The covid injection is not a vaccine. It makes your body produce the toxic spike protein that causes the disease known as COVID-19. The side effects from the “vaccine” are not a sign that your body is building immunity, rather it is the result of toxic shock or poisoning.
From the mRNA instructions that come with the covid injection, your body’s cells may produce trillions of spike proteins over several weeks (the amount will vary between persons) potentially causing permanent damage. I would suggest that the body’s immune reaction to this injection is more akin to building up tolerance through exposure to a poison, kind of like alcohol tolerance.
A better analogy would be comparing it to the process of making anti-venom for snake venom, which is also made up of mostly proteins. Anti-venom is made by exposing animal subjects to small doses of snake venom over a period of a month or so. The animals eventually build up an immunity or tolerance by producing antibodies that can neutralise venom proteins, and this pre-established blood serum is used in anti-venom.
You can, of course, build up your own immunity to snake bites in this way, as many snake handlers do, but the immune effects only last for the duration of the course of exposure and will eventually wane when you cease to be exposed to the venom. This short-term immune response parallels what we see happening with the covid injections, seeing as people are lining up for their third shot, not even 9 months into their covid “vaccination” regime.
The concept of building up tolerance to a toxin by long-term low-dose exposure is not a new concept, but many people would not consider it as a way of immunising themselves against a pathogenic virus. Low dose exposure to a toxin can have severe acute adverse effects and the long term risks may be unknown, as is the case for the covid injection.
And yet, when it comes to covid, this is how we are expected to immunise ourselves against it? By long-term ongoing exposure to a simulation of the known-to-be-harmful toxic protein of SARS coronavirus? And delivered into our bodies in such a way that our own cells become the disposable vector attacked by our immune system, instead of the attenuated actual virus?
Thus, your immune response is short-lived and only helps to somewhat neutralise the effects of the spike protein, but does not actually sterilise the virus or prevent its spread to other people. If you wish to maintain this so-called immunity, repeated doses (toxic exposure) are needed at fairly regular intervals (e.g., within a few months or less).
Covid is here to stay and so we are being forced to have a subscription service to our own immune system in order to survive more contagious and more virulent strains.
We are merely guinea pigs being used to create our own anti-venom to this pathogen, and we’re just supposed to hope and pray that our bodies won’t fuck out in the process or suffer long-term damage.
And if you accept that the covid injection is a vaccine, then by that definition you should accept that literally anything put into a needle and injected into the body can be considered a vaccine.
Here is what the US Patent Office said to Dr Anthony Fauci when he tried to get the same “vaccine” technology patented for use on HIV:
These arguments are persuasive to the extent that an antigenic peptide stimulates an immune response that may produce antibodies that bind to a specific peptide or protein, but it is not persuasive in regards to a vaccine. The immune response produced by a vaccine must be more than merely some immune response, but must also be protective, as noted in the previous office action. The Art recognises the term vaccine to be a compound which prevents infection. Applicant has not demonstrated that the instantly claimed vaccine meets even the lower standard set forth in the specification, let alone the standard Art definition for being operative in regards.
The US Patent and Trademark Office
