The issue of whether or not to vaccinate yourself or your children is a scary one, with vaccine advocates constantly raising the terrifying spector of debilitating disease or even death for those who refuse vaccinations. Every parent trembles when hearing such fearful warnings. But are vaccines safe? Should we be putting such cocktails of foreign chemicals into our and our children's bloodstreams?
As concerns vaccines, I once asked a prominent pediatrician who had given me an eloquent speech about breastmilk providing immunities to newborns why I needed to have my baby vaccinated for the illnesses I had already suffered, if I were passing along my immunities through breastmilk. He basically shrugged his shoulders and changed the subject. I also asked him why, if all the other children had been vaccinated already, we should be worried about an unvaccinated child causing an epidemic. Weren't the vaccines used on the other children effective? Shouldn't they stop an epidemic? I never received a reply to that question either.
Now, in addition to the concerns about mercury added to vaccines causing several health problems such as autism in children comes new worries about aluminum adjuvants in vaccines.
New Warning About Everyday Poison Linked to Alzheimer's, ADHD, and Autism
Dr. David Ayoub is a radiologist and a physician, and has become a specialist on the additives and preservatives used in vaccines. He was a presenter at the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) Conference in Washington D.C. last year.
Here he discusses the practice of using aluminum as an adjuvant, and why he believes aluminum may be far more toxic than thimerosal in vaccines.
Dr. Ayoub was, as many of you are, very concerned about mercury (thimerosal) in vaccines for a number of years, and attended a number of autism conferences that featured physicians who were highlighting the dangers of mercury. However, a few personal encounters heightened his interest in another toxic metal frequently used in vaccines, namely aluminum. Parents of autistic children kept pointing out the fact that their children’s heavy metal toxicity profiles showed high amounts of aluminum, and they wanted to know what that meant....
Further Reading
The FDA Shuts Down Common Infant Vaccine
Comments (13)
-
|2010-03-20 20:27:49 Arhata - vaccines and aluminum
I love the smell of aluminum!
There are more over 80 in our country than ever before. Were most of them subject to the amount of vaccines that kids are today. What we eat is a 'vaccine' equivalent.
-
|2010-03-21 16:25:24 Gene - hmmmAgain you post something that actually directly affects peoples lives and it is mostly ignored?! very few responses. I guess indoctrination means more than being healthy and living clean.
Sad very sad!
-
|2010-03-22 22:46:06 Amy - vaccinesI for one have been very sceptical of vaccines in the last few years. When my kids were young and I was stupid(very young mother) I didn't think twice about having them vaccinated. It wasn't untill my husband began having horrible reactions to anthrax vaccines and a few friends had gotten the flu after recieving the flu shots. So, I did my research and found out, just horrible, horrible things! Needless to say, I do not have myself or my kids vaccinated for flu and nor have my daughters been vaccinated for HPV. I also found out, "WHO Murdered Africa". I am convinced now that vaccines are nothing more than biological warfare and we are mere guinea pigs for the powers that be.
[urlhttp://healingtools.tripod.com/who_africa.html[/url]
GREAT post! I'm glad you are as concerned as I am.
-
|2010-03-22 22:54:48 Gregory FegelM.S. has already posted a link to Bill Gates' recent TED speech, in which Gates mentions his plan to use vaccines to reduce the earth's human population by 10 to 15%. Perhaps Gates made a 'Fruedian slip', or perhaps it didn't occur to Gates that his speech would appear on youtube.
Here's another link to Gates' notorious 'vaccine speech':
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUJMR3BUm2s&feature=related
William Engdhal has written an excellent and well-researched article which explains why the remark about vaccines that Bill Gates made in his TED speech should be taken seriously. Engdhal wrote:
Gates made his remarks to the invitation-only Long Beach, California TED2010 Conference, in a speech titled, “Innovating to Zero!.” Along with the scientifically absurd proposition of reducing manmade CO2 emissions worldwide to zero by 2050, approximately four and a half minutes into the talk, Gates declares, "First we got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's headed up to about 9 billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."
http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Swine_Flu/Gates_Vaccines/gate...
-
|2010-03-23 03:53:19 Gregory FegelAcharya S. has identified two of the main reasons why 'vaccine refuseniks' should not be punished or forced to submit to vaccinations. The first reason is that, if a vaccine works as it is supposed to, all those who recieve the vaccine are protected, and have nothing to fear from those who refuse the vaccine. The second reason is that if 'vaccine refuseniks' get a disease or transmit a disease, it will only be refuseniks who get that disease. So why not allow the refuseniks to make that choice for themselves?
One argument that the government may put forward is that the 'vaccine refuseniks' should not be permitted to 'endanger' their children by refusing to have them vaccinated. The parents can argue that there are health risks with recieving a vaccine. It is an issue of parent's control versus State control over the children.
-
|2010-03-23 10:28:55 Gregory FegelAcharya S. wrote "... I once asked a prominent pediatrician who had given me an eloquent speech about breastmilk providing immunities to newborns why I needed to have my baby vaccinated for the illnesses I had already suffered, if I were passing along my immunities through breastmilk. He basically shrugged his shoulders and changed the subject."
Of course, the doctor should have answered the question, which is quite sensible and probably often asked by mothers. If I'm not mistaken, I believe the standard medical opinion is that while the mother's antibodies that provide immunity pass through the placenta, the mother's white blood cells that produced the antibodies do not.
About a year after birth, the antibodies which the infant recieved from the mother through the placenta will terminate, and the infant's own white blood cells will then need to produce their own antibodies. Hence the medico's recommendation for vaccines to prompt the infant's white blood cells to produce antibodies in response to the vaccinations.
I don't know why the mother's antibodies don't stimulate the infant's white blood cells to produce the same antibodies, but apparently they don't. If they did, inherited immunity to various diseases would be much more commonplace than it is.
Wikipedia states: "Maternal passive immunity is a type of naturally acquired passive immunity, and refers to antibody-mediated immunity conveyed to a fetus by its mother during pregnancy. Maternal antibodies (MatAb) are passed through the placenta to the fetus by an FcRn receptor on placental cells. This occurs around the third month of gestation. Immunoglobulin G is the only antibody isotype that can pass through the placenta. Immunization is often required shortly following birth to prevent diseases such as tuberculosis, hepatitis B, polio, and pertussis, however, maternal antibodies can inhibit the induction of protective vaccine responses throughout the first year of life. This effect is usually overcome by secondary responses to booster immunization."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_immunity
-
|2010-03-23 10:29:27 ad1. By the time you are an adult and having children your immunity to childhood diseases has mostly faded. That is why young children need their own vaccines.
2. Did you think of the other unvaccinated children, like newborns, who would be susceptible? If the herd immunity level drops then such children become very vulnerable.
This is very basic stuff Acharya, that any intelligent parent should be able to understand.
-
|2010-03-24 10:55:48 Gregory Fegelad wrote: "By the time you are an adult and having children your immunity to childhood diseases has mostly faded. That is why young children need their own vaccines."
Not so. Adults are immune to childhood diseases because they have either already had them, they have been exposed to them, or they have been vaccinated against them. Adults who have never had a certain childhood disease or never recieved a vaccination to it are the adults who are at risk of getting a childhood disease.
Adults who have never had chicken pox or mumps are at risk for getting those diseases. The purpose of giving children vaccines for 'childhood diseases' is mainly to protect the children from one another, although it's possible for an adult 'first-timer' to get or transmit a childhood disease.
ad wrote: "Did you think of the other unvaccinated children, like newborns, who would be susceptible? If the herd immunity level drops then such children become very vulnerable."
Vaccinated children have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated children. If your point is that newborn infants who have not yet been vaccinated are at risk from unvaccinated children or adults, that's true. You are correct that increasing the herd immunity through vaccination tends to protect the entire community from infection, including the unvaccinated.
The WHO's militant campaign to eliminate smallpox in the 1960s was successful. Smallpox was formerly a global scourge, and now it's history. Except for the weaponized smallpox retained in military and 'research' labs by the USA and Russia.
It's unfortunate that unscrupulous or dishonest practices by governments and industry have caused many people to distrust vaccines, but it is a problem that has been created as much by real incidents that have inspired reasonable fear as by public ignorance.
In my previous posts above, two corrections: Herr Doctor's name should be spelled 'Freud', and the mother's antibodies do not stimulate an immune response in the infant because an antigen is required to do that.
-
|2010-03-24 17:55:24 Gene - Post on the (HEALTH? CARE?) Bill please!Are you still trying to read the "SOCIALIST/actually corporate welfare bill" Acharya or just not going there? That just got forced down our throats.
-
Does anyone know of any good books following up on the case made by the book, 'VACCINE-A', by Gary Matsumoto, against the experimental anthrax vaccine forced on GIs in the Gulf War? It allegedly gave auto-immune diseases to tens of thousands of recipients. The case was pretty well proven in my opinion, just by the fact that none of the hudreds of journalists who spent time in the same areas got the disease. None of them received the vaccine.
-
|2010-08-10 17:04:47 Norman Jacobson - $ 20 Trillion IndustryThe Alzheimer's industry anticipates recieving $ 20 Trillion from the US Government in the next 40 years.
If aluminum-hydroxide, the $ Billion ingredient in Mylanta(R) was banned from food and medicine, it is likely that alzheimer's disease would be a disease of the past and no money for the Alzheimer's industry.
-
|2011-03-15 23:48:45 Ross CoeThe Genome Project has stated that autistic children they studied had genetic mutation that did not originate with their parents. So autism isn't "genetic" in the way mainstream medicine insists. Why are these babies experiencing mutations? Do a search. Mercury and spontaneous genetic mutation. Do the same for aluminum. You'll see what causes autism.
Powered by !JoomlaComment 4.0 beta2
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=176 44