Date:   1/12/2011 7:19:00 AM ( 13 y ago)
Hits:   2,610
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1751326

 Is your opinion to avoid all vaccines? We plan to have children in the near future, and I struggle with this. I do not want to give them vaccines, but I feel I don't know enough about it. Is is safe to not vaccinate them at all or do you recommend some of them?

I do not recommend vaccinations at all.  First of all contrary to claims they have NEVER been proven to work.  The whole basis for the claim they work is on the fact that smallpox is no longer present in the general population.  The vaccine proponents claim that the eradication was due to vaccines.  On the other hand versions of Ebola, Marburg's and Lassa fever all suddenly appeared in Africa in the late 70s in the same villages being inoculated for smallpox during the World Health Organization's (WHO's)  Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI). Funny thing is that when the vaccines were stopped these diseases all disappeared on their own.  No vaccines were available for any of these diseases.  So here we have proof that viruses can disappear on their own accord without vaccines. So who is to say that this is not what happened with smallpox to begin with?

It also needs to be noted that the WHO was warned several times prior to this that their vaccines were contaminated with viruses, yet did nothing about this.  But they also wrote in their journal and the Federation Proceedings in 1972 that they wanted to produce synthetic viruses to inject in to humans during routine vaccinations for the purpose of selectively destroying the immune system by destroying either T cell, B cell or antibody function while leaving the rest of the immune system intact.  But that is all another story.

And why can you still get viruses that you have been vaccinated for?  And why are diseases for which vaccines are available, such as mumps, on the rise despite mandatory vaccinations in schools, including collages.  All of this evidence shows that vaccines are not as effective as being claimed. 

Ont he other hand it is known that vaccines do carry dangers.  Look at the swine flu vaccines given back in the 70s.  It cost the US government over $1 billion to settle lawsuits over all the deaths and injuries they caused in the civilian population.  I state "civilian population" because military personnel were forced to have the vaccines, but they were prohibited from suing the government for their injuries.  Then there was the whole fiasco of the polio vaccines we were given back in the 60s that were contaminated with the simian virus type 40 (SV40), which has been linked to a number of human cancers.  Over 90 million Americans were inoculated with the contaminated vaccines.  Then there have been all the recent deaths and injuries around the world caused by the new HPV vaccines.  These are only a few examples.  There are many more out there that can be found with a  little more research.

Then there is the whole issue behind the link of vaccines and autism.  Of course they are jumping all over that doctor claiming his research was fraudulent.  If they did that every time that the drug companies falsified drug research to get approval we would not have any pharmaceuticals including vaccines.  Whether or not he really falsified his research we will never know.  They use the same garbage to discredit researchers all the time when they get too close to the truth we are not supposed to know.  Look at what happened with the researcher that discovered the link between H. pylori and ulcers as well as stomach cancer.  The medical establishment went after him big time calling him a quack, trying to get his research grants revoked and him blackballed from research.  The entire time the drug companies were working on and testing antibiotic therapies for H. pylori.  One the drugs were ready for approval by the FDA all of a sudden the discovery was all over the news.  Funny thing was that I read about the finding in one of my science journals about 20 years before the media finally jumped on it.  And a year after the media jumped on the story the FDA was approving the drugs for H. pylori that take an average of 12-14 years to develop, test and get approval.  So as thousands of people were dying each year from H. pylori induced diseases the FDA and the drug companies were playing politics at the cost of people's lives.  I see no real difference between what they did then and what they are doing now with the vaccines.

So is there really a link between vaccines and autism?  I would say yes.  The rate of autism cases increased at the same time vaccines became mandatory.  And we do know that mercury has a high affinity for brain tissue, and infants would be especially susceptible to the effects.

Maybe it is not the only cause of autism, but it could still be accounting for many cases.  And if the medical establishment is so certain that mercury in vaccines is not playing any role then why did they lie claiming they took the mercury out of the vaccines.  They specifically said that the mercury was removed from childhood vaccines, yet there was no change in the rate of autism cases.  But this was not true.   They only removed the mercury from SOME of the childhood vaccines.  So the children were still getting injected with mercury.  In addition, how could they say there was no change in the rates of autism?  Think about it.  A child has to be several years old to really try and get a diagnosis of autism.  You really cannot diagnose an infant.  So they stopped putting mercury in SOME of the vaccines, but even at that did not wait several years so the newly born children they were basin their claims on were old enough to really know if there was a change. So they were misleading the public all the way around, then they expect us to believe the rest of the crap they are feeding us.

Another issue I have had is the vaccinating of newborns.  This is nothing short of criminal.  The whole concept of vaccines is that they supposedly stimulate an antibody response to protect the person from the illness.  Even if this does work infants CANNOT mount a proper antibody response.  This is why maternal antibodies from breast milk are so essential for newborns until their immune systems can mature enough to handle the effects of antigens they are exposed to.  So what are the long term effects of injecting antigens, both from the vaccines and the needle contamination, in to an infant's system that has an immature immune system?  For those who do not know what I mean by the needle contamination, the needle is contaminated as soon as it is uncapped due to airborne antigens.  This is even an issue for adults receiving shots or IVs.  If you ever got mild redness around an injection site that is a minor infection from the needle contamination.  In a healthy immune system it is not a big deal as our systems can readily fight the infection.  But immune suppressed patients are at a greater risk of more serious infections.  A friend of mine was in the hospital not too long ago for this.  He developed thrombophlebitis from a contaminated IV needle.  They discharged him with the infection and he was right back in the hospital the next day.  There is a good reason they say children and the elderly are more prone to pathogens like influenza viruses.  They have weaken immune systems.  Which means they are also more prone to other antigens, including those from receiving vaccines.

So the medical establishment can rant and rave all day about how vaccines help to prevent disease and save lives.  The evidence shows that vaccines also cause disease and injure and kill people as well.

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.00 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=1751326