Reply To: Vaccine contaminants and safety

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

Paul Barbara

@ Clark May 13, 2020 at 23:40
I am still at the same point in ‘Bad Science’, and I’m not likely going to get back to it for a while due to more important reading I have to do.
It’s fine to agree that Regulatory Agencies are ‘captured’, we both agree on that, but that is the whole purpose of Dr. Bolgan and ‘Corvelva’ getting tests done, and though the whole series is not yet complete, demanding government take action to clarify the safety or otherwise of the mandatory children’s vaccines. It is no use at all to wait till tens or hundreds or thousands of kids get seriously injured or killed by these mandatory vaccines, the Precautionary Principle demands the government take immediate action, which they have not done, nor do they show any inclination to do so in the future.
Of course, both sides are biased – Corvelva, over their children’s health, and the government and Big Pharma, over mega-bucks. I’m also biased, in favour of the children and parents.
many if not most of the campaigners backing Corvelva are not ‘anti-vaxxers’, but they demand safe vaccines and proof of efficacy.
Even Dr. Judy Mikovits is not an anti-vaxxer, nor is Bobby Kennedy Jr., they are against unsafe vaccines, and against mandatory vaccines.
I haven’t had time to go back and find the vaccines that Corvelva has had tested, they tested more than 4 (each multiple disease) but only used info re 4, because they didn’t yet have the results from the labs for the others. They found a host of gunk in them which shouldn’t be there, but acknowledged that these were only preliminary results, and more specific and rigorous testing was needed to confirm or negate their preliminary findings.
Regarding the ‘Scientific Approach’ to Covid-19, this should be of interest:

‘COVID CHAOS: A Closer Look At Coronavirus Testing’
‘…Flaws in Testing

This is not the first time coronavirus tests have come into question. In Britain, tests produced under Public Health England (PHE) protocols were found to lack sufficient accuracy and were abandoned. Similarly, in the United States, the CDC’s own tests were also found to be flawed. Other countries including the United States, Spain, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Turkey and India have all reported faulty or inaccurate tests from Chinese suppliers.
Obviously, bad tests means bad results. False negative test results return people who are actually infected with COVID-19 back into the community, confirmed to be safe to enjoy their remaining freedom. If the virus spreads and behaves as the MSM would have us believe, a small number of false negatives could spell disaster…’

Even the designer of the PCR test said it should NOT be used for diagnosis; but then a test that can be skewed to go either way, like a Diebold voting machine, is a handy tool to the PTB if they have a nefarious agenda.
I wonder if anyone on here is going to try to ridicule the PCR test information in the article? Because if it is true, it demolishes the whole concept of using these tests as they are currently being used.

  • This reply was modified 1 year, 1 month ago by modbot.
  • This reply was modified 12 months ago by modbot.