Vaccinations; recent developments

[Cap-Z-ro]

Its going on everywhere...plastics leeching estrogen into the landfills and then into the water aquifers has lowered male sperm count significantly=infertility=sterilization=checkmate.

Regards...

[allcanadian]

@Sark


Think of it this way, how about you apply the rules you apply to me to yourself and I think that should just about answer all your questions concerning your last post. You ask for proof and references and citations none of which you have actually provided. Now why would you think I should do such a thing when neither of us have?. You may want to rethink this because in my opinion you are being unreasonable in thinking I need to prove anything hence the reason I use the phase-- in my opinion.


AC

[allcanadian]

@mark E

OK so you've got the alarming claim.  Now, if you dig a little deeper you will find out the claims are nonsense because the vaccine does not contain HCG.  When the vaccine samples were tested at a high quality lab, they registered lower HCG than the tap water.

Google Ultra-low level testing relating to toxins and long term exposure and it should explain everything. The scientific studies suggest there are levels well below that considered safe which do more harm over time that the levels actually considered safe.


AC

[sarkeizen]

Mass Sterilization effort in Kenya.

Well it's kind of half-ish-right.  Fertility vaccines have been researched (mostly for animals) for decades.  hCG is used in one I know of.  The thing missing from this article that would make it useful is the amount of hCG detected in their lab reports.  Why would you do that?  Thankfully it was in the WHO report 1.12 mIU/ml in what I assume was the "churches" samples.  Assuming the  higher level results are correct there is simply no possibility that any sane person would think this is an attempt to sterilize someone.   As these are well within the observed values in non-pregnant women.

Again...a few seconds would have made you look smarter.

[sarkeizen]

You ask for proof and references and citations none of which you have actually provided.

Actually I've provided a few and I've made a completely open offer to respond to any specific request you ask for.

Now why would you think I should do such a thing when neither of us have?

The difference is the willingness to do so.  If you say: "Right here you say X and I'd like to see a reference for that".  I will be more than happy to comply.  See I don't fault you for having a stupid opinion, or not sourcing it but you should be willing and able to do so when asked, even if you don't like the way you've been asked.  There are dozens of comments I could make about your conduct but I simply don't think it's relevant to the discussion.

You may want to rethink this because in my opinion you are being unreasonable in thinking I need to prove anything

Well that's good because I haven't asked you to prove anything.  I've asked you to provide external support for assertions you've made - which appear to be based on external data.

hence the reason I use the phase-- in my opinion.

I'm not calling into question that these...ideas...are your opinions.  I'm just giving you the opportunity to differentiate them from poor, uninformed and unsubstantiated....opinions.