Ingredients in Vaccines...

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 02:53 PM
link   
I did a search for a topic specically on the ingredients used in vaccines and could find none. As I feel this is important information, and because I feel there is a nefarious effort to inject as many of the "useless eaters" with these "helpful" cocktails, I started this in General Conspiracies, not finding a good place otherwise. Move this thread if it belongs elsewhere.

From www.vaccination.inoz.com... which is a list of what they put in vaccines:


Formaldehyde:

(Used in vaccines as a tissue fixative)

Aust. National Research Council: Fewer than 20% but perhaps more than 10% of the general population may be susceptible to formaldehyde and may react acutely at any exposure level. More hazardous than most chemicals in 5 out of 12 ranking systems, on at least 8 federal regulatory lists, ranked as one of the most hazardous compounds (worst 10%) to ecosystems and human health (Environmental Defense Fund).

It is not safe at ANY level.

National Academy of Science:
There is no population threshold for irritation effects.

National Research Council:
Fewer than 20% but perhaps more than 10% of the general population may be susceptible to formaldehyde and may react acutely at any exposure level.

Formaldehyde is oxidised to formic acid which leads to acidosis and nerve damage. Acidosis can be described as a condition in which the acidity of the body tissues and fluids is abnormally high. The liver and the kidneys may also be damaged.

Other effects:

Eye; nasal; throat and pulmonary irritation; acute sense of smell; alters tissue proteins; anaemia; antibodies formation; apathy; blindness; blood in urine; blurred vision; body aches; bronchial spasms; bronchitis; burns nasal and throat; cardiac impairment; palpitations and arrhythmias; central nervous system depression; changes in higher cognitive functions; chemical sensitivity; chest pains and tightness; chronic vaginitis; colds; coma; conjunctivitis; constipation; convulsions; corneal erosion; cough; death; destruction of red blood cells; depression; dermatitis; diarrhoea; difficulty concentrating; disorientation; dizziness; ear aches; eczema; emotional upsets; ethmoid polyps; fatigue; fecula bleeding; foetal asphyxiation (and they don’t know what could cause SIDS?); flu-like or cold like illness; frequent urination with pain; gastritis; gastrointestinal inflammation; headaches; haemolytic anaemia; haemolytic haematuria; hoarseness; hyperactive airway disease; hyperactivity; hypomenstrual syndrome; immune system sensitiser; impaired (short) attention span; impaired capacity to attain attention; inability or difficulty swallowing; inability to recall words and names; inconsistent IQ profiles; inflammatory diseases of the reproductive organs; intestinal pain; intrinsic asthma; irritability; jaundice; joint pain; aches and swelling; kidney pain; laryngeal spasm; loss of memory; loss of sense of smell; loss of taste; malaise; menstrual and testicular pain; menstrual irregularities; metallic taste; muscle spasms and cramps; nasal congestions; crusting and mucosae inflammation; nausea; nosebleeds; numbness and tingling of the forearms and finger tips; pale, clammy skin; partial laryngeal paralysis; pneumonia; post nasal drip; pulmonary oedema; reduced body temperature; retarded speech pattern; ringing or tingling in the ear; schizophrenic-type symptoms; sensitivity to sound; shock; short term memory loss; shortness of breath; skin lesions; sneezing; sore throat; spacey feeling; speaking difficulty; sterility; swollen glands; tearing; thirst; tracheitis; tracheobronchitis; vertigo; vomiting blood; vomiting; wheezing.

References; C. Wilson; Chronic Exposure and Human Health (1993), McFarland & Company taken from Our Toxic Times Feb 1997 pgs 18 & 19.


Also, they link to this: www.whale.to... which has the following, discussing the "mercury-free" vaccines:


During an investigation into the mercury issue, HAPI learned that
Thimerosal, a 50% mercury compound, is still being used to produce
most vaccines and that the manufacturers are simply "filtering it
out" of the final product. However, according to Boyd Haley, PhD,
Chemistry Department Chair, University of Kentucky, mercury binds to
the antigenic protein in the vaccine and cannot be completely, 100%
filtered out.

All four vaccine vials tested contained mercury despite manufacturer
claims that two of the vials were completely mercury free. All four
vials also contained aluminum, one nine times more than the other
three, which tremendously enhances the toxicity of mercury causing
neuronal death in the brain.


The WHO is now claiming that children have a "RIGHT" to be injected with these toxins. And plan to ensure that all children are forced to receive them...except, I will bet, the children of the Elite.

Any of you out there have thoughts on this?




posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 03:01 PM
link   
that list of effects is pretty standard with anything foriegn put into your body, its called a reaction


even aspirin can cause that, maybe not all but alot, as many people react differently

Im not one to agree with vaccines myself, but the idea of prevention and possible cures are just astounding and amazing that we can figure out stuff like this

its a doubleedged sword, no matter what youll get stabbed



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by MurderCityDevil
that list of effects is pretty standard with anything foriegn put into your body, its called a reaction

even aspirin can cause that, maybe not all but alot, as many people react differently


There is a BIG difference with oral consumption (a natural function) and injection (NOT natural), for one thing, and it would be my guess you didn't read what I linked to, for another.

There are HORRIFIC things used and possible issues with vaccines. If you go down the list, it just gets scarier and scarier.

And to FORCE anyone - and especially a child, who cannot have a say, to have this creppola injected into their veins... The parent should be in control!


Im not one to agree with vaccines myself, but the idea of prevention and possible cures are just astounding and amazing that we can figure out stuff like this


While I agree that the idea is a good one, the practice is barbaric and primative. (Glad you are not specifically a proponent of this.)


its a doubleedged sword, no matter what youll get stabbed


No... It is not. On the one hand, one risks illness - risks, only - and on the other hand, one is guaranteed of having toxins pumped into one's veins. Give me the risks only option, thank you very much.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 08:20 AM
link   
It is really true that no one wants to discuss the things they are talking about forcing into our kids?!?

I am saddened that no one is interested enough to talk about these ingredients. Maybe I should list them here...?

Formaldehyde

Mercury

Antifreeze

Aluminium

2-Phenoxyethanol

Phenol

Methanol

Borax

Glutaraldehyde

MSG

Sulfate and phosphate compounds

Polymyxin B

Polysorbate 20 / 80

Sorbitol

Polyribosylribitol

Beta-Propiolactone

Amphotericin B

Animal organ tissue and blood

Aborted human fetal tissue and human albumin

Large foreign proteins

This is not an exhaustive list. It is, however, a list with disturbing toxic and/or allergenic properties.

Do we really want these injected into our children?



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 08:25 AM
link   
I'm on the fence, I have not had my child vaccinated yet because of age 8 months old. I don't know who to trust anymore. The Doc keeps hounding us to get the vaccines, but from another Doc says my child is too young and to wait until at least one years old. WTF am I supposed to do. Is there a website you could steer me to?



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
ohh and another thing, I have friends saying that I need to get my child vaccinated, then I have an other friend who says don't because there kid was all normal and crawling before getting the vaccs and when she did get them was not talking(baby nois), crawling.



posted on Aug, 3 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by 38181
I'm on the fence, I have not had my child vaccinated yet because of age 8 months old. I don't know who to trust anymore. The Doc keeps hounding us to get the vaccines, but from another Doc says my child is too young and to wait until at least one years old. WTF am I supposed to do. Is there a website you could steer me to?


My advice... Read the link in my first post, see how toxic these ingredients are, keep in mind that pharmaceutical companies pay doctors to prescribe their stuff - including vaccinations (so just because a doctor says your child needs them, doesn't mean that they have your child's best interest in mind), that pharmaceutical companies pay for "studies," that independent researchers are finding many issues with these toxins but are suppressed in the media, that virtually ALL vaccines have mercury in them (even the "mercury-free" vaccines are testing as having mercury in them), and that there is no "safe" amount for some of these things they put in vaccines to be injected into the bloodstream.

Seriously, this is an effort to get rid of the "useless eaters" on this planet.



posted on Aug, 23 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   
I suppose when deciding whether to get your children vaccinated or not its a matter of statistics. Do they lower your chance of getting sick overall? By this I mean to take into account the risk posed by the vaccine itself also. Taking the Vaccine wont necessarily make you sick but then you wont definitely get sick without it either..

I would say it was worth the risk but I only know the symptoms of what they help prevent and not the symptoms of a negative reaction to the ingredients in the vaccines themselves. Oh and vaccination has already done a lot for us when it comes to our overall health.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by CuriosityStrikes
 


Well, if the decision to vaccinate is based on statistics and facts, then the decision is clear. Vaccination raises the chances of becoming infected with whatever you're vaccinating against, and obviously, the chances of adverse reaction.

Part 1 www.youtube.com...
Part 2 www.youtube.com...
Part 3 www.youtube.com...
Part 4 www.youtube.com...
Part 5 www.youtube.com...

Tried to embed, but it's producing a malformed video id (adding a slash at the end).



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


You won't believe what I found at the store. Maybe next time I go i'll take a picture of it, but you can buy MSG in a big plastic bottle, just as if it was some sort of spice or salt. I was shocked. Now you can buy poison to add it to your food! Couldn't be easier!



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Unit541
 

Firstly I would like to thank you for posting some interesting videos.

Secondly I would like to say that some points made were interesting and certainly merit some more research but that others were a bit questionable and hard to agree with.

One point is that the decrease in cases of certain diseases that were originally attributed to vaccinations is in fact down to the general increase in hygiene and diet instead. I doubt this on the grounds that diets are not generally getting better from what I know, I thought diet related problems such as obesity and diabetes were on the increase and also too much hygiene can be said to be a bad thing and is as unnatural as the injections they disagree with and I question.

Another point that was made is that antibodies are bad for you when it comes to fighting disease, the proof for this is supposedly the HIV virus. He seems to overlook the fact that antibodies fight viruses and that the HIV virus slowly reduces the numbers of antibodies causing AIDS. He says that some people with antibodies still die when they catch diseases and that some people with no antibodies don't even catch the disease. Now I agree with this point but doubt its relevance, having antibodies does not stop you catching a disease but they are created to fight a disease once it is caught, he also fails to mention what happens when someone without antibodies does catch the disease.

The final point I have doubts of is the idea that DNA in the vaccinations are incorporated into the human genome and that it could transform us. I would like more information on this as its brushed over pretty quickly and yet it sounds quite serious. Is this even possible?

One point I do agree with is that vaccines should not be given to people who are already ill as the vaccine could distract the immune system from fighting an already present problem.

Another point I agree with is that injecting foreign material bypasses the natural barriers of the immune system and that this could be a problem, I think this needs more research. I do think it must be noted that some diseases such as malaria are contracted this way though (unless I am very much mistaken.

There is much else I could comment on in the video but also much else I have not the knowledge to comment on.

Once again thank you for posting an interesting set of videos.



posted on Aug, 24 2008 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Most people believe that science is precise, and scientists are smart, careful, and responsible. I believe most are, but not this one (Albert Sabin). He is the one who made the decision of what to inject into millions of children. You will have your head in your hands shaking No, this can't be real. But it is.

Despite the virus vaccine producing tumors in mice, it was given to millions of children anyway so as not to "obfuscate" (his own words) vaccine technology of the time.



[edit on 24-8-2008 by ATS4dummies]

[edit on 24-8-2008 by ATS4dummies]

[edit on 24-8-2008 by ATS4dummies]



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by CuriosityStrikes
I suppose when deciding whether to get your children vaccinated or not its a matter of statistics. Do they lower your chance of getting sick overall? By this I mean to take into account the risk posed by the vaccine itself also. Taking the Vaccine wont necessarily make you sick but then you wont definitely get sick without it either..


That is a hard thing to determine... How can you absolutely attribute the fact that someone did NOT contract a given disease to the fact that they were vaccinated? And taking a vaccine absolutely WILL make you sick - the degree to which you become ill depends on numerous factors, but regardless, when you take a vaccine, you are putting toxins and allergens into your bloodstream. They WILL take one toll or another.


I would say it was worth the risk but I only know the symptoms of what they help prevent and not the symptoms of a negative reaction to the ingredients in the vaccines themselves. Oh and vaccination has already done a lot for us when it comes to our overall health.


It's worth the guarantee of toxins/allergens being injected into one's body over a risk of becoming sick - which one will most likely survive?

Not in my book.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by CuriosityStrikes
I suppose when deciding whether to get your children vaccinated or not its a matter of statistics. Do they lower your chance of getting sick overall? By this I mean to take into account the risk posed by the vaccine itself also. Taking the Vaccine wont necessarily make you sick but then you wont definitely get sick without it either..

I would say it was worth the risk but I only know the symptoms of what they help prevent and not the symptoms of a negative reaction to the ingredients in the vaccines themselves. Oh and vaccination has already done a lot for us when it comes to our overall health.


The statistics are not reliable. Vaccines appeared at a time when cleanliness and social changes were taking place via emergence of a strong middle class. What they have accredited as success to vaccinations, are not actually proof of anything. I had to do a great deal of reading because of my sons unheard of reaction to his shots (unheard of being defined by the doctor) in the province of BC. This information was widely available then online with even quick searches revealed that vaccines were controversial in their claims at the time. But here is something on it (hopefully have more time for this later):
www.vaclib.org...
Of interest here is:


From: Vaccination, A Parents Dilemma, Greg Beattle,
c 1997, Oracle Press, Queensland, Australia, p. 36-57
Note: no vaccine was ever created for Scarlet Fever
which virtually disappeared. No widespread
vaccination was used for Typhoid Fever


Here from this site, a practicing nurse looking at it from the other side:


Of particular interest highlighted by the study is the claim that the diseases vaccines are meant to prevent have declined, due to better sewerage, water, hygiene and nutrition and not due to vaccination. While it is not the most common claim for withholding vaccination (it is the sixth commonest rationale), it is one I would like to focus on, as I hear it often. It is an example of a decision made as a result of poor knowledge and founded on misleading information and statistics. ...

This evidence refutes the IAS's claim. As one research study, "Impact of anti-vaccine movements on pertussis control: the untold story", illustrated, there is strong evidence of a causal relation between pertussis epidemics and the activity of anti-vaccination movements. This research uses data from a range of countries including England, Russia, Japan, Sweden and Italy. (7)

As vaccination coverage increases, both the frequency and severity of epidemics decline. One researcher clearly shows that the incidence of pertussis in five different countries throughout the world, is associated with the level of activity of the anti-vaccination movements and the level of national coverage. "There is no question that these [the anti-vaccination movements] undermine, collectively and individually, the benefits of vaccination." (8)


It was a really hard decision at the time, but the public health nurse finally caught his immunization up in the emergency room after after days of taking antihistamines so in an emergency he could be treated quickly. However, this was before I found out what was actually in the shots, also this was before my youngest son was possibly delayed enormously and went through health problems that started after his first (and last vaccine). Consequently, I believe that this is a case where modern science should be our friend and be assisting humankind with its advances, but sadly has been used to compromise our health and seriously harm as many serfs as possible by the Bildenburg group. Until things change, vaccinations are a thing of the past in our family.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by LOLZebra
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


You won't believe what I found at the store. Maybe next time I go i'll take a picture of it, but you can buy MSG in a big plastic bottle, just as if it was some sort of spice or salt. I was shocked. Now you can buy poison to add it to your food! Couldn't be easier!


That and fluoridated water for infants! And people doubt there is an effort to eliminate the "useless eaters..."

[sigh]



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by CuriosityStrikes
One point is that the decrease in cases of certain diseases that were originally attributed to vaccinations is in fact down to the general increase in hygiene and diet instead. I doubt this on the grounds that diets are not generally getting better from what I know, I thought diet related problems such as obesity and diabetes were on the increase and also too much hygiene can be said to be a bad thing and is as unnatural as the injections they disagree with and I question.


You must understand that the data shown are from the times that vaccines were introduced. That the reported incidences of illness for all the diseases being vaccinated for was already dropping because the middle class was flourishing, and cleanliness and good diets were becoming prevalent.

These are the data used even today to suggest that vaccines did ANYTHING. But the fact is that some of the vaccines caused an upward turn in the incidence of the disease - only within the group vaccinated!

It's as if you are jumping up and down. You are getting tired and slow the number of jumps you make per minute as time goes on. I come along and as I come up to you, I pick my nose. I notice that your jumping decreases in quantity of jumps and I conclude that by picking my nose I can make you slow your jumping rate.

That's basically what happened with vaccines.


Another point that was made is that antibodies are bad for you when it comes to fighting disease, the proof for this is supposedly the HIV virus.


I suspect you didn't grasp that wholly. What he said was initially it was thought that if you had antibodies, you were "immune," having those protective guys there. Along comes AIDS and now, if you have the HIV antibodies, it DOESN'T mean you are protected, but rather, it means you're screwed.

So obviously, just having antibodies is not a sign of any degree of protection.


He seems to overlook the fact that antibodies fight viruses and that the HIV virus slowly reduces the numbers of antibodies causing AIDS. He says that some people with antibodies still die when they catch diseases and that some people with no antibodies don't even catch the disease. Now I agree with this point but doubt its relevance, having antibodies does not stop you catching a disease but they are created to fight a disease once it is caught, he also fails to mention what happens when someone without antibodies does catch the disease.


I think his point is that there is a great deal that we don't know about the whole immune process. As for what happens when someone without antibodies catches a disease... Depending on their health, which in turn depends on their diet and other factors, they make antibodies and either have mild symptoms or, through the range, have severe symptoms.

All vaccines do is make antibodies - at least in terms of anything that is used to "prove" they work.


The final point I have doubts of is the idea that DNA in the vaccinations are incorporated into the human genome and that it could transform us. I would like more information on this as its brushed over pretty quickly and yet it sounds quite serious. Is this even possible?


I believe it is, yes, given that the DNA is coming though a delivery system that the body is not evolved to handle... I am not a geneticist so I could be wrong, but I do think it can have a genetic effect.

[edit on 8/25/2008 by Amaterasu]





new topics
top topics
 
3

log in

join