innovation.
2. Historical Background: The Nobel Prize was created by Alfred Nobel, who made his fortune from dynamite. The prize was his way to make amends for his “merchant of death” legacy.
3. Kissinger’s Award: The video mentions that the Nobel Prize lost its credibility when it was awarded to Henry Kissinger, who was responsible for the Vietnam War.
4. Lobotomy and Nobel: Another example cited is the Nobel Prize given to the inventor of lobotomy, questioning the ethical considerations of the award.
5. Non-Disclosure Agreements: Dr. Malone had signed NDAs that prevented him from disclosing his work, contributing to the misattribution of credit.
6. Stolen Valor: The term is used to describe the act of taking credit for someone else’s achievements, as is alleged to have happened with the mRNA vaccine Nobel Prize.
7. Wikipedia Edits: Dr. Malone’s contributions were allegedly edited out of Wikipedia, further erasing his role in the development of mRNA technology.
8. Pharmaceutical Industry Influence: The video suggests that the pharmaceutical industry has a significant influence on academic awards and recognitions.
9. Barack Obama’s Nobel: The video criticises the Nobel Peace Prize given to Barack Obama, citing his involvement in drone strikes.
10. Financial Interests: The video speculates that companies like Pfizer may have financial ties to the Nobel Foundation.
Standout Quotes:
1. “The Nobel Prize winners for the mRNA vaccine wearing masks during the ceremony is worth a thousand words.”
2. “The Nobel Prize was created by a man who made his fortune from dynamite, and now it’s blowing up in their faces.”
3. “When they gave the Nobel Peace Prize to Kissinger for the Vietnam War, that’s when satire died.”
4. “When pharmaceutical industry interests merge with academic competitiveness, ethics gets to ride the back of the bus.”
5. “Barack Obama had a Nobel Peace Prize and a kill list. If that’s not irony, I don’t know what is.”
6. “This is not just about a prize; it’s about the erosion of trust in scientific institutions.”
I hadn’t realised that a Nobel Prize was handed out for lobotomies.
Definition
A lobotomy is a surgical procedure that involves cutting or removing parts of the frontal lobes of the brain. The operation was initially developed as a treatment for severe mental disorders, particularly schizophrenia and other forms of psychosis.
Historical Context
The procedure was popularized in the 1930s and 1940s, largely through the efforts of Portuguese neurologist António Egas Moniz and American neurologist Walter Freeman. Moniz was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1949 for his role in developing the technique.
Procedure Details
1. Prefrontal Lobotomy: The most common form involved severing the connections between the prefrontal cortex and other parts of the brain.
2. Transorbital Lobotomy: This variant involved inserting a surgical instrument through the eye socket to reach the frontal lobes.
3. Techniques: Over the years, various techniques were developed, ranging from crude methods using ice picks to more refined surgical procedures.
Ice picks! Nice. That was The Science™ back then. Frankly not much has changed.
Nobel Prize for Lobotomy: Overview
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1949 was awarded to António Egas Moniz for the development of prefrontal leucotomy, commonly known as lobotomy. The procedure was designed as a surgical intervention to alleviate severe mental illnesses such as schizophrenia.
Controversies and Ethical Implications
1. Informed Consent: The practice has been heavily criticized for ethical reasons, primarily because many patients subjected to the procedure were not in a position to give informed consent.
2. Side Effects: Lobotomies often resulted in severe cognitive and emotional side effects, including apathy, passivity, and in some cases, a complete loss of personality.
3. Scientific Rigour: The lack of rigorous scientific testing prior to its widespread application also garnered criticism.
4. Subsequent Advances: Subsequent advances in psychiatric medication and therapy have rendered lobotomy largely obsolete and generally considered inhumane.
Current Perspective
Today, the awarding of the Nobel Prize for the development of the lobotomy is often cited as one of the most controversial decisions in the history of the Nobel Prizes. Medical ethics and treatment methods have evolved significantly, making the decision appear deeply flawed in retrospect.
Sources
· Nobel Prize Official Website, “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1949” Link
· Pressman, J.D. (1998). “Last Resort: Psychosurgery and the Limits of Medicine”. Cambridge University Press.
I wonder what they will say in years to come about this year’s award to Kariko and Weissman?
But now I want to get into the weeds a bit.
What exactly did they get their prize for?
The 2023 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded jointly to Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman for their groundbreaking work on mRNA vaccines which significantly contributed to the fight against COVID-19.
Their discoveries concerning nucleoside base modifications enabled the development of effective mRNA vaccines against the virus, marking a significant advancement in medical science and global health amidst the pandemic1234.
So, what does “nucleoside base modifications” mean?
This is the official line:
Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman’s notable discoveries around nucleoside base modifications significantly propelled the development of mRNA vaccines, particularly for combating COVID-19. Here’s a breakdown of their contributions:
1. Fundamental Understanding:
· Their work underscored the crucial role of base modifications in mRNA, addressing a significant barrier to employing mRNA for clinical applications. This paved the way for the development of mRNA-based vaccines, a cornerstone in the fight against COVID-191.
2. Early Developments (2005):
· In 2005, Karikó and Weissman developed nucleoside base modifications to prevent the immune system from initiating an inflammatory response against lab-created mRNA, a hurdle observed in earlier attempts to utilise mRNA therapeutically2.
3. Reduced Inflammation and Enhanced Protein Production:
· Their discoveries entailed modifications that both diminished inflammatory responses and augmented protein production. By doing so, they eliminated critical challenges, facilitating the progression towards effective mRNA vaccines3.
4. Suppression of RNA Recognition:
· Their research indicated that nucleoside modifications suppress the potential of RNA to activate dendritic cells (DCs), which are part of the immune system. This suppression aids in avoiding an undesirable immune reaction to the introduced mRNA, making mRNA vaccines more tolerable and effective4.
Through these discoveries, Karikó and Weissman established a foundation that enabled the rapid development of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19, marking a significant milestone in modern medicine and global health.
But there is a problem with this official story.
It may have “diminished inflammation”, but it didn’t eliminate it.
And the “augmented” protein production means that cells now were producing much more foreign antigen protein than the body would have normally allowed if it wasn’t disabled from stopping it by “suppressing the recognition” of this foreign RNA.
So, said another way, what these two prize winners did is find a way to prevent our bodies from doing what they have evolved to do over millennia, and that is to attack and take out foreign dangerous intruders.
Their secret weapon was Pseudouridine. Here again is the official story.
Yes, pseudouridine is indeed a part of the base modifications made by Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman which was fundamental to their development of mRNA vaccines. Here are the specifics based on various sources:
1. Replacement of Uridine with Pseudouridine:
· The replacement of uridine with pseudouridine in mRNA was a key modification that rendered the RNA non-immunogenic, which is vital for preventing unwanted immune responses when introduced into the body1.
2. Superior Nonimmunogenic Vector:
· Incorporating pseudouridine into mRNA yielded a superior nonimmunogenic vector with enhanced translational capacity and biological stability. This modification improves the mRNA’s ability to code for proteins without triggering adverse immune reactions2.
3. Thwarting Immune Response:
· In 2005, while collaborating, Karikó and Weissman discovered that swapping out uridine for pseudouridine, a nucleoside naturally found in RNA, not only thwarted the immune response but also played a role in the success of mRNA as a platform for vaccine development3.
4. Improved Translational Capacity:
· The mRNAs containing pseudouridines showcased higher translational capacity compared to unmodified mRNAs, indicating an enhanced ability to translate the genetic code into proteins, which is a central aspect for the effectiveness of mRNA vaccines4.
5. Patent for Modified mRNA:
· A patent was filed by the University of Pennsylvania on August 21, 2006, on behalf of Karikó and Weissman for RNA containing modified nucleosides, which included the use of pseudouridine to create a synthetic mRNA code, showcasing the significance of this modification in their work5.
These modifications allowed for the development of mRNA vaccines, marking a monumental advancement in the field of medicine, especially in the rapid development of effective vaccines against COVID-19.
What they basically did is figure out how to create Fiberglass Logs.
This is taken from a long document. Read the rest here substack.com
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Expose The Lies About Covid 19
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Wisenox
| #
Damn, mentioned a patent, but left out the good stuff.
The patent from the article is contained in the Moderna patent. The patent has the abilities to delete, silence or replace genes as well, but the article leaves that out.
So, what else is in the Moderna patent?
Here’s a couple:
US 8,246,995 Hydrophobic nanotubes and nanoparticles as transporters for the delivery of drugs into cells.
WO2012094304 Nanotubes as carriers of nucleic acids into cells.
2013/0251618 Method for making semiconductive single wall carbon nanotubes.
2015/0030576 Methods and compositions for targeting agents into and across the blood brain barrier.
See what they choose to avoid talking about?
There’s a reason for that. Look up internet of bio-nano things and look at the different pictures and graphics of humans. Notice that they all have black dots in the brain????
Reply