My son has autism. He was born early, a premier, because we lost our twin brother. I had no clue to question medical authority. But when I did question why are they giving my 3 month old at 4 lbs! If we should wait because he is a premie, it was "Nahhh. He'll be fine." And onitsha went with every vaxx. All his milestines were fine until that damn MMR. He got a fever. "Nahhh, common side effect. Then he bagan his hand twitching, zonle outs, and reduced verbalization.
When covid came and call me a stupid denier, I never got that poison for me or my son! Then people asking me what is wrong with you and I was able to discuss my refusal, including the malpractice pulled on my mother- another time, they gave me the stink eye and argued with me that is NOT why he has autism. I liked to tell them about those other poisons, like Thalidomide, Vioxx, HRT for women, and phen fen that were pulled from market.
Not to cast doubt on the seriousness of the problem of autism, but I am not sure that a 6-month study is such a bad thing. Maybe all these vaccines cause autism, and maybe they don't - I am not an expert, so I don't know the answer. But just making changes to the vaccine schedule willy-nilly might be as bad as the current situation.
To be honest, I am not sure how much of an expert RFK, jr. is either - he may be fairly KNOWLEDGEABLE about the subject, but I am not sure I would call him an expert. Which means what I said above - a 6-month study might not be such a bad idea.
I am aware. But correlation is not always causation. It MIGHT indicate causation - but it's not proof of causation. Proof would be demonstrating the mechanism by which autism is caused by vaccines. To my knowledge (and again, I am not an expert), such proof is lacking at the moment. Perhaps it's lacking because nobody wanted to look closely enough, perhaps there are other reasons, perhaps it's lacking because there is some other factor involved.
As I said, I am not denying the possibility - all I am saying is, a 6-month study doesn't scream "conspiracy of silence" to me.
It would be unethical to do research involving injecting infants with poison. Proof would be needed of a mechanism by which a "vaccine" existed and had any point. There is no evidence of "a virus" existing in the first place to even begin imagining a "vaccine" could be developed. Injecting poison is illegal activity. The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) requires countries to destroy all chemical weapons and prohibits developing, stockpiling, or using chemical weapons.
My son has autism. He was born early, a premier, because we lost our twin brother. I had no clue to question medical authority. But when I did question why are they giving my 3 month old at 4 lbs! If we should wait because he is a premie, it was "Nahhh. He'll be fine." And onitsha went with every vaxx. All his milestines were fine until that damn MMR. He got a fever. "Nahhh, common side effect. Then he bagan his hand twitching, zonle outs, and reduced verbalization.
When covid came and call me a stupid denier, I never got that poison for me or my son! Then people asking me what is wrong with you and I was able to discuss my refusal, including the malpractice pulled on my mother- another time, they gave me the stink eye and argued with me that is NOT why he has autism. I liked to tell them about those other poisons, like Thalidomide, Vioxx, HRT for women, and phen fen that were pulled from market.
The lies they all tell us in pursuit of profits and power...it is stunning what "they" do to us in so many ways.
Someones name is in the Epstein files they really don't want us to see. My intuition tells me it is someone on the Supreme Court.
https://rumble.com/playlists/ItG1ZMwWgTw
Oops-PREMIE (A pre-term baby). The auto correct was designed by NON ENGLISH speakers!
Not to cast doubt on the seriousness of the problem of autism, but I am not sure that a 6-month study is such a bad thing. Maybe all these vaccines cause autism, and maybe they don't - I am not an expert, so I don't know the answer. But just making changes to the vaccine schedule willy-nilly might be as bad as the current situation.
To be honest, I am not sure how much of an expert RFK, jr. is either - he may be fairly KNOWLEDGEABLE about the subject, but I am not sure I would call him an expert. Which means what I said above - a 6-month study might not be such a bad idea.
The rates increased dramatically in 1989 when they increased the number of vaccines.
I am aware. But correlation is not always causation. It MIGHT indicate causation - but it's not proof of causation. Proof would be demonstrating the mechanism by which autism is caused by vaccines. To my knowledge (and again, I am not an expert), such proof is lacking at the moment. Perhaps it's lacking because nobody wanted to look closely enough, perhaps there are other reasons, perhaps it's lacking because there is some other factor involved.
As I said, I am not denying the possibility - all I am saying is, a 6-month study doesn't scream "conspiracy of silence" to me.
It would be unethical to do research involving injecting infants with poison. Proof would be needed of a mechanism by which a "vaccine" existed and had any point. There is no evidence of "a virus" existing in the first place to even begin imagining a "vaccine" could be developed. Injecting poison is illegal activity. The Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) requires countries to destroy all chemical weapons and prohibits developing, stockpiling, or using chemical weapons.
https://odysee.com/@InconvenientTruth:6/The-final-refutal-of-virology:6