This story was spotted by S.S. who passed it along, and it has me intrigued, because a second volunteer for Astrazeneca's covid-19 virus vaccine has come down with the rare neurological condition known as myelitis, according to this article in RT:
As the article points out, Astrazeneca is denying the second case is due to the vaccine, and that the first was the result of undiagnosed multiple sclerosis. But then there's this:
The first participant of the British trials – which are being conducted in conjunction with Oxford University – fell ill after receiving one dose of the experimental vaccine in July.
The female volunteer was later diagnosed with transverse myelitis, a rare inflammatory disease that affects the spinal cord, causing weakness, sensory alterations, and autonomic nervous-system dysfunction. The company’s spokeswoman later told the media the volunteer had undiagnosed multiple sclerosis, and the trials resumed.
The second female recipient of the vaccine suffered complications after the follow-up dose in September. AstraZeneca didn’t confirm her diagnosis, but a source told the New York Times it was also transverse myelitis.
On September 6, trials of the drug were paused again, after the second woman felt ill, but they resumed in Britain, Brazil, India, and South Africa less than a week later. The US hasn’t yet green-lighted the continuation of the test, however.
AstraZeneca, which has administered its vaccine to some 18,000 people worldwide, said in internal documents that the two cases of the illness were “unlikely to be associated with the vaccine, or there was insufficient evidence to say for certain that the illnesses were or were not related to the vaccine.”
Now I have to wonder... what are the odds that two volunteers for the vaccine trials both contracted the same thing, and that both were women? Granted, two is not a wide sample, and with only one factor involved, one can expect that a random coin toss, let us say, might produce the results of two heads, or two tails, on two tosses. As more tosses are made, the more the results will approach the expected 50-50 result. But this involved the same specific disorder, and the same sex, in both cases.
I don't know about you, but that raises my suspicion meter into the red zone.
But then there's this at the end of the article:
Unlike AstraZeneca’s jab, Russia’s Sputnik V, the world’s first registered vaccine, uses human adenoviruses as a vector – an extensively studied approach.
Earlier this month, respected British medical journal The Lancet published the Russian Ministry of Health’s Sputnik V study, showing the vaccine to be 100 percent effective, producing antibodies in all 76 participants of early-stage trials.
Notably absent is the report of any similar neurological disorders being associated with the Russian vaccine tests.
And it's that which brings me to today's high octane speculation and question. Suppose, just for speculation's sake, that the Russian vaccine turns out to be the only one that (1) isn't loaded with a bunch of other
agendas stuff like nanotechnology, heavy metals, mercury, and Baal Gates' "tracking" system, and (2) is the only one that works, and (3) the Russian scientists involved in its creation explain why it works, and why it's not such a good idea to be putting all those other agendas things into vaccines.
I don't know about you, but I have this fantasy picture in my mind of Mr. Globaloney giving interviews on television with a rather sheepish expression on his face, sitting in front of a plate of sauteed crow, explaining why we're suddenly friends with Russia and those sanctions were simply a misunderstanding. Or conversely, explaining why the Russian science is "bad" science because it's Russian, and why the West's poisonous vaccines are really good because the "science is real," just like the tests of the vaccine that the CDC recently admitted it doesn't even have, and just like the statistics are completely reliable.
See you on the flip side...