cdc pushes vaccinations for all, no exceptions

You're doing a great job of not gaining respect. And if you don't care about that, see how far it gets you around here.
You start out with hostility condescension and criticizing another's religious convictions.
Good going. Welcome to the community.

Show that you're not a troll. Add to the information here.

BTW, you haven't cited any references here either. Where are your references to the effectiveness of vaccines and mercury content etc. !!?!?
Quote peer reviewed journals for crying out loud!!!

That or go away. Either is fine with the rest of us.

PS. You're right about my spelling. Glad you edited your post AFTER the fact to correct yours. (another troll move).

 

You have your shots. What are you worried about?

"herd" great choice of words. Says something about the mentality of this person.

This attitude is exactly why we're survivalists.

 

Where did I state that? I stated that it enters by two completely different mechanisms. One of which elicits a vastly different response than, say, a typical IgA response. But again, this isn't the point of the thread.

So you're willing to completely strip me of my rights to save your own butt? How virtuous of you. No really, way to stand up for the rights of your fellow man.

I think you're confusing the actual right to make a choice with the actual choice that is made.

Look, all I'm saying is "Don't strong arm me. I'll make my own choice". If you don't like that choice, too bad. But you know what? I don't walk out in public when I'm sick.. do you? again, a personal choice, and the right one, IMO..

 

What gains respect

Kissing butt and stepping along with the crowd is what gains respect here?

Make no mistake, I've criticized no one's religious beliefs. That is another conversation entirely anyone is welcome to engage me with in another thread if you like.

I've made no claim if the effectiveness of any vaccine beyond the anecdotal comment of my own experience with H1N1 vaccine, which is not evidence. Where did I look up the mercury content of vaccines and seafoods? Sure. Here you go.

You can find the mercury levels of various seafoods at the FDA here.

There are tons more. But, I think you know that.

Now, about that Guillain–Barré cluster you were telling us about?

 

For the record, I agree. I don't believe you have.

Additionally, there are vaccines without thimerisol and squalene. If anything, I would take those. But the ones offered in my area, to my knowledge, were contaminated with those chemicals. You're also supposed to take a total of 1mL in two separate visits. I just don't have any other way to say it. Direct injection into the blood stream of a particularly, VERY toxic and poisonous chemical, which is known to be a neuro-inflammatory is not my idea of "help".

If you have other pathogens in your body that are latent, this stuff can trigger it. Quite honestly, I forget the list of viruses and other chemicals that attach themselves to specific tissues etc, but they can sit dormant and then get triggered and some people have flat out died from that kind of thing. Now, you know that "the herd" is not as isolated as it was and that we've mostly all come into contact with some of these pathogens. Then, heaven forbid, the vaccines get contaminated with something else: flash back to 2002 where Medeva had contaminated vaccines that contained prions that caused Mad Cow.. Is it really worth it? not to me, but that's my opinion.. I have just become less trustworthy of the gov'ts ability to ensure that we'll not be harmed or killed by their ineptitude.

no position other than to note that all vaccine manufacturers warn against vaccination when GB has occurred in a 6-8 week time span between the last vaccination.

 

The trouble with choice

I wonder how you weigh this against my boys' right to not catch some disfiguring, debilitating, completely preventable, disease because your kids brought it to school. Can you convince us all you'd fight for my right to endanger your children if the roles were reversed?

I'm thinking you haven't looked into the field of epidemiology very deeply. Or maybe you're not thinking about the incubation period of most diseases. You know, where you are contagious, but not displaying symptoms. By the time you feel sick, it's too late. You've already spread the pathogen. A pathogen wouldn't be very successful if it were any other way, would it?

This is what would serve you well: The realization that your choices in this topic affect others. That very fact makes them not entirely your choice to make. Surely this can't be a foreign idea. You can choose to drink, you can choose to drive. You may not choose to do them together, because of the danger to others. Same concept.

If it were, in fact, possible for you to eliminate the risk you would pose to society by "choosing" to become incubators for diseases, we wouldn't be having this conversation. But, the fact is you cannot eliminate that risk to others.

 

No but participating and adding value does. After 2 or three posts, you started in with criticism and an obnoxious tone.

"Why would anyone risk their own lives, or worse, the lives of their children, from something that can be so easily prevented? Are there people who are really willing to sacrifice the lives of their children for religious beliefs?

My very real children are worth far more to me than that."

That's not mocking religious beliefs?
I don't know. Maybe you have no social graces and this is how you enter an established conversation among friends. I have no idea what is going through your mind, but Tango3 said it best to another newbie who started down a similar path. The "corner tavern" analogy fits.

http://www.survivalmonkey.com/forum/general-discussion/18463-gulf-coast-evacuation-6.html#post125627

No, but you stated you had yourself and your children vaccinated. Evidently before you even heard of Guillain-Barre syndrome. That renders all of your arguments for research moot. You apparently didn't research the subject too thoroughly yourself.

And quoting FDA data to support government promoted vaccinations - Well, I think you just walked into a Metallica concert wearing disco pants

 

You have choices there too, as do I. You know it and I know it. You can live in fear of being infected or you can choose to live without fear mongering from the government. It's your choice and no one is making you make it. Don't force it on me either.

You can still be contagious after the symptoms appear. I'm aware of prodromal phases, thank you. It's not like I don't try to prevent myself from getting sick. But again, I CHOOSE how.. not you and not the government. This is the whole point.

See above.

 

dodging

You're dodging my question entirely. I'm not in fear of infection, I've done something concrete about it. The point I made is to say that I don't think your belief in freedom of choice would be so righteous if it were your kids that come home with some disease that my unprotected kids gave them. I think you're stumping for freedom of choice and liberty, until it affects you personally.

Again, you missed my point entirely. My point is that you are contagious before symptoms appear. Spreading the contagion to others, making your choice to not immunize effectively their "choice" also. Do you really not see this? What gives anyone the right to spread disease when we know how to prevent it? Did you totally miss the analogy I gave you about drink driving? Are you ready to fight for my freedom of choice to get loaded and mow down your family with a car? Or does absolute freedom of choice only apply to you?

There are a couple things going on here. One is the conversation about freedom of choice, the other is about the science of immunology and epidemiology. As to the first, it seems you don't think that freedom of choice is a spectrum, which it most certainly is. You also seem to think freedom of choice trumps responsibility to the society in which you live.

As for the science, in quite a few places, I've been told how I am the one who's afraid of something. Does it not occur to anyone that perhaps your fear of immunizations is misguided? Do you really think the government is so competent that it can mastermind such a successful conspiracy of poisoning the entire population to the benefit of the scary "big pharma"?

 

on the contrary. I am not dodging it one bit. I'm also not in fear of infection. I can deal with it naturally now and all it took was a 2 days of not feeling well. You do realize that even though you're vaccinated that can still be contagious given poor timing? i.e. you catch it and then you get vaccinated? you also realize that people can GET sick FROM the vaccination? so what gives you the right to inject yourself KNOWINGLY, with the greater potential of actually getting sick "on purpose" and then transmitting it? hmm..

see above.

what kind of horse crap is this? straw man.. total straw man.

not correct at all.. not even close.. you're so far out in left field it's not even funny. You see, when you take away my choice to freely say "hey, no problem.. I'll stay home instead of get vaccinated"... "Sure.. I can see that it's probably for the best", then you make me a slave. When you remove choice, you remove humanity. I'm not willing to let that happen. Of course, as I've mentioned NUMEROUS times already.. GIVEN the choice, I would choose a vaccine with NO adjuvants and I would glady sit home for a few days. But again.. don't think for a minute that you can force me to make this decision. I will make it on my accord, or I will simply fight back. Can't YOU understand THAT?

heheh.. actually, I think they're rather TOO incompetent and I don't bite on those population reduction, big pharma, conspiracies. See, I don't think they really care either way. I'm an advocate for most things science but if I feel something is dangerous.. I vote no. My fear of immunization is something you've manufactured. I'm not afraid of immunization. I'm extremely concerned about the competency of the gov'ts ability to manage it and extremely concerned about the LACK of proper testing that the FDA has been known for. I am not willing to say "OHHH, The FDA said it was ok.. so it MUST be ok".. I need look no further than the aspartame chemical which has screwed up my big toes. How do I know this? scientific trial and error and a crap load of pain. Google "Gout, Toes, Aspartame" and have a read. The gov't is filled with incompetency and until they can prove otherwise.. I'm not trusting them at all.. done.. forget it. In which case, they can take their vaccines and stick it. I'd RATHER get sick and make my choice. If it kills me, at least I didn't die a slave.

 

Well, allow me to retort.

Do you infer that it is? If so, how is that my problem? My children are not an abstraction, but are concrete, and very real. Regardless, one's beliefs aren't a protected entity here, save for the fact that if I were to get into that with you in this thread, it would be off-topic and would rightly be seen as inflammatory.

Read your link. Of note is how the author derided the target by telling the new member how he was free not to read the thread. That cuts both ways as well, if you wish to bring it up. You are free not to read mine. Unless this is to become a closed forum, which is up to the management.

Are you indignant that I just showed up here in your conversation among friends with a few facts that illustrate the absurdity of your assertions? Is the position you've taken unable to withstand scrutiny?

Yes, of course. Again, do you honestly think the government has the competence to coordinate the research results of the NIH, FDA, CDC, USDA in such a concerted effort? Let alone to get so many people in government to agree to do so? I've heard this before of conspiracy theories. It's their single biggest fault.

You bring up a valid point about taking information from government sources when discussing a topic with someone who thinks the government is out to get them. Your point is not necessarily valid from a scientific standpoint, but only to the value that you place on the information. The veracity of a conclusion is in no way connected to someone's distrust of the entity making the conclusion.

But, in the interest of fair play, here's a study that shows a negative correlation between thimerosol and autism. You must know I can keep these coming, if you like. I don't think it will matter, though.

 

Good luck then.

Sure. If the faeces-ventilator impact event I think you secretly hope for occurs, I'd sure like to be there if you have to bury one of your children for something you could have prevented.

I think this is tough talk from someone who has never had to face this, and knows how fantastically unlikely it is, thanks to decades of properly applied public health policy.

Can you really not see the added risk to you and your family is increased when others make the choice not to vaccinate? Why should you have to tolerate that risk?

 

I wouldn't wish that.. not for anyone. Just what are you trying to prove? why don't you go visit this poor girl: Flu Shot Disabled Beautiful Cheerleader - ( Dystonia Disorder) - icyou health videos

Brother..if you only knew how close to death I've been. You ask anyone that's been that close and death doesn't seem so scary any more.

I have an even harder time dealing with the fact that I could have prevented neurological damage by NOT injecting them a contaminated vaccine, or a vaccine laced with neuro-inflammatory adjuvants that open the blood brain barrier (very very bad by the way). Like I've said before. I have no problem with immunization, I just no longer trust the gov't to ensure the safety of my children. I certainly don't fancy placing the life of my children in their hands.

 

Fair enough question

Hello Ghrit,

Thanks for reading. I once wondered that, too. It is beyond dispute that vaccinated people are much, much less likely to contract the subject disease, it's not a certainty. Infections still can, and do, occur. Vaccine failure. I think this may be the biggest weakness in the current vaccination approach in that the response to any given vaccine isn't usually measured. Vaccinated people that do get infected have much lower mortality rates, and usually milder symptoms. Reading up on the subject shows that measles and Hib are particularly successful pathogens that manage to find their way into what we thought were protected people.

But that is the smaller risk, to be sure. Measles, in particular, is fantastically contagious. If the herd immunity fails, it is the people who have exercised their choice, check that, it is the children of the people who have exercised their choice not to vaccinate who are going to pay for that choice.

The issue of freedom of choice aside, this is just bad math. Bad math that has consequences.

Put another way, how would it be possible to say a choice not to vaccinate can possibly be a benefit to public health?

There's a pretty good chance that the very fact that you and I are having this discussion so pleasantly is possible because neither of us are dead or paralyzed because of vaccinations.

 

Anecdotes are worthless...

That "poor girl" is just fine. She didn't have dystonia. If she did, she would still have it. There is no cure. What she had, if it was not outright fraud, was psychosomatic. Bad choice of anecdotes. Do you think we'd have heard a thing about her had she not been a cute little cheerleader?

You are very brave, no doubt. I think we'd find that when someone you love is dying from something stupid like pertussis is what would put your convictions to the test.

You see, that's the thing. There is no evidence to support that fear of neurological damage caused by vaccines. There just isn't. While your over the top distrust of our government is not entirely unfounded, you just cannot apply that distrust universally and make decisions based on it. Or you're making bad decisions.

I am wondering what standard of evidence would suit you. Personally, I don't think there is any.