05 Oct 20
@metal-brain saidWhat IS your alternative?
If there is an alternative to poison why don't they use it? Because it costs more?
US vaccine makers are immune from lawsuits except in special circumstances and have been since 1986. Merck is one of the few special circumstances that brought on a lawsuit claiming they were aware their vaccine was harmful and covered it up.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/lawsuit-claims-gardasil-merck-human-papilloma-virus-vaccine-caused-severe-vaccine-induced-injuries-teen/5721944
05 Oct 20
2 edits
@metal-brain said
If there is an alternative to poison why don't they use it? Because it costs more?
US vaccine makers are immune from lawsuits except in special circumstances and have been since 1986. Merck is one of the few special circumstances that brought on a lawsuit claiming they were aware their vaccine was harmful and covered it up.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/lawsuit-claims-gardasil-merck-human-papilloma-virus-vaccine-caused-severe-vaccine-induced-injuries-teen/5721944
If there is an alternative to poison why don't they use it?its not a poison at the very low doses used but rather completely harmless. Much more of it already exists in all our bodies as part of our natural metabolism.
Because it costs more?No, and I have already answered that question and shown you the link for that. Here is it yet again;
https://theconversation.com/toxins-in-vaccines-a-potentially-deadly-misunderstanding-11010
"...Formaldehyde is used in vaccine preparation to kill viruses or inactivate the proteins used. ..."
Which part of the above can you not accept?
US vaccine makers are immune from lawsuits except in special circumstances and have been since 1986. Merck is one of the few special circumstances that brought on a lawsuit claiming they were aware their vaccine was harmful and covered it up.So what? What has that got to do with Formaldehyde known to be perfectly safe in them at the low doses?
@humy saidMerck has a history of covering up harmful products. Vioxx being a good example. If you had read the article I provided I would not have to tell you that. They settled for nearly 5 billion, almost a billion more than the entire vaccine court budget. Funny how they got immunity from lawsuits because they threatened to get out of the vaccine business because they said lawsuits were too expensive. Then they paid more than the entire budget of the vaccine court and stayed in business.If there is an alternative to poison why don't they use it?its not a poison atthe very low doses used.
Because it costs more?No, and I have already answered that question and shown you the link for that. Here is it yet again;
https://theconversation.com/toxins-in-vaccines-a-potentially-deadly-misunderstanding-11010
"...Formaldehyde is us ...[text shortened]... n a lawsuit claiming they were aware their vaccine was harmful and covered it up. [/quote]So what?
If you had read the article you would know their gardisil vaccine was how they were going to recover the money they lost in the Vioxx lawsuit alleging a cover-up. That vaccine also cause a girl to become sterile and cannot reproduce anymore.
Go ahead and take a vaccine without knowing who made it. Maybe you being from a different country allows you to sue Merck if you get a neurological disorder. We can't, that is why I will not take their vaccines. Have at it though.
05 Oct 20
3 edits
@metal-brain said
Merck has a history of covering up harmful products. Vioxx being a good example. If you had read the article I provided I would not have to tell you that. They settled for nearly 5 billion, almost a billion more than the entire vaccine court budget. Funny how they got immunity from lawsuits because they threatened to get out of the vaccine business because they said lawsu ...[text shortened]... et a neurological disorder. We can't, that is why I will not take their vaccines. Have at it though.
Merck has a history of covering up harmful products. Vioxx being a good example. If you had read the article I provided I would not have to tell you that.You don't have to tell me that because I never CLIAMED nor implied the contray and nothing what I asserted had anything to do with that. This is your new stupid straw man.
Go ahead and take a vaccine without knowing who made it.what has that got to do with Formaldehyde known to be perfectly safe in them at the low doses? Answer, Nothing.
Was their vaccines found to be unsafe because they contained Formaldehyde at the usual low doses other vaccines have?
If yes; your link doesn't even mention 'Formaldehyde' so show a relevant link that claims that please...
If no, (and the answer is no), you make no point.
05 Oct 20
@ponderable saidI think that should have been;
What IS your alternative?
What is YOUR alternative?
That's me just being nitpicky 🙂
06 Oct 20
@humy saidHow would you know they are safe or not? Compensation comes from the vaccine courts and those courts drag their feet and make it as difficult as possible for claimants to get compensation. Those claimants who have children with autism can get compensation, but only if they pretend Autism is not the cause when it is. That way the vaccine makers have plausible deniability that autism lawsuits are as numerous as they are. The process is a huge lie.Merck has a history of covering up harmful products. Vioxx being a good example. If you had read the article I provided I would not have to tell you that.You don't have to tell me that because I never CLIAMED nor implied the contray and nothing what I asserted had anything to do with that. This is your new stupid straw man.
[quote] Go ahead and take a vacci ...[text shortened]... o show a relevant link that claims that please...
If no, (and the answer is no), you make no point.
Take your vaccines though. Don't bother asking for an insert. You don't need to know what the contents are. Have faith in your US vaccine.
06 Oct 20
@humy saidDoes it matter? It cuts into profits too much. There is no incentive for a US vaccine maker to make their vaccines as safe as possible. They cannot be sued unless it can be proven they intentionally produced a harmful vaccine and covered it up.
I think that should have been;
What is YOUR alternative?
That's me just being nitpicky 🙂
The same cads who covered up the Vioxx dangers are making vaccines. Take Merck's vaccines though. You don't want people calling you antivaxx, do you?
06 Oct 20
10 edits
@metal-brain saidwow what a stupid new obvious straw man!
How would you know they are safe or not?
Obviously I never said/implied/claimed I know some/which particular vaccines are safe let alone "US" ones in particular. As I already said, like you I am not an expert on vaccines.
All I asserted, and asserted because this is what the science says, is that the usual low doses of formaldehyde in them is known to be perfectly safe. Obviously that doesn't in any way imply all vaccines are safe (your new stupid straw man I assume? ); That only implies that if any are dangerous (and I am sure a few are and NEVER denied this) then the reason why is for some other reason other than a low dose of formaldehyde being in them. We have already shown our source of information on this claim and you have so far done nothing to show evidence to the contrary to this claim, which explains why you keep resorting to straw mans and make out the claim is something more or other than just that claim; It's because you realize you cannot attack the claim (because you know it is valid) so you desperately are trying to change that claim to a silly one that is easy to attack and which I and we never made. NOBODY here I am aware of including I has ever claimed all vaccines are always safe.
06 Oct 20
3 edits
This is a link about fake news that scares people with common myths about vaccines which science has debunked and this scaring results in many people not getting vaccinated or not allowing their children to be vaccinated so to result in more preventable diseases and deaths;
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/news-item/fake-news-a-threat-to-curbing-vaccine-preventable-diseases-in-the-uk
"...Last year, there was a shocking 30% rise in the global number of cases of measles. In Europe, there were 64,946 measles cases between November 2017 and October 2018 – over twice the figure for the whole of 2017. ...This is concerning, given that the complications of measles lead to several poor outcomes including, in severe cases, brain infections and even death. Yet it is a vaccine-preventable disease...."
Fake news with baseless scares by irresponsible people that reject what the science says, kills.
06 Oct 20
@humy saidreally? Is this a myth?
This is a link about fake news that scares people with common myths about vaccines which science has debunked and this scaring results in many people not getting vaccinated or not allowing their children to be vaccinated so to result in more preventable diseases and deaths;
https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/news-item/fake-news-a-threat-to-curbing-vaccine-preventable-diseases-i ...[text shortened]...
Fake news with baseless scares by irresponsible people that reject what the science says, kills.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/un-forced-admit-gates-funded-vaccine-causing-polio-outbreak-africa/5723137
@metal-brain saidwow yet ANOTHER one of your stupid new obvious straw mans!
really? Is this a myth?
https://www.globalresearch.ca/un-forced-admit-gates-funded-vaccine-causing-polio-outbreak-africa/5723137
I OBVIOUSLY never CLAIMED/implied THAT was a myth and, unless you are COMPLETELY stupid, you know it and know you will convince nobody here.
None of what was explained to be myth in my link implied what is said in your above link is a myth.
So, what will be your next stupid straw man? -keep them coming... They show you for what you are.
07 Oct 20
@humy saidYou said this:
wow yet ANOTHER one of your stupid new obvious straw mans!
I OBVIOUSLY never CLAIMED/implied THAT was a myth and, unless you are COMPLETELY stupid, you know it and know you will convince nobody here.
None of what was explained to be myth in my link implied what is said in your above link is a myth.
So, what will be your next stupid straw man? -keep them coming... They show you for what you are.
"Fake news with baseless scares by irresponsible people that reject what the science says, kills."
You called it fake news. That implies it is a myth and you know it.
@metal-brain saidYou lie via straw man, as usual. And your are using exactly the same straw man I already just debunked. The "it" in that "You called it fake news" (your above comment) OBVIOUSLY cannot correctly and sensibly refer to what was presented in your link (which was the https://www.globalresearch.ca/un-forced-admit-gates-funded-vaccine-causing-polio-outbreak-africa/5723137 one), because I made that comment of mine BEFORE, not AFTER you presented that new link of yours and you and we obviously know it because that's just plain to see. How could I have been claiming that link of yours is presenting fake news before I even knew of the link? That makes no sense whatsoever and is just your incredibly moronic straw man that convinces nobody here. Saying fake news exists doesn't imply that or any other specific one particular link presents fake news any more than it implies all news is fake news. Who are you trying to kid here? You are just embarrassing yourself; Why?
You said this:
"Fake news with baseless scares by irresponsible people that reject what the science says, kills."
You called it fake news.
- Joined
- 09 Sep 18
- Moves
- 20590
08 Oct 20
@sonhouse saidi got the flu & pneumonia jab last week all i got was a sore left arm.
@Metal-Brain
I got several vaxxes in the last month or so, flu, shingles. No reaction at all, nothing bad happened to me.
Let me guess, since you troll us for this BS, you never had ANY vaxxes, right? You are so paranoid, you read BS on Hannity or some such talking head show and you freak out.
08 Oct 20
6 edits
@badradger saidI am not currently eligible for the free flu jab because I am not currently in the sufficiently high risk group but if and when I become to be in the sufficiently high risk group I would choose to have it because I know I would be just stupid not to; The risk to health from catching flu generally far outweighs the risk to health from the vaccine.
i got the flu & pneumonia jab last week all i got was a sore left arm.
I would also have any coronavirus vaccine going; only after it has passed all the usually safety checks (vaccine trials) of course (else I presume I wouldn't be allowed to have it anyway). That's because, just like with flu, the risk to health from catching it would presumably far outweigh the risk to health from the vaccine.