Originally Posted by Deva33mommy
And ccohenou, can you point the way to ONE study that actually compares health between vaxed and never vaxed individuals? For any vaccine? I've been looking for such a study.
Unfortunately, it looks like she's taken the tactic of insinuating that we are all simpletons, who think that only children who've never been exposed to any toxins or drugs of any kind, in any way, will qualify as a control group. You know, that whole "Adam and Eve" comment? In reality, she knows that what we're looking for - vaccine studies comparing a group of children who receive the vaccine, with a group of children who receive an inert injection - does not exist. Whether or not she's willing to admit that this has some obvious implications about the safety of vaccines and their components remains to be seen.
Ccohenou, you can't honestly believe that asking a drug company to do a REAL study, in which the control group is actually a control group, is somehow impossible. For what other reason do you think the term 'placebo' exists in so many articles, studies, etc? When they say 'placebo', are we to believe that they're actually referring to another drug? I see ads in the paper all the time, looking for drug study participants. They frequently refer to placebos. Surely they use placebos because that is the best way to study the effects a drug has on those to whom it's given. That's what we're saying they need to do with vaccines. Arguing this point is just silly. If they don't safety test a vaccine using a placebo, how are we to believe they're as "safe" as they claim they are - especially given how many toxins they contain, and what some of those toxins are known to do in the body?