Neurosurgeon Speaks On How Vaccines Harm

[rodentraiser]

I think it's understood that just because you get a vaccine, it doesn't mean you still won't get sick. If you get a vaccine, you are far more likely to not to get the disease you were vaccinated against. What I see happening is an all or nothing mentality. I see people saying that they saw one person still get sick after having a vaccination, so therefore ALL vaccinations are useless. It's like food stamps. A lot of people get helped by having them but just because SOME people abuse them, there are people who don't want ANYONE to have them. It's sad, because people are never going to get 100% in anything, so to throw out what helps just because someone sees "only" a 95% success rate, is sad.

Willowdreams, I commend you on your choices. What I might be careful of, though, is the raw milk. People have already forgotten the E. coli O157:H7 epidemic that came from unpasturized Odwall apple juice. Also, some cows carry TB and that's something that can be passed on to people if they drink the milk of a tubercular cow.

[Little Fish]

If you get a vaccine, you are far more likely to not to get the disease you were vaccinated against.

and yet all outbreaks of disease always gets blamed on unvaccinated people, we've seen many people on this forum call for unvaccinated to be put in jail, have their kids put into 'care', accuse them of child abuse, call for them to wear mandatory yellow stars,etc.

specifically what is the likelihood to not get the disease after a vaccine? most people believe it is 100%, after all they do call it "immunity".

"I think it's understood that just because you get a vaccine, it doesn't mean you still won't get sick"

have proper studies even been done to compare sickness in vaccinated vs unvaccinated? i don't think so. Dr Offet (mr vaccine who is making a ton of money from patents) even stated a few years ago such a study should not be done because it would be unethical.

http://www.greenmedi...ally-being-done

Edited September 8, 2013 by Little Fish

[FurthurBB]

I hope you go get all your vaccine's the system can give you.

I remember piers morgan getting a vaccine and got a cold the next week.

Okay, and in what world would a cold be related to any vaccine?

[FurthurBB]

"i actually hate all b.s. antivaxxers. you are not making things better, you are actively killing people. cheers for that, if you are psychopaths."

its always framed as pro-vaccine vs anti-vaccine isn't it.

a false dialectic is always promoted to manipulate us by narrowing the debate window.

do you want safe vaccines or unsafe vaccines? its that simple.

maybe we should just let those that make and sell vaccines to do all the testing, and while we're at it get our governments to give immunity to them for any vaccine damage, oh wait we did that already.

Dr Blaylock MD, is a dilligent reseacher and reviewer of the scientific literature and an expert in the neurology field. i wouldn't dismiss what he says lightly.

There is nothing more impressive about Dr. Blaylock than there is about a 16-year-old girl who is rebellious.

so predictable.

Logic? You would think so.

Theres tons of evidence ,all of which is covered up by the medical community .

All anyone has to do is look at rates of autism and birth defects ,country to country,year by year ,and then compare the rise of each disorder to the amount of childhood vaccinations.given in the same country same year.

The rise of disease correlates perfectly to the rise of vaccination .

By year and by country .

The first cases of autism in some countries ,did not appear until after vaccinstions began .

The country was COMPLETELY autism free for its *entire history* ,before vsccinations were introduced .

Ahem

Well, then how about evidence instead of lies for once, SImbi?

[FurthurBB]

Money controls the world, so If money wasn't an object couldn't everyone have fresh drinking water? But then again money has to go to the rich so they have the monopoly so they control all thoughts and all life on planet earth.

[media=]

[/media]

Yes the rich people wanna help third world countries. *facepalm*

True and the multi-billion dollar a year alternative medicine industry is using you to line their pockets.

[FurthurBB]

and yet all outbreaks of disease always gets blamed on unvaccinated people, we've seen many people on this forum call for unvaccinated to be put in jail, have their kids put into 'care', accuse them of child abuse, call for them to wear mandatory yellow stars,etc.

specifically what is the likelihood to not get the disease after a vaccine? most people believe it is 100%, after all they do call it "immunity".

"I think it's understood that just because you get a vaccine, it doesn't mean you still won't get sick"

have proper studies even been done to compare sickness in vaccinated vs unvaccinated? i don't think so. Dr Offet (mr vaccine who is making a ton of money from patents) even stated a few years ago such a study should not be done because it would be unethical.

http://www.greenmedi...ally-being-done

No, this is another misrepresentation. Antivax people want a vax vs unvaxed study where one group of children are fully vaccinated and one are not and they are followed over a lifetime I guess. That is unethical. There have been many epidemiological studies looking at populations of vaxed vs unvaxed and they did not find whatever antivax people were looking for so that is not good enough. Also, disease outbreaks can be traced back to their source very easily these days and they always trace back to someone unvaccinated. The problem is that unvaccinated people often group together and that causes the perfect vector for an epidemic. It is not until the epidemic is already started that under vaccinated and vaccinated people get infected because they are usually grouped with other vaccinated people which offers a buffer of immunity to them.

[Little Fish]

There is nothing more impressive about Dr. Blaylock than there is about a 16-year-old girl who is rebellious

nevermind your own petulance (psychological projection perhaps?), do you get that that is an ad hominem argument? and unwarranted too.

Antivax people want a vax vs unvaxed study where one group of children are fully vaccinated and one are not and they are followed over a lifetime I guess. That is unethical.

why do you think it is unethical? or have you injected your own assumptions in order to imagine it to be unethical?

you have 2 groups in the study, those that wish to have vaccines and those that don't, how is that unethical? those running the study are not imposing anything whatsoever on the volunteers,

furthermore if what you say is the case, then Paul Offit (vaccine patent millionaire and advisor to merck) would have no reason to state they should not be done based on his imagined unethical grounds. as i understand, the study in progress mentioned in the link has been given ethics approval. from the link you dismissed without even reading "The study already has ethics approval and is ready to roll."

There have been many epidemiological studies looking at populations of vaxed vs unvaxed and they did not find whatever antivax people were looking for so that is not good enough.

what you say here has been disputed (with explanations) in the information given in this thread.

"they always trace back to someone unvaccinated"

do you have any evidence for that? please give evidence for ALL outbreaks.

"The problem is that unvaccinated people often group together and that causes the perfect vector for an epidemic."

is there any evidence that the groups such as the Amish (who do not vaccinate) are more susceptible to disease or ravaged by epidemics?

Edited September 8, 2013 by Little Fish

[RaptorBites]

"The problem is that unvaccinated people often group together and that causes the perfect vector for an epidemic."

is there any evidence that the groups such as the Amish (who do not vaccinate) are more susceptible to disease or ravaged by epidemics?

Amish don't vaccinate? Funny since I seen some California Amish at the local clinic a few days ago.

In any case.

http://pediatrics.aa...9-2599.abstract

Objective: Holmes County, Ohio, one of the largest Amish communities in the world, has persistently low immunization rates. Studies of other Amish communities have revealed that parents do not immunize their children because of lack of access to immunizations. Our study explored reasons that Amish parents in the previously uninvestigated Holmes County population exempt themselves from immunizations.

Methods: In January 2007, questionnaires for assessing attitudes regarding immunizations were mailed to a random sampling of 1000 Amish parents in Holmes County.

Results: Thirty-seven percent of the parents responded. Among the 359 respondents, 68% stated that all of their children had received at least 1 immunization, and 17% reported that some of their children had received at least 1 immunization. Only 14% of the parents reported that none of their children had received immunizations. Eighty-six percent of the parents who completely exempted their children from vaccines stated that the main reason they do not vaccinate their children is concern over adverse effects. Many parents indicated that they allow their children to receive only some vaccines because of concern about the way certain vaccines are produced.

Conclusions: The reasons that Amish parents resist immunizations mirror reasons that non-Amish parents resist immunizations. Even in America's closed religious communities, the major barrier to vaccination is concern over adverse effects of vaccinations. If 85% of Amish parents surveyed accept some immunizations, they are a dynamic group that may be influenced to accept preventative care. Underimmunization in the Amish population must be approached with emphasis on changing parental perceptions of vaccines in addition to ensuring access to vaccines.

Seems to me that Amish people DO vaccinate.

Was it your intention to purposefully lie?

Edited September 9, 2013 by RaptorBites

[Little Fish]

Antivax people want a vax vs unvaxed study where one group of children are fully vaccinated and one are not and they are followed over a lifetime I guess. That is unethical.

why do you think it is unethical? or have you injected your own assumptions in order to imagine it to be unethical?

you have 2 groups in the study, those that wish to have vaccines and those that don't, how is that unethical? those running the study are not imposing anything whatsoever on the volunteers,

furthermore if what you say is the case, then Paul Offit (vaccine patent millionaire and advisor to merck) would have no reason to state they should not be done based on his imagined unethical grounds. as i understand, the study in progress mentioned in the link has been given ethics approval. from the link you dismissed without even reading "The study already has ethics approval and is ready to roll."

There have been many epidemiological studies looking at populations of vaxed vs unvaxed and they did not find whatever antivax people were looking for so that is not good enough.

what you say here has been disputed (with explanations) in the information given in this thread.

"they always trace back to someone unvaccinated"

do you have any evidence for that? please give evidence for ALL outbreaks.

"The problem is that unvaccinated people often group together and that causes the perfect vector for an epidemic."

is there any evidence that the groups such as the Amish (who rarely vaccinate) are more susceptible to disease or ravaged by epidemics?

[david icke is right]

Amish don't vaccinate? Funny since I seen some California Amish at the local clinic a few days ago.

In any case.

Poor sods the evil ones are dragging everyone to get the vaccines.

[flbrnt]

I am back from getting my flu shot. Please help me. I think I am dying. (yawn)

[musicpenguin]

this thread is about 50% conspiritard and about 50% smart people. WAKE UP SHEEPLE.

[david icke is right]

I am back from getting my flu shot. Please help me. I think I am dying. (yawn)

Pmsl, Just wait it will get ya. Lets us know when you get the flu wont ya.

[DecoNoir]

Pmsl, Just wait it will get ya. Lets us know when you get the flu wont ya.

The flu mutates constantly, so your challenge is moot. Unless you have a problem with evolution. By this point it wouldn't surprise me at all.

[FurthurBB]

nevermind your own petulance (psychological projection perhaps?), do you get that that is an ad hominem argument? and unwarranted too.

why do you think it is unethical? or have you injected your own assumptions in order to imagine it to be unethical?

you have 2 groups in the study, those that wish to have vaccines and those that don't, how is that unethical? those running the study are not imposing anything whatsoever on the volunteers,

furthermore if what you say is the case, then Paul Offit (vaccine patent millionaire and advisor to merck) would have no reason to state they should not be done based on his imagined unethical grounds. as i understand, the study in progress mentioned in the link has been given ethics approval. from the link you dismissed without even reading "The study already has ethics approval and is ready to roll."

what you say here has been disputed (with explanations) in the information given in this thread.

"they always trace back to someone unvaccinated"

do you have any evidence for that? please give evidence for ALL outbreaks.

"The problem is that unvaccinated people often group together and that causes the perfect vector for an epidemic."

is there any evidence that the groups such as the Amish (who do not vaccinate) are more susceptible to disease or ravaged by epidemics?

So, I didn't attack you I told you that there is nothing impressive about a person that I am not impressed with. A person who makes their living off being rebellious is not impressive to me. So, you attacked me for absolutely no reason as is your usual tactic. It is unethical because the participants cannot be given a choice or it would bias and ruin the entire experiment. You could not tell the participants which group they are in so they would not know if they were protected or not. Sorry, but what I say about epidemiological studies are true, they have been done to death in almost every country in the world no matter how much you want to deny it. The Amish do vaccinate and you can easily find the information you want about recent epidemics of vaccine preventable diseases.

[Little Fish]

So, I didn't attack you I told you that there is nothing impressive about a person that I am not impressed with. A person who makes their living off being rebellious is not impressive to me.

you compared Professor Blaylock, an accomplished neurosurgeon, to a 16 year old girl. you said nothing about the arguments of the man, you just said something against the man, that's an ad hominem argument and thus a fallacious argument, right?

did you watch the video of his talk in post #1 ?

"It is unethical because the participants cannot be given a choice"

again you did not look at the information, they are not going to be forced into any group. they or their parents make their own choices about whether they will be vaccinated. the study is not changing the vaccine habits of the volunteers.

"what I say about epidemiological studies are true, they have been done to death in almost every country in the world no matter how much you want to deny it."

"This study concerns a major current health question: namely, whether vaccination is linked in any way to children's long-term health. Vaccination is one of the greatest discoveries in medicine, yet little is known about its long-term impact. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of vaccination by comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children in terms of a number of major health outcomes, including asthma, autism, diabetes, and learning disability."

http://www.greenmedi...ing-done?page=2

[media=]

[/media]

the studies you refer to, do not compare unvaccinated to vaccinated as explained in the above video. a group that takes 50 vaccines (including the MMR) to a group that takes 49 vaccines (not the MMR) is a flawed study as explained in the video.

Also explained in the video is that there are survey studies that show vaccinated have a significantly higher disease rate than unvaccinated.

there is also the monkey study that shows monkeys develop learning problems when vaccinated according to the current vaccine schedule.

"The Amish do vaccinate"

The Amish do not generally take 24 vaccines by age one and 40+ vaccines by the age of five, as we have already established.

and you can easily find the information you want about recent epidemics of vaccine preventable diseases."

appealing to the ether isn't evidence that ALL outbreaks originate with an unvaccinated person which is what you claimed. we have already established that vaccines do not provide immunity.

Edited September 10, 2013 by Little Fish

[david icke is right]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2416629/Ben-Foy-8-falls-asleep-20-times-DAY-swine-flu-jab-gives-narcolepsy.html

Boy, 8, falls asleep 20 times a DAY after mother claims swine flu jab gave him narcolepsy

Must be a coincidence scientifically speaking a probability that this happens is 1 in 1 million, Nothing to see here.

[FurthurBB]

you compared Professor Blaylock, an accomplished neurosurgeon, to a 16 year old girl. you said nothing about the arguments of the man, you just said something against the man, that's an ad hominem argument and thus a fallacious argument, right?

did you watch the video of his talk in post #1 ?

"It is unethical because the participants cannot be given a choice"

again you did not look at the information, they are not going to be forced into any group. they or their parents make their own choices about whether they will be vaccinated. the study is not changing the vaccine habits of the volunteers.

"what I say about epidemiological studies are true, they have been done to death in almost every country in the world no matter how much you want to deny it."

"This study concerns a major current health question: namely, whether vaccination is linked in any way to children's long-term health. Vaccination is one of the greatest discoveries in medicine, yet little is known about its long-term impact. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of vaccination by comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children in terms of a number of major health outcomes, including asthma, autism, diabetes, and learning disability."

http://www.greenmedi...ing-done?page=2

[media=]

[/media]

the studies you refer to, do not compare unvaccinated to vaccinated as explained in the above video. a group that takes 50 vaccines (including the MMR) to a group that takes 49 vaccines (not the MMR) is a flawed study as explained in the video.

Also explained in the video is that there are survey studies that show vaccinated have a significantly higher disease rate than unvaccinated.

there is also the monkey study that shows monkeys develop learning problems when vaccinated according to the current vaccine schedule.

"The Amish do vaccinate"

The Amish do not generally take 24 vaccines by age one and 40+ vaccines by the age of five, as we have already established.

and you can easily find the information you want about recent epidemics of vaccine preventable diseases."

appealing to the ether isn't evidence that ALL outbreaks originate with an unvaccinated person which is what you claimed. we have already established that vaccines do not provide immunity.

Vaccines do provide immunity and that has been established. Is this opposite day? The Amish vaccinate so sorry your point is not valid. Again, I am not impressed with someone who makes their living from being rebellious. That is no more impressive to me than a rebellious 16-year-old girl. That is not an attack, that is the truth. There is nothing to even dispute in his arguments because it has already been successfully disputed. You just seem angry that I am not impressed with your source. Anyway, as far as your study if it is not blinded then it is worthless.

[FurthurBB]

http://www.dailymail...narcolepsy.html

Boy, 8, falls asleep 20 times a DAY after mother claims swine flu jab gave him narcolepsy

Must be a coincidence scientifically speaking a probability that this happens is 1 in 1 million, Nothing to see here.

No that is not coincidence. No one said that vaccine have no side effects. They are medicine and all medicine that has any real mode of action has side effects. In other countries flu vaccines have adjuvants to provide better protection for the elderly. The US will not allow flu vaccines with adjuvants because studies have shown that it makes one of the safest vaccines into a vaccine that has many side effects. We are not willing to take the risk for a better vaccination program contrary to what antivax people are always claiming.

[rodentraiser]

specifically what is the likelihood to not get the disease after a vaccine? most people believe it is 100%, after all they do call it "immunity".

See, that's part of the "all or nothing" mentality I was talking about. A few vaccinations don't take and therefore none of them are valid. Or useful.

"Immunity" is a word that has been around long before vaccines. Immunity is not always 100%. Immunity is what it says - it has to do with the immune system. People who have compromised immune systems, say from something like HIV or AIDS, may die of TB, because TB can be a latent disease that kicks in when the immune system is stressed. A child who is malnourished, recovering from a cold or flu, or just plain under the weather, may not have an immunization "take". It's a fact of life. Get over it.

have proper studies even been done to compare sickness in vaccinated vs unvaccinated? i don't think so. Dr Offet (mr vaccine who is making a ton of money from patents) even stated a few years ago such a study should not be done because it would be unethical.

Seriously - a proper study? How's this for a proper study:

Polio. "Dr. Jonas Salk's mass experimental polio vaccination campaign was so successful that cases of the disease in Western Europe and North America plummeted from 76,000 in 1955 to less than 1000 in 1967."

I'd call that a pretty significant "study".

Smallpox. Centuries of pandemics have killed millions in China, Japan, the Roman Empire, Europe, and the Americas. Smallpox, with measles, TB, and influenza, killed an estimated 56 million Amerindian people during the initial years of the Spanish conquest. By 1958, it was killing 2 million people a year in 33 countries. Thanks to vaccination, the last case of variola major was in 1975 and the last case of variola minor was in 1977. Smallpox, except for the reserves in the freezers of the US and Russia, is eliminated in the world today.

I'd call that a pretty significant study also.

As for parents being considered abusive for not vaccinating their kids, let me be straight on this. Not vaccinating your kids is a lot like cigarette smoke. I personally don't give a whoop or holler about you or your kids. But when your lack of knowledge about medical science endangers the rest of us, then I take offense. I'm not your kid and my kids aren't your kids. If you choose to go live in polio valley and let your kids be killed and crippled by polio, feel free. But when your kids have to attend the same school as my kids, live in the same town, shop at the same stores, go to the same movie theater while they may be incubating a deadly disease, your right to not vaccinate ends right there.

And if you don't know the difference between variola major and variola minor, or the history of smallpox, then you have no business even lecturing anyone on vaccination.

[Erowin]

Hu? The cases are made pound for pound. Like back in the 50's something like 10 in every hundred thousand got autism. Now its like 1 in 10. There is no question that autism cases have gone through the roof. Its a epidemic

Oh my god. Theres a very common logic trap most people fall into- correlation does not imply causation. Lets say the incidents of people getting sick rises when a heat wave comes. Some people deduce that aha! the heat wave causes the sickness. However, they are two unrelated events. You have to prove a link between the heat wave and the sickness or you're making up conclusions.

This happened with vaccines/autism. People started to realize autism was a real disease and children who would have been called "mentally retarded" or "troubled" get a correct diagnosis. Because we can finally call autism when we see it, the number of cases skyrockets, though its biologically the same. A guy does a fake and flawed test linking it to vaccines and -boom-

everyone is still spouting off this 'link'.

EVERYONE PLEASE VACCINATE YOUR CHILDREN!!!

Because of mass panic and a tendency to ignore the science, you are putting your children at risk! Not only that, you could KILL other peoples kids. I'm not joking. Not vaccinating could actually result in the death of another. Herd immunity is going down and people who can't get vaccinated due to medical reasons or allergies are no longer safe and catching measles, mumps, etc. THEY ARE ON THE RISE. WE HAVE NOT SEEN THIS MANY CASES OF THESE DISEASES IN RECENT TIMES BEFORE. Polio and the like is COMING BACK because some people don't let their child get vaccinated. Even if it makes you nervous, do it for your children- and everyone elses children.

[Little Fish]

Oh my god. Theres a very common logic trap most people fall into- correlation does not imply causation. Lets say the incidents of people getting sick rises when a heat wave comes. Some people deduce that aha! the heat wave causes the sickness. However, they are two unrelated events. You have to prove a link between the heat wave and the sickness or you're making up conclusions.

you have taken preacherman's quote out of context, go back and read what he was responding to, not what you thought he was responding to.

This happened with vaccines/autism. People started to realize autism was a real disease and children who would have been called "mentally retarded" or "troubled" get a correct diagnosis.

speculation, the notion that 1 in 50 boys have always been autistic is not merit worthy when autism was not known before the 1930s.

autism was discovered in the 1930s and the initial cases traced back to people involved with use of organic mercury which at the time was a new product used in lumber products, seed fungicide and vaccines. many of those initial cases have been linked back to those 3 exposure mechanisms, it is too significant to ignore, and you are asking those that have that information to ignore it? how does one unlearn something?

Because we can finally call autism when we see it, the number of cases skyrockets, though its biologically the same. A guy does a fake and flawed test linking it to vaccines and -boom-

everyone is still spouting off this 'link'.

many appease their fear by hating wakefield. don't listen to cnn, read his book, you are being lied to. the study was not fake, nor flawed, it was a case series study which proposed a hypothesis to be tested. the guy who claimed it was fake is nothing more than a quote stitching conspiracy theorist.

]EVERYONE PLEASE VACCINATE YOUR CHILDREN!!![/b]

Because of mass panic and a tendency to ignore the science, you are putting your children at risk! Not only that, you could KILL other peoples kids. I'm not joking. Not vaccinating could actually result in the death of another. Herd immunity is going down and people who can't get vaccinated due to medical reasons or allergies are no longer safe and catching measles, mumps, etc. THEY ARE ON THE RISE. WE HAVE NOT SEEN THIS MANY CASES OF THESE DISEASES IN RECENT TIMES BEFORE. Polio and the like is COMING BACK because some people don't let their child get vaccinated. Even if it makes you nervous, do it for your children- and everyone elses children.

vaccines are manufactured in china where plants are inspected every thirteen years.

40% of vaccines have been found to be contaminated with viral material that should not have been there.

vaccines manufacturers are immune from liability.

you do not know what is in vaccines because nobody knows, not even the manufacturers.

why should your fear of disease trump someone else's fear of vaccines?

[DecoNoir]

Autism was named in the 1930's although similar cases have been documented back in the 1800's and maybe even further when they just chalked it up to demons.

Not that any of this matters as you'll just pull convenient excuses or bull**** claims about "Big Pharma" out of your asses as usual.

[Little Fish]

<snip hostility>

have you read the Simpsonwood transcripts yet?

[DecoNoir]

have you read the Simpsonwood transcripts yet?

have you read the Simpsonwood transcripts yet?

Indeed, and I noticed a distinct lack of anything supporting this bogus theory. Thank you for directing me to what I already knew