For those who think it is irresponsible not to get vaccinated

Originally posted by KhufuKeplerTriangle
OP, I knew a woman named Marie on the PP forum.
Her adult daughter gave birth to a baby girl.
The girl got the MMR.
Mom changed a diaper and contracted Measles and is now in a wheelchair, paralyzed.
The doctor thinks mycoplasma is eating her nerves up, or some antibody is stripping the myelin.

I wonder if anyone on ATS knows why myelin stripping is a side effect of vaccine adverse reaction.
I wonder if they know what mycoplasma is, and that it was suspected to contribute to GWS (Gulf War Syndrome), spread by the anthrax vaccine.

Seriously - sometimes I wonder if MMR and other diseases would be totally wiped out by now if we hadn't started vaccinating against them.

Originally posted by thebtheb

Originally posted by KhufuKeplerTriangle
OP, I knew a woman named Marie on the PP forum.
Her adult daughter gave birth to a baby girl.
The girl got the MMR.
Mom changed a diaper and contracted Measles and is now in a wheelchair, paralyzed.
The doctor thinks mycoplasma is eating her nerves up, or some antibody is stripping the myelin.

I wonder if anyone on ATS knows why myelin stripping is a side effect of vaccine adverse reaction.
I wonder if they know what mycoplasma is, and that it was suspected to contribute to GWS (Gulf War Syndrome), spread by the anthrax vaccine.

Seriously - sometimes I wonder if MMR and other diseases would be totally wiped out by now if we hadn't started vaccinating against them.

precisely what Dr. Wakefield said!!!!!
And the MERCK whistleblowers said he was right, that MMR causes measles, the tests results presented by MERCK showed animal antibody, and MERCK has lied for over 10 years because it's such good business selling snake oil to innocent infants and their dumb parents!!!

reply to post by thebtheb


In a couple of generations of getting the shots our natural immunity will be lost and we will need shots to survive. The immune systems of people are very complicated. The types of foods we are eating is more of a problem with health than the vaccines. Foods that suppress the immune system and slow detoxification of the body cause a majority of the problems for a lot of people.

Originally posted by Dizrael

Originally posted by pryingopen3rdeye
reply to post by Ex_CT2

 

it is YOUR OWN right to decide what is injected into your body, for people to criticize that decision is not PRO rights,

those who support forced vaccinations would certainly get some perspective if and when someone wants to forcibly inject them with something they dont want, hence the point of such rights

im sure this is probably already posted somewhere in this thread but im gonna say it anyways.

im military. i am sworn to obey the lawful orders of the officers appointed above me. i, and many others, are ordered to be vaccinated. yearly flu shots, Tdap (no idea what it is), Typhoid, ViCPs, yellow fever, anthrax, SMALL POX. my kids to go to school are required to receive vaccinations. it is a well known fact amongst us in the military everyone gets a little sick during and right after the flu shots come around (its now a flu mist, sprays in both nostrils).

i dont believe vaccinations are going anywhere, and who knows, maybe it will no longer be an option to NOT be vaccinated for civilians...

Cool avatar!!

I knew a man named Berthel Holly, a SMSgt in the ANG. He said each time the anthrax shot was stuck to him, the side effects got worse, literally scaled out of his tolerance. He was sick for WEEKS after shot #4 and started refusing it, against orders, and he walked right up and told me that, and recommended I do the same (defy orders). Luckily Mr. BIDEN wrote a letter asking Congress to stop the anthrax regimen while I was a member, and the series was halted until I left the unit and when I was gone, they started it up again.

Please read about the Dover AFB pilot illness due to anthrax vaccine and squalene tests on humans.
I actually dated the man who gave P1 bacteriophage/Lambda Red research to NIH/USA.
His P1 was the vector that made anthrax vaccine possible.
What a weird coincidence, eh? Like marrying the axe murderer almost...

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by HIWATT

 

If you take vitamin D supplements, make sure you get some sunlight everyday or they can become a problem. I know someone who wound up with problems from taking supplements but she was not getting enough sunlight.

Careful here. I'm well versed in Vit D knowledge, so I'll just spew:

First of all, if taking D supplements, do not take D2, take D3. D2 is a synthetic form of D and the body does not recognize it. D3 is the natural form that your body needs, and is the same form produced by the sun.

D is incredibly important and has been proven to be very effective in preventing the flu, all cancers (including skin). Nearly everyone doesn't get enough vitamin D. So people are supplementing with it. But too much vitamin D can cause D toxicity, so you have to be careful. If you D levels are already high, and you take too much vitamin D, it can build up and cause D toxicity which goes away relatively slowly, so you can't take too much. Then again, if your D levels are low, it can take some time of high dosing before your levels are optimum. For this reason, many people suggest getting tested for your D levels before supplementing.

Chances are that if you take 400 iu a day, you're under-dosing and you will not get D toxicity, however you will also not have enough D in you to prevent the flu etc. Taking about 5000 iu a day is a good start, and for many people would be appropriate. Some even suggest up to 20,000 iu a day - but if for some reason you already have high levels, this could be too much.

The sun gives you the best vitamin D with no possibility of overdose. Your body regulates the D you get from the sun, so you could be getting 80,000 iu a day from the sun, but you will never develop D toxicity. It's for this reason that I use the sun. Another problem is that people think that going in the sun at 9 am or 5 pm is going to give them D. It will NOT! It will actually deplete your D. This is because the sun exudes UVA rays, and UVB rays. UVA rays are constant, from the moment the sun is in the sky until it sets. UVB rays are not constant. They are significant at around 11 am, peak at 12:30 or 1 pm, and after 3, are mostly non-existent. Yet UVB rays are the ones that make vitamin D. UVA rays actually deplete it. So the sun has its own built-in system to regulate vitamin D. This is why to get vitamin D from the sun, it must be between 11 am and 2 or 3 pm. I'm not talking get an all out tan. For most people, 10-20 minutes of unprotected exposure 3 times a week is all you need. This results in a light, moderate tan. And actually a moderate tan is one of the best defenses for skin cancer. Unfortunately, the media and sun block industry have scared people completely away from the sun. But saying have NO sun at all because overexposure causes skin cancer is like saying people drown, so stop drinking water. Moderate, careful, no burns.

However if you've built up D through summer sun, taking a supplement, you should be careful because your D levels are already high. I have not heard of needing to be in the sun to have D supplements be effective, but I can't say that's not true. I'll have to research that.

But: D3, not D2, check the package. Don't take too much, don't take too little, if you're unsure, get your D levels tested or just use the sun. I use a tanning bed in the winter and that's a whole other kettle of fish. One of the reasons tanning beds have become so villified recently is that they are causing skin cancer. One of the main ways they do this is that most tanning beds these days use UVA only. UVA is the damaging ray. It is the one that depletes vitamin D, penetrates ALL layers of skin, and causes cancer and wrinkling. Half these tanning bed places advertise the benefits of vit D, not knowing that their beds are actually depleting it. So I go and I ask the owners if they have beds with UVA AND UVB bulbs. If they don't, or they don't know (they often don't know) I pass on that company. I find one with UVB, a light bed that isn't strong. And I use those, very sparingly - like 4-8 minutes since they ARE stronger than the actual sun.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Honor93

 

Anecdotal analyses do not prove anything. Vaccines and their drawbacks are preferable to pandemics. Note that polio victims of the late 40s still require medical treatment while those who had the vaccine and remained polio free do not require treatment related to polio.

you did not ask any such thing.
you asked how healthcare costs could/would plummet with less vaccines [paraphrased]
i answered with factual evidence that substantiates less care = less cost.

less than 100 cases in a handful of schools is hardly a pandemic

hmmmm, from chicken pox to polio and you present them as similar ???
do you use strawman tactics often ?

so, how many ppl who were vaccinated with the polio vax contracted it anyway or developed severe/life threatening or chronic conditions ??

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Between April 1982 and June 1983 four children 3 to 24 months of age were referred for evaluation of neurologic abnormalities found to be compatible with vaccine-related poliovirus infection, which had not been suspected by referring physicians. Patients were epidemiologically unrelated residents of Indiana, and none had prior symptoms suggestive of immunodeficiency.

so, here we have lifetime chronic healthcare costs and progressive fatal cerebral atrophy in one, but i suppose those lives are worth the risk eh ??

perhaps you should read this ... www.nvic.org...

If all the war money, cable company money, vaccine money was put into US agriculture,

we would all be happy and healthy.

reply to post by KhufuKeplerTriangle


I want some of what you are smoking You are right but it will never happen.

Originally posted by Honor93

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Honor93

 

Anecdotal analyses do not prove anything. Vaccines and their drawbacks are preferable to pandemics. Note that polio victims of the late 40s still require medical treatment while those who had the vaccine and remained polio free do not require treatment related to polio.

you did not ask any such thing.
you asked how healthcare costs could/would plummet with less vaccines [paraphrased]
i answered with factual evidence that substantiates less care = less cost.

less than 100 cases in a handful of schools is hardly a pandemic

hmmmm, from chicken pox to polio and you present them as similar ???
do you use strawman tactics often ?

so, how many ppl who were vaccinated with the polio vax contracted it anyway or developed severe/life threatening or chronic conditions ??

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Between April 1982 and June 1983 four children 3 to 24 months of age were referred for evaluation of neurologic abnormalities found to be compatible with vaccine-related poliovirus infection, which had not been suspected by referring physicians. Patients were epidemiologically unrelated residents of Indiana, and none had prior symptoms suggestive of immunodeficiency.

so, here we have lifetime chronic healthcare costs and progressive fatal cerebral atrophy in one, but i suppose those lives are worth the risk eh ??

perhaps you should read this ... www.nvic.org...

My point was that avoiding the many polio infections by using polio vaccine greatly reduced health care costs related to polio over the lifetime of the individuals. Many children were saved by the Salk vaccine and a vaccine reduced the costs of healthcare both financially and in lives spared. The few that contracted the disease after receiving the vaccine were unfortunate but putting the entire population at risk because of a few would undoubtedly cost far more lives. In 1952 there were 58,000 polio cases with a population half of what it is now. This may be a helpful read for you en.wikipedia.org...

Do you think that 100,000+ polio cases would cost more or less than 4 polio cases?

Do you have any data that support your arguments that vaccines increase the cost of healthcare or are you guessing?

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by Honor93

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Honor93

 

Anecdotal analyses do not prove anything. Vaccines and their drawbacks are preferable to pandemics. Note that polio victims of the late 40s still require medical treatment while those who had the vaccine and remained polio free do not require treatment related to polio.

you did not ask any such thing.
you asked how healthcare costs could/would plummet with less vaccines [paraphrased]
i answered with factual evidence that substantiates less care = less cost.

less than 100 cases in a handful of schools is hardly a pandemic

hmmmm, from chicken pox to polio and you present them as similar ???
do you use strawman tactics often ?

so, how many ppl who were vaccinated with the polio vax contracted it anyway or developed severe/life threatening or chronic conditions ??

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Between April 1982 and June 1983 four children 3 to 24 months of age were referred for evaluation of neurologic abnormalities found to be compatible with vaccine-related poliovirus infection, which had not been suspected by referring physicians. Patients were epidemiologically unrelated residents of Indiana, and none had prior symptoms suggestive of immunodeficiency.

so, here we have lifetime chronic healthcare costs and progressive fatal cerebral atrophy in one, but i suppose those lives are worth the risk eh ??

perhaps you should read this ... www.nvic.org...

My point was that avoiding the many polio infections by using polio vaccine greatly reduced health care costs related to polio over the lifetime of the individuals. Many children were saved by the Salk vaccine and a vaccine reduced the costs of healthcare both financially and in lives spared. The few that contracted the disease after receiving the vaccine were unfortunate but putting the entire population at risk because of a few would undoubtedly cost far more lives. In 1952 there were 58,000 polio cases with a population half of what it is now. This may be a helpful read for you en.wikipedia.org...

Do you think that 100,000+ polio cases would cost more or less than 4 polio cases?

Do you have any data that support your arguments that vaccines increase the cost of healthcare or are you guessing?

Of course you also have to balance this with the fact that only 1 in 200 cases of polio are serious. 1 to 2% result in muscle stiffness or neck pain. And less than 1% result in paralysis. Of that 1%, only half of THAT result in permanent paralysis. And type of polio caused by the polio vaccine (it has its own name) is supposed to be worse.
The Centers for Disease control has themselves admitted that every case of polio in the United States since 1979 is caused by the polio vaccine. So what do they do? Bring it over to Africa and Nigeria where the exact same thing happened in Nigeria, and is happening in India right now, with 47,000 cases of vaccine caused polio, yet apparently the only recourse is to keep vaccinating children. How anyone can see any sense in this and not question: 1. The makers of vaccines and just how smart they apparently are. 2. The outright stupidity of this method - is beyond me.

reply to post by pteridine

My point was that avoiding the many polio infections by using polio vaccine greatly reduced health care costs related to polio over the lifetime of the individuals.

that is an assumption and purely subjective.
you cannot claim to know about cases that might or might not have occurred.

yes, the polio vaccine was effective for some, not all
yes, the polio virus spread via vaccine shedding in addition to natural pathways
yes, for some, the vaccine caused lifetime, crippling, debilitating and fatal consequence
and no, those who contracted the virus after being vaccinated endured a lifetime of disability and Social Security at the taxpayers expense.

sorry, i don't do this kind of fantasy.
could have, should have, might have are all suppositions.

"unfortunate" you say ? wow
must be the "cost" of doing business as they say, right ??

hahahahaha, Wiki ??? aren't you funny

try this ... www.nature.com...
or this ... digitaljournal.com...
or even this ... from a pro-vaccine stance ...

www.immunizationinfo.org...
Because almost all of our children are immunized, and only few are not, it can be the case that during an epidemic the majority of cases occur among children who were immunized.

neatly sandwiched between all the rest but it's there.

let's read that again with emphasis ...

Because almost all of our children are immunized, and only few are not, it can be the case that during an epidemic the majority of cases occur among children who were immunized.

look, i'm not here to argue or debate hypotheticals.
i agree with the OP and for many reasons ... am just trying to share the knowledge.
do with it what you will.

just for fun, i'll answer your question and commence with a courtesy check, ok?

Do you think that 100,000+ polio cases would cost more or less than 4 polio cases?

since the prognosis for polio is death ... what's your point ?
of course treating the symptoms of 100,000 is more costly but the outcome remains the same.

however, since those 104,000 are dying, their health maintenence costs also terminate while those who are merely damaged from the vaccine entail a lifetime of healthcare expense, disability and a host of other debilitating complications.

now for the courtesy part ... read any of the links provided then add up the additional expense to the US taxpayers ... it's somewhere around 50 Billion or so and growing with each "advance"

ETA -- just dawned on me that there are more cases of PPS (post-polio syndrome) today than the total number of deaths from polio world-wide ... what does that tell ya about long-term medical costs ???

Here's what Mike Adams has to say about it...

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by HIWATT

 

If you take vitamin D supplements, make sure you get some sunlight everyday or they can become a problem. I know someone who wound up with problems from taking supplements but she was not getting enough sunlight.

I take it in the fall and winter when we have much less sun exposure to compensate.

I'm trying to make sense of your comment? Taking Vitamin D is an option to keep your D levels in line when there's less sun available to allow your body to produce it naturally....

If your friend had issue maybe he/she was gulping them like candy. That can and will make you ill.

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by thebtheb

 

In a couple of generations of getting the shots our natural immunity will be lost and we will need shots to survive. The immune systems of people are very complicated. The types of foods we are eating is more of a problem with health than the vaccines. Foods that suppress the immune system and slow detoxification of the body cause a majority of the problems for a lot of people.

Ricky this week and last week i have been unable to stop thinking about "fasting", i.e. taking a break from the bad food.

Good places for a fast or near fast: volcanic parks, generally warm but private areas in nature, hot springs etc.
You can make it fun; bring a friend who has done it before for example, bring music/crafts/wicca stuff/your bible/etc


I think humans MUST regain the discipline of fasting to overcome the toxic world.
And to be able to migrate (HAJJ!) freely.

reply to post by KhufuKeplerTriangle


After three days it triggers the body to start repairing using the stored fat. Fasting can rejuvinate a person in a week unless the person is so weak that they can't make the three days. Drinking good water is necessary, my father also drank coffee when fasting. I have fasted a couple of days but never three days. I went many years with eating one meal a day though but still drank coffee during the day with sugar and cream.

reply to post by HIWATT


She used to be a dietician for the health department and believed what she was told. She had a lot of problems taking it because her body makes it easily, one of the lucky ones I guess. I don't take any supplements with D in them but I eat potatoes. It has a form of D in them but needs more vitamin K to process it. I don't think that form of D needs the sun even. Trouble is that without high amounts of K it starts to calcify tissues. I have found that taking magnesium supplements is also necessary for me and my daughter, I guess that's just the way it is. It's hard to get enough Magnesium without grazing like a horse.

I test everything on myself, I found so many things being told to people that don't apply to half the people that it's sickening. Testing on myself takes a week minimum when dealing with foods to see results. Making more than one change in diet complicates things. Been doing this for six years now, didn't always have good results with this either. I screwed up when trying to raise the niacin levels in the food and the wife experienced AFIB. Just adding a little tobasco sauce and other niacin rich foods like oranges and chili to her diet caused it. Two grand copayment later and pills she could not take and I know how not to cook for her now. Women need Leucine to counteract the Niacin, guys don't.

reply to post by pryingopen3rdeye


I couldn't agree more!

Many people feel that Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy is really polio by another name.

I got narcolepsy from getting vaccinated in grade 8. It's gotten milder over 2 decades since but it's still there. And I'm a "lucky one". So many people die from anaphilactic shock or end up with some serious problem. But I think they're realizing that they might not be able to get to everyone, so instead they try and use propaganda to turn the willing sheeple on those that are awake by telling them the non-vacs are putting you at risk. Well in Canada we don't have that yet fortunately. they haven't gotten to the point where everything is mandidtory but they basically trick the kids at school as they come across as if it's a normal everyday event and they have nothing to worry about. It's so sad.

Originally posted by r2d246
I got narcolepsy from getting vaccinated in grade 8.

how do you know it was from being vaccinated?

It's gotten milder over 2 decades since but it's still there. And I'm a "lucky one". So many people die from anaphilactic shock or end up with some serious problem.[/quoet]

how many? compared to, say, 1 million people dying worldwide from measles every year....and thousands of cases of encephilitis in the US alone every year....??

[quoet] But I think they're realizing that they might not be able to get to everyone, so instead they try and use propaganda to turn the willing sheeple on those that are awake by telling them the non-vacs are putting you at risk. Well in Canada we don't have that yet fortunately. they haven't gotten to the point where everything is mandidtory but they basically trick the kids at school as they come across as if it's a normal everyday event and they have nothing to worry about. It's so sad.

I feel sorry for you

edit on 18-10-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)