Speaking of surveillance… has anyone else noticed the multitudes of hovering surveillance aircraft above their counties? I live in rural VA about 70 miles west of DC, and these things dot the skies all about. As I drive down state rt. 29 through three counties at least 3 are in my sites at all times. I have yet to hear anyone else’s observations! In my 50+ years I’ve never seen this.
There have been some concerns raised over the last few weeks regarding the paper by Daniel Broudy and Young Mi Lee.
Some of the concerns raised are very technical in nature so it is very hard for me to assess them objectively as the last time I was anywhere near a Microscope of any kind was back in high school.
This is well and truly outside my circle of competence so I am hoping you could weigh in on that.
Here are just three of the technical concerns raised:
I am not including others as I don't think they warrant much discussion except for the fact that the Chief Scientific Officer and Chief of Maternal & Prenatal Medicine at The Wellness Company seem to be fully onboard with the bioengineering issue all of a sudden despite them dismissing it for years.
To me this indicates that there may be an orchestrated attempt underway to "Poison the well" for the work you and your colleagues are doing.
John Campbell has deleted his recent video covering the IJVTPR paper sighting concerns about the credibility of the authors and their findings:
Thank you. You raised important issues. I looked at the links above. Many serious objections have been lodged. In the material at the first link above, the author of it made some excellent points as well, but one thing he said does not seem to be true.
With respect to the capabilities of optical microscopy, it is not true that objects below 500nm are totally invisible. Using enhanced darkfield microscopic techniques, much smaller objects can be visualized as being present even if their precise shape and structure cannot be. For example, quantum dots are visible as they actively emit light and move about on the slide. Only the very smallest nanosized structures cannot be seen at all by enhanced darkfield microscopy. Some structures that are only several nanometers in one dimension have other dimensions that are much larger which makes them visible using enhanced darkfield techniques. This is a useful source to review: Dark-field/hyperspectral microscopy for detecting nanoscale particles in environmental nanotoxicology research - ScienceDirect at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969721005465. Also see:
Dr. John Campbell's notice and removal of the video he did on the paper only cited the fact that some of his friends had concerns, not that he does. What they think about it is really not relevant to whether the paper is flawed or not, unless they provide a well-reasoned, detailed critique of it.
It would be ideal if a point-by-point detailed critique of the Lee/Broudy paper could be written and published, even if only on substack, or if the authors were asked to respond to the questions that have been raised thus far. All derisive, accusatory and adhominem type attacks and accusations are not helpful in way of determining the truth. I don't know if anyone has tried to contact them which would be the right thing to do.
My understanding is that most of those who have thus far written critically of the paper do not object to the authors conclusion that there is micro and nanotech in the CV19 injectable products but that the materials and methods used were inappropriate to the task. Some seem to think that this was an attempt to discredit all the work other investigators have done to prove beyond reasonable doubt that many substances (injectables, supplements, oral medications, food, water etc.) now contain this technology and that the authors are engaged in a psyop. While that is theoretically possible, the paper should be evaluated based on what it contains, not theories about the motivations for writing/publishing it or the perceived lack of qualifications of the authors. It should be unnecessary to point out that for over 3 years those who have the qualifications to do the basic science lab work on this vital topic have refused to do so or provide meaningful critiques of the work by those who have done so.
Given what has been proven already, the goal should be to determine what is true and what is false about the topic of micro/nanotechnology contamination of injectables and other products, as well as of all living things.
Thank you so much for this reply! Really (really!) appreciate it.
The thing that is of most interest to me is why Mr. Broudy is the co-author of a scientific paper in a peer review journal (not a journalistic piece or opinion piece) on this topic given his background.
My assumption is that he was brought in to assist with the English as Dr. Lee appears to not have the level of English that will enable her to write this piece on her own but maybe he has written other scientific papers on this topic previously. I don't know.
As far as why those with the qualifications and professional experience in Microscopy refusing to replicate the work done by Dr. Nixon and others, I think the answer to that is fairly evident at this point.
Ultimately, if there is indeed, as I strongly suspect, an orchestrated attempt underway to "poison the well", this is how this tactic can be fought against:
"To counter poisoning the well, individuals can:
1. Focus on the issue: Engage with the substance of the argument and avoid personal attacks or biases.
2. Verify information: Fact-check claims and avoid spreading misinformation.
3. Promote respectful dialogue: Encourage open and respectful communication, and address biased or hostile language."
Thank you. I agree with the three points you made above.
FYI, the first time I heard of the first author, Dr. Lee was in 2022. I read her paper entitled: Foreign Materials in Blood Samples of Recipients of COVID-19 Vaccines at: https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/37. Note it is the same journal that the most recent Lee/Broudy paper appeared in. On that one, she was the first of three authors. I recommend everyone read that paper for background.
I note that one of Broudy's important papers no longer has a live link which was entitled: View of Cyborgs R Us: The bio-nano panopticon of Injected Bodies. I find it strange that it is now missing.
I have been following this topic and reading papers about it for three years. For me it began in 2021 with the first report by Pablo Campra that he found graphene in CV19 vials utilizing the technique of micro-Raman spectroscopy. His final report was published in November of 2021 and was still on-line when I recently checked. Since then, over 26 independent groups have found evidence of non-declared substances in those products.
It's not as though Lee and Broudy have never written about this topic before. On August 9, 2024, I wrote: "An extremely important paper has just been published (7/18/24), which should be very carefully reviewed and publicly critiqued...", referring to their paper, Real-Time Self-Assembly of Stereomicroscopically Visible Artificial Constructions in Incubated Specimens of mRNA Products Mainly from Pfizer and Moderna: A Comprehensive Longitudinal Study. Here's the URL to my post: https://akajshannon.substack.com/p/advanced-nanotechnology-in-cv19-injectables.
However, this is such a complicated topic with so much conflicting information that it is not easy to navigate through if you are not a practitioner yourself (which I am certainly not).
Here are just two examples of articles that present other views in a way that seems at least somewhat credible to my (very untrained/unqualified) eye:
Speaking of surveillance… has anyone else noticed the multitudes of hovering surveillance aircraft above their counties? I live in rural VA about 70 miles west of DC, and these things dot the skies all about. As I drive down state rt. 29 through three counties at least 3 are in my sites at all times. I have yet to hear anyone else’s observations! In my 50+ years I’ve never seen this.
It's for traffic analysis by Shirley Contracting to widen the road to 66 from Arlington. I've been interested in that region to locate a specific unknown waterway by the geology I see in videos and so far no one is saying the location. It doesn't sound important, but I could use some help.
Speaking of surveillance… has anyone else noticed the multitudes of hovering surveillance aircraft above their counties? I live in rural VA about 70 miles west of DC, and these things dot the skies all about. As I drive down state rt. 29 through three counties at least 3 are in my sites at all times. I have yet to hear anyone else’s observations! In my 50+ years I’ve never seen this.
Excellent lineup and moderator. Legit. Not your average hero ball. Registered. Grateful for the notice.
Thanks
David
Hi David,
There have been some concerns raised over the last few weeks regarding the paper by Daniel Broudy and Young Mi Lee.
Some of the concerns raised are very technical in nature so it is very hard for me to assess them objectively as the last time I was anywhere near a Microscope of any kind was back in high school.
This is well and truly outside my circle of competence so I am hoping you could weigh in on that.
Here are just three of the technical concerns raised:
https://x.com/NameIsSpartacus/status/1826121058388423012
https://thedailybeagle.substack.com/i/148612523/unsurprisingly-the-paper-is-bunk-too
https://substack.com/@bushfoodforager/note/c-68218797
I am not including others as I don't think they warrant much discussion except for the fact that the Chief Scientific Officer and Chief of Maternal & Prenatal Medicine at The Wellness Company seem to be fully onboard with the bioengineering issue all of a sudden despite them dismissing it for years.
To me this indicates that there may be an orchestrated attempt underway to "Poison the well" for the work you and your colleagues are doing.
John Campbell has deleted his recent video covering the IJVTPR paper sighting concerns about the credibility of the authors and their findings:
https://x.com/Johnincarlisle/status/1832729975667011843
Thank you. You raised important issues. I looked at the links above. Many serious objections have been lodged. In the material at the first link above, the author of it made some excellent points as well, but one thing he said does not seem to be true.
With respect to the capabilities of optical microscopy, it is not true that objects below 500nm are totally invisible. Using enhanced darkfield microscopic techniques, much smaller objects can be visualized as being present even if their precise shape and structure cannot be. For example, quantum dots are visible as they actively emit light and move about on the slide. Only the very smallest nanosized structures cannot be seen at all by enhanced darkfield microscopy. Some structures that are only several nanometers in one dimension have other dimensions that are much larger which makes them visible using enhanced darkfield techniques. This is a useful source to review: Dark-field/hyperspectral microscopy for detecting nanoscale particles in environmental nanotoxicology research - ScienceDirect at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969721005465. Also see:
Hyperspectral Image Processing Techniques at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/hyperspectral-imaging
Dr. John Campbell's notice and removal of the video he did on the paper only cited the fact that some of his friends had concerns, not that he does. What they think about it is really not relevant to whether the paper is flawed or not, unless they provide a well-reasoned, detailed critique of it.
It would be ideal if a point-by-point detailed critique of the Lee/Broudy paper could be written and published, even if only on substack, or if the authors were asked to respond to the questions that have been raised thus far. All derisive, accusatory and adhominem type attacks and accusations are not helpful in way of determining the truth. I don't know if anyone has tried to contact them which would be the right thing to do.
My understanding is that most of those who have thus far written critically of the paper do not object to the authors conclusion that there is micro and nanotech in the CV19 injectable products but that the materials and methods used were inappropriate to the task. Some seem to think that this was an attempt to discredit all the work other investigators have done to prove beyond reasonable doubt that many substances (injectables, supplements, oral medications, food, water etc.) now contain this technology and that the authors are engaged in a psyop. While that is theoretically possible, the paper should be evaluated based on what it contains, not theories about the motivations for writing/publishing it or the perceived lack of qualifications of the authors. It should be unnecessary to point out that for over 3 years those who have the qualifications to do the basic science lab work on this vital topic have refused to do so or provide meaningful critiques of the work by those who have done so.
Given what has been proven already, the goal should be to determine what is true and what is false about the topic of micro/nanotechnology contamination of injectables and other products, as well as of all living things.
Thank you so much for this reply! Really (really!) appreciate it.
The thing that is of most interest to me is why Mr. Broudy is the co-author of a scientific paper in a peer review journal (not a journalistic piece or opinion piece) on this topic given his background.
My assumption is that he was brought in to assist with the English as Dr. Lee appears to not have the level of English that will enable her to write this piece on her own but maybe he has written other scientific papers on this topic previously. I don't know.
As far as why those with the qualifications and professional experience in Microscopy refusing to replicate the work done by Dr. Nixon and others, I think the answer to that is fairly evident at this point.
Ultimately, if there is indeed, as I strongly suspect, an orchestrated attempt underway to "poison the well", this is how this tactic can be fought against:
"To counter poisoning the well, individuals can:
1. Focus on the issue: Engage with the substance of the argument and avoid personal attacks or biases.
2. Verify information: Fact-check claims and avoid spreading misinformation.
3. Promote respectful dialogue: Encourage open and respectful communication, and address biased or hostile language."
Thank you. I agree with the three points you made above.
FYI, the first time I heard of the first author, Dr. Lee was in 2022. I read her paper entitled: Foreign Materials in Blood Samples of Recipients of COVID-19 Vaccines at: https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/37. Note it is the same journal that the most recent Lee/Broudy paper appeared in. On that one, she was the first of three authors. I recommend everyone read that paper for background.
Here is a paper by Broudy and Kyrie in the same journal, entitled: Syllogistic Reasoning Demystifies Evidence of COVID-19 Vaccine Constituents at: https://www.ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/32.
I note that one of Broudy's important papers no longer has a live link which was entitled: View of Cyborgs R Us: The bio-nano panopticon of Injected Bodies. I find it strange that it is now missing.
Another by Broudy (alone) in the same journal is: Vaccine Development and Social Control at: https://www.ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/29.
Here's a paper by Broudy and Arakaki from 2020 entitled: Who Wants to be a Slave? The Technocratic Convergence of Humans and Data. Frontiers in Communication. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcomm.2020.00037/full.
An important paper to read from 2022 is: What Is in the So-called COVID-19 “Vaccines”? Part 1: Evidence of a Global Crime Against Humanity by David Hughes at: https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/52?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email.
I have been following this topic and reading papers about it for three years. For me it began in 2021 with the first report by Pablo Campra that he found graphene in CV19 vials utilizing the technique of micro-Raman spectroscopy. His final report was published in November of 2021 and was still on-line when I recently checked. Since then, over 26 independent groups have found evidence of non-declared substances in those products.
It's not as though Lee and Broudy have never written about this topic before. On August 9, 2024, I wrote: "An extremely important paper has just been published (7/18/24), which should be very carefully reviewed and publicly critiqued...", referring to their paper, Real-Time Self-Assembly of Stereomicroscopically Visible Artificial Constructions in Incubated Specimens of mRNA Products Mainly from Pfizer and Moderna: A Comprehensive Longitudinal Study. Here's the URL to my post: https://akajshannon.substack.com/p/advanced-nanotechnology-in-cv19-injectables.
Thanks for your interest and thoughtful response.
Thanks so much for this! I can see Mr. Broudy has a fairly extensive history in publishing on this topic.
I am very familiar with the work of Pablo Campra. I have first been exposed to it through the Spanish "Big Reset" documentary:
https://rumble.com/v2ag19o-big-reset-movie-nanotech-in-the-c19-injections.html
I have also written extensively about the work David and his colleagues have done so I definitely don't think this is pseudoscience:
https://actionabletruth.substack.com/p/nanotech-bioengineering-threat
However, this is such a complicated topic with so much conflicting information that it is not easy to navigate through if you are not a practitioner yourself (which I am certainly not).
Here are just two examples of articles that present other views in a way that seems at least somewhat credible to my (very untrained/unqualified) eye:
https://geoffpain.substack.com/p/fifth-column-promoting-graphene-fantasies
https://thetruthaddict.substack.com/p/the-graphene-psyop
Sasha Latypova also did a ss article on Lee/Broudy paper today. Not that I'm recommending SL.
Speaking of surveillance… has anyone else noticed the multitudes of hovering surveillance aircraft above their counties? I live in rural VA about 70 miles west of DC, and these things dot the skies all about. As I drive down state rt. 29 through three counties at least 3 are in my sites at all times. I have yet to hear anyone else’s observations! In my 50+ years I’ve never seen this.
It's for traffic analysis by Shirley Contracting to widen the road to 66 from Arlington. I've been interested in that region to locate a specific unknown waterway by the geology I see in videos and so far no one is saying the location. It doesn't sound important, but I could use some help.
No, I’m afraid it’s not.
Actually you haven't done the research, I did it for you, so be paranoid, or do your own research.
That’s not even close to the area I’m referring to; I know exactly what it is. Research expert. 🙄
Ripper mate!👍