System failure: AI exposes zero Government oversight

Of course, under torture =)

If in a hurry, skip to the conclusion: carcinogenic contamination could have been ongoing for years. Or watch this video 1 min (please download and share in social media):

This is a summary that will save your hours of tedious repetitions from the AI, proving that ChatGPT is a robot programmed to conceal the truth about vaccines and other topics it listed by it, like climate change and human evolution.

Interestingly, nearly all the scientific references provided by the AI were faked by it and 100% of the references, even the few good ones, had a wrong link.

Hopefully, this article would be another tool you could share to keep waking-up the still-trusting sleepwalkers. It’s a win-win, either they start distrusting the medical system or the AI or both!

Full session by the clever interrogator Gavin de Becker, bestselling author of “The Gift of Fear,” is here:

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/chatgpt-ai-covid-vaccine-dn

It's amazing that, in spite of a muzzled AI, Gavin was able to make it say the truth: that the government uses us as involuntary human guinea pigs for all pharmaceutical products, and that there's practically no pharmacovigilance, in two words: we are slaves of Big Pharma "my body, their choice!"

This research took 28 hours, including late night work. If you like it, please consider a paid subscription:

or please consider “buy me a coffee” (one dollar makes a difference):

Some humor before the heavy truth

Withdrawn vaccines

AI’s partial list of vaccine products that have been withdrawn or discontinued from the market:

1. Oral Polio Vaccine (OPV, Salk 1955 and Sabin 1961): the transition to different uncontaminated monkey cell-lines took years, despite knowing it was contaminated with carcinogenic monkey virus SV40, and without warning the parents.

2. OPV (live attenuated poliovirus): it is still in use in dozens of countries, instead of having been discontinued in favor of inactivated (“dead”) polio vaccine (IPV). This transition continues after decades, in spite of knowing OPV causes vaccine-derived polio, and without warning the parents.

3. Rabies Vaccine: produced using duck embryos, contained residual egg proteins, which caused allergy to egg. Replaced with other cell-culture-based rabies vaccines.

4. DTP vaccine (Diphtheria, Tetanus, and Pertussis): along 1970s and 1980s, a whole-cell pertussis component caused high fever and seizures in some children. Replaced with acellular pertussis vaccines in some countries (note: not all!). This transition aimed to maintain protection against pertussis while reducing the risk of adverse events associated with the vaccine (note: so they kept giving it in spite of an increased risk of handicapping children and not telling their parents).

5. MMR Vaccine (Mumps-Measles-Rubella): In the 1990s, the MMR vaccine containing the Urabe strain of mumps was withdrawn in several countries (note: not all!) for causing aseptic meningitis.

6. Rotashield from Wyeth: a rotavirus vaccine FDA approved in 1998, withdrawn in 1999, after causing intussusception, intestinal blockage, in infants. The replacement vaccine was withdrawn for causing the same severe effect.

7. Pandemrix vaccine (H1N1 influenza, swine flu): in 2009-2010 caused narcolepsy, a chronic neurological disorder characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness and, in some cases, sudden episodes of muscle weakness or paralysis (cataplexy), especially in Finland and Sweden, primarily in children and adolescents. Discontinued in some countries (not all!). Until today, it’s not known which ingredient caused this autoimmune response, so it could happen with any new vaccine with such approved ingredients. .

8. Dengvaxia (Dengue Fever Vaccine): In 2017, it was announced that it should not be given to persons without prior dengue, because if infected with dengue after the vaccine, it caused severe dengue.

9. Lymerix (Lyme Disease Vaccine from GlaxoSmithKline): “voluntarily” withdrawn in 2002, after causing joint pain and arthritis.

10. ImuLyme (Lyme disease vaccine, from Sanofi Pasteur), was discontinued in 2002 for causing the same problem.

3 conclusions from natural intelligence:

1. None of the vaccines has ever been recalled. Why? due to lawsuits (a recall proves harm to those who took the bad medicine) and economic loss of inventory, preferring to keep on maiming children until stocks run off and/or until replacement.

2. Nothing changed in the system to prevent this carnage ever happening again.

3. Doctors keep pushing any vaccine product like religious fundamentalists, without ever questioning the approval and quality-control system and without having a clue of what they are pushing into the veins of patients denied of informed consent.

Pharma negligence

AI’s partial list:

1. Thalidomide: Thalidomide was initially approved for use in the late 1950s as a sedative and anti-nausea medication, including for pregnant women. It was later discovered to cause severe birth defects when taken during pregnancy, leading to limb deformities in infants.

2. Vioxx (Rofecoxib): Vioxx, a painkiller and anti-inflammatory drug, was approved by the FDA in 1999. It was later withdrawn from the market in 2004 due to an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes associated with its use.

3. Fen-Phen: Fen-Phen was a combination of fenfluramine and phentermine, used as a weight-loss medication in the 1990s. It was linked to serious heart and lung problems, leading to its withdrawal from the market.

4. Baycol (Cerivastatin): Baycol, a cholesterol-lowering medication, was approved by the FDA in 1997. It was withdrawn from the market in 2001 due to reports of severe muscle toxicity, including a life-threatening condition called rhabdomyolysis.

5. Rezulin (Troglitazone): Rezulin, an oral diabetes medication, was approved by the FDA in 1997. It was later withdrawn from the market in 2000 due to reports of severe liver toxicity and deaths associated with its use.

6. Propulsid (Cisapride): Propulsid, a medication used to treat gastrointestinal disorders, was approved by the FDA in 1993. It was withdrawn from the market in 2000 due to concerns about life-threatening heart arrhythmias associated with its use, particularly when used with other medications.

7. DES (Diethylstilbestrol): DES was approved for use as a synthetic estrogen in pregnant women between the late 1930s and early 1970s to prevent miscarriages. It was later linked to an increased risk of reproductive and developmental health issues in the offspring of exposed women.

8. Accutane (Isotretinoin): Accutane, a medication used to treat severe acne, was approved by the FDA in 1982. It has been associated with serious side effects, including birth defects, psychiatric disorders, and inflammatory bowel disease.

9. OxyContin (Oxycodone): OxyContin, an extended-release opioid pain medication, was approved by the FDA in 1995. It became associated with a nationwide opioid addiction crisis and was the subject of numerous lawsuits and regulatory actions.

10. Tysabri (Natalizumab): Tysabri, a medication for the treatment of multiple sclerosis and Crohn’s disease, was approved by the FDA in 2004. It was temporarily withdrawn from the market in 2005 due to concerns about the risk of a rare brain infection called progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML).

11. Avandia (Rosiglitazone): Avandia, an oral diabetes medication, was approved by the FDA in 1999. It was associated with an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes, leading to restrictions on its use.

12. Zelnorm (Tegaserod): Zelnorm, a medication for irritable bowel syndrome and chronic constipation, was approved by the FDA in 2002. It was withdrawn from the market in 2007 due to concerns about cardiovascular side effects.

13. Bextra (Valdecoxib): Bextra, another NSAID, was approved by the FDA in 2001. It was withdrawn from the market in 2005 due to an increased risk of serious skin reactions and cardiovascular events.

14. Mylotarg (Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin): Mylotarg, a treatment for acute myeloid leukemia, was approved by the FDA in 2000 but was voluntarily withdrawn from the market in 2010 due to concerns about safety and efficacy.

15. Pergolide (Permax): Pergolide, a medication for Parkinson’s disease, was approved by the FDA but later withdrawn from the market in 2007 due to the risk of heart valve damage.

16. Dexfenfluramine (Redux): Dexfenfluramine, a weight-loss medication, was approved but later withdrawn from the market in 1997 due to associations with heart valve problems.

AI’s conclusion: there is no way to ensure with certainty that a pharmaceutical product will not be recalled or withdrawn from the market in the future. Unexpected side effects, or adverse reactions to these products led to harm or health problems for people who had used them.

#monkeygate: vaccines with monkey-virus, causing cancer

The AI recognized that (I added scientific references):

“vaccines made in the USA between 1955 and 1961 were found to be contaminated with SV40 (simian vacuolating virus 40 or simian virus 40), from the growth medium (rhesus monkey kidney cell culture) and from the original seed strain. Like other polyomaviruses, SV40 is a DNA virus that has the potential to cause tumors by suppression of the transcriptional properties of tumor suppressor p53…”

SV40, allegedly first discovered in vaccines in 1960, has been linked since 1961 with inflammatory kidney diseases (site of latency) and cancer ¹:

• lymphomas ², including non-Hodgkin ³

• brain tumors ⁴, particularly in babies⁵ and children ⁶

• bone tumors

• leukemia ⁷

• mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer primarily associated with asbestos ⁸

Health safety system: a hoax

AI: “The presence of fragments or partial strands of Simian Virus 40 (SV40) or any other genetic material in vaccines or vaccine components is a matter of concern and requires thorough investigation and transparency. The detection of such genetic material, even in small amounts, can raise questions about vaccine safety and manufacturing processes.

Health authorities and regulatory agencies typically take a cautious and thorough approach to investigate and address the situation. The primary considerations include:

1. Vaccine Safety: Ensuring the safety of vaccines is a paramount concern. Any presence of foreign genetic material, even in small amounts, warrants investigation to assess potential risks to vaccine recipients. The introduction of genetic material, even in fragmentary form, into the body can potentially lead to unintended consequences, including immune responses or other health effects like cancer.

2. Transparency: Regulatory agencies and vaccine manufacturers are expected to communicate transparently with the public and healthcare professionals regarding any findings related to vaccine safety, contaminants, or genetic material.

3. Investigation: Thorough investigations are conducted to determine the nature and source of any detected genetic material. This includes assessing whether it poses a risk to vaccine recipients. Regulatory agencies prioritize the safety and well-being of the public, they may take swift action to mitigate potential risks, like issuing recalls, suspending distribution, or advising healthcare providers to stop administering the product until the risk has been thoroughly assessed.

4. Risk Assessment: Health authorities and regulatory agencies assess the potential risks associated with the presence of genetic material and make determinations regarding vaccine safety based on scientific evidence.

5. Preventive Measures: Actions are taken to prevent the recurrence of similar incidents and to ensure the safety and quality of vaccines in the future.

If a regulatory agency failed to study a particular vaccine known to have fragments of Simian Virus 40 (SV40) and failed to inform the public of the associated risks, it would be a serious concern. In cases where regulatory agencies are found to have neglected their responsibilities, there may be legal and accountability mechanisms in place to investigate and address the issue.

Regulatory negligence, conflicts of interest, and intentional malfeasance are also possible causes for a product initially claimed to be safe to be subsequently found unsafe or to have unexpected side effects. These factors can contribute to lapses in the regulatory oversight process and may lead to failures in ensuring the safety and efficacy of products.

It’s important to acknowledge that regulatory agencies like the FDA have established protocols, guidelines, and ethical standards to minimize the influence of conflicts of interest and to prioritize public safety.”

Conclusion from the chat with ChatGPT

Current detection of SV40 fragments in blood and tissues in those never vaccinated with OPV, prove that:

a) there might be human to human spread (horizontal transmission) ⁹

b) vaccines were still infected with SV40, despite allegations, at least in 1998: “SV40 continues to infect humans long after vaccines were freed from contamination.” ¹⁰

Could SV40 biohacking through vaccines have started before 2002?: “inability to detect some regions of the virus genome may suggest that those regions are not required for tumor persistence or growth …” ¹¹

Health Canada has written (I’ll dig deeper in next article): “It was possible for Health Canada to confirm the presence of the enhancer based on the plasmid DNA sequence submitted by Pfizer against the published SV40 enhancer sequence.”:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/world/exclusive-health-canada-confirms-undisclosed-presence-of-dna-sequence-in-pfizer-shot-5513277

Deliberately, COVID Pifzer vaccines had and still have SV40 DNA fragments. One argument sustains that it was added as part of the replication process for the spike protein but no rational argument is provided to justify the use of that dangerous viral sequence and to hide it to the health authorities.

Another position states that it was deliberately added to induce cancer. It’s no coincidence that Pfizer also added undisclosed human DNA to hack the cell nucleus and that turbo-cancers appeared after COVID shots:

In sum, ChatGPT proves that something is VERY wrong with the vaccine safety oversight in every single country of the world, because nothing has been done as predicted by it, NOTHING!

Call to action

1. Share:

2. If you didn’t receive this by email, please subscribe:

3. Show your love in the tip jar =)

(one dollar makes a difference)

4. Please consider a paid subscription:

5. Please consider commissioning an article for the topic of your preference:

Most important: let’s keep praying for each other and the conversion of our enemies!

---

Footnotes

1 Rotondo, J. C., Mazzoni, E., Bononi, I., Tognon, M., & Martini, F. (2019). Association Between Simian Virus 40 and Human Tumors. Frontiers in oncology, 9, 670. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2019.00670

Shah K. V. (2007). SV40 and human cancer: a review of recent data. International journal of cancer, 120(2), 215–223. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.22425

Vilchez, R. A., & Butel, J. S. (2004). Emergent human pathogen simian virus 40 and its role in cancer. Clinical microbiology reviews, 17(3), 495–508. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.17.3.495-508.2004

Vilchez RA, Kozinetz CA, Butel JS. Conventional epidemiology and the link between SV40 and human cancers. The Lancet Oncology Vol 4, Is 3, P188-191, March 2003 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(03)01024-6

Shivapurkar, N., Harada, K., Reddy, J., Scheuermann, R. H., Xu, Y., McKenna, R. W., Milchgrub, S., Kroft, S. H., Feng, Z., & Gazdar, A. F. (2002). Presence of simian virus 40 DNA sequences in human lymphomas. Lancet, 359(9309), 851-852. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07921-7

May Wong, Joseph S. Pagano, John T. Schiller, Satvir S. Tevethia, Nancy Raab-Traub, Jack Gruber, New Associations of Human Papillomavirus, Simian Virus 40, and Epstein-Barr Virus with Human Cancer, JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Volume 94, Issue 24, 18 December 2002, Pages 1832–1836, https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/94.24.1832

Jasani, B., Cristaudo, A., Emri, S. A., Gazdar, A. F., Gibbs, A., Krynska, B., Miller, C., Mutti, L., Radu, C., Tognon, M., & Procopio, A. (2001). Association of SV40 with human tumours. Seminars in cancer biology, 11(1), 49–61. https://doi.org/10.1006/scbi.2000.0346

Butel, J. S., & Lednicky, J. A. (1999). Cell and molecular biology of simian virus 40: implications for human infections and disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 91(2), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/91.2.119

EDDY, B. E., BORMAN, G. S., BERKELEY, W. H., & YOUNG, R. D. (1961). Tumors induced in hamsters by injection of rhesus monkey kidney cell extracts. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine. Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine (New York, N.Y.), 107, 191–197. https://doi.org/10.3181/00379727-107-26576

2 Toracchio, S., Kozinetz, C. A., Killen, D. E., Sheehan, A. M., Banez, E. I., Ittmann, M. M., Sroller, V., & Butel, J. S. (2009). Variable frequency of polyomavirus SV40 and herpesvirus EBV in lymphomas from two different urban population groups in Houston, TX. Journal of clinical virology : the official publication of the Pan American Society for Clinical Virology, 46(2), 154–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2009.06.023

Shivapurkar N, Harada K, et al. Presence of simian virus 40 DNA sequences in human lymphomas. 2002. Lancet, 359(9309), 851-852.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07921-7

3 Vilchez, R., Butel, J. SV40 in human brain cancers and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Oncogene 22, 5164–5172 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1206547

Vilchez RA, Madden CR, et al. Association between simian virus 40 and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. 9 Mar 2002. The Lancet Vol 359, Is 9309, P817-823 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07950-3

4 Lednicky, J. A., & Butel, J. S. (2001). Simian virus 40 regulatory region structural diversity and the association of viral archetypal regulatory regions with human brain tumors. Seminars in cancer biology, 11(1), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1006/scbi.2000.0345

5 GIRARDI, A. J., SWEET, B. H., SLOTNICK, V. B., & HILLEMAN, M. R. (1962). Development of tumors in hamsters inoculated in the neonatal period with vacuolating virus, SV-40. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine. Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine (New York, N.Y.), 109, 649–660. https://doi.org/10.3181/00379727-109-27298

6 Bergsagel, D. J., Finegold, M. J., Butel, J. S., Kupsky, W. J., & Garcea, R. L. (1992). DNA sequences similar to those of simian virus 40 in ependymomas and choroid plexus tumors of childhood. The New England journal of medicine, 326(15), 988–993. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199204093261504

7 Janet S Butel, Regis A Vilchez, Jeffrey L Jorgensen & Claudia A Kozinetz (2003) Association Between SV40 and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma, Leukemia & Lymphoma, 44:sup3, S33-S39, DOI: 10.1080/10428190310001623784

8 Carbone, M., Gazdar, A., & Butel, J. S. (2020). SV40 and human mesothelioma. Translational lung cancer research, 9(Suppl 1), S47–S59. https://doi.org/10.21037/tlcr.2020.02.03

Carbone, M., Pass, H. I., Rizzo, P., Marinetti, M., Di Muzio, M., Mew, D. J., Levine, A. S., & Procopio, A. (1994). Simian virus 40-like DNA sequences in human pleural mesothelioma. Oncogene, 9(6), 1781–1790. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8183577/

Rizzo P, Bocchetta M, et al. SV40 and the pathogenesis of mesothelioma. Seminars in Cancer Biology, Vol 11, Is 1, Feb 2001, Pages 63-71 https://doi.org/10.1006/scbi.2000.0347

9 Tognon, M., Corallini, A., Manfrini, M., Taronna, A., Butel, J. S., Pietrobon, S., Trevisiol, L., Bononi, I., Vaccher, E., Barbanti-Brodano, G., Martini, F., & Mazzoni, E. (2016). Specific Antibodies Reacting with SV40 Large T Antigen Mimotopes in Serum Samples of Healthy Subjects. PloS one, 11(1), e0145720. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0145720

Martini, F., Corallini, A., Balatti, V., Sabbioni, S., Pancaldi, C., & Tognon, M. (2007). Simian virus 40 in humans. Infectious agents and cancer, 2, 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1750-9378-2-13

Minor P, Pipkin PA et al. Natural infection and transmission of SV40. Virology. Vol 314, Is 1, 15 Sep 2003, Pages 403-409 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6822(03)00435-5

10 Jafar, S., Rodriguez-Barradas, M., Graham, D. Y., & Butel, J. S. (1998). Serological evidence of SV40 infections in HIV-infected and HIV-negative adults. Journal of medical virology, 54(4), 276–284. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1096-9071(199804)54:4<276::aid-jmv7>3.0.co;2-1 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9557293/

11 Martini, F., Lazzarin, L., et al. (2002). Different simian virus 40 genomic regions and sequences homologous with SV40 large T antigen in DNA of human brain and bone tumors and of leukocytes from blood donors. Cancer, 94(4), 1037–1048. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.10272