Mothering Forum banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,078 Posts
This.

So why should Merck be worried now since they have legal immunity in most countries where they do vaccine business? Well the simple answer is that these teenagers and their mothers are pro-vaccine. They were the industry’s best customers. They vaccinated their kids all the way up the line and thought nothing of vaccinating their healthy, athletic teenagers with the new vaccine. They were sold a vaccine against cancer (not a virus), and who wouldn’t want to protect their kids, no matter how remote the risk that they would develop the specific cancer the vaccine is intended to prevent? But unlike infants who suffer horrible reactions, these girls can articulate their pain, describe their symptoms, and are on social media. In addition, they, their parents, and their communities know that these girls were robustly healthy prior to the shot, and no one can say that they or their parents “just didn’t notice” an “underlying” debilitating condition. That’s a truly scary scenario for the makers of this multi-billion-dollar product.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
and this
In fact, of the 150 sick girls in Ireland, only a handful have any diagnosis at all, despite the devastating nature of their illnesses, as Irish doctors have yet to understand and recognize their illnesses (to the point that many of the girls have had their appendixes removed, hoping to resolve undetermined abdominal pain).
How can it be called the background rate of illnesses which regularly occur in teens, if most of these girls still don't have a diagnosis? Seems like another attempt to have it both ways. No diagnosis means that studies don't need to count them. But we'll still claim that the undiagnosed illnesses which they seem to be suffering from are chronic fatigue or something of the sort...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,833 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
and this

How can it be called the background rate of illnesses which regularly occur in teens, if most of these girls still don't have a diagnosis? Seems like another attempt to have it both ways. No diagnosis means that studies don't need to count them. But we'll still claim that the undiagnosed illnesses which they seem to be suffering from are chronic fatigue or something of the sort...
I'm quite serious with this question. Anyone have an explanation of how this background rate thingee can be applied to illnesses that lack a definite diagnosis?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anne Jividen

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,389 Posts
Yes, this is an gregarious example of "coinsidence disorder". When will our government judicially monitor what is being injected into our female children?
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top