I don't know who proved, to your satisfaction, that the polio vaccine was contaminated with SV40. My guess is that the very researchers and watchdogs who did so are the same ones who demonstrated that SV40 doesn't have a causal relationship to cancer, and that the polio vaccine is safe.

Here's who didn't contaminate that batch of the polio vaccine: the CDC. You see, the CDC isn't the drug manufacturer. In fact, they are exactly the type of agency that tests vaccines for things like SV40 contamination, adverse reactions, ect... By declaring that batch contaminated, they are not admitting to their own wrongdoing, but rather exposing an oversight on the part of major drug manufacturers at the time.

So we are back to my original point, which is that you, and the author of this post, simultaneously want the CDC to be an unreliable source of information, an enemy of the truth, and also for their statements to be credible evidence of your claims.

So it's really not such a poor choice on my part to point out that you are declaring only the statements that confirm your beliefs to be true here. I'm not a fool, I know that the CDC is made of people, who can get things wrong, but I'm simply not buying that the CDC is obfuscating the deep dark secret that the polio vaccine is unsafe, simply by pointing out SV40 contamination from half a century ago.

Also, I think you could think a little less highly of your apparent monopoly on logic and the nature of humankind? Two really logically people actually can come to a different conclusion here, and I don't think your last treatise on the nature of liars really helps your case.

Especially since, hey man, you kinda lied to me, remember? When you posted that CDC page, and told me to debunk it because it proves your point? Then you turned around and said essentially "Nahhh I didn't really believe that, fooled you!"

As to the claim that I'm forcing you to waste time and effort debating me, I dunno. You could ignore me. No way is anyone else reading this. I seriously doubt I'm pulling you away from a vital truth-telling task. When the history of the anti-vax movement is written, I doubt it will include public-relations professionals (or in this case, just a regular dude) on an infant social media platform arguing with internet strangers.