Dr. James Thorp a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist who has 44 years of obstetrical experience describes how he's woken up to the dangers of "vaccines."

 

Source: https://lionessofjudah.substack.com/p/dr-james-thorp-i-vaccinated-all-my

or directly on X > https://x.com/SenseReceptor/status/1919066395981062405

 

 

Expect the sheep to bleat "But he's not a virologist!" in harmony (by the way, if only virologists are allowed to talk about this issue, then why were pharmacists giving vaccine advice to people?).

 

Anyway, great example which a lot of people should follow.

17 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

Expect the sheep to bleat "But he's not a virologist!" in harmony (by the way, if only virologists are allowed to talk about this issue, then why were pharmacists giving vaccine advice to people?).

 

Anyway, great example which a lot of people should follow.

Remember the “mix-n-match” approach (get one jab of each vaccine because of course….more is better)  people were taking towards vaccines?

 

No need to worry about potential interactions. 🙄

 

Very sciency.

 

I wonder what brainless vaxtard came up with that kind of advice.

3 minutes ago, Airalee said:

No need to worry about potential interactions. 🙄

 

The MMR  seems quite dodgy to me  why combine 3  in one shot  the R is not even necessary for males.

There should be separate shots and the choice to take them or not totally up to the individual no cohersion ,shaming, incentives or mandates.

 

And even before any of that they all should be tested against randomised placebo trials

for effecacy and most importantly safety.

40 minutes ago, Airalee said:

Remember the “mix-n-match” approach (get one jab of each vaccine because of course….more is better)  people were taking towards vaccines?

 

No need to worry about potential interactions. 🙄

 

Very sciency.

 

I wonder what brainless vaxtard came up with that kind of advice.

 

Any approach was good to reach the end goal, which was to vaccinate everybody to the brim. It's only when the criticisms started to appear that the "experts only" thing was pulled out of the hat.

 

An amateur can inoculate the jab, but an amateur can't assess the jab's safety. No, that's the experts' job… And those experts who speak negatively of the jab are demoted from their expert status and become "discredited by the medical community", which is even worse than amateur status.

 

So… only "experts" who speak positively of the jab may speak.

34 minutes ago, johng said:

The MMR  seems quite dodgy to me  why combine 3  in one shot  the R is not even necessary for males.

There should be separate shots and the choice to take them or not totally up to the individual no coercion ,shaming, incentives or mandates.

 

And even before any of that they all should be tested against randomized placebo trials

for efficacy and most importantly safety.

The MMR vaccine has been around for decades. Nobody is dying. Do tell us how boys are immune from rubella, I don't believe it. 

 

9 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Nobody is dying.

Says you.

 

9 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

boys are immune from rubella

Rubella is (supposedly) to protect pregnant women...though perhaps you think a man can get pregnant too ?

22 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

Nobody is dying.

 

People have always died from vaccination, it's long been established that this happens.

The numbers are supposedly so low that it is accepted a small number of people will die from the vaccine but it will save far more lives than it ends or ruins.

So you're trading one small set of peoples lives for another larger set of peoples lives.

This is how they think. It's not the same set of people who die from the disease who would die from the vaccine - I think.

It is a real life version of the 'trolley problem' as illustrated below - the choice was made to pull the lever and save the 5 people and sacrafice the 1 person - without action the 1 person would not be harmed :

I became antivaccination after reading books on the subject.   

 

You learn the language of truth which is simplicity.  The tricksters use complicated medicalise language with fancy suits, who speak in obtuse circles never saying anything coherent.

 

Illiteracy is correctable for those seeking the truth.  Even a doctor figured it out.

2 hours ago, johng said:

 

Says you.

 

Rubella is (supposedly) to protect pregnant women...though perhaps you think a man can get pregnant too ?

Says everyone in the medical field. 

 

Everyone gets vaccinated for Rubella so they don't get sick. It is not just about pregnant women.

On 5/6/2025 at 12:58 AM, rattlesnake said:

Expect the sheep to bleat "But he's not a virologist!" in harmony (by the way, if only virologists are allowed to talk about this issue, then why were pharmacists giving vaccine advice to people?).

 

Anyway, great example which a lot of people should follow.

I agree. We need to cull those stupid enough to take these idiots at face value and who continue to pollute the public discourse with nonsensical conspiracy theories from nutters. Can't happen soon enough! Hope you've eschewed these horrible poisons too. 

On 5/6/2025 at 7:20 PM, johng said:

The MMR  seems quite dodgy to me  why combine 3  in one shot  the R is not even necessary for males.

There should be separate shots and the choice to take them or not totally up to the individual no cohersion ,shaming, incentives or mandates.

 

And even before any of that they all should be tested against randomised placebo trials

for effecacy and most importantly safety.

 

Only cruel people (or idiots) actually test against placebos. (Unless there's no existing treatment).

You test against the current normal protocol, to see if a new protocol is better than what you're already doing.

Testing against a placebo is comparing treatment against, effectively, the total absence of treatment.

And that has ethical issues if you're not treating people where there is a known treatment.

I.e. you test a new measles vaccine alongside the existing measle vaccine to see if it's better. A placebo would mean people don't get vaccinated at all. Which is sheer idiocy, unless you actively want the return of polio, smallpox, measles (which is already returning and killing people with stupid parents.)

Testing against a placebo is the only

way to know if a the treatment is effective  or the perceived effect was just a "placebo" effect.

Simple evaluation: what are the chances of getting long time till life disadvantages of getting a disease as vaccinated, and the same for in case NOT having a vaccination ?

The differences are gigantic, in the advance of vaccination. And already since 1798, when cow pocks was used to defeat the real pocks.

On 5/6/2025 at 12:58 AM, rattlesnake said:

Expect the sheep to bleat "But he's not a virologist!" in harmony (by the way, if only virologists are allowed to talk about this issue, then why were pharmacists giving vaccine advice to people?).

 

Anyway, great example which a lot of people should follow.

 

But he's not. You wouldn't want him to perform brain surgery on you either.

 

Sheep. Impressive you are. 

I have just noticed that somebody at AN created a sub-sub-sub-forum for vaccine theorists.

 

That's such a wonderful idea.