Now they tell us?

Blood from the vaxxed may not be safe for transfusions, say researchers.

JUST when TCW readers might have thought they had heard enough about the covid jab harms, a major review has called for the vaccination campaign to be suspended pending studies of the risks to blood transfusion and organ transplant recipients.

A team of researchers in Japan say that, based on the volume of evidence that has come to light about post-vaccination harms, medical professionals worldwide should be alerted to potential dangers in using blood derived from people who have had the jab, as well as from those suffering persistent symptoms from covid itself (‘long covid’). They say methods to identify and remove the contaminants are urgently needed, and propose a range of specific tests and regulations to deal with the risks.

The lead author of the 20-page report, posted on March 15, is Jun Ueda, associate professor in the department of advanced medical science, Asahikawa Medical University. The highly referenced paper is a preprint, not yet peer-reviewed.

In it, the researchers say that intensive studies of the covid virus itself have shown its key mechanism of harm to be the way its spike protein binds to blood vessel walls, triggering blood clots.

‘However, it has been reported from various countries around the world that genetic vaccines such as mRNA vaccines encoding spike proteins have also caused a wide variety of diseases in all organs and systems, including the nervous system, in addition to thrombosis and resulting cardiovascular disorders.’ This is because the gene products go beyond the site of the jab to organs and tissues throughout the body.

Contrary to initial expectations, the genes and proteins are now known to persist in the blood for prolonged periods, and post-vaccination syndrome, or ‘spikeopathy’, has become a major global problem, the researchers say. The jabs should have been regarded as biomedicine, but because they were classified as vaccines, huge numbers of people were inoculated and many areas of medicine are beginning to become involved with the consequences. ‘This has never happened before in the history of biomedicine, and consequently it is highly suspected that blood products for transfusion have been affected.’

A search of the medical literature on diseases related to blood and blood vessels, combined with the key words ‘Covid-19 vaccine’ and ‘side effects’, yielded several hundred articles. In addition to abnormally shaped red blood cells, microscopic examination has shown grossly abnormal materials floating in the blood of some mRNA-vaccinated individuals.

The spike protein can cause amyloidosis (a rare disease in which a protein called amyloid builds up in organs such as the heart, kidneys, liver, spleen, nervous system and digestive tract). It can also cause prolonged immune dysfunction, increasing infection risk, and can cross the blood-brain barrier, with the potential to affect brain function.

‘Thus, there is no longer any doubt that the spike protein used as an antigen in genetic vaccines is itself toxic . . . From the perspective of traditional containment of infectious diseases, greater caution is required in the collection of blood from genetic vaccine recipients and the subsequent handling of blood products, as well as during solid organ transplantation and even surgical procedures.’

The review says that because blood contamination affects so many areas of health care, blood donors should be interviewed so that records can be kept of when and how many genetic jabs they have received. Since it is not known how long the jab products persist in the body, their blood should be used with extreme caution.

The paper sets out a range of tests needed to confirm the safety of blood products from gene vaccine recipients, and to check for contamination with spike protein or the modified genes used in the jabs. It says guidelines are needed on how to handle blood found to contain the contaminants.

‘If the blood product is found to contain the spike protein or a modified gene derived from the genetic vaccine, it is essential to remove them,’ the researchers say. But since there is currently no reliable way to do so, ‘we suggest that all such blood products be discarded until a definitive solution is found’.

Medical facilities unable to take such a step immediately should explain the possibility of contamination with spike protein or other foreign substances to prospective patients, and include this warning on the consent form.

The most important initial action is to make the relevant medical personnel aware of the situation, the review states. ‘Unless accurate tests are established, no conclusions can be drawn about the risk or safety of blood transfusions using blood products from gene vaccine recipients.

‘Thorough and continuous investigation is therefore necessary. To accomplish this, all potential donors should be registered, traceability of blood products should be ensured, and rigorous recipient outcome studies and meta-analyses should be maintained.’

Advancing 2A Rights After Constitutional Carry

With Constitutional Carry now on the books in 29 states, there’s a real question about how to continue supporting and strengthening the right to keep and bear arms. Some pro-2A lawmakers in Tennessee decided to take aim at “gun-free zones” this session, but their bill failed to make it out of a Senate committee on Tuesday after objections from the Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce, the Tennessee Bureau of Investigations, and the state’s Department of Safety.

A bill that would have effectively let some people bring guns into places where guns are prohibited, as long as they had a concealed carry permit, failed in a Senate committee on March 26.

SB 2180 would have required those people, if asked to leave, to at least take their guns out of the building or else face a criminal trespassing charge. They also would not have faced penalties for violating postings that prohibit guns from the area.

During the meeting, the department said the bill may have effectively protected people who bring guns into areas like Department of Children’s Services offices, jails or driver’s license centers. The department also said it was concerned people at businesses that prohibit guns may need to confront armed people themselves.

If armed people didn’t leave the business, or take their guns outside, then the business would need to wait for law enforcement to arrive.

Republican lawmakers said they were worried making people leave guns in their cars may increase the chance they are stolen.

“I think most people who are concealed probably ignore the sign, and I think 100% of criminals ignore the sign,” said Sen. Kerry Roberts (R-Springfield). “What I’m really getting at is this, which is a bigger issue — someone to leave their gun in a car for it to be potentially stolen, or to bring it with them?”

Robert’s argument is a valid one, but the legislation still arguably intrudes on the rights of property owners. So what, if anything, can lawmakers to do keep strengthening our Second Amendment rights once they’ve put Constitutional Carry in place?

On today’s Bearing Arms Cam & Co, however, we have a few suggestions for legislators that stand a better chance of getting enacted into law; including one that might be even more effective at getting rid of “gun-free zones” on private property.

Continue reading “”

Once more we see that SloJoe is not, and never has been, in charge.
Part of me is glad that his staff know he’s a senile dolt and reverse anything he’s says that “off script”, but the people who actually are running the executive branch have no Constitutional authority to do so.
They’ve illegally usurped power.

Janet Yellen walks back Biden’s comments US taxpayers on hook for Baltimore bridge collapse
Biden said Tuesday that federal government ‘will pay for the entire cost of reconstructing that bridge’

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Wednesday appeared to walk back comments from President Biden that U.S. taxpayers would foot the bill for the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse in Baltimore.

Appearing on MSNBC, Yellen said money from the bipartisan infrastructure law could “potentially be helpful.”

“My expectation would be that ultimately there will be insurance payments, in part, to cover this. But we don’t want to allow worrying about where the financing will come from to hold up reconstruction,” Yellen said.

Her comments come a day after Biden said it was his “intention that the federal government will pay for the entire cost of reconstructing that bridge, and I expect the Congress to support my effort.”

Biden said that, while the effort will take some time, the people of Baltimore “can count on us.”

When asked by a reporter whether the company that manages the ship should be held responsible, Biden said the federal government would not wait for any decisions and would step in to get the bridge built and reopened.

The Francis Scott Key Bridge along I-695 in Maryland collapsed in the Baltimore harbor around 1:30 a.m. Tuesday after a cargo ship slammed into a support beam. The collapse sent at least eight construction workers and multiple vehicles plunging into the Patapsco River below.

The cargo ship that hit the bridge was the Dali, a 95,000 GT Singapore-flagged container ship, per the Maritime and Port Authority (MPA) of Singapore. There were 22 crew members onboard at the time of the incident.

The Synergy Group, a Singapore-based company that manages the ship, said in a statement that two pilots piloting the ship through the harbor and all crew members onboard were accounted for and there are no reports of any injuries. The group also said that no pollution has been reported.

The large vessel appeared to catch fire before becoming disabled. Footage of the incident shows the lights going out multiple times on the vessel in question prior to impact, suggesting the collision may have been due to a power failure.

“This pesky Constitution keeps us from doing whatever we want…..”

Breyer says Supreme Court risks creating ‘Constitution that no one wants’

Former Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer said the Supreme Court risks creating a “Constitution that no one wants” if it follows its current way of interpreting law.

In an interview with Politico Magazine published Tuesday, Breyer discussed his view of originalism, a legal theory based on the idea that law should be interpreted according to the writers’ original intent, which is popular among the conservative majority on the court.

Breyer said in the interview that he used to argue with the late fellow Justice Antonin Scalia, a noted originalist, about originalism and told him if the theory is used to interpret the Constitution, “or the statutes, we will have a Constitution that no one wants.”

“Because the world does change, not necessarily so much in terms of values, but certainly in terms of the facts to which those values are applied,” Breyer continued.

Breyer argued in the Politico Magazine interview that originalism discounts “lots of changes designed to further the value of protecting basic civil rights, because the world has changed.”

On Sunday, Breyer also said that he would support age limits for Supreme Court justices and that an age limit would have helped him make his own decision to retire in 2022.

“I don’t think that’s harmful,” Breyer said, talking about age-limited terms on the high court in an NBC “Meet the Press” interview with Kristen Welker on Sunday. “If you had long terms, for example, they’d have to be long. Why long? Because I don’t think you want someone who’s appointed to the Supreme Court to be thinking about his next job.”

“And so, a 20-year term? I don’t know, 18? Long term? Fine. Fine,” he said. “I don’t think that would be harmful. I think it would have helped, in my case. It would have avoided, for me, going through difficult decisions when you retire. What’s the right time? And so, that would be okay.”

Proof eco-extremists don’t want to fix the problem, they want to tear down society.

This week, Harvard University has shut down a Bill Gates-funded geoengineering experiment. The controversial Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment, or SCoPEx, run by professors David Keith and Frank Keutsch, aimed to study the potential future implementation of geoengineering by crop dusting sulphuric acid into our stratosphere. Nice.

Even if you put aside the almost instant validity such an experiment would give to conspiracy theories like chemtrails and HAARP, it still sounds a bit too much, playing with our thin air like that — in an unprecedented, and potentially catastrophic, manner, too.

But let’s not kid ourselves. The plug wasn’t pulled over fears of playing fast and loose with the venusformation of Earth’s atmosphere.

Nor was it due to the Harvard faculty’s occasional (yet frequent) dalliance with plagiarism or concerns over the lack of diversity within the ivory tower.

No, according to the MIT Technology Review, it was something else entirely: “Even studying the possibility of solar geoengineering eases the societal pressure to cut greenhouse gas emissions,” it clarified.

The Harvard Crimson picked up the scent too, noting that “a vocal minority of scientists have voiced concern that [the experiment’s] technology may provide an excuse to reduce pressure to cut emissions.”

And that’s the irony. Fixing “climate change” without destroying capitalism and everything the West stands for does nothing for the revolution.

What a waste of a good crisis!

It turns out, the climate change business thrives on more climate change alarmism. Whodathunk?

Continue reading “”