It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Real Next Level BS of the Vaccine Controversy.

page: 5
100
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 26 2015 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Halfswede
It surprises me that very few question the mechanism of a "no-fault" vaccine court. By it's very nature, it is designed to allow victims of adverse effects (that apparently don't happen) to be compensated while at the same time officially putting a "NO LINK HERE" stamp on each and every case that gets compensation.

How can you have unbiased research on a subject when every case that is officially recognized is officially stamped with "no-fault/no-link/case-details-sealed" because of the settlement terms.

Since it is the only venue allowed for such cases, victims of adverse effects have no other choice. If you wan't compensation, sign the settlement/NDA etc.

I am just saying that it should raise suspicions that almost all other medical procedures have the normal court system as the venue for damages, where fault can be made and has led to many many faulty medications being pulled and real unbiased research suddenly coming to light.

However the one industry telling you everything is perfectly fine has its own special "no fault" court.



Adverse events with vaccines do happen.
Adverse events can range from a sore arm or mild fever to severe complications.
Nowhere does it tell you otherwise.
Thankfully severe events are extremely rare, in the one in millions bracket.

If you take some time to read this it might give you more of an idea about what the Vaccine Injury Compensation Programs are, why they were started and how they work.
www.historyofvaccines.org...

"How can you have unbiased research on a subject when every case that is officially recognized is officially stamped with "no-fault/no-link/case-details-sealed" because of the settlement terms"
I've not seen any evidence of that ever happening.
Do you have any to share?
Having their records dismissed when they accept compensation isn't part of the agreement at all.
edit on 26/2/15 by Pardon? because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 26 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: GetHyped

I got my numbers from the CDC and wikipedia pages (that cited CDC studies for the numbers). I posted all my links with the math laid out in another thread. I'm not going to look for it, nor track it all down again. You can argue all that you want, but my numbers are not wrong for the timespan and information I stated.

But regardless, the percentage of Americans contracting and dying from Measles in the last few years is at zero right now in America.

Indisputible...although something tells me that you're going to try.

From you:


Measles kills between 1 in 300 and 1 in 1000, not 0%.


That is not a current number for modern America in the last few years, like the timeframe I specified.

Take care, I'm not going to put forth effort into this nonsense anymore.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 01:37 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse




The researchers of the meta-analysys purpotedly left out all the studies that used the information from the US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System... Guess what? the CDC requires parents and doctors to report all adverse reactions of vaccine to this same system that your meta-analysys left out...



Guess what? the CDC requires parents and doctors to report all adverse reactions of vaccine to this same system that your meta-analysys left out...


Why am I not surprised? Great work you've done...the truth always comes out.



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 02:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: ElectricUniverse




The researchers of the meta-analysys purpotedly left out all the studies that used the information from the US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System... Guess what? the CDC requires parents and doctors to report all adverse reactions of vaccine to this same system that your meta-analysys left out...



Guess what? the CDC requires parents and doctors to report all adverse reactions of vaccine to this same system that your meta-analysys left out...


Why am I not surprised? Great work you've done...the truth always comes out.


Any event can and SHOULD be reported to VAERS after a vaccine.
Whether that event is actually caused by that vaccine is unknown at that time until further investigation is carried out.
Why would any meta-analysis take into account events which have no proven causation?
How do you know that the very few events which have possibly been caused by vaccines have not been included?
Answer: You don't.
So the original comment is pointless and if that is your way of debunking the study then you've failed.
Miserably.

I would have thought that by now, those using VAERS against vaccines would have at least learned what it is.
I mean, isn't it you lot who are always telling people to "do the research"?

edit on 27/2/15 by Pardon? because: (no reason given)

edit on 27/2/15 by Pardon? because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 03:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: GetHyped

I got my numbers from the CDC and wikipedia pages (that cited CDC studies for the numbers). I posted all my links with the math laid out in another thread. I'm not going to look for it, nor track it all down again. You can argue all that you want, but my numbers are not wrong for the timespan and information I stated.

But regardless, the percentage of Americans contracting and dying from Measles in the last few years is at zero right now in America.

Indisputible...although something tells me that you're going to try.

From you:


Measles kills between 1 in 300 and 1 in 1000, not 0%.


That is not a current number for modern America in the last few years, like the timeframe I specified.

Take care, I'm not going to put forth effort into this nonsense anymore.


Mortality rates are a very disingenuous way of looking at the impact of measles.
Mortality rates dropped initially because of better healthcare and living standards prior to the vaccine.
Morbidity didn't really change.

Take time to read this. Even if you just get through the first paragraph it should help you understand things better.
jid.oxfordjournals.org...

For those with a short attention span, here's a snippet.
"From 1956 to 1960, an average of 450 measles-related deaths were reported each year (∼1 death/ 1000 reported cases), compared with an average of 5300 measles-related deaths during 1912–1916 (26 deaths/ 1000 reported cases) [2]. Nevertheless, in the late 1950s, serious complications due to measles remained frequent and costly. As a result of measles virus infections, an average of 150,000 patients had respiratory complications and 4000 patients had encephalitis each year; the latter was associated with a high risk of neurological sequelae and death. These complications and others resulted in an estimated 48,000 persons with measles being hospitalized every year[3]. "

So no, dying isn't the main issue here.
edit on 27/2/15 by Pardon? because: Formatting



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:35 AM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Excellent thread OP, this is the kind of work that really makes a difference when anyone wants to do additional research and have an excellent foundation and starting point. I myself had the late 50's early 60's polio vaccine and am getting ready to find out if I have a problem related to the SRV40 virus (tinnitus complicated with an extra continuous internal "sound" on the right side, so MRI's, CAT's and PET's, here I come). S&F, many more if I could.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Including vaccines turning you into the incredible hulk:


Like other spontaneous reporting systems, VAERS has several limitations, including underreporting, unverified reports, inconsistent data quality, absence of a control group that is not vaccinated, and inadequate data about the number of people vaccinated. Indeed, an autism activist named Jim Laidler once reported to VAERS that a vaccine had turned him into The Incredible Hulk. The report was accepted and entered into the database, but the dubious nature thereof prompted a VAERS representative to contact Mr. Laidler, who then gave his consent to delete the report.[3]


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   
double post

edit on 27-2-2015 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey


Measles case-fatality rates have declined in association with economic development and associated decreased crowding, older age at infection, improved nutrition, and treatment for secondary pneumonia [206, 207]. One hundred years ago in Scotland, the measles case-fatality rate was 30–40 deaths per 1000 cases [208]. In the United States, mortality from measles decreased from 25 per 1000 reported cases in 1912 [209, 210] to 1 per 1000 reported cases in 1962 [211]. In New York State, measles mortality decreased by >15-fold long before the introduction of measles vaccination (figure 2) [212]. US and UK case-fatality rates were ∼1 per 1000 reported measles cases from the 1940s through the 1980s 3, 124, 133, 211]. During the past 13 years in the United States, the case-fatality rate has averaged 3 per 1000 reported measles cases (table 2). This increase is most likely due to more complete reporting of measles as a cause of death, HIV infections, and a higher proportion of cases among preschool-aged children and adults. Annual US measles deaths have declined from 408 in 1962 to 0 from 1993-present [213].


jid.oxfordjournals.org...

Note the numbers. 1 in 300 to 1 in 1000 for the US. The decline in death rate in recent years has been to the plummet in incidence because of vaccine prevalence. Guess what: if less people are getting the disease, less people are going to die from it. It takes a special sort of denialism to thus conclude "no one dies from measles because it's harmless".
edit on 27-2-2015 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 10:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Excellent thread OP, this is the kind of work that really makes a difference when anyone wants to do additional research and have an excellent foundation and starting point. I myself had the late 50's early 60's polio vaccine and am getting ready to find out if I have a problem related to the SRV40 virus (tinnitus complicated with an extra continuous internal "sound" on the right side, so MRI's, CAT's and PET's, here I come). S&F, many more if I could.

Cheers - Dave


I'm sorry to hear you contracted polio......




posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Excellent thread OP, this is the kind of work that really makes a difference when anyone wants to do additional research and have an excellent foundation and starting point. I myself had the late 50's early 60's polio vaccine and am getting ready to find out if I have a problem related to the SRV40 virus (tinnitus complicated with an extra continuous internal "sound" on the right side, so MRI's, CAT's and PET's, here I come). S&F, many more if I could.

Cheers - Dave


I'm sorry to hear you contracted polio......



No, I am concerned about the brain cancer aspects of the SRV40 virus, never had polio. There is well documented information on the SRV40 virus in the late 50's and early 60's polio vaccines (I had mine in 1960 and a booster in 1962). I am noticing that a number of people in my age group are coming down with brain cancers, some benign and other malignant. Apparently a way to notice this starting in yourself is watching for something like tinnitus, but which appears to be localized on one side of the head only, rather than uniform in both sides. I have the tinnitus hearing problems, the constant background noise in both sides, but have developed (in the last two years) an almost symmetrical dual tone internal "sound" on the right side that can be "heard" over the internally generated background noise caused by the tinnitus. So, I just have to go check it out with MRI's and other equipment. As I said however, it may or may not be attached to the SRV40 virus that was in the polio vaccines.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 2/27.2015 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Excellent thread OP, this is the kind of work that really makes a difference when anyone wants to do additional research and have an excellent foundation and starting point. I myself had the late 50's early 60's polio vaccine and am getting ready to find out if I have a problem related to the SRV40 virus (tinnitus complicated with an extra continuous internal "sound" on the right side, so MRI's, CAT's and PET's, here I come). S&F, many more if I could.

Cheers - Dave


I'm sorry to hear you contracted polio......



No, I am concerned about the brain cancer aspects of the SRV40 virus, never had polio. There is well documented information on the SRV40 virus in the late 50's and early 60's polio vaccines (I had mine in 1960 and a booster in 1962). I am noticing that a number of people in my age group are coming down with brain cancers, some benign and other malignant. Apparently a way to notice this starting in yourself is watching for something like tinnitus, but which appears to be localized on one side of the head only, rather than uniform in both sides. I have the tinnitus hearing problems, the constant background noise in both sides, but have developed (in the last two years) an almost symmetrical dual tone internal "sound" on the right side that can be "heard" over the internally generated background noise caused by the tinnitus. So, I just have to go check it out with MRI's and other equipment. As I said however, it may or may not be attached to the SRV40 virus that was in the polio vaccines.

Cheers - Dave


The SV40 virus issue is a zombie meme, in that it raises it's head every so often whenever someone thinks they've found previously undiscovered information online from quacks.

Would you like to know more?



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Excellent thread OP, this is the kind of work that really makes a difference when anyone wants to do additional research and have an excellent foundation and starting point. I myself had the late 50's early 60's polio vaccine and am getting ready to find out if I have a problem related to the SRV40 virus (tinnitus complicated with an extra continuous internal "sound" on the right side, so MRI's, CAT's and PET's, here I come). S&F, many more if I could.

Cheers - Dave


I'm sorry to hear you contracted polio......



No, I am concerned about the brain cancer aspects of the SRV40 virus, never had polio. There is well documented information on the SRV40 virus in the late 50's and early 60's polio vaccines (I had mine in 1960 and a booster in 1962). I am noticing that a number of people in my age group are coming down with brain cancers, some benign and other malignant. Apparently a way to notice this starting in yourself is watching for something like tinnitus, but which appears to be localized on one side of the head only, rather than uniform in both sides. I have the tinnitus hearing problems, the constant background noise in both sides, but have developed (in the last two years) an almost symmetrical dual tone internal "sound" on the right side that can be "heard" over the internally generated background noise caused by the tinnitus. So, I just have to go check it out with MRI's and other equipment. As I said however, it may or may not be attached to the SRV40 virus that was in the polio vaccines.

Cheers - Dave


What brain cancer?
There's been no association with it.
Ever.
Unless of course, you're the first.

Although, since you have probably not been kept in an hermetically sealed capsule all of your life that your isssues may have been caused by something else? Or even just age-related?



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pardon?

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Excellent thread OP, this is the kind of work that really makes a difference when anyone wants to do additional research and have an excellent foundation and starting point. I myself had the late 50's early 60's polio vaccine and am getting ready to find out if I have a problem related to the SRV40 virus (tinnitus complicated with an extra continuous internal "sound" on the right side, so MRI's, CAT's and PET's, here I come). S&F, many more if I could.

Cheers - Dave


I'm sorry to hear you contracted polio......



No, I am concerned about the brain cancer aspects of the SRV40 virus, never had polio. There is well documented information on the SRV40 virus in the late 50's and early 60's polio vaccines (I had mine in 1960 and a booster in 1962). I am noticing that a number of people in my age group are coming down with brain cancers, some benign and other malignant. Apparently a way to notice this starting in yourself is watching for something like tinnitus, but which appears to be localized on one side of the head only, rather than uniform in both sides. I have the tinnitus hearing problems, the constant background noise in both sides, but have developed (in the last two years) an almost symmetrical dual tone internal "sound" on the right side that can be "heard" over the internally generated background noise caused by the tinnitus. So, I just have to go check it out with MRI's and other equipment. As I said however, it may or may not be attached to the SRV40 virus that was in the polio vaccines.

Cheers - Dave


What brain cancer?
There's been no association with it.
Ever.
Unless of course, you're the first.

Although, since you have probably not been kept in an hermetically sealed capsule all of your life that your isssues may have been caused by something else? Or even just age-related?


I just did a quick scan, apologies, SV40 in the polio vaccines. No linkages huh? Well, I just did a quick search just for you, including the CDC link ;-)

Link to Polio, SV40 and Brain Cancer Articles

Cheers - Dave



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 03:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Excellent thread OP, this is the kind of work that really makes a difference when anyone wants to do additional research and have an excellent foundation and starting point. I myself had the late 50's early 60's polio vaccine and am getting ready to find out if I have a problem related to the SRV40 virus (tinnitus complicated with an extra continuous internal "sound" on the right side, so MRI's, CAT's and PET's, here I come). S&F, many more if I could.

Cheers - Dave


I'm sorry to hear you contracted polio......



No, I am concerned about the brain cancer aspects of the SRV40 virus, never had polio. There is well documented information on the SRV40 virus in the late 50's and early 60's polio vaccines (I had mine in 1960 and a booster in 1962). I am noticing that a number of people in my age group are coming down with brain cancers, some benign and other malignant. Apparently a way to notice this starting in yourself is watching for something like tinnitus, but which appears to be localized on one side of the head only, rather than uniform in both sides. I have the tinnitus hearing problems, the constant background noise in both sides, but have developed (in the last two years) an almost symmetrical dual tone internal "sound" on the right side that can be "heard" over the internally generated background noise caused by the tinnitus. So, I just have to go check it out with MRI's and other equipment. As I said however, it may or may not be attached to the SRV40 virus that was in the polio vaccines.

Cheers - Dave


The SV40 virus issue is a zombie meme, in that it raises it's head every so often whenever someone thinks they've found previously undiscovered information online from quacks.

Would you like to know more?


The problem with experts is, who do you believe? Big pharma runs its own studies and buries its mistakes. Everybody they use for opinion is on the payroll in some way or another and that's called a conflict of interest. I just read a little about the vaccine courts, there's another absolutely corrupt mess full of conflict of interest.

Another interesting thing is that some of the articles say that a modified polio vaccine can be used to fight brain cancer tumors, of course, this is coming from the experts as well. Who knows, big pharma and the medical community is much like an unopened grave...

remains to be seen

I'll report back on this in a couple of months after I've had all the tests, because I don't want to belabour it now.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 2/27.2015 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2015 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Each person can criticize the other's source until the world ends, but what I particularly like about science is that it doesn't change just because someone doesn't like it. It may motivate a lifelong search for evidence contradicting it, but it will not change overnight strictly because someone says so.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 01:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: Pardon?

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Excellent thread OP, this is the kind of work that really makes a difference when anyone wants to do additional research and have an excellent foundation and starting point. I myself had the late 50's early 60's polio vaccine and am getting ready to find out if I have a problem related to the SRV40 virus (tinnitus complicated with an extra continuous internal "sound" on the right side, so MRI's, CAT's and PET's, here I come). S&F, many more if I could.

Cheers - Dave


I'm sorry to hear you contracted polio......



No, I am concerned about the brain cancer aspects of the SRV40 virus, never had polio. There is well documented information on the SRV40 virus in the late 50's and early 60's polio vaccines (I had mine in 1960 and a booster in 1962). I am noticing that a number of people in my age group are coming down with brain cancers, some benign and other malignant. Apparently a way to notice this starting in yourself is watching for something like tinnitus, but which appears to be localized on one side of the head only, rather than uniform in both sides. I have the tinnitus hearing problems, the constant background noise in both sides, but have developed (in the last two years) an almost symmetrical dual tone internal "sound" on the right side that can be "heard" over the internally generated background noise caused by the tinnitus. So, I just have to go check it out with MRI's and other equipment. As I said however, it may or may not be attached to the SRV40 virus that was in the polio vaccines.

Cheers - Dave


What brain cancer?
There's been no association with it.
Ever.
Unless of course, you're the first.

Although, since you have probably not been kept in an hermetically sealed capsule all of your life that your isssues may have been caused by something else? Or even just age-related?


I just did a quick scan, apologies, SV40 in the polio vaccines. No linkages huh? Well, I just did a quick search just for you, including the CDC link ;-)

Link to Polio, SV40 and Brain Cancer Articles

Cheers - Dave


So why do you still think it gives you it then.
4th link down (1st real study on the list).
cebp.aacrjournals.org...
"In conclusion, our results are consistent with the majority of previous epidemiological studies, mainly of large cohorts, that did not show convincing evidence of increased risk of brain tumors after vaccination for polio, the only major known source of human exposure to SV40 (4 , 5) . Although both injected (Salk) and unlicensed oral (Sabin) polio vaccines were contaminated with SV40, animal experiments suggest a greater risk associated with the injected vaccine, especially when given in infancy (4) . In our study, risks for both injected and oral vaccine given during the 1954–1962 period, when they were most likely contaminated, and for birth years 1941–1962, when the majority were exposed to the potentially contaminated vaccine during infancy or early childhood, were around unity.

To summarize, it shows no link at all.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Pardon?

I had the injections in 1960 and 1962, not the oral dosing. Personally I don't know if the weird background noise (dual synchronous tone) on only the right side is an anomaly, an expression of something serious or not so serious, that's why I get to have a new battery of tests. However, since I did have the injections, if there is a link, there is a probability. It's really quite irrelevant anyway as I am in Canada and our tort law and legal medical processes probably preclude me from taking an legal action if a definitive link were established. It was only mentioned because since I am going to have to take the tests and I did have the polio vaccines when they were allegedly compromised by SV40, it would be interesting to see what comes out of this however I highly doubt the medical community would confirm a linkage if it existed. They're just about all alopathic whores anyway.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: Pardon?

I had the injections in 1960 and 1962, not the oral dosing. Personally I don't know if the weird background noise (dual synchronous tone) on only the right side is an anomaly, an expression of something serious or not so serious, that's why I get to have a new battery of tests. However, since I did have the injections, if there is a link, there is a probability. It's really quite irrelevant anyway as I am in Canada and our tort law and legal medical processes probably preclude me from taking an legal action if a definitive link were established. It was only mentioned because since I am going to have to take the tests and I did have the polio vaccines when they were allegedly compromised by SV40, it would be interesting to see what comes out of this however I highly doubt the medical community would confirm a linkage if it existed. They're just about all alopathic whores anyway.

Cheers - Dave




What if these "allopathic whores" determine that there is a connection?
Will you believe them or denounce them?


They won't though as there's no association.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Keep on trying.



posted on Feb, 28 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pardon?

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle
a reply to: Pardon?

I had the injections in 1960 and 1962, not the oral dosing. Personally I don't know if the weird background noise (dual synchronous tone) on only the right side is an anomaly, an expression of something serious or not so serious, that's why I get to have a new battery of tests. However, since I did have the injections, if there is a link, there is a probability. It's really quite irrelevant anyway as I am in Canada and our tort law and legal medical processes probably preclude me from taking an legal action if a definitive link were established. It was only mentioned because since I am going to have to take the tests and I did have the polio vaccines when they were allegedly compromised by SV40, it would be interesting to see what comes out of this however I highly doubt the medical community would confirm a linkage if it existed. They're just about all alopathic whores anyway.

Cheers - Dave




What if these "allopathic whores" determine that there is a connection?
Will you believe them or denounce them?


They won't though as there's no association.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Keep on trying.


I don't know whether I would believe them or denounce them, simply because everything is tied to an agenda. If the truth is inconvenient, people lie and alternately if the truth is convenient, they don't lie. It all comes down to meeting a goal based on an agenda. Coming from a background dealing with military and government, I know this for a fact. Try LOL, they've done all the work for me.

Cheers - Dave



new topics

top topics



 
100
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join