Reply To: Vaccine contaminants and safety

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


“…I realised [Dr. Puztai] was being pilloried because he was calling into question the Big Agri ‘Frankenfood’ business. His experiments, though flawed, gave ample reason to follow them up, using better practices”

His experiments were followed up, and continue to be; the scientific consensus is that genetically modified foods must be tested for safety on a case-by-case basis. But the same goes for anything potentially edible, and our present-day lists of what is edible and what is poisonous are based on millennia of trial and error. In this respect, GM foods are no different to any others; they are merely newer.

“So all those who eat what they consider are healthy foods, are selfish in your eyes […] ?”

I’m not saying they’re particularly selfish people; we are all selfish people, selfishness is in the nature of us that we should be striving to overcome. But yes, I am saying that it’s a selfish concern; a concern about the self.

We should remember that globally, the major danger around food and nutrition is not getting enough of it; famine and malnutrition. When genetic modification can improve nutritional security it should be praised and welcomed, not demonised with ungrounded fears and emotive sound-bites such as ‘frankenfoods’.

“I haven’t said, nor implied, [that “smart meters” are] a ‘death ray’ machine, but that it is very dangerous, and has killed many people, and will kill many more”

I take it you mean that the communication components are deadly, which is what I meant by “death ray”. At present this is very unlikely to be true, because they use the same communications infrastructure as the rest of the various communications networks; there is no health basis for singling out “smart meters”. 5G however uses much higher frequencies than before, and health testing of those higher frequencies is insufficiently public.

“WHO Admits Polio Vaccines Are Causing Polio”

It’s not an “admission”; it is a problem with the oral vaccine that was known and anticipated. The article merely adds misleading anti-vax spin to the health institutions’ own monitoring reports.