Is it Time to Ban Vaccines Once and For All?

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Ruralguy

 

First of all...just because you have had your shots does not make you 100% unsusceptible to developing the disease. You are still a carrier even if you do not get sick.

Plus...a kid who has had their shots could be a carrier and infect a kid without their shots. The idea is to not allow the Virus to Mutate which it will do in a case of extreme exposure to kids that have had their shots.

Once the Virus mutates...all bets are off. Split Infinity

What you're saying is that you're not safe unless you get it, but you're not safe even though you get it, and no one else is safe either, whether you get it or not. That argument strikes me as illogical fear mongering.

Well summed up frazzle, it is indeed a bizarre 'logic' that has been described and one that I'll certainly be steering clear of. The immune system has had thousands of years to get to this advanced level where it is today, I put my trust in the generational experience of the immune system, not in dodgy theories that are being used to fund billionaires. I descend from people who didn't need vaccines, as does everyone here.

In 1957 the 'Science' told us that Thalidomide was the latest wonder drug to be used for treating morning-sickness. At least we eventually found out the truth about Thalidomide, whereas today it would have all been covered up, the media would be warned against reporting it on the grounds of so-called "responsible journalism". i.e. don't tell those guys as it will put them off our products.

Look at how the stories are changed to manipulate us, this is further proof that we are not being given the real data on vaccine damage. We are being kept in a bubble where only pro-vaccine information is allowed, everything else is kept inside the medical community (close to the top)

BBC story changed to avoid vaccine criticism
www.whale.to...

Originally posted by frazzle

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Ruralguy

 

First of all...just because you have had your shots does not make you 100% unsusceptible to developing the disease. You are still a carrier even if you do not get sick.

Plus...a kid who has had their shots could be a carrier and infect a kid without their shots. The idea is to not allow the Virus to Mutate which it will do in a case of extreme exposure to kids that have had their shots.

Once the Virus mutates...all bets are off. Split Infinity

What you're saying is that you're not safe unless you get it, but you're not safe even though you get it, and no one else is safe either, whether you get it or not. That argument strikes me as illogical fear mongering.

reply to post by Rubinstein


"Outdated stock". Yeah, they've got the kids best interests at heart.

The whole program is immoral.

reply to post by SplitInfinity


SI: They should get all the FACTS and forget about what some guy told them on a web board or what someone said on a site. If they want to see REALITY...look up the World Health Orginization Web Site. There are REAL documented cases that they can look up or even telephone the actual people as many a U.S. Citizen...who has gone into a WAR ZONE or DISASTER AREA in a different country without being in a sanctioned U.S. Aid Group but went in with a Christian Religious Group that paid their own way to get to the country...and because all sanctioned U.S. or U.N. Relief Agencies WILL NOT ALLOW ONE OF THEIR PEOPLE IN THESE AREAS WITHOUT PROPER BOOSTER SHOTS OR IMMUNIZATION....these Religious Group Aid workers come back to the states and develop HORRIBLE DISEASES.

You neglected to give us any specifics on the missionaries and aid people who’d become ill during overseas operations so I had to try to find a few examples. Guess what, the only religious group I found was a Christian group from Minnesota, some of whom who came home with dengue fever ~ for which there IS no vaccine. Chances are good that they had gotten the recommended immunizations, but oops. And who is to say whether or not the immunizations they DID get hadn’t lowered their immune response and set them up for dengue?

I found one other interesting little stat about UN workers:

abcnews.go.com...

Compelling new scientific evidence suggests United Nations peacekeepers have carried a virulent strain of cholera -- a super bug -- into the Western Hemisphere for the first time.

The vicious form of cholera has already killed 7,000 people in Haiti, where it surfaced in a remote village in October 2010. Leading researchers from Harvard Medical School and elsewhere told ABC News that, despite UN denials, there is now a mountain of evidence suggesting the strain originated in Nepal, and was carried to Haiti by Nepalese soldiers who came to Haiti to serve as UN peacekeepers after the earthquake that ravaged the country on Jan. 12, 2010.

My only advice: If you have a disaster, BE CAREFUL WHO YOU TRUST~

Originally posted by Rubinstein
I descend from people who didn't need vaccines, as does everyone here.

Only because the people who did need vaccines died before reaching childbearing age, or after giving birth to your ancestors. You can say ex post facto that they didn't need vaccines, so long as your only criterion for "not needing a vaccine" is "successfully reproducing someone who would become one of your ancestors." I don't think your egocentric retrospective paradigm of public health is really going to catch on.

In 1957 the 'Science' told us that Thalidomide was the latest wonder drug to be used for treating morning-sickness.

Not in the United States. I propose that other countries, the ones that did approve thalidomide for use in pregnant women, were not doing "the 'Science'" correctly.

FurvusRexCaeli,

We all descend from people who didn't need vaccines, the others have been wiped out. We descend from the survivors. Whereas if there had been thousands of years of vaccination before now, our existence today might well depend on them...but it doesn't! We have immune systems so complex that modern day scientists do not understand them, that is why they "Research" them, if you let someone interfere with yours or your child's immune system; you're part of the "Research".

Regarding Thalidomide, the FDA was a lot better back then, less corruption.

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by Rubinstein
I descend from people who didn't need vaccines, as does everyone here.

Only because the people who did need vaccines died before reaching childbearing age, or after giving birth to your ancestors. You can say ex post facto that they didn't need vaccines, so long as your only criterion for "not needing a vaccine" is "successfully reproducing someone who would become one of your ancestors." I don't think your egocentric retrospective paradigm of public health is really going to catch on.

In 1957 the 'Science' told us that Thalidomide was the latest wonder drug to be used for treating morning-sickness.

Not in the United States. I propose that other countries, the ones that did approve thalidomide for use in pregnant women, were not doing "the 'Science'" correctly.

Pharma, Utilities and Big Ag Lead Lobbying in 2012

Pharmaceuticals, utilities and big agriculture have led the lobbying charge so far this year, according to preliminary figures from latest lobbying disclosures. The pharmaceutical industry as a whole spent $69.6 million on lobbying in the first three months alone, while electrical utilities spent $43.3 million. The agricultural services industry - which includes heavy hitters like Monsanto, the American Farm Bureau and Archer Daniels Midland - spent far less, only about $12.9 million, but that represented a 48 percent increase over its lobbying in the final three months of 2011.
.....
At the forefront of the pharmaceutical firms' lobbying push was PhRMA (Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America), the industry trade group, which has spent $5.2 million so far this year. If that rate is sustained, PhRMA will top its 2009 total - when it fought hard over healthcare reform and spent $26.1 million. Following right behind the trade group was Merck, which has spent $4.5 million so far this year, more than half of its total spending in all of last year.

www.opensecrets.org...

Nice find frazzle, most people think that Big Pharma spend a lot of their money on research, though in relatively little goes on research, most goes on Marketing and Lobbying. If it was REAL research and REAL testing, they'd have to spend a lot more money on it.

Originally posted by frazzle
Pharma, Utilities and Big Ag Lead Lobbying in 2012

Pharmaceuticals, utilities and big agriculture have led the lobbying charge so far this year, according to preliminary figures from latest lobbying disclosures. The pharmaceutical industry as a whole spent $69.6 million on lobbying in the first three months alone, while electrical utilities spent $43.3 million. The agricultural services industry - which includes heavy hitters like Monsanto, the American Farm Bureau and Archer Daniels Midland - spent far less, only about $12.9 million, but that represented a 48 percent increase over its lobbying in the final three months of 2011.
.....
At the forefront of the pharmaceutical firms' lobbying push was PhRMA (Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America), the industry trade group, which has spent $5.2 million so far this year. If that rate is sustained, PhRMA will top its 2009 total - when it fought hard over healthcare reform and spent $26.1 million. Following right behind the trade group was Merck, which has spent $4.5 million so far this year, more than half of its total spending in all of last year.

www.opensecrets.org...

Originally posted by Rubinstein
Nice find frazzle, most people think that Big Pharma spend a lot of their money on research, though in relatively little goes on research, most goes on Marketing and Lobbying. If it was REAL research and REAL testing, they'd have to spend a lot more money on it.

Well, they do enough research to come up with ever more harmful drugs to dump into the willing lab rats (and the unwilling lab rats/monkeys) every year. But based on the way "our" representatives fawn all over these snake oil salesmen, you'd think their 30 ounces of silver comes in the form of psychotropic drugs.

reply to post by Rubinstein


most shots here in the west have helped to eradicate most childhood diseases ,the only problem is that our governments are allowing people into our countries who have never been immunized. and we are seeing a rise in those diseases here in the west.and yet there are countries where none of these shots are available for their people and the west is starting to pay for it.what happens if these diseases mutate our shots and updated shots are useless ,remember past history of the world -THE BLACK DEATH spread like wild fire when it went through Europe.
we are now seeing diseases from the southern countries migrating north ward and we have no shots for them here in the lower 48 or all the way up to southern Canada as the 49th parallel is on the same latitude as California at point pee-lee in Ontario..
back to the flu shot and all of their hype and scare tactics about get the shot ,as they throw together a concoction of strains of flu and hope and pray that they got it right this time so far their average is not so good.considering that the flu has been around forever and most people get it at lest once in their lives ,example - i`m almost 60 and never have i had the flu and i have never gotten the shot ,so who really needs it .

The black death was from sugar, those who didn't eat the sugar were fine.. If you look at the data for the childhood diseases, it turns out it was improved nutrition and sanitation that dealt with those. It's fine to catch measles if you're healthy and eating well, in fact measles is actually good for you, it makes you grow taller and improves your artistic ability, you become immune to various Cancers. It is only those who don't have enough Vitamin A who are at risk from measles. Chicken Pox and Mumps are also known to be good for you for a number of reasons. Obviously males should catch mumps as young as possible, not after/during pubity.

Completely agree about the flu shot, it's not good. The reason it's given to the over 60's is to eventually cause dementia, get them into a home and drain their life savings.

We've been lied to once again by the same people who brought us 9/11, The Kennedy Assassination, Swine Flu and funded/planned both World Wars.

Originally posted by picratus
reply to post by Rubinstein

 

most shots here in the west have helped to eradicate most childhood diseases ,the only problem is that our governments are allowing people into our countries who have never been immunized. and we are seeing a rise in those diseases here in the west.and yet there are countries where none of these shots are available for their people and the west is starting to pay for it.what happens if these diseases mutate our shots and updated shots are useless ,remember past history of the world -THE BLACK DEATH spread like wild fire when it went through Europe.
we are now seeing diseases from the southern countries migrating north ward and we have no shots for them here in the lower 48 or all the way up to southern Canada as the 49th parallel is on the same latitude as California at point pee-lee in Ontario..
back to the flu shot and all of their hype and scare tactics about get the shot ,as they throw together a concoction of strains of flu and hope and pray that they got it right this time so far their average is not so good.considering that the flu has been around forever and most people get it at lest once in their lives ,example - i`m almost 60 and never have i had the flu and i have never gotten the shot ,so who really needs it .

reply to post by frazzle

There is a BIG difference between on station...ready to go...USAID or UN Disaster workers who have been innoculated in stages with multiple booster shots as are Members of CDC Task Forces.

A Christian Group with limited resources will be getting a single shot...if that...and after this shot a person is supposed to wait to see if any interactions occur before getting secondary or third booster shots.

Plus they are getting these innoculations that are not the latest State of the Art immunizations that are developed to handle the latest mutation of diseases.

It takes time to build up true immunity to a mutating Virus or Bacteria.

Split Infinity

I hope that the UN Disaster Workers don't live to regret it, like the Gulf War Vets.

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by frazzle

 

There is a BIG difference between on station...ready to go...USAID or UN Disaster workers who have been innoculated in stages with multiple booster shots as are Members of CDC Task Forces.

A Christian Group with limited resources will be getting a single shot...if that...and after this shot a person is supposed to wait to see if any interactions occur before getting secondary or third booster shots.

Plus they are getting these innoculations that are not the latest State of the Art immunizations that are developed to handle the latest mutation of diseases.

It takes time to build up true immunity to a mutating Virus or Bacteria.

Split Infinity

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by frazzle

 

There is a BIG difference between on station...ready to go...USAID or UN Disaster workers who have been innoculated in stages with multiple booster shots as are Members of CDC Task Forces.

A Christian Group with limited resources will be getting a single shot...if that...and after this shot a person is supposed to wait to see if any interactions occur before getting secondary or third booster shots.

Plus they are getting these innoculations that are not the latest State of the Art immunizations that are developed to handle the latest mutation of diseases.

It takes time to build up true immunity to a mutating Virus or Bacteria.

Split Infinity

Again, the only example of sickened christian aid people I could find had gotten dengue fever for which there is no vaccine. The only UN workers I found spreading disease were from Kenya, and who knows if they'd been vaccinated for Cholera, it didn't stop the UN from sending them to Haiti and infecting the people there. Mayo clinic says the Cholera vaccine MAY help in preventing the disease.

The excuses for vaccines not working are merely wiggle words: It takes time for a vaccine to work, it doesn't always work, viruses mutate, vaccines MAY help. I'm sure that's comforting to the people who thought they were protected.

reply to post by frazzle

FRAZ...although many things you say are true...the reality is that I TRAVEL...and there is NO WAY IN HELL...I would go to some of the places I have been without undergoing several rounds of Booster Shots. NO WAY!

I have seen what happens to people who are not properly immunized and it is horrific. Anyone who thinks they can just travel to a Third World Country without these shots and not have a HIGH PROBABILITY of being infected by various diseases is fooling themselves...to Death!

Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


You travel and you have a choice in the matter. You'll get no argument from me on that.

Infants and small children do not have a choice and what's more, their parents are not fully informed on the potential dangers and are generally not given a choice even when they are. This is my problem with the vaccine programs as they exist.

Fear is being used against you SplitInfinity, the science isn't backed up.

In reality, we're being enslaved with vaccines, they are about taking away freedom. Newborns are free, they have no debt, they don't have to work, that is why they are injected with disease, to put a ball and chain around their ankle. Those who travel Internationally are of a demographic that is the most free of all; they generally have money and time on their hands, that is why they're being targeted for vaccination, these people are like the frogs who almost escape from a bucket in a French restaurant, or the free range chicken who's wings have almost developed enough to allow her to fly out of the farm. The frog gets pushed back into the bucket, the chicken has it's wings clipped and the person who travels gets injected with illness in an attempt to disrupt his/her immune system, by damaging the persons health you can take some of their excess money and increase their need to submit to employment.

One has to get away from the propaganda and zoom out to see what's really going on here.

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by frazzle

 

FRAZ...although many things you say are true...the reality is that I TRAVEL...and there is NO WAY IN HELL...I would go to some of the places I have been without undergoing several rounds of Booster Shots. NO WAY!

I have seen what happens to people who are not properly immunized and it is horrific. Anyone who thinks they can just travel to a Third World Country without these shots and not have a HIGH PROBABILITY of being infected by various diseases is fooling themselves...to Death!

Split Infinity

reply to post by frazzle

I have no arguement against the concept that immunization is 100% safe. But I KNOW that the risk of not being immunized vs. doing so is too great a threat. Split Infinity

reply to post by Rubinstein

I am not the one who is fearful. Your case against all immunization is not logical. I can agree that being immunized with an untried and true vaccine is foolhardy....but for basic immunizations for dangerous diseases...where the probability of adverse reaction is tiny...there is no logic to not get your shots especially a child. Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


No you don't know that, you believe it. Your belief may be based on personal experiences, but others should not be required to follow your beliefs because you won't be there for them when they have bad experiences on account of your beliefs.

For me the issue is force and a total lack of transparency on the part of the manufacturers and FDA.