U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-13-2012, 03:21 PM
 
9,079 posts, read 5,607,909 times
Reputation: 3829

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy View Post
Ah, the trial lawyer shills keep praying I won't keep bringing up Wakefields study being funded by lawyers with current suits against pharma companies over autism.....

I keep mentioning it, you guys keep dodging it. Pathetic.
I'll be your huckleberry

The character assassination of Dr. Wakefield, and the maligning of his research findings was a mainstream collective assault .... militaristic in it's tactics and coordination, resembling a Nazi blitzkrieg .... with one clear goal and purpose ... effect a metaphorical public execution of him for his great crime of daring to cast any negative light upon medicine's sacred cow of immunology, to which none dare do if they know what's good for them. This war is divided into two sides ... those who enthusiastically champion vaccine technology with every breath, and those who dare summon the extreme wrath guaranteed for those failing to do so. The reality is, Wakefield is just one of the more minor casualties in a much wider war on public health, with the true victims of this dastardly consortium of criminals being innocent children ... and the egregiousness of the fraud is simply too obvious to miss by any rational account, or person possessing any degree of integrity.

The unprecedented efforts and massive resources expended to build an impenetrable fortress of defense around mass vaccination knows no comparable equal, including the unbelievably pathetic and gross violation of long standing public/consumer safety rights and philosophy of common law justice, illustrated by Congress anointing pharmaceutical companies blanket legal immunity from civil actions relating to any damage caused by their products, for which no other industry in history has ever enjoyed. The equally unprecedented creation of an entirely separate judicial system outside of that which applies to every other person, entity and legal matter defines the depth corruption relating to this unprecedented madness. To call this system a banana republic style kangaroo court disgrace would be conservatively generous .... and it's pool of funds available to these corrupt black robed criminal miscreants who periodically dole out Vaccine Court "awards" for damages they choose to occasionally bestow, just adds insult to injury, given that those funds actually come from piggyback fees attached to the price of the vaccines themselves. This disgusting situation which places the financial burden of victim compensation on the harmed parties themselves, guarantees the pharma-cartel will suffer not one penny of actual damages for the harm they inflict, EVER. It is indeed an affront to the very concept of justice, and a direct indictment of criminal fraud for whom each participant in this vile system is guilty, from doctors to judges to the United States Congress, which represents nothing more than the pharmaceutical industry's lapdogs of bribe taking criminals for whom the industry owns outright.

On the larger radar screen, Wakefield is but a small blip, serving only as additional evidence of how broadly the corruption has spread, as if any additional evidence might be needed.

 
Old 10-13-2012, 04:03 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
11,149 posts, read 6,502,152 times
Reputation: 10743
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
That is what you do not understand. Exposure a "cocktail of many kinds" of antigens is exactly what occurs in nature.

A newborn infant goes from a sterile environment to the real world and is immediately bombarded with thousands of antigens, picking up bacteria from the environment, his mother, father, siblings, even the family pets. Antigens from things the mother eats appear in breast milk. Antigens, such as pollen, are in the very air he breathes. I do not understand your "diagnostic" reference. There is nothing "diagnostic" related to immunization.



The myth is that multiple vaccines or vaccine combinations overwhelm the immune system. That is a concept that sounds reasonable to uneducated people but is absolutely not true.

An allergic reaction does not mean the immune system is "overwhelmed." It actually means that it is, if anything, hyperactive.



Route of administration is the way the vaccine is administered. You implied that injecting a vaccine defeated the bodies defenses. It does not. Vaccines utilize the normal mechanisms of the immune system. They do not "defeat" it, they do not "overwhelm" it, they do not "damage" it. Vaccines just present to the immune system an altered virus or bacterium to which the body develops protective antibodies to prevent infection and illness due to the wild viruses or bacteria. Vaccines do exactly the same thing that wild infections do, minus the illness.
The body may be exposed to different things, but the immune system certainly doesn't respond to everything the same way. Most pathogens are kept out by the integumentary system, mucous membranes, and various first-line defenses. The body raises an eyebrow when these defenses have been defeated and a significant number of pathogens reaches the blood stream or other significant area. Immune response is graduated and tailored. The body responds vigorously when it detects a pathogen in high numbers in one of it's vital areas. It cranks up the furnace and starts producing massive amounts of antibodies, along with B lymphocyte "memory" cells. This is exactly the type of response you want when you give an immunization, that's why dosage is important; it needs to be high enough to get the body to feel threatened. When it does, your body mounts a significant response. You body doesn't produce mass antibodies and memory cells every time it sees one of those thousands of "germs". For example, I'm sure most people reading this have been exposed to HIV. By exposed I don't mean in the clinical sense, but the body has come into contact with HIV through the skin, mouth, nose etc. But the exposure amount wasn't high enough and the virus was likely neutralized by the body's front-line defenses. There was no systemic immune response, the body did not make anti-hiv antibodies and memory cells in any significant amount. If it did, you would test positive for HIV. But of course, most of us don't because the body responds accordingly. Despite being surrounded by germs every day, the body does not respond to all of them every day in any significant amount. If it did, we would feel crappy and have fevers every other day. The immune response required for long-lasting immunity is a significant one, and the body doesn't respond to significant threats on a daily basis. With vaccines, you are often injecting several different antigens at one time, so your body sees several different significant threats that have broken through its front-line defenses and are now in the deep tissue, lymph, or blood stream. Accordingly, your body marshals a significant response. That's why people/kids often feel crappy and run fevers after vaccination. So, I would disagree that getting multiple vaccinations is the same as being exposed to all kinds of nasties through your normal daily course of events.
 
Old 10-13-2012, 04:09 PM
 
4,743 posts, read 3,728,188 times
Reputation: 2481
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post
But of course, most of us don't because the body responds accordingly. Despite being surrounded by germs every day, the body does not respond to all of them every day in any significant amount. If it did, we would feel crappy and have fevers every other day. The immune response required for long-lasting immunity is a significant one, and the body doesn't respond to significant threats on a daily basis. With vaccines, you are often injecting several different antigens at one time, so your body sees several different significant threats that have broken through its front-line defenses and are now in the deep tissue, lymph, or blood stream. Accordingly, your body marshals a significant response. That's why people/kids often feel crappy and run fevers after vaccination. So, I would disagree that getting multiple vaccinations is the same as being exposed to all kinds of nasties through your normal daily course of events.

I'm not sure what your argument here, since it is the vacine's goal to trigger a immunity response from the body, and even its a small one you could feel fever/pain/etc

and these clinical side effects are studies, and known. Hell some have worse effects than others (see smallpox vac)

Yet to argue that normal - and understood - reactions to a vaccination mean that any other magic event might happen is a stretch. Having a immune response to a injection is quite different than your brain re-wiriting itself or causing damage.
 
Old 10-13-2012, 04:11 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,398 posts, read 28,234,455 times
Reputation: 28974
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post
You can create an experiment or series of experiments that would help establish that there is no cause and effect relationship between vaccines and autism, but it would be difficult and the ethics would be questionable. But until that happens I would be hard-pressed to conclude that vaccines are "safe" and can never influence the onset of autism. The people defending vaccines are using the vaccine court ruling to help support their case, so I brought up the other vaccine court rulings that suggest others. But I agree that a vaccine court is not an end authority on science issues.
Although the "double blind controlled study" is one commonly used to evaluate new medications, it is not the only valid study design. What can be done is to look at large numbers of people and compare the incidence of autism in people who were vaccinated compared to people who were not vaccinated.

One of the largest is this one:

MMS: Error

It was a "retrospective cohort study" done in Denmark.

The other thing about studies is that one study, even if large, must be confirmed by others. That is how Wakefield got caught. His small study could not be reproduced when other researchers tried to do so.

To date, the studies do not show a causative role for vaccination with respect to autism.

To demand an unethical study as the only evidence you will accept "proving" vaccines are safe pretty well says you do not understand scientific investigation at all.

Quote:
I did acknowledge the need to prevent serious communicable diseases, and I used smallpox as an example of when a national vaccine policy might be warranted. At the time, smallpox was a devastating disease. The vaccine for smallpox can cause pretty bad reactions, but probably justified at the time. The risks of vaccine injuries in some cases exceed the risks of a particular disease. Smallpox is probably the best example. I don't doubt the effectiveness of some vaccines, but certain vaccines are less effective than others, and some people believe that vaccines are not effective at all.
This is just further denial of the fact that vaccine preventable illnesses all have serious risks. We do not develop vaccines for diseases that have no serious risks. The economics would fail. The benefit would not exceed the risk.

Once you accept that one vaccine is indicated (smallpox), how can you deny that other vaccines developed using the same scientific principles are less valuable? You have to believe that getting measles is no big deal. But measles can (and does, in other countries) kill people.

Some vaccines are indeed less effective than others. They need boosters.

The belief that vaccines are not effective at all is unfounded in fact. It is an opinion based on faulty research.

Any vaccine must be shown to be effective. Then an analysis done of the benefits versus the risks. If the risk is too great, the vaccine will not be approved. This where the anti-vaccine crowd fall on their faces, because all they see is risk. They deny the benefit. Also, an analysis is done of the cost versus the benefit. This means that in a situation like exposure to rabies, even a very high cost is justified. Treatment for exposure to rabies can cost $2000 to $7000.

Quote:
On the consent issues, I must disagree. It might work that way in a perfect world, but most of the time people are told they are simply getting a tetanus shot. It might be best practice to inform someone about DTaP, but few nurses or doctors do it, at least in my experience. I think if we took a forum poll about the last time people received a "tetanus shot" most would say they were not told they were getting DTaP. Many people have no idea what they are getting, and are not told. Many people also probably don't need a "booster" for the other vaccines when they need a tetanus shot. Like I said before, if their titers are low for pertussis, then they can consent to a receive a pertussis vaccine. Or at least they could consent to and receive a pertussis vaccine if anyone made a single pertussis vaccine, but you can't get one here. Sorry, I still don't agree with giving people a vaccine when there is zero evidence that it will help them in any way.
You keep saying "most" people are uninformed about the vaccines they received.

That is your opinion. It is not a fact.

MMS: Error

Why would any medical practice open itself up to an accusation of lack of informed consent? It's actually the law! The information sheets must be used, and they are available in thirty languages.

People are not given vaccines with "zero evidence that it will help." Those vaccines do not exist. Your opinion is that adults do not need to vaccinated for pertussis. The fact is that they do.

By the way, you can get the tetanus vaccine all by its lonesome from Sanofi Pasteur.

Complete List of Vaccines Licensed for Immunization and Distribution in the US
 
Old 10-13-2012, 04:12 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,398 posts, read 28,234,455 times
Reputation: 28974
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDusr View Post
Actually an allergic reaction can be quite severe. It can kill a person or put them in a coma. So no autism isn't the only "harm" that has been discussed. The frequency is irrelevant to the harmed individual. The idea of forcing people to inject things into their body against their own will is a sick one.

Please stop with the crazy unrelated analogies. Free will and say so over ones beliefs and their own body is not outdated. However, the use of force on people is a rather old babaric idea.
Who is being "forced" to take vaccines?
 
Old 10-13-2012, 04:29 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
11,149 posts, read 6,502,152 times
Reputation: 10743
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Although the "double blind controlled study" is one commonly used to evaluate new medications, it is not the only valid study design. What can be done is to look at large numbers of people and compare the incidence of autism in people who were vaccinated compared to people who were not vaccinated.

One of the largest is this one:

MMS: Error

It was a "retrospective cohort study" done in Denmark.

The other thing about studies is that one study, even if large, must be confirmed by others. That is how Wakefield got caught. His small study could not be reproduced when other researchers tried to do so.

To date, the studies do not show a causative role for vaccination with respect to autism.

To demand an unethical study as the only evidence you will accept "proving" vaccines are safe pretty well says you do not understand scientific investigation at all.



This is just further denial of the fact that vaccine preventable illnesses all have serious risks. We do not develop vaccines for diseases that have no serious risks. The economics would fail. The benefit would not exceed the risk.

Once you accept that one vaccine is indicated (smallpox), how can you deny that other vaccines developed using the same scientific principles are less valuable? You have to believe that getting measles is no big deal. But measles can (and does, in other countries) kill people.

Some vaccines are indeed less effective than others. They need boosters.

The belief that vaccines are not effective at all is unfounded in fact. It is an opinion based on faulty research.

Any vaccine must be shown to be effective. Then an analysis done of the benefits versus the risks. If the risk is too great, the vaccine will not be approved. This where the anti-vaccine crowd fall on their faces, because all they see is risk. They deny the benefit. Also, an analysis is done of the cost versus the benefit. This means that in a situation like exposure to rabies, even a very high cost is justified. Treatment for exposure to rabies can cost $2000 to $7000.



You keep saying "most" people are uninformed about the vaccines they received.

That is your opinion. It is not a fact.

MMS: Error

Why would any medical practice open itself up to an accusation of lack of informed consent? It's actually the law! The information sheets must be used, and they are available in thirty languages.

People are not given vaccines with "zero evidence that it will help." Those vaccines do not exist. Your opinion is that adults do not need to vaccinated for pertussis. The fact is that they do.

By the way, you can get the tetanus vaccine all by its lonesome from Sanofi Pasteur.

Complete List of Vaccines Licensed for Immunization and Distribution in the US
Again, no cause and effect study related to vaccination and autism, just the Denmark study already discussed. "We" don't make vaccines for serious illness only. We have a vaccination for the flu... of course, the flu can be serious in certain populations, but most people would not regard the flu as a "serious" illness. It can also be prevented with vitamin D. So "we" do not just produce vaccines that people need to prevent serious diseases. And some vaccines will not be significantly more effective no matter how many boosters you give. I don't know what medical facilities you have worked in, but I have rarely seen a physician have someone sign an informed consent for DTaP and explain exactly what they are getting. Again, maybe in a perfect would people would get their informed consent in 30 languages, but in reality it rarely happens, at least not in the hospital setting.

Giving someone who is sufficiently immune to a disease a vaccination for that disease will not help them. It wasn't my opinion that adults don't need the pertussis vaccines, it is a fact that a person who is sufficiently immune to pertussis does not need a pertussis vaccine. You can't get a single pertussis vaccine. You can, theoretically, get a single tetanus vaccine, but I have never seen one in practice.
 
Old 10-13-2012, 04:32 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,398 posts, read 28,234,455 times
Reputation: 28974
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
I'll be your huckleberry

The character assassination of Dr. Wakefield, and the maligning of his research findings was a mainstream collective assault .... militaristic in it's tactics and coordination, resembling a Nazi blitzkrieg .... with one clear goal and purpose ... effect a metaphorical public execution of him for his great crime of daring to cast any negative light upon medicine's sacred cow of immunology, to which none dare do if they know what's good for them. This war is divided into two sides ... those who enthusiastically champion vaccine technology with every breath, and those who dare summon the extreme wrath guaranteed for those failing to do so. The reality is, Wakefield is just one of the more minor casualties in a much wider war on public health, with the true victims of this dastardly consortium of criminals being innocent children ... and the egregiousness of the fraud is simply too obvious to miss by any rational account, or person possessing any degree of integrity.

The unprecedented efforts and massive resources expended to build an impenetrable fortress of defense around mass vaccination knows no comparable equal, including the unbelievably pathetic and gross violation of long standing public/consumer safety rights and philosophy of common law justice, illustrated by Congress anointing pharmaceutical companies blanket legal immunity from civil actions relating to any damage caused by their products, for which no other industry in history has ever enjoyed. The equally unprecedented creation of an entirely separate judicial system outside of that which applies to every other person, entity and legal matter defines the depth corruption relating to this unprecedented madness. To call this system a banana republic style kangaroo court disgrace would be conservatively generous .... and it's pool of funds available to these corrupt black robed criminal miscreants who periodically dole out Vaccine Court "awards" for damages they choose to occasionally bestow, just adds insult to injury, given that those funds actually come from piggyback fees attached to the price of the vaccines themselves. This disgusting situation which places the financial burden of victim compensation on the harmed parties themselves, guarantees the pharma-cartel will suffer not one penny of actual damages for the harm they inflict, EVER. It is indeed an affront to the very concept of justice, and a direct indictment of criminal fraud for whom each participant in this vile system is guilty, from doctors to judges to the United States Congress, which represents nothing more than the pharmaceutical industry's lapdogs of bribe taking criminals for whom the industry owns outright.

On the larger radar screen, Wakefield is but a small blip, serving only as additional evidence of how broadly the corruption has spread, as if any additional evidence might be needed.
What the vaccine compensation system does is allow people who are truly harmed by vaccines to be compensated. The amount received is fair and reduces the legal costs of having to sue someone. Everyone who has a known complication can apply. This includes people who would never have filed a suit.

You do not get to be compensated for something that is not due to vaccines. That includes autism.

Note that no one has to show that a complication is due to a "defective" vaccine. Adverse reactions and complications do not mean a vaccine is "defective."

Would you sue Bayer because you had a serious adverse reaction to its aspirin, say a bleeding ulcer? Would that mean aspirin is a "defective" product? Is peanut butter a defective product because some people are allergic to peanuts?

Wakefield was a fraud. His sole goal was to sell his own vaccine.
 
Old 10-13-2012, 04:50 PM
Status: "Summer!" (set 15 days ago)
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
86,983 posts, read 102,540,351 times
Reputation: 33045
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post
Again, no cause and effect study related to vaccination and autism, just the Denmark study already discussed. "We" don't make vaccines for serious illness only. We have a vaccination for the flu... of course, the flu can be serious in certain populations, but most people would not regard the flu as a "serious" illness. It can also be prevented with vitamin D. So "we" do not just produce vaccines that people need to prevent serious diseases. And some vaccines will not be significantly more effective no matter how many boosters you give. I don't know what medical facilities you have worked in, but I have rarely seen a physician have someone sign an informed consent for DTaP and explain exactly what they are getting. Again, maybe in a perfect would people would get their informed consent in 30 languages, but in reality it rarely happens, at least not in the hospital setting.

Giving someone who is sufficiently immune to a disease a vaccination for that disease will not help them. It wasn't my opinion that adults don't need the pertussis vaccines, it is a fact that a person who is sufficiently immune to pertussis does not need a pertussis vaccine. You can't get a single pertussis vaccine. You can, theoretically, get a single tetanus vaccine, but I have never seen one in practice.
Anyone who has ever had a case of influenza (not gastroenteritis, which many people call flu) will tell you they never want to get it again. There are numerous complications to the flu, and it cannot be prevented with Vitamin D, that is "stuff" as Biden said the other night. (Seems to mean BS, as Ryan concurred, it's Irish.)

I work in a physician's office, and our staff all explain what the DTaP and every other vaccine is, plus we hand out these Vaccine Information Statements. Hospitalized people rarely get vaccines.

I don't know if there is any more single-antigen tetanus vaccine. I, in fact, have never seen it in 40+ years of nursing, mostly in maternal-child health. What you get in the ER used to be Td (Tetanus-diphtheria). Now, it is recommended that everyone get one dose of TdaP (Tetanus-diphtheria-acellular Pertussis) at age 10 or over. I think some ERs are giving TdaP when a person has a "dirty" wound and their immunization status is unknown. I don't think there is any single antigen Pertussis vaccine around, either. There is nothing wrong with combining these vaccines/toxoids. (Tetanus and diphtheria are toxoids.) An infant gets one shot instead of three. I honestly think that the reason this anti-vaccine movement got started was b/c parents don't like to see their kids get poked.

Pertussis immunity wears off! My daughter got pertussis at 13, 8 years after she had received her last DTaP. (There was no Tdap then.) This is well known and well-documented. Immunity from the disease also wears off.

Tdap - Pertussis - Whooping Cough Vaccine
CDC - Tdap Vaccine for Tetanus, Diphtheria, Pertussis - Preteens-Teens - Vaccines
Duration of immunity against pertussis ... [Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI
 
Old 10-13-2012, 04:51 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
23,398 posts, read 28,234,455 times
Reputation: 28974
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey View Post
The body may be exposed to different things, but the immune system certainly doesn't respond to everything the same way. Most pathogens are kept out by the integumentary system, mucous membranes, and various first-line defenses. The body raises an eyebrow when these defenses have been defeated and a significant number of pathogens reaches the blood stream or other significant area. Immune response is graduated and tailored. The body responds vigorously when it detects a pathogen in high numbers in one of it's vital areas. It cranks up the furnace and starts producing massive amounts of antibodies, along with B lymphocyte "memory" cells. This is exactly the type of response you want when you give an immunization, that's why dosage is important; it needs to be high enough to get the body to feel threatened. When it does, your body mounts a significant response. You body doesn't produce mass antibodies and memory cells every time it sees one of those thousands of "germs". For example, I'm sure most people reading this have been exposed to HIV. By exposed I don't mean in the clinical sense, but the body has come into contact with HIV through the skin, mouth, nose etc. But the exposure amount wasn't high enough and the virus was likely neutralized by the body's front-line defenses. There was no systemic immune response, the body did not make anti-hiv antibodies and memory cells in any significant amount. If it did, you would test positive for HIV. But of course, most of us don't because the body responds accordingly. Despite being surrounded by germs every day, the body does not respond to all of them every day in any significant amount. If it did, we would feel crappy and have fevers every other day. The immune response required for long-lasting immunity is a significant one, and the body doesn't respond to significant threats on a daily basis. With vaccines, you are often injecting several different antigens at one time, so your body sees several different significant threats that have broken through its front-line defenses and are now in the deep tissue, lymph, or blood stream. Accordingly, your body marshals a significant response. That's why people/kids often feel crappy and run fevers after vaccination. So, I would disagree that getting multiple vaccinations is the same as being exposed to all kinds of nasties through your normal daily course of events.
Do you have any support for the notion that "most" people reading this have been exposed to HIV in the manner you describe? I doubt it.

You keep putting forth your opinions as if they are facts.

Your assumption is that the only time the immune system is responding to an infectious organism is when we have symptoms such as a fever. That is not true. The vast majority of the time, the threat is dealt with without any symptoms at all.

Also, many people take vaccines and have no symptoms at all. None. Zilch. The vaccine still works.

The number of antigens in a vaccine is far fewer than what we are exposed to daily. It is quantifiable fact. It does not matter whether the antigen is inhaled, ingested, or injected. No matter the route of administration of an antigen there is a final common pathway with exposure to the immune system. Eat it, and it is exposed to immune cells in the gut. and the bloodstream. Inhale it and it is exposed to immune cells in the respiratory tract and the bloodstream. Inject it and it is exposed to the bloodstream. Oral polio vaccine is more immunogenic than injected inactivated vaccine. The live oral vaccine has a small risk of causing polio symptoms. Both do work. So your idea that there is something inherently wrong with injecting a vaccine is missing the mark. The fact is that injected vaccines work.
 
Old 10-13-2012, 04:57 PM
 
9,079 posts, read 5,607,909 times
Reputation: 3829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostrider275452 View Post
The polio virus is still among us and rears its ugly head from time to time. If someone with the polio virus enters the country and no one is vaccinated, it will spread unchecked like wild fire. The only way to eradicate or keep it in check is massive vaccinations. If you choose not to vaccinate your kids, you are putting them in serious danger, although they will be offered some protection by hiding behind other kids who's parents were smart enough to see the potential danger. BTW, there is no cure for polio.
Of course it is impossible to defeat a mythical belief ... as we have thousands of years of mythical beliefs which have endured the test of time, which testify to that reality. Likewise, it is impossible to effectively address every aspect of a systematic fraud of such a magnitude, that has continued for the better part of 150 years. That's a lot of time to dig in, and become well entrenched.

Nevertheless, the centerpieces of the vaccine industry such as polio, as well as the mother of all vaccine technology, Smallpox vaccine, are actually constructed on foundations of sand, if facts and truth were to enjoy any relative popularity in comparison with the myths.

Polio for example, much to the pure disbelief of the masses so deliberately deceived all their lives with lies and propaganda, was one of the most mild infectious diseases ever to be identified by medical science. Of course such a statement draws snickers from the crowd who's minds are emblazoned with images of wheelchairs and leg braces, who believe that was the inevitable outcome for anyone so unfortunate to become exposed to the virus. But the truth is quite the opposite. The number of cases resulting in paralysis were miniscule in comparison with the massive numbers of the population suspected of being infected (est. 60% infection rate if my recollection is accurate)... with 90% of those infected with Polio never experiencing a single symptom!! The majority of those that did become symptomatic, suffered nothing more than VERY minor "flu" symptoms, which quickly passed without complication or need of treatment. This characterizes the fraudulent propaganda tactics of the vaccine industry dating back to it's early days, as it deliberately created this image of polio as a mortal threat not unlike the bubonic plague, while nothing could have been further from the truth.

The fact is, in the United States, there is not a single case of polio that has occurred since the 1950's that was not attributable to the vaccine itself, before it's discontinuation. And the truth is, polio vaccine did not eradicate polio as it is so repeatedly claimed, but was self eradicated as a self limiting infection due to it's mildness coupled with it's rapid burnout. If anything, polio vaccine extended it's life cycle for years.

Smallpox vaccination, on the other hand, is an even a greater hoax, in that for over 100 years, it used the cowpox virus as it's active ingredient, which is a distinctly separate virus than that of the actual smallpox virus ... meaning it could never have been effective, from day one, given that antibody production against one virus is totally useless against a different virus, or so the mechanisms of immunology are said to work, with one exception ..... yes indeedy ... smallpox. While the science of the time had no way of differentiating between viruses', modern science can, and once this error was discovered, the vaccine industry needed an answer to this highly troublesome fly in the ointment. So a very elaborate story was concocted defining how in this one unique instance, these separate viruses were closely enough "related", which allowed the vaccine to work!! And there are explanations which incorporate a massively contrived amount of techno-babble to convince the masses of the legitimacy of such contradictory claims, because ... they had no choice in oder to defend the crown jewel of the vaccine world from being forever exposed as the great fraud that it was.

The truth of smallpox vaccination is not one of cure and eradication as is the historical claim ... but of the spread of death and devastation everywhere smallpox vaccination programs were deployed, with vaccinated population segments suffering obscenely higher rates of death, in comparison to unvaccinated segments. The problems were so obvious, that there were massive revolts by an outraged public which eventually forced European governments to abandon their mandatory vaccination programs.

There is much more to this story, but the bottom line is, vaccination represents perhaps the greatest medical hoax ever perpetrated in history, and the medical cartel's total control over medical delivery and government regulation in this country obviously extends to the power to control that which is allowed in the history books.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top