Thanks for your critique.  It's cumbersome to document complex philosophical framework prior to each use of the word 'believe'.  I do try to use the word carefully and mostly stand by my use though I was not careful and it could be read from one of my sentences that I believe 'all' people in positions of power blah, blah, blah.  That was a mistake on my part.  Other than that I stand by my writings.

In logical analysis I use the method of testing the null hypothesis liberally when possible.  Basically, if a null hypothesis is absurd, I tend to assign high weight to a hypothesis and sometimes shift it to a 'fact' or 'near fact' which I can legitimately 'believe'.

The null hypothesis of hCG laced tetanus vaccines being developed is that they were not.  In this case the null hypothesis is that in spite of documented scientific literature and lack of denials of such a program, it never existed.  That nearly impossible to sustain so I 'believe' that such developments were almost certainly undertaken.  There is an outside possibility that the evidence for them was fabricated for some unknown reason, but that is very difficult to believe.  Especially in light of corroborating observations.  By far the simplest explanation was that such developments occurred, and there are abundant reasons to believe that there were means, motive, and opportunity to do just that.

---

As for metals in the body interacting with electromagnetic radiation, like I said from the start it is a 'weak' hypothesis.  Just something I thought up to match against the observation that there seems to be a strong desire to inject them in to humans early and often.  Other hypothesis which are stronger exist including that big brother loves us all, wants the best for us, and will brow-beat the fuck out of anyone who goes against their will.

The observation that some metals (such as iron) tend to be better conductors than others (such as Al) can be weighted against the hypothesis but does not kill it.  In part this is because the hypothetical electromagnetic methods are not known and probably don't even exist at all (which directly applies to the strength of the hypothesis and which is why I consider it 'weak'.  It's filed away, however, because if evidence of electromagnetic population management operations do strengthen, so does the hypothesis about injections.  I would note that in the study of electromagnetism, it is noted that elemental forms of metals behave differently than those found as constituents of more complex molecules like hemoglobin.

---

I tend to not spend much time on metaphysical hypothesis (e.g., Christ died to save sinners, or dark matter and alien consciousness control us all) for the same reason I don't drive my car into a bog where it is certain I'll get stuck.  The world is chalk full of more tangible areas of exploration where real progress can be made.

The systematic favoritism/discrimination related to 'evidence' (and more generally, theories/hypotheses) is a different matter all together.  If questioning the official dogma about, say, polio and our hero scientists involved with it leads to loss of employment and any 'evidence' against it is banished from 'scientific' journals, then I consider limited 'evidence' to be explainable by mechanisms outside of the hypothesis I seek to explore.