Of course mortality rates aren't linked to the use of vaccines. Vaccines won't make diseases more or less dangerous. Vaccines make people resistant to the disease so they don't contract the disease in the first place. When vaccines are deployed in a society they reduced transmission rates i.e how many people contract the disease. You're doing nothing but deliberately misrepresenting facts.

Vaccines in themselves are fine. The problem is that we aren't told what we're being injected with on a chemical level (not 'it's weakened flu cells'). That on top of being forced to take a vaccine is what I'm against.

Vaccines aren't inherently bad.

Even if they tell you what's in them, how could you verify it? That's an awful lot of trust.

It shouldn't be that way, but in these times you are absolutely right

I can't bring myself to trust anyone.

You may be right. But you may be wrong. I don't think there is unbiased proof that they do any good. All research has been done by TPTB and Big Pharma. My suspicion is that NO VACCINES ARE GOOD. I'd be willing to bet all my money against all of your money that the elite do not vaccinate their children for anything.

they don't

Polio?

Read about it. I was shocked to learn we were told lies about polio.

...or you could link your source(s)?

Search this sub for "polio". Sorry but I don't come here to do the arguing. I know that annoys people. Sorry.

Sorry but I don't come here to do the arguing

No you're right you come here to make claims and refuse to back them up. So you're just a waste.

Not a waste, necessarily. I like doing my own research and people who introduce claims give me new search terms to use.

Wow. You make the claim. You provide the evidence.

Don't cop out

Isn't polio the same as meningitis?

I remember a day when the idea of a vaccine for the flu or chicken pox would have had grandpa throwing his head back and laughing as he nearly tips his rocking chair. It seems it only takes a generation or two to convince a whole populace that something that was just a mild inconvenience is now so terrifying we all need to run and get a shot for it.

In fact, there is a vast difference in general between the world that was and the word that the younger generations Believe there was. The machine depends on the younger generation to do what they naturally tend to do. Not listen to grandpa.

Lol yeah, remember when everyone used to laugh at idiots that get flu shots, and now it's considered normal?

I'd still be laughing if it wasn't the tragedy that it is.

Yea, remember when polio just magically disappeared?

What's your source of authority regarding how polio did or did not disappear?

A shit load of historical documentation.

Who published the polio information "historically"?

Is this the type of dumb shit we're going to do?

You have absolutely zero evidence to suggest anything other than the published information on the polio vaccine is accurate so you're going to try to ad hominem your way through a retarded accusation that doctors are all in on a conspiracy.

You're either on too much medication or not enough, but you need to get your shit together.

What dumb shit is that? I'm asking you to come up with answers to question you should have already asked yourself a long time ago.

Do you have evidence of the validity of your sources?

You're asking stupid questions and no matter how I answer them you'll have another stupid question that you think proves something. No matter how much evidence is provided you'll still fail to understand any of it and cling to your not even half baked theory that you've already decided is correct with you're unbelievably terrible understanding of the science.

I don't believe in theories. Do you?

This might be the most ignorant shit I've ever read.

I'm just still waiting to hear why. The point of this sub is to question the voice of authority. I wonder why you don't.

You said you don't believe in theories. That's not questioning authority, it's just retarded.

"believe" in them..that is i do not put my trust where i have no evidence i can observe. I might speculate and run ideas through my ability to discern evidence, but i Believe in what i can see the evidence for.

When we trust authority without evidence, we're believing in the theory that they are honest and correct.

But there is plenty of evidence, you're just not able to understand it apparently.

What is it? Since i don't know what you consider it to be its a bit unfair to say i'm unable to comprehend it.

The entire body of evidence supporting vaccination. How thick can you be?

My entire point. That is a body of evidence you've read and heard repeated but have no way to measure the validity of. We're here to question that very thing.

And you believe that because you lack the understanding.

What am i not understanding? You mentioned "the entire body of evidence" which is still unnamed.

I can only guess you mean publications that i'm not sure you, yourself have read or you might have offered them (or an example of them) as the evidence you're speaking of.

Was grandpa an immunologist?

No, and he probably survived multiple bouts of flu and at least one of chicken pox just like all his ancestors before him.

How many "experts" are your voice of authority?

No, and he probably survived multiple bouts of flu and at least one of chicken pox just like all his ancestors before him.

So was his knowledge observer bias or epidemiological analysis?

You should be able to personally observe the evidence of whatever you believe. If not, you're believing the Voice Of Authority. How many of them do you know?

Coincedence is not a repeatable, explainable system. Lmao. Basic as fuck

What coincidence?

No, and he probably survived multiple bouts of flu and at least one of chicken pox just like all his ancestors before him.

You should be able to personally observe the evidence of whatever you believe.

This was not an example of coincidence, but alludes to the general fact that (at least for those of us old enough) we all know good and well that there was a time such an idea as being vaccinated for these things was laughable.

I read something very scary the other day. Someone had a theory that TPTB are going to put a VACCINE in the "flu vaccine" that protects against a weaponized virus that they release in mass onto the people. The only people that survive will be the good obedient slaves that got the flu vaccine, haha.

That rather sounds like something they might spread abroad to scare the "fringe" into being vaccinated.

Oh yeah. Far more likely. No vaccines for me please.

Anyone whose knee jerk reaction to this is YOU'RE FUCKING WRONG---

2 months ago I'd have said the same thing, and I even had researched it!

Now, I am gathering more data and withholding my judgement for now.

Remember, 6 months ago they told you elections were fair, right?

ALOT of our Science is funded by companies.

There are PLENTY of well-respected MD's out there with years experience who have opinions on it.

Keep an open mind.

I'm not saying it's right or it's wrong.

Just...open your mind. Don't be a Hillbot, or a Trumpette. Just listen.

That's one hell of a way to write a lot and say a little.

I know. It's good.

Nah, far from it.

Oh. Well since you think so, I guess I'll have to rethink everything.

No sarcasm implied.

Cool, i'll tag you as a convinced person.

Oh, I only said I'd rethink it. Since that's what smart people do- they consider all the evidence before they make a decision.

[deleted]

You should really have an open mind about this. Basically you are repeating what we have been told by our government. If you look close you will learn that Big Pharma and TPTB are the ones telling us these things. I think we've been lied to on a massive scale. I don't think the elite vaccinate their kids for anything.

[deleted]

How is you thinking that about this person any better than what this person thinks of you? You see? Just because you believe it doesn't make it true, it makes it what you believe.

At some point in your life, you have believed something different from what you do right now, this moment. Do you honestly believe those changes are over for you? Has your brain congealed into a completely finished entity? I hope not.

[deleted]

I understand, you only care enough about this conversation to respond to all of my posts.

As for you argument regarding OP, your point is taken. You'll notice that is not my argument, however. My argument is to simply be open enough to research it yourself.

Does that make you better or smarter or healthier? All it makes you is not open to ideas with which you don't agree.

Because you can't possibly know the absolute truth. Right? Ever on anything. Maybe you're a vaccination research scientist. If you are, that would definitely mean you are aware that humans can't know everything (i've never met a scientist who didn't feel at least a little bit unsure). In 1000 years, humanity will have researched every tiny possible thing they can think of, and still we will not know everything.

Picture yourself 10 years ago. Have your ideas changed since then? If not, well that's weird. But if so, that tells you that minds change. Including your own.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying, breathe. Observe. Listen. Withhold judgement.

If mortality rates are all you're concerned about, do you bother to protect yourself against non-fatal illnesses?

For example, salmonella is unlikely to kill you - So do you bother to check if your chicken is properly cooked?

Or after you go to the toilet, do you wash your hands even though infection and disease brought on by poor hygiene is unlikely to kill you?

Just because something won't kill you, doesn't mean you shouldn't protect against it.

yes but washing your hands and cooking your meat properly don't come with a plethora of side effects. You can't get mercury poisoning from washing your hands.

The arguement here ia whether the risk of vacinating is worth the benefit of disease prevention.

This also does not even speak on the efficacy of vaccines and whether they even work.

You can't get mercury poisoning from washing your hands.

I've had vaccines, where is my mercury poisoning?

I've also eaten a shitload of tuna, which contains mercury - Still no poisoning. Am I invulnerable?

The arguement here ia whether the risk of vacinating is worth the benefit of disease prevention.

Which it is.

This also does not even speak on the efficacy of vaccines and whether they even work.

If it doesn't speak on it, then that's a topic for another day.

OK. So how old are you? How many doses of vaccines have you had in your life time? How many doses at once? Who were the manufacturers?

Mercury from Tuna and Salmon is filtered through the liver, not directly injected into the muscles, it's not comparable. Like wise, health organizations still warn about over consumption of fish. Also if you are an adult, which Im assuming you are based on your level of literacy, you have a far higher body weight and thus and higher level of tolerance to heavy metals. None the less you still may have signs of heavy metals poisoning and we are only forced to believe you or disbelieve you, which doesn't put the readers in a very good position.

Do you have children? Many parents are deciding it's not worth the risk, considering there is no study that tests the full CDC schedule together. It's bad science to test one vaccine at a time when in practice this is not how they are administered.

OK. So how old are you?

Too private for my fans to handle.

How many doses of vaccines have you had in your life time? How many doses at once? Who were the manufacturers?

Fucktons

Mercury from Tuna and Salmon is filtered through the liver, not directly injected into the muscles, it's not comparable.

What a cop out.

If vaccines can cause mercury poisoning, and eating too much tuna can cause mercury poisoning, then there's certainly a quantifiable comparison between the two.

Also if you are an adult, which Im assuming you are based on your level of literacy

... I've never had a compliment before...

Many parents are deciding it's not worth the risk

Many parents are also retarded.

If vaccines can cause mercury poisoning, and eating too much tuna can cause mercury poisoning, then there's certainly a quantifiable comparison between the two.

Yes there most certainly is. It's the comparable limit between the two. Much more has to go through your digestive system in order to have negative effects. Thank god for the liver!

Are you an immunologist? A doctor? A vaccine researcher? A scientist? Why should anyone believe your opinion?

Much more has to go through your digestive system in order to have negative effects.

How much more?

1 shot = how many tunas?

Are you an immunologist? A doctor? A vaccine researcher? A scientist?

If I lied, would you believe me?

Why should anyone believe your opinion?

Nobody has to.

Sorry, but the burden of proof is on whether or not they are safe, not whether they are dangerous.

Which part are you replying to?

This also does not even speak on the efficacy of vaccines and whether they even work.

Smallpox was eradicated by a global vaccination programme.

And two of the three types of polio have already likely been eradicated using a vaccination programme.

There are probably going to be less than 50 cases of type 1 polio globally this year too.

That's pretty conclusive evidence.

Sources?

The polio vaccine also contained known cancer causing SV-40 monkey virus all the way up till 1999. There is also similar evidence that Polio was eradicated BEFORE the introduction of the vaccine and that it was also reclassified as a disease to bolster the numbers.

Sources?

There have been zero smallpox cases since it was eradicated in the late 70s.

Prior to that it was one of the most deadly diseases, with over 10 million cases and millions of deaths per year.

There is also similar evidence that Polio was eradicated BEFORE the introduction of the vaccine

That's demonstrably nonsense. The vaccine was introduced in the 50s and 60s and there have been many cases since then.

So does that mean the entire CDC schedule of vaccines is safe and justifiable? When is smallpox vaccinated for currently? Who makes the vaccine? When do you receive the dose? I'm not even sure it's on the schedule.

Even if your arguments were sound, they are missing the point. No study has tested the safety and efficacy of the entire CDC schedule of vaccines together. Even the studies testing singular doses are questionable and nefariously funded.

When is smallpox vaccinated for currently?

It's not.

Because it was eradicated.

By a vaccination programme.

Even if your arguments were sound, they are missing the point

I was responding to your claim about the 'efficacy of vaccines and whether they even work'.

It was your point I was addressing, so how do you conclude I was missing it?

Sorry but it's not sound logic to believe that because one vaccine has (may have) worked, that they all work just as well.

None the less, you are missing the point because vaccine safety is more important than efficacy. The real issue is whether or not they are safe and effective. No one has or is testing the full schedule of vaccines in combination with each other. This is the real issue, not whether a vaccine that isn't even administered anymore has worked.

Why have measles, mumps, etc, not been eradicated yet as well? Why are populations that are already vaccinated still catching the diseases? You can't compare efficacy between one vaccine and the other. Whether the smallpox vaccine was actually the CAUSE of the eradication rather than increased awareness and sanitation standards is irrelevant to the efficacy of ALL of other vaccines. And also has no bearing on the efficacy of the combination of vaccines together.

What do you have to say about the graphs presented above as well?

None the less, you are missing the point because vaccine safety is more important than efficacy.

You specifically said:

This also does not even speak on the efficacy of vaccines and whether they even work.

So no, I am not missing the point.

What's happening is you are changing the argument now that I've addressed and countered that point.

Why have measles, mumps, etc, not been eradicated yet as well?

Firstly, not all diseases can be eradicated by a vaccination programme. If a disease has a non-human reservoir (if it can exist outside the human body), it's not possible to eradicate it.

Its incidence can be virtually eliminated with a good enough vaccination programme, but as soon as vaccinations stop, the disease will re-emerge into the population (because the virus is still present in the environment).

For diseases that don't have a non-human reservoir, eradication is possible. That's why both polio and smallpox were good candidates for eradication.

Measles is a candidate for eradication because humans are the only reservoir for the disease.

Although it hasn't yet been eradicated there are countries and regions where it has already been eliminated. But with large numbers of non-vaccinated people around the world there is still incidence and transmission of the disease.

What do you have to say about the graphs presented above as well?

The OP's claim is spurious. There's a difference between mortality rates and infection rates.

Those graphs were for mortality rates and went back to the early 1800s. Of course mortality rates dropped, because since the 1800s there have been huge improvements in medicine and healthcare.

But those diseases still kill.

And the way to reduce the numbers of people who die from a disease is to reduce the incidence of the diseases (reduce the infection rates), ideally to zero.

If those graphs showed infection rates, there would be a clear match between the introduction of vaccinations and the infection rates of those diseases.

And that's what's relevant. Because the fewer people who have the disease, the lower the infection rates.

And the fewer people who contract a disease, the fewer people who die.

This is still not addressing whether vaccinations are safe. Your points are all marvelous but they do not address the current CDC schedule of 80+ doses in the first few years of life. Non-fatal infectious disease prevention is nice but should be secondary to vaccine safety. We should not be vaccinating until we know the full effects of all the doses combined.

Since introduction, more people have died from the measles vaccine than the measles themselves documented. This does not even begin to address the injuries from the vaccines reported and unreported.

It also does not address the new findings of certain immunities given from actually contracting measles, including immunities to certain cancers.

This also does not address the possible negligent storing, transporting, manufacturing, and administering of the vaccines. Don't shake it up properly? Store or transport improperly? It can become exponentially more dangerous.

The point is very clear: If vaccines are safe there should be no problem to do a study that tests the entire CDC recommended schedule and it's effects. Until this is done, one is literally subjecting their children to a medical experiment by following the recommended schedule.

I'm all for disease eradication and the preservation of life but NOT at the cost of our children's health. Vaccine manufacturers should be held liable, NOT the US government. (1986 bill) Vaccines should NOT be vehicles of profit. They should be held to the standards of all other pharmaceutical drugs, NOT given a free pass under the guise of "public health."

Until studies of vaccinated and unvaccinated populations are done. Until studies of the ENTIRE CDC schedule of vaccines together are done, then one is subjecting their child to a medical experiment.

This is still not addressing whether vaccinations are safe.

For the third time, I responded to specific points you made:

Why have measles, mumps, etc, not been eradicated yet as well?

and

What do you have to say about the graphs presented above as well?

But when you are unable to respond adequately you then change the discussion to something different and ignore your own comments and questions - the comments and questions I was responding to.

Your points are all marvelous but they do not address the current CDC schedule of 80+ doses in the first few years of life.

Because that's not what you asked!

You asked why measles hasn't been eradicated and what I thought of the graphs.

Is there are reason you keep changing the subject when I respond to your claims, statements and questions?

Well, you are only choosing to respond to certain points and not others. You have no comment to the entire last post I just made and only quoted previous ones

OK let's say they are effective (which is debatable, considering MERCK themselves has admitted to their Mumps vaccine as not being effective),

Now I'm asking about : safety of current CDC schedule of 80+ doses in the first few years of life.

Is there are reason you keep changing the subject when I respond to your claims, statements and questions? Yes, the reason is because focusing on efficacy and not safety is the wrong focus.

You are not responding to any of my claims about safety. I reiterate:

I'm all for disease eradication and the preservation of life but NOT at the cost of our children's health. Vaccine manufacturers should be held liable, NOT the US government. (1986 bill) Vaccines should NOT be vehicles of profit. They should be held to the standards of all other pharmaceutical drugs, NOT given a free pass under the guise of "public health." Until studies of vaccinated and unvaccinated populations are done. Until studies of the ENTIRE CDC schedule of vaccines together are done, then one is subjecting their child to a medical experiment.

How can you really trust MERCK?

How can you trust corporations that have fiduciary duty to their stockholders? There is NO incentive for their products to be safe as long as the money they lose from lawsuits and liabilities is less than their total profits.

What about the collusion of corporations and the CDC?

What about the whistleblowers?

What about lying in their studies?

It's really not an all-or-nothing proposition. Vaccines aren't necessarily bad...they can be wonderful...but...they can be really bad if Big Pharma decides to add in some super-duper, cost-saving sketchy preservatives. Recently, I watched this short testimony by RFK Jr. & what he says seems pretty reasonable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2UJ2oBeya0 It has made me re-think what had been my knee-jerk reaction to anti-vaccine people.

Non-fatal infectious disease prevention is nice but should be secondary to vaccine safety.

Sorry your brain is inflamed from measles, but really it's secondary to making sure vaccines are safe. And by safe, I mean safe to a standard that convinces people with no medical training or knowledge of the science that a vaccine they are convinced gave their child autism didn't.

Since introduction, more people have died from the measles vaccine than the measles themselves documented.

Bit more to it than that isn't there? During 2000-2014, measles vaccination prevented an estimated 17.1 million deaths(source: the WHO). There have been 108 deaths from the measles vaccine in the last 10 years (source: an anti vaccine webpage). Now far be it from me to say you are talking out of your arse, but frankly you are. The rest of your points are similarly based on your lack of knowledge, based as it mainly is on information provided to you by people with a clear agenda, that being, no vaccines.

Sorry Joey, 0 studies done on the entire CDC schedule. Why? They won't dare approach it. Why no studies on unvaccinated populations vs vaccinated? Why would all these mother's lie? That's not good science Joey. Anyone knowledgable in science would remain skeptical and open minded. Unless actual experiments, not funded by those poised to make billions off the results, are done then we cannot say science supports the conclusion that vaccines are not injuring children. Please show me the Scientific study that tests the entire CDC schedule together. I would absolutely love to find good evidence that vaccines are not harming children!

You truly don't have a clue until you are a parent and you see mental regressions after shots. Autism = mercury / heavy metal poisoning. Also, Autism is just the tip of the iceberg for vaccine injuries. $4 Billion paid from the US government for vaccine injuries already, not to mention private settlements, not to mention parents who were bullied and convinced to not report their vaccine injuries.

I also do not trust the WHO, CDC, or FDA. CDC and FDA especially, they are criminal organizations that do not have the public health in mind.

Because there is no evidence that the receiving vaccinations on the CDC schedule is causing any problems. There is an acknowledged problem with parents being fearful of the schedule, due to the efforts of anti-vaxxers with no scientific support no doubt.

See https://www.nap.edu/catalog/13563/the-childhood-immunization-schedule-and-safety-stakeholder-concerns-scientific-evidence and https://www.nap.edu/read/13563/chapter/2

The mothers aren't lying, they just have no idea what they are talking about. They do not have the training or the objectivity to draw conclusions from their observations.

Are you open minded and skeptical about gravity? asprin? morphine? The claim that it is bad science not to be skeptical about vaccines is simply a ruse. You will continue to be "skeptical and openminded" about vaccines until you get the answer you want, regardless of the overwhelming amount of evidence that shows them to be safe and effective.

How many experiments, that come to the same conclusion, that vaccines are safe and the way they are administered is safe, will it take before you admit defeat? Obviously no amount, because you are a true believer. Not someone who actually acknowledges the scientific evidence. Also, vaccines are amongst the least profitable ventures of the pharmacuticals companies, despite the propaganda you might read. Vaccines make up around 1.82% of their total expected revenues in 2013. http://www.skepticalraptor.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Vaccine-Market-Value.pdf

There is no mercury in vaccines any more. Not that it did anything anyway. Thiomersal has been used since the 1930's in vaccines, was there a massive increase in autism around then?

Not $4 billion, $2 billion and that includes lawyers fees https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_injury#Vaccine_Injury_Compensation_Program also that is over the course of 23 years. and a grand total of one claim for autism out of 2620 cases.

So you don't not in fact trust anyone who doesn't agree with you. All the doctors, scientist, researchers etc. 10s of thousands of them, all evil psychopaths knowingly giving children autism. You're not a skeptic, you are a religious believer. I probably shouldn't have wasted my time replying I'm not going to stop you in your efforts to reintroduce horrible preventable illnesses to the worlds children and cause great suffering and death. I hope you are happy with yourself

Because there is no evidence that the receiving vaccinations on the CDC schedule is causing any problems

False. Thousands of parents report problems after their vaccinations. Thousands more are bullied into not reporting. Thousands more are too belief blind to even be aware that they MIGHT be causing a problem. Just because the CDC doesn't report any evidence doesn't mean there is none. I will repeat, until the current CDC schedule has been tested thoroughly, then one is subjecting their children to a medical experiment. Vaccines are not testing to the rigors of normal pharmaceutical drugs. There are no double blind studies, this is shit science. There are NO studies that show the current full schedule is safe and effective. PLEASE send me the studies that test all the combined doses. There is PLENTY of evidence but WAY too much money involved to let it out. Sorry but testing one at a time does NOT cut it.

ALSO: Just last month over a dozen whistleblowers from the CDC are calling out their OWN organization for shitty science. Calling themselves SPIDER standing for (CDC Scientists Preserving Integrity, Diligence and Ethics in Research).

http://www.truthlibrary.info/articles/corporate-fraud/the-original-letter-from-cdc-spider-whistleblowers/

Over a dozen whistleblowers are calling out their own organization, calling for the stopping of corporate collusion. These are just the ones brave enough to say anything!! The CDC is an absolute mess and believing or trusting any of their reports is insane. Until the place is cleaned up one should not take anything that comes out of the CDC as truth.

Like I said, it's not just about autism. Food allergies, skin diseases, auto-immune diseases. Forget about autism there are many types of vaccine injuries.

This does not even go into possible negligence in transporting, storing, and administering the vaccines, which is independent of their manufactured safety.

There is no mercury in vaccines any more. Not that it did anything anyway. Thimersal has been used since the 1930's in vaccines, was there a massive increase in autism around then?

This is false. There is also aluminum. Just read the package inserts. In the 1930s there was not 80+ doses lol. What are you even talking about?

Also there is now Glyphosate, a known neurotoxin, in vaccines. Do you think that injecting glyphosate is safe? Has the combined effects of mercury, aluminum and glyphosate in all the combined doses been tested? No. http://www.ecowatch.com/glyphosate-vaccines-1999343362.html

What about the National Institute of Health coming out about our terrible culture of toxic chemicals earlier this year as well????

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/ehp358/

The CDC and the NIH BOTH coming out THIS YEAR saying there are BIG PROBLEMS. HELLO?? ARE YOU PAYING ATTENTION??

Also, vaccines are amongst the least profitable ventures of the pharmacuticals companies, despite the propaganda you might read. Vaccines make up around 1.82% of their total expected revenues in 2013.

It doesn't matter HOW profitable it is. Vaccines should NOT be profitable. They should be heavily regulated. When they are in the category of profitable drugs then executives MUST make decisions based upon fiduciary duty or else they are legally liable for negligence. Corporations MUST put profit first. This is NOT a good idea for drugs and vaccines. I absolutely do NOT trust MERCK especially after they released Vioxx KNOWING it was NOT safe, killing tens to hundreds of thousands of people depending on the numbers. Why would MERCK ever have your best interest and not profit, in mind? What is stopping them from doing it again? Especially considering the US government will pick up the tab for a shitty vaccine.

So you don't not in fact trust anyone who doesn't agree with you. All the doctors, scientist, researchers etc. 10s of thousands of them, all evil psychopaths knowingly giving children autism. You're not a skeptic, you are a religious believer. I probably shouldn't have wasted my time replying I'm not going to stop you in your efforts to reintroduce horrible preventable illnesses to the worlds children and cause great suffering and death. I hope you are happy with yourself

Yup, very happy with myself. Scientists are calling out their own organizations. Whistleblowers in many different companies too. Holistic doctors being murdered by the dozens. Data has been fixed and changed in studies to suit the needs of those funding the study. Research institutions are nearly completely taken over by monied interests. CDC and FDA are criminal organizations, just look at the health of the people in the USA. It's in shambles. It only took a few paid off "Harvard scientists" to completely derail decades of research on Sugar and its terrible effects. There are many doctors who DO agree with me. There are many people fighting for the truth. The good news is the truth stands up to even the most rigorous testing. Which is why I'm an advocate for ACTUAL and GOOD SCIENCE to be done on vaccines especially them all combined, not the mumbo jumbo which is passed off as science now. In fact I think the religious belief in western medicine is FAR greater than the skepticism of it.

Does that make you better or smarter or healthier? All it makes you is not open to ideas with which you don't agree.

Because you can't possibly know the absolute truth. Right? Ever on anything. Maybe you're a vaccination research scientist. If you are, that would definitely mean you are aware that humans can't know everything (i've never met a scientist who didn't feel at least a little bit unsure). In 1000 years, humanity will have researched every tiny possible thing they can think of, and still we will not know everything.

Picture yourself 10 years ago. Have your ideas changed since then? If not, well that's weird. But if so, that tells you that minds change. Including your own.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying, breathe. Observe. Listen. Withhold judgement.

How is you thinking that about this person any better than what this person thinks of you? You see? Just because you believe it doesn't make it true, it makes it what you believe.

At some point in your life, you have believed something different from what you do right now, this moment. Do you honestly believe those changes are over for you? Has your brain congealed into a completely finished entity? I hope not.