Please go aheadit's because you've never actually investigated the history of vaccines. I have, and it's definitely not what you believe
you are welcome to post research on vaccines, provided it is from verified, authoritative sources.
Please go aheadit's because you've never actually investigated the history of vaccines. I have, and it's definitely not what you believe
The ONS has changed it's reporting data several times and 'adjusted' death rates downwards more than once...
PMSL !it has not adjusted death rates at all, ever
the ONS has changed its reporting methodology which give different figures
Your initial post was clearly written in a pejorative tone to denigrate people who know the truth
do not continue to post opinions stated as fact, or I will report younot an experimental mrna gene therapy
false argumentSo where's your evidence that vaccine's have reduced death since they were introduced? because the actual evidence points to better diet and living conditions, using the British Government's own historical data.
it killed 68 peoplewait until you get a load of the history of the first vaccine, the smallpox vaccine,
WRONGSeriously, grow up, this is the last response from me, get your attention fix elsewhere and leave the debating to the adults. I literally gave you a document, from Moderna, which states the FDA classified their 'vaccine' as a gene therapy, you utter imbecile.
covid vaccines workThat's simply a propaganda video on the pfizer trial, you know the one, where they wanted to hide the documents for 75 years, it doesn't even remotely address the point I made. I guess you haven't examined those recently released documents at all then, which debunks this nonsense, by their own words.
thats not the FDAPage 70 first paragraph, and I quote; Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA.
This is what makes you an imbecile.
Yes whoops - yours a real big one. He's famous.Whoops....
interesting you fail to mention small pox was widespread in the Philippines in the late 1800sWhoops....
Statistics on vaccination against Small-Pox in the Philippines when the United States took over are instructive. Reports run thus: In 1918, the Army forced the vaccination of 3,285,376 natives when no epidemic was brewing, only the sporadic cases of the usual mild nature. Of the vaccinated persons, 47,369 came down with small-pox, and of these 16,477 died. In 1919 the experiment was doubled. 7,670,252 natives were vaccinated. Of these 65,180 cases came down with small-pox, and 44,408 died. One sees here that the fatality rate increased in the twice vaccinated cases. In the first experiment, one-third died, and in the second, two-thirds of the infected ones. This speaks for the retention of viral units from the previous vaccinations, and indicates that, in the vaccine the shuffling in of units varies in different specimens of vaccine. It should be stated also that every epidemic of viral disease treated by the writer followed vaccination within a few months, when protection should have been had instead of an epidemic. This was so in Brazil, in Aftosa, Cinemosa, Hog Cholera and Rabies, and in Cuba in Hog Cholera.
The Survival Factor In Neoplastic And Viral Diseases William Koch : William Frederick Koch : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive
Dr. Koch’s research focused on the means to restore the body’s oxidation mechanism back to its original vitality, thereby re-equipping the body with its...archive.org
It's almost like there's a pattern...
so you cant provide any proofSo in your tiny mind, Moderna submitted this to the US Securities and Exchange Commission, but they were lying? They must be a bit rubbish because they spent some time after that sentence trying to caveat it, as if they weren't very keen on having to admit it.
Like I said, this is why you're an imbecile.
yesHave you checked the rate of autism since the MMR jab was introduced? ADHD, allergies, etc etc
yeah because he was a snake oil salesman -sort of person you source for your "evidence" ehAnd? they sued him twice and failed,
Wakefield in the LancetWhat study? do go on...