Some contradictions that just don't make sense

Are you puzzled by these contradications with the experimental genetic injections?

You may have noticed the following contradictions? If you are trying to help your family to see the contradictions, feel free to forward this substack to them.

These contradictions should be reviewed carefully as you make your decision on whether or not to take the first injection of the experimental gene therapy injections. As you consider the second and third injections, be aware that the number of injections in your future may be out of your control. The costs of these injections may be out of your control. If the government decides to stop purchasing them from the pharma companies, or decides that their prices should be lowered significantly and the pharma disagrees, you could be left paying for what started out free.  You would then need to find the money to maintain your health status, which could very well depend on receiving that booster shot annually or every six months.

Here are some Contradictions versus Truth

Statement No. 1:

The vaccines are safe

Contradiction No. 1:

If the genetic injections are so safe, why was it necessary to grant full indemnification and no liability to the manufacturers?

The reported, and many times, very life destroying Serious Adverse Reactions are not insignificant.  They do not support the blanket statement about safety. Who are they safe for? Who are they not safe for?

Truth No.1:

If the genetic injections are so safe, then the manufacturers should be willing to guarantee their safety by foregoing indemnification. 

Mandating that whole populations receive the injections is malpractice. No medicine is suitable for everyone.

Statement No. 2

The vaccines are effective

Contradiction No. 2

If the vaccines are so effective why is there a high rate of breakthrough infections as observed in Israel, and everywhere else they have been introduced? In Israel, they are now onto their fifth injection. When I took the Yellow Fever vaccination, I did not need to take the Yellow Fever vaccination every year. The vaccination had a very long duration of at least 10 years. Likewise, with other vaccinations that I have taken.

Truth No. 2

The genetic injections have been observed to lose their effectiveness in a relatively short period of time. Whereas the effect of vaccinations normally last years, or at least for a season in the case of the influenza vaccination, these appear to lose their effect a lot faster than that. In Israel, to maintain the same level of effectiveness, they are now receiving their fourth injection.

Statement No. 3

Children need to be vaccinated in order to go to public school, and to take part in normal life.

Contradiction No. 3

Healthy children are not at risk of serious illness from Sars-Cov-2. Why do they need to be vaccinated with a medical product which is experimental, and for which the long-term effects are unknown?

Children cannot give informed consent. Vaccine or no acceptance to public school is coercion. Coercion is not acceptable for any medical product. This policy disproportionately affects the poor and those of color, who already suffer from health disparities.

The wealthy can take their children out of state-sponsored-education and educate them privately, or at home. The poor and those dependent on government funded education do not have that luxury.

Truth No. 3:

The policy is discriminatory against the poor, and people who cannot afford to home school or place their children in private schools.

Statement No. 4

Pregnant women should be vaccinated

Contradiction No. 4

Pregnant women were excluded from the clinical trials. Any population excluded from clinical trials is not supposed to receive the medicine when it is commercialized.

After thalidomide, the administration of any substance to pregnant women, especially on a population basis, amounts to malpractice. Anyone advocating for this should be removed from their position in public health, because they are incompetent.

Truth No. 4:

This blanket policy is inconsistent with the clinical studies, and caution is advised. It is highly unusual to promote the administration of medical products to pregnant and breast-feeding women.

Statement No. 5

First responders, including nurses, physicians, firefighters and police must take the genetic injections, even if they are at risk of cardiovascular toxicity.

Contradiction No. 5

First responders are entitled to medical privacy and informed consent. They were being applauded in 2020, and then fired in 2021 and 2022.

Truth No. 5:

This policy is a travesty. Many first responders have natural immunity, which provides greater protection than any of these genetic injections. Even if they do not have natural immunity, no one has the right to tell them what to inject into their bodies.

---

Statement No. 6

The genetic injections are effective.

Contradiction No. 6

The genetic injections were developed for the alpha variant of Sars-Cov-2. The most prevalent variant is Omicron. This variant causes mild symptoms. The genetic injections are not considered effective against Omicron.

Truth No. 6

The mandating of these genetic injections, that lose their effect over a short duration of time, could promote the creation of more lethal variants. Why? Viruses mutate as they seek to find a way to survive. If the genetic injection is easy for them to get around, they will mutate using their ingenuity. The end result is that they could become more lethal. Fortunately the Omicron variant does not cause severe illness. Ideally everyone should get this variant and be immunised naturally.

As the benefits decrease, the risks become of increasing concern. If the benefits are no longer present, or no longer justify the not insignificant risks, they should be removed from the marketplace.

Statement No. 7

Natural immunity for Sars-Cov-2 virus does not exist.

Contradiction No. 7

There is no reason to believe that Sars-Cov-2 is acting differently to other RNA viruses. The decision to mandate that everyone takes one of the genetic injections is not only against international law, in relation to informed consent, but it also makes no scientific sense. If someone has already had the infection, they would be immune to developing the infection in the future, at least for a good period of time. This is not different because this is Sars-Cov-2. Reinventing science creates a lot of confusion, and that is what has happened with Sars-Cov-2.

Truth No. 7

People who were infected with the Swine flu in the early 2000s are still immune to the Swine flu, and even to influenza.

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-12152500

Here is a review of the evidence for natural immunity from The Lancet, one of the most respected peer reviewed medical journals.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00676-9/fulltext

There is good reason to believe that people who have developed natural immunity are at greater risk of serious adverse reactions if they are injected with the genetic injections.

The British Medical Journal is another well respected peer-reviewed journal. See their thoughts on the need to recognize natural immunity.

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2101

Always confer with your medical professional for advice that is appropriate for your medical situation.

Feel free to leave other contradictions in the Comments.