# What's in a Vaccine?



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

I came across this file and thought it was interesting. I'm not familiar with most of the ingredients, but I do wonder why they need to use things like dye, formaldehyde, and MSG.

Ingredients (PDF from cdc.gov)

Erin Burnett, on CNN, compared measles to polio. I thought that was a stupid comparison. Growing up in the 50's, I seem to remember measles and chicken pox as being no big deal, while polio was feared by adults and children. Do I remember correctly?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Goes to show ya cnn has some dopey folks on...measles CAN be bad, esp if you're pregnant. Have there been deaths w/this 'epidemic'? I read a couple articles & did not say there were. We were told when the 100K illegal kids came that this would happen.
Thought it was funny that idiot Joy Beher said it was republicans fault..."they're gonna kill us". LOL. Mostly the outbreaks are in states that are widely "D".


----------



## Jim Bunton (Mar 16, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> I came across this file and thought it was interesting. I'm not familiar with most of the ingredients, but I do wonder why they need to use things like dye, formaldehyde, and MSG.
> 
> Ingredients (PDF from cdc.gov)
> 
> Erin Burnett, on CNN, compared measles to polio. I thought that was a stupid comparison. Growing up in the 50's, I seem to remember measles and chicken pox as being no big deal, while polio was feared by adults and children. Do I remember correctly?


Here is a chart showing the dramatic drop in both measles cases and deaths. The vaccine was introduced in 1963. Our populatin has gone from 190,000,000 to 315,000,000 since 1963.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

So there were, on average, about 10 deaths per state per year from measles or 500 in US per year prior to 1965. Compare that to deaths from flu which ranged from 3,000 to 49,000 per year. (CDC)

As usual, the media is making a mountain out of a mole hill.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

MoonRiver said:


> So there were, on average, about 10 deaths per state per year from measles or 500 in US per year prior to 1965. Compare that to deaths from flu which ranged from 3,000 to 49,000 per year. (CDC)
> 
> As usual, the media is making a mountain out of a mole hill.


It's only a molehill if your child wasn't one of the ones who died from something that is largely now preventable.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Tricky Grama said:


> Goes to show ya cnn has some dopey folks on...measles CAN be bad, esp if you're pregnant. Have there been deaths w/this 'epidemic'? I read a couple articles & did not say there were. We were told when the 100K illegal kids came that this would happen.
> Thought it was funny that idiot Joy Beher said it was republicans fault..."they're gonna kill us". LOL. Mostly the outbreaks are in states that are widely "D".


Yea, a small town near me fought tooth and nail to keep out these sick people that the government wanted to dump on us. It was us "repubs" fighting it because we knew what was going on.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

I only have one question, but before I ask it. 
yes I was vaccinated as a child, yes our children were vaccinated. So I have no dog in this race..

Who verifies that this (or any vaccine or drug) is safe?

If you tell me the FDA, then why are there so many lawsuits etc for drugs that were on the market and after being approved by the FDA have been pulled because they are unsafe..

The FDA is maintained by the Pharmaceutical Companies, it is staffed by previous employees of these very companies they are suppose to "rule" against if there is a problem. 

Also if I recall, from my past research many years ago, correctly the FDA is only a pseudo government agency. While it gets federal funding yada, yada yada, it isn't directly controlled by Government. Which then means it isn't a "Watchdog" agency with a mission to protect the people. IT means they are there to protect the drug companies...
So with that in mind,
How am I suppose to trust the FDA?
How am I suppose to trust the CDC? (who we already know are political hacks)

Sorry, so it ended up being 3 questions...
But I find it ironic that the FDA, who approve the drugs are maintained by /paid for by the very people who are submitting the drugs for approval.. 
It's a fox guarding the hen house situation that people don't know about or apparently care about..


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

mmoetc said:


> It's only a molehill if your child wasn't one of the ones who died from something that is largely now preventable.


Let's see how that works out.

500,000 kids got measles and 500 died

Or for every 1000 kids that got measles, 1 died

500/500,000 = .001 or .1%


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

mmoetc said:


> It's only a molehill if your child wasn't one of the ones who died from something that is largely now preventable.



You know, I find it very funny how pro vax people always say this but don't seem to appreciate it when anti vax people say the same thing about a vaccine.

It doesn't matter what the odds are if your kid is one of those odds, sickness or vaccine. We all have a good shot at dying of something, as parents we look whatever info we look at and make our decisions. That's all we can do. People telling us that we killed our kid because we vax'd them or we didn't vax them, we got the wrong model of car, drove on the wrong day, had the wrong docter, home birth, hospital birth, whatever, none of that helps anything or anybody.

We make our choices everyday and live or die by them.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

One death that might have been prevented.

Of course it is not all about death. It is complications like loss of hearing that are also preventable.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

thermopkt said:


> You know, I find it very funny how pro vax people always say this but don't seem to appreciate it when anti vax people say the same thing about a vaccine.
> 
> It doesn't matter what the odds are if your kid is one of those odds, sickness or vaccine. We all have a good shot at dying of something, as parents we look whatever info we look at and make our decisions. That's all we can do. People telling us that we killed our kid because we vax'd them or we didn't vax them, we got the wrong model of car, drove on the wrong day, had the wrong docter, home birth, hospital birth, whatever, none of that helps anything or anybody.
> 
> We make our choices everyday and live or die by them.


You make the choice but it might be your child that dies or someone elses who could not vaccinate due to heath problems.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

Wlover said:


> You make the choice but it might be your child that dies



Exactly!!!

My best friend's toddler died screaming and seizing after vaccinations. It was the most horrible thing to watch, I drove them to the emergency room.

But that's ok, it only matters if it's YOUR child that's affected.

What if you feed your kid a peanut better sandwich and they have developed a deathly allergy? What if you vax your kid with a live vax (those vaxed with a live vax are capable of spreading the disease for a bit) and my kid gets it and dies?

My point was/is, there are NO guarantees! You make your choices and deal with the consequences/benefits. Why are YOUR decisions better than (and to be enforced upon) mine? How would you feel if vaccination was outlawed when you truly believe it's the best choice? I'm not getting into the studies supporting this, that and the other. Nobody is going to change anybody else's mind, but why can people not respect other people's choices? Why am I responsible for YOU? Why should you be responsible for ME?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Goes to show ya cnn has some dopey folks on...measles CAN be bad, esp if you're pregnant. Have there been deaths w/this 'epidemic'? I read a couple articles & did not say there were. We were told when the 100K illegal kids came that this would happen.
> Thought it was funny that idiot Joy Beher said it was republicans fault..."they're gonna kill us". LOL. Mostly the outbreaks are in states that are widely "D".


 I like what Ben Carson has to say.
*CARSON: âWE NEED TO BE DOUBLY VIGILANTâ WITH VACCINES DUE TO BORDER*


> Carson was asked about a statement he gave where he said *âwe should not allow those diseases to return by foregoing safe immunization programs,* for philosophical, religious or other reasons when we have the means to eradicate them,â he explained âWe already have policies in place at schools that require immunization records and things of that nature. What we have to recognize is that a lot of people are put off when they hear the word âgovernment force,â and perhaps thereâs a better way to put these things, but the fact of the matter is, studies have shown us over the course of time, that the benefit-to-risk ratio for vaccination is way in the favor of doing it as opposed to not doing it.


â

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/02/04/carson-we-need-to-be-doubly-vigilant-with-vaccines-due-to-border/


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

thermopkt said:


> Exactly!!!
> 
> My best friend's toddler died screaming and seizing after vaccinations. It was the most horrible thing to watch, I drove them to the emergency room.
> 
> ...


There are no laws requiring vaccinations. It is your choice. It is however a choice to discuss it and let our opinions be known. There is a big difference between respect a decision ( which most do) and being okay with it.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

Wlover said:


> *There are no laws requiring vaccinations.*



I gotta get out of this thread, but really???!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Wlover said:


> There are no laws requiring vaccinations. It is your choice. It is however a choice to discuss it and let our opinions be known. There is a big difference between respect a decision ( which most do) and being okay with it.


There ARE some states that require it to go to school.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> There ARE some states that require it to go to school.


Those would be regulations not laws. There are also regulations that all immigrants must have all their vaccinations when applying to emigrate while still in their home country.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

School is just the easiest way to enforce it. My oldest was vaccinated by force or CPS was going to take her. We homeschool.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

thermopkt said:


> School is just the easiest way to enforce it. My oldest was vaccinated by force or CPS was going to take her. We homeschool.


You did have the choice to fight that. CPS just like any government agency is staffed by people who make mistakes.

I don't mean to make light or diminish what you went through but the statistics illustrate that having our population vaccinated saves more lives than than it causes deaths.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Wlover said:


> Those would be regulations not laws. There are also regulations that all immigrants must have all their vaccinations when applying to emigrate while still in their home country.


But that did not happen and it was deliberate by the obama adm. The border agents that had to deal with the disease filled immigrants kept complaining and were told to keep their mouths shut. The immigrants were shipped all over the Country without being vac.ed or anything for such things as scabies, TB, every other disease we have attempted to eradicate. People have to open their EYES as to why he is doing this-the enemy within.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Wlover said:


> Those would be regulations not laws. There are also regulations that all immigrants must have all their vaccinations when applying to emigrate while still in their home country.


Regulations are authorized by law. In other words, a regulation is only meaningful if the agency creating the regulation is legally authorized to do so.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

7thswan said:


> But that did not happen and it was deliberate by the obama adm. The border agents that had to deal with the disease filled immigrants kept complaining and were told to keep their mouths shut. The immigrants were shipped all over the Country without being vac.ed or anything for such things as scabies, TB, every other disease we have attempted to eradicate. People have to open their EYES as to why he is doing this-the enemy within.


Not what I talked about. Very different. Millions of people also come here on legal trips every year with no need for vaccinations. 
You can blame Obama all you want but that policy has been in place with every President in at least the last 50 years. This is not a discussion about Obama, it is about vaccinations.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

Wlover said:


> You did have the choice to fight that.



:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Glen Beck said that the Disney measles outbreak was traced to a group/family from the Philippines and an Amish group/family. Shouldn't that be something the media should be covering? It changes the entire story line.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Glen Beck said that the Disney measles outbreak was traced to a group/family from the Philippines and an Amish group/family. Shouldn't that be something the media should be covering? It changes the entire story line.


Different outbreak. They have not identified the index case in California.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

Directly from the CDC website:

In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates and licenses all vaccines to ensure safety and effectiveness. No federal vaccination laws exist*,* but all 50 states require certain vaccinations for children entering public schools. Depending on the state, children must be vaccinated against some or all of the following diseases: mumps, measles, rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, and polio.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Wlover said:


> Not what I talked about. Very different. Millions of people also come here on legal trips every year with no need for vaccinations.
> You can blame Obama all you want but that policy has been in place with every President in at least the last 50 years. This is not a discussion about Obama, it is about vaccinations.


We would not be talking about Vacs. if the measles were not brought back in by obamas illegals from Cen.Amer. and Honduras.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

7thswan said:


> We would not be talking about Vacs. if the measles were not brought back in by obamas illegals from Cen.Amer. and Honduras.


Proof or speculation? I see no proof or even suggestion of this as a reality.

I can also search vaccines on HT and see that there are hundreds of threads about vaccines so I think we would be discussing them.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

MoonRiver said:


> Glen Beck said that the Disney measles outbreak was traced to a group/family from the Philippines and an Amish group/family. Shouldn't that be something the media should be covering? It changes the entire story line.




http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/me...asles-outbreak-came-overseas-cdc-says-n296441


There's been on ongoing outbreak of measles in the Philippines, but no imported U.S. cases have been linked to the Philippines this year, Schuchat said. Genetic tests of the virus affecting Americans are similar to strains seen in Indonesia, Qatar, Azerbaijan and Dubai.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> So there were, on average, about 10 deaths per state per year from measles or 500 in US per year prior to 1965. Compare that to deaths from flu which ranged from 3,000 to 49,000 per year. (CDC)
> 
> As usual, the media is making a mountain out of a mole hill.


Apples to pears. 

Measles is almost 100% preventable by vaccine. The flu isn't. 

Measles is also much more contagious than the flu. From what I have read if you put one person with the flu on a bus full of unvaccinated people in an hour you might get two people infected. Do the same with measles and 1/2 to 3/4 of the people will be infected.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Ya you can't compere some flu stats with what a measles outbreak can do. And how easy measles can be prevented.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

beowoulf90 said:


> I only have one question, but before I ask it.
> yes I was vaccinated as a child, yes our children were vaccinated. So I have no dog in this race..
> 
> Who verifies that this (or any vaccine or drug) is safe?
> ...


Take a few hours and research what a drug company has to do to get FDA approval for a new drug. But no matter how much testing you do before you release a new drug you don't know what is going to happen when it is in widespread and long term use. How long do you think a drug should be tested before it is ruled 'safe'? 5 years? 10? 20? 




beowoulf90 said:


> The FDA is maintained by the Pharmaceutical Companies, it is staffed by previous employees of these very companies they are suppose to "rule" against if there is a problem.


True and this can be a problem which is why we must have public access to their records.




beowoulf90 said:


> How am I suppose to trust the FDA?


Look at its history. What percentage of the drugs approved turn out to have problems? Ever wonder why its such big news when it happens? Could it be because it is such a rare occurrence?


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Wlover said:


> Proof or speculation? I see no proof or even suggestion of this as a reality.
> 
> I can also search vaccines on HT and see that there are hundreds of threads about vaccines so I think we would be discussing them.


What, you waiting for the CDC to admit it? Not like the media are they, in Obamas back pocket:facepalm:


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

watcher said:


> Apples to pears.
> 
> Measles is almost 100% preventable by vaccine. The flu isn't.
> 
> Measles is also much more contagious than the flu. From what I have read if you put one person with the flu on a bus full of unvaccinated people in an hour you might get two people infected. Do the same with measles and 1/2 to 3/4 of the people will be infected.


Of course it's apples to apples. 500 deaths for measles and many, many times that for the flu. If no child was vaccinated for measles in the US, we would still likely have less than 1000 deaths a year, a fraction of the deaths from flu. 

My point is the death rate from measles is very low, but you wouldn't know that from watching the news. They make it sound like if your child catches measles they will die.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

7thswan said:


> What, you waiting for the CDC to admit it? Not like the media are they, in Obamas back pocket:facepalm:


I think most people are much more inclined to believe the CDC than some stranger over the internet.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

arabian knight said:


> Ya you can't compere some flu stats with what a measles outbreak can do. And how easy measles can be prevented.


I did!

I was comparing death rates, not contagion.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

thermopkt said:


> You know, I find it very funny how pro vax people always say this but don't seem to appreciate it when anti vax people say the same thing about a vaccine.
> 
> It doesn't matter what the odds are if your kid is one of those odds, sickness or vaccine. We all have a good shot at dying of something, as parents we look whatever info we look at and make our decisions. That's all we can do. People telling us that we killed our kid because we vax'd them or we didn't vax them, we got the wrong model of car, drove on the wrong day, had the wrong docter, home birth, hospital birth, whatever, none of that helps anything or anybody.
> 
> We make our choices everyday and live or die by them.


This is harsh but if you don't vaccinate your kids and they get sick I don't really care that much. What I do care about is your unvaccinated kids pose a threat to other children who can not be vaccinated.

I've used this before but I'll use it here.

Say your neighbor, which you share a fence with, has a dozen dogs and refuses to have them vaccinated. But that doesn't worry you because you always vaccinate your dogs. Now lets say your dog has just had a litter of puppies and your neighbor tells you that he just discovered some of his dogs have distemper. In the next few days your new puppies, who are too young to vaccinate, start showing symptoms. You know that the odds are 80% of your new pups are going to wind up DEAD and there's not really anything you could have done. But most likely they'd all live if your neighbor had vaccinated his dogs.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

7thswan said:


> What, you waiting for the CDC to admit it? Not like the media are they, in Obamas back pocket:facepalm:


I guess I will repeat this. This is not about Obama no matter how many times you say his name you are not going to get a different reality.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

watcher said:


> This is harsh but if you don't vaccinate your kids and they get sick I don't really care that much. What I do care about is your unvaccinated kids pose a threat to other children who can not be vaccinated.
> 
> I've used this before but I'll use it here.
> 
> Say your neighbor, which you share a fence with, has a dozen dogs and refuses to have them vaccinated. But that doesn't worry you because you always vaccinate your dogs. Now lets say your dog has just had a litter of puppies and your neighbor tells you that he just discovered some of his dogs have distemper. In the next few days your new puppies, who are too young to vaccinate, start showing symptoms. You know that the odds are 80% of your new pups are going to wind up DEAD and there's not really anything you could have done. But most likely they'd all live if your neighbor had vaccinated his dogs.


The problem is not so much unvaccinated people in the US, but people who bring measles into the US. If no one brought measles in, there would be no one to catch it from.

I would have no problem with requiring everyone coming into the US, including US citizens and residents, to have a mmr shot.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

watcher said:


> This is harsh but if you don't vaccinate your kids and they get sick I don't really care that much. What I do care about is your unvaccinated kids pose a threat to other children who can not be vaccinated.
> 
> I've used this before but I'll use it here.
> 
> Say your neighbor, which you share a fence with, has a dozen dogs and refuses to have them vaccinated. But that doesn't worry you because you always vaccinate your dogs. Now lets say your dog has just had a litter of puppies and your neighbor tells you that he just discovered some of his dogs have distemper. In the next few days your new puppies, who are too young to vaccinate, start showing symptoms. You know that the odds are 80% of your new pups are going to wind up DEAD and there's not really anything you could have done. But most likely they'd all live if your neighbor had vaccinated his dogs.



That would suck, but that's life. Why should the neighbor vax his dogs so I don't have to take any care with my pups? HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ME OR MY DOGS!! Why is it better that his dog end up paralyzed or dead from a vax reaction? Why is my dog better than his dog?

The only thing that really gets me about pro vax people is that their kids/opinions are more valuable than mine. Just like Wlover's repsonse. *" I don't mean to make light or diminish what you went through but the statistics illustrate that having our population vaccinated saves more lives than than it causes deaths" *Translated as, well that sucks, but it ain't me or mine and your kid died so my kid doesn't have to be sick. There is no more evil phrase/idea the 'the greater good'.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

7thswan said:


> We would not be talking about Vacs. if the measles were not brought back in by obamas illegals from Cen.Amer. and Honduras.


 Boy isn't that the truth. Obama opened the flood gates from SA. Come to the USA don't even have to stop in Mexico as they will give you FREE pass for 24 hours IF you go directly into the USA. What a hornets nest now he has made. He MUST step up and take responsibility but that will never happen.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Wlover said:


> I guess I will repeat this. This is not about Obama no matter how many times you say his name you are not going to get a different reality.


It is in this regard. Measles only exists in the US because someone brought it in from outside the US. Therefore, imo the government screwed up.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

thermopkt said:


> That would suck, but that's life. Why should the neighbor vax his dogs so I don't have to take any care with my pups? HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ME OR MY DOGS!! Why is it better that his dog end up paralyzed or dead from a vax reaction? Why is my dog better than his dog?
> 
> The only thing that really gets me about pro vax people is that their kids/opinions are more valuable than mine. Just like Wlover's repsonse. *" I don't mean to make light or diminish what you went through but the statistics illustrate that having our population vaccinated saves more lives than than it causes deaths" *Translated as, well that sucks, but it ain't me or mine and your kid died so my kid doesn't have to be sick. There is no more evil phrase/idea the 'the greater good'.


I feel for every person that might lose a family member to a vaccination. I also feel for every family member who might lose someone to the disease. I don't take it lightly. I do however want to have the least amount of people lose a family member. The better out come is less people lose family members. That means vaccination is the solution. I take a chance when vaccinating my children but yes I do it because it will save some parent somewhere from losing a child. Firefighter, policeman and armed forces do the same thing every day. They go to work putting their lives in danger for the greater good. I would not call that evil.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

Wlover said:


> Firefighter, policeman and armed forces do the same thing every day. They go to work putting their lives in danger for the greater good. I would not call that evil.



But *they *made that choice. Nobody forced them into it. Totally different. A person making a choice to sacrifice for the greater good is an almost sacred act. *Forcing* somebody to do something for the greater good is evil.

If I step in front of a bus to save you, that's my choice and a noble thing. If you push me in front of that bus to save yourself, that's murder.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

thermopkt said:


> But *they *made that choice. Nobody forced them into it. Totally different. A person making a choice to sacrifice for the greater good is an almost sacred act. *Forcing* somebody to do something for the greater good is evil.
> 
> If I step in front of a bus to save you, that's my choice and a noble thing. If you push me in front of that bus to save yourself, that's murder.


Again there are no laws forcing anyone to get vaccinated.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

But how many people like you (maybe not you specifically) are trying to make so that there are? Will I have that choice in 2 years? People do get their kids taken away for refusing vaccinations. And if you think you can 'fight' CPS, you are rather naive. I was a foster parent for 7 years and it was a, um,......shall we say...enlightening experience.

I don't think you should not vax if you want. I don't think you should agree with non vaxers. I don't think you should be able to take my choice away from me.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

thermopkt said:


> But how many people like you (maybe not you specifically) are trying to make so that there are? Will I have that choice in 2 years? People do get their kids taken away for refusing vaccinations. And if you think you can 'fight' CPS, you are rather naive. I was a foster parent for 7 years and it was a, um,......shall we say...enlightening experience.
> 
> I don't think you should not vax if you want. I don't think you should agree with non vaxers. I don't think you should be able to take my choice away from me.


Then you fight against the law, just as you should fight CPS.

We as a people take choices away from other people every day. That is the way of the world. You fight for what you believe no matter what side you are on. We do it for the better good. We kill for the better good every day even when many of us don't believe in why we are killing. You live in a country that gives you the choice to fight those laws. It is not perfect but you chose to stay here.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

Wlover said:


> We do it for the better good.



That's the problem. There are extremely few things in life that need 'a better good.'





I think we're on the verge of derailing Moonriver's thread, so we better stop.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

thermopkt said:


> That's the problem. There are extremely few things in life that need 'a better good.'
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You live in a country that has laws and a constitution that allows everyone to decide how they feel about that, how they wish to vote about that and what rights they have with regards to that in the constitution.

I believe that Moonriver posted a vague thread on a controversial subject hoping to stir the hornets nest. Thread drift is part of the package.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Wlover said:


> Again there are no laws forcing anyone to get vaccinated.


Where did you get that idea?


----------



## Oxankle (Jun 20, 2003)

The son of a buckl should be treated as a traitor. Oops, the people who elected him would have to be treated as idiots. Perhaps we'd better leave him alone.


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

watcher said:


> Take a few hours and research what a drug company has to do to get FDA approval for a new drug. But no matter how much testing you do before you release a new drug you don't know what is going to happen when it is in widespread and long term use. How long do you think a drug should be tested before it is ruled 'safe'? 5 years? 10? 20?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes supposedly the FDA requires new drugs to go through "rigorous" testing for years. That is what we are told over and over again. 
But when you have those at the FDA who previously worked for Drug Company ABC reviewing the "testing". I have to question the results.

For example I previously worked for a major National Trucking Company, but I now work for an HVAC & Plumbing Co. Yet I do call upon those I know who still work for the Trucking Company and get better shipping rates. Even though when I bid the project to the owner/General Contractor I used the standard shipping rates..

So after they tested these new drugs after 5, 10, 15, 20 years and they haven't seen any problems. Then the drug is on the market for a few years and there is a problem(s). I have to question the testing. 

You never will have access to the complete FDA records. Just like the "transparency" of the IRS or this Admin or the Veterans Admin. (pick any government agency under any president, it makes no difference) They will only reveal what the have to. That is until you start holding these people responsible and start convicting them of their crimes. But being the cynic I'm becoming, that won't happen anytime soon. The people don't have the courage to stand up for what is right!

I am looking at the history and the percentage doesn't matter. Why you ask, because even aspirin has become a drug with long term side affects, but hasn't been pulled. Yet we are still told it is safe..

Also according to the FDA Rules & Regs. I can be charged with a crime if I tell you to eat an orange to cure a cold, because I've just prescribed a "drug" (yes it's food, but because I told you to take it to cure something, it becomes a drug under their regs) without a medical license. 
Now would I actually be charged? I doubt it if I only told you, but if I continually tell people that and it becomes wide spread, then yes I would be charged. Why? Because the FDA and drug companies don't want me to cut into their business..

Oh I almost forgot to add;
I'm not against vaccination or drugs. I spent 6 years active duty in the Army and traveled to many different Countries and had so many vaccinations for god only knows what.. So if I come down with something, it's from another planet


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Wlover said:


> You live in a country that has laws and a constitution that allows everyone to decide how they feel about that, how they wish to vote about that and what rights they have with regards to that in the constitution.
> 
> I believe that Moonriver posted a vague thread on a controversial subject hoping to stir the hornets nest. Thread drift is part of the package.


You are wrong. I really hoped someone could shed light on what some of the ingredients are and why they are included in the vaccines.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

Wlover said:


> Proof or speculation? I see no proof or even suggestion of this as a reality.
> 
> I can also search vaccines on HT and see that there are hundreds of threads about vaccines so I think we would be discussing them.


https://www.google.com/search?newwi...sedr...0...1c.1.61.serp..0.10.629.-p5W-Xt0egg


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> The problem is not so much unvaccinated people in the US, but people who bring measles into the US. If no one brought measles in, there would be no one to catch it from.


As my dad used to say "If a frog had wings he wouldn't bump his butt every time he jumped." IOW, playing "what if" games is meaningless. You have to deal with reality not some what if world. The fact is until measles is completely eradicated from the earth you can never be sure it is not going to come into the US. 




MoonRiver said:


> I would have no problem with requiring everyone coming into the US, including US citizens and residents, to have a mmr shot.


What about the fact that the vaccine isn't 100% effective? If its 99.999% effective and we had one million coming into the US you would still have 10,000 people who could be carrying measles. And if only one of them is the danger to an unvaccinated population is HUGE. Especially in this day when a group of people in one place can move to locations around the nation in a matter of hours. Google "mouse traps and ping pong balls" and watch some of the videos and you'll get the idea.

I guess you could quarantine each and every traveler entering the US for 14-21 days to make sure they don't have measles. Of course you still have the problem with people who enter the US illegally.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

MoonRiver said:


> You are wrong. I really hoped someone could shed light on what some of the ingredients are and why they are included in the vaccines.


http://imgur.com/a/ybBUJ?gallery


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

thermopkt said:


> That would suck, but that's life. Why should the neighbor vax his dogs so I don't have to take any care with my pups? HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ME OR MY DOGS!! Why is it better that his dog end up paralyzed or dead from a vax reaction? Why is my dog better than his dog?


I'm sorry but your logic escapes me. I clearly implied you were a responsible pet owner who has already looked at the risk and decided its better to vaccinate your dogs. So you logic there escapes me. 

Your dog is dead because of his choice. He chose to take an action which a "reasonable man" would see as having a great chance to place others or other's property in danger. If he were burning trash on his property on a windy day and some embers landed on your roof and burned your house down would he not be held responsible? Would not a "reasonable man" look at the risk and say he took an unreasonable risk? The same applies here. If you look at the risk of the dangers to his dog by the vaccine vs the risk to him and OTHERS by not vaccinating which do you think would be greater? I have no problem with him not vaccinating his dogs but if it can be proven that his actions harmed others he should be held responsible or not? 

IMO, if it can be proven that a families non medically supported reason to not vaccinate had resulted in infecting someone they should be held responsible for the harm their choice caused. 




thermopkt said:


> The only thing that really gets me about pro vax people is that their kids/opinions are more valuable than mine. Just like Wlover's repsonse. *" I don't mean to make light or diminish what you went through but the statistics illustrate that having our population vaccinated saves more lives than than it causes deaths" *Translated as, well that sucks, but it ain't me or mine and your kid died so my kid doesn't have to be sick.


Again I have no problem with you not vaccinating your kids, pets or livestock. But if it causes someone else damage you should be held responsible. And we have a right, because of the danger to society, to limit where, when and how your kids, pets and livestock may leave your property and interact with society. Example if you don't want to vaccinate your dog fine, just don't expect to be able to take him to a public dog park. 





thermopkt said:


> There is no more evil phrase/idea the 'the greater good'.


Sometimes the rights of the many outweigh the rights of the few. Sometimes things must be done for 'the greater good'. Is locking men in a 10 flooding compartment knowing full well the will drown good or evil? What if locking them in is the only way to keep a ship with hundreds of other men from sinking? If one of those 10 men was your brother, father or son you might think it was evil. But if your kin was on the other side of the locked door you'd probably see it differently.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

watcher said:


> What about the fact that the vaccine isn't 100% effective? If its 99.999% effective and we had one million coming into the US you would still have 10,000 people who could be carrying measles. And if only one of them is the danger to an unvaccinated population is HUGE. Especially in this day when a group of people in one place can move to locations around the nation in a matter of hours.


I never recommended we stop doing vaccinations. 

Some small number of people (like 4) in US died from measles between 2000 until the outbreak in 2014. In fact, in 2000 the government claimed measles had been eliminated in US. So as long as a large percentage of people in US are vaccinated, the threat has to come from outside the country because there is no measles in the country to catch.

Why not make it a requirement that all people entering the US show proof of vaccination? Kind of like fighting terrorism - better to fight it there than here!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> I never recommended we stop doing vaccinations.
> 
> Some small number of people (like 4) in US died from measles between 2000 until the outbreak in 2014. In fact, in 2000 the government claimed measles had been eliminated in US. So as long as a large percentage of people in US are vaccinated, the threat has to come from outside the country because there is no measles in the country to catch.
> 
> Why not make it a requirement that all people entering the US show proof of vaccination? Kind of like fighting terrorism - better to fight it there than here!


Poof, done. Ain't I something? Of course seeing as how some people have been known to violate the law I don't think it will solve the problem. Do you?

_United States immigration law requires immigrant visa applicants to obtain certain vaccinations (listed below) prior to the issuance of an immigrant visa. Panel physicians who conduct medical examinations of immigrant visa applicants are required to verify that immigrant visa applicants have met the vaccination requirements, or that it is medically inappropriate for the visa applicant to receive one or more of the listed vaccinations:_


_Hepatitis A_
_Hepatitis B_
_Influenza_
_Influenza type b (Hib)_
_Measles_
_Meningococcal_
_Mumps_
_Pneumococcal_
_Pertussis_
_Polio_
_Rotavirus_
_Rubella_
_Tetanus and diphtheria toxoids_
_Varicella_


----------



## emdeengee (Apr 20, 2010)

MoonRiver said:


> I came across this file and thought it was interesting. I'm not familiar with most of the ingredients, but I do wonder why they need to use things like dye, formaldehyde, and MSG.
> 
> Ingredients (PDF from cdc.gov)
> 
> Erin Burnett, on CNN, compared measles to polio. I thought that was a stupid comparison. Growing up in the 50's, I seem to remember measles and chicken pox as being no big deal, while polio was feared by adults and children. Do I remember correctly?


You remember incorrectly. Even today measles is the greatest vaccine-preventable killer of children in the world today and the eighth leading cause of death among persons of all ages worldwide.

http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S1.long


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

watcher said:


> I'm sorry but your logic escapes me. I clearly implied you were a responsible pet owner who has already looked at the risk and decided its better to vaccinate your dogs. So you logic there escapes me.
> 
> Your dog is dead because of his choice. He chose to take an action which a "reasonable man" would see as having a great chance to place others or other's property in danger. If he were burning trash on his property on a windy day and some embers landed on your roof and burned your house down would he not be held responsible? Would not a "reasonable man" look at the risk and say he took an unreasonable risk? The same applies here. If you look at the risk of the dangers to his dog by the vaccine vs the risk to him and OTHERS by not vaccinating which do you think would be greater? I have no problem with him not vaccinating his dogs but if it can be proven that his actions harmed others he should be held responsible or not?
> 
> ...



By that logic, we ought to ban things like sex. You know how many people would be saved from death by std or pregnancy if nobody had sex? How many lives could be saved! How many children yet to be born could be saved from a miserable death and/or life from complications of their parent's disease! It's for the children!

If all families had a parent stay home instead of sending their kids to public school/daycare, those kids wouldn't spread diseases. If sick people would stay out of the doctors, those of use who are there and not sick wouldn't be exposed.

It tends to get pretty ridiculous, doesn't it?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

thermopkt said:


> By that logic, we ought to ban things like sex. You know how many people would be saved from death by std or pregnancy if nobody had sex? How many lives could be saved! How many children yet to be born could be saved from a miserable death and/or life from complications of their parent's disease!
> 
> If all families had a parent stay home instead of sending their kids to public school/daycare, those kids wouldn't spread diseases. If sick people would stay out of the doctors, those of use who are there and not sick wouldn't be exposed.
> 
> It tends to get pretty ridiculous, doesn't it?


Not really the same thing. Vaccines are a way to do something and lower your odds of death and illness. They would be comparable with seat belts,mouth guards, helmets, condoms and so on.

They reduce the risks while still allowing you to participate in life.


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

Suppose a person did not vaccinate their son, A. A lives close to B who is undergoing chemotherapy and has a suppressed immune system and cannot be vaccinated until said therapy is completed.

A's parents allow A to play with B. B's parents do not know that A is unvaccinated and lo and behold, A comes down with disease X and gives that disease to B during their playtime. Now B is in the hospital in critical condition and B's parents are barely hanging on financially because one parent has to stay at the hospital with B at all times. So half income has been given up. Medical bills are mounting. B's family is facing bankruptcy. Do they have recourse against A's parents?

I predict that sooner rather than later, parents of unvaccinated children who transmit a preventable disease in such a manner as above will be made liable for damages. Research has been done on this subject in the past:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2317548

*Compensating the Victims of Failure to Vaccinate: What are the Options?*

[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;]_This article asks whether parents who choose not to vaccinate their child should be liable if that child, at higher risk of infectious disease than vaccinated children, transmits a vaccine-preventable diseases to another. The article argues that a tort remedy in this situation is both desirable and appropriate. It is desirable to assure compensation to the injured child and the family, who should not have to face the insult of financial ruin on top of the injury from the disease. It is also appropriate to require that a family that chooses not to vaccinate a child fully internalize the costs of that decision, and not pass them on to others._[/FONT]


[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;]So that study/re[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;]search was done and then in 2015, [FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;]Newser picks it up here:[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;]http://www.newser.com/story/202230/should-parents-of-infected-kids-sue-anti-vaxxers.html?utm_source=part&utm_medium=foxnews&utm_campaign=rss_health_rel[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
_Paper author Dorit Rubinstein Reiss points out that parents who opt not to vaccinate should bear the responsibility of that decision by paying financially if another child becomes sick as a result of their actions. Although many states offer vaccination exemptions, that wouldn't necessarily preempt a lawsuit, she adds. "The fact that behavior is legal does not mean you're not negligent to engage in it&#8212;and if you're negligent and someone is hurt, in our system you usually have to pay," Reiss tells Noah Berlatsky, writing for the Atlantic._


[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][/FONT]
And here is a legal blog that discusses both for and against liability for not vaccinating: 


http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/billofhealth/2013/05/23/liability-for-failure-to-vaccinate/
[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][/FONT]
[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][/FONT]


I think it is only a matter of time and the "right" case will emerge and this issue will be decided in a court. (it may have already happened, I haven't researched that far yet).
[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][/FONT]
[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[/FONT]


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

emdeengee said:


> You remember incorrectly. Even today measles is the greatest vaccine-preventable killer of children in the world today and the eighth leading cause of death among persons of all ages worldwide.
> 
> http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S1.long


Rubella causes great harm to fetus health and development should a pregnant woman be exposed and catch it.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

sidepasser said:


> Suppose a person did not vaccinate their son, A. A lives close to B who is undergoing chemotherapy and has a suppressed immune system and cannot be vaccinated until said therapy is completed.
> 
> A's parents allow A to play with B. B's parents do not know that A is unvaccinated and lo and behold, A comes down with disease X and gives that disease to B during their playtime. Now B is in the hospital in critical condition and B's parents are barely hanging on financially because one parent has to stay at the hospital with B at all times. So half income has been given up. Medical bills are mounting. B's family is facing bankruptcy. Do they have recourse against A's parents?
> 
> ...



If I was B's parents, I would make it my business to know. That child's health is my responsibility and foisting that responsibility on someone else at the risk of _their _child is not cool. In the current thinking on this thread, B's parents should be sued for neglect.

People always want someone to blame. I've never figured that out. How does having someone to blame make anything any better or change anything that has happened?

Again, why is it that the prevailing attitude is that it's bad if a kid dies, or even gets sick, of a 'vaccine preventable illness' and somebody should pay but it's only sad but ok if a kid dies or has lifelong issues from the vaccine? It was for the greater good after all.




I really wish my computer would stop doing weird things so I don't have to go back and retype all the parts of my post that didn't make it in the first time.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

emdeengee said:


> You remember incorrectly. Even today measles is the greatest vaccine-preventable killer of children in the world today and the eighth leading cause of death among persons of all ages worldwide.
> 
> http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S1.long


What I'm saying is I don't remember anyone panicking when there was an outbreak of measles or chicken pox. I don't think the school even closed. Getting measles was the norm and (per 100,000) very few died. On the other hand, everyone was scared to death of polio.

As the article says, the death rate for measles was declining even before the vaccination became common because of improvements in health care. There is an antiviral currently in testing that, when and if approved, can treat people who have been exposed to measles.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

sidepasser said:


> Suppose a person did not vaccinate their son, A. A lives close to B who is undergoing chemotherapy and has a suppressed immune system and cannot be vaccinated until said therapy is completed.[FONT=Myriad Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Sans-serif;]
> [/FONT]


Judge Napolitano discussed on Fox News and it sounds like it comes down to whether the parents knowingly allowed child a to play with child b while knowing child a had been exposed to measles.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> What I'm saying is I don't remember anyone panicking when there was an outbreak of measles or chicken pox. I don't think the school even closed. Getting measles was the norm and (per 100,000) very few died. On the other hand, everyone was scared to death of polio.
> 
> As the article says, the death rate for measles was declining even before the vaccination became common because of improvements in health care. There is an antiviral currently in testing that, when and if approved, can treat people who have been exposed to measles.


They key would be "exposed" Antivirals will not help if you don't know you were exposed. The timeline between exposure and symptoms can be two week. When they have the symptoms it is too late.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Wlover said:


> They key would be "exposed" Antivirals will not help if you don't know you were exposed. The timeline between exposure and symptoms can be two week.


They would do like they did with Ebola.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> They would do like they did with Ebola.



So would you rather get vaccinated for Ebola or wait and hope they can give you an antiviral in time?


----------



## WildernesFamily (Mar 11, 2006)

watcher said:


> Poof, done. Ain't I something? Of course seeing as how some people have been known to violate the law I don't think it will solve the problem. Do you?
> 
> _U__nited States immigration law requires immigrant visa applicants to obtain certain vaccinations (listed below) prior to the issuance of an immigrant visa. Panel physicians who conduct medical examinations of immigrant visa applicants are required to verify that immigrant visa applicants have met the vaccination requirements, or that it is medically inappropriate for the visa applicant to receive one or more of the listed vaccinations:_
> 
> ...


Wrong.

MoonRiver said


> Why not make it a requirement that *all *people entering the US show proof of vaccination?


But what you referenced above is only applicable for an IMMIGRANT visa, not a visitor's visa, worker's visa, student visa or others... in fact there are more than 20 non-immigrant visa types which people use to travel to the US with every day.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Wlover said:


> So would you rather get vaccinated for Ebola or wait and hope they can give you an antiviral in time?


Doesn't apply to me. I was exposed as a child so have lifetime immunity.

An antiviral is just another tool in the tool belt. I have never said I was against vaccination. I just question why the media is making such a big deal over a relatively trivial issue.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

watcher said:


> I'm sorry but your logic escapes me. I clearly implied you were a responsible pet owner who has already looked at the risk and decided its better to vaccinate your dogs. So you logic there escapes me.
> 
> Your dog is dead because of his choice. He chose to take an action which a "reasonable man" would see as having a great chance to place others or other's property in danger. If he were burning trash on his property on a windy day and some embers landed on your roof and burned your house down would he not be held responsible? Would not a "reasonable man" look at the risk and say he took an unreasonable risk? The same applies here. If you look at the risk of the dangers to his dog by the vaccine vs the risk to him and OTHERS by not vaccinating which do you think would be greater? I have no problem with him not vaccinating his dogs but if it can be proven that his actions harmed others he should be held responsible or not?
> 
> ...


If a right can be taken away by someone else.....it's not a right then is it?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> Doesn't apply to me. I was exposed as a child so have lifetime immunity.
> 
> An antiviral is just another tool in the tool belt. I have never said I was against vaccination. I just question why the media is making such a big deal over a relatively trivial issue.


It is not really a trivial issue. More and more parents are not vaccinating their children because of incorrect information. The strides that have been made by this country towards eradicate diseases you can vaccinate for is being threatened.

The main reason that this was such a big story is that the start of over 100 cases was at an amusement park where people from all over the country visit and then travel home and possible further spread it. That is news.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Wlover said:


> It is not really a trivial issue. More and more parents are not vaccinating their children because of incorrect information. The strides that have been made by this country towards eradicate diseases you can vaccinate for is being threatened.
> 
> The main reason that this was such a big story is that the start of over 100 cases was at an amusement park where people from all over the country visit and then travel home and possible further spread it. That is news.


It's also news that quite a few of these folks that got the measles had been vaccinated. Why is that not being stated in the news?


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

my my...even California is thinking of eliminating exemptions from vaccines:

http://www.mercurynews.com/health/c...out-provision-vaccination-law?source=infinite
SACRAMENTO -- Two state senators said Wednesday they will introduce legislation to eliminate a controversial "personal belief exemption" that allows California parents to refuse to vaccinate their children.




"We shouldn't wait for more children to sicken or die before we act," Sen. Richard Pan, a Sacramento Democrat who is also a pediatrician, said at a Wednesday news conference. "Parents are letting us know our current laws are insufficient to protect their kids."In Washington, D.C., California's two Democratic senators, Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, on Wednesday asked state health officials to go further and consider eliminating the "religious exemption."


----------



## sidepasser (May 10, 2002)

Of the 34 people for whom the California Department of Public Health had vaccination records, *only five had received both doses *of the measles vaccine, according to the department. One received just the first dose. Nationally, officials are seeing the same trend, Schuchat said last week. 
"This is not a problem with the measles vaccine not working," she said. "This is a problem of the measles vaccine not being used." 
The CDC is seeing more adult cases of measles than usual during this outbreak, Schuchat said, adding that children are getting the virus, too.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/measles-cases-climb-102-cdc/story?id=28669137


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Wlover said:


> It is not really a trivial issue. More and more parents are not vaccinating their children because of incorrect information. The strides that have been made by this country towards eradicate diseases you can vaccinate for is being threatened.
> 
> The main reason that this was such a big story is that the start of over 100 cases was at an amusement park where people from all over the country visit and then travel home and possible further spread it. That is news.


It is a news story, but not worthy of all the hype being used on it. This is the media trying to get ratings. 

The measles outbreak came from overseas and I have yet to hear the first news broadcast mention it. I also don't see where there has been a single death. Just poor reporting all around. If you believe the media, this is all the fault of Republicans and vaccine deniers.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> It is a news story, but not worthy of all the hype being used on it. This is the media trying to get ratings.
> 
> The measles outbreak came from overseas and I have yet to hear the first news broadcast mention it. I also don't see where there has been a single death. Just poor reporting all around. If you believe the media, this is all the fault of Republicans and vaccine deniers.


Welcome to the US. The media is about making money, you don,t really expect them to present the news in any way then will make money?


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

Why is there no coverage on the 100,000 people on average that die as a side effect of correct usage of prescription drugs ( not including ilegal usage), or the aproximatly 700,000 people that die from other medical mistakes each year? Or the coverups of these by doctors so the families of these people don't even know about it


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

haley1 said:


> Why is there no coverage on the 100,000 people on average that die as a side effect of correct usage of prescription drugs ( not including ilegal usage), or the aproximatly 700,000 people that die from other medical mistakes each year? Or the coverups of these by doctors so the families of these people don't even know about it


Those numbers can't be right. Around 2.5 million deaths each year, no way are 1/3 of all deaths due to drug reactions and medical mistakes.


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

.....


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Ya those numbers are way out of whack. Besides as people get older they take ,ore and ore drugs because of the FAILING health. If they had not taken ANY they would be dying early.
So who knows for sure if it is some meds or a combination of things including the big one getting OLD. And I just love how these anti vac folks just love to push numbers of vans killing people when a good share was because of MANY OTHER Factors.`!


----------



## haley1 (Aug 15, 2012)

The op asked what was in vaccines, here the flu shot.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

NaturalNews strikes again. Shoulda known.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

From the journal of patient saftey:


http://journals.lww.com/journalpati...idence_based_estimate_of_patient_harms.2.aspx

preventable adverse events (PAEs)

CONCLUSIONS

There was much debate after the IOM report about the accuracy of its estimates. In a sense, it does not matter whether the deaths of 100,000, 200,000 or 400,000 Americans each year are associated with PAEs in hospitals. Any of the estimates demands assertive action on the part of providers, legislators, and people who will one day become patients. Yet, the action and progress on patient safety is frustratingly slow; however, one must hope that the present,* evidence-based estimate of 400,000+ deaths per year* will foster an outcry for overdue changes and increased vigilance in medical care to address the problem of harm to patients who come to a hospital seeking only to be healed.


----------



## BlackFeather (Jun 17, 2014)

Interesting articles for what they are worth
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/01/joseph-mercola/the-sordid-history-of-vaccines/
http://vactruth.com/2015/02/03/sids-death-vaccines/
Note if you google sids and vaccines you get quite a lot of listings.
With so many getting measles with this latest outbreak the vaccination must not work as well as claimed.

My view is that vaccines can be helpful but with what happened in Kenya with the Tetanus shot having a birth control hormone attached and women getting it unknowingly, how can you trust anything these people want to give you. How do you know what is really in the shot. As I see it there is a major lack of trust with the establishment, it seems people lie all the time an when they tell the truth how are we to know? Same with our government, they lie even when they don't have to, so if they say they are telling the truth why should we believe them? I remember reading an article about a journalist who went to see his high school buddy years after school. His buddy was vice president of a pharmaceutical company, the VP told his journalist friend that it was good that people were sick, that made them money and wished everyone was sick in some way so they could make more money. After reading this I don't trust these people.
http://www.matercare.org/news-publi...ion-campaign-is-all-about-population-control/
http://sanevax.org/making-vaccines-cancer-cells-safe/


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

JeffreyD said:


> If a right can be taken away by someone else.....it's not a right then is it?


I can't find that definition in the dictionary. Where did you learn that fact?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Wlover said:


> Welcome to the US. The media is about making money, you don,t really expect them to present the news in any way then will make money?


This issue isn't in the news because of money. The truth is that Rand Paul & Chris Christie can connect with a certain right-wing, anti-establishment constituency with this kind of vaccine rhetoric. From reviewing this thread I'd say they've succeeded, although recently they both seemed to have stepped in 'it' with their vaccine comments.

But honestly, does anyone really expect an anti-vaccine political movement of any size to speak of to come out of this? I think not. Look for Rand Paul & Chris Christie to lose interest this issue after the republican primary.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> I can't find that definition in the dictionary. Where did you learn that fact?


What is your definition? It's really just common sense! And it is a fact.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> This issue isn't in the news because of money. The truth is that Rand Paul & Chris Christie can connect with a certain right-wing, anti-establishment constituency with this kind of vaccine rhetoric. From reviewing this thread I'd say they've succeeded, although recently they both seemed to have stepped in 'it' with their vaccine comments.
> 
> But honestly, does anyone really expect an anti-vaccine political movement of any size to speak of to come out of this? I think not. Look for Rand Paul & Chris Christie to lose interest this issue after the republican primary.


Haha...This is tooooo funny! You do realize that the greatest group of anti-vaccine folks bar far...are liberals. Sure, some are conservatives, but look where the clusters are. At least that's the way it is here in California! !!


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Wlover said:


> Those would be regulations not laws. There are also regulations that all immigrants must have all their vaccinations when applying to emigrate while still in their home country.


This is true for those who are NOT illegal.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> This is true for those who are NOT illegal.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wlover View Post
Those would be regulations not laws. There are also regulations that all immigrants must have all their vaccinations *when applying to emigrate while still in their home country.*


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> Doesn't apply to me. I was exposed as a child so have lifetime immunity.
> 
> An antiviral is just another tool in the tool belt. I have never said I was against vaccination. I just question why the media is making such a big deal over a relatively trivial issue.


Partly b/c the media perceives the issue to be a conservative at fault issue. When they realize its mostly the blue states that are having the 'epidemic' they'll quit w/leading it on the news. When they realize its this administration who let in thousands of unvaccinated illegal children, they'll stop w/news on it.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> It is a news story, but not worthy of all the hype being used on it. This is the media trying to get ratings.
> 
> The measles outbreak came from overseas and I have yet to hear the first news broadcast mention it. I also don't see where there has been a single death. Just poor reporting all around. If you believe the media, this is all the fault of Republicans and vaccine deniers.


Did you hear that idiot Joy Behar? 
Bwhahaha!


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Wlover said:


> Welcome to the US. The media is about making money, you don,t really expect them to present the news in any way then will make money?


I expect the free press to be factual.
Another BWhahaha!


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> I expect the free press to be factual.
> Another BWhahaha!


Factual and taking time to present all the facts are two very different things. It is proven every day by the members of this forum that the facts don't really matter just the ones that support their opinions.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Wlover said:


> Factual and taking time to present all the facts are two very different things. It is proven every day by the members of this forum that the facts don't really matter just the ones that support their opinions.


Facts like these? http://mobile.philly.com/news/politics/?wss=/philly/news/politics&id=290960711&. Or "facts" from Glenn Beck?


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

Nevada said:


> This issue isn't in the news because of money. The truth is that Rand Paul & Chris Christie can connect with a certain right-wing, anti-establishment constituency with this kind of vaccine rhetoric. From reviewing this thread I'd say they've succeeded, although recently they both seemed to have stepped in 'it' with their vaccine comments.
> 
> But honestly, does anyone really expect an anti-vaccine political movement of any size to speak of to come out of this? I think not. Look for Rand Paul & Chris Christie to lose interest this issue after the republican primary.


This is Chat, not Politics.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

MoonRiver said:


> This is Chat, not Politics.


As I said, there's a constituency that Rand Paul & Chris Christie connects with when they say those things, so they're doing it for political reasons.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

JeffreyD said:


> Haha...This is tooooo funny! You do realize that the greatest group of anti-vaccine folks bar far...are liberals. Sure, some are conservatives, but look where the clusters are. At least that's the way it is here in California! !!


That's true, some on the left buy this political rhetoric. There are some very independent leftover souls from the 60s, and perhaps their kids, who will go along with it.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> That's true, some on the left buy this political rhetoric. There are some very independent leftover souls from the 60s, and perhaps their kids, who will go along with it.


It's not a political thing with them, it's a what you put into your body thing. You know...sprouts, algae, moss, things of that nature. Anything else is harmful.


----------



## BlackFeather (Jun 17, 2014)

Found another good article about vaccines, and the fight to keep information about them from the people, http://www.activistpost.com/2012/08/exposing-fdas-vaccine-injury-cover-up.html


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

All a person needs to see in the address is *Activist Post*
And that is a good one to stay far away as they sure as heck just a one-sided anti this, anti that, and anti everything else that anti's don't like or believe in.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

thermopkt said:


> If I was B's parents, I would make it my business to know. That child's health is my responsibility and foisting that responsibility on someone else at the risk of _their _child is not cool. In the current thinking on this thread, B's parents should be sued for neglect.
> 
> People always want someone to blame. I've never figured that out. How does having someone to blame make anything any better or change anything that has happened?
> 
> ...


Do you ask the people you work with if they have been vaccinated? After all its not only children who can be carriers of all kinds of nasties. Would you not be upset to discover you are now sterile (assuming you don't want to be) because your co-worker gave you mumps?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

*Vaccinate the masses*



> Most anti-vaccination activists, otherwise known as &#8220;those parents who are endangering their children,&#8221; quote a study published in the Lancet completed by ex-Doctor Andrew Wakefield. I say &#8220;ex-Doctor&#8221; because Mr. Wakefield had his medical &#8232;license revoked in 2010.
> 
> In his study, Wakefield vaccinated 12 children with the MMR vaccine. He claimed that, within days, the children exhibited signs of autism. Wakefield holds that vaccines cause gastroenterological swelling, which impedes brain function, causing autism.
> 
> Since its publication, a British medical panel revoked Wakefield&#8217;s medical license, stating he has &#8220;callous disregard&#8221; for the suffering of the children he experimented on, performing lumbar punctures and colonoscopies without prior approval. The panel found Wakefield had patented a measles vaccine that would become financially successful had his research succeeded in knocking the main vaccine off the market.


http://www.idsnews.com/article/2015/02/vaccinate-the-masses


----------



## harvestmoon1964 (Apr 24, 2014)

I wonder what anti-vaxxers would do if they came out with a vaccine for autism.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

watcher said:


> Do you ask the people you work with if they have been vaccinated? After all its not only children who can be carriers of all kinds of nasties. Would you not be upset to discover you are now sterile (assuming you don't want to be) because your co-worker gave you mumps?



Whereas if it happens to me as a side effect of that vaccine I should be ok with it? Orchitis is listed as an adverse reaction on the package insert. Orchitis can cause infertility. 

Although I must say, that's not an issue for me. :gaptooth:

Seriously, I'm not trying to talk you into disliking vaccines. I'm objecting to your wanting to take away my choice. Life involves risk. You are all arguing that vaccines lower that risk, maybe, maybe not, but if that's the thinking, there are sooo many other things that you should also be concerned about. Like driving, sex, several job occupations like mining, etc.

You say my choice not to vaccinate may put you at risk. Your choice to drive may be putting ME at risk.


I don't even object to all vaccinations. There are just some where I think the risk from the vaccination outweighs the risk from the disease. There are some where it's the opposite.

Again, _choice_. If it gets taken away from me, it also gets taken away from you.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

College friend who is a PA told me that the CDC recommends 49 vaccinations before age 6. Having no children myself I asked if she had followed that guideline with her own, she said no that some of the recommended vaccines were in her opinion not necessary especially at such a young age. For her own children she spreads the vaccines into longer time spans. She also will accommodate parents wishes on vaccines with no problem.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

thermopkt said:


> Whereas if it happens to me as a side effect of that vaccine I should be ok with it? Orchitis is listed as an adverse reaction on the package insert. Orchitis can cause infertility.
> 
> Although I must say, that's not an issue for me. :gaptooth:
> 
> ...


I have no problems with you making choices but you should be ready to take RESPONSIBILITY for the actions which result from those choices. 

You can choose to drink. You can choose to drink and drive. But society has decided that doing so means you place such a great risk to others if you are caught doing so you will pay a very high cost for that choice. 

In the same way you can choose to not vac your kid. But don't get your knickers in a knot when society decides that in doing so you are putting others at risk. And because of that danger they don't want your kid go any where that it would be possible to transmit an infectious disease to someone who for medical reasons can not be vaccinated. To include but not limited to the grocery store, the park, the school and movie theater.

And IMO if you make either of those two choices (DUI or not vaccinating) and your actions are proven to harm others you should be held fully responsible for the damages your choice causes.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

no really said:


> College friend who is a PA told me that the CDC recommends 49 vaccinations before age 6. Having no children myself I asked if she had followed that guideline with her own, she said no that some of the recommended vaccines were in her opinion not necessary especially at such a young age. For her own children she spreads the vaccines into longer time spans. She also will accommodate parents wishes on vaccines with no problem.


To clarify, those are 49 injections of 16 different vaccines.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

watcher said:


> And IMO if you make either of those two choices (DUI or not vaccinating) and your actions are proven to harm others you should be held fully responsible for the damages your choice causes.



_*Again*_, I am asking why, as a non vaxer, I would be held responsible if I 'harm' others, but *I* am expected to eat it if me or my child is harmed because of *you*? If I catch rubella while pregnant from someone who has just been vaxed with a live vax, should I be able to go after that person and the drug company and society?


Yeah, right. Double standard there.


Whereas if I am vaccinated, I can freely run around whilst ill and spread all sorts of disease and it's ok with you? That kinda seems to be what you're saying.


If I am expected to take responsibility for any harm my choices cause, you had better be ready to take responsibility for any harm YOUR choices cause me. Especially when you *force *your choice on me. The way you want things is for me to take all the risk. And they call non vaxers selfish.

You don't have to live with the memory of that toddler's miserable, painful, terrifying death. I do. So does her mother. She was pregnant at the time and was unable to get a medical exemption and so was forced to go to a non vax friendly state to have the baby and she will never have any more kids because she's terrified to watch another go through that when/if people like you force vaccination. And yet SHE is classified as selfish. YOU were complicit in murder according to your thinking.

People who have seen horrible consequences from disease want vaccinations, people who've seen horrible consequences from vaccinations would prefer the disease. All of us make choices and have opinions based on our life experiences.

People will always die and get sick, get damaged. Yes, now most kids won't get sick and die from measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, hiB, tetanus, diptheria, etc., but now we have more autoimmune diseases, fatal food allergies, asthma, metal disorders, leukemia, deafness from repeated ear infections, infertility, etc. I am not saying that vaccines cause any of those, just that nature will fill a vacuum and for every disease we 'eliminate', we end up with something, or somethings, else.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

thermopkt said:


> _*Again*_, I am asking why, as a non vaxer, I would be held responsible if I 'harm' others, but *I* am expected to eat it if me or my child is harmed because of *you*?


Because YOU made the CHOICE which place others in harms way. Just as if you made the choice to get in your car and go to the store after drinking six beers. You chose to take an action a reasonable man would see is irresponsible. AAMOF, so irresponsible society has decided to make it a criminal act. If during that trip you ran over a kid there would be a direct link between your choice and the harm done. Now because of those two factors you would be held responsible for your choice. 

If you choose to not vac your kid and due to that choice your kid catches something and transmits it to another kid there is a DIRECT link between your choice and the harm done to another. 




thermopkt said:


> If I catch rubella while pregnant from someone who has just been vaxed with a live vax, should I be able to go after that person and the drug company and society?


If you can show that the person was directly responsible then yes you should be free to "go after" them. But to win you'd have to prove that their actions were not 'reasonable' in the eyes of the court. Example, if the person had been told to self quarantine for 5 days after the shot and they went out after 2.




thermopkt said:


> Yeah, right. Double standard there.


Not from me. My standard is you are to be held responsible for your actions at all times. 




thermopkt said:


> Whereas if I am vaccinated, I can freely run around whilst ill and spread all sorts of disease and it's ok with you? That kinda seems to be what you're saying.


Nope. If you have the flu and know you have the flu and go to work and infect others you should be held just as responsible as if you went to work with smallpox.




thermopkt said:


> If I am expected to take responsibility for any harm my choices cause, you had better be ready to take responsibility for any harm YOUR choices cause me. Especially when you *force *your choice on me. The way you want things is for me to take all the risk. And they call non vaxers selfish.


Wrong again. I don't see choosing not to vac as child endangerment nor abuse. Therefore I don't give an airborne rodent's rectum if you vac your kids or not. What does it matter to me if your kid goes blind from rubella or is parallelized by polio unless you expect me to provide something for them? 

Now when you expect to have your non-vacced kids treated the same as others then there's a problem. Because like it or not your choice has made them a greater threat to the safety of others. 




thermopkt said:


> You don't have to live with the memory of that toddler's miserable, painful, terrifying death. I do. So does her mother. She was pregnant at the time and was unable to get a medical exemption and so was forced to go to a non vax friendly state to have the baby and she will never have any more kids because she's terrified to watch another go through that when/if people like you force vaccination. And yet SHE is classified as selfish. YOU were complicit in murder according to your thinking.


Still wrong. I believe in personal freedom but with that freedom comes responsibility. 





thermopkt said:


> People will always die and get sick, get damaged. Yes, now most kids won't get sick and die from measles, mumps, rubella, chicken pox, hiB, tetanus, diptheria, etc., but now we have more autoimmune diseases, fatal food allergies, asthma, metal disorders, leukemia, deafness from repeated ear infections, infertility, etc. I am not saying that vaccines cause any of those, just that nature will fill a vacuum and for every disease we 'eliminate', we end up with something, or somethings, else.


Yep. I know many adults alive today with such problems which would not have lived through childhood years ago. But that has nothing to do with this issue. The risk of damage/harm from vaccinating people is VASTLY out weighed by the known dangers of an unvaccinated population. The individual risk of damage due to an averse reaction to a vaccine is slight vs the risk of damage from catching the disease. Therefore to me any responsible person is going to vaccinate their child, not only to protect their child but for the protection of society in general.

Again there are times when a person must put others ahead of themselves. And there are times when society must put the good of society ahead of personal choice and freedom. Its the price one must pay to live in a society, to do otherwise means anarchy.


----------



## Molly Mckee (Jul 8, 2006)

One thing that has always bothered me is when people point out all the things they think vaccinating may cause, illegal (or legal in some states now) drug use is never factored in. I have never seen a study that considers parental or even grand-parental drug use causing some of the things people think vaccines cause. Not only can illegal drugs cause problems for children of users, they are cut with all kinds of horrible other chemicals. People that will use drugs they buy from people that they wouldn't accept a cup of coffee from, because of the filth in their home. Then they claim the drugs won't hurt anyone. They smoke pot grown who knows where, under what conditions, but worry about roundup ready crops? At the same time they use chemicals all over their yards, but suburban chemicals don't seem to bother many people.
Drug use became common at the same time all these problems children have became more apparently widespread, but we simply ignore that part of the equation. 

One of the smartest doctors I have ever know, a geneticist, felt that people were going to pay a price for all the illegal drugs. I guess it's easier to blame a vaccine for kids problems than realize that you of your partner may have caused them, even if it was when you were young and stupid.


----------



## MoonRiver (Sep 2, 2007)

MoonRiver said:


> I'm not familiar with most of the ingredients, but I do wonder why they need to use things like dye, formaldehyde, and MSG.


This is quoted from my OP. No one has yet to explain why dye, formaldehyde, and MSG are used in vaccinations. There's a lot of other stuff in some of the vaccines that, to a layman, seem potentially dangerous.

Someone please correct me if this is wrong, but I believe a vaccine is made up of 3 major components: 


An antigen
One or more adjuvants (boost immune response)
Preservatives
I think people that are questioning vaccinations and those who don't vaccinate their children are not worried about the antigen, but about the adjuvants and preservatives. There is also some question as to where an antigen is grown.

If the media was doing their job they would explain this to us. My concern is that a vaccine today does not have the exact same components as the "same" vaccine of 10 or 20 years ago. Are the adjuvants and preservatives used today better for the patient, the drug company, neither, or both? Obviously the drug companies want the longest shelf life possible, but we have seen what has happened with some of the preservatives food companies have used.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

watcher said:


> Its the price one must pay to live in a society, to do otherwise means anarchy.



No, it's the price I am forced to pay to live in a society that I am not allowed to opt out of. Basically I'm being told that I _will_ stay right here and keep being exploited by your society and I _will _do everything it says whilst being exploited. Land of the free.


----------



## MDKatie (Dec 13, 2010)

MoonRiver said:


> This is quoted from my OP. No one has yet to explain why dye, formaldehyde, and MSG are used in vaccinations. There's a lot of other stuff in some of the vaccines that, to a layman, seem potentially dangerous.
> 
> Someone please correct me if this is wrong, but I believe a vaccine is made up of 3 major components:
> 
> ...



The information is out there, on many websites. Here's a link directly to the CDC website that explains what ingredients are used and why. 


Here's a link from the University of Oxford.


----------



## bluefish (Jan 27, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> This is quoted from my OP. No one has yet to explain why dye, formaldehyde, and MSG are used in vaccinations. There's a lot of other stuff in some of the vaccines that, to a layman, seem potentially dangerous.
> 
> Someone please correct me if this is wrong, but I believe a vaccine is made up of 3 major components:
> 
> ...


Aluminum is the most commonly used adjuvant. They say it's safe, but then we hear how drinking out of aluminum cans can cause damage. Anyway, here's a CDC link on adjuvants. http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/adjuvants.html

Apparently they don't actually know how adjuvants work. So how do they know they are necessary? There's a paper done in 2010 that raises some questions. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100303193113.htm

Here is an interesting statement from the FDA regarding additives. - 

*How does FDA evaluate adjuvants for safety and efficacy?

When evaluating a vaccine for safety and efficacy, FDA considers adjuvants as a component of the vaccine; they are not licensed separately.*

http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/ucm187810.htm



Formaldehyde is used to inactivate viruses in the vaccines. There is supposedly only tiny residues left in the actual vaccine.



Gelatin from pigs is used in some vaccines to help stabilize the vax against the effects from temperature



Antibiotics are used in the manufacture of vaccines to keep bacteria and such from growing in them. Traces do appear in the vax. The four most commonly used are neomycin, streptomycin, polymyxin b and gentimicin.


Yeast proteins are used in the production of Gardasil.


Latex in the packaging of some vaccines may cause anaphylactic shock in allergic individuals.



*Monosodium glutamate *(*MSG*) and 2-phenoxy-ethanol which are used as stabilizers in a few vaccines to help the vaccine remain unchanged when the vaccine is exposed to heat, light, acidity, or humidity.
http://www.ovg.ox.ac.uk/vaccine-ingredients
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/ucm187810.htm


Above are some of the links where this info is found.


Would suck to have an unknown allergy to any of that stuff wouldn't it?


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

"Aluminum is the most commonly used adjuvant."

I think recall a study where one of anomalies in a Alzheimer patient is higher levels of aluminum in the brain..

Coincidence?

I don't know. But I do know that the CDC is a political group and no longer a medical group.. Yes they still act like a medical group, but they also continually take a political stance. That there makes me question anything they say.. Also the fact that the FDA is filled with nothing but Drug Company cronies also makes me question what they say..
I'm guessing I will never find the truth, simply because I don't trust those who use politics as "fact" and those who now are suppose to regulate their previous boss.

Here is an example in a different business:
3 upper level management people who worked for Yellow Freight (National hauler) bought Preston (Regional Hauler). They then proceeded to run Preston into the ground by doing things they know didn't work. Within 5 years Preston closed it's doors for good and all 3 of the previous upper level management people were "rehired" by Yellow while the rest of the employees had to find new jobs..
They did it all within the "Regulations" of the governing authority..

The FDA does / has done the same thing.. When an employee of the FDA leaves, it seems they return to the previous employer ie the Drug Company..

So who is to be trusted?

I know I don't have the answer!


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

What we "know" about what's safe and what isn't changes from day to day depending on what the latest scare the 'news' is pushing. 

You have to look at the retaliative risk of something. You put yourself in a much greater risk of being killed or permanently injured each time you take a trip in your car than you would by taking a vaccine shot each day or your life. Yet you don't think twice about sticking the family in the car and taking off. Yet you'll wring your hands, wail and moan and fret about the risk of a vaccine. Seriously people?!?


----------



## beowoulf90 (Jan 13, 2004)

watcher said:


> What we "know" about what's safe and what isn't changes from day to day depending on what the latest scare the 'news' is pushing.
> 
> You have to look at the retaliative risk of something. You put yourself in a much greater risk of being killed or permanently injured each time you take a trip in your car than you would by taking a vaccine shot each day or your life. Yet you don't think twice about sticking the family in the car and taking off. Yet you'll wring your hands, wail and moan and fret about the risk of a vaccine. Seriously people?!?



Well you are seriously wrong.. 
I'm not wringing my hands.. I asked questions and you only want to feed me some "government propaganda"

As I've said previously if you bothered to read my posts.
I have been vaccinated for MANY things since I spent over 6 years in the military "traveling" the world I can't count the number of times they injected me with some vaccine because of where we were going..

Secondly, my children have been vaccinated..

But I asked serious questions, because I want to know the answer.
According to your "stance" mercury is good for you, yet in the same breath we already know that 1 drop of mercury can poison a 5 acre lake/pond and you are suppose to treat these new CFL bulbs as hazardous material. Yet a form of mercury is / was used in vaccines.
They also know that from the study of Alzheimer patients, that they have a higher level of aluminum in their brains, yet it is being used as a preservative in vaccines? in other products?

Do I know the answer? no I don't
But I don't believe everything the FDA, CDC for the reasons I've stated. Do they tell some truths? Yes they do, but it's a matter of figuring out what the truth is and not falling for the propaganda..

It seems now the Socialists have started to convince the population that everyone needs/should be _______ (fill in the blank) Vaccinations is just the latest..

Once you give up your freedom it isn't easily recovered..

But I do understand.. 
The Government allows millions of undocumented illegal aliens into the Country without screening for disease or criminal records etc.
Then when there is some outbreak they will claim to have the fix, but we have to give up a "little" piece of our Freedom to solve the problem that they created..

Some fall for this deception..
I'm not..
I'll question everything...This goes way beyond political party, but goes to the root of Government in and of itself.. 

As one of our Founding Fathers said; "Government is a necessary evil" that needs to be watched and kept in check by the people.. Unfortunately the people don't care or have gotten lazy. My thoughts arre they just want to be slaves because they haven't the will to be free or make their own choices..


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

watcher said:


> What we "know" about what's safe and what isn't changes from day to day depending on what the latest scare the 'news' is pushing.
> 
> You have to look at the retaliative risk of something. You put yourself in a much greater risk of being killed or permanently injured each time you take a trip in your car than you would by taking a vaccine shot each day or your life. Yet you don't think twice about sticking the family in the car and taking off. Yet you'll wring your hands, wail and moan and fret about the risk of a vaccine. Seriously people?!?


 Ya really. There is many years generations at that in receiving vaccinations. And many Bad diseases have literally ben wiped OUT. 
And this business that autism is caused by vaccines is utterly ridiculous.
Even on the Autism Speaks website mentions Nothing about it and I mean nothing. In fact they are Recommending getting these shots for measles. How about that?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

beowoulf90 said:


> Well you are seriously wrong..
> I'm not wringing my hands.. I asked questions and you only want to feed me some "government propaganda"


Sigh. . .that was a general "you" not a specific.


What I have given you are facts. Many of which are NOT provided by governments. 


If you research you will find out that there have been several studies done in many nations covering millions of kids. If you check that research you will find out the "dangers" of vaccinating are much smaller than dangers from many things you do to or allow your child to do every day. 

I have tried to find the number of children (birth to 6 y.o.) who die from adverse reactions from vaccines but I haven't found it. Do you have that data? 




beowoulf90 said:


> But I asked serious questions, because I want to know the answer.
> According to your "stance" mercury is good for you, yet in the same breath we already know that 1 drop of mercury can poison a 5 acre lake/pond and you are suppose to treat these new CFL bulbs as hazardous material. Yet a form of mercury is / was used in vaccines.


Based on the definition of "poison" (in PPM/PPB) given to you by the very same government you don't seem to trust when they tell you the stuff in vaccines are safe. See a little problem with that?

The huge fear of heavy metals is hype. Are they dangerous? Sure but they aren't going to kill you if you look it them w/o a level hasmat suit. As a kid I handled mercury a lot. I had a big bottle of it I kept in my desk drawer I used in all kinds of experiments. I have mercury in the fillings in my teeth. I also handled a lot of lead, including melting it to make balls and bullets, w/o all the "necessary" safety gear which is "required" to keep you safe today. You must be shocked I'm still alive.




beowoulf90 said:


> They also know that from the study of Alzheimer patients, that they have a higher level of aluminum in their brains, yet it is being used as a preservative in vaccines? in other products?


And did you know that everyone who ate carrots in 1750 is DEAD! Therefore carrots must be deadly. IOW, just because something is there doesn't mean there is a causal link between the two.




beowoulf90 said:


> Do I know the answer? no I don't
> But I don't believe everything the FDA, CDC for the reasons I've stated. Do they tell some truths? Yes they do, but it's a matter of figuring out what the truth is and not falling for the propaganda..


What do you see as propaganda? That vaccines work? That having almost everyone vaccinated protects those who can not be vaccinated? That the numbers of children harmed is very small? 




beowoulf90 said:


> Once you give up your freedom it isn't easily recovered..


You can not have freedom is you are not going to take responsibility for your actions and the results of those actions. I've said over and over I don't care if you vac you kid or not. But if you don't then you should be ready to 'suffer' to consequences of that choice. Such as people not wanting your child to be in a situation which could endanger their child. Don't expect me or others to pay for any of the medical cost incurred if your child gets a disease which the data shows is 99% preventable if vaccinated against. And if you child gets it and passes it on to my kid be ready for me to expect you to pay for the cost I have because of it.




beowoulf90 said:


> But I do understand..
> The Government allows millions of undocumented illegal aliens into the Country without screening for disease or criminal records etc.
> Then when there is some outbreak they will claim to have the fix, but we have to give up a "little" piece of our Freedom to solve the problem that they created..


The possible cause has nothing to do with vac/don't vac discussion. It doesn't matter if it was caused by an illegal freely allowed in by the feds or if it was caused by a US citizen bringing it in when they return from a trip abroad. What does matter is the fact is once its here if enough people refuse to get vaccinated and go out in public the disease will spread and will infect people who would otherwise not be infected. I'd like to ask an anti-vac who's child caught it and did or quite possibly did transmit it to a chemo patient who died because if it how they feel knowing their action lead to the death of another. But after talking to many I think I know the answer; they wouldn't care because they would not see it as THEIR fault because nothing is ever their fault.




beowoulf90 said:


> Some fall for this deception..
> I'm not..
> I'll question everything...This goes way beyond political party, but goes to the root of Government in and of itself..


What good is it to question something if you refuse to really see the data and accept the answer? Can you honestly look at the data and say that its better off not vaccinating? 




beowoulf90 said:


> As one of our Founding Fathers said; "Government is a necessary evil" that needs to be watched and kept in check by the people.. Unfortunately the people don't care or have gotten lazy. My thoughts arre they just want to be slaves because they haven't the will to be free or make their own choices..


They will become slaves if the refuse to take responsibility for their choices because others will become sick of having to pay for those choices. 

Look at it this way. Your neighbor has the choice to burn or not burn his leaves. If he chooses to burn them only when the wind is blowing the smoke toward your house at some point you are going to get tired of it and try to put a stop to it. You'll probably first ask him to not do it. If he tells you to push off he has the freedom to burn when he wants you are then going to, most likely, go to the authorities to see if they will stop him. If they tell you there's nothing they can do because there's no law against it you, again most likely, will start pushing for a law to allow them to stop it. Once that's passed he'll no longer have the freedom to burn his leaves but neither will all the people who burn leaves responsibly. One, or a few, people who refuse to take responsibility for their actions results in the loss of freedom for all.

This is what's going to happen here. Those few who refused to vac and ignored their responsibility by taking took their family to a very crowed public place and caused the spread of a disease will most likely cause the lost of the very freedom they wanted.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Ah yes that old mercury, why how many on here when they were found Played with mercury? I know I did and watched if form itself while rolling around on the table.
And that tiny bit that is in CFL's my goodness there is way more in the 8 foot tubes of which are still in use and many just get broken in the dumpster. I know I have smashed many a 8 footer in the dumpster over the years hmmm and I am still around. Just few few years ago one 4 foot bulb busted over the manic I was working on. No big deal a cleanup crew came in and just swept it up. And they were not wearing little yellow suits nor did they have on yellow boots either. LOL This is pure you know what that a person has to call hazmat folks. And this was at a pretty good sized company in 3 states too not some fly by night small business.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> Ah yes that old mercury, why how many on here when they were found Played with mercury? I know I did and watched if form itself while rolling around on the table.
> And that tiny bit that is in CFL's my goodness there is way more in the 8 foot tubes of which are still in use and many just get broken in the dumpster. I know I have smashed many a 8 footer in the dumpster over the years hmmm and I am still around. Just few few years ago one 4 foot bulb busted over the manic I was working on. No big deal a cleanup crew came in and just swept it up. And they were not wearing little yellow suits nor did they have on yellow boots either. LOL This is pure you know what that a person has to call hazmat folks. And this was at a pretty good sized company in 3 states too not some fly by night small business.


Are you suggesting that mercury poisoning is a myth? Do you want to see what it looks like?


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Pretty much ANYTHING can poison a person if gotten too much of said substance. Heck drink too much water with nothing else and see what happens..


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> Pretty much ANYTHING can poison a person if gotten too much of said substance. Heck drink too much water with nothing else and see what happens..


Heavy metals are different. Your body doesn't have the ability to get rid of heavy metals that accumulate in your body. If you exceed that amount in your lifetime you can suffer terrible consequences.

The mad hatters pretty much all died off from mercury poisoning. It's not a good way to go. Google for Mad Hatters Disease.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Are you suggesting that mercury poisoning is a myth? Do you want to see what it looks like?


Depends on what part you are talking about. If you are talking about the current view that if you you break a mercury thermometer you need to evacuate a zone no smaller than 1,000 yards from the impact area and only enter it wearing a level 3 hasmat suit. Or the drop will poison a 5 acre lake. Then yes.

If you are talking about long term exposure then no.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Heavy metals are different. Your body doesn't have the ability to get rid of heavy metals that accumulate in your body. If you exceed that amount in your lifetime you can suffer terrible consequences.
> 
> The mad hatters pretty much all died off from mercury poisoning. It's not a good way to go. Google for Mad Hatters Disease.


And how many of the "mercury filled" vaccines would you have to take to get even 10% of that level?


----------



## pinfeather (Nov 12, 2006)

Thimerosol (mercury) still listed in the influenza vaccine. Wow. EPA says mercury in the amount of the size of the head of a pin contaminates 23 gallons of water enough to make it unfit for human consumption. Wonder how much mercury is in influenza vaccine?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Wlover said:


> I believe that Moonriver posted a vague thread on a controversial subject hoping to stir the hornets nest. Thread drift is part of the package.


Really? Part of the package? How about your threads? No drift? Ok here but not in the one about SCOTUS & h.c. exchanges?
Why so?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

MoonRiver said:


> What I'm saying is I don't remember anyone panicking when there was an outbreak of measles or chicken pox. I don't think the school even closed. Getting measles was the norm and (per 100,000) very few died. On the other hand, everyone was scared to death of polio.
> 
> As the article says, the death rate for measles was declining even before the vaccination became common because of improvements in health care. There is an antiviral currently in testing that, when and if approved, can treat people who have been exposed to measles.


You are certainly correct, MR. Polio was sooo feared. Measles was almost nada.
Anyone who disputes must not have been here (US) back then.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Wlover said:


> Welcome to the US. The media is about making money, you don,t really expect them to present the news in any way then will make money?


Up until a couple decades ago we could expect the news to be truthful & not slanted. That is no longer the case. Now we have a left-leaning lying media. Look at NBC, the Obamanetwork.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Wlover said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Wlover View Post
> Those would be regulations not laws. There are also regulations that all immigrants must have all their vaccinations *when applying to emigrate while still in their home country.*


Yup. Sooo, ya think those entering ILLEGALLY are being vaccinated 1st?
no, not really. Do you think those entering ILLEGALLY apply to emigrate?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Tricky Grama said:


> Yup. Sooo, ya think those entering ILLEGALLY are being vaccinated 1st?
> no, not really. Do you think those entering ILLEGALLY apply to emigrate?


It might behoove you to read the thread and all responses before picking on posts and trying to make a point. If you did that you would see that the questions you ask and try to jump on have already been answered and dealt with.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Tricky Grama said:


> Yup. Sooo, ya think those entering ILLEGALLY are being vaccinated 1st?
> no, not really. Do you think those entering ILLEGALLY apply to emigrate?


 They Stay illegal as long as possible even for ever as long as they can Git Away With It. 
They go back and forth to Mexico like Obama goes away and golfs.
I have talked personally with some that all they do is contact another illegal in Mexico they come up here get trained for two weeks or so this is at a dairy at thee OWN no pay once trained in the first illegal goes back to Mexico for what ever time he wanted to, and then come on back and switch with the one that took his place, and this takes over and over and over again, at the places that allow this to happen in the US.
And WHAT do these illegals bring back to the USA *diseases* Thats what. And anybody that doesn't want to believe that just hang out at some of these places and ask questions and see for themselves just what is what and what is happening in and to, this country right now.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

arabian knight said:


> I have talked personally with some that all they do is contact another illegal in Mexico they come up here get trained for two weeks or so this is at a dairy at thee OWN no pay once trained in the first illegal goes back to Mexico for what ever time he wanted to, and then come on back and switch with the one that took his place, and this takes over and over and over again, at the places that allow this to happen in the US.


Conservatives meet the most unusual people.


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

MoonRiver said:


> What I'm saying is I don't remember anyone panicking when there was an outbreak of measles or chicken pox. I don't think the school even closed. Getting measles was the norm and (per 100,000) very few died. On the other hand, everyone was scared to death of polio.


AMEN!!! I think a lot of the current hysteria comes from the vaccine makers who want to sell more vaccines. We all lived through all those childhood diseases. 
Thank God for the polio vaccines and others that prevent horrible complications and death. But chicken pox is a very mild disease. And for the most part measles was too when we were kids. I think the measles vaccine has been a blessing overall. But severe complications from the disease itself weren't totally common at all. A lot of the info out there on these things borders on fear mongering.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

pinfeather said:


> Thimerosol (mercury) still listed in the influenza vaccine. Wow. EPA says mercury in the amount of the size of the head of a pin contaminates 23 gallons of water enough to make it unfit for human consumption. Wonder how much mercury is in influenza vaccine?


One of my points. People trust government agencies when they support their point of view but view agencies which do not support their views as 'evil'.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

pinfeather said:


> Thimerosol (mercury) still listed in the influenza vaccine. Wow. EPA says mercury in the amount of the size of the head of a pin contaminates 23 gallons of water enough to make it unfit for human consumption. Wonder how much mercury is in influenza vaccine?


Here ya go. http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228#t2


----------



## pinfeather (Nov 12, 2006)

watcher said:


> One of my points. People trust government agencies when they support their point of view but view agencies which do not support their views as 'evil'.


Exactly! If the EPA says it's unsafe, how can the FDA say it's safe? I'm honestly on the fence with the vaccinate/don't vaccinate issue. I vaccinated my boys (way before the firestorm) but might not have with all the information/misinformation that's out today.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

pinfeather said:


> Exactly! If the EPA says it's unsafe, how can the FDA say it's safe? I'm honestly on the fence with the vaccinate/don't vaccinate issue. I vaccinated my boys (way before the firestorm) but might not have with all the information/misinformation that's out today.


Not my point. Because people _want to believe_ that mercury is so dangerous that even looking at a picture of it will kill you they trust the government agency which agrees with them. But when another agency, the FDA, says that not all mercury is the same and this type is safe for what its being used for those people start screaming about how you can't believe what the government says because the entire government is controlled by big business and. . . .

As I have pointed out if mercury, as well as other heavy metals, is as dangerous as the EPA and others are trying to get us believe I should have been dead before I was 14. And that was a LONG time ago. I used to have a jar of mercury in my desk in my bedroom and would play with it from time to time as well as use it in experiments. Some of said experiments if done today would probably result in a visit from all kinds of law enforcement types. You can do interesting things with mercury and nitric acid  AAMOF, you can do a lot REALLY interesting things with nitric acid. Sigh. . .the good old days when a boy could blow up things and only have to face an angry parent.

I also used to play with and work with molten lead with on protective gear other than leather gloves.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

watcher said:


> Not my point. Because people _want to believe_ that mercury is so dangerous that even looking at a picture of it will kill you they trust the government agency which agrees with them. But when another agency, the FDA, says that not all mercury is the same and this type is safe for what its being used for those people start screaming about how you can't believe what the government says because the entire government is controlled by big business and. . . .
> 
> As I have pointed out if mercury, as well as other heavy metals, is as dangerous as the EPA and others are trying to get us believe I should have been dead before I was 14. And that was a LONG time ago. I used to have a jar of mercury in my desk in my bedroom and would play with it from time to time as well as use it in experiments. Some of said experiments if done today would probably result in a visit from all kinds of law enforcement types. You can do interesting things with mercury and nitric acid  AAMOF, you can do a lot REALLY interesting things with nitric acid. Sigh. . .the good old days when a boy could blow up things and only have to face an angry parent.
> 
> I also used to play with and work with molten lead with on protective gear other than leather gloves.


There's mercury in a lot of things, even things we eat. It's a matter of quantity. Here is a site that ranks fish my mercury content.

http://longevity.about.com/od/lifelongnutrition/a/fish_mercury.htm


----------



## harvestmoon1964 (Apr 24, 2014)

pinfeather said:


> Thimerosol (mercury) still listed in the influenza vaccine. Wow. EPA says mercury in the amount of the size of the head of a pin contaminates 23 gallons of water enough to make it unfit for human consumption. Wonder how much mercury is in influenza vaccine?


They are talking about two very different types of mercury. Methylmercury and ethylmercury. Not the same thing at all.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/thimerosal/thimerosal_faqs.html#a


----------

