Originally posted by Sublime620
What I actually saw was on TLC or something however the study seemed pretty conclusive - unless people here think it was rigged (this is a conspiracy
forum after all).
the concept of immunisation itself should not be called into question, because certain diseases can only be caught once, by default.
there's of course the question if there's a way to vaccinate against something against which the real illness does not convey immunity, which is
anybody's guess as far as i'm concerned and i severely doubt that a real or imagined lack of effectiveness is the real problem here, which is why i
if it was not really useful but harmless, people would take them without a hitch, think of homeopathy, chances are, there's no single molecule of the
active ingredient in your concoction. can't get any safer, can you? coincidentially, homeopathy is widely accepted...
so, imho, if vaccines were really tested in experiments and proven effective, people would still hesitate, because of fear, justified or not. Stompk
linked to a VAERS site, what do you think, did they pay hundreds of millions for nothing? of course not.
there are known side effects and their description matches the worst fears of vaccine opponents, let me give you an example, taken from an older
According to NVIC's report, a majority of Gardasil adverse event reports to VAERS involved those who suffered fever, nausea, headache or pain;
14 percent were for syncopal episodes with or without neurological signs; and 8 percent experienced tingling, numbness and loss of sensation,
facial paralysis or Guillain-Barre Syndrome. Although adverse event reports to VAERS do not prove causation, they can provide an early warning sign
that a new vaccine may be causing health problems that could be important. For example, reports to VAERS of bowel blockage (intussusception) in babies
following receipt of Merck's Rota Teq (rotavirus) vaccine prompted the FDA to issue a public warning to doctors and consumers on Feb. 13.
NVIC also found that there were several VAERS reports of HPV infection, genital warts and cervical lesions after Gardasil vaccination. It is
unknown if the girls were infected with HPV before being vaccinated or if Gardasil failed to protect them. One case of HPV infection occurred in a
22-year-old girl who had participated in a Merck Gardasil trial in 2003 when she had shown "strong conversion to all 4 vaccine types" but "tested
positive for high risk HPV" in 2006, according to the VAERS report.*
* comment: that's imho typical whitwash, first present the facts - vacinnees suffering from HPV following vaccination - although they remain vague as
to not tip people off, then they bring in doubt, namely that one could not be quite sure how they got it while citing one
individual case which
has no broader significance. the fact that this vaccine is for (low end) teenagers should ring a few bells, though, because 22 years old is most
certainly way outside the 'target group' if you will.
key being with or without neurological signs
. all of these side effects are apparently neurological in nature, some of them more pronounced
than others. tingling, loss of sensation, paralysis
. that's in teenagers, mind you, now imagine a triple vaccine given to a toddler and
you'll understand why many people are very concerned. imploring parents to do it anyway will do very little to establish their confidence in
vaccines, will it?