← Back to context Comment by robertlagrant 1 year ago Yes, but if it's one of his goals, then bringing him in isn't going to reverse it. 2 comments robertlagrant Reply ceejayoz 1 year ago He's both a "no dyes in food" activist and a "vaccines bad" activist. Both are goals of his.I'd rather have vaccines and dyes than no vaccines and no dyes. robertlagrant 1 year ago Okay, but that seems irrelevant to this thread. What you're getting is RFK, and he doesn't like dyes in food. So as I understand it the original claim is false, and that's all this thread is trying to address.
ceejayoz 1 year ago He's both a "no dyes in food" activist and a "vaccines bad" activist. Both are goals of his.I'd rather have vaccines and dyes than no vaccines and no dyes. robertlagrant 1 year ago Okay, but that seems irrelevant to this thread. What you're getting is RFK, and he doesn't like dyes in food. So as I understand it the original claim is false, and that's all this thread is trying to address.
robertlagrant 1 year ago Okay, but that seems irrelevant to this thread. What you're getting is RFK, and he doesn't like dyes in food. So as I understand it the original claim is false, and that's all this thread is trying to address.
He's both a "no dyes in food" activist and a "vaccines bad" activist. Both are goals of his.
I'd rather have vaccines and dyes than no vaccines and no dyes.
Okay, but that seems irrelevant to this thread. What you're getting is RFK, and he doesn't like dyes in food. So as I understand it the original claim is false, and that's all this thread is trying to address.