Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

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


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
251 replies to this topic

#151 mcgillnuck

mcgillnuck

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,508 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 06

Posted 30 March 2012 - 11:00 AM

But the new research highlights the fact that innate immunity plays a significant role in fighting infections, and is perhaps more important than adaptive immunity at preventing or fighting infections. In tests, adaptive immune system antibodies were shown unable to fight infection by themselves, which in essence debunks the theory that vaccine-induced antibodies serve any legitimate function in preventing or fighting off infection.


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."

Edited by mcgillnuck, 30 March 2012 - 11:26 AM.


Props to canuckbuddy for the sig

#152 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,379 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 30 March 2012 - 11:05 AM

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

+1

I'm a natural sceptic who is just as naturally mistrusting of government but I'm not sure what type of stupid/superstition one has to beat themselves over the head with to ignore the proof in the pudding about vaccinations and their effectiveness.

There are levels of vaccinations that are more a requirement because of the possibility of spreading to others rapidly and causing death/enormous health issues on a pandemic level, then there are those vaccinations which would help prevent the common cold, which helps for less essential reasons to a healthy person, like not missing work or school, or a bit more important reasons, like not spreading it to those with weaker immune systems like neonates/infants, the elderly, and those biologically with weakened/compromised immune systems.

Those who refuse to vaccinate themselves against especially the more volatile diseases should be classified a type of potential biohazard and kept track of around the public should either a pandemic occur or possibly occur. If you want to put others at risk with your personal ignorance, understand there will be a heavy cost. I should not have to be so worried about certain diseases that are largely eradicated thanks to vaccines because someone is off their rocker and doesn't want to vaccinate themselves. (if that's even legal)

Edited by zaibatsu, 30 March 2012 - 11:11 AM.


#153 mcgillnuck

mcgillnuck

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,508 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 06

Posted 30 March 2012 - 11:36 AM

The actualy paper costs money but I was able to find this:

B Cell Maintenance of Subcapsular Sinus Macrophages Protects against a Fatal Viral Infection Independent of Adaptive Immunity:

http://www.cell.com/...00057-X#Summary


What the study actually says:

It seems that mice don't need adaptive immunity to defend against VSV infection.

The title of this thread:


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



Do you see the difference?

Props to canuckbuddy for the sig

#154 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,379 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 30 March 2012 - 11:48 AM

What the study actually says:

It seems that mice don't need adaptive immunity to defend against VSV infection.

The title of this thread:


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



Do you see the difference?

Long answer short.. no.

When someone is out to prove a point and religiously believes something so rigidly without reason, the ridiculous generalized hyperbole of the assertion made in the OP compared to the very specific lab tests on mice for a particular disease that hardly even affects humans whatsoever somehow proves a point.. of nothing. VSV.. malaria/polio.. er, yeah.

Edited by zaibatsu, 30 March 2012 - 11:50 AM.


#155 -Goose-

-Goose-

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,586 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 10

Posted 30 March 2012 - 12:23 PM

Yeap. One study just broke down about the last 50 years of medical research.

Seriously, get a hold of yourselves. Vaccines are one of the greatest things to come out of modern medicine. They've been the number 1 factor is reducing deaths before the age of 5, among other things. If it weren't so critical, we wouldn't see billionaires like Gates and Buffet spending billions on research.

Posted Image


#156 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:10 PM

William Howard Hay, MD

Pocono, PA., on June 25, 1937, before The Medical Freedom Society

December 21, 1937

MR. BURDICK. Mr. Speaker, under the leave to extend my remarks in the RECORD, I include the following address by William Howard Hay, M.D., of Pocono, PA., on June 25, 1937, before the Medical Freedom Society on the Lemke bill to abolish compulsory vaccination:


I was glad to hear the Honorable Mr. Lemke’s presentation of the subject matter of his bill. I have thought many times of all the insane things that we have advocated in medicine, that Is one of the most insane-to insist on the vaccination of children, or anybody else, for the prevention of smallpox, when, as a matter of fact, we are never able to prove that vaccination saved one man from small-pox. Naturally not. When you have protected anybody, as we denote protection in medicine, you have at the same time destroyed your evidence. If that man doesn’t take the disease against which he is supposed he be protected, how can you ever know he would have taken it if he hadn’t been protected? We have destroyed the evidence.

As a matter of fact, perhaps it is safe to say that not more than 10 per cent of the people ever would take smallpox if sleeping in the same bed with an infected smallpox victim. We know there is a large immunity to smallpox. Very few people are subject to it, and these usually in the filthiest surroundings. Now, if we carry that natural immunity to smallpox as we do other diseases, and we have been protected by vaccination and then we are exposed to smallpox and don’t take it, don’t you see there is no proof there? We may be carrying a natural Immunity. If one case that has been successfully vaccinated afterwards develops smallpox, that is proof that it isn’t protection, now, isn’t it?

I know of one epidemic of smallpox comprising nine hundred and some cases in which 95 per cent of the infected had been vaccinated, and most of them recently. I have had in my own experience one very small epidemic comprising 33 cases, of which 29 had vaccination histories a “good” scar, and some of them vaccinated within the last year. There was no protection there.

Among these was one girl who was not vaccinated, never had been, who had five cases of smallpox in the family, nursed those cases that were ill, a baby among the others, the worst case of small-pox among them, refused vaccination and was never infected at all-a natural immunity.

What is true of smallpox is true of every other disease. We are not all equally subject to all the diseases that occur. We know that king. an epidemic of influenza sweeps over the country. Why doesn’t everyone have it? The germ, if it is a germ, and we don t know that it is, is ubiquitous. They are everywhere. You can’t hide from them. And yet perhaps but 10 per cent of the population of any region will be infected. What protects the 90 per cent? Natural immunity.

We may have natural immunity this year and we may not have It next year, but we can’t create it artificially by using a so-called immune serum. As I say, when we do use an immune serum we have destroyed every possibility of using that case as evidence, because we have no way of knowing whether it would ever have been infected.

We have always recognized the fact that but 15 per cent of children are subject to diphtheria, no matter how thoroughly they are exposed. Statistics of every epidemic of diphtheria in every section of the country, if averaged, will show that average, with 85 per cent who are not infected. We have taken diphtheria antitoxin, we have used toxin-antitoxin and toxoid, and if we found a susceptibility or reaction to this, we have immunized that case against diphtheria by a series of three injections of anti diphtheric serum. We have to admit 15 per cent of the children are still unprotected because they take diphtheria. Isn’t that the same 15 percent? We have no way of proving it isn’t.

A number of years ago when we were just beginning to study diphtheria antitoxin minutely, Cook County, Ill., hospital decided to immunize one-half of the nursing staff and not the other half. Diphtheria broke out soon afterward among the immunized cases, not the others. It invaded both halves, both the immunized and the unimmunized, and the total of cases was much higher among the supposedly immunized cases than among those not immunized. We didn’t do much for those nurses.

When we took over the management of the Philippines and all of its destinies, we announced to the bloomin’ cockeyed world we were going to dean up smallpox in the Philippines. Well, we waited a few years but we did make a serious effort. In fact, in a population of 10,000,000 people we consummated 30,000,000 vaccinations within a period of 6 years. The Province of Rizal, of which Manila was the center, was the most accessible, of course; the little rascals couldn’t get away there, we could catch them, and did, and some of them were vaccinated three and four and five and six times in the 6 years. We were going to make it thorough. In Mindanao and some of the other more outlying provinces, more mountainous, we couldn’t catch the little rascals, so there was a smaller percentage of vaccinations In the outlying districts. Rizal had to take it.

Within 6 years of that time the Philippines suffered the worst attack of smallpox, the worst epidemic three times over, that had ever occurred in the history of the islands, and it was almost three times as fatal. The death rate ran as high as 60 per cent in certain areas where formerly it had been 10 and 15 per cent, and the thing that climaxed the whole point was this: In Rizal we had the highest incidence and the highest mortality of any part of the Archipelago. The Navy reported that vaccination of the sailors went on as regularly as drills, every so often they were vaccinated, but they had their usual percentage of smallpox, and yet they were protected!

Now we are asking in many States to have the privilege of deciding whether we will be vaccinated or not. No one wishes to deny his brother the privilege of being vaccinated if he has any faith in it, but here is the ridiculous thin g about it: The ones who are objecting to abolishing the law and who are insisting on vaccination are the ones who are afraid that they will take smallpox if their brothers are not vaccinated. Now if you are vaccinated, you are protected, aren’t you? What are you afraid of? Suppose your next-door neighbor does get smallpox because he was not vaccinated; that is his business; he has a right to have smallpox if he wants to; he can’t give it to you if you have been vaccinated, so what are you worrying about? Let him do as he pleases. That is all we are asking; we are not asking that they forbid vaccination. Let everyone have what he wants, but let us not compel those to have vaccination who know there is nothing in it, who know it is not a protection.

It is now 30 years since I have been confining myself to the treatment of chronic diseases. During those 30 years I have run against so many histories of little children who had never seen a sick day until they were vaccinated and who, in the several years that have followed, have never seen a well day since. I couldn’t put my finger on the disease they have. They just weren’t strong. Their resistance was gone. They were perfectly well before they were vaccinated. They have never been well since. Now you can’t record those as deaths from vaccination because they are still alive; but in England, where statistics are a little more frank than they are with us, where they ate kept a little more accurately, a little more aboveboard than In this country, the actual official records show three times as many deaths directly from vaccinations as from smallpox for the past 21 years. If they record three times as many deaths, I will guarantee, you that there are three times as many deaths that were not recorded that are directly traceable to vaccination. That doesn’t take into account the many, many cases of encephalitis or sleeping sickness, of this or that form of degeneration, that occur as a direct result of vaccination. That case Is still alive. It hasn’t entered here the mortality records yet, but it is suffering and has suffered ever since vaccination.

And if you have been dealing, as I have, with the derelicts from all over the world for 30 years, you would find an almost fatal relationship between this history of vaccination and some failing that follows this for many years that has kept a person from being as well as he should have been.

It is nonsense to think that you can inject pus-and it is usually from the pustule of the dead smallpox victim; that is the basis of it; we used to think it was from cowpox, but the manufacturers deny that and say the most reliable form originates in the pustule of someone who had died from smallpox-it is unthinkable that you can inject that into a little child and in anyway improve its health.

What Is true of vaccination is exactly as true of all forms of serum immunization, so called. There is no such thing as immunization, but we sell it under the name, “immunization”. We jab a needle full of pus germs, we will say the streptococcus, for instance, in attenuated form so it won’t pollute too badly, and we increase the dose or potency of that little by little until we build up what we call a resistance to it. You can do the same thing with the rattlesnake venom. You can be bitten just a little by a rattlesnake and not die, and If you are bitten often enough, you can be bitten In a vital part and not die; you have built up a resistance to the venom of the rattlesnake, but have you improved your physique by doing so? If we could by any means build up a natural resistance to disease through these artificial means, I would applaud it to the echo, but we can’t do it. The body has its own methods of defense. These depend on the vitality of the body at the time. If it is vital enough, it will resist all infections; if it isn’t vital enough, It won’t, and you can’t change the vitality of the body for the better by introducing poison of any kind into it.

http://www.vaccinati...-howard-hay-md/

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

        Sig too big, images removed. - SN

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#157 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:14 PM

Below Are Many Other Examples of Epidemics Following Inoculations Compulsory Vaccination in the Philippine's Leads to Smallpox Epidemic

In 1905, following the commencement of systematic vaccination enforced by the US Government, an epidemic occurred where the case mortality ranged from 25% to 50% in different parts of the islands. In 1918-1919 with over 95% of the population vaccinated, the worst epidemic in the Philippine's history occurred resulting in a case mortality of 65%. The highest percentage occurred in the capital Manila , the most thoroughly vaccinated place. The lowest percentage occurred in Mindanao , the least vaccinated place owing to religious prejudices. Dr V de Jesus, Director of Health, stated that the 1918-1919 smallpox epidemic resulted in 60,855 deaths. The 1920 Report of the Philippines Health Service contains the following comments:

"From the time in which smallpox was practically eradicated in the city of Manila to the year 1918 (about 9 years) in which the epidemic appears certainly in one of its severest forms, hundreds after hundreds of thousands of people were yearly vaccinated with the most unfortunate result that the 1918 epidemic looks prima facie as a flagrant failure of the classic Immunization towards future epidemics". 1920 Report of the Philippines Health Service

"We were fortunate enough to address their own medical (and) health officials where we reminded them of the incidence of smallpox in formerly "immunized" Filipinos. We invited them to consult their own medical records and asked them to correct us if our own facts and figures disagreed. No such correction has been forthcoming, and we can only conclude that between 1918-1919 there were 112,549 cases of smallpox notified, with 60,855 deaths. Systematic (mass) vaccination started in 1905, and since its introduction case mortality increased alarmingly. Their own records comment that "The mortality is hardly explainable."-Second Thoughts on Disease by Kalokerinos & Dettman-The Survival Factor in Neoplastic and Viral Diseases, Dr. William Koch

Compulsory Vaccination in Germany Leads to Smallpox Epidemic

In Germany, in the years 1870-1871, over 1,000,000 people had smallpox, of which 120,000 died. 96 percent of these had been vaccinated. An address sent to the governments of the various German states from Bismarck, the Chancellor of Germany, contained the following comment: "the hopes placed in the efficacy of the cowpox virus as preventative of smallpox have proved entirely deceptive."

Compulsory Vaccination in Japan Leads to Smallpox Epidemic

In Japan in 1885, 13 years after compulsory vaccination commenced there in 1872, a law was passed requiring re-vaccination every seven years. From 1886 to 1892, 25,474,370 revaccinations were recorded in Japan . Yet during this same period, Japan had 156,175 cases of smallpox with 38,979 deaths, representing a case mortality of nearly 25 percent. In 1896, the Japanese Parliament passed another act requiring every Japanese resident to be vaccinated and re-vaccinated every 5 years. Between 1889 and 1908, there were 171,611 smallpox cases with 47,919 deaths - a case mortality of 30 percent. This case mortality exceeds the smallpox death rate of the pre-vaccination period when nobody was vaccinated. It is noteworthy that Australia at this time - one of the least-vaccinated countries in the world for smallpox - had only three smallpox cases in 15 years, in comparison with Japan 's record of 165,775 cases and 28,979 deaths, in merely a 6-year period of compulsory vaccination and re-vaccination.

Compulsory Vaccination in England leads to Smallpox Epidemic

In England, compulsory vaccination against smallpox was first introduced in 1852, yet in the period 1857 to 1859, a smallpox epidemic killed 14,244 people. In 1863 to 1865, a second epidemic claimed 20,059 lives. In 1867, a more stringent compulsory vaccination law was passed and those who evaded vaccination were prosecuted. After an intensive four-year effort to vaccinate the entire population between the ages of 2 and 50, the Chief Medical Officer of England announced in May 1871 that 97.5 percent had been vaccinated. In the following year, 1872, England experienced its worst-ever smallpox epidemic, which claimed 44,840 lives. Between 1871 and 1880, during the period of compulsory vaccination, the death rate from smallpox leapt from 28 to 46 per 100,000 population.By 1907, the Vaccination Acts of England were repealed, with the help of some of the world's preeminent scientists who had turned staunchly against vaccination; Alfred Russell Wallace (one of the founders of modern evolutionary biology and zoogeography, and co-discoverer with Charles Darwin of the Theory of Natural Selection), Charles Creighton (Britain's most learned epidemiologist and medical historian), William Farr (epidemiologist and medical statistician, first to describe how seasonal epidemics rise and fall - known today as Farr's Law"), and the renowned Dr. Edgar M. Crookshank, Professor of Bacteriology and Comparative Pathology in King's College, London, and author of the scathing scientific critique of vaccination, The History and Pathology of Vaccination (1889). But before the law was amended in 1898 to include a conscientious exemption clause, an average of 2,000 parents per year were jailed and prosecuted - some repeatedly - for resisting vaccination. Large numbers went to prison in default of paying fines. Hundreds had their homes and possessions seized.

Compulsory Vaccination in Italy Leads to Smallpox Epidemic

" Italy was one of the best-vaccinated countries in the world, if not the best of all. For twenty years before 1885, our nation was vaccinated in the proportion of 98.5 percent. Notwithstanding, the epidemics of smallpox that we have had have been something so frightful that nothing before the invention of vaccination could equal them. During 1887, we had 16,249 deaths from smallpox; in 1888, we had 18,110, and in 1889, 131,413."

http://pblake.wrytes...918-Spanish.htm

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

        Sig too big, images removed. - SN

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#158 taxi

taxi

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,850 posts
  • Joined: 16-September 06

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:33 PM

^^^^^

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.

#159 lfergs

lfergs

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,295 posts
  • Joined: 24-July 06

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:37 PM

I never trust anyone that's motivated for money. The pharmaceutical industry, how much money do they need?

Like you said, we have survived this long. Why would we need to start adding all these things to our bodies?

It's only asking for trouble.


It's called technology and you eat its advances everyday.

An English scientist a few hundred years ago predicted that at the current rate of growth, humans will run out of food to feed the growing population.

While his estimates of population growth and food availability were correct, he failed to include technological advances as a solution to the food shortage.

The food you ate today was likely brought to you by advances in pesticides, hormones and perhaps even some genetic re-engineering.

Edited by lfergs, 30 March 2012 - 05:38 PM.

Posted Image
Nuuuuh huh!! - No way!!

#160 lfergs

lfergs

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,295 posts
  • Joined: 24-July 06

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:40 PM

By the way DarthNinja_S19Blade:

"Wryte Stuff.com" - not the most credible source.
Posted Image
Nuuuuh huh!! - No way!!

#161 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:46 PM

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."



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.

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

        Sig too big, images removed. - SN

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#162 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:47 PM

^^^^^

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.


Go watch some TV or something.

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

        Sig too big, images removed. - SN

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#163 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 30 March 2012 - 05:52 PM

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."


I also did not see any link about curing cancer with spices.

I did see the link about one spice and diabetes, which research shows that there is great promise with Cinnamon and diabetes.

Also with regard to cancer, there has also been great promise with the spice black cumin in treating and preventing cancer.


Black Cumin May Treat Pancreatic Cancer

http://www.huffingto...n_n_629602.html

BTW: Pharmaceutical corporations in general are some of the most evil and vile entities on this planet.

Edited by DarthNinja_S19Blade, 30 March 2012 - 06:11 PM.

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

        Sig too big, images removed. - SN

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#164 MadMonk

MadMonk

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 613 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 03

Posted 30 March 2012 - 06:27 PM

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?

#165 DoorKnob

DoorKnob

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,358 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 04

Posted 30 March 2012 - 06:38 PM

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?


Pages later, and you're all still feeding him. I've decided by now he can't be legitimate.

If he is, then simply wow. All I can say is it's a hell of a lot easier to draw your own conclusion and then cherry pick the evidence as you choose (and I use the word "evidence" extremely loosely, for reasons pointed out multiple times in previous posts) than it is to put them together and come to a logical conclusion. Baffling. Taxi's last post nailed it.

#166 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 30 March 2012 - 07:56 PM

^^^^^

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.


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.

Edited by DarthNinja_S19Blade, 30 March 2012 - 07:56 PM.

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

        Sig too big, images removed. - SN

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#167 GodzillaDeuce

GodzillaDeuce

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,123 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 08

Posted 30 March 2012 - 08:05 PM

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


lol

Bayes Theorem. Google it

well I'm sorry that gd is soo perfect


#168 MadMonk

MadMonk

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 613 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 03

Posted 30 March 2012 - 08:39 PM

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)

#169 GodzillaDeuce

GodzillaDeuce

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,123 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 08

Posted 30 March 2012 - 08:48 PM

lol

Bayes Theorem. Google it


after posting this, I googled dr dick

Darthninja you should have posted this:


"Professor George Dick, speaking at an environmental conference in Brussels in 1973, admitted that in recent decades, 75% of British people who contracted smallpox had been vaccinated. This, combined with the fact that only 40% of children (and a maximum of 10% of adults) had been vaccinated, clearly shows that vaccinated people have a much higher tendency to contract the disease."

I thought that over 90% of people would have been vaccinated. my bad

http://rawfed.com/vax/stats.html

well I'm sorry that gd is soo perfect


#170 DoorKnob

DoorKnob

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,358 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 04

Posted 30 March 2012 - 10:44 PM

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.


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.

Edited by DoorKnob, 30 March 2012 - 10:54 PM.


#171 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,379 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 31 March 2012 - 08:48 AM

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.

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.

Edited by zaibatsu, 31 March 2012 - 08:49 AM.


#172 taxi

taxi

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,850 posts
  • Joined: 16-September 06

Posted 31 March 2012 - 09:13 AM

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)


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.

#173 MadMonk

MadMonk

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 613 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 03

Posted 31 March 2012 - 09:50 AM

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.


I think decribing it as "vials on a train" is being too generous. Here's how vaccine was actually produced:

An important feature of the first hundred years of vaccination was that vaccine production was conducted without any sort of state control. "Vaccine parks" were established by all and sundry, individual physicians maintained their own stocks of "humanized" vaccine by arm-to-arm inoculations, and Hime (1896) complained "The country [Great Britain] is flooded with cheap stuff 'made in Germany' and elsewhere, of unknown nature or origin. It is cheap and therefore sells." In Great Britain the labours of the Royal Commission on Vaccination (Great Britain, 1898) resulted in the Vaccination Act of 1898, which prohibited arm-to-arm vaccination by public vaccinators and undertook to supply them with glycerolated calf lymph.

Taken from the WHO report.

Of course, cars nowadays is just as reliable as a Ford model T. Airbus A320s are no safer than the de Havilland comet. Engineers most certainly didn't learn anything from the collapse of the Tacoma bridge.

#174 mcgillnuck

mcgillnuck

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,508 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 06

Posted 31 March 2012 - 12:40 PM

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.


So on the one hand you have the almost unanimous opinion of experts that vaccines work, based on a century of studies and data.

On the other hand you have a guy who seems to believe in almost every major medical conspiracy, who makes his living travelling to different Christian radio and TV networks to sell his books and who nobody in the medical community takes seriously.

Why do you choose to believe the latter?

Props to canuckbuddy for the sig

#175 Blood Fiend

Blood Fiend

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Joined: 17-January 12

Posted 31 March 2012 - 03:58 PM

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.

Edited by Blood Fiend, 31 March 2012 - 04:10 PM.


#176 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 31 March 2012 - 04:04 PM

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.


Childish attacks says the one who bases his existence in topics on pouncing, labeling and throwing insults (then crawling back into your little hole). But I hope I didn't hurt your feelings too much, seems like you're having some difficulty coping with just one tongue-in-cheek statement I made (which was a direct response to your last windbaggery).

What is truly fantastic is the jump in your self-perception...amusing.

And yeah, I get it; everyone must think, act, talk, walk and behave the same as dictated by popular culture and mass media and this what makes someone "normal". "Normal" people don't think independently and critically outside of what they are told by the oblong box and government smokesperson (where and how do you think your most beloved go-to argument "tin foil hat" was and is propagated?).

And of course leave it to you to twist my words into fitting into your own limited comprehension so you can throw your little pitty-pat arguments and feel like a "champ".

"You and your sources are a bunch of crazy poopy heads".

Oh that's right, you are the self-declared "champ", here to save all the poor ignorant people right from 'falling for it', like you stated in another thread? Do you insult other peoples' intelligence much, guy?

You talk about me being the "one in a million who is enlightened" but then again, you are the one who declared something in another thread like '50% of people are dumb'. So that's what you're here to do right; protect all the 'poor dumb people' since you are so enlightened? Do you insult other peoples' intelligence much, guy?

As for it being 'me against everyone else' in certain threads, I'm sorry, did I give some kind of impression that I care? I'm not here to be like you, think like you or act like you (or anyone else for that matter), get over it. But let's take a closer look at this notion of yours...

If we were to apply your own brilliant logic and statistics, what you're saying is that it's me (and you mentioned Dank) against everyone yet half the population is dumb. Since you brought-up horses, again, I guess that's where you come in on your high horse as a 'knight in shining armour' to protect the poor dumb people. Do you insult other peoples' intelligence much, guy?

Funny you talk about the earth being flat...when people first suggested that the earth was round, I would imagine that the people around them responded much like you did. It's because 50% of people were dumb and they were trying to protect those poor dumb people from falling for such propaganda like "the earth is round". There's just no room for such nonsense.

A saddle is really for the comfort of the rider so I suppose I can't blame you for asking since you rear end must be sore after having it handed to you.

And you want to call me a horse, that's fine. But get it right, I'm a freakin' bucking bronco.

Maybe it's time for you to go shopping for a muzzle.

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

        Sig too big, images removed. - SN

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#177 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 31 March 2012 - 04:17 PM

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.


I find it ironic that you continuously refer to yourself as a 'skeptic' yet are so ready to accept 'colossal amounts of evidence' from the very entity you claim to be skeptical of. But whatever, this is your prerogative.

Why take Alex Jones as a perfect example? Because he fits your example?

How does Alex Jones profit from me? Wouldn't that require me to support the guy, frequent his website and purchase his productions? (Nevermind the fact that I myself have on numerous occasions referred to Alex Jones as a loudmouth, fear-mongerer and obfuscator - don't get me wrong, I will still use some of his interviews etc. if the interviewee adds some type of insight or beneficial information).

Seems to be the go-to argument for some people is continually bring up people like Alex Jones...perhaps trying to make people look guilty by disassociated association?

That would be like me saying evil pharma corporations and lying government officials like Rumsfeld et al. profit from people like you and others in this thread going back decades...oh wait, bad example (because it's neither made up nor it is some far-reaching assumption).

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

        Sig too big, images removed. - SN

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#178 DarthNinja

DarthNinja

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,976 posts
  • Joined: 18-November 08

Posted 31 March 2012 - 04:20 PM

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.


Always good to see another 5%'er! :emot-parrot:

**RETIRED...**

"Have not those who disbelieve known that the heavens & the earth were joined together as one united piece, then We (Allah) parted them? And We have made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (Qur'an 21:30)

        Sig too big, images removed. - SN

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” (David Rockefeller)


#179 Blood Fiend

Blood Fiend

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Joined: 17-January 12

Posted 31 March 2012 - 04:22 PM

Always good to see another 5%'er! :emot-parrot:

My hat is off to you good sir.

#180 GodzillaDeuce

GodzillaDeuce

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,123 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 08

Posted 31 March 2012 - 04:46 PM

rediculas.


fun game

well I'm sorry that gd is soo perfect





Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.