Bedrock Of Vaccination Theory Crumbles As Science Reveals Antibodies Not Necessary To Fight Viruses

[DarthNinja]

I've translated this paragraph into hockey-speak for everyone:

"We discovered that the goaltender was incapable of winning hockey games by himself, which in essence debunks the theory that goaltenders serve any legitimate function in hockey"

You need innate AND adaptive immunity to fight off an infection, just like you need skaters and a goalie to win a hockey game.

There is no group of people on earth that bug me more than anti-vacciners. It's just ignorance for the sake of ignorance, and it costs lives. How the hell could anyone say vaccines don't work? We eradicated smallpox and polio FFS. Do you think that just spontaneously occurred exactly as it would have if vaccines did work?

It's good to be skeptical as long as you use that skepticism to learn more about a treatment from credible sources and make decisions based on that knowledge. If you're connecting random dots without evidence and believing whatever you hear on the internet you're not being skeptical, you're being paranoid and ignorant.

/Immunology major and pharmacist

Edit: I made the mistake of actually clicking the links provided by the OP. Does that seem like a reputable source to you? Honestly? They're selling a "spice that cures diabetes" in the sidebar. I just don't understand the thought process of someone who looks at that website and says "wow, this disproves a century of scientific evidence."

[DarthNinja]

^^^^^

I try to avoid personal attacks in internet debates, but you're an idiot. Effective small pox vaccines were not made until the 1940s. Everyone knew that there were many problems with the previous vaccines and they were not 100% effective.

Do you really think we should make medical policy choices based on statements made be doctors in the 1930s? Perhaps we should make lobotomies mandatory for homosexuals too? You are litterally arguing that we should put modern medicine back 85 years.

[DarthNinja]

I've translated this paragraph into hockey-speak for everyone:

"We discovered that the goaltender was incapable of winning hockey games by himself, which in essence debunks the theory that goaltenders serve any legitimate function in hockey"

You need innate AND adaptive immunity to fight off an infection, just like you need skaters and a goalie to win a hockey game.

There is no group of people on earth that bug me more than anti-vacciners. It's just ignorance for the sake of ignorance, and it costs lives. How the hell could anyone say vaccines don't work? We eradicated smallpox and polio FFS. Do you think that just spontaneously occurred exactly as it would have if vaccines did work?

It's good to be skeptical as long as you use that skepticism to learn more about a treatment from credible sources and make decisions based on that knowledge. If you're connecting random dots without evidence and believing whatever you hear on the internet you're not being skeptical, you're being paranoid and ignorant.

/Immunology major and pharmacist

Edit: I made the mistake of actually clicking the links provided by the OP. Does that seem like a reputable source to you? Honestly? They're selling a "spice that cures diabetes" in the sidebar. I just don't understand the thought process of someone who looks at that website and says "wow, this disproves a century of scientific evidence."

[MadMonk]

DarthNinja,

Do you or do you not agree that the best way to determine the effect of a vaccine is comparing the data before the introduction of vaccination and after the introduction of vaccination?

[DoorKnob]

DarthNinja,

Do you or do you not agree that the best way to determine the effect of a vaccine is comparing the data before the introduction of vaccination and after the introduction of vaccination?

[DarthNinja]

^^^^^

I try to avoid personal attacks in internet debates, but you're an idiot. Effective small pox vaccines were not made until the 1940s. Everyone knew that there were many problems with the previous vaccines and they were not 100% effective.

Do you really think we should make medical policy choices based on statements made be doctors in the 1930s? Perhaps we should make lobotomies mandatory for homosexuals too? You are litterally arguing that we should put modern medicine back 85 years.

[GodzillaDeuce]

British Prof. George Dick stated in 1973 that 75% of individuals who contracted smallpox in the UK within recent decades were vaccinated.

[MadMonk]

It is true that an epidemic swept through europe in in the 1870's, due to people not realizing that people have to be revaccinated for it to be effective, but if you actually do a bit of proper data analysis (Original Source) the claim that vaccines don't work is extremely weak):

Here are the deaths rates per million (averages from 1870-1876) (Death during the highest year in brackets)

Countries which have compulsory vaccination

England: 361 (1012)

Scotland: 314 (718)

Bavaria: 346 (1045)

Sweden: 333 (936)

Average for countries with compulsory vaccination: 339

Let's see how countries without compulsory vaccination fare:

Prussia:953 (2624)

Austria: 1360 (3147)

Belgium: 1293 (4168)

Netherlands: 958 (4355)

Average for countries without compulsory vaccination: 1141

Note that the Netherlands would've been higher as in 1872 they required proof of vaccination for admission to schools)

[GodzillaDeuce]

lol

Bayes Theorem. Google it

[DoorKnob]

Uhh huh.

So what you're saying is ignore the doctor(s) in 1937 because an effective vaccine was not made until just a few years later?

What you're saying is nonsensical because people were given compulsory vaccinations by governments in the late 1800's and early 1900's.

So are you saying then that the governments and medical establishments knowingly and purposely forced compulsory vaccinations on people even though "everyone knew" (to quote your words) that they were highly problematic and not effective?

I call you a DoorKnob but that's already taken by someone else.

British Prof. George Dick stated in 1973 that 75% of individuals who contracted smallpox in the UK within recent decades were vaccinated.

[Mr. Ambien]

Not the first time you've resorted to such childish attacks; but thanks for coming out, champ.

The jumps in your logic are just fantastic.

Obviously, yes, ignore the doctors from 1937 because what they said back then has proven not to be true now. Just because they believed something 75 (yep, that many) years ago doesn't make it true now. I don't even know how you can possibly draw that conclusion. If I could find an article online written by a doctor that has found the earth to be flat, you'd be all over it. I really shouldn't be surprised, because you turned a biased, poorly written article based on a miniscule study completely irrelevant to the now-ridiculous topic of a crumbling bedrock of vaccination theory. WTC, moon, and now this. Literally unbelievable.

And your sources are equally so. I wouldn't be surprised to see you linking to freerepublic in the near future.

Don't you find it a little strange that in literally every thread it's you against everyone else? But I guess you're just the one in a million that's just on another level intellectual and we're all just sheeple. Oh, sorry, 1 in 500k cause Dank just jumps on whatever topic you get involved in like it's made of syrup. All I'm saying is, I think you're a horse. Two, three, many, countless people have called you a horse. Maybe it's time to go shopping for a saddle.

[taxi]

It is true that an epidemic swept through europe in in the 1870's, due to people not realizing that people have to be revaccinated for it to be effective, but if you actually do a bit of proper data analysis (Original Source) the claim that vaccines don't work is extremely weak):

Here are the deaths rates per million (averages from 1870-1876) (Death during the highest year in brackets)

Countries which have compulsory vaccination

England: 361 (1012)

Scotland: 314 (718)

Bavaria: 346 (1045)

Sweden: 333 (936)

Average for countries with compulsory vaccination: 339

Let's see how countries without compulsory vaccination fare:

Prussia:953 (2624)

Austria: 1360 (3147)

Belgium: 1293 (4168)

Netherlands: 958 (4355)

Average for countries without compulsory vaccination: 1141

Note that the Netherlands would've been higher as in 1872 they required proof of vaccination for admission to schools)

[MadMonk]

Another major factor affecting the historical effectiveness of vaccines is that vaccines were often accidentally contaminated, denatured, or destroyed by accident prior to use. Preservation technology was not up to snuff and you were transporting the vaccines via train, at best.

Modern day vaccines can be thrown in a vat of liquid nitrogen, transported via jet, and then put in proper storage devices. It simply did not work that way until very recently.

[mcgillnuck]

Abstract

On June 7-8, 2000 a secret conference was held at the Simpsonwood Conference Center in Norcross, Georgia to discuss a study examining the link between increasing doses of Thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders. The study was done using the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) database, an official governmental data bank collecting patient vaccination information on the children from the health maintenance organizations (HMOs) being paid to participate. Attending were 51 scientists, representatives of pharmaceutical vaccine manufacturing companies and a representative of the World Health Organization; the public and the media were unlawfully excluded. The conclusions of this meeting were quite startling, since it confirmed a dose-response link between Thimerosal and neurodevelopmental disorders that held up to rigorous statistical analyses. In their discussion, they make plain why the meeting was held in secret: the conclusions would have destroyed the public’s confidence in the vaccine program, and more importantly, their faith in vaccine authorities. When the results of this study were published three years later in the journal Pediatrics, the “problem” had been fixed, in that by adding another set of data from a third HMO, reorganizing the criteria for inclusion and restructuring the patient groupings, a less than statistically significant link was demonstrated. In my analysis I discuss the more outrageous statements made during the meeting and how accepted experts in the field of mercury neurotoxicity were excluded from the meeting.

I was asked to write a paper on some of the newer mechanisms of vaccine damage to the nervous system, but in the interim I came across an incredible document that should blow the lid off the cover-up being engineered by the pharmaceutical companies in conjunction with powerful governmental agencies.

It all started when a friend of mine sent me a copy of a letter from Congressman David Weldon, M.D. to the director of the CDC, Dr Julie L. Gerberding, in which Congressman Weldon alludes to a study by a Doctor Thomas Verstraeten, then representing the CDC, on the connection between infant exposure to Thimerosal-containing vaccines and neurodevelopmental injury. In this shocking letter, Congressman Weldon refers to Dr. Verstraeten’s study, which looked at the data from the Vaccine Safety Datalink and found a statistically significant correlation between Thimerosal exposure via vaccines and several neurodevelopmental disorders including tics, speech and language delays, and possibly ADD.

http://www.russellblaylockmd.com/

Dr. Blaylock serves on the editorial staff of the Journal of the American Nutraceutical Association and is on the editorial staff of the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, official journal of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons. He serves on the editorial board of the journal Fluoride, official journal of the International Society for Fluoride Research. . He has a monthly nutrition newsletter, published by NewsMax.com, The Blaylock Wellness Newsletter.

Dr. Blaylock serves as the medical consultant for the Fluoride Toxicity Research Collaborative. He was recently awarded the Integrity in Science award by the Westin Price Foundation. Presently, he is a visiting professor in the department of biological sciences at Belhaven College in Jackson, Mississippi.

At present he is a member of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons, the American Nutraceutical Association, the International and American Associations of Clinical Nutritionist, American College of Nutrition, American Association for Health Freedom, National Health Federation, American Academy of Anti-Aging Medicine and the Price-Pottenger Nutrition Foundation. He was recently appointed as a member of the Scientific Advisory Panel of the Life-Extension Foundation.

[Blood Fiend]

Love me or hate me the following is my opinion:

Reading multiple pages of replies, half for, half against immunization, astounded by the replies. I am a firm beleiver that 95% of you are naturally stupid, with tendancies of lemmings. To take sides in somthing that you clearly don't have a grasp of is rediculas.

On one side you have the Govt', and pharmacuitical companies telling you, that you need these vaccines or you might die. With both of these large companies making huge dividends off of any one who will blindly follow without question. Keep in mind the Govt' is known for scams, shams, and plans to keep the financial split of the population 6% to 94%, rich to poor that is.

On the other hand you have a doctor at a university, obviously with tenur, perhaps with a moral view of being financially raped without cause. Investigating the possible pros/cons of vaccines. With astounding numbers in multiple studies over a long period of time, in multiple countries with multiple ailments.

Now as a people, we are demoralized to conform and be happy with "getting by", the easiest way is to comform to political ideals and go "with the grain". There are way to many people on this planet, we know this, with the GOVT getting people to take vaccines that actually increase the mortality rate. Many viruses/ailments have been wiped off the earth, why would we need to still take vaccines for them? polio for instance, is known to cause cancer, with the possiblity to decrease the number of people on the planet.

Now for left wing/right wing nutz that can't see both sides of a story objectivly, theres a dilema of incompitance holding you back from making an educated decision(objectivly). I strongly beleive that of all the conspiracy theorys, and anti-govt propaganda, of the 100% of the material, at least 1% is true, and most likely worse then reported.

I for one am sick of being told what to beleive is real by a GOVT that asks us to blindly follow them with out justification or unbiased information. If you think vaccines will help you, then get them, if you don't, don't! However the stuides are quite compelling against vaccines, considering that the information is comming from an unbiased source, like a university doctor. Who by the way doesn't stand to profit from decreasing use of these vaccines/drugs.

[DarthNinja]

Not the first time you've resorted to such childish attacks; but thanks for coming out, champ.

The jumps in your logic are just fantastic.

Obviously, yes, ignore the doctors from 1937 because what they said back then has proven not to be true now. Just because they believed something 75 (yep, that many) years ago doesn't make it true now. I don't even know how you can possibly draw that conclusion. If I could find an article online written by a doctor that has found the earth to be flat, you'd be all over it. I really shouldn't be surprised, because you turned a biased, poorly written article based on a miniscule study completely irrelevant to the now-ridiculous topic of a crumbling bedrock of vaccination theory. WTC, moon, and now this. Literally unbelievable.

And your sources are equally so. I wouldn't be surprised to see you linking to freerepublic in the near future.

Don't you find it a little strange that in literally every thread it's you against everyone else? But I guess you're just the one in a million that's just on another level intellectual and we're all just sheeple. Oh, sorry, 1 in 500k cause Dank just jumps on whatever topic you get involved in like it's made of syrup. All I'm saying is, I think you're a horse. Two, three, many, countless people have called you a horse. Maybe it's time to go shopping for a saddle.

[DarthNinja]

Take Alex Jones as a perfect example.. Being a government critic and reading almost anything I come across and look at evidence that might prove it's validity, there's a niche of people who believe everything is part of a conspiracy. Difference is, Alex Jones profits from people like the OP, so for him perpetuating spooks into believing there's a conspiracy around every corner is an excellent way to make some $$$$$. People naturally are sceptics. Hell, I'm a sceptic of just about everything, but the difference is, is NOT to ignore colossal amounts of evidence when it clearly slaps you across the face. Conspiracy theorists do just that, to religiously focus on the most minute shred of evidence, embellishing it as something greater when it clearly isn't, obviously not wanting to find out or understand the truth but something to validate their religious-like conspiracy. Unfortunately these type of nuts are far too prominent on CDC.

[DarthNinja]

Love me or hate me the following is my opinion: Reading multiple pages of replies, half for, half against immunization, astounded by the replies. I am a firm beleiver that 95% of you are naturally stupid, with tendancies of lemmings. To take sides in somthing that you clearly don't have a grasp of is rediculas. On one side you have the Govt', and pharmacuitical companies telling you, that you need these vaccines or you might die. With both of these large companies making huge dividends off of any one who will blindly follow without question. Keep in mind the Govt' is known for scams, shams, and plans to keep the financial split of the population 6% to 94%, rich to poor that is. On the other hand you have a doctor at a university, obviously with tenur, perhaps with a moral view of being financially raped without cause. Investigating the possible pros/cons of vaccines. With astounding numbers in multiple studies over a long period of time, in multiple countries with multiple ailments. Now as a people, we are demoralized to conform and be happy with "getting by", the easiest way is to comform to political ideals and go "with the grain". There are way to many people on this planet, we know this, with the GOVT getting people to take vaccines that actually increase the mortality rate. Many viruses/ailments have been wiped off the earth, why would we need to still take vaccines for them? polio for instance, is known to cause cancer, with the possiblity to decrease the number of people on the planet. Now for left wing/right wing nutz that can't see both sides of a story objectivly, theres a dilema of incompitance holding you back from making an educated decision(objectivly). I strongly beleive that of all the conspiracy theorys, and anti-govt propaganda, of the 100% of the material, at least 1% is true, and most likely worse then reported. I for one am sick of being told what to beleive is real by a GOVT that asks us to blindly follow them with out justification or unbiased information. If you think vaccines will help you, then get them, if you don't, don't! However the stuides are quite compelling against vaccines, considering that the information is comming from an unbiased source, like a university doctor. Who by the way doesn't stand to profit from decreasing use of these vaccines/drugs.

[Blood Fiend]

Always good to see another 5%'er!

[GodzillaDeuce]

rediculas.