Secret New Documents Reveal Shocking Truth About Vaccine Cover UP.

Originally posted by jasonl1983
But Bill Gates says they're safe! Anybody else think he's turning into some sort of "I want to rule the world" megalomaniac?

The only person that knows if it is safe is the chemist/bio engineer that mixed it up.

reply to post by Gorman91


Using your reasoning, you could also say vaccinations were responsible for the increase in our national debt...

It's an exponential growth path - there's absolutely no evidence other than your opinion, conjecture & coincidence to suggest that the population growth was a direct result of vaccination.

I think it's much more likely that it's because more people were having babies & their babies were having babies & so on...

reply to post by coldkidc


Then the curve would be smoother, and not a sudden, random explosion. That population growth was more than exponential. It was quite literally shift. And it just so happens that around that same time, vaccines for polio, pox, and influenza were created. Three very big causes for infant mortality.

People were having babies, and those babies were dying. Suddenly they weren't.

Vaccines are the only link, because it happened in many 3rd world nations that were colonies as well, as a result of colonial medicines available.

reply to post by Gorman91


I disagree that vaccines are the only possible reason.

What about improvements in technology & general medical procedures?
What about improvements in agriculture & distribution?
Residential & commercial codes & improvements in infrastructure?
A lot was happening in the 50's & 60's - "the times, they were a changing"

reply to post by coldkidc


All of that happened in 1st world countries. Vaccines are pretty much the only thing that was in both colony and homeland.

I see your point but all I'm trying to say is that the best it could be is "possible" that it was due to vaccinations - it is not provable & there were a whole lot of other factors.

So the moral of this story is avoid vaccines at all cost???

reply to post by coldkidc


Indeed. But it seems more probable.

reply to post by jhn7537


You should simply investigate what is in them besides the vaccine.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by jhn7537

 

You should simply investigate what is in them besides the vaccine.

Well, crap, I just had my 10 year Tetanus shot a couple months ago... SIGH

Well, learning what's in them is one thing. But being educated enough to understand what everything does it another... I'm sure you need to be a couple credits shy of being a biochemist to fully understand what everything does...

Originally posted by WeRpeons
reply to post by beckybecky

 

Funny you should post this thread today. I just got back from my yearly physical and the first thing my doctor asks me when he walks into the room is, "did you get the flu shot yet?" I said no, and than he started to give me a sales talk about why I should consider getting it.

I told him he could talk about me taking the shot until the cows come home because I just didn't trust the shots. I told him I've gone my whole life never needing one and I also honestly couldn't remember the last time I came down with the flu. He looked at me and said, but you're a teacher and you're in an environment with kids who may be carrying the flu virus. I said so, and I don't ever remember taking a day off because I was sick with the flu. He was perplexed to say the least. He than laughs and says, I have to watch who I pick my battles with.

I really think I'm bombarded with germs and viruses everyday. I just think my body naturally creates a resistance to germs and viruses. I'm handling papers from kids who are sneezing, coughing and just coming back from being sick. You would think teachers would be the most susceptible to viruses, but I think if they did some research on it, they would find the majority of teachers don't really get sick that often.

I just find it really odd how they have been pushing flu shots in the past few years.

You have that right...Because I work for Department of Human Services they have been trying ever so desperately to fear-monger me into taking the flu-shot...(haven't gotten one in 6 years)

lets just say I have a reputation at work for being the anti-vaccine guy...anyway I ended up having to get a "religious" exemption from the shot but they are going to try and force me to wear a "mask" during flu season while I'm at work...(which I think is ridiculous) even though all the patients are offered the flu-vaccine at any time...

So I am at absolutely no "risk" of infecting them unless they CHOSE as well to not get the shot...at which point I cannot be held responsible for any illness they may get...it was their choice not to "protect" themselves...

Anyway the DHS where I work is notorious for claiming the shot is mandatory and omitting the information regarding exemption. They like to fear-monger people into getting the shot...they are arrogant beyond all measure and the Dr. there scare the hell out of me way way way more than the patients...the patients have no power and you know what to expect...the Dr.s around there are GODS and their word is law...

reply to post by unityemissions


"Idiots will continue to take the jab no matter how much information is presented which shows they're detrimental and for the most part worthless."

some of those idiots are forced to, or its home schooling for you, i dont know of one public school that doesnt demand it, and very rarely getting out of it because of religion. not many parents have that option.

reply to post by jhn7537


Eh not really. Just know what stuff does and how it reacts, really. It's your environment. You should be aware of the costs and benefits of things around you.

reply to post by jasonl1983


"But Bill Gates says they're safe! Anybody else think he's turning into some sort of "I want to rule the world" megalomaniac? "

yah , like im really going to trust a guy who stole from friends to make a fortune. lol


the gates could give two #$%^ less about us. its an act. they will be the first to fush us down the toilet if given the chance. oh sure i know i know they give tons of money........... what do you really think they are going to be putting in those GM mosquitos? im betting its not cures lol

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by kalamatas

 

These are not exactly neutral unbiased sources dude.

I'm sorry. these diseases are gone because of vaccines. They didn't run rampant for hundreds of years and then suddenly disappear when vaccines were introduced by chance. The global population didn't go up by a factor of x3 around the same time as these vaccines by chance.

It was because of vaccines. That's why we didn't have 7 billion people on Earth until them.

3 billion to 7 billion in 50 years, starting around the time of widespread vaccine use.

And you know, I'll go further than that. There's strong evidence that ancient Rome knew about bacteria, and had some form of vaccines. And guess what. The population of Rome alone was in the millions then as well.



I maintain my point though. They are putting things into them that are a big no no. But vaccines are the primary cause of health and population increases in the last 50 years.

edit on 8-1-2013 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

And vaccine manufacturers are neutral unbiased sources? And no these diseases weren't gone because of vaccines. It is a well documented fact that these diseases declined to near nothing prior to the vaccines. There was a spike in Polio after the vaccine was introduced because the vaccine caused it. This isn't just speculation.

Vaccines do not create immunity. That is a fact as well. That's why they give booster shots. Beyond that "immunity" is measured by antibody response, which is not a true measure of immunity. It is only a measure of exposure. Exposure does not equal immunity. This has been studied as well in cases where children from schools with the highest titers from vaccines were the ones who contracted the illness as well as showing those unvaccinated who did contract the illness didn't have higher titers after illness. Hence that would lead one to see that antibody level means very little. The immune system and the creation of immunity is through multiple complex routes of the body (i.e. mucous membranes, g.i. tract...). Injecting a dead protein is hardly a sure fire way for the body to figure out how to fight off an illness for good.

Beyond the (in your opinion) possibly biased information, the stats alone are enough to question effectiveness. The study that I shared from Natural News is only one on many many cases showing that "immunized" individuals are just as likely if not more likely to contract the illness they were vaccinated against.

As far as the Romans go, I know they were pretty advanced for their time as far as sanitation goes

Public health was developed by the Romans as they believed that cleanliness would lead to good health. The Romans made links between causes of disease and methods of prevention. as a consequence they developed a large system of Public Health works around their empire.

The Romans believed that Prevention of illness was more important than cure of illness. Roman Philosophy was based along the lines of searching for a reason then establishing a preventative measure to minimise the risk attached. As a practical people they used observations of the environment to determine what was causing ill health. This form of empirical observation led the Romans to realise that death rates were higher in and around marshes and swamps.

The cure would then be based upon logic. As the Romans believed that Gods held the key to longevity of life they initially built Temples to the gods near large swamps to pacify them and reduce the deaths. Alternatives to this were the drainage of swamps and they also ensured that the army and important people lived away from these areas.

Such empirical observations led the Romans to believe that ill health could be associated with, amongst other things, bad air, bad water, swamps, sewage, debris and lack of personal cleanliness. In some places, Rome included, it is impossible to avoid all of these unless something is physically done to alter the environment. The Romans, being technologically adequate, resolved to provide clean water through aqueducts, to remove the bulk of sewage through the building of sewers and to develop a system of public toilets throughout their towns and city's. Personal hygiene was encouraged through the building of large public baths (The City of Bath being an obvious British example of these).

The consequence of this pragmatic approach to preventative measures was an advanced system of public health structures, many of which are still visible in places today.

www.schoolshistory.org.uk...

And I've never heard the idea the the "Baby Boomers" were so prolific because of vaccines. The were many other factors that are attributable to that.

Anyway think what you want.

Kindest regards!

reply to post by fourthmeal


quacky research should not be the foundation we base on when the health of our children is at stakes!

Originally posted by Waldy
reply to post by fourthmeal

 

quacky research should not be the foundation we base on when the health of our children is at stakes!

What quacky research are you referring to?

reply to post by kalamatas


Well a booster shot is because of mutations. See there's this thing called evolution. lol.


Now as for statistics, you might have missed my previous post.

Sorry to inform you, but the time when vaccines for common infant mortality correlates to the baby boomer generation and the overall global population boom. And one of the few things that the world had easy access to, mostly because of colonization, was in fact, shots.


And as for Rome: (remember, there is no evidence they had microscopes)

"When building a house or farm especial care should be taken to place it at the foot of a wooded hill where it is exposed to health-giving winds. Care should be taken where there are swamps in the neighbourhood, because certain tiny creatures which cannot be seen by the eyes breed there. These float through the air and enter the body by the mouth and nose and cause serious disease." Marcus Varro.

They also had needles, but this isn't exactly proof for vaccinations by needle. The way they vaccinated is probably the way I vaccinate myself naturally without shots today. I consume natural immune boosters and get myself sick. 3 days later, I'm vaccinated. Did you miss the recent news? They found pill medicines on roman ship wrecks.

This method is basically vaccination without needles. Same function, different form. You can get vaccinated by either boosting your body and letting yourself get sick early, or weakening the disease and putting it in you.

That's all a vaccine is.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by kalamatas

 

Well a booster shot is because of mutations. See there's this thing called evolution. lol.


Now as for statistics, you might have missed my previous post.

Sorry to inform you, but the time when vaccines for common infant mortality correlates to the baby boomer generation and the overall global population boom. And one of the few things that the world had easy access to, mostly because of colonization, was in fact, shots.


And as for Rome: (remember, there is no evidence they had microscopes)

"When building a house or farm especial care should be taken to place it at the foot of a wooded hill where it is exposed to health-giving winds. Care should be taken where there are swamps in the neighbourhood, because certain tiny creatures which cannot be seen by the eyes breed there. These float through the air and enter the body by the mouth and nose and cause serious disease." Marcus Varro.

They also had needles, but this isn't exactly proof for vaccinations by needle. The way they vaccinated is probably the way I vaccinate myself naturally without shots today. I consume natural immune boosters and get myself sick. 3 days later, I'm vaccinated. Did you miss the recent news? They found pill medicines on roman ship wrecks.

This method is basically vaccination without needles. Same function, different form. You can get vaccinated by either boosting your body and letting yourself get sick early, or weakening the disease and putting it in you.

That's all a vaccine is.

Boosters aren't different than the original vaccine. It's not modified for mutations. That makes no sense. Boosters are to boost immunity not cover mutations. Wow.

What you're talking about is exposing yourself to pathogens via the proper immune stimulating route. This confers true immunity because, as I already noted previously, you are exposed to the pathogen via mucous membranes and your gastrointestinal tract. This is the proper way to signal the body to mount a PROPER immune response and actually learn to fight the pathogen. It is a completely different mechanism than injecting a dead substance intramuscularly or if the nurse sucks at shot into your bloodstream.

Why do you need a tetanus booster? Not because of mutation but because effectiveness wears off. Ingest tetanus toxoid and you become immune.

It is absolutely NOT the same function. Your completely bypassing the first and critical lines of defense.

reply to post by kalamatas

Boosters aren't different than the original vaccine. It's not modified for mutations. That makes no sense. Boosters are to boost immunity not cover mutations. Wow.

Actually they are. Because there's no logical reason to otherwise need a boosting to your immune system. Your body does not forget a virus. But a virus mutates and then it needs to find a new way.

What you're talking about is exposing yourself to pathogens via the proper immune stimulating route. This confers true immunity because, as I already noted previously, you are exposed to the pathogen via mucous membranes and your gastrointestinal tract. This is the proper way to signal the body to mount a PROPER immune response and actually learn to fight the pathogen. It is a completely different mechanism than injecting a dead substance intramuscularly or if the nurse sucks at shot into your bloodstream.

Actually it's not different. See you're trying to say it is, but the reality is that the body can mount a more effective assault in the blood than in the mucous. Furthermore, mucous is not for fighting a disease. It is for preventing it. In hopes that it gets caught in that rather than the lungs and dies.

The function of what is happening remains the same. The substance being dead is basically irrelevant. It's the specific protein assemblies that the body has to scan. And it can do that to something dead or alive. Furthermore, the "mounting the offensive" is what is actually your cold. That's what a cold is. The war, not the infection.

Why do you need a tetanus booster? Not because of mutation but because effectiveness wears off. Ingest tetanus toxoid and you become immune.

The effectiveness wears off because the entity mutates. Ingest it, and you will get sick again if it is a mutation. Because the body has to find a new way to combat the changed structure.

It is absolutely NOT the same function. Your completely bypassing the first and critical lines of defense.

Because the first means of defense are not immunity. It's killing it before it enters you.