It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Retired Vaccine Expert Speaks Out (Get this information out before the Internet gets Censored!)

page: 5
92
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Look at what Dr. Russell Blaylock has to say on the subject.


You mean the same Dr. Russell Blaylock who, conveniently, started marketing a miracle cure for the ailments he claims are caused by vaccines?

How ironic. Almost as if all his statements are part of some sort of marketing scam...


It's a brain repair formula for older people. It's full of vitamins and fatty acids. Does not mention to give it to kids that are damaged from vaccines.

The good thing is I don't think anyone has died from his supplement. Should we talk about all the prescription medicine and vaccine related deaths? Perhaps you want to get in the SV40 debacle?

The truth is Vne, your industry oozes of corruption and greed. You're a smarty pants, you must know something isn't right when every 3rd commercial is a drug I need to ask my doctor about.




posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roid_Rage27
Vaccines have not wiped out diseases. Better nutrition and cleaner living are the reasons. Check the CDC numbers, the diseases were on the decline before mass vaccinations.


This is one of the most common myths I see on this site. I don't have the energy to post all links and evidence again, but please look in my post history. Your statement holds absolutely no water, especially when using the same CDC data you claim supports you.



Cmon...water filters?


That has nothing to do with the link I posted. The link was about water intoxication, which occurs with over-consumption of water. I was trying to make the point (but I suppose it doesn't work if the person I'm addressing doesn't bother to READ THE POST) that plenty of things are "toxic" in high doses, but are perfectly safe in normal/low doses.




5% of global deaths? I bet you anything most of those are from developing countries and the kids did not have clean water or proper nutrition


You know why they don't happen more often here? Because of our vaccine.

Decline in deaths post-RV vaccine introduction.

How do you explain this data? We are looking at a span of one year, which means there could not have been a drastic change in this population's diet or water situation. In that one year, once the vaccine was introduced, there was a 35-41% reduction in rotavirus-caused deaths. That seems pretty freaking effective to me.


Again you work on the premise that vaccines are actually effective.


It's not a premise when it is founded on statistical studies that have been repeated and validated at the university, industrial, and governmental level in multiple nations.


To say that vaccines have wiped out disease is analogous to saying my father has smoked for 50 years and he doesn't have Alzheimer's, therefore smoking prevents Alzheimer's.


If you don't understand biostatistical tests like incidence, prevalence, and predictive value, it's best you just don't engage in biostatistics discussions. Your above statement is so incredibly ignorant that it is now clear to me that you don't even have the faintest clue about the research behind vaccines and have done zero, and I mean ZERO, research on the subject.




Injecting a virus/bacteria directly in to the blood stream, bypassing the mucus membranes is natural?


What do you think happens when you get an infection on a cut, or are bitten by a bug or animal? It is the exact same process - introducing bacteria or viruses directly to the blood stream. This is actually what lead to some of the first vaccines. Shamans noticed that people who were bitten by certain animals either died or were, for some reason, protected from the disease in the future, so they tried to emulate the process. I want to say it started in China, but I could be mistaken on that part.

Cmon you are losing credibility here.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Roid_Rage27

It's a brain repair formula for older people.


Really? Because he certainly tries his damndest to make this a cure-all for ALL diseases. These quotes are just from the blurb on his front page:


maximize your brain’s ability to heal and reduce inflammation (a central mechanism of these devastating neurological disorders)



I have added a mixture of nutrients known to promote DNA Repair, since damage to DNA is widespread in all neurodegenerative disorders.



Research also shows that the sooner we start a brain maintenance/repair nutritional program, the better protected we will be.


Nothing in there jumps out as being just for old people. In fact, that last quote says he wants you to start buying his snake oil as soon as possible!

What a quack, taking advantage of scared and sick people.


The good thing is I don't think anyone has died from his supplement.


That's because it's nothing but a benign snake oil pill.


Should we talk about all the prescription medicine and vaccine related deaths?


Sure. While we're at it, let's discuss the fact that ZERO people have been cured of severe infection through alternative medicine, ZERO cases of cancer have been treated through alternative methods, and ZERO epidemics have been stemmed through alternative methods.

To paraphrase a popular saying, 'with powerful therapies come serious risks'.


your industry oozes of corruption and greed.


My "industry" is public health, where I get the same salary for writing zero or a thousand prescriptions per year, and I treat people regardless of insurance status.

Please stop making personal attacks, especially when they are based on imagined character flaws rather than reality.


You're a smarty pants, you must know something isn't right when every 3rd commercial is a drug I need to ask my doctor about.


What does that have to do with doctors? That's Pharma, not doctors.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
I was given an MMR vaccine (without my permission and informed after the fact) in 1999 while in hospital and two days later developed a rare autoimmune disease that almost cost me my life (acute thrombolytic thrombocytopenia purpura). I was there for another medical reason and was about to be discharged. A final blood test revealed an extremely low platelet level. Normal levels are 150000 to 450000 platelets per microliter. Mine was 3,000 and I would have died within days. I had to undergo plasmaphoresis treatments daily for 3 weeks (plasma exchange). This involves being hooked up to a machine that removes your blood, separates it and then adds new plasma. Based on this experience I will never submit to another vaccine in my lifetime.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Roid_Rage27
 


Another boring argument from authority. Yawn. And its an authority who not only sells a laughable "BRAIN REPAIR FORMULA" but also says that MSG, which has been present in our food for four decades, is toxic to the brain. The guy's conclusions are definitely worth doubting.

You claim that cleanliness alone would have wiped out diseases, not vaccines? I've heard some immensely dumb assertions in my day but this one takes the cake. Yeah, smallpox and polio are gonna be wiped out by cleanliness and nutrition


Yes, cleanliness and nutrition help prevent the spread of disease, do you know what else has been proven to help prevent the spread of disease - Vaccines. However the vaccines won't be as effective if people abandon using them in the same way disease would increase if everyone stopped washing their hands. The anti-vaccine movement isn't just irrational it's genuinely dangerous.
edit on 20-1-2011 by Titen-Sxull because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 02:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Originally posted by Whitbit
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


Regarding your above post, asking from the POV of a skeptic/on thefence, would you recommend vaccinating for some things but not others?


In my opinion, they are all worth getting, but to answer your question, if you had to go "bare minimum" for some reason, you would want to have your child vaccinated with the MMR, DTaP, rotavirus, flu, and Hib vaccines. These comprise, by and large, the biggest killers of infants (Hib, flu, DTaP, rota) and the diseases with the worst complications (MMR).


Thank you SO much for your opinion on this. Bookmarking for future reference. Still doubtful, but of all the doubt and conspiracy floating around when you know at least 40% is plausible, what do you do? In this case I would have to put the child first. People are probably always going to be saying things about vaccines from now on... but maybe I will be the one of half the parents whose children don't come down with rubella and are crippled for life because I chose to vaccinate. I, nor anyone I ever knew, went to school with, or ever met ever reported ill effects of being vaccinated. I assure you, they were all vaccinated. Long term effects may be unpredictable or unknown...but I suppose that may be a risk that has to be taken.

I would never forgive myself as a parent if I had the means to protect my child but didnt, thereby exposing them to a disease. I will tell you these diseases are not entirely eradicated. People do have them, which is what makes me consider having an MMR myself to prevent harm to an unborn baby. If anyone has anything recent on MMR vaccine and/or why we may need a booster it is welcome in my pm's. If not, tomorrow is my day off and I have time to do some research. Thanks

edit on 20-1-2011 by Whitbit because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2011 by Whitbit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 03:05 AM
link   
reply to post by devildogUSMC
 

Tell her to look up 'doctor marys monkey' before she gets your baby vaccinated. Then she will realise just how Big pharma cares. Good luck. Peace starchild.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 03:27 AM
link   
Wow, first time i hear of how bad vaccines really could be, or are they really, i have 2 young ones, and with last year scare, i phoned my mom, she works for a lab that produces vaccines, and works on new ones, she told me , how most people dont really need them, but ceratin age groups should think about using them, so i asked her about if it was true that theres mercury in them, she said that some do contain small traces of mercury, and she tried to explain,why, , which i didint get much.


Oh and no she dosent get a fat pay check from an obscure group eheheh, she makes average wage, and loves her work.

Im not sure about you guys, but ill believe my mom first, before i get scared by obscure stories

just my 2 cents, and i dont mean to tell anybody what to believe



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 

Thats fine, Now can you tell us all what you say to the parent who comes to see you AFTER
their child has been vaccinated and is ill. A child who was was normal and healthy before the vaccination but developed symtoms soon after. Ah, yes, you diagnose them. ADD or ADHD. and give them a prescription for another drug, one they will have to be on for a very long time. Job done. Tell me, have you ever had these problems with a child that has not been vaccinated? have you ever even asked. Have you never questioned how the pharmaceutical companies just happen to have Ritalin and and other companion drugs just at the right time for a comparatively new illness. What you have just said is pure textbook drivil. l would suggest you do some research, of course it won't help your career, big pharma won't appreciate it and you won't get rich off them. 'Doctor marys monkey' could be a good place to start. Do some research, deny lgnorance, and Please don't be a textbook junky. With respect Peace, starchild.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   
Man, you guys are sooooo wrong! Haven't you seen it on the news for the past week or two? Vaccines are perfectly safe and make you healthy! I've heard it over and over on the TV so it must be true. Some guy did a study saying Autism or ADD or something was linked to it, but he lied about it. So theres nothing here folks.....oh look, a chicken!!



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 04:43 AM
link   
S&F

However, naturally im a skeptic. The info in the way its presented makes me extra skeptical. However, it is good information, which should become widespread.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 05:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by star child
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 

Thats fine, Now can you tell us all what you say to the parent who comes to see you AFTER
their child has been vaccinated and is ill. A child who was was normal and healthy before the vaccination but developed symtoms soon after.


I tell them that correlation doesn't equal causation, and that the symptoms of autism, ADD, and ADHD often begin to manifest around the 18-24 month range, which is also a vaccine milestone. This doesn't mean the two are related, as these conditions also show up at those ages in unvaccinated children.


Tell me, have you ever had these problems with a child that has not been vaccinated?


Have I ever seen autism, ADD, or ADHD in unvaccinated kids? Absolutely. I'm Russian, and I go over there twice a year as a health care volunteer, usually outside either Moscow or Ekaterinburg. In both places, you see autism and behavioral issues at about the same rate as you do in America, but their vaccination rate is abysmal.


Have you never questioned how the pharmaceutical companies just happen to have Ritalin and and other companion drugs just at the right time for a comparatively new illness.


Uh, you know the drug was created LONG after the condition was classified, right? I mean, like, DECADES after it was classified. Why are you just making stuff up now?


Do some research, deny lgnorance,


I would give you the same advice, considering the textbook Alex Jones regurgitation-fest of yours I just read.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 05:35 AM
link   
Hi Guys, I have just read that an FDA approval for a new drug costs around $500 million!?? Is that true? It seems a lot. It is a new cancer drug derived from rain-forest plant in QLD, Australia. That boosts the immune system so much that tumors disappear just in days after application. So far only tested on pets and animals only.

I have a feeling that aboriginals used this plant for centuries before "we" find it.

So it seems it is really all about money.

Pecs



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


Yes, but all the Doctors are bought by big pharma, and have you ever questioned the medicine you subscribe to your patients? No Doctor really questions if the new medicines are safe or tested properly or on the long run. They take all the info presented by the pharma at face value. And as you said they are not doctors. They are a business and every business has only one goal and it is to: MAKE MONEY. They did not make a Hippocratic oath to only help people they there to produce results the boss wants and to make money for the shareholders.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by ptahotep76
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


Yes, but all the Doctors are bought by big pharma, and have you ever questioned the medicine you subscribe to your patients? No Doctor really questions if the new medicines are safe or tested properly or on the long run. They take all the info presented by the pharma at face value. And as you said they are not doctors. They are a business and every business has only one goal and it is to: MAKE MONEY. They did not make a Hippocratic oath to only help people they there to produce results the boss wants and to make money for the shareholders.



Of course doctors question the new drugs. That's why older drugs (like statins) are more often prescribed than new drugs.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:22 AM
link   
reply to post by budaruskie
 


Mine are 13 and 10, didn't get vact and are sound very normal and bright, like kids were when I were't lad, they are in classes at school dominated by kids on the ADD or Autism spectrum, I hasten to add the classes are dominated not my kids, but each class has abt 4 odd Autistics and 4/5 naughty ADDs, most of the other kids have a variety of skin, breathing or auto immune disorders, crazy.

We researched the field heavily before we made the decision and were surprised to note that in other countries it is freely acknowledged that vaccines cause damage and compensation schemes are set up, at more than a cursory glance the whole field is corrupt and based on nowt.

I met their mom at uni, she subsequently worked for Mencap, and we both knew how to research and read stacks of pro vaccine books and papers not just all the anti stuff, we even went to a couple of conferences on the sly.

I wondered if the inbred Euro elite have compromised immune systems so that the largely harmless childhood diseases are dangerous to them, thus the herd needs immunising at what ever cost to keep the princes and princesses safe.

whether the opies guy is real or not he speaks the truth!!
edit on 20-1-2011 by Thepreye because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2011 by Thepreye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 

As the old saying goes, 'you can lead a horse to water but you can't make lt drink'. l really feel sorry that there are doctors that are so incapable of doing real research. You obviously have not even researched all the information on statins either. How sad. FYl. l have never listened to Alex Jones. l am too busy working to try to clean up the mess that doctors with your mindset have made, unfortunately. Peace and hope starchild.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
reply to post by soficrow
 


So, you have no evidence that "most researchers" have financial conflicts? Is that what I'm supposed to draw from your post? All I see is a revision of guidelines, which happens all the time to accommodate changing technology, trends, and environments.

Why can't you just provide evidence of your claim, rather than dancing around the point?


Research funding relies on industry partnerships - and those partnerships include university-corporate, government-corporate and scientist-corporate alliances. It's how the system works.

I really don't have the time or interest to do your research for you. Personally, I think it incumbent upon YOU to prove the negative.


But here are a few quick picks:

NIH Freezes Grants to Emory in Secret Drug Money Scandal


The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has halted payments on a research grant to Emory University, following the revelation that the psychiatrist in charge of the research concealed hundreds of thousands of dollars in drug company payments, possibly in violation of university and federal conflict-of-interest rules.


University of Miami scandal raises questions about government research


NIMH director Thomas Insel, MD, assured Pascal Goldschmidt, MD, UM’s medical school dean that Nemeroff’s congressional investigation for unreported drug industry income and NIH’s termination of his $9 million grant shouldn’t stop the government funding spigot -- even as Insel personally revised NIMH’s “conflict of interest” rules.


At the Harvard School of Dental Medicine, One Professor’s Flouride Scandal Stinks


But transparency is not likely. “The reviews are not publicly available, and the reason for this is that we provide confidentiality to everyone within the review process,” Lacey wrote in an e-mail.

“We’re all for academic freedom, but the tax payers of the U.S.—including you and me and your mom and dad—funded his research,” says Sucher. “Taxpayers have a right to know how the university came up with that finding.”


NOTE: Despite the "results" of this "study," flouride regs are being changed to benefit public health, not pork and profit.




...in conjunction with the eminent Professor Henry Lai, Louis Slesin produced a highly detailed and well researched article documenting the apparent trend between the source of funding and the likely outcome of the paper in question. Whilst it was not so surprising to find that industry funded papers more often found a null or negative result, what was surprising was the proportion of papers published in a single journal, Radiation Research, that followed the same trend!



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Thepreye
 


I am also an educated person who did not base my decision on "what the Internet said" although it was info I saw on the net that made me question the universal assumption that vaccines are magical cures. It's hard to ignore the fact that two people I went to school with had polio that they contracted from the vaccines as well as one's own intuition.
It all boils down to this in my mind. If you receive a vaccine you can count on a) contracting the disease with no guarantee of how severe a case it will be, b) experiencing some side effect or effects with no indication of how severe they will be, c) having to take booster shots in the future, d) that you don't even get an implied guarantee that the vaccine will actually immunize you based upon any and every statement the doctors and drug companies have made. If you don't take the shot you MAY contract the disease and we know that more than 95% or more of people will defeat any of the diseases without injury, you WON'T experience ANY side effects, and if you do actually contract a disease and live through it you WILL have LIFE-LONG IMMUNITY without the need of any more medicine. This in and of itself is a powerful enough argument for me.
When you add to it that the statistics do in fact indicate that these diseases such as smallpox and polio WERE actually in steep decline before immunization efforts, the conspicuous lack of long-term experiments, the complete removal of liability for drug companies specifically with vaccinations, the marginalization of KNOWN side-effects and lack of study on them, the fact that drug companies have proven themselves to be much more concerned with profit rather than patient health, the fact that just 200 years ago the "best" doctors in the world were bleeding the sickness out of their patients, and the fact that human beings have thrived for at least 100,000 years without any vaccinations it becomes a rather easy decision to make.




top topics



 
92
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join