Like with mandating shots, I think they have to be actually safe for mandates to even be on the table. If there is a chance of hurting even 1 in every billion then it has to be choice.
So with these tests. I think they have to be super accurate for mandated tests to be on the table.
I still disagree with mandates on an ethical level I am just saying the govt shouldn't even get close to mandates unless they fix the problems with the tests and shots and all the rest.
Almost seems like there is an agenda and I don't think money is even in the top 3 goals of the people making the agenda.
I did not know that HIV testing was mandatory in newborns and pregnancy. I am fine with people choosing to test, or not choosing to test, but being mandatory is, as Rebecca states, “a spectacularly bad idea“.
In the United States we might be able to challenge this in court. Especially after the Covid testing fiasco, people are more willing to accept personal choice.
I expect this would be mainly a state government decision. However, if there is any move on the federal level it would come only if RFK Junior is elected president, which actually is a possibility. Because the mainstream media has blacked out and targeted him, it is up to people like us to encourage others to actually listen to his interviews and hear what his policies are. For example, here is a nice short one I like to share.
So mandatory tests for pregnant women and those in the reproductive years will assist the country to meet the target so far we are 1.5 millions short, to achieve 95 percent tested, 95 % on Arvs and 95 % on Viral supression,
I begin to suspect that one reason for the push was to help facilitate the collection of human genetics material for the biotechnomaniacs who want, among other things, to CRISPR about with "better human evolution thru ScienceTM". The larger the data sets the better. Esp for those pesky over-breeders among the unwashed on any continent. See- "helpful" philanthropy which somehow continues to sterilize women all over the globe without their knowledge or consent.
This is so disturbing, given the utter fraudulence of the tests, as you've so well explained in your book. It's probably mandatory so that they can keep fear of HIV infection alive in the general population and peddle their poisonous "remedies". Why the change in 2011? Could be pushback on the Perth Group's findings.
A year later, in 2012, Lindsey Nagel gave birth and was thrust into a devastating and infuriating nightmare. Duesberg wrote about Lindsey in his 1995 book "Inventing the AIDS Virus." She was born in Romania in 1990 and adopted by a Minnesota couple in 1992. One of her 2 HIV tests came out positive and she was immediately put on AZT as a little toddler, suffering terrible side effects. Fortunately, her parents were tipped off by Duesberg and, defying the medical establishment that never forgave them, they soon took her off AZT after which she thrived and lived a happy life until late 2012 when things started to go south..... Are you familiar with her story?
Like with mandating shots, I think they have to be actually safe for mandates to even be on the table. If there is a chance of hurting even 1 in every billion then it has to be choice.
So with these tests. I think they have to be super accurate for mandated tests to be on the table.
I still disagree with mandates on an ethical level I am just saying the govt shouldn't even get close to mandates unless they fix the problems with the tests and shots and all the rest.
Almost seems like there is an agenda and I don't think money is even in the top 3 goals of the people making the agenda.
I did not know that HIV testing was mandatory in newborns and pregnancy. I am fine with people choosing to test, or not choosing to test, but being mandatory is, as Rebecca states, “a spectacularly bad idea“.
In the United States we might be able to challenge this in court. Especially after the Covid testing fiasco, people are more willing to accept personal choice.
I expect this would be mainly a state government decision. However, if there is any move on the federal level it would come only if RFK Junior is elected president, which actually is a possibility. Because the mainstream media has blacked out and targeted him, it is up to people like us to encourage others to actually listen to his interviews and hear what his policies are. For example, here is a nice short one I like to share.
https://rumble.com/v2w67cr-if-you-become-president-how-will-vaccine-policy-change-rfk-jr.-new-hampshir.html
So mandatory tests for pregnant women and those in the reproductive years will assist the country to meet the target so far we are 1.5 millions short, to achieve 95 percent tested, 95 % on Arvs and 95 % on Viral supression,
It's like there is a specific target
I just heard on the news today that South Africa is 1.5 millions people short to meet the UNAiDS target of 2025, that is 95-95-95
I begin to suspect that one reason for the push was to help facilitate the collection of human genetics material for the biotechnomaniacs who want, among other things, to CRISPR about with "better human evolution thru ScienceTM". The larger the data sets the better. Esp for those pesky over-breeders among the unwashed on any continent. See- "helpful" philanthropy which somehow continues to sterilize women all over the globe without their knowledge or consent.
$$$ and narrative control
This is so disturbing, given the utter fraudulence of the tests, as you've so well explained in your book. It's probably mandatory so that they can keep fear of HIV infection alive in the general population and peddle their poisonous "remedies". Why the change in 2011? Could be pushback on the Perth Group's findings.
A year later, in 2012, Lindsey Nagel gave birth and was thrust into a devastating and infuriating nightmare. Duesberg wrote about Lindsey in his 1995 book "Inventing the AIDS Virus." She was born in Romania in 1990 and adopted by a Minnesota couple in 1992. One of her 2 HIV tests came out positive and she was immediately put on AZT as a little toddler, suffering terrible side effects. Fortunately, her parents were tipped off by Duesberg and, defying the medical establishment that never forgave them, they soon took her off AZT after which she thrived and lived a happy life until late 2012 when things started to go south..... Are you familiar with her story?
And in some cases, partners of the HIV positive women would test negative.
In South Africa it's been mandatory from early 2000s, I would say about 10% of women test positive particular black women