RFK Jr: Allergies can be Induced by Vaccine Adjuvants, Known to Science for Years
Why the Vaccine-Allergy Connection Can’t Be Ignored Any Longer
Do vaccines cause allergies? The shocking part is, the answer seems to be yes, and they’ve had data to back this up for years, but they’ve been denying it. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent critic of vaccine policy, has stated that vaccines contribute to allergies in humans. My own research into his claims yielded striking findings. Evidence suggests a link, though a significant body of official statements leads many to believe otherwise. As I’ll show, these official statements are not trustworthy. Often, when vaccines are questioned, the usual standards of logic seem to shift. But a rose, or adjuvant, but another name, or use, still causes problems for humanity.
My wife and I recently welcomed our first son into the world, Benjamin, and we decided long ago not to vaccinate our children. I could talk about the reasons why at length, but the following article is just one thread out of a big ball of yarn I’ve been gathering for years.
It is my hope that the information presented here will empower others to make more informed health decisions, especially given the widespread suffering caused by allergies.
Like my work? Consider becoming a subscriber
Robert F. Kennedy Jr on Allergies Link to Vaccines
In 2023, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared on the Aubrey Marcus Podcast, a controversial interview that was later banned—possibly due to Kennedy’s statements linking vaccines to allergies, among other topics.
Kennedy claimed that aluminum adjuvants in vaccines may contribute to food allergies—such as peanut, dairy, and latex—essentially by sensitizing the immune system, which induces an immune reaction to a virus, and can also induce allergies for unrelated substances as a side effect. He cited his son’s severe allergic reactions and his work with the Food Allergy Initiative, which raised $100 million to study treatments.
The most explosive and essential point of their discussion was that Kennedy said researchers have been inducing allergies in rats using aluminum adjuvants combined with allergens. The same mechanism could affect humans, potentially triggered by vaccine excipients like peanut oil or by environmental exposure post-vaccination. In other words, if it works in rats to induce allergies, why wouldn’t it do the same in humans?
Kennedy and Marcus discussed how aluminum adjuvants might cause allergic reactions to environmental substances like cat dander or Timothy weed (a type of hay). Kennedy suggested that if the adjuvants remain active in the body after vaccination, exposure to these substances could prompt the immune system to become permanently sensitized unintended things. Marcus raised the example of petting a cat post-vaccination, implying that cat dander could trigger an allergic response. Kennedy added that similar exposure during a "Timothy weed outbreak" could lead to chronic allergies like hay fever, highlighting a broader risk of developing sensitivities not just to vaccine ingredients, but to unrelated environmental allergens encountered while the immune system is primed.
A Deeper Conspiracy
Many believe that the vaccine industry contributed to allergies and other health issues to profit from the treatment of these conditions, and that there has been a profit-driven motive for vaccines dating back into the 19th century.
Furthermore, the shielding from liability due to vaccines is oddly suspicious, raising concerns that the industry is well aware of the problems that are little acknowledged in the mainstream but are recognized in alternative circles.
Book Peanut Allergy Epidemic by Heather Fraser
The video by Matt From Cultivate Elevate argues that vaccines, particularly through the use of adjuvants like peanut oil, shellfish, latex, ragweed, and pollen, may be responsible for the rise in food allergies. It cites a 1959 study where mice developed allergies to peanut oil used in vaccines and a 1964 New York Times article about Merck's vaccine containing peanut oil, alongside personal anecdotes of increased allergy prevalence. The video criticizes the 1986 Vaccine Injury Act and the 2005 PREP Act for shielding manufacturers from liability, mentions potential links to autism via mercury, and discusses financial incentives in the vaccine industry. It calls for further investigation, referencing Heather Fraser's book and an old vaccination advertisement, while connecting to current events like RFK Jr.'s removal of CDC vaccine advisors, suggesting a need to reassess vaccine safety and policy.
First, all the psoriasis on my back suddenly started to peel and I didn't know why.....well my entire back cleared up. I had brown patches all over my skin all my life in different places and its a fungus because I always had candida....they VANISHED!!!! also I had some swollen joints on my left hand always red the swelling and redness is gone!!!!!
No pain!
the most incredible is, by mistake, I noticed little magnets would stick to me on my chest area and torso!! metals? After 30 capsules of humic acid, they no longer stick!!!
Save 10% and get free shipping with a subscription!
MUST HAVE DETOX POWERHOUSE: Fight viruses, remove heavy metals and microplastics, and restore your gut all at once with Humic and Fulvic Acid from Ascent Nutrition.
Challenging Vaccine Industry Logic: Intent vs. Effect
Before we get into the meat and potatoes of this article, it’s important to consider that allergies can be caused by several different factors.
Allergies are a type of immune system dysfunction, specifically Type I hypersensitivity in the Gell and Coombs classification. The immune system is an extremely complex body system, influenced by diet, environment, and even early childhood experiences (See ACEs and the Immune System), along with, of course, vaccines, which are a type of technology specifically designed to trigger an immune system reaction. That means that, while we can make a compelling case for vaccine-induced allergies, there are other factors, like mother-to-child transference via breastmilk, environmental causes, botanical sexism (using only one sex of plant by landscapers), toxins and pollutants, and possibly other unacknowledged factors. RFK Jr. is likely aware of many of these factors, and it shouldn’t be assumed that he claims is that allergies only come from vaccines.
RFK Jr. is arguing that the presence of a known allergy-causing agent—the aluminum adjuvant—could explain the rise in allergies. These allergies aren’t just to things in the vaccines, like peanut oil or soy, but other unrelated substances encountered after vaccination, such as grass or cats. If he's right—which the rat studies suggest he is—it has significant implications for the medical industry, its lack of due diligence, and the untold suffering experienced by millions, if not billions, of people since widespread vaccination became standard medical practice.
Is there really no evidence?
Vaccine defenders and the broader media claim there is no evidence to confirm the link between vaccines and allergies, pointing to many studies done that apparently debunk the claim. However, as we’ll also discuss below, this appears to be, at least in part, because proper studies comparing vaccinated against unvaccinated children and people are rare, and when they are done, various biases can cloud the data. And what might be the most important fact to dispute the official position on vaccines, making the industry look frankly like liars is that another industry, the allergy industry, regularly uses vaccine adjuvants to induce allergies in rats. This alone should be enough to support the idea that vaccines in humans can induce allergies as well.
Some people develop allergies without exposure to vaccines, and not all vaccinated individuals develop allergies. This means there isn’t a strong one-to-one connection, making the issue even more complicated to evaluate and investigate. What’s more, the design of a study can either confirm or refute a link between vaccines and allergies. That is, studies can be manipulated to prove what the study producer wants. This suggests that the uncertainty may reflect, at best, an unacknowledged gap in medical understanding or, at worst, an exploited ambiguity to conceal a connection.
The logic is straightforward: a) if aluminum, as an adjuvant, can stimulate the immune system to respond to a target (such as a virus in vaccines) and b) aluminum can also induce allergies in rats, it is therefore plausible that aluminum in vaccines could contribute to allergies in humans.
Protect Yourself from Cell Phone, Wifi, and other Electrosmog
Our lives have been invaded by EMF radiation through your cell phone, WiFi, the electrical grid, 5G, and the coming biomedical technology revolution is just around the corner. Protect your health and the health of your family with the very best in EMF protection.
Buy here and watch my interview with FTW Project Morocco, a good friend and partner with Just In Stillness.
Studies Supporting RFK Jr.
Here’s a list of studies showing that aluminum vaccine adjuvants are linked to inducing immune system sensitivities.
Tomljenovic and Shaw (2011) - "Aluminum Vaccine Adjuvants: Are they Safe?"
Methodology: This review article examines the safety of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines, focusing on their potential to induce immune system sensitivities and other adverse effects.
Findings: The study suggests that aluminum adjuvants can lead to immune system dysregulation, potentially causing sensitivities or autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA). It highlights concerns about their long-term effects, though it does not conclusively prove to the satisfaction of medical officialdom that they cause allergies.
Gherardi et al. (2015) - "Biopersistence and Brain Translocation of Aluminum Adjuvants of Vaccines"
Methodology: This study investigated the biopersistence (how long they stay in the body) of aluminum adjuvants in the body and their potential to translocate to the brain, using animal models and human tissue samples.
Findings: The research found that aluminum adjuvants can persist in the body and potentially induce immune system sensitivities, including neurological and autoimmune reactions. This is cited as a concern for unintended immune effects.
Exley et al. (2019) - "Aluminum in Brain Tissue in Autism"
Methodology: This study analyzed aluminum levels in brain tissue from individuals with autism, some of whom had received aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines.
Findings: The study found high levels of aluminum in brain tissue, suggesting a potential link to immune system sensitivities and neurological issues.
Increased Allergy Rates Correlate with Vaccination Schedules
Some observational data suggest that the rise in allergy rates coincides with the expansion of vaccination schedules, which rose sharply in the 90s. For example, the increase in childhood allergies in the late 20th century aligns with the addition of more vaccines to the childhood immunization schedule.
Citation: Mawson et al. (2017) "Pilot Comparative Study on the Health of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated 6- to 12-year-old U.S. Children," Journal of Translational Science. This study reported higher rates of allergies among vaccinated children.
Experimental Use of Aluminum Adjuvants in Rats
Aluminum adjuvants are used in animal models, such as rats, to induce allergic responses for research purposes. An entire industry uses this method at a large scale, proving that the link between aluminum adjuvants and allergies is well acknowledged.
Citation: Tomljenovic and Shaw (2011) "Aluminum Vaccine Adjuvants: Are they Safe?" Current Medicinal Chemistry. This review discusses the use of aluminum adjuvants in inducing immune responses, including in animal models, but does not directly link this to human allergies.
Anthroposophic Lifestyle Studies
Studies on children from anthroposophic families, who often delay or avoid vaccinations, have shown lower rates of atopy compared to vaccinated children. This has been interpreted by some as evidence that vaccines might contribute to allergies.
Citation: Alm et al. (1999) "Atopy in Children of Families with an Anthroposophic Lifestyle," The Lancet. This study found lower atopy rates in less vaccinated children, but it is often discussed in the context of the hygiene hypothesis rather than a direct vaccine-allergy link.
Flaws in the System
One of my big issues with the medical system, particularly concerning vaccines, is that not all relevant data is tracked. If the industry were genuinely interested in avoiding side effects and solving any problems related to their products, they would take all claims seriously, by gathering exhaustive data and reports, especially given the industry is extremely profitable and ahs the money the throw around. However, that's not the case. Instead, there appears to be a knee-jerk defensiveness and close-mindedness.
The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and the COVID vaccine response by the medical industry's often inadequate awareness of vaccine adverse effects highlight the problem. If the medical system were genuinely committed to tracking these effects, monitoring would be a routine part of medical checkups. Instead, reliance on self-reporting by patients who often not know what to look for means that vaccine side effects are significantly underreported. In stark contrast, consider the immense effort mobilized for COVID testing and tracking. Clearly, this isn’t an issue of the capacity to track and gather data. This indicates a lack of care, at best, or a coordinated effort to suppress the truth, at worst. Unless doctors and researchers proactively study these adverse effects, most remain obscured, and systems like VAERS, intended to capture such data, and often cited as the main tool used to track adverse effects, are alarmingly ill-equipped.
Invisible Adverse Effects: How the Medical System Blinds Itself Links Between Vaccine-Induced Allergies to Unrelated Substances
A vaccine, like a drug, is a potent intervention that can cause many effects. Truly understanding and identifying any potentially damaging side effects requires an exhaustive and highly detailed approach.
Think of it like a pebble cast into a still pond. In many ways, studies and the medical community generally maintain a narrow lens on the effects vaccines might cause. It's as if the system only pays attention to a tiny sliver of the ripples that spread out from that pebble.
The body is an extremely delicate and intricate system of trillions of cells moving together using trillions upon trillions of chemical reactions and subtle energies. Identifying how a complex chemical injection like a vaccine might affect the body requires a methodical and all-inclusive approach. However, the industry tends to cherry-pick and discount information from studies, doctors in the field, and patients. This isn’t just a small issue with a few isolated areas of the medical system; it’s baked in at an industry-wide level. The very fact that the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 exists at all is proof of why the system is broken, potentially by design, because manufacturers were regularly losing lawsuits in court due to vaccine injury.
Rocket science, for instance, looks at almost every influence that could be at work on the rocket, such as the weather, the electrical activity in space, the materials used to make the rocket, and the purity of the fuel. It is well recognized that tiny details can have a major impact, and therefore, no stone should go unturned. While rocket science and biology aren't directly correlated, it is a good analogy because the fine-tuning that takes place in biology is, in many ways, even more nuanced and refined.
Doctor’s Aren’t Able to Track All Side Effects
A doctor might administer a vaccine and observe their patient for only 15 to 30 minutes, which is meant to look for issues related to the vaccine itself, like anaphylaxis, not allergies to other substances, which show up right away. After this, the doctor relies on the patient to report any side effects. This approach isn’t likely to catch issues as subtle as allergies, which might not manifest until a reaction occurs, and even then, the patient might not make the connection to the vaccine to ask their doctor.
Clinical Trials Do Not Look for Side Effects
Clinical trial timelines for vaccines are structured in phases, both pre- and post-licensure, to ensure safety and efficacy, during which observation takes place to identify adverse effects. Pre-licensure, vaccines undergo Phase I trials with small groups (20-100 people) observed for a few weeks to months for safety and dosage determination, followed by Phase II trials with hundreds of participants lasting several months to a year to assess immunogenicity and optimal dosing, and finally Phase III trials with thousands of participants over 1-4 years to confirm efficacy and monitor side effects compared to a placebo or existing treatments.
Post-licensure, passive surveillance systems like VAERS collect reports indefinitely to capture rare or long-term side effects, while active surveillance through systems like the Vaccine Safety Datalink and post-marketing studies can extend over years to decades, ensuring ongoing safety monitoring as the vaccine is used in larger populations.
Given all this testing, surely they must test a vaccine to see if it might have caused the secondary effect of inducing an allergy in the person taking it? At no point during all this testing and observation do they look for any secondary allergies to unrelated substances that are caused by the vaccines.
Unfortunately, there's no article or statement from a vaccine manufacturer admitting they don't test vaccines to determine if they induce allergies to unrelated substances. However, the lack of this admission doesn't mean there's no proof. I encourge you to try to find a clinical trial for a vaccine that specifically looks for the induction of allergies to unrelated substances. I haven't been able to find a single one.
Questionable Studies of the Vaccine Industry
For years, the public believed that the science conducted by the medical field was unparalleled. However, the COVID vaccine and the subsequent studies on its efficacy revealed that science can be far more untrustworthy than one might assume. The studies, media narratives, and misinformation pushed to the public were brazen and deceptive, to put it mildly.
Book Profiles of the Vaccine-Injured: "A Lifetime Price to Pay" (Children’s Health Defense)
Kennedy’s 2018 Lawsuit Against HHS, About the Vaccine Allergy Link
Children's Health Defense (CHD) sued the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) over alleged failures to adequately study vaccine safety, including potential links to allergies, which is a significant example of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s legal efforts against vaccines. This lawsuit, filed in 2018, sought to compel HHS to provide documentation and evidence that it had conducted the safety studies required by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. (Strangely, the internet has been scrubbed, and there are very few sources left that talk about this case, but I did find this source.)
CHD alleged that HHS had failed to fulfill its statutory obligation to conduct safety studies on vaccines, including investigating potential links to conditions like allergies, autism, and other adverse effects. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 requires HHS to conduct ongoing safety studies of vaccines. CHD claimed that HHS had not adequately performed these studies, particularly regarding long-term effects and potential links to allergies. The lawsuit highlighted concerns about vaccine ingredients, such as aluminum adjuvants, and their potential to cause harm, including allergies. Kennedy and CHD argued that these ingredients had not been sufficiently studied for safety.
Book The Medical-Pharmaceutical Killing Machine: Facing Facts Could Save Your Life
The Children's Health Defense (CHD) lawsuit is well-founded and precisely the type of activism we should expect from someone who genuinely cares about health. What we shouldn't expect, however, is the reaction. The coordinated effort by media, institutions, and the medical system to downplay any claim that vaccines play a role in adverse health outcomes is—given that vaccine adjuvants are used to induce allergies—proof of bad faith or severe incompetence. Either way, the incredible toll inflicted upon humanity is a tragedy of immeasurable scope.
In the future, if RFK Jr. indeed succeeds with MAHA, which there's good reason to believe he will, our children will be appalled by the extent to which our medical system was asleep at the wheel. Or worse, they may discover it was knowingly making people sick for profit, and perhaps something even more insidious.
Studies For and Against Vaccine-Induced Allergies
The debate over whether vaccines contribute to allergies is supported by studies with varying methodologies, which can significantly shape their results and potentially mislead the public. In other words, depending on the study's design and how data is treated, research can either highlight a potential vaccine-allergy connection or downplay it. This complexity is partly due to factors like inherited allergies from the mother, making definitive proof or disproof more challenging.
It’s worth noting that evaluating studies is important because, as RFK Jr. has said when discussing the lawsuits he’s been a part of, experts from both sides can often argue different conclusions. Simply listening to experts isn’t enough. We need to get granular and look at things with a critical eye to develop intrinsic personal knowledge, rather than just relying on the dogma or extrinsic knowledge from officialdom. In the media, conclusions are often framed as the final word when, in fact, there’s much more nuance.
Given this, there are studies that have been done where unvaccinated children were compared to vaccinated children. Some of those studies showed a higher rate of allergies, while some studies show no difference.
Studies Find Fewer Allergies in Unvaccinated Children
Mawson et al. (2017) - "Pilot Comparative Study on the Health of Vaccinated and Unvaccinated 6- to 12-year-old U.S. Children"
Methodology: This study used a survey-based approach, relying on parental reports of health outcomes among homeschooled children. It compared vaccinated and unvaccinated children within this specific population.
Criticisms: The study has been criticized for its small sample size (666 children), lack of randomization, potential selection bias (homeschooled children may differ from the general population), and reliance on self-reported data, which can be subjective and inaccurate. The methodology did not control for confounding variables like socioeconomic status or environmental factors, which are known to influence allergy rates.
The presence of criticism, in and of itself, does not refute a study about fewer allergies in unvaccinated children. A small sample size is not proof of an invalid study, nor is the absence of controls for confounding variables disproof. The key point is a statistically significant correlation between allergy rates in vaccinated vs unvaccinated children, that cannot be discounted by other factors.
Holbreich et al. (2010) - "Amish children living in northern Indiana have a very low prevalence of allergic sensitization"
Methodology: This study examined health outcomes, including allergies, in Amish children, comparing them to non-Amish children. It used medical records and clinical assessments to evaluate allergy prevalence.
Findings: The study found that Amish children had lower rates of allergies compared to the general population, attributing this to their lifestyle, which includes minimal vaccination, extensive exposure to farm environments, and a diet rich in unprocessed foods. However, it did not directly test the hypothesis that lack of vaccination causes lower allergy rates, as other factors were significant.
Hooker and Miller (2020) - "Analysis of Health Outcomes in Vaccinated and Unvaccinated Children: Developmental Delays, Asthma, Ear Infections and Gastrointestinal Disorders"
Methodology: Similar to Mawson et al., this study used survey data from parents, focusing on a comparison of health outcomes, including allergies, between vaccinated and unvaccinated children.
Alm et al. (1999) - "Atopy in Children of Families with an Anthroposophic Lifestyle"
Methodology: This study compared children from anthroposophic families (who often delay or avoid vaccinations) with children from non-anthroposophic families. It used clinical assessments and questionnaires to measure atopy (allergic hypersensitivity).
Studies Finding No Difference in Allergy Rates
McKeever et al. (2004) - "Vaccination and Allergic Disease: A Birth Cohort Study"
Methodology: This study used a birth cohort approach, following children from birth and tracking vaccination status and the incidence of allergic diseases like asthma and eczema. It employed medical records and clinical diagnoses rather than self-reports.
German Health Study (2011) - "Vaccination Status and Health in Children and Adolescents"
Methodology: This study compared health outcomes, including allergies, between vaccinated and unvaccinated children using a large, representative sample from Germany. It relied on medical records and standardized health assessments.
Bias and Skewed Data
The differences between the studies are significant, and it’s important to note that bias cannot be completely negated.
Selection bias, one of the types of bias that can be very influential, is not always considered when discussing medical studies in the media. Selection bias can be a form of cherry picking. For instance, if the thing being studied is that children who are homeschooled and not vaccinated have fewer allergies, and yet no homeschooled or unvaccinated children are chosen, then the data is skewed. The skewed study can then appear to show no connection, which is a form of medical misinformation.
Surveying might seem unscientific, but it allows a person's actual experience to factor in. Medical data, however, often ignores the patient's experience, focusing instead on doctor reports, tests, and lab results, which can—and often do—overlook experiential data that might indicate an allergy. That said, surveys can indeed be biased if participants provide inaccurate information, but the mere possibility of bias isn't enough to discount the data entirely.
Allergic reactions are easy to confuse with other issues, and people who experience them might not report them in a way that allows proper identification by the medical system. This means that medical data, often considered more objective, might be a poor overall sample of the actual number of people who experience reactions. Again, the fact that so many COVID vaccine reactions were dismissed and ignored suggests that doctors in the field and the broader medical system aren't truly equipped to assess allergies properly.
The Toll of Allergies on Health
The impact of allergies on human health is significant.
Here are some statistics from the American Academy of Allergy Asthma & Immunology:
38.7% of food allergic children have a history of severe reactions
30.4% of food allergic children have multiple food allergies
Of food allergic children, peanut is the most prevalent allergen, followed by milk and then shellfish
In 2012, 5.6% or 4.1 million children reported food allergies in the past 12 months.
6.2% of adults reported having a food allergy.
Women are more likely to have food allergies than men (7.8% of Women and 4.6% of Men)
In 2021, 8.5% of Black adults reported having a food allergy compared to only 4.4% of Hispanic adults, 4.5% of Asian adults, and 6.2% of White adults.
Findings from a 2021 NHIS survey indicated:
An estimated 1 in 20 children have food allergies (5.8%).
Children aged 12-17 are more likely to have food allergies than children in younger age groups.
Allergies affect a significant portion of the global population, with estimates suggesting that around 10-30% of people worldwide suffer from some form of allergic condition.
Allergies are a common health problem that affects many people around the world. About 30-40% of people today have one or more allergies, and the number of people with allergies has been increasing over the past 20 years. Common allergens include things like pollen, certain foods, pet hair, and house dust mites. Other types of allergies include drug, insect sting, latex, skin, and chemical allergies.
The economic burden of allergies is substantial, with healthcare costs and lost productivity amounting to billions of dollars annually. For instance, in the United States alone, the direct and indirect costs of allergies were estimated to be around $18 billion per year as of the early 2020s.
Treating Allergies: A Billion-Dollar Industry
Treating allergies is a big money maker. The allergy treatment industry is robust, with numerous drugs available on the market and many more in research and development.
Reports show, there are hundreds of allergy medications approved for use, including antihistamines, decongestants, corticosteroids, and immunotherapy treatments.
The global allergy treatment market was valued at approximately $24.7 billion in 2017 and is projected to reach $40.4 billion by 2025, growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6.3%.
This growth is driven by the increasing prevalence of allergic diseases, rising awareness, and advancements in treatment options. Research and development efforts continue to expand, with numerous clinical trials underway to develop new therapies, particularly for food allergies and severe allergic reactions.
Worst Case Scenario
The fact is, vaccine manufacturers and the medical system in general are not sensitive enough to vaccine side effects, including their link to allergies. The worst-case scenario would be that these systemic blind spots are by design. The benefit, of course, would be financial: treating allergies is a billion-dollar industry, and the health impacts of vaccine-related issues could be far more costly than what is presently known, given how large these blind spots appear to be.
The Parasitic Economy is a term I coined to refer to the various systemically designed and locally and systemically implemented policies, industries, and culturally reinforced behaviors that enable the exploitation of the entire population for the benefit of a select few.
Regarding the issue of vaccines and their link to allergies, supposing there is a proven link and that this is an intentionally maintained systemic influence, the implication is that health issues are purposely induced into the population. This acts as a driver to push the population into the labor economy due to high healthcare costs. While the cause of high healthcare costs might not be linked to such an insidious plot, the fact remains that healthcare is one of the many factors that drive people to work within a system that is, in many respects, exploitative. There are other benefits for a parasitic economy as well, like time wasting and demoralization of the affected populations.
A complete review of the parasitic economy is beyond the scope of this article, but that is forthcoming, and it's worth mentioning here to leave a breadcrumb for future consideration.
Final Thoughts
While the link between vaccines and allergies has not been proven to the satisfaction of the medical system and the skeptics who reject these claims as wild conspiracy, we know for certain that, at the very least, the vaccine industry and medical system are suffering from severe and costly blind spots. And these blind spots just so happen to leave the door open for sweeping problems that have global implications for health and wellness. The fact that a trillion-dollar industry has emerged to service the medical problems of modern people is not something to casually dismiss, but dismissal seems to be the standard reaction, to the great benefit of those who profit from human suffering.
For what it’s worth, RFK Jr. may be poised to finally expose the incompetencies of the systems we’ve come to rely on, as he has launched an effort to identify the issues associated with vaccines, as HHS Secretary under the Trump administration.
The solutions to these problems at a grand level might be far away, but we know we have tools now to address things in the short term, which I invite you to look into—things that I believe have helped me.
Read How I Detoxed from vaccines, heavy metals, pesticides, microplastics, and more
With love,
Justin
Please tell me what you think or let me know if I got something wrong. I want to hear from you.
Justin Deschamps is a researcher, omniologist, podcaster, and business consultant who has committed himself to restoring the knowledge, reason, and goodwill that helped the founding fathers create the greatest nation on earth.
Follow me on:
Most vaccine studies don't use an inert placebo, they use a previously approved vaccine as a placebo. So any study claiming placebo based is a biased study.. Vaccines are used to create illnesses that the big pHARMaceutical companies have pills for. Follow the $$$$$$$ Great post Justin...
Yes, vaccines are dangerous!! We need to focus more on building immune systems with healthy foods, antioxidant teas, herbs any clean up our food industry to keep it from weakening our immune system.