A colleague who read my previous post about the 60 Minutes miracle cure programme pointed out some of the reaction to the story on the Facebook page of the official-sounding Vaccination Information Network.
A visit to the page finds it is anything but informative. Despite that, the VINE has attracted a following of 8000-plus people interested in a hodge-podge of pseudoscientific information about vaccinaton, the “AIDs hoax” and worse.
Obviously, people commenting on the 60 Minutes story were triumphant that “nutritional therapy” had won out in the case of Alan Smith. As one poster writes:
Great to hear about this, everyone should know how Vit C cures the most stubborn bacteria. I am sure there are many others that did not get the right treatment and are not alive today.
The Vaccination Information Network, which is the work of anti-vaccine campaigner Erwin Alber, was according to Facebook, started in 1988, in New Zealand, “to help parents make an informed choice on behalf of their child”.
Consider that last bit when you look at the photos of the children below, whose parents proudly on their behalf, proclaim their anti-vaccine status on Facebook…
Now should I show you some pictures of children who were not vaccinated and suffered physical and/or mental disablement as a result? No, I think you get the point…
PETER GRIFFIN 
Alison, Grant and Dr Mike may (or may possibly not) be interested in these MEDICAL JOURNAL ARTICLES.
Here are 188 authoritative medical research articles in professional journals, which verify in detail the dangers and ineffectiveness of vaccines. Think not that this ongoing tragedy is unknown to medical science. Hundreds of research reports have been made on the subject. The titles of the research reports have been placed in bold print. Just scan down through them and see for yourself.
http://www.123people.com/ext/frm?ti=personensuche%20telefonbuch&search_term=delatte%20yves&search_country=US&st=suche%20nach%20personen&target_url=http://www.pathlights.com/nr_encyclopedia/onlinebooks/Vaccine/chapter12.htm§ion=weblink&wrt_id=217
Erwin, I’m truly sorry to hear of your cousin’s loss. But at the same time, you’ve moved a bit from the topic we’re discussing.
For every 200 people infected by polio,1 person (& it’s usually a child under the age of 5) will develop some degree irreversible paralysis (usually affecting their legs – hence the prevalence of kids wearing leg braces when my mother was growing up). Of those paralysed, between 5 & 10% die due to paralysis of the breathing muscles. These are not trivial figures. And the fact that ‘only a small percentage of the population was affected’ doesn’t somehow make it all better for those who were affected! Just how many polio cases would it take before they would become important in your eyes?
20 years ago there were around 350,000 cases of polio world-wide; in 2007 that was down to about 1650. As for the ‘story’ about how polio (& other diseases) were in decline prior to the introduction of vaccination – I’ve responded to this one before, but let’s just take the US as an example. Cases of polio in the US peaked in 1952. Inactivated polio vaccines have been used there since 1955. Polio is now effectively eliminated from the States.
And in response to your last comment, Erwin: since the site you refer us to has on its front page the usual untruths about what’s found in vaccines, why on earth should one believe anything else it has to say? Thimerosal was removed from pediatric vaccines (other than for influenza, & even then a thimerosal-free version is available) in 2002. Aluminium is the 3rd most common element on earth & is found in nearly all rocks & soil – your daily intake from normal dietary sources would far exceed (by several orders of magnitude) the tiny fraction used as an adjuvant in vaccines. And so on…
With regard to your references: the titles don’t actually tell us much & since the authors of ‘123 people’ haven’t given hot-links, I’d be extremely surprised if you (or possibly even the site’s authors) have actually read many of the documents. You’ve already shown a tendency to cherry-pick titles or quotes that serve your purposes & I doubt these are any different.
For example, the JAMA paper cited by ‘123 people’ on uptake of rubella vaccination among medical personnel looked at a total of 197 hospital staff – not just physicians. The authors found that the uptake rate was patchy but noted that many in the sample weren’t aware that adults also benefit from vaccination. The authors do not provide any evidence of widespread physician reluctance to vaccinate. They do, however, provide data from another study which found that, rather than the outright refusal implied by the 123 site, medical workers surveyed had a range of reasons for not taking an offered MMR vaccine. Reasons included pregnancy, medical contraindications, age, & unconfirmed histories of prior vaccination.
I’m pretty sure that if I had the time & energy to check those other references out, a fair proportion of them wouldn’t say what you believe them to say. But I’ve got a lecture to prepare & in any case, I’ve had enough of your Gish gallop techniques for the evening. Tomorrow… is another day 🙂
Erwinalber
It’s a pity that all of the 188 references are at least 15 years old, some at least 50 years old.
I have picked and read one of the more recent ones at random (“Acute Hepatitis B Infection after Vaccination,” Lancet Vol. 345 Jan. 1995) and find there is nothing to support your contention that vaccines are ineffectual or harmful. It is the usual misinterpretation of a medical paper – sigh, why do I fall for this each time.
Hi Alison,
But at the same time, you’ve [Alber] moved a bit from the topic we’re discussing.
Well, that was predictable! 🙂 (Hence my earlier forecast…)
I’m not going to look into the “referencesâ€, as I’ve seen this anti-vaccine silliness for a few years now (as you have I’m sure) and, as you say, a page starting with the “toxins in vaccines†gambit tells you that you can stop right there.
His trying to make everyone else do the work is a ruse I’ve seen too many times to want to follow. It’s his claim to prove. He’ll have to do more than lazily point at references he clearly hasn’t read, or at least understood.
The page he points at isn’t on 123. The page is from the creationist pathlights.com website which hosts an “encyclopedia†— scratch that — misinformation site. It’s widely panned for how intellectually dishonest it is. It may be worth asking him if part of his anti-vaccine stance is from religion? It might explain how he reacted to my pointing out his ideological approach is similar to religious groups’ and why he readily accepted the end-times rant on his site that I mentioned earlier.
Oh, what I wanted to say. (And slightly off-topic.) Orac has reviewed yet another study just out showing in even more detail a lack of association between thimerosal in vaccines and autism, or autism spectrum disorders, or regressive autism. Besides, as he points out, even under a several times extended ‘deadline’ of when a drop in autism levels should occur as a consequence of removing thimerosal in the vaccines, it hasn’t happened. Autism levels are as high as ever with no thimerosal in the vaccines.
Grant, you say that “autism levels are as high as ever, with no thiomersal in vaccines.”
The thiomersal in vaccines was supposed to have been removed some years ago, but existing stocks continued to be used. As Hannah Poling’s father, a neurologist who has thoroughly researched this issue for his daughter’s compensation case for vaccine-induced autism (which he has now won), explains, if thiomersal was responsible for autism, we therefore couldn’t expect a drop in autism until about 2010 (now).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5Ru-Tp27AM&feature=player_embedded
The fact that autism rates haven’t dropped is also due to the fact that some vaccines which have the thiomersal removed after the manufacturing process still have traces of mercury in them. As if this wasn’t bad enough, the yearly flu shot mandated for children (and adults – including pregnant women!!!) still has thiomersal in it!
In any case, thiomersal is only ONE of a number of neurotoxins in vaccines, which means that vaccines will continue to cause neurological disorders (including autism), regardless of whether they contain mercury or not.
Dr Tinus Smits has successfully alleviated and even reversed autism in about 300 children with the homeopathic treatment he’s developed, which involves anti-doting each vaccine with the homeopathic form of the vaccine. If the child e.g. lost his speech following MMR, once the vaccine had been cleared from the organism by anti-doting it with homeopathic MMR, the child would regain its speech. This clearly shows that autism is caused by toxins in vaccines, although other pharmaceutical drugs such as antibiotics, and even drugs and anesthetics the mother was given during pregnancy and childbirth, also play a part and also need to be cleared from the body for the child to recover. This may be a bit too technical for you to understand, but the point is that it works.
At least people like Dr Smits and Dr Wakefield and his colleagues have taken effective steps to help these unfortunate children, unlike the medical establishment in general, which has been busy covering up its involvement in the harm caused by vaccines, and obstructing parents’ search for answers and demands for proper investigation and effective treatment.
erwinalber claims:
“thiomersal is only ONE of a number of neurotoxins in vaccines, which means that vaccines will continue to cause neurological disorders (including autism), regardless of whether they contain mercury or not.”
Again, if vaccines are filled with these neurotoxins, then why do the majority of people suffer no ill effects?
“If the child e.g. lost his speech following MMR, once the vaccine had been cleared from the organism by anti-doting it with homeopathic MMR, the child would regain its speech.”
I would be interested to know what is in this homeopathic MMR that you mentioned.
Continuing the clarifications…
The thiomersal in vaccines was supposed to have been removed some years ago, but existing stocks continued to be used.
The ‘existing stock’ he refers to expired seven years ago:
“ With the exception of some influenza vaccines and tetanus-diphtheria (Td) vaccines (given to children aged 7 and older), the last lots of recommended vaccines which contained thimerosal as a preservative expired by early 2003. If providers have such expired vaccines, they should discard them.â€
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/thimerosal/thimerosal_faqs_availfree.html
(The influenza vaccine is available in non-thimerosal form, as explained on the same page. Autism typically is identified by parents at around age 3 or so. [It’s beginnings are much earlier.])
The Poling case is just a continued Gish Gallop. (Note how he’s swung off topic yet again, avoiding issues and admitting what he has gotten wrong, etc.)
The legal cases he refers to do not and cannot “prove†a case to be caused by the medical issue at hand. (These courts say so themselves.) In fact, as I understand it, in the H.P. case the judge explicitly pointed out in his ruling that H.P. has a distinct disorder – a mitochrondrial metabolism disorder that shows some symptoms similar to what autistics have. The Poling case doesn’t support ‘vaccines cause autism’ and is unable to.
For one of many starting points to understand this, with links, see:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/09/cbs_news_resident_anti-vaccine_propagand.php
In any case, thiomersal is only ONE of a number of neurotoxins in vaccines,
This line is to be expected, to self-justify keeping going. Thimerosal as a justification is very obviously failing — even those that promote anti-vaccine views can see that — and they have over the past few years being moving over to “discover†(read: invent) other things that might be “wrong.â€
Dr Tinus Smits has successfully alleviated and even reversed autism in about 300 children with the homeopathic treatment he’s developed,
This is simple nonsense most parents concerned about vaccines wouldn’t have a bar of. Note how it very obviously exploits that some children’s delayed speech development will recover later. (It’s a classic natural health remedy pitch: offer a ‘treatment’ to something that will commonly resolve and hold this up as success.)
This may be a bit too technical for you to understand, but the point is that it works.
Still favouring put-downs and pot-shots…
On a more scientific note, there have been ample studies to show it is most unlikely that there is a link between (any) vaccines and autism. Autism is a strongly genetic disorder, in fact one of the (if not the) most genetic of the more common neurological disorders. There is good work over the past few years revealing initial leads to the genetics underlying autism. Another large study just came out a few days ago, which I may write about if I find time and it proves suitable for a more general audience. These positive studies, that is looking for the cause rather than trying to apportion “blameâ€, should be the focus of those with interests in autism.
Just in case anyone wonders where I’ve gone… I’ll be over in my own blog writing. Hopefully something new will be up sometime this evening.
I am not a scientist. I am not a doctor or a pharmacist. I am, however, an intelligent, curious, literate person who likes to research a topic widely before formulating a firm(ish) opinion. I am also a mother, and my child is fully vaccinated.
Everything that I have read convinces me that vaccination is the only sensible option – there is no proof that any approved vaccine causes autism or anything else, because this proof doesn’t exist. Just because one thing follows another doesn’t mean it caused it. If I eat eggs for breakfast and three months later I sneeze, does that mean I’m allergic to eggs? I don’t think so.
My grandmother had polio as a chile and I saw what it had done to her, physically and mentally. I’ve read accounts of the devasting effects of whooping cough, measles, meningitis – why on earth would anyone risk having to watch their child go through that on the basis of hystertical, unproven, overblown pseudo-science which has been disproven time and time again?
Get real people, there is no ‘Big Pharma’ conspiracy! I personally believe that my doctor wants me to get well (shocking I know) and I would much rather trust my health to someone with at least 5 years of solid scientific training, founded on decades of sound scientifc research, than to someone with a woo-diploma offering me a drop of water on a sugar pill and whining that their remedy can’t be tested by conventional science!
May have gotten a bit off topic there, sorry. Rant over and out.
Thanks for an absolutely wonderful post, Renee.
As Dr Herbert Shelton once pointed out:
“Belief in immunization is a form of delusional insanity.”
It shows. Someone ought to write a paper about the above two textbook cases.
Erwin, I’ve held off saying this, but I really can’t put it off after your last post: your outright rudeness & personal insults do absolutely nothing to further your argument. You really can’t expect to be treated with any sort of respect if you show none to others.
Alison, my comment was in response to the gross insult to my intelligence.
???
I fail to see anything in Renee’s post, or that of Dr Mike that follows, that could constitute a gross insult to anyone’s intelligence.
I do hope Renee isn’t offended by erwinalber’s rudeness. I’m not. Given his name calling and irrational arguments remind me of a toddler throwing at tantrum, I give his insults the same level of credence.
I suspect that’s because you seem to be yet someone else sharing the same blinkered attitude, making it a trio, Alison. I’ll explain shortly.
Erwin, I think its almost time to wrap this thread up, we are going around in circles on vaccination again. How about some (civil) closing comments…?
Renee, the statement that “there is no proof that any approved vaccine causes autism or anything else, because this proof doesn’t exist†is illogical. Once upon a time, it was believed that the was flat, and there seemed to be no reason to believe, nor was there proof, that the earth was round, but that didn’t stop the earth from being round.
Similarly, just because your vaccinated child seems okay doesn’t automatically mean that vaccines are safe, or even that your child escaped unscathed, or that others parents and their children got off as lightly as you did. Ian’s parents e.g. lost their son to a hepatitis B vaccination at the age of 47 days. .
http://www.iansvoice.org/
As for the autism controversy, consider this statement by Dr. Peter Fletcher, who was Chief Scientific Officer at the Department of Health. He said that if it is proven that the jab causes autism, “the refusal by governments to evaluate the risks properly will make this one of the greatest scandals in medical history”. He added that after agreeing to be an expert witness on drug-safety trials for parents’ lawyers, he had received and studied thousands of documents relating to the case which he believed the public had a right to see.
He said he has seen a “steady accumulation of evidence” from scientists worldwide that the measles, mumps and rubella jab is causing brain damage in certain children, but that “There are very powerful people in positions of great authority in Britain and elsewhere who have staked their reputations and careers on the safety of MMR and they are willing to do almost anything to protect themselves.â€
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-376203/Former-science-chief-MMR-fears-coming-true.html#ixzz0zVHgZizo
In the USA, Hannah Poling’s parents have just been awarded compensation for their child’s autism, which it seems was triggered by vaccinations due to an underlying mitochondrial disorder. Hannah may reportedly end up being paid compensation amounting to $20 million over her lifetime.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5Ru-Tp27AM&feature=player_embedded
Since 1988, up until 2008, nearly $2 billion have been paid out to parents of children who have suffered severe vaccine injuries and disabilities under the US Vaccine Injury Compensation Act, yet two out of every three parents who apply for compensation are turned away empty-handed. People who claim that vaccines are safe obviously haven’t done their homework.
So, while you may consider vaccination as the only sensible options, there are a growing number of parents who no longer subscribe to the belief in vaccinations. Studies have shown that the more highly educated parents are, the less likely they are to vaccinate their child, while parents from a lower socio-economic background are more likely to blindly follow what their doctor or the authorities tell them to do. Interesting.
http://www.vaccineriskawareness.com/More-Educated-Mothers-Are-Less-Likely-To-Vaccinate
Agreed Peter.
Here is my closing statement:
First of all thank you for allowing me to defend my stance on vaccinations!
I doubt that the information I have presented has made my protagonists change their minds in any way, but neither have I changed mine, but I hope that other readers who have remained in the background may have picked up some information here and there which may them cause to question the claim that vaccines are a safe and effective way of preventing diseases and provide them with the incentive to do some further research, before deciding whether to vaccinate or not.
I’ll close with the words:
May our children grow up vaccine-free!
Love them and protect them, but NEVER inject them!
Last minute post:
http://www.impfschaden.info/en/vaccine-adverse-event-reports/
Closing comments:
First let’s begin with a point of agreement – the human immune system is a complex and impressive defense against foreign organisms.
However, most of us here agree that impressive as it is, there are some diseases that when we encounter them can cause substantial often permanent damage e.g. smallpox, polio. Others, while a significant number of the population may experience short term illness can still cause severe illness in a significant minority (measles, mumps) particularly those who are vulnerable, e.g. children.
Vaccines are a way of exposing the body to weakened or inactive viruses (or other antigens) in order to stimulate an immune response. This immune response ensures that when the body is exposed to the actual (full strength) antigen it can mount a full defense.
Those who oppose vaccines tend to make two arguments: that vaccines do not work and that vaccines are harmful. They cherry pick data that in their opinion support these two points. They often list screeds of journal references to support their arguments, however, if you actually read these papers they do not say what the anti vaccine people say.
It is true that some vaccines do not work for everyone. Some people (typically 5 to 20%) of the population do not respond to vaccinations. They remain vulnerable to the disease. This is why herd immunity is important. If one child in a classroom has not responded to a vaccine then so long of the rest of his classmates have been vaccinated and developed antibodies and therefore cannot contract the disease and infect him, he is safe within the classroom environment. The moment there is at least one classmate who is unvaccinated, the risk is there that should the classmate become infected so will the “non-responsive” child.
In a population dense, high mobility world where diseases can cross the globe in 24 hours any disease outbreak can now be carried world wide. We cannot afford to have herd immunity drop.
Those who oppose vaccines also state that they are harmful. This is a potentially valid argument – introduction of anything different into the body can cause a reaction. For example, a small number of people react badly to traces of toxins in peanut butter. However, the evidence we have at hand show only a small minority of people respond badly to vaccines with sore arms, fever etc. There have been suggestions that some deaths or severe illnesses have been linked to vaccines, however, there is no clear evidence to confirm this. Often there is a confusion of correlation with causation. This area needs further scientific study. Some people claim that there is a link between vaccines and autism, However, the early, poorly run and unethical study that first proposed this ides has been disproved by subsequent research.
Even if a tiny minority of people where shown to exhibit bad responses to vaccines, this does not mean they should not be used. In a small minority of traffic accidents seat belts can cause terrible injuries even death. This does not mean that we should remove seatbelts from cars because that would create and even greater numbers of injuries or lose of life.
Many opponents to vaccines often default to claims of a conspiracy involving drug companies and the medical and scientific community. This I reject completely. I have worked with many scientists and I know that the majority have chosen science because they want to make the world a better place. I find these attacks, which are often highly personal, offensive.
As scientists, medical personnel and well informed parents move to counter the ill informed arguments of anti-vaccine groups around the world I hope that common sense will prevail. Otherwise the proof of the the effectiveness of vaccines may come in the form of increased numbers of disease outbreaks and deaths around the world as immunisation levels drop. I hope we never reach that stage.
Returning briefly. While followers of Alber’s campaign deserve some sympathies for being misled, I think that Alber’s campaign itself deserves the criticism it has drawn.
Rather than repeat DrMike’s short essay (I agree with the points he makes), I will leave readers with two thoughts:
(1) As I wrote earlier in my experience the simplest way to see the effectiveness of vaccines without having to understand the science is to observe the return of the diseases the vaccines target when the vaccinations are reduced or stopped, and the curtailing of these diseases when the vaccines are re-introduced.* This has been observed many times, for different vaccines targeting different diseases in different communities. The examples given earlier of Malawi (measles) and Nigeria (polio) may be exotic for readers here, but it is also true England (measles), Germany (pertussis, which Erwin presented incorrectly as supporting his “argumentâ€) and other examples in more familiar settings.
(2) Erwin does not have an argument, and never did. He has a ideology, which he self-justifies. There is a fundamental and very important difference. Arguments put evidence first, then draw conclusions. Ideologies are based on “just so†statements that are shored-up. Erwin puts his belief ahead of evidence, as he has amply demonstrated. When shown that a claim he has made is wrong he avoids acknowledging it. He relies on quotes, put-downs, and stereotypes, none of which are evidence. None of the research papers or studies he referenced have supported him or say what he thinks they do. This shows that he does not check his claims before making them. It is possible that he may not be capable of checking them (i.e. that he lacks the science background to understand them), in which case he should not make the claims in the first place – it is dishonest to present an argument you don’t understand as if you do.
That these diseases are a rarity is a luxury the wealthier parts of the world have as a consequence of modern medicine, both public health and vaccination. Claiming that because we rarely see serious cases of these diseases today, we don’t need vaccines is a contradiction in terms. A key reason we don’t see these serious cases is, in large part, because of the vaccinations.
—
* While this is anecdotal in one sense, that’s the price for avoiding the science. The ‘property’ way is through understanding the controlled trials and research science, of course.
I was under the impression that Peter Griffin was going to close this thread. I wish he had, because closing it would prevent the danger of going back on the merry-go-round of futile arguments. I now stand accused of standing of pushing an ideology. Well, if true, the same is true about pro-vaccination people.
The reason why the two ideologies will never be reconciled is because they originate from two very different viewpoints, or world views. The one I represent is that the universe is an ordered system based on intelligence and that this intelligence is expressed in nature, including our organisms, and that.if our rains are intact and not messed up due to vaccination, we are wired up to this intelligence which is basically inherent in everything. The more we live in harmony with and cooperate with this intelligence, which is a combination of love and wisdom, and the less we interfere with the natural order of things, the better. Hence the tendency towards home births, breastfeeding, not vaccinating, home-schooling, natural foods, etc. If we take responsibility for our own health and live as healthily and naturally as possible, there is no problem. In this world view, the less the government interferes in our lives, the better. The individual is sovereign. It is the role of government is to rule on behalf of the people, and to serve the individuals society is composed of. People with this world view like to figure things out for themselves and don’t take much notice of authority figures or so-called experts and in fact tend to be deeply distrustful of them.
The other viewpoint seems to be that the universe is based on randomness and that we need to rely on external authorities such as scientists and government institutions to figure things out and to solve our problems for us and to protect us against the perceived threat of infectious diseases. In this world view, the government plays a central role and in fact rules over people. Here, society and the state take precedence over the individual. People with this viewpoint tend to trust experts and other authority figures to do their thinking and decision-making for them. Here we may have a tendency to medicalised childbirth, bottle feeding, state schooling, belief in the value of supposed public health measures such as vaccination and fluoridation and scientific developments such as genetic engineering.
These are of course very much generalisations, to get a point across. In reality, the lines are of course somewhat blurred, and some people will change sides when they become disillusioned, as may be the case with parents whose child suffers a vaccine injury.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Vaccination-Information-Network-VINE/69667273997#!/album.php?aid=243976&id=69667273997&ref=mf
Problems arise when representatives of one side tries to impose their view of the world on the people on the other side, as is the case with attempts to make vaccinations mandatory. What people on each side of the debate need to come to terms with is that why someone thinks the way they do is based on reasons that make sense to them, no matter how irrelevant or idiotic they may seem to someone on the other side of the debate. The most important thing is that if we are to live in a free society, our freedom of thought, speech and practice must be upheld.
As regards vaccination, I am unhappy that some of my taxes go towards paying for a practice which I abhor. I feel that if people believe in such nonsense, they should pay for it out of their own pocket instead of relying on money from us non-vaxers to help pay for it.
If we take responsibility for our own health and live as healthily and naturally as possible, there is no problem.
Seriously? Back in the Neolithic, when all there was available, was ‘natural’ & there was certainly no prospect of vaccination, people would have been judged reasonably old if they’d made it past 30. Once they’d come up with agriculture & began to live a more settled existence – still all natural, no vaccinations etc – the lifespan didn’t increase & in addition people were faced with the reality of zoonoses (like measles) jumping to them from their domestic animals. ‘All-natural’ isn’t necessarily any healthier.
People with this [natural] world view like to figure things out for themselves… – I have news for you: so do those on the other side of your fence. You are presenting both straw-man & false-dichotomy logical fallacies here.
On the issue of freedom of speech, action etc – people have that right, but they should not by exerting it be impinging on the rights of others. When others in the community cannot be vaccinated eg infants or people who are immunocompromised, then any loss of herd immunity puts them at risk of very serious disease & death. Or – as I’ve asked you before – is it simply OK in your view for a certain proportion of the population to be placed at risk or, indeed, to die?
Please don’t trot out the usual cliches in response to this query; we’ve answered them previously and your refusal to address those responses suggests that your argument isn’t particularly strong.
The one I represent is that the universe is an ordered system based on intelligence and that this intelligence is expressed in nature, including our organisms, and that.if our rains are intact and not messed up due to vaccination, we are wired up to this intelligence which is basically inherent in everything.
Thank you for clearly explaining the ideology you hold that underlies your opposition to vaccination. You seem to want to imply my previous comment was re-opening the discussion: it was writing closing remarks as Peter invited. Likewise, my statement re ideology are not new, as you imply (“I now stand…â€), but a summing together of several points I raised earlier. Thank you.
Alison, using y remark to draw a link to Neanderthal cavemen’s life expectancy is as ludicrous and pathetic as pro-vaxers using the high death rates from measles, tetanus and other diseases in Third World countries as an argument for vaccinating children in America or other “developed” nations. I’m talking about now.
“When others in the community cannot be vaccinated eg infants or people who are immunocompromised, then any loss of herd immunity puts them at risk of very serious disease & death.”
Or so the pseudo-science used to promote the vaccination racket goes. Talk about herd mentality! It’s such crap that to be frank, every time I hear people put forward the concept of herd mentality I suffer a severe onset of an urge to spew. I think the medical term for it is nausea, in case you prefer it.
Erwinalber, Peter suggested closing the thread and I assumed allowed some time for everyone to have a final post. I posted one, as did Grant and Alison. You have posted five times – leading to a response from Grant and now myself. If anyone is prolonging this thread, it is you.
Ah well, the German’s have a saying “When the cat’s gone out, the mice frollick!”
No doubt Peter will soon drop the curtains on the show!
May you enjoy living in blissful ignorance while it lasts!
Er, Neolithic = modern humans… (ie not neandertals…)
Thanks for the correction Alison – my attention span must have been running a bit short. At least that’s what I hope it was, and not incipient Alzheimers from the childhood diphtheria shot I was unfortunately given.
My point still stands though.
BTW, did you know that Barbie and presumably Ken are anti-vax?
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Vaccination-Information-Network-VINE/69667273997?v=photos#!/photo.php?pid=3888185&id=69667273997&ref=fbx_album
Shattering the false philosophy and junk science of conventional medicine
Thursday, March 30, 2006
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com
http://www.naturalnews.com/019334_health_disease_drugs.html
Millions of Chinese oppose mass vaccination plan
Tuesday, September 14, 2010 by: Jonathan Benson, staff writer
http://www.naturalnews.com/029739_chinese_opposition_mass_vaccination.html
Love it! It looks like people are finally waking up to what is being done to them and to the WHO’s genocidal intentions! 🙂 .