We need to exercise the precautionary principle in case the jab really is fatal over the long term

Since I have learned about the risks of taking ‘the jab’ (mRNA shots) I have sent emails to friends and family, suggesting they exercise the precautionary principle before taking it.

Everyone I have written to has taken it anyway and even urged me to take it, despite the warning. I am worried their lives may be at risk, based on all that I’ve learned.

The Precautionary Principle is a guiding principle for decision-makers when faced with a health or ecological hazard. It urges preventative caution in cases where are all the variables are unknown.

For example, with a new technology, if the risks are unknown, the principle would advise against going ahead with it. It’s mostly used with environmental risks but applies equally well to experimental mRNA shots.

This is what I wrote:

I saw a short video today from a molecular biologist which I found compelling. Previous to watching it, I was aware of the fact that the jab had a cytotoxin that ‘biodistributes’ (i.e., disperses) to different parts of the body and can cause the ‘adverse events’ listed here. A cytotoxin simply means “a substance having a specific toxic effect on certain cells.”

I did not consider the possibility that it would eventually kill a person who took enough of the shots. I thought its adverse effects dissipated in time. Apparently, that’s not the case. Its ability to work against Covid-19 dissipates but its toxicity does not.

For some reason, this surprised me. Would the state be so audacious as to knowingly poison billions of people? Are those warning about the depopulation agenda right?

I wrote an article based on this video (below). Here is the link to the article.

If this is true — if it does kill people who take enough mRNA injections — then I think it’s important for people to NOT take the jab, for their own safety. It’s not worth the risk.

Yes, it mitigates the effects of Covid-19 if you have that particular disease, and yes that disease can kill you (particularly if you’re obese, older, or have health problems), but the jab does not provide immunity and itself risky and possibly fatal.

If you have Covid, it seems more prudent to take Ivermectin instead – if you can get access to it. It seems to work, based on reports from around the world, and won’t kill you.

This is the short response I got:

“A friend – young – just died of Covid. such a sad day.”

I have had longer replies from friends and family telling me I’m wrong and I should take the jab, etc.

My reply to them is this:

I only shared the info. on mRNA shots in order to save you and your family in the event that it is a poison, as some scientists and physicians are now saying.

The risk of you dying from Covid is less than 1% (most people recover and afterward develop natural immunity) but if these dissident scientists are right, then the possible risk of dying from the jab is 100% if you take enough of them over time.

If that young person who died had been allowed to take Ivermectin, as 230 million did in the Uttar Pradesh province of India and Japan — where it took Covid rates down dramatically, without negative side-effects — the young person might still be alive.

In contrast, places with high vaccination rates are more prone to variants (e.g., Israel, Singapore), which occur as a result of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) responses of the human cell to the ‘vaccine.’

So a drug that’s proven to work in other countries is purposely being denied to Americans and Canadians so they’ll use the more risky mRNA shot — a shot which according to several scientists (e.g., Michael Palmer, Luc Montagnier) will over time eventually kill the person who keeps taking them.

The FDA did not authorize Ivermetictin for Covid, so it has not been prescribed in the U.S. The FDA is a political organization; it also authorized opioids that kill 50,000 Americans per year, so it does not give public health interests priority.

The other thing to keep in mind is that anyone 0 to 19 years old has a 0.003% risk of dying from Covid (i.e., the inverse of a 99.997% recovery rate, or almost no risk of dying), according to the CDC, so it’s possible that a young person did not actually die of Covid, despite the official report.

It just seems odd that a young person would die from Covid since there are almost zero cases of that happening, statistically.

Was he or she misdiagnosed, possibly? The PCR tests they give have lot of ‘false positives.’ Or did he/she have co-morbidities (something else that caused the death)? Or was he/she put on a ventilator — which have done more harm than good, and ended up killing some Covid patients?

The health industry has been corrupted by politics and profit, unfortunately, so we are not getting the full truth about what’s happening.

I know it sounds like a dystopian movie plot, but unfortunately, it’s real, and the only heroes in the plot are the scientists who have spoken out against this breath of the Hippocratic oath to do no harm.

VRM Wire 13 « Vaccine Resistance Movement

The reason I sent the first email (on the risk of death from the jab) is to let you know that some scientists are saying that if you keep taking it, it’s eventually fatal.

It can have lesser side-effects too: a minor example is that someone I know who took the jab and went deaf in one year. Another got heart inflammation.

The risk of adverse events in 0 to 19-year-olds, as compared to their risk of dying from Covid-19, means that from a cost-benefit perspective it’s not worth it for them to take it.

Here (again) is the list of ‘adverse events’ that are possible.  Eventually, people will catch on (as some already have), but not before many die from the jab itself.

Many people are deferring their judgment to the state health authorities, but there’s something very wrong with their judgment if those authorities don’t allow treatments that work and do allow treatments that are dangerous.

It seems that pharmaceutical corporations have been instrumental in corrupting the healthcare industry (a process that started long before 2020 but has accelerated to insane levels). And this has been driven by biased media coverage for political reasons.

The evidence of this is the widespread censorship of thousands of physicians and scientists who have dared to speak the truth at risk to their own careers. Many of them are specialists in this area of medicine.

Now I could be wrong about all this, and Dr. Fauci could be right, but he has lied to Congress about the Wuhan lab and NIH funding, so his credibility is not that good.

The scientists who are warning us (e.g., Robert Malone) have no reason to lie. They don’t benefit from it; in fact, their careers are often ruined. They do it for moral reasons.

It would be better to exercise the precautionary principle, in case the dissident scientists are right about ADE and the cytotoxins — even at the risk of becoming a second-class citizen (due to discrimination against the unvaxxed) as a result.

Btw, don’t trust so-called fact-checkers as most are paid directly or indirectly by Big Pharma and are in a conflict of interest. Their role is to confuse and placate the public, not tell the truth.

There is a Cold war (or more precisely an asymmetric war) being waged against the public through health care and the media. The stakes are very high.

There is a lot of propaganda being pushed on people to take the jab and distrust any warnings against it, and to censor any other medical opinion.

This is a political game and the people waging this war are not above killing a lot of people to get their way.

Published by

Ungekrzte

"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity ... the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This immaturity is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the [European] Enlightenment. "Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large part of mankind gladly remain minors all their lives, long after nature has freed them from external guidance. They are the reasons why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as guardians. It is so comfortable to be a minor. If I have a book that thinks for me, a pastor who acts as my conscience, a physician who prescribes my diet [or vaccine], and so on--then I have no need to exert myself. I have no need to think, if only I can pay; others will take care of that disagreeable business for me. Those guardians who have kindly taken supervision upon themselves see to it that the overwhelming majority of mankind ... should consider the step to maturity, not only as hard, but as extremely dangerous. First, these guardians make their domestic cattle stupid and carefully prevent the docile creatures from taking a single step without the leading-strings to which they have fastened them. Then they show them the danger that would threaten them if they should try to walk by themselves. Now this danger is really not very great; after stumbling a few times they would, at last, learn to walk. However, examples of such failures intimidate and generally discourage all further attempts. "Thus it is very difficult for the individual to work himself out of the immaturity which has become almost second nature to him. He has even grown to like it, and is at first really incapable of using his own understanding because he has never been permitted to try it. Dogmas and formulas [e.g., Leftist ideology, identity politics] these mechanical tools designed for reasonable use--or rather abuse--of his natural gifts, are the fetters of an everlasting immaturity. The man who casts them off would make an uncertain leap over the narrowest ditch, because he is not used to such free movement. That is why there are only a few men who walk firmly, and who have emerged from immaturity by cultivating their own minds." - Kant, "An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment"

5 thoughts on “We need to exercise the precautionary principle in case the jab really is fatal over the long term”

  1. A very sensible argument. In this sentence, do you mean surviving rather thank dying from?

    The other thing to keep in mind is that anyone 0 to 19 years old has a 99.997% risk of dying from Covid, according to the CDC, so it’s possible that a young person did not actually die of Covid, despite the official report.

    Mobile

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks! Yes, I caught that error and corrected it, then saw your correction. I often publish these things prematurely and edit them later. I need to proof-read better 🙂

      Like

    1. I am scared, but not of Covid-19. I am scared of the scapegoating going on. Throughout history, when minority groups were dehumanized and their rights violated and they were blamed for wrongdoing they were not guilty of, it always ended badly. We’re not going to be fed to the lions literally — but figuratively yes. Expect harsher (and totally unjustified) restrictions on the unvaccinated in the future. This is a political campaign to divide and conquer the world through fear and lies.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s