Truth about vaccinations quotes

[alwayssaythanku]

These are quoted from www.vaccinetruth.org

"Never doubt that a small group of committed people can change the world, indeed its the only thing that ever does." Margaret Mead

For us to bombard a newborn baby with a whole battery of vaccines as, in effect, their very first immunologic experience I think is reckless beyond measure. I would say it borders on the criminal.
Dr. Moscowitz

Cost for vaccinations: $10.00
Cost of trip to McDonalds after vaxing: $10.00
Cost of hospitalization after reacting to vax: $300,000.00*
Cost of avoiding vaxes and knowing your child never reacts: PRICELESS

• Actual bill United States

What is the name of the test that can be given to determine if a child can safely receive a vaccine?

It's called a breath test. You hold a mirror in front of the child and if condensation appears, they are still alive and cannot "safely" receive a vaccine.

Steve

Vaccination is a medical procedure that causes permanent and irreversible modification of the immune system

"The only shot my son needs is a shot at the future."

......Lori Mcilwain

Modern medicine" may well be defined as "the experimental study of what
happens when poisonous chemicals are placed into malnourished human
bodies." A. Saul Contributing Editor,
Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine (www.orthomed.org)

You can always put the vaccines in... but you can never take them out.

I'm only being pedantic janeybops -or at least pisky.

my mumis deaf in one ear because of measles. but she has lived her life, goot married, had kids blah de blah and when we were talking about vaccinations yesterday (after thw HV had been to see me- she was happy to leave ds3 unvaccinated but spent 2 minutes trying to persuade me to vaccinate ds2- which is a bit insane as ds3 is more at risk froom the diseases than ds2) she cmae out with quite a strong anti-vax rant (surprised me- she's a nurse - and used to be very pro-vax). I think that's what 24 hours with ds1 does to people. Given the choice of deafness in one ear or being like ds1 I know which anyone in their right mind would choose. (and of course the equation isn't that simple as the risk from vaccines and risk from the actual disease will be different on an indvidual basis). But that's what my mother's rant was recognising.

Another way to protect one vulnerable group (babies) from measles is to let everyone get it (!) Then babies have goood passive immunity. I still say for this sort of reason- and because of the rise in cases in adults they're going to have to introduce a teenage MMR booster soon (then a few years after that an adult one etc). My friend made that point to someone from the dept of health during a radio phone in and the dept of health man agreed with him. Watch and see.......

pisky? picky I mean!

The pertussis vaccine used ot be contra-indicatated if a child had epilepsy- no idea whether it still is (the aP is supposedly less seizure inducing that the wP) - and no idea what they do if it is still contraindicated as the DT no longer exists.

One one of ds3's hospital forms (born 2 and a hlaf weeks ago) here is a box which says something like "is ppertussis vaccine contraindicated" and the no box has been ticked- although no-one asked me anything about family history etc.

highlander did they give your 4 month old hepatitis B jab?? That's not standard for babies that age is it?

My friends incident happened on Tuesday of this week, with the jab being given on Thursday

depends on the country singsong

If we "immunise" which is another misnomer, but more on that later, our natural ability to fight off disease will be lost. Nature works well if you leave it alone. When we catch measles, rubella etc, our immune systems develop natural antibodies to the disease. There has NEVER been an epidemic outbreak of measles.rubella croup, diptheria which killed thousands, in a healthy community. Healthy immune systems are able to fight off these diseases. Polio, if you wish to look at the statistical facts was virtually eradicated BEFORE the vaccine was invented. Look this up its true. Smallpox developed with corresponding epidemiological counterparts, i.e. impoverished society, filthy living conditions, bad food, lack of hygiene etc. We are living in the midst of one of the greatest epidemics we have ever seen, i.e. AIDS. There is no vaccination for it. The drugs are toxic and it is questionable whether they work at all. Again AIDS is not a disease, it is the name for something we do not know which represses the immune system. Also, AIDS is diagnosed in a totally different way in Africa and other countries than it is in the USA or U.K. What does that tell us? That the origin of it is unknown, that we dont know much about it and that it could be coming from already compromised immune systems. Women who are pregnant have been diagnosed AIDS positive due to hormone imbalances in their systems. That is how unreliable the medical community's "knowledge" is. Tragically, that is how dangerous their lack of knowledge is, because pregnant women have actually been treated with AIDS drugs to protect their babies. Again look this up its out there. I am not making this up. If we simulate "immunity" for every virus or disease what is left of our own immune system? Its a bit like genetically modified food. The seeds harvest for one year and then die out. MOnsanto alleges their seeds are immune to particular diseases which strike the particular plant. What happens when a new strain of disease comes out. A new disease could blight the entire crop. Because the seed only lasts one harvest, it dies out and there is no new harvest.

This debate is about fear. Its about the fear of mothers who have already vaccinated, who made that heart wrenching decision to do what is best for their child. To hear that the opposite might be true is terrifying and lets face it, we dont like to be scared and we all have our own comfort zones in terms of knowledge acceptance. This debate for vaccinations is not new, has little to do with science or fact but is based on what we have been fed by the medical establishment. Unless one is a research statistician and a historian, as well as a clinician, it is extremely difficult to prove to one scientifically that jabs are harmful. However, I have never believed in what "experts" say. We all have brains, we all know our bodies and ultimately we all have a little voice inside us telling us what is right and what is wrong. Sometimes that voice comes out angry and fearful and sometimes it comes out indignant.

On the point of "immunisation" I wish we had a virologist on this site. Maybe we do. Jabs do not provide immunity. What they do is isolate cells which normally can fight a whole host of disease. The jabs then change these particular cells so that they fight only one particular disease. The compromised immunity comes from this fact. Instead of having an army of fighting cells, the jabs isolate certain ones and retain them for a particular war. Anybody care to argue with me on this point using facts and science, please do. Yes, I am venting my spleen just like what has been shown on this thread and generally by the medical community. They do their darndest to make sure we the people do not try and help ourselves. Ask your GP about going to a naturopath or a homeopath or a chiropractor and see what reaction you get. Tell you doc, you have been researching on the internet about disease. I can guarantee what reaction you will generally get. Medicine is a religion and the high priestess is control. Doctors are Gods, not to be questioned and we are their minions and are expected to do what they tell us because we are so "ignorant".

AST, you comments about treatments for aids are very misleading. It is true there is no cure, but people are now living for many years with the condition, before the drug regimes they died. You are being very misleading.

The reason that aids is diagnesed in a different way in Afric is because they lack the money. The reason it present differently is that local people fall prey to local diseases. You are 100% wrong about this and you are misleading people to put forwars you viewpoint.

If you cannot present your argument with fact please think again.

Oh and I may not be a virologist, but I know enough about immunology to know that your comments about the immune system are very ill thought out.

You are making very sweeping generalisation that lack supporting evidence, the very thing you say medicine does.

Vaccination helps the individual produce specific cells to fight a specific disease, using the antibody antigen recognition. It does not stop the body producing other cells that can fight other illnesses. I can recomend some A level text books that explain the basics of the immune sytem if you like.

I have abosolutly no problem with other people disagreeing with immunisation, it isn't my decission. However you are making some very infamatory comments with very little reasoned argument.

People on MN have argues the anti jab line using good scemtific understanding. Their arguments are far more cerdible and you are not pushing forward your point of view.

Just one more thing, to those who found my posts OTT or "in your face", I do not apologise for approaching this topic in a mature, albeit slanted manner. Lets face it, we arent 12 years old. If your sensibilities have been offended then I truly apologise but hey this is 2005. You see much worse on Channel 4 after 10.00pm Its the content obviously, which some people find distressing. I originally posted quotes from real people who kids suffered "real" physical trauma due to vaccinations. What I post pales in comparison to the propaganda we see everyday on the television and in our surgeries. So the balance of vaccinations is still firmly in the favour of the pro argument. What is it going to take to get people to wake up to the fact that vaccinations are not what they appear? Babies cant cry out and say no mom, i dont want that needle. They are people the most precious people and I for one, will do everything in my power to persuade parents not to vaccinate. I can tell you that none of my friends or family vaccinate. I dont live in a particularly progressive community either, in fact quite the opposite. What happend though is mothers got together and started talking about the consequences of jabs in their kids and after comparing notes came to the realisation all was not well. The truth is often painful just like the consequences of jabs.

R the argument you wanted re how they work.

There are cells in the immune system who's job it is to recognise and destro different bacteria and viruses. They are realitvly undifferentiated.....not set up to fight any one micro-organism. When you get a micro-organism invade the body, which is happening all the time, these cells recognise that is is forign because of antigens on the surface of the cell. These are protiens that stick up out of the surface of the cell.

Your cells have set markers, and they are different to everyone elses (this is why they tissue type before organ transplant btw). Your cells normally regognise your cells as yours and will fight anything elase (this goes wrong in auto immune diseases like lupus and some forms of arthritis etc)

When a micro-organism is recognised new white blood cells are made that can regognise it , bind to it or produce antibodies to it and kill it. These are new cells and you make them in their thousnads. You are not using up the original undifferentiated cells, they are still hanging around, waiting for the next micro-organism to arrive. When that happens a whole new set of white blood cells are produced. So yor comments about cells being 'prevented' from killing other vbacteria is a load of toffee i'm afraid.

AIDs kills of the original cells, it acts in quite a different way, and I can give you some of the detailes about that if you are interested/.

FWIW, I think that it is wrong to think of sceinec or medicine or doctors as God. But you get around it by reading fact, not fiction.

So you are here to spread the word?

One extra effect vax have on the body though is to increase the ratio of TH2 cells to TH1 cells. This isn't necessarily a problem- but can be if you already have a ratio skewed in favour of T H2 cells. Increases the risk of developing autoimmune conditions.

That's a very simplified (over simplistic) description. But you know how complicated immunology is.

here's a bit from Andy Wakefiled which mentions th1 and th2 ratios.

alwayssaythanku, for those of us who maybe aren?t as good at web searches or who haven?t been able to find the statistical facts you talk about being out there, could you please post some links to where you have read your facts from. TIA

another link for you hmb- but warning I said it was complicated!

Message withdrawn

TH1 and TH2 explanation

One branch is the humoral immune system (or Th2 function) which primarily produces antibodies in the blood circulation as a sensing or recognizing function of the immune system to the presence of foreign antigens in the body. The other branch is the cellular or cell-mediated immune system (or Th1 function) which primarily destroys, digests and expels foreign antigens out of the body through the activity of its cells found in the thymus, tonsils, adenoids, spleen, lymph nodes and lymph system throughout the body. This process of destroying, digesting and discharging foreign antigens from the body is known as "the acute inflammatory response" and is often accompanied by the classic signs of inflammation: fever, pain, malaise and discharge of mucus, pus, skin rash or diarrhea.

These two functional branches of the immune system may be compared to the two functions in eating: tasting and recognizing the food on the one hand, and digesting the food and eliminating the food waste on the other hand. In the same way, the humoral or Th2 branch of the immune system "tastes" and recognizes and even remembers foreign antigens and the cellular or Th1 branch of the immune system digests and eliminates the foreign antigens from the body. But just as too much repeated tasting of food will ruin the appetite, so also too much repeated stimulation of the "tasting" humoral immune system by an antigen will inhibit and suppress the digesting and eliminating function of the cellular immune system. In other words, overstimulating antibody production can suppress the acute inflammatory response of the cellular immune system!

This explains the polar opposite relationship between acute discharging inflammations on the one hand and allergies and auto-immune inflammations on the other hand. The more a person has of one, the less he or she will have of the other!

A growing number of scientists believe that the increase in America, Europe, Australia and Japan in allergic and auto-immune diseases (which stimulate the humoral or Th2 branch of the immune system) is caused by the lack of stimulation of the cellular or the Th1 branch of the immune system from the lack of acute inflammatory responses and discharges in childhood. We need to identify the factors which cause this shift in the function of the immune system or which cause allergies and auto-immune diseases in childhood to increase!

If we now return to the original question of the mechanism of action of vaccinations, we find what I believe is the key to the puzzle. A vaccination consists of introducing a disease agent or disease antigen into an individual?s body without causing the disease. If the disease agent provoked the whole immune system into action it would cause all the symptoms of the disease! The symptoms of a disease are primarily the symptoms (fever, pain, malaise, loss of function) of the acute inflammatory response to the disease.

So the trick of a vaccination is to stimulate the immune system just enough so that it makes antibodies and "remembers" the disease antigen but not so much that it provokes an acute inflammatory response by the cellular immune system and makes us sick with the disease we?re trying to prevent! Thus a vaccination works by stimulating very much the antibody production (Th2) and by stimulating very little or not at all the digesting and discharging function of the cellular immune system (Th1).

Vaccine antigens are designed to be "unprovocative" or "indigestible" for the cellular immune system (Th1) and highly stimulating for the antibody-mediated humoral immune system (Th2).

Perhaps it is not difficult to see then why the repeated use of vaccinations would tend to shift the functional balance of the immune system toward the antibody-producing side (Th2) and away from the acute inflammatory discharging side (the cell-mediated side or Th1). This has been confirmed by observation especially in the case of Gulf War Illness: most vaccinations cause a shift in immune function from the Th1 side (acute inflammatory discharging response) to the Th2 side (chronic auto-immune or allergic response).
The outcome of this line of thought is that, contrary to previous belief, vaccinations do not strengthen or "boost" the whole immune system. Instead vaccinations overstimulate the "tasting and remembering" function of the antibody-mediated branch of the immune system (Th2) which simultaneously suppresses the cellular immune system (Th1) thus "preventing" the disease in question.

What in reality is prevented is not the disease but the ability of our cellular immune system to manifest, to respond to and to overcome the disease!

There is no system of the human being, from mind to muscles to immune system, which gets stronger through avoiding challenges, but only through overcoming challenges. The wise use of vaccinations would be to use them selectively, and not on a mass scale. In order for vaccinations to be helpful and not harmful, we must know beforehand in each individual to be vaccinated whether the Th1 function or the Th2 function of the immune system predominates.

In individuals in whom the Th1 function predominates, causing many acute inflammations because the cellular immune system is overreactive, a vaccination could have a balancing effect on the immune system and be helpful for that individual.

In individuals in whom the Th2 function predominates, causing few acute inflammations but rather the tendency to chronic allergic or autoimmune inflammations, a vaccination would cause the Th2 function to predominate even more, aggravating the imbalance of the immune system and harming the health of that individual. This is what happened in Gulf War Illness

written by PHILIP F. INCAO, M.D.
1624 Gilpin Street
Denver, CO 80218-1633

I keep bleating on about this but gulf war vets and autistics often share the same compound in their urine (IAG). it's presence supposedly suggests that thier membranes are more leaky than they should be.

I think antibiotics are best avoided if you can help it?
I certainly haven't had the need to have them prescribed as yet for my boy.
I just think they suppress any natural immunity there may be.
It makes me think of the old saying my mum had...
The more you can keep out the hospital the less you have to stay in hospital. Off the wall I know, but I can remember thinking maybe there is something in that.

The following is culled from this website: tuberose.com/Vaccinations.html

This website does not rant, just points out facts with statistics, far too long to quote here together with an explanation about how antibodies do not prevent disease.

Heres an excerpt. Ignorance breeds fear. When you know the facts, you become powerful not fearful.

Those few who dare to question the status quo are frequently ostracized, and in any case they are still legally bound to adhere to the system's legal mandates. Unless parents sign exemption forms, children must be vaccinated before they can get into school. This is the law, and lobbying controls legislation. The second most powerful lobby in Washington is the pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceutical companies are inventing new vaccines every year, all with the hope of their being included in the mandated vaccination schedule. It's very big money. And there are more vaccines on the back burner. Yet there are never long-term safety studies before vaccines get approved for mass use. There are also never any follow-up studies about long-term effectiveness of vaccines. This is why vaccines are always being altered and replaced--they cause negative side effects.

That is why, since 1986, the U.S. Federal Government's National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP) has paid out over $1.2 billion in taxpayer dollars to parents of vaccine-injured and killed children. As of December 2000, 40 vaccinations are currently mandated for children in the American Pediatric Association's immunization (i.e. vaccination) schedule. The word mandated doesn't mean mandatory, but for all intents and purposes, it might as well. Seven of these are legally required for schoolchildren in nearly all fifty states. Vaccination is so accepted, is seen as so necessary by most people, that they don't even question it. If they do, the consequences can be ostracism or worse. The reactions to this multitude of shots are what can spell trouble for the infant. Children, by law, must be vaccinated against the five traditional childhood diseases of mumps, measles, rubella, diphtheria and pertussis, plus tetanus and polio.

Unbelievably, not until recently was there a centralized U.S. record-keeping agency to which physicians could report vaccine reactions. It wasn't until 1991 that the CDC and FDA's VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System) was set up. It receives about 11,000 reports of serious adverse reactions to vaccination annually, some 1% (112+) of which are deaths from vaccine reactions. Some 33,000 reactions were reported between 1992 and 1996. Before then, it's anybody's guess how many reactions and deaths there were, because no agency was keeping track. Many of the adverse reactions to vaccination probably haven't even shown up yet. After all, someone may not get a disease as a result of a vaccine that contained atypical forms of a disease agent or other contaminants until years after vaccination.

Many health professionals are speaking out about their concern that childhood vaccines harm the developing immune system. At the same time, questions are being raised about the skyrocketing rate of chronic illness and disease among children. It doesn't seem likely those processed foods, environmental toxins, dental toxins, psychological stress and over used antibiotic drugs are the only culprits. Illnesses tend to begin when babies are three or four months old--the point at which maternal antibodies are beginning to wear out, leaving babies susceptible to environmental substances. These babies aren't developing their own antibodies in response to the challenges. Investigators need to spend more time investigating immune system reactions to vaccines. Investigations thus far have produced the same conclusion: Vaccines can trigger immune suppression