You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: How the Measles Vaccination Program has Destroyed Herd Immunity
@canadian-coconut Now that is a good content with some shocking news for a father of two just like me. Thanks for sharing!
@canadian-coconut Now that is a good content with some shocking news for a father of two just like me. Thanks for sharing!
Please do look into it as deeply as you can. The pro-vaccination people are simply parroting what they've been told. They don't seem to think for themselves. Anyone with children have the motivation to learn everything they can. Blind obedience just won't do. @canadian-coconut blog has some of the best information that I've found collected in her blog.
@lifeworship @i-repost My kids are both immunized. Where I live it's one of the first things you need to do before your kids would be accepted into pre-school/nursery. To be honest my older son has a stronger immune than his younger brother who is still in the process of getting all the necessary injections.
You really should vaccinate your kids. @canadian-coconut isn't a health expert and likely hasn't even studied basic biology
^This is an unsubstantiated claim and not an argument. Please add to the quality of the conversation by at least making an argument for your claim substantiated with evidence and reason.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4160575/
This study was titled not for the faint hearted, because?
A. It demonstrates that making predictions based on antibody and antigen interactions is extremely hard to impossible to do.
B. Because the study focuses on the industrial integrity of antibody and antigen industry, and the standards and calibrations which are compromised by poor quality, the paper put it PBS, as it outlines study after study exemplifying the fail of commercial standard.
C.or blatantly states "To date, it is extremely rare for patterns of immuno-EM studies to be reported, but independent searches in the literature can be very useful to identify studies in which the same antibodies have already been used. Worryingly, it is also extremely unusual for companies to report results of peptide inhibition studies and sadly even rarer for them to report KD/KO data."
D. While the long road between antigen and antibody is a rocky one, more judicious use of specificity controls by commercial companies would be highly desirable for improving the reliability and usefulness of these powerful tools for cell biology and related disciplines. At least for EM some effective methods are now available for establishing quantitative estimates of labeling distributions, and for determining more accurately how much of the labeling is due to the interactions of the antibody with the intended target. Given the commercial importance of the market and the extent to which researchers are dependent on their products, it is now high time for the companies to put more effort in trying to ensure that more of the estimated 350,000 antibodies on the market do what they are claimed to do.
(ding ding ding, it's d all of the above, with the banger being that all those pictures of viruses isolated and presented as viruses don't exist, as just now we can establish some standards over how a piece of gold would look if attached to this peptide, or to this antigen, which is basically in it's infancy, yet we've been told their safe based on theory that hardly had evidence to back it up and mountains of evidence of it's "pitfalls")
http://neue-medizin.com/lanka2.htm
He denies HIV baah. I know you're pretty stupid, but really?
Actually terrain theory denies germ theory, pretty much why you cannot claim that "this is the hiv" virus is because these implications over here
http://virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/pp101basics.htm
So you're saying you don't believe in germ theory?
I don't take such maters on faith, I don't blindly fall for the appeal to authority of CDC and question everything.
It's a yes or no fam
Do you believe in germ theory?
Do you not understand what I said?
Wait sorry about that, I misspoke.
He denies the very existence of most viruses. Including Measles.
No, he denies the viruses being observed under electron microscopy, and that is evident by the limitations of electron microscopy and the time when viruses were claimed isolated, with polio being isolated in the early 1900, so no, he doesn't deny the existence of most viruses, he is saying those pictures people present as viruses aren't viruses, and we have no pictures of these viruses, and http://virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/pp101basics.htm that link explains why this is. If you look int you you will be hard pressed to disagree with his conclusion, since there is no evidence of such isolation and in turn observation by electron microscopy.
No, the man denies the existence of many viruses
Uh huh. He denies the existence of many viruses. I said that
Naturally if you were to look into something and find lies, and deceit and manufactured crap, you would deny the existence of those fabrications, would you not?