| Some really worrying numbers here 09:11 - Apr 25 with 40419 views | StokieBlue |
500,000 UK children have missed a measles jab.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-48039524
I know there is a tiny chance of side-effects from the vaccine but overall the huge weight of evidence is that having the vaccine is statistically far better for any individual.
We will get anecdotal evidence no doubt which counters this but anecdotal evidence is tail events not the weight of probability.
Something needs to be done.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |  |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 09:44 - Apr 26 with 3657 views | StokieBlue |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 09:38 - Apr 26 by Harry_Palmer |
Chrisswailes, I have backed up pretty much everything I have contributed in this thread with science and stood by my position despite an onslaught of opposition.
You on the other hand have entered the thread once to offer personal abuse without even the courtesy of substantiating your comment. And I'm the ignorant one? |
I'm going to dispute this. It's not science, it's blatant cherry picking as others have pointed out.
I know you have a personal connection to the subject but that is clouding your reasoning. You are treating a low probability event as something which is likely to happen due to personal circumstances. That is understandable from a human perspective but not from a scientific one.
It's like saying you know someone who was hit by a bus so you're never going to cross the road again and neither should anyone else because they will get hit by a bus. The total lack of appreciate to the probabilities is very annoying. All outcomes are not equally likely but you never take this into account.
I'll try and look at your longer post today at some point.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:06 - Apr 26 with 3640 views | Swailsey |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 09:38 - Apr 26 by Harry_Palmer |
Chrisswailes, I have backed up pretty much everything I have contributed in this thread with science and stood by my position despite an onslaught of opposition.
You on the other hand have entered the thread once to offer personal abuse without even the courtesy of substantiating your comment. And I'm the ignorant one? |
I don’t think being called ignorant is personal abuse.
I can do a quick Google for some evidence if you like, since you like that? |  |
| Who said: "Colin Healy made Cesc Fabregas look like Colin Healy"? | We miss you TLA |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:07 - Apr 26 with 3641 views | StokieBlue |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 21:21 - Apr 25 by Harry_Palmer |
Nope wrong again. Nothing special about me other than the ability to research, question, and think for myself rather than regurgitate lies ,you could do it too if only you'd try.
If I really wanted to try and put myself up as someone special do you think i'd opt for anonymous postings on a football message board? Whether you believe it or not my motives are entirely genuine, when you have seen first hand the damage that vaccines can do you kind of get interested in the subject. I simply want people to consider the facts and science on the other side of the issue that the mainstream media for some reason seem to ignore
I have provided plenty of evidence over multiple threads, you have simply chosen to ignore it or taken SB's word as gospel that the sources are suspect etc. But seeing as you seem to have a thirst for evidence on this topic here are 10 facts about Measles for you :
1.) Measles had a .001% mortality rate in 1962...the year BEFORE the vaccine was introduced.
2.) The measles vaccine contains the live virus meaning you can acquire the very disease you hope to avoid from the vaccine. The vaccine insert even says 'atypical measles' is a known adverse reaction.
3.) The vaccine contains aborted fetal DNA. We’re not talking about whole double strand DNA, we’re talking about fragments which are little bits and pieces of DNA. The smaller it is the more likely it is to incorporate into the nucleus of the cells of the vaccine recipient. So those fragments are recombining, they’re inserting into the nucleus of the cells of children who are receiving these vaccines, and insertional mutagenesis is strongly associated with childhood cancers, especially lymphoma and leukemia. Guess which childhood cancers have skyrocketed in the last two decades coinciding with the explosion in the vaccine schedule? Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and Leukemia
4.) The vaccine is highly ineffective and has been shown to not work even in highly vaccinated populations.
"An outbreak of measles occurred in a high school with a documented vaccination level of 98 per cent." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1646939/
"We conclude that outbreaks of measles can occur in secondary schools, even when more than 99 percent of the students have been vaccinated and more than 95 percent are immune."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3821823
"The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8053748
5.) The MMR vaccine comes with great risks. As of March 31, 2018, there have been more than 89,355 reports of measles vaccine reactions, hospitalizations, injuries and deaths following measles vaccinations made to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), including 445 related deaths, 6,196 hospitalizations, and 1,657 related disabilities.
7.) Between 1983 and 1990, there was a 423% increase in measles cases among vaccinated individuals. Then in 2006, the largest mumps outbreak in twenty years occurred. Among those infected, 63% were “immunized.
8.) The MMR vaccine insert contains over 40 paragraphs of adverse reactions.
9.) As revealed by CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson the MMR vaccine is still legitimately associated with autism. The following study provides new epidemiologic evidence showing that African American males receiving the MMR vaccine prior to 24 months of age are more likely to receive an autism diagnosis.
https://translationalneurodegeneration.biomedcentral.com/…/…
10.) The measles itself can actually protect the body from disease. The following study reveals that infection with measles and mumps (especially in the case of both infections) is associated with lower risks of mortality from atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26122188 |
1). This is just totally wrong. In 1987-2000 in the US the mortality rate was 0.3% and in less developed countries is was up to 28%. Why have you posted that number with no source?
2). MMR contains an attenuated measles vaccine (weakened) from which you can't get the disease in the way you are implying. You might get a very mild form of measles but you've implied it's the full blown thing - a total falsehood.
3). Once again this is misleading and untrue. The original cell material came from aborted fetus 50 years ago but the amount that might be present in the latest generation of those cells is about a billionth of a gram (the same as in fruit or veg). To claim it's causing mutagenesis is wild at best. Any evidence at all for that? It's essential to use this system as the vaccines can't be produced with animal cells (although I suspect you'd say that was even worse if they could).
4). The vaccine is not highly inefficient. It's effective up to a probability, which is about 97%. Given this there are always going to be outliers where an outbreak could occur, that's how probabilities work. Citing an example of such an outlier doesn't mean it's "highly ineffective". That's a stone-face lie and you should retract it.
5). Hard to assess this one as you've not given a source and you didn't say what the starting date for the numbers was, only the end date. Either way it's accepted widely by the scientific community that the risks of having the vaccine, whilst they may be non-zero are better than the risks of not having it. It's a risk-reward equation in which you seem to ignore the reward side.
6). There is no 6 for some reason.
7). I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here? A 400% increase from what baseline figure? How many unvaccinated people were they exposed to which would increase the likelihood of someone in the 3% of people it won't work for coming into contact with the disease? Not enough data and once again ignoring probabilities.
8). No reason to doubt you on this. However for context if you listen to an advert for a medicine in the US it usually ends with "may cause death". They are legally obliged to state every possible thing that may happen regardless of the likelihood.
9). So the link you provided doesn't work but this is once again a total lie and you should be ashamed of this one. Dr. Thompson himself has stated he omitted vital statistical information and that the conclusion is flawed. He has also said that parents should give their children the MMR vaccine so it's quite a strange one for you to use as evidence.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/bad-medicine/
10). What exactly are you advocating here? That everyone gets given measles and if they survive and aren't harmed (unlike the lady on the BBC last night who is now disabled after getting measles) then there is a slightly increased chance that they won't die of something else later in life? It's a totally bonkers thing to even bring up.
I don't think we are going to agree but some of your stuff needed calling out and I felt you deserved a response.
Good day.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:24 - Apr 26 with 3629 views | Harry_Palmer |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 08:56 - Apr 26 by WeWereZombies |
I think that that's a bit unfair, the poster has cherry picked his studies to be sure but it is always good to question. Just not so good having questioned to then not use all the available information and make a decision on balance.
Also a bit worried that he thinks a water filter will save him from PFOA and PTFE contamination - unless he is on a wind up... [Post edited 26 Apr 2019 8:57]
|
I am providing the balance for the other side of the story that for some reason nobody wants to tell. I have literally hundreds of studies that back up my position so the question you need to ask is why are these studies ignored when they clearly demonstrate the potential harm vaccines can cause. When was the last time you saw a vaccine injury in the mainstream news? Yet an outbreak of measles and we have mass hysteria, despite it being relatively harmless in the vast majority of cases.
Everybody is concerned about children getting sick or harmed until there is the implication that a vaccine was involved, then suddenly nobody wants to know. Maybe its some of you that should stop believing everything you are told and use all the available data.
With regards to the water filter, I'm not talking about a brita, its a pretty powerful piece of kit that removes between 90 - 100% of a huge list of contaminants in independent testing. I'm not sure about the specific microplastics you mentioned but in any case I'm not really sure what your point is?
https://www.puriflowfilters.co.uk/Sentry
If the most powerful water filters can't remove these plastics then I have no choice as I have to drink water, I do currently have a choice over what substances I choose to inject directly into my blood stream. It will be a very dark day for all of us if that most basic of human rights is taken away. |  | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:25 - Apr 26 with 3624 views | m14_blue |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 09:38 - Apr 26 by Harry_Palmer |
Chrisswailes, I have backed up pretty much everything I have contributed in this thread with science and stood by my position despite an onslaught of opposition.
You on the other hand have entered the thread once to offer personal abuse without even the courtesy of substantiating your comment. And I'm the ignorant one? |
I'm sorry, this is just bizarre. You're obviously a perfectly intelligent guy but you have a huge blind spot on this issue.
Do you seriously think that your research makes you better qualified than the overwhelming majority of medical academics and professionals? These are some of the brightest and most talented people on the planet, who have chosen to dedicate their lives and careers to helping others, and you think you know better? Reading articles online, particularly articles cherry picked to fit a pre-determined narrative, does not give your opinion equal weight as theirs. I don't understand why you can't see that.
I'm not sure if you're saying these people are part of some grand conspiracy or that they just aren't as intelligent as you, but either way it's grossly offensive.
It's exactly the same phenomenon as flat earthers and climate change deniers and I find it extremely disturbing. |  | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:37 - Apr 26 with 3612 views | Harry_Palmer |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 09:44 - Apr 26 by StokieBlue |
I'm going to dispute this. It's not science, it's blatant cherry picking as others have pointed out.
I know you have a personal connection to the subject but that is clouding your reasoning. You are treating a low probability event as something which is likely to happen due to personal circumstances. That is understandable from a human perspective but not from a scientific one.
It's like saying you know someone who was hit by a bus so you're never going to cross the road again and neither should anyone else because they will get hit by a bus. The total lack of appreciate to the probabilities is very annoying. All outcomes are not equally likely but you never take this into account.
I'll try and look at your longer post today at some point.
SB |
Does not everything you accuse me of apply to you also? You cherry pick studies that suit your argument and ignore those that don't. You also treat a low probability event such as a serious complication from measles as the norm while seemingly ignoring the vast majority of cases that would pass without such problems. You also ignore the fact that outbreaks happen in vaccinated populations and assume ( without solid evidence ) that any drop in disease rates is due entirely to the vaccine. | | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:42 - Apr 26 with 3605 views | Harry_Palmer |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:06 - Apr 26 by Swailsey |
I don’t think being called ignorant is personal abuse.
I can do a quick Google for some evidence if you like, since you like that? |
I think you just proved my point, you have nothing to offer whatsoever apart from joining in to have a swipe from within the comfort of the herd. Other people are at least putting their views across with some reasoning. | | | |
| Well done for taking the time to respond Stokers on 10:43 - Apr 26 with 3605 views | Dyland |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:07 - Apr 26 by StokieBlue |
1). This is just totally wrong. In 1987-2000 in the US the mortality rate was 0.3% and in less developed countries is was up to 28%. Why have you posted that number with no source?
2). MMR contains an attenuated measles vaccine (weakened) from which you can't get the disease in the way you are implying. You might get a very mild form of measles but you've implied it's the full blown thing - a total falsehood.
3). Once again this is misleading and untrue. The original cell material came from aborted fetus 50 years ago but the amount that might be present in the latest generation of those cells is about a billionth of a gram (the same as in fruit or veg). To claim it's causing mutagenesis is wild at best. Any evidence at all for that? It's essential to use this system as the vaccines can't be produced with animal cells (although I suspect you'd say that was even worse if they could).
4). The vaccine is not highly inefficient. It's effective up to a probability, which is about 97%. Given this there are always going to be outliers where an outbreak could occur, that's how probabilities work. Citing an example of such an outlier doesn't mean it's "highly ineffective". That's a stone-face lie and you should retract it.
5). Hard to assess this one as you've not given a source and you didn't say what the starting date for the numbers was, only the end date. Either way it's accepted widely by the scientific community that the risks of having the vaccine, whilst they may be non-zero are better than the risks of not having it. It's a risk-reward equation in which you seem to ignore the reward side.
6). There is no 6 for some reason.
7). I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here? A 400% increase from what baseline figure? How many unvaccinated people were they exposed to which would increase the likelihood of someone in the 3% of people it won't work for coming into contact with the disease? Not enough data and once again ignoring probabilities.
8). No reason to doubt you on this. However for context if you listen to an advert for a medicine in the US it usually ends with "may cause death". They are legally obliged to state every possible thing that may happen regardless of the likelihood.
9). So the link you provided doesn't work but this is once again a total lie and you should be ashamed of this one. Dr. Thompson himself has stated he omitted vital statistical information and that the conclusion is flawed. He has also said that parents should give their children the MMR vaccine so it's quite a strange one for you to use as evidence.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/bad-medicine/
10). What exactly are you advocating here? That everyone gets given measles and if they survive and aren't harmed (unlike the lady on the BBC last night who is now disabled after getting measles) then there is a slightly increased chance that they won't die of something else later in life? It's a totally bonkers thing to even bring up.
I don't think we are going to agree but some of your stuff needed calling out and I felt you deserved a response.
Good day.
SB |
Top boy, you. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:44 - Apr 26 with 3605 views | StokieBlue |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:37 - Apr 26 by Harry_Palmer |
Does not everything you accuse me of apply to you also? You cherry pick studies that suit your argument and ignore those that don't. You also treat a low probability event such as a serious complication from measles as the norm while seemingly ignoring the vast majority of cases that would pass without such problems. You also ignore the fact that outbreaks happen in vaccinated populations and assume ( without solid evidence ) that any drop in disease rates is due entirely to the vaccine. |
"Does not everything you accuse me of apply to you also? You cherry pick studies that suit your argument and ignore those that don't."
This isn't really true, there is no need to cherry pick because the vast weight of evidence is against your view - you can take virtually any study you like.
"You also treat a low probability event such as a serious complication from measles as the norm while seemingly ignoring the vast majority of cases that would pass without such problems."
It's not really true though is it - there is a much higher probability of a complication from measles than there is from a complication from the vaccine.
" You also ignore the fact that outbreaks happen in vaccinated populations and assume ( without solid evidence ) that any drop in disease rates is due entirely to the vaccine."
This is a false premise that I've covered in the response to your 10 points. You either haven't understood how the probabilities work with regards to outbreaks in vaccinated populations or you do understand and are misusing the statistics.
You are right though, I am bias heavily towards the scientific consensus that vaccination is a good thing and I'm happy to admit my bias.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 11:00 - Apr 26 with 3591 views | Swailsey |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:42 - Apr 26 by Harry_Palmer |
I think you just proved my point, you have nothing to offer whatsoever apart from joining in to have a swipe from within the comfort of the herd. Other people are at least putting their views across with some reasoning. |
Dude..what is the point of me regurgitating what others have already said?
Stop fishing. | |
| Who said: "Colin Healy made Cesc Fabregas look like Colin Healy"? | We miss you TLA |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 12:08 - Apr 26 with 3563 views | SpruceMoose |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:42 - Apr 26 by Harry_Palmer |
I think you just proved my point, you have nothing to offer whatsoever apart from joining in to have a swipe from within the comfort of the herd. Other people are at least putting their views across with some reasoning. |
Called it. You love feeling as if you're separate from, and more special than, this 'herd'. Just call us sheeple and get it over with. |  |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 12:11 - Apr 26 with 3562 views | Harry_Palmer |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:07 - Apr 26 by StokieBlue |
1). This is just totally wrong. In 1987-2000 in the US the mortality rate was 0.3% and in less developed countries is was up to 28%. Why have you posted that number with no source?
2). MMR contains an attenuated measles vaccine (weakened) from which you can't get the disease in the way you are implying. You might get a very mild form of measles but you've implied it's the full blown thing - a total falsehood.
3). Once again this is misleading and untrue. The original cell material came from aborted fetus 50 years ago but the amount that might be present in the latest generation of those cells is about a billionth of a gram (the same as in fruit or veg). To claim it's causing mutagenesis is wild at best. Any evidence at all for that? It's essential to use this system as the vaccines can't be produced with animal cells (although I suspect you'd say that was even worse if they could).
4). The vaccine is not highly inefficient. It's effective up to a probability, which is about 97%. Given this there are always going to be outliers where an outbreak could occur, that's how probabilities work. Citing an example of such an outlier doesn't mean it's "highly ineffective". That's a stone-face lie and you should retract it.
5). Hard to assess this one as you've not given a source and you didn't say what the starting date for the numbers was, only the end date. Either way it's accepted widely by the scientific community that the risks of having the vaccine, whilst they may be non-zero are better than the risks of not having it. It's a risk-reward equation in which you seem to ignore the reward side.
6). There is no 6 for some reason.
7). I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here? A 400% increase from what baseline figure? How many unvaccinated people were they exposed to which would increase the likelihood of someone in the 3% of people it won't work for coming into contact with the disease? Not enough data and once again ignoring probabilities.
8). No reason to doubt you on this. However for context if you listen to an advert for a medicine in the US it usually ends with "may cause death". They are legally obliged to state every possible thing that may happen regardless of the likelihood.
9). So the link you provided doesn't work but this is once again a total lie and you should be ashamed of this one. Dr. Thompson himself has stated he omitted vital statistical information and that the conclusion is flawed. He has also said that parents should give their children the MMR vaccine so it's quite a strange one for you to use as evidence.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/bad-medicine/
10). What exactly are you advocating here? That everyone gets given measles and if they survive and aren't harmed (unlike the lady on the BBC last night who is now disabled after getting measles) then there is a slightly increased chance that they won't die of something else later in life? It's a totally bonkers thing to even bring up.
I don't think we are going to agree but some of your stuff needed calling out and I felt you deserved a response.
Good day.
SB |
1) https://physiciansforinformedconsent.org/measles/dis/
"between 1959 and 1962, annually there were 400 measles deaths out of 4 million cases, about 1 in 10,000 cases".
The graph yet again shows the decline in deaths well and truly underway from about 1940, well before the vaccine was introduced.
2) I never implied it was full blown, I said atypical measles.
3) Asking me for sources but all the time but no source provided by yourself.
4) Probability is not proof but ok I will retract the 'highly ineffective' and change that to 'shown to sometimes be ineffective'
5) The Vaers website is available to all, take a look.
6) Sorry about that, we'll leave that one, I think 9 is enough to be getting on with.
7) Its self explanatory. A baseline figure is not really relevant.
8) Yes, its true.
9) Can't access your link, but Thompson confessed to omitting data that showed there was an Autism link, not the other way around. There are many other studies that also provide links to autism and other neurological development conditions, a few links below. I am not suggesting vaccines are THE cause but there is evidence that they can be a contributing factor in susceptible individuals. And no I am not ashamed of stating the truth.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19773461 ( fever being one of the most common listed vaccine side effects )
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4215490/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=19106436
10) Not at all, just highlighting the fact that getting measles doesn't always end in disaster and can even have a positive side effect. | | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 12:16 - Apr 26 with 3552 views | Harry_Palmer |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:44 - Apr 26 by StokieBlue |
"Does not everything you accuse me of apply to you also? You cherry pick studies that suit your argument and ignore those that don't."
This isn't really true, there is no need to cherry pick because the vast weight of evidence is against your view - you can take virtually any study you like.
"You also treat a low probability event such as a serious complication from measles as the norm while seemingly ignoring the vast majority of cases that would pass without such problems."
It's not really true though is it - there is a much higher probability of a complication from measles than there is from a complication from the vaccine.
" You also ignore the fact that outbreaks happen in vaccinated populations and assume ( without solid evidence ) that any drop in disease rates is due entirely to the vaccine."
This is a false premise that I've covered in the response to your 10 points. You either haven't understood how the probabilities work with regards to outbreaks in vaccinated populations or you do understand and are misusing the statistics.
You are right though, I am bias heavily towards the scientific consensus that vaccination is a good thing and I'm happy to admit my bias.
SB |
Many flaws here but I rather feel I am wasting my time as I know from experience you will always insist on having the last word so it will just go on and on. We will have to agree to disagree ( again ) on these points. | | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 12:18 - Apr 26 with 3550 views | Harry_Palmer |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 12:08 - Apr 26 by SpruceMoose |
Called it. You love feeling as if you're separate from, and more special than, this 'herd'. Just call us sheeple and get it over with. |
Of course you did Spucey. How are you getting on reviewing the evidence I posted in an open minded and neutral manner? Nah, didn't think so. | | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 12:24 - Apr 26 with 3541 views | Harry_Palmer |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:25 - Apr 26 by m14_blue |
I'm sorry, this is just bizarre. You're obviously a perfectly intelligent guy but you have a huge blind spot on this issue.
Do you seriously think that your research makes you better qualified than the overwhelming majority of medical academics and professionals? These are some of the brightest and most talented people on the planet, who have chosen to dedicate their lives and careers to helping others, and you think you know better? Reading articles online, particularly articles cherry picked to fit a pre-determined narrative, does not give your opinion equal weight as theirs. I don't understand why you can't see that.
I'm not sure if you're saying these people are part of some grand conspiracy or that they just aren't as intelligent as you, but either way it's grossly offensive.
It's exactly the same phenomenon as flat earthers and climate change deniers and I find it extremely disturbing. |
I genuinely don't have time to properly answer this right now ( debating with Stokie is a full time job! ) but seeing as you ask a very valid question I answer in due course. | | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 12:46 - Apr 26 with 3531 views | SpruceMoose |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 12:18 - Apr 26 by Harry_Palmer |
Of course you did Spucey. How are you getting on reviewing the evidence I posted in an open minded and neutral manner? Nah, didn't think so. |
You don't understand what evidence is so I won't waste my time. You're an extremist and there's no reasoning with you. Even someone like Stokie, who has shown you an infinite amount of respect and patience, is banging his head against a brick wall. You just keep going on about people mindlessly being part of the herd man...
You're bought into a conspiracy theory. There's no way you'll back down. I just hope your ignorance and arrogance doesn't hurt anyone. | |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 15:10 - Apr 26 with 3477 views | gordon |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 21:21 - Apr 25 by Harry_Palmer |
Nope wrong again. Nothing special about me other than the ability to research, question, and think for myself rather than regurgitate lies ,you could do it too if only you'd try.
If I really wanted to try and put myself up as someone special do you think i'd opt for anonymous postings on a football message board? Whether you believe it or not my motives are entirely genuine, when you have seen first hand the damage that vaccines can do you kind of get interested in the subject. I simply want people to consider the facts and science on the other side of the issue that the mainstream media for some reason seem to ignore
I have provided plenty of evidence over multiple threads, you have simply chosen to ignore it or taken SB's word as gospel that the sources are suspect etc. But seeing as you seem to have a thirst for evidence on this topic here are 10 facts about Measles for you :
1.) Measles had a .001% mortality rate in 1962...the year BEFORE the vaccine was introduced.
2.) The measles vaccine contains the live virus meaning you can acquire the very disease you hope to avoid from the vaccine. The vaccine insert even says 'atypical measles' is a known adverse reaction.
3.) The vaccine contains aborted fetal DNA. We’re not talking about whole double strand DNA, we’re talking about fragments which are little bits and pieces of DNA. The smaller it is the more likely it is to incorporate into the nucleus of the cells of the vaccine recipient. So those fragments are recombining, they’re inserting into the nucleus of the cells of children who are receiving these vaccines, and insertional mutagenesis is strongly associated with childhood cancers, especially lymphoma and leukemia. Guess which childhood cancers have skyrocketed in the last two decades coinciding with the explosion in the vaccine schedule? Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and Leukemia
4.) The vaccine is highly ineffective and has been shown to not work even in highly vaccinated populations.
"An outbreak of measles occurred in a high school with a documented vaccination level of 98 per cent." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1646939/
"We conclude that outbreaks of measles can occur in secondary schools, even when more than 99 percent of the students have been vaccinated and more than 95 percent are immune."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3821823
"The apparent paradox is that as measles immunization rates rise to high levels in a population, measles becomes a disease of immunized persons"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8053748
5.) The MMR vaccine comes with great risks. As of March 31, 2018, there have been more than 89,355 reports of measles vaccine reactions, hospitalizations, injuries and deaths following measles vaccinations made to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), including 445 related deaths, 6,196 hospitalizations, and 1,657 related disabilities.
7.) Between 1983 and 1990, there was a 423% increase in measles cases among vaccinated individuals. Then in 2006, the largest mumps outbreak in twenty years occurred. Among those infected, 63% were “immunized.
8.) The MMR vaccine insert contains over 40 paragraphs of adverse reactions.
9.) As revealed by CDC whistleblower Dr. William Thompson the MMR vaccine is still legitimately associated with autism. The following study provides new epidemiologic evidence showing that African American males receiving the MMR vaccine prior to 24 months of age are more likely to receive an autism diagnosis.
https://translationalneurodegeneration.biomedcentral.com/…/…
10.) The measles itself can actually protect the body from disease. The following study reveals that infection with measles and mumps (especially in the case of both infections) is associated with lower risks of mortality from atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26122188 |
Just a point of pedantry, but what you're doing just isn't research. Research is systematic investigation into a question or problem which contributes to a greater understanding or knowledge of a topic. What you're doing is obfuscation.
The people who did the research, who dedicated their lives to furthering our understanding of a really important question, are having their work abominably misrepresented here - and there you are congratulating yourself for reading a few blogs. Well done you! |  | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 15:20 - Apr 26 with 3471 views | jjblue84 |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 16:30 - Apr 25 by Harry_Palmer |
Its ok, I understand that people get angry when confronted with views that go against the lies they have been sold, it hurts. I'm sure admin will see that there was zero abuse and reprimand the plonker concerned for wasting their time. |
Admin only bans what it disagrees with, not what's right and wrong! And I speak from personal experience as Phil still has my blog chained up in his dungeon! |  | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 15:43 - Apr 26 with 3458 views | SpruceMoose |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 15:20 - Apr 26 by jjblue84 |
Admin only bans what it disagrees with, not what's right and wrong! And I speak from personal experience as Phil still has my blog chained up in his dungeon! |
Yeah, because much like Harry's anti-vaxx position, it was sh!t.
Phil said you were free to post it up on the forum yourself though.
We are still waiting... | |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 15:46 - Apr 26 with 3450 views | jjblue84 |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 15:43 - Apr 26 by SpruceMoose |
Yeah, because much like Harry's anti-vaxx position, it was sh!t.
Phil said you were free to post it up on the forum yourself though.
We are still waiting... |
Ignorance alert!!  | | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 16:20 - Apr 26 with 3428 views | SpruceMoose |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 15:46 - Apr 26 by jjblue84 |
Ignorance alert!! |
Post your blog or shut the fuk up about it. | |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 16:58 - Apr 26 with 3413 views | WeWereZombies |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 10:24 - Apr 26 by Harry_Palmer |
I am providing the balance for the other side of the story that for some reason nobody wants to tell. I have literally hundreds of studies that back up my position so the question you need to ask is why are these studies ignored when they clearly demonstrate the potential harm vaccines can cause. When was the last time you saw a vaccine injury in the mainstream news? Yet an outbreak of measles and we have mass hysteria, despite it being relatively harmless in the vast majority of cases.
Everybody is concerned about children getting sick or harmed until there is the implication that a vaccine was involved, then suddenly nobody wants to know. Maybe its some of you that should stop believing everything you are told and use all the available data.
With regards to the water filter, I'm not talking about a brita, its a pretty powerful piece of kit that removes between 90 - 100% of a huge list of contaminants in independent testing. I'm not sure about the specific microplastics you mentioned but in any case I'm not really sure what your point is?
https://www.puriflowfilters.co.uk/Sentry
If the most powerful water filters can't remove these plastics then I have no choice as I have to drink water, I do currently have a choice over what substances I choose to inject directly into my blood stream. It will be a very dark day for all of us if that most basic of human rights is taken away. |
As Stokie has pointed out it is a question of perspective and balance, and we have to weigh threats and opportunities, strengths and weaknesses, all the time in our everyday lives. When advice and information is offered with confidence and authority it is unwise to ignore it even if you do not follow it. The ante is upped, however, when contagious diseases are involved because your decisions affect not just yourself or your immediate family but all the people you come into contact with (hence my earlier link about 'Typhoid Mary').
The particulates in water example I threw into the mix was more of a case of how impossible it is to avoid chemicals in modern life than a decision point case. It came out of a puzzle my son set me a few months ago - who is the most influential person in the World? His assertion is that it is chemist Roy J. Plunkett who worked for DuPont in the 1930s and developed Teflon because PFOA has found its way into every water source, even tribes in the remoteness of the Amazon Basin who have no contact with other humans are subject to it in their water courses.
'According to the Environmental Working Group, teflon and PFOA (which is the chemical used to make teflon) are some of the most persistent chemicals in the world. Their toxic legacy will outlive every one of us, and the next 25 generations of our offspring. Ironically, it may shorten each generation’s lifespan, as well. PFOA’s effects include liver damage, immune dysfunction, thyroid dysfunction, and a decreased ability to fight infection.'
From: https://greenlivingideas.com/2012/06/13/how-toxic-is-teflon/ |  |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 17:04 - Apr 26 with 3402 views | jjblue84 |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 16:20 - Apr 26 by SpruceMoose |
Post your blog or shut the fuk up about it. |
It's banned! How many more times!  | | | |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 17:10 - Apr 26 with 3394 views | SpruceMoose |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 17:04 - Apr 26 by jjblue84 |
It's banned! How many more times! |
Now you're just lying.
It isn't banned. You've just not got the bottle to post it.
Phil said he wasn't going to post it because it was probably the worst thing he'd ever read, but that you were more than welcome to post it on the forum yourself.
So, now that I have cleared that up for you, I will look forward to you posting it for our amusement.
Let me guess though, I bet it features quality insight along the lines of 'Evans makes money out of owning us because of taxes or sumfink'. | |
| Pronouns: He/Him/His.
"Imagine being a heterosexual white male in Britain at this moment. How bad is that. Everything you say is racist, everything you say is homophobic. The Woke community have really f****d this country." | | Poll: | Selectamod |
| |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 17:13 - Apr 26 with 3389 views | jjblue84 |
| Some really worrying numbers here on 17:10 - Apr 26 by SpruceMoose |
Now you're just lying.
It isn't banned. You've just not got the bottle to post it.
Phil said he wasn't going to post it because it was probably the worst thing he'd ever read, but that you were more than welcome to post it on the forum yourself.
So, now that I have cleared that up for you, I will look forward to you posting it for our amusement.
Let me guess though, I bet it features quality insight along the lines of 'Evans makes money out of owning us because of taxes or sumfink'. |
Haha, enjoy your world... | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
