Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2026 Poal.co

477

Supposedly the majority of vaccine adverse effects have come from 5% of the batches. These batches are definately not created equal. If a medical-cabal-dictatorship was trying to kill everyone, wouldn't they want to get as much data out of them as possible? One way to do that is to subject the whole population to experimental drug trails. Why would you stop at testing just one drug? So the theory is that in each vaccine is a cocktail of drugs that differs from batch to batch. By recording what batches people got, and requiring anyone who wants to recieve other medical services to have that data associated with them, you can look at their future medical history to determine the long term outcomes of the cocktails they've recieved.

So the people who had their limbs turn black and rot off got one hell of a bad drug. They are being reckless with your health, and that is to be certain. Why not aquire a lot of data out of people if you are willing to be completely reckless with their wellbeing?

Supposedly the majority of vaccine adverse effects have come from 5% of the batches. These batches are definately not created equal. If a medical-cabal-dictatorship was trying to kill everyone, wouldn't they want to get as much data out of them as possible? One way to do that is to subject the whole population to experimental drug trails. Why would you stop at testing just one drug? So the theory is that in each vaccine is a cocktail of drugs that differs from batch to batch. By recording what batches people got, and requiring anyone who wants to recieve other medical services to have that data associated with them, you can look at their future medical history to determine the long term outcomes of the cocktails they've recieved. So the people who had their limbs turn black and rot off got one hell of a bad drug. They are being reckless with your health, and that is to be certain. Why not aquire a lot of data out of people if you are willing to be completely reckless with their wellbeing?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (21).
[–] • 0 pt (edited )

Probably not. With how rigorous the quality control is for this kind of stuff, it's just not possible for them to manufacture wildly different formulations from what was approved. They'd all get shut down, quickly.

We got those standards because of various fuckups over decades.

But what you can do is you can buy just one dose from any place then send it off to a lab to get analyzed. Ensure you follow extremely rigorous chain of custody processes so no one can say you tampered with it.

Tell us the results. This will cost you $600 to do.

If you want to mass analyze, you'll have to buy from batches all over the US. Could cost thousands to do an independent assessment.

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

Get one of each named company's shot to determine if they are using the population as an experiment.

If they are doing it, they would differentiate the tested substances between multiple entities or faces each with their own layer of separation from the original decision.

This is how those really in charge operate. Multiple shell companies and redundancies so your grievances if ever "resolved" never hurt the true decision maker so nothing really changes in the future because the company that got hit was just a pawn.