VacLib reprint of BoiseWeekly article

Source: http://www.boiseweekly.com/...
Note: this link originally took you to the front page of BoiseWeekly.com where a link to this article was found by clicking "More..." under "Most Commented On" section.

Boise Weekly

December 14, 2011 Features

Idaho's Epidemic of Fear: Vaccination Liberation Movement Takes a Shot at Public Health
The war over vaccinations heats up in North Idaho

A reprint from the BoiseWeekly...

by George Prentice

C O M M E N T S - - - 51 to 100

[Note: the report section "x of y people like this" is not accurate as the numbers simply reflect the number who liked the comment at the time the comment was copied from the BoiseWeekly web site.]

Comment:
My point was that the paper, having been incorrectly cited, does not prove a link between vaccination and diabetes.

The fact that you were unable to distinguish review articles (as in the case of the three papers to which I linked) from opinion pieces is also rather troubling.

Addressing parents' concerns: do vaccines cause allergic or autoimmune diseases?

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/111/3/653.full.pdf+html

Is listed as a review article according to pubmed, though this is not clearly stated in the paper itself. However, the authors are careful to back up their statements with citations (rather than merely stating their opinion).

The Vaccine Safety Update:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/amc/articles/AMC2680557/?tool=pubmed

The author specifically states that the article is a selective literature review.

Vaccine safety controversies and the future of vaccination programs

http://journals.lww.com/pidj/toc/2005/11000

Is clearly listed as a review article

...

I wonder if this misunderstanding is why Ms. Barker did not offer citations for the studies on the use of vitamins c and d to halt infection or diabetes?
report 3 likes, 23 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 20, 2011 at 9:34 AM
Comment:
Just reported in the Washington Post today: "Federal panel asks science journals to censor reports on how to make a deadlier ‘bird flu’"

Now why would anyone fund the CREATION of a "deadlier 'bird flu'? Is there already a vaccine out there that will be used to fight this tenacious virus? More marketing needed but Dr. James Gavin could be rolling in the dough on this one? I know I'll be watching for the stock quotes on this one for sure.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/hea…

Been hoping for a break in my financial situation in 2012, I think all I have to do is follow the "new" science to see what they invent, then pick up some stock in the pharm/vac companies that will hold the patent. That appears to be the way its done. I know, I am slow and uneducated but somehow I think if I can follow people like Dr. James Gavin and be sure to dump the stock just before the public finds the drug or procedure to be worthless, I could make some money too. We could all use a little extra cash.
report 27 likes, 5 dislikes.
Posted by Vickie Barker on December 20, 2011 at 1:18 PM
Comment:

While this is not a pediatric vaccine, I have the package insert info for the vaccine Zostavax in front of me. It's one of the growing number of vaccines produced with aborted fetal cell lines, in this case the MRC-5 cell line. Under "Description," of Zostavax it reads: "Each dose contains...residual components of MRC-5 cells including DNA and protein...."

If this isn't macabre, cannibalistic, Frankenstein medicine, I don't know what is. Any bureaucrat trying to force vaccination on the public has NO respect for human rights. NONE!!! At the top, the arrogant pro-vaccination movement, the movement trying to force vaccination on people who don't want it, is driven purely by greed and the desire for power.

Christine Hahn is quoted in the above article as saying that "we asked parents to explain their...reasons why they're not having their child immunized." It also says that Dana Williams said that "she's anxious to have conversations with parents who may choose to exempt their children from vaccinations."

The fact is: It's not the business of these busybody bureaucrats why parents make the decisions they do. The children belong to the parents, not to the state and these anti-freedom statists like Hahn and Williams.

Cynthia Taggart is quoted in the article as saying, "We have had vaccination opponents here for many, many years. It goes way back." She's right about that.

In about 1999 there was a massive protest down at the Capitol against some vaccination bill, probably related to IRIS. One of the legislators, since retired, told me that it was extremely unusual to see such a huge crowd protesting any issue.

Ingri Cassell had nothing to do with that protest. The fact is, many Idahoans treasure their freedom--including the freedom to think thoughts and make decisions not approved by these vaccination tyrants! There will be a strong community opposing vaccination in Idaho whether Ingri Cassell and Vaccination Liberation are here or not.

In a 1978 interview, Nobel Prize recipient Dr. Linus Pauling pointed out that "The evidence is that (vitamin C) provides protection against all of the infectious diseases...all bacterial and viral diseases...measles, mumps, pneumonia, meningitis, chickenpox, serum hepatitis, infectious hepatitis, influenza...there are even published reports on the effectiveness of ascorbic acid in preventing and treating poliomyelitis."

(At that time, 1978, it was reported that Pauling was the only person, living or dead, who had received an unshared Nobel Prize twice.)

Pauling also has pointed out, in one of books, that in 1935 Dr. Claus Jungeblut of Columbia University found that high intake of vitamin C stopped the paralysis of polio.

Dr. Fred Klenner successfully treated polio with large doses of vitamin C and described his treatment in the article, "The Treatment of Poliomyelitis and Other Virus Diseases with Vitamin C" in "Southern Medicine and Surgery," July 1949.

The medical system we have in America is run by a brutal monopoly which refuses to allow these effective, inexpensive treatments. Their god is money and power. They--and this includes those responsible for this effort to force vaccination--don't care how many innocent people are killed and maimed.

report 25 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by Idaho Spud on December 20, 2011 at 3:01 PM
Comment:

While Linus Pauling's positive contributions to science should be applauded, his views on vitamin c do not stand up to scrutiny.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/02/vitamin_c_and_cancer_has_linus_pauling_b.php

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/colds.html

A more measured discussion of the source of cell lines used in the production of vaccines can be found here:

http://www.immunizationinfo.org/issues/vaccine-components/human-fetal-links-some-vaccines

However, suggesting that those trying to limit the impact of vaccine-preventable childhood disease are somehow uncaring is almost as lazy as the suggestion that all pro-vaccination commentators are being funded by 'big pharma'...
report 6 likes, 25 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 20, 2011 at 3:34 PM
Comment:

It appears that if you a particular outcome in mind when you do your research, then you will be able to find all manner of websites and articles to support your mindset. I find it amazing that James Gavin would use anything associated Stephen Barrett. See www.quackpotwatch.org

And his Scienceblogs article is an opinion piece - the woman probably used straight ascorbic acid. The form of "Vitamin C" Vickie is referring to is the full spectrum of ascorbates as found in nature. Both Vickie and I have had so much personal experience of using the full spectrum of ascorbates for various infectious ailments, heart disease and hypertension or high blood pressure, that no amount of pseudoscience will convince us otherwise. When we have literally hundreds of formerly sick and dying people recover as a result of using the full spectrum of ascorbates, we do not need pharma-backed websites to discredit what we know from experience to be true.

And you somehow think that some diseases are "vaccine-preventable"? Just so you know, these "vaccine-preventable" diseases are not deadly in and of themselves or we would all be dead. We should be focusing on why thousands of people have experienced pertussis, polio, measles, chickenpox, and even smallpox and recovered. Why didn't they die? And the more perplexing question, why are the ones who recover healthier as a result of a bout with the disease? Why aren't we focusing on how to properly treat an "infectious" disease? Why do many people contract the very disease that the vaccine was designed to prevent after being vaccinated several times against the disease? Hardly very scientific proof that vaccines are indeed the only effective means of disease prevention.
As for me and my family, will will gladly take a daily full spectrum of ascorbates as a means of disease prevention than injections of unGodly microbes cultured in both animal and human fetal cell lines, aluminum, thimerosal, formaldehyde, polysorbate 80, and other known carcinogens.

We are in this fight for the simple reason that we aim to preserve our right to do just that - feed and treat our bodies as God and nature intended.
report 26 likes, 2 dislikes.
Posted by ImmunizeWizely on December 20, 2011 at 7:14 PM
Comment:

To use a soccer analogy, you're playing the man, not the ball:

Please try to challenge the science (rather than resorting to ad hominem). The scienceblogs piece was referenced as was that from quackwatch. Perhaps you could start by explaining why you choose to ignore the studies presented?

Likewise, suggesting that a patient, "probably used straight ascorbic acid" is not exactly a useful rebuttal. Moreover, your personal experiences do not trump large-scale epidemiological data (effectively you are suggesting that an uncontrolled experiment with two subjects is more 'scientific' than a number of controlled experiments with many subjects).

Can you see why this is not the case?

...

As to your suggestion that vaccine-preventable diseases aren't deadly, you seem to be confusing the fact that these diseases aren't 100% lethal... with the idea that they might not be lethal at all.

Smallpox killed around 30% of the people affected (before it was eradicated, by vaccines) - and those it didn't kill, it left scarred. Measles killed 164 000 people globally in 2008 (that's around 18 people per hour). And the long-term sequelae of measles include blindness, hepatitis, encephalitis and subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (none of which involve the patient being healther after infection).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002392/

Then you appear to confuse the fact that vaccines aren't 100% effective (a point that has already been ceded) with the idea they might be 0% effective - this is still not the case.

Most routine childhood vaccines are effective for 85% to 95% of recipients. So between 5 and 15% will not develop immunity.

In the developed world at least the numbers of people who are vaccinated still vastly outweigh those who aren't. So it is perfectly possible for 5-15% to still be larger than the unvaccinated population.

For example:

Take a population of 1000 of whom all but 5 are fully vaccinated. Assuming that 5% of those vaccinated do no become immune, that means 49.75 (lets call it 50 for the sake of argument) of the vaccinated population are at risk, as opposed to 5 of the unvaccinated population.

Of course, if none of them were vaccinated, then all 1000 would be at risk: and, given that 90% of people without immunity sharing a living space with a measles sufferer will catch the disease, that means 900 with measles as opposed to 49.5 (or 50 with rounding) when the majority are vaccinated.

http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S4.full

...
report 3 likes, 25 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 21, 2011 at 12:04 AM
Comment:
Dr. Gavin, Not one of your figures/percentages is scientific. We do not know how any of these people who allegedly died from smallpox or ended up blind from measles were treated. Have you read the missing 21st chapter of Alfred Russel Wallace's book, The Wonderful Century? Thankfully, we have rescued this 121 page document and many others from the late 1800s and early 1900s so that accurate smallpox history is now available. At the following link is the scan of one such booklet, Authoritative Opinions Adverse to Vaccination or it's Compulsory Enforcement http://www.vaclib.org/books/archive2/opinion/opinion.htm

It is clear your mind is made up and no amount of information you provide will likely change our own research and life experiences. However, we suggest that you debate the doctors and scientists who are listed at the International Medical Council on Vaccinations. 83 of them are signatories to "Vaccines: Get the Full Story" here - Vaccines: Get the Full Story

We strongly encourage you to continue vaccinating yourself and those who believe these injections are a form of holy water in the arsenal against scary diseases. Just allow us the right to abstain from these unGodly disease-laden injections.
report 27 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by ImmunizeWizely on December 21, 2011 at 12:17 PM
Comment:

It appears you are using the term 'scientific' in a somewhat novel manner.

WHO reference the 30% death rate here:

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/smallpox/en/

It is reiterated here:

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/237229-overview#aw2aab6b2b4aa http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/237229-overview#aw2aab6b2b4aa

This
report cites a range of mortality between 25.5 and 38%

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1139298/pdf/medhist00083-0005.pdf

...

MMR having a 90% effectiveness vs. measles is reported here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16094223

And here (where they found an effectiveness of 96%)

http://researchonline.nd.edu.au/med_article/48/

...

And lastly, 90% of people without immunity sharing a living space with a measles sufferer will catch the disease:

http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/transmission.html

And here:

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/966220-overview

...

report 5 likes, 24 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 21, 2011 at 2:38 PM
Comment:

Is intelligence a disease??????????

When reading the above blogs, I haven't taken the time to check out the links given although they no doubt have some great info. Until last night, that is, when I did glance at two of the three links given by James Gavin and the one given by ImmunizeWizely on their last Dec. 20 posts.

I'd like to urge my fellow supporters of human rights to check out Gavin's first link. I could hardly believe what I read under the title, "The Nobel Disease":

"(T)here's something about becoming a Nobel Laureate that has a tendency to lead people to becoming cranks."

This would be laughable if it weren't so serious.

Apparently these vaccination tyrants consider intelligence to be a DISEASE--at least when that intelligence dares to question their "holy" dogma. How long before they advocate for a vaccine against this intelligence that dares to to think unapproved thoughts and to ask unapproved questions?

Are the pro-vaccinators mentioned above really any different than those responsible for the Inquisition? They sound as though they're ready for their Vaccine Inquisition (see statements by Hahn and Williams in the BW article).

Incidentally, in my post of Dec. 20, I referred to an interview with Dr. Linus Pauling printed in 1978. Two years before, the British journal "New Scientist" had ranked Pauling as one of the top 20 scientists of all time.

report 25 likes, 6 dislikes.
Posted by Idaho Spud on December 21, 2011 at 4:12 PM
Comment:

Regarding aborted fetal cell culture in vaccines:

I was also quite surprised to hear that most of the common childhood vaccines used today were developed using the WI-38 and MRC-5 aborted fetal cell lines. Some of the vaccine literature use the term "therapeutic abortion" to describe this original fetus, which can imply an abortion to save the life of the mother. However doing more investigation also finds evidence of an “optional” abortion for the original 1960 fetal tissue. Here is a quoted medical panel Q& A:

Philadelphia: Q: Dr. McCarthy: I wonder if there is any information about the reasons for aborting that particular embryo that gave rise to WI-38; and if it was from a family A: Dr. S. Plotkin: I should like to answer Dr. McCarthy’s question. This fetus was chosen by Dr. Sven Gard, specifically for this purpose. Both parents are known, and unfortunately for the story, they are married to each other, still alive and well, and living in Stockholm, presumably. The abortion was done because they felt they had too many children. There were no family diseases in the history of either parent, and no history of cancer specifically in the families; I believe this answers Dr. McCarthy’s question.

For some groups this second scenario will make a difference in their immunization choices. The National Catholic Bioethics Center has several publications available on this subject. They have a list of Vaccines which includes a list of vaccines using aborted fetus culture, those with no alternatives available, and a list of "safe” or alternatives available. For religions restricting animal products, vegans, and animal right advocates, choices can get even more complicated as most vaccines use either animal or human cells in development: Those grown on egg cultures may be the only possible alternative depending on how restrictive their belief system is. Now, if you are allergic to eggs....

Seems to me this country has always been about religious freedom, the freedom to believe or NOT believe, AND the freedom of choice: Vaccinating should not be an exception to this freedom.
report 29 likes, 4 dislikes.
Posted by Thankful on December 21, 2011 at 9:18 PM
Comment:

Should one consider the serum package insert a reliable source of research to make a fully informed decision regarding vaccines? I believe so!

You will learn about the ingredients, how the vaccine is cultured, whether it contains human diploid lung fibroblasts, fetal cells, animal serum, (or likely all that and more.) You will also learn about the potential side effects, the expected side effects, the endless list of warnings, precautions, contraindications, adverse reactions, (everything from fever, headache,.....to convulsions or seizures.....to Diabetes, to death.)

You will learn about the disease itself, and case statistics. Who should and shouldn't receive the vaccine. (Better hope your doctor has done their homework!) If you're pregnant or nursing,...well, the effects of the vaccine on the baby are unknown at this time. And if you're not pregnant and accept the vaccine, make sure your doctor remembers to tell you, (or your teenage daughter), NOT to get pregnant for 3 months post vaccine!

Yes, the serum package inserts are a wealth of information! Except for the part, (in most, if not all), where the vaccine you're learning about has (not) been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or impairment of fertility!

Mutagenesis would include, but not be limited to: Autoimmune diseases (MS), etc., Cancers, Cleft Palate, Diabetes, ( http://www.whale.to/v/coulter.html ) Heart Disease, Hypertension, Inflammatory Bowel Disease, Mood Disorder, Obesity, and Infertility. Scary stuff! But, no worries! Big Pharma has drugs for most of these!

Carcinogenesis: Literally, the creation of Cancer!

Impairment of Fertility: There is a reason why so many families are now being created in clinics. What is that reason? Anyone?

The Pertussis vaccine is used to purposely induce brain swelling in Lab mice. Why should we not expect it to do the same to a human infant? The high pitched cry (scream) the doctor will tell you is just a side effect of the vaccine. I truly believe it's due to the horrific pain the baby feels as it's brain swells, and bleeds.

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/buttram.htm ( Harold E. Buttram M.D. on Vitamin C, Vaccines, Innocent parents and caregivers wrongly accused, prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned for vaccine injuries and deaths.)

report 28 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by ChristyAnn on December 22, 2011 at 1:15 AM
Comment:
It's hard to tell whether information is being deliberately misunderstood or whether the original text really is that unclear:

In terms of references to 'The Nobel Disease' this is merely a shorthand for the simple fact that even brilliant scientists can embrace ideas that turn out to be wrong (in some cases very wrong).

For example, in 1948, Linus Pauling proposed that the DNA molecule was a triple helix. This proposion turned out to be incorrect:

http://www.paulingexhibit.org/dr-linus-pauling-and-dna-research.htm

This does not detract from his other accomplishments, but it shows very clearly that despite his two Nobel Prizes, he was not infaliable.

Likewise, his ideas around vitamin c have not been bourne out following intensive research:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17636648

[Note, this is a systematic review carried out by the Cochrane Database, not an opinion piece]

...

And whale.to is still not a credible source of medical information - a fact that was pointed out by Special Master Denise Vowell during the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program decision — Jane Doe/16 v. HHS (No. 06-670V, June 2, 2008, unpublished):

http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/Vowell.Doe16.pdf">

"Daubert, 509 U.S. at 593-94. When an expert places reliance on documents such as Pet. Ex. 13, the weight that may be accorded that expert’s opinion is not enhanced."

Pet. Ex. 13 in this case is the article from whale.to

...

Lastly I would ask:

Having provided information to clarify why the vaccinated might outnumber the unvaccinated during an outbreak of vaccine-preventable disease, as well as providing links that attempt to explain the concept of herd immunity in a more accessible manner, I wonder if these ideas are any clearer to the commentators who failed to understand them previously?

I ask because I have noted a tendancy that although questions are asked, the answers, when provided, are apparently ignored.
report 5 likes, 24 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 22, 2011 at 2:27 AM
Comment:
I have to admit when I see links to the WHO as being promoted as a last resort for families to base their decisions on when it comes to health I do become a bit cautious. For the last several months I've been researching Agenda 21 and I have to tell you I can see how the Agenda 21 and the WHO agenda may each be a part of the part so to speak.

I am relieved to see that others around the world however are not quite as blind as the people in the US. Although I do give credit to those waking up here in the U.S.

Should a person not expect an injury after being injected with toxic substances, such as mercury, aluminum, polysorbate 80, formaldehyde, sodium borate and "secretive" genetically-engineered pathogens of insect, plant and animal DNA origins? According to Mr. Gavin apparently through the research he cites over and over again, there should be no injuries, at least not so many as to warrant a parent opting out of the cycles of vaccines.

Even if we accepted the CDC's statement on face-value, then someone must be held responsible for injuries and deaths caused by vaccines. The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (NCVIA) and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) exist to redress and compensate families for injuries caused by vaccines. This "system" is notoriously mired in red tape and is too long and drawn out to benefit victims. Most victims attempting to receive justice through this "official" process, never receive anything but misery. And we've already seen the numbers on the cases of injury which are FAR TOO MANY.

I would think that a National Minister of Health would have done his research before claiming vaccinations are in fact dangerous and actually declare a moratorium suspending such activity. The Nation of Islam's National Minister of Health, Dr. Abdul Alim Muhammad actually did this. He issued a moratorium on vaccination as dangerous drugs administered for the sake of profit, for making future patients for the global medical industry, and for ridding the earth of millions of people. We are warned against receiving vaccinations.

Understanding that vaccination was (and remains) compulsory, Dr. Muhammad placed the burden on those requiring people to be vaccinated by imposing on the"vaccinator" the natural and Constitutional duty to "guarantee," in the form of a $1,000,000 (one million dollars) bond, that if the person is injured by the vaccine or if the vaccine proves ineffective, the $1,000,000 will be paid to that person.

Here is the precise wording of this Vaccination Guarantee:

"I, the undersigned, do hereby guarantee that the vaccination I give is safe and will not cause any of the diseases known to have been caused by vaccination, such as encephalitis, encephalopathy, stroke, asthma, autism, SIDS, multiple sclerosis, arthritis, lupus, blood disorders and death. I also, guarantee that it will prevent the disease it is given to prevent. If any physical or mental damage results from the vaccines which I give, I will pay the victim or family $1,000,000 (one million dollars) without delay. Each vaccinator must post bond and give proof that he/she is able to make good the guarantee before he/she gives the vaccinations."

So with a guarantee in place this would certainly help take the load off the back of the health industry and families pocket books. An injured child whether it be from vaccinations or a car accident does cost everyone. And as you propose here Mr. Gavin that those administering the vaccinations certainly must have read the research you are posting here, then they should feel comfortable in signing a guarantee. What would they have to lose right?

report 25 likes, 4 dislikes.
Posted by Vickie Barker on December 22, 2011 at 11:09 AM
Comment:
Sorry, I should have added a link for those that are not familiar with Agenda 21. This short clip actually explains it quite well. Including implications it will have on humanity. Opinions within the video come in some cases from those that were in on the negotiations. Truly an interesting watch.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzEEgtOFFlM&NR=1

Could the vaccinations be a part of this Agenda as Smart Growth? Sustainable development? Even part of Bill Gate's plan on reducing the population? One should at least "wonder" about it ALL.
report 23 likes, 4 dislikes.
Posted by Vickie Barker on December 22, 2011 at 11:22 AM
Comment:
Ms. Barker I can only presume that you haven't understood what I have been saying:

Let me reiterate:

Vaccines do have adverse effects, although fortunately these are rare. Vaccines are not 100% effective.

However:

Vaccine Preventable Disease causes adverse effects (these adverse effects tend to be more severe and to occur more frequently). Vaccines are not 0% effective.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/6mishome.htm#risk

...

Please let me know if these points are in anyway unclear and I will try to further clarify.
report 5 likes, 20 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 22, 2011 at 11:44 AM
Comment:
"Ms. Barker I can only presume that you haven't understood what I have been saying"

James, I admire your tenacity as well as your adeptness at picking apart an antivaxer's argument piece-by-piece (with due citations). Your opponents here, it seems, are being intentionally ignorant (or are just incredibly stupid). How many times can someone retort with the same logical fallacies after it's been pointed out to them how such arguments are false and/or irrelevant? I mean, how many times do we have to read the "deadly toxins" gambit in this same thread??

I actually laughed out loud when a previous responder had the audacity to accuse you of having "made up your mind already no matter what the evidence may show", which i think reaches new levels of "epic fail" for lack of self-awareness and unintentional irony. I admit I don't have too much to contribute here but I cheer you on. The "good debate" is worth keeping up (IMHO) maybe not to ever convince the true kool-aid drinkers, but maybe, hopefully, to help win over any fence-sitting newbies who haven't gone fully over the cliff yet.
report 4 likes, 23 dislikes.
Posted by Mike Schmitt on December 22, 2011 at 8:01 PM
Comment:

"ImmunizeWizely" said: "We strongly encourage you to continue vaccinating yourself and those who believe these injections are a form of holy water in the arsenal against scary diseases. Just allow us the right to abstain from these unGodly disease-laden injections."

I'm afraid you miss the point. YOU have the choice to risk YOUR childrens' lives against vaccine-preventable diseases. The problem is, by your spread of misinformation and junk science, you are also risking the lives of the children of people who may not be wise enough to see through your smoke-screen, and of course as more gullible people jump on the non-vax bandwagon due to this false fear being created by the antivaxxers, it also puts EVERYONE in greater risk of an outbreak - the small percentage who can't be vaxxed due to allergic or health reasons, and the somewhat-larger percentage (addressed previously by james) who are vaxxed but for whom certain vaccines may not have provided sufficient immunity.
report 3 likes, 22 dislikes.
Posted by Mike Schmitt on December 22, 2011 at 8:09 PM
Comment:

I'll repeat my earlier question: If the pro-vaccinators here are such experts on science, could you, please, tell me what scientific studies have been done showing that residual DNA in vaccines is safe? I'm not aware that any such studies have been done.

Before you bash people for putting their children at risk, please show us the science that indicates that these cannibalistic vaccines, the ones produced with aborted fetal cell lines are, in fact, safe.

Thank you.

There is a school of thought that says that the rise in autism corresponds to the introduction of these vaccines. I applaud the non-vaccinating parents for caring for their children's health rather than subjecting them to the unscientific whims of the greedy medical monopoly.

report 23 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by Idaho Spud on December 22, 2011 at 8:51 PM
Comment:

Mr. Gavin,

May I assume that you presume Ms. Barker isn't the only one who hasn't understood what you've been saying? (Actually, I think we all have a very clear understanding of what each other is saying. It might be that some just can't make peace with agreeing to disagree.) As well, consideration must be taken that we are obviously a group of independent thinkers with at least an average to above, comprehension of logic and reason, with abilities to separate facts from fairy tales and how our own extensive research and life experiences have brought us to the opinions and beliefs we have today.

You say, "Vaccines do have adverse effects, although fortunately these are rare."

I would ask, just how 'rare' are those adverse effects really? Why the astronomical numbers of people taking insulin, antidepressants, dialysis, chemotherapy, radiation, cholesterol and blood pressure drugs, etc. etc. etc., for ailments, maladies, defects, and diseases that were virtually unheard of and/or non-existent prior to the birth of the 'sacred cow'?

Do you acknowledge the correlation between the increase in Autism, ADD, ADHD, Asthma, Cancer and debilitating Arthritis in babies and young children, and the increase in the numbers of vaccines on the schedule?

How 'rare' are those adverse effects given the need for VAERS and NCVIA?

How do you explain the 'rarity' of adverse effects to the grieving loved ones of the injured or deceased? For those 'rare' cases, who were told they were doing the best thing possible to protect their baby, or their grandparent, by vaccinating?

You say, "Vaccines are not 100% effective." I'm thinking most, if not all would agree with you on that. But would you deny there may be some vaccines that are 100% ineffective? (Providing the desired effect is to promote a strong, healthy immune system.) Can you offer any numbers on the percentage of the safety of vaccines?

And finally, why would you use the words, Vaccines..not..effective, and Vaccine preventable disease, all in the same post?

report 23 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by ChristyAnn on December 22, 2011 at 9:23 PM
Comment:

"I'll repeat my earlier question: If the pro-vaccinators here are such experts on science, could you, please, tell me what scientific studies have been done showing that residual DNA in vaccines is safe? I'm not aware that any such studies have been done."

What evidence do you have to believe that "residual DNA" is in any way unsafe, let alone more dangerous than vaccine-preventable diseases? And how this "DNA" is in any way more dangerous than the "residual DNA" we ingest in basically every single food we eat, as well as breathed in abundantly via dust in the air (dead skin cells, dander, dead insects, plant material, mold, spores, mildew, even in traces, add together to make quite an amount after any given length of time). But I'm guessing this "residual DNA" is just another scare gambit the antivax movement has basically invented from scratch to influence more and more gullibles. It's not based on science, and therefore they resort to the game of "well we can't prove it IS dangerous, but you can't prove it *isn't*!!!"...

"Before you bash people for putting their children at risk, please show us the science that indicates that these cannibalistic vaccines, the ones produced with aborted fetal cell lines are, in fact, safe."

The fact that you seem unable to type the word "vaccine" without including the descriptions "cannibalistic" and "produced with aborted fetal cell lines" is not but a sign of your flimsy logic and appeal to emotion and fear rather than real science and research. The real fault, however, of your statement here is that there is ABUNDANT "science" indicating these vaccines are, "in fact", safe. I suggest you check out any of the dozens of links James has posted so far. As for my contribution, I turn to my favorite youtube skeptic in his 2-part series about vaccines and autism, in which he makes things very plain and visual: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW1IEqKuf6s (part 1)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Tl3tUQng9Q (part 2)
I know "Spud" has no intention of watching these, but I hope to help any fence-sitters who may actually be open to logic and evidence.

"There is a school of thought that says that the rise in autism corresponds to the introduction of these vaccines."

All available evidence and scientific study proves that this school of thought is WRONG. People are right for wanting to protect their kids, but the people spreading fear of vaccines causing autism are NOT PROTECTING ANYONE.
report 4 likes, 23 dislikes.
Posted by Mike Schmitt on December 22, 2011 at 9:35 PM
Comment:

@ChristyAnn:
Sorry but I had to comment because the lack of logic makes my head hurt. I will attempt to point out at least some of the mistake(s) you have made here, though mr. Gavin may do so more eloquently later (i hope).

you said: "But would you deny there may be some vaccines that are 100% ineffective?" Yes. There are no vaccines on market that are "100% ineffective". If there were one, it wouldn't be a vaccine(!!). It wouldn't pass the rigorous testing requirements, and they wouldn't bother making it. To even be marketed, a vaccine must not only be tested for efficacy over a wide sample population over a certain amount of time, but also tested for a nominal level of safety. You seem to remain under the delusion that "big pharma" is some umbrella shadow organization which can market vinegar in a vial and call it a vaccine because they secretly control all research and testing facilities (to include government and academic studies). Follow-up question for you, then: do you deny that a new vaccine has ever been scrapped for being unsafe or ineffective? By the logic you seem to follow, this should have never happened, because neither being unsafe nor being ineffective is grounds for a vaccine to fail to get put on market.

"Do you acknowledge the correlation between the increase in Autism, ADD, ADHD, Asthma, Cancer and debilitating Arthritis in babies and young children, and the increase in the numbers of vaccines on the schedule?"

I also acknowledge the correlation between the rise in average global temperatures and the decrease in number of pirates, but this doesn't mean they have anything to do with each other. CORRELATION DOES NOT MEAN CAUSATION! (this is at least the 500th time someone has had to say this in this thread alone... ok maybe not but i am exaggerating MILDLY)

"How do you explain the 'rarity' of adverse effects to the grieving loved ones of the injured or deceased? For those 'rare' cases, who were told they were doing the best thing possible to protect their baby, or their grandparent, by vaccinating?"

This is like saying that because a man was trapped in his car and strangled by his seatbelt after a crash, that therefore seatbelts are dangerous and should be warned against. "how do you explain the 'rarity' of seat belt injuries to the grieving loved ones of the injured or deceased"? Well, it's tragic but the statistics don't lie - the preventative measures are FAR SAFER when taken than when not taken. The side-effects are RARE and MUCH MILDER than the effects of the disease. I can see you haven't bothered read James' previous comments, I've noted several times he has said basically these same words previously. I have a sinking feeling that I am wasting my breath.

"And finally, why would you use the words, Vaccines..not..effective, and Vaccine preventable disease, all in the same post?"

anybody who reads his original post, then reads this sentence, and sees how you have cherrypicked (OBVIOUSLY) and twisted his words (DECEPTIVELY) will realize you are being intentionally decietful. I'll let his original words stand for themselves, his explanation was well-written and easily understood (at least... to most people...)

"Why the astronomical numbers of people taking insulin, antidepressants, dialysis, chemotherapy, radiation, cholesterol and blood pressure drugs, etc. etc. etc., for ailments, maladies, defects, and diseases that were virtually unheard of and/or non-existent prior to the birth of the 'sacred cow'?"

There we go with correlation-causation again. Let me have a guess: is the "sacred cow" you're talking about... the car? no? how about the Television? or in-house electricity? how about in-house plumbing? Because all these things were once "virtually unheard of and/or non-existent", too. Of course, the REAL answer to this is: people just used to DIE of these things, or suffer untreated (funny, they also used to DIE of, or be permanently scarred or disabled by, vaccine preventable diseases as well). Antidepressants didn't exist, dialysis didn't exist, chemotherapy and radiation didn't exist, bp and cholesterol medicine didn't exist. Are you actually claiming these diseases didn't exist before vaccines became prevalent? Or are you blaming the *invention* of all these treatments on the advent of vaccines? That would be a neat angle to take.
report 5 likes, 25 dislikes.
Posted by Mike Schmitt on December 22, 2011 at 10:08 PM
Comment:

Christyann

The prevalence of adverse events for both vaccine-preventable disease and the vaccines themselves could be found in the link I provided.

Here's a more detailed breakdown:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm

And a good overview is available here:

http://www.aafp.org/afp/2002/1201/p2113.html

The Australian Immunisation Handbook has a good comparison of the effects of disease with the side-effects of their vaccines:

http://health.gov.au/internet/immunise/publishing.nsf/Content/Handbook-quickguides-sideeffects

...

An overview of VAERS can be found here:

http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/ReportaProblem/VaccineAdverseEvents/Overview/default.htm

As they point out in the third paragraph:

"The
report of an adverse event to VAERS is not proof that a vaccine caused the event"

...

There is good evidence that when vaccination rates fall, the incidence of the diseases they protect against increases:

For example:

Gangarosa EJ, et al. Impact of anti-vaccine movements on pertussis control: the untold story. Lancet 1998;351:356-61

...

Given that I stated in my last post that:

"Vaccines are not 0% effective"

For you to ask whether I agree that some vaccines are 100% ineffective does suggest that you were perhaps premature when you stated:

"Actually, I think we all have a very clear understanding of what each other is saying"

...
report 3 likes, 20 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 23, 2011 at 1:00 AM
Comment:
The author of this article needs to go and do some research of his own. He needs to do more research on Andrew Wakefield and his study. First of all the study wasn't even about autism and the MMR vaccines. SEcondly, two other docs did the same study before wakefield and did a presentation on it at the Royal Free Hospital. Also, he needs to go in and research the way Merck is discrediting docs and researchers who are coming out against their products. Also, how many new facts are coming out about Brian Deer and his connections to Murdoch and the hacking scandal. And how he committed fraud in investigating his story. Also, there are new facts, new scientists and the parents of Wakefields patients coming out in support of Wakefield. ONe thing to remember is that Wakefield never stated that the MMR vaccine causes Autism, he stated that there was enough evidence that it needed to be studied further. And the two other docs didn't retract their findings, they retracted THE INTERPRETATIONS being put on their findings (by others). I know many parents who have vaccine injured children, and I am one of the parents. I refuse to put poisons in my children. Formaldehyde (More hazardous than most chemicals, in 5 out of 12 ranking systems, On at least 8 federal regulatory lists. Ranked as one of the most hazardous compounds (worst 10%) to ecosystems and human health), aluminum (The half-life of aluminum in the brain is 7 to 4 years. More hazardous than most chemicals in 2 out of 6 ranking systems. On at least 2 federal regulatory lists. Two-month old babies now receive 1,225 mcg of aluminum from their vaccines -- 50 times higher than safety levels! Aluminum is extraordinarily toxic when found with mercury and yet it is in 4 vaccines with thimerasol), beta-propiolactone (More hazardous than most chemical. In 3 out of 3 ranking systems. On at least 5 federal regulatory lists Ranked as one of the most hazardous compounds (worst 10%) to humans), Polysorbates have been shown to cause dangerous, sometimes fatal effects, when given through a needle and has been proven to cause infertility, phenol (toxic at all levels), glutamate or monosodium-glutamate into laboratory animals have resulted in damage to nerve cells in the brain and due to concerns expressed by the American Academy of Pediatrics, MSG was removed from all products intended for use in infants under the age of one. Sorbitol (according to gov records not to be injected) and yes 13 still contain thimerasol which according to the FDA and Eli LIlly is 50% mercury. .5 ppb of mercury kills neuroblastoma cells, 2 ppb in drinking water, 20 ppb neurite membrane structure destroyed, 600 ppb considered as "trace amounts" in vaccines, 50,000 ppb (25 mcg) current amount in flu vaccines, meningococcal and tetanus vaccines. “A small dose of mercury that kills 1 in 100 rats and a dose of aluminum that will kill 1 in 100 rats, when combined have a striking effect: all the rats die. Doses of mercury that have a 1 percent mortality will have a 100 percent mortality rate if some aluminum is there.” - Donald Miller, M.D. Professor of Surgery, University. http://www.mercuryexposure.info/science/he… Some people will say you get more mercury in fish but anyone who has actually done the research will know that is not true. As for formaldehyde and it being in our lives everyday......they are warning about it in Johnson and Johnsons baby shampoos because it will seep through the skin, however isn't injecting it worse? I believe so.
report 23 likes, 4 dislikes.
Posted by mkfamily on December 23, 2011 at 11:13 AM
Comment:
Before the 1960's most children contracted common measles in the US. Complications were very rare and usually self-limiting. A vaccine is unnecessary.
Measles was already on the Decline.
Vaccination had nothing to do with the continued decline in the incidence of measles in the US. From 1958 to 1962, a year before the measles vaccine was introduced, the number of cases had already fallen 38%. More generally, the death rate from measles in United States and Great Britain had fallen by 98% from 1915 to 1958. Alderson, M International Mortality Statistics (Washington, DC Facts on File., 1981) pp. 182-183.
Epidemics Regularly Occur in Highly Vaccinated Population Large outbreaks often have showed that over 95% were previously vaccinated with measles..
FDA. "FDA workshop to review warnings, use instructions, and precautionary information (on vaccines)." (Rockland, Maryland: FDA, September 18, 1992, p 27..
A British study concluded that adults who were vaccinated with measles vaccine as children were at much higher risk of developing inflammatory bowel disease such as Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis, as adults. But we have no way of validating other long term effects because no safety studies have ever been performed to license a measles vaccine. Physicians Desk reference (PDR); 55th edition (Montvale, NJ: Medical Economics. 2001) p 1884 In 1995.
A mouse model for encephalopathy induced by pertussis immunization has been described; it has features that closely resemble some of the severe reactions, including seizures and a shock-like state leading to death, occasionally seen after administration of Bordetella pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine. Pertussis toxin is required for pertussis vaccine encephalopathy, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 82, pp. 8733-8736, December 1985.
http://www.pnas.org/content/82/24/8733.full.pdf
***As US infants got 5 DPT shots, this translates to a 1 in 62000 risk of permanent brain damage.
A hypotonic–hyporesponsive episode (HHE) is the sudden onset of hypotonia, hyporesponsiveness, and pallor or cyanosis that occurs within 48 hours after childhood immunizations. This syndrome has been primarily associated with pertussis-containing vaccines administered to children <2 years of age, and has been estimated to occur once every 1750 diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTwP) vaccinations. Hypotonic–Hyporesponsive Episodes Reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), 1996–1998, Pediatrics Vol. 106 No. 4 October 1, 2000, http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/106/4/e52.abstract
Here is an article from the British Medical Journal, it is what the medical professionals would call a credible publication: http://www.bmj.com/content/333/7560/174.full These children in this study were vaccinated with the vaccine that is supposed to protect them from the type of pertussis they got. "A substantial proportion of immunised school age children presenting to UK primary care with a persistent cough had evidence of a recent infection with Bordetella pertussis." "Our results show that a substantial proportion of school age children with persistent cough who present in primary care have evidence of a recent Bordetella pertussis infection. Despite this, general practitioners rarely diagnose and notify whooping cough in this age group. Most of the children in our study had received a full set of primary immunisations." Bordetella pertussis is the strain that the children are vaccinated for, and yet here they are infected with the illness.
***"It has been researched that 80% of all sudden infant death syndromes occurred within 7 days of a whooping cough vaccination (Torch, W.C., 1982; Miller, C.L. und Fletcher, N.B. 1976, Br MedJ 17 Jan.117-119)"
Special educational needs in boys receiving the Hep B triple series is 9 times greater than in unvaccinated boys. Goodman and Galagher, Toxicol. Environ.Chem. 2008;90:997-1008
***Boys who receive the Hep B vaccine at less than 1 month old have a 2.94% greater odds for ASD (Atrial septal defect, a form of congenital heart defect that enables blood flow between the left and right atria via the interatrial septum) compared to those vaccinated later or the unvaccinated boys. Goodman and Galagher. J. Toxicol.Environ.Health 2010; 73;1665-1667
report 20 likes, 2 dislikes.
Posted by mkfamily on December 23, 2011 at 11:25 AM
Comment:
Is polio still a disease seen in the United States?
The last cases of naturally occurring paralytic polio in the United States were in 1979, when an outbreak occurred among the Amish in several Midwestern states. From 1980 through 1999, there were 162 confirmed cases of paralytic polio cases reported. Of the 162 cases, eight cases were acquired outside the United States and imported. The last imported case caused by wild poliovirus into the United States was reported in 1993. The remaining 154 cases were vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) caused by live oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV). http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/polio/dis-faqs.htm

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/polio/DS00572/METHOD=print
Although polio can cause paralysis and death, the vast majority of people who are infected with the poliovirus don't become sick and are never aware they've been infected with polio.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/155580.php Polio can be classified as either symptomatic or asymptomatic. About 95% of all cases display no symptoms (asymptomatic polio), and between 4% and 8% of cases display symptoms (symptomatic polio). Symptomatic polio can be broken down further into a mild form called nonparalytic or abortive polio and a severe form called paralytic polio (occurring in 0.1% to 2% of cases).
NOTE 95% OF CASES DISPLAY NO SYMPTOMS!!!
Nonparalytic polio (abortive poliomyelitis) leads to flu-like symptoms that last for a few days or weeks, such as fever, sore throat, headache, vomiting, fatigue, back and neck pain, arm and leg stiffness, muscle tenderness, muscle spasms, and meningitis. OPV is created from a weakened or attenuated form of poliovirus, and it is the vaccine of choice in many countries because of its low cost, ease of administration, and ability to provide excellent immunity in the intestine. OPV, however, has been known to revert to a dangerous form of poliovirus that is able to paralyze its victim. Opv is the vaccine that Gates is spending millions of dollars to use in poor nations. Many of these nations are reporting a higher rate of polio and polio deaths as a result. The US stopped using OPV because of the dangers of it. The Times of INdia reported 13 deaths in the 0-5 age group in the first five months of 2011, these deaths were within the first 24 hours after vaccination.Dr. Jonas Salk, creator of the polio vaccine, says that analysis indicates that the live virus vaccine in use since the 1960's is the principle, if not sole cause of all polio cases since 1961."Polio was pretty obscure before the twentieth century. There'd been some outbreaks in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and most victims had been under the age of four".
In 1977, Dr. Jonas Salk, who developed the first polio vaccine, testified along with other scientists that mass inoculation against polio was the cause of most polio cases through the USA since 1961. Science, April 4, 1977, “Abstracts”
In Oman between 1988 and 1989, a polio outbreak occurred amongst thousands of fully vaccinated children. The region with the highest attack rate had the highest vaccine coverage. The region with the lowest attack rate had the lowest vaccine coverage. The Lancet, September 21, 1991
In the USA in 1960, 2 virologists discovered that both polio vaccines were contaminated with the simian virus 40, which causes cancer in animals as well as changes in human cell cultures. Millions of children had been injected with these vaccines. Medical Journal of Australia, March 17, 1973, p.555
..."In 1958 mass vaccination of 15,700,000 Americans resulted in a horrific increase in polio, the highest being 700% in Ottawa, Canada. The highest incidence in the USA occurred in the states that had been induced to adopt compulsory polio shots. 47% of the diagnosed polio cases in the Detroit epidemic were found to have been inoculated at least once, 34% at least twice, 22% at least thrice. Non-white cases had been found vaccinated 54% as much as white cases. However, according to the CDC's Polio Packet, non-white to white paralytic case incidence was 18 to 1, or 1800%.
“The epidemic was the second worst in Detroit history. Paralytic cases were 18 times more frequent among non-whites...” During a 1959 epidemic in Massachusetts, 77.5% of the paralytic cases had received three or more doses of the inactivated vaccine. Some doctors and scientists on the staff of the National Institute of Health during the 1950's stated the vaccine was "worthless as a preventative and dangerous to take".
In 1962 there were only 900 reported cases. However, there was knowledge of under reporting easily taking the numbers up in the thousands. Twenty percent of those children had received between two to five doses of the inactivated vaccine and also managed to be paralyzed by the wild type virus. So, it was well-known in the American medical arena that the vaccine was causing paralysis. 33,300 total cases of polio and 33 cases of paralytic polio in 1950 led to 9 deaths. AFTER the Salk Vaccine had been widely implemented in 1960, paralytic polio cases increased 80 fold to 2,525." Granted, the US doesnt use the OPV anymore, however other countries still do and that increases the rate and risk of it coming to our country. And it won't even be wild polio, it will be vaccine induced polio. The polio vaccine we give now does not protect from vaccine induced polio.

Decline in Polio was already on the decline when vaccination campaigns began. In the United States and England, the incidence of death had already significantly declined between 1923-1953, before polio vaccinations (47% and 55%, respectively). After polio vacination campaigns, the overall incidence continued to decline -- but they declined in countries that did not have widespread use of polio vaccination.
report 24 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by mkfamily on December 23, 2011 at 11:35 AM
Comment:
*** This is coming from the MMWR, which is the CDC’s own weekly publication. Here are 2 examples showing that we’ve always known that vaccinated kids can contract measles from the MMR vaccine itself. From December 9, 1983, to January 13, 1984, 21 cases of measles occurred in Sangamon County, Illinois. The outbreak involved 16 high school students, all of whom had histories of measles vaccination after 15 months of age documented in their school health records. Of the five remaining cases, four occurred in unvaccinated preschool children, two of whom were under 15 months of age, and one case occurred in a previously vaccinated college student. So here we have 21 patients with measles. 17 were fully vaccinated and 4 were unvaccinated. 80% of the patients were vaccinated, 20% were unvaccinated. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000359.htm
An outbreak of measles occurred among adolescents in Corpus Christi, Texas, in the spring of 1985, even though vaccination requirements for school attendance had been thoroughly enforced. (100% of the students were fully vaccinated). 14 students had the measles. We conclude that outbreaks of measles can occur in secondary schools, even when more than 99 percent of the students have been vaccinated and more than 95 percent are immune. (N Engl J Med 1987; 316:771–4.) http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM198703263161303
August 2009 "More than 1,000 people in New Jersey and New York have been sickened with mumps since August. The mumps outbreak began at a summer camp for Orthodox Jewish boys in Sullivan County, New York. Health officials have linked the outbreak to an 11-year-old boy at the camp. The boy had been fully vaccinated against the mumps, as had 77% of the patients in New Jersey. A total of 25 cases were reported among camp attendees and staff members. The median age of patients was 12 years (range: 9--30 years), and all were male. Of the 24 patients for whom vaccination status was reported, 20 (83%) had received age-appropriate vaccination with 2 doses, one (4%) had received partial age-appropriate vaccination with 1 dose, and three (13%) were unvaccinated.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5845a5.htm
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X11015428
Transmission of mumps virus from mumps-vaccinated individuals to close contacts
—The Centers for Disease Control reports that in the United States, cases of whooping cough (pertussis) have increased approximately 10-fold in the last 20 years, despite an increase in infant vaccination rates from 61 percent getting at least three doses of the pertussis vaccine in 1991 to 96.2 percent getting at least three doses in 2008. —“The rise in pertussis doesn’t seem to be related to parents’
refusing to have their children vaccinated for fear of potential side effects. In California, pertussis rates are about the same in counties with high childhood vaccination rates and low ones,” the New York Times reported last year.
A Penn State study (“Acellular Pertussis Vaccination Enhances B. Parapertussis Colonization”) in 2010 found that DTaP vaccination actually increased the growth of para-pertussis bacteria, indicating that “herd immunity” may be a wishful term. It is also wishful to blame Dr. Andrew Wakefield (see “Callous Disregard,” Skyhorse Publishing) for this issue or parents who question Thimerosal, a very toxic mercury.
"It has been researched that 80% of all sudden infant death syndromes occurred within 7 days of a whooping cough vaccination (Torch, W.C., 1982; Miller, C.L. und Fletcher, N.B. 1976, Br MedJ 17 Jan.117-119)" Pertussis (DTP vaccine): There have been 3 outbreaks in the last 19 years. In 1993 there was an outbreak in Ohio, where 82% of the cases occurred in people who had already received the vaccine. In 1996 there was an outbreak in Vermont, where 74% of the cases occurred in people who had already received the vaccine. In 2003 there was an outbreak in Cyprus, where 79% of the cases occurred in people who had already received the vaccine. So, how well is this vaccine actually working AND then take into consideration the damage the actual vaccine is doing. For instance, "70% of children who have died of SIDS received the pertussis vaccine within 3 weeks before death." Within this 3 week time period after receiving the vaccine, children's breathing patterns became stress induced, wreaking havoc on their respiratory systems, suggesting that some of these cases label as SIDS have a known cause, vaccination side effects. (Miller 120 and 121). By the way, in the vaccine package inserts....SIDS is listed as a precaution.
**** Mumps (MMR vaccine): "In 2006 there was a large outbreak of the mumps in the United States. 92% of these cases were in people who were previously vaccinated against the disease" (Miller 167).
* It is unknown whether immunizing adolescents and adults against pertussis will reduce the risk of transmission to infants.
Bisgard KM, Pascual FB, Ehresmann KR, et al. Infant pertussis: Who was the source? Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2004;23:985-989.
“Three students are confirmed cases. But all of those affected so far have been vaccinated for the bacterial illness.” (Whooping Cough)
http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-20111102-whooping-cough,0,2719176.story?track=rss
report 22 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by mkfamily on December 23, 2011 at 11:41 AM
Comment:
http://www.bmj.com/content/331/7529/1412tab=full
British Medical Journal article says American flu death numbers are more PR than science.

http://www.jpands.org/vol11no2/ayoub.pdf
this is the link to the original PDF and at the end has 1 1/2 pages of sources. These sources are the same sources that the mainstream medical use as supporting the flu shot, yet in the sources can be found the opposite information.
Influenza Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)

Flu vaccine: It was in the later half of 2002 that the CDC began advocating that all children receive the influenza vaccine. In 1999, 25 children died of influenza in the U.S. In 2000, 19 children died of the virus. In 2001, 13 children died of the virus, in 2002, 12 children died of the virus. Yet, in 2003, during the push to get all children the vaccine, 90 children died of the virus (a sevenfold increase). Several conclusions can be drawn here, such as the strain used in the vaccine may cause the person receiving the vaccine to contract the virus AND that the virus in the vaccine is more dangerous ((Torch, W.C., 1982; Miller, C.L. und Fletcher, N.B. 1976, Br MedJ 17 Jan. page 97).
*** Pneumococcal Disease (Prevnar): "Dr. Barthelow Classen, an immunologist at Classen Immunotherapies, testified before the Drug and Food administration that this vaccine could cause a major epidemic of diabetes, calculating that this vaccine will cause 28,000 cases of insulin dependent diabetes every year in the United States alone. On a side note, there are 90 strains of this disease and the vaccine is designed to protect against only 7 of them (Miller 326).

IN the news today: Japan removes Prevnar and ACtHIb from use in the whole country because of infant deaths. http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/03/08/japan.vaccines/index.html

Institute of Medicine (IOM) now admits:
"Vaccines are not free from side effects, or "adverse effects"
•Two Canadian flu vaccines were linked to oculo-respiratory syndrome characterized by conjunctivitis, facial swelling, and mild respiratory symptoms.
•Scientific research suggests that many people, who experience an adverse reaction to vaccines, have individual susceptibility that can make them at higher risk for experiencing acute and chronic health problems after vaccination due to biodiversity (genetic variations) within populations; age at the time of vaccination; immune deficiencies; coinciding infections/illnesses; and other environmental exposures, (such as toxins, traumas).
report 21 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by mkfamily on December 23, 2011 at 11:49 AM
Comment:
***According to the FDA website: 8 vaccines contain forms of aborted fetal tissue (Fetal Cell Line Wistar RA 27/3, Fetal Cell Line WI-38, and MRC-5), human serum albumin (from human blood), genetically engineered human albumin, and DNA. MMR (MMRII), Chic Pox (Varivax), Chic Pox/MMR (ProQuad), Hep A (Havrix), Hep A (Vaqta), DTap/Hib/Polio (Pentacel), Rabies (ImoVax) and Rabies (RabAvert).
***According to a retired pharmaceutical scientist: 23 vaccines contain DNA.
***According to the CDC website: 7 vaccines contain either aborted fetal tissues, human serum albumin or DNA. (DTap/IPV-Pentacel, Hep A-Havrix, Hep A-Vaqta, Hep A/Hep B-Twinrix, MMRII, MMRV-Proquad, and Varicella (chicken Pox).

www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20049118-10391695.html
Vaccines and Autism, A new scientific review (cbs news investigation) Human DNA in vaccines

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles…
(Human DNA in vaccines) The article in the Journal of Immunotoxicology is entitled "Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes--A review." The author is Helen Ratajczak, surprisingly herself a former senior scientist at a pharmaceutical firm. Ratajczak did what nobody else apparently has bothered to do: she reviewed the body of published science since autism was first described in 1943. Not just one theory suggested by research such as the role of MMR shots, or the mercury preservative thimerosal; but all of them. Ratajczak says human tissue is currently used in 23 vaccines. She discusses the increase in autism incidences corresponding with the introduction of human DNA to MMR vaccine, and suggests the two could be linked. Ratajczak also says an additional increased spike in autism occurred in 1995 when chicken pox vaccine was grown in human fetal tissue. A number of independent scientists have said they've been subjected to orchestrated campaigns to discredit them when their research exposed vaccine safety issues, especially if it veered into the topic of autism. We asked Ratajczak how she came to research the controversial topic. She told us that for years while working in the pharmaceutical industry, she was restricted as to what she was allowed to publish. "I'm retired now," she told CBS News. "I can write what I want."

Fetal Cell Line: MRC-5, WI-38, RA27/3 (also note the RA27/3 strain of rubella virus was observed to induce brain cell death), WI-26 VA4, HEK-293, and IMR-90. PER.C6 is a newer cell line developed by Crucell and licensed by Merck. According to this document, the fetus was healthy and normal when killed at 18 weeks. The mother decided to abort because she was unsure who the father was. At the outset PER.C6 was started for the sole purpose of vaccine development. This 2005 patent reads on line 0224, "Human embryonic retinoblast (HER) cells were isolated from the eyes of aborted fetuses of 18 and 21 weeks of age." (The patent is prefaced by this 2001 application assigned to Crucell). This research illustrates how the PER.C6 cell line is being promoted for use in flu, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria, rabies, cancer, and other vaccines.
report 23 likes, 2 dislikes.
Posted by mkfamily on December 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM
Comment:
I have a couple of questions for pro-vaxers. When you have taken your child in for their chicken pox vaccines were you told these things? The vaccine may shed for up to 6 weeks. The vaccinated child is supposed to be secluded away from others for that time. They are especially not supposed to be around pregnant women or infants. How many pregnant women take their child in for the vaccine? How many of these vaccinated children have an infant in their household? Have they told you that your chicken pox vaccinated child is not supposed to be exposed to salicylates? Salicylates can be found in many foods such as fruits, veggies, condoments, nuts etc. The reason they are not supposed to be exposed is because of Reye's syndrome.

Have they told you that after a child is vaccinated (with any vaccine) that crying unconsollably for 3 or more hours, you are supposed to take them to the ER. This is because of encephilitis. Yet, if you call the doc or nurse, they will tell you it is normal. It is not normal.

Did you know that in some of the vaccine inserts it says that SIDS is one of the dangers of vaccination?

All this can be found in the package inserts. Do you know that nurses and doctors do not read these inserts?

Did you know that most docs and nurses only get a very short instruction on vaccines, safety etc. They only go buy what they are told, not by actual research.

If your child is vaccinated and it is supposed to protect them from the illness, then why are you so afraid of my unvaccinated child? YOu say because of the infants? What about the vaccinated child spreading the vaccine form of the illness to the infant?

So if you take your child and get a live virus vaccine, the go out shopping and he or she touches the cart, the door or an item......you may be shedding the virus for those who are unprotected. This includes the flumist. YOur child gets it, we all know that sniffing stuff up our noses makes them run. So the child uses his hand as the kleenex (as they all do), then he touches something else and you have just spread the flu. Or he sneezes and it goes all over....you have just spread the flu. Congratulations!!

I have two vaccine injured children and two unvaccinated healthy children. I will not subject my two healthy children to the poisons in vaccines just for the health of your child. Why is your childs health more important than my childs health? Why do I have to take a chance on my children being injured just to save yours when yours "might" get an illness.

Do you all think that unvaccinated children are just reseviours for disease? They aren't. They have just as likely of a chance of getting a disease as your vaccinated child does. If their chances are the same, then why should we inject poison into them.

Would you let your child swallow liquid aluminum, or mercury, or phenol or formaldehyde? Then why do you inject it into their blood streams?
report 25 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by mkfamily on December 23, 2011 at 12:14 PM
Comment:

Here is some food for thought: Under goals see Substances which...: 1. will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness ;
12. alter personality structure in such a way that the tendency of the recipient to become dependent upon another person is enhanced (aka - autism),
14. will lower the ambition and general working efficiency of men when administered in UNDETECTABLE AMOUNTS.
16. ...sureptitiously administered (i.e. you do not know you received the substances...as they are in undetectable amounts...see point 14).
17. surreptitiously administered by above routes and which in very small amounts will make it impossible for the person to perform activities... (i.e. ways to get it into your body...think about that, how do you get the population as a whole to take something...multiple times, in undetectable amounts, so that it affects their mentation, but does not leave a trace

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA

for those of you who do not believe our government would use our own children as test subjects.... http://www.rense.com/general36/history.htm
http://newsone.com/nation/associatedpress4/past-medical-testing-on-humans-revealed/

and I have many more links from mainstream articles about our government using foster kids as guinea pigs.

And who goes in for the medical testing trials to get paid? Low income people. They feel they may get medical help or a cure for free.
report 22 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by mkfamily on December 23, 2011 at 12:26 PM
Comment:

Here is something written by a friend: Lets do some critical thinking. Most critical thinking that is learned in a textbook is programmed brainwashing. A few answers to a question are made available and than the reader or student is guided to the answer that the business wants them to choose. This is common with the medical profession. When a young person is in school for the medical profession they don’t really do much critical thinking. Its about the same as in grade and high school. Chapters are crammed. Test answers are memorized. There really isn’t much discussion involved. And if a really sharp student questions a idea, subject or statement, they are usually brushed off as the teacher doesn’t want to get involved in getting off the beaten path. Its like the time a few years ago I was talking with a college student about chemistry. I stated it was a dead subject. He replied about dead things having life like a piece of furniture. I pointed to a desk and said so that is alive? He said there were atoms in it which had some sort of movement. I asked him to go back to his teacher and ask for some proof. He was a gutsy guy and questioned his teacher. The teacher gave him some typical mumbo jumbo which explained nothing and he proceeded to explain it to me. It was more than absurd. So I said look you pay this man to teach you. You have a right to get an answer that makes sense. I suggested he go back and just ask for the proof that these atoms were moving inside of any piece of furniture. I said any molecule can only be seen with an electron microscope and everything seen under that is not alive including atoms which are nothing more then guesses on the functions of molecules. When I saw him next, he said he put the professor to the wall with his questions. The professor responded, why are you taking this class and walked away. My young friend learned a valuable lesson. When you don’t understand something, don’t assume your to dumb to understand. If the person really knows what they are talking about, they can break it down and answer all questions.

So why am I bringing this up? Because I am going to give you a statement of facts about vaccinations and the results. Then we can discuss what the vaccinators conclude and what I conclude. The vaccinators conclusion will be based on theory. My conclusion will be based on common sense. This statement of fact comes from Dr. Peebles book, Vaccination a Curse.

“ In the same year that inoculation reached England (1721), 244 persons were inoculated in Boston, Mass., by Dr. Boyston, of whom six died.” The vaccinator would declare that 238 people were saved by the inoculation and that the six that died already had the disease at the time of inoculation, and couldn’t be saved. Does that make sense to you? Not if you think about it. First of all it implies the absurd thought that all 244 persons were going to get smallpox and the only way to prevent it was to inoculate all of them. Does that make sense to you? It might if you are brainless, but most people are not brainless, but they have no knowledge of the truth and so believe the “expert.” They just trust. A common sense thinking approach to any disease is to just look around at the people in your village, town, city and your own family. This would tell you that not only everyone does not get a particular disease, but in fact most people do not. You hear of people stating that everyone one they knew got chicken pox, measles or whooping cough when they were children. Yet when questioned, when asked to think about their best friends, having any diseases, all of a sudden there not so sure. The same was said of polio. It was said that everyone had polio, but just didn’t know it. And the people believed. My question was a simple one, if the person didn’t know he/she had polio or any other disease, how could they know? But that gets us back to belief in the “expert.” Do you really think that these people through their schools, advertising, TV shows and media don’t know how to program the people? Now lets go back to the statement and use a little common sense. 244 people inoculated and six died. Well the six that died after the inoculation died from the inoculation. The 238 survived because their system was able to neutralize or eliminate the poison. That’s just common sense. All one needs to understand and deal with this is a little more faith in yourself and a little less faith in the so called expert.

Now I have discovered another problem the vaccinators have created.
Vaccine virus injections.
Inoculations: Arm to Arm scarification.
Vaccination: Taking pus from the smallpox victim, scratching it into a cow, taking the cow-pus and injecting it into the person.
Immunization. This doesn’t even apply as putting poison in a body doesn’t prevent any disease.
So what is this poison injection to be called????? as it clearly is not any of the above.
report 23 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by mkfamily on December 23, 2011 at 12:30 PM
Comment:

mkfamily:

The British Medical Journal reported Wakefield's fraud here:

http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5347.full

here:

http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452

and here:

http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2011/01/06/brian-deer-piltdown-medicine-the-missing-link-between-mmr-and-autism/

This includes evidence that the data the trial relied upon was altered, that Wakefield failed to disclose his conflict of interests (not least that he had patented a single vaccine and a test for the new diagnosis he claimed to have found) and that he had treated children unethically).

In Wakefield's press conference when he presented his (now retracted) Lancet paper he called for the MMR to be replaced with single shots.

A transcript of that interview can be found here:

http://briandeer.com/wakefield/royal-video.htm

[I note your attack on Brian Deer, but do you have some evidence to show that Wakefield didn't commit fraud?]

...

Presumably you are aware that your body produces formaldehyde?

http://www.eco-usa.net/toxics/chemicals/formaldehyde.shtml

It's ubiquitous and produced in quantities that far exceed what you be exposed to from the vaccination schedule in, for example, car exhaust.

...

Your description of Aluminum does not gel with the (referenced) information here:

http://www.chop.edu/export/download/pdfs/a…

"The quantity of aluminum in vaccines is tiny compared with the quantity required to cause harm."

...

Adjuvants, additives, residuals and preservatives are discussed in detail here:

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cont…

...

The tl:dr version:

The toxin is in the dosage...
report 4 likes, 21 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 23, 2011 at 12:48 PM
Comment:

mkfamily:

The myth that disease incidence was falling prior to the introduction of vaccines has already been debunked:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/6misho…

And I have already explained why the majority of patients who develop vaccine-preventable illness will have been vaccinated.

...

You reference a news story about two vaccines being temporarily suspended in Japan (due to safety concerns) earlier this year.

I was surprised you missed the follow-up stories which reported no link between the children's deaths and the vaccines they received.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-08/j…

...

Both the MMR and the chicken pox (varicella) vaccines contain live, attenuated virus:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17520544

This paper looks at the risk of transmission associated with attenuated vaccines:

"A review of the medical literature revealed no major risk of transmission associated with any live attenuated vaccine."

...

Reading the BMJ article you referenced:

http://www.bmj.com/content/333/7560/174.full

Did you miss this line:

"Although immunisation failed to protect them against pertussis, it did result in attenuated clinical features."

...

As for the influenza vaccine, the review here:

http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeff…

Cites an overall effectiveness of between 72-77%

...

report 4 likes, 20 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 23, 2011 at 1:47 PM
Comment:

Beware......the MMR vaccine mentioned above is one of the vaccines made with an aborted fetal cell line--in other words, it's one of the growing number of cannibalistic vaccines. There have been no studies done on the safety of these aborted fetal cell lines.

Using these vaccines is very unscientific.

report 21 likes, 4 dislikes.
Posted by Idaho Spud on December 23, 2011 at 5:58 PM
Comment:

Spud said: "There have been no studies done on the safety of these aborted fetal cell lines. Using these vaccines is very unscientific."

Sorry but I call bullshit. These statements are false in every possible way. I see you don't trouble us with any proof or evidence, scare tactics are clearly sufficient for you!
report 5 likes, 23 dislikes.
Posted by Mike Schmitt on December 23, 2011 at 7:36 PM
Comment:

Vaccines do not contain cells from aborted fetuses.

As has been noted previously, the viruses used to produce the vaccine are grown in a human cell line. During purification all cells are removed. What remains are, at most, residual DNA fragments.

Studies have looked at the potential risk of these residual DNA fragments:

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/ScienceForum…

"the oncogenic risk from cellular DNA in vaccines containing less than or equal to 10 ng of cell-substrate DNA is likely less than 1 in 10^7"

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8527122

"The small amounts of cellular DNA present in the final product, and the deleterious effect of the vaccine manufacturing process on the integrity and biological activity of DNA, both contribute to regarding residual cellular DNA as an issue of no practical importance. There is no evidence that limits on the concentration of residual cellular DNA in the final product is scientifically justified."

...
report 2 likes, 21 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 24, 2011 at 5:26 AM
Comment:
So Dr Wakefield lied about the association between the MMR and autism did he? (and yes, he is a doctor, his title was reinstated).

That's very interesting, because the case review concluded that there was no association between the MMR and autism. It did state that more investigation was needed into a possible link between the MMR and the GI issues of the children in the case review.

So if Wakefield lied, does this mean that there IS an association between the MMR and autism? And why is the current standard of journalism so appalling that a journalist can't even check his/her sources before perpetuating a myth? If I was the Editor of this newspaper I would haul the writer of this article over the coals for ineptitude.
report 22 likes, 3 dislikes .
Posted by Anita Bugges on December 25, 2011 at 4:51 AM
Comment:
Anita Bugges:

http://webcache.gmc-uk.org/gmclrmp_enu/sta…

Andrew Wakefield was removed from the medical register following a fitness to practice panel hearing 24 May 2010.

http://www.gmc-uk.org/Wakefield_SPM_and_SA…

...

This is the retracted paper:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9500320…

While the paper referenced 'possible environmental factors', the paper's findings begin:

'Onset of behavioural symptoms was associated by the parents with measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination in eight of the 12 children'

...

During Wakefield's press conference (held outside the Royal Free Hospital) on Feb 4 1998, he was less equivocal, calling for MMR to be split into its component vaccines (stating that his feeling was that the new syndrome he claimed to have discovered was related to the MMR rather than single vaccines).

http://briandeer.com/wakefield/royal-video.htm

...
report 3 likes, 17 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 25, 2011 at 10:40 AM
Comment:
It appears that James Gavin & Mike Schmitt either work for the pharmaceutical/vaccine mfg. or have financial interest or are plain ignorant of how the human body works. So... 1. Could you please provide one double-blind, placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of vaccines?

2. Could you please provide scientific evidence on ANY study which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?

3. Could you please provide scientific evidence which can prove that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was attributable to inoculation of populations?

4. Could you please explain how the safety and mechanism of vaccines in the human body are scientifically proven if their pharmacokinetics (the study of bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of ingredients) are never examined or analyzed in any vaccine study?

One of the most critical elements which defines the toxicity potential of any vaccine are its pharmacokinetic properties. Drug companies and health agencies refuse to consider the study, analysis or evaluation of the pharmacokinetic properties of any vaccine.

There is not one double-blind, placebo-controlled study in the history of vaccine development that has ever proven their safety, effectiveness or achievements (unless those achievements have underlined their damage to human health).

There are also no controlled studies completed in any country which have objectively proven that vaccines have had any direct or consequential effect on the reduction of any type of disease in any part of the world.

Every single study that has ever attempted to validate the safety and effectiveness of vaccines has conclusively established carcinogenic, mutagenic, neurotoxic or fertility impairments, but they won't address those.

Claim: Preservatives and chemical additives used in the manufacture of vaccines are safe and no studies have been linked or proven them unsafe for use in humans.

Fact: The claim is completely false.

5. Could you please provide scientific justification as to how injecting a human being with a confirmed neurotoxin is beneficial to human health and prevents disease?

6. Can you provide a risk/benefit profile on how the benefits of injecting a known neurotoxin exceeds its risks to human health for the intended goal of preventing disease?

This issue is no longer even open to debate. It is a scientifically established fact in literally hundreds of studies that the preservatives and chemical additives in vaccines damage cells. Neurotoxicity, immune suppression, immune-mediated chronic inflammation and carcinogenic proliferation are just a few of several effects that have been observed on the human body.

Fortunately, the drug companies still tell us the damage vaccines have on the human body. People just don't read them. All you have to do is look at the insert for any vaccine, and it will detail the exact ingredients, alerts and potentially lethal effects.

Any medical professional who believes that it is justified to inject any type of neurotoxin into any person to prevent any disease is completely misguided, misinformed, deluded and ignorant of any logic regarding human health.

Claim: Once an individual is injected with the foreign antigen in the vaccine, that individual becomes immune to future infections.

Fact: The claim is completely false.

7. Could you please provide scientific justification on how bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning and prevents future infections?

8. Could you please provide scientific justification on how a vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?

9. Could you please provide scientific justification as to how a vaccination can target a virus in an infected individual who does not have the exact viral configuration or strain the vaccine was developed for? All promoters of vaccination fail to realize that the respiratory tract of humans (actually all mammals) contains antibodies which initiates natural immune responses within the respiratory tract mucosa. Bypassing this mucosal aspect of the immune system by directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream leads to a corruption in the immune system itself. As a result, the pathogenic viruses or bacteria cannot be eliminated by the immune system and remain in the body, where they will further grow and/or mutate as the individual is exposed to ever more antigens and toxins in the environment which continue to assault the immune system.

Despite the injection of any type of vaccine, viruses continue circulating through the body, mutating and transforming into other organisms. The ability of a vaccine manufacturer to target the exact viral strain without knowing its mutagenic properties is equivalent to shooting a gun at a fixed target that has already been moved from its location. You would be shooting at what was, not what is!

Flu viruses, may mutate, change or adapt several times over a period of one flu season, making the seasonal influenza vaccine 100% redundant and ineffective every single flu season. Ironically, the natural immune defenses of the human body can target these changes but the vaccines cannot.

report 22 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by Dennis Cosgrove on December 25, 2011 at 12:36 PM
Comment:

The pharma-shill gambit is almost certainly one of the most tired arguments used to avoid confronting the evidence present by opponents.

Baseless accusations aside - I note Dennis Cosgrove has copied and pasted the rather misguided "9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims.” by David Mihalovic, ND.

Mark Crislip rather comprehensively demolished this dubious article in 2010:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.…

...

However, I couldn't help but notice the following statement toward the end of Dennis Cosgrove's post:

"Despite the injection of any type of vaccine, viruses continue circulating through the body, mutating and transforming into other organisms."

I'd be interested to see what evidence you would cite to support the belief that viruses can transform into other organisms.

Assuming this is not a mistype, it reveals a rather startling lack of understanding regarding the basics of microbiology.

...

It is particularly important to recognise that merely stating something does not make it so.

Show you evidence please.

report 3 likes, 19 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 25, 2011 at 4:12 PM
Comment:

Mr. Gavin, Regarding the sites you referred......

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-e…

(The CDC,....Extreme conflict of interest as far as I'm concerned.) As I referenced in an earlier post, and in total agreement with Mr. Cosgrove, where he states, ("Fortunately, the drug companies still tell us the damage vaccines have on the human body. People just don't read them. All you have to do is look at the insert for any vaccine, and it will detail the exact ingredients, alerts and potentially lethal effects.")

Please see..(http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm)..for all the CDC won't tell you.

You referred... http://www.aafp.org/afp/2002/1201/p2113.html, where I found the following...

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) recently concluded that “the evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship at the population level between MMR vaccine and ASD (autistic spectrum disorders).”16(p9) However, the IOM could “not exclude the possibility that MMR vaccine could contribute to ASD in a small number of children.”16(p9).... (An evasive, sheepish, half hearted acknowledgement.)

Dr. Buttram,...a very thoughtful, very honest man,..... "The IOM is now on record stating that it is "biologically plausible" that thimerosal-containing vaccines may be causally related to the current increases in the childhood neurodevelopemental problems such as autism, ADHD, speech delays, and other conditions. In my opinion, this list should include vaccine reactions that are mistakenly diagnosed as Shaken Baby Syndrome." (Harold E. Buttram M.D.)

You also referred.... http://health.gov.au/internet/immunise/pub (I found their disclaimer to speak volumes)...
"While every effort has been made to check drug dosage recommendations in this Handbook, it is still possible that errors have been missed. Furthermore, dosage recommendations are continually being revised and new adverse events recognised."

You referred...http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/... (Another conflict of interest. And what a coincidence!).... "More than ten million vaccinations per year are given to children less than one year old, usually between 2 months and 6 months of age. At this stage of development infants are at risk for a variety of medical events and serious childhood illnesses. These naturally occurring events include fevers, seizures, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), cancer, congenital heart disease, asthma, and other conditions."

(It seems the so called naturally occurring events are some of the exact same events listed in the vaccine serum package inserts as adverse events resulting from vaccines! And that the vaccinations are given during the stage of development where infants are at risk!! GIVE ME A BREAK!! As well as the parents who live with, and care for, these infants!)

You say,....There is good evidence that when vaccination rates fall, the incidence of the diseases they protect against increases: For example: Gangarosa EJ, et al. Impact of anti-vaccine movements on pertussis control: the untold story. Lancet 1998;351:356-61

That 'untold story' didn't tell me anything. Can you show more recent proof?

I don't believe I was premature in stating, "Actually, I think we all have a very clear understanding of what each other is saying" Questioning the sites you post for others to reference doesn't mean a lack of understanding. So let me say, (I) have a very clear understanding of what you are saying. I just happen to oppose in opinion.
report 19 likes, 1 dislike .
Posted by ChristyAnn on December 25, 2011 at 4:27 PM
Comment:

ChristyAnn:

If you understood what I was saying, (following a post where I clearly stated that vaccination was not 0% effective) why did you ask me whether I agreed that some vaccinations were 100% ineffective?

Your link to 'packet inserts' appears to be broken at present:

However, the CDC provide very clear information on vaccine ingredients, potential side effects and (most importantly) they also provide information on the risks associated with vaccine-preventable disease (so you can look at the risk/benefit).

The Institute of Medicine's most recent report:

http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Adverse-Ef…

Evidence Favors Rejection of a Causal Relationship

The evidence favors rejection of five vaccine–adverse event relationships:

MMR vaccine and autism MMR vaccine and type 1 diabetes DTaP (tetanus) vaccine and type 1 diabetes Inactivated influenza vaccine and Bell’s palsy (weakness of the facial nerve) Inactivated influenza vaccine and exacerbation of asthma or reactive airway disease episodes in children and adults

...

Once again I have to point out that personal experience does not trump large scale epidemiological studies.

And, of course, to remind you that correlation does not equal causation:

...

You weren't clear as to why the Lancet article "didn't tell you anything":

More recent information:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMs…

Specificially looking at Measles Outbreaks in 2011:

http://pediatrics.about.com/od/measles/a/m…

Looking specifically at the impact in the UK:

http://www.bmj.com/content/333/7574/890.full

report 2 likes, 17 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 26, 2011 at 3:09 AM
Comment:
I am a vaccine refuser, and am heartened to read how our numbers are increasing. My baby was given the hep-B vaccine in the hospital when she was born, without asking my permission (I had already told her pediatrician I didn't want her to get it). She reacted at four days old with four days and nights of high-pitched, inconsolable screaming (vaccine-induced encephalitis) and was later diagnosed with autism. This was stupid and needless. A congressional sub-committee in May 1999 had investigated the safety of this vaccine, and found it to be so dangerous that it recommended a moratorium be placed on its use. So why was it blithely given to my baby a year later, in May 2000, without even asking my permission? I had tested negative for hep-B, it is a disease close to nonexistent among children, and the vaccine protection wears off before the child is old enough to have sex or do illegal drugs, the major modes of transmission. My baby was permanently damaged only to yield profits for Big Pharma. I had measles as a child, like all children did in the '60s, it was not considered a dangerous disease, and now that we know that vitamin A and lack of fever reducers reduce still more the risk of rare complications, many of us would rather take our chances with the natural disease rather than risk the many dangers of the MMR. (Dr. Wakefield was vindicated in Nature magazine in November, and even Brian Deer now says he doesn't believe Wakefield committed fraud. He was railroaded by Big Pharma, terrified that if parents knew the truth about the MMR causing autism and bowel disease, that profits would fall precipitously.) The DTaP vaccine is not very effective, 30-70%, and most of the people who get whooping cough have been completely and appropriately vaccinated. The vaccine is still very dangerous, causing most of the cases of asthma in the U.S., also autism and SIDS. The disease used to be very dangerous, but, like measles, evolved to being a not very serious one for most people. Infants must be quarantined anyway: the DTaP at two months old does nothing to protect them from pertussis, but doubles their rate of asthma. To protect them from the many carriers of pertussis, both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated, they should be kept away from possible disease vectors until they are four months old and their airways have developed enough to handle coughing the mucus out of their lungs. Pertudoron 1 and 2 help, but not antibiotics. Holding the infant up on your shoulder all night used to be standard practice, and will probably become so again now that the disease is becoming so much more common. Mumps and chickenpox are nearly always mild diseases, conferring permanent immunity and a stronger, better-educated immune system. Vaccines are meant to produce inflammation and subsequent antibodies. Unfortunately, many people react more than they were supposed to. My baby and millions of others reacted with brain inflammation, encephalitis, which then results in autism, ADHD, dyslexia, learning disorders, and seizure disorders. Many people's immune systems are skewed by vaccines from a normal Th1 response to an abnormal, autoimmune Th2 response, resulting in asthma, allergies, bowel disease, and diabetes, all of which are many times more common in vaccinated people than in unvaccinated. Parents must inform themselves by reading books by Randall Neustaedter, Aviva Jill Romm, Wendy Lydall, Cynthia Cournoyer, Jamie Murphy, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, and Dr. Mayer Eisenstein before allowing their child to get any vaccine. There is no safe vaccine. There are thousands of scientific studies indicting vaccines as causing many kinds of permanent damage, and the authors I have mentioned cite hundreds of them in their excellent, well-documented books. Autism was new in the 1930s, after the first pertussis vaccines were developed a few years before. Dr. Leo Kanner collaborated with his colleagues at Johns Hopkins on a compendium of every neurological disease known to man in the mid-'30s: nothing like autism was described. He published his landmark study on the first cases of autism in 1943, saying it had never before been seen or described. The rate of autism (from the pertussis vaccine) was about one in ten thousand until the MMR came out in the late '80s, starting the upward spiral of autism. The hep-B at birth started the deluge of cases of autism in the 1990s, described by school nurse Patti White in her testimony before Congress. It's now one in eighty-eight in Missouri, one in forty-eight boys. Mercury is out of vaccines except for most flu vaccines, which still have a lot and are now recommended for everyone from six months of age on up (which is new). But aluminum is still in most of the vaccines, as well as formaldehyde, diploid (human fetus) cells, animal blood, and dozens of other highly antigenic substances. The aluminum is responsible for the twenty-fold increase in Alzheimer's since the yearly flu vaccines started about 1980. The flu vaccine has paralyzed hundreds, some permanently, and has killed many. There's not a single case of autism among the 35,000 unvaccinated patients of Dr. Mayer Eisenstein over forty years of practice, nor is there any among the unvaccinated Amish. In short, there are a LOT of excellent reasons that parents are refusing vaccines for their children in record numbers. Unvaccinated children are healthier, with intact immune systems. The vaccine-preventable diseases are either mild in children (measles, mumps, rubella, pertussis, hepatitis A, chicken pox) or very rare (encephalitis and hepatitis). We refusers would MUCH rather take our chances with the diseases and treat them, when they occur, with herbal and homeopathic remedies. Nearly half of all children in the U.S. now suffer from an autoimmune disease, that were rare to non-existent before vaccines. We are fighting to preserve the health of our children, even though it means swimming against the ill-informed general opinion.
report 21 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by Cynthia Parker on December 26, 2011 at 10:45 AM
Comment:
Mr. Gavin,

I see in my last post, the site for the inserts looks incomplete. Please try again.

http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inser…
report 19 likes, 2 dislikes.
Posted by ChristyAnn on December 26, 2011 at 11:52 AM
Comment:
Cythnia Parker:

The 'wall of text' approach isn't particularly readable. But I note that you've repeated the demonstrably false statement that the Amish don't suffer from autism:

http://imfar.confex.com/imfar/2010/webprog…

...

Regarding a moratorium on hepatitis b vaccination in children:

The transcript of the hearing doesn't mention a moratorium - I wonder if Ms. Parker can cite some evidence that it was put in place?

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/ge…

...

Regarding Andrew Wakefield, presumably Ms. Parker was refering to this article:

http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111109/ful…

But it is untrue to say that Wakefield has been vindicated in any way. Likewise it is untrue to suggest that Brian Deer has retracted his findings against Wakefield (indeed, the pathology reports mentioned in the Nature article serve only to further disprove Wakefield's assertions, as detailed in this article:).

http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d6823

...

Please, if you are going to make assertions, you need to provide some evidence to support it.

Choice is important, but it has to be informed choice and, while I agree that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, no one is entitled to their own facts.
report 3 likes, 21 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 26, 2011 at 1:07 PM
Comment:

I fear vaccines.I will always fear vaccines.I will never trust the vaccine pushers, which include the CDC, state agencies, the list goes on.I will never trust them, nor will anyone in my family or long list of friends that have witnessed my son's regression into autism, loss of speech, immediately after receiving his MMr. So the state can push all they want, and take all the bribes from the Big Pharmaceutical companies that their pockets can handle we will not vaccinate.
report 20 likes, 2 dislikes.
Posted by joejoev on December 26, 2011 at 2:12 PM
Comment:

Mr. Gavin,

UN- believable!! Are you saying that (Cynthia Parker's fact) that her newborn child was injured by the Hep B vaccine despite (her own important informed choice) NOT to have the infant vaccinated, is WRONG?? Wow. Spoken like a true proponent of the vaccine scam. I see $$$ between the lines of your posts.

Furthermore......

Excerpt from my earlier post.....

You say, "Vaccines are not 100% effective." I'm thinking most, if not all would agree with you on that. But would you deny there may be some vaccines that are 100% ineffective? (Providing the desired effect is to promote a strong, healthy immune system.) Can you offer any numbers on the percentage of the safety of vaccines?

I was asking, (in other words), if you believe some vaccines to be detrimental to the immune system. (I'm guessing your answer to be, no.)

Also, you completely ignored my reference regarding the site you referred, where the FDA reports....... "More than ten million vaccinations per year are given to children less than one year old, usually between 2 months and 6 months of age. At this stage of development infants are at risk for a variety of medical events and serious childhood illnesses. These naturally occurring events include fevers, seizures, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), cancer, congenital heart disease, asthma, and other conditions."

(It seems the so called naturally occurring events are some of the exact same events listed in the vaccine serum package inserts as adverse events resulting from vaccines! And that the vaccinations are given during the stage of development where infants are at risk!! GIVE ME A BREAK!! As well as the parents who live with, and care for, these infants!)

So if the 'naturally occurring events' usually happen between the ages of 2 and 6 months, that only supports the high probability, possibly even, (fact) that Cynthia Parker's baby was indeed injured by the Hep B vaccine.
report 20 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by ChristyAnn on December 26, 2011 at 2:16 PM
Comment:

Cythia Parker, I hate to break the news to you, but there are over 55 different Amish variations, so which one are you talking about when you say the autism rates are increasing for the Amish, my guess is that you are referring to those Amish that vaccinate, so yes they're rates of course will increase.Anytime you shock the immune system with any toxin including vaccines, you could expect in increase of neurological disorders such as autism/brain damage.Thanks for proving our point on the refusal of toxic vaccines!
report 17 likes, 3 dislikes.
Posted by joejoev on December 26, 2011 at 2:20 PM
Comment:

Sorry about the typo on my previous post.
report 1 like, 2 dislikes.
Posted by joejoev on December 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM
Comment:

ChristyAnn:

You seem to have confused an opinion with a fact.

I don't know the cause of Ms. Parker's child's symptoms - and for that reason I did not reference it.

And I note that you've also put forward the 'pharma shill gambit' - which remains baseless and lazy.

It seems also that you have missed my point again:

There are risks associated with vaccines. There are risks associated with vaccine-preventable disease. I am not aware of any evidence to suggest that vaccines 'weaken' the immune system (but if you can cite any papers I'd be happy to read them).

Significant risks associated with vaccines are generally rare (details can be found in the patient information leaflets). If you look at all the evidence, the consensus is that the benefits of being vaccinated outweigh the risks.

So no, I still stand by my assertion that no vaccine is 0% effective (efficacy data for vaccines is included in the patient information leaflet on the site you linked to).

...

I'm confused as to why you thought I had ignored the link I had offered you as evidence...

But once again can I remind you that correlation doesn't equal causation.

What the
   report is in fact saying is that these events occur at the same time as vaccination is usually given (therefore people will eroneously link the two independent events).

It goes on to say:

"Some infants coincidentally experience an adverse event shortly after a vaccination. In such situations an infection, congenital abnormality, injury, or some other provocation may cause the event. Because of such coincidences, it is usually not possible from VAERS data alone to determine whether a particular adverse event resulted from a concurrent condition or from a vaccination - even when the event occurs soon after vaccination."

...

But there is no difference in neurological outcomes when you compare those who receive the recommended vaccination schedule and those who either don't receive vaccination or receive it late.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cont…

...
   report 3 likes, 18 dislikes.
Posted by James Gavin on December 26, 2011 at 6:36 PM

Comments 1-50  |   51-100  |   101-150  |   151-200  |   201-250  |   251-300  |   301-350  |   351-394