Childhood diseases return as parents refuse vaccines

page: 24
34
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 17 2011 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Griffo
 


Maybe you should do some research, MAYBE, just maybe TPTB are putting these illnesses back on the market so they can convince people to vaccinate and kill off the population, JUST MAYBE!!

www.whale.to...


The vaccine promoters and drug insurance companies, no doubt, remembered the multi-million dollar law suits following the devastating polio vaccine campaign of the 1950’s when the Salk, Sabin, and Cutter vaccines caused thousands of cases of polio, death, and other disasters. The law suits flooded the courts and the vaccine promoters and drug houses had to pay out damages amounting to many millions of dollars.The vaccine promoters and drug insurance companies, no doubt, remembered the multi-million dollar law suits following the devastating polio vaccine campaign of the 1950’s when the Salk, Sabin, and Cutter vaccines caused thousands of cases of polio, death, and other disasters. The law suits flooded the courts and the vaccine promoters and drug houses had to pay out damages amounting to many millions of dollars.

The five pharmaceutical houses making the Salk vaccine were called the Rockefeller chain then, and it is the same ones now making the swine flu vaccine, with a few exceptions. The vaccine promoters wanted to dodge all financial loss—the cost of the vaccine and the damage suits, so they could make clear profit, while the taxpayers were saddled with both the payment of the vaccine and the damages, also. I doubt that the crime syndicate could run a more crooked racket than this government sponsored and financed caper, with all the profits siphoned off into the pockets of the medical and drug concerns.

If those smooth talking con-men had been holding a machine gun on (Gerald) Ford they couldn’t have done a quicker and easier job of robbing this simple man who didn’t even know enough to do a little investigating before dipping into the public till to finance a private money making scheme.



Do some research people, vaccines CAUSE death and disease, not cure it, sanitation is the cure and good hygeine and nutrition. Please...vaccines..KMA!!!!!!!!!




posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by daddio
reply to post by Griffo
 


Maybe you should do some research, MAYBE, just maybe TPTB are putting these illnesses back on the market so they can convince people to vaccinate and kill off the population, JUST MAYBE!!

www.whale.to...


The vaccine promoters and drug insurance companies, no doubt, remembered the multi-million dollar law suits following the devastating polio vaccine campaign of the 1950’s when the Salk, Sabin, and Cutter vaccines caused thousands of cases of polio, death, and other disasters. The law suits flooded the courts and the vaccine promoters and drug houses had to pay out damages amounting to many millions of dollars.The vaccine promoters and drug insurance companies, no doubt, remembered the multi-million dollar law suits following the devastating polio vaccine campaign of the 1950’s when the Salk, Sabin, and Cutter vaccines caused thousands of cases of polio, death, and other disasters. The law suits flooded the courts and the vaccine promoters and drug houses had to pay out damages amounting to many millions of dollars.

The five pharmaceutical houses making the Salk vaccine were called the Rockefeller chain then, and it is the same ones now making the swine flu vaccine, with a few exceptions. The vaccine promoters wanted to dodge all financial loss—the cost of the vaccine and the damage suits, so they could make clear profit, while the taxpayers were saddled with both the payment of the vaccine and the damages, also. I doubt that the crime syndicate could run a more crooked racket than this government sponsored and financed caper, with all the profits siphoned off into the pockets of the medical and drug concerns.

If those smooth talking con-men had been holding a machine gun on (Gerald) Ford they couldn’t have done a quicker and easier job of robbing this simple man who didn’t even know enough to do a little investigating before dipping into the public till to finance a private money making scheme.



Do some research people, vaccines CAUSE death and disease, not cure it, sanitation is the cure and good hygeine and nutrition. Please...vaccines..KMA!!!!!!!!!


I read this and had to restrain myself from jumping out my _ Just... ughhhh... Why in the name of all that is holy did you get a star for that comment? Was it someone's idea of a joke?



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Tetrarch42
 

Here's why Daddio got a star, this is what my family went through with the vaccines and either quality control is off or some whacko scientist for some twisted reason is sending out batches with live bacteria. You figure it out, 'kay?


Originally posted by seentoomuch

Originally posted by SaturnFX
their "sacrifice" will be a good example for the rest on the benefits of modern day medicine.


Well, you need a shot of reality, here goes:

4 months ago my grand-daughters had their combo vaccine which included the Whooping Cough vaccine.

1 1/2 weeks later the twins fell sick and the doctor upon seeing them thought it was just a viral bug, no worries.

1 week later my son, who is 30 years old got "the bug".

He went into the doctor and the doctor said, "Whooping Cough" even though he had been vaccinated for Whooping Cough as a child. My son told the doctor about his twin girls being sick and his doctor said to have the twin's doctor recheck them.

Twins were rechecked and sure enough had "Whooping Cough"

By this point I had the bug and my son's doctor treated me for "Whooping Cough" even though I had been vaccinated as a child.

We were visited by the City of Austin Health Dept who made sure that all of our family and any visiting friends and my grandson's school were all notified and that all who had been around any of us were treated with a Z pack of antibiotics.

We live in a very nice area, very nice homes, the twins aren't in large crowds or anything like that. They are cared for at home by their other grandmother, who btw was also vaccinated.

Hmmmmmmm, I wonder what gave the twins "Whooping Cough"? Could it be that quality control is lacking at the plants who produce the vaccines, occasionally allowing live bacterium into the mix instead of dead bacterium? That was the discussion I had with the City Health and they said that they were not allowed to report possible bad batches, that that was the CDC domain, but they felt that many of the current outbreaks could be attributed to that but the way the system is set up their hands were tied. They did acknowledge that they noticed that many of the households that have been hit with this illness usually had a child who had recently been vaccinated in it.

Also, it turns out that all you adults out there need to go in and ge re-vaccinated 'cause evidently they wear off over time. I double dog dare you pro vaccine people to go in and do the right thing and get your shots, 'kay?

So, in my opinion your post is totally ignorant of the true situation.

STM
edit on 6/17/2011 by seentoomuch because: (no reason given)
edit on 9/18/2011 by seentoomuch because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by seentoomuch
reply to post by Tetrarch42
 

Here's why Daddio got a star, this is what my family went through with the vaccines and either quality control is off or some whacko scientist for some twisted reason is sending out batches with live bacteria. You figure it out, 'kay?


Originally posted by seentoomuch

Originally posted by SaturnFX
their "sacrifice" will be a good example for the rest on the benefits of modern day medicine.


Well, you need a shot of reality, here goes:

4 months ago my grand-daughters had their combo vaccine which included the Whooping Cough vaccine.

1 1/2 weeks later the twins fell sick and the doctor upon seeing them thought it was just a viral bug, no worries.

1 week later my son, who is 30 years old got "the bug".

He went into the doctor and the doctor said, "Whooping Cough" even though he had been vaccinated for Whooping Cough as a child. My son told the doctor about his twin girls being sick and his doctor said to have the twin's doctor recheck them.

Twins were rechecked and sure enough had "Whooping Cough"

By this point I had the bug and my son's doctor treated me for "Whooping Cough" even though I had been vaccinated as a child.

We were visited by the City of Austin Health Dept who made sure that all of our family and any visiting friends and my grandson's school were all notified and that all who had been around any of us were treated with a Z pack of antibiotics.

We live in a very nice area, very nice homes, the twins aren't in large crowds or anything like that. They are cared for at home by their other grandmother, who btw was also vaccinated.

Hmmmmmmm, I wonder what gave the twins "Whooping Cough"? Could it be that quality control is lacking at the plants who produce the vaccines, occasionally allowing live bacterium into the mix instead of dead bacterium? That was the discussion I had with the City Health and they said that they were not allowed to report possible bad batches, that that was the CDC domain, but they felt that many of the current outbreaks could be attributed to that but the way the system is set up their hands were tied. They did acknowledge that they noticed that many of the households that have been hit with this illness usually had a child who had recently been vaccinated in it.

Also, it turns out that all you adults out there need to go in and ge re-vaccinated 'cause evidently they wear off over time. I double dog dare you pro vaccine people to go in and do the right thing and get your shots, 'kay?

So, in my opinion your post is totally ignorant of the true situation.

STM
edit on 6/17/2011 by seentoomuch because: (no reason given)
edit on 9/18/2011 by seentoomuch because: (no reason given)


Whooping cough requires a booster shot, considering your apparent mistrust of the medical community and vaccines in general I'll assume you didn't get yours?
edit on 18-9-2011 by Tetrarch42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Tetrarch42
 


Are you saying the months old twins needed a booster shot too? They were struck with Whooping cough right after receiving the vaccination, explain that please?



edit on 9/18/2011 by seentoomuch because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   
There we go again....
Whooping cough.



In various areas of the US there have been several outbreaks of whooping cough, for which there still is no cure. And every time that happens the local community’s only response is – you guessed it – yet another dose of DTaP.





To reiterate, whooping cough was gone, we started vaccinating, we quintupled the dosage of the vaccine, a new whooping cough emerged, and now the cure is supposed to be another dose. So not only does the DTaP vaccine not work, it is almost certainly the cause of an entirely new version of pertussis breaking out. Vaccine-caused diseases — nothing new– the CDC has admitted for years that vaccines are the primary cause of other diseases, including polio and measles. :shk:


Read that again: "the CDC has admitted for years that vaccines are the primary cause of other diseases, including polio and measles."



Where the story loses all scientific credibility is when the kids who get the new whooping cough are given another DTaP booster shot. :bnghd: This is preposterous. Even if vaccines worked and triggered the immunity they are advertised to do, no vaccine scientist would ever claim a curative effect from a vaccine. In other words, they would never say once you have a disease that a vaccine can cure you. That is impossible. The only ones who would make such a ludicrous and superstitious claim would be irresponsible people in clinics selling shots, and also lawmakers, like the uneducated, unscientific people in government who dreamed up a marketing ploy like Assembly Bill 354. :bnghd:


Flu shots.




In August of 2010 Australia banned the flu shot for young children after 250 hospitalizations for convulsion and one death. [6] Finland then outlawed the current flu shot for all children for the same reason: convulsions. Here’s why. The seasonal flu vaccine that is currently on the market now that all these other countries are outlawing contains the unproven, untested H1N1 as one of the strains. [CDC.gov] Amazingly, the makers of the vaccine themselves don’t have much confidence in it: a quote from the insert of the current 2010 flu vaccine Fluzone: “There have been no clinical studies demonstrating an decrease in influenza after vaccination with Fluzone.” [5]





.....the new current flu shot has a specified amount of mercury per shot: 25 micrograms. [5] That is 30 times the EPA safe level for an adult, and we’re giving it to children of 6 months.






The Mandated Schedule of vaccines for children doubled from the 80s to the 90s:
1980 – 20 vaccines
1995 – 40 vaccines
2011 – 68 vaccines
:shk:


Do we even know so many contagious diseases?
Educate yourself before vaccinating!
And everyone who find this task too demanding, then be good kids and go take your shots. And leave the rest of us alone.

Edit: links for those who can be bothered with the truth behind vaccines.
Tricky New California Vaccine Law
Not A Good Year to Get The Flu Shot
Vaccines and the Peanut Allergy Epidemic
Autism and Vaccines
Smallpox: Bringing a Dead Disease Back to Life
edit on 19-9-2011 by WhiteHat because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by WhiteHat
 


You do realize that every unvaccinated person in a population decreases the herd immunity of said population right? Pathogens need uninterrupted chains of transmission to remain in a population, vaccines prevent these chains of transmission. The reason that things like measles are rare today(even amongst those who are unvaccinated) is because of this herd immunity.

Vaccines also create selective pressure for pathogens to become less virulent, because the more quickly a disease kills someone the less likely they will transmit the disease to someone else- thus vaccines make diseases less dangerous over time.

It's not just a clear cut case of getting the vaccine or not because vaccines are effective in a cumulative way, having just some of the population vaccinated greatly decreases their effectiveness. Diptheria for example has a herd immunity threshold of 85%, that is to say that diptheria outbreaks will occur within a population unless at least 85% of the population is vaccinated, and the lower that percentage the more people get the disease and the higher the chance the disease becomes more virulent.

Oh and your "the doctor within" website is awful, it states that smallpox killed "hundreds of thousands" and that by the end of the 18th century "burning itself out in the human population"? Try a death toll of 300-500 million not "hundreds of thousands" and note that it was nowhere near burning itself out.

Source: "The Power of Plagues" by Irwin W. Sherman.

Please respond with more reputable information sources if you decide to do so in the future.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 07:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Griffo
 


I completly agree with you!

Parents who refuse to have their children vaccinated are ignorant.

If I child dies from a disease that could have been prevented by a vaccination, those parents should be charged with the murder of their child.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Vaccinations are down to the parents. People shouldn't feel pressured because of what other people think.
edit on 23-9-2011 by Lulzaroonie because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Submarines
reply to post by Griffo
 


I completly agree with you!

Parents who refuse to have their children vaccinated are ignorant.

If I child dies from a disease that could have been prevented by a vaccination, those parents should be charged with the murder of their child.


Children who have the vaccines can still get ill and die, some kids get ill and die from the vaccines (not many, I agree), does that make their parents murderers too?



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lulzaroonie
Vaccinations are down to the parents. People shouldn't feel pressured because of what other people think.
edit on 23-9-2011 by Lulzaroonie because: (no reason given)


Yes they should, because their unvaccinated child decreases herd immunity and increases the chance that other children get sick or that the disease mutates into a new, more virulent strain.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 08:59 AM
link   
The whole "anti-vaccine" crowd live in 1st world societies buoyed up by modern medicine. They have never had to deal with high infant mortality rates due to preventable diseases so it's easy to poo-poo the science that, statistically speaking, is the reason they are alive today and not crippled/killed by small pox or polio or one of the many numerous childhood diseases of yesteryear. It's sad really when people are so far removed from the dangers that modern medicine has guarded them from that they start to question the role that it has played. It's even sadder that they are willing to put not only their own children at risk but also society at large. If this foolishness keeps up, we could very well see the return of the crippling and often fatal diseases we once thought we'd eradicated. If only there was a vaccine for human stupidity and ignorance.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 
Do you think you should stick a needle in a months old baby filled with several vaccines? Wouldn't one at a time be a little more logical, something a baby could deal with more easily if the following is watched closely;

Quality Control. I know, I know, it is a low statistical chance that your child would be given a bad batch, live virus or bacteria according to the statistics. BUT, the CDC has played with the statistics in that they do not show babies who have caught the bug they have been vaccinated for as having the bug, none show up in any of the statistics. The reason why is that they consider babies who have these illnesses after a vaccination as having a false positive 'cause they have recently had the vaccination. They do however list siblings and other family members as having contracted the illness supposedly outside the home, all mention of the recent vaccination of the babies is left out. The only thing the CDC admits to is "reactions" which leave out a full blown case of the illness vaccinated for.

Also, for you "you should have gotten your booster" people the brother of my twin granddaughters was only a few years older, no booster should've been needed. Should Dr.s check to see if a vaccination has taken? They used to, but since my grandson also came down with it I think his original vaccination did not even take, without a check it puts the whole "vaccines saves lives" theory at risk.

Imho, at the very least, Quality Control, Accurate Statistics and Dr. Checks need to be applied before anyone makes statements about the safety of these vaccines with the exclusion of the subject of the safety of other ingredients in the vaccines, that's a whole nother can of worms, and I don't know enough about it.

STM
edit on 9/23/2011 by seentoomuch because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
The whole "anti-vaccine" crowd live in 1st world societies buoyed up by modern medicine. They have never had to deal with high infant mortality rates due to preventable diseases so it's easy to poo-poo the science that, statistically speaking, is the reason they are alive today and not crippled/killed by small pox or polio or one of the many numerous childhood diseases of yesteryear. It's sad really when people are so far removed from the dangers that modern medicine has guarded them from that they start to question the role that it has played. It's even sadder that they are willing to put not only their own children at risk but also society at large. If this foolishness keeps up, we could very well see the return of the crippling and often fatal diseases we once thought we'd eradicated. If only there was a vaccine for human stupidity and ignorance.


So what was the case 2000 years ago? Did everyone just die and stuff due to no modern medicine? Your theory is flawed and proof is severely lacking. Please back up the above statements. Or should i just take your word for it like when you say mercury is good for you?



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by scoobdude

So what was the case 2000 years ago? Did everyone just die and stuff due to no modern medicine? Your theory is flawed and proof is severely lacking.

Well... yes. Infant morality due to disease was something like 66% before modern medicine. That means for every 3 children you had, only 1 was likely to live beyond their 10th birthday.


Please back up the above statements.

Not at hand, no. I can't transfer my education into your brain. This isn't some deep, hidden information, it's pretty much common knowledge to anyone who has even a cursory understanding of the history of medicine. Google is your friend.


Or should i just take your word for it like when you say mercury is good for you?

I'm sorry, can you show me where I said "mercury is good for you"? Why are you putting words into my mouth?



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Tetrarch42
 

have a look at the work of Dr Vera Schrieber a researcher of some 30 years, anti vaccination argument. the graphs she produces show that diseases like scarlet fever and many others were unaffected by the introduction of vaccines against them. There should be an expected sudden plunge on the graphs when the vaccines were introduced. Diseases have declined due to hygiene and nutrition improvements, vaccines made no noticeable difference but made some companies a lot of money.



posted on Sep, 24 2011 @ 06:54 AM
link   
Dr Vera Schrieber? Hardly objective research
Where is the peer-reviewed science from credible journals?



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 

Got a link to that 66% mortality rate? And even with modern medicine, where exactly is the proof that vaccines are what slowed this rate to what it is now? according to your theory 66% of unvaccinated babies should be dead..

Your right our education can be transfered via osmosis, but that does not mean what you have learned is correct either way, nor does it mean what I have is either. But sources to provide some sort of information for me to read to at least prove that your information is correct. Without this, please refrain from being in disbelief when I do not take your word as gospel. Please also understand I may not believe you cause i still have questions.

it was an example with the mercury thing. But nice change of tactic there



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
Dr Vera Schrieber? Hardly objective research
Where is the peer-reviewed science from credible journals?


Peer reviewed makes it correct or just helps you believe it? A better response would be to point out holes in the logic or theory. Your mockery attempt is uncalled for and you statement has added nothing to the conversation. Please help us believe you at least
edit on 25-9-2011 by scoobdude because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by scoobdude
reply to post by john_bmth
 

Got a link to that 66% mortality rate? And even with modern medicine, where exactly is the proof that vaccines are what slowed this rate to what it is now? according to your theory 66% of unvaccinated babies should be dead..

No, I said the decrease was attributed to modern medicine, which includes (but is not limited to) vaccination. Did you know you could die of a stubbed toe before penicillin? Probably not. Do some homework, you are seriously lacking in historical awareness.


Your right our education can be transfered via osmosis, but that does not mean what you have learned is correct either way, nor does it mean what I have is either.

Let's see: educated in knowledge discovered through scientific method or educated by reading questionable websites and watching youtube videos. I know which I have more faith in.


But sources to provide some sort of information for me to read to at least prove that your information is correct. Without this, please refrain from being in disbelief when I do not take your word as gospel. Please also understand I may not believe you cause i still have questions.

I can't magically transfer you back to my secondary school. I can't magically elicit all of the knowledge I've learned from books and other sources. If you actually bothered to do some reading on the topic, you would be enlightened. I am not going to compensate for your lack of education. What I am saying is not controversial in the slightest.


it was an example with the mercury thing. But nice change of tactic there

No, you were intellectually dishonest by putting words into my mouth that I never said.


Peer reviewed makes it correct or just helps you believe it?

Do you even know what peer-review is? Do you understand why it is a cornerstone of scientific method? Seriously, it's a waste of time "debating" people who have such low levels of scientific literacy yet hold the very thing they misunderstand in such contempt.


A better response would be to point out holes in the logic or theory.

And you're seriously going to do that?
The person who doesn't even understand peer-review or the concept of dosage? The person that cannot grasp the concept that before modern medicine infant mortality rates (and mortality rates in general) were much higher than they were today in the modern world? Like I said above, it is absurd discussing anything with people who are so disturbingly ignorant of the very concepts trash talk.


Your mockery attempt is uncalled for and you statement has added nothing to the conversation. Please help us believe you at least

Mockery? Of Dr Vera Schrieber? That lone crank who cannot even get basic methodology correct? I love your cherry picking of data: let's ignore the massive body of good, solid research that has been validated independently by objective parties and instead take the word of some lone crank with questionable qualifications instead.
edit on 25-9-2011 by john_bmth because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join