Vaccines Under the Surface: What Mainstream News Won’t Connect

| |

Top Tier Gear USA


Fantasy: “vaccines remarkably safe and effective”

The article below was a small section of my book, AIDS INC., which I wrote in 1987-8. At the time, I decided to take a look at vaccines and see what I could find out about them.

My ensuing research led me into all sorts of surprising areas.

Since the period of 1987-8, much more has come to light about vaccine safety and efficacy. Here is what I discovered way back when—

* * * * *

“The combined death rate from scarlet fever, diphtheria, whooping cough and measles among children up to fifteen shows that nearly 90 percent of the total decline in mortality between 1860 and 1965 had occurred before the introduction of antibiotics and widespread immunization. In part, this recession may be attributed to improved housing and to a decrease in the virulence of micro-organisms, but by far the most important factor was a higher host-resistance due to better nutrition.” Ivan Illich, Medical Nemesis, Bantam Books, 1977

“In a recent British outbreak of whooping cough, for example, even fully immunized children contracted the disease in fairly large numbers; and the rates of serious complications and death were reduced only slightly. In another recent outbreak of pertussis, 46 of the 85 fully immunized children studied eventually contracted the disease.”

“In 1977, 34 new cases of measles were reported on the campus of UCLA, in a population that was supposedly 91% immune, according to careful serological testing. Another 20 cases of measles were reported in the Pecos, New Mexico, area within a period of a few months in 1981, and 75% of them had been fully immunized, some of them quite recently. A survey of sixth-graders in a well-immunized urban community revealed that about 15% of this age group are still susceptible to rubella, a figure essentially identical with that of the pre-vaccine era.” Richard Moskowitz, MD, The Case Against Immunizations, 1983, American Institute of Homeopathy.

“Of all reported whooping cough cases between 1979 and 1984 in children over 7 months of age – that is, old enough to have received the primary course of the DPT shots (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) – 41% occurred in children who had received three or more shots and 22% in children who had one or two immunizations.”

“Among children under 7 months of age who had whooping cough, 34% had been immunized between one and three times…”

“… Based on the only U.S. findings on adverse DPT reactions, an FDA-financed study at the University of California, Los Angeles, one out of every 350 children will have a convulsion; one in 180 children will experience high-pitched screaming; and one in 66 will have a fever of 105 degrees or more.” Jennifer Hyman, Democrat and Chronicle, Rochester, New York, special supplement on DPT, dated April, 1987.

“A study undertaken in 1979 at the University of California, Los Angeles, under the sponsorship of the Food and Drug Administration, and which has been confirmed by other studies, indicates that in the U.S.A. approximately 1,000 infants die annually as a direct result of DPT vaccinations, and these are classified as SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) deaths. These represent about 10 to 15% of the total number of SIDS deaths occurring annually in the U.S.A. (between 8,000 and 10,000 depending on which statistics are used).” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, CW Daniel Company Limited, Saffron Walden, Essex, England, 1987.

“Assistant Secretary of Health Edward Brandt, Jr., MD, testifying before the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources, rounded… figures off to 9,000 cases of convulsions, 9,000 cases of collapse, and 17,000 cases of high-pitched screaming for a total of 35,000 acute neurological reactions occurring within forty-eight hours of a DPT shot among America’s children every year.” DPT: A Shot in the Dark, by Harris L. Coulter and Barbara Loe Fischer, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

“While 70-80% of British children were immunized against pertussis in 1970-71, the rate is now 39%. The committee predicts that the next pertussis epidemic will probably turn out to be more severe than the one in 1974/75. However, they do not explain why, in 1970/71, there were more than 33,000 cases of pertussis with 41 fatal cases among the very well immunized British child population; whereas in 1974/75, with a declining rate of vaccination, a pertussis epidemic caused only 25,000 cases with 25 fatalities.” Wolfgang Ehrengut, Lancet, Feb. 18, 1978, p. 370.

“… Barker and Pichichero, in a prospective study of 1232 children in Denver, Colorado, found after DTP that only 7% of those vaccinated were free from untoward reactions, which included pyrexia (53%), acute behavioral changes (82%), prolonged screaming (13%), and listlessness, anorexia and vomiting. 71% of those receiving second injections of DTP experienced two or more of the reactions monitored.” Lancet, May 28, 1983, p. 1217

“Publications by the World Health Organization show that diphtheria is steadily declining in most European countries, including those in which there has been no immunization. The decline began long before vaccination was developed. There is certainly no guarantee that vaccination will protect a child against the disease; in fact, over 30,000 cases of diphtheria have been recorded in the United Kingdom in fully immunized children.” Leon Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 58.

“Pertussis (whooping cough) immunization is controversial, as the side effects have received a great deal of publicity. The counter claim is that the effectiveness and protection offered by the procedure far outweigh the possible ill effects… annual deaths, per million children, from this disease over the period from 1900 to the mid-nineteen seventies, shows that from a high point of just under 900 deaths per million children (under age 15) in 1905, the decline has been consistent and dramatic. There had been a lowering of mortality rates of approximately 80% by the time immunization was introduced on a mass scale, in the mid-nineteen fifties. The decline has continued, albeit at a slower rate, ever since. No credit can be given to vaccination for the major part of the decline since it was not in use.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, p. 63.

“… the swine-flu vaccination program was one of its (CDC) greatest blunders. It all began in 1976 when CDC scientists saw that a virus involved in a flu attack outbreak at Fort Dix, N.J., was similar to the swine-flu virus that killed 500,000 Americans in 1918. Health officials immediately launched a 100-million dollar program to immunize every American. But the expected epidemic never materialized, and the vaccine led to partial paralysis in 532 people. There were 32 deaths.” U.S. News and World Report, Joseph Carey, October 14, 1985, p. 70, “How Medical Sleuths Track Killer Diseases.”

“Despite (cases) in which (smallpox) vaccination plainly failed to protect the population, and despite the rampant side-effects of the methods, the proponents of vaccination continued their attempts to justify the methods by claims that the disease had declined in Europe as a whole during the period of its compulsory use. If the decline could be correlated with the use of the vaccination, then all else could be set aside, and the advantage between its current low incidence could be shown to outweigh the periodic failures of the method, and to favour the continued use of vaccination. However, the credit for the decline in the incidence of smallpox could not be given to vaccination. The fact is that its incidence declined in all parts of Europe, whether or not vaccination was employed.” Chaitow, Vaccination and Immunization, pp. 6-7.

“Smallpox, like typhus, has been dying out (in England) since 1780. Vaccination in this country has largely fallen into disuse since people began to realize how its value was discredited by the great smallpox epidemic of 1871-2 (which occurred after extensive vaccination).” W. Scott Webb, A Century of Vaccination, Swan Sonnenschein, 1898.

“In this incident (Kyoto, Japan, 1948) – the most serious of its kind – a toxic (vaccine) batch of alum-precipitated toxoid (APT) was responsible for illness in over 600 infants and for no fewer than 68 deaths.”

“On 20 and 22 October, 1948, a large number of babies and children in the city of Kyoto received their first injection of APT. On the 4th and 5th of November, 15,561 babies and children aged some months to 13 years received their second dose. One to two days later, 606 of those who had been injected fell ill. Of these, 9 died of acute diphtheritic paralysis in seven to fourteen days, and 59 of late paralysis mainly in four to seven weeks.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization, Athone Press, University of London, 1967.

“Accidents may, however, follow the use of this so-called killed (rabies) vaccine owing to inadequate processing. A very serious occurrence of this sort occurred at Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil, in 1960. No fewer than 18 out of 66 persons vaccinated with Fermi’s carbolized (rabies) vaccine suffered from encephalomyelitis and every one of the eighteen died.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“At a press conference in Washington on 24 July, 1942, the Secretary of War reported that 28,585 cases of jaundice had been observed in the (American) Army between 1 January and 4 July after yellow fever vaccination, and of these 62 proved fatal.” Sir Graham Wilson, Hazards of Immunization.

“The world’s biggest trial (conducted in south India) to assess the value of BCG tuberculosis vaccine has made the startling revelation that the vaccine ‘does not give any protection against bacillary forms of tuberculosis.’ The study said to be ‘most exhaustive and meticulous,’ was launched in 1968 by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) with assistance from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, Georgia.”

“The incidence of new cases among the BCG vaccinated group was slightly (but statistically insignificantly) higher than in the control group, a finding that led to the conclusion that BCG’s protective effect ‘was zero.’” New Scientist, November 15, 1979, as quoted by Hans Ruesch in Naked Empress, Civis Publishers, Switzerland, 1982.

“Between 10 December 1929 and 30 April 1930, 251 of 412 infants born in Lubeck received three doses of BCG vaccine by the mouth during the first ten days of life. Of these 251, 72 died of tuberculosis, most of them in two to five months and all but one before the end of the first year. In addition, 135 suffered from clinical tuberculosis but eventually recovered; and 44 became tuberculin-positive but remained well. None of the 161 unvaccinated infants born at the time was affected in this way and none of these died of tuberculosis within the following three years.” Hazards of Immunization, Wilson.

“We conducted a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial to test the efficacy of the 14-valent pneumococcal capsular polysaccharide vaccine in 2295 high-risk patients… Seventy-one episodes of proved or probable pneumococcal pneumonia or bronchitis occurred among 63 of the patients (27 placebo recipients and 36 vaccine recipients)… We were unable to demonstrate any efficacy of the pneumococcal vaccine in preventing pneumonia or bronchitis in this population.” New England Journal of Medicine, November 20, 1986, p. 1318, Michael Simberkoff et al.

“But already before Salk developed his vaccine, polio had been constantly regressing; the 39 cases out of every 100,000 inhabitants registered in 1942 had gradually diminished from year to year until they were reduced to only 15 cases in 1952… according to M. Beddow Baylay, the English surgeon and medical historian.” Slaughter of the Innocent, Hans Reusch, Civitas Publishers, Switzerland, and Swain, New York, 1983.

“Many published stories and reports have stated, implied and otherwise led professional people and the public to believe that the sharp reduction of cases (and of deaths) from poliomyelitis in 1955 as compared to 1954 is attributable to the Salk vaccine… That it is a misconception follows from these considerations. The number of children inoculated has been too small to account for the decrease. The sharp decrease was apparent before the inoculations began or could take effect and was of the same order as the decrease following the immediate post-inoculation period.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, vol. 20, no. 1, 1987.

“So far it is hardly possible to gain insight into the extent of the immunization catastrophe of 1955 in the United States. It may be considered certain that the officially ascertained 200 cases (of polio) which were caused directly or indirectly by the (polio) vaccination constitute minimum figures… It can hardly be estimated how many of the 1359 (polio) cases among vaccinated persons must be regarded as failures of the vaccine and how many of them were infected by the vaccine. A careful study of the epidemiologic course of polio in the United States yields indications of grave significance. In numerous states of the U.S.A., typical early epidemics developed with the immunizations in the spring of 1955… The vaccination incidents of the year 1955 cannot be exclusively traced back to the failure of one manufacturing firm.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980, vol. 19, no. 4, “Story of the Salk Vaccine (Part 2).”

“Suffice it to say that most of the large (polio) epidemics that have occurred in this country since the introduction of the Salk vaccine have followed the wide-scale use of the vaccine and have been characterized by an uncommon early seasonal onset. To name a few, there is the Massachusetts epidemic of 1955; the Chicago epidemic of 1956; and the Des Moines epidemic of 1959.” Dr. Herbert Ratner, Child and Family, 1980 vol. 19, no. 4.

“The live (Sabin) poliovirus vaccine has been the predominant cause of domestically arising cases of paralytic poliomyelitis in the United States since 1972. To avoid the occurrence of such cases, it would be necessary to discontinue the routine use of live poliovirus vaccine.” Jonas Salk, Science, March 4, 1977, p. 845.

“By the (U.S.) government’s own admission, there has been a 41% failure rate in persons who were previously vaccinated against the (measles) virus.” Dr. Anthony Morris, John Chriss, BG Young, “Occurrence of Measles in Previously Vaccinated Individuals,” 1979; presented at a meeting of the American Society for Microbiology at Fort Detrick, Maryland, April 27, 1979.

“Prior to the time doctors began giving rubella (German measles) vaccinations, an estimated 85% of adults were naturally immune to the disease (for life). Because of immunization, the vast majority of women never acquire natural immunity (or lifetime protection).” Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, Let’s Live, December 1983, as quoted by Carolyn Reuben in the LA WEEKLY, June 28, 1985.

“Adminstration of KMV (killed measles vaccine) apparently set in motion an aberrant immunologic response that not only failed to protect children against natural measles, but resulted in heightened susceptibility.” JAMA Aug. 22, 1980, vol. 244, p. 804, Vincent Fulginiti and Ray Helfer. The authors indicate that such falsely protected children can come down with “an often severe, atypical form of measles. Atypical measles is characterized by fever, headache… and a diverse rash (which)… may consist of a mixture of macules, papules, vesicles, and pustules…”

The above quotes reflect only a mere fraction of an available literature which shows there is a need for an extensive review of vaccination. It is certain that undisclosed, unlooked for illness occurs as a result of vaccines, or as a result of infection after protective immunity should have been conferred but wasn’t. A certain amount of this sort of illness is immunosuppressive in the widest sense, and some in a narrower sense (depression of T-cell numbers, etc.). When looking for unusual illness and immune depression, vaccines are one of those areas which remain partially hidden from investigation. That is a mistake. It is not adequate to say, “Vaccines are simple; they stimulate the immune system and confer immunity against specific germ agents.” That is the glossy presentation. What vaccines often do is something else. They engage some aspect of the body’s immune-response, but to what effect over the long term? Why, for example, do children who have measles vaccine develop a susceptibility to another more severe, atypical measles? Is that virulent form of the disease the result of reactivation of the virus in the vaccine?

Official reports on vaccine reactions are often at odds with unofficial estimates because of the method of analysis used. If vaccine-reaction is defined as a small set of possible effects experienced within 72 hours of an inoculation, then figures will be smaller. But doctors like G.T. Stewart, of the University of Glasgow, have found through meticulous investigation, including visits to hospitals and interviews with parents of vaccinated children, that reactions as severe as brain-damage (e.g., from the DPT vaccine) can be overlooked, go unreported and can be assumed mistakenly to have come from other causes.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Jon Rappoport of No More Fake News.

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALEDEXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
[yottie id="4"]

811 thoughts on “Vaccines Under the Surface: What Mainstream News Won’t Connect”

  1. I have not decided if the State is trying to kill off a few million people, or vaccines with heavy metals and Squalene oil, are just to make money while making the sheep passively stupid.

        1. Not to argue but where do you find these numbers. I am interested in actual numbers of population and I know some countries do not accurately count their people.

      1. Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !sy220c:
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash510WebMasterGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!sy220c:….,……

        1. Seeing as how you’re obviously all about the money, you could make a lot more money as a sexual prostitute than you are as a Google prostitute, so why not do that and stop crapping up these comments sections with your worthless advertisements.

      2. 1915 – Pertussis vaccine introduced – World population = 1,800,000,000
        1955 – Polio vaccine introduced – World population = 2,780,000,000
        1963 – Measles vaccine introduced – World population = 3,210,000,000
        1981 – Hep B vaccine introduced – World population = 4,530,000,000
        1995 – Varicella vaccine introduced – World population = 5,700,000,000
        2016 – World population today = 7,125,000,000
        Worst. Depopulation. Scheme. Ever!

        1. You undoubtedly haven’t researched vaccines or you would understand that the illnesses they are supposed to prevent happen in vaccinated individuals as much or more than the unvaccinated because it lowers the immune system. What it doesn’t kill it disables. I guess you think the mega increase in autistic boys is caused by M&Ms?

          1. Liar liar, pants on fire!

            I challenge you to find a single VPD for which your statement is true.

            With measles, the unvaccinated are about 30 times more likely to become infected compared to the vaccinated, as proven with every measles outbreak in recent history.

            When it comes to the zombie conspiracy of “vaccines cause autism”, we’ve known for decades now that the unvaccinated develop autism at the same rate as the vaccinated, so it’s obvious that vaccines don’t cause it. (Taylor et al. 2014)

            “I guess you think the mega increase in autistic boys is caused by M&Ms?” Well, Baxter et al. (2014) showed that, when using the same diagnosis criteria, the autism rate hasn’t changed in at least 25 years.

          2. You are either really dumb or you are a shill for the CDC in one capacity or another. By the way what harm can measles, mumps, or chicken pox do to a healthy child, it is usually just a vacation from school, I enjoyed my bouts with these minor problems as long as I didn’t eat anything sour or sweet with the mumps.

          3. 30% of measles patients have a complication, from relatively mild, like diarrhea to extremely serious, like encephalitis. In between, vision and hearing loss.

            Mumps: Used to be the leading cause of unilateral acquired sensorineural deafness in children. Mumps deafness is usually sudden in onset and profound.

            Chickenpox: Most recover, about 150 died per year.

          4. China as well as many other Countries have banned the MMR Vaccination for good reason!! It causes Autism…
            FYI: the 150 died per year statistic where people vaccinated for Chickenpox. You got to be as intelligent as a Baboon:)

          5. LOL! You’re a piece all right, Piece! A piece of work!

            The Chinese actually require a dose of measles vaccine at 8 months and two doses of MMR dose 1 at 18-24 months, and dose 2 at age 5.

            Why people try to put up such easily checked out lies is something I don’t understand. That’s what the internet is for! Virtually all countries recommend at least 1 dose of MMR and many developed countries recommend 2 doses.

            Liz Ditz: “Then Piece2016 claims: “Which is why many other countries don’t use [the MMR vaccine].

            What countries would those be, Piece2016? Not Canada, Mexico, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands,
            Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, or the United Kingdom. All have 2 doses of MMR on their immunization schedules, which you would know if you had consulted actual sources (say, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control) rather
            than anti-vaccine propaganda sites.”

            Falls Angel: “Add Australia, New Zealand, Japan (MR only, mumps vax is optional), Russia says at least one dose of MMR. And so on.”

          6. the ones with ‘complications’ are the ones who get unnecessarily medicated with antipyretics and hosptilalized

          7. So you can’t think of a single example to back up your false claims?
            Rather, like an ignorant conspiracy theorist, you simply try to change the subject.

            “By the way what harm can measles, mumps, or chicken pox do to a healthy child”

            It can kill them.

          8. Back in the 50s and 60s no one in our whole school had any problems with childhood diseases, until vaccines became more prevalent, it is ignorance to think, with all the evidence from CDC whistleblowers and other experts on the subject, that vaccines are harmless.

          9. Like an ignorant conspiracy theorist, you simply try to change the subject.

            Back in the 50s and 60s, people with severe autism were put into institutions- out of sight, out of mind.

            Even William Thompson, the “CDC Whistlblower” says the nonsense promoted in anti-vax films like “vaxxed” are lies.

          10. “Brian” appears to have escaped this segregation process.

            But I suppose it’s either agree with vaccine company lies, or get permanently infected with a bullet to the back of the head.
            There is a recent and notorious “Danish Study” which clearly involves rampant fraud in the service of these companies.

          11. There is a recent and notorious “Danish Study” which clearly involves rampant fraud in the service of these companies.


          12. You are so full of it, CDC Stats easily show the huge increase just since the 80s. You lost all credibility on that one!

          13. Assuming that they are already compromised by poor diet, inadequate hygiene, etc.
            The whole thrust of the article was to point out to those with ears, ( so it obviously wasn’t directed at Brian, assuming that that is his real name ) that the rates of all these infections were rapidly declining well before the introduction of these lucrative but extremely dangerous concoctions.
            I have read a study by Erasmus University that what happens is that vaccinations cripple the immune system by knocking out the so-called memory cells, so no response to infections by similar-but-different aetiological agents can occur; the price of vaccination therefore is that one now needs a vaccination against every single variant of a disease-causing organism.
            Good for business ( the bottom line here ) but lethal for good health.

          14. “…the rates of all these infections were rapidly declining well before the introduction of [vaccines]”

            – a common anti-vax lie that is proven false with a minimal amount of research.

            For example, measles incidence in the U.S. hadn’t really changed at all for at least fifty years prior to the vaccine, and then after the vaccine was introduced, the rate dropped 90%, permanently, within a decade.

          15. I always point people to the decline of typhoid in the US. Since it’s a disease affected by sanitation and since there’s no vaccine we can use it as a proxy statistic for the effect size of sanitation. What we see is that cases decline to virtually nothing by the 40’s long before polio vaccine was widely available in the US. So it’s unreasonable to attribute much of the reduction in polio cases to sanitation post vaccine.

            People who say things like “it ran it’s course” clearly don’t understand how plagues work.

          16. There is a vaccine for typhoid, but it’s not routinely used in the US d/t decent sanitation. People traveling to places with poor sanitation are generally recommended to get it. I got it when I went to Brazil. Typhoid seems to be one of the few diseases that is responsive to decent sanitation.

          17. Yes, I should have said: “at that time”. I think I mentioned elsewhere I had the typhoid vaccine before I went to Malawi.

          18. ”So it’s unreasonable to attribute much of the reduction in polio cases to sanitation post vaccine”But not unreasonable to attribute it to sanitation AND diet..

          19. Actually it’s still irrational to think that nutrition is continuing to significantly contribute to increasing longevity. Ioannidis noted in his recent study Is everything we eat associated with cancer? that the effect size for most food research is very, very small. Interestingly this is the exact problem that Richard Smith noted as one of the things that makes published research wrong in that quote that you (and others) tend to confuse constantly.

          20. I read what Ioannidis had to say and he’s one confused scientist. All these diets he mentioned have some merit but it does confuse some people. People are always trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. I see that all the time in the gym with these workout routines people try that are supposed to increase this or that in record time. The same goes with all these fancy diets. Just eat plain unadulterated ( organic if available ) food. Eat a good variety of vegetables and meats but go easy on fruit. Rule of thumb consume a lot more fats than carbs. Eliminate pastries, sodas diet or not ( that’s you Johnny ) most snack foods, white rice and anything made with white flour. Junk food should be a treat not a staple food.

          21. I read what Ioannidis had to say and he’s one confused scientist.

            Apparently not the part about what his team found in terms of how weak food research is.

            Eat a good variety of vegetables and meats but go easy on fruit. Rule of thumb consume a lot more fats than carbs. Eliminate pastries, sodas diet or not ( that’s you Johnny ) most snack foods, white rice and anything made with white flour. Junk food should be a treat not a staple food.

            …and the research says that the rules really are far, far more loose.

          22. Feel free to vaccinate you and yours but you are breeding tougher more resistant strains that will reek havoc with the human system.

          23. I didn’t determine that, science did. It is the same way with antibiotics, the more they are used the stronger the strain they were designed to fight get.

          24. I didn’t determine that, science did.

            Which science paper shows vaccinated populations more likely to develop more deadly viruses?

            It is the same way with antibiotics, the more they are used the stronger the strain they were designed to fight get.

            Not really. It’s that various antibiotics operate by various mechanisms. An antibiotic removes the population which is vulnerable to the mechanism of action and if your body can’t take care of the rest then they will multiply. The result is a more resistant infection. In contrast a vaccine alters your immune system to make it more ready to stop the replication of viruses. Lower number of replications means less chance of a resistant strain developing. A person who is ill with the chicken pox is more likely to develop a vaccine resistant strain than a vaccinated person.

          25. Keep believing that crap and vaccinate as much as you want to, hell, double up or triple if you want to just leave me out. It’s like the obortionists say, it’s a choice.

          26. It’s not crap. It’s pretty much how science thinks antibiotic resistance works. Someone who is ill can be making millions of viruses. RNA viruses are rather error prone. So everyone who gets sick is creating all sorts of variants that someone who is vaccinated is not.

            Not to mention that we don’t see anywhere close to the kind of resistance to vaccines that we see in antibiotics.

          27. No. Antibiotics work in a very different way to vaccines.

            For a start, antibiotics are generally given after exposure while vaccines are generally given beforehand.

            There’s no ‘halfway’ setting with any individual vaccine like there is for individual vaccine … you either take it or you don’t…and with antibiotics there are essentially three options: 1)Don’t take a given antibiotic course, 2)Start the course but don’t finish it, 3)Finish the course. This is about logistics only, some options are clearly more sensible than others.

            It’s mucking about on the medium setting that is the problem with antibiotics and it has an easy two-point solution.

            1)Only take antibiotics when you NEED them.
            2)When you do need antibiotics, FINISH THE WHOLE COURSE…even if you feel better part way through.

          28. Must really have you in knots if you’re trying to self-soothe this much tonight. Plagues generally are migrations of animal diseases and they treat humans like kindling. It’s hard for a plague to burn out.

          29. Let’s just go over the things I said:
            i) You are self-soothing.
            ii) Plagues are migrations of animal diseases.
            iii) They treat humans like kindling.
            iv) They generally don’t just burn out.

            Which thing are you referencing?

          30. If you are as smart as you PRETEND to be you’d be able to pick the correct one from your anal retentive list. Which one is most likely to have a connection to sanitation and clean water?

          31. How about you do something OTHER than trying to find a reason to block every potentially productive conversation? Let me know. 🙂

          32. Again, try to do something other than block the potential for conversation. The alternative is that you are simply about harassment.

          33. So you admit that your belief that you’re being honest with yourself really isn’t meaningful. Thanks.

          34. Well if people think their being honest with themselves BOTH when they are and are not. Then it – by definition – isn’t a meaningful distinction.

          35. Well if you spend most of your time deflecting (like you just did there – Thanks!), insulting or avoiding the question at hand. Then obviously we’re not going to cover much ground. However anytime you want to stop all that we can have a useful discussion.

          36. Actually it’s more just a rather obvious truth: Your near constant deflection, insults and avoiding the question make it difficult to have a useful discussion. Again, thanks for providing an example in your post.

          37. Hardly. These are just facts, you insult people a lot, you deflect a lot and you avoid the question a lot. Those things make it difficult to have a useful discussion. So instead we just have these things where you say something vacuous and I deftly refute it.

          38. 1. Measles death rate had declined by almost 100% before the use of a measles vaccine

            During the 1800s, measles was a notable cause of death. Epidemics occurred every few years causing a large influx of children into local hospital wards. In Glasgow, England From 1807-1812 measles accounted for 11% of all deaths. In the years from 1867-1872, 49% of children in a Paris orphanage who developed measles died. [2] Starting in the mid to late-1800s deaths from all infectious diseases, including measles, began to decline. By the 1930s in England and the United States the chance of dying from measles had dropped to 1-2 percent.

            A killed measles virus (KMV) vaccine came into use in the United States in 1963. What you may not have heard, is that by 1963, the death rate from measles in the United States had already dropped by approximately 98%. [3]

          39. A few facts:

            Before the first Salk vaccine trials, polio incidence had already declined greatly.
            Decline was even greater by the time the Salk and Sabine vaccines came into widespread use.
            The intensive use in 1958 was followed by more than a doubling of incidence. At no time after
            the introduction of the two vaccines against polio was decline greater than before vaccine

            Graph showing Death from Polio:
            The Polio Death Rate was Decreasing on its Own
            Before the Vaccine was Introduced

            Original available at:
            [United States and England]

            According to VACCINES Are They Really Safe & Effective? by Neil Z. Miller,

            “From 1923 to 1953,before the Salk killed-virus vaccine was introduced,
            polio death rate in the United States and England had already declined
            on its own by 47 percent and 55 percent, respectively. Source
            International Mortality Statistics (1981) by Michael Alderson.”

            See page 16.

          40. Neil Z Miller? The guy who says he gets his information from aliens.

            Ah, Ron…if you didn’t exist, we’d have to invent you.

          41. ”The guy who says he gets his information from aliens.’ Citations please. Polak upvoted you I would delete than one if you can.

          42. Ron, you’re again confusing ‘morbidity’ and ‘mortality’: death rates tell us nothing about how many people were infected, only how many infected people died.

          43. But the rates of infection were NOT declining significantly until the introduction of vaccines: it was deaths due to infection that were declining, as the result of improved medical care.
            Would you argue that because the development of the iron lung allowed people paralyzed by polio to survive an effective polio vaccine was unnecessary?

          44. The kids who were convulsing in their beds with measles encephalitis, or who died are not able to post on the Internet to say how much they didn’t enjoy the experience, I’m afraid.

          45. latimes(dot)com/local/california/la-me-measles-20150418-story.html

            “California’s measles outbreak is over, but vaccine fight continues
            About 1 in 5 who got the measles in California had to be hospitalized. One collapsed at home, was placed on a mechanical ventilator due to severe pneumonia and developed multiple organ injury. Another suffered acute respiratory distress syndrome and had to be treated with an experimental drug that required special approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.”

          46. Oh yeah, it killed me and all my friends and classmates who had measles, you are right, yep, living in a fantasy world. You vaccinate if you want to, I choose not to. If vaccines are so good why is it being pushed on the ones who choose not to?

          47. It didn’t kill everyone, but it did kill some, and was a major cause of permanent disabilit for thousands.

          48. Measles vaccine was licensed in the United States in
            During 1958-1962, an average of 503,282 measles cases and 432
            measles-associated deaths were reported each year (9-11). Measles
            and deaths began to decline in 1965 and continued a 33-year
            downward trend.

          49. Survivor’s bias, mark. It didn’t kill you and it didn’t kill me either. It did kill my uncle, however, and it did kill Roald Dahl’s daughter.
            As a result we’re here to testify how “it was no big deal, just a vacation for us” while my uncle and his daughter are not here to weigh in with a very different perspective.

          50. As a result we’re here to testify how “it was no big deal, just a vacation for us” while my uncle and his daughter are not here to weigh in with a very different perspective.

            Upvote x1000.

          51. Before the introduction of vaccine against measles it accounted for about 2.6 million deaths each year worldwide.
            Of those who survive, thirty percent of all children–healthy or otherwise–infected with measles develops complications which include pneumonia, blindness and encephalopathy. Additionally measles infection places these children at risk of SSPE, an untreatable and invariably fatal adverse consequence of infection.

          52. Someone bought into Olmstead’s nonsensical idea that the Amish don’t vaccinate and they don’t have autism.

            Newsflash! Both are lies.

          53. Tim you really aren’t going to sway these people with facts. Most nurses wouldn’t take the vaccines they FORCE on them if they didn’t threaten them with being fired just like almost 90% of oncologists admit they wouldn’t take chemo if they had cancer.

          54. Still lying, I see.

            Considering the facts all prove you wrong, and then you simply try to change the subject when someone shows you those facts, then it’s clear that “these people” aren’t the problem.

          55. I’ll tell you what, you believe what you want and I’ll believe what I want. You get vaccinated and vaccinate your kids if that’s what floats your boat and I will abstain from vaccinating myself or my children.
            I will be fine letting you vaccinate or shoot up heroin if you want but I’m sure without a doubt you would try to force me into vaccinating.
            I wouldn’t be surprised if you were alright with murdering babies through abortion and would call it choice but wouldn’t give me and mine choice in this matter.

          56. I don’t mind if you drive drunk, there is no victim if you drive drunk and don’t hurt anyone or their property but drunk or not if you harm person or property you are liable for damages.
            No victim no crime is the way our country and laws were set up. Any other way leads to creeping communism and tyranny as is evident in our country today.

          57. Wrong. If I do something stupid so that someone is likely to get hurt then yes, I may well be found liable even if nobody got hurt in reality.

            However, I will give you props for being consistent.

            Which country are you talking about? We’re on the WORLD wide web.

          58. 3 months’ imprisonment
            up to £2,500 fine
            a possible driving ban

            That is the English-Welsh list of penalties (Scotland, Ireland & Ireland are probably slightly different from this and each other because they slightly less than always are) for merely “Being in charge of a vehicle while above the legal limit or unfit through drink” per

            Those are the penalties before anyone even attempts to actually DRIVE the car.

          59. Yes and it is like that in most states, that is how far that they have pushed true Liberty back. And the thing is with the indoctrination and mind control by the government and the press most people would have it no other way. SHEEP!

          60. Any other way leads to creeping communism and tyranny as is evident in our country today.

            So you can never have a law that punishes behavior which puts people at risk with a net benefit?

          61. Not if you value liberty over safety like the founders did. People today are so brainwashed that true liberty scares them shitless.

          62. Not if you value liberty over safety like the founders did.

            a) Do you really think it’s a good idea to believe that even the smallest reduction in freedom is worth any and every risk?
            b) The founders probably didn’t believe that every and any risk is worth every and any freedom.

            Franklin said if you would give up liberty for safety you would deserve and get neither.

            Yet they did. Laws themselves are restrictions on liberty in exchange for various forms of safety.

          63. Any infringement on liberty, from the original government, that doesn’t have a direct victim is not worth ANY safety. The founders warned over and over in their papers and letters about guarding liberty jealously. Does Liberty or Death ring a bell.

          64. that doesn’t have a direct victim is not worth ANY safety

            By “safety” I assume you mean risk prevention. So there should be no zoning, ownership, training requirements on possessing things which are exceptionally destructive. Even something that could destroy thousands, the earth or even the universe. It’s, according to you entirely rational to have no way of regulating these things. Only post-hoc action is acceptable.

          65. Where in hell do you get the idea that liberty would cause the world to be destroyed? ? You will make a great slave! ?

          66. Think about it:

            Your position is that we can only interfere post-hoc with things that have victims, right?

            Here, meet Bob. I could murder Bob and there’d be nothing Bob could do about it providing I make damn sure I suceed. Now, you could argue that I’ve stolen Bob from his family but in that scenario, all I need do as a literal get-out-of-jail-free card is murder them too.

            Now, that is admittedly an extreme example but Bob isn’t suffering any more – he’s dead. Nor do his family care because they’re dead. No victims. Possibly I might have the problem of traumatized witnesses but again, that’s one problem with a simple solution in this world..

          67. Well you don’t want any liberty taken away right? And any price is worth paying for that. Right? Even the world being destroyed. Right?

            You’ve lost this argument by the way….

          68. I beg to differ, you lost the argument when you wimped out with the “safety at any cost- Liberty be damned” grovel.

          69. That’s actually not the argument I’m making. At no point do I say that ANY liberty is worth ANY mitigation of risk. You can go back and check. Like any sane person I believe that SOME liberties – such as the liberty to own a doomsday device – are reasonable to sacrifice for the risk mitigation of the accidental trigger of doomsday.

            You on the other hand have said:

            Any infringement on liberty, from the original government, that doesn’t have a direct victim is not worth ANY safety.

            Since restricting people from owning doomsday devices is an infringement on liberty and since ANY risk is acceptable. You must therefore consider the restricting of people from owning doomsday machines as less important than the destruction of the planet – no matter how insanely likely these machines are of triggering said planetary destruction

          70. Can you explain why Jefferson’s first rough draft is as follows then?

            “We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness;”

            Why not “Liberty, the pursuit of happiness & life?”

          71. you really aren’t going to sway these people with facts.

            Perhaps you could, em, present some facts? For instance, a source for your claim about “most” nurses, or your PFA 90 percent of oncologists that wouldn’t use chemotherapy for themselves. Although the number is wrong, that idea most likely derives from a 1985 survey on a specific, then new, chemotherapy agent for lung cancer, and the question was structured to include its use for palliative treatment of metastatic bone cancer (i.e., incurable NSC lung cancer). In light of considerable side effects from that specific drug and the impossibility of cure in that scenario, it was not surprising that about 2/3 of oncology physicians and nurses would opt for palliative care only. Follow up studies were performed in 1991 and 1997 with quite different results. Not surprisingly, as clinical benefits and therapy to reduce side effects have both increased, more oncologists would chose chemo. Read more here, preferably before continuing to spout this inaccurate “statistic.”

          72. The Amish, contrary to myth, do vaccinate their children although in lower numbers than the non-Amish population (and when they elect not to vaccinate they indicate it’s due to the same irrational fear of vaccines non-Amish anti-vaxers cite as reasons for their refusal).

            The Amish who don’t vaccinate still accrue significant benefits from routine immunization as the likelihood they’ll be exposed to an Amish or non-Amish individual suffering from a contagious disease is significantly lower than it would be in the absence of vaccination programs.

            The downside of the reduced vaccine uptake compared to the general population? The Amish exhibit a higher incidence of outbreaks of diseases for which vaccines are available and outbreaks which do occur in Amish communities are more widespread (an outbreak of pertussis in the Amish community in Kent, DE, in 2005 resulted in 345 individuals being infected.)

          73. Oh, not this “Amish don’t vaccinate” shtick again! 75% of Amish kids have had at least one dose of vaccine. You can check my posts for the cite. Likewise, the Amish do have autism. One reason for a lower rate of diagnosis is the Amish propensity to take care of their own.

          74. Depending on where you live in the US, 88-97% of the children in your area were vaccinated.

            Every single one died or was disabled?

          75. Nice poster. Which vaccine company made it? I suspect a vaccine company because it’s the type of bull they like to spread.

          76. mark, I have researched vaccines which is why I’m aware your claim is not accurate.

            When a disease outbreak occurs, more vaccinated individuals may become infected than unvaccinated individuals but not because vaccination “lowers’ the immune system (whatever you mean by that).

            it’s instead due to the fact that the number of vaccinated individuals greatly exceeds the number of unvaccinated individuals in the population, and a small percentage of a large number may be greater than a large percentage of a small number.

            When we determine risk of infection (rather than numbers affected) we find that unvaccinated individuals are at very much greater risk of infection than vaccinated ones when exposed to an infectious agent.

            ‘ I guess you think the mega increase in autistic boys is caused by M&Ms?”

            First, it’s important to note that what we’re observing is an increase in the number of people being given a diangosis as autistic and not necessarily an increase in the actual number of autistic individuals within the population.

            Second, the increase appears to be a result of multiple contributing factors, none of which are routine childhood vaccination.

            The most significant are changes in diagnostic criteria, improved surveillance and changes in reporting practices.

            A recent Danish study for example ( Explaining the increase in the prevalence of autism spectrum disorders: the proportion attributable tochanges in reporting practices January 2015, PMID: 2536503) found that changes to reporting practices alone may account for as much as 60% of the observed increase in the prevalence of ASD diagnoses in that nation.

          77. JGC, this should be patently self evident to anyone with more than a few neurones.
            Mark doesn’t seem to meet those criteria.

        2. Even Bill Gates said if they continued to fund vaccine research they would be able to solve the worlds overpopulation.

          1. Answer this question, if vaccines are so good why try to FORCE it on me. You take it and you have nothing to worry about.
            Whoever tries to force me to be vaccinated will get a shot that I promise will prevent them from ever catching ANY disease or sickness.

          2. No one is forcing vaccinations so you have nothing to worry about. Of course, your choice to not get vaccinated comes with consequences, both for yourself, your children, and potentially those around you who can’t be vaccinated.

            Answer this question, if an unvaccinated-by-choice gets sick with a disease that they could have avoided through vaccination, and then infects an infant too young to be vaccinated (it’s happened several times already), should that person be liable for damages? If the infant dies, should the person be charged with murder?

          3. Since an individual harmed or killed by vaccines can’t sue the manufacturers and/or doctors for damages then your question is mute.

          4. Unsurprisingly, your comment is another anti-vax lie.

            Newsflash! Vaccine manufacturers can be sued. Of course, if you can’t win in the low-standard vaccine court, you certainly won’t win in an actual lawsuit.

          5. Again, if an unvaccinated-by-choice gets sick, and then infects an infant too young to be vaccinated, should that person be liable for damages?

            I answered your questions. Now you answer mine.

          6. Absolutely, unequivocally not under any circumstances!!
            It’s like sueing someone because they give you the flu. Anyone who believes that is beyond reasoning with.

          7. Lurkers take note that anti-vaxxers “absolutely, unequivocally” refuse to take responsibility for their choices, even if it kills children.

          8. You are absolutely and unequivocally correct when it comes to injecting toxins into me and my children’s systems and I will not be intimidated.

          9. That is just one of the reasons we homeschool. Not exposing my children to socialist indoctrination and ghetto trash are the main reasons.

          10. The main reason we don’t is that the environment required for proper social integration is difficult to simulate. Thanks for illustrating my point.

          11. More vague assertions. Whereas I make a point pretty clearly. Someone who says crap like

            Not exposing my children to…ghetto trash

            are not well socialized.

          12. That’s your evidence of socialization? And you being the one calling evidence weak? HYPOCRITE ALERT!

          13. Are you claiming that saying that is a characteristic of someone who is well socialized? 🙂

          14. It isn’t evidence of socialization at all. And its isn’t evidence anyone with a proper working brain would offer for or against. Its plain nonsense.

          15. It isn’t evidence of socialization at all.

            So someone is perfectly socialized and has these attitudes? Right?

          16. It doesn’t matter if someone can be. Only if the person who possesses that trait would or would not act in this fashion. You are claiming – implicitly – that someone perfectly socialized would act that way.

          17. You have lost it man. Its you who claimed that. Time to get off the comp before you have a breakdown.

          18. The only claim I’ve made is that it’s reasonable to look at a particular post as evidence of poor socialization. You seem to have imagined that I claimed something else.

          19. Yea you twisted that around so I dropped it. Its pretty much the same outcome for any attempt anyone who tries will be subject to.

          20. Notice how whenever you claim I’m twisting things. You can’t point out clearly how or where? That’s because you’re wrong and you can’t deal with that. So the only thing you can do to avoid dissonance is to confabulate that the reason why you can’t provide a counter-argument is that it’s just the eeeeeeeeevvvvviiiiilllllllllllllllllllll word twisting Jonathan. LOL.

          21. Well as soon as you get around to the other steps let me know. It was your confession after all. 🙂

          22. So you weren’t confessing that you have to fall back to claiming someone is twisting something whenever your’re cornered? So near and yet so far!

          23. People’s attitudes toward other people and people groups is part of socialization. This was a poster exhibiting that.

          24. Nope. Socialization is like going to school, church, etc Attitudes can be secular and NOT part of the society at large. See many seniors with tattoos and torn jeans in your neighborhood?

          25. Socialization is a term used by sociologists, social psychologists, anthropologists, political scientists, and educationalists to refer to the lifelong process of inheriting and disseminating norms, customs, values and ideologies

            This person is having a problem absorbing norms and values. They are poorly socialized.

          26. Hey way to over do it. Take a simple statement and turn it into a manifesto. Have you finished Mein Kampf yet?

          27. Nope. Just pointing out what I meant and showing that you’re wrong…and of course putting you in a position to squirm around like you’re doing right now. 🙂

          28. I have zero liability for your sickness or health. I repeat, if vaccines are so good stop worrying about what I do and get yourself vaccinated.

          29. 1)Depends whether you’ve taken reasonable precautions or not.

            2)Your argument relies on the assumptions that a)Vaccines are perfect and b)Everybody can be vaccinated. Both assumptions are false.

            3)Nobody actually cares whether or not you get vaccinated beyond whining at you on the internet. There might be consequences to your choice though.


          30. It wasn’t permission. I was simply pointing out that no-one cared beyond whining on the internet at you.

            People do sometimes decide that ex. their employee being vaccinated is more important than their employee being a specific person but of course, our hypothetical person will simply have to make a choice there as to what is more important.

          31. No, different scenario. Just answer the question. And the word is “moot”, not “mute”. Get out a dictionary.

          32. Except auto spell accepts moot, without changing it to mute.

            Caught out lying again, weren’t you.

          33. I said you were right and you still want to bitch? Maybe it’s the vaccines making you irrational.

          34. You said I was right, but made out your mistake was because of autocorrect. You lied. I pointed it out, and you claim I am being irrational? Perhaps you need to be using something other than a dictionary for 5 year olds, one which explains the meaning of big or unusual words.

          35. So we are down to my spelling mistake as the only thing we disagree on, boy are we making progress, who said you were to dumb to be reasoned with? ?

          36. So you could prove a virus circulating in a community comes from an individual? And what of the parents of this child? Are they expecting a sanitized world where their unvaccinated child will never be sick?

          37. No…he didn’t…that is what is known as a Conspirotard interweb youtube myth….

            A really dumb one that requires avoiding critical thought…..accompanied by silly video editing.

          38. Polak? Polak? Joe you’re mind is slipping you change name every month. Just when you said if I called you EJITT, or something like that, we’d get along.

          39. “Bill Gates: Over this decade, we believe unbelievable progress can be made, in both inventing new vaccines and making sure they get out to all the children who need them. We could cut the number of children who die every year from about 9 million to half of that, if we have success on it. We have to do three things in parallel: Eradicate the few that fit that profile — ringworm and polio; get the coverage up for the vaccines we have; and then invent the vaccines — and we only need about six or seven more — and then you would have all the tools to reduce childhood death, reduce population growth, and everything — the stability, the environment — benefits from that.”

            In other words, families living in stable environments with a higher standard of living and better health care, don’t need to have half a dozen children just to ensure two or three of them make it to adulthood.

          40. You mean like the polio vaccine that caused Acute Flaccid Paralysis in those that got it. That vaccine?

          41. After crippling saving thousands, millions with that vaccine, they were kinda forced to stop using it able to develop a better one


          42. Oh I know how it really works. ”Studies” conducted by scientist are funded either directly or indirectly by the drug companies whose products are being studied and they’d better come up with a favorable result or there will be no future funds available for future ” studies.” See how that works?

          43. File under:Ron, recycles something already refuted (AGAIN!)

            This is already refuted Ron. More NPAFP shows up in both the vaccinated and unvaccinated and slightly more in the later. You already have the study reference for this.

          44. In the study I gave you more of the unvaccinated controls had NPAFP. It was somewhat close. Which of course means that the polio vaccine is not the primary cause of NPAFP.

          45. “The authors noted that while India
            was polio-free in 2011, in the same year, there were 47500 cases of
            NPAFP. While data from India’s National Polio Surveillance Project
            showed NPAFP rate increased in proportion to the number of polio vaccine
            doses received, independent studies showed that children identified
            with NPAFP ‘were at more than twice the risk of dying than those with
            wild polio infection.’” [8]

            The corruption and deceit by these organizations does not stop there.

          46. You said:

            Most of those who came down with NPAFP were vaccinated.

            …and yet when you actually read research that actually examines that very thing you see

            There was a significant difference in vaccination status: WPV1 cases included in the case-NPAFP matched analysis were more likely to be unvaccinated than those not included (64% vs 49%, P = .036). [1]

            So as usual you didn’t bother checking your facts.

            The corruption and deceit by these organizations does not stop there.

            Tell me Ron, do you ever get tired of manufacturing vainglorious indignation? My guess is “no”.


          47. Paralysis cases soar after oral polio vaccine introduced


            By Elliott Freeman

            Apr 26, 2012 in Health

            A new report by two Delhi pediatricians
            suggests that the sharp rise in childhood paralysis in India is due to
            the increased usage of the oral polio vaccine, a drug that was banned in
            the U.S. over a decade ago.

            1 of 2

            Dr. Neetu Vashisht and Dr. Jacob Puliyel of St. Stephens Hospital created the report after analyzing data from India’s 10-year-old National Polio Surveillance Project, which is available online.
            Their findings, which were published in the Indian Journal of medical
            Ethics, revealed that rates of non-polio acute flaccid paralysis (NPAFP)
            have increased 1200% since the oral polio vaccine was introduced to
            India a decade ago.

            The oral polio vaccine contains a live polio virus and has been linked
            to polio-like paralysis. Polio vaccines used in other countries do not
            include the live virus, but polio vaccines used in India do.

            The doctors provided other troubling details in their report:

            “In 2011, there were an extra 47500 new cases of NPAFP [in India].
            Clinically indistinguishable from polio paralysis but twice as deadly,
            the incidence of NPAFP was directly proportional to doses of oral polio

            Ajay Khera, the Deputy Commissioner for Child Health and Immunisation
            for the Ministry of Family and Health Welfare (MHFW), downplayed the
            significance of the findings in an interview with Tehelka News.
            In reference to the rise in paralysis cases, he said, “It’s not an
            alert sign but indicative of the quality of the surveillance.”

            However, increases in surveillance quality over time do not explain the
            strong location-based correlation discovered by Vashist and Puliyel.
            According to the report:

            “In the states of Uttar Pradesh (UP) and Bihar, which have pulse
            polio rounds nearly every month, the non-polio AFP rate is 25- and
            35-fold higher than the international norms. The relationship of the
            non-polio AFP rate is curvilinear with a more steep increase beyond six
            doses of OPV in one year.”

            Read more:

          48. This is just some nobody giving a flowery rendition of the same research. Again when you look at case-controls in a population. NPAFP is somewhat more likely in unvaccinated. Which makes sense because it’s from an entirely different class of viruses.

          49. Only one small area of India had the people received the polio vaccine and it was only those people in that area that, were vaccinated, that came down with NPAFP. Did I clear that up for you or will you persist in trying to remain ignorant?

          50. Non Polio and the reason it’s called Non Polio is because the virus in the vaccine once injected mutated into a different virus that cause a paralytic disease that was far deadlier than polio.

          51. Rise in paralysis cases after polio

            Deccan Chronicle – Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited is the publisher of
            largest circulated English Newspaper in South India

            April 14, 2012


            Cases of non-polio acute flaccid
            paralysis, better known as AFP, has sharply increased with the increase
            in the administration of oral polio vaccination (OPV) in the country
            under the much-acclaimed polio eradication programme.

            According to a report by Dr. Neetu
            Vashisht and Dr. Jacob Puliyel, appearing in the April-June issue of the
            Indian Journal of Medical Ethics, the incidence of non-polio AFP had
            gone up by 12 times over and above the normal rates with the onset of
            the administration OPV 10 years ago. The report appeared at a time when
            Kerala is getting prepared for another round of OPV on April 15.

            Dr. Jacob, also a member of the national
            technical advisory group on immunisation and of the working group on
            food and drug regulation in the 12th Five Year Plan, told DC on Friday
            that there was a definite co-relation between the increase in the number
            AFP and the irrational administration of OPV.

            Normally, he said, the chances of
            children under the age of 15 getting affected by non-polio AFP are 1-2
            per 100,000. But, the rate of non-polio AFP nationally “is now 12 times
            higher than expected.” In 2011, an additional 47,500 children were newly
            paralyzed, over and above the standard rate of 2 children per 100,000
            non-polio AFP cases, says the paper in the journal.

            Dr. Jacob said the increase in the
            occurrence of non-polio AFP could be directly linked to the massive
            increase in the dosage of OPV in the name of eradication. Although, the
            increase in the non-polio AFP was known for quite some time, it was for
            the first time that a co-relation was established by collating the data
            of the national polio surveillance, he said.

            “It is sad that, even after meticulous
            surveillance, this large excess in the incidence of paralysis was not
            investigated as a possible signal.”

            , nor was any effort made to try and
            study the mechanism for this spurt in non-polio AFP.”

            According to Dr Jacob, the dream of
            eradicating polio will remain a mirage due to the existence of “residual
            samples of samples virus stored in laboratories, by vaccine-derived
            polioviruses or by poliovirus that is chemically synthesized with
            malignant intent”.

            The increase in non-polio AFP might have
            been caused by the increase in OPV, leading to virus strains other than
            that of causing polio getting active, he said.


          52. Mainstream media in the USA not on your life. The media in the US is just as corrupt as the people you work for.

          53. I’ll try and make this as simple as I can: THE VIRUS IN THE POLIO VACCINE MUTATED AND THE MUTATED VIRUS IS WHAT CAUSED NPAFP. Did you get that?

          54. Just the facts really. Not harassing or bullying and if it’s rude I deeply apologize. Although Ron and you regularly are pretty abusive to people.

          55. I doubt I need anything of the sort. The point stands one would have to be exceptionally ignorant to accept Ron’s hypothesis. 🙂

          56. Ron does fine. You simply won’t show him respect as part of the game you play. You don’t “talk” to him, you lecture and attempt to discredit the most minor things.

          57. Ron does fine

            Not really. Case in point Ron claims that it’s very likely that vaccine strain polio will make huge changes in it’s genome in most people. Yet we know smaller changes in it’s genome are far less likely.

            You simply won’t show him respect

            I don’t really have much of an opinion on him one way or the other. He’s kind of a bad person. So are you for that matter. His ideas are generally exceptionally stupid.

            You don’t “talk” to him, you lecture

            I sure do talk to him. The problem is that he’s pretty incapable of actually explaining his position. Because, it’s just something he’s read somewhere else and is just regurgitating here. Which is because he has less than zero clue how to evaluate evidence. I also explain where his position is incorrect.

            attempt to discredit the most minor things.

            The idea that large gene changes happen massively more frequently than small gene changes is hardly a minor thing.

          58. No Ron, your believe about viral mutation is already refuted because the number of changes are going to be larger between viral groups than within. QED. 🙂

          59. Gee you’re good at playing stupid. The paralysis and deaths were caused by the virus in the polio vaccine that had mutated. No polio vaccine no NPAFP. DID YOU GET THAT?

          60. Again this has been refuted. NPAFP happens in the vaccinated and unvaccinated (and in a population where the majority aren’t vaccinated it happens slightly more in the unvaccinated).

            The idea that echoviruses or other viruses correlated with NPAFP are mutations of vaccine strain polio is just fantasy. We know the mutation rate of OPV because occasionally we see vaccine derived polio. Where the vaccine strain becomes similar enough to wildtype to infect someone. However since a wildtype viruse is MUCH MUCH CLOSER to vaccine strain than an echovirus the likelihood of vaccine strain becoming and echovirus must be LOWER than becoming VDP. Ergo NPAFP can not because by vaccine strain mutations. QED.

          61. I see basic science escapes you when it doesn’t fit in to your preconceived notion that vaccines are harmless.

          62. I see that your position is so weak that you have to make up a vague claim to avoid getting crushed. 🙂

            The idea that echoviruses or other viruses correlated with NPAFP are mutations of vaccine strain polio is just fantasy. We know the mutation rate of OPV because occasionally we see vaccine derived polio. Where the vaccine strain becomes similar enough to wildtype to infect someone. However since a wildtype viruse is MUCH MUCH CLOSER to vaccine strain than an echovirus the likelihood of vaccine strain becoming and echovirus must be LOWER than becoming VDP. Ergo NPAFP can not because by vaccine strain mutations. QED.

          63. Really? You think what Gates says has merit? Its all speculation and wishful thinking. Has he settled the cases in India regarding that nasty Malaria vaccine yet?

          64. Judging from your comment history, it sounds like you’d support depopulation so long as it only targeted people who don’t look like you!

        3. Imagine how much greater the population would have been if the vaccines hadn’t been given.
          On Bill’s own admission, vaccines reduce population by 10-15%.
          ( They contain anti-HCG; which has nothing to do with illness prevention, but everything to do with pregnancy prevention. )

          1. ” Over this decade, we believe unbelievable progress can be made, in both inventing new vaccines and making sure they get out to all the children who need them. We could cut the number of children who die every year from about 9 million to half of that, if we have success on it. We have to do three things in parallel: Eradicate the few that fit that profile — ringworm and polio; get the coverage up for the vaccines we have; and then invent the vaccines — and we only need about six or seven more — and then you would have all the tools to reduce childhood death, reduce population growth, and everything — the stability, the environment — benefits from that.” Bill Gates.

          2. It’s true that Bill Gates said it. That’s what an original cite looks like (unlike, say, a cite that is actually Andrew Wakefield claiming that somebody else said something).

          3. From a man who made millions off an entirely different product and is now giving away his money through a variety of international charitable efforts.

          4. Charity my arse. He gave away a few thousands but because he invested in the products he ” gave ” away he stands to make millions.

          5. Read before you post. That 27 billion was the total sum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation hasgiven for all causes combined not only vaccines:

            The other creators of the Giving Pledge, Microsoft founder Bill Gates and his wife Melinda use their foundation to fund
            initiatives and programs around the world that support agricultural
            development, emergency relief, urban poverty, global health, and
            education. They have already given away more money than anyone else on
            the planet, donating $27 billion, according to Wealth-X.

          6. Your claim was that Gates gave away a few thousands. Thanks for confirming that you were wrong.

            Thanks also for confirming that the Gates Foundation does not focus solely on vaccines.

          7. You claimed Gates ( based on the polio vaccine ) gave away 27 billion dollars towards those vaccines and I said thousands. My figure is a heck of a lot more accurate than yours.

          8. Short term memory issues, Ron? You need to see a doctor for that.

            shay simmons From a man who made millions off an entirely different product and is now giving away his money through a variety of international charitable efforts.

            Ron Roy shay simmons
            Charity my arse. He gave away a few thousands but because he invested in the products he ” gave ” away he stands to make millions.

          9. The few thousand I refereed too was what he paid for the polio vaccines that crippled thousands.He did invest in that vaccine, and others, expecting it to work and then the Indian government would have had to purchase what they needed to vaccinate the rest of the country which would have costs millions.

          10. Yep… perfectly logical act for a man who has given away $27 billion and who has so much money he could use it for Kleenex if he wanted to.

            Oh, Ron…as I said, if you didnt exist, we would have to invent you.

          11. Reducing child deaths through vaccines mean people in third world countries don’t need to have lots of kids in the hopes of a few living to adulthood.

          1. It isn’t:

            Have a look at tables 1 and 2.
            You can see that the United States requires more vaccines in the first
            year of life than any other country yet has the highest IMR of all
            developed countries. We require more than twice as many vaccines as
            Sweden, Japan, Iceland, Norway, and Denmark yet our IMR is much higher
            than those countries. Many factors can impact IMR but the number of
            vaccines in the first year of life appears to be an important factor.

            Table 1: 2009 Infant mortality rates, top 34 nations8
































            Czech Republic





















            South Korea
























            United Kingdom



            New Zealand


















            San Marino






            United States


          2. Infant mortality rates regressed
            against number of vaccine doses
            routinely given: Is there a
            biochemical or synergistic toxicity?
            Neil Z Miller and Gary S Goldman
            The infant mortality rate (IMR) is one of the most important indicators of the socio-economic well-being and
            public health conditions of a country. The US childhood immunization schedule specifies 26 vaccine doses for
            infants aged less than 1 year—the most in the world—yet 33 nations have lower IMRs. Using linear regression,
            the immunization schedules of these 34 nations were examined and a correlation coefficient of
            < 0.0001) was found between IMRs and the number of vaccine doses routinely given to infants. Nations were
            also grouped into five different vaccine dose ranges: 12–14, 15–17, 18–20, 21–23, and 24–26. The mean IMRs of
            all nations within each group were then calculated. Linear regression analysis of unweighted mean IMRs
            showed a high statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing
            infant mortality rates, with
            0.992 (
            0.0009). Using the Tukey-Kramer test, statistically significant differ-
            ences in mean IMRs were found between nations giving 12–14 vaccine doses and those giving 21–23, and 24–26
            doses. A closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs
            is essential.

          3. Vaccine Study

            by Neil Z. Miller and Dr. Gary Goldman
            Finds Statistically Significant Correlations

            Between Vaccines and Infant Deaths

            Neil Z. Miller and Dr. Gary Goldman wrote an important vaccine study
            that was recently published in a peer-reviewed journal. This study found
            statistically significant correlations between international immunization schedules and infant mortality rates: nations that require the most vaccines for their babies tend to have higher (worse) infant mortality rates.
            This study also found a biologically plausible explanation for this
            counter-intuitive correlation: the potential for synergistic toxicity
            due to over-vaccination and the misclassification of baby deaths as SIDS
            and other non-vaccine causes.

            For Immediate Release:

            Developed nations that require the most vaccines for babies

            tend to have the highest infant death rates

            September 2011 — A new study, published in Human and Experimental Toxicology,
            a prestigious journal indexed by the National Library of Medicine,
            found that developed nations with higher (worse) infant mortality rates
            tend to give their infants more vaccine doses. For example, the United
            States requires infants to receive 26 vaccines (the most in the world)
            yet more than 6 U.S. infants die per every 1000 live births. In
            contrast, Sweden and Japan administer 12 vaccines to infants, the least
            amount, and report less than 3 deaths per 1000 live births.

            The current study by Miller and Goldman, “Infant Mortality Rates
            Regressed Against Number of Vaccine Doses Routinely Given: Is There a
            Biochemical or Synergistic Toxicity?” (available here),
            found “a high statistically significant correlation between increasing
            number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates.” This
            raises an important question: Would fewer vaccines administered to
            infants reduce the number of infant deaths? The authors concluded that
            “closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or
            synergistic toxicity, and infant mortality rates, is essential. All
            nations — rich and poor, advanced and developing — have an obligation
            to determine whether their immunization schedules are achieving their
            desired goals.”

            Other study findings:

            * The United States spends more per capita on healthcare than any other country yet 33
            nations have better infant mortality rates.

            * Some infant deaths attributed to sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) may be
            vaccine-related, perhaps due to over-vaccination.

            * Progress on reducing infant deaths should include monitoring immunization schedules
            and official causes of death (to determine if vaccine-related infant deaths are being

            * Infant mortality rates will remain high in developing nations that cannot provide clean
            water, proper nutrition, improved sanitation, and better access to health care.

            Download the entire study:

            Miller-Goldman Study (PDF)

            Miller-Goldman Study (PubMed)

            Author contacts:

            Neil Z. Miller: neilzmiller at gmail [dot] com

            Gary S. Goldman: pearblossominc at aol [dot] com

          4. Yet you do cite published studies. Hence you choose your evidence by the OUTCOME rather than it’s statistical strength.

          5. Look who’s calling the kettle black. I also tend to believe people who dare tell the truth in spite of what the MEDICAL MAFIA will do to them. Any medical professional who is a threat to the drug industry’s profits are immediately denigrated by enforcers like Johnny. Anyone with information on natural ( non drug ) cures or that mentions harm caused by drugs or vaccines is made to look like a quack. When in reality the real quacks are the ones who promote drugs and vaccines.

          6. Look who’s calling the kettle black.

            No Ron. Every study I reject I do so on statistical strength or the strength of the evidence presented using an internally consistent model. I’d gladly bet that you couldn’t find one place where I haven’t.

            I also tend to believe people who dare tell the truth in spite of what the MEDICAL MAFIA will do to them

            In other words you chose evidence entirely by the outcome. Thanks for affirming my point again.

          7. Ron…could you tell us what the difference is between “statistically significant” and “clinically significant?”

            How did you control for confounders like babies being younger? Can you explain why there are NEVER SIDs deaths after the Hep A vaccine?

          8. The Hep A vaccine is given in combination with other vaccine so it would be hard to say that it was that specific vaccine that cause SIDS. However the Hep B vaccine is given alone and:

            By December 31, 2002, th
            ere were also 30 VAERS reports
            listing cerebral edema after administration of hepatitis B vac-
            cine alone or with other vaccines. 6 of the 19 individuals who
            died had received the recombinant hepatitis B vaccine alone.
            Deaths of 3 infants were cl
            assified as SIDS in NVS: cases 7
            and 28 above, and a case with
            VAERS ID 120390, an infant
            who died approximately 16 hours after the second dose of hepa-
            titis B vaccine.

          9. The Hep A vaccine is given in combination with other vaccine so it would
            be hard to say that it was that specific vaccine that cause SIDS.

          10. (waving hand) — is it for the same reason that there are never ever cases of SIDS after the shingles vaccine?

          11. Deaths were reported maybe not as SIDS but to the loved ones of the dead baby I don’t think it mattered as to what anyone labeled the death:

            On December 1, 2004 Hepatitis A vaccine was added to the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program’s (VICP) Vaccine Injury Table, as published in the Federal Register.

            As of September 1, 2015, there had been 103 claims filed in the
            federal Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) for injuries and
            deaths following Hepatitis A vaccination, including 6 deaths and 97
            serious injuries.

            Using the MedAlerts search engine, as of September 1, 2015 there had been 3,450
            serious adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting
            System (VAERS) in connection with Hepatitis A containing vaccines since
            1990. Over 35% of those serious Hepatitis A vaccine-related adverse
            events occurring in adults between seventeen and forty-four years old.
            Of these Hepatitis A-vaccine related adverse event reports to VAERS 114 were deaths, with 34% of the deaths occurring in children under three years of age.

          12. Ok we’ll use the term infant, Sudden Infant Deaths Syndrome as in SIDS.The Hep A vaccine IS given yo 1 year old INFANTS..

            I really don’t think whether the term baby or infant is applied to a dead child matters to the parents.

            Combined vaccines:

            The hepatitis A vaccine is also available
            as a combined vaccination with a hepatitis B vaccine (Twinrix® and
            Ambirix®) and also as a combination with a typhoid vaccine (Hepatyrix®
            or ViATIM®).

            The ages for the combined vaccines are as follows:

            Twinrix Adult® is for those who are aged 16 years or older.

            Twinrix Paediatric® is for those who are aged 1-15 years.

            Ambirix® is for those who are aged 1-15 years.

            Hepatyrix® is for those who are aged 15 years or over.ViATIM® for those who are aged 16 years or over

          13. I know Ron. It’s called Socratic questioning.

            An infant is a child between birth and one year. Once it hits one year, it isn’t a baby – it’s a child though admittedly a young one. Toddler is a special case of child meaning young child.

    1. Vaccine formulations don’t contain heavy metals, John. Some more ltidose vials may use the mercuric salt thimerosal as a preservative but that’s not, at all the same thing: thimerosal is ‘mercury’ to no greater extant than table salt is metallic sodium (which is to say, not at all).

      As for squalene, your liver manufactures it constantly (it’s a required precursor for steroid synthesis) such that the normal circulating levels of squareness in the bloodstream dwarf any exposure that could result as a consequence of routine vaccination.

      1. BS. Many flu vaccines also contain Sqaulane oil, as an adjuvant. This is what gave USA, Gulf War Illness, when the DOD used GIs for lab rats and tested an unapproved, not tested on humans, experimental Anthrax vaccine. They know it Fked up several hundred thousand GIs, so what do they do? they put it in flu shots for old people and little children. And yes, the heavy metals are still in many of the vaccines. So we have a choice. Is the FDA just absolutely stupid, trying to make US peoples sick and kill them, or just don’t give a FF as long as they get their bribes from the Vaccine manufactures?

        1. Not BS: squalene is manufactured by the human liver and is necessary precursor for all sterol molecules including cholesterol, sterol hormones and vitamin D. The normal circulating level of squalene in humans is orders of magnitude greater than any increase achievable by routine childhood or seasonal flu vaccination.

          Attempts have been made to link GWS to squareness based on the premise GWS suffered are more likely to have antibodies to squalene than a symptomatic servicemen , but the tests performed to detect antibodies lacked necessary controls to demonstrate the test was specific to squalene antibodies. Further the vaccine lots servicemen received were tested for the presence of squalene: 37 of 38 lots were negative for its presence while the 38th had traces present, at about a 30th the level found in circulating blood.

          And finally later studies have demonstrated that not only do 1 in 10 people have antibodies to squalene regardless of whether or not they’ve been exposed to it via vaccination and that These naturally occurring antibodies are no more common in Gulf War veterans than in the general population.

          Those are the facts, John, and while you’re entitled to your own opinion you’re not entitled to your own facts.

          1. FO. You are trying to blow BS up the ass of a bGI who was used as ba lab rat, who has suffered every after with illness. A GI that was told by the congressional representative to the VA, A congressman from California, that everyone knew that the DOD Fked us up, his language, and not Saddam. That the DOD was lying about it and that there would have to be a congressional investigation to prove that the DOD was lying and that the experimental vaccine, that they were not supposed to give us, which many GIs including myself, did not have documented in their medical records. They never had that investigation. Because you seem very ignorant on the subject, i am going to do you a favor. One can not help being ignorant if they have been fed a lie, and have not been exposed to the truth, so i will give you the benefit of the doubt. I will assume that you are merely monumentally ignorant on the subject Here is some truth for yoU. Read this. VACCINE-A, THE COVERT GOVERNMENT EXPERIMENT THATS KILLING OUR SOLDIERS, and why GI’s Are Only the First Victims.

          2. I’m not blown my BS up anyone’s ass, John. If you wish I can provide citations supporting all the statements I made in the previous post.

          3. I completely understood my micro biology. Virus mutate at a high rate. Antibodies form in a “key and lock” type relationship. If the Antibodies do not fit EXACTLY, the antibody is useless. Take that the flu virus mutates at a high rate, flu vaccines are guesses, one year ahead of time, what the popular flu strains will be next year, and make vaccines for last years version of the virus, which because of mutation, is useless as tits on a bore hog. It can however, give last years flu to ones getting the vaccine, and so you have this years strains and last years strains going at the same time. If vaccine people believed that their vaccines worked, they would not insist that people who do not want the vaccine, should be forced to take it so that they do not infect the people who got vaccinated for that illness! In other words, they are saying, because our vaccines do not work, we want to force you to take them. Now as to the heavy metals. Individual vaccines, one injection vaccines, sealed, do not need a preservative such as the mercury and aluminum are used for in vaccines. That means if you are rich, a person in the know, a big wig, a big politician, you can get a hot with no heavy metal preservative. But the vial for the cattle, the poor, the masses, well, these are multi shot files. In order to extract one shot, you inject that much air into the bottle. You have now introduced into a formally vacuum-packed sterile environment contaminates. This mean that even with refrigeration, a preservative is needed. So yes, a dishonest person can claim that current vaccines do not have heavy metals in them and be right, IF they are talking, and making it plain that they are talking about single shot vials and not multi shot vials. Now, take you half truths, intentional ignorance, and trot on out of here. We can discuss the difference in the human body producing squalene oil, and having the same injected into a muscle, and the ramifications of that on the human, (and lab animals immune systems, squalene oil injected into animals to induce auto immune diseases to be studies has been done for many years before the experimental vaccine), immune system.

      1. It is that thing which when produced by the body itself is beneficial to the body, but foreign squalene is injected into the body, it causes the immune system to form antibodies against these oils as a foreign substance. These anti bodies then can not tell the difference in the bodies natural oils, and attacks the bodies natural oils. Anyone with half a brain who had a few pre med classes is aware that lab animals are often intentionally given auto immune diseases to be studied by injecting them with Squalene oil.

        1. The labels fell off my bottles – since there is such a huge difference, would you kindly match them back up again?

          Bottle A: C30H50
          Bottle B: C30H50

          Label 1: Natural
          Label 2: Artificial

          Uhhh…what dose is that in lab animals and how does it compare to the doses in vaccines?

  2. Umm — my son had smallpox vaccination in 1963, it was given to ALL babies. And I had a repeat vaccination at the same time — my fourth. So why is this idiot saying vaccination for smallpox had declined in this country?

    1. Smallpox vaccine in the US was discontinued in 1972 except for travelers. It is now only a few military people who get it, world wide. But you’re right, the guy’s an idiot.

      1. An idiot who backs his arguments up with facts and quotations.
        Unlike you, who resort to ad hominem attacks; always the sign of someone with nothing worthwhile to say.

        1. “who resort to ad hominem attacks; always the sign of someone with nothing worthwhile to say.” – Tim Webb

          “You are either exceptionally naive, which I doubt, or a professional ie paid troll, which I suspect.” – Tim Webb
          “I sense a congenital idiot” – Tim Webb

        2. Hey! Jon put his words out there on the WWW. That makes him a public person. All I said was he is an idiot, meaning low IQ. That much is obvious. Read Mike’s response.

    2. Please note the time period the comment related to.
      It is a bit rich when a granny who has probably never studied anything beyond knitting tries to tell someone who has devoted much time and effort to studying this phenomenon ( for your good, not his ) that he is an idiot.
      Anyway, re-read the quote, and try and understand it this time.

      “Smallpox, like typhus, has been dying out (in England) since 1780.
      Vaccination in this country has largely fallen into disuse since people
      began to realize how its value was discredited by the great smallpox
      epidemic of 1871-2 (which occurred after extensive vaccination).” W.
      Scott Webb, A Century of Vaccination, Swan Sonnenschein, 1898.

          1. Exactly.

            Even if you assume it’s all done cash-in-hand thus leaving little trace – surely, at least one person who by all rights shouldn’t be able to afford one has bought a Ferrari or something.

          2. Like the time the sergeant who was our classified material custodian drove her new Corvette into the squadron parking lot.

          3. I would think it would cost many billions of dollars to pay off everyone needing to be paid off around the world.

            The hoops the antivax stooges need to jump through to keep the cognitive dissonance at bay is mind boggling!
            I guess that’s life inside a cult.

          4. Ron seriously thinks Bill Gates tried using the Gates Foundation as a cover to sell a million dollars worth of vaccines to the government of India.
            Yep — donate $27billion in order to make $1million. It’s that kind of business savvy that put Gates where he is today.

      1. Jon “The Matrix” Rappoport*? Joe merde-ola? Mike “The Health DeRanger” Adams? Suzanne Humphry-Dumphry? Babs Low Ficher?

        *You can always tell when someone is a serious adult when they take on a world view/philosophy from a cheesy fantasy flick aimed at prepubescent, socially awkward boys. I really like it when they babble “Red pill or blue pill?” as if that has some deep meaning and isn’t an idiotic plot device in an idiotic kids movie.

        1. You forgot NeiI “I talk to aliens” Miller and John “The Illuminati are injecting us with tracking chips” Scudamore.

        2.’s seems the “Red pill / Blue pill” thing is a tell . More about being “alt reality” than being a skeptic or thinker.

          1. More about being 14 yrs. old, immature, socially stunted and undeveloped, I’d say.

            Personally… I pattern my life and Weltanschauung on Star Trek – The Original Series; particularly the Space Hippies episode.
            Enlightenment through modern culture has never since reached such dizzying heights – even in The Matrix films.
            Live long and Prespero, Al Mather!

      2. A lot of people wonder why. But one thing’s sure, it’s not vaccines that are causing old people to live a few fewer months. Most of them had the diseases we vaccinate for today!

        1. Absolutely correct. They didn’t die from the KILLER DISEASES did they? Why not? Now there’s a scientific mystery for ya!

          1. The law of diminishing returns always kicks in; but I’m happy with the fact that life expectancy for my demographic has gone up twenty-seven years in the last century.

          2. Amazing as to what a good healthy diet and better hygiene can accomplish in spite of vaccines isn’t it?

          3. See we do everything right — our air is somewhat pure, our water ( spring or well ) water has been tested and it’s pure, we eat organic, we don’t vaccinate or take ” medicinal ” drugs and we live into our 90’s or more. FTFY too.

          4. And so do thousands of people who don’t drink well water, don’t eat organic, do vaccinate and use prescription drugs.

          5. There are four nursing homes within 30 miles from where I live and they’re full of people who didn’t drink well water, didn’t eat organic, did vaccinate and use prescription drugs.

          6. So? There are thousands of towns all over the country full of active seniors who don’t follow your useless prescription for health.

          7. Find just a few that could keep up with me; cutting and splitting 4 to 5 cords of firewood, cleaning two feet of snow off 180 ft. of roof with a roof rake ( not on the same day of course ) then going to the gym for a workout. Now I know some who could but they have the same lifestyle as me. You on the other hand wouldn’t last one hour and Johnny well to be safe we’d have to have an ambulance standing by.
            Yes I’m bragging people my age tend to do that but usually they’re talking about what they used to do.

          8. LMAO! You really are the gift that keeps on giving, Ron! Better than Jelly of the Month club, even!

          9. You on the other hand wouldn’t last one hour and Johnny well to be safe we’d have to have an ambulance standing by.

            Except that again, this is a claim you can’t back up.

          10. If I can get Johnny to ” chop ” some of my wood it would give me time to do many other things I enjoy plus to see him do physical work would put a smile on my face. lol

          11. If I can get Johnny to ” chop ” some of my wood

            Ron are you making a pass at me? Your tendency to fantasize about me is pretty creepy. Just sayin’

          12. Johnny I see how your mind works and that’s f ing creepy. Wood Johnny as in trees. Chopping as with an axe.

          13. Ron, you put the word “chop” in quotes. Which generally implies you’re being euphemistic about something. You have posted several places where you described fantasies about me. It’s reasonable for me to wonder.

          14. Johnny I emphasized CHOP because I would have given you an axe to chop my wood. I use a chainsaw but I would have given you an axe because I wouldn’t have trusted you with a chainsaw.

          15. It’s illustrating that quotes are generally not interpreted as emphasis but some form of inversion. So you would mean something OTHER than chopping. Please read next time.

          16. Be careful as to what you say to Johnny he has the predilection to interpret everything in a perverted way. His mind is really twisted well I guess his stance on vaccine is proof of that.

          17. Actually if you read. You’ll see that all I did was ask if you were making a pass at me. You clearly – by normal English parsing rules – weren’t referring to chopping. Plus you have many times mentioned fantasizing about me. I considered it at least plausible that you have some kind of weird fixation.

          18. ”by normal English parsing rules” Again Johnny shows his swollen head! I could google it ( parsing rules ) but then I wouldn’t be able to ask WTF is parsing rules? Johnny speak in a manner that we” uneducated” souls can understand. I or anyone else can dig up words that are rarely if ever used in the English language but we’d rather be understood without having someone run to a dictionary. Even your fellow sh_ _ _ _ I mean co workers get frustrated at your I’m smarter than you attitude.

          19. Again Johnny shows his swollen head!

            Ron, I just know more than you in a few areas and I generally treat people as if they are equal in education to myself.

            Your speech here on the other hand seems to be a kind of anti-intellectualism basically shaming people for knowing things. I hope people in your town stand up to your bullying like I do.

            Johnny speak in a manner that we” uneducated” souls can understand.

            Ron, just ask a question when you don’t understand something. I do the same – you suck at answering questions because you generally don’t know what you’re talking about. Right now I’m treating you as my equal. That’s the opposite of having a swelled head.

            Parsing rules are, broadly just the rules by which a language is interpreted. I’ve already provided a website where it’s pretty clear how quotation marks are interpreted (and hey you used them right this time!)

          20. 60 posts in the last 24 hours. I can pretty well guess as to who ( or is it whom? )your working for.

          21. Most of which took me 30-40 seconds to post. Because they were to AutismDadd who was self-soothing for some reason – perhaps he had a bad day? So rounding up that means I spent…what…an hour typing posts all day?

            …and you imagine that tells you who I work for? I have asked you to stop fantasizing about me Ron. Again perhaps your affections need a healthier focus.

          22. She lives in Canada?

            Johnny again you make a false assumption but then again you have plenty of practice. Johnny she lives in the US and she, believe or not, follows your posts on her computer on occasion.

          23. you make a false assumption

            …and you are starting to write sentences as awkward as Lowell. If something is false. Just say ‘it’s false’.

            She lives in Canada?

            I take it you don’t get it.

            she, believe or not, follows your posts on her computer on occasion.

            Given her residence in the Great White North, I’m inclined to one of those options more than the other.

          24. Ron, you’ve dragged this out for months. You just want to come up with an excuse not to debate. Even if it makes you look dishonest by denying something which would only improve the outcome of the vote.

          25. Again if a ten year old can beat me in a debate (your claim) then you should be doing everything you can to encourage this debate since it would cost you nothing. However you do the opposite. You run away from discussing things, you demand things which are bad for the process and you deliberately require things which you knew pretty much from the beginning were dealbreakers.

            Isn’t that just admitting you’re the one who’s afraid here Ron?

          26. Johnny, Johnny, Johnny you’re the one holding up the debate. Your demands would eliminate some of the voting public. All I ask is an open debate period. Since we can’t agree on who could vote there simply would be no voting. I can’t make this any easier.

          27. Your demands would

            increase the quality of the outcome as you have admitted.

            All I ask is

            to change the original deal. Sorry. Ron I can hear you talk anytime. 🙂

            I can’t make this any easier

            actually that’s kind of a lie. You admit that voting the way I’ve described increases the accuracy of the vote. So it would be easy to allow for this better system.

          28. Where did I say it would increase the accuracy of the vote? I’m waiting……………………………..

          29. You already admitted that if the most logical people voted then you would be more likely to win. 🙂

          30. So you’re changing your mind now? Which is it? Will people who can act and reason logically be more likely to favor me or you?

          31. 1)Don’t be ridiculous, Ron Roy. A ten-year-old can defeat Johnny in a debate, remember? It would grow the voting public if you’re right since we don’t usually allow ten-year-olds to vote.

            2)The qualified vote was what made it interesting.

            3)Sure, you could. You could agree to the tested vote or I suppose…at least holding it in court where perjury laws apply.

          32. Ron..

            There is nothing that exposure gives us (we aren’t telling people anything they don’t already know). There is nothing that refuting you gives us – we can do that right here.

            All you have to do is to agree to that tested vote.

          33. What a joke! How do you know, Ron? Did you go over there and interview them? My MIL lives in a nursing home. She’s 97 years old, will be 98 in July, b. 1919. She grew up on a farm, drank well water and ate organic food. The only vaccine she had as a child was smallpox. She was 7 years old before diphtheria vaccine became available in 1926, probably didn’t have it b/c it didn’t come into widespread use until the 1940s. She was 19 when tetanus toxoid vaccine came out in 1938, and in her 20s and married before pertussis vaccine came out and was not given to people over 7. She may have had a Td at some point in time. She probably had some polio vaccine, as they gave it to everyone during those “Sabin Sundays” in the early 60s. I know my parents, of similar ages, took it. She was in her late 40s when the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines came out. She almost definitely had the diseases. Ditto chickenpox, which vaccine came out when she was 76. I don’t know if she had shingles vaccine. She does get a flu shot every year. She used few prescription drugs during her lifetime, and takes few now.

            The average age to enter a nursing home is 79, b 1937-38. Even those people were born well before most of these vaccines.

          34. You have a real reading comprehension problem, sabel. Someone born in 1938 did not get these vaccines as kids, they got the diseases.

          35. What are YOU talking about is the more relevant question. The average age to enter a nursing home is 79. A 79 yo was born in 1937 or 1938.

          36. OK, what? We had to go through this whole conversation because you didn’t read the post I was responding to?

          37. Well, I never said that; I don’t care about my post count. Is that why you prolonged this idiocy? For YOUR post count?

          38. Oh no not just vaccines prescription drugs and all the advise on how to eat to stay healthy that ISN’T given by doctors.

          39. This just kind of shows how you pick your evidence not by it’s quality but by it’s outcome. So the first article – which you didn’t bother following up on because after all if you like the outcome you swallow it whole just like any gullible person.

            Exactly one reference to Science for an article which does not appear on the journals search for that year. Again if I was talking to someone who thinks about what they believe if that matters. However I know, to you it doesn’t 🙂

            From there it’s all quotemining. Which is evidence of pretty dubious value at best:

            Dr. Tedd Koren, D.C.– Who talks about mumps outbreaks in Switzerland however his complaint isn’t really relevant to the question of if appropriate antibody levels actually strongly correlate with disease resistance.
            Trevor Gunn, B.Sc.– Who claims that people need different levels of seroconversion to confer immunity. Which is neither here nor there since you can always calibrate against an upper bound.
            Dr. John March Dr – is either wrong or being misquoted or misunderstood. Even if most viral diseases we know of are better combated by humoral immunity. It doesn’t mean that the ones we currently use vaccines for are not well controlled by antibodies.
            Glenn Dettman – Just makes up something about “true antibodies”
            Raymond Obomsawin, PHD makes the statment

            [W]e find that upon investigating unexpected and unexplainable outbreaks of acute infection among ‘immunized’ persons

            Except that outbreaks of infection among the vaccinated is expected when a disease still has a reservoir. So again either wrong or being misquoted/misunderstood.

            As usual Ron, if you actually read this stuff and thought about it instead of just googling for something you agree with and posting it. You would probably be far less ignorant. 🙂

          40. Trevor Gunn, B.Sc.- Who claims that people need different levels
            of seroconversion to confer immunity. Which is neither here nor there
            since you can always calibrate against an upper bound. Says Johnny.

            Glenn Dettman – Just makes up something about “true antibodies” Again says Johnny.

            Glenn Dettman – Just makes up something about “true antibodies” Again Says Johnny.
            Johnny your claims are just what would be expected from a pharm rep.

          41. I notice again you can’t seem to respond to the fact that you pick your evidence by it’s outcome. 🙂

          42. Wow what a pethetic invention. Neither here nor there….whoo that’s some top notch science Buzz

          43. Well if you mean that Ron’s posted rubbish and misinformation is easy to refute. Otherwise, what I posted was just clarifying what those people said and indicating how it’s either wrong, misquoted or irrelevant.

          44. No, again a lot of what Ron posts is so poor in quality it’s not even internally consistent.

          45. Dr. Tedd Koren, D.C.- Who talks about mumps outbreaks in
            Switzerland however his complaint isn’t really relevant to the question
            of if appropriate antibody levels actually strongly correlate with
            disease resistance.Are you pretending to be stupid? Of course antibody levels are relevant to so called disease resistance. That is according to medical dogma but that dogma is wrong. People who have 0 antibodies to a disease have been immune to that disease and others with high antibody levels still got the disease. Dr. John March is also correct high antibody counts mean nothing. You’re just voicing your biased opinion Johnny not facts.

          46. Are you pretending to be stupid? Of course antibody levels are relevant to so called disease resistance.

            Yeah, if they’re appropriate antibodies. Switzerland outbreak happened because…

            i) the coverage was low (80% rather than 90-95% nationally)
            ii) Primary vaccine failure (so seroconversion did not occur)
            iii) Rubini strain is simply not a strain expected to have strong coverage over the strains in the Switzerland outbreaks.[1]

            Since all three of these mean that people who were infected did not have appropriate seroconversion. Thus pretending that Switzerland is somehow evidence that seroconversion does not imply immunity is incorrect.

            because lower

          47. Now that’s just wrong. Please don’t live 27 more years. You will use up precious food and water and provide nothing but dirty dirty diapers.

          48. Why wouldn’t big pharma want more people aging? That ensures every drug used to keep people alive becomes a cash cow. I don’t get you Ron. In one thread you talk about big pharma wanting to push vaccines to make money (despite the fact that the real money is in treatment). Then you change your tune to say big pharma wants to kill us off, effectively reducing their bottom line. Pick a conspiracy and stick to it. You make too many contradictory statements.

          49. You’ve got that wrong they don’t want people to die they just want to keep them sick that’s where the real money is. Some do die but that’s the price of their doing business.

          50. Yes, poisoning ( keeping them sick ) customers is great business for pharmaceutical companies it insures a customer base. FTFY

          51. Nope the life expectancy would have gone up even more if they had. Like I said it’s amazing as to what a good diet and proper hygiene can do in spite of vaccines and I might add prescription drugs.

          52. It’s so cute watching cultists like you avoid dissonance. Hygiene had the majority of it’s improvement in the 1940’s and you have to keep on streeeeeeettttttccccching it’s effect just so you can keep believing that “vaccines couldn’t possibly have contributed to longevity”.

          53. Health regions with life expectancies lower than the Canadian average share similar characteristics. They tend to have higher levels of long-term unemployment, lower proportions of high school and university graduates, smaller immigrant populations, larger Aboriginal populations and rural/remote locations[1]

            Also immigration is an exceptionally small part of the population which means even if immigrant populations weren’t disadvantaged in health care it’s almost impossible for it to be repsonsible for the effect. Math for trades Ron. Math. For. Trades.

          54. ”Also immigration is an exceptionally small part of the population” Who are you trying to kid? I went to Montreal a few years back and I remember when I was on the subway thinking to myself ” Where are all the white people?” Asians and blacks all around and I was the only white person.

          55. Who are you trying to kid?

            1/140th of the population. Not to mention it’s a segment of the population associated with lower longevity. Math. Ron. Math.

          56. As usual your math is wrong: In 2011, the immigrants comprised 20.6% of Canada’s population; one in five people were immigrants.

          57. “immigration” not “immigrants”. Go back and check Ron I’ll wait. Are you done? Did you have to move your lips while reading?

            We’re talking about the constant increase of life expectancy. If the only reason it’s moving up constantly is become of immigration then you wouldn’t count the same immigrants over and over. Their effect on the population may have some lag before showing up in longevity statistics however it would be a one-time thing. If you want to blame immigration for the constant increase in lifespan You would look at the year-over-year increase of immigrants.

            Math for trades Ron. Math. For. Trades.

          58. The number of people immigrating to Canada in the last three years was 711,000 the total increase in population was 2,437,756. So the increase of population by immigrants was almost one third of that increase.

          59. 711,000 / 3 = 237,000 /a.
            Total population: 35 160 000
            35 160 000 / 237 000 = 148

            or 148th of the population. So again what I said was correct and that of course makes your attempt to correct – incorrect. 🙂

          60. Now pray tell how many of the total population ARE immigrants. Go ahead Johnny use your math skills.

          61. It’s irrelevant. We are talking about increase. So you need to look at Year over year values.

          62. Your talking about increase I’m talking about the total number of immigrants vs native born Canadians.

          63. …and from the beginning we were talking about INCREASE of life expectancy. Go back. Check. Move your lips while you read.

      3. Even with improved diets and better hygiene people can’t withstand the onslaught of health destroying vaccines and drugs which are increasing day by day.

      4. Mississippi has highest vaccine compliance in the US, it is also bottom no. 47 of the states overall health stakes! Speaks volumes

    1. ”People have never been healthier and live longer no thanks to medical science and witch-doctoring.” But because of improved diets and better hygiene. FTFY

    2. Uh, not true. Going to your doctor is the third leading cause of death in the US. Also the Genome project has just been announced as a total failure, 100 billion GBP spent on another science fallacy, just like vaccination.

    1. Ssssh.
      They’re sleeping peacefully.
      A lot of people will be out of a job if they wake; leave them be, for the sake of the GDP.

    1. Strange comment about an article which is referencing published medical literature. If vaccines are so harmless, why was it necessary to establish a limited-liability vaccine court like worker’s compensation tribunals?

      1. Because vaccines aren’t 100.000% harmless, but they’re recommended for almost everybody because of their benefit to public health. The VICP protects vaccine recipients by creating a no-fault system with a low evidentiary standard, and it protects vaccine manufacturers by making their liability payments predictable.

          1. Anyone who cares to read detailed accounts of the harm done to children can, and if they can’t have sympathy and compassion we can surmise they are sadists and sociopaths.

          2. Having sympathy and compassion who is an amputee isn’t the same as agreeing that they lost their limbs by alien abduction.

          3. I’m just pointing out that I don’t need to believe someone’s story about how they were injured to be compassionate to them. Whereas you are always demanding that people do so.

          4. I simply don’t believe I have to believe that someone was injured by space aliens to have compassion for the fact that their injured. This is an easy thing to separate if you’re rational.

          5. So if the person was crying “space aliens” instead of “vaccine injury” you would or would not believe them?

          6. So you only have sympathy for any condition if you agree with the persons assessment as to how it was caused?

          7. So similarly I have sympathy for people who are injured or have injured children even though the evidence rather strongly says that their etiology is incorrect.

          8. Well a) not everyone who participates in a vaccine study in a medical journal is uninterested in the health of the vaccinated and b) Even if your rather warped worldview was correct. It’s really all evidence that indicates they’re wrong.

          9. I’m happy to explain any specific thing. However you only seem capable of making vague assertions as to what you don’t understand. Which tells me you’re likely just making things up. 🙂

          10. Any specific aspect of any of my posts that someone asks about I will almost always explain. Sorry, you’re wrong again. 🙂

          11. I do and as understanding is a joint effort. I have yet to see a case where anyone putting in a reasonable effort leaves not understanding most of what I say.

          12. Hilarious. You only have 3 people on here you harass, me Ron and Lowell. So of course we don’t understand you.

          13. As usual you don’t like being called out for your harassment of people and your abusive speech so it’s all about anyone but you. Not to mention that you’ve already admitted to not wanting a reasonable conversation with me. I think that counts as your confession.

            That said, anytime you want a reasonable conversation with me you can just stop your abusive speech and attempts to block the conversation. 🙂

          14. So again, another confession that all you’re about is harassment and abuse. Communication is not what you want. Right?

          15. It’s still a confession that you don’t want conversation and that stacks a significant amount of evidence in the: “Autism Dadd is here just to harass and abuse” column.

          16. Surely you don’t want to base your theory on correlation and coincidence? The Science Community with take away your license to practice.

          17. Well we have a pretty enormous sample of you being abusive so that reduces the error rate. 🙂

          18. Raw data means you can do analysis which is often better than having it just handed to you. In this case we have a pretty extensive corpus describing how badly you treat people.

          19. It might be impossible for you to want to. However it’s not impossible for you to have one with me. Just stop your abusive speech and attempts to block the conversation.

          20. Deflect all you want. But having a productive conversation with me is entirely possible – except that’s not your goal. 🙂

          21. As stated you can have a productive conversation anytime you want to drop blocking it. Just the facts. I’m talking to you kindly, honestly and clearly. I almost always define my terms and respond to questions about the topic at hand. You generally insult, deflect and dodge.

          22. Not as much as it would be in a more productive conversation. Instead I get to see something of your psyche. Perhaps pity you a bit.

          23. If you don’t like it. Put away your insults, deflections and dodges and have a productive conversation.

          24. Again if you don’t like this interaction then you can have a normal conversation. You just need to stop with the insults, deflections and dodges. Otherwise it’s reasonable to infer that you aren’t interested in communication which puts more evidence in the “AutismDadd just wants to harass people” column.

          25. We could talk about Kennedy but that would require having a normal conversation and so far you’re mostly using disqus to self-soothe.

          26. Except that the number of people who think that about me is exceptionally small. The number of people who think that about him is exceptionally large.

          27. No, just that there are far more people expressing negative stuff about RFK than I even know.

          28. Johnny give people a chance. Hardly anyone knows you if as many people knew you as Kennedy you would beat him hands down as far as being unpopular. Give yourself a little credit.

          29. Zero times any number always equals zero, the same equation is applies to having a productive conversation with you.

          30. Zero times any number always equals zero

            Congratulations! You’ve grasped the concept of multiplicative identity.

            the same equation is applies to having a productive conversation with you.

            The fact that Adadd doesn’t have a productive conversation with me isn’t really telling. The fact that he has a hard time having a productive conversation here with anyone he disagrees with and that his responses are pretty much just vague and dismissive are more informative.

            While I’m sure I’m not perfect, the evidence seems to say that the problem is mostly him. As I’ve said, I’m sure various things shaped him into the poorly socialized being he is. So it’s not really about being a “bad person”. So much as learning to overcome our biases as humans.

          31. I try to be clear and transparent. Thanks for admitting that a significant part of your ignorance is deliberate. 🙂

          32. Actually your action was in your prior posts (and probably more than one if I looked through the history).

          33. The idea that VICP has a low evidentiary standard is actually the opinion of several legal experts including Kevin Conway VICP counsel for Steering Committee for Petitioners’ Counsel in VI Court.

        1. Infectious disease had massively declined in the first world before the introduction of vaccinations.
          Why was this?
          At the risk of stating the obvious, it was because of greatly improved diet and sanitation.
          Therefore, surely the default position should be to further improve the hygiene and diet of the population, not only in the first world, but in the third world too.
          But there’s no profit in this strategy.
          The bottom line is as it always has been; big profit for a few people, irrespective of the damage being caused by these poisons.
          Permanent damage.

          1. Diet and sanitation have a huge role to play in public health, but they simply can’t eradicate VPDs. Not yet, anyway. There are entire living generations today where every individual is assumed to have contracted measles. Diet and sanitation haven’t changed that much, Mr. Webb. Vaccines have.

            As for bringing first world food and sanitation standards to the third world, who’s going to do that? It was an expensive undertaking to distribute smallpox vaccine around the world, and that didn’t even try to reach every person. Who do you think is going to pay to bring modern sewerage, tap water, pasteurization, etc. to every community?

          2. Not to mention 3rd world countries provide free test subjects for vaccines, and if harmed, these poor, powerless people can do nothing about it. That’s a HUGE WIN for vaccine research.

          3. What about them, exactly? It’s sad whenever somebody is hurt by medicine that should have helped them, but I’m not sure what you want to do about it in poor countries. There are few practical options without a compensation program or effective access to the courts.

          4. So vaccine makers and pushers are not responsible for these faulty products in poor nations and victims can just crawl into there mud and stick huts to suffer or die? How humane.

          5. How about something humane like compensating the injured in poor countries that vaccines harmed? Is that a no no?

          6. No, it’s not. The difficulty is that, as I said, that requires convenient access to courts and/or a VICP, which a lot of poor countries don’t have. I don’t know a way around that, but I’m interested in suggestions.

          7. Well, you seem to be suggesting that the pharmaceutical companies should take charge of vaccine injury claims themselves. It “doesn’t require a court,” after all.

          8. This was your suggestion, not mine. I don’t think any company should get final say in whether they’re liable for an injury or not.

          9. Your point being then, they ARE unreliable but still used by the legal department to adjudicate. That makes the legal department unreliable.

          10. Yeah, that’s why the VICP and even civil court is superior to your proposal of letting pharmaceutical companies decide their own liability.

          11. I’m not proposing Big Pharma decide. I propose they pay for damages as part of business, not be protected like they are. How is protecting a criminal from prosecution superior?

          12. So…who should adjudicate claims? A VICP? Civil courts? Somebody else? Somebody has to actually decide how much liability the manufacturers have. In the United States, that’s done by a VICP.

            Just FYI, vaccine manufacturers are subject to criminal law just like any other company.

          13. Hilarious. VIOXX killed how many? And they knew during their studies VIOXX was faulty? How many went to prison for Negligence causing death?

          14. I don’t know how many it killed, but Merck has been held liable for billions of dollars in damages and hundreds of millions of dollars in criminal fines. Can you answer the question, though?

          15. MERCK (synonymous with consumer death) paid out a FRACTION of VIOXX profits. Now about your BOGUS claim they are treated the same by law enforcement….

          16. You’re wandering, AD.

            Who should adjudicate vaccine injury claims? A VICP? Civil courts? Somebody else? Somebody has to actually decide how much liability the manufacturers have.

          17. And how does that affect the manufacturers bottom line? Can they claim it through an income tax deduction? Does it come from the .75 they pay to protect their profits?

          18. And would you imagine that cost could be a business expense? OK So MERCK (synonymous with consumer death) pays .75 cents per Gardasil shot which costs what $360.00 per shot? That’s quite a hardship for MERCK (synonymous with consumer death).

          19. Product liability is a business expense for every manufacturer. The point of the 75¢ payments isn’t to hurt Merck, it’s to protect the rare victims of vaccine injury. Fortunately, Gardasil is much, much, much, much better at preventing cancer (synonymous with consumer death) than it is at causing injuries!

          20. So you’d prefer for people in the third world to just die and be permanently injured by vaccine-preventable diseases..? Gotcha. Very humane of you!

          21. I’m not for disease or vaccine injury. I support supplying food, sanitation and clean drinking water. But that’s too costly, so they vaccinate even though its contraindicated and they make no effort to improve living conditions

          22. If other countries are footing the bill, then vaccination is a lot more cost-effective. Who do you propose should pay to bring the third world up to first world sanitary standards?

          23. All the DO-GOODERS who whine about death by measles. How much $$$ have you donated to African relief agencies? How much has CDC or Big Pharma donated? Instead you promote vaccination of the retched poor and staving even though it contraindicated. That’s inhumane. Oh but more cost effective, another misnomer. Cost effective to who? Zero compassion and zero compensation for injuries…real cost effective.

          24. Contraindicated? BS. The vaccines prevent far, far more suffering than they cause. You just don’t give a damn about people who get killed by disease.

            As for charities footing the bill to modernize entire continents, that’s absurd. The job is staggering. It’s enormous. It’s going to take state action to accomplish that.

          25. Shows what you know. Its contraindicated to vaccinate sick and malnourished people. That is vaccine science speaking not me. They don’t follow their own recommendations which is reckless.

          26. Wow you are dense. Its contraindicated in vaccine studies and this is the opinion of vaccine scientist. Guess you were hoping it was Jenny McCarthy.

          27. Its not about where as in Chicago dumb-ass its part of the science itself. TRY LOOKING IT UP!!!!!!!!!

          28. I did. I don’t see contraindications against vaccinating sick, malnourished, or poor people. I think you’re making it up or repeating what somebody else made up.

          29. I see pages stating that it’s a myth that certain people (e.g., people recovering from an illness) shouldn’t be vaccinated, but none of the contraindications you described.

          30. I’m seeing that recommendations have changed to benefit vaccine programs. Apparently they don’t care, as many children are already so ill from being malnourished , the vaccines may just contribute to their death. They call it a coincidence. you know the Vaccine equivalent of lying on a stack of Bibles?

          31. More likely, they’ll contribute to them not dying from preventable illnesses. What’s the vaccine equivalent of lying on a stack of bibles? 😀

          32. i noticed this recently as well. going so far as to vax kids with fever in case they don’t come back later.
            when mine were small we were always told no vaxxing with a fever.
            at least vets still keep to that from what i’ve seen.

          33. They are a sneaky bunch. Searching the web has changed to. I wasn’t finding what I used to. Guess I should try goodgopher

          34. Bullshit. Scammers are free to publish books, give seminars, promote phony therapies, write articles, run their own websites, put up billboards, and comment on Disqus. There’s no censorship — most people are just too smart to fall for bullshit that promotes disease (synonymous with consumer death).

          35. I can only handle so much garbage in one sitting. Between you and Graham, its a wonder I can last this long before needing to talk to someone intelligent.

          36. Again, it would be interesting to see a cite specifically for some form of malnourishment being contraindicated – that is having evidence of a specific negative outcome. As opposed to avoiding it as a precaution.

          37. And can you show this for the common vaccine preventable diseases of childhood, namely measles, rubella, chickenpox, mumps, rotavirus and some of the less common ones like pertussis, diphtheria, pneumococcus, polio?

            (And Remember, your claim is a decline in incidence, not mortality)

          38. Ol’ Timmy hasn’t been back since the drubbing he received several days ago. Probably the only smart thing he’s done in a long time…

          39. I dont get hs comment, what more can we do to improve sanitation and diet? Force feed people veggie shakes and wrap them in plastic wrap, tissue boxes on their feet?

          40. People like Timmy are so absorbed by the capitalism (“big pharma”) conspiracy theories they are unable to think rationally. Ron Roy (and plenty of other anti-vax and anti-modern-ag types) is the same way. I think it’s either a brain defect or a bizarre coping mechanism that helps them rationalize the lack of control over their lives.

          41. But they have control over their lives.. Maybe they don’t want any control, and just get babysat by the Gov, from birth to death.

          42. It’s easier for them to blame some faceless entity like, “The Gummint” for their failings.

        2. Bull. Its not a no fault system. Vaccines are at fault. 2 out of 3 claims are denied. It keeps NVICP from going bankrupt.

          1. Wikipedia? Snicker. Vaccine pushers either know all the possible side effects and deny many or they just don’t know how much harm the are doing. Both are unacceptable.

          2. Evidence of what? The fact that it exists doesn’t support your assertion of secret side effects, a conspiracy, or rank incompetence. Do you think that vaccine-inured people shouldn’t have a VICP to turn to?

          3. …and again we seem to have to explain what “no fault system” means to AutismDadd. The success rate does not make or keep something from being a no-fault system. It’s about the requirements of law. In the NVICP you need to demonstrate that you have suffered an injury or loss that meets certain criteria. In a tort case you would have to demonstrate that AND that the tortfeasor had a duty to act AND that they did not comply with this duty. Each one of these extra things requires that much more legal argumentation.

            This is why tort is likely more expensive and while I think the NVICP could use some improvement why it is a generally a better idea than resorting to tort.

          4. Yawn. Stop the parrot act. Don’t call a program NO FAULT when there is fault. Consumers are victims. Vaccines are at fault. If you want to change the name to accurately describe the program call it what it is, like Hush Money For Vaccine Carnage Program.

          5. Don’t call a program NO FAULT when there is fault.

            AutismDadd you really have some kind of comprehension difficulty here. A no-fault system isn’t declaring that nobody is at fault. It’s stating that you don’t need to determine liability for a judgement. Car insurance in most of Canada and some parts in the US is no-fault. That is also not a declaration that no collisions anywhere exist where no party with is more culpable.

          6. No fault determines fault and car insurance decides who pays deductible based on circumstances (fault). No fault with vaccines is another form of manipulation of injured and dead consumers. Its not some heartfelt apology.

          7. No fault determines fault

            No, no-fault means that fault – that is liability – does not need to be determined in court. Fault can exist and fault may be assumed or determined by another agency but that’s not what no-fault insurance is about.

            car insurance decides who pays deductible based on circumstances (fault).

            The deductible is payable by the policy owner in most circumstances in a no-fault system like Ontario. In the cases where it’s paid through DC you still don’t have to determine this in court. Hence it’s a no-fault system.

            I get that you want to shoehorn your own rather deficient ideas about insurance into this so that you can feel better about your ideas about vaccination however you really should just deal with the fact that your assumptions about what a no-fault system means were simply incorrect.

          8. Nice twisting to suit your delusion. You are wrong but because of some character flaw you can only disagree. There may be meds for that.

          9. Nice twisting to suit your delusion.

            It’s simply the definition of no-fault insurance. You can look it up.

            You are wrong but because of some character flaw you can only disagree.

            Except I’m not just disagreeing I’ve provided an argument, one I might add you can’t find a fault in. So the only person who is capable of “only disagreeing” appears to be you.

          10. Who cares

            You do, obviously. We are talking about the definition of “no fault insurance”. The reason? When Ken S. called NVICP one you said:

            Its not a no fault system.

            If you are claiming it’s not one and Ken is claiming it is. Clearly the definition of the term matters to both parties.

            about a worthless definition?

            When you’re rather obviously incorrect you can only belittle the thing being discussed. Classic cognitive dissonance avoidance.

            Next time just say: “I AutismDadd made a mistake. I thought no-fault meant something different than what it does.”.

          11. Stuff that Disqus Troll. Its a con to call it “no fault” The definition is a con too. Vaccines and CDC etc are at fault because the promote faulty, fraudulent products. Those compensated and those dismissed are victims just like VIOXX victims.

          12. Its a con to call it “no fault”

            No, it’s the definition of the term. It existed prior to vaccine programs. You don’t like it that’s fine however it doesn’t change that no-fault is a proper, well used and reasonably well understood term.

          13. It is still based on fault

            More correctly it does not required a determination of liability in court. Hence it is no-fault. You were wrong. Deal.

          14. More nonsense. Then why are lawyers or experts needed? Why have definitions or judges? What are they judging?

          15. Then why are lawyers or experts needed? Why have definitions or judges? What are they judging?

            It depends. In the case of NVCIP it appears to be about the plausibility of causation. Not all things which contribute to some outcome necessitate liability.

          16. No, it’s simply true. Not everything that potentially contributes to something necessitates liability. Sorry.

          17. It’s simply true. Not everything that potentially contributes to something necessitates liability. This is why tort law is different than special courts like VICP.

          18. No it’s just that you have no refutation for the fact that. Not everything that potentially contributes to something necessitates liability. I already gave you the outline of the principles of tort and how this differs. Sorry you lost this one.

      2. First, some of these articles are very old, going back to the 1940s, 70+ years ago now, and reference vaccines no longer in use in the US (whole cell DTP, oral polio vaccine, smallpox vaccine, killed measles vaccine), are rarely used (rabies) and/or were never used in the US (BCG).

        The NVICP was established with the help of anti-vax queen Barbara Loe Fisher. It’s purpose was to provide a venue for compensation without having to go through civil court, where it’s hard to win a case, yet costs enormous amounts of money to all involved.

        https://violentmetaphors com/2013/11/22/why-anti-vaxers-hate-the-nvicp-and-just-what-is-it-anyway-by-colin-mcroberts/

      3. …and if they’re so harmful how is it that the vast majority of Canada (all but Quebec) which tends to have a vaccine program as aggressive or more so than the US not use a limited-liability vaccine court?