Opposition to Vaccination

visionary · Nov 23, 2020

Fetal embryo fibroblast cells used to grow vaccine viruses were first obtained from ??elective?? termination. Now I ask you, will a male fetal cell interfere with a female recipient's identity? or vis versa? Ever wonder why the gender confusion occurs? We know that doctors have been using hormones to give sexual characteristics requested. So just how much of the gene factor is needed to make changes?

Research into the field of genetic influences is still new. They are just starting to understand the influence of multiple sperm donors in one female and what it does. eg...

Women Absorb And Retain Male DNA From Sperm. December 13, 2018 By Alex 43 Comments.

A scientific study has shown that females retain and carry MALE DNA from every sexual encounter with men, this is according to a new study by the University of Seattle and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. The study, which found these facts accidentally, was originally trying to find out if women who were pregnant with a boy might be more susceptible to certain neurological conditions.

side bar...... So women think twice before going multiply encounters, not only from the moral aspect but from the physical changes these encounters do to the body. There is also the mental aspect as well as the emotional aspect that must also play a role in this.

sesquiterpene · Nov 23, 2020

visionary said:
[Snip nonsense that doesn't have anything to do with vaccines]

Nothing left, is there?

JohnDB · Nov 23, 2020

I think that with the current round of Trump Vaccines too many people watched how the sausage was made and are somewhat over reacting to how they are made.

But I can understand why some don't like a vaccine made from cell lines of an aborted child. I can understand why some don't want an mRNA vaccine either (although they are common for a variety of things)

But there's still other choices for Vaccines.
Or there's the Darwin Award.

visionary · Nov 23, 2020

sesquiterpene said:
Nothing left, is there?

Just trying to get you to think deeper than current thoughts.

Kylie · Nov 24, 2020

visionary said:
Caner.gov
Formaldehyde is a colorless, flammable, strong-smelling chemical that is used in building materials and to produce many household products … In addition, formaldehyde is commonly used as an industrial fungicide, germicide, and disinfectant, and as a preservative in mortuaries and medical laboratories.

Cancer.gov also states that lab studies show that formaldehyde exposure could cause cancer. In 1987, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classified formaldehyde as a probable human carcinogen. And that, human studies indicate an association between formaldehyde exposure and certain types of cancer. The CDC assures the public that the small amounts of formaldehyde in vaccines are safe. But, offer no studies to back such a claim. Yet, when the entire childhood vaccine schedule is taken into account, a child will have had almost 1,600 mcg of formaldehyde injected into their body by age six.

The lone research currently available that looks at the effects of formaldehyde when injected is from 1905. The study demonstrated that highly diluted formaldehyde in liquid caused grave health issues in animals.

The conclusion states that, “Pneumonia and bronchitis are found in all animals after the injection of formalin [formaldehyde],” and that:

Animals subjected to chronic poisoning with formalin administered by intraperitoneal injection develop fibrinous peritonitis [inflammation of the abdominal organs], associated with marked eosinophilia [a condition marked by elevated white blood cells, indicating an infection, allergic reaction, or cancer]. The changes in the kidneys and liver consist of cloudy swelling, fatty degeneration, focal necrosis [dead cells in the liver] and leukocyte infiltration [an abundance of infection-fighting white blood cells].

The amount of formaldehyde in a vaccine is tiny compared to what is naturally in your body.

"In fact, the FDA reports there is 50 to 70 times more formaldehyde present in an average newborn's body than in a single dose of vaccine." SOURCE

Astroqualia · Apr 9, 2021

Vaccines can and do cause autism. There was an analytical study of hundreds of other studies that showed a several hundred percent increase in autism for children who received specific vaccinations over the course of several years. The problem is, the mainstream evil folk don't want this information out, so they use their vast reserves of money to pay people to say it doesn't happen, when it does, and evidence exists of it happening.

I wouldn't place too much faith in this satanic-led world.

Kylie · Apr 9, 2021

Astroqualia said:
Vaccines can and do cause autism. There was an analytical study of hundreds of other studies that showed a several hundred percent increase in autism for children who received specific vaccinations over the course of several years. The problem is, the mainstream evil folk don't want this information out, so they use their vast reserves of money to pay people to say it doesn't happen, when it does, and evidence exists of it happening.

I wouldn't place too much faith in this satanic-led world.

Can you provide a link to this study please?

Astroqualia · Apr 9, 2021

Kylie said:
Can you provide a link to this study please?

I found it several months ago, and from googling it again, it seems to have been retracted. Pretty par for the course, since those studies tend to go against the desired narrative of those with deep pockets tied to the pharma industry that profit off vaccines. There is another one that showed a huge increase in autism in vaccinated vs unvaccinated children, also gone. It's hard to find information that the extremely wealthy do not want to get out, and take active measures in hushing. Here is a starting point to where you could do your own research in, if you wanted to be informed about this issue:

30 Scientific Studies Showing the Link between Vaccines and Autism

Ponderous Curmudgeon · Apr 9, 2021

Astroqualia said:
Vaccines can and do cause autism. There was an analytical study of hundreds of other studies that showed a several hundred percent increase in autism for children who received specific vaccinations over the course of several years. The problem is, the mainstream evil folk don't want this information out, so they use their vast reserves of money to pay people to say it doesn't happen, when it does, and evidence exists of it happening.

I wouldn't place too much faith in this satanic-led world.

Oh but you do, my observation is that conspiracy theorists such as you put far more faith in Satan than anyone else.

Kylie · Apr 9, 2021

Astroqualia said:
I found it several months ago, and from googling it again, it seems to have been retracted. Pretty par for the course, since those studies tend to go against the desired narrative of those with deep pockets tied to the pharma industry that profit off vaccines. There is another one that showed a huge increase in autism in vaccinated vs unvaccinated children, also gone. It's hard to find information that the extremely wealthy do not want to get out, and take active measures in hushing. Here is a starting point to where you could do your own research in, if you wanted to be informed about this issue:

30 Scientific Studies Showing the Link between Vaccines and Autism

I don't see any links on that page to actual studies.

Also, you can't conclude that the reason it was retracted was because the pro-vaccine people forced it to be retracted.

And if being vaccinated is so bad, why is it that members of the US military require vaccinations? Does the military gain from weakening their soldiers?

Astroqualia · Apr 9, 2021

Kylie said:
I don't see any links on that page to actual studies.

Also, you can't conclude that the reason it was retracted was because the pro-vaccine people forced it to be retracted.

And if being vaccinated is so bad, why is it that members of the US military require vaccinations? Does the military gain from weakening their soldiers?

Are you unable to research for yourself using keywords to find content, do you require to be spoonfed sources? How about this, venmo me 20 bucks for an hour of my time, and I'll spend that time to supply many links to studies. It's a waste of time to Google for people who are too lazy to inform themselves, and just want to likely armchair deny whatever source info does come up. I've been down this road many times, and after several years of providing source info and debating about it, don't like to waste my finite time on earth doing this.

I never said there was objectively undeniable proof of pro vaccine folk forcing to retract studies. Once you tie many different aspects of how our world operates underneath the public facade, it becomes apparent. If you expect nefarious, wealthy, influential people to just nonchalantly talk about how they act in this way, that seems like foolishness, to me.

The vaccines given by the government to the military aren't the same as the vaccines given to babies. That's akin to saying apples are apples, granny Smith apples are exactly the same as another species of apples. It's simply not the case.

Astroqualia · Apr 9, 2021

Ponderous Curmudgeon said:
Oh but you do, my observation is that conspiracy theorists such as you put far more faith in Satan than anyone else.

...what? Why are you just applying backwards logic to what I said? Who has any faith in Satan? Satan has clear actions in this world, as scripture says Satan is the god of this world. What do you think that means? It does not mean he is powerless.

Kylie · Apr 9, 2021

Astroqualia said:
Are you unable to research for yourself using keywords to find content, do you require to be spoonfed sources? How about this, venmo me 20 bucks for an hour of my time, and I'll spend that time to supply many links to studies. It's a waste of time to Google for people who are too lazy to inform themselves, and just want to likely armchair deny whatever source info does come up. I've been down this road many times, and after several years of providing source info and debating about it, don't like to waste my finite time on earth doing this.

I never said there was objectively undeniable proof of pro vaccine folk forcing to retract studies. Once you tie many different aspects of how our world operates underneath the public facade, it becomes apparent. If you expect nefarious, wealthy, influential people to just nonchalantly talk about how they act in this way, that seems like foolishness, to me.

The vaccines given by the government to the military aren't the same as the vaccines given to babies. That's akin to saying apples are apples, granny Smith apples are exactly the same as another species of apples. It's simply not the case.

So, you want me to do your homework. You got nothing. Just conspiracy fantasies that you have zero evidence for.

Astroqualia · Apr 9, 2021

Kylie said:
So, you want me to do your homework. You got nothing. Just conspiracy fantasies that you have zero evidence for.

Wrong.
I already did my homework years ago, and you are now seeking for me to provide a copy of my homework, instead of doing it yourself, as I did my own work years ago. It's not my fault you're late to the game and unable to type words into a search engine and browse around, critically thinking about both sides to a big issue.

If telling yourself I have no evidence is what you want to believe, you're likely going to believe it regardless of any proof I would potentially find. Which brings me back around to, I've been down this road many times, and it tends to be a waste of time. Believe what you want.

Kylie · Apr 9, 2021

Astroqualia said:
Wrong.
I already did my homework years ago, and you are now seeking for me to provide a copy of my homework, instead of doing it yourself, as I did my own work years ago. It's not my fault you're late to the game and unable to type words into a search engine and browse around, critically thinking about both sides to a big issue.

If telling yourself I have no evidence is what you want to believe, you're likely going to believe it regardless of any proof I would potentially find. Which brings me back around to, I've been down this road many times, and it tends to be a waste of time. Believe what you want.

If you want me to accept as valid the claim you are making, you must support your claim. I'm not going to accept your claim just because you say you have verified it. The burden of proof rests squarely on your shoulders.

Astroqualia · Apr 9, 2021

Kylie said:
If you want me to accept as valid the claim you are making, you must support your claim. I'm not going to accept your claim just because you say you have verified it. The burden of proof rests squarely on your shoulders.

This brings us back around to the inability to conduct one's own research with some materials provided as a starting point. It isn't my job to make you believe anything, or to spoonfeed you bits of information. What I do is tell others the honest result of what I have found, and let it be on them to find out pertinent information if curious, especially considering the amount of time it takes to gather resources that have been found and viewed literally months or years ago. Some subjects I will heavily source, when the materials are actually still existent to share. In this case, digging through scientific studies that I already have dug through several times in the past is simply not how I will be spending my Friday night.

I tend to notice those who argue about the other side needing to provide proof and such, are individuals who tend to disregard anything not accepted as an official story by authority. Do you know what I do when our roles are reversed? I grab a few keywords the opposing view says, and I educate myself on both sides of the topic at hand, instead of asking to be spoonfed. This road inevitably leads to a path where I take the time to provide the info, and the other person just blanket discredits it. Dont believe it if you want to, I don't care, as most people don't believe the truth anyway.

Kylie · Apr 10, 2021

Astroqualia said:
This brings us back around to the inability to conduct one's own research with some materials provided as a starting point. It isn't my job to make you believe anything, or to spoonfeed you bits of information. What I do is tell others the honest result of what I have found, and let it be on them to find out pertinent information if curious, especially considering the amount of time it takes to gather resources that have been found and viewed literally months or years ago. Some subjects I will heavily source, when the materials are actually still existent to share. In this case, digging through scientific studies that I already have dug through several times in the past is simply not how I will be spending my Friday night.

I tend to notice those who argue about the other side needing to provide proof and such, are individuals who tend to disregard anything not accepted as an official story by authority. Do you know what I do when our roles are reversed? I grab a few keywords the opposing view says, and I educate myself on both sides of the topic at hand, instead of asking to be spoonfed. This road inevitably leads to a path where I take the time to provide the info, and the other person just blanket discredits it. Dont believe it if you want to, I don't care, as most people don't believe the truth anyway.

Do you understand burden of proof?

JohnEmmett · Apr 10, 2021

Kylie said:
Do you understand burden of proof?

Do your homework

sesquiterpene · Apr 10, 2021

Astroqualia said:
I found it several months ago, and from googling it again, it seems to have been retracted.

It's a bit of a problem, isn't it? The history of "research" by antivaxxers is one of monumental incompetence, often bolstered by pure fraud. I mean, how incompetent do you need to be to have a paper retracted twice? Here's a link detailing some of the sad history:
Search Results for “Autism and vaccines” – Page 2 – Retraction Watch

Astroqualia · Apr 10, 2021

sesquiterpene said:
It's a bit of a problem, isn't it? The history of "research" by antivaxxers is one of monumental incompetence, often bolstered by pure fraud. I mean, how incompetent do you need to be to have a paper retracted twice? Here's a link detailing some of the sad history:
Search Results for “Autism and vaccines” – Page 2 – Retraction Watch

Not at all, the problem is mentioned above, but folks seem content to glaze over most of a post in order to just harp on one isolated point. A retraction of a paper does not automatically equate to objective incorrectness. Agendas and control of information have a lot to do with it.

Opposition to Vaccination

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Your God is my God... Ruth said, so say I.

Defeater of Illogic

Born-again Truthseeker

Defeater of Illogic

Born-again Truthseeker

Well-Known Member

Defeater of Illogic

Born-again Truthseeker

Born-again Truthseeker

Defeater of Illogic

Born-again Truthseeker

Defeater of Illogic

Born-again Truthseeker

Defeater of Illogic

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Born-again Truthseeker

Similar threads