GlaxoSmithKline malaria vaccine trials successful but drug will not be profitable

Originally posted by alfa1

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
It is widely reported - but they all seem to be direct copies of the link I posted above from 2002.

By now you've probably read my post above yours showing the real truth of this story.
Its now been 16 and a half years since there was found to be no truth in the allegations of sterilisation in the vaccine but the anti-vaccine crowd still havnt caught onto that yet.
I suggest its because they dont want to know.
It took me about 16 and a half minutes to find the story was bogus, so there's no justification for the story to still be floating around the net all these years later.
Unless they simply dont care about lying.

They don't - it's all disinfo of course - how could you possibly trust the WHO since they are part of the NWO/UN and so self-evidently evil, etc.

They claim to be searching for the truth - but in fact they don't bother checking sources at all - they didn't even bother to check whether the chemicals in question actually do the damage that was claimed - permanent sterilisation from the hormone?? Nope - it doesn't do that!

reply to post by InnerTruths

Did you READ the article before posting it OP?

That has to be the dumbest question I have ever heard on ATS. And I have heard lots of dumb questions.

Some times I think it's time for ATS to thin the heard a little.

What gave you the impression I didn't read the article

Originally posted by pianopraze
reply to post by alfa1

 

Um... there is tons of evidence that vaccines are being used for sterilization. I don't have all the refernce at my finger tips, but the UN has been found guilty. And thermesol (mercury) is a cause also...

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
H1N1 vaccine linked to 700% increase in miscarriages
Ten Things You're Not Supposed to Know about the Swine Flu Vaccine
Doctors speak out about H1N1 Vaccine Dangers
Avian and swine flu vaccines cause sterility and death

I get into it, and other provide more information in this thread: ats thread link.

It would be good if you could use some credible information to back up your claims

Quoting mis-informed, non-validated jibberish off the internet does nothing for an informed public debate.

reply to post by Skewed


It's called "corporate responsibility", a growing theme amongst big corporations as they realise consumers are now more interested in the ethics of the company they are using / investing in

Originally posted by Skewed
I have an even better malaria treatment. Actually, bartenders are probably very familiar with this.

Ever look at the ingredients on a bottle of tonic water. An ingredient that is added to it is called Quinine. It is extracted from the bark of the cinchona tree.

Again, another remedy without the need of big pharma.

Quinine - wiki

You would need to drink somemany litres of tonic water to get an effective dose of quinine that you would probably die of over hydration.

It scares me to think you would be protected from Malaria by your one or two G&Ts a day...
www.thetraveldoctor.com.au...

reply to post by Dumbfounded


And even at the maximum allowed level in fluid by the EPA you'd need at least 2 litres to get a minimally theraputic quantity- wiki article on Tonic Water:

In the United States, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) limits the quinine content in tonic water to 83 ppm[3] (83 mg per litre if calculated by mass), while the daily therapeutic dose of quinine is in the range of 167–333 mg.