@HPSupport They told me it was fixed and it was working fine and there was nothing wrong with it. Iโve had to wait one to two days to get the updates to all get down. I mean itโs useless and brand new and cost $1000 Canadian what am I supposed to do when repair centre says everything ok
@HPSupport I sent it to the USA service center. They sent it back saying itโs fixed. They changed it to Windows 10 as they said it was faster in my imagination. I thought it was faster but it wasnโt they help me reload windows 11 it became a turtle brand new piece of garbage.
@HPSupport I waited three months to get my brand new Windows 11 HP laptop. I was so excited when I finally got it. It would take 10 minutes to boot up. I could breathe in and out before I could type the next letter. Iโve never seen anything so slow it was slower than my original IBM XT
Crimes Against Humanity.
โI regret that my co-authors and I omitted significant information in โ2004 Pediatricsโ. The omitted data stated that African-American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months have an INCREASED risk for Autismโฆโ
One of the suspects has been granted #bail after being charged with attempted #murder and conspiracy to commit #kidnapping.
CANADIANS PUT YOUR CAR FOBS IN THE MAIL BOX.
YOU DON;T NEED TO PAY FOR A NEW DOOR THEN.
CAC Coronary Artery Calcium Scan: New Heart Disease Test Causes Cancer.
Major Organizations Warn Public Against It...
42 Of Every 100K Patients Develop Cancer From Ionizing Radiation.
Radiation Dosage Varies 10X From One Hospital To Another, Causing 5,600 New Cases Of Cancer.
The American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology & the United States Preventive Services Task Force do not recommend the use of heart CT scans for patients with a low or high risk of heart disease because CT scans could be more harmful than beneficial due to the relatively high dose of radiation.
"Tens of millions of adults would be exposed to relatively high levels of radiation through this procedure. Doctors still have not established a standard dose of radiation to be used for heart CT scans & doses for this test vary from one hospital to another, with some patients getting 10X the amount of radiation as patients in another hospital."
A 2009 study showed that one heart CT scan for the 50 million Americans who would receive the average radiation dose, these scans would result in 5,600 new cancer cases. The number of new cancer cases would be even higher if individuals were screened more than once in their lifetime.
Radiation from CT scans is even of concern to the FDA even when the CT scans are necessary. On October 9, 2009, the FDA announced that it was notifying healthcare professionals that 206 patients who were being tested for stroke received CT radiation doses that were 8X the expected level at one particular medical facility.
While this event involved a single kind of diagnostic test at one facility, the FDA warned that โit reflects more widespread problems with CT quality assurance programs.โ
Each year, over 600,000 Americans die from heart disease even though heart disease can be prevented. Although heart CT scanning may be a useful tool in detecting blockages in heart arteries, there is not enough evidence to show that this test is worth the risks, especially compared to traditional risk factor assessment.
For this reason, the Cancer Prevention & Treatment Fund of the National Research Center for Women & Families agrees with the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force that heart CT scans are not recommended for screening for heart disease.
๐CAC Screening Radiation 10X Cancer Risk๐
https://t.co/RxczYHq31V
๐Ionizing Radiation Risk From CAC Test๐
https://t.co/nfvJCUFtrb
๐Cancer Risk From CT Scan Radiation๐
https://t.co/aKApNrPza7
Video: Dr David Alfrey
He proved unvaccinated kids were healthier. They revoked his license.
Dr. Paul Thomas studied 3,324 children and found unvaccinated kids had FEWER doctor visits and BETTER health outcomes.
Hereโs what his data showed:
Fever โ 9.1ร higher in vaccinated
Ear Pain โ 3.4ร higher
Otitis Media (Ear Infections) โ 2.9ร higher
Conjunctivitis โ 2.4ร higher
Eye Disorders (Other) โ 1.8ร higher
Asthma โ 5.2ร higher
Allergic Rhinitis (Hay Fever) โ 6.9ร higher
Sinusitis โ 4.3ร higher
Breathing Issues โ 2.9ร higher
Anemia โ 5.5ร higher
Eczema โ 4.5ร higher
Urticaria (Hives) โ 2.1ร higher
Dermatitis โ 1.4ร higher
Behavioral Issues โ 4.1ร higher
Gastroenteritis โ 4.7ร higher
Weight/Eating Disorders โ 2.5ร higher
ADHD โ 0 cases in unvaccinated group
*Data based on how often children visited the doctor for each condition*
Instead of investigating the findings, the Oregon Medical Board suspended Dr. Thomasโs licenseโjust days after the study was published. Months later, the study was retracted.
Dr. Paul Thomas isnโt the only one who faced swift punishment for publishing inconvenient science.
Other doctors have faced similar consequences for exposing the same pattern.
The question is: Why are doctors being punished simply for comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated kids?