A vaccination question..

a reply to: chr0naut

Even with some exposure to the pathogen you are better off than with none.

I know with flu it depends on how closely related to the strains you are vaccinated with the strain you get exposed to is as far as the effectiveness of your annual flu shot. Even if the strain you get exposed to makes you sick, if it's related closely enough to one in the shot, the sickness might be blunted depending on how strong your immune system is.

The reason Spanish Flu was so bad was because it was a completely novel strain of the virus that had never previously circulated in human populations, so the immune system had no defense against it and went into complete overdrive trying to defend. The better your immune system was, the likelier it was to kill you.

It's that type of overdrive reaction that vaccine makers are careful not to provoke, and it's just one reason why no vaccine will ever be 100% effective.

originally posted by: sled735
I've been watching a series about vaccines titled Vaccines Revealed.

If you really want to learn the truth about vaccines, there are doctors, scientists, biologists, parents, and whistle blowers telling their story in this 9-part series.

You will see how the studies shown to doctors are not correct; people who tried to warn the public were 'silenced', and how family after family has been ruined from some of the vaccines 'they' force on children.

And, don't you find it odd that the studies done by the FDA on the vaccines were all working for the pharmaceutical companies?

There is also a really good show about the flu vaccine.

It was free to watch all 9 shows, but tonight is the last one, I think. You can click on the link at the top and see if you can still watch it. At least, maybe you can see tonight's show.

I RECOMMEND EVERYONE SHOULD WATCH THIS.

I clicked the link you posted. Every page transition from that site attempted to execute several methods to capture extended data and profile me. Why might that be?

In the article on why one should not have a 'flu shot, it came down to trace amounts of Mercury and Formaldehyde in different preparations. You'd get more 20 more mercury from sushi and your body naturally produces five times more Formaldehyde than you'd get in a 'flu shot. As far as I know, there have been no studies that even remotely suggest issues with the dilutions and amounts involved in immunization. The article's author is a Chiropractor, it would be far more convincing if someone with a biochemistry qualification said something.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: rickymouse

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Jefferton

Because vaccines really only work when a critical mass of the population are taking them if only 5% of the population for example were to be vaccinated then the load on public services for example would be strenuous and that 5% would mostly be taking the load. Also some people who might want to be vaccinated cannot because of allergies for instance and then when you have some who have not been vaccinated those people then become at risk. The idea is called "herd immunity" its a big part of vaccination programs

Also not vaccinating a child in my view could amount to neglect or abuse. If I saw you hitting your child in public I would probably intervene, wilfully leaving your kid open to getting various nasty viruses is pretty much the same.

I also abhorrer wilful ignorance and people who deny simple facts like the earth is round, the sun is bright, a orange is orange and vaccines protect people.

I hope you do not really believe that crap. If a vaccine protects you against a disease, it protects you. The fact is they do not protect people like people think. Some of the vaccines years ago worked well, if you got the vaccine, it was extremely rare that you would ever get the disease.

Flu vaccines are not like that, if you are vaccinated, you still get the disease, you supposedly fight it quicker but the thing is that the vaccine can mutate quickly in ones body, as soon as it attaches to a cell there is a mutation. Your vaccination may not fight the mutation that is created. The Flu vaccine is a poor vaccine. It will never work to lower flu in the world. I read some pretty indepth information on why these vaccines for flu do not work. I do not think the Pharma companies are making excuses either, I think what I am talking about may be the truth. These vaccines actually mutate quickly, they also have gene expression abilities to alter their makeup. The antigen based resistance does not work well with flu vaccines.

Vaccinations are not 100% effective, but their effectiveness rises as the disease vector is reduced.

The vaccine does not kill the disease, it only tells our immune systems what to look for.

If we get a disease after being immunised, it is the fault of our immune system being inadequate to fight the pathogen.

Vaccinations are more effective at reducing disease, than nothing.

Study the innate immune system, read maybe fifty scientific studies on it then come back and talk to me.

If you use antigens or microbe derived chemistry to trigger the immune system, that is specific to the microbe. If the virus mutates, then the vaccine is worthless. It still mutates within the human body, even in the body of someone vaccinated. Yes it does steer the immune to fight that exact virus, but at the expense of it's ability to fight other microbes. Even the Strawberry causes the body to fight viruses because of a chemical that it contains, one that they are now researching as a broad form antiviral. But it lowers a person's ability to fight bacteria and fungus. so you have to eat foods that raise your resistance to those.

I even know how the vaccine works in the body, the vaccine triggers the creation of Ammonia which then breaks off and raises nitric oxide in the blood. This nitric oxide compound kills the virus. Nitric oxide also kills some bacteria and sulfites can also kill some bacteria, raising sulfite levels is what some antibiotics do, and some antibiotics also raise nitric oxide levels so technically they can help with some viruses on a non discrimitory basis. Other ways to stop viruses is to discharge the virus's charge so it can get into the cell, that is what Tamaflu does along with pine needle tea. another way is to slow the replication process of the virus by chemical means, another word cut off it's energy. That way the body can kill it easier. The vaccines use two ways of these to kill viruses, they do know what they are doing somewhat. But all of these systems have risk and the risk for some people is great. Those who naturally have a high anion gap caused by Ammonia may be at risk of a cytokine storm. My last sentence is the only information I am not totally sure of but it looks like it may be true.

You have the right to believe what you want, I base my belief on reading research by professional people, not on information provided on people who want to profit off of us or by agencies that are believing things they have allowed and promote as good. Their belief that they are helping everyone is blinding them. But the FDA and the Pharma companies do say that if you get very ill from a vaccine, you should not take it anymore. So they are aware that some people can have severe reactions to it. My reactions are on my medical records as are my one daughters and her kids. The other daughter from my present wife can take vaccinations and may actually need them to ward off the flu.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: rickymouse

Do you guys take lessons in posting BS or is it just a natural born skill I am not blessed with?

I mean let's take this little nugget of "wisdom"

The Flu vaccine is a poor vaccine

You say it like it's a absolute fact, when really it's just nonsense and dangerous nonsense at that. According to the American journal of public health

An overall and substantial decline in influenza-classed mortality was observed during the 20th century, from an average seasonal rate of 10.2 deaths per 100 000 population in the 1940s to 0.56 per 100 000 by the 1990s. The 1918–1919 pandemic stands out as an exceptional outlier.

Conclusion; the flu vaccine is a pretty epic vaccine in terms of reducing mortality

Remember what you said five to ten years from now. That is about how long it will take till the new vaccines will be released. The testing on boosting the innate immune response is being done, if they can do that safely, without creating autoimmune problems, then that vaccine will possibly be what I consider a decent medicine. If they try to push it into use ahead of it's time without actual clinical trials that are done properly, it could still be a problem.

At that time, you can kick yourself in your own britches because the science backing that will probably be a lot better. Or you could just eat strawberry shortcake half the winter and not worry about viruses. You could also eat some pineapples once in a while, the bromelaine kills viruses in the blood, it is absorbed almost instantly. I can go on and on with ways to fight viruses or stop them from infecting us, remember even before vaccines, the majority of people did not get the flu. Ask yourself why, because they craved things that killed the flu, or their parents would have certain foods in the fall and winter and these foods killed virus. Even monolaurin in milk kills viruses. As long as you drink full fat milk that is, one percent has most of it removed.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: rickymouse

You can only make a vaccine so effective before you start getting into the question of making it toxic or infectious to the organism.

Most vaccines are going to have a very high rate of effectiveness 80%+ but none are going to ever be 100% for this reason. 100% is going to be as bad as catching to disease, maybe worse. Making a vaccine is the balancing act between increasing effectiveness and keeping it safe where only those who are allergic or those who are going to react badly (you cannot make a medication that will not have this population) are the ones who need to worry.

The problem I think we have is that it has been so long since deadly disease has run rampant through most modern populations that we forget what that is like. So it is easier to point at the few victims of vaccines because you never see the ones vaccines have saved. It's like attempting to prove/disprove a negative.

You can find those who reacted badly to the vaccine, but I cannot find those ones alive thanks to the polio vaccine. So my argument is and remains always a hypothetical that people must take on faith until public trust in vaccines erodes so badly that we see an outbreak of polio again and remember why we all got those shots in the first place.

The polio vaccine worked, some of the earlier vaccines actually were well researched and they give long term coverage. The Tetanus vaccine actually works for over thirty years, they are trying to stop vaccinating people every ten years in Europe, every time you give a vaccination that is not needed, sticking a needle in someone's body, there is risk involved. They are going to go to the thirty year unless there is a bad injury there.

If all these vaccines are doing so great, how come there are so many kids getting really sick this year. I am constantly hearing about schoolkids being sick all the time, what are they doing with all those figures. There were not many sick kids that missed a lot of school when I grew up, maybe once in a while a flu outbreak would hit the schools, nobody died ever in our school from the flu or measles and there were no vaccines. Some kids did get pretty sick with the mumps, but nobody died. The information people are passing around is nothing but deception. Sure, they did not know how to treat sicknesses back in the twenties and thirties, in the forties a lot of new knowledge was gained and a lot of disease rates dropped. Back in the sixties more of the sicknesses kids and adults had were food poisoning, not viruses. Antibiotics helped with those. I had food poisoning quite a few times back then, usually from old canned food that nobody paid attention as to make sure to watch if air was coming out or being sucked in. They also did not have nearly as much sanitation control back then with workers. Very sick workers were picking and packing food for delivery.

I looked at a lot of graphs over the last seven years to see if sickness has gone down. Yes some has, but not overall viral infections, seems broadform they have actually got worse. The reason may be because you are stimulate the body to fight a certain problem that does not exist at the time, taking away it's detection of other viruses and microbes and even cancer in our bodies..

The only vax i will not get my child is the gardasil vax...

a reply to: Jefferton

because we are deeply concerned for the health of your kids.

I could have sworn it was illegal to not get as least the core vaccinations...polio, mmr, tdap....that and i think the ckn pox vax but i could be wrong.

originally posted by: Jefferton
Why do people with kids that are vaccinated, worry and have such a strong oppinion about parents that don't vaccinate?
If vaccinations work, and your loved ones are indeed vaccinated, why the stress and anger?

Am I missing something?

Really curious.

The same things that drive most conflicts between people: fear and a desire to control others.

a reply to: Jefferton

The first 4 replies to this thread all provided reasons why the unvaccinated should be vaccinated.

One of the things i've noticed, a number of times over time, in the UFO forum, is that nearly all of the first 3-4 replies are 'debunking' types of replies.

Funny how its just occured in this vaccine thread.

One seems to come to the view that it seems that some people must sit at computers, with fingers poised, all day long just waiting for certain types of threads to be posted. I wonder how much that type of work pays?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Jefferton

Also some people who might want to be vaccinated cannot because of allergies for instance and then when you have some who have not been vaccinated those people then become at risk. The idea is called "herd immunity" its a big part of vaccination programs

So lets get this straight.... Vaccines are effective but they are not effective in a crowd? Come on mate, they cant be both.

originally posted by: Azureblue

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Jefferton

Also some people who might want to be vaccinated cannot because of allergies for instance and then when you have some who have not been vaccinated those people then become at risk. The idea is called "herd immunity" its a big part of vaccination programs

So lets get this straight.... Vaccines are effective but they are not effective in a crowd? Come on mate, they cant be both.

I think you may be misunderstanding my point.

Lets say you dont vaccinate your kid because you think the measles jab is wrong somehow. Fair enough that's up to you, but now lets say there is another kid in your kids class who is allergic to the vaccine and was unable to get it. That other kid relays on all other kids having the jab to ensure his or her own immunity. So now lets say your kid gets measles because you were reckless enough to not have him vaccinated then this other kid who is allergic to the vaccine also gets it. So now not only is your own kid sick but his class mate is all sick all because you failed to accept the importance of vaccination programs.

How about the recent study that showed that vaccinated kids were, on the whole, less healthy and more prone to disease or nutrient deficiencies.

Would it be selfish of me to let my child have the very low chance of getting a surviveable (but awful) disease, but avoid the chance of them being generally unhealthy for the rest of their lives?

It's a tricky one.

All I know is that once you have a baby, you do everything in your power to avoid exposure to even the most benign things, so getting them injected with literal diseases is a very scary and weird feeling.

a reply to: Jefferton

Right. The anti -vaxers are basing their position on their poor understanding of the world
in general.

a reply to: Jefferton

the more people who are vaccinated the less likely it is that the illness will not get to elderly, very young and the critical ill, who may not have the ability to tolerate the illness or the shot.

Whenever you hear of an elder person dying of flu or pneumonia in the hospital to can be sure some well meaning relative patted their hand in sympathy and gave them the bug.

a reply to: rickymouse

Ricky do you have your shots?

a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

oh bull crap.

OUR kids need to kicked off the internet and be forced to play out side.

FIrst they need the exercise and sun shine. Muscle bulk check, tan check. After get some excersise they need to eat some whole food not potatoe chip and aspartame filled pop. burgers eggs apples un processed food.

originally posted by: SmilingROB
a reply to: rickymouse

Ricky do you have your shots?

I had all the required ones when I was a kid, maybe six total. I won't get the DTAP again but will consider the DT because the last one made me so muccusy in my lungs it almost sent me to the doctor. According to the information at a medical site, it is probably the Pertusus since I had Tetnus shots before and never got those symptoms. The Tetnus alone would be safer. If you have ever had Pertusus, then you have immunity and that gives symptoms as I got from the shot.

I had two flu shots in my life and I got the sickest I have ever been from those shots. I thought I was a goner the second time. According to what I have read I should never take a flu shot, the cytokine storm can kill me. It is my immune system that could kill me, not the virus. If I get sick, I usually get one day of a mild sickness the most, my wife hates me for that. She gets walloped by the flu.

I gave up doing shots many years ago, the hangover sucked.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Azureblue

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Jefferton

Also some people who might want to be vaccinated cannot because of allergies for instance and then when you have some who have not been vaccinated those people then become at risk. The idea is called "herd immunity" its a big part of vaccination programs

So lets get this straight.... Vaccines are effective but they are not effective in a crowd? Come on mate, they cant be both.

I think you may be misunderstanding my point.

Lets say you dont vaccinate your kid because you think the measles jab is wrong somehow. Fair enough that's up to you, but now lets say there is another kid in your kids class who is allergic to the vaccine and was unable to get it. That other kid relays on all other kids having the jab to ensure his or her own immunity. So now lets say your kid gets measles because you were reckless enough to not have him vaccinated then this other kid who is allergic to the vaccine also gets it. So now not only is your own kid sick but his class mate is all sick all because you failed to accept the importance of vaccination programs.

How did the unvaccinated child contract measles and respectively pass it on to the child who couldn't receive the vaccine in a class full of vaccinated children?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: Azureblue

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: Jefferton

Also some people who might want to be vaccinated cannot because of allergies for instance and then when you have some who have not been vaccinated those people then become at risk. The idea is called "herd immunity" its a big part of vaccination programs

So lets get this straight.... Vaccines are effective but they are not effective in a crowd? Come on mate, they cant be both.

I think you may be misunderstanding my point.

So now lets say your kid gets measles because you were reckless enough to not have him vaccinated .

So people who choose not to get their kids vaccinated never give due and serious consideration to the risks of vaccinations do they?