Jump to content
Jambands.ca

H1N1 - To Vaccinate or Not to Vaccinate


PMatt

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 338
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Dissing vaccines is just small minded. Vaccines are the greatest success of science and medicine period.

some vaccines.

the concept is great but not every vaccine is great nor is every approach.

blindly accepting all vaccines as equal is just as small minded as presuming all vaccines are bad for everyone.

I'm still amazed that people vaccinate their kids from the chicken pox when the immunity doesn't last forever. get chicken pox as an adult and it can turn really bad - much worse than a child, while getting it as a kid prevents us from getting it ever again. I'm glad I got it when i was a kid (chicken pox).

i wish that were the same for everything else.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya I hear you on that YT. I'm still embarressed by all the quackery I swallowed in the past following that false study...my pendulum has swung pretty far now but yes..definately wise to not paint all vaccines with the same brush. That said my friends kid has permanant lung damage because she was too distrustfull to vaccinate against H1N1 when the goverment was suggesting she do it...

You get a booster for the chicken pox vaccine as an adult.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

YT, have you ever taken any courses on medicine? The reason I ask, is that I have taken a few physiology courses over the years and one of the things that came up every now and then was vaccinations. The physiology is rather simple, and the theory quite sound, it seems. Unfortunately, the lectures never touched on the horrific darker side that always seems to come up around these parts. What's the big issue, if you don't mind me asking?

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not taken a course, but my issues are with the not-so-rare reactions and the questionable science behind many vaccines that are pumped out without proper testing.

It would be great if they were all tested properly - then i wouldn't be mostly on the fence about this issue. The flu shot - is a gamble, especially with kids. Many parents want to protect their kids and I get that but I would certainly not want to play russian roulette with my kid's heatlth either way and that's precisely the position many parents are finding themselves in.

the 'pretty good chance nothing bad will happen' or 'I hope my kid doesn't get H1N1 cause I'll look like a negligent parent'

It's an awful position to be put in, with a bigger chance that a vaccination will have a complication compared to a possibly dead child.

I hope that some day there's a vaccine for the strep-like viral infection that I beat but led to my late sister's Leukemia. I'd certainly consider that one if it were a cut and dry winner.

Doctors don't want to tell anybody that vaccines should be weighed carefully with their complications. You'll never hear a doctor tell someone to not get the flu shot. You won't hear stories about their complications on any courses they teach either.

Do you REALLY think it's unfortunate to not take lectures about the dark side of vaccines?

Ignorance is bliss sometimes, Hal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish I could friggin remember how BradM showed me how to put vids up proper...I like this F you Jenny Mcidiot one...

..like is definately the wrong word. I appreciate this video.

Heres another link to science based-critical thinking and vaccines...

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?cat=36

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Documents emerge proving Dr Andrew Wakefield innocent; BMJ and Brian Deer caught misrepresenting the facts

by Mike Adams, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) New documents have emerged that clear Dr Andrew Wakefield of the allegations of fraud recently made by the British Medical Journal and its reporter Brian Deer. This new evidence "completely negates the allegations that I committed scientific

fraud. Brian Deer and Dr. Godlee of the British Medical Journal (BMJ) knew or should

have known about the facts set out below before publishing their false allegations," says Dr Andrew Wakefield (see sources, below).

Newly-revealed documents show that on December 20th, 1996, a meeting of The Inflammatory Bowel Disease Study Group based at the Royal Free Hospital Medical School featured a presentation by Professor Walker-Smith on seven of the children who would later become part of the group of patients Dr Wakefield wrote about in his 1998 The Lancet paper (which was later retracted by The Lancet).

Remember, Dr Wakefield has been accused of completely fabricating his findings about these same children in his 1998 paper, but these documents reveal that fourteen months before Dr Wakefield's paper was published, two other researchers -- Professor Walker-Smith and Dr Amar Dhillon -- independently documented the same problems in these children, including symptoms of autism.

Thus, Dr Wakefield could not have "fabricated" these findings as alleged by the British Medical Journal, which now finds itself in the position of needing to issue a retraction, or it must now expand its accusations of fraud to include Professor Walker-Smith and Dr Dhillon... essentially, the BMJ must now insist that a "conspiracy of fraud" existed among at least these three researchers, and possibly more, in order to back up its allegation that Dr Wakefield's study results were fabricated.

The smoking-gun evidence

Professor Walker-Smith's 1996 presentation at the Royal Free Hospital Medical School was entitled, "Entero-colitis and Disintegrative Disorder Following MMR - A Review of the First Seven Cases."

His presentation notes began with the following text: "“I wish today, to present some preliminary details concerning seven children, all boys, who appear to have entero-colitis and disintegrative disorder, probably autism, following MMR. I shall now briefly present

their case history [sic]."

He then went on to detail the clinical history of these seven children as derived from his medical team as well as senior pathologist Dr Amar Dhillon. Importantly, Dr Andrew Wakefield was not part of this investigation. This means that Dr Wakefield's findings were independently replicated by another medical research team.

The British Medical Journal's accusations against Dr Wakefield -- that he fabricated his findings -- are therefore false. The mainstream media accusation that Dr Wakefield's findings have "never been replicated" is also blatantly false.

Here are the notes on the seven children, as presented in 1996, 14 months BEFORE Dr Wakefield published his landmark paper in The Lancet:

Child 1. Immediate reaction to MMR with fever at 1 [corrected, illegible]

Rapid deterioration in behaviour - autism

Histology active chronic inflammation in caecum

Treated Asacol

INDETERMINATE COLITIS** (1)

Child 2. MMR at 15 months - head banging 2 weeks later.

Hyperactive from 18 months.

Endoscopy - aphthoid ulcer at hepatic flexure

Caecum: lymphoid nodular hyperplasia with erythematous rim and pale swollen

core.

Histology, Ileum mild inflammation, colon moderate inflammation

Acute and chronic inflammation.

Treated CT3211 [a dietary treatment]

INDETERMINATE COLITIS** ? CROHN’S DISEASE

Child 3. ? dysmorphism - chromosomes and normal development

MMR at 5 months [sic]

Measles at 2.5 years* - 1 month later change in behavior

Hyperactive with food

Colonoscopy - granular rectum, normal colon and lymphoid nodular

hyperplasia.

Histopathology: lymphoid nodular hyperplasia.

Increased eosinophils 5/5 mild increase in inflammatory cells (Dhillon)

Routine normal

LYMPHOID NODULAR HYPERPLASIA

INDETERMINATE COLITIS**

[* correction: he received measles vaccine first at approximately 15 months of

age and MMR at 2.5. years]

Child 4 (2). Reacted to triple vaccine 4 months - screaming and near cot death

(DPT)

MMR at 15 months - behaviour changed after 1 week.

“measles rash†week before

Endoscopy - minor abnormalities of vascular pattern

Histology - non-specific proctocolitis**

Treated

INDETERMINTE PROCTOCOLITIS

LYMPHOID NODULAR HYPERPLASIA

Child 5 (3). MMR at 14 months.

Second day after, fever and rash, bangs head and behaviour abnormal

thereafter.

Endoscopy - Lymphoid nodular hyperplasia

Histopathology: Marked increase in IEL’s [intraepithelial lymphocytes] in ileum

with chronic inflammatory cells in reactive follicles. Increase in inflammatory cells in colon and IELs increased.

LYMPHOID NODULAR HYPERPLASIA

INDETERMINATE COLITIS

Child 6 (7). MMR - 16 months - no obvious reaction

2 years behavioral change - 2.5 years

Screaming attacks - / food related

Endoscopy - Lymphoid nodular hyperplasia terminal ileum

Histology - Prominent lymphoid follicles

Dhillon: moderate to marked increase in IEL’s, increase in chronic inflammatory

cells throughout the colon - superficial macrophages not quite granuloma

INDTERMINATE COLITIS

Child 78. MMR 14 months

16 months “growling voiceâ€

18 months - behavioural changes - autism diagnosed at 3 years

Barium [follow through X ray] 5 cm tight stricture [proximal] to insertion of

terminal ileum

Endoscopy- prominent lymphoid follicle in ileum

Mild proctitis with granular mucosa

Histology

Ileum - reactive follicles

Colon - bifid forms, increased IEL’s

Slight increase in inflammatory cells

INDETERMINATE COLITIS

? CROHN’S DISEASE

NOTES:

(1) Inflammation that is not diagnostic of either Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis

(2) Child 6 in The Lancet paper. The chronological order was corrected for the final Lancet paper.

(3) Child 3 in The Lancet paper

BMJ caught in its own fraud

These documents reveal that the British Medical Journal has been caught in its own fraud for willfully ignoring this evidence, which was presented to it long before its recent publication of Brian Deer's article calling Dr Wakefield a fraud.

The BMJ willfully ignored this evidence and simply decided to destroy Dr Wakefield's professional reputation by any means necessary. As Dr Wakefield explains:

"In allowing itself to become the vehicle for Brian Deer’s particular brand of journalism; in circumventing the process of due diligence in its enthusiasm to “kill the beastâ€, the BMJ has taken a huge risk. As the document presented above shows, this was a mistake. Medicine, presented with the possibility of an iatrogenic catastrophe, has boarded a dissonant bandwagon and has gone after those who have concerns - genuine concerns - that childhood vaccines may be responsible, at least in part, for the autism epidemic. The relevant science has been grossly misrepresented, crushed beneath the wheels of a Public Relations 16-wheeler that is out of control. In the meantime a relentless tsunami of damaged children claims this land."

Brian Deer caught as a liar

It has also been revealed that journalist Brian Deer, the author of the BMJ article condemning Dr Wakefield as a fraud, is himself a liar. In attempting to gather evidence for his article in the BMJ, he lied about his identity and entered the home of one of the parents of the autism children. Specifically, he claimed he was working for The Sunday Times even though he was never a Sunday Times employee.

This is just the tip of the iceberg of the outright deception that has been used by the BMJ and Brian Deer in their attempt to silence a doctor whose only "crime" was publicly expressing concern about the safety of MMR vaccines.

That the BMJ and its writer Brian Deer have now been caught ignoring evidence and engaging in their own fraud gives credence to the idea that MMR vaccines may, indeed, not only be dangerous; but that they may be so dangerous that the top medical journals have to lie about the facts in order to protect them.

What's clear here is that the BMJ has strayed so far from the realm of evidence-based scientific thinking that it can no longer be called a reputable medical journal at all. Its callous disregard for the truth -- and its politically-motivated witch hunt against a researcher who only sought to protect the health of children -- exposes it as a danger to the scientific community and the world of conventional medicine.

As this truth unfolds, these revelations will rock the medical world and expose these science journals as the frauds they truly are. Think about this: While these medical journals are taking money from vaccine manufacturers (who pay their ads), they are ignoring any scientific evidence they don't like in order to vilify anyone who threatens the profits of these very same vaccine companies! And yet, these medical journals never admit that their very existence depends on the financial flow of money from these vaccine manufacturers who are strongly impacted by their editorial decisions!

There is fraud taking place in the vaccine industry today, of course, and the medical journals are the point men who push their distorted disinformation into the minds of doctors, journalists and anyone they can reach with their scientific distortions. At stake is the future of the vaccine industry, which is of course a multi-billion-dollar industry that thrives on misinformation and the ongoing scientific censorship of the facts surrounding the health risks posed by vaccines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...