Dr. Stanley Plotkin – “Godfather of Vaccines” – What do Abortions have to do with Vaccines?
HOME -
My Rumble Channel -- Waking the World up
Please Visit my other Blog Sites - Answers to Mysterious and Chronic Health Conditions
Dr. Stanley Plotkin – “Godfather of Vaccines” – What do Abortions have to do with Vaccines?
Do Aborted Fetuses have anything to do with Vaccines? The answers from this expert may shock you.
Dr. Stanley Plotkin, often referred to as the “Godfather of Vaccines” because he spent a good majority of his life specializing in developing vaccines.
Dr. Stanley Plotkin studied aborted fetuses to see if they could be used to make Vaccines.
Guess what, he decided that they could be beneficial in developing vaccines.
Dr. Plotkin has worked as a consultant to vaccine manufacturers, such as Sanofi Pasteur, as
well as biotechnology firms, non-profits and governments.
This is a copy of his “Under Oath” Deposition on January 11, 2018.
The reason for this deposition was a court battle between divorced parents where one wanted their child to be vaccinated and the other did not.
Michael Schmitt, the father of the 2 year old daughter wanted his daughter to be vaccinated.
Lori Matheson, the mother of the 2 year old daughter did NOT want her daughter to be vaccinated.
Lori Matheson objected to vaccines based on “Heath and Religious” grounds.
Custody of the 2 year old girl was shared by the two parents but the mother, Lori Matheson (Plaintiff) had primary custody.
The Case: Miatheson vs Schmitt – Deposition of Stanley A. Plotkin, M.D. – Case # 2015-831539-DM, January 11, 2018, County of Oakland Circuit Court, Family Division, Michigan.
The result of this case – the court ruled that it was in the best interest of the child to be vaccinated in December of 2018, the Court of Appeals upheld this decision, saying not enough sufficient evidence to show the child would be harmed by vaccinations or that potential risks outweighed benefits. In 2020, the Michigan Supreme Court denied to hear the appeal, thus the Court of Appeals decision stands.
Mandatory Vaccination was Ordered.
Yes, just f*cking unbeliebable.
AND Here is the Testimony Heard given by Dr. Stanley Plotkin:
Q. In your work related to vaccines, how many fetuses have been a part of that work?
A. My own personal work? Two.
Q. Two. So, in all of your work related to vaccines throughout your whole career, you only ever worked with two fetuses?
A. In terms of making vaccines, yes. Yes.
Q. I'm going to hand you what's been marked Plaintiff's Exhibit 41. Are you familiar with this article, Dr. Plotkin?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Are you listed as an author on this article?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. This study took place at the Wistar Institute, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. How many fetuses were used in the study described in this article?
A. Quite a few. But my answer to the previous question was what did I use to make vaccines, and the answer was two.
ATTORNEY TO COURT REPORTER: Can you read back the question I had asked?
THE REPORTER: Question, "In your work related to vaccines how many fetuses have been a part of that work?" Answer, "My own personal work? Two."
Q. Okay . So, I'm going to ask that question again. In your work related to vaccines, how many fetuses were involved in that work?
A. There was only two fetuses involved in making vaccines. When fetal strains of fibroblast strains were first developed, I was involved in that work trying characterize those cells but they were not used to make vaccines.
Q. Wasn't the purpose of this study to help develop a human cell line or to support the use of human cell lines in the creation of vaccines?
A. The idea was to study the cell strains from fetuses to determine whether or not they could be used to make vaccines.
Q. So, this was related to your work?
A. Well, yes in a sense.
Q. To vaccines, correct?
A. Yes. It was preparatory.
Q. Okay. So, this study involved 74 fetuses, correct?
A. I don't remember exactly how many.
Q. Will you turn to Pg.12 of the study?
A. No, it's 76.
Q. 76?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. And these fetuses were all 3 months or older when aborted, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. And these were all normally developed fetuses, correct?
A. Yes.
Q. These included fetuses that were aborted for social and psychiatric reasons, correct?
A. Correct.
Q. What organs did you harvest from these fetuses?
A. Well, I didn't personally harvest any, but a whole range of tissues were harvested by co-workers.
Q. Okay. And these pieces were then cut up into little pieces, right?
A. Yes.
Q. And they were cultured?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Some of the pieces of the fetuses were pituitary gland that were chopped into pieces?
A. Uh-huh.
Q. Included the lung of fetuses?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Included the skin?
A. Yes.
Q. Kidney?
A. Yes.
Q. Spleen?
A. Yes.
Q. Heart?
A. Yes.
Q. And tongue?
A. (Laughs) I don't recall, but probably; yes.
Q. So, I just want to make sure I understand. In your entire career -- and this was just one study, so
I'm going to ask you again. In your entire career, how many fetuses have you worked with?
A. Well --
Q. Approximately.
A. I don't remember the exact number, but quite a few when we were studying them originally before we decided to use them originally to make vaccines.
Q. Do you have any since -- This one study had 76. How many other studies did you have that you used aborted fetuses for?
A. Oh, I don't know how many.
Conclusion: It’s hard to believe that after this testimony, that ANY court in the United States would make a Vaccine with these ingredients Mandatory and FORCE the parents to vaccinate this 2 year old girl.
What an unjust world we live in.
Sources:
1. Gina G. Harrison -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PN7FQCkiBp8
2. Welsh, Teresa. “'Dad Gets a Say:' Divorced Parents Go to Court Over Whether to Vaccinate Child.” Miami Herald, 10 Oct. 2017, www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article178152101.html. *Notes: Vaccine Court Case - Battle between divorced parents, the dad wants their 2 year old daughter to be vaccinated and the mother does not want their 2 year old daughter to be vaccinated based on Health and Religious grounds. *Vaccination Court Case.
3. “LORI MATHESON V MICHAEL SCHMITT (per Curiam Opinion).” Justia Law, law.justia.com/cases/michigan/court-of-appeals-unpublished/2019/347022.html. *Note: Vaccine Court Case -The Court of Appeals -- Matheson vs Schmitt - Shared custody - Mother does not want 2 year old child to be vaccinated, father does. plaintiff had strong religious objections to the use of vaccines because “some vaccines are cultured in aborted fetal cells "and also contain animal blood, and that plaintiff objected specifically to the MMR, polio, Hepatitis A, and flu vaccines because of her religious beliefs. Court Ruled that child must be vaccinated. Mandatory Vaccination justified. Does the Court have Authority to require vaccinations? YES. The Appeal Court ruled that in favor of the initial ruling, the child must be vaccinated. "Once the trial court receives such documentation from the child’s pediatrician, within 7 days the court shall enter an order directing that the child be vaccinated in conformance with the pediatrician’s recommendations, and the trial court’s order should further provide that the course of vaccination must begin within 21 days of the trial court’s order."
=================================================================
PROTECT YOURSELF: Protect yourself, your children and loved ones from the harmful EMF from the newly installed 5G Towers. We are constantly being Bombarded by Harmful Radiation, being hit from all directions, every single day.
Up
to 75% OFF!
Hope
& Tivon’s EMF Protection Products:
https://www.ftwproject.com/our-special-offers/ref/528/
Check out the Special Offers on all the EMF PROTECTION
Products – including:
1. Phone
& Laptop Shields
2. Pyramids
3.
Sleeping
Pods
4. Charge
Plates
5. GardenSets
6.
Shungite
Tiles
7. Pendants.
***PLEASE FOLLOW My BLOG → https://mrnavac.blogspot.com/
END. 7/16/2025 3:00 PM
*******************************************************
Comments
Post a Comment