..... beginning to see a first glance these days flaws in logic in purported 'scientific' research....
eg: injected vs ingested... in vitro vs in vivo... one can overdose or overuse anything but making claims about cardiovascular events in patients for whom you do not evaluate the impact of the rest of their condition/s and/or lifestyle on one factor naturally occurring or synthesized - couldn't be further from the scientific method than that! I'm beginning to think that the scientific method is an ideal some may have striven for once upon a time, but is now a cudgel, used by corp shills, to brow beat anyone who can still rub two brain cells together. What I would give for some real critical thinking in our schools? Maybe The Broken Science Initiative will shine a light www.brokenscience.org - here's hoping.
”June 7, 2024: The 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals just ruled held that “[t]his misapplies Jacobson,” which “did not involve a claim in which the compelled vaccine was ‘designed to reduce symptoms in the infected vaccine recipient rather than to prevent transmission and infection.”’ Jacobson does not, the majority concluded, extend to “forced medical treatment” for the benefit of the recipient.”
When HFDF asked the court to opine as to whether or not the CDC’s claim that the COVID-19 vaccines were ‘safe and effective’, the court responded with the rhetorical question, “safe and effective for what?”
But here is a problem - future vaccines are now as per ”June 7, 2024: The 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals just ruled are "forced medical treatment" and the CDC’s claim that the vaccines are ‘safe and effective’, the court responded with the rhetorical question, “safe and effective for what?” which makes all "vaccines" illegal, by definition and purpose.
..... beginning to see a first glance these days flaws in logic in purported 'scientific' research....
eg: injected vs ingested... in vitro vs in vivo... one can overdose or overuse anything but making claims about cardiovascular events in patients for whom you do not evaluate the impact of the rest of their condition/s and/or lifestyle on one factor naturally occurring or synthesized - couldn't be further from the scientific method than that! I'm beginning to think that the scientific method is an ideal some may have striven for once upon a time, but is now a cudgel, used by corp shills, to brow beat anyone who can still rub two brain cells together. What I would give for some real critical thinking in our schools? Maybe The Broken Science Initiative will shine a light www.brokenscience.org - here's hoping.
”June 7, 2024: The 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals just ruled held that “[t]his misapplies Jacobson,” which “did not involve a claim in which the compelled vaccine was ‘designed to reduce symptoms in the infected vaccine recipient rather than to prevent transmission and infection.”’ Jacobson does not, the majority concluded, extend to “forced medical treatment” for the benefit of the recipient.”
When HFDF asked the court to opine as to whether or not the CDC’s claim that the COVID-19 vaccines were ‘safe and effective’, the court responded with the rhetorical question, “safe and effective for what?”
But here is a problem - future vaccines are now as per ”June 7, 2024: The 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals just ruled are "forced medical treatment" and the CDC’s claim that the vaccines are ‘safe and effective’, the court responded with the rhetorical question, “safe and effective for what?” which makes all "vaccines" illegal, by definition and purpose.
A "forced medical treatment" like getting an ingrown toenail removed by a Big Pharma Sales Representative Doctor.