No, there is no possibility that he is not dishonest. It was conclusively proven during unrefuted testimony that he was informed that the samples he was using were contaminated and were producing false positives. He was developing a measles "transfer factor" which would replace the MMR vaccine, if he could instill public mistrust in it. He stood to make millions. He was paid tens of thousands of pounds by the lawyers and never disclosed it. No, there is not a shred of a possibility that he was not dishonest.
Comment Reply
No, there is no possibility that he is not dishonest. It was conclusively proven during unrefuted testimony that he was informed that the samples he was using were contaminated and were producing false positives. He was developing a measles "transfer factor" which would replace the MMR vaccine, if he could instill public mistrust in it. He stood to make millions. He was paid tens of thousands of pounds by the lawyers and never disclosed it. No, there is not a shred of a possibility that he was not dishonest.
May 26, 2010 - 8:36pmThis Comment
Reply