Listen to this article: Dr. Margaret Hamburger on Personalized Medicine

Mysterious Vaping Illness Continued

In this post I am reviewing the second video (episode 169.2) in a series on the potential of vaping products to be used as a way to seed COVID 19. Mark Kulacz reviews some of what he spoke about in Episode 169.1 and he brings up some more information, furthering this hypothesis. Most importantly he doesn’t make any accusations or assertions, instead he asks questions about the evidence. To evaluate the situation we are in, it helps to ask questions.

A mysterious vaping illness appeared in 2019, with cases peaking in the summer. This vaping illness resulted in symptoms that are the same as the symptoms associated with the “novel dangerous” virus known to us as COVID 19. Mark tweeted a hypothesis on the topic, and Gain of Function (GOF) whistleblower, Andrew Huff doth protest too much. Andrew blocked Mark and replied to the tweet asserting that Mark is controlled opposition.

In episode 169.1 there was also mention of Rick Bright and Fauci, who at the Making Influenza History: The Quest for a Universal Vaccine event (that you can watch on YouTube), enthusiastically agreed that:

“ There might be a need or even an urgent call for an entity of excitement out there that's completely disruptive, that's not beholden to bureaucratic strings and processes.” Rick Bright

Whenever there is a crime, part of the investigation is to look at motive. There are many players in this particular crime, and there are a lot of different motivations for this crime. It seems crucial to note that while Melinda Gates plays a role in this crime, she is not the only player here.

At a speech delivered by Dr. Margaret Hamburger, 21st Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, she explained that we are entering the early days of the genomic age. Her speech (see linked YouTube video), from Oct 27, 2009 explains that there are issues with the regulatory system. It is too slow, there is too much red tape. She says that there are people who desperately need these genetic therapies, and if we cannot speed up the approval of these types of products then those people are being let down.

For a long time there has been a lot of interest in genetics and genetic engineering. Investors are highly interested in this, but to sell it to the people it needs to be tested and proven. It’s the next big thing, to be able to fix errors in genetic code. Forgive me, but I am not interested in fixing my genetic code, as I understand that genetics is a small part of the story. What these people often ignore is the term epigenetics, whereby our genetics is altered all on it’s own by our environment. Your diet, your thoughts, your habits, what is sprayed down on us from airplanes, all determine our genetics. But conveniently investors and those pushing this stuff just ignore all of that.

Ever since it was discovered that the genetic code could be altered using LNP, mRNA and CRSPR(etc.), there has been a push to speed up the release of genetic alterations (therapies); which is personalized medicine, designed for the person, based on their genetics. Margaret explains in her speech that this means that we need new medicines as well as testing devices. The diagnostic testing devices are needed to find a persons genetic weaknesses as they would be associated with disease, allowing for these new therapies to be tailored to each person.

In the following quote Dr. Hamburger says the word “science” a lot. And that’s how you know that you can trust her 100%.

… In order to deliver the promise of scientific discovery to patients and consumers, I found that I'm increasingly becoming a zealot for the advancement of regulatory science. As a science-based science led regulatory agency, the FDA must respond to the extraordinary advances in new science and technology, which offer great new opportunities, but also challenge our capacity for research development and regulatory processes. As we endeavor to translate the great promise of the new science and technology into real world products for those who need them, it is essential that we have a regulatory agency that is scientifically robust and trusted by the policymakers, and by the American people. We must be able to understand and respond to the full range of innovative products that will come before us. And we must leverage advances in science and technology to ensure that our regulatory systems are as effective and efficient as they possibly can be.

The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREPA), passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by President of the United States George W. Bush in December 2005 , is a controversial tort liability shield intended to protect vaccine manufacturers from financial risk in the event of a declared public health emergency. source: wikipedia

The Food and Drug Administration took a special interest into vaping products under Margaret Hamburger with legislation passed in 2014. Then within 5 years there was a mysterious illness associated with vaping products. What does the FDA do? Do they protect Americans as consumers or do they participate in other backroom type deals? It is odd that after deciding to regulate these vaping products they seemed to have become more dangerous.

As you can see from the earlier post, there is a patent for aerosolized mRNA “vaccines.” The patent is for thermostable aerosolized “vaccines” which would potentially allow for such a product to be used in a E-Vape device.

The Moderna website says that they have developed an aerosolized “vaccine” for COVID 19. Is that strange that it is not widely known or spoken of? I can imagine that there are a couple of reasons why we haven’t heard much about it. Or maybe you have. I just stopped looking at the propaganda in 2020. My top reason for why we wouldn’t hear about it much is because of the novelty of such a thing. People are familiar and feel comfortable with taking injections, not me, but most people seem to be.

When there is a patent or a scientific paper does this mean that something is real? Or would people create a patent and/or write scientific papers to lead us into some direction? Are we being led as if by breadcrumbs to reach an approved conclusion? Mark Kulacz is asking these questions.

Other questions he asks are, why would Andrew Huff reply to his hypothesis tweet? Is this just another trail of breadcrumbs leading to nowhere, or is this really something we should be considering?

In my own case I don’t really want anything that they are offering. But more than anything I want the choice of what I will take. I want the choice to say Yes or No to any product, even products that are thoroughly tested. Unfortunately this isn’t convenient for people who are interested in selling products that are not thoroughly tested. My proposal is that we should once again have informed consent.

In the case of genetic therapies, we don’t really know to what extent we might end up receiving this product in other ways. This is otherwise known as shedding. This means that informed consent becomes ever more complicated. Regardless, I don’t think it is right to exclude groups of people from society for their mistakes. I accept that there’s not much I can do to avoid being shed on. I still prefer to receive whatever this poison is second hand, instead of vaping it, puffing it or injecting it.

I recommend you watch this episode of Housatonic, because I didn’t get into all the details. If you wanted a couple more interesting details advance the video to one hour and 40 minutes in. Or watch the whole thing. If it feels like it will take too long, you can always use the speed feature to have the episode speed up, and slow it down when you find something that you want to know more about.

Thanks once again to anyone who took the time to read this. I am sure not many will. I just write these things so that I can summarize and learn information for myself. It is my opinion that we need to arm ourselves with this kind of information, in order to find the confidence to say no loudly to this tyranny.