RE: Investigating the truth behind @steemtruth’s “truth” - Part 1: Vaccines do not stop desease?
What is a toxic dose ?
Dr. Haley (Toxicologist) declines to state a toxic level of mercury because patients differ in their ability to detoxify and excrete the mercury. Also, many
factors synergistically increase the toxicity of a given level.
Example
Antibiotics.
Both ampicillin and tetracycline have been shown to enhance
the neuron-killing effect of thimerosal, perhaps by enhancing its delivery to specific sites.
"combination of substances in toxicology can be greater than the sum of its parts. "With lead and mercury, for instance, a toxicity rating of 1 for each mercury and lead equals not 2, but 60 when combined."---Hal Huggins
Boyd Haley, Ph.D., Professor and Chair of the Chemistry Department, University of Kentucky discusses the issue of testosterone and mercury:
"One of the conundrums of autism is the 4:1 ratio of boys to girls that get the disease. We therefore decided to test the effects of both female and male hormones on the neurotoxicity of thimerosal. The results were eye-opening. For example, 50 nanomolar thimerosal causes less than 5% neuron death within the first three hours incubation and 1 micromolar testosterone causes no significant death within this time frame. However, mix these two together and 100% neuron death was observed at the earliest time point checked. This represents a severe enhancement of thimerosal toxicity."
A good example demonstrating 'synergistic toxicity' is a 1978 study on mice (Shubert et al. Combined Effects in Toxicology – A Rapid systematic Testing Procedure: Cadmium, Mercury & Lead. J. of Toxicology & Environmental Health 4:763, 1978). The study took the amount of mercury salt that kills 1 in 100 mice and 1/20th of the amount of lead salt that kills 1 in 100 mice. When these amounts of mercury salt and lead salt were administered, the synergistic toxicity of these two toxins killed 100 in 100 mice:
If Additive toxicity, one would expect 1 + 0.05 = 1.05 mice to die (1 or 2)
With Synergistic toxicity, the results were: 1 + 0.05 = 100 mice died
MY Question is where are these studies on combining vaccines for this mandated schedule? Not to mention many other factors like MTHFR gene mutation and environmental factors. ?
Do you have any on this mandated schedule?
Just curious
I will deal with safety issues of vaccines in my answer to @steemtruth's third post, where he also adressed this.
This post here just targets his ridiculous statements that vaccines would not be working - which I have debunked as wrong, and I will debunk it again in my second post.
Feel free to ask again below that future third post.
I'm good
I have my proof
My doctors
Immunologists
Toxicologists
Virologists
Neurologists
My research
My proof
My journals
My own responsibilities
Thanks though :) have a great day
good for you, bad for my children who will eventually suffer from the ignorance that your cult is spreading via the herd immunity effect.
Lmao herd immunity I needed a good laugh and what a shame you are one of the ones that are suppose to protect the safety of our kids
If your kids get sick it is your fault !
Blame germs ?
Blame the toxic polluted body
That invited the germs a perfect home
Wow I'm amazed at the ignorance
Herding ignorance
Cults sacrifice animals glad you are a part of that
Abort more babies
And that's exactly the point where it's too much.
I accept your differing opinion.
I tolerate the circumstance that you don't seem able to write one coherent question at a time.
I am annoyed by you spamming the comment section of my post with ~ 20 long and hard to understand, more and more emotional comments...It is the try to silence reason with noise and besides, really bad manners, but I still tolerate that.
But I am not tolerating this kind of insult in my blog!
You crossed the line, you are muted.
Insulted ?
Getting nutritional advice from these doctors is like going to a French restaurant and asking for chow mein
Ugh
He can't handle the truth. LOL
A very noteworthy study was published in 2013, looking at baboons, which are susceptible and manifest whooping cough like humans do. In the study by Warfel, baboons who were either vaccinated or not vaccinated were later exposed to pertussis bacteria, something that cannot be done experimentally in humans (due to ethical considerations), but which yields very important data. Expectedly, the baboons that had never been infected got the cough and remained colonized with bacteria for a maximum of 38 days. Baboons that were previously vaccinated and immune vaccine-style, became colonized upon later exposure for a longer time than the naïve baboons; 42 days. However unvaccinated baboons that recovered naturally and were later exposed to the bacteria did not become colonized at all – zero days.
So, who is providing better herd immunity in the face of bacterial exposure? Vaccinated individuals who presume they are immune, yet remain asymptomatically colonized for 42 days spreading bacteria? Unvaccinated kids who get infected and remain colonized for 38 days? Or the naturally convalesced who are not able to be colonized and therefore do not spread bacteria at all upon re-exposure? Better still: natural convalescence makes for decades longer, solid immunity than vaccination.
http://www.pnas.org/content/111/2/787.abstract