It's all in God's hands....cont

[Serpo]

continues............


and no it isnt.......

like the fact my daughter is having her first child and its going to be pumped full of vaccines despite whatever I may say............so no it isnt ,

its about choices we all make and we either listen to our "higher voice"or not..........

Not that ,that may work either as the populace is so brain/mind controlled you may as well speak to a brick wall.........

the PTB supposedly running the show are pretending to be god where as in fact they are the exact opposite.

to say its all in gods hands is the same as "its the will of Allah"

its a defeatist and a give up attitude

surely we are little bits of the creator , everyone of us

http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?84558-It-s-all-in-God-s-hands

[Hitch]

its a defeatist and a give up attitude

It is not a defeatist nor give up attitude.

It is a trusting one.

[Serpo]

It is not a defeatist nor give up attitude.

It is a trusting one.https://images.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.citizensamericaparty.org%2Fdol lar-InGodWeTrust.jpg&f=1

[Serpo]

It is not a defeatist nor give up attitude.

It is a trusting one.


I agree on one level but on another I dont................

[Jerrylynnb]

Serpo, I feel for you to the bottom of my being - my little granddaughter (now 6) was a bubbling and promising toddler up until age one when she was pumped full of those damnable vaccines - after that, she developed autism and now she goes around banging her head because she wants to communicate but is not able to do so - it brings me to tears.

Can't you INSIST that before they inject a needle into her that they disclose FULLY and COMPLETELY, under penalty of PERJURY, exactly what is in the serum, how it was prepared, and, what data is kept on the aftereffects, even years later, for those receiving that serum?

I suppose not - like you, I am feeling helpless.

At least in the case of my granddaughter, my son and his wife now are enlightened, and, they are resisting any further vaccines at all cost.

You have my full sympathy.

[Horn]

If everything were in God's hands there'd be no reason for anyone else otherwise.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPAYR5NReE8

You and I would zigzag away thru the bore and the pain, occasionally glancing up thru the rain, like a pack of lonely dogs.

[Serpo]

Standard vaccination schedule for family assistance Children born before 1 July 2012

Age
Disease immunised against


2 months


Diphtheria
Tetanus
Pertussis
Polio
Hib
Hepatitis B




4 months


Diphtheria
Tetanus
Pertussis
Polio
Hib
Hepatitis B




6 months


Diphtheria
Tetanus
Pertussis
Polio
Hib
Hepatitis B (or at 12 months)




12 months


Measles
Mumps
Rubella
Hib
Hepatitis B (or at 6 months)




4 years


Diphtheria
Tetanus
Pertussis
Polio
Measles
Mumps
Rubella





Children born after 1 July 2012

Age
Disease immunised against


2 months


Diphtheria
Tetanus
Pertussis
Polio
Hib
Hepatitis B
Pneumococcal




4 months


Diphtheria
Tetanus
Pertussis
Polio
Hib
Hepatitis B
Pneumococcal




6 months


Diphtheria
Tetanus
Pertussis
Polio
Hib
Hepatitis B (or at 12 months)
Pneumococcal




12 months


Measles
Mumps
Rubella
Hib
Hepatitis B (or at 6 months)
Meningococcal C




18 months


Measles
Mumps
Rubella
Varicella




4 years


Diphtheria
Tetanus
Pertussis
Polio





The immunisation requirements affect eligibility for the Family Tax Benefit Part A supplement from the 2012–2013 financial year onwards. We will check with the Australian Childhood Immunisation Register (http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/services/medicare/australian-childhood-immunisation-register) to see whether your child is immunised, or has an approved exemption, after the end of the financial year when your family’s payments are balanced (http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/enablers/centrelink/family-tax-benefit-part-a-part-b/balancing-your-family-assistance-payments). This happens after you lodge your tax return and your income details are confirmed by the Australian Taxation Office or you tell us that you don’t need to lodge one.
If your supplement is not paid because immunisation requirements haven’t been met, you have 1 year from the end of the financial year that your child turned 1, 2 or 5, to meet the requirements.
If you submit or intend to submit a lump sum Family Tax Benefit claim and there are special circumstances that prevent your child from meeting the immunisation requirements within the 1 year timeframe, please contact us to discuss.
Additional vaccines are provided to children free of charge under the National Immunisation Program. Read more about the National Immunisation Program Schedule (http://www.immunise.health.gov.au/) on the Department of Health website.

http://www.humanservices.gov.au/customer/subjects/immunising-your-children

[Serpo]

Serpo, I feel for you to the bottom of my being - my little granddaughter (now 6) was a bubbling and promising toddler up until age one when she was pumped full of those damnable vaccines - after that, she developed autism and now she goes around banging her head because she wants to communicate but is not able to do so - it brings me to tears.

Can't you INSIST that before they inject a needle into her that they disclose FULLY and COMPLETELY, under penalty of PERJURY, exactly what is in the serum, how it was prepared, and, what data is kept on the aftereffects, even years later, for those receiving that serum?

I suppose not - like you, I am feeling helpless.

At least in the case of my granddaughter, my son and his wife now are enlightened, and, they are resisting any further vaccines at all cost.

You have my full sympathy.

Thanks for your support Jerry ,that is a tragic story of yours and you have my full sympathy.......also.

Basic autism approach......

get rid of heavy metals,with either microsecond zeolite , or diatomaceous earth or Chlorella.

Then destroy parasites (mms).....





Have you seen this


http://www.autismone.org/content/38-children-recovered-20-months-mms-0


http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?70576-38-autistic-Children-Recovered-in-20-months-with-MMS (http://www.autismone.org/content/38-children-recovered-20-months-mms-0)

[aeondaze]

I'm sorry that this is affecting you this much, but the truth is you aren't the parent. FULLSTOP.

Secondly, I have reservations about vaccinations, I detested having to do it with my children and will continue to for my youngest. Anything that can possibly go wrong causes me great concern and there is no doubt that vaccinations can have harmful effects in a small number of children in the population. Health experts freely admit this, but for the most part these fears are statistically irrational and I fully admit that!

The truth is that unvaccinated children are at much greater risk from infectious diseases than from the vaccines themselves. This is particularly true the larger the proportion of unvaccinated children in the population. One only needs to look at the alarming rise in infectious diseases in the northern NSW hippy populations top see that this is a real and concerning phenomena, just go look into TB deaths in children in this region.

The fear of autism is also irrational as the cause of this increase in diagnosis has been shown by numerous Scandinavian studies to be due to the change in the way the condition was diagnosed in the 1990's as this saw a larger segment of cases categorised as autistic which previously weren't and I think its like 60% of this increase can be directly attributed to this.

Lastly it has been shown that vaccination does trigger autism in a VERY small section of the population due to their genetic makeup. These same children it has been shown in all likelihood would have presented later in life with autistic symptoms, the vaccine only brought this condition forward. This is similar to how cannabis has been linked to schizophrenia and bipolarity within the medical community, however it has been shown that a lot of these individuals would also have in all likelihood, presented later in life with symptoms but the cannabis, rather than being a direct cause of it, merely brought the condition to light.

You can think what you will, you can present all manner of non professional videos and lay opinions on the matter, you can even bring up the boogie man mercury all you like but the facts are that your daughter has probably made the right "rational" choice for her and you need to respect that no matter how hard that may be for someone like you who has an innate inability to separate superstition from the science and refuses to even consider for a moment the counter side to this argument.

[StreetsOfGold]

say its all in gods hands is the same as "its the will of Allah"

Ironically, you're correct since god(s) is always a reference to Satan or one of his minions ...IN THE BIBLE

2 Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

god = Satan
God = Lord Jesus Christ

[Spectrism]

I think people say: "it's all in God's hands", simplistically without understanding the real meaning. The bible says that God wishes none to perish, yet many do. So, it is clear that not all is the will of God.

What is true, is this: God ultimately will be the authority in all things. He will be the perfect judge missing nothing and meting out justice. And He provided an escape for those who would agree to it. His complete authority will be seen in His dealing with all. In that sense, it is "all in God's hands". This temporary realm of man's choices given authority still must be brought under the true Authority. Now we see destruction, evil, corruption, death. These will all be swallowed up in God's judgments.

[Jerrylynnb]

The only thing, aeondaze, is that you cannot get a full and complete disclosure of any and every substance contained in the serum being injected directly into the vein. Are you going on blind faith that the "medical" industry would take care not to allow any harmful substance within the serum? If so, this *blind faith* is your prerogative, but, simply pronouncing it is in no way reassuring to the rest of us. To say that any given autistic child would have developed it anyway, is merely repeating the exculpatory line promulgated by the "medical" industry. and citing mainstream "studies" to support this claim is not at all reassuring (who pays for these studies and is there any outside oversight as to the inclusion of ALL DATA, even that which would be counter to their desired "results").

None of us really have any idea how they prepare these serums, what they use to preserve them on the shelf until administered, what tests they did to what level of assurance that no risk is involved, nor, really, ANYTHING at all about what gets injected DIRECTLY into the vein.

Why any one of us chose to swallow the mainstream line about vaccines and how good they are and how idiotic and foolish are we who reject them, is something I do not understand - nobody is expecting you, or any pro-vacciners, to have the same doubts about it as we do, but, we wonder why you can't admit that you are not speaking from a position of knowledge, but, more likely, one from an unsubstantiated blind faith in the mainstream medical industry.

I do not share this faith.

As a personal tale, I just so happened to be born with an allergy to tetanus, discovered when I was only about 6 years old when I was given a tetanus shot for a bad cut. I developed a life-threatening fever and the doctor warned my mother to NEVER allow me to ever have a tetanus shot for the rest of my life. That warning served to exclude me for all the shots that other students got in our schools, because, the shots all had tetanus in them as a standard "booster" concoction. So, I was one of those children you mention that DID NOT GET SHOTS in school. I lived through it just fine. Yes, I got the measles, the mumps, whooping cough, scarlet fever, etc., but, I stayed in bed and got over them all from the immune system in my own body. I stand here now, at 73, and can proclaim that SHOTS ARE NOT NECESSARY to living a long and healthy life. Childhood illnesses are something that come and go, and, if we want to rely on *blind faith*, are probably something that help our own immune system develop while we are still very young and get exposed to them.

No sir. Forcing these shots on our children, no matter which *authority* gets cited, is nothing short of tyranny, and, offers a splendid opportunity for tyrants to infect a whole population for whatever nefarious ends they secretly harbor in the depths of their evil beings.

[Serpo]

I'm sorry that this is affecting you this much, but the truth is you aren't the parent. FULLSTOP.

Secondly, I have reservations about vaccinations, I detested having to do it with my children and will continue to for my youngest. Anything that can possibly go wrong causes me great concern and there is no doubt that vaccinations can have harmful effects in a small number of children in the population. Health experts freely admit this, but for the most part these fears are statistically irrational and I fully admit that!

The truth is that unvaccinated children are at much greater risk from infectious diseases than from the vaccines themselves. This is particularly true the larger the proportion of unvaccinated children in the population. One only needs to look at the alarming rise in infectious diseases in the northern NSW hippy populations top see that this is a real and concerning phenomena, just go look into TB deaths in children in this region.

The fear of autism is also irrational as the cause of this increase in diagnosis has been shown by numerous Scandinavian studies to be due to the change in the way the condition was diagnosed in the 1990's as this saw a larger segment of cases categorised as autistic which previously weren't and I think its like 60% of this increase can be directly attributed to this.

Lastly it has been shown that vaccination does trigger autism in a VERY small section of the population due to their genetic makeup. These same children it has been shown in all likelihood would have presented later in life with autistic symptoms, the vaccine only brought this condition forward. This is similar to how cannabis has been linked to schizophrenia and bipolarity within the medical community, however it has been shown that a lot of these individuals would also have in all likelihood, presented later in life with symptoms but the cannabis, rather than being a direct cause of it, merely brought the condition to light.

You can think what you will, you can present all manner of non professional videos and lay opinions on the matter, you can even bring up the boogie man mercury all you like but the facts are that your daughter has probably made the right "rational" choice for her and you need to respect that no matter how hard that may be for someone like you who has an innate inability to separate superstition from the science and refuses to even consider for a moment the counter side to this argument.


There is nothing in this world that you catch that goes straight into the blood system like a vaccine.

TB can be caught from unpasteurised cows milk.

All your arguments are there to satisfy your own conscience , if you want doctors to inject this stuff into your kids and put up an argument for vaccines are really good for , thats fine most people think this way anyhow, except me and Im sure Jerry dosnt either.

To me its like Russian rolute,as the vaccines increase so does the chance of autism in the child.

Their natural immune systems will be crushed anyhow, still big pharm needs to make a buck.

Can you tell me ONE thing that big pharm has created that cures anything as opposed to managing the symptoms.

My kids got practically no vaccines and my son none at all, hes an adult now and fine.

[aeondaze]

why you can't admit that you are not speaking from a position of knowledge, but, more likely, one from an unsubstantiated blind faith in the mainstream medical industry.

With all due respect Jerry, this is rich. I do not conduct my life based on unsubstantiated blind faith, far from it. I have a tertiary qualification in Science and as such I can deduce good science from bad and understand when statistical analysis has reached its limit or is being used to support something that has no basis, so I find your assumption rather offensive, yet I can appreciate the irony as that is actually the position of the anti vaccine crowd. It is however brazen of you to accuse me of this I have to say, particularly when you know naught about me.


As a personal tale, I just so happened to be born with an allergy to tetanus, discovered when I was only about 6 years old when I was given a tetanus shot for a bad cut. I developed a life-threatening fever and the doctor warned my mother to NEVER allow me to ever have a tetanus shot for the rest of my life.

Lets hope then that you never get infected with Tetanus because that would mean certain death for you.


No sir. Forcing these shots on our children, no matter which *authority* gets cited, is nothing short of tyranny, and, offers a splendid opportunity for tyrants to infect a whole population for whatever nefarious ends they secretly harbor in the depths of their evil beings.

Sure, that could be the case, but the track record doesn't show that at all in relation to the vaccines they do give us so far, they could also just decide to put a bullet in our heads, wait, I think some tyrants already have.

Lastly I NEVER advocated forced vaccinations, so I don't know why you bring this up. Would I like to see greater than 80% of the population that I personally live in immunized, sure. Buts thats purely from a infectious disease standpoint, I wouldn't go around forcing people to vaccinate.

This is a classic example of why I have a healthy suspicion and a cautious approach when it comes to the anti-vaccination crowd, they do everything they can to marginalize anyone that is pro vaccine, just as much as the ones who advocate forced vaccinations.

I'm in neither camp yet you'd like to assert somehow that I wish to violate peoples civil liberties. Lastly what you've given us is a barrage of superstitious hocus pocus and a touching yet albeit, useless personal anecdotes. These don't really qualify as science. Sure, maybe one page out of a notebook, but what we're looking for here is repeatability and a large number of experiments or observations.

Jerry its great to have you here at GSUS, most of my friends are a lot older than myself and I cherish their experiences and thoughts but that doesn't mean I always have to agree with them.

[Jewboo]

https://i.imgur.com/sTUyI.gif

[Serpo]

I guess this is the level you feel most comfortable with.............................

Among the very ancient people of Sardinia, who were called Sardi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardinian_people) or Sardoni, it was customary to kill old people. While killing their old people, the Sardi laughed loudly. This is the origin of notorious sardonic laughter (Eugen Fehrle, 1930), now meaning cruel, malicious laughter. In light of our findings things begin to look different. Laughter accompanies the passage from death to life; it creates life and accompanies birth. Consequently, laughter accompanying killing transforms death into a new birth, nullifies murder as such, and is an act of piety that transforms death into a new life.[7] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardonicism#cite_note-7)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardonicism



Sardonicism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardonicism)

Sardonicism is "the quality or state of being sardonic; an instance of this; a sardonic remark." A sardonic action is one that is "disdainfully or skeptically humorous" or "derisively mocking." Also, when referring to laughter or a smile, it is "bitter, scornful, mocking." Hence, when referring to a person or a personal attribute, it is "[c]haracterized by or exhibiting bitterness, scorn or mockery."




Very close to the word sadistic............

[aeondaze]

There is nothing in this world that you catch that goes straight into the blood system like a vaccine.

TB can be caught from unpasteurised cows milk.

All your arguments are there to satisfy your own conscience , if you want doctors to inject this stuff into your kids and put up an argument for vaccines are really good for , thats fine most people think this way anyhow, except me and Im sure Jerry dosnt either.

To me its like Russian rolute,as the vaccines increase so does the chance of autism in the child.

Their natural immune systems will be crushed anyhow, still big pharm needs to make a buck.

Can you tell me ONE thing that big pharm has created that cures anything as opposed to managing the symptoms.

My kids got practically no vaccines and my son none at all, hes an adult now and fine.

Yes, I vaccinated my children because I calculated that the risk of them catching an infectious disease was greater than them having an adverse reaction to the vaccines. I just don't think I could live with myself if my child died from one when they are easily preventable.

I've covered the increased rate in autism diagnosis already, you choose not to see the rationality of the argument and prefer to place your faith in unfounded superstition then thats fine, its your choice.

Sure a lot of things in life are like Russian roulette, even getting in a car these days qualifies as that and the risks are far greater than vaccination, but somehow you still choose to get into a car...:rolleyes:

Again you choose luck and your own personal anecdotes as reasons to base your decisions and opinions thats fine, but it doesn't mean your argument has a basis in fact.
Their natural immune system is greater from exposure to vaccinations, you don't have any proof otherwise, while there is a ground swell of data that supports my hypothesis.

I think the hardest thing for you to come to terms with is that your daughter is making personal decisions for herself and you have no say in the matter.

[Jewboo]

Sardonicism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sardonicism)

Sardonicism is "the quality or state of being sardonic; an instance of this; a sardonic remark." A sardonic action is one that is "disdainfully or skeptically humorous" or "derisively mocking." Also, when referring to laughter or a smile, it is "bitter, scornful, mocking." Hence, when referring to a person or a personal attribute, it is "[c]haracterized by or exhibiting bitterness, scorn or mockery."



https://i.imgur.com/jvGAB6f.gif

[Serpo]

At least you can go to a temple now JB............

Decoding the Symbols on the Satanic Temple’s Baphomet Statue By majestic (http://disinfo.com/author/majestic/) on August 1, 2015 in News (http://disinfo.com/category/news/)
You all know about the unveiling of the Satanic Temple’s statue of Baphomet (http://disinfo.com/2015/07/baphomet-statue-unveiled-at-largest-public-satanic-ceremony-in-history/) in Detroit last weekend, but do you know what the symbols mean? BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-33682878) investigates:

A controversial statue unveiled by the Satanic Temple at a secret ceremony in Detroit has attracted protests. But who is the goat-headed figure? And what do the elements of the statue symbolise?
https://s3.amazonaws.com/disinfo/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/01204918/baphomet.jpg
The bronze statue is nearly 9ft tall and depicts a winged hermaphrodite known as Baphomet, flanked by two smiling children. It cost $100,000 (£64,000) to make and hundreds of Satanists turned out to see it unveiled.
Long term, the Satanic Temple wants to move the piece 900 miles (1,450km) south-west and erect it opposite a Ten Commandments monument outside Oklahoma City’s Capitol Building.
The Baphomet will “complement and contrast” the Christian commandments which include “unconstitutional prohibitions against free speech and free exercise of religion,” according to the organisation.
“Our statue will serve as a beacon calling for compassion and empathy among all living creatures,” says Lucien Greaves, the group’s co-founder.
He hopes people of all ages will “sit on the lap of Satan for inspiration and contemplation… It’s a nice little tourist attraction. People would travel a great distance to see it.”
The name Baphomet The name dates back to the Inquisition and torture of the Knights Templar about 1100 who, according to French chroniclers of the Crusades, confessed to worshipping a heathen idol called Baphometh.
Some scholars believe “Baphometh” was simply a corruption of “Mahomet” – the Prophet Muhammad.
But over the years as the mystery and speculation around the Templars has grown, so too have the interpretations of the word and its meaning.
One elaborate interpretation even drove the plot in Dan Brown’s historical thriller Da Vinci Code, where the word Baphomet is decoded and translated to mean “Sophia” or wisdom…http://disinfo.com/2015/08/decoding-the-symbols-on-the-satanic-temples-baphomet-statue/

[Serpo]

I think the hardest thing for you to come to terms with is that your daughter is making personal decisions for herself and you have no say in the matter.


Haha my daughter has always made decisions for herself, what a knee jerk

[aeondaze]

Haha my daughter has always made decisions for herself, what a knee jerk

Hey, I didn't start the thread....o)(~


;)

[Serpo]

Your Immune System, How It Works And How Vaccines Damage It

"Chronic illnesses are now so common, having a sick child seems to be the “new normal.”Children are supposed to be vibrant, healthy, free of disease." - Janet Levatin MD, Pediatrician.


http://d121tcdkpp02p4.cloudfront.net/clim/115923/Alicia-and-Andy-at-Xmas-02.jpg



The Theory



Medical theory is that if your child is exposed to a weakened version of the disease, he will produce antibodies to that disease and become ‘immune’, so that he will never contract the illness.

At first glance, this sounds like a solid principle, BUT it only focuses on one small aspect of the immune system, the antibodies, and fails to look at all the other functions responsible for protecting your child’s health.



So, how does the immune system work?



The immune system is also made up of the skin, mucous membranes in the nose and throat, ears and eyes, nasal hairs, saliva, the spleen, intestines, tonsils, the thymus gland and even the brain. All of these parts work together in a holistic way to bring about a whole body immunity, which is only in part to do with antibodies.



• The skin acts as a barrier to prevent bacteria entering the body. It also filters out toxins through fever, which is the purpose of a fever when your child is ill.

• The nasal hairs prevent foreign particles from travelling up the nose, and the mucous membranes excrete a substance which is anti-bacterial.

• Tonsils help prevent respiratory diseases and illnesses such as Polio, and saliva contains substances which destroy and neutralise microbes.

• The spleen and intestines, among other organs, deposit fats and vitamins around the body and protect against viral and bacterial invasion.

• The thymus gland produces thymus cells, known as ‘T’ cells, which are antibodies to infection.

• There are various glands (nodes) in the body that drain it of toxins and useless material. For instance, the cervical nodes drain the head, neck and chest.

• The pituitary gland in the brain directs all of the systems above, so if the brain goes wrong, so does the immune system. It sends electrical impulses to all areas of the body, stimulating cell re-generation and muscle growth. These electrical impulses also stimulate the thymus gland – the centre of immune function.



What effect does vaccination have on this immune function?



Vaccination – the act of artificially acquiring a disease so as to become immune to it – is flawed in a number of ways. Firstly, a vaccine contains many hazardous chemicals and not just the viruses to immunise against. These each have their own toxic affect on the body. Secondly, the route of entry is different to a naturally occurring disease. Most natural diseases would enter through the mouth or the nasal cavity, not the skin.

Vaccination breaks the skin with a needle and injects foreign matter into the blood supply.

This bypasses the skin’s role in immune function, as well as the tonsils, the mucous membranes, and so on.



Normally, the body produces extra antibodies after being primed by the tonsils that there is impending infection. Therefore, if the infection takes hold, there will be an army of white blood cells, ready to neutralise the infection.

In the case of vaccination, this infection goes straight to the blood, with no prior build up for the body, and there are no extra immune cells to deal with it.

Also, with vaccination there is more than one disease present (e.g. measles, mumps, rubella all in one), whereas naturally a child would never contract 3 diseases at the same time. This puts additional strain on the immune system.



What problems can this cause?



Injection of vaccine via this unnatural route can use up 70% of the immune system’s resources, instead of the usual 3 to 4% with a wild occurring disease (according to Cynthia Cournoyer, ‘What About Immunizations?’, Dennis Nelson Publishers, 1991).

Because the body has no extra antibodies waiting to counter the vaccine, it can go into overdrive in an attempt to deal with the situation, taking much needed vitamins away from bones and other organs, to use for the production of more antibodies. This means that the other vital systems go short on vitamins, in extreme cases leading to bone fractures caused by the immune response leaching vitamins to cope with the vaccine. This lack of vitamins can also cause bruising and retinal bleeding and haemorrhaging, which is why some vaccine damaged babies have been falsely labelled as ‘shaken baby syndrome’ cases. These type of vaccine injuries are similar to those caused by trauma.



The massive surge of antibodies created by the vaccine can also cause the body to become hypersensitive and this is responsible for the increase in allergies and auto-immune diseases. Allergies are an over-exposure to toxic elements which the body is unable to cleanse itself of.

If the adrenals, which include the pancreas, the pituitary gland and the spleen, become over-stimulated, for instance, by vaccination, this can cause the body to become toxic and unable to regulate itself. This has been linked to heart disease, diabetes, asthma and bronchitis, to name a few. Over-stimulating the adrenals also causes a decrease in circulation of blood round the body, and atrophying of vascular vessels.

It is in this state of dysfunction and chemical overload, from vaccines, pollution, junk food, pharmaceutical drugs and so on, that our bodies become less able to stay healthy.



‘When the body is in its ideal state of harmony, there is no need for "immunity." In such a state of harmony and balance, the thymus functions properly as the central regulator for the proper digestion of elements and all that is taken into the body is digested and excreted.’ – (Stonebridge Associated Colleges, 2005).



In the time immediately following vaccination, when extra vitamins are being used up to fight the vaccine, this may actually make the person more susceptible to the disease. For instance, in the Merck, Sharp and Dohme LTD product information for HIB vaccine, it states: ‘Cases of Haemophilus B disease may occur in the weeks after vaccination’, and in Lederle Hibtiter information sheet, ‘Cases of HIB disease, although rare, may occur after vaccination.’ This is known as ‘PROVOCATION disease’, i.e. disease caused by vaccine.

Live vaccines are more likely to pass on the disease to their recipient or his close contacts, as the viruses are excreted in urine, faeces and saliva for upto 3 weeks after each shot.

The polio vaccine was changed from the live oral vaccine to part of the injectable, killed 5 in 1, because the only cases of polio in western countries were caused by the vaccine.



Vaccine caused diseases are often more severe than the naturally occurring disease. For instance, ATYPICAL measles, only got by vaccinated children, is much more serious because the vaccine suppresses the child’s rash, which is his means of excreting the toxins, and this leads to the toxins being pushed deeper into the body and affecting the major organs and sometimes the brain, as atypical measles encephalitis.

Vaccine viruses can also attach themselves to cells, organs and brain tissue and cause cancers, disabilities and brain injury, as in the case of a boy who became autistic and had a seizure disorder after his MMR jab at 15 months. Great Ormand Street Children’s Hospital tested him at 13 years of age and found remains of vaccine viruses in the injured parts of his brain. (The Sunday Express, 6 October 2002).

Antibodies to brain tissue have also been found in blood tests of autistic children.



Disease Mutations



Even with inactivated vaccines, it is possible for the killed virus or bacteria to mutate into a different form of the disease. For instance, a 16 year old Canadian girl died of Meningitis B after her boyfriend had been given the Meningitis C vaccine. Lab tests confirmed that the vaccine can mutate into B form and infect both the recipient and his or her close contacts. (Pulse, doctor’s magazine, 20th November 1999).

Large numbers of chronic diseases have evolved in the place of infectious disease, since the introduction of mass vaccination, including ME, Lupus, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, Autism (previously known as Kanner Syndrome, discovered by Dr. Kanner in the 1940’s), MS, Ebola virus, AIDS, Lichen Planus, Vulvodynia and other hypersensitivity conditions, not to mention the rife and uncontrollable rates of cancer, heart disease, asthma, eczema and other allergies. Even meningitis was extremely rare before the 20th century.



We are killing ourselves in our quest to ‘prevent’ childhood illness, as mother nature is stronger than man, so tampering with immune function can have disastrous consequences for all.
Vaccines Cause Immune Suppression

Immunostimulation Versus Immunosuppression after Multiple Vaccinations: the Woes of Therapeutic Vaccine Development


Three articles in this issue of Clinical Cancer Research show how multiple vaccinations can lead to immunosuppression. Moreover, two studies in patients show that granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) as an adjuvant immunostimulant to different kind of vaccines can lead to adverse outcome in terms of relapse-free and overall survival. Modulation of regulatory T-cell activity may be required to overcome this outcome and may be crucial for the successful development of therapeutic vaccines.

Source: (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(22):6745–7) Cancer Patients Injected With Cancer Vaccine Caused 'Early Melanoma Deaths'


Ninety-seven patients with resected melanoma (stage II-IV) were enrolled, stratified by stage, and randomized to receive a cellular melanoma vaccine with or without GM-CSF. The primary endpoint was delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) response to melanoma cells. Antibody responses, peripheral leukocyte counts, and survival were also examined.

Results: The GM-CSF arm showed enhanced antibody responses with an increase in IgM titer against the TA90 antigen and increased TA90 immune complexes. This arm also had diminished antimelanoma cell delayed-type hypersensitivity response. Peripheral blood leukocyte profiles showed increases in eosinophils and basophils with decreased monocytes in the GM-CSF arm. These immune changes were accompanied by an increase in early melanoma deaths and a trend toward worse survival with GM-CSF.

Conclusion: These data suggest that GM-CSF is not helpful as an immune adjuvant in this dose and schedule and raise concern that it may be harmful. Based on the discordant findings of an immune endpoint and clinical outcome, the use of such surrogate endpoints in selecting treatments for further evaluation must be done with a great deal of caution.

Source: (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(22):7029–35) Partial CD4 Depletion Reduces Regulatory T Cells Induced by Multiple Vaccinations


Results: Multiple vaccinations, rather than boosting the immune response, significantly reduced therapeutic efficacy of adoptive immunotherapy and were associated with an increased frequency and absolute number of CD3+CD4+Foxp3+ T regulatory (Treg) cells. Anti-CD4 administration reduced the absolute number of Treg cells 9-fold. Effector T-cells generated from anti-CD4–treated mice were significantly (P < 0.0001) more therapeutic in adoptive transfer studies than T cells from multiply vaccinated animals with a full complement of CD4+ cells.

Conclusion: These results suggest that CD4+ Treg cells limit the efficacy of multiple vaccinations and that timed partial depletion of CD4+ T cells may reduce suppression and “tip-the-balance” in favor of therapeutic antitumor immunity. The recent failure of large phase III cancer vaccine clinical trials, wherein patients received multiple vaccines, underscores the potential clinical relevance of these findings.

Source: (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(22):6881–90) 1 in 5 Americans Suffer From Allergies


If springtime breezes bring you sniffles, you can take comfort in the knowledge that you are not alone.

For reasons that researchers do not fully understand, allergies to pollen, dust, pet dander and food have become more prevalent among Americans in recent decades. Today, one out of every five Americans suffers from allergies, according to the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America.

“We don't know why the incidence of allergies is on the rise,” said Maya Jerath, M.D., Ph.D., an assistant professor in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine and director of the UNC Allergy and Immunology Clinic.

Nor do researchers understand why an allergy develops in the first place. “That has baffled people and continues to baffle people in this field a lot,” she said.

An allergy is an immune reaction to a harmless substance, such as a pollen grain or peanut protein. Instead of ignoring the substance, the body produces antibodies to mount a fight against it. Allergy symptoms can range from itchy eyes and sneezing to life-threatening anaphylactic reactions.

The causes of allergies remain elusive in part because the immune system's role is complex, Jerath said. The system must defend the body from countless foreign invaders in food, water and the air around you.

Significantly for allergy sufferers, the immune system must also learn to distinguish particles that are dangerous from those that are not. For most people, this learning occurs during early childhood.

“If it doesn't get adequate exposure to certain things, those regulatory mechanisms don't get set up,” Jerath said.

For that reason, some researchers believe that a lack of exposure to microorganisms early in life may precondition a person to allergies. This explanation, called the “hygiene hypothesis,” suggests that growing up surrounded by many other children, dirt or livestock helps the immune system develop a tolerance to harmless irritants.

Source: Physorg.com, by Sara Peach, 24 February 2010. The spectrum of post-vaccination inflammatory CNS demyelinating syndromes

A wide variety of inflammatory diseases temporally associated with the administration of various vaccines, has been reported in the literature. A PubMed search from 1979 to 2013 revealed seventy one (71) documented cases. The most commonly reported vaccinations that were associated with CNS demyelinating diseases included influenza (21 cases), human papilloma virus (HPV) (9 cases), hepatitis A or B (8 cases), rabies (5 cases), measles (5 cases), rubella (5 cases), yellow fever (3 cases), anthrax (2 cases), meningococcus (2 cases) and tetanus (2 cases). The vast majority of post-vaccination CNS demyelinating syndromes, are related to influenza vaccination and this could be attributed to the high percentage of the population that received the vaccine during the HI1N1 epidemia from 2009 to 2012. Usually the symptoms of the CNS demyelinating syndrome appear few days following the immunization (mean: 14.2 days) but there are cases where the clinical presentation was delayed (more than 3 weeks or even up to 5 months post-vaccination) (approximately a third of all the reported cases).
In terms of the clinical presentation and the affected CNS areas, there is a great diversity among the reported cases of post-vaccination acute demyelinating syndromes. Optic neuritis was the prominent clinical presentation in 38 cases, multifocal disseminated demyelination in 30, myelitis in 24 and encephalitis in 17. Interestingly in a rather high proportion of the patients (and especially following influenza and human papiloma virus vaccination-HPV) the dominant localizations of demyelination were the optic nerves and the myelon, presenting as optic neuritis and myelitis (with or without additional manifestations of ADEM), reminiscent to neuromyelitic optica (or, more generally, the NMO-spectrum of diseases). Seven patients suffered an NMO-like disease following HPV and we had two similar cases in our Center. One patient with post-vaccination ADEM, subsequently developed NMO.
Overal, the risk of a demyelinating CNS disease following vaccination, although non-negligible, is relatively low. The risk of onset or relapse of CNS demyelination following infections against which the vaccines are aimed to protect, is substantially higher and the benefits of vaccinations surpass the potential risks of CNS inflammation. This does not in any way exempt us from “learning” the lessons taught by the reported cases and searching new and safer ways to improve vaccination techniques and increase their safety profile.

Source: Autoimmunity Reviews, Volume 13, issue 3, March 2014.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2013.10.003

(http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autrev.2013.10.003)




MODERN CHILDREN ARE SICKER THAN THEY WERE IN THE 1940's AND 50's


"In 1947 I was a nursery nurse student working in a nursery for little babies whose mothers needed to work as they were illegitimate and so no fathers were getting a wage.

The babies were very well and very sweet. There were colds and flu occasionally and scabies now and again.

There was NO asthma, eczema, epilepsy, hyperactivity, cardiac disease or cot death. Cot death started in 1957 after DPT was started.

You need to be in your 80's to remember what life was like. Babies died of pneumonia because the houses were so cold but NOT of the awful diseases they have now."

Mrs B - Retired Nursery Nurse.
Autoimmune Tissue Scurvy Misdiagnosed as Child Abuse


Abstract
Requests from distressed parents and relatives seeking help after having been falsely accused by doctors of injuring their children are not uncommon. Viraland parasitic infections and vaccines cause an autoimmune disorder, Tissue Scurvy, misdiagnosed as child abuse. This report presents the evidence. Method. Relevant hospital and laboratory reports of three children were examined for evidence of Tissue Scurvy as the cause of the neurological lesions, fractures, bruises and hemorrhages found on them. Results. In all the cases in which appropriate histories and tests were done there was evidence that the doctors either misinterpreted the laboratory evidence or they were unaware of the significance of abnormal tests suggesting Tissue Scurvy as the cause. Conclusion. Some doctors are unaware of the pathophysiological processes of autoimmunity, haemostasis and osteogenesis and are misdiagnosing vaccine induced Tissue Scurvy, absence of Vitamin C within the cell, as Non-accidental Injury.

Full paper here: http://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.cmr.20130206.17.pdf

Source: Michael D Innis, Autoimmune Tissue Scurvy Misdiagnosed as Child Abuse, Clinical Medicine Research. Vol. 2, No. 6, 2013, pp. 154-157. doi: 10.11648/j.cmr.20130206.17
Biology Video Explains Benefit of Fever and Childhood Diseases (it is pro-vaccine but interesting). Section starts at minute 33.43

Section on how fever kills viruses and how childhood diseases are 'vital'. Segment is only tiny but interesting, even if video is pro-vaccine. (VAN does not agree that vaccines are harmless or that antibodies always mean you are immune). http://www.vaccineriskawareness.com/Your-Immune-System-How-It-Works-And-How-Vaccines-Damage-It

[Horn]

Dont try to preach God's will to vampires, that part should remain in his hands.

Your only duty is to paint his targets. :)

[aeondaze]

Children are sicker? You're prepared to go along with this without taking into consideration that our ability to diagnose a vast range of illness is by far greater than fifty years ago?

Fine, its your call, but it does make you look more than just a little myopic.

And yet still despite this....

http://homework.uoregon.edu/pub/class/hc434/wme.gif

Care to explain?

[Cebu_4_2]

https://i.imgur.com/jvGAB6f.gif

I can guarantee that kid is now deaf in that ear. What was this gif from?

[singular_me]

hahahahahahahahhahahha... aeon is pro the medical cartel.... is like saying that antibiotics injected in meat is healthier. LOL

since the mid 1900s most diseases are manufactured.... and now mindless scientists work on finding vaccines to fight super bugs that they create and dont even exist in nature... why? because a pandemic is coming (and a vaccine must be available for the elites)... among many other awful things.

Dutch Researcher Created A Super-Influenza Virus With The Potential To Kill Millions
http://www.doctortipster.com/6952-dutch-researcher-created-a-super-influenza-virus-with-the-potential-to-kill-millions.html


and then he claims that the fear of autism is irrational.

I could post series of links to show that the big pharma's intentions are to keep us sick and/or kill us...

aeon is just a typical mind controlled scientist and has absolutely no clue about the agenda 21.

his chart about life expectancy is fooling many, today many people are on life support taking drugs for diseases caused by the cartel in the first place because big pharma is a wall street asset.

look for my thread: 50% of US adults will have cancer by 2016.... what life expectancy? this chart will be soon taking a huge dive... watch




The truth is that unvaccinated children are at much greater risk from infectious diseases than from the vaccines themselves. This is particularly true the larger the proportion of unvaccinated children in the population. One only needs to look at the alarming rise in infectious diseases in the northern NSW hippy populations top see that this is a real and concerning phenomena, just go look into TB deaths in children in this region.

The fear of autism is also irrational....

[aeondaze]

hahahahahahahahhahahha... aeon is pro the medical cartel.... is like saying that antibiotic injected in meat is healthier. LOL

since the mid 1900s most diseases are manufactured.... and now scientists works on finding vaccines to fight super bugs that they creae and dont even exist in nature... why? because a pandemic is coming... among many other awful things.

Couldn't help yourself could you?

Once again you bowl on up with your bombastic and pompous proclamations (none of which have come to fruition). You're the epitome of self righteousness wrapped up in unfounded claims and illogical conclusions.

Have you enlightened anyone here by spewing your special brand of vitriol cloaked in passive aggression? I didn't think so.

Maybe you'd like to make yourslef useful and explain why life expectancy has been steadily increasing for over 100 years?

http://homework.uoregon.edu/pub/class/hc434/wme.gif

[Serpo]

Although it is sad that my son who has not had any vaccine will only live to 45 yrs old ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,by this reckoning..........

[aeondaze]

this chart will be soon taking a huge dive... watch

Yep, sure thing. I'll keep a look out for that one. Though you've been saying that for years and so far I haven't seen one iota of a lowering, maybe a slight leveling off in positive rate of change but that in no way constitutes a DECREASE.

How about this for an idea, you don't have a single clue and are merely guessing and hoping Yes, that sounds about right!

:p

[Cebu_4_2]

When I was young I had frequent uncontrollable nose bleeds at about the age of 5 up. I did have many vaccines I can not document. My son had the same deal around 4-5 years and the docs said they need to remove his spleen as that was the problem. I tie these directly to vaccines as no other family members prior to vaccines had an issue. I finally had to deal with the issue first hand when they symptom suppression treatments stopped working. On that day I decided I had to take control of the situation because there was no other option.

I suppressed the symptoms with a couple herbs and also boosted the platelets with a couple others. This certainly bought time in which I found that this method cured the issues 100%. My son who thinks he is invincible would at times skip my recommendations and eventually bleed, which was devastatingly disturbing. Now he is pretty much good with no pre-bleed loss of platelet signs.

My daughter on the other hand has had no vaccines, I am not young anymore and the stress of that crap would take a further toll on my longevity. I hope my* orthodox Jewish religion will suspend any and all vaccinations required in the future.

* yes I will use this excuse if needed.

[aeondaze]

When I was young I had frequent uncontrollable nose bleeds at about the age of 5 up. I did have many vaccines I can not document. My son had the same deal around 4-5 years and the docs said they need to remove his spleen as that was the problem. I tie these directly to vaccines as no other family members prior to vaccines had an issue. I finally had to deal with the issue first hand when they symptom suppression treatments stopped working. On that day I decided I had to take control of the situation because there was no other option.

I suppressed the symptoms with a couple herbs and also boosted the platelets with a couple others. This certainly bought time in which I found that this method cured the issues 100%. My son who thinks he is invincible would at times skip my recommendations and eventually bleed, which was devastatingly disturbing. Now he is pretty much good with no pre-bleed loss of platelet signs.

My daughter on the other hand has had no vaccines, I am not young anymore and the stress of that crap would take a further toll on my longevity. I hope my* orthodox Jewish religion will suspend any and all vaccinations required in the future.

* yes I will use this excuse if needed.

To say this is due to vaccines is a pretty long bow to draw, sometimes its difficult to ascertain coincidence from causality but i do understand that you would have concerns, I'm just glad you found a treatment that appeared to work.

*are you really an orthodox jew?

[Horn]

http://images.medicaldaily.com/sites/medicaldaily.com/files/styles/embedded_full/public/2015/01/26/autism-rates.JPG?itok=1G4uNXn2

[monty]

Children are sicker? You're prepared to go along with this without taking into consideration that our ability to diagnose a vast range of illness is by far greater than fifty years ago?

Fine, its your call, but it does make you look more than just a little myopic.

And yet still despite this....

http://homework.uoregon.edu/pub/class/hc434/wme.gif

Care to explain?


The increase in life expectancy is more likely due to medical advances in the treatment of degenerative diseases than the use of childhood vaccines.

I also am 73 years old, had measles, mumps, chicken pox as did nearly every one I grew up with. I was vaccinated for small pox, polio, scarlet fever and.

[Cebu_4_2]

To say this is due to vaccines is a pretty long bow to draw, sometimes its difficult to ascertain coincidence from causality but i do understand that you would have concerns, I'm just glad you found a treatment that appeared to work.

*are you really an orthodox jew?


******* this formatting, fuck this I will put a 2 sentence together if able.

Both me and my son had the same reaction at appx the same age after vaccines.
I was never diagnosed, son was. Removal of spleen was the cure. 30% chance it would work, 100% chance he will need to be hospitalized with any infection... for LIFE Having to be monitored for life was kinda a let down since they couldn't do fuck in the first place.

I saved his life man, you want to say he needs MORE vaccines meets a blind billboard to me. You can believe what you want but putting a gun to my head to pump this death into my child will be met with force.

Anyone touches the little one will have a similar consequence. A little unadulterated non poisoned little human, such a rare thing to witness these days if you go to where little kids play.

[Cebu_4_2]

The increase in life expectancy is more likely due to medical advances in the treatment of degenerative diseases than the use of childhood vaccines.

I also am 73 years old, had measles, mumps, chicken pox as did nearly every one I grew up with. I was vaccinated for small pox, polio, scarlet fever and.

Haha that is funny in a way, so was I vaccinated yet still got measles, mumps, chicken pox
scarlet feaver and many other things I was vaccinated from. LOL

[Horn]

Post modernization is cause for longevity.

From what I remember growing up the vaccines were spread over a long period of years, not sure they were ever useful to me personally. Excepting the tetanus they give you for puncture wounds anytime you get a puncture would.

Nowadays from what I saw and that they attempted to do on many children including mine is to give them a veritable multi-cocktail of vaccinations all while very young and within the first couple years after birth.

[Serpo]

Post modernization is cause for longevity.

From what I remember growing up the vaccines were spread over a long period of years, not sure they were ever useful to me personally. Excepting the tetanus they give you for puncture wounds anytime you get a puncture would.

Nowadays from what I saw and that they attempted to do on many children including mine is to give them a veritable multi-cocktail of vaccinations all while very young and within the first couple years after birth.

No blood brain barrier in very young children and nothing like a triple mmr vac injected directly into the blood stream .........................three diseases to cope with in one instant .....WTF

[Jerrylynnb]

Yes, aeondaze, I jumped to a conclusion about your attitude concerning forced vaccinations, and I stand corrected. Surely you know, there is a push by powerful entities to do just that - force vaccinations on the public, and, the arguments they use are what you are laying out here. So, when you put out those charts and suppose that the data is genuine and the science involved is truly non-biased, it puts you in the camp of the tyrants, unless, as you did in your reply, you specifically negate that. What I wonder is, if they were to get away with forcing vaccinations on the public, would you join in with any group attempting to overturn such a ruling? Since you don't see any harm in widespread vaccinations, you might be willing to stand aside and let others fight for freedom - like you say, I don't know that much about you, but, this acceptance of others scientific papers and published results as genuine, is not warranted in today's world. Sure, there is such a thing as good science, but, there is also such a thing a greed and deception, and selective gathering of data, carefully concealing non-supportive data, to publish a paper that the scientific world can cite as "proof".

Embracing vaccinations, in theory, and in practice, is your prerogative, and I harbor no ill intentions about that. But I am absolutely horrified, and mightily resentful, when others who believe in vaccinations suggest it ought to be forced on the public. I hope you, and others of a freedom mindset, will be as helpful in combating forced vaccines as those of us who reject the "science" that supports a pro-vaccination viewpoint.

A more fundamental question, that you didn't address, is how informed are you as to the totality of the contents of the serums they use in the vaccinations? Is there at least a sort of blind faith there (since I doubt you are actually in a position to test these serums, qualitatively AND quantitatively, for a multitude of potentially harmful ingredients that may not be reported on. How did you form your conclusion that the serums are free of any substances that would be harmful to some substantial number of recipients?

Peace - I aspire to be on good terms with all the posters here on GSUS - we are a different breed and I'm proud to be associated with this group.

About 30 years ago, there was a big push to put flouride in the public water system - I objected out of common sense, but, I had a manager that was adamant about the benefits of fluoridation and I actually got a lesser evaluation from him after having a heated argument about it - sometimes when intelligent men form an opinion it can be like prying nails out to get them to go back and retrace what it was that led them to whatever conclusions they are comfortable with.

Of course I cannot prove anything about vaccinations (or fluoridation, for that matter), but I can stick to common sense and proceed with a skeptical attitude about "science" (so-called) when something that seems whacky is suggested.
Violating your body with contaminates when you are healthy and not ill, and are only being violated due to some "scientific" results that suggest you are better off with the violation (to guard against some perceived jeopardy due to this or that "scientific" study), then I say, get lost! I'll take my chances with mother nature and accept the consequences with a good spirit.

Another example from the past that might be useful to you - thalidomide. We had some very intelligent germans come over to our installation back in the 80's, and one of them had a hand attached directly to his shoulder. He was super intelligent and was expert with our big mainframes, but, I could only imagine what emotional suffering he would have to endure FOR HIS WHOLE LIFE, due to somebody's scientific study somewhere that said thalidomide was safe to use. Examples like this are solid meat for we skeptics, and, I am not willing to accept these anti-natural schemes and potents that today's "science" comes up with (for a huge profit, of course).

[Serpo]

Keep posting Jerry we need some common sense around here.........

[aeondaze]

I will address a lot of these issues separately, but firstly in the interests of brevity there are two BIG mistakes being made here.

Most of the arguments you are making dear GSUS members fit into one of two categories.

1. They are based on emotional responses, which in and of themselves are perfectly fine however they don't contain any established facts or basis in provable repeatable results.

AND

2. You either unwittingly or deliberately conflate the argument with issues and topics which have no bearing on the issue issues at hand, or the one the person you are replying to has specifically addressed, which in this case is VACCINATION.

Point in question. Why would someone who has genuine concerns have to wade through a morass of opinions about fluoride or thalidomide? These things have absolutely NOTHING to do with VACCINATION. They are a conflation of the main issue.

The second mistake you make here Jerry again, is assuming that because someone can see the validity in vaccination that they somehow wholly support the medical establishment and big pharma. Why does that have to be so, seriously?

It doesn't, right? I still would like to you to address that because it is perplexing and irritating and whatever causes this pure speculative assumption more than likely infects the whole illogical argument the anti vaccine crowd follow because its whats is known as misrepresentation. Its the same mistake the anti vaccine crowd make time and time again when dealing with the issues at hand. They are so completely blinded by their staunch vehemence against vaccination they're utterly incapable of actually addressing the issue practically and as a sub sequence ALL of their decisions are tainted by this approach as are the vast majority of their arguments.

Montys come out and said that in all likliehood (sorry Monty I'd have liked to put you in there with your own definitive quote heading, but I was in a slight hurry)


The increase in life expectancy is more likely due to medical advances in the treatment of degenerative diseases than the use of childhood vaccines.

Bravo, excellent.

But again this was not posted by me specifically in response to vaccinations,which your response would lead one to believe, this was posted in response to Serpos conflation of the issue with a link to a story that supports a correlation between an increase in childhood sickness and time. However for all that supposed sickness we still see an increase in life expectancy! So what do we see here, Serpo is the one deliberately conflating the argument and yet my response to that is somehow proof that my argument for vaccinations is not solid. This is extremely poor, sorry Monty, I love your stuff, but you need to go back and see what was posted, I NEVER said the this graph had ANY bearing on the issue of vaccinations. Serpo was the one who deliberately conflated the argument, and yet somehow responding to that makes my argument weak?

Again I never claimed that vaccination would completely prevent a child catching any of those infectious diseases, if you can find me saying that I;d like to know...what I thought was implied or understood was that vaccination significantly reduces ones chance of catching an infectious disease. Just because two people on here have caught something they were vaccinated against doesn't prove vaccinations are inherently evil and doesn't work. Infact a good case can be made through your example of the EXACT OPPOSITE.

Lastly and this one is specifically for Jerry again, I think its wholly unhelpful that the medical community doesn't explicitly reveal what is contained within their vaccines. I too wanted to know this information myself. Realistically though, who really thinks they're going to divulge specifically what is in their proprietary formulas? Nobody else does.

To finish off here, there are a whole raft of things you would consume that you have no idea about whats inside and no idea about what that animal may have consumed before you ate it. You might be lucky to be one of the VERY few people that grow absolutely EVERYTHING the you eat yourself, probabilistically though the chances are minimal thats the case, I'm making an assumption here, but its a fairly reasonable one to make, unlike a lot of the speculating that the anti vaccine crowd do and at least I do it knowingly.

:rolleyes:

[Serpo]

I will address a lot of these issues separately, but firstly in the interests of brevity there are two BIG mistakes being made here.

Most of the arguments you are making dear GSUS members fit into one of two categories.

1. They are based on emotional responses, which in and of themselves are perfectly fine however they don't contain any established facts or basis in provable repeatable results.

AND

2. You either unwittingly or deliberately conflate the argument with issues and topics which have no bearing on the issue issues at hand, or the one the person you are replying to has specifically addressed, which in this case is VACCINATION.

Point in question. Why would someone who has genuine concerns have to wade through a morass of opinions about fluoride or thalidomide? These things have absolutely NOTHING to do with VACCINATION. They are a conflation of the main issue.

The second mistake you make here Jerry again, is assuming that because someone can see the validity in vaccination that they somehow wholly support the medical establishment and big pharma. Why does that have to be so, seriously?

It doesn't, right? I still would like to you to address that because it is perplexing and irritating and whatever causes this pure speculative assumption more than likely infects the whole illogical argument the anti vaccine crowd follow because its whats is known as misrepresentation. Its the same mistake the anti vaccine crowd make time and time again when dealing with the issues at hand. They are so completely blinded by their staunch vehemence against vaccination they're utterly incapable of actually addressing the issue practically and as a sub sequence ALL of their decisions are tainted by this approach as are the vast majority of their arguments.

Montys come out and said that in all likliehood (sorry Monty I'd have liked to put you in there with your own definitive quote heading, but I was in a slight hurry)



Bravo, excellent.

But again this was not posted by me specifically in response to vaccinations,which your response would lead one to believe, this was posted in response to Serpos conflation of the issue with a link to a story that supports a correlation between an increase in childhood sickness and time. However for all that supposed sickness we still see an increase in life expectancy! So what do we see here, Serpo is the one deliberately conflating the argument and yet my response to that is somehow proof that my argument for vaccinations is not solid. This is extremely poor, sorry Monty, I love your stuff, but you need to go back and see what was posted, I NEVER said the this graph had ANY bearing on the issue of vaccinations. Serpo was the one who deliberately conflated the argument, and yet somehow responding to that makes my argument weak?

Again I never claimed that vaccination would completely prevent a child catching any of those infectious diseases, if you can find me saying that I;d like to know...what I thought was implied or understood was that vaccination significantly reduces ones chance of catching an infectious disease. Just because two people on here have caught something they were vaccinated against doesn't prove vaccinations are inherently evil and doesn't work. Infact a good case can be made through your example of the EXACT OPPOSITE.

Lastly and this one is specifically for Jerry again, I think its wholly unhelpful that the medical community doesn't explicitly reveal what is contained within their vaccines. I too wanted to know this information myself. Realistically though, who really thinks they're going to divulge specifically what is in their proprietary formulas? Nobody else does.

To finish off here, there are a whole raft of things you would consume that you have no idea about whats inside and no idea about what that animal may have consumed before you ate it. You might be lucky to be one of the VERY few people that grow absolutely EVERYTHING the you eat yourself, probabilistically though the chances are minimal thats the case, I'm making an assumption here, but its a fairly reasonable one to make, unlike a lot of the speculating that the anti vaccine crowd do and at least I do it knowingly.

:rolleyes:


What............?

[Jerrylynnb]

Aeondaze, since you "see the validity in vaccinations", I assume your thinking about it was logical and based on what you deemed to be good science. Accepting something unnatural due to good science is not limited to just vaccinations, and my mention of fluoridation and thalidomide was merely citing other instances. I assume you to be consistent in your method of analysis, and, if you let good science convince you to accept something unnatural (poking a needle underneath your skin) in the case of vaccinations, then, you might also consider other instances where good science suggests something unnatural, such as flouridation and thalidomide. My mention was mere citation of other instances of the same class.

I have to eat and drink, so I am at the mercy of labeling. I do NOT have to have my skin penetrated, so, I am not at the mercy of serum labeling, nor any pronouncements by any authority.

Just seeing the validity in vaccinations doesn't mean you necessarily have faith in the business as it is practiced in today's world, but, I assume you do, since you are willing to take a vaccination when you are not sick nor injured. That suggests you do have faith (blind or otherwise) that the practitioners in the vaccination business are trustworthy - I don't believe that for one minute.

It is an interesting subject, but, we can disagree without any need to demean or denigrate those who hold opposing opinions, because, in the end, we each have our own reasons for what we believe. The science you cite is what you deem to be good science - I assume it was paid for by some greedy so-and-so and the researchers knew where their bread was buttered. I got my reasons but that is a very long story - I've seen this kind of shit first hand and even been drawn into it myself kicking and screaming, but, with mouths to feed, what's a fellow to do?

[Serpo]

The craziest part about this whole thing is that medical science is admitting by vaccines that they are unable to treat this great list of diseases that we are meant to be vaccinated against.........how can we trust people that dont know shite.

They want everyone vaccinated because the medical system is hopeless and basically a lost cause.....IMO

Why not just get sick instead of being vac against about 20 or 30 different things that no body is going to get them all anyway.

Its so obvious its just another big pharm scam........

Remember they have repressed lots of treatments for various things ie the big C.....why ...to make cash....... same with vac

[aeondaze]

The craziest part about this whole thing is that medical science is admitting by vaccines that they are unable to treat this great list of diseases that we are meant to be vaccinated against.........how can we trust people that dont know shite.

I really don't what to say to this, its rather incredible that you would justify your opinion based on the fact that the medical establishment isn't perfect.

Well duh! Of course it isn't, NOTHING IN THIS WORLD IS, except maybe your impression of yourself it would seem.

That has to be one of the most impossibly unrealistic opinions I think I've ever heard from anyone

I would quote the rest of what you said but clearly its another case of conflating the issue to try and justify the impossibly high standard that you hold the medical establishment to. They aren't perfect, they get things wrong just like engineers, scientists, naturopaths, mothers, fathers, priests, Prime Ministers, janitors, electricians, plumbers, gamblers, pilots, taxi drivers...do i really need to go on? What makes you think the medical community would be any different, regardless of what they say about themselves?

Can you hear how ridiculous you sound?

[Serpo]

I really don't what to say to this, its rather incredible that you would justify your opinion based on the fact that the medical establishment isn't perfect.

Well duh! Of course it isn't, NOTHING IN THIS WORLD IS, except maybe your impression of yourself it would seem.

That has to be one of the most impossibly unrealistic opinions I think I've ever heard from anyone

I would quote the rest of what you said but clearly its another case of conflating the issue to try and justify the impossibly high standard that you hold the medical establishment to. They aren't perfect, they get things wrong just like engineers, scientists, naturopaths, mothers, fathers, priests, Prime Ministers, janitors, electricians, plumbers, gamblers, pilots, taxi drivers...do i really need to go on? What makes you think the medical community would be any different, regardless of what they say about themselves?

Can you hear ridiculous you sound?


what?


have you heard about the new word............its called ................................cuckwit

[aeondaze]

what? have you heard about the new word............its called ................................cuckwit

Its nice to see you expanding your horizons and finding new terms with which to define yourself :)

[aeondaze]

The science you cite is what you deem to be good science - I assume it was paid for by some greedy so-and-so and the researchers knew where their bread was buttered. I got my reasons but that is a very long story - I've seen this kind of shit first hand and even been drawn into it myself kicking and screaming, but, with mouths to feed, what's a fellow to do?

That may be the case, I haven't really looked into that side of things. What matters though is whether the science is valid or not, as you yourself have said, and in this case regardless of who paid for it, the science that has established no link between autism and vaccinations is good. What is not good, and not by a long shot, is the scientific practices of Dr Andrew Wakefield, who single handedly conned many people into believing there was a link.

Ironically this is a classic example for Serpo because we can see here where the medical fraternity, and in particular one individual, got it drastically wrong.

There have been many claims that this guy was marginalised because of his conclusions but the truth is that his study was fraudulent and this is what got him struck off the register. So what did the good doctor do that was so wrong? Well he misrepresented or altered the medical histories of all 12 of the patients whose cases formed the basis of the 1998 study, which on its own is incredible but theres more...

Since then Wakefield has been unable to reproduce his results in the face of criticism, and other researchers have been unable to match them. Most of his co-authors withdrew their names from the study in 2004 after learning he had had been paid by a law firm that intended to sue vaccine manufacturers

Isn't that incredible! The very guy that wrote the paper that defined the supposed 'good' science behind the link between autism and vaccination was himself PAID by a law firm that intended to use that bogus data to sue vaccination manufactures for what one can only imagine was VAST sums of money!

And to this day anti vaccine supporters site this article as "good science" and accuse the vaccine manufactures of the very thing that the champion of their cause has done.

Remarkable. Just. Remarkable.

The truth is that you can accuse anyone of having ulterior motives but the science stands beyond the hearsay and conjecture and will in and of itself provide the proof. In this case, vaccinations haven't been shown to cause autism and the anti vaccinations crowd do not have any credible data that supports such a hypothesis.

I actually find the whole topic amazing. Its just astounding that some people accuse the vaccine manufacturers of fraudulent practices when the reality is the the very data they have used to justify their position is fraudulent and was sponsored by people who's sole intention was to profit!

The hardcore anti vaccine crowd has a lot to answer for in this regard from their irrational opinions and belligerent attitude, but it wouldn't be so bad if there wasn't the health of a lot of people at stake.

[Jerrylynnb]

Aeondaze, I am surprised that you would accept a vaccination since you responded with "That may be the case, I haven't really looked into that side of things...", concerning the preparation of the witch's brew they concoct and inject into your blood. Wow! I would have suspected that you would subject that side of it to the same probing analysis to which you seem to have subjected this Wakefield person (I don't know who that is).

In the end, it sure seems to me that you are proceeding with some kind of *FAITH* (blind, well-earned, or otherwise) that the folks who propose, design, concoct, brew, ship, store, prepare, and then INJECT, vaccinations are all trustworthy and are taking care not to allow any contents that might be harmful, since it will be bypassing your stomach and going directly into your blood. Somehow, that just doesn't seem very scientific to me, but is what I would expect from a true believer. ("I trust you, Doc, here's my arm, stick that needle in me")

By the way, I am not basing my objection to vaccinations on any "data", but on COMMON SENSE. Is that something you reject out-of-hand?

We can finish this off if you are amenable to tracing your steps (however long ago it was) that led you to believe vaccinations are good for you and aren't likely to cause any harm. I'd be interested in whether or not you were as skeptical, and with the same scrutiny (as in this Wakefield claim), when you were first introduced to the idea of vaccinations.

For me, I objected immediately and violently and had to be held down by two fat nurses whilst a third one poked me good (before my tetanus episode). I didn't need no stinkin' research to tell me that poking a needle in my arm was bullshit. and that I had been ASSAULTED by these fat nurses. So there.

[Serpo]

That may be the case, I haven't really looked into that side of things. What matters though is whether the science is valid or not, as you yourself have said, and in this case regardless of who paid for it, the science that has established no link between autism and vaccinations is good. What is not good, and not by a long shot, is the scientific practices of Dr Andrew Wakefield, who single handedly conned many people into believing there was a link.

Ironically this is a classic example for Serpo because we can see here where the medical fraternity, and in particular one individual, got it drastically wrong.

There have been many claims that this guy was marginalised because of his conclusions but the truth is that his study was fraudulent and this is what got him struck off the register. So what did the good doctor do that was so wrong? Well he misrepresented or altered the medical histories of all 12 of the patients whose cases formed the basis of the 1998 study, which on its own is incredible but theres more...

Since then Wakefield has been unable to reproduce his results in the face of criticism, and other researchers have been unable to match them. Most of his co-authors withdrew their names from the study in 2004 after learning he had had been paid by a law firm that intended to sue vaccine manufacturers

Isn't that incredible! The very guy that wrote the paper that defined the supposed 'good' science behind the link between autism and vaccination was himself PAID by a law firm that intended to use that bogus data to sue vaccination manufactures for what one can only imagine was VAST sums of money!

And to this day anti vaccine supporters site this article as "good science" and accuse the vaccine manufactures of the very thing that the champion of their cause has done.

Remarkable. Just. Remarkable.

The truth is that you can accuse anyone of having ulterior motives but the science stands beyond the hearsay and conjecture and will in and of itself provide the proof. In this case, vaccinations haven't been shown to cause autism and the anti vaccinations crowd do not have any credible data that supports such a hypothesis.

I actually find the whole topic amazing. Its just astounding that some people accuse the vaccine manufacturers of fraudulent practices when the reality is the the very data they have used to justify their position is fraudulent and was sponsored by people who's sole intention was to profit!

The hardcore anti vaccine crowd has a lot to answer for in this regard, but and it wouldn't be so bad if there wasn't the health of a lot of people at stake from their irrational opinions and belligerent attitude.


Except Jerrys grandchild of course............




http://www.drjeffhealthcenter.com/ihpages/ihimages/mmr.jpg



http://www.drjeffhealthcenter.com/ihpages/pages/autism.html

[Serpo]

First They Came for the Anti-Vaxxers

http://www.ezekieldiet.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/vaccine-810x402.jpg
http://www.ezekieldiet.com/wp-content/themes/EZ-diet/images/article-btn.jpg (http://www.ezekieldiet.com/first-they-came-for-the-anti-vaxxers/#) by EzekielDiet.com (http://www.ezekieldiet.com/author/admin/)
Posted on Apr 26, 2015 (http://www.ezekieldiet.com/2015/04) Photo Credit: StopTheCrime.net http://www.stopthecrime.net/ (http://www.stopthecrime.net/)
As seen at GreenMedInfo (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/first-they-came-anti-vaxxers) originally published at LewRockwell.com (https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/04/bretigne-shaffer/first-they-came-for-the-anti-vaxxers/)

Written By: Bretigne Shaffer (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/gmi-blogs/bretigne)
10 ways the pro-vaxxers shut down reasonable debate on vaccines.

Earlier this year I spent a few days at the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center with my daughter who was having an EEG done. On our way home, I learned that there had been an outbreak of an antibiotic-resistant bacteria (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/roundup-weedkiller-feeds-antibiotic-resistant-bacteria-study-finds) while we were there, that it had infected seven people and killed two of them. My daughter and I were fine – the infection having been limited to people using a particular kind of duodenoscope.
When the story hit the news, I fully expected nationwide outcry similar to that inspired by the recent measles “epidemic” that began at Disneyland (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/disney-measles-outbreak-mousetrap-ignorance). That outbreak killed no-one, yet set the country on fire with calls for mandatory vaccination and even prison sentences for parents who choose not to vaccinate their children. Drug-resistant “superbugs” kill nearly 15,000 people a year in the US and a recent report predicts that they could kill as many as 300 million people by 2050. Surely this far more deadly health threat would lead to similar widespread outrage and calls for those even remotely responsible to be held accountable.
I expected to see editorials calling for anyone who engaged in the overuse of antibiotics (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/reflection-antibiotics) to be shunned by society; doctors who prescribed them unnecessarily (around 50% of all prescriptions by some estimates) to be censured and perhaps lose their licenses; parents who asked for antibiotics every time their child had an ear infection – despite the fact that the vast majority are not bacterial and are unaffected by antibiotics – to be thrown in jail for endangering the rest of us. But I saw nothing along these lines. Why not?
The manipulation of the conversation around vaccines (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/page/vaccine-research) in the mainstream media has been nothing short of a tour de force. If you read only mainstream publications, you might come away with the impression that outbreaks of measles are the most serious public health crisis since the Black Death. You might think that those who do not vaccinate are uneducated, superstitious, “anti-science” zealots who get their information from daytime talk shows. You might even start to feel outrage at these people who – for no good reason at all – have decided to endanger everyone else by refusing to do what every doctor knows is perfectly safe, effective and the socially responsible thing to do.
The presentation of this issue has been a study in just how easy it can be to generate mass hysteria around a particular threat – even while much more serious threats inspire no such response. It’s as if every mainstream reporter has been given the same playbook to use in putting together their articles about vaccines – a playbook designed to elicit the above response from the public. I’ve tried to imagine what this playbook must look like and I think I’ve come up with a pretty decent facsimile. Here it is, along with my own annotations:
1. Make it clear that parents who choose not to vaccinate their children are only getting their information from Jenny McCarthy, Jim Carey and other celebrities with absolutely no scientific credentials.
Pretend that doctors and scientists who are critical of vaccines – doctors like Dr. Suzanne Humphries, Dr. Robert Sears, Dr. Kenneth Stoller, Dr. Robert Rowen, Dr. Janet Levatin, Dr. Stephanie Cave, Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, Dr. Meryl Nass, Dr. Jay Gordon, Dr. Jane Orient, and many of the members of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, CDC researcher Dr. William Thompson (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/cdc-autismvaccine-coverup-extends-media-and-journals), and all of the doctors and scientists listed here and here – don’t exist. Because really, if you don’t write about them, they don’t.
2. Always equate the views of the CDC, medical journals and pharmaceutical company spokespeople with “science.” Some people will try to tell you that science is a method, not a conclusion, that scientific truths cannot be determined by consensus or by appeal to authority, but you can just ignore them.
As one (self-proclaimed) scientist put it:
“In my personal and scientifically backed opinion, the war against disease is a hundred fold more important than the mum-led war against vaccines. Do you want your child to die a slow, painful, agonizing death? If not, then shut the f*** up with your so called ‘facts’ you got from Yahoo Answers and get your kid vaccinated.


“I am going to sound derogatory, but if you don’t have formal education in at least biology, you have no role to talk about the way vaccines should be done.” (Sic.)

In other words, if you don’t have the same training we do, you don’t get to be part of the discussion. Even when the topic of that discussion is whether or not we get to forcibly inject things into your bodies and the bodies of your children. Just shut up and trust the scientists. But not these scientists – they are all anti-science scientists. Only trust these ones.
3. Remind your readers that, however heart wrenching or tragic, anecdotal accounts are just that. They are not scientific, they don‘t say anything about relative risk, and should play no role in influencing your opinion about vaccines.
Until you want to tell them the heart wrenching story of how author Roald Dahl lost his daughter to measles (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/2013-measles-outbreak-failing-vaccine-not-failure-vaccinate1), or about the death of a young girl from rotavirus that inspired Dr. Paul Offit to develop a vaccine for that disease.
Anecdotal accounts of people suffering from vaccine-preventable illnesses are fine. Anything else though is just irrational. Take for example the thousands of stories from parents whose children were perfectly healthy until they received one or more vaccines and then suddenly lost the ability to speak, to walk, to feed themselves, or who started having seizures, stopped breathing or died (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/vaccine-injury-first-gut-then-brain). Many of the parents in these cases report that their doctors insist the vaccines had nothing to do with their child’s injury, even when no other explanation is apparent. Indeed, the vaccine manufacturers and the CDC insist that most such cases are simply coincidences and have nothing to do with the vaccines. But given the well-documented degree of conflict of interest and fraudulent practices within the CDC and the medical research community as a whole, many parents are understandably skeptical of such claims.
4. Remind your readers that “correlation is not causation.“
Unless you want to show them this graph and tell them it proves that vaccines save lives:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/assets/2015/04/1.jpg (https://www.lewrockwell.com/assets/2015/04/1.jpg)
Source. (https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/measles-gets-a-helping-hand/)
Whatever you do though, make sure you don’t accidentally show them this graph instead:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/assets/2015/04/2.jpg (https://www.lewrockwell.com/assets/2015/04/2.jpg)
Source. (http://business.financialpost.com/2014/04/16/lawrence-solomon-the-untold-story-of-measles/)
To listen to the mainstream media, one would think that measles was a deadly affliction on a par with Ebola or the plague. Vaccine advocates distort the dangers of measles by pointing to adverse effects experienced by populations in underdeveloped countries, where even the mildest of diseases can be deadly due to things like poor nutrition and sanitation.
By the 1950s in the United States though, measles was considered a mild childhood disease that nearly everyone caught before adulthood and lived through with no serious consequences. Says Dr. Donald Miller (https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/02/donald-w-miller-jr-md/more-dangerous-than-measles/):
“With good sanitation and nutrition, the pre-vaccine mortality rate of measles in the U.S. was less than 1 in a million (compared with 14 deaths per 100,000 in 1900); seizures occurred in 1 in 3,000 people; and encephalitis, 1 in 100,000, with full recovery in 75 percent of those cases.”

It is also worth noting that the CDC’s statement that “(f)or every 1,000 children who get measles, one or two will die from it” relies on reported cases of measles. A more accurate estimate puts the death rate at closer to 1 out of 10,000 cases.
Meanwhile, in the past ten years there have been only a handful of measles deaths in the US, but VAERS data report 109 deaths associated with the measles vaccine since January of 2004, and the US Court of Federal Claims has settled 111 claims related to harm from the MMR vaccine (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/vaccinated-spreading-measles-who-merck-cdc-documents-confirms) in that same time.
Not only is measles a relatively benign illness for healthy people living in developed countries, contracting and surviving the disease confers benefits to the immune system – as well as strengthening herd immunity – in ways that vaccines cannot.
Far from protecting the most vulnerable demographic groups, widespread vaccination has increased the risk of serious harm from measles in some of these populations: Infants and very young children, as well as adults. Normally, measles wouldn’t appear in these age groups – but now it does, thanks to the vaccine. As Lawrence Solomon reported in the Financial Post last year:
“In the pre-vaccine era, when the natural measles virus infected the entire population, measles — ‘typically a benign childhood illness,’ as Clinical Pediatrics described it — was welcomed for providing lifetime immunity, thus avoiding dangerous adult infections. In today’s vaccine era, adults have accounted for one quarter to one half of measles cases; most of them involve pneumonia, one-quarter of them hospitalization.
“Also importantly, measles during pregnancies have risen dangerously because expectant mothers no longer have lifetime immunity. Today’s vaccinated expectant mothers are at risk because the measles vaccine wanes with time and because it often fails to protect against measles.
“…The danger extends to babies, whose bodies are too immature to receive measles vaccination before age one, making them entirely dependent on antibodies inherited from their mothers. In their first year out of the womb, infants suffer the highest rate of measles infections and the most lasting harm. Yet vaccinated mothers have little antibody to pass on — only about one-quarter as much as mothers protected by natural measles — leaving infants vulnerable three months after birth, according to a study last year in the Journal of Infectious Diseases. [Emphasis mine.]
“Factors such as these increased the death rate for adults and the very young, helping to reverse the decline in deaths seen in previous decades, according to a 2004 study in the Journal of Infectious Disease, authored by researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.”

As discussed below, childhood illnesses like measles and mumps can help to develop the immune system in ways that help to protect against things like asthma, autoimmune disease (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/new-autoimmunity-syndrome-linked-aluminum-vaccines) and even cancer. So the proposition that eliminating measles – rather than simply reducing its deadliness – is a worthy public health goal is a questionable one.
5. Whenever possible, present the debate as if there are no legitimate reasons to choose not to vaccinate – only “personal beliefs” and “irrational fears.“
The reality is that there are legitimate and documented concerns about vaccine safety (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/vaccine-safety-myth). Nobody denies this – all that is in dispute is the magnitude of the harm caused by vaccines. Vaccine manufacturers and their institutional supporters of course insist that any harm from vaccines is minuscule and easily outweighed by the benefits. However this claim is suspect for a number of reasons, not least of which is the stunning degree of conflict of interest and outright fraud within the world of medical research. Leaving aside these issues though, there remain good reasons to distrust the manufacturers’ claims.
Numerous studies fly in the face of the manufacturers’ claims, showing connections between vaccines and autoimmune disease, asthma, allergies, cancer, encephalopathy, and yes, autism (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/do-vaccinations-cause-autism). And even assuming integrity in the clinical trial process, these are not sufficient to demonstrate vaccine safety, as they typically only look at reactions that occur within a few weeks of vaccination, and only compare the adverse events experienced with one vaccine against those experienced with another vaccine – not against an unvaccinated sample. Even the Cochrane Review of the literature on the MMR vaccine, for example, came to the conclusion in 2012 that “(t)he design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both pre- and post-marketing, are largely inadequate.”
Studies that purport to demonstrate the safety of vaccines are similarly flawed and limited in their scope. Indeed, of the list of 42 studies put forward by the American Academy of Pediatrics, with an invitation to parents to “examine the evidence”, none compare vaccinated against unvaccinated populations, and most look only at either the MMR vaccine or at Thimerosal (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/study-finds-evidence-cdc-cover-link-between-autism-and-mercury-vaccines).
Meanwhile, because of a law that removes any liability from the makers of vaccines for any harm caused by their products, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has paid out nearly $3 billion in damages to the families of those who claim they have been injured by vaccines since its inception in 1988. This is despite the elimination by the DHHS of most of the original adverse events from the “Table of Compensable Events”, and what NVIC President Barbara Loe Fisher calls “…a highly adversarial, lengthy, expensive, traumatic and unfair imitation of a court trial for vaccine victims and their attorneys.”
And every year, around 30,000 reports are made to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) which records adverse reactions immediately following vaccination (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/how-vaccinated-kids-infect-non-vaccinated), as reported by doctors, other medical professionals, pharmaceutical companies, patients and parents. Thirteen percent of these are classified as “serious” (including death).
Of course these numbers don’t mean very much without a comparison to the background rate of such adverse events in the general population, not immediately following vaccination. Some studies have shown no increased adverse events after vaccination as compared to the general population. Other studies (including some that use post-vaccination data for other vaccines for comparison, rather than population-wide background rates) show higher rates of adverse events immediately post-vaccine.
Vaccine proponents argue that the VAERS numbers are not an accurate reflection of vaccine damage, because each case reported has not been conclusively proven to be caused by a vaccine. It is a legitimate point – and is largely due to the fact that in most cases there is no way to confirm vaccination as the cause of the event.
The much bigger problem though is the degree to which the VAERS numbers suffer from significant underreporting. Says president of the National Vaccine Information Center and advocate for parental choice regarding vaccines Barbara Loe Fisher:
“There have been estimates that perhaps less than 5 or 10 percent of doctors report hospitalizations, injuries, deaths, or other serious health problems following vaccination. The 1986 Vaccine Injury Act contained no legal sanctions for not reporting [via VAERS]; doctors can refuse to report and suffer no consequences.”

Indeed, one study found that while 68% of cases of vaccine-associated polio were reported, only 4% of MMR-associated thrombocytopenia (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/disease/vaccine-induced-toxicity) were reported. An earlier study found that only 1% of adverse events following prescription drug use were reported. And in 1994, a survey found that only 18% of 159 doctors’ offices made reports when children suffered serious health problems following vaccination. In New York, this number was one out of 40.
Some argue that adverse events are also over-reported to VAERS, presumably by distraught parents, but this charge is less credible. All the evidence shows that doctors and other healthcare providers are extremely reluctant to report events to VAERS. Healthcare providers account for 36% of all reports to VAERS, with vaccine manufacturers accounting for another 37%. Vaccine recipients and their parents or guardians account for only 7% of reports.
So what is the real risk of overall vaccine injury? The only honest answer is that nobody knows. The number of genuine vaccine injuries is likely much higher than what is reported in VAERS, but how much higher nobody can reliably say. The science on vaccine safety is conflicted, it is insufficient and it is badly corrupted by special interests. It is anything but “settled.”
But there’s more.
There is evidence that vaccines may cause harm well beyond what would show up in an adverse events report – harm that may manifest over many years, rather than in the days and weeks immediately following vaccination. Vaccines have been connected to increased rates of cancer, severe allergies and autoimmune disease:
As Dr. Donald Miller explains:
“Measles helps a child’s immune system grow strong and mature.
“Once past the immunologic barriers of skin and mucosa, our (2-trillion-cell) immune system has two components: An innate system, which all animals have; and an evolutionarily more recent adaptive system that vertebrates have. The childhood diseases—measles, mumps, rubella, and chickenpox—play a constructive role in the maturation of the adaptive immune system. Two kinds of helper T-cells (Th) manage this system:cellular T-cells (Th1); and humoral T-cells (Th2), which make antibodies. The Th1 cellular T-cells are especially important because they attack and kill cells in the body that run amok and become cancerous. And they also kill cells that become infected with viruses.
“Measles (and other viral childhood diseases) stimulate both the Th1 and Th2 components. The MMR vaccine stimulates predominately the Th2 side. Overstimulation of this part of the adaptive immune system provokes allergies, asthma, and auto-immune diseases. Since the Th1 side thwarts cancer, if it does not get fully developed in childhood a person can wind up being more prone to cancer later in life. Women who had mumps during childhood, for example, have been found to be less likely to develop ovarian cancer compared with women who did not have mumps.”

(The study can be found here (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2951028/).)
According to the CDC, food allergies (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/allergies-101-info) in children increased by about 50% between 1997 and 2011. Asthma rates have also been on the rise, with an increase of 28% between 2001 and 2011. And childhood cancer rates have been increasing since the 1970s. The National Institutes of Health reported in 1996 that the incidence of childhood cancer had increased by 10% between 1973 and 1991, and a 1999 report in the International Journal of Health Services said that:
“From the early 1980s to the early 1990s, the incidence of cancer in American children under 10 years of age rose 37 percent, or 3 percent annually. There is an inverse correlation between increases in cancer rates and age at diagnosis; the largest rise (54 percent) occurred in children diagnosed before their first birthday. “

There are no definitive explanations for these dramatic increases in potentially life-threatening conditions among children, and in all likelihood there is no single cause responsible for any one of them. However parents have good reason to be concerned about harmful environmental factors, including vaccines. Indeed, several studies show increased rates of immunological problems associated with vaccination (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/attacking-ourselves-top-doctors-reveal-vaccines-turn-our-immune-system-against-us).
A study in New Zealand found a higher rate of asthma among those who had been vaccinated (Kemp et al, 1997); Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Study in the US showed that children vaccinated with DTP or Tetanus vaccines were twice as likely to develop asthma as unvaccinated children (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/article/dtp-or-tetanus-vaccination-increases-risk-allergies-and-related-respiratory-symptoms) (Hurwitz and Morgenstern, 2000), and another study showed that the MMR vaccine can cause human white blood cells to develop IgE antibodies – one of the main characteristics of asthma (Imani and Kehoe, 2001). A 2008 study found that delaying DPT vaccination was associated with reduced risk of childhood asthma.
Other studies have found a link between vaccines and allergies and autoimmune disease. A 1996 study in Africa found higher rates of allergies among those who had been vaccinated against measles than among those who had survived the disease. The study concluded that “(m)easles infection may prevent the development of atopy in African children.”
http://cdn.greenmedinfo.com/sites/default/files/ckeditor/lrossi/images/5890890_m%281%29.jpg
A 2001 study confirmed “A causal association between measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP)…”; A study in 2014 found a strong correlation between hepatitis B vaccination and higher rates of multiple sclerosis (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/article/hepatitis-b-vaccination-has-potential-induce-central-demyelinating-disorders); a 1999 study in Japan found that “…gelatin-containing DTaP vaccine may have a causal relationship to the development of this gelatin allergy”; and in 2009, a Japanese study that gave mice repeated immunizations with antigen found that “(s)ystemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host’s immune ‘system’ by repeated immunization…”http://www.ezekieldiet.com/first-they-came-for-the-anti-vaxxers/

[Serpo]

cont..............



In the journal Autoimmunity, Vared Molina and Yehudi Shoenfeld write "Vaccines, in several reports were found to be temporally followed by a new onset of autoimmune disease. The same mechanisms that act in infectious invasion of the host, apply equally to the host response to vaccination. It has been accepted for diphtheria and tetanus toxoid, polio and measles vaccines and GBS. Also this theory has been accepted for MMR vaccination and development of autoimmune thrombocytopenia, MS has been associated with HBV vaccination."
Those who would force vaccinations on the rest of us are fond of repeating bromides like "your right to be sick ends where public health begins." But who gets to decide what constitutes "public health"? Who decided that the eradication of every childhood illness is in the best interests of "public health"? Why are not increased rates of childhood cancer and life-threatening allergies relevant to "public health"? Why can I not demand that everyone else stop vaccinating their children because doing so directly threatens the ability of mine to contract childhood diseases which might help strengthen their immune systems?
6. If you must acknowledge that critics of vaccines have actual reasons for their concerns, restrict the discussion to the fear that vaccines may cause autism, and be sure to stress that the only basis for this concern is the retracted 1998 study by Andrew Wakefield.
You can also mention some of the studies that "prove" there is no causal link between vaccines and autism. Just be sure not to mention any of the ones that do show a connection, like this one (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3364648/), this one (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058170) or this one (http://autismoava.org/archivos/1-s2.0-S0162013411002212-main.pdf). Be especially careful not to mention this one (http://labmed.ascpjournals.org/content/33/9/708.full.pdf), this one (http://www.ms.academicjournals.org/article/article1409245960_Deisher%20et%20al.pdf), or any of these (http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2007/06/no-evidence-of-any-link.html), these (https://therefurbishedrogue.wordpress.com/2013/05/03/my-list-of-peer-reviewed-vaccine-research/) or these (http://www.scribd.com/doc/220807175/86-Research-Papers-Supporting-the-Vaccine-Autism-Link).
At all costs, never ever mention any of the concerns listed in "4." above.
For bonus points, see if you can create the impression that the only potential problem with vaccines is thimerosal, and then declare that thimerosal has been removed from all vaccines. (It hasn't.)
7. When in doubt, pepper your stories with some of the following affirmations. Remember: The more you say them, the truer they become: "Vaccines save lives"; "parents who don't vaccinate are selfish" ("ignorant", "anti-science" and "hippies" all work well too.); and above all: "the science is settled."
You may have to repeat this last one many many times before your readers come to understand and accept it.
8. Don't even address vaccines directly. Simply include some mention of vaccine skepticism as an example of the kind of irrational thinking some people (especially, strangely, well-educated ones) still engage in despite "everyone knowing" how foolish it is.
This is perhaps the most powerful tool you can use to sway your audience. Nobody wants to be seen as foolish, and most people don't have the time or inclination to look closely at the evidence for and against vaccine safety. If people keep hearing that "everyone knows" vaccines are safe and effective, most of them will tend to go along with that position even if they don't know much about the topic – if only to avoid being seen as crackpots. Fear of public humiliation can be a beautiful thing in the right hands.
9. If the icky topic of conflict of interest or corruption of the research by vested interests comes up, just laugh it off. Remember: Writing in a derisive tone about other people's claims or concerns is exactly the same as refuting them.
Amy Wallace, who wrote this Wired piece (http://www.wired.com/2009/10/ff_waronscience/) handled this especially well. And not only did she fail to interview a single critic of vaccines for the article, she cunningly created the impression that she had included their views by visiting an Autism One conference and mentioning and briefly quoting – but never actually speaking with – NVIC president Barbara Loe Fisher. Well done Amy Wallace!
Be sure to quote Dr. Paul Offit (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/do-you-believe-offit) and to cite him (http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/165792176.html) as a "vaccine expert". Don't bother disclosing that he has made millions of dollars from the Rotavirus vaccine he developed. The whole notion of disclosing conflicts of interest within a story is so passé. Also anti-science.
Vaccine advocates like to point to studies that show no increased risk of harm from vaccines. They assert that these studies invalidate the findings of other studies that do show a link between vaccines and asthma, allergies, autism and other conditions. In a world in which scientific institutions could be trusted to conduct honest, objective research and produce credible results, this might provide some comfort. In the real world though, there is little reason to give credence to much of the research that gets produced on vaccines – and much less so to results that in any way favor the manufacturers of those vaccines.
Lest anyone suspect that this kind of cynicism about the scientific establishment is confined to anti-vaccination activists, here is what Marcia Angell, former editor in chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, wrote in 2009:

"...(C)onflicts of interest and biases exist in virtually every field of medicine, particularly those that rely heavily on drugs or devices. It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of TheNew England Journal of Medicine." [Emphasis mine.]
Angell adds:

"No one knows the total amount provided by drug companies to physicians, but I estimate from the annual reports of the top nine US drug companies that it comes to tens of billions of dollars a year. By such means, the pharmaceutical industry has gained enormous control over how doctors evaluate and use its own products. Its extensive ties to physicians, particularly senior faculty at prestigious medical schools, affect the results of research, the way medicine is practiced, and even the definition of what constitutes a disease."
Likewise, in his 2013 book "Bad Pharma", physician (and vaccine advocate) Ben Goldacre writes:

"Overall, the pharmaceutical industry spends around half a billion dollars a year on advertising in academic journals. The biggest – NEJM, JAMA – take $10 or $20 million each, and there is a few million each for the next rank down."
Goldacre adds that "(a)dvertising is not the only source of drug company revenue for academic journals", and cites "supplements" – special editions sponsored by drug companies – and reprints of individual academic papers that can bring in up to a million dollars each. And he cites a 2009 study demonstrating that industry-funded studies are more likely to be accepted by journals.
The real-world impact of this control has been well documented, from the FDA concealing fraud in medical trials, to built-in biases in studies, to pharmaceutical companies misleading practitioners as to the safety and efficacy of their products, to allegations of fraudulent misconduct brought by scientists turned whistleblowers (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/breaking-whistleblower-names-cdc-scientists-covering-vaccine-autism-link).
Recently, two former Merck scientists charged that the pharmaceutical giant "...fraudulently misled the government and omitted, concealed, and adulterated material information regarding the efficacy of its mumps vaccine..." And in August of last year, senior CDC scientist William Thompson came forward with the statement that he and other researchers had omitted statistically significant data from a 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. (It is worth noting that Dr. Thompson's earlier studies at the CDC were hailed as "definitive" in refuting the Thimerosal-autism link by none other than Dr. Paul Offit.)
According to Thompson's statement "(t)he omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed."
In a secretly recorded conversation, Dr. Thompson told with Dr. Brian Hooker, "I have a boss who is asking me to lie. The higher ups wanted to do certain things and I went along with it." He told Dr. Hooker that "...the CDC has not been transparent, we've missed ten years of research, because the CDC is so paralyzed right now by anything related to autism. They're not doing what they should be doing. They are afraid to look for things that might be associated..."
Put simply: The scientific establishment has lost any right to be taken at its word on this issue.
10. "Muh Herd Immunity!"
Remind your readers of our long-treasured right to herd immunity: The right to demand – at gunpoint if necessary – that others take every possible precaution against contracting communicable diseases, regardless of the risks to themselves of doing so. This is a right our forefathers fought and died for and we're not about to give it up now.
Actually, no.
Those who support imposing vaccines by force argue that those who do not vaccinate threaten herd immunity for the entire population. The idea that vaccines can successfully provide herd immunity is already questionable, as – unlike many childhood diseases – they do not confer lifetime immunity. Nor do they offer 100% immunity to those vaccinated. But more importantly this argument presumes that "herd immunity" is something anyone has a right to in the first place.
For centuries, people have been aware that being out in public carries certain risks – among them, the risk that one might contract a disease from another person. Never before have people widely asserted that they have the right to demand that everyone around them take all possible precautions at whatever cost to themselves to make this environment absolutely risk free. If, as the mandatory vaccination proponents contend, we can demand that everyone around us take every conceivable precaution against every communicable disease, what else can we demand of them?
For starters, the recently vaccinated (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/measles-transmitted-vaccinated-gov-researchers-confirm) (with live-virus vaccines) should be excluded from all public property. And if not, why not? They pose far more of a risk than does anyone who has simply not been vaccinated. What are some other risky practices Americans should no longer tolerate from each other? Going out in public with a cold? Being a poor driver? Being in possession of any substance that might cause a severe allergic reaction in someone else?
How about superbugs (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/honey-and-ginger-beat-antibiotics-inhibiting-superbugs)? What are we going to do about all those people who abuse antibiotics, ultimately leading to the creation of superbugs. Antibiotic-resistant bacteria are responsible for nearly 15,000 deaths in the US each year, far outstripping pre-vaccine deaths for measles, mumps and whooping cough combined. Can we not hold the irresponsible people who take antibiotics every time they have a minor infection accountable for this?
Personally, I avoid antibiotics for myself and my family as much as possible. I have never given them to a child with an ear infection (and yes, we've had some.) Should my preferences be imposed on everyone else? Doing so would clearly strike a blow against the propagation of superbugs. So why not?
Here's why not: Because your right to protect "public health" – whatever you think that may be given the interest-driven media hysteria of the moment – ends where my body begins.
Herd immunity (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/herd-immunity-myth-or-reality) is not something anyone has a "right" to. It is a positive externality, and like other such externalities it is not something you have a right to demand that your fellow human beings provide for you. More to the point, you do not have a right to demand that other parents impose risks on their children that they are not comfortable with, in order to protect your child or anyone else's children.
The Forced Vaccination Threat: a Tragedy of the Commons
Can there ever be a point where spreading a disease becomes "assault"? Of course there can: A person who knows that they are infected with Ebola, for example, stepping into a crowded subway car and proceeding to cough all over the other passengers, could easily be considered guilty of assault. But measles is hardly Ebola (it is not even on the federal government's list of quarantinable diseases), and – contrary to the media frenzy that insists otherwise – not being vaccinated does not equate to being infected with a disease, far less to knowingly infecting others. Failure to take every precaution against getting a disease is hardly "assault."
Even in the case of a truly deadly illness like Ebola, there is no justification for forcing a particular method of prevention on those who have not contracted it, or forcing treatment on anyone who has. All that anyone has a right to do is demand that those people not infect others.
It should be obvious by now that none of this would even be an issue if we lived in a society that honored self-ownership and private property. In the event of an outbreak of a truly dangerous disease – or even a disease that posed a serious risk to only a small segment of the population – each property owner could make their own decision about whether to exclude those who were infected or indeed, even those who chose not to be vaccinated against the disease, presuming there was a vaccine for it.
As economist Robert Murphy writes:

"Private businesses aren't stupid; they don't need the government to order them to keep lepers away. And if a particular church, say, wants to open its doors to such a person, that's perfectly within their rights. (As a matter of courtesy, we would hope this policy would be announced to others who might not want to visit the same building.) Indeed, the final repository for such people would be buildings where the owners thought they could safely contain the disease. And the common name people would use for these buildings is "hospital." In a free society, to be "quarantined" would simply mean that most owners (of roads, sidewalks, malls, hotels, factories, etc.) would refuse access, and so a contagious person would have few choices outside of treatment facilities."
Rather than having a one-size-fits-all solution imposed upon everyone by some authority, everyone would make choices based on their own perception of the risks. Businesses that responded to the risk sensitivities of their customers would do well and those that did not would suffer. And because not all people have the same perception of or sensitivity to the same risks, there would be a wide variety of choices: Schools that allow unvaccinated children and schools that do not; restaurants that cater to those with severe allergies and those that do not; parks, libraries, cinemas and other establishments that specialize in serving immunocompromised and other medically fragile individuals, and those that do not.
In the absence of a "commons" – property that is used by everyone but owned by no-one (or, more realistically, owned by the state) there would be no calls for anyone to have vaccines forced upon them at gunpoint. Those who believe vaccinations are absolutely necessary would frequent businesses and venues that enforced strict vaccination policies, and those who did not would frequent places that had more relaxed policies.
My own guess is that for the most part, the issue would simply go away. People would come to realize that the real risk to themselves and their families posed by those who do not vaccinate is in fact minuscule – particularly in comparison to other risks we all expose ourselves to daily. In the absence of a "commons" managed by people who do not have to earn the costs of their operation, most business owners would find that they stood to lose more by excluding "non-vaxxers" than they did to gain by allowing them in.
It is only in a world where property rights are not clearly defined, where there are great swathes of "commons" (either "public" property or nominally private property over which owners do not have genuine decision-making powers) that there can be a conflict between "public" health and individual rights. Eliminate the commons and you eliminate that conflict – replacing it with a myriad of voluntary solutions to meet the differing wants and needs of diverse individuals.
Whatever Your Views on Vaccines, the Prospect of Forced Vaccination Ought to Make You Very Very Afraid
Do those who believe in mandated vaccination (http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/will-flu-vaccines-be-required-all-us-health-employees-2020-a) really want to establish the precedent of granting a government body the power to compel people to be injected with substances against their will? You may support the forced vaccination of other people's children because you think vaccines are undeniably beneficial and problem-free. But you may not be so thrilled about the next substance the state decides everyone should have forced into their veins.
Do you really want to establish the precedent of being able to demand from your neighbors that they pose no risk to you at all? The corollary of course being that they may then demand the same of you? If as a society we decide that we have the right to demand a 100% risk-free environment in which to live then the potential intrusions into our lives are infinite.
Even if the manufacturers' claims are correct and the risk of serious injury from vaccines is infinitesimal, for most people it is impossible to know ahead of time whether or not they will be injured by a vaccine. Nobody has the right to force another person to choose that risk – however small it may be – over the risks of the diseases the vaccines are intended to prevent.
The state already controls vast swathes of what we can do with our lives: What professions we may enter, how and where we may conduct business, what substances we cannot ingest, how much of the money we earn we are allowed to keep, how we may travel and what indignities we must tolerate in order to do so, when and where we may protest, and the list goes on and on. If you do not believe that individuals have the right to control what goes into their own bodies then I have to wonder what rights – if any – you do believe people still have.
It seems to me that, save choosing our mates for us, the last remnant of our self ownership lies in our right not to be directly assaulted, not to have unwanted drugs or other substances forced into our bodies. If you believe that the state has the right to do this, then there is essentially nothing left that it does not have a right to do.
The pro-vaccine lobby has done a phenomenal job of inciting fear among the American public in a way that happens to serve its interests: Fear of little children who may not have been vaccinated; fear of other parents who may make choices different from yours; fear of a disease that in the developed world is far less deadly than lightning strikes. But they've left out one of the most frightening specters of all, one that has a truly horrifying historical record of death and destruction: An all-powerful state that can literally do whatever it wishes to those living under it. If that prospect frightens you less than the remote possibility that you might contract measles from my five year old, then quite frankly you scare the hell out of me.

[Serpo]

Scientist and Stem Cell Expert Says Don't Be So Quick to Believe Vaccines Are Safe Dr. Theresa Deisher believes those made from fetal stem cell lines may pose a serious risk

http://www.aleteia.org/image/en/article/scientist-and-stem-cell-expert-says-dont-be-so-quick-to-believe-vaccines-are-safe-5321336255676416/author/0

Zoe Romanowsky (242) (http://www.aleteia.org/en/author/zoe-romanowsky)






SHARES
10k






Share









Tweet









Post





































http://www.aleteia.org/image/en/article/scientist-and-stem-cell-expert-says-dont-be-so-quick-to-believe-vaccines-are-safe-5321336255676416/web-syringe-needle-many-john-donges-cc/topic john-donges-cc





















Dr. Theresa Deisher is no stranger to science, research, and ethics. She holds a PhD in Molecular and Cellular Physiology from Stanford University and has spent over 20 years in commercial biotechnology before founding Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI) (http://soundchoice.org), which promotes consumer awareness about the widespread use of electively aborted fetal material in drug discovery, development, and commercialization.

Dr. Deisher is an inventor with 23 issued U.S. patents. She was the first person to discover adult cardiac derived stem cells, and has been a champion of adult stem cell research for two decades. She is also founder of AVM Biotechnology, (http://avmbiotech.com) which is dedicated to the discovery, development, and commercialization of safe, effective, and ethical stem cell technologies for regenerative medicine, oncology, and fully human biologics.

Deisher spoke to Aleteia’s Zoe Romanowsky about why parents and the general public should not be quick to support government mandated vaccines or believe that all vaccines are safe.


Dr. Deisher, your background is in molecular and cellular physiology and the biotech industry. How did you come to be interested in vaccine science and safety?

We took on the task to develop alternative vaccines from a moral and philosophical perspective. In reading about vaccines one cannot miss the vaccine autism controversy. What was striking is that several scientific articles whose purpose was to refute any link, actually demonstrated a very strong association. That association was between autism rates and the use of fetal manufactured vaccines. Therefore, we undertook a survey of as many countries as possible where autism and vaccine information was accessible and accurate. Across decades and across continents there is an association between the use of fetal manufactured vaccines and autism.

Government mandated vaccination programs are a very divisive issue right now. As a scientist and mother, you are not anti-vaccine, but you believe there are serious problems with vaccines that need to be addressed. Could you explain your position?

The FDA has debated the safety of using human fetal cell lines for vaccine manufacture for over 50 years, yet actual safety studies have never been done. There has never been an epidemiological study that has considered the relative risk of autism diagnosis based on receipt of fetal manufactured vaccines, which includes MMR II, Varivax, Vaqta, Havrix and Pentacel.

People who question the U.S. vaccination schedule, which is very aggressive, and the very real dangers of adjuvants in vaccines, and the long term impact of a heavy vaccination schedule on natural immunity, have rational and sound scientific concerns. It is sad and perplexing that civil, complete, and rational discussions of these concerns are obstructed by pharma, by the media, and unfortunately often by our elected officials, pediatricians, and family physicians.

There is still concern out there that vaccines may cause or trigger autism and other developmental problems. A lot of experts say there is no evidence that vaccines cause autism, but many parents aren’t convinced. A graph on the Sound Choice website (http://soundchoice.org/autism/)shows that the three largest spikes in autism coincide with the introduction of vaccines produced with aborted fetal cells. Is this the piece we’re missing here—that it’s not vaccines per se, but what's in certain vaccines? And why is this not showing up in the studies that the government agencies and pharmaceutical companies say we should believe?

Yes, this is the piece that we are missing. It is not the MMR, but the fetal contaminants in the MMR. This is not showing up in studies because there are several fetal manufactured vaccines. Studies have looked only at MMR, but never all fetal manufactured vaccines. Children are rarely completely unvaccinated, and in the overwhelming majority of cases when parents reject vaccines, they only reject one or two—typically MMR and DTaP, because of the public perception of a link to autism. However, a child who did not receive MMR likely did receive Varivax (chickenpox) and/or Vaqta or Havrix (hepatitis A). Therefore, studies must be conducted to consider the question of the relative risk of autism if a child received any, a combination, or all of the fetal manufactured vaccines. This has never been done.

In fact, no study has ever looked at the relationship between fetal vaccines and autism. If you have five smelly garbage bags and you take one outside yet the smell remains would you conclude that one garbage bag had no relationship to the smell? Of course not. They have looked at MMR II, but most of those children got the chickenpox vaccine and hep A—both fetal vaccines. No study has ever looked at children who get no fetal vaccines. Yet the data exists. Mennonites vaccinate, but will not use the fetal vaccines and their children have zero autism.

Aside from the morality of using aborted fetal cell lines in the first place why are these vaccines problematic?

The vaccines are contaminated with toxic residuals from the fetal cell lines that are known to be able to trigger autoimmunity and insertional mutagenesis, which is when foreign DNA inserts itself into a recipient’s genome. It is by nature a mutation which can cause disease if it inserts in the wrong place. Perhaps 85% of the genome is susceptible to disease if an insertion occurs.

I read that you are also concerned that vaccines using aborted fetal cell lines may be linked to childhood cancers and other diseases that may not show up for years. Can you explain?

Insertional mutagenesis occurs most readily in stem cells. Lymphomas and leukemias include certain subtypes that involve mutations in stem or progenitor cells. If insertional mutagenesis occurs in a stem cell, that stem cell will remain dormant in the germinal center in the case of BL, FL and DCLBL until it is triggered to grow and mature by the presentation of an antigen (bacteria or virus, etc.). The maturation includes a process called hypermutation and class switching. Mistargeted hypermutation is known to be a likely mechanism in B cell lymphomas. If a B cell precursor or stem cell has been the recipient of insertional mutagenesis, this insertion could interfere with normal class switching and lead to chromosomal translocations and other abnormalities, causing cancer. Insertional mutagenesis puts the cell as subsequent risk for additional mutations and disease.http://www.aleteia.org/en/health/article/scientist-and-stem-cell-expert-says-dont-be-so-quick-to-believe-vaccines-are-safe-5321336255676416

[Serpo]

Autism http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Autism-Posters.jpg (http://soundchoice.org/autism/autism-research/)Click on the posters to read our autism research publications The dangers of using aborted fetal cell lines (http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/excerpt-from-fda-dockets-2001-van-der-Eb.pdf) for vaccine manufacture have been debated by the FDA for over 50 years, and yet they have not done sufficient safety studies. The active component of a vaccine is a virus. Viruses are too large to manufacture in test tubes. Therefore, vaccine manufacturers exploit the natural method of producing virus– they inoculate cells and the cells produce the virus for them. Each vial of vaccine contains contaminants from the cells used to make the virus. When we use animal cells to make viruses, the residual material is not human and so we mount an immune response to it and eliminate it. However, in the case of vaccines produced using aborted human fetal cell lines, we have the dangers of triggering an autoimmune response and insertion of the contaminating DNA to disrupt the child’s own genes.
In the US, autism has spiked up in 3 distinct years, called changepoints. The first changepoint occurred in 1981, the second in 19881, and the third in 1996. These spikes coincide with the introduction of vaccines that are produced in aborted fetal cells. In 1979, aborted fetal cell produced MMR II (http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Appendix-I-mmr_ii_pi1.pdf) was approved in the US. Compliance campaigns brought MMR II use up from as low as 49% for children born before 1987 to over 82% for children born in 1989 and later. A second dose of MMR II was also introduced to the vaccination schedule for children born in 1988 and later. The third changepoint corresponds to the approval of aborted fetal cell produced Varivax (chickenpox) (http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Appendix-F-Varivax-Summary-for-Basis-of-Approval.pdf) in 1995 (See figure below).
http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Autism-Changepoints.jpg (http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Autism-Changepoints.jpg)

The scientific community has well documented the biological processes that make human fetal contaminants in our vaccines so potentially dangerous. Sound Choice is doing the studies (http://soundchoice.org/research/) to demonstrate the actual dangers with each vaccine.
1Also published by the EPA in March 2010.
Further Information:


Regressive Autism Prevalence (http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Regressive_Autism_Prevalence.pdf)
Facts About Autism — Autism Speaks (http://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism/facts-about-autism)
Papers of the Week — (http://sfari.org/sfari/resources/papers-of-the-week)The Simons Foundation Autism Research Initiative (http://sfari.org/sfari/resources/papers-of-the-week)
NVAC April 2009 Vaccine Safety Draft Report (http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/NVAC_April_2009_Vaccine_Safety_Draft_Report.pdf)
WI-38 Aborted Fetal Cell Line (http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Appendix-K-WI-38-derivation.pdf)
MRC-5 Aborted Fetal Cell Line (http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Appendix-J-MRC-5-derivation-and-NATURE-abstract.pdf)
http://soundchoice.org/autism/ (http://soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Appendix-J-MRC-5-derivation-and-NATURE-abstract.pdf)

[Serpo]

http://www.drjeffhealthcenter.com/ihpages/pages/autism.html
http://www.drjeffhealthcenter.com/ihpages/ihimages/autismgraph3.jpg

[Serpo]

Inadaze is waiting for some pro vaccine argument to come out so he can carry on vaccinating his kids with a clear conscience.............................well it wont be coming around here , but Im sure there are plenty of other sites on the web that will lap up what you say..........

[Serpo]

Vaccine Court Awards Millions to Two Children With Autism



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html


(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html)$1.5m-plus award in vaccine-autism lawsuithttp://www.huliq.com/8738/15m-plus-award-vaccine-autism-lawsuit


(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/post2468343_b_2468343.html)

[Serpo]

New Published Study Verifies Andrew Wakefield’s Research on Autism – Again (MMR Vaccine Causes Autism) (http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2013/06/21/new-published-study-verifies-andrew-wakefields-research-on-autism-again-mmr-vaccine-causes-autism/) Posted by: TLB Staff (http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/author/shortshit/)
Published June 21, 2013, filed under HEALTH (http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/category/health/) http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/autism-detection-voice1-150x150.jpg (http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/autism-detection-voice1.jpg)Controversial Doctor and Autism Media Channel Director proven right – MMR Vaccine Causes Autism & Inflammatory Bowel Disease.
Two landmark events – a government concession in the US Vaccine Court, and a groundbreaking scientific paper – confirm that physician, scientist, and Autism Media Channel [AMC] Director, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, and the parents were right all along.
In a recently published December 13, 2012 vaccine court ruling, hundreds of thousands of dollars were awarded to Ryan Mojabi, whose parents described how “MMR vaccinations,” caused a “severe and debilitating injury to his brain, diagnosed as Autism Spectrum Disorder (‘ASD’).”
Later the same month, the government suffered a second major defeat when young Emily Moller from Houston won compensation following vaccine-related brain injury that, once again, involved MMR and resulted in autism. The cases follow similar successful petitions in the Italian and US courts (including Hannah Poling [ii], Bailey Banks [iii], Misty Hyatt [iv], Kienan Freeman [v], Valentino Bocca [vi], and Julia Grimes [vii]) [I]in which the governments conceded or the court ruled that vaccines had caused brain injury. In turn, this injury led to an ASD diagnosis. MMR vaccine was the common denominator in these cases.
And today, scientists and physicians from Wake Forest University, New York, and Venezuela, reported findings that not only confirm the presence of intestinal disease in children with autism and intestinal symptoms, but also indicate that this disease may be novel. [viii] Using sophisticated laboratory methods Dr. Steve Walker and his colleagues endorsed Wakefield’s original findings by showing molecular changes in the children’s intestinal tissues that were highly distinctive and clearly abnormal.
From 1998 Dr. Wakefield discovered and reported intestinal disease in children with autism. [ix] Based upon the medical histories of the children he linked their disease and their autistic regression to the Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR vaccine). He has since been subjected to relentless personal and professional attacks in the media, and from governments, doctors and the pharmaceutical industry. In the wake of demonstrably false and highly damaging allegations of scientific fraud by British journalist Brian Deer and the British Medical Journal, Dr. Wakefield is pursuing defamation proceedings against them in Texas. [x]
While repeated studies from around the world confirmed Wakefield’s bowel disease in autistic children [xi] and his position that safety studies of the MMR are inadequate, [xii] Dr. Wakefield ’s career has been destroyed by false allegations. Despite this he continues to work tirelessly to help solve the autism catastrophe.
The incidence of autism has rocketed to a risk of around 1 in 25 for children born today. Mean while governments, absent any explanation and fearing loss of public trust, continue to deny the vaccine autism connection despite the concessions in vaccine court.
Speaking from his home in Austin, Texas, Dr. Wakefield said,

There can be very little doubt that vaccines can and do cause autism. In these children, the evidence for a n adverse reaction involving brain injury following the MMR that progresses to an autism diagnosis is compelling. It’s now a question of the body count. The parents’ story was right all along. Governments must stop playing with words while children continue to be damaged . My hope is that recognition of the intestinal disease in these children will lead to the relief of their suffering. This is long , long overdue .”
Dr. Andrew Wakefield is a best selling author, [xi] founder of the autism research non profit Strategic Autism Initiative (SAI), and Director of the Autism Media Channel.
“Identification of Unique Gene Expression Profile in Children with Regressive Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Ileocolitis (http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058058)” PLOS ONE March 8, 2013, available online at: http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058058
References [i] Decision Awarding Damages to Ryan Mohabi 13 Dec 2012 (http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/CAMPBELL-SMITH.MOJABI-PROFFER.12.13.2012.pdf)
[ii] Family to Receive $1.5M+ in First-Ever Vaccine-Autism Court Award (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-20015982-10391695.html) September 9, 2010 2:14 PM
and
Decision Awarding Damages 21 July 2012 (http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/CAMPBELLSMITH.%20DOE77082710.pdf)
[iii] http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/Abell.BANKS.02-0738V.pdf (see footnote 4)
[iv] Vaccine Case: An Exception Or A Precedent? (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/06/eveningnews/main3915703.shtml) February 11, 2009 3:20 PM CBS News By Sharyl Attkisson
[v] KIENAN FREEMAN RULING CONCERNING “ENTITLEMENT” (http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/HASTINGS.Freeman.pdf) – September 25, 2003
[vi] MMR: A mother’s victory. The vast majority of doctors say there is no link between the triple jab and autism, but could an Italian court case reignite this controversial debate? (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2160054/MMR-A-mothers-victory-The-vast-majority-doctors-say-link-triple-jab-autism-Italian-court-case-reignite-controversial-debate.html) By Sue Reid – Daily Mail 15 June 2012
[vii] JULIA GRIMES – DECISION AWARDING DAMAGES (http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/MORAN.LAWSON011211.pdf) January 12, 2011
[viii] Walker S., Fortunado J, Krigsman A., Gonzalez L. Identification of Unique Gene Expression Profile in Children with Regressive Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Ileocolitis (http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058058)
[ix] Wakefield AJ. Callous Disregard: Autism and Vaccines – The Truth Behind a Tragedy (http://www.callous-disregard.com/). 2010. Skyhorse Publishing, NY, NY. Chapter 1, footnotes 1 & 4, p.20
[x] For Affidavits see www.DrWakefieldJusticeFund.org (http://www.drwakefieldjusticefund.org/)
[xi] Wakefield AJ. Waging War on the Autistic Child (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Waging-War-Autistic-Child-Munchausen/dp/1616086149). 2012 Skyhorse Publishing NY, NY. Chapter 2, footnotes 2 11, pp. 255 256
[xii] Jefferson T et al, Unintended events following immunization with MMR: a systematic review. Vaccine 21 (2003) 3954–3960
Source: Press Release from Autism Media Channel (http://www.autismmediachannel.com/)
Here is a list of 28 studies from around the world that support Dr. Wakefield’s research:


The Journal of Pediatrics November 1999; 135(5):559-63 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/4.Horvath%201.pdf)
The Journal of Pediatrics 2000; 138(3): 366-372 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/5.Furlano.pdf)
Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003; 23(6): 504-517 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/9.lymphocytes%20in%20autism.pdf)
Journal of Neuroimmunology 2005 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/Ileal%20cytokines.pdf)
Brain, Behavior and Immunity 1993; 7: 97-103 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/Singh.pdf)
Pediatric Neurology 2003; 28(4): 1-3 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/Singh%20Elevated%20MV%20antibody%20titers%202003.p df)
Neuropsychobiology 2005; 51:77-85 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/Neuropsych%20--%20Jyonouchi.pdf)
The Journal of Pediatrics May 2005;146(5):605-10 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/Jyonouchi%202005.pdf)
Autism Insights 2009; 1: 1-11 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/Krigsman%20proof.pdf)
Canadian Journal of Gastroenterology February 2009; 23(2): 95-98 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/Cdn%20journal%20of%20Gstrto%20-Autistic%20Entercolitis%20Fact%20ot%20Fiction%20Fe d%202009.pdf)
Annals of Clinical Psychiatry 2009:21(3): 148-161 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/Singh%20autoimmune%20autism.pdf)
Journal of Child Neurology June 29, 2009; 000:1-6 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/celaic%20and%20autism.pdf)
Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders March 2009;39(3):405-13 (http://mercola.fileburst.com/PDF/GI%20symptoms%20in%20PDD%20Yale.pdf)
Medical Hypotheses August 1998;51:133-144 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Medical+hypotheses%22%5BJour%5D+AND +133%5Bpage%5D+AND+1998%5Bpdat%5D&cmd=detailssearch).
Journal of Child Neurology July 2000; ;15(7):429-35 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Journal+of+child+neurology%22%5BJou r%5D+AND+429%5Bpage%5D+AND+2000%5Bpdat%5D&cmd=detailssearch)
Lancet. 1972;2:883–884 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4116595).
Journal of Autism and Childhood Schizophrenia January-March 1971;1:48-62 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Journal+of+autism+and+childhood+sch izophrenia%22%5BJour%5D+AND+48%5Bpage%5D+AND+1971% 5Bpdat%5D&cmd=detailssearch)
Journal of Pediatrics March 2001;138:366-372 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11241044).
Molecular Psychiatry 2002;7:375-382 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Molecular+psychiatry%22%5BJour%5D+A ND+375%5Bpage%5D+AND+2002%5Bpdat%5D&cmd=detailssearch).
American Journal of Gastroenterolgy April 2004;598-605 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22The+American+journal+of+gastroenter ology%22%5BJour%5D+AND+598%5Bpage%5D+AND+2004%5Bpd at%5D&cmd=detailssearch).
Journal of Clinical Immunology November 2003;23:504-517 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Journal+of+clinical+immunology%22%5 BJour%5D+AND+504%5Bpage%5D+AND+2003%5Bpdat%5D&cmd=detailssearch).
Neuroimmunology April 2006;173(1-2):126-34 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Journal+of+neuroimmunology%22%5BJou r%5D+AND+173%5Bvolume%5D+AND+126%5Bpage%5D+AND+200 6%5Bpdat%5D&cmd=detailssearch).
Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol Biol. Psychiatry December 30 2006;30:1472-1477. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Progress+in+neuro-psychopharmacology+%26+biological+psychiatry%22%5B Jour%5D+AND+1472%5Bpage%5D+AND+2006%5Bpdat%5D&cmd=detailssearch)
Clinical Infectious Diseases September 1 2002;35(Suppl 1):S6-S16 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Clinical+infectious+diseases+%3A+an +official+publication+of+the+Infectious+Diseases+S ociety+of+America%22%5BJour%5D+AND+s6%5Bpage%5D+AN D+2002%5Bpdat%5D&cmd=detailssearch)
Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2004;70(11):6459-6465 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Applied+and+environmental+microbiol ogy%22%5BJour%5D+AND+6459%5Bpage%5D+AND+2004%5Bpda t%5D&cmd=detailssearch)
Journal of Medical Microbiology October 2005;54:987-991 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=%22Journal+of+medical+microbiology%22% 5BJour%5D+AND+987%5Bpage%5D+AND+2005%5Bpdat%5D&cmd=detailssearch)
Archivos venezolanos de puericultura y pediatría 2006; Vol 69 (1): 19-25.
Gastroenterology. 2005:128 (Suppl 2);Abstract-303


See this and other informative and applicable articles at Health Impact Daily News.
See original here: http://healthimpactnews.com/2013/new-published-study-verifies-andrew-wakefields-research-on-autism-again/

http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2013/06/21/new-published-study-verifies-andrew-wakefields-research-on-autism-again-mmr-vaccine-causes-autism/

[aeondaze]

This is excellent we're actually having a REAL debate!

Just off the bat though, the problem you face with your approach Serpo is that you do the anti vaccination crowd a disservice by getting emotionally worked up and abusive towards anyone that disagrees with you. It doesn't help anyone to decide for themselves what constitutes the facts on the matter; it will turn a lot of people away when they think to themselves "Gee these anti vaccination people are aggressive goons"

At least Jerry has the decency to remain civil during the discussion, you on the other hand are completely incapable.

So I'm not addressing your first two points because they have absolutely NOTHING to do with the science involved, they are merely a bitter off piste tirade.

OK, lets get to the meat of it!

You claim that a study by Dr. Stephen J. Walker proves Andrew Wakefield was correct and that there is a link between Autism and vaccination, but lets see what Dr. Stephen J. Walker himself has to say on the matter...

Wake Forest Researcher Warns Against Making Connection Between Presence of Measles Virus and Autism (http://www.wakehealth.edu/News-Releases/2006/Wake_Forest_Researcher_Warns_Against_Making_Connec tion_Between_Presence_of_Measles_Virus_and_Autism. htm)

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. – An American scientist whose research replicates a connection published in England in 2002 between the measles virus and bowel disease in autistic children strongly warns against making the “leap” to suggesting that the measles vaccine might actually cause autism.

“That is not what our research is showing,” said Stephen J. Walker, Ph.D., an assistant professor of physiology and pharmacology at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center. Walker and colleagues have issued an abstract to be presented at this week’s International Meeting for Autism Research, indicating that a high percentage of autistic children that they have tested with chronic bowel disease show evidence of measles virus in their intestines.

Some observers have said that the presence of the measles virus indicates a strong possibility that the measles vaccine, a possible source of the virus, could have caused the children’s autism. That possible connection has caused a major controversy in the United Kingdom, where the connection was first made in 2002. The vaccine is first given as part of a triple vaccine called MMR – for measles, mumps and rubella – at ages 12-18 months. That is shortly before a particular type of autism (regressive) begins to appear in children afflicted with the condition, which has fueled the speculation about a connection.

Walker says the new research does not support the connection, and he notes that the results have not even been published in a peer-reviewed journal. “Even if we showed association (between measles virus and bowel disease) and we published it in a peer-reviewed journal, the conclusion will be simply that there is measles virus in the gut of a large number of children who have regressive autism and bowel disease. End of story.

“We haven’t done anything to demonstrate that the measles virus is causing autism or even causing bowel disease.”

Walker explains that exploring the causes of chronic bowel disease in autistic children is the major impetus for his research. “There are lots of viruses in the gut, and any one of them could be causing inflammation. If it truly is from a vaccine and this virus causes inflammation and a chronic bowel condition in some susceptible children, then that’s something that needs to be known.”

The main task at hand, Walker said, is to determine what is causing the bowel condition in the autistic children,

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________________

So there you have it. The man who actually performed the research that the anti vaccination crowd claims proves Andrew Wakefield's fraudulent research is in fact correct disagrees with this finding and has come out to explicitly DENY this link! It doesn't get much more obvious than that!

Next you assert that Andrew Wakefield (with newly published journal by Dr. Walker in hand) is sewing British journalist Brian Deer and the British Medical Journal. Well lets see how that went...

Andrew Wakefield loses frivolous defamation lawsuit. To pay court costs. (http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2014/09/19/andrew-wakefield-loses-frivolous-defamation-lawsuit-to-pay-court-costs/)

So he LOST! The courts have ruled that this guy has no case for claiming defamationwhich ipso facto means, the court rules in favor of the claim that Andrew Wakefield research IS FRAUDULENT!

BAM! Two down, a few more to go...

So now onto the court decisions...of which there are FOUR, keep this number in your mind...So what is the outcome of all these court actions....

From Serpos link to HUFPO.


Perhaps the feds were loath to concede yet another vaccine case involving autism. Four cases in the Autism Omnibus Proceedings were recently compensated. Three of those cases are marked with asterisks, indicating the government did not conclude that autism can be caused by vaccines. But the fourth autism case that was paid out in 2013 (Ryan's case? We don't know) has no such caveat.

Meanwhile, as HHS says it "has never concluded in any case that autism was caused by vaccination,"

So these cases weren't fought over CAUSE, they are fought over whether or not vaccination triggered autism. The medical fraternity freely admits that in certain instances, recipients with a particular genetic makeup will have adverse reactions to vaccinations.

So what are we talking about? FOUR CASES.

There have been four cases where the government has done the right thing and ceased to defend the case and instead agreed to compensate the aggrieved. These cases aren't really about autism and vaccines these cases are about the lives of children who have been severely impacted through no fault of their own from vaccination. The governments role in all of this is not to prove beyond reasonable doubt that vaccination doesn't cause autism, the governments role is to mitigate their liability. Its about money not the medicine, the medicine was merely a scapegoat, and when they'd had enough financially, they simply pulled the plug and agreed to settle.

FOUR cases.

Four cases out of how many vaccinations? What, like about 300 million vaccinations over the course of thirty years and ONLY four cases. I'm not saying there aren't more, I'm saying that the numbers are significantly LESS than the anti vaccination crowd would have people believe.

OK, now onto Dr. Theresa Deisher and the anti vaccinations crowds claims. From the outset lets get this straight, Dr. Theresa Deisher has NEVER said that fetal tissue contamination of vaccinations CAUSES autism. What she is saying is that these studies have never been performed and that is something that needs looking into and I agree wholeheartedly!
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ _________________________

Clearly Serpo you've spent years of your life looking into this matter, you can see by how quickly you posted these links, look at them all, they're all like between 3 and five minutes apart.

You keep those links nice and handy ready at the slightest trigger to post this barrage if inane myopic drivel without EVER presenting a balanced look at the issue. Its taken me about an hour to sort the wheat from the chaff and see that MOST of what your have posted here is either outright false or a gross misrepresentations of the facts.

As I have said before the anti vaccination crowd doesn't have anything that supports their argument so they resort to whinny whinging complaints about how the pro vaccination crowd subverts their attempts and obfuscates the issues when the truth is, that is an exact page out of the anti vaccination crowds playbook.

;)

[Serpo]

Just off the bat though, the problem you face with your approach Serpo is that you do the anti vaccination crowd a disservice by getting emotionally worked up and abusive towards anyone that disagrees with you. It doesn't help anyone to decide for themselves what constitutes the facts on the matter; it will turn a lot of people away when they think to themselves "Gee these anti vaccination people are aggressive goons"

At least Jerry has the decency to remain civil during the discussion, you on the other hand are completely incapable.

Im not here for some crowd , these are from my own learning's.

Im not representing anyone , we are all individuals and we make uop our own minds individually.

Jerry hasnt been abused by you in the past like I have for the crime of being a kiwi living in YOUR country.

I think you are an over educated idiot, who likes to argue about things for the sake of arguments sake and any common sense has been long educated out of you and you are probably years younger than myself.

Look if you LOVE vaccines thats fine , go and hit up to your hearts content.

Read this you know all , from Dr Mercolas website or is he misinformed also............

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2001/08/18/vaccine-myths.aspx