For those of you who have been following my journey over the past three and half years, some of the information in my response to the Australian Human Rights Commission will come as no surprise.

For those who are new, my termination is only a small part of my fight against Australia’s bureaucracies after being rattled awake from living a relatively normal existence prior to January 2020.

I consider myself to be part of the middle class, I left school after completing Year 10, I did not attend university, but had a strong work ethic and worked hard to provide for my family while living within our means and saving for the occasional family holiday.

I have never claimed to be an expert in anything which I have presented via my publicly available correspondence covering various issues over the past three years, I simply wanted answers to issues that were unfolding in front of me.

Seeing that the Union which I was part of when the so-called pandemic started, were left wanting in response to the mandating of experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure to employees, I chose to resign and joined the Red Union, who have been working behind the scenes to get resolutions for many Australians since their inception.

The Australian Human Rights Commission has sought clarification about the claim against my ex-employer. So, as I have done with much of my previous correspondence, I am sharing my response to the Commission below, not to be self-indulgent, but to spark further debate and discussion around how we can do things better into the future.

To this end, before moving on to read my response, I share this recent opinion, which makes sense to me, considering the many failed attempts to date to recompense Australians due to mandates. I do so in the hope that it sparks further discussion, debate, clarification, even rebuttal on how best to approach future nation destroying events.

Thinking about the argument for “bodily autonomy” in the Australian Constitution

 

The Australian Constitution has no concept of protecting individuals, as in a "bill of rights"

 

It is a document on the governing a federation of independent colonies, renamed "states", which have their own laws, separately developed, due to the "tyranny of distance", until the telegraph line was completed in 1872. Australia was established in 1900 as a federation of "united states", but without a revolution like America, where slavery and government tyranny gave rise to the idea of individual freedom enshrined in the US Constitution.

 

As penal colonies from its beginning, the concept of "individual rights" was obviously incompatible in colonial governments; freedom was only granted by the state. The Australian Constitution is essentially a document listing a set of 39 tasks which Federal Government should accomplish, with implied powers to override state laws, where necessary.

 

Outside the 39 tasks, the Federal Government has no power vested by the Constitution. Australian health is largely a state matter, except when the states come together by agreement.

 

The Australian Constitution limits the power of the Federal Government over the states, by stating what it can do.

 

This explains why, on the matter of individual rights in relation to health, the Australian Constitution is useless. Section (xxiiiA) limits the Federal Government from conscripting the services of doctors and dentists. The Federal Government has no power to issue “vaccine” mandates for Australia.

 

The historical origin and the underlying assumption of Australian laws is that Australians are granted freedom to the extent by the states. There are no innate "individual rights". The bottom line is: Australian colonial history does not help Australian laws in preventing government tyranny. Progress may occur on a state-by-state basis, as in America.

 

Credit - Dr Wilson Sy

From: erich.neug [email protected]

To: Human Rights team[email protected]

CC: Info Service[email protected]

Date: Saturday, August 19th, 2023 at 5:47 PM

Response to Australian Human Rights Commission

Mark Neugebauer regarding *********REDACTED********* Clarifications. 

Firstly, thank you for acknowledging the lodgement of my complaint against *********REDACTED*********, my employer prior to being terminated, for not receiving what is now more aptly referred to as a “Countermeasure” (1)

Below I will elaborate further on my submission, whilst acknowledging this reference from your email: “Please note, this matter has not yet been accepted as a complaint.”

I will premise the remainder of my correspondence to you on these two points. I will assert that as a result of my own independent investigations as presented directly to **REDACTED** in (Annexure 4_COVID_19_Correspondence_Employment termination) (2) and the confirmation by the then Australian Federal Minister of Health, Greg Hunt’s admission “that the world is engaged in the largest clinical trial ever”,

That not just my human rights (4) have been breached, but that my termination also goes against the 10 Points of the Nuremburg Code. (5)

With this reply I declare that my human rights have been breached by **REDACTED**  who as an organisation became a tool of the State and Federal Government, as they have provided no evidence to indicate that **REDACTED**  sought to legally challenge the State Government of South Australia, namely the Minister for Health Stephen Wade and SA Health under the leadership of the then CMO, Nicola Spurrier, who was also part of National Cabinet, surrounding the validity and legality of the mandates enacted on the Disability Sector for staff to receive the COVID-19 Countermeasures.

Even though, these entities put in place mechanisms for a mandate, of which the legality based on my opening premise, still have not been properly tested under South Australian and Federal laws, I was not employed by those entities.

But instead, I was employed by **REDACTED**  directly, and my contract of employment and position description for the role I was undertaking was with **REDACTED**, which up until the date of my termination did not stipulate that there was a requirement for me to receive an experimental still in trial phase gene therapy countermeasure for me to fulfill my role as an employee with **REDACTED**, and therefore **REDACTED**  has breached their duty of care to protect my Human Rights for coercing me to take the countermeasure under threat of termination, which is ultimately what eventuated.

I also declare that there needs to be a further investigation into the breach of my human rights and breaches of the Nuremberg Code by **REDACTED**, and specifically the CEO of **REDACTED**  for being involved in openly lobbying for me to receive an experimental still in trial phase gene therapy countermeasure, (6) as part of his position as Board Member for the **REDACTED** (7) Not to mention the further investigations which need to be undertaken into links between the planning at event 201

Of which Australia’s Jane Halton took part, strongly advocating for Australia’s CEO’s to be part of increasing the countermeasure uptake.

Does the Australian Human Rights Commission have the scope to investigate if there were financial incentives for Australian CEO’s and organisations to push the countermeasures, seeing Australian Politicians are so averse to getting to the bottom of these type of questions? (10) I wonder why?

So, moving on, regarding the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 1 (11), states:

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”

I declare that my Human Rights have been breached at Article 1 by **REDACTED**, as I have not been acted towards in a spirit of brotherhood. It has been assumed that I, as a Human being, having been born free and equal in dignity and rights, lack reason in being able to establish through independent research (12) of globally available resources from 2020 to current, that the countermeasures were not required for my employment at **REDACTED**. My research during this time indicated, and continues to show, that the countermeasures were neither safer nor more effective than my natural immunity, they were not effective at stopping transmissibility, nor being able to create less of a viral load than natural infection.

My Human rights in respect to my conscience have also been breached by **REDACTED**, due to the fact that my independent research of globally available resources indicated that the countermeasures, were in fact not as safe or effective as claimed by the manufacturers of the product, and I could not in good conscience receive the countermeasures for myself, nor recommend them for people living with a disability, (13) whom I was responsible for in my positions as team leader and support worker.

Article 3, (14) states:

“Everyone has the right to life, liberty and the security of person.”

The free dictionary defines (15) “PERSONAL SECURITY” as “The legal and uninterrupted enjoyment by a man of his life, his body, his health and his reputation. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 202.”

I declare that my Human Rights have been breached at Article 3 by **REDACTED** as they enacted coercive pressure on me to take the experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure under threat of termination of employment, even though I had not breached my position description or contract of employment. Their coercive actions threatened my Personal Security of uninterrupted enjoyment of my body and my health, including my overall mental health during these times.

Article 19 (16), states:

“Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”

I declare that my Human Rights have been breached by **REDACTED**, as indicated by the record of conversation completed by the Director of Client Services (2) of **REDACTED**  while still employed in the position of Team Leader, there was pressure to censor the ability for me to share evolving research and important information, including from some of the world’s most imminent scientists, doctors, actuaries, statisticians, etc.

It would be worth an investigation to know whether **REDACTED**, the NDIS, NQSC, SA Health had any part in eventually managing to get my LinkedIn profile shut down altogether, but I’m not holding my breath. And seeing our politicians are averse to a Royal Commission, I doubt our governments involvement in shutting down my free speech (17) on other platforms will ever be fully investigated either. So is it any wonder there is pushback against New ACMA powers to combat misinformation and disinformation (the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023, (18) even from Australian Human Rights lawyers.

In context of the above information, my Human Rights claim against *********REDACTED*********, is as follows:

1.       The CEO of **REDACTED** actively campaigned via media and in his role as board member for the *********REDACTED********* to mandate an experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure to the Disability Workforce? Questions arising from this:

o    Was pressure exerted from either the Federal Government, State Government, or via Jane Halton resulting from the Event 201 simulation to push for the mandate in turn violating my human rights?

o    Did the Federal Government, State Government, or other corporate institutions provide financial or other personal and organisational benefits to push for the mandate in turn violating my human rights?

2.       There was no further investigation on **REDACTED** part to seek and present legal advice as to whether their decision to blindly accept SA Health’s mandating of the experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure to workers.

o   In fact, It was easier for **REDACTED** at the time to terminate my employment under the direction of the Emergency Management (In-home and Community Aged Care and Disability Support Workers Vaccination) (COVID-19) Direction 2021 (“Direction”), (19) without further consideration that this may actually breach my human rights.

o   And of course, why would they, when the CEO was actively campaigning for the workforce to be mandated to receive the experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure. (See above claim 1 and questions arising from this)

3.       Even though I had proven myself to be an exemplary employee in both my capacity as Team Leader and Disability Support worker, with many transferable skills to take on other roles within the organisation, **REDACTED** found it easier to Terminate my employment as opposed to investigating non client facing positions within **REDACTED**, as per their response to my correspondence.

o   As with many Australian organisations, it was easier for **REDACTED**  to remove someone who questioned the narrative of mandates and COVID response as quickly as possible, how convenient for them to be provided this opportunity by the state government, and not able to be challenged for doing so.

o   So, for the first time in my 38-year working life I was terminated from my employment, and not even as result of anything I had done wrong, but merely for choosing not to submit to an experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure. What human rights?

4.       I was rewarded for my exemplary service to **REDACTED** by being stood down from paid shifts from 1^st December 2021 and provided with my Termination letter on the 7^{th of} December 2021.

o   The termination letter stated that I was entitled to 4 weeks’ notice and that my effective termination date was in fact the 4^th of January 2022.

o   But here is the reward for my diligent service, **REDACTED** claim that I was not entitled to payment for this 4 weeks’ notice because apparently, I was not entitled to work because of the Emergency Management (In-home and Community Aged Care and Disability Support Workers Vaccination) (COVID-19) Direction 2021 (“Direction”) So they were spared my severance pay.

o   Add to this, that I was not able to claim unemployment benefits for this time as I was effectively not terminated until the 4^th of January 2022. Not really a great display of human rights for an organisation providing disability services.

In closing, I must declare that I have very little faith in my claim with the Australian Human Rights Commission going anywhere regarding the actions **REDACTED** took against me in mandating an experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure, and ultimately terminating my employment for choosing not to receive it.

Hence why my redacted correspondence is publicly available for debate and discussion among the broader community, with the hope to find a way forward to secure the inalienable human rights of all Australian’s more effectively.

Because there is ever emerging evidence that unelected global actors have been working on and looking to subvert Australia’s sovereignty and inalienable rights.

And as we have seen, Australians like me have been let down by their constitution, state and federal governments, the media, organisations like the Fair Work Commission, the judiciary, and legal systems, and even the Australian Human Rights Commission.

So, seeing our current politicians are averse to enacting a royal commission into the response to COVID and the mandating of an experimental still in trial phase mRNA gene therapy countermeasure, Australians may need to strongly consider putting in motion the drawing up a State or Federal “Bill of Rights” to protect Australians from organisational and government over reach as a result of a  “Global” Health Emergency,

or even similar emergencies (22) into the future.

Regards

Mark Neugebauer

Claimant

(1) - Did National Security Imperatives Compromise COVID-19 Vaccine Safety? ‑ https://brownstone.org/articles/did-national-security-imperatives-compromise-covid-19-vaccine-safety/

(2) - Annexure 4 COVID-19 Correspondence - Employment Termination. - https://southausinfocus.locals.com/api/v1/posts/content/document/d_c9fb57d7-903f-4a89-8108-0ca4d261faf9.pdf

(3) - Health minister admits public is being experimented on. - https://rumble.com/viqzcj-health-minister-admits-public-is-being-experimented-on..html

(4) - UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

(5) - The ten points of the Nuremberg Code - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Code#The_ten_points_of_the_Nuremberg_Code

(6) - *********REDACTED*********

(7) - *********REDACTED*********

(8) - Event 201-Flooding the Zone with a Plandemic of Lies. Social Media Known as Greatest Threat - https://rumble.com/v1yj3wi-event-201-flooding-the-zone-with-a-plandemic-of-lies.-social-media-known-as.html

(9) - Were Australia's CEO's primed for the Vaccine role out by Event 201, and how much did they know? - https://rumble.com/v21p3vk-were-australias-ceos-primed-for-the-vaccine-role-out-by-event-201-and-how-m.html

(10) - Pandemic response - https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Chamber_documents/Senate_chamber_documents/Divisions/Details?id=2673

(11) – UDoHR Article 1 - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_1

(12) - Annexure 1 – COVID-19 Response Correspondence to Politicians and Bureaucrats. - https://southausinfocus.locals.com/api/v1/posts/content/document/d_73a8aea6-4a51-4456-b03c-ea6c44153408.pdf

(13) – Annexure 2 COVID-19 Correspondence regarding the Disability Sector. - https://southausinfocus.locals.com/api/v1/posts/content/document/d_e25e8898-7c04-4282-9eee-350190fc82fa.pdf

(14) - UDoHR Article 3 - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_3

(15) - Security of person. (n.d.) A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier.. (1856). Retrieved August 19 2023 from https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Security+of+person

(16) - UDoHR Article 19 - https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights#Article_19

(17) - The Australian Twitter Files Australia's very own health censorship apparatus in full swing - https://southausinfocus.locals.com/post/4053480/the-australian-twitter-files

(18) – MAATS Method, Our Submission regarding the 'Misinformation' Bill - https://www.maatsmethod.com.au/post/our-submission-regarding-the-misinformation-bill

(19) - Emergency Management (In-home and Community Aged Care and Disability Support Workers Vaccination) (COVID-19) Direction 2021 (“Direction”) - https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/legislation/CV19/passenger-transport-vaccination/ceased-in-home-and-community-aged-care-and-disability-workers-vaccination/Emergency-Management-In-home-and-Community-Aged-Care-and-Disability-Support-Workers-VaccinationCOVID-19-Direction-2021_8.11.2021.pdf

(20) - Senate Speech 30 March 2022 - World Economic Forum - https://youtu.be/zKoXAnqYYCU?si=yaoYLixNswW90taH

(21) - Why is the World Health Organisation pushing for more power? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVJyv9hSUxo

(22) - South Australia has joined other governments and jurisdictions around the world in declaring a climate emergency in Parliament today. - https://www.premier.sa.gov.au/media-releases/news-items/climate-emergency-declaration-passes-in-parliament

(END)

Become a Supporter

With the 🇦🇺 #AusTwitterFiles on censorship gaining traction with Senator Alex Antic's revelation from a recent freedom of information request, I encourage all who have an investigative mind to dig further into any conflicts of interest and links to global corporatist entities by the ATAGI and the TGA. 

Link👇

I recently wrote to Brendan Murphy and Mark Butler with my ongoing concerns about COVID19 Countermeasures and Children (especially those in care)

Link 👇

In the response received by Dr Grant Pegg, Principal Medical Advisor, Pharmacovigilance Branch, Health Products Regulation Group, he passed the buck (they do this a lot) to ATAGI and TGA

Link 👇

So, with @mtaibbi and @NAffects confirming the relationship between Twitter 1.0 and the Department of Home Affairs.

Link 👇

Link 👇

In @SenatorAntic recent cross examination of the Dept. of Home Affairs, they confirmed that they are not responsible for determining the reason they should request the removal of content from social media platforms but are acting on the “expert advice from the Department of Health”.

Link 👇

I had already writen a letter requesting if Australia’s government had been involved in censorship as exposed by the original #TwitterFiles 

Link 👇

In their reply, they fobbed me off, and as we have now come to understand, knowing full well they were giving "expert advice” to the Department of Home Affairs to censor Australian social media accounts.

Link 👇

So, now that we know the Department of Health is directing the Department of Home affairs to censor Australians on COVID related conversations, but the Department of Health is receiving their expert advice from ATAGI and the TGA.

Who is the main driver behind censoring critical information and debate?

We now know that the AHPRA censored Australian doctors for recommending early treatment protocols and against any concerns they might have had regarding the COVID-19 countermeasures, so as not to “undermine” the roll out.

Link 👇

And as we’ve found out from a letter sent to suspended Dr William Bay, “AHPRA acts independently to the Australian Government. 👇

Which Dr William Bay @DrBillyBay sought to challenge in Australia’s Courts

Link 👇

But we also know Australia’s legal system has not been conducive in allowing evidence to be presented over concerns regarding the roll out of the COVID-19 countermeasures, and in particular to children.

Myself and 5 other plaintiffs, apparently did not have enough standing to bring about a challenge to the approval of the countermeasures for children by the TGA including on the advice of ATAGI.

Link 👇

There is now overwhelming evidence that there have been nefarious actions to censor critical information for Australians to make informed decisions about their health, but which also could have saved the lives of many Australians during the last 3 years. My questions around censorship topics focused on:

Link 👇

And what about the role of the NATIONAL COVID CLINICAL EVIDENCE TASKFORCE (NCCET) set up to review the evidence of potential COVId-19 treatments (which by the way were available from the beginning)

Link 👇

No Australian government department has had to face any real scrutiny for their decisions over the past 3 years, either via the courts, over social media due to censorship, or even Australia’s MSM, as it is increasingly becoming evident, they all appear to be a mouthpiece for the State, and as shared by @DumerNatalie, a disrespectful mouthpiece at that.

Link 👇

Australia’s MSM didn’t even run a comprehensive report on an enquiry set up via One Nation Australia and other Senators interviewing expert witnesses regarding Australia’s response to COVID. This alone should prove they are biased and captured.

Link 👇

And it’s not through lack of trying to get information out of ATAGI.

Elizabeth Hart @elizmhart, who is an independent researcher investigating the gross over-use of vaccine products and conflicts of interest in vaccination policy, sent this letter to Nigel Crawford, Chair of the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI)

Why does ATAGI recommend COVID-19 mRNA injections for all children aged 5 to 11 years?

Link 👇

So, to find out where the head of the snake is, who do Australia’s investigative journalists, researchers, and true representative politicians focus on in this tangled web of Health Bureaucracy overreach and censorship? Is it:

The TGA?

The ATAGI?

The AHPRA?

The NCCET?

https://federation.gov.au/national-cabinet?

Or is it at a more sinister global level, where organisations like the WHO, the WEF, the UN and individuals such as Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab dictate their censorship terms through people like Australia’s Jane Halton who played an integral part in the EVENT 201 preparedness exercise in October of 2019.

Link 👇

Either way, make no mistake, our government is determined to look at further censorship under the guise of protecting Australians from mis and dis information, just like the Event 201 exercise programmed all stakeholders to work towards.

The question is….Wil you let them?

Link 👇

Mark Neugebauer is a South Australian resident concerned about seen and unseen globalist individuals and organisations who seek to influence all aspects of our lives which could ultimately lead to the degradation of our inalienable human rights.

Mark Neugebauer has not received any direct funding from any individual or organisation mentioned in this article, however this does not prevent those mentioned becoming a supporter of this platform.

Want to reach out or become a contributor? Reach out - [email protected]

his latest substack is where all the contamination data and controversy can be read .. the full article Curious Kittens is further below

 

.. from that long and complex article i have extracted the discussion on the contaminates .. Plasmids (dsDNA) .. it is all about the antibiotic resistant Plasmid which replicate at hyper rates within the large intestine, smashing the gut microbiome, which is needed to keep so many other centres of the body working well, especially brain functioning:

 

 

The EMA set limits for dsDNA contamination at less than 330ng/mg RNA. This is roughly 1 part per 3,030 mRNA molecules. It is not clear how they set these standards. For instance, a shot containing 34 trillion mRNAs with a 1 part per 3,000 plasmid contamination rate would equate to over 10 billion dual antibiotic resistant plasmids being transfected per patient. The sequencing evidence we now have on hand confirms that most of this DNA is in-fact the expression plasmid DNA, complete with spike protein, SV40 mammalian expression promoters, dual antibiotic resistance and high copy origins of replication that are compatible with both mammalian and bacterial amplification.

 

One can make a quick estimate of the relative ratio of the vector to insert nucleic acids by looking at the maximum depth of coverage of the insert versus the vector. Moderna vial 2 has 739X maximum coverage over the vector and 2.2 million X coverage over the insert. This equates to 1 vector for every 3,000 mRNAs.

 

The Pfizer vials have an order of magnitude higher rates of contamination. This is consistent with the fragment analysis having more off target peaks.

 

Discussion (in part)

 

Contamination of double stranded DNA (dsDNA) in these vaccines is a significant concern. The EMA specified dsDNA limits in this vaccines below 0.33% (330pg/mg). This is roughly 1 DNA molecule for 3,000 mRNA molecules. While the Moderna vaccines are meeting this specification, the Pfizer vaccines are 10 fold higher in contamination with 1 DNA molecule per 350 mRNAs. This is 1 replication competent plasmid per 350 mRNA molecules and equates to billions of antibiotic resistant plasmids injected per person per shot.

 

The EMA had good reason to monitor the dsDNA levels in the vaccines. DsDNA injections can induce type I interferon responses via STING in mammals. If these dsDNAs are packaged into LNPs, they can transfect and transform both mammalian and bacterial cells in the patients microbiome. Its not clear how the EMA settled on their acceptable dsDNA contamination and if they had considered contaminating DNA that was capable of amplifying inside the host.

The vectors contain mammalian promoters, bacterial origins of replication in addition to the neomycin and kanamycin resistance genes. Circular plasmids like this are used for stable transfection and continued expression of genes in mammalian cells with the strong SV40 promoter. This could lead to prolonged spike expression in patients injected with these constructs. Bacteria transformed with these plasmids would replicate 50-300 copies of the plasmid per cell. It is not know if the bacteria would also express the spike protein in these plasmids but the presence of T7 promoters in some of the vectors implies this is likely.

Patient use of neomycin or kanamycin after vaccination with these plasmids could enable the the selection of neomycin and kanamycin resistant bacteria in the gut microbiome. It is unclear if the spike protein in these expression vectors is expressed in bacteria. Nevertheless, inoculating billions of people with dual antibiotic resistance, high-copy number plasmids could be a step backwards in our fight against antibiotic resistance. Do these expression vectors transform the gut microbiome? How many copies of the mammalian plasmid expression vectors are replicated post vaccine transfection?

.. at this point let us look at the antibiotics Neomycin and Kanamycin

Neomycin is used to help lessen the symptoms of hepatic coma, a complication of liver disease. In addition, it may be used with another medicine before any surgery affecting the bowels to help prevent infection during surgery.

 

Kanamycin on the other hand is used to treat serious bacterial infections in many different parts of the body, including:

• TB involving the lungs
• active tuberculosis
• a systemic inflammatory response called sepsis due to an infection with bacteria
• a bacterial infection
• an infection of the central nervous system called meningitis
• pneumonia caused by bacteria
• infection within the abdomen
• infection of the biliary tract
• bacterial urinary tract infection
• an infection of the skin and the tissue below the skin
• infection of a joint
• infection of bone
• infection of burn wound

.. Kevin McKernan continues:

 

Arkmedic covers a biodistribution study that demonstrates LNP localization to the large intestine in 48hrs. Even if 1% of the LNPs localize to the intestines, bacteria could amplify these plasmids to far higher levels given the high copy origin of replication in the vectors.

 

.. Arkmedic reproduced the following biodistribution table which stopped at the 48 hour mark, so the large intestine number of 1.34% would be higher over subsequent days:

 

.. McKernan concludes (in part):

 

These are potent contaminants in the vaccines being administered to children. Billions of these contaminants per injection is likely an under estimate of their the entire burden as these plasmids can self replicate in bacterial hosts. Multiple studies have demonstrated prolonged vaccine mRNA clearance. This could be the result of the m1Ψ in the mRNA or the transfection or transformation of DNA based expression vectors. The introduction of billions of antibiotic resistance genes in high copy replication competent plasmids should evoke concerns over accelerating global antibiotic resistance.

 

Kevin then followed with a tweet storm (click on the image) summarising his extensive paper, which is a great lead-in before launching into read the entire paper:

 

To assist the lay and expert reader, Dr Jessica Rose also penned a substack overnight directly addressing the Plasmids discovered by Kevin et al .. a really helpful read:

 

Contamination with antibiotic/spike-containing expression vectors in the COVID-19 modified mRNA products

 

.. Jessica gets straight to the point with:

 

These expression vectors do not belong in the shots. This is contamination and we do not know if these contaminants are accidental, or if they were put there. I would bet on the former, but either way it doesn’t matter: this is criminally negligent proof of bad manufacturing practices. It’s time to recall these products.

 

.. please read the entire article so the seriousness of this discovery can be better conveyed

 

 

but i can share this .. this data from McKernan was reviewed by a Australian Professor of Medicine last night, and their short note to me in reply was as follows (kept anonymous):

 

 

That's bad. Also, whenever a drug is registered it's metabolic byproducts need to be identified and shown to be non-toxic.

Where is the evidence for this with the LNP and mRNA?

Zero.

 

And the massive excretion into the environment of this unknown waste.

It's bad enough with metabolites of antibiotics and hormones.

 

Furthermore, the uniqueness of the above and the metabolites of spike protein and we have the potential for bio-catastrophe.

 

Cheers

 

XXXXXXXXXXX

 

 

the title/subject of this note stated these 'vaccines' now pose a risk to the unvaccinated

 

.. the antibiotic resistance discussed above begins within the human who received the shots (and boosters) .. but that antibiotic resistance can spread throughout communities .. this is what the good Professor of Medicine has alluded to in his note above

 

only a few nights ago someone i was in discussion with asked me about 'shedding' and these vaccines .. in the context of Spike protein only, i was rather dismissive

 

.. but i had no idea then about these Plasmids and how easily the resistant bacteria created from them can be transmitted everywhere

 

upon which topic .. community transmission of these resistant bacteria .. i leave for the experts to better educate us all

 

please share

 

Julian Gillespie

LLB, BJuris