Embed Notice

@zleap i believe anything which might lead to people possibly requiring life long medication should be looked into. it doesn't say anything about the worth of people or their rights.

regarding vaccines, i can't say anything about his claims about the measles vaccine. i know that the polio vaccine used in 3rd world countries has repeatedly lead to polio because the virus wasn't sufficiently deactivated. that's why polio vaccines in the west aren't the oral ones anymore afaik. they still are used in 3rd world countries as they don't require as much refrigeration.

the part about psychiatric medication being of influence in school shootings also has evidence to back it up. it is known that some of these medications have very different effects in adolescents, like increasing the risk of suicide.

the more there are things which "can't be questioned" because it would be "too dangerous" (to whom?), the more people will distrust the things they are presented with - even if those are correct.

if RFK (or anyone else) has ideas believed to be wrong, they have to be properly discussed. for example: "wifi is very unlikely to induce cancer as microwaves aren't ionizing radiation. the military personal which got cancer got it because of x-rays created in the radar installations as by-product, not because of the radar-microwaves." - much better than just branding him "conspiracy theorist". people are able to look up the claims of the discussion themselves instead of having to blindly trust someone.

i'm convinced the idea that there are things which can't be questioned lead to the current reality, not the other way around. we need to be able to discuss things and science will regain trust. people started to trust science in the first place because ideas were freely discussed instead of mandated.

if a person acts in a bad way, not respecting the natural rights of others, it is because they chose to do so. not because things were discussed.