Finding the Truth about Vaccinations

11 thoughts on “Finding the Truth about Vaccinations”

1. Vaccines are claimed to have eradicated polio and small pox etc. The interesting thing is during that period those diseases were declining before the advent of vaccines and declined in non vaccinated countries at the same or greater rates then vaccinated countries. Data going back to the beginning of vaccination indicates there is no evidence that vaccines work period but in fact vaccines were often the cause of the disease they claimed to protect against.

   I seem to recall a law suite a while back where the CDC or some agency finally admitted there was a link between vaccines and autism. I believe crib deaths have been linked to vaccines also.

   Vaccines are the pop culture of modern medicine they have been accepted as valid with no scientific evidence to back them up.

   A few links to consider.

   http://www.heilkunst.com/drugs10.html

   http://www.vernoncoleman.com/vaccines.htm

   http://www.naturalnews.com/029641_vaccines_junk_science.html

   We vaccinated our children when we didn’t know any better but I would never recommend vaccines to anyone and in fact I would try to talk them out of it,. It is poison and the drug companies make billions peddling it with the vaccine protection myth and politicians have been threatening to make vaccines mandatory as the evidence becomes more available that they are not only worthless but dangerous. That’s what politicians do they ensure markets for the politically connected for otherwise worthless and dangerous products that few would buy without being forced.

   Reply

2. The father makes the case that not only is this far from the only study INDICATING a possible link, the “flawed” wakefield study does not say there IS a link, just that of the 12 autistic children studied, all were suffering from a new bowel disease and that parents of 8 of the children had noted developmental regression after receiving the MMR vaccine (period).

   Essentially he was making the case for more research to be done and that MMR only accounts for a small fraction of the total immunizations children routinely receive. He remained emotionally controlled and gracious despite badgering by the male reporter.

   The media gives the impression that entire goal of the study was to show a causal link between the MMR vaccine and autism and appears to be TRYING to make the case that because a study CREDITED with starting the vaccine-autism link MAY have been flawed this MUST mean there IS no possible link. A kind of combined strawman/Ad Hominem attack.

   The male reporter was clearly emotionally-overwrought , though I doubt he was consciously trying to deceive/lying as some have said. More likely IMO, is that he believes in the efficacy of immunization and is outraged that many people will continue to be convinced by such “nut cases” into refusing to immunize their innnocent children.

   The Doc may have perpetuated, inadvertantly or not, a misunderstanding of the term “herd immunity”. As I understand it, herd immunity does not help protect a general population from getting a contagious disease – but only those that are NOT immunized. The concept of herd immunity centers around ENTIRELY wiping out a disease so that those folks that don’t develop immunity, naturally or due to vaccination, just never get exposed to it period.

   The idea is that if the virus is unable to find new hosts then it cannot propagate itself and so eventually it dies out. But, in order to work, every last trace of the virus ON EARTH must be eradicated, I think the likelyhood of that is very slim, so what’s the point? Every person is still going to have to be immunized forever.

   But my point was, contrary to what the Doc indicated, one person refusing to get vaccinated standing in a roomful of folks that have, does not increase their chances of getting it – assuming their vaccinations WORKED and they thus developed immunity (or had it naturally).

   The doc himself supported the case for ongoing research and carefully weighing the evidence FOR ONESELF – genetics may pre-dispose some people towards autism and if they come into environmental contact with a “trigger” that turns on/off those related genes, then they may develop autism.

   For me the evidence points toward an environmental trigger, a primary reason being that, assuming that most children that are eventually diagosed with autism develop normally and then at some arbitrary point begin to regress and “lose” developmental milestones, this indicates to me that they must have the requisites for normal function initially but something triggers the decline.

   Based soley on this one video, I found the father’s argument – that there may be some link between immunization and autism – the more compelling.

   Reply

3. Vaccines are claimed to have eradicated polio and small pox etc. The interesting thing is during that period those diseases were declining before the advent of vaccines and declined in non vaccinated countries at the same or greater rates then vaccinated countries. Data going back to the beginning of vaccination indicates there is no evidence that vaccines work period but in fact vaccines were often the cause of the disease they claimed to protect against.

   I seem to recall a law suite a while back where the CDC or some agency finally admitted there was a link between vaccines and autism. I believe crib deaths have been linked to vaccines also.

   Vaccines are the pop culture of modern medicine they have been accepted as valid with no scientific evidence to back them up.

   A few links to consider.

   http://www.heilkunst.com/drugs10.html

   http://www.vernoncoleman.com/vaccines.htm

   http://www.naturalnews.com/029641_vaccines_junk_science.html

   We vaccinated our children when we didn’t know any better but I would never recommend vaccines to anyone and in fact I would try to talk them out of it,. It is poison and the drug companies make billions peddling it with the vaccine protection myth and politicians have been threatening to make vaccines mandatory as the evidence becomes more available that they are not only worthless but dangerous. That’s what politicians do they ensure markets for the politically connected for otherwise worthless and dangerous products that few would buy without being forced.

   Reply

4. Larry Woods says,

   I looked at Wikipedia demographics for America. It appears we have about 50 million children currently 12 years or younger. This is the prime group to receive vaccinations. The video news story reported that about 80% of these children get all 36 vaccines. I also looked up and averaged cost of 36 typical vaccines doses. It appears the CDC (Center for Disease Control – big pharma/government insiders) pays around $100 for these 36 doses (various types – I calculated a rough average) while the private sector pays around $200 for the same. If we go with the lower number to simplify our discussion but to still gain a feeling for scale, we see that $100 times 50 million children times 80% who get all the vaccines reveals approximately a 4 billion dollar ($4,000,000,000) market every 12 years or a $333 million dollar annual market in America alone. Worldwide it must be over a billion dollars annual. Keep in mind that vaccines are only one part of the unbelievably huge and hugely profitable worldwide pharma market.

   The news reporters made a big deal that the researcher had received payments from some law firm. They never identified the law firm nor why they thought the law firm wanted to use the doctor’s findings in the future for law suits against pharmaceutical companies. But the reporters accepted this as a basic premise. Could it be that the doctor testified in court on several occasions as an expert witness well AFTER he completed his mini study? If so, why would this count as a conflict of interest? And if money would absolutely corrupt the researcher, then what about the billion dollars per year that the drug companies stand to loose if vaccines get proven useless or maybe even harmful? Could that motivate them to do a hit piece on the doctor who has been exposing them? Follow the money; follow the motive.

   I admit to prejudice. I learned some patterns of misbehavior that make me suspicious any time we discuss large pharmaceutical companies or other huge companies. I do not trust the drug companies. Big companies love to get government mandates that lock in their products. For example, DuPont controlled the patent on refrigerant gas. A couple years before their patent wore out they created another different gas very similar to Freon (Chlorofluorocarbon – CFC) but different enough to get them a new patent. [Incidentally, this new gas is not as efficient as Freon and so it costs consumers vast amounts of extra heating and air conditioning dollars every year.] Then they became the leading exponent to outlaw their own Freon because it “depletes the ozone layer”. So now Freon is outlawed and we all must purchase the new Dupont patent product which they control exclusively (as they had controlled Freon) until this new patent runs out. Now there is an example of manipulating the system to lock in a monopoly. The whole scare about CFCs compromising the “ozone layer” was cooked up by DuPont to lock in their worldwide ubiquitous Freon patents which bring them billions of dollars. Did they have motivation? Did they have huge resources to help them sound convincing presenting their false research which neatly locks them into a whole nuther round of government monopoly for this product? Use government mandate to lock in your monopoly! Do they care that now millions of hoodwinked hippie tree-huggers waste untold time and money crusading about the “ozone layer”? That is what drug companies and other large companies do all the time.

   Another more general example: Drug companies discover some plant that creates a healing compound. They immediately go to work creating a synthetic copy of it that is slightly different just enough to net them a patent – they cannot patent a natural organic compound. Then they announce their big discovery creating this healing agent which, due to their patent, they exclusively control. You could have simply eaten the grapefruit or whatever fruit the compound naturally comes from but there are no million dollar studies proving that. Your doctor cannot legally work with the “unproven” natural food source. So he or she recommends the big drug company patented drug. But it has side effects which we rarely ever find in nature. So millions of people pay for a $100 doctor visit and then pay $60 per month for this patented medication and then suffer a multitude of “side effects” when they could have merely eaten guava or some cheap natural source which the drug companies never reveal. This whole selfish scenario just leaves me cold. I hate this much selfishness and deception piled up so high. I hate this.

   I once read a wonderful and simple book about the history of DMSO that reveals much of this selfish syndrome involving the FDA and their motivation to protect their bosses: big pharma. Let me give you one more example of the FDA watching out for their bosses who are the really big players. One of my sons-in-law is an advance computer programmer. Until about six months ago he worked on a project using computers to interpret ultrasound images searching for breast cancer and other breast disease. Yes, he looks at tits for a living – but only through ultrasound. Yet I always kidded him about that mystic… Their product was viable years ago but the FDA would not allow them to market this less invasive and more accurate diagnosis system. It could have saved thousands of lives by now. My cynical theory is that Merck or some other big pharma company owned by them will swoop in and purchase the technology, now that the company went tits up because they could not operate forever without finally actually selling some product. Within a year Merck will be the exclusive worldwide source for this life saving innovation. And the company who actually developed it gets a pittance far less than their investors put in. And the programmers, like David, who worked on it for five years or so get nothing from their now defunct stock options. I confess, I have grown very cynical over the years. My hat is off to this brave Dad who made excellent points and who answered the barbed accusations with grace and knowledge.

   So my cynical reaction to this “news” hit piece on the doctor who tried to alert people to some dangers of vaccines is that big pharma paid the news organization to go after this story and spoon fed them the big pharma point of view and the big pharma “facts”. I hate the big pharma big selfishness and their willingness to sacrifice the good health of thousand so they can enjoy their huge government enforced monopoly at our expense. Do I sound cynical? Quite.

   Your brother,
   Larry Woods

   Reply

   1. Larry you may be cynical which I share but you gave me a good laugh with these to lines below. Thanks.

      “Until about six months ago he worked on a project using computers to interpret ultrasound images searching for breast cancer and other breast disease.” Yes, he looks at tits for a living” – but only through ultrasound. Yet I always kidded him about that mystic…”

      “My cynical theory is that Merck or some other big pharma company owned by them will swoop in and purchase the technology, now that the company “went tits up because they could not operate forever without finally actually selling some product”

      Reply

5. My G-pa got a flu shot back in 1992 and right after the shot he got so sick he was in the hospital for 8 months and then died. The Drs have suspected it was the flu shot.
   It had the exact same virus in it that killed him. The virus caused Guillain-Barre syndrome which killed him!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

   Reply

6. I researched and then pondered this subject when my daughter was a toddler and understood it to be an important decision-process for every parent. I read as mush as I could from both sides and talked to other parents who had already made the decision on vaccination pro or con. I also relied on my own intuitive ability as the final arbitrator for my decision. I was surprised that I came to the decision to proceed with vaccinations for my daughter based on a sound judgment and realization that the benefits of vaccination outweighed the negatives or risks.

   I understand the introduction of the minute amounts of mercury in the vaccinations have been discontinue for all vaccine formulations except for the fu vaccine which is not recommended for children under 6 months old. Even so there is still a disproportionate pandemic increase in autism without this attribute in the mix. There must be, therefore, another cause.

   Me sense on the ‘cause’ is tht is is associated with an anomaly that is occurring in the etheric/astral body and then affecting the mental body that is developing in the child. There is a possible ‘tearing’ or trauma to the emotional body that occurs wit the child and the mental body is not yet anchored and this affects its development. It is the same affect in adult when he experiences extreme stress and some people have breakdown where those who have a stronger astral body development then are not as affected by stress.
   The treatments fro autism and its recovery are very similar to stress-related illnesses affecting the neurological systems. Until the medical communities and people in general begin to understand the multiple sheaths or bodes that make up the human physical composition then the causes of some auto-immune diseases and neurological diseases will not be understood. Until the invention of the microscope, then the scientists did not understand the cause of viral and bacterial disease and today without the proper instruments to study the multiple sheaths then the cause of some disease cannot be discerned.

   The doctor presenting the case for no association of vaccines and autism seemed clear and concise as did the commentators whereas the emotional parent seemed confused and disoriented and unable to clearly present his case.

   Reply

7. Here is a post from Sharón
   I am always suspect when the “experts” declare something to be true
   with no room for doubt or error as the doctor did in the first half of
   this interview. I am also suspect when the interviewer suddenly
   stutters when making a declaration as non-stutters who basically tell
   the truth will stutter when attempting to produce a lie per the
   television show “Lie to Me”. The male interviewer stuttered
   tremendously when he stated that there were no other studies done that
   connected these two items, vaccinations and autism. Notice that the
   doctor only mentioned the study of 12 children and the female
   interviewer kept stressing that 12 wasn’t enough to have a valid
   study. Yet the parent stated that he had spoken with over 1000 parents
   and there was a connection. Also the parent stated facts and did his
   best to not be emotional while the interviewers kept trying to make
   this an emotional issue by the constant repetition of conveying their
   sympathy. The interviewers did their best to declare that the parent
   must be feeling this way due to his son having autism versus soley
   commenting on the facts that the parent was presenting. The parent
   stated that the study that could prove this link, or disprove it
   hasn’t been done while simultaneously making a connection between
   mercury and autism. The mercury poisoning that is used in vacinations
   to prolong the vaccinations shelf life was alluded to when the parent
   stated that multiple vaccinations were given at the same time and it
   would be important to study the effects of mercury not just the MMR
   vaccination. I believe mercury has a strong influence on causing
   autism in children and am curious if a heavy detox program, or some
   other way of eliminating mercury from the body would aid people who
   have been diagnosed with autism.
   Sharón

   Reply

8. I cannot access the video just yet. However, Jesus did say that one man’s poison is another man’s cure. So the truth lies probably in a person’s karma or their parent’s karma and a person’s etheric body and how each one of us is affected by particular herbs or drugs throughout our lifetimes. Synthetic drugs or even herbs affect each person differently. Some people smoke cigarettes and do not die early from them whilst other people never smoke and can die of lung cancer, so until I
   view the video and see what they say, and judge the evidence then my opinion is probably not that useful.

   Ruth

   Reply

   1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYelVlA7kDw&feature=related

      Perhaps the incoming Aquarius energies are impacting upon the mental body, hence we see some more babies developing autism etc due to the impact of these energies upon their etheric bodies. Autism does not necessarily equate to non intelligence, it is just a conflict between the emotional body and the mental body. If autism is caused by vaccinations, then why does it only affect some souls and not others? Many more people take prescription drugs daily and many use illegal drugs these days, so this could impact upon a baby’s etheric body as well before they are born.

      Ruth

      Reply

9. The scientist who are against the vaccine shots seem to have a better argument, but that could be false logic as the other person said that there have been studies on vaccine shots that link the two.

   He also, said that one must compare children who never had a vaccine shot.

   I copied this form another site:

   Children Who Are Not Vaccinated Never Get Autism! Or not as often.

   http://healthfreedoms.org/2009/10/23/children-who-are-not-vaccinated-never-get-autism/
   It’s a far piece from the horse-and-buggies of Lancaster County, Pa., to the cars and freeways of Cook County, Ill. But thousands of children cared for by Homefirst Health Services in metropolitan Chicago have at least two things in common with thousands of Amish children in rural Lancaster: They have never been vaccinated. And they don’t have autism.

   “We have a fairly large practice. We have about 30,000 or 35,000 children that we’ve taken care of over the years, and I don’t think we have a single case of autism in children delivered by us who never received vaccines,” said Dr. Mayer Eisenstein, Homefirst’s medical director who founded the practice in 1973. Homefirst doctors have delivered more than 15,000 babies at home, and thousands of them have never been vaccinated.

   The few autistic children Homefirst sees were vaccinated before their families became patients, Eisenstein said. “I can think of two or three autistic children who we’ve delivered their mother’s next baby, and we aren’t really totally taking care of that child — they have special care needs. But they bring the younger children to us. I don’t have a single case that I can think of that wasn’t vaccinated.”

   The autism rate in Illinois public schools is 38 per 10,000, according to state Education Department data; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention puts the national rate of autism spectrum disorders at 1 in 166 — 60 per 10,000.

   Below is a scintific study that links autism ro the vaccine shots.

   http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/171457.php

   I could be wrong, but I think there may be a link to autism or vaccine shots. If I am wrong, then I was dump by false logic. Also, there are lot of testimonials that claim that their kids got it right after the shot.

   Reply