jump to last post 1-50 of 55 discussions (187 posts)

Keep your kids healthy - don't vaccinate them!

  1. sannyasinman profile image59
    sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

    Whooping cough outbreaks higher among children already vaccinated. Measles vaccines cause measles . .  and more

    http://www.naturalnews.com/035466_whoop … reaks.html

    1. pedrog profile image58
      pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      This anti-vax movement is something really dangerous, if there are enough stupid people to subscribe this movement some extinct diseases, like polio, might come back.

      I don't know in how many countries this is happening, i think this started in the UK but the fertile ground for this kind of crap is in the USA, never heard of anti-vax in my country, vaccination is mandatory.

      1. lorlie6 profile image85
        lorlie6posted 5 years agoin reply to this

        So true pedrog!!!  Immunizations are a crucial part of bodily health.  The anti-vaccination crusade is bunk.

      2. cloverleaffarm profile image73
        cloverleaffarmposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Very true. If people stop vaccinating, serious disease like polio will see a comeback.
        While in the US, it is not mandatory, it should be. I was vaccinated, my kids were vaccinated, and my grand daughter has been vaccinated. Personally, I don't see the big deal about vaccinations. It keeps people safe.
        lorlie6, you are right it is a bunch of bunk! People have been vaccinated for years.
        If you don't want to vaccinate your kids, that is your choice. But, they won't be playing with my kids. Vaccines were created to keep the disease away, and if you want to open your child up to health issues, that is your decision. But, you decision is not going to affect my family.

    2. prettydarkhorse profile image64
      prettydarkhorseposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Here in the US, for public schools, it is a requirement for the children to have the necessary vaccines. The parents must present a proof that it is their cultural belief not to have those vaccines in order for their children to be accepted for school registration. It includes vaccination for pertussis/whooping cough.

      1. Caitlin Pyle profile image81
        Caitlin Pyleposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        WOW... then they let the students in? what kind of proof can they provide?

    3. fit2day profile image77
      fit2dayposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Some vaccinations may be helpful, but I would argue that most aren't. I'm fine with vaccinations, but they should never be mandatory, if more children were breast-fed, played outside, etc. their bodies would develop natural immunity to many sicknesses. Instead their are infants being pumped full of crap with no concern as to what may happen.

      I had an allergic reaction to rubella that nearly killed me and there are many deaths directly attributable to shots. I think the idea that vaccines have nothing to do with the skyrocketing autism cases is nonsense and every time I look, there seems to be another vaccine children have to get.

      1. pedrog profile image58
        pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Do you know what a vaccine is?

        It is a very clever way for we to use our natural immune system...

        The rise in autism has nothing to do with vaccination or chemtrails or any other conspiracy theory, in fact the reason we see a rise in the statistics is because today the diagnose is being done much more effectively and the "range" for what we call autism has been extended, some disorder that is called today autism, 10 or 20 years ago we would just call it a shy kid or some other thing.

        I advise you to read about Jonas Salk, maybe you will understand why vaccination is so important, sure we could not use it and eventually we would gain a natural resistance to the particular disease but how many people would die before that happens? 10 million? 100 million? A billion? Well, maybe more, it will depend on the disease.

        1. sannyasinman profile image59
          sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          The best defense against ANY disease or virus is a healthy immune system. Vaccines contain substances toxic to the human body, and serve to deplete the bodies natural defences, not strengthen them. 

          This is an example of what will be injected into your body, from Sanofi Pasteur’s own usage instructions for the swine flu vaccine:   
          - Thimerosal (mercury). Mercury is toxic to the human body.
          - Embryonated chicken eggs
          - Formaldehyde 100mcg max (they do not know how much exactly). It is classified as a probable cause of cancer in the USA.
          - Sodium phosphate
          - Sodium chloride (table salt)
          - Polyethylene glycol p-isooctylphenyl ether. This is a toxic detergent.
          - Gelatin
          - 15 mcg hemagglutinin (HA) of influenza A/California/07/2009 (H1N1) v-like virus per 0.5 mL dose
          - Sucrose (table sugar)
          This is not a complete list of ingredients, as none is available.

          There are concerns that this vaccine, and others like it may also contain:
          - Aspartame.
          - Human fetus embryo
          - Dog kidney cells
          - Bovine cow serum
          - Mouse brain cells 
          - Squalene

          Quite a toxic cocktail . . .

          1. pedrog profile image58
            pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            You forgot dihydrogen monoxide, it's also a chemical, spooky stuff...

          2. busy-mama profile image60
            busy-mamaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Wow! Just wow, what more can one say.

      2. Marisa Wright profile image94
        Marisa Wrightposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I lived in Africa for a number of years, where children are all breast fed, play outside with animals, etc. etc.  The children are not vaccinated.

        I saw children who were deaf and blind thanks to measles (although they were the lucky ones - many died).  Diphtheria still killed many children.  Polio was still rife.  These deadly diseases are still frighteningly common in developing countries around the world.

        You may think the chances of your children being exposed to these diseases is remote, but our world is so interconnected these days, and thousands of people are travelling between countries every day. It would only take one Peace Corps volunteer, businessman or vacationer to come back from Africa infected, and come in contact with your child - or one of your child's friends, or the friend of a friend. 

        Children in the US and Europe can't possibly build immunity to any of these diseases through breast feeding, because there have been so few cases in the last couple of generations, so their parents haven't been  exposed to those germs.

        Remember how smallpox wiped out so many American Indians and Australian Aborigines, because the disease was unknown to them so they had no immunity?  With so many people under the age of 30 unvaccinated and with no natural immunity, authorities are really concerned that if one of these diseases did get started in Australia or the US, it would go through the population like wildfire. 

        As for whooping cough - there has been a fashion for parents not to get the whooping cough vaccine in Australia.  Last year there was a spate of deaths in unvaccinated babies.  It's a horrible, distressing death for the baby.  The mood is changing.

        1. Aficionada profile image88
          Aficionadaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          +1

          Very well stated!   I'm old enough to remember when some vaccines were still new here in the US, and I remember people who had been affected by polio in pre-vaccine days: a relative with a withered and useless arm; a friend's father who lived in an iron lung; friends who wore leg braces.  These were people who had survived the disease.

          As Marisa indicates, it is incredibly naive to believe that a strong immune system can protect against diseases that the person has not built immunity to, through exposure to the disease or through immunizations.

        2. davenstan profile image76
          davenstanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          I believe in vaccines, just not getting 6 at once at every appointment. My child can have one or two vaccines at a time.

      3. Lizolivia profile image88
        Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        In 1976 there was persuasion about a swine flu pandemic with tv ads to get the shot. There were no, zero, confirmed cases! It was a hoax then just like the last, h1n1 was. They even tried convincing people by saying celebrities got the shot, turned out it was a complete falsehood, Said Mary Tyler Moore got the vaccine and she didn't, her doctor advised her against it. They used celebrity and political endorsements without having gotten their consent, and without knowing whether or not they even got the vaccine.

        I got that swine flu shot and was sick in bed like a vegetable for two weeks unable to eat and barely able to get up to empty bladder with a severe respiratory and sinus infection. It was the only time in my life when the thought occurred to me that I might die.

        My dad got the shot, became very ill and died. My then 90 year old very healthy grandmother was persuaded into it, against her wishes, by caring family members; she got sick and past away within 6 months.

        There were 2 different vaccines used during that mass vaccine campaign. One caused worse effects compared to the other. Many died from Guillian Barr Syndrome, which is a possible effect from all flu shots, and many were paralyzed with Guillian Barr.

        thinktwice dot com

      4. Brook Health Care profile image56
        Brook Health Careposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        More deaths and chronic medical complications actually occur from the diseases that are being vaccinated against than the vaccines themselves.

    4. tamlee21 profile image60
      tamlee21posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It's really sad that there are so many mindless people that believe in the forces of "they"  "They say......"  Who are they?  Do your own research.

    5. Onusonus profile image87
      Onusonusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Antivaccination movements are...
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfdZTZQvuCo

    6. A Troubled Man profile image60
      A Troubled Manposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      "About the author: Mike Adams is an award-winning journalist and holistic nutritionist - Adams is currently the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center"

      This guy is dangerous, has no credentials in medicine and is clearly on a mission. His website boasts support from FoxNews and CNN. His interviews are allegedly with experts in their field but the aren't experts in medicine.

      1. Eric Newland profile image60
        Eric Newlandposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        No, you see, it's all a big conspiracy. Evil doctors want you to think that people who are trained in medicine know more about medicine than people who aren't trained in medicine. As if!

        1. sannyasinman profile image59
          sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Medical doctors are trained by BigPharma to diagnose a malfunction in "a body system" presented before them, then to dispense drugs, the surgeons knife, or radiation. This is not effective medecine, there is nothing natural about it,  and rarely treats the whole person. If todays medecine is effective, why are there more people dying from the effects of the drugs that medical doctors prescribe than from the illnesses for which they are suffering?

          For example, there are several proven cures for cancer, but they are ridiculed by the medical profession, and ruthlessly suppressed because they are natural cures, that do not involve selling huge amounts if expensive BigPharma drugs. While billions of dollars are spent every year on "cancer research" and a misinformed, gullible public donate their hard earned cash to find a "cure". What hipocrisy!

          Watch this video if you dare:
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnaBG177VIw
          This documentary catalogs how allopathic medicine established dominance in the early part of the 20th Century, and how natural medicines were arbitrarily banned from the medical profession, despite the basis of this decision being scientifically unsound. The wholesale transition from natural medicines to chemical ones was based on financial and political reasons, at the expense of the patients.

          Same with vaccines. The more the better = more $$$$ in profits.  The current number of vaccinations your children will receive by the time they are 18 years old might be an high as 68! And there will be more to come. And all this is Ok with you because the medical profession says so! BigPharms must be so proud of you!

    7. Jesus was a hippy profile image60
      Jesus was a hippyposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Oh dear, I heard about the "anti vaccine movement" years ago. What an asinine thing to do.

      Lets all let our kids be vulnerable to all the deadly diseases. What a great idea that is.

      By the way, vaccines are proven to be effective. That is why they are so common.

    8. 2besure profile image85
      2besureposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I agree!  My Dr. even tried to get me to take the whooping cough vaccination and I am 60.  They get paid to push this stuff!

      1. SmartAndFun profile image91
        SmartAndFunposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Adults need boosters, because vaccine protection fades over time. Are you around babies? Adults who have not gotten their booster shot can spread whooping cough to babies who have not completed a series of 3 shots (usually by 6 months old) or whose parents choose not to have them immunized. Your dr. is not only trying to protect you, he's trying to protect any babies you come in contact with, and all the unvaccinated kids that are out in the world today.

        Incidentally, last week a baby died from whooping cough in my area (North Texas/Dallas). Whooping cough's number of cases is increasing because so many adults are not getting boosters and so many babies/children are not getting immunized. Whooping cough can be deadly to babies, especially.

        1. 2besure profile image85
          2besureposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          I an not around babies at all.  I work from home.  She knows this.

        2. sannyasinman profile image59
          sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Australia Ends Whooping Cough Cocooning Program: deciding that vaccinating adults was an effective means of protecting infants.

          http://sanevax.org/australia-ends-whoop … effective/

          1. Quilligrapher profile image90
            Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Thank you, Sanny, for another misleading article with the potential to kill babies. The article does not say vaccinating children is not effective. It says vaccinating adults is not an effective way to protect infants.  Australia still recommends immunization to improve resistance to Whooping Cough (Pertussis) in infants.

            According to the Australian Government Department of Health and Aging: 
            “ Pertussis is a vaccine preventable disease. Pertussis vaccination is recommended as part of routine childhood immunisation. It is listed on the National Immunisation Program (NIP) Schedule and funded for children under the Immunise Australia Program.” (1)

            It is hard to keep up with all the misinformation being circulated.

            (1) http://immunise.health.gov.au/internet/ … -pertussis

            1. Lizolivia profile image88
              Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              The DPT vaccine causes asthma, as it did with one of my children. He didn't have any respiratory problems before the vaccine and afterward needed respirators and bronchilators. Now 25 years later he still has allergies and asthma, although he's had an allergy desensitization program.

              The DPT vaccine has shown to be one of the primary causes of sudden infant death (sids) in infants due to respiratory failure.
                 thinktwice dot com

              1. Quilligrapher profile image90
                Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this


                Hi again, Ms. Liz. I apologize for taking so long to acknowledge your post.

                I am very sorry to read your son suffers from asthma. It is a horrible disease with which to live. 

                Since you have now shifted your focus from Polio to SIDS, I shall try to keep up with you. <grin> Many web sites devoted to sudden infant death syndrome offer vast amounts of information and many sources for current data. It is interesting to note that I was not able to find one site devoted to SIDS that suggested, as you have, DPT vaccines have been shown to be a cause. I gather your source used the phrase “primary cause.” To the contrary, the SIDS Network Org advises “It is likely that SIDS, like many other medical disorders, will eventually have more than one explanation.”

                Dr. Thomas G. Keens, Professor of Pediatrics, Physiology and Biophysics, published a paper called Sudden Infant Death Syndrome at the 22nd Annual Sudden Infant Death Syndrome Conference that challenges on multiple levels any suggestion that vaccines are related to this phenomenon. For example, he points out that  “SIDS is more common in winter months and less common in the summer. If SIDS was simply a collection of other natural causes of infant death, one would not expect these unique age and seasonal distributions. Thus, epidemiologic evidence favors the hypothesis that the majority of SIDS victims died from a single common mechanism of death, although many "triggers" might lead an infant into that final common pathway.” Clearly, the complicated and mostly unknown elements of SIDS do not point to a single trigger or cause. (1)

                He goes on to say, “Based on current knowledge, there is nothing that SIDS parents did to cause their babies' deaths, and nothing they could have done to prevent them” Antivax proponents like to imply an unvaccinated infant is less likely to experience a SIDS death when there is no clinical evidence to support that position. He goes on in his summary, “Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) is the most common cause of death between the ages of 1- month and 1-year. It affects nearly one out of every 1,000 live births. The etiology of SIDS is unknown. There are no tests currently available which predict the infant who will die from SIDS. Although reduction of SIDS risks for populations may be possible, SIDS deaths can not be prevented in individual infants.”

                Thanks for suggesting the ThinkTwice web site. Although it contains many claims, I was not able to find a study on this site that supports your statement “The DPT vaccine has shown to be one of the primary causes of sudden infant death (sids) in infants.” Perhaps you can point us to your source.

                ThinkTwice.com does, however, suggest the best source for vaccine related information. It clearly recommends “ the FDA and CDC -- not the Thinktwice Global Vaccine Institute -- should be consulted for the most up-to-date information regarding who should or should not receive vaccines, at what ages, and the number of doses.” (2) I say this is good advice. Don’t you agree?

                (1) http://www.californiasids.com/UploadedF … erview.pdf
                (2) http://thinktwice.com/disclaim.htm

                1. Lizolivia profile image88
                  Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Hi Quill,
                  the fda and cdc?
                  Have these people never heard of conflict of interest?...Many articles and much info bring the Public Health Service, the CDC, the FDA, the "peer-reviewed" journals, and the rest of the medical-industrial-government complex into disrepute. Physicians can follow along if they so choose (the kickbacks per percentage of vaccinated are a very appealing incentive), and since they make their living from it. Parents with children being maimed and crippled by the very vaccines which are proclaimed innocuous by authors who are on the vaccine maker's payroll, expect at least elementary honesty from those who call themselves scientists.

                  Torch, W.S., 1982. (DPT) immunization: a potential cause of the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). Neurology; 32(4): A169 abstract).
                  "At the 34th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics, presented a study linking the DPT shot with SIDS. Torch concluded: "These data show that DPT vaccination may be a generally unrecognized major cause of sudden infant and early childhood death, and that the risks of immunization may outweigh its potential benefits.
                  Pediatric Infect Dis. PMID: 6835859, UI: 83169234 - "They found a statistically significant excess of deaths in the first day and the first week after vaccination."
                  Pediatrics 81:6 Part 11 (June 1988) - The category "sudden death" is also instructive in that the entity disappeared following both whole-cell and acellular vaccines when immunisation was delayed until a child was 24 months of age. It is clear that delaying the initial vaccination until a child is 24 months, regardless of the type of vaccine, reduces most of the temporally associated severe adverse events.

                  In 1985 Dr. Scheibner, a former principle research scientist for the government of Australia, and her husband electrochemical engineer Leif Karlsson invented the breathing monitor for babies who are diagnosed “at risk” for SIDS. Over the next three years, the couple monitored hundreds of babies and studied the event reports. “By 1988 we knew that vaccines are killing babies,” said Dr. Scheibner Ph.D.

                  SIDS occurs among babies who have suffered a physical insult to their vulnerable bodies. They learned that the most common physical insult suffered by SIDS babies was routine vaccinations. Printouts from their monitor showed illuminated patterns that indicated critical days after vaccinations.

                  Once they had proven to themselves the causal link between vaccines and SIDS and had appropriately analyzed and documented their findings, they submitted their work to the medical community for peer review. Rather than attempt to duplicate their work or alter public health policy to protect infants, the majority of the medical community's members chose to protect the interests of vaccine manufacturers.

  2. WriteAngled profile image89
    WriteAngledposted 5 years ago

    I wasn't allowed to vaccinate my elder daughter against whooping cough, because the policy at the time in the country where we lived was to deny this vaccine to babies with neonatal jaundice.

    My daughter had whooping cough at the age of two. It was not a happy time for her or for me, and she retained an increased susceptibility to coughing even after recovering.

  3. innersmiff profile image71
    innersmiffposted 5 years ago

    The human body is a fantastic healing device if left alone by itself, but supported by nutrition. Vaccinations are slow-kill depopulation devices that discombobulate the body's immune system and do little to nothing to prevent diseases. Fact remains that more people who have taken the flu jab end up having the flu than not. Now children are subject to on average around 30 vaccinations before they are 3 years of age, and are growing up with a record number of illnesses. Depression, autism and cancer are on the rise and we wonder why it's happening? It's quite ridiculous that people armed with all of the facts that argue against vaccines still support them. Probably because it's trendy. Well guess what, you are not helping your children by stabbing them with all kinds of dangerous chemicals, neither is it okay to enforce a vaccination upon any individual. That is a violation of the basic common law the universe runs by. Supporting vaccination is tantamount to child abuse.

    1. Quilligrapher profile image90
      Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Hi there, Inner. How you doin’?

      I am certain that you have some very good reasons for believing as you do. Unfortunately, you are not sharing your reasons with us and that’s creates a “hard sell.” More then 50% of flu vaccine recipients get the flu? Okay, I’m opened minded, fairly intelligent, and willing to respect a reasonable argument. Please provide supporting data for this claim. Evidence I can verify.
      HINT: It is a popular strategy to ask a question when implying something you can not support. It also draws attention to your lack of proof. I agree that depression, autism, and cancer is widespread. Please provide clinical data connecting these conditions to vaccinations.

      Thanks, Inner. I appreciate your taking the time to share the hard data that you used to reach your conclusions.

  4. Eric Newland profile image60
    Eric Newlandposted 5 years ago

    Hey, remember that big smallpox outbreak we had a few years back?

    Oh? You DON'T? I wonder why...

  5. sannyasinman profile image59
    sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

    Interview with Dr Suzanne Humphries about vaccines
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUORtLSg … r_embedded

    “Nobody has EVER done a long-term, placebo controlled study to PROVE that ANY vaccine is safe” – Dr Suzanne Humphries

    “Nobody is tracking the long-term affects of vaccination”- Dr Suzanne Humphries

    “Formaldehyde is embalming fluid and is highly toxic. It is in practically all vaccines” – Dr Suzanne Humphries

    ALSO, a few questions to ask your doctor before you agree to vaccination . . .

    1. Could you please provide one double-blind, placebo-controlled study that can proves the safety and effectiveness of vaccines?

    2. Could you please provide scientific evidence on ANY study which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?

    3. Could you please provide scientific evidence which can prove that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was attributable to inoculation of populations?

    1. pedrog profile image58
      pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      "Suzanne Humphries is a nephrologist (kidney doctor) who has recently become a vocal proponent of pseudoscience and quack medicine. Humphries has been involved with the International Medical Council on Vaccination, a front group for vaccine hysteria, and is a signer of the organization's anti-vax Project Steve petition. She has written several blog posts and done several podcasts and interviews insinuating that kidney failure is caused by vaccines."

      As seen at: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Suzanne_Humphries

      I don't need to ask any doctor i already know!

      Some more reading for you:

      Vaccines bring 7 diseases under control: http://www.unicef.org/pon96/hevaccin.htm

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eradicatio … s_diseases

      About polio vaccine and Jonas Salk:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonas_Salk … inst_polio

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H6NkM61HlB8

      And about formaldehyde you can read here, just scroll a little:

      http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccin … 187810.htm

      1. sannyasinman profile image59
        sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        And some reading for you . .

        Mumps outbreak spreads among people who got vaccinated against mumps
        http://www.naturalnews.com/028142_mumps_vaccines.html

        Flu Vaccines, pharma fraud, quack science, the CDC and WHO
        http://www.naturalnews.com/029124_flu_v … ckery.html

        Sixth study in recent months links mercury in flu shots to brain damage, autism
        http://www.naturalnews.com/031870_flu_s … amage.html

        Myths and Facts: Study Verifies That There Is No Value In Any Flu Vaccine
        http://preventdisease.com/news/10/12101 … ines.shtml


        And if you want to earn yourself $10,000 . . .there is a $10'000 reward offered for scientific proof of H1N1 vaccine safety and effectiveness
        http://www.naturalnews.com/027985_H1N1_ … afety.html

        1. pedrog profile image58
          pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          LOL

          If you are getting your information from nutjobs like Alex Jones and all the other pseudoscience crap sites, i can see why you believe in what you believe.

          I have another link for you:

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory

    2. psycheskinner profile image80
      psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

      None of the vaccines are more dangerous than the disease they protect against.

      Not vaccination put all the children in the community at risk unnecessarily.

      1. sannyasinman profile image59
        sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Want to read some reports from real people about their experiences after vaccination?
        http://sanevax.org/

        Still think vaccines are good for your health?

        1. EmpressFelicity profile image77
          EmpressFelicityposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Vaccination is a good idea - a life-saving idea in a lot of cases.

          BUT there are things that concern me/questions I'd ask.

          1. How many different vaccinations can one child/adolescent's immune system actually put up with before it starts to have adverse effects, at least in some cases? The NHS in Britain routinely offers 15 vaccinations for children up to the age of 18 (http://www.nhs.uk/Planners/vaccinations … klist.aspx). That's a long way from the five or so against diphtheria/polio/tetanus that I would have had from age 0 - 18.

          2. Some of the additives they put in vaccines concern me. For example, thiomersal is an organomercury compound used to preserve vaccines. Fortunately thiomersal isn't used much in the West but I'm sure there's a thriving market for it elsewhere in the world. Then there are the aluminium-containing adjuvants used to improve the immune response to vaccines. I wonder if there's a link between those and Alzheimer's disease in later life. Again, the more vaccinations you have, the more additives you take into your system.

          3. I don't feel comfortable with the idea of compulsory vaccination. It smacks of totalitarianism.

          1. recommend1 profile image67
            recommend1posted 5 years agoin reply to this


            What is in vaccines and other relatively 'side-issues' are worthy of investigation,  but wholesale vaccination is necessary to suppress the more virulent deseases where the greater number of individuals with a sickness endangers the greater number of others. 

            It also protects those children with stupid parents who are prepared to sacrifice their own children in their ongoing attempt to return the world to a dark age of ignorance and superstition.

            1. EmpressFelicity profile image77
              EmpressFelicityposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Ah, the "greater good" argument. Not a fan of that myself.




              Not everyone who is against compulsory vaccination is ignorant or superstitious.

              1. recommend1 profile image67
                recommend1posted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Nor am I in some cases, except that the opposite is not acceptable either,  for my kids to be in danger through the actions of others is unnacceptable also.

                I did not claim that everyone against vaccination is ignorant,  I said it protects some children from ignorant parents - in the same way that court orders are needed to enforce blood transfusions for children of those who don't believe in them, you know, superstitious people.

            2. sannyasinman profile image59
              sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              This is EXACTLY what BigPharma and their trained and paid repeaters better known as "medical professionals" want you to believe.

              You have swallowed the message hook,line and sinker. Congratulations. BigPharma will be proud of you.

              Please don't disturb yourself by reading any of the tons of information on the web which totally contradicts what the mainstream, "official", sources tell you.

    3. Eric Newland profile image60
      Eric Newlandposted 5 years ago

      I've never caught a single illness I was vaccinated against, nor has anyone I know.

      You know, though, I might concede to the small chance that vaccines can cause serious complications. But compared to the risks associated with catching the diseases they defend against? It's a no-brainer. Pretty damn obvious which gamble is the bigger one.

      Another proven obvious fact is that on top of a generally healthy lifestyle, you know what else helps your immune system? Exercise. As in fighting off pathogens. I've heard that catching at least one cold a year can actually help reduce the risk of cancer.

      So why not give your immune system a workout in a controlled manner?

      And has it ever occurred to you that the money might be coming from the other camp? I'm sure doctors can make a lot of money treating unimmunized people who catch completely preventable diseases. I can easily see some of the less scrupulous one's feeding the anti-vaccination frenzy to increase their profits.

      1. Lizolivia profile image88
        Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Over the past few years, the majority of measles and mumps were contracted by vaccinated people, neither of which is anywhere close to being a life-threatening risk when contracted while young and healthy! It becomes much more serious when the vaccinated at an older age come down with it, and the malnourished in underdeveloped countries. Polio occurs in the vaccinated almost exclusively by this point in time, only the name has been changed to protect the guilty. Today's Polio hides behind the name of viral or aseptic meningitis.
        Neither diphtheria nor tetanus exist and as long as there's clean water and sewage disposal, neither would return irregardless of vaccines which are neither safe nor effective anyway.
        Immunity to anything cannot be achieved by injection. It bypasses the first 3 layers of the immune system straight into the blood or muscle tissue only to confuse and destroy its proper functioning.
        The government has been buying stock in these pharma corporations since the '70s which is a conflict of interest, the more sales, the merrier.
        Pharma sales is a trillion a year, vaccine sales is in the multi-billions. The public relations and propaganda is on the side with all the money, and their sales pitch has remained the same for decades, almost word for word! "It wasn't the vaccine (I didn't do it); it was a co-incidence (it was something else, don't sue me). The ones protected are the vaccine makers since the government gave them immunity from liability. If the practice were as safe as they like for us to believe, there wouldn't be the need for financial protection by the government due to lawsuits by the people. The risks far outweigh any possible benefits. It is not easy to undo an injected vaccine. Think Twice!

    4. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Paralysis Cases Spike in Wake of Bill Gates’ Polio Vaccination Effort in India

      http://www.infowars.com/paralysis-cases … -in-india/

    5. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Autism Rates Rise with Increase in Vaccination Schedule - even Donald Trump agrees . .
      http://www.naturalnews.com/035486_Donal … utism.html

      1. Quilligrapher profile image90
        Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Donald Trump! Now there is a trained health professional we can rely on. big_smile

        1. sannyasinman profile image59
          sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          You miss the point, which is, that EVEN Donald Trump can see the dangers. If he can, then anyone else should also be able to, if they can just open their minds, shut out the relentless conditioning by BigPharma and their "trained medical professionals" for a moment, and let common sense prevail.

          Anyone can do this, even DT, even you, maybe even, one day, a medically trained  professional. Let's just hope it happens soon, before our children are so stuffed full of chemicals that they have no natural immune system left.

          1. Quilligrapher profile image90
            Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Hey there Sanny. It is nice to be able to exchange ideas with you.

            I hear what you are saying: any person that disagrees with you and Donald Trump is not open minded, has a conditioned response to BigPharma and medical professionals, and doesn’t use common sense. You must feel quite superior to those that think differently then you do. It seems to me MANY people who are open minded, neutral to BigPharma’s position, and exercising a lot of common sense are telling you that they disagree with you.

            Obviously, you pretend to have unique reasoning skills that lead you to oppose vaccination, therefore, anyone who disagrees with you must be lacking these attributes. A truly open mind, one free of pre-conditioning and eager to exercise common sense, would be offering and asking others for hard data that can be analyzed and compared. However, you argue my mental agility is somehow flawed and inferior to you and Mr. Trump because my analysis of the proven benefits of vaccination vastly justifies the known and probable risks.

            I have no problem with your opinions on this subject and I defend your right to refuse to protect your children with vaccinations as recommended by public health officials. However, beware of an ego that encourages you to question the reasoning ability of others because they disagree with you and “the Donald.”

            I sincerely hope your unprotected children are never exposed to another unvaccinated carrier of a disease.

            1. sannyasinman profile image59
              sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Ok, I  am asking you to provide your "hard data that can be analysed and compared".

              Oh, and you can also win yourself $10'000 in the process. Simply provide reliable scientific proof that the H1N1 vaccine is safe for human use. As you apparently have already done your open-minded analysis, that should be simple for you, shouldn't it?
              http://www.naturalnews.com/027985_H1N1_ … afety.html

              By the way. did you consider any of the information below before coming to your weighed and reasoned conclusion?

              Mumps outbreak spreads among people who got vaccinated against mumps
              http://www.naturalnews.com/028142_mumps_vaccines.html

              Flu Vaccines, pharma fraud, quack science, the CDC and WHO
              http://www.naturalnews.com/029124_flu_v … ckery.html

              Sixth study in recent months links mercury in flu shots to brain damage, autism
              http://www.naturalnews.com/031870_flu_s … amage.html

              Myths and Facts: Study Verifies That There Is No Value In Any Flu Vaccine
              http://preventdisease.com/news/10/12101 … ines.shtml

              Oh, and you also know of course that the WHO admitted it was in collusion with BigPharma when a pandemic level 6 international emergency was FALSELY declared relative to the fabricated swine flu pandemic, causing unwitting governments around the world to spend billions of dollars on a useless vaccine to prevent a non-existant emergency - with BigPharma laughing all the way to the bank.

              1. hinazille profile image84
                hinazilleposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Agreed, Agreed & Agreed!!!!!!!!!!

              2. Quilligrapher profile image90
                Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Hi Sanny. I apologize to you for taking so long to respond. Me bad!

                I thank you for providing a link to this mumps article. (http://www.naturalnews.com/028142_mumps … z1sMXYhchy) It makes me question the “Health Ranger” and many of his rash and unsupported statements about the purpose and risks of vaccines. I was struck by one particular false claim: “The vaccine industry wants the public to believe that vaccines are effective at preventing infection.” Not so. Vaccines are not intended to prevent infection but, rather, to reduce the likelihood of infection. The CDC states: “Vaccines reduce the risk of infection by working with the body's natural defenses to help it safely develop immunity to disease.” (2) Please note that “reduce the risk” and “develop immunity” do not equate to “preventing infection.” It seems Mr. Adams needs to re-define the purpose of vaccines to convince his readers that they are not effective. In fact, most of his arguments are meaningless if the reader does not believe his lie that shots are aimed at “preventing infections.”

                You asked me for hard data. I can not evaluate the effectiveness of all vaccines. I don’t see how anyone can since there are no data applicable to all vaccines. I can make a judgement about certain individual vaccines however. Here is where the importance of “hard data” and extensive research come into play. When examining mumps, for example, “From 1967, when the mumps vaccine was first licensed, to the early 2000s, the number of reported cases decreased from 186,000 to <500 annually. …Estimates of the effectiveness of the mumps vaccine have varied in previous studies, ranging from 73% to 91% after 1 dose and from 79% to 95% after 2 doses. At least one study found 2 doses to be more effective than 1 dose.”
                This quote is from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5905a1.htm and the studies covering the effectiveness of the mumps vaccine are:
                (1) Dayan GH, Rubin S. Mumps outbreaks in vaccinated populations: are available mumps vaccines effective enough to prevent outbreaks? Clin Infect Dis 2008;47:1458--67.
                (2) Hviid A, Rubin S, Muhlemann K. Mumps. Lancet 2008;371:932--44.
                (3)  Marin M, Quinlisk P, Shimabukuro T, et al. Mumps vaccination coverage and vaccine effectiveness in a large outbreak among college students---Iowa, 2006. Vaccine 2008;26:3601--7.
                (4) Cohen C, White JM, Savage EJ, et al. Vaccine effectiveness estimates 2004--2005 mumps outbreak, England. Emerg Infect Dis 2007;13:12—7

                I am hoping, Sanny, you will browse at least one of these to see the difference between a data supported research paper and the questionable advice offered by the “Health Ranger.” What he believes is not as important as why. I don’t come to Hubpages to be adversarial. I come here to learn. I try to keep an open mind. I work at minimizing my pre-conditioning, exercising common sense, and searching for “hard” data I can analyze and compare. I am happy to share data I found and I look forward to reviewing yours so that we both take away a little more knowledge then we had before.   

                I hope your day is going well for you. If so, keep it up.

    6. fit2day profile image77
      fit2dayposted 5 years ago

      One major issue with vaccines lies in the fact that there's no telling what it will do from person to person. If people went back to breast-feeding their children, letting them play outside, and not rubbing anti-bacterial soap on them every 15 minutes, kids wouldn't be nearly as sick.

      Vaccines haven't proven to make kids healthier or increase immunity, it's only assumed that they won't get whatever the vaccine is for, rather or not they would've gotten it anyway. There's hardcore push to mandate Gardasil, though it's killed at least 34 people. I say if you wanna vaccinate, pop pills, or whatever, go ahead, but don't force everyone else to.

      1. pedrog profile image58
        pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        You should read all the material in this post first, to start!

        I don't know where you are from, but in my country breast-feeding is the norm...

        I don't know what the relation is between vaccination and breast-feeding...

        And vaccination is mandatory and should be mandatory even if you are an adult!

        I don't want you near me, or my children (specially my children) if you don't have your vaccination up to date!

        It is not a "personal belief" it's a matter of public health and safety!

        1. TLMinut profile image59
          TLMinutposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          ----------
          This is what I don't quite understand - if vaccinations are effective, why would you be so concerned that you come in contact with the disease? Not that you would seek someone out that's sick, but isn't the only one at risk the one who isn't vaccinated?

          1. fit2day profile image77
            fit2dayposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Thank you TLMinut, apparently I'm going to give everyone the flu who has their flu shots, because I didn't get mine.

          2. pedrog profile image58
            pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            This is my best understanding of the issue:

            Inoculation is not an exact science, in theory our immune system carries the information for 10 years, but in me it could be for 9 years, in my children 8 or 7 years or something else, so if you are infected and not inoculated for some disease i have a chance to catch it even if i am in the normal period of immunization but my system doesn't carry the information anymore, children are particularly vulnerable to these kind of diseases...

            If i am not correct in something, someone please correct me.

            1. fit2day profile image77
              fit2dayposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Seriously pedrog, I'd like for you to write a hub on this subject. I'll read it to try and understand your full argument. I'm not completely against vaccines, but I think the way they're mandated and the fact that there are so many of them is insane. I don't know how many times I've pumped gas and seen "need a flu shot?" flash on the screen.

              It makes me think, I'm pumping gas, why the hell would I be thinking about a shot. (btw, never had the flu or the shot)

              The companies making these things are as concerned with keeping people from sickness as they are about curing cancer. If it were up to them, they'd make 100 placebo vaccines that everyone would have to get annually. The vaccines aren't free, out of pocket, insurance, or taxes, somebody's paying for them.

              1. pedrog profile image58
                pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                I've never seen publicity for vaccination in my country, the mandatory vaccines are free (payed by the government), i've never took the flu shot, maybe when i'm older (i'm pretty healthy).

                And there are so many vaccines because there are MANY diseases... And when the HIV vaccine comes out i'm the first one in line tongue

                1. fit2day profile image77
                  fit2dayposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Taxes pay the government. In my country citizens work to pay for politicians to talk about what they're going to do with the money.

                  you'll be first in line to get the HIV vaccine...lol

      2. Marisa Wright profile image94
        Marisa Wrightposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I suggest you do some Googling about polio, and look at the pictures of rows and rows of children in iron lungs in the days before the polio vaccine.

        How do you explain that we've been able to eradicate smallpox from the world by the use of vaccines, and have made huge inroads on polio by the same method?

    7. recommend1 profile image67
      recommend1posted 5 years ago

      The rise in popularity of these stupidly dangerous ideas and the brain dead followers of creationism are an interesting side effect of the wide availability of a vast range of information - to people unable to deal with it all.  You know, really stupid people.

      I seem to remember it was Wittgenstein who talked about a meta-language that could encompass all the various disciplines to raise the 'quality' of knowledge and understanding to new levels, beyond those of simply philosophy, physics etc on their own. The way current academic research and progress is carried out contains a pinch of his original ideas I think.

      The inferred side of such a meta-language would be that dimwits would not understand it, seems a good idea in retrospect.

      1. fit2day profile image77
        fit2dayposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Yes recommend1, I believe in God and don't apologize for it. If it wasn't for information, I'd still be popping pills in an attempt to be healthy, so yes I'm one of those dangerous really stupid people you're talking about.

        Please don't argue with me, I'm too stupid to get it.

        1. pedrog profile image58
          pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Go pray in silence please!

          Mathew 6:6

          "But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

        2. recommend1 profile image67
          recommend1posted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Don't muddy this up by suggesting that god is even an issue in my post - I mentioned creationists, and they have nothing to do with god or any branch of christianity.

          I think you are right in your last statement.

    8. melpor profile image88
      melporposted 5 years ago

      The whooping cough number is higher among children who are vaccinated because they are not getting the required booster shots to keep the whooping cough virus at bay. Because of this lapse in vaccination these children, and adults also, are putting immune compromised people such as cancer patients, the elderly, and people who have not been vaccinated at a greater risk of coming down with whooping cough. Whooping cough can be deadly if not treated properly and it is something you do not want to get. I know, I had the whooping cough as a child many years ago and it was not a pleasant experience. Please get your child vaccinated and adults get your booster shots. This disease was almost eradicated at one point. If we keep making unwise decisions like this the polio virus will be around again.

    9. hinazille profile image84
      hinazilleposted 5 years ago

      Vaccinations may be in some cases neccessary, but in most cases they are not. the incidence of vaccinated individuals acquiring the very same condition they are vaccinating against is pretty high, and can lead to other complications.

      the best way to protect yourself against disease is to develop and maintain a healthy, efficient immune system - taking supplements (natural) can aid in boosting the immune system, so are well worth checking out.

      I noticed someone towards the top of this post mentioned that they thought the anti-vaccination movement is dangerous. utterly unbelievable! the facts clearly show that vaccinations are neither effective, nor longterm, for the most part.

      1. pedrog profile image58
        pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Please suply some facts to your claims! I Will acept links to credible studies, not quack, pseudoscience sites.

        Thank you.

        1. sannyasinman profile image59
          sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          The double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, the gold standard of organized medicine, has never been used to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. No risk-to-benefit studies have ever been done. Vaccines remain scientifically unproven!

      2. cloverleaffarm profile image73
        cloverleaffarmposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Really? Boosting the immune system against polio, diphtheria, rubella?
        They developed this vaccines to prevent the disease. You can have the healthiest immune system in the world, if you are not vaccinated against theses diseases, you are at risk of developing them.

    10. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Child Paralyzed By Vaccinations And Stolen From Mother By State
      http://vactruth.com/2012/04/13/paralyze … cinations/

      Yet more evidence of the dangers of vaccines.
      These children and MANY MORE have died or had their health irrevocably damaged by vaccines . . 

      http://sanevax.org/victims-2/vaccine-victims-memorial/

      1. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Jonas Salk must be rolling in his grave.

        1. cloverleaffarm profile image73
          cloverleaffarmposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          That, or laughing at them all.

      2. pedrog profile image58
        pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        QUACK ALERT:

        vactruth.com: http://vactruth.com/about/ as you can see, nothing to do with science, just a "landing page" to grab email adress, and spread pseudoscience.

        sanevax.org; Just another "consumer" website with no scientific credibility:

        http://whois.net/whois/sanevax.org

        http://sanevax.org/media-about-2/about-us/

        1. Lizolivia profile image88
          Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Salk's polio vaccine was contaminated with a rhesus monkey virus, SV40, that has shown to cause cancer.
          Some animal viruses are difficult to detect and some require a longer period of time before they appear in the culture.

          3. Federal regulatory agencies either did not know, or knew and did not do anything about, evidence that SV40 contaminated oral polio vaccine was released for use by the public from the 1960’s through the 1990’s.

          Aside of an unknown cancer-causing virus lurking in the vials, the vaccinated were getting polio:
          On 8 May 1955, the Surgeon General suspended the entire US production of the vaccine and called for emergency meetings with Salk and the manufacturers. They then agreed that these cases were caused by polioviruses surviving the formaldehyde poisoning by being inside ‘lumps in the vaccine'.  The manufacturers agreed to stir their vaccine better, the public were told they had no further need to worry, and the distribution of the vaccine resumed.
          In Boston during the next 4 months, more than 2,000 of the vaccinated went down with polio - yet in the previous year there were only 273 cases. The number of cases doubled in vaccinated NY State and Connecticut, and tripled in Vermont. There was a five-fold increase in polio in vaccinated Rhode Island and Wisconsin.  Many children were paralyzed in the vaccine-injected arm.
          By '57 Polio cases rose from 300 to 400% in the five states or cities that made the Salk vaccine compulsory by law.

      3. cloverleaffarm profile image73
        cloverleaffarmposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        As a former foster parents, the state would not "steal" a child just because you vaccinated it. A child has to be pretty abused to be "taken" by the state.

        1. innersmiff profile image71
          innersmiffposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Really? A child my girlfriend knew got stolen because she went to school on a public bus.

    11. melbel profile image93
      melbelposted 5 years ago

      I found this bit interesting:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0IvM8c-Pew

      1. pedrog profile image58
        pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Love those guys, that episode answer some questions in this thread.

    12. Quilligrapher profile image90
      Quilligrapherposted 5 years ago

      Let’s look at measles. The Associated Press noted recently that the 222 cases of measles reported in the USA last year are significantly higher than the approximate 60 incidents usually reported. Two thirds of the Americans struck had not been vaccinated. Among them were 50 children whose parents evaded state requirements with philosophical, religious or medical exemptions. In Europe, where vaccination rates are much lower, the number of outbreaks was much larger. Only 27 cases have been reported in the USA so far this year. If you believe vaccination causes the disease to spread, you have to be asking yourself why there aren’t many, many more cases.

      1. Hollie Thomas profile image60
        Hollie Thomasposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I'm broadly in favour of vaccinations. Both my children were vaccinated for polio etc, however, not for MMR. The reason for this is that my local health authority would not separate the vaccinations, children had to have the three vaccines in one. When my daughter was born I had a long conversation with a midwife about this. I asked her if she had given permission for her children to have the three in one. She answered honestly and said that she had not, she would only consider vaccinating her children if the vaccine was given separately. Her husband, a GP, was of the same mind, they simply felt, as I, that there had been enough studies (longitudal) to completely eliminate any potential risks.

        Now I know that measles, mumps and rubella can in some cases result in far more serious illnesses. However, on balance, after weighing up the risks of vaccination and none vaccination, I decided against. Both my children have had measles and German measles, but not mumps. I have to admit that when they had both conditions I felt a twinge of both guilt and doubt about the decision I had taken, but fortunately the illness only lasted a few days. That was many years ago.

        I was vaccinated against measles (German) when I was a child, however, after my son was born I was told that I had no immunity against the disease and was re-vaccinated. Same again after my daughters birth!

    13. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago
      1. pedrog profile image58
        pedrogposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        QUACK ALERT:

        MERCOLA.COM: http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/mercola.html

        NVIC nothing to do with science, just a consumer association: http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/mercola.html

      2. Quilligrapher profile image90
        Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Hi Sanny. Me back again.

        I believe you think you have very good reasons to be opposed to widespread vaccinations. I respect every parent’s desire to apply their learning to protect their children. They have, after all, primary responsibility for the welfare of their infants. However, when adults urge others to place their children at risk on the basis of anecdotes and unsound advice from untrained and unqualified “experts”, they are irresponsible and neglient.   

        Any adult looking to determine if vaccines do more harm than good should consider the records and indisputable accomplishments of some vacccines:   
        The first major outbreak of polio in the United States occurred with 132 cases reported in Vermont in 1894.
        The virus spread each and every year until the number of cases exploded during the four years following WWII. The average each year grew to more than 20,000.
        At its peak, 93,000 new cases were reported in the USA during 1952 and 1953.
        The successful trials of the Salk vaccine led to a nationwide vaccination program in 1955.
        By 1957, there are only about 5600 cases of polio in the United States.
        In 1964, the reported cases of polio drops to only 121 nationally.
        Finally, the last indigenous transmission of wild poliovirus occurred in 1979. That was the year man and vaccine conquered polio.

        Sanny, do you want to see this disease return? I do not and, therefore, I favor helping young immune systems to resist common contagious infections that have a long history of killing and crippling youngsters.

        1. sannyasinman profile image59
          sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Yet another doctor warns aginst vaccine dangers. This one is perhaps more to your liking, as she gives very specific definitions of the terminology and testing methods used for vaccines, using scientific and medical terminology. No emotion or "quack science" involved.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAJb01ZiJNk

          What do you think?

          1. Quilligrapher profile image90
            Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this


            Thanks, Sanny, for the link and for inviting me to comment on its contents.

            The video actually provides everything you said it would:
            The narrator is a MD.
            She discusses definitions, terminology, and testing methods.
            She uses medical and scientific terms.
            There is no “quack science.”

            In fact, there is NO SCIENCE in the presentation at all. She raises several questions about vaccine safety but does not provide an answer for any of the questions she raises. No science is offered to justify her opinions about vaccine safety. More importantly, she does not reveal a single scientific study that supports her doubts about the safety of vaccines. In short, every thing she said is based on conjecture and is intellectually bankrupt.

            This last observation may in deed be at the heart of our different opinions about vaccination. I have an open mind and I am sincerely looking for an intellectual justification for the anti-vax movement when there is none. It appears to me proponents are satisfied with opinions and conclusions that resonate with those they already embrace. In addition, they appear to be willing to advocate a point of view without demanding any evidence to support it. Emotions, suspicions, and mistrust of doctors and pharmaceutical firms are repeated themes accompanying arguments devoid of analytical thinking.

            All of which is fine with me. Everyone must arrive at their own conclusions using whatever methods work for them. Those with children are free not to vaccinate them if they are so inclined. However, it is my opinion that it is irresponsible for an adult to urge others to place their children at serious risk based on anecdotes and unsound advice from untrained and unqualified “experts.”

            Finally, to help me to understand better, can you explain why you accept the opinions of this particular Doctor and reject the opinions of thousands of other Doctors that disagree with her?

            1. sannyasinman profile image59
              sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Quilligrapher:
              There are many, many doctors who are aware of vaccine dangers and who agree with this particular doctor, and many doctors who will not vaccinate their own children.  However as you know, medical doctors as a whole simply repeat what they were taught in the medical schools which are funded by BigPharma. If they dare voice an independent opinion, they are ridiculed and ostricised by the rest of the medical community.  There is no "healthy debate" permitted. You know this is true.   

              Also, there is no shortage of research regarding the negative effects of a wide variety of vaccines. From Gardasil to the seasonal flu shot, studies have proven that the extreme risks associated with vaccinating often outweigh the benefits. Here is a fraction of the research (over 100 studies) tying vaccines to a host of health conditions:
              http://www.activistpost.com/2011/09/100 … ngers.html

              The double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, the gold standard of organized medicine, has never been used to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. If you know of one, please provide information. Vaccine safety remains scientifically unproven!

              Nowadays, BigPharma can issue vaccines (of which more and more are becoming mandatory), without adequate scientific studies to prove that they are safe for human use. In addition they demand total immunity from any liability regarding death or health damage caused by vaccination. Why?

              So BigPharma can inject you and your children with whatever they like, without fully disclosing the ingredients, and without ever needing to prove it's safety. It is up to the public to suffer the effects of vaccination for themselves, and then fight an uphill battle to prove that a vaccine is dangerous - and there are many, many individuals who have had their lives either ended or totally destroyed by vaccination. You know this is true also.

              Do you see nothing wrong in this?

              1. Shanna11 profile image92
                Shanna11posted 5 years agoin reply to this

                There are many, many, many, many, many, many MORE individuals who have had THEIR lives ended or destroyed by third-world diseases that vaccines have eradicated.

                There was an outbreak of whooping cough-- a third world disease that should be eradicated in the US-- in California last summer among infants too young to be vaccinated. Do you want to know WHY they lost their lives to a disease they should have NEVER had? They were too young to fight the disease, but the UNVACCINATED kids who contracted whooping cough passed it on to these babies, and they died!

                Do YOU see nothing wrong this?

                Cost/benefit analysis. It's pretty basic.

                Besides, your 'research' links are hardly credible. At all. That's also also pretty basic to see.

                1. sannyasinman profile image59
                  sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  Did you say whooping cough? Well, now we come full circle, back to the original posted item. Which was . .

                  Whooping cough outbreaks higher among children already vaccinated. Measles vaccines cause measles . .  and more

                  http://www.naturalnews.com/035466_whoop … reaks.html

                  Funny that . . .

                  You also conveniently ignore that which you can't prove or explain.
                  Again, there is NO double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, the gold standard of organized medicine, which has ever been used to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals.  Why? Surely you must agree that the onus is on the drug manufacturer to prove that a vaccine is safe for human use before it is injected into peoples veins?

                  Again ,please show me ANY scientific study that PROVES vaccines are safe and actually immunise the person against the disease.
                  There is much evidence of people either dying from the vaccine, or still contracting the disease AFTER vaccination. (see previous posts).

                  1. Aficionada profile image88
                    Aficionadaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    In the Reuters article that was linked in the wildly inaccurate Natural News article, the researchers stated very clearly that the vaccinated children who did contract whooping cough did not get as sick as those who had not been vaccinated.

                    If there is so much evidence of people dying from vaccines, please provide links to trustworthy sources that support your claim.

              2. Quilligrapher profile image90
                Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Hi there, Sannyasinman.

                Again, I appreciate your providing links to the data you claim justifies your position on the dangers of vaccines. As I said before, I am looking for an intellectual justification to support your position and you always respond with cut and paste information pointing us to sources that you never read yourself.

                I examined your source “100 Compiled Studies on Vaccine Dangers” offered to us above. I suggest you revisit this web site yourself.

                Here are the first twelve studies cut from just the first section. Studies you claim prove vaccination is unsafe today. Please look over this list carefully:

                “Vaccines and Immunization References and Research Citations; Vaccines Have Been Linked to Leukemias and Lymphomas:

                Bichel, “Post-vaccinial Lymphadenitis Developing into Hodgkin’s Disease”, Acta Med Scand, 1976, Vol 199, p523-525.

                Stewart, AM, et al, “Aetiology of Childhood Leukaemia”, Lancet, 16 Oct, 1965, 2:789-790. [Listed under Vaccine Adverse Reactions.]

                Glathe, H et al, “Evidence of Tumorigenic Activity of Candidate Cell Substrate in Vaccine Production by the Use of Anti-Lymphocyte Serum”, Development Biol Std, 1977, 34:145-148.

                Bolognesi, DP, “Potential Leukemia Virus Subunit Vaccines: Discussion”, Can Research, Feb 1976, 36(2 pt 2):655-656.

                Colon, VF, et al, “Vaccinia Necrosum as a Clue to Lymphatic Lymphoma”, Geriatrics, Dec 1968, 23:81-82.

                Park-Dincsoy, H et al, “Lymphoid Depletion in a case of Vaccinia Gangrenosa”, Laval Med, Jan 1968, 39:24-26.

                Hugoson, G et al, “The Occurrence of Bovine Leukosis Following the Introduction of Babesiosis Vaccination”, Bibl Haemat, 1968, 30:157-161.

                Hartstock, , “”Post-vaccinial Lymphadenitis: Hyperplasia of Lymphoid Tissue That Simulates Malignant Lymphomas”, Apr 1968, Cancer, 21(4):632-649.

                Allerberger, F, “An Outbreak of Suppurative Lymphadenitis Connected with BCG Vaccination in Austria- 1990/1991,” Am Rev Respir Disorder, Aug 1991, 144(2) 469.

                Omokoku B, Castells S, “Post-DPT inoculation cervical lymphadenitis in children.” N Y State J Med 1981 Oct;81(11):1667-1668. Vaccines and Chromosome Changes Leading to Mutations:

                Knuutila, S et al, “An Increased Frequency of Chromosomal Changes and SCE’s in Cultured Lymphocytes of 12 Subjects Vaccinated Against Smallpox,” Hum Genet, 1978 Feb 23; 41(1):89-96.

                Cherkeziia, SE, et al, “Disorders in the Murine Chromosome Apparatus Induced By Immunization with a Complex of Anti-viral Vaccines,” Vopr Virusol, 1979 Sept Oct, (5):547-550”


                Now, go back and read these titles again, only this time take note of the dates on these studies: 1976, 1965, 1977, 1976, 1968, 1968, 1968, 1968, 1991, 1981, 1978, and 1979. Every study in your list of 100 is more than 15 years old and about half go back fifty years to the ‘60s.
                You describe doctors as mindless robots that follow BigPharma without exercising their own individual intelligence. Nearly every teenage high school junior knows it takes an IQ above 120 to practice medicine and only about 3% of human race come close to that level. You believe that the best minds on the planet “as a whole simply repeat what they were taught in the medical schools.” The same distrust of science and advanced thinking that led humanity into the Dark Ages is still at work trying to lead the world back to those times.

                Sorry, Sanny. I have yet to find any intellectual justificaton or analytical thinking coming from anti-vax proponents. But, I encourage you to keep looking.

                1. sannyasinman profile image59
                  sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  My, you do like to make inferences . . .
                  I never said anything derogatory about doctors' intelligence. I said that they are trained to ignore anything which does not involve drugs or surgery. They are trained to think the same way, the way that suits BigPharmas profits - and vaccines are VERY profitable.   

                  It is the RESPONSIBILITY of the developers, promoters and enforcers of vaccines to prove their safety and efficacy. It should not be incumbent upon the general public to have to prove that vaccines are dangerous. Don't you see this?

                  Read this . . .

                  http://vactruth.com/2012/04/11/weve-sho … the-proof/

                  1. Quilligrapher profile image90
                    Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                    Hi Sanny,

                    Here I am again. I have noticed that each time I present research that challenges your previous post, you never question the data or correct me. You just post another link to another article spewing more distrust and flawed logic.  I am beginning to think you get paid for back links to web sites that urge parents to refuse vaccinations and to place their infants risk. You have no data and no conclusive studies. This time you linked to an article writen by a housewife selling a book she wrote. How does she prove a link between autism and vaccines? “It was very moving at the end of the rally when Jenny McCarthy asked parents to hold up the posters of their children and show the media their proof. The crowd was silent as the cameras spanned the beautiful faces of child after child who had developed autism after a vaccine. They couldn’t all be coincidences, I thought.” Vaccinated children that develop autism is proof?  A recent study shows 1 out of 88 children have ASD whether vacination or not. 

                    The Autism Science Foundation provides funding directly to scientist conducting cutting-edge autism research to discover the causes of autism and develop better treatments. They say, “It’s been so rewarding to see the scientific progress being made toward understanding what causes autism and in developing better treatments for individuals with autism. While there are still a handful of parents who, in almost a religious way, cling to the notion that vaccines cause autism, the vast majority of parents and scientists have accepted what the data clearly show. There is no data to support an autism vaccine link. There never has been. Vaccines don’t cause autism. (emphasis added)

                    A decade ago most agreed that we need to study vaccines in relation to autism. We had to reconcile the fact that the number of vaccines children were receiving was increasing, and at the same time, the number of children who were being diagnosed with autism also was on the rise. But fortunately this was a question that could be studied – and answered – by science. We looked at children who received vaccines and those who didn’t, or who received them on a different, slower schedule. There was no difference in their neurological outcomes. We’ve done multiple studies looking at the measles, mumps and rubella vaccination in relation to autism. We’ve looked at thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative, and its relation to autism. The studies are very clear; there is no relationship in the data between vaccines and autism.” (1)

                    Rather than post another link to another article, why don’t you  point out to us why you disbelieve this conclusion of The Autism Science Foundation. You will also find over 20 links on the page to funded studies. Unlike your links, nearly all of these were published in the last eight years.
                    The safety and efficacy of vaccines has been proven only you and your kind place more credibility with those who provide you with NO proof.

                    The Institute of Medicine has studied the hypothesis that vaccines, specifically the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and thimerosal-containing vaccines, are causally associated with autism. The conclusions, published in  “Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism”, is there is no causal relationship between MMR vaccine and autism, nor is there a causal relationship between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism. (2)

                    Again, if you question these conclusions then state your case instead leading us off to another web site bent on ignoring the volumes of evidence that vaccines do the job for which they are intended.

                    (1) http://www.autismsciencefoundation.org/ … cines.html
                    (2) http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2004/Immuniz … utism.aspx

                    1. sannyasinman profile image59
                      sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                      As previously stated, the medical profession ostricises ANYONE who disagrees with the "official line" regarding vaccine safety and efficacy, which remains, despite what you say, unproven. Any doctor who is brave enough to risk ruining his professional credibility by speaking out, is labelled as a "quack" or something equally derogatory.

                      You also conveniently turn a blind eye to the mountains of evidence that vaccines are dangerous and have killed or ruined many, many peoples lives. 

                      Regarding autism and vaccine links, see this ... 
                      http://www.cryshame.org/

                      Oh and the IoM . . would this be the same Institute of Medecine which gave full support to declaring a level 6 swine-flu pandemic two years ago? A pandemic where WHO was shown to be in collusion with BigPharma, a pandemic which even WHO now admits never existed, but on their say-so, governments the world over were panicked into spending billions on ineffective, unnecessary vacines? is this your reference for the safery and efficacy of vaccines?

    14. moonlake profile image91
      moonlakeposted 5 years ago

      I don't want to go back to days of old without vaccinating. It's bad enough they no longer give small pox vaccinations. My doctor said if small pox comes back our kids will die from it or live and have terrible scarring.
      I had whooping cough as a child it was terrible.
      Not getting vaccinations is what's causing all the outbreaks in my opinion and I'm sure no expert. 
      Not to mention what measles can do to the babies of women who are pregnant.
      My cousin was in an iron lung from polio now that he is much older symptoms of that polio are coming back.

    15. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Infant Monkeys Given Standard Doses of Vaccines Develop Autism Symptoms

      http://vran.org/in-the-news/infant-monk … -symptoms/

      1. Eric Newland profile image60
        Eric Newlandposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        http://neuroskeptic.blogspot.com/2011/0 … t.html?m=1

        If you REALLY want to protect your kids from autism, you know what you should do? Not have sex during winter.

        http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/ne … ntion/5250

        16% higher risk! An actual correlation! Parents who conceive during winter are being irresponsible!

      2. Shanna11 profile image92
        Shanna11posted 5 years agoin reply to this

        That study is outdated, and unless you can find a more recently updated published version of it that provides the hard data, it's hardly legitimate.

        How many monkeys were used? What type of monkeys? What exactly were the 'autism-LIKE symptoms'? Do monkeys even have autism? What are the comparative sizes and weights of the infant monkeys to that of a child who would have received that vaccine? Who funded the study? What were the results numerically among the study?

        The reporting on the study is murky at best. It cannot be taken seriously until hard numeric data is provided and has been reviewed by unbiased peers.

    16. Healthy Pursuits profile image90
      Healthy Pursuitsposted 5 years ago

      Wow! What a lively debate! I agree with several statements. I think that too many toxins are being introduced with vaccines, and that too many unnecessary vaccinations are occurring - and some of them are being given to babies that are too young.
      However, I'm also old enough to remember the 1950's when some vaccines were not regularly used. One of my classmates in grade school was deaf due to measles, and two other classmates in the high school were crippled from Polio. One of my elderly neighbors was also badly pockmarked from Smallpox, and had lost her two sisters when she was sick with it as a child.
      I lived in a small town of about 8500 people, and people in my town didn't travel a lot.
      After I began to study health issues, I looked back on my hometown and wondered how the disease picture in that population would look with today's global travel versus the lack of vaccinations in the 1950's.
      We are now in an odd place historically, where most of us still have the benefit of herd immunity, which means that we are protected by the majority of people around us either being immune to a disease or not having been exposed to it by strangers to the group. Some of that is due to having a generally cleaner, healthier population with healthier immune systems, and some of it is due to vaccinations.
      I think that we can discuss this issue all we want to, but as more people refuse more vaccinations, and more people travel, the debate about how immunity stands in the modern world will be settled by Mother Nature. We will then know if we should or should not be receiving at least certain vaccinations.

    17. psycheskinner profile image80
      psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

      The risk analysis clearly shows you child is more likely to die or be seriously harmed from *not* being vaccinated.  The fact we still have pediatric measles fatalities is a national disgrace.

      And the reason vaccinated children contract disease is lack of herd immunity--that is, when population vaccination falls below 85% rates of disease go up in both vaccinated and unvaccinated kids.

      1. Healthy Pursuits profile image90
        Healthy Pursuitsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        While having too many members in any population group vulnerable to a disease is a lousy idea, vaccinated children contracting a disease anyway really depends on the disease.

        For many diseases, if the disease has a lot of bodies to play in, it can change just enough to make it still able to infect a vaccinated person, even if the infection has less severe symptoms.  So, I agree that lack of herd immunity can in some cases overcome vaccination.

        It's better to not give the disease room to spread in the first place.

        While measles can be terrible and is an extremely infectious disease, I also worry about babies and whooping cough. When I was a child - again in the 1950's - babies were still dying of whooping cough often enough that it was considered a possible cause if someone heard that a baby had died, if the baby died in any season but summer.
        If a parent chooses to not vaccinate a baby until a certain age, or at all, it's very important for the parents, older siblings and grandparents to take the responsibility to be vaccinated or to get boosters for whooping cough. A baby's immune system is not strong enough to combat this disease. The disease can easily be spread to the baby by other members who have it but are combating it well enough that they aren't aware their discomfort is due to whooping cough.

      2. Lizolivia profile image88
        Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        If a false history is repeated often enough, the chances are that people will believe it. It is simply a matter of most of us not having time to check all the facts for ourselves.
        13 days after the vaccine had been acclaimed as one of the greatest medical discoveries of the century, came the news of disaster. Within two weeks nearly 200 vaccinated children came down with polio. May 1955, the Surgeon General suspended the entire US production of the vaccine. The manufacturers agreed to stir their vaccine better, the public told they need not worry, and the distribution of the vaccine resumed. It was now reported by the media that the vaccine still seemed to be causing a polio epidemic rather than preventing it. There was a five-fold increase in polio in the vaccinated. Many children were paralyzed in the vaccine-injected arm.
        1955, the Medical Practitioners' Union reported, "In fact, there is no evidence that any lasting immunity is achieved [by vaccination]." Polio cases rose from 300 to 400% in the five states that made the Salk vaccine compulsory by law.
        The immediate profits made were very considerable. Wyeth's profits went up 50% between '55 and '56. Merck's - $16M to $20M. Eli Lilly - $16M to $30M.
           There were no polio epidemics after '56 and by 1964 very few cases were being reported. What happened?  Regulatory changes:
        '60 - decreed that all cases of polio within 30 days of vaccine were to be recorded, not as possibly caused by the vaccine, but as ‘pre-existing'. Ensured that far fewer cases of vaccine failure would be recorded. Also, The Los Angeles County health authority explained: ‘Most cases reported prior to July 1, 1958 of non-paralytic poliomyelitis are now reported as viral or aseptic meningitis' in accordance with instructions from Washington.' Between 1951 and 1960 in the US 70,083 cases of non-paralytic polio were diagnosed - and zero cases of aseptic meningitis. Over the next twenty years over 100,000 cases of aseptic meningitis were diagnosed and only 589 cases of ‘non-paralytic polio'.
        Non-paralytic polio was renamed as meningitis even though the poliovirus were present!  Reported figures for polio were officially to exclude ‘cases of aseptic meningitis due to poliovirus or other enteroviruses.' Canada - 1959 official bulletin entitled Poliomyelitis Trends, 1958. It may be noted that the Dominion Council of Health at its 74th meeting in Oct. '58 recommended that for the purposes of national reporting and statistics the term non-paralytic poliomyelitis be replaced by ‘meningitis, viral or aseptic'‘.

    18. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      100 Compiled Studies on Vaccine Dangers

      There is no shortage of research regarding the negative effects of a wide variety of vaccines. From Gardasil to the seasonal flu shot, studies have proven that the extreme risks associated with vaccinating oftentimes outweigh the minor benefits. Here is a fraction of the research (over 100 studies) tying vaccines to a host of health conditions, broken down by category:
      http://www.activistpost.com/2011/09/100 … ngers.html

      1. Shanna11 profile image92
        Shanna11posted 5 years agoin reply to this

        MINOR benefits?

        Oh you mean like not dying of one of those diseases?

        You are completely misguided if you think that the amount of people who have bad reactions to vaccines is in any way comparable to the amount of people who have died as a result of the diseases that vaccines eradicate.
        Here's a hint--- the amount of people negatively affected by vaccines is SUCH a tiny fraction of the amount of people who have died in droves from those diseases.

        I cannot believe how you turn a blind eye to all those millions of deaths that vaccines now prevent.

        1. sannyasinman profile image59
          sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Again I repeat . . .

          The double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial, the gold standard of organized medicine, has never been used to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. If you know of one, please provide information. Until you or BigPharma can do that, vaccine safety and effectiveness remains scientifically unproven!

          1. Aficionada profile image88
            Aficionadaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            It appears that you are saying that the only acceptable "scientific proof" is the gold standard -- the double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.  But is that accurate?

            There is also the question of ethics in this situation. Is it actually ethical to ask parents to deliberately expose their children to life-threatening and maiming diseases in order to prove something to your satisfaction? As a parent, I would not want to take that risk with my children's health. I would not want to take that risk with their lives.

            I wonder if the parents who live in countries where some of these diseases are still rampant would choose to avoid vaccinating their children, if the choice of vaccinating them is offered?

            1. sannyasinman profile image59
              sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Yet you are willing to inject a toxic chemical cocktail into your children's body, without any proof that it is safe, without even knowing what the true contents are, and without knowing if it will actually prevent the disease in question, because no study has ever been done to prove that it actually does immunise the person against the disease. 

              The onus is upon the medical profession to fully test a vaccine before it is released. They do not do this. Why not? They are obliged to do tests and trials for other drugs, why not vaccines?

              1. Aficionada profile image88
                Aficionadaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Again, you are making claims that you need to back up.  Just saying it a lot of times does not make it accurate.

                You say that there is no proof that vaccines are safe.  That's not true either. Even if the proof does not fit the gold standard that you wish to meet, there is still the proof of safety in the millions of children who have been safely vaccinated since vaccinations began.

                1. sannyasinman profile image59
                  sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  One of my favorite articles explaining just how safe unvaccinated children are is written by Homeopath and G.P Dr Jayne Donegan who writes:

                  We vaccinate against lots of childhood diseases now because we are told that having the diseases is a bad thing and leads to thousands of deaths. However, when we look at the figures from the Office for National Statistics, we see that 95% of the people who used to die from measles stopped dying before the vaccine was introduced in 1968 and similarly 99% of the people who used to die of whooping cough. The mortality rate for tuberculosis fell no differently in countries that did and did not use the BCG vaccine. Scarlet fever, rheumatic fever and typhus were deadly killers. They all disappeared without a vaccine.

    19. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Doctors Change Names of Diseases When Vaccines Do Not Work

      http://vactruth.com/2012/04/25/change-n … -diseases/

    20. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      "Nearly all polio outbreaks since 1961 were caused by the oral polio vaccine," -Jonas Salk, inventor of the IPV, testifying before a Senate subcommittee in 1972

      "Use of either Salk or Sabin vaccine will increase the possibility that your child will contact the disease. It appears that the most effective way to protect your child from polio is to make sure that he doesn't get the vaccine "---Dr Mendelsohn M.D.(1984)
      http://www.whale.to/v/mendelsohn.html

      The Lancet reported in 1976 that vaccines do not adequately protect against whooping cough and close to one-third of notified cases were fully vaccinated.

      The Lancet reported in 1977 that there is no protection demonstrated from whooping cough vaccine in infants.

      Science reported in 1977 that as many as 26 percent of children receiving the rubella vaccination develop arthritis.

    21. SmartAndFun profile image91
      SmartAndFunposted 5 years ago

      1972, 1984, 1976, 1977, 1977...

      Your newest source is almost 30 years old. Has medicine not changed and advanced in 30 -40 years?

      1. sannyasinman profile image59
        sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Yes, incredible isn't it?
        Vaccines were unsafe and often inneffective then and they are still unsafe and often ineffective today, only there are many more of them, and they are now becoming mandatory.

      2. sannyasinman profile image59
        sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        To answer your question, where vaccines are concerned, apparently not. Some more recent facts to satisfy you that vaccines are ineffective and dangerous ...

        1996 - The Merck Manual publishes that “Autoimmune diseases may be initiated by the encephalitis that can follow rabies vaccination in which an autoimmune cross-reaction probably is initiated by animal brain tissue in the vaccine”.

        1999 - The Lancet publishes that there were 15,229 cases of diphtheria in Russia, and that most children were fully vaccinated.

        2002 - According to the NIH, a Japanese study in 2002, “Development of Vaccination Policy in Japan,” documents the number of Japanese children developing autism rose and fell in direct proportion to the number of children vaccinated each year.

        2006 - polio was reported on the rise in Nigeria despite an almost universal rate of vaccination in that country.

        1. Quilligrapher profile image90
          Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Hi Sanny, 
          Again, you post information that proves your position on vaccination is ill advised and you present it like it really proves your case.

          You suggest that polio vaccinations are not effective because polio cases were on the rise in 2006 in Nigeria, a country that you say has “an almost universal rate of vaccination.” However, again, you did not take the time to examine the underlying facts. Your statement is true but it actually proves how effective the polio vaccine has been in Nigeria.

          1. The Polio Eradication Organization reported 22 new cases of polio in Nigeria during 2006, an increase of 19 new cases over the previous year. (1)  However, the population of Nigeria in 2006 was 140.9 million people. (2)
          I will do the arithmetic for you: 22 new cases in a vaccinated population of 140.9 million people means 99.99985% of the population were able to resist infection.
          2. The outbreak of polio peaked at 154 new cases in 2009 and the population had grown to 151.2 million. In that year, 99.999% of the population were able to resist the virus.
          3. Before the polio vaccine was developed, the polio epidemic in the USA began with 132 new cases in 1894, grew every year to an average of 20,000 new cases during WWII, and finally peaked at 93,000 new cases during 1952-1953. A nationwide vaccination program was started in 1955. For 61 years, polio spread unchecked in the USA. Now that the polio vaccine is available worldwide, you suggest that 22 new cases in Nigeria during 2006 is proof that the vaccine in ineffective. How about the fact that new cases in Nigeria declined by 120 to only 34 new cases in 2011 with the population at 158 million? The number of new cases in Nigeria is declining and you want to convince us the vaccine is ineffective and even contributes to the spread of the virus.

          Sanny, you seem to have an endless inventory of false and misleading data and you obviously are not very concerned about the accuracy and validity of the claims you spread because I see no evidence that you research any of them yourself. You cut and paste from web sites that peddle untested theories to a gullible, ill-informed segment of society. The tragedy, however, is the spread of these untested theories can place many children at risk.

          Do as you please to your own children, but please do not urge others to risk the health of their children based upon your beliefs in half-truths and unproven conjecture.

          (1) http://www.polioeradication.org/Dataand … virus.aspx
          (2) http://www.tradingeconomics.com/nigeria/population

          1. sannyasinman profile image59
            sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Just like the climate scientists who are paid to prove that global warming is man made and caused by CO2 emissions (when it clearly is not), you cherry pick your data and conveniently ignore everything else. What about these

            1996 - The Merck Manual publishes that “Autoimmune diseases may be initiated by the encephalitis that can follow rabies vaccination in which an autoimmune cross-reaction probably is initiated by animal brain tissue in the vaccine”.

            1999 - The Lancet publishes that there were 15,229 cases of diphtheria in Russia, and that most children were fully vaccinated.

            2002 - According to the NIH, a Japanese study in 2002, “Development of Vaccination Policy in Japan,” documents the number of Japanese children developing autism rose and fell in direct proportion to the number of children vaccinated each year. 

            and what about this ...

            Italian court rules MMR vaccine did trigger autism. The Italian court ruled that the child “has been damaged by irreversible complications due to vaccination (prophylaxis trivalent MMR)” and ordered the Ministry of Health to compensate the child with a 15 year annuity and to reimburse the parents of their court cost..
            http://www.nyrnaturalnews.com/chemicals … er-autism/

            1. Quilligrapher profile image90
              Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Hi Sanny.

              Thank you for suggesting that I cherry pick my data when you are the one who introduced the rise of polio cases in Nigeria during 2006 as a proof that “vaccines are ineffective and dangerous!” All I did was point out to you two factors: 1) you did not examine the underlying facts yourself, and 2) the data actually demonstrates the vaccine is highly effective in curbing the spread of the wild poliovirus. Apparently, you agree with me on this one point since you introduced a new issue about an Italian court ruling but you conveniently ignored and did not challenge the conclusion drawn from the Nigerian data.

              1. sannyasinman profile image59
                sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                Lots and lots and lots of graphs and statistics (I know how much you like them) which show time and time again that drugs and vaccines played no part in the fall in infectious diseases. Read this with an open mind if you dare . . .

                http://preventdisease.com/news/10/10251 … shtml#Typh

                1. Quilligrapher profile image90
                  Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this



                  Hello Sanny,

                  Although I respect the enthusiasm of your convictions, I am disappointed, but not surprised, that your replies never address the data that prove your claims are inaccurate. Your reply to the Nigerian polio cases in 2006 included a link to an unrelated Italian legal decision about a MMR case. It had nothing to do with polio or the Nigerian outbreak. Typically, your posts display an unwillingness to acknowledge or address the evidence that exposes the errors in your claims. When asked to address the Nigerian issue, your reply contained a link to an article condemning the entire medical profession. All of your posts ignore the truth when it is pointed out to you. All you do is cut and paste more inane and illogical articles. Your posts never defend nor support your claims and this reveals a lot about the depth of your convictions.

          2. Lizolivia profile image88
            Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            polio (referred to as viral meningitis by the medical arena since 1960) and tuberculosis are likely the adverse effects that presented after mass smallpox inoculations.

    22. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Is the MMR vaccine necessary? This doctor says no . .

      http://www.cryshame.co.uk/index.php?opt … ;Itemid=80

    23. kjrzeek1 profile image73
      kjrzeek1posted 5 years ago

      I am not an expert by any means when it comes to vaccinations, but I chose not to vaccinate my children and they are the healthiest kids I know.  I talk to so many other parent and friends and their kids are getting multiple ear infections a year and are sick quite often.  My son is 4 and he has never had an ear infection in his life and has vomited once in his life.  He is in daycare at the gym and pre-school two days a week.  Vaccines can not be trusted, and the pharmaceutical industry is a pill pushing bully.  Too many doctors only want to treat your symptoms and not help you get healthy because you won't keep coming back for visits or refills.....Just my opinion....expose your children to everything that you can to help them develop a strong immune system and you will never need a prescription ever.  Eating right and taking care of your body is all you need to do.  Sorry, but I can't stand it when people want medicine to fix them.....Just my two cents...

      1. SmartAndFun profile image91
        SmartAndFunposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        On the other hand, kjrzeek, my children have always gotten all of their immunizations, and they are also extremely healthy, and fit the description you give of your children's health.

        I do hope that you never, ever travel overseas or to Mexico with your unvaccinated children.

        I also hope that an unvaccinated child who has travelled overseas and brought back measles or whooping cough or some other preventable disease, (or catches it here in the US due to one of more-and-more common outbreaks we are experiencing) does not get dropped off into the gym daycare with your child. The results could be disastrous.

        Even if your child was able to pull through the disease just fine, there's the chance he or she could unwittingly spread it to an ill, immunocompromised child, who cannot be vaccinated due to their weakened immune system. You could be responsible for another child's death.

      2. Lizolivia profile image88
        Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Many vaccines themselves spread the virus in the manner that they shed the virus for up to 8 weeks after inoculations. Referred to as viral shedding. The immuno-compromised are not to be near anyone who has been vaccinated within the previous 8 weeks, they can become very ill.

    24. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      More Proof that Flu Shots Don't Work . . .

      http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic … -work.aspx

      1. Aficionada profile image88
        Aficionadaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Oops, there you go indiscriminately tossing around the P-word again.

        To anyone interested: the link takes you to a site owned/operated by Dr. Joseph Mercola.  The site disclaimer states:   Bolding by me.

        In other words, there is no scientific research to back it up - it is merely opinions, possibly based on Dr. Mercola's independent "research."

        About Dr. Mercola, see: http://www.quackwatch.com/11Ind/mercola.html

        In case you missed it, that article is on a site called QUACK Watch.

    25. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Infant Mortality Tied to Number of Vaccines Given

      http://www.healingourchildren.org/infan … nes-given/

      1. Aficionada profile image88
        Aficionadaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        The disclaimer to that (Healing Our Children) site reads:


        Again, my own bolding.  About Ramiel Nagel, from his Amazon author page:



        His great claim to fame is his independent "research" on healing dental cavities through nutrition.  He is not a trained dentist; he is a layman who has studied the subject (without actual scientific research) and has come to these conclusions on his own.

        What gold standard of research - the double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial - has Ramiel Nagel followed to come up with his conclusions?

    26. innersmiff profile image71
      innersmiffposted 5 years ago

      http://s3.hubimg.com/u/6596314_f248.jpg

      1. Jane Bovary profile image84
        Jane Bovaryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Because if my kid catches something from your kid before she's had a chance to be vaccinated she will get sick.

        Those children who aren't vaccinated will be protected for a time by 'herd immunisation', (ie: the majority who do get vaccinations) but over time, if vaccination rates continue to drop, those unimmunised children will be at much greater risk and the potential to spread disease to as yet unvaccinated children will also be greater.

        1. Lizolivia profile image88
          Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Sounds like a ridiculous circus of big pharma propaganda.

    27. SmartAndFun profile image91
      SmartAndFunposted 5 years ago

      Smiff, there are four groups of children who unvaccinated kids put in danger:

      1. Infants who are not yet old enough to have received vaccines.

      2. Immunocompromised children whose immune systems are unable to tolerate vaccines, such as children who are transplant recipients, or have undergone chemotherapy or received a bone marrow donation.

      4. Vaccinated kids whose vaccine, for whatever reason, fails to provide adequate protection (no vaccine is 100% effective).

      3. Unvaccinated kids themseleves.

      In order to sustain herd immunity, 93-95% of the population needs to be immunized. In some communities where refusing immunizations has become the trendy thing to do, rates for children are as low as 70%. We are losing our herd immunity.

      It certainly would be a tragedy for a child to survive cancer or a heart transplant but then contract meningococcal meningitis from an unvaccinated playmate and die.

      And then there's grandma and grandpa. Don't bring your unvaccinated kids around the elderly, who are also vulnerable.

      1. innersmiff profile image71
        innersmiffposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I don't have the research, at hand, to tackle those points so let's accept them for now. On what moral basis can you argue for forcing vaccinations on children without the parent's consent? These days you need a permission form to take children to the local swimming pool - why is all of that thrown out of the window when it comes to vaccinations?

        There are also two huge red flags with the vaccination issue:
        1. They are free
        Nothing is free. If somebody is paying to give you something for free, there is clearly a special interest which needs to be looked at. A more sensible and moral solution would be to privatise vaccinations. Those who want them can have them and the ramifications are ultimately their responsibility. Those worried about the population as a whole can pool together to give free vaccines to those who can't afford them. Finally, increased competition would allow for cheaper, safer and more effective vaccines to be developed.
        2. They are enforced
        It's a truism that if something is forced upon you, the thing in question was not very desirable in the first place. If you are right and vaccines are completely safe, then there really shouldn't be an issue. In the long run, consumers are rational, as demonstrated by the decrease in tobacco usage over the past few decades, clearly based on the overwhelming evidence of its dangers. I don't have the stats to hand, but if vaccine refusals are on the increase, there has to be a reason for it and it is certainly worth looking at. If they are on the decrease, you have nothing to worry about and you don't have to force them on anyone!

        Enforced inoculation is violence, so as a pacifist I can not support it.

      2. Lizolivia profile image88
        Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Hormone chemicals in some vaccines are known to cause infertility. Immuno-compromised persons are not to go near anyone freshly vaccinated because some vaccines shed the virus for up to 8 weeks.
        Diptheria hasn't existed since clean water, sewer drains and improved nutrition. Fear the vaccine!  Smallpox - how many people does anyone know that lives or works on a farm with animals? Fear the vaccine!  Tetanus - Not only is an inoculation, particularly a 'pre'-inoculation for this non-effective, tetanus has barely even existed for a couple decades, nor has it ever been an epidemic. Fear the vaccine!  Whooping cough, pertussis - vaccine has been shown to cause asthma and wreck havoc to the respiratory system. Fear the vaccine!  Measles - Catch it when young and build a life-long immunity without adverse effects. Fear the vaccine!  Rubella - same as measles.  Mumps - same.  Flu - No one can predict the strain that will, or may, pose a problem early enough to make mass doses in time for it to be effective, not that any flu shot would be effective anyway.  Fear the vaccine!  etc, etc

    28. SmartAndFun profile image91
      SmartAndFunposted 5 years ago

      Here in the US vaccinations are not forced, nor are they free. My humble opinion is that getting healthy children immunized is the responsible thing to do. This not only protects the vaccinated kids, it ensures herd immunity, which helps prevent babies, immunocompromised kids and the elderly from contracting diseases that could kill them. I know two kids -- a cancer survivor and a heart-transplant recipient -- who cannot go to school or daycare because of unvaccinated kids.

      My own 4-year-old nephew is not vaccinated, and I worry that he could transmit something to my in-laws, who are in their 80s and in frail health. He loves his great grandparents and visits them at least once or twice a week. He also attends a church where many of the parents are against vaccination, so he plays and mingles once or twice a week with many unvaccinated kids at church, then goes and sits in the laps of his great grandparents. I worry about all three of them.

      1. innersmiff profile image71
        innersmiffposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Worry. Immunise your children. But do not enforce immunisation upon other peoples' children (thank goodness wherever you are vaccinations are not enforced, but I know of places where they are). It is that child's parents' business whether they do or not, and his great grandparents' business whether they want to be in contact with him. I worry that those who are strangled with worry will eventually panic and cause a disaster for civil liberties.

        Life is a risk. You might be able to prevent all diseases if you wanted to, but if you lose what makes life worth living in the first place, what's the point?

      2. Lizolivia profile image88
        Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        The vaccinated are walking carriers of the viruses, not the unvaccinated! Some viruses shed for up to 2 months after inoculation with each and every vaccine. All this viral shedding can cause illnesses in the people within the environment. Some people are more susceptible than others.

    29. SmartAndFun profile image91
      SmartAndFunposted 5 years ago

      You say it is only the unvaccinated children's parents' business whether they choose to vaccinate or not. However, their decision has an impact on the  health of the entire community, so that makes it everyone's business.

      1. Lizolivia profile image88
        Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        There is no medical impact on the health of anyone whatsoever by anyone who is not vaccinated. Your statements are absurd! However, anyone who is freshly vaccinated, needs to remain at a lengthy distance from people who are either immuno-compromised, or susceptible because many vaccines shed the virus for up to 8 weeks and they can become very ill.

    30. Paul Kemp profile image84
      Paul Kempposted 5 years ago

      How can the unvaccinated be a threat to the vaccinated, who are supposedly "protected" against that disease? Your logic is not sound.

      1. SmartAndFun profile image91
        SmartAndFunposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        The following is copied from my earlier post. I guess you didn't see it.

        "Smiff, there are four groups of children who unvaccinated kids put in danger:

        1. Infants who are not yet old enough to have received vaccines.

        2. Immunocompromised children whose immune systems are unable to tolerate vaccines, such as children who are transplant recipients, or have undergone chemotherapy or received a bone marrow donation.

        3. Vaccinated kids whose vaccine, for whatever reason, fails to provide adequate protection (no vaccine is 100% effective).

        4. Unvaccinated kids themseleves.

        In order to sustain herd immunity, 93-95% of the population needs to be immunized. In some communities where refusing immunizations has become the trendy thing to do, rates for children are as low as 70%. We are losing our herd immunity.

        It certainly would be a tragedy for a child to survive cancer or a heart transplant but then contract meningococcal meningitis from an unvaccinated playmate and die.

        And then there's grandma and grandpa. Don't bring your unvaccinated kids around the elderly, who are also vulnerable."

    31. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Italian court rules MMR vaccine did trigger autism

      http://www.nyrnaturalnews.com/chemicals … er-autism/

    32. psycheskinner profile image80
      psycheskinnerposted 5 years ago

      If you are suggesting we have more polio now that we vaccinate against it than we would if we didn't, that is mind-bogglingly inconsistent with what actually happened. Without the vaccination we would have thousands dead and many more living their lives in iron lung machines.

      Only people surround by responsible citizens who vaccinate their families are safe enough to believe that they don't work.

      1. Lizolivia profile image88
        Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Non-paralytic polio runs rampant in our society today and has for a long time. The diagnosis of non-paralytic polio was changed to viral and aseptic meningitis.
        There was a five-fold increase in polio in the vaccinated. Many children were paralyzed in the vaccine-injected arm.
        1955, the Medical Practitioners' Union reported, "In fact, there is no evidence that any lasting immunity is achieved [by vaccination]." Polio cases rose from 300 to 400% in the five states that made the Salk vaccine compulsory by law.
        The immediate profits made were very considerable. Wyeth's profits went up 50% between '55 and '56. Merck's - $16M to $20M. Eli Lilly - $16M to $30M.
           There were no polio epidemics after '56 and by 1964 very few cases were being reported. What happened?  Regulatory changes:
        '60 - decreed that all cases of polio within 30 days of vaccine were to be recorded, not as possibly caused by the vaccine, but as ‘pre-existing'. Ensured that far fewer cases of vaccine failure would be recorded.

        1. Quilligrapher profile image90
          Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Hi Ms. Liz. Welcome to the discussion.

          The polio vaccine, aggressive health care professionals, and diligent parents who vaccinate their children on schedule, are the major reasons polio has been eliminated in this country for over 30 years.

          Your comment above is a good example of the half-truths spread to mislead the public. It tries to discredit modern medical protocols that have been time tested, and proven successful. In your case, you offer a quote from a 57-year-old report as if it was still relevant today.
          Two observations about this rather odd statement.

          First, mass smallpox inoculations do not exist anywhere in the world today. Your comment suggests that your source is another ill-informed, cut-n-paste anti-vax proponent. Sanofi Pastuer Biologics Co, producer of the ACAM2000 smallpox vaccine, reports it is only available to high-risk individuals, designated U.S. military personnel, and certain laboratory researchers. It is not offered to the general public because the smallpox disease has been eliminated in the world. The federal government maintains an inventory in the Strategic National Stockpile, for distribution by the Department of Health and Human Services, in case it is ever needed. (2)

          Secondly, not all strains of Polio were re-classified as viral meningitis. I recommend you look into the differences between these two diseases. The CDC clearly states, “There is no specific treatment for viral meningitis. Antibiotics do not help viral infections, so they are not useful in the treatment of viral meningitis. Most patients completely recover on their own within 7 to 10 days. A hospital stay may be necessary in more severe cases or for people with weak immune systems.” (1) Please note that viral meningitis, unlike paralytic polio, is rarely life threting.

          Finally, since you claim “polio and tuberculosis are likely the adverse effects that presented after mass smallpox inoculations”, you must have knowledge of a clinical study that confirms your assertion. When you say “likely adverse effects”, do you mean to 100% of those vaccinated, 50%, 10%, 1%, or less than 1%? I would be interested in reading your source if you can share the link with us.
           

          Non-paralytic polio, as noted above, is no worse that catching the flu. However, vaccine-derived polioviruses can and do cause outbreaks in countries with low vaccine coverage. The oral polio vaccine that anti-vax promoters love to attack has not been used in the US since 2000. Today, IPV vaccination in the US is very high and the vaccine protects people against naturally occurring polioviruses and vaccine-derived polioviruses as well. (3)

          Thanks for contributing to the dialog, Ms. Liz. I have learned a lot from your post.

          (1) http://www.cdc.gov/meningitis/viral.html
          (2) http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccin … 078041.htm
          (3) http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/polio/dis-faqs.htm

    33. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Natural Infectious Disease Declines vs. Vaccination Effectiveness and Dangers . .

      The main advances in combating disease over 200 years have been better food and clean drinking water.  Improved sanitation, less overcrowded and better living conditions also contribute.
      For those of you who like statistics, be sure to view the pdf file.

      http://preventdisease.com/news/09/11100 … ions.shtml

    34. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Questions to ask your medical professional before you agree to vaccinate your child. .
      QUESTION #1
      "Do you know if any of the chemicals or preservatives inside the vaccine will accumulate in my child's body?"

      The pharmacokinetic properties of drugs which study the bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of ingredients, are never studied for vaccines. This means a vaccine manufacturer or doctor can never know with any conclusive evidence if the chemicals or preservatives inside vaccines will accumulate (for any known period of time) in the body after a vaccine injection.

      You can check any vaccine insert for yourself to verify that these properties ARE NOT STUDIED. The reason they are not studied is because there would be conclusive evidence for a lack of metabolized heavy metals which are present in every vaccine. It would show how these toxins can accumulate inside the body and the brain and consequently demonstrate a serious health threat to vaccine recipients.

    35. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Questions to ask your medical professional before you agree to vaccinate your child:

      QUESTION #2
      "I read that thimerosal and mercury derivatives were banned 15 years ago by the FDA. Are they no longer in the current influenza vaccines then? Was there ever any conclusive evidence that thimerosal caused any harm?"

      Most doctors have now been trained to answer "NO" to this question. This is a misinformed and false response. The truth is, although the FDA gave a two year deadline to remove thimerosal from vaccines after they were banned in 1997, they kept appearing in vaccine formulations and the FDA did nothing about it.

      If the doctor refutes your assertion that thimerosal in vaccines was linked to disease, direct them to one of many research studies on the subject.

      FDA APPROVED 2011/2012 Vaccines - 3 out of 5 had thimerosal

      Most vaccines prepared for the 2009 Flu Pandemic Hoax, 8 out of 10 H1N1 vaccines had thimerosal.

      Many of the inserts indicate in the recommendations section that they are approved for children:
      CSL PANVAX H1N1 Vaccine - 10 years and older
      Sanofi-Pasteur H1N1 Vaccine - 6 months and older
      Novartis H1N1 Monovalent Vaccine - 4 years and older

    36. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Questions to ask your medical professional before you agree to vaccinate your child:

      QUESTION #3
      "Aren't researchers now finding that vaccines have actually caused many more diseases than they have are prevented?"

      Polio paralysis is a perfect example (among many others) to demonstrate the debilitating cause and effect of vaccination. Outbreaks of polio after 1950 were demonstrably caused by intensified diphtheria and whooping cough vaccination, tonsillectomies, other injections (painkillers) and a variety of traumas. There is now evidence that polio paralysis has also been a very common yet discreetly hidden side effect associated with polio vaccines.
      - Polio Vaccinations Are Now The Number One Cause of Polio Paralysis

      The chemicals in the vaccines depress our immune system; the virus present depresses immune function, and the foreign DNA/RNA from animal tissues depresses immunity.
      - Vaccines and Immune Suppression

      According to the United States' Food and Drug Administration, 1.5 million Americans were hospitalised in 1978 alone, as a consequence of pharmaceutical drugs administered to "cure" them. Can you imagine what that number is today?
      - Why Do Pharmaceutical Drugs Injure and Kill?

      The risks of vaccines in terms of their disease promoting capabilities far exceed any benefits claimed by the vaccine industry, period!

      http://preventdisease.com/news/12/04021 … nate.shtml

    37. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Drugs and vaccines played no part in the fall in infectious diseases.

      http://preventdisease.com/news/10/10251 … shtml#Typh

    38. Lizolivia profile image88
      Lizoliviaposted 5 years ago

      Why would anyone trust much of anything the FDA and CDC have to say about products of the top big pharma makers? They are both funded by pharmaceutical corps (big pharma). Have these people never heard of conflict of interest?...These kinds of articles bring the Public Health Service, the CDC, the FDA, the "peer-reviewed" journals, and the rest of the medical-industrial-government complex into disrepute. Physicians can follow along if they so choose (the kickbacks per percentage of vaccinated are a very appealing incentive), and since they make their living from it. Parents with children being maimed and crippled by the very vaccines which are proclaimed innocuous by authors who are on the vaccine maker's big payroll, expect at least elementary honesty from those who call themselves scientists.

      Torch, W.S., 1982. Diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT) immunization: a potential cause of the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). Neurology; 32(4): A169 abstract).
      "At the 34th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Pediatrics, presented a study linking the DPT shot with SIDS. Torch concluded: "These data show that DPT vaccination may be a generally unrecognized major cause of sudden infant and early childhood death, and that the risks of immunization may outweigh its potential benefits.
      Pediatric Infect Dis. PMID: 6835859, UI: 83169234 - "They found a statistically significant excess of deaths in the first day and the first week after vaccination, i.e., a "temporal association."
      Pediatrics 81:6 Part 11 (June 1988) - The category "sudden death" is also instructive in that the entity disappeared following both whole-cell and acellular vaccines when immunisation was delayed until a child was 24 months of age. It is clear that delaying the initial vaccination until a child is 24 months, regardless of the type of vaccine, reduces most of the temporally associated severe adverse events.

      In 1985 Dr. Scheibner, a former principle research scientist for the government of Australia, and her husband electrochemical engineer Leif Karlsson invented the CotWatch breathing monitor for babies who are diagnosed “at risk” for SIDS, or “Cot Death” as it is known in Australia. Over the next three years, the couple monitored hundreds of babies and studied the event reports that their CotWatch produced. “By 1988 we knew that vaccines are killing babies,” said Dr. Scheibner Ph.D.

      SIDS occurs among babies who have suffered a physical insult to their vulnerable bodies. Scheibner and Karlsson learned that the most common physical insult suffered by SIDS babies was routine vaccinations. Printouts from their monitor showed illuminated patterns that indicated critical days after vaccinations.

      Once they had proven to themselves the causal link between vaccines and SIDS and had appropriately analyzed and documented their findings, Scheibner and Karlsson submitted their work to the medical community for peer review. Rather than attempt to duplicate their work or alter public health policy to protect infants, the majority of the medical community's members chose to protect the interests of vaccine manufacturers.

      1. Lizolivia profile image88
        Lizoliviaposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I meant for this reply to be for Quill in response to his question way up toward the top of this topic page.

    39. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Vehemently denied by BigPharma for years, now there is a legal precedent.
      It's official.

      Italian court rules that MMR vaccine caused Autism.

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … ebate.html

    40. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Merck faked mumps vaccine efficacy results for over a decade, says lawsuit

      http://www.naturalnews.com/036328_Merck … ms_Act.htm

      1. Quilligrapher profile image90
        Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Hi Sanny. Thanks for this latest tidbit from the radar of the “Health Ranger,” a blogger with no nutritional or medical credentials to support his particular “opinions.” Just like you, I am looking forward to learning what merits, if any, are contained within the claims of this lawsuit.

        For now, however, let’s closely examine just what your posting is and what it is not.

        The lawsuit by two former Merck employees on behalf of the US Government was recently made public after the US Department of Justice concluded their own two-year investigation by declining to participate in the case.

        This lawsuit makes several claims directed against Merck. It seems, the plaintiffs hope to convince the court that the manufacturer defrauded the government with attempts to influence a decade of lab results that were intended to confirm the vaccine was 95% effective as established by previous testing. It is important to note, if they succeed it will not prove that the mumps vaccine is not effective in reducing the risks of contracting this infectious decease, only that it may, or may not, be 95% effected as purported.   

        In the real world of public health, however, the vaccine has enjoyed significant success since first licensed by the FDA in 1967 in conjunction with the gradual passage of state immunization laws that followed. The number of new cases of mumps, Sanny, declined by 99% between 1968 and 1993. Surveys at the time found mumps cases were lowest in states with comprehensive school immunization laws requiring vaccination and they were the highest in states that did not. Since use of the vaccine has become widespread, the incidence of mumps is very rare, with the exception of the two distinctively different outbreaks occurring between 2006 and again in 2009-2010. This country has seen new incidences of mumps drop from over 152,000 cases in 1968 to typically less than 30 per year during the last decade.

        Unfortunately, I see nothing in either of your last two posts to support your opening statement that children would be healthier if not vaccinated.

        1. sannyasinman profile image59
          sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Will you shoot this messenger as well? Do you have any disparaging comments which you have saved up for just such an occasion about the Daily Mail in the UK?

          This is not BigPharma funded research and opinion from the bought and paid for medical profession, it is a LEGAL COURT RULING.

          You know very well that to get a judgment in a court of law you need PROOF.

          Italian court rules that MMR vaccine caused Autism.

          http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … ebate.html

          You see now don't you, that there is proof that MMR vaccine can cause autism?

          1. Quilligrapher profile image90
            Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Hello, Sanny. 

            I am excited and extremely happy for the parents of Valentino Bocca while deeply saddened and distressed by the tragic illness that has struck their son. I recognize the burdens and the sacrifices this family must endure and I am happy that the court decision was in their favor.

            Your criticism about disparaging remarks is in order and I apologize to you and to Mr. Mike Adams for besmirching his reputation. I am unable to prove there is no link between MMR and autism, nor am I able to find anyone who can prove there is. Because facts and the meanings of words are important for understanding this issue, I choose mine as carefully as I examine those used by others. Please allow me to explain why I am reluctant to accept this judgement in Italy as “proof.”

            While I see the statement “Italian court rules that MMR vaccine caused Autism” as true, changing the word “rules” to “proof,” as in “there is proof that MMR vaccine can cause autism”, creates a false statement. The court decision DID NOT prove MMR causes autism and the article in the Daily Mail declares “that no convincing mechanism to explain a link has been set out.” The article not only does not prove a link but rather reaches the conclusion in the last sentence that the debate about MMR and autism is NOT settled by this court judgement: “the Italian judgment clearly suggests this important debate is far from over.”

            In addition, I recognize that Italian magistrates play a slightly different role than judges in US courts. They not only render decisions but they also conduct their own investigations. In this particular case, the court appointed Antonio Barboni, a doctor of forensic medicine, to independently advise the court. Unable to identify pre-existing conditions, Dr. Barboni concluded that Valentino’s autism was probably the result of the MMR vaccine. Two other medical professionals agreed. While I sincerely respect the medical opinions of these three doctors, I can not accept MMR absolutely causes autism when the court’s appointed expert hedged his opinion by saying it was a “reasonable scientific probability.” This can mean anything in the range from slightly to highly probable. Regardless of degree, I do not view his determination of “reasonable scientific probability” as anything approaching an absolute certainty. A single case study conducted by three qualified medical professionals is evidence that falls short of “proof” by my standards. 

            The existence of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism is a scientific hypothesis that will not be resolved by anecdotes, fear, or conspiracy theories. More evidence is required from larger and better-designed studies. Several studies have already been undertaken. Overwhelmingly, large studies suggest that there is no link between autism and the MMR vaccine. As for now, the bulk of the scientific evidence suggests that the MMR vaccine does not cause autism.

            Thanks you, Sanny, for your engaging comments.

    41. cat on a soapbox profile image86
      cat on a soapboxposted 5 years ago

      This is obviously a hotbed issue. If you don't wish to vaccinate your children, that's YOUR decision, but PLEASE don't suggest that others follow your ill-advised ways. It is ridiculous to say that a disease is caused by the vaccine.  The innoculation is from DEAD virus! If there is any scientific evidence suggesting an uptick in outbreaks of whooping cough among those recently vaccinated, it is because parents failed to get the 4 boosters for their children prior to the one recently required for school enrollment.

      1. recommend1 profile image67
        recommend1posted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I generally agree with this, however, even if there is a chance that these innoculations do cause illnesses as some claim - it is still better to vaccinate as the numbers of 'casualties' from not vaccinating are far higher than those that might possibly be caused by vaccination.

        The side issue is that those who do not vaccinate take full advantage of the suppression of the desease in any population through general vaccination while endangering the success of the overall campaign and so ensuring that those deseases are not eradicated as they might be.  This cynical exploitation of what might be seen as a win-win situation means that those parents who refuse vaccination are either ill informed or taking persoanl advantage to the detriment of others.

      2. sannyasinman profile image59
        sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        "Nearly all polio outbreaks since 1961 were caused by the oral polio vaccine",'
        -Jonas Salk, inventor of the IPV, testifying before a Senate subcommittee in 1972

        1. Nouveau Skeptic profile image70
          Nouveau Skepticposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          The reason those outbreaks effected a tiny number of people, none in the US, is also due to the vaccine.

          If vaccinating stopped polio would be back and we would see people in iron lungs again.

          1. sannyasinman profile image59
            sannyasinmanposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            These doctors and Phd's say that vaccination did not eradicate polio. They say it still exists but has been "renamed" to hide the ineffectiveness of the vaccine. . .

            http://www.whale.to/v/polio2.htm

    42. eddierr profile image60
      eddierrposted 5 years ago

      I'll take the risks of vaccination over the risks of not vaccinating.

      1. Nouveau Skeptic profile image70
        Nouveau Skepticposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Quite.  If vaccines are far less deadly than diseases.

    43. cat on a soapbox profile image86
      cat on a soapboxposted 5 years ago

      Hi sammyasinman,
      You are correct about the glut of polio cases that came after the 1954 vacinnations and the fact that Salk himself took the blame. What you failed to mention is that ALL cases were linked to a poorly prepared batch of vaccine from one drug company. An inferior product speaks only for itself!

    44. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Yet more lies from vaccine manufacturers . .

      U.S. Government & Whistleblowers Sue Merck About Falsely Certified Mumps Vaccine

      http://vactruth.com/2012/07/17/whistleb … dium=email

      1. Quilligrapher profile image90
        Quilligrapherposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Hi Sannyasinman.

        Firstly, I must point out that the title of this article appears to be untrue. The US Government is not suing Merck. The lawsuit was filed years ago by two former Merck employees, ostensibly on behalf of the U.S. government but the US Department of Justice declined to join the litigation after investigating the claims and allegations for over two years.

        I read this article and, obviously, it does not say the claims have been found to be factual although is discusses them as if they were facts. It will be interesting to see if this litigation proceeds and how it is concluded. It is quite disturbing, however, to see this article intentionally distort facts and try to mislead readers. It speaks about the alleged claims as if they are true while knowing the court has not yet reached a decision.

        This lawsuit makes several claims directed against Merck that may or may not be true. It seems, the plaintiffs hope to convince the court that the manufacturer defrauded the government by influencing decades of lab results that were intended to confirm the vaccine was 95% effective as established by previous testing. It is important to note, if they succeed it will not prove that the mumps vaccine is not effective in reducing the risks of contracting this infectious decease, only that it might not be 95% effective as purported. 

        Meanwhile, in the real world of public health, the vaccine has enjoyed significant praise and widespread success since first licensed by the FDA in 1967. The number of new cases of mumps declined by 99% between 1968 and 1993. Surveys at the time found mumps cases were lowest in states with comprehensive school immunization laws requiring vaccination and they were the highest in states that did not. Since use of the vaccine has become widespread, the incidence of mumps is very rare, with the exception of the two distinctively different outbreaks occurring between 2006 and again in 2009-2010. This country has seen new incidences of mumps drop from over 152,000 cases in 1968 to typically less than 30 per year during the last decade. (1)

        I encourage people to read this article carefully and pay particular attention the all of the questions in the last paragraph. The author is trying to create a negative impression by asking readers to provide answers when she herself can not.

        Thank you, Sannyasinman, for posting this piece. Please let me know if I misstated any facts. We should discuss this matter again when the court reaches a decision.

        (1) http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00038546.htm

    45. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Vaccinated Children Have up to 500% more Disease Than Unvaccinated Children

      http://worldtruth.tv/vaccinated-childre … -children/

    46. sannyasinman profile image59
      sannyasinmanposted 5 years ago

      Lawsuit Filed: Merck Accused of Falsifying Efficacy Studies and Lying about Effectiveness of Mumps Vaccine...

      The article also explains how Merck Faked and Manipulated Vaccine Trials to Achieve Desired Results ...

      http://articles.mercola.com/sites/artic … L_artNew_1

     
    working