RE: Mandatory vaccination - before its too late.
This is absolutely correct.
Shoot, shovel and shut up OR LOSE EVERYTHING
That is the law of the land.
Unfortunately, vaccination data has already been corrupted.
Further, now that there is enough anti-vaxxers, they are paying for labs to test vaccines, and they are finding things in there that...
Cause Cancer.
Not, might cause cancer stuff, but will cause cancer in about 1 in 2.
But, you have to be reading up on the latest cancer cures and cancer research NOT FUNDED BY THE NCI (you know, the doctors who are committing suicide at every increasing rates)
Heavy metals that should not be there.
Contaminants that should not be there. (the only way they could get in there is someone put them in there)
The vaccine industry is about to be sued into the stone age.
This was a very good article.
And can be applied to the entirety of the law.
Laws of the future will take this push/pull mechanism into account.
I'm not at all saying that the results are tarnished in any way... but anti-vaxxers paying for lab tests is just the other side of the same coin. Most studies can be done in such a way to prove the points that the payer wants to prove....
Truly what is needed is completely independent, peer-reviewed and easily replicatable research that can prove it one way or another (again, I'm not saying the research you mention doesn't fit that criteria, I just want to point out that any special interest group paying for lab research is troubling).
i can understand your theory. If you expect one group to shade things one way, you could expect an opposing group to shade things the other.
However, you missed what i said.
The anti-vaxxers are not paying for someone to do a study, they are paying for someone to find out what is in the vaccine.
And, to give an example, if you were testing treated water, you would expect to find traces of toilet paper.
However, if you were testing well water, and you found toilet paper in it, what are your conclusions?
That is the kind of things they are finding in vaccines.
Now, would you take a shot that said, "Warning, this substance is known to cause cancer"?
Such ingredients shouldn't be used in a shot.
And peer-reviewed is just a group of people that all agree with each other. To get into the group you have to agree with the group.
And since all this group gets paid by Big-pharma, you can't ask for peer review of anything that opposes big pharma.
Or, in other words, what we are now finding is, it is no longer this vaccine causes autism.
It is...
This vaccine was designed to cause autism and cancer and many other medical problems.
Immunity is a very complex super system of our body. And our science is not even close to a good understanding of how it works.
Guys it really isnt that complex nor it it rocket science. It's just about reading the inserts and doing a bit of research and some critical thinking.
This is the current vaccine schedule in NSW
For example let's look at INFANRIX HEXA
INFANRIX HEXA
To be administered at 6 weeks old as per NSW immunisation schedule.
Insert link here.
https://au.gsk.com/en-au/products/our-prescription-medicines-and-vaccines/vaccines/infanrix-hexa/
At pages 4 & 5 you will see the list of ingredients.
Lots of ingredients to look at here but I'll zero in on FORMALDEHYDE.
According to this.
https://www.publichealth.org/public-awareness/understanding-vaccines/goes-vaccine/
Formaldehyde
Why is it used? Formaldehyde has been used for decades in vaccines to inactivate viruses and detoxify bacterial toxins, ensuring they don’t result in sickness when injected.
Health concerns? The U.S. EPA classifies formaldehyde as a carcinogen, as does the International Agency for Cancer Research and the National Toxicology Program. Additionally, several studies have since linked strong, long-term formaldehyde exposure to certain types of cancer.
Is it safe? The potential for harm depends on the amount. Formaldehyde is always present in the human body as part of our natural metabolic process, but long-term exposure to high amounts can overwhelm our system and be harmful. Fortunately, the amount of formaldehyde found in vaccines is very small, most of it being diluted down to residual amounts during the manufacturing process. In fact, the FDA reports there is 50 to 70 times more formaldehyde present in an average newborn’s body than in a single dose of vaccine. In brief, current science shows formaldehyde in vaccines to be harmless.
Amount in vaccines? The highest amount of formaldehyde present in any vaccine is .02 mg per dose. An average two-month-old baby would have around 1.1 mg of formaldehyde circulating in their body, with higher naturally-occurring amounts for older children.
Now .....
Clearly they know long term exposure to FORMALDEHYDE is linked to cancer. Like regular boosts from 6 weeks to 4 years old "long term"?
They say the amount used in vaccines are small. Ok.. but where's the actual amount on the insert?
They say 2 month old babies would already have 1.1mg of FORMALDEHYDE in their body. So let's circle back. If it's known that long term exposure and increased amounts of FORMALDEHYDE causes cancer why keep using it in the vaccines? They know babies have a certain amount in their system so sure at 6 weeks old, let's just add more of that shit in?
And even so, as "small" amount as it is, if we go back to the schedule, just INFANRIX alone, there's 4 more instances where more FORMALDEHYDE will be injected in your child by the time its 4 years old. So were essentially topping up the amount of FORMALDEHYDE as the kid gets older? Keeping in mind the older the kid gets the more FORMALDEHYDE they reckon will be in their system already.
So what the actual?
My logic says to reduce the amount of FORMALDEHYDE in my child not increase it, no matter how "small" they say the amount is.
I haven't even looked at the other vaccine inserts yet. There's a very real possibility that each vaccine listed on the schedule could contain FORMALDEHYDE.
Posted using Partiko Android