I'm old enough to remember that it used to be known that you NEVER VAX ANY CHILD UNDER AGE 67 MINIMUM! That's because it causes great harm, especially to the brain, which is one of the places where the immune system is. It causes autism and in infants, yes, it can kill them. It's been established that it causes SIDS in infants just for one. I say this as a 70 y.o. woman who, when I was 5 was vaxed. I remember this clearly because my mom was putting me up for adoption at age 5 and had to take me to the doctor. For some reason, she felt I had to be vaxed or she wouldn't put me up for adoption (she was not a very nice person and not a good mom either). The doctor was absolutely horrified that she wanted to vax me at that age and they had an argument. Finally, he turned to me me and said "I hope you will remember this when you're older and that you don't suffer any damage from the jab but I think it's better to vax you than allow you to remain with your mother." He really, really didn't want to vax me but he also knew my mom was not a good mom and IMO he made the right decision. I will be forever grateful to him for his decision. I do have symptoms of autism and memory issues, always have had that since that jab.
My husband has over 50 yrs as a virologist/immunologist who used to help develop jabs in 1970s - until he learned that cancer cells were put into the jabs. He quit doing vaxes and never had one after that. This is documented in the book "Dr. Mary's Monkey" and I've also seen it in an abstract on PubMed, cancer cells are used in jabs to this day. They are called SV-40 and come from monkeys. My husband worked for years at Public Health of PA advising the public/doctors/govt on how to manage disease/illness. He also worked with a Nobel prize winning scientist at her invitation. He KNOWS his science and is not an order-follower, he does his own research.
In my INFORMED opinion, all vaxes need to be halted. Period. Our creator gave us an immune system for a reason! It works well if we take care of ourselves and little babies do NOT need jabs -
their mom's immune system has them protected until they develop their own which is age 6 minimum.
So what did all of us older women do when RSV shots were never even heard of? We all survived it didn't we our children survived didn't they? This is insanity.
Unfortunately that would be categorized under Surviver Bias. I have not vaccinated my children, but I do sympathize with those who lost theirs due to poor nutrition, poor health, or simply just bad luck.
The story says 100 children die from RSV every year, which might be right, or might be wrong.
Even if it is right, I'd bet my net worth that more than 100 children will die from their RSV "vaccines." Far more will suffer serious adverse events and medical conditions.
The key point is that this guarantees that 50 percent of American children could get these shots in the future. The government will pay for the shots. Merk will make billions of dollars; the doctors and health clinics will make money from giving them.
Exactly. Notice they never want to do a deep dive into why 100 to 300 die when majority, millions survive. Oh no. That's too much real science. Of course those children that died most likely had underlying conditions and the flu tipped them or was it prior injections? What an absolutely obvious scam and it isn't hard to see now at all. Ask the paediatrician any of these questions and he'll cancel your child as a patient.
In one study the article cited, it was 5 deaths in the jabbed group compared to zero. Extrapolate the size of that group onto the population and what do you get? Grok says the size of the groups is not available. Seems strange. A similar study by a different company had 17,000 who got jabbed. So say 20,000 to be generous. 3.62 million births/yr in USA. Divide by 20,000. That is 181. So 181 dead kids if ONE death were caused by the jab in the study. If all 5 were, figure 181x5 = 905. That's being generous with the 20,000 sample size assumption. 905 dead kids. The dead are the most damaged, damage occurs on a spectrum, so many, many more severe harms. If the sample size were something to be proud of, Merck wouldn't hide it. So, probably much less than 20,000, which would mean more dead kids.
This is so wrong! Newborns do not need vaccines. The study says it all! It better not ever be mandated or more and more people will start homeschooling! C’mon RFK, we supported you for a reason and this isn’t it!
Have we humans created such a toxic environment for infants to be conceived and born into that we are now addicted, physically and mentally, to the drugs that are such a huge part of the toxicity itself? Should LESS healthy infants be given potentially harmful injections when they are less able to tolerate adverse events?
Talk about disconcerting. I remember writing a vaccine story two years ago, where the main point was that the Medical and Vaccine Complex was champing at the bit to get new RSV "vaccines" on the market. I guess they succeeded ... Surprise, surprise.
What a shameful act. Shame on Dr Malone. And what has happened to RFK Jr? Captured? Beyond disappointing for those who supported him directly for this topic.
Meet the New Boss, same as the Old Boss… Malone’s position is stunning to me. He has lost all credibility and appears to be bought. I’m willing to give odds on two things: There will be more deaths from the vaccine than from the virus and 2) Malone’s net worth will increase substantially. I’m disgusted.
So, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) "recommends" yet another vaccine.
What does "recommend" actually mean in practice? Can a child attend school without receiving an RSV shot? If this is now another required chemical injection, then RFK Jr's ACIP changes were simply to mislead the public and create the illusion of change.
Thanks to the Defender for STILL defending sanity and real science and publicizing these news-worthy events. I'm happy to support this organization with a small, monthly donation. I hope more concerned citizens support CHD and its Defender journalism operation.
I'm old enough to remember that it used to be known that you NEVER VAX ANY CHILD UNDER AGE 67 MINIMUM! That's because it causes great harm, especially to the brain, which is one of the places where the immune system is. It causes autism and in infants, yes, it can kill them. It's been established that it causes SIDS in infants just for one. I say this as a 70 y.o. woman who, when I was 5 was vaxed. I remember this clearly because my mom was putting me up for adoption at age 5 and had to take me to the doctor. For some reason, she felt I had to be vaxed or she wouldn't put me up for adoption (she was not a very nice person and not a good mom either). The doctor was absolutely horrified that she wanted to vax me at that age and they had an argument. Finally, he turned to me me and said "I hope you will remember this when you're older and that you don't suffer any damage from the jab but I think it's better to vax you than allow you to remain with your mother." He really, really didn't want to vax me but he also knew my mom was not a good mom and IMO he made the right decision. I will be forever grateful to him for his decision. I do have symptoms of autism and memory issues, always have had that since that jab.
My husband has over 50 yrs as a virologist/immunologist who used to help develop jabs in 1970s - until he learned that cancer cells were put into the jabs. He quit doing vaxes and never had one after that. This is documented in the book "Dr. Mary's Monkey" and I've also seen it in an abstract on PubMed, cancer cells are used in jabs to this day. They are called SV-40 and come from monkeys. My husband worked for years at Public Health of PA advising the public/doctors/govt on how to manage disease/illness. He also worked with a Nobel prize winning scientist at her invitation. He KNOWS his science and is not an order-follower, he does his own research.
In my INFORMED opinion, all vaxes need to be halted. Period. Our creator gave us an immune system for a reason! It works well if we take care of ourselves and little babies do NOT need jabs -
their mom's immune system has them protected until they develop their own which is age 6 minimum.
This is fear-mongering in my book.
Newborns don’t need ANY vaccines!! Sad… I am blown away! RFK Jr, what are you thinking?
He has outsourced his thinking (and courage) to his handlers; now just follows orders ...
They don’t!
So what did all of us older women do when RSV shots were never even heard of? We all survived it didn't we our children survived didn't they? This is insanity.
Unfortunately that would be categorized under Surviver Bias. I have not vaccinated my children, but I do sympathize with those who lost theirs due to poor nutrition, poor health, or simply just bad luck.
The story says 100 children die from RSV every year, which might be right, or might be wrong.
Even if it is right, I'd bet my net worth that more than 100 children will die from their RSV "vaccines." Far more will suffer serious adverse events and medical conditions.
The key point is that this guarantees that 50 percent of American children could get these shots in the future. The government will pay for the shots. Merk will make billions of dollars; the doctors and health clinics will make money from giving them.
Nobody can be sued if anyone is harmed.
These "vaccines" are a diabolical racket.
Exactly. Notice they never want to do a deep dive into why 100 to 300 die when majority, millions survive. Oh no. That's too much real science. Of course those children that died most likely had underlying conditions and the flu tipped them or was it prior injections? What an absolutely obvious scam and it isn't hard to see now at all. Ask the paediatrician any of these questions and he'll cancel your child as a patient.
In one study the article cited, it was 5 deaths in the jabbed group compared to zero. Extrapolate the size of that group onto the population and what do you get? Grok says the size of the groups is not available. Seems strange. A similar study by a different company had 17,000 who got jabbed. So say 20,000 to be generous. 3.62 million births/yr in USA. Divide by 20,000. That is 181. So 181 dead kids if ONE death were caused by the jab in the study. If all 5 were, figure 181x5 = 905. That's being generous with the 20,000 sample size assumption. 905 dead kids. The dead are the most damaged, damage occurs on a spectrum, so many, many more severe harms. If the sample size were something to be proud of, Merck wouldn't hide it. So, probably much less than 20,000, which would mean more dead kids.
I agree with you.
This is so wrong! Newborns do not need vaccines. The study says it all! It better not ever be mandated or more and more people will start homeschooling! C’mon RFK, we supported you for a reason and this isn’t it!
Have we humans created such a toxic environment for infants to be conceived and born into that we are now addicted, physically and mentally, to the drugs that are such a huge part of the toxicity itself? Should LESS healthy infants be given potentially harmful injections when they are less able to tolerate adverse events?
We have health upside down.
Talk about disconcerting. I remember writing a vaccine story two years ago, where the main point was that the Medical and Vaccine Complex was champing at the bit to get new RSV "vaccines" on the market. I guess they succeeded ... Surprise, surprise.
So nothing has changed. I should have known.
What a shameful act. Shame on Dr Malone. And what has happened to RFK Jr? Captured? Beyond disappointing for those who supported him directly for this topic.
Greeting this again, makes me say, who the heck would vaccinate their children at all????!!!! Zero. They need zero.
*Reading this
poison
This is pretty shocking news …
Why does anyone support ANYTHING the government does?
Didn’t CONvid teach you anything?
The world will never be the same.
The brainwashing and propaganda is COMPLETE.
Remnants will be left.
God is my Hightower.
Meet the New Boss, same as the Old Boss… Malone’s position is stunning to me. He has lost all credibility and appears to be bought. I’m willing to give odds on two things: There will be more deaths from the vaccine than from the virus and 2) Malone’s net worth will increase substantially. I’m disgusted.
Its really sad. And if so how many other respected voices are also not exactly who they say they are?
So, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) "recommends" yet another vaccine.
What does "recommend" actually mean in practice? Can a child attend school without receiving an RSV shot? If this is now another required chemical injection, then RFK Jr's ACIP changes were simply to mislead the public and create the illusion of change.
so 5 dead babies didn't matter?
I guess not.
Thanks to the Defender for STILL defending sanity and real science and publicizing these news-worthy events. I'm happy to support this organization with a small, monthly donation. I hope more concerned citizens support CHD and its Defender journalism operation.