The most important reveal of our lifetimes is happening right now.
It began just after Katherine Watt and Sasha Latypova learned about, not me, or my book, which is not what anyone should be talking about, but about Charles Richet, who won the Nobel prize for his discovery of anaphylaxis in 1913. I just happened to write a book about that discovery, in which I explain its relevance to today and current events, that they just happened to find, in the course of other research they were doing.
It is rare that any one piece of information directly affects every living man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth today. But this is one of those rare instances, and it directly affects YOU.
Please understand that any discussion of me, or the fact that it was my book they found, is a distraction.
I do not want to take center stage. I don't need or want any recognition here.
My sincere desire, is for the work of Charles Richet to be rediscovered.
I need your help with this. I need a favor from you, and from anyone who reads this. I am literally, on my knees, begging and pleading, that all of you refuse to allow the conversation this book started to end. I am asking that you refuse to allow Richet's discoveries to swept aside or ignored, by anyone. And I am going to provide you with bulletproof arguments that will make any attempt you make unassailable.
The thing that helps the cause the most is to just share my book, or a way to find it, like a free download link I will provide, that other websites can add to theirs, and this article which is also on my blog if you received it directly from me, or a previous one liked below, which explains why it is so important to read:
(EA BLOG POST ON 4/12/21: https://estateartistry.com/blog/order-my-book-april-13th-and-14th-it-is-free)
If anyone would like me to send them a free copy, my email address is ceo@estateartistry.com. People can request a free pdf from me. I respectfully request that you pass that around with any quotes made by either Sasha Latypova or Katherine Watt regarding the reactions they had immediately after they learned about Charles Richet, which may continue to show up in other ways in their respective substack articles. I will provide some good ones in this post.
(The first mention was by Katherine Watt on Bailiwick News on August 26th and forward)
https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/intentional-elusivity-of-definitions
(First mention by Sasha Latypova in Due Diligence and Art was on September 3rd, 2024 and forward)
It doesn’t matter what reaction or quote you choose, even if you use good ones made by others since, as long as they are thought-provoking, I just saw plenty in these first two articles by Sasha and Kat. Jane Ruby and I don't get along. I call her 'Fake Jane' but I she recently interviewed Sasha, there may be good quotes in that clip. The quotes by either Sasha or Katherine are the best. Their acknowledgement of the significance of this information is a form of endorsement that I have been waiting years to see. And not to sell people more of my books either. Clearly I don't care about that.
The minute they saw it, (Katherine reviewed an old post on 'Northern Tracy', which included incorrect conclusions made by Tracey (now deceased), but cited my book and a Richet biography) their reaction was one of shock and horror. This was exactly what I intended to convey. It was my initial reaction as well.
It is rare that any one piece of information directly affects every living man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth today. But this is one of those rare instances, and it directly affects YOU.
Please understand that any discussion of me, or the fact that it was my book they found, is a distraction.
I do not want to take center stage. I don't need or want any recognition here.
My sincere desire, is for the work of Charles Richet to be rediscovered.
I need your help with this. I need a favor from you, and from anyone who reads this. I am literally, on my knees, begging and pleading, that all of you refuse to allow the conversation this book started to end. I am asking that you refuse to allow Richet's discoveries to swept aside or ignored, by anyone. And I am going to provide you with bulletproof arguments that will make any attempt you make unassailable.
The thing that helps the cause the most is to just share my book, or a way to find it, like a free download link I will provide, that other websites can add to theirs, and this article which is also on my blog if you received it directly from me, or a previous one liked below, which explains why it is so important to read:
(EA BLOG POST ON 4/12/21: https://estateartistry.com/blog/order-my-book-april-13th-and-14th-it-is-free)
If anyone would like me to send them a free copy, my email address is ceo@estateartistry.com. People can request a free pdf from me. I respectfully request that you pass that around with any quotes made by either Sasha Latypova or Katherine Watt regarding the reactions they had immediately after they learned about Charles Richet, which may continue to show up in other ways in their respective substack articles. I will provide some good ones in this post.
(The first mention was by Katherine Watt on Bailiwick News on August 26th and forward)
https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/intentional-elusivity-of-definitions
(First mention by Sasha Latypova in Due Diligence and Art was on September 3rd, 2024 and forward)
It doesn’t matter what reaction or quote you choose, even if you use good ones made by others since, as long as they are thought-provoking, I just saw plenty in these first two articles by Sasha and Kat. Jane Ruby and I don't get along. I call her 'Fake Jane' but I she recently interviewed Sasha, there may be good quotes in that clip. The quotes by either Sasha or Katherine are the best. Their acknowledgement of the significance of this information is a form of endorsement that I have been waiting years to see. And not to sell people more of my books either. Clearly I don't care about that.
The minute they saw it, (Katherine reviewed an old post on 'Northern Tracy', which included incorrect conclusions made by Tracey (now deceased), but cited my book and a Richet biography) their reaction was one of shock and horror. This was exactly what I intended to convey. It was my initial reaction as well.
A strange observation: When I first read Katherine's article on August 26th I was doing so from a hotel room at the beach on a cell phone, (not sure if that is relevant) but when I first read it there was something I saw that was part of the article then, something that is not there any longer, so I can only assume it was edited out after the article was initially published. This is something I cannot explain, or prove, since I don't have a printout of it. But what I saw that day were text bubbles of the kind you sometimes see in movies, where cell phone text messages are flashed on the screen like subtitles, to let you see what characters are texting to each other. Upon reading the Northern Tracy post, Katherine immediately called Sasha to share her finding, and that is still a topic within this piece. I clearly recall excerpts of a texting or messenger exchange between the two that were originally transcribed into the August 26th Bailiwick News post I read. However, by the time I got home and re-read the same Bailiwick News article on my computer, I noticed they were no longer there. They would have made excellent quotes that amplified their reactions, but they are gone now. The rest of the piece seemed to me to be unchanged.
But putting that aside for now, the fact that this came as a surprise to both you them tells you right there that it was important. It also demonstrates that it is not at all unusual for even very well informed people like the two of them, to be completely unaware of this crucial information. There is no doubt in my mind that is the result of an covert agenda, the goal of which was to ensure people forget this, and to reduce any mention of it, in hopes that a piece of incriminating evidence would just 'go away'.
Richet's conclusions, and the ones I make, which apply his work to the present day are correct, shockingly correct. Sasha is parroting some of those conclusions now, and what they mean for vaccinated people is as shocking and horrifying a reality as I state in my book that it is. The realization that befell both Sasha and Katherine was one of "WOW" at first, followed by "OMG No!" shortly after, and everyone who is spreading this news is finding out everyone they show it to, if they understand the implications (which I will now reiterate clearly), is having a similar reaction.
With Sasha and Katherine commenting publicly as they did, mostly because those comments come from two well-known and well respected, highly credible sources, who are both recognized as populist heroes for their activist work exposing the covid con and the dangers of vaccination, the information and conclusions made in my book just became credible facts! And they BOTH further recognized what they meant, which is that:
But putting that aside for now, the fact that this came as a surprise to both you them tells you right there that it was important. It also demonstrates that it is not at all unusual for even very well informed people like the two of them, to be completely unaware of this crucial information. There is no doubt in my mind that is the result of an covert agenda, the goal of which was to ensure people forget this, and to reduce any mention of it, in hopes that a piece of incriminating evidence would just 'go away'.
Richet's conclusions, and the ones I make, which apply his work to the present day are correct, shockingly correct. Sasha is parroting some of those conclusions now, and what they mean for vaccinated people is as shocking and horrifying a reality as I state in my book that it is. The realization that befell both Sasha and Katherine was one of "WOW" at first, followed by "OMG No!" shortly after, and everyone who is spreading this news is finding out everyone they show it to, if they understand the implications (which I will now reiterate clearly), is having a similar reaction.
With Sasha and Katherine commenting publicly as they did, mostly because those comments come from two well-known and well respected, highly credible sources, who are both recognized as populist heroes for their activist work exposing the covid con and the dangers of vaccination, the information and conclusions made in my book just became credible facts! And they BOTH further recognized what they meant, which is that:
This information sinks the entire CDC/WHO/Gates/Vaccine Insanity Ship!
These are facts that must reach people in all sorts of occupations, and they must look at it, but especially those in science and healthcare, because it came from one of their own, who was recognized with a high honor, which is proof our common enemy cannot take back. It is:
- Proof that they cannot dispute.
- Proof that will never be overturned or revised.
- Proof that is fundamentally based on basic human physiology that has not, cannot, and will not ever change.
- And proof that there can be no future 'modified understanding' of. Which also means you can be certain that any new 'updates' or additional 'qualifying factors' you may hear about after this, will be flat out lies.
What Richet understood by 1913 was that these patterns and outcomes, which we now refer to as anaphylaxis, are hard-wired in people. There are only variations in severity between individuals that have to do with secondary exposure timing, and to a lesser extent, the amount of primary exposure toxin that is present in the body when that secondary exposure occurs.
Therefore, left with no other options, it was decided that; It MUST be hidden from view. This was our common enemy's only choice. They could not remove the predictability of this chain of events, so they attempted to effectively 'remove' Charles Richet, to 'memory hole' his discovery. This is why my book had to be, and was, banned by Amazon. My guess is my book was probably noticed after a prominent journalist, named Eliz VanHamelin, published a two page article on it that catapulted the title to number one in Amazons social sciences category.
As a way to intentionally increase mortality, the reliability of this anaphylactic pattern was useful, but knowledge of it was evidence.
Because of what Richet concluded, and I repeated, and applied to present day, in a very clear concise way anyone can follow was:
Therefore, left with no other options, it was decided that; It MUST be hidden from view. This was our common enemy's only choice. They could not remove the predictability of this chain of events, so they attempted to effectively 'remove' Charles Richet, to 'memory hole' his discovery. This is why my book had to be, and was, banned by Amazon. My guess is my book was probably noticed after a prominent journalist, named Eliz VanHamelin, published a two page article on it that catapulted the title to number one in Amazons social sciences category.
As a way to intentionally increase mortality, the reliability of this anaphylactic pattern was useful, but knowledge of it was evidence.
Because of what Richet concluded, and I repeated, and applied to present day, in a very clear concise way anyone can follow was:
Richet's findings definitively provide the one simple reason, (which is the reliability of that anaphylactic pattern), that is obvious to see and easy to confirm,
without any more vaccine experimentation…
That makes the whole concept of "vaccination as protection" clearly impossible,
AND
That repeated vaccinations are only capable of harm and nothing else.
That explain WHY a severe anaphylactic shock is NOT "rare and unusual" at all.
It is COMPLETELY PREDICTABLE.
Because it always happens, and that is KNOWN FACT!
PEOPLE AT THE TOP KNOW, that it is extremely likely that any vaccination
can cause death suddenly.
I CANNOT MAKE IT ANY MORE CLEAR:
POPULATION REDUCTION THROUGH REPEATED VACCINATION
IS PREMEDITATED, INTENTIONAL, AND DELIBERATE!
CASE CLOSED!
This realization is rippling across a sea of audiences, right now,
and that must become a TSUNAMI,
or we are all DEAD.
without any more vaccine experimentation…
That makes the whole concept of "vaccination as protection" clearly impossible,
AND
That repeated vaccinations are only capable of harm and nothing else.
That explain WHY a severe anaphylactic shock is NOT "rare and unusual" at all.
It is COMPLETELY PREDICTABLE.
Because it always happens, and that is KNOWN FACT!
PEOPLE AT THE TOP KNOW, that it is extremely likely that any vaccination
can cause death suddenly.
I CANNOT MAKE IT ANY MORE CLEAR:
POPULATION REDUCTION THROUGH REPEATED VACCINATION
IS PREMEDITATED, INTENTIONAL, AND DELIBERATE!
CASE CLOSED!
This realization is rippling across a sea of audiences, right now,
and that must become a TSUNAMI,
or we are all DEAD.
Below are some of the quotes I thought were telling in more ways than one:
Main takeaways are in red.
If I disagree with any of them, my rebuttals follow the quote in blue
"I did not know that anaphylaxis is all allergy to foreign proteins. I thought it was only very an extremely severe reaction. Richet basically explains how any protein, if injected is detrimental to the body (and I believe to the microbiome)." -Sasha Latypova 2024
"I would agree with this - no "biologics" should ever be used based on his research and based on what he said in this speech." . - Sasha Latypova 2024
"In general, I think this self-non-self differentiation is a fundamental law of nature".
- Sasha Latypova 2024
"The protein info was interesting to me too, as a piece of evidence about how long the vaccinators have known that what they were doing was always harming the recipients, to a greater or lesser degree based on unpredictable aspects of the mix of stuff in the vial and the unique biology of the specific living organism. "
- Katherine Watt 2024
"And I was interested in Richet’s account of the etymology of the word anaphylaxis, as the opposite (ana) of protection (phylaxis) = deliberately rendering an organism hypersensitive." -Katherine Watt 2024
"Weaponized proteins." -Katherine Watt 2024
Main takeaways are in red.
If I disagree with any of them, my rebuttals follow the quote in blue
"I did not know that anaphylaxis is all allergy to foreign proteins. I thought it was only very an extremely severe reaction. Richet basically explains how any protein, if injected is detrimental to the body (and I believe to the microbiome)." -Sasha Latypova 2024
"I would agree with this - no "biologics" should ever be used based on his research and based on what he said in this speech." . - Sasha Latypova 2024
"In general, I think this self-non-self differentiation is a fundamental law of nature".
- Sasha Latypova 2024
"The protein info was interesting to me too, as a piece of evidence about how long the vaccinators have known that what they were doing was always harming the recipients, to a greater or lesser degree based on unpredictable aspects of the mix of stuff in the vial and the unique biology of the specific living organism. "
- Katherine Watt 2024
"And I was interested in Richet’s account of the etymology of the word anaphylaxis, as the opposite (ana) of protection (phylaxis) = deliberately rendering an organism hypersensitive." -Katherine Watt 2024
"Weaponized proteins." -Katherine Watt 2024
Quotes from my book included in various posts:
“Charles Richet’s speech, and all of his findings, are murder mystery clues that are now more than 108 years old and, from what I can see, either long forgotten or completely ignored. This is why Richet’s work provided a perfect way to plan billions of perfect murders. Until this very moment, no one has been knowledgeable or observant enough to put it all together, connect the dots, and come forward to expose this clever deception”
- John Lukach in 2021
“To my knowledge, I am the only person, outside of this eugenicist cabal, who has been able to recognize that anaphylaxis accurately describes exactly why ALL mRNA VACCINES WILL LEAVE ALL RECIPIENTS OF THEM EITHER PERMANENTLY DISABLED, TERMINALLY ILL, OR IMUNOCOMPROMISED AND SUSCEPTIBLE TO DEATH AT ANY TIME – especially the ones created to combat CV-19 and its mutations, which offer no viral immunity protection whatsoever” [because all mRNA are alien foreign protein sequences]
- John Lukach in 2021
“Richet’s experiments proved that hypersensitivity was an immune phenomenon. His work in anaphylaxis helped to elucidate diseases such as hay fever and asthma, as well as others that arise from massive allergic reactions. Further analysis by other researchers demonstrated the reasons for the dual toxic effects of ctinotoxin, immunogenicity and hyper-sensitizing at the same time. What Richet learned was how to induce allergic hypersensitivity. This hypersensitivity is permanent. This is the eugenicists’ weapon.”
- John Lukach in 2021
“Proteins are the building blocks of the body and the body creates them all the time as needed. Any protein created by the body is considered “self.” Any alien foreign protein that is mechanically introduced is considered by the body as “not self.” It is really that simple. Vaccine antigens are alien foreign proteins. This is why vaccines elicit an immune response. In fact, all attenuated vaccines contain one or more proteins. This is what constitutes the attenuated viral material, but repeatedly introducing the same foreign protein causes hypersensitivity and the result of that second exposure is anaphylaxis”
- John Lukach in 2021
“Charles Richet’s speech, and all of his findings, are murder mystery clues that are now more than 108 years old and, from what I can see, either long forgotten or completely ignored. This is why Richet’s work provided a perfect way to plan billions of perfect murders. Until this very moment, no one has been knowledgeable or observant enough to put it all together, connect the dots, and come forward to expose this clever deception”
- John Lukach in 2021
“To my knowledge, I am the only person, outside of this eugenicist cabal, who has been able to recognize that anaphylaxis accurately describes exactly why ALL mRNA VACCINES WILL LEAVE ALL RECIPIENTS OF THEM EITHER PERMANENTLY DISABLED, TERMINALLY ILL, OR IMUNOCOMPROMISED AND SUSCEPTIBLE TO DEATH AT ANY TIME – especially the ones created to combat CV-19 and its mutations, which offer no viral immunity protection whatsoever” [because all mRNA are alien foreign protein sequences]
- John Lukach in 2021
“Richet’s experiments proved that hypersensitivity was an immune phenomenon. His work in anaphylaxis helped to elucidate diseases such as hay fever and asthma, as well as others that arise from massive allergic reactions. Further analysis by other researchers demonstrated the reasons for the dual toxic effects of ctinotoxin, immunogenicity and hyper-sensitizing at the same time. What Richet learned was how to induce allergic hypersensitivity. This hypersensitivity is permanent. This is the eugenicists’ weapon.”
- John Lukach in 2021
“Proteins are the building blocks of the body and the body creates them all the time as needed. Any protein created by the body is considered “self.” Any alien foreign protein that is mechanically introduced is considered by the body as “not self.” It is really that simple. Vaccine antigens are alien foreign proteins. This is why vaccines elicit an immune response. In fact, all attenuated vaccines contain one or more proteins. This is what constitutes the attenuated viral material, but repeatedly introducing the same foreign protein causes hypersensitivity and the result of that second exposure is anaphylaxis”
- John Lukach in 2021
QUOTES BELOW ARE TAKEN FROM THIS ARTICLE POSTED BY SASHA LATYPOVA ON SEP 3:
https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/the-second-shot-or-what-do-vaccinators?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=870364&post_id=148130497&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=14wub3&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Please understand that I am COMPLETELY BANNED from using Substack, that it is an unusual form of censorship, in that that I have yet to find anyone else that has been banned by Substack in the same way I have been. Not only am I not allowed to comment on anything platform wide, I do not even have the basic functionality that the platform offers regular readers. Any comments I have ever left on any authors stack have been COMPLETELY PURGED. It is as if I never visited the Substack website EVER. I had but one prior block, that was limited to a single author's page, that was initiated before this platform-wide restriction happened. That block was a initiated by Dr. Ana Milhalcea after I left comments that contradicted some of her claims about EDTA chelation therapy, based on valid, factual information I confirmed with other doctors. Ana used to be a friend. We both attended MD4CE standing calls together. She sent me her books, I sent her mine. I have her email address, her personal cell number and her office number. I tried numerous times to reach her and discuss her reaction. No correspondence was ever answered, no explanation was ever given. I had extensive conversations with others on multiple stacks prior to this punishment, that was never explained by anyone. Those discussions were never nasty or abusive. Every thing I ever said there was completely professional and polite to a fault. Yet, even instances of COPIED COMMENTS, if they were originally left by me, HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY REMOVED! Thus, I am forced to express my opinions and rebuttals here.
"I would like to acknowledge that I knew not much about anaphylaxis other than it is a dangerous, life threatening allergic reaction." - Sasha Latypova
"I witnessed it in a local grocery store pharmacy that administered covid vaccines. A young apparently healthy man (in his 30s) dropped on the floor immediately after the injection and was lying there when I walked in. Everyone was behaving like it wasn’t a big deal. I wanted to be let off this planet." - Sasha Latypova
"Katherine Watt pointed me to Charles Richet’s Nobel Prize acceptance speech and to a couple of articles by this author (Northern Tracey links removed). I suggest you read them. The author was way ahead of all of us on this topic. "
- Sasha Latypova
NO DON’T! While Northern Tracey may have been ahead of Katherine and Sasha, I am STILL way ahead of everyone speaking, even now. The Northern Tracey article on Richet is extremely bad. It is a poorly assembled mash up that is confusing, misleading, and even incorrect. You will not be able to figure out who said what, which citations come from my book and which ones belong to the other biographer, and whoever this second author is we may never know, because he is not even identified in this. Someone may know, but I could not find it in this piece, and all throughout Northern Tracy is typing out her own mental gymnastics, which are very easy to confuse with either me or the other unnamed author, because all three sources are conflated into a disorderly puzzle. What's worse, is that many of the conclusions in that article are Northern Tracy's, not mine, and all of those are WRONG! -John Lukach (a bit disappointed that Sasha would suggest this)
"poisons made by people like Richet and now CDC/pharma. They do not transmit by air or casual contact.
No labs" - Sasha Latypova
"What becomes apparent from reviewing Richet’s 100+ year old research - the only thing you really need to worry about with respect to “viruses/poisons” is an injection of biologics (proteins) for the 2nd time within the anaphylaxis window that starts typically after 20 days and lasting anywhere from months to years to the lifetime." - Sasha Latypova
NO! This is inaccurate, and a horribly misleading statement! DON’T GET ANY.. because you may already have a hypersensitivity. You have no idea what proteins are in any injectable, not to mention they ALL contain as yet unidentified crystalloid structures as well that grow inside your blood. They have been seen and pointed out by countless other microscopists and doctors doing live blood analysis since the jabbing began. Sasha herself has also repeatedly made the point that vaccine manufacturers are not being held to proper standards, or even their own standards, in the manufacturing processes.
Additionally, Researchers from La Quinta Columna have been testing every kind of medical injectable out there, for years! And what they have been screaming about is this: They found that everything they looked at was adulterated, and using Ramen Spectrography to identify their contents, they determined they all contained graphene. Last I checked, which was about a year ago, they had managed to examine samples they obtained of over 750 commonly used products, all medical injectables, and THEY WERE ALL BAD.
-John Lukach 2024
This can happen in nature from the 2nd bite of an animal/insect carrying same biological toxin (a very low probability event nowadays), or from what is now forced by the government policy - from the needle wielded by a brainless money whore masquerading as a healthcare provider who is doing it for the 90th time in your or your child’s life “because science”. - Sasha Latypova
While mostly true, I would argue with what I think I understand Sasha's assertion, or assumption to be here. It sounds like she is saying there is a very low probability you may already have a hypersensitivity that could become triggered by an insect or animal bite, which can be set off by a vaccine, or vice versa. I would not automatically assume that is true just because you live in a first world country, and given the opportunity, I would remind her of this very strange thing going on that Bill Gates has been behind, that involves the release of millions of what Gates claims are "genetically modified mosquitoes". Gates, as usual, explains this effort to be a benevolent means of combating mosquito borne diseases that are rarely seen in the places he is doing this, but then I see reports of occurrences of those same diseases that cite numerous cases in cities like Boston.
I checked to see if the places these reports are coming from and the locations of GMO mosquitoes I could find line up. I could not find any examples where they did, but I don't trust Bill Gates and I don't believe anything he says about the things he spends money on. You will have to decide if these cases are even real, if he is dropping mosquitoes in populated areas to increase the chances a vaccinated person will go into anaphylactic shock and die as a result, or if these insects are really genetically modified, because I really don't know.
But what Bill Gates is, or is not doing, is neither here nor there, because there is nothing uncommon about bees and mosquitoes, or a bunch of other common stinging and biting creatures. What I can assure you of is this: If vaccines and other medical injectables are being laced with sensitizing proteins, that match any of the ones you are exposed to in a bite or sting, the effect could very well be the same. I think it likely that you and I will start noticing many more vaccinated people 'dying suddenly' this way, that previously had no idea they were, or had become, susceptible. -John Lukach 2024
https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/the-second-shot-or-what-do-vaccinators?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=870364&post_id=148130497&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=14wub3&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Please understand that I am COMPLETELY BANNED from using Substack, that it is an unusual form of censorship, in that that I have yet to find anyone else that has been banned by Substack in the same way I have been. Not only am I not allowed to comment on anything platform wide, I do not even have the basic functionality that the platform offers regular readers. Any comments I have ever left on any authors stack have been COMPLETELY PURGED. It is as if I never visited the Substack website EVER. I had but one prior block, that was limited to a single author's page, that was initiated before this platform-wide restriction happened. That block was a initiated by Dr. Ana Milhalcea after I left comments that contradicted some of her claims about EDTA chelation therapy, based on valid, factual information I confirmed with other doctors. Ana used to be a friend. We both attended MD4CE standing calls together. She sent me her books, I sent her mine. I have her email address, her personal cell number and her office number. I tried numerous times to reach her and discuss her reaction. No correspondence was ever answered, no explanation was ever given. I had extensive conversations with others on multiple stacks prior to this punishment, that was never explained by anyone. Those discussions were never nasty or abusive. Every thing I ever said there was completely professional and polite to a fault. Yet, even instances of COPIED COMMENTS, if they were originally left by me, HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY REMOVED! Thus, I am forced to express my opinions and rebuttals here.
"I would like to acknowledge that I knew not much about anaphylaxis other than it is a dangerous, life threatening allergic reaction." - Sasha Latypova
"I witnessed it in a local grocery store pharmacy that administered covid vaccines. A young apparently healthy man (in his 30s) dropped on the floor immediately after the injection and was lying there when I walked in. Everyone was behaving like it wasn’t a big deal. I wanted to be let off this planet." - Sasha Latypova
"Katherine Watt pointed me to Charles Richet’s Nobel Prize acceptance speech and to a couple of articles by this author (Northern Tracey links removed). I suggest you read them. The author was way ahead of all of us on this topic. "
- Sasha Latypova
NO DON’T! While Northern Tracey may have been ahead of Katherine and Sasha, I am STILL way ahead of everyone speaking, even now. The Northern Tracey article on Richet is extremely bad. It is a poorly assembled mash up that is confusing, misleading, and even incorrect. You will not be able to figure out who said what, which citations come from my book and which ones belong to the other biographer, and whoever this second author is we may never know, because he is not even identified in this. Someone may know, but I could not find it in this piece, and all throughout Northern Tracy is typing out her own mental gymnastics, which are very easy to confuse with either me or the other unnamed author, because all three sources are conflated into a disorderly puzzle. What's worse, is that many of the conclusions in that article are Northern Tracy's, not mine, and all of those are WRONG! -John Lukach (a bit disappointed that Sasha would suggest this)
"poisons made by people like Richet and now CDC/pharma. They do not transmit by air or casual contact.
No labs" - Sasha Latypova
"What becomes apparent from reviewing Richet’s 100+ year old research - the only thing you really need to worry about with respect to “viruses/poisons” is an injection of biologics (proteins) for the 2nd time within the anaphylaxis window that starts typically after 20 days and lasting anywhere from months to years to the lifetime." - Sasha Latypova
NO! This is inaccurate, and a horribly misleading statement! DON’T GET ANY.. because you may already have a hypersensitivity. You have no idea what proteins are in any injectable, not to mention they ALL contain as yet unidentified crystalloid structures as well that grow inside your blood. They have been seen and pointed out by countless other microscopists and doctors doing live blood analysis since the jabbing began. Sasha herself has also repeatedly made the point that vaccine manufacturers are not being held to proper standards, or even their own standards, in the manufacturing processes.
Additionally, Researchers from La Quinta Columna have been testing every kind of medical injectable out there, for years! And what they have been screaming about is this: They found that everything they looked at was adulterated, and using Ramen Spectrography to identify their contents, they determined they all contained graphene. Last I checked, which was about a year ago, they had managed to examine samples they obtained of over 750 commonly used products, all medical injectables, and THEY WERE ALL BAD.
-John Lukach 2024
This can happen in nature from the 2nd bite of an animal/insect carrying same biological toxin (a very low probability event nowadays), or from what is now forced by the government policy - from the needle wielded by a brainless money whore masquerading as a healthcare provider who is doing it for the 90th time in your or your child’s life “because science”. - Sasha Latypova
While mostly true, I would argue with what I think I understand Sasha's assertion, or assumption to be here. It sounds like she is saying there is a very low probability you may already have a hypersensitivity that could become triggered by an insect or animal bite, which can be set off by a vaccine, or vice versa. I would not automatically assume that is true just because you live in a first world country, and given the opportunity, I would remind her of this very strange thing going on that Bill Gates has been behind, that involves the release of millions of what Gates claims are "genetically modified mosquitoes". Gates, as usual, explains this effort to be a benevolent means of combating mosquito borne diseases that are rarely seen in the places he is doing this, but then I see reports of occurrences of those same diseases that cite numerous cases in cities like Boston.
I checked to see if the places these reports are coming from and the locations of GMO mosquitoes I could find line up. I could not find any examples where they did, but I don't trust Bill Gates and I don't believe anything he says about the things he spends money on. You will have to decide if these cases are even real, if he is dropping mosquitoes in populated areas to increase the chances a vaccinated person will go into anaphylactic shock and die as a result, or if these insects are really genetically modified, because I really don't know.
But what Bill Gates is, or is not doing, is neither here nor there, because there is nothing uncommon about bees and mosquitoes, or a bunch of other common stinging and biting creatures. What I can assure you of is this: If vaccines and other medical injectables are being laced with sensitizing proteins, that match any of the ones you are exposed to in a bite or sting, the effect could very well be the same. I think it likely that you and I will start noticing many more vaccinated people 'dying suddenly' this way, that previously had no idea they were, or had become, susceptible. -John Lukach 2024
I frequently attend standing calls held by Medical Doctors of Covid Ethics International. I have a well established reputation amongst the seventy or so regular attendees on these calls, as a valuable contributor.
I recently attended a call in which a trauma surgeon from United Kingdom gave a presentation which was about the view from his chair of what went on during the pandemic.
Before the recording started I had an opportunity to explain everything, all of this, to him and all the attendees present before he began his presentation.
As you might expect, this presentation was a recollection of how everyone involved, himself included, were caught up in what I would describe as a ScoobyDoo mystery in which the old man in the mask wasn't even wearing one. It wasn't clear to me at the time if what I was hearing was a case of vaccine blindness or fact avoidance, but either way, they were all searching like detectives for a reason that would explain all the death they saw, all the while failing to notice, as a good detective would, what they all had in common. They considered every possible cause and factor except the most obvious one: They were all vaccinated.
In the question and answer period that followed I could tell the doctor was monitoring the activity and sentiments expressed in the chat log that everyone participates in during the meeting. His eyes kept darting to the log display. I could tell he was affected by the angry comments, many of which were my own, and they were coming at him fast and furious.
Upon seeing this I reassured him in that log, that nobody present expected him to grovel or apologize, that we understood, and that nobody present was blaming him personally. But by the same token, what we wanted to hear, was him explicitly state that a hard lesson was learned. And that he would never forget it.
We never got exactly that, but I think he understood.
I only mention what took place on this call to offer you a suggestion, not to beat up any more on the surgeon, who I believe is now aware of the nature of his mistakes then. I appeared to me that his reason for being there at all, giving this presentation, was his way of explaining what occurred. I think it possible this was his way of atoning for those mistakes -- of implying that such mistakes would not happen again while he was on watch.
I had the last question.
I gave him my book, 'Covid-19 Vaccines and Induced Anaphylaxis' and the important parts of this very article, and I said to him directly:
Now that you have this information, now that you understand how valuable it is:
I recently attended a call in which a trauma surgeon from United Kingdom gave a presentation which was about the view from his chair of what went on during the pandemic.
Before the recording started I had an opportunity to explain everything, all of this, to him and all the attendees present before he began his presentation.
As you might expect, this presentation was a recollection of how everyone involved, himself included, were caught up in what I would describe as a ScoobyDoo mystery in which the old man in the mask wasn't even wearing one. It wasn't clear to me at the time if what I was hearing was a case of vaccine blindness or fact avoidance, but either way, they were all searching like detectives for a reason that would explain all the death they saw, all the while failing to notice, as a good detective would, what they all had in common. They considered every possible cause and factor except the most obvious one: They were all vaccinated.
In the question and answer period that followed I could tell the doctor was monitoring the activity and sentiments expressed in the chat log that everyone participates in during the meeting. His eyes kept darting to the log display. I could tell he was affected by the angry comments, many of which were my own, and they were coming at him fast and furious.
Upon seeing this I reassured him in that log, that nobody present expected him to grovel or apologize, that we understood, and that nobody present was blaming him personally. But by the same token, what we wanted to hear, was him explicitly state that a hard lesson was learned. And that he would never forget it.
We never got exactly that, but I think he understood.
I only mention what took place on this call to offer you a suggestion, not to beat up any more on the surgeon, who I believe is now aware of the nature of his mistakes then. I appeared to me that his reason for being there at all, giving this presentation, was his way of explaining what occurred. I think it possible this was his way of atoning for those mistakes -- of implying that such mistakes would not happen again while he was on watch.
I had the last question.
I gave him my book, 'Covid-19 Vaccines and Induced Anaphylaxis' and the important parts of this very article, and I said to him directly:
Now that you have this information, now that you understand how valuable it is:
WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WITH IT?
The poor guy was speechless. I floored him with that question, and I could tell that, at that moment, he had no idea. I let him off the hook, because duty called and he had to get back to doing his job. But later on I emailed him with a few suggestions. I advised him to share this with his colleagues, that he organize them, and that they band together to defeat the pressure placed on them by medical boards and administrations that keep them all in line by threatening them with losing their livelihoods.
While the meeting was going on, one of the things I shared in the chat log was an observation that I have always thought odd. That despite all the time doctors in hospital settings spend with each other, it seems to me a strange thing, that no camaraderie develops. One would think that an impossible thing. Nobody commented on that observation. But it must be true, because they live and conduct themselves in fear of repercussions that are swift and decisive whenever they question anything.
What this doctor did freely admit, was that they are all trained to not question what they are taught, that to do so is death for them. I challenge that assumption, and I think all doctors should challenge it as well. That is a decision I would hope many of them will make in the days ahead, and I hope they decide it to be the MOST important ethical responsibility they have, and something they are honor bound to do.
While the meeting was going on, one of the things I shared in the chat log was an observation that I have always thought odd. That despite all the time doctors in hospital settings spend with each other, it seems to me a strange thing, that no camaraderie develops. One would think that an impossible thing. Nobody commented on that observation. But it must be true, because they live and conduct themselves in fear of repercussions that are swift and decisive whenever they question anything.
What this doctor did freely admit, was that they are all trained to not question what they are taught, that to do so is death for them. I challenge that assumption, and I think all doctors should challenge it as well. That is a decision I would hope many of them will make in the days ahead, and I hope they decide it to be the MOST important ethical responsibility they have, and something they are honor bound to do.
I credit this last bit to my good friend, Gordon Groves, who brought this to my attention, and who was kicked off a livestream given by "Fake Jane"
for leaving this comment about the last person
to be awarded the Nobel Prize:
"Compare [Charles Richet]with the Nobel Prize given to Drew Weissman for Covid 19 vaccines:"
Drew Weissman
The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2023
Born: 7 September 1959, Lexington, MA, USA
Affiliation at the time of the award: Penn Institute for RNA Innovations, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Prize motivation: “for their discoveries concerning nucleoside base modifications that enabled the development of effective mRNA vaccines against COVID-19”
Work: A vaccine prevents diseases by stimulating the body's immune system to develop a defense against the infectious agent. One type of vaccine uses mRNA, which transfers genetic information from DNA to stimulate protein production. In 2005, Drew Weissman and Katalin Karikó discovered that certain modifications of the building blocks of RNA prevented unwanted inflammatory reactions and increased the production of desired proteins. The discovery laid the foundation for effective mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 during the pandemic that began in early 2020.
"This is the exact opposite of what Richet said in 1913, but go ahead and give the same prize to a murderer and liar. All Hail The New World Order !!!"
Weissman could not possibly have done this. The prize motivations section even uses the word "effective" in its description of vaccines. Gordon is exactly correct to point out this debasement of the Nobel Prize and the corruption within the Nobel selection committee. Honoring Weissman with the Nobel on this basis, was blatantly FRAUD.
Weissman was given that award to create a fallback position that could be utilized should people begin to re-discover Charles Richet. They may say he was wrong, that the Nobel committee back then made an error, or they may double down and say Drew Weissman proved Richet wrong.
None of that matters. We see what they have done here. They cannot prove it. Drew Weissman cannot prove it. They lose.
Game, Set, Match.
In my follow-up email to the trauma surgeon I told him what I would do is challenge that award, and I reminded him that he now had everything he would need to mount a challenge and succeed, because Drew would not be able to prove his case and be worthy of it.
I suggested the possibility that if he was ballsy enough to do such a thing, maybe the Nobel committee would have no other option that to let him hang onto it.
I told him I would check up on him in a few months to see what, if any, efforts he had made, and to get an answer to my original question that he could not give me before:
I suggested the possibility that if he was ballsy enough to do such a thing, maybe the Nobel committee would have no other option that to let him hang onto it.
I told him I would check up on him in a few months to see what, if any, efforts he had made, and to get an answer to my original question that he could not give me before:
WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO WITH IT?
I closed the email with this: "Don't make me swim over there and kick your ass!"
This is what I suggest you should do with every doctor you run into. Provide them with this article, a copy of or link to my book "Covid-19 Vaccines and Induced Anaphylaxis" and demand to know what they intend to do to protect you. Don't let them squirm out of their obligation, out of their oath, to:
This is what I suggest you should do with every doctor you run into. Provide them with this article, a copy of or link to my book "Covid-19 Vaccines and Induced Anaphylaxis" and demand to know what they intend to do to protect you. Don't let them squirm out of their obligation, out of their oath, to:
DO NO HARM!
| covid-19_vaccines_and_induced_anaphylaxis_-_final.pdf |
Thank you all, for reading, for acting, and most of all, for refusing to allow this to continue.
Be Well;
John Lukach
Be Well;
John Lukach
RSS Feed