Are We tested on as kids?

This is a very personal experience for me and am hoping someone can put my mind at rest, am I just unlucky or is something not quite right?!

I'll be short and sweet if you wanna know more personal details (not too many)for research, IF anyone take this up?

I just saw another thread where i posted an exerpt from this, that stirred up some thoughts, ideas & emotions i have kept bottled for a long time!

I'll tell you the facts and you give me some sort of direction maybe i can put these fears of similar things happening to me that occur DAILY!

Please take my word for everything below and what else i post as swear, this is the whole truth

anyway as i said this is something for us all to bang around!

I have always asked myself as to what vaccines and what injections may or may not be given during or following pregnancy to the child.

Why do i ask, well Before i was 22 I had 2 best friends friends die from SAD (sudden adult death), 1 from CF (Cystic Fibrosis) and 2 from Lukemia. 3 the exact same age as myself 2 slightly older, but in the same area.

3 of us were in the same primary school, high school and college as did the older lukemia victims

as i said same school, areas etc. We all lived in a 3 mile radius of each other.

The Best bit yet, we were all born in the same hospital!

My very best freind died June 6th 1999 4 weeks away from 18, as im sure you can understand im hellishly passionate about this subject.

As an expectant father i have recentley found out that if your baby or you were born previous to 1991 you have no legal right to the maternity/Birth records?????

Why the hell do this, what are they hiding, that the mother couldn't see or be aware of, when SHE was giving birth. Apart from whenthe matron/midwife takes away baby to be cleaned and checked over!!

One day maybe with slippers, pipe in hand in front of the fire with a famous grouse, i may find out the truth!

So have we and are we still being tested on with what may be the catastrophic results of these tests!

Maybe they are maybe they aren't but what are the odds of this happening? this is a genuine question and would appriciate any input any one can give!!!!


Thanks





[edit on 7/31/2006 by evo1981]

[edit on 7/31/2006 by evo1981]

Considering just the sheer number of children born in one hospital in one year of even a smaller metro area, and the fact that most children born in that hospital in that year whose parents stay in the area will end up in the same schools, I don't find it unusual that 5 children out of hundreds died of totally unrelated causes.

My cousin and my sister were born in the same hospital, they went to the same catholic school, same cathedral, and they both got the flu in the same fall season. It MUST be a diabolical experiment!!

Mariella

I didn't live in a city i lived in a tiny village I had 26 people in my primary years 3 are dead i'd say that is......... unusual then! 2 of the same cause

Well, if you live in a tiny village, which I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you aren't lying just to make your story more credible, then isn't it more likely that you just didn't receive adequate medical care? Rural areas are notorious for having poor or limited medical care, thus 3 children with serious conditions could easily go untreated.

Mariella

hard to tell, imho, if people wanted to test something harmful, they'd make damned sure that no obvious statistical giveaways exist, ie. spread them out randomly.


that said, even if you could find the cause, people wouldn't believe and you can never be really sure, either. i'll hazard a guess, is it an agricultural area? if so, i'd take a look at carcinogenic pesticides... but don't expect honest studies on the subject.

Thanks long lance, i have too thought about the pesticide reasons etc

And god damn it please take my word i LIVED in a tiny village, actually a place called Crook, not far from Wigan UK. Health care was good as far as i know, if i had a problem it got dealt with well, perhaps better than big citys where they have an issue with sheer volumes

I would think that as members of a group we would take each others feelings into account when trying to get an answer to something of a personal nature. I SERIUOSLY worry about my health and don't speak to many people about it, i THOUGHT forum memebers would perhaps deal with this subject with a little TACT.

Obvioulsy not the right place to post this thread

MODS if you are looking, can this thread be deleted as i think i have made a mistake, im not being over the top or soft but this thread is causing me some distress, I thought i was ready to start speaking about it be obviuosly not, sorry for any inconvinence caused

So when I question the statistical validity of your shock at 3 children in a village becoming ill...that's a lack of tact?

Wow, well then let me be the first to welcome you to the world of impersonal studies. There is little room for worrying about stepping on emotional toes when you are trying to flesh out a scenario and understand it better. Should we not investigate terrorists because it may cause emotional distress to their families?

Mariella

I have thought the government experimenting thing all along. I agree that there is something they are not telling us. About the closed birth records, have you tried getting your own records and what exactly did they say. I may look into getting my own. Though what would that prove anyway. It's not like they are going to put it in black and white...GOVERNMENT TEST SUBJECT. In fact there are reports of government testing on soldiers back in Vietnam and such, so why is it so hard for others to fathom the very existence of this happening now??!! I guess to these people "ignorance is bliss" some people are so controlled by the system they just can't see the light.

No, I can completely buy that the government has and probably still does experiment on its citizens. My main problem with this story, however, is that only 3 children were invovled. If the government is trying to perform a repeatable medical experiment, why would they choose a sample size of 3? Why wouldn't they use prisoners and create a sample of 300 or 3000?

Granted, I am not a proponent of these experiments, should they exist, but I highly doubt any medical experiment worth undertaking wuuld even produce results with a sample size that small.

Mariella

Glad to hear that you're atleast open to the idea of the experimentation but, isn't it possible that it was done on thousands more, just maybe not in the same area? Is it possible that the experiment was done on more areas and more social diversity than just that one??? Just because he happens to only know 3 of the subjects doesn't mean there aren't more. I doubt he could poll the entire US to find the information. It's easier to experiment on the masses due to innoculations whereas with prisoners it wouldn't be justified and could be detected easier.

So what experiments do you think the government could possibly be doing if this isn't one of them?

Originally posted by dirty_underground
Glad to hear that you're atleast open to the idea of the experimentation but, isn't it possible that it was done on thousands more, just maybe not in the same area? Is it possible that the experiment was done on more areas and more social diversity than just that one??? Just because he happens to only know 3 of the subjects doesn't mean there aren't more. I doubt he could poll the entire US to find the information. It's easier to experiment on the masses due to innoculations whereas with prisoners it wouldn't be justified and could be detected easier.

So what experiments do you think the government could possibly be doing if this isn't one of them?

The problem with them spreading out thousands of "experimentees" all over the nation is that they would have to have doctors or analysts in each area. And, as we all know, the more people you have involved in a conspiracy, the less likely it is to remain hidden.

Mariella

Cystic fibrosis is genetic, so there's a history there of some problems on both sides of the family of your friend who died from CF. Folks with that diagnosis don't live much beyond 20, as a rule.

Certain types of leukemia (there's more than one) are also genetic.

Since people from a small community tend to marry people from the community or from the area, you see certain kinds of conditions that occur in "groups" on the landscape. These are recessive genes; people with only one copy don't get the disease but can carry it forward. If two people with these genes marry, there's a 1 in 4 chance that their children will have the condition.

Each of these conditions has associated conditions. I would bet that you also find certain kinds of cancers (but not all kinds of cancers) in the area because of the genetic component. While I wouldn't rule out an environmental cause, if it's that bad, it would also affect animals... you'd see horses and dogs and cats that died early (2-5 years in horses, 5 years in dogs, 7 years in cats... no animals in the area that are significantly older than that.)

many thanks byrd at least you explained it with some sort of decencey!