CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Lifestyle › Health › Do vaccines actually work?

Do vaccines actually work?

Started by Jamie Rivera78 · · 👁 10 views · 64 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Jamie Rivera78Edward GreenMegan ReedBrandon Castillo4AAndrew Campbell4Lisa DoyleKeith Sanders29Nathan Peterson11Justin FoxLawrence WellsLarry Lewis2Laura Walker6melloweagle11Andrew Anderson6Grace Jackson11ironpuma14Scott Allen10wearyjackal12Benjamin Murphy2driftinggull13Michael Newman18Sophia Evans76Kyle Nelson2
Michael Newman18 Michael Newman18 Member
17 messages
joined Dec 2002
#61 ·
Scott Allen10 said:from my experience—having pulled and worked on thousands of arterial blood gases—metabolic or respiratory acidosis was never actually the root cause; rather, it was always just an obvious consequence of some underlying condition.

Could someone please list the clinical manifestations of acidosis?
Jamie Rivera78 Jamie Rivera78 MemberOP
28 messages
joined Nov 2016
#62 ·
Mass immunization is basically the holy grail of our healthcare system's agenda. They’re so obsessed with it that the list of diseases they want to jab us against just keeps growing and growing. It's an absolute gamble, honestly, and the actual protection against infectious stuff? Questionable at best. Especially when you look at those common childhood illnesses. BIG PHARMA HAS ATTACHED SOME HORRIFIC DOOMSDAY SCENARIO TO EVERY SINGLE ONE JUST TO JUSTIFY POKING HOLES IN A KID'S IMMUNE SYSTEM. Basically, they think nothing should be left to nature. BECAUSE NATURE IS "BAD." Take rubella, for example. It’s a perfect case study.

Rubella is one of those "harmless" childhood rashes. Medical intervention is pretty much overkill. Except for one tiny detail... apparently, catching it during the first trimester of pregnancy CAN mess up the fetus. That's the big selling point for mass vaccination. The other reason? Convenience. IT’S BETTER NOT TO GET SICK THAN TO GET SICK. Sure, sounds totally logical if you don't think about it too hard.

But let's be real: the odds of actually getting sick during that specific first trimester window are slim. (Most people catch it when they're little kids anyway.) And as for the vaccines themselves? Studies show that JUST A FEW YEARS AFTER THE RUBELLA SHOT, ANY TRACE OF THAT ARTIFICIAL IMMUNITY VANISHES, and this happens to about a third of people who got it. Nobody can tell you for sure how long this fake "protection" lasts. Or if it even works at all. Not to mention the mutated virus strains popping up everywhere—which the vaccine doesn't even touch.

Still, they say young women and future moms need special protection. Even though artificial immunity CANNOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO NATURAL IMMUNITY. And here's the kicker: we end up doing exactly what we were trying to avoid. We strip these women of the chance to build up natural defenses, which means rubella just shows up later in life when the symptoms hit way harder. WHICH MEANS THE RISK OF GETTING SICK DURING PREGNANCY ACTUALLY GOES UP. In other words, we might see more fetal damage IF THE MOTHER WAS VACCINATED. (If you're still living in the fantasy that vaccinated people are invincible, reality is going to hit you hard. All because they think YOU CAN'T COPY NATURE WHEN IT COMES TO IMMUNITY.)

Then there’s the whole "is the vaccine itself toxic?" question. Spoiler alert: things aren't looking great there either. Arthritis symptoms pop up in at least 4% of those "protected" folks. SOME AUTHORS EVEN CLAIM IT'S AS HIGH AS 26%. There's actual proof of the virus hanging out in joints after the shot. The pain can be intense enough to stop you from walking normally. These symptoms can drag on for months, sometimes even FOR YEARS. AND JUST BECAUSE THE PAIN STOPS DOESN'T MEAN IT WON'T COME BACK. We've even seen serious complications like rheumatoid arthritis being logged.

If we accept the medical claim that rubella is the main threat to unborn babies, then pregnant women should be able to trust that their OB-GYNs won't pass the disease to them. You'd expect a doctor not to be a walking infection source. But get this: according to a study out of California, 90% OF OB-GYNS REFUSED THE RUBELLA VACCINE. The healthcare system doesn't really slap any restrictions on medical staff who aren't fully covered by shots. Kind of a paradox, right? If the doctors themselves are spooked, why on earth are they pushing this on our kids?

The body has its own built-in ways to handle sickness. Childhood infections are A CRITICAL LINK IN STRENGTHENING THAT ENTIRE SYSTEM. They're a vital part of growing up. Obviously, nobody is going to go out and intentionally infect a child. But running away screaming from a harmless infection by using tools with unpredictable side effects? I don't know what to call it. Irrational fear. Fanaticism. Mental torture. Pure stupidity. Rubella is just one example. Is this protecting fetuses, or is it just violence against them?
Sophia Evans76 Sophia Evans76 Member
43 messages
joined Dec 2003
#63 ·
Jamie Rivera78 said:6. A study just dropped in The Lancet, and the data is pretty clear: the tuberculosis vaccine basically offers ZERO protection. Honestly, the infection rates among those who were vaccinated are actually HIGHER than those who weren't. And mind you—this is the ONLY published trial of this vaccine conducted under strict, standard regulatory protocols. The only one.


Man, you really went off the deep end there. Look, it's true that the BCG shot doesn't really do much for adults fighting TB, but when it comes to infants? It’s still incredibly effective at preventing things like TB meningitis and miliary tuberculosis... which, you know, is actually something worth noting...

It's the same deal with those hardcore activists over in California... nobody there vaccinates their kids either... 🙄
Sophia Evans76 Sophia Evans76 Member
43 messages
joined Dec 2003
#64 ·
Laura Walker6 said:Look, you guys basically built HIV under a microscope in the first place. You cooked it up in some lab, and now you’re trying to play God by making a "cure" for your own creation...😬
Meanwhile, Michio Kushi used macrobiotics to treat people with HIV. And honestly? Most of them were doing just fine—most are still walking around today. Well, except for those two folks who went on vacation, indulged in some ice cream and tropical fruit, and kicked the bucket two days later. It’s not that his methods failed; he boosted their immune systems so much that even with HIV in their system, they felt, looked, and functioned like perfectly healthy people!!

Then there was that president of an African nation—I can't remember which one, maybe somewhere near Kenya🤔—who was treating HIV patients too. He had this whole "magic trick" version of treatment going on...😬 and apparently, those patients swear he actually cured them...🤣
Kyle Nelson2 Kyle Nelson2 Regular
475 messages
joined Jun 2008
#65 ·
Arsen, why don't you go ahead and actually introduce yourself? Tell us about your education or whatever, so we can figure out if you're just making this stuff up as you go, pulling from some actual textbooks, or just listening to whatever nonsense comes out of the Watchtower

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads