Our famous “viral immunologist” and nudger-in-chief on twitter, Dr Graham Bottley, put out this tweet this week using his apparent business account (which we have covered previously). It was a pretty straightforward challenge, and - unlike Graham’s tweets - every point made below is referenced with sources.
This is excellent!! One of the hardest questions for me to answer when attacked by family and friends was how these vaccines are any different from all the other ones we have taken. I used to just answer they are experimental and it’s new technology. This reply always fell on deaf ears.
This is the informed consent information everyone should have had access to before deciding to agree to be experimented on!!
Thank you so much for putting this paper together. I will be sharing with many!!!
Me too! That’s why I was able to remain unvaxxed. Despite all the pressure from family and friends!!! I actually had a choice! I got on the news in CA protesting with a sign. My body. My choice!!
Exactly Deb my body my choice we should Never give that up.
I can imagine a situation with a real threatening communicable disease, with an available 'cure' if its all legit then no one would need to be forced into it.
I think we would all take the rabies shot if we were bitten.
I have been reading tweets from people saying they can't sleep due to the fear of what the mRNA may be doing in their bodies. It breaks my heart, those poor people.
My doctor did reveal as much as she could in 10 minutes, in the privacy of the consulting rooms, including prophylaxis and early treatment. She said privately, she could speak the truth, but "out there" it was different. That was my last appointment with her, as she quit her practice to avoid the mandates. I miss having her as my doctor.
'Informed Consent' was 'cancelled' at the same time as Big Pharma applied for their 'vax' EMERGENCY USE APPROVAL (Licence to kill). It also coincided with the hiding and denigrating of pre-existing, proven anti-viral medicines like IVERMECTIN, HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE, etc, that, if the actually 'existed' the FDA could not have granted the EUA for the deadly injections.
Bloody hell, how can that guy be a doctor and still not see the blindingly obvious differences in the technologies. The risks both known and unknown associated with intracellular therapies. The bio-distribution difficulties associated with nonlipids and intramuscular injection. The ability to cross barriers traditionally not at risk of being breached. The uncontrollable dosage being produced which will vary widely from person to person.
He's a PhD as opposed to a medical doctor. Scientists now are using the titles "virologist" and "microbiologist" very loosely whereas most people would think these are medical doctors with expertise in those specialties, this is no longer the case. For instance a few of Graham's twitter followers call themselves "medical microbiologists" but are in fact technicians in the lab who put the samples in for testing.
Thank you for giving the "viral immunologists" and other sheep lords something to think about. And then forget all about it and stay in denial.
I'm a Finnish person whose profession isn't even near the injectables but during the 2.5+ yrs. I've learned more about them than I never wanted (and I can trust no doctor over here anymore, which I used to be able to do. Now it's easy to spot to most lunatic ones though, they're wearing masks).
I have a work in progress which is strongly related to ARK's latest article and it could be translated to "state as the misinformation superspreader". I'll use/translate parts of this and your earlier article about the cancer risk (Welcome to Gilead) but keep it simple enough (as I'm not a pro in this field and don't want to be the same as Botley but on the opposite side).
Thank you for everything you do to keep the world (that cares) informed!
PS. I'm no biologist*, nor a viral immunologist. Just a mouse with more than two cells and some experience and analytical skills from another field where a tiny mistake can kill masses (and has done so).
*) Besides that, I do know what a woman is and don't want their bodies and genetics messed with the "magical science sauce". Take care people, I love you as you are!
Great stuff. This article is deliberately technical as (1) I want them to know that I can prove that they are lying and (2) I want this to be a reference source.
If you want to translate this to layman's terminology it would be much appreciated, but all the references are here for you when you need them.
I've been trying to shoot down our NHS's misinformation on some Finnish forums but a more complete package is needed and posted in twitter in Finnish. I won't write anything that cannot be referenced and I'll point out to people that these are not patented as vaccines but experimental gene therapies (yet falsely marketed as vaccines).
The timing of your article was perfect and it provided even more ammo for my war against those who mislead people. I already knew about Röntgen et al. and how pseudouridine is not similar to uridine as they've told.
This is one of our NHS's (THL=department of health and wellbeing :D) lies to authority-trusting and unsuspecting Finnish people most of whom know nothing about the criminal past of pharma, nor about the role of money in medical research so they have had no reason not to trust our health authorities*:
"Because it is RNA, it cannot integrate into the DNA of the vaccinated cell. In other words, a mRNA vaccine cannot change human DNA. In addition, the RNA contained in the vaccine is quickly broken down in the body."
- I'll point to the 2 research papers that show how RNA translocates to the nucleus and to the Swedish In Vitro research with liver cells in order to show that this cannot be said with certainty. The "broken down quickly" is easily proven to be misinformation.
*) Health authorities, who have treated us well in the past but now the organizations were captured like in almost everywhere and proof of this is the lock-step ban of using of IVM or HCQ to treat those infected and they were banned by FIMEA, our national drug regulator. Only a small group of medical professionals are speaking out but they are labeled as "Russian misinformation", "US far-right propaganda" or "awful Fascist Canadian truckers who want people to die", etc.
So my focus will be to show people that several things that were not supposed to be possible are so, if they had been studied properly and not "at the speed of science".
It's quite easy to show people how these things do not prevent anything by showing these data (in another article) but they are so confused they'll only get angrier. I.e., there has been only little talk of the "mysterious" the sky high excess deaths (~20%!) that started right after they got the masses injected (same in DEN and NOR, which had the same protocols as FIN), see the graph below:
And the excess cannot be blamed on covid since reported covid deaths jumped high only after omicron surfaced (Nov of -21 when >80% of >17-year-olds here were 2x injected...):
The "vaccination" coverage proves how trusting and irrational fear-driven my fellow citizens were and still are as 2/3rd of the adult population is 3x injected and almost 90% took the initial 2 injections (translated into ENG by google):
Leaked EU-Pfizer agreement reveals cover-up of bacterial proteins, endotoxins, DNA, dsRNA, other contaminants and up to 50% truncated, modified, recombined, junk mRNA in the vaccine
They all claim "good manufacturing practices" compliance but they are contaminated with all kinds of garbage. QC may be an oxymoron when applied to pharmaceuticals.
I saw that the agilent curve. Not sure how to interpret. Are these mRNA fragments that can produce proteins or do they have ends missing and will fail to produce proteins?
We don't know. if you open the pdf you can see the breakdown of fragments by size and instead of that curve falling off in a regular smooth manner there are bumps at around 1890nt and 2932nt.
It is possible that there are two additional RNAs in there, and without sequencing nobody will know what they are.
Spike encoding mRNA could break at those locations. In which case my understanding is that no protein will be made. If broken strands can reattach randomly, then random variations of the spike protein can be produced.
This is almost like a drug manufacturer getting a prodrug to market by saying what it *should* metabolise into, without studying what it actually metabolises into.
They should never have been approved in the first place.
That question has been among my most serious concerns about this whole technology. Essentially this product manufactures itself in situ after administration.
When I read the Pfizer dossier filed with EMA, I couldn’t believe they’d been permitted to rise humans in a trial, let alone launch it.
Nobody knows what is encoded because the manufacturers have not even been required to demonstrate what is made. It’s literally a conspiracy because I know that we can’t know. It must be determined empirically.
It is my understanding that provided the start codon is intact, it’s possible that a nested series of polypeptides will be formed.
yes! What a seriously lame analogy. A seatbelt is something you can take off and walk away from with no evidence of it ever being across your body. Also being told 'it's just a little prick'. It's a 'little prick' in the way that a vasectomy is 'just a snip'. Actually, vasectomies are reversible...
Thank you for an excellent run dish of major differences.
I knew without much work that there was no way safety could have been determined let alone expected given the embarrassingly short developmental timeline.
A decade might have been enough though we are now certain that mRNA vaccines can never be safe enough for widespread public health applications especially if the alleged health risk varies tremendously. The risk / benefit even if they worked, which they don’t, would vary a thousand fold & possibility more.
What an appalling liar that fellow is. Nobody believes these are the same as previous vaccines.
1. Traditional vaccines deliver a unit dose of attenuated or killed pathogen. Essentially the dose is set.
2. Genetic vaccines theoretically contain a unit dose of genetic information. In practise, the makers are hopelessly unable to manufacture consistently & EMA arbitrarily lowered the acceptable amount of intact mRNA at the last minute to permit EUA. Subsequently independent examination has shown extraordinary variation in mRNA amounts in notionally the same vaccine. EVEN IF they’d managed to manufacture consistently, there’s a large difference between this & traditional vaccines. Some recipients efficiently take up the LNP-coated vaccine & transcribe it well & for extended periods of time. Others take it up poorly, and make lesser amounts of spike protein for a brief period. INEVITABLY recipients experience very large variation in exposure to antigen. This grossly impacts safety & is almost certainly the reason why there have been unprecedented numbers of AEs, SAEs & deaths. Deaths are commonly due to thromboembolic events, predicted by independent experts.
3. The uptake of LNP-coated mRNA is very different from uptake of traditional vaccines. This was also predicted not only by independent experts, but by the manufacturers own studies filed with regulators & accessible to the public under FOIA. Non-clinical studies showed accumulation of LNP into sensitive tissues including ovaries in all species tested, matching predictions made ten years earlier in peer reviewed journal articles, concluding that this formulation technology represented an unappreciated reproductive toxicity risk.
That’s just for starters. Anyone claiming these gene based agents are “identical” to traditional vaccines on safety are ignorant or lying.
Yes, all these are true. I did not include them specifically in the article because I only included referenced claims. However it can be inferred that all these things are true as a consequence of the claims referenced in the article.
Graham Bottley has spent his scientific career, for what it is, dedicated to the field of teaching flow cytometry. He has very little understanding of the implications of long lasting pseudouridylated RNA and the clinical consequences of novel drugs on a human population. He also is clearly lying about isolating a virus which needs BSL-3+ certification. If he isn't lying about that, there needs to be an urgent investigation by DEFRA
The short answer is: "Vaccines carry (weakened) pathogen by themselves. In contrast, novel genotoxic substances genetically transform healthy tissues of your internal organs into pathogen. This is the difference"
Let's also add that a mRNA transfection shares little in common with a natural infection which starts at the mucosa, stimulating a highly individual NK cell and T-cell activity and recognition of early expressed, functionally-constrained viral proteins (shared across similar viruses) displayed by infected cells which cascades (depending on severity) into B-cell activation (igG recall or igM) and finally linked recognition of B-cell with T-cells to solidify any new immune memory, if necessary. Hence, natural infections do not always present ANY or many antibodies in response to a coronavirus. The transfections on the other hand stimulate heaps of antigen specific antibodies (spike). This makes for a great selling point but is CONTRARY to the immune system's conservative approach to a highly mutable virus.
Thank you so much for posting the German investigator's brochure. It stated a lot of what I thought it would based on reading the Pfizer EMA leaks (which commented on a drug application rather than directly showing it). It has a lot of critical information in it that needs to be brought to public attention.
This is excellent!! One of the hardest questions for me to answer when attacked by family and friends was how these vaccines are any different from all the other ones we have taken. I used to just answer they are experimental and it’s new technology. This reply always fell on deaf ears.
This is the informed consent information everyone should have had access to before deciding to agree to be experimented on!!
Thank you so much for putting this paper together. I will be sharing with many!!!
"This is the informed consent information everyone should have had access to before deciding to agree to be experimented on" absolutely correct.
Some doctors, don't know percentage of course, probably quietly expressed reservations with trusted patients in the privacy of their rooms.
Outside of that they were coerced and cajoled along with the rest of us by the 'authorities'.
Big question of why. it looks obvious that there was coordination by Govt with Pharma companies to mislead and force this upon people.
Its criminal fraudulent behaviour, but by the time the truth all comes out, there will be little chance of us holding anyone to account.
I thank God I was out of the workforce at the time.
Me too! That’s why I was able to remain unvaxxed. Despite all the pressure from family and friends!!! I actually had a choice! I got on the news in CA protesting with a sign. My body. My choice!!
Exactly Deb my body my choice we should Never give that up.
I can imagine a situation with a real threatening communicable disease, with an available 'cure' if its all legit then no one would need to be forced into it.
I think we would all take the rabies shot if we were bitten.
I have been reading tweets from people saying they can't sleep due to the fear of what the mRNA may be doing in their bodies. It breaks my heart, those poor people.
I think half of us should choose not to get the rabies shot and then observe what happens over the decades.
My doctor did reveal as much as she could in 10 minutes, in the privacy of the consulting rooms, including prophylaxis and early treatment. She said privately, she could speak the truth, but "out there" it was different. That was my last appointment with her, as she quit her practice to avoid the mandates. I miss having her as my doctor.
Correct.
Amen and hallelujah
'Informed Consent' was 'cancelled' at the same time as Big Pharma applied for their 'vax' EMERGENCY USE APPROVAL (Licence to kill). It also coincided with the hiding and denigrating of pre-existing, proven anti-viral medicines like IVERMECTIN, HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE, etc, that, if the actually 'existed' the FDA could not have granted the EUA for the deadly injections.
Mick from Hooe (UK) Unjabbed to live longer.
Bloody hell, how can that guy be a doctor and still not see the blindingly obvious differences in the technologies. The risks both known and unknown associated with intracellular therapies. The bio-distribution difficulties associated with nonlipids and intramuscular injection. The ability to cross barriers traditionally not at risk of being breached. The uncontrollable dosage being produced which will vary widely from person to person.
Is he really a doctor and immunologist?
He's a PhD as opposed to a medical doctor. Scientists now are using the titles "virologist" and "microbiologist" very loosely whereas most people would think these are medical doctors with expertise in those specialties, this is no longer the case. For instance a few of Graham's twitter followers call themselves "medical microbiologists" but are in fact technicians in the lab who put the samples in for testing.
Aren't those people called Med Techs? Medical Technicians?
Ask them https://twitter.com/thesassymicrobe
or lab techs
My money is on the latter, based on Dr. Syed previous work…
Isnt that called misinformation?
I think he probably knows the science but also knows that non-science people would just take his words for it.
That's blatantly evil
Bloody brilliant :)
Thank you for giving the "viral immunologists" and other sheep lords something to think about. And then forget all about it and stay in denial.
I'm a Finnish person whose profession isn't even near the injectables but during the 2.5+ yrs. I've learned more about them than I never wanted (and I can trust no doctor over here anymore, which I used to be able to do. Now it's easy to spot to most lunatic ones though, they're wearing masks).
I have a work in progress which is strongly related to ARK's latest article and it could be translated to "state as the misinformation superspreader". I'll use/translate parts of this and your earlier article about the cancer risk (Welcome to Gilead) but keep it simple enough (as I'm not a pro in this field and don't want to be the same as Botley but on the opposite side).
You can see why I want to inform the people (who care) that they are being lied to by checking out the "covid vaccine FAQ" which our national health service (THL) spews out in three languages. See the English one here: https://thl.fi/en/web/infectious-diseases-and-vaccinations/what-s-new/coronavirus-covid-19-latest-updates/vaccines-and-coronavirus/mrna-vaccines-faq
Thank you for everything you do to keep the world (that cares) informed!
PS. I'm no biologist*, nor a viral immunologist. Just a mouse with more than two cells and some experience and analytical skills from another field where a tiny mistake can kill masses (and has done so).
*) Besides that, I do know what a woman is and don't want their bodies and genetics messed with the "magical science sauce". Take care people, I love you as you are!
Great stuff. This article is deliberately technical as (1) I want them to know that I can prove that they are lying and (2) I want this to be a reference source.
If you want to translate this to layman's terminology it would be much appreciated, but all the references are here for you when you need them.
I've been trying to shoot down our NHS's misinformation on some Finnish forums but a more complete package is needed and posted in twitter in Finnish. I won't write anything that cannot be referenced and I'll point out to people that these are not patented as vaccines but experimental gene therapies (yet falsely marketed as vaccines).
The timing of your article was perfect and it provided even more ammo for my war against those who mislead people. I already knew about Röntgen et al. and how pseudouridine is not similar to uridine as they've told.
This is one of our NHS's (THL=department of health and wellbeing :D) lies to authority-trusting and unsuspecting Finnish people most of whom know nothing about the criminal past of pharma, nor about the role of money in medical research so they have had no reason not to trust our health authorities*:
"Because it is RNA, it cannot integrate into the DNA of the vaccinated cell. In other words, a mRNA vaccine cannot change human DNA. In addition, the RNA contained in the vaccine is quickly broken down in the body."
- I'll point to the 2 research papers that show how RNA translocates to the nucleus and to the Swedish In Vitro research with liver cells in order to show that this cannot be said with certainty. The "broken down quickly" is easily proven to be misinformation.
*) Health authorities, who have treated us well in the past but now the organizations were captured like in almost everywhere and proof of this is the lock-step ban of using of IVM or HCQ to treat those infected and they were banned by FIMEA, our national drug regulator. Only a small group of medical professionals are speaking out but they are labeled as "Russian misinformation", "US far-right propaganda" or "awful Fascist Canadian truckers who want people to die", etc.
So my focus will be to show people that several things that were not supposed to be possible are so, if they had been studied properly and not "at the speed of science".
It's quite easy to show people how these things do not prevent anything by showing these data (in another article) but they are so confused they'll only get angrier. I.e., there has been only little talk of the "mysterious" the sky high excess deaths (~20%!) that started right after they got the masses injected (same in DEN and NOR, which had the same protocols as FIN), see the graph below:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-excess-deaths-covid?country=DNK~FIN~NOR
And the excess cannot be blamed on covid since reported covid deaths jumped high only after omicron surfaced (Nov of -21 when >80% of >17-year-olds here were 2x injected...):
https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&facet=none&pickerSort=desc&pickerMetric=new_cases_per_million&Metric=Confirmed+deaths&Interval=Cumulative&Relative+to+Population=true&Color+by+test+positivity=false&country=~FIN
The "vaccination" coverage proves how trusting and irrational fear-driven my fellow citizens were and still are as 2/3rd of the adult population is 3x injected and almost 90% took the initial 2 injections (translated into ENG by google):
https://www-thl-fi.translate.goog/episeuranta/rokotukset/koronarokotusten_edistyminen.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en
PS. I think the good people here would be interested in this (written October 24, 2022):
"Half of Virginia high school out sick due to flu-like symptoms" (What could be causing this...)
https://news.yahoo.com/half-virginia-high-school-sick-162621265.html
Traditional vaccines maim and kill. mRNA vaccines are way better at maiming and killing.
Vaccines and Biologics injury table based on mechanistic evidence – Feb 2020 Covering over 125 conditions
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2582634
Leaked EU-Pfizer agreement reveals cover-up of bacterial proteins, endotoxins, DNA, dsRNA, other contaminants and up to 50% truncated, modified, recombined, junk mRNA in the vaccine
https://vinuarumugham.substack.com/p/leaked-eu-pfizer-agreement-reveals
Good point, but it does appear that there is at least some QC with the trad-vaxes. Did you see that agilent curve?
They all claim "good manufacturing practices" compliance but they are contaminated with all kinds of garbage. QC may be an oxymoron when applied to pharmaceuticals.
I saw that the agilent curve. Not sure how to interpret. Are these mRNA fragments that can produce proteins or do they have ends missing and will fail to produce proteins?
We don't know. if you open the pdf you can see the breakdown of fragments by size and instead of that curve falling off in a regular smooth manner there are bumps at around 1890nt and 2932nt.
It is possible that there are two additional RNAs in there, and without sequencing nobody will know what they are.
Is it possible that those are the locations where breakage occurs most easily?
If that's true what the hell is it encoding?
Spike encoding mRNA could break at those locations. In which case my understanding is that no protein will be made. If broken strands can reattach randomly, then random variations of the spike protein can be produced.
This right here.
This is almost like a drug manufacturer getting a prodrug to market by saying what it *should* metabolise into, without studying what it actually metabolises into.
They should never have been approved in the first place.
That question has been among my most serious concerns about this whole technology. Essentially this product manufactures itself in situ after administration.
When I read the Pfizer dossier filed with EMA, I couldn’t believe they’d been permitted to rise humans in a trial, let alone launch it.
Nobody knows what is encoded because the manufacturers have not even been required to demonstrate what is made. It’s literally a conspiracy because I know that we can’t know. It must be determined empirically.
It is my understanding that provided the start codon is intact, it’s possible that a nested series of polypeptides will be formed.
And people want to compare this to seatbelts 🤦🏼♀️
yes! What a seriously lame analogy. A seatbelt is something you can take off and walk away from with no evidence of it ever being across your body. Also being told 'it's just a little prick'. It's a 'little prick' in the way that a vasectomy is 'just a snip'. Actually, vasectomies are reversible...
Thank you for an excellent run dish of major differences.
I knew without much work that there was no way safety could have been determined let alone expected given the embarrassingly short developmental timeline.
A decade might have been enough though we are now certain that mRNA vaccines can never be safe enough for widespread public health applications especially if the alleged health risk varies tremendously. The risk / benefit even if they worked, which they don’t, would vary a thousand fold & possibility more.
What an appalling liar that fellow is. Nobody believes these are the same as previous vaccines.
1. Traditional vaccines deliver a unit dose of attenuated or killed pathogen. Essentially the dose is set.
2. Genetic vaccines theoretically contain a unit dose of genetic information. In practise, the makers are hopelessly unable to manufacture consistently & EMA arbitrarily lowered the acceptable amount of intact mRNA at the last minute to permit EUA. Subsequently independent examination has shown extraordinary variation in mRNA amounts in notionally the same vaccine. EVEN IF they’d managed to manufacture consistently, there’s a large difference between this & traditional vaccines. Some recipients efficiently take up the LNP-coated vaccine & transcribe it well & for extended periods of time. Others take it up poorly, and make lesser amounts of spike protein for a brief period. INEVITABLY recipients experience very large variation in exposure to antigen. This grossly impacts safety & is almost certainly the reason why there have been unprecedented numbers of AEs, SAEs & deaths. Deaths are commonly due to thromboembolic events, predicted by independent experts.
3. The uptake of LNP-coated mRNA is very different from uptake of traditional vaccines. This was also predicted not only by independent experts, but by the manufacturers own studies filed with regulators & accessible to the public under FOIA. Non-clinical studies showed accumulation of LNP into sensitive tissues including ovaries in all species tested, matching predictions made ten years earlier in peer reviewed journal articles, concluding that this formulation technology represented an unappreciated reproductive toxicity risk.
That’s just for starters. Anyone claiming these gene based agents are “identical” to traditional vaccines on safety are ignorant or lying.
Dr Mike Yeadon
Yes, all these are true. I did not include them specifically in the article because I only included referenced claims. However it can be inferred that all these things are true as a consequence of the claims referenced in the article.
Graham Bottley has spent his scientific career, for what it is, dedicated to the field of teaching flow cytometry. He has very little understanding of the implications of long lasting pseudouridylated RNA and the clinical consequences of novel drugs on a human population. He also is clearly lying about isolating a virus which needs BSL-3+ certification. If he isn't lying about that, there needs to be an urgent investigation by DEFRA
OOF. The big guns are swinging and hitting hard here. Look forward to their reply... :~)
The question is, how are these liars and subverters brought to justice?
Where’s the “Fuck” button when you need it?
Great work Doc. A nice rebuttal to the mutton muppets… :~)
Thanks namesakeAnon
The short answer is: "Vaccines carry (weakened) pathogen by themselves. In contrast, novel genotoxic substances genetically transform healthy tissues of your internal organs into pathogen. This is the difference"
Let's also add that a mRNA transfection shares little in common with a natural infection which starts at the mucosa, stimulating a highly individual NK cell and T-cell activity and recognition of early expressed, functionally-constrained viral proteins (shared across similar viruses) displayed by infected cells which cascades (depending on severity) into B-cell activation (igG recall or igM) and finally linked recognition of B-cell with T-cells to solidify any new immune memory, if necessary. Hence, natural infections do not always present ANY or many antibodies in response to a coronavirus. The transfections on the other hand stimulate heaps of antigen specific antibodies (spike). This makes for a great selling point but is CONTRARY to the immune system's conservative approach to a highly mutable virus.
Agree! It's the difference between giving a man a fish vs teaching him to fish.
A slight suggestion to add to point 1: synthetic mrna that does not break down in the body like natural mrna does.
Great compilation!
A brilliant and much needed synthesis Arkmedic; we all benefit from your priceless work. Thank you.
Excellent list and I'll certainly be sharing it.
Thank you so much for posting the German investigator's brochure. It stated a lot of what I thought it would based on reading the Pfizer EMA leaks (which commented on a drug application rather than directly showing it). It has a lot of critical information in it that needs to be brought to public attention.
The short answer is they are not “vaccines”.
Time to stop calling them by that name.