Documentary on the dangers of Aluminium Adjuvants. RIP Peanuts.
“Indiscriminate respect of authority is truth’s greatest enemy” - Einstein
This journey I’m on keeps getting more and more interesting.
A reader from France, and now a mentor in this subject matter, suggested I watch this French documentary, and I’m so glad I did.
It’s quite simply wonderful!
It’s narrated in the first person, and I’m happy to accept the premise of the doco as it’s presented. A mother, whose cat died because of an aluminum adjuvant, goes on an 18-month journey to understand the subject. She ends up understanding it and explaining it like no other documentary I’ve seen so far.
It’s like a cross between the ditsy, yet highly intelligent, Reece Witherspoon in Legally Blonde and John Wick. You cannot understand John Wick without understanding first that THEY killed his dog, Daisy. Well to understand this woman’s passion for the subject and her decimation of the current junk science narrative, you need to understand the death of her cat, Peanuts. That’s where the story starts.
This is not a review of the doco; I would simply highly recommend you watch it. But instead, I want to capture some of the main threads, insights and learnings from it for me.
One of the first points she makes is that pet vaccines are now being promoted as aluminium-adjuvant free! Yes, pet vaccines are being made safer for your pets…you babies, well that’s another matter altogether.
She covers quite a bit of ground regarding one of the touchstones of the vaccine church, and this is the “safety” study of Mitkus 2011. I remembered that name from Handley’s book, How to end the autism epidemic:
This conclusion raises an obvious question: How is the safety of aluminum calibrated by the FDA and CDC for use in pediatric vaccines? It’s hard to believe, but the entire basis for declaring that aluminum adjuvant can be safely injected into the bodies of newborns is based on a single study published by a single FDA scientist, Dr. Robert J. Mitkus, in 2011 “Updated Aluminum Pharmacokinetics Following Infant Exposures through Diet and Vaccination” appears to be a reassuring response to any concerns parents might have, which Dr. Mitkus directly addresses in the study’s abstract:
Because concerns have been expressed by the public that aluminum in vaccines may pose a risk to infants, we developed an up-to-date analysis of the safety of aluminum adjuvants.
What would be lost on the average layperson is that the only biological science Dr. Mitkus considered in making his safety assessment was a single study that infused (rather than injected) aluminum citrate (rather than aluminum hydroxide) into adults (rather than babies). It’s hard to put this seemingly minor detail in proper context. In no other drug on the planet (except for vaccines) would safety standards ever be determined without using the actual product (aluminum hydroxide) administered in the proper way (intramuscular injection), into the proper patient population (infants).
Vaccine Papers provides additional perspective on Dr. Mitkus’s study:
Mitkus 2011 is the best scientific evidence vaccine promoters have for defending Al adjuvant safety. It is fatally flawed and incredibly bad. It is not based on any toxicity experiments with actual Al adjuvant. It ignores key studies that contradict the assumptions it is based on.… Aluminum adjuvant nanoparticles are very different from dissolved aluminum ions. Consequently, the only scientifically valid way to establish the safety of injected aluminum adjuvant, is by experiments with injected aluminum adjuvant. Studies of ingested, soluble aluminum salts cannot establish the safety of Al adjuvant. Models of only dissolved aluminum cannot be used to determine the toxicity of the particles. Ignoring the toxicity of Al adjuvant particles is scientifically indefensible. Why do the vaccine promoters rely on oral ingestion studies to defend Al adjuvant safety? It is because they have no experimental research showing that injecting Al adjuvant is safe! They are empty-handed.
In early 2018 a paper published in the prestigious Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry took dead aim at the safety standards used for vaccine aluminum adjuvant. Titled, “Critical Analysis of Reference Studies on the Toxicokinetics of Aluminum-Based Adjuvants,” the paper addressed the limitations of studies, in particular Dr. Mitkus’s, that both the FDA and the CDC have relied on to declare vaccine aluminum “safe” to be injected into children. The study authors, from France and the U.K., included most of the leading experts in the world on the neurotoxicity of aluminum, including Dr. Romain Gherardi, Dr. Guillemette Crepeaux, and Dr. Christopher Exley. Their criticism was incisive:
To date, aluminum adjuvants per se have, perhaps surprisingly, not been the subject of any official experimental investigation, and this being in spite of the well-established neurotoxicity of aluminum.
The study authors also mention a laundry list of countries that have produced studies implicating aluminum-containing vaccines in chronic illness:
The occurrence of myalgia and arthralgia, chronic fatigue and neurological disorders following multiple injections of aluminum containing vaccines against hepatitis B, tetanus and human papilloma virus (HPV) has been reported in many countries: Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, United Kingdom, Italy, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Portugal, and USA.
The gist of their paper? None of the studies done to date on aluminum safety actually tell us if aluminum is, in fact, safe. All the study authors of this paper have done their own biological studies of aluminum adjuvant and found it to be highly neurotoxic. Their conclusion:
Both paucity and serious weaknesses of reference studies strongly suggest that novel experimental studies of Al adjuvants toxicokinetics should be performed on the long-term, including both neonatal and adult exposures, to ensure their safety and restore population confidence in Al-containing vaccines.
Words like “paucity” and “serious weaknesses” are not words you want to hear when you are the CDC or the FDA and your job is to certify that something is safe when it appears that’s not remotely true. Then again, “paucity” and “serious weakness” are not words you want to hear when you are a parent and your job is to protect the life of your child.
Aluminum (AL) doesn’t exist naturally in its pure state, natural compounds formed with AL are not toxic, outside the body. But it has no biological function whatsoever, hence it is toxic in any living organism.
This from Exley’s excellent Imagine you are an aluminum atom:
Why must we pay particular attention to aluminum? Why, because its biogeochemistry—its natural history—raises two red flags immediately and simultaneously. Two danger signals that actually are easily missed by all of us and easily dismissed by those whose interests are conflicted by aluminum’s omnipresence in human life and, consequently, are purposely blind to its danger signals. First, aluminum in all of its myriad forms is superabundant; it is the third most abundant element (after oxygen and silicon) of the Earth’s crust. The land upon which we walk and the mountains we endeavor to climb are made of aluminum, silicon, and oxygen.2 Second, aluminum is superreactive; it is both chemically and biologically reactive. However, these two red flags identify a paradox, as the abundant and biologically reactive aluminum has no biological function either in any organism today or in any extinct biota from the evolutionary past. We know the latter to be true since aluminum left no biochemical footprints in the sands of evolutionary time. This means in practical terms that when we encounter aluminum in our everyday lives, our bodies only see aluminum as an impostor, something foreign, and something for which we have not been preprepared through biochemical evolution. This in turn means that all of our encounters with aluminum are adventitious, random, and chaotic. There is no aluminum homeostasis, no protection against it, and no controlled elimination.
The doco highlights the point, that our three primary barriers to keep AL out, our skin, intestines and lungs are by-passed with an injection. Which is the foundational reason why “research” that looks at ingested AL is purposefully misleading.
The BBB (blood brain barrier) is still being formed in the first 6 months of the baby’s life. So, macrophages, unwittingly acting as trojan horses, get through much more easily than they otherwise would in an older child or adult.
The go to study, for the orthodoxy, that “proves” AL safety in humans is Flarend 1997. It was a one-month study, on four rabbits, and actually showed cerebral penetration!
The video at the top of this stack, in an excellent 3 minutes on the truth of AL in the baby’s body vs the junk science used to confuse and frame it as safe. There is a complexity to the subject that the whole doco does a great job explaining, but this 3-minute section is easy enough to follow and understand the scale of the false equivalency that has been fed to us.
Around minute 42.30 she makes the point that because industry needs toxic agents, it made us believe in The Paracelsus Principle “The dose is the poison”. Yes!!
I have fallen for that one, it’s such a wonderful fast-thought. It is off course true sometimes, but it is NOT absolutely true. You can have something that is toxic regardless of dose…off course!
It turns out that in France, they discovered an alternative adjuvant to AL, Calcium Phosphate. It is a natural compound, was used for 10 years with no meaningful adverse effects. But AL was ultimately chosen instead for its “cost effectiveness”.
The doco also outlines this related adjuvant insight, that adjuvants allow labs to lower the actual quantity of antigens used. True antigens are the costliest element in the vaccines, they multiply production costs 4-fold.
Another way of thinking about this is that the vaccine industry is really the “antibody” industry.
That’s its primary product.
It baits our natural immunity into creating antibodies, that is it’s main KPI (key performance indicator). Antigens are the “bait” that tricks the immune system into action. Attenuated viruses are “poor bait” that don’t generate that many antibodies, and they are expensive to produce. Adjuvants on the other hand, and especially AL adjuvants, are cheap and highly effective at putting the immune system into a crazed state of antibody generation. It is such a crazed state that our body will even make antibodies to the AL! Think about that, our immune system, in a maddened state that is trying to defend us, actually makes antibodies to the aluminum compound. This is ultimately an “auto-immune” dynamic as the macrophages that smuggle the AL to other parts of the body, now invite the body’s “AL antibodies” to attack those parts of the body.
It's cheap and nasty, whichever way you come at the subject.
She makes the point that AL adjuvants will ultimately be seen as mercury fillings, lead pipes and asbestos. It’s only a matter of time and suffering, the question is how much. How many more decades of this corruption?
Luckily, they have already cleaned up the vaccines for the ferrets!
Lies are Unbekoming is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Thank you for reading this Substack.
Please consider a small paid subscription (donation). The money goes to a good cause.
I am always looking for good, personal GMC (pandemic and jab) or childhood vaccination stories. Shared stories are remembered and help others.
In the comments, please let me know what’s on your mind.
You can write to me privately: email@example.com
If you are Covid-jab injured, consider the FLCCC Post-Vaccine Treatment
Here are three eBooks I have produced so far: