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 didn’t say that Hep B is ONLY transmitted via sex and sharing needles, I said that it’s the most common way. I also mentioned that Hep B negative mothers do not need to worry, which automatically precludes Hep B positive mothers since their babies are actually at risk at birth. To say that I’m spreading misinformation is false.
There are real concern over the safety of Gardisal. Those who refuse to take any VAERS’ reports seriously and who poo-poo the fact that other countries outside of the US have taken a step back from this vaccine or listen to people’s stories regarding adverse reactions can deny all you want but the concerns are real.
As usual, your argument is over semantics. If women stopped getting paps, what do you think would happen? This screening tool does prevent cervical cancer. If people don’t get screened they won’t know that they have pre-cancerous changes to their cervical cells and they won’t get treated. Pap smears save lives. We’ve been over this again and again, you never seem to budge in your understanding or your rhetoric on this topic. It’s tiring to have to go over this with you again and again. I do find it deplorable that you’d undermine the importance of paps as a health professional.
The topic is not “vaccine debate”. The topic has to do with the marketing of the disease post drug availability vs pre-availability. You are proving my point as you act as if people are crazy if they refuse these vaccines yet prior to the vaccine, people really didn’t panic over any of these things.
OK, point taken about the Hep B issue, but you do seem to pretty much blow it off as nothing to be concerned about. See this: "There are four reasons for recommending that all infants
receive hepatitis B vaccine, starting within 24 hours of birth. First, people have a very high risk for developing chronic hepatitis B virus infection if they become infected at birth or during childhood, with an increased risk of dying prematurely from liver cancer or cirrhosis. Second, hepatitis B infection in infants and young children usually produces no symptoms, so these individuals can spread the infection to others without knowing it. Third, most early childhood spread of hepatitis B occurs in households where a person has chronic hepatitis B virus infection, but the spread of the virus has also been recognized in daycare centers and schools. Fourth, long-term protection following infant vaccination is expected to last for decades and will ultimately protect against acquiring infection at any age." http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4205.pdf
I do not advocate getting rid of pap smear testing; I advocate doing what the experts recommend. Further, calling a pap smear "early detection" is a matter of semantics, meaning "words have meaning". The cancer has already developed for the pap to be abnormal. This is the second time I have clarified this and I will ask you to quit lying about my stance, and knock off the deplorable talk.
You have presented no evidence of this "concern over the safety of Gardisal (sic)". The only country to take Gardasil off their recommended schedule is Japan, a known vaccine hesitant country. Their OB-gyn group disagreed with this action. It is up to the person making the claim to support it with peer-reviewed information. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5809565/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist
Gardasil is known to cause appendicitis among some people.
Oh? Perhaps you could supply some peer-reviewed information about that. There is a certain baseline amount of appendicitis regardless of receipt of vaccine. Does that increase after Gardasil?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legion777
Exactly. They did the same for other diseases such as mumps & measles.
These childhood diseases are much less severe in the young than in adults & is why mothers were happy for their kids to play with infected kids.
During my childhood I heard mothers talking amongst themselves who'd suggest play dates with sick kids to ensure that theirs 'got it over & done with'. My 6th class teacher said once that it was a shame when our govt. introduced the protocol of isolating infected children from the others. Back in the day he said, they'd stick a child with mumps/chickenpox/measles in the middle of the classroom to ensure their classmates were also infected.
I'd bet London to a brick that it was Big pHarmas influence that stopped that sensible idea.
Your teacher was ignorant and lying. For one thing, with measles a child is usually too sick to even go to school. For another, measles has always been considered a serious disease. People used to have to put up "quarantine" signs on their front doors if someone in the house had measles. Outbreak! On the front lines of a measles epidemic | National Museum of American History
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
The risk of catching Hep B in any given year is one in 62,500.
The vast majority of people who catch Hep B contract it via sharing needles or having sex with a person who is infected. 9 out of ten people who get Hep B will clear the virus on their own. One’s chances of catching Hep B via an accidental, infected needle stick in a medical setting is 6- 30%. Healthcare workers who handle needles, perform blood draws, etc are at a higher risk then the average person simply due to the fact that they regularly handle needles and run a higher risk of an accidental needle stick.
For the average person who does not share needles or have sex with an infected partner, the risk is minimal. You can’t get Hep B from ingesting someone else’s blood either. You could possibly contract it if someone bled into an open wound or if there was blood on a toothbrush and you brushed your teeth with it and cut your mouth. However, the risk to the average person is extremely small. This link puts it at almost zero.
So why has it become mandatory to vaccinate all infants within days of birth for something that is most often acquired via sex and drugs? An over reaction? A sales opportunity?
I've read 1000s of magazines in my life. Not even once did I even care about the ads. Nor think "Hey- here's an ad! I must take these meds!" Ya know....like MOST of the population.
Well jolly good for you!
These ads are quite costly - I guarantee you they wouldn't be spending the big bucks if they weren't paying off big time....same with TV ads which are prevalent on nearly every network.
The less people know, the more they think they know.
Sometimes people who know a little think they know a lot. Sometimes people who know a little think they know a little. Sometimes experts are wrong. Sometimes experts feel pressure to go along with the majority consensus in their field. Sometimes the majority consensus is wrong. Sometimes the majority consensus is influenced by drug companies.
The Dunning-Kruger experiments were contrived and, I think, very unconvincing. You can contrive an experiment to show just about anything you want.
It is very easy to think of examples where people do NOT over-estimate their knowledge.
Dunning-Kruger is mentioned every time someone wants to support the mainstream consensus on anything. The basic message is "If you are not an expert, your opinion is worthless."
But when experts disagree with the mainstream consensus, they can't use Dunning Kruger. So they say the expert went nuts, or whatever excuse they can find.
You are the one who repeatedly uses the A word. I have never mentioned it. Not once.
Why are you arguing a point I have NEVER brought up? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I will ask again.
What do you mean by a "reaction"? Describe a "reaction" for us.
What is "$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice
Again:
What was the diagnostic criteria that MDs used to confirm a case of polio BEFORE the vaccine?
What was the diagnostic criteria that MDs used to confirm a case of polio AFTER the vaccine went mainstream?
It's a factual question that you REFUSE to answer.
Why?
What you are calling "diagnostic criteria" are actually case finding criteria. Since other viruses can cause exactly the same clinical picture as polio, case finding just identifies people who need further testing. Case finding does not produce a diagnosis. Some of the cases will have polio and some will have other causes.
Prior to the advent of the vaccine, polio was diagnosed in much the same way it is today. From 1956:
The best method was isolation of virus from stool. The brief letter describes work on improving blood tests. Polio is an enterovirus, and transmission is through the fecal oral route, which is why stool was - and is - tested. Today tests that look for viral RNA simplify the process.
The hoopla over "diagnostic criteria" is just one of many techniques used by anti-vaxxers to try to discredit vaccines by trying to claim they do not work. Polio vaccine does work, and no one is hiding cases of polio by calling polio something it is not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Good4Nothin
All of your posts at CD that I have seen have been defending drugs. I never saw you criticize a drug, ever, and I never saw you criticize any aspect of mainstream medicine, ever. I never saw you post on any topic other than drugs.
If you aren't a paid poster, then at least you are a dedicated volunteer.
Good grief. My posting history is public. Just go to my profile. As of right now:
Top Forums
Politics and Other Controversies: 3499
Health and Wellness: 2968
Current Events: 2302
Genealogy: 1375
Writing: 1083
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legion777
Wow; do you consider yourself some sort of powerful psychic? An expert on any given subject? Or is it that you've convinced yourself that the medical industry only has patients best interests at heart & really aren't in it just for the money?
Not sure where you get your info but I know what I read on the photocopy from the medical texts that were given to me.
I've given up smoking so many times, especially in winter when symptoms get really bad (scares the hell out of me) Since diagnosis the longest break was 6 months. Giving up tobacco is simply torture for me. Buergers patients are typically extremely addicted to nicotine. At the time of diagnosis a behavioural scientist reckoned that because of my 'horrific & brutal' (his words) upbringing I learnt to cope by smoking. It's my go to when I'm emotional, it's how I cope.
After 12 years of fighting it, I took out an expensive pipe that had sat in the cupboard for 30 years & learnt how to smoke it without burning my mouth (why it had sat in the cupboard for so long) & haven't had a cigarette in 7 years.
None-the-less, no, I have not given up smoking. The cannabis is the only explanation why I've survived 19 years.
As for the other patients, I can't say for sure for the support group patients but the others went through the same struggle as me & smoked on/off until they died. They took the dangerous pHarmaceuticals & now they are dead while I rejected most of them & took cannabis. I'm alive. Fancy that eh? But I'm sure you'll come up with some other explanation in defense of Big pHarma products.
The link I gave will lead you to the article on recent INDEPENDENT research on patients using statins but if you think you know better than researchers who actually followed patients who took statins, then ah, ok then.
What cancer cures? Conventional medicine is still torturing & killing patients with chemotherapy. Nothings changed in that regard for around 80 years.
If the cancer research industry was interested in cure, it wouldn't have treated the brilliant Dr Rife so appallingly & not buried his treatment that had close to a 100% cure rate. If the industry was the slightest bit interested in putting patients before profit, they'd concentrate on natural substances such as cannabis (THC kills cancer cells) apricot kernels or the herbal essiac, just to name a few.
It must be lovely to think that the medical industry has our best interests at heart but as disappointing as it may be, I'd prefer to face reality.
I bet you're one of those who willingly accepts the flu vaccine every year. If I'm correct, do yourself a HUGE favour & do some research (no, no, no, not medical industry 'research', actual non-biased independent research)
Whatever material you had about the disease appears to be wrong, since what I found does not describe everyone with it having amputations and dying within a couple of years. The article I cited specifically says it does not reduce lifespan and the people who do the worst are those who continue smoking.
"Cannabis arteritis (CA) is a major and underdiagnosed cause of peripheral arterial disease in young patients ... CA is a subtype of Buerger's disease. It is poorly known but increasingly prevalent and manifests in cannabis users regardless of tobacco use. The drug is considered at least a cofactor of the arteriopathy. The most effective treatment is cessation of consumption. Being cannabis one of the most consumed drugs, its mandatory to ask about its use in all young patients with arteriopathy."
The body of research on statins taken as a whole supports their use in patients with risk factors for cardiovascular disease.
Rife never cured a single cancer, He was a charlatan pure and simple. On the other hand, there are millions of cancer survivors in the US thanks to modern medicine. My son is one of them: cancer free for 32 years since he was treated with chemo for childhood cancer. About 90% of kids who have the same diagnosis he did will become long-term survivors. Apricot pits do not cure cancer, and saying they do is ironic, since they contain a real toxin: cyanide.
"The American Cancer Society states that "Reviews of medical records of people who have been treated with Essiac do not support claims that this product helps people with cancer live longer or that it relieves their symptoms."
Yes, I take flu vaccine. My age puts me in a higher risk category for complications from it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissTerri
Hep B is not a concern for babies born to mothers who are Hep B negative and who won’t be living in a household with people who have Hep B. It is an overreaction to recommend that all newborns be given this vaccine before they leave the hospital. Parents get it because it’s pushed in the hospital post birth. The vast majority of babies and children are not at risk. The vast amount of adults ar not even at great risk. It’s a money maker, pure and simple. Getting it on the schedule at birth is how the drug companies can make money off of something that really isn’t a threat to the majority.
I find it deplorable that a health professional would downplay the importance and effectiveness of paps in preventing cancer through the use of changing semantics to try to promote a vaccine with a questionable safety record.
I was born long before the flu vaccine came out, thanks though for your uninformed and unnecessary false comment regarding my age. I had kids when the chicken pox vaccine was still kind of iffy and I was a kid who remembers her experience with chicken pox well and remember all of the parents in the neighborhood getting the kids together to play so we could spread it to one another and get it over with. Other then taking some baths with baking soda at night after a full day of playing, swimming outside with all of my friends who also had chicken pox, not a single one of us missed a beat. The parents were happy we got it over with, no one was fretting. I actually have fond memories of that summer.
Flu was a normal part of life prior to the vaccine. There was not major fear mongering every year. I’ve had flu once in my life, as a child. It’s not fun but it’s also not the end of the world. I got one flu shot as an adult, not too long after it came out because it was free through my work and really didn’t question it. I felt awful afterwards. Not flu, but really crappy and I had some weird health issues pop up that never really went away. Was there a connection? Who knows? But will I ever get another flu shot? No, it’s just not necessary. The available information, research, data surrounding flu vaccines does not prove that they are very effective. Sure, one can cherry pick and make claims but the body of evidence really does not support the argument that it does much. The people I know who get the vaccine tend to be the ones who get the flu most often. Those I know who don’t, tend to not get the flu very often. Go figure.
I am aware that this is a passion of yours and I know nothing anyone here will say will stop that or get you on topic as the discussion which is about marketing, using fear in order to sell drugs.
It's really mind boggling that you feel that getting a vaccine preventable disease is better than preventing it. There is no way to predict which children will be exposed to hepatitis B and which will not. The reason that universal newborn vaccination was introduced is because selective vaccination was not protecting enough children. If you think your child could never be exposed to someone with hepatitis B you are very naive.
The parents who lost their children to chickenpox were not very happy, I suspect.
"These high hospitalization rates equated with a substantial influenza burden of illness during the 2016–2017 season with an estimated 30.9 million people getting sick with influenza, 14.5 million going to a health care provider for influenza, and an estimated 600,000 people being hospitalized from influenza." A flu vaccine that is only 36% effective is still going to prevent millions of people from getting sick.
Unless you know the flu vaccine status of every person you meet you cannot use your anecdotal experience to say a single thing about the effectiveness of flu vaccine. Having a slight fever and some muscle aches after taking the vaccine is not due to flu, it is due to the immune system reacting to the vaccine and doing its job.
The reason that the hepatitis B vaccine, the chickenpox vaccine, the HPV vaccine, and the flu vaccine exist is to reduce the burden of sickness and mortality from those diseases. The vaccines are not produced solely to sell the vaccine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtovenice
And what YOU fail to understand is that MDs base the need for lab testing on symptoms.
It'd be like sending a overweight man who had chest pains home, telling him he needs to have chest pains for a month before looking into the fact that he is having a heart attack. If the symptoms don't match the criteria for diagnosis ... there is no test and there is no diagnosis.
24 hours to 60 days is a HUGE change in diagnostic criteria. And accounts for the DROP in polio cases.
The criteria were changed 1954 .... the vaccine was rolled out 1955.
Why would diagnostic criteria be changed at that time? There is no way to compare number of cases pre/post because criteria for diagnosis is drastically different.
Anyone can see that.
The case finding criteria were changed, not the tests to diagnose polio, which identified the actual virus. As polio was wiped out, what was left was cases that looked exactly like polio but had other causes. There were lab tests to diagnose polio before the vaccine was developed.
Science is not something that someone would use as a tool to win an arguement. Science is not set in stone as it is ever evolving. Science is defined as “the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. “
I’m tired of people abusing this term in order to “win”.
If science is on your side, show it to us, please.
I certainly will NOT get into the vaccine area as I have pretty strong opinions and just glad I'm not bringing babies into this world with all these vaccines today.
I don't get vaccines, nor the other 2 tests we're told we SHOULD get.
But I was thinking about the "newer" dis-ease Fibromyalgia which I was told I had in 1999, prior to that day I never heard the term. I was trying to get my thyroid supported, for 10 long years, and one endo touching around my neck said "your thyroid is fine" but you have Fibro....then proceeded to TRY to get me on his drug protocol. He did not succeed. Good grief.
My feeling is Fibro is a basket of stuff gone wrong that doctors don't know what to do and so came up with this term.
I read that long ago it was like a rheumatism...don't hear that one anymore but do hear this fibro and all the drugs being pushed for it. Lyrica, Cymbalta, Guiafenison (the cheapest) and don't hear that one much at all on the TV, if at all.
(Good grief, Suzy, it must have taken you an hr to type the above #336 long long story)
Last edited by jaminhealth; 07-13-2018 at 10:44 PM..
They're off subject, big time. This is about pharma making up diseases to sell a drug. Like that high blood pressure med that gave guys erections so pharma put an inert ingredient in the drug and marketed the same drug for erectile dysfunction. Like misusing syndrome for dysmenorrhea, like blathering about side effects, no such thing, all the effects are from the drug. Oh yeah, pharma is making stuff up, for sure. With this convo, they've got someone siphoning articles they want, to the top of a Google search.
So I just finished my 88 page magazine and within this small publication were the following ads:
*Lyrica for Fibromyalgia pain
..
They throw Lyrica around like candy these days. Recently when in hospital over half of the patients that I spoke to were prescribed Lyrica for all sorts of reasons.
Lyrica is an anti-epileptic & also commonly used as a mood stabiliser. Every patient I've met through my pain clinic were prescribed Lyrica or Epillim (another anti-epileptic) Most say it's entirely useless for nerve related pain. A few have said it helps a little.
Until I found that cannabis was brilliant for nerve pain, I suffered from excruciating nerve pain that was getting progressively worse. So I know what it's like. Two patients from my pain clinic committed suicide because they couldn't cope with nerve pain & we suspect that a few other regulars who've gone missing have also 'checked out early'.
Nerve pain is bad enough without also giving a dangerous liver damaging drug that causes horrible side-effects (many patients have told me that they 'don't feel human' while taking Lyrica) Sudden cessation can kill so patients have to wean off it slowly. One of the worst commonly prescribed pHarmaceuticals.
It just does my head in that Dr's could do this to their patients. So much for 'Cause no harm'.
It's so sad that so many people put 100% faith in their Dr's & accept whatever treatment that's prescribed without question nor any research.
In actual fact, whenever I question or disagree with a specialist (Never my GPs, they've been great) they usually get quite angry & aggressive. One pain clinic Dr was getting stuck into me when I refused to even entertain the idea of trying Epillim. She shut up real quick when I asked 'Would you take it or prescribe it for one of your family?
It was quite common for parents to try and ensure their kids got chicken pox young. By swimming, I mean, we got in the kiddie pool in the yard and played in the sprinkler to cool down after running, playing and biking around the neighborhood during the day. The kids in my neighborhood who got it together were in the range of 4 to 7. It was very normal.
Well I was way too sick for that when I had the chicken pox. I was miserable. Had no desire to play in a kiddie pool. What I remember was laying in bed and forcing myself not to scratch. Oh, and then a couple of weeks later my mother (born in 1932) catching it from my brother and me and spending 6 weeks in the ICU on experimental antivirals. Good times.
I certainly will NOT get into the vaccine area as I have pretty strong opinions and just glad I'm not bringing babies into this world with all these vaccines today.
I don't get vaccines, nor the other 2 tests we're told we SHOULD get.
But I was thinking about the "newer" dis-ease Fibromyalgia which I was told I had in 1999, prior to that day I never heard the term. I was trying to get my thyroid supported, for 10 long years, and one endo touching around my neck said "your thyroid is fine" but you have Fibro....then proceeded to TRY to get me on his drug protocol. He did not succeed. Good grief.
My feeling is Fibro is a basket of stuff gone wrong that doctors don't know what to do and so came up with this term.
I read that long ago it was like a rheumatism...don't hear that one anymore but do hear this fibro and all the drugs being pushed for it. Lyrica, Cymbalta, Guiafenison (the cheapest) and don't hear that one much at all on the TV, if at all.
(Good grief, Suzy, it must have taken you an hr to type the above #336 long long story)
Which is full of contradictions, btw, all looking to support big pharma and drugs.
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.
