I guess I have to get up to speed because I don’t know who Christine is 😕
I will say that I’m a bit tired of hearing people tout ivermectin as the elixir to treat absolutely everything. A pharmaceutical drug is still something to be cautious of and I don’t agree that people are taking it as a prophylactic.
That's great news. What the public want to see is the egos being put aside and a panel of the researchers for & against Ivermectin reaching a consensus of how to use alternatives to vaccines to our best advantage. Quite frankly we're very weary and sick of 'controlled oppositions', we just want the truth! Most ppl never heard of Tim Truth. I prefer to hear from the researchers. We need a panel that sign agreements for no vested interest in these products.
The salesmanship of allopathic drugs must change, to putting regard for our health & 'no harms' first. The problem is Pharma, weather, tech, has been militarised and nobody is addressing this elephant in the room, ie Medical Countermeasures traded in front of our eyes, treating the entire global population like 'terr#$sts'. We are human beings, not 'terr#$sts' to be eliminated under mil-govt-pharma programs!
Genius: We need a panel that sign agreements for no vested interest in these products....
But to be clear, that would indeed exclude Tess Lawrie! The problem is totally that pharma and militaries are ATTACKING us, so NO to Pharma in all its forms is our best path forward for ourselves. We just want the truth and stop the attacks through food, drugs, EMF's, geo-engineering, etc, etc... Sigh!
Yeah, if Tess has vested interests in the system as it is, she needs to untether herself from those interests if we are to move forward correctly. She cld invest in gold, silver, real estate but not products that should and must be tested as to whether it is appropriate to stay on the market. The Pharma industry cannot go on the way it is. Tess Lawrie promises a better way forward, w/ exercise, nutrition, exercise, I agree. So she MUST let go of the PAST to move forward into this 'better way forward'! So yeah, the panel MUST be vested interest FREE. These vested interests were always part of humanitarian studies to be aware of and to ensure there is zero tolerance for regulatory capture, and I'm sure it wld have been HUUUGE in the sciences. So this is simply the way it MUST BE!
Comments are disappearing off this thread. Is there a way to put them back in? Otherwise the thread does not make sense.
As to virus/no virus. I would like someone to debate why this matters to a court case involving the forced experimentation on people of any substance, whether it is made from a virus, wholly synthetic, chemical not biological, or any other type of substance.
I agree with Peggy Hall who says even if the government offers a great tasting chocolate syrup that causes her to live 500 years, it is her choice of consent or no consent to take the product. That is a legal argument supported by human rights.
While it may be personally important to many people to disprove the existence of viruses, it is not necessary or sufficient to disprove or prove their existence to argue a case for no forced human experimentation.
The only way I see this entering a court case is in a limited way. If the govt. claims there is a virus they should show that virus sequence to the whole world. If they say it is communicable, they should be able to prove that.
Christine Massey has shown no government has never done regarding Covid 19. That information must be given as part of informed consent and would seem to me to be a way of demanding the legal removal all NPC as well as "vaccines" as the problem they are supposed to address is not able to be shown by any government.
This is why I urge a legal approach, one which says their are inalienable human rights which may not be abrogated. Those would be things like free speech and the right to bodily integrity.
Other than that, I will let my prior comments which no longer show up on this thread, stand.
By the way your spot on about the legal arguments on this... Proving experimentation is far more important to prove than the no virus - except - long term we must prove it - if true because the concept of pandemic and all the gauntlet of laws for pandemics would be nullified - we need to do it but it will be done how you say. Spot on
Why I believe this will end up staying an argument concerning human rights is this: the global psychopaths are declaring climate emergencies and free speech emergencies (for example). They use these "emergencies" just as they do with a claimed but unproven pathogen such as covid 19-to abrogate our human rights.
They are in full swing against freedom of speech for the reason that they cannot have anyone showing they are full of crap and wrong. In Britain they are terrorizing citizens and journalists alike, as in Canada, Australia, Germany and the US. It is no accident that they are going after free speech.
If any real information enters the public domain they will not be able to implement their plans without using extreme brutality (as they are doing already regarding freedom of speech). Use of extreme brutality itself causes many people to question why these entities need to commit acts of violence against people who are simply exercising a right.
In every case courts of law must force governments to openly show what they are claiming. Then even if they can show it, which they cannot, the court rules based on our human rights. We have free speech, freedom of movement etc. no matter what the psychopaths wish to claim.
WE are totally with you and praying we can raise the funds for the lawsuit sooner than later because thats exactly what we plan to do! Its got to be seen as a whole with the censorship and frauds as an illegal attack on rights... ughhhh!
Yes, there are many people's comments who are missing. I know this because I read them yesterday. I do think that substack is not a proponent of freedom of speech, I'm sorry to say. They also seem to have: "bent the knee".
That is so aggravating - we also wonder if they are culling our subscribers because when a ton of people sign up our #'s go down and it makes no sense - we know we piss people off but literally as thy come in the #'s go down at certain times - other times its normal. It's got to be Substack being evil which sucks!
Dr.Yeadon needs to make clear to Dr.Lawrie the following.
Ivermectin cannot cure Isolation harms, no human rights, neglect, dehydration and starvation, no ambulances to care homes, no GPs to care homes, misuse DNACPRs, overuse Midazolam...why is Tess Lawrie refusing to discuss the Scottish COVID-19 inquiry closing statements?
Fyi after replying to Dr.Lawrie with that comment on X about 2 weeks ago my account of 6 months was suspended the next day. I only had 400 posts 90+% on Scottish COVID inquiry.
This is a false claim about me. I cannot read Dr. Yeadon's mind but I can read his original proposal. There was nothing in it about debating Christine Massey about the non existence or existence of viruses. No one is saying not to ask for this debate but it is not honorable or just to make one proposal and have the other party accept it, then suddenly add on new terms and conditions--ones which are substantially different.
He can make as many terms as he likes. I am only commenting on whether it is just to keep doing that or not. Is not just.
We stand by that Mike must have legit reasons that the debate is useless compartmentalized and must be done as a whole in tandem! We see both sides but clearly the topics are one and should be addressed as a whole!
Such a joke, been personally taking ivermectin and supplements FOR YEARS! Healthier than my Arabian at 50 years old. These "concerns" are stupid at best.
The bias is the oligarchs trying to take away supplements and convince everybody ivermectin is for horses, while they hand out dope and cut off children's genitals, while installing litter boxes for "furries" in public restrooms. If they actually came from a place of logic, then there wouldn't be the statement that they're stupid. But, I can call them stupid because they are indeed, without thought. If I wasn't being sprayed with chemtrails like a cockroach daily, maybe I wouldn't be as biased. But then again, probably.
The war on man compels all of us to collaborate and cooperate. Please consider:
21:33 mins https://youtu.be/aOPXtthcQ6o | Ruling entities’ knowledge of the vibrational realm is superb. They know humans are walking radio frequency towers and they know how to lower frequency; they know the weaker you are the easier you are to control and bend to the will of the mind control expert. What follows is a prime example of how they work psychically and in the frequency.
They coerced every body to take the jab or forced as many as they could through mind control means, mostly group pressure and other modalities of psychological manipulation. When they reached their peak uptake rate, not only were the people who took the shot disempowered through poisoning, which lowers their frequency, the wrecking ball comes around again psychically, ‘You took the shot, we're here to let you know it was a big mistake.” They go public on purpose to say not only did I poison you, and knowingly, because a Pfizer executive in the European Parliament responded to questions from Rob Roos. This Pfizer executive admitted the jab was never tested for safety or efficacy, it didn't prevent contagion, it didn't prevent getting the disease, it didn't prevent you from spreading it. They let all that information out on purpose, to let people know how stupid they were to even believe them in the first place.
The frequency [signature energy] of the average human would have been knocked down through poison in their bloodstream and knocked down again psychically. If you muscle test someone who's knocked down psychically, they test weaker and weaker the more psychically you disempower them. The more lies you prove to them you're pushing through their own system or you're actually proving they volunteered for something they should never have volunteered for, that's old Black Magic, where you trick them and then come out and tell them they were tricked in order to disempower them further. You might think the average person would get their back up and resist the next attack but in reality the weaker you are the more you comply with the next attack.
Have the Ivermectin and virology wrecking balls been set in motion to pit man against man, which disempowers rivals and lowers the collective consciousness to keep man trapped in this dark construct?
Every body is 100% in control of their perceptions, and 100% in control in their responses to what shows up on their life screen. In other words, through consent collectively we contributed to the problems and now it's time for us collectively to become the solution.
Respectful and cordial debate is ALWAYS a GREAT thing and we need much more of that, especially amongst prominent names.
I welcome this decision by Dr. Yeadon but why set pre-conditions for participation?
Probably because the two topics are deeply intertwined and it's pointless to debate one without the other ; )
I disagree that they are "deeply intertwined".
One is about the benefits vs risks of a certain pharmaceutical intervention....and not just in the context of C19.
The other is whether ANY pharmaceutical intervention was even necessary....in the context of C19.
The latter is a much bigger and more complex discussion to be had and BOTH absolutely need to happen but one should not be conditional on another.
This is not how debates work.
Agree to disagree. Why is she telling people ivermectin works for a fake virus? The topics are one
Has Tess refused to debate the existence of SARS-COV-2 or set ANY conditions on her part for participating in such a debate?
You say " ...the other is whether ANY pharmaceutical intervention is necessary.."
When the quid pro quo was for....
"If Tess holds a discussion with Christine on the lack of scientific evidence for the existence of SARS-CoV-2"
Precisely
They would be separate debates negating "This is not how debates work".
They are totally intwined from Yeadon's stance.
It's an offer to do something he wasn't going to do, who decides on conditionals, looks like the main players offering to debate.
Thank you for the voice of reason here Rjj!
Exactly! Thank you for clarifying this so well. Jill
I guess I have to get up to speed because I don’t know who Christine is 😕
I will say that I’m a bit tired of hearing people tout ivermectin as the elixir to treat absolutely everything. A pharmaceutical drug is still something to be cautious of and I don’t agree that people are taking it as a prophylactic.
lol we don’t know who Christine is either haha… agreed.. an anti parasite was promoted as a prophylactic and it makes no sense. Be cautious!
Christine Massey? justa guessing.
This would be excellent if that Christine!
Very nice job in deed. You formatted my words much clearer than I did! 🙏
We thought your article and message was awesome Tim! We gotta keep the message going! Even if it pisses a lot of people off!
That's great news. What the public want to see is the egos being put aside and a panel of the researchers for & against Ivermectin reaching a consensus of how to use alternatives to vaccines to our best advantage. Quite frankly we're very weary and sick of 'controlled oppositions', we just want the truth! Most ppl never heard of Tim Truth. I prefer to hear from the researchers. We need a panel that sign agreements for no vested interest in these products.
The salesmanship of allopathic drugs must change, to putting regard for our health & 'no harms' first. The problem is Pharma, weather, tech, has been militarised and nobody is addressing this elephant in the room, ie Medical Countermeasures traded in front of our eyes, treating the entire global population like 'terr#$sts'. We are human beings, not 'terr#$sts' to be eliminated under mil-govt-pharma programs!
Agree with every word Kezeek!
Genius: We need a panel that sign agreements for no vested interest in these products....
But to be clear, that would indeed exclude Tess Lawrie! The problem is totally that pharma and militaries are ATTACKING us, so NO to Pharma in all its forms is our best path forward for ourselves. We just want the truth and stop the attacks through food, drugs, EMF's, geo-engineering, etc, etc... Sigh!
Yeah, if Tess has vested interests in the system as it is, she needs to untether herself from those interests if we are to move forward correctly. She cld invest in gold, silver, real estate but not products that should and must be tested as to whether it is appropriate to stay on the market. The Pharma industry cannot go on the way it is. Tess Lawrie promises a better way forward, w/ exercise, nutrition, exercise, I agree. So she MUST let go of the PAST to move forward into this 'better way forward'! So yeah, the panel MUST be vested interest FREE. These vested interests were always part of humanitarian studies to be aware of and to ensure there is zero tolerance for regulatory capture, and I'm sure it wld have been HUUUGE in the sciences. So this is simply the way it MUST BE!
Comments are disappearing off this thread. Is there a way to put them back in? Otherwise the thread does not make sense.
As to virus/no virus. I would like someone to debate why this matters to a court case involving the forced experimentation on people of any substance, whether it is made from a virus, wholly synthetic, chemical not biological, or any other type of substance.
I agree with Peggy Hall who says even if the government offers a great tasting chocolate syrup that causes her to live 500 years, it is her choice of consent or no consent to take the product. That is a legal argument supported by human rights.
While it may be personally important to many people to disprove the existence of viruses, it is not necessary or sufficient to disprove or prove their existence to argue a case for no forced human experimentation.
The only way I see this entering a court case is in a limited way. If the govt. claims there is a virus they should show that virus sequence to the whole world. If they say it is communicable, they should be able to prove that.
Christine Massey has shown no government has never done regarding Covid 19. That information must be given as part of informed consent and would seem to me to be a way of demanding the legal removal all NPC as well as "vaccines" as the problem they are supposed to address is not able to be shown by any government.
This is why I urge a legal approach, one which says their are inalienable human rights which may not be abrogated. Those would be things like free speech and the right to bodily integrity.
Other than that, I will let my prior comments which no longer show up on this thread, stand.
By the way your spot on about the legal arguments on this... Proving experimentation is far more important to prove than the no virus - except - long term we must prove it - if true because the concept of pandemic and all the gauntlet of laws for pandemics would be nullified - we need to do it but it will be done how you say. Spot on
Why I believe this will end up staying an argument concerning human rights is this: the global psychopaths are declaring climate emergencies and free speech emergencies (for example). They use these "emergencies" just as they do with a claimed but unproven pathogen such as covid 19-to abrogate our human rights.
They are in full swing against freedom of speech for the reason that they cannot have anyone showing they are full of crap and wrong. In Britain they are terrorizing citizens and journalists alike, as in Canada, Australia, Germany and the US. It is no accident that they are going after free speech.
If any real information enters the public domain they will not be able to implement their plans without using extreme brutality (as they are doing already regarding freedom of speech). Use of extreme brutality itself causes many people to question why these entities need to commit acts of violence against people who are simply exercising a right.
In every case courts of law must force governments to openly show what they are claiming. Then even if they can show it, which they cannot, the court rules based on our human rights. We have free speech, freedom of movement etc. no matter what the psychopaths wish to claim.
WE are totally with you and praying we can raise the funds for the lawsuit sooner than later because thats exactly what we plan to do! Its got to be seen as a whole with the censorship and frauds as an illegal attack on rights... ughhhh!
Really? Comments are disappearing? We are not deleting them! We wonder if Substack is shadow banning? How irksome!
Yes, there are many people's comments who are missing. I know this because I read them yesterday. I do think that substack is not a proponent of freedom of speech, I'm sorry to say. They also seem to have: "bent the knee".
That is so aggravating - we also wonder if they are culling our subscribers because when a ton of people sign up our #'s go down and it makes no sense - we know we piss people off but literally as thy come in the #'s go down at certain times - other times its normal. It's got to be Substack being evil which sucks!
Dr.Yeadon needs to make clear to Dr.Lawrie the following.
Ivermectin cannot cure Isolation harms, no human rights, neglect, dehydration and starvation, no ambulances to care homes, no GPs to care homes, misuse DNACPRs, overuse Midazolam...why is Tess Lawrie refusing to discuss the Scottish COVID-19 inquiry closing statements?
https://biologyphenom.substack.com/p/scottish-covid-19-inquiryclosing
Great points biologyphenom!
Fyi after replying to Dr.Lawrie with that comment on X about 2 weeks ago my account of 6 months was suspended the next day. I only had 400 posts 90+% on Scottish COVID inquiry.
She agreed to the initial proposal put forth. Don't add new conditions to the original proposal. That is not a just or honorable thing to do.
Have the debate which was asked for. Then ask about the second debate.
Ironically it appears you are putting just as much stipulations as Yeadon... If you really think about it...
Do we have the full insight of why Dr yeadon has started those are his terms?
His terms are his alone to define.
We think the two topics must be discussed as a whole because they are intertwined but what do we know?
This is a false claim about me. I cannot read Dr. Yeadon's mind but I can read his original proposal. There was nothing in it about debating Christine Massey about the non existence or existence of viruses. No one is saying not to ask for this debate but it is not honorable or just to make one proposal and have the other party accept it, then suddenly add on new terms and conditions--ones which are substantially different.
He can make as many terms as he likes. I am only commenting on whether it is just to keep doing that or not. Is not just.
We stand by that Mike must have legit reasons that the debate is useless compartmentalized and must be done as a whole in tandem! We see both sides but clearly the topics are one and should be addressed as a whole!
Such a joke, been personally taking ivermectin and supplements FOR YEARS! Healthier than my Arabian at 50 years old. These "concerns" are stupid at best.
No concern should be dismissed as stupid without hearing from both sides. This is the bias we mention!
The bias is the oligarchs trying to take away supplements and convince everybody ivermectin is for horses, while they hand out dope and cut off children's genitals, while installing litter boxes for "furries" in public restrooms. If they actually came from a place of logic, then there wouldn't be the statement that they're stupid. But, I can call them stupid because they are indeed, without thought. If I wasn't being sprayed with chemtrails like a cockroach daily, maybe I wouldn't be as biased. But then again, probably.
Finally a grand rounds !!! 💥🙌🏼💟🤗
The war on man compels all of us to collaborate and cooperate. Please consider:
21:33 mins https://youtu.be/aOPXtthcQ6o | Ruling entities’ knowledge of the vibrational realm is superb. They know humans are walking radio frequency towers and they know how to lower frequency; they know the weaker you are the easier you are to control and bend to the will of the mind control expert. What follows is a prime example of how they work psychically and in the frequency.
They coerced every body to take the jab or forced as many as they could through mind control means, mostly group pressure and other modalities of psychological manipulation. When they reached their peak uptake rate, not only were the people who took the shot disempowered through poisoning, which lowers their frequency, the wrecking ball comes around again psychically, ‘You took the shot, we're here to let you know it was a big mistake.” They go public on purpose to say not only did I poison you, and knowingly, because a Pfizer executive in the European Parliament responded to questions from Rob Roos. This Pfizer executive admitted the jab was never tested for safety or efficacy, it didn't prevent contagion, it didn't prevent getting the disease, it didn't prevent you from spreading it. They let all that information out on purpose, to let people know how stupid they were to even believe them in the first place.
The frequency [signature energy] of the average human would have been knocked down through poison in their bloodstream and knocked down again psychically. If you muscle test someone who's knocked down psychically, they test weaker and weaker the more psychically you disempower them. The more lies you prove to them you're pushing through their own system or you're actually proving they volunteered for something they should never have volunteered for, that's old Black Magic, where you trick them and then come out and tell them they were tricked in order to disempower them further. You might think the average person would get their back up and resist the next attack but in reality the weaker you are the more you comply with the next attack.
Have the Ivermectin and virology wrecking balls been set in motion to pit man against man, which disempowers rivals and lowers the collective consciousness to keep man trapped in this dark construct?
Every body is 100% in control of their perceptions, and 100% in control in their responses to what shows up on their life screen. In other words, through consent collectively we contributed to the problems and now it's time for us collectively to become the solution.
It’s a Bioweapon to depopulate. Look at the various mechanisms that have been implicated in these jabs and you will understand . Call it what it is .
I'm still waiting for this debate... anyone else?