90 Miles From Tyranny

Monday, July 11, 2022

Laval University Professor Suspended for Questioning Covid Vaccines for Children

A professor at Laval University (Université Laval) in Quebec City has been suspended without pay for two months for questioning the benefits of COVID vaccines for children. Microbiology and immunology Professor Patrick Provost sent out an email soliciting a discussion on the issue and raising his concerns. He has now been disciplined for merely raising such issues by a university that has discarded any semblance of academic integrity and free speech.

According to The Suburban, the controversy began as a conference of Réinfo COVID, “a collective of nurses, physicians, scientists, and citizens seeking to generate debate about how the pandemic has been handled by the government.”Provost asked his colleagues “to share their views with the public” on these issues. Provost also wrote in a June Quebecor Media piece that the COVID-19 “was very real” but asked “was it as significant as reported?” He argued that there was evidence of only five individuals under age 40 dying of the disease and challenged the need for the Canadian government’s vaccine mandates and passports.

As with the university, Quebecor Media quickly yielded to a mob of critics and removed Provost’s remarks. Journal de Québec Editor-in-Chief Sébastien Ménard said that Provost’s points “were inaccurate or could mislead the public.” Notably, Ménard did not seem compelled to address the alleged inaccuracies in the comments or Provost’s basis for raising his concerns.

Ménard did not seem to entertain the possibility that the media can be a place for the exchange of such ideas, including a rigorous debate challenging Provost’s assertions. Instead, the solution, once again, was censorship.

Most of Provost’s colleagues have said nothing in defense of an academic being denied the very freedom that defines and sustains our profession. One exception is Douglas Farrow, a professor of theology and ethics at McGill University in Montreal, who denounced the suspension as “A Repressive Political Act” in a Substack article.

To its credit, the Université Laval faculty union has filed a grievance on...

Visage à trois #354

Three Videos For Your Viewing Pleasure:

Three Additional Bonus Videos:

Quick Hits Of Wisdom, Knowledge And Snark #521

Why spike protein?

I’m confused, and for many reasons. Stupidly, I asked myself why did all the scientists around the world pick the spike protein out of all the viral proteins to replicate using DNA/mRNA technology?

Detective work ensued.

Some scientists have said that the spike was chosen because it is the protein that binds to host cells, and thus it is the only part of the virus that can elicit "neutralising antibodies" that help prevent infection.

If you didn’t know, neutralising antibodies not only bind to a virus, they bind in a manner that blocks infection. Only a small subset of the many antibodies that bind a virus are capable of neutralisation.

And yes, the spike protein is capable of eliciting neutralising antibodies, and though I have researched this thoroughly, I could not find evidence of other parts of the virus having the ability to do the same thing. Remember that this doesn’t rule out the possibility that they can’t however. It just hasn’t been tested.

So spike was chosen to elicit neutralisation, okay, or as one paper puts it, “S glycoprotein is responsible for the entry of the virus into host cells, where it begins to spread, but it can also be recognized by the immune system triggering a protective response, the main objective of vaccines. Several types of new vaccines currently in use are selected based on their ability to generate neutralizing antibodies upon immunization.”.

This would be all well and good but as we know now, mRNA-vaccine-induced neutralising antibodies are highly variable among individuals. In other words… useless. This should have been tested thoroughly before mass introduction don’t you think?

Spike is also rapidly mutating and evades vaccine-induced antibodies with high efficiency. So again, useless.

And what makes this all so potentially sinister is that the spike protein is extremely toxic, regardless of what certain ‘fact checkers’ have said in the past.

Will these 'fact checkers' ever get prosecuted for spreading lies or what?

The spike protein is definitely toxic. We know it can cross the blood-brain barrier in mice and cause nerve damage. We know it can cause cardiac damage. We know it can cause lung inflammation. We know it can cause endothelial cell damage. We know it can significantly inhibit DNA damage repair.

You get the point. (Click on those hyperlinks if you don’t believe me)

Also remember that the COVID lab-leak hypothesis, the hypothesis regarding whether or not SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus emerged from a laboratory and was subsequently leaked, has not been disproven as of yet.

I bring this up because it has been found that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein (both the natural and mRNA kind) has GP120 (Panglolin HIV) and Staphylococcus Enterotoxin B (SEB) gene inserts.

That’s the human immunodeficiency virus HIV. One study, now withdrawn, noting the GP120 inserts states, “Taken together, our findings suggest unconventional evolution of 2019-nCoV that warrants further investigation.”. I ditto that.

And the symptoms of SEB intoxication is noted in one review titled ‘Staphylococcal Enterotoxin B as a Biological Weapon: Recognition, Management, and Surveillance of Staphylococcal Enterotoxin’, like the following,

“sudden onset of fever (40-41C), chills, headache, myalgia, non-productive cough. Some patients may develop shortness of breath and chest pain. Fever may last for 2-5 days and cough may continue for up to one month. Patients also present with nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea when the toxin is swallowed.”.

Now, what does that sound like?

So I ask again, why spike protein?

Why not use other proteins, a weaker spike, or a...