Lies Anti-Vaxxers Tell: "Too Many Vaccines Overloads The Immune System"

[Ender]

Guess you havent done your research then.

YOU are the one who won't supply the links.

And I've done tons of research on vaxs and the dangers and have posted plenty- but why should I continue to post when it just turns into name-calling and absolute denial of anything that's not government?

[donnay]

And I'd rep you, if I could.

Gotcha covered.

[specsaregood]

Guess not. I have better uses of my time than to research fellow RPFers. They can state their views if they want them known. Why does she need you to stick up for her?

because I know how you guys work, you'll accuse somebody of something then if you don't get an immediate reply denying it, you'll go around for years making the same damn claim and say you never heard otherwise. Well here you go:

I don't ever advocate for mandatory vaccines. Moron.

now you've got your quote, pretty succinct. I don't ever expect to see any of you claiming she supports mandatory vaccinations ever again, right?

[Firestarter]

In the Original Post is an opinion piece by the WHO without evidence.
Here’s the best “evidence” I’ve found that vaccines do NOT work (and plenty of it); “LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION” by J.T. Biggs, from 1912 when “science” still meant something: http://www.whale.to/a/biggs.html

The Leicester Anti-Vaccination League was formed in 1869. The stalwart little band of pioneers, numbering less than twenty persons, laboured on, until they grew numerically to such an extent that, whereas in 1867 over 94 per cent. of the children born were vaccinated, in 1897 only 1.3 per cent, of the infants were subjected to the trying ordeal. And that low percentage of vaccinations in the last-mentioned year was arrived at in spite of—and perhaps, to some extent, as the natural outcome of—many thousands of prosecutions against defaulters. These were instituted under the oppressive Act of 1867, and resulted in the infliction of fines, the levying of distress warrants, and the commitment of parents to prison. Obviously, those figures demonstrate that the people of Leicester were following the lead of theAnti-Vaccination League, and that not one class only, but all sections of the townspeople, were equally resolute in their opposition and detestation of the hateful legal enactments.

The experience of the terrible smallpox epidemic of 1871-73, when many thousands of vaccinated persons contracted the disease, and several hundreds died as the result of the alleged "protection" (!) having lamentably failed in its hour of trial, produced in the minds of the thinking people of Leicester pronounced hostility against the blood-polluting quackery, which was found to be more baneful in its ultimate results than the disease it was supposed to prevent.

Here's the reaction by Angelatc, that shows that Leicester wasn't only refusing vaccines, but they also pioneered "alternative treatment" like we can only find in a police state...

Here's what your anti-vax site didn't tell you:

1. Vaccines were required by law in Leicester, and the government would send inspectors around to ensure the kiddies were current.
2. The people demanded that the government build hospitals dedicated entirely to the containment of infectious diseases.
3. People were required to report sickness to the government.
4. People were offered bounties for reporting sick neighbors.
5. Sick people were quarantined in the afore-mentioned hospitals, as were anybody who had been in contact with them.
6. Doctors coming to examine the hospitals were required to have vaccines.
7. Doctors and nurses in the hospitals were required to be vaccinated and revaccinated.
8. When the local anti-vaxxers, the "Sanitary Committee" got the mandate dropped, hospital staffers began to contract the disease and die.


So if you want a government that sends inspectors around to your door, pays your neighbors to spy on you, drags your whole family out to quarantine you if someone has a fever, to spend weeks in a hospital with other sick people, then the Leicester Method might be for you.

From the link posted by Angelatc:

Smallpox was a major cause of death and morbidity in England in the eighteenth century. From the late eighteenth century onwards it began to decline, although there were two large nationwide epidemics in 1838 and 1871.

So when the death caused by smallpox was already declining, they quickly administered a vaccine…

[donnay]

Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
I don't ever advocate for mandatory vaccines. Moron.

now you've got your quote, pretty succinct. I don't ever expect to see any of you claiming she supports mandatory vaccinations ever again, right?

I'm glad they make you get the shot. Working in health care you shouldn't be allowed to spread disease from one patient to the next. That's disgusting.

I'd make it illegal for people who are allergic to, or refuse vaccines to hold health care jobs, period. Or at least make it legal for hospitals to fire those people. I should have the right to know that my nurse isn't an anti-science loon imitating a walking Petri dish. And in an operating room? How did these peope manage to choose health care as a profession for heaven's sakes? "We don't believe in post-1700 medicine, but we're still going to collect our paychecks."

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...vaccine+debate

[helmuth_hubener]

I don't ever advocate for mandatory hand washing.

I'm glad they make you wash your hands. Working in fast food you shouldn't be allowed to spread disease from one customer to the next.

Contradiction?

[angelatc]

She has stated it so many times that you would have to willfully ignore them in order to not have seen them.

Thank you. I am staunchly libertarian - I am against mandatory everything.

But being libertarian I also refuse to allow dangerous information to stand uncorrected. Not getting children vaccinated increases the odds that your children will get sick.


That's the plain hard truth.

[angelatc]

So you’ve posted “evidence” already on this forum... I guess you leave it there because this “evidence” is too difficult for a simple guy like me to understand.

Anti-vaxxers are literally hallucinating in order to make their scenarios plausible. That's just a different reality than most of us live in. I can't fix that, but I can try to keep the mass hysteria from spreading unchallenged through the forums.

Hallucination #1: The data supplied by the WHO is either flawed or fabricated for some reason:

You can’t seriously call the opinion piece by the WHO that you’ve also posted here "evidence":

Their the opinion is based solidly in facts. They've studied medicine, gathered data, made predictions and tracked results. They don't need to fabricate conspiracy theories and/or ignore data to provide evidence for their theories, because they have actual evidence.

Hallucination #2: Ignoring large portions of a document in order to focus on a small segment that, when taken out of context, seemingly validates the hallucination.

Here’s the best “evidence” I’ve found that vaccines do NOT work (and plenty of it); “LEICESTER: SANITATION versus VACCINATION” by J.T. Biggs, from 1912 when “science” still meant something: http://www.whale.to/a/biggs.html

Citing a literal pig farmer citing data from over 100 years ago but yet ignoring current data supplied by scientists from all over the world.

Here's the best part: I cited the same flipping document in my rebuttal pointing out portions that your sources omitted in their screeds. Note that, perhaps inadvertently, you just now switched from using that 1912 paper to prove that vaccines were not necessary to proving that vaccines do not work. If the latter theory was true, Leicester would have been the only region to be smallpox free, but that wasn't the case. Thank God. I would hate to think about the people who quote this tripe being on "Sanitation Committees" ripping families from their homes and forcing them into asylums.

This part is true:

I guess your point is not that alternative treatment is better than vaccines.

You would be correct. My point is not that alternative treatment is better than vaccines.

Halllucination #3: Ignoring everything I said and repeating the same exact theory without addressing or rebutting the counter-point:

So when the death caused by smallpox was already declining, they quickly administered a vaccine…

Please stop repeating the same point over and over without addressing the rebuttals already posted. Diseases always wane and ebb. But every single disease that has either literally or essentially disappeared has only done so immediately after a vaccine program hit target vaccine rates in the population, with one exception. The exception is for a disease that they do not expect to see results from for another 10 years.

Which scenario makes more sense?

A: Evil greedy (even Salk) people were smart enough to know that the a disease which had existed for millions of years was getting ready to permanently die out naturally and so they quickly introduced a vaccine to cash in. Their predictions were right every single time, even before computers existed and global communications took weeks.

B.The diseases vanished because the vaccines worked as predicted, and when they didn't work exactly as predicted, they adjusted dosages and/or the vaccine schedule to improve the success rate.

(Most people will choose B.)

Again, hallucination #3: Entirely ignoring the point I just made.

You’re not really saying India as a prime example for the use of vaccines, do you?

Of course I am. Why wouldn't I? My data stands firm. The contention was that hygiene brought about disease eradication. India has made no significant changes to hygiene or living conditions in the past 10 years, yet the vaccine preventable disease rates have plummeted as predicted as the population reached high levels of vaccinations. That proves the theory that vaccines work, and disproves the sanitation theory, while simultaneously dealing a serious blow to the theory that diseases just die out naturally.

And now, for something completely different:

Member of Bilderberg Melinda Gates, wife of the so-called “richest man in theworld”, is a real philanthropist and founded the “Bill and Melinda GatesFoundation”, that is trying to get “wild polio” out of this world.
Apparently it is really bad when(only) several hundreds of children die of “wild polio”, so ten thousands ofchildren in India get paralysed by Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis (NPAFP),caused by the vaccine: http://humansarefree.com/2016/05/bil...am-caused.html

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3310638/
Of the 3 strains of wild poliovirus (type 1, type 2, and type 3), wild poliovirus type 2 was eradicated in 1999. Case numbers of wild poliovirus type 3 are down to the lowest-ever levels with the no cases reported since a case reported by Nigeria in November 2012. Wildpoliovirus type 1 is still prevalent in Africa and the Middle East, where vaccine rates are still quite low. More evidence that vaccines, and not nature, are responsible.

Acute flaccid paralysis isn't caused by the vaccine. That's pretty easily proved with the simple fact that only certain isolated regions in India are seeing an uptick in the NPAFP cases despite the vaccines being administered worldwide.

Now go ahead - ignore every counter-point I've graciously and patiently provided and throw out some new talking points instead. Make sure to use the word YOU a lot. That always helps.

[acptulsa]

I'm at a loss how it's harmful to take the common sense approach, and let a child's immune system learn how to fight diseases one at a time. Maybe most--even the overwhelming majority of--children can handle having their immune systems bombarded with multiple strains of dead bacteria, and can actually learn to recognize and deal with the lot at once. But where's the harm in limiting how many subjects their little immune systems must study at one time?

[Natural Citizen]

Well it's true that the pro freedom of choice folks don't always get everything right. But neither do the anti freedom of choice folks.

One thing that is always true, though, is that nobody has a right to have their feelings addressed.

[angelatc]

So provide the studies and data!!!!

Do you EVER post anything regarding vaccines that is not either a direct attack against those you don't agree with (ad hominem fallacy) or an appeal to authority (such as the government declaring all vaccines are safe, therefore we have nothing to worry about)?

You never post anything scientific or that can ever be debated....

“In the face of these normal events, it seems unlikely that the number of separate antigens contained in childhood vaccines …would represent an appreciable added burden on the immune system that would be immunosuppressive.”

https://www.nap.edu/catalog/2138/adv...g-on-causality

http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd...sfunction.aspx

[acptulsa]

“...it seems unlikely..."

How terribly reassuring.

Now. What is the proven or alleged advantage to doing them all at once, or in such short order?

[donnay]

Anti-vaxxers are literally hallucinating in order to make their scenarios plausible. That's just a different reality than most of us live in. I can't fix that, but I can try to keep the mass hysteria from spreading unchallenged through the forums.

Hallucination #1: The data supplied by the WHO is either flawed or fabricated for some reason:


Their the opinion is based solidly in facts. They've studied medicine, gathered data, made predictions and tracked results. They don't need to fabricate conspiracy theories and/or ignore data to provide evidence for their theories, because they have actual evidence.

Hallucination #2: Ignoring large portions of a document in order to focus on a small segment that, when taken out of context, seemingly validates the hallucination.


Citing a literal pig farmer citing data from over 100 years ago but yet ignoring current data supplied by scientists from all over the world.

Here's the best part: I cited the same flipping document in my rebuttal pointing out portions that your sources omitted in their screeds. Note that, perhaps inadvertently, you just now switched from using that 1912 paper to prove that vaccines were not necessary to proving that vaccines do not work. If the latter theory was true, Leicester would have been the only region to be smallpox free, but that wasn't the case. Thank God. I would hate to think about the people who quote this tripe being on "Sanitation Committees" ripping families from their homes and forcing them into asylums.

This part is true:



You would be correct. My point is not that alternative treatment is better than vaccines.

Halllucination #3: Ignoring everything I said and repeating the same exact theory without addressing or rebutting the counter-point:



Please stop repeating the same point over and over without addressing the rebuttals already posted. Diseases always wane and ebb. But every single disease that has either literally or essentially disappeared has only done so immediately after a vaccine program hit target vaccine rates in the population, with one exception. The exception is for a disease that they do not expect to see results from for another 10 years.

Which scenario makes more sense?

A: Evil greedy (even Salk) people were smart enough to know that the a disease which had existed for millions of years was getting ready to permanently die out naturally and so they quickly introduced a vaccine to cash in. Their predictions were right every single time, even before computers existed and global communications took weeks.

B.The diseases vanished because the vaccines worked as predicted, and when they didn't work exactly as predicted, they adjusted dosages and/or the vaccine schedule to improve the success rate.

(Most people will choose B.)

Again, hallucination #3: Entirely ignoring the point I just made.


Of course I am. Why wouldn't I? My data stands firm. The contention was that hygiene brought about disease eradication. India has made no significant changes to hygiene or living conditions in the past 10 years, yet the vaccine preventable disease rates have plummeted as predicted as the population reached high levels of vaccinations. That proves the theory that vaccines work, and disproves the sanitation theory, while simultaneously dealing a serious blow to the theory that diseases just die out naturally.

And now, for something completely different:


https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3310638/
Of the 3 strains of wild poliovirus (type 1, type 2, and type 3), wild poliovirus type 2 was eradicated in 1999. Case numbers of wild poliovirus type 3 are down to the lowest-ever levels with the no cases reported since a case reported by Nigeria in November 2012. Wildpoliovirus type 1 is still prevalent in Africa and the Middle East, where vaccine rates are still quite low. More evidence that vaccines, and not nature, are responsible.

Acute flaccid paralysis isn't caused by the vaccine. That's pretty easily proved with the simple fact that only certain isolated regions in India are seeing an uptick in the NPAFP cases despite the vaccines being administered worldwide.

Now go ahead - ignore every counter-point I've graciously and patiently provided and throw out some new talking points instead. Make sure to use the word YOU a lot. That always helps.

Smoke, Mirrors, and the “Disappearance” Of Polio
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/20...ance-of-polio/

CDC and Friends Sprinting Towards the Polio “Finish Line,”
http://drsuzanne.net/wp-content/uplo...-Humphries.pdf

Confirmed India’s Polio Eradication Campaign Caused 47,500 Cases of Vaccine-Induced Polio Paralysis
https://realfarmacy.com/confirmed-in...lio-paralysis/

Acute Flaccid Myelitis and Routine Childhood Vaccinations: This is Nothing New
http://vaxtruth.org/2016/11/acute-fl...s-nothing-new/

If India is polio-free, why are children still getting paralysed by the polio virus?
https://scroll.in/pulse/803485/if-in...he-polio-virus

[angelatc]

I'm at a loss how it's harmful to take the common sense approach, and let a child's immune system learn how to fight diseases one at a time. Maybe most--even the overwhelming majority of--children can handle having their immune systems bombarded with multiple strains of dead bacteria, and can actually learn to recognize and deal with the lot at once. But where's the harm in limiting how many subjects their little immune systems must study at one time?

The child encounters thousands of new bacteria every single day. At no point are we ever battling one disease at a time.

At one point, I thought this theory had some merit but there is literally no evidence to support it. There's no harm in getting multi-dose vaccines.

How terribly reassuring.

Now. What is the proven or alleged advantage to doing them all at once, or in such short order?

The potential harm in not getting multi-dose vaccines are:

1. First and foremost - leaving the child exposed for longer than necessary.

2. The parent problem: Multiple doctor visits cost multiple fees, so it raises costs. It also increases the odds that parents won't make all the follow up visits required.

3. Forcing the child to get far more injections than really necessary.

[Natural Citizen]

“In the face of these normal events, it seems unlikely that the number of separate antigens contained in childhood vaccines …would represent an appreciable added burden on the immune system that would be immunosuppressive.”

https://www.nap.edu/catalog/2138/adv...g-on-causality

http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd...sfunction.aspx

I've never even heard of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program


From your first link...Executive Summary

P.L. 99-660 stated that the review was to include those vaccines covered by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) and hepatitis B vaccines were added for consideration because of the increasing use of these vaccines and the supposition that in the near future they could be mandatory vaccines covered by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

I bet we're paying for it, though.

Chapter 2 contains an in-depth discussion of the approach used by the committee to weight the evidence and assess causality.

Didn't read the second link yet.

[angelatc]

Smoke, Mirrors, and the “Disappearance” Of Polio
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/20...ance-of-polio/

CDC and Friends Sprinting Towards the Polio “Finish Line,”
http://drsuzanne.net/wp-content/uplo...-Humphries.pdf

Confirmed India’s Polio Eradication Campaign Caused 47,500 Cases of Vaccine-Induced Polio Paralysis
https://realfarmacy.com/confirmed-in...lio-paralysis/

Acute Flaccid Myelitis and Routine Childhood Vaccinations: This is Nothing New
http://vaxtruth.org/2016/11/acute-fl...s-nothing-new/

If India is polio-free, why are children still getting paralysed by the polio virus?
https://scroll.in/pulse/803485/if-in...he-polio-virus

THanks for making my point. Ignore everything I post and post a bunch of links that we've already addressed, but anti-vaxxers are literally blind to.

Case in point: that list link. Amy and I both went over the differences between NFP and polio. I used to think the anti-vaxxers were willfully ignoring our data. Now I think that their brains just don't function logically. They literally create alternate realities.

[helmuth_hubener]

Our civilization is collapsing and dying.
It is literally in death throes.
I can understand annoyance at people who are incorrect in their understanding...
about something.
Anything.
I can.
And yet, at some point,
At some outrageously horrible point,
At some point when everything you love is being burned to the already black-charred ground,
And the world and the loves and the ways of your forebears are ashes, stone-cold, long-forgotten,
And the prospects are dim and your allies are thin, and the world which now dies, again never may rise,
It is time to stop poking and prodding your friends, your few friends,
With meaningless, trivial pinheads.

This goes for both sides, all.
Consider your ways.

[angelatc]

I've never even heard of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

It's an important part of the conspiracy theory. Background: First, you have to realize there isn't much money in traditional vaccines because the patents expired long ago. So when lawyers started trying to cash in on the "Vaccines Are Dangerous!!!' nonsense, the drug makers threatened to pull out of the American market unless they were protected from nuisance lawsuits where verdicts would be handed down by people on juries based on emotional, not scientific opinions.

Congress devised the NVICP, which is sort of a vaccine court where decisions on compensation are made on evidence and not emotion. It's funded by a surcharge on our vaccines.

[acptulsa]

The child encounters thousands of new bacteria every single day. At no point are we ever battling one disease at a time.

At one point, I thought this theory had some merit but there is literally no evidence to support it. There's no harm in getting multi-dose vaccines. The potential harm in not getting multi-dose vaccines are:

1. First and foremost - leaving the child exposed for longer than necessary.

2. The parent problem: Multiple doctor visits cost multiple fees, so it raises costs. It also increases the odds that parents won't make all the follow up visits required.

3. Forcing the child to get far more injections than really necessary.

Kind of weak counterpoints to someone thinking it 'unlikely' that your individual child won't have their immune system adversely affected by, or run into the poorly understood risks of autism over, a massive dose of multiple dead but deadly diseases.

Hardly worth vilifying parents who choose to spread them out. I don't see anything to be gained by treating them that way.

[angelatc]

Kind of weak counterpoints to someone thinking it 'unlikely' that your individual child won't have their immune system adversely affected by, or run into the poorly understood risks of autism over, a massive dose of multiple dead but deadly diseases.

Hardly worth vilifying parents who choose to spread them out. I don't see anything to be gained by treating them that way.

Not vilifying anybody. Just saying that there's no legitimate reason to spread them out. You asked about advantages of multi-dosing, I gave you 3.

It just frustrates me off that the anti-vaxxers spread their disfunction so deep that some people can't help but start to believe at least a little of it. There's no link to autism. There's no evidence that multi-dose vaccines are harmful.

[euphemia]

It sounds personal. It shouldn't really matter what choices people make as long as you are still free to make yours.

[Natural Citizen]

It's an important part of the conspiracy theory. Background: First, you have to realize there isn't much money in traditional vaccines because the patents expired long ago. So when lawyers started trying to cash in on the "Vaccines Are Dangerous!!!' nonsense, the drug makers threatened to pull out of the American market unless they were protected from nuisance lawsuits where verdicts would be handed down by people on juries based on emotional, not scientific opinions.

Congress devised the NVICP, which is sort of a vaccine court where decisions on compensation are made on evidence and not emotion. It's funded by a surcharge on our vaccines.

Oh, I see. Is that what you meant when you said that the anti vaccine folks would end up becoming the vehicle for more government? It does make sense.

I didn't know we paid for it via surcharge.

Anyway. Good to know. As I said, I never even heard of it.

As far as vaccination, I'm not against it. Although I did strech them out a little.

That was actually a requirement by the NCAA. Which I also did not know until my son got his NCAA certification.

[angelatc]

It sounds personal. It shouldn't really matter what choices people make as long as you are still free to make yours.

Get the anti-vaxxers to stop poisoning the well and we'll talk. But I will get booted from the forum long before I let the anti-vaxxers spread these dangerous lies unchallenged. They're here specifically targeting new young parents who are especially emotionally vulnerable to the propaganda.

[acptulsa]

Not vilifying anybody. Just saying that there's no legitimate reason to spread them out. You asked about advantages of multi-dosing, I gave you 3.

It just frustrates me off that the anti-vaxxers spread their disfunction so deep that some people can't help but start to believe at least a little of it. There's no link to autism. There's no evidence that multi-dose vaccines are harmful.

Because no parent worth his or her salt is satisfied with a null 'proof'.

There is no proven link, but there is also no proof that the risk doesn't exist. So let people spread them out, if that aids their peace of mind. Don't call them anti-anything over a trifle like that, unless you want them to become that very thing out of spite.

I thought we learned the hard way over the course of two Ron Paul campaigns that the way to convince people yours is the reasonable position is to be reasonable.

[Natural Citizen]

It sounds personal. It shouldn't really matter what choices people make as long as you are still free to make yours.

Yeah, but what she said makes sense. When people make it a public bunch of drama instead of keeping family decisions personal in the first place is when it seems like government gets involved and makes rules for everyone.

In other words, the squeaky wheel makes the most noise.

[angelatc]

There is no proven link, but there is also no proof that the risk doesn't exist.

That's not how science works. In keeping on-topic, I am going to go back to the title of my thread and simply point out that you just stated my simple point: There's no evidence that too many vaccines overload immune systems.

But the anti-vaxxers lie and say there is a real danger.

[donnay]

THanks for making my point. Ignore everything I post and post a bunch of links that we've already addressed, but anti-vaxxers are literally blind to.

Case in point: that list link. Amy and I both went over the differences between NFP and polio. I used to think the anti-vaxxers were willfully ignoring our data. Now I think that their brains just don't function logically. They literally create alternate realities.

You KEEP on saying you proved things, but you didn't. When the officials keep changing the goal post by renaming a disease to suit their needs to push more vaccines on the people, it isn't proving anything.

As I have stated over and over again, I am all for rational debate, but it is hard to do so with an irrational debater. You drew first blood sweetheart, not me.

[euphemia]

But don't you think young parents have access to information without worrying what one or two posters think? Vaccination today is not what it was when my daughter was little and it certainly isn't what it was when I was little. The perspective is certainly different now, and I think people should be very cautious about what they agree to have done to their children.

Honestly, if the children are not attending formal school, there is no reason that the CDC schedule has to be the standard. It's really okay to delay some of the vaccinations. I had measles, rubella, chicken pox, and mumps. I do not know one person who died from those diseases. I know a few people who had polio and were left with disabilities, but they survived.

Disease is not the end of the world. Loss of liberty is. I just want you to be careful how you lay out your argument because it sounds very much like you agree with the government standard and think everyone must comply, and that those who don't are idiots. Just think about it. If I were doing it over today I would not go by the CDC standard. I am not an idiot. I just don't agree that age two is the cut off. It is okay to space out the vaccines and delay or ingnore some. Or not vaccinate if the risk of exposure is low.

[angelatc]

Yeah, but what she said makes sense. When people make it a public bunch of drama instead of keeping family decisions personal in the first place is when it seems like government gets involved and makes rules for everyone.

In other words, the squeaky wheel makes the most noise.

BINGO! For the most part we've managed to avoid mandatory vaccinations. But if the charlatans manage to convince enough people that vaccines are more dangerous than disease, the government will simply stop politely ignoring them.

Personally I think that the greenmedinfo/naturalnews/whale.to people are just creating a mass hysteria so they can cash in on it. But if I wanted to create a conspiracy, I'd assume that ala 1984, the resistance is part of the plan.

[angelatc]

You KEEP on saying you proved things, but you didn't. When the officials keep changing the goal post by renaming a disease to suit their needs to push more vaccines on the people, it isn't proving anything.

As I have stated over and over again, I am all for rational debate, but it is hard to do so with an irrational debater. You drew first blood sweetheart, not me.

Amazing. She literally does not address a single thing that I posted.