Mothering › Forums › Health › Vaccinations › Ingredients in vaxes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ingredients in vaxes

post #1 of 15
Thread Starter 

Hi ladies!

I have a question about Squalene in the vaxes...

I am trying to defend myself to my hubby about vax ingredients and I follow Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, vax expert, amongst others..She has stated that there is squalene (rat poison) in the vax ingredients...but, when I look on the cdc's website and their vax ingredients and the pharma insert ingredients I don't see it as an ingredient...is there another name for it?...Also...I looked at the graph on the cdc's website for the decline of disease vs. when vaxes were strated and theirs is MUCH different than any others I have seen!  Of course theirs show that vaccinations helped the decline of diseases while other graphs show the decline happened way b4 the vaxes were licensed...can they lie like that?

post #2 of 15

Which vaccines does Tenpenny say contain squalene?

post #3 of 15

Hi...yes they can lie...and yes, vaccines were introduced after all the major epidemics were long gone...the fact that they were or they are gone is nothing to do with vaccines as people think...better lifestyle, clean water, etc is the reason why they are gone...it is difficult to explain this to people sometimes..

hands off vaccines if you can...check this out..it may help you

 

http://www.informedchoice.info/cocktail.html

 

good luck

post #4 of 15

And forgot: - some vaccines are not even licensed..but they use them on people

                 - some of them are not even tested

 

post #5 of 15

There are no U.S. vaccines adjuvanted with squalene. It's not a rat poison, either, FWIW.

post #6 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucia Z 84 View Post

And forgot: - some vaccines are not even licensed..but they use them on people

                 - some of them are not even tested

 


Please name one, just one vaccine that is currently being used on people which is not licensed or tested.  Just one.

post #7 of 15

The closest that statement would come to being true would be, say, giving TT to a kid under 7, since its only for kids 7 and over...something "off label" like that.

 

ETA...I know when my grandfather was in the later stages of pancreatic cancer, he did a lot of experimental treatments (some that prolonged his life a while!); I could see there being vaccines in there that are not licensed, though, not being in the field at all, I have no idea how that works. But I can't think of other situations, off the top of my head, where unlicensed/untested vaccines are used on a regular basis.

post #8 of 15

It's confusing when you first start to question vaccines. There's too much fear (both sides) and too little concrete information on which to base your decisions.  You want to do the best for your children and you don't want to have any regrets. 

 

I don't think that there is squalene in the U.S. vaccines and the reason why I think that is because there was a lot of uproar over the idea of allowing it in the H1N1 vaccine in 2009.  The argument was that they were having to make special batches for the U.S. since the we've declared Squalene to be illegal for use in vaccines.  Squalene (sp?) has been shown to induce a stronger immune response, so it would have allowed the recommendation of one flu shot vs. the  2 that were recommended.  The stronger immune response is more likely trigger auto-immune disorders. It's been awhile, but that was my understanding of it.

 

You don't need squalene to be in the vaccines in order to be concerned about them. The other ingredients are worrisome as well.  Do you have access to a naturapathic doctor?  They may be a better source for this kind of information.  My naturapath really helped me understand what I needed to know about vaccines in order to make the decision.  Anything I find by Mercola or Tenpenny seems too...what's the word...fear inducing? Same with the outspoken pro-vaccine people.  I don't want to make these decisions based on fear.

 

My naturapath explained that vaccinating before 6 months was useless because a child younger than that can't have a proper immune response to the vaccine.  A healthy child will usually get immunity from one vaccine and not need boosters. Boosters are to catch a small percentage of children who don't have a proper response to the first vaccine.  Most healthy children will not get severely ill from VPD's.  A breastfed child is at less of a risk and a child who does not attend daycare has even a smaller risk of contracting or getting sick from a VPD.  A child who eats a healthy diet is also well-armed against severe reactions to vaccine-preventable diseases.  It helped a lot to have a supportive physician help with this decision. 

 

Here's a good Mothering article that may help http://mothering.com/vaccinations-why-all-the-fuss

 

post #9 of 15

I'm not sure about the rat poison connection?  Squalene is a naturally occurring substance produced by the liver of, I believe, anything that has a liver including humans.  Commercial squalene is extracted from shark livers because they have a lot of it.  It is used to boost the immune response to a vaccine, meaning less vaccine needs to be used for each individual and a low vaccine supply can be stretched farther.  The US purchased a supply of squalene around the time of H1N1 in case things got really bad and they needed to speed up vaccination, but they never used it, and no vaccines used in the US have had squalene.  The H1N1 vaccines in Canada and the Europe* did use squalene, and I am not aware of any problems associated with it.  It seems to be very safe for use in vaccines, and the most troubling aspect of it to me is the potential devastating effect it could have on shark populations if used in the future. 

 

Unfortunately, some of the antivac sites contain very misleading graphs, which is a little disturbing to me because it is hard to believe that they are presenting the graphs the way they do by accident.   Some diseases really did cease to be problems due to improved sanitary practices - diseases such as typhoid and cholera which are spread contaminated water or food.  Not so much with diseases that are spread directly from human to human such as the flu, common cold, chicken pox, measles, mumps, german measles, etc.  

 

What did go down, and what is often shown as evidence that diseases themselves were going away before vaccines, is the death rates for diseases due in a large part to antibiotics to treat bacterial infections (scarlet fever, which is caused by the same bacteria as strep throat and for which there is still no vaccine, used to be a pretty serious illness but is now cleared up easily with a simple course of antibiotics), and to treat opportunistic secondary infections in the wake of a virus, as well as many other drugs, the iron lung to save many polio victims who would have died before its invention, the ability to intubate people can't breath on their own, etc.  Measles, for instance, only kills 1 or 2 per thousand people who get it in the first world today, but in places with high poverty and malnutrition levels and low or no access to modern health care, it can still kill as many as 5 to 10% of those are unfortunate enough to be stricken with it.  

 

But while the death rates plummeted for many of these diseases, they diseases themselves continued to spread in rising and falling epidemics until intruduction of vaccine at which point the rates of disease themselves did indeed drop dramatically.   

 

*edited, much later, because just back rereading the thread and noticed I'd written Canada and US use squalene when I meant Canada and Europe.  Ouch - bad mistake. 


Edited by pers - 2/5/11 at 4:00pm
post #10 of 15

H1N1

 

What do human brain and nerve tissues, Gulf War Syndrome, some health supplements and GlaxoSmithKline’s new swine flu vaccine adjuvant all have in common? The answer: squalene. Its presence in fatty tissues and supplements is generally benign or beneficial; its presence in GSK’s vaccine is morbid.

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) holds the contract to supply Canada’s pandemic H1N1 vaccine – a vaccine containing an unlicensed additive, specifically the AS03 squalene based adjuvant. AS03 is designed to stimulate a dramatically increased immune response which results in less vaccine antigen being required in each vaccine dose.

 

It’s unethical to recommend a vaccine which hasn’t even received the usual minimal safety testing let alone long term testing.

post #11 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucia Z 84 View Post

What do human brain and nerve tissues, Gulf War Syndrome, some health supplements and GlaxoSmithKline’s new swine flu vaccine adjuvant all have in common? The answer: squalene. Its presence in fatty tissues and supplements is generally benign or beneficial; its presence in GSK’s vaccine is morbid.

GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) holds the contract to supply Canada’s pandemic H1N1 vaccine – a vaccine containing an unlicensed additive, specifically the AS03 squalene based adjuvant. AS03 is designed to stimulate a dramatically increased immune response which results in less vaccine antigen being required in each vaccine dose.

 

It’s unethical to recommend a vaccine which hasn’t even received the usual minimal safety testing let alone long term testing.


 

This is not true.  Some put forth the theory after FDA tests of Anthrax vaccine given to Gulf War soldiers tested positive for minute traces of squalene.  One single set of FDA tests turned up extremely small amounts of squalene, but it was in amounts way way too small to have served any purpose as an adjuvant or really have any effect at all.  The FDA test is extremely sensitive and can pick up even the smallest amounts, such traces of squalene that were produced in a human body and left behind in the oily residue from a fingerprint on glass equipment used in the test. It is very easy to contaminate the results when using such sensitive tests, and none of the other many tests conducted at other times or by other agencies found squalene.

 

Squalene has, however, been used deliberately and openly in millions of doses of flu vaccine in few countries in Europe for over a decade now.  Why isnt Gulf War Syndrome running rampant in these countries if squalene had anything to do with it?

 

Canadian versions of H1N1 vaccine with squalene did receive testing before being released to the general population.  Long term testing on the specific formula was not possible due to the time factor, but it was very similar to other vaccines containing squalene which had been well tested for years and shown to be very safe.  Perhaps not ideal, but neither was leaving the population vulnerable to a potentially devastating pandemic. Thankfully H1N1 turned out not to be nearly as bad as predicted, though still people did die and it was a bit of a concern for a bit when the ICUs reached their absolutely capacity and all ventilators were in use in my city and many others.  Wouldn't it be nice if we had crystal balls so we could no for sure what the best decision was before having to make it instead of wading through shades of gray and trying to balance risks that aren't completely known?

post #12 of 15

I am not sure were you stand when it comes to SUBJECT-VACCINATION  but I think everyone should read this post from the beginning to the end...

 

http://www.vaccinetruth.org/must_see_vaccine_explanation.htm

 

post #13 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucia Z 84 View Post

I am not sure were you stand when it comes to SUBJECT-VACCINATION  but I think everyone should read this post from the beginning to the end...

 

http://www.vaccinetruth.org/must_see_vaccine_explanation.htm

 



uh, i gave it a good try, really i did. but the formatting and writing style were too much for me. could you sum up the main point for me?

post #14 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayaMama View Post

uh, i gave it a good try, really i did. but the formatting and writing style were too much for me. could you sum up the main point for me?


Tobacco science, something something, the Amish don't get autism, Hannah Poling, something something.

post #15 of 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by Otto View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlayaMama View Post

uh, i gave it a good try, really i did. but the formatting and writing style were too much for me. could you sum up the main point for me?


Tobacco science, something something, the Amish don't get autism, Hannah Poling, something something.

ROTFLMAO.gif
 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Forums › Health › Vaccinations › Ingredients in vaxes