Reply To: Vaccine contaminants and safety

Home Forums Discussion Forum Vaccine contaminants and safety Reply To: Vaccine contaminants and safety


Paul, it’s clear that you haven’t read even Bad Science, let alone Bad Pharma; it is simply impossible to have a meaningful conversation about this sort of subject until you have at least some of the necessary tools.

The assessment of the effects of ethyl and methyl mercury in a system as complex as a living mammal is a hugely complex and technical subject, and just one of a myriad similar assessments; I know for certain that it is way beyond my technical experience, yet you rush in where angels fear to tread. You then attempt to support these claims with sweeping assertions such as “Big Pharma will not give you that opportunity” and “the WHO […] have previously been very credibly accussed of cooperating with the likes of Bill Gates and other ‘human culling’ organisations, to assist spreading a vaccine among Third Country women which […] also sterilised them”. These concern completely the opposite end of the pyramid of human activity, the pinnacle as opposed to the base.

An ocean of highly complex structure with effectively infinite details lie between these two types of assessment and it cannot be ignored; the two simply do not belong together in the same comment. I’m sorry Paul, but this is conspiracy theorists’ type of thinking, like trying to assess momentum transfer in the collapses of the Twin Towers on the basis of whether I personally am Jewish or not.

“The WHO, as the Western Governments ,UN and OPCW have all been compromised.”

This is true, but “compromised” does not mean “puppet”, and the details are all-important. You need to be campaigning for transparency (as Ben Goldacre is) rather than against vaccines. It’s as if you’re campaigning against looking and listening when crossing a road because that’s what governments recommend.

I take it you won’t read Goldacre because “he could be one of the bad guys” and thus might corrupt your thinking?