Polio Outbreak Puts Global Eradication at Risk

tigershark1988
Have you? I haven't taken an immunology class specifically, but I used to work as a nurse and have done extensive research on the various properties of vaccines. Aluminum, Formaldehyde, and mercury are all well known to be poisonous even in small doses as the effects are cumulative. Foreign genetic material often contaminates the shots after serial passage and some diseases can even jump the species barrier. You should do some research into the history of vaccine creation, It's pretty disturbing.

I have studied immunology and drug development as well as the history of vaccination. Valid concerns about vaccines do exist, which is why developing better vaccines is an ongoing process. Many common objections to vaccination, though, stem from scaremongering tactics used by anti-vaccine activists or from misunderstanding/lack of understanding of the science behind immunology and vaccine creation. There isn't a single monolithic entity behind or controlling all of science, medicine, and drug development, let alone a malevolent one. There are countless researchers and bright minds from all over the world involved in producing and testing the vaccines that so many here dismiss out of hand as "evil" or "poisonous." In the end, with vaccines and vaccine ingredients as with any other medical treatment, the overall risk vs. benefit must be considered, as nothing, even H2O, is 100% safe with no caveats. Aluminum, formaldehyde, and mercury (which serve actual purposes - they aren't just stuck in there for no reason or with the intent of causing harm) aren't even found in every vaccine, and when they are present, it is in absolutely miniscule quantities. Regular environmental and occupational exposure to harmful substances is far more concerning.

A website about vaccines and formaldehyde, presented by the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia
A page debunking some myths about vaccines and their ingredients
Another page "demystifying vaccine ingredients"

The last two may be dismissed as "blogs" but I would argue that they are very well-researched pages and that they cite their sources. I would also recommend that people search through primary scientific literature themselves (you can use PubMed) and see that there are many, many different people and institutions working on creating vaccines and testing their safety and efficacy. I would be concerned if just one entity - say, the US CDC - had complete control over this entire process, but that is simply not the case.

Dianec
reply to post by supermarket2012

 

If they don't trust ours they should make their own to save their own people. Most vaccine benefits outweigh their risks by a long shot. No one in the U. S. would ever use this venue to kill people in Pakistan by the way.

Maybe not KILL them....but sterilize them?

Do you know exactly what checks and protocols go into place, to prevent someone from tampering with the vaccines?

Not to mention the taliban has enemies besides the US. What makes you think once they get into the country, someone wouldn't be able to tamper with the vaccines?


I'm just saying.....we are talking about muslims and the taliban, who are hated by much of the world's population, TAKING "medicine" that goes directly into their bloodstream. Why WOULDNT they be paranoid?

Well I believe the campaign promoting vaccination is based on fear. I am also of the opinion that vaccines often cause the disease they aim to prevent, for example the only flu shot Ive ever received gave me the worst case of the flu I have ever had the very next day. Several other students in my nursing program were sick in the days following our mandatory vaccinations. Let's look at small pox vaccinations shall we?

In 1881 the % of children vaccinated against smallpox was 96.5% The number of small pox deaths that year was 3,708.
In 1891 82.1% were vaccinated and there were 933 deaths
In 1901 67.9% vaccinated, and there were 437 deaths
This pattern continues until 1941 when 39.9% were vaccinated and there was 1 death.

People started refusing the shots and the number of occurrences diminished. Then the medical industry took credit for eradicating the problem.

Aluminum, Formaldehyde, and Mercury have an EXTENSIVE history of well reported and documented destructive effects. Sodium Chloride, Sodium Hydroxide, Sorbitol, and Hydrolized gelatin are some other chemicals added to some vaccines. It doesn't take much though to determine that pumping these chemicals into your body is going to do more harm than good, particularly if your taking this poison cocktail to rid yourself of something as trivial as the flu.

There are an alarming number of cases of paralytic poliomyelitis in these regions where the OPV vaccine is being pushed as well. The OPV if given to children with weak immune systems can actually mutate back to its wild state of virulence. There needs to be a serious discussion on vaccines and their usefulness as there is a myriad of data that shows vaccines don't often do what they're supposed to and frequently have the opposite effect. We need researchers and regulatory agencies with no vested interests in the vaccine project. Bill gates is an avid proponent of vaccination, and he has also advocated thet vaccines help in population reduction. I would not touch a vaccine of any kind with a 50 foot pole.
www.youtube.com...

reply to post by tigershark1988


I realize now that you have not looked into vaccines beyond your own confirmation bias. Especially that last line about Bill Gates because you couldn't have taken what he said more out of context than you just did. Maybe later when I Adam at an actual computer I will post the pertinent info on all you claimed proving how wrong you are.

Saying you got a flu shot once and came down with the flu later is too dumb to argue. By your logic I should get the flu every year since I do get the shot but I don't last time I did I was 15 in school.

BTW I couldnt care less if the Taliban themselves took the vaccine or not but I do take issue with them keeping it from others and attacking medical workers. It is voluntary but they are taking the choice away.

Grimpachi
reply to post by tigershark1988

 

I realize now that you have not looked into vaccines beyond your own confirmation bias. Especially that last line about Bill Gates because you couldn't have taken what he said more out of context than you just did. Maybe later when I Adam at an actual computer I will post the pertinent info on all you claimed proving how wrong you are.

Saying you got a flu shot once and came down with the flu later is too dumb to argue. By your logic I should get the flu every year since I do get the shot but I don't last time I did I was 15 in school.

BTW I couldnt care less if the Taliban themselves took the vaccine or not but I do take issue with them keeping it from others and attacking medical workers. It is voluntary but they are taking the choice away.

edit on 20-10-2013 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

Your entitled to your opinion. I have researched much factual information. The bill gates tidbit is not direct evidence of anything but certainly raises questions and gives some perspective.
As far as my flu shot giving me the flu, of course it doesn't happen to everyone everytime. It is rare that the attenuated flu virus is still active in the vaccine but it DOES happen.

reply to post by supermarket2012


I know that what opopanax says rings true because my own husband works in pharma albeit animal pharma, but his industry makes a lot of vaccines that use some of the same ingredients you are so suspicious of. His job is to work with all the testing data that goes into making sure the vaccines they produce are safe and effective and he understands the purposes of the various ingredients. He would NEVER, EVER ask either myself or our son do anything that he considers a serious risk to our health or safety, and we get the necessary vaccinations for the major illnesses. You would likely cringe at the number and kind of vaccinations he has to have just to hold down his job.

It is a calculated risk between the small chance of adverse reaction and the small risk of contracting the disease. For many of those diseases, you can only screw up once. Just walk through an old graveyard and you'll see. For others, like the annual flu or the chicken pox, the risk of screwing up are very, very tiny, so maybe you skip the shot.

To start, the inactivated influenza vaccine does not give people the flu. This myth has been extensively debunked.
WebMD
Mayo Clinic
BBC
Discovery Health

I could list off hundreds of other credible sources that all say the same thing. How plausible do you think it is that ALL of these scientists, medical professionals, nonprofit organizations, independent institutions, etc. are colluding? That none of them are employing the scientific method? That every last one of them is corrupt or evil? I consider myself a skeptic and somewhat of a cynic, but even my worldview is not nearly that grim.

Most of what people colloquially call "the flu" is not actually the seasonal influenza virus that these vaccines are designed to prevent. Also, getting a seasonal flu shot doesn't guarantee that you won't get the flu. Unfortunately these vaccines are far from 100% effective. That doesn't mean that they CAUSE the disease. When I was a child, I became violently ill (I suspect food poisoning from some sketchy fish and chips) after visiting an aquarium. For many years, I associated visiting aquariums with getting sick to my stomach. As an adult, I now understand that correlation does not imply causation, but I frequently see others, many of whom should know better, employ this logical fallacy.

ketsuko
reply to post by supermarket2012

 

I know that what opopanax says rings true because my own husband works in pharma albeit animal pharma, but his industry makes a lot of vaccines that use some of the same ingredients you are so suspicious of. His job is to work with all the testing data that goes into making sure the vaccines they produce are safe and effective and he understands the purposes of the various ingredients. He would NEVER, EVER ask either myself or our son do anything that he considers a serious risk to our health or safety, and we get the necessary vaccinations for the major illnesses. You would likely cringe at the number and kind of vaccinations he has to have just to hold down his job.

It is a calculated risk between the small chance of adverse reaction and the small risk of contracting the disease. For many of those diseases, you can only screw up once. Just walk through an old graveyard and you'll see. For others, like the annual flu or the chicken pox, the risk of screwing up are very, very tiny, so maybe you skip the shot.

Why did you specifically reply to me? I never said vaccines are bad.

I AM suspicious of vaccines, and I do not believe in most of them. Some of them have gone towards nearly eradicating certain illnesses, and that is fantastic.

I was not saying vaccines are bad. What I was saying is that I understand why the taliban would reject the vaccines, considering WHO the vaccines are going from.

1) The U.S. and the taliban are enemies. All is fair in love and war, and despite international laws, I would NEVER put it past the US to put something else in the vaccines that might suit their agenda. I'm sure the taliban wouldn't put it past the US either.

2) Even if the US doesn't have an ulterior motive, there could be a faction WITHIN our government/military that tampers with the vaccines.

3) Even if the US doesnt have an ulterior motive, and NEITHER DOES ANYONE within our government or military, there could still be ENEMIES OF THE TALIBAN who somehow get their hands on the vaccines, and contaminate them.


Also, we all know the taliban are fundamentalists. Perhaps vaccines go against their beliefs. Who knows.


Anyway, while your husband may be a good man, not everyone is a good man or women. There is much evil in this world we live in, and the very nature of trusting someone enough to inject something they tell you that you need into your blood stream, is hard for many people to do.

I have known enough crazy people in my time to know that NOTHING surprises me these days. There are most certainly crazy people who hold all KINDS of important positions and jobs in this world, jobs which affect millions of people everyday.


Anyway, I am not agreeing with the taliban, nor am I saying vaccines are bad. I just want to clarify that

supermarket2012

Dianec
reply to post by supermarket2012

 

If they don't trust ours they should make their own to save their own people. Most vaccine benefits outweigh their risks by a long shot. No one in the U. S. would ever use this venue to kill people in Pakistan by the way.

Maybe not KILL them....but sterilize them?

Do you know exactly what checks and protocols go into place, to prevent someone from tampering with the vaccines?

Not to mention the taliban has enemies besides the US. What makes you think once they get into the country, someone wouldn't be able to tamper with the vaccines?


I'm just saying.....we are talking about muslims and the taliban, who are hated by much of the world's population, TAKING "medicine" that goes directly into their bloodstream. Why WOULDNT they be paranoid?

Yea I imagine if they sent us vaccines I wouldn't be to hip on accepting them. I guess we will see where this goes. Maybe disease will be the thing that begins some letting down of these hate walls people have put up. Much more complex that just that but a tragedy like all of your people dying may be the beginning of some love for one another. Being idealistic

reply to post by supermarket2012


Because I got the wrong post. My apologies.

I think vaccines are a risk like every other medicine you take, so you have to look at the potential benefit v. the potential reward.

We generally don't bother with the annual flu vaccines unless there are specific extenuating circumstances, for example.

tigershark1988

opopanax

tigershark1988
Vaccines do very little to prevent diseases as any immunity gained is temporary at best. A virus or bacterium must travel through all natural avenues of your immune system for your body to gain a competent immunity, not be injected into your body with a myriad of harmful chemicals that can do serious damage.

I can understand mistrust of "the establishment," "the government," etc. and I would never assert that vaccines are a perfect solution or that they never cause harm. However, your claims here are simply untrue. Have you ever taken an immunology class? Do you understand the purpose of the various vaccine components (e.g. adjuvants) you're dismissing as "a myriad of harmful chemicals"?

Have you? I haven't taken an immunology class specifically, but I used to work as a nurse and have done extensive research on the various properties of vaccines. Aluminum, Formaldehyde, and mercury are all well known to be poisonous even in small doses as the effects are cumulative. Foreign genetic material often contaminates the shots after serial passage and some diseases can even jump the species barrier. You should do some research into the history of vaccine creation, It's pretty disturbing.

You inhale more aluminium in one year if you live in an urban area than you would get from all vaccines.

You will ingest more "bad" mercury (i.e. methylmercury or inorganic mercury) from eating a can of tuna than you would from having all of the vaccines which contain thimerosal. (BTW, thimerosal is metabolised into ETHYLmercury or organic mercury. This does not accumulate in the body like METHYLmercury does and is excreted in about a week).

Your body naturally produces formaldehyde in far larger amounts than are present in vaccines and we're exposed to far higher levels of it on a daily basis than we would ever get from vaccines.
www.harpocratesspeaks.com...

Considering you say you used to be a nurse I'm really surprised you didn't already know these facts.

As you replied to another post, you are certainly entitled to your opinion however you aren't entitled to your own facts.

reply to post by Pardon?


There is a large difference between what you specify and injecting those chemicals directly into your blood stream.

Personally I think Vaccines are badly over used and over developed. They need to stop asking 'can we' and ask 'should we'. Since every vaccine, by nature of injecting something foreign in it self, carries SOME degree of risk. However minor it may be.

Having said that? Polio and Small Pox vaccines are among the exceptions I'll strongly stand on for saying the good of the whole comes over the good of the super-minority that have a bad reaction.

An honest look at Small Pox

A brief look at Polio

Now, present company excluded and to no one in particular, of course...but poetic justice would see those fighting Vaccines on general principle and to the exclusion of ALL else....be among the first to contract the resurgent diseases which will flow back if the effort to keep clear of them ceases.

If the Taliban and AQ killers want to wallow in disease and "cut off the world"? Good.. I say we return the favor and help Pakistan build that whole sub-region into a quarantine zone enforced with lethal measures.

let it stand as a lesson to those who would endanger the world with things thought to have been nearly, if not totally wiped out ....but for the pure ignorance and backward thinking of a few like them.

tigershark1988
There is a large difference between what you specify and injecting those chemicals directly into your blood stream.

Out of curiosity, do you think that none of the experts involved in creating, testing, approving, and administering vaccines have looked into this, that none of them care, that they're all colluding to intentionally cause harm, or...?

tigershark1988
reply to post by Pardon?

 

There is a large difference between what you specify and injecting those chemicals directly into your blood stream.

Really?
Care to elaborate?
If I were you I'd do a bit of reading before replying as you'll find out there's very little difference indeed.

Can I ask what type of nurse you were as your knowledge of physiology seems to be extremely limited.

Pardon?

tigershark1988
reply to post by Pardon?

 

There is a large difference between what you specify and injecting those chemicals directly into your blood stream.

Really?
Care to elaborate?
If I were you I'd do a bit of reading before replying as you'll find out there's very little difference indeed.

Can I ask what type of nurse you were as your knowledge of physiology seems to be extremely limited.

only 1 percent of ingested aluminum is absorbed, where injection is concerned 100% of the aluminum must be filtered through the kidneys. There is one example for you

tigershark1988

Pardon?

tigershark1988
reply to post by Pardon?

 

There is a large difference between what you specify and injecting those chemicals directly into your blood stream.

Really?
Care to elaborate?
If I were you I'd do a bit of reading before replying as you'll find out there's very little difference indeed.

Can I ask what type of nurse you were as your knowledge of physiology seems to be extremely limited.

only 1 percent of ingested aluminum is absorbed, where injection is concerned 100% of the aluminum must be filtered through the kidneys. There is one example for you

So you haven't bothered reading up on it have you?

Quoting percentages is completely meaningless if you don't also quote the relative numbers you're getting those percentages from.


However, lets deal with the numbers.
In the first 6 months of life, if they have all of their vaccines, infants will be given 4 milligrams of aluminium in the form of salts.
If they are breast-fed in the same period they will ingest 10 milligrams, formula fed about 40 milligrams and if they have soy-based food around 120 milligrams.
This isn't adding the aluminium found elsewhere, like in the air we breathe, water we drink, virtually every food, medicines, paints, cosmetics etc etc (you have to understand that aluminium is the most widespread metal on Earth, it's EVERYWHERE). You can even absorb it through your skin.
So you can see the non-vaccine aluminium amounts are totting up pretty fast.
(Just as a quick aside, since aluminium has been around since the year dot in one form or another, humans have always been exposed to it. Constantly. Every day of all of our lives.)
So even if we stick to your percentages, we still absorb far more aluminium from the environment than we could ever do from vaccines.

The vast majority is excreted from our waste very quickly indeed but a tiny fraction isn't and this remains in our bones, lungs and brains.
It's estimated that by the time children become adults, they will have accumulated between 50 and 100 milligrams of aluminium, almost all of which comes from food.

But going back to your "absorption", vaccine based aluminium will be metabolised exactly the same way as both ingested (and inhaled) aluminium will as both ingested and inhaled aluminium salts will pass through to the bloodstream.
Either way, most of the aluminium in the bloodstream is immediately bound by a protein called transferrin, which carries aluminium to the kidneys where it is eliminated from the body.
About half of the aluminium in vaccines or in food is eliminated in less than 24 hours; more than three-quarters is eliminated in two weeks and virtually all of it is eliminated in three years.
So your total accumulated dose from vaccines would probably only be in the microgram range (a millionth of a gram).
The body is very adept at dealing with aluminium, it has to be.

So when you put it into the proper perspective it's really not a big deal at all is it?

(For those of you not up to speed with metric weights, a milligram is a thousandth of a gram which is in turn a thousandth of a kilogram, about 2.2 pounds. Another way of seeing the weight is that a gram is about one fifth of the weight of a teaspoon of water)


Would you care for me to show you why the formaldehyde and thimerasol aren't dangerous either?

reply to post by Pardon?



Ethylmercury hangs around a bit longer than a week.

"Though inorganic mercury metabolized from ethylmercury has a much longer half-life in the brain, at least 120 days"

Ethylmercury

ZeussusZ
reply to post by Pardon?

 

Ethylmercury hangs around a bit longer than a week.

"Though inorganic mercury metabolized from ethylmercury has a much longer half-life in the brain, at least 120 days"

Ethylmercury

And in the same paragraph it says that the half-life in humans is 18 days...
That's immaterial for a few reasons though.
Ethylmercury doesn't bioaccumulate (unlike it's methyl cousin)
Thimerosal is only in the flu vax and in trace amounts in the DTaP so the likelihood of there being enough to metabolize to inorganic mercury is virtually nil.
As I said earlier, you will absorb far more mercury from eating a can of tuna than you ever will from a lifetime of vaccines.

My first thought when I read this was that the US probably realized they were not being vaccinated and let loose some polio in the area.