Topic: Vaccinated vs. Unvaccinated: Guess who is Sicker? - page 23. (Read 45532 times)

Every year a lot of kids die of vaccine preventable diseases. By your logic, it should also be legal to give kids alcohol, might as well right? Why make it illegal, fucking government, why would they want to help kids, right? They are evil. Not vaccinating your kid is the same as giving him alcohol, or tobacco or drugs sometimes. You could be killing your kid because of it.

PD: however I do think that making vaccines mandatory could be sending the wrong message to all the nutjobs, thinking that they make it mandatory because they want to poison us and not because they want to help.

A lot of things are mandatory, like wearing helmets or seat belts, etc etc, they don't do it because they hate people...

There are already laws on the books for pandemics and emergencies. This has nothing to do with mandating people get common vaccinations by force of law.

Ok genius. What would happen if something like Ebola appeared in the US or wherever the fuck you live. Let's call it, the badecker's disease. It kills people in a few days. They make a vaccine that works and stops it, would you think it's a good idea to force people to take the vaccines? Yeah, think about it for a few seconds genius.

I shouldn't have to tell you what to say. In fact if you were giving this information a fair examination you wouldn't be saying anything, and be reading about it instead of simply denying its relevance over and over again (and don't lie to me I know damned well you didn't do anything more than skim at the most). I never made any of those arguments so I am not going to bother defending those premises. Also there is an important difference... no one is trying to force people to take paracetamol pills by law. This entire issue would largely be a non-issue for people if there wasn't creeping legislation mandating vaccinations in many states against any standards of implied consent.


http://icandecide.org/government/ICAN-HHS-Stipulated-Order-July-2018.pdf

The Corruption of Science: What They Won't Tell You!  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrGRP2mu0GA

The Death of Science | Scientific Corruption and You https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmvLdOkpg2M

The Health and Medicine Division (HMD) division (previously known as the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine has published a number of vaccine safety reviews and reports under commission of HRSA, an agency of HHS
[/quote]

You haven't come to grips with what is being talked about here, have you? Nobody is talking about mere reviews and reports alone. Anybody can REview. Anybody can report. Anybody can talk about reports.

So, what is the important point that was shown to be non-existent? The point is the safety tests themselves. The reports showed no safety tests that showed safety. All that was shown are reports that suggest that there were some safety tests done, and that vaccines are safe. The tests, themselves, couldn't be found.

Why are you trying to hide the fact that the tests were never done... or at least were never shown? Because that is what is not available... the conclusive test reports themselves. Are you one of the people who is trying to poison children and babies?

That's the whole point, dufus. They aren't going to show tests that kill people. They can't make any money by scaring people away. And the people don't know why they died. How in the world dense are you? Millions of peoples' lives depend on the safety of vaccines, and they can't even show one safety report.

I was thinking all along that you were simply a guy with different beliefs and understandings. Now you are showing that you are the next worst thing to a mass murderer.

If those tests showed vaccines kill people, surely you can find more, no? Oh wait, literally every other report that exists shows the exact opposite, you are just a fucking moron, get out of my face. Go pray to your god nutjob. Vaccines are proven to work, it's a fact, show me the evidence that they don't.

You're right. People's lives and health are important, especially when injecting stuff into them. They must have done a test. Anybody can lose a test report.

What? Oh, they did two tests, and lost both reports? That can happen. How many times does a person lose their car keys.

Oh, oh, oh... You said 3 tests. And they lost all three reports? Hmmm. Well, I guess it is easy to lose 3 reports. But this stuff is rather important. They should have been able to find at least one of those reports.

What was that? They did thousands of tests just to be sure, and lost all those reports? Wow! This is starting to sound like some kind of coverup.

I know why they lost all those test reports. The tests were bad! They showed that vaccines kill people, and the ones that they don't kill come out sick... even if the illness shows up many years later. And they did it all for money.

Why has it taken so long for this to come out into the open? They must be using a good percentage of the money from patients to push this coverup.

Wow, just wow!

What do you want me to say exactly about well known documented data? Should I do a brief comment after each report? The argument that vaccines aren't safe or that the government doesn't care is simply false as shown above. Simple because they lost some reports somewhere it doesn't mean the whole thing is a hoax and they are trying to kill people. Vaccines are proven to work, it's a fact, we have stopped plenty of diseases thanks to them. No one is arguing that vaccines are 100% safe because nothing is, any drug has side effects, you can die from eating too many paracetamol pills, it doesn't even take that many.

Science will prevail. Nutjobs wont.

If you are in any doubt that Vaccinations are crippling and handicapping children, then gather some empirical evidence by spending some time in McDonalds. Just compare the number of damaged kids with those of the early 1900s. You could also check the toxic chemicals added to the vaccines tht are designed to damage the immune system and reduce fertility.

I see lots of information you likely didn't even read, copy and pasted (that is against forum rules to plagiarize BTW), but I don't see your premise, retort, or argument...

You haven't come to grips with what is being talked about here, have you? Nobody is talking about mere reviews and reports alone. Anybody can REview. Anybody can report. Anybody can talk about reports.

So, what is the important point that was shown to be non-existent? The point is the safety tests themselves. The reports showed no safety tests that showed safety. All that was shown are reports that suggest that there were some safety tests done, and that vaccines are safe. The tests, themselves, couldn't be found.

Why are you trying to hide the fact that the tests were never done... or at least were never shown? Because that is what is not available... the conclusive test reports themselves. Are you one of the people who is trying to poison children and babies?

The Health and Medicine Division (HMD) division (previously known as the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine has published a number of vaccine safety reviews and reports under commission of HRSA, an agency of HHS

the National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC), established in 1987, has had regular meetings and published regular reports about vaccine safety

a number of other vaccine safety oversight advisory committees and government groups were established, including the Advisory Commission on Childhood Vaccines, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), the Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Review Advisory Committee (MIDRAC) of NIAID, and the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, with the Vaccine Interagency Group of the National Vaccine Program Office providing overall coordination. They all report to the Secretary of HHS.

the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) and Vaccine Safety Datalink were established in 1990, but it is important to keep in mind that VAERS was created from a merger of the CDC Monitoring System for Adverse Events Following Immunization (MSAEFI) and the vaccine reports contained in the FDA Spontaneous Reporting System (SRS) programs. It’s not like we just start following adverse events following immunization in 1990.

a Task Force on Safer Childhood Vaccines was established and completed a report, “identifying key issues and enhancing collaboration on behalf of vaccine safety” in 1996. Did someone forget to send it to Congress?

the Salk inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) replaced the oral polio vaccine (OPV) in 1996 because of a small risk of vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis (VAPP), beginning with a sequential IPV-OPV vaccine schedule and then going to an all IPV schedule in 2000

the DTaP vaccine, which is supposed to have fewer side effects than DTP is licensed, and replaces DTP for all required doses by 1997, although DTP is never actually shown to have caused seizures or brain damage

RotaShield, the first rotavirus vaccine is licensed in 1998 but is soon withdrawn from the market in 1999 after it is associated with an increased risk of intussusception, a form of bowel obstruction

the Clinical Immunization Safety Assessment (CISA) Project was established in 2001


So hey, if you want to continue acting like nutjobs go ahead but stop hindering science like you have always been doing, science will always prevail because it works, religion does not.

Ok, now that you are past the point of trying to dismiss this source, and that you have been provided a premise with a source to back it up, what is your evidence this is NOT something that has serious implications? On what evidence do you base the conclusion that they are meeting every other requirement?

What?!?!?!  LOL!

We are talking about injecting things into people, into children, into babies.

What if they showed thousands of reports. But what if there were one or two that were missing, or were in doubt. But they didn't even have ONE report.

Hancock - What kind of bastard must I have been...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0aN8oU7ePY

Nobody? Not ONE report?

It does not, obviously missing reports isn't good but it happens, they were meeting every other requirement though.

Either it was settled or dismissed, it can't be both. So I checked for myself. It was settled, because it was a FOIA suit, and the requested records simply did not exist, even though they were required to be created by law. Essentially the government had responsibilities under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 that it was not meeting. This does in fact have serious implications.

However you want to say it, the lawsuit shows that there aren't any vaccine tests that prove their safety. Medical certifications that vaccines are safe are not backed up by anything. The lawsuit showed it.

Of course it's hard to admit when you are wrong. Your article is simply false, the government did not lose any lawsuit. They settled and then it was dismissed, so yes, your article is proven to be bullshit, end of the story, if you can't even admit this, there is no point in talking to you, you are intellectually dishonest.

If somebody made a scientific theory pertaining to the evaluation of scientific theories in general, many scientific theories would be evaluated by it to be hoaxes... not really scientific theories, but rather hopes and dreams of scientists and others who wished that these hoax theories were true.

In addition, when the media and other people who can make money off a scientific theory, twist it into being reality, when nobody knows that it is reality, and then the scientists accept the media and universities, and start calling scientific theories fact when nobody knows that they are, that's when scientific theory validity starts to fail.

Rather than show the dividing line between what exists, scientific theories about it, and scientific theories that try to prove the existence of something, you would rather badmouth people who try to clarify things.

Scientific theories exist.
Some STs try to prove that something else exists.
Some STs try to prove how something that is known works.
Some STs have been proven false, yet remain.
Some STs have been proven factual, yet remain STs.

It all has to do with a consensus of a lot of people for all kinds of reasons, many of which are not based in good-faith thinking. And you like the idea of keeping the muddle there, rather than clarifying the differences regarding what the STs are trying to prove, and if they are even valid. You show yourself to be a person who does not have good faith, but rather, one who is trying to manipulate the minds of people for deceitful reasons.