| |
 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Medicine Forum » 9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and... |
|
Page 1 of 2 Goto page 1, 2 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| john... |
 Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vaccine_debate.shtml
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
2. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence on ANY study
which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?
3. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence which can prove
that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was
attributable to inoculation of populations?
4. What to ask: Could you please explain how the safety and mechanism of
vaccines in the human body are scientifically proven if their
pharmacokinetics (the study of bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism
and excretion of ingredients) are never examined or analyzed in any vaccine
study?
One of the most critical elements which defines the toxicity potential of
any vaccine are its pharmacokinetic properties. Drug companies and health
agencies refuse to consider the study, analysis or evaluation of the
pharmacokinetic properties of any vaccine.
There is not one double-blind, placebo-controlled study in the history of
vaccine development that has ever proven their safety, effectiveness or
achievements (unless those achievements have underlined their damage to
human health).
There are also no controlled studies completed in any country which have
objectively proven that vaccines have had any direct or consequential effect
on the reduction of any type of disease in any part of the world.
Every single study that has ever attempted to validate the safety and
effectiveness of vaccines has conclusively established carcinogenic,
mutagenic, neurotoxic or fertility impairments, but they won't address
those.
******************************************************************************
Claim: Preservatives and chemical additives used in the manufacture of
vaccines are safe and no studies have been linked or proven them unsafe for
use in humans.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
5. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
injecting a human being with a confirmed neurotoxin is beneficial to human
health and prevents disease?
6. What to ask: Can you provide a risk/benefit profile on how the benefits
of injecting a known neurotoxin exceeds its risks to human health for the
intended goal of preventing disease?
This issue is no longer even open to debate. It is a scientifically
established fact in literally hundreds of studies that the preservatives and
chemical additives in vaccines damage cells. Neurotoxicity, immune
suppression, immune-mediated chronic inflammation and carcinogenic
proliferation are just a few of several effects that have been observed on
the human body. See a list of chemicals in vaccines
Fortunately, the drug companies still tell us the damage vaccines have on
the human body. People just don't read them. All you have to do is look at
the insert for any vaccine, and it will detail the exact ingredients, alerts
and potentially lethal effects.
See my latest analysis of the Arepanrix H1N1 vaccine for an example.
Any medical professional who believes that it is justified to inject any
type of neurotoxin into any person to prevent any disease is completely
misguided, misinformed, deluded and ignorant of any logic regarding human
health.
******************************************************************************
Claim: Once an individual is injected with the foreign antigen in the
vaccine, that individual becomes immune to future infections.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
7. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how
bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how
directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning
and prevents future infections?
8. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how a
vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?
9. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
a vaccination can target a virus in an infected individual who does not have
the exact viral configuration or strain the vaccine was developed for?
All promoters of vaccination fail to realize that the respiratory tract of
humans (actually all mammals) contains antibodies which initiates natural
immune responses within the respiratory tract mucosa. Bypassing this mucosal
aspect of the immune system by directly injecting viruses into the
bloodstream leads to a corruption in the immune system itself. As a result,
the pathogenic viruses or bacteria cannot be eliminated by the immune system
and remain in the body, where they will further grow and/or mutate as the
individual is exposed to ever more antigens and toxins in the environment
which continue to assault the immune system.
Despite the injection of any type of vaccine, viruses continue circulating
through the body, mutating and transforming into other organisms. The
ability of a vaccine manufacturer to target the exact viral strain without
knowing its mutagenic properties is equivalent to shooting a gun at a fixed
target that has already been moved from its location. You would be shooting
at what was, not what is!
Flu viruses, may mutate, change or adapt several times over a period of one
flu season, making the seasonal influenza vaccine 100% redundant and
ineffective every single flu season. Ironically, the natural immune defenses
of the human body can target these changes but the vaccines cannot.
I have never encountered one pro-vaccine advocate, whether medically or
scientifically qualified, who could answer even 1 let alone all 9 of these
questions. One or all of the following will happen when debating any of the
above questions:
- They will concede defeat and admit they are stumped
- They will attempt to discredit unrelated issues that do not pertain to the
question.
- They will formulate their response and rebuttal based on historical
arguments and scientific studies which have been disproved over and over
again.
Not one pro-vaccine advocate will ever directly address these questions in
an open mainstream venue. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Mark Probert... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 2:21 pm, "john" <nos... at (no spam) bt.com> wrote:
[quote]http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vacci...
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
[/quote]
http://wps.aw.com/wps/media/objects/14/15269/projects/ch12_salk/index.html
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4585992
1952 The United States reports 57,628 polio cases -- the worst U.S.
epidemic on record.
-- Dr. Salk and his colleagues develop a potentially safe, injectable
vaccine against polio. Nearly 15,000 Pittsburgh-area subjects, mostly
children, receive the vaccine in pilot trials.
-- Salk's former mentor, Dr. Thomas Francis, designs, directs and
evaluates field trials of the polio vaccine. Unprecedented in their
scope and size, the trials involve around 1.8 million children from
the United States, Canada and Finland. They are among the first to use
the double-blind process that has since become standard.
If your idiot writer could not even get the first one right, why
bother to continue?
DisMISSED! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Mark Probert... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 4:13 pm, dr_jeff <u... at (no spam) msu.edu> wrote:
[quote]Mark Probert wrote:
...
John Scumamore claims that polio is still around but is called other
things.
Actually, it is confined to Africa and the Indian subcontinent. Thanks
to vaccines, polio is no longer in the western hemisphere, Europe and
most of Asia.
[/quote]
Agreed. Reads John's post where he proves me correct.
[quote]
Smallpox is another example of a
disease that has almost been eradicated through vaccination.-
Actually, smallpox has been eradicated.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Mark Probert... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 4:44 pm, Ja... at (no spam) nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
[quote]In article <FaCdndKRR8KyHXHXnZ2dnUVZ8oedn... at (no spam) bt.com>, "john"
nos... at (no spam) bt.com> wrote:
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vacci...
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
2. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence on ANY study
which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?
3. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence which can prove
that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was
attributable to inoculation of populations?
4. What to ask: Could you please explain how the safety and mechanism of
vaccines in the human body are scientifically proven if their
pharmacokinetics (the study of bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism
and excretion of ingredients) are never examined or analyzed in any vaccine
study?
One of the most critical elements which defines the toxicity potential of
any vaccine are its pharmacokinetic properties. Drug companies and health
agencies refuse to consider the study, analysis or evaluation of the
pharmacokinetic properties of any vaccine.
There is not one double-blind, placebo-controlled study in the history of
vaccine development that has ever proven their safety, effectiveness or
achievements (unless those achievements have underlined their damage to
human health).
There are also no controlled studies completed in any country which have
objectively proven that vaccines have had any direct or consequential effect
on the reduction of any type of disease in any part of the world.
Every single study that has ever attempted to validate the safety and
effectiveness of vaccines has conclusively established carcinogenic,
mutagenic, neurotoxic or fertility impairments, but they won't address
those.
******************************************************************************
Claim: Preservatives and chemical additives used in the manufacture of
vaccines are safe and no studies have been linked or proven them unsafe for
use in humans.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
5. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
injecting a human being with a confirmed neurotoxin is beneficial to human
health and prevents disease?
6. What to ask: Can you provide a risk/benefit profile on how the benefits
of injecting a known neurotoxin exceeds its risks to human health for the
intended goal of preventing disease?
This issue is no longer even open to debate. It is a scientifically
established fact in literally hundreds of studies that the preservatives and
chemical additives in vaccines damage cells. Neurotoxicity, immune
suppression, immune-mediated chronic inflammation and carcinogenic
proliferation are just a few of several effects that have been observed on
the human body. See a list of chemicals in vaccines
Fortunately, the drug companies still tell us the damage vaccines have on
the human body. People just don't read them. All you have to do is look at
the insert for any vaccine, and it will detail the exact ingredients, alerts
and potentially lethal effects.
See my latest analysis of the Arepanrix H1N1 vaccine for an example.
Any medical professional who believes that it is justified to inject any
type of neurotoxin into any person to prevent any disease is completely
misguided, misinformed, deluded and ignorant of any logic regarding human
health.
******************************************************************************
Claim: Once an individual is injected with the foreign antigen in the
vaccine, that individual becomes immune to future infections.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
7. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how
bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how
directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning
and prevents future infections?
8. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how a
vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?
9. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
a vaccination can target a virus in an infected individual who does not have
the exact viral configuration or strain the vaccine was developed for?
All promoters of vaccination fail to realize that the respiratory tract of
humans (actually all mammals) contains antibodies which initiates natural
immune responses within the respiratory tract mucosa. Bypassing this mucosal
aspect of the immune system by directly injecting viruses into the
bloodstream leads to a corruption in the immune system itself. As a result,
the pathogenic viruses or bacteria cannot be eliminated by the immune system
and remain in the body, where they will further grow and/or mutate as the
individual is exposed to ever more antigens and toxins in the environment
which continue to assault the immune system.
Despite the injection of any type of vaccine, viruses continue circulating
through the body, mutating and transforming into other organisms. The
ability of a vaccine manufacturer to target the exact viral strain without
knowing its mutagenic properties is equivalent to shooting a gun at a fixed
target that has already been moved from its location. You would be shooting
at what was, not what is!
Flu viruses, may mutate, change or adapt several times over a period of one
flu season, making the seasonal influenza vaccine 100% redundant and
ineffective every single flu season. Ironically, the natural immune defenses
of the human body can target these changes but the vaccines cannot.
I have never encountered one pro-vaccine advocate, whether medically or
scientifically qualified, who could answer even 1 let alone all 9 of these
questions. One or all of the following will happen when debating any of the
above questions:
- They will concede defeat and admit they are stumped
- They will attempt to discredit unrelated issues that do not pertain to the
question.
- They will formulate their response and rebuttal based on historical
arguments and scientific studies which have been disproved over and over
again.
Not one pro-vaccine advocate will ever directly address these questions in
an open mainstream venue.
The reality is that some vaccines have prevented millions of people from
developing terrible diseases such as polio (poliomyelitis). Polio went
from MAJOR public health problem to a minor one in very short time. The
reason is because of the Salk Vaccine.
[/quote]
John Scumamore claims that polio is still around but is called other
things.
Smallpox is another example of a
[quote]disease that has almost been eradicated through vaccination.-
[/quote]
Actually, smallpox has been eradicated. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jan Drew... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 3:37�pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 4:44�pm, Ja... at (no spam) nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
In article <FaCdndKRR8KyHXHXnZ2dnUVZ8oedn... at (no spam) bt.com>, "john"
nos... at (no spam) bt.com> wrote:
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vacci...
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
[/quote]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]
2. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence on ANY study
which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?
[/quote]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]3. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence which can prove
that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was
attributable to inoculation of populations?
[/quote]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]4. What to ask: Could you please explain how the safety and mechanism of
vaccines in the human body are scientifically proven if their
pharmacokinetics (the study of bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism
and excretion of ingredients) are never examined or analyzed in any vaccine
study?
[/quote]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]
One of the most critical elements which defines the toxicity potential of
any vaccine are its pharmacokinetic properties. Drug companies and health
agencies refuse to consider the study, analysis or evaluation of the
pharmacokinetic properties of any vaccine.
There is not one double-blind, placebo-controlled study in the history of
vaccine development that has ever proven their safety, effectiveness or
achievements (unless those achievements have underlined their damage to
human health).
There are also no controlled studies completed in any country which have
objectively proven that vaccines have had any direct or consequential effect
on the reduction of any type of disease in any part of the world.
Every single study that has ever attempted to validate the safety and
effectiveness of vaccines has conclusively established carcinogenic,
mutagenic, neurotoxic or fertility impairments, but they won't address
those.
***************************************************************************��***
Claim: Preservatives and chemical additives used in the manufacture of
vaccines are safe and no studies have been linked or proven them unsafe for
use in humans.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
5. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
injecting a human being with a confirmed neurotoxin is beneficial to human
health and prevents disease?
[/quote]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]
6. What to ask: Can you provide a risk/benefit profile on how the benefits
of injecting a known neurotoxin exceeds its risks to human health for the
intended goal of preventing disease?
[/quote]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]
This issue is no longer even open to debate. It is a scientifically
established fact in literally hundreds of studies that the preservatives and
chemical additives in vaccines damage cells. Neurotoxicity, immune
suppression, immune-mediated chronic inflammation and carcinogenic
proliferation are just a few of several effects that have been observed on
the human body. See a list of chemicals in vaccines
Fortunately, the drug companies still tell us the damage vaccines have on
the human body. People just don't read them. All you have to do is look at
the insert for any vaccine, and it will detail the exact ingredients, alerts
and potentially lethal effects.
See my latest analysis of the Arepanrix H1N1 vaccine for an example.
Any medical professional who believes that it is justified to inject any
type of neurotoxin into any person to prevent any disease is completely
misguided, misinformed, deluded and ignorant of any logic regarding human
health.
***************************************************************************��***
Claim: Once an individual is injected with the foreign antigen in the
vaccine, that individual becomes immune to future infections.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
7. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how
bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how
directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning
and prevents future infections?
[/quote]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]8. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how a
vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?
[/quote]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]
9. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
a vaccination can target a virus in an infected individual who does not have
the exact viral configuration or strain the vaccine was developed for?
[/quote]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[quote]All promoters of vaccination fail to realize that the respiratory tract of
humans (actually all mammals) contains antibodies which initiates natural
immune responses within the respiratory tract mucosa. Bypassing this mucosal
aspect of the immune system by directly injecting viruses into the
bloodstream leads to a corruption in the immune system itself. As a result,
the pathogenic viruses or bacteria cannot be eliminated by the immune system
and remain in the body, where they will further grow and/or mutate as the
individual is exposed to ever more antigens and toxins in the environment
which continue to assault the immune system.
Despite the injection of any type of vaccine, viruses continue circulating
through the body, mutating and transforming into other organisms. The
ability of a vaccine manufacturer to target the exact viral strain without
knowing its mutagenic properties is equivalent to shooting a gun at a fixed
target that has already been moved from its location. You would be shooting
at what was, not what is!
Flu viruses, may mutate, change or adapt several times over a period of one
flu season, making the seasonal influenza vaccine 100% redundant and
ineffective every single flu season. Ironically, the natural immune defenses
of the human body can target these changes but the vaccines cannot.
I have never encountered one pro-vaccine advocate, whether medically or
scientifically qualified, who could answer even 1 let alone all 9 of these
questions. One or all of the following will happen when debating any of the
above questions:
- They will concede defeat and admit they are stumped
- They will attempt to discredit unrelated issues that do not pertain to the
question.
- They will formulate their response and rebuttal based on historical
arguments and scientific studies which have been disproved over and over
again.
Not one pro-vaccine advocate will ever directly address these questions in
an open mainstream venue.
The reality is that some vaccines have prevented millions of people from
developing terrible diseases such as polio (poliomyelitis). Polio went
from MAJOR public health problem to a minor one in very short time. The
reason is because of the Salk Vaccine.
[/quote]
Not a single answer. Hmmmm.
[quote]
John Scumamore
[/quote]
Ooops, this thread is not about John.
Can't answer. No surprise there. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Mark Probert... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:45 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 7:11 pm, Jan Drew <jdrew63... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 3:37 pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 31, 4:44 pm, Ja... at (no spam) nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
In article <FaCdndKRR8KyHXHXnZ2dnUVZ8oedn... at (no spam) bt.com>, "john"
nos... at (no spam) bt.com> wrote:
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vacci....
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence on ANY study
which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence which can prove
that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was
attributable to inoculation of populations?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. What to ask: Could you please explain how the safety and mechanism of
vaccines in the human body are scientifically proven if their
pharmacokinetics (the study of bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism
and excretion of ingredients) are never examined or analyzed in any vaccine
study?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the most critical elements which defines the toxicity potential of
any vaccine are its pharmacokinetic properties. Drug companies and health
agencies refuse to consider the study, analysis or evaluation of the
pharmacokinetic properties of any vaccine.
There is not one double-blind, placebo-controlled study in the history of
vaccine development that has ever proven their safety, effectiveness or
achievements (unless those achievements have underlined their damage to
human health).
There are also no controlled studies completed in any country which have
objectively proven that vaccines have had any direct or consequential effect
on the reduction of any type of disease in any part of the world.
Every single study that has ever attempted to validate the safety and
effectiveness of vaccines has conclusively established carcinogenic,
mutagenic, neurotoxic or fertility impairments, but they won't address
those.
*************************************************************************** ***
Claim: Preservatives and chemical additives used in the manufacture of
vaccines are safe and no studies have been linked or proven them unsafe for
use in humans.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
5. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
injecting a human being with a confirmed neurotoxin is beneficial to human
health and prevents disease?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. What to ask: Can you provide a risk/benefit profile on how the benefits
of injecting a known neurotoxin exceeds its risks to human health for the
intended goal of preventing disease?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This issue is no longer even open to debate. It is a scientifically
established fact in literally hundreds of studies that the preservatives and
chemical additives in vaccines damage cells. Neurotoxicity, immune
suppression, immune-mediated chronic inflammation and carcinogenic
proliferation are just a few of several effects that have been observed on
the human body. See a list of chemicals in vaccines
Fortunately, the drug companies still tell us the damage vaccines have on
the human body. People just don't read them. All you have to do is look at
the insert for any vaccine, and it will detail the exact ingredients, alerts
and potentially lethal effects.
See my latest analysis of the Arepanrix H1N1 vaccine for an example..
Any medical professional who believes that it is justified to inject any
type of neurotoxin into any person to prevent any disease is completely
misguided, misinformed, deluded and ignorant of any logic regarding human
health.
*************************************************************************** ***
Claim: Once an individual is injected with the foreign antigen in the
vaccine, that individual becomes immune to future infections.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
7. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how
bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how
directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning
and prevents future infections?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how a
vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
a vaccination can target a virus in an infected individual who does not have
the exact viral configuration or strain the vaccine was developed for?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All promoters of vaccination fail to realize that the respiratory tract of
humans (actually all mammals) contains antibodies which initiates natural
immune responses within the respiratory tract mucosa. Bypassing this mucosal
aspect of the immune system by directly injecting viruses into the
bloodstream leads to a corruption in the immune system itself. As a result,
the pathogenic viruses or bacteria cannot be eliminated by the immune system
and remain in the body, where they will further grow and/or mutate as the
individual is exposed to ever more antigens and toxins in the environment
which continue to assault the immune system.
Despite the injection of any type of vaccine, viruses continue circulating
through the body, mutating and transforming into other organisms. The
ability of a vaccine manufacturer to target the exact viral strain without
knowing its mutagenic properties is equivalent to shooting a gun at a fixed
target that has already been moved from its location. You would be shooting
at what was, not what is!
Flu viruses, may mutate, change or adapt several times over a period of one
flu season, making the seasonal influenza vaccine 100% redundant and
ineffective every single flu season. Ironically, the natural immune defenses
of the human body can target these changes but the vaccines cannot.
I have never encountered one pro-vaccine advocate, whether medically or
scientifically qualified, who could answer even 1 let alone all 9 of these
questions. One or all of the following will happen when debating any of the
above questions:
- They will concede defeat and admit they are stumped
- They will attempt to discredit unrelated issues that do not pertain to the
question.
- They will formulate their response and rebuttal based on historical
arguments and scientific studies which have been disproved over and over
again.
Not one pro-vaccine advocate will ever directly address these questions in
an open mainstream venue.
The reality is that some vaccines have prevented millions of people from
developing terrible diseases such as polio (poliomyelitis). Polio went
from MAJOR public health problem to a minor one in very short time. The
reason is because of the Salk Vaccine.
Not a single answer. Hmmmm.
[/quote]
There was one answer and it disproved their fundamental concept so
strongly that the rest of the shit had to be deleted.
Of course, you left out my answer.
That makes you a liar.
[quote]
John Scumamore
Ooops, this thread is not about John.
Can't answer. No surprise there.-
[/quote]
Did answer and you did not understand it. No suprise there. You have
trouble understanding Dick & Jane,.
Oh, and this thread is now about you and John. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| dr_jeff... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:45 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
john wrote:
[quote]http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vaccine_debate.shtml
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
[/quote]
Double-blind study comparing the immunogenicity of a licensed
DTwPHib-CRM197 conjugate vaccine (Quattvaxemâ„¢) with three
investigational, liquid formulations using lower doses of Hib-CRM197
conjugate. Eda Tamma, Alessandra Veroneseb, Mario Contornic, Sirli
Meristea, Pantaleo Naccib, Corresponding Author Contact Information,
E-mail The Corresponding Author and Simonetta Vivianib. Vaccine
Volume 23, Issue 14, 25 February 2005, Pages 1715-1719.
We performed a double-blind clinical study to evaluate the safety and
immunogenicity of four formulations of a DTwPHib full liquid vaccine,
three of which contained fractional doses of the 10 μg-dose of
CRM197-Hib conjugate vaccine.
A total of 261 infants were enrolled and randomised to receive at 3, 4
and 5 months of age, in a double-blind fashion, one of the four DTwPHib
vaccine formulations containing 10, 5, 2.5 or 1.25 μg of CRM197-Hib
conjugate. Post-immunization reactions were similar in the four vaccine
groups, they were mild, transient and resolved without sequelae. The
seroconversion rates to anti-PRP titres ≥ 0.15 μg/mL were 100%, 98%, 97%
and 98% in the groups 10, 5, 2.5 and 1.25 μg, respectively. The
seroconversion rates to anti-PRP titres ≥1 μg/mL were 95%, 97%, 88% and
90%, again respectively. Anti-PRP GMTs were 18, 17, 7.82 and 6.94 μg/mL,
respectively. All subjects were protected against tetanus and
diphtheria, and >80% seroconverted to pertussis.
High, and similar, levels of anti-PRP GMTs were elicited by the
formulations with 10 and 5 μg of CRM197-Hib conjugate.
Although the formulations with 2.5 and 1.25 μg of CRM197-Hib elicited
lower levels of anti-PRP GMTs, they were immunogenic and are possible
candidates for further development.
Keywords: Combined vaccines; Fractional doses Hib vaccine; DTwPHib full
liquid vaccine
[quote]2. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence on ANY study
which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?
[/quote]
Postlicensure Safety Surveillance for Varicella Vaccine
Robert P. Wise, MD, MPH; Marcel E. Salive, MD, MPH; M. Miles Braun, MD,
MPH; Gina Terracciano Mootrey, DO, MPH; Jane F. Seward, MBBS, MPH; Lisa
G. Rider, MD; Philip R. Krause, MD
JAMA. 2000;284:1271-1279.
Context Since its licensure in 1995, the extensive use of varicella
vaccine and close surveillance of the associated anecdotal reports of
suspected adverse effects provide the opportunity to detect potential
risks not observed before licensure because of the relatively small
sample size and other limitations of clinical trials.
Objectives To detect potential hazards, including rare events,
associated with varicella vaccine, and to assess case reports for
clinical and epidemiological implications.
Design and Setting Postlicensure case-series study of suspected vaccine
adverse events reported to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
(VAERS) from March 17, 1995, through July 25, 1998.
Main Outcome Measures Numbers of reported adverse events, proportions,
and reporting rates (reports per 100,000 doses distributed).
Results VAERS received 6574 case reports of adverse events in
recipients of varicella vaccine, a rate of 67.5 reports per 100,000
doses sold. Approximately 4% of reports described serious adverse
events, including 14 deaths. The most frequently reported adverse events
were rashes, possible vaccine failures, and injection site reactions.
Misinterpretation of varicella serology after vaccination appeared to
account for 17% of reports of possible vaccine failures. Among 251
patients with herpes zoster, 14 had the vaccine strain of varicella
zoster virus (VZV), while 12 had the wild-type virus. None of 30
anaphylaxis cases was fatal. An immunodeficient patient with pneumonia
had the vaccine strain of VZV in a lung biopsy. Pregnant women
occasionally received varicella vaccine through confusion with varicella
zoster immunoglobulin. Although the role of varicella vaccine remained
unproven in most serious adverse event reports, there were a few
positive rechallenge reports and consistency of many cases with
syndromes recognized as complications of natural varicella.
Conclusion Most of the reported adverse events associated with
varicella vaccine are minor, and serious risks appear to be rare. We
could not confirm a vaccine etiology for most of the reported serious
events; several will require further study to clarify whether varicella
vaccine plays a role. Education is needed to ensure appropriate use of
varicella serologic assays and to eliminate confusion between varicella
vaccine and varicella zoster immunoglobulin.
And
The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal:
December 1999 - Volume 18 - Issue 12 - pp 1041-1046
Original Studies
Postmarketing evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of varicella
vaccine
BLACK, STEVEN MD; SHINEFIELD, HENRY MD; RAY, PAULA MS; LEWIS, EDWIN MS;
HANSEN, JOHN; SCHWALBE, JOAN MS; COPLAN, PAUL SCD; SHARRAR, ROBERT MD,
MSC; GUESS, HARRY MD, PHD
Collapse Box
Abstract
Background. The Oka strain of live attenuated varicella virus was
licensed for use in healthy children in the United States in March,
1995. We report a postmarketing evaluation of the short term safety of
this vaccine within Kaiser Permanente.
Methods. After licensure varicella vaccination was introduced into the
preventive care program of the Northern California Kaiser Permanente
Medical Care Program. Potential adverse events after vaccination with
varicella vaccine were identified from automated clinical databases of
hospitalizations, emergency room visits and clinic visits. Deaths were
identified from automated clinical databases at Kaiser as well as from
the State death records for California. To evaluate safety, rates of
diagnosis-specific events in the risk periods were compared with the
rates of such diagnosis-specific events in two self control and one
historical control period.
Results. During the study period of April 1, 1995, to December 31, 1996,
a total of 89 753 adults and children received varicella vaccine. A
total of 3200 relative risks were calculated, and of these 5 hospital
diagnostic categories, 9 emergency visit diagnostic categories and 30
outpatient diagnostic categories demonstrated at least 1 relative risk
with a P value of <0.05 in 1 or more age groups and in comparisons with
1 control period or more. The p value for these tests was not adjusted
for multiple comparisons. Of these categories 14 demonstrated an
increased risk either in more than 1 age group or against more than 1
comparison group. These categories included elective procedures, febrile
seizure, febrile illness, well child, acute gastroenteritis, varicella,
congenital anomaly, "rule out sepsis," trauma, viral syndrome, apnea,
back pain, congenital valvular heart disease and vision evaluation for
glasses. Of these the outcomes of elective procedure, congenital
anomaly, congenital valvular heart disease, well child and vision
evaluation for glasses were judged not to have a biologically plausible
association with vaccination. A second diagnostic grouping included
febrile illness, viral illness, febrile seizure and "rule out sepsis."
In an analysis of these events which adjusted for the concomitant
administration of M-M-RII vaccine, none of the associations was
statistically associated with receipt of varicella vaccine. The
diagnostic category of "rule out sepsis" still had a relative risk of
1.95 with P = 0.02. None of the children in the "rule out sepsis"
category had positive bacteriologic cultures from any other normally
sterile site. Because of the large number of gastroenteritis cases, we
reviewed a random sample of 100 exposed and 100 unexposed cases. From
this review no consistent time association or clustering of any of these
events was seen in the exposed follow-up time interval. Only
gastroenteritis and negative evaluations for sepsis were thought to be
possibly associated with receipt of varicella vaccine. Although there
was a statistically significant increased risk over the entire 30
day-period, there was no clustering of these events within the 30-day
window.
Conclusion. In this study population of 89 753 children and adults, the
varicella vaccine (Oka strain, Merck) appeared to have a favorable
safety profile. In addition rates of varicella-like rash and of
breakthrough cases were both low and consistent with the rates observed
in prelicensure studies.
[quote]3. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence which can prove
that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was
attributable to inoculation of population
[/quote]
http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2009/10/22/CDC-Vaccine-reduces-rotavirus-in-children/UPI-11331256238812/
[quote]4. What to ask: Could you please explain how the safety and mechanism of
vaccines in the human body are scientifically proven if their
pharmacokinetics (the study of bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism
and excretion of ingredients) are never examined or analyzed in any vaccine
study?
[/quote]
Studies like the ones above. You can learn how vaccines work at the
library by reading basic immunology textbooks. You can do this on the
internet, too.
[quote]One of the most critical elements which defines the toxicity potential of
any vaccine are its pharmacokinetic properties. Drug companies and health
agencies refuse to consider the study, analysis or evaluation of the
pharmacokinetic properties of any vaccine.
[/quote]
What does pharmacokinetifc mean? And why are pharmacokinetic properties
of vaccines so important?
[quote]There is not one double-blind, placebo-controlled study in the history of
vaccine development that has ever proven their safety, effectiveness or
achievements (unless those achievements have underlined their damage to
human health).
[/quote]
I disagree. See above.
[quote]There are also no controlled studies completed in any country which have
objectively proven that vaccines have had any direct or consequential effect
on the reduction of any type of disease in any part of the world.
Every single study that has ever attempted to validate the safety and
effectiveness of vaccines has conclusively established carcinogenic,
mutagenic, neurotoxic or fertility impairments, but they won't address
those.
******************************************************************************
Claim: Preservatives and chemical additives used in the manufacture of
vaccines are safe and no studies have been linked or proven them unsafe for
use in humans.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
5. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
injecting a human being with a confirmed neurotoxin is beneficial to human
health and prevents disease?
[/quote]
It helps the vaccine work better. The doses used are so small that they
do not pose a danger. Even oxygen is a neurotoxin. Doses matter.
[quote]6. What to ask: Can you provide a risk/benefit profile on how the benefits
of injecting a known neurotoxin exceeds its risks to human health for the
intended goal of preventing disease?
[/quote]
How many people died from small pox last year?
[quote]This issue is no longer even open to debate. It is a scientifically
established fact in literally hundreds of studies that the preservatives and
chemical additives in vaccines damage cells.
[/quote]
In tissue culture at higher doses than used in humans. They don't show
that any chemical in vaccines are a danger in the doses used.
[quote]Neurotoxicity,
[/quote]
Is non-existant with vaccines.
[quote]immune
suppression,
[/quote]
Actually, it is immune enhancement with vaccines.
[quote]immune-mediated chronic inflammation and carcinogenic
proliferation are just a few of several effects that have been observed on
the human body.
[/quote]
Not from vaccines. Stop your fear mongering.
[quote]See a list of chemicals in vaccines
Fortunately, the drug companies still tell us the damage vaccines have on
the human body. People just don't read them. All you have to do is look at
the insert for any vaccine, and it will detail the exact ingredients, alerts
and potentially lethal effects.
See my latest analysis of the Arepanrix H1N1 vaccine for an example.
Any medical professional who believes that it is justified to inject any
type of neurotoxin into any person to prevent any disease is completely
misguided, misinformed, deluded and ignorant of any logic regarding human
health.
******************************************************************************
Claim: Once an individual is injected with the foreign antigen in the
vaccine, that individual becomes immune to future infections.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
[/quote]
Actually, it is well established. That's how the immune system works.
Try taking immunology 101 at you local college or get a immunology textbook.
[quote]7. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how
bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how
directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning
and prevents future infections?
[/quote]
Vaccines aren't injected into the blood stream. Vaccines cause
antibodies to be made, which are released into the bloodstream. And, if
you don't bypass the mucus membranes, the immune system will not see the
vaccine and be able to respond.
[quote]8. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification on how a
vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?
[/quote]
They don't.
[quote]9. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific justification as to how
a vaccination can target a virus in an infected individual who does not have
the exact viral configuration or strain the vaccine was developed for?
[/quote]
They target key proteins or proteins or other antigens that don't change
much between differnet strains.
Just like a person who is exposed to one strain of the flu is often has
some or even total immunity to some other strains of the flu.
jeff
[quote]
All promoters of vaccination fail to realize that the respiratory tract of
humans (actually all mammals) contains antibodies which initiates natural
immune responses within the respiratory tract mucosa. Bypassing this mucosal
aspect of the immune system by directly injecting viruses into the
bloodstream leads to a corruption in the immune system itself.
[/quote]
This is utter nonsense.
[quote]As a result,
the pathogenic viruses or bacteria cannot be eliminated by the immune system
and remain in the body, where they will further grow and/or mutate as the
individual is exposed to ever more antigens and toxins in the environment
which continue to assault the immune system.
Despite the injection of any type of vaccine, viruses continue circulating
through the body, mutating and transforming into other organisms. The
ability of a vaccine manufacturer to target the exact viral strain without
knowing its mutagenic properties is equivalent to shooting a gun at a fixed
target that has already been moved from its location. You would be shooting
at what was, not what is!
Flu viruses, may mutate, change or adapt several times over a period of one
flu season, making the seasonal influenza vaccine 100% redundant and
ineffective every single flu season. Ironically, the natural immune defenses
of the human body can target these changes but the vaccines cannot.
I have never encountered one pro-vaccine advocate, whether medically or
scientifically qualified, who could answer even 1 let alone all 9 of these
questions. One or all of the following will happen when debating any of the
above questions:
[/quote]
Actually, you just have encountered one who answered all nine.
[quote]- They will concede defeat and admit they are stumped
- They will attempt to discredit unrelated issues that do not pertain to the
question.
- They will formulate their response and rebuttal based on historical
arguments and scientific studies which have been disproved over and over
again.
Not one pro-vaccine advocate will ever directly address these questions in
an open mainstream venue.
[/quote]
I did.
Have a lovely day. Unfortunately, thanks to assholes who spread lies
like yours, many people won't be protected against deadly diseases and
some will die.
Jeff |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jan Drew... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 3:45Â pm, not dr_jeff <u... at (no spam) msu.edu> wrote:
[quote]john wrote:
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vacci...
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
Double-blind study comparing the immunogenicity of a licensed
DTwPHib-CRM197 conjugate vaccine (Quattvaxemâ„¢) with three
investigational, liquid formulations using lower doses of Hib-CRM197
conjugate. Eda Tamma, Alessandra Veroneseb, Mario Contornic, Sirli
Meristea, Pantaleo Naccib, Corresponding Author Contact Information,
E-mail The Corresponding Author and Simonetta Vivianib.
[/quote]
Who? Where did you not dr--find that name?
Vaccine
[quote]Volume 23, Issue 14, 25 February 2005, Pages 1715-1719.
We performed a double-blind clinical study to evaluate the safety and
immunogenicity of four formulations of a DTwPHib full liquid vaccine,
three of which contained fractional doses of the 10 μg-dose of
CRM197-Hib conjugate vaccine.
A total of 261 infants were enrolled and randomised to receive at 3, 4
and 5 months of age, in a double-blind fashion, one of the four DTwPHib
vaccine formulations containing 10, 5, 2.5 or 1.25 μg of CRM197-Hib
conjugate. Post-immunization reactions were similar in the four vaccine
groups, they were mild, transient and resolved without sequelae. The
seroconversion rates to anti-PRP titres ≥ 0.15 μg/mL were 100%, 98%, 97%
and 98% in the groups 10, 5, 2.5 and 1.25 μg, respectively. The
seroconversion rates to anti-PRP titres ≥1 μg/mL were 95%, 97%, 88% and
90%, again respectively. Anti-PRP GMTs were 18, 17, 7.82 and 6.94 μg/mL,
respectively. All subjects were protected against tetanus and
diphtheria, and >80% seroconverted to pertussis.
High, and similar, levels of anti-PRP GMTs were elicited by the
formulations with 10 and 5 μg of CRM197-Hib conjugate.
Although the formulations with 2.5 and 1.25 μg of CRM197-Hib elicited
lower levels of anti-PRP GMTs, they were immunogenic and are possible
candidates for further development.
Keywords: Combined vaccines; Fractional doses Hib vaccine; DTwPHib full
liquid vaccine
2. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence on ANY study
which can confirm the long-term safety and effectiveness of vaccines?
Postlicensure Safety Surveillance for Varicella Vaccine
Robert P. Wise, MD, MPH; Marcel E. Salive, MD, MPH; M. Miles Braun, MD,
MPH; Gina Terracciano Mootrey, DO, MPH; Jane F. Seward, MBBS, MPH; Lisa
G. Rider, MD; Philip R. Krause, MD
JAMA. 2000;284:1271-1279.
[/quote]
JAMA=Organized medicine liars.
[quote]
Context  Since its licensure in 1995, the extensive use of varicella
vaccine and close surveillance of the associated anecdotal reports of
suspected adverse effects provide the opportunity to detect potential
risks not observed before licensure because of the relatively small
sample size and other limitations of clinical trials.
Objectives  To detect potential hazards, including rare events,
associated with varicella vaccine, and to assess case reports for
clinical and epidemiological implications.
Design and Setting  Postlicensure case-series study of suspected vaccine
adverse events reported to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System
(VAERS) from March 17, 1995, through July 25, 1998.
Main Outcome Measures  Numbers of reported adverse events, proportions,
and reporting rates (reports per 100,000 doses distributed).
Results  VAERS received 6574 case reports of adverse events in
recipients of varicella vaccine, a rate of 67.5 reports per 100,000
doses sold. Approximately 4% of reports described serious adverse
events, including 14 deaths. The most frequently reported adverse events
were rashes, possible vaccine failures, and injection site reactions.
Misinterpretation of varicella serology after vaccination appeared to
account for 17% of reports of possible vaccine failures. Among 251
patients with herpes zoster, 14 had the vaccine strain of varicella
zoster virus (VZV), while 12 had the wild-type virus. None of 30
anaphylaxis cases was fatal. An immunodeficient patient with pneumonia
had the vaccine strain of VZV in a lung biopsy. Pregnant women
occasionally received varicella vaccine through confusion with varicella
zoster immunoglobulin. Although the role of varicella vaccine remained
unproven in most serious adverse event reports, there were a few
positive rechallenge reports and consistency of many cases with
syndromes recognized as complications of natural varicella.
Conclusion
[/quote]
By whom?
 Most of the reported adverse events associated with
[quote]varicella vaccine are minor, and serious risks appear to be rare. We
could not confirm a vaccine etiology for most of the reported serious
events; several will require further study to clarify whether varicella
vaccine plays a role. Education is needed to ensure appropriate use of
varicella serologic assays and to eliminate confusion between varicella
vaccine and varicella zoster immunoglobulin.
And
The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal:
December 1999 - Volume 18 - Issue 12 - pp 1041-1046
Original Studies
Postmarketing evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of varicella
vaccine
BLACK, STEVEN MD; SHINEFIELD, HENRY MD; RAY, PAULA MS; LEWIS, EDWIN MS;
HANSEN, JOHN; SCHWALBE, JOAN MS; COPLAN, PAUL SCD; SHARRAR, ROBERT MD,
MSC; GUESS, HARRY MD, PHD
Collapse Box
Abstract
Background. The Oka strain of live attenuated varicella virus was
licensed for use in healthy children in the United States in March,
1995. We report a postmarketing evaluation of the short term safety of
this vaccine within Kaiser Permanente.
Methods. After licensure varicella vaccination was introduced into the
preventive care program of the Northern California Kaiser Permanente
Medical Care Program. Potential adverse events after vaccination with
varicella vaccine were identified from automated clinical databases of
hospitalizations, emergency room visits and clinic visits. Deaths were
identified from automated clinical databases at Kaiser as well as from
the State death records for California. To evaluate safety, rates of
diagnosis-specific events in the risk periods were compared with the
rates of such diagnosis-specific events in two self control and one
historical control period.
Results. During the study period of April 1, 1995, to December 31, 1996,
a total of 89 753 adults and children received varicella vaccine. A
total of 3200 relative risks were calculated, and of these 5 hospital
diagnostic categories, 9 emergency visit diagnostic categories and 30
outpatient diagnostic categories demonstrated at least 1 relative risk
with a P value of <0.05 in 1 or more age groups and in comparisons with
1 control period or more. The p value for these tests was not adjusted
for multiple comparisons. Of these categories 14 demonstrated an
increased risk either in more than 1 age group or against more than 1
comparison group. These categories included elective procedures, febrile
seizure, febrile illness, well child, acute gastroenteritis, varicella,
congenital anomaly, "rule out sepsis," trauma, viral syndrome, apnea,
back pain, congenital valvular heart disease and vision evaluation for
glasses. Of these the outcomes of elective procedure, congenital
anomaly, congenital valvular heart disease, well child and vision
evaluation for glasses were judged not to have a biologically plausible
association with vaccination. A second diagnostic grouping included
febrile illness, viral illness, febrile seizure and "rule out sepsis."
In an analysis of these events which adjusted for the concomitant
administration of M-M-RII vaccine, none of the associations was
statistically associated with receipt of varicella vaccine. The
diagnostic category of "rule out sepsis" still had a relative risk of
1.95 with P = 0.02. None of the children in the "rule out sepsis"
category had positive bacteriologic cultures from any other normally
sterile site. Because of the large number of gastroenteritis cases, we
reviewed a random sample of 100 exposed and 100 unexposed cases. From
this review no consistent time association or clustering of any of these
events was seen in the exposed follow-up time interval. Only
gastroenteritis and negative evaluations for sepsis were thought to be
possibly associated with receipt of varicella vaccine. Although there
was a statistically significant increased risk over the entire 30
day-period, there was no clustering of these events within the 30-day
window.
Conclusion.
[/quote]
By Whom??
In this study population of 89 753 children and adults, the
[quote]varicella vaccine (Oka strain, Merck) appeared to have a favorable
safety profile. In addition rates of varicella-like rash and of
breakthrough cases were both low and consistent with the rates observed
in prelicensure studies.
[/quote]
Merck--what a joke.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18803138
[quote]
3. What to ask: Could you please provide scientific evidence which can prove
that disease reduction in any part of the world, at any point in history was
attributable to inoculation of population
http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2009/10/22/CDC-Vaccine-reduces-rotavir...
[/quote]
[quote]
4. What to ask: Could you please explain how the safety and mechanism of
vaccines in the human body are scientifically proven if their
pharmacokinetics (the study of bodily absorption, distribution, metabolism
and excretion of
[/quote]
I see not dr--did not go past question 4.
Neither did he get anything correct.
Results 1 - 10 of about 1,140,000 for CDC fraud. (0.35 seconds)
Dr. Viviani received a medicine and surgery degree from Siena
University as well as postgraduate degrees in public health and
laboratory. She holds a two-year postgraduate training degree in field
epidemiology from the CDC and the Istituto Superiore di Sanità .
Did you mean Simonetta Viviani
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18803138
Pharmaceutical giant Merck has agreed to pay more than $670 million to
settle claims it overcharged the government for drugs and bribed
doctors to prescribe its drugs. It's one of the biggest health care
fraud settlements ever. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jan Drew... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:53 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 3:52�pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 2:21�pm, "john" <nos... at (no spam) bt.com> wrote:
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vacci...
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
http://wps.aw.com/wps/media/objects/14/15269/projects/ch12_salk/index...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4585992
1952 The United States reports 57,628 polio cases -- the worst U.S.
epidemic on record.
-- Dr. Salk and his colleagues develop a potentially safe, injectable
vaccine against polio. Nearly 15,000 Pittsburgh-area subjects, mostly
children, receive the vaccine in pilot trials.
-- Salk's former mentor, Dr. Thomas Francis, designs, directs and
evaluates field trials of the polio vaccine. Unprecedented in their
scope and size, the trials involve around 1.8 million children from
the United States, Canada and Finland. They are among the first to use
the double-blind process that has since become standard.
If your idiot writer could not even get the first one right, why
bother to continue?
DisMISSED!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Mark Probert... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:57 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 7:53 pm, Jan Drew <jdrew63... at (no spam) aol.com> wrote:
Thank you, Jan. This is such a good post, it needed an Encore!
[quote]On Oct 31, 3:52 pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 31, 2:21 pm, "john" <nos... at (no spam) bt.com> wrote:
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vacci....
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
http://wps.aw.com/wps/media/objects/14/15269/projects/ch12_salk/index...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4585992
1952 The United States reports 57,628 polio cases -- the worst U.S.
epidemic on record.
-- Dr. Salk and his colleagues develop a potentially safe, injectable
vaccine against polio. Nearly 15,000 Pittsburgh-area subjects, mostly
children, receive the vaccine in pilot trials.
-- Salk's former mentor, Dr. Thomas Francis, designs, directs and
evaluates field trials of the polio vaccine. Unprecedented in their
scope and size, the trials involve around 1.8 million children from
the United States, Canada and Finland. They are among the first to use
the double-blind process that has since become standard.
If your idiot writer could not even get the first one right, why
bother to continue?
DisMISSED!- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jan Drew... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 31, 3:52�pm, Mark Probert <mark.prob... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 31, 2:21�pm, "john" <nos... at (no spam) bt.com> wrote:
http://preventdisease.com/news/09/102809_9_arguments_to_win_any_vacci...
9 Questions That Stump Every Pro-Vaccine Advocate and Their Claims
Since the flu pandemic was declared, there have been several so-called
"vaccine experts" coming out of the wood work attempting to justify the
effectiveness of vaccines. All of them parrot the same ridiculous historical
and pseudoscientific perspectives of vaccinations which are easily squelched
with the following 9 questions.
Claim: The study of vaccines, their historical record of achievements,
effectiveness, safety and mechanism in humans are well understood and proven
in scientific and medical circles.
Fact: The claim is completely false.
1. What to ask: Could you please provide one double-blind,
placebo-controlled study that can prove the safety and effectiveness of
vaccines?
http://wps.aw.com/wps/media/objects/14/15269/projects/ch12_salk/index...
[/quote]
Hmmm. This is not a double-blind placebo controlled study that proved
the question John asked.
[quote]
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4585992
[/quote]
Neither is that.
[quote]
1952 The United States reports 57,628 polio cases -- the worst U.S.
epidemic on record.
-- Dr. Salk and his colleagues develop a potentially safe, injectable
vaccine against polio. Nearly 15,000 Pittsburgh-area subjects, mostly
children, receive the vaccine in pilot trials.
[/quote]
Read the words trials. This is not what John listed.
[quote]
[/quote]
Neither is this thread about Polio
[quote]
DisMISSED!
[/quote]
You are indeed.
Go to your room. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jan Drew... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[quote]Mark Probert wrote:
...
[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| john... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Jason" <Jason at (no spam) nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Jason-3110091244030001 at (no spam) 67-150-
[quote]
The reality is that some vaccines have prevented millions of people from
developing terrible diseases such as polio (poliomyelitis). Polio went
from MAJOR public health problem to a minor one in very short time. The
reason is because of the Salk Vaccine. Smallpox is another example of a
disease that has almost been eradicated through vaccination.
[/quote]
That's just bollocks
see smallpox http://www.whale.to/vaccines/smallpox.html
polio http://www.whale.to/v/polio2.htm
Go to your medical library, and ask to see the United States Polio
Surveillance Unit's bulletins, from 1955 to 1970.
They will be listed as "missing".
Every single medical library in USA, that someone checked out for me,
and New Zealand (and possible other countries) has them listed as "missing".
There is only one place you can see them, as far as I know, and that is
in the AMA library, and they are listed as having top security clearance
requirements to see, according to someone who tried to access them.
Why might this be? When he was alive, Dr Ratner had copies of them at
his home. He gave me many of the years' data I wanted. They clearly showed
that from the inception of the SALK vaccine, to it's discontinuation, the
vaccine had MINUS efficacy and was actually causing more polio in the
vaccinated than in the unvaccinated.
Any studious person looking at Government stats in retrospect, would be
able to easily see that the polical and media canonization of SALK and his
vaccine was a mirage of duplicity upon duplicity.------Hilary Butler -[2009
April] Olmsted on Autism: Hopkins Loses Early Case File |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| dr_jeff... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:13 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mark Probert wrote:
<...>
[quote]John Scumamore claims that polio is still around but is called other
things.
[/quote]
Actually, it is confined to Africa and the Indian subcontinent. Thanks
to vaccines, polio is no longer in the western hemisphere, Europe and
most of Asia.
[quote]Smallpox is another example of a
disease that has almost been eradicated through vaccination.-
Actually, smallpox has been eradicated.
[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| john... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 2:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:38 am
|
|