RFK Jr has never indicated that he was going to throw the baby out with the bathwater. And vaccines do indeed deserve deep scrutiny due to the liability-free status that protects manufactures. They need to be held accountable for everything they produce just like with regular drugs.
RFK Jr is a thoughtful man, and he has never indicated that he is an anti-vaxxer, or that he is a rash impulsive individual. He has stated that he is pro safe vaccines and feels that vaccines have a role to play in keeping people healthy. But they have to be safe and they are not. It is not a black-and-white issue that vaccines are what keeps you healthy but contaminated food, poisoned water and poisoned air should be overlooked as not affecting health. And that is where today’s pharmaceutical companies would have you be, totally dependent upon only their injections to keep you safe. And that is total hogwash.
RFK Jr will bring forth a balanced policy that takes the pillars of health which is eating clean food, exercise, fresh air, good sleep, and the correct preventative measures to ward off disease and viruses, which would include safe vaccines. But they have to be safe and they have to prove to the general public and scrutinized by people like RFK Jr that they are indeed safe. No more hiding test results for 75 years. No more Fox guarding the henhouse. Complete transparency, and effective vaccines that do not harm people.
He didn't specifically describe the RFK policy that he's objecting to, either.
A lot of people think RFK wants to ban vaccines. What I've heard him say is that he wants to insist on transparency of data and increased safety and efficacy testing.
I totally agree. I appreciate GV’s theorizing, but it’s not clear to me that he has the corner on how we should think about these things, and I just want me and my blood left alone for a while. Stop trying to control creation by messing with my immune system, please.
That said, I’m grateful that RFKJ is clearly signaling that he thinks more like a true liberal (which is a conservative or libertarian today) and isn’t planning on mandating or banning anything, but developing good research, rooting out corruption, and empowering individuals to make informed decisions.
This is a complex topic and unfortunately (because of the way things were handled and all the lies and truths that have come out ) most of us have learned a lot over the last few years. For many, myself included, my current approach is no more shots. Until and unless I can be convinced that they are necessary, safe and effective, I will assume they are not. I can do the research on the first (necessary) but may need help on the safe and effective part.
That’s the thing with trust, once you have been lied to, which we now know we have, by the entire health establishment, it will take a lot of work to ever rebuild trust.
I used to think vaccines were of some use but not for the 'flu. I realised in 2020 that none of them are/were any good, they were merely advertised to make them seem so.
The basic asertion is that vaccines cause a mild form of the disease, hopelfully so mild you don't notice, yet the adjuvants (i.e. toxic substances) are there to create a stronger reaction (i.e. make you sicker).
The big lie is that they 'train' the body to recognise the supposed disease causing agent injected next time.
I agree with your statement Nirav. But I don’t feel Geert is totally disregarding his viewpoint either. IMO RFK jr is a thoughtful man who invites opinion from both sides of the fence and I very much hope he engages a broad spectrum of expertise in this highly nuanced argument.
He has stated many times that he believes we need more research into both the benefits and the risks of vaccination. Especially in the very young with naive immune systems. There is a growing school of thought, and data, showing that the sheer number of vaccines in the childhood schedule is permanently harming the immune systems of our children, impacting their well-being far into adulthood.
It’s my hope that with thorough scientific study dedicated to honest exploration of the available data we can shed light on the truth of what’s being going on. Focussing both on the vaccine schedule AND the impact of environmental toxicity. It is most certainly a combination of the two but we need to know the facts to decipher the level of impact across the board.
I am done with allopathic medicine in its entirety. I can not agree with what you say in this post. I realize that your intentions are good, but your seemingly unquestionable allegiance to our contemporary, high-tech medical system is wrong, in my opinion.
So if you and your upvoters have broken bones, peritonitis, get run over by a car etc., you're all going to refuse all intervention and treatment by conventual medicine? Your decision, of course, but I'm just wondering how this plays out in real time. Your children are dying, very seriously injured and only such intervention has a chance of keeping them alive, you're just going to watch them die when a good surgeon might save their lives? In practice, how does this approach work?
For the record, Nirav made no statement of 'unquestionable allegiance' in his or her post but you have stated you're done with conventual medicine 'in its entirety'. I'd love to know how that'll hold up when faced with your own impending death or that of a loved one. Just saying.
Any number of definitions are available such as "Allopathic medicine is the general term for what most people understand as modern, Western medicine. The allopathic medicine definition describes it as a method of treating disease with remedies (such as SURGERY or drugs) that produce different effects from those caused by the disease." How much trauma medicine doesn't involve surgery and drugs?
Perhaps I was wrong about what Truthbird meant, but when health conscious people say anti allopathic, we mean pharmaceutical drugs and poison pills, not surgery.
Nobody needs vaccines. Surgery has value and so do medicines when they are used correctly. But to think the body needs modification from birth is way past arrogance.
You can get into the weeds of semantics all you want. I understood the comment. Modern medicine is wonderful at trauma care, but abysmal when it comes to things like chronic disease.
Endemic infectious disease is somewhere in the middle; my personal feeling is that natural immunity is best. Our culture has gotten so risk-averse and safetyist that it's lost sight of the fact that what were endemic childhood diseases in the 50s and 60s, when I grow up, were just part of life.
I think it has been said in the medical freedom community before but should obviously be stated here — there is a huge difference between emergency medicine and the standard of care found in your every day allopathic method of “prevention “. Hands down our country has some of the best emergency medicine standards and practices in the world—but even there we have a long way to go—for example there are hundreds if not thousands of studies done about the superiority of DMSO in treating brain damage from a variety of injury including stroke, physical damage etc and yet it is verboten to use as it can not be monetized and was demonized by FDA. There are other examples—I highly recommend The Forgotten Side of Medicine here on substack for more quality information from an outstanding practicing physician here in the US. But I sincerely doubt anyone would not wish to have emergency medical care in the event of a severe injury—but they certainly wouldn’t want their ability to receive that care to be contingent upon their receiving an unwanted and unnecessary vaccination while there. There was a very brutal reminder that this does happen very recently where a young lady was needing emergency care for a genetic disorder but was refused treatment unless she took 3 vaccines whereupon she had a life threatening (and changing) reaction. I will link below. This is just wrong on so many levels. And it makes a sane, normal person hesitant to even go in for much needed emergency treatment.
Sorry this is graphic but this young lady simply went in for a simple blood transfusion which is necessary from time to time for her condition but the hematologist insisted she receive I believe 3 different vaccines—at least one of which was a combination of several vaccines in one shot. She has been hospitalized ever since. It’s very tragic.
"Conventional medicine" killed my daughter (the Covid jab). They scared the populace into believing a lie, and she was bullied by people scared of an illness into taking something she didn't want...and died 10 weeks later of turbo-cancer at the age of 27. "Conventional medicine" is still advertizing
advertising the Covid jabs!! They haven't been removed from the market. The heinous acts of conventional medicine are still in an active state!! They haven't backed down, apologized, acknowledged their wrongdoing...and have gotten away with murder...and you want us to trust them. Are you completely mad?
I’m so sorry for your loss. I see and hear too many stories like this every day nowadadays.
We all need to fight and stand up for what’s right. I’m very hopeful that RFKjr and Jay Battacharia will change the status quo for the better. Let’s face it, anything is better than what’s currently going on!
Substack tells me you are replying to me here. No idea why as I haven't said anything about trusting anyone. It's simply a thread about the true meaning of the word 'allopathic' and whether people are prepared to forego conventual western'medicine' if that is all that is available to them in an emergency.
Geert you obviously have not listened to Rfk jr speak and are basing your comments on rumors. There is a big effort to cancel Rfk now as he poses a huge threat to the merry go round of vaccine business that we have now where the govt mandates the shots and takes commission from the manufacturers and the manufacturers have no product liability and do the testing of their own products. Great business model. No marketing costs and product liability. Rfk has never advocated for stopping all vaccination. He is not against vaccines but against untested vaccines and he wants people to have choice and know the risks. This substack you just published diminishes you because it is based on inaccurate info. Rfk has said that none of the childhood vaccines have been saline placebo tested for safety nor have there been any synergy tests done on the safety of giving 70 plus vaccines to kids. I fully support Rfk jr and this whole corrupt process needs to be cleaned up.
Do you not notice how some of these comments blame Geert for encouraging rejection of vaccines , and some are criticising him for promoting vaccines.? Just take his words as they stand. It's his opinion and advice . Why is everyone so critical in comments ?
No he isnt. He is making a general point about his own views. Something strange happens online where so many people become defensive and dont actually read the articles.
It’s pretty obvious he didn’t do any research on Rfk. You may not agree. I have tons of respect for Rfk and his lifelong fight for children’s health. I’ve heard him speak numerous times and he does not have a vaccine policy.
He wasnt claiming to know Rfks opinions. Rfk has changed tack a few times anyhow. Geert is offering his own advice and thoughts. I wouldnt risk jabs but honestly i dont know if people on remote islands etc are vulnerable due to never getting exposed to most illnesses. That’s what Geert was discussing here.
He's not disparaging anyone - you are. "as a vaccinologist, I am somewhat concerned about the extreme polarization that America is currently experiencing." As a vaccinologist he's perfectly entitled to give his opinion on vaccines and anything connected.
I'm not a scientist but it's been blatantly obvious for a long time that polarization on a lot of subjects (not just science) is happening, because a lot of people are rejecting all modern medicine/science as a bad thing in itself and dangerous per se, without reflecting on the fact that medicine, like technology et al. is neither good nor bad. It's the people who use it and the way they use it and the ends to which it is put which are good or bad.
"However, as a vaccinologist, I am somewhat concerned about the extreme polarization that America is currently experiencing. This polarization now threatens to penetrate even the deepest layers of society, including public health."
My only response to that it
(My words)
When countries and their embedded coin operated "health" systems willfully, intentionally and with extreme coercion and fore knowledge of consequences try to murder, grievously harm AND LOOT the masses for profit and control, ... yeah, that can be a bit polarizing
Extreme polarization in the face of intentional murder and harm for profit and control is a rational reasonable and perfectly expected consequence
Like the biblical saying Proverb Galatians 6:7-9 says
You shall reap what you sow
They sowed the seeds of extreme polarization and they got what they asked
Which, when you think about it is probably what they want
Few methods of control and repression are more time honored and successful than
Divide and conquer.
Mass polarization is just a euphemism for divide, the conquer part is for the vulture jackals that install it
Start by restoring the definition of a vaccine. The bogus changed definition allowed the failed and deadly COVID concoction to be called a vaccine when it isn't.
With the huge number of people who are vaccine injured or have died after getting the covid shot, plus the huge rise in autism cases, SIDS cases, and disabilities in children who received childhood shots, I can't support any vaccine.
I recently saw an orthopedic doctor in preparation for knee surgery. He is not affiliated with a hospital and he has treated me for 10+ years. I told him that I trust him, but since covid I don't trust many doctors. He replied, "Nor should you."
I have read that on average, the flu vaccine only has an absolute efficacy of around 5%. Influenza usually makes up only a small fraction of flu like illnesses and the cdc lumps influenza with pneumonia which inflates its importance
Never had one. Personal observation was they were ineffective. People I knew who had them were always sicker afterwards than I was. I think they initially depress the immune system and leave one open to infection. I have a generally low opinion of vaccines. They have been a poor trade off with a massively effective pr campaign
No and there is no gain, except for big pharma profits. Vaccines are the biggest fraud. Many people have been persuaded that poisoning oneself is good for one's health.
Of course if a vial contains saline who would know? No adverse affects and you feel fine. At a cost of what, £10 per shot.
I have a history in immunology, biochemistry and medicine, and was on to Pharma's game way back when statins first came on the scene. I was refusing Hepatitis B and Gardasil vaccines for my kids many years ago since their risk/benefit profile was not to my liking. I have watched many videos and interviews with RFK, and he is well read on the subject, has dealt with deep industrial corruption and influence first hand, and strikes me as sincere. Although it is very strongly wired in human nature to be loyal to your team, and either be ardently "pro-vax" or "anti-vax", mother nature doesn't care what we think, and neither do viruses or our immune systems. Every vaccine , and for that matter every medical intervention has a risk-benefit profile. Very few interventions are 100% good / 0% bad or vice versa. The key is to conduct large prospective trials(randomized if possible), which not surprisingly have not been done since the original polio vaccine. That was a live attenuated vaccine which did give immunity from polio to many recipients, but unfortunately also caused polio and other side effects in many individuals. Pharma and the media lump all vaccines under the same umbrella, but the different vaccines have very different risk/benefit profiles, and rarely should be given to everyone, and in some cases should be given to no one. Right now the Pharma industry has financially captured nearly every regulatory and academic research organization, and have successfully pushed the "safe and effective" campaign since they profit off every vaccine (no matter whether or not it is beneficial or harmful) If RFK can undo some of this capture, and get back to legitimate, unbiased or minimally biased scientific trials, and generate legitimate risk/benefit profiles for these vaccines, we'll all be better off. And based on decades of study, I do believe there is ample evidence that the cumulative effect of the current vaccine schedule either causes or contributes to neurological/immunological disorders such as autism/SIDS and autoimmune diseases in susceptible individuals. We need bona-fide independent (not pharma controlled) large scale prospective trials to prove this, to counteract the overwhelming messaging to the contrary. Given the huge polarization on the issue, it would be easy to enroll millions of children in a true placebo/control trial, with millions of parents happy to follow the CDC schedule, and millions of others happy to opt for zero vaccines(placebo). Such a trial would answer the question within a few years. I hope RFK gets the chance to do this.
It has been obvious for a very long time that vaccines cannot work. Inject something toxic into the body and it will react. This has been seen time and time again over many decades, perhaps two centuries now. That is a very long trial!
Poisoning the body can never train it and protect it, but manipulation of statistics has been done to deceive people into thinking it is a good idea.
First , I have a hard time believing in the health system we are presently in……. Over 15 years ago I had a discussion with my family physician about the yearly flu jab…..the pros and cons persay…. I told him from what I had heard and read I wasn’t sold on taking the jabs…. I proceeded to tell him what I had learned….. that the jabs this fall were for last years strain, they are a year behind,,, and ONLY MAY WORK at fighting the flu from LAST YEARS BUG, The problem is the new strain this year is stronger and has eradicated last years strain . That was right from SCIENCE….Doctor told me that was correct . So I said if that is correct, why would I allow anything to be injected into my body that I don’t know what is in it and it MAY have a positive effect on my body for something that can’t harm me anymore…it has been eradicated already….. his answer was…Jeffrey.. because everyone else your age is doing it. Then 4 years ago we were told to trust science for something that was safe and effective when it had no shelf life yet…..THAT HAS BEEN PROVEN AS A LIE……WHY? My previous 15 year old lie from science told me this may be history repeating it’s lie….. first the liars said take the jab… it is safe and effective ,,,, it wasn’t SAFE or EFFECTIVE …Then the same people said to everyone including the one’s jabbed……if the unjabbed don’t jab up….they could cause a negative effect for the jabbers .. IN OTHER WORDS THE JABS DO NOT WORK…….FACT….. Some people have reasoning skills…..we are not all 🐑
Jeffrey, Oh the jabs did work. Where do you think the variants came from? And the vaccinated blamed the un- vaxxed. The jabs (IMO) caused the immune system to attack it's self causing cancers (BRCA1) and cardiology events (micro clots) we have never seen before. I work in cardiology and i have seen events explode in the last two years. What's curious and sad it's hitting the men and women in their teens to their late 40's.
I like things working in MY FAVOUR….NOT THE oligarchs favour……..thanks but like I said over 15 years ago and most recently 3 to 4 years ago….. emphatic NO.
He was being ironic. The jabs work to cause harm as he indicates. It is impossible for them to do otherwise as that is their design intent. They can do not good at all unless you count big pharma profits as a good and I don't.
Now I am not a virologist or an immunologist, but I'd like to leave a comment on this paragraph:
>>Immunizing the immunologically naive portion of the population (e.g., newborns) with live-attenuated vaccines not only strengthens innate immunity but also establishes an immunological memory of adaptive Abs, thereby contributing both to the individual protection of the vaccinated and to maintaining herd immunity in the population.<<
Newborns do not yet have an immune system that can be immediately trained, nor are their kidneys well enough developed to excrete vaccine adjuvans. The initial immunity of the mother is provided to the infant through antibodies in the milk - breastfeeding provides the child with immunity until the immune system of the child can do so.
Vaccination for measles has caused a change in the risk profile. Past: mothers that had measles as a child got permanent immunity and provide breastfeeding protection. Infants up to 2 years were protected from measles, will get them in childhood when it is mostly safe, will gain permanent immunity - and will give it forward. Present: The mother never had measles, just a vaccination that needs a refresher every decade or so. The mother is unable to provide breastfeeding protection - the newborn cannot gain antibodies against measles in a highly vulnerable state and is at life risk. It will have to receive a vaccine and can catch measles in their adulthood when their vaccine protection diminishes - again when they are much likelier to have measles with complications.
Absolutely right. Vanden Bossche will receive a lot of criticism for the line advocating vaccination of newborns. I guess we can't expect someone who appears to have spent a great deal of professional life on vaccines to reject them entirely, but maybe, GVB, you might take a second look at a lot of them.
Thanks for the argument. I would hope that vaccine policies would emerge as a consequence of careful deliberation of all perspectives and all research, and not only those offered by commercial companies and conflicted officials. That is precisely what ‘thinking carefully’ means. To date, such thinking has been conspicuous by its absence.
"I therefore continue to advocate for a new vaccine approach that enables training of broad, non-variant-specific cell-mediated innate immunity to prevent productive infection through sterilizing immunity. Such an immune intervention would not only protect the vaccinated individual from illness but also protect immunologically naive individuals by sufficiently curbing virus transmission within the population to prevent productive infection in these individuals. "
I need more explanation of all that.
And it seems you are wholly in favour, generally, of vaccines and even - perhaps even especially - in the very young. Then how do you meet the objections of such as 'Dr Sam' with their examples, that I find most dramatically telling, of the actual fraud that vaccine 'victories' in the past have been shown to be - such as polio and small pox?
If people want to pay for poisoning themselves they should be free to be stupid.
But not expect the taxpayer or others to pay for their stupidty. This has always been the issue, government fraud stealing taxpayers' money to pay for poisoning the masses.
Can we finally start testing ALL vaccines, placebo-controlled trails, and if you really can mix them together in one injection. What about polio induced by the polio vaccines?
Geert, respectfully, you have said according to your own theory/prediction that we face an immanent and inevitable human catastrophe the magnitude of which will require societies of the developed world to be completely rebuilt. If that's the case, then why worry about this?
RFK Jr has never indicated that he was going to throw the baby out with the bathwater. And vaccines do indeed deserve deep scrutiny due to the liability-free status that protects manufactures. They need to be held accountable for everything they produce just like with regular drugs.
RFK Jr is a thoughtful man, and he has never indicated that he is an anti-vaxxer, or that he is a rash impulsive individual. He has stated that he is pro safe vaccines and feels that vaccines have a role to play in keeping people healthy. But they have to be safe and they are not. It is not a black-and-white issue that vaccines are what keeps you healthy but contaminated food, poisoned water and poisoned air should be overlooked as not affecting health. And that is where today’s pharmaceutical companies would have you be, totally dependent upon only their injections to keep you safe. And that is total hogwash.
RFK Jr will bring forth a balanced policy that takes the pillars of health which is eating clean food, exercise, fresh air, good sleep, and the correct preventative measures to ward off disease and viruses, which would include safe vaccines. But they have to be safe and they have to prove to the general public and scrutinized by people like RFK Jr that they are indeed safe. No more hiding test results for 75 years. No more Fox guarding the henhouse. Complete transparency, and effective vaccines that do not harm people.
Totally agree. It’s disappointing that Geert, who is clearly capable of deep research, came out with this ridiculous statement about Rfk.
This article is presumably aimed at a wide audience. He didnt accuse RFK of anything.
He didn't specifically describe the RFK policy that he's objecting to, either.
A lot of people think RFK wants to ban vaccines. What I've heard him say is that he wants to insist on transparency of data and increased safety and efficacy testing.
I totally agree. I appreciate GV’s theorizing, but it’s not clear to me that he has the corner on how we should think about these things, and I just want me and my blood left alone for a while. Stop trying to control creation by messing with my immune system, please.
That said, I’m grateful that RFKJ is clearly signaling that he thinks more like a true liberal (which is a conservative or libertarian today) and isn’t planning on mandating or banning anything, but developing good research, rooting out corruption, and empowering individuals to make informed decisions.
This is a complex topic and unfortunately (because of the way things were handled and all the lies and truths that have come out ) most of us have learned a lot over the last few years. For many, myself included, my current approach is no more shots. Until and unless I can be convinced that they are necessary, safe and effective, I will assume they are not. I can do the research on the first (necessary) but may need help on the safe and effective part.
That’s the thing with trust, once you have been lied to, which we now know we have, by the entire health establishment, it will take a lot of work to ever rebuild trust.
I used to think vaccines were of some use but not for the 'flu. I realised in 2020 that none of them are/were any good, they were merely advertised to make them seem so.
The basic asertion is that vaccines cause a mild form of the disease, hopelfully so mild you don't notice, yet the adjuvants (i.e. toxic substances) are there to create a stronger reaction (i.e. make you sicker).
The big lie is that they 'train' the body to recognise the supposed disease causing agent injected next time.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/what-is-the-flu-aka-covid-19-and
I agree with your statement Nirav. But I don’t feel Geert is totally disregarding his viewpoint either. IMO RFK jr is a thoughtful man who invites opinion from both sides of the fence and I very much hope he engages a broad spectrum of expertise in this highly nuanced argument.
He has stated many times that he believes we need more research into both the benefits and the risks of vaccination. Especially in the very young with naive immune systems. There is a growing school of thought, and data, showing that the sheer number of vaccines in the childhood schedule is permanently harming the immune systems of our children, impacting their well-being far into adulthood.
It’s my hope that with thorough scientific study dedicated to honest exploration of the available data we can shed light on the truth of what’s being going on. Focussing both on the vaccine schedule AND the impact of environmental toxicity. It is most certainly a combination of the two but we need to know the facts to decipher the level of impact across the board.
Right on Nirvana, could not have said it better myself! Thank you.
I am done with allopathic medicine in its entirety. I can not agree with what you say in this post. I realize that your intentions are good, but your seemingly unquestionable allegiance to our contemporary, high-tech medical system is wrong, in my opinion.
So if you and your upvoters have broken bones, peritonitis, get run over by a car etc., you're all going to refuse all intervention and treatment by conventual medicine? Your decision, of course, but I'm just wondering how this plays out in real time. Your children are dying, very seriously injured and only such intervention has a chance of keeping them alive, you're just going to watch them die when a good surgeon might save their lives? In practice, how does this approach work?
For the record, Nirav made no statement of 'unquestionable allegiance' in his or her post but you have stated you're done with conventual medicine 'in its entirety'. I'd love to know how that'll hold up when faced with your own impending death or that of a loved one. Just saying.
He said allopathic medicine, not trauma medicine, no one has a problem with trauma medicine.
Any number of definitions are available such as "Allopathic medicine is the general term for what most people understand as modern, Western medicine. The allopathic medicine definition describes it as a method of treating disease with remedies (such as SURGERY or drugs) that produce different effects from those caused by the disease." How much trauma medicine doesn't involve surgery and drugs?
Perhaps I was wrong about what Truthbird meant, but when health conscious people say anti allopathic, we mean pharmaceutical drugs and poison pills, not surgery.
But that isn't what it means and it includes surgery etc. Another explanation of it : https://tinyurl.com/sz4bhh78 What is Allopathic Doctor?
Nobody needs vaccines. Surgery has value and so do medicines when they are used correctly. But to think the body needs modification from birth is way past arrogance.
You can get into the weeds of semantics all you want. I understood the comment. Modern medicine is wonderful at trauma care, but abysmal when it comes to things like chronic disease.
Endemic infectious disease is somewhere in the middle; my personal feeling is that natural immunity is best. Our culture has gotten so risk-averse and safetyist that it's lost sight of the fact that what were endemic childhood diseases in the 50s and 60s, when I grow up, were just part of life.
I think it has been said in the medical freedom community before but should obviously be stated here — there is a huge difference between emergency medicine and the standard of care found in your every day allopathic method of “prevention “. Hands down our country has some of the best emergency medicine standards and practices in the world—but even there we have a long way to go—for example there are hundreds if not thousands of studies done about the superiority of DMSO in treating brain damage from a variety of injury including stroke, physical damage etc and yet it is verboten to use as it can not be monetized and was demonized by FDA. There are other examples—I highly recommend The Forgotten Side of Medicine here on substack for more quality information from an outstanding practicing physician here in the US. But I sincerely doubt anyone would not wish to have emergency medical care in the event of a severe injury—but they certainly wouldn’t want their ability to receive that care to be contingent upon their receiving an unwanted and unnecessary vaccination while there. There was a very brutal reminder that this does happen very recently where a young lady was needing emergency care for a genetic disorder but was refused treatment unless she took 3 vaccines whereupon she had a life threatening (and changing) reaction. I will link below. This is just wrong on so many levels. And it makes a sane, normal person hesitant to even go in for much needed emergency treatment.
https://open.substack.com/pub/therebelpatient/p/update-on-alexis-as-candace-owens?r=rq5sl&utm_medium=ios
Sorry this is graphic but this young lady simply went in for a simple blood transfusion which is necessary from time to time for her condition but the hematologist insisted she receive I believe 3 different vaccines—at least one of which was a combination of several vaccines in one shot. She has been hospitalized ever since. It’s very tragic.
"Conventional medicine" killed my daughter (the Covid jab). They scared the populace into believing a lie, and she was bullied by people scared of an illness into taking something she didn't want...and died 10 weeks later of turbo-cancer at the age of 27. "Conventional medicine" is still advertizing
advertising the Covid jabs!! They haven't been removed from the market. The heinous acts of conventional medicine are still in an active state!! They haven't backed down, apologized, acknowledged their wrongdoing...and have gotten away with murder...and you want us to trust them. Are you completely mad?
I’m so sorry for your loss. I see and hear too many stories like this every day nowadadays.
We all need to fight and stand up for what’s right. I’m very hopeful that RFKjr and Jay Battacharia will change the status quo for the better. Let’s face it, anything is better than what’s currently going on!
Substack tells me you are replying to me here. No idea why as I haven't said anything about trusting anyone. It's simply a thread about the true meaning of the word 'allopathic' and whether people are prepared to forego conventual western'medicine' if that is all that is available to them in an emergency.
Geert you obviously have not listened to Rfk jr speak and are basing your comments on rumors. There is a big effort to cancel Rfk now as he poses a huge threat to the merry go round of vaccine business that we have now where the govt mandates the shots and takes commission from the manufacturers and the manufacturers have no product liability and do the testing of their own products. Great business model. No marketing costs and product liability. Rfk has never advocated for stopping all vaccination. He is not against vaccines but against untested vaccines and he wants people to have choice and know the risks. This substack you just published diminishes you because it is based on inaccurate info. Rfk has said that none of the childhood vaccines have been saline placebo tested for safety nor have there been any synergy tests done on the safety of giving 70 plus vaccines to kids. I fully support Rfk jr and this whole corrupt process needs to be cleaned up.
Do you not notice how some of these comments blame Geert for encouraging rejection of vaccines , and some are criticising him for promoting vaccines.? Just take his words as they stand. It's his opinion and advice . Why is everyone so critical in comments ?
We are critical because he is disparaging RFK jr and he making false statements about rfk’s position.
No he isnt. He is making a general point about his own views. Something strange happens online where so many people become defensive and dont actually read the articles.
It’s pretty obvious he didn’t do any research on Rfk. You may not agree. I have tons of respect for Rfk and his lifelong fight for children’s health. I’ve heard him speak numerous times and he does not have a vaccine policy.
He wasnt claiming to know Rfks opinions. Rfk has changed tack a few times anyhow. Geert is offering his own advice and thoughts. I wouldnt risk jabs but honestly i dont know if people on remote islands etc are vulnerable due to never getting exposed to most illnesses. That’s what Geert was discussing here.
Totally agree.
He's not disparaging anyone - you are. "as a vaccinologist, I am somewhat concerned about the extreme polarization that America is currently experiencing." As a vaccinologist he's perfectly entitled to give his opinion on vaccines and anything connected.
I'm not a scientist but it's been blatantly obvious for a long time that polarization on a lot of subjects (not just science) is happening, because a lot of people are rejecting all modern medicine/science as a bad thing in itself and dangerous per se, without reflecting on the fact that medicine, like technology et al. is neither good nor bad. It's the people who use it and the way they use it and the ends to which it is put which are good or bad.
Precisely! I love reading informed articulate bright posts…BRAVO 💝🙏🏻
Thank you GVB, however, I believe ALL vaccines are toxic. 'Turtles all the Way Down' - informative & powerful read ...
Yes, they must be toxic by definition as they are designed to cause an 'immune response'.
In plain English that means your body is reacting to being poisoned and saying in effect 'Don't do it!'
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/adjuvants-and-immune-response-what?utm_source=publication-search
"However, as a vaccinologist, I am somewhat concerned about the extreme polarization that America is currently experiencing. This polarization now threatens to penetrate even the deepest layers of society, including public health."
My only response to that it
(My words)
When countries and their embedded coin operated "health" systems willfully, intentionally and with extreme coercion and fore knowledge of consequences try to murder, grievously harm AND LOOT the masses for profit and control, ... yeah, that can be a bit polarizing
Extreme polarization in the face of intentional murder and harm for profit and control is a rational reasonable and perfectly expected consequence
Like the biblical saying Proverb Galatians 6:7-9 says
You shall reap what you sow
They sowed the seeds of extreme polarization and they got what they asked
Which, when you think about it is probably what they want
Few methods of control and repression are more time honored and successful than
Divide and conquer.
Mass polarization is just a euphemism for divide, the conquer part is for the vulture jackals that install it
well said, thank you
Start by restoring the definition of a vaccine. The bogus changed definition allowed the failed and deadly COVID concoction to be called a vaccine when it isn't.
With the huge number of people who are vaccine injured or have died after getting the covid shot, plus the huge rise in autism cases, SIDS cases, and disabilities in children who received childhood shots, I can't support any vaccine.
I recently saw an orthopedic doctor in preparation for knee surgery. He is not affiliated with a hospital and he has treated me for 10+ years. I told him that I trust him, but since covid I don't trust many doctors. He replied, "Nor should you."
Indeed so.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/d-is-fordoctors?utm_source=publication-search
they need to follow this https://normanjames.substack.com/p/electric-diet?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Geert please name an example of successful vaccination program, and present the evidence in simple charts, before and after situation.
I knew that you are worshiper of vaccines, the moment you offered your solution to the problem of COVID, more vaccines, mixing up polio and whatever.
regular flue vaccine had 30% efficacy rates, did you ever pass an exam with 30% efficacy?
You must be seeking new job opportunity, the dog never barks for the sake of village.
I have read that on average, the flu vaccine only has an absolute efficacy of around 5%. Influenza usually makes up only a small fraction of flu like illnesses and the cdc lumps influenza with pneumonia which inflates its importance
and, at what cost? Even if it were to reduce the risk of contracting flu, do the side effects offset the any gain?
Never had one. Personal observation was they were ineffective. People I knew who had them were always sicker afterwards than I was. I think they initially depress the immune system and leave one open to infection. I have a generally low opinion of vaccines. They have been a poor trade off with a massively effective pr campaign
No and there is no gain, except for big pharma profits. Vaccines are the biggest fraud. Many people have been persuaded that poisoning oneself is good for one's health.
Of course if a vial contains saline who would know? No adverse affects and you feel fine. At a cost of what, £10 per shot.
https://www.ft.com/content/58b11945-71b1-4f96-b389-695e162642fb
Pay to be poisoned, utter stupidity, and fraud, a gigantic fraud.
https://alphaandomegacloud.wordpress.com/2022/11/14/vaccination-industry-in-a-nutshell/
The 'flu vaccine is quite effective at making people ill. Beyond that it is pointless.
Unless you count the needle that the vaccine passes through. :)
I have a history in immunology, biochemistry and medicine, and was on to Pharma's game way back when statins first came on the scene. I was refusing Hepatitis B and Gardasil vaccines for my kids many years ago since their risk/benefit profile was not to my liking. I have watched many videos and interviews with RFK, and he is well read on the subject, has dealt with deep industrial corruption and influence first hand, and strikes me as sincere. Although it is very strongly wired in human nature to be loyal to your team, and either be ardently "pro-vax" or "anti-vax", mother nature doesn't care what we think, and neither do viruses or our immune systems. Every vaccine , and for that matter every medical intervention has a risk-benefit profile. Very few interventions are 100% good / 0% bad or vice versa. The key is to conduct large prospective trials(randomized if possible), which not surprisingly have not been done since the original polio vaccine. That was a live attenuated vaccine which did give immunity from polio to many recipients, but unfortunately also caused polio and other side effects in many individuals. Pharma and the media lump all vaccines under the same umbrella, but the different vaccines have very different risk/benefit profiles, and rarely should be given to everyone, and in some cases should be given to no one. Right now the Pharma industry has financially captured nearly every regulatory and academic research organization, and have successfully pushed the "safe and effective" campaign since they profit off every vaccine (no matter whether or not it is beneficial or harmful) If RFK can undo some of this capture, and get back to legitimate, unbiased or minimally biased scientific trials, and generate legitimate risk/benefit profiles for these vaccines, we'll all be better off. And based on decades of study, I do believe there is ample evidence that the cumulative effect of the current vaccine schedule either causes or contributes to neurological/immunological disorders such as autism/SIDS and autoimmune diseases in susceptible individuals. We need bona-fide independent (not pharma controlled) large scale prospective trials to prove this, to counteract the overwhelming messaging to the contrary. Given the huge polarization on the issue, it would be easy to enroll millions of children in a true placebo/control trial, with millions of parents happy to follow the CDC schedule, and millions of others happy to opt for zero vaccines(placebo). Such a trial would answer the question within a few years. I hope RFK gets the chance to do this.
Best response by far!
Glad to see sanity appearing here occasionally!!
One of the best comments I've seen on the subject, thank you.
It has been obvious for a very long time that vaccines cannot work. Inject something toxic into the body and it will react. This has been seen time and time again over many decades, perhaps two centuries now. That is a very long trial!
Poisoning the body can never train it and protect it, but manipulation of statistics has been done to deceive people into thinking it is a good idea.
First , I have a hard time believing in the health system we are presently in……. Over 15 years ago I had a discussion with my family physician about the yearly flu jab…..the pros and cons persay…. I told him from what I had heard and read I wasn’t sold on taking the jabs…. I proceeded to tell him what I had learned….. that the jabs this fall were for last years strain, they are a year behind,,, and ONLY MAY WORK at fighting the flu from LAST YEARS BUG, The problem is the new strain this year is stronger and has eradicated last years strain . That was right from SCIENCE….Doctor told me that was correct . So I said if that is correct, why would I allow anything to be injected into my body that I don’t know what is in it and it MAY have a positive effect on my body for something that can’t harm me anymore…it has been eradicated already….. his answer was…Jeffrey.. because everyone else your age is doing it. Then 4 years ago we were told to trust science for something that was safe and effective when it had no shelf life yet…..THAT HAS BEEN PROVEN AS A LIE……WHY? My previous 15 year old lie from science told me this may be history repeating it’s lie….. first the liars said take the jab… it is safe and effective ,,,, it wasn’t SAFE or EFFECTIVE …Then the same people said to everyone including the one’s jabbed……if the unjabbed don’t jab up….they could cause a negative effect for the jabbers .. IN OTHER WORDS THE JABS DO NOT WORK…….FACT….. Some people have reasoning skills…..we are not all 🐑
Jeffrey, Oh the jabs did work. Where do you think the variants came from? And the vaccinated blamed the un- vaxxed. The jabs (IMO) caused the immune system to attack it's self causing cancers (BRCA1) and cardiology events (micro clots) we have never seen before. I work in cardiology and i have seen events explode in the last two years. What's curious and sad it's hitting the men and women in their teens to their late 40's.
I like things working in MY FAVOUR….NOT THE oligarchs favour……..thanks but like I said over 15 years ago and most recently 3 to 4 years ago….. emphatic NO.
Were you ironic, or what? If yes, then put in punctuation to suggest so.
He was being ironic. The jabs work to cause harm as he indicates. It is impossible for them to do otherwise as that is their design intent. They can do not good at all unless you count big pharma profits as a good and I don't.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/what-is-the-flu-aka-covid-19-and
Hi,
Now I am not a virologist or an immunologist, but I'd like to leave a comment on this paragraph:
>>Immunizing the immunologically naive portion of the population (e.g., newborns) with live-attenuated vaccines not only strengthens innate immunity but also establishes an immunological memory of adaptive Abs, thereby contributing both to the individual protection of the vaccinated and to maintaining herd immunity in the population.<<
Newborns do not yet have an immune system that can be immediately trained, nor are their kidneys well enough developed to excrete vaccine adjuvans. The initial immunity of the mother is provided to the infant through antibodies in the milk - breastfeeding provides the child with immunity until the immune system of the child can do so.
Vaccination for measles has caused a change in the risk profile. Past: mothers that had measles as a child got permanent immunity and provide breastfeeding protection. Infants up to 2 years were protected from measles, will get them in childhood when it is mostly safe, will gain permanent immunity - and will give it forward. Present: The mother never had measles, just a vaccination that needs a refresher every decade or so. The mother is unable to provide breastfeeding protection - the newborn cannot gain antibodies against measles in a highly vulnerable state and is at life risk. It will have to receive a vaccine and can catch measles in their adulthood when their vaccine protection diminishes - again when they are much likelier to have measles with complications.
I am not sure if you have seen the pilot study outcomes. The result was in short that vaccinated people on general are more sicklish than the unvaccinated, and even worse, the unvaccinated children of vaccinated mothers are worse off than the unvaccinated children of unvaccinated mothers. A link to the presentations can be found here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365417868_Health_versus_Disorder_Disease_and_Death_Unvaccinated_Persons_Are_Incommensurably_Healthier_than_Vaccinated
Nature had it right. Mankind messed it up.
Absolutely right. Vanden Bossche will receive a lot of criticism for the line advocating vaccination of newborns. I guess we can't expect someone who appears to have spent a great deal of professional life on vaccines to reject them entirely, but maybe, GVB, you might take a second look at a lot of them.
He should be criticised for advocating them for anybody. I am not a doctor and I worked it out in 2020 in 2 months solid research.
Thanks for the argument. I would hope that vaccine policies would emerge as a consequence of careful deliberation of all perspectives and all research, and not only those offered by commercial companies and conflicted officials. That is precisely what ‘thinking carefully’ means. To date, such thinking has been conspicuous by its absence.
so this is the gist:
"I therefore continue to advocate for a new vaccine approach that enables training of broad, non-variant-specific cell-mediated innate immunity to prevent productive infection through sterilizing immunity. Such an immune intervention would not only protect the vaccinated individual from illness but also protect immunologically naive individuals by sufficiently curbing virus transmission within the population to prevent productive infection in these individuals. "
I need more explanation of all that.
And it seems you are wholly in favour, generally, of vaccines and even - perhaps even especially - in the very young. Then how do you meet the objections of such as 'Dr Sam' with their examples, that I find most dramatically telling, of the actual fraud that vaccine 'victories' in the past have been shown to be - such as polio and small pox?
Ban all "vaccine" mandates. The childhood "vaccines" are the most devastating and unnecessary. No schools should require a "vaccine" to attend.
Continuing production and research is fine as long as the products are voluntary to take.
If people want to pay for poisoning themselves they should be free to be stupid.
But not expect the taxpayer or others to pay for their stupidty. This has always been the issue, government fraud stealing taxpayers' money to pay for poisoning the masses.
Can we finally start testing ALL vaccines, placebo-controlled trails, and if you really can mix them together in one injection. What about polio induced by the polio vaccines?
Geert, respectfully, you have said according to your own theory/prediction that we face an immanent and inevitable human catastrophe the magnitude of which will require societies of the developed world to be completely rebuilt. If that's the case, then why worry about this?
This is an excellent question!