HIV and HPV; does Trump know the difference?
- Thread starter mstp1992
- Start date
LMAO!!!
"Somebody" runs a 'search' on the word "vaccine" on here every morning, to figure out which threads to post the Bat-Shit-Crazy in.....
If you have time, I'd suggest going back through some of our debates to see what happened. The climate for this subject has changed quite a bit in this forum from even a year or two ago because the bully backers know they've got no good debate surrounding the safety aspect of vaccines. You can go back and see what it was like vs. after my comment in this thread for instance. The hard core "pro-vaccine" (for lack of a better term) argument has really taken some hard hits lately in light of some of the newer science that has surfaced. I'd like to focus on a couple key points regarding safety. First, probably 99% of all vaccine studies have focused on one vaccine (MMR) and one ingredient (thimerosal) out of I believe 16 vaccines and 49 ingredients. Very little has been thoroughly looked at outside of those two items, and even those studies have major fatal flaws like no true placebos, healthy user bias, cherry picking data, conflicts of interest, studying populations with a much more lax schedule than the US, whistleblowers and con men as lead authors, etc.
My second key point is that one of those many ingredients that have not been thoroughly looked at is aluminum adjuvant. US regulatory agencies cite (1 study!) (Mitkus) to base their stance on aluminum toxicity to ensure the American public that it is safe, and this is that study:
https://vaccinepapers.org/wp-content/uploads/FDA-aluminum-paper.pdf
Good explanation on why this is a problem:
https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/a-lone-fda-scientist-could-end-the-autism-epidemic/
New study that indicates many major flaws in that (Mitkus) study:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0946672X17300950
Explanation of what this study is saying:
In addition to all this, 3 of the world's top scientists that have worked with aluminum (nearly 200 peer-reviewed studies between the 3 of them) all wrote letters to the Director of DHS indicating they are deeply concerned about vaccine aluminum and are urgently calling for more studies. Many, many other doctors and scientists are voicing similar concerns regarding aluminum.
Are you serious? Did you skip over, well, almost the entire article? The only article I posted has plenty of info/studies that indicate the neurotoxicity of aluminum. Add to that the several studies that I posted here in the past that put into serious question the safety of aluminum adjuvant. What were there like 15 or 16 or so? I'll dig them out again for you if you want.
If you mean that it is unproven what level of aluminum has the ability to cause recognizable problems, I think you're right and I suppose that's why the 7000 medical professionals Dr Weiler referred to in his interview are calling for the FDA to hire Dr Chris Shaw to do the dose-escalation studies so we can begin to start making those determinations. I think at this point, however, we should at the very least have enough info to place vaccines in the "highly suspicious" category.
Or - Joe do you still hold the position that without a doubt the aluminum in vaccines is safe? If you do, please post the studies/explanation here that lead you to believe that holding that position is still reasonable.
Check this out. If this doesn't make you go hmmm....I don't know what will. Sorry about the audio:
Yep. The only "serious" link was the last one, which simply is challenging (w/o any real toxicity data) the levels set.
In a rather obscure journal.
With no major authors of note.
And it hasn't yet been responded to yet, since they literally just put it out. (But it will)
Seems like it's simply fodder for the weak minded to pull snippets from.
I don't bother with Youtube videos, because most do not provide any context to any of the bullshit they espouse. If the audio sucks, it's likely because it was done in someone's mom's basement.
Here are those letters I was referring to:
WOW....an "Ophthalmologist" with alleged expertise on vaccines!!!
Do you hit up the podiatrist's office for your STD "itches"?
Riiiight. So, do you still hold your position that the amount of aluminum given in the current schedule is without a doubt safe?
No, I'm asking you to provide the science that backs up your stance. Surely there must be something out there you're holding on to.
Last edited:
So....no experience on vaccines or toxicology.
When the AMA and American Association of Pediatrics (and a hundred OTHER medical associations) come around and agree on the "aluminum" stuff, I'll be convinced. In the meantime, 99% or more pediatricians vaccinate their OWN children, which OUGHT to be enough to convince yourself that you are not identifying reliable sources.
I see @naturalbornhawk still hanging on to the that movement that uses as playboy bunny as its spokesperson.
The aluminum contained in vaccines is similar to that found in a liter (about 1 quart or 32 fluid ounces) of infant formula. While infants receive about 4.4 milligrams* of aluminum in the first six months of life from vaccines, they receive more than that in their diet. Breast-fed infants ingest about 7 milligrams, formula-fed infants ingest about 38 milligrams, and infants who are fed soy formula ingest almost 117 milligrams of aluminum during the first six months of life.
*Note: One milligram is one-thousandth of a gram. One gram is the weight of one-fifth of a teaspoon of water.
http://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-ingredients/aluminum
*Note: One milligram is one-thousandth of a gram. One gram is the weight of one-fifth of a teaspoon of water.
http://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-ingredients/aluminum
Except it is.
Nobody else can name one other person involved in the movement and no doctor who is remotely tied has any sort of creditability.
Look you hitched your wagon to a glorified stripper. That's fine and there are many subjects where I would like to be hooked to a stripper...medical decisions are not one, however.
Sorry ANYC you're not following. If you're with me thus far in the thread you should have recognized the difference between ingested and injected aluminum. The mechanisms involved are completely different.
I'll go with the bunch of highly skilled, trained and respected doctors. I like my side better when it comes to medical advice. Not your stripper side.
What data is the AMA and the "hundred OTHER medical associations" looking at when they formulate their recommendations regarding aluminum adjuvant safety?
The 99% of pediatricians thing is a piss poor argument. I'm not looking for an echo from a parrot.
Ok, here's one. There are plenty more - and more, it seems, are being brave and questioning every day despite the tremendous up-hill battle they face if they take that path.
You can EASILY visit their websites and find it. They are very open about sharing that information.
So I get TPIR fail buzzer w/ no explanation. Makes sense
I think I actually heard it when I read your response.
The AMA is not forthcoming regarding this issue on their website by the way. Skimming through what the AAP has to offer it looks like there are a couple major problems. A lot of their publications are older, but here's the major problem I have: On the AAP website, I found this publication:
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/112/6/1394#ref-42
Scroll down to adjuvants. Under that heading it says this:
For determining the quantity of aluminum below which safety is likely, data were generated in mice that were inoculated orally with various quantities of aluminum lactate.42
#42 is this study: https://vaccinepapers.org/wp-conten...ion-on-spontaneous-motor-activity-in-mice.pdf
Yep, another study that uses ingestion rather than injection to determine safe levels of pediatric dosing! Joe - this has been my contention all along. Intuitively you know it's wrong to use an ingestion model to determine injection safety, but now we have the science that indicates the drastic differences and potential dangers of the mechanisms of injection.
Do you have something worth while to show me specifically? If not, I rest my case.
Translation: "I don't understand anything they are talking about over there. But I insist that I know more than people who had 4 years of undergraduate biology, 4-5 years of med school and 2+ years of residency, with many having 4-5 more years of residency and fellowship training. And I'll believe the word of a Playboy Bunny over all that expertise, just because".
What a miserable response. You've lost this debate Joe. Everyone's using faulty rodent ingestion models to determine safe pediatric dosing levels for injected aluminum. Show me any one of your "hundred OTHER medical associations" web pages that indicates anything different - or it's true.
If the above is true, then you should have no problem reporting back with some substance if it exists.
We've had multiple discussions on this.
One of the last ones, you posted "data" about measles, which confounded Great Britain data with US data, and I called that out.
I think it was the lewrockwell website.
And I destroyed it.
I've posted numerous sources of information for you, and you seem to have forgotten it all. There is no indication this time will be any different.
So you've got absolutely nothing on the aluminum problem put on your plate. That's what I thought. How are we going to know if the aluminum we're giving our kids is safe if the models we're using to determine safety are faulty? How would you ever know if that aluminum is causing damage? You wouldn't. Now we have new science that indicates not only that aluminum autistic brains are loaded with aluminum, but they are in areas never before detected (as compared to Alzheimer's) and we have science that has indicated exactly how it gets there from the injection site.
As for your straw man point, you destroyed a semantic detail on one small section of a 9 page article that brought up 100's of damning points against the pro-vaccine side of the debate and claimed victory over the whole debate. Think about how laughable that is. I gave you your due golf clap, a kudos if you will, for pointing that out as I roll my eyes. Then you keep bringing it up as if you want me to throw you a party. You should let it go because it's not helping you at all. What it does do is indicate to me that your weak hand has to reach something - anything - positive to say because your ship is sunk.
No, this was presented to you a year ago. And you've apparently forgotten.
Latest posts
-
-
-
Missouri State Transfer WR Raylen Sharpe Visiting Iowa on Tuesday- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
