Vaccine/autism CT discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anders Lindman said:
There are several possible scenarios ranging from vaccines being a conspiracy already from the beginning to vaccines only being used for conspiracy purposes the last decades/years. Or no conspiracy at all.
Click to expand...

Give it up Anders, some posters on the other thread have figured out what you and Clayton and tru are really up to. YOU are the ones being paid by BigPharma and the physicians to reduce or eliminate vaccines.

It is obvious that vaccines essentially eliminate the disease they are targeted for (at least temporarily, sometimes for good). It is also obvious that pharmaceutical makers can make a whole lot more money on drugs used to treat diseases that are now rare. In addition, physicians and hospitals can make more money treating diseases than they make just giving shots.

So it is also completely obvious that you guys are the conspiracy. As you frighten parents into delaying or skipping vaccines, more children and adults will become ill from vaccine-preventable diseases and their sequellae. So the drug companies, doctors and hospitals make more money.

You cannot deny it. It is perfectly clear.
 
Travis said:
No, this is not proof of anything about the mercury.

People got scared for no reason. People vote. Politicians want those votes. Politicians pushed to have their unfounded fear accommodated.

If they were scared of a tree because it was supposedly haunted and then the politicians have the military blow up the tree is that proof of haunted trees?
Click to expand...

It was a vicious circle. Some groups started raising fears about the Mercury, people started to panic and avoid the vaccine, the government puts pressure on to remove the Mercury to maintain vaccination rates, the companies comply to keep their supply contracts, and then the original CT's claim the removal of the Mercury proves they were right and are emboldened for their next nonsense claim.
 
Tomblvd said:
Give it up Anders, some posters on the other thread have figured out what you and Clayton and tru are really up to. YOU are the ones being paid by BigPharma and the physicians to reduce or eliminate vaccines.

It is obvious that vaccines essentially eliminate the disease they are targeted for (at least temporarily, sometimes for good). It is also obvious that pharmaceutical makers can make a whole lot more money on drugs used to treat diseases that are now rare. In addition, physicians and hospitals can make more money treating diseases than they make just giving shots.

So it is also completely obvious that you guys are the conspiracy. As you frighten parents into delaying or skipping vaccines, more children and adults will become ill from vaccine-preventable diseases and their sequellae. So the drug companies, doctors and hospitals make more money.

You cannot deny it. It is perfectly clear.
Click to expand...

Yes, I saw that, lol. From a conspiracy perspective I don't think it's about money on the highest level. Money is merely a lower level control tool. At the top of the compartmentalized conspiracy structure is some other goal than mere profit. A Brave New World, anyone? ;)
 
Anders Lindman said:
Yes, I saw that, lol. From a conspiracy perspective I don't think it's about money on the highest level. Money is merely a lower level control tool. At the top of the compartmentalized conspiracy structure is some other goal than mere profit. A Brave New World, anyone? ;)
Click to expand...

No.

We aren't laughing with you, we're laughing at you.

In case you didn't notice.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I don't inject beer into my veins.
Click to expand...

You don't inject vaccines into veins either.

Alchol, ethyl alcohol, you can drink. The body metabolises it quite quickly.

Methyl alcohol, or rubbing alcohol, can lead to all sorts of problem.

Thimerosal = ethyl mercury and the body metabolises it very quickly.

Methyl mercury = big tuna fish/some fish = biomagnification to a significant degree can be a problem.

It really helps to know a bit of science, but organic chemistry is typically beyond most people.

Most humans are still naked apes, and to quote Douglas Adams 'still think digital watches are really cool' and have no idea about science anymore as it has become rather complicated.

This is where a little bit of information and knowledge does become dangerous.

Just because you can use teh googles and do a bit of research doesn't mean what you find is true or that you actually have the full concept, or can put it in context.
 
Another interesting phenomena has to do with serious side effects....

Clayton Moore said:
Split from the "what do you guys believe?" thread here.
Posted By: LashL


The proof of the pudding that there are conspiracies at high levels of society is media's insistence that there are NONE.

Let's see. Big pharma and the mainstream media insist vaccines are absolutely safe but close to NONE of the vaccines are tested with a control group. They have convinced much of the American public that questioning the safety of vaccines is criminal.

Yet commercial after commercial airs up front and personal that if you've taken DRUG X, Y, or Z contact my law firm. Now you know those drugs, I think ZOLOFT is the star of the newer ripe for litigation drugs, were supposed to be tested with a control group! What happened.

And the media pretty much crucifies anyone who dares suggest a link between autism and vaccines. Why would the media trust and speak out for an industry/community with such a poor drug testing track record?
Click to expand...

Another interesting phenomena has to do with serious side effects that do not surface until the offending drug has been FDA approved and has been prescribed to tens/hundreds of thousands, out there in the open market for a while....

The classic example was/is the Vioxx example, though there are many just like it.

In the case of Merck's Vioxx/Rofecoxib, the drug hit the market like gangbusters. It was/is an ibuprofen type drug, modified/selective in the sense that it tended to not cause problems with stomach ulcers and stomach bleeding as most drugs in its class typically do. The elderly can be particularly affected in this regard.

So the drug in mainstream clinical trials appeared safe. It got launched, and for a while, Merck was raking it in big time. People with every sort of ache and pain were taking the stuff, drug reps were pushing it like mad, docs handing it out like candy. THEN, BOOM!, "out of the blue" people start having heart attacks. WHAT? HEART ATTACKS?

Turns out the drug causes problems in this regard, and during the early clinical trials, there were not enough guinnea pigs that had gotten a whiff of the stuff to really tell the extent and nature of potential problems. So a few thousand people try Vioxx and it looks OK. Then the drug goes FDA approved. Now you have millions exposed and the statistical power of that real life experiment/clinical trial far exceeds the statistical reach of the safety trials leading up to the FDA's approval and Merck's launch.

So the system is flawed in this regard. One cannot tell what the side effects are going to be until many of the drugs get more exposure/more use post approval, Many drugs tend not to get the exposure required to have all the potential problems teased out until these drugs are approved and on the open market for a while. Then, after tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of cumulative doses, then and only then, do you start sometimes to pick up on some really nasty and threatening stuff.

It's scary really. You should always be exceedingly careful about drugs that first hit the American market for this reason. Neckache? Sure, take some of this VIOXX.... see you in the coronary care unit first thing in the morning.....
 
Last edited:
So why release the 'unmanipulated' data? Why not just carry on as before or release lower figures to show things are better?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
So why release the 'unmanipulated' data? Why not just carry on as before or release lower figures to show things are better?
Click to expand...


Because then there wouldn't be a conspiracy!

Duh.

But seriously, did you see how easily the poster invented a completely new conspiracy theory?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
So why release the 'unmanipulated' data? Why not just carry on as before or release lower figures to show things are better?
Click to expand...

Because those who had manipulated the data believed that removing the mercury from the vaccines would fix the problem. What they didn't know, was that they were being fooled by the pharma industry. Mercury is not the problem. Some other ingredient in the vaccines is what causes autism.
 
So don't they look at their own numbers before releasing them? Why stop fiddling with the figures when it will blow your cover?

It's amazing that anyone involved in a conspiracy is very clever and very stupid at the same time.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
So don't they look at their own numbers before releasing them? Why stop fiddling with the figures when it will blow your cover?

It's amazing that anyone involved in a conspiracy is very clever and very stupid at the same time.
Click to expand...

We can look at this that posted earlier as an example:

How can the fraudulent scientific paper published in the medical journal The Lancet connecting vaccines with autism have passed the peer-review process unless the official statistics had been manipulated? See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_controversy
Click to expand...

The reason the paper could pass the peer-review is because the statistics for vaccines and autism fitted the claimed result of the study. Later on the statistics was manipulated to remove the correlation between vaccinations and autism.

The governments manipulated the statistics and then removed the mercury from the vaccines and believed that would fix the problem. So they didn't think they needed to manipulate the statistics for future years. They were fooled! Mhuahaha. When the actual statistics for the later years started coming in the governments realized that mercury wasn't the cause of autism but then it was too late manipulate the statistics again.
 
Last edited:
So let me get this right.

Mercury in vaccines causes autism. So the government removed the mercury. Then the CT changes to vaccines caused autism? Eventually it will devolve into needles cause autism.

Out of curiosity, sine the actual diseases in question don't cause autism? Then how can the vaccine?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom