Is it Time to Ban Vaccines Once and For All?

Originally posted by Mentalistbee
You don't want to be vaccinated, that is fine, but don't come up with these one sided statements about how horrible, and what an alleged evil purpose they have.

With all of the pathological fascism going around lately, you really can't blame people for getting offended and retaliating in the opposite direction.

Originally posted by Rubinstein
It was improved nutrition and sanitation that helped out humanity, and then not long after that mass vaccination programs came along and tried to take credit. Those illnesses you mentioned wouldn't be killing people, as long as we were all well nourished. It's a myth that's been propagated to make money; vaccines are a $Billion industry.

Historical evidence seems to contradict this belief that good nutrition and sanitation will assure that an epidemic will not occur with a return to the majority of people being unvaccinated. During the polio outbreak in the U.S. the virus seemed to thrive in sanitary conditions and appeared to affect large numbers of affluent Americans.

Put simply, paralytic polio was an inadvertent by-product of modern sanitary conditions. When people were no longer in contact with the open sewers and privies that had once exposed them to the polio virus in very early infancy when paralysis rarely occurs, the disease changed from an endemic condition so mild that no one knew of its existence to a seemingly new epidemic threat of mysterious origins and terrifyingly unknown scope (p. 23).

This central theory regarding the spread of polio is supported, at least to some extent, by experiences in third world countries. During World War II, for instance, U.S. and British troops stationed in undeveloped countries were much more likely to contract polio than native peoples, who apparently had already developed immunity (Paul, 1971). Even in the 1970's, when individuals from developed countries came into contact with those from a country without a modern sanitation system, the incidence of paralytic polio was about twenty times greater for those from the developed country (Nathanson and Martin, 1979).

www.cloudnet.com...

The long list of prominent Americans and others worldwide who contracted polio include a U.S. president, a U.S. Supreme court justice, billionaire businessmen, actors, and writers. It can be reasonably assumed these people could afford the best food and living conditions.

www.livingwithcerebralpalsy.com...

This puts an interesting twist on the concept of an evil conspiracy by the wealthy. It does not seem likely that the elite would be trying to destroy themselves. During this time they were as frightened as anyone and it spurred the frantic rush for researching and developing a vaccine, and philanthropy by many of the very wealthy due to the lack of money that hospitals had in caring for the sick and disabled.

Some families also received support through philanthropic organizations such as the Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine fraternity, which established a network of pediatric hospitals in 1919, the Shriners Hospitals for Children, to provide care free of charge for children with polio.

en.wikipedia.org...

Right now a big talking point of the anti-vaccine movement involves the presence of a virus from Rhesus monkeys in the first batches of the oral polio vaccine. Looking at the big picture historically it is easy to see that in the rush to develop a vaccine that mistakes and unintentional errors can occur. There are some who develop polio from the vaccine but many, many more are spared.

The scientists and doctors were under extreme pressure from the WEALTHY to develop a vaccine because THEY were being disabled from polio. I say this as someone who could have been exposed to one of the first batches, although I have suffered no health issues to date. There were no massive epidemics of cancer or the appearance of widespread autism in the children of my generation and we received the vaccines that had more problems associated with them than today’s vaccines.

I’m not saying there is absolutely no connection in the health issues of children today but the facts available now suggest that it would not be responsible to end vaccination. Most importantly any past issues with the first batches of the vaccine does not mean that there is an ongoing conspiracy to hurt children today and it is irresponsible to imply that without facts to back it up.

Originally posted by Aeonflux
I've been sceptical about vaccines for many years, I believe the dangers are under played.

Interestingly I went recently to the GP surgery recently and was invited to have one of these old person flu jabs. I declined the offer and explained my concerns, my concerns were not refuted and I was not pressed to take the jab, In fact I derived the impression that my concerns about vaccines were shared.

It would be interesting to know therefore how many doctors, nurses or people working in doctors surgeries take the vaccines themselves? Have they been warned off taking them? If so, that would be pretty strong evidence not to take vaccines in my opinion.

Thanks for posting Aeonflux

It's good to see more people who question what is going on without blindly assuming it's for our benefit. These Doctors/Nurses have to ask you if you would like it, but if they've been around for long enough that they'll have witnessed and been involved in more than enough vaccine damage to know the serious and unnecessary risks involved during any vaccination

Thanks for posting Tetrarch42

Your theory is all based on the concept that vaccines are perfectly healthy and aren't causing the majority of the serious illnesses that are around today. If people aren't going down with Cancers, Diabetes (T1), HIV, Leukemia, it saves an incredible amount of money. If children are no longer being vaccinated against Measles, then just make sure they have enough Vitamin A in their diet, provide supplements if necessary (the vaccine is more expensive than the vitamins), it's infinitely cheaper than paying for vaccines and the illnesses they bring.

Originally posted by Tetrarch42
The public health fall-out of banning vaccines would be catastrophic; we'd see a return of previously forgotten infectious disease, present endemic/cyclical diseases would become more virulent and the economic ramifications of having to treat major outbreaks would go well towards bankrupting a national economy.

In short, the answer is a resounding NO. As in if you think banning vaccines is a good idea you're so out of your depth as far as public health and infectious disease goes it isn't even funny.

reply to post by Rubinstein


Sigh...

This is beyond bias, you have no in between, just black and white. Either vaccines are bad, or they are good.

How about you do a bit of a search, on how vaccines have helped hundreds upon millions of people, or does that not count?


Also do not carry on about ''what the mainstream has taught you'' like you're knowledgeable. I wonder where you got the vaccines are evil thing? That is all over the mainstream supposed ''underground'' area of things.

Also keep carrying on at this rate, I wonder why you even posted this. Usually when people post things, it is a discussion, and exchange of information, what is the point if any one who tries to explain their side/belief just gets what you said for the last few pages reposted over and over.

Here's a hint, we got it, you think vaccines are evil, how about you give me some thing new/convincing op.

reply to post by Rubinstein


One of my children is in dental college. In order to do clinical work on patients all students and faculty are required to have vaccinations up to date or prove their immunity with a titer or you cannot have contact with patients. The clinic sees hundreds of patients from all walks of life. It is located next to a large university and many students frrom foreign countries come there to get dental work. Wouldn't that be a shame if they could opt out and potentially cause an outbreak of hepatitis or other contagious diseases?

Ah, you just found out the whole rub.

There is NO such thing as "immunity" from a vaccine.

It may reduce your chances because your body already has antibodies built up to fight it when the real thing invades you, but that doesn't do much to guarantee victory.

Do you see the logical fallacy placed upon people (and yourself) by assuming that a vaccine creates immunity? This is, by and large, impossible.

reply to post by fourthmeal


Of course but it's the best option we've got now. To throw progress out the window because it doesn't afford everyone total victory all of the time is not logical.

TZela,

Thanks for posting! If the Rubella vaccine itself was completely safe, I would agree with you. However, it contains human DNA from an aborted fetus. Why is this a problem? Ever since these "fetal tissue" vaccines were introduced we've seen a rise in cases of Autism

"increase in autism incidences corresponding with the introduction of human DNA to MMR vaccine"

"An additional increased spike in incidence of autism occurred in 1995 when the chicken pox vaccine was grown in human fetal tissue."

articles.mercola.com...

Why is this? A lot of people seem to understand the concept that we when inject a dead or partially killed virus through the blood-brain barrier, it then sets off our body's emergency defense mechanisms and antibodies are created. What about the other substances in the vaccine? Do we not create antibodies to those too? Well sometimes we do, and if it's a substance that naturally occurs in your body, that's when you're in trouble. That means for the rest of your life your immune system is fighting against you, that's what's known as an autoimmune disorder. Vaccine-related Autism (not the original Rain-man style Autism) is showing strong signs of being an autoimmune disorder. This means people with powerful immune systems, are more likely to go down with Autism and/or other autoimmune diseases and allergies after vaccination. They are creating antibodies not just to the virus, but to other parts of the vaccine, such as the fetal tissue. Their immune systems then attack anything that looks the same inside their bodies, like substances that the brain needs to function correctly.

Autism tied to autoimmune diseases in immediate family
www.usatoday.com...

Is it worth sacrificing a percentage of children on the alter of vaccination, so as these other people can live? It is a trade, is it worth it? If we had never got started with vaccination, we wouldn't be in this situation. Children would be getting Rubella at a safe time in their lives, without any need for risk.

Originally posted by TZela

Originally posted by Rubinstein
Vaccines are a slippery slope, first it's just those who actually want them, then the next thing you've got these people saying "I don't want your kid going to school with my kid unless your child is vaccinated too". Which is of course ludicrous, as if vaccines are so special the vaccinated kids will have the immune systems of super heroes...but they don't, vaccinated children are an unhealthy bunch

There have been several posts, including the above that seem to think those who are concerned about unvaccinated children being sent to school have no basis for their concerns. I would like to present a situation to demonstrate this concern is not “ludicrous” as the OP has stated in this thread.

Let’s consider rubella and pregnancy. The good news is that this is very rare due to vaccination. However this could change with many people opting their children out of the vaccine. Let’s say unvaccinated child contracts rubella and puts a pregnant teacher’s unborn child at risk with very serious consequences. This can occur before the expectant mother knows her immunity status. Perhaps the teacher, a staff member or any parent of a student is pregnant. An expectant mother may come to programs, help out at school, carpool or invite the child into their home. There are many situations that could give rise to an unvaccinated child causing devastating consequences, in this case, to the unborn baby.

There is a chance any unvaccinated child, including your own could contract rubella and could expose YOUR unborn baby to rubella if you are not already immune.

Congenital rubella syndrome is caused by a virus known as a rubivirus. When adults and children contract the disease, it is known as rubella, or German measles.

If a pregnant woman contracts rubella during her first trimester, there is a very good chance that she will pass it on to her fetus. There is also a chance that the infection will result in a miscarriage.

Pregnant women who have been exposed to rubella need to seek medical attention immediately.

The good news is that rubella is very uncommon now that children are vaccinated for the disease.

Only 30 to 60 cases of rubella are documented each year in the United States. Fewer than five infants each year are diagnosed with congenital rubella syndrome.

The rubivirus does the most damage to a developing fetus during the first trimester. After the fourth month, the mother's rubella infection is less likely to harm the fetus.

Babies who are born with congenital rubella syndrome may have severe birth defects.

www.babycenter.com...

[/quote

Originally posted by TZela
reply to post by fourthmeal

 

Of course but it's the best option we've got now. To throw progress out the window because it doesn't afford everyone total victory all of the time is not logical.

It's 'progress' in terms of profit, but we really need to proper regulate this industry. It's the Globalist Bankers who control Big Pharma, they are not trustworthy. The same people who are behind the wars, behind 9/11, the debt crisis etc. Big Pharma is a different part of the same engine as the Banking system, these are not people we should be trusting with the precious health of our little ones.

For vaccines to ever be trusted again, we would need to make serious changes

1. Proper independent regulation
2. Not human cells (i.e autoimmune illnesses)
3. Don't vaccinate until after 2yo (Crib/Cot Death)
4. No multiple vaccines (high risk)
5. Do not vaccinate in the Summer (immune system too powerful)
6. No cross-business e.g. no more contamination with Cancer-Causing SV40 to bring future business

Until vaccines are independently proven to be completely safe, there should be no vaccines for the under 18's; this should be the age of consent for vaccination.

People are made to believe it's real immunity, whereas real immunity comes after catching an illness. It doesn't seem to be well known that artificial immunity is not as strong and doesn't last for ever. Then there's Vaccine Efficacy, for example the Swine Flu vaccine websites admitted that there was only a 25% chance that the vaccine would work (1 in 4). If people had known that they wouldn't have queued up, they all believed it would work for them, 100%.

Originally posted by fourthmeal
Ah, you just found out the whole rub.

There is NO such thing as "immunity" from a vaccine.

It may reduce your chances because your body already has antibodies built up to fight it when the real thing invades you, but that doesn't do much to guarantee victory.

Do you see the logical fallacy placed upon people (and yourself) by assuming that a vaccine creates immunity? This is, by and large, impossible.

reply to post by fleabit


fleabit: So many tinfoil laden theories - misguided reasoning - don't entrust the health of your child to people on a conspiracy site. Consult your DOCTOR. You know.. professionals with degrees who are actually a lot better qualified to answer these sorts of questions.

How many people consult an epidemiologist when deciding whether they or their child should have an immunization? Your doctor is a general practitioner, not a specialist or a phd.

fleabit: Do the research on your own on professional sites.

Okay, here are a few of the latest studies and concerns epidemiologists are dealing with :

*Spruance, S.L., et al. “Recurrent joint symptoms in children vaccinated with HPV-77DK12 rubella vaccine.” Journal of Pediatrics 1972;80(3):413-17.

*Cooper, L.Z., et al. “Transient arthritis after rubella vaccination.” Am J Dis Child 1969; 118:218-225.

*Schaffner, W., et al. “Polyneuropathy following rubella immunization: a follow-up study and review of the problem.” American Journal of Diseases of Children 1974; 127:684-688.

*Herrmann, K.L., et al. “Rubella antibody persistence after immunization.” Journal of the America Medical Association 1982; 247(2):193-196.

More at: www.vaccineinjury.info...

But I guess these doctors are tinfoilhatters too, just because they're researching trends and voicing concerns. The school nurse knows better, just ask her.

Excellent post frazzle

Most people seem to think a doctor is a vaccine expert, whereas they actually learn very little about vaccination during their course of study, they just have to follow Big Pharma's orders. (as you will know)

Most GP's I have visited knew very little about vaccination, and I converted a good number into becoming anti-vaccine with the studies I have passed to them; one GP even quit his job the next week (so upset by what he had learned).

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by fleabit

 

fleabit: So many tinfoil laden theories - misguided reasoning - don't entrust the health of your child to people on a conspiracy site. Consult your DOCTOR. You know.. professionals with degrees who are actually a lot better qualified to answer these sorts of questions.

How many people consult an epidemiologist when deciding whether they or their child should have an immunization? Your doctor is a general practitioner, not a specialist or a phd.

fleabit: Do the research on your own on professional sites.

Okay, here are a few of the latest studies and concerns epidemiologists are dealing with :

*Spruance, S.L., et al. “Recurrent joint symptoms in children vaccinated with HPV-77DK12 rubella vaccine.” Journal of Pediatrics 1972;80(3):413-17.

*Cooper, L.Z., et al. “Transient arthritis after rubella vaccination.” Am J Dis Child 1969; 118:218-225.

*Schaffner, W., et al. “Polyneuropathy following rubella immunization: a follow-up study and review of the problem.” American Journal of Diseases of Children 1974; 127:684-688.

*Herrmann, K.L., et al. “Rubella antibody persistence after immunization.” Journal of the America Medical Association 1982; 247(2):193-196.

More at: www.vaccineinjury.info...

But I guess these doctors are tinfoilhatters too, just because they're researching trends and voicing concerns. The school nurse knows better, just ask her.

Mentalistbee,

I don't know why you think I should do a search, this has been my area of research for over 10 years, that is why I'm bringing this information to the surface. The Official Story is well known, you don't have to be a researcher to know it.

Sometimes it seems like posters are ignoring the evidence that has been posted, they act as if it doesn't exist, that is when I repeat it.

I am here out of a sense of duty, to the innocent people around the world who are having/have had their lives ruined by vaccines. Including people very close to me, one who is no longer in this world because of a vaccination. I know this thread is reaching a lot of people, so it's going to be saving lives, but still that is not enough, we need more people to pick up the baton and spread the message into their communities.

Originally posted by Mentalistbee
reply to post by Rubinstein

 

Sigh...

This is beyond bias, you have no in between, just black and white. Either vaccines are bad, or they are good.

How about you do a bit of a search, on how vaccines have helped hundreds upon millions of people, or does that not count?


Also do not carry on about ''what the mainstream has taught you'' like you're knowledgeable. I wonder where you got the vaccines are evil thing? That is all over the mainstream supposed ''underground'' area of things.

Also keep carrying on at this rate, I wonder why you even posted this. Usually when people post things, it is a discussion, and exchange of information, what is the point if any one who tries to explain their side/belief just gets what you said for the last few pages reposted over and over.

Here's a hint, we got it, you think vaccines are evil, how about you give me some thing new/convincing op.

TZela, your argument only works if vaccines aren't spreading disease and causing harm, otherwise again, it's just a trade

Originally posted by TZela
reply to post by Rubinstein

 

One of my children is in dental college. In order to do clinical work on patients all students and faculty are required to have vaccinations up to date or prove their immunity with a titer or you cannot have contact with patients. The clinic sees hundreds of patients from all walks of life. It is located next to a large university and many students frrom foreign countries come there to get dental work. Wouldn't that be a shame if they could opt out and potentially cause an outbreak of hepatitis or other contagious diseases?

Exactly imherejusttoread,

We know what the Bankers are up to, we know the media are controlled by them, as a general rule we're getting screwed by The Western System. Could there be this one bubble, Big Pharma, owned by the Bankers, but this time they have decided to do good in the world, to bring good health. Is it possible that they're really evil apart from when it comes to Big Pharma, that's the one time they do good in the world?

As soon as people become aware of which families control Big Pharma, they'd have to be pretty gullible to believe it's there to really bring good health. If it was they'd be telling us to eat Broccoli...you can't patent Broccoli though

Originally posted by imherejusttoread

Originally posted by Mentalistbee
You don't want to be vaccinated, that is fine, but don't come up with these one sided statements about how horrible, and what an alleged evil purpose they have.

With all of the pathological fascism going around lately, you really can't blame people for getting offended and retaliating in the opposite direction.

reply to post by Rubinstein



The facts that exist today show that it is not a balanced trade. Historical evidence and current research bear out the conclusion that the benefit to the overwhelming majority outweighs the actual evidence against vaccines.

"TRADE" is correct.

Remember that book I suggested you guys read?

There are actually several folks deep in the thick of this debate (like Dr's, W.H.O. members), many of them mention the trade. It is this (paraphrased)

We trade acute illnesses for lingering health problems, with no real guarantee that we can actually prevent what we are attempting to in the first place.

Most also agree that these epidemics (like Polio) were the cause of sanitation and nutrition, not the lack of vaccine. Also many agree that there was a huge risk of people actually getting the vaccine and then contracting Polio.

There were two entire townships wiped out when the vaccine for influenza was forced upon them.


Another important viewpoint, and again this is mentioned in the book:

It isn't just mercury, aluminum, the chemicals of engine coolant, and formaldehyde in vaccines. There are unknown dna strands of bovine, pig, and other animals. There are cases where a vaccine administered actually caused an outbreak of another kind, because singling out a strand of virii is impossible, and other non-screened items make it in.

At this point, I'd like to show something that most have seen before:
endthelie.com...

Just head down to the pharma section

Pharma and politicians are One. And Pharma is after profits first, and your health somewhere close to dead-last in importance.

reply to post by Rubinstein


Rubenstein: just make sure they have enough Vitamin A in their diet, provide supplements if necessary (the vaccine is more expensive than the vitamins), it's infinitely cheaper than paying for vaccines and the illnesses they bring.

I'd say vitamin C would be even more important for the immune system because the body can't manufacture it. And minerals!! There was a doctor by the name of Joel Wallach who wrote a book he called "Dead Doctor's Don't Lie" and not only is it very entertaIning, he makes a good case for the depletion of minerals in the soil (based on a government study way back in the 1930s) being responsible for the rise in diseases of all kinds. Of course he was demonized by the established medical community, but like he asked, why don't cows ever need hip transplants? Well, because we give them salt licks that are full of minerals and trace minerals that aren't in their regular diet. He also pointed out that animal feed contains more nurishment than human baby formula. Well, I suppose that was before the folks who make animal feed started pouring antibiotics and growth hormones and other dead animals into animal feed. But there sure has been a rash of recalled formula.

We have gone so far around the bend on what's healthy and what's not it isn't funny. Now they're feeding us pink slime, for pete's sake.

Originally posted by TZela
Wouldn't that be a shame if they could opt out and potentially cause an outbreak of hepatitis or other contagious diseases?

What does shame have to do with anything? Rights don't end when someone's feelings begin.

There's a major difference between requiring mandatory vaccination to be employed by a private business vs. requiring mandatory vaccination by the state. I can opt out of the former by going to their competition. I can opt out of the latter by... dying.