P
pixelsmith
Guest
Life saving campaign that killed people. Lol.
-
NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
The Official Paracast Political Thread! — Part Four
- Thread starter Gene Steinberg
- Start date
Free episodes:
- Status
Life saving campaign that killed people. Lol.
Dodging again.
You claimed the vaccinations killed those kids. As Angelo correctly pointed out, the issue was the needles not the vaccine.
Your response would indicate you also think hypodermic needles are also bad.
What do you do when your kids get sick ? Dance around them with rattles and shake a dead chook over them ?
Witchdoctor- Witch doctors or African witch doctors
You claimed the vaccinations killed those kids. As Angelo correctly pointed out, the issue was the needles not the vaccine.
Your response would indicate you also think hypodermic needles are also bad.
What do you do when your kids get sick ? Dance around them with rattles and shake a dead chook over them ?
Witchdoctor- Witch doctors or African witch doctors
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Dodging again.
You claimed the vaccinations killed those kids. As Angelo correctly pointed out, the issue was the needles not the vaccine.
Your response would indicate you also think hypodermic needles are also bad.
What do you do when your kids get sick ? Dance around them with rattles and shake a dead chook over them ?
Witchdoctor- Witch doctors or African witch doctors
My kids are both vaccine injured. They seek medical attention when needed but no longer vaccinate.
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Seriously, the only people who vaccinate are either really ignorant or simply retarded.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
matthew1977
Paranormal Maven
when you become personally aware of autism (friend or family has it) your world view on vaccines will change.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
Why? One does not have anything to do with the other. This notion that they are related comes from a fraudulent study with poor data. It's like saying It's like saying that when you become personally aware of rain, your world view of picnics will change.
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Autism is indeed a possible side affect of a vaccine particularly the MMR given before age 3. This is what a lead scientist from the CDC said they covered up by destroying the data. Except he kept his 10,000 documents.
Does the MMR vaccine cause autism?
Medical conditions with unknown causes have been incorrectly linked to particular vaccines. The most prominent example is the claimed link between the MMR vaccine and autism—a disease whose first clinical signs commonly occur in the second year of life, at a time when MMR vaccine is usually given. The original suggestion that the MMR vaccine might be linked to autism was made in 1998, when a research group proposed that the attenuated (live) measles virus in the vaccine infected the intestine. The leader of the research group claimed this led to inflammation that resulted in lower absorption of nutrients needed for normal brain development, the outcome being developmental disorders such as autism.
Many comprehensive studies subsequently ruled out this suggested link by showing conclusively that rates of autism are the same among children who have and have not been vaccinated. Ultimately, the original report was shown to be fraudulent, and was retracted by the medical journal that published it.
Similarly, any link between thiomersal, which was previously used in minute quantities as a preservative in vaccines, and autism has also been excluded (see Question 2) 77.
In some cases, these kinds of reactions may be caused by the vaccine. But in other situations, the symptoms may be unrelated, occurring by chance at the same time as the vaccination. For this reason, scientists refer to these kinds of symptoms as adverse events following immunisation to indicate that events that follow vaccination may not be caused by the vaccine.
One unique study from Finland addressed this issue 74. Researchers analysed common symptoms in 581 pairs of twins after one twin received the MMR vaccine and the other was given a dummy vaccine (a placebo). Between one and six days after the injection, the number of adverse events in the twin who received the MMR vaccine was almost identical to those in the twin who received placebo 74 (see Figure 4.1). Between seven and 12 days after the injection, the vaccinated group had a measurable increase in symptoms that are known to be associated with administration of the attenuated measles vaccine, such as fever, irritability and rash. On the other hand, no difference between the two groups could be detected over that period in the frequency of cough and cold-like symptoms—which occur commonly with or without vaccination. Moreover, even some of the symptoms known to occur after MMR vaccine were also seen in the group who received placebo, but at a lower rate.
In summary, this valuable study showed that many common symptoms that occur after a vaccine is given are not caused by the vaccine, but occur by chance at that time.
4. Are vaccines safe? | Australian Academy of Science
Medical conditions with unknown causes have been incorrectly linked to particular vaccines. The most prominent example is the claimed link between the MMR vaccine and autism—a disease whose first clinical signs commonly occur in the second year of life, at a time when MMR vaccine is usually given. The original suggestion that the MMR vaccine might be linked to autism was made in 1998, when a research group proposed that the attenuated (live) measles virus in the vaccine infected the intestine. The leader of the research group claimed this led to inflammation that resulted in lower absorption of nutrients needed for normal brain development, the outcome being developmental disorders such as autism.
Many comprehensive studies subsequently ruled out this suggested link by showing conclusively that rates of autism are the same among children who have and have not been vaccinated. Ultimately, the original report was shown to be fraudulent, and was retracted by the medical journal that published it.
Similarly, any link between thiomersal, which was previously used in minute quantities as a preservative in vaccines, and autism has also been excluded (see Question 2) 77.
In some cases, these kinds of reactions may be caused by the vaccine. But in other situations, the symptoms may be unrelated, occurring by chance at the same time as the vaccination. For this reason, scientists refer to these kinds of symptoms as adverse events following immunisation to indicate that events that follow vaccination may not be caused by the vaccine.
One unique study from Finland addressed this issue 74. Researchers analysed common symptoms in 581 pairs of twins after one twin received the MMR vaccine and the other was given a dummy vaccine (a placebo). Between one and six days after the injection, the number of adverse events in the twin who received the MMR vaccine was almost identical to those in the twin who received placebo 74 (see Figure 4.1). Between seven and 12 days after the injection, the vaccinated group had a measurable increase in symptoms that are known to be associated with administration of the attenuated measles vaccine, such as fever, irritability and rash. On the other hand, no difference between the two groups could be detected over that period in the frequency of cough and cold-like symptoms—which occur commonly with or without vaccination. Moreover, even some of the symptoms known to occur after MMR vaccine were also seen in the group who received placebo, but at a lower rate.
In summary, this valuable study showed that many common symptoms that occur after a vaccine is given are not caused by the vaccine, but occur by chance at that time.
4. Are vaccines safe? | Australian Academy of Science
Last edited by a moderator:
Senator Hanson has refused to distance herself from previous remarks linking vaccines to autism, a discredited fringe conspiracy that is not supported by science.
The head of Autism Awareness Australia, Nicole Rogerson, is demanding Senator Hanson retract her comments.
"It shows just an absolute lack of knowledge to do with anything to do with childhood vaccination and autism, and I think she shouldn't comment on what she clearly doesn't understand," Ms Rogerson said.
Nicole Rogerson, a long-time campaigner for evidence based intervention, joins Dr Gannon in calling out anti-vaccination activists and pseudoscience peddlers of miracle ‘cures and therapies’.
“Families are extremely vulnerable, especially at the time of their child’s diagnosis. We need to ensure they have correct and clear information about evidence based therapy options and not be swindled by an industry of ‘snake oil’ salesmen that sadly still exists.
Australian Medical Association announce Position Statement on Autism Spectrum Disorder - Autism Awareness Australia
1998: A study published in The Lancet suggests that the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine causes autism. This finding was quickly debunked.
2000: Vaccine manufacturers remove thimerosal (a mercury-based preservative) from all routinely given childhood vaccines due to public fears about its role in autism--even though, again, the vaccine-autism link has been debunked.
The History of Autism
The head of Autism Awareness Australia, Nicole Rogerson, is demanding Senator Hanson retract her comments.
"It shows just an absolute lack of knowledge to do with anything to do with childhood vaccination and autism, and I think she shouldn't comment on what she clearly doesn't understand," Ms Rogerson said.
Nicole Rogerson, a long-time campaigner for evidence based intervention, joins Dr Gannon in calling out anti-vaccination activists and pseudoscience peddlers of miracle ‘cures and therapies’.
“Families are extremely vulnerable, especially at the time of their child’s diagnosis. We need to ensure they have correct and clear information about evidence based therapy options and not be swindled by an industry of ‘snake oil’ salesmen that sadly still exists.
Australian Medical Association announce Position Statement on Autism Spectrum Disorder - Autism Awareness Australia
1998: A study published in The Lancet suggests that the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine causes autism. This finding was quickly debunked.
2000: Vaccine manufacturers remove thimerosal (a mercury-based preservative) from all routinely given childhood vaccines due to public fears about its role in autism--even though, again, the vaccine-autism link has been debunked.
The History of Autism
Last edited by a moderator:
MMR
Wakefield’s original research has been criticised on a number of grounds. Following publication, the paper was criticised for using adult or other non-standard rather than paediatric ranges on some laboratory tests, meaning that some of the gastrointestinal findings were in fact not abnormal10],[11]. It was also found that there was a link between Dr Wakefield and a legal action by parents of some of the children in the study against makers of the MMR. The journal that published the article, The Lancet, suggested that this link should have been known to help inform whether the paper should have been published in the first place[12],[13]. Ten of the thirteen original authors of the paper issued a partial retraction in 2004, suggesting there was no causal link established between the MMR and autism[14]. In 2010, The UK General Medical Council[15] found Wakefield had displayed serious professional misconduct on numerous occasions in relation to his research. As a result of these findings Wakefield, was removed from the medical register and the Lancet issued a full retraction of the paper in February 2010[16].
A number of large population studies have found no evidence to support a causal association between MMR and autism. A study of more than 500,000 Danish children[17] found no increased risk of ASDs among those who had received the MMR compared with those who had not been vaccinated, and even though autism rates increased during the study period, this increase occurred well after the introduction of the MMR vaccine.
Similarly, Fombonne and colleagues[18] study in 2006 of more than 27,000 Canadian children noted that rates of Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDDs) increased over time, while take-up of the MMR vaccination decreased which ruled out a causal association between ASD and the MMR. Another study[19] also found that even when the MMR was discontinued in a region of Japan, autism rates continued to rise, suggesting that the MMR vaccine was unlikely to be the main cause of autism. Similarly, a more recent study of Japanese children[20] did not find convincing evidence that MMR vaccination was associated with an increased risk of ASD
In an attempt to replicate part of Wakefield’s findings, a study in 2008[21] compared bowel tissue of 25 children’s autism and gastrointestinal symptoms, with 13 children with gastrointestinal symptoms alone. The researchers found no differences between the two groups.
In 2010, more research[22] found that autism risk was actually lower in children who were vaccinated with the MMR than in children who were unvaccinated.
Fact Sheet - Vaccinations & autism | Positive Partnerships | Working together to support school aged students on the autism spectrum
Wakefield’s original research has been criticised on a number of grounds. Following publication, the paper was criticised for using adult or other non-standard rather than paediatric ranges on some laboratory tests, meaning that some of the gastrointestinal findings were in fact not abnormal10],[11]. It was also found that there was a link between Dr Wakefield and a legal action by parents of some of the children in the study against makers of the MMR. The journal that published the article, The Lancet, suggested that this link should have been known to help inform whether the paper should have been published in the first place[12],[13]. Ten of the thirteen original authors of the paper issued a partial retraction in 2004, suggesting there was no causal link established between the MMR and autism[14]. In 2010, The UK General Medical Council[15] found Wakefield had displayed serious professional misconduct on numerous occasions in relation to his research. As a result of these findings Wakefield, was removed from the medical register and the Lancet issued a full retraction of the paper in February 2010[16].
A number of large population studies have found no evidence to support a causal association between MMR and autism. A study of more than 500,000 Danish children[17] found no increased risk of ASDs among those who had received the MMR compared with those who had not been vaccinated, and even though autism rates increased during the study period, this increase occurred well after the introduction of the MMR vaccine.
Similarly, Fombonne and colleagues[18] study in 2006 of more than 27,000 Canadian children noted that rates of Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDDs) increased over time, while take-up of the MMR vaccination decreased which ruled out a causal association between ASD and the MMR. Another study[19] also found that even when the MMR was discontinued in a region of Japan, autism rates continued to rise, suggesting that the MMR vaccine was unlikely to be the main cause of autism. Similarly, a more recent study of Japanese children[20] did not find convincing evidence that MMR vaccination was associated with an increased risk of ASD
In an attempt to replicate part of Wakefield’s findings, a study in 2008[21] compared bowel tissue of 25 children’s autism and gastrointestinal symptoms, with 13 children with gastrointestinal symptoms alone. The researchers found no differences between the two groups.
In 2010, more research[22] found that autism risk was actually lower in children who were vaccinated with the MMR than in children who were unvaccinated.
Fact Sheet - Vaccinations & autism | Positive Partnerships | Working together to support school aged students on the autism spectrum
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Mike stop drinking the kool aid.
Autism has been scientifically linked to MMR by dozens of studies. Even the CDC knows it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Autism has been scientifically linked to MMR by dozens of studies. Even the CDC knows it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Seriously, only really ignorant and retarded people think vaccines are safe and effective.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I can actually quote studies, you just claim them. And the one you do quote Wakefields has been discredited and he got struck off the medical register as a result.
Madsen, K.M., Hvid, A., Vestergaard, M., Schendel, D., Wohlfahrt, J., Thorsen, P., Olsen, J. & Melbye, M. (2002). A population-based study of measles, mumps and rubella vaccination and autism. The New England Journal of Medicine, 347(19), 1477 – 1482.
(A study of more than 500,000 Danish children[17] found no increased risk of ASDs among those who had received the MMR compared with those who had not been vaccinated, and even though autism rates increased during the study period, this increase occurred well after the introduction of the MMR vaccine.)
Fombonne, E., Zakarian, R., Bennett, A., Meng, L. & McLean-Heywood, D. (2006). Pervasive developmental disorders in Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Prevalence & links with immunisations. Pediatrics, 118(1), e139 – e150.
(Similarly, Fombonne and colleagues[18] study in 2006 of more than 27,000 Canadian children noted that rates of Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDDs) increased over time, while take-up of the MMR vaccination decreased which ruled out a causal association between ASD and the MMR.)
Honda, H., Shimizu, Y. & Rutter, M. (2005). No effect of MMR withdrawal on the incidence of autism: a total population study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(6), 572 – 579.
(Another study[19] also found that even when the MMR was discontinued in a region of Japan, autism rates continued to rise, suggesting that the MMR vaccine was unlikely to be the main cause of autism)
Uno, Y., Uchiyama, T., Kurosawa, M., Aleksica, B. & Ozakia, N. (2012). The combined measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines and the total number of vaccines are not associated with development of autism spectrum disorder: The first case–control study in Asia. Vaccine, 3(28), 4292–4298.
(Similarly, a more recent study of Japanese children[20] did not find convincing evidence that MMR vaccination was associated with an increased risk of ASD)
Hornig, M., Briese, T., Buie, T., Bauman, M.L., Lauwers, G. et al. (2008). Lack of association between measles virus vaccine and autism with enteropathy: A case-control study. PLoSONE, 3(9), e3140.
(In an attempt to replicate part of Wakefield’s findings, a study in 2008[21] compared bowel tissue of 25 children’s autism and gastrointestinal symptoms, with 13 children with gastrointestinal symptoms alone. The researchers found no differences between the two groups.)
Mrożek-Budzyn, D., Kiełtyka, A., Majewska, R. (2010). Lack of association between measles-mumps-rubella vaccination and autism in children: A case-control study. Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal,129(5), 397 – 400.
(In 2010, more research[22] found that autism risk was actually lower in children who were vaccinated with the MMR than in children who were unvaccinated.)
National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance of Vaccine Preventable Diseases (NCIRS) (2005). Thiomersal fact sheet. Retrieved September 5, 2009,
(More cases of PDD were found in the group that had no exposure to thiomersal, leading them to rule out an association between PDDs and thiomersal.)
Schechter, R. & Grether, J.K. (2008). Continuing increases in autism reported to California’s developmental services system: Mercury in retrograde. Archives of General Psychiatry, 65(1), 19 – 24.
(Another study[24] also looked at rates of autism before and after the removal of thiomersal from vaccines in California and found no decrease in diagnosis)
Price, C.S., Thompson, W.W., Goodson, B., Weintraub, E.S., Croen, L.A., Hinrichsen, V.L., Marcy, M., Robertson, A., Eriksen, E., Lewis, E., Bemel, P., Shay, D., Davis, R.L. & DeStefano, F. (2010). Prenatal and infant exposure to thimerosal from vaccines and immunoglobulins and risk of autism. Pediatrics, 126, 656 – 664.
(and a similar recent study[25] also looked at thiomersal exposure and found no evidence that higher thiomersal exposure was associated with increased risk of autism.)
Study after study after study, Documented and presented.
All you have is claims, not facts.
P
pixelsmith
Guest
P
pixelsmith
Guest
Why not try watching VAXXED. If you can't afford $4 I could give it to you.
Stream the Film Instantly - Vaxxed
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Stream the Film Instantly - Vaxxed
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
He was cleared of misconduct, but his findings re vaccinations are still considered as incorrect.
Dr. Malcolm Molyneux refused to reverse the retraction of exonerated gastroenterologist Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s paper on post-vaccination autism
Having considered all of the relevant material, I can see no sufficient reason for reinstatement of the Wakefield paper.
In addition other studies have tried to replicate his results
In an attempt to replicate part of Wakefield’s findings, a study in 2008[21] compared bowel tissue of 25 children’s autism and gastrointestinal symptoms, with 13 children with gastrointestinal symptoms alone. The researchers found no differences between the two groups.
The UK General Medical Council[15] found Wakefield had displayed serious professional misconduct on numerous occasions in relation to his research.
So all that happened if we fact check your data, is he was cleared of misconduct. His theory remains disproved.
At the end of the day they said to Wakefield your results are bogus, and you displayed serious misconduct as part of how you did the research. This has now been changed to just your results are bogus.
All that links says is that you are not a wilful idiot, just an idiot.
Its right there in your own link.
There fact checked for you.
Dr. Malcolm Molyneux refused to reverse the retraction of exonerated gastroenterologist Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s paper on post-vaccination autism
Having considered all of the relevant material, I can see no sufficient reason for reinstatement of the Wakefield paper.
In addition other studies have tried to replicate his results
In an attempt to replicate part of Wakefield’s findings, a study in 2008[21] compared bowel tissue of 25 children’s autism and gastrointestinal symptoms, with 13 children with gastrointestinal symptoms alone. The researchers found no differences between the two groups.
The UK General Medical Council[15] found Wakefield had displayed serious professional misconduct on numerous occasions in relation to his research.
So all that happened if we fact check your data, is he was cleared of misconduct. His theory remains disproved.
At the end of the day they said to Wakefield your results are bogus, and you displayed serious misconduct as part of how you did the research. This has now been changed to just your results are bogus.
All that links says is that you are not a wilful idiot, just an idiot.
Its right there in your own link.
There fact checked for you.
http://www.ecbt.org/images/articles/Andrew_Wakefield_Has_Never_Been_Exonerated_Final.pdf
If we Fact check the claim we find
On March 6, 2004, some of our ex-colleagues issued a “retraction of an interpretation”, not a retraction of the factual content of the paper, as widely inferred.
The Lancet and our co-authors have had the opportunity to seek further details and consider their position with respect to perceived conflicts of interest. We read the absence of any comment as implying tacit acknowledgment of lack of such conflict, as stated by AJW at the time.
Conflict of interest is created when involvement in one project potentially could, or actively does, interfere with the objective and dispassionate assessment of the processes or outcomes of another project. We cannot accept that the knowledge that affected children were later to pursue litigation, following their clinical referral and investigation, influenced the content or tone of the 1998 paper which was a description of a possible new syndrome in the classical mode. We emphasise that this was not a scientific paper but a clinical report.
He was cleared of misconduct as it pertained to what was thought to be a conflict of interest regarding his involvement with parents wanting to litigate.
On 1 April 2011, the James Randi Educational Foundation awarded Wakefield the Pigasus Award for "refusal to face reality".[128]
Clear evidence of falsification of data should now close the door on this damaging vaccine scare ... Who perpetrated this fraud? There is no doubt that it was Wakefield. Is it possible that he was wrong, but not dishonest: that he was so incompetent that he was unable to fairly describe the project, or to report even one of the 12 children's cases accurately? No. A great deal of thought and effort must have gone into drafting the paper to achieve the results he wanted: the discrepancies all led in one direction; misreporting was gross. Moreover, although the scale of the GMC's 217 day hearing precluded additional charges focused directly on the fraud, the panel found him guilty of dishonesty concerning the study's admissions criteria, its funding by the Legal Aid Board, and his statements about it afterwards.
All your link says is that they retract the claim he was a dishonest fraud. They still maintain he is wrong.
If we Fact check the claim we find
On March 6, 2004, some of our ex-colleagues issued a “retraction of an interpretation”, not a retraction of the factual content of the paper, as widely inferred.
The Lancet and our co-authors have had the opportunity to seek further details and consider their position with respect to perceived conflicts of interest. We read the absence of any comment as implying tacit acknowledgment of lack of such conflict, as stated by AJW at the time.
Conflict of interest is created when involvement in one project potentially could, or actively does, interfere with the objective and dispassionate assessment of the processes or outcomes of another project. We cannot accept that the knowledge that affected children were later to pursue litigation, following their clinical referral and investigation, influenced the content or tone of the 1998 paper which was a description of a possible new syndrome in the classical mode. We emphasise that this was not a scientific paper but a clinical report.
He was cleared of misconduct as it pertained to what was thought to be a conflict of interest regarding his involvement with parents wanting to litigate.
On 1 April 2011, the James Randi Educational Foundation awarded Wakefield the Pigasus Award for "refusal to face reality".[128]
Clear evidence of falsification of data should now close the door on this damaging vaccine scare ... Who perpetrated this fraud? There is no doubt that it was Wakefield. Is it possible that he was wrong, but not dishonest: that he was so incompetent that he was unable to fairly describe the project, or to report even one of the 12 children's cases accurately? No. A great deal of thought and effort must have gone into drafting the paper to achieve the results he wanted: the discrepancies all led in one direction; misreporting was gross. Moreover, although the scale of the GMC's 217 day hearing precluded additional charges focused directly on the fraud, the panel found him guilty of dishonesty concerning the study's admissions criteria, its funding by the Legal Aid Board, and his statements about it afterwards.
All your link says is that they retract the claim he was a dishonest fraud. They still maintain he is wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
I do have a quibble with the awards this year though. Our old friend Andrew Wakefield — the defrocked, debunked, and discredited founder of the modern antivax movement — was given the "Refusal to Face Reality Award" for his ongoing (and wrong) claims that vaccines cause all sorts of health problems from gastric distress to autism. But it’s not clear he’s refusing to face reality at all. In fact, the point could be made that he may be simply cashing in on parents’ fears, in which case he is facing reality quite squarely.
But that’s merely a quibble. The important thing is that Wakefield’s ignominy is highlighted.
2011 JREF Pigasus awards - Bad Astronomy
Print and laminate a copy for your wall
I think most will agree you've earned the honour.
But that’s merely a quibble. The important thing is that Wakefield’s ignominy is highlighted.
2011 JREF Pigasus awards - Bad Astronomy
Print and laminate a copy for your wall
I think most will agree you've earned the honour.
Angel of Ioren
Friendly Skeptic
I'm actually more fascinated with the refusal to face reality here.
The sky is blue. No it's orange. No, just look, it's blue. No, you're ignorant, and are not facing the facts, it's orange. The people that I think are right say it's orange which means it is. Okay, but people that actually know what they're talking about say it's blue. That's just a cover-up, follow the money. But it really is blue. No, its not. Look here's a picture of a blue sky. Not that picture was faked.
This is a never ending circle of misery. It's really unfortunate because this isn't like UFOs where you can agree to disagree. Even as a UFO skeptic, I have to leave room to be completely wrong and say that it's possible, no matter how remote, that aliens are visiting Earth, or some other intelligence if you don't like the ETH. But vaccines... FFS - they are PROVEN to work, and work well, and the reward FAR exceeds any risks (and as with any drug there are some risks). And let's not get started on the damn global warming - its happening, we're part of it, and we can help slow it down.
The sky is blue. No it's orange. No, just look, it's blue. No, you're ignorant, and are not facing the facts, it's orange. The people that I think are right say it's orange which means it is. Okay, but people that actually know what they're talking about say it's blue. That's just a cover-up, follow the money. But it really is blue. No, its not. Look here's a picture of a blue sky. Not that picture was faked.
This is a never ending circle of misery. It's really unfortunate because this isn't like UFOs where you can agree to disagree. Even as a UFO skeptic, I have to leave room to be completely wrong and say that it's possible, no matter how remote, that aliens are visiting Earth, or some other intelligence if you don't like the ETH. But vaccines... FFS - they are PROVEN to work, and work well, and the reward FAR exceeds any risks (and as with any drug there are some risks). And let's not get started on the damn global warming - its happening, we're part of it, and we can help slow it down.
- Status