Who funds the Anti-Vax Movement?

originally posted by: fernalley

Here's something really odd though - Big Pharma have been amazingly quiet in combating the anti-vaccine movement. A community group is publicly attempting to derail the vaccine-based profits of Big Pharma, yet there is simply *no* response.

a reply to: Pardon?
Pharma is quiet as they have the Media on their side and the minute they so much as get a whiff of a flu,measle or whatever the upcoming pandemic is we are assaulted with it all day long. So much that they caused a run on vaccines and our city ran out. They opened special locations-people lined up for hours-and they ran out. And this was for a regular flu season! I even heard neighbors commenting that people who lucked out deserved it for not getting it earlier.

The Media did them proud. I imagine if a cold vaccine was released those that opted out would be treated like lepers for endangering their lives and everyone else's.

The difference is that a cold won't kill you.
The flu can and does.

a reply to: Pardon?

Here is a link to a really well written article about the why the truth about the harm vaccines can cause was covered up.

The vaccination policy and the Code of Practice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation: are they at odds?

I read that in 2011 and I am still wondering why people haven't opened their eyes yet.

One of the most eye-opening documents ever

originally posted by: imnotanother
a reply to: Pardon?

Here is a link to a really well written article about the why the truth about the harm vaccines can cause was covered up.

The vaccination policy and the Code of Practice of the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation: are they at odds?

I read that in 2011 and I am still wondering why people haven't opened their eyes yet.

High-dose Vitamin C soon deals with the Flu, no need for dangerous autoimmune disease inducing vaccines

originally posted by: Pardon?

The difference is that a cold won't kill you.
The flu can and does.

originally posted by: hiddencode
High-dose Vitamin C soon deals with the Flu, no need for dangerous autoimmune disease inducing vaccines

It works wonders for so many diseases.

Here is a link to an article on How to treat whooping cough with Vitamin C

a reply to: imnotanother
Excellent link to a peer reviewed oh wait it is just another antivax opinion piece. Vitamin c is important as part of our general health but it is not a wonder cure.
Also you do know that high dose vitamin c is made by your terrible bogey men "big pharma"

a reply to: imnotanother

Nice, some peer-reviewed research from the anti-va... Nope, it's another opinion piece trying to pass itself off as science!

a reply to: imnotanother

1. Who is funding the "movement?"

Both large pharmaceutical companies and "alternative medicine" providers.

2. How are they promoting the "movement?"

Through a mixture of deliberately untrustworthy celebrity spokespeople and intense online activity designed to create the illusion that it is a grass roots movement.

3. Who is profiting from citizens NOT being vaccinated?

Corporations selling remedies to the people who get ill because they have not been vaccinated.

4. How are they profiting from citizens NOT being vaccinated?

By selling them nostrums that will ease the symptoms rather than heal or prevent the illness.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
Excellent link to a peer reviewed oh wait it is just another antivax opinion piece.

Pal reviewed sources are opinion pieces as well.

It is nothing but corruption and fraud hiding behind a facade of false credibility.

Remember, current scientific "truth" is defined and guarded by a committee of the most powerful people and organizations in the scientific community (it's called "peer review"). Anyone who has ever worked on a committee knows real progress under such systems is slow and painful. Real scientific progress usually comes from determined, outcast scientific rebels who are viciously attacked by old guard defenders of the current scientific community. You might recognize a few of their names: Einstein, Semmelweis, Copernicus, Tesla, and more than a few others.

modern science is ruled by conformity, not the search for scientific truth

Scientific fraud, however, is rampant amongst nearly all of the sciences and no "peer review" is immune. In fact, peer review is the problem.

This brings into question the so-called scientific process of peer review that is often cited as if it were holy writ and the end-all, be-all of truth. "It`s peer reviewed," they scream when anyone questions their research or evidence. The rejoinder should ask, "Peer reviewed by whom?"

The blame lies in the way that science is conducted with all other reasons emanating from this core paradigm change.

Peer review, however, has no such requirements. It who read the original work and give an editorial on it. No tests or double-checking of facts or methods are required. Basically, with peer review, someone writes a study paper and it is then sent to a group of scientific critics to either blast or praise it.

Professor Charlton is right. Peer review is bunk and is just editorializing in the name of science. It is because of this practice that the rampant fraud and misleading conclusions of scientific research is so prevalent today.

The Scientific Fraud Pandemic: Few Honest Scientists Remain

Despite its importance as the ultimate gatekeeper of scientific publication and funding, peer review is known to engender bias, incompetence, excessive expense, ineffectiveness, and corruption. A surfeit of publications has documented the deficiencies of this system.

How to Fix Peer Review

a reply to: Murgatroid

The thing you fail to get though, (as most do when posting information like you have), is that peer review has at least some checks and balances. And there indeed is strife among some various scientific circles. Most often when money is pushing something.

But, the very fact you have something to post is showing that problems are addressed and concerns are raised. By people in the field no less. Yet, the anti-vax movement, which has a ton of money flowing into it, spearheaded now by Mike Adams and Mercola who probably have the largest network for disseminating their BS, have zero checks and balances. These people prey on mothers with sick kids and blame things they have no credible evidence which supports it, but alas Pharm does have a bad history, is criminally liable and continues to attempt to subvert regulations, and people believe them over the big bad pharma (at least they tell you they are screwing you).

It's like saying I don't trust the fox so I'm going to live with the wolf.

The anti-vaxers have a ton of money, "non-profit" organizations that pay their bills, fly them around to conferences ("What's that hun, you want to go to Hawaii? Sure we're doing a conference there next week, I just penned it in...")

And they're all selling natural remedies, most of which are of small benefit completed shelved since minor medicinal advances, and others which are outright dangerous.

There is a very, very slim ring of truth to a few of their platforms in natural remedies, which is what keeps their plausible deniability at maximum strength, and of course the underlying distrust with pharma.

These ones you think are your saviours though, they're not. Worse liars than the originals.

We need a system of honour brought back to medicine, before profit, simple as that. Colloidal Silver isn't going to cure your Gout, and avoiding vaccines while rubbing honey chilated clay prune farts on your body isn't going to make your life any better.

a reply to: imnotanother

I always hear that "charlatans" are spreading misinformation for profit

This one is so funny on many levels. Got nothing else to add, its pointless. Spoonfed people enjoy being spoonfed.

originally posted by: _damon
a reply to: imnotanother



Spoonfed people enjoy being spoonfed.

If you blindly accept vaccines then you are, in fact, "spoonfed."

I am not sure why people have a hard time understanding that vaccines are a very new thing in our history. Everyone screams, "SCIENCE!!!"
Well, science tells us that humans have been here on this planet much longer than vaccines exist. I have had great-grandparents live longer than my aunts and uncles. Why don't you just observe what you are actually experiencing, making a scientific guess, and then see what the conclusion.
Instead of listening to the TV ads, radio, newspaper, and whatever pro vaccine ad you are being blasted by (usually funded by the government) and see that other people are questioning the vaccines because of personal experience, like myself.
Why be so quick to judge and think that everyone obtained their information from somebody that is trying to sell them something.
I guess I am "old school". I still have a network of real life people I call friends that I visit physically in the human form and have interactions with. During these interactions, that we call conversations, we discuss things that are on our minds. Things we question. Philosophy.
It keeps our minds open and makes them expand with knowledge turned to wisdom. Personal experience.
So please, wake up before it is too late. Some of us our tired of everyone letting the world go down the tube.

originally posted by: imnotanother

originally posted by: _damon
a reply to: imnotanother



Spoonfed people enjoy being spoonfed.

If you blindly accept vaccines then you are, in fact, "spoonfed."

I am not sure why people have a hard time understanding that vaccines are a very new thing in our history. Everyone screams, "SCIENCE!!!"
Well, science tells us that humans have been here on this planet much longer than vaccines exist. I have had great-grandparents live longer than my aunts and uncles. Why don't you just observe what you are actually experiencing, making a scientific guess, and then see what the conclusion.
Instead of listening to the TV ads, radio, newspaper, and whatever pro vaccine ad you are being blasted by (usually funded by the government) and see that other people are questioning the vaccines because of personal experience, like myself.
Why be so quick to judge and think that everyone obtained their information from somebody that is trying to sell them something.
I guess I am "old school". I still have a network of real life people I call friends that I visit physically in the human form and have interactions with. During these interactions, that we call conversations, we discuss things that are on our minds. Things we question. Philosophy.
It keeps our minds open and makes them expand with knowledge turned to wisdom. Personal experience.
So please, wake up before it is too late. Some of us our tired of everyone letting the world go down the tube.

Can you point me to any research papers that Suzanne Humphries has produced please or has she just written a book (you can buy her book on her website)?
I've searched Pubmed but there are no entries from her.

For your link written by Tomljenovic (funded by NVIC/Mercola) have a quick read through this.
www.metabunk.org...

What you fail to acknowledge though is that some of us actually understand science, medicine in particular and are perfectly capable of reading studies and deciding whether or not they are robust.
Some of us actually remember iron-lungs for polio victims.
Some of us have seen infants choke whilst coughing due to whooping cough.
Some of us have seen children on artificial ventilation due to measles induced encephalitis.

Thankfully most of us don't wish to return to a pre-vaccine era and remain more akin to troglodytes but unfortunately there are a small but very vocal minority who have a bizarre, almost fairytale notion that life then was all fresh air and daisies and that disease was just an annoyance...

The difference is that a cold won't kill you.
The flu can and does.

a reply to: Pardon?
Some people may get bacterial pneumonia after having the flu or even a common cold. It is the secondary infection can kill people. So in essence colds can kill.

Pneumonia can have 30 different causes as well.
The CDC lumps Influenza and the flu together. This is from the CDC citing cause of deaths in 2004

Influenza and pneumonia ..................... 50,097
Influenza ............................... 500
Pneumonia ............................. 49,597
CDCs stats

So why are the numbers of death from flu overstated? How many times do people think they have the flu when flu like symptoms can be caused by many things? When H1N1 came out doctors offices had and still have Stop Signs on their doors. They have no interest in sending me to a lab to identify my flu like symptoms.

So if and when a vaccine comes out for the cold it will be very hyped up as another leading cause of death.

I think there is no profit in Anti Vax movement, someone say they wills ell books or some other medicine, but that is not the case i think, there is little money and if they are in this movement to make money then they would take the money from Pharmaceutic giants to be quiet.

But think this way: What if some rich guy kid get vaccinated and then doctors tell him that his kid got ill because of it or something like that? Will he not donate some money if not all to fight the criminals?

P.S. You dont need to be very smart nor read Anti Vax messages to know how this vaccine business goes?

originally posted by: saadad
I think there is no profit in Anti Vax movement, someone say they wills ell books or some other medicine, but that is not the case i think, there is little money and if they are in this movement to make money then they would take the money from Pharmaceutic giants to be quiet.

Have you seen Andrew Wakfield's mansion recently? Clue: he didn't fund it with his (struck off, non-existent) doctor's salary:

There's a simple reason for the anti-vaccine movement: vaccines are remarkably successful. They are the most important achievement in the history of science-based medicine.

Therefore, since they are so successful, the actual effects that you see are a small number of reactions from the vaccine, instead of the communicable disease which was suppressed with extraordinary efficacy. (if there were no reactions among anybody, then it would be ineffective because only biologically inert treatments are free of undesired effects)

Ignorant or conspiratorial or selfish people see the results (almost all the problems come from the vaccine) and believe that vaccines are the problem.

A medication which made 50% of people unquestionably better would not be doubted, because there would still be many people with the disease around and the experiences of some recovering would be widely known.

Imagine there were an Ebola vaccine. In 70 years I'm sure there would be anti-vaxers complaining about the sporadic Ebola caused by the vaccine. When the thousands of dead from Ebola today are buried and forgotten.

originally posted by: imnotanother

originally posted by: _damon
a reply to: imnotanother



Spoonfed people enjoy being spoonfed.

If you blindly accept vaccines then you are, in fact, "spoonfed."

I am not sure why people have a hard time understanding that vaccines are a very new thing in our history. Everyone screams, "SCIENCE!!!"
Well, science tells us that humans have been here on this planet much longer than vaccines exist.

So did smallpox. But not any more!

Why? SCIENCE! Not ignorance.

originally posted by: jtma508
a reply to: imnotanother

But it's not simply a personal choice issue. This isn't about personal health as much as it is public health. Notwithstanding the fact that it is entirely possible that there could be problems with vaccines --- not saying there is, not saying there isn't --- as a child of the polio epidemic I have seen some of what can happen when a disease runs rampant through a population. With the advent of the polio vaccine the disease was stopped in its tracks. There are some who will claim that the epidemic stopped on its own or because some magical fairy dust appeared from nowhere. But there are numerous other examples of once prevalent diseases having been all but eliminated. Many here just aren't old enough to have seen what things used to be like. The key is that viable hosts have to be eliminated through vaccination to stop the disease. As long as unvaccinated people are around in sizeable numbers the disease will continue.

I may be coming in late in the game here, but DO YOU MEAN LIKE......HOW SWINE FLU WAS ERADICATED BY VACCINES? I hate to bring up the Spanish Flu or the Plague. Is Plague still around? yes. Is it still an epidemic killing millions? no. Is there a vaccine? eeerrmmmm no.

If it were vaccines that saved the world then the world would have been long dead before the advent of them.

I would have to (and will for my ENG102 paper this semester) do more research to even prove to myself that these diseases were in decline as they introduced the vaccine, but......yeah.

originally posted by: frickfrick

originally posted by: jtma508
a reply to: imnotanother

But it's not simply a personal choice issue. This isn't about personal health as much as it is public health. Notwithstanding the fact that it is entirely possible that there could be problems with vaccines --- not saying there is, not saying there isn't --- as a child of the polio epidemic I have seen some of what can happen when a disease runs rampant through a population. With the advent of the polio vaccine the disease was stopped in its tracks. There are some who will claim that the epidemic stopped on its own or because some magical fairy dust appeared from nowhere. But there are numerous other examples of once prevalent diseases having been all but eliminated. Many here just aren't old enough to have seen what things used to be like. The key is that viable hosts have to be eliminated through vaccination to stop the disease. As long as unvaccinated people are around in sizeable numbers the disease will continue.

I may be coming in late in the game here, but DO YOU MEAN LIKE......HOW SWINE FLU WAS ERADICATED BY VACCINES? I hate to bring up the Spanish Flu or the Plague. Is Plague still around? yes. Is it still an epidemic killing millions? no. Is there a vaccine? eeerrmmmm no.

If it were vaccines that saved the world then the world would have been long dead before the advent of them.

I would have to (and will for my ENG102 paper this semester) do more research to even prove to myself that these diseases were in decline as they introduced the vaccine, but......yeah.

I'm guessing since you're researching for an English course paper that the content is secondary to the diction and grammar.
Which is good given what you seem to believe.

If you were doing a science paper I would probably suggest that you choose another topic as you would need to study a bit harder even to grasp the basic concept of what vaccination has done (and hasn't done).