or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Profits from vaccines
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Profits from vaccines - Page 2

post #21 of 86

I am sure diet and lifestyle have a great deal to do with the nation's ill health, as I am sure over vaccination does too.

 

Epidemiology and estimated population burden of selected autoimmune diseases in the United States

 

 

 

Quote:
From the incidence data we estimate that 237,203 Americans will develop an autoimmune disease in 1996 and that approximately 1,186,015 new cases of these autoimmune diseases occur in the United States every 5 years. Women were at 2.7 times greater risk than men to acquire an autoimmune disease. After reviewing the medical literature for incidence and prevalence rates of 24 autoimmune diseases, we conclude that many autoimmune diseases are infrequently studied by epidemiologists. As a result the total burden of disease may be an underestimate. 

 

 

#OneMan'sBurdenIsAnotherMan'sProfit

 

post #22 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Pek you're right there and that comes up every once in awhile around here. I think it's important to note that if that's what you believe, you are accusing thousands of people of conspiring not just to cover up information on a product they believe is safe but isn't, but actually creating, testing, and injecting a product into healthy children that they know will cause lifelong harm. I don't believe that's possible.
Not necessarily.

 

Reaping the benfit of does not equal set out to cause.

post #23 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

 

Reaping the benfit of does not equal set out to cause.

 

I don't think Rrrrrachel is saying they are being accused of having developed vaccines specifically to damage children, just that they are being accused of conspiring to hide evidence that the vaccines they have developed are more dangerous than good. That is what it boils down to right? 

post #24 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

Reaping the benfit of does not equal set out to cause.

If you're accusing them of being motivated by profit, and getting that profit by causing life long medical conditions, you may not be accusing them as having set out intentionally int hat path,but you're certainly accusing them of knowingly traveling on it.
post #25 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post


If you're accusing them of being motivated by profit, and getting that profit by causing life long medical conditions, you may not be accusing them as having set out intentionally int hat path,but you're certainly accusing them of knowingly traveling on it.

 

So what if one does?  If that's what one believes, why can't it be stated?  

post #26 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

So what if one does?  If that's what one believes, why can't it be stated?  
I don't care what you state. I was just responding to what Kathy said.
post #27 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Pek you're right there and that comes up every once in awhile around here. I think it's important to note that if that's what you believe, you are accusing thousands of people of conspiring not just to cover up information on a product they believe is safe but isn't, but actually creating, testing, and injecting a product into healthy children that they know will cause lifelong harm. I don't believe that's possible.
 

Your belief.

post #28 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post


If you're accusing them of being motivated by profit, and getting that profit by causing life long medical conditions, you may not be accusing them as having set out intentionally int hat path,but you're certainly accusing them of knowingly traveling on it.

I think most in the vaccine industry genuinely believe in their product.  I think most of them are looking at large scale number - i.e. public health (whereas I am more interested in my families health) I think a lot of the information that is disseminated to the public is very careful to shine a pro-vax light on things, as they worry about scaring people away from vaxxing.

 

 

As per Big Pharm, they are profit motivated corporations.  Of course they try and display themselves and their product in a good light.  I dont really trust them to have individuals best interests at heart, which is no different from how I feel about many corporations.  If that makes me a conspiracy theorist in some peoples eyes, so be it.  It would be a pretty loose interpretation of the word.

post #29 of 86
Thread Starter 
I don't consider your position to be a conspiracy theory, Kathy. It is not one of the more extreme ones around, though. You're right that public health officials are cautious about anything that might scare people away from vaccinating.

Becky - yup. Hence my use of the word belief. Purely my opinion, ymmv.
post #30 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Pek you're right there and that comes up every once in awhile around here. I think it's important to note that if that's what you believe, you are accusing thousands of people of conspiring not just to cover up information on a product they believe is safe but isn't, but actually creating, testing, and injecting a product into healthy children that they know will cause lifelong harm. I don't believe that's possible.
There is also no evidence that vaccines cause life long medical conditions except in the case of very rare serious adverse events. The overwhelming majority of Americans get vaccines. What percentage have a life long medical condition?

It took me quite a while to get back to this thread, and there's lots below this post I'm quoting.

I threw that out there as a devil's advocate thing. But the tobacco industry covered up knowledge that their products were harmful, and they denied marketing to children with a cute cartoon camel. That the pharmaceutical industry could repeat those actions doesn't seem farfetched. And it doesn't take an organized conspiracy. Just lots of people who put profit ahead of health of others.
post #31 of 86
Thread Starter 
The tobacco industry was not subject to the same kind of licensing requirements and oversight the vaccine industry is. It would require a lot of people outside of the immediate industry to conspire, too.
post #32 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

The tobacco industry was not subject to the same kind of licensing requirements and oversight the vaccine industry is. 

Except the government agencies that oversee the licensing requirements and oversight, etc., are rife with conflict of interest, making that a moot point.

 

It really doesn't take that many people to be in control of the game to make it work the way they want it. Everyone else becomes a pawn, and pawns are easily controlled.


We've already seen this in history.

 

And we don't have to look to far to see it happening again in the here and now. 

 

Look at the recent events in Vancouver (the nurses being forced to get a flu shot, or else wear a mask and distinctive badge,or else lose their job, EVEN THOUGH THE FLU SHOT IS NOT EFFECTIVE.  You've got the lead author of the Cochrane Collaborative review of the flu shot, WRITING TO THE PAPER, from ROME, to complain that his above-mentioned study results were twisted to fit the vaccine sales agenda. Even he makes references to tyrants in history who forced public ridicule on human beings by forcing them to wear distinctive bages or clothing. http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Cochrane+review+vaccine+definitive+health+officer+suggests/7543272/story.html

 

And in Cincinnati:

http://www.wlwt.com/news/local-news/cincinnati/TriHealth-fires-150-employees-for-not-getting-flu-shots/-/13549970/17523386/-/3khe3s/-/index.html#ixzz2DGsXGK2E  TriHealth fires 150 employees for not getting flu shots


 

post #33 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Except the government agencies that oversee the licensing requirements and oversight, etc., are rife with conflict of interest, making that a moot point.

 

It really doesn't take that many people to be in control of the game to make it work the way they want it. Everyone else becomes a pawn, and pawns are easily controlled.


We've already seen this in history.

Right!

post #34 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Except the government agencies that oversee the licensing requirements and oversight, etc., are rife with conflict of interest, making that a moot point.

 

It really doesn't take that many people to be in control of the game to make it work the way they want it. Everyone else becomes a pawn, and pawns are easily controlled.


We've already seen this in history.

 

I see that with the food industry. One of the reasons why I don't trust the government to oversee vaccine safety is because of its poor record in handling food safety and allowing food to be adulterated with crud like pesticides, chemicals, artificial flavorings and colors.

 

It just keeps dropping the ball, and promoting things that are questionable (increased grain and vegetable oil consumption and reduced saturated fat and meat-eating) and quiet about other things that they should be against (trans-fats, refined sugar and flour consumption).

 

Did you know that the bad health effects of partially hydrogenated oils has been known about since the late 70s and early 80s? But food manufacturers put a lot of pressure on scientists to withhold this information from the public, and blackballed others like Dr. Mary Enig who was basically a trans-fats whistle blower. 

 

The article "The Oiling of America" spells it all out. You may be interested in the sections from "Shenanigans at the FDA" to "The Food Giants Fight Back."

post #35 of 86

Looks like a good read.  The FDA is already populated with Monsanto execs....http://www.naturalnews.com/037678_Michael_Taylor_Monsanto_FDA.html

post #36 of 86
Taxi - so I'm curious, do you think GM foods eaten daily or vaccines given a handful of times mostly in childhood are more likely to cause the apparent rise in chronic allergies and other conditions?
post #37 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Taxi - so I'm curious, do you think GM foods eaten daily or vaccines given a handful of times mostly in childhood are more likely to cause the apparent rise in chronic allergies and other conditions?

It doesn't have to be one or the other. Both can be contributing factors. The black and white thinking around here amazes me sometimes. 

post #38 of 86

I am not sure if this is in this thread, but….

 

US gov't gave out  5.7 billion dollars to big pharm for vaccine manufacturing in 2011.

 

http://vactruth.com/2012/11/30/2011-billions-vaccine-manufacturers/

post #39 of 86
Thread Starter 

Good.  I'm glad the government is helping insure we have a secure supply of vaccines to help prevent shortages.  

post #40 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post

It doesn't have to be one or the other. Both can be contributing factors. The black and white thinking around here amazes me sometimes. 

They can both be more likely?  I think that's mathematically impossible, but what do I know.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Profits from vaccines