A simple concept that joygarner has been ignoring: The dose makes the poison.
Toxicity isn't some magical, objective trait. Toxicity is relative to what it comes into contact with. The human body is an amazingly complex collection of self-sustaining chemical reactions. It has great self-protection and self-healing measures. Because of that, it can tolerate some things. One ion of mercury isn't going to wreak havoc, otherwise fish would be banned. We can tolerate small doses of many things.
Income: One-time expenses with a few booster shots.
Cost, if you believe the anti-vaxxers: Paying for absolute control of information in an era where information flows freely.
Anti-vaxxers: Untested industrial chelators sold as "food supplements" to avoid scrutiny in the US, regular chelation treatments that have caused deaths, infinite kinds of "detox" fads, diet books, grants from lawyers for fishing expeditions.
Why is it that all your comrades' websites censor dissenting comments, while all of my fellow skeptics have no such policy?
I regularly read trolls like you showing up at Respectful Insolence and the like, and they get their comments posted and responded to.
Let me guess: Ignorance is strength, and you've always been at war with Oceania. Unfortunately for you, there are no memory holes in the Information Age.
Nobody in the world can convince me that mercury in my bloodstream is a good thing. Certainly not repeated/cumulative, (over 50 shots by the time you're 18 per big pharma recommendations)
The reason the mercury is hidden behind the name "thimersol" is precisely b/c the toxic effects of mercury are well established. Science-turned-upside-down, is to say that mercury is safe, so long as it's administered in the form of a vaccination.
When you begin a sentence that way, you forfeit your right to be a part of the argument. If your mind cannot be changed, then you're committed to a dogma and not arguing from a scientific perspective.
Which should be obvious because, instead of supplying evidence that vaccines are harmful, you just repeated standard antivax talking points. Evidence or STFU.
Why are you so threatened by someone merely pointing out that they prefer not to inject mercury into their bloodstream? There is ample evidence that this and many other ingredients in the vaccines are unsafe, for any one willing to do even a little bit of research. But hey, if you like all of the shots, go get them. Nobody is trying to stop you. The government never lies to the people, and big pharma has no motive to sell this stuff beyond the public good, so go for it.
People *die,* and you wonder why I'm "threatened?"
You blindly trust money-grubbing lawyers and quacks who want to completely deregulate human experimentation over a vast, international scientific community, full of people with competing interests who carefully review all evidence, and you wonder why I feel "threatened."
It's cute how you think that there's only one government in the world, as if A) I care about what the government says, and B) that the world ends off the coast of Florida.
More people died from the last swine flu vaccine, (in the 70's) then from the swine flu. This last similarly-hyped vaccine is no better. About that "blind trust" thing, (1) no "Lawyers" informed me about any of this, (2) I read Baxter's patent for the h1n1 vaccine which was granted years before the outbreak.
"Blind trust" is what it takes to let someone inject you without daring to ask questions. Go get your swine flu shot. Nobody is trying to stop you. I hear there's a glut on the market.
2. Not just lawyers, but quacks trying to sell their magical time-reversing detoxes, as well as other gullible parents who didn't think to ask meaningful questions.
3. I do ask questions. The real doctors answer. When I ask the mercury militia questions, they call it "oppression" that I don't blindly trust them.
4. Regulatory agencies exist to question doctors, but nuts like you want them dismantled when your messiahs are staring down the business end of those questions.
I never said anything about "dismantling" regulatory bodies. I would love it if the FDA wasn't run almost exclusively by big pharma, (it's a loop, they work at pharm, go over to FDA and back).
I would really like it if we could have an FDA who was truly looking out for us. That's just not the way it is right now. There are plenty of M.D.s who are saying that the vaccines are not safe and who won't let their own families get the shots.
1. In other words, you think the FDA is the only regulatory agency in the entire world. The Earth doesn't end in a waterfall off the coasts of Florida and California, you know. There are, *gasp* other nations out there, you know.
2. Ah, the messianic model of science: That getting letters after your name renders you infallible, and thus free to say that all of chemistry, pharmacology, toxicology, biology, and physics are wrong. They are Authorities, and it is your sacred duty to never question.
A. Someone like me who is very much in favor of strengthening regulatory bodies,
Or
B. Someone like you, who rejects basic chemistry, and by extension, believes all technological advances since the discovery of the periodic table are pure dumb luck, based on false ideas of chemical interactions, and that universities across the entire Earth are overrun with "Big Pharma's" Men In Black who prevent students from experimenting.
"periodic table"? So that's where you say I can confirm that it's safe to inject mercury into my bloodstream?
I've read some great University studies which show that the ingredients in the shots are not safe. Most who report these things are not getting heard is all. Where are you getting all of this other stuff? I never said those things. It's simple. I do not believe that I want to put mercury into my body if I can avoid it. You like it, you think it's safe and good? help yourself.
1. Periodic table. The table of elements that predicts their properties. Did you flunk 5th grade.
2. No, this is the part where you deliberately lie about what I believe. The safety depends on the dose. Human beings are slightly more complicated than lightbulbs, you know.
3. What university studies?
4. No, I do not believe mercury is safe and good without qualification. Who's paying you to lie about my beliefs? Are you a political spin doctor.
that was very bad form on my part. I owe you an apology. I am sorry for that. Truly. Name-calling has no place and I am ashamed of myself. Best these dialogues are used to exchange information/differing views freely without attacks.
Akusai (actionskeptic) said it right: you're pretty blatantly stating how dogmatic you are.
Of course, for your second paragraph, you inform us that you flunked 5th grade science: Thimerosal is a *compound* that contains mercury. Any child should be able to tell you that compounds are very different from elements.
Let me guess: All the groundbreaking chemists from the 1800's were in on the conspiracy, right?
You're the sort of nut who believes water is explosive because it contains hydrogen.
I remember when they told us that mercury was "safe" so long as it was mixed with something else and then inserted into our teeth. Now the studies show that chewing releases dangerous levels of the mercury, (it won't stay in the "compound" when exposed to saliva, acids, etc.) Further, the waste from the "amalgam" is illegal to dump b/c it's widely known to be highly toxic. Apparently, the only "safe" place to put this stuff is into our bodies?
Except that people with amalgam fillings don't show any signs of increased mercury levels, in direct contradiction to what you claim.
As for your nutty conspiracy theory, the cost of maintaining one would quickly dwarf the tiny, tiny profit (and often loss) from vaccines.
And don't call mercury compounds "mercury" unless you're going to argue that 19th century chemists started this insanely expensive, inefficient, and fragile conspiracy you posit.
I guess you haven't read about the CDC and WHO scandal which proved that the directors of these organizations PERSONALLY made hundreds of millions (via-big pharma) off of selling this "pandemic" in order to get countries to order up millions of the shots?
Studies which prove that it is safe to inject mercury into my bloodstream, (whether alone or in a "compound")? Can you cite exactly where this "mercury is entirely safe in the human body" study can be found?
2. Wow. Millions in profit. And all it took was trillions and trillions to silence all the other doctors in the world.
3. Wow, straw man. You're so indoctrinated, you don't even know my position on the issue! Or did your Big Placebo overlords tell you to lie about the opposition? The *dose* makes the poison.
4. It's not injected into the blood stream. It's injected into muscle. Duh.
5. Compounds are different from elements. Don't lie by calling a mercury compound "mercury."
The big problem with your conspiracy theory is that it requires a belief that these people ALREADY had an infinite amount of money that they could throw all over the world. And that they did so in order to make a tiny, tiny amount of money.
Wouldn't it be easier for them to simply make bogus claims on vitamin "supplements" that so many of your allies can get away with due to the regulatory loophole manufactured in the US by the Big Placebo lobby?
What's amazing here, Joy, is that everything you've said up until now still just boils down to the highly emotive claim "Mercury bad!" You haven't said anything ob substance or even backed that claim.
What's especially funny about that is that the claims of the actual antivaccination movement left you behind long ago. They've moved on to slightly subtler claims about aluminum or "toxins," and do you know why? Becuase there's no evidence that thimerosal causes any harm!
The reason they dumped the thimerosal hypothesis: They've been embarrassed. Exposure goes down, and there is absolutely no corresponding drop in autism diagnoses. There's only so much they can make up. Yeah, like Chinese cremations can *coincidentally* increase exposure at *exactly* the same dosage as the removed thimerosal.
Oh, and your buddies also claim it's Children's Tylenol and tiny numbers of antigens being "too much, too soon." It changes about every two weeks.
Just read the package insert (before injection is best) on any one of the vaccines. Polio had an identical decline in the unvaccinated countries as those who were vaccinating. Also, polio was already on a sharp decline here in the US long before anyone was vaccinated.
I don't "love Polio". What an absurd thing to say.
To be absolutely clear: I don't cite any studies claiming that mercury is entirely safe because *I don't believe that,* and would be initially suspicious of such a hypothetical study and look deeper in it.
I feel no obligation to defend your lie about our beliefs on the matter. That's pretty much what you're asking me to do: You're asking me to lie about what I believe.
The dose makes the poison. Humans are more complex than lightbulbs.
I believe I'd prefer not to inject mercury or squalene, formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80, (last one is known to sterilize rats when injected) etc. into my bloodstream. Even if I am wrong about my "belief" it is still what I believe, & I have read the package inserts, so I know what's in the shots. It's not a "lie" to believe something. It's a lie to say something you don't really believe to be true.
No, but it's stupid as hell to believe something without supporting evidence, just because you'd "prefer not to" do something. I'd prefer not to use condoms. Should I therefore believe that they actually increase the risk of pregnancy?
And where are those "university studies" you mentioned before? I notice you never responded to requests for them. Dodge much?
No, you're lying about what *I* believe. You're lying about what all us skeptics believe. You're lying about what doctors believe. Just admit it.
And you do realize that the human body makes its own squalene, formaldehyde, and other toxins, right? Necessary part of life. It's the *dose* that makes the poison.
I'll also point out your lie of omission: Those rats only got sterilized by *high doses*, right? The dose makes the poison, otherwise all life would be impossible. Get out of the bubble.
And where is your evidence that vaccines are at all harmful? Don't rag on mercury; I neatly explained why the "MERCURY IS BAD!!!" nonsense has no prior plausibility. You need to provide evidence that vaccines cause more harm than good or you need to shut the fuck up.
- formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80, the list goes on.
If you feel safe injecting yourself with this stuff on a routine basis, good for you. I prefer not to. That's my right, and if the vaccines really work, you have nothing to fear once you get your shot right?
There's less formaldehyde in the entire schedule than a single accidental breath of car exhaust. Aluminum: do you drink soda from cans? Then STFU. Al phosphate is used to absorb toxic elements. Thimerosal is the mercury-containing compound, so you're now being redundant. Polysorbate 80 is an adjuvant, which lessens the necessary number of viral components for an immune reaction, making the vaccine less dangerous.
What's your evidence that these are harmful in the amounts they occur in vaccines?
One other thing, I read Baxter's patent for the H1N1 vaccine, as well as their sterilization vaccine. Polysorbate 80 is the primary active ingredient he one to sterilize "animals" and the % of this substance is the same in both vaccines.
Roll your sleeve up and get your shot, b/c you trust. I prefer to see what the longer-term effects actually are before I do. My best 2 U.
Again, you lie by omission: You just completely ignore dosages, don't you? Only very high amounts cause sterility, and we're talking about very low amounts in vaccines.
Why are you so scared of talking about dosages? It's a basic principle of medicine that too much of something is harmful, and that the human body can heal itself by small damage.
You seem to believe there's no such thing as too much of a good thing, and no such thing as a safe level of risk. Do you live in a plastic bubble?
Stop dodging. You refuse to answer questions or present evidence, you just keep changing the subject and saying the same old things in different words.
In other words, you didn't bother to listen to anything he said, and that you blindly believe whatever the mercury militia says, even if it blatantly contradicts basic chemistry knowledge any fifth grader is supposed to know.
The "mercury militia" is headed up by people who have personally been harmed. Big pharma is headed up by people who personally stand to lose billions (in damages) if the truth is told, and further, stand to make billions if they can get us all to buy their products without questioning anything. The theory that mercury is a good thing to inject into my bloodstream (whether in a "compound" or not) just seems a bit off to me. That's all I'm saying.
More like the lawyers of those people who tell them that they can make a profit if they just indoctrinate the parents into believing their children aren't real: That they're just autistic shells covering up the "real" child underneath.
I've been online with a number of autistic people hurt by that rhetoric.
And it's amazingly naive of you to think that the medical community is so monolithic. Do you seriously believe that a scientific community can be so absolutely uniform in interests?
They were "blocked" for the same reasons Creationism was blocked: Bad science!
You routinely mock basic chemistry. Wakefield evades ethical oversight and performs basic statistical errors. You try to turn science upside-down so that you can sell raw powdered industrial chelators as a "dietary supplement" to avoid the testing requirements we force Big Pharma into performing.
You repeatedly lie about what real doctors say. Courts don't like people who get caught red-handed at lying.
There's a difference between "blocked" and "lost due to inadequate evidence" or "thrown out due to lack of standing or complete absurdity." Just because authority thinks you're wrong doesn't mean you're right.
Hell, it may be a good indication that you are, in fact, wrong.
I mean, this stuff is made out of sodium and chlorine. And people put it in their *mouths*!? Clearly, this only seems like a good idea because of a Dan-Brown-esque conspiracy by all chefs ever.
Ha ha. That's a good trick. Compare people who logically question the safety of certain chemicals injected directly into the bloodstream, (which is much different that ingestion or even breathing) to people who think water is an "explosive". Sure, that'll shame them into getting their shots like big pharma tells them they must. It does little to convince me that the shots are completely incapable of causing any harm though. Nice try.
Completely missing the point. You've been busy arguing that a mercury compound is no different than elemental mercury (why else would you lie by calling thimerosal "mercury"), hence, you obviously believe that water is an explosive because it is a hydrogen compound.
Can't face your self-contradiction? That, my friend, is known as cognitive dissonance. It happens when your brain notices the inconsistency between your lies.
You can't just throw the word "logically" in as an adverb and make your argumentative process logical. What you've been doing is emotive expression, fallacious reasoning, subject changing, and ignoring the basics of modern science. You have yet to put together a coherent argument or present solid evidence for your case.
Evidence or STFU.
By the way, the comparison is apt: if you think mercury in a compound is the same as mercury out of a compound, then you should think water is explosive.
That would explain all the men in black suits and sunglasses that hovered over my high school chemistry classes, lifting up flashy metal things whenever someone asked a question.
Those covalent and ionic bonds we learned about? Nothing but a 19th century conspiracy that just by sheer coincidence happens to be mathematically consistent with reality and of practical use, despite being a lie by 19th century chemists made up so that anonymous doctors from a century later can make pocket change.
Oh yeah mercury is good for the brain, its goooooooood!!!!!! LMFAO
NWOpartycrasher 1 year ago
A simple concept that joygarner has been ignoring: The dose makes the poison.
Toxicity isn't some magical, objective trait. Toxicity is relative to what it comes into contact with. The human body is an amazingly complex collection of self-sustaining chemical reactions. It has great self-protection and self-healing measures. Because of that, it can tolerate some things. One ion of mercury isn't going to wreak havoc, otherwise fish would be banned. We can tolerate small doses of many things.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
Let's look at the profit potentials:
Pharmaceutical companies:
Income: One-time expenses with a few booster shots.
Cost, if you believe the anti-vaxxers: Paying for absolute control of information in an era where information flows freely.
Anti-vaxxers: Untested industrial chelators sold as "food supplements" to avoid scrutiny in the US, regular chelation treatments that have caused deaths, infinite kinds of "detox" fads, diet books, grants from lawyers for fishing expeditions.
Cost: Not much.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
Serious question for joygarner:
Why is it that all your comrades' websites censor dissenting comments, while all of my fellow skeptics have no such policy?
I regularly read trolls like you showing up at Respectful Insolence and the like, and they get their comments posted and responded to.
Let me guess: Ignorance is strength, and you've always been at war with Oceania. Unfortunately for you, there are no memory holes in the Information Age.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
Nobody in the world can convince me that mercury in my bloodstream is a good thing. Certainly not repeated/cumulative, (over 50 shots by the time you're 18 per big pharma recommendations)
The reason the mercury is hidden behind the name "thimersol" is precisely b/c the toxic effects of mercury are well established. Science-turned-upside-down, is to say that mercury is safe, so long as it's administered in the form of a vaccination.
joygarner 2 years ago
"Nobody in the world can convince me.."
When you begin a sentence that way, you forfeit your right to be a part of the argument. If your mind cannot be changed, then you're committed to a dogma and not arguing from a scientific perspective.
Which should be obvious because, instead of supplying evidence that vaccines are harmful, you just repeated standard antivax talking points. Evidence or STFU.
And I'm supposed to be the moron?
actionskeptic 2 years ago
Why are you so threatened by someone merely pointing out that they prefer not to inject mercury into their bloodstream? There is ample evidence that this and many other ingredients in the vaccines are unsafe, for any one willing to do even a little bit of research. But hey, if you like all of the shots, go get them. Nobody is trying to stop you. The government never lies to the people, and big pharma has no motive to sell this stuff beyond the public good, so go for it.
joygarner 2 years ago
People *die,* and you wonder why I'm "threatened?"
You blindly trust money-grubbing lawyers and quacks who want to completely deregulate human experimentation over a vast, international scientific community, full of people with competing interests who carefully review all evidence, and you wonder why I feel "threatened."
It's cute how you think that there's only one government in the world, as if A) I care about what the government says, and B) that the world ends off the coast of Florida.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
More people died from the last swine flu vaccine, (in the 70's) then from the swine flu. This last similarly-hyped vaccine is no better. About that "blind trust" thing, (1) no "Lawyers" informed me about any of this, (2) I read Baxter's patent for the h1n1 vaccine which was granted years before the outbreak.
"Blind trust" is what it takes to let someone inject you without daring to ask questions. Go get your swine flu shot. Nobody is trying to stop you. I hear there's a glut on the market.
joygarner 2 years ago
1. Citation?
2. Not just lawyers, but quacks trying to sell their magical time-reversing detoxes, as well as other gullible parents who didn't think to ask meaningful questions.
3. I do ask questions. The real doctors answer. When I ask the mercury militia questions, they call it "oppression" that I don't blindly trust them.
4. Regulatory agencies exist to question doctors, but nuts like you want them dismantled when your messiahs are staring down the business end of those questions.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
I never said anything about "dismantling" regulatory bodies. I would love it if the FDA wasn't run almost exclusively by big pharma, (it's a loop, they work at pharm, go over to FDA and back).
I would really like it if we could have an FDA who was truly looking out for us. That's just not the way it is right now. There are plenty of M.D.s who are saying that the vaccines are not safe and who won't let their own families get the shots.
joygarner 2 years ago
1. In other words, you think the FDA is the only regulatory agency in the entire world. The Earth doesn't end in a waterfall off the coasts of Florida and California, you know. There are, *gasp* other nations out there, you know.
2. Ah, the messianic model of science: That getting letters after your name renders you infallible, and thus free to say that all of chemistry, pharmacology, toxicology, biology, and physics are wrong. They are Authorities, and it is your sacred duty to never question.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
Also, who's more trustworthy?:
A. Someone like me who is very much in favor of strengthening regulatory bodies,
Or
B. Someone like you, who rejects basic chemistry, and by extension, believes all technological advances since the discovery of the periodic table are pure dumb luck, based on false ideas of chemical interactions, and that universities across the entire Earth are overrun with "Big Pharma's" Men In Black who prevent students from experimenting.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
"periodic table"? So that's where you say I can confirm that it's safe to inject mercury into my bloodstream?
I've read some great University studies which show that the ingredients in the shots are not safe. Most who report these things are not getting heard is all. Where are you getting all of this other stuff? I never said those things. It's simple. I do not believe that I want to put mercury into my body if I can avoid it. You like it, you think it's safe and good? help yourself.
joygarner 2 years ago
1. Periodic table. The table of elements that predicts their properties. Did you flunk 5th grade.
2. No, this is the part where you deliberately lie about what I believe. The safety depends on the dose. Human beings are slightly more complicated than lightbulbs, you know.
3. What university studies?
4. No, I do not believe mercury is safe and good without qualification. Who's paying you to lie about my beliefs? Are you a political spin doctor.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
I don't remember calling you a "moron". Where did that come from?
joygarner 2 years ago
Scroll down. It was one of your first comments. You said it about three weeks ago as of this comment.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
that was very bad form on my part. I owe you an apology. I am sorry for that. Truly. Name-calling has no place and I am ashamed of myself. Best these dialogues are used to exchange information/differing views freely without attacks.
My best.
joygarner 2 years ago
I called the guy in the video a moron. Are you the guy in the video?
joygarner 2 years ago
Nope, that's actionskeptic/Akusai.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
Akusai (actionskeptic) said it right: you're pretty blatantly stating how dogmatic you are.
Of course, for your second paragraph, you inform us that you flunked 5th grade science: Thimerosal is a *compound* that contains mercury. Any child should be able to tell you that compounds are very different from elements.
Let me guess: All the groundbreaking chemists from the 1800's were in on the conspiracy, right?
You're the sort of nut who believes water is explosive because it contains hydrogen.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
I remember when they told us that mercury was "safe" so long as it was mixed with something else and then inserted into our teeth. Now the studies show that chewing releases dangerous levels of the mercury, (it won't stay in the "compound" when exposed to saliva, acids, etc.) Further, the waste from the "amalgam" is illegal to dump b/c it's widely known to be highly toxic. Apparently, the only "safe" place to put this stuff is into our bodies?
joygarner 2 years ago
Except that people with amalgam fillings don't show any signs of increased mercury levels, in direct contradiction to what you claim.
As for your nutty conspiracy theory, the cost of maintaining one would quickly dwarf the tiny, tiny profit (and often loss) from vaccines.
And don't call mercury compounds "mercury" unless you're going to argue that 19th century chemists started this insanely expensive, inefficient, and fragile conspiracy you posit.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
@TheBronzeDog wow, no profits?
I guess you haven't read about the CDC and WHO scandal which proved that the directors of these organizations PERSONALLY made hundreds of millions (via-big pharma) off of selling this "pandemic" in order to get countries to order up millions of the shots?
Studies which prove that it is safe to inject mercury into my bloodstream, (whether alone or in a "compound")? Can you cite exactly where this "mercury is entirely safe in the human body" study can be found?
joygarner 2 years ago
1. Citation?
2. Wow. Millions in profit. And all it took was trillions and trillions to silence all the other doctors in the world.
3. Wow, straw man. You're so indoctrinated, you don't even know my position on the issue! Or did your Big Placebo overlords tell you to lie about the opposition? The *dose* makes the poison.
4. It's not injected into the blood stream. It's injected into muscle. Duh.
5. Compounds are different from elements. Don't lie by calling a mercury compound "mercury."
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
The big problem with your conspiracy theory is that it requires a belief that these people ALREADY had an infinite amount of money that they could throw all over the world. And that they did so in order to make a tiny, tiny amount of money.
Wouldn't it be easier for them to simply make bogus claims on vitamin "supplements" that so many of your allies can get away with due to the regulatory loophole manufactured in the US by the Big Placebo lobby?
Altie medicine: Pill pop your way to health!
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
What's amazing here, Joy, is that everything you've said up until now still just boils down to the highly emotive claim "Mercury bad!" You haven't said anything ob substance or even backed that claim.
What's especially funny about that is that the claims of the actual antivaccination movement left you behind long ago. They've moved on to slightly subtler claims about aluminum or "toxins," and do you know why? Becuase there's no evidence that thimerosal causes any harm!
Why do you love polio?
actionskeptic 2 years ago
The reason they dumped the thimerosal hypothesis: They've been embarrassed. Exposure goes down, and there is absolutely no corresponding drop in autism diagnoses. There's only so much they can make up. Yeah, like Chinese cremations can *coincidentally* increase exposure at *exactly* the same dosage as the removed thimerosal.
Oh, and your buddies also claim it's Children's Tylenol and tiny numbers of antigens being "too much, too soon." It changes about every two weeks.
We don't change stories.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
Just read the package insert (before injection is best) on any one of the vaccines. Polio had an identical decline in the unvaccinated countries as those who were vaccinating. Also, polio was already on a sharp decline here in the US long before anyone was vaccinated.
I don't "love Polio". What an absurd thing to say.
joygarner 2 years ago
Complete and utter fabrication.
Oh, and you loving Polio is exactly as absurd as your lie that we "love" mercury. Akusai was just holding you up to a mirror.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
Big pahrma accounts for 60% or more of the advertising budgets of most major TV news media.
joygarner 2 years ago
A lot of those are altie "supplements" bought up by Big Pharma for having large profit margin. And I hate those.
And, it is, of course, wrong of them to advertise drugs the way they do. At least I think so.
Of course, you're so indoctrinated by your echo chambers you never bothered to learn actual people's opinions.
Oh, and big, big fallacy: Did it never occur to you that sometimes people make money by doing good things? Making money is not inherently evil.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
To be absolutely clear: I don't cite any studies claiming that mercury is entirely safe because *I don't believe that,* and would be initially suspicious of such a hypothetical study and look deeper in it.
I feel no obligation to defend your lie about our beliefs on the matter. That's pretty much what you're asking me to do: You're asking me to lie about what I believe.
The dose makes the poison. Humans are more complex than lightbulbs.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
I "lie" when I say I believe something?
I believe I'd prefer not to inject mercury or squalene, formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80, (last one is known to sterilize rats when injected) etc. into my bloodstream. Even if I am wrong about my "belief" it is still what I believe, & I have read the package inserts, so I know what's in the shots. It's not a "lie" to believe something. It's a lie to say something you don't really believe to be true.
joygarner 2 years ago
No, but it's stupid as hell to believe something without supporting evidence, just because you'd "prefer not to" do something. I'd prefer not to use condoms. Should I therefore believe that they actually increase the risk of pregnancy?
And where are those "university studies" you mentioned before? I notice you never responded to requests for them. Dodge much?
Evidence or STFU. Take your belief and shove it.
actionskeptic 2 years ago
No, you're lying about what *I* believe. You're lying about what all us skeptics believe. You're lying about what doctors believe. Just admit it.
And you do realize that the human body makes its own squalene, formaldehyde, and other toxins, right? Necessary part of life. It's the *dose* that makes the poison.
I'll also point out your lie of omission: Those rats only got sterilized by *high doses*, right? The dose makes the poison, otherwise all life would be impossible. Get out of the bubble.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
And where is your evidence that vaccines are at all harmful? Don't rag on mercury; I neatly explained why the "MERCURY IS BAD!!!" nonsense has no prior plausibility. You need to provide evidence that vaccines cause more harm than good or you need to shut the fuck up.
actionskeptic 2 years ago
- formaldehyde, aluminum hydroxide, aluminum phosphate, thimerosal, and polysorbate 80, the list goes on.
If you feel safe injecting yourself with this stuff on a routine basis, good for you. I prefer not to. That's my right, and if the vaccines really work, you have nothing to fear once you get your shot right?
joygarner 2 years ago
There's less formaldehyde in the entire schedule than a single accidental breath of car exhaust. Aluminum: do you drink soda from cans? Then STFU. Al phosphate is used to absorb toxic elements. Thimerosal is the mercury-containing compound, so you're now being redundant. Polysorbate 80 is an adjuvant, which lessens the necessary number of viral components for an immune reaction, making the vaccine less dangerous.
What's your evidence that these are harmful in the amounts they occur in vaccines?
actionskeptic 2 years ago
One other thing, I read Baxter's patent for the H1N1 vaccine, as well as their sterilization vaccine. Polysorbate 80 is the primary active ingredient he one to sterilize "animals" and the % of this substance is the same in both vaccines.
Roll your sleeve up and get your shot, b/c you trust. I prefer to see what the longer-term effects actually are before I do. My best 2 U.
joygarner 2 years ago
Again, you lie by omission: You just completely ignore dosages, don't you? Only very high amounts cause sterility, and we're talking about very low amounts in vaccines.
Why are you so scared of talking about dosages? It's a basic principle of medicine that too much of something is harmful, and that the human body can heal itself by small damage.
You seem to believe there's no such thing as too much of a good thing, and no such thing as a safe level of risk. Do you live in a plastic bubble?
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
Stop dodging. You refuse to answer questions or present evidence, you just keep changing the subject and saying the same old things in different words.
Evidence or STFU.
actionskeptic 2 years ago
This guy is a moron.
Yeah, mercury is "safe" so long as big pharma is shooting it directly into your bloodstream.
joygarner 2 years ago
In other words, you didn't bother to listen to anything he said, and that you blindly believe whatever the mercury militia says, even if it blatantly contradicts basic chemistry knowledge any fifth grader is supposed to know.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
The "mercury militia" is headed up by people who have personally been harmed. Big pharma is headed up by people who personally stand to lose billions (in damages) if the truth is told, and further, stand to make billions if they can get us all to buy their products without questioning anything. The theory that mercury is a good thing to inject into my bloodstream (whether in a "compound" or not) just seems a bit off to me. That's all I'm saying.
joygarner 2 years ago
More like the lawyers of those people who tell them that they can make a profit if they just indoctrinate the parents into believing their children aren't real: That they're just autistic shells covering up the "real" child underneath.
I've been online with a number of autistic people hurt by that rhetoric.
And it's amazingly naive of you to think that the medical community is so monolithic. Do you seriously believe that a scientific community can be so absolutely uniform in interests?
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
There are no "profits" to be made. Lawsuits against big pharma are blocked at every level.
joygarner 2 years ago
They were "blocked" for the same reasons Creationism was blocked: Bad science!
You routinely mock basic chemistry. Wakefield evades ethical oversight and performs basic statistical errors. You try to turn science upside-down so that you can sell raw powdered industrial chelators as a "dietary supplement" to avoid the testing requirements we force Big Pharma into performing.
You repeatedly lie about what real doctors say. Courts don't like people who get caught red-handed at lying.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
There's a difference between "blocked" and "lost due to inadequate evidence" or "thrown out due to lack of standing or complete absurdity." Just because authority thinks you're wrong doesn't mean you're right.
Hell, it may be a good indication that you are, in fact, wrong.
actionskeptic 2 years ago
You must realize that, by your logic, table salt is simultaneously toxic and explosive.
maxwchase 2 years ago
I mean, this stuff is made out of sodium and chlorine. And people put it in their *mouths*!? Clearly, this only seems like a good idea because of a Dan-Brown-esque conspiracy by all chefs ever.
maxwchase 2 years ago
Let's not forget that water is highly explosive if you dare expose it to flame.
Those Germans should have known better than to fill the Hindenberg with water!
actionskeptic 2 years ago
Ha ha. That's a good trick. Compare people who logically question the safety of certain chemicals injected directly into the bloodstream, (which is much different that ingestion or even breathing) to people who think water is an "explosive". Sure, that'll shame them into getting their shots like big pharma tells them they must. It does little to convince me that the shots are completely incapable of causing any harm though. Nice try.
joygarner 2 years ago
Completely missing the point. You've been busy arguing that a mercury compound is no different than elemental mercury (why else would you lie by calling thimerosal "mercury"), hence, you obviously believe that water is an explosive because it is a hydrogen compound.
Can't face your self-contradiction? That, my friend, is known as cognitive dissonance. It happens when your brain notices the inconsistency between your lies.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
You can't just throw the word "logically" in as an adverb and make your argumentative process logical. What you've been doing is emotive expression, fallacious reasoning, subject changing, and ignoring the basics of modern science. You have yet to put together a coherent argument or present solid evidence for your case.
Evidence or STFU.
By the way, the comparison is apt: if you think mercury in a compound is the same as mercury out of a compound, then you should think water is explosive.
actionskeptic 2 years ago
Don't forget the massive straw man about us saying "mercury is good".
Favorite of political spin doctors: Lying about your opponents' beliefs to score cheap rhetorical points.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago
That would explain all the men in black suits and sunglasses that hovered over my high school chemistry classes, lifting up flashy metal things whenever someone asked a question.
Those covalent and ionic bonds we learned about? Nothing but a 19th century conspiracy that just by sheer coincidence happens to be mathematically consistent with reality and of practical use, despite being a lie by 19th century chemists made up so that anonymous doctors from a century later can make pocket change.
TheBronzeDog 2 years ago