Re: measles. I know there is no point in yelling at the TV because they can't hear you, but yesterday while watching reruns of Call The Midwife I just couldn't stop myself. I never saw this series for the psy-op it really is when I first watched it on PBS years ago. In season 8 episode 5 (I think... not sure because I got so blind with rage) Dr. Turner sets up an experimental measles vaccine trial and tasks the clinic midwives with drumming up participants, children ten months of age and up. They do so by scaring the shit out of mothers with half truths about measles (which in East End London by 1964 was not at all the lethal childhood infection that it was in Victorian times). They do not mention vitamin A, or that any of the mothers who had measles themselves as kids have passed long lasting immunity to their infants up to age four years. So why was the trial set up to vaccinate babies for measles at ten months of age when their risk was essentially nil even in one of the poorest parts of London? And the show, which purports to be historically accurate, omits the historical fact that the first experimental killed vaccines caused severe illness, permanent disability and death, and were withdrawn. The early live attenuated ones were not much better. In the episode, one nervous panicked mother gets hysterical because her seven month old child does not qualify for the trial. She had lost her first baby at eight months of age who "just died" and no cause was found. Hmm. What vaccines were 8 month old babies getting from the NHS back in 1962? Diphtheria? Tetanus? Pertussis? Polio? Smallpox? What was the measles mortality incidence for ten month old babies in 1963 that would lead a researcher to believe a vaccine was necessary at this age? Anyway, second baby gets a rash, mom goes wild with fear that baby is dying of measles, mad as heck because it should have been prevented by that shot she wasn't allowed to get, and Dr. Turner is SO reassuring that it's just roseola, Sixth Disease, a mild self limiting harmless virus infection. (Like measles in 1964). I am still fuming.
Wow ... my Mom Loved that show. She trusted the liberal, Trump-Derangement-Syndrome narrative completely. She passed away in October. I don't know for sure, but it's likely her fifth covid "vaccine" killed her. She'd promised me she hadn't gotten it, so I didn't strongly assume her fourth shot brought previous cancer back a year and a half later.
But then I saw her vaccine card, and realized she got a fifth shot just a month before her mouth started bothering her again, and three months before she was diagnosed with cancer again, this time with a more aggressive element (but it wasn't "turbo"), so I'm not sure, but those things should never have been given to any living being, never mind most of the planet.
I need to get back in touch with Cole Diagnostics and see if there's a way to test her cells for presence of spike / vaccine elements.
There are others who were more surely, clearly killed by the shots. There must be accountability and criminal charges ...
Yep, Mom loved her TV. Computer and newspaper by day, TV by night. The narrative talking to her all the time.
If that is the statement written by Dr. Dave Weldon it was in sore need of proofreading before being issued. He misspelled "Bobby" twice in the first two paragraphs and the statement is riddled with grammatical errors. It also raise unanswered questions. This may not reflect on his medical abilities, but it does nothing for his credibility to let this go out over his name.
Which was the original? Did Weldon really misspell Bobby, or did someone change and then distribute the altered version to make him look bad? Don't know the answer. Just asking questions.
Good find. As far as I can tell those are the only two differences from the one shown here, so I'm going with either Dr Weldon himself or his staff making those corrections or someone at Stat or elsewhere doing so. The question of why the rest of the statement is so badly written remains.
Many great professionals, including doctors, are not great writers. We don't know much about Dr. Weldon, except what we've read. But we can imagine his frustration, stress, and the speed with which he replied to the outrageous withdrawal may have played a part in his poorly presented statement.
That said, a good editor is always in order for any public official (or wannabe public official). Sadly, time doesn't always allow the careful review that the material deserves and the public expects.
Having edited lots of material, we know how time consuming and challenging a good edit is. One must maintain a delicate balance between conveying information clearly and with good organization without compromising the original author's voice.
Everything you say is true. I made a mistake in my original comment (maybe you noticed it), and I was a proofreader for decades. At least two doctors I follow on Substack clearly don't have their writing proofread. The time element did occur to me. Still, I, and probably you, could have quite quickly brought it up to a standard where most readers would not have perceived anything amiss.
Re: measles. I know there is no point in yelling at the TV because they can't hear you, but yesterday while watching reruns of Call The Midwife I just couldn't stop myself. I never saw this series for the psy-op it really is when I first watched it on PBS years ago. In season 8 episode 5 (I think... not sure because I got so blind with rage) Dr. Turner sets up an experimental measles vaccine trial and tasks the clinic midwives with drumming up participants, children ten months of age and up. They do so by scaring the shit out of mothers with half truths about measles (which in East End London by 1964 was not at all the lethal childhood infection that it was in Victorian times). They do not mention vitamin A, or that any of the mothers who had measles themselves as kids have passed long lasting immunity to their infants up to age four years. So why was the trial set up to vaccinate babies for measles at ten months of age when their risk was essentially nil even in one of the poorest parts of London? And the show, which purports to be historically accurate, omits the historical fact that the first experimental killed vaccines caused severe illness, permanent disability and death, and were withdrawn. The early live attenuated ones were not much better. In the episode, one nervous panicked mother gets hysterical because her seven month old child does not qualify for the trial. She had lost her first baby at eight months of age who "just died" and no cause was found. Hmm. What vaccines were 8 month old babies getting from the NHS back in 1962? Diphtheria? Tetanus? Pertussis? Polio? Smallpox? What was the measles mortality incidence for ten month old babies in 1963 that would lead a researcher to believe a vaccine was necessary at this age? Anyway, second baby gets a rash, mom goes wild with fear that baby is dying of measles, mad as heck because it should have been prevented by that shot she wasn't allowed to get, and Dr. Turner is SO reassuring that it's just roseola, Sixth Disease, a mild self limiting harmless virus infection. (Like measles in 1964). I am still fuming.
Wow ... my Mom Loved that show. She trusted the liberal, Trump-Derangement-Syndrome narrative completely. She passed away in October. I don't know for sure, but it's likely her fifth covid "vaccine" killed her. She'd promised me she hadn't gotten it, so I didn't strongly assume her fourth shot brought previous cancer back a year and a half later.
But then I saw her vaccine card, and realized she got a fifth shot just a month before her mouth started bothering her again, and three months before she was diagnosed with cancer again, this time with a more aggressive element (but it wasn't "turbo"), so I'm not sure, but those things should never have been given to any living being, never mind most of the planet.
I need to get back in touch with Cole Diagnostics and see if there's a way to test her cells for presence of spike / vaccine elements.
There are others who were more surely, clearly killed by the shots. There must be accountability and criminal charges ...
Yep, Mom loved her TV. Computer and newspaper by day, TV by night. The narrative talking to her all the time.
Call the Midwife used to be a good show. In the past couple of seasons, they have become a mouthpiece for the left. I stopped watching it a while ago.
The link for Dr. Lindley's video isn't live. Could it be this one? https://x.com/KLVeritas/status/1902465569468633136
If that is the statement written by Dr. Dave Weldon it was in sore need of proofreading before being issued. He misspelled "Bobby" twice in the first two paragraphs and the statement is riddled with grammatical errors. It also raise unanswered questions. This may not reflect on his medical abilities, but it does nothing for his credibility to let this go out over his name.
Very interesting comment about misspelled name.
Found another statement online in which "Bobby" was not misspelled as "Bobbie." https://www.statnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Dave-Weldon-statement.pdf
Which was the original? Did Weldon really misspell Bobby, or did someone change and then distribute the altered version to make him look bad? Don't know the answer. Just asking questions.
Good find. As far as I can tell those are the only two differences from the one shown here, so I'm going with either Dr Weldon himself or his staff making those corrections or someone at Stat or elsewhere doing so. The question of why the rest of the statement is so badly written remains.
Many great professionals, including doctors, are not great writers. We don't know much about Dr. Weldon, except what we've read. But we can imagine his frustration, stress, and the speed with which he replied to the outrageous withdrawal may have played a part in his poorly presented statement.
That said, a good editor is always in order for any public official (or wannabe public official). Sadly, time doesn't always allow the careful review that the material deserves and the public expects.
Having edited lots of material, we know how time consuming and challenging a good edit is. One must maintain a delicate balance between conveying information clearly and with good organization without compromising the original author's voice.
Everything you say is true. I made a mistake in my original comment (maybe you noticed it), and I was a proofreader for decades. At least two doctors I follow on Substack clearly don't have their writing proofread. The time element did occur to me. Still, I, and probably you, could have quite quickly brought it up to a standard where most readers would not have perceived anything amiss.