Obama Grants Immunity to CDC Whistleblower on Measles Vaccine Link to Autism

a reply to: Variable

Do not insult me.

I find your comment highly patronising. You think the doctors LOL'd at me? How old are you? Do you have children of your own? Have you been through the vaccination process?

I do know what Im talking about. My child began having symptoms a few hours after the jab. Doctors said this was a normal reaction to the jab. The symptoms did not stop only worsened. On day 3 when I took her back to doctors THAT is when I was told it was nothing to do with the jab.

It seems you barely paid attention to my full comment, jumping on one thing that you think you can paint me as DUMB with.

a reply to: Variable

This is another case of spreading ignorance IMHO. You take a extremely complex text and cherry pick a sentence out of context to prove some nebulous point of what? Vaccines are bad? Did you take the further step of reading just what "vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis" is? If so how does it fit into your point? Pasting in a few paragraphs about something so complicated is not helpful. If someone wants to learn about a subject you should give them links to the data. Then they can go from there. By simply putting in snippets out of context, without any preface, enlightens no one. All you did was give the ignorant another snippet they can point to and say "SEE! measles vaccines give you VAPP"

DENY IGNORANCE!

So you think no one should use quotes because they are, by definition, taken out of context. You think members should provide links only - with no quotes. Because quotes are cherry picked. Guess that explains why you never quote your references - or provide any.

FYI - The re-emergence of diseases thought to have been totally eradicated is a well-recognized global problem - and is being researched by pre-eminent scientists around the world. The book Considerations for Viral Disease Eradication: Lessons Learned and Future Strategies, provides a good overview of current knowledge, wisdom and conclusions. Which is why I cited it.

The Chapter Biological Challenges to Post-Eradication, is especially relevant in this thread - which is why I provided quotes and the link. As you say, readers can click on the link, read more and enlighten themselves.

Regarding Major biological challenges after eradication, which include:

* Continuing and improving surveillance for the detection of vaccine-associated cases,
* Recrudescence (outbreaks) of infection,
* New zoonotic transmissions, and
* The emergence of recombinant viral strains.

NOTE that: Overcoming these challenges will require a better understanding of pathogen transmission and viral biology.



fyi - DENY IGNORANCE! does NOT mean DENY Your OWN IGNORANCE! Nor does it mean "Obstruct People from Accessing Relevant Background Information."

a reply to: daftpink

Sorry that what you took from it. Ignorance is not a bad thing, it can be fixed.

I have four children and one grandchild. They all live with me still. A few of my children have had issues over the years, as well as my wife. I learned early on the best way to protect them, when we went to office visits to determine care, was to educate myself on the subjects as thoroughly as possible. My grandchild has Hyrdranencephaly We went through several diagnosis as she grew in my daughter's womb. Because of my predilections with learning, i was able to ask relevant questions. I have found, being in a room full of people asking questions, the Dr's would turn to me after a few inquiries, then direct all further correspondence to me. I think this is simply because i knew the subject and was able to ask relevant questions. Also, i am not as emotional as the women in the room. Too often feelings creep into the conversation, many doctors are logical, fact-based people. I jive with those people.

You have to understand that Doctors (especially specialists) have seen the same situations over and over. To you, the issue is profound, but to them it's Tuesday. This doesn't mean they don't care, its just they can't emotionally invest in the care like you do. They would go nuts.

Educate yourself.

a reply to: Variable

You continue to patronise me as you assume I have not educated myself about these matters. I work in the field of autism. My son is now 17, they tried to give him the MMR when he was 5. I have been educating myself ever since. I have no ignorance. You know nothing of my background or involvement with the medical industry.

Stop assuming so much.

a reply to: Variable

...I have found, being in a room full of people asking questions, the Dr's would turn to me after a few inquiries, then direct all further correspondence to me. I think this is simply because i knew the subject and was able to ask relevant questions. Also, i am not as emotional as the women in the room. Too often feelings creep into the conversation, many doctors are logical, fact-based people. I jive with those people.

More like you simply "jive with" the paradigm - and don't question it - you're playing the same game and not rocking the boat. I'm sure it makes you feel smart and important, and leaves the doctors reassured that you back them 100%.

Some of us question the paradigm. That's a good thing.

a reply to: GetHyped

I provided 5 links in the OP, but as you know, the primary source appears to be the Daily Caller. The journalist seems unwilling to disclose his source, so we have to wait for the hearings for an official disclosure (kinda like what happened with Watergate). I don't deny the Daily Caller might have an agenda - most everyone has an agenda. But by any standard, the Daily Caller is credible. FYI:

The Daily Caller is a politically conservative[2][3] news and opinion website based in Washington, D.C., United States. ...

...The Daily Caller is in the White House rotating press pool and has full-time reporters on Capitol Hill.[8] Its reporters have appeared on MSNBC, Fox News Channel, CNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC and CBS, and radio stations across the country.

...The Guardian referred to The Daily Caller as "the conservative answer to The Huffington Post".[9] An article in The Washingtonian commented that in comparison to The Huffington Post, "The Caller puts more emphasis on its own reporting, whereas HuffPo is happy to feature someone else’s story" and "The Caller's headlines tend to be less misleading and opaque."

...In an interview with Politico, (editor-in-chief) Carlson said that The Daily Caller will not be tied to ideology but rather will be "breaking stories of importance". In a Washington Post article, Carlson said "We're not enforcing any kind of ideological orthodoxy on anyone."[12] In an interview with The New York Times, Carlson said that the vast majority of traditional reporting comes from a liberal point of view and called The Daily Caller's reporting "the balance against the rest of the conventional press".

a reply to: soficrow

More like you simply "jive with" the paradigm - and don't question it - you're playing the same game and not rocking the boat.

HAHA you couldn't be more wrong. Armed with knowledge you can ask the right questions, you also may have the ability to catch them when they are full of it or do something wrong. I fired a surgeon who operated on my wife once. I won't go into the reasons, but his bed side manner was appalling and it was affecting my wife's care. I scared the ever living # out of their legal department. The amount of fawning and ass kissing that was had was wonderful to see. But i didn't make a emotional scene, i gave them both barrels to be sure, but it was calm and measured and that had a much bigger effect on them then the screaming diatribes i have witnessed in hospitals. I hate hospitals (and i have been in them more than my fair share,) I think to get the best care you have to be on top of all things, otherwise you could end up dead.

V

a reply to: Variable

Many of us are educated, including daftpink and me. I know how to negotiate, navigate and research too. As you say, "you have to be on top of all things, otherwise you could end up dead." And as daft pink said, You continue to patronise me ...Stop assuming so much.

a reply to: Entreri06

I understand your point, my view is that there is an inherent susceptibility within people's genes (excuse the lack of biological knowledge) that is quite blatantly disregarded by current methods, I am not anti vaccination as a whole and appreciate the benefits that it has had to many. However being on the margin of this issue has been the toughest times of my life....to think that there is even a chance that the struggles could have been avoided if the pharmaceutical giants and governments showed more regard for people than for green paper...kills me inside that I allowed it to happen. If people were warned of the risks in the first place then at least they could make an informed decison, is that to much to ask?

Thanks for your reply and concern.

originally posted by: sirpatrix
a reply to: Entreri06

I understand your point, my view is that there is an inherent susceptibility within people's genes (excuse the lack of biological knowledge) that is quite blatantly disregarded by current methods, I am not anti vaccination as a whole and appreciate the benefits that it has had to many. However being on the margin of this issue has been the toughest times of my life....to think that there is even a chance that the struggles could have been avoided if the pharmaceutical giants and governments showed more regard for people than for green paper...kills me inside that I allowed it to happen. If people were warned of the risks in the first place then at least they could make an informed decison, is that to much to ask?

Thanks for your reply and concern.

It's sad to say this, but even assuming the vaccines are responsible for rare cases of autism. Vaccines have been a no brainer net gain to society. Should we be doing more to minimize any negative effects? Of course. However even if vaccines do have that effect in rare cases we still gotta do it for the big stuff that's wide spread.



Make no mistake folks it'll prob be a virus that gets us, that crushes continents sooner or later... And when it try's to. It'll be the trial and error from MMR and all the others that saves us.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
There are literally thousands of studies showing the success of vaccination. If you don't want to read them, ask a doctor. If you want to believe further, ask an anonymous source on the internet - which will provide many un-claimable "facts". Which are no facts, indeed.

And since these kinds of studies have been proven over, and over, and over again to be filled with lies, falsified and omitted/modified data, you trust them because...?

Again - even *if* it is true that vaccines *could* be created that were safe and effective, I wouldn't trust *anything* coming from this totally broken and psychopathic system that is in place right now.

Okay, then don't. But how about separating from us all by moving into the woods?
(1) you wouldn't get any diseases as they can't spread to you
(2) the herd immunity wouldn't get watered down by another unvaccinated person in the crowd.

a reply to: ManFromEurope

RE: Herd Immunity

“Her d Immunity.” The flawed science and failures of mass vaccination

In India, doctors are concerned about profit margins being protected before human lives, with recommendations to vaccinate every child with more expensive, newer vaccines. Dr Jacob Puliyel describes the problems he sees..

“An analysis in the Lancet showed how the Pneumococcal vaccine reduces only 4 cases of pneumonia per 1000 children. The cost for vaccinating 1000 children comes to $ 12,750. Treating the 4 cases of pneumonia in India using WHO protocol, would cost $ 1. The pneumococcus strains prevalent in India are nearly all sensitive to inexpensive antibiotics like penicillin. In the US which has been using the pneumococcal vaccine for some years now, there has been a strain shift – strains covered in the vaccine are being replaced by other strains. Ominously the new strains are more antibiotic resistant. Vaccine has simply made the problem of pneumococcal disease worse. Yet this vaccine is being pushed in Africa and Asia.…It is not about lives lost in poor countries – it is all about the cash register. These organizations and their sponsors have profit margins to protect. Ethics is not a major issue with them.”
The profits to vaccine manufacturers and the government must be enormous.

The CDC is in the vaccine business. Members of the CDC’s Vaccine Advisory Committee accept payment from vaccine manufacturers. Sanofi-Pasteur, Merck and others specifically seek to employ CDC staff once their contracts have run out. Relationships have included sharing a vaccine patent, owning stock in a vaccine company, payments for research, payment to monitor manufacturer vaccine tests, and funding academic departments. Thanks to a 1980 law, the CDC currently holds dozens of licensing agreements. It also has numerous ongoing projects to collaborate on new vaccines.