Is it Time to Ban Vaccines Once and For All?

reply to post by frazzle

I agree that whenever Big Business is involved there will be abuse and paid off politicians. But I do not base my statements of my BELIEF....I base them on FACTS.

It is a FACT that prior to the development of Vaccines for diseases such as Polio, T.B....etc...that MILLIONS were infected and dying.

It is a FACT that without innoculations and mandated ones in the United States that in there absence would soon follow epidemics of Massive Proportions such as now occur in Africa and other Third World Countries.

I also admit it is a FACT that large Corps. use these countries as test grounds for new Vaccines because of those countries corrupt political systems.

But lastly...it is a FACT...if I had not been getting Booster Shots all these years...I would now be dead because of where I have been.

You are speaking with a person who is never sick...who has an immune system that allows me to heal rapidly. I have very seldom ever had to use Antibiotics as I know that the only time a person should take these is if they have a serious infection that is Bacterial not Viral since a Virus is uneffected by Antibiotics.

Yet as healthy as I am...without innoculations...I would be easily infected by many dangerous diseases.
Split Infinity

reply to post by SplitInfinity


I also admit it is a FACT that large Corps. use these countries as test grounds for new Vaccines because of those countries corrupt political systems.

But, of course, our own political system is not corrupt enough to allow the drug manufacturers to test their products on our kids. Right?

MSNBC reports that for the past two decades the government conducted experiments involving drugs for AIDS on foster children but without the legal protections they should have had.

“The practice ensured that foster children — mostly poor or minority — received care from world-class researchers at government expense, slowing their rate of death and extending their lives. But it also exposed a vulnerable population to the risks of medical research and drugs that were known to have serious side effects in adults and for which the safety for children was unknown.”

The results of these experiments ranged from minor adverse side effects to “a disturbing higher rate of death among children who took higher doses of the drug.”

Most of these experiments were conducted in the 1990’s in seven states: Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Colorado and Texas.

www.politicususa.com...

Evil is evil no matter what country or socioeconomic situation the child may be born into. Denial that it happens here is ... well, its something.

reply to post by frazzle

I deny nothing and I feel that abuse should be punished. But just because a person or group abuses something...does not make the whole evil or bad.

The main point that I am trying to make is...even with all the abuses...even with the evils done by large Corps...and even plain mistakes that were done with the best intentions...A CHILD SHOULD BE INNOCULATED AGAINST DISEASE. PERIOD! To say it is better to not get shots is a LIE and the facts and percentages do not support it. Split Infinity

The people who make these products are criminals and cannot be trusted, it's been shown time and time again, we cannot trust the health of our children with the products these criminals sell to us

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by frazzle

 

I deny nothing and I feel that abuse should be punished. But just because a person or group abuses something...does not make the whole evil or bad.

The main point that I am trying to make is...even with all the abuses...even with the evils done by large Corps...and even plain mistakes that were done with the best intentions...A CHILD SHOULD BE INNOCULATED AGAINST DISEASE. PERIOD! To say it is better to not get shots is a LIE and the facts and percentages do not support it. Split Infinity

originally posted by: ElisaTest
Please do not talk about vaccinations hampering the human body's natural ability to ward of viral/ bacterial infection. Unless you hold a degree or are pursuing one in microbiology, speculation of the adverse side effects of vaccinations becomes a haven for media nerds. The only reason a body can naturally fight off infection, is if the pathogen in question is easily overcome by the the body's innate, then adaptive immune system or the body remembers a previous encounter and initiates the adaptive response. In both cases, the body recognizes key elements of the invading pathogen called antigens and formulates a counter attack by producing complimentary antibodies to disable the antigen. So when a human host becomes infected with parts of a virus/bacteria (antigen), the body reacts and remembers so it may prevent/ reduce another similar infection.

Now what does a vaccination do? Is it not used in the prevention/ reduction of viral/ bacterial infection? How so one may ask. Simple; vaccinations work exactly the same as if one were naturally introduced to pathogens except instead of gambling on chance that one may be infected randomly, the body is introduced to it artificially.

Now people are going to say; "Artificial induced immunity is bad because its not natural!". Natural induced immunity relies on the fact that the entire pathogen is used to alert the immune system and thus the body is actually fighting for its life. Artificial induced immunity uses pieces of the pathogen, non- dangerous pieces that can never infect you with what it originally meant for. The body is tricked into building up defences so when it does face the exact whole pathogen, it can easily disable it thanks to the vaccine.

I understand that there exists potential for bad things to happen, so let me try to debunk some common misconceptions. (1) People have been told they can never get sick from the shot yet develop fever, fatigue, malaise and body aches. This can be attributed to something added to the vaccination called an adjuvent. Basically it acts as a vector for the antigen to travel, but most importantly causes the aforementioned side effects. The adjuvent is water, salts and sometimes oil and is used to start up your immune system to readily interact with the antigen pieces. (2) Government uses vaccines to kill the weak or induce infection to stimulate medicinal monetary gains. Who gives more in a lifetime to the government, sick/ dead people not working or the ones living and are not capable of spreading disease and thus not ruining all three social classes? (Interesting sidenote: Dr. Salk, creator of the Polio vaccine, chose not to patent it.) (3) The use of attenuated vaccines. The aforementioned point is in my opinion the only worrying thing in the whole vaccine debate. Instead of using dead antigen parts, a live mutated virus is used. Attenuated vaccines are usually used for long term immunizations and thus do not need booster shots, as well as having cheaper maintenance costs. The disadvantage is that the mutated virus that does not effect the host now, may potentially mutate into a form that may effect the host. The chance of the said occurrence is astoundingly low and decreases everyday thanks to new research, but does occur which is why waivers/ consent forms are sometimes signed. Many frightful parents know this, but understand the percentages in trusting vaccinations versus none. (4) Somehow, somewhere, some form of killer new virus/ bacteria will come from a vaccine. This event is even more-so less likely to happen than point three due to certain unique mutations that have to occur.

I understand that people do not believe in vaccinations and I respect their choices, but I hope that people understand that many more people owe their existence and continued existence to them. I welcome all criticisms but if any numbers/ statistics are used, please cite and provide links to SCHOLARLY JOURNALS only. Wikipedia and even the links it uses to cite are only good for basic universal knowledge.

Yes, the concern lies not in the viruses that are being injected via vaccines, but the adjuvants contained therein used as artificial stimulants for the immune system, primarily aluminium whose dosage per vaccination exceeds the amounts which have been tested as safe for a young organism such as that of an infant- who are being bombarded with a vast number of shots up to their first year of life.
According to recent studies it has been found that aluminium significantly reduces the body's natural extraction of mercury, which unfortunately cannot be avoided, although in small amounts it is contained in various parts of our environment, as well as foods especially fish. In addition overstimulation of the natural immune system can various dysfunctions in the brain. Any ways read all about it in this link, and many related articles there.
articles.mercola.com...
I wonder if the vaccinated children who are fortunate enough to have no side effects, are already mutants who are developing immunity to harmful toxins, and perhaps this is in fact the vested motive. Which would mean that if we are a race that is learning to survive within such circumstances, then man is freely given the opportunity to dump any waste upon this planet,without having to worry about the consequence. And as for those who happen to be victims in the process, oh well those are simply ascribed to genetics, giving those armies of medical specialists a load of work to do, and very little results to be found!
Myself,a mother of vaccinated children up until a couple of years ago when I decided to say no, have done a lot of research, specifically on the "actual" contents (not those that come on the leaflet with the product) and real side effects with officially published statistics by the manufacturers. For those in Europe these can be found on the EMA European Medicines Agency website. I was inquiring the hepatitis b vaccine Engerix B which is being administered to children in my country on the second day of their birth and found 50 pages of very vague information with no specific data on side effects. http//www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Referrals_document/Engerix_B_30/WC500011088.pdf
Furthermore I looked at the new Prevenar 13 valent super-vaccine which parents here are proudly ordering from abroad, as the best of the best! And paying a fortune for it (about US$70). www.ema.europa.eu...
And official research papers stated quote" Prevenar 13 is intended for the vaccination of infants. No studies of fertility, embryo-fetal development, and per- postnatal development toxicity have been conducted." Of course not, why would they publish such studies? This may partially answer the question of infertility rates going up.
Needless to say, my youngest child who has had the least shots is by far healthier than the ones who have had their regular jabs, and who have developed autoimmune diseases, skin and food allergies and various nervous disorders. I need no further testing. Enough is enough! It is time to give our children's natural health defence system a chance!

originally posted by: priestess22


Yes, the concern lies not in the viruses that are being injected via vaccines, but the adjuvants contained therein used as artificial stimulants for the immune system, primarily aluminium whose dosage per vaccination exceeds the amounts which have been tested as safe for a young organism such as that of an infant- who are being bombarded with a vast number of shots up to their first year of life.
According to recent studies it has been found that aluminium significantly reduces the body's natural extraction of mercury, which unfortunately cannot be avoided, although in small amounts it is contained in various parts of our environment, as well as foods especially fish. In addition overstimulation of the natural immune system can various dysfunctions in the brain. Any ways read all about it in this link, and many related articles there.
articles.mercola.com...
I wonder if the vaccinated children who are fortunate enough to have no side effects, are already mutants who are developing immunity to harmful toxins, and perhaps this is in fact the vested motive. Which would mean that if we are a race that is learning to survive within such circumstances, then man is freely given the opportunity to dump any waste upon this planet,without having to worry about the consequence. And as for those who happen to be victims in the process, oh well those are simply ascribed to genetics, giving those armies of medical specialists a load of work to do, and very little results to be found!
Myself,a mother of vaccinated children up until a couple of years ago when I decided to say no, have done a lot of research, specifically on the "actual" contents (not those that come on the leaflet with the product) and real side effects with officially published statistics by the manufacturers. For those in Europe these can be found on the EMA European Medicines Agency website. I was inquiring the hepatitis b vaccine Engerix B which is being administered to children in my country on the second day of their birth and found 50 pages of very vague information with no specific data on side effects. http//www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Referrals_document/Engerix_B_30/WC500011088.pdf
Furthermore I looked at the new Prevenar 13 valent super-vaccine which parents here are proudly ordering from abroad, as the best of the best! And paying a fortune for it (about US$70). www.ema.europa.eu...
And official research papers stated quote" Prevenar 13 is intended for the vaccination of infants. No studies of fertility, embryo-fetal development, and per- postnatal development toxicity have been conducted." Of course not, why would they publish such studies? This may partially answer the question of infertility rates going up.
Needless to say, my youngest child who has had the least shots is by far healthier than the ones who have had their regular jabs, and who have developed autoimmune diseases, skin and food allergies and various nervous disorders. I need no further testing. Enough is enough! It is time to give our children's natural health defence system a chance!

There's more aluminium in 6 months worth of breast-milk than there is in the total amount of vaccines you could receive in your life.
And, if you researched properly instead of reading what a tanning-bed salesman tells you (Mercola, who incidentally funds the amusingly titled National Vaccine (mis)Information Centre) you may discover that very few vaccines actually contain adjuvants as they don't them them to illicit a proper immune response.
And they're aluminium SALTS, not elemental aluminium.
Don't forget to buy Mercola's stuff to make you better from them though, that's really important (for his bank account).

Studying vaccines for all of the issues you mention is only necessary if there is reasonable cause to do so.
The fact that they're not studied for them means they are not causal, there are no links from vaccines to them, they have nothing to do with each other.
You might as well ask why vaccines aren't tested to see if they cause racism, premature baldness or priapism.
Why isn't aspirin tested to see if it causes the ability to fly?

Natural immunity would be fine if it prevented you getting the disease but guess what? You have to get the disease to gain this natural immunity. The relatives of the thousands of kids who die from these preventable diseases every year are probably consoling themselves by thinking that "at least they had natural immunity so had they lived they wouldn't have got the disease again".

Congratulations on your efforts to take us back to the Victorian age.

originally posted by: Pardon?

originally posted by: priestess22


There's more aluminium in 6 months worth of breast-milk than there is in the total amount of vaccines you could receive in your life.
And, if you researched properly instead of reading what a tanning-bed salesman tells you (Mercola, who incidentally funds the amusingly titled National Vaccine (mis)Information Centre) you may discover that very few vaccines actually contain adjuvants as they don't them them to illicit a proper immune response.
And they're aluminium SALTS, not elemental aluminium.

Studying vaccines for all of the issues you mention is only necessary if there is reasonable cause to do so.
The fact that they're not studied for them means they are not causal, there are no links from vaccines to them, they have nothing to do with each other.
You might as well ask why vaccines aren't tested to see if they cause racism, premature baldness or priapism.
Why isn't aspirin tested to see if it causes the ability to fly?

Natural immunity would be fine if it prevented you getting the disease but guess what? You have to get the disease to gain this natural immunity. The relatives of the thousands of kids who die from these preventable diseases every year are probably consoling themselves by thinking that "at least they had natural immunity so had they lived they wouldn't have got the disease again".

The breast milk statistic is a concerning one, the source of which is where from exactly? And yes aluminium has been found in tap water also.There is a difference however, between the effects substances have when taken orally over a longer period versus them being injected directly into the bloodstream all at once.This has been announced by professionals in the field - immunologists themselves.
I believe insufficient testing is being performed/presented to the public regarding the long term side effects of vaccines on humans, some of which could well be infertility, autoimmune diseases, allergies.Whose source probably is genetic, however what triggered them is my point of concern, and vaccines certainly come into question.The latter two my children who were vaccinated on schedule contrived not long after their shots. So many specialists we have seen. One is then certainly compelled to do research and ask questions. As I mentioned my youngest has hardly had any shots, and has so far been the healthiest between them. I base my perceptions only on personal experience with the matter, and any other information is only added on if applicable to my case.

originally posted by: priestess22


The breast milk statistic is a concerning one, the source of which is where from exactly? And yes aluminium has been found in tap water also.There is a difference however, between the effects substances have when taken orally over a longer period versus them being injected directly into the bloodstream all at once.This has been announced by professionals in the field - immunologists themselves.
I believe insufficient testing is being performed/presented to the public regarding the long term side effects of vaccines on humans, some of which could well be infertility, autoimmune diseases, allergies.Whose source probably is genetic, however what triggered them is my point of concern, and vaccines certainly come into question.The latter two my children who were vaccinated on schedule contrived not long after their shots. So many specialists we have seen. One is then certainly compelled to do research and ask questions. As I mentioned my youngest has hardly had any shots, and has so far been the healthiest between them. I base my perceptions only on personal experience with the matter, and any other information is only added on if applicable to my case.

Aluminium is one of the most abundant elements on Earth. It's pretty much everywhere.
This gives a reasonable overview to how much aluminium is where.
www.chop.edu...

Just for your information, vaccines are not and have never been "injected directly into the bloodstream".
They are injected into the muscle or under the skin, intranasally and some are actually taken orally (polio anyone?).
Here's a little graphic to help you understand injection vs ingestion (it is very simplified but it'll give you a decent grounding point)
3.bp.blogspot.com...

Can you tell me what your belief that insufficient testing is done on vaccines is actually based upon?
And what do you consider "long-term"? (Bear in mind that vaccination has been around for a few hundred years now).
There have been plenty of studies into potential links with allergies and autoimmune diseases and none have found any link at all.
As for infertility, I think you might find that certain vaccines actually protect against that.

It's extremely easy to blame vaccines (or anything else for that matter) on illnesses which may or may not have a definitive cause and in some ways it helps people cope with illness if they can directly attribute them to a specific event however, as the saying goes, correlation does not imply causation.
So I'm afraid that personal experience doesn't really count for much in this matter as I'm guessing you're not experienced in the field and it's you who's deciding what's applicable for your circumstances?

If you wish to read up on vaccines to increase your understanding and knowledge of them (I have a different definition of the word research than most on this site) please do but it does seem to me that you tend to believe things which fit in with what you think rather than understanding the issue from an-biased and scientific viewpoint.

originally posted by: Pardon?

originally posted by: priestess22



Just for your information, vaccines are not and have never been "injected directly into the bloodstream".
They are injected into the muscle or under the skin, intranasally and some are actually taken orally (polio anyone?).
Here's a little graphic to help you understand injection vs ingestion (it is very simplified but it'll give you a decent grounding point)
3.bp.blogspot.com...

Can you tell me what your belief that insufficient testing is done on vaccines is actually based upon?
And what do you consider "long-term"? (Bear in mind that vaccination has been around for a few hundred years now).
There have been plenty of studies into potential links with allergies and autoimmune diseases and none have found any link at all.

You are correct they are introduced intramuscularly, apologies for I was exhausted when making the post, and am not a medical doctor. What I meant was they enter the body in a more concentrated dose.
Understand I am not advocating a full cessation of their use, however more consideration over those children who may be at risk from substances contained within vaccinations, at least due to their genetic predisposition or personal medical history. More information presented to the parents about the possible risks, as well as more time and funds dedicated to their research by government, and not by private companies who then sell the reports to those who can afford them. Below are some actual recent studies related to aluminium and vaccine adjuvants for those who are interested in this information.
www.researchgate.net...
www.researchgate.net... erse_long_term_neurological_outcomes
Now on this one a full length research report is not available for free, (as mentioned above) but I have read it and it is valid. lup.sagepub.com...
And here is a case study performed on a 43 year old man, again I have it but cannot forward the contents -you have to purchase the full report. Why aren't these things publicly available to all?
www.sciencedirect.com...
And yes we all choose what is relevant to our case, were it not so then there would be no free will. Unfortunately our belief that we make our own choices is to some extent an illusion as our "freedom" is and always has been manipulated by those who find personal gain in this window of opportunity. Especially in the area of health, be it synthetic or natural medicine they are thrusting forward.

originally posted by: priestess22

You are correct they are introduced intramuscularly, apologies for I was exhausted when making the post, and am not a medical doctor. What I meant was they enter the body in a more concentrated dose.
Understand I am not advocating a full cessation of their use, however more consideration over those children who may be at risk from substances contained within vaccinations, at least due to their genetic predisposition or personal medical history. More information presented to the parents about the possible risks, as well as more time and funds dedicated to their research by government, and not by private companies who then sell the reports to those who can afford them. Below are some actual recent studies related to aluminium and vaccine adjuvants for those who are interested in this information.
www.researchgate.net...
www.researchgate.net... erse_long_term_neurological_outcomes
Now on this one a full length research report is not available for free, (as mentioned above) but I have read it and it is valid. lup.sagepub.com...
And here is a case study performed on a 43 year old man, again I have it but cannot forward the contents -you have to purchase the full report. Why aren't these things publicly available to all?
www.sciencedirect.com...
And yes we all choose what is relevant to our case, were it not so then there would be no free will. Unfortunately our belief that we make our own choices is to some extent an illusion as our "freedom" is and always has been manipulated by those who find personal gain in this window of opportunity. Especially in the area of health, be it synthetic or natural medicine they are thrusting forward.

They don't enter the body at a more concentrated dose at all.
You'll breathe in as much aluminium in a couple of months as you will from all the vaccines you get in your lifetime.
And just to reiterate, NOT EVERY VACCINE CONTAINS ALUMINIUM SALTS.

The studies you've cited from Shaw & Tomljenovic are classic examples of anti-vax pseudo-science trying to masquerade as legitimate research (neither of the authors are associated with any scientific aspect of vaccinations, immunology, virology etc). They are produced solely with the intention of fooling people with limited scientific or medical knowledge into believing vaccines are bad and it gives them material to peddle around various anti-vax conferences for which they get paid very well. (In the third link they've actually invented a brand new disease to fit into their study, A.S.I.A.)
Here's a nice link which explains their connection to the anti-vax brigade and there is a link in the page as to why their studies are bogus).
www.harpocratesspeaks.com...
You go on about funding but why isn't the funding given to the likes of Tom and Shaw given to legitimate researchers for legitimate reasons?
Why is so much money being spent on producing mis-information?
They're the questions you should be asking.
(One of the answers is that being a prominent anti-vaxxer is quite well-paid and for little effort and zero responsibility.)

The other link is in a journal called Medical HYPOTHESES. That should give you a clue as to why it's not research. Nor is the journal peer-reviewed. Pretty much anyone can get anything published there as long as they pay the publishing fee.
It's a case study. A single case study at that.
And it's wrapped in an hypothesis.
Essentially it's an idea and one which has been refuted.


To address your last paragraph, it's perfectly clear that any "manipulation" to do with vaccines is coming from the anti-vax side and they're doing this by using misinformation and outright lies and relying the general public's lack of scientific comprehension, which, if you'll forgive me for saying, is apparent in your posts.
If you go on the scientific consensus on vaccination, there truly is no debate however, as I've shown above, there's a lot of people making a very easy living out of it (have you seen Mercola's mansion just outside Chicago or his one in Florida? What about Andrew Wakefield's $4 million mansion in Texas?) so it's in their bank-accounts' best interests to keep propagating and regurgitating the lies.

Profit making tendencies on a large or small scale are the basis of society today, and those who do not take part in it unfortunately are barely surviving. As to the moral aspects of it we can both equally find evidence to support both sides, as to every thesis there is an anti-thesis. Which came into being first the diseases, or the vaccines that are meant to protect us against them? Can you truly confirm that the idea was first developed only as recently as a century ago?If we truly had the answer to this question, then we could understand who's the one making profits here. I am not biased to either natural or manmade medicines, neither to their producers, peddlers or the wealth they accumulate on these grounds. Personally I believe the less medication the better, as we all have self-healing potential in our bodies and minds, the body is such an intelligent and amazing mechanism we haven't even begun to tap into the capacity of its ability, a knowledge which has been hidden from us through the development of medicine, and yes the herbal ones have been around for much longer, and I understand can be just as harmful/useful as the synthetic, depending on the amounts of intake. This is a thread which could and probably will go on for the rest of our lives. Science is constantly subject to change. Bottom line can anybody force you into not taking vaccines if you choose to do so? Or convince me to take them against my will, and if I do not comply fine me or throw me into prison and forward my children onto the social services, for being an incompetent parent? reply to: Pardon?

originally posted by: priestess22
Profit making tendencies on a large or small scale are the basis of society today, and those who do not take part in it unfortunately are barely surviving. As to the moral aspects of it we can both equally find evidence to support both sides, as to every thesis there is an anti-thesis. Which came into being first the diseases, or the vaccines that are meant to protect us against them? Can you truly confirm that the idea was first developed only as recently as a century ago?If we truly had the answer to this question, then we could understand who's the one making profits here. I am not biased to either natural or manmade medicines, neither to their producers, peddlers or the wealth they accumulate on these grounds. Personally I believe the less medication the better, as we all have self-healing potential in our bodies and minds, the body is such an intelligent and amazing mechanism we haven't even begun to tap into the capacity of its ability, a knowledge which has been hidden from us through the development of medicine, and yes the herbal ones have been around for much longer, and I understand can be just as harmful/useful as the synthetic, depending on the amounts of intake. This is a thread which could and probably will go on for the rest of our lives. Science is constantly subject to change. Bottom line can anybody force you into not taking vaccines if you choose to do so? Or convince me to take them against my will, and if I do not comply fine me or throw me into prison and forward my children onto the social services, for being an incompetent parent? reply to: Pardon?

Which came first, the diseases or the vaccines?
Is that a serious question?
Certainly both measles and smallpox have been physically documented over a thousand years ago?
So has mumps.
The vaccinations have been far more recent.
Polio is well-documented hundreds of years prior to any vaccine.
So has diphtheria, tuberculosis etc etc etc.
I really don't understand how you could even ask a question.


And to say one. More. Time.
There should be no need to impose vaccinations on anyone as the science overwhelmingly says they are beneficial. Over and over and over again.
Unfortunately people's BELIEFS get in the way and now we're seeing a resurgence in preventable diseases.
So, if people are too stubborn to take them voluntarily and by doing so they are putting others at risk then I really do think something needs to be done. Ideally it would be via education but changing an ingrained belief is virtually impossible so...
Or should we just go back to survival of the fittest and disregard our advances in medicine?

a reply to: Rubinstein

Hey, if you don't want to vaccinate your kids, then don't. You can't take the choice away from the parents that do vaccinate their children. As far as I'm concerned, the benefits outweigh the risks and well, not everything is a conspiracy and not everyone is out to get you.

I find it really amusing that both sides claim to do extensive research however they never seem to come across each others evidence during that time. Is it safe to say that those against vaccines only look for evidence that support their claims, and those for vaccines do the same? Excluding any evidence that may disprove their own theories?

Anyway, my life experiences in terms of vaccines. I had all mine as a kid. I've always been ill, sometimes due to my own clumsiness or getting hit by cars in all fairness, but I always seem to have something. My husband however is never ill, as strong as an ox and he also had all his vaccines as a kid. All my friends of my age also had vaccines and the vast majority of them have also been perfectly healthy bar the occasional cold or stomach bug.
I have two kids. One is 3 1/2. (The half is very important to him.) He has had all his jabs so far, and he has also been extremely healthy. He had one tummy bug when he was about 1 but that was me passing it on to him. He has however been ill a whole bunch of times since starting nursery! All of a sudden he was in a room with a bunch of other kids, getting up in each others faces and coughing and sneezing all over each other. He now has tonsillitis. My other son is 3 mths old and he has also had 2 lots of jabs so far. He has had no side effects. Not even a temperature.
I am a member of a birth group and every mummy on their has immunized their children with no harmful effects. We all also had the flu jab while pregnant and not one of us had any side effects from that, nor did our babies. Only one baby has a medical issue and that is down to being premature.
Also in was talking to a friend the other day who has an autistic son. I was telling her about my son's jabs coming up and she told me her son has never been immunized. This is due to an issue with his immune system that means its dangerous for him to have them. I can't remember the name of it. These days I can barely remember my own name due to late night feeds. So anyway, there has to be a different cause of autism, blaming vaccines is ridiculous and research would be better directed towards finding the actual cause. I also only know one person with any form of diabetes.

Ooh and babies exposed to chicken pox while breastfeeding do receive a form of immunity from their mother, however this normally means they only get a mild form if they catch it but can still get a full blown dose later in life if they come in contact with it. I personally don't see the point in having a chicken pox vaccine until you are adult as that's when most complications arrive.

Thats just my input based on my life experiences.

Also when did Penn and Teller become scientists? Is it the same Penn and Teller I'm thinking of? Not taking the Mick, I'm honestly confused and it won't let me watch the vids right now so I have zero context. I thought they were some sort of magicians or some doodah. Seriously, help a girl out.

originally posted by: christmaspig
I find it really amusing that both sides claim to do extensive research however they never seem to come across each others evidence during that time. Is it safe to say that those against vaccines only look for evidence that support their claims, and those for vaccines do the same? Excluding any evidence that may disprove their own theories?

Anyway, my life experiences in terms of vaccines. I had all mine as a kid. I've always been ill, sometimes due to my own clumsiness or getting hit by cars in all fairness, but I always seem to have something. My husband however is never ill, as strong as an ox and he also had all his vaccines as a kid. All my friends of my age also had vaccines and the vast majority of them have also been perfectly healthy bar the occasional cold or stomach bug.
I have two kids. One is 3 1/2. (The half is very important to him.) He has had all his jabs so far, and he has also been extremely healthy. He had one tummy bug when he was about 1 but that was me passing it on to him. He has however been ill a whole bunch of times since starting nursery! All of a sudden he was in a room with a bunch of other kids, getting up in each others faces and coughing and sneezing all over each other. He now has tonsillitis. My other son is 3 mths old and he has also had 2 lots of jabs so far. He has had no side effects. Not even a temperature.
I am a member of a birth group and every mummy on their has immunized their children with no harmful effects. We all also had the flu jab while pregnant and not one of us had any side effects from that, nor did our babies. Only one baby has a medical issue and that is down to being premature.
Also in was talking to a friend the other day who has an autistic son. I was telling her about my son's jabs coming up and she told me her son has never been immunized. This is due to an issue with his immune system that means its dangerous for him to have them. I can't remember the name of it. These days I can barely remember my own name due to late night feeds. So anyway, there has to be a different cause of autism, blaming vaccines is ridiculous and research would be better directed towards finding the actual cause. I also only know one person with any form of diabetes.

Ooh and babies exposed to chicken pox while breastfeeding do receive a form of immunity from their mother, however this normally means they only get a mild form if they catch it but can still get a full blown dose later in life if they come in contact with it. I personally don't see the point in having a chicken pox vaccine until you are adult as that's when most complications arrive.

Thats just my input based on my life experiences.

Also when did Penn and Teller become scientists? Is it the same Penn and Teller I'm thinking of? Not taking the Mick, I'm honestly confused and it won't let me watch the vids right now so I have zero context. I thought they were some sort of magicians or some doodah. Seriously, help a girl out.

The simple fact is that any "evidence" presented by anti-vaxxers is usually fraudulent or at the very least skewed.
That's the whole point!
Their "evidence" does get looked at and even though it's bogus they refuse to accept it.
They refuse to accept the more than overwhelming validated science that states quite categorically that they are not only safe but beneficial.

As for Penn & Teller, I don;t think they're pretending to be scientists at all, they're just presenting the facts in a way that befitted their TV series. They did the same with several other conspiracy theories.

a reply to: Pardon?

Oh right, do they have a conspiracy show or something then? I just have a vague memory ofthem being some sort of magicians is all. And now they're going on about vaccines? Still can't watch the vids. Tablet isn't playing nicely. I'm English, so have no idea what they actually do. We're th magicians or did I make it up? Sorry, don't mean to go, just confused as to their relevance :-/

originally posted by: christmaspig
a reply to: Pardon?

Oh right, do they have a conspiracy show or something then? I just have a vague memory ofthem being some sort of magicians is all. And now they're going on about vaccines? Still can't watch the vids. Tablet isn't playing nicely. I'm English, so have no idea what they actually do. We're th magicians or did I make it up? Sorry, don't mean to go, just confused as to their relevance :-/

Yes as far as I know they are magicians (and skeptics) but they've had a couple of TV series about various things, one of them being about conspiracies. The vaccine one was shown as part of this.
Penn & Teller

They're very anti science-denialism hence they felt they should speak out.

fantastic thread! and yes, it is time to ban all vaccines

Excellent post! I have a 2 year old son and in today's society trying not to get him his shots is blasphimous talk even in my close circle of informed friends. So I gave in and got him his 1 year "wellness" shots. 3 days after he started puking uncontrollably. Doctor said it was a side affect to his mumps shot should go away in a day or two. 2 weeks after he started to develop a "light" case of Measles. Ummm excuse me? Covered in spots all over his body. Dizziness fever and so on. Once again doctor assured me this is normal. I asked how in the hell this is normal and I got a pamphlet. HA. (Changed doctors after the pamphlet argument)

The kicker though was his attitude change. Before his shots he was happy, joyful, playful and energetic. After on the other hand he was lethargic, angry, zoned off more times than I could count. Now tell me how that could be good for a child? It's one thing to have a reaction physically but I draw the line when it changes personality and behavior.

Besides the immune system is meant to regenerate its self and grow. Not be artificially put on a crutch and waste away. Big pharma can suck a fat one. Ain't touching my family no more. It's common sense that something that hurts your child should be expelled from his/her life. It's sad to see that parental instinct has been tossed aside for false security because of the "gossip" spread by big pharma into scaring people of a huge non existant outbreak.

Rant over

This has all the data, the history is provided with sources in this 2 hour lecture given by a Dr. to other practitioners. You guys are going to love this, even talks about how, and who, weaponize cancer with a combination of vaccines and radiation to try and kill Fidel Castro. This alone is worth watching it for, major conspiracy sourced out there, but that is not all. Really educate yourself on what vaccines really are, what they do, how bypassing the primary immune system by injecting foreign material directly into the blood stream (nothing is supposed to directly enter the blood stream!) is harmful, and most importantly, learn how vaccination and immunization ARE NOT the same thing.

Everyones been lied to about polio, there is alot to explain, I beg you all to hear this practicing Doctor out and spread the word.