An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots End

[beforewisdom]

The other side of the story about vaccines

 

 

An Epidemic of Fear: How Panicked Parents Skipping Shots Endangers Us All

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/10/ff_waronscience/all/1

[VeganEssentials]

Interesting read, but it still doesn't give me enough reason to get vaccinated for the 'ol swine flu I'll do well enough without another dose of Thiomersal.

 

In my opinion, if research were being put more into finding new ways for creating antiviral/antifungals that could replace the toxic compounds used in most vaccines, the anti side wouldn't have much worry any longer. However, simply saying "take what we're giving you and accept our statements that they're safe" doesn't bestow a lot of faith in some people as to having assurance of complete safety in a product. Just as the article goes into depth with those who say that the components in vaccines may be partly to blame for autism, the powes that be have yet to offer concrete proof that they don't, so round and round we go.

 

This whole debate on to vaccinate or to not is bordering on quasi-religious as we get further along into flu season. Most times, I'd swear that if we changed things around and replaced the statement of "do you agree with vaccinations?" to "do you believe in god?" these debates would be practically interchangable. The pro-vaccine people say that the anti-side can't prove that the crappy compounds in most vaccines are actually harmful, and the anti-side says "show me the proof that they can't cause health problems", which has yet to be done by the pro side which insists that they're safe. We haven't gotten anywhere, but most everyone seems to want to pick a side like they do in politics and ignore the middle ground.

 

It all comes down to the fact that I'm cool with having been vaccinated against the common things that I've been given during childhood (not that I had any say in it), but I'm not going to get vaccianted and take in things I'd prefer to keep out of my body to prevent an illness that the vaccination might not actually prevent. H1N1 be damned, I've weighed the risk vs. reward and to me, the risk just ain't worth it. Sometimes it's good to be shut-in with work for days on end without ever going out in public

[Marcina]

There's more mercury in a can of tuna than in a vaccine.

[VeganEssentials]

There's more mercury in a can of tuna than in a vaccine.

 

While that may be pertinent to someone who eats tuna, I prefer to keep my body as free of toxic compounds as much as possible

 

Again, point being that IF the powers that be would work on alternate methods to remove the potentially toxic compounds in favor of things that might be more "natural" (not sure how natural you can get with such a thing, but is anyone even TRYING now to come up with a better option that what we've got so we can put this issue to bed?!?), this discussion could be closed quickly and easily.

 

I mean, I couldn't get a freakin' albuterol inhaler for my asthma that had simple AEROSOL delivery because "the FDA ruled that it was damaging to the environment" (yet, you can still buy aerosol hairspray, which goes directly into the air vs. into my lungs), but somehow, using a compound that has been proven to cotain toxic materials (if in disagreement, please cite any studies that show mercury in any form to be beneficial for health) did not get scrutinized until recently. Apparently, those in power seem to have their collective heads up their asses when it comes to being concerned about actual product safety vs. the interests of big pharama.

 

It's everyone's choice to get vaccinated or not for the upcoming "pandemic", which would scare me if we hadn't already had to contend with SARS, bird flu, and everything else that gets national headlines about how it'll kill half the population, then it disappears into the night without doing so regardless of vaccinations or not. I'm no conspiracy theorist, but something's MIGHTY fishy about this time around that ain't ringing true for being accurate info on what they're telling us, so I'll opt out by my own decision.

[djshrew]

I just want to note that not all vaccines contain mercury (not speaking about the new H1N1 vaccine). regarding other flu vaccines, you can get one without mercury in it. not to say that you should or that the other ingredients are safe....just wanted to get that out there.

 

I found a list that shows which contain it and which do not...of course now I can't find it. I'll keep looking

[beforewisdom]

There's more mercury in a can of tuna than in a vaccine.

 

You watched Dr. Greger's video too!

[beforewisdom]

Interesting read, but it still doesn't give me enough reason to get vaccinated for the 'ol swine flu I'll do well enough without another dose of Thiomersal.

 

The article didn't mention adult vaccinations or the pig flu vaccination. It focused on the other side of the debate about vaccinating children against common debilitating childhood diseases.

[SeaSiren]

Hot topic on the Mommy Boards. I have decided on delayed for the little one coming and possibly selective (still researching).

 

I found the vax comparison list from 1983 to 2007 (for the US):

http://www.generationrescue.org/pdf/cdc_comparison.pdf

[VeganEssentials]

Interesting read, but it still doesn't give me enough reason to get vaccinated for the 'ol swine flu I'll do well enough without another dose of Thiomersal.

 

The article didn't mention adult vaccinations or the pig flu vaccination. It focused on the other side of the debate about vaccinating children against common debilitating childhood diseases.

 

True, I was simply making a note about the current hot-button issue that seems to have stirred the bulk of recent debate about vaccinations in general. Until this last few months, few of us really seemed to bother to talk or even think about them, but with the H1N1 hullabaloo being bandied about daily, I just felt like mentioning it

 

But still, my point about the fact that taking out the "questionable" elements in vaccinations should pretty well alleviate the majority of concerns as discussed in the article. It boils down to the points that, people are worried about the potentially damaging effects of giving children dozens of vaccinations containing things that they're opposed to putting in the bodies of growing children. Remove the component in favor of an option that won't expose kids to something that is the hot-button ingredient for worry over things like autism, and suddenly the problem goes away. It really is simple in that regard, but I'm sure we'll have to wait another decade for it to happen, watch the gov't create more panels for discussion, and spend a half billion dollars to say "Maybe we SHOULD take the bad stuff out". As we all know, it can't happen quickly and without massive spending and time spent to discuss it, because that would be logical, and big business and gov't just don't work that way

[Im Your Man]

there's people sleeping in their car to get the vaccine first or some arrive to wait in line at 4 in the morning and then after waiting 8 hours they dont even get a shot of the vaccine because they are being told they are not in the priority group . ahah, good for them ! some are so panicked that they get angry and the police must come. It reminds me of this story in Island, because the economy is low, McDonalds is closing all their restaurants in this country, so all the crazy people there are waiting in line to get a last Big Mac, there's line ups even in the street, each joint sells 10,000 sandwiches per day... We see how sad hopeless and doomed mankind is with stories like this.

[Marcina]

There's more mercury in a can of tuna than in a vaccine.

 

You watched Dr. Greger's video too!

 

No I didn't.. It's just a simple fact. I've never heard of Dr. Greger.

[blabbate]

The pro-vaccine people say that the anti-side can't prove that the crappy compounds in most vaccines are actually harmful, and the anti-side says "show me the proof that they can't cause health problems", which has yet to be done by the pro side which insists that they're safe.

How are we supposed to prove that something is safe? We have generations of people injected with vaccines containing thimerosal, but no causative links to health problems, including autism. Thimerosal was removed from non-flu vaccines in 2002, but we haven't see any changes in toxicology in the intervening years. That's 70 years of widespread use without issue. How high is the burden of proof?

[Im Your Man]

The pro-vaccine people say that the anti-side can't prove that the crappy compounds in most vaccines are actually harmful, and the anti-side says "show me the proof that they can't cause health problems", which has yet to be done by the pro side which insists that they're safe.

How are we supposed to prove that something is safe? We have generations of people injected with vaccines containing thimerosal, but no causative links to health problems, including autism. Thimerosal was removed from non-flu vaccines in 2002, but we haven't see any changes in toxicology in the intervening years. That's 70 years of widespread use without issue. How high is the burden of proof?

Sometimes they test a pill and it causes death or serious problems. I remember once they gave a new medication in a British study and the first 2 person to receive the pill got their heads blowing the size of balloons and got transported to emergencies; of course they didn't give the pill to the others. In 1976 they gave a vaccine to 40 million Americans for a flue that caused 1 death but the vaccine caused 40 deads so they stopped the vaccination campaingn. There are side-effects for ALL medications, including even common stuff like Aspirin. What are the consequences for health other than tiny symptoms, we don't know, but what we know is that cancer rates, allergies and most diseases are increasing since many decades. Why? For instance it is clear that some substances in sprays to mask odors in houses are carcinogenic, but its only now that ther are doing studies to find out if these products sold since many years are harmful. 2 studies shown that they can be very bad for health but of course the companies say that their products are safe. A doctor said that in 40 years of carreer he has never saw a case of cancer caused by anti-odor sprays... but how could he know ? as if someone would show up and say: ''I have a cancer and the only thing I usein my life is anti-odor sprays so it must be because of that''. There are so many junk in everything that its impossible to know what exactly is the cause of what... and most chances its the addition of everything toxic put together that is the real culpit: that's an experiment they cannot do in laboratory: to test the combination of all the products used in shampoos, body lotion, insecticides, food additives, etc on a person and to watch the effect after 10 years of exposure. But its easy to see the results of such experiment on wild animals, they become hermaphrodites and have ton of cancers that they didn't have before, may it be small frogs or huge belugas, as long as they live in water near the shore of cities or facilities. Why would it be different for the human animal ? Its already proven that we are exposed to a high quantity of endocrine disruptors due to the pill and other pharmaceutical wastes in water that we drink in tap water. People consume 50% more anti-depressive than a decade ago , 300% more Ritalin, etc... Its ridiculour to even just think that all this have no negative effects on our health.

[chrisjs]

Thimerosal was removed from non-flu vaccines in 2002, but we haven't see any changes in toxicology in the intervening years.

Aside from the flu vaccines, it's still in most Tetanus vaccines (dtap / dt / tt), one of the meningitis ones, and the combined hepA/HepB (separate Hep A and Hep B ones are mercury free). http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/safetyavailability/vaccinesafety/ucm096228#t3

[SeaSiren]

Soooo, the Mommy boards I am on are reporting reaction to the shot. Several have had children who are sick with Flu like symptoms for 2-3 days after the vaccine which includes a fever. A few of the pregnant women have been hospitalized after the vaccine with the Flu. The pro-vaccine persons of course are saying that "well, you must have already had it in your system and just didn't know it." OK, perhaps ... but that many all on the board with my due date month? They are "supposibly" monitoring the side effects of the vaccine now, but how many are actually reporting it, and how much will get out to the general public. BTW my OB is not pushing this vaccine. I just have this sick feeling, I am going to be watching TV ten years from now and a lwayer commercial flashes across the screen .... "was your child seriously effected from birth defects becuse of the H1N1 Flu Vaccine ... you deserve justice, call us at 1-800-***".

 

Seems like damned if you do, damned if you don't! Not been a issue since I have not had it available to me though.

[chrisjs]

Soooo, the Mommy boards I am on are reporting reaction to the shot. Several have had children who are sick with Flu like symptoms for 2-3 days after the vaccine which includes a fever....

A few knuckleheads at my job ran off on friday to get the nasal spray. Once of them commented that it had severe side effects but that was just a rumor...I claimed the efficacy was a rumor as it hasn't been clinically proven. Now I'm concerned that they're going to be shedding the live virus. There's a reason the high risks groups aren't approved for the spray.

 

I just have this sick feeling, I am going to be watching TV ten years from now and a lwayer commercial flashes across the screen .... "was your child seriously effected from birth defects becuse of the H1N1 Flu Vaccine ... you deserve justice, call us at 1-800-***".

"Luckily" the government has put limits of liability for people seriously injured or killed by the vaccine: http://www.hrsa.gov/countermeasurescomp/default.htm

[beforewisdom]

How are we supposed to prove that something is safe? We have generations of people injected with vaccines containing thimerosal, but no causative links to health problems, including autism. Thimerosal was removed from non-flu vaccines in 2002, but we haven't see any changes in toxicology in the intervening years. That's 70 years of widespread use without issue. How high is the burden of proof?

 

That is a good point. Many of the parents now protesting childhood vaccinations were vaccinated themselves with no ill effects to them, their friends or their family.

[VeganEssentials]

How are we supposed to prove that something is safe? We have generations of people injected with vaccines containing thimerosal, but no causative links to health problems, including autism. Thimerosal was removed from non-flu vaccines in 2002, but we haven't see any changes in toxicology in the intervening years. That's 70 years of widespread use without issue. How high is the burden of proof?

 

That is a good point. Many of the parents now protesting childhood vaccinations were vaccinated themselves with no ill effects to them, their friends or their family.

 

blabbate - Unfortunately, the burden of proof may not pan out all that well, since much of what we're told is "safe" may not actually be so. However, I still stick to my main sentiment - Thimerosal cannot possibly be anything BUT potentially harmful (unless I'm wrong in believing that some mercury derivities can actually benefit health ), so removing it from some vaccines would at the very least quell any fear of that particular ingredient. If vaccines can be made without it, and it's the main hot-button ingredient, then common sense would dictate to remote it and work with an alternate agent so that it can't even be questioned. It's like saying "We've put a bit of arsenic into this drug you're taking. It's a very low dose, one you'll get through just fine, so don't worry about it." Sure, I may be fine after taking it, but maybe the next person isn't. I found this out the hard way with my eye treatments - I fell into that "minor percentage" to get the double-vision side effect where my brain just isn't coordinating with my optic nerves in the same way it used to. Would I do it all over again as I have to save my vision? Yes, because it was take the drug or go blind. A flu vaccine is not comparable to something that is essential to live normally, so that's why I have such a gripe with it. We're under mass hysteria over something that might end up to be no worse of a pandemic/epidemic/whatever than any other flu, but for some reason, we're all being told that we NEED to protect ourselves with this shot, and that we somehow shouldn't be concerned with side effects, yet somehow the makers are protected from extensive litigation even if there were massive reports of harmful side effects. I just don't feel that I trust the powers that be on this one, no matter how much they scream at us that "this is the big one".

 

Why not remove the offensive ingredient and remove all worry about that part to end the argument? That's all I'm saying. Again, maybe the vast majority of people will not have any issues relating to the vaccine. But, there's no doubt that some aren't taking it well based on reports from people getting sick after taking it (and that's just the short-term). What if there are negative side effects for a great deal of people, all for something that may not have been a fraction as essential as it's been made out to be? I'm just hoping people will take the time to question the pros and cons before falling for the hype surrounding everything relating to H1N1 in particular. I don't have any debate about vaccines for things like measles, mumps, rubella, etc. that are Thimerosal-free - I see the value in their use as dictated by the article, and if there aren't hot-button ingredients that people identify as toxic to an extent, then the issue with the anti-side lies elsewhere. For those reasons, you'd have to talk to someone who has objections from a different perspective. Mine is simply in being told that something that cannot do me any good is "safe", and that I have strong doubts that the H1N1 will necessarily pose a fraction of the threat that we're being told.

 

And, of course, if it is well-contained and doesn't spread out, we'll all be fed the story that it was only "because of the vaccine" and how we should all praise those who thrust it at us every chance they get. That's just how things work, after all, when you deal with big business

[Im Your Man]

Here in Quebec the people are so panicked and they're scared of death so they rush to the clinics to get the vaccine, and they're mad because they have to wait all night in the cold with no bathrooms nearby. ahah... Its so great that in Paris they just opened the clinics for vaccination and nobody came to get a shot ! The first day, about 20 persons came to get a dose of the vaccine. No citizens want this shit, because only 10% of the nurses and doctors in France accepted to get the vaccine. So if 90% of people working in the health care business know this vaccine is harmful or useless, why the population would want this shit in their bodies ? In fact, many nurses and doctors in all countries dont want to get vaccinated for the H1N1, and I'm sure the people who made the vaccine dont want it.

[Im Your Man]

oh yeah and the vaccine killed one person. But its kept as a secret by the medias. They said a nurse died a few days after being vaccinated... and they said she died of the flue H1N1 and the vaccine is not related to her death (by that, they mean it couldn't have saved her... they dont mean it could be the cause of her death, of course...) because they say she already had the flue A H1N1 when she got the vaccine. Well precisely: the vaccine killed her, not the flue. One must not be vaccinated when already sick: that woman's body was already fighting the virus and then they gave her a shot of the virus and adjuvants, which weakened her immune system even more and killed her.

 

Another thing that the medias didn't talk too much about it: about a hundred nurses got vaccinated with the wrong vaccine ! In fact, they receive a shot of the vaccine with twice too much adjuvants, so they need to get vaccinated again. So in total they will have receive three times more adjuvants than the other people.

[blabbate]

oh yeah and the vaccine killed one person. But its kept as a secret by the medias. They said a nurse died a few days after being vaccinated... and they said she died of the flue H1N1 and the vaccine is not related to her death (by that, they mean it couldn't have saved her... they dont mean it could be the cause of her death, of course...) because they say she already had the flue A H1N1 when she got the vaccine. Well precisely: the vaccine killed her, not the flue. One must not be vaccinated when already sick: that woman's body was already fighting the virus and then they gave her a shot of the virus and adjuvants, which weakened her immune system even more and killed her.

That doesn't make any sense. She already had a potentially deadly virus. She was vaccinated while she had the virus. She died of symptoms related to the virus. And you assume the vaccine killed her? I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's certainly not the most likely situation.

 

By the way, stats to date in the U.S.:

H1N1 deaths: 3900

H1N1 vaccine deaths: 0

[blabbate]

How are we supposed to prove that something is safe? We have generations of people injected with vaccines containing thimerosal, but no causative links to health problems, including autism. Thimerosal was removed from non-flu vaccines in 2002, but we haven't see any changes in toxicology in the intervening years. That's 70 years of widespread use without issue. How high is the burden of proof?

blabbate - Unfortunately, the burden of proof may not pan out all that well, since much of what we're told is "safe" may not actually be so. However, I still stick to my main sentiment - Thimerosal cannot possibly be anything BUT potentially harmful (unless I'm wrong in believing that some mercury derivities can actually benefit health ), so removing it from some vaccines would at the very least quell any fear of that particular ingredient. If vaccines can be made without it, and it's the main hot-button ingredient, then common sense would dictate to remote it and work with an alternate agent so that it can't even be questioned.

Thimerosal itself doesn't have any health benefits that I know of, no. Its benefit is as a preservative and decontaminant for vaccines. We just don't have anything else that works as well for multi-dose vials.

 

I agree that if we can take it out, we should, just to quiet the paranoids. But I don't think its presence is a good enough excuse to avoid vaccinations. The science just isn't there.

 

It's like saying "We've put a bit of arsenic into this drug you're taking. It's a very low dose, one you'll get through just fine, so don't worry about it." Sure, I may be fine after taking it, but maybe the next person isn't.

Inorganic arsenic is in many of our foods, particularly grains, at trace levels and even in much of our drinking water. It has no health benefits and cannot be anything but potentially harmful. Yet we don't worry about it because we know those levels are safe.

 

A flu vaccine is not comparable to something that is essential to live normally, so that's why I have such a gripe with it. We're under mass hysteria over something that might end up to be no worse of a pandemic/epidemic/whatever than any other flu, but for some reason, we're all being told that we NEED to protect ourselves with this shot, and that we somehow shouldn't be concerned with side effects, yet somehow the makers are protected from extensive litigation even if there were massive reports of harmful side effects. I just don't feel that I trust the powers that be on this one, no matter how much they scream at us that "this is the big one".

This is only the big one in that it's killing the young and healthy, I think. Otherwise it's like most other flues. But whether it is or isn't any worse than usual, I don't see why it matters. It's a flu virus that we know is responsible for thousands of deaths vs a vaccine responsible for none.

[chrisjs]

By the way, stats to date in the U.S.:

H1N1 deaths: 3900

H1N1 vaccine deaths: 0

Here's some details on how the CDC extrapolated that number:

http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/pdf/details_eip_methods_plus_schematic.pdf

[Im Your Man]

She already had a potentially deadly virus. She was vaccinated while she had the virus. She died of symptoms related to the virus. And you assume the vaccine killed her? I'm not saying it's impossible, but it's certainly not the most likely situation.

What do you mean ? we must not vaccinate someone who's sick, its dangerous, and it killed her.

 

By the way, stats to date in the U.S.:

H1N1 deaths: 3900

H1N1 vaccine deaths: 0

By the way, stats to date in the U.S.:

H1N1 deaths: 3900

H1N1 vaccine deaths: ? (and perhaps many to come)

people infected with H1N1 : 22 000 000

Regular flue deaths : 30, 000

 

 

I heard someone in the gym today, he said he felt sick like he had the flue for a week right after he got the vaccine. He said he never felt that sick in his whole life.

His friend said he's crazy he got this vaccine.

 

Why the USA give the vaccine to all people without adjuvants and in Canada its only pregnant women that have it without adjuvants. Why do pregnant women get no adjuvants... oh I get it, because its dangerous and toxic

 

Why 50% of doctors say this vaccine is useless and dont want to get near it or to prescribe it.

 

Also, a recent study showed that Tamiflue can make the H1N1 virus more virulent because it adapts. This is only when we use Tamiflue in a preventive way though, which is in smaller dose than the normal dose, and while we are infected without knowing it, like when the symptoms are not started yet... Well its not surprising, all antivirals, antibiotics, insecticides, etc do this. We're doomed if we continue like this: in a few decades we will have to face some undestructible, almost immortal viruses.

[Im Your Man]

Inorganic arsenic is in many of our foods, particularly grains, at trace levels and even in much of our drinking water. It has no health benefits and cannot be anything but potentially harmful. Yet we don't worry about it because we know those levels are safe.

Do you work for the government ? Because you sound like a politician lying about safety and all that. What is called safe may be just under the thin red line that separates life and death and may be 'safe' for the time of one tiny exposure but not safe for the thousands of times we are exposed to those substances. Also, let's say it is true that a product is 'safe', but then add another product labelled as 'safe', so both added together are already less 'safe'... and we are exposed to about 30,000 substances that can't be found in nature and were created by mad scientists and unleashed in society to be tested on us, some human guinea pigs. Arsenic is safe, blablabla... even the US governement banned the adjuvants from the vaccine. If we would believe what you are saying, there would be no harmful substance in this world... yet people are dying. Studies show that Bisphenol A, found in plastic bottles for water, etc is toxic and causes a dozen of diseases like breast cancer, prostate cancer, cardiovascular diseases, and even asthma and diabetes. We find Bisphenol A in ALL urine of EVERYBODY. These diseases and all diseases are increasing since decades.

 

They say the adjuvants found in the vaccine are supposed to stimulate and boost our immune system... some toxic products that any intelligent person wouldn't want to inject in his body even in infinitesimal dose.

I heard a guy saying that the experimental vaccines given to soldiers during Gulf war had 1 million less squalene than the H1N1 vaccine... ''the H1N1 has 1 million times more squalene in it than what they gave to soldiers that gave birth to mutant and mutilated kids with no arms, etc...'' lol, but its not more crazy than what governement say, always talking about the safety of the vaccine and drugs while keeping the nation in a state of constant fear about the pandemia so they will go get vaccinated. A vaccine that took 2 months to be made and tested for a few days, while it should have taken 10 years to make and many months to test it before giving it to million of people...