Topic: Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated: Guess who is Sicker? - page 12. (Read 45532 times)

This might not be directly about vaccines and who is sicker, but it shows that the drug companies have incentive to keep people sick, and that they could easily be using vaccines to help with this program of theirs.


Big Pharma on display: A drug company now charges almost $300 for a $5 bottle of a simple, low-cost vitamin

You certainly would not be the first nor the last.  "The love of money is the root of all evil." so they say.

I've actually been studying religion even more than science (the real kind) over the last couple of years.  The good, the bad, and the ugly aspects of it.  Again, 'progress' since in my studies the 'good' has achieved a much higher level of appreciation in my mind than it had before, and classic fundamental Christianity in particular.

^^^ Maybe if I started a religion I could make some money.     

I come from the 'anacro-science' frame of reference and have spend probably 47 or my last 52 years immersed in it.  Off-and-on at least.

Even if 'the theory of evolution' is 'not true', it is 'not true' in the same sense that Newtonian physics is 'not true.'  It is 'true enough' to be extremely useful and in fact indispensable in understanding reality and in forming and testing hypotheses.

I'll defer on researching the 'impossible evolution' at this time.  Every time I've done so in the past I've come away with the impression that the protagonists of the argument are woefully ignorant of the basic principles of the theory.  When I next visit the topic I shall focus on the arguments of those who have done respected work in the scientific community, have been recognized for their achievements, and have 'turned.'  There are enough such people that I cannot write off the 'impossibility' thesis completely.

You may consider this 'progress' if you like since I had been more militant in my anti-religious stance in earlier times.  Actually, it's the total corruption of 'science' by the likes of the global warming eco-scammers and pro-vaxxers which is probably more associated with my attitude of looking into alternatives to the 'settled' science.  'Cult science' as Feynman would call it.  Another fitting term would be 'scientism.'  Whatever you want to call it I find more objectionable and disgusting than most other forms religions (with the notable exception being Babylonian Talmud based Judisim with all of it's ethic supremacist baggage.)

I respect your (BADecker) work a fair bit.  To beat these scammers it will take work from all angles, and more than a little dedication.  At the end you and I will meet in Heaven, in Hell, in the Matrix, or never.  I'm content with any of these possibilities.  God Bless, Move Forward!

Your poor little puppy!


Autism Symptoms in Pets Rise as Pet Vaccination Rates Rise

Vaccines are destroying natural immunity. This might be okay if they replaced the natural with something that worked, but they aren't. Standardized vaccination is destroying human life and peace down the road.


Vaccinated children face a 3000% increased risk of dangerous allergy, stunning new science finds

We all "specialize" in different areas. You and I seem to be in agreement in much of what we suggest about the medical not testing vaccines and drugs for safety. I learn from you. Please learn this one thing from me, because if you don't, much of what you have said in your post that I am quoting is false.

There is no proof for evolution theory evolution (ETE). The only real way to show that ETE exists is, go back into the past and track the DNA of countless thousands (or millions) of creatures to see if ETE is the way it happened. Why is this the only way? Because if creatures were created, who is to say that they were not created as individual creatures, similar though they might be in many ways?

Is that kind of thinking too radical for you? Then Internet search on "impossible evolution" to see that there is plenty of evidence to show that ETE is impossible.

Ah yes.  Ticks.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT6gCqulCok  What a surprise to see them lending a hand to the force vaccination for all pro-vax movement.

I live in a rural area and get tick bites multiple times per year.  Twice I've gotten flu-like symptoms after a tick bite and both times have taken a short course of antibiotics just in case.

My mom got the classic bulls-eye rash and the 'medical professional' still refused to treat it as potential lyme since there were 'only 8 reports' in the state.  When Mom insisted, the lady got terribly upset and practically through the antibiotic prescription at her.  On her way out the door my mom said 'I'm sure you are going to report this as a potential case, right?' just to further piss the 'doctor' off.

The good news is that since we are all going to die from global climate change brought on by cow farts, ticks can also make people allergic to red meat.  Here's a 'mainstream' story about that (though the 'conspiracy theory' explorations of same contain a lot more actual scientific information.):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nndLZSMpuQ  CBS has it pegged as a double-bite transferring some natural meat sugars.  Ya, I'm sure that's what it is...


It is fairly easy to see the next few moves in this chess game.

The next move is that the pro-vax forces will be spreading around certain diseases that they claim to have a solution for and say "See, told you so.  Now we need force vaccination."

The anti-vaxxer counter-play will be to analyze the genetic material and see if it happens to stem from a strain out of Fort Detrick or some such.

A wild-card will be whistle-blowers who's conscience has been pushed beyond the breaking point.  Also how effectively the 'open source' scientific establishment can muster the resources to use state-of-the-art analytical equipment.  Also how effective the recent clamp-down on the free flow of information by Google et-al turns out to be.

The Plumb Island crew have been severely hampered in their lyme project because people with money have gotten ill and have contributed lots of money to independent research and lab facilities.  The 'open source' understanding of the Borrelia burgdorferi bacterium and associated weaponized biological agents is actually fairly well understood at this point for those who care to look.

For those who think that vaccination is not necessary:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tick-borne_encephalitis

Tick-borne encephalitis is one of deadliest viral infections in 21st century. Due to climate change, it spreads quickly and this proccess is irreversible since it's nearly impossible to sanitize infected areas. For example, 20 years ago nobody heared about tick-borne encephalitis in Romania or Moscow region. But now it's here and slowly moves to west. Little by little it conquers new territories in Austria, Germany and other countries.

That wouldn't be a problem if effective vaccine would have existed. Unfortunately, there is no such one. People from accross the globe spent years trying to create attenuated strain of the virus, but they came to conclusion that it's impossible. So, only inactivated vaccines are available, and their protection level is very limited. You have to revaccinate every 3 years in order to keep protective level of antibodies.

Dear antivaccinators, giving the lethality rate and complications into account, your extinction is only a matter of time. This planet will become uncapable of supporting your life quite soon.

There is always risk with medical procedure or medicine side effects. Would you want to not have vaccination? Without vaccination you might have higher risk to get a horrible disease? There are always choice, you can off course refuse to get vaccination for your children, but then you need to accept if anything happen, you have also need to face the problem.

All animal's bodies and physiology evolve over millions of years to deal with common threats which are a factor in their life-ways.  It's not worth the 'waste' to deal with corner case threats.

'Injection' is an uncommon threat for most humans for most of history.  Not so much for a honey badger which tangles with vipers a number of times in it's life.  These creatures are 'on the path' toward being able to deal with a certain type of injected toxin.  Much more so than we.  

Evolutionarily speaking, the particular 'brood of vipers' that we tangle with regularly are a relatively new phenomenon.  As a species, our 'bodies and minds' are still playing catch-up.

Humans have a well developed gut to deal with environmental hazards such as aluminum.  Injecting something into the blood stream is VASTLY different than having it pass through the digestive process.  Vax pushing media darlings such as Dr. Paul Offit are completely aware of this principle, but they deliberately mis-infom in the mainstream media when they say how 'little' aluminum is in vaccines vs. how much we end up eating and thus not to worry about it.

Why does Dr. Paul Offit spread such mis-information to the scientifically illiterate masses?  Why is he given the platform to do so?  Is it only 'just the money', or is there something more to it?

^^^ A point in addition is:

Look throughout nature. Where do you find "puncturing of skin" and "injections" in nature?

Bee stings.
Snake venom.
Spider bites.
Sea creature stabs.
Thorn and thistle stabs.

Do any of these ever produce anything but pain or death for the victim?

One might say that people injecting other people are doing it for good, not for bad, like nature. Perhaps that's their desire. But are people smart enough to really know what they are doing?

Consider. The Hunza's - https://www.gaia.com/article/hunza-people-longevity-health-secrets - live much longer naturally than the medical can do for the rest of us. And the natives of Vilcabamba, Ecuador, similar. Science isn't smart enough to give us even 200 years of life. So, why would they be smart enough to give us safe vaccination processes, when all of nature gives us deadly stabs? Now, when we are finding out that vaccines aren't safe, why don't they stop?

Or maybe 'we' would be better off...as nasty as that sounds.

The 'scientifically minded', including the people who's offspring have access to the 'finest institutions of learning' have described a perfectly valid hypothesis that Darwin's principle of 'survival of the fittest' fails under a welfare state, or at least that 'fitness' means vastly different things under such a society than it has historically.

If 'injections' is being used as a tool to modulate the behavior and impact of the sea of useless eaters, as proposed by Bertrand Russell, then the tiny minority who recognize the (long ago proposed) methods and take pains to avoid them will be 'selected for'.

In a struggle between the 'elite' who actively damaged a vast swath of society and the 'elite' who argued against doing so, I'd rather be on the side of the latter.  This for both ethical and tactical reasons.

Except that nobody knows this for sure, because it's hard to predict the outcome for something that was not done. What something? Letting a disease run its course. Further, by not letting a disease run its course, who knows how many other diseases that would have been destroyed by the first one running its course, have been allowed to flourish?


Did you ever notice that the great spread of technology happened after the first vaccinations started? Sure, there was some spread of technology before, but the great spread has come after. And now we are able to destroy the world with our technology, and we just might do it if we are not careful.

In other words, who knows that if "curing" diseases through vaccination, did not cause the rise of technology - which has its good points - but might be the reason that we will all destroyed in the near future. In just the same way that we do not clearly understand all the bad illnesses that are caused as an aftermath of vaccination, so we do not see clearly if vaccination is destroying the world or not. Post-vaccination illnesses might be far greater, and wider spread than we think.

How do we know that they are not? We don't know, because we are only doing the first of the long-term studies, now. And the first few serious, long term studies into how bad the side-effects of vaccinations are, are showing us that vaccines just might be devastatingly bad in the long run... way worse than if we had let a few people die.


Telling people that vaccines are safe, when there have really been no long term studies done to prove safety, is some of the worst illness around. If they would inject all the medical people with truth serum vaccine, people would reject vaccines in short order.

The way I see it is: I personally do not believe in massive global conspiracies, pretty much ever. I don't think there is one here where a lot of people are organized to kill a lot of people on purpose through vaccines. However it's true that big corporations always do anything to make money, pushing for certain vaccines that might not have all the necessary safety tests is not something that would surprise me, however I also know that vaccines do work, some of them at least, we have eradicated deadly diseases with them, yes, perhaps they weren't 100% safe but it's saving 100m people vs a few people having side effects. When we are talking about other vaccines that are not about super deadly spreading diseases then yes, they might not be the best.

The truth is that we will never know the whole truth of these things unless any of us knows a lot of powerful people. 

Russian bots are a big problem though right? You are pathetically clueless as to the functioning of the world around you. Maybe you are better off not realizing the world is not as it presents itself.

DUDE you're actually talking about an organized effort against antivaxx on social media xD
How do you want us to not just... Laugh?

Shhh little boy the adults are talking.

This thread is always a fun one.
51 pages summed up in one sentence:
If your study supports vaccins, it's only because the corrupted institution that made it is part of the global conspiracy.

How can you take such persons seriously? xD

She does a lot of good work and is worth spending some time on.

Dr. Suzanne Humphries, M.D. | Full Testimony (West Virginia Senate Education Committee) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNKcaWp3Sf4

also

https://healthimpactnews.com/2017/harvard-immunologist-to-legislators-unvaccinated-children-pose-zero-risk-to-anyone/

As a side note, is anyone else seeing the steady ramping up of rhetoric against "antivaxxers" in various social media? It seems to me like an organized effort, and I am starting to see that censorship on the topic is increasing. This is not a good sign when we can no longer freely discuss medical treatment.