We are in a sad state of affairs. Truth in the realm of vaccines has been held with such skepticism and it is hard to understand why. We all should be open to see the reality right in front of us. Having Doctors such as Dr. Tenpenny always stepping forward to educate and warn us, with facts, not innuendo, put many in a position to have to dig deeper and understand the possibility, things are not as we always thought. The hardest part to the truth about vaccines is changing the concept that is ingrained in the minds of many, especially the newly educated students from our universities. Thank you, Sherri, for bringing out the information in a way that can be easily understood.
I would that if the vaccine reduces the likelihood of disease targeted but causes other long term negative health effects, the latter are not attributed to the vaccine.
I’m so glad people are questioning the dogma of vaccines. Since the industry has been protected by the 1986 liability act the amount of vaccines has exploded but the safety has taken a back seat. The whole industry needs to be upended. Our children have suffered far too often. Thanks you Dr Tenpenny for your diligence & informing the public! You’re the best!!!!
Well said Dr. Tenpenny. Here is a rumination about adaptive immunity from someone who does not know anything about "immune systems" - just questioning the overall logic.
Does “Adaptive Immunity” Offer an Evolutionary Advantage? What Really Happens When We Encounter New Poisons? Do Aluminium Adjuvants, per Their Allergic Sensitization, Contribute to the Lack of Reproducibility in Nutrition and Supplement studies? (99.7% of Americans are vaccinated)
I am deeply suspicious of an immune theory that says you first have to "catch" a pathogen that you are not able to defend against during the first encounter. Germ theorists say that during this first encounter you have to narrowly escape death in order to teach the body to compile a defence protocol - so called "adaptive immunity". Analogy: let the invaders into the village - they will kill most of us - but next time, by golly, we will be ready! How can this possibly provide an evolutionary advantage? Surely we HAVE to be ready the FIRST and EVERY time to survive and propagate. Evolution enabled us to develop first encounter responses to poisons that have been around for millions of years. For example, being able to smell ammonia, sulphur dioxide, hydrogen sulphide or the gaseous products of putrefaction. Then there are automated reflexes like vomiting to remove poisoned food that our taste buds did not detect. If these protective systems fail the FIRST time - you are dead.
After reading books like Can You Catch a Cold? I realise that the idea of "pathogenic germs' is simply propaganda for the vaccine industrial complex. And let's not forget disinfectants e.g sprays that "kill bacteria and 99.5% of viruses" - that actually harm 100% of humans.
Let’s now consider what happens when a poison arrives that we did NOT evolve with. Combustion engines release fumes that are unfamiliar to our chemical defences, so we cannot smell carbon monoxide and, we do NOT develop an immunity to the first or any exposure. Another example: elemental aluminium & its salts which we did not encounter until it was separated from bauxite - late 1800’s. We do NOT develop an immunity to the first or any encounter with aluminium. It’s actually much worse. When aluminium salts are injected into us, our clean up crew recognises a foreign invader but does not “know" what to with it. You can see and feel the redness at the site of injection. “Wow! the jab is working”. But aluminium is actually the ‘antigen'. Chaos and confusion ensues: the macrophages that are trying to carry it away become “confused", disabled or killed by the aluminium. If they are responding to inflammation already present in the brain, they carry it there unintentionally, instead of moving it away for excretion. I am paraphrasing Chris Exley in “Imagine You Are An Aluminum Atom” who also notes that aluminium poisoning is strongly correlated to 37 diseases including many symptoms of neurological dysfunction.
In the presence of aluminium adjuvants we develop allergic sensitivity to many vital foods like peanuts and gluten etc.. This effect is widely known among clinical researchers, in fact that’s how animal models for allergy research are developed in those poor lab rats. Aluminium adjuvant + peanut = rat with peanut allergy. Essentially we develop an “immune response” to essential nutrients rather than to mythical pathogens. Just the opposite of any benefit we are told to expect. Is this corrupted adaptive immunity or something else?
It may go beyond this. For example, could aluminum in vaccinations cause an allergic sensitivity to vitamin supplements? The aluminium adjuvant taken by the mother in her pregnancy jabs might be a factor in a baby’s resulting autism. Would this explain why Vit. B12 and folic acid supplements seem to cause autism in some prenatal studies while in other studies they show preventative benefits? What explains the incredible lack of reproducibility? Or, could pre-natal ALLERGIC SENSITIZATION to B12 or folic acid (induced by a prenatal jab) be a confounding factor versus women taking the same supplements but remaining non-jabbed during pregnancy?
More generally, does this unpredictable sensitization to nutrients why most nutrition studies are 'noisy’ and hard to reproduce? Just asking. Cheers
You can just extrapolate that the same "science" and gimmicks are used in the vast majority of drug trials. If they can get away with these shortcuts in vaccine trials, they will do it in all drug trials. The FDA and CDC don't give a hoot as they protect the big pharma companies, not the public.
"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine." Dr. Marcia Angell
Yes yes yes! So much here that every human being needs to let soak in and simmer.
💯🎯
We are in a sad state of affairs. Truth in the realm of vaccines has been held with such skepticism and it is hard to understand why. We all should be open to see the reality right in front of us. Having Doctors such as Dr. Tenpenny always stepping forward to educate and warn us, with facts, not innuendo, put many in a position to have to dig deeper and understand the possibility, things are not as we always thought. The hardest part to the truth about vaccines is changing the concept that is ingrained in the minds of many, especially the newly educated students from our universities. Thank you, Sherri, for bringing out the information in a way that can be easily understood.
Excellent summary of ph-harma deception.
I would that if the vaccine reduces the likelihood of disease targeted but causes other long term negative health effects, the latter are not attributed to the vaccine.
I’m so glad people are questioning the dogma of vaccines. Since the industry has been protected by the 1986 liability act the amount of vaccines has exploded but the safety has taken a back seat. The whole industry needs to be upended. Our children have suffered far too often. Thanks you Dr Tenpenny for your diligence & informing the public! You’re the best!!!!
Well said Dr. Tenpenny. Here is a rumination about adaptive immunity from someone who does not know anything about "immune systems" - just questioning the overall logic.
Does “Adaptive Immunity” Offer an Evolutionary Advantage? What Really Happens When We Encounter New Poisons? Do Aluminium Adjuvants, per Their Allergic Sensitization, Contribute to the Lack of Reproducibility in Nutrition and Supplement studies? (99.7% of Americans are vaccinated)
I am deeply suspicious of an immune theory that says you first have to "catch" a pathogen that you are not able to defend against during the first encounter. Germ theorists say that during this first encounter you have to narrowly escape death in order to teach the body to compile a defence protocol - so called "adaptive immunity". Analogy: let the invaders into the village - they will kill most of us - but next time, by golly, we will be ready! How can this possibly provide an evolutionary advantage? Surely we HAVE to be ready the FIRST and EVERY time to survive and propagate. Evolution enabled us to develop first encounter responses to poisons that have been around for millions of years. For example, being able to smell ammonia, sulphur dioxide, hydrogen sulphide or the gaseous products of putrefaction. Then there are automated reflexes like vomiting to remove poisoned food that our taste buds did not detect. If these protective systems fail the FIRST time - you are dead.
After reading books like Can You Catch a Cold? I realise that the idea of "pathogenic germs' is simply propaganda for the vaccine industrial complex. And let's not forget disinfectants e.g sprays that "kill bacteria and 99.5% of viruses" - that actually harm 100% of humans.
Let’s now consider what happens when a poison arrives that we did NOT evolve with. Combustion engines release fumes that are unfamiliar to our chemical defences, so we cannot smell carbon monoxide and, we do NOT develop an immunity to the first or any exposure. Another example: elemental aluminium & its salts which we did not encounter until it was separated from bauxite - late 1800’s. We do NOT develop an immunity to the first or any encounter with aluminium. It’s actually much worse. When aluminium salts are injected into us, our clean up crew recognises a foreign invader but does not “know" what to with it. You can see and feel the redness at the site of injection. “Wow! the jab is working”. But aluminium is actually the ‘antigen'. Chaos and confusion ensues: the macrophages that are trying to carry it away become “confused", disabled or killed by the aluminium. If they are responding to inflammation already present in the brain, they carry it there unintentionally, instead of moving it away for excretion. I am paraphrasing Chris Exley in “Imagine You Are An Aluminum Atom” who also notes that aluminium poisoning is strongly correlated to 37 diseases including many symptoms of neurological dysfunction.
In the presence of aluminium adjuvants we develop allergic sensitivity to many vital foods like peanuts and gluten etc.. This effect is widely known among clinical researchers, in fact that’s how animal models for allergy research are developed in those poor lab rats. Aluminium adjuvant + peanut = rat with peanut allergy. Essentially we develop an “immune response” to essential nutrients rather than to mythical pathogens. Just the opposite of any benefit we are told to expect. Is this corrupted adaptive immunity or something else?
It may go beyond this. For example, could aluminum in vaccinations cause an allergic sensitivity to vitamin supplements? The aluminium adjuvant taken by the mother in her pregnancy jabs might be a factor in a baby’s resulting autism. Would this explain why Vit. B12 and folic acid supplements seem to cause autism in some prenatal studies while in other studies they show preventative benefits? What explains the incredible lack of reproducibility? Or, could pre-natal ALLERGIC SENSITIZATION to B12 or folic acid (induced by a prenatal jab) be a confounding factor versus women taking the same supplements but remaining non-jabbed during pregnancy?
More generally, does this unpredictable sensitization to nutrients why most nutrition studies are 'noisy’ and hard to reproduce? Just asking. Cheers
If, after reading this article, you ever again submit to allowing ANY vaccine to be injected into your body, you are certifiable.
Agreed.
You can just extrapolate that the same "science" and gimmicks are used in the vast majority of drug trials. If they can get away with these shortcuts in vaccine trials, they will do it in all drug trials. The FDA and CDC don't give a hoot as they protect the big pharma companies, not the public.
Dr. Tenpenny, you are a refreshing breath of air. Thank you for being a rare source of truth in a world so full of lies.
"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine." Dr. Marcia Angell
I wish RFk, Jr would have your help on the vaccine issues!
Help me get a position on the MAHA team by voting! Please pass on the link!
https://nominees.mahanow.org/t/sherri-tenpenny/2460
Gain of function research wasn't used in the creation of the Spanish Flu vaccine.