I've been really curious about the glucose drink expectant mothers have to drink to test their blood sugar. I don't know any person who just sits around and drinks it, so why would they use it for a test? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to ask the mother to come in fasted, and bring a particularly carbacious meal with dessert, then have her blood tested? If someone isn't drinking glucola on a regular basis, it doesn't make sense why they'd give a mother and unborn baby a shot of sugar like that when they could just have her eat a high-carb and sugar meal, then use that as a basis of how her body is handling sugar.
Just threw the Now brand of Omega fish stinky away. I don't take it because of the burps. This whole thing is just such a shit show. If they tell us its good for us walk the other way.
We have been so duped. If it smells fishy it probably is stinky and a lie.
My wife and I made the easy decision to home birth our son 5 years ago. There are many reasons, one of which obviously was to make it easier to not turn him into an allopathic pin cushion.
If you aren't sure about the "vitamin" scam, look no further than the first prick they try to deliver to newborns, "Vitamin K"....aka Phytonadione. Even midwives have to present you with the option to inject this "vitamin", made in a lab. Why? Because your baby is "deficient" in this "nature-made" (in a lab) pharmaceutical. If you get in a car accident on the way home, your baby could bleed to death! It wont happen because you smashed your car, it will be because you didn't get your baby's blood "naturally thickened" by this wonder drug. Remember, it's a "vitamin"....and baby's can't eat fermented Natto or whatever else "K" is allegedly found in. The message is clear, GET THIS VITAMIN OR ENDANGER YOUR BABY.
"Vitamin K1 Injection may be diluted with 0.9% Sodium Chloride Injection, 5% Dextrose Injection, or 5% Dextrose and Sodium Chloride Injection. Benzyl alcohol as a preservative has been associated with toxicity in newborns." Sounds good. Where do I sign up? Never mind the risks... I'd rather have my baby gasping for air, turning yellow, or suffering anaphylactic shock than have him sitting there with Mother Nature's overly thin blood she accidentally gave him.
Here we can see a prime example of how the death cult allopaths can't wait to get the game started with another initiation ritual. They will even combine a vaccine (a virology product) with a "vitamin". The idea that you even have to sign an opt out form to not get this jabbed into your newborn is absolutely ludicrous. Oh, and I forgot to mention, the boy popped out right into my hands in a birthing pool, didn't have his cord or his tally wacker snipped off for no reason, and did not bleed to death or miss out on white coats passing him around in bright lights like a tiny human football. Hasn't been touched by a pharmaceutical since, despite all of Mother Nature's attempts to get him.
Good stuff however I seldom have the luxury of time to read and digest the entire post. That said, I shall share this tidbit of wisdom with your readership. Anytime you see 'may' n a headline, 'fish oil may...' STOP immediately. Insert or YOU read 'may NOT...' THOU shalt be far ahead of the herd and far better off. ***end comment ***
Shared a link to this information via FaceBook . FB removed the post because they indicate that it LOOKS LIKE likes, I was attempting to get follows or shares in a misleading way. It very mush appears that they are about anything but truth and fact. Needs to rebranded as Farce Book.
" Teratogen chemicals account for 5% of birth defects (discussed in my investigation). If pregnant mothers knew that they reduced their chances of birthing a health baby by 5% would they still consume this vitamin for their babies health?"
👉Agent, you are saying 5% of the birth defects are due to chemicals, not of all births. Since only a small % of newborns have birth defects (the CDC says it's 1 in 33 births), then it would not be a reduction of 5% of the total of healthy babies, it means the reduction of healthy babies from chemicals are 5% of the 1/33 births with birth defects: 1/33 is 3%→5% of 3% is 0.15%, so 0.15% of the TOTAL number of births have defects due to chemicals. Otherwise its a good post and sorry for the trouble.
1) Beware of all CDC statistics in the first place. If birth defect is anything like VAERS (and it appears it isn't much different), the numbers are easily manipulated and/or grossly underreported.
2) Birth defects are only classified as structural abnormalities (like extra chromosomes {{Downs}}, shrunken head, missing eyes and ears, etc...) so they just go with the obvious, and this isn't going to capture much of the early stage developmental issues, which are many. But since the CDC is intentionally poisoning mother and child from fetus to cradle to grave from every angle of intervention, it's like getting sheep damage stats from the local wolf. Special note: they had to change brain damage into a thing called "Autism" to cover & obfuscate for direct effects of the poison pricks. I have to wonder how many babies are beginning their lives with a severe uphill climb from a developmental standpoint.
3) I notice they only use a handful of states to do data collection. So I suspect they just extrapolate that data... which would make it rather rough. But let's just assume it is 1/33... considering how often babies are born- almost 5 per second world wide- it would only take 7 seconds to produce a physically messed up newborn. Does that seem 'normal'?
Also, I have to wonder if they can really hand pick one toxic chemical and designate an accurate % to any kind of damage assessment and criteria... whether that be a newborn or an adult. Given how many we live with and the various methods they are thrown at us and/or we are just exposed to, it must be near impossible to single any one thing out from the toxic smog. So we could just conclude that:
1) Lots of babies are being killed or born completely fucked up.
2) Prenatal (or any) so-called "vitamins" are all various lab cocktails of poison proven to cause damage.
3) If you don't want to be harmed, or have your newborn harmed, don't ingest chemical poisons. You probably have already been poisoned enough to not add anymore.
P.S. - I don't think "Vitamins" have actually been authentically discovered in food. I think they are only newly created lab byproducts given special meaning... expose this, and it's game over. Looking forward to part IV to touch on this.
Thanks FP, yes I cringed when typing in the CDC stats. Regardless, birth defects are, or at least were, much less then the total births (my nose is above my mouth and my arms are above my torso, but my brain doesn't fill my skull completely), my point is that 5% of the birth-defect births is much less then 5% of the total births whether birth defects are 1/10 or minimized by the CDC to 1/33....
I've been really curious about the glucose drink expectant mothers have to drink to test their blood sugar. I don't know any person who just sits around and drinks it, so why would they use it for a test? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to ask the mother to come in fasted, and bring a particularly carbacious meal with dessert, then have her blood tested? If someone isn't drinking glucola on a regular basis, it doesn't make sense why they'd give a mother and unborn baby a shot of sugar like that when they could just have her eat a high-carb and sugar meal, then use that as a basis of how her body is handling sugar.
Just threw the Now brand of Omega fish stinky away. I don't take it because of the burps. This whole thing is just such a shit show. If they tell us its good for us walk the other way.
We have been so duped. If it smells fishy it probably is stinky and a lie.
Great questions indeed. A tragedy that more people aren't asking them.
You wrote: "What if Mr. Gates and pals actually didn’t want to help people live long lives? What if it was a scheme? A hoax? A ploy? A swindle?"
My wife and I made the easy decision to home birth our son 5 years ago. There are many reasons, one of which obviously was to make it easier to not turn him into an allopathic pin cushion.
If you aren't sure about the "vitamin" scam, look no further than the first prick they try to deliver to newborns, "Vitamin K"....aka Phytonadione. Even midwives have to present you with the option to inject this "vitamin", made in a lab. Why? Because your baby is "deficient" in this "nature-made" (in a lab) pharmaceutical. If you get in a car accident on the way home, your baby could bleed to death! It wont happen because you smashed your car, it will be because you didn't get your baby's blood "naturally thickened" by this wonder drug. Remember, it's a "vitamin"....and baby's can't eat fermented Natto or whatever else "K" is allegedly found in. The message is clear, GET THIS VITAMIN OR ENDANGER YOUR BABY.
"Vitamin K1 Injection may be diluted with 0.9% Sodium Chloride Injection, 5% Dextrose Injection, or 5% Dextrose and Sodium Chloride Injection. Benzyl alcohol as a preservative has been associated with toxicity in newborns." Sounds good. Where do I sign up? Never mind the risks... I'd rather have my baby gasping for air, turning yellow, or suffering anaphylactic shock than have him sitting there with Mother Nature's overly thin blood she accidentally gave him.
Here we can see a prime example of how the death cult allopaths can't wait to get the game started with another initiation ritual. They will even combine a vaccine (a virology product) with a "vitamin". The idea that you even have to sign an opt out form to not get this jabbed into your newborn is absolutely ludicrous. Oh, and I forgot to mention, the boy popped out right into my hands in a birthing pool, didn't have his cord or his tally wacker snipped off for no reason, and did not bleed to death or miss out on white coats passing him around in bright lights like a tiny human football. Hasn't been touched by a pharmaceutical since, despite all of Mother Nature's attempts to get him.
The onslaught of tests and pokes lined up for newborns is really wild.
Have 3 full bottles of "Clean Cod Liver Oil" and now I notice it has cholecalciferol thrown in. FFS.
Oh and the flavour is lemon meringue. Too funny, but really it isn't.
Into the garbage it goes.
Good stuff however I seldom have the luxury of time to read and digest the entire post. That said, I shall share this tidbit of wisdom with your readership. Anytime you see 'may' n a headline, 'fish oil may...' STOP immediately. Insert or YOU read 'may NOT...' THOU shalt be far ahead of the herd and far better off. ***end comment ***
Shared a link to this information via FaceBook . FB removed the post because they indicate that it LOOKS LIKE likes, I was attempting to get follows or shares in a misleading way. It very mush appears that they are about anything but truth and fact. Needs to rebranded as Farce Book.
Groundbreaking exposé! Amazing how they get away with this stuff…
" Teratogen chemicals account for 5% of birth defects (discussed in my investigation). If pregnant mothers knew that they reduced their chances of birthing a health baby by 5% would they still consume this vitamin for their babies health?"
👉Agent, you are saying 5% of the birth defects are due to chemicals, not of all births. Since only a small % of newborns have birth defects (the CDC says it's 1 in 33 births), then it would not be a reduction of 5% of the total of healthy babies, it means the reduction of healthy babies from chemicals are 5% of the 1/33 births with birth defects: 1/33 is 3%→5% of 3% is 0.15%, so 0.15% of the TOTAL number of births have defects due to chemicals. Otherwise its a good post and sorry for the trouble.
Good point. Here are a few more for context.
1) Beware of all CDC statistics in the first place. If birth defect is anything like VAERS (and it appears it isn't much different), the numbers are easily manipulated and/or grossly underreported.
2) Birth defects are only classified as structural abnormalities (like extra chromosomes {{Downs}}, shrunken head, missing eyes and ears, etc...) so they just go with the obvious, and this isn't going to capture much of the early stage developmental issues, which are many. But since the CDC is intentionally poisoning mother and child from fetus to cradle to grave from every angle of intervention, it's like getting sheep damage stats from the local wolf. Special note: they had to change brain damage into a thing called "Autism" to cover & obfuscate for direct effects of the poison pricks. I have to wonder how many babies are beginning their lives with a severe uphill climb from a developmental standpoint.
3) I notice they only use a handful of states to do data collection. So I suspect they just extrapolate that data... which would make it rather rough. But let's just assume it is 1/33... considering how often babies are born- almost 5 per second world wide- it would only take 7 seconds to produce a physically messed up newborn. Does that seem 'normal'?
Also, I have to wonder if they can really hand pick one toxic chemical and designate an accurate % to any kind of damage assessment and criteria... whether that be a newborn or an adult. Given how many we live with and the various methods they are thrown at us and/or we are just exposed to, it must be near impossible to single any one thing out from the toxic smog. So we could just conclude that:
1) Lots of babies are being killed or born completely fucked up.
2) Prenatal (or any) so-called "vitamins" are all various lab cocktails of poison proven to cause damage.
3) If you don't want to be harmed, or have your newborn harmed, don't ingest chemical poisons. You probably have already been poisoned enough to not add anymore.
P.S. - I don't think "Vitamins" have actually been authentically discovered in food. I think they are only newly created lab byproducts given special meaning... expose this, and it's game over. Looking forward to part IV to touch on this.
Thanks FP, yes I cringed when typing in the CDC stats. Regardless, birth defects are, or at least were, much less then the total births (my nose is above my mouth and my arms are above my torso, but my brain doesn't fill my skull completely), my point is that 5% of the birth-defect births is much less then 5% of the total births whether birth defects are 1/10 or minimized by the CDC to 1/33....