The most common and accepted idea is that vaccine was and are again the mains tools either with antibiotics and better hygein that allow the wold population to explose.
Many deadly and problematic viral disease that once being plagues for all society have since nearly disapear (polio, small pox, tuberculosis)
Since some years now, in our society that long forgoten the real meaning of suffering from theses diseases, voice haved raise to consider vaccine themselves as the problem instead of as the medecine.
Most of the internet site and circles that promote those ideas are fairly extremist in their point of view.
I think I haved express enough my own point of view on the "anti-vaccine lobby".
However, even if some plays dangerously with thoses fear, the fears are still there.
I want to give here a voice to those who share those fear.
Those fear must be filled with accurate information because a lot of disinformation is goin on and, saddly a lot of this occur in the francophone culture.
Yes, vaccine haved alway been a balance between risk and benefits.
Happyly, I think most of the time the balance have been on the site of benefits.
Some mistake haved been made in the past but greater mistake haved been made in the agronomic and food industry more often I think.
Most of the fear spread about them are poorly documented and based mainly on speculation.
Remember that before Louis Pasteur (vaccine inventor) the average life expectancy was 49 years old.
We'd both been getting annual flu shots for many years and neither of us has ever had a reaction before.
After seeing 20/20 the other night and learning that our government approved a program to test imitation blood on patients without their knowledge or consent, my decision to pass on any new vaccinations was only confirmed.
I'd rather depend on social distancing and what remedies we've stored.
Who knows, the vaccines being developed may be great, but I don't want to be part of the experiment.
Philosophic Objection to Vaccination as a Risk for Tetanus Among Children Younger Than 15 Years
Elizabeth Fair, MPH*, Trudy V. Murphy, MD*, Anne Golaz, MD, MPH and Melinda Wharton, MD, MPH*
* Division of Epidemiology and Surveillance, National Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
Division of Vaccine-Preventable Disease Eradication, National Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
--> Objectives. Although safe and effective vaccines are available to protect against tetanus in the United States and vaccination rates are high, cases of tetanus among children continue to occur. The objectives of this article are to describe reported cases of tetanus in children in the United States and to identify the reasons for lack of protection against tetanus.
Methods. We reviewed all cases of tetanus in children <15 years of age that were reported to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System from 1992 through 2000. Cases were defined by physician diagnosis. We verified the information in the case reports with state and local health departments.
Results. From 1992 through 2000, 15 cases of tetanus in children <15 years of age were reported from 11 states. Twelve cases were in boys. Two cases were in neonates <10 days of age; the other 13 cases were in children who ranged in age from 3 to 14 years. The median length of hospitalization was 28 days; 8 children required mechanical ventilation. There were no deaths. Twelve (80%) children were unprotected because of lack of vaccination, including 1 neonate whose mother was not vaccinated. Among all unvaccinated cases, objection to vaccination, either religious or philosophic, was the reported reason for choosing not to vaccinate.
Conclusion. The majority of recent cases of tetanus among children in the United States were in unvaccinated children whose parents objected to vaccination. Parents who choose not to vaccinate their children should be advised of the seriousness of the disease and be informed that tetanus is not preventable by means other than vaccination.
drcarley
Sorry Roman, but the site that you promote is inexact in the timing and in many affirmations. I would suggest if you want to corroborate your point of view with backbone infos, to get serious corroboration, not conspiratorusts one, they have the bad tendency to bend on the side of their rhetoric in their corroborations.
Fever is the natural reaction of imune system to a disease, it stimulate the growt of white blood cells. A vaccine can provoque fever without you haved to being sick.
Monkey liver cells haved been used for other vaccines.
Influenza do not grow on that. (maybe H5N1 would be the exeption but there is absolutely no need for that)
But that said, I understand you point Roman, you do not trust big-pharma.
And everyone here understand my opinion.
That's all
You need to substantiate your opinions if you want to pursue this line of discussion.
The fact is that many millions have been saved from suffering and even death by vaccines.
There are facts to support your points. Get them and post here.
Why allow Mingus to support his/her theory with research funded by the Pharmaceutical Industry? How can we be certain it is not bias toward their desired outcome. We certainly know who gives these organizations grants. You removed websites from my post that provided folks with another view. Some of the sites did contain research. However, it did not fulfill your standards. Which are? So I guess if we can't determine if the parents are real, their testimony can't be shown here on flutrackers. However, research funded by the Pharmaceutical Industry can be used to support their product. This is silly. How can we ever have a real debate? What a shame.
The vaccine debate is a good one. There are many facts on both sides. Much is unknown. It is worth pursuing vaccines for many different diseases, but of course, there is always a risk. The risk varies.
We may have to agree to disagree. I see both sides of the debate. My daughter had a bad reaction to her first pertussis shot. So I discontinued the rest of those scheduled.
But, I am sure she benefited from the polio vaccine.
I read it. I thought toxicity wasn't a big problem.
For sure, adjuvant and inactivation products have a certain level of toxicity but everything is made to reduce this risk to a minimum.
Some theory haved claim vaccine can cause diseases like autism but it never being verify. Autism is one of the most ununderstood disease and many theory goin on to explain that that accused many thing like antibiotics, preservative in food, television, mother's education, yeast-linked disease and so.
None of theses theory haved reach the acceptance level in the scientific community.
But maybe Mellie could talk more about that other issue, she is a psy.Phd.
What do you think could have happened, if you continued vaccinating your daughter? One vaccine after another. Your daughters immune system already stressed. Is it that much of a stretch to see how unsafe and unpredictable vaccines can be. Especially when giving to very young children? Do we really need "peer reviewed" studies? Peer reviewed by who? Doctors who are prescribing vaccines?? Sorry, in this situation, I will believe the thousands of parents who report severe reactions. I will assume they are not conspiring against the medical profession. That seems highly unlikely.
No, the toxicity and the immune reaction are two totally different things that are not linked together in this case.
Virus are toxic because they invade our cells and disrupt them.
In a natural infection, our immune cells react to the surface protein of the virus.
A vaccine will contain theses surfaces protein but the virus will not be "alive" so we will react the same way we should with a real infection to the surface protein of the virus, just that.
Our immune system is made to react to protean that are not part of our body, that's it.
There is no link to the toxicity.
The toxicity came from the products that kill the virus and this has notting to do with the immunity produce by the vax.
Other reaction can be allergic reaction to eggs protein include in the vax.
Immune response is not driven by the toxicity, this is a misconception.
Is this official reaction to anyone questioning vaccines?
How many vaccines does an infant receive, Mingus?
What's the average age?
In your opinion, is their immune system fully formed?
It's not just me, Mingus. There are millions of parents that have said, enough is enough. That is a wise choice and certainly reflects an advanced society.
It's impossible to track long term, chronic illness in ferrets. That should be obvious to any educated human. I would want to know that information before I allowed my child to be injected. Unfortunately, the scientists making the vaccine are not able to gather this important data. This makes the vaccine process, clearly experimental. That should be made clear to the public. They deserve all the information available before they make this very important choice.
In an advanced society, scientists admit their mistakes. Flordia1 is not the only parent who has witnessed the effects of vaccines. There are millions, Mingus. These folks are not delusional. They took their children to the doctor, got their vaccines, the kids got sick. This is not rare. Further more, you have no way of tracking long term "allergic" reactions to vaccines. Sorry, ferrets are not going to cut it in an advanced society. The Pharma industry has no idea what the long term consequences may be. So your 0.1% percent possible reaction is your opinion. It is not grounded in science. In fact, it excludes the worst possible reaction, chronic illness. This reaction is very difficult to diagnose and is often is placed in a separate category. The vaccine is not considered a suspect. The illness remains a mystery. Times are changing, Mingus. The public is becoming wise to this situation. The Pharma companies see the writing on the wall. That's why they are making a very quick exit out of the vaccine market. That's what I consider an advance society.
They have used monkey kidneys or livers in vaccines. It is well documented. Go ahead and do a google search if your interested.
"It has caused no systemic toxicity in human trials because the adjuvant never enters the bloodstream," says Greg Glenn, chief scientist at Iomai."
I read it. I thought toxicity wasn't a big problem. Seems these folks think it is. What is their definition of "systemic toxicity?" Have they shared this with the public? Could this "systemic toxicity" cause chronic illness (cancer, autism, etc)?
"It may not necessarily protect you from infection, but it will probably stop you dying."
Of course you may have never gotten the BF, however, now you get to suffer from "systemic toxicity" which may just kill you down the road.
The vaccine approach is flawed. That's why the Pharma companies want a waiver. They know it. IMHO we need to focus or attention and money on other less dangerous ways to survive.
It would be long to answer and I must do further reading but I appear that every immune reaction let in our blood the cells of the "immunne memory".
Each further time a immunne response is produce against a pathogen, theses cells are ready to being put in action more readily and if they had produce antibody with "cross-ractivity" to the new one they can be activated faster because the "must find the good antibody" work can be done quickly.
I grossly approximative, but It's a little like that.
Psychological research shows that people tend to overestimate risk in the risk-benefit equation when the risk is small but the outcome is severe and when the rare manifestation of the bad outcome is "harped on" in the media (or on the internet). Seeing or hearing repeatedly about the a bad outcome makes the risk loom larger in our consciousness.
I second what Mingus says about our failure to know firsthand what health care was like prior to vaccination. One of our relatives was key in development of the Salk polio vaccine. It was always interesting and often heartbreaking to hear him tell stories of morbidity and mortality he dealt with in his lifetime: stories of large families in remote Montana in the 1920s and '30s wiped out by a bug that we give no thought to today because of vaccines; loads and loads of kids with polio in iron lung machines in the '50s because they couldn't breathe; caskets in the hospital basement. (We have some planks from those caskets that were turned into lab shelves after the vaccine saved a generation. My husband was a "guinea pig" for his father's vaccines. Worked well for him!)
Our generation doesn't know that kind of infection and death. That's one reason why talk of pandemic falls on so many deaf ears.
(Snowy Owl, I still live in fear of deleting a whole thread! Can I say, glad it was you, old chap, and not me that wiped it out!)
Thank you.
please calm down.
Snowy haved explain himself and I think I haved answer some of your point.
My intention was not to censor you at all, but until the Dr. Carley's credibility is better assessed, they will not allow link to his site.
However, his name will be enough for every one to find what is all about.
And forgive me, Some Time I took long to answer, I read your post while at job this morning and did not haved much time to produce a structured answer.
This thread is for this,
I'm sorry and I wish we could explain ourself kindly.
Ming
"Thirteen outbreaks of measles were identified during 1985–1994 in religious
groups opposing vaccination. These outbreaks resulted in more than 1200 cases
and 9 deaths. Outbreaks of polio (in the 1970s), pertussis, and rubella have been
documented among Amish groups.37 Salmon et al.38 found that persons with
religious or philosophic exemptions were 35 times more likely to contract measles
than were vaccinated persons during 1985–1992. They also found that persons
living in communities with high concentrations of exemptors were themselves
at increased risk for measles because of increased risk for exposure.Rota et al.39 studied the processes required to obtain religious and philosophic"
You can't have a debate if the funding of the sources used remains hidden. The medical industry's relationship with the Pharmaceutical Industry is not a secret. It plays a role when discussing research that downplays the effect of vaccines. How can it not? According to your rules, the debate can never take place here. Thanks for allowing it to limp along this far.
You receive the vaccine and risk not only autism, but a variety of chronic illness, that includes cancer. In addition, the hurried vaccine could also corrupt the host immune system, allowing some individuals to now be a vector for the virus. Similar to the concerns over HIV positive individuals.
option four:
You make fundamental lifestyle changes which include the use of organic food, purified water, herbs etc. You exercise regularly. You lose weight. Control stress. Prepare for a pandemic. Practice self quaratine during a pandemic.
That's your choice Roman,
The last things I must add is:
- Most of the easy accusation you put on the vaccine fault are poorly documented and only based on hypothetic theory.
- Deactivated(killed) influenza virus cannot being the vector of the disease, that's a lie and a misconception.
- No influenza vaccine ever haved been made with monkey's kidney
- The real risk when dealing with a inactivated influenza vaccine is alergic reaction.
Now your choice is your choice but remember that it is herd immunity that prevent long forgotten disease to reapear in our advanced society and this must be understood as a collective responsability.
Some of the most compelling evidence comes from the parents who witness their children's health change very quickly after being vaccinated. Of course, what they witness can't be peer reviewed. So we should just ignore them? Now we have to find money to conduct the research. Since we are not creating a product that can make billions of dollars that becomes incredibly difficult.
There are research papers on those sites. Many of those papers get started because of the stories from parents found there also. Professionals who engage in this research are often shunned by the medical profession. Compiling this research is nearly impossible. It's the stories from parents, that is really making a difference. Stories like yours, Florida1.
I am one of the least vaccinated persons to have gone through the armed forces, the story on this is a separate issue.
My kids have been denied day care and schooling for not having all the required vaccinations.
Lately we have taken some well proven ones, including some new ones as Hepatitis A and B and we do keep up with our tetanus.
We took the flu vaccine last year and the shots wore worth nothing, more harm than good.
I am very hesitant on vaccines for more reasons than this page has room fore but I want to point out that the reasons are mostly not the anti vaccine reasons you can find on the net.
When the next pandemic arrives, our country has a pre vaccine for all of us, my family will skip it at the time of administration! We might consider it later.
If a H5N1 current pandemic genotype vac is developed and available during a pandemic or a imminent threat of one in our locale, we will skip it. I see it better for my family the ride out the storm until a the main stream has had it tested, a acceptable variant has been made available a few years later and there is some evidence that it is worth taking.
At this stage we see developing antibodies H5N1 very important, but not to the stage we shall have any half variant injected into us to do so. Social distancing to the extreme and a mother load of healthy substances and un-healthy antivirals at this stage is my thinking of defence, along with the means of social distancing.
1: J Infect Dis. 2006 Jul 15;194(2):159-67. Epub 2006 Jun 9. Related Articles, Links
Click here to read
Immunization with Reverse-Genetics-Produced H5N1 Influenza Vaccine Protects Ferrets against Homologous and Heterologous Challenge.
Govorkova EA, Webby RJ, Humberd J, Seiler JP, Webster RG.
Department of Infectious Diseases, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, 38105-2794, USA.
Background. Multiple cases of transmission of avian H5N1 influenza viruses to humans illustrate the urgent need for an efficacious, cross-protective vaccine.Methods. Ferrets were immunized with inactivated whole-virus vaccine produced by reverse genetics with the hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase genes of A/HK/213/03 virus. Ferrets received a single dose of vaccine (7 or 15 mu g of HA) with aluminum hydroxide adjuvant or 2 doses (7 mu g of HA each) without adjuvant and were challenged with 10(6) 50% egg infectious doses of A/HK/213/03, A/HK/156/97, or A/Vietnam/1203/04 virus.Results. One or 2 doses of vaccine induced a protective antibody response to the vaccine strain. All immunization regimens completely protected ferrets from challenge with homologous wild-type A/HK/213/03 virus: no clinical signs of infection were observed, virus replication was significantly reduced (P<.05) and was restricted to the upper respiratory tract, and spread of virus to the brain was prevented. Importantly, all vaccinated ferrets were protected against lethal challenge with the highly pathogenic strain A/Vietnam/1203/04. The 2-dose schedule induced higher levels of antibodies that were cross-reactive to antigenically distinct H5N1 viruses.Conclusions. H5N1 vaccines may stimulate an immune response that is more cross-protective than what might be predicted by in vitro assays and, thus, hold potential for being stockpiled as "initial" pandemic vaccines.
PMID: 16779721 [PubMed - in process]
Also
http://www.h5n1experts.org/forum/showthread.php?t=429
Moreover, serologic studies in
man suggest that a current adjuvanted H5N1 vaccine could be used
for priming against a future H5N1 pandemic virus.21
This thing can happen only for live attenuated vaccine which are made diseases that are known to be very stable one. This kind of vaccine create high immunity in general.
Influenza vaccine are made of inactivated(dead) culture. The virus is dead and cannot revert back to virulence. This is in fact the protein from the virus and this have the same effect than have the flu for the immune system.
The products used for inactivated the culture will of course be of some toxicity, better kill that virus! Formalin is often used. But the final concentration will be below the toxic zone.
Remember that insect repellent is toxic but wont kill you.
70% Alcool is toxic but you still can safely drink a beer.
A lot of the synthetic products in your daily food will be toxic at high dose too.
A vax once a year won't be a problem for you.
The higher danger of that kind of vaccine is the allergic reaction.
Most of them are made of eggs culture so everyone alergic to egg sould avoid them...
Some other are made of cells culture and will be safer for thoses individuals.
The cases of guillan-barré syndrome that are often accused of being recorded after the 1976 H1N1 vaccination campain have never been successfully linked with the vaccine by serious study. The controverse is still ongoing 30 years after so maybe better data is to look for...
As for the monkey,s kidney, don't worry there where notting such as this in any influenza vaccine ever.
This was used in other diseases in the fifties and some theory accused AIDS of being pass to human from that.
But the vaccine of that time was a Formalin inactivated vax...
Some other theory accuse instead the hygien in some african villages where the same needles was used for many individuals to save money.
I think the blame if for the colonial administration of that time.
Again, we must be careful on that issue.
It is easy to accused everything about everything
One thing is real
Vaccines saves thousand of millions of live since the last hundred years.
Many diseases that where once create heavy handicap and severe complication and death is now nearly disapeared.
Under a certain lever of herd immunity, they reapear.
Keep the herd immunity high prevent them to reappear, this is a collective responsability, not a individual one.
Mingus.
This is a pure hypothesis here and do not take theses numbers as real ones,
option one:
You get a seasonal flu with a case-fatality rate of 0.1% and a vaccine with a adverse reaction % of 0.001% then suspected unverified study that link autism to that.
I could be a calculated risk to take it
It could be a personal choice to not take it
option two:
You get a catastrophic pandemia with case-falality rate ranging from 5% to 20% that kill mostly healthy youg peoples and a vaccine quickly made with a adverse reaction rate of 0.1% and again this suspected unverified study that link autism to that.
What whould you choose ?
Here is some information. Lets remember, the Pharma companies have billions of dollars to create any data they want. The individuals trying to figure out why their kids are sick have a tiny, tiny, fraction of that available to them. Some have nothing at all.
I have personal experience with this wonder drug:
"Excerpt from the Wall Street Journal, Friday, October 12, 2001 (front page)
Worries About Safety Of Its Anthrax Vaccine Put the Army in a Bind
"For both anthrax and smallpox, the side effects of the vaccines are serious enough that widespread vaccination could cause more damage than the diseases themselves" "Fear of the vaccine is perhaps greater than fear of anthrax. As many as 400 members of the U.S. military have been court-martialed or have resigned rather than submit to the vaccination because of the perceived risks. Some physicians share their misgivings." "All told, vaccinating all Americans against smallpox could cause 3,000 severe adverse reactions and a much larger number of lesser problems, according to Thomas Monath, an executive at British vaccine manufacturer Acambis" Los Angeles Times October 29, 2001 " taken from Shirley's-wellness-cafe.com
Vaccination Mandates: The Public Health Imperative and Individual Rights
LEGAL ISSUES AND CONTROVERSIES—EXEMPTIONS TO
MANDATORY VACCINATION
Although vaccines are safe and effective, they are neither perfectly safe nor
perfectly effective. Some persons who receive vaccines will have an adverse
reaction, and some will not be protected. In developing vaccines, the challenge
is to minimize the likelihood of adverse effect while maximizing effectiveness.
Some people have medical conditions that increase the risk for adverse effect,
and therefore they should not receive vaccines. Recognizing this fact, all state
vaccination laws provide for exemptions for persons with contraindicating
conditions.
The religious beliefs of some people are in opposition to vaccination, and
other people oppose vaccination on other grounds, including philosophic. In
addition, some persons are not opposed to all vaccines but oppose the concept
of mandatory vaccination or mandates for specific vaccines. In the latter case,
they may believe they (or their children) are not at risk for a particular disease
or that, if contracted, the disease is not severe. If the disease in question is
uncommon (as is the case in the United States today for most vaccinepreventable
diseases), they might not be willing to undertake any level of risk
of adverse effect.
Forty-eight states allow religious exemptions (all but Mississippi and West
Virginia), and 15 (California, Colorado, Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan,
Minnesota, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah, Vermont,
Washington, and Wisconsin) permit philosophic exemptions29 (RH Snyder, National
Immunization Program [NIP], CDC, personal communication). The criteria
for allowing these exemptions vary greatly. Some states require membership in a recognized religion,e whereas others merely require an affirmation of
religious (or philosophic) opposition. Nationwide, fewer than 1% of school entrants
have medical, religious, or philosophic exemptions to mandatory vaccination.
Seven states had more than 1% with exemptions in the 1997–1998 school
year (Colorado, Michigan, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and West
Virginia [those with philosophic exemptions are italicized]). Michigan had the
highest level of exemption at 2.3% (RH Snyder, NIP, CDC, personal communication.).
However, in some communities, the levels of exemptors may be as
high as 5%. In 1995, 84% of California schools had fewer than 1% of students
with exemptions, but 4% of schools had 5% or more with exemptions (NA
Smith, Immunization Program, California Department of Public Health, personal
communication).
Thirteen outbreaks of measles were identified during 1985–1994 in religious
groups opposing vaccination. These outbreaks resulted in more than 1200 cases
and 9 deaths. Outbreaks of polio (in the 1970s), pertussis, and rubella have been
documented among Amish groups.37 Salmon et al.38 found that persons with
religious or philosophic exemptions were 35 times more likely to contract measles
than were vaccinated persons during 1985–1992. They also found that persons
living in communities with high concentrations of exemptors were themselves
at increased risk for measles because of increased risk for exposure.Rota et al.39 studied the processes required to obtain religious and philosophic
exemptions to school vaccination laws and found an inverse correlation between
the complexity of the exemption process and the proportion of exemptions filed.
None of 19 states with the highest level of complexity in gaining exemptions
had more than 1% of students exempted compared with 5 of 15 states with the
simplest procedure. In these latter states, less effort was required to claim a
nonmedical exemption than to fulfill the vaccination requirement.
...Scope of statutory exemptions—sincerely held religious belief
In Sherr v. Northport-East Northport Union Free School District,51 the plaintiffs
had been denied an exemption under the state’s religious exemption statute by
the school district because, although they claimed religious opposition to vaccination,
they were not “bona fide members of a recognized religious organization”
whose teachings oppose vaccination, as required by New York law (672
F.Supp. at 84 [quoting subsection 9 of N.Y. Pub. Health L. § 2164]). The U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of New York found that New York’s
limitation of the religious exemption violated both the Establishment and Free
Exercise clauses of the First Amendment.i
The court found that this limitation violated the Establishment Clause by
running afoul of at least the last two prongs of the Lemon testj: (1) by inhibiting
the religious practices of individuals who oppose vaccination of their children
on religious grounds but are not members of a religious organization recognized
by the state and (2) by restricting the exemption to “recognized religious organizations”
requires that the government involve itself in religious matters to
an inordinate degree through such government approval (672 F.Supp. at 89–90).
In addition, the court held that the limiting language violated the Free Exercise
Clause because no compelling societal interest existed to justify the burden
placed on the free religious exercise of “certain individuals while other persons
remain free to avoid subjecting their children to a religiously objectionable medical
technique because they may belong to a particular religious organization to
which the state has given a stamp of approval” (672 F.Supp. at 90–1). There
“surely exist less restrictive alternative means of achieving the state’s aims than
the blatantly discriminatory restriction . . . the state has devised” (672 F.Supp.
at 91). Striking down New York’s limitation, the court found that “sincerely
held religious beliefs” in opposition to vaccination, whether or not as part of a
recognized religion, should suffice (672 F.Supp. at 98).
278 CONTROL AND PREVENTION
Do Statutory Religious Exemptions Encompass Philosophic Opposition?
Strength of convictions aside, defining “religious” belief can be difficult, and understanding
its implications for philosophic exemptions that a state may or may
not wish to voluntarily confer is a challenge. As the Supreme Court noted in
Yoder: “to have the protection of the Religion Clauses, the claims must be rooted
in religious belief” (406 U.S. at 215, 92 S.Ct. at 1533). Decisions by the U.S.
Supreme Court in two conscientious objector cases indicate that a bright line
may not always exist between the religious and the philosophic and that at least
some amount of philosophic opposition to vaccination may rise to the level of
being religious and therefore incorporated into a voluntarily conferred religious
exemption, regardless of whether the state explicitly provides for a philosophic
exemption.k In United States v. Seeger52 and Welsh v. United States,53 the Court
interpreted “religious,” as it appeared in a federal statutory religious-based conscientious
objector exemption from military conscription, very expansively to
extend beyond traditional religious beliefs. Seeger defined the test as “[a] sincere
and meaningful belief which occupies in the life of its possessor a place parallel
to that filled by the God of those admittedly qualifying for the exemption” (380
U.S. at 176, 85 S.Ct. at 859). The Court elaborated in Welsh: “to be ‘religious’
. . . this opposition . . . [must] stem from . . . moral, ethical, or religious beliefs
about what is right and wrong and that these beliefs be held with the strength of
traditional religious convictions” (398 U.S. at 340, 90 S.Ct. at 1796).
However, the Welsh Court clarified that “moral, ethical, or religious principles”
do not incorporate “considerations of policy, pragmatism, or expediency”
(398 U.S. at 342–3, 90 S.Ct. at 1798). Yoder provides further illumination: “A
way of life, however virtuous and admirable, may not be interposed as a barrier
to reasonable state regulation of education if it is based on purely secular considerations.
. . . [T]he very concept of ordered liberty precludes allowing every
person to make his own standards on matters of conduct in which the society
as a whole has important interests. Thus, if the Amish asserted their claims
because of their subjective evaluation and rejection of the contemporary secular
values accepted by the majority, much as Thoreau rejected the social values of
his time and isolated himself at Walden Pond, their claims would not rest on a
religious basis. Thoreau’s choice was philosophical and personal rather than
religious, and such belief does not rise to the demands of the Religion Clauses”
(406 U.S. at 215–6, 92 S.Ct. at 1533). Thus, the court in Mason v. General
Brown Central School District54 rejected fear of the possible side effects from
vaccination, although based on strong convictions, as rising to the level of religious
beliefs because of evidence that the plaintiff’s beliefs were “simply an
embodiment of secular chiropractic ethics” (851 F.2d at 51–2). Mason, and
similar decisions, indicate that the expansive religious interpretation of Seeger
and Welsh should not be read too broadly.
Again, everyone understands your point. Please move on.
I am not asking again.
I have remoce the whole thread while attempting to remove, 'innacuracy or innapropriated comments.
Please remember that we are working very to give a chance to pertinent, laboratory corroborated, facts on Traditional, Alternative an Allophatic efficient protocol.
As being part of the 'Natural', 'Alternatives' and 'Soft' Medicines group, I have work very hard with many other people to promote efficient alternatives. In order to do so, we all have to respect the different Intervention Lobby.
Each and one of them have its Achille Heels, that is not the point.
The point is that we want to promote what can be efficient in reducing morbidity & mortality.
So let's not shoot the Carrier, lets examine it, find corroborations and indiquate accessibility.
We have to get the job done together,
We are in the same boat.
PS - Sorry Roman, JJackson, Mingus and gsgs, I tought I was doing fine in the redirection process of the thread, but I drop it.
I'll do better next time (I hope).
SO
I even posted a section of a medical text that clearly observed the harmful effects of vaccines on the nervous system. Mingus was silent. I tried. I'll dig deeper.
Second, The adjuvant does not produce high imune responce by being toxic, they produce umine responce by permitting the viral protein to be available to the human cells for a longer time.
Third, not all vaccine haved aluminium hydroxide as adjuvant, some haved only mireral oil, and this is very safe...
Then
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3876178&dopt=Abstract
1: Clin Exp Immunol. 1985 Jul;61(1):143-51. Related Articles, Links
Modulation of the human immune response by the non-toxic and non-pyrogenic adjuvant aluminium hydroxide: effect on antigen uptake and antigen presentation.
Mannhalter JW, Neychev HO, Zlabinger GJ, Ahmad R, Eibl MM.
and
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Aluminium hydroxide, Al(OH)3, is the most stable form of aluminium in normal conditions. As found in nature it is known as the mineral gibbsite. Closely related are aluminium oxide hydroxide, AlO(OH), and aluminium oxide, Al2O3, differing only by loss of water. These compounds together are the major components of the aluminium ore, bauxite.
(...)
Pharmacologically this compound, also known as Alu-Cap or Aludrox, is used as an antacid. It binds with the excess acid in the stomach, thus reducing it's acidity. This decrease of acidity of the contents of the stomach may in turn help to relieve the symptoms of ulcers, heartburn or dyspepsia. It can also cause constipation and is therefore often used with magnesium carbonate. This compound is also used to control phosphate levels in the blood for people suffering from kidney failure. However, there are unverified claims that excessive consumption of aluminium is a cause of Alzheimer's disease.
Frankly, I'm sure you will take much more heavyer dose with your standard antiacid and other medecine that peoples used on a regular basis than there is include inside a one or two shot vaccine once a year or less.
And about alzeimer, I insist to the quote
unverified claims
All the data is there for peoples to make well informed decision.
You have the choice of you opinion Roman but you cannot play with common fear without good documentation and reference.
Best wishes
Is it your position that we would be better off - from a public health point of view - if we went revert to a position were no one uses vaccines?
Do you dispute that the lives saved by vaccination are greater than those immpared by the side effects of administered vaccines?
The artices posted by St. Michael are untrue, or unsound?
Who do you think funds your sources? Where do you think they get their grant money? These are the sources parents are supposed to use when deciding to vaccinate their children? Unfortunatly, the medical profession is intimatley tied to the Pharmaceutical Industry. Many doctors have private contracts with specific companies. At one time, Vioxx was a great idea. It had loads of research, by doctors, that proved how safe and wonderful it was. They were wrong and people died. That is one example of many. Research is easy to buy.
The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly
Issue: Volume 2, Number 1 / Spring 2002
Pages: 51 - 67
URL: Linking Options
Vaccines, Abortion, and Moral Coherence
Daniel P. Maher
Abstract:
The health benefits associated with relatively recent advances in vaccine therapy are well documented.To mention just a few: in 1921 there were nearly 207,000 reported cases of diphtheria in the United States. In 1991, there were two. In the same year, apart from a small number (five to ten) of vaccine-associated cases, there were no reported cases of poliomyelitis, as compared with more than twentyone thousand in 1952; The CDC projects that the world will be polio-free by 2003. Smallpox is said to be eradicated globally since late 1977, success that has rendered the vaccine itself normally unnecessary and even inadvisable since the risks associated with this vaccine are greater than the risk of contracting smallpox. Even in the case of diseases that remain somewhat common, such as mumpsthere were approximately 4,000 reported cases in the United States in 1991it must be noted that this figure represents only about 2.6% of the 152,000 cases reported in 1968. Occasional outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, such as pertussis in Japan (19741979) and measles in the United States (19891991), have been traced to failure to use available vaccines.
As stated in Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine , 6th edition, p. 943: "RARELY IS PREVENTION OF INFECTION PER SE CONSIDERED TO BE AN IMPORTANT GOAL OF VACCINATION. In fact, asymptomatic infection after vaccination can serve to enhance and prolong the immune response." Of course, if the immune response has been overwhelmed or corrupted, the "asymptomatic infection" will become a CHRONIC DISEASE. In fact, on the same page of Harrison's, in the following paragraph, it states the following:
"PERSISTENCE AND LATENCY. Many viruses persist in host tissues for months or years without causing overt disease. A FLARE-UP OF THESE LATENT INFECTIONS MAY BE INDUCED BY TRAUMA, INTERCURRENT DISEASE, DECLINE IN ANTIBODY TITERS, OR UNKNOWN STIMULI. Experiments with tissue cultures and laboratory animals reveal that persistence of virus in tissue results from an interplay of various factors peculiar to each virus and its host. LATENCY IS PROMOTED BY THE PRESENCE OF ANTIBODY OR OTHER VIRAL INHIBITORS THAT PREVENT EXTENSIVE CELL-TO-CELL SPREAD OF VIRUS. IF ANTIBODY IS WITHDRAWN, VIRAL MULTIPLICATION OFTEN RESUMES, WITH CONCOMITANT CELLULAR NECROSIS."
:
"In the same (6th) Edition of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine , it is stated on page 975 in regards to the poliomyelitis vaccine: "Vaccine virus multiplies in the intestinal tract and remains at this site. LIVE VACCINE VIRUS SPREADS AND INFECTS CONTACTS OF VACCINATED INDIVIDUALS. This type of immunization in the presence of epidemic poliomyelitis may lead to REPLACEMENT OF THE "WILD" PARALYTOGENIC STRAIN BY THE ONE IN THE VACCINE....." In direct contradiction to this statement, the 1/1/2000 Vaccine Information statement put out by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Immunization Program states that the "OPV (Oral Polio Vaccine) is better at keeping the disease from spreading to other
people. However, it does state in this document that "OPV actually causes polio".
You are incorrect. The virus is mixed with other substances to create a strong response from the host immune system. That is why they mix the virus with aluminium (toxic), etc. If not, why are they including these "foreign" toxic substances? This is a very common method, used to guarantee a strong immune response. This theoretically helps stimulate the body to create anti-bodies for the virus. However, the foreign, toxic substances used do not simply disappear (like beer). The body still has to fight their effects and many times, it loses.
drcarley.com
6th edition of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine on p. 1791, under the heading "Multiple Sclerosis and other DEMYELINATING Diseases", it states the following: "A large and important group of neurologic disorders are termed the demyelinating diseases because they share the common pathologic feature of foci of degeneration, involving the myelin sheath of nerves. These foci vary in size, shape, distribution, and rate of development in the different illnesses. The axis cylinder often suffers damage, as does the myelin sheath, but the destruction of myelin is considered the primary change...syndromes can be clearly distinguished....(including) acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (including post infectious and POSTVACCINAL ENCEPHALOMYELITIS)...(P. 1798) - "the association of the neurologic disorder with vaccination or inoculation usually leaves the diagnosis in little doubt, and the characteristic combination of encephalitic and myelitic features will help to distinguish the condition from meningitis, viral encephalitis, and poliomyelitis". This self evident fact has been taken out of subsequent editions of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine.
Why? Why remove this information without explanation. This is not a blog. This is a section taken from a previous edition of a very well respected medical reference. They simply removed this very important observation. Why? Why? Why?
I think the article Mingus posted reveals a lot. Vaccines do produce "systemic Toxicity". This will corrupt your immune system. This is a big problem with current vaccines. That is why they are trying to change the way they are administered. It's strange. Some members of the public and medical community have been asking about the effects of "systemic toxicity" for years. They were told it was very rare and not a concern. However, they have spent millions finding a new way to administer the vaccine. Why? Seems they have a little explaining to do. I can only conclude the old method did not work very well and in fact did cause "systemic toxicity". Now they want to use a brand new method to help stop a pandemic. Perhaps they should admit their previous failure. I'm sure there are millions of parents that would appreciate that curtesy. Why pharma companies think the public should trust them now is a complete mystery.
So unless you have something new, please move on to another topic.
Thanks.
S.
There is not conspiracy in the pharma industry, and vaccine are a cheap and effective but un-profit-creative business sector.
Roman, most of the data you provide is coincidential and based on overgeneralisation and exageration of reality.
One of the first "source of Expert" you provide us was not only controversial but also banned of his professionnal order for a reason I have not to tell here and I haved previously informed you of that.
I did not answer you because I never said vaccine where no risk at all.
Vanishing Vaccinations: Why Are So
Many Americans Opting Out of
Vaccinating Their Children?
Steve P. Calandrillo
Univ. of Washington School of Law
The headline screamed, "Measles Blamed in 42 Deaths; Epidemic Expected to Top
16,000 by Year's End." [FN1] Another ominously warned, "Measles Spreading: Polio,
Diphtheria Next?" [FN2] The year and the place? One might reasonably guess the turn
of the 19th century in any number of undeveloped nations. Sadly and shockingly, the
year was 1990, and the country was the United States.
This tale is not unique. In addition to the 55,000 American measles cases and 130
deaths between 1989 and 1991, [FN3] the disease afflicted 125 others in a Christian
Science School in Illinois in 1985. [FN4] Outbreaks among the Amish occurred again
in 1987 and 1988, killing two. [FN5] Rubella, a supposedly "nothing disease,"
attacked 890 children in Amish areas in 1991, leading to more than a dozen
permanently deformed children. [FN6] America's last two polio *356 outbreaks
occurred among Amish and Mennonite communities and in a Christian Science school in
Connecticut. [FN7] All could have been avoided if the parents of the children
afflicted had not opted out of vaccination.
Sadly, these tragedies may be more likely to occur today than ten or twenty years
ago. On Vashon Island, Washington, nearly one in five schoolchildren opted out of
immunizations in the year 2000, as some residents prefer alternative therapies and
homeopathy to vaccines. [FN8] Unfortunately, outbreaks of whooping cough--which can
be fatal in infants--struck the island every year between 1995 and 1999,
hospitalizing some babies and leaving other children with chronic asthma. [FN9] Yet,
one resident interviewed still "consider[ed] well-baby care to be a capitalist
plot," and prefers not to immunize her children to this day despite having been a
victim of tetanus herself since she too was never vaccinated as an infant. [FN10]
The law faces a difficult challenge in responding to situations like these:
namely, how to balance public health welfare with a parent's individual right and
freedom to raise her child as she sees fit. While "compulsory" vaccination laws in
all states require immunizations prior to school entry, they are in fact not usually
mandatory. Exemptions to vaccination requirements are often easy *357 to receive--in
some states, one must merely check a box to legally opt out. [FN11] Alternatively,
if documentation is required, one is welcome to join the Congregation of Universal
Wisdom, whose tenets hold that "Universal Wisdom is the Supreme Master of all levels
in creation" and that the "laying on of hands to the vertebrae shall be the sole
means of maintaining the life force." [FN12] Further, "[n]o member of the
Congregation shall have injected . . . into the body any foreign materials of
unhealthy or unnatural composition [i.e., vaccines]." [FN13] The Congregation is
growing fast--to date, it claims over 5,000 members in 28 states, primarily parents
who are seeking exemptions to vaccination requirements. [FN14]
So far the United States has been extremely lucky: most outbreaks of preventable
disease in recent years have been confined to dozens or hundreds of people
37 UMIJLR 353 Page 4
(Cite as: 37 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 353)
Copr. © West 2004 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works
(excluding the 55,000 victims of measles between 1989 and 1991 [FN15]). Measles,
mumps, polio, diphtheria and other now easily preventable diseases no longer cause
mass deaths in America, although the rest of the world is not nearly as fortunate.
[FN16] Consequently, media coverage has largely passed over this lurking danger in
America, often giving greater coverage to the risks posed by vaccines or the
controversial link between immunizations and autism. Today, however, with exemption
rates pushing higher and the new omnipresent threat of *358 bioterrorism, [FN17]
this threat to public health cannot be ignored any longer.
You receive the vaccine and risk not only autism, but a variety of chronic illness, that includes cancer. In addition, the hurried vaccine could also corrupt the host immune system, allowing some individuals to now be a vector for the virus. Similar to the concerns over HIV positive individuals.
option four:
You make fundamental lifestyle changes which include the use of organic food, purified water, herbs etc. You exercise regularly. You lose weight. Control stress. Prepare for a pandemic. Practice self quaratine during a pandemic.
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison's_Principles_of_Internal_Medicine
Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine is an American textbook of internal medicine. First published in 1950, it is presently in its sixteenth edition. Although it is aimed at all members of the medical profession, it is mainly used by internists and junior doctors in this field, as well as medical students.
The work is named after Dr Tinsley R. Harrison of Talladega, Alabama, who served as editor-in-chief of the first five editions and established the format of the work - a strong basis of clinical medicine interwoven with an understanding of pathophysiology.
A vaxine is a 2ml solution that will dilute in your whole body. This dilution will greatly reduce the toxic property on the inactivant. The most commoly used is formalin and this product is more a kind of solvent the same way alcool is and his dilution will not permanently "corrupt youself".
Are you permanently corrupted when you drink a beer ?
Your article clearly admits "systemic toxicity". The point of the article was the new method used to avoid this. Why did they change their method of delivery?
"The most commoly used is formalin and this product is more a kind of solvent the same way alcool is and his dilution will not permanently "corrupt youself".
Are you permanently corrupted when you drink a beer ?"
If it was so simple Mingus they would not have gone to the trouble of avoiding your version of "Systemic toxicity". They change it for a very good reason.
Beer is not mixed with aluminum or monkey kidneys and injected in your blood stream. Correct? The body has a strong immune response to this mixture because it is toxic. That is the point. Astrong response so the body makes antibodies to the virus. Whether or not the immune system, especially in infants, ever recovers fully is still a mystery. That is why they are looking for other methods. It is not a fringe argument to suggest the body does not fully recover. Big pharma is walking away from vaccines, IMHO, because it knows the current methods are flawed.
I believe the side effects are under-reported. Chronic illness can cause undetected problems for life. The number of "side-effects" may be far greater than reported. If this is true, I would like to see the technology evolve and the truth to come out. There was a time the medical profession would drill holes in your head if you had a headache. Thank God they figured out that was a flawed approach.
"The artices posted by St. Michael are untrue, or unsound?"
They are clearly funded by the Pharmaceutical Industry. They should be discarded as easily as the parents testimonials were.
The expert wasn't banned. She gave up her license. Dr. Carley is a court appointed expert. Sorry, that's the truth. I'm sure her medical background competes if not surpasses your own.
"There is not conspiracy in the pharma industry, and vaccine are a cheap and effective but un-profit-creative business sector."
Then why the liability waivers????? Please answer this. Also could you give me your thoughts on the missing section from
6th edition of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine on p. 1791, under the heading "Multiple Sclerosis and other DEMYELINATING Diseases", it states the following: "A large and important group of neurologic disorders are termed the demyelinating diseases because they share the common pathologic feature of foci of degeneration, involving the myelin sheath of nerves. These foci vary in size, shape, distribution, and rate of development in the different illnesses. The axis cylinder often suffers damage, as does the myelin sheath, but the destruction of myelin is considered the primary change...syndromes can be clearly distinguished....(including) acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (including post infectious and POSTVACCINAL ENCEPHALOMYELITIS)...(P. 1798) - "the association of the neurologic disorder with vaccination or inoculation usually leaves the diagnosis in little doubt, and the characteristic combination of encephalitic and myelitic features will help to distinguish the condition from meningitis, viral encephalitis, and poliomyelitis". This self evident fact has been taken out of subsequent editions of Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine.
Why? Why remove this information without explanation. This is not a blog. This is a section taken from a previous edition of a very well respected medical reference. They simply removed this very important observation. Why? Why? Why?
Military Mute On Vaccine Danger?
WASHINGTON, Aug. 21, 2003
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CBS/AP)
Quote
When Army Reservist Rachael Lacy got her military shots last spring, she became deathly ill in a matter of weeks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CBS) A half million U.S. soldiers were inoculated for the war with Iraq. Some of them got sick after their vaccinations. Whether the vaccines were to blame remains an open question because, as CBS News Correspondent Sharyl Attkisson reports, the military may not be reporting all the cases properly.
When Army Reservist Rachael Lacy got her military shots last spring, she became deathly ill in a matter of weeks.
The coroner listed "recent smallpox and anthrax vaccination(s)" as contributors to her death.
Y
#If you have any other info about this subject , Please add it free.# |
