[off topic] Are you for/against vaccinations?

When you look at graphs that represents the number of vaccines kids have gotten over the last 25 years, it mirrors that of autism rates. Yet there is an argument that the two aren't connected. They, the medical establishment still claim its their diagnostic techniques have gotten better, but look around and tell me you know of any adults that have autism... they are not there.

Vaccines are tested separately, so its foolish that they are used in the form of a cocktail, because injecting vaccines together has NOT been studied. We can deduce from the three false premises of a vaccine, that they are not effective.

1. Not everyone will come in contact with these disease.
2. The people who do come in contact with these diseases, will not always be effected (think of an airplane).
3. Vaccines do not keep anyone from getting sick, and we know this from the millions of people who claim damages against them.

Health cannot come through a needle. How are you going to inject something in your body, a virus, a particle of bacteria and a bunch of chemicals and say 'this will keep you healthy' ? Health in the presence of pharmaceuticals is an oxymoron.

And, what I don't understand from parents is the abdication of your precious child to a person who wears a white coat having the title of Pediatrician, trusting that they know best...

For the 19 states that have a philosophical exemption and the 50 states that have a religious exemption from vaccines, its very possible that you can maintain the health of your child without school mandated vaccines.

And stereofidelic, your posts just sap my will to live.

Health cannot come through a needle. How are you going to inject something in your body, a virus, a particle of bacteria and a bunch of chemicals and say 'this will keep you healthy' ? Health in the presence of pharmaceuticals is an oxymoron.

I mean, where do I even begin with a paragraph like this?

Anti-vaxxers have enough blood on their hands as it is. They obviously want even more people to die of preventable diseases.

I'm not sure NCOT, where do you begin? You have a lot of to speak from.

UNICEF ignores the fact that vaccines can cause harm and do cause harm. We have never funded a study on vaccinated children against unvaccinated children. So, naturally the CDC is allowing a pool of the population receive that vaccinations that went untested for. The U.S. Gov has paid out $2 billion on vaccine injury claims, leaving only 25% of those actually compensated by these injuries.

The vaccines are simply a driver for the pharmaceutical industry, and a certain number of children that get these vaccines will end up with health problems, and what do these conditions do other than drive pharma sales? They are a propagator for the use of medications.

I really think that in the future, social anthropologists will look back at this time of medical history, and look at what we were doing; injecting aborted fetal cells, chemicals, animal dna, and viruses into little children and somehow thinking that this is going to keep them healthy? I think social anthropology will look at this in the same way as we looked at blood leading, leeches, trephination etc as the biggest crime against humanity, for scamming young parents into believing this was something necessary into keeping children healthy.

I really think that in the future, social anthropologists will look back at this time of medical history, and look at what we were doing; injecting aborted fetal cells, chemicals, animal dna, and viruses into little children and somehow thinking that this is going to keep them healthy? I think social anthropology will look at this in the same way as we looked at blood leading, leeches, trephination etc as the biggest crime against humanity, for scamming young parents into believing this was something necessary into keeping children healthy.

Lolzers, what a silly, absurd, and trite appeal to future generations, almost as though you were hoping they will absolve anti-vaxxers of their past and present crimes and thus remove the guilt that you collectively bear.

Here, I'll get out my crystal ball and save you the trouble of wondering: they won't.

Never let reality interfere with what you want to believe. There's a government agent and a big pharma representative hiding behind every bush waiting to get you. Global warming doesn't exist and the holocaust never happened.

Really, you just can reason with unreasonable people.

This thread sounds like me trying to talk to my son,another crazy idea of his was that he was not
going to sign the birth certificate for the baby since that would be in effect a contract with the government.
I think his wife put her foot down on that one.
I am sure he has been tainted by his ride through the medical system,where all the UC drugs failed,
of course modern surgery did the trick,and provided a way towards health.
I am sure he has read that polio paper where the vaccine is not necessary since the disease was in decline,and all the stuff on thimerosal causing autism,that is what is driving him. Actually he does believe that vaccines work to provide immunity,he is against the preservatives in them. I keep trying to explain that without preservatives the vaccines will grow fungus and or bacteria, the recent case in point is the injectable steroids that contained fungus, and killed
many.  Perhaps they can make single does injectables where you don't need all the preservatives,

have not looked into that,believe some are made that way.
Old Mike

Post Edited (Old Mike) : 11/15/2013 6:56:14 AM (GMT-7)

I'm not a scientist or a statistician, but I absolutely think that autism numbers are up because the understanding of the condition and diagnosis methods have improved, especially for children with high functioning autism.

My child is high functioning on the autism spectrum. I feel very strongly that he it is highly unlikely that he would have been diagnosed autistic if he had grown up with me in the 60's and 70's. (He may have been given other labels, but not autism)

Go to any support site where parents of kids on the spectrum gather and you will witness many instances of parents and sometimes aunts/uncles being diagnosed with HFA after recognizing themselves in the traits of their autistic offspring that were missed by parents/school/doctors in generations past.

Also, speaking of big business, the business of developmental psychology and therapy is huge. Just about every town has at lease one place you can take your kid to be evaluated for giftedness, learning disabled, autistic, etc. It costs hundreds of dollars to be tested and thousands of dollars for subsequent therapy if needed. Between pushy parents looking for labels and inexperienced or plain greedy psychologists there are diagnosis being given out they may not be deserved including ones for autism. I'm not saying it happens a lot, but I know that it happens some of the time and adds to the numbers.

I'm going to have to retract my apology on polio vaccines after doing further research and looking at Dr.Sherri Tenpenny's work. There are different classifications of polio and roughly 2% end up with paralytic polio, of which 50% recover. Most forms of polio are benign and go away. It takes a lot to go against the current dogma on not well researched scientific paradigms. It's easy to play the quackery card and not look at the actual argument proposed. This is the same reason Galileo was prosecuted for saying the earth revolved around the sun. Ad-hominem attacks have no place in the scientific realm, but it is all too common today.

There are a lot of fallacious arguments in this thread that I don't even know where to begin. It would take a whole day for me to address them all. It would also be a colossal waste of time to even try to change the minds of people who refuse to even listen to the contrary viewpoints. My so-called "diabolical" intention isn't to be anti-vaccine, but rather to look at the evidence and some confounding research, and not just blindly listen to some authority. That way we can make more educated and informed decisions about what we decide to put in our body. The statistics from adverse medical reactions are at an all time high for this very reason. It would behoove us to do our own research and not let other people make the conclusions for us.

If you asked me this question 4 months ago, I would have responded differently. I worshiped scientists like Richard Dawkins and shunned everything "non-scientific" as quackery. Unfortunately, there's a strong distinction between good science and bad science. The vast majority of the studies on nutrition, vaccines, pharmaceutical agents cannot be considered science simply because there are a few non-conflict of interest independent entities that verify the studies. The Cochran Collaboration, an independent organization that looks at meta-analysis of studies, makes a modest effort to do this but still falls short because of the flawed nature of studies it analyzes. Even then, they were able to demonstrate that flu vaccines were next to useless.

On the effectiveness of vaccines -

Is there a double blind study detailing the effectiveness on vaccines in the general population vs unvaccinated kids? Is there a modicum of scientific evidence out there denoting the effectiveness of vaccines? I'd love for the CDC to fund this study to put to rest any concerns. Unfortunately, due to the nature of the business and profits involved, we won't be seeing one anytime soon. All we can do is look at epidemiological data and study populations like the Amish or age-old tribes and make correlations.

Although one can't say that vaccines cause autism, we can certainly make inferences as to why autism is on the rise. Much of it has to do with the assault on our microbial diversity with food, antibiotics and other pharmaceutical agents, but more research is needed on the role that vaccines play in changing the microbiome. I don't believe in the diagnostic box myth anymore. We've expanded the diagnostic box for many illnesses, including non-existent psychiatric ones. Autism is nothing on the realm of psychiatric illnesses, it has always been a discernible condition. The rise in inflammatory bowel disease is also seen through hospitalization statistics, not because we've expanded the so-called diagnostic box. We know that more people than ever before are coming down with it via hospitalizations, and this is at unprecedented rates.

There are some legitimate studies on flu vaccines and their ineffectiveness on the general population. There is no demonstrable herd immunity effect as mentioned earlier.

On the increased lifespan fallacy -

I can't even begin to tell you how many times I've heard this one. This is some strong statistical manipulation at work here. This argument is based on averages. If someone died at age 13 from a war, the lifespan reduces significantly. Because we are able to address some infant mortality, poverty, sanitation and malnutrition issues, we are not dying young anymore. This doesn't imply that it's medical care that's doing it. People also did not drop dead at the age of 40, contrary to popular belief. Because of our suboptimal medical care, our lifespan is expected to decrease. We still live in the dark ages of medicine where the symptoms are treated as the cause.

I think my friend summed it up pretty well here:

Modern technology has given us toxic food, but plenty of medications, surgeries and other medical procedures to keep us breathing well into our decrepit eighties. Unfortunately, the party is about to be over. The medicine is not improving at the same rate that our diet and lifestyle is decaying. We are beginning to see a shortening of the average lifespan that I believe will continue if something drastic is not done to fix the standard american diet (SAD).

On the electromagnetic radiation fallacy -

Unless you live in a cave, did you know that are being bombarded by EM waves every second of the day? This is from visible light in the EM spectrum and much of it is from the sun. Waves from the computer screen, even at the highest setting, cannot be as high as the magnitude we receive from the sun. There's this ill-conceived notion that sunlight causes skin cancer, which is not only incorrect, but studies have found that those working indoors have higher rates of skin cancer. For as long as humans have existed on this earth, sunlight has always been considered a necessary for existence and the human body. We wouldn't be here today if not for the sun. Therefore it is incorrect to say that these EM waves are harmful in the first place.

Tying this in to vaccinations, a healthy adult body is able to sequester sunlight, or any other EM waves for that matter, so as to not have it harm the body via vitamin D synthesis from the cholesterol hormone (please refer to my thread on cholesterol here). A developing baby is not able to sequester some of the questionable ingredients in vaccines. You're essentially asking a baby to produce a high enough immune response to fight off something that it is not well equipped to take. If one does decide to vaccinate, it would be prudent to wait a couple years until the immune system is fully developed so as to not suffer an adverse reaction. We know that adverse reactions are not so rare simply because 95% of them go unreported. Whatever statistic provided is likely be incorrect and 30-40 higher than reported because of the antiquated reporting system. The FDA admitted to this and refuses to change it.

Post Edited (StealthGuardian) : 11/15/2013 9:24:45 AM (GMT-7)

So those that are anti-vaccine.... Who is more evil; the pediatricians that are giving the vaccines or the pharmaceutical companies making them? I can see it now as the patient leaves the office... "Oh, there's another child I've harmed today!! (Enter maniacal laugh here...)"

Sorry. I'm not seeing it. I feel the the drs are trying their best to protect our children, and society as a whole, by giving these vaccines.

Very true, Soystud!

@ Butte1 - In my opinion, it would be more devastating to lose a child to a sickness that is preventable by a simple vaccine. Just knowing it could have been prevented would be horrible and the parents have to live with that for the rest of their life. Why take the risk? It's not worth it.

I sure would like a explanation of why adult primary care doctors no longer mention vaccines and almost never have them available. When I have asked the reply is "oh the health department does that".The last two towns I have lived in the health department was the only place you could get shots other than flu. I had a middle aged neighbor die of tetanus a couple years ago. Getting your shots, exercising and eating a good diet will extend your life more than anything your doctor can do...just ask him.

The biggest reason the life expectancy from birth has increased so much is the reduction in infant and child mortality.If you made it to age 18 in 1900, accidents(and war)) not disease were the primary reason you didn't reach 80. Doctors aren't primarily responsible for that. They didn't cure these kids for the most part. The kids got better nutrition, vaccinations, sanitation, safety, education and all that preventative stuff your doctor never talks about and has little responsibility for.Much of this is because of regulations and laws. By the way, why do we spend so much on cure and relatively little on prevention? MONEY. Cure is a business and prevention is left up to the individual and the government.

Just thought I would get that off my chest before this turned into bunny hugging, hippy, global warming deniers v. big pharmacy worshiping, my doctor is god and everything in medicine is great war. It is actually possible to believe in vaccines and think doctors and hospitals are incredibility inefficient and misdirecting resources...and that big pharma are a bunch of crooks.

Yes, I've noticed the amount of advertisement for shingles vaccines.

But I'm not sure why you're saying what you are based on what I said...