Why is this (toxic) substance in the Moderna 'vaccine'?

Shocker: Why Is This Substance in the Moderna Covid Vaccine? - LewRockwell

Perhaps some of those who have criticized use of the word 'dangerous' in describing the injection can defend their criticism?

Does the presence of carcinogenic substances in the injection help explain why they were issued under EUA?

Does it help explain why so many have died from it? If SM-102 will kill aquatic life will it kill humans it is injected into?

 

Have you ever heard the phrase "the dose makes the poison?"

 

Just wait 1 or 2 years.
Anyone will die of it

 

If a large portion of the vaccinated population doesn't die in 1-2 years, then would you be willing to drop this idea you have?

 

beat me too it

 

Rationalize being injected with toxic chemicals as you must. As your body is being poisoned, convince yourself you're doing it for altruistic reasons. Whatever blows your skirt.

I'll pass on being poisoned to 'protect' me from a virus with a 99% survival rate.

 

You know water can kill you if you drink too much, yeah? Charred meat can be carcinogenic. Alcohol, sunlight, etc. Everything can potentially be toxic. Literally any medicine can kill you if you the dosage is wrong. You might as well accuse the entire medical community of trying to kill off humanity. I mean, you're only a few degrees away from that at this point.

 

C'mon man, is that the best you can do? Drinking too much water or getting too much sun is not even close to taking toxic chemicals by injection in a state of fear over a virus with a 99% survival rate.

Desperate is as desperate does.

 

https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/sm-102-moderna-vaccine

 

No comment on how every medication is potentially dangerous/toxic?

Your ravings certainly are desperate.

 

Have it your way Joe. If you like being injected with toxic chemicals, by all means have at it.

I'll pass. I've managed to survive without taking the flu shots all these years. Why do I want to be injected with toxic chemicals delivered by criminal organizations like Pfizer and the rest of pharma?

 

This has nothing to do with "my way", I was just providing information. The fact is the SM-102 is not toxic. For industrial uses, SM-102 can be dissolved in chloroform and chloroform is toxic. The warning in the safety data refers to the industrial solution, not the clinical use. Plenty of reliable and trusted sources have picked up on this claim and explained it, I just picked the first decent source I hit.

None of this in itself means the vaccine is safe but it does mean that the claims made in link you posted are factually wrong. It would be good for you to simply and unconditionally acknowledge that.

 

Over many years I've been required to read and keep on hand MSDS for various chemicals. You can rationalize it any way you need to, you can warmly embrace pharma's advertising psychobabble to your heart's content.

SM-102 is a toxic chemical as the sheet says.

Fools rush in where wise men fear to tread.

 

I'm not "rationalising" anything, I'm still just presenting simple facts.

That is not what the sheet referred to says. It is this; https://www.caymanchem.com/msdss/33474m.pdf (as referenced in the OP link). The key point is on page three, where it identifies the "dangerous component" as chloroform and "other component" as SM-102.

Or you could just read this press release from the same company where they explain exactly the same simple facts; https://www.caymanchem.com/news/sm-102-statement

 

LOL, you want me to place my faith and trust in the FDA and Cayman Chemical. Sorry dude, no can do.

10% active ingredient that is carcinogenic is enough for me. And 90% chloroform. That drug can kill too.

Cayman's label says the drug in meant for in vitro only, but here you are rationalizing its use in vivo.

Defending the indefensible works great in church Joe, but not with me. No way I'm going to put those poisons in my body for a virus with a 99% survival rate.

I might have been born at night sir, but it was not last night.

 

You're relying on Cayman Chemical to tell you it's toxic! You can either trust them or not. Make your mind up.

But your own source doesn't say the active ingredient is carcinogenic, it only lists the chloroform as a dangerous ingredient.

I'm still not defending anything, I'm only posting facts. I take that accusation as a personal insult, keep it up and I'll report it as such. Stick to facts please.

You're free to do whatever you want with your own body. I'm only challenging the misinformation you're propagating.

 

You swallow and regurgitate the misinformation and deceptions delivered by Pharma, Fauci and the mainstream media. Have a look in the mirror Joe, if you're looking for misinformation sources.

 

Stop with the petty misdirection. I referenced exactly the same source as you, Cayman Chemical. Do you consider them a trusted source or deceptive?

 

I consider them as trustworthy as any other corporation.

Why have you ignored the in vitro versus in vivo point in their literature?

Why do you post as though chloroform is some harmless chemical?

 

That isn't really an answer. Given that they are your source for the claim that SM-102 is toxic but you dismiss them as my source for the claim that it is not, do you consider them a trusted source?

No point digging in to details until we've agreed whether we're trusting them or not.

I'm not. Chloroform is toxic, SM-102 is not. Chloroform isn't listed as an ingredient in the vaccines, SM-102 is.

 

The SMDS is my source. And your refusal to acknowledge in vitro and in vivo differences proves to me once again you are basically a dishonest poster, so insecure in your chosen position that you cannot or will not post honestly.

 

SM-102 from the OSHA Safety Data Sheet

Application of the substance / the mixture For research use only, not for human or veterinary use.

https://www.caymanchem.com/msdss/33474m.pdf

 

Instead of just reading the propaganda why not read the datasheet on SM-102 itself? Question everything. ~ George Carlin

 

It is a fabrication intended to terrorize people [which should be a crime considering the maliciousness of it]. So no, in two years the claim will be four years, and in four years the claim will be 8 years, etc. etc. etc. However we can be certain that in 100 years or so, this stuff is going to kill you.

 

Yes, the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine does contain SM-102.