Triumphrat

Owenbrau

Fraud is what the anti-vaccine movement is based on. That's what started it all, fraud and the desire to make money suing companies and doctors. So now they have people distrusting science and medicine. Vaccine-preventable diseases kill more people in the US than are killed with guns.

Used to be you'd go back to school in the fall, wondering if all your classmates had SURVIVED the summer, or if you'd lost any to polio. We don't have that worry anymore. We killed it. With vaccines. I am of the very last age group that routinely got smallpox vaccine. You don't have to now, we killed it. With vaccines, and even more effectively than polio as it no longer exists in the wild anywhere in the world.


Sent from my iPhone using Motorcycle.com App

__________________
There is a fine line between "hobby", and "mental illness"

Johnnystriple

If I understand the vaccine, it may help you avoid the flu and then again, if you do get the flu it wont be as saver as if you didn't get the vaccine. Am I misinformed?

spank86

Don't, twenty pages later he'll only tell you he understands your stats but instinctively feels them To be wrong and you'll wish you never started.

__________________

spank86

Best case it saves you from the flu and the vaccine gives no after effects.

Worst case you get some small after effects, a bit of aching and the like as your immune system adapts to the dead vaccine but nothing harmful and then you get a strain of flu you WEREN'T vaccinated for and the vaccine does nothing.

There's no point where the vaccine can make it lots worse for you (barring unlikely catastrophe) basically the vaccine can't make the flue you Do get worse, it just reduces the likelihood of you getting it.

__________________

alexibrow

Utter rubbish, vaccines had nothing to do with the eradication of smallpox, nor any other disease.

And I'm not speaking from a position of ignorance, I've spent a lot of time conducting my own research into vaccines and immunology, and what I have found is that we are all being lied to on a grand scale by those with a vested interest in the sale of vaccines.

And I wasn't completely truthful about there being no proper research into the effectiveness of vaccines: a huge clinical trial was conducted in Germany in the 1970s IIRC, that concluded that people who had been vaccinated with a particular tuberculosis vaccine were more at risk of contracting TB than those who weren't given the vaccine.

The problem with the research is twofold:

1) In order to conduct a meaningful trial, you have to vaccinate one group of subjects, but not another; it's considered unethical to withhold vaccinations from people because they might get sick with the disease that the vaccine is designed to prevent. This is a catch 22 situation, and is the main reason that this type of research is not carried out.

2) Instead, prototype vaccines are injected into live subjects, and their levels of antibodies are measured before and after. The percentage of subjects that produce antibodies in response to the vaccine is called its efficacy level. When you are told "this vaccine is 70% effective", this is what they mean.

There is a huge problem here though: no-one, nobody at all, understands the relationship between antibodies and immunity: THEY ARE NOT THE SAME THING. Scientists still can't explain why people with little or no antibodies are able to demonstrate immunity, and people with high antibody levels can get sick.

These are well established scientific facts that you can find out for yourselves, if you ever doubted the conventional wisdom and thus had reason to.

I will dig out the evidence and post it here, that proves that vaccines had sod all to do with the eradication of smallpox.

Oh, and just so you know: the polio virus is probably in some of us right now. It still exists. The reason you don't get sick is because your (on the whole) immune system is doing its job properly.

Confused yet? If you are, it's because most if not all of what you've been told is wrong.

Sent from my pet cat using pheromones.

__________________

spank86

So what did eradicate smallpox at the exact same time that we began vaccination?


Also it's not unethical to not give people vaccinations that we don't know would work at all, it's perfectly ethical, they are in the same position as all the other people NOT in the study who don't get vaccinations.

__________________

alexibrow

The answer to your first question is almost certainly the improved living conditions that were being brought about at the time.

Your second statement only makes sense if we completely disregard the myths and lies that we are fed. People believe in vaccines, they are the stuff of legend. Why would the big pharma companies conduct extremely lengthy and expensive double-blind trials, when they can get away with demonstrating the ludicrous efficacy measure for a fraction of the cost? That's all they have to do by law. No other drugs that I know of are introduced without proper studies, but with vaccines, everyone's blinded by the faith.

This sounds ridiculous, and it is. It doesn't make it any less true though.

Have a look at this web page showing the decline in death rates from many diseases that we are told were eradicated/improved by vaccines. Look at how the death rates were already in marked decline before the vaccine was introduced.

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/decline1.html

There is a real vaccine conspiracy being perpetrated by the pharma giants, because somehow (a long time ago) we all started to believe in vaccines. It's a very emotive subject, and in my experience most people become extremely defensive and even openly hostile when someone questions this particular belief system.

My research led me to believe something else. What conclusions has your research on vaccines led you to?

spank86

mortality is a bad measure because other methods such as improved health and living standards have made the diseases more survivable, that's not the same as reducing incidence of the disease.

__________________

dogtired

Don't be silly Lee, every skiving Aussie knows that sick days are for making long weekends. I find the concept of taking a day off work just to be sick preposterous!
And a serious waste of a perfectly good day, you could be riding, golfing, surfing, drinking etc etc...

__________________
I'd do me...

Deuteronomy 25:11-12

alexibrow

Agreed, but it's the mortality rates that are consistently being misrepresented by the health professionals.

I don't think that there are any other statistics available from a long way back, as people didn't keep much in the way of records in terms of incidence of disease.

This part of your statement is the most interesting to me:

You're absolutely right: much more survivable. So why do we need to vaccinate against diseases that are no longer harmful for most people (assuming that vaccines stop us from contracting the diseases)?