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.

 

Measles Vaccine Reduces Death From Other Infections Too

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2015 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk

Unless you can cite that claim from the primary source I believe it's safe to assume it's been pulled from your backside.




posted on May, 12 2015 @ 04:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Witness2008

Then you do not understand the information you read, i.e. scientific illiteracy (just like all anti-vaxxers).


THIS [above] really pissed me off. Where is this righteousness coming from that allows [blind?] pro-vaxxers to speak to others this way?

I am all for debate but when it comes to childishness and generalisations like this it makes me cringe with embarrassment. You Sir/Madam have just brought down ANY credibility you may or may not have had.

P.S: I am vaccine-aware [meaning I don't believe everything blindly until I have double checked it, which is neither anti, nor pro - just like the majority of people you call anti-vaxxers] and I have written many scientific reports during my career as a Scientist. So you are even wrong when you generalise. Why am I supposed to believe anything a person like you is saying? < Absolutely serious question?



posted on May, 12 2015 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Hecate666

I reserve to be "self-righteous" considering anti-vaxxers are demonstrably wrong AND demonstrably scientifically illiterate. "Scientifically literate" and "anti-vaccine" (sorry, "vaccine aware"!) is an oxymoron.

I'm sorry that you have deluded yourself to thinking you are informed on the issue; you are not. You are not a unique snowflake, you are but a long line of ignorant anti-intellectuals who think their armchair googling and motivated reasoning makes them more qualified than trained academics to speak on such issues.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Getting back to the subject of the thread certainly one thing this study shows (and confirms other studies' concerns) is that having measles "naturally" isn't good for you.
Yet another anti-vaccine trope ruined.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Hecate666

I reserve to be "self-righteous" considering anti-vaxxers are demonstrably wrong AND demonstrably scientifically illiterate. "Scientifically literate" and "anti-vaccine" (sorry, "vaccine aware"!) is an oxymoron.

I'm sorry that you have deluded yourself to thinking you are informed on the issue; you are not. You are not a unique snowflake, you are but a long line of ignorant anti-intellectuals who think their armchair googling and motivated reasoning makes them more qualified than trained academics to speak on such issues.



You are all knowing and there is no possibility you could be wrong. I'll get that. Believe it, and learn how to be less condescending, because one day you might have to eat humble pie. With this, have a nice life.



posted on May, 13 2015 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Hecate666

The overwhelming body of objective evidence is on my side, not yours. The anti-vax claims have been proved to be wrong time and time again. Denying reality is called "delusion".
edit on 13-5-2015 by GetHyped because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 02:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Hecate666

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Witness2008

Then you do not understand the information you read, i.e. scientific illiteracy (just like all anti-vaxxers).


THIS [above] really pissed me off. Where is this righteousness coming from that allows [blind?] pro-vaxxers to speak to others this way?

I am all for debate but when it comes to childishness and generalisations like this it makes me cringe with embarrassment. You Sir/Madam have just brought down ANY credibility you may or may not have had.

P.S: I am vaccine-aware [meaning I don't believe everything blindly until I have double checked it, which is neither anti, nor pro - just like the majority of people you call anti-vaxxers] and I have written many scientific reports during my career as a Scientist. So you are even wrong when you generalise. Why am I supposed to believe anything a person like you is saying? < Absolutely serious question?


With the greatest respect, having worked in chemical & medical science in various disciplines including research and clinical over the last quarter of a century I've never once heard anyone refer to themselves as a "scientist" either in a specific or general way...
"Scientists" tend to be quite specific in what they do given how big a spectrum science covers.
For example, when I worked in chemistry people would call themselves an organic chemist, chemical engineer, physical chemist etc etc.
In the medical field people would call themselves, CRA's, doctors, clinical physiologists etc etc.
Never "a scientist".



posted on May, 15 2015 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Pardon?

But bro, he's written loads of scientific reports on science because he's a scientist. His field of research? Science.

Seems legit /s



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Witness2008

That brings to mind the inserts on chemo drugs: causes cancer.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Pardon?

I have a simple explanation here about the 'mercury' in vaccines. Whilst methylmercury can stay in the body for weeks and months, ethylmercury has a half life of a few days to about a week, it cannot stay in the body long enough to build up toxic levels from one vaccination set to the other. And we ingest methylmercury from ocean fish, aprox. 65mcg per 6 oz can ( a vaccine dose has 25mcg of ethylmercury ). LINK




EDIT: my apologies to the OP if this is off topic, but some have mentioned mercury and I just had to post this.

edit on 4-7-2015 by Agartha because: (no reason given)


EDIT again: I decided to make the pic of the pages bigger as the writing may be too small for some to read.




edit on 4-7-2015 by Agartha because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: Witness2008

That brings to mind the inserts on chemo drugs: causes cancer.



Which chemo drug insert is that on?
And which therapy is it attributed to and at which dose?
I'd like to check it for myself as you're proving to be very unbelievable in your recent threads and posts.

In fact, I would suggest that you are lying.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Agartha
a reply to: Pardon?

I have a simple explanation here about the 'mercury' in vaccines. Whilst methylmercury can stay in the body for weeks and months, ethylmercury has a half life of a few days to about a week, it cannot stay in the body long enough to build up toxic levels from one vaccination set to the other. And we ingest methylmercury from ocean fish, aprox. 65mcg per 6 oz can ( a vaccine dose has 25mcg of ethylmercury ). LINK







EDIT: my apologies to the OP if this is off topic, but some have mentioned mercury and I just had to post this.


No apology needed.
Unfortunately I feel it will fall on blind eyes if some of the posts in this thread are to go by.
edit on 4/7/15 by Pardon? because: Reformatting



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pardon?

No apology needed.
Unfortunately I feel it will fall on blind eyes if some of the posts in this thread are to go by.



I wish they would try to learn real science, and not the half truths anti-vaccine sites post. Don't they know that back in the 80s we were actually exposed to more immunologic components with fewer vaccines than children today with more vaccines? And we are still here and we are fine. In 1983 children used to get 15094 antigens by the age of 4 with vaccines that prevented 7 diseases. Nowadays children get 419 antigens by the age of 6 with vaccines that prevent 14 diseases LINK



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: Pardon?

No apology needed.
Unfortunately I feel it will fall on blind eyes if some of the posts in this thread are to go by.



I wish they would try to learn real science, and not the half truths anti-vaccine sites post. Don't they know that back in the 80s we were actually exposed to more immunologic components with fewer vaccines than children today with more vaccines? And we are still here and we are fine. In 1983 children used to get 15094 antigens by the age of 4 with vaccines that prevented 7 diseases. Nowadays children get 419 antigens by the age of 6 with vaccines that prevent 14 diseases LINK




Babies are exposed to more antigens whilst being born than by an entire lifetime of vaccinations.
But that's natural so it must be better.
Or something.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Always arguments for and against....but have never seen a full list of ingredients, broken down to the purpose and side effects of each ingredient..

And to the lady who vaccinated all her children, children's grandchildren, children's great grandchildrens, cousins, 2nd cousins..and knows 300 students in school with no autism, except one...you have done your job,why are you here...move on...just because your circle of life is hunky dory, doesn't account for everyone else in the world....idiot....

Let's see the list, each listed ingredients and it's purpose, and each ingredient potential side effect...Let's see an independent study....a real study..

Let's also see a study on vaccinations given when a child is sick, or close to teething...with a under developed blood brain barrier and under developed immune systems....and let's see the results of the effects of vaccinations...

Then we can have a debate that is not one sided....Let's see all the facts...
edit on 4-7-2015 by nitetrain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: nitetrain
Always arguments for and against....but have never seen a full list of ingredients, broken down to the purpose and side effects of each ingredient..

And to the lady who vaccinated all her children, children's grandchildren, children's great grandchildrens, cousins, 2nd cousins..and knows 300 students in school with no autism, except one...you have done your job,why are you here...move on...just because your circle of life is hunky dory, doesn't account for everyone else in the world....idiot....

Let's see the list, each listed ingredients and it's purpose, and each ingredient potential side effect...

Let's also see a study on vaccinations given when a child is sick, or close to teething...with a under developed blood brain barrier and under developed immune systems....and let's see the results of the effects of vaccinations...

Then we can have a debate that is not one sided....Let's see all the facts...



Go on, then: show us the ingredients and then we can discuss them.
I have already posted about 'mercury', that is types of mercury and dose in vaccines and tuna.


edit on 4-7-2015 by Agartha because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Pardon?

Dr. Ben Johnson, M.D., N.M.D., D.O. said all of the chemo drugs that you see say on the label that they cause cancer.

Begin at 48:30:



From Natural News, "Pharmacists give themselves cancer from dispensing toxic chemotherapy chemicals":


One of the side effects of chemotherapy is, ironically, cancer. The cancer doctors don't say much about it, but it's printed right on the chemo drug warning labels (in small print, of course).


edit on 7/4/2015 by ConnectDots because: Add



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 10:08 PM
link   
The Pertussis Vaccine list autism and SIDs as serious adverse events on package inserts....


therefusers.com... insert/#.VZieR2oo62c

Uh good job at research pro-vaccinations people's....what say ya now....but government says it ok....lack of proper nutrition among other conspiracies are really numbing the minds...

oh and let's get a list of all the ingredients in each multi dose/single dose vaccinations.....yeah, they won't harm the child or the development...I have seen other vaccinations list autism as an adverse side effect.....obviously it doesn't affect every single child...of course there would be no debate....the debate is that vaccinations are causing a certain percentage of children with brain damage...and really there is no debate..just some clueless and narrow minded people...common sense is lost...

classic example of simple minded people following the puppet master and listening to the main stream media..carry on with your couch and potatoe chips with soda in hand....


Here is a download direct from FDA insert of another vaccinations..I don't know how to correct link it...aww heck, look it up..even if you read it and see it...you still will deny it..

www.godlikeproductions.com...
edit on 4-7-2015 by nitetrain because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 03:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: Pardon?

Dr. Ben Johnson, M.D., N.M.D., D.O. said all of the chemo drugs that you see say on the label that they cause cancer.

Begin at 48:30:



From Natural News, "Pharmacists give themselves cancer from dispensing toxic chemotherapy chemicals":


One of the side effects of chemotherapy is, ironically, cancer. The cancer doctors don't say much about it, but it's printed right on the chemo drug warning labels (in small print, of course).



You're not getting this "evidence" thing are you?
Words are words and the words from a "doctor" who appeared in The Secret hold little credibility.
He says "we use radiation to treat cancer, what do x-rays do? They cause cancer".
But radiation from x-rays isn't used in radiotherapy.
That's called being dishonest.

And the link from (Un)naturalnews uses a newspaper article as its source.
And the title is extremely misleading.
And in the newspaper article are testimonies.

In the other link from that site it links to a study specific to contamination from antineoplastins.
Have a guess who uses antineoplastins as part of his therapy protocol...
Burzynski.
The one in your video.
That's what he bases his whole ethos upon.


You're not good at this science thing are you?



posted on Jul, 5 2015 @ 03:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: nitetrain
The Pertussis Vaccine list autism and SIDs as serious adverse events on package inserts....


therefusers.com... insert/#.VZieR2oo62c

Uh good job at research pro-vaccinations people's....what say ya now....but government says it ok....lack of proper nutrition among other conspiracies are really numbing the minds...

oh and let's get a list of all the ingredients in each multi dose/single dose vaccinations.....yeah, they won't harm the child or the development...I have seen other vaccinations list autism as an adverse side effect.....obviously it doesn't affect every single child...of course there would be no debate....the debate is that vaccinations are causing a certain percentage of children with brain damage...and really there is no debate..just some clueless and narrow minded people...common sense is lost...

classic example of simple minded people following the puppet master and listening to the main stream media..carry on with your couch and potatoe chips with soda in hand....


Here is a download direct from FDA insert of another vaccinations..I don't know how to correct link it...aww heck, look it up..even if you read it and see it...you still will deny it..

www.godlikeproductions.com...


Yeah, great research from you too.

See if you can look up why side effects and adverse events have to be listed on package inserts and whether they have to be shown to have been caused by the vaccine.

Have you done it yet?
That's right, no they don't have to be caused by the vaccines at all.
If any event has been reported within a certain time period after administering a vaccine it has to be listed whether or not the vaccine has caused it.

And you use GLP.
Dear me.
edit on 5/7/15 by Pardon? because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join