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.
The personal story above is 100% true and factual. It’s also not a unique story. Others have had similar experiences, with varying degrees of successful outcomes. The common theme is heavy metal toxicity.
Often the question is asked, why do some children suffer these effects, while the majority do not? This is a complicated question that there is no clear, single answer, but is likely to be a combination of several things, to include each individual’s ability to cope with toxicity, as well as how much of a toxic load they may have been exposed to with the vaccines, and other environmental sources.
Heavy metals are neurotoxins ... there is no debate about that. These neurotoxins are bioaccumulative. The greater the exposure, the greater the dangers, and subsequent risk of development of neurological disorders. And given the varying degrees of symptoms of autism, from mild to severe, there is likely another category not discussed... neurological impairment that is undetectable due to lack of significant symptoms, yet still affecting brain function, and performance, just to less significant degrees.
While I was already aware of these dangers before my first hand experience with them, it boggles my mind that people of average intelligence cannot seem to grasp the fundamental cause and effect so obvious, between injecting infants and toddlers with substances containing known neurotoxins, and the subsequent appearance of neurological disorders.
It’s like a person standing on the side of the road, just after an automobile crash, scratching his head in bewilderment as to how that nasty dent appeared on his car.
Yes, some do have better immune systems than others, but no one is born with immunity to flu. These stories of smokers and drinkers are greatly embellished, just like all these stories of people with lung cancer who supposedly never smoked (but in reality did for the most part).
And you know this how? How can you possibly make such patently absurd statements?
Facts are, more non smokers develop lung cancer than do smokers ... I would guess that is because there are more non smokers among today’s population, as opposed to the 1950’s.
This doesn’t logically support the mainstream narrative of smoking being the primary cause of lung cancer, so of course, you’ll rationalize away the facts as non facts, embellishments and I suppose a great deal of lying on the part of these dying smokers who claim to not be smokers?
While this is way off topic, it does reflect the degree of credibility here.
As for immunity to flu, the best defense is a strong immune system, which directly urges the avoidance of anything that lowers immune function, such as vaccines and the chemical adjuvants added to excite the immune response. This taxesthe immune system and can make a person more vulnerable to infections.
Problems here are several .... vaccines are designed to stimulate antibody production. But antibodies are just one element of a complex, synergistic immune system. The over stimulation of this one element of the immune system can create lots of problems, from autoimmune disease, to antibody-dependent enhancement, which is a condition that actually assists virus infection of healthy cells.
So no, injecting viruses, heavy metals, dna fragments, mycoplasmas, formaldehyde, and other nasty constituent elements in vaccines is not what a sane person should consider healthy.
Anecdotally, one ought to consider the question of why we in the US spend more on healthcare than any other nation, yet we lead all other nations in chronic and major disease categories?
Maybe we are indeed getting what we pay for, it’s just not what we thought we were paying for?
Project much, coschristi? Now I'm not accusing you of name-calling (sarc font). The HELL you're not accusing me of propagandizing. You can try to weasel out of it by saying "she" (as if I died and went away, no such luck) is reiterating propaganda, but if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.
Just who did I call a name? Gaylenwoof said s/he is not antivax in post #325. I said if you're not antivax, you can't go along with Jeremy Hammond. Hammond, yes, I called him a loon. He wrote that piece for Robert F. Kennedy Jr, a known anti-vaxer (though he claims he's "fiercely pro vaccine while reviling numerous vaccines, claiming there is still mercury in vaccines, etc.).
But, I've been accused on this very thread of getting paid to post pro-vaccine information; I was falsely accused of supporting mandatory, no make that MANDATORY (how it was posted) vaccines (post since removed). I have neither the time nor inclination to go back through the whole 377 posts to see who called who names, but I can assure you, it's not all one sided.
You have said anti vaccine people are science deniers.
You post all the time: "get your vaccine," "now's the time to get your vaccine," "you need to go get your vaccine," "everyone needs to get the vaccine."
When a poster said the science shows that vaccines are optional, you came back with reply that it was a false statement. The opposite of optional is mandatory, last time I checked.
And yet you pretend you don't want vaccines to be mandatory. Maybe check your language when you post? Because that is absolutely how your position comes across via your own posts. There is no other way to interpret your hundreds of provaccine posts.
...Over the following 2 years of extensive treatments that centered on heavy metal detoxification, and nutritional supplements, Ryan made a miraculous recovery.
For my part, I would need to know: who diagnosed the heavy metal toxicity, and who or what facility did the treatment for heavy metal detoxification?
BTW: I share your deep skepticism about the medical industry and big pharma. I think we've made a lot of progress in health care, but I also think that a variety of entrenched economic interests and misguided social paradigms have created a system that, in far too many cases, actually keeps people unnecessarily sick. But, on the other hand, I also avoid overgeneralization. I look at issues on an individual basis and look for specific evidence relating to the specific issues at hand. In the case of immunizations, I know enough about the biochemistry to know that some of the anti-vax claims stem from utter ignorance. But I can't rule out all of the claims, so I don't jump on any bandwagons on either side. And, as I said before, I try to avoid being suckered in by emotional anecdotes. Generally speaking, anecdotal claims can raise questions, but they generally can't answer them. When dealing with controversial emotional issues, we really need a rigorous application of the scientific method. I could hear a 100 stories just like the one that you told, but if peer-reviewed empirical data is lacking, I'd have to remain skeptical - which is to say, not really convinced by either side of the debate (because the anecdotal evidence does carry some weight we me - just not enough to convince me on its own).
And, again to be clear, I have not investigated the history of this issue in enough detail to call myself an expert on any of this. For example: Is mercury still a component of contemporary vaccines? There is a lot that I don't know about the heavy metal aspect of this issue.
Perfect example of the Transfer/Association technique used in Propaganda campaigns. And no; I’m not accusing Katarina of being a propagandist. I am saying she is reiterating propaganda:
Is there a reason that vaccines; a product of science: Are supported by propaganda; an influencer of opinion?
Are you labeling the poster above as an evil “anti-vaxxer”? Is he not intelligent enough to utilize his own reading comprehension & cognition to decide what is “loony”?
“Your not one of us if; you agree with him, her, them, that ...” Good grief.
But carry on if you must; conservative Republicans who are in favor of immunizations have already felt alienated here on this thread by this tactic.
Can a pro-vaccine argument be won without the use of propaganda? Meaning no use of labels, transfer or Bandwagoning? Meaning that nobody gets called an anti vaccine anything: Scientists are scientists. Doctors are doctors. Parents are not “poor historians” looking for “someone to blame”. Whistleblowers are not “just a disgruntled employee”.
Can that happen? Can vaccines, as a product of science; stand on its own two feet by virtue of the science? All the science?
This would be nice wouldn't it, if people could recognize good science from bad, take into account who paid for the studies, who gets paid / how they get paid to publish the studies, who funds CME (it's the pharma industry) and then look at how the media spin the information.
Facts are fluid, apparently. And anytime I post re vaccine I always get called names. Every. Single. Time. I pretty much expect it.
And whenever I ask the 2 simple questions:
How many CONFIRMED cases of the flu were reported by the CDC?
How many CONFIRMED cases of deaths caused by the flu were reported by the CDC?
I either get insulted or ignored.
Because the truth and FACT of the matter is that the CDC has no idea.
No idea at all.
You'd think if this was such a horrific, pandemic, devastating issue, the CDC would be front and center, scientists and researchers and data collectors on the ball, making sure that they had that information so it could be reported truthfully 1. to the public so the public would know the risk and 2. to be used in drug dev to create a vaccine or drug that would have a better efficacy.
But it's all just guesswork. And guesswork? Ain't science. But it sure makes good headlines.
I don't get the flu shot just based off of personal experience, not science. I don't care what science has to say. When I was active duty I had to get a flu shot each year and sometimes I got sick after, sometimes I didn't. Each time I was told that it was a dead virus and I cant get sick from it, but many times I did. I haven't had a flu shot in almost 10 years now, and in that time I haven't had the flu. I am not anti vaccination, but the flu shot is one that I wont get because I don't feel the need to.
BTW: What we commonly call "the flu" is hardly ever actual influenza. Actual influenza is not a "stomach virus" but in everyday language, most of us think of "the flu" as a stomach virus. I don't know how much this matters to the current debate, but it is good to keep in mind that "the flu" as used in everyday language is a vague term that rarely overlaps with the more technical uses of the term influenza. Just off hand, I don't know if the "flu vax" is meant to cover "influenza" or the "the flu". The CDC probably doesn't collect detailed info about "the flu" but it might focus on influenza. (?)
BTW: What we commonly call "the flu" is hardly ever actual influenza. Actual influenza is not a "stomach virus" but in everyday language, most of us think of "the flu" as a stomach virus. I don't know how much this matters to the current debate, but it is good to keep in mind that "the flu" as used in everyday language is a vague term that rarely overlaps with the more technical uses of the term influenza. Just off hand, I don't know if the "flu vax" is meant to cover "influenza" or the "the flu". The CDC probably doesn't collect detailed info about "the flu" but it might focus on influenza. (?)
It matters a lot. It's the reason a lot of people get the flu shot and then claim to have gotten the flu.
It's interesting that you don't know what the flu vaccine is meant to cover, yet you have argued pretty much against it in this thread. FYI, the flu vaccine contains vaccine against two "A" strains of INFLUENZA and vaccine against 1 or 2 "B" strains. https://www.livescience.com/40279-fl...formation.html "The composition of the 2018-2019 flu shot will be slightly different from last season's flu shot. Specifically, there will be a different strain of the H3N2 virus and a different strain of the influenza B virus in this season's flu shot, compared with last season's shot. According to the CDC, the 2018-2019 trivalent flu shot will contain the following strains of the flu virus:
A/Michigan/45/2015 (H1N1)pdm09-like virus — This is the H1N1 component that is the same as last year's flu shot.
A/Singapore/INFIMH-16–0019/2016 A(H3N2)-like virus — This is the H3N2 component that is different from last year's flu shot.
B/Colorado/06/2017-like (B/Victoria lineage) virus — This is the This is the influenza B strain component that is the different from last year's shot."
The flu vaccine is not meant to immunize against stomach viruses.
It may come as some surprise to you, but the CDC DOES know the difference, and it does (big surprise) focus on influenza when it's discussing influenza.
These are basic facts. You should not be arguing against flu vaccine if you don't know them.
You have said anti vaccine people are science deniers.
You post all the time: "get your vaccine," "now's the time to get your vaccine," "you need to go get your vaccine," "everyone needs to get the vaccine."
When a poster said the science shows that vaccines are optional, you came back with reply that it was a false statement. The opposite of optional is mandatory, last time I checked.
And yet you pretend you don't want vaccines to be mandatory. Maybe check your language when you post? Because that is absolutely how your position comes across via your own posts. There is no other way to interpret your hundreds of provaccine posts.
You are lying about me again. I have not used the term "science deniers". If I have, please source it.
I did not say that about flu vaccine. You are once again lying about me. I have always emphasized that there are NO mandatory vaccines for anything in the US.
I can see that you want to get the thread closed, because I'm not putting up with people telling blatant LIES about me.
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.