UK Bans COVID Vax for Kids – Vaccine Harms Sexual Development in Little Boys

AZ posting 15 times in a row shows the target has been hit.

Honestly it must be exhausting trying to keep the lie going.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Well you did claim that 40% of the UK would be dead or dying by AIDS a few months back.

How come we are all still standing?

Where are all the dead bodies lining the streets?

I think you may find its your own credibility that's of concern and in question considering the doom porn you come away with that never happens nor materializes.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Well you did claim that 40% of the UK would be dead or dying by AIDS a few months back.

How come we are all still standing?

Where are all the dead bodies lining the streets?

I think you may find its your own credibility that's of concern and in question considering the doom porn you come away with that never happens nor materializes.

That's a pretty poor measure for winning the argument.

"I'm not dead yet so I prove the vaccine is safe."

The jig is up Andy. It's time to grow up.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

I'm sure AZ can fend for himself, but it isn't folk claiming they're not dead yet, it's folk gently pointing out to you that contrary to your doom porn claims that the vaxxed are dropping like flies, we aren't living in a 28 Days Later film?

Straw man.

Tssk.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Great, except they have done no such thing. What actually happened was that they have simply ended a short term vax campaign for school age children, which was only really put in place because of demands from parents and teachers.

Link

As you said yourself covid doesn't really affect young kids, so this program wasn't seen as being particularly useful.

Wait, are you saying health authorities make decisions based on parents and teachers feelings sand not science?

They're going to spin everything to make it sound like there is still some credibility.

If parents and the public wanted it then it was based on the officials and media pushing for it, based on a very long fear campaign where they demonized anybody that disagreed.

That poster was fully on board with all the authoritarian measures. They were onboard with vaccinating children for a disease they were at virtually no risk from. In spite of their claims about risk ratios they've ignored any data that has been used to show them the vaccine causes a higher risk of Illness, disability, and death in children than COVID itself.

The bottom line is there a children dying and being maimed from unnecessary COVID vaccines. The vocal people still defending vaccines have been repeatedly directed to irrefutable proof that this is true based on data and statements from official sources. All the frequent fliers have no been linked at least once to my thread and they ignore it. No amount of appealing to their sense of humanity has shaken their deeply rooted political biases, not even dead children .

No matter what they say now, they are aware of children being killed and have not refuted the information, they support kids dying for political narratives.

The don't deserve consideration in forum discussions about the vaccines until they reconcile this very well documented fact. Until they can explain why the government approving and promoting a "vaccine" killing kids for no clinical benefit is acceptable they shouldn't be taken seriously. They have zero credibility and the only "science" they really know is what has been dictated to them and promoted as the "right" thing to do.

They know and still keep doing it. It's disgusting. The backtracking has already started with the claim this particular poster isn't fond of vaccinating kids this way. They were very vocal about defending vaccinating children and ignored my early factual evidence that this vaccine was a disaster for kids and would result in dead kids. Most of them have left a long trail of evidence that they simply aren't going to be allowed to erase while this stie still exists.

It's time for past statements to start being revisited if they're going to continue. I encourage everybody to view the posts from the early parts of the pandemic to see who's criteria has changed to fit current narratives and remind them of it when they start their backtracking.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

Things change over time.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

And yet you fail to be able to provide any sort of tangible evidence that shows or suggests 40% of the population here in the UK are dead or dying with AIDS after all this time.

There is little argument v1rtu0s0, you are as wrong now, as you were back then.

The jig is up Andy. It's time to grow up.

I would suggest you take a leaf out your own book.

But you wont because doom porn is a buzz for you.

Which is plainly evident via your posting history.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Things change over time.

Looks like we have a backpeddler.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Things change over time.

And kids are still being given a vaccine that is killing them for no clinical benefit.

You still support it in spite of being shown irrefutable data.

Until you can explain that you have no credibility and, while you continue to advocate for killing children, nobody should take anything you say any more seriously than the unscientific anti-vaxxers.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Things do indeed change v1rtu0s0.

It's pretty much a constant of our universe.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Things change over time.

And kids are still being given a vaccine that is killing them for no clinical benefit.

You still support it in spite of being shown irrefutable data.

Until you can explain that you have no credibility and, while you continue to advocate for killing children, nobody should take anything you say any more seriously than the unscientific anti-vaxxers.

This. 1000%.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

And yet you fail to be able to provide any sort of tangible evidence that shows or suggests 40% of the population here in the UK are dead or dying with AIDS after all this time.

There is little argument v1rtu0s0, you are as wrong now, as you were back then.

The jig is up Andy. It's time to grow up.

I would suggest you take a leaf out your own book.

But you wont because doom porn is a buzz for you.

Which is plainly evident via your posting history.

There is mountains of evidence despite the fact they try to censor it and or remove it from search results. You're not gonna see it on BBC though.

And so, the assault on men continues.

There must be some nazi butch dykes and dog faces pony soldiers who are reveling in the streets.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
AZ posting 15 times in a row shows the target has been hit.

Honestly it must be exhausting trying to keep the lie going.

And yet you haven't been able to counter a single one of the posts that I've made.

You're responses all have one thing in common, that you never include any details that could possibly be fact checked.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

You might be interested to hear, but fertility rates can fluxuate dramatically over time

I can't upload the images right now as the page is down, but if you visit this page (link) you'll see that fertility in the UK is actually up on it's pre-pandemic levels.

Chart and table of the U.K. fertility rate from 1950 to 2022. United Nations projections are also included through the year 2100.
The current fertility rate for U.K. in 2022 is 1.753 births per woman, a 0.06% increase from 2021.
The fertility rate for U.K. in 2021 was 1.752 births per woman, a 0% increase from 2020.
The fertility rate for U.K. in 2020 was 1.752 births per woman, a 0.06% increase from 2019.
The fertility rate for U.K. in 2019 was 1.751 births per woman, a 0.06% increase from 2018.

Link

So, it's actually been rising slightly for the last 4 years, rather than falling. The fact that they've see the same year on year rise in 2018 and 2019 (Pre vax) as in 2021 and 2022 (Post vax) would suggest that the vax has had absolutely no effect on UK fertility rates at all.

In the UK, the main cause of fertility lose is actually obesity.

And this relates to retarded fertility in developing testes how? Not many 11 year olds popping out sprogs to affect the current stats.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

And yet you fail to be able to provide any sort of tangible evidence that shows or suggests 40% of the population here in the UK are dead or dying with AIDS after all this time.

There is little argument v1rtu0s0, you are as wrong now, as you were back then.

The jig is up Andy. It's time to grow up.

I would suggest you take a leaf out your own book.

But you wont because doom porn is a buzz for you.

Which is plainly evident via your posting history.

There is mountains of evidence despite the fact they try to censor it and or remove it from search results. You're not gonna see it on BBC though.

And yet you haven't linked to any of it?

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Ksihkehe

Things change over time.

Looks like we have a backpeddler.

I have various threads bookmarked. They say things change. Things change based on data and none of the backtracking or reversing course has been based on data, but opinions and sentiment. Masking, social distancing, lockdowns, vaccination of children, basing recommendations on demographic data, have not changed during the course of COVID based on data. It changed based on narratives and significant effort was made to manipulate the data to fit those narratives.

I don't think they remember what they actually said in the name of "science". It's no longer speculation on my part, it has gone from accurate and science-based speculation to irrefutable and documented fact.

Them and people like them continue support for what allowed things to get out of control. It was them and people like them that refused to allow real discussion and cheered for censorship. It was the labeling of science that didn't agree with their opinion as disinformation that allowed this to progress to this point.

I have provided irrefutable evidence children are dying for no reason. Their response is "things change". They have no explanation why these deaths are acceptable or necessary to prevent other deaths because the sources they parrot have not provided them any. That's because it's scientifically indefensible. Many of them still use debunked claims that the therapeutic prevents transmission or illness, that masking prevents transmission, and that other vague policies are needed in spite of their science gods acknowledging it's all absutely without scientific evidence.

They are now as fully engaged in anti-science disinformation as they claimed others were for the past two years.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Great, except they have done no such thing. What actually happened was that they have simply ended a short term vax campaign for school age children, which was only really put in place because of demands from parents and teachers.

Link

As you said yourself covid doesn't really affect young kids, so this program wasn't seen as being particularly useful.

Wait, are you saying health authorities make decisions based on parents and teachers feelings and not science?

You've been saying more or less the same thing for the last two years, so I think that I've got you over a barrel on this one.

About 80 percent of the UK's covid policy is based on public demand, not science. A fact that I've been using to debunk most of your NWO based conspiracies for the last couple of years. So I've also got you over a barrel on this one too.

You can't say that I'm wrong without admitting that I was right all of those other times.

Is that why they control information so tightly that comments are disabled on video that has a societal impact? Like speeches and stuff.

originally posted by: Dalamax

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

You might be interested to hear, but fertility rates can fluxuate dramatically over time

I can't upload the images right now as the page is down, but if you visit this page (link) you'll see that fertility in the UK is actually up on it's pre-pandemic levels.

Chart and table of the U.K. fertility rate from 1950 to 2022. United Nations projections are also included through the year 2100.
The current fertility rate for U.K. in 2022 is 1.753 births per woman, a 0.06% increase from 2021.
The fertility rate for U.K. in 2021 was 1.752 births per woman, a 0% increase from 2020.
The fertility rate for U.K. in 2020 was 1.752 births per woman, a 0.06% increase from 2019.
The fertility rate for U.K. in 2019 was 1.751 births per woman, a 0.06% increase from 2018.

Link

So, it's actually been rising slightly for the last 4 years, rather than falling. The fact that they've see the same year on year rise in 2018 and 2019 (Pre vax) as in 2021 and 2022 (Post vax) would suggest that the vax has had absolutely no effect on UK fertility rates at all.

In the UK, the main cause of fertility lose is actually obesity.

And this relates to retarded fertility in developing testes how? Not many 11 year olds popping out sprogs to affect the current stats.

It's the UK, there aren't many vaxed 11 year olds to begin with, as the government didn't see much advantage in vaxxing children. It was a PR stunt at best.

Ask yourself this, how do you research the fertility of an 11 year old boy?

originally posted by: Dalamax

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Great, except they have done no such thing. What actually happened was that they have simply ended a short term vax campaign for school age children, which was only really put in place because of demands from parents and teachers.

Link

As you said yourself covid doesn't really affect young kids, so this program wasn't seen as being particularly useful.

Wait, are you saying health authorities make decisions based on parents and teachers feelings and not science?

You've been saying more or less the same thing for the last two years, so I think that I've got you over a barrel on this one.

About 80 percent of the UK's covid policy is based on public demand, not science. A fact that I've been using to debunk most of your NWO based conspiracies for the last couple of years. So I've also got you over a barrel on this one too.

You can't say that I'm wrong without admitting that I was right all of those other times.

Is that why they control information so tightly that comments are disabled on video that has a societal impact? Like speeches and stuff.

Well, you're certainly being censored here, aren't you.