Bitcoin Forum

In the 100 or so front page posts on this section that are just about bashing Muslims, black people, and immigrants, I figured we need to focus on more immediate, and important issues.

State mandated vaccines are a tragedy. One cannot call the country he was born in a "Free country", if they support state mandated vaccines, as they are a form of aggression. If you call yourself "pro-choice" but are opposed to vaccines, then you are not pro-choice, you are just a lying, hypocritical, two faced liberal.

What I'm not going to discuss is whether or not vaccines are safe, because my clear position on the issue is that they do cause severe psychological harm, I have witnessed this first hand.

What I am willing to defend, however, is the fact that the government should not have the authority to force you to undergo medical procedures of their choice.

Not that I will totally absolve Government from what you accuse them of, but I stand to say, it is not totally unsafe to do vaccine. For example when a child is born all things being equal the antibody of the mother through breast feeding can protect the child for six months after that, when the child is not vaccinated, then the child is prone to several diseases as a result of that.

Over here, the issue of polio has been a call for concern until government mandated that children between the ages of 6 months to 5 years be vaccinated and this has proven to have reduced to a considerable length.

I feel like some vaccines are needed but most like yearly flu vaccinations are pure garbage. I am not a medical doctor, but I imagine babies do need to get certain vaccinations, I am sure there are very wealthy people in the world that get injections without all of the nasty chemicals and toxins inside their body, while the public has to get that nasty stuff into our bodies, even though scientists claim its a low amount.

Do you know what would happen if people stopped getting their kids vaccinated just because one out of 10000 kids got autism? There would be an epidemic of diseases and the mortality would be a little higher than usual. I don't know what siht you're getting vaccinated with but in Serbia, I've never seen or heard that some kid got retarded from the vaccine and also they are a must here.

he's probably scared of needles

That needle is a really small tube to do what you ask in the title.     ;D

if you are vaccinated how can you be at risk though, the vaccination is supposed to protect you from that disease. The only one at risk should be the non-vaccinated person right? That is the logical way of looking at it, unless vaccinations are flawed and far from perfect, which is also true. + there are so many unnecessary vaccinations being promoted to the public that it is a complete joke like the flu shot, I would never take that .

There are so many child deaths worldwide from compulsory vaccination. Many governments have allowed parents to abandon children vaccination. But there was a problem - do not take these children to school. And it ends with the parents to agree to vaccination

Vaccines are bad? Really? Ever heard of tetanus? A really bad thing to get and very easy when you are a kid running around or riding a bicycle and falling in the dirt.
Nowadays people are trying to protect their children from common cold which is a bit too much in my view but there are diseases like malaria that you just can't ignore.

What? You are saying there are alot of child deaths due to vaccination?
What? Please source me.

It's easy screaming vaccines are bad, but you'll never hear someone talking about all the lives that are saved due to them. It's in the millions.
Look at the child death graph from before the basic vaccinations in 3rd world countries, and after.
Huge differences. Now tell me where you read that there are so many child deaths due to "compulsory vaccination"?

whatever

just refuse and resist

I wholeheartedly agree with you. In my opinion, no one should be forced to receive medical treatment of any kind, especially not if it's something as controversial as prophylactic vaccination. It clearly stands against free will.

However there seems to be a majority of people advocating for an extension of vaccination programs, actually believing that these are desirable for the public good. These people must be considered henchmen of the medical industry and the ever growing socialist oppression by government.

"State controlled aggression" stops your offspring from dying horribly. I'll quite happily let the statist penis slide all the way inside me if stops my little darlings from sicking up their own pelvises because some freeman on the land fuckhead doesn't get his spawn dealt with.

Well I'm scared of needles but dammit, if I need to get a shot for something I'll clench my butcheeks but still I'll take that shot. :D

You guys are so hopeless.

Did you read my post?

I am not saying you shouldn't get vaccinated. I'm only stating that the government does not have any role in shoving medical procedures down your throat. An example of forcing people to undergo medical procedures because of primitive collectivist beliefs of the time is circumcision. Look at how bad that turned out, for everybody.

Have the vaccines pushers been killed? I hope so

The Government shouldn't force any adult to udergo medical procedures the adult in question doesn't want. However, it is not that simple. What about little kids? What about the situation when their hippie parents don't want them vaccinated for the reasons "known" only to them, but the kids need the vaccines?

Do you think these words on Vaccination from the Wikipedia are not true?

"Vaccines have led to major progressions within the United States battle against disease. In 2007, studies regarding the effectiveness of vaccines on mortality or morbidity rates of those exposed to various diseases have shown almost 100% decreases in death rates, and about a 90% decrease in exposure rates." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccination - United States Progression

I think everyone has read what you posted and I believe that many have come to the same conclusion:

You're afraid of vaccine, maybe you're one of those weirdo guys who's afraid of needle

In my country as we are poor we are obliged to receive many vaccines a year. We must thank the non-governmental organizations that are giving us the vaccines. This has reduced many diseases.

Without the vaccines, we would have never eradicated contagious diseases such as polio and smallpox. For every death or injury which resulted from vaccination, tens of thousands of lives were saved. It is stupid as well as extremely harmful to spread negative propaganda against vaccination.

I think that if the company applies such ideas, it is useful for someone. Most likely pharmaceutical companies are keen to capitalise on medicines. People do not understand and support the delusion that they impose. Look at the ongoing epidemic in Africa. Do you want it?

lol what? Go back to the book or internet and take a look at what was happening with diseases and illnesses back in the time where there were no vaccines and than after they were invented and put in a regular use, than come back here.

Why the vaccines didnt stop the epidemic in Africa?

I heard stories that the epidemic in Africa was a plan, made to poison the people there. I heard there were sprays from the sky and in the food that had poison in them, which is why they were so sick. Obviously, vaccines are a very poor way to manage illnesses in my opinion, there should be a more efficient way to solve diseases . Vaccines are so outdated, its so 20th century.

We are merely human not gods or demigods.

So if we are to believe science vaccines are a form of Russian roulette .

And if you take the vaccine you have about 1500 pistols with 6 chambers  total of 9000 chambers and 1 bullet.

So a vaccine has a 1/9000 chance of really killing you.

 But the disease is like 15 pistols 6 chambers  1 bullet or a 1/90 chance of death.

This is a crude example but. Let's use it.  If it is true normal rational people will pick the 9000 to 1 shot not the 90 to 1 shot.

All things said I usually go vaccine yes.  Other then the flu shots.

I am 59 so far I guessed right  ;D

At the op you could be right in that if 95% of the world said no to vaccines .  World population would shrink due to death rate from desease.   If the worlds population slowly shrinks the risk of a major war killing us all off should lower.

But personally I take my shots.

That is not necessarily perfectly true.  In fact, one could be forgiven for wondering if maybe vaccines are not largely snake-oil when perusing charts such as the following.

Then there are diseases for which a vaccine was never developed and which had been quite problematic yet are now every bit as rare as the 'eradicated' ones for which a vaccines have been marketed.  Scarlet fever for instance.

Some would suggest that sanitation, enough food, etc, probably play the largest role, and perhaps the only role in some cases.

https://childhealthsafety.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/us-deaths-1900-1965.gif

In fact, vaccination stops some epidemiological phenomena, but in Africa it is difficult to do. Many tribes live in isolation. In addition, poverty exacerbates disease.

Which epidemic are you talking about? Small-pox was eradicated from Africa with the help of vaccination. Polio has been almost eradicated using similar means. Ebola and HIV are serious threats, but that is because vaccines are yet to be developed for those diseases. 

The only thing that can stop the diseases in Africa is purifying the whole continent with fire, juat burn it all down. Well major reasons why that didnt happen, the diseass stopping, was because of the poverty, still tribes there,etc...

That was the Russia spreading the propaganda around to destroy the influence of US during the cold war mostly.

I will want to disagree with you that no one should be forced to use medical treatment. I don't know what is applicable over there but over here government should even do more to jail parents who refuse to allow their children be vaccinated against some permanent disease especially polio because they end up turning into social menace begging on the street because of no fault of theirs. This issue I am talking about is a fundamental one over here and its painful to see talents waste away because of parent disobedience.

guillain barre syndrome in Greece after vaccinated

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2i4GckcvB4

Even if it was true, let's say that, that's the only one case? Yes, let's risk the epidemic because one person got goofd from vaccine.. yeah, sure.

No, maybe it should be selective, just like drugs should be legal and thus the natural selection occurs in it's modern way. lol

That's the whole point. No one is saying that the vaccines are 100% risk-free. There may be a few hundred deaths and complications from vaccine usage every year. But when you compare that to the millions of deaths, which were avoided as a result of vaccination, this figure seems minuscule.

Vaccines have been based on medical fraud for over a hundred years


The concept of vaccinating to immunize began in 1796, when British apothecary (pharmacist) Edward Jenner inserted cowpox pus under the skin of an eight year old boy. Jenner based his experiment on an unsubstantiated rumor that anyone who had experienced cowpox would be immune to smallpox.

England's incidents of smallpox after vaccination rose steadily from five percent in the beginning to 95% by 1895. There was even a serious epidemic around 1872, one year after smallpox vaccinations were decreed mandatory in the UK. The mortality rate among smallpox victims also shot up five fold around that time.

Despite intelligent protests with obvious facts and figures disproving efficacy, and proving harm from toxic materials and viruses contained in vaccines that endanger natural immunity, the inoculation for immunization premise has been maintained.

Protecting the industry against truth by attacking reasonable dissenters viciously has resulted in vaccine industry revenue of $17 billion annually today. This doesn't include revenue from doctors' visits for vaccinations and resulting ill health from them.

The vaccinators' tactics of suppressing scientific data from concerned professionals has become more mafia like. Sincere medical professionals who register health concerns over vaccines are severely punished and slandered by the medical mafia owned mainstream media.


http://www.naturalnews.com/035715_vaccines_history_fraud.html#ixzz25WOWKVBT

I do believe that some kinds of vaccines can be 'effective' (and to a lesser degree 'safe') in certain situations such as a pandemic or biological warfare environment.  In such situations the risk/reward ratio is well outside the norm.  In 'normal' circumstances it makes little sense to me to vaccinate for non-problems when a vaccination regime could be implemented if/when needed.

One of the justifications for giving vaccine manufacturers immunity in the legal system was that they would then maintain production capacity to a point where it could conceivably meet unusual challenges as above described.

If should have been anticipated that they would use their own legal immunity to make tons of money with which to capture the regulatory system.  When they did just that, it should have been the case that the abuse was ended.  Clearly this has not happened either, and I attributed it to being the case that the same parties who implemented the regulatory capture (by buying/intimidating politicians) have done the same with many other sectors including, most importantly, academia and the press.

Another factor which I'm increasingly convinced is involved is outlined in the following quote.  I've not yet transcribed it to this particular thread.  For well over a century since science came into it's own, a class of elites have recognized the utility of biology, endocrinology, etc.  Just as a people can change their leadership, the leadership can change their people:


Another formation of the quote an others from the author who was in the upper ranks of elite philosophy at his time:  http://www.whale.to/b/russell_h.html (http://www.whale.to/b/russell_h.html)  I think it more than fair to suspect that Russell's ideas were in part a transcript of the programs underway by his peers and also formed at least a rough map which has been followed since by the same.

Bottom line is, you're putting others at risk by turning yourself into an incubator and carrier by not vaccinating yourself.  This seems like yet another one of those things where hardcore libertarians somehow think they can still live and function within a society but only give a shit about themselves.  Sorry, but it doesn't work like that.  Go live in a cave somewhere or find a deserted island if you're that desperate to remove yourself from the rest of civilisation.  You don't get to take all the benefits but none of the accompanying responsibility. 

But I suppose you couldn't remove yourself from society, because you'll still be expecting a doctor to cure you when you manage to infect yourself with the plague or some horrific ailment that could have easily been avoided.   ::)

Seems that in the case of whooping cough, for instance, being vaccinated can turn one into a permanent asymptomatic carrier of the wild strain.  And therefore should go live on a desert island for the benefit of the rest of us.

Mumps is another interesting case.  Get this no-big-deal bug as a child as I did and you have life-long immunity.  Get vaccinated (which is less and less effective requiring Merck to engage in outright fraud (http://www.naturalnews.com/036328_Merck_mumps_vaccine_False_Claims_Act.html) in order to maintain their monopoly on MMR) and you get mumps after puberty when it can cause infertility in males.  Search 'mumps outbreak university'.

Of course infertility among the peeps is not at all a bad thing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Y_ubswux58) to many in leadership positions (like our current science czar, Holdren, under Obama.)

Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe (2016)

https://torrentz2.eu/search?f=vaxxed

You can't just generalize like that, some substances of the vaccines can cause to some people a problem, just like allergies.

Also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o65l1YAVaYc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o65l1YAVaYc)

If someone offers me a choice between a two-hour bout of mild allergy, and a severe infection of measles or diphtheria, then I would select the former any time of the day. Those who don't want to get vaccinated can stay that way. But they should avoid contact with the general population, as they are a health risk to the rest of us.

There is danger in vaccines because some with imminence power can do things about. But Vaccines do do what they are intended for and when you don't vaccinate your children, you are putting others in danger.

absolutely, there are a few nice caves around there I believe, where those can go.

Then you wait until the kids are old enough to make their own rational decisions.

===


Wikipedia is not an all knowing, all wise source. Even then, my argument is not about the effectiveness of vaccines, at all.


This is indeed correct. AIDS was created to sterilize the blacks and indigenous populations of the world.

Vaccinated children have up to 500% more disease than unvaccinated children

http://www.naturalnews.com/036220_vaccinated_children_disease_allergies.html

Vaccination in itself is not bad, because vaccination is made so our immune system can battle more diseases later in our life. But as the author mentioned that there is something fishy in the vaccines, as if a new substance was present in the vaccine that is not related to fighting disease. If this is true then this is very alarming, but the author needs some substantial evidence and ground so he can file a case or can oppose the governments movement on vaccination.

If someone offered me the choice between a mild childhood ailment when every kid got once and I got to take a week off 4th grade, or a lifetime of booster shots and a very good chance of getting mumps at any time anyway (since even the boosters often fail) and a chance of infertility when I did get the disease, I'll take the former.

The ecology of many of these diseases and the interactions with human populations seem to be that the natural profile results in the fewest severe problems.  Chicken-pox seems also to be in this category.  A segment of the younger people seems to be acting as a natural booster for the rest and thus shingles is reduced in older people.  It was theorized even before chicken-pox was added to the vaccination schedule that shingles would become more prevalent, and that's what happened.  The reaction was that big pharma developed a shingles vaccination also.  The trouble (for us peeps) was that it didn't work for shit at detering shingles but it worked fine for big pharma since they made some bucks off it.

Basically, as long as the vaccine manufactures don't have to worry about liability for problems, they can make a ton of money off vaccines, and a much much larger amount of money off people who are sickened by the vaccines when they provoke auto-immune related problems which are skyrocketing.  Better yet, with a system like Obamacare the medical system generally and big pharma in particular can charge anything they wish for 'products and services'.  Even someone without money is a profitable victim because someone with money will pick up the tab.

The big race here between 'the elite' and 'the peeps' seems to be whether us peeps will wise up to the game or die off before we do.  Most people get smart only after they get sick and start researching this stuff, but by that time they are broke and sick and it's harder for them to be effective at making a difference.

It is not strange that health improves when the population gives up using diluted sewage as the principle beverage.

– Dr. Thurman Rice, 1932

But a competent snake-oil salesman could see an opportunity here.  Especially one who had effective ownership of the media, the research institutes, the government sponsored 'oversight' organizations, the hospitals, the medical trade organizations, etc.

everyone gets vaccinated: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs378/en/

with vaccinations rate of 85+% for certain diseases - why the fuck arent we all dead or atleast look like frankenstein?

wait, you prolly got a frankenstein brain; maybe shouldnt have took that polio vaccination :D

Yes, there area small chips inside all of those who get vaccinated, it's all the deed of those big jewish families who want to bring the NWO, so they're implementing that devices in us and soon, We'll have barcodes on our arms.

And why not? People do not unite and fight for their rights. So not so scary for them. If the people rise up against any government they will not keep. Probably not all that bad? A person sells themselves for money and it allows you to do anything with him.

thats what i was thinking. ive never seen proof that its harmful even if it killed 1 in 10,000 how many would die in an outbreak?


idiots like the op believe anything they read including facebook post or fake news post created by people who want fast revenue.


Even legit news is corrupt, Like the thing about cops killing people the rise of deaths would increase ofcourse every year theirs 6million more people in the us est so... more cops and more disputes the numbers has always been the same and people are making it worse..

when you see nothing but bad news its easy to get upset "cnn" "fox" w/e found their golding niche thats all...

i'm not a cop and don't really care about which side is right or wrong but attacking cops or killing them is just gonna make their job more stressful and these numbers that has always been the same will climb.

which is my point if you are a sheep that will jump on board without proof problems get worse.
If you deny statistics and don't wanna get your child vaccined you put a larger amount at risk.

I think that calls for the blocking of vaccination in the world is nothing but an attempt to reduce the world population. Even if you don't get any disease, concerned people can help.

in that case let's be honest about our intentions and call for a one child policy for indians and africans, more humane and probably more effective way of getting the same result

Now in all civilized countries there is a reduction in fertility. Educated people do not just want to have children and to make their children to live with dignity. The more dodgy the more children they have. And the more it crime.

From an operational point of view, vaccinations programs are (potentially) more effective.  If you force a policy on people they get suspicious, resentful, and disruptive.  If, OTOH, you use propaganda correctly you can get the peeps to gladly pay the costs and a lot more, and to self-enforce policy upon one another.

Note that from the view of a competent Ecologist, there is little difference between having no kid, or having a kid who itself will not have kids for whatever reason; Incapable, unwilling, etc.  Further, a sufficiently damaged kid can be useful to the controllers in a bunch of ways.  The kid(s) can sap a families resources making the family itself more dependent on the state and less likely to or capable of causing problems.  Certain kinds of damage can also make a person more susceptible to propaganda thus reducing the threat and increasing the utility a generation out.

Eugenics can be made to be quite profitable in addition to addressing the primary goals of the practitioner.  In fact, it works a lot better that way because it enlists the support of people who are not necessarily passionate about eugenics programs in and of themselves.  For every 1 eugenics enthusiast there are 1000 people who just want to get rich and don't care much how they do it.

How many children do you have? In my country, no one forbids, but the majority of families have one child. I believe that it is possible to have children no more than you can contain them well.

If not the way things are turning out now, Vaccines have turned out to be effective in combating some life threatening diseases after years of extensive research and this has gone a long way in reducing needless death. Over here probably because of the level of advancement in technology still at the low stage we still rely on vaccine a lot. You see pregnant women vaccinated to protect their unborn babies at the same time after birth vaccinated to protect the baby and this has made WHO declared our country POLIO free in 2014. This is an achievement that cannot be faulted in any way...

I think so, what if vaccines save lives then they need to use. All who do not use the vaccine you have that right, but if not vaccinated person infect other, he should compensate the caused damage.

Don't forget about the costs of treating these people when they become ill.
Example: You refuse to vaccinate yourself against something common, but deadly, like tuberculosis, and catch it. Who is going to pay for the treatment? If someone wants to take their chances, I won't stand in their way, but be ready to face the consequences.

Everyone that knows the data and a little knowledge of science can say, that vaccinations have not cure any disease. Most of the deadly diseases were already in decline at the time vaccinations came into existence. The one and the most underpreciated element that prevented huge and deadly plague was invention of sanitation and more commonly used personal hygiene.

Those people that says that its all because of vaccines doesnt know what they are talking about. Children and adults, where almost swimming in sewage before the widespread usage of sanitation in the cities. If you think that people can be healthy in sewage, good luck. Just look at the data folks.

Many plagues was caused by the use of vaccines but you wont hear that dont you?

On the other hand, unless you overvaccinate an infant and those fuckers do, vaccines are almost harmless, but completly unnecessary. There are some rare cases where taking a vaccine would be beneficial, but give me a break with that prevention from the disease. Its a lie to scare people and leave their money to Rotschilds.

Water and sewage was already known in ancient Egypt, but that hasn't stopped the epidemic. I am sure that more effective way to combat the epidemic than the vaccination came up.

Believe all you want. Plagues wont be there where there is no dirt fleas rats and malnutrition all around. I dont  want to convince anyone. Vaccinate yoursefl and your child all you want. But please dont scare tactic the ones that doesnt.

There are chances they won't make it to that time, you know. Also brainwashed as they are in the communities where they live it's hard to expect they will be able to make their own rational decisions.

I don't know about every case because every particular case is unique, but since it has been proved that vaccines are effective parents shouldn't decide for their children whether to do it or not because people are uneducated mostly.

It is useless to convince people that we need in a timely manner to take care of your health. Why persuade? Most important to those who are sick to infect others. But life will put everything in its place.

If one has been bitten by a rabid animal it makes sense to use rabies vaccine.  One has a very high odds of getting the disease and the disease has a very high mortality (100%).  It's a particularly unpleasant death as well.

There are other cases where vaccination works and makes sense.  The big problem is that the ability to properly use risk/reward decision making is completely broken in our world of pseudo-science, propaganda, and crony economics.  One doesn't need to dig very deep into this issue to see that some weird stuff is going on, but what exactly it is isn't very clear.

I am African and in my country I did not hear anything about it. But it may be possible. We always have to be careful about the millionaires who are going to poor countries to "donate" because they always have something evil in mind.


 :o :o

What makes you think so?

read the title and agreed, read your post and agreed too. i'll no support vaccines anymore

+1

Vaccines defeated so many deadly diseases, it's a nonsense to come back.

I do not believe that vaccination is evil. She had saved a lot of people from various terrible diseases. Without vaccination mankind would have died from the dreaded disease

They're not evil sionce they stop the spreading of diseases that could wipe out a big chunk of humanity, on the other hand, by vaccinating we're preventing the natural selection and we're allowing weak ones to reproduce more weak humans, therefore in one hand vaccines are good and on the other hand they are bad since they're leading to overpopulation of the Earth.

lol, what you said is so wrong. Firstly, natural selection has nothing to do with weak humans. You probably got C- in grade 11 biology, so you think you understand Darwinistic ideologies. Vaccines are outdated, new ways to prevent disease should become available. Something more efficient and less hassle.

Many diseases disappeared without vaccination. Sanitation is the key.

Survival of the fittest, why do you think that in our case girls prefer more muscular guys over some twigs? Yeah, and Earth is overpopulated and soon to be dry of sources, new planet to live on should be available.

You bet it is. Facts dont lie. People do.

Leonardo da Vinci survived in the middle of the black death plagued in Vienna. Why? because he washed himself? propably. But mostly its many factors involved, the one that he was a gay as well. Being gay made him not use the services of whores. And whores had fleas for sure. He could afford to eat well, and stay indoors not in the seweged streets of Vienna. Did he vaccinated himself?

What modern medical science at that times had to say of a way not be diseased? It said not to wash yourself. Becuase the layer of dirt was suppose to block the morrow wind. Current medicine says you need to poison your children. Do it at your own peril mmmmk?

In the middle of the black death epidemics, there were consevative countries like Poland, that didnt believe some plague doctors not to wash yourself. In poland herbs had a widespread usage, and we were clean people at that times. What was the results? No black death plague. Single casualties only. Did they vaccinated?


test on IQ. Why does the ones that vaccinated fear the unvaccinated. Do they fear that vaccination dont work? Or those fuckers wants some scapegoating practices made.

P.S and no we are not conservative now anymore. Vaccination is a must here. Its horrible really. Why cant people take minimal risk? Its not like I will disease the vaccinated ones. Its illogical. 10 people out of 100 wont cause the plague. Leave us alone will you? You can even eat your children for all I care. Just leave the ones that dont want vaccination alone ok?

If they are our vaccines, then they are yours too.

There is no such thing as "our".

What is the dispute? There are vaccines that help fight diseases. Is the opinion of the other side, doing nothing.I understand that so the dispute is not conducted. To cancel you need something to offer in return.

Only a Russian can bear such nonsense. Ditch agriculture to defeat tetanus. A good way of dealing with the disease. The following method will wipe out the population to avoid epidemics.

Exactly! That's not enough to say let's not do it and then die from diseases. If there was a way to avoid vaccines but to stay healthy in the same time I'd vote for that, but all the alternatives are not effective so far.

The effect of cancer treatment is also not 100%. So not to treat? Religion offers an alternative treatment is prayer. Is it a method? I believe that until will not be more effective way you need to use something that is.

Whether they are effective or not or can cause some side effects or not, I fully agree that the government should not be imposing vaccines but give people that choice to take them or not. The reason why we have imposition is because one person should not be spreading any disease but if the vaccines are effective why be afraid?

Before, no one was afraid of vaccination. Now launched a campaign to discredit vaccination. Maybe it's someone who needs it? Someone provokes a weakening of the immune system of people.

As I said before, vaccines are not as bad as some people assume they are. Most kids need them and while nothing better is invented we shouldn't oppose vaccination, kids deserve to be in a good health.

A better question is, 'if vaccines are safe, why the need for liability immunity for the pharma companies who make them?'

It's worse than just that these companies make them.  They also do most of the research as well.  Supposedly entities like the CDC look over the research, but for all intents and purposes the pharma industry owns the CDC.  Personnel at the CDC do their time in 'public service' then walk right through the revolving door to make real money in the 'private sector'...as long as they play ball.  Look at the head of CDC under Bush, Julie Gerberding; she went straight on to become president of Merck’s Vaccine division.

and this is a very interesting idea. Maybe you're right and now there is a specially hidden genocide. Government is not very profitable to have so many people.

Unfortunately the people themselves accept these rules of the game and not leave yourself a chance at life. Besides, the government is to blame it will be impossible, because people are taking such a decision.

For those who are unaware, there is nothing particularly new about the leadership class being highly interested in injecting their peeps, the peeps sensing a problem, and tensions coming to a head:

http://www.vaccinationinformationnetwork.com/revolts-and-opposition-against-compulsory-smallpox-vaccination/ (http://www.vaccinationinformationnetwork.com/revolts-and-opposition-against-compulsory-smallpox-vaccination/)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_Revolt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_Revolt)

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

yes, the decision will be made by people. But the motivation for this decision will be imposed due to the government's opinion. The government will simply create the conditions, and the people themselves will do everything

I am sure that this situation will lead to casualties. However, do people choose their own destiny. It's their decision. Only I don't want them got sick and infected me and my children.

From: http://smartvax.org/2011/04/29/allergy-and-anaphylaxis-history/  (http://smartvax.org/2011/04/29/allergy-and-anaphylaxis-history/)

Of course with our modern vaccinations and schedules there are no longer any problems with allergies and no company makes any money selling medicine to people to treat them in a life-long palliative manner.

And so few autoimune related issues either.

No 'scientific' total health outcome studies comparing vaxxed vs. unvaxxed somehow.  Much to difficult I guess.  Hey, here's a very recent article I'd not seen:

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/2016-health-study-on-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-children-pulled-from-publication-after-it-found-vaxxed-kids-more-likely-to-get-autism_122016 (http://www.thedailysheeple.com/2016-health-study-on-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-children-pulled-from-publication-after-it-found-vaxxed-kids-more-likely-to-get-autism_122016)


So you can choose for your kids between the possibility of getting a mild rash (or, to be fair, vicious cough for some weeks) and life-long immunity, or possibly being converted into a life-long retard or life-long consumer of expensive pharma offerings to help with the misery of not being able to breath half the time.  Your choice.*

_{(*)not applicable in the state of California.}

80-85% of the first world population is vaccinated.

You must be one of the life long retarded autist zombies you talk about LOL

We've earlier established that you have a reading deficit so it would not be a surprise to find one in mathematics as well.  NDD?  Similac baby?  Here are some study words for the day:  'likely', 'possibility', 'less', 'more'.

As an aside, it's worth note that between 60% and 70% of Americans, depending on who's study one uses, now take prescription drugs for one chronic condition or another (and often multiple of them.)  I have no doubt that TPTB would like to see that be up around 90%, and we're getting there.

Over 85% of the first world population is vaccinated.

Do you understand the implications of this sentence?
If you think yes, just belive me you dont.

And btw. posting links to blogs is no science.


It is quite funny that especially you are talking about deficits in reading comprehension and stochastic - are you by chance a popular comedian in real life?

You are not saying anything so there are no 'implications'.
If you think you are, just believe me you aren't

And btw, if I wear my white lab coat and eye protection when I post then it's 'science'.

85+% of 2 billion people are 1,7+ billion people.

If what you and your blogs states are true we would see a huge amount (tens of millions of people) dying of vaccination and some more millions getting life long diseases which restricts their physical or psychological body functions.

There would be no power on earth that could hide that.


You must be one of the art degree scientists right?  ::)
They always have problems with logic.

I (and many many many others) believe that vaccines increase one's chances of falling victim to certain negative health impacts.  That does not mean that everyone who gets vaccinated will, or that someone who has not been vaccinated will not.  It's all about the odds.  This really should not be that difficult.

The percentage of the population with negative health impacts from probably a variety of factors is quite high as evidenced by the rates of prescription drug use.  Plotting vaccines doses against negative health issues shows a correlation (not causation.)  Personally I suspect that such things as chronic mycoplasma infections are probably more impactive on overall health than immune system dysfunction caused by vaccines, though vaccines seem to be a vector for some of these infections due to certain necessities involved in their manufacture.  And it is kind of a fact that a lot of these were developed as non-lethal biological warfare agents though it is not clear that our infection rates from the so developed strains were deliberate, accidental, or none of the above.  I suspect that food is also a significant source of problems these days.

As for 'seeing', sometimes one doesn't see the forest for the trees.  I've seen autism rates go from something like 1/10,000 when I was a kid to something like 1/60.  With all our wonderful science somehow we just can't seem to figure it out (shrugs.)  Ya, ya, 'better diagnosis, blah, blah, blah'.  Two+ orders of magnitude?  Not buying it and neither are most nurses and doctors when they are willing to speak freely.  Millennials here in the U.S. have never known a time when 2/3 of the population didn't wander around like zombies but I do.  Even we who remember the 70's look back at films of people from the 50's in awe.

Technically I'm an engineer FWIW.  Or was when last working formally.

They make people play their silly little russian roulette game for absolutely no provable reason. Its ok to play russian rulette for me, but dont coerce people into having to play that silly game.

For example during the I world war one could imagine that there are excelent grounds to get the tetanus disease. People were lying with open wounds on the ground in the horse shit. All those requirements must be met. And still there was just single cases of that disease. Until they started experimenting with the vaccines on soldiers. They inflicted the disease uppon the soldiers and claimed afterwards that vaccines are useful because the soldiers had Tetanus. THEY INFLICTED IT! Numbers of such a cases are numberless. I just dont have the need and time to write all the cases.

If vaccines are so great why bother using government to coerce people to do the vaccination? If they would be so great people should put themselfves in huge lines to be vaccinated. They dont. Only the most insecure, most irresponsible, and the dumbest mothers do that.

Deadly diseases are a subject of absolutely horryfing conditions to get it. Extreme malnutrition is one of the aspect. The other aspect is absolutely unclean enviroment. We need to understand there is an absolute horror in the world and as such will be such a deadly diseases.

As for non deadly and non crippling disease. Most of them have good health benefit to have in some point in live. Like water pox or mumps. The data shows that getting those diseases naturally, decrease your chance of brain cancer in the future.

Reading comprehension.
What are millions of 2 billion people? I made the odds in favor of you people and the numbers are still unreasonable.

If i take the number of your blogs we have probaly 100 millions of victims - dont forget we are giving out vaccines for over 70 years now.



The only corrolation you show is that ill people do take drugs against their illness.
The rest is just your opinion, complete nonsense or some conspiracy theory.



We have much higher increase in diabetes, cancer, heart and blood vessel diseases - all this because of vaccines? Or is it just the advancement of our society with its sex drugs and rock n roll?
Not to forget Mc donalds and burger king



Didnt you had to take a lecture in stochastic and logic? Should be It is basic lecture for every engineer (the first for sure, not sure if logic is actually a basic lecture for a engineer).

Why only fast-food guilty? I think first to blame the fridge. Since the refrigerator has appeared in every home started to have problems with excess weight, and this leads to the development of various diseases.

Maybe it is, but how clever is the person who will refuse to use the fridge? From vaccination to give up easier. So I don't believe that non-vaccination will lead to reduced growth of cancer.

You are putting actual numbers to a proposed phenomenon which lacks even rate metrics (e.g., 'probably 100 million victims'.)  And then trying to tell me that I don't understand 'logic and stochastic' analysis?  Lol.

My complaint is that studies which could honestly pin down some of the rates in what is a very complex system are avoided like the plague.  Those studies which do sneak through are typically quashed, and flawed ones which further a certain narrative are promoted.  I've not seen it yet, but the movie 'vaxxed' is supposed to be about this occurring at the CDC.

Applying 'logic' to the observation that science is skewed and quashed when it goes against the 'safe and effective' mantra about vaccines leads me to believe that they are less 'safe and effective' than the mainstream propaganda would have us believe.  A corollary in logical analysis would be 'why the effort?'.  I propose one possible explanation is that the health problems which may be associated with over-vaccination are actually quite profitable and useful to the pharma industry and others.

My hypothesis is nothing new.  Back in the early 50's Bertrand Russell hypothesized that in future 'scientific societies', 'diet and injection' would be among the tools that a leadership would use to produce a more manageable population with attributes and behaviors which would be to their liking.

Reading comprehension. My sources are your anti vaccine blogs with their numbers. LOL

The amount of vaccinations ranges in the multi billion (5++ billion vaccinations).
Do you understand how many deaths and cripples would have been made if vaccines were dangerous?
And exactly this is your narrative: vaccines are dangerous and bad - lead to death or cripple you.

The following is more opinions, nonsense and even more conspiracies from you - i dont even know what to say about that.

Acient-aliens-meme.jpg

You are full of shit dear.

You cant refute anything that is why you are only answering my comment on what a stupid being you are.

Ever heard of ockhams razor? Why do you think no alien reptiles are in power on the flat earth we are living on?


https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1710254.0

^^

it won't either way. But their main argument is that 1:1.000.000 cases, some kid stays retarded because of the  vaccine. Hey, I'm alergic to bees, let's kill them all just because 1:100.000 people are alergic too.

The funny part is depending on blog they state odds ranging from 1:1.000 to 1:100.000.

Information keeps coming out substantiating what a lot of us figured out a while ago.

http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-08-top-doctors-reveal-that-vaccines-can-trigger-autoimmunity-turning-our-immune-systems-against-us.html (http://www.naturalnews.com/2016-12-08-top-doctors-reveal-that-vaccines-can-trigger-autoimmunity-turning-our-immune-systems-against-us.html)


Very profitable for the medical-industrial complex.  My guess is that you don't even hold any shares in any of these corporations but are rather a simple big-brother loving damaged minion who these people have worked hard to create.  Anyone who would support for president probably the most corrupt politician ever seen in the U.S. (Hillary Clinton) is almost certain to be a victim of the attack on one front or another.

Your side better get cracking on 'fake news' and peer-2-peer info sharing clamp-down because the end is near and the games are being figured out rapidly by those who can still think critically.

More "facts" about vaccinations beside that you again believe that im a hillary supporter and a .gov employee? :D

Here are hard facts:

I rarely state things as 'fact' on purpose.  I did state as a given fact that sick people are economically advantageous for drug makers.  Feel free to argue the converse if you like.

As for your .gov association, I've mentioned several times that it's more likely that you are but a run-of-the-mill victim though I didn't rule out the possibility that you are a contractor or some such.

Since you seem to have a little bit of genuine interest in the topic, note that a healthy immune system needs to be active against 'self' in addition to the more commonly considered invaders and it's a tricky business.  Turbo-charging an immune system with activity stress and adjuvants is playing Russian-roulette with autoimmune problems.  The trouble is that to the extent that vaccines work at all, it is only because of adjuvants.

Furthermore, for 'ethical' reasons, the term 'work' is defined as the vaccines producing a certain level of titers.  The actual on-the-ground effectiveness at dealing with supposed diseases is a distant second.

The logical take-away is that due to the inevitable risks, vaccination should be used as sparingly as possible.  This means only for critical issues in under an honest and rational cost/benefit analysis.  What is happening under our current system where the pharma corporations have no fiscal liability and pretty much own the CDC (and most other branches of govt under our oligarchy here in the U.S.) is that we peeps are being over-vaccinated to an astonishing degree, and are almost certainly paying the price (literally and figuratively.)

If a doctor inject into your blood mercury, aluminum, msg and formaldehyde it is a criminal operation. But where is the police?

Also, from memory, a short list of other goodies which are or have been known to have been along for the ride:

 - Tween-80 detergent which interferes with lipids helping the blood-brain barrier to do it's job.

 - SV-40 virus found in half of all cancers (polio vaccine.)

 - Pig viruses undetected until well after vaccine went into production and started to be injected into people (rotovirus vaccine.)

 - A wide variety of broken down cellular components from the culture medium (human and animal cell lines and tissues.)

 - mycoplasma species.

 - hCG (human chorionic gonadotropin) which was specifically developed to cause infertility in females and has been used covertly in tetanus vaccination programs from time to time.

This is very alarming where vaccine which is supposed to be to prevent diseases and other illness are the one also which are not safe to used and caused more harm than prevention. Sadly, it is more on profit to the corporations who produced it, but it seems the subject are just like being experimented, they release without stringent test being made.

Aside from that theres a Flu vaccine that is being reported that caused also problems, the Dengue vaccine and hpv vaccine gardasil that has so much negative review.

While this is certainly true and horrible facts but you can't deny that vaccines have also tremendous positive effects as well.
You can't view every vaccine like it is some kind conspiracy medicine used to enslave or make you sick.

Do you people actually know what vaccine does? Do you know why does in contain the viruses in itself? Can anyone, please, reply to me and explain how vaccines work? You can even google it if you want to.

You are trying to harm people by spreading scare-stories against vaccination. None of the vaccines contain mercury or aluminium (at least those which are properly manufactured). You are no different from the ISIS terrorists, who claim that vaccination is a plot by the Western corporations to make Muslim males infertile.

This thread is indicative of the looming realisation that anti-vaxxers are losing the scientific argument, so they attempt to turn it into a moral freedom issue instead.  Whatever it takes to promote the warped notion that it's okay to be a selfish egomaniac, even if your choices have a negative impact on other people.  The good news is, Darwin is still the hardest working dead guy going, so if the anti-vaxxers want to willingly thin out their own numbers through sheer ignorance and selfishness, Darwinism will happily oblige.  Just try not to harm other people in the process by infecting them with something, or dying at the wheel and causing an accident or whatever.  The sooner you remove yourselves from the genepool, the better.  Try not to reproduce.  And don't force your idiocy on any offspring that are unfortunate enough to be brought into this world by you.

Are you kidding me. Do you know what adjuvant is? Maybe vaccines do not contain them but adjuvants are mainly that. Omg i cant believe you guys are so full of misinformation.

@doomad

Yeah yeah yeah darwin yeah yeah yeah if not vaxxines we would all be dead yeah yeah yeah selfish nonvaxxiners. Thats how you sound. Anything more to add? I really cant believe how one can have Darwin, unselfishness and vaccines in one coherent order. If you believe darwin was right you believe you are selfish and Darwin was telling about survival without the artificial help. I seriously cant believe if people are actually believing what they are writing.



@Tyrannt

No. Every non vaxxiners had a higher order from their supreme commander and know nothing about everything.


p.s if humanity believes that vacciners gaining millions and billions of dollars for free are pure unselfish angels and nonvacinera are a selfish bastards becuase simply they care and have 0 from it, all is lost. We as humanity may as well inject vaccines directly into the brain, it wont change anything.

as well we all know today that vaccines is what most people are living on today take good look at one of the most deadly sickness today HIV Aids to a large ways vaccines have been able to cut down in a way because it sub press the various  and here by making people to live today so vaccines is very important for people that needs it.

Bolded by me. No, this is objectively untrue. Vaccines have historically saved millions of people - the only people at risk are the very very rare individuals that have an allergic reaction to said vaccines. And vaccines still save far more people overall due to the danger of herd immunity being compromised.

I do agree that the state should force people to vaccinate their children, but in passive ways (such as denying families state benefits if they refuse, and forcing them to alert other parents if their own children are unvaccinated). I don't agree that criminal charges such as actual fines/prison should be applied because that is a bit authoritarian in my view, but I have no problem with the state denying benefits to unvaccinated families. If you don't like it, you can move to a country where it's not enforced.

I believe that vaccination is necessary. Mankind through vaccination get rid of many diseases. Are we again want to epidemics of terrible diseases? I think not

It's slime-ball who thinks that vaccines are causing negatives health effects and would NOT warn people about them.  Less competition for their own kids, more chance of collecting social security due to the earlier die-off of the chumps, and less people infecting the globe if the de-population death cult is your thing.

A person who bought the 'safe and effective' party line would have no reason to invent 'scare-stories'.  Just the opposite since they earnestly think they will benefit by 'herd immunity'.

Basically, the only people who would provide warnings are people who genuinely thinks there might be real issues and who have an decency instinct to look out for their fellow man.

I suppose there could be a mix here, and that I might be in that category.  People who are gullible enough to eat up the corp/gov/nwo vaccine propaganda will suffer injury to themselves and their progeny and thus be selected against over time.  This could contribute to the strength of our society.  Such people (e.g., modern 'progressives') are causing serious problems at the present time and we could do with fewer of them.  It's an honor and a duty to give those who should not be final-solution'd a chance to hear the other side and wise up though, else Darwinism can't work properly here.

As for the 'Muslim males', I doubt it.  Their task is to break down Western society which has been softened up by a variety of de-masculation programs over the years (including but not limited to vaccination regimes.)  Once that is mostly accomplished the leadership can go ahead and "Kill them.  Kill them both." to borrow a line from Raiders of the Lost Ark.

---

Mercury is not used as an adjuvant.  It's uses as a preservative.  Most vaccines nowadays contain only a little left over from the manufacturing process, but multi-dose flu vaccines still use it as a preservatives and most of those who are stupid enough to take the flu vaccination get a healthy dose.

Funny thing about mercury:  A hundred years ago someone thought to wonder if it was safe.  To test it, they injected mercury into 12 people (iirc) who were dying of encephalitis.  They all died of encephalitis thus proving that mercury is safe.  And so it stood for most of a century.  Eventually (after a legislator's own grand-kid was damaged) it was taken out of most vaccines, but NOT because it caused any problems mind you.  Just to make 'uneducated' people feel better.

---

Aluminum is the most common adjuvant at the present.  Vaccines which are problematic to get working contain more of it.  HPV is a good example of this.

Crushed glass as an adjuvant was tried in horses.  Turns out that it cause enough discomfort to the animal to have a bunch of crushed glass in their tissue that it was abandoned.

Another potential adjuvant is squalene which is an oil related to that which lubricates our joints.  It was found through experiments on ignorant and powerless army recruits (like me) that it might be causing joint problems and was a common complaint from those suffering from 'gulf war syndrome.'  I personally got a fuck-load of shots during gulf war and my joints are fine.  Either I am lucky and not prone to problems, or I lucked out and got in a control group.  Impossible to know about such things.  Anyway, I found it interesting that this year only injected flu vaccine is recommended and they are back to using squalene as an adjuvant for older victims.

Yeah sorry to my prelegent for my lack of knowledge, as I thought that adjuvant has as well a preservative function. Good distinction here. Yes. Ive ment that mercury is used for vaccine not to get spoiled. And its not because the angels of vaccines are so unselfish. They want their cheap vaccines to be even more cheap.

Im the last guy who can say that little mercury here and there is a killing blow. But ffs. They vaccinate infants and they dont even know whats inside most of the time. Adjuvants and preservatives may vary from vaccine to vaccine depending on a manufacturer. If you think that picking unlucky infant that have the cheapest dose of vaccines is ok... i rest my case.

I think its some war of rich and informed against the poor and uninformed. They think they do good to humanity that way.

And an IQ test. Which of the vaccines would a corrupt government buy? Those cheap or those less harmful? Someone will buy those cheap vaccines. Propably some more corrupted and poorer countries.

P.s and if you think that people dont do silly things just because they are under pressure to profit. You are wrong.

I personally feel it quite possible that a certain few people 'at the top' know with precision that injections are useful for some pretty nasty population effects and are deploying them for exactly that reason here and there and from time to time.  'Vaccination' is simply the most convenient way to justify injecting things into people's bloodstreams and thus bypassing the digestive tract which simplifies things.

I personally bought the standard story about 'safe and effective' hook, line, and sinker for most of my life.  I don't remember if I ever exhibited my wisdom by explaining 'herd immunity' to anyone but it wouldn't surprise me if I had.

Later, for reasons I don't remember, I looked into things a bit more deeply and tried to study the actual science behind things in more detail.  As the years tick by, more and more doctors (or former doctors) come out of the closet and give very detailed presentations on various aspects of what they know.  I must have a hundred such presentations.  These were very helpful to me.

Like almost all of these doctors do, I mostly wrote off the malfeasance to innocent mistakes, cronyism, corporate greed, etc.  Over time I've come to take the concept that we peeps are being deliberately damaged for a deeper goal than simply making a buck or pinching pennies in safety precautions in order for our benevolent leadership to 'serve' more people.  One of the things which has influenced me to this line of thinking is that the real movers and shakers from earlier times wrote pretty freely about doing so.

Another reason for my suspicions is that the concept of damaging people to make them more manageable actually makes a lot of sense, and can even be justified on ethical grounds if one has a bit of a fucked up mind and/or a quasi-religious mindset which lends itself to considering humans as a kind of a blight on Mother Earth.  A surprising number of highly intelligent people seem to fall into one or more of these camps.

Wow! So much misinformation, and misconception in this thread.
I'm 74, and very healthy, I don't take any drugs - prescription or recreational, and I haven't had any vaccinations since I was a kid. Vaccines have changed over 70 years, and modern ones are extremely damaging, as they destroy the natural immune system of the body. At best, giving a healthy baby a vaccination weakens its immune system, and its ability to adjust to the rapid changes in modern infections, at worst, it damages the body and brain of the child. The immune system needs to work, and if it is frustrated, then it starts to invent all sorts of new jobs - this is one of the causes of the rise in alergic reactions.

The 'flu vaccine is madness - who really believes that infecting a person with an out-of-date virus will help them build a resistance to the latest viruses. You wouln't install anti-virus software for Windows 98 on your Windows 10 computer, so why do it to your body. Your body should have the ability to create anti-virus protection for all the latest threats - don't destroy that mechanism, and leave yourself unprotected.

feel like some vaccines are needed but most like yearly flu vaccinations are pure garbage.
I imagine babies do need to get certain vaccinations. This is probably why the government wants everybody to be vaccinated.
Because Each vaccine means money

Vaccinating a healthy baby is one of the worst things you can do. You mess up its developing immune system, and you condemn it to a life of dependance on destructive drugs. Imaging the guilt a mother must feel when she realises that she was the cause of her baby's ill health.

It seems pretty suspicious to me that the medical/industrial complex is so intent on giving at least one shot on the first day of life.  Especially that it is Hep-B which 1) protects against a disease almost exclusively associated with shooting up illegal drugs and having unprotected sex, and 2) wears off before the kid reaches an age where they are at risk of such behavior anyway.  It looks to me suspiciously like an excuse for something else.

(My own personal hypothesis is that there is a desire to get a dose of metal into people as soon as possible, and especially into the brain, so that electromagnetic radiation could be more impactful.  Vaccines do seem to be designed to open the blood-brain barrier, and aluminum from shots is known to infuse into brain tissue.  Shaw & Tomljenovic and UBC have done a fair bit of what I find fairly convincing research on this (Al in the brain.)  Of course they are roundly attacked by such 'fake science' sites like metabunk.)

Back in 'our day' pregnant women were not even supposed to take so much as an aspirin.  Actually I (around age 50) might be in a different category since in slightly earlier times there was a problem with thalidomide and everyone was gun-shy.  Be that as it may, it's been recognized for some time the sensitivity of a developing fetus.  Until fairly recently giving shots to pregnant women was tantamount to malpractice as I understand things.  Now pregnant women are implored to get flu shots by some of the most hard-core advertising campaigns I've seen.  And these pharmacy flu shots are the multi-dose kind which are still preserved with mercury.

Even the CDC admits that mercury in gestation can cause tics, but they say it's no big deal because they usually wear off.  My feeling is that tics are instinctively creepy to others because they indicate a neurological dysfunction and, again instinctively, a person who is not a good partner for mating with or for anything else.  One way or another, even if the tics wear off by, say, age 10, ten years of having them and getting teased in school and so on is vastly worse than having the flu for a week.

As for the flu, I personally welcome it.  I feel that it exercises the immune system and is a good thing.  If I go more than two years without getting the flu I might actually be sick enough for one day to lay around in bed when I finally do.  It's not fun, but it's not a bid deal.  Yes, some people 'die' while they have it, but it's not from the flu.  Basically these people were on the edge already and the flu tipped them over it.  If it wasn't the flu it would have been something else fairly soon anyway in most cases.

Even if some vaccines might be useful. Im an open minded person. We should leave the space to informed parents about unnecessary vaccines. I would cross out many of them that I know that having some disease are useful to have naturally and wont kill me or my children.

Why not leave the option to cross out certain types of vaccines. Lets have one vaccine like against polio or such. One vaccine would not be enough to destroy a persons life. I wouldnt mind even paying a fee for some greedy bastards. Let them have their money.

And yeah people should be able to sue the producents of vaccines. They need to know who produce what and when. That would teach people to not mess around and try better.

People should find the solution to please everyone. By making argues over an internet we achieve the sittuation that the media has the last word. And thats just wrong.

P.S I have some remark about the conspiracy of people "at the top". Usualy I have tendency to weed all of the possible solution before trying to find some super malicious ones. Zbigniew Brzezinski is clearly writing in his books about the society on which people would be divided into two cathegorys. Those who can afford modern medicine and those who dont. I dont believe Brzezinski have the intelectual capability to plan on a world scale personally.

It's not just vaccies that are a problem, the food supply is severely messed up. I've taken to using Himalayan sea salt instead of the standard stuff. It's a bit more expensive, but it contains iodine and some other minerals. Most people are iodine deficient these days. It used to be used in the manufacure of bread, but those days are long gone, now most bread is just a deficient pappy mass unless you can find a decent baker.

I still have some difficuty in thinking of sea salt being found in the mountains. :)

I agree that the pharma cartel is exploiting poor people, by selling certain type of medications. That said, I believe that the vaccinations do more good than bad for the humans. 99% of the vaccines are harm-free.

Well, Darwin was wrong. For example the powerful dinosaurs extinct and weak species survived.  ;D

Dinosaurs were a big group, consisting of giants such as Argentinosaurus and Spinosaurus, as well as midgets such as Microraptor and Compsognathus. All of them became extinct, regardless of whether they were powerful or not.

This would be a gross misunderstanding of Darwin's theory of evolution.  'Powerful' (or even 'strong') has nothing to do with it.  It's all about being adapted to an environment, and most of the time being 'weak' is a better strategy on the inter-species level.  The basic reason for this is related to thermodynamics.  Being 'powerful' burns more precious energy which can be difficult to find consistently.

Within a species especially in the higher vertebrates grades there is a tendency for sexual dimophism and displays of 'strength'.  The purpose is to impress a potential mate as an individual who is capable enough to exploit an environment and produce a surplus (to be burnt on bigger tail-feathers, corvettes, etc.)

Blind faith in a leadership and their propaganda organs can cut both ways for humans.  It strengthens a group and lets them dominate other groups.  But when domination of other groups is no longer possible (because it has been achieved, for instance) or a goal, a society starts to eat it's tail as competition within the group replace outward domination as primary driving force.  At that point the leaders might try to weaken or kill off the followers and vice-versa.  The Fabian Socialists understood these fairly basic dynamics rather well...and they were/are not big fans of 'democracy'.

lack of knowledge is not a crime anywhere in this world.Why would anyone want a particular religion males to be infertile .The fakers who spread these sort of fake news should be prosecuted.

I also think that vaccines are more than good than evil. There are certain basic vaccinations, which should be binding. The rest - at the discretion of parents

Vaccines Can Cause Infertility
https://vactruth.com/2013/07/20/vaccines-can-cause-infertility/

I may go along with that AFTER there is complete transparency in the entire process (research, manufacture, testing, oversight, etc) AND adversarial analysis adjudicated in a transparent manner.  NOT before.

As long as corporations can shroud their 'technology' behind a shield of 'intellectual property' and 'trade secrets' law, and as long as corporations can hire the 'public service' oversight personnel after their 'service', no thanks.  That is begging for trouble and we see plenty of it peeking through in spite of the propaganda veil.

I am in favor of people being able to hand over their immune systems to corp/gov, and even that of their children to a lesser degree, to entities who they, for whatever reason, choose to trust.  I am very opposed to FORCING others to do so.

I have zero interest in muzzling people who question things.  That is a totalitarian nightmare scenerio on a lot of fronts.  The political Left is rapidly losing their support precisely because they are, as of fairly recently, cheerleaders for such totalitarian principles.  Goodbye and good residence, and if it is TPTB vaccination regimes which does the deed, at least they are good for something.

Going by your logic, the human race should have been extinct long back. Vaccination was first invented in 1796. And now, the vaccination coverage is close to 99% of the world population. If your post was true, then 99% of the world population should have been infertile by now. But as per the latest stats, the human population in the world is increasing by some 10 million individuals per annum.

You need to take a little time to understand the basics of what a guy says before casting aspersion on his/her 'logic'.  Otherwise it's a strawman.  Obviously nobody is saying that all vaccinations have any particular effect.

What a lot of us are saying is that we may not be getting a complete and honest story about some of the things that some of the injection regimes are designed to achieve.  Here's another article with the same basic concerns.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/is-the-un-using-vaccines-to-secretly-sterilize-women-all-over-the-globe/5413599 (http://www.globalresearch.ca/is-the-un-using-vaccines-to-secretly-sterilize-women-all-over-the-globe/5413599)

I have zero difficulty believing that such programs exist, and only slightly less believing that the development effort would not have been undertaken without and intent to deploy it.  Only slightly less than that in believing that attempts at deployment have been undertaken from time to time here and there.

While a lot of people who, years later, ended up on bitcointalk.org were reading Ayn Rand I was reading Garrett Hardin's 'Lifeboat Ethics'.  I do have a better than par understanding of the ethical considerations associated with population.  Indeed, when nearly forced to pick from a list of about 200 'charities' to donate to 30 years ago, I choose 'Zero Population Growth.'  I have an understanding of how some people consider 'scientific' means of controlling population to be more ethical than, say, war or starvation, and I don't even necessarily disagree with them in principle.

I also understand how any means of population control be it laissez-faire or engineered can be parlayed into accumulation of wealth as long as it is at least predictable.  I've come to believe that those at the seats of power can and do use any and all of the generally possible population control methods for personal enrichment even while a vast majority probably do earnestly believe that they are using their unique wisdom and capabilities for the 'betterment' of humanity (or more generally, of the planet.)

Currently we have a situation where utter hog-wash 'scientific' arguments like 'global climate change' and spiritual feelings used as bedrock cornerstones are being sold to (aka, implanted) in the public mind to justify eugenics programs.  This makes me believe that the motives are at least as much about obtaining power and control as they are 'ethical' in an abstract manner.  It also contorts any operational efforts which will likely lead to a bad outcome.

Most people still rely on their generational line for security in old age.  Covertly sterilizing people is 'evil' for a lot of reasons, but one of the main ones is that it robs them of this potential.  The globalist new-agers might justify this in a belief that they are going to 'end poverty by 2030 world-wide' but it is entirely unclear that they will be able to achieve this.  OTOH, it is crystal clear to any thinking person that the only possible way to do this would be to massively de-populate the planet down to the 1/2 to 1 billion mark that their leaders love to toss around.  Anyone who actually believes this 'agenda-2030' hype is either to stupid to understand what is going on (most of them), or does see the big-picture and welcomes it.

Vaccines are not yet available for the most serious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, and Ebola. Even the existing medications and vaccines are losing their healing power, due to drug resistance. And certain groups of people refusing to get vaccinated is being cited as one of the main reasons for the prevalence of drug resistance.

Was a mechanism for this described?  I can think up a plausible one rather easily but I'll leave it to the reader to test their understandings of the science here rather than explore it.

One cannot keep cattle alive long enough to fatten up for slaughter when you cram them together into a feed-lot unless you dose the shit out of them.  Same goes for people.  That's a good argument for not stack-n-packing them into 200 ft^2 micro-dwellings in 'human habitat megacenters'.  But the new-age globalists are dead set on doing just that since it is what the plan calls for.  I suspect that this is one of the major driving forces behind having corp/gov take over management of people's immune systems.

None of you 'safe and effective' propaganda victims can figure it out, eh?

Here's one:  People may get sick from certain select things (e.g., pertussis) at a somewhat higher rate without vaccine regimes.  That means that they will be treated, and sometimes the treatment will consists of antibiotics.  The higher the rate of antibiotics treatment, the higher the incidence of drug resistance.

Back in the age of real science such hypotheses would be explored and modeled, the risks would be weighed, potential resolution schemes would be analysed, and a practical policy which benefited the population would be selected.  Now in the propagandized pseudo-science age the major considerations seem to be the medical/industrial complex's bottom line and the social engineer's need to construct a population with attributes that please their sponsors.

I think that vaccines against these terrible diseases have been invented, but the government is not profitable to promote their

http://www.newsweek.com/anti-vaxxers-accidentally-fund-study-showing-theres-no-link-between-autism-and-379245 (http://www.newsweek.com/anti-vaxxers-accidentally-fund-study-showing-theres-no-link-between-autism-and-379245)

Me and all my friends seem fine after few vaccines which we took when we were children.

Well, if 'just fine' means treating Newsweek as a source of truth...

Anyway, just a quick scan on this.  Seems to me that the study participants should have at least kept their funders appraised, especially if they had agreed to.

http://www.safeminds.org/blog/2015/10/19/safeminds-review-of-vaccine-safety-and-autism-like-outcomes-in-a-non-human-primate-model-identifies-distortion-in-public-reporting-and-argues-need-for-full-disclosure-of-research-documents/
 (http://www.safeminds.org/blog/2015/10/19/safeminds-review-of-vaccine-safety-and-autism-like-outcomes-in-a-non-human-primate-model-identifies-distortion-in-public-reporting-and-argues-need-for-full-disclosure-of-research-documents/)

I'm more than ready for a transparent vax vs. un-vax total health outcome study.  One with reasonable protocols which are justified and followed.  Would that be to much to ask before forcing people to subject their kids to big-phrama's will?  Especially when they have no liability for any problems they may cause!

To say the honest truth, the U.S. is starting to remind me of the Inca culture where the powers that be forced the citizens to bring in their kids and send them up the steep stairs where the high priests would do their thing.  It's truly interesting how history rhymes and repeats.

You sound like a real conspiratard tvbcof.

You linked naturalnews with an article about schoenfeld which was an outright lie without even realising and understanding.

Your expertise is less then zero. Nobody believes in your shit except some newbie accounts, 3rd world sig spammers or the usual conspiracy idiots on this board.

Sometimes the truth just hurts i know, but accepting it is the first step for a restart.

I suppose you mean about hCG?  IIRC that was the only naturalnews thing I remember using.  Just the first URL I pulled up on the topic.  I've studied the hCG thing extensively because it seemed outrageous.  It is highly substantiated that hCG in a tetanus carrier vaccines were developed to induce sterility and has been used in Mexico and the Philippines at least.  One person was a Philippine doctor who herself became sterilized and which is how the scheme was exposed.  A UN WHO operation if I recall correctly.  As for the more recent Kenya operation, I cannot be sure but most signs point to it being yet another attempt including the very odd protocols which don't match run-of-the-mill vaccination programs in substantial ways.  Over and over both in reading and indeed in real life from talking to a relative I find that organizations such as UNICEF are highly interested in population control.  It matches perfectly with the writings of those ultra-wealthy sponsors of such so-called NGO's.  And Henry Kissinger's work identifying third-world population as a major security problem for the U.S. (meaning mainly our corporations ability to exploit the third-world at the lowest cost possible.)

If TPTB just cannot control their burning desire to depopulate I wish they would go the Inca route.  The way things are now I gotta use my tax dollars to support a bunch of drooling tards like you for life.  Skepticism about vaccinations is clustered among the affluent who, ironically, would be better able to shoulder the financial burden of having damaged kids than would the typical drone who believes everything they hear on the TV about vaccination programs....as long as someone with a stethoscope hanging around their neck says it.

Why should the government hide the invention of important vaccines? It will save the government tens of billions of USD from the health budget (especially if vaccines are invented for diseases for cancer, HIV.etc).

Then you must have already taken shots of every vaccine that existed and will ever exist...

Btw. Today i pissed for a duration of about 5 minutes. It must be a eugenics or mind control programm of TPTB or the elite.

 ::)

Not at all surprised to find out that you have urinary problems to go along with your other issues.  You seem like exactly the kind of 'designer person' who the so-called NWO welcomes for the future.  You are not alone, but fortunately the 'consensus' is being constructed that you and your yellow trail are the new trendy:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMiWGi6H29I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMiWGi6H29I)

Back in the day, we might suggest to people like you:

  "If your pole is to short of your pressure to weak,
    lift the lid; don't piss on the seat"

I actually think it is a better idea that you just sit like a female and dribble for however long it takes...then pull out a new diaper from you back-pack...as long as it is made from renewable materials.  You know that since the Euro-pee'n males 'sitzpinkle' (by force of law in Sweden so I've heard) it must be be cool and trendy.

It's not clear if, and if so how much, vaccination regimes have to do with our new-found excretory problem/solutions.  That's why a total health outcome study would be of interest.

Hear a lot and know nothing.

You are a really extra ordinary person or so it seems (emphasis bolded).

 ;D

My methods are structured, with some deliberation, such that I need not worry excessively about what it may so seem (emphasis bolded).  And that I have other forms of comfort in what can be a complex world not without it's risks.

Are you by chance taking psychedelic medcine or drugs (delusions are one of the usual side effects)?
That would for sure explain everything.  :D

tvbcof, you've got all these paranoid ideas about vaccines, saying they might be being used for population control by the "NWO" etc, you said something else equally ludicrous about the aluminum particles making our brains more susceptible to radiation...

The problem is, the evidence shows the exact opposite. We can clearly see that death/infection rates historically drop when vaccines are introduced. What's more, there is no evidence of population control/infertility or any  radiation mind control. Yes, I know about MK Ultra/Naomi etc but none of that shit really worked.

Where are all the people dying/becoming sterile from the vaccines? Last time I checked, the world population was rising pretty quickly.

All I am doing is presenting hypotheses spinning together known or highly probable facts about the world.  I'm asking no one to do anything more than consider a set of  hypotheses and map them to observation and explanatory power.  In fact I am not even doing that.  Only for those who can do so and enjoy doing so.

Writing off any hypothesis about anything because it is 'ludicrous' or 'paranoid' or 'unpopular' is not scientifically or ethically correct (but there is no law against it.)  Turns out that it is highly effective to promote exactly this mode of thought whether there is a 'conspiracy' going or whether one simply does not want to be second-guessed or bothered to defend against it.

I am encouraging people to not necessarily accept at face value the narrative of entities who have either a bad history or a reason to deceive or both.  Those who are skeptical here are the kinds of people who will have long term benefit to the society in which I live.  I also genuinely don't want people who are gullible to be injured either simply out of concern for my fellow man and because it is a complex world which not everyone is equipped to deal with for no real fault of their own.

FWIW, no I am not (with the exception of nicotine and caffeine.)  I found out everything I need to know about psychedelics 30 years ago in a couple of experiments.  I found them interesting, but the effects adequately explained by the neuroscience of the day and the effects to be no big deal.

I wouldn't doubt that long term use of psychotropics or pot could cause problems, but it's one of those things where the cause (of abuse) and effects (of abuse) could be difficult to sort out.  In other words, when considering the long-term abusers that I know it is not clear that they abuse drugs because of mental issues or whether they have mental issues which cause them to be long term abusers.

I am in fact even more skeptical of (or 'paranoid about' if you prefer) prescription psychoactive drugs than I am about vaccination programs, but the basic core set of concerns I have of the two classes of drugs are similar.

I agree that we should question everything, and use critical thinking to try and find the truth about these kinds of issues.

But that doesn't mean we should simply accept and believe hypotheses just because there's a possibility they might be true. That's the opposite of scientific critical thinking, especially when there is overwhelming evidence that is contrary to the hypothesis.

Yes, of course it's possible that vaccines are a covert plan to sterilize and depopulate the human race, weaken their immune systems so they rely on drugs made by Big Pharma, or change their brain chemistry to make them more susceptible to government mind control.

But until we get some good evidence that any of this is true, it makes no sense to believe it. Especially when the evidence that vaccines have saved millions of people's lives and are relatively safe is overwhelming.

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

Without a properly dimension of the problem it's hard give an opinion.
Did you have any valid scientific statement about vaccine falling?
 if not you are just give a wrong opinion, and "free" doesn't mean this.

Flat Earth.. nuff said.

Is notbatman your alt? You sound astonishing similar like him.

Btw. You might convince people if you put more science and theories and much less conspiracies in your posts.
80% of your posts are just summaries of conspiracies you read at online blogs.

Also dont play mother theresa. You dont let people consider - in your eyes and opinions people not believing in your conspiracy garbage are all stupid nwo sheeples etc. Pp.

To 'believe a hypothesis' is a nonsense phrase.  At least as I define things.  By my definition a hypothesis cannot be believed.  It sits among other complementary or mutually exclusive hypotheses to be analysed against incoming information or new formulations of information.  Of course it can easily be rejected for a variety of reasons, but NOT simply because it is out of fashion in some way.

It is also the case that one can expect 'good evidence' to surface only when there is a mechanism by which that can occur.  If there are mechanisms by which evidence is limited in quality then it makes no sense to reject a hypothesis by virtue of lack of evidence.  In my analysis of the vaccination issue I see many many efforts to support one hypothesis and discount a competing one in very dishonest ways.

There are strong hypotheses and weak ones.  A good example of a weak one is what I tossed out about metallic components in brain tissue being deliberately installed to make some possible electromagnetic impacts more functional.  I classify it as 'my own' because as far as I remember I came up with it on my own and in a response to the question of why there might be a desire by some to get aluminum (and a bit of Hg) containing vaccines injected into a baby on the first day of life.  Even more, why do so when it seems that the vaccine itself has at best an ambiguous benefit.

My chief argument against the hypothesis that electromagnetic means are sometimes used to manipulate human development and behavior is that such programs could be leaked by insiders and/or detected by outsiders.  With the advent of sensitive and flexible analytical tools available to the masses, it's hard to imagine that someone somewhere would not be interested enough to study and detect such programs.  I've not seen it, but then I've not looked that hard either.

Going back to your suggestion that MKULTRA did exist 'but none of that shit really worked' I would say that this is simply unknown.  If the official story is to be believed, most of the records were destroyed.  It is an interesting subject generally for a variety of reasons, and it did seem to be a fairly long running and well funded program which in and of itself calls into question the assertion that none of it worked.  Where I go from here is to pay attention to some continuing similar research (e.g., being able to pull a graphical image of a face out of a person's thought patterns), and analyze the lives of some of the people who were known to have participated in some of the MKULTRA experiments such as Ken Kesey and Ted Kaczynski (aka, the unibomber.)

'Flat Earth' is probably the most obvious mass media 'conspiracy theory' (sic) psy-op ever.  Implemented exactly so people like you could write of anything and everything which goes against the grain with a statement like:

  'Flat Earth...nuff said.'

You should appraise yourself of the work of Cass Sunstein.  Or continue life as a victim of his disciples if you are comfortable with it.  (shrugs)

Yeah like i said mind control and eugenics programm of tptb or the elite  ;D

Well what would you expect from someone who buys brain power pills from alex jones. ::)

The null hypotheses are:

 - No workable mind control methods exist

 - No one has ever been interested in eugenics, and if there at one point some who were there are not now.

 - There is no group of people who have extra power over others in the direction of society.

 - There are no people who consider themselves 'elite' relative to a lower class.

I should not like to be tasked with defending these null hypotheses.

Wait what... why are you saying tptb uses vaccines to make the population infertile then and why are you talking about mind control programms?
Did i missed the joke? Flat earth much?
This is what you worte on the last page:


Just tell me the truth which drugs do you take? Someone here might be able to help you.
Or do you have some brain related disease?

I assume you are at least somewhat familiar with 'agenda 2030' (https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld), right?  Do you know that they have 'set themselves the goal' of 'between now and 2030, to end poverty and hunger everywhere'?  Does that sound fairly practical to you?  Ideas on how it might be achieved?

Since you are aware enough to critique my thought patterns (even as you leave out a critical line in my quote) I have to assume that you are also familiar with the Georgia Guidestones.  Particularly rule number one which states (in 14 languages or whatever) that population should be maintained below 1/2 billion.

Defenders of the guidestones claim that the author(s) were just talking about if something unpredicted happens:



Hard to know exactly who pulls what strings in the (totally made up) 'elite' classes, but Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, feels strongly enough about us 'useless eaters' to utter:


I don't know about you but I don't find it very confidence inspiring as it relates to the guy's concern for my health.  Perhaps if I had royal blood it would be a different story.

---

Ya, all of these things are hypothesis and paranoia (seriously) but I'm pretty sure of one thing:  If there were some sort of 'event' which plays out somewhat along the lines of the so described, a lot of people (who remain among the living) will be looking back and saying 'Wow, how did we not see that coming?!?'

Well I'm bored to read the whole thread and count, but can someone give me a aproximate breakdown of sheeple/brainwashees here? It's interesting to know. ;)

I agree that to "believe" a hypothesis is a nonsense phrase, but in your previous posts you seem to say that you do in fact believe hypotheses (bolded by me):


As for your "electromagnetic radiation" hypothesis, well you're right in saying that if it were true then there's a good chance that the program's details could be leaked, that's one good argument against it. Another would be that aluminium isn't very magnetic, so would seem like a poor choice of metal to have any effect on external EM radiation. The iron in a person's blood would be more susceptible to this sort of thing, no? Another argument still would be that there is no evidence of any actual method or apparatus that could perform these kind of effects, or even any process by which it could occur (in the realm of publically available scientific literature).

Yes, I agree with you that the evidence for certain hypotheses is "limited in quality/quantity", and therefore it makes sense to at least consider them. But that doesn't mean that they should be given any sort of scientific merit, just because the evidence is limited and/or hard to get.

As an example, I could formulate a hypothesis that everyone on Earth is being controlled by a being from an alternate dimension, through some sort of dark energy radiation that is undetectable by any equipment on Earth. Just because the evidence for this hypothesis is probably impossible to acquire, that doesn't give the hypothesis any scientific merit whatsoever.

As far as I can see, this totally refutes your claim "If there are mechanisms by which evidence is limited in quality then it makes no sense to reject a hypothesis by virtue of lack of evidence."

People are spreading their lies and religious propaganda here, and here are the results:

https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/166956-Two-new-cases-cripple-hopes-of-polio-free-Pakistan

http://www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/Polio-back-in-Nigeria-despite-having-been-declared-no-more/440808-3467146-jg6th1z/

Religious extremists are prohibiting parents from administering polio vaccination to their children, claiming that doing so will reduce their fertility. And as a result, polio is still around despite vaccines available for the last 100 years.

No surprise there. Africa has been a waste dumping site for the world and their lack of education and extremistic views on religion can bring things like this. Same goes for Pakistan. It's their choice not to get vaccines but it's other peoples problem that those same people can contribute to wider spread disesases.

That is the problem. Both Pakistan and Nigeria are among the top contributors of immigrants in the European Union. I am afraid that these people will bring back diseases such as polio, which have been successfully eradicated from the EU.

ok, counting... sheeple +2

ok, counting... sheeple +3

 ;D

Due to this thread I ran across another presentation about polio from a person who I have developed a good deal of respect for (for reasons I won't go into in the interest of brevity.)  For those who would like to consider some information from something other than the medical/industrial complex's party line, here you go:

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rrb1XwI2_JA (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rrb1XwI2_JA)

Likely this will be labeled 'fake news' and banned by our rapidly expanding Chinese inspired censorship programs here in the U.S. pretty soon if we stay on the present trajectory.  So, see it while you can.

The Central Mechanism By Which Vaccines Induce Autism - Dr. Russell Blaylock Lecture

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uS0ioiB0_oY

Thanks for your critique.  It's cumbersome to document complex philosophical framework prior to each use of the word 'believe'.  I do try to use the word carefully and mostly stand by my use though I was not careful and it could be read from one of my sentences that I believe 'all' people in positions of power blah, blah, blah.  That was a mistake on my part.  Other than that I stand by my writings.

In logical analysis I use the method of testing the null hypothesis liberally when possible.  Basically, if a null hypothesis is absurd, I tend to assign high weight to a hypothesis and sometimes shift it to a 'fact' or 'near fact' which I can legitimately 'believe'.

The null hypothesis of hCG laced tetanus vaccines being developed is that they were not.  In this case the null hypothesis is that in spite of documented scientific literature and lack of denials of such a program, it never existed.  That nearly impossible to sustain so I 'believe' that such developments were almost certainly undertaken.  There is an outside possibility that the evidence for them was fabricated for some unknown reason, but that is very difficult to believe.  Especially in light of corroborating observations.  By far the simplest explanation was that such developments occurred, and there are abundant reasons to believe that there were means, motive, and opportunity to do just that.

---

As for metals in the body interacting with electromagnetic radiation, like I said from the start it is a 'weak' hypothesis.  Just something I thought up to match against the observation that there seems to be a strong desire to inject them in to humans early and often.  Other hypothesis which are stronger exist including that big brother loves us all, wants the best for us, and will brow-beat the fuck out of anyone who goes against their will.

The observation that some metals (such as iron) tend to be better conductors than others (such as Al) can be weighted against the hypothesis but does not kill it.  In part this is because the hypothetical electromagnetic methods are not known and probably don't even exist at all (which directly applies to the strength of the hypothesis and which is why I consider it 'weak'.  It's filed away, however, because if evidence of electromagnetic population management operations do strengthen, so does the hypothesis about injections.  I would note that in the study of electromagnetism, it is noted that elemental forms of metals behave differently than those found as constituents of more complex molecules like hemoglobin.

---

I tend to not spend much time on metaphysical hypothesis (e.g., Christ died to save sinners, or dark matter and alien consciousness control us all) for the same reason I don't drive my car into a bog where it is certain I'll get stuck.  The world is chalk full of more tangible areas of exploration where real progress can be made.

The systematic favoritism/discrimination related to 'evidence' (and more generally, theories/hypotheses) is a different matter all together.  If questioning the official dogma about, say, polio and our hero scientists involved with it leads to loss of employment and any 'evidence' against it is banished from 'scientific' journals, then I consider limited 'evidence' to be explainable by mechanisms outside of the hypothesis I seek to explore.

Thanks for your humble and well thought out reply - it is a refreshing thing on BCT when users respond in an intelligent, rational manner (when so many users on here revert to fallacies and personal attacks).

There is a lot in your post which I will need some time to process, but it does seem as we are venturing into the philosophical/epistemological realms of evidence and its strengths and weaknesses.

I also don't spend much time on the "metaphysical hypotheses", my example was just to demonstrate the problems when we claim "the evidence is hard/impossible to obtain, therefore the hypothesis may have scientific merit". I realize the real life implications of that claim are far more complex, when we are discussing effects which are relatively well documented and follow the general laws of established physics, such as the effects of vaccines.

I just wish we could escape some of the pseudoscience related to the more controversial aspects of vaccines, eg the misinformation that Andrew Wakefield perpetuated and still is popular today among certain groups. I do think that Big Pharma should be more transparent in their research/deployment of drugs and vaccines, because they are certainly corrupt in many ways and making money is very high on their priority list.

A serious problem that should be addressed is certain pharmaceutical companies suppressing studies that claim their drug is ineffective: Case in point - studies that showed that Tamiflu was fairly inneffective were suppressed by Roche Pharmaceuticals, and governments around the world spent millions stockpiling a drug which in most cases is nearly useless! But I see that as a company being corrupt for monetary gain, dissimilar to a company planning to market a dnagerous drug/vaccine to depopulate/control the masses through physiological means.

However this doesn't mean that every drug or vaccine produced is necessarily dangerous or ineffective. We just need to be careful and attempt to find as much unbiased research as possible on drugs and vaccines (unbiased being the tricky one haha).

no, now it's +3 ;)

I'd differ with you on Wakefield.  His defenses seem to hold up as best I can see.  In particular his co-author had half-a-million to spend in court.  His case was nearly identical and the court overturned the panels decisions, restored the guy's medical credentials, and lambasted the panel for gross negligence.  Long story short, it looks to me a lot more like a case of trying to ruin a doctor/scientist who threatened the public health system's plans and/or the pharma industries profits.  Most of the other authors of the infamous study ducked out and continued on to normal careers in the medical/industrial complex as I read things.  That Wakefield's career trajectory differed is, if anything, a testament to his credibility as I see it.

I'm in complete agreement with the importance of making things transparent and removing the mechanisms which can lead to unscientific pressures.  I, and I think most 'anti-vaxers' are not against vaccines at all.  As long as they are not abused, and especially for profit motives, I don't have all that much against them.  I simply want this problem to be resolved BEFORE they are forced upon the population.  I don't see terrible epidemics in nations which use fewer vaccines than we do (which is nearly all of them) so I don't think there is an overriding need to vaccinate everyone for everything on public health grounds.  Let's just get it right on the oversight front first.

One argument which is at least logically sustainable is that we (the government) needs the private sector to maintain a large capacity in order to meet surprise demand (epidemic, biological warfare, etc.)  Because we are a supposedly 'capitalist democracy', we have to rely on the private sector, and in order to do that we need to give them product liability immunity and a lot of orders.  I call bullshit.  If it is that great a need, then the government itself should build and maintain the facilities in mothball state.  I would much rather see my tax dollars go to this than funding jihadist to destabilize the Middle East.

As for corporate greed vs. genocidal depopulation (or modification), we could easily have both simultaneously.  Or one which could be flipped to the other.  Although it is arguable to some looking at the general state of health here stateside, we've not seen a genocidal program yet.  My point of concern is that I don't trust some of these people (and very bad things could be accomplished with 99% of the _insiders_ not knowing what is going on) and I want there to be circuit breakers.  Transparency and good fail-safe oversight which keeps up with the technology would be sufficient for me.  Mandating a state-dictated vaccine regime is going the opposite direction.

Further, 'depopulation' is not the only threat, and this is particularly true as the pace of technology increases.  CRISPR technology, nano-technology, etc, are bound to continue forward.  I don't want some corp/gov bureaucrat deciding that it is best for the humanity under their charge to have their DNA be altered even if they have, or think they have a good and ethical reason to do so.  Especially with the likes of Elon Musk gingerly floating the idea that people maybe should be fitted with a neural lace in order to interface with the hive mind more efficiently (and thus beat back the evil AI in some nebulous way or some weirdo shit like that.)

(The neural lace idea reminds me of yet another (weak) hypothesis about metallic compounds injected, ingested, etc.  This one is not my own.  The idea is that they could be used as building blocks for structures such as a neural lace.)

I cannot blame the government if they are against the Muslim because most of the terrorist that are attacking the government are Muslims, and based on my observation most of the Muslims are brutal, and hurting their wives, well just my opinion because I have seen so many scenario like this. It is not like I'm against them, I'm just saying what I have seen.

Nowadays with the rise of the social media and broadband penetration, anyone can spread any sort of conspiracy theory. Dr. Russell Blaylock has not given any proof to back up his claim. According to the research, autism rates are the same for vaccinated and non-vaccinated children.

Vaccine is trying to blame all. It is not correct. I did the vaccination and I have not had anything. I did vaccinate my daughter and she also did not hurt. Isn't this proof that vaccination needed?

^ "useful idiot"

I am also a supporter of vaccination. I'm sure that to avoid the spread of the epidemic can only be due to vaccination. From vaccines die unit but saved billions. Isn't that right? And no one will convince me otherwise.

^ another "useful idiot"

Yup!  Classic example of Darwin's theory in action.

I don't recall the guy publishing on economics, but I doubt that he explored the unfortunate consequences in 'developed' countries where the so-called 'strong' are compelled to keep the weak alive through tax payer funded 'public health' programs.  From a social engineering perspective this is kind of handy though if one seeks to severely damage an entire society when one's toolkit can mostly just pick off individuals and their immediate progeny.

If you react to attempts to explain it so idiots like you that the vaccines are necessary, I don't want to waste time communicating with you. Not vacciniosa and your death will be just natural selection.

You just went full neo-Nazi. Never go eugenicist.

You are conflating things which don't match on a variety of fronts.  Deliberately or through force of habit I'm sure.  Eugenics pre-dated the national socialist worker's party rise to power in Germany, and they implemented it 1) in one of several distinct forms, and 2) with considerable support from pioneers overseas (esp, the United States.)

Eugenics does seek to promote the generation of 'better' humans or populations of them, but 'better' is not well defined and means different things to different people.  To the the nazis it seemed to mean blonde hair and blue eyes.  At least in their propaganda.  To others in a leadership position it could mean docile and feminized population with allergies which won't push back against leadership and will buy medications by the truck-load.

H.G. Wells was popular among the early eugenics crowd (and likely one himself.)  An idea which had great appeal was the differentiation of humans into several distinct classes which may eventually separate into different species.  He called them the Morlock and the Eloi.  I would call them the 'pharmaceutical company executive' and 'useful idiots' (e.g., criptix, sithara007, etc.)

No I'm not going to waste my time to useful idiots anymore. It's now my job only to tell them they are useful idiots.

I am surprised nobody posted

"blame the illuminatis !"

 :D

*much care Lol
do you really think that anyone on this planet takes you serious?
Did you get vaccinated or are mental diseases common in your family?



It is always either the "elite", tptb, illuminatis, aliens, reptiles or hillary clinton  ;D

Run along down to MartLaw...oops, I mean WalMart...and get your yearly flu vaccine like a good little eloi.  In fact you can take mine as well.

right, walmart and vaccines are the secret plan of the alien reptiles to overthrow humans on planet earth and enslave them forever.  >:(


hollow earth nuff said

This thread is going too far off the rail, relax everyone.

Back to the topic at hand: Vaccinations are proven to prevent diseases, and babies/kids need them more due to the lack of antibodies during development, as a result they get vaccinated because we can't get their conscious.

In the other hand, there is no proof that vaccines harm the babies/kids as far as I am aware, there are claims but no proof, things such as autism for instance are the same rates for vaccinated and none-vaccinated individuals.

I would appreciate it if you intend to reply to this, don't straw-man the conversation, thanks.

How would one 'straw-man' the conversation?

I have taken the time to listen to probably 100 doctors and scientists who have serious concerns about how vaccines are used.  They gain nothing but grief and ridicule for their efforts, though they probably do sometimes feel a sense of self-respect.

The main doctors and scientists I hear saying what you seem to parrot are either known to be in the pockets of big phrama (e.g., Paul Offit) or very well could be.  Their presentations tend to 'feel' to me very much like the countless other astro-turf marketing campaigns produced by PR firms.  Similarly, the sooth-troll posts on many many comments sections or boards.  Almost never to any of these people demonstrate even the slightest understanding of the science behind the concerns.  All they do is exactly what you do:  regurgitate some assurtions that 'studies prove blah, blah, blah.'  Sometimes they'll throw out a catchy word such at 'herd immunity' as if it demonstrates and actually understanding of anything.  It doesn't.  The principles of 'herd immunity' are rather easy to grasp, but mapping it into reality is quite messy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bYAQ-ZZtEU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bYAQ-ZZtEU)

Former CBS reporter.  LOL!

Don't forget the jews, I've heard they're some big mofos. :O

also,  reptiles or hillary clinton are pretty much the same, tho Hillary is a reptile that obeys Moloch.

Are you sure you've replied to the right thread? I think you mixed something up here.

Sheeple first need to learn to read, then they need to surf around, and then they need to apply logical thinking. Maybe we're asking too much fom them?

We tried.  (shrug)

Don't fuck vaccines. They will fuck you back.

There is a purpose why there are vaccines don't be a bitch about it.

I do not believe that the vaccine provokes the disease autism in children. What will parents do if their children will lose health due to the lack of vaccination? And who is responsible for what, they can trigger a future epidemic.

God help us with this many people which can't use their heads properly.

God helps those who help themselves! I think that now you need to think about to deal with is antivaccination. If I had my way I would have introduced a special tax on those who refused vaccination and sent the money in a Fund to fight future epidemics.

IMHO only vaccines that has been thoroughly tested should be allowed for these mandatory vaccination. That provided, I don't see any reason why the gov't should not do it. Imagine an epidemic the scale of the Ebola outbreak. You may not even have universal healthcare but when s**t happens the gov't would have to shell out some cash. Which is coming out of your pocket.

You know what they say. Yes, we're all cattle. But many are sheeple too. I'm totally tired of explaining unexplainable to brainwashees who think state and pharmaceutical mafia have any kind of positive intent. People, for the sake of humanity, you need to open your eyes and your minds. Internet, which is mainly uncensored when you read not just mainstream news is great source of information. There are countless studies and countless interviews with insiders that confitm negative impact of vaccination, and it's not just the vaccination. We're living in a world where policies are made by elite and corporations and it goes deeply covering every aspect of living.

Here's a little handbook about most obvious conspiracies that are actually praxis, but many people won't believe it because it sounds too weird to be true.

1) 9/11 was a false flag operation which was good excuse for war games in Middle East, capturing oil fields and heroin production. Osama Bin Laden is most probably alive, there was a whole circus with his capture, why didn't they show him?
2) Vaccination is part of population control policy, spreading diseases through it.
3) War on drugs is war for money and war for people not to be fully aware of the potential of their brain.
4) Chemtrails / GMO / Haarp are connected operations which have various goals.
5) Financial/banksters FIAT money fraud, fractional reserve banking - well connected with Blockstream's (Bilderberg) investment in demise of Bitcoin.
6) Religions are deception, a tool for making new wars, same goes for mainstream media.
... there is much much more, but those are most important conspiracies.

That's the world we live in today, if you can't see that, you're stupid, you're blind and I have nothing but pity for you. You're the part of the reason why we will soon have World War III.

The epidemic is easier to prevent than to fight its consequences. Where people take money for treatment? Where should take the money those people whom it infects? To such consequences need to prepare in advance.

Yes, "prevention is better than cure" may be to cliche but there's truth to it. People who skimp usually end up spending more. Say, a dengue vaccine is already available and the gov't is offering it for free. By not taking it you risk getting infected (and in dengue's case, it can kill you). And you spend more on hospital bills, you can just imagine how expensive it is, especially in poorer countries like mine where people can't afford to get their own health insurance. Even with some help from the gov't, the costs can add up. And since the gov't is spending, where do you think they're getting the money from? Yes, from you -- and you're also paying for other people who got sick because they refused the vaccine.

  "Only the small secrets need to be protected.
   The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity."

        --- Marshall McLuhan

I agree with you completely. Man cannot exist outside society and therefore can not ignore the rules that exist in this society. I'm all for a tax with those who are not vaccinated, but if he hasn't the money to return it to the heirs.

So weird, but so true. That's just illustrates the dark ages we live in. Forget Capitalism, Communism, Socialism, Idiotism... they're all deceptions. Remember, Modern Slavery is the system we live in and you're changing nothing by going to elections. You just think you're changing because it's lovely to have sense you have some (fake) power.

I am not on the payroll of any pharmaceutical company. I just want normal human beings to use modern medicine, so that they live longer and healthier. On the other hand, your behavior was very disappointing.

The world is ruled by clans which transmit power from one clan to others. A simple man cannot lead the country. If this system is not broken, the world is doomed to a clan fight. Who is sponsoring the company for failure to vaccinate? Why? Think!

Reminds me of those horror tales about people getting government approved and paid for 'Flu' jabs

Enter the Twilight zone !

My two special friends that can see through all the world wide conspiracies of the modern dark age.
Connecting all that secret links of the big puzzle into one wonderful conspiracy which everyone can understand.
How can humanity just not realise that we have another einstein and hawking here?!

Lol

 :D

Careful about santa on christmas - i read that he is actually a secret moon nazi. ;D

You snipped the important part:

 - pharma execs == morlock
 - useful idiots == eloi

If you have a well trained horse it will comply with your commands at the reigns and often enough will anticipate your desires on it's own.  Like stop and turn at the end of the row that was just plowed.

If you team a well trained horse with a poorly trained one, the well trained one will sometimes discipline the poorly behaving one on it's own.  Like reach over and bite it when it's doing something which is known by the trained one to be against the wishes of the master.  It doesn't even need to be trained to exhibit this behavior.

I'm not accusing you of being 'on the payroll' per-se.

I am saying that it is a big mistake to assume or take in faith without thinking that things are either 'all good' or 'all bad'.  There is nothing in logic which would preclude some modern medicine from being used for 'good' purposes and others to be used for 'bad' purposes.

Beyond that, 'good' and 'bad' are themselves subjective terms which mean different things to different people.  It can be argued that achieving and maintaining 'sustainable' human population levels is, for all intents and purposes, 'doing God's work'.  I can also be argued 'why not make a dime off doing God's work?'...Especially if one is endowed with a more sophisticated ethical framework than the average bear.

Everyone decides to do it or not. Well, I have not seen anything bad from vaccinations, except that we do not suffer from those diseases from which we vaccinated.

s/moon /Ashken/ perhaps?

Spurred in part by the pedogate stuff which likely involves a fair number of our politicians, I got to trying to sort out the various esoterica that a lot of peeps seem to be impacted by.  Talmudic law, Kabbalah, Thelema, Freemasonry, Catholicism, etc.

  Santa Klaus --> Satan Claws

I mean you have some creepy old weirdo who lives past the edge of nowhere doing God knows what with a bunch of stunted freaks.  He spends most of the year spying on kids and logging their activities (like the NSA) and on a specially prescribed day he sneaks out and breaks into their houses.  If offerings are left he might leave without doing any terrible harm.

The old creep spends a lot of time trying to get kids to sit on his lap.  He wears a red outfit which may have significance to those who like smear kids blood on themselves as the kid bleeds out.

On a more down-to-earth level, the whole Santa Klaus thing teaches a fairly important lesson to some.  Namely, 'authority figures lie like crazy.'  At least it did in my case.  I remember back to about age three, and I remember being pretty dubious about the whole thing even by that time.  I liked the candy canes though since my sweet-tooth was still active.

I know of a situation in Africa in which after the children were vaccinated against polio, the vaccine which was supposed to cure polio ended making the children that were vaccinated being crippled rather.

No more effective means than vaccination at this time did not come up. I am sure that vaccination is needed. Before something to cancel you need to come up with an alternative.

What about an immune system?  It got us this far.  The relatively recent invention of drinking clean water and washing the shit off one's hands occasionally turned our native immune systems from being a satisfactory solution to one which serves with remarkable effectiveness.  Looking at the infection rate profiles of a lot of the 'vaccine preventable diseases' seem to indicate that vaccination may have had no effect whatsoever and lifestyle changes did it all.

If anything we need MORE disease to limit population growth.  Further, the right kinds of disease or impairment can produce significant advantages from a political and economic perspective, and designing other social control infrastructure around it can multiply the effect by orders of magnitude.  Looking at things through this lens makes a lot of observations fall neatly into place.

BTW, David Rockefeller, who's dynasty got it's start selling snake oil medical cures, died a few days ago.  Some posit that we will shift to a new dynasty with Bill Gates at it's head.  For my part I'll be watching with interest.

Vaccinations are absolutely necessary.
As with any medical product, there are also possible side effects, which can have serious consequences in individual cases. Nevertheless vaccinations are more useful than harmful. If you do not vaccinate yourself or your child, you will only benefit from herd immunity in a vaccinated society. I do not know if the government should carry out forced vaccinations, but vaccinations against serious diseases should be made for your own safety.
As an example, thousands of people, especially children in Africa and Asia (India), could be saved every year if they had a rabies vaccine available.

I am not sure how to respond to this ,may be they have provided fake vaccines or low quality medicine,if it is properly managed and developed under strict government regulation vaccines are used to cure rather than crippling and i have not heard about it in my county,may be because they are superior when it comes to medicine.

It's hardly uncommon to tailor vaccines to a country based on the particular 'needs' of the country in question

https://www.pop.org/content/bad-blood-philippines (https://www.pop.org/content/bad-blood-philippines)

From: http://www.zebrafactcheck.com/did-kissinger-call-depopulation-a-priority/ (http://www.zebrafactcheck.com/did-kissinger-call-depopulation-a-priority/)

I'm all for good-faith efforts to help others with their problems, but when the driving force is to help one's crony friends and sponsors make more money it is totally reasonable to expect the programs and implementation to be unethical.

To this day all U.S. presidents regularly make the pilgrimage to kiss Henry Kissinger's ring.  Including Trump so it seems, though it would be awfully interesting to be a fly on the wall.

People who will risk their kid's well-being on the assumption that they are 'western' and thus immune from the machinations of the likes of Kissinger, Gates, and Merck probably deserve what they get.  From my perspective, the problem with these people is that they are likely to be holding the guns which force others into taking the same crap-shoot with their own kids.

But doesn't measles make your immune system "forget" previous infections, allowing you to get, for example, chickenpox again even if you have already developed immunity to it in the past?

By the way, you saying we need more diseases to limit population is just cruel. What would you suggest next, a maximum age limit for existence?

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel  (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/10/why-i-hope-to-die-at-75/379329/), Obamacare contributor and brother of former Obama chief of staff Rahm, beat me to it.

I sort of respect the guy for stating his beliefs and making his argument, and I'm not at all surprised to see him be censored by people who very likely have a similar belief.  The main difference would be that those who censored the guy mostly believe that your life should not extend past a particular age but not necessarily their own.

I don't think I would enjoin in a suicide pact with a guy like Emanuel, and if I did, I'd be like 'trust but verify'.

I am predicting that by the time I'm scheduled for the mortal coil I'll be offered 'immortality' (upload into the borg) if I choose to go easily, or to struggle against the very same useful idiot a-holes who are currently calling for forced injection at gunpoint ('For the greater good' of course.)  I also predict that the AI immortality will be a total sham.

if the biggest reason why preventing yourself from contracting a debilitating viral infection is because you're afraid of a 1 second poke, maybe you need to grow a pair.

Vaccines is  very important to our bodies so that it can control against diseases and prevent diseases like hepatitis A, hepatitis B, polio, mumps, measles, rubella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, chickenpox, ...and some others..Vaccines give you the power to protect your children from getting sick.It also important to adult it give strong to our immune system..

Give this man a cookie. You have the good sense your parents gave you. It's rare here, and welcome aboard.

Even if you did (the paranoid) believe that vaccines are harmful, despite an overwhelming majority of scientific evidence which suggest otherwise, you have to concede that the benefits (not dying for the majority of folks) greatly outweigh the risks (possibly dying for a few folks, or developing autism). If I'm going to roll a d00 in the game of life, fuck it, I'll take those chances. And depend on my Constitution bonus because I'm a dwarf.

Oh, BTW folks, the earth is flat, and aliens killed Kennedy.

True story.

If you live around where I live in where you see children who are supposed to be in school but are incapacitated and have now turn into beggars due to what can be avoided in the first place without no fault of theirs, then you will know the importance of vaccination for the body or you became a victim of disease or even know someone who became a victim of disease a migrant brought into the country that could have been avoided with vaccination, the you will have a rethink about how important it is to get vaccinated...

I don't live in the US and don't know those people. Who are they to decide anyway up to what age an individual should live?! The government don't own people. If they want to kill off people for the "noble" cause of keeping population in check, then they should start with themselves and become martyrs to their cause.

I wouldn't compare mandatory vaccination to being forced to let go of my body and upload my mind into a droid. The droid example sounded more like a punishment. I may be overthinking stuff but I believe the reason for forced vaccination is not to protect the individual but the group as a whole. Why would I want possible vectors walking around when they can be immunized to prevent them infecting the weaker members who can't get a vaccination (for example the really young and old).

I agree with the AI sham though. Droids would probably require less maintenance than organic bodies, which is bad for capitalism which thrive on consumption. And don't get me started on being uploaded into a global SIM city. They wouldn't be able to make money out of that.

Do you really think that in the future they might want to replace all people with robots, even in ordinary life? It is clear that to do some work, the droids will be much better than man, but this is for production, and life remains a life and it is the prerogative of a living being.

People doing bad things is probably a bigger threat to members of society than naturally occurring pathogens.

If everyone were fitted with a neural lace for monitoring, crime in it's various forms could be reduced to near zero.  Anyone who was about to commit a crime, or even get themselves into trouble by doing something dangerous, could be stopped from harming others or saved from themselves.

Such a thing would have other benefits as well.  Instant and intimate feelversations with anyone else in the hive, regardless of geo-location, would be trivial (and the amount you pay the corporation would probably be less than an SMS of a few years ago.)  Also, no need to try to remember a bunch of passwords.

A neural lace would probably be much less invasive to the human body than manipulation of our immune systems which are highly complex.  If corporations performed the safety studies (with science!) and government entities signed off on the studies, would you be comfortable having one grown within your brain and initiated?  Would you be comfortable forcing others who have some 'crazy paranoia' thing going and don't trust the powers that be to avoid mis-using the framework to undergo the procedure?

In certain third world nations, some of the radical religious groups (such as the Jehova's Witnesses and the Wahabbis) urge their followers to shun vaccinations and modern medicine. Actually, I don't really care if their children get crippled. But here, they are also putting the other children to risk as well.

I totally agree. One should be able to decide whether or not to have themselves, or their children, vaccinated.

Isn't this allready widely accepted from certain religious groups?

Classic trick for moving the herd in whatever direction is desired.  Once one knows the trick one notices it being used in some variation all over the place.  Usually by slimeballs or their useful idiot minions.

We must already get used to the fact that people are ruled and do it very professionally. Of course, influence on the public has political and financial meaning. And ways of influence are being studied even in institutions.

Some institutions are dedicated to this (Tavistock, Annenberg, various think-tank 'institutes', etc).  In most 'institutes of higher learning' the subject is studiously ignored.  Not unlike monetary system considerations where one can master most undergraduate economics coursework and have no clue what 'money' even is for instance.  At least lower-division coursework.  I personally have no hands-on familiarity with the details of the upper-division stuff.

That's what I said. It's not realistic. It's more likely that we'll find a a way to stall aging and life become a "pay for life years" scheme than for them to replace everyone with droids.


People would probably find this disturbing. Not everyone would appreciate becoming a snowflake dissipating in an ocean. It could come sooner than we expect though. Neurologist already have ways of predicting what choices people would they before them become conscious of their decision (and also opens up the debate whether we actually have free will). The device they're using is currently bulky but with the rate technology progresses, we can't really tell. Same goes for TMS. They can actually temporarily turn you into a psychopath by stimulating/dampening certain areas of the brain.

Hopefully though we'd get nanobots before we reach neural networks. If we can simply have bots circulating in our body fighting off infections, we won't have any need for vaccines.

Really dude? There are better ways to waste time than posting against vaccines.


This ^

Some people will be spurred to do their own research, and some of them will end up being willing and able to help re-build society once the scum are tarred and feathered and run out on a rail.

Others will not and, because I can,  I'm going to have to keep paying for all of the fucked up imbeciles which are being created at break-neck pace right now.  The insane vaccination regimes we are under these days are at least a part of the problem.  The more I research this subject, the more obvious it becomes.

So, time well spent even if it were not driven strictly by ethics.

BTW, I've never had much fear of needles and I've had my share of vaccinations via them and via air-gun.  At least we (in the military) were told that what we were getting were vaccines, but there is really no way to really know.  It's fairly well documented that various entities take advantage of both prisoners and military personnel to perform studies of this and that.  If the administer of a shot is good and there is a little bit of luck, I don't even feel the needle at all.

Why is everyone so strongly opposed to vaccination? After all, is there still a profit or not? However, there is one thought that some groups of people specifically create different kinds of viruses in order to successfully sell vaccines to people. And earnings will not be bad.

I myself will not get vaccinated as feel it's better to not mess with the body's immune system

I stumbled across some vaccination records a few days ago.  Back in the mid 1960's very many fewer were the schedule.  I spent my first year in what were effectively third-world conditions.  After a year I was back in civilization and got 'caught up' for the first time.

I never get infections from wounds.  I get the sniffles and flu like everyone else but it almost never stops me from doing anything.  Only one time in a decade would I have stayed home from work, but there was a super critical project going on so I went in anyway and spent the day in a server room.

The nasty thing about vaccines is that in order to make them 'work' (meaning make one develop titers in the blood which last for a while which is the 'scientific' legal, and economic definition) it is necessary to use adjuvants.  These turbo-charge one part of the immune system (the part which works using antibodies.)  One problem is that the immune system is constantly at work beating down parts of one's own body which are misbehaving.  The adjuvants (usually aluminum) are non-specific.  It is no surprise at all that this turbo-charging of one element of the immune system would result in a cascade of auto-immunity problems, cancers, etc.  And that is exactly what we are seeing as the schedule calls for more and more vaccines at an earlier and earlier age.

I consider myself really lucky to have gone my first year vaccine free, in a non-sterile environment, and breastfeeding.  I suspect that your instinct on letting you immune system work on it's own is the correct one for anyone who doesn't have some sort of congenital defect.