Study Shows Significant Link Between Mercury and Autism

As for quoting RFK Jr.:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-robert-f-kennedy-jr-distorted-vaccine-science1/

https://www.statnews.com/2017/09/22/robert-kennedy-vaccine-safety/

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/common-anti-vaxx-claims

https://www.publichealth.org/public-awareness/understanding-vaccines/vaccine-myths-debunked/

 

I want to make something clear to those of you who refer to conspiracies-many of us are fed up with your allegations of suppression. We have lived through 4 years of a pathpological liar of a President spewing out over 20,000 lies, absolute lies proven false. His last fiasco after 2 months of claiming votes were fake after being able to provide one piece of evidence resulted in fools being manipulated by him to have a tantrum for the entire world to see.

Some of you appeared conditionedby him to believe it is acceptable and rational communication to assert something you can not prove as a fact, i.e., " It's just pushed to the side and suppressed." What is "IT'S"?

How do you know " IT'S" is supressed. If it was in fact suppressed you would not know it exists to know it was suppressed. So finish your lazy allegation you though in as an aside. What is "IT'S" and how was it suppressed?

Next, if you make an assertion the very thing suppressed is in one of many links you can provide what the hell does that mean? If you can provide the links how is it suppressed?

There are in fact millions of links and articles on the internet. The fact you can not find the ones you think back up your beliefs, does not mean they are suppressed it could simply mean they do not exist because your assertions are false or mistaken and so they have never been written.

Can you please if you want to be taken seriously not pull out conspiracy references when you can not back up a point. Its a waste of your time and anyone else's who wants to debate with you. Either back up a position with something or don't but claiming conspiracy theories of supression is why you can't find things to back you up is crap.

As for what you have presented its already been repudiated thank you.

 

They are not the same like crack cocaine is not the same as Cocaine HCl.

 

So does this study explain what's wrong with Biden?

 

Again you use a false analogy. Thimerosal is not related to Methyl Mercury in the way you think crack cocaine is to cocaine.

The fact you even attempt to use such analogy shows you can't grasp the chemical compound structures of all 4 types and why Thimerosal is not managed in the body the way Methyl Mercury is let alone cocaine or crack cocaine.

 

Which study do you refer to? Interesting when you guys have no knowledge of the topic you make pronouncements on you need to deflect.

So which study? Yah yah. You love Trump, you don't wear a mask, no one tells you what to do an d everyone who disagrees with you is wrong. Got it.

 

Have it your way Death, I could not care less. Heavy metals and cocaine are not good for the human body.

 

Of course heavy metals and cocaine are not good for the human body. Why argued they were? Peace. Hey I respect your opinions. I sound nasty writing back. Just debating. Thanks. If I sounded know it all I apologize. Just debating.

 

You should totally go on tour, this material is Gold Jerry, Gold!

 

Newman.

 

Kenny Bania actually.

 

The fact that you trust the CDC is, in my view, an admission that you're not very well informed as to their history. Here's a good article on them, published almost 20 years ago:
**
October 18, 2001

A leading vaccine injury law group announced today that their firm is now in possession of an unreleased confidential report authored by Centers for Disease Control scientists which studied autism as a potential neurological injury caused by mercury in children’s vaccines. An announcement was made by the law firm of Waters & Kraus, the firm that filed the first known lawsuit alleging that a mercury preservative in children’s vaccines caused neurological damage to an infant ultimately diagnosed with autism.

Andy Waters, the lead attorney in the firm, warned that a different version of the report was eventually made public and has been cited by the recent Institute of Medicine study as inconclusive on the issue of whether the mercury-based vaccine preservative known as thimerosal has contributed to cause a nationwide epidemic of regressive autism and other neurological disorders in small children. The confidential version of the study, however, clearly demonstrated that an exposure to more than 62.5 micrograms of mercury within the first three months of life significantly increased a child’s risk of developing autism. Specifically, the study found a 2.48 times increased risk of autism – that is to say, children with the exposure were more than twice as likely to develop autism as children not exposed. In the United States, courts of law have generally held that a relative increased risk of 2.0 or higher is sufficient to substantiate that a given exposure causes disease. As but one example, in the case of Cook v. United States, 545 F.Supp. 306, at 308 (Northern District – California 1982) the Court stated that, “in a vaccine case, a relative risk greater than 2.0 establishes that there is a greater than 50% chance that the injury was caused by the vaccine.”

Waters indicated that, in many of the cases his firm has evaluated, including the case filed in a Texas state court on behalf of the Counter family, the affected child received more than 62.5 micrograms of mercury through pediatric vaccines in the first three months of life.

The confidential report, which was obtained by the SAFEMINDS support and advocacy group, states: “As for the exposure evaluated at 3 months of age, we found increasing risks of ‘neurological developmental disorders’ with increasing cumulative exposure to thimerosal … within the group of ‘developmental disorders’… for the sub-group called ‘specific delays,’ and within this sub-group for the specific disorder ‘developmental speech disorder,’ and for ‘autism,’ ‘stuttering’ and ‘attention deficit disorder.'” The report also contained the graph depicted below which illustrated the report’s findings of a child’s increasing risk of developing the neurological symptoms of autism Waters pointed out that the confidential study’s lead author, Thomas Verstraeten, has since left the Centers for Disease Control and is now employed by GlaxoSmithKline, a manufacturer of thimerosal-containing vaccines for many years that is a defendant in numerous suits pending nationwide. “We have asked GlaxoSmithKline to provide Mr. Verstraeten’s deposition in order to understand if conflict of interest issues may have played a role in the CDC’s decision to keep this report confidential, and specifically, their failure to reveal it to the Institute of Medicine.” Waters called the report’s contents and the fact that it was kept from the public as “shocking, but unfortunately not surprising, given the political influence of pharmaceutical companies and the tremendous liability they face if they are forced to compensate thousands of families for the costs of care that these children require.”
**

Full article:
https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/vac...ooked-books-on-mercury-secret-report-reveals/

 

I know, imagine actually believing this bullshit

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/conversations/downloads/vacsafe-thimerosal-color-office.pdf

 

I'm not referring to 'conspiracies'. I don't believe I have referred you to one.

Moreover, don't try and box me in a 'anti-vaxx' corner. I'm for anything that works. But I want the truth, the whole truth, and Pharma has integrity issues, and the medical establishment has a herd mentality that 'vaccines are the greatest advance in medical science' and so the can now pat themselves on the back. But, this mentality is a veritable juggernaut. you go against the establishment, and they will railroad you, pull your medical license, not give you the opportunity to give your side of the argument.

Vaccines work, but there are vaccines, and there are vaccines, and there are issues, and there are dangers.
A thoughtful, considered discussion is a good thing. Where I am taken aback is anyone I'm debating automatically makes some assumptions about who I am and what I'm trying to debate.

What I say 'suppression' it's just an observation. An opinion.

I posted 240 studies, and your immediate reaction was they were discredited . That's not a valid counter argument. You have said nothing, nor put forth anything that compels me to accept your argument. Anyone can declare anything. If I said' 'you are wrong', does that make is so? Well, the converse is true, as well. You tell me to post evidence, and I did, or I believe it was evidence. Your counter argument was not evidence that it was repudiated, so you are guilty of the very thing you are accusing me of.

I could post 1200 studies (available on request), and your reaction will be the same. Right?

so, EVERY study that doesn't put a vaccine in a good light is repudiated by you and the medical establishment. NOT ONE of them is valid? Not even one?

But All , or at least MOST of the studies that put vaccines in a good light, no, nothing wrong with them. They are fine.

That's odd, because, Richard Horton, the Editor of the The Lancet, himself, wrote:

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)60696-1/fulltext?rss=yes

"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put it, “poor methods get results”. The Academy of Medical Sciences, Medical Research Council, and Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council have now put their reputational weight behind an investigation into these questionable research practices. The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of “significance” pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale. We reject important confirmations. Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent, endpoints that foster reductive metrics, such as high-impact publication. National assessment procedures, such as the Research Excellence Framework, incentivise bad practices. And individual scientists, including their most senior leaders, do little to alter a research culture that occasionally veers close to misconduct."

Was he saying 'don't pay attention to science', of course not. But, if half the studies are wrong and that fact isn't caught by peer review, the flip side of that argument could probably be true, that if I referred you to 1200 studies that show vaccines, or some vaccines, have some serious issues, that half of them could just as easily be a lot better than the peers who are repudiating them. Again, for the following reason: The medical community has this mentality, it serves as a juggernaught to attack data that isn't perfect ( no studies are perfect, control groups cannot match the general population, especially since the control group populations are far more scrutinized, less than healthy subjects are excluded, etc, more so than when the vaccine is administered to the general public, where one size often fits all, where they give the vaccines out like candy. Because of the HUB factor ( healthy user bias ) the safety results are skewed in favor of the manufacturer, and, in my view, completely unrealiable ) so of course they are going to find problems with studies that don't put vaccines in a good light, and are less inclined to scrutinize the studies with the same fervor that put vaccines in a good light. I mean, Horton pretty much said so, so who am I to doubt him?

But it doesn't stop there, pharma as an integrity problem. To Wit:

http://golombhonik.com/merck-hit-with-antitrust-class-action-over-vaccine-data.html

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970204531404577054472253737682

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/glaxo...-resolve-fraud-allegations-and-failure-report

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_pharmaceutical_settlements

Excuse me if I have some questions.

Vaccine manufacturers, as I'm sure you are aware, because of the National Child Vaccine Injury Act, cannot be held liable for injuries incurred using their vaccines. That's extremely problematic, so it begs the question: why the act? Because, in 1986, vaccine manufacturers told congress, 'give us this law, or we will stop making vaccines'. So, congress gave in. But why would vaccine manufacturers want to be free of liability? They didn't require a Child Aspirin Injury Act, they didn't require a Child Cough Syrup Injury Act, etc, so why the NCVIA ?

Well, I'll tell you and the answer is obvious: It is because the vaccine manufacturers anticipated a spate of injury lawsuits above and beyond what they would normally get for other products. Well, if that is true then it must also be true that vaccines are disproportionately unsafe compared to other products and that disproportionate degree must be significant that they held Congress hostage. And that is true because vaccines are not subject to the same level of clinical trials that drugs are, where drugs must go through 10 years of studies, and $100 million is required to be spent. Because of the necessity of dispatching vaccines to the market place with greater speed, they are far more lenient in the studies. But that means they are disproportionately less safe. That establishes, for me, the following truth: That vaccine could be a lot safer, if they put them through the same rigors that they put drug through. so, there is a tug of war between public need for them and safety, and where is the right balance. If a drug, because it's safer, only seriously injures one in 100,000 people, the $100 million spent on safety was worth it, but if a vaccine seriously injures one in 3000 people, is the less money spent on safety worth it? Not to theses people:



So, some $4 billion has been awarded by the vaccine injury courts, and noting that ALL 'autism' lawsuits are automatically tossed out. This amount would be vastly higher if autism suits were allowed. This is because of the studies that 'prove' vaccines do not cause autism. Vaccines do not cause autism, directly, but there are other factors where autism could result, albeit indirectly, in autism increased. There are plenty of mothers whose child was put on the spectrum following a vaccination, hundreds of them, see the above link. I put more faith in them than (flawed) science. Just because you banter the word 'science', well, there is science, and then there is science with an agenda, and don't tell me there isn't such a thing.

There are no shortcuts to health. Are kids healthier today, given that CDC recommends some 50 doses of some 14 vaccines by the age of 6, then we were as children in the 50s, with only a handful of jabs, and nothing before the age of 2? I'm not seeing it.

Given that:
1 in 9 has asthma
1 in 10 has ADHD
1 in 12 has food allergies
1 in 20 has seizures
1 in 45 boys have autism
1 in 68 children have autism

I don't know what vaccines are doing, but, as far as I can tell, one thing they are not doing, is making children healthier than they were when I as a kid,

Look, I'm not telling anyone to not get vaccinated, I'm just saying, proceed with caution, make sure you have no allergies to the ingredients, and make sure the vaccine is really necessary. For example: I haven't had the flu in 30 years, and for persons of my age ( over 60 ) the CDC says the flu shot is not that effective, so I'm not seeing the need for it. For years, I drove a cab, taking elderly folks to the doctor all hte time, exposing myself to all sorts of bugs floating around, which is probably why I don't get the flu, due to this constant exposure over the years. So, I don't see the need for that particular shot. I had mumps, rubella, and the measles, as a child, so I don't need the MMR shot. Etc.

 

Great post. I didn't read all of it, or see all the video material, but I think I saw more than enough to think that you are definitely on the right track. I -am- an anti vaxxer, but I fully respect that there's a spectrum out there and I definitely believe that any reservations about vaccines is better than none. I saw a good bit of your first video as well as the small video clip after it (that woman features prominently in one or both of the vaxxed documentaries), definitely good.

 

from the
PMC journal
US National Library of Medicine
National Institutes of Health

Thimerosal and Animal Brains:
New Data for Assessing Human Ethylmercury Risk
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1280369/

From the Article:
Brain concentrations of total mercury were approximately 3–4 times lower in the thimerosal group
than in the methylmercury group, and total mercury cleared more rapidly in the thimerosal group
(with a half-life of 24.2 days versus 59.5 days).

.....Ethyl having a Breakdown
True Ethyl was found to break down faster than Methyl - Perhaps Because ?
of all the Inorganic Mercury left in her brain as a result of partaking of Thimerosal ?
.............................................................................................................................................

From the Article:

However, the proportion of inorganic mercury in the brain was much higher in the thimerosal
group (21–86% of total mercury) compared to the methylmercury group (6–10%). Brain
concentrations of inorganic mercury were approximately twice as high in the thimerosal group
compared to the methylmercury group. Inorganic mercury remains in the brain much longer
than organic mercury, with an estimated half-life of more than a year. It’s not currently known
whether inorganic mercury presents any risk to the developing brain.

Given these findings, the researchers caution that risk assessments for thimerosal based on
studies using blood mercury measurements may not be valid, depending on the design of the
study. Further, the observed differences in distribution and breakdown of mercury compounds
between exposed groups indicate that methylmercury is not a suitable model for thimerosal
toxicity.

The researchers emphasize, however, that the risks associated with low-level exposures to
inorganic mercury in the developing brain are unknown, and they describe other research
linking persistent inorganic mercury exposure with increased activation of microglia in the brain,
an effect recently reported in children with autism. They recommend further research focused
specifically on the biotransformation of thimerosal and its neurotoxic potential.

 

This guy* is pretty articulate. He starts to say some really important things at the 24:40 time mark. Watch it at least until the 28:17 time mark.

COVID 19 Doctors Speak Out 016 - Dr. Paul Thomas Targeted By Medical Board & Media After Landmark V
https://www.brighteon.com/25f46319-9c13-4f78-9cf6-de654cc7ad8d
https://www.bitchute.com/video/4mxiQl5SW4M8/
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...010944FA77138C03AB7D010944FA7713&&FORM=VDRVSR

This is the chart he talks about.
https://bretigne.typepad.com/.a/6a00e5520fbe9388340263e9810696200b-pi


*
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Dr.+P...s=n&sk=&cvid=177893378DE243528DAAFBFD3511C6DB

 

A fascinating interview with Dr. Paul Thomas.

 

Thank you. At least I can debate with you. Thank you for finding a legitimate point to respond with.

You have raised a valid issue if we automatically assume thimerosal was safe or we used certain kinds of blood mercury measurements.

Very true. I have never argued that nor has anyone who understands what is in a vaccine. What we argue is the automatic assumption thimerosal is dangerous is nonsensical and I can be and will be as specific as I can be in response to you and I refer you to among other sites: https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/safety-availability-biologics/thimerosal-and-vaccines

To start with and oothers and myself have argued, thimerosal at the concentration levels used in vaccines, thimerosal was/is used to kill specific organisms and to prevent the growth of specific fungi. What we are in fact talking about in a vaccine is a concentration of thimerosal at 0.001% or 1 part in 100,000 to 0.01% or 1 part in 10,000. At that minute level ithas been shown to be effective in destroying a very wide range of pathogens that could otherwise make someone ill. What this measurement in fact means us that a vaccine containing 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative will contain 50 micrograms of thimerosal for each 0.5 mL dose or in otherwords roughly about 25 micrograms of mercury per 0.5 mL dose. That would amount to the same amount of elemental mercury contained in a 3 ounce can of tuna fish but the body reduces the mercurcy found in fish differently than it would thimerosal because thimerosal at this level is immediately released by the body whereas the other type in fish does have the capacity to accumulate although also unlikely as its urinated or defecated out.

The assumption this level of mercury which is NOT evenb similiar to what is found in fish was not tested to determine its safety or was based on defective science is false.

Thimerosal was introduced just before WW2 in the 1930's and the original data data and test studies came from injecting it in several animal species and then humans to assure its safety and effectiveness as a preservative but not at a level to harm humans and those original studies from (=Powell and Jamieson 1931 can be found by anyone on publiuc domain and since those initial studies anyone can go to Bibliography- Notable Studies and Assessments Supporting the Safe Use of Thimerosal in Vaccines to see for themselves the findings and record of safe and effective use of thimerosal.

The problem today is when people come on this forum, they have no clue as to the original studies or the lengfthy ones conducted to determine the safe levels of thimerosal and think the level found in vaccine was a random level created without any reference and it shows in the responses which ignore those studies, do not acknowledge them and in some responders on this forum indicate they do not know they exist as they ask for proof of them and its not my job to educate them of something they don't bother to first look up.

The assumption from those debating thimerosal is often that there is a conspiracy by phatrmaceutical manufacturers to kill us and deliberately poison us and this is why people like me come on here and challenge the comments. SWe have never contended any vaccine or medical prescription has no side effects. Any medicine or vaccine can and will have side effects and in the usual; case of thimerosal its a temporary redness of skin and swelling. There have never been reports of anyone coming down with a neurological or any other illness from exposure to thimerosal in vaccines and the accusations it causes neurological illnesses or alzheimer's or Parkinson's or autism were false rumours started by non scientists who based their assumptions on heresay antecdotal comments of individuals, not data using controlled methodology.

Here is also what people need to know when they start repeating unproven heresay on thimerosal.

1- vaccines recommended for children 6 years of age and younger in the U.S., Canada and the world are now available in formulations that do NOT contain any thimerosal and so whent he anti-vaccine conspirators start up can they please check whether the vaccine they are accusing of being dangerous even has thimerosal;

2-thimerosal was introduced in vaccines to destroy the possibility of fatal bacteria or fungi contaminating the vaccine such as staphylococci , and it was not put in as part of any pharmaceutical conspiracy to deliberately kill people-the intent was not to kill people, the exact opposite, to make sure the vaccine had a positive effect-it would make no sense to give you a vaccine to kill you and common sense would tell you that;

3-anti-vaccine advocates do not bother to investigate the studies and regulations and safeguards pharmaceutical manufacturers and governments engage in or the role of the many non profit and government regulators in European, Canada's and the US's governments all working together with each other and other scientifically advanced countries such as India, Israel, Australia, New Zealand whose physicians and scientists spend their lives researching to make things safe for us to use and are not part of a conspiracy-for example, the US
FDA has continuously addressed the issue of thimerosal as a preservative in vaccines and all these studies are public domain;

4-the use of thimerosal has significantly declined due to reformulation and development of new vaccines presented in single-dose containers reducing the threat of contamination-most Americans have no clue what the FDA Modernization Act (FDAMA) of 1997 is and what it requires and that included the role of the FDA in conducting a thorough study and analysis of the use of thimerosal in childhood vaccines and you can find it on public domain-it was done in 1999, and you can type it in, thimerosal studies, Ball et al; in that study it took the actual amount of ethylmercury (thimerosal) in the vaccines and did compare their levels to existing guidelines for exposure to methylmercury, (the kind found in fish) because there were no existing guidelines for ethylmercury, the actual metabolite of thimerosal that we know is removed from the body without accumulating like metrhyl mercury and therefore already inherently safer-at the time of that 1999 review in 1999, in fact tge maximum cumulative exposure to mercury from vaccines in the recommended childhood immunization schedule was found to be within acceptable limits for the methylmercury exposure guidelines set by FDA, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, and the World Health Organization;

5-where there might be a concern which I have not debated nor does anyone who defends the use of our vaccines that it is possible, that an infant and/or anyone of us depending on the weight of our body, our age, any pre-existing illnesses and pre-extsing expsure toto cumulative levels of methyl mercury during the first six months of life or from an industrial accident could in theory exceed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recommended guidelines for safe intake of methylmercury NOT thimerosal.

In summary not withstanding those safe findings the pointnis moot because its been removed from vaccines. To use it now as a basis to argue against taking vaccines for Covid 19, diptheria, measles, chicken pox, etc. is absolutely irresponsible. People will die because of their fear and ignore as to vaccines and the contagious diseases that could otherwise be prevented from spreading and killing people.

Stop feeding into this Trump bull crap of reading allegations never proven about conspiracies or false news and stop jumping onm articles you agree with and go further. You owe yourself the need to read up on all sides of the argyument not just the one Trump or conspiracy people tell you.

I grew up with a pediatric neurologist as a mother. She was no member of the illuminati nor was she aconspirator nor am I but I did see and baby-sit some of her patients. I saw first hand children who died from illnesses that they did not need to die from because their parents did not believe in vaccines and refused to immunize them. Stop with the ignorance.

When polio broke out in the late 50's we had the same b.s. arguments about that vaccine. We have had the same b.s. about the small pox vaccine and flu shots and all kinds of vaccines and who has died? Its always the vulnerable-children, the elderly and why? Why? Ignorance.

 

No. This is I think far more accurate a similie. They are not the same like human coronavirus is not the same as nonhuman coronavirus.

 

I did not have time to get back to this and in particular Patricio and Eadora two posters I take seriously and like to debate with. I also apologize for earlier typos. I was not wearing my glasses and I am not sure what the phack went on with my editing. I like their debate comments so I am tyrying to debate them with vigour and respect they are entitled to.

First off I too am a skeptic. I do not myself feel comfortable at all with The World Health Organization. As for suspicion of the CDC, FDA, pharmaceutical manifacturers, governments, big business, I know it flavours much of the skepticism we read today and the sheer volume of misinformation and corruption we read adds to that as well. I get all that. I am not here to tell anyone to trust me or anyone. That is an individual choice people make and I am as skeptical as all authority sources as all of you are.

That said the people now behind the Covid 19 vaccine, i.e., Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, should we write them all off? Would you have me automaticallly ignore the protocol they follow enforced by the USFDA, and Canadian, British, European, Australia, Israeli medical agencies. Do you really want me to believe Israel ordered all its citizens given the vaccine because its a conspiracy? Think about it. Israel has faced existential threat of extinction since 1949 and needs every citizen it can find being healthy to defend its continued existence. Would it recklessly give them all as they have the vaccine? You think they would compromise their military and the civilians that are a large portion of the call ups required to have it function? Really? You want me to believe Oxford University, Harvard, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, etc., are all negligent idiots?

Like many I read yes public domain. So I did see the late-stage clinical trials reported by Pfizer and Moderna claiming their vaccines were 95% and 94.1% effective. Do I thinjk they lied? Do I think they conspired to create those numbers? Further do I think University of Oxford /AstraZeneca who reported their vaccine had a 70% effectivity rate lied?

No. Do I suspect or have reason to question the Chinese and Russian vaccines, of course. They keep their results secret.

Do I think there is an illiuminati conspiracy to kill us all off or alter our dna? No.

What I do think is most of us are not immunologists, pharmacologists, medical doctors, scientists or pharmacists who might have better ability to decipher how vaccines work and whether they are dangerous.

What I do think is you and I can not and will never know the full story on anything and we have choices-fear everything or try stay calm and rational and work with information we can as individuals prove to ourselves as true through objective neutral analysis not subjective opinions we read from others.

So with that in mind, I have never argued vaccines have no negative side effects. There will always be a portion of the population who can NOT take them due to pre-existing medical conditions or allergies. I also think each individual reacts to any vaccine differently because of the inherent individual characteristics of our genetic make-ups.

The above can be corroborated through objective analysis and no doctor or scientist ever said a vaccine was perfect or without ethical and other consequences.

What I do challenge are people who incorrectly assume all kinds of mercury are equally as dangerous when we are exposed to them. What I do challenge are people claiming vaccines cause autism. I challenge those two claims because they are scientifically incorrect and there are logical, rational, objective testing that prove them wrong.

What I would also contend is that coronavirus vaccines like any vaccines are not given to you to make you "healthier". That assumption reflects a basic misunderstanding of the purpose and function of a vaccine. The lifestyle you choose (physically active or sedentarty), your environment (the kinds and amounts of pollutants, stress, human relationships, onoise, electro-magnetic or other energy or chemicals you are exposed to), your diet and your genetic predisposition, all factor into what makes you healthy or unhealthy, Vaccines do not make you either unhealthy or healthy. They are designed to assist your body develop anti-bodies to help your bodies resist negative side effects from being exposed to certain contagious pathogens. They work better on some than others and when they are made they are based on a scientic methodology that tries to find the minimum level of the contagious pathogen needed to put in your body to trigger your body to develop anti-bodies that it can store to fight exposure to that same pathogen later on. So in that sense a vaccine necessarily injects you with something that is unhealthy.

The vaccines we talk of contain what they calll messenger RNA (or mRNA) which we are explained instruct our cells how to prodiuce a protein that can then trigger an immune response. That's the long and short of it. No I am not a scientist but that basic function can be read about and explained to you by your pharmacist or doctor. No they are not out to get you.

What they will explain is that this mRNA from the vaccine and in the current case the Covid vaccine never enter the nucleus of the cell, which is where youur DNA so stories there is a conspiracy to manipulate your dna is just not tryue.

The mRNA cannot affect or interact with our DNA. The mRNA works with your body’s natural defenses to safely develop immunity to disease. Also and we have all been told this but not all of us listen- the immune cells we can create eventually or inevitably break down and get rid of the mRNA soon after they have finished using the instructions. Now you can ignore the CDC and call them liars or inaccurate for explaining the above but your pharmacist? The entire science domain? Doctors? They are all liars? Of course not.

No there is no lethal mercurcy or secret ingredients in vaccines out to kill you or turn you into a mutant so you can be eaten or killed off.

The choice is yours to stop after reading conspiracy articles or look for all sides of the discussion. That is your choice.

Here is what I know, if the fears many of you have about vaccines are true then the vaccines used to contain polio, small pox, rubella, measles, mumps, diptheria, cholera, should have already wiped us out long ago.

Here is what I know. In the third and fourth world, people die of diseases you and I will not die from because we have access to medical vaccines they do not. If you do not want the vaccine I think we should give it to someone who wants it.

However if you think you are entitled to walk around in public with a contagious illness that can kill others, you are mistaken and will have to come to grips with the fact your individual right to do what you want will collide with the greater need to protect far more people than you and because of that clash or conflict the majority are going to expect the minority to get real with thinking they can rule over the majority.

Vaccines come down to two kinds of elitist intolerance reactions. One is the belief that anything given for the benefit of the masses is dangerous and can not be true and the other is that the needs of the masses are beneath the needs of the few.

Its a double message sent out by anti-vaccine deniers and its inherently contradictory and illogical.

It is also inherently illogical to believe if you are suspicious or skeptical of information, you must assume its part of a greater lie pattern designed to control you.

 

Here's a video on the subject.

Autism Is A Medical Problem And There Is Proven, Effective Medical Treatment - Dr. Stoller, MD
https://www.altcensored.com/watch?v=JnD8Il2PS9E


Here's where I found the video.

Nothing to See Here: Autism Rates Still Climbing, Vaccines Unexamined
https://vaxxter.com/nothing-to-see-here-autism-rates-still-climbing-vaccines-unexamined/
(excerpts)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What Causes Encephalopathy, Encephalitis, and or Neurodegenerative Disease?

At the Simpsonwood meeting of 2000, David Johnson, then State Public Health Officer of Michigan, and member of ACIP said:

“Aluminum and mercury are often, simultaneously administered to infants … [yet] there is absolutely no data, [not even] animal data, about the potential for synergy, additivity … [to] allow us to draw any conclusions [about] simultaneous exposure to these two [metals] in vaccines” (page 20).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Testifying before Congress in May 2004, Dr. Rashid Buttar explained that there are over 1,400 references on the relationship between mercury and neurodegeneration – and noted that children with autism were not excreting mercury. “the autistic population … [has] … an impaired detoxification pathway, … they cannot get rid of the mercury”, he said. Through chelation, with glutathione and dimercaptopropanesulfonic acid (DMPS), Buttar successfully treated patients, including his own son.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


edit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Autism Causes: Mercury Poisoning from Vaccines & Environment - Dan Olmsted
https://www.altcensored.com/watch?v=iOqKLoYptF8

 

Borderline disinformation/misinformation. There is no mercury in any vaccine. If autism levels are climbing as one of your batshit videos claims, then it proves the problem is not related to Thimerosal! A substance easily expelled by the body and not anywhere near as toxic as mercury found in things like fish.
Thimerosal and Vaccines | Safety | CDC
Studies found no risk from mercury-based vaccine additive | Fact check (usatoday.com)ir batshit videos claims, then it proves

 

I think they don't understand the concept of compounds. Sodium explodes upon contact with water. Chlorine is a gas that poisons humans. But we regularly put a compound containing both on our food without the explosion or the poisoning. They don't understand this concept.

 

Let's remember that thimerosal hasn't been used in vaccines for childhood diseases for more than 20 years.

It was removed as a precautionary measure - not due to any scientific link to health problems.

There is no connection to autism, as demonstrated by testing, but perhaps more obviously by the fact that autism rate continued to increase when thimerosal was no longer used.

The only use of thimerosal in vaccines today is in multi-use flu vaccine vials, as a preservative is required due to the reuse of the vial. There are also single dose vials available, so if someone is still concerned, they could look for that.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/pa...downloads/vacsafe-thimerosal-color-office.pdf