This is so cool. The immune system is one of the most amazing systems in the body. Thanks for explaining this.
Wow, unbelievable that the CDC is defining immunity in terms of antibodies. They are trying to rewrite biology and biological knowledge to help pharmaceutical companies sell products.
Feb 10, 2023·edited Feb 10, 2023Liked by Joomi Kim
The human immune system is way more complex than anything Einstein came up with and it hasn't been completely figured out yet. 99% of the "experts" are clueless including many advanced scientists and doctors. But you don't have to understand everything. Here's a pro tip to those reading. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. My unfixed immune system has worked flawlessly these past three years. Zero problems/side effects/ worries. Great work as always.
None of the flu vaccine studies on the CDC website show much efficacy in terms of symptomatic infection. As I recall, more than half of the studies just measure antibodies, and they have not made the connection between increased antibodies equating to reduced symptomatic flu infection. The flu vaccine has been available for over 30 years. When they couldn't prove that it's effective, and have no real world evidence, maybe that's when they changed their definition of immunity. Because flu vaccines do increase antibodies, I don't think that's hard to do. Just inject antigens and other shit into the body and it'll increase antibodies. "Woohoo, I'm sick as a dog but I have more antibodies!' 😄
Thank you so much it's an incredible tutorial! Basic concepts are confusing enough for most of us & incredible complexities get overwhelming. This is an instant favorite bookmark! <3
"We constantly hear about antibodies in the context of “immunity.” In fact, this is how the CDC defines “immunity”:
Immunity to a disease is achieved through the presence of antibodies to that disease in a person’s system."
In my mind a lot of this problem begins w an unholy alliance between Rockefeller's toxic chemical fortunes and FDA adopting a don't look - don't find policy w respect to chemical safety.
SCORECARD :
If an industrial chemical is allowed by law to be released into the environment, most people assume that it must have been tested and evaluated for its potential risks. Unfortunately, this is simply not true.... Could government assess a chemical's safety or risk? For most of the important industrial chemicals in U.S. commerce, government lacks the information to draw any scientifically based conclusion about the degree of risk--or lack of risk--that a chemical may pose when used.
Next big dirtbag loophole was created by evil genius Michael Taylor heading FDA between gigs at Monsanto & back again under Obama. Taylor invented a policy of "substantial equivalence" so gmo foods would not be tested as "novel" products but declared equal to traditional foods if a few meaningless measures like fiber & nutrients are in the same range.. safety.. pfffft!
Biotechnology Consultation Memorandum of Conference BNF No. 000001
September 19, 1994
Wholesomeness Studies
Monsanto described the results of wholesomeness studies they carried out in rats, chickens, catfish, dairy cattle, and bobwhite quail. On the basis of their consideration of the totality of these studies, Monsanto has concluded that there is no significant difference in the wholesomeness of glyphosate-tolerant and traditional soybean varieties, as expected from their compositional analysis. These data are summarized on page 49 of Monsanto's September 2 submission.
Conclusions
Monsanto has concluded, in essence, that the glyphosate-tolerant soybean variety they have developed is not significantly altered within the meaning of 21 CFR 170.30(f)(2) when compared to soybean varieties with a history of safe use. At this time, based on Monsanto's description of its data and analysis, the agency considers Monsanto's consultation on this product to be complete.
This is so cool. The immune system is one of the most amazing systems in the body. Thanks for explaining this.
Wow, unbelievable that the CDC is defining immunity in terms of antibodies. They are trying to rewrite biology and biological knowledge to help pharmaceutical companies sell products.
The human immune system is way more complex than anything Einstein came up with and it hasn't been completely figured out yet. 99% of the "experts" are clueless including many advanced scientists and doctors. But you don't have to understand everything. Here's a pro tip to those reading. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. My unfixed immune system has worked flawlessly these past three years. Zero problems/side effects/ worries. Great work as always.
That odd sentence ("Immunity to a disease is achieved through the presence of antibodies to that disease in a person’s system.") was there since 2007.
https://web.archive.org/web/20071101040244/http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/immunity-types.htm
None of the flu vaccine studies on the CDC website show much efficacy in terms of symptomatic infection. As I recall, more than half of the studies just measure antibodies, and they have not made the connection between increased antibodies equating to reduced symptomatic flu infection. The flu vaccine has been available for over 30 years. When they couldn't prove that it's effective, and have no real world evidence, maybe that's when they changed their definition of immunity. Because flu vaccines do increase antibodies, I don't think that's hard to do. Just inject antigens and other shit into the body and it'll increase antibodies. "Woohoo, I'm sick as a dog but I have more antibodies!' 😄
So fascinating, Joomi, thanks for explaining it so anyone can understand.
There's no SARS-COV-2 'virus', hence there's no 'immunity' against it..
Thank you so much it's an incredible tutorial! Basic concepts are confusing enough for most of us & incredible complexities get overwhelming. This is an instant favorite bookmark! <3
"We constantly hear about antibodies in the context of “immunity.” In fact, this is how the CDC defines “immunity”:
Immunity to a disease is achieved through the presence of antibodies to that disease in a person’s system."
In my mind a lot of this problem begins w an unholy alliance between Rockefeller's toxic chemical fortunes and FDA adopting a don't look - don't find policy w respect to chemical safety.
SCORECARD :
If an industrial chemical is allowed by law to be released into the environment, most people assume that it must have been tested and evaluated for its potential risks. Unfortunately, this is simply not true.... Could government assess a chemical's safety or risk? For most of the important industrial chemicals in U.S. commerce, government lacks the information to draw any scientifically based conclusion about the degree of risk--or lack of risk--that a chemical may pose when used.
https://web.archive.org/web/20120917041002/http://scorecard.goodguide.com/chemical-profiles/chems-profile-descriptions.tcl#safety_assessment
Next big dirtbag loophole was created by evil genius Michael Taylor heading FDA between gigs at Monsanto & back again under Obama. Taylor invented a policy of "substantial equivalence" so gmo foods would not be tested as "novel" products but declared equal to traditional foods if a few meaningless measures like fiber & nutrients are in the same range.. safety.. pfffft!
Biotechnology Consultation Memorandum of Conference BNF No. 000001
September 19, 1994
Wholesomeness Studies
Monsanto described the results of wholesomeness studies they carried out in rats, chickens, catfish, dairy cattle, and bobwhite quail. On the basis of their consideration of the totality of these studies, Monsanto has concluded that there is no significant difference in the wholesomeness of glyphosate-tolerant and traditional soybean varieties, as expected from their compositional analysis. These data are summarized on page 49 of Monsanto's September 2 submission.
Conclusions
Monsanto has concluded, in essence, that the glyphosate-tolerant soybean variety they have developed is not significantly altered within the meaning of 21 CFR 170.30(f)(2) when compared to soybean varieties with a history of safe use. At this time, based on Monsanto's description of its data and analysis, the agency considers Monsanto's consultation on this product to be complete.
F. Owen Fields, Ph.D.
https://web.archive.org/web/20101122021318/www.fda.gov/Food/Biotechnology/Submissions/ucm161130.htm
Good points. The corruption of institutions began long before.
Thank you Joomi for your brave work. I lost my job because of vax mandates so I really appreciate that this is freely available.