I don't much care about the data. It assumes there is a positive and healthy reason to inject yourself with mRNA poisons. There is NO amount of data that will ever change my mind about taking big pharma drugs, vaccines and mRNA poisons. I refuse to engage with any big pharma product.
You're smart. And by the grace of God you saw enough (payed attention) and put it all together. I collect and expose data that our "health" agencies refuse to collect/disclose for those who don't yet understand what's happening.
At this late stage, it seems as though many people are remaining ignorant on purpose, i.e., WILLFULY ignorant;-)
People STILL want so much to believe that they're NOT being culled.
That's my guess-- plus, people will refuse to believe weapons are aimed at them until they get HARMED. It's interesting how hard people will fight to NOT BELIEVE they are in danger... All we can do is try to keep attempting to BRING THE LIGHT... as you do.
Yes, I agree. But THEY don't know everything, THEY don't have all the power they think they do, and THEY are fighting against The Divine. Of course we will win! Yes, we will suffer, and many will die, surely. Already so. But... WE WILL WIN.
But these numbers may be shared with someone who is still on the fence about taking it or taking more. It's good to share information and it's being shared since I see it out there. It's really all we can do. Those who took it have been very quiet excepting for the shills and gatekeepers. I'm with you though, I don't want anything they have to offer. I stopped taking their poisons back in 1995 since it would make very sick. I always ended up at the hospital and still have my medical records to prove it.
I have found that when you go over the general "laundry list" of ailments that are now KNOWN to be driven by a dysfunctional immune system, (heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, cancer, allergies, and on and on) it seems to spark interest in the idea the vaccines are to blame. It also helps to mention that the damage often only becomes obvious many months, or even years after the immune system has been "triggered" and the progressive damage is now severe enough to be diagnosed.
Most people are falsely informed their health problems are "genetic." I'm still waiting to see evidence there is anyone in the world whose genetic codes are such that they are entirely impervious to these chemical and biological assaults upon our bodies via direct injection;-)
Great work Joy. I've just downloaded the study. I'll read it this week and share with family members who have young children. They are the ones who have the power to destroy the vaccine industry. You look fabulous btw.
You're AWESOME! Your willingness to have these "uncomfortable" discussions is what changes EVERYTHING! Even if they're too ashamed, embarrassed, (or freaked out) to give the appearance they're taking any of it in, it IS getting in. And one day they will wake up and KNOW that everything you informed them of was TRUE.
Thank you Joy. I share your control group info often. I agree that 'safe and effective' is a marketing jingle and not remotely the language of science.
I have a question about newer statistic on chronic disease in our country. Often we hear the quote that there are 54 percent chronic illnesses in children. This 54 number is from either 2006 or 2011. Did the number get so much larger that the CDC does not report new numbers? Does getting this info require bunches of FOIA requests and going to court -- or a fairy godmother? Would appreciate hearing your thoughts on this topic.
Good question. Much confusion over this one. For starters, it's important to understand that the CDC does not consider childhood obesity to be a chronic condition, even though we all know it massively increases the risks for every other "co-morbidity." So in fact, standing alone, obesity is a "condition" that should concern us all.
For the Children's graph of the 99% vaccine exposed, the Control Group study used stale and "official" (numbers which did not include obesity) in order to assure nobody could argue we over-stated the number of health problems seen in Children at the time of the study, since this was a "product safety" study conducted with observance of the Federal Rules of Evidence, and in anticipation of a federal lawsuit (to prohibit all vaccine mandates nationwide).
The truth is that back around 2008, it had already been established that the rate of childhood illnesses was doubling every 12 years, which at the time, evidenced a trajectory of ALL CHILDREN (in America) having one or more serious (deadly) health conditions by 2030. Factor in the "aging out" (of those no longer considered children) and what you have is a DEAD nation.
The act of attempting to enforce an IGNORED FOIA request requires endless legal bills. And with no assurance of enforcement, due to the corrupt status of most of our federal courts/judges. You could get a judge who will rule that they have 10, 20, 30, or more years to answer the request. And there's really no way to control the editing they WILL do, if they ever do answer the request.
We're begging for answers at the doorstep of the actual PERPS. So our only choice really, is to be resourceful enough to locate the answers we seek through other means.
Good point about the rise in childhood obesity exacerbating health problems further.
And thank you for conducting the Vax vs UnVax Independent study.
On Monday, Feb. 26, 2024, Senator Ron Johnson held a public roundtable forum entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What Are They Hiding?” Guest Dr. Brian Hooker spoke of your valuable vax/unvax study beginning at 1:49 minutes into video. For those who missed this, the link to the Roundtable Hearing is:
Bryan Hooker testified VERY well. He mentioned me and the Control Group study. Got a couple tiny items wrong, but over-all, very nice to have him discussing it and showing the GRAPHS.
When they don't age scotch whiskey long enough to be labelled as scotch whiskey, they call it rare. J & B Rare Scotch Whiskey. In steak, rare means illegal to serve in a restaurant. In vaccines, rare means whatever they say it means. Certainly it doesn't mean that side effects are uncommon.
Thank you Diane! It's got to reach those who genuinely do not yet know what's happening here. Lately however, it's looking like those who are STILL claiming they "don't know" are WILLFULLY ignorant.
It's getting pretty easy to understand the truth, even with all of their best efforts to censor, and even with all of their propaganda. If they were truly winning the "information war" they would NOT need mandates;-) And the mandates are facing new and stronger challenges each day.
You should factor in the influence of ultrasound, it seems quite possible that ultrasound initiates a vulnerability that a secondary stressor (vaccines) exploit:
True. This is a very BAD technology. I wish I had asked the entirely unvaccinated (post birth) whether they had sonograms while developing. At the same time, it's clear that merely eliminating vaccines reduces the incidence of all health conditions and disorders from a 50-60% risk (of one or more conditions) down to less than 6% risk of any condition. Once we also eliminated pregnancy (pre-birth) exposures and the K-shot injection (at birth) the risk went down to 2.64%, and the conditions suffered (in this 2.64% who had any problems) were generally very mild, i.e., no diabetes, cancer, arthritis, heart issues, etc.
So we can already clearly see a MASSIVE reduction in risk of any issues just by removing vaccines and related pharma products (standing alone). I do remember seeing a (rare) study, showing that sonograms are associated with emotional problems that show up later. I am of the opinion that NOBODY is immune to the poison they're putting in vaccines, no matter what else they're doing or have done.
I am also sort of done with the argument that problems that were already there were merely "triggered" by vaccines. Vaccines are extremely destructive to health standing ALONE. They are doing so much damage to humanity that all other potential threats are almost irrelevant right now. But still, I think it's safer not to use sonograms on babies.
True, remove vaccines and a massive reduction of chronic disease follows. However, we don't have the data to say if it takes two to tango (vaccines and ultrasound) or if only one is sufficient to cause the chronic diseases.
Jim West's summary of the Chinese Human Studies is utterly shocking, and the thesis that vaccines could not do the damage they do without ultrasound remains a live option. It is quite possible that removing ultrasound but keeping vaccines could signal a similar massive reduction in chronic disease. I don't think your data allows us to conclude on that, but Jim West notes Cuba have *very low autism* yet have very high vaccine compliance but *no ultrasound* as they could not afford it, this is curious to say the least:
Anyway, I'm really just prodding you to read his short book I previously linked. It can be done in one evening. There are also 2 summaries of the book here:
Almost all of the unvaccinated (under the age of 40) were exposed to ultrasound in utero. After about 1988, over 99% of all pregnancies were exposed to ultrasound. If it was primarily the ultrasounds causing these problems, we would not see such a massive difference in health outcomes between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.
Right now, I am not super interested in looking for other causes for all of these problems right now. It's obvious what the PRIMARY problem is, and we are nowhere near fixing it. "Vaccines trigger (all sorts of health problems) in people who are vulnerable." - is the sort of argument pharma makes when they're in a corner. They say "Yes, but the kid had bad genes" or whatever.
In my mind, "trigger" means CAUSE. Literally no person earth is completely immune from the damage vaccines are capable of. All that being said, I don't trust that the sonograms are as safe as advertised. I just don't see them as our primary battleground at this particular moment in time, given how massive and devastating the vaccine issue is, and how far we are from fixing this problem.
Plus, government is not making ANY attempt to MANDATE sonograms on the general public.
I don’t think you quite see the point. If almost all the unvaccinated were exposed to ultrasound then this may only reflect just what I said - it takes 2 to tango - ultrasound (or vaccines) alone may not do nearly as much harm as them both together. We don’t know. Similarly, perhaps a vaccinated group who did not have ultrasound might show similar reduction in chronic disease as your unvaccinated group (who it seems had ultrasound). The data don’t give that info. But Jim West’s data needs to be brought into the picture and carefully considered.
I am not defending the use of sonogram, and I do strongly suspect they cause injuries to developing babies. I am simply saying that vaccines do NOT require any special pre-existing "conditions" (or exposures) in order to DESTROY human health. Long before sonograms were available, there was already ample evidence that vaccines were destroying people.
The Control Group study proved that there is only a 1 in 3 times the number of ATOMS estimated to exist in the entire universe, that vaccines (standing alone) are NOT the cause of well over 90% of the deadly and disabling diseases and disorders suffered by Americans today. This is confirmed by a senior research scientist at MIT. And we've yet to stop this particular mechanism.
Again, nobody is attempting to MANDATE sonograms on all of humanity. If they were more dangerous, you can bet the powers-to-be WOULD be trying to mandate them on all of us. This is, after all, an EXTERMINATION. My focus will remain on the most obvious (and well-documented) primary weapon against humanity at this time. I'm not about to start claiming that the ONLY reason vaccines are harmful is because of sonograms. The evidence simply doesn't support such a conclusion. The ingredients in vaccines can, and DO, harm perfectly health people.
Just as important as keeping clear of P-Harma, is the idea of keeping POSITIVE, and keeping our hearts full of Love. LOVE IS ALL YOU NEED, said my namesake... ^_^
Yes! Looking for and focusing on the GOOD is an amazing "health tonic." Even in this midst of this attempt to exterminate over 90% of humanity, I often stop to realize that:
Without the nemesis, we would never really get to know, and SEE just how beautiful mankind can truly be. What grand things would one do without challenge? How could we ever know what we're capable of, without the nemesis? How would we grow if life were nothing more than a tea party of pleasantries?
We keep our eyes on the prize, we ask for a GOOD OUTCOME, no matter what happens, we trust that the GOOD will endure. It's hard work sometimes!! This is why we have all these stories of say, David and Goliath... ^_^
Actually, it was "less than 1%." Nobody has ever refuted the study. And NOTHING about the data collection improved after the study was published. It only got WORSE.
Hernandez suggests that theists who construe God as an object of knowledge have a special culpability for God's death since they not only promote an idea of God that plays directly into atheism but also "contribute to the problems facing humanity . . . by undermining the mystery that Marcel thinks underlies the relationship between God and humans" (p. 32). Further, Hernandez argues that, for Marcel, the way in which one responds to the death of God is the defining existential issue for all individuals. "Marcel's position," she writes,
is that for any given individual, regardless of their belief, the death of God presents an unavoidable moral obstacle that must be wrestled with in order for freedom (and then, moral responsibility and virtue) to be able to take hold. The obstacle of the death of God is not something that can be overcome; it is an existential dilemma that can only be struggled over and grappled with until, ultimately, one's life is defined by it. (p. 48)
The first step in the Marcelian ethical life, then, is to recognize one's own participation in the destruction of meaning and value embodied in the death of God. This participation is rooted in one's functional, materialist, and rationalist stance toward existence. Even if this destruction of meaning and value cannot be finally and definitively overcome, Hernandez argues, the lived struggle against it can form the basis for the creation of existential meaning.
So buyer beware. I feel that the overwhelming coercion was the best reason to say NO. Seriously why would any government of this country mandate "temporal" life for all occupants? No homeless in my town were ill. No idea how many had to vax to stay homeless with benefits. So in that sense choice exists. Right, Date Rape.
I think this is a great idea. I would also in the future like to see some numbers of how many murderers have been found guilty (and hung) broken down by profession, age and extent of their participation in the genocide. That would be so nice.
You know during the Black Plague it was pretty common for angry mobs to punish folks who they believed were somehow responsible for the dying (witches, Jews, gypsies) to get free trips down wells. When they needed to punish higher numbers, they herded everyone into a house and set it on fire. I am by no means encouraging vigilante mob justice. And of course we no longer have open wells in our culture. And I would like to caution and alert anyone to remain far upwind from any “potential” house or building fires that “might” happen to be set in the future. Houses and buildings have all kinds of materials that emit toxic gases when they consume genocidal murderers. I don’t want any celebratory viewing to turn into something that damages lungs and hurts people. Be safe! Stay far up wind….
So what is the problem here is almost insurmountable. If we trust why is there trust even with transparency? Facts we collect require context. If the transparency is by the magic filter of course alternative contexts arise.
I don't much care about the data. It assumes there is a positive and healthy reason to inject yourself with mRNA poisons. There is NO amount of data that will ever change my mind about taking big pharma drugs, vaccines and mRNA poisons. I refuse to engage with any big pharma product.
You're smart. And by the grace of God you saw enough (payed attention) and put it all together. I collect and expose data that our "health" agencies refuse to collect/disclose for those who don't yet understand what's happening.
At this late stage, it seems as though many people are remaining ignorant on purpose, i.e., WILLFULY ignorant;-)
Godspeed,
Joy
It's the censorship, largely, I think.
People STILL want so much to believe that they're NOT being culled.
That's my guess-- plus, people will refuse to believe weapons are aimed at them until they get HARMED. It's interesting how hard people will fight to NOT BELIEVE they are in danger... All we can do is try to keep attempting to BRING THE LIGHT... as you do.
Godspeed. We're truly in this together. They don't plan on sparing very many of us.
Yes, I agree. But THEY don't know everything, THEY don't have all the power they think they do, and THEY are fighting against The Divine. Of course we will win! Yes, we will suffer, and many will die, surely. Already so. But... WE WILL WIN.
Yes, you're smart. And you're not alone. xo
But these numbers may be shared with someone who is still on the fence about taking it or taking more. It's good to share information and it's being shared since I see it out there. It's really all we can do. Those who took it have been very quiet excepting for the shills and gatekeepers. I'm with you though, I don't want anything they have to offer. I stopped taking their poisons back in 1995 since it would make very sick. I always ended up at the hospital and still have my medical records to prove it.
I have found that when you go over the general "laundry list" of ailments that are now KNOWN to be driven by a dysfunctional immune system, (heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, cancer, allergies, and on and on) it seems to spark interest in the idea the vaccines are to blame. It also helps to mention that the damage often only becomes obvious many months, or even years after the immune system has been "triggered" and the progressive damage is now severe enough to be diagnosed.
Most people are falsely informed their health problems are "genetic." I'm still waiting to see evidence there is anyone in the world whose genetic codes are such that they are entirely impervious to these chemical and biological assaults upon our bodies via direct injection;-)
Great work Joy. I've just downloaded the study. I'll read it this week and share with family members who have young children. They are the ones who have the power to destroy the vaccine industry. You look fabulous btw.
You're AWESOME! Your willingness to have these "uncomfortable" discussions is what changes EVERYTHING! Even if they're too ashamed, embarrassed, (or freaked out) to give the appearance they're taking any of it in, it IS getting in. And one day they will wake up and KNOW that everything you informed them of was TRUE.
Godspeed!
Thank you Joy. I share your control group info often. I agree that 'safe and effective' is a marketing jingle and not remotely the language of science.
I have a question about newer statistic on chronic disease in our country. Often we hear the quote that there are 54 percent chronic illnesses in children. This 54 number is from either 2006 or 2011. Did the number get so much larger that the CDC does not report new numbers? Does getting this info require bunches of FOIA requests and going to court -- or a fairy godmother? Would appreciate hearing your thoughts on this topic.
Good question. Much confusion over this one. For starters, it's important to understand that the CDC does not consider childhood obesity to be a chronic condition, even though we all know it massively increases the risks for every other "co-morbidity." So in fact, standing alone, obesity is a "condition" that should concern us all.
For the Children's graph of the 99% vaccine exposed, the Control Group study used stale and "official" (numbers which did not include obesity) in order to assure nobody could argue we over-stated the number of health problems seen in Children at the time of the study, since this was a "product safety" study conducted with observance of the Federal Rules of Evidence, and in anticipation of a federal lawsuit (to prohibit all vaccine mandates nationwide).
The truth is that back around 2008, it had already been established that the rate of childhood illnesses was doubling every 12 years, which at the time, evidenced a trajectory of ALL CHILDREN (in America) having one or more serious (deadly) health conditions by 2030. Factor in the "aging out" (of those no longer considered children) and what you have is a DEAD nation.
The act of attempting to enforce an IGNORED FOIA request requires endless legal bills. And with no assurance of enforcement, due to the corrupt status of most of our federal courts/judges. You could get a judge who will rule that they have 10, 20, 30, or more years to answer the request. And there's really no way to control the editing they WILL do, if they ever do answer the request.
We're begging for answers at the doorstep of the actual PERPS. So our only choice really, is to be resourceful enough to locate the answers we seek through other means.
Godspeed,
Joy
Joy-
Thank you for answering my question.
Good point about the rise in childhood obesity exacerbating health problems further.
And thank you for conducting the Vax vs UnVax Independent study.
On Monday, Feb. 26, 2024, Senator Ron Johnson held a public roundtable forum entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What Are They Hiding?” Guest Dr. Brian Hooker spoke of your valuable vax/unvax study beginning at 1:49 minutes into video. For those who missed this, the link to the Roundtable Hearing is:
https://thevaccinereaction.org/2024/02/federal-health-agencies-and-the-covid-cartel-what-are-they-hiding/?fbclid=IwAR0QXMjYjNAgodgTUuR37Rnq8f8tpKa4w_8e2dm9EWC752sLbMliJVikLIQ
Bryan Hooker testified VERY well. He mentioned me and the Control Group study. Got a couple tiny items wrong, but over-all, very nice to have him discussing it and showing the GRAPHS.
Thank YOU, and God bless you for helping to make people aware!!!
Joy
When they don't age scotch whiskey long enough to be labelled as scotch whiskey, they call it rare. J & B Rare Scotch Whiskey. In steak, rare means illegal to serve in a restaurant. In vaccines, rare means whatever they say it means. Certainly it doesn't mean that side effects are uncommon.
Excellent! I have sent on your study and graphs countless times. Thank you for this honest work and appraisal of these poison injections!
Thank you Diane! It's got to reach those who genuinely do not yet know what's happening here. Lately however, it's looking like those who are STILL claiming they "don't know" are WILLFULLY ignorant.
It's getting pretty easy to understand the truth, even with all of their best efforts to censor, and even with all of their propaganda. If they were truly winning the "information war" they would NOT need mandates;-) And the mandates are facing new and stronger challenges each day.
You should factor in the influence of ultrasound, it seems quite possible that ultrasound initiates a vulnerability that a secondary stressor (vaccines) exploit:
https://www.amazon.com/Studies-Conducted-Indicate-Prenatal-Ultrasound/dp/1941719031/ref=sr_1_1?crid=36IZ9SADBHSYC&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.H0xsVboncUsrTAjAn5C_ij1Wurr2vxfb5aDML-iZSi_oD5DlCbJ2z7C0iqzTqgV3.P6uwVFnN7NUwe_PKwO9JRUxEkp6PXuq-aWkoRcEXpNo&dib_tag=se&keywords=jim+west+ultrasound&qid=1714329961&sprefix=jim+west+ultrasoun%2Caps%2C153&sr=8-1
True. This is a very BAD technology. I wish I had asked the entirely unvaccinated (post birth) whether they had sonograms while developing. At the same time, it's clear that merely eliminating vaccines reduces the incidence of all health conditions and disorders from a 50-60% risk (of one or more conditions) down to less than 6% risk of any condition. Once we also eliminated pregnancy (pre-birth) exposures and the K-shot injection (at birth) the risk went down to 2.64%, and the conditions suffered (in this 2.64% who had any problems) were generally very mild, i.e., no diabetes, cancer, arthritis, heart issues, etc.
So we can already clearly see a MASSIVE reduction in risk of any issues just by removing vaccines and related pharma products (standing alone). I do remember seeing a (rare) study, showing that sonograms are associated with emotional problems that show up later. I am of the opinion that NOBODY is immune to the poison they're putting in vaccines, no matter what else they're doing or have done.
I am also sort of done with the argument that problems that were already there were merely "triggered" by vaccines. Vaccines are extremely destructive to health standing ALONE. They are doing so much damage to humanity that all other potential threats are almost irrelevant right now. But still, I think it's safer not to use sonograms on babies.
True, remove vaccines and a massive reduction of chronic disease follows. However, we don't have the data to say if it takes two to tango (vaccines and ultrasound) or if only one is sufficient to cause the chronic diseases.
Jim West's summary of the Chinese Human Studies is utterly shocking, and the thesis that vaccines could not do the damage they do without ultrasound remains a live option. It is quite possible that removing ultrasound but keeping vaccines could signal a similar massive reduction in chronic disease. I don't think your data allows us to conclude on that, but Jim West notes Cuba have *very low autism* yet have very high vaccine compliance but *no ultrasound* as they could not afford it, this is curious to say the least:
https://harvoa-med.blogspot.com/2019/08/vaut.html
Anyway, I'm really just prodding you to read his short book I previously linked. It can be done in one evening. There are also 2 summaries of the book here:
https://www.townsendletter.com/April2017/ultrasound0417.html
https://www.harvoa.org/chs/rev/index.htm
Almost all of the unvaccinated (under the age of 40) were exposed to ultrasound in utero. After about 1988, over 99% of all pregnancies were exposed to ultrasound. If it was primarily the ultrasounds causing these problems, we would not see such a massive difference in health outcomes between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated.
Right now, I am not super interested in looking for other causes for all of these problems right now. It's obvious what the PRIMARY problem is, and we are nowhere near fixing it. "Vaccines trigger (all sorts of health problems) in people who are vulnerable." - is the sort of argument pharma makes when they're in a corner. They say "Yes, but the kid had bad genes" or whatever.
In my mind, "trigger" means CAUSE. Literally no person earth is completely immune from the damage vaccines are capable of. All that being said, I don't trust that the sonograms are as safe as advertised. I just don't see them as our primary battleground at this particular moment in time, given how massive and devastating the vaccine issue is, and how far we are from fixing this problem.
Plus, government is not making ANY attempt to MANDATE sonograms on the general public.
I don’t think you quite see the point. If almost all the unvaccinated were exposed to ultrasound then this may only reflect just what I said - it takes 2 to tango - ultrasound (or vaccines) alone may not do nearly as much harm as them both together. We don’t know. Similarly, perhaps a vaccinated group who did not have ultrasound might show similar reduction in chronic disease as your unvaccinated group (who it seems had ultrasound). The data don’t give that info. But Jim West’s data needs to be brought into the picture and carefully considered.
I am not defending the use of sonogram, and I do strongly suspect they cause injuries to developing babies. I am simply saying that vaccines do NOT require any special pre-existing "conditions" (or exposures) in order to DESTROY human health. Long before sonograms were available, there was already ample evidence that vaccines were destroying people.
The Control Group study proved that there is only a 1 in 3 times the number of ATOMS estimated to exist in the entire universe, that vaccines (standing alone) are NOT the cause of well over 90% of the deadly and disabling diseases and disorders suffered by Americans today. This is confirmed by a senior research scientist at MIT. And we've yet to stop this particular mechanism.
Again, nobody is attempting to MANDATE sonograms on all of humanity. If they were more dangerous, you can bet the powers-to-be WOULD be trying to mandate them on all of us. This is, after all, an EXTERMINATION. My focus will remain on the most obvious (and well-documented) primary weapon against humanity at this time. I'm not about to start claiming that the ONLY reason vaccines are harmful is because of sonograms. The evidence simply doesn't support such a conclusion. The ingredients in vaccines can, and DO, harm perfectly health people.
Just as important as keeping clear of P-Harma, is the idea of keeping POSITIVE, and keeping our hearts full of Love. LOVE IS ALL YOU NEED, said my namesake... ^_^
GOOD WORK, and THANK YOU.
xo xo
Yes! Looking for and focusing on the GOOD is an amazing "health tonic." Even in this midst of this attempt to exterminate over 90% of humanity, I often stop to realize that:
Without the nemesis, we would never really get to know, and SEE just how beautiful mankind can truly be. What grand things would one do without challenge? How could we ever know what we're capable of, without the nemesis? How would we grow if life were nothing more than a tea party of pleasantries?
ADVENTURE! And we're IN it right now.
We keep our eyes on the prize, we ask for a GOOD OUTCOME, no matter what happens, we trust that the GOOD will endure. It's hard work sometimes!! This is why we have all these stories of say, David and Goliath... ^_^
With God, all things are possible.
Oh, and thank YOU!!! Godspeed dear one!
XOXO, Joy
And Thank YOU, dear one, too!!!
WE SHALL PREVAIL! xo xo xo xo xo
^_^
Woof!
https://realnewsaustralia.com/2021/08/14/covid-19-adverse-event-under-reporting/
Same here in the U.S. where "less than 1%" of the vaccine injuries are ever reported by "VAERS" (Vaccine Adverse Reporting System) SEE: https://digital.ahrq.gov/ahrq-funded-projects/electronic-support-public-health-vaccine-adverse-event-reporting-system
No improvements to the system were deployed as a result of this study.
Yes , a much quoted Harvard study said 1% are reported.
Actually, it was "less than 1%." Nobody has ever refuted the study. And NOTHING about the data collection improved after the study was published. It only got WORSE.
https://i-base.info/qa/812 definition of rare
Yeah. It's false advertising;-)
Hernandez suggests that theists who construe God as an object of knowledge have a special culpability for God's death since they not only promote an idea of God that plays directly into atheism but also "contribute to the problems facing humanity . . . by undermining the mystery that Marcel thinks underlies the relationship between God and humans" (p. 32). Further, Hernandez argues that, for Marcel, the way in which one responds to the death of God is the defining existential issue for all individuals. "Marcel's position," she writes,
is that for any given individual, regardless of their belief, the death of God presents an unavoidable moral obstacle that must be wrestled with in order for freedom (and then, moral responsibility and virtue) to be able to take hold. The obstacle of the death of God is not something that can be overcome; it is an existential dilemma that can only be struggled over and grappled with until, ultimately, one's life is defined by it. (p. 48)
The first step in the Marcelian ethical life, then, is to recognize one's own participation in the destruction of meaning and value embodied in the death of God. This participation is rooted in one's functional, materialist, and rationalist stance toward existence. Even if this destruction of meaning and value cannot be finally and definitively overcome, Hernandez argues, the lived struggle against it can form the basis for the creation of existential meaning.
Excellent food for thought.
We all contribute each day to things we later wish we hadn't;-)
The good news is when we choose to do different things we do differently. Obviously we choose to accept risk.
But it's not a choice if we're told (and believe) there's "no risk" or "very little risk" when there is SERIOUS risk;-)
So buyer beware. I feel that the overwhelming coercion was the best reason to say NO. Seriously why would any government of this country mandate "temporal" life for all occupants? No homeless in my town were ill. No idea how many had to vax to stay homeless with benefits. So in that sense choice exists. Right, Date Rape.
You make very good points. BRAVO! It does get frustrating trying to save people who wished jail and even DEATH upon those who refused the jabs.
https://i-base.info/qa/812 Clinical definition of rare
I think this is a great idea. I would also in the future like to see some numbers of how many murderers have been found guilty (and hung) broken down by profession, age and extent of their participation in the genocide. That would be so nice.
Yes indeed it would be VERY nice. They're taking us OUT in massive numbers. But because it's called "science" they get a free pass? Me thinks not.
They say I’m a dreamer… but I’m not the only one.
Yes, and one day we will raise a glass at the marriage supper of the Lamb. (Rev 19:9)
You know during the Black Plague it was pretty common for angry mobs to punish folks who they believed were somehow responsible for the dying (witches, Jews, gypsies) to get free trips down wells. When they needed to punish higher numbers, they herded everyone into a house and set it on fire. I am by no means encouraging vigilante mob justice. And of course we no longer have open wells in our culture. And I would like to caution and alert anyone to remain far upwind from any “potential” house or building fires that “might” happen to be set in the future. Houses and buildings have all kinds of materials that emit toxic gases when they consume genocidal murderers. I don’t want any celebratory viewing to turn into something that damages lungs and hurts people. Be safe! Stay far up wind….
So what is the problem here is almost insurmountable. If we trust why is there trust even with transparency? Facts we collect require context. If the transparency is by the magic filter of course alternative contexts arise.