So many people get lyme and yet cannot seem to remember a bite. Could this be why?
Biologists tested 24 draws out of a DTaP (tetanus combo) vaccine. The analysis showed things like 21 different un-identified parasite eggs, Lyme spirochetes, fungus and more “goodies” that should NOT be in vax.
.. and a study was done in Italy and they found the same thing...see next comment
Posted by Carmen (Member # 42391) on :
THE CORVELVA STUDIES, an independent testing agency has completed the analysis of THE SECOND VACCINE ON THEIR LIST and it ain't good folks -
Within the GlaxoSmithKline Priorix Tetra vaccine, Proteobacteria, Platyhelminthes and Nematoda worms, 10 other viruses to ssRNA, Microviridae (bacterial or phage viruses)
and numerous retroviruses including endogenous human and avian retroviruses, avian viruses, human immunodeficiency and immunodeficiency virus of monkeys (fragments that if inserted into the database detect fragments of HIV and SIV),
virus, horse infectious anemia virus, lymphoproliferative disease virus, Rous sarcoma virus. Other viruses like alphaendornavirus and hepatitis b virus, yeast ----- CLEARLY THEY WANT US DEAD virus.
(breaking up the post for easier reading for many here)
[ 05-08-2019, 02:10 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Robin123 (Member # 9197) on :
Wow, is all I can say.
Posted by Ann-Ohio (Member # 44364) on :
Corvelva is based in Italy. Here is an article with more information about this group.It was published in "Nature", a very respected science magazine. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07464-0 Posted by Bartenderbonnie (Member # 49177) on :
Carmen
Thank you for posting this. Finally concrete evidence of the hidden dangers of vaccines. I'm making copies to provide to any of my providers that suggest a jab. This past month alone, I was told I needed a tetanus shot, flu shot and a shingles shot. DISGUSTING!!!!!
Knowledge is power.
Posted by Blackstone (Member # 9453) on :
I would be skeptical of anything posted on the sites/videos listed above, as they are third party reporting and editorializing.
I'll avoid discussing the overall viability of "real news australia", but the fact they'd suggest that something as important as this to be "run through a translator" is a major hit to the credibility for two reasons . First, auto translators can make mistakes even on common speech and are woefully unequipped to handle specialist terminology like legal and medical terminology. Second, Corvelva themselves has a full English report of the investigation in question!
Note that they're most concerned about contamination and improper manufacture, NOT making any statements that vaccines are by nature bad or ineffective.
I'll show this report to a few colleagues of mine who are more involved on the lab side of things to see what they think. No matter what, there should not be any objection to greater independent study. In fact, the first thing that Corvelva should do is to find those willing to repeat the investigation and verify the findings and/or highlight any discrepancies or explanations.
Posted by Keebler (Member # 12673) on :
- I have a very hard time writing my sentences so that they convey what I'm trying to say. But, here's a try:
Blackstone has some very important points in general.
Ann's "Nature" article post, a good source (though still "Nature" might not consider all angles in all articles) and not so much about the specific facts that come from that,
Also keep in mind that there are (seriously) foreign "bots" that are posting all kinds of stuff about vaccines just to get everyone all upset.
Of course, there IS a lot of concern and the regular mass media folks are sorely dismissing the issues of vaccine adjuvants and labeling anyone with concerns or knowledge as the "anti" group.
But the foreign "bots" are particularly busy flaming the debate on social media sites to further polarize our society. They create fake stuff - as if there's not already enough to sort through, they make it harder.
Yet,
Any site that starts with "real news ______ " could be questionable. Yet, sometimes real facts are also mixed in with lies and intended skewing of public opinion not necessary within any one article but in the mix of all their articles in general.
Some "real news" might be fine but other sites with similar name might not. It can be hard to know.
However, that being said, there are some good legitimate groups where we can double check & find up to date facts, search and research: