Found this posted on X by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, with a reply from the Health Ranger:
Dr Sherri Tenpenny
@BusyDrT
We've got to stop calling chicken pox and measles diseases, because they're not. They're infections, and infections come and go in a week to 10 days, and leave behind a lifetime of immunity. A disease is something that comes and stays, and frequently can't be cured. So when you vaccinate to avoid an infection, what you potentially are doing is causing a disease.
1:37 PM · Mar 1, 2025
·
364K
Views
HealthRanger
@HealthRanger
·
Mar 1
Really excellent point, Sherri. They aren't "diseases" at all. And the media and Big Pharma are wildly, predictable, outrageously overreacting in order to SCARE people unnecessarily.
According to the cdc measles is a disease. An infection would be a more or less similar definition. Dr Morse says diseases don't exist. He says infection means inflammation. He says flu like symptoms are the same as detox symptoms. I think he would say a lymphatic expression is a good definition for measles like symptoms. Since measles is a disease and diseases don't exist I think it would be accurate to say measles is a disease definition used on the 'unvaccinated' to promote the MMR. Mike Stone wrote in Measles magic about how being "unvaccinated" was one of the requirements for this diagnosis.
Yes, it is a difficult discussion, but a necessary one, especially for us who believe that life begins at conception.
It is a discussion that I think needs to be surrounded by prayer. It touches a deep emotion: the longing to have children when one cannot conceive is a very difficult conversation pto have. But have we must: if life begins as conception, as it indeed does, do we have a right to treat as commodities?
What happens to the other IVF children (embryos) that are not chosen for implant? Discarded? Frozen? ....
Thank you for boldly sharing this here! I want to read it loudly from the rooftops for all to hear. Well said, all of it, though I am sorry for the injuries and pain your family has endured because of this culture of bullying about vaccines.
Apologies, Melody for monopolizing your comment section. It's just that, as a fellow Catholic, I am so grateful for this wonderful and informative, yet extremely painful post of yours. I sent it to 32 people on my contact list.
Just one last link about the objective dangers of MMR vaccines...
"Ten years later, our newborn was injured by the Hepatitis B vaccine. "
This is inaccurate. There is no such thing as a specific antibody since there is no evidence of the virus. It follows no "vaccine" exists. It is an important distinction since if you had not been told it was a "vaccine" you wouldn't have let it anywhere near your new born. Calling it a "vaccine" therefore could endanger other children.
You completely missed my point in order to make your own. It’s rude. The discussion of mechanism is not the subject of this post. I’m trying to reach people to help with understanding the heart of opposition. You’re going to drive them away by getting caught up in your head. It’s not dangerous to call it a vaccine. It’s using common language (used by the industry AND medical freedom advocates) to have a chance of increasing understanding. The conversation you want to have belongs somewhere else.
It is important because it is a legal definition and if there is no virus then the definition is wrong and the activity isn't legal. If it is not legal then they are relying on the perception it is legal. By calling it a vaccine you are supporting the perception that it is legal. If you think they are harmful then it seems like it would be counterproductive to support that perception.
I understand why it is important to you to make this point. Now please understand why it distracts from mine, which is a much earlier point of connection with people unfamiliar with these topics.
Found this posted on X by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, with a reply from the Health Ranger:
Dr Sherri Tenpenny
@BusyDrT
We've got to stop calling chicken pox and measles diseases, because they're not. They're infections, and infections come and go in a week to 10 days, and leave behind a lifetime of immunity. A disease is something that comes and stays, and frequently can't be cured. So when you vaccinate to avoid an infection, what you potentially are doing is causing a disease.
1:37 PM · Mar 1, 2025
·
364K
Views
HealthRanger
@HealthRanger
·
Mar 1
Really excellent point, Sherri. They aren't "diseases" at all. And the media and Big Pharma are wildly, predictable, outrageously overreacting in order to SCARE people unnecessarily.
She makes a great point.
According to the cdc measles is a disease. An infection would be a more or less similar definition. Dr Morse says diseases don't exist. He says infection means inflammation. He says flu like symptoms are the same as detox symptoms. I think he would say a lymphatic expression is a good definition for measles like symptoms. Since measles is a disease and diseases don't exist I think it would be accurate to say measles is a disease definition used on the 'unvaccinated' to promote the MMR. Mike Stone wrote in Measles magic about how being "unvaccinated" was one of the requirements for this diagnosis.
Thank you Melody. This is a heart-wrenching post, which I have shared .
I was speaking about IVF recently, and am glad to see info about it among your resources. I will buy it.
God bless
I’m so glad to know that people are engaging the IVF discussion. Not easy. Thank you thank you ♥️ I’m eager to read Stacy’s book!
Yes, it is a difficult discussion, but a necessary one, especially for us who believe that life begins at conception.
It is a discussion that I think needs to be surrounded by prayer. It touches a deep emotion: the longing to have children when one cannot conceive is a very difficult conversation pto have. But have we must: if life begins as conception, as it indeed does, do we have a right to treat as commodities?
What happens to the other IVF children (embryos) that are not chosen for implant? Discarded? Frozen? ....
Thank you for boldly sharing this here! I want to read it loudly from the rooftops for all to hear. Well said, all of it, though I am sorry for the injuries and pain your family has endured because of this culture of bullying about vaccines.
Thank you so much, Jessica. I truly appreciate your kindness and that you took the time to read and share. ♥️
Apologies, Melody for monopolizing your comment section. It's just that, as a fellow Catholic, I am so grateful for this wonderful and informative, yet extremely painful post of yours. I sent it to 32 people on my contact list.
Just one last link about the objective dangers of MMR vaccines...
https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/events/the-peoples-study/mmr-vaccine-without-authorization-mmr-cdc/?
"Ten years later, our newborn was injured by the Hepatitis B vaccine. "
This is inaccurate. There is no such thing as a specific antibody since there is no evidence of the virus. It follows no "vaccine" exists. It is an important distinction since if you had not been told it was a "vaccine" you wouldn't have let it anywhere near your new born. Calling it a "vaccine" therefore could endanger other children.
https://www.scribd.com/document/669586413/Stefan-Lanka-the-Misinterpretation-of-the-Antibodies-English-Translation
You completely missed my point in order to make your own. It’s rude. The discussion of mechanism is not the subject of this post. I’m trying to reach people to help with understanding the heart of opposition. You’re going to drive them away by getting caught up in your head. It’s not dangerous to call it a vaccine. It’s using common language (used by the industry AND medical freedom advocates) to have a chance of increasing understanding. The conversation you want to have belongs somewhere else.
I agree Melody. In fact, the definition of vaccine was actually changed to allow this 'JAB' to be accepted as a vaccine.
https://drbowden.substack.com/p/covid-shot-fact-sheet
It is important because it is a legal definition and if there is no virus then the definition is wrong and the activity isn't legal. If it is not legal then they are relying on the perception it is legal. By calling it a vaccine you are supporting the perception that it is legal. If you think they are harmful then it seems like it would be counterproductive to support that perception.
I understand why it is important to you to make this point. Now please understand why it distracts from mine, which is a much earlier point of connection with people unfamiliar with these topics.