Posted on 07/27/2020 11:10:00 AM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
The Russians and Chinese already have poisoned vaccines ready to be disbursed to us through Big Pharma.
“You know what’s also spiked along with autism rates? Maternal cannabis use.”
EXACTLY.
Isn’t Dr Fauxchi funding virus research in the Wuhan labs?
the neglect. no contact. No touching. Remember the Romanian babies?
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/07/can-an-unloved-child-learn-to-love/612253/
1 in 45 is too many, but on the surface it is not a strong argument that vaccinations are the issue. Maybe it is vaccinations in combination with some other risk factors that hasn’t yet been identified. Or maybe it is something else entirely eg. substance abuse, environment of the mother during pregnancy or some other combination of factors.
Could be. I just think the nagalase angle is interesting
Increase in autism? Too many pothead mothers and fathers.
Could be a contributing factor, however the presence of immunosuppressive Nagalase in vaccines is troubling
Autism spectrum disorder
Mayo Clinic
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/autism-spectrum-disorder/symptoms-causes/syc-20352928
Excerpt:
“No link between vaccines and autism spectrum disorder
One of the greatest controversies in autism spectrum disorder centers on whether a link exists between the disorder and childhood vaccines. Despite extensive research, no reliable study has shown a link between autism spectrum disorder and any vaccines. In fact, the original study that ignited the debate years ago has been retracted due to poor design and questionable research methods.”
Want to provide from what knowledge base you are using to arrive at your conclusion? For me, I do not buy your opinion. But, change my mind and convince me that you know what you are talking about. I’m more than willing to listen to your evidence supporting your claim.
I should have read further. Then I would have learned that you are just a clueless person who thinks all humans are just angelic. Bad people is not a concept you can accept. Well I am much more inclined to believe these people who have actually researched the issue, than I am to listen to a know-it-all sans any real knowledge. Especially on the topic discussed in this article.
Whistleblowers during the Obama Administration were routinely silenced (e.g. Planned Parenthood expose’). Additionally, why is there a National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program? And why do Vaccines Manufacturers have a Liability Shield?
I can assure that I do not believe all humans are angelic. My years as a criminal prosecutor can attest to that. I do believe in evidence being necessary to prove a fact. Sensational writing without more is not persuasive.
Those are good questions for consideration. Thanks.
As a prosecutor you know all too well that when you get too technical the case becomes even harder to convince a jury of guilt, unless you have the ability to communicate it in less technical terms.
I doubt you would listen to the opinions of doctors who discount your belief that a person you are trying is guilty of the crime for which you are prosecuting just because he rejects what you think is clear evidence of guilt. For example, he may not have knowledge of the person's previous history of criminal behavior to which you have access that shows he has been accused but not convicted of several crimes with similar MO's, yet a judge has ruled that history inadmissible and thus not visible to the doctors.
My point is, you shouldn't discount it so cavalierly just because you do not understand fully the concept. You should know better than most that large amounts of money corrupt people, especially if they hold a belief, such as too many people on this earth. In those cases they have double motivation. But we both know it only takes one motivation to corrupt, or for evil to rule their decision processes.
Conceptually I agree with almost all of what you say.
But when I speak of evidence to prove something I am not referring to conjecture or suspicious actions. And if I add in the ideological motivation to subconsciously slant the meaning or interpretation of inferences then things become even more problematic.
For example, I once had a forensic pathologist who testified that the victim had been stabbed in the back numerous times when eyewitnesses within feet saw him being stabbed in front. Now how do you square that? A trained autopsy surgeon contradicting numerous witnesses.
The point being that experts who settle on a solution become wedded to that belief notwithstanding the other evidence.
Wait, are we back to this Jenny McCarthy “Vaccines cause Autism!” discredited nonsense again? Most anti-vaxxers gave up on that theory after decades of studies demonstrated time and time again that there was zero link between vaccines and autism.
Most moved on to saying that vaccines are full of “toxins”. Or that individually they’re fine, but do damage when too many are done at once (e.g. the alternative schedule crowd). Or that vaccines “overload” a child’s immune system. Or that “natural immunity” (e.g. getting polio and smallpox) is better than getting vaccinated and never getting the diseases.
But autism? Man, what a blast from the nonsense past!
Why do deniers refer to 'original studies that ignite debate' but fail to link to them?
Moving on.
Medical technocrats methods aren't what I'd expect from industrial/technical technocrat. Say humans were industrial robots, expensive industrial robots, that came off the production line and passed the acceptance tests. During their warranty period some robots developed problems causing their skills to slowly diminish and were returned to the manufacturer for repair or replacement.
If that happened enough times the manufacturer would set about trying to determine what the cause of the malfunction was, don't you think?
They'd be checking everything. Which would mean for a robot, software and hardware, right? They're technocrats to the max. They're looking at everything. Inside, outside, upside down or topside. Failures do not reflect well on the manufacturer and are an expense they don't need. Medical technocrats in similar circumstances caused by autism don't have such a protocol. Why is that?
Could it be because medical technocrats ascribe to the https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/autism%20spectrum%20disorder definition of autism as a spectrum disorder:
any of a group of developmental disorders (such as autism and Asperger's syndrome) marked by impairments in the ability to communicate and interact socially and by the presence of repetitive behaviors or restricted interests — called also pervasive developmental disorder;
which to a layman such as myself and many like me, sounds like a software problem has been declared and there is no need to even look at the physical components (hardware).
Having a taxpayer supported insurance company https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/index.html relieve medical technocrats of any financial burden would no doubt also cause slippage in their measure of concern.
However, I do believe both explanations topped with a democrat version of human compassion would explain the purposeful attack on humanity.
Good conspiratorial read...
Same mother different brother, and more fun...
The Best of Dead Doctors Don’t Lie
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esaSKqO27II
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.