BmOnline Diskusjonsforum Norge

Great Barrington Declaration:
Kopi fra Folkedomstolen

Vi vet nå fra overlege Halvor Næss på Haukeland sykehus og fra virologene Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor og epidemiolog Harvard University, Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor og epidemiolog og immunolog Oxford University og Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor og epidemiolog, Stanford University og fra over 54.000 forskere og leger som er med på oppropet og underskriftskampanjen, Great Barrington Declaration og fra tidligere Chief Science Officer i legemiddelselskapet Pfizer Dr. Mike Yeadon, at i beste fall er disse tiltakene sterkt overdrevet

Hva er det vitenskapelige grunnlaget for smittevernstiltakene?

Jeg ber dere se på koronarestriksjonenes lovlighet og på hvilke vitenskapelig grunnlag disse restriksjonene er tuftet på, og PCR-testenes gyldighet for å teste for en aktiv infeksjon når viruset ikke oppfyller Kochs postulater.

PCR-testenes formål og gyldighet:

Ifølge testmetodens oppfinner Nobelprisvinner og biokjemiker, Kary Banks Mullis, er PCR-testen designet for bruk til forsking for å kopiere og forstørre genetisk materiale og ikke til å diagnostisere en aktiv virusinfeksjon. Testen kan ikke skille mellom aktivt eller dødt virus.

Folkhälsomyndigheten i Sverige har uttalt at «PCR-test kan inte avgöra om någon är smittsam».

Patolog Dr. Roger Hodkinson og konsernsjef i bioteknologiselskapet Western Medical Assements, som produserer PCR-tester og sier at positive testresultater ikke er ensbetydende med klinisk aktiv smittsom infeksjon og at all testing bør stoppe på grunn av de falske tallene dette produserer.

- Politikere og media står bak et ubegrunnet hysteri. Vi ser en politikk og politikere som spiller rollen som medisinere, som er et veldig farlig spill, sier Dr. Hodkinson i Israel National News.

Her er hva TESTPINNENE utsetter deg for. Derfor LA deg ikke teste!!
Disse dustene som tar testen på deg sprayer denne pinnen med kreftfremkallende spray Ethylene Oxid- se på Google hva det betyr.

Du får kreft i hjernen- og sannheten er at de ønsker å ta livet av folk i millionklassen.


Ethylene Oxide

A model of the ethylene oxide molecule.
What is ethylene oxide?

At room temperature, ethylene oxide is a flammable colorless gas with a sweet odor. It is used primarily to produce other chemicals, including antifreeze. In smaller amounts, ethylene oxide is used as a pesticide and a sterilizing agent. The ability of ethylene oxide to damage DNA makes it an effective sterilizing agent but also accounts for its cancer-causing activity.

How are people exposed to ethylene oxide?

The primary routes of human exposure to ethylene oxide are inhalation and ingestion, which may occur through occupational, consumer, or environmental exposure. Because ethylene oxide is highly explosive and reactive, the equipment used for its processing generally consists of tightly closed and highly automated systems, which decreases the risk of occupational exposure.

Despite these precautions, workers and people who live near industrial facilities that produce or use ethylene oxide may be exposed to ethylene oxide through uncontrolled industrial emissions. The general population may also be exposed through tobacco smoke and the use of products that have been sterilized with ethylene oxide, such as medical products, cosmetics, and beekeeping equipment.

Which cancers are associated with exposure to ethylene oxide?

Lymphoma and leukemia are the cancers most frequently reported to be associated with occupational exposure to ethylene oxide. Stomach and breast cancers may also be associated with ethylene oxide exposure.

How can exposures be reduced?

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration has information about limiting occupational exposure to ethylene oxide.
Yeah, probably something you don’t want to be jamming up inside your brain, huh?

"I’m not a rocket scientist, but I’d say I probably do NOT want that chemical all over my brain."

In 2005, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considered banning ethylene oxide in new sterilizing facilities because of the cancer risk it posed to residents who lived around the plants.

“We also considered prohibiting the use of ethylene oxide for new facilities, which would necessitate the use of an alternative sterilization process,” reads the proposed rule, published in the federal register on Oct. 24, 2005.

Ultimately, under pressure from industry, and with the EPA’s acceptance of companies’ claims they were doing everything feasible to cut their emissions, the agency failed to act — worried about disrupting a key part of the process of sterilizing medical equipment in the U.S.

Fast-forward to 2019, and what’s past looks a lot like prologue.

Once again, the EPA is considering new restrictions on ethylene oxide sterilization because of the cancer risks it poses. Once again, the sterilizing and medical device industries are pushing back, warning of harm to patients if ethylene oxide is restricted. Federal lobbying disclosures show medical device makers and sterilizers have spent more than $1 million over the past 12 months lobbying Congress and the EPA on ethylene oxide issues.

There’s a big difference this time around, though: public awareness.

“Nobody in the last 40 years has been pressuring from the outside that there are community exposures from this,” said Peter Orris, MD, a professor and chief of occupational and environmental medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

Greater appreciation of the environmental health threat has — for the first time — raised an outcry from residents in Georgia, Illinois, and elsewhere who’ve been exposed to ethylene oxide pollution — sometimes for decades — without any real warning that it was near them or could be dangerous.

https://welovetrump.com/2021/03/25/man- ... se-cancer/