The vaccine empire has collapsed

I searched and found nothing, Mods if this is in the wrong area plz move, thank you.

Been taking bookoo time off due to a deadline that is only days away, but saw this headline & had to post it.

A review from The Cochrane Collaboration, a widely respected research-analysis team, went over all the evidence, and entered its conclusion: In healthy adults, no flu vaccine delivers protection from the flu. Boom! It doesn't protect against transmission of flu viruses from person to person, either. Boom! So all the promotion and all the pandering and all the scare tactics and all the "expert medical opinion" and all the media coverage...useless, worthless, and irrelevant.

Further.

Here is an interesting comment from the analysis: "The review showed that reliable evidence on influenza vaccines is thin but there is evidence of widespread manipulation of conclusions..." Now who in the world would benefit from such manipulating? Oh yes. One other thing. The Cochrane review, published by John Wiley and Sons, appeared online on July 7, 2010. Over two years ago.

So we finally hear about this two years LATER, after the excess supplies have been "included" with the flu shots this year of the H1N1 vaccine. (You did ask before you got the shot, right?)

Link Source

Further reading:
No Value in Any Influenza Vaccine: Cochrane Collaboration Study

This study is damning of the entire pharmaceutical industry and its minions, the drug testing industry and the medical system that relies on and promotes them. Influenza vaccines produce no benefit and cause serious harm. (Updated article.)

The authors found: Vaccines administered parenterally, that is, outside the digestive tract—which generally means by injection—reduced influenza-like symptoms by only 4%. They found no evidence that vaccination prevents viral transmission in healthy adults! (There goes the whole herd immunity argument!) This is particularly significant because, as they noted, inactivated vaccines are known to perform best in healthy adults. They also found no evidence that flu vaccines prevent complications, either. They attempted to ascertain the degree of complications, and though they did report on some, most of the studies simply did not address the issue or did so inadequately.

So those that having been taking the hit about how "irresponsible" you are for not trusting vaccines b/c of Big Pharma in bed with the Govt, hopefully you will feel slightly vindicated today.

God Bless.

reply to post by schadenfreude


I know it was biased soon as i saw the word "boom!" in a article describing science. Then of course i check the link and found out to be organic/natural product/news site, so clearly they would be against "unnatural" thing.

Vaccine work by using natural body process and of course i love nature more than anything and not all vaccine are bad.

But to say vaccine empire has collapsed is a stretch.... Flu vaccine is like 10% of the entire vaccine process and it never going to collapse, only will be replaced with more accurate system.

Flu Vaccine is a guess..

1) it does not always get the correct virus, because these pre-emptive flu vaccine are a guessed of prevention against certain strains that they obtained from previous patterns.

2) They would not work because it is not the right virus.

3) Virus mutated.

4) Hosts health conditions.


I would avoid Flu vaccines... you body would take care of it naturally as long as you are a health individual.

But i would not jump on flu paranoia and bash all the Vaccines, certain disease are almost non-existence because of vaccines.

Antibiotics are more unnatural but people drink that in gallons!
.

reply to post by schadenfreude


You actually posted a quote using the word Boom! ??

Find a legitimate site and you have a legit claim. But bogus retro hippy sites isn't one of them.

Some of this is funny:

The authors found: Vaccines administered parenterally, that is, outside the digestive tract—which generally means by injection—reduced influenza-like symptoms by only 4%

It is a vaccine, you take it before you get sick, you don't take it to reduce symptoms.

reply to post by luciddream


I agree with you up to this point:

"I would avoid Flu vaccines... you body would take care of it naturally as long as you are a health individual"


The flu kills 15-35,000 people a year, it is a yearly pandemic. The death toll is 50,000 if it is severe.So no, natural isn't always the way to go.

Over 200,000 are hospitalized.

There is a loss of $10 billion dollars in productivity to America each year because of the flu.

The vaccines are accumulative, that is why the push them. You are vaccinated against that strain for life. Just because there is a flu du jour for the winter, doesn't mean the others have ceased to exist.

reply to post by luciddream

Then go read some damn studies and check the vaccine inserts. Then you will discover that there is absolutely no long term research on health effects and that pharma industry cheats on the studies.
I have asked this question many times and will ask again.. How can anyone defend studies where they cheat to the point where they inject the PLACEBO/control group with ADJUVANTS containing mercury, alluminium and other toxic compounds?
This is exactly what happened with the gardasil study. When people got sick after a certain short time period then it was brushed off as unrelated, even though vaccine side effects will in most cases show up weeks later.
No vaccine has ever been studied for carinogenic effects either, which is something that is written on the INSERT ITSELF.
Merck has even admitted in past that vaccines was contaminated with viruses that have the potential of giving you cancer later in your life, which is a vaccine that many of us has recieved.
Meanwhile cancer rates, auto immune disorders, allergies and neurological problems are sky high.

What I find most fun is how most people here on ATS are against pharma industry and would have no issues believing that it is corrupt when it comes to drug/medicines, but yet vaccines are blindly accepted as safe even though these very same companies are responsible for the safety studies regarding vaccines as well.
They cheat when it comes to drugs, so why is it so hard to believe that they do the same when it comes to vaccines?

Originally posted by schadenfreude
I searched and found nothing,

I searched and found that although it doesnt have a thread of its own, this study has been raised in several different threads about vaccines over the last few years.

A few examples...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by schadenfreude
Been taking bookoo time off due to a deadline that is only days away, but saw this headline & had to post it.

A review from The Cochrane Collaboration, a widely respected research-analysis team, went over all the evidence, and entered its conclusion: In healthy adults, no flu vaccine delivers protection from the flu.

If you took the time to read past the sensationalist headline, and actually read the Cochrane study itself, you'll see that naturalnews lied to you again. Naturalnews bang on about the vaccines having no effect, but Cochrane says YES they do (but small). Naturalnews would have you think Cochrane found that vaccines are dangerous, but NO they did not.

Summary of main results
Inactivated influenza vaccines decrease the risk of symptoms of influenza and time off work, but their effects are minimal, especially if the vaccines and the circulating viruses are mismatched. There is no evidence that they affect complications or transmission.

Overall completeness and applicability of evidence
Taken alone, the review shows that according to randomised evidence, inactivated vaccines have a small effect in preventing symptoms of influenza and getting workers back to work quicker.

----

Furthermore, taking the time to visit the Cochrane website and do more research (rather than just starting a thread after reading one single webpage) finds that this finding is consistent among other research that Cochrane have done on vaccines.
- No evidence to say they are dangerous.
- Small BENIFICIAL effect.

An example from 2 months ago...
Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy children

I don't like getting vaccines for my child (soon to be children) because I have asked for the insert and they usually refuse to give it. If I was given this, looked it over and felt that it was safe enough, I would vaccinate. If they are hiding nothing and these vaccines are JUST FINE for us, then why refuse a curious mother the insert?

EDIT: And I am not just talking about the Influenza vaccine.

Originally posted by TheSparrowSings
I don't like getting vaccines for my child (soon to be children) because I have asked for the insert and they usually refuse to give it. If I was given this, looked it over and felt that it was safe enough, I would vaccinate. If they are hiding nothing and these vaccines are JUST FINE for us, then why refuse a curious mother the insert?

And according to law they should show it to you if you ask. Again shows that they have something to hide..

And might I just add that so far this is a 100 percent track record with Naturalnews.

Every single article of theirs that I've taken the time to examine, has been filled with lies and misrepresentations of the facts.

reply to post by juleol


They have a "print out" which doesn't cover the ingredients but only covers possible side effects. This is all I have ever been able to acquire from them. I am prepared (when the 2nd child is born) to go over the heads of the health clinic nurses and head straight to Alberta Health Services for my answers.

reply to post by juleol

they inject the PLACEBO/control group with ADJUVANTS containing mercury, alluminium and other toxic compounds?

There are many types of placebos, it varies with testing. Certain placebos has everything (including preservatives such as Thermosol(mercury) and other compounds to prevent microbial growth(which is even worse if it gets into your bloodstream) but the actual Active ingredients, while some placebo are called "sugar pill" which is just fake pill.

Controls vary a lot depending on the test, if you link me to article mentioning PLACEBOS having preservatives such as mercury, i will have a look at it and see the reason behind that control.

Regarding Cancer

You can link Cancer to ANYTHINGS, i'm at a point where unless a direct radiation is applied, i'm not gonna believe in Cancer from other sources.....unless can prove with extensive research with good results(not the 4% of people had cancer etc, but with 40%+).

its could be you McDonalds, X ray, Vaccine, Air, Water, ANYTHING...

It's nice to see your information. It should be combined with Leading World Bank Demographer: Vaccination Campaigns Part Of Population Reduction Policy
and this Bill Gates talks about ‘vaccines to reduce population’ (quoted) to get a fuller view. They know they don't work for diseases (except to spread them!). Other type of vaccines (non-flu) have been shown again and again to actually increase the incidence of the disease in those vaccinated (aka infected) with it vs. those who never get the shot who have actually a lower rate of the disease. This has been known for decades. It's just people doing a really crappy job of population control or simply being psychopathic sadists.

People are being vaccinated right now.
How has the "vaccine empire" collapsed?

reply to post by luciddream

There are many types of placebos, it varies with testing. Certain placebos has everything (including preservatives such as Thermosol(mercury) and other compounds to prevent microbial growth(which is even worse if it gets into your bloodstream) but the actual Active ingredients, while some placebo are called "sugar pill" which is just fake pill.

You dont need that with saline water which is how placebos should be done.
And you cant call it a placebo when you inject them with high amounts of toxic heavy metals which is believed to behind many of the side effects.
And I dont have an article. You have to read the actual merck funded study itself.

But what about other issues?? Why are you okay with there being absolutely no long term testing?? Or that they dont test them for carcinogenic properties??

reply to post by juleol

high amounts of toxic heavy metals..

Its actually very very low, trace amounts, and they are getting much less since 1930s.

But what about other issues?? Why are you okay with there being absolutely no long term testing??

You can't do a Long Term testings... who will be willing to factor out ALL the possible things you can get affected in life? is anyone willing to isolate themselves in a clean room for 70-80 yrs, since birth? These study would never find that vaccine caused the disease or illness. Just like Cancer, THERE Are Many causes, and if supposedly someone who got vaccine get Cancer, that would not prove vaccine caused it.

If there is high chance that vaccines does cause disease A, then A would be predominant, because you may not know, but a lot of people still get vaccinated.

I usually discuss and agree with DPT vaccine(you probably got as baby) and perhaps Hepatitis but not Gardasil and these new vaccines.

reply to post by juleol


For me it is a vaccine by vaccine basis. Not all meds are good, not all are bad. Same with vax.

I have more of an issue wth the number of vaccinations, then individual. I think flu is fine, I think mmr is dangerous.

There are countless "laws" that state I must be allowed to know all of the ingredients in the food I eat, or in the supplements I take. In fact, there are laws that state that many of the chemical products I use must list the ingredients, though not in percentages, in order to protect myself.

There are no laws that allow me to see what the ingredients are in the flu vacs, in fact, I am prohibited by law from having that knowledge and expressing it to others - the ingredients are proprietary, and I am prevented from knowing if the stated ingredients are actually in the jab itself. I have no way of making sure the jab has "protective flu vaccine" and not chemicals designed to alter my dna.

So are asked, in fact implored, to get a yearly flu vacs on faith, which not only seems good enough for the makers of the shot, but the takers of the shot.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by schadenfreude

 

You actually posted a quote using the word Boom! ??

Find a legitimate site and you have a legit claim. But bogus retro hippy sites isn't one of them.

Some of this is funny:

The authors found: Vaccines administered parenterally, that is, outside the digestive tract—which generally means by injection—reduced influenza-like symptoms by only 4%

It is a vaccine, you take it before you get sick, you don't take it to reduce symptoms.

edit on 9-10-2012 by nixie_nox because: (no reason given)

So you basically bash the site because of the word gaia and you discredit them based on a misunderstanding on your part.

They mean there were 4% less cases of influenza, or influenza like symptoms, obviously.

Also it has nothing to do with the site, they just refered to a study.

reply to post by nixie_nox

The flu kills 15-35,000 people a year, it is a yearly pandemic. The death toll is 50,000 if it is severe.So no, natural isn't always the way to go. Over 200,000 are hospitalized. There is a loss of $10 billion dollars in productivity to America each year because of the flu.

These are sick, old, and unhealthy people.

If you are of normal health, you don't need a flu shot.

And as research points out, it hardly has a positive effect.

In 2012, it seems very few will be persuaded to change their stance. There has been far too many opportunities for people to believe what they want, and have it solidified. I mean, if you're just now a teenager, maybe so, but most adults are pretty well set in their beliefs.

I'm not strictly anti-vaccine, but think a bit like nixie-nox here. It's more of the number of vaccines we give out in a given period of time that I think is a problem. As for possible contaminants, and potential side effects, I think this happens as well, but is a lesser problem on the whole.

Every once in a while you get someone who has an extreme reaction. I'm more concerned about subtle effects that take a while to fully manifest, of which we simply may not know how this process comes about.

Personally, I will likely never take another vaccine in my life. I believe in the bodies ability to fight off whatever comes my way, if I feed it with the correct nutrients, and rest. If it doesn't, I simply wasn't fit enough. So be it.

We're all free to make our own decisions on the matter. I used to publicly bitch about it, but now think there's little point. People will ultimately choose as they please.