Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated: Guess who is Sicker?

[netherfikk]

The scary part is that simple minded foold are literally killing their own children

[1714712858]

1714712858

[1714712858]

1714712858

[1714712858]

1714712858

[BADecker]

It's always easy to claim that someone didn't give proof, when there is plenty of proof out there and you just want to ignore it.
Arguments for vaccination source from scientists and physicians.
Arguments against vaccination source from conspiration theorists and fake news.
I won't dignify ungrounded claims with in-depth discussions and just hope you either take the right decisions for life and health and consequently vaccinate or that you are forced to do so, so that your children don't have to suffer your ignorance.

You don't seem to get it, do you! Robert Kennedy used a FOIA request to get copies the safety tests that are required by law. And they didn't give him even one, even though there were 30 years of tests that were supposed to have been done.

If they have the tests, and if they have the people who will stand up in court and swear to having done the tests, as well as the test reports being accurate, why didn't they provide even one, after 30 years of it being required?

Call it what you want. If you go along with them, that they don't have to supply safety test reports, especially when required by law, it's YOU who are the fake news provider.

Pop up a test, if you have any. There are a few out there. But the way the medical is handling it sheds a bad light on what they are doing. And a bad light in cases like this means a danger red light.

[BADecker]

Here's the problem. If vaccines are found to be dangerous, then the whole medical can be said to be dangerous. If the medical is shut down, the whole industry will lose millions of jobs. Such a loss as that will be dangerous for the whole country, kids and adults alike.

Therefore, it's in our best benefit to let our kids die, and for people to make their own choice about the medical, rather than let government choose safety for us... right?


Infant Vaccine Death Testimonies Mount As We Continue Dissolving The Illusions

We naturally have fear and a resistance to seeing the dark side of life. We seem to want to put off seeing the full extent of human depravity, even as the evidence mounts. But it is necessary in some measure to get a more balanced and informed picture of humanity as a whole.

If we are to awaken as a collective and move on to a higher lived expression of what it is to be human, it will be through having the courage to look squarely at what is actually happening in our world. This will help us connect to a greater understanding of the hidden system of control that has long been in place and has maintained the illusion I sometimes refer to as 'mainstream perception,' a more innocent and naive perspective on the world that continues to bestow authority over humanity to the global elite.

Infant Vaccine Deaths

There are few areas of human activity that trigger our resistance to seeing what is in plain sight as much as the way that modern vaccines are being administered in our world, especially in the face of renewed efforts from governments to enforce mandatory vaccination. It seems that as parents, we are being forced into making a choice. We can uphold the status quo, follow the simple industry mantra we have seen and heard thousands of times that 'vaccines are safe and effective,' and essentially keep our noses out of the business of trusted medical professionals. Or we can join a growing number of people that are no longer doing that, and begin to examine inconsistencies in the industry mantra based on mounting real-life evidence and scientific testimony of vaccine injury.

For some people, like myself, I have long questioned the nature and motives of our Western medical system, and this inquiry heightened into a sense of urgency regarding vaccines when my son was born. I read Suzanne Humphries' excellent book 'Dissolving Illusions,' among others. I made an informed decision not to have him vaccinated, and today he is a bright, energetic 5-year old boy with no health issues.

For others less fortunate, their first inkling of something being amiss with our medical system and specifically with vaccines was as a result of the heart-wrenching experience of seeing their beautiful, healthy child become ill and die right after having been administered a 'normal' array of vaccines.

I understand for many, it is difficult and painful to even read about these stories. At the same time, I would urge people who are uncertain about vaccine safety to consider looking into such stories and see what kind of conclusions you come to.

On his website entitled 'Stop Mandatory Vaccination,' activist Larry Cook works tirelessly to research and report on testimony and scientific evidence regarding the effects of vaccines. He has created this page that specifically brings together the many stories of infant vaccine deaths, and it certainly bears investigation. He urges people to proliferate these stories on social media, not because there might be a morbid fascination with these stories, but rather because the end goal is mass awareness of what is going on, which will enable us to end unsafe practices in our society that lead unnecessarily to injury and death. Another reason he is asking people to share these stories, it must be noted, is because like CE he is experiencing a high degree of censorship and reach limitation brought on by the social media giants.

Patterns Emerge

When one pays close attention to testimony such as these stories with an open mind, there are many similarities, and when we put these together, patterns inevitably begin to emerge which evokes a bigger picture of what is going on.

Sudden Death: Unlike most illnesses that lead to death that we are familiar with, where symptoms gradually worsen over long periods of time, these stories speak of an immediate reversal from perfect health to a sudden and shocking downward spiral of unexpected symptoms including unresponsiveness, seizures, screaming, head banging, loss of speech, etc. Isn't the most common-sense conclusion that this may have been caused by the known toxins that were injected into the infant only days earlier?

SIDS Diagnosis: Many parents were told that their infant had died of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome). For those unaware, SIDS is a made-up medical term that really means 'we don't know why your infant died.' In fact, according to the Mayo Clinic, 'Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) is the unexplained death, usually during sleep, of a seemingly healthy baby less than a year old.' How is this anything more than a contrivance used to absolve the medical industry of responsibility?

Other Questionable Diagnoses: Other diagnoses were that the infant died of 'natural causes' (as though there are any 'natural' causes for an infant to die), or in the case of Catie Clobes, her daughter Evee's death was ruled 'undetermined,' even after doctors agreed to look into all potential causes–but then didn't look into the impact of vaccines (see next).

Doctors Never Blame Vaccines: We see in story after story that doctors virtually never blame vaccines for an infant's death. It's not logical, but it is understandable when you look at the big picture. One reason doctors avoid blaming vaccines could include a fear of being sued, either as a result of their administration of the vaccines or the fact that they didn't properly warn parents of potential risks. In some cases, it may be that the doctor simply does not want to deal with the guilt, and will be willfully blind to the possibility that vaccines could cause damage, sometimes even mocking the parent for thinking such a thing. Again, in the case of Catie Clobes, the pathologist refused to test the role of the vaccines in Evee's death as Catie had requested, saying "It's not medically necessary, there is no medical reasoning, and it's not medically approved." Doctors and nurses involved are often tight-lipped, cold, and try to close inquiry down as quickly as possible.

Industry Never Admits Liability: In one story a nurse told a grieving mother about the 'Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System' (VAERS) and how she could sue for compensation, but the nurse told the mother she could get in trouble for telling her. Imagine! Doctors and nurses are perpetually denying the possibility that vaccines might have caused the fatality, under fear of reprisal. Those few doctors who are willing to back up a patient's suspicion that vaccines are the cause of damage can lead their patients to a successful award in the VAERS court, which has already paid out over $4 billion in settlements. Does $4 billion in settlements, where ill-equipped and grieving individuals take on a massive industry with top lawyers at their disposal and win, suggest that vaccines have been proven to be harmful? But get this–the court is set up as a firewall for the vaccine industry, which does not have to admit liability even if it is successfully concluded in the court that vaccines caused severe injury or death. The reason? It was argued that if the vaccine companies were liable for damage, the whole vaccine industry would be out of business. As if that should even matter when it comes to the health of our children.

EDIT: Vaccine Education Summit Sat Sept 28th, 2019, 8-5 pm @ Sheraton Crescent PHX - Advanced Ticket Sales - http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/264852-2019-07-19-vaccine-education-summit-sat-sept-28th-2019-8-5-pm.htm.

[tvbcof]

Why 'first day' injections are so critical.  A couple of hypothesese:

It used to be common medical sense that pregnant women were to take nothing.  To be fair, this was strong in my cohort which followed the thalidomide nightmare.  At that time and prior, though, doctors used to avoid giving shots to newborns.  The kidney clearing capacity is very low in newborns and increases rapidly.

In the mid 1980's (which so happens to be when pharma was given liability immunity for vaccines) they started giving Hep-B on the first day of life.  As and aside, it is Hep-B which was the early one to contain AAHSA (a type of aluminum adjuvant) and it was this one which has a history of being lied about on the ingredients with respect to the 'flavor' of aluminum particles used.

Firstly, I suggest that one reason for giving newborns a blast of mercury/aluminum/formaldehyde/etc directly into their bloodstream on the first day of life is that parents tend to notice regressions.  That is, if a baby is awake, crawling, babbling, etc before the vaccination and stops afterward, mothers who spend all day with the baby tend to notice it.  Doctors will tell the mother that she just didn't know their baby and because he, as a doctor, has medical training he understands her baby a lot better than she does.  Some mothers buy it and other's don't.  Anyway, blasting the kid full of neurotoxins before handing the kid off to mommy helps solve this problem.

Secondly I suggest that it is the fact that babies with their low kidney function is exactly why 'they' want to dose them up at that time.  The nanometer sized aluminum particles stick around longer and more of them get into the brain cells.  If one can also fuck up the (also very low) liver function with methyl alcohol in the Vitamin K shot, that helps as well.

[tvbcof]

Much is known with pretty good precision how vaccines cause neural system damage.  This paper ties together the various research which conclusively demonstrates a lot of this stuff, and also shows how the corp/gov pro-vax entities deceive using studies which are designed to fail.

It's a one to two hour read for people with some background in science or medicine.  Well worth the effort...especially if a person has kids, is going to have kids, or is slotted to be a victim of the up-coming 'Healthy People 2020' initiatives with forced vaccination for everyone.

  http://vaccinepapers.org/wp-content/uploads/Autism-and-aluminum-adjuvants-in-vaccines.pdf

This was actually written several years ago.  Just in the last few years more studies which validate these results and build on them have been performed.  Almost none of these studies are done in the United States, and most of them have been done with private funding.  When you damage enough people you are bound to impact some people with a combination of money and ethics.  That's an Achilles's Heel for most eugenics operations.

You will notice that some of the official pro-vax agency declarations will say 'we have no evidence' of negative impacts from vaccines.  That gives certain legal protections.  (Of course the mainstream media will flat out deny things but they don't need the same kinds of legal protections because they are fake news.)  They can only do this if they quash or reject certain studies or pretend not to know about them.  Recently they are not even getting papers 'retracted' which requires some vague justification.  Now, in their desperation, they are just getting journals to 'withdraw' papers without reason.

[wattcrypto]

I think we need to take into account the entire globe rather than just some subset in a sterile high income town in the US.

[TwitchySeal]

  http://vaccinepapers.org/wp-content/uploads/Autism-and-aluminum-adjuvants-in-vaccines.pdf

Whoever wrote the paper you linked forgot to put their name on it.

[tvbcof]

  http://vaccinepapers.org/wp-content/uploads/Autism-and-aluminum-adjuvants-in-vaccines.pdf

Whoever wrote the paper you linked forgot to put their name on it.

They didn't forget.  This is a scientist (fairly obviously) who works anonymously under the name 'vaccinepapers'.  Judging by the style I would say it is likely mostly one person.  The person describes why on their website http://www.vaccinepapers.org.

Working anonymously is not uncommon in this field.  On the other side, 'skeptical raptor' does it, and 'orac' (Dr. Gorski) did it for a while under a variety of personas (e.g., a teenage girl.)

There can be both good reasons and nefarious reasons for maintaining anonymity.  To me, the most important thing is the quality of the content.

[BADecker]

Details - http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/Article/264852-2019-07-19-vaccine-education-summit-sat-sept-28th-2019-8-5-pm.htm.

[BADecker]

They are even starting to admit that vaccine efficacy is fraudulent.


Pharma hack Paul Offit accidentally admits FDA's process for licensing vaccines is fraudulent

In a failed attempt at trying to dissuade educated parents against choosing to not have their children vaccinated based on antibody blood tests, Big Pharma hack Paul Offit has inadvertently admitted, on the record, that the federal government's official vaccine policies are fundamentally flawed, at best, and very likely scientifically fraudulent.

In a recent video published by the "Vaccine Education Center" at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP) where he works, Offit tries to make the case that antibody blood tests, which measure antibody levels as an indicator of immunity against disease, aren't medically useful. If this is the case, then everything that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) rely upon to create vaccine policy is also not medically useful, or accurate.

Using antibody blood tests to try to measure a protective immune response, in Offit's own words, is "not as easily done as you would think." And yet, the presence of antibodies in the blood has long been what government officials claim is, in fact, a valid indicator that a person is immune to disease – so which is it?

The answer is neither and both, depending upon what's trying to be accomplished. In Offit's case, the goal is to keep as many parents as possible on the vaccine train, which will ensure that vaccine manufacturers like himself continue to rake in massive profits. At the same time, Offit's very argument is invalidated by his own admissions towards this end, as he clearly states in the video that antibody titer does not necessarily correlate with immunity. Similarly, a lack of antibodies is not necessarily an indicator of a lack of immunity.

Using a measles outbreak that occurred during the late 1980s and early 1990s to try to make his point, Offit states in the video that, when looking back on this particular outbreak, it was discovered that "there were many people who had been vaccinated, but who didn't have antibodies against measles who were still protected." In other words, antibody tests aren't, in fact, a valid indicator of immunity, even though this is what the government uses as "evidence" that vaccines somehow work.

[BADecker]

Since this isn't safe, why would anyone think that vaccines or 5G are safe?


Prenatal Ultrasound--Not So Sound After All

Prenatal ultrasound is a taken-for-granted component of modern maternity care, to such an extent that most obstetrician-gynecologists find it impossible to practice their profession without it. American women now routinely undergo four to five ultrasounds per pregnancy. Despite the absence of demonstrated benefits, there is also a trend toward "new applications of ultrasound…at earlier stages in pregnancy" (p. 47), including Doppler fetal heart rate monitoring that magnifies the unborn baby's exposure manyfold.

A Scottish physician developed the first 2D ultrasound machine in the late 1950s. Intended for prenatal scanning as well as gynecological tumor diagnosis, the machine drew on the doctor's prior experience with military radar technology. Now, the latest growth sector in ultrasound technology is 3D imaging (which shows the baby's face) or 4D ultrasound that creates a "live video effect, like a movie"—luring parents into stockpiling "keepsake" footage of their baby's in utero facial expressions.

While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tells prospective parents that ultrasound exams provide "a valuable opportunity to view and hear the heartbeat of the fetus, bond with the unborn baby, and capture images to share with family and friends"—and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) denies any association between ultrasound and adverse maternal, fetal or neonatal outcomes—not everyone shares the agencies' complacency. In fact, two recent books make the opposite case. One author—backed up by over 1500 scientific citations—argues that prenatal ultrasound is so harmful to children that it "should be banned from obstetrics immediately." The other contends that the "subtle and not-so-subtle" biological effects of ultrasound "have set the human species on a tragic path" from which it may take generations to recover.

… a single exposure to ultrasound produced cellular and DNA damage similar to 250 chest x rays—and damage was permanent and heritable for ten generations and beyond.

Known but hidden risks

Few prospective parents realize that ultrasound technology is not just sound waves but is based on non-ionizing radiation. Other examples of man-made non-ionizing radiation include cell phones, cell towers, cordless phones, Wi-Fi and more. Although ionizing radiation (think X-rays) has the reputation of being more powerful, non-ionizing radiation is plenty capable of producing biological effects—including altering and damaging cells. In the mid-1980s, a best-selling doctor/author likened ultrasound to other "unproven" technologies "being sold to the public as being 'perfectly safe'" and scolded the medical profession for failing to take the "necessary steps to protect people against a malignant technology." Around the same time, the World Health Organization declared (in vain) that concerns about ultrasound's clinical efficacy and safety "do not allow a recommendation for routine screening."

According to the author of one of the recent ultrasound critiques, the technology causes far-reaching damage. Describing a series of studies published in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the author notes that "a single exposure to ultrasound produced cellular and DNA damage similar to 250 chest x rays"—and "[d]amage was permanent and heritable for ten generations and beyond." Forms of damage included "DNA shearing, single and double strand breaks, chromosome rearrangements and DNA uncoiling, deformities and mutations in offspring, as well as the complete deactivation of genetic material within sonicated cells."

Bombshell new video exposes horrifying crime of vaccine mandates… help this video go viral on Facebook

Even as the evil tech giants and deceptive mainstream media desperately try to censor any truthful information about vaccine ingredients and their health risks, a new video has just been posted that may turn the tables and awaken people to the truth.

Posted by GreenMedInfo, the new video unleashes an array of shocking, true facts about vaccines and how they systematically damage the health of children.

Watch it at this link on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/greenmedinfo/videos/2325821697679985/.

UPDATE: The video has now been posted on Brighteon as well:

https://www.brighteon.com/945074b3-520e-4edb-85fd-f52d782d3508

Every effort will be made to censor this video and block the channels that promote it. We have already been completely de-platformed by Facebook and all the other tech giants for daring to report the truth about the dangers of vaccines.

[BADecker]

Bump for awareness. Take a look at the google search results for vaccine dangers and you will see differing opinions on the safety of vaccines are hidden from view. If vaccines are so safe, why are search results being scrubbed?

So far DuckDuckGo - https://duckduckgo.com/ and Entire Web - https://www.entireweb.com/ are much better search engines for getting the rest of the info. Seems like StartPage caters to Google these days.

[tvbcof]

Bump for awareness. Take a look at the google search results for vaccine dangers and you will see differing opinions on the safety of vaccines are hidden from view. If vaccines are so safe, why are search results being scrubbed?

So far DuckDuckGo - https://duckduckgo.com/ and Entire Web - https://www.entireweb.com/ are much better search engines for getting the rest of the info. Seems like StartPage caters to Google these days.

It used to be that I mostly used to use DuckDuckGo for political reasons when I remembered to do so.  Now I use Google only for trivial crap.  It is basically useless for information on a growing list of topics.  For real research I pretty much always use DuckDuckGo.  Quite simply, it (and other's like it) are the only ones which work if one wishes to actually learn about the world.

For years I've understood the methods Google uses.   Machine learning algorithms to 'guide' people individually for the purposes of misinforming, indoctrinating, and what-not.  For that reason I never subscribe to channels, 'like' videos, or follow the 'recommended for you' links on Jewtube.  I also rarely comment because I'm regularly shadow-banned, and have been for at least 5 years or so...this is not a new thing even if some people are just now figuring it out.

On Jewtube I keep a list of channels I respect using the 'featured channels' widget and scan through them occasionally.  A fair number of the content providers I've found worth 'following' have been completely scrubbed by now.

Google is even more useless than the 'fake news' mainstream media when it comes to actually learning things, and vastly more pernicious.

[moonhub]

Oh, these opponents of vaccination. They were given a vaccine, no, they are looking for conspiracy theories.

[tvbcof]

Oh, these opponents of vaccination. They were given a vaccine, no, they are looking for conspiracy theories.

Looking at the science.  It becomes impossible to not see 'conspiracies when doing this.  At least it does for someone with a basic competency in science and analysis.

[moonhub]

Oh, these opponents of vaccination. They were given a vaccine, no, they are looking for conspiracy theories.

Looking at the science.  It becomes impossible to not see 'conspiracies when doing this.  At least it does for someone with a basic competency in science and analysis.

There are some pharmaceutical companies that are trying to trick people, but they are a minority.

[tvbcof]

Oh, these opponents of vaccination. They were given a vaccine, no, they are looking for conspiracy theories.

Looking at the science.  It becomes impossible to not see 'conspiracies when doing this.  At least it does for someone with a basic competency in science and analysis.

There are some pharmaceutical companies that are trying to trick people, but they are a minority.

Is that based information that your are somehow privy to, or is it just your suspicion?

It actually is a fairly handy supposition for the 'herd' to have.  I mean, if one of the 'pharmaceutical companies' gets caught in some sort of malfeasance, people who are conditioned with this supposition will write it off to 'one of the few bad apples' and it won't shake confidence in the larger system.

It is also suspiciously convenient that people simply don't remember the instances of malfeasance which happened more than a few weeks prior.

[moonhub]

Oh, these opponents of vaccination. They were given a vaccine, no, they are looking for conspiracy theories.

Looking at the science.  It becomes impossible to not see 'conspiracies when doing this.  At least it does for someone with a basic competency in science and analysis.

There are some pharmaceutical companies that are trying to trick people, but they are a minority.

Is that based information that your are somehow privy to, or is it just your suspicion?

It actually is a fairly handy supposition for the 'herd' to have.  I mean, if one of the 'pharmaceutical companies' gets caught in some sort of malfeasance, people who are conditioned with this supposition will write it off to 'one of the few bad apples' and it won't shake confidence in the larger system.

It is also suspiciously convenient that people simply don't remember the instances of malfeasance which happened more than a few weeks prior.

People’s anger is not long, yes. Here you are undoubtedly right, and I am inclined to doubt everything about the general picture, but I have no good reason to believe that there is some kind of big conspiracy.

[BADecker]

Oh, these opponents of vaccination. They were given a vaccine, no, they are looking for conspiracy theories.

Looking at the science.  It becomes impossible to not see 'conspiracies when doing this.  At least it does for someone with a basic competency in science and analysis.

There are some pharmaceutical companies that are trying to trick people, but they are a minority.

Is that based information that your are somehow privy to, or is it just your suspicion?

It actually is a fairly handy supposition for the 'herd' to have.  I mean, if one of the 'pharmaceutical companies' gets caught in some sort of malfeasance, people who are conditioned with this supposition will write it off to 'one of the few bad apples' and it won't shake confidence in the larger system.

It is also suspiciously convenient that people simply don't remember the instances of malfeasance which happened more than a few weeks prior.

People’s anger is not long, yes. Here you are undoubtedly right, and I am inclined to doubt everything about the general picture, but I have no good reason to believe that there is some kind of big conspiracy.

If you get together with a friend, and decide to start a business, that is a conspiracy of sorts. Big Pharma is simply business.

[moonhub]

Oh, these opponents of vaccination. They were given a vaccine, no, they are looking for conspiracy theories.

Looking at the science.  It becomes impossible to not see 'conspiracies when doing this.  At least it does for someone with a basic competency in science and analysis.

There are some pharmaceutical companies that are trying to trick people, but they are a minority.

Is that based information that your are somehow privy to, or is it just your suspicion?

It actually is a fairly handy supposition for the 'herd' to have.  I mean, if one of the 'pharmaceutical companies' gets caught in some sort of malfeasance, people who are conditioned with this supposition will write it off to 'one of the few bad apples' and it won't shake confidence in the larger system.

It is also suspiciously convenient that people simply don't remember the instances of malfeasance which happened more than a few weeks prior.

People’s anger is not long, yes. Here you are undoubtedly right, and I am inclined to doubt everything about the general picture, but I have no good reason to believe that there is some kind of big conspiracy.

If you get together with a friend, and decide to start a business, that is a conspiracy of sorts. Big Pharma is simply business.

Perhaps I agree with you.