He's spewed anti-2A rhetoric after school shootings- knowing they're false flags and living through the playbook.
He is just another paid actor. I'm tired of these yutzes.
He is shilling for germ theory even as he "exposes" vaccines. His position is that they're not sufficiently tested or tracked- which is true. But whether they are necessary at all is the real question, and he doesn't even attempt to touch the scam that is the germ and viral theory of illness. He is fervently asking the WRONG QUESTIONS, directing people away from the fundamental understanding of how our health actually works and toward Rockefeller-funded mainstream/allopathic medicine.
Kennedy is the controlled opposition to vaccines- one side says "status quo", the other side says "test and track". But both operate on the premise that vaccines actually do anything at all.
There is no such thing as a contagious virus, let alone one that is the product of "gain of function research". There has never been a paper or experiment published that definitively proves any virus is the cause of any disease. This sounds like an insane position- but don't take my word for it. Viruses are not what they tell us. Tiny external virus particles don't "infect us"- if they did, things like masks would work... and they obviously don't do anything, and in most cases they make things worse.
You know how to get a cold or a flu. Everyone does. Go outside in 40 degree rainy weather for a few hours or stay up super late and don't sleep for three days. You can get sick by yourself without being in contact with anyone else. So who gave you the virus?
You can see viruses with electron microscopy, absolutely. But they are not pathogenic. And almost everything we see in books and media are artistic representations. Viruses do not hijack our cells, instruct our cells to abandon their innate, programmed functions to turn into "virus factories" as invading enemies, and then wage a battle. The theory is that our very specialized cells essential for precise metabolic processes (which we survived without despite all these cells temporarily abandoning their function to become virus factories) then return to their original functions like nothing happened is just so silly. Sometimes overnight.
Follow the path of how viruses are purported to work, and challenge every step. It's absolute nonsense. How about the "a virus is neither dead nor alive", and yet we have "live virus" and "attenuated virus"?
"Cognition and behavior in sheep repetitively inoculated with aluminum adjuvant-containing vaccines or aluminum adjuvant only". Read the literature- there has never been a virus to fulfill Koch's Postulates. They require adjuvants to "transfer illness", but the adjuvants alone have the same effect as the "live vaccine".
There is no "immune response" mounted against virus only vaccines- they do nothing because they cannot do anything. There have been experiments for centuries trying to get people sick through swapping spit, and they do not work.
The landmark study in question is by Dr. Milton Rosenau, called “Experiments to Determine Mode of Spread of Influenza” and published in JAMA in 1919. They could not prove human-to-human transmission of influenza through exposure to only bodily fluids- whether injecting blood, swabbing spit and mucous, coughing/exhaling into each others' faces.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/221687
If there exist exceptions to a rule, the rule does not accurately explain reality. THIS is what science is- if a theory does not account for every situation, it is not correct. Our bodies tend to order, not disorder- there is a reason why people across the world get exposed to the same chemicals or same radiation and get precisely the same cancers with precisely the same biomarkers- it's not random bad luck or something going haywire- it is a series of precise, preprogrammed responses to external stimuli. We are all a bit different in great part because of the variance in our environments and diets, but the underlying design is the same.
Tuberculosis is highly contagious- but only among families that cook or heat their homes with fire indoors. Explain this using "virus theory". You get sick because you need to get sick, your "symptoms" are your body working to make you better, and you share signals with the people you interact with as we are made to be social, and if you need an illness to heal, there is a good chance the people you share your life with will need that illness as well. With tuberculosis, you cough your lungs up until they are clear of particulate matter inhaled from indoor fires. And if you don't have this precondition, it is nearly impossible to actually contract illness despite being exposed to TB.
Hepatitis B is another example- this is a "virus" affecting intravenous drug users and people with risky lifestyles. Except needle sticks from infected patients has between a 0.5% and a 0.1% positive test rate post-exposure, which is in line with the probability that a random person who is tested for Hep B will test positive. Hepa is live and titis is inflammation- your liver pulls in more resources to assist in breaking down toxins when engaged in risky behavior- and you can generate a Hepatitis infection by taking too much Tylenol or drinking too much Alcohol. There is a reason they ask you for your lifestyle choices when testing you for this- they ask on the intake forms if you do drugs or about your sexual partners- same for HIV. If this was actually "science", it shouldn't matter what those answers are. If you look hard enough, you will find anything you could possibly find in anyone- when you get tested for a Pneumonia infection or Influenza or Hepatitis or markers for HIV antibodies- they are testing population counts, not whether they are present or not. Remember, the killer of HIV was Anthony Fauci pushing the homosexual community to AZT, just like the killer of Covid-19 was Anthony Fauci pushing terrified elderly people to Remdesivir and sedation on ventilators (the mechanism of death by Remdesivir, by the way, is that Remdesivir is wildly toxic to kidneys, and when the kidneys are overwhelmed with toxins to process, they dump excess fluid into your lungs to cough out- but if you are sedated on a ventilator, your lungs just fill with fluid and you quickly drown).
This also explains why parents tested masks in June 2021 and found a dozen pathogenic diseases the children were obviously not exposed to. Nobody could make heads or tails of this because it makes no sense if you have to be exposed to external pathogens from another person in order to contract an illness. The combination of stress and lack of proper exhalation/waste disposal from wearing masks explains why these masks tested positive for so many pathogens. Not because they were partially exposed from someone else, but because the stressors and stunted waste maintenance (and lack of Vitamin D, also essential for breaking down toxins) was in the process of initiating various infections based on the kids' needs.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scottmorefield/2021/06/15/a-group-of-parents-sent-their-kids-face-masks-to-a-lab-for-analysis-heres-what-they-found-n2591047
Our adversary in this realm is the Father of Lies. Do not forget it. How many lies do you need to uncover before your default position regarding the mainstream is they are lying until proven truthful beyond a shadow of a doubt.
And the proof has not been provided. Not even a little bit.
My understanding is the rabies virus specifically attacks nerve cells. They replicate until they get to the brain. The brain swells, the patient goes into a coma and usually dies. Once it gets that far, the survival rate is very low.
Sorry, I meant how does it work in his scenario if virii aren't real...like what is rabies then and why can you catch it from being bitten if there are no viruses
I do not know yet. I'll do some research and try to remember to get back to you. That is a great question- and if any hypothesis has any contradicting evidence, it needs to be thrown out and the position reevaluated.
Mainstream science stands up to zero scrutiny. This is why people are called anti-vaxxers, anti-science, conspiracy theorists instead of having their questions answered. Because the answers are lies. Read my later response, it's quite a lot more information, but it explains the world so much better and in a predictive manner, rather than just chalking up unexplained events as "luck" or "randomness".
He's spewed anti-2A rhetoric after school shootings- knowing they're false flags and living through the playbook.
He is just another paid actor. I'm tired of these yutzes.
He is shilling for germ theory even as he "exposes" vaccines. His position is that they're not sufficiently tested or tracked- which is true. But whether they are necessary at all is the real question, and he doesn't even attempt to touch the scam that is the germ and viral theory of illness. He is fervently asking the WRONG QUESTIONS, directing people away from the fundamental understanding of how our health actually works and toward Rockefeller-funded mainstream/allopathic medicine.
Kennedy is the controlled opposition to vaccines- one side says "status quo", the other side says "test and track". But both operate on the premise that vaccines actually do anything at all.
There is no such thing as a contagious virus, let alone one that is the product of "gain of function research". There has never been a paper or experiment published that definitively proves any virus is the cause of any disease. This sounds like an insane position- but don't take my word for it. Viruses are not what they tell us. Tiny external virus particles don't "infect us"- if they did, things like masks would work... and they obviously don't do anything, and in most cases they make things worse.
How does rabies work then? Serious question and not being oppositional here.
You know how to get a cold or a flu. Everyone does. Go outside in 40 degree rainy weather for a few hours or stay up super late and don't sleep for three days. You can get sick by yourself without being in contact with anyone else. So who gave you the virus?
You can see viruses with electron microscopy, absolutely. But they are not pathogenic. And almost everything we see in books and media are artistic representations. Viruses do not hijack our cells, instruct our cells to abandon their innate, programmed functions to turn into "virus factories" as invading enemies, and then wage a battle. The theory is that our very specialized cells essential for precise metabolic processes (which we survived without despite all these cells temporarily abandoning their function to become virus factories) then return to their original functions like nothing happened is just so silly. Sometimes overnight.
Follow the path of how viruses are purported to work, and challenge every step. It's absolute nonsense. How about the "a virus is neither dead nor alive", and yet we have "live virus" and "attenuated virus"?
He's a small example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31783216/
"Cognition and behavior in sheep repetitively inoculated with aluminum adjuvant-containing vaccines or aluminum adjuvant only". Read the literature- there has never been a virus to fulfill Koch's Postulates. They require adjuvants to "transfer illness", but the adjuvants alone have the same effect as the "live vaccine".
There is no "immune response" mounted against virus only vaccines- they do nothing because they cannot do anything. There have been experiments for centuries trying to get people sick through swapping spit, and they do not work.
The landmark study in question is by Dr. Milton Rosenau, called “Experiments to Determine Mode of Spread of Influenza” and published in JAMA in 1919. They could not prove human-to-human transmission of influenza through exposure to only bodily fluids- whether injecting blood, swabbing spit and mucous, coughing/exhaling into each others' faces. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/221687
If there exist exceptions to a rule, the rule does not accurately explain reality. THIS is what science is- if a theory does not account for every situation, it is not correct. Our bodies tend to order, not disorder- there is a reason why people across the world get exposed to the same chemicals or same radiation and get precisely the same cancers with precisely the same biomarkers- it's not random bad luck or something going haywire- it is a series of precise, preprogrammed responses to external stimuli. We are all a bit different in great part because of the variance in our environments and diets, but the underlying design is the same.
Tuberculosis is highly contagious- but only among families that cook or heat their homes with fire indoors. Explain this using "virus theory". You get sick because you need to get sick, your "symptoms" are your body working to make you better, and you share signals with the people you interact with as we are made to be social, and if you need an illness to heal, there is a good chance the people you share your life with will need that illness as well. With tuberculosis, you cough your lungs up until they are clear of particulate matter inhaled from indoor fires. And if you don't have this precondition, it is nearly impossible to actually contract illness despite being exposed to TB.
Hepatitis B is another example- this is a "virus" affecting intravenous drug users and people with risky lifestyles. Except needle sticks from infected patients has between a 0.5% and a 0.1% positive test rate post-exposure, which is in line with the probability that a random person who is tested for Hep B will test positive. Hepa is live and titis is inflammation- your liver pulls in more resources to assist in breaking down toxins when engaged in risky behavior- and you can generate a Hepatitis infection by taking too much Tylenol or drinking too much Alcohol. There is a reason they ask you for your lifestyle choices when testing you for this- they ask on the intake forms if you do drugs or about your sexual partners- same for HIV. If this was actually "science", it shouldn't matter what those answers are. If you look hard enough, you will find anything you could possibly find in anyone- when you get tested for a Pneumonia infection or Influenza or Hepatitis or markers for HIV antibodies- they are testing population counts, not whether they are present or not. Remember, the killer of HIV was Anthony Fauci pushing the homosexual community to AZT, just like the killer of Covid-19 was Anthony Fauci pushing terrified elderly people to Remdesivir and sedation on ventilators (the mechanism of death by Remdesivir, by the way, is that Remdesivir is wildly toxic to kidneys, and when the kidneys are overwhelmed with toxins to process, they dump excess fluid into your lungs to cough out- but if you are sedated on a ventilator, your lungs just fill with fluid and you quickly drown).
Kary Mullis said it best: "With PCR you can find almost ANYTHING in ANYBODY". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHmVj3LTqrU&ab_channel=DissociatedPress
This also explains why parents tested masks in June 2021 and found a dozen pathogenic diseases the children were obviously not exposed to. Nobody could make heads or tails of this because it makes no sense if you have to be exposed to external pathogens from another person in order to contract an illness. The combination of stress and lack of proper exhalation/waste disposal from wearing masks explains why these masks tested positive for so many pathogens. Not because they were partially exposed from someone else, but because the stressors and stunted waste maintenance (and lack of Vitamin D, also essential for breaking down toxins) was in the process of initiating various infections based on the kids' needs. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scottmorefield/2021/06/15/a-group-of-parents-sent-their-kids-face-masks-to-a-lab-for-analysis-heres-what-they-found-n2591047
Our adversary in this realm is the Father of Lies. Do not forget it. How many lies do you need to uncover before your default position regarding the mainstream is they are lying until proven truthful beyond a shadow of a doubt.
And the proof has not been provided. Not even a little bit.
My understanding is the rabies virus specifically attacks nerve cells. They replicate until they get to the brain. The brain swells, the patient goes into a coma and usually dies. Once it gets that far, the survival rate is very low.
Sorry, I meant how does it work in his scenario if virii aren't real...like what is rabies then and why can you catch it from being bitten if there are no viruses
Oh, I understand now what you were asking. Don't have an answer for that!
I do not know yet. I'll do some research and try to remember to get back to you. That is a great question- and if any hypothesis has any contradicting evidence, it needs to be thrown out and the position reevaluated.
Mainstream science stands up to zero scrutiny. This is why people are called anti-vaxxers, anti-science, conspiracy theorists instead of having their questions answered. Because the answers are lies. Read my later response, it's quite a lot more information, but it explains the world so much better and in a predictive manner, rather than just chalking up unexplained events as "luck" or "randomness".
It's what immediately jumps to mind with the virus question. I'd be curious to hear what you find