Vaccines: how do I talk to my anti-vac wife about it?

[Sledge]

Nice graph but you cannot pin anything on the teflon-coated vaccine industry. Butter wouldn't melt...!

People's lives and health are not important. V$cc$n$s work!

You replace the "s" with a dollar sign when suggesting something is all about the money, for example "The Church of $cientology." If you go about replacing letters at random, you look like a total...

... wait, you think vaccines are a con. Your little error isn't going to make you look any worse.

 

[laca]

Yes, it does.

You are ridiculous.

You are total Poe, you are scientifically ignorant, yet try to claim it for your retarded, backward ideology.



You don't believe that bacteria and viruses cause disease.

You don't believe in vaccination.

You don't believe in any expertise in the medical field beyond, the reluctant, repair of people after trauma.

You provided a paper that stated less that 2% of scientists had done anything fraudulent with their research.

If this is not blatent cretinism, I don't know what it.

 

[pakeha]

ThaNKS FOR THE LINKS!

...
You might want to look here, and his four part series. You will see why Trusetheeker refuses to answer.

You should also enjoy this one:
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/

One of the more recent entries, Random Flu Thoughts by Dr. Crislip (an infectious disease doctor), had this pithy observation:

He also has podcasts: A Gobbet 'o Pus and Quackcast (which is his ScienceBasedMedicine posts read with his wonderfully snarky style).

Now exactly what caused the 90% decline in measles morbidity between 1960 and 1970 in the USA? I have not seen you answer that rather simple question.

(I suggest that you do not confuse the word "morbidity" with "mortality")

 

[Chris Haynes]

That plus the nasty chemicals and viruses in the vaccines. It's a horrible intrusion into the child imo. Are the vaccines needed? .....

In order to answer that, you need to tell us if getting measles from a wild virus is safer than getting it from a vaccine. Do show your work by posting the title, journal, date and main author of the peer reviewed papers that support your statement that vaccines are not necessary.

Remember that measles tends to cause severe affects from deafness, paralysis, blindness and even death in one out of a thousand cases. So make sure your evidence is quite solid. It also spreads quite easily and quickly, which is why it returns so fast. That is why one kid can infect so many in San Diego, CA... and why it went from almost extinct to endemic in the UK shortly after the media got a hold of Wakefield's error filled press release (his Lancet paper did not show a relationship between any MMR and autism, he just lied in the press conference).

Ouch. As Tomblvd wrote, I'm a bit late about this. I guess I could contribute to that thread but it would take a lot of research to learn about possible conspiracies. Alex Jones has talked a lot about vaccine conspiracies for example and I recently happened to watch a video where Bill Gates said that vaccines reduced populations!

Have you ever seen the videos here:
http://www.gapminder.org/ ?

Go, and learn something. If you have time, check out this forty minute video.

I happen to have first hand experience of vaccine testing.

Me too! I was a college student used in the 1976 Swine Flu tests. I got two vaccines. I am still alive.

 

[Capsid]

Me too! I was a college student used in the 1976 Swine Flu tests. I got two vaccines. I am still alive.

Sorry, I meant that I am involved in the testing procedures. Although I have had a flu jab every year for more than 15 years now. The only side effect I appear to have is a worrying addiction to an internet forum.

 

[Anders Lindman]

In order to answer that, you need to tell us if getting measles from a wild virus is safer than getting it from a vaccine. Do show your work by posting the title, journal, date and main author of the peer reviewed papers that support your statement that vaccines are not necessary.

Remember that measles tends to cause severe affects from deafness, paralysis, blindness and even death in one out of a thousand cases. So make sure your evidence is quite solid. It also spreads quite easily and quickly, which is why it returns so fast. That is why one kid can infect so many in San Diego, CA... and why it went from almost extinct to endemic in the UK shortly after the media got a hold of Wakefield's error filled press release (his Lancet paper did not show a relationship between any MMR and autism, he just lied in the press conference).



Have you ever seen the videos here:
http://www.gapminder.org/ ?

Go, and learn something. If you have time, check out this forty minute video.

What I meant was that we need to strive for something better than vaccines to be invented.

"Since the mid-1980s, many vaccines have been added to the schedule. Now, children could receive as many as 24 shots by 2 years of age and five shots in a single visit." -- http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine...ine-schedule/history-of-vaccine-schedule.html

Notice that it says as many as 24 SHOTS by the age of 2 years. Each shot can contain several vaccines at the same time. This is an alarming trend imo. I didn't say that the vaccines are useless. That I don't know about. It's a less intrusive protection I'm wanting. The progress of biotech is accelerating fast at the moment and will continue to follow an exponential curve. That means massive improvement within just a few decades. Already today scientists have started to use for example nanotechnology in medicine:

"Using an innovative nanotechnology-based "vaccine," researchers were able to successfully restore normal blood sugar in mice with type 1 diabetes, and also slow the onset of diabetes in mice at risk for the disease." -- http://www.jdrf.org/index.cfm?page_id=113648

Some may think that holy crock, nanotechnology in the body sounds even scarier than ordinary vaccines, lol, but I think with the emergence of strong artificial intelligence things like nanotechnology can become entirely safe and extremely powerful and as some experts say can even reverse biological aging. So already within say two decades from now we may have better alternatives to ordinary vaccines.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

Just keep repeating the mantras and ignore all evidence to the contrary. Simples!

I've worked in molecular genetics and understand how vaccines work. I've also used the properties of the immune system in a large number of experiments that can only be understood if you know how the immune system works in detail.

In that work I've also worked extensively with both bacteria and viruses, so I know how they work, how they interact with each other and other organisms and how the immune system recognizes, targets and removes these foreign organisms from your body.

Because of this I also have intricate knowledge of just how easy it is to overcome the immune system and the myriad mechanisms used by microorganism and viruses to do exactly that. And how we can use immunization to train the immune system to still recognize such major threats without exposing the body to the ACTUAL threat.

Strange how in all that time and with all those experiments I've never actually seen your evidence to the contrary.
Tell me, what exact work did you do to discover your evidence, and where is it chronicled?

 

[Capsid]

What I meant was that we need to strive for something better than vaccines to be invented.

"Since the mid-1980s, many vaccines have been added to the schedule. Now, children could receive as many as 24 shots by 2 years of age and five shots in a single visit." -- http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine...ine-schedule/history-of-vaccine-schedule.html

Notice that it says as many as 24 SHOTS by the age of 2 years. Each shot can contain several vaccines at the same time. This is an alarming trend imo. I didn't say that the vaccines are useless. That I don't know about. It's a less intrusive protection I'm wanting. The progress of biotech is accelerating fast at the moment and will continue to follow an exponential curve. That means massive improvement within just a few decades. Already today scientists have started to use for example nanotechnology in medicine:

"Using an innovative nanotechnology-based "vaccine," researchers were able to successfully restore normal blood sugar in mice with type 1 diabetes, and also slow the onset of diabetes in mice at risk for the disease." -- http://www.jdrf.org/index.cfm?page_id=113648

Some may think that holy crock, nanotechnology in the body sounds even scarier than ordinary vaccines, lol, but I think with the emergence of strong artificial intelligence things like nanotechnology can become entirely safe and extremely powerful and as some experts say can even reverse biological aging. So already within say two decades from now we may have better alternatives to ordinary vaccines.

As I have said before the immune system has the capacity to respond to millions of antigens. 24 shots is a drop in the ocean.

 

[Lukraak_Sisser]

What I meant was that we need to strive for something better than vaccines to be invented.

"Since the mid-1980s, many vaccines have been added to the schedule. Now, children could receive as many as 24 shots by 2 years of age and five shots in a single visit." -- http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine...ine-schedule/history-of-vaccine-schedule.html

Notice that it says as many as 24 SHOTS by the age of 2 years. Each shot can contain several vaccines at the same time. This is an alarming trend imo. I didn't say that the vaccines are useless. That I don't know about. It's a less intrusive protection I'm wanting. The progress of biotech is accelerating fast at the moment and will continue to follow an exponential curve. That means massive improvement within just a few decades. Already today scientists have started to use for example nanotechnology in medicine:

"Using an innovative nanotechnology-based "vaccine," researchers were able to successfully restore normal blood sugar in mice with type 1 diabetes, and also slow the onset of diabetes in mice at risk for the disease." -- http://www.jdrf.org/index.cfm?page_id=113648

Some may think that holy crock, nanotechnology in the body sounds even scarier than ordinary vaccines, lol, but I think with the emergence of strong artificial intelligence things like nanotechnology can become entirely safe and extremely powerful and as some experts say can even reverse biological aging. So already within say two decades from now we may have better alternatives to ordinary vaccines.

Sure, maybe one day we will have something better, but until then we work with what we have. And what we have is quite good and safe, certainly a lot safer than doing nothing as every statistic shows.

 

[Tomblvd]

What I meant was that we need to strive for something better than vaccines to be invented.

"Since the mid-1980s, many vaccines have been added to the schedule. Now, children could receive as many as 24 shots by 2 years of age and five shots in a single visit." -- http://www.chop.edu/service/vaccine...ine-schedule/history-of-vaccine-schedule.html

Notice that it says as many as 24 SHOTS by the age of 2 years. Each shot can contain several vaccines at the same time. This is an alarming trend imo. I didn't say that the vaccines are useless. That I don't know about. It's a less intrusive protection I'm wanting.

The total number of antigens in the entire childhood vaccine schedule right now is less than the old smallpox vaccine. So while children are getting more vaccines, there are less active ingredients than there were even 20 years ago.

You need to find something else to be excited about. This one's a dead end for you.

 

[trusetheeker]

Another study:

"The discontinuation of thimerosal-containing vaccines in Denmark in 1992 was followed by an increase in the incidence of autism. Our ecological data do not support a correlation between thimerosal-containing vaccines and the incidence of autism." -- http://www.pediatricsdigest.mobi/content/112/3/604.full

How can the removal of mercury from vaccine correlate with the increase of autism? Sure, it could be other factors yet I find it curious how the removal of the mercury matches an increase of autism.

The abstract doesn't say what they replaced the thimerosal with! Sugar-free (or no added sugar) drinks just replace sugar with other sweeteners notably aspartame. Vaccines in multi-use vials without thimerosal will just use a different preservative. Of course, all other preservatives used will be absolutely safe!

According to the FDA, here's one reason why they use preservatives:

Tragic consequences have followed the use of multi-dose vials that did not contain a preservative and have served as the impetus for this requirement. One particularly telling incident from Australia is described by Sir Graham S. Wilson in his classic book, The Hazards of Immunization

In January 1928, in the early stages of an immunization campaign against diphtheria, Dr. Ewing George Thomson, Medical Officer of Health of Bundaberg, began the injection of children with toxin-antitoxin mixture. The material was taken from an India-rubber-capped bottle containing 10 mL of TAM. On the 17th, 20th, 21, and 24th January, Dr. Thomson injected subcutaneously a total of 21 children without ill effect. On the 27th a further 21 children were injected.Of these children .eleven died on the 28th and one on the 29th. (Wilson 1967)

This disaster was investigated by a Royal Commission and the final sentence in the summary of their findings reads as follows:

The consideration of all possible evidence concerning the deaths at Bundeberg points to the injection of living staphylococci as the cause of the fatalities.

---
Besides being evidence of people suffering and dying at the hands of executioners (oops) vaccinators (which these pro-vaxers insist on denying,) it also shows that if you're going to force this crap into people in the name of saving their lives, you'd best make sure it doesn't kill them outright.
---
How about this for a confidence-inspiring statement from the AAP in 2003:

Although no published studies to date have compared the incidence of neurodevelopmental delay in children who received thimerosal-free or thimerosal-containing vaccines, several facts are reassuring that the level of mercury contained in vaccines was not likely to be harmful.

But really, although pumping mercury into a child's body makes as little sense as pumping flouride, aluminum, iodine, etc especially when you're not measuring how much dosage of same they're getting from other sources, there's nothing to say that it's the additives that are causing damage. It just might be any of the other crap that just naturally swims along in the serum from the vaccine host whether human, monkey or chicken that is the culprit.

 

[Belz...]

Sorry but you'll find that my username is 'trusetheeker'

Ah, yes. But you'll find that it's so nonsensical that it's understandable that people read it as "truthseeker".

 

[ehcks]

Nice graph but you cannot pin anything on the teflon-coated vaccine industry. Butter wouldn't melt...!

People's lives and health are not important. V$cc$n$s work!

Vaccines are the least profitable thing a company can do about diseases.

I shouldn't even have to compare the numbers. A vaccine costs around $20 at most, many lasting your entire life, some needing repeats at 10 years. Sitting in a hospital with an actual disease that requires treatment is over $200 a day in the US.

And if everyone were vaccinated for a disease, that disease would go extinct and the vaccine would be taken off the market.

 

[excaza]

Vaccines are the least profitable thing a company can do about diseases.

I'm sick of the 'vaccines are only for profit' line getting trotted out weekly in these types of threads. Prescription drugs (you know, what they'd give you if you got sick) have far higher profit margins than vaccines could ever dream of achieving. If there was some vast 'Big Pharma' conspiracy to make money, it would be focused on eliminating vaccines, not keeping them around.

 

[Tomblvd]

I'm sick of the 'vaccines are only for profit' line getting trotted out weekly in these types of threads. Prescription drugs (you know, what they'd give you if you got sick) have far higher profit margins than vaccines could ever dream of achieving. If there was some vast 'Big Pharma' conspiracy to make money, it would be focused on eliminating vaccines, not keeping them around.

What you and ehcks said....

It is utterly silly to think "BigPharma" and physicians would choose to eliminate sick people if they were truly only interested in profits.

 

[Belz...]

Vaccines are the least profitable thing a company can do about diseases.

I shouldn't even have to compare the numbers. A vaccine costs around $20 at most, many lasting your entire life, some needing repeats at 10 years. Sitting in a hospital with an actual disease that requires treatment is over $200 a day in the US.

And if everyone were vaccinated for a disease, that disease would go extinct and the vaccine would be taken off the market.

+1

I don't understand that anti-vaccine argument. It doesn't make sense on the face of it.

At least when the anti-pharma people rant about selling medecine to people who don't need it have a point.

 

[Tatyana]

Apparently you're not familiar with the respiratory system otherwise you'd know where the carbon dioxide comes from.
---

Carbon dioxide is not from the respiratory system.

The lungs only eliminate CO2, well the lungs and one other organ in the body.

Go on, tell me where it is from, you have the googles to help you as well.

Also, tell me how the innate immune system works in a paragraph, what is one of the mechanism the body deals with bacteria in the innate system?

 

[LarianLeQuella]

If there was some vast 'Big Pharma' conspiracy to make money, it would be focused on eliminating vaccines, not keeping them around.

Holy christ on a cracker! I think you finally hit on the actual truth here. Anti-vaxxers like trusetheeker and the rest of that brigade are not as loony as they appear. Instead, they are in the pockets of Big Pharma trying to eliminate vaccines! It's so obvious now!

 

[Tomblvd]

Holy christ on a cracker! I think you finally hit on the actual truth here. Anti-vaxxers like trusetheeker and the rest of that brigade are not as loony as they appear. Instead, they are in the pockets of Big Pharma trying to eliminate vaccines! It's so obvious now!

Thanks to you all here, we have finally laid bare the real conspiracy.

I lay it out on the other thread.

Well done.

 

[trusetheeker]

Is chlorine in the water a toxin?

Of course it is. That's why the professionals insist on distilled water. Unfortunately, most people don't have easy access to potable distilled water although I understand that several US grocery stores do stock it. If you want it in the UK, you have to buy your own distiller or order it from specialist suppliers.