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.

 

Childcare rebates could be denied to anti-vaccination parents under new Federal Government laws

page: 6
21
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   

A return to civil debate is needed...



As You are responsible for your own posts., we require Civility and Decorum


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!




posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 11:55 PM
link   
a reply to: AdamuBureido



“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” —Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977 www.uvm.edu...

From his book bio, Ivan Illich studied Theology and Philosphy in Rome and has a Doctorate in History from Salzburg. He served as an assistant pastor and an vice-rector. That does not really recommend him as an authority on analysis of medical statistics.

In truth, the death rate of all those diseases you list had declined before the introduction of vaccines due to better hygiene, better knowledge of infection vectors and effective quarantine procedures, and of course better nutrition is always a boon. However they were not eliminated. The death rate from measles alone was relatively stable at between 700 and 1000 per year from at least 1950. The measles vaccine reduced that to less than 100 practically overnight in 1965. Another push in the late 70's dropped it to less than 15 per year, and the final push in the early 90's dropped it to zero.

Measles Elimination in the United States



“… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT [diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus vaccine] reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more.” —Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987.


Hmmmm. Some children will have mild to severe reactions to the DPT vaccine. What happened before the vaccine was available?

History of Diptheria


Diphtheria once was a major cause of illness and death among children. The United States recorded 206,000 cases of diphtheria in 1921, resulting in 15,520 deaths. Diphtheria death rates range from about 20% for those under age five and over age 40, to 5-10% for those aged 5-40 years. Death rates were likely higher before the 20th century. Diphtheria was the third leading cause of death in children in England and Wales in the 1930s


From 20% death rate ( 1 in 5) to 1 in 350 having convulsions and not dying. 15,520 deaths per year to ZERO. Sounds like a win to me.

Disease Risk - Tetanus


The overall case-fatality rate in the United States has declined from 91% in 1947, to 24% during 1989 to 1991, to 11% during 1995 to 1997. No mortality was observed in the United States between 1995 and 1997 in individuals younger than 25 years of age.... In 1947 through 1949, before widespread use of the vaccine, an average of 580 cases of tetanus and an average of 472 deaths from tetanus were reported [5]. During 1972--2006, the cumulative number of reported neonatal tetanus cases decreased to 32; the most recent cases were reported in 1989, 1995, 1998, and 2001.


Again a drop in mortality from 91% in 1947 to virtually 0 in people under 25yo.

Pertussis


Pertussis, also known as whooping cough, is a highly contagious bacterial disease caused by Bordetella pertussis. It's characterized by severe coughing spells that end in a "whooping" sound when the person breathes in. Historically, pertussis caused significant morbidity and mortality in the world. In the 1940’s in the US, pertussis was responsible for more infant deaths than measles, scarlet fever, diphtheria, polio, and meningitis combined.


And you are complaining about 'a few' NON FATAL adverse reactions? Look, I'm not saying these reactions are not serious for the child or frightening for the parents. But when the alternatives is a mortality rate of 91% or the quite unusual and relatively short lived adverse reaction to the vaccine, I know which one I'd choose for my child. Every time and without doubt.



“In 1977, 34 new cases of measles were reported on the campus of UCLA, in a population that was supposedly 91% immune [via vaccination], according to careful serological testing. Another 20 cases of measles were reported in the Pecos, New Mexico, area within a period of a few months in 1981, and 75% of them had been fully immunized, some of them quite recently. A survey of sixth-graders in a well-immunized urban community revealed that about 15% of this age group are still susceptible to rubella [German measles], a figure essentially identical with that of the pre-vaccine era.” (Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy.) www.vaclib.org...


The oldest student population figure I can come up with is 1992 when UCLA had a student population of 35,407. Lets be conservative and say that in 1977 they had only 20,000 students. If 91% were immune, that means that there were 9% or 1800 who were not immune. Furthermore, 34 is only 0.17 percent of 20,000. Finally, it was not claimed in 1977 that measles had been eradicated, and the 2nd elimination initiative was likely informed by the UCLA 'epidemic'.

(continued)



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 12:09 AM
link   
a reply to: AdamuBureido



“By the (U.S.) government’s own admission, there has been a 41% failure rate in persons who were previously vaccinated against the (measles) virus.” (Dr. Anthony Morris, John Chriss, BG Young, ‘Occurrence of Measles in Previously Vaccinated Individuals,’ 1979; presented at a meeting of the American Society for Microbiology at Fort Detrick, Maryland, April 27, 1979.)


Yeah, so? I don't believe that 41% failure rate in the 1970's but there are many possible causes for vaccine failure, and this incident no doubt contributed to reducing them. There was another such outbreak in the mid eighties. No one has ever claimed that the vaccine is 100% effective. Your examples come from before the 3rd elimination initiative that literally eradicated measles and reduced the death rate effectively to zero. You are proposing that 34 NON FATAL cases in the late 1970's proves that the vaccine failed? That the vaccine reduced the death rate from 1000 per year to effectivly zero is ineffective? Do you understand the difference between catching a disease and dying from a disease? And the difference between tens of thousands of cases and a few dozens?



“Administration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” (JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer.) The authors indicate that such falsely protected children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules…”


Yes, the KMV did not work.

CDC: Measles FAQ



People who have documentation of receiving LIVE measles vaccine in the 1960s do not need to be revaccinated. People who were vaccinated prior to 1968 with either inactivated (killed) measles vaccine or measles vaccine of unknown type should be revaccinated with at least one dose of live attenuated measles vaccine. This recommendation is intended to protect those who may have received killed measles vaccine, which was available in 1963-1967 and was not effective.




“Prior to the time doctors began giving rubella (measles) vaccinations, an estimated 85% of adults were naturally immune to the disease (for life). Because of immunization, the vast majority of women never acquire natural immunity (or lifetime protection).” (Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, Let’s Live, December 1983, as quoted by Carolyn Reuben in LA WEEKLY, June 28, 1985.)


"Naturally immune" means that they were exposed to the virus as a child. Now that the population is immunized, children are no longer exposed. So yes, that figure is possibly correct and a sign that the vaccine is working. All those kids getting rubella, staying home from school and infecting their mothers who happen to be pregnant with their little sister or brother, aren't happening anymore. I don't know about you, but I consider that a GOOD THING.

Rubella - History of Vaccines



Rubella is not normally a serious illness in children, and, in fact, its symptoms are often mild. The chief danger of the disease is Congenital Rubella Syndrome.

From 1964-1965, before the development of a vaccine against the disease, a rubella epidemic swept the United States. During that short period there were 12.5 million cases of rubella. Twenty thousand children were born with CRS: 11,000 were deaf, 3,500 blind, and 1,800 mentally retarded. There were 2,100 neonatal deaths and more than 11,000 abortions – some a spontaneous result of rubella infection in the mother, and others performed surgically after women were informed of the serious risks of rubella exposure during their pregnancy.

As of 2004, rubella was declared eliminated in the United States, and transmission of the rubella virus in the World Health Organization’s Region of the Americas was halted in 2009. Globally, about 100,000 rubella cases were reported for 2012 in the member states to the World Health Organization, though it is probable that the number of actual cases is much higher. The countries with the largest number of cases in 2012 were Timor-Leste, Macedonia, Thailand, Tajikistan, and Syria. The number of estimated CRS cases each year is more than 100,000.



posted on Apr, 15 2015 @ 04:59 AM
link   
Oh now I do remember this when it happened--but in light of the policy announcment I think its important to revisit:

FEDERAL Health Minister Tony Abbott admits he may appear a "cruel, callow, callous, heartless bastard" over not having his daughters vaccinated with the anti-cervical cancer drug, Gardasil

Source: The Australian, November 9 2006

So this PM of ours, who himself is anti-vacc is now dictating that the rest of the community cant make that objection. We knew he was a hypocrite, but these double-standards are just ridiculous.

One rule for them, another for us. Fascism indeed.
edit on 15-4-2015 by ItVibrates because: Fixed quote tags



posted on Apr, 16 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: sstech
a reply to: scghst1

Oh, shut up.

This site is rampant w/ lies, half-truths, conjecture, and nonsense.

W/o a proper physicians diagnosis, there is no telling what caused what ever problem it is that you think that you have, regardless of where you, a person w/ what would appear to be no medical training, thinks it came from, or whom you wish to blame.

I sourced a video straight from this site. I know the basic history behind their ability to post those videos on this site.

Do yourself a favor and learn some basic debate decorum and manners.



^^
Clearly this guy is one of those paid shills. I never said about having any physical problems regarding vaccinations. In fact I reinforced your bullsh!7 by saying that I am vaccinated and am fine. Stop trying to hijack threads.



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 03:53 AM
link   
Just sayin'...



edit on 18/4/2015 by rnaa because: embed image instead of link



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 04:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: ItVibrates


I dont know whats next, the government mandating abortions? euthanasia? where does this end?.


Sorry you can make your point without this massive slippery slope.

This is about keeping people alive not killing them.

I don't agree with it 100% by any means though. Need to learn more about it.


Well that topic is still up for debate my friend!



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 11:41 PM
link   
This just gets better dosnt it? Now religious folk cant get an exemption (not that I'm religious) for vaccines. But whats worse here is that:

Doctors will be given incentive payments so that parents stick to their children’s vaccination schedule, and the one religious exemption to vaccinations will end, as part of a push by the federal government to boost the immunisation rate.

Source
Doctors will be given incentives? like Big Pharma does not throw enough cash at them to push the vaccine agenda, the government has to throw money at them too. No concern about the millions of us starving and homeless, just give more money to people already making a fortune to support your fascist agenda.

This is not about vaccines, this is about control systems. If you still think this is about public saftey then keep drinking that Kool-aid.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 12:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: ItVibrates
No concern about the millions of us starving and homeless,


Exactly where are the millions starving and homeless in Australia? We only have a population of 23 million....



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   
I've been following this over the past week and it upsets me to no end!
So Tony Abbott claims he's protecting Australian children huh?!
He is seeking to remove parental rights to "conscientiously object" to vaccinating their children for religious, philosophical or medical reasons! Yet, it was well and good for this hypocrite to exercise the right to "conscientiously object" on an issue like abortion!
And he threatens parents risk losing government payments if they refuse to vaccinate their children. Yet, this hypocrite is going to double MDs pay for every jab they give!
Totally discriminatory!
This two faced Jesuit is NOT protecting Australian children only the profits of the "cut, burn and poison" death cult of Big Pharma!
I pray Yahweh El Neqamah will rebuke Tony Abbott and all of those who support his "bullet in a needle" policies!!!



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: cameraobscura
He is seeking to remove parental rights to "conscientiously object" to vaccinating their children for religious, philosophical or medical reasons!


So in fact you have not followed it at all, as no child is forced to get a vaccination.



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: anogiant
a reply to: ItVibrates

Oh wauw, isn't that blackmailing?

I wrote an article about it. When you are vaccinated you can make people sick with a weak immune system. Also, there are cases of brain damage. The vaccines are not 100% clean, that's for sure. As parent, you have the right to refuse.

I call it, the modern holocaust


Is it blackmail or a bribe?



posted on Apr, 19 2015 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: ItVibrates



This just gets better dosnt it? Now religious folk cant get an exemption (not that I'm religious) for vaccines.


There are actually ZERO religions who registered a religious objection to vaccination in Australia.

This latest announcement just removes confusion for people who might think that they can claim an objection based on religion where none exists and embarrassment for those who have to administer the program.

It is better to say it once, up front, to everyone, than have to repeat it thousands of times to each individual.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 12:51 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce

On the contrary, ALL children vaccinated have had this abuse forced upon them by their parents (or guardians). I know of no child who has NEVER been given the choice to refuse to get a vaccination. Further, their choice and right to refuse is handed to their misguided parents to make who, through peer pressure, fear tactics, and now economic sanctions, usually give in to, and follow, the crowd not wanting to be "different" or upset the powers that be in this ever growing technocratic state of Australia. What's so wrong with maximizing the people's freedom to choose (e.g. whether to vaccinate, whether to vote, whether to carry a gun, etc.) rather than compelling people to make the only decision self-righteous know-it-alls deem it best we should make?! Cui bono?



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 12:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: cameraobscura
had this abuse forced upon them


Except it is NOT abuse at all, just a good decision made by their parents.


handed to their misguided parents to make who, through peer pressure, fear tactics, and now economic sanctions, usually give in to, and follow, the crowd not wanting to be "different"


What a load of garbage, how about the parents just made a good decision that was best for their child? As that is exactly what it is.


What's so wrong with maximizing the people's freedom to choose (e.g. whether to vaccinate,


People have always had that choice....


Cui bono?


That of the child, of course.



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 04:16 AM
link   
will probably lead to enforced sterilisation or contraception of those on welfare, who knows, maybe even an inserted tracking device that monitors their movement to make sure they are not spending their < sarcasm > oh so generous "Taxpayer" funded< /sarcasm > benefits on, heaven forbid.............entertainment.
edit on 2042015 by AkaDeDrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 20 2015 @ 05:38 AM
link   
a reply to: hellobruce




Except it is NOT abuse at all, just a good decision made by their parents...how about the parents just made a good decision that was best for their child? As that is exactly what it is.


Well hellobruce I can see we're going to have to agree to disagree...

For one thing it depends on your definition of "abuse." And secondly if you come across parents who differ with your opinion and choose to not vaccinate their child haven't these parents made an equally "good decision that was best for their child" as well?!

So then why the heavy-handed threat to penalize Australian parents who choose to not vaccinate their children if other Australian parents who choose to vaccinate their children aren't penalized?! Isn't this a perfect example of unjust discrimination?! I don't see why if Australian parents are "free to choose" to vaccinate their child as you claim we're seeing one group coming under the threat of economic sanctions for making a choice they're supposedly free to make and yet if they make the "wrong" choice according to the so-called "experts" i.e. choose to refuse to vaccinate their children they''ll be punished unlike those who choose to follow the "expert" opinions and vaccinate their children.

I'd be wary of imposing sanctions on a minority group--any group actually!--just because their choice relating to medical matters differs with my personal belief system especially in light of the fact that history amply demonstrates draconian measures such as this tends to be targeted at first against small groups before being extended and applied to the wider population by which time it's nigh too late to do anything about it without much sacrifice...



posted on May, 5 2015 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Forgive me if I've posted this in the wrong section as I've never posted in here before.
As we all know Mr Abbott has made some claims in regards to vaccination and welfare payments.
I work in a Hospital in Australia and FLU vaccinations are in full swing with people basically forcing them on staff members here.
We are a training hospital so take on a lot of students from local universities.
In a recent meeting I've just heard that all students will have profiles on an online data base where they will be linked with local agencies in order to organise student placements. While I find this to be a huge concern regarding privacy the extremely concerning aspect of this is that each individual will be asked to list what vaccinations they have received and certain students may miss out on learning opportunities if they have not been vaccinated.



posted on May, 6 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: JValentine
and certain students may miss out on learning opportunities if they have not been vaccinated.


Then they had better hurry up and be vaccinated then!



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 12:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: rnaa
a reply to: ItVibrates



This just gets better dosnt it? Now religious folk cant get an exemption (not that I'm religious) for vaccines.


There are actually ZERO religions who registered a religious objection to vaccination in Australia.

This latest announcement just removes confusion for people who might think that they can claim an objection based on religion where none exists and embarrassment for those who have to administer the program.

It is better to say it once, up front, to everyone, than have to repeat it thousands of times to each individual.


ZERO???




top topics



 
21
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join