Faith Healer Convinces Followers To Never Vaccinate, Now Church The Center Of Measles Outbreak (VIDE

Who ever use to have these 'measles parties' need to have child protection services called on them.

About one out of 10 children with measles also gets an ear infection, and up to one out of 20 gets pneumonia. About one out of 1,000 gets encephalitis, and one or two out of 1,000 die. Other rash-causing diseases often confused with measles include roseola (roseola infantum) and rubella (German measles).
While measles is almost gone from the United States, it still kills nearly 200,000 people each year around the world. Measles can also make a pregnant woman have a miscarriage or give birth prematurely. For more information, visit the Complications page.

www.cdc.gov...

And by far, my favorite quote by a med student. This is pure gold and couldn't have said it better myself.

So... I'm a medical student.

When I hear this, I used to really give a #. It used to bother me a whole lot. I used to really want to invest in active public debate. Now I'm just apathetic to the whole thing. People aren't going to change their minds when they've abandoned an evidence-based view of the world.

I say, let the #ers kill themselves with herbs, and crystals, and prayer.

When your infection turns septic, and the MI, stroke, or trauma eventually happens- I'll be here. I'll be waiting. I will help you.

And I won't need to convince you to save you.

My only #ing request is that we establish a legal precedent to prevent these people from harming their children with this bull#.

Link

reply to post by Dianec


Good god by your logic of you can't protect them fro everything so why protect them at all. You may as well leave a half loaded gun in the room with them. Russian roulette with disease or bullets it is about the same. While you are at it give a ten year old the keys to your car what could go wrong? Some of you people simply do not make any sense.

Why not have a flu party I am sure most will live and develop antibodys you know because those vaccines are so dangerous even if there isn't evidence to support it. You guys must love Scientology that religion thinks the same.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


And you are simply wrong. It is not proven, in fact those who are vaccinated have a higher incidence of getting the very disease they were vaccinated against. They are also much more likely to suffer auto-immune illnesses, dementia, death, SIDS, Autism, MS, paralysis, Crohns, irritable bowel, fibromyalgia, diabeties 1 & 2 to name a few!




This image shows the increase in deaths from flu AFTER children vaccinated compared to prior to being vaccinated





Study linking Autism to vaccinations and their adjuvants



Infant mortality rate rises with vaccinations



Mortality rates increase in countries based on increase in vaccines:



Depression and neuro-degeneration increase with vaccines



Study in the Netherlands proving illness increases with vaccinations



Lawyer who used to defend the vaccine industry presses to stop vaccinations




Did you even watch the video I posted? Or are you just happy believing the lies told to you by the government?


Vaccinations are proven to increase likelihood of death, and Doctors know it. Many doctors won't get vaccines nor will they give them to their children, yet they will give them to your children.











Here you have a much larger population with lower vaccine rates with vastly lower deaths than a smaller highly vaccinated population with much higher death rates



The WHO claimed to eradicate Small Pox, but what is the truth? Diseases were plummeting before vaccines!



Theory vs. Reality regarding illness and vaccinations





The medical community is pushed to fight disease the wrong way. The 1918 flu is a perfect example:



But but but, we wiped out these diseases like polio with our vaccines! Really? Or did they just start naming them something else?



What is the real cause of polio? How did it get stopped? Why does it persist in other countries?



The use of DDT and the corresponding rise in Polio



Proof vaccines kill people more than help them



More evidence diseases were declining BEFORE vaccines were used. Thus the WHO claiming to be eradicating illnesses via vaccines are lies"





The real healer is natural via nutrition and hygiene. This shows a direct correlation to vitamin C and fighting disease



No vaccine was adopted for TB in America and yet what happened?



What about Pertussis?



Still not convinced? I have more



What about the dreaded flu?



An independent research team which is supposed to not have any political pressure reviewd 51 studies of 260,000 children and what did they find?



Same with the elderly who are getting these vaccines which have been proven to cause dementia! This was the same Cochran team covering 64 studies and 40 years of vaccines!



Same for BCG for TB. In fact the Lancet, one of the most prestigious medical journals found in 1996 that you have an increased risk to get TB if you are vaccinated! Those who got the 2 dose group vs the placebo group came down with TB more often!



When monitored over several years they found in 250,000 subjects in a DOUBLE BLIND RANDOMIZED CONTROL STUDY published by the Indian Medical Research in 1999:



Do you get that? The vaccinated had DOUBLE the incidents of TB over the placebo group! Yes, let's all run out and get those vaccines! IT'S PROVEN SCIENCE! Why has Canada still pushed this vaccine?

What about Diphtheria? Any science on that?




These are major studies in respected medical associations all disproving the effectiveness of vaccines! But, the vaccines are supposed to create antibodies that cause you to be protected except it is not proven.

In the New England Journal of Medicine in the 1980's found:







So, if you want to refute all this evidence and run out and vaccinate yourself and your children because of the fear porn put out by the CDC and WHO you go right ahead. I won't ever do it to myself or my family. I think the evidence is clear.

Who's with me to have a 'peanut party', where we distribute peanut M&Ms to our kids and find out if they are 1 of the 100 that are severely allergic to peanuts?

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Where is the source for these images.

Because I already find them misleading and inaccurate, I'm sure you can figure out the ones pertaining to the MMR ones. It's common sense.

Can you or do I have to explain it to you like you're 5 on why they're just plain wrong.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Could you please link your sources for those graphs so we know if they are credible or not.

reply to post by Grimpachi


They are all in that video. So, since none of you pro-vaccine people want to avail yourself of this information, I have no doubt you won't watch the video since I already posted it once and you did not recognize the information which I have supplied.

I know the truth sucks, but it's still the truth

In case you have a change of heart:

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

More evidence diseases were declining BEFORE vaccines were used. Thus the WHO claiming to be eradicating illnesses via vaccines are lies"

As pointed out here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Those charts are misleading if not deceptive. The term is "cherry picking".

It is not proven that vaccinations increase the incidence of disease.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


For those who can't watch the video let me guess just take it on faith that your source is credible.

No thanks the charts are bogus. We all know Youtube never lies right.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

They are all in that video. So, since none of you pro-vaccine people want to avail yourself of this information, I have no doubt you won't watch the video since I already posted it once and you did not recognize the information which I have supplied.

The question is actually what is the source of the data for those charts. Some people would like to confirm that the charts actually show what is claimed rather than accepting them at face value.

reply to post by Phage


Then watch the video and do your own homework. It's all in there, and I did supply the groups for them. Blow up the image and get it from there or listen to the Dr. presenting it as he GIVES THEM OUT.

I know, you can't be bothered since you know the truth.

Or maybe you need to be

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Okay, so I guess you want me to go down the explain-it-like-you're-five-route, we can even turn this into a Dora The Explorer interactive learning experience for you. Actually I just deleted a portion of this and figured I'd just link you. I really don't have time the Vikings are on TV and don't want to spend that time typing out the obvious.

I have no doubt you won't click the link since I already posted it once and you did not recognize the information which I have supplied.

When there’s an outbreak of a disease that’s rare for a given area, such as measles in the United States, unvaccinated people aren’t the only ones at risk. Because no vaccination is 100% effective, some vaccinated individuals will get the disease as well. In fact, during an outbreak, the number of vaccinated individuals who get sick will often outnumber the unvaccinated people who get sick. This, however, is not because vaccines are ineffective, but because there are so few people who avoid vaccination in the first place. Look at the numbers for a hypothetical outbreak:

You have a group of 500 people who have been exposed to an outbreak of a rare disease. Of those 500 people, 490 have been vaccinated; 10 have not. Different vaccines provide different rates of protection, but in this case, let's assume that 98 of every 100 people who are vaccinated will successfully develop immunity against the disease.

When exposed to the outbreak, all 10 of the unvaccinated individuals get the disease. What about the 490 who were vaccinated?

Based on the assumption of 98 of every 100 people developing successful immunity (leaving two of the 100 unprotected), about 10 of the 490 vaccinated individuals will get the disease—the same as the number of unvaccinated individuals.

Those numbers, however, don’t take into account the percentage of vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals who got sick. Of those who fell ill, 10 had been vaccinated and 10 had not. But the 10 who had been vaccinated are only (10 / 490) = 2% of the individuals who had been vaccinated in the population of 500. The 10 who hadn’t been vaccinated are (10 / 10) = 100% of those who weren’t vaccinated. The final results of the outbreak, therefore, look like this:

Population size: 500
Vaccinated individuals: 490
Unvaccinated individuals: 10
Percentage of vaccinated individuals who fell ill: 2%
Percentage of unvaccinated individuals who fell ill: 100%

Link (again)


Truth sucks, it hurts doesn't it?

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

I see. You don't care about original sources. I do. I found the source of those charts in the article which was linked earlier.
Perhaps you can address some of the criticisms in the article which was posted earlier but you ignored.

Here’s the problem. It’s not surprising that death rates were declining before introduction of the vaccines. Medicine was improving. More importantly, supportive care was improving. For example, take the case of polio. Before the introduction of the iron lung and its widespread use, for example, if a polio patient developed paralysis of the respiratory muscles, he would almost certainly die.

Note how Obomsawin left out a section of ten years when measles was not nationally reportable. Also note how he has, to be charitable, cherry picked the years to produce the impression of a smoothly declining measles incidence from 1935 to 1959. As I said, it doesn’t get much more intellectually dishonest than that. But it’s even worse than that. The graph above still gives the impression that measles incidence was falling before the ten years for which there is no data.

www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...

For those interested in vaccine propaganda and truth, here is this video:

Not surprising usually when someone refuses to link there sources it is a huge red flag saying intellectually dishonest. The usual of do your own homework or I will not spoon feed you is another red flag.

Linking a YouTube video without a summary sometimes means you do not understand the information yourself but it sounded good enough to convince you.

I want to know the source of graphs and quotes I want to know if they can be trusted otherwise I could make a bogus graph saying whatever I want it to but it wouldn’t mean its true.

reply to post by Grimpachi

Start here on your voyage through the cherry orchard.
genesgreenbook.com...

Aluminum hydroxide injections lead to motor deficits and motor neuron degeneration

Abstract Gulf War Syndrome is a multi-system disorder afflicting many veterans of Western armies in the 1990–1991 Gulf War. A number of those afflicted may show neurological deficits including various cognitive dysfunctions and motor neuron disease, the latter expression virtually indistinguishable from classical amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) except for the age of onset.

This ALS “cluster” represents the second such ALS cluster described in the literature to date. Possible causes of GWS include several of the adjuvants in the anthrax vaccine and others. The most likely culprit appears to be aluminum hydroxide. In an initial series of experiments, we examined the potential toxicity of aluminum hydroxide in male, outbred CD-1 mice injected subcutaneously in two equivalent-to-human doses.

After sacrifice, spinal cord and motor cortex samples were examined by immunohistochemistry. Aluminum-treated mice showed significantly increased apoptosis of motor neurons and increases in reactive astrocytes and microglial proliferation within the spinal cord and cortex. Morin stain detected the presence of aluminum in the cytoplasm of motor neurons with some neurons also testing positive for the presence of hyper-phosphorylated tau protein, a pathological hallmark of various neurological diseases, including Alzheimer's disease and frontotemporal dementia. A second series of experiments was conducted on mice injected with six doses of aluminum hydroxide.

Behavioural analyses in these mice revealed significant impairments in a number of motor functions as well as diminished spatial memory capacity. The demonstrated neurotoxicity of aluminum hydroxide and its relative ubiquity as an adjuvant suggest that greater scrutiny by the scientific community is warranted. Keywords: Aluminum hydroxide, Adjuvant, Neurotoxicity, Gulf War Syndrome, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

source

The video I just posted talks about the effect of aluminum on mice. You see, the CDC and medical community never did a study on this aluminum adjuvant to see the effects. Then this research team did ,and saw the mice change in behavior and once killed, they saw the incredible damage done to their neurons and brains!

We know what mercury does which they call Thimerosal in vaccines now. They used to list it as mercury, then people got smart. So, they thought changing the name would shut us up. They do the same with Aspartame on food labels now. They just put in Amino-Sweet or phenylalanine or Phenylketonurics.

Originally posted by Grimpachi
reply to post by Dianec

 

Good god by your logic of you can't protect them fro everything so why protect them at all. You may as well leave a half loaded gun in the room with them. Russian roulette with disease or bullets it is about the same. While you are at it give a ten year old the keys to your car what could go wrong? Some of you people simply do not make any sense.

Why not have a flu party I am sure most will live and develop antibodys you know because those vaccines are so dangerous even if there isn't evidence to support it. You guys must love Scientology that religion thinks the same.

It's clear you are taking my statements out of context entirely. Never did I say to expose children to a disease. Where did I say that? When did I support any religion or scientology in here? When did I say not to protect children at all? I was very clear and let me know if this is still not clear:

We live in the United States. We have rights. One of those rights is a choice of what we put into our bodies in this case. There are reasonable limits to that choice in that you cannot work in certain fields or have children in pre-school or daycares without being fully (up to date) vaccinated. To make it a crime for people to not have mandatory vaccinations is not a viable option - as it takes away our freedoms. When would limits on those freedoms end? They would not end on mandatory inoculation for all citizens." No where in there did I say don't have protections anywhere - lets expose them all.

I don't mean to be rude but you are either unable to comprehend what I have now tried to explain a third time or are unable to justify your statement that mandatory vaccines should be the new law (by stating it should be child abuse if you do not vaccinate your children). And I truly do not understand your attacks with religious references or a need to twist words so far out of context. It actually took some effort to twist what I said into this understanding you have taken from it - would have been more simple to read it line by line and take it for what it was rather than to add some sinister deeper meaning to it).

If you need further clarity I can try to explain my reply to you in another way but I am not sure I can make it anymore straight forward. An analogy (when I spoke of bug spray to avoid tics), is meant to convey an example of similar proportions. I know I should point out when i am using these but usually people understand them.

My message was really simple:

*I believe in vaccines (pointed out that I fully prescribe to them minus the flu shot).
*I also believe people should have a choice
*Choosing to not vaccinate is not a crime (not child abuse/neglect).
*It should not be considered child abuse/neglect because that would mean all are required to vaccinate. In turn choice is taken away (inalienable rights). After that more choices begin to be taken away as a way to control our decisions for the better good of everyone.

You hears:

*I'm some crazy Christian or Scientologist
*I think we should expose all kids to not only disease but also all other dangers we can possibly think of.
*Don't protect kids at all because it will cause a chain reaction. I simply stated it would lead to other things. We protect children more than you can know (I have worked in that field). We have tons of laws. In my opinion we do not need to add laws to make people give their children vaccines.

Pretty sure the pharma companies paid the "visitor" to the church to carry the measles in there to prove their point. And yes, the government would do something like that(smallpox blankets to native americans? Syphillis testing on african americans, etc etc).

I have had two cousins have their vaccines and are now autistic, one cousin had the mmr and ran a fever of over 103 and the dr told them, it was normal. >.< Something ain't stirring the koolaid.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
For those interested in vaccine propaganda and truth, here is this video:

It would be nice if you answered the question and not just said "go watch this youtube video".

Knowing, as you've been told several times now, that your graphs show deceptive cherry picking of data rather than the raw data, do you still support them?