Doctors ordered to stop giving flu jabs to children

Mercury based? If it wasn't for the additives then the vaccines would either not work or actually be lethal.

Mercury is not necessary in the vaccine, because it is forbidden in the Netherlands, we acknowledge the destructive capabilities from mercury.

Do you know the company Philips. You know (the producer of medical equipment, lights, tv etc)

This circulates witin this company

link

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours

Mercury based? If it wasn't for the additives then the vaccines would either not work or actually be lethal.

Mercury is not necessary in the vaccine, because it is forbidden in the Netherlands, we acknowledge the destructive capabilities from mercury.

The point of adding mercury is not because it acts as a vaccine. It's what's called an adjuvant. Generally you would see aluminium salts used as adjuvants, but mercury and other such compounds have also been used. The point of their being there is because they assist in activating and getting your immune system to recognise the antigens present in the vaccine. Adjuvants are not toxic in the minute quantities you see in vaccines. In specific reference to mercury, while mercury is definitely a toxin it is a toxin at concentrations between 1000-1000000 times more than what they are in the vaccine. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that putting mercury into vaccines in such minute concentrations as an adjuvant imparts any toxic side affects.

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours

Mercury based? If it wasn't for the additives then the vaccines would either not work or actually be lethal.

Mercury is not necessary in the vaccine, because it is forbidden in the Netherlands, we acknowledge the destructive capabilities from mercury.

The point of adding mercury is not because it acts as a vaccine. It's what's called an adjuvant. Generally you would see aluminium salts used as adjuvants, but mercury and other such compounds have also been used. The point of their being there is because they assist in activating and getting your immune system to recognise the antigens present in the vaccine. Adjuvants are not toxic in the minute quantities you see in vaccines. In specific reference to mercury, while mercury is definitely a toxin it is a toxin at concentrations between 1000-1000000 times more than what they are in the vaccine. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that putting mercury into vaccines in such minute concentrations as an adjuvant imparts any toxic side affects.

edit on 6-2-2011 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)

Then why is mercury/thimorisal forbidden in the Netherlands? To my understanding is mercury a adjuvant, for the purpose to extend the expire date of the vaccine.

Well the Netherlands has banned fluoride to since to 70's, Mercury too. I am just happy it al is forbidden.
But still I wont get the shot, but that is because i believe in my own body

In his letter Roig cites another letter written by Minister Hoogervorst. Who writes in 2005: "It is true that the vaccines used in the Netherlands for the annual influenza campaign since 2004 no longer contain Thiomersal. The reason for banning Thiomersal from vaccines has not been adverse to avoid, but the body does not unduly burden of mercury. But in the current H1N1 flu is back so it Thiomersal. And therefore, according to Van Rooij earlier this year by Minister Klink purchased vaccines are used. They can not even be sold, since the products would be illegal to sell Thiomersal.

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours

Originally posted by hypervalentiodine

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours

Mercury based? If it wasn't for the additives then the vaccines would either not work or actually be lethal.

Mercury is not necessary in the vaccine, because it is forbidden in the Netherlands, we acknowledge the destructive capabilities from mercury.

The point of adding mercury is not because it acts as a vaccine. It's what's called an adjuvant. Generally you would see aluminium salts used as adjuvants, but mercury and other such compounds have also been used. The point of their being there is because they assist in activating and getting your immune system to recognise the antigens present in the vaccine. Adjuvants are not toxic in the minute quantities you see in vaccines. In specific reference to mercury, while mercury is definitely a toxin it is a toxin at concentrations between 1000-1000000 times more than what they are in the vaccine. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that putting mercury into vaccines in such minute concentrations as an adjuvant imparts any toxic side affects.

edit on 6-2-2011 by hypervalentiodine because: (no reason given)

Then why is mercury/thimorisal forbidden in the Netherlands? To my understanding is mercury a adjuvant, for the purpose to extend the expire date of the vaccine.

Well the Netherlands has banned fluoride to since to 70's, Mercury too. I am just happy it al is forbidden.
But still I wont get the shot, but that is because i believe in my own body

That is not the purpose of an adjuvant. Feel free to google it.

I am not in a position to conjecture as to why certain things are banned in certain countries. Mercury obviously has a stigma attached to it that doesn't fare so well in the public eye - and rightly so. As I said though, there is no scientific data to say whether the quantities used in vaccines is harmful.

I'm sorry, I couldn't make sense of the second excerpt you provided. The English is quite muddled. Not your fault, I'm sure, but I can't really understand it.

In any case, this is a snippet from the only scientific study I know of that looked at the affects of Thiomersal (ingentaconnect article):

The guidelines for long-term mercury exposure should not be used for evaluating risk from intermittent single day exposures, such as immunisation using thiomersal-containing vaccines. Similar or higher mercury exposures likely occur from breast feeding and the health benefit of eliminating thiomersal from a vaccine, if any, is likely to be very small. On the other hand, the benefits accrued from the use of thiomersal-containing vaccines are considerably greater but vary substantially between affluent and developing regions of the world.

You probably don't have access to the full article, so I took the extract from the abstract so you know I didn't take it out of context.

Google translate

n his letter Rooij cites another letter written by Minister Hoogervorst. Who writes in 2005: "It is true that the vaccines used in the Netherlands for the annual influenza campaign since 2004 no longer contain Thiomersal. The reason for banning Thiomersal from vaccines has not been adverse to avoid, but the body does not unduly burden of mercury. But in the current H1N1 flu is back so it Thiomersal. And therefore, according to Van Rooij earlier this year by Minister Klink purchased vaccines are used. They can not even be sold, since the products would be illegal to sell Thiomersal.

Richard transltates goolgle translate.

Mr Rooij states in his letter, that another letter written by minister Hoogervors. Who wrote in 2005: "It is true that the vaccines used in the Netherlands for the annual influenza campaign since 2004 no longer contain Thiomersal. The reason to leave out the mercury is to withhold your body from unnecessary poisoning. But in the current flu jab it is back the illegal substance mercury. And therefore 'according to Rooij' all the vaccines that we required earlier this year, can not be sold. Since the product is illigal to sell, and to admit in the Netherlands

Never have a vaccine if you can avoid it.

And don't let anyone you love have a vaccine.

I am conflicted about those childhood vaccines that apparently we have to give our kids - I know a child who, I believe, suffered from that early vaccine.

What would happen if we said "NO"!

Originally posted by TribeOfManyColours
Google translate

n his letter Rooij cites another letter written by Minister Hoogervorst. Who writes in 2005: "It is true that the vaccines used in the Netherlands for the annual influenza campaign since 2004 no longer contain Thiomersal. The reason for banning Thiomersal from vaccines has not been adverse to avoid, but the body does not unduly burden of mercury. But in the current H1N1 flu is back so it Thiomersal. And therefore, according to Van Rooij earlier this year by Minister Klink purchased vaccines are used. They can not even be sold, since the products would be illegal to sell Thiomersal.

Richard transltates goolgle translate.

Mr Rooij states in his letter, that another letter written by minister Hoogervors. Who wrote in 2005: "It is true that the vaccines used in the Netherlands for the annual influenza campaign since 2004 no longer contain Thiomersal. The reason to leave out the mercury is to withhold your body from unnecessary poisoning. But in the current flu jab it is back the illegal substance mercury. And therefore 'according to Rooij' all the vaccines that we required earlier this year, can not be sold. Since the product is illigal to sell, and to admit in the Netherlands

Thank you for that, it makes much more sense

There is no evidence to prove that statement is correct. I am not asking you to provide because I already know it is not there. Vaccines are a one-off shot. The concentrations of mercury in the H1N1 vaccine are so tiny that they have no recorded toxicity issues. What you are forgetting is that your body has mechanisms to deal with an influx of heavy metals such as mercury. Of course, if you overload your body with mercury, things go bad and poisoning results, but that's not to say you aren't built to cope with trace amounts. Heck, water can kill you if you consume too much of it.

reply to post by catwhoknowsplusone


In the Netherlands you just can say no, even to those vaccines you should get by birth. How is that it the states?

We in the Netherlands have i religious area across the country, its called the biblebelt. Almost all of those people will never get a vaccine.

reply to post by TribeOfManyColours


Hi, Tribe,

I am here in NZ and all our babies get those birth shots -it just happens and no-one asks permission.

That is bad.

Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours

 

Hi, Tribe,

I am here in NZ and all our babies get those birth shots -it just happens and no-one asks permission.

That is bad.

About that, that is the same here. If you are not in the Knowing they admit it to those birth shots. It is bad indeed(in my personal believes)

If it were not for the pharma control of the FDA this would never be allowed here. It would be considered Toxic Waste!

A typical 0.5 milliliter flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000 parts per billion - of mercury.

The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as hazardous waste. The limit for drinking water is 2 parts per billion.

Using the standards set for methyl mercury consumption - the kind that's in fish - an average 130-pound person getting the flu shot would exceed the daily limit by more than four times. A 22-pound baby would get more than 25 times the amount of mercury considered safe. And doctors are recommending that many babies and children get two flu shots this season.

A material safety data sheet from Eli Lilly and Co., which no longer makes a flu vaccine, says effects of exposure to thimerosal may include "fetal changes, decreased offspring survival and lung tissue changes. . . . Exposure in utero and in children may cause mild to severe mental retardation and mild to severe motor coordination impairment."

source