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.
OK, I've been away from the computer for a time, while this debate rages on (again). Here are a few of my observations from this thread:
I agree. While there are some anti-immunization doctors out there, I doubt that any of them work in pediatrics, infectious disease or family practice. Why trust the opinion of someone doesn't give immunizations or work with patients with vaccine-preventable diseases?
Yes, they will be beating down the doors. A lot of anti-imm patients in our practice call in a panic when they find out their kid has been exposed to a Vaccine-preventable disease.
As I understand it, that poster has an AAS in nursing, and an LPN certificate. She was obviously not in any position of responsiblity in that lab. Furthermore, the lab that makes the vaccine is not the same lab where the research is being done.
There are stats for the frequency of side effect of the various vaccines in the text of the VIS that goes with every dose of vaccine.
Regarding the bold, getting vaccinated IS trading scik care for heath care.
Since you and Suzy are so interested, I was involved in vaccine production. I was in college at the time though the job didn't require a 4 year college degree. Later, I worked as an analytical scientist in a lab, but we didn't test vaccines. And your description of me is 100% inaccurate from my gender to my level of education to my job... just an FYI. But formal training and education does not make a person an automatic expert in anything, and lack of formal education in a field doesn't necessarily mean that a person in ignorant in that field.
This is somewhat correct, but you've chosen your words to create an implication that doesn't really exist.
Yes, a small percentage of the population can have negative side effects to immunizations. A very small percentage of that small percentage may have severe side effects (though Autism is not one of them). You know what else this is true for?
Peanut butter.
You see, when someone has an allergic reaction to peanut butter, it is not the peanut butter "causing" the damage, in the strictest biological sense, it is just a reaction to a certain body. Same logic applies to vaccines.
The government does not require children to eat peanut butter as a prerequisite to obtaining an education. And the government has paid billions of dollars for vaccine injury and dedicated an entire court to handle that "very small percentage" of the vaccine injury cases.
At this point it would be beating a dead horse. The facts have been posted here in this thread as well as countless others. Your side got obliterated, and the discussion has been settled for anyone possessing critical thinking skills.
That said, here's a few facts for you, my apologies if they've been previously posted.
- The "Vaccine Court" (which was set up to deal with nothing but vaccine issues) ruled that there was no credible evidence to substantiate a link between vaccines...specifically those containing thimerosal...and Autism.
- PBS Frontline did an episode on this called "The Vaccine War" and one of the things brought was that Denmark had embarked on a pretty substantial investigation into the supposed thimerosal/Autism link. They found that children who were not given vaccines containing thimerosal had the same statistical rates of Autism as children who did receive the vaccines.
You can find that episode on Netflix Streaming. Probably online too.
That same vaccine court has also awarded money to children with ASD which "resulted" from vaccination:
The vaccine court is also a political entity that is influenced by protecting the government. Courts are often worried about opening the "flood gates" to lawsuits, especially where those suits would be against the US government. Like I said earlier, there is not a sufficient number of cause and effect based studies that "prove" vaccines can never cause autism, so I don't know how anyone with any integrity can conclude that the issue is settled.
The government does not require children to eat peanut butter as a prerequisite to obtaining an education.
Because the health of others is not dependent on doing so.
Quote:
And the government has paid billions of dollars for vaccine injury and dedicated an entire court to handle that "very small percentage" of the vaccine injury cases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJJersey
That same vaccine court has also awarded money to children with ASD which "resulted" from vaccination:
The vaccine court is also a political entity that is influenced by protecting the government. Courts are often worried about opening the "flood gates" to lawsuits, especially where those suits would be against the US government. Like I said earlier, there is not a sufficient number of cause and effect based studies that "prove" vaccines can never cause autism, so I don't know how anyone with any integrity can conclude that the issue is settled.
Talk about cognitive dissonance! So which is it? Is the court a fair and credible arbitrator of facts or a political entity protecting the government? It can't be both.
By the way, from the link you posted:
Quote:
In acknowledging Hannah's injuries, the government said vaccines aggravated an unknown mitochondrial disorder Hannah had which didn't "cause" her autism, but "resulted" in it. It's unknown how many other children have similar undiagnosed mitochondrial disorder. All other autism "test cases" have been defeated at trial. Approximately 4,800 are awaiting disposition in federal vaccine court.
Quote:
Then-director of the Centers for Disease Control Julie Gerberding (who is now President of Merck Vaccines) stated: "The government has made absolutely no statement indicating that vaccines are a cause of autism. This does not represent anything other than a very specific situation and a very sad situation as far as the family of the affected child."
The point was, if you go to the link, they claim victory over polio several times thruought history, only to claim it's back and we need to inject millions all over again, or they claim it's mutated, or it's a new strain. Polio is useful to scare the people into lining up for their next injection. Therefore it will always be with us, until the people don't buy into the lies anymore and stop being sheeple.
Notice they talk about the herd - you are nothing but a bunch of diseased animals to them that need to be culled.
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.
Because the health of others is not dependent on doing so.
Talk about cognitive dissonance! So which is it? Is the court a fair and credible arbitrator of facts or a political entity protecting the government? It can't be both.
By the way, from the link you posted:
The health of others may be dependent on some kids getting certain vaccines. As for the vaccine court, there is nothing inconsistent in my posts. I posted from the begging that I think vaccines can cause ASD in a certain number of genetically susceptible children but were probably not the root cause of the spike in autism. The vaccine court in the above case agreed that this girl's injuries were, at least in part, related to her vaccination. What the court won't do, and what the government was quick to protect itself from in the above case, is say that vaccines "cause" autism. The case cited earlier was a class action that set out to prove the mercury in vaccines caused autism. If the court ruled that it did, then the courts would be flooded with cases. That does not mean that the court can never find that vaccines may contribute to ASD on a case-by-case evaluation. This mechanism prevents the "flood gates" from opening yet provides benefit to some kids who have been crippled by vaccination. If fact, everything I posted is consistent with this idea.
you wouldn't say that if you would just take the time to read it
I've read plenty of peer reviewed literature on vaccines and their safety, much of it thanks to Kat and Suzy posting it here. Your side seems to have trouble coming up with similar material.
The use of worn out phrases like "conspiracy theory" to dismiss any and all information contrary to one's currently held views and beliefs, is nothing more than a transparent tactical deflection. Moreover, those who rely on such an approach to discussion and debate are ensuring that they remain permanently trapped in the same perpetual state of arrested intellectual development that they are currently suffering, as they insist on treating each new idea, opinion and fact as an enemy which must be defeated, by any means necessary, rather than viewed as a potential opportunity to expand one's knowledge and awareness.
This mindset truly highlights the often misunderstood differences between ignorance and stupidity, with the former being simply a lacking of accurate information, while the latter defines the insurmountable problem of one's inability or unwillingness to learn, ergo the concept "you can't fix stupid".
The best place to start for people suffering such a debilitating condition is to ask oneself a simple question .... at what point in time did you reach the conclusion that your knowledge of the world was total and complete, requiring no further additions? Then, you can try to uncover the cause which allowed this arrogant delusion of all-knowing state of perfection to take hold, and work from there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
There is no question about the science of immunizations. It is not a matter of opinion.
So many problems revealed in such a simple single sentence! It's amazing! I would first like to point out to you the shear stupidity of making such a definitively false statement, given the fact that there indeed are Hundred's of Thousands, if not Millions of people that do question the science of immunization, including a number of whom that are Medical Doctors, Scientists, Researchers, along with the common folks numbering in the Ten's of Thousands who have actually suffered severe damage and death from vaccinations. What I believe you are attempting to convey is that, in your mind, there is no question. But it is beyond any stretch of the imagination as to how any rational, honest person could reach such an absurd conclusion. And I would thusly offer you the same advice previously given, which would encourage you to ask yourself how, in the course of all human history, a certain few like you achieved what no other human has managed ... that is to possess all of the knowledge and secrets of the universe, which allows you this X-Ray vision of reality that the rest of us can't see?
Your mindset also characterizes the foundational and broadly applicable flaws in modern scientific approach today (which includes medical science) who relies on demagoguery first, and then resorts to more strenuous and forceful measures to demand acceptance and compliance, if that should fail ... none of which seem to require actual scientific factual support ... just consensus agreement, and money to be made. The scientific peer review process which promises to safeguard the integrity of scientific information by consensus agreement, illustrates the nature of the fraud quite nicely, because consensus opinion has NEVER BEEN the insurer of truth. Truth doesn't require a majority vote, nor does it require protection by force, as truth has it's own defense mechanisms inbuilt. It cannot be changed, altered, created or destroyed by the collective desires and agreement of idiots, liars and self serving ideologues.
One truth, which happens to be the very topic of this thread, is not a "conspiracy theory" as has been insinuated. It's a factual account of new information gained by the latest scientific testing of childhood vaccines on infant monkeys, who manifested in response, similar symptoms of autism which is affecting an epidemic level of human children today. This isn't the only evidence linking vaccines with autism, but is indeed the most powerful to date scientific demonstration supporting decades of legitimate concerns over the safety of these vaccines, which have been met with nothing but a chorus of strenuous denials by mainstream medical science. Worse yet, this total hostility toward legitimate investigations of these concerns among those involved in the fields of immunology and pharmacology, coincide with decades of deliberate cover-ups of severe safety AND efficacy issues. They've been caught falsifying data, and burying inconvenient testing results so many times now, as to render official claims of both safety and effectiveness, less than useless. Those are FACTS ... and not an opinion. You, and several others here seem to have a "consensus" problem distinguishing between facts and opinions, which in your case, never matches up.
To be fair, many people simply aren't equipped to deal with all of the hidden facts and contrived opinions and contradictions and obfuscations revolving around vaccine safety, so they defer to their most trusted source of the truth ... their doctors. Unfortunately, that can be a deadly mistake in a world where truth has been replaced with false beliefs created by pure propaganda. And doctors are generally less knowledgeable about the pharmaceutical products they promote and distribute, than the used car salesmen working for Merck, who serves as the Doctor's ongoing source of supplemental education.
But the one thing most people can rely on to help protect themselves is the age old tool called common sense. Things as simple as understanding when the pharmaceutical industry spends hundreds of millions in lobbying for laws which will shield them from civil liability in the event of damage caused by their products, you can bet that they need such protection. The absurdity of allowing an industry to produce and distribute harmful products with complete immunity, defines the only real immunological value coming from the vaccine industry .... the immunity to poison you and your children, with impunity.
^^^I stand by what I said. There is no question about the science behind vaccines. None whatsoever.
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.
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.
