Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Childhood diseases return as parents refuse vaccines

page: 26
34
<< 23  24  25    27 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   
reply to post by nikiano
 


Then post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.




posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by nikiano
My professional opinion (backed by scientific literature) is that vaccinations do more harm than good.

Yeah? Care to share some articles?



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by scoobdude

As the saying goes, just cause one is paranoid does not mean they are not out to get them. And as you may have read there are several cases which IMHO have shown instances or coincidences that vaccines are not good. So am I living in reality....or better yet are we living in the same one?

Then post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.


Still on that huh? You completely ignored my previous response to you in regards to mercury. So until you respond to that, please do not expect a direct response from me. Have your peers review that mmmkay.



posted on Sep, 30 2011 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by nikiano
My professional opinion (backed by scientific literature) is that vaccinations do more harm than good.

Yeah? Care to share some articles?


How about an interview with an ex-vaccine researcher?




Q: Are some vaccines more dangerous than others?

A: Yes. The DPT shot, for example. The MMR. But some lots of a vaccine are more dangerous than other lots of the same vaccine. As far as I'm concerned, all vaccines are dangerous.

Q: Why?

A: Several reasons. They involve the human immune system in a process that tends to compromise immunity. They can actually cause the disease they are supposed to prevent. They can cause other diseases than the ones they are supposed to prevent.

Q: Why are we quoted statistics which seem to prove that vaccines have been tremendously successful at wiping out diseases?

A: Why? To give the illusion that these vaccines are useful. If a vaccine suppresses visible symptoms of a disease like measles, everyone assumes that the vaccine is a success. But, under the surface, the vaccine can harm the immune system itself. And if it causes other diseases -- say, meningitis -- that fact is masked, because no one believes that the vaccine can do that. The connection is overlooked.





Q: It is said that the smallpox vaccine wiped out smallpox in England.

A: Yes. But when you study the available statistics, you get another picture. Q: Which is? A: There were cities in England where people who were not vaccinated did not get smallpox. There were places where people who were vaccinated experienced smallpox epidemics. And smallpox was already on the decline before the vaccine was introduced.

Q: So you're saying that we have been treated to a false history. A: Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. This is a history that has been cooked up to convince people that vaccines are invariably safe and effective. Q: Now, you worked in labs. Where purity was an issue.

A: The public believes that these labs, these manufacturing facilities are the cleanest places in the world. That is not true. Contamination occurs all the time. You get all sorts of debris introduced into vaccines.

Q: For example, the SV40 monkey virus slips into the polio vaccine.

A: Well yes, that happened. But that's not what I mean. The SV40 got into the polio vaccine because the vaccine was made by using monkey kidneys. But I'm talking about something else. The actual lab conditions. The mistakes. The careless errors. SV40, which was later found in cancer tumors -- that was what I would call a structural problem. It was an accepted part of the manufacturing process. If you use monkey kidneys, you open the door to germs which you don't know are in those kidneys.





Q: How are vaccine statistics falsely presented? A: There are many ways. For example, suppose that 25 people who have received the hepatitis B vaccine come down with hepatitis. Well, hep B is a liver disease. But you can call liver disease many things. You can change the diagnosis. Then, you've concealed the root cause of the problem. Q: And that happens? A: All the time. It HAS to happen, if the doctors automatically assume that people who get vaccines DO NOT come down with the diseases they are now supposed to be protected from. And that is exactly what doctors assume. You see, it's circular reasoning. It's a closed system. It admits no fault. No possible fault. If a person who gets a vaccine against hepatitis gets hepatitis, or gets some other disease, the automatic assumption is, this had nothing to do with the vaccine. Q: In your years working in the vaccine establishment, how many doctors did you encounter who admitted that vaccines were a problem? A: None. There were a few who privately questioned what they were doing. But they would never go public, even within their companies. Q: What was the turning point for you? A: I had a friend whose baby died after a DPT shot. Q: Did you investigate? A: Yes, informally. I found that this baby was completely healthy before the vaccination. There was no reason for his death, except the vaccine. That started my doubts. Of course, I wanted to believe that the baby had gotten a bad shot from a bad lot. But as I looked into this further, I found that was not the case in this instance. I was being drawn into a spiral of doubt that increased over time. I continued to investigate. I found that, contrary to what I thought, vaccines are not tested in a scientific way. Q: What do you mean? A: For example, no long-term studies are done on any vaccines. Long-term follow-up is not done in any careful way. Why? Because, again, the assumption is made that vaccines do not cause problems. So why should anyone check? On top of that, a vaccine reaction is defined so that all bad reactions are said to occur very soon after the shot is given. But that does not make sense.


Read entire article for MORE information



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by summer5
 

Websites don't cut it. You refute science with science, not websites or youtube videos. Post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by scoobdude
Still on that huh? You completely ignored my previous response to you in regards to mercury. So until you respond to that, please do not expect a direct response from me. Have your peers review that mmmkay.

Your response about mercury was not pertinent to the thread. Post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by scoobdude
Still on that huh? You completely ignored my previous response to you in regards to mercury. So until you respond to that, please do not expect a direct response from me. Have your peers review that mmmkay.

Your response about mercury was not pertinent to the thread. Post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.


No journal needed to deduce that Hg is bad and is in the vaccines. dispove that point before we move forward please. If the CDC lists it as a nuerological poison than it is not? Hazmat also declares it as such, but i can't post a pdf for some reason.

But here read this: Chronic neurobehavioural effects of elemental mercury in dentists
edit on 1-10-2011 by scoobdude because: (no reason given)


And another Elemental mercury vapour toxicity, treatment, and prognosis after acute, intensive exposure in chloralkali plant workers. Part I: History, neuropsychological findings and chelator effects
edit on 1-10-2011 by scoobdude because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by scoobdude

No journal needed to deduce that Hg is bad and is in the vaccines.

Yes, you do need to provide evidence that vaccines are bad. You have not demonstrated anything by saying that mercury is toxic at high dosages. That is common knowledge. Arsenic is toxic at high dosages, yet it is found in vegetables (and other food products) and is consumed by yourself on a daily basis. I ask again: post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.
edit on 1-10-2011 by john_bmth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
reply to post by summer5
 

Websites don't cut it. You refute science with science, not websites or youtube videos. Post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.


Sorry if that is not good enough for you. It sure is for me, seeing as that interview was with a family member of mine.

I am not here to change your mind, or any one else for that matter, think what you want. Take the shots, administer them to your children, the choice is yours.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   
I have a three year old and a one year old. My oldest had some shots when he was a baby. He had high fever, belly problems, ect.. all the "norm. reactions". So I stopped the shots, waited till he started talking so he can tell me if something was wrong, then resumed them. He never had a bad reaction after the second go at the shots at age 2 and a half. My daughter, same thing. She was a little worse with the reactions though. Some vomiting involved and higher fevers. So, I'm going to wait again to get the remaining shots. I don't think people should just NOT give the shots to their kids. I do however believe (based on my kids) that they handle the shots better when they are a little older.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by summer5
 


Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Science is fought with science, therefore if you make an extraordinary claim such as 'vaccinations are ineffective and harmful' then you must present extraordinary proof in the form of solid science to back it up. Unlike most crackpot conspiracy theories on this site, this isn't a bit of harmless ignorance. The anti-vaccine hysteria is not only completely unfounded but also potentially damaging to society at large.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Glass
 


I can show you plenty of sources matey.

I can show you proof, not evidence, but concrete proof that the entire vaccine programme is a sham and always has been.

There are a plethora of reasons for the vaccination scam, first and foremost it was about population control, especially in African and Asian countries, under the guise of WHO sponsored help.

In more recent decades the vaccine scam has become more about money and the generation of future earnings potential by means of setting the 'host' up to be predisposed to certain illness later on in life. It's is also about controlling the masses, by dumbing down or generally impeding the learning abilities of children.

What proof am i talking about?

How about statistics from the BMJ, CDC, and the WHO themselves that show, *conclusively* that the rates of infection of EVERY disease currently vaccinated 'against' today, was in a VERY sharp decline BEFORE the vaccination scam was started?

I have a post on here with the graphs and charts made from the official, government and 'health' organisations own records and stats...i'll see if i can dig it up and amend this post.

The HPV 'vaccines' are an extension of the scam, only this time it's driving force is 'BILL and MELISSA GATES' who stumped up a billion dollars to kick start the programme, and has stated ON THE RECORD that with the proper vaccines administered, we can REDUCE the worlds population by 10 - 15%!

Tell me...how exactly does a vaccine REDUCE the population? Specifically, how does a HPV vaccine, with Gates' huge wallet behind it, given to young girls and young women, REDUCE the population?

I'll help you out...death or infertility in 10 - 15% of the lucky recipients of the poison, that's how.

As i say, i'll look out the post that has the pretty pictures that illustrate exactly what i've said, if you really need to see them.

The 'Flu shot' scam is another good aspect too...

Good hygiene, improved sanitation and nutrition was responsible for the eradication of the majority of these old diseases, the 'vaccine' scam is responsible for keeping them around, and now a resurgence to scare more into taking the poison for their families.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:27 PM
link   
The more ground the anti-vaxxer crowed gets the more likely the herd immunity system we have built will collapse. Vaccines only offer a higher protection they don't make you immune. The higher number of un-vaccineted children the greater risk of exposure. The greater risk of exposure the greater risk of getting the disease.

As a optimist I believe the anti-vaxxer fad will end and only a fringe group will remain. Though if it doesn't it would be kinda of ironic that the conspiracy crowed saying that vaccination is whats going to be the downfall and end of humanity and convinces everyone to stop taking them. Suddenly widespread epidemics of once beaten diseases comes back and kills off a good portion of our race causing civil and social collapse.

It would be the conspiracy theorist themselves that bring about the end of days as it were. Almost like a self-fulfilling prophecy.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 





Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Science is fought with science, therefore if you make an extraordinary claim such as 'vaccinations are ineffective and harmful' then you must present extraordinary proof in the form of solid science to back it up


I'm sorry, did I miss you extraordinary proof that they are indeed 100% safe and effective? And the solid science to back it up?



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by summer5
reply to post by john_bmth
 





Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Science is fought with science, therefore if you make an extraordinary claim such as 'vaccinations are ineffective and harmful' then you must present extraordinary proof in the form of solid science to back it up


I'm sorry, did I miss you extraordinary proof that they are indeed 100% safe and effective? And the solid science to back it up?


Nothing is 100% safe and effective. As for the solid science, there's whole journals dedicated to vaccine research.

However, you are the one that is making the extraordinary claim that not only are vaccines are unsafe and ineffective but there is a global conspiracy to suppress this information. Therefore, the onus is on you to support your extraordinary claims with extraordinary proof. So, once again, post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by john_bmth
 





Therefore, the onus is on you to support your extraordinary claims with extraordinary proof.


I'm sorry, its not on me to prove to you anything. If you choose to believe your medical journals of "proof" be my guest.

Again, I am not here to try to convince you, or any other member to not vaccinate. I know what I know, and that's all that matters...good day to you.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by summer5

I'm sorry, its not on me to prove to you anything. If you choose to believe your medical journals of "proof" be my guest.

Oh, so you're one of these "anti-science" hypocrites. Why don't you live up to your Luddite ideals and throw away the computer you're spreading your ignorance from? I'm assuming you or your family have never received medical treatment at all in your lives, nor will you ever receive medical treatment? Best hope you don't get sick or injured, really.


Again, I am not here to try to convince you, or any other member to not vaccinate. I know what I know, and that's all that matters...good day to you.

You're spreading misinformation that could potentially lead to harm. That's bad enough.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by scoobdude

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by scoobdude
Still on that huh? You completely ignored my previous response to you in regards to mercury. So until you respond to that, please do not expect a direct response from me. Have your peers review that mmmkay.

Your response about mercury was not pertinent to the thread. Post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.


No journal needed to deduce that Hg is bad and is in the vaccines. dispove that point before we move forward please. If the CDC lists it as a nuerological poison than it is not? Hazmat also declares it as such, but i can't post a pdf for some reason.

But here read this: Chronic neurobehavioural effects of elemental mercury in dentists
edit on 1-10-2011 by scoobdude because: (no reason given)


And another Elemental mercury vapour toxicity, treatment, and prognosis after acute, intensive exposure in chloralkali plant workers. Part I: History, neuropsychological findings and chelator effects
edit on 1-10-2011 by scoobdude because: (no reason given)


What fear-mongering dishonesty, apple pips contain amygdalin which degrades into Hydrogen Cyanide in the human body. Cyanide is a highly poisonous element just like mercury, I guess you're never going to eat apples again right?



posted on Oct, 3 2011 @ 12:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tetrarch42

Originally posted by scoobdude

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by scoobdude
Still on that huh? You completely ignored my previous response to you in regards to mercury. So until you respond to that, please do not expect a direct response from me. Have your peers review that mmmkay.

Your response about mercury was not pertinent to the thread. Post the peer-reviewed science from credible journals that supports your view. It's as simple as that.


No journal needed to deduce that Hg is bad and is in the vaccines. dispove that point before we move forward please. If the CDC lists it as a nuerological poison than it is not? Hazmat also declares it as such, but i can't post a pdf for some reason.

But here read this: Chronic neurobehavioural effects of elemental mercury in dentists
edit on 1-10-2011 by scoobdude because: (no reason given)


And another Elemental mercury vapour toxicity, treatment, and prognosis after acute, intensive exposure in chloralkali plant workers. Part I: History, neuropsychological findings and chelator effects
edit on 1-10-2011 by scoobdude because: (no reason given)


What fear-mongering dishonesty, apple pips contain amygdalin which degrades into Hydrogen Cyanide in the human body. Cyanide is a highly poisonous element just like mercury, I guess you're never going to eat apples again right?


Do you eat apple seeds, cause I don't. But before I change the subject you should research bitter almonds and b17 which also has cyanide yet it only attacks cancer cells....and pasterization of all almonds kills this substance. Now go to your local store and find this vitamin on the shelf.....let me know when, where, and how you do.

Back to Hg, the CDC has limit, I.e. a tolarance your body can handle. So when that limit is set for an adult, and is still 12.5x the recommended dosage...well..I find issue with that. I would also be more understanding if it was the only way... but its not. There are other preservatives available...so why not be more humane, especially with how much money they are making.

And again my main point in this thread is no matter what you believe keep the choice open.



In very rare cases, the oral vaccine used to prevent polio can cause polio paralysis in persons who are vaccinated (1 in every 8.1 million doses) and in people who are close contacts of a vaccinated person (1 in every 5 million doses). About 8 to 9 cases of paralytic polio caused by the oral vaccine have been reported in the United States yearly.




Except for an occasional importation, all cases of paralytic polio since 1979 have been caused by the oral polio vaccine. However, thousands of polo infections still occur in other parts of the world. Most cases are reported from Asia and Africa.



www.dhpe.org...

Peer reviewed or not, these stats speak for themselves. The possibility to harm is there.



posted on Mar, 12 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Revolution9
 


doctor>internet conspiracy theorist. i think you answer your own questions on who you should trust.






top topics



 
34
<< 23  24  25    27 >>

log in

join