Do you know how vaccines are evaluated for safety? Prepare to be surprised. - Page 9

[RiverSky]

Another amazing thread.... thank you, thank you, thank you!!!

[Devaskyla]

Thanks for bumping, I've never seen this one before. And I add a request for it being a sticky.

[drnmd1216]

Wow, reading this makes me feel like I am in the Matrix. We haven't vaxed for a while now, since my son had a serious reaction at 6 months old to the aluminum at all 3 sites of injection (so how would a placebo of aluminum tell me ANYTHING about the safety of it to my child??) This is most definately the icing on the cake for me. Its just unbelievable that you think your children's best interests are in mind when you go to the doctors and in the end, its all for the almightly dollar. You can't trust anyone. It just makes me sick!

Thank you for the great, eye opening post!

[midstreammama]

Wow, reading this makes me feel like I am in the Matrix



I have felt that way ever since I took the pill when dd was 2mo.

I 6th or 7th or 8th this for a sticky!

[twinsplusone]

Ok, with my 3 kids, it took me the ENTIRE day to read this entire thread!!!!
Thank you though.......I can't say it enough!
Just unbelievable

[ericswifey27]

Originally Posted by Plummeting

This is why it's so freakin frustrating talking to people who insist that the vaccines must be safe, since the FDA allowed them to go to market. You can't judge adverse events like autoimmune disorders or allergies by following people for a few days. And you can't judge ANYTHING by comparing your vaccine to another shot containing some of the same toxic ingredients. : That doesn't seem to bother people at all.

Apparently, they'd be happy with a study that followed people who ate nothing but twinkies for 5 days, while the control group ate nothing but brownies for 5 days. The study would conclude, after only 5 days, that no one had died or suffered any serious adverse events, and the minor reactions were equal between groups, therefore, eating nothing but twinkies must be safe. If you explain it like that, it suddenly becomes ludicrous, because *everyone* knows you can't survive on twinkies alone, but they just can't quite see how you could possibly draw a comparison between that and vaccine studies. <sigh>

Lol. I love the twinkie/brownie analogy... so true!

I picked up a mainstream parenting magazine (don't ask why: ) and was reading the fine print for a vax ad, wish I could remember which one... One of the studies it referred to to show vaccine efficacy/safety was a study done on 20 children. 20. How the hell can you determine the safety of something tested on a mere 20 people? WTH...

[Mom2J]

Just when I thought I could no longer be surprised.....: Like a couple of the pp's, I have a psych degree, and I've participated in a little research myself. The way these studies (and I use that term loosely) were conducted is mind-boggling. If I would have turned in sonething so sloppy for school, my profs would have laughed me out of the building!

Evey time I think about the vax's I've allowed for my son I want to :Puke

You know, I get that $ and greed explain a lot of this, but come on!!! This is utterly insane!

Thanks for the great thread. Poor DH will have to listen to me again tonight. Last night the first words out of his mouth wheb he came home were, "I saw an article titled something like 1 in 4 Women Have Cervical Cancer Virus and I knew I was going to hear it when I got home."

[LongIsland]

Originally Posted by Mom2J

Poor DH will have to listen to me again tonight. Last night the first words out of his mouth wheb he came home were, "I saw an article titled something like 1 in 4 Women Have Cervical Cancer Virus and I knew I was going to hear it when I got home."

Like the government was trying tell us something we don't already know. But wait a minute - most people don't know this. That's why Merck had to "Tell Someone" in order to scare people into compliance.

Make sure you tell DH that, in that same study, they found that a whopping 3.4 percent carried one of the four strains contained in the vaccine. But as we all know, of the four strains contained in the vaccine, 16 and 18 are associated with 70% of cancer cases - the other two strains contained in the vaccine are for genital warts.

Almost all women clear HPV from their bodies, including strains 16 and 18. How many women clear 16 or 18 from their bodies, only to contract many of the other strains during their lifetime . . . not contained in the vaccines.

[luvmy2boys]

Originally Posted by aisraeltax

LI,
im sure im not the only one, but wanted to say i appreciate you posting this info. its very useful to me and i want to make sure you don't get discouraged by no replies.

: I'm actually having to read this in stages, as just thinking about it literally makes me feel ill.:

It makes me so sad for all the kids out there. It makes me mad for the vaxes I received as a child. And it also makes me sad because a few years back I decided that I wanted to make a career change and go to nursing school. I would love to work in the NICU and make a difference to those babies. Only I'm realizing that I don't think I could stand watching, and even aiding in, procedures and practices that I don't agree with, knowing in my soul that what I was doing is harmful. This goes beyond vaccines...I'm sure they are not the only drugs that aren't what they are cracked up to be.

[Tracy]

bump

[carmel23]

I would just like to address this topic with a little background of Salk, the man who developed the polio vaccine. It was first given in mass to school children in April 1954. Parents were lining there children up to receive this unproven vaccine.

Salk had tested the vaccine on himself, his wife and his children. Some of his associates received the vaccine, and then some children who had already survived polio received it (it see if it would in fact boost antibodies).

Was this a scientifically proven vaccine? No. But people were so terrified of the disease that they were willing to take this chance.

[LongIsland]

Originally Posted by carmel23

Was this a scientifically proven vaccine? No. But people were so terrified of the disease that they were willing to take this chance.

Indeed they were. In fact, in the 2006 Pulitzer Prize winning book, Polio: An American Story, one book reviewer writes this:

Finally, and perhaps most tellingly, Oshinsky reveals that polio was never the raging epidemic portrayed by the media, but in truth a relatively uncommon disease. But in baby-booming America--increasingly suburban, family-oriented, and hygiene-obsessed--the specter of polio, like the specter of the atomic bomb, soon became a cloud of terror over daily life

[carmel23]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3829129.stm

Polio today (2004-- not 1950)

I think that the chart is very telling...

[sophiekat]

: the majority of those figures are estimates (from 88 - 98). i'd like to know how they "estimated"

[mamakay]

Originally Posted by sophiekat

: the majority of those figures are estimates (from 88 - 98). i'd like to know how they "estimated"

And their definition of a "case" would be helpful, too.

[carmel23]

My take on it is that no one else was there counting... so they probably asked people how many had died--survey. Or used a statistical analysis method that they use to estimate number of deaths in war or disaster in addition to survey.

But here is another excerpt:

"But since immunisations stopped 237 cases have been reported across West and central Africa, including 197 in Nigeria, compared to a total of 49 cases for the same period last year."

[mamakay]

Originally Posted by carmel23

My take on it is that no one else was there counting... so they probably asked people how many had died--survey. Or used a statistical analysis method that they use to estimate number of deaths in war or disaster in addition to survey.

But here is another excerpt:

"But since immunisations stopped 237 cases have been reported across West and central Africa, including 197 in Nigeria, compared to a total of 49 cases for the same period last year."

What are they calling a "case", though?

A stool sample or paralysis?

Also, are these the same people who are having to get 9 or 10 doses of OPV?

[lyttlewon]

Originally Posted by carmel23

I would just like to address this topic with a little background of Salk, the man who developed the polio vaccine. It was first given in mass to school children in April 1954. Parents were lining there children up to receive this unproven vaccine.

Salk had tested the vaccine on himself, his wife and his children. Some of his associates received the vaccine, and then some children who had already survived polio received it (it see if it would in fact boost antibodies).

Was this a scientifically proven vaccine? No. But people were so terrified of the disease that they were willing to take this chance.

Yep and they paid the price. Salks vaccine was a huge failure that gave more paralictic polio than the wild virus. Goes to show how powerful government/journalist fear mongering can be.

[carmel23]

Originally Posted by lyttlewon

Yep and they paid the price. Salks vaccine was a huge failure that gave more paralictic polio than the wild virus. Goes to show how powerful government/journalist fear mongering can be.

I guess the eradication of polio in this country is considered a failure? :

[mamakay]

Originally Posted by carmel23

I guess the eradication of polio in this country is considered a failure? :

What did the Salk vaccine have to do with that?