And the Nobel Prize Goes to...

Two Non-Discoverers of a Technology Mis-Used to Make the Worst 'Vaccines' in History

It has been two years, two months, and nine days (or 801 total days) since the administration of my employer, the University of Guelph, banned me from accessing my office and laboratory.

- B. Bridle -

Update: I have been contacted by people who lost faith in the Nobel Prize long ago. I have to admit to some naïveté in the field of medical history. Out of fairness, there were some major blunders prior to this one. They include the Nobel Prize being awarded to António Egas Moniz in 1949 for developing frontal lobotomies, and to Barack Obama for "peace".

It has just been announced that the 2023 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine has been jointly awarded to Drs. Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman. The recognition was made “for their discoveries concerning nucleoside base modifications that enabled the development of effective mRNA vaccines against COVID-19”.

This is a tragedy for at least three reasons:

1. The modified RNA shots have not only proven to be ineffective, ever-accumulating data suggest they may have predisposed people who took them to getting COVID-19.

2. The nucleoside modifications for which the award was given are responsible for the modified RNAs from these shots being found in the body for many weeks and even months post-injection. We were publicly guaranteed that these modified RNAs would not be found in the body beyond approximately 36-48 hours, because longer than that could be dangerous. For goodness sake, these modified RNAs are even being inadvertently transferred to breastfeeding babies via their shedding in mothers milk. So, a dangerous modification that ultimately caused all people pushing the public health narrative to be proven liars is worthy of an award?!?

3. Dr. Robert Malone is demonstrably (via patents and publications) an original inventor of the foundational technology used to make the COVID-19 shots. It is strange that tweaking of the technology in a harmful way was recognized over the foundational technology itself. It seems that Dr. Malone may have been overlooked due to political reasons, which should never play a role in an award for scientific research. Dr. Malone does not consider the current modified RNA shots to be effective, nor particularly safe. So, his name would not fit well alongside an award declaration stating the COVID-19 shots are “effective”. I did note that the award selection committee dropped the term “safe” from the mantra used to describe the shots.

One of the craziest things about this announcement is the following image that was presented to highlight “Methods for vaccine production before the COVID-19 pandemic“….

…if anything, this illustration reminds me of how much better the traditional technologies were compared to modified RNA shots. With more traditional vaccines, such as those recommended before a person goes on vacation to an exotic location where a unique pathogen is endemic:

• A person would be protected from getting the disease

• A person would be protected from transmitting the causative agent of the disease to others

• A person did not need everyone around them to take the shot to be personally protected

• A medical professional would administer the vaccine and then wish the person well on their vacation; they would not tell the person to stay away from the ‘danger zone’/vacation destination

• The same medical professional would have no concerns about the person returning home because they would have confidence that the agent of the exotic disease would not be brought back

• The vaccine would have undergone at least a decade of clinical trial testing prior to public use, so its safety profile (including long-term) would be better defined than a technology rolled out after one year

• A single shot (at most two) could provide life-long protection (against disease and transmission)

So, I must be missing something. If it were me and I felt compelled to give an award for a vaccine technology and I was comparing the performance of modified RNA shots versus traditional technologies, it would be a no-contest. The traditional technologies would win hands down.

The day the Nobel prize gets awarded for a medical technology that has dramatically underperformed and possibly backfired, and that still has not undergone full and proper clinical trial testing, is the day that I loose all respect for the once noble award.

Sadly, that day has come. The Nobel prize has been demoted to a mere tool for promoting propaganda.

---