My heart goes out to de Niro in this interview. He is visibly upset. I get the sense that there is so much more he wants to say, but can’t. Nonetheless, he leaves his mark. Such a famous person who is never in the headlines, a private family man, making such a bold statement. He wants the truth. So do I. I feel bad for all the negative criticism de Niro has received, but this angry attack on him and his decision to pull VaXXed from The Tribeca film festival only gave it more publicity. It also proves someone is scared of the truth being known.
Pediatrician Dr. Paul Thomas Agrees with Robert De Niro: “Let’s Find Out The Truth” About Vaccines – GREAT READ AND GREAT COMMENTS AT THE END ♥
Now that De Niro’s testimony about his son on the Today Show is literally being talked about around the world, what are the questions we need to ask?
1) Is it the MMR vaccine that is problematic or is it the MMR vaccine in combination with other vaccines?
2) Are there other vaccine ingredients that are just too toxic for a baby’s body to handle cumulatively, especially the cumulative amounts of aluminum that are in the vaccines?
3) Could it be the acetaminophen (the main ingredient in Tylenol) that is causing the biggest assault to the brain by depleting the body of glutathione?
4) Is it the cumulative toxic exposure and immune disruption (from things like antibiotics and vitamin D deficiency) that is causing children to slip into autism after the 12-month doctor’s visit?
6) Or is it a combination of all of these issues, perhaps especially the toxic amounts of aluminum, combined with acetaminophen, which disrupts the ability to get rid of toxins, compounded by the three live virus vaccine (MMR) given to small children already burdened with toxins from pesticides, herbicides, fluoride, antibiotics, and an aggressive infant vaccine schedule, that is damaging some babies’ brains?
Robert de Niro says son changed overnight after MMR jab – Daily Mail – ‘Let’s find out the truth’: Robert de Niro
“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.
“There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”
“… Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E = mc². Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.” ~ Michael Crichton, courtesy of JB Handley