It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


No, I will not vaccinate my children!

page: 14
<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 11:32 AM

Originally posted by Sublime620

Allergy Vaccine

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 post.

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 thread:


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?

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 12:22 PM
reply to post by Unit541

Well I ask myself that question regularly, which is one of the reasons I've done a great deal of research on the whole allopath vs natural healing subject.

What are you actually inferring from your response to my post? weren't you saying virtually the same thing as me one post earlier?

[edit on 27-11-2007 by RogerT]

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 12:29 PM
reply to post by Sublime620

You posted PR about a company increasing its staff in anticipaiton of launching 3 vaccines which have not even finished clinical trials (as of article, which was 2004 - what happened in the past 3 years since the company claimed it would be market ready in around a year?)

I asked you to post data from the study you claimed to be quoting from in your original post. However it turns out this was hearsay from a TV show you once watched but now can't remember?!

Well that's how the PR is perpetuated and how come you don't really need conspirators beyond the very top level, in order for an unsubstantiated rumor to become fact.

It works the same way for conspiracy theories too. That's why it's best to question everything

[edit on 27-11-2007 by RogerT]

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 12:38 PM

Originally posted by DazedDave
This is unbelievable. You're going to take such a huge risk because of some video you found on Google? I seriously question your state of mind and parenting abilities. This is insane!

Is it not also surprising that you would presumably allow a stranger to inject some unknown liquid into your child without doing some basic research?

In addition, don't these people seem awfully insistent in these vaccinations in Maryland to the point where they would make it seem like it's legally mandated, when, in fact, there are opt out forms.

Admittedly one can watch too many science fiction shows and get a feeling of suspicion when we see how similar plots play out, but why not just proceed with caution?

Why can't we insist they hand out hazardous material information sheets on the vaccines? Ever hear of Material Safety Data Sheets? They're available for all chemicals and for many medicines.

You have to be nearly asleep at the switch for their behavior in Maryland not to cause a raised eyebrow, no?

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 02:27 PM

Originally posted by RogerT
Wow, now that's a rare insight into a period of history, thanks for your candor.

Thank goodness you listened to your intuition and didn't take the shot, so you could stay around and tell people about it.

So sorry for your suffering.

Much appreciated Roger. It frightens me that there are so many naive, ignorant and downright mean people on a site like this. btw, we all suffered from the loss of some truly creative and wonderful people- whom unwittingly participated in a "vaccination" scam which cost them their lives.

I hope there are many more like on here- Please send them my way!

[edit on 27-11-2007 by dk3000]

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 02:29 PM

Originally posted by Badge01
You have to be nearly asleep at the switch for their behavior in Maryland not to cause a raised eyebrow, no?

Consider that a nail hit on the head.

What many of the vaccination proponents in this thread fail to realize, is that the discussion really isn't based around whether or not to vaccinate, but whether or not it's the parents decision to vaccinate their children.

As an opponent of child vaccinations, I don't really care if anyone else things they're right or wrong. However I demand my right to choose whether or not I let, as Badge01 so eloquently put it, some stranger inject some unknown substance into my child.

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 03:36 PM
reply to post by RogerT

show me an outbreak of smallpox in an area of the world where there have been vaccinations on a significant scale.

the common knowledge position is that there are none

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 04:53 PM
reply to post by pexx421

The onset of the major symptoms leading to autism spectrum disorder diagnoses coincides with vaccination. This temporal connection has created a false correlation among the general public. I work with an animal model of autism so I have done a lot of research on this. A quick journal search (try pubmed) will give you peer reviewed information. Here is an example so you don't have to take my word for it.

Can J Neurol Sci. 2006 Nov;33(4):341-6
Immunizations and autism: a review of the literature.
Doja A, Roberts W.
Division of Neurology, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

Because of a temporal correlation between the first notable signs and symptoms of autism and the routine childhood vaccination schedule, many parents have become increasingly concerned regarding the possible etiologic role vaccines may play in the development of autism. In particular, some have suggested an association between the Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine and autism. Our literature review found very few studies supporting this theory, with the overwhelming majority showing no causal association between the Measles-Mumps-Rubella vaccine and autism. The vaccine preservative thimerosal has alternatively been hypothesized to have a possible causal role in autism. Again, no convincing evidence was found to support this claim, nor for the use of chelation therapy in autism. With decreasing uptake of immunizations in children and the inevitable occurrence of measles outbreaks, it is important that clinicians be aware of the literature concerning vaccinations and autism so that they may have informed discussions with parents and caregivers.

It is also important for the general public to be aware. Please do your research in peer reviewed journals instead of getting your information from magazines and websites. Pubmed is free to look at as many abstracts as you want. Its just good practice in order to draw your own opinions instead of taking someones word for it via propaganda websites and non peer reviewed magazines.
These tend to have twisted and inflated statistics.

[edit on 27-11-2007 by halocleptic]

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 05:31 PM
reply to post by halocleptic

First, let me commend you on this post. If one is to argue for immunizations, this is how it should be done. By providing legitimate information, rather than telling us all how stupid we are and how we lack parenting skills.

However, it's not the temporal correlation between the onset of symptoms and the immunization schedule that worries most parents. It's the presence of thimerisol in a significant number of vaccines that, well, scares parents to death.

The proposition is that there's a link between thimerisol and autism, not the vaccine itself.

You'd be hard pressed to come across an animal who developed autism as a result of a vaccine, as thimerisol has been banned from use in animal vaccines for quite some time because of perceived dangers the chemical presented.

It all comes down to this. We know thimerisol is toxic, to such an extent that it was banned from animal vaccines. So why would I want it injected into my child?

If the vial containing the vaccine about to be administered to your child had a skull and crossbones on the label, how would you feel then? Someone earlier asked about Material Safety Data Sheets. Anyone seen the MSDS for Thimerisol?

Highly Toxic (USA) Very Toxic (EU).
Very toxic by inhalation, in contact with skin and if swallowed.
Danger of cumulative effects. May cause sensitization by inhalation and skin contact.
Irritating to eyes, respiratory system and skin.
Calif. Prop. 65 reproductive hazard.
Target organ(s): Nerves. Kidneys.


* additional chronic hazards present.

I'll take my chances with a healthy lifestyle, thank you very much. Add to the above information that this toxin is not required for the vaccine to be "effective", and you have a whole new list of questions.

Many others, like me, have come to their own conclusion that this substance is not something I feel should be injected into my children, especially when the same government that tells me I should, also tells me it's too dangerous to inject into my dog.

As a conspiracy related site, I feel that topics on ATS discussing immunizations, should be kept in the realm of conspiracy, as the childish mud-slinging against parents who actually have the cahones to do what they feel is right for their kids, and not what society tells them to do with them, gets very old, very quick. As mentioned before, calling us bad parents is going to be less than effective at getting us to let some schmuck inject our kids with toxic substances.

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 05:56 PM

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
show me an outbreak of smallpox in an area of the world where there have been vaccinations on a significant scale.

the common knowledge position is that there are none

Show me an outbreak of smallpox in an area of the world where there have been significant purchases of wide screen TV's. The common knowledge position is that there are none.

By your logic, widescreen TV's protect against smallpox. Well at least if someone in authority were saying so, then it would.

Yes, that is a ridiculous statement that proves nothing, and neither does yours.

As an afterthought, injecting a plethora of toxic chemical cocktails, mixed with live deadly diseases and other unknown animal pathogenic contaminants, into the bloodstream of a perfectly healthy baby, doesn't seem like common sense to me.

When you step back and take a cold hard look, it's easy to see why Jenner was heartily challenged by some of the top medical minds and scientists of his era.

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 06:02 PM
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

Another afterthought...

If you had bothered to read the thread before posting your comment, you would have found my reference to Brigg's papers on smallpox and the town of Leicester. So there is an area of the world that fell prey to smallpox epidemic after vaccination was widespread. Later, the people of leicester began to refuse the vaccine and went instead with sanitation etc. and the smallpox incidence reduced considerably compared to other areas (cf London) where vaccination was still in full force.

Perhaps common knowledge isn't always accurate?

The question is, will you actually go look at the research with an open mind, now that someone has given you an answer you thought was impossible, or will you just shrug it off and continue posting your common knowledge/assumptions as fact?

[edit on 27-11-2007 by RogerT]

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 06:17 PM
And an after - after thought of my own.

Since Smallpox is not on the schedule of childhood vaccinations, how is any argument relating to smallpox relevant in this discussion? It's just not.

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 06:18 PM
I vaccinated my older three children and they got sick alot and ear infections and all.
My last five have not been and they a very healthy and rarely get sick. So I think a strong immune system is the real answer. I take Body Balance and we all stay well, in fact the people around us get sick but we stay well.

I think we have become a paranoid people and instead of healing we just drug and cover.

Just my two cents for what its worth.

posted on Nov, 27 2007 @ 06:21 PM

Originally posted by spiritwomyn
...instead of healing we just drug and cover.

wow. I know it's only your two cents worth, but it's the most valuable post in this thread.

I'd sit here and give you stars all night if I could.

posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 12:19 PM
am I the only one who sees the irony here? Worried that shots can harm the child, yet they allow the child to go to ghetto headstart????


reply to post by stompk

posted on Nov, 28 2007 @ 04:09 PM
reply to post by RogerT

Don't forget the smallpox scare incident in Morocco. I will see if I can find the link. Its funny- you post the facts and the sheeple sleep.

"Cell-Based Vaccine Production"

Stay in the Know

Get updates on about new technologies and videos from experts.

Sign up now
For over 30 years, the majority of influenza vaccines have been produced in chicken eggs. While the technology is proven and reliable, an alternative cell-based method for vaccine production could prove invaluable in the event of a pandemic influenza. Realistically, both methods will be necessary to produce enough vaccine supply for the global population.

here's the link:

Lets pick this apart. The technology is proven and reliable= So what is the need for alternatives??????????

Achem's Razor: They are looking for money and/or guinea pigs.

If anyone cares to research this site, seriously it is filled with glaring contradictions and fabulous PR tactics. This site and sites like it are why people are being duped. It was not that long ago that if you published a book you had credibility- then if you were lauded on the radio- you enjoyed even more credibility- then television catapulted you into famous credibility- now the net is being earmarked for credibility based on websites and supposed experts.

Conducting research on that sites experts the credibility begins to fade but the site is laid out so well that most people would give them the benefit of the doubt.

Here's a link that will lead to the road to Morocco:

Here is another horror story from 2006 military vaccination program:

Okay, here is a link that many will find quite interesting. Scroll down for the bio-terrorism section:

Most intriguing. All experts- true experts disagree with mass vaccines UNLESS an outbreak has occurred. Roger- you win this one!

end transmission.

[edit on 28-11-2007 by dk3000]

posted on Dec, 2 2007 @ 10:23 PM
ok... people.. lets listen hear (a pun)

well as you say vaccinations are dangerous and have dangerous effects on people. but look at it

people have been vaccinated for a long time now. and i think these "effects" would of shown up.. one in a while.

yes i guess there must be some occasion it seemed like vaccinations caused a disease or something.. but there are a million other things that could cause a disabilty.

you people talk say polio has now increased since vaccinations.. i havent heard of any such talk ever in my life. and i could be wrong but theres no mass cases of autism and dumbing down of kids that have been vaccinated.

just because some kid in the middle of no where was diagnosed with autism a while after being vaccinated does not mean that is the cause and this is the effect.

open your eyes people. the news would be filled with stories of this. doctors would know.

what im coming to is that

this CONSPIRACY is exactly what it is... a random shot in the dark to try and prove your thoughts

posted on Dec, 2 2007 @ 10:44 PM
Did anyone catch the doco on Sundance Channel about the AIDS virus.


They are still using monkey-derived source for the Polio vaccine and they -could- use recombinant (according to the speaker) and don't.

I didn't really focus on the show since Sundance repeats its stuff a lot.

Uh, (searching) here's the title: "The Origins of Aids"

Now bear in mind that some parts of it make allegations that ended up not being supported. But the idea that they're still using monkey substrate is enough to make me wince.

Should be easy to google. Didn't know yesterday was world AIDS day... (they had on a bunch of stuff on many channels).

2 cents.

[edit on 2-12-2007 by Badge01]


posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 02:01 PM
I saw a news article once about African country, where all the peasants thought the free vaccination program was going to kill them, (muslim propaganda). And they showed this mother who had lost her children to polio (I think). She had regretted believing the muslim propaganda, because now her children had died, had they had the jab they would not have died (from Polio).

If anyone does not want their children to be immunised, that's fine, just be prepared to accept that they may die unnecessarily.

BTW "the waiver" discussed in the first posts, was probably nothing more than a parenatal declaration that immunisation was not be administered. It's not a "waiver" it was an "instruction".

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 11:12 PM
The Website for "Vaccination the Hidden Truth"

All information provided by Vaccination Information Service is sourced from orthodox peer-reviewed medical research from the world's most prestigious medical journals (over 100,000 pages studied). Ironically this research is sponsored in most cases by the vaccine manufacturers themselves.

The term "immunisation", often substituted for vaccination, is false and should be legally challenged, because it is well documented in medical research (see articles within) that the direct injection of foreign proteins and other toxic material (particularly known immune-sensitising poisons such as mercury) sensitises, meaning makes the recipient more, not less, easily affected by what he/she encounters in the future. This means they do the opposite of immunise, commonly even preventing immunity from developing after natural exposure. (Vaccines "de-immunise".)

A host of health problems (and sometimes death itself) result from these directly injected poisons, which are in unpredictably varying amounts from one batch to the next. Sanctioned Russian Roulette.

The actual frequency of health problems has been estimated by authorities to be possibly up to 100 times, or more, greater than that reported (see articles within), that difference being due to the fact that doctors are not given any real incentive to report adverse effects. They are also being told that they must never let their patients (or parents) think that the risks could outweigh the benefits, so it is normal policy to deny a link no matter how apparent it is to the patient (or parent).

The only thing that does immunise (i.e. enable the body to protect itself from harm by foreign organisms) is Mother Nature, provided she is properly supported with sufficient basic nutrition, and her sophisticated immune development process not interfered with. "Organically-grown" (vaccine-free) children arouse frequent comments due to their noticeably stronger health, alertness, awareness and happier demeanor. Their parents frequently comment that they learn faster than their vaccinated older siblings did, and are ahead of their peers at school.

Graphs showing natural decline of diseases and Vacc not even speeding up the process

[edit on 12-12-2007 by aussiespeeder]

top topics

<< 11  12  13    15  16 >>

log in