Interview with Sasha Latypova
From Pharmaceutical R&D Executive to Independent Investigator of the DoD’s COVID-19 Countermeasures Program
Sasha Latypova spent 25 years in pharmaceutical research and development, co-founded companies that developed AI-based cardiac safety tools, and worked directly with the FDA on regulatory approaches for assessing cardiovascular risk. She knows how the system is supposed to work—and she recognized immediately when it stopped working that way.
I listened to her March 2023 conversation with Robert Kennedy Jr. about militarized healthcare. I had been skeptical of the official COVID narrative for some time and had been pulling at various threads, but the pieces weren’t forming a coherent picture. Sasha provided the structural framework I was missing. The Department of Defense contracts, the Other Transactions Authority procurement mechanism, the deliberate circumvention of normal pharmaceutical regulations—suddenly the question shifted from “why would they do this?” to “how was this legally possible?” Her work answered that question.
What distinguishes Sasha’s research is her willingness to engage with primary sources at a level most commentators avoid. She read the entire 1,000+ page EMA document leak from late 2020—highly technical regulatory correspondence that revealed manufacturing fraud and political pressure on European reviewers. Her collaboration with legal researcher Katherine Watt on the PREP Act and related emergency authorities exposed the legal architecture that enabled liability-free deployment of products that would never have survived normal regulatory scrutiny.
The personal cost of this work deserves acknowledgment. Sasha left a successful career and a quiet life she loved—painting, traveling, studying art in Italy. She did not need to do any of this. Instead, she has spent years in the public square, facing coordinated attacks from both mainstream institutions and figures within the health freedom movement itself. Her family has been targeted. Her professional background has been misrepresented. None of it has stopped her. She continues to publish, to provide expert testimony in legal cases, to collaborate on formal regulatory petitions, and to speak plainly about what she has found.
The conversation that follows covers her transition from pharmaceutical executive to independent investigator, the significance of the DoD procurement structure, the leaked EMA files, the PREP Act framework, her recent Citizens Petition to revoke COVID vaccine licenses, and more. For readers encountering her work for the first time, this serves as a substantial introduction. For those already familiar, her answers extend and update that body of research.
With immense gratitude to Sasha Latypova.
Due Diligence and Art | Sasha Latypova | Substack
Support Independent Research
This work remains free because paid subscribers make it possible. If you find value here, consider joining them.
What paid subscribers get: Access to the Deep Dive Audio Library — 170+ in-depth discussions (30-50 min each) exploring the books behind these essays. New discussions added weekly. That’s 100+ hours of content for less than the price of a single audiobook.
[Upgrade to Paid – $5/month or $50/year]
Get in touch Essay ideas, stories, or expertise to share: unbekoming@outlook.com
1. Sasha, please walk us through your journey from pharmaceutical R&D executive—founding companies like iCardiac Technologies and working on cardiac safety initiatives with the FDA—to becoming one of the most prominent independent investigators of COVID-19 vaccine manufacturing and regulatory frameworks. What prompted this shift?
I am a former pharmaceutical research and development industry executive and entrepreneur. I spent 25 years working in the industry in various roles, ultimately managing my own companies. After graduating from the business school at Dartmouth College, I worked initially as an econometrics and management consultant for healthcare clients, and later as clinical trials contractor for ~70 pharmaceutical clients, large and small. Pfizer invested in two of my companies for purposes of developing new computational methods for medical imaging and electrocardiographic measurements in clinical trials. The precision and accuracy requirements for these modalities in clinical trials are much higher from those in hospital diagnostic setting. At iCardiac, we developed what today would be called artificial intelligence-based tools to process 100,000x more digital electrocardiogram data vs conventional methods and to vastly reduce false positives and false negatives. With this method, we were able to determine if a drug was posing the risk to the heart much earlier in development, reducing the risk exposure to human subjects and even eliminating most risky drugs from the pipelines. I was a co-founder and a senior executive in charge of business development and regulatory affairs. I interacted with the FDA and other global regulators on behalf of my clients. I also participated in the FDA-industry consortium for developing new regulatory approaches for assessing cardiovascular safety.
I developed significant knowledge of how FDA assessed risk and safety of drugs and related US law and regulations. I never worked in vaccines or biologics, and, at the time, I did not realize they were not in general regulated for safety or cardiovascular safety at all. However, I did run across gene therapies in the context of a very large scandal in the industry, where several healthy volunteers died or were severely disabled by one such product in a clinical trial in the UK around 2008. I was shocked about that case and looked up the product in development and read the available FDA publications. At the time, the whole class of gene therapies was considered extremely risky, with a long list of known toxicities, and these products were being developed only for terminal cancer and other very severe illnesses with no good treatment alternatives. It was inconceivable to me that the trial in the UK recruited healthy volunteers as the drug was too toxic to justify this risk with an Institutional Review Board (IRB). That company subsequently went out of business.
By 2016 iCardiac was sold to a larger company, and I decided to leave the pharma industry. I didn’t need to work anymore, and I wanted to pursue the love of art that I postponed all my life. I took classes, travelled to Italy for several months of study and enjoyed my family. I don’t watch TV and I was never much interested in social media, other than following several artists and museums on Instagram. In many ways those few years were the happiest of my life, the end of the “age of innocence”, so to speak.
For most of 2020, I was still very naïve. My husband and I bought our current house in Tahoe in early 2020 and were busy planning the move from the East Coast. The “covid pandemic” news seemed like annoying noise. I looked at the case fatality numbers, they didn’t look different from the regular flu, and I thought the media were simply running clickbait headlines and overblowing it. I started getting more concerned when the FDA went on attack against hydroxychloroquine. The funny part was – they were assigning it the cardiovascular risks that I knew from my years in the cardiovascular safety industry that HCQ did not have. But I knew the FDA also knew this perfectly well, too. Yet, for the first time in my experience I saw them go on national TV/media and lie about HCQ non-stop. I saw the federal government and the states violate the doctors’ right to practice medicine and prescribe HCQ off label. I could not understand how or why this was possible, but I wasn’t going to overlook the fact that it was happening.
I started using Telegram at that time and was following some dissenting voices, to try to make some sense of what was happening. When in the 2nd half of 2020 I realized that mRNA/gene therapy tech was being pushed as a “vaccine”, my antennae really went up. I could not understand how the FDA could claim this was a good idea given everything I knew they knew about this dangerous toxic product! Note that at that time, I still believed the lies of both virology and genetics. However, there was no shred of doubt to me that the FDA and the pharmas were lying, I just did not know why or how they could do such a monstrous thing legally and get away with it.
When the shots went on the market and the horrific death and injury toll started accumulating in VAERS, I started looking at the reports. By summer of 2021 I conducted enough data analysis, especially looking at the toxicity by vaccine batch. I was able to publish these data first in the world in a UK news outlet Expose in October of 2021 with help from Mike Yeadon. From then on, I started to collaborate with Craig Paardekooper on the website How Bad is Your Batch, a website that has since become a great resource for millions of people. I have been speaking out and publishing since then.
2. Your Substack, Due Diligence and Art, pairs pharmaceutical analysis with your watercolor paintings. Please tell us how these two very different pursuits came together, and what the creative work provides for you personally amid the heavy investigative material.
As far as art, I work in both oil and watercolor. Watercolor is a relatively recent medium for me, as it is in my opinion is the most difficult of all to master. And I am still struggling with both. When I started writing on Substack in late 2022, one of the followers asked to also publish my art. It never occurred to me that my writing about pharma and government fraud would go together with my art, but it seems they do quite well. People appreciate art as a reprieve from the darkness of my material. I also appreciate the motivation to continue working on my art as a method to maintain my own sanity despite what’s happening in the world today.
3. You recently submitted expert testimony in a Dutch court case against government officials, Albert Bourla, and Bill Gates. Your testimony makes a striking claim that COVID-19 mRNA injections are “indistinguishable from bio-chemical weapons.” Can you explain in plain terms what you mean by this and what evidence brought you to this conclusion?
I advise to read the testimony here:
The testimony has an executive summary section where sources (all public) are summarized. In plain terms, if you pick up a syringe lying on the ground in a park and inject a passerby with it, you can be subject to prosecution for assault with a deadly weapon. This is not at all different from the mRNA shots, legally “countermeasures”, non-medical, non-pharmaceutical products, which are allowed to be adulterated (de facto poison) and mislabelled (de-facto lies) by the US law.
4. You’ve written extensively about how COVID products were procured through Other Transactions Authority contracts by the Department of Defense rather than through normal pharmaceutical channels. Why does this distinction matter so much for understanding what these products actually are?
The OTA procurement mechanism is a mechanism that the US government uses to procure military supplies and weapons systems. It is inappropriate for purchasing medical products especially for mass civilian distribution. This mechanism was used by the planners of the covid military operation to award billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to crony corporations, to avoid regulations and accountability by describing vaccines as “prototypes” and “demonstrations of manufacturing” (i.e. fakes) and avoid Congressional and public scrutiny.
Links to articles on covid contracts:
5. The leaked EMA documents from late 2020 figure prominently in your work. What were the most damaging revelations in those files, and why do you think they received so little mainstream media attention?
I first became aware of the EMA files in 2022. Mike Yeadon forwarded it to me due to my work on vaccine batch variability analysis at the time. There were some mainstream reports on this leak, most notably, by the British Medical Journal, but beyond discussing one of the issues identified in it – the concerns raised by the regulators immediately prior to launch about the instability of mRNA and unknown impact on the safety or efficacy of the shots - nothing else from those files was covered by any media at the time. To my knowledge I am the first person who read the package entirely (over 1000 pages of highly technical documentation) and began reporting on the utter fraud contained in it. As a side note, I also alerted several “covid dissenters” about my findings and gave them the leaked documents. Several of these people now attack me publicly on social media and publish smears about me while taking credit for the knowledge they wouldn’t have without my help.
The significance of the EMA leak is described in the Citizens Petition that I co-authored with the colleagues from Children’s Health Defence in December 2025. The petition asks the FDA to revoke BLA licenses for covid shots since they never met the legal standards for biologics licensing in the US. The petition can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FDA-2025-P-6831-0001
Quoting:
In late November 2020, records for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine regulatory review were publicly released by a data leak from the European Medicines Agency.1 The authenticity of the documents was confirmed by the British Medical Journal.2 The EMA did not deny the authenticity of the documents. The documents also contain some of the FDA reviewers’ correspondence with Pfizer. In addition to the manufacturing documentation, the EMA files also contain 14 screenshots of emails dating from mid to late November 2020.3 The email exchanges are between the EMA staff and senior executives at the agency and their correspondence with the FDA and MHRA (the UK regulator). These emails demonstrate that the EMA reviewers were under massive political pressure to overlook all regulatory deficiencies. It is also evident that the EMA and FDA leadership at the time were concerned primarily with coordinating the launch dates, and the “authorization” of these shots was a foregone conclusion.
Emails leaked from EMA also demonstrate that the EU regulators were primarily concerned with the dates of product launch prior to reviewing the necessary regulatory data package. The process was highly political and not scientific. As stated above, the EMA staff reviewers objected to the data, but the high-ranking officials appeared to have ignored and overruled their concerns.
The regulatory review and approval standards in the United States and the European Union are substantially the same due to the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) and Mutual Recognition Agreements. The documents show that the first regulatory review of Pfizer’s manufacturing process, a so-called “rolling review”, began on or around November 26, 2020. During this review, the Biologics Working Party (BWP) at the European Medicines Agency identified three Quality Major Objections (MOs)4 during the assessment of Pfizer’s CMC documentation. There were severe and unresolvable – given the unrealistic timeline – issues with the quality of the product the EMA staff were pressured to ok. The manufacturing process was woefully out of cGMP compliance. Specifically, major objections included:
MO1: lack of cGMP compliance and inability to establish it prior to launch;
MO2: lack of mRNA integrity and large amounts of mRNA fragments, and incomparability of the commercial process (PPQ batches) with the process that was used to make the doses for the pivotal clinical trial that had just wrapped up the data collection;
MO3: many significant gaps in manufacturing documentation making it impossible to determine if the product could be made as described. The manufacturing process compliance with cGMP (BLA or CMA standards) could not be verified at all.
Additionally, 100+ objections and observations were issued by the reviewers flagging a variety of serious concerns with the manufacturing process quality and data completeness.
The EMA regulatory review of Pfizer CMC documentation revealed that the Phase 3 data could not satisfy the BLA standards. The two main reasons for this failure were:
The manufacturing process used to produce the Phase 3 clinical trial drug product (aka Process 1) was found non-representative of the commercial scale manufacturing process being presented to the regulatory review (Process 2); and
The scaled Process 2 was found non-compliant with cGMP requirements due to numerous identified deficiencies and large gaps - missing or pending normally required information. This made it impossible for the regulators to evaluate Pfizer’s process for cGMP compliance prior to commercial distribution of the product.
Each one of these reasons by itself precludes the possibility of Pfizer’s Phase 3 clinical trial data, from late fall of 2020, being acceptable for BLA labelling in August of 2021.
The magnitude and severity of the cGMP non-compliance issues identified by the European regulators at that time preclude the possibility that the data from the Phase 3 COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials could satisfy the accurate BLA labelling at a later date.
The pivotal trials for COVID-19 vaccines had completed primary Phase 3 data collection in late fall of 2020. Specifically, for Pfizer, the data lock for the primary efficacy endpoints was on November 14, 2020,5 and for Moderna - on or before November 16, 2020.6 Both dates are prior to the dates of the EMA/FDA CMC regulatory review for Pfizer, which happened around November 26, 2020. At that time, Moderna’s CMC documentation was not available for review at all. While for both vaccines, final trial completion dates are listed in 2022-2023, both trials broke the blinding and removed the placebo control groups by injecting the participants with the COVID-19 vaccines starting around December 2020. This, too, is a serious violation of the BLA standards, but is acceptable for EUA. Some special-population post-market studies were performed in 2021-2022 (e.g., in children and some immunocompromised populations, updated product versions); however, none were BLA-compliant.
The FDA cannot claim that objections and observations of the European regulators are not relevant. Unlike the FDA, the EMA used an investigational regulatory pathway (Conditional Marketing Authorization, CMA7) for initially deploying COVID-19 vaccines in the EU. The CMA standards are substantially similar to the BLA standards in the United States, as they apply to the products legally deemed investigational. In fact, until COVID-19 vaccines, the CMA pathway had never been utilized for approving any product for a very broad indication and mass deployment. CMA requires the same cGMP compliance as any commercially approved investigational drug or biologic, while allowing for some regulatory commitments post-market. Therefore, the major objections of the EMA reviewers are highly relevant as evidence of major deficiencies with respect to the BLA-readiness of Pfizer’s manufacturing process at the time of the primary data completion of its pivotal Phase 3 trial.
The FDA cannot claim that these manufacturing compliance violations have been resolved between 2020 and 2025, for the following reasons:
Even if the FDA can demonstrate that Pfizer’s Comirnaty manufacturing process is cGMP compliant today, the manufacturing process today is NOT the same process that was used to manufacture the Phase 3 trial material. Therefore, the data from the Phase 3 trial do not represent the product that is being shipped today, and the product should be deemed mislabelled.
Even if the FDA has discretion to use the so-called “real world” observational data as supporting evidence for various regulatory decisions, these “real-world” data alone, regardless of how voluminous, are not a valid substitute for legally prescribed evidentiary data package collected in cGMP compliant manner, as required for BLA labelling.
Effect: the data from Phase 3 trials, which are included in several sections of Comirnaty and SPIKEVAX BLA labels (Sections 6, 8, 14), cannot be deemed representative of the commercially shipped SPIKEVAX and Comirnaty vials. This means that vials being distributed in interstate commerce today are mislabelled for purposes of BLA.
6. The PREP Act is central to your analysis. For readers unfamiliar with it, can you explain how this 2005 law effectively removes pharmaceutical manufacturers from any meaningful accountability for these products?
Pease refer to the PREP Act briefing here:
Also, some of the links in the above document refer to Katherine Watt’s substack that is now closed and so the links will be broken. Her summary document on the PREP Act is available here: https://bailiwicknewsarchives.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/prep-act-public-health-emergency-eua-law-october-2025-2.pdf
7. Your open letter to HHS Secretary Kennedy and FDA Commissioner Makary with the “Not For Sale” group expressed frustration that MAHA leadership has not delivered on removing mRNA products from the market. What specifically would you need to see from the current administration to consider it genuine reform?
Robert Kennedy ran on promises to remove mRNA shots from market among other promises of accountability for the covid atrocities. I had 2 full length podcast discussions with him, where he was in agreement with materials I discussed, i.e. the military nature of the covid campaign, the attack on civilians with poison shots and total fraud/lies to the public and avoidance of liability via the PREP Act shield:
2022 Moderna files and the blatant fraud that they demonstrated:
2023 Militarized Healthcare discussion:
I had additional conversations with Robert Kennedy on the phone and by text and he seemed to agree and understand what was going on with covid and mRNA very well.
He ran his POTUS campaign on a highly energized base of “MAHA moms”. After joining Trump’s campaign, Kennedy’s base essentially secured Trump’s victory, delivering the crucial swing vote, despite many of us having distaste for Trump due to his commitment to the covid military campaign, refusal to acknowledge the victims, and his love of pharma and the mRNA tech.
Once confirmed as head of HHS, Kennedy abandoned his campaign promises. Instead, the MAHA policy flipped into Anything But Vaccines – a sick joke of endless distractions into things that make no difference, such as artificial food dyes:
Kennedy went on humiliating (IMO) publicity stunts and photo ops, while people whose lives were destroyed by the covid atrocities, whose children were brutally murdered in hospitals (Rebecca Charles, Scott Schara) or who lost their children to mRNA shots (the Allen family, Ernest Ramirez), everyone who campaigned for Kennedy tirelessly, where told to cheer for this utter nonsense like reformulated Froot Loops. MAHA policy was redesigned by the brand-new leadership of Calley and Casey Means – unknowns, previous pharma lobbyists, suddenly parachuted into “health freedom” and straight on Tucker Carlson’s show. My friend and colleague Debbie Lerman wrote a very good expose of the Means duo, and I advise everyone to read it:
In February, 2025 I published an open letter to RFK Jr reminding him something that he knew very well – his authority in the US law to terminate the PREP Act declaration for covid emergency under PREP Act, which would automatically remove the liability shield for pharma companies shipping unregulated, liability free poison under false labels of “FDA approved covid vaccines”:
In spring of 2025, I republished a similar appeal with my colleagues, Shannon Joy, Mary Talley Bowden and Naomi Wolf. In May 2025, I received a phone call from RFK Jr saying that he knows “what we want him to do” (i.e. terminate covid emergency now extended to end of 2029), but essentially saying that Trump won’t let him do it. I have an extremely low opinion of Donald Trump, but I understand the political constraints that RFK Jr faces. However, Trump cannot force RFK Jr to continue violating the US law, which is very clear about the standards that the pharma manufacturers must meet for BLA licensing. The FDA, specifically Peter Marks, committed fraud (legally allowed by the PREP Act, but fraud nonetheless) and lied to the public issuing legal fakes, BLA licenses for mRNA platforms in 2021. The US law does not allow this, and FDA does not get to make the law. I have collaborated with Children’s Health Defence, the organization RFK Jr founded but is no longer associated with, to revoke the fraudulently issued BLAs and/or relabel the mRNA vaccines, properly as EUA Countermeasures for the duration of the covid emergency declaration. The Petition can be found here: https://www.regulations.gov/document/FDA-2025-P-6831-0001
This petition is not a political one. This is a formal mechanism which is used to petition the FDA to change regulatory practices. There are typically 150 of these instruments filed a year, mostly by pharma companies and lobbyists. Most petitions get 0-30 comments. Our petition broke all time historical records for public engagement receiving over 100,000 individual comments from the public in one day. It will take the FDA data management staff months to process these comments. Ultimately, if the FDA does not act in 180 days, this petition can be turned into a lawsuit against HHS. Acting on this petition is the right thing to do for HHS and will demonstrate genuine commitment of RFK Jr and his agency to reform and accountability promised to his political base on the campaign trail.
8. You’ve written about newborn genetic screening as another concerning data collection practice. What are the risks you see with these programs, and what practical steps can new parents take to protect their children?
I have written about the failure of both virology and genetic theory. These areas of science are largely fraudulent and lack use of scientific methods of proof. Wrt to genetic screening of newborns, there is no benefit to submitting your baby’s “genetic” data (it is largely a set of meaningless computer models, which tell nothing about baby’s health). However, collection of these data serves many underhanded and sometimes nefarious agendas, including gaslighting the parents who submit to vaccines in pregnancy or to the childhood vaccines in case the baby is injured by the vaccines. False “genetic” causes are immediately ascribed to these vaccine-induced injuries, and most parents are continuously lied to while the baby is managed into further illness and sometimes death by the poisoners in white coats. Many people who lack knowledge of the poisoning/Eugenics agendas of the past 2 centuries and only go by prevailing “authoritative” narratives will have a knee jerk reaction to this statement and accuse me of being a conspiracist, “hyperbolic”, “crazy”, “emotional” etc. Trust me, I don’t care. I was one of these ignorants myself not very long ago. I am not interested in reaching those people, nor am I striving to convince them of anything. Wilful ignorance is very common. As a standalone independent writer, I don’t have time, resources or any desire to attract an audience of the wilfully blind. For those who are interested in learning more about the failure of genetic theory and genetic approaches to illness, I have written many articles on this topic:
9. In response to an essay arguing that gluten intolerance, celiac disease, and wheat allergies are caused by glyphosate poisoning, you commented that vaccine-induced anaphylaxis is the actual culprit. Could you flesh out this perspective? What mechanism connects vaccination to these widespread food sensitivities, and why do you think glyphosate has become a popular but incorrect explanation?
Food allergies are the phenomenon of anaphylaxis, described by Charles Richet, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1913. Injections of proteins directly into the blood stream is “forbidden” by nature. Foreign proteins can only enter the body via the digestive tract, where they are disassembled by digestion and only small parts/products taken into the blood stream and delivered to the cells, for energy and construction of body’s own unique and non-reproducible in any other way proteins for continuous renewal of its own tissues. For example, it is relatively safe to consume snake venom and sucking it out of the bite wound has been used as bush medicine (because foreign protein can be digested more or ess safely). However, any foreign protein injected directly into blood, including benign ones like milk or egg will reliably cause the effect of allergy/anaphylaxis in some significant % of subjects. This is known from naturally occurring anaphylaxis to repeated bee stings or jelly fish stings. Vaccines contain thousands of foreign proteins, and oftentimes these are food based (albumins derived from wheat and other cereals), fish, meat/gelatine, egg, yeast, peanut and other nut oils, aborted fetal tissues, etc. I have written about anaphylaxis effects of vaccines in several articles:
Vaccination for anything is in principle impossible due to the effects of anaphylaxis, and should have been abandoned shortly after Richet’s Nobel.
Glyphosate has nothing to do with the commonly occurring gluten allergy. Exposure to glyphosate should be avoided of course, and I am not saying glyphosate is safe. It is not safe. However, dangers commonly ascribed to glyphosate are typically significantly overstated, and many of the harms assigned to it are primarily vaccine harms. Glyphosate is another scapegoat for Anything-But-Vaccines propaganda ops. I have reviewed several claims of glyphosate harms and found them scientifically not well justified:
Interestingly, glyphosate was found in at least 5 childhood vaccines, see here:
This may mean that there is an allergy (anaphylaxis) to glyphosate with and without allergy to albumins/gluten as part of the poisoning commonly induced by the childhood vaccines. Again, vaccines are the primary vector, and glyphosate is only a contributing element.
10. You’ve engaged with readers who suggest that Lyme disease may be vaccine-induced rather than exclusively caused by tick bites, and you’ve appeared sympathetic to this view. Could you expand on your thinking here? What makes you skeptical of the conventional tick-borne bacterial infection model, and how does this fit into your broader framework of chronic illness stemming from vaccination?
I do not believe in the tick bite narratives for Lyme, because I remove several hundred ticks a year from my two dogs who do not experience any ill effects from them. There are other authors who have covered lack of evidence for causation of Lyme by tick bites. Lyme disease symptoms are broad, non-specific, and very heavily overlap with common symptoms of vaccine induced auto-immune illness. In any case, whether one agrees or disagrees with this – one would need to first exclude vaccine induced causes for Lyme (which is not allowed in modern science), and only after that look for additional causes or triggers.
I have re-published an excellent article on Lyme/alpha gal reaction from Weston Price and there is really little I can add to it:
In my opinion, Lyme is a variety of auto-immune vaccine induced injuries.
11. Your analysis of the foundational 1897 papers by Loeffler and Frosch on Foot-and-Mouth Disease raises methodological concerns you see repeating in modern virology. What patterns connect 19th-century research failures to contemporary pandemic science?
Virology and vaccinations have never been a scientific endeavour. I reviewed many foundational works claiming to discover germs for diseases from the 19th century and early 20th century and all of them are NON scientific. The main failures are – absence of the null hypothesis, absence of controls, often tiny sample sizes, no independent verification/reproducibility of claims, no blinding of experiments, and no investigation into any other likely causes of illness (e.g. water pollution with sewage, arsenic, mercury and other toxins common to the 19th century, malnutrition, blight, rodents and other pests, etc). On the other hand, the hallmarks of all “great” virologists of the time include Eugenics ideology, ties to aristocratic class and state power, unchecked ambition and greed, and race for “discovering” the germs in order to sell “cures”. As an example, Robert Koch who is credited with discovery of TB “bacilli” ran concentration camps in Africa experimenting on imprisoned population, and sold his “tuberculin” cure (which didn’t work and killed people) for approx. $35,000 per dose in today’s money.
These are my articles reviewing the “foundational” fraud of virology:
12. The U.S. Government financial statements you cite show that if people die younger, Social Security’s funding shortfall decreases by trillions of dollars. You argue this creates a “compelling interest” for the government to shorten life expectancy, with vaccination being the most efficient method. Can you walk readers through this financial analysis and explain why you believe it reveals the true motive behind vaccination policy?
This is covered in this article:
13. You’ve faced significant pushback, including what you describe as a planned hit piece from Nature magazine and ongoing attacks from certain figures in the vaccine-skeptic community whom you characterize as “chaos agents.” How do readers distinguish genuine independent researchers from controlled opposition?
Nature “journalist” at least was pretty clear about his intentions, and I thank him for his honesty. The journal did not publish anything as far as I am aware. My guess is they realized they can’t win this because they cannot argue with my material based on facts, and my professional background makes me highly credible.
In addition, I recently had several conversations with a writer from The New York Times – yes, imagine, the evil mainstream reached out and wanted to talk about the PREP Act, something very few in the “health freedom” want to do! He was respectful. He read my articles, understood what I said and asked good questions. I was frank with him and said – your side, the ostensible enemy, wants to simply pretend that I don’t exist, but it’s the fake “OUR” side who wants to destroy me. He said wanted to write an article, but, IMO, it will be a snowy day in hell before the NYT will publish that article, so that was just a nice talk.
I have had continuous targeted harassment and attacks from large named and anonymous accounts in the so-called “health freedom” space. They publish outright lies about me, lies that are easy to check, and that only shows them as liars and does not reflect on me at all. For example, they say I have “ties to the Boston Consulting Group”, a company I never worked for nor had any relationship with. They are saying this because my husband worked there as a junior associate for 1 year, crunching marketing numbers for Ford’s minivan line, 26+ years ago before we were even married! Based on this, Robert Malone claims my husband is affiliated with WEF. Yes, that’s how every Chase bank teller or anyone married to a Chase bank teller is also affiliated with WEF! Another tactic, practiced by an Israel-based “scientist” Jessica Rose, other “scientists” -Kevin McKernan and Kevin McCairn (why do they have the same name? beats me) and the “mouse army” i.e. affiliates of the anonymous account “Jikky Leaks” on X aka “Arkmedic” on Substack (I call them Moussad for short) – they publish my publicly available CV as “gotcha expose”. “OMG! Look what I found, Sasha worked in pharma industry!!!” Right. I was keeping this deeply hidden secret on my publicly available LinkedIn profile, and these Sherlocks figured it out.
The Moussad army also claim I “derail” legal cases, whereas the case where the defendant (Dr. Kirk More) won against the US government who wanted to throw him in jail for 35 years, was thanks to the evidence I and Katherine Watt provided to his defence team! If I “derailed” the case, one should ask – for WHOM? That should tell people everything they need to know about my attackers.
These so-called “truthers” go after my family, my daughter, my co-workers and former employees. To my knowledge, I am the only person in the covid dissenting space whose family and friends have been attacked because these trolls cannot argue with a single fact I published about the real nature of the covid crimes. These people really stop at nothing. But they don’t make me afraid. I just laugh at them.
The sad truth is - there are more military-intelligence-biodefense affiliated fake dissenters than there are genuine voices out there. Money easily buys both sides of the argument, and the dissenting side is frequently cheaper to capture. Numerous heath freedom commentators have been captured more recently by the MAHA propaganda machine, who raised millions to pay “influencers” to trumpet nonsense on social media like “historical moment as we defeat the food dyes” or “RFK Jr just destroyed XYZ by tweeting about ABC”. They are not hiding that they pay for political content. They run weekly zoom calls to give talking points to their social media sock puppets the same way the Pharma lobby or any political influence group does. This is nauseating.
As to how the readers can discern the truth from lies – I have a simple advice. “Unity” is over-rated. Don’t join any clubs as, inevitably, you will be asked to compromise your integrity for the sake of the “collective good” – MAHA’s rapid conversion into a dumb propaganda machine is case in point. Resist that. Think for yourself, always. Do not repeat the words of others, especially if they are telling you what you want to hear! Just because the person criticized mRNA shots in some way, does not make them trustworthy and “on our side” by default. I am not on anyone’s team or side. I am an independent individual, with my own thinking and my own opinions, take it or leave it, and you should be, too.
Do not repeat the words that you hear blindly but put them into your own language first. Examine them, find the logic, check the facts for yourself. Do not take my word for it, check it! Don’t just skim the headlines. You do not have to be a scientist or an expert. Be suspicious of the “experts” that spew a lot of opaque technical lingo at you. An “expert” that cannot clearly explain something to a lay person is a charlatan. You are capable, and being an outsider and a non-expert, you may be MORE capable than those who are beholden to the establishment to the see that the king is buck naked. God gave you His own intelligence when He designed you in His magnificent image. But you must learn to use it for it to be so.
14. Katherine Watt, the paralegal and legal researcher, appears frequently as a collaborator in your work on legal frameworks. How did this partnership develop, and what does she bring to the analysis that complements your pharmaceutical expertise?
Katherine is a person of deep Christian faith and integrity. She uncovered the most important piece of the puzzle I was looking for – the US laws that have been systematically put in place over the decades by the planners of the covid atrocity. The law is the most important evidence of planned democide, the evil acts committed by the military-intelligence-“biodefense” global crime cartel, i.e. Public-Private Pandemic-Preparedness Partnerships. Law making happens to be a series of intentional acts. If they resulted in mass death and horrific injuries – then that was the intent! Katherine closed her substack now, but we continue to collaborate on important projects. She will always be my treasured friend and colleague.
Katherine’s archive is available here: https://bailiwicknewsarchives.wordpress.com/teleopolitics/
15. For readers who want to follow your ongoing investigations and support your work, where should they go? And what projects or cases are you most focused on in the coming months?
My work is available on Substack, which is my main platform for now. In the coming year I continue to work on several legal cases, support other cases financially and with expertise - all pro-bono. My paid subscribers are the only source of funding that I use for my work which involves countless hours of research and writing, and also business travel. I am planning to continue covering similar topics, and I am currently soliciting feedback and questions from my subscribers on what they want me to research and write about.
Due Diligence and Art | Sasha Latypova | Substack
Support Independent Research
This work remains free because paid subscribers make it possible. If you find value here, consider joining them.
What paid subscribers get: Access to the Deep Dive Audio Library — 170+ in-depth discussions (30-50 min each) exploring the books behind these essays. New discussions added weekly. That’s 100+ hours of content for less than the price of a single audiobook.
[Upgrade to Paid – $5/month or $50/year]
Get in touch Essay ideas, stories, or expertise to share: unbekoming@outlook.com
Bitcoin: 3Q6BK8x8zjoPaXykQggzvoJxg5FiEbkb3U
Ethereum: 0x4CB0d39d8466a34609318FC1B003B745893788b3
New Biology Clinic
For those of you looking for practitioners who actually understand terrain medicine and the principles we explore here, I want to share something valuable. Dr. Tom Cowan—whose books and podcasts have shaped much of my own thinking about health—has created the New Biology Clinic, a virtual practice staffed by wellness specialists who operate from the same foundational understanding. This isn’t about symptom suppression or the conventional model. It’s about personalized guidance rooted in how living systems actually work. The clinic offers individual and family memberships that include not just private consults, but group sessions covering movement, nutrition, breathwork, biofield tuning, and more. Everything is virtual, making it accessible wherever you are. If you’ve been searching for practitioners who won’t look at you blankly when you mention structured water or the importance of the extracellular matrix, this is worth exploring. Use discount code “Unbekoming” to get $100 off the member activation fee. You can learn more and sign up at newbiologyclinic.com
European Medicines Agency leaked files
British Medical Journal, The EMA covid-19 data leak, and what it tells us about mRNA instability (March 10, 2021) https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n627
European Medicines Agency leaked emails
Ibid.
FDA, Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine (BNT162, PF-07302048) Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Briefing Document: 10 December 2020, p.8; https://www.fda.gov/media/144246/download
Businesswire, Moderna Announces Primary Efficacy Analysis in Phase 3 COVE Study for Its COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate and Filing Today with U.S. FDA for Emergency Use Authorization (November 30, 2020) https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20201130005506/en/Moderna-Announces-Primary-Efficacy-Analysis-in-Phase-3-COVE-Study-for-Its-COVID-19-Vaccine-Candidate-and-Filing-Today-with-U.S.-FDA-for-Emergency-Use-Authorization
NIH, National Library of Medicine Pub Med Central, The European Medicines Agency’s EU conditional marketing authorisations for COVID-19 vaccines (January 13, 2021)