10 minutes ago, daveAustin said:

Not an anti-vaxer but if I could go back I would not take the Covid jabs again. Dangerous stuff that personally caused issues. 

 

good.   but you don't need to even use the stupid label "anti-vaxxer" , which is just a slur to escape real reviews on the safety and efficacy of solutions that someone else wants us to shoot in our body . 

 

Informed consent ...... is what ALWAYS should be ...... but rarely is .

Mandated,  or otherwise coerced..... is the PTB  modus operandi ,  POWER.

Comply or there will be consequences.    Not exactly freedom ,  is it ?

5 minutes ago, transam said:

Good for you, and thanks for wearing a mask...........

Only did wear a mask when having to enter the Imm Office and opted whenever I could for shops that did not make these face-diapers mandatory for entering.   

Just now, Red Phoenix said:

Only did wear a mask when having to enter the Imm Office and opted whenever I could for shops that did not make these face-diapers mandatory for entering.   

So you didn't stand your ground, you wore a mask, as you will use big pharma if YOU get a problem.......

29 minutes ago, transam said:

No need to, if I caught Covid, I didn't know, the vax did it for transam..........

 

 Would you at least thank the NHS? 

 

1 hour ago, transam said:

Correct, he never had Covid, nor did I, or if he did, he/we didn't know.............

 

But I do recall that you wrote you had a flare-up of shingles shortly after your 'safe and effective' Covid-jab.  

Yep, the jab is truly the gift that keeps on giving.  

On 12/14/2025 at 3:22 AM, rattlesnake said:

 

Certainly, Mark. I'm sure the other 'conspiracy theorists' of the forum, who are very knowledgeable, could give you good sources, but I would recommend starting with this interview of Tina Peters. It is 17 minutes long, but she sums it up well in the first five minutes:

 

https://zerospike.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/My-Movie-45.m4v

In 1883,  Antoine Bechamp reports Pasteur does not know what he is doing while discussing Pasteur's preventative innoculation theory.  Since 142 years later, our "experts" are still following the false germs of the air doctrine in tandem with vaccination, I am highly skeptical of the analysis in the video and respectfully reject the spike protein explanation.  

 

Bechamp explains that the toxic vaccine bacterium injected into the patient contains an unusual mixture of both fermented and unfermented microzymas and upon entering the blood flow of the patient, it creates a new environment with foreign unknown microzyma, that is favorable to ferments, the result can bear out unusual, unexpected fermentations leading to catastrophic health consequences, according to Bechamp. 

 

In Bechamp's book, the 13th and 14th conferences have large sections describing his concerns about long term affects of Pasteur's preventative innoculation theory and he does not describe spike proteins but rather microzyma ferments.  

 

Or is current day spike protein the same thing as Bechamp's out of control microzyma ferment?

3 hours ago, rattlesnake said:

 

And therefore the vaccine works! Mic drop!

 

There's a difference between:

1 - The vaccine doesn't work 100%

2 - The vaccine is not perfectly safe all the time 100%

3 - The vaccine is trying to kill you, it's extremely dangerous. Millions have died and millions more will die due to future effects of the vaccine later on. If it didn't kill you on the spot, it will kill you in 5 years. 

 

So which is it?

Can we just get a vote with all the anti-vaxxers to see where you stand?

Because it seems you like to confuse things by constantly changing the goal posts.

 

Clearly, if an 83 year frail old man with pre-existing cancer didn't die on the spot after the Covid jab, do you think you may be exaggerating the dangers of this vaccine?

 

 

 

26 minutes ago, Mark Nothing said:

Or is current day spike protein the same thing as Bechamp's out of control microzyma ferment?

 

Yeah, let us know when you finish your dual Phds in virology and microbiology so we can settle this for once and for all. 

 

2 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

Yeah, let us know when you finish your dual Phds in virology and microbiology so we can settle this for once and for all. 

 

 

Here is top virologist and ex-CDC Director Robert Redfield's take:

 

 

11 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

There's a difference between:

1 - The vaccine doesn't work 100%

2 - The vaccine is not perfectly safe all the time 100%

3 - The vaccine is trying to kill you, it's extremely dangerous. Millions have died and millions more will die due to future effects of the vaccine later on. If it didn't kill you on the spot, it will kill you in 5 years. 

 

So which is it?

Can we just get a vote with all the anti-vaxxers to see where you stand?

Because it seems you like to confuse things by constantly changing the goal posts.

 

Clearly, if an 83 year frail old man with pre-existing cancer didn't die on the spot after the Covid jab, do you think you may be exaggerating the dangers of this vaccine?

 

 

 

 

3.

33 minutes ago, Mark Nothing said:

In 1883,  Antoine Bechamp reports Pasteur does not know what he is doing while discussing Pasteur's preventative innoculation theory.  Since 142 years later, our "experts" are still following the false germs of the air doctrine in tandem with vaccination, I am highly skeptical of the analysis in the video and respectfully reject the spike protein explanation.  

 

Bechamp explains that the toxic vaccine bacterium injected into the patient contains an unusual mixture of both fermented and unfermented microzymas and upon entering the blood flow of the patient, it creates a new environment with foreign unknown microzyma, that is favorable to ferments, the result can bear out unusual, unexpected fermentations leading to catastrophic health consequences, according to Bechamp. 

 

In Bechamp's book, the 13th and 14th conferences have large sections describing his concerns about long term affects of Pasteur's preventative innoculation theory and he does not describe spike proteins but rather microzyma ferments.  

 

Or is current day spike protein the same thing as Bechamp's out of control microzyma ferment?

 

Interesting. I know Sherri Tenpenny, who rejects the vaccination mythology entirely, has also spoken about the Spike protein extensively, so it would be worth digging up her takes on it, from a "non-Pasteur germ theory" perspective.

 

11 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

3.

 

But you have no explanation for 83 year old frail men with pre-existing cancer to not die from a vaccine.

 

You would have more credibility if you didn't take such a strong stance.

 

And I don't care who said what.

You can't answer my question. 

So you don't know what you don't know. 

 

 

5 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

 

But you have no explanation for 83 year old frail men with pre-existing cancer to not die from a vaccine.

 

You would have more credibility if you didn't take such a strong stance.

 

And I don't care who said what.

You can't answer my question. 

So you don't know what you don't know. 

 

 

 

The 83 year-old man was fortunate to have a weak batch. If you still have the code from your vax, feel free to check it here:

 

https://knollfrank.github.io/HowBadIsMyBatch/HowBadIsMyBatch.html

 

 

11 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

You would have more credibility if you didn't take such a strong stance.

 

Credibility to who? Save the frogs?

 

I'm not "taking a strong stance", I'm choosing one of the three options you gave. If there had been a 4, "There are very concerning red flags about this product and the authorities have consistently turned a blind eye to them", I would have chosen that one.

1 hour ago, rattlesnake said:

Here is top virologist and ex-CDC Director Robert Redfield's take:

 

This is fake news.

 

mRNA is a revolutionary technology in health. 

 

6 hours ago, rumak said:

 

I just stick with the oh so true classic :   "don't confuse education with intelligence " .

 

He could be in the running for the next "I'm jabbed and I'm proud" Poster Boy .    got my vote .....😉

I’m betting he’s got health issues.  Wouldn’t be desperately trying to learn about low carb diets if there wasn’t a reason.   

9 hours ago, save the frogs said:

 

That the vaccine causes "future health problems" is more fear-mongering on your team's part that has no solid scientific basis. 

 

         alleging that  the vaccine may  cause problems in the future is  certainly nowhere near  as ridiculous as stating that it definitely won't.   The scientific approach would favour the former

         In the absence of any long term statistics nobody knows    it sounds to me like a lot of people are worried, possibly subconsciously, and have a need to reaffirm the decisions they took regarding this vax

You guys got me.

I surrender.

 

14 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

This is fake news.

 

mRNA is a revolutionary technology in health. 

 

 

Sure, save the frogs. Everything is just fine and you are going to be OK. You can leave the crazy antivaxxers in their echochamber, no need to come back as you know we are lying… right?

8 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

it sounds to me like a lot of people are worried, possibly subconsciously, and have a need to reaffirm the decisions they took regarding this vax

 

Also my thoughts.

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

 

There's a difference between:

1 - The vaccine doesn't work 100%

2 - The vaccine is not perfectly safe all the time 100%

3 - The vaccine is trying to kill you, it's extremely dangerous. Millions have died and millions more will die due to future effects of the vaccine later on. If it didn't kill you on the spot, it will kill you in 5 years. 

 

So which is it?

Can we just get a vote with all the anti-vaxxers to see where you stand?

Because it seems you like to confuse things by constantly changing the goal posts.

 

Clearly, if an 83 year frail old man with pre-existing cancer didn't die on the spot after the Covid jab, do you think you may be exaggerating the dangers of this vaccine?

 

 

 

This is nonsense Frogs Sir.

 

.You know as well as me that there is no such thing as a 'safe n effective' vaxx.

 

There is a case however, for saying that some vaxxes are more dangerous than others.

 

www.howbadismybatch.com

1 hour ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Interesting. I know Sherri Tenpenny, who rejects the vaccination mythology entirely, has also spoken about the Spike protein extensively, so it would be worth digging up her takes on it, from a "non-Pasteur germ theory" perspective.

I reckon the 'spike protein' is a red herring. And I can say why.

7 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

I reckon the 'spike protein' is a red herring. And I can say why.

 

I'm all ears, Stiddle.

43 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Also my thoughts.

      I kind of get that , and I understand that it may provide some sort of comfort and indeed a therapeutic effect  It's not that different in essence, to proper medically administered group therapy,  

      Although differs significantly in the amount of hared and venom that the participants appear to need to generate  and direct at  those not in their  help group,

5 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

      I kind of get that , and I understand that it may provide some sort of comfort and indeed a therapeutic effect  It's not that different in essence, to proper medically administered group therapy,  

      Although differs significantly in the amount of hared and venom that the participants appear to need to generate  and direct at  those not in their  help group,

 

Short-term comfort, yes, probably. But denial never works in the long term. Every second spent in denial increases the magnitude of the final crash, which will happen.

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

mRNA is a revolutionary technology in health.

That may well prove to be the case, but all in the fullness of time, they said similar about  thalidomide, remember that,?     

And what about the safe and effective vaccines that were very quietly withdrawn ?   

10 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

 

Short-term comfort, yes, probably. But denial never works in the long term. Every second spent in denial increases the magnitude of the final crash, which will happen.

I just hope I live long enough to see the truth come out, unlikely regardless of any prognosis my oncologist might eventually dream up

Massive increase in people with turbo cancers since the rollout of the shots. Same with excess deaths.

 

So much for being safe and effective. Only effective culling the population, which could be the whole reason for the rollout of a pandemic. 

On 12/6/2025 at 4:57 AM, cjinchiangrai said:

The vaccines saved many millions of lives. You story does not provide any evidence that the vaccine was responsible for this guys death.

There is no evidence. Look at excess deaths from the time of the shot rollout. Their timelines are identical. Only an idiot would deny this. Only a bigger idiot would still be taking the poison! 

3 minutes ago, bkknirvana said:

Massive increase in people with turbo cancers since the rollout of the shots. Same with excess deaths.

 

So much for being safe and effective. Only effective culling the population, which could be the whole reason for the rollout of a pandemic. 

Is turbo cancer a medical term?