Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated: Guess who is Sicker?

[BADecker]

Vaccines are needed, anyone who says they are not is a moron just like anyone who says all vaccines are 100% safe is also a moron.

Well, of course vaccines are needed at this stage of the game. What would happen if everybody suddenly realized that vaccines were poison, and were responsible for creating many maladies, including the ones that they were supposed to be destroying? If everybody suddenly realized this, they would stop trusting doctors and the medical. In fact, they would be out to lynch members of the medical. The whole medical would collapse. Because of the size of the medical employment population, millions would be out of a job. The economy would collapse, and amidst civil war, at that.

No, it's better to keep on destroying health with vaccines, a few hundred thousand people at a time, than that the whole country, and large parts of the world, collapse by letting everybody understand the destructiveness of vaccines.

[1715069974]

1715069974

[1715069974]

1715069974

[1715069974]

1715069974

[Astargath]

Vaccines are needed, anyone who says they are not is a moron just like anyone who says all vaccines are 100% safe is also a moron.

Well, of course vaccines are needed at this stage of the game. What would happen if everybody suddenly realized that vaccines were poison, and were responsible for creating many maladies, including the ones that they were supposed to be destroying? If everybody suddenly realized this, they would stop trusting doctors and the medical. In fact, they would be out to lynch members of the medical. The whole medical would collapse. Because of the size of the medical employment population, millions would be out of a job. The economy would collapse, and amidst civil war, at that.

No, it's better to keep on destroying health with vaccines, a few hundred thousand people at a time, than that the whole country, and large parts of the world, collapse by letting everybody understand the destructiveness of vaccines.

Just curious, what do you actually think it's the cure of the diseases that vaccines are eradicating. Like how would you get rid of polio and other terrible diseases exactly?

[BADecker]

Vaccines are needed, anyone who says they are not is a moron just like anyone who says all vaccines are 100% safe is also a moron.

Well, of course vaccines are needed at this stage of the game. What would happen if everybody suddenly realized that vaccines were poison, and were responsible for creating many maladies, including the ones that they were supposed to be destroying? If everybody suddenly realized this, they would stop trusting doctors and the medical. In fact, they would be out to lynch members of the medical. The whole medical would collapse. Because of the size of the medical employment population, millions would be out of a job. The economy would collapse, and amidst civil war, at that.

No, it's better to keep on destroying health with vaccines, a few hundred thousand people at a time, than that the whole country, and large parts of the world, collapse by letting everybody understand the destructiveness of vaccines.

Just curious, what do you actually think it's the cure of the diseases that vaccines are eradicating.

Why do you like asking questions that don't have answers, if that is a question (no question mark)? And you say "it's" when you should say "is" if you want to make any sense.

Like how would you get rid of polio and other terrible diseases exactly?

Since vaccines don't eradicate any diseases, here's what does:
1. Good nutrition: good food and good water;
2. Good hygiene;
3. Let the disease run its natural course;
4. Death;
5. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

[BADecker]

It finally went to court where the government was required to produce the documentation that vaccines had been tested, and government didn't have any tests to show. Check it out at https://phibetaiota.net/2018/09/rebecca-campbell-us-government-loses-vaccine-lawsuit-has-lied-to-the-public-for-decades-vaccines-not-tested-autism-will-drop-if-parents-use-this-case-to-legally-challenge-mandated-vaccinatio/:

Vaccine injury lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Del Bigtree, producer of the suppressed anti-vaccine documentary, Vaxxed, and the Informed Consent Action Network (ICAN) are credited with this victory. They demanded the relevant government documents proving that all federally approved vaccines had been tested for quality over the past 32 years — and there were none.

Here are the huge legal and practical implications in this legal victory for the American people:

This means that the US Department of Health and Human Services and all vaccine makers have been lying to the American people for over 30 years about the effectiveness and safety of vaccines; this may ultimately mean that continuing the existence — at least in their current form — of five US “healthcare” agencies are now in doubt: the CDC, the FDA, the IOM, the NIH and the “Health” part of DHHS itself; this may also threaten the existence of state medical boards and exclusive medical guilds like the AMA:

...

[Astargath]

Vaccines are needed, anyone who says they are not is a moron just like anyone who says all vaccines are 100% safe is also a moron.

Well, of course vaccines are needed at this stage of the game. What would happen if everybody suddenly realized that vaccines were poison, and were responsible for creating many maladies, including the ones that they were supposed to be destroying? If everybody suddenly realized this, they would stop trusting doctors and the medical. In fact, they would be out to lynch members of the medical. The whole medical would collapse. Because of the size of the medical employment population, millions would be out of a job. The economy would collapse, and amidst civil war, at that.

No, it's better to keep on destroying health with vaccines, a few hundred thousand people at a time, than that the whole country, and large parts of the world, collapse by letting everybody understand the destructiveness of vaccines.

Just curious, what do you actually think it's the cure of the diseases that vaccines are eradicating.

Why do you like asking questions that don't have answers, if that is a question (no question mark)? And you say "it's" when you should say "is" if you want to make any sense.

Like how would you get rid of polio and other terrible diseases exactly?

Since vaccines don't eradicate any diseases, here's what does:
1. Good nutrition: good food and good water;
2. Good hygiene;
3. Let the disease run its natural course;
4. Death;
5. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

Because religious people don't get sick, lmao.

[BADecker]

Since vaccines don't eradicate any diseases, here's what does:
1. Good nutrition: good food and good water;
2. Good hygiene;
3. Let the disease run its natural course;
4. Death;
5. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

Because religious people don't get sick, lmao.

Yes, it's amazing that you have been so healthy with your science, big bang, and evolution religion. Number 5 that I mentioned doesn't talk about religion.




WARNING: Your Kid’s Vaccines May Actually Be Making Them Sick...

Thousands of Children are Silently Being Poisoned by Deadly Toxins in Government-Mandated Vaccinations — Many Without Showing Any Immediate Symptoms…
Is Your Child One of Them? Watch This Video to Find Out…

[Astargath]

Since vaccines don't eradicate any diseases, here's what does:
1. Good nutrition: good food and good water;
2. Good hygiene;
3. Let the disease run its natural course;
4. Death;
5. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

Because religious people don't get sick, lmao.

Yes, it's amazing that you have been so healthy with your science, big bang, and evolution religion. Number 5 that I mentioned doesn't talk about religion.




WARNING: Your Kid’s Vaccines May Actually Be Making Them Sick...

Thousands of Children are Silently Being Poisoned by Deadly Toxins in Government-Mandated Vaccinations — Many Without Showing Any Immediate Symptoms…
Is Your Child One of Them? Watch This Video to Find Out…

Yes I have definitely been, that's why religious nutjobs like you still go to the doctor because you don't trust God enough to cure or help you, you still need science and medicine, bunch of hypocrites.

[FilesFM_Announcements]

Its harrowing as a parent to know what is the right decision in regards to vaccines and injections, We have had doubts about vaccinations with our son and daughter, and raised such issues with our doctor; she told us that she will only recommend the vaccines which she feels our children need, and won't excessively try to push other vaccines on us. I kinda hope this is the duty of all doctors to talk about the pros and cons and only do what is necessary...

[BADecker]

Since vaccines don't eradicate any diseases, here's what does:
1. Good nutrition: good food and good water;
2. Good hygiene;
3. Let the disease run its natural course;
4. Death;
5. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

Because religious people don't get sick, lmao.

Yes, it's amazing that you have been so healthy with your science, big bang, and evolution religion. Number 5 that I mentioned doesn't talk about religion.




WARNING: Your Kid’s Vaccines May Actually Be Making Them Sick...

Thousands of Children are Silently Being Poisoned by Deadly Toxins in Government-Mandated Vaccinations — Many Without Showing Any Immediate Symptoms…
Is Your Child One of Them? Watch This Video to Find Out…

Yes I have definitely been, that's why religious nutjobs like you still go to the doctor because you don't trust God enough to cure or help you, you still need science and medicine, bunch of hypocrites.

What gives you the idea that I go to the doctor? Besides, what does my or any religion have to do with going to the doctor... except if it is the religion of faith in medicine, that is.

I have been showing you a lot of information that is coming out about how unreliable and even bad vaccines are, but you still like them. And you still advertise that they are good. And you would rather demean me than accept the truth. What does that really say about your motives and good faith?

[Astargath]

Since vaccines don't eradicate any diseases, here's what does:
1. Good nutrition: good food and good water;
2. Good hygiene;
3. Let the disease run its natural course;
4. Death;
5. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

. But mostly, a healthy relationship with God, who cures all diseases according to the best wisdom around.

Because religious people don't get sick, lmao.

Yes, it's amazing that you have been so healthy with your science, big bang, and evolution religion. Number 5 that I mentioned doesn't talk about religion.




WARNING: Your Kid’s Vaccines May Actually Be Making Them Sick...

Thousands of Children are Silently Being Poisoned by Deadly Toxins in Government-Mandated Vaccinations — Many Without Showing Any Immediate Symptoms…
Is Your Child One of Them? Watch This Video to Find Out…

Yes I have definitely been, that's why religious nutjobs like you still go to the doctor because you don't trust God enough to cure or help you, you still need science and medicine, bunch of hypocrites.

What gives you the idea that I go to the doctor? Besides, what does my or any religion have to do with going to the doctor... except if it is the religion of faith in medicine, that is.

I have been showing you a lot of information that is coming out about how unreliable and even bad vaccines are, but you still like them. And you still advertise that they are good. And you would rather demean me than accept the truth. What does that really say about your motives and good faith?

Someone who doesn't accept current scientific theories shouldn't discuss anything about science.

[BADecker]

Someone who doesn't accept current scientific theories shouldn't discuss anything about science.

What's that? Astargath's law? Understanding that scientific theories exist is quite factual understanding.

Rather, somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact should build himself a synagogue to think in.

Now, what does that have to do with vaccines?

[BADecker]

Who Is Telling The Truth About Prescription Opioid Deaths? DEA? CDC? Neither?

"Controlled Prescription Drugs (CPDs) ... are still responsible for the most drug-involved overdose deaths and are the second most commonly abused substance in the United States."

2018 National Drug Threat Assessment. Drug Enforcement Administration, October 2018.

I just don't get it. A newly-released 164-page report just issued by the DEA maintains that controlled prescription drugs are killing more Americans than any other type of drug (1); even more than heroin and fentanyl. But if you've been keeping up in this area this sounds very strange. Can it really be true that drugs like Vicodin and Percocet are killing more Americans, especially when one report after another lays the blame on illicit fentanyl and its scary analogs? What is going on? Are we seeing more of lying by omission or the use of intentionally misleading statistics, such as we've seen from the CDC and its advisors (See: The Opioid Epidemic In 6 Charts Designed To Deceive You)? Is this claim legitimate?

...

[Astargath]

Someone who doesn't accept current scientific theories shouldn't discuss anything about science.

What's that? Astargath's law? Understanding that scientific theories exist is quite factual understanding.

Rather, somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact should build himself a synagogue to think in.

Now, what does that have to do with vaccines?

''somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact'' Showing your misunderstanding for theories again. A scientific theory is simply the best understanding we have of a specific phenomena. It's the best explanation of it.

[TECSHARE]

Someone who doesn't accept current scientific theories shouldn't discuss anything about science.

What's that? Astargath's law? Understanding that scientific theories exist is quite factual understanding.

Rather, somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact should build himself a synagogue to think in.

Now, what does that have to do with vaccines?

''somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact'' Showing your misunderstanding for theories again. A scientific theory is simply the best understanding we have of a specific phenomena. It's the best explanation of it.

So then your theory is the only theory that is accurate, and the other theories are just theories right? To you science is an amorphous mass that fits whatever definition you need it to at any given moment. Theories are by definition up for debate.

[Astargath]

Someone who doesn't accept current scientific theories shouldn't discuss anything about science.

What's that? Astargath's law? Understanding that scientific theories exist is quite factual understanding.

Rather, somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact should build himself a synagogue to think in.

Now, what does that have to do with vaccines?

''somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact'' Showing your misunderstanding for theories again. A scientific theory is simply the best understanding we have of a specific phenomena. It's the best explanation of it.

So then your theory is the only theory that is accurate, and the other theories are just theories right? To you science is an amorphous mass that fits whatever definition you need it to at any given moment. Theories are by definition up for debate.

Scientific theories are by definition not up to debate. A scientific theory has a very different meaning than a ''theory''. Not saying a scientific theory is the absolute truth and they can certainly change but only after a lot of evidence is presented. In the present any scientific theory is the best understanding we have of, gravity, evolution, quantum physics, etc etc.

''A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.[3]''

[TECSHARE]

Someone who doesn't accept current scientific theories shouldn't discuss anything about science.

What's that? Astargath's law? Understanding that scientific theories exist is quite factual understanding.

Rather, somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact should build himself a synagogue to think in.

Now, what does that have to do with vaccines?

''somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact'' Showing your misunderstanding for theories again. A scientific theory is simply the best understanding we have of a specific phenomena. It's the best explanation of it.

So then your theory is the only theory that is accurate, and the other theories are just theories right? To you science is an amorphous mass that fits whatever definition you need it to at any given moment. Theories are by definition up for debate.

Scientific theories are by definition not up to debate. A scientific theory has a very different meaning than a ''theory''. Not saying a scientific theory is the absolute truth and they can certainly change but only after a lot of evidence is presented. In the present any scientific theory is the best understanding we have of, gravity, evolution, quantum physics, etc etc.

''A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.[3]''

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning

"Abductive reasoning (also called abduction,[1] abductive inference,[1] or retroduction[2]) is a form of logical inference which starts with an observation or set of observations then seeks to find the simplest and most likely explanation. This process, unlike deductive reasoning, yields a plausible conclusion but does not positively verify it. Abductive conclusions are thus qualified as having a remnant of uncertainty or doubt, which is expressed in retreat terms such as "best available" or "most likely". One can understand abductive reasoning as inference to the best explanation,[3] although not all uses of the terms abduction and inference to the best explanation are exactly equivalent.[4][5] "


In other words under debate. Thanks for making my argument for me.

[Astargath]

Someone who doesn't accept current scientific theories shouldn't discuss anything about science.

What's that? Astargath's law? Understanding that scientific theories exist is quite factual understanding.

Rather, somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact should build himself a synagogue to think in.

Now, what does that have to do with vaccines?

''somebody who thinks scientific theories are fact'' Showing your misunderstanding for theories again. A scientific theory is simply the best understanding we have of a specific phenomena. It's the best explanation of it.

So then your theory is the only theory that is accurate, and the other theories are just theories right? To you science is an amorphous mass that fits whatever definition you need it to at any given moment. Theories are by definition up for debate.

Scientific theories are by definition not up to debate. A scientific theory has a very different meaning than a ''theory''. Not saying a scientific theory is the absolute truth and they can certainly change but only after a lot of evidence is presented. In the present any scientific theory is the best understanding we have of, gravity, evolution, quantum physics, etc etc.

''A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.[3]''

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abductive_reasoning

"Abductive reasoning (also called abduction,[1] abductive inference,[1] or retroduction[2]) is a form of logical inference which starts with an observation or set of observations then seeks to find the simplest and most likely explanation. This process, unlike deductive reasoning, yields a plausible conclusion but does not positively verify it. Abductive conclusions are thus qualified as having a remnant of uncertainty or doubt, which is expressed in retreat terms such as "best available" or "most likely". One can understand abductive reasoning as inference to the best explanation,[3] although not all uses of the terms abduction and inference to the best explanation are exactly equivalent.[4][5] "


In other words under debate. Thanks for making my argument for me.

''Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing,''

Stop cherry picking, are you badecker's brother?

And as I said, ''One can understand abductive reasoning as inference to the best explanation'' Scientific theories are the best explanation we have right now, they might not be 100% true but unless you can prove otherwise they remain as true. Note that evolution is tested and has been tested for a long time.

There is no opposing scientific theory to evolution, at most some scientists disagree on specific things inside the evolution theory but no one has been able to present a better theory, not even fucking close.

[TECSHARE]

''Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing,''

Stop cherry picking, are you badecker's brother?

And as I said, ''One can understand abductive reasoning as inference to the best explanation'' Scientific theories are the best explanation we have right now, they might not be 100% true but unless you can prove otherwise they remain as true. Note that evolution is tested and has been tested for a long time.

There is no opposing scientific theory to evolution, at most some scientists disagree on specific things inside the evolution theory but no one has been able to present a better theory, not even fucking close.

It doesn't matter how much you test it, how much data there is, or how well it is accepted, a "theory", or "scientific theory" is still a theory. As a theory, as with all science, nothing is ever settled, and everything is up for debate if new contradictory data is presented. You may not agree with the data, you may think it is inaccurate, but it is a fact this is how scientific theory operates. There is no such thing as settled science, and things that were "facts" 5 years ago, 5 months ago, or 5 minutes ago are often not "facts" a moment later because new data is discovered.

[Astargath]

''Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing,''

Stop cherry picking, are you badecker's brother?

And as I said, ''One can understand abductive reasoning as inference to the best explanation'' Scientific theories are the best explanation we have right now, they might not be 100% true but unless you can prove otherwise they remain as true. Note that evolution is tested and has been tested for a long time.

There is no opposing scientific theory to evolution, at most some scientists disagree on specific things inside the evolution theory but no one has been able to present a better theory, not even fucking close.

It doesn't matter how much you test it, how much data there is, or how well it is accepted, a "theory", or "scientific theory" is still a theory. As a theory, as with all science, nothing is ever settled, and everything is up for debate if new contradictory data is presented. You may not agree with the data, you may think it is inaccurate, but it is a fact this is how scientific theory operates. There is no such thing as settled science, and things that were "facts" 5 years ago, 5 months ago, or 5 minutes ago are often not "facts" a moment later because new data is discovered.

So what, what the fuck is your point here? Nothing will ever be 100% true, ever. You can't prove anything with an 100% certainty. Saying that is useless, that's why we use the best we have, the best we can do, which is scientific theories. Yes they are up for debate, if that's what you really want me to say, but not any debate, some idiots saying evolution isn't real shouldn't be seen as a debate. The evidence for gravity or evolution is so overwhelming that you basically have to accept it as 100% truth. We have been using and applying scientific theories for a variety of things and it works, science works. Someone who is unable to accept well established scientific theories just because he doesn't like them should NOT discuss anything related to science, and that's a fact heh.

[BADecker]

''Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing,''

Stop cherry picking, are you badecker's brother?

And as I said, ''One can understand abductive reasoning as inference to the best explanation'' Scientific theories are the best explanation we have right now, they might not be 100% true but unless you can prove otherwise they remain as true. Note that evolution is tested and has been tested for a long time.

There is no opposing scientific theory to evolution, at most some scientists disagree on specific things inside the evolution theory but no one has been able to present a better theory, not even fucking close.

It doesn't matter how much you test it, how much data there is, or how well it is accepted, a "theory", or "scientific theory" is still a theory. As a theory, as with all science, nothing is ever settled, and everything is up for debate if new contradictory data is presented. You may not agree with the data, you may think it is inaccurate, but it is a fact this is how scientific theory operates. There is no such thing as settled science, and things that were "facts" 5 years ago, 5 months ago, or 5 minutes ago are often not "facts" a moment later because new data is discovered.

So what, what the fuck is your point here? Nothing will ever be 100% true, ever. You can't prove anything with an 100% certainty. Saying that is useless, that's why we use the best we have, the best we can do, which is scientific theories. Yes they are up for debate, if that's what you really want me to say, but not any debate, some idiots saying evolution isn't real shouldn't be seen as a debate. The evidence for gravity or evolution is so overwhelming that you basically have to accept it as 100% truth. We have been using and applying scientific theories for a variety of things and it works, science works. Someone who is unable to accept well established scientific theories just because he doesn't like them should NOT discuss anything related to science, and that's a fact heh.

Then since we know that nothing will ever be true, why even try?

The point is that we are finding that the whole medical is full of lies. Lies are the opposite of truth. And this among a whole lot more is proving it - https://phibetaiota.net/2018/09/rebecca-campbell-us-government-loses-vaccine-lawsuit-has-lied-to-the-public-for-decades-vaccines-not-tested-autism-will-drop-if-parents-use-this-case-to-legally-challenge-mandated-vaccinatio/.