Doctors ordered to stop giving flu jabs to children

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 06:20 AM
link   
I am undecided about my stance on this subject. I don't personally get the flu shot. I am nearly thirty and have only had one flu despite never being vacinated. I just figure with my odds the cost isn't worth it.

I have had all of the vaccines required as a kid in the early 1980s. I have also had vaccines for hep and for typhoid. Besides slightly low good cholesterol numbers I am in good shape. However, I have a kid and that means I'm searching for the answers.

As a seeker, I tend to look for credible information. In my opinion NN lacks that credibility. Their disclaimer really makes me wary of anything they post.


All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing International, LTD. is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind.


edit on 18-1-2011 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine
I apologise, I must be misreading your question. Who are 'they'? Studies undertaken by universities are normally funded by government grants. Essentially, if they think your research serves some sort of purpose (e.g. contributes to the pool of knowledge or has medical applications) they give you a bunch of money to buy the chemicals, etc. that you need and you go for it. All of the papers I linked were university based research groups. Most of them are when it comes to vaccines - so no hidden agenda.

Do you have a link to an actual paper that supports this 700% claim of yours? I couldn't find anything.


Not my claims. Link is in OP.

As for the study I put the link in the post above but here it is again: link.

They note in the paper that they are using vaccine makers own studies:

This review includes 15 out of 36 trials funded by industry (four had no funding declaration). An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size. Studies funded from public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines. The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions and spurious notoriety of the studies. The content and conclusions of this review should be interpreted in light of this finding.


So even with half of the studies being made by the pharmaceutical companies (and they note that "public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines") there result is only 1 in 100 are helped in the nominative studies.

Here is their quote in the "in plain language" result section:

In average conditions (partially matching vaccine) 100 people need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms.


1 in 100 are helped so 99% are not.

And to refute your saying the industry reports are not looked well upon they state:

An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by hypervalentiodine
 



For example, the cervical cancer vaccine developed in Australia not so long ago is a mimic of the capsule that encases the cervical cancer virus. When you inject these into a patient, your body's immune system responds and gets rid of it. It is able to 'remember' this capsule, so that if an actual cervical cancer virus enters a host body, the immune system can quickly see that it has the same viral capsule and get rid of it before anything happens.


Okay I am not a scientist, but my understanding of the HPV vaccine is entirely different from yours. My understanding is that only 2 types of the HPV virus may ultimately lead to cervical cancers and the remaining strains of HPV (nearly 200) cause no symptoms or problems at all. Furthermore, not all cervical cancers are caused by the 2 strains of HPV, about 30% of them are not and considering that there are only 270,000 deaths from all cervical cancers worldwide in a population of just under 7 billion, that's miniscule, and I really don't think that a vaccination program will make a significant difference to the number of deaths. Also my understanding is that once you have been infected by HPV the vaccine is pointless, so vaccinating women who have already been sexually active is pointless as there is a high chance they already have the virus, but a very, very low chance that they will go on to develop cervical cancer, and I think this is a big issue with vaccination programs that use a scatter gun approach that affects millions of people, with potential risks attached, when the likelyhood of them contracting the illness being prevented by the vaccine is remote.

Obviously polio and smallpox etc are different as anybody can be susceptible to contracting these diseases, but this HPV one bothers me, as it plays on the already, over inflated (IMO) fears of women about this incredibly rare cancer, who then undergo all manner of invasive treatments that can cause all sorts of other problems, usually to find out (or not as the medical profession are rather reticent about providing the true facts) that they never did have, or for that matter ever will have this very rare cancer.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by backinblack
 


Without knowing why the fits were caused, it is pretty daft to jump to conclusions. Just think, out of the millions and millions and millions of people who get vaccinated every year for a wide variety of diseases, just what is the proportion of bad reactions? What about people having bad reactions with cough medicine, or Aspirin, or Ibuprofen? You can find cases of people dying from anything if you look hard enough and have a large enough sample. You have to look at the big picture and see what the rate of incidence is.

I have a feeling I am talking to people who have already made up their minds, however.


Sounds as though you have definitely made up your mind mate!

However, you might want to reconsider your position after looking at these statistics, all itemised and documented by legit organisations such as the Lancet, Office of national statistics, CDC, BMJ and so on.

You can check out the references yourselves if you'd like to confirm the figures. You'll *never* see these statistics on the MSM or on a poster on your doctors wall, that's for an absolute certainty!

I have a LOT of slides and collated information to post here, so it will seem like a lot of information to take in and digest, but each slide is self explanatory.

Some of the images have been cut short on the right hand side, but nothing is really missing...just ask if in doubt, ok?

Here's a little food for thought for those sitting on the fence of this issue or for those that think they have been given the facts in order to make an informed choice for themselves and families;



What do you immediately notice about this graph?

..and again, this one:



And again;



And again;



And again;



You get the idea by now yes? More? OK..



More;



More;



Yet More;



I *really* don't have to explain these do i?!! The death rate among under 5's almost quadruples after mandatory vaccinations are introduced in 2002...



Death rates Vs number of vaccinations;



OK, that's enough of the patently obvious graphs...how about a nice piece of pie? I doubt many will enjoy these pies though...



Another slice for you?



More;



More;



Again;



Another..



Yep, still more (you can check all of these yourselves people)



And on...



A little Mercury to go with your slice of pie perhaps?



And a bar graph or two to finish off;



Vaccination and correlation with SIDS.



Vaccinated health Vs Unvaccinated health;



More;



Links to bowel disease; Look at the correlations in these graphs..







That's all folks!

Personally, the evidence is clear. More than clear actually.

Take notice of the data or don't, believe what you are being officially told or don't, vaccinate or don't...it's entirely up to you, but at least you have some information, checkable information at that, to base your decisions on.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeNice81
I am undecided about my stance on this subject. I don't personally get the flu shot. I am nearly thirty and have only had one flu despite never being vacinated. I just figure with my odds the cost isn't worth it.

I have had all of the vaccines required as a kid in the early 1980s. I have also had vaccines for hep and for typhoid. Besides slightly low good cholesterol numbers I am in good shape. However, I have a kid and that means I'm searching for the answers.

As a seeker, I tend to look for credible information. In my opinion NN lacks that credibility. Their disclaimer really makes me wary of anything they post.


All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing International, LTD. is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind.


edit on 18-1-2011 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)

I am also undecided....What I do know is that one of my sons did in fact get the chickenpox just 3 years after being vaccinated. However, it was not bad at all...2 of my boys got the pneumonia vaccination, few years later, one had walking pneumonia, the other was hospitalized with pneumonia twice, 2 years in a row, for 3-4 days each hospital stay...I don't personally get the flu shot and haven't had the flu in 14 years. Now my boys are still young, 1 now has a compromised immune system, something I think he may just have been born with...As far as the rest of the vaccs....Still keeping my eye on the boys, but I am not noticing any other problems as of yet??...fingers crossed...BTW, I wanted to add, I didn't allow my 2 boys to get the flu vacc this year.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


GOOD GRIEF!!!

This article has NOTHING to do with vaccine dangers, which I happen to believe are real. But that's irrelevant. The source article is about government policy, and vaccination priorities that do NOT include children:



Local doctors say the change of plan (to vaccinate kids) – (is) to bring the area in line with official Government restrictions –

Government policy says that while pregnant women, the elderly, and those with health problems are supposed to be offered the vaccine, healthy children should not be given it, despite high incidence of flu among the young this winter.


Who on earth do you think might be served by TOTALLY misrepresenting situations and news reports?

Get real. And for goodness sake, get responsible!



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by peponastick
That's right the Government loves you and wants you to be healthy..They put flouride in the water because they care about your teeth...They are spraying chemtrails to keep the nasty sun from getting too hot and causing global warming...YES...The loving government really does care about us!


Odd then that on this occasion it was government, on the advice of their advisors, that decided that children should not be vaccinated. Doesn't quite square with "government wants to kill your children" now does it.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Spending years on the conspiracy circuit this vaccination issue is a new one. I had thought there was some minor problems with profit based research, but the long term cost / benefit is looking like there are major problems with the whole program. It is looking like the whole medical industry is just as screwed up as the military industry with profits and not reason driving decisions. Here is another study similar to the one presented by spikey www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

The answers to all the debates and questions is in the numbers, not selective studies and statistics but the whole picture. I can see enough allegations and supporting arguments to review the long term data and determine the actual risks, costs and benefits of each vaccine. There is a distinct possibility that science may be on the wrong track using vaccinations to stimulate the immune system and treat disease. The thing I would like to know for each disease are:

1/ What have been the long term infection, long term complication and death rates for each disease.
2/ When was the vaccination introduced and any upgrades made.
3/ What are the long term complications and death rates for each vaccination.
4/ What are the actual death rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated for each disease.
5/ What are the long term complication rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated for each disease.

I am over all this trust me stuff. I just want the hard facts, without adjustments.
edit on 18-1-2011 by kwakakev because: added 'without adjustments'



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 



There is a distinct possibility that science may be on the wrong track using vaccinations to stimulate the immune system and treat disease.


I agree.


Seems vaccines might be infecting 'hosts' with latent infections, in part due to contaminations but also route of entry, and as result of bypassing immune barriers in the gut and lymphatic systems.


The thing I would like to know for each disease are:

1/ What have been the long term infection, long term complication and death rates for each disease.
2/ When was the vaccination introduced and any upgrades made.
3/ What are the long term complications and death rates for each vaccination.
4/ What are the actual death rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated for each disease.
5/ What are the long term complication rates between the vaccinated and unvaccinated for each disease.

I am over all this trust me stuff. I just want the hard facts.


Have been looking at this for a while - the key is researching each disease individually, and focusing on long term chronic disease that manifests decades after exposure. Most evidence seems to be epidemiological, and it's hard to distinguish the long-term effects of 'natural infection' from vaccine impacts. ...a gargantuan task, but doable.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Who on earth do you think might be served by TOTALLY misrepresenting situations and news reports?

Get real. And for goodness sake, get responsible!


I am unaware of misrepresenting the original article. I took an excerpt which restated the articles headline. The entire article is there for your perusal.

This is breaking news... I posted the article. You are then supposed to comment on your feelings on the article... which I did.

Articles full title:

Doctors ordered to stop giving flu jabs to children
Health officials have ordered doctors to shelve a vaccination programme which was under way to protect children from swine flu.


My excert representing content of article:

He said that the programme was sensible, because “stopping just one child from needing intensive care treatment more than pays for vaccinating the whole school”.

The decision, taken at a meeting of the PCT on January 5, had been backed by local doctors.

The PCT now says it changed its stance last week “based on further advice received from the SHA”.


If anything my selected quote shows vaccines and government in a good light!

No misrepresentation.

Responsible? What have I done that was Irresponsible? The article sparked a lively debate which has brought out interesting facts and data of which I was totally unaware. My knowledge has grown, and I assume the other readers of these articles knowledge has grown. How is this Irresponsible?

Where is my misrepresentation and irresponsibility?

As for reality. Just because I see the pharmaseudical industry (more precisely those that own/run it) as sociopaths does not mean I do not live in reality. I have presented facts and data to back up my opinion. That's as real as it gets



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by pianopraze
 


Sorry for jumping down your throat - shouldn't have - I had just read a 'breaking news' story where the link was real, but the entire "quote" was fabricated. So was prickly, quick to be critical. Mis-read your post I guess.

...My concern was that on first reading, it seemed you were saying that the program was pulled with local doctors backing, when actually it was started by local doctors, against national policy - and was pulled to comply with national policy.



My excert representing content of article:

He said that the programme was sensible, because “stopping just one child from needing intensive care treatment more than pays for vaccinating the whole school”.

The decision, taken at a meeting of the PCT on January 5, had been backed by local doctors.

The PCT now says it changed its stance last week “based on further advice received from the SHA”.


If anything my selected quote shows vaccines and government in a good light!



...We're on the same page here - I think the basic rationale justifying vaccines is seriously flawed, never mind the contaminations. ...My worry is that all "vaccine criticisms" are getting blown off now, after the researcher got busted for falsifying his study to prove the vaccine-autism link (for his own personal profit!). Just concerned we have to be ultra sceptical, critical and above-board.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by soficrow
 


I'm not guilty of going off on anyone...


No worries. To me, now more than ever after some of the information brought forth in this thread, I am leaning away from trusting any vaccine.

I don't trust them.

They have repeatedly "accidently" released deadly viruses in these "vaccines"... link

And they have even been caught testing deadly viruses on homeless people killing them! link

This is insanity!
edit on 18-1-2011 by pianopraze because: typos



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze

So even with half of the studies being made by the pharmaceutical companies (and they note that "public sources were significantly less likely to report conclusions favorable to the vaccines") there result is only 1 in 100 are helped in the nominative studies.

Here is their quote in the "in plain language" result section:

In average conditions (partially matching vaccine) 100 people need to be vaccinated to avoid one set of influenza symptoms.


1 in 100 are helped so 99% are not.

And to refute your saying the industry reports are not looked well upon they state:

An earlier systematic review of 274 influenza vaccine studies published up to 2007 found industry funded studies were published in more prestigious journals and cited more than other studies independently from methodological quality and size.



Vaccines are a preventative measure. If a vaccine stopped one out of one million people from getting influenza, it's doing its job. Saying that 99% aren't helped is a complete misnomer.

Also, your second excerpt hasn't said by what industry these people were funded. It doesn't necessarily mean pharmaceutical companies.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze
reply to post by soficrow
 


I'm not guilty of going off on anyone...


No worries. To me, now more than ever after some of the information brought forth in this thread, I am leaning away from trusting any vaccine.

I don't trust them.

They have repeatedly "accidently" released deadly viruses in these "vaccines"... link

And they have even been caught testing deadly viruses on homeless people killing them! link

This is insanity!
edit on 18-1-2011 by pianopraze because: typos


It is within your rights not to trust them. The vaccine trial in Poland that supposedly killed a bunch of homeless people was just that, a trial. Unfortunately, the doctors involved did not follow ethical procedure in the slightest and were by no means within their rights to do what they did - by which I mean they should have never given a 'trial' vaccine to any person, ever, until it was deemed appropriate. I read some other articles regarding your first link. It wasn't a vaccine that got contaminated, it was samples of viral material that Baxter international had sent of to some labs around Europe. There was no danger in it being administered to anyone. In any case, I suppose a lot of this comes down to the fact that sometimes people and companies can do rotten things, that doesn't mean all people and all companies do rotten things all of the time.
edit on 18-1-2011 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-1-2011 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by hypervalentiodine
 





You see, that depends entirely upon where and when in the world you are referring to. Small pox was the leading cause of death in Europe in the 18th century. From the 19th century onwards there were a number of varying vaccinations in different parts of the globe. So yes, if you are referring to the 1950's hemisphere vaccination effort, then your correlations are correct - incidences were decreasing prior. But that was because of all the other vaccination efforts that precedented that - not because of lifestyle changes. Besides that, even if the number of people with small pox (or any other disease) was decreasing before people were getting vaccinated for it, the fact still remains that the people that were vaccinated for it inherited an immunity, thereby preventing further or prolonged outbreaks.


Cowpox vaccine was believed able to immunize people against smallpox. At the
time this vaccine was introduced, there was already a decline in the number of
cases of smallpox. Japan introduced compulsory vaccination in 1872. In 1892
there were 165,774 cases of smallpox with 29,979 deaths despite the vaccination
program. A stringent compulsory smallpox vaccine program, which prosecuted
those refusing the vaccine, was instituted in England in 1867. Within 4 years 97.5
% of persons between 2 and 50 had been vaccinated. The following year
England experienced the worst smallpox epidemic[1] in its history
with 44,840 deaths. Between 1871 and 1880 the incidence of smallpox
escalated from 28 to 46 per 100,000. The smallpox vaccine does not
work.
Null Gary Vaccination: An Analysis of the Health Risks- Part Townsend Letter for Doctors & Patients Dec. 2003 pg 78



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine

Vaccines are a preventative measure. If a vaccine stopped one out of one million people from getting influenza, it's doing its job. Saying that 99% aren't helped is a complete misnomer.

Also, your second excerpt hasn't said by what industry these people were funded. It doesn't necessarily mean pharmaceutical companies.


I enjoy the intelligent conversation, but please read my posts fully when you reply. You seem to overlook mass sections and entire posts. This post has the link to the original paper and the except that tells about funding, not the one you replied to. The paper has the full list but I do not have the subscription to see the full index. Maybe your university does. "the industry" in context of this paper is "the pharmaceutical industry"

I am horrible at math, but even I can see 1 out of 100 is 1%. If one percent is helped that means 99% are NOT helped. Simple, simple, simple. And to state that it IS worth vaccinating when there are many studies that show there are harmful risks to fertility, death, and neural damage does NOT make it a "no brainer" to say it is worth taking the vaccine.

On a sarcastic note I do agree it is doing it's job. The job this industry intends... reducing to population. Just like Jobs stated in my OP video.


Originally posted by hypervalentiodine
It is within your rights not to trust them. The vaccine trial in Poland that supposedly killed a bunch of homeless people was just that, a trial. Unfortunately, the doctors involved did not follow ethical procedure in the slightest and were by no means within their rights to do what they did - by which I mean they should have never given a 'trial' vaccine to any person, ever, until it was deemed appropriate. I read some other articles regarding your first link. It wasn't a vaccine that got contaminated, it was samples of viral material that Baxter international had sent of to some labs around Europe. There was no danger in it being administered to anyone. In any case, I suppose a lot of this comes down to the fact that sometimes people and companies can do rotten things, that doesn't mean all people and all companies do rotten things all of the time.
edit on 18-1-2011 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-1-2011 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)


It was not an isolated case, nor was it just a few nurses in one hospital killing those homeless people any more than it was a few E-4s in Guantanamo that were implementing MK-ULTRA style mind control torture on those inmates. Those orders and directives came down from the very top of the industry, no matter what gets printed in the paper.

Everyone knows how scape-goats work.

As to the "no danger to being administered" that is patently false. These were flu vaccines set for distribution. It was only some last minute tests before distribution by the nations heath officials that discovered every test animal died which stopped it from releasing a pandemic:

Baxter flu vaccines contaminated with H5N1 – otherwise known as the human form of avian flu, one of the most deadly biological weapons on earth with a 60% kill rate – were received by labs in the Czech Republic, Germany, and Slovenia.
Initially, Baxter attempted to stonewall questions by invoking “trade secrets” and refused to reveal how the vaccines were contaminated with H5N1. After increased pressure they then claimed that pure H5N1 batches were sent by accident. This was seemingly an attempt to quickly change the story and hide the fact that the accidental contamination of a vaccine with a deadly biological agent like avian flu is virtually imp


Why? Two reasons. They stood to make BILLIONS and they have a stated agenda to depopulate the planet! Ted Turner has said it, Bill Gates has said it, The UN has numerous documents stating it. This is document fact not conspiracy!

In addition, as we have previously reported, those that have a stake in the Tamiflu vaccine include top globalists and BIlderberg members like George Shultz, Lodewijk J.R. de Vink and former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
Authorities in both Europe and the U.S. have openly detailed plans for martial law, quarantine and internment should a bird flu pandemic occur.
The other motivation, as we have exhaustively documented on this website for years, is the fact that elites throughout history have openly stated that they want to see a world population reduction of around 80 per cent. Shocking stories like this take the plausibility of that narrative out of the realms of conspiracy theory and into the dangerous reality of conspiracy fact.


Isn't it interesting how all these threads lead back to Rumsfeld and Cheney?

And this is NOT THE FIRST TIME!!!! They have repeatedly infected thousands to millions of people with deadly diseases. They KNOWINGLY realeased the HIV virus on a prvious occasion!

In 2006 it was revealed that Bayer Corporation had discovered that their injection drug, which was used by hemophiliacs, was contaminated with the HIV virus. Internal documents prove that after they positively knew that the drug was contaminated, they took it off the U.S. market only to dump it on the European, Asian and Latin American markets, knowingly exposing thousands, most of them children, to the live HIV virus. Government officials in France went to prison for allowing the drug to be distributed. The documents show that the FDA colluded with Bayer to cover-up the scandal and allowed the deadly drug to be distributed globally. No Bayer executives ever faced arrest or prosecution in the United States.


No one is very brought to justice - other than a few 'rogue nureses and doctors'


No mater how well documented people are rushing to buy these vaccines from corporations that have repeatedly show the willingness to spread pandemics of deadly diseases.

Mass insanity!
edit on 18-1-2011 by pianopraze because: typos
edit on 18-1-2011 by pianopraze because: typos



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine

Vaccines are a preventative measure. If a vaccine stopped one out of one million people from getting influenza, it's doing its job. Saying that 99% aren't helped is a complete misnomer.

Also, your second excerpt hasn't said by what industry these people were funded. It doesn't necessarily mean pharmaceutical companies.


I enjoy the intelligent conversation, but please read my posts fully when you reply. You seem to overlook mass sections and entire posts. This post has the link to the original paper and the except that tells about funding, not the one you replied to. The paper has the full list but I do not have the subscription to see the full index. Maybe your university does. "the industry" in context of this paper is "the pharmaceutical industry"

I am horrible at math, but even I can see 1 out of 100 is 1%. If one percent is helped that means 99% are NOT helped. Simple, simple, simple. And to state that it IS worth vaccinating when there are many studies that show there are harmful risks to fertility, death, and neural damage does NOT make it a "no brainer" to say it is worth taking the vaccine.

On a sarcastic note I do agree it is doing it's job. The job this industry intends... reducing to population. Just like Jobs stated in my OP video.


Originally posted by hypervalentiodine
It is within your rights not to trust them. The vaccine trial in Poland that supposedly killed a bunch of homeless people was just that, a trial. Unfortunately, the doctors involved did not follow ethical procedure in the slightest and were by no means within their rights to do what they did - by which I mean they should have never given a 'trial' vaccine to any person, ever, until it was deemed appropriate. I read some other articles regarding your first link. It wasn't a vaccine that got contaminated, it was samples of viral material that Baxter international had sent of to some labs around Europe. There was no danger in it being administered to anyone. In any case, I suppose a lot of this comes down to the fact that sometimes people and companies can do rotten things, that doesn't mean all people and all companies do rotten things all of the time.
edit on 18-1-2011 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-1-2011 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)


It was not an isolated case, nor was it just a few nurses in one hospital killing those homeless people any more than it was a few E-4s in Guantanamo that were implementing MK-ULTRA style mind control torture on those inmates. Those orders and directives came down from the very top of the industry, no matter what gets printed in the paper.

Everyone knows how scape-goats work.

As to the "no danger to being administered" that is patently false. These were flu vaccines set for distribution. It was only some last minute tests before distribution by the nations heath officials that discovered every test animal died which stopped it from releasing a pandemic:

Baxter flu vaccines contaminated with H5N1 – otherwise known as the human form of avian flu, one of the most deadly biological weapons on earth with a 60% kill rate – were received by labs in the Czech Republic, Germany, and Slovenia.
Initially, Baxter attempted to stonewall questions by invoking “trade secrets” and refused to reveal how the vaccines were contaminated with H5N1. After increased pressure they then claimed that pure H5N1 batches were sent by accident. This was seemingly an attempt to quickly change the story and hide the fact that the accidental contamination of a vaccine with a deadly biological agent like avian flu is virtually imp


Why? Two reasons. They stood to make BILLIONS and they have a stated agenda to depopulate the planet! Ted Turner has said it, Bill Gates has said it, The UN has numerous documents stating it. This is document fact not conspiracy!

In addition, as we have previously reported, those that have a stake in the Tamiflu vaccine include top globalists and BIlderberg members like George Shultz, Lodewijk J.R. de Vink and former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
Authorities in both Europe and the U.S. have openly detailed plans for martial law, quarantine and internment should a bird flu pandemic occur.
The other motivation, as we have exhaustively documented on this website for years, is the fact that elites throughout history have openly stated that they want to see a world population reduction of around 80 per cent. Shocking stories like this take the plausibility of that narrative out of the realms of conspiracy theory and into the dangerous reality of conspiracy fact.


Isn't it interesting how all these threads lead back to Rumsfeld and Cheney?

And this is NOT THE FIRST TIME!!!! They have repeatedly infected thousands to millions of people with deadly diseases. They KNOWINGLY realeased the HIV virus on a prvious occasion!

In 2006 it was revealed that Bayer Corporation had discovered that their injection drug, which was used by hemophiliacs, was contaminated with the HIV virus. Internal documents prove that after they positively knew that the drug was contaminated, they took it off the U.S. market only to dump it on the European, Asian and Latin American markets, knowingly exposing thousands, most of them children, to the live HIV virus. Government officials in France went to prison for allowing the drug to be distributed. The documents show that the FDA colluded with Bayer to cover-up the scandal and allowed the deadly drug to be distributed globally. No Bayer executives ever faced arrest or prosecution in the United States.


No one is very brought to justice - other than a few 'rogue nureses and doctors'


No mater how well documented people are rushing to buy these vaccines from corporations that have repeatedly show the willingness to spread pandemics of deadly diseases.

Mass insanity!
edit on 18-1-2011 by pianopraze because: typos
edit on 18-1-2011 by pianopraze because: typos


I think in the end we just have to agree to disagree.



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine
I think in the end we just have to agree to disagree.


Perfectly acceptable.

I hope I have been subversive enough to keep you thinking for a while



posted on Jan, 18 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine
I think in the end we just have to agree to disagree.


Perfectly acceptable.

I hope I have been subversive enough to keep you thinking for a while



It's always interesting for someone in my position to hear what people's opinions are on this sort of subject. I may not agree with them, but certainly they do put some perspective on it for me.



posted on Jan, 22 2011 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by backinblack
 


Without knowing why the fits were caused, it is pretty daft to jump to conclusions. Just think, out of the millions and millions and millions of people who get vaccinated every year for a wide variety of diseases, just what is the proportion of bad reactions? What about people having bad reactions with cough medicine, or Aspirin, or Ibuprofen? You can find cases of people dying from anything if you look hard enough and have a large enough sample. You have to look at the big picture and see what the rate of incidence is.

I have a feeling I am talking to people who have already made up their minds, however.
\
Just as you have already made up yours. I fail to see a difference.





new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join