Parade Article-Why So Many Parents Are Delaying or Skipping Vaccines - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 80 Old 10-28-2012, 01:48 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

 

There are just too many players in medicine, epidemiology, pharmacology to hide such things on the scale you suggest. It cannot be possible. These people are real people, just like you and me, and most of them have devoted their lives to trying to either keep people healthy or search for cures from diseases. So suggesting they are all colluding to hide major side effects which are seriously injuring major numbers of people from over 40 years of MMR is in my opinion frankly ridiculous, and also rather offensive. 

 

It is possible.

 

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0005738

 

"A pooled weighted average of 1.97% (N = 7, 95%CI: 0.86–4.45) of scientists admitted to have fabricated, falsified or modified data or results at least once –a serious form of misconduct by any standard– and up to 33.7% admitted other questionable research practices. In surveys asking about the behaviour of colleagues, admission rates were 14.12% (N = 12, 95% CI: 9.91–19.72) for falsification, and up to 72% for other questionable research practices. Meta-regression showed that self reports surveys, surveys using the words “falsification” or “fabrication”, and mailed surveys yielded lower percentages of misconduct. When these factors were controlled for, misconduct was reported more frequently by medical/pharmacological researchers than others."


A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#62 of 80 Old 10-28-2012, 01:54 PM
 
Bokonon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 2,975
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirzam View Post

 

You have no idea. You do not need millions of people in collusion to achieve evil. You need a just a minute percentage of people without the slightest bit of human compassion and empathy to be able to control others via programming and essentially mind control. 

 

Isn't it something like 1% of people are sociopaths?  Somehow MKULTRA was allowed, and many people knew about that.

rachelsmama and BeckyBird like this.

A, jammin.gif mama to a boy (2005) and a girl (2009)
Bokonon is offline  
#63 of 80 Old 10-28-2012, 02:10 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,933
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)

I'm with Miriam on this one.

 

Why do you so quickly forget about history? Humans have been treating each other horribly since the beginning, and it still continues to this day. The idea that there is some great elaborate conspiracy with thousands of evil doctors, nurses, scientists, etc. IS preposterous. I agree! However, if the people at the TOP of the medical field/government are corrupt, and everyone follows their recommendations, the result is the situation we have today.

 

Researchers: Keep your job, or whistleblow and lose everything. Doctors: have a complaint about vaccines? Speak up and enjoy the ostracism!! Nurses:follow the doctor's orders. Doctors: follow the CDC/FDA/AMA.  Work at the CDC? Get a job with Merck making more $$ after you've spent your time at the CDC recommending all the good vaccines!!!!   Work at Monsanto? Enjoy your new job with the FDA!! Haha, it's a great system of honesty and truth!

 

Please, people, if you don't believe this, that's fine. Why do you criticize those of us who do believe there is terrible corruption at the highest levels of our country? Didn't we just get through a similar historical event? (WW2) I'm still stuck on the fact that the Nazis were in power here in the USA. (look it up. Bush family history is a good place to start.)  Some of us do not believe in the credibility of the agencies responsible for our safety. Simple as that! No elaborate million-man conspiracy, no. Just greedy, bad people who are in charge. Nothing new. Same age-old problems. It would be "new" if there were not corruption and greed at the top!  How completely trusting you are in these folks.

 

 I don't trust them. I am not a bad person just because I don't have faith in these people.

Mirzam, applejuice and kathymuggle like this.

 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
#64 of 80 Old 10-28-2012, 03:02 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,136
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 183 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post

 

 

Researchers: Keep your job, or whistleblow and lose everything. Doctors: have a complaint about vaccines? Speak up and enjoy the ostracism!! Nurses:follow the doctor's orders. Doctors: follow the CDC/FDA/AMA.  Work at the CDC? Get a job with Merck making more $$ after you've spent your time at the CDC recommending all the good vaccines!!!!   Work at Monsanto? Enjoy your new job with the FDA!! Haha, it's a great system of honesty and truth!

 

 

 

I agree with this.  I see it in all fields.  Humans beings really do want to look out for themselves and their families first (that is not entirely a bad thing) however, it can be used as collateral to keep people from making waves.  

rachelsmama likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#65 of 80 Old 10-28-2012, 06:39 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,504
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 83 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post

 

 

I'd really like to know how long is long enough.  For example, the MMR vaccine has been in use in the USA since 1971.  There is more than 40 years of post-market data on it.  And yet, we still debate its safety.  

Err, the Cochrane Review doesn't agree with your assesment:

 

The design and reporting of safety outcomes in MMR vaccine studies, both pre- and post-marketing, are largely inadequate. The evidence of adverse events following immunisation with the MMR vaccine cannot be separated from its role in preventing the target diseases.


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#66 of 80 Old 10-29-2012, 11:17 AM
 
Storm Bride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 27,300
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

 

REALLY?  You cannot honestly call yourself pro-science and be this naive.

 

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0005738

 

"A pooled weighted average of 1.97% (N = 7, 95%CI: 0.86–4.45) of scientists admitted to have fabricated, falsified or modified data or results at least once –a serious form of misconduct by any standard– and up to 33.7% admitted other questionable research practices. In surveys asking about the behaviour of colleagues, admission rates were 14.12% (N = 12, 95% CI: 9.91–19.72) for falsification, and up to 72% for other questionable research practices. Meta-regression showed that self reports surveys, surveys using the words “falsification” or “fabrication”, and mailed surveys yielded lower percentages of misconduct. When these factors were controlled for, misconduct was reported more frequently by medical/pharmacological researchers than others."

 

That's unsurprising, but kind of scary, considering the crucial role science plays in our day to day lives now.

 

I actually have tremendous respect for science, as a tool. What I see happening a lot, though, is that people (not saying anyone on this thread - just something I've noticed a lot online) tend to see "science"  as some sort of unfailing touchstone for truth in all things. It's a process, and it's ongoing, and yesterday's "best science" is today's "wow - we were way off on that". People also tend to conflate technological advancements with science. They're related, but they're not the same thing. I'm deeply disturbed by how often I hear people talk about science and scientists, and the overall attitude is similar to a devoutly religious person citing the Bible or the Ten Commandments. Science isn't supposed to be faith based, and when one treats scientists as the mouth of God, that's what it becomes.

 

Personally, I think the biggest failing of science is that it doesn't take into account the "what we don't know we don't know" factor. I'm not saying it doesn't try to do so. It absolutely does. That's why research just keeps going. There's a reason scientists talk about pushing back the frontiers of knowledge! I just think there's still a whole lot we don't know. And, in the case of vaccines....I think that the human body is amazingly complex and I don't think we know as much as we think we do. (Just as an example, how long has it been since the appendix was considered to be an evolutionary remnant? Then, "oh, look - it does have a function". Also, when did we start to realize that intestinal bacteria play a role in the immune system?) I'm very hesitant to mess with the complexities of the immune system, without a really good reason. For me, chickenpox isn't a good enough reason. Mumps wouldn't be, either (although, without mumps circulating as much, my kids haven't caught wild mumps, so ds2, at least, will be vaxed in the next few years, as I'd like to reduce his odds of getting it post-puberty). Polio? Heck, yeah. And, I have no problem with the fact that I have a pockmark on my left arm, from a smallpox vaccine as a child...


Lisa, lucky mama of Kelly (3/93) ribboncesarean.gif, Emma (5/03) ribboncesarean.gif, Evan (7/05) ribboncesarean.gif, & Jenna (6/09) ribboncesarean.gif
Loving my amazing dh, James & forever missing ribbonpb.gif Aaron Ambrose ribboncesarean.gif (11/07) ribbonpb.gif

Storm Bride is offline  
#67 of 80 Old 10-29-2012, 02:34 PM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post

That's unsurprising, but kind of scary, considering the crucial role science plays in our day to day lives now.

I actually have tremendous respect for science, as a tool. What I see happening a lot, though, is that people (not saying anyone on this thread - just something I've noticed a lot online) tend to see "science"  as some sort of unfailing touchstone for truth in all things. It's a process, and it's ongoing, and yesterday's "best science" is today's "wow - we were way off on that". People also tend to conflate technological advancements with science. They're related, but they're not the same thing. I'm deeply disturbed by how often I hear people talk about science and scientists, and the overall attitude is similar to a devoutly religious person citing the Bible or the Ten Commandments. Science isn't supposed to be faith based, and when one treats scientists as the mouth of God, that's what it becomes.

The 'science' as a religion references occur frequently among all these threads, and I'm not afraid to say it! I am pro science! And too much of what is presented as 'science' doesn't even resemble science! And too many "pro science" people hide behind that label, and blindly follow 'science' leaders.

Direct questions are frequently responded to with condescension. Intimidation is used instead of information. Links to articles *about* studies are provided instead of the actual information. Only once have I seen a study with real numbers provided! I've given you all months to post real information. Articles about information without actual data does not count. Insults don't count. Then there is the infighting, where usually the same four individuals get started having a private repeat of their ongoing fight, ignoring other posters. It's absurd that supposedly informed, intelligent adults keep repeating the same tired arguments over and over.

Now I understand why perodically someone gets fed up, spouts outrage, and declares a decision to leave these threads. I've reached that point today.
rachelsmama likes this.
pek64 is offline  
#68 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 02:20 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,792
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pek64 View Post


The 'science' as a religion references occur frequently among all these threads, and I'm not afraid to say it! I am pro science! And too much of what is presented as 'science' doesn't even resemble science! And too many "pro science" people hide behind that label, and blindly follow 'science' leaders.
 

 

I agree. Although I do think it's OK to listen to experts and consider their opinions (although I wouldn't call that blindly following science leaders). Science is a process, and I will admit to trusting the process (studies, publication, peer review, and systematic understanding of a body of evidence consisting of years of this stuff) to help us understand what's going on in the world and make the best choices for many things including the health of our family. 


Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#69 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 02:24 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,792
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post

 

REALLY?  You cannot honestly call yourself pro-science *** ** **** *****.

 

I can call myself what I like. And maybe I am naive - but I like to think of it as trusting in the humanity of people. Even with the statistics you gave, 98% of the scientists weren't fabricating data. Most weren't involved in questionable practices. And whose to say which are which. Have you never considered that it's the people coming out with the unusual studies demonstrating links between vaccines and serious health issues who could be the ones guilty of misconduct. I know at least one who was found guilty....... Wakefield.

 

 So i've mentioned one of the worst words on a vaccination forum, and this post will probably be followed by lots of defense of Wakefield now, but the bottom line in mainstream science has found him guilty of misconduct, removed his medical license and revocked completely the original study he published about MMR.  

 

Edited to remove a personal insult from the quote by Bokonon.


Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#70 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 04:21 AM - Thread Starter
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)

there are plenty of articles about his exhonoration

 

 

  1. Andy Wakefield exonerated because John Walker-Smith won his ...

    scienceblogs.com/.../03/.../andy-wakefield-exonerated-because-john-...
    Mar 8, 2012 – DrWakefield's statement and subsequent publicity had a .... tries to spin this as some sort of exoneration of its heroAndy Wakefield, it's not.
  2.  

    DrAndrew Wakefield reveals real story behind vaccines, autism ...

    www.naturalnews.com/035513_Andrew_Wakefield_vaccines_autism...
    Apr 10, 2012 – DrAndrew Wakefield: Absolutely, in the High Court in the UK, the long ... and he was completely and utterlyexonerated in the high court.
  3.  

    DrAndrew Wakefield's Co-Author on Controversial Lancet “MMR ...

    Mar 7, 2012 – DrAndrew Wakefield's Co-Author on Controversial Lancet “MMR Paper” Exonerated of All Charges of Professional Misconduct. Prof.
  4.  

    Editorial by Jenny McCarthy: MMR Doctor Exonerated—Who's Guilty ...

    Mar 10, 2012 – Editorial by Jenny McCarthy: MMR DoctorExonerated—Who's Guilty Now? ... Most of all, it's outrageous that DrAndrew Wakefield has been ...
  5.  

    Science-Based Medicine » An antivaccine tale of two legal actions

    Mar 12, 2012 – Then, in February 2010, in rapid successionAndrew Wakefield, the hero .... group Generation Rescue entitled MMR Doctor Exonerated—Who's ...
  6.  

    MMR Doctor Exonerated—Who's Guilty Now? » Generation Rescue ...

    www.generationrescue.org/.../mmr-doctor-exonerated-who-s-guilty-...
    Mar 9, 2012 – ... British judge clearing DrAndrew Wakefield'scolleague and co-author of ... Jenny McCarthy » MMR DoctorExonerated—Who's Guilty Now?
  7.  

    Does Walker-Smith's Exoneration Exonerate Wakefield?

    deanesmay.com/.../does-walker-smiths-exoneration-exonerate-wakefi...
    Mar 10, 2012 – Following the recent exoneration of Dr. Walker-Smith, who along with DrAndrew Wakefield was struck from the medical register and lost his ...
  8.  

    Lancet author exonerated - Vaccination Risk Awareness Network

    Mar 7, 2012 – Lancet author exonerated ... Dr Andrew Wakefield, lead author of the 1998 Lancet study had begun researching a possible connection ...
  9.  

    DrAndrew Wakefield, Prof. John Walker-Smith Exonerated, Patti ...

    www.robertscottbell.com/.../dr-andrew-wakefield-prof-joh-walker-s...
    Mar 9, 2012 – DrAndrew Wakefield, Prof. John Walker-SmithExonerated, Patti Finn Vaccine Mandate Updates, Dr. Frank King Encore, Acne, Itching, Warts, ...
  10.  
     

    FreeThinking, Atheism, and Skepticism: Living with the holes ...

    Aug 2, 2012 – As far as DrAndrew Wakefield goes, the co-author of his research, John Walker-Smith, has been exoneratedof all charges and his medical ...
  11. Andy Wakefield exonerated because John Walker-Smith won his ...

    scienceblogs.com/.../03/.../andy-wakefield-exonerated-because-john-...
    Mar 8, 2012 – DrWakefield's statement and subsequent publicity had a .... tries to spin this as some sort of exoneration of its heroAndy Wakefield, it's not.
  12.  

    DrAndrew Wakefield reveals real story behind vaccines, autism ...

    www.naturalnews.com/035513_Andrew_Wakefield_vaccines_autism...
    Apr 10, 2012 – DrAndrew Wakefield: Absolutely, in the High Court in the UK, the long ... and he was completely and utterlyexonerated in the high court.
  13.  

    DrAndrew Wakefield's Co-Author on Controversial Lancet “MMR ...

    Mar 7, 2012 – DrAndrew Wakefield's Co-Author on Controversial Lancet “MMR Paper” Exonerated of All Charges of Professional Misconduct. Prof.
  14.  

    Editorial by Jenny McCarthy: MMR Doctor Exonerated—Who's Guilty ...

    Mar 10, 2012 – Editorial by Jenny McCarthy: MMR DoctorExonerated—Who's Guilty Now? ... Most of all, it's outrageous that DrAndrew Wakefield has been ...
  15.  

    Science-Based Medicine » An antivaccine tale of two legal actions

    Mar 12, 2012 – Then, in February 2010, in rapid successionAndrew Wakefield, the hero .... group Generation Rescue entitled MMR Doctor Exonerated—Who's ...
  16.  

    MMR Doctor Exonerated—Who's Guilty Now? » Generation Rescue ...

    www.generationrescue.org/.../mmr-doctor-exonerated-who-s-guilty-...
    Mar 9, 2012 – ... British judge clearing DrAndrew Wakefield'scolleague and co-author of ... Jenny McCarthy » MMR DoctorExonerated—Who's Guilty Now?
  17.  

    Does Walker-Smith's Exoneration Exonerate Wakefield?

    deanesmay.com/.../does-walker-smiths-exoneration-exonerate-wakefi...
    Mar 10, 2012 – Following the recent exoneration of Dr. Walker-Smith, who along with DrAndrew Wakefield was struck from the medical register and lost his ...
  18.  

    Lancet author exonerated - Vaccination Risk Awareness Network

    Mar 7, 2012 – Lancet author exonerated ... Dr Andrew Wakefield, lead author of the 1998 Lancet study had begun researching a possible connection ...
  19.  

    DrAndrew Wakefield, Prof. John Walker-Smith Exonerated, Patti ...

    www.robertscottbell.com/.../dr-andrew-wakefield-prof-joh-walker-s...
    Mar 9, 2012 – DrAndrew Wakefield, Prof. John Walker-SmithExonerated, Patti Finn Vaccine Mandate Updates, Dr. Frank King Encore, Acne, Itching, Warts, ...
  20.  
     

    FreeThinking, Atheism, and Skepticism: Living with the holes ...

    Aug 2, 2012 – As far as DrAndrew Wakefield goes, the co-author of his research, John Walker-Smith, has been exoneratedof all charges and his medical ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

 

I can call myself what I like. And maybe I am naive - but I like to think of it as trusting in the humanity of people. Even with the statistics you gave, 98% of the scientists weren't fabricating data. Most weren't involved in questionable practices. And whose to say which are which. Have you never considered that it's the people coming out with the unusual studies demonstrating links between vaccines and serious health issues who could be the ones guilty of misconduct. I know at least one who was found guilty....... Wakefield.

 

 So i've mentioned one of the worst words on a vaccination forum, and this post will probably be followed by lots of defense of Wakefield now, but the bottom line in mainstream science has found him guilty of misconduct, removed his medical license and revocked completely the original study he published about MMR.  

emmy526 is offline  
#71 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 04:43 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,792
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)

Interesting article with discussion relevant to trust in the scientific process and the expertise of scientists: 

 

http://scienceofmom.com/2012/01/11/on-parenting-science-and-trust-and-choosing-to-vaccinate/

 

An exerpt: 

 

 

 

Quote:
What would be naïve is for me to think that I could become an expert on vaccinations.  It would be naïve for me to think that I could understand the vaccine field better than the committees of scientists and doctors who have made this their life’s work. I know how much work it took me to become an expert on one or two corners of nutrition and fetal physiology. It took thousands of hours of reading textbooks and journal articles, sitting in lectures, attending conferences, and struggling at the lab bench before I started to feel even a little bit comfortable calling myself an expert in any field. So I think it is naïve for a parent to think that she can become an expert on vaccines by spending some time on the Internet reading questionable sources, almost all of which have some agenda. I accept that I can’t know everything, and I have enough faith in humanity that I trust others who know more than me.

Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#72 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 04:51 AM - Thread Starter
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)

It IS a bit ignorant for a parent to think they can just pull up any article willy nilly and think they are automatically an expert.   ALL parents i know who do not vax,  did not pull some article offa google in haste to make their decision.    Some of us actually witnessed the damage being done to our children, and it doesn't matter  how many experts studied this or that...THEY didn't study my baby after a reaction, and what's worse, the dr refused to admit the reaction.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Interesting article with discussion relevant to trust in the scientific process and the expertise of scientists: 

 

http://scienceofmom.com/2012/01/11/on-parenting-science-and-trust-and-choosing-to-vaccinate/

 

An exerpt: 

Quote:

What would be naïve is for me to think that I could become an expert on vaccinations.  It would be naïve for me to think that I could understand the vaccine field better than the committees of scientists and doctors who have made this their life’s work. I know how much work it took me to become an expert on one or two corners of nutrition and fetal physiology. It took thousands of hours of reading textbooks and journal articles, sitting in lectures, attending conferences, and struggling at the lab bench before I started to feel even a little bit comfortable calling myself an expert in any field. So I think it is naïve for a parent to think that she can become an expert on vaccines by spending some time on the Internet reading questionable sources, almost all of which have some agenda. I accept that I can’t know everything, and I have enough faith in humanity that I trust others who know more than me.

 

 

emmy526 is offline  
#73 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 04:56 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,792
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

there are plenty of articles about his exhonoration

 

 

 

Probably should have read some of those before posting a massive copy of a Google search. 

 

These two: 

 

 

 

Quote:

 

Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

 

 

 

are actually about how his supposed exoneration is a load of nonesense..... 


Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#74 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 05:00 AM - Thread Starter
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,668
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)

that's why i posted a bunch of articles...so people could make their own conclusions...that way, people could compare articles and decipher fact from fiction for themselves ...its just an example of the enormous amount of info out there on him, good and bad info

Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

 

Probably should have read some of those before posting a massive copy of a Google search. 

 

These two: 

 

 

 

 

are actually about how his supposed exoneration is a load of nonesense..... 

kathymuggle likes this.
emmy526 is offline  
#75 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 05:06 AM
 
Mosaic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: La vida loca
Posts: 4,005
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Discussing individuals' naivety is personally targeted and NOT focusing on the issue, and that is against our forum guidelines, Bokonon and others. Edit your posts and get back on topic.

Mi vida loca: full-time WOHM, frugalista, foodie wannabe, 10+ years of TCOYF 

 

R-E-S-P-E-C-T spells BRAND NEW User Agreement!!

Mosaic is offline  
#76 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 05:07 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,792
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)

Mosaic - does this include me editing bits where I quote them as calling me naive? Sorry I'm not sure of the rules there....


Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#77 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 05:55 AM
 
Mosaic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: La vida loca
Posts: 4,005
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Mosaic - does this include me editing bits where I quote them as calling me naive? Sorry I'm not sure of the rules there....
If you could, that would be helpful. Thanks!

Mi vida loca: full-time WOHM, frugalista, foodie wannabe, 10+ years of TCOYF 

 

R-E-S-P-E-C-T spells BRAND NEW User Agreement!!

Mosaic is offline  
#78 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 06:36 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,136
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 183 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

 

There are just too many players in medicine, epidemiology, pharmacology to hide such things on the scale you suggest. It cannot be possible. These people are real people, just like you and me, and most of them have devoted their lives to trying to either keep people healthy or search for cures from diseases. So suggesting they are all colluding to hide major side effects which are seriously injuring major numbers of people from over 40 years of MMR is in my opinion frankly ridiculous, and also rather offensive. 

I know you did not say this, but it is a jumping off thought for the following, so bear with me:

 

It does not have to be:

 

a)  you accept that scientist are the experts and always listen to their advice

b)  you think everyone is colluding to hide major side effects.

 

The choice does not have to be sheeple or conspiracy theorist.  There can be a third - informed decisions.  One can be pro, non or sel/del and have come to an informed decision.  One can make a poorly informed choice - but it is often very difficult on the internet to figure out whether or not someone made a poorly informed choice.   It really isn't ours to judge anyways. It is the height of arrogance for a non-vaxxer or pro-vaxxer to assume the other is making a poorly informed choice simply because they came to a different conclusion than you.

rachelsmama, BeckyBird and Bokonon like this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is online now  
#79 of 80 Old 10-30-2012, 12:30 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,212
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Have you never considered that it's the people coming out with the unusual studies demonstrating links between vaccines and serious health issues who could be the ones guilty of misconduct. I know at least one who was found guilty....... Wakefield.

 So i've mentioned one of the worst words on a vaccination forum, and this post will probably be followed by lots of defense of Wakefield now, but the bottom line in mainstream science has found him guilty of misconduct, removed his medical license and revocked completely the original study he published about MMR.  


A few months ago, you might have named Dr. Walker-Smith as one whom "mainstream science has found him guilty of misconduct, removed his medical license and revocked completely the original study he published about MMR."

Except the judgment against him was quashed, and his medical license reinstated. According to The Guardian, "The judge said the GMC fitness to practise panel's conclusion that Walker-Smith was guilty of serious professional misconduct was flawed in two respects. There had been "inadequate and superficial reasoning and, in a number of instances, a wrong conclusion."

And isn't it funny that we don't hear a word from you on the misconduct or Poul Thorsen (indicted for embezzling $2M of autism research funds, or of the whistleblower lawsuit brought against by Merck's own virologists, on Merck's coverup of dishonesty and unethical conduct regarding the MMR vaccine?

Obviously, mainstream science's ability to determine who is or is not guilty of misconduct, is severely compromised.
Mirzam, emmy526 and BeckyBird like this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#80 of 80 Old 10-31-2012, 01:17 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,933
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 52 Post(s)

This documentary is free to watch for a limited time.... heartbeat.gifhttp://geneticroulettemovie.com/  heartbeat.gif

 

Genetic Roulette, covering the dangers of GMOs in our food supply. Yes, this is truly a current-day conspiracy, and I wonder how many of you can disagree with that. Either watch the video or study GMOs for an hour, and you'll quickly see how the biotech companies and the government are working together---at the expense of humans, animals, and plants. The almighty dollar trumps health, once again, as usual.

 

This GMO issue clearly shows how you can have powerful agencies that set the standards for all the people to follow. The problem is at the top, with the FDA and the companies (mostly Monsanto) working together. Biotech industries fund universities, which then promote pro-GMO policies. Professors are expected to promote GMOs, and it's a trickle-down effect.

 

Why does this belong in the Vaccination forum? Well, it expands on my earlier post about corruption, and how the problem is usually at the top. I think most parents here at MDC believe in the importance of good nutrition, so GMO food is something we all need to worry about. How do GMOs relate to vaccines? There are GMO ingredients in vaccines, so could they be contributing to side effects? This is an area where more research is needed, and unfortunately "GMO dissenters" are often fired!  Example: Arpad Pusztai. Look him up please (I am running out of time, sorry)

http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_18101.cfm

 

So, in addition to the suspicion we have of toxic adjuvants in vaccines, add GMOs to the list. More research is needed. Also, the documentary Genetic Roulette is a must watch for everyone who eats food (LOL!)  Bonus for me, it also highlights the corruption and conspiracy between the FDA and Monsanto, and how there is a trickle-down effect. Again, this is not a million-man conspiracy, but a very real, dangerous reality. So many similarities between GMO science and Vaccine science, in my opinion.

 

Please watch the movie while it's free!

basilico and kathymuggle like this.

 
 
 "Medical propaganda ops are, in the long run, the most dangerous. They appear to be neutral. They wave no political banners. They claim to be science. For these reasons, they can accomplish the goals of overt fascism without arousing suspicion.” — Jon Rappoport
 
 
 
beckybird is online now  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off