• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Vaccine/autism CT discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Clayton Moore said:
Good job. Now go get the anthrax vaccine series that they are trying to test on babies.
Click to expand...

I know for a fact when you previously made this claim it turned out 1) you misread the actual article and 2) you were completely debunked.

Now you claiming it again. Do you think we have such short memories or is it you?
 
Robrob said:
I know for a fact when you previously made this claim it turned out 1) you misread the actual article and 2) you were completely debunked.

Now you claiming it again. Do you think we have such short memories or is it you?
Click to expand...

This is absolutely standard for Clayton. It was very clear that Clayton misunderstood the original, dated article and this was pointed out to him. Now he returns with exactly his original claim. It's not a matter of intepretation! The facts are very clear: no one is testing an anthrax vaccine on children.

If the debunking is repeated, Clayton will reply with, "Baloney," and a laughing dog. He will then switch to a different subject, only to post the claim again after a few weeks.

I find it remarkable Clayton doesn't get bored with this approach, and I don't know why he thinks it is a winning strategy. It only undermines his position further.
 
pakeha said:
This sounds familiar, CM.
Could you source this claim, please?
Click to expand...
Clayton really seems to enjoy chasing his own repeatedly debunked tail. Maybe he assumes lurkers like myself haven't been paying attention? And of course we're not smart enough to see 1) he uses a lot of discredited sources or 2) cherry picks credible ones to try to fit his "hypothesis", or 3) just frankly makes stuff up. Sorry Clayton, no one here is buying your BS.
 
Straw Man said:
You don't really have the hang of the Stundie yet, or perhaps you do.

A single Measles and Rubella vaccine is available in the UK, but not so for the Mumps vaccine at the present time.
Click to expand...

Pshaw. I am sure Clayton can give a REALLY good explanation why two of the three only appear to be available...
 
Clayton Moore said:
If single vaccines were being withdrawn in order to push the MMR vaccine then why is it that the single measles and singles rubella vaccines are available?
Click to expand...
Stundie
Click to expand...
I was trying to work out why what I'd said might be stupid.

It occurred to me that the makers of MMR vaccine and the makers of the single vaccines might be different. It turns out that Merck made both the single mumps vaccine and MMR but not measles or rubella vaccines. So maybe Clayton thinks that Merck had a cunning plan to increase sales of MMR by withdrawing the mumps vaccine but this wouldn't affect the other single vaccines which aren't made by Merck? That's the best explanation I can think of.

Of course, that would assume that they'd actually get an increase in sales of MMR by withdrawing the single mumps vaccine - and an increase that would be greater than the loss of income from the single mumps vaccine. And that they would, like Clayton, be willing to see children who didn't get MMR get sick because they were left unprotected from mumps. So for this to be the case, we'd have to assume that (a) Merck thought there would be a financial advantage and (b) that Merck are as callous as Clayton.

On the other hand, Sanofi Pasteur have single measles and rubella vaccines licensed for use in the UK and an MMR vaccine licensed for use in the UK. They haven't withdrawn their single measles vaccine. Even if Merck did think that withdrawing single vaccines would increase their profit from MMR (and that's a pretty big assumption), it seems that Sanofi Pasteur don't.
 
No he doesn't. Not knowing what he's talking about has never stopped him before.
 
jdc324 said:
I was trying to work out why what I'd said might be stupid.

It occurred to me that the makers of MMR vaccine and the makers of the single vaccines might be different. It turns out that Merck made both the single mumps vaccine and MMR but not measles or rubella vaccines. So maybe Clayton thinks that Merck had a cunning plan to increase sales of MMR by withdrawing the mumps vaccine but this wouldn't affect the other single vaccines which aren't made by Merck? That's the best explanation I can think of.

Of course, that would assume that they'd actually get an increase in sales of MMR by withdrawing the single mumps vaccine - and an increase that would be greater than the loss of income from the single mumps vaccine. And that they would, like Clayton, be willing to see children who didn't get MMR get sick because they were left unprotected from mumps. So for this to be the case, we'd have to assume that (a) Merck thought there would be a financial advantage and (b) that Merck are as callous as Clayton.

On the other hand, Sanofi Pasteur have single measles and rubella vaccines licensed for use in the UK and an MMR vaccine licensed for use in the UK. They haven't withdrawn their single measles vaccine. Even if Merck did think that withdrawing single vaccines would increase their profit from MMR (and that's a pretty big assumption), it seems that Sanofi Pasteur don't.
Click to expand...

So how are you going to get the mumps vaccine?
 
Clayton Moore said:
So how are you going to get the mumps vaccine?
Click to expand...

Oh, look, you're quoting a post that kills your argument in order to ask a question that changes the subject while not actually addressing the quoted post in any way.

What a surprise.
 
Well, we are often stunned by your posts, but I don't think that's what you meant.
 
Clayton Moore said:
So if you can only get the mumps vaccine in the MMR you have to get the MMR.
There's no alternative.

Stundies all around.
Click to expand...

So one manufacturer withdrew a product to benefit a different manufacturer?

Besides, don't you complain there are too many vaccines? Wouldn't a single combined jab be better?


What stops you obtaining a single mumps jab from a different manufacturer? Or isyourargument now that you cant buy something it is not profitable to make?


Oh, and have you submitted these "stundies" or do you believe you are the one to declare winners?
 
Clayton Moore said:
So how are you going to get the mumps vaccine?
Click to expand...
Well, that was my original point: you can't. At least, not in England and Wales. Unless you have the MMR vaccine.

So... everyone who advocates single vaccines is in effect advocating leaving children unprotected against mumps. Which I think is thoroughly irresponsible.

Personally, I made sure I was protected by going to my GP's surgery, asking them to check which recommended vaccines I'd had, and getting two doses of MMR vaccine to make sure I was vaccinated against measles, mumps and rubella. This means that I am protected against those three diseases - and, perhaps more importantly, that my friends' children who are too young to be vaccinated can't get any of those diseases from me. Because I won't have them to pass on. Because I've been immunised against them.

My message is "protect yourself and others: get vaccinated". Yours appears to be "get whichever single vaccines you can... and hope for the best". Am I being unfair?
 
Email from Experimental Vaccines


Pandemrix Vaccine Linked To Narcolepsy
by EVaccines

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7MRJ9aYZM4
The New World Orders “big pharma division” has gone to great lengths to ensure that you get the medications and vaccinations you deserve. Only this time they have been exposed in their idea of what ensure and deserve really mean. The Pandemrix H1N1 vaccination given to Europeans living in Sweden & Finland has been linked to multiple narcolepsy cases occurring in children and adolescents ever since the man made 2009 swine flu pandemic was declared and the false solutions were presented. GlaxoSmithKline is the manufacture of the bunk flu vaccine that is now a banned substance in both the United States and Europe having failed on numerous attempts to cover up their actions they have plead guilty to fraud. With charges revolving around anti-depressant medications being prescribed to children and having paid out 3 billion dollars in fines we can see what their true agenda is; profits.

Pandemrix Vaccine Banned

What Next Weight A Loss Vaccine?

Narcolepsy is a neurological disorder that affects a person’s sleeping cycles causing them to inadvertently loss their ability to remain awake. This symptom is the most dangerous aspect of the disorder merely walking down a flight of stair may lead to a broken arm and head injuries from this loss of consciousness. The vaccine Pandemrix has now been directly linked to creating this neurological disorder by provoking or damaging the immune system either indirectly or directly. This study indicates that vaccines can be used to damage the body’s ability to regulate itself acting as a catalyst for creating disorders and illnesses. This is just one case where the effects of the vaccinations started to express themselves ahead of schedule. What if these symptoms would have showed up a decade later, who would have connected the dots? These experiments on humanity are ongoing and will only stop when their goals are reached or when the populations have been reduced to groups of sterilized subservient workers who are dedicated, medicated and vaccinated!
Click to expand...


2009? And people are getting multiple MMR shots? Incredible.
 
I want to know why they are suppressing the Langstrom 'Luck Virus' Vaccinations!

they seemd to work very well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom