it's not 97%. Vaccines are effective for 85% to 95% so an unvaccinated kid will increase the risk of disease for everyone that may be exposed.

Example:

"In a high school of 1,000 students, none has ever had measles. All but 5 of the students have had two doses of measles vaccine, and so are fully immunized. The entire student body is exposed to measles, and every susceptible student becomes infected. The 5 unvaccinated students will be infected, of course. But of the 995 who have been vaccinated, we would expect several not to respond to the vaccine. The efficacy rate for two doses of measles vaccine can be higher than 99%. In this class, 7 students do not respond, and they, too, become infected. Therefore 7 of 12, or about 58%, of the cases occur in students who have been fully vaccinated.

As you can see, this doesn?t prove the vaccine didn?t work ? only that most of the children in the class had been vaccinated, so those who were vaccinated and did not respond outnumbered those who had not been vaccinated. Looking at it another way, 100% of the children who had not been vaccinated got measles, compared with less than 1% of those who had been vaccinated. Measles vaccine protected most of the class; if nobody in the class had been vaccinated, there would probably have been 1,000 cases of measles.?

The logic of this statement is sophist. The measles and mumps can be carried by a vaccinated child who does not get sick but can still infect others. Therefore, regardless of whether a child has been vaccinated or not those viruses can still be transmitted in that population and even if 100% were inoculated some will still contract the illness. Also, your logic assumes all un vaccinated children would contract it which is not necessarily true. It is a hypothetical assumption to the point you are making.

Yes, vaccinated children will stand a higher chance of resistance so please don't think I am trying to debate that. I am just saying exposure is still imminent regardless of whether a kid is vaccinated or not and the traditional method of quarantining a kid that comes down with mumps or measles has worked fine for many many years. Also, modern medicine has seriously reduced mortality from those illnesses regardless.

I think you're completely downplaying a) just how contagious measles is b) the complications that come along with it and c) the economic costs.

From what I've read, there could be a number of causes. Apparently peanuts are used as a soil fixer crop to absorb some nutriants while replenishing others, so it might not be a case of being allergic to the nut, but what it has absorbed.

Others believe that our environment has become too clean, so we are losing the ability to deal with some compounds. I remember reading about one study that investigated the relationship between c-sections and allergies. They found that childeren born by C-section were 5 times more likely to have allergies than children born naturally. So perhaps whatever babies pick up coming down the birth canal, must be vital to helping us deal with the environment we live in.

More than likely it's a combination of many factors.

That is another assumption and not relevant to the point I am making regardless.

There is still a cost associated with vaccinations. There is still a cost to treatment in a vaccinated or unvaccinated individual that contracts it and those costs will be relatively equal.

If anything I am not downplaying the chances of infection but acknowledging them anyway since my proposition takes into account a transmission by a vaccinated carrier transmitting it.

Peanuts are legumes so that is to be expected as it is nothing new when it comes to soil fixing . Been used for millennia that way.

Less mothers are breastfeeding during the colostrum stage so that is more likely than the birth canal notion... never heard about babies picking up anything from the birth canal besides vd. The link to c sections probably is a result of "planned deliveries" which occur with typically working mothers that want to get back to work asap and don't give enough time to breastfeeding while the colostrum is in her milk. But that is just my guess.

From a few days ago, at 31.45 minutes there's a discussion with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Even if we agree with all of the above, the safer choice is still to vaccinate.

You know that is extremely rare, right?

There's no study to show this, as they're not actually studying the adverse effects of the vaccines, this is all based on assumption :2 cents:

Let's say for example that a vaccine induces Asthma, Asthma kills people every day in the US

We don't know it's rare, nobody is studying this, the vaccine strain has been found in outbreaks :2 cents:

Crib Death, Diabetes Type 1, MS, Motor Neurone Disease, Muscle Wasting Diseases, Asthma, Peanut Allergies, Childhood Leukemia, Lupus, Eczema etc all being caused by vaccines :2 cents:

Yeah, none of those diseases could possibly be caused by all the pollution, carcinogens, gmo, sugar, processed foods etc. Just vaccines!!!

I'm sure you're right about some parents choosing the C-section, but it's not the only reason. c-sections are also incredibly efficient. When my son was born we wanted it naturally. Our primary OB was on vacation for our due date. Labour wasn't that long (speaking from a guy's perspective) about 13 hours. I was speaking with one of the nurses afterwards, she said we were lucky that we had the replacement doctor we did, as any other doctor in that hospital would have had her in the O.R. The c-section allows parents and the hospital to schedule for maximum efficiency. I read later that the hospital had a c-section rate higher than the provincial average.

It's important to understand that the same process which can induce desirable antibodies also has the capacity to induce undesirable antibodies, that's antibodies which attack your own body for the rest of your life i.e. autoimmunity. Every vaccine we receive is another lottery ticket to the autoimmune disease lottery, tinkering with the immune system is a highly dangerous game; there is no way of controlling which immune responses take place.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/art...l.pone.0008382

"Systemic autoimmunity appears to be the inevitable consequence of over-stimulating the host's immune ?system? by repeated immunization with antigen, to the levels that surpass system's self-organized criticality."

Exactly. A lottery. One with 1 in a million+ chance :)

How did this go 4 pages? Vaccines used to be a lot more extreme in the amount of stuff put into the system. The chance of overloading the immune system was much higher 20 years ago.

1. Why risk your child?
2. They may want to travel and not get infected or infect the other nice people they meet
3. Why risk the rest of us just because there might be something up that is unknown?

As a logic problem, you should not be ruled by fear of the unknown.

There are smaller prizes too which are easier to win :2 cents:

Asthma is relatively easy to 'win' from the DPT vaccine, around 1 in 5.

Now there are even more vaccines in the schedule than ever, they want to give many of these vaccines on the same sitting, now the pharmaceuticals don't have to pay out compensation if their vaccines harm you, now the want to give you vaccines every year, now they have a vaccine for newborns. Doctors are now scared to speak out against the danger of vaccines, they fear they will be smeared and deregistered. Freedom of speech and informed consent are being strongly discouraged on this topic; it's a complete whitewash.

funny how there used to be yearly sacrifices to appease the demons so they don't visit death and destruction on us all

Worldwide sales of flu vaccines in 2013 = $3.1 billion USD
Worldwide sales of all pharmaceutical products in 2013 = $1 trillion USD

That's .03 % of their sales.

.03


Fantastic analogy, Richard.

just funny :)

$3.1 Billion per year is a very good amount for a product, definitely a product worth pushing. However those profits are just the tip of the iceberg compared to the real money the flu vaccines bring in, that's the money from the complications afterwards e.g. eventually pushing people to Alzheimer's (build-up of Aluminum), inducing more autoimmune diseases, spreading more Flu. The pharmaceuticals are after lifelong sickness, that means customer for life, rebills for life. They couldn't give a damn about mild short-term illnesses like Flu, Measles, Mumps, Chicken Pox etc, 1 or 2 weeks of sales is not what they are after, they want you as a customer for life, that is their ultimate objective, vaccines are one of their tools for doing this. :2 cents:

In fact, vaccines were so unprofitable that some companies stopped making them altogether. In 1967, there were 26 vaccine manufactures. That number dropped to 17 by 1980. Ten years ago, the financial incentives to produce vaccines were so weak that there was growing concern that pharmaceutical companies were abandoning the vaccine business for selling more-profitable daily drug treatments. Compared with drugs that require daily doses, vaccines are only administered once a year or a lifetime. The pharmaceutical company Wyeth (which has since been acquired by Pfizer) reported that they stopped making the flu vaccine because the margins were so low.

Where is the proof the Flu causes alzheimer's disease?

Source
A study of more than 4,000 adults in Canada showed that past exposure to several vaccines, including the flu vaccine, was linked to a decreased chance of developing Alzheimer's.


A report in the Nov. 3, 2004, JAMA found that annual flu shots for older adults were associated with a reduced risk of death from all causes. The abstract of that report is posted on PubMed.

Ok I get that Wehateporn would be on this. I did not see that he was the one keeping it alive.

shame none of your conspiracies have killed you yet. Those would be the conspiracies I would get behind

Additional funding was provided by Pfizer Canada Incorporated through the Medical Research Council/Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of Canada Health Activity Program, NHRDP project 6603-1417-302 (R), Bayer Incorporated, and British Columbia Health Research Foundation projects 38 (93-2) and 34 (96-1).

Still didn't post your peer reviewed studies that show that any of these vaccines cause alzheimer's disease.

get lost, liar.

Consumers used to be able to claim compensation from the pharmaceuticals for vaccine injuries, then Clinton changed that, Pharma can do as much damage as they like with vaccines and not have to pay out. Now the vaccine sector is growing rapidly.

Vaccines Market worth $57.8 Billion by 2019

The Aluminum from vaccines slowly builds up in the brain, as this professor explains

Do you have anything published in a medical journal?

The top comment says it all:

http://i.imgur.com/9e0DQ9t.png


:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

That one was published in a medical journal, I gave you the video with the professor explaining as it makes it easier to understand

Aluminum hydroxide injections lead to motor deficits and motor neuron degeneration

Looks like some shill trying to turn science into conspiracy in an attempt to discredit it:2 cents:

Ah yes, cherry picked as usual. How much aluminum hydroxide was given to those mice vs the typical dose in a vaccine? Mmmhmm. You also can die if you drink too much water, too.

After the study this professor now has serious concerns about vaccines, the FDA didn't even argue against him, that should tell you enough, you want to write off his concerns then so be it, but when an expect like this speaks out it's wise to take note

But I thought the doctors didn't know, and it was down to guys like you to advise them on such things? Are you now saying they do know, and don't need you to let them in on the secret, but they can't share the secret, or what?

4 days ago back on page 2:

Which 'top UK doctor' showed gratitude for infomation you provided? Or is he scared to speak out/make himself known in case he has an accident etc? Who is/are the team, 'researching a danger' after being alerted by you? And why can't you alert us here in saneville?

The ones who've been around longer tend to know, some of the doctors around here don't vaccinate their kids.

My sister married into the family of one of the top UK doctors, an expert in his field. I've also contacted a number of research teams around the UK with solid data I've put together, generally they've been very grateful, one team is now researching in more detail into a specific causation I've presented data for, they initially assumed I was wrong until they examined all the data I'd put together; they were stunned!

Anyway, enough about me, this is not about me, this is about saving lives and spreading important information

Wow...I must have missed this very informative piece of excellent, scientific journalism. I was probably watching an equally important piece of journalism excellence at the time... the Real story behind 9-11. Or was it a piece on the fallacy of global warming...or....

...cough cough bull shit cough

:1orglaugh quite the ambiguous statement there, the family of one of the top doctors... so she married a guy who has a sister who married a guy who is the brother-in-law of the doctor's nephew, or some other equally 'close' relationship no doubt.


:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :helpme so you, some random interweb guy, who sells porn but in his spare time is a scientific genius, contacted these research teams, and not only did they drop everything to at first 'assume you were wrong', they then delved deeper until the stunning moment they realised you were right? Holy fucking shit lol, and you type this kind of bollocks with a straight face?

Of course it needs to be about you, if you are passing yourself off as having 'degrees in science' with a view to those claims holding some kind of weight, and assuming authority based on you tipping those poor dumb doctors the wink, and changing entire research team patterns.

As i said already, i'd bet all my money that he's fabricating his "family" story and their credentials.

In one thread he's busy talking about how lizard people are living underground and taking over the earth and in others, he's surrounded by highly qualified medical professionals (conveniently adding credibility to his vaccination arguments).

In other threads he's busying himself with paranoid delusions about Illuminati conspiracies.

This is not the personality that attracts successful relationships with well balanced, well educated and professional people. This is the kind of personality who marries a 21 yr old, socially retarded, morbidly obese girl for her World of Warcraft gold or some shit.

I'll say it again, it wasn't too many years ago that he was revealed to be a loner, living with his parents.... suddenly, he's an academic and over qualified scientist with 2 degrees, married to a medical professional at the top of her field and related of course, to similar people... all of whom ... quite conveniently share his paranoid and delusional views which have been refuted time and time again by study after study ... all of which hold beliefs fully consistent with his paranoid delusions.

Of course, at the center this discussion as with all others, is a big evil monster called "they" who are busying themselves manipulating the masses for profit, always moving undetected by everyone except a small cadre of lunatics who have it all figured out... A belief and behaviors, which all schizophrenics among other mentally ill, share.

No. It isn't rare at all. In fact, like all viruses mumps and measles will follow a bell curve of infection rate, and they are capable of being transmitted just as easily from a healthy living being, vaccinated or not, as well as from inanimate objects with which one makes contact. They are also self defeating and will run out soon as there are no more hosts to carry it.

Let me say again... I am not anti vaccine. I am anti misinformation which I view as a type of virus in the metaphorical sense.

Disease, Cases per year before vaccines, Cases in 2007, Percent decline
Diphtheria, 175,885, 0, 100%
Tetanus, 1,314, 28, 98%
Measles, 503,282, 43, 99.9%
Mumps, 152,209, 800, 99.5%
Rubella, 47,745, 12, 99.9%
Congenital rubella syndrome, 823, 0, 100%

Correlation is not causation, these were already declining before the vaccines :2 cents:

However, this still doesn't compare against the adverse effects of vaccines

You're just trolling Jel, this is a serious topic which you are completely out of your depth with, I won't bother replying to you in this thread anymore, not until you grow up

I think the whole "Vaccines are bad" idea is moronic. Look at how many children DON'T GET POLIO every year and that should give you a pretty good idea of how bad vaccines are.

Parents do not have the right not to vaccinate their children. They are exposing them to illnesses that are lethal, plus they are exposing the rest of the population, that means MY kid and YOUR kid too.

I won my bet with myself, time to pay up!

That's still their right though :2 cents: It isn't illegal not to vaccinate :) Trying to control what other people are legally allowed to do, then saying they don't have the right in the first place, is a bad direction to go in.