does-common-sense-still-exist

Does Common Sense Still Exist?

Published On: August 1, 2021Tags: Vaccines

7 Common Sense Questions

By Megan Kuntz

The heresy of heresies was common sense.

-George Orwell

After a year of constant fear-mongering, fact-checking, and cancel-culture-ing, is our common sense still intact? Or did Big Brother somehow succeed in robbing us of this important tenet of critical thought?

Let’s ask some explorative, common-sense questions to find out.

▶WOULD YOU GLADLY COMPLY WITH A BAN OF ALL VEHICULAR TRAVEL?
ANSWER:

Of course not. Even if such a mandate could save “even just one life” you’d recognize the infringement on your rights and would be able to count the cost of such a drastic intervention.

Don’t lose touch with uncensored news! Join our mailing list today.

POINT OF CONSIDERATION:

While many people over the course of the pandemic have compared lockdowns to putting on a seatbelt before a car accident occurs rather than after, an NCBI study entitled “Forecasting for COVID-19 has failed” speaks to this point saying: “Prolonged draconian lockdown is not equivalent to seat belts. It resembles forbidding all commute.”

▶WOULD YOU INTENTIONALLY ABUSE YOUR CHILD BY LIMITING THEIR OXYGEN INTAKE, SOCIALIZATION, EDUCATION, AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY?
ANSWER:

Of course not! You love your child. You’d understand that their brains are growing and developing and that they need friends, schooling, and extracurricular activities in order to stay physically, emotionally, and mentally healthy.

POINTS OF CONSIDERATION:

Masking children limits their oxygen intake. A JAMA Pediatrics Randomized Clinical Trial entitled “Experimental Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Content in Inhaled Air With or Without Face Masks in Healthy Children” states:

“This [masking] leads in turn to impairments attributable to hypercapnia. A recent review concluded that there was ample evidence for adverse effects of wearing such masks. We suggest that decision- makers weigh the hard evidence produced by these experimental measurements accordingly, which suggest that children should not be forced to wear face masks.”
Limiting the social and educational opportunities of children is harmful to their development and wellbeing. The conclusion of an NCBI article entitled “Impact of COVID-19 and lockdown on mental health of children and adolescents: A narrative review with recommendations” states:

“The containment measures like school and activity centers closures for long periods together expose the children and youth to the debilitating effects on educational, psychological, and developmental attainment as they experience loneliness, anxiety, and uncertainty.”

▶WOULD YOU TRUST YOUR GARAGE IF THEY RAN THEIR DIAGNOSTIC TOOL LONGER THAN RECOMMENDED, RESULTING IN FALSE POSITIVES?
ANSWER:

Of course not. You’d realize that this would lead to all sorts of wasted money, resources, and time, and you’d also question the morals and intentions of your mechanic.

POINT OF CONSIDERATION:

Despite the warnings from several prominent experts (i.e. Michael Mina, epidemiologist; Juliet Morrison, virologist; Carl Hanegan, Oxford professor) stating that the cycle threshold for PCR tests (the test used to diagnose COVID) should be cut off around 30-35 cycles, many labs are continuing to cycle their tests up to 40 cycles.

Even Dr Tony Fauci states: “If you get a cycle threshold of 35 or more, the chances of it being replication-competent are miniscule. You almost never can culture virus from a 37 threshold cycle, even 36, it’s just dead nucleoids, period.”

▶WOULD YOU AUTOMATICALLY TRUST A BRAND NEW PRODUCT PUT OUT BY A COMPANY THAT HAS A TRACK RECORD OF MANY OF THEIR PRODUCTS CAUSING INJURY, DISABILITY, AND DEATH?
ANSWER:

Of course not. If you were brave (unwise?) enough to trust them at all, you’d at least wait until long- term data was available before using their new product.

POINT OF CONSIDERATION:

Both Johnson and Johnson and Pfizer (two of the leading COVID jab manufacturers) have abysmal safety track records- thousands upon thousands of serious, safetyrelated lawsuits. Pfizer, in fact, had the (dis)honour of being rated as “least reputable pharmaceutical company” (according to public perception) on RepTrak.com’s 2017 and 2018 reputation lists. Johnson and Johnson have also made such a (in)famous name for themselves that there is an entire website dedicated to their lawsuits and failures: johnsonandtoxin.com

▶WOULD YOU TRUST YOUR LIFE SAVINGS TO A FINANCIAL ADVISOR WHO HAS YET TO SUCCESSFULLY INVEST MONEY ONE TIME?
ANSWER:

Of course not. Before investing you’d spend plenty of time researching the names of reputable investors, looking for those who have a solid history of experience and success.

POINT OF CONSIDERATION:

In stark comparison to Pfizer and Johnson and Johnson’s atrocious track records, Moderna’s—(one of the other major COVID jab manufacturers)—track record is clean! That is, because they don’t have a track record. At all. Moderna has never successfully made a pharmaceutical drug, and this “vaccine” is their first vaccine (though it, more appropriately, should be called mRNA therapy).

If you wouldn’t trust your life savings to an investor who has never successfully invested money, why would you trust your life to a pharmaceutical company who has never successfully produced a pharmaceutical drug?

►WOULD YOU BUY A CAR THAT WAS BANNED IN 18 COUNTRIES FOR OCCASIONALLY EXPLODING?
ANSWER:

Of course not.

POINT OF CONSIDERATION:

The AstraZeneca (the fourth and final major COVID vaccination manufacturer) COVID shot has been banned or halted in several countries worldwide because of its link to blood clots. Blood clots can cause serious health complications such as tissue damage, stroke, heart attack, and death.

NOTE: Wait! Before you read that and decide that you’d rather risk the exploding car (blood clots) than COVID, remember that there are promising, researched treatments for COVID out there (visit c19study.com for a database of relevant studies). Keeping this database of successful COVID treatment studies in mind, read Section 2 of the Nuremberg Code: “The experiment (aka COVID jabs approved for emergency use only) should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.” FINAL QUESTION:

▶WHY ARE YOU ANSWERING “YES” TO QUESTIONS YOU’D NORMALLY ANSWER “OF COURSE NOT” TO?