From the Desk of Jenny Collins: A Comment Concerning Medical Pluralism and Vaccinations

Jenny Collins.

This is what gives me pause about the lion’s share of Big Medical.

Medically-incestuous research, I like to call it.

For the anti-vaxxers, quit with the dumb memes and toe-deep logic.

Collins writes with some neck-deep gravitas here. Please slow your roll and develop your logic and argumentation such that it matches your passion.

For those in the traditional medical community who see one way of doing things and acting as though any branch of science is settled, you might want to reconsider.

Behaving as though “settled science” exists, and behaving as if we should be controlled by governments into putting stuff into us is NOT the way we go about making America the way she was designed: liberated.

Further, “settled science” is a good way to provoke the L-rd to send Feynman, Rutherford, and Einstien.

“Settled science” is the purview of the Pharisees, and when G-d does a new thing, those who have settled their neat little paradigms will be in for a rude awakening.

#rejectamedicalreligiousspirit

With those elements out of the way, the following is what it will take for us to consider even looking at supporting the option of vaccines. But be warned, mandating vaccines is one way to start a revolt.

Oh and I don’t recall which thread it was in now, but to clarify what I meant about anti-science: Any person, news outlet or doctor who says vaccines are completely safe are anti-science in my view because it is not good science to deem something safe that has ever been studied long-term for safety or for their synergistic effects.

There may be a few studies suggesting single shot efficacy, I’ll give you that, but most were paid for by the industry, so those unfortunately discredit themselves due to the conflicts of interest.

As a preamble, it’s wise to remember that efficacy and safety are not the same thing.

For example, nuclear bombs may be effective in eradicating some terrorist cells. But nuclear bombs are not safe. Too many casualties of war and life-long impairments, including death of those who were never a threat to begin with.

There are so many safer, more humane ways to strengthen the immune system without vaccines. (But they don’t get airtime by Pharma since their business model only makes money from disease or disease management, not from healthy people.)

Anyways, back to your question, here are a few answers for starters (I came up with most of these myself and asked a few friends who have studied more than I have what they would add and included their answers too)—because we don’t even know what we don’t know yet.

Findings from any of the following would naturally lead to more inquiries.

First, before anything else, remove the legal immunity from the vaccine manufacturers—so the pharmaceutical companies are once again subject to liability for injuries and deaths. There is no incentive for Pharma to make them safer since there is no liability. Your and my tax dollars should not pay for negligence by corporations. (No liability, no deal.)

* Several independent meta analyses (gold standard reviews) by independent scientists, researchers and doctors from diverse training (allopathic, naturopathic and more) who are not funded in any form by pharmaceutical interests. (Medical pluralism is a strength, not a weakness.)

* Vaccine inserts say it has not been studied for carcinogenic or mutagenic properties or ability to impair fertility (so that’s a good place to look.)

* Independent studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. (Hasn’t been done.)

* Several generational studies examining the lifetime health and generational health of those who have been vaccinated and those who have not been vaccinated. (Hasn’t ever been done.)

* Independent studies investigating the multiple interacting factors, both short- and long-term synergistic effects of the current vaccine schedule in large samples. (Also never been done.)

* Research exploring the effects of bioaccumulation over time and its impact on neurological functions.

* This is a big one: Genetic research studying susceptibility to vaccine injuries so we have better data to “do no harm.” (MTHFR gene mutation for example are highly susceptible to adverse effects.)

* Go beyond the surface for autism and vaccine links and look into the genetics specifically of different populations. Especially when studies already show that African American children and the Somali populations in the U.S. and abroad have higher rates of autism. The CDC already does their Community Report on autism every 4 years or so, but they need to continue to do research on why it is, not only reporting what is.

* Environmental studies — how do different environments shape susceptibility to adverse effects.

* Research showing no correlation to autoimmune diseases. (There are SO many linked possible side effects that need to be explored with intensity.)

* Safe adjuvants (for all vaccines) and safe cell substrates (for live virus vaccines). Both of which would need to undergo individual testing using the gold standard double blind randomized saline placebo. And the testing would need to be carried on long term at least 10-15 years before marketing the vaccine so any late effects (especially cancer, diabetes and other autoimmune illnesses ) could be studied.

* Testing every vaccine for safe amounts of adjuvant for different patient weights, (applying the same standards other drugs are subject to.)

* Studies that show repeatedly that an IgG inoculation (blood born) increases an IgA (gut born immunity) response safely. (Because science can rarely prove…the results or findings merely suggest.)

I look forward to your reply. No rush.

This. This is a proper anti-vax response. And “Amen”!