Does rabies exist? - Page 3

[zinemama]

Originally Posted by Cristiaz

Rabies exsists because Pastuer created it. I just read this in the book The Sanctity of Human Blood: Vaccination i$ Not Immunization. Pretty messed up huh? Just like Jenner kept small pox alive and well killing more people EVER than any other vaccine.

The Greeks coined the word "hydrophobia" to describe rabies centuries before Pasteur. Pasteur did not create it. That is absurd.

[Juvysen]

[Cristiaz]

Originally Posted by zinemama

The Greeks coined the word "hydrophobia" to describe rabies centuries before Pasteur. Pasteur did not create it. That is absurd.

The problem I have with arguing any vaccine topic is that we all read and site different sources so everyone believes they are right. What's the point? Should not have posted my opinion. Half the stuff I read in replies regarding vaccines, I think is absurd...however we are all entitled to our opinions and we are entitled to believe in our sources. Which is why I don't tell people their opinions are absurd. Thanks.

[zinemama]

Originally Posted by Cristiaz

The problem I have with arguing any vaccine topic is that we all read and site different sources so everyone believes they are right. What's the point? Should not have posted my opinion. Half the stuff I read in replies regarding vaccines, I think is absurd...however we are all entitled to our opinions and we are entitled to believe in our sources. Which is why I don't tell people their opinions are absurd. Thanks.

I don't see why you shouldn't have posted your opinion. It's a free country. But I'm not sure what you are objecting to. You contend that Pasteur invented rabies. He lived in the 1800s. Rabies has been extensively documented for centuries before that.

Are you saying that all those descriptions of mad dogs and other animals foaming at the mouth and people dying in agony after being bitten were actually some other phenomenon?

You are correct that there is a connection between Pasteur and rabies. He produced an attenuated form of the virus which he used to make a successful vaccine. He did not invent the virus.

"Rabies is a very old disease, perhaps as old as humankind. The word rabies has its origin in Sanskrit, 3000 years BBC: "rabhas" means "to do violence". The Greek word for rabies, "lyssa" derives from the root "lud" which means "violent". Thus, the family of viruses to which rabies belongs is lyssa. The first description of the disease dates from the 23rd. century BC in the Eshuma Code of Babylon. Antiquity, did know rabies as well as the link between human disease and animals, especially dogs. But, it is a famous Italian scholar, Girolamo Fracastoro, born in Verona, who described the disease, which obviously he had seen in many patients, and its routes of contamination in 1530."

http://www.fas.org/ahead/docs/rabies.htm

Are you saying that all this is false?

[mamajama]

Someone asked what is wrong with *********. Aside from the fact that it contains an infinite amount of paranoid drivel, it also contains anti-semitic propanganda including revisionist history declaring that the holocaust never happened. I am adding the link not to promote this garbage but to answer a question posed by a previous poster. http://www.*********/b/holocaust_revisionism.html

Would you really truly take anything seriously supported by a site that would support this kind of hate speech?

[rayo de sol]

Originally Posted by Pepper44

Just a couple months ago I was at the animal diagnostic center taking in one of my dead chickens for testing (to make sure I didn't have a disease in my flock)

I thought only mammals got rabies?

Originally Posted by Pepper44

My DD is not vaccinated and I feel strongly that vaccines are not the answer, but in the case of rabies (if she were bitten by a rabid animal) I would do it considering it's the only possible way to save her life. Obviously in that case the risks of the vaccine wouldn't even matter considering the other option is death!

BUT the choices aren't only getting the rabies vaccine or dying of rabies!

You're assuming that rabies has a 100 percent transmission rate, that every time a rabid animal bites another mammal, that the bitten mammal then develops the disease.

Does anyone know what the transmission rate for rabies is?

My guess would be that it's pretty low, especially if you scrub the wound well afterward.

[rayo de sol]

Originally Posted by Marnica

I don't question the woman interviewed survived rabies, but the claim that she is the only person EVER to survive the bite of a rabid animal...I would like to see this documented in a scientific publication. Don't really feel like Dr. Phil or the Doctors is a great reference.

I totally agree, Marnica.

People have been surviving the bites of rabid animals since forever.

[rayo de sol]

Originally Posted by expatmommy

Rabies is largely controlled in North America because domestic pets are vaccinated

Honest question: how do we know that that's why rabies isn't some huge epidemic here?

Why do we assume that the vaccine is a magic bullet?

[rayo de sol]

Originally Posted by mamajama

it also contains anti-semitic propanganda including revisionist history declaring that the holocaust never happened.

That's horrifying. Thanks for letting me know.

[mamajama]

Originally Posted by rayo de sol

That's horrifying. Thanks for letting me know.

you're welcome! It is horrifying, isn't it. I think it certainly deserves mention. I know that sifting through data regarding vaccinations can be really daunting. Like struggling through a quagmire. When I was researching back when my kids were wee, I found it most helpful to use some process of elimination. : this source woulda received the big red X treatment for sure.

[rayo de sol]

The purpose of this research was to determine whether trappers in northern Alaska acquired immunity to rabies virus from non-bite exposures while trapping and skinning arctic foxes (Alopex lagopus). In coastal Alaska recurring epizootics presumably provide trappers ample opportunity for contact with rabid animals….This represents the first report of an unvaccinated person acquiring rabies virus antibody with a titre above the 0.5 I.U./ml level considered acceptable by the World Health Organization.

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...abies_antibody

So, people can apparently build up a natural immunity to rabies....

[Juvysen]

Originally Posted by rayo de sol

https://www.researchgate.net/publica...abies_antibody

So, people can apparently build up a natural immunity to rabies....

fascinating!

[MyLilPwny]

I don't have any qualms about *********. I like the site. I'm not going to believe that the site is 100% accurate, but I'll say for the most part it is and has good intentions. There is no book that I have read about health that I think is 100% accurate on absolutely everything. But I still like the books, because for the most part they are accurate. So I'm just saying that no source is 100% perfect, but it doesn't automatically make it a bad source.

About rabies and the rabies vaccine, I think there is a good possibility that the conventional beliefs on it are based on a bunch of lies, just like how the polio and small pox vaccines are based on a bunch of lies, and really every vaccine has lies built into it that play off of people's fears. That is what Vaccination Liberation is basically saying in this article here about the rabies vaccine:

http://www.vaclib.org/intro/rabies.htm

They are against the rabies vaccine. The article explains some of the lies behind rabies and the vaccine.

Here is a quote that I think is very suspicious in regards to the supposed deadly virus:

What is the rabies virus? The identifying bacteria are called "Negri bodies" and are found in the brain of the dead animal. However, these bodies are found the brains of animals and people who have died of causes having nothing to do with rabies. Frequently, they are not found in the brains of animals that the experts were sure had rabies.

and this too:

Dr. Charles W. Dulles, former lecturer at the University of Pennsylvania, said, "It has been shown by statistics that in countries where that method [the Pasteur treatment] is employed the number of deaths from hydrophobia has increased and not diminished." 13 Ethyl Douglas Hume points out that prior to the Pasteur treatment the average number of deaths per year from hydrophobia in France was 30. After the Pasteur treatment, the number Jumped to 45. She also discusses at length how the figures were manipulated to give the impression of "success."14

And then they ask if that sounds familiar. Of course it does. Polio and small pox, anyone? Why would the rabies virus be different than any other virus? The disease with which a particular virus is associated is sometimes present and sometimes it is not. People who have a particular virus may or may not have the disease associated with it.

The article also poses the question how do you really know that an animal "has rabies" and especially in the old historical context - supposed rabies cases can be a number of things instead like an animal is really suffering from poor treatment, hunger, thirst, fear, running fits, teething fits, worm fits, sunstroke from heat exposure, or hysteria caused by the animal finding itself in a strange environment. Just because "rabies" was documented historically, it doesn't really mean that it was this supposed rabies deadly disease. How do you know that all these supposed human rabies deaths were really rabies? How do you know they weren't tetanus?

[felix23]

Originally Posted by mamajama

Someone asked what is wrong with *********. Aside from the fact that it contains an infinite amount of paranoid drivel, it also contains anti-semitic propanganda including revisionist history declaring that the holocaust never happened. I am adding the link not to promote this garbage but to answer a question posed by a previous poster. http://www.*********/b/holocaust_revisionism.html

Would you really truly take anything seriously supported by a site that would support this kind of hate speech?

OMG!!! I have never really searched that site, so I had no idea that it was anti-semitic. If the information is only found on that site and no other place on the internet, then I would have a really hard time believing it was real and not something the author just made up. I mean, they also provide "proof" (gag me), that the holocaust didn't happen, so how can they be trusted? Thank you so much for bringing this to light.

[hippy mum]

Originally Posted by rayo de sol

Honest question: how do we know that that's why rabies isn't some huge epidemic here?

Why do we assume that the vaccine is a magic bullet?

Good thinking. I remember reading some articles about the vaccine and how it's not as effective as we thought, and how it's harmful to our pets. I'll have to try to find it, it's been a few years.
I worked as a vet tech both in a shelter-lots of wild cats-and also private practice. Ironically, getting the vaccine was only brought up at pp, not at the shelter where rabies was. I've seen animals with it. In the county I'm in, if the animla is suspected of rabies, it is watched for 24hrs and if it looks rabid at all, it is pts and tested. That is the only reason why my dogs are vaccinated. I am not vaccinated for it.
I remember reading last year, if the state would allow titers by the vet to prove an animal had immunity to rabies, but it's not been passed yet. I think maybe they are worried people won't take thier pet in every 5yrs to ensure they are still carrying the immunity to it.
Our county started this "feed" thing last year for the wild animals. It was this pellet food that had something that was supposed to prevent rabies. Animals ate it and gained immunity to it. Not sure if it's working, haven't seen any reports on it, or the number of cases our county has had since.

[zinemama]

Originally Posted by ThereseReich

I don't have any qualms about *********. I like the site. I'm not going to believe that the site is 100% accurate, but I'll say for the most part it is and has good intentions.

How can a site that supports Holocaust denial be presumed to have "good intentions?"

[Liquesce]

Originally Posted by ThereseReich

I don't have any qualms about *********. I like the site. I'm not going to believe that the site is 100% accurate, but I'll say for the most part it is and has good intentions.

Really? Even putting Holocaust denialism aside -- which should never be done, but even so -- the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Illuminati mind control, Jesuit "soldiers of satan" world takeover, support for David Icke's whole thing about the world being secretly run by reptilian humanoids, etc, etc, etc. Offensive, groundless conspiratorial fringe theories run rampant on that website, and I can not even begin to fathom really looking at it and saying "it's for the most part accurate."

[MyLilPwny]

I really don't care if ********* is wrong about the holocaust because it does not affect the information on vaccines and I'm here to discuss vaccines, not the holocaust, and as I mentioned before, no source is 100% accurate and I've never read a book that I 100% agree with but I still like these books I've read and the information in them, so its the same with *********. I know a lot about vaccines. And *********'s info on vaccines matches with a lot of other books and sources on vaccines that I've read, so yes it is real, solid information on vaccines, and yes, *********'s information on vaccines has good intentions.

[Jugs]

Originally Posted by felix23

OMG!!! If the information is only found on that site and no other place on the internet, then I would have a really hard time believing it was real and not something the author just made up.

Ditto. That's my qualm with "smoking gun" sites; to post information so radically different than conventional knowledge but with a grain of truth is one thing, but I have a difficult time believing anything that can't be cross-referenced with conventional information. ********* is famous for that. A site like Inside Vaccines is more my style: does not support vaccination, but backs up their information with mainstream publications. I would never post a ********* link, because their credibility alone calls their unique information into question. And seriously, with something as deadly serious as rabies, I would not be hitching my wagon to their star by forgoing prohylaxis, on the off chance that they just *might* be right.

[georgia]

Hi, posts have been removed that were either in violation of the User Agreement or that referenced or quoted posts that were removed. Those whose posts were in violation have been contacted.

Please note that for the most part, we are not interested in "policing" links to other sites with the exception of explicit adult content and a few particular hate sites that we have decided to not host due to past incidents. See this for more details regarding links. Members are welcome to link to sites they believe to be in support of their statements, but please also understand that members are welcome to post to disagree and refute. We do require that members "debate the post and not the poster." There's no reason to make this personal. Our purpose is information, support and community. We do not expect everyone to agree, but we do require everyone be respectful.

Further UAVs will most likely result in the thread's permanent removal, so please post with care. If anyone wishes to start a new thread about vaccine resource sites and their respectability, please feel free to do so in the appropriate forum. Please PM me, abimommy or the forum's moderators with any further questions, comments or concerns.