Mandatory Vaccinations

Thank you Jamie. You said it better than I was able to, but that is exactly what I was refering to in my earlier posts. Though I dont agree with the autism comment. Not enough evidence either way with that one. You might also want to read the article in my previous post to get a better understanding of my position.

Does it concern you at all that the only places on the Internet that link to this article, that's over a decade old mind you, also advocate creatonism and claim to debunk darwinism?

The only thing I am concerned with are the facts within the article. As for the age of it, that still does not invalidate the information. It is only one example that better explains my reasoning behind my personal beliefs on this matter. I do believe that further and more indepth research needs to be conducted to insure that the vaccination is in fact safe and will not harm those it is intended to protect. One of the major flaws in the system is that this really boils down to money. This is big business at its best(or worst depending on how you look at it). We are talking about a multi-billion dollar a year industry here, with a proven track record of secret testing on the general population. Its immoral and wrong of them to mandate things like this just to make a buck.

My point was that it's 10 years old, backed by absolutely no one in all that time and only repeated and published by groups that are already considered fringe at best.

And it's the basis of your evidence and one of the strongest influences you cite.

You can't claim that big business is suppressing the truth here - If that were the case global warming would never have been an issue because far larger companies face far nastier truths from that but hordes of scientists still came out on both sides to argue the case.

This you have virtually nothing. Are you telling me virtually all the doctors and medical professionals and scientists of the world have no vested interest in the truth and are covering it up? That seems pretty infeasible and rather conspiracy-theorist material at best.

The thing about facts is they don't have to be true. A fact is simply something that be proven or disproven. It's just an allegation. Your article of facts can easily be lies of manipulations of the truth and considered how outweighed it is by observable and recreateable, credible, evidence I find it hard to accept as anything more than misguided propaganda written by someone who had an agenda that involved misleading well meaning parents.

You really need to read this to understand my position on this issue. If you are really as concerned with those who dont get vaccinated, reading this may open your eyes to the other dangers of getting vaccinated.
http://curezone.com/art/read.asp?ID=12&db=12&C0=735

Could you be a little more specific? Most of that article is unverifiable or meaningless information (no context - efficacy vs. side effects) and it's huge.

I'm actually with Jamie on the annual flu vaccinations... unless it's a more deadly strain like H1N1, I don't bother.

The only thing I am concerned with are the facts within the article. As for the age of it, that still does not invalidate the information.

I was not going to post through lack of Biology knowledge, but this lets me say with confidence that you're an idiot. You're telling us medical science today is not an improvement on over a decade ago?

I've actually had H1N1 which is a strain of Influenza Type A. I took antivirals, rested, used symptom control medication like Theraflu, followed my doctor's advice and was over it within a week or two time-wise.

As for the medical website... facts that are 10 years old should be examined against other newer information at least for updates to given facts to show if any new information was drawn from new studies and such. However, arguing over it and not finding new information to validate or invalidate the information presented isn't going to solve the problem. After reading the paper, more or less the paper itself is on theoretical issues as disease origins and transmission methods rather than concrete issues like confirmed studies and active research. I would say look for better articles.

The thing about facts is they don't have to be true. A fact is simply something that be proven or disproven. It's just an allegation. Your article of facts can easily be lies of manipulations of the truth and considered how outweighed it is by observable and recreateable, credible, evidence I find it hard to accept as anything more than misguided propaganda written by someone who had an agenda that involved misleading well meaning parents.

Here are some facts to chew on.

Vaccinations reduce our immunity in many important ways:

1) Vaccines contain many chemicals and heavy metals, like mercury and aluminum, which are in-themselves immuno-suppressing. Mercury actually causes changes in the lymphocyte activity and decreases lymphocyte viability.

2) Vaccines contain foreign tissues and foreign DNA/RNA which act to suppress the immune system via graft-vs-host rejection phenomena.

3) Vaccines alter our t-cell helper/suppressor ratios … just like those seen with AIDS. This ratio is a key indicator of a proper functioning immune system.

4) Vaccines alter the metabolic activity of PMNs and reduce their chemotaxic abilities. PMNs are our body’s defenses against pathogenic bacteria and viruses.

5) Vaccines suppress our immunity merely buy over-taxing our immune system with foreign material, heavy metals, pathogens and viruses. The heavy metals slow down our immune system, while the viruses set up shop to grow and divide. It is like being chained and handcuffed before swimming.

6) Vaccines clog our lymphatic system and lymph nodes with large protein molecules which have not been adequately broken down by our digestive processes, since vaccines by pass digestion with injections. This is why vaccines are linked to allergies, because they contain large proteins which as circulating immune complexes (CICs) or “klinkers” which cause our body to become allergic.

7) Vaccines deplete our body of vital immune-enhancing nutrients, like vitamin C, A and zinc, which are needed for a strong immune system. It is nutrients like these that primes our immune system, feeds the white blood cells and macrophages and allows them to function optimally.

Vaccines are neurotoxic and slow the level of nervous transmission, and communications to the brain and other tissues. Now we know that some lymphocytes communicate directly with the brain through a complex set of neurotransmitters. Altering these factors will also depress our immunity.

Here are some facts to chew on.

Vaccinations reduce our immunity in many important ways:

1) Vaccines contain many chemicals and heavy metals, like mercury and aluminum, which are in-themselves immuno-suppressing. Mercury actually causes changes in the lymphocyte activity and decreases lymphocyte viability.

2) Vaccines contain foreign tissues and foreign DNA/RNA which act to suppress the immune system via graft-vs-host rejection phenomena.

3) Vaccines alter our t-cell helper/suppressor ratios … just like those seen with AIDS. This ratio is a key indicator of a proper functioning immune system.

4) Vaccines alter the metabolic activity of PMNs and reduce their chemotaxic abilities. PMNs are our body’s defenses against pathogenic bacteria and viruses.

5) Vaccines suppress our immunity merely buy over-taxing our immune system with foreign material, heavy metals, pathogens and viruses. The heavy metals slow down our immune system, while the viruses set up shop to grow and divide. It is like being chained and handcuffed before swimming.

6) Vaccines clog our lymphatic system and lymph nodes with large protein molecules which have not been adequately broken down by our digestive processes, since vaccines by pass digestion with injections. This is why vaccines are linked to allergies, because they contain large proteins which as circulating immune complexes (CICs) or “klinkers” which cause our body to become allergic.

7) Vaccines deplete our body of vital immune-enhancing nutrients, like vitamin C, A and zinc, which are needed for a strong immune system. It is nutrients like these that primes our immune system, feeds the white blood cells and macrophages and allows them to function optimally.

Vaccines are neurotoxic and slow the level of nervous transmission, and communications to the brain and other tissues. Now we know that some lymphocytes communicate directly with the brain through a complex set of neurotransmitters. Altering these factors will also depress our immunity.

Which data fits this theory? (Or, as you say, "facts")

And when I mean data I mean either a biological examination that also has statistical evidence with a sample rate of over 12 people, and a confidence interval of at least 95%.

I suggest you read my earlier post, as most of your "facts" are debunked either there or around there in the thread. No need to beat the same dead horse.

Well I'm over this thread. That last post of kanevaldier's is one of the most trolltastic ones I've seen of late. It gets more obvious as you read through the post, with the whole design of the troll post coming to fruition with the comment that vaccines are neurotoxic. Oh boy oh boy. Good one.

Here are some facts to chew on.

You copy pasted this word for word, but have you actually researched any of the claims or seen any proof of them?
The internet is full of outright lies and misinformation, why haven't you applied your skepticism to these particular facts?

It makes very specific claims with no citations or references, all of which should be easily provable.

And most of those "facts" are in fact, false. Especially those involving the brain. Go research the Blood-Brain Barrier.

I'm just a skeptic by nature. I question everything.

Which in my opinion is always a good thing.

Anyway, I'm going to not reply to a few posts. If you want me to answer some of your questions, then just read my old posts. Most of the questions you have asked me have already been answered and I have backed up with evidence. If you wish to ignore the studies that dont support your preconceived notations then I cant do anything about that.

Although people need to stop saying Wakefield is a fraud, because apparently it was lies about him and his studies that caused him to lose his license. One of the major lies used to discredit him is that no studies shared the same results or conclusions, and yet there are studies that concur with his studies http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/01/wakef...dings.html
http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2011/0...wakefield/

Back to placebos, I've been having difficulty looking into studies. One major problem is that many studies will only give me brief summaries unless I pay for them, and I need the details. One in particular is what placebo is used. The standard for injections is saline solution. While my search was at first fruitless I did manage to come across one major concern I have with the credability of many studies:

The first key deception occurred during Gardasil trials. Instead of using a “saline solution” as the placebo, Merck used the vaccine's carrier agent minus only the HPV virus components. In addition to sodium chloride and water, the placebo also contained aluminum, polysorbate 80 and sodium borate.

http://www.tbyil.com/Gardasil_Deception.htm

In other words, they used the vaccine minus the antigens of the virus in order to pretend that the vaccine does not cause increased rates of paralization or death. This fraud sickens me, and the fact that these frauds are protected from prosecution by law. If it wasnt for laws granting immunity to these people, there would at least be a real incentive for proper studies and quality control.

Also, Scientists are being silenced:

Many who speak out against Merck products quickly find their credibility assaulted. If they are in an academic institution, they quickly find their research support drying up, and some end up blackballed by the pharmaceutical industry. What Merck has made perfectly clear over the last several years is that speaking out against Merck’s products is academic suicide.

http://coto2.wordpress.com/2009/09/28/me...bjections/

New research shows that information on potentially lethal side effects of the blockbuster painkiller Vioxx was "neglected, restricted, distorted and silenced" by pharmaceutical giant Merck, writes London-based physician and author John Briffa in The Epoch Times.

http://www.naturalnews.com/028730_side_e...drugs.html

Dr. David Graham, who reveals how his FDA managers tried to silence him and quash evidence that indicated Vioxx was unsafe.

http://current.com/green/88795960_pbs-dr...unsafe.htm
One thing in common here is the connection with Merck, one of the largest, if not largest, drug and vaccine companies in America.

I would like to know the reasoning behind the chicken pox vaccine though. To me it just doesn't make any sense at all. Well, it doesn't make sense to me why it would be "mandatory". It's definitely been proven that getting the chicken pox at a young age is much better than getting it when you're a lot older. It doesn't actually prevent you from getting it. The prevnar vaccine is also another concern of mine. It's back on the market but I still don't trust it one little bit and I will never give it to my children. I also have an issue with the flu vaccines. I've never had one and my children have never had one. Considering the way things are going, some day they will probably make flu vaccines a mandatory one too in order to enroll children in school.

I'm not saying that some vaccines aren't useful and haven't helped prevent wide-spread disease. I do think that the medical and scientific community is starting to go a little overboard with it though without researching and testing some of the newer ones well enough.

For instance, the Gardasil vaccine. Now that one was put in place to help prevent cancer. Since cancer isn't contagious, why would states try to make it mandatory? It hasn't been available for too many years so, in my opinion, hasn't really been tested enough to see if there will be any long lasting effects that could arise from it. I understand the concept behind it but I am not willing to give it to my teenage daughters and take a gamble either. I realize that cancer can strike at any age but typically cervical cancer strikes those who are considered elderly. That particular vaccine has also supposedly helped prevent some penile and anal cancers. So why aren't they trying to make it mandatory for boys? Just because cervical cancer is a much more common cancer than anal or penile cancer is irrelevant in my opinion.

I would also like to reiterate that all of my children are vaccinated except for my youngest. She will start receiving her vaccines this month. I have made a choice with all of them to do it this way. Is it just coincidental that they are all prefectly happy and healthy? Maybe, maybe not. And there are still certain vaccines that I will always refuse to give them.......period.

EDIT: LOL, apparently you were thinking about Gardasil at the same time I was. After I posted this, I saw your new post. Just thought that was kinda funny.

I find it extremely hard not to consider the opposing side complete idiots the way they present their arguments. If you're writing a blog, sure, you can do what the f'uck you want. But when you're writing a scientific article, stop the goddamned propaganda. If you're advocating for free choice for people, putting the weight of self's educated decision on their shoulder about almost every problem there is in this world, politics, science, economics, music, drugs or even f'ucking vaccines, you'd better damned well be aware that they should at least be able to tell what the f'uck those facts that you present mean. But if everyone were able to do that, you probably aren't even in business, any business.

I really don't get it. What's the point if the people were to distrust one group and worship the other? How is it any better for them if they "stop surrendering so many decisions to the government" because they are f'ucking told to? Such disgust.

I would like to know the reasoning behind the chicken pox vaccine though. To me it just doesn't make any sense at all. Well, it doesn't make sense to me why it would be "mandatory". It's definitely been proven that getting the chicken pox at a young age is much better than getting it when you're a lot older. It doesn't actually prevent you from getting it.

What do you mean? Obviously the people making the vaccine mandatory has to have a certain stance regarding the effectiveness and the need for their vaccine. Whether or not that is true remains to be proven, hopefully by you and other skeptics.

I've never heard of a chicken pox vaccine... Looks like I have another thing to research, but I agree that at first glance it seems pointless. Its a common disease, you get almost complete immunity after having it once, etc. One thing I want to look into is the level of immunity offered by the vaccine (since vaccines are only temporary immunity).

And Merck has pushed for Gardasil for boys. Anyway, I've got something new to research.

For instance, the Gardasil vaccine. Now that one was put in place to help prevent cancer. Since cancer isn't contagious, why would states try to make it mandatory?

It's quotes like these that bother me the most throughout this thread. The majority of you speaking out against vaccinations, whether skeptics or full blown opponents, have all made at least one moronic error like these in one of your posts, something that, quite honestly, makes the rest of us question the validity of your arguments if you don't even know what you're talking about in the first place.

In this case, Talia, Gardasil vaccinates against four types of the human papiloma virus (HPV), two of which cause over 70% of all cases of cervical cancer. HPV is a sexually transmitted infection, and is therefore contagious, so vaccinations against such pathogens, if available, are highly useful.

You're also correct to say that Gardasil protects against some penile and anal cancers as well. According to the above article I linked, the drug is in high demand among gay men especially, as one study of the San Francisco area showed that 95% of gay men infected with HIV were also infected with HBV.

Now should this drug be mandatory in schools? I haven't done enough research to make a conclusive stance, but at the moment I'd personally say no, simply because it protects against an STI, and unless you're going to a porn school or something, it's unnecessary.

All that aside, the main contention of this post is to request that people actually know about the disease and vaccine themselves before they start discussing them. It was AnonymousMoose as well, for example, who idiotically called influenza a retrovirus. If you want to be taken seriously, know the basics.

In this case, Talia, Gardasil vaccinates against four types of the human papiloma virus (HPV), two of which cause over 70% of all cases of cervical cancer. HPV is a sexually transmitted infection, and is therefore contagious, so vaccinations against such pathogens, if available, are highly useful.

Exactly my point though. It's sexually transmitted. It's not like having whooping cough ffs. You make a choice to have sex with someone, therefore you are also given the choice to protect yourself via abstaining from sexual activity. If you're dumb enough to have sex with someone and you don't know what potential diseases they have, that's your own fault you took that risk to begin with. I believe this particular vaccine hasn't been studied enough to know what the long-term effects might be. They also state there is no conclusive evidence that the deaths of those women/girls was caused by this vaccine. However, I'm not convinced that it WASN'T caused by it. I'd rather take the gamble the other way in the hopes my children can live to be a ripe old age.

Exactly my point though. It's sexually transmitted. It's not like having whooping cough ffs. You make a choice to have sex with someone, therefore you are also given the choice to protect yourself via abstaining from sexual activity. If you're dumb enough to have sex with someone and you don't know what potential diseases they have, that's your own fault you took that risk to begin with. I believe this particular vaccine hasn't been studied enough to know what the long-term effects might be. They also state there is no conclusive evidence that the deaths of those women/girls was caused by this vaccine. However, I'm not convinced that it WASN'T caused by it. I'd rather take the gamble the other way in the hopes my children can live to be a ripe old age.

So, what about when your child want to have sex at some point and time? You'd rather have them be unprotected because of the unfathomably small chance unproven chance that there may be a side effect?

So, what about when your child want to have sex at some point and time? You'd rather have them be unprotected because of the unfathomably small chance unproven chance that there may be a side effect?

Education is the best form of prevention and my teenage daughters are VERY well educated and know the potential risks of having sex.

Exactly my point though. It's sexually transmitted. It's not like having whooping cough ffs. You make a choice to have sex with someone, therefore you are also given the choice to protect yourself via abstaining from sexual activity. If you're dumb enough to have sex with someone and you don't know what potential diseases they have, that's your own fault you took that risk to begin with. I believe this particular vaccine hasn't been studied enough to know what the long-term effects might be. They also state there is no conclusive evidence that the deaths of those women/girls was caused by this vaccine. However, I'm not convinced that it WASN'T caused by it. I'd rather take the gamble the other way in the hopes my children can live to be a ripe old age.

It's impossible to know for sure that your partner has or hasn't got a certain STI. Sometimes they present themselves in inactive forms and there would be no way to know other than running tests. Suggesting abstinency is really stupid, it's not like people will stop having sex, that's not an option. Condoms, spermicides, female condoms and vaccines to the diseases that can be vaccinated are the measures that should be taken.