shape
carat
color
clarity

Did you get a flu shot this year?

telephone89

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 29, 2014
Messages
4,223
u7f79nzsokd21.jpg
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
What I am posting now is hard to believe, but it happened.

This first link is full of information. Not only personal to the couple that started the foundation (please read the journey of their little boy that died in 96 of a brain tumor in which this virus was detected), but the site also gives the background on the subject at hand. So I will only give a brief intro so you know if it's something you want to read about. It's about SV40. That stands for Simian Virus #40. It was detected in monkey kidney cells that were being used to manufacture the Polio vaccine. It infected millions of U.S. people and many abroad, and by this couples account, lived on, though that's not the "official" story. The public was never told, the vaccines were never pulled. Nope. Our loving health agency, the one who professes to care so much about us, never said a word. And this may very well explain why there is an explosion of cancers.

These are the people in charge of our health. If they will do this, what won't they do? If anyone thinks this is ok? You have issues. And we're supposed to trust them.....


http://www.sv40foundation.org/cpv-link.html#_edn40


Stanley Plotkin is an American physician who works as a consultant to vaccine manufacturers, such as Sanofi Pasteur, as well as biotechnology firms, non-profits and governments. In the 1960s, he played a pivotal role in discovery of a vaccine against rubella virus while working at Wistar Institute in Philadelphia. Plotkin was a member of Wistar’s active research faculty from 1960 to 1991. Today, in addition to his emeritus appointment at Wistar, he is emeritus professor of Pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania. His book, "Vaccines",[2][3] is the standard reference on the subject.[4][5] He is an editor with Clinical and Vaccine Immunology, which is published by the American Society for Microbiology in Washington, D.C..

This is him in a legal deposition, where he admits to the SV40 infecting vaccines. That info begins immediately. He goes on to list other viruses infecting vaccines. He also is asked about many other ingredients in vacs. 7 1/2 min. total



From the CDC, scroll down just a bit. While they readily admit it happened (finally, they did not up until recently), I find their assessment in whether it's causing cancer or not a bit optimistic. But then, what would you expect them to say.?

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.html


I don't know how to describe this, it's about an SV40 investigative book, in the Lancet.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(04)16746-9/fulltext


Emergent Human Pathogen Simian Virus 40 And It's Role In Cancer
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC452549/
 

Gussie

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
3,700
Again risk versus benefit. It's not perfect. The polio vaccine has saved millions of lives - that's a fact. There will always be risk with any drug, vaccine, procedure, etc.

Jonas Salk did not patent the polio vaccine. He forfeited millions (maybe billions) and claimed a moral committment to public health as reason for not pursuing a patent. There are good people in medicine.

Choosing to forego vaccinations with proven results is a choice. However, it is within reason to question that choice and the moral committment to public health.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
What I would like to see addressed by the anti-vaxxers here, is the what they think of the long and correctly predicted rise of measles. How do they justify this?
 

YadaYadaYada

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 2, 2016
Messages
11,840
Well I'm totally done with this thread, after the memes started yesterday and the whole pro death post I don't see any point in continuing any discussion. IMO it makes a mockery of parents who have seen their child suffer as the result of vaccination. Nothing good or positive is going to come out of this, so I'm out.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
msop, I have been convicted and feel badly for what I said to you. I should not have said what I did, and I apologize. I hope you will forgive me.
sadwave.gif
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
Well I'm totally done with this thread, after the memes started yesterday and the whole pro death post I don't see any point in continuing any discussion. IMO it makes a mockery of parents who have seen their child suffer as the result of vaccination. Nothing good or positive is going to come out of this, so I'm out.
Stephanie, I understand how you feel, I don't blame you for leaving. But I disagree that no good will come out of this. I'm not expecting those being vocal in this thread to get anything I post, but I'm not really posting it for them. I'm posting it for all those who are silently lurking, and there are many.

My goal here is not to be everybody's friend (though I would certainly like to be), it's not to rack up a bunch of "likes" on my posts. My goal is to share the overwhelming amount of evidence that things are not as they seem. And very few people know that. My posts are for the ones who love the truth, whatever that is, and want to know it. That is what this is about.

I came across this on FB last night, and it couldn't have been more timely. This is me to a tee.
51047869_1986185118125747_5409156484883808256_n.jpg
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
What I would like to see addressed by the anti-vaxxers here, is the what they think of the long and correctly predicted rise of measles. How do they justify this?
Well my own personal opinion would be that we were designed to get the measles and then enjoy life long immunity. But we are not affording people that option now, since we are vaccinating everyone with a "fake" measles so to speak. It's not the same.

But here's a thought from someone whom I'm sure you will appreciate more than me or mine. :)

Dr. Poland is no vaccine denier. Not only is he among the harshest and most outspoken critics of the "irrationality of the antivaccinationists," he is also one of the strongest proponents for vaccines and the good that they can do. As Professor of Medicine and founder and leader of the Mayo Clinic's Vaccine Research Group, one of the world's largest vaccine research organizations; as editor-in-chief of the peer-reviewed scientific journal,Vaccine; as recipient of numerous awards; as chair of vaccine data monitoring committees for pharmaceutical giant Merck; as patent holder in various vaccines processes; as someone who enjoys special employee status with the Centers for Disease Control and the U.S. Department of Defense and as someone who has sat on every federal committee that has dealt with vaccines, no one can accuse him of seeing vaccines from a narrow perspective.

http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/im...-HDKBOBawp5DCbJcohKXn-gowruH7fTNzqQFBjhpwi1s8
 

lyra

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
5,249
Not that you care, but measles is not a one and done thing. Getting measles was a life defining moment for me. It ruined part of my childhood forever. I had side effects, physical and emotional. Only to learn later in life when I was already pregnant, that it did NOT in fact, give me immunity. Ellen, you expect and hope for others to listen and agree with you, yet you don't listen and agree with anyone else, no matter what solid evidence is presented. I'm done too. I was here the first time you started a thread like this, and that was 10 years ago. Your kids are over 30. Why do what are voluntary vaccines in adults, matter so much to you now? Anyone over 18 can make their own choices. I'm also deeply offended that you are suggesting that people skip out on vaccines with no regard to the vulnerable populations. I'm part of that population. There are vaccines I can't actually get because of that. So many of us depend on herd immunity for real, so it's a slap in the face to have someone trying to drum up support for anti-vaccination, which is in fact now endangering our lives. I guess it's all about the self now, putting oneself first, and no care for the community.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
Unfortunately Ellen, you have completely missed what this doctor was saying. I read the actual linked paper by him in your article, and neither that nor the interview below, constitutes a doctor saying that the vaccine is ineffective, or supports your anti-vax position.

Here is an interview with the man, rather than a piece that misinterprets what he said and why he said it.

Read his own words.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/taraha...ccine-researcher-gregory-poland/#2ca16f5043e0
Vaccine Researcher Gregory Poland Says Measles Jab Is Amazingly Effective But Not Perfect

While public health officials scramble to keep up with more than 100 measles cases across 14 states now, some vaccine researchers have been calling for a solution to this problem before it arrived. Gregory Poland, editor in chief of the scientific journal Vaccine, founded and heads the Vaccine Research Group at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. A major focus of his team's research is learning how genetics play a role in how individuals respond to vaccines and whether they experience any adverse events – and measles is among the main diseases the center studies.

Poland said he became seriously interested in measles and the vaccine during the 1989-91 outbreak, which killed 123 people and hospitalized thousands. But anywhere from 20 to 40 percent of the cases occurred in people who had received one or two measles vaccines, leading to the recommendation of a second dose on the childhood schedule. So Poland wrote about what seemed a counterintuitive idea: in very highly immunized populations, most measles cases were going to occur in those who were immunized – but not because the vaccine is worse than others on the CDC childhood immunization schedule. Rather, it had to do with rates of primary and secondary failure of the vaccine combined with how incredibly contagious the disease is, infecting 90 percent of susceptible individuals and remaining airborne for up to two hours. With primary failure, a person's immune system doesn't respond to the vaccine and make the necessary antibodies. In secondary failure, the body makes the antibodies, but they fade over time. (I wrote about both in detail here.)

In the avalanche of media coverage about the current outbreak, Poland's comments have frequently shown up but often out of context. So I interviewed Poland to learn what he thinks about the current measles vaccine, the ongoing outbreak, those who refuse to vaccinate and the future.

Tell me about the measles vaccine.

On the one hand, we have the most transmissible disease known in humans, and on the other hand we have an excellent vaccine – which is not a perfect vaccine – and we don't induce immunity in somewhere between 2 to 5 percent of the people who receive it. When everybody is vaccinated, the only cases you'll see are those in cases who are immunized, though you'll see very few cases compared to a population that doesn't have high levels of herd immunity. This is counterintuitive, and people misunderstand it. For any other disease, that's an out-of-the-ballpark, grand slam vaccine, but with measles, it's not because of the high transmissibility and the high level of herd immunity needed.

What are some of the challenges of preventing measles?

While we eradicated smallpox, measles was next on the list, and we've missed that deadline five times now. Can we control and eliminate measles? Sure, we have. It was eliminated in 2000 in the U.S., so the only cases that occurred were imported. But as we creep toward that goal of eradicating measles, we may need an even better vaccine than what we have. I'm not saying the vaccine isn't any good. In fact, it's an excellent vaccine. But in the very unique niche of such a highly transmissible disease, and having a couple percent who don't respond, and then a growing subpopulation who cannot get the vaccine, we may need an even better one. More people survive [disease such as cancer] now, but live on anti-rejection immunosuppressants the rest of their lives. That was the reason for calling for an even better measles vaccine, one that perhaps would not be a live viral vaccine, where there wouldn't be any contraindication for the immunocompromised. We make it more immunogenic, so maybe we don't have that 2 to 5 percent who don't respond, and we make it cheap and easy to administer worldwide.

Is there any other vaccine as effective as the measles vaccine?

Probably the one that would most hit that would be tetanus vaccine [which prevents a bacterial infection], but in terms of a viral vaccine, maybe smallpox. Probably no other routinely used viral vaccine is as effective as the measles vaccine.

Is measles likely to return to the U.S. for good?

Every time you add another sub population of people who are not protected, you grow the pool of the susceptibles, and if you have a large enough pool spread across enough areas, you can reestablish measles. If the only susceptibles were those in whom the vaccine failed, you would only have very small outbreaks of one or two or three people spread across time. The reason this is a big issue is that we do have this undercurrent of vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-refusing patients. And we do have failure.

The point is, to say the obvious, that we have an excellent vaccine, but we find ourselves in a unique situation right now. We've eliminated measles through indigenous transmission, but we have a small failure rate of the vaccine, and a growing sub population of people who won't get the vaccine. The point in my editorial was that we might be able to solve all those problems by developing an even better vaccine. But that's what people misunderstand. Both sides hear what they want to hear, and when I'm writing to scientific community, I think some of the nuances could be misinterpreted by laypeople or by people with an agenda. They think, "Hey, here's somebody who's saying it's not good vaccine" because that's what they want to hear.

Tell me your thoughts about those who choose not to get their children vaccinated.

One of the things I take as valid health criticism, as my daughter, a psychologist, has pointed out, is that we in the medical profession have not done a good job of discussing or explaining this to our patients. She developed an idea that people have different preferred cognitive styles and decision-making behaviors and that what we need to do is not stick only to the highly analytic cognitive style of a physician – all about the facts and data and numbers – but to determine the cognitive style of the patient in the front of us. Then it's incumbent upon us to best meet the cognitive styles of the patient. I think we have erred in not doing that.

I don't think my patients who reject vaccines are nuts. They have come to conclusion – I believe their conclusion is in error – but they have come to a conclusion that the vaccine is not good. I've yet to meet a parent who doesn't want to do the very best for their child, including vaccines. What I try to do now is that I then try to determine the style they use to make decisions under uncertainty, and that often means I have to establish a rapport or relationship with that patient before they will consider getting a vaccine. Or they may decide never to, but I often view my role as a physician as a patient advisor, and I try to give them the best information we know and have. If they make a choice that I think is adverse to that, I will let them know.

How has the measles vaccine affected cases of the disease, and the complications and deaths that can come with the disease?

The measles vaccine has dramatically decreased cases because of the lower number that occur. The risk of taking the vaccine itself would be, if it was administered properly, maybe about a one in million chance of anaphylaxis. Otherwise there really aren't life-threatening issues or complications associated with the vaccine. On the contrary side, should you develop measles, 1 in 1,000 develop encephalitis. During the outbreak in 1989-91, 3 out of 1000 kids died. It's not for everybody a benign disease. For many children, it will be benign, but you can't predict that, nor can you predict who they are going to expose, who may have more serious complications.

The way I often conclude my conversation with patients is that there are no risk-free decisions. The observed risk of autism due to MMR is zero. The risk of anaphylaxis is 1 in a million. The risk of any other life-threatening illness has got to be so small, maybe one in 10 million, that we can't detect it. Now let's look at the measles. If we're wise, we always the lower risk with the higher benefit, because that's what a rational person would do, enhancing their benefits while minimizing their risks.

During residency, I was chosen to go in and tell a mother that her baby was dead from pertussis. Back then, the fear was about SIDS and DPT, and she had elected not to immunize her baby. It was such a bad case that this woman's life was tragically altered by the death of her baby daughter, and for as long as this mother lives, she regrets every day that she did not immunize her child.

People get to choose, but there are consequences to those choices. Yes, parents are allowed currently to make that choice not to vaccinate, but with a disease this transmissible, and the complications that can occur, you're also choosing for other people because your child is going to expose somebody, perhaps before you even know your child is sick. And what's going to happen to those people? Like any rational society, we depend on the idea that people will make good decisions and have good will. But I've spent my career talking about this stuff, and I've found actually THE most contagious disease is fear. But to be afraid is to be ignorant in a case like this.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
Unfortunately Ellen, you have completely missed what this doctor was saying. I read the actual linked paper by him in your article, and neither that nor the interview below, constitutes a doctor saying that the vaccine is ineffective, or supports your anti-vax position.

Here is an interview with the man, rather than a piece that misinterprets what he said and why he said it.

Read his own words.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/taraha...ccine-researcher-gregory-poland/#2ca16f5043e0
Vaccine Researcher Gregory Poland Says Measles Jab Is Amazingly Effective But Not Perfect

While public health officials scramble to keep up with more than 100 measles cases across 14 states now, some vaccine researchers have been calling for a solution to this problem before it arrived. Gregory Poland, editor in chief of the scientific journal Vaccine, founded and heads the Vaccine Research Group at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn. A major focus of his team's research is learning how genetics play a role in how individuals respond to vaccines and whether they experience any adverse events – and measles is among the main diseases the center studies.

Poland said he became seriously interested in measles and the vaccine during the 1989-91 outbreak, which killed 123 people and hospitalized thousands. But anywhere from 20 to 40 percent of the cases occurred in people who had received one or two measles vaccines, leading to the recommendation of a second dose on the childhood schedule. So Poland wrote about what seemed a counterintuitive idea: in very highly immunized populations, most measles cases were going to occur in those who were immunized – but not because the vaccine is worse than others on the CDC childhood immunization schedule. Rather, it had to do with rates of primary and secondary failure of the vaccine combined with how incredibly contagious the disease is, infecting 90 percent of susceptible individuals and remaining airborne for up to two hours. With primary failure, a person's immune system doesn't respond to the vaccine and make the necessary antibodies. In secondary failure, the body makes the antibodies, but they fade over time. (I wrote about both in detail here.)

In the avalanche of media coverage about the current outbreak, Poland's comments have frequently shown up but often out of context. So I interviewed Poland to learn what he thinks about the current measles vaccine, the ongoing outbreak, those who refuse to vaccinate and the future.

Tell me about the measles vaccine.

On the one hand, we have the most transmissible disease known in humans, and on the other hand we have an excellent vaccine – which is not a perfect vaccine – and we don't induce immunity in somewhere between 2 to 5 percent of the people who receive it. When everybody is vaccinated, the only cases you'll see are those in cases who are immunized, though you'll see very few cases compared to a population that doesn't have high levels of herd immunity. This is counterintuitive, and people misunderstand it. For any other disease, that's an out-of-the-ballpark, grand slam vaccine, but with measles, it's not because of the high transmissibility and the high level of herd immunity needed.

What are some of the challenges of preventing measles?

While we eradicated smallpox, measles was next on the list, and we've missed that deadline five times now. Can we control and eliminate measles? Sure, we have. It was eliminated in 2000 in the U.S., so the only cases that occurred were imported. But as we creep toward that goal of eradicating measles, we may need an even better vaccine than what we have. I'm not saying the vaccine isn't any good. In fact, it's an excellent vaccine. But in the very unique niche of such a highly transmissible disease, and having a couple percent who don't respond, and then a growing subpopulation who cannot get the vaccine, we may need an even better one. More people survive [disease such as cancer] now, but live on anti-rejection immunosuppressants the rest of their lives. That was the reason for calling for an even better measles vaccine, one that perhaps would not be a live viral vaccine, where there wouldn't be any contraindication for the immunocompromised. We make it more immunogenic, so maybe we don't have that 2 to 5 percent who don't respond, and we make it cheap and easy to administer worldwide.

Is there any other vaccine as effective as the measles vaccine?

Probably the one that would most hit that would be tetanus vaccine [which prevents a bacterial infection], but in terms of a viral vaccine, maybe smallpox. Probably no other routinely used viral vaccine is as effective as the measles vaccine.

Is measles likely to return to the U.S. for good?

Every time you add another sub population of people who are not protected, you grow the pool of the susceptibles, and if you have a large enough pool spread across enough areas, you can reestablish measles. If the only susceptibles were those in whom the vaccine failed, you would only have very small outbreaks of one or two or three people spread across time. The reason this is a big issue is that we do have this undercurrent of vaccine-hesitant and vaccine-refusing patients. And we do have failure.

The point is, to say the obvious, that we have an excellent vaccine, but we find ourselves in a unique situation right now. We've eliminated measles through indigenous transmission, but we have a small failure rate of the vaccine, and a growing sub population of people who won't get the vaccine. The point in my editorial was that we might be able to solve all those problems by developing an even better vaccine. But that's what people misunderstand. Both sides hear what they want to hear, and when I'm writing to scientific community, I think some of the nuances could be misinterpreted by laypeople or by people with an agenda. They think, "Hey, here's somebody who's saying it's not good vaccine" because that's what they want to hear.

Tell me your thoughts about those who choose not to get their children vaccinated.

One of the things I take as valid health criticism, as my daughter, a psychologist, has pointed out, is that we in the medical profession have not done a good job of discussing or explaining this to our patients. She developed an idea that people have different preferred cognitive styles and decision-making behaviors and that what we need to do is not stick only to the highly analytic cognitive style of a physician – all about the facts and data and numbers – but to determine the cognitive style of the patient in the front of us. Then it's incumbent upon us to best meet the cognitive styles of the patient. I think we have erred in not doing that.

I don't think my patients who reject vaccines are nuts. They have come to conclusion – I believe their conclusion is in error – but they have come to a conclusion that the vaccine is not good. I've yet to meet a parent who doesn't want to do the very best for their child, including vaccines. What I try to do now is that I then try to determine the style they use to make decisions under uncertainty, and that often means I have to establish a rapport or relationship with that patient before they will consider getting a vaccine. Or they may decide never to, but I often view my role as a physician as a patient advisor, and I try to give them the best information we know and have. If they make a choice that I think is adverse to that, I will let them know.

How has the measles vaccine affected cases of the disease, and the complications and deaths that can come with the disease?

The measles vaccine has dramatically decreased cases because of the lower number that occur. The risk of taking the vaccine itself would be, if it was administered properly, maybe about a one in million chance of anaphylaxis. Otherwise there really aren't life-threatening issues or complications associated with the vaccine. On the contrary side, should you develop measles, 1 in 1,000 develop encephalitis. During the outbreak in 1989-91, 3 out of 1000 kids died. It's not for everybody a benign disease. For many children, it will be benign, but you can't predict that, nor can you predict who they are going to expose, who may have more serious complications.

The way I often conclude my conversation with patients is that there are no risk-free decisions. The observed risk of autism due to MMR is zero. The risk of anaphylaxis is 1 in a million. The risk of any other life-threatening illness has got to be so small, maybe one in 10 million, that we can't detect it. Now let's look at the measles. If we're wise, we always the lower risk with the higher benefit, because that's what a rational person would do, enhancing their benefits while minimizing their risks.

During residency, I was chosen to go in and tell a mother that her baby was dead from pertussis. Back then, the fear was about SIDS and DPT, and she had elected not to immunize her baby. It was such a bad case that this woman's life was tragically altered by the death of her baby daughter, and for as long as this mother lives, she regrets every day that she did not immunize her child.

People get to choose, but there are consequences to those choices. Yes, parents are allowed currently to make that choice not to vaccinate, but with a disease this transmissible, and the complications that can occur, you're also choosing for other people because your child is going to expose somebody, perhaps before you even know your child is sick. And what's going to happen to those people? Like any rational society, we depend on the idea that people will make good decisions and have good will. But I've spent my career talking about this stuff, and I've found actually THE most contagious disease is fear. But to be afraid is to be ignorant in a case like this.
I didn't misread it, and I never said, nor insinuated he's on my side. I clearly pointed out in the text before the link I posted he's not. He hates antivaxxers. But, besides blaming us, he said we need a better vaccine. I read it, that's what it said.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
I didn't misread it, and I never said, nor insinuated he's on my side. I clearly pointed out in the text before the link I posted he's not. He hates antivaxxers. But, besides blaming us, he said we need a better vaccine. I read it, that's what it said.

I'm sure we could use a improved vaccine. But In doctor-speak, saying we need a better vaccine is not at all equivalent to saying the one currently available is either ineffective or should be avoided.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
Not that you care, but measles is not a one and done thing. Getting measles was a life defining moment for me. It ruined part of my childhood forever. I had side effects, physical and emotional. Only to learn later in life when I was already pregnant, that it did NOT in fact, give me immunity. Ellen, you expect and hope for others to listen and agree with you, yet you don't listen and agree with anyone else, no matter what solid evidence is presented. I'm done too. I was here the first time you started a thread like this, and that was 10 years ago. Your kids are over 30. Why do what are voluntary vaccines in adults, matter so much to you now? Anyone over 18 can make their own choices. I'm also deeply offended that you are suggesting that people skip out on vaccines with no regard to the vulnerable populations. I'm part of that population. There are vaccines I can't actually get because of that. So many of us depend on herd immunity for real, so it's a slap in the face to have someone trying to drum up support for anti-vaccination, which is in fact now endangering our lives. I guess it's all about the self now, putting oneself first, and no care for the community.
lyra, did you read all of my post on SV40? If not, I suggest you do. If you did, do you really not have a problem with the people in charge of our health, knowingly allowing a virus infected vaccine to be distributed to millions? Knowing it could possibly cause cancer? Are you really ok with that?? And Dr. Plotkin revealed there are other virus infected vaccines out there too. Again, is that ok with you? Because it's not ok with me. But whether or not I like it, I think the whole world has a right to KNOW the truth. Then they can truly make an informed decision. That's what I'm trying to do here. Let people know what kind of people and agencies we're really dealing with. And I'm not talking about just flu shots here.

lyra, I am truly sorry your life was affected by a childhood disease. I am. But one of my children is dead. Most likely from a vaccine. But I guess it's all about risk vs. benefit, huh?
 

lyra

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
5,249
Ellen, you have maintained that you don't know what caused your child's SIDS. I'm sorry for your loss. You are blameless in that.

Vaccines have not been shown to cause sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).
Babies receive multiple vaccines when they are between 2 to 4 months old. This age range is also the peak age for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). The timing of the 2 month and 4 month shots and SIDS has led some people to question whether they might be related. However, studies have found that vaccines do not cause and are not linked to SIDS.

Multiple research studies and safety reviews have looked at possible links between vaccines and SIDS. The evidence accumulated over many years do not show any links between childhood immunization and SIDS.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
lyra, no, I don't KNOW what caused his death, that's what SIDS is. Sudden death with no known cause. That doesn't mean there isn't one, it just wasn't found. Healthy babies don't just die. Please, stop posting links to "research" from the main stream medical establishment, it means nothing. And if you want to get an idea of just how many healthy babies die after getting vaccinations, look through this search list. Listen to these moms tell how their child was perfectly fine, got vaxxed, died. Again, after a while it stops being a coincidence.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=healthy+baby+dies+after+vaccines


This is hopefully the beginning of real SIDS recognition. Court finds child died from SIDS.
http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/new-decision-us-vaccine-court-sids-case-significant



And I'll tell you why I don't listen to you guys. Because you are just parroting information from the medical establishment that runs things. They are bought and paid for by the pharmaceutical companies, as are our politicians, the ones that should be fighting for us. There are huge conflicts of interest. There are huge profits being made the way things are and they don't want that changed. So it's a very well oiled machine that is running things, and it's as crooked as can be. Don't even act like that's an out of hand statement after I linked the SV40 story. There is SO much corruption it's sickening. Anyone who would trust these people, needs to rethink things.

I have listened to countless qualified, highly educated doctors, researchers, experts in various fields, who are not invested in anything. They have ZERO to gain, and much to lose in the way of reputation and practice, and they give an entirely different story. They disagree. Why? They have NOTHING to gain. They are not all anti vax. They simply don't buy what the medical powers that be are selling.

I really recommend watching this lecture. It's 77 min. long, by Dr. Marcia Angell. She is an American physician, author, and the first woman to serve as editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine. She is currently a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts. She is pro vaccine, pro medicine. She is not what you would call "on my side", at all. And yet, after serving as editor-in-chief for the NEJM for 13 years, she totally gets what's going on, and she doesn't like it. No rational person should. And she has worked at trying to expose and change what is going on, to a more ethical and balanced behavior. This explains a LOT.

First I will link Robert Kennedy, he says it basically in 3 1/2 min.


Marcia


Then you can read this very shorty article from the Lancet, talking about how up to half of the studies people base decisions on may be FALSE. Marcia speaks to this as well.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(15)60696-1/fulltext
 

lyra

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
5,249
My final words. I scroll past from now on or ignore. I base my choices on science. Science that is definable and gives repeatable results. There is no problem with vaccines. There is only a problem with individuals who refuse to believe in actual science and real doctors. There is no other valid viewpoint, I'm sorry. The rest is meaningless. Go to a third world country and see what living with a lack of vaccines really means. In the province where I live, there is only 2% of the population that are unvaccinated, and that includes babies and other vulnerable people. Thank God we don't have as much anti-vax propaganda as the US. There is some, but we still remain with adequate herd protection here.
 

Ellen

Super_Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
24,433
I'm going to post this and then I'm done. I think I will have shown that the people in charge of our health, are not interested in our health. They are interested in money and sick people, who make more money.

I'm first posting a very short clip after the case dismissal against Dr. Walker Smith. He is the man who headed the 13 man team that Dr. Wakefield was on. I'm sure I don't have to tell anyone who he is. Anyway, after the case finally went before a real judge, instead of the court of public opinion, he was totally exonerated and his license restored. The judge was appalled at how things had been handled and basically said this must never happen again. My question is, why didn't we hear this in the news? My word, it was a huge story, but, nothing. Crickets. We didn't hear, because the machine there is the same. When anyone hears Wakefield's name, they want everyone to think "discredited quack". And everyone does. Only, he isn't.

Dr. Smith

Here is Dr. Wakefield's story in his own words. I highly recommend listening, you'll finally get the real story.


I doubt anybody knows what the movie Vaxxed was about. It was about a top CDC scientist who blew the whistle on the CDC. He was working on the study that found the MMR DID cause autism. He and others were told to literally chuck the info in the trash and change the data. He was unknowingly recorded on phone calls for hours by another doctor. The entire transcript was made into a book. Ten thousand documents from the CDC were handed over to Sen. William Posey, who went to the floor about it. But, no investigation. How come? Because, the machine doesn't want something like this getting out. That would be bad for business! This isn't made up folks, it happened. But you go ahead and believe what makes you want..

http://vaxxedthemovie.com/about/

Congressman Posey


Just because these are so informative.




Lady given shot against her and her daughters wishes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NWs9lgVdrI


Son given shot strictly forbidden by his mother.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxne1v0ZD_0


Military whistleblower
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYWXzTscjc8


FDA and fraud
FDA Lets Drugs Approved on Fraudulent Research Stay on the Market


Fun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEWPBhDDu1I


Why are 20,000 nurses against mandatory flu vacs? That's a whopping 400 per state.
https://www.learntherisk.org/vaccin...-in-defiance-of-big-pharmas-flu-shot-threats/


Vaccine research nurse tells of her daughters injury. She worked with big name (and names them) drug companies who told her what she could and couldn't tell parents....Wouldn't you love to know?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEFbMIHtU8U




I truly wish you all the very best. I know none of you liked this, I know many of you don't believe it/don't want to believe it. But it's truth, and I could not sit on this in good conscience. If I had only had this information before I had kids...... Hopefully, I've saved someones child. Just one, would all be worth it.


God bless.


The most useful piece of learning for the uses of life is to unlearn what is untrue. - Antisthenes
 

telephone89

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 29, 2014
Messages
4,223
@Ellen "the people in charge of our health, are not interested in our health. They are interested in money and sick people, who make more money."

This might be true in the US, but what about every other country with universal healthcare? My country and many others rely on keeping people healthy as it doesn't impact the system as much. You think we're brainwashed, but honestly you are the one sounding unhinged.

eta - "Anyway, after the case finally went before a real judge, instead of the court of public opinion, he was totally exonerated and his license restored. "
Do you have any proof of this? I can't find any articles that he still has a license.
 
Last edited:

msop04

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
10,051
@Ellen "the people in charge of our health, are not interested in our health. They are interested in money and sick people, who make more money."

This might be true in the US, but what about every other country with universal healthcare? My country and many others rely on keeping people healthy as it doesn't impact the system as much. You think we're brainwashed, but honestly you are the one sounding unhinged.

Please. This is not true in the US. Not that I need to state the obvious, but the mere mention of this about professionals who have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of improving the lives of others is totally ridiculous, as well as extremely insulting.
 

evergreen

Brilliant_Rock
Joined
Jan 18, 2012
Messages
828
Thanks for keeping going with this thread, @msop04 and others. As an anesthesiologist and epidemiologist (ok, I model cognitive change after surgery in older adults, not infectious diseases, heh), and someone who is FULLY vaccinated herself, plus my husband, my son, my parents and DH's parents, and my friends and colleagues -- nobody made me, or us, do any of this. I'm grateful we can get vaccines, both to protect ourselves and others around us. They work. They reduce harm. They save lives. They make the hospital a safer place. I get absolutely NOTHING from other people being vaccinated, personally, except the benefits of herd immunity . A doctor (MD) in a Facebook doctor-mom group I belong to got Guillain-Barre from a flu shot -- yes, this happens, and yes, it's considerably more rare than getting GBS from influenza itself -- and she was asking the other doctor-moms if there was any way she could possibly get the flu shot in the future. (Answer: no. Absolute contraindication.) It's... That's how much this science means. That's how strong this science is. People who understand this field understand that rare bad things happen, and yet they are counterbalanced with so much good that we accept that risk, and study it (hence, vaccine surveillance programs) to make sure there isn't something we've missed.

That was rambly. :) I don't know how to engage with the conspiracy theorists when I'm literally one of the people accused of conspiring, by virtue of my ahem-ty-hrmph years of extra education. (So much education. So many years.). If there was a conspiracy, I would've heard of it; we would've blown it wide open because that's what scientists do. Meanwhile, I go on protecting my patients, my family, and myself by using science, in the form of vaccines, and send virtual hugs to those who aren't too burnt out to engage with the internet echo chamber rhetoric.
 

Snowdrop13

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,960
@Ellen "the people in charge of our health, are not interested in our health. They are interested in money and sick people, who make more money."

This might be true in the US, but what about every other country with universal healthcare? My country and many others rely on keeping people healthy as it doesn't impact the system as much. You think we're brainwashed, but honestly you are the one sounding unhinged.

eta - "Anyway, after the case finally went before a real judge, instead of the court of public opinion, he was totally exonerated and his license restored. "
Do you have any proof of this? I can't find any articles that he still has a license.
According to the U.K. medical council website he is no longer licensed to practice, but given that he graduated in 1960 he must be in his 80’s now anyway.
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
According to the U.K. medical council website he is no longer licensed to practice, but given that he graduated in 1960 he must be in his 80’s now anyway.

Even I found that first thing a bit confusing. Probably because there were too many unspecified pronouns, it was not all that clear whether the "he" being un-declared a "unqualified quack", was Dr. Smith, or former Dr. Wakefield. Smith is the guy who was a co-author of the Lancet paper, and the one who was reinstated. Wakefield, on the other hand, remains barred from practicing in the UK - is still an unqualified quack, and is apparently living in a place much more amenable (and lucrative) to getting away with reality-denial: The US. In Texas. :shock:

Yay. "murcah. :rolleyes: Hmmm...maybe it IS time to re-think the immigration issue....

Oh, and measles is now in Fort Worth! Woot!
 

telephone89

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 29, 2014
Messages
4,223
Please. This is not true in the US. Not that I need to state the obvious, but the mere mention of this about professionals who have dedicated their lives to the pursuit of improving the lives of others is totally ridiculous, as well as extremely insulting.
I should have worded that better. I mean that the US healthcare system is totally different than most other countries. So I can possibly see how people could think it's there to make money, not heal people when a hospital visit costs $2 million. But that doesn't make a single bit of sense for every single other country lol. Seems the she's left the thread and won't be back to defend these whackjob claims anyways.

According to the U.K. medical council website he is no longer licensed to practice, but given that he graduated in 1960 he must be in his 80’s now anyway.
Thats all I could find as well. So *if* he did have his license reinstated, it was later removed anyways.
 

telephone89

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 29, 2014
Messages
4,223
Even I found that first thing a bit confusing. Probably because there were too many unspecified pronouns, it was not all that clear whether the "he" being un-declared a "unqualified quack", was Dr. Smith, or former Dr. Wakefield. Smith is the guy who was a co-author of the Lancet paper, and the one who was reinstated. Wakefield, on the other hand, remains barred from practicing in the UK - is still an unqualified quack, and is apparently living in a place much more amenable (and lucrative) to getting away with reality-denial: The US. In Texas. :shock:

Yay. "murcah. :rolleyes: Hmmm...maybe it IS time to re-think the immigration issue....

Oh, and measles is now in Fort Worth! Woot!
Ah that makes sense. Thank you for clarifying!
 

msop04

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
10,051
Thanks for keeping going with this thread, @msop04 and others. As an anesthesiologist and epidemiologist (ok, I model cognitive change after surgery in older adults, not infectious diseases, heh), and someone who is FULLY vaccinated herself, plus my husband, my son, my parents and DH's parents, and my friends and colleagues -- nobody made me, or us, do any of this. I'm grateful we can get vaccines, both to protect ourselves and others around us. They work. They reduce harm. They save lives. They make the hospital a safer place. I get absolutely NOTHING from other people being vaccinated, personally, except the benefits of herd immunity . A doctor (MD) in a Facebook doctor-mom group I belong to got Guillain-Barre from a flu shot -- yes, this happens, and yes, it's considerably more rare than getting GBS from influenza itself -- and she was asking the other doctor-moms if there was any way she could possibly get the flu shot in the future. (Answer: no. Absolute contraindication.) It's... That's how much this science means. That's how strong this science is. People who understand this field understand that rare bad things happen, and yet they are counterbalanced with so much good that we accept that risk, and study it (hence, vaccine surveillance programs) to make sure there isn't something we've missed.

That was rambly. :) I don't know how to engage with the conspiracy theorists when I'm literally one of the people accused of conspiring, by virtue of my ahem-ty-hrmph years of extra education. (So much education. So many years.). If there was a conspiracy, I would've heard of it; we would've blown it wide open because that's what scientists do. Meanwhile, I go on protecting my patients, my family, and myself by using science, in the form of vaccines, and send virtual hugs to those who aren't too burnt out to engage with the internet echo chamber rhetoric.

Thank you for your post, @evergreen.
 

msop04

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
10,051
I should have worded that better. I mean that the US healthcare system is totally different than most other countries. So I can possibly see how people could think it's there to make money, not heal people when a hospital visit costs $2 million. But that doesn't make a single bit of sense for every single other country lol. Seems the she's left the thread and won't be back to defend these whackjob claims anyways.

I wanted to clarify that I was appalled by the comment(s) Ellen made, not yours. :)
 

cmd2014

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Aug 6, 2014
Messages
2,541
Frankly, the idea of allowing people to contract a highly contagious and dangerous disease that can be easily prevented due to fear mongering and anti-science ramblings is bizarre.

Measles is a serious disease. It can cause deafness. It causes encephalitis in 1 out of every 1000 children infected. This is fatal in many cases, and when it is not fatal, it results in permanent brain damage. It can cause pregnant women to lose their babies. 2 out of every 1000 children infected will die from complications like pneumonia and/or encephalitis. Of those who survive, the virus goes latent (like chickenpox and cold sores, it never entirely goes away once you are infected), and can recur to cause long term complications like subacute sclerosing panencephalitis which is a fatal neurological disease. Caused by having measles earlier in life.

@Ellen, I am so sorry that your baby died of SIDS. I wish we understood it better. Most research these days (yes, I know, from those of us you do not trust, but who truly, really, honestly, are just dedicating our lives to making the world better for everyone else) suggests that it is likely due to a combination of respiratory problems due to a number of possible factors (low birth weight, environmental pollutants, respiratory infections, possible neurological defects in the sleep center of the brain, obstruction due to overly soft sleeping surfaces) and sleeping position, which is why we no longer put babies on their stomachs (we think that for some this may inadvertently make it difficult for them to breathe). The "back to sleep" program that encouraged parents to put babies to sleep on their backs rather than their stomachs the way we were taught to in the 70's and 80's has dramatically reduced the number of SIDS deaths since the 1990's. So fighting for something that will result in many more children dead (because 2 deaths out of every 1000 infected in an airborne, highly contagious disease would result in millions of children dying every year without vaccinations) and latching onto stuff from the internet that is not only not true but designed to fuel this anti-sciences frenzy is not helpful - to you, or to anyone else. Nor will it prevent another mother from suffering the horrific loss of their child to SIDS. The Back to Sleep program has done more on that front than all other efforts combined.

If it helps you to have some trust in the medical field, health care is NOT a for-profit enterprise in any other country but the US. Every other country but the US that has government funded health care is working tirelessly on issues of population health to *prevent* overuse of the system so that we can continue to offer the same quality of healthcare to everyone that people expect and deserve. So this constant accusation that the medical system is just out to make people sick in order to make money is bizarre and simply not true. Large scale epidemiological studies are also generally conducted world wide, and the World Health Organization adopts policies and puts out position papers based on replicated research across places and cultures. So think what you will of your own CDC. They are only one of many organizations in the world who are conducting the kind of research that anti-science, anti-vaccination people don't want to believe.
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top