H1N1 Vaccine: Found some informative articles

they are also wildly exaggerating the number of cases of swine flu, many of which have turned out to be the regular seasonal flu, and more more of which have turned out not to be flu at all, but other infections such as the common cold and bacterial pneumonia
~~~

Actually, swine flu is the only genuine problem in the entire issue. The concerns discussed in the post, and in the articles referred to in it, turned out to be nothing but fluff. Kudos for reading the post before responding, but I think you missed the point.

"Conspiracy theories" is the title they give everything they don't want you to believe or understand. That fear technique is greatly over used.

Ah, the ever-malevolent, mythical "they," always cropping up for the sole purpose of taking responsibility for any and all randomly imagined evil behavior anyone might exhibit. I was waiting for that. ^_^

I believe YOU are today, part of "they" as it was your "conspiracy theory" label.

See how easy that was to figure out?

Oh, yes, I am very powerful... President Obama calls me every night before making any big decisions. I'm his chief adviser.
This is what happens when you challenge people's ridiculous conspiracy theories by presenting real facts... they decide that you are part of the conspiracy!
You're worse than the guy who thinks the cash registers at the store where I work call the cops on everyone who gets IDed for alcohol purchase.

Why, you DO qualify for the Conspiracy CZAR. Congrats! Nice pic!

Linda, I think she's seen your posts before... so that makes her approach to you most logical.

BTW - I'd pass on chopping logic with Hannah were I you. She doesn't play nice.

Hey, now... I'm just tryin' to live up to my name XD

Well written article. I will not get the vaccine, just because others will need it more, and I believe I had the version of swine flu that occurred in the 1970's. I did get my seasonal flu vaccine. My theory being that it is a different vaccine each year and that maybe I am building residual immunity to all forms of the flu. There are lots of other very scary viruses out there, though.

Thanks, Heather ^_^
I'm waiting on the vaccine. According to my doctor, it's vital that those with weakened immune systems and respiratory ailments which make them vulnerable get it first. When we were discussing the flu and the vaccine, he pointed out that those who are most vulnerable are those who are most likely to spread it. As a person who has overcome childhood asthma, and now very rarely gets sick, I'm not in that group.
Once the first round is distributed and we've had a chance to see how the virus is affecting our community, we'll discuss it again before deciding whether or not I need the vaccine.
You may have something, though, with the residual immunity idea. I hadn't thought of that - I hope the same thing is working for my Mom, who does have a compromised immune system and who gets the flu shot and the pneumonia shot every year.

Anyone stupid enough to believe that Obama had the virus produced, then they should hit themselves in the head with a sledgehammer until their skulls crack open and then they could be called "brain surgeons." WHY? Because that makes as much sense as some one who would believe that Obama ordered the virus. .

LOL, true, Ed!

Speaking of STUPID

...case in point, Ed. When they can't prove their point, they get hysterical and start posting wild rumors and outright lies.
Some links from previous discussions on this subject, (if my html is good)

New England Journal of Medicine: A Population-Based Study of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella Vaccination and Autism
(From the article's Discussion section: "This study provides three strong arguments against a causal relation between MMR vaccination and autism. First, the risk of autism was similar in vaccinated and unvaccinated children, in both age-adjusted and fully adjusted analyses. Second, there was no temporal clustering of cases of autism at any time after immunization. Third, neither autistic disorder nor other autistic-spectrum disorders were associated with MMR vaccination. Furthermore, the results were derived from a nationwide cohort study with nearly complete follow-up data.")

New England Journal of Medicine: Vaccine Refusal, Mandatory Immunization, and the Risks of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases
(From the article: "Vaccine refusal not only increases the individual risk of disease but also increases the risk for the whole community.")

MotherJones.com: Vaccine Skeptics-VS-Your Kids
From the article: "It turned out that by working in Boulder—one of the wealthiest, most well-educated towns in the country—Moran had put herself at risk of contracting a disease that largely disappeared after widespread vaccination against it began in the 1950s. Since the early 1990s, whooping cough has periodically whipped through Boulder, where a large percentage of parents do not immunize their children, public health officials say." The really bad part - she was pregnant at the time, and her child was born with whooping cough, and suffered permanent lung damage.

Anatomy of a Scare
The beginning of a very, very bad year for antivaccinationists

Autism's False Prophets: Finally, science pushes back against antivaccine lunacy

Brian Deer: The Wakefield Factor


Further links can be found At this location

Clueless in America (this should take you awhile - it refutes EVERYTHING you expound here.

No, actually, it doesn't.
Not only does it not refute anything I've said, it doesn't even address anything I've said except for the Guillian-Barre statement, and it doesn't refute that. It simply discusses the original theory that I addressed in my post, offering absolutely no proof of cause.

1976 was an odd year for me.
A friend died from that version of swine flu. He was a senior linebacker for the local high school.
The way he died was sickening.
I got my swine flu shot and went home.
OMG! the news anchor was talking about how people were dying from the swine flu shot!! OH 78&*(&%#^^&^&*%( and more.
I do not remember what exactly happened back then, but it was a small number of people..

It was very small, and there was no definitive proof that the syndrome was caused by the shot. In fact, the ratio of Guillian-Barre occurrence which got blamed on the shot was 1 in 10,000,000 while the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke page on the syndrome shows the incidence in the general population as being 1 in 100,000... so more people develop the syndrome without the shot than with it. That really indicates the opposite of a cause-effect relationship between the two.

You didn't even go to the links and a skim job at best. Oh well, life goes on.

I agree with Hannah.

Actually, I did go to the links. None of them address the New England Journal study, none of them show any definitive evidence of link between any vaccine and Autism, none of them address the Typhoid Mary style Anti-Vaxx effect on the general populace, none of them address the incident in Boulder, none of them address the Brian Deer article on Wakefield or the fallacy and money-grubbing lawsuit-happy nature of the Anti-Vaxx movement.
You aren't reading what you're claiming to have responded to. The stuff you're posting doesn't give any actual response to anything I've written, nor does it offer any real reply to any of the comments in this thread. You are just posting random, unsubstantiated, and unrelated crap and calling it a reply.

Thanks Ed! ^_^
It's good to see some sense in this thread, LOL!

WHAT????? I FINALLY made sense??????? someone call Ripley's and my teachers quick!!!!

Thank you for posting to our group; http://civilrights4all.gather.com/
Please keep posting to our group and ask others to join.

Because I am in health care and I worry about my getting the flu and passing it on to my clients. They would most likely suffer from getting the flu. I have received my annual flu vaccine, but not the H1N1. I have to get this soon.

If I were still working as a CNA, I'd definitely get the shot... I worked in two different nursing homes at two different times, both of which had emphysema patients and patients with other respiratory ailments... people who would be fodder for a virus like H1N1.

Speaking of fodder, here are the HIDDEN and FORGOTTEN.

Linda, wild guesses and hypothetical questions don't add up to a true conspiracy (well, other than in your mind). You need EVIDENCE, FACTS, etc. You have NEITHER!

The link in your article goes to a site called "News with Views."
That pretty much says it all, Linda. The article I read there is extremely slanted, written by someone who started out with a conclusion and set out to prove it.
The connections and associations drawn are not well proved... only loosely bound by having time in common. It's just like the "connection" between the 1976 swine flu vaccine and Guillain-Barré syndrome - nothing but speculation with a bunch of official statistics thrown in to make it look more credible than it is.
And you're accusing me of using scare tactics... you're the one trying to scare people!

and the first comment under your post actually debunks it, LOL!
"It appears that most of the deaths attributed to the flu were from bocavirus, metapneumovirus and pneumonia, among other things."

Hannah, where in the WORLD did you get the idea that actual information would make a difference to ANY of these moonbats? Linda A. will NEVER accept information as reality. Only belief and imagination counts for her. In her view, every doctor and immunologist for the past 60 years has been in on and supporting this vast conspiracy of vaccines being created to control Americans.

Soon as it's available, I'm getting my H1N1.

It would make a good movie, you know... the conspiracy nuts have a great story idea. The government could put nanochips or nanobots in the vaccine serum... those could go straight to the recipient's brain, where they could take hold and begin manipulating the individual's thoughts, feelings, and attitudes, thereby giving the government total control over anyone and everyone who has ever received a shot for anything. It would then have to be up to the Anti-Vaxx nuts to save the world. It'd be like The Matrix, but with drugs and tiny bits of imaginary technology (not in that they don't exist, but in that they have capabilities which don't currently exist) instead of big hardware.
By ignoring reality and embracing one's darkest fears, one can totally release one's inner sci-fi/horror author! ^_^
Great, now I can add that to my list of novels "on the back burner." XP

Ya know? I had my son vaccinated for both the seasonal and h1n1 last week. Ever since then, he's been making this strange beeping sound and there's a blip on my gps........ He must be microchipped!!!!!

Seriously though, I've seen people say that they believe the h1n1 vaccine is a secret human microchipping program. Ugh. Really people?

Thank you for the informative and intelligent article. I really did have my son vaccinated for both, he is high risk. I believe in science and vaccines. I am grateful that we have them.

Blips... ROFL!
Thanks for checking out the post :)

If it can be conclusively shown that H1N1 is a natural virus and the vaccine is an appropriate response and Obama was proved to a Communist Martian transvestite to be impeached ASAP Linda A and her cohorts would be perfectly happy. Medicine, logic, history, fact have NO BEARING upon their claims and agenda. Their goal, at all costs, is the downfall of the first African American President of the United States, reality, security, economy be damned. Debating upon fact and logic with these is a fools errand.

Good point... it's kind of useless to try to convince the conspiracy nuts... my goal is to keep the conspiracy nuts from convincing everybody else. Next thing you know, they'll have us all in a cave waiting for the sky to stop falling!

iI added the following to my (now flagged) post on the subject yesterday:

Folks, thousands of MDs, PhDs, critical specialists, immunologists, etc. have spent millions of dollars, and up to fifteen years in learning. I guarantee you that 99.999 percent of them will tell you that immunizations are safe, effective and essential. They will tell you that negative reactions to the vaccine (ANY vaccine) comprise less than one-tent of one percent of the population that received it. They will tell you that ANYone who refuses the vaccine based on stuff they read in supermarket magazines, internet conversation, hear on Oprah, or any other such non-professional sources, is a fool.

THESE PEOPLE DIDN'T GO THRU ALL THIS EDUCATION JUST TO LIE TO YOU!!!! WHY would you believe that for the past sixty years they've been conspiring to perpetrate some scientific falsehood on you, and dragging all the new graduates into the conspiracy as fast as they come out of school? Is that what you think? REALLY?!?

And I don't give a damn WHAT your halfwitted GP told you... If he thinks this vaccine is a bad idea, he's not keeping up with the journals, and you should find another GP.

And one fella said to me:

You keep looking at the phony data and trying to get people to use these untested drugs Chuck, I am sure their are many out there still falling for the same old scare tactics.

My response (to which no one replied - mebbe tonite):

WHO falsified the data, and HOW did they get the ENTIRE medical community AND the ENTIRE immunology establishment to join in and protect their conspiracy, year, after year, after year, as new an idealistic doctors and specialists were added to those groups?

HOW did they DO that, friend? How did they create a conspiracy that included tens of thousands of participants, and keep all of us BUT you, Marilyn and Linda A from finding out?

LOL
I run into all kinds of 'em at work, especially when I cover for a night shifter.
There's one guy who, in all seriousness, believes that when we "swipe" his ID through the credit card slot to verify that it's genuine (because company policy says we have to ID for alcohol purchase) the register calls the local police and sends a message that he is driving drunk. I am not kidding. The guy believes that if we swipe his card instead of just typing in his birth date (which flags the cashier with the company and we get into trouble if we do it too frequently) that the cops will come find him, pull him over, and cite him for DUI.
Of course, in order to believe this, he has to think that we've got an elaborate system set up which knows which police station to call and identifies which store called them, sends the data in an instant, and somehow manages to tell the cops not only who is buying the beer, but whether or not they are driving and where they are going.
Conspiracy theorists are usually short on logic and long on paranoia (or guilt.)

The problem with conspiracy theories is... ya gotta thimk 'em thru; and they've gotta hang together when you do. These don't.

...and the problem with conspiracy theorists is that they would rather blindly believe than think about it.

...and when they don't have the facts to back up their criticism, they downrate.
^_^

I read but didn't rate your post... Personally, after many years of vaccine history research and bringing it all up to current day, I believe your own touted "sources" to be a nescient conspiracy, in reverse of the facts......

That is typical of the Anti-Vaxx movement. The truth is in the above links - the Anti-Vaxx movement was started for the purpose of facilitating lawsuits. It was never about health. It was always about money. Everything the Anti-Vaxx crowd has claimed has been debunked, yet you guys are still trying to scare the "Average Joe" into risking their lives, their kids' lives, and their neighbors' lives based on absolute bunk.
If there's any conspiracy afoot, it's the Great Nutjob Conspiracy to Maim, Disable, and Kill Through the Spread of Preventable Diseases. You guys really are a trip.

And your sources are what exactly?? And your accepted "facts" are gleaned from who exactly?? Your own response is also typical of the medical cartel and big pharma's propaganda for obsene profit at any cost. You may wish to dig a bit deeper friend to reveal the actual truth concerning prescription drug company's motives, along with the ever increasing scientific research being presented to the public by reputable scientists and medical doctors concerning vaccines and prescription drugs and you may also find interesting, the actual charts throughout the history of these ever increasing vaccinations and what diseases their vaccine frenzy has actually prevented vs the harm done to the overall health of our nation's children and adults...

And are you also aware of these facts, Hannah? All multiple-dose vials of the H1N1 injectable vaccine contain up to 25 mcg/dose of mercury which is 250 times the EPA safety limit! A limited number of single dose vials will not contain mercury. Nasal spray vaccines do not contain mercury, but are live attenuated viruses, meaning they cannot be sterilized to remove hitchhiker viruses incubated along with the swine flu in egg cultures.

Some H1N1 vaccines also contains squalene, which when injected causes antibodies to our own body’s squalene, leading to joint inflammation and disease. The 1976 swine flu vaccine contained the deadly Guillain-Barre virus, which caused neurological disease, leading to paralysis, inability to breath, and death.

Most flu vaccines also contain: aluminum, phenol, ethylene glycol (antifreeze), detergents, disinfectants, and formaldehyde! By law, patients must be given information in writing about the risks and benefits of vaccination before a vaccine is administered.

Laura Power is a nutritional biochemist with 27 years experience in clinical and research nutrition. She is the owner of the Allergy & Nutrition Clinic in northern Virginia. She specializes in nutritional evaluation and therapy for: children with developmental delays and multiple adult conditions. www.laurapower.com.

One hundred years ago, infectious diseases were the leading cause of death in children, with diphtheria, measles, scarlet fever, and pertussis accounting for most. Conventional medical wisdom credits vaccines for wiping out these killers? Today the top reasons for the deaths of children younger than five are accidents, genetic abnormalities, developmental disorders, sudden infant death syndrome, and cancer.

Fifty years ago, when the vaccine schedule contained only FOUR vaccines (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis and smallpox), autism was virtually unknown. Today, one in every 68 families has a child with autism. Vaccine proponents do not address an important consideration. Could contracting childhood diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, and chicken pox play a constructive role in the maturation of a person’s immune system? Or, conversely, does removing them have any adverse consequences?

A 15-member Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) decides which vaccines should be on the Childhood Immunization Schedule. It calls for one vaccine, against hepatitis B, to be given on the day of birth; seven vaccines at two months; six more (including booster shots) at four months; and as many as eight vaccines on the six month well-baby visit. Seven vaccines injected into a 13 pound, two-month old infant are equivalent to 70 doses in a 130 pound adult.

Four doses each of vaccines for Hemophilus influenzae type b infections, diphtheria, tetanus (lockjaw) and pertussis (whooping cough) are recommended during the first 12 months of life. Before a child reaches the age of two he or she will have received 32 vaccinations on this schedule, including injections against polio, pneumococcal infections, measles, mumps, rubella (German measles), chickenpox, and influenza (the flu).

Health officials consider a vaccine to be safe if no bad reactions like seizures, intestinal obstruction, or anaphylaxis occur immediately and acutely. However, NO randomized, controlled trials have been done on the long-term effects of their immunization schedule!

What about administering 32 vaccines during the period in which 80 percent of a person’s brain development takes place? Human brains are known to form from the third trimester of pregnancy through the first two years of extra uterine life. Given this fact alone, perhaps it would be prudent to withhold any vaccinations until children are at least two years old.

The new field of neuroimmunology offers sufficient evidence to justify adopting a different vaccination schedule. Scientists know that the brain has its own specialized immune system, separate from that of the rest of the body. When a person is vaccinated, its specialized immune cells, the microglia, become activated. Multiple vaccinations, spaced close together over-stimulate the microglia, causing them to release a variety of toxic elements that damage brain cells and their synaptic connections. Researchers call the damage caused by these toxic substances "bystander injury." For more on this subject read the work of neurosurgeon, Russell Blaylock, MD online.

A User-Friendly Vaccination Schedule
No vaccinations until a child is two years old.
No vaccines should be given to a sick child or one who has taken antibiotics recently.
No vaccines containing thimerosal, which is 50 percent mercury;
No live virus vaccines (except for smallpox, should it recur). This includes the combined measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine; chickenpox (varicella) vaccine; and the live-virus polio (Sabin) vaccine.
Vaccines, if given after the age of two, should be injected only one at a time, no more than once every six months in order to allow the immune system sufficient time to recover and stabilize between shots. Allowable vaccines are acellular (aP), not whole cell, pertussis, diphtheria, tetanus, and Salk polio. I agree with Gary Null who recommends avoiding the three newest vaccines on the CDC’s schedule –hepatitis B, pneumococcal conjugate (PCV7), and Hemophilus influenzae type b (Hib).

Donald Miller is a cardiac surgeon and Professor of Surgery at the University of Washington in Seattle and a member of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness. His web site is www.donaldmiller.com

Conspiracy? Don't really know NOR do I care, however when one uses their brains adequately to research and realize the facts of all this foolish and often damaging vaccine frenzy, concerning vaccines, the truth has a way of slapping one in the face with some good ole common sence?

Sandy, my sources are listed above. You obviously didn't read them, or you wouldn't be posting the crap you just did about "the deadly Guillian-Barre virus."
You haven't offered any actual proof of anything of your above theories. The Thimerosol issue has already been debunked. No medical evidence of any damage has ever been found.
As far as adequately researching and realizing facts, I'm still waiting for you Anti-Vaxx nuts to do exactly that.
In the meantime, you have no right to interfere with other folks' childcare choices based on your own misguided beliefs.

What you call "interfering" lol... is actually a presentation of factual scientific evidence, hun..... Now, at last glance, although it's fading fast, this is STILL America and folks have a right to know ALL the information concerning ANY topic, INCLUDING vaccines, which then SHOULD enable them to make wiser and more INFORMED decisions and choices concerning their OWN heath and that of their loved ones... I could very easily say the same to you dear, "you have no right to interfere with one's FREE choices based on your own "misguided beliefs." lol.

And you state that your sources are listed above? Yes, I did read them and that was exactly what prompted my question to you... Allow me to rephrase that and claify it for you a wee bit. My question was exactly "who" is behind and actually at the root of the rhetoric being touted by your "sources?"

You're not actually presenting what you claim. You still haven't provided sources, and you're advocating a position based on absolutely nothing. Spreading unwarranted hysteria under the guise of providing valid information and insisting that others don't have the right to accept genuine scientific and medical fact because you feel that your statements are more valid is is an act of inflicting your viewpoint on the general population is interfering with the right of the layman to make informed choices. Spreading misinformation as you are doing is a disservice. Your movement is responsible for the resurgence of preventable diseases which should have been gone by now.
What you refer to as wise and informed decisions are, in fact, foolish and misguided choices.
You have demonstrated your mindset by even posting your comments in this particular thread... the post itself is about one very specific set of false beliefs regarding the H1N1 vaccine. Your comment doesn't even address the subject matter of the post, but skips directly to anti-vaccine propaganda.

As for my sources, the "who" of both sides are described in the text of various parts of the sources you claim to have read. Apparently you missed that.

Wow, lost another line in the posting. "that your statements are more valid is is an act" should have been "that your statements are more valid is not helping others make informed and wiser choices. It is an act..."

Once again, text is disappearing after I hit the submit button. O.o

... "is interfering" should have read "and is interfering"

I'm not a big fan of Obama, but wasn't the virus around before him?

Yes and no. There were flu viruses which were similar - combinations of bird, swine, and human flu - before Obama. The well-known versions were the 1976 outbreak (mass vaccinations, few flu deaths) and the 1918/19 pandemic (no vaccine, massive numbers of flu deaths.) H1N1 looks like it originated early this year in Mexico. In order to create it in a lab, scientists would have had to start much earlier than the Obama administration's time frame, but those who believe he's responsible for the disease usually ignore such logic, as their desire to believe overrules their desire for truth.

wow thanks for the information and the laugh (I got a mental picture of what drug companies trolling abortion clinics would look like!)

Thanks ^_^
Yeah, the mental image is kinda funny... I can see a Smedley-esque individual representing the companies, skulking around the back doors of brick buildings twirling his mustache while waiting for men and women in scrubs to hand out the latest "product." :P

first ones free

Some people don't have a grasp on a couple of ideas.
verifiable fact
credible source

To them, if they agree with it, it is a fact.
If they agree with the agenda of the source, they consider it credible, simple.

Sensible post hannah.

Thanks, Cena. I've noticed exactly what your talking about.

"Some people don't have a grasp on a couple of ideas.verifiable fact credible source"

Thanks, Ladies... I've noticed exactly the same thing... But after all, folks still do have some freedoms of choice and it is my hope that more of them will arm themselves and those freedoms with the more unbiased and much more accurate scientific information that's being presented for their consideration today.... LOT'S will ride on it....The choice is still their's to make...

Actual scientific studies - credible source.
Individual opinion - not so much, regardless of the individual's educational credentials.

Until you prove a theory, it's just a theory. The overwhelming lack of real evidence of harm done by vaccines leaves the Anti-Vaxx movement with nothing but empty conjecture and fear-mongering. Conversely, the preventable diseases for which those vaccines exist have a history which is known and verified. Still, those in the movement will not only continue to believe as they choose regardless of the facts, but demonstrate an obsessive compulsion to bully others into joining their little cult.

A MUCH bigger and more accurate picture can be pieced together, if one chooses to put forth the effort to uncover it?
Fear-mongering by government has but one objective. That is to expand the power of the state over the individual. Over time, mainly due to the government indoctrination centers, (the public school system) this country has become a place that lives and breathes in the collective. It is all about the public good or the good of society. This thinking in effect has destroyed the sanctity of the individual. This is the major problem facing us, for as long as the "good of society" trumps over the rights of the individual, we are doomed to a socialistic existence, which simply means freedom be damned! This entire fear-mongering campaign by government is intentional, is propaganda driven, and depends fully on the cooperation of the masses, of which you are one. This is why real dissent and individualism is forcibly squelched by the state at every opportunity, and why examples are being made of those who question then buck the system. the majority in this country are simply a collective herd of sheep and fully dependent on the government apparatus for their very existence.
They have given up their individual freedom for protection and support by the state. Only a return to individualism and self-reliance can allow us to escape this serf-like malaise. Without this change in thinking, the fear-mongering state will get what it desires, while the people will get what they deserve. FEAR MONGERING

Sandy, you can rant and rave all you like, but the truth is, everything you've said here is nothing but a bunch of crap. Your disjointed and wandering preaching doesn't make your case at all, except with those who all ready believe what you do, and those who are easily manipulated.
You call people sheep for not choosing to believe your crap. You post accusations without actual sources for most of your information, and only radical, far-out sources for the rest. Your last link here, about the "vaccine pied pipers" is a good case in point - it leads to a page on the website of one Lew Rockwell, who describes himself as "Anti-State." Regardless of how one feels about the term "anti-state," its presence on his home page definitely signifies an agenda.
The man has nothing to do with the Mayo clinic, and you provide no link which does. Again, not a credible source.

Your Anti-Vaxx spiel in response to a post aimed at debunking myths which are not related to your statements and encouraging individuals to include their own physicians in any decisions they make regarding this medical choice only shows you to be a fanatic bent on convincing everyone to follow you. You accuse others of being sheep if and only if they don't flock to the Anti-Vaxx movement like... well, like a bunch of sheep. You are everything you have called me, and you do everything you've tried to say I'm doing. Your lies and nonsensical ramblings haven't been deleted only so that others can see how ridiculous and far-out the Anti-Vaxx movement really is.

This comment is to let you know that this content has reached at least ten comments, and as such has been removed from Comment Speedway! Congratulations!

To more deeply review and futher educate yourself on the pros and cons of all that is going on with this "pandemic" and "vaccine" scare tactics, read more and then decide for yourselves? ALL ABOUT VACCINES AND GOVERNMENT SCARE TACTICS

I did decide for my self I chose not to get the shot, but there is a reason, a medical one. Also for medical reasons one of my children is getting the shot. Also for medical reasons no one may enter my house for one week after the inhaler version.
These are all medical reasons, not because I am afraid of my government, I am, but for totally separate reasons.

Sandy, you can rant and rave all you like, but the truth is, everything you've said here is nothing but a bunch of crap. Your disjointed and wandering preaching doesn't make your case at all, except with those who all ready believe what you do, and those who are easily manipulated.
You call people sheep for not choosing to believe your crap. You post accusations without actual sources for most of your information, and only radical, far-out sources for the rest. Your last link here, about the "vaccine pied pipers" is a good case in point - it leads to a page on the website of one Lew Rockwell, who describes himself as "Anti-State." Regardless of how one feels about the term "anti-state," its presence on his home page definitely signifies an agenda.
The man has nothing to do with the Mayo clinic, and you provide no link which does. Again, not a credible source.

Your Anti-Vaxx spiel in response to a post aimed at debunking myths which are not related to your statements and encouraging individuals to include their own physicians in any decisions they make regarding this medical choice only shows you to be a fanatic bent on convincing everyone to follow you. You accuse others of being sheep if and only if they don't flock to the Anti-Vaxx movement like... well, like a bunch of sheep. You are everything you have called me, and you do everything you've tried to say I'm doing. Your lies and nonsensical ramblings haven't been deleted only so that others can see how ridiculous and far-out the Anti-Vaxx movement really is.

How's the Mayo Clinic suit you, Hanah, for just one of MANY "credible" references?? Doesn't appear that you are doing much "sincere" homework before you post your "own" opinion?
The Mayo Clinic researchers say that the sequential use of one drug, such as Tamiflu initially, followed by amantidine when Tamiflu resistance occurs, is inherently flawed. The researchers say "the use of single-drug anti-viral drug therapy against influenza is unwise and dangerous." These strong comments, published in the May 2009 issue of Communicable Infectious Diseases, have drawn little or no attention from public news sources.The long dreaded H5N1 flu virus, with a 60% death rate, fizzled when it was found it is not transmitted very well from human to human. But suddenly a contaminated vaccine which combined the deadly H5N1 with more transmissible seasonal flu strains was found by Biotest, a vaccine distributor in the Czech Republic, when it was tested in ferrets and it killed all of them. [The Canadian Press February 27, 2009] The maker of that H5N1/H1N1 contaminated flu vaccine, Baxter, had filed a patent a year prior describing a method to produce vaccines in multiple species using several different antigens (US patent: US 2009/0060950 A1). Safeguards should have prevented this contamination, which suggests the contamination was intentional. It is just too coincidental that French President Nicolas Sarkozy visited Mexico and announced a new $126 million facility by French drug manufacturer Sanofi-Aventis at the same time the H1N1-09 swine flu outbreak broke onto the scene. President Barack Obama visited Mexico the week prior to the flu outbreak there.
There is a cozy relationship here where the World Health Organization prematurely declares a pandemic which coerces more than 80 governments to purchase flu vaccines and then public health authorities invoke mandatory flu vaccination programs for school children and become the free sales agents for the vaccine makers. The vaccine makers then funnel profits back to the politicians in the form of political contributions which are veiled kickbacks. Read the entire "factual" article? WHERE ARE THE VACCINE PIED PIPERS LEADING US?

Sandy, you can rant and rave all you like, but the truth is, everything you've said here is nothing but a bunch of crap. Your disjointed and wandering preaching doesn't make your case at all, except with those who all ready believe what you do, and those who are easily manipulated.
You call people sheep for not choosing to believe your crap. You post accusations without actual sources for most of your information, and only radical, far-out sources for the rest. Your last link here, about the "vaccine pied pipers" is a good case in point - it leads to a page on the website of one Lew Rockwell, who describes himself as "Anti-State." Regardless of how one feels about the term "anti-state," its presence on his home page definitely signifies an agenda.
The man has nothing to do with the Mayo clinic, and you provide no link which does. Again, not a credible source.

Your Anti-Vaxx spiel in response to a post aimed at debunking myths which are not related to your statements and encouraging individuals to include their own physicians in any decisions they make regarding this medical choice only shows you to be a fanatic bent on convincing everyone to follow you. You accuse others of being sheep if and only if they don't flock to the Anti-Vaxx movement like... well, like a bunch of sheep. You are everything you have called me, and you do everything you've tried to say I'm doing. Your lies and nonsensical ramblings haven't been deleted only so that others can see how ridiculous and far-out the Anti-Vaxx movement really is.

hannah, when did sharing any medical advice, opinions, published journals from reputable sources (whether or not they meet another's own personal credibility criteria) become ranting and raving? why do you insist on making this personal with your name calling? I called you nothing and if you took something I said to imply an attack on you personally, as you are obviously attempting to degrade and do to me, then that's your own misconception, your pride and further, your mistake.... You asked for credible refs? Lew-Rockwell is merely ONE of thousands available to you and others and the professionals that belong to and write about and for these organizations, (which, btw, reference links to original source material ARE provided, in ANY and ALL published studies posted, included in those reports) so don't you believe folks have the right and the intelligence to research, confirm or deny them for themselves and thus make their own decisions. Why are practicing contempt prior to investigation??? Are you also against more informed free choice just because that information does'nt agree with your's??? Why would you be so against others researching and determining for themselves what is acceptable to them or not??? You are as much set in your beliefs and opinions as I and millions of others in this country are. ..... However, we ALL have the freedom of speech to express those views, beliefs and opinions without having them ridiculed in such a blantant manner.......Further, you may be interested or not, in knowing that I am NOT entirely anti-vax... However, I AM against OVER VACCINATION, VACCINATION OF CHILDREN UNDER 2 YRS OF AGE, WITH DANGEROUS AND MANY TOXIC VACCINES AND ADMINISTERED AT THE TIME OF THEIR LIVES WHEN THEIR LITTLE BRAINS ARE STILL DEVELOPING! This practice is RAMPANT today and increasing quickly and btw, due to many professional's scientific research, responsible for much of our youth's shameful medical status! AND FUTHER, I AM against government control over our personal lives. If you wish to allow government to dictate your every move or else, then that's your choice, it's NOT my own nor is it the choice of millions of other Americans! It's something I am NOT eager to have happen. So there is a difference and you may wish to school yourself a bit more on that difference between "anti-vax and common sence?

You are not offering a more informed free choice. You've posted anti-vaccine propaganda as a reply to a post debunking myths, not a pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine post.
You're arguing against a subject other than the subject of the post.
Your comments contain long rants against vaccines with allegations regarding the contents and their alleged effects, all with no support from any reliable or credible source.
You called everyone who doesn't buy into your viewpoint sheep. I don't, therefore you called me a sheep. I contend that the name fits you better, because you have bought into the anti-vaxx hysteria, and have demonstrated the desire to maintain that belief rather than learn the facts.
You've accused me of rejecting your information only because it disagrees with my point, and for no other reason, despite its nature... all after having done exactly that yourself when you labeled my sources part of a conspiracy in order to feel justified in ignoring the information presented there.
And yes, I consider that all to be ranting and raving, and no, I can't take anything you've written seriously or consider it anything other than ridiculous.

Freedom of speech as a right does not guarantee the right to be believed, taken seriously, or permitted to not have your viewpoint questioned or argued against. It doesn't even guarantee the right to be heard. You seem to think that you have the right to argue your point in response to my post, but I do not have the right to disagree with you. Your comments indicate a belief that disagreement with your viewpoint and questioning or rejection of your decidedly poorly qualified sources of information equals some sort of censorship. It doesn't.
Your comments carry the attitude of one who feels entitled to require others to be persuaded by your viewpoint regardless of the origin of your information. You're not entitled. You're as free as anyone else on Gather to write a post on this (leaving my name out of it, as per TOS) and decide whether or not to allow a dissenting viewpoint, but you do not get to prohibit disagreement with your comments on my post.
You're not really even entitled to use my post, as you have been, as a forum for your personal vendetta against vaccines. Site rules give me the right to delete all of your comments. If I were trying to censor you, I'd have done that, and changed the settings on this post to prevent you from spouting any more anti-vaxx propaganda. I didn't, and I won't. I think it's important for others to see the true nature of the anti-vaxx movement, and you've done a great job of providing an accurate example.

I think each person should get to decide for him/her self. As long as no one forces us or keeps us from taking the drug... have at it.. There is risk in everything, some people choose not to "gamble". Some choose to take one risk over some other risk.

With so much propaganda going around on both sides, it gets really hard to tell what is real and what is "opinion".

I agree, Nora........ That's where through, unbiased and intelligent individual research should come onto center stage..... If folks have ALL information available to them, pertaining to any topic, they stand more prepared to make their own informed choices of what's best for them and their loved ones..... That opportunity is squashed or ceases to exist if much of the modern, available studies, ones that may even go against mainstream medical's rules and thinking, are thawarted, condemed or kept from the public eye... "We're not in Kansas anymore Toto" Motives have and increasingly changing from what once began as potentionaly benificial and first do no harm, to now, mega profits and God knows what else drives all this insanity!

That is why I always go beyond the initial page when checking someone's link. As I found above, the "credible" source for one side or the other of an argument often turns out to be an individual with either no credentials, or without related credentials, who has an agenda and often a radical viewpoint.
When most of one side's "credible" sources turn out to be sites like that, and most of the other side's sources are certified, accredited, or otherwise qualified authorities on the subject, (such as scientists, doctors, legal experts, etc. depending on the subject) then I know which side to believe.

The important thing people need to remember when trying to sort out a discussion like this is that not all "information" presented is factual.
It's vital that readers check and trace sources, and when possible, learn the history of the debate beyond the forum in which they've found it.

You both made good points. And yes, in considering all aspects, we need to consider whether or not someone or expert or whatever entity "has a dog in that race" in giving advice on which "dog" to bet on. Good old common sense.

I agree, Hannah and Nora.. I changed or deleted a few articles that I had posted through the years which were further researched and scrutinized, sometimes by another reader and sometimes by myself and upon closer inspection, revealed some questionable information. I believe most folks do their level best to present quality, fact filled articles concerning this and other subjects, with intent of educating others. Errors can and do happen to the best intentioned poster, thus the important need to further research any and all information presented as oppossed to simply accepting any of it..

The Anti-Vaxx movement, started in England, began with a "dog in that race," and it's been that way ever since.
That story is traceable through these two links:

Brian Deer: The Wakefield Factor (part two)
Dr. Andrew Wakefield is the father of the Anti-Vaxx movement. His "study," the results of which he claimed to be evidence that thimerosal in vaccines causes Autism, has been debunked to the point of drowning. The most telling part of Mr. Deer's article is the beginning of part two:
"Nine months before Andrew Wakefield and London's Royal Free hospital medical school unleashed a global scare over the MMR vaccine, they filed, on June 5 1997, the first of a string of patent claims for theoretically vastly profitable products which could only succeed if MMR's reputation was damaged. These included a purported safer measles vaccine - a potential competitor - and treatments for bowel disease and autism. All were based on claims that measles virus in MMR was at fault."

There's your dog... the almighty dollar.

Ok, the second link didn't post:
MMR DOCTOR GIVEN LEGAL AID THOUSANDS
"ANDREW WAKEFIELD, the former surgeon whose campaign linking the MMR vaccine with autism caused a collapse in immunisation rates, was paid more than £400,000 by lawyers trying to prove that the vaccine was unsafe. "

Again Hannah, wouldn't it be wiser and more educational for readers, if the entire story, research, findings and all the information concerning Dr. Andrew Wakefield were presented here and/or researched in full, instead of merely posting this one claim made against him? There's LOTS more to the story..

Did I see "lawyers"??? AAAhhh there's the rub!

Nora, Yes, you saw lawyers.
There is also the fact that the "study" on which the entire anti-vaxx movement was based wasn't even a study. It was based on his treatment of 12 autistic kids with gastrointestinal problems.

Also, while looking for an old comment with more links, including this one

Andrew Wakefield, From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I returned to a post where I've argued this issue before, only to find variations on several of the above "points" posted there, too... Sandy, I see that I've argued this with you previously, proved you wrong previously, debunked your sources previously, and yet you are still spouting the same crap.
You're not gathering knowledge to make an informed choice. You've picked a stance and are going to argue it to death, regardless of the facts.

I remember you from this post:
Ah, the Good Ol' (Unbelievably Dangerous) Pre-Vaccination Days

Since the discussion has taken this turn, I feel perfectly justified in making an old post into a looong comment:

The purpose of this post is to provide some clarification on some of the myths I've been hearing about Vaccines. There are a lot of links in the post, some of which are right next to each other with only punctuation and a space between. These links lead to online articles which have information supporting the statements in the post.

MYTH: Vaccines contain ANTIFREEZE! (ethylene glycol)
FACT: Some Vaccines contain an organic chemical compound, the name of which is can be misread by the layman as meaning the same thing as antifreeze: Phenoxyethanol, an organic chemical compound. Flu vaccine contains polyethylene glycol, (not the same as ethylene glycol) which is found in many products marketed for human use, including laxatives and toothpaste. Chicken Pox vaccine contains ethylene-diamine-tetraacetic-acid, an amino acid with numerous uses including the treatment of lead poisoning. It is described by Answers.com as "Any of a family of colorless liquids with high molecular weight that are soluble in water and in many organic solvents and are used in detergents and as emulsifiers and plasticizers." According to the Columbia Encyclopedia portion of the entry, "Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is used to thicken shampoo and cosmetics" and can be added to medicines for various reasons, such as in the case of interferon, in which it is used to prevent the immune system from causing the body to reject the medicine. These are definitely not the same thing as Antifreeze, which would have no medical purpose for inclusion in the serum. Why would a company trying to make a profit spend money adding an unnecessary and only harmful ingredient to a product they want people to continue to use over the long term? Wouldn't that be wasting money?
Also, according to Medicinenet.com's article Definition of Antifreeze Poisoning, "Ethylene glycol is itself relatively nontoxic. However, it is metabolized (changed) in the body by the enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase into glycolic acid, glyoxylic acid and oxalic acid, which are highly toxic compounds." In other words, the terrible effects associated with Antifreeze won't occur unless and until it hits your digestive system, something which would not occur from a shot in the arm or leg, anyway.

MYTH: Vaccines contain dangerous levels of poisonous FORMALDEHYDE!
FACT: This is another example of failure to understand the nature of a substance.
According to immune.org, Formaldehyde is not just an industrial substance which, on exposure, poisons the body. In fact, a form of it is naturally produced by the human body. It is also found in the air we breathe and the food we eat.
According to the article Common Anti-Vaccination Myths and Misconceptions from insidevaccines.com, the Formaldehyde used in vaccines, like the Formaldehyde found in your body, is chemically different from commercial Formaldehyde. From the article:
"Formaldehyde in our bodies = H2CO (natural)
Formaldehyde in vaccines = H2CO (synthetic)
Formaldehyde in embalming fluid = H2CO+CH3OH+CH3CH2OH+solvents
Formaldehyde in plywood = H2CO+NH2CONH2+CH3OH+HCOOH+H2O"


MYTH: MERCURY in Vaccines causes AUTISM and ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE
FACT: The Alzheimer's/Vaccine myth began with one statement made by one doctor during a speech at a conference, according to Common Anti-Vaccination Myths and Misconceptions from insidevaccines.com. Dr. Fudenberg based his statement of opinion regarding thimerosal in vaccines on the effects of the accumulation of aluminum and mercury on the human brain.
The Autism/Vaccine myth began with an associate of Dr. Fudenberg, Andrew Wakefield. Wakefield's work on the Autism/Vaccine connection has been discredited, and the idea of that connection was contradicted by a statement issued by 10 of the 13 writers of the original study's conclusions.
Further, this article on a 2008 study explains that it is unlikely for mercury toxicity from vaccines to occur at all: Infants Eliminate Mercury In Vaccines Faster Than Previously Thought - It Does Not Have Time To Build Up In Babies' Bodies.
This was not an unexpected finding. according to the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, "Thimerosal -- a preservative still used in the influenza vaccine --contains a different form of mercury called ethylmercury. Studies comparing ethylmercury and methylmercury suggest that they are processed differently in the human body. Ethylmercury is broken down and excreted much more rapidly than methylmercury. Therefore, ethylmercury (the type of mercury in the influenza vaccine) is much less likely than methylmercury (the type of mercury in the environment) to accumulate in the body and cause harm.
In other words, it won't build up in the brain because it doesn't stay in the body long enough.
The Children's Hospital article goes on to state that "Methylmercury is found in low levels in water, infant formula and breast milk. Although it is clear that large quantities of mercury can damage the nervous system, there is no evidence that the small quantities contained in water, infant formula and breast milk do. An infant who is exclusively breast-fed will ingest more than twice the quantity of mercury that was ever contained in vaccines and 15 times the quantity of mercury contained in the influenza vaccine." (emphasis added by me)
Unless the anti-vaccine crowd wants to argue that breastfeeding causes Autism or Alzheimer's, the association of those disorders with vaccines makes no sense.
Another point in the argument against the Autism myth is the recent finding of another study, though it is a small study and needs to be repeated before anyone gets too excited about it:
Early Signs of Autism May Be Present at Birth
As the article states, the study brings up the possibility of early intervention, which could be extremely valuable to autistic children. It also brings up the possibility that the disorder is present before any vaccinations are ever administered.

MYTH: The MMR Vaccine is full of dangerous ingredients like ALUMINUM, BLEACH, and MSG!
FACT: Actual ingredients of MMR Vaccine:
Amino Acids,
Bovine Albumin or Serum, (protein made by the liver)
Chick Embryo Fibroblasts, (a culture medium)
Human Serum Albumin, (protein made by the liver)
Gelatin,
Glutamate, (neurotransmitter, not to be confused with MSG, which is more than just glutamate)
Neomycin, (antibiotic)
Phosphate Buffers, (maintain PH)
Sodium Chloride, (salt)
Sorbitol, (an alcohol)
Sucrose, (a sugar)
Vitamins

This is not the list you will see on the anti-vaccine sites. It's the actual ingredients as explained in the manufacturer's insert, page 1.

Finally, I'd like to point out a couple of interesting articles on the history of the anti-vaccine movement:
Brian Deer: The Wakefield Factor
Newsweek: Anatomy of a Scare, by Sharon Begley
Further links can be found At this location

One problem common to both the Anti-Vaxx movement and all Conspiracy theorists: The failure to apply Occam’s Razor in the decision making process involved with their conclusions on their respective subjects.
What is Occam's Razor?
It's a rule to use when choosing between two different explanations for something.
The best explanation I've seen is HERE
The other problem with both of the above is that when actual measurable physical evidence is presented against their theory, rather than give up on Rockley's "milk fairy," they become angry with the cat.

"You're not gathering knowledge to make an informed choice. You've picked a stance and are going to argue it to death, regardless of the facts."

There are two sides to the vaccine story that you do not acknowledge. You do not address or even mention the ever increasing deaths and damage now being incurred by millions of children and their parents nationwide. That which you so callusly accuse me of is exactly what you are doing.. You have chosen your stance on this subject and further, are presenting your own take and often mistaken views of our nation's current health crisis and much of the root of it, by presenting biased mainstream sources that are intent on reflecting your own opinion of the situation. If you trust the cdc, the fda, big pharma and mainstream medicine as a whole, then you are entitled to do so. You speak badly of Dr. Wakefied? Have you ever seriously researched Dr Offit and HIS motives and kickbacks? I assume he may be one of your idols and/or sources?? There is a stark difference between their motives... Not to mention the hundreds of other professionals who dare to speak out against the ongoing assult of our nation's children via overvaccination and the heavy load of toxins that are being injected into their bloodstream!

Hannah, have you failed to note or even researched at all, the current health of our nation's children?? THAT in itself, paints the true picture of the reality. This includes crib death, behaviorly disadvantaged children, seizures,adhd, cancers,diabetes, allergies,athsma, intestional ruin, ect,ect,ect, THAT alone tells a much different story than the one you are attempting to present via mainstream's chess game of spin, misinformation and downright deceipt. Would you have an intelligent opinion and/or explaination for THIS reality? Again, I would urge you AND others to unbiasly and intelligently research ALL the information, the history of vaccine use, all the doctors and scientists, both pro and con, who are now stepping up to the base and proclaiming what they believe and have found to be facts due to their research. Many professionals are doing so, despite their risk of being blackballed by government, mainstream medical and the big pharma industries who btw, stand to loose mega profits and incur huge lawsuits if these truths gets out and are finally understood by the public! That's the difference between us, friend. I encourage others to question and will often provide links and search engine pages for them to begin their research...... the rest is up to them...While you ridicule and attempt to debunk any and all information sources that reflect a different view than your own. Maybe you are employed in the medical field or for a pharmacutical company? I am not......

"There are two sides to the vaccine story that you do not acknowledge. You do not address or even mention the ever increasing deaths and damage now being incurred by millions of children and their parents nationwide."

Actually, I have researched the anti-vaxx movement extensively. There is no threat at all from receiving vaccines. The same stuff gets repeated over and over by the same people, all from one of three groups: Lawyers trying to make a buck by inciting people into malpractice lawsuits, "alternative health" profiteers, and those few individuals who have been taken in by their hype.

You write as if your sources, by virtue of being non-mainstream, are unbiased and therefore pure and factual. You are either mistaken, or you are associated with them in some way. Maybe you sell some kind of alternative product for a living, since you so foolishly accuse me of being employed by your chosen enemy in this discussion.

I don't have to attempt to debunk your claims or your sources. They've all ready been debunked over and over, because they are false.
The fact that you want there to be a problem does not create one, and the fact that you want what you say to be true does not make it true. No matter how many ultra-long rants you type, your sources will still be flawed, your logic will still be flawed, and you will still be wrong.

The current health of our nation's children is better than it was before vaccines. To say otherwise is ridiculous. To attribute health problems to vaccines without proof (and you have no proof) is also ridiculous. I'd like to explain your reality, but since it isn't real, the only explanation is that you are delusional.

And by the way, I'm employed by a corporation which has absolutely no connection with the medical, pharmicutical, or alternative health industry.

...and, case-in-point. You've demonstrated exactly what the original comment in this thread pointed out; rather than accept that there might not be a milk-fairy, you're angry with the cat, and willing to verbally attack anyone who points him out.

Hannah, To paint the picture more vividly for you, we have a problem in this country which is far more deadly than any terrorist attack, far more devastating than every day people even realize.......Each and every year that problem claims more lives than the total death toll from most wars.

I'm talking about America's escalating health crisis. Statistically, if you are a man, the lifetime probability that you will get cancer is 44%. It's not much better for women. They have a 39% chance. More than one in three women will get cancer during their lifetime. Despite the fact that the National Cancer Institute has claimed that we are winning the war against cancer, the fact is that the number of incidents has increased by a whopping 56% for men and 22% for women, all within a single generation.

If this is considered winning, I'd hate to see what your definition of losing would be.

On any given day, over 1,500 people will die of cancer. Over 710,000 people will die this year alone from heart disease.

Diabetes, which is steadily increasing (over 400% in the past 20 years), and throw in obesity, strokes, AIDS, and respiratory disorders, you begin to get a glimpse of the health problems we're currently facing in this country. WHY? (research it for yourself)
How much money has been donated in the past fifty years toward the research of these issues? It certainly has to be in the billions of dollars. Have you ever stopped to wonder why we're worse off today, health-wise, than we were fifty years ago? (research THAT for yourself)

Today, we have more hospitals, MORE VACCINES, more doctors, more drugs, and more health research organizations than we could have ever imagined fifty years ago. And yet our health crisis rages on. MORE cases of cancer. MORE cases of heart disease, diabetes, respiratory problems, and on and on it goes.

Can you think of any compelling reason or evidence that would lead you to believe that the medical and pharmacutical industry, (as it exists today) will EVER come up with cures or reasonable solutions to these major issues, much less the minor ones??? (Something wrong with this picture, would you agree?)

As conspiratorial as it may sound, the medical industry is big business.
Although I do have utmost respect for doctors. They have chosen a profession to help people, which is more than most folks can say. However, look at the numbers for a moment and consider what would happen to this country's economy if most diseases were suddenly cured?? The very thing that fuels the pharmaceutical industry is earnings. And earnings don't come from well people...

The industry as a whole and that INCLUDES vaccines, is not being responsible, and the FDA is only partially, if at all, looking out for our interest, while giving a brief nod to the shareholders who sit on their advisory committees. (research that for yourself)

Here's what they could and SHOULD be doing, according to the gloomy statistics....... Funding studies that explore other venues of health to treat and cure disease, WITHOUT the ever increasing use of vaccines and drugs. They should be aggressively looking for alternatives to high cost drugs and medical procedures that drive up the cost of health care in this country. But, sad to say, allopathic medicine is currently the healthcare god and change won't happen until we, the people get ourselves properly informed and take a stand.
Naturally they would want you to think anything else is quackery. The very foundation they are standing on though, IS starting to crumble. All one has to do is look at the statistics and casualties of our modern health care system. Couple that with the fact that it brings in much more than 15% of the Gross Domestic Product and you have a formula for one DEFENSIVE bunch of folks! (are you in that defensive group?) Is it any wonder that mainstream medical attempts to INVALIDATE all things natural and are trying to tout QUACKERY and make people feel silly for even considering anything less than their medical god of the land?

A report and book named "Death By Medicine" (Oct. 2003), written by FIVE doctors, is the most comprehensive report on the true state of U.S. healthcare ever conducted.

Death by Medicine, covers the prior 10 year period and delivers some startling news. For just this 10 year period, the number of iatrogenic deaths (that is, deaths that were induced inadvertently) by patients of allopathic medicine stand at 7,841,360

That's over three-quarters of a million people dying per year. Remember, these aren't natural deaths, but mistakes made by allopathic practitioners and health care workers.
SO WHO'S PRACTICING QUACKERY? (research that for yourself)

Yet if there were even one death that occurred because of negligence from a naturopathic doctor there would be a media circus followed by a burning at the stake. Does this sound anything to you like a double standard? (research that for yourself)

The numbers of unnecessary interventions during the same 10 year period? including deaths as well as others that did not die. 164 million!
Doctors, overall, are trying to do the best they can with the tools they have. This is true. So then, with these statistics glaring them in the face, let them start exploring other tools, rather than the so often faulty ones that allopathic medicine has burdened us with for way too long.

Would it shock you to know that use of prescription drugs is the fourth leading cause of death in the United States at 106,000 people per year? I'm not talking about drug abuse or overdose, but rather, appropriately administered, FDA-approved drugs. (research it for yourself) Some company is promoting a drug you can barely pronounce, which you have very little idea what it's even for (yet they encourage you to "ask your doctor about it" - marketing at its finest) and then a narrator quickly rambles off a list of issues that may arise because of using this fine product? The FDA forms advisory committees made up of doctors and scientists to help determine these things. But many of these people are shareholders and have a vested interest in the very companies that manufacture the drugs they are approving. INCLUDING VACCINES......

By any standards, this is a blatant conflict of interest and we, the people, often become the guinea pigs. Those who readily pay for decisions that are often fueled more by greed than a genuine concern for public health. People are by nature self-serving. Given the opportunity, nine times out of ten, people will vote to benefit themselves financially rather than stand up for something moral when the two are contrary to one another.

It's no wonder the FDA is currently working right now to undermine and regulate any natural supplements and to take away our freedom to choose anything other than their drugs. (have you researched this topic?)

And when it comes to hurting others for the sake of profit, this is morally, absolutely, and unequivocally WRONG. It is the very essence of corruption, and evil.

Yes, I DO have my views as you do, however, my own have evolved from many years of researching, PERSONAL experience with family which primarily include my parents, 5 children and 10 grandchildren between the years of 1969 through today! My opinions are NOT based on mere personal views. Rather, they are based on FACTS, gained through EXPERIENCE and RESEARCH that have proven sound and true, so I advise folks to NOT throw out the baby with the bath water! All folks reading posts such as this owe it to themselves to further research ALL the information, however, it's one's own decisions to make for now, that is.......

"And when it comes to hurting others for the sake of profit, this is morally, absolutely, and unequivocally WRONG. It is the very essence of corruption, and evil."

That is what the Anti-Vaxx movement is all about; hurting others for the sake of profit; namely the profit of lawyers and Big Herba - those who profit from the practice "Alternative Health" and distribution of products associated with it.
These folks can't make a profit without attempting to discredit real, working medicine. The Anti-Vaxx movement is nothing but a symptom of that fact.

I can't believe you said that!! That makes me sick to my stomach and vividly reveals that you have your head clean up your ass!! Tell that to the millions of parents that haven't NOR intend on seeking financial recourse over the deaths and/or illness of their children!!!

...and there you have the true nature of the Anti-Vaxx nut. When their arguments fall short, they resort to verbal abuse.

There are not millions of parents involved in the Anti-Vaxx movement. The movement is a fringe group with no credibility. There are also not millions of parents with children suffering due to anything to do with vaccines. Therefore, there is no "millions" of anyone to tell that to.
There are, however, individuals who have suffered because of the misinformation campaign put out by the Anti-Vaxx movement.
Preventable diseases have been seeing a resurgence since the '90s when the movement really took hold. Those who profit by working against modern medicine rather than alongside it are hurting others for the sake of profit. That includes the founding father of the movement, the lawyers he's involved with, everyone who has written and sold an anti-vaxx book, appeared on a talk show to spread the anti-vaxx propaganda, and even garnered points on a social site posting said propaganda.

I have a couple of questions that I have asked before but never gotten any answers to;
1. If the mercury in vaccines was not harmful, why did they take it out?

2. What causes a child that is developing "normally" to regress after receiving 25 shots before the age of 3? (Yeah, I know this first hand, happened to my neice.)

3. What is the harm in spacing out the vaccinations in children?

4. What is the incident rate of Autism among the Amish who do not vaccinate?

1. If the mercury in vaccines was not harmful, why did they take it out?

A. They took it out due to P.R.
It has been repeatedly proved that thimerosol cannot be the cause of Autism. The only reason to remove it was the anti-vaxx hysteria, which became loud enough to cause action when Oprah featured a former porn star's anti-vaxx hysterics on her show.

2. What causes a child that is developing "normally" to regress after receiving 25 shots before the age of 3? (Yeah, I know this first hand, happened to my neice.)
A broad variety of causes for Autism and other mental disabilities have been identified, most of which are genetic or environmental. No link to vaccines and Autism or any other illness has been proven. On the other hand, scientists are beginning to discover that there are signs of Autism, which normally isn't diagnosed until around age three due to the nature of child development, may be identifiable much earlier.

3. What is the harm in spacing out the vaccinations in children?
That is like asking why bother looking both ways before crossing the street. Spacing out vaccines creates the chance that children may be exposed to dangerous communicable diseases before having been vaccinated.

4. What is the incident rate of Autism among the Amish who do not vaccinate?
The Amish do not seek medical help except in extreme cases. There are not any definitive numbers regarding Autism because it is not something for which they would seek diagnosis and treatment.

Two links, the first one showing why the Amish don't make a good case study on anything medical with reference to the general population, and the second an interesting article on early signs of Autism:

Genetic Disorders Hit Amish Hard


Early Signs of Autism May Be Present at Birth

One more, related to your second question:

Detecting Signs of Autism (Why Pediatricians Miss the Signs of Autism)
From the article:
"Our pediatrician is a good friend, and a highly experienced doctor. But when we brought our son in for his regular three-year checkup, he saw no developmental red flags.

Our son was diagnosed with Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS) six months later. This time, he was seen by an evaluation team including a psychologist, speech therapist and occupational therapist.

Of course, we went back to our pediatrician and asked why he hadn't seen any problems. He apologized to us, but noted that our son's physical development (height, weight, skeletal structure)was right on schedule. Tommy had also used two-three words phrases to express himself, once again right on schedule."

First, vaccines don't cause any mental illness. Genes can. (About.com article) Emotional trauma can. Brain injuries can. Vaccines don't. I am beginning to suspect something, based on the fact that with the exception of one individual (who owned a "natural foods" shop) from whom I have heard Anti-Vaxx propaganda have at some point identified themselves as blood relatives of Autism patients. I think those who want so badly to believe that the disorder is caused by vaccines have that wish because it would absolve them of having to believe that the predisposition to it is in their own DNA.

Why else maintain such fatally flawed logic?
Think about this: All kids who get the vaccines get the exact same ingredients. It's not only unlikely that the product would cause such a problem in only a small percentage and spare all of the others, it's ridiculous. Given the explanation as to why kids supposedly are developing autism because of vaccines, I want a detailed explanation as to why all of the other kids who receive the same vaccines come through it just fine. Most of the arguments I've seen from the vaccine skeptics camp go along the lines of the "don't-go-to-hospitals-people-die-there" camp... the reasoning is flawed based on a reasoning of association without a control study.

Second, Autism diagnosis is not like the diagnosis of many other disorders. It's often subjective. I've had psychology students (and professors) try to tell me I have Asperger Syndrome (one of the spectrum of disorders included under the umbrella diagnosis of Autism) just because I'm smart, know a lot about photography, became very clumsy (after a series of car accidents I then have to tell them about) and have nervous habits. They diagnose it not because they've done a good, well rounded study of me, but because once they see the first "symptom" they start looking for the rest. You can find symptoms of Asberger in a lot of nerds like me, especially those of us who have a hobby or start a profession at a young age. That doesn't mean a diagnosis of such would be correct. And yes, I've checked with real doctors. Medically, I don't fit the diagnosis. That is the difference between personal observation and medical testing; personal observation is tainted by personal opinion.

Criteria for the diagnosis of Autism has been drastically broadened over the last thirty years, as has the level of severity of symptoms which qualifies a patient for a diagnosis within the spectrum of Autistic diagnoses. Awareness of the disorder has also increased greatly. This means that many who may have gone through life without diagnosis twenty or thirty years ago because either their cases would not fit the criteria, their symptoms would be too mild to be understood, or their parents simply would not know to seek help, would today be diagnosed and treated. "Studies" suggesting that vaccines cause autism fail to take these factors into account and are therefore flawed.

In addition, Autism is diagnosed based on behavioral symptoms (not a definitive test, such as seeking an abnormality in brain chemistry or a particular substance present in the blood, etc.) and whether or not patients "pass" the criteria set in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Disorders IV, an American made book with criteria based on American culture and American ideas of what is normal. This makes it hard to trust statistics from countries where vaccines aren't as prevalent, as the prevalence of Autism spectrum diagnoses may be affected by cultural differences.

Again I ask you Hannah, are you employed in the medical field or for a pharmacutical company? You sound MUCH like mainstream medical. You have what some may deem to be a spin off all your own....... Further, have any of your children been affected YET, by any of the medical issues and statistics that I clearly laid out for you above?? I hope and pray not........

Futher, you have skated right over the raging health crisis described for you in this country without even offering to guess at an explaination? Do you happen to have one? America is the MOST vaccinated country in the world but near the bottom of the barrel when it comes to health!

Either you don't read well, or you ignore what you don't want to see.
I've all ready answered your first question.
Your second question is ridiculous. You have not clearly laid out anything, therefore there is no answer to what you are asking.

Your raging health crisis has nothing to do with the current discussion, unless you are claiming that all health issues stem from vaccines. In that case, I'd have to ask you to explain the existence of poor health in this country before vaccines existed (since life expectancy is up).

Since you have turned the discussion to a debate on vaccines, your statement regarding your raging health crisis is irrelevant at best, and deliberate dodging and misdirection at worst.

Suit yourself dear... You believe what you wish to believe and I will believe what I have found to be factual since 1969. If others desire to do further research on all the information available to date, they will. If not, they won't.. I have no power to force anyone to do anything nor do I wish to do so....... So I wish you and your's the best and lots of luck down the road...

There is a difference between finding something to be factual and choosing to believe it.
You have an agenda. You've demonstrated that by your comments.
Your anti-vaccine bias, which apparently comes from the desire to not believe other things may have caused whatever health problem your family member is suffering, shows clearly in everything you've said, from the impassioned but fact-free rants about vaccines to the tenancy to wander from vaccines to general health the entire medical profession, to the conspiracy angle.
Enjoy your milk fairy.

And you enjoy your own fairy milk, hannah....... while you yet can...
Btw, I just posted something new that may or may not interest you and others?.. WE THE PEOPLE

However, after reading your thought processes here, I would almost assume, that you may disagree with any truth found there as well? It's not about vaccines per-say so, on second thought, you may find yourself out of your element a wee bit? It will be interesting though to read your thoughts?

Well, you know what they say about assuming.
What you just said proves that true on three counts; first, that you understand my reference to the milk fairy (I'm suspicious that you haven't read the subject matter to which I am referring); second, that my skepticism regarding the anti-vaxx movement makes me a liberal or otherwise pro-tax/anti-constitution; third, that my only area of interest is vaccines.