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.

 

Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: luciddream

I worked and work in Pharmaceutical field; the following are true about them..

*It is first a business but public safety comes very close 2nd.


I believe that to a certain extent... to take it to the extreme, they won't have many customers if they kill them all off with bad products. That's generally considered bad business practice! But there is a big difference between providing products that don't kill and products that serve the best interests of the patients. At the most cynical, one could easily suspect that many drugs are known to cause other problems, that are then treated with even more pharmaceuticals, and on and on. Streaming business... and income.


*Flu vaccination is not as same as DPPT Vaccine(Diptheria, Polio, Pertusis and Tetnus)...


Could you expand on this? I know that every year's flu vaccine is based on the strain predicted to be most prevalent. What else should I/we know?


*Jabbing many vaccine in short amount of time is not good.


This is one of the things that scares me -- not about the vaccines themselves, but the schedule. I've seen many objections to the so-called "accelerated" timetable, but I haven't seen any alternate schedules offered. Are you aware of any alternative plans suggested? Anyone conducting studies or anything to develop a new schedule?




posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Agartha

Good question. I don't. I have to have some level of trust that the manufacturer is reputable, uses quality ingredients and safe manufacturing processes. Much like hot dogs and ground beef and pretty much anything.

That level of trust with both Big Pharma and the FDA has been broken.


This is what I don't get: don't you know that the same companies some call 'Big Pharma' are also the manufacturers of supplements? (I assume that by 'big pharma' you are talking about Bayer, Unilever, Glaxosmithkline, etc).



Even worse, supplements don't even need to go through safety and efficacy trials. Big Supplement lobbied hard in the US in the early 90's to get the laws changed to exempt themselves from such testing in order to make more $$$.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: luciddream
*Jabbing many vaccine in short amount of time is not good.



[citation needed]



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea


Not my vitamins. I do understand that many synthetic vitamin supplements are produced by Big Pharma, but not all. I also understand that synthetic vitamins can cause as much harm as benefit. I don't take synthetic vitamins. I take whole food vitamins.



Unfortunately I have to leave this thread to start a night shift, so I won't be back to reply immediately.... but, Boadicea, could you please tell me the name of the vitamins you take, I would like to do a bit of research. Thank you.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped

Even worse, supplements don't even need to go through safety and efficacy trials. Big Supplement lobbied hard in the US in the early 90's to get the laws changed to exempt themselves from such testing in order to make more $$$.


Correct, I read about this in a nursing journal not long ago..... hence I am really interested to see what Boadicea takes, as she states they are natural. I am really interested in researching this.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Agartha


This is what I don't get: don't you know that the same companies some call 'Big Pharma' are also the manufacturers of supplements? (I assume that by 'big pharma' you are talking about Bayer, Unilever, Glaxosmithkline, etc).


Not my vitamins. I do understand that many synthetic vitamin supplements are produced by Big Pharma, but not all. I also understand that synthetic vitamins can cause as much harm as benefit. I don't take synthetic vitamins. I take whole food vitamins.



If you eat a balanced diet then there's absolutely no need to take vitamins.
None whatsoever.
And I think you may be disappointed to discover that there's no difference between "natural" and synthetic vitamins.
www.mommypotamus.com...



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Boadicea

DPPT and its equivalent to the modern era are tried and tested for decades. These are given for free.. atleast in Canada.

Flu vaccine is like you said, is just a guess of the predicted prevalent strains and does not gauretee that you will be immune. The Mutation or the variation of Influenza virus is way too high.

I usually see Anti-Vax use flu vaccine as a reason to bash all vaccine. "

"See flu vaccine dont work! that means they all suck!"

DTTP or Dtap improved lives for decades from deadly viruses.. where back in the days once you get Polio, you are guaranteed cripple for the rest of your life.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: luciddream

I worked and work in Pharmaceutical field; the following are true about them..

*It is first a business but public safety comes very close 2nd.


I believe that to a certain extent... to take it to the extreme, they won't have many customers if they kill them all off with bad products. That's generally considered bad business practice! But there is a big difference between providing products that don't kill and products that serve the best interests of the patients. At the most cynical, one could easily suspect that many drugs are known to cause other problems, that are then treated with even more pharmaceuticals, and on and on. Streaming business... and income.


*Flu vaccination is not as same as DPPT Vaccine(Diptheria, Polio, Pertusis and Tetnus)...


Could you expand on this? I know that every year's flu vaccine is based on the strain predicted to be most prevalent. What else should I/we know?


*Jabbing many vaccine in short amount of time is not good.


This is one of the things that scares me -- not about the vaccines themselves, but the schedule. I've seen many objections to the so-called "accelerated" timetable, but I haven't seen any alternate schedules offered. Are you aware of any alternative plans suggested? Anyone conducting studies or anything to develop a new schedule?


Why does the schedule scare you?
It's not an accelerated timetable at all.
Vaccines are given at specific times of a child's life to afford them the optimal protection and multiple jabs are given to lessen the amounts of visits to the doctor. It's less traumatic for the child too. Gets it over in one visit.
There's no need to provide an alternative schedule.
www.who.int...
Saying that Dr Bob et al would recommend that as they would get paid for the individual visits wouldn't they?



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: luciddream
a reply to: Boadicea

DPPT and its equivalent to the modern era are tried and tested for decades. These are given for free.. atleast in Canada.

Flu vaccine is like you said, is just a guess of the predicted prevalent strains and does not gauretee that you will be immune. The Mutation or the variation of Influenza virus is way too high.

I usually see Anti-Vax use flu vaccine as a reason to bash all vaccine. "

"See flu vaccine dont work! that means they all suck!"

DTTP or Dtap improved lives for decades from deadly viruses.. where back in the days once you get Polio, you are guaranteed cripple for the rest of your life.


Thing is though, even against the most difficult flu strain protect against, H3N2, last year's provided a minimum of 38% protection.
That's still better than zero.
It was between 65 and 70% effective against the other strains.
I'm not a betting man but I'll take those odds.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Agartha


Unfortunately I have to leave this thread to start a night shift, so I won't be back to reply immediately.... but, Boadicea, could you please tell me the name of the vitamins you take, I would like to do a bit of research. Thank you.


Have a good night at work... and no, I won't tell you what brand vitamin I take, because it's irrelevant to the OP, and because I don't trust and don't care what your research might come up with.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Agartha

originally posted by: GetHyped

Even worse, supplements don't even need to go through safety and efficacy trials. Big Supplement lobbied hard in the US in the early 90's to get the laws changed to exempt themselves from such testing in order to make more $$$.


Correct, I read about this in a nursing journal not long ago..... hence I am really interested to see what Boadicea takes, as she states they are natural. I am really interested in researching this.


Big Supplement (and little supplement) lie quite a bit.
www.nytimes.com...

You really don't know what you're getting.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: luciddream
a reply to: Boadicea

DPPT and its equivalent to the modern era are tried and tested for decades.


May I impose on your knowledge and experience to ask another question? It isn't unusual for my husband to get banged up at work, and therefore require a tetanus shot every few years (I don't remember the time period... 7 years? 10 years?). This last time, a few weeks ago, they said the tetanus vaccine is no longer produced alone so he had to get the DPPT. I'm not sure if this should concern me going forward or not. I know the tetanus wears off, but what about the others? Would repeated vaccinations for the diptheria and pertussis cause any problems we should watch for?


Flu vaccine is like you said, is just a guess of the predicted prevalent strains and does not gauretee that you will be immune. The Mutation or the variation of Influenza virus is way too high.


So if I understand this correctly, whereas the flu strain used for flu vaccines varies from year to year, the other virus strains used for vaccines (such as measles, polio, etc.) remain constant? And is it also correct to say that flu vaccines are effective only on that particular flu, whereas the measles virus (for example) used for vaccines is also effective on other measles strains? So if I get a flu shot and still come down with the flu, it's not that the flu vaccine didn't work, but just that the flu I got was a different strain? (I hope that makes sense!)


DTTP or Dtap improved lives for decades from deadly viruses.. where back in the days once you get Polio, you are guaranteed cripple for the rest of your life.


Not quite always... my dad had polio, but he wasn't paralyzed from it. However, I don't want to minimize or discount the suffering of those who were.

ETA: Thanks for the wisdom you've already shared... and for any further wisdom you share. I appreciate it

edit on 10-10-2015 by Boadicea because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pardon?
If not vaccinating only effected the individual then fine, it should be a personal decision but when that decision can and will agent others then at the very least a gentle push is required.


Could be that you push some people hard in the opposite direction.

People skeptical of vaccines are not going to be less skeptical because the government is more involved. Better to keep a CIVIL public debate open than close it entirely because the government says so.

On that note, I think the debate would more healthy if people had some respect for one another. Yes, I know some people are aghast that there are parents who don't vaccinate their kids. It doesn't bother me. I accepted it long ago.

And I can't imagine wanting to force another parent to do something, but if you want to educate/convince anti-vaxxers, the best approach is probably not ridicule, condescension, and coercion.

***
EDIT: Also, there are a lot of personal health care and mental health care decisions people make that you might consider dangerous to others. Doesn't give you any right to make their health care decisions for them.
edit on 10-10-2015 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye debate


This word keeps coming up.

Is there any debate that the world is flat?

The anti-vaccination lot literally made up their side of the coin out of thin air.

I state that the moon is made of Cap'n Crunch.

Who wants to debate this controversy with me?



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 12:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped

originally posted by: MotherMayEye debate


This word keeps coming up.

Is there any debate that the world is flat?

The anti-vaccination lot literally made up their side of the coin out of thin air.

I state that the moon is made of Cap'n Crunch.

Who wants to debate this controversy with me?


Probably not anyone you are hoping to enlighten or educate about the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. They would likely tune out at this part, "I state that the moon is made of Cap'n Crunch."



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

The vaccine "debate" was manufactured from day one by a bunch of frauds looking to make a quick buck.



posted on Oct, 10 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: MotherMayEye

The vaccine "debate" was manufactured from day one by a bunch of frauds looking to make a quick buck.


But the parents debating are ofter people looking for answers to questions about autism and SIDS when there really are none.

If you think it's effective to respond with ridicule and condescension, you are doing your cause a disservice. I understand you think they are clownsh*t crazy, reckless fools who are prone to fear-mongering...I kind of feel that way about most anti-vaxxers and mandatory vaxxers. I just think the best approach is one of mutual respect despite my bewilderment.



edit on 10-10-2015 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2015 @ 05:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: MotherMayEye

The vaccine "debate" was manufactured from day one by a bunch of frauds looking to make a quick buck.


But the parents debating are ofter people looking for answers to questions about autism and SIDS when there really are none.

If you think it's effective to respond with ridicule and condescension, you are doing your cause a disservice. I understand you think they are clownsh*t crazy, reckless fools who are prone to fear-mongering...I kind of feel that way about most anti-vaxxers and mandatory vaxxers. I just think the best approach is one of mutual respect despite my bewilderment.


As I mentioned earlier, there are some people who have genuine concerns and that's because if you're not used to looking for information about vaccines you get presented with page after page of misinformation and lies.
Generally, when they are explained the facts about vaccinations and that they don't even have a casual association with SIDS and autism (SIDS actually shows a reduction after vaccination) they no longer need to debate.
The ones that continue the debate are the ones where it has become a belief system and the ones at the top of the pyramid continue to re-hash and regurgitate misinformation and lies to reinforce this misguided belief system as it pays them very well.
www.sids-network.org...
So no, there's no real debate.
As has been hinted at earlier, it is akin to the flat-earth vs spherical earth "debate".
It's on that level.



posted on Oct, 11 2015 @ 08:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Pardon?

Seriously. I don't need you to reexplain your position. My point is that you won't reach anyone with ridicule and condescension.

Like anti-vaxxers, you don't have much use for common sense though.



posted on Oct, 11 2015 @ 08:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Pardon?

Seriously. I don't need you to reexplain your position. My point is that you won't reach anyone with ridicule and condescension.

Like anti-vaxxers, you don't have much use for common sense though.



As a person who is often accused of being insulting and/or condescending merely because I favor the truth and don't mind confronting those who don't, I have to say, whatever "side" of this you're supporting isn't profiting much from your repeated needling of Pardon here.

Pardon? took time to explain, quite reasonably I might add, what their position is to you. You, on the other hand, are merely critiquing the way you perceive they are making their points, and are doing so quite snippingly. You're not challenging anything they're saying, just the way they are saying it.

Why don't you take your own advise and focus on the facts of the matter rather than trying to divert the thread into being merely about another poster?

Just a general comment from a post participant ...

edit on 8Sun, 11 Oct 2015 08:24:22 -050015p0820151066 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join