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.
Let's switch the subject from the deadly, contagious Disney Measles epidemic of 100 people which killed zero infected. Media (sponsored by WHAT agenda?) created a panic and demand for more legislation to mandate vaccinations for little children.
I give you Whooping Cough instead (sic). That DTP vaccine has been around far longer than MMR. So how come deadly, contagious pertussis has not been eradicated from the US? In 2012 there were 50,000, as opposed to 100 measles, cases across the country. Where is the outrage against Dr. Jenny parents of young children not vaccinating to that one? Vaccinate 100% of the little children and there will not be THOUSANDS of whooping cough cases!!!
Come on "health care professionals" and pro vaxers explain WHY there are so many whooping cough outbreaks. Yes, I KNOW the answer. I want YOU to ADMIT why. Hint. It is not because parents are not vaccinating babies.
As for the Disney measles outbreak ...
1) no deaths occurred, which doesn't fit the fear mongering narrative constantly being repeated by the fascist forced medical crowd ... but it does fit the truth which I have first hand experience with as a child when every kd got the damned measels ... inconvenient, uncomfortable yes. Deadly? NOT
2) Of those infected, several were FULLY vaccinated. That isn't talked about much, because the primary focus was, as aways, to blame the unvaccinated as responsible for the outbreak, contrary to the vast majority of outbreaks which occur with vaccinated majorities.
3) Is it really coincidental that several detailed pieces of legislation were immediately tabled in response to this Disney outbreak? Given that such types of legislation require months to create, I find the timing to be a bit beyond mere coincidence. Some may think I'm a paranoid conspiracy nut for suggesting the, but that's because they have no capacity to think .... it wouldn't be the first time if someone covertly introduced a little blast of measles virus in the air ...
While the anti-vax contingent moans about autism, which is not caused by vaccines, vaccines have essentially wiped out childhood meningitis, which used to cause deaths and brain damage in survivors.
Money $pent on vaccines is money well $pent.
Your total absence of anything remotely resembling compassion for the extrodinary numbers of children now suffering autism, (1 in 50) rings clear as a bell here, as you define the legitimate concern over the disaster of the autism epidemic as "moaning". And this callousness is obviously a prerequisite for those engaged in the poisoning of children via dozens of toxic cocktails injected into them with full knowledge of the potential severe side effects that absolutely WILL DAMAGE some of those children severely. Hey, so we lose a few ... gotta break a few eggs if you want to make an omelet right!
This is precisely why no one can or should trust what you say.
It's amazing what some people can reveal in just a brief comment,
As I said before all the bogus information that is coming from the Homeopathic community who are nothing more then Charlestons who used to sell heeling elixir in the 19th century. The internet has given them a way to spread lies and made up information they have caused lot of this fear to stop people from vaccinating their kids. I never even heard of anyone not getting their kids vaccinated back in the 60's and 70's after someone bogus autism link was spread around the internet now people believe that stuff. The guy who originally wrote it is now says he was wrong, but still people think what they read on the internet is always the truth.
It's an issue that has united far leftists and far righties! Dear God.......
Your total absence of anything remotely resembling compassion for the extrodinary numbers of children now suffering autism, (1 in 50) rings clear as a bell here, as you define the legitimate concern over the disaster of the autism epidemic as "moaning". And this callousness is obviously a prerequisite for those engaged in the poisoning of children via dozens of toxic cocktails injected into them with full knowledge of the potential severe side effects that absolutely WILL DAMAGE some of those children severely. Hey, so we lose a few ... gotta break a few eggs if you want to make an omelet right!
This is precisely why no one can or should trust what you say.
It's amazing what some people can reveal in just a brief comment,
Twisting her words to suggest she's doesn't care about autism.... tisk tisk. It's amazing what some people can reveal with dishonest tactics.
You underestimates the human body's ability to process toxic chemicals, as the devil is in the dose. Now, you should focus your attention on all the new chemicals that have been developed this past century that have become part of the consumer world around us. You come into those type of chemicals far more often than a vaccination.
Unvaccinated kids are a danger to kids and adults who are immunocompromised, because they could be contagious at any point in time. The unvaxed are also a danger to babies who are too young to receive certain vaccines, e.g. MMR, chickenpox, Hep A and other for the same reason. For other vaccines that infants get, e.g. DTaP, polio, Hib, Hepatitis B, Prevnar and rotavirus, the unvaxed are a danger b/c infants aren't fully protected until they have had the full series of these vaccines, generally around age 6 months. Unvaxed kids are also a danger to those few people for whom the vaccines don't give immunity.
BREASTFED infants are protected through the antibodies in their mother's milk, more so if their mothers had the natural diseases themselves. The longer a mother nurses her baby, the longer the baby will be receiving antibodies in her milk. Natural antibodies as opposed to manufactured chemical ones.
I can tell you that breastfeeding also helps to protect baby from norovirus also, but since is just "my" experience so I won't bother with that. Science people will think that is nothing but hogwash.
How pathetic. So, when Weston Price cited Johns Hopkins rather inconvenient admission, they removed the information, and so, you are claiming Johns Hopkins was engaging in "misinformation", but decided to stop? Please.
In any case, Johns Hopkins was only ONE of SEVERAL different sources confirming the "shedding, including sources that have not only found the vaccine virus in the urine of vaccinated persons, but also found active infections of flu virus typed back to the vaccine, rather than the wild virus, which is definitive proof that the vaccine can indeed spread the disease.
Of course you and others must DENY, DENY, DENY ... you have no other alternative, other than admit you're dead wrong, and in so doing, your entire fraud would collapse. We should not foolishly hold our breath waiting for that to happen, because we already know full well that what we are confronting here are deliberate lies and deception ... not simple error.
Johns Hopkins changed their information; they did not take it down. Johns Hopkins is a resepcted health care institution and does not give a rip about the Weston Price Foundation. I have spent a career in health care and never heard of WP until this kerfluffle. Hopkins changed the info b/c it was incorrect, based on theoretical ass*umptions rather than on good evidence. There is no evidence that measles vaccine virus "sheds".
Please post a link, to JH not to some woo source, about this flu "information".
Twisting her words to suggest she's doesn't care about autism.... tisk tisk. It's amazing what some people can reveal with dishonest tactics.
Nothing dishonest in pointing out the nonchalant and dismissive way "moaning" was used to describe the deep concern people have regarding the tragic explosion of autism, regardless of what the cause is.
Quote:
You underestimates the human body's ability to process toxic chemicals, as the devil is in the dose. Now, you should focus your attention on all the new chemicals that have been developed this past century that have become part of the consumer world around us. You come into those type of chemicals far more often than a vaccination.
I don't underestimate anything ... particularly the ability of the human body to process toxins, which vary from individual to individual, and most especially between 200 lb adults, and 7 lb infants. But one of the most prominent voices of the pro-vaccine crowd .. Dr. Paul Offit seems clueless to such differences when claiming that a child could handle 10,000 vaccines injected into them at the same time. A grade school child rebutted that asinine ascertion using elementary school level science and math.
As for the impact on human health via chemical overload in our environment, just who do you think is responsible for that??? Let me give you a clue ... it's the same crowd attacking human health through the air, water, food AND medicine, all of it under the watchful eyes of the FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION. You know, the same agency we're supposed to trust to ensure the safety of vaccines and other pharmaceuticals.
Johns Hopkins changed their information; they did not take it down. Johns Hopkins is a resepcted health care institution and does not give a rip about the Weston Price Foundation. I have spent a career in health care and never heard of WP until this kerfluffle. Hopkins changed the info b/c it was incorrect, based on theoretical ass*umptions rather than on good evidence. There is no evidence that measles vaccine virus "sheds".
Please post a link, to JH not to some woo source, about this flu "information".
If you're going to be a shill, try at least to be less transparent about it for goodness sake! Johns Hopkins IS a prominent and respected source regarding health research, and it was just one of several sources Weston Price cited. Don't confuse the reporting source with the source of the information being reported. No one should be that dense, but it is all too common to conflate the messenger with the actual source of the message, particularly when said information is inconvenient to one's position!
That Johns Hopkins subsequently "corrected" their information in response to a spotlight being shined upon it, only indicts their integrity, unless we are to believe Johns Hopkins is so sloppy as to confuse provable clinical research information with inaccurate theoretical science, as you want to suggest. If that be the case, then their "revised" version of the facts is no more valid and trustworthy as the original claims. But we all know what the real deal is here, don't we now? Yes indeedy, when real science and politics conflict, politics always wins, because that is where mainstream science recieves the vast majority of it's funding!!
The bottom line here is that virtually all modern mainstream science today has one thing in common ... consensus with the party line is mandatory with no challenge allowed. Anyone who does challenge it is immediately attacked, ridiculed, and marginalized, and ..... de-funded.
About 5% of immunocompetent children receiving their first dose of MMR vaccine have mild measles with fever and rash. The vaccine strain can cause severe measles in immunocompromised people.” British Medical Journal [BMJ] CASE REPORT Rash in a 15 month old girl
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt
Please post a link, to JH not to some woo source, about this flu "information".
I no longer consider Johns Hopkins a credible source, since they've now proven to be willing to dismiss their own information as error. Why should I then accept it?
What about the British Medical Journal? Are they too homeopathic quacks trying to besmirch the pharmaceutical industry and promote vitamins?
You see, there are NUMEROUS sources which report live virus shedding and vaccine induced illness, contrary to the false ascertions being regurgitated ad nauseam. This must be done, because the truth is exactly the opposite of the false narrative being promoted which claims that the unvaccinated pose the threat.
Of course, all one needs to do is utilize basic common sense to measure the legitimacy of such conflicting claims.
It's REEEEEAAAAL EEEEZZZY .... Ask one simple question .... who is more likely to be a vector for virus transmission ... a random person selected from a crowd who may or may not have been exposed to any virus, or a person who was injected with a virus deliberately?
I'll bypass your obvious bias here by using an analogy ... OK? Who is more likely to place an auto insurance claim .... a random driver selected from rush hour traffic, or the two drivers on the side of the road who just crashed into each other?
The conclusion really is that simple.
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.
