Penn & Teller's "BS" Yesterday on vaccinations...

[Reason]

Basically the entire episode was calling people who don't get vaccinations nutjobs.

[WaltM]

they are!

this is why

a) people need to know Penn is neither a saint, nor a patriot

b) I pointed out he doesn't believe 9/11 was a conspiracy

c) he also believes open borders is good

d) he mocks "carbon creditors" but doesn't know how to question AGW

you don't really believe vaccines cause autism, do you?

[jmdrake]

Regardless of the autism question, mass vaccination caused more deaths in 1976 than the feared "swine flu".

YouTube - Ron Paul about the Swine Flu People die from the Vaccines not from The Flu (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJiTStZtrlE)

[dannno]

I watched quite a few episodes on netflix recently. That show is for entertainment, period. Some of the episodes are entertaining and I generally agree with them, other times they act like complete morons and use horrible evidence to back their claims.

John Stossel's new show "Stossel" is a WAAAAYY better libertarian show. Bullshit! is better if you wanna see some naked chicks.

[Zippyjuan]

For some it is an emotional, not logical, issue. The risks of the vaccines are incredibly small compared to the risks of getting the diseases you are vaccinated against. Some of them were the leading cause of premature death 100 years ago. How many have died from getting vaccinated?

http://massachusettsmom.blogspot.com/2009/01/death-linked-to-unvaccinated-child.html

Monday, January 26, 2009
Death linked to Unvaccinated child

According to the CDC, an infant has died in Minnesota (and four others are ill) from a disease that had all but been eradicated. Hib is the pathogen responsible for the deaths and it is one of the things for which children get vaccinated. In this case, according to the CDC, the infant who died had not been vaccinated and two other children who are ill had also not been vaccinated. The final two children had not received the full complement of vaccinations.
A tragic death that could have been avoided.


http://massachusettsmom.blogspot.com/2009/01/death-linked-to-unvaccinated-child.html

http://www.chiroaccess.com/Articles/Unvaccinated-Children-Trigger-Measles-Outbreak.aspx?id=0000143

Unvaccinated Children Trigger Measles Outbreak

This information is provided to you for use in conjunction with your clinical judgment and the specific needs of the patient.

ChiroACCESS Editorial Staff ChiroACCESS Editorial StaffThe article was written by the combined efforts of the ChiroACCESS editorial staff.

ChiroACCESS

Published on March 22, 2010
Text Size: Share this:
An article published today (March 22, 2010) in the journal Pediatrics describes the reasons for the measles outbreak in San Diego in 2008. Seventy-five percent of the children involved in this California outbreak were unvaccinated. Multiple studies around the globe reflect the same risk to the unvaccined. Measles can have very serious complications and it is estimated that in 2000 there were 733,000 measles related deaths worldwide.

[brandon]

How many horrific diseases have been eradicated thanks to vaccinations?

[WaltM]

How many horrific diseases have been eradicated thanks to vaccinations?

this question is meaningless to people who don't know medicine and disease, unfortunately.

[Zippyjuan]

Regardless of the autism question, mass vaccination caused more deaths in 1976 than the feared "swine flu".



It is unfortunately true that 25 people died of swine flu vaccine related issues. Out of millions who received the vaccination. The risk was less than one in 100,000. It is also unfortunately true that over 30,000 die every year from flu related causes. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/us_flu-related_deaths.htm Which was the greater risk? Being one of the 25 or one of the 30,000?

[Kludge]

I watched quite a few episodes on netflix recently. That show is for entertainment, period. Some of the episodes are entertaining and I generally agree with them, other times they act like complete morons and use horrible evidence to back their claims.

John Stossel's new show "Stossel" is a WAAAAYY better libertarian show. Bullshit! is better if you wanna see some naked chicks.

Stossel also called out those opposing vaccinating their kids.

YouTube - Vaccine Fears -- Stossel In The Classroom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjeX6zVzo7M)

[jmdrake]

It is unfortunately true that 25 people died of swine flu vaccine related issues. Out of millions who received the vaccination. The risk was less than one in 100,000. It is also unfortunately true that over 30,000 die every year from flu related causes. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/us_flu-related_deaths.htm Which was the greater risk? Being one of the 25 or one of the 30,000?

How many people died from swine flu? One! But you love making apples and cabbage comparisons don't you? But hey go ahead and take your flu shot. I'm not stopping you. Also the seasonal flu shot only has about a 30% chance of being "right" any given year. That's because they have to guess at what the new flu strain will be. It's quite likely that many of the 30,000 deaths were of people who got the flu shot. You're better off just boosting your immune system.

[angelatc]

It is unfortunately true that 25 people died of swine flu vaccine related issues. Out of millions who received the vaccination. The risk was less than one in 100,000. It is also unfortunately true that over 30,000 die every year from flu related causes. http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/disease/us_flu-related_deaths.htm Which was the greater risk? Being one of the 25 or one of the 30,000?

For it to have any real meaning, wouldn't you need to compare the number of people who got the vaccine against the number of people who died, and compare the odds of dying against the number of people who got the flu? You also have to weight the deaths according to other criteria like age and health.

[jmdrake]

Stossel also called out those opposing vaccinating their kids.

YouTube - Vaccine Fears -- Stossel In The Classroom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjeX6zVzo7M)

John Stossel also thinks the "military is what is great about America".

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=251276

I'm not a Stossel fan by any stretch.

[Zippyjuan]

How many people died from swine flu? One! But you love making apples and cabbage comparisons don't you? But hey go ahead and take your flu shot. I'm not stopping you. Also the seasonal flu shot only has about a 30% chance of being "right" any given year. That's because they have to guess at what the new flu strain will be. It's quite likely that many of the 30,000 deaths were of people who got the flu shot. You're better off just boosting your immune system.

Can you measure how many people did NOT die because they got a flu vaccination? Was that greater than 25?

I should note that I do not get the flu vaccination becasue I am not an at-risk person. But I do agree on getting the childhood vaccinations. Things like Hepatitus B are probably not necessary either for kids but others are important.

This is from an article about a woman whose child nearly died because somebody else decided not to have their child immunized. The first mother's child had an immune deficiency which meant that vaccines would not work on her. So you are not just making the decision on behalf of your own children but others as well.



Brendalee Flint did everything she could to keep her baby safe. She nourished her with breast milk; she gave her all the routine vaccines. But Flint never realized how much her daughter's health would depend on the actions of her friends, neighbors and even strangers.
By 15 months old, Flint's daughter, Julieanna Metcalf, was walking, exploring and even saying her first few words. Then one day in the bath, while fighting what seemed like an ordinary stomach bug, Julieanna became so weak and floppy that she couldn't hold up her head.


"She couldn't say 'Help me,' but her eyes were begging me to do something," says Flint, 35.

Flint rushed the baby to the hospital, where she was diagnosed with meningitis, a swelling of the lining of the brain, caused by a severe case of Hib, or Haemophilus influenzae type b. Julieanna was one of five children in Minnesota hospitalized with Hib in January 2008, the state's biggest outbreak since 1992.

Three of the other Minnesota children hospitalized for Hib were unvaccinated, including one who died, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.


"I just want everybody to know what can happen if you don't vaccinate your baby," Flint says. "It's not just your kid. When you get your child vaccinated, it helps to protect the other kids who don't have the ability to protect themselves."

During the 2008 Hib outbreak, Flint's daughter began having seizures at the hospital, and doctors had to operate on her brain. They made an incision in her skull from one ear to the other. A priest performed a second baptism.

"I still remember walking her to the surgery room and giving her to the doctor," Flint says. "I didn't know if I would see her again."

Thanks to the success of vaccines, few parents today know anyone who has become sick with a serious contagious disease, says William Schaffner, an infectious-disease expert at Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Instead, parents are often concerned about chronic illnesses, such as asthma, allergies or autism, which don't have a clear cause.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-06-childhoodvaccines06_CV_N.htm

Nearly 30% of patients in the current mumps outbreak — which has hit communities in New York state, New Jersey and Quebec — failed to receive one or both recommended shots. And more than 90% of victims in the 2008 measles outbreaks, which sprouted up across the USA, were either unvaccinated or had unclear vaccination records, the CDC says.

A study published Monday in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine found that unvaccinated children are nine times as likely as others to contract chickenpox — which killed 100 children and hospitalized 10,000 a year before a vaccine became available in 1995. The same authors found that unvaccinated kids are 23 times as likely to develop whooping cough.

Danielle Romaguera's daughter, Gabrielle, was only 7 weeks old when she died from whooping cough — one week before she would have received her first shot.

Shannon Duffy Peterson of Minnesota says she realized the dangers of diseases such as chickenpox and pneumococcus only after her children became ill. She didn't vaccinate her son or daughter against either disease after their pediatrician said the shots weren't needed.

In 2001, both children were hospitalized because of a bacterial illness called invasive pneumococcal disease. Her 5-year-old son survived. Her daughter, Abigale, who was two weeks shy of turning 6, died.

"I can't tell parents enough the importance of vaccination," Peterson says in video on the PKIDs website. "I hope that no one else has to hold their child when they die."

Lingering effects

Julieanna spent a month in the hospital, mostly in intensive care. By the time Julieanna left the hospital, she had lost the ability to walk, talk and even swallow.

"It was like having a newborn again," Flint says. "I would rub her throat for swallowing and rub her cheeks for chewing. She couldn't crawl. She could scream, and that was about it."

Two years later, Julieanna still needs weekly injections to prop up her immune system — and might for the rest of her life, Flint says.

Although Julieanna has relearned how to walk, she often falls, Flint says. She attends special-education sessions, as well as physical therapy, speech therapy and occupational therapy.

Flint says she lives with the fear that Julieanna will suffer from lingering brain damage, as well as the knowledge that she remains vulnerable to a host of germs carried by her classmates.

"I don't know if she will grow out of this," says Flint, who spoke to Congress about vaccines in May. "I wish I could see what the future will be."

Schaffner says he sees vaccination as a part of the obligation of the strong to protect the weak.

"We all have to be protected, so the virus can't find these babies," Schaffner says. "We have to provide a cocoon of protection around them. We surround them with strength. I find that to be part of our responsibility. We cannot think just about ourselves."

Vaccines have nearly eliminated some diseases

Before vaccines became available, hundreds of thousands of Americans — including thousands of children — routinely came down with dreaded infectious diseases each year. Although vaccines have nearly eliminated many of these diseases, doctors say outbreaks in unvaccinated communities put everyone at risk.

Avg. annual cases, before vaccine Peak annual deaths, before vaccine Decline in cases Decline in deaths

Vaccines approved before 1980

Diphtheria 21,053 3,065 100% 100%

Measles 530,217 552 99% 100%

Mumps 162,344 50 96% 100%

Polio 16,316 5,865 100% 100%

Rubella (German measles) 47,745 2,184 99% 100%

Tetanus 580 511 93% 99%

Whooping cough 200,752 7,518 92% 99%

Vaccines approved after 1980

Chickenpox 4,085,120 138 85% 82%

Hepatitis A 117,333 298 87% 87%

Acute hepatitis B 66,232 267 80% 80%

Hib 20,000 Not available 99% 99%

Invasive pneumoccal disease 63,067 7,300 34% 25%


Source: The Journal of the American Medical Association

[jmdrake]

Can you measure how many people did NOT die because they got a flu vaccination? Was that greater than 25?

I should note that I do not get the flu vaccination becasue I am not an at-risk person. But I do agree on getting the childhood vaccinations. Things like Hepatitus B are probably not necessary either for kids but others are important.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2010-01-06-childhoodvaccines06_CV_N.htm

I give you one better. A study of Canada's anti H1N1 campaign that concludes spending 250 million saved three lives.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/article/847366--the-real-lessons-of-h1n1

The real lessons of H1N1
There was little or no flexibility to scale the pandemic plan down in case of a mild outbreak
Comment on this story »
Published On Fri Aug 13 2010

A Toronto Public Health Nurse loads syringes with H1N1 vaccine on Nov. 18, 2009, the first day the general public could get a flu shot. By that time there was virtually no benefit from the immunizations.

A Toronto Public Health Nurse loads syringes with H1N1 vaccine on Nov. 18, 2009, the first day the general public could get a flu shot. By that time there was virtually no benefit from the immunizations.
Carlos Osorio/Toronto Star
Ads by Google
Flu Symptoms & Treatment

Links and Resources to Flu
Diagnosis and Treatment
AmericanChemistry.com/Flu
Richard Schabas
and and Neil V. Rau

The World Health Organization has called off the H1N1 “pandemic.” It’s about time. There has been little to no H1N1 activity in Canada since November and anywhere on Earth since February, as demonstrated by WHO’s own global surveillance system.

So what actually happened? The simple answer is: not much out of the ordinary. Yes, hundreds of millions of people were infected and tens of thousands died, but worse happens almost every year from influenza. There were differences — higher rates than usual in younger people and much, much lower rates in older people. H1N1 was just the flu and not a virulent mutating superbug. On balance, the WHO’s own assessment (from August 2009) that H1N1 was “slightly worse than a normal influenza season” seems about right.

H1N1 was a pandemic without teeth because it was only half a pandemic. It turns out the virus wasn’t so novel after all. It was indeed a pandemic in “younger” people — those born after 1957 — but this is the age group that almost always shrugs off influenza. H1N1 was not a pandemic in older people probably because of immunity from previous exposure to a similar virus that circulated up until 1957. It is precisely these older people who are most vulnerable to influenza.

The supposed danger of H1N1 for healthy young people was grossly exaggerated. The median age of death from H1N1 in Canada was 53 — younger than usual from influenza but not exactly young — and the great majority had serious underlying health problems. Far more healthy young people were killed by automobiles than by H1N1 during the pandemic.

These patterns first emerged in Mexico in April 2009 and stayed consistent throughout. The picture was crystal clear by July 2009 following the winter outbreaks in Australia. Ironically, the more benign the evidence the more bellicose our rhetoric became.

Canada responded to H1N1 with an aggressive immunization program. A recent “study” of Ontario’s program, published in the for-profit journal Vaccine, claims that this was all worthwhile — preventing a million cases of disease and more than 50 lives. Editorial writers have been quick to endorse this study. Too quick.

The truth is more prosaic. The Vaccine study is flawed. It is based on a theoretical modelling and assumptions rather than on real data. Its conclusions are unreliable.

Our analysis, based on real Ontario disease and immunization data, paints a very different picture. The impact of immunization appears to have been tiny — reducing the outbreak by less than one per cent. Immunization prevented fewer than 20,000 cases of influenza illness and no more than three deaths. This is not nothing but it is a very small return for an outlay of more than $250 million.

Immunization against H1N1 had very little benefit because it came too late. Immunization didn’t even begin until after the late October peak of the fall outbreak. It is unclear whether this was anyone’s fault. Were decisions made last summer to delay the production of H1N1 vaccine to complete the production of seasonal influenza vaccine? If so, this was a serious error that needs to be acknowledged and learned from.

Immunization against H1N1 carried on for far too long. There was virtually no benefit at all from immunizations given after the middle of November because the outbreak was over by the time the vaccine had any effect — about 10 days after administration. Concerns about another winter wave of influenza (the “third wave”) were unjustified from the evidence and, as events have shown, they were wrong.

The global experience further documents the futility of Canada’s quixotic efforts. Countries that immunized less than Canada (the U.S., for example), much less than Canada (the U.K.) or not at all (Poland) had H1N1 experiences similar to ours.

So what lessons should we learn from all of this?

• Look before you leap. When a new infectious disease problem emerges, the premium must be on gathering and analyzing reliable information rather than triggering preconceived and inappropriate responses. The perception that these events are emergencies requiring instant response is overstated. A little thoughtful reflection will be invaluable.

• React to facts, not fears. Pandemic plans gave little or no flexibility to scale down measures for a mild (or ultra-mild) pandemic. Everything was geared to a 1918-style disaster — more of a phantom than a real threat in our modern world. Once activated, the plans took on lives of their own.

• Keep the politicians away. Public health officials can and should change their minds when new evidence emerges. They can be wrong without shame so long as they stay flexible and open-minded. Reversing fields is much more difficult for politicians. Our persistence with H1N1 immunization long after it had any value had much to do with political face-saving.

• Never exaggerate. Public health’s greatest asset is credibility. The unfortunate tendency to overstate the dangers of H1N1 will only mean that some people will doubt our word when we have something really important to say.

• Be your own toughest critic. Public health authorities — federal and provincial — have yet to produce any rigorous evidence-based analysis of the H1N1 experience. If we don’t identify our mistakes, how can we learn from them?

Dr. Richard Schabas is the Medical Officer of Health for the Hastings and Prince Edward Counties Health Unit and was Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health from 1987-97. Dr. Neil Rau is an Infectious Diseases Specialist and Medical Microbiologist based in Oakville and a Lecturer in the Department of Medicine (Division of Infectious Diseases) at the University of Toronto.

Now maybe you choose to believe the higher numbers of "lives saved" published in a journal dedicated to the proposition that "vaccines are good". (And maybe you believe Obama's numbers for how many jobs he's "saved" too.) But still spending $250 million to save at most 50 lives? That's supposed to be a good ROI? That's $5 million per life saved. You could find 100 smokers, offer them $1 million each to quit smoking, have better results and save $150 million. And sure that was "20/20 hindsight", but I thought they were overhyping the swine flu from the beginning. Now I drive around and see drug stores selling "flu vaccine" all year long. :(

[M House]

Both of my parents are doctors. And more than 90 percent of the time they opt out of getting vaccinated for most anything. They know there's a very slight chance that many of the vaccines can make you really sick even die. Being doctors, they are of course the most important people in the world. So um it just doesn't work out cuz there's just so many people depending on them. Oh noez. You on the other hand, well I don't know it probably won't kill you...lol

[specsaregood]

How many horrific diseases have been eradicated thanks to vaccinations?

I don't know; how many? Thanks in advance.

[WaltM]

Stossel also called out those opposing vaccinating their kids.

YouTube - Vaccine Fears -- Stossel In The Classroom (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjeX6zVzo7M)

has stossel EVER been on the right side of conspiracy theories?

[WaltM]

For it to have any real meaning, wouldn't you need to compare the number of people who got the vaccine against the number of people who died, and compare the odds of dying against the number of people who got the flu? You also have to weight the deaths according to other criteria like age and health.

and then, how do you convince these people that the people who WERE vaccinated were actually PREVENTED from anything?

[angelatc]

and then, how do you convince these people that the people who WERE vaccinated were actually PREVENTED from anything?


I'm pretty sure that people who don't believe vaccines work won't believe anything. But in science, you vaccinate people and then expose them to the disease. If the rate of infection is lower in vaccinated populations than non-vaccinated populations, then you have a vaccine that prevents infection to some degree.

[WaltM]

I give you one better. A study of Canada's anti H1N1 campaign that concludes spending 250 million saved three lives.


and how many did this vaccine make sick, or kill?

[WaltM]

I'm pretty sure that people who don't believe vaccines work won't believe anything. But in science, you vaccinate people and then expose them to the disease. If the rate of infection is lower in vaccinated populations than non-vaccinated populations, then you have a vaccine that prevents infection to some degree.

fair enough.

and you are right, just like you ask people what would convince them autism is irrelevant to vaccines, they never tell you.

and as my signature points out, the person who alleges he collected, read and knows AGW alarmism, has admitted that (practically, essentially, scientifically and empirically) nothing will convince him AGW is true.

[WaltM]

Both of my parents are doctors. And more than 90 percent of the time they opt out of getting vaccinated for most anything. They know there's a very slight chance that many of the vaccines can make you really sick even die. Being doctors, they are of course the most important people in the world. So um it just doesn't work out cuz there's just so many people depending on them. Oh noez. You on the other hand, well I don't know it probably won't kill you...lol

doctors are not the most important if banks can rob you, and if media can lie to you.

as for your parents, I'm sure they understand herd immunity.

[jmdrake]

and how many did this vaccine make sick, or kill?

30 apparently.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/swine-flu/story.html?id=2259971

It's hard to tell from the above article if that's just Canada or worldwide. That said the best we can say about the H1N1 vaccination program is that it wasn't worth the money. The worst we can say is that it might have done more harm than good.

Note that it's hard to nail these things down. Ron Paul said 25 people died from the 1976 vaccinations. But according to 60 minutes 300 people died.

YouTube - CBS 60 Minutes 300 death claims from 1976 swine flu vaccine, only one death from flu (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzl9QQS4ZXU)

[WaltM]

30 apparently.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/swine-flu/story.html?id=2259971

It's hard to tell from the above article if that's just Canada or worldwide. That said the best we can say about the H1N1 vaccination program is that it wasn't worth the money. The worst we can say is that it might have done more harm than good.

Note that it's hard to nail these things down. Ron Paul said 25 people died from the 1976 vaccinations. But according to 60 minutes 300 people died.

YouTube - CBS 60 Minutes 300 death claims from 1976 swine flu vaccine, only one death from flu (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzl9QQS4ZXU)

maybe the 300 number included people such as these
(a made up symptom or made up cause)
YouTube - Desiree Jennings & Dr. Buttar on Inside Edition (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kpe1u4cKbTk)

[jmdrake]

maybe the 300 number included people such as these
(a made up symptom or made up cause)
YouTube - Desiree Jennings & Dr. Buttar on Inside Edition (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kpe1u4cKbTk)

Not unless these 275 people killed themselves after making up their cases.

Anyway, if you want to enrich the vaccine industry and shoot yourself up I'm not going to stand in your way. The risk/reward ratio is not nearly good enough for me. The problem is with folks who want to dismiss the legitimate concerns of others as "conspiracy theories".

[WaltM]

Not unless these 275 people killed themselves after making up their cases.


no, somebody could have died, and their family or doctors couldn't determine the best cause, so vaccines might have been an easy scapegoat at the time.




Anyway, if you want to enrich the vaccine industry and shoot yourself up I'm not going to stand in your way.


cool.



The risk/reward ratio is not nearly good enough for me. The problem is with folks who want to dismiss the legitimate concerns of others as "conspiracy theories".

fair enough. we obviously draw the line differently

[M House]

doctors are not the most important if banks can rob you, and if media can lie to you.

as for your parents, I'm sure they understand herd immunity.

Ah herd immunity...
Like I said when it's not necessary, why even take a very small risk? I personally think it's pretty cowardly lol. You'll find though alotta people in the medical field do take this approach.

[bj72]

Ah, "herd immunity". Love that those on RPF are pushing "herd immunity".

BTW, so if my child has a reaction within 48 hours of a multi dose vaccine, such as blood in the stool, and the Drs multiple times refuse to acknowledge it, or allow single dose vaccines as an alternative to see if one is the culprit....what should I do as a parent? Continue to inject my child with a chemical cocktail that I know is causing some direct reaction just to help the "herd immunity", and see if it stays at status quo or gets worse the next round? Wouldn't that be almost like abuse or at least negligent on my part as a parent?

I find it ironic that so many that believe wholeheartedly in vaccines, often react so violently to those who abstain. So, it is okay for you to force my child (by intense social pressure, law and/or physical force) to take a chemical cocktail for your child's immunity? But it is not okay for my child to stay as is, in a natural state, and let the immune system work things out? I'm not touching, injecting or forcing anything in your child.

My husband and I actually got into a discussion with his formerly favorite aunt on vaccinations recently. She was in an extremely argumentative mode and tried to argue everyone should be forced to have vaccinations. We calmly asked what about those who had reactions (minor to severe). Within two minutes the conversation went downhill very fast. She said they were so few that had reactions or are injured, that for the good of the many everyone should be forced to....We pointed out our 2nd and 3rd children both had reactions, and we have stopped vaccinations. We asked would she potentially risk their lives by forcing something into their system against their (and our) will to save her own. She (yelling/screaming by now....she was very heated), said yes she would kill our child to save her own life. She actually said this, in front of our children, coming aggressively at me while I held our youngest in my arms. My husband had to physically get between her and me as she cornered me. Needless to say we won't be around her anymore. She is the extreme example of where progressivism heads to when discussing social matters. That for the "social good" it is okay to violate another.

BTW, it is very hard to get Drs to acknowledge reactions, much less report them in VEERS, so the data is likely faulty. We were pro-vaccination before our 2nd child started having reactions. We did our research on the .gov site as asked to by our Dr at the time, and he sadly failed when we asked him many questions he should've known the answer to (like what the ingredients were in each vaccine). The vaccine makers are making it more difficult to obtain single vaccinations, not easier. And, they are also leaving in many questionable ingredients, despite campaigns to the contrary.

Also, some outbreaks are caused by those who have had the vaccination (smallpox) and then expose others to it.

I will not force people to not take vaccinations. I would like the courtesy of people not forcing my children (or me) to take them in return.

AND OBTW - Where do all those recommendations from the "settled science" come from? The CDC. I know no one here on the RPF could in their wildest imagination believe that there could be a hidden agenda there that might lead someone in the CDC to cherry pick their "settled science." Nope. No chance....

[SkyPie]

Lots of those who do not vaccinate do not believe vaccines cause autism. It's wrong to assume you know why people make the choices they make.

I don't want to get into it too far but as a whole vaccines help weaken the gene pool as even fatal diseases are self limiting. The plague saw survivors and those people went on to produce people with resistance.

[WaltM]

Ah, "herd immunity". Love that those on RPF are pushing "herd immunity".


Pushing? not everything is political.




BTW, so if my child has a reaction within 48 hours of a multi dose vaccine, such as blood in the stool, and the Drs multiple times refuse to acknowledge it, or allow single dose vaccines as an alternative to see if one is the culprit....what should I do as a parent?


is this typical? what exactly is the reaction?

do you expect a simple answer?




Continue to inject my child with a chemical cocktail that I know is causing some direct reaction just to help the "herd immunity", and see if it stays at status quo or gets worse the next round?


That you know? What is the reaction?




Wouldn't that be almost like abuse or at least negligent on my part as a parent?


or paranoid and cynical.




I find it ironic that so many that believe wholeheartedly in vaccines, often react so violently to those who abstain.


I don't believe wholeheartedly in vaccines, but the biggest abstainers I've seen get their arguments from fearmongers, rumors, and other baseless information.



So, it is okay for you to force my child (by intense social pressure, law and/or physical force) to take a chemical cocktail for your child's immunity?


No more than it's OK for me to force your child to live if you chose to let him die.

No more than it's OK for force you to quarantine your child if there's reason to believe they may be a risk to others.

No more than it's OK for somebody to force me to keep my child away from yours for my child's good.




But it is not okay for my child to stay as is, in a natural state, and let the immune system work things out?


Not all diseases are equal, so there's no simply answer to "let the immune system work things out".



I'm not touching, injecting or forcing anything in your child.


But if you purposely refuse to vaccinate your child, you're exposing mine to unnecessary risk. (of course, this is based on my reliance to medical professions saying that the vaccine is helpful, the disease is real, and prevention is serious)



My husband and I actually got into a discussion with his formerly favorite aunt on vaccinations recently. She was in an extremely argumentative mode and tried to argue everyone should be forced to have vaccinations.


I don't believe vaccines are perfect. Just for the record.




We calmly asked what about those who had reactions (minor to severe). Within two minutes the conversation went downhill very fast. She said they were so few that had reactions or are injured, that for the good of the many everyone should be forced to....We pointed out our 2nd and 3rd children both had reactions, and we have stopped vaccinations.


what were the reactions, short or long term?



We asked would she potentially risk their lives by forcing something into their system against their (and our) will to save her own. She (yelling/screaming by now....she was very heated), said yes she would kill our child to save her own life.


as if you'd do the opposite.



She actually said this, in front of our children, coming aggressively at me while I held our youngest in my arms. My husband had to physically get between her and me as she cornered me. Needless to say we won't be around her anymore. She is the extreme example of where progressivism heads to when discussing social matters. That for the "social good" it is okay to violate another.


I dare you say you'd not violate or use force to protect social good.




BTW, it is very hard to get Drs to acknowledge reactions, much less report them in VEERS, so the data is likely faulty.


So either the doctors are in on a conspiracy, in which case you should stop trusting them, or you're seeing what you shouldn't worry of.



We were pro-vaccination before our 2nd child started having reactions. We did our research on the .gov site as asked to by our Dr at the time, and he sadly failed when we asked him many questions he should've known the answer to (like what the ingredients were in each vaccine). The vaccine makers are making it more difficult to obtain single vaccinations, not easier. And, they are also leaving in many questionable ingredients, despite campaigns to the contrary.


This would run completely contrary to the claim that they just want to make money. If money were to goal, they'd make placebo vaccines and never risk being accused of giving harmful injections.

If hurting people were the goal, they'd not nicely ask you to get vaccinated.

What's a questionable ingredient? Thimerisol?



Also, some outbreaks are caused by those who have had the vaccination (smallpox) and then expose others to it.

I will not force people to not take vaccinations. I would like the courtesy of people not forcing my children (or me) to take them in return.


you sound like there's a difference between "active" and "passive" use of force and exposure to danger.





AND OBTW - Where do all those recommendations from the "settled science" come from? The CDC. I know no one here on the RPF could in their wildest imagination believe that there could be a hidden agenda there that might lead someone in the CDC to cherry pick their "settled science." Nope. No chance....

it's possible.

where do you get your settled science? or is everything about your child?

[WaltM]

Lots of those who do not vaccinate do not believe vaccines cause autism. It's wrong to assume you know why people make the choices they make.


I'd like to hear what their basis is, other than "well, it's just this report, and this other one, so overall it's a lot of suspicions"




I don't want to get into it too far but as a whole vaccines help weaken the gene pool as even fatal diseases are self limiting. The plague saw survivors and those people went on to produce people with resistance.

are you a eugenicist?

[jmdrake]

no, somebody could have died, and their family or doctors couldn't determine the best cause, so vaccines might have been an easy scapegoat at the time.

cool.

fair enough. we obviously draw the line differently

Yeah. Fair enough. All I have to add is that if 275 people died from unknown causes and all had been vaccinated that is a large enough number to statistically conclude the vaccines had something to do with it. The cause of most deaths can quite easily be determined.

[johngr]

Penn and Teller's BULLSHIT! What an apt name for their show.

The gold standard for clinical trials on medications is the randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial. But so far as I know, none have ever been done on innoculations. That actually makes me do a double WTF? As innoculations are delivered essentially the same way as medicines, there are no study-design or other methodological problems with doing a control group study of them.

Why haven't any been done?

And please, don't give me the "it's unethical" "argument" unless you want that response ruthlessly torn apart. The unethical "argument" begs the question that a control group study is trying to answer.

The cohort studies they do on innoculations have self-selection problems. Generally healthier people tend to follow (bullshit) advice from (as we know from many examples in other arenas) health "authorities"

Control groups trials necessarily deprive half the study participants of a potential but unproven cure or prevention method. The after-the-fact cohort study methodology does not prove that a vaccine not only is effective but also that the costs of the innoculation itself and of possible adverse reactions (Guillan Barré, autism, etc) outweigh the vaccinated minus unvaccinated levels of morbidity, relative incidence of each level of severity and mortality of the the disease that the innoculation would prevent.

This study indicates some of the problems with cohort studies (virtually the only type of study done on vaccines):


Abstract
Numerous observational studies have reported that seniors who receive influenza vaccine are at substantially lower risk of death and hospitalization during the influenza season than unvaccinated seniors. These estimates could be influenced by differences in underlying health status between the vaccinated and unvaccinated groups. Since a protective effect of vaccination should be specific to influenza season, evaluation of non-influenza periods could indicate the possible contribution of bias to the estimates observed during influenza season.

Methods We evaluated a cohort of 72 527 persons 65 years of age and older followed during an 8 year period and assessed the risk of death from any cause, or hospitalization for pneumonia or influenza, in relation to influenza vaccination, in periods before, during, and after influenza seasons. Secondary models adjusted for covariates defined primarily by diagnosis codes assigned to medical encounters.

Results The relative risk of death for vaccinated persons compared with unvaccinated persons was 0.39 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.33–0.47] before influenza season, 0.56 (0.52–0.61) during influenza season, and 0.74 (0.67–0.80) after influenza season. The relative risk of pneumonia hospitalization was 0.72 (0.59–0.89) before, 0.82 (0.75–0.89) during, and 0.95 (0.85–1.07) after influenza season. Adjustment for diagnosis code variables resulted in estimates that were further from the null, in all time periods.

Conclusions The reductions in risk before influenza season indicate preferential receipt of vaccine by relatively healthy seniors. Adjustment for diagnosis code variables did not control for this bias. In this study, the magnitude of the bias demonstrated by the associations before the influenza season was sufficient to account entirely for the associations observed during influenza season.


In other words, more health-conscious and consequently healthier people tend to get flu shots so they're not going to get as sick. Note also that they use indicies of infection such as pneumonia hospitalisation and mortality, rather than confirm diagnosis by viral titer.

With no control group studies, innoculations get a free ride on the benefits of clean water, better sanitatation, better nutrition and generally better health habits of the populations they're given to. A scarlet fever vaccine, if one had been developed, would no doubt be solely credited for the downtrend of the morbidity and mortality of that disease over the past 60 years.

[johngr]

Lest anyone find a counterexample of one of the two or three placebo studies they've done on vaccines, here's one thing to keep in mind about them. The control group is given not normal saline but instead a toxic cocktail of all the adjuvants and preservatives the vaccine contains, minus the chicken embryos, rat fetuses, contaminated monkey viruses and various other biological waste of the vaccine. So any (primarily neurological and anaphylacitc) adverse reactions and deaths caused by the mercury, aluminium, sqaulene and other toxic shit are also present in the control group.

[Zippyjuan]

You really need to be careful of that squalene stuff. Do you know what it really is? An oil. Your own body even produces it- it is what leaves the mark of your fingerprints. You have more squalene on your keyboard right now than you have ever received via vaccinations. Even eaten ice cream? It is in that too. You have consumed more squalene in one dish of icecream than all of the vaccinations in your lifetime. You can buy squalene at health foods stores- it is good for your skin. Mercury is not used in vaccines intended for children (the H1N1 was allowed to use it but that was not intended for children and versions without it were available) and the version which is used is quickly passed through the body- it has a half life in the body of about seven days so it does not build up toxicity like other versions of mercury (ethyl mercury is the one in some vaccines, methyl mercury is the more toxic version). After thimerisol was removed from childhood vaccines, the rates of autism continued to rise- not diminish as one would expect if the thimerisol were a factor in autism.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squalene

Squalene is a natural organic compound originally obtained for commercial purposes primarily from shark liver oil, though plant sources (primarily vegetable oils) are used as well, including amaranth seed, rice bran, wheat germ, and olives. All plants and animals produce squalene, including humans. Squalene has been proposed to be an important part of the Mediterranean diet as it may be a chemopreventative substance that protects people from cancer.[1][2]

Squalene is a hydrocarbon and a triterpene, and is a natural and vital part of the synthesis of cholesterol, steroid hormones, and vitamin D in the human body.[3] Squalene is used in cosmetics, and more recently as an immunologic adjuvant in vaccines.


Ethyl vs Methyl Mercury
http://www.myomancy.com/2005/05/ethyl_mercury_v

Myomancy ADHD, Dyslexia and Autism Ethyl Mercury Versus Methyl Mercury
One of the proposed links between Mercury and Autism is Thimerosal, a compound that has been used in vaccinations. A new study [PDF of abstract] from the University of Washington, Seattle, USA has examine the different effects of ethyl mercury, used in Thimerosal, and methyl mercury, commonly used in industrial processes. Most of the toxicology data on mercury is based on accidental exposure to Methyl Mercury in the work place.
The study inject new born monkeys with either ethyl mercury (in the form of thimerosal) or methyl mercury in doses equivalent to that found in vaccinations for human babies. Mercury levels were then monitored and it was found that the ethyl mercury cleared from the body a lot quicker than the methyl mercury. Critically brain concentrations of total mercury were significantly lower by about three-fold for the thimerosal exposed infants when compared to the methyl mercury infants. This is important because mercury causes brain damage only through long-term exposure (a fact that gave us the phrase ‘as mad as a hatter‘). Thus if the body is cleaning itself quickly of the ethyl mercury, it doesn’t have the chance to build up and cause damage.


Thimerisol Discontinued but Autism Rises. There are simliar results from studies in the US:
http://www.immunizationinfo.org/science/autism-and-thimerosal-danish-study

The question
Did the incidence of autism in Denmark decrease after thimerosal-containing vaccines were discontinued in 1992?

The study
Thimerosal-containing vaccines were used in Denmark from the early 1950s until 1992—when thimerosal was removed from vaccines. If thimerosal-containing vaccines were causing autism in Danish children, the removal of thimerosal from vaccines should have impacted the incidence of autism.

To see if that was the case, the researchers analyzed data on autism cases from the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register dating back to 1971.

The findings
From 1971 to 2000, 956 children were diagnosed with autism, with a rise in the number of cases in the 1990s. They found no correlation between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism. The incidence [number of new cases over a time period] of autism remained fairly stable until 1990 and thereafter increased throughout the study period, including the period when thimerosal was no longer in vaccines.



Their data do not suggest a cause-and-effect relation between thimerosal-containing vaccines and autism.

[Jeremy]

This is the same man who can't support Rand Paul because he's a Christian.... wtf?

[Kludge]

This is the same man who can't support Rand Paul because he's a Christian.... wtf?

:confused:

YouTube - Penn Jillette supports Ron Paul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QK2wPR8IpQ)

Edit: saw "Ron" not "Rand"

[dannno]

You have consumed more squalene in one dish of icecream than all of the vaccinations in your lifetime.

Have you ever tried injecting that much into your veins :confused:

[Ricky201]

:confused:

YouTube - Penn Jillette supports Ron Paul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QK2wPR8IpQ)

YouTube - More Politicians Should Be Like Rand Paul! - Penn Point (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHn4OLuE8kI&feature=channel)

He states that he likes Rand's honesty, but he lumps him in with the "Christian Right" so therefore he already disagrees with him.

[eOs]

YouTube - (1/2) Do Vaccines Cause Autism? Correlation vs. Causation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW1IEqKuf6s)
YouTube - (2/2) Do Vaccines Cause Autism? Correlation vs. Causation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Tl3tUQng9Q)

[Kludge]

YouTube - More Politicians Should Be Like Rand Paul! - Penn Point (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHn4OLuE8kI&feature=channel)

He states that he likes Rand's honesty, but he lumps him in with the "Christian Right" so therefore he already disagrees with him.

That's.... remarkably ignorant and offensive. Really wasn't worth him doing a segment on with such an uninformed opinion.

[EndDaFed]

If that flu had a higher percentage of lethality and no vaccines were made everyone would be up in arms. It's called the precautionary principle. Where something that has a plausible risk of occurring and has the potential to be of great impact you don't sit on your ass and do nothing. What if it had mutated into a more deadly form? These things can't be known for certain which is why action must be taken. Doing nothing will surly not leave you better off if things do go wrong.

[WaltM]

Have you ever tried injecting that much into your veins :confused:

no, he hasn't and it wouldn't matter.

because as he said.

he eats more ice cream with sugar and water than you'll ever inject in a lifetime of water and sugar.

he can inject a little more water and a little more sugar, and it won't kill him.

[WaltM]

If that flu had a higher percentage of lethality and no vaccines were made everyone would be up in arms.


exactly, and then people would be complaining and conspiracing that Big Pharma wants people to be sick and withhold cures until they can sell it for a sky high price.

it's spoiled people who live in industrialized countries that get to chose whether they want to be immunized.



It's called the precautionary principle. Where something that has a plausible risk of occurring and has the potential to be of great impact you don't sit on your ass and do nothing. What if it had mutated into a more deadly form? These things can't be known for certain which is why action must be taken. Doing nothing will surly not leave you better off if things do go wrong.

granted that not all mutations are equal, and not all risks are equal, you are right. not all actions are worthy either, (too bad, the people who pretend to be skeptical and paranoid aren't those who actually do the math).

this is why when the H1N1 & bid flu scares first started, people jumped back and forth about what conspiracy they want to believe in. Ranging from the flu is intentionally made, to the flu doesn't really exist, to the vaccines are harmful to the vacccines are useless. the people who ran out to by sanitation supplies are the same people who don't want you to listen to the media about the possible outbreak.

[jmdrake]

YouTube - More Politicians Should Be Like Rand Paul! - Penn Point (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHn4OLuE8kI&feature=channel)

He states that he likes Rand's honesty, but he lumps him in with the "Christian Right" so therefore he already disagrees with him.

Interesting. Does he not understand that Rand learned his Christianity from his father? I'm amazed at the number of atheists who just gloss over Ron Paul's open and avowed Christianity and yet show such hostility to other Christians who share Ron Paul's limited government philosophy.

[johngr]

Zippyjuan: there is no reason whatsoever to inject a control group with adjuvants and preservatives or anything other than saline unless you're worried that adverse reactions to them would be shown in stark relief.

[BoutTreeFiddy]

I saw Penn's junk on the NASA episode. After I cleaned up, I felt disgusted.

[johngr]

I saw Penn's junk on the NASA episode. After I cleaned up, I felt disgusted.

Penn and Teller did an episode on GMO and organic food. Fortunately, i hadn't eaten my heirloom seed alfalfa sprouts or I'd have had to clean up my keybord.
YouTube - Norman Borlaug on Penn and Teller: BS (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIvNopv9Pa8)

[WhiteHaven]

Don't care who thinks I should give my kids vaccines nor do I care who doesn't like it. My daughter was given all her shots up until 18 months she was sick constantly,my son has NEVER had a shot in his life and has NEVER been sick. So you can make your own assumptions. I had to change doctors because every time we went for a check up the 1 doctor insisted on letting us give my son shots. Since we have stopped giving the kids that poison my daughter is healthier than ever,before we stopped giving her the vaccines she used to break out in hives on her back constantly and itch has not happened once since we stopped the vaccines.

[EndDaFed]

That was a great episode. They covered many of the main points without being mean about it like their past shows. This was a tame show by comparison.

[Kludge]

Oh - hey -- thanks to whoever banned the "White Nationalist."

[wizardwatson]

:confused:

YouTube - Penn Jillette supports Ron Paul (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QK2wPR8IpQ)

Edit: saw "Ron" not "Rand"

You see what we are dealing with people?

Penn says he "supports" Ron Paul but then they all giggle about he is "unelectable". They pay lip service to truth but they don't back truth up and truly support it. Only the guy on the phone probably was a sincere supporter.

"Yeah, I agree with Ron Paul but lets be serious, he won't be elected."

When they "support" Ron Paul with this superficial tone, and then all join together in their little giggles about how they basically all realize that it will have to be someone else because "come on, seriously, you know he can't win" they betray Ron Paul with a kiss.

[Baptist]

Basically the entire episode was calling people who don't get vaccinations nutjobs.

Of course.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2853013#post2853013

YouTube - PharmaWhores: The Showtime Sting of Penn & Teller- Trailer (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYDYUcx02c0)

YouTube - PHARMAWHORES The SHOWTIME Sting of Penn & Teller PART I (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J24kqktYYD0)

[Zippyjuan]

Isn't that the same Dr Horrowitz that said that if everybody could hit the same frequency that there would be no more wars and total peace on the planet? 528Hz? (He is a dentist, not a medical doctor and says he quit that in 1996). He claims that this frequency can also "repair broken DNA". Says AIDs is not caused by HIV and that he can cure it.

He claims he found the number hidden in the Bible.
http://www.drlenhorowitz.com/wow3press_release.htm

He told Al Jezera that the H1N1 vaccine was intended to wipe out muslims (how a killer vaccine could tell the religion of it's host is beyond me).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Horowitz

On October 7, 2009, Horowitz told al Jazeera that H1N1 vaccines would cause sterility, as part of a plan of "pangenocide" against Muslims.

He also said that AIDs was intended to wipe out black people.


In his 2001 book entitled, Death in the Air: Globalism, Terrorism and Toxic Warfare, Horowitz concludes that the predilection of HIV/AIDS for Black Americans and Africans is the likeliest result of successful national security policies ordered during the administrations of Richard M. Nixon and Jimmy Carter, leaving very little room for argument that there is no intentional movement to eliminate the Black population globally. Horowitz said national security documents reveal the intentional targeting of Blacks in America and Africa for population control, including depopulation, as is being accomplished by the AIDS epidemic today.

[Romulus]

You see what we are dealing with people?

Penn says he "supports" Ron Paul but then they all giggle about he is "unelectable". They pay lip service to truth but they don't back truth up and truly support it. Only the guy on the phone probably was a sincere supporter.

"Yeah, I agree with Ron Paul but lets be serious, he won't be elected."

When they "support" Ron Paul with this superficial tone, and then all join together in their little giggles about how they basically all realize that it will have to be someone else because "come on, seriously, you know he can't win" they betray Ron Paul with a kiss.

I agree. Glad you see it too. Penn and Teller are modern day gatekeeping propagandists.

[Baptist]

Isn't that the same Dr Horrowitz that bla bla bla bla..........

Why don't you watch the videos on Penn and Teller, and comment on them?

[Zippyjuan]

Why don't you watch the videos on Penn and Teller, and comment on them?


The Horrowitz video? It says nothing really. I have seen it before. Just shows he has a big ego.

The one on Ron Paul?

Or the one on GM foods? Some modified foods are good, some are not. Practically every food item you eat is the result of genetic modification. Not all of it was done using DNA but cross breeding is another tool and that has gone on for centuries as man has tried to grow better plants and animals. Do I aprove of the way that companies like Monsanto runs it- where they forbid farmers from reusing seeds? Definately not. But modified crops reduce the amounts of fertilizers and pesticides needed to feed the same amount of people with the same amount of land. Isn't that part of the reason for organic? They have produced drought or flood resistant crops which have reduced famines. Organic production has its place but it also uses more resources and land to produce the same amount of food.

Or do you mean their Vaccine show?
Update- found the Penn and Teller vaccine videos- link a couple posts down. Yeah- I pretty much agree with them on it.

[angelatc]

I don't know; how many? Thanks in advance.

One that I know of, and it killed 25% of the people that caught it. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/smallpox/en/

Polio might be next:
Overall, in the 20 years since the Global Polio Eradication Initiative was launched, the number of cases has fallen by over 99%. In 2008, only four countries in the world remain polio-endemic.

[angelatc]

Zippyjuan: there is no reason whatsoever to inject a control group with adjuvants and preservatives or anything other than saline unless you're worried that adverse reactions to them would be shown in stark relief.

Uh, there is if you're doing a double-blind study.

[Zippyjuan]

The Penn and Teller Vaccination Program:
YouTube - Vaccination - Penn & Teller: Bullshit! (1/2) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aky-sRri-NQ)

YouTube - Vaccination - Penn & Teller: Bullshit! (2/2) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gnxci5tezZY&feature=related)

[SkyPie]

Don't care who thinks I should give my kids vaccines nor do I care who doesn't like it. My daughter was given all her shots up until 18 months she was sick constantly,my son has NEVER had a shot in his life and has NEVER been sick. So you can make your own assumptions. I had to change doctors because every time we went for a check up the 1 doctor insisted on letting us give my son shots. Since we have stopped giving the kids that poison my daughter is healthier than ever,before we stopped giving her the vaccines she used to break out in hives on her back constantly and itch has not happened once since we stopped the vaccines.

I see the same in animals. It shows through the generations, too. Unvaccinated parents tend to have robust offspring and the mothers remain fit.

[SkyPie]

I'd like to hear what their basis is, other than "well, it's just this report, and this other one, so overall it's a lot of suspicions"




are you a eugenicist?

I believe in survival of the fittest. You are free to believe what you want, just don't tell me what to do with myself or my children.