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.
I have no idea why it’s such big news that an 18 year old boy decided to get some vaccines. Very weird that it’s newsworthy.
Probably for the same reason that:
"Some (125?) people got sick & then ... they got better!" was newsworthy in 2014.
Because it triggered a national debate (!) since many (many/125 =?) who fell ill were not immunized against measles (!) & in a state of terror(!); Californians looked to their fearless leaders to save them & do something ... do anything! Whatever it takes!
And California Senate Bill 277 by Senator Pan was signed into law in 2015; removing exemptions for children in school. And people are still getting sick & getting better but that's ... whatever.
If I had to guess (which I do since the media cucks are so obedient); it has something to do with the legislation of the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act of 2019, most specifically; SEC. 304. (Improving Emergency Preparedness & Response Considerations For Children). Prior related legislation is being amended to include MASSIVE amounts of money available for grants to agencies:
Quote:
Public Health Security Grants Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 319C-1(h)(1)(A) (42 U.S.C. 247d-
3a(h)(1)(A))
is amended by striking ``$641,900,000 for fiscal year 2014'' and all that follows through the period at the
end and inserting ``$685,000,000 for each of fiscal years 019 through 2023 for awards pursuant to paragraph subject to the authority of the Secretary to make awards pursuant to paragraphs (4) and (5)..'.
It also relaxes standards for pharma experimentation on animals but that's ... whatever too. If you propagandize fear enough to Americans; they will throw their pets, children & their own mom under the bus; if that's what it takes.
"Some (125?) people got sick & then ... they got better!" was newsworthy in 2014.
Because it triggered a national debate (!) since many (many/125 =?) who fell ill were not immunized against measles (!) & in a state of terror(!); Californians looked to their fearless leaders to save them & do something ... do anything! Whatever it takes!
And California Senate Bill 277 by Senator Pan was signed into law in 2015; removing exemptions for children in school. And people are still getting sick & getting better but that's ... whatever.
If I had to guess (which I do since the media cucks are so obedient); it has something to do with the legislation of the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act of 2019, most specifically; SEC. 304. (Improving Emergency Preparedness & Response Considerations For Children). Prior related legislation is being amended to include MASSIVE amounts of money available for grants to agencies:
It also relaxes standards for pharma experimentation on animals but that's ... whatever too. If you propagandize fear enough to Americans; they will throw their pets, children & their own mom under the bus; if that's what it takes.
It should be noted that much of the work needed has to do with third world countries where the health of infants is more at risk than is true in most of the west.
Oh definitely; without a doubt.
His work follows the trajectory of what safety surveillance for vaccines should look like; no matter what country you are in. It starts with the undeniable signal of mortality & works it's way up.
Not the mortality of full-gestation, high-apgar, good birthweight infants but ALL infants. He analyzes his cohort groups not by "high risk for adverse events to immunization" but "will be less likely to receive an immunization based on percieved risks by parents & nurses".
You can tell how backwards our CDC approved research is by the cohorts involved; they declare those at risk as ineligible for safety studies, yet those children are not eligible for medical exemptions. That is not unintentional bias. I will never be persuaded to accept a safety risk that was deduced by intentional bias; regardless of how it applies to me or my children.
Aaby's trajectory of safety surveillance would have spared my daughter's death by moving that particular vaccine back by about 9 months. She could be alive & fully vaccinated.
There have been thousands just like her. What would happen if the CDC actually changed the schedule, or at least changed the schedule for pre-term, low-birthweight females, based on safety research? They would have thousands of parents to answer to; that's what. Enough to sway public opinion & spur investigations.
Their schedule is not based on science; it's based on "If we change it; we admit it".
That was not my nephew or friends kid. I can't stress that both were normal little boys until one day the lights got turned off. Both played, were talking, sociable little boys then one day they stopped. They used to eat all sorts of foods too until the lights went out.
Back in medieval times, such kids were called "changelings". A witch or a fairy stole the kids and left someone else in their place. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Changeling. See "neurological differences".
Plus, when records of these kids with immediate transformations are reviewed, signs were often present well before the vaccines. Brian Hooker, a big player in the anti-vaccine world, lost his case in vaccine court because it turned out his son was delayed long before the MMR vaccine was given him.
Actually, it sounds like the school didn’t understand what tetanus is.
How so? One can both get tetanus from a human bite and a well-established ER treatment from human bites is a tetanus jab if the patient is behind on them.
(e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776367/)
Whats the issue? You argue "not coming from a position of ignorance" but then immediately portray such.
Listen, your adaptive immune system doesn't give a flying **** how ignorant the person is - it just needs to be presented with the antigen in a sufficient format, and preferably not pathogen active setting, to invoke what it does naturally. It really just doesn't care, millions of years evolution gave it that. Just relying on the innate immune system when evolution decided we need both - that's your call, but the school was right.
How so? One can both get tetanus from a human bite and a well-established ER treatment from human bites is a tetanus jab if the patient is behind on them.
(e.g. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776367/)
Whats the issue? You argue "not coming from a position of ignorance" but then immediately portray such.
Listen, your adaptive immune system doesn't give a flying **** how ignorant the person is - it just needs to be presented with the antigen in a sufficient format, and preferably not pathogen active setting, to invoke what it does naturally. It really just doesn't care, millions of years evolution gave it that. Just relying on the innate immune system when evolution decided we need both - that's your call, but the school was right.
A human bite where the skin is not broken?
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.
