Major Measels Outbreak Fearred in Washington State (anti-vaxxers)

[dualstow]

Actually, even now I'm not so sure that some significant problem in a vaccine wouldn't be covered up. I'm pretty sure it would be, as the "powers that be" seem to be absolutely addicted to vaccines. I'm not saying that vaccines aren't great, but I would bet that a lot would be covered up for the "greater good" of not discouraging people from getting vaccinated.

It's classic Cost/Benefit, or rather Risk/Benefit.

I'm sure there are some out there who believe something like RFID will be injected along with treatment -- not you, Xan. I know you're just talking about the potential cover-up of side effects -- but it's a chance I'm willing to take. I also think there would be plenty of whistleblowers. The initial whistleblowers would be painted as nutcases, and I would assume they are nutcases. But, the truth would out.

We don't even have control over the air that we breathe.

[moda0306]

Actually, even now I'm not so sure that some significant problem in a vaccine wouldn't be covered up. I'm pretty sure it would be, as the "powers that be" seem to be absolutely addicted to vaccines. I'm not saying that vaccines aren't great, but I would bet that a lot would be covered up for the "greater good" of not discouraging people from getting vaccinated.

It's classic Cost/Benefit, or rather Risk/Benefit.

I'm sure there are some out there who believe something like RFID will be injected along with treatment -- not you, Xan. I know you're just talking about the potential cover-up of side effects -- but it's a chance I'm willing to take. I also think there would be plenty of whistleblowers. The initial whistleblowers would be painted as nutcases, and I would assume they are nutcases. But, the truth would out.

We don't even have control over the air that we breathe.

I really don't know about this. In the 1950's doctors were injecting pregnant women with radiation. I don't think this came out until the OJ Simpson trial... to crickets... because there was a football player being tried for murder.

[dualstow]

I also think there would be plenty of whistleblowers.

I really don't know about this. In the 1950's doctors were injecting pregnant women with radiation. I don't think this came out until the OJ Simpson trial... to crickets... because there was a football player being tried for murder.

On what scale?
"Injecting" -- are you just talking about x-rays?

[moda0306]

I also think there would be plenty of whistleblowers.

I really don't know about this. In the 1950's doctors were injecting pregnant women with radiation. I don't think this came out until the OJ Simpson trial... to crickets... because there was a football player being tried for murder.

On what scale?
"Injecting" -- are you just talking about x-rays?

Oh my you haven't heard about this? I heard a podcast on it and was literally sick to my stomach by the end.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rad ... xperiments

Numerous human radiation experiments have been performed in the United States, many of which were funded by various U.S. government agencies[3] such as the United States Department of Defense, the United States Atomic Energy Commission, and the United States Public Health Service. Experiments including:

feeding radioactive material to mentally disabled children[4]
enlisting doctors to administer radioactive iron to impoverished pregnant women
exposing U.S. soldiers and prisoners to high levels of radiation[4]
irradiating the testicles of prisoners, which caused severe birth defects[4]
exhuming bodies from graveyards to test them for radiation (without the consent of the families of the deceased)[5]

[dualstow]

No, I hadn't. There's too much to hear about. Tell me more about this OJ fellow.
J/k, that is truly disturbing information. Ugh!

[Xan]

Actually, even now I'm not so sure that some significant problem in a vaccine wouldn't be covered up. I'm pretty sure it would be, as the "powers that be" seem to be absolutely addicted to vaccines. I'm not saying that vaccines aren't great, but I would bet that a lot would be covered up for the "greater good" of not discouraging people from getting vaccinated.

It's classic Cost/Benefit, or rather Risk/Benefit.

I'm sure there are some out there who believe something like RFID will be injected along with treatment -- not you, Xan. I know you're just talking about the potential cover-up of side effects -- but it's a chance I'm willing to take. I also think there would be plenty of whistleblowers. The initial whistleblowers would be painted as nutcases, and I would assume they are nutcases. But, the truth would out.

We don't even have control over the air that we breathe.

Just to clarify: I don't think there's a cover-up of side effects. But it wouldn't surprise me if there was a strong urge to cover something up. And I would say my primary fear is "what might happen with this power in the future", not that anybody at all is doing anything wrong right now.

Suppose somebody were to propose that in 100 years, your great-grandchildren would be absolutely required to receive whatever injection that "they" say is needed. Would you vote yes or no on supporting that measure? It would have to be no, wouldn't it? Yet that will undoubtedly be the effect of removing all ability to opt out.

[Maddy]

If we've learned anything over the last ten years, it's the extent to which we've been blissfully naive about who controls things and about the sociopathic policies that have been pursued in our name but without our knowledge or consent.

One of the things that impacts my assessment of the vaccine issue is the fact that virtually no one is talking about the obvious contributions to the problem of both globalism and immigrant vectors. As long as the issue remains politically charged, you have to maintain a fair degree of skepticism. And considering that there are astronomical profits to be made by minimizing risks or suppressing information, it's hard to believe that we're getting the whole story. After all, if U.S. military policy can be dictated by private corporations, why would we think public health policy would be immune from their influence?

Moreover, as long as there are big question marks about why people get cancer, autoimmune disease, and autism, I think it is too early to rule anything out. I had a wonderful conversation with a PhD immunologist recently, whose private opinion is that the rise in autoimmune disease (which he accepts as a reasonable premise) is probably due, at least in part, to an increase in the cumulative amount of antigenic assault on our bodies ("environmental crap"). The bottom line, for me, is that it makes sense to avoid unnecessary exposures, whether they be from vaccines, Monsanto products or people disembarking from airplanes.

And Sophie, I do understand your frustration with us. I regularly find myself in the position of having to calm myself down when people start talking about UCC 2-207 and how you can escape the jurisdiction of a court by refusing to sign your name except in capital letters. What I really want to do is say, "How could you be so stupid to believe that?" I have to remind myself that people are being bombarded daily with more misleading information than they can possibly digest--much less evaluate with any degree of expertise. How many of us have the leisure to pursue a master's in epidemiology just to be able to distinguish the meritorious studies from the unmeritorious ones?

[sophie]

I2start: I agree with your questions about vaccine schedules - unfortunately I'm not aware of any studies or supporting lab evidence to show whether there is added risk from bundling vaccines, or administering on a time-compressed schedule. It is something that probably should be studied. Of note though, many of the illnesses that prompt the vaccines also tend to strike on a compressed schedule (e.g. usually before age 7), and that's got a lot to do with how the schedule was designed.

Maddy: Not sure I understand what you're getting yet. Yes, the measles clusters have started with index cases that came from overseas, but we haven't been given any information to suggest that there's a practical way to prevent this. One of the problems with measles is that the disease can be transmitted for days before it's diagnosable. It might be reasonable, though, to add a question to the visa applications about immunizations, and to add measles to the list of required international immunizations (which currently is limited to yellow fever).

There may or may not be a rise in autoimmune diseases - remember that many of them could not be diagnosed until recently which does NOT mean that they didn't exist previously, and there's been a big increase in conditions like fibromyalgia, celiac, chronic Lyme, and chronic fatigue that have become fads and are enormously overdiagnosed. Sadly, there are a lot of physicians only too happy to prey on people who go diagnosis shopping. Your PhD friend might not be aware of these things. But, it is certainly reasonable to expect that "environmental crap" is not good for us. So where do you start? Fluoridated water, preservatives in food, growth hormones and antibiotics given to meat & milk animals, contaminants in water, unnecessary medications, airborne pollutants, outgassing of furniture and home building materials....quite a long list, and most of these have not been studied to nearly the extent that vaccines have been. If anything, I'd consider vaccines to be the safest of these. Despite a ton of studies there has never been any hint of a link with vaccines and autoimmune disease. If that's the basis of the antivaxxer argument (a theoretical worry with zero evidence despite extensive testing) then the bar for anti-science must be at an all-time low.

[pugchief]

Sophie,

Upthread you mentioned how trustworthy the CDC is. Yet in your last post you refer to Fluoride as one of the 'environmental crap'. Unless something has changed, the CDC considers water fluoridation as a boon to public health with little risk at proper levels. So which is it?

[barrett]

Interesting. When one of my siblings contracted chicken pox, all three of us were put together to get it over with. But, with chicken pox, I thought the logic was that it's much worse if it hits you as an adult. (I'll be waiting years for a shingles vaccine. Supplies are low). We certainly weren't intentionally exposed to anything else. Is that true about chicken pox and childhood, btw? I don't know.

I contracted chicken pox when I was 33 and it was bad... and not just for a few days. I believe my immune system didn't really recover until the last year or two. Just turned 60 last September. I have asthma and the chicken pox triggered a decade of taking everything my pulmonologist could throw at it. The 1990s were my lost decade. Kinda like Japanese stock market only with breathing.

And both my wife and I got our first shingles vaccination last month (we are in CT). Hopefully our pharmacy still has a supply for round two.

[dualstow]

Barrett's back! How long did you have to wait for the shingles vax, part 1?

[sophie]

Sophie,

Upthread you mentioned how trustworthy the CDC is. Yet in your last post you refer to Fluoride as one of the 'environmental crap'. Unless something has changed, the CDC considers water fluoridation as a boon to public health with little risk at proper levels. So which is it?

I didn't say they were infallible, just that they aren't nefarious and there's no conspiracy going on. And the extent that they are fallible is no worse than any other group (including the anti-vaxxers). Their position on fluoride is based on available studies, which do the usual thing of confusing correlation with causality. What do you think about that, personally?