Interestingly enough, without adjuvants there would most likely be little to no risk at all from a vaccination. Medical governing boards like the FDA required some form of proof (or at least something they could call proof) that the vaccines were effective before they could be patented and sold. Any rational person would think this would be done through clinical trials, but no. A British doctor discovered that adding aluminum salts triggered an inflammatory response, and this immune system response was enough to prove efficacy of the vaccine itself. Soon all kinds of toxins were added to the ingredient list so they could be sold to the public as safe.
Don't know why your post was down voted. I think vaccines are a flawed science. Sure they may produce an immune response, but is that the best way to protect us? While the immune system is triggered, it is (temporarily at least) weakened, perhaps then allowing other diseases (besides the one the vaccine is targeted) to take hold. They say not to get a vaccine when you are sick or also often when you get a vaccine, say for flu, you end up getting the flu anyway. I wonder if the weakened immune system from the frontal attack of the vaccine the reason why.
Another flaw is that the vaccine passes our natural immune system protection response, the skin, the nasal passages, the digestion system, and goes directly to the muscle and then the blood. And another flaw is more than one vaccine (or a combined vaccine) is given at a time, how much can a typical immune system handle? Another flaw are the harmful ingredients and adjuvants, yet more and more stress (or downright poisoning??) on the immune system. Another flaw is body weight are not considered in a dose. More flaws, no way to see if the ingredients in the vials are safe, not enough testing, corruption beyond corruption all around, no legal protection, etc, etc, etc, etc. I just see too many questions and no real answers besides, "Trust the $cience."
Also, it's not well know about the uproars about vaccines since it's beginning, we are not told about the protests that people against vaccination coming into their communities. We are not told about the failures of the industry, only the supposed success. The history has been white-washed and all we hear is that vaccines conquered childhood diseases. What is the true history, why do charts show disease rates lowering before the vaccination come out? Dissolving Illusions–Charts from the book Why were polio epidemics not widespread but mainly in farming communities (fertilizer usage) and where DDT was sprayed or for adults, where toxins were rampant in industry? The Moth in the Iron Lung
The biggest problem with vaccines is not the fraud they are based on (Louis Pastuer's fraudulent data), but the unwillingness of any established medical expert to view the information objectively. We have technology for genetic editing, but still no direct evidence for pathogenic of any "virus." And the medical establishment protects the position of indirect evidence by viciously attacking any opposing idea.
MJ Rosenau's series of experiments on modes of transmission of influenza (1918) proved that flu is not spread from person to person via bodily secretion (mucus, blood, tears) or exhaled breath. He could only conclude that more research was necessary to understand the disease.
Interestingly enough, without adjuvants there would most likely be little to no risk at all from a vaccination. Medical governing boards like the FDA required some form of proof (or at least something they could call proof) that the vaccines were effective before they could be patented and sold. Any rational person would think this would be done through clinical trials, but no. A British doctor discovered that adding aluminum salts triggered an inflammatory response, and this immune system response was enough to prove efficacy of the vaccine itself. Soon all kinds of toxins were added to the ingredient list so they could be sold to the public as safe.
Don't know why your post was down voted. I think vaccines are a flawed science. Sure they may produce an immune response, but is that the best way to protect us? While the immune system is triggered, it is (temporarily at least) weakened, perhaps then allowing other diseases (besides the one the vaccine is targeted) to take hold. They say not to get a vaccine when you are sick or also often when you get a vaccine, say for flu, you end up getting the flu anyway. I wonder if the weakened immune system from the frontal attack of the vaccine the reason why.
Another flaw is that the vaccine passes our natural immune system protection response, the skin, the nasal passages, the digestion system, and goes directly to the muscle and then the blood. And another flaw is more than one vaccine (or a combined vaccine) is given at a time, how much can a typical immune system handle? Another flaw are the harmful ingredients and adjuvants, yet more and more stress (or downright poisoning??) on the immune system. Another flaw is body weight are not considered in a dose. More flaws, no way to see if the ingredients in the vials are safe, not enough testing, corruption beyond corruption all around, no legal protection, etc, etc, etc, etc. I just see too many questions and no real answers besides, "Trust the $cience."
Also, it's not well know about the uproars about vaccines since it's beginning, we are not told about the protests that people against vaccination coming into their communities. We are not told about the failures of the industry, only the supposed success. The history has been white-washed and all we hear is that vaccines conquered childhood diseases. What is the true history, why do charts show disease rates lowering before the vaccination come out? Dissolving Illusions–Charts from the book Why were polio epidemics not widespread but mainly in farming communities (fertilizer usage) and where DDT was sprayed or for adults, where toxins were rampant in industry? The Moth in the Iron Lung
Exactly. 🎯
The biggest problem with vaccines is not the fraud they are based on (Louis Pastuer's fraudulent data), but the unwillingness of any established medical expert to view the information objectively. We have technology for genetic editing, but still no direct evidence for pathogenic of any "virus." And the medical establishment protects the position of indirect evidence by viciously attacking any opposing idea.
MJ Rosenau's series of experiments on modes of transmission of influenza (1918) proved that flu is not spread from person to person via bodily secretion (mucus, blood, tears) or exhaled breath. He could only conclude that more research was necessary to understand the disease.