So I heard about cows have been given bovaer to stop global warming. The news article mentions Coles, do you think our local butchers are safe from it?
Where Should We Buy Our Beef from?
Tomstars241 on 11/12/2024 - 21:53
Last edited 11/12/2024 - 22:33
Last edited 11/12/2024 - 22:33
Comments
- 1
- 2
It depends on if the local butchers are sourcing their meat from the same farms who are using Bovaer. Ask the butchers if you have any concerns.
The butcher probably wouldn't know what is given to the animals. Some things, like hormones, need to be declared on what is called a National Vendor Declaration each time animals are sold. They would know if they are certified grain fed etc, but treatments and additives don't generally need to be declared when selling. Ensuring no Bovaer had been fed would need to be a specific commercial specification. It would really depend on if they have an exclusive their supply chain or are buying what is available at the time they need to order.
If animals are sold from farm, to feedlot, to abattoir, to meat packer, to retailer there is no way to know exactly what they have been fed at each step of the supply chain.
Bovaer is not on the vendor dec, and nor should it be - https://www.integritysystems.com.au/globalassets/isc/pdf-fil…
Even without a specific commercial specification, making a false claim about a product is still fraud.
If a butcher is willing to research and source Bovaer-free meat and advertise it as such, the claim is either true, or someone is breaking the law.
When you buy meat thats been soaking in styrofoam covered by glad wrap, Bovaer is the least of your problems aye
imagine you were forced to not fart
Those days are called the working from office days. It has been a hard adjustment for body that has been used to hitting that mute button before releasing a new hole in the ozone layer.
before releasing a new hole in the ozone layer.
Some days I feel personally responsible for how thin the ozone layer is down south.
Bigger adjustment wearing pants again.
yes ??
Could be aside effectOR
Not burpingI think they still fart. It just reduces the quantity of methane. Methane is only one of the gases in farts. The smelly portion of farts is actually not methane.
Anyway, I think it's cow burps that emit more methane than their farts.
Cows of the future will need to meet Euro emission standards to save the Earth
That's only going to work if they program them to what is required. Eat the glut of humans.
Oh, it's you again with the anti-humanity comments…
Anti overpopulation. Your mixing me up with Mental Yahoo
No problem, we'll just get VW to do the testing.
damn you went down the rabbit hole.
There was a study where feeding cows seaweed reduced methane production by something like 98% Pretty sure thats what this is.
They've been putting hormones in chicken for years, ya need to pick your battles.
They don't actually put hormones in chickens. Selective breeding has been able to achieve fast growth rates.
"Hormones and steroids have not been used in Australia's meat chicken industry for more than 60 years"
"International ban
The use of hormones in poultry has been banned internationally for over 50 years.Australian regulations
In Australia, it is illegal to administer hormones to chickens under any circumstances. The government regularly tests meat to confirm that hormones are not used.Logistical impossibility
It would be logistically impossible to inject hormones into chickens on a farm because growth hormones are injected, not consumed."Have you never been to a chicken gym? What do you think they do at night, they don't just roost, their gym rolls out and they hit the weights. During the night the gym junkie comes out to dish out the growth hormones.
"i can give up at any time, i promise, bok bok"
do you even lift bra?
Everyday is drumstick day…
When I went down the chicken rabbit hole I found that it's not hormones they inject the chickens with, it's the antibiotics which provide additional growth in addition to keeping the chickens from getting sick in the overpopulated, less-than-sanitary conditions they live in. It's only the organic chickens aren't injected with these antibiotics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasalocid
Pretty sure livestock feedlots use this too.
EDIT:
A vets take on some downstream issues>
https://thevetgroup.com.au/lasalocid-bovatec-toxicity-be-awa…That's what i meant, bingo.
Your information is incorrect and out of date:
"Antibiotics are only used when there is no other effective solution, and only medicines approved by the APVMA, Australia's national veterinary product regulator, are used."
"fast food and supermarkets require their chicken meat to be free of antibiotics."
"Antibiotics are administered only when necessary to prevent or treat a clinical disease, and done so in isolation. If antibiotics are used they are approved for Poultry by the Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA), which are the regulatory authority governing conditions of the use of antibiotics in Australia.
The industry has adopted an antibiotics policy which sets out the responsible use of antibiotics that it advocates, and is strictly regulated and administered under government regulations, so that there is sufficient time for any residue to be eliminated. Given that no residues have been found in chicken meat, even people with allergies to certain antibiotics can consume properly cooked chicken meat in Australia with confidence."
Thanks for the correction.
Well hello fellow meat supply chain person. You do know your stuff and have dispelled a number of rumours in this thread, well done.
All I would add is that the APVMA just sets the rules for racing for the usage of antibiotics. They don't actually track usage. The APVMA just wags its finger and says "make sure you only use this product as per the label". It's actually up to the commercial supply chain itself to self-regulate and there are very few domestic regulations they need to comply with from a sales and production perspective. Commercial entities just need to ensure they aren't selling products within the specified withholding period and there are no residues outside of MRLs in sold product (and that they aren't lying to consumers).
There was a study where feeding cows seaweed reduced methane production by something like 98% Pretty sure thats what this is.
No this something different.
No this something different.
Agreed, I think those original studies were done to stop people complaining. Bovaer is not produced from seaweed, nor are the molecular compounds similar at all. It is also not a derivation of a compound inside seaweed…
given some tablets so they don’t fart
Are these available to give to your partner?
Maybe buy them a box of Lacteeze Double Strength tablets for christmas
Perhaps we can install catalytic converters on the cows, for the people that really want their beef & jugs of milk to be additive free. The only problem is, methane comes out of both ends of cows, so you'll need to capture the burp and fart at the same time.
great, im already being r8ped by the government, now someone wants to shove a muffler up my arse for good measure.
No, but you could attach a long tube to the rear end of your partner, and put the other end of the tube out the window.
Excellent idea!
I’ll call it a Fartsnorter
Mate if you think that's the only chemical onboard cattle, I have some really bad news for you.
The problem is there is so much cancer in the youth today, and we don't know what is causing it.
If they tax beef and offset the carbon elsewhere, I would be more for that rather than doing this.
Omg, this shit… Was wondering when this was going to get here…
Bovaer is the new 5G nano-bot Covid vaccine that cookers have clutched onto. Just wait till,you hear how bad for the environment it is to make those tin foil hats people keep buying…
Here’s a thought, if you don’t like it… don’t eat it. Simples *meerkat clicks*
Farting is an important part of my identity. What if this stops me from farting as well?
Its unaustralian not to fart on a hamburger.
Wait for them to realise that Tin Foil and Aluminium Foil are two different tings too!
People not eating it is the entire point of the thread.
They dont want to eat yet another avoidable chemical cocktail, so are asking for lists of suppliers with a policy against it. Simple indeed.Bonus, most of those online suppliers are a lot cheaper and better quality meat than the supermarkets.
You're not eating it, it gets fully metabolised in the cow's digestive system. You avoid it by not eating out of a cow's feed trough, working in a Bovaer factory, or being a farmhand. You were probably already doing all of these things. The trace amounts that might make it in to a food product are going to be less hazardous than the plastic the meat comes packaged in
I was optimistic for lab grown meat's success, but seeing the hubbub that's happened over an extensively tested additive has made me worried that this naturopathic quackery will prevent it taking off
I was optimistic for lab grown meat's success
You will never get it.
You won't be saying that if your children started eating it and became sick over time. We are still testing the long term safety of this product.
Remember Thalidomide. Never again.
There is a risk, it's not a non-zero risk. Some people who can afford to shop around and pay more should do so.
There is also preliminary evidence it is in beef offal and the veins of the cow… O_o!
If I eat this beef will it stop me from farting?
No. If you want to stop farting, give up: coffee, nuts, seeds, beans, yoghurt, all fermented foods, bread, cake, all high-fibre foods, eggplants, mangos, and sugar. And eat 50% of what you eat now.
imagine you owe your conscious to choose to not be a paedophile because your ancestors had sex with children at some point ages ago and now you curse and shame those who continue to sleep with children. what kind of hypocrisy is that?
Are you okay?
?
I think we should curse and punish those who sleep with children dude?, dont you agree?
go see a shrink dude. you have a sick mind.
reported to the FBI.
Might want to try a more local law enforcement agency next time
@baldur: I didn't realise they had such a wide reaching jurisdiction. Wonder which other laws they enforce internationally
Who is cursing and shaming people who eat meat?
Can always get grass fed, grass finished direct from farmers, butchered for ~ $12 - $20 per kg ;)
Been doing it for close to a decade now :P
Yeah I do this too through https://halfacow.farm; they butcher, portion and vac seal everything for you so it's quite convenient.
Lots of different farms are on the platform so you can find a farm that has beef that you like.
How do you work your way through it? Most of the stuff I can find you get 2 nights of steak and then spend the next several months working through meat that needs a slow cooker.
Extremely keen on bulk buying good meat, so I genuinely asking, not having a crack.Two nights of steak from half a cow??
Here's an example for 1/8 of a cow, so half would be ~4x this.
1 x Eye Fillet Steak
2 x Rump Steak
2 x T-Bone Steak
2 x New York Steak
2 x Scotch Fillet Steak
2 x Blade Steak
2 x Round Steak
4 x Chuck Steak
4 x Minute Steak
2 x Oyster Blade Steak
Osso Bucco
Silverside Roast
Brisket
Short Ribs
Gravy Beef
2.5 kg Lean Mince
6 kg Sausages or Burger Mince (You can choose on the cut sheet) Sausages and Burger mince are Gluten free.
3-4kg Bones (Optional)I buy whole cows butchered at a time (dress weight generally 200 - 260kg) …
There is always a heap of choice cuts as @trapper mentioned …
Last order included things like:
Sliced Fillet, Rump Steak, T Bone or Porterhouse, Topside Schnitzels, Round, Silverside, Gravy Beef, Ribs (rolled roast or short rib), Brisket, Oyster Blade Steak, Bolar Blade Steak / Roast, Blade Steak, Scotch Fillet, Chuck Diced, Skirt Diced, Mince, Sausages (thin or thick),Osso Bucco.
It's not just 1 T-Bone, the last order had like 28 x 1in thick T-bones and 25+kg of mince, etc
I use Paris Creek Beef when in Australia: https://pariscreekbeef.com.au/order.php
I use Paris Creek Beef when in Australia
This looks great how you can pick the options for each cut, what's the interstate delivery like?
@trapper: Click "I have read and understood terms" and click "Next" …
Select your choice of product and select how you want it packaged, click "Next" …
In "Step 3" you can see the cuts options …
In "Step 4" you can also request various offal options (I get Liver and Heart) …
Not sure if they will deliver to any other states!
When I am in SA, the delivery is free … When I am in the NT, I get a whole cow delivered frozen via road freight for ~ $200 …
How do you store the excess and how long do you take to get through it?
Concerned freezing would make the steak taste shit
@Tech5: Stored in chest freezer …
Family of 5 strict carnivore, get through a whole cow in less than 2 months …
We compared our SA delivery (fresh) to NT delivery (frozen) - both seared to "rare" and there was no taste difference (just don't get them "freezer burn") …
We also ran some cheap vitamin panels on a random selection, the water soluble vitamins after frozen were ~ 10% reduced …
Farts make scents. Cheers
Dammit - have an upvote
Bovaer being unsafe is a conspiracy started by the vegans to stop you eating red meat.
Meat and Livestock Australia have put together an explainer - https://www.mla.com.au/research-and-development/Environment-…
Time for the conspiracists to fight their hardest battle yet, do they blindly follow the newest bout of fear mongering to have something new to rant about at Christmas, or eat the Bovaer meat to stick it to the vegans
This is a 4d chess move from the vegans to fight climate change.
To date, MLA has observed methane reduction of 60–90% in feedlots and 15% for grazing animals.
So the problem is feedlots really. All cattle should be grass fed and finished, it's just way better for you anyway.
No they should not. It's inefficient.
It is the same issue with those that say everyone should eat organic. The problem is you don't get the yield.
How much more grazing land do you think we would need without feedlotting?
Not much, all cattle here in Australia is basically grass fed, it's just the last couple of months they are placed in feed lots.
It doesn't cost that much more to keep feeding them grass, hence the minimal price difference to the consumer.
@TEER3X: This is a half truth but an important one. Just over 30% of all Australian cattle are feedlot finished.
Cattle that are not run through a feedlot will be labelled as grassfed from a technical trade or labelling perspective.
Any cattle that is run through a feedlot for the last period of its life before slaughter will from a regulatory perspective be defined as grainfed or feedlot finished.
You are correct, comparative with the USA, we run a lesser proportion of our overall herd through feedlots and, of those that go through a feedlot, they usually spend less time in the feedlot.
Pricing dynamic of keeping on grass or finishing on grain at a feedlot is a commercial one. Exports markets (remember > 70% of Aus beef is exported) such as the USA love fatty beef that has come from cows finished on a feedlot.
There can be a price premium for both grass fed and grain fed, but it just comes down the the market. The pricing dynamic on how you carry and finish cattle is both market driven and comes down to climatic factors. I.e., a dry summer will mean limited capacity to carry cattle and turning them off at auction to a feedlot buyer makes more sense, noting the feedlot will have economies of scale to purchase grain for finishing quite cheaply (or will even have on-site irrigation for growing their own grain).
On the flip side, if you're selling into a market that prefers purely grass fed cattle, it would make more sense to absorb the cost of agisting your cattle or buying in grass feed to finish, rather than turning them off.
MLA say there is no bovaer or metabolites in the tissue or milk of animals fed this feed while linking scientific research papers that specifically say it is.
What they mean is it is in the milk and tissue at levels they deem safe.
"Safety Assessment: Outcome ofassessment of 3-Nitrooxypropanol “3-NOP” as a feed additive for all ruminantsfor milk production and reproduction,from DSM Nutritional ProductsReference number RP1059"
"levels of 3-NOP or its primary metabolite NOPA in milk and edible tissues were not deemed as being of concern as consumer intakes would be well within the ADI."
Yeah, I re-read what you wrote and I agree.
Don’t tell me that ! I already brought 2kg of bovaer to store in my, “End of Industrial Civilisation” stash.
If it makes the cannibals eat the next person rather that me, then I’ll prove to them by my lack of farts that I’m toxic meat.
Local butchers and farmers markets are the go. Just ask around at you local butchers where they get their meat from and what additives are/are or given to the animals. There are also a few healthy online meat suppliers that can ship you whatever you want.
Fear the cow farts, love the wars!
Will this be the new global slogan?Just to be clear. Most local butchers will not actually know the background of the cattle they're buying. A big retailer like Woolworths, Coles, and Aldi, have integrated supply chains and will have supply contracts that determine the nature of the cattle (or rather the meat) that they're buying, and they'll periodically audit their suppliers to ensure compliance.
But local butchers seldom have any transparency as to the traceability of the carcases they are buying. The application and usage of an environmental inhibitor, such as Bovaer 10, is not a requisite declarable usage from a regulatory perspective.
To provide an example, I could readily be a cattle farmer and use Bovaer 10 and receive the carbon credits from utilising it in my herd. But I am not compelled to disclose the usage of environmental inhibitors on National Vendor Decelerations/Waybills when I consign my cattle for sale to an auction yard. That data doesn't make it to the auctions/sale yard. So when an abattoir/packer buys my animals from the auctions, they will know the PIC of my property, and the things I disclosed on my NVD/Waybill, but if I don't disclose it on those products, they won't know.
Hope that makes sense.
So there may be dishonest butchers out there?
I guess a lot of it would depend on where you live with the city butchers buying in their meat as per your description, out in the country a lot of butchers grow their own meat or have family that do or connections to other local producers. Any of them that I have asked about additives have always been straightforward with their answers. I will concede that YMMV. We had one good butcher who supplied a lot of their own beef but some other guy bought into the shop and eventually bought out the original owners and the change in meat quality was quite obvious to the point we stopped going to them.I wouldn't say dishonest butchers, just more they're complacent. I also am really transparent to the general public; farmers are romanticised as a bastion of "Aussie virtue". The reality is that farming, just like any other industry, will see that the vast majority of them are honest, but there are also a significant amount of individuals out to make a buck.
The same logic also applies to the butchers themselves. Often they're honest brokers, but you have a minority that just want to make a buck. It muddies the water.
For consumers its important to understand that there is no national traceability system for animals and animal products. You simply will never know from which farm your steaks came from. It is purely a system of trust from a consumer's perspective. You trust your butcher is being honest in the story they tell you and the butcher trusts the abattoir was honest, and the abattoir trusts the sale yard was honest, and the sale yard trusts the farmer was honest. As I said, there are products along the way like NVDs - which are legal declarations - that add some regulatory scrutiny to the process, but there's about 1 prosecution per year for false and misleading conduct around cattle sales. It simply isn't a high priority for local councils or state governments.
Australia's entire food safety and health system is purely based around… food safety. So long as the food doesn't kill a consumer, government really doesn't get involved in what are called animal raising claims (i.e., someone stating their animals are "Bovaer 10 free"). It's a different story for the export supply chain, the federal government cares deeply about animal raising claims and false declarations.
But when it comes down to your local butcher, it truly is a role of the dice. Very few independent butchers have direct supply contracts with a farmer that guarantee (via legal enforcement of commercial contracts) specific things about the animals. Most butchers are just buying their meat from an abattoir who is buying it from a sales yard who is selling it on behalf of a farmer who completed an NVD/Waybill "honestly".
Again, just to be really clear. There is far more to it than this. I've tried to dumb it down as much as I can. I'm skipping things like state government auditing of farmers (normally happens once in ~20 years if you're a farmer where they look for illegal chemicals or improper storage of things). But the only things your average and normal local butcher can really tell you with certainty is the name of the abattoir where the cattle were slaughtered. All the abattoir can really tell the butcher is what declarations were on the NVD/Waybill of the cattle they received (things like, were hormone growth promotants used on the cattle, etc.).
There are a subsect of butchers who are called "non-packers" who buy the cattle themselves either directly from a farmer or directly from a sales yard, and that adds more transparency. But again, its a very long story!
The thing that's funny about conspiracy theories is that the people who believe them are skeptical of the knowledge of experts. But they are not
skeptical of the knowledge of non-experts.You will find it's the other way round, they are skeptical of main stream media "experts" (as these are just paid shills to say whatever the agenda is) …
There are generally "experts" on both sides of any "conspiracy" (which is just the main stream medias term for somebody that disagrees with their agenda) …
For Example, there were reputable Flinders University Bio-Engineering Professors that found the slice sites of COVID-19 and were saying it was man made in 2020 and they were labelled "conspiracy theorists", but this week a 502 page US congressional report confirmed exactly what they were saying (but the main stream media won't mention the report, but can be read here: https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/12.04… )
For Example, there were reputable Flinders University Bio-Engineering Professors that found the slice sites of COVID-19 and were saying it was man made in 2020 (as an example of people on both sides)!!
Yeah, Nah, I will believe the US congress 2 year investigation over some rando "debunk" website run by the mainstream media with an agenda, Thanks ;)
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/12.04…
@7ekn00: That is 502 pages long, what exactly am I looking for in there?
And that "rando debunk website" (have you never heard of AAP?) actually asked the Flinders University Bio-Engineering Professor in question. Does Prof Petrovsky have an agenda as well, despite supposedly being the researcher you're saying found this?
That you don't think a US congressman has an agenda is exactly the point. You won't trust the professor in question replying, nor trust a renowned media organisation, but the US congress is the source of truth? I wouldn't trust the US congress to tell me the time.
But your logic is still off. Even if the virus did originate in a lab, that still doesn't make the claims about what those professors found true. That's the problem here, you're trusting a made up facebook post and trying to retrospectively prove it's still true using something entirely unrelated.
@freefall101: The professors were threatened with their careers, what do you think anybody would say at the height of cancel culture?!?
(PS they were not the only ones that found the slice sites - there were published articles out of Israel and the EU - all mysteriously disappeared days later - and as the 502 page report highlights, they show the Fauci emails behind the retraction of 100s of articles)
Same can be said about you … believe rando websites, but not official government investigations that also included "experts" ;)
And as we are demonstrating and as I said originally, there are "experts" on both sides of every "conspiracy" :P
And as we are demonstrating and as I said originally, there are "experts" on both sides of every "conspiracy" :P
No, you're cherry-picking your conspiracy theories. The notion that the virus that caused Covid-19 originated in a lab accident is not that controversial, as government organizations have investigated this possibility, WHO considered this possibility, and it is still not ruled out. Everything I've seen, including this report, is using language like "possible", "likely", "credible", but there is still no direct evidence. As far as I can tell, the only notable thing this report you posted demonstrated regarding the origins is that some WHO officials may have downplayed the possibility of a lab origin for diplomatic reasons, and to avoid international chaos or potential conflict between powerful nations.
And no, the mainstream media has not ignored this select subcommittee investigation into the covid-19 origin. I've just read a bunch of articles from mainstream news media organizations that mentioned this investigation. It's just that the final report does not appear to have found any new evidence, so it's likely not very newsworthy, which is why you're not seeing it in headline news. Your notion that this should be headline news is a little biased, I think.
If you're not cherry picking your theories, you would know that most conspiracy theories (e.g. moon landing hoax, vaccine-autism link) are wacky, not supported by any evidence at all, and are definitely not supported by the experts. That's how they achieve their reputation or classification as a conspiracy theory. You either have to be extremely stupid or extremely ignorant to believe them.
Some conspiracy theories are only supported by "imaginary" experts, or arm-chair experts, or pseudoscientific academic dropouts who think evidence is not important or that cherry-picking data and leaping to unfounded conclusions is how science is done. If you're debating a conspiracy theorist, it can get annoying to point out the difference between science and pseudoscience again and again.
By the way a "conspiracy" is not a "conspiracy theory".
slice sites
What are "slice sites"? You keep mentioning them, they're not in the 502 page report.
The professors were threatened with their careers, what do you think anybody would say at the height of cancel culture?!?
Where is your evidence of that? Filling in the gaps with theories is not evidence of anything.
PS they were not the only ones that found the slice sites - there were published articles out of Israel and the EU - all mysteriously disappeared days later - and as the 502 page report highlights, they show the Fauci emails behind the retraction of 100s of articles
Can you point out where in the report it says that? It's a big article and I couldn't find it via searching.
Again it sounds like you're making a link that isn't there. What is your source for published articles out of Israel and the EU mysteriously disappearing? Why would Fauci, an American, be able to do this? This is why you sound so conspiratorial.
Same can be said about you … believe rando websites, but not official government investigations that also included "experts" ;)
Why do you keep calling it a rando website when it's the AAP and directly quotes the person involved?
I believe the experts who were questioned by congress, I just don't trust a paper written by congress. I believe the experts are right that there is convincing evidence it may have come from a lab, but there are plenty of experts that say the opposite. I also believe they're selectively quoting people, there are tonnes of specialists who say the opposite to that paper. However, what you specifically said was:
For Example, there were reputable Flinders University Bio-Engineering Professors that found the slice sites of COVID-19 and were saying it was man made in 2020 (as an example of people on both sides)!!
You can see where I'm coming from, right? You made an unfounded claim and have no facts. You're pulling a paper from last week that in no way backs up your claim, only that there is evidence of a lab leak (which there always has been). I found a quote from the professor in question. You claim he's being pressured to say that with no proof.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807…
"WASHINGTON—The U.S. Energy Department has concluded that the Covid pandemic most likely arose from a laboratory leak, according to a classified intelligence report recently provided to the White House and key members of Congress.
The shift by the Energy Department, which previously was undecided on how the virus emerged, is noted in an update to a 2021 document by Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines’s office."
@dwayne johnson: I never said there wasn’t evidence it came from a lab. I’m saying what OP specifically said is false.
It’s clear that there’s no smoking gun nor extreme coverup, the DoE is just one of many agencies that make up the mix of opinions https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Report-…
Basically China knows and we don’t, we can just balance probabilities.
@freefall101: he said people are skeptical of experts because they are often wrong about things. The covid thing was an example that illustrates experts are often wrong, so blindly trusting them may not be the most optimal approach
@dwayne johnson: The example was fake though, that's my point. And they're blindly trying to defend a story that has been proven fake by saying more false things.
And who was wrong? From what I've read today, they accurately provided the information that was available at the time. If you read that piece from congress, it was Fauci who called for looking into whether it came from a Chinese lab. And to this day there's still no confirmed source.
The only thing that is wrong is there is evidence covid was man made and involved something called "slice sites".
@dwayne johnson: Well done!!! Somebody that has great reading comprehension skills … it's so rare to see now days!
The point was, with that particular issue, there were "experts" on both sides (and the ones paid by main stream media were WRONG = reduced trust in anything said by main stream "experts"!!)
the covid vaccine stops the spread of the virus and is safe and effective
@Senatekill that is exactly what the powers that be said at the beginning and has proven to be false. Throwing in the moonlandings and any other bullshit is just a swerve.
- 1
- 2
Sleep now bro