It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
hudsonhawk69
ladybug121
reply to post by Grimpachi
I have a sister in law who is not giving her children vaccines. I'm wondering the outcome of it. I hope the kids end up okay.
My children have not been vaccinated and they are fine.
VeritasAequitas
reply to post by Pardon?
How about you jog on, hmm? This is America jack; not some country ruled by an authoritarian dictator like your queen. It goes against our very Constitution to enact what you just insinuated... You can't just force people to take shots or faulty medicine that they don't want, nor is it any of your god damned business to say that we don't have the right to decide for ourselves, or even that our kids should be taken away from us for not complying.. That violates our free will, and right to govern our own lifes; that's not what government is for..
MOSTwanted
reply to post by carabao
Here, from your favorite source... you decide why this article even exists, if vaccines are so safe. Can you read between the slanted lines?
Adverse events following immunization[edit]
All vaccines may cause side effects, and immunization safety is a real concern. Unlike most other medical interventions, vaccines are given to healthy people, and people are far less willing to tolerate vaccines' adverse effects than adverse effects of other treatments. As the success of immunization programs increases and the incidence of disease decreases, public attention shifts away from the risks of disease to the risk of vaccination.[2]
Concerns about immunization safety often follow a pattern. First, some investigators suggest that a medical condition of increasing prevalence or unknown cause is an adverse effect of vaccination. The initial study, and subsequent studies by the same group, have inadequate methodology, typically a poorly controlled or uncontrolled case series. A premature announcement is made of the alleged adverse effect, resonating with individuals suffering the condition, and underestimating the potential harm to those whom the vaccine could protect. The initial study is not reproduced by other groups. Finally, it takes several years to regain public confidence in the vaccine.[2]
Controversies in this area revolve around the question of whether the risks of adverse events following immunization outweigh the benefits of saving people from tragic outcomes of common diseases. There is some scientific evidence that immunizations can cause serious adverse effects, such as gelatin measles-mumps-rubella vaccine (MMR) causing anaphylaxis, a severe allergic reaction.[2] Controversy exists over whether conditions such as autism are caused by vaccines. Allegations particularly focus on the MMR vaccine and on thiomersal, a preservative that was used in vaccines routinely given to U.S. children less than 24 months of age prior to 2001.[3][4] Current scientific evidence does not support causation for these disorders.[2] Nearly 5,000 U.S. families of children diagnosed with autism have claims for compensation from a federal fund, saying that their health problems were caused by common childhood vaccines. In one case, the government conceded that the child had a pre-existing mitochondrial disorder with autism-like symptoms aggravated by five simultaneous immunizations.[5][6]
United States[edit]
Vaccine Injury Compensation Program[edit]
In 1988, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) went into effect to compensate individuals and families of individuals who have been injured by covered childhood vaccines.[7] The VICP was adopted in response to an earlier scare over the pertussis portion of the DPT vaccine. These claims were later generally discredited, but some U.S. lawsuits against vaccine makers won substantial awards; most makers ceased production, and the last remaining major manufacturer threatened to do so. It uses a no-fault alternative dispute resolution system for resolving vaccine injury claims. Funding for claims of harm after 1988 comes from a patient fee of 75 cents per vaccination. To win an award, a claimant must show a causal connection; if medical records show a child has one of several listed adverse effects soon after vaccination, the assumption is that it was caused by the vaccine. The proof standard is the civil-law preponderance of the evidence, showing that causation was more likely than not. Claims that are denied can be pursued in regular lawsuits, though this is rare. Some claimants are suing thimerosal makers instead of vaccine makers, filing class-action suits, or demanding monitoring for vaccinated children who do not show signs of autism.[1]
The VICP covers all vaccines listed on the Vaccine Injury Table[8] maintained by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. From 1988 until March 3, 2011, 5,636 claims relating to autism, and 8,119 non-autism claims, were made to the VICP. 2,620 of these claims, one autism-related, were compensated, with 4,463 non-autism and 814 autism claims dismissed; awards (including attorney's fees) totaled over $2 billion. The VICP also applies to claims for injuries suffered before 1988; there were 4,264 of these claims of which 1,189 were compensated with awards totaling $903 million.[9]
MOSTwanted
reply to post by Pardon?
Don't you see that you can't even sue the vaccine manufacturers? They are immune. Do u know any other companies immune from selling poison? You must support no labeling requirements on Gmo's. Because you believe what any organization tells you that has a lot of financial backing and the ability to bribe others to support their agenda. The stats in my post are unacceptable and although it's slanted in support of vaccines, how can you ignore the facts contained therein
3asya5pi3
reply to post by boymonkey74
The science may be on point(and I agree has saved millions of lives), but ultimately on the larger scale the government is administering these vaccines. So you have to trust that what you require, is what you are receiving.edit on 6-1-2014 by 3asya5pi3 because: grammar
boymonkey74
reply to post by 3asya5pi3
Seeing I have had many shots over the years and many of the people I care for have had them and not one has died...yes I do.
I know one co worker who got flu after the flu jab and she said she was already getting it.
If the Government wanted us dead they would do it in a better fashion than vaccines.
3asya5pi3
reply to post by boymonkey74
boymonkey74
reply to post by 3asya5pi3
Seeing I have had many shots over the years and many of the people I care for have had them and not one has died...yes I do.
I know one co worker who got flu after the flu jab and she said she was already getting it.
If the Government wanted us dead they would do it in a better fashion than vaccines.
As I said, it is merely a matter of trust. Personally, I was vaccinated as a child and I believe it helped to prevent me from contracting multiple diseases.
However there have been cases where such vaccines have caused horrible side effects. Perhaps there is nothing sinister about it? Perhaps there needs to be some sort of preliminary test before patients are vaccinated?
Regardless you have to see it from both perspectives. One being a parent watching their childs well being degrade drastically after a vaccine that they trusted was safe. Perhaps isolated cases, but just something to be aware of.edit on 6-1-2014 by 3asya5pi3 because: (no reason given)edit on 6-1-2014 by 3asya5pi3 because: (no reason given)
jibajaba
Personally I am not buying what you are selling.
Anyone could come up with this mumbojumbo.
I have a grand that has not been nor will be vaccinated and has not been sick.
The others have stopped getting any vax.
My oldest got chicken pox and was vaccinated.
Check out
and
I have many more.