The once-sacred award ceremony left out other scientists who also played a critical role in the development of the mRNA platform. The most notable omission was Dr. Robert Malone, who has been a vocal critic of the so-called COVID vaccine. Malone has stood up for the vaccine injured and repeatedly provided real-world data documenting the serious and life-threatening risks associated with the jab.
The future of mRNA’s many lucrative applications hang in the balance
On Monday, October 2, 2023, the Karolinska Institute in Sweden awarded the 2023 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine to Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman – two of the scientists who helped discover nucleoside base modifications that enabled the development of the mRNA vaccine technology. The scientists were congratulated by the Director of the World Health Organization – General Tedros Ghebreyesus. The corrupt WHO director described their mRNA technology as “safe and effective vaccines.” This worn-out proclamation is far removed from reality and goes against an overwhelming body of evidence that suggests the opposite.
In the United States alone, the imperfect Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) recorded tens of thousands of deaths and over 2 million serious adverse reactions from the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA shots. This flawed VAERS system relies heavily on the biased opinion of medical professionals who are not properly trained or do not have enough time to understand and validate their patients’ vaccine injuries. Because medical professionals are directly implicated in facilitating the injury, accurate reporting of vaccine injuries is something that doctors are incentivized to cover up, misdiagnose, and lie about. This is just one of the reasons why the CDC’s own studies show that the magnitude of vaccine injuries and deaths in the population are under-reported and may represent less than 1% of the actual injuries that occur.
Even so, VAERS has captured more vaccine injures for the COVID jab than all other vaccines combined since the program’s inception in 1986. The safety signals are there, but they are being ignored by some of the most powerful institutions in the world today.
Nobel Prize in Medicine becomes a COVID vaccine propaganda tool to rewrite history
Professor and senior physician, Olle Kämpe was one of the pre-selected panelists who answered questions about the “prize winning” mRNA vaccine. When asked, “Will this Nobel Prize affect the opinion of antivaxxers and the vaccine hesitant?” Kämpe responded, “I don’t know if antivaxxers will change in anyway, but I think giving a Nobel Prize for this covid-19 vaccine may make hesitant people take the vaccine and be sure that it's very efficient and safe.”
With this response, it’s clear that the Nobel Prize is being used as a tool of propaganda to make the injurious and failed vaccine appear as a life-saving intervention. With this deceptive maneuver, the collaborators and co-conspirators behind the depopulation agenda are using the Nobel Prize as a tool of propaganda to rewrite history and re-establish some sort of authority on a very serious matter that ultimately implicates the Nuremberg Code and the very medical ethics that medical professionals swore to uphold.
For years, Moderna operated as an investment firm and failed to pass multiple mRNA therapeutics through phase one clinical trials. Some of the biggest names in pharma, from Novartis, Roche, and Merck, abandoned the field of RNA interference, over concerns about toxicity. Ironically, Weissman and three of his colleagues noted in 2018 that the trials for rabies and flu mRNA vaccines could trigger injection site and systemic reactions, inflammation, and autoimmune conditions. They wrote that the “side effects were not trivial" in a paper published in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.
The future of lucrative mRNA vaccine platforms is at stake here, and the people behind the technology are going to do everything in their power to promote their brand of medical fraud, even after decades of failed animal experiments and after the last three years of amassing a human body count.
Sources include:
Digital.AHRQ.gov [PDF]
Please contact us for more information.
