I love Dr. Nancy Snyderman of NBC

For example, this unsourced bit of nonsense:

Research shows that nearly 1 in 5,000 children who receive the chickenpox inoculation develop shingles within ten years of being vaccinated.
Click to expand...


Why no citation for this fact? Because, the risk of developing shingles after having received the vaccine is less than the risk of developing shingles after having gotten the chicken pox.

(source)
 
SaveAmericaFightNWO said:
How do you figure?

I'd really like to know... how YOU would know..

that this virus has been erradicated?

Let's test this theory of yours... lets put a vaccinated kid, in the same room as someone WITH smallpox...

let's see how well this vaccine-based-immunity holds up..


so again.. How do you figure that we'd still have small pox?
Click to expand...
When was the last case of smallpox? The only way smallpox was eradicated was by vaccination, natural immunity didn't eradicate it.
 
SaveAmericaFightNWO said:
Let's say I dilute the sodium fluoride... playing devils advocate here...

parts of the dilution, is just plain water, correct? right, so there's water running through your body, then bam.. that one molecule of sodium fluoride hits your bone, and destroys .05% of your bone density.. instead of a whole 1% of your bone density..

It's still toxic to the bones, still toxic to the thyroid, still toxic, no matter what dilution, you'll still have toxicity.

You can't just dilute it and say its no longer toxic.. you can however say that its "less toxic".


same effect, it still is toxic to your cells, still toxic to your body, regardless of if it is diluted or not.
Click to expand...
It isn't toxic if it has no effect. At a low enough dilution it won't be toxic.
 
SaveAmericaFightNWO said:
besides, toxic substances generally linger in the body, without a hardcore detoxing process... especially fluoride

it can take decades to fully detox fluoride, and even then, you're going to continue to be exposed by fluoride, every day, slowing down the detoxing process.

these accumulate in the body, and can cause toxic over load to our organs

ever heard of Liver failure?
Click to expand...
It's critical on the concentration of the toxin. Please try and understand this.
 
SaveAmericaFightNWO said:
Let's test this theory of yours... lets put a vaccinated kid, in the same room as someone WITH smallpox...

let's see how well this vaccine-based-immunity holds up.
Click to expand...

Let's say you put one kid with smallpox in a day-care center with 100 other unvaccinated kids, and did another experiment where you did the same thing with 100 vaccinated kids.

Many of those unvaccinated kids would get smallpox.

A few of the vaccinated kids would get smallpox. This is because any vaccine is not effective for 100% of people. The key idea is that there will be a big difference in the incidence of smallpox between the two groups. If everyone is vaccinated, the disease can't propagate through a population and gets eradicated, like what happened with smallpox.

So no, I wouldn't put my vaccinated kid in a room with another kid with smallpox, just because there's a small chance that he could catch it. It's a small chance, but not one I'm willing to take.
 
SaveAmerica and so on, this button is your friend:
edit.gif
No need to make four posts in a row if you realize you have more to say after hitting "Submit". Just edit your post, add what you have to add, and tag it with "ETA", or (presumably) "Edit to add".
 
CurtC said:
Congratulations on figuring out how to click the link on a paper's abstract page to get the full text of the study. That's pretty basic internetin', but you apparently don't learn well.
Click to expand...

Well aparently some people also don't know how to post the full text, like I know how to do the first time when I post something, I don't make you search for it.

Apparently you think that I'll know which text YOU are looking at, when you provide me with a link to a short version... hmm.. you're a smart and brave soul aren't you for pointing out someone else's mistake posting in error the wrong link to the wrong text.


People who are immunocompromised, or have hypersensitivity to vaccine components, would likely not get vaccinated anyway. Those folks depend on the rest of us getting vaccinated and providing some herd immunity. It's no surprise that they were excluded from the study.
Click to expand...

Thats a lie, there's tons of media talking heads that told everyone, especially those that are immunocompromised to "get your damn vaccines"

The other people who were excluded were the ones who wouldn't comply with the study requirements (following instructions), and people who had already received this kind of vaccination before. I hope that I don't need to explain why these folks were excluded.
Click to expand...

I know, as well as many other people know why they were excluded from the test studies, to fudge the conclusion, that is obvious, a human being can see this from just watching a drug advertisement that they're asking you to trust them, while they're providing you with side-effects that are worse than the actual original symptoms, etc.. etc.. medical industry corruption is present and will persist as long as useful idiots watch Television.

So what you've pointed out here is that this particular study, which was brought up simply because it's one of the first results that Google returns, was done properly. And the only thing you can find against it is that, for no reason, you suppose the saline placebo was impure.
Click to expand...

It wasn't done properly, and I have pointed out 2 basic simple reasons why, and I don't even have a medical degree or anything and I can see that conflict of interest exists when the company selling a drug/vaccine is the same people responsible for making up the tests.. the results are going to favor the company's product, not safety concerns.. if that was the case then why did the FDA allow Bayer to do what it did? to allow Vioxx to be sold to thousands after 55,000 Americans had already died from it?

You need to realize something:
Click to expand...

NO. YOU need to realize MANY things.

everything is a chemical.
Click to expand...

yes but bio-available chemicals and toxic chemicals are two different things here. food is not toxic, vaccines are.

The food you eat is made up of nothing but chemicals.
Click to expand...

yeah.. those chemicals are called nutrients generally (if you're not a dumb ****)


Some of those are toxic in higher doses, and toxic chemicals get absorbed into your bloodstream. There has never been a time when this wasn't the case. So by feeding a baby, you are putting toxic chemicals into its bloodstream.
Click to expand...

What the **** are you feeding your kid? cause I don't put toxic chemicals in my kids... maybe YOU do.. maybe you buy cheap china made formula.. maybe you don't understand the term organic, maybe you THINK things that are good for you are toxic.. and things that are harmful like toxic chemicals from vaccines... are good for you?!?

By the way, when it was asked of you, what evidence would change your mind, you answered that nothing ever could.
Click to expand...

What evidence would change my mind to accept toxic chemicals as medicine, you mean. That I could never be convinced of, never. I don't believe TOXIC ******* CHEMICALS can heal people.. unlike ALLOPATHS/ORTHODOX criminal spin-doctors and pharmaceutical corporations. No I would not believe in anything they produce as "medicine" until I can see some HARD data that is TRUE and INDEPENDENT from vaccine manufacturers..

So far none exists. There's not one good study out there that could convince anyone that toxic chemicals are "good for you".. sorry I don't buy into the orthodox, "lets poison you to heal you" mentality.

I think you all are nuts that believe that.


Your tone sounded like you somehow thought this was a position of strength, but to the rest of us you had just admitted that your beliefs are like a religion, where you tenaciously hold onto them without regard for any facts. You just admitted this; we knew it already, but you should realize your limitation.
Click to expand...

You think I care what you think about me? About my beliefs?

You think you'd be convinced otherwise if I were to show you data that shows time and time again, that vaccines aren't the cause of the decline in disease?

I bet you'd give me the same answer, that you would not change your mind. Regardless of the facts I show you, you will continue to believe lies spread on television, while I learn the truth, that the revolution will NOT be televised!

Do not misspell or otherwise disguise obscenities to evade the autocensor. Either type them correctly (which will cause the autocensor to replace the entire word with asterisks), mask them fully yourself (that is, type all asterisks instead of the word), or refrain from using them.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Myriad
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Psi Baba said:
Okay, so I'm reading this old thread here and when it mentions Dr. Paul Offit, I immediately think, "Damn, I read that awesome article about him in WIRED back in October and meant to start a thread about it or post a link in an autism thread. This is the perfect place for it!"

And then I get to Post #24 . . . :eye-poppi

Anyway: An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All
Click to expand...

your link states the following I thought was interesting, I've already read the article in the past;

"helped by the mainstream media, which has an interest in pumping up bad science to create a “debate” where there should be none."

the mainstream pushes vaccinations all the time!

Oh.. is this a pro-vaccine argument of a life-time.

There should just be NO debate at all, just blindly give up your health rights to the multi-national corporations, what a great idea?

*sarcasm*
 
CurtC said:
Let's say you put one kid with smallpox in a day-care center with 100 other unvaccinated kids, and did another experiment where you did the same thing with 100 vaccinated kids.

Many of those unvaccinated kids would get smallpox.

A few of the vaccinated kids would get smallpox. This is because any vaccine is not effective for 100% of people. The key idea is that there will be a big difference in the incidence of smallpox between the two groups. If everyone is vaccinated, the disease can't propagate through a population and gets eradicated, like what happened with smallpox.

So no, I wouldn't put my vaccinated kid in a room with another kid with smallpox, just because there's a small chance that he could catch it. It's a small chance, but not one I'm willing to take.
Click to expand...

I doubt that, if the kids are from well-educated parents and aren't feeding the kids crap, I'm almost certain the kids that had been vaccinated would drop like flies and the unvaccinated kids would recover from the disease.

SEE thats exactly why I don't vaccinate;

vaccines offer no real immunity, even the people that are FOR vaccines are too scared to allow their "protected" children to be around a un-vaccinated child. must not be that much of a protection... lol

Well then that proves.. the vaccines don't work and aren't worth the risk!

I'd rather take the chance of getting an illness.. than a vaccine with all the ingredients PLUS a illness.


People on the TV say all the time "safe and effective" 100% always, absolutely safe, etc etc.... mean while if you would just read the insert...
 
Capsid said:
It isn't toxic if it has no effect. At a low enough dilution it won't be toxic.
Click to expand...

a toxin is still a toxin.

toxins have effects, whether or not you see them with your naked eyes or not.

You can't tell me, that a toxin, if diluted enough, stops being a toxin..
 
SaveAmericaFightNWO said:
Well aparently some people also don't know how to post the full text, like I know how to do the first time when I post something, I don't make you search for it.
Click to expand...
Just one tiny problem: that's not allowed due to copyright laws and will earn you an infraction from our friends them mods. I should know, I just got a stern warning not too long ago for posting a public domain picture here without citing its source. Word of advice, take copyright laws very seriously here, because while you may not find them that important, the moderators certainly do;).

Thats a lie, there's tons of media talking heads that told everyone, especially those that are immunocompromised to "get your damn vaccines"
Click to expand...
Okay, so let's say there are. Problem is they aren't doctors, and they don't decide who gets vaccinated.

I know, as well as many other people know why they were excluded from the test studies, to fudge the conclusion, that is obvious, a human being can see this from just watching a drug advertisement that they're asking you to trust them, while they're providing you with side-effects that are worse than the actual original symptoms, etc.. etc.. medical industry corruption is present and will persist as long as useful idiots watch Television.
Click to expand...
They are required by law (unlike alternative practicioners, cough, cough) to list even the most vague, rare and unproven side-effects. I love how you say this makes them less trustworthy:D.

There are people more qualified than me to reply to all the statements and accusations you're flooding us with, but I will respond to this, since it's directed at me:

it wasn't an assumption, it was a question.
Click to expand...
Okay, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt--
so whats your answer? you're a big fan of CNN or Fox news aint ya?
Click to expand...
Never mind:rolleyes:.
 
SaveAmericaFightNWO said:
yes but bio-available chemicals and toxic chemicals are two different things here. food is not toxic, vaccines are.
Click to expand...

You're again, absolutely wrong at a definitional level.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxicity

Toxic chemicals are any chemical that can damage an organism.
Many fruits contain cyanide, but it is in such low levels and such an inaccessible form as to pose no threat, but those substances are both natural and toxic.

For a stronger example, many mushrooms are very toxic and can cause severe symptoms or death.

Alcohol is toxic.

Heck, water could be toxic if you drink enough of it.Link
Water intoxication (also known as hyper-hydration or water poisoning) is a potentially fatal disturbance in brain functions that results when the normal balance of electrolytes in the body is pushed outside of safe limits by over-consumption of water. Normal, healthy (physically, nutritionally and mentally) individuals have little reason to worry about accidentally consuming too much water. Nearly all deaths related to water intoxication in normal individuals have resulted either from water drinking contests, in which individuals attempt to consume high amounts of water, or long bouts of intensive exercise during which electrolytes are not properly replenished, yet excessive amounts of fluid are still consumed.[1]

Water can be considered a poison when over-consumed just like any other substance. The recommendation from the medical field is to drink about 1.2 liters per day[2] depending upon body mass. Water intoxication would only occur at levels far higher than that.
Click to expand...

So your odd division of chemicals makes absolutely no sense.
 
Cavemonster said:
Ah, there's your problem, giving nothing is not a placebo.
It really isn't, definitionally.
Click to expand...

It's not my problem. I'm not claiming that toxic chemicals are "safe and effective" they are.. they have to prove, with out a doubt.

I meant was that you have to give them nothing! as the placebo...for it to be valid... You COULD use saline solution, but I'm saying that the saline solution that THEY are using.. could also contain other ingredients.

the placebo can't be another vaccine... or even saline with other possible ingredients that are unlisted (maybe contains squalene? maybe adjuvants?)

What I'm saying is that companies.. especially pharmas, generally falsify their studies to be approved by FDA politicians, so it takes a keen eye for details to pick out the junk science from actual science.
 
Cavemonster said:
You're again, absolutely wrong at a definitional level.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxicity
Click to expand...

Really? I think you're absolutely wrong at all levels.

Toxic chemicals are any chemical that can damage an organism
Click to expand...

yea.. an apple isn't something that can harm beneficial organism in the human body.


Many fruits contain cyanide
Click to expand...

since when???? I don't eat fruits that have been sprayed with pesticides!!!!


but it is in such low levels and such an inaccessible form as to pose no threat, but those substances are both natural and toxic.
Click to expand...

toxic chemicals are still toxic chemicals, and still pose a threat, whether you believe so or not, it still is toxic. Cyanide is toxic, but not part of the natural fruit.


For a stronger example, many mushrooms are very toxic and can cause severe symptoms or death.
Click to expand...

yup, duh. Vaccines contain toxic ingredients that were purposely put in the shots and into us... mushrooms aren't forced into our blood or tissue.. we have to be willing to eat them. generally a child can't oppose to getting shots, the doctor/nurse subdue you.


Alcohol is toxic.
Click to expand...

I never said it wasn't. I don't drink alcohol. and yes I'm of age.


Heck, water could be toxic if you drink enough of it.
Click to expand...

You think that I don't know this? You think that its funny to make fun?

You think its funny or some kind of joke that when I'm talking about chemicals that ARE already toxic, in the doses they're given, in the vaccines..

you think that its just a big game to win huh?


So your odd division of chemicals makes absolutely no sense.
Click to expand...

my odd division? how about your odd way of turning the argument from TOXIC CHEMICALS IN VACCINES.... to "oh there's toxins everywhere".. well DUH, but I don't go walking around town and random people just INJECT cyanide into my arm....

PURPOSELY PUT TOXIC CHEMICALS IN THERE TO HARM US = pHARMa
 
Did you know that potatoes contain glycoalkaloids? Toxic chemicals that can cause headaches, diarrhea, cramps and in severe cases coma and death.
These are not from pesticides, they are naturally occurring.

So would you let your child eat a potato? After all you seem to have a zero tolerance policy for even low levels of "toxic chemicals"
 
Safe-Keeper said:
No, I asked how they are relevant to the discussion.
Click to expand...

Oh you did? cause you didn't make that clear about what you were asking there, cause you worded as though "is that what you call good business practices cause that's not how I would do business" rant...

It's very relevant how corporations are run, if they are the one's selling us "medicine" that is full of cancer virus and toxic ingredients..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom