Lies Anti-Vaxxers Tell: "Too Many Vaccines Overloads The Immune System"

[Zippyjuan]

I suppose all the hundreds of scratch and prick tests I went through were just fun and games? And why I experience serious symptoms if I eat certain fruits more than three days in a row, or have eggplant or banana at all?

The connection to vaccines is not lost on me. The protien in the food contains the allergen. Vaccines, cultured in eggs, cause protiens to be introduced through the skin and vascular system, which is not how they are meant to be received.

This has been my experience over the last 25 years or so.

Food allergies were unheard of 150 years ago because people ate a locally grown, seasonal diet. They ate from the earth around them, where they had natural immunity. This is why local honey is considered to be beneficial. These days we really do not know what we are eating, how it was raised, or whether it has been modified. Peanuts were among the first to be genetically modified so that the protien changed. This is why so many kids have allergies today.

Proteins are found throughout your body under your skin. They are in all of your cells.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-c...n/con-20032721

Vaccinations and egg allergy

Some shots to prevent illness (vaccines) contain egg proteins. In some people, these vaccines pose a risk of triggering an allergic reaction.

Measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccines are generally safe for children with egg allergy, even though eggs are used to produce them.

Flu (influenza) vaccines sometimes contain small amounts of egg proteins. However, a flu vaccine that doesn't contain these proteins is approved for use in adults age 18 and older. And even vaccines that do have egg proteins can be given safely to most people with egg allergy without any problems. If you or your child has had a reaction to eggs in the past, talk to your doctor before getting a flu vaccination.

Yellow fever vaccine can provoke an allergic reaction in some people who have egg allergy. It's given to travelers entering countries where there's a risk of contracting yellow fever. It's not generally recommended for people with egg allergy, but is sometimes given under medical supervision after testing for a reaction.

Other vaccines are generally not risky for people who have egg allergy. But ask your doctor, just to be safe. If your doctor is concerned about a vaccine, he or she may test you or your child to see whether it is likely to cause a reaction.

So unless you are going to a country with yellow fever and need to be vaccinated against it, you should be fine. There isn't enough egg protein left in the vaccine.

[euphemia]

But it's still eggs. It's a concentrated bit of egg, which might not be of any consequence to a 150 pound adult, but might be a lot to a 12 pound child who is being given 5-7 vaccines at once. Of course protiens are in your skin, but they are not meant to be introduced directly through the skin into the vascular system.

I could fill a whole thread with my experience with allergies, but I have to go to work now. Have a good rest of your day.

[Zippyjuan]

But it's still eggs. It's a concentrated bit of egg, which might not be of any consequence to a 150 pound adult, but might be a lot to a 12 pound child who is being given 5-7 vaccines at once. Of course protiens are in your skin, but they are not meant to be introduced directly through the skin into the vascular system.

I could fill a whole thread with my experience with allergies, but I have to go to work now. Have a good rest of your day.

Actually it is a diluted bit of egg- not concentrated- and an extremely small amount at that. But if you like to stress over it- stress away.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7708070

We recruited 54 children (mean age, 18.5 months) who had not previously been vaccinated and were allergic to eggs. The children's histories of allergy were confirmed with skin tests and double-blind, placebo-controlled food-challenge tests; some children also underwent skin testing with the MMR vaccine. We then routinely administered the vaccine to the children in one subcutaneous (0.5-ml) dose.
RESULTS:

All 54 children had positive results on skin testing with egg. Allergy to eggs was confirmed in 26 of the children by convincing histories of anaphylaxis after the ingestion of eggs, in 22 children by food-challenge tests, and in 6 patients by convincing histories of recent allergic reactions occurring after the ingestion of eggs. Of the 17 children who underwent skin testing with the MMR vaccine, 3 had positive results. All 54 children received the MMR vaccine as a single subcutaneous injection; none had an immediate or delayed adverse reaction.

[euphemia]

It's not something that should be given in seven doses to a baby or toddler. I have had an egg reaction from a vaccine before. It's not fun.

[angelatc]

Honest question, not looking to quarrel. Is there an upper limit to how many shots a child can have before it becomes a concern to you? 26 shots by age 2, with as many as 5 shots in a single visit seems excessive to me. What if in 10 years, the number of vaccines on the 'schedule' went up to 36...46... 56... would you be concerned then? Is there no limit to how much stuff we pump into our kids before we step back and start to ask honest questions?

I think that's a bit of a strawman. All theories are valid theories. But there is no evidence to support the theory that too many vaccines are overloading young immune systems.

If you're seriously interested: http://www.oregon.gov/oha/ph/Prevent...tigenCount.pdf

[angelatc]

Data collection is part of science. .

Scientific data collection includes controls and verification. VAERS has neither. This is a quote from the paper linked in your post:

Although VAERS collects information about adverse events
that occur after vaccines are administered, it should be noted
that a report is not a confirmation that a vaccine caused the
event

[euphemia]

I think that's a bit of a strawman. All theories are valid theories. But there is no evidence to support the theory that too many vaccines are overloading young immune systems

And your medical degree is from where?

[angelatc]

And your medical degree is from where?

I never said I had a medical degree. I said there is no evidence to support the theory that too many vaccines are overloading young immune systems.

[Ender]

I never said I had a medical degree. I said there is no evidence to support the theory that too many vaccines are overloading young immune systems.

There is plenty of evidence but you will not read it if it is not stamped by the government.


Hiding Vaccine-Related Deaths With Semantic Sleight-of-Hand

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/07/...elated-deaths/

[angelatc]

There is plenty of evidence but you will not read it if it is not stamped by the government.


Hiding Vaccine-Related Deaths With Semantic Sleight-of-Hand

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/07/...elated-deaths/

The reason VAERS isn't accurate is explained above but I will explain it again. The data is random, not verified, not confirmed and even subject to duplication.

On the other hand, childhood disease along with mortality rates have dropped dramatically since we started vaccinating the children. Mortality rates didn't start rising again as the vaccine schedule was adjusted, which means there's something incorrect about that author's assumption.

There's no evidence that too many vaccines overload the immune system.

[Created4]

Scientific data collection includes controls and verification.

Wrong. The more you post, the more obvious it is that you know little or nothing about science. Data means data, period. What one does with that data is of course subject to interpretation, and you can argue whether or not the data is accurate. But it is still data. If a doctor submits a report that in her clinical experience one of her patients suffered harm due to a vaccine, that is raw data. Sure, that data has limitations and is subject to interpretation, but it is still raw data - with no controls (that's a good thing).

But to say "data collection includes controls and verification" is to admit that the data is being manipulated. You are now talking about studies or experiments with the data - not data collection.

If "uncontrolled data" is the same over time in terms of its input, then a valid scientific inquiry is to look at trends in how that data is submitted, and come up with hypothesis and theories as to why the data is going in a certain direction. The theories are subject to debate, but the data is still raw unfiltered data.

And does the government manipulate data? Yes, of course they do. We have a CDC whistleblower right now that has supplied evidence that certain data in at least one study looking at the link between the MMR vaccine and autism was suppressed because it did not support the conclusion they wanted to make and present to the public.

[helmuth_hubener]

it is still raw data - with no controls (that's a good thing).

But to say "data collection includes controls and verification" is to admit that the data is being manipulated.

"Control" is a technical term. It does not relate to the idea of "authoritarian control and manipulation" with which you have associated it. It refers to something else entirely which I have not the interest to explain.

I would recommend just letting this drop, Created.

[euphemia]

There's no evidence that too many vaccines overload the immune system.

Except the best practice of doctors who practice immunotherapy.

[Firestarter]

I never said I had a medical degree. I said there is no evidence to support the theory that too many vaccines are overloading young immune systems.

There is plenty of evidence but you will not read it if it is not stamped by the government.


Hiding Vaccine-Related Deaths With Semantic Sleight-of-Hand

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/07/...elated-deaths/

From the article:

Although experts are less willing to openly disclose the fact that adverse reactions can and do include death, one has only to look at reports to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) to see that mortality is a possible outcome. From 1990 through 2010, for example, VAERS received 1,881 reports of infant deaths following vaccination, representing a 4.8% mortality rate.

See tables 2, 3 and 4 from the report in the last link with the hospitalisation and mortality rate as recorded in VAERS.

[angelatc]

Except the best practice of doctors who practice immunotherapy.

That's simply not true.

[angelatc]

From the article:

Which proves or disproves nothing.

Trying really hard to make this simple. Randomly collected anonymous, unverified data is not reliable. Suppose just to prove my point, I just went and reported that a female child had a seizure 6 days after a Gardasil vaccine. We would then know with 100% certainty that the data is flawed.

Another flaw? We don't know how many times a doctor and/or a nurse, and/or parent, and/or a grandparent, and/or a daycare provider, and/or a nosy neighbor may have reported a single incident in a child. Based on the passions of the anti-vaxxers, it's not impossible for me to believe that activists intentionally do exactly what I suggested above, which is to file false reports in order to manipulate the data.

Also the system literally encourages people to report incidents even if they probably aren't related to the vaccine.


Aside from that, use common sense.

From 1990 through 2010, for example, VAERS received 1,881 reports of infant deaths following vaccination, representing a 4.8% mortality rate.

Have 4.5% of the infants in the US died, much less died after being vaccinated? No, therefore something is obviously wrong with the conclusion.

[angelatc]

But to say "data collection includes controls and verification" is to admit that the data is being manipulated.

Scientific method isn't about data manipulation. Collecting data via VAERS is a tool that can be used to form a hypothesis, but not a conclusion.

VAERS is not designed to detect if a vaccine caused an adverse event, but it can identify unusual or unexpected patterns of reporting that might indicate possible safety problems requiring a closer look.

[euphemia]

Aside from that, use common sense.

But anonymous miscreants on the internet......

[angelatc]

But anonymous miscreants on the internet......

Thanks for contributing to the thread.

[euphemia]

Let it be a lesson to you.

[Created4]

Scientific method isn't about data manipulation. Collecting data via VAERS is a tool that can be used to form a hypothesis, but not a conclusion.

Nothing I have written disagrees with this. I never made any claims about the "scientific method," only that a database that is unfiltered and contains raw data has merit, rather than data manipulated to prove something.

Another flaw? We don't know how many times a doctor and/or a nurse, and/or parent, and/or a grandparent, and/or a daycare provider, and/or a nosy neighbor may have reported a single incident in a child.

Any database setup properly filters out duplicate data - it is so easy to do. This is an imaginary "flaw" based on your prejudice: "Based on the passions of the anti-vaxxers, it's not impossible for me to believe that"

[angelatc]

Nothing I have written disagrees with this. I never made any claims about the "scientific method," only that a database that is unfiltered and contains raw data has merit, rather than data manipulated to prove something.

It has merit when used to create a hypothesis. The Rockwell paper is using it to create a conclusion.

Any database setup properly filters out duplicate data - it is so easy to do.

So ....controls?

[angelatc]

Let it be a lesson to you.

The only thing I've learned today is that you can take any thread and turn it into multiple stories about yourself. Oh, and you have to have the last word.

[euphemia]

That's simply not true.

Shows what you know. This is your thread and you are free to be as obnoxious and negative as you want to be. Nobody has to listen to a single thing you say.

[Ender]

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/247218/

There are over 165 studies that have focused on Thimerosal, an organic-mercury (Hg) based compound, used as a preservative in many childhood vaccines, and found it to be harmful. Of these, 16 were conducted to specifically examine the effects of Thimerosal on human infants or children with reported outcomes of death; acrodynia; poisoning; allergic reaction; malformations; auto-immune reaction; Well’s syndrome; developmental delay; and neurodevelopmental disorders, including tics, speech delay, language delay, attention deficit disorder, and autism. In contrast, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states that Thimerosal is safe and there is “no relationship between [T]himerosal[-]containing vaccines and autism rates in children.” This is puzzling because, in a study conducted directly by CDC epidemiologists, a 7.6-fold increased risk of autism from exposure to Thimerosal during infancy was found. The CDC’s current stance that Thimerosal is safe and that there is no relationship between Thimerosal and autism is based on six specific published epidemiological studies coauthored and sponsored by the CDC. The purpose of this review is to examine these six publications and analyze possible reasons why their published outcomes are so different from the results of investigations by multiple independent research groups over the past 75+ years.

Considering that there are many studies conducted by independent researchers which show a relationship between Thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders, the results of the six studies examined in this review, particularly those showing the protective effects of Thimerosal, should bring into question the validity of the methodology used in the studies. A list of the most common methodological issues with these six studies is shown in Table 1. Importantly, other than the Hviid et al. [23] study, five of the publications examined in this review were directly commissioned by the CDC, raising the possible issue of conflict of interests or research bias, since vaccine promotion is a central mission of the CDC. Conceivably, if serious neurological disorders are found to be related to Thimerosal in vaccines, such findings could possibly be viewed as damaging to the vaccine program.

[angelatc]

Shows what you know. This is your thread and you are free to be as obnoxious and negative as you want to be. Nobody has to listen to a single thing you say.

I'm not the one going off the rails here.

[angelatc]

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/247218/

Off the original topic, which is "Too Many Vaccines Overload Young Immune Systems."

Start your own thread, or Google for the rebuttals yourself.

[angelatc]

The fact is there are plenty of unvaccinated children already in the population that could be studied if this were truly the concern.

The gold standard experiment would have to be run as a double-blind. Meaning either that half of a group would have to get a placebo vaccine, or children (both vaxxed and unvaxxed) would have to be intentionally exposed to dangerous disease.

There are already thousands of studies that indicate disease transmission rates drop dramatically in vaccinated populations. There are no studies that indicate that too many vaccines overload young immune systems.

[angelatc]

Still waiting to see who else is currently on immunotherapy.

As my regular readers may recall, I was diagnosed with an auto-immune disorder when I was 12 and have been seeing immunologists on a regular basis for over 40 years now.

Not sure why that matters.

[Ender]

Off the original topic, which is "Too Many Vaccines Overload Young Immune Systems."

Start your own thread, or Google for the rebuttals yourself.

So, no rebuttals, eh?

Obviously you did NOT read the link.

It is NOT off-topic.