Problems with the "Swine flu vaccine"

[Robert Maxwell]

Tachyon Shield wrote:

---

What does my opinion on Vaccines have to do with TNZ?

Because that's where this horseshit without any scientific basis belongs.

You always make these statements without backing them up with any reputable sources. This is not the first time you've done this, either.

I come to SciTech to have interesting discussions about actual science and technology, and you are always bringing in whacked-out conspiracy theories you can't provide a shred of proof for.

Your threads about impractical scientific fantasies, like the pyramid thing, I don't really mind so much. At least there is some scientific content there, marginal as it is. But if you're going to come in here and claim vaccines are part of a conspiracy to kill people or make them stupid, you'd best bring some proof or you're just going to get called out and ridiculed for it.

[All Seeing Eye]

Robert Maxwell wrote:

---

Because that's where this horseshit without any scientific basis belongs.

You always make these statements without backing them up with any reputable sources. This is not the first time you've done this, either.

I come to SciTech to have interesting discussions about actual science and technology, and you are always bringing in whacked-out conspiracy theories you can't provide a shred of proof for.

Your threads about impractical scientific fantasies, like the pyramid thing, I don't really mind so much. At least there is some scientific content there, marginal as it is. But if you're going to come in here and claim vaccines are part of a conspiracy to kill people or make them stupid, you'd best bring some proof or you're just going to get called out and ridiculed for it.

What does my opinion on Vaccines have to do with TNZ?

I'm entitled to such an opinion and if you don't like it, rather than cry about it, ignore it instead.

LINK

LINK

Other additives in vaccines such as formaldehyde, 2-phenoxyethanol (not too far distant from antifreeze) and aluminum salts are also unlikely to be good for the human body.

Those are just the chemicals we know about. What else is thrown in there is the ultimate question.

Imagine vaccines with the toxins we know about being injected into children or pregnant women and the damage done would be irreversible. Neurological damage done to the baby whilst it's still in the womb.

[Robert Maxwell]

Tachyon Shield wrote:

---

What does my opinion on Vaccines have to do with TNZ?

TNZ has very low standards for discussion, obviously.

I'm entitled to such an opinion and if you don't like it, rather than cry about it, ignore it instead.

Opinions have no place in science.

LINK

LINK

You do realize the Thimerosal-autism link proved to be bullshit, right?

And you just relinked the OP's article...

Other additives in vaccines such as formaldehyde, 2-phenoxyethanol (not too far distant from antifreeze) and aluminum salts are also unlikely to be good for the human body.

You are misinformed about formaldehyde.

Saying a chemical is "not too distant" from some other toxic chemical is very deceptive. Carbon dioxide is a natural waste product of respiration, and is not typically dangerous to humans. Carbon monoxide differs by a single atom, and yet it is potently lethal to humans. How similar one chemical is to others is irrelevant--their effect on humans varies widely.

Those are just the chemicals we know about. What else is thrown in there is the ultimate question.

It's not that hard to find out what's in vaccines, you know. Go look it up. Or ask your doctor for an information pamphlet on whatever vaccine you're concerned about. They have to disclose what the ingredients are.

Imagine vaccines with the toxins we know about being injected into children or pregnant women and the damage done would be irreversible. Neurological damage done to the baby whilst it's still in the womb.

Show me that damage is being caused by vaccines in more than a handful of isolated cases. Go on, show me.

[All Seeing Eye]

Claiming the link to Autism and other neurological damage was proven false is false itself. You are choosing the words of one bunch of scientists over another bunch. It would be absolutely ridiculous to just presume that vaccines are safe because a bunch of scientists say they found no link, the fact that some scientists say otherwise and vaccines are full of chemicals proven to be toxic is a huge whopping flashing red light.

Yes I know I linked to the OPs link because it's a very valid link and valid proof so I re-linked to it to emphasize it.

In regards to any compound that has ethanol contained within it then you're damn right it's toxic to Humans. Since when has any form of ethanol been good for humans? (Alcohol isn't even safe really). It doesn't matter about the odd atom here or there the fact is it's still ethanol and beyond alcohol it becomes more and more toxic.

Pump all this into a child or a baby in a womb and do you really think it wont cause neurological damage?
The link I provided you about Mercury shows Mercury immediately destroys brain neurons on contact.

Fresh Link.

[Bob The Skutter]

No, it's not choosing 1 group over another, it's choosing 1 paper which found 2 cases of autism in a study and a bunch of media frenzy over the evidence of many peer reviewed studies that found nothing to say there was causation between vaccination and autism.

[All Seeing Eye]

Bob The Skutter wrote:

---

No, it's not choosing 1 group over another, it's choosing 1 paper which found 2 cases of autism in a study and a bunch of media frenzy over the evidence of many peer reviewed studies that found nothing to say there was causation between vaccination and autism.

Look at the ingredients of Vaccines and use your common sense.

[Bob The Skutter]

Tachyon Shield wrote:

---

Look at the ingredients of Vaccines and use your common sense.

If you're going to use the common sense argument... Look at the ingredients in your body, and use your common sense, there's no way you could be alive.
There are plenty of things that are good(or at least benign) for you in small amounts that will kill you in large.

[Robert Maxwell]

Hey Tachy, did you know there are billions of toxic bacteria all over your skin? If they ever make their way inside a wound you'll probably die. Go bathe in a vat of antibacterial soap, just to be safe.

Oh, wait. You need those to live. Crap!

Like I said, what you post here isn't science. Not in any way, shape, or form. It's fear, paranoia, and misinformation.

[The Badger]

Tachyon Shield wrote:

---

Claiming the link to Autism and other neurological damage was proven false is false itself. You are choosing the words of one bunch of scientists over another bunch.

From the original study, published in the Lancet 1998.
"Interpretation. We identified associated gastrointestinal disease and developmental regression in a group of previously normal children, which was generally associated in time with possible environmental triggers."

Note 'possible environmental triggers'. The original paper said that there might be a causal link between autism and the MMR vaccine, not that there was one for certain.

In 2004, ten of the thirteen scientists who carried out the original study made a formal retraction.
"We wish to make it clear that in this paper no causal link was established between MMR vaccine and autism as the data were insufficient. However, the possibility of such a link was raised and consequent events have had major implications for public health. In view of this, we consider now is the appropriate time that we should together formally retract the interpretation placed upon these findings in the paper, according to precedent."

This year the Sunday Times discovered that Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who ran the study, had received more than four hundred thousand pounds from lawyers trying to prove that vaccines are unsafe. A legal aid fund, attempting a lawsuit against pharmaceutical manufacturers, paid nearly three and a half million pounds in an attempt to find suitable evidence.

Furthermore, the British General Medicine Council has begun an investigation into Wakefield. There are two grounds. The first, based on claims by journalist Brian Deer, are of serious professional misconduct, involving totally unnecessary surgical procedures that in one case caused life threatening injuries.
In addition, evidence has arose indicating that during the study Wakefield suppressed and falsified data to better support the results he wanted.


So it's not really a case of "choosing the words of one bunch of scientists over another bunch". It's a case of deciding who is more reliable.

On the one hand you have the vast majority of scientists. Yes, many work for 'big pharm' and could conceivably be covering themselves. But many others are independent and have no such motivation. Included in their ranks are ten of the original group, who have removed their support after the many flaws and conflicts of interest came to light.

In the other group, you have a tiny minority, the greatest of which is known to be on the take, and suspected of unethical proceedings and scientific fraud.

[Chrisisall]

Lindley wrote:

---

Any vaccine that presents a significant danger would not be allowed to remain in use by the FDA.

Ho boy, my first visit to this area & what do I see? Trust in quasi-corrupt agencies.

JustAFriend wrote:

---

You can delude yourself about vaccinations but that's the main reason that people only lived to 40 years old up until the start of the 20th century....

Oh, I thought it was general sanitary conditions, silly me!

Robert Maxwell wrote:

---

The last thing vaccine manufacturers want is a bad vaccine that will kill a bunch of people. They know damn well it would be a PR nightmare, and in future years fewer people would get vaccinated for fear of a repeat. It's not in their interest to push bad vaccines.

Big Pharm, like any other governmental agency, knows that people remember nothing. Mention the Bhopal accident to anyone and watch them go, "What?"
Time heals all PR problems.

[Chrisisall]

Tachyon Shield wrote:

---

Look at the ingredients of Vaccines and use your common sense.

That's a hard thing for peeps to do, you don't get common sense with a side of fries at fast food joints.
Remember when margarine was pushed by health peeps? Valium? Not breast feeding kids?

Put a few letters after someone's name & the lemmings jump.

[Bob The Skutter]

Robert Maxwell wrote:

---

Hey Tachy, did you know there are billions of toxic bacteria all over your skin? If they ever make their way inside a wound you'll probably die. Go bathe in a vat of antibacterial soap, just to be safe.

Oh, wait. You need those to live. Crap!

Like I said, what you post here isn't science. Not in any way, shape, or form. It's fear, paranoia, and misinformation.

Hey don't I know it. I'm currently infected by Staphylococcus aureus. In the middle of a course of antibiotics for a heart infection, and the closest thing I can think of for a source of infection is a nasty scratch from my cat.

[Lindley]

Chrisisall wrote:

---

Ho boy, my first visit to this area & what do I see? Trust in quasi-corrupt agencies.

What does "quasi-corrupt" mean? Something is either corrupt or it isn't. Or does it just mean you want an adjective to throw in there?

"The 'dubious' part is very important. It doesn't mean anything, but it scares people!"
-Londo, Babylon 5

You're right to an extent, though----no agency should be trusted to do its job simply because that *is* it's job. Agencies should be trusted to do what's best for the agency. Which means that the check on both the megas *and* the FDA is the press----bad PR is bad for everyone except the press, who see it as a field day.

So if there's something wrong going on, please provide a link to something the press has said about it, which contains more substance than the vague concerns voiced in the original article (which is more about past events than future).

[Chrisisall]

Lindley wrote:

---

What does "quasi-corrupt" mean? Something is either corrupt or it isn't. Or does it just mean you want an adjective to throw in there?

I meant it as in sometimes peeps there are able to do their jobs correctly, and sometimes not, depending on the department, the political and economic pressures, and the individuals involved. Gonna get all black & white on me? Okay, it's corrupt, as is every governmental agency AND every government on the planet. is that better for ya?

Which means that the check on both the megas *and* the FDA is the press

The press hates reporting on technical stuff that the public has no training to understand, they like "Peeps killed/peeps saved" stories. So, yeah, the press is there, and they do some good stuff, but as to precisely what vaccines do & don't do, they are useless until peeps start dying IMO. If most doctors have so little understanding of the field they're in, why put any faith in the FDA or the WHO or the press is what I'm wondering.

[Lindley]

Chrisisall wrote:

---

If most doctors have so little understanding of the field they're in

I was with you up to here. Where do you get that premise from?