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.
Some people are great at gas-lighting on City-data. You can provide absolute incontrovertible PRIMARY evidence and they will tell you, you are wrong and there is no such evidence, it doesn't exist.
Anyway....
Here's someone who got Polio from the polio vaccine with a knock down drag out account of what the vaccination did to him and I'm sure someone will say I'm wrong and it didn't happen.
I agree. The never ending defense
of these drugs & vaccines is disturbing.
There are casualties, horrible side
effects & there are cases where people got the
disease they were vaccinated for.
Only on this forum do I see
such blatant denial.
I agree. The never ending defense
of these drugs & vaccines is disturbing.
There are casualties, horrible side
effects & there are cases where people got the
disease they were vaccinated for.
Only on this forum do I see
such blatant denial.
People should at the VERY minimum ALWAYS obtain the insert with all the potential side effects and read it through BEFORE sticking their arm out to take the vaccines. NEVER trust the medical doctor.
I think we have to start "withdrawing our consent" for all these mandates of these new vaccines. Without protesting in the correct legal manner in writing to the Court Clerk and continuing to do nothing, they consider it consenting.
People should at the VERY minimum ALWAYS obtain the insert with all the potential side effects and read it through BEFORE sticking their arm out to take the vaccines. NEVER trust the medical doctor.
I think we have to start "withdrawing our consent" for all these mandates of these new vaccines. Without protesting in the correct legal manner in writing to the Court Clerk and continuing to do nothing, they consider it consenting.
I've always read up extensively on
the vaccinations well before I even walked
into the pediatrician's office.
Knowledge is power.
Thank God my pediatrician agreed with
me when I opted out of a few...
He told me that many of the vaccines
are being pushed for $$$$.
He admitted he wasn't endangering his
own kids with the never ones.
There is something I don't understand about this debate. If you have your children vaccinated, how can they then catch the diseases they are protected against?
It seems like the only risk the anti-vaxxers pose is to the other anti-vaxxers. Am I missing something?
With that being said, I have to say I am totally against having something forcibly injected into myself or my kids under penalty of law. That seems like a slippery slope to me.
They aren't protected against it. That is just it. If they were protected and the vaccines were effective, there wouldn't be any debate. Instead people are catching on to the truth that vaccines have never been proven effective and in fact, they do more to cause the very disease they are supposed to protect against.
Just do an advanced search for: +the +polio +vaccine + was +never +proven +effective.
The entire course of vaccinations takes a few years. A child can be on schedule for all their vaccinations but hasn't finished the whole course yet. For example there is a case of a 5-month-old who caught measles from a child who wasn't vaccinated. The 5-month-old was too young to have all the vaccinations yet, therefore must rely on everyone around her to be measles-free and/or vaccinated against measles. But because she was in contact with an un-vaccinated, measles-infected child, the baby caught the measles too. Her parents are livid because they had her on schedule for vaccinations but she got sick anyway due to the sickly anti-vax child.
Nobody ever died from the Measles if they had average health before coming down with it. My mother had Measles and Whooping cough and German Measles. I had both Mumps and Chicken Pox and we both survived. There is no good reason to have a vaccination against an easily survivable ailment.
Someone could write the counter-point to this article. If you have a child with cancer and a lowered immune system (since you were stupid enough to put the child through the barbaric allopathic treatments for it which have all but destroyed the child's immune system), shouldn't it be YOUR responsibility to keep the child at home and away from germs rampant in public venues?
The general public shouldn't have to bend over backwards to accommodate every sick person with a potentially lowered immune system. The person themselves should make the effort to avoid contact with the public if their immune system is that compromised.
Ultimately it is the person with a weak immune system who is most susceptible to contracting a virus. Those with super strong immune systems can have sex with someone with an HIV outbreak and not get the virus. It is a myth that a truly healthy person can "catch" a disease. That is just what the medical profession WANTS you to believe so you will follow your fear and rush out and get all the toxic vaccines.
Here's someone who got Polio from the polio vaccine with a knock down drag out account of what the vaccination did to him and I'm sure someone will say I'm wrong and it didn't happen.
BTW he DID get better NO THANKS to the medical profession. [i][b]It was fasting and raw foods that restored his health.
The oral polio vaccine can cause polio. That is why it is no longer used in the US and has not been since 2000. The killed virus injectable vaccine cannot cause polio because the virus in it cannot replicate. The gentleman in your video was given the oral vaccine in Croatia. If he got better, it was not due to eating carrots and bananas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh
They aren't protected against it. That is just it. If they were protected and the vaccines were effective, there wouldn't be any debate. Instead people are catching on to the truth that vaccines have never been proven effective and in fact, they do more to cause the very disease they are supposed to protect against.
If vaccines were not effective, we would still be getting smallpox.
The vaccines in current use in the US do not "do more to cause the very disease they are supposed to protect against."
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilybh
Nobody ever died from the Measles if they had average health before coming down with it. My mother had Measles and Whooping cough and German Measles. I had both Mumps and Chicken Pox and we both survived. There is no good reason to have a vaccination against an easily survivable ailment.
Glad you and your mom survived. Also glad she did not have German measles while she was pregnant with you. Many people do not survive vaccine preventable diseases and many more are left with handicaps after they survive. Measles infection leaves the immune system damaged for up to three years after recovery from the initial infection, increasing the risk of getting other infections. The measles vaccine does not do that. Having chickenpox produces a lifelong susceptibility to shingles. The vaccine produces a much lower risk of that.
As to healthy people not dying from measles, that is just poppycock. Here is author Roald Dahl's account of the death of his daughter Olivia:
Someone could write the counter-point to this article. If you have a child with cancer and a lowered immune system (since you were stupid enough to put the child through the barbaric allopathic treatments for it which have all but destroyed the child's immune system), shouldn't it be YOUR responsibility to keep the child at home and away from germs rampant in public venues?
The general public shouldn't have to bend over backwards to accommodate every sick person with a potentially lowered immune system. The person themselves should make the effort to avoid contact with the public if their immune system is that compromised.
I am one of the parents who had a child with cancer and was, in your opinion, "stupid enough to put the child through the barbaric allopathic treatments for it". He was 13 years old when he was diagnosed. He is now 40, a husband and father, and happily gainfully employed. These days, over 90% of the children who have the same leukemia he did are cured. He was on chemo for four years. Were we supposed to keep him at home that whole time? Of course we worried about his catching something. Parents of kids on chemo should not have to worry about their children catching something preventable, though. They should be able to expect to send their children to school and not have to worry about being exposed to chickenpox.
Quote:
Ultimately it is the person with a weak immune system who is most susceptible to contracting a virus. Those with super strong immune systems can have sex with someone with an HIV outbreak and not get the virus. It is a myth that a truly healthy person can "catch" a disease. That is just what the medical profession WANTS you to believe so you will follow your fear and rush out and get all the toxic vaccines.
Yes, being immunocompromised increases the risk of getting infections. That is why we need to maintain herd immunity with vaccines for the diseases we can prevent.
The idea that perfectly healthy people do not get infections is ludicrous. Of course they do, every day.
There are a few rare people who have a gene that protects them from HIV. Other perfectly healthy people can and do get HIV.
You are the one who is trying to argue this thing to death for no reason other then to draw attention away from the fact that there is a lawsuit that is moving forward which was initiated by whistleblowers who claim that Merck manipulated data to overinflate the efficacy of their mumps vaccine. It's sad that you feel the need to resort to condescending remarks when you have nothing else. Get a grip.
The government did not look at the issue and conclude that there was no fraud as you claim. And if the company did make that claim then they lied. By the way, I don't think you understood what Mark was trying to explain. The government's action in this case doesn't mean that they agree with the Plaintiff but it also doesn't mean that they disagree with the Plaintiff. They haven't made a stand either way. The important thing is that the case is moving forward.
The fact remains that the government did not institute proceedings against Merck. The suit was brought by private citizens.
The fact remains that the government did not institute proceedings against Merck. The suit was brought by private citizens.
No one has claimed otherwise. You are the only one who is arguing about this point.
Last edited by MissTerri; 04-29-2016 at 12:50 PM..
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.
