Lyft Industrial Deals Beauty Best Books of the Month Shop new men's suiting nav_sap_plcc_ascpsc Learn more about Amazon Music Unlimited PCB for Musical Instruments Starting at $39.99 Grocery Handmade Tote Bags Book a house cleaner for 2 or more hours on Amazon Transparent Transparent Transparent  Introducing Echo Show Introducing All-New Fire HD 10 with Alexa hands-free $149.99 Kindle Oasis, unlike any Kindle you've ever held Trade in. Get paid. Go shopping. Tailgating STEMClubToys17_gno
Customer Discussions > Health forum

Anti Vaccines - Disease by Injection?

This discussion has reached the maximum length permitted, and cannot accept new replies. Start a new discussion

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jun 17, 2011, 9:57:43 AM PDT
I just was reading about some research done on mice where they were injected with liver cancer cells then given something to see if the cancer is effected. Has anyone ever had the thought that it could be very possible that the same could be done to us humans? Could we possibly be getting injected with cancer cells ourselves everytime we get a injection at our doctor's office? Maybe when we go in for our flu shots? I know many of you don't think like I do, but Cancer is a BIG money maker, and if we are healthy, then they would be out of business, wouldn't they? I really do believe they are in it for the money and if making people ill makes their pockets full then that is what they do! Just think of the many times we have been "frightened" into getting a vaccine, like the "bird flu" out break not all that long ago. People were standing in line in fear there would not be enough vaccines to go around. Then what happened? NOTHING! No out break! But the drug companies profitted in a big way, didn't they? They always do! And they always will until people start waking up and realizing that need to be in control of their own health and that they don't need any vaccines to be well. In fact, it is quite the opposite! Think twice when the "alarm bells" go off, urging us all to run like no tomorrow to get those vaccines! You may be running yourselves into your graves sooner than necessary!

Posted on Jun 17, 2011, 10:01:05 AM PDT
I like cheese.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2011, 10:57:49 AM PDT
What are you smoking? Can I get some of it? Are the effects temporary? I would only want to think like that for maybe an hour, and then it would turn into a bad trip.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 17, 2011, 11:08:07 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 17, 2011, 11:17:10 AM PDT
That is an awful lot of paranoid BS to fit in one post.

First you start with a flase premise, that you can "catch" cancer from a tainted injection. I suggest you do some reading about MHC and immunology.

Then move on to the same paranoid nonsense about cancer being big business.

It is true that people need to take charge of thir own health.

Posted on Jun 19, 2011, 2:18:17 PM PDT
A. Flowers says:
This is an interesting new "position" for the anti-vaxxers. I've been wondering what they would come up with. Extreme paranoia was the only route left, then, now that the autism link was debunked?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2011, 3:03:12 PM PDT
Autism has not been debunked, just to clarify.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 19, 2011, 7:49:30 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 19, 2011, 8:10:07 PM PDT
YTWong says:
It isn't just autism that people fear...

There could be many other various side effects as a result of vaccination... (including death)

Just read this article:

Virus in the system

And here are the readers' response to this article:

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2011, 6:42:33 AM PDT
You probably need to read more history, so you can have a clear and better understanding about vaccines. There was a time when people died or got severe sequelae from diseases that now are preventable with vaccines, such as polio and measles. By vaccinating most of the population, many diseases have virtually been eradicated (e.g. smallpox), since for some of the pathogens the human being is the only natural reservoir. When people refuse to get vaccinated, they may infected by microorganisms that may cause severe disease. You can argue that you will create immunity, which can be true, but if you transmit this germ to someone else that has risk factors to get complications from such an infection, then that's when you understand why vaccinating it's so important. Many parents are refusing to vaccinate their kids against pertussis, and proudly state that their kids had the infection, and did just fine. What they don't recognize is that the rate of deaths in young infants due to pertussis has been increasing. Think about how would you feel if your baby ends up dying after catching pertussis from an older, unvaccinated child, that recovered from the infection.
Although there are corrupt people in the healthcare system, most of us scientists and health professionals have a burning desire to serve humanity and improve our world. To cure when possible, and to relieve and comfort when not. Please always read both sides of the story. Our health conditions are now better than 100 years ago, greatly due to science. What wouldn't our ancestor do to have what we now take for granted!

Posted on Jun 20, 2011, 9:29:19 AM PDT
Faye says:
Well, I was pro-vaccine, until my son got into problems already as a newborn. They vaccinated him, booster after booster ...bravo...he got all shot............but OMG.......he was crying for hours, feeling very uncomfortable/sick. And when he needed another shot I always told the docs: please, isn't there anything else we can do? No, they would say. And this behavior didn't stop after the shots......he developed kind of ADHD docs told me. He got Ritalin at age 3............kicked out of school at age 3, they couldn't handle him..........I didn't know where to go..........Ritalin worked: he reacted like a robot, when I said "sit", he sat there for hours ..........but then the side effect: during night he was fully awake.......... Finally I woke up, searched the net day and night, took him off the Ritalin after a month......and found a homeopath......he got some herbal medication and he turned like a leaf on a tree. Unbelievable! Ever since we go there, he has so much improved, I just couldn't believe my eyes. He is in school, no problems, one of the best students in class. And above all drug-free!!!!! He will need another shot at age 10 to comply with the gov. rules (if I don't do it he won't be accepted at school), but now we use it in combination with homeopathic medication that will soften the effect. So now I'm anti-vac the way it is done now: the homeopath says those vac-boosters are the culprit of many ADHD and problem-kids nowadays. Vaccinations are needed, but we need to change the way we do it!!!!

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2011, 10:05:46 AM PDT
Darks says:
Sorry there, Flowers, but snide remarks don't count for science here.

Posted on Jun 20, 2011, 10:58:23 AM PDT

Well, the original post doesn't contain any science....why should we? ;P

Posted on Jun 20, 2011, 11:13:52 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 20, 2011, 11:14:57 AM PDT
J.Espresso says:
To add my two cents, in addition to the obvious eradication or large reductions in what were once common diseases such as polio and measles, thanks to vaccination, those who choose not to vaccinate their children are counting on those of us who do to keep their children healthy. You are essentially free-riders. If your child is in a community where the majority of others have been vaccinated, odds are they won't get that disease, but that's not assured, and the more parents who choose to follow your lead -the greater the risk will be to your own child and to public health in general.

Vaccination is not just an individual choice. It is a public health responsibility. Those who don't vaccinate are counting on those of us who do to keep your children from getting these diseases, while doing nothing themselves to keep from spreading the disease -- and that's not really fair, is it?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2011, 6:39:53 PM PDT
Plus in this mobile society where we have greater contact with people from places that have not eradicated diseases we rarely see in the US. The potential harm of having a significant amount of people who have not been vaccinated in our population is frightening.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2011, 7:02:38 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 20, 2011, 7:03:16 PM PDT
Darks says:
So that they can dip their cups into the bountiful fountains of our knowledge. Well, my knowledge, anyway. You can just teach them how to grapple. XD

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2011, 7:09:06 PM PDT
Darks says:
Large reductions, eh? Sorry mate, but historical data says otherwise. For instance, measles deaths had declined by 99.8% before vaccines were even introduced.

And also, if public health is reason enough to vaccinate every child, who then is responsible for those children who suffer adverse reactions to vaccines? Will you step up and pay for their care? Of course not. Unless you have a personal and financial stake in another child's wellbeing, do not ask someone to potentially sacrifice their child for the "greater good".

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2011, 8:51:00 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 20, 2011, 9:40:05 PM PDT
Ali says:
It's plainly understood in mainstream immunology that cancer can in fact be "injected". It's actually part of laboratory protocol to inject cancer cells in order to induce cancer, especially once the immune system is compromised. Whether such contaminants are in vaccines is a different issue, but claiming that it's a false premise is itself plainly false.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2011, 8:53:35 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 20, 2011, 10:36:35 PM PDT
Ali says:
A.Flowers, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) in its 2004 report indicated only that the 'epidemiological' evidence that it had on hand, which was actually produced in preparation for the IOM's review, favored rejection of a causal connection between either thimerosal-containing vaccines or MMR vaccines ["Immmunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism", Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, 14 May 2004,]. The IOM specifically stated, however, that basic science---in other words biology---would not even be weighed as evidence.

It is naive---extremely faithful to medical ideology---to confuse epidemiology for biological facts. The IOM assumed and looked for a 'linear no-threshold' (LNT) model of response, namely that autism would increase within the population by direct proportion to the average dosage of thimerosal administered. Yet biological systems generally do not operate according to the LNT model [Higgins JP, "Nonlinear systems in medicine", Yale J Biol Med, 2002 Sep-Dec;75(5-6):247-60,].

Physicians see statistical data and confuse them for revelations of objective truth by failing to grasp that the theoretical models, which the statisics were applied to, might have been constructed via unreaslistic assumptions [Epidemiology, 1998 May;9(3):322-32,]. Perhaps 9 of 10 physicians cannot distinguish the truth value of a key figure, 'significance testing', in the statistical data [BMC Med, 2011 Feb 28;9:20,]. Physician culture reveres 'authority opinion'---the aura of privileged knowledge---which lacks legitimacy within basic science [J Eval Clin Pract, 1997 Apr;3(2):133-8,], and confuse the 'democratic fallacy' for 'the truth' [Emerg Themes Epidemiol, 2011 Jan 11;8(1):1, section "Introduction",].

I have yet to see any basic research indicating that vaccination cannot be a component with the 'causal constellation' behind many cases of autism. If you can offer some such research---or cite or explain your information sources---I think it will help contribute to understanding.

A 2011 article in a journal of basic science---bridging both toxicology with the quite nonlinear branch of biology called immunology---explains, "Due to the extensive parallels between autism and mercury poisoning, the likelihood of a causal relationship is great" [Ratajczak HV, "Theoretical aspects of autism: causes---a review", J Immunotoxicol, 2011 Jan-Mar;8(1):68-79, =].

A 2007 compilation on autism basic research explained, "Furthermore, only a small fraction of infants exposed to mercurials exhibited acrodynia"---a disease of polyneuritis and gastrointestinal disorders after mercury poisoning---"suggesting that the affected children were less resistant to the toxin. These patterns are somewhat analogous to patterns of onset and prevalence in autism which becomes apparent in the first several years of life and affects about 1 in 175 infants" [Zhao LB, ed, Autism Research Advances (New York: Nova Science, 2007), p 158,].

"A recent study offers experimental evidence that in animals there are subpopulations which are more susceptible to thimerosal. The ability of thimerosal to damage the nervous system in one strain of mice is due to the susceptibility of the immune system which this strain exhibits. Hornig et al reported that a strain (SLJ/J) of autoimmune disease-sensitive mice challenged postnatally with thimerosal at weight-equivalent doses and at points in time equivalent to the childhood pediatric immunization schedule exhibited growth delay, reduced locomotion, reduced response to open-field and novel environments, and greater number and density of hippocampal neurons compared to two other control strains of mice that were autoimmune disease-insensitive. SLJ/J mice are a commercially available inbred strain. The authors proposed that genes linked to mercury-induced autoimmunity may influence the relative neuro- or immunotoxicity of thimerosal. This finding in mice is very significant because it lends experimental support for, and a possible medical[-practice] basis for, the view derived from the clinical studies described above that a portion of the human population has heightened, age-dependent sensitivity to mercury, including mercury in calomel, thimerosal, and phenylmercurials. If this is so, the minimal effective toxic dose of mercury for the most sensitive members of the human population may be significantly lower than the average effective toxic dose for the population as a whole" [Zhao LB, 2007, p 150-1].

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2011, 10:00:11 PM PDT
yes, yes it has. For christs sake, the guy admitted it was false. Plus, they don't even use mercury anymore.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 20, 2011, 10:21:09 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 22, 2011, 3:33:51 AM PDT
Ali says:
Dr/2 Slartibartfast, when thimerosal was removed in 1999 as a vaccine preservative, its use in the manufacturing process and its presence as trace residue remained in some vaccines. In 2008 National Network for Immunization Information explained that thimerosal-free influenza vaccine for injection by hypodermic needle, called 'trivalent inactivated vaccine' (TIV), was "not available in the United States. However, TIV is available both with trace amounts of thimerosal and with thimerosal as a preservative" ["Mercury in vaccines"---section "Is thimerosal still in the vaccines that children receive?", NNII, 6 Aug 2008,].

Although mere trace amount would presumably bring less toxicological effect, it would still be predicted to have immunological effect and could prime sensitization to mercury. So trace mercury in vaccines still could plausibly prime a putative 'autism immune phenotype'---a phenotype being a specific form and function actually expressed---perhaps clinically brought out later by other mercury exposures activating this immune phenotype. In other words, injection with even trace amounts of thimerosal might prime a putative autism immune phenotype, that is, an 'immunological' effect, in whichever susceptible children---who might be a relatively small subpopulation to begin with---and either rising thimerosal dose or rising mercury exposure otherwise, a 'toxicological' effect, might simply then determine the 'severity' of the primed phenotype's expression [See my previous post, Jun 20, 2011 8:53:35 PM PDT].

Thimerosal is still a preservative in vaccines administered in the Third World. In America multidose vials of influenza vaccine---a vaccine recommended by the CDC for all pregnant women and children at least age 6 months---continued to contain thimerosal preservative ["General questions and answers on thimerosal"---section "Is thimerosal still being used?", U.S. CDC, 15 Dec 2009,]. Till 2007 all influenza vaccines---even single dose containers---available in the U.S. contained thimerosal preservative ["Thimerosal in influenza vaccines", NNII, 22 Oct 2007,].

In any case, it will help discussion if you cite or at least discuss your indications. Presumably, you didn't merely fabricate them on whim.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2011, 9:27:30 AM PDT
DJD says:
The data pro-vaccine supporters are using is old and at the very least omits the meta-analysis of the subject. In recent times the number of vaccines given to people has had an inverse relationship to the age at which they are given. Newborns are inundated with multiple vaccines in a very short life span for an under developed nervous and immune system. By introducing these teratogens after birth you don't get the physical deformities found when introduced during gestation, you get the symptoms of a spectrum of diseases which is why it is difficult to isolate the cause-effect relationship because the effect may not be apparent until years later.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2011, 9:47:57 AM PDT
J.Espresso says:
"who then is responsible for those children who suffer adverse reactions to vaccines?"

-- Quite simply, which is greater, the risk of an adverse reaction, or the risk of contracting the disease? If your answer is the risk of an adverse reaction, you can thank the prior few generations for reducing the threat of these diseases inthis country. Having lived several years in a developing country, it was not uncommon to see people dragging useless, emaciated, polio stricken paralyzed legs behind them as they begged for change on the street corner -- a disease we fortunately no longer see very often in our country. Why is it still common there, but not here? You don't think vaccinations might have something to do with that?

You certainly have the right not to vaccinate your child. It's your child, and your choice. Just realize that you live in an interconnected world, and your choices affect others as well. In many states here in the US, you have the right to withhold medical care for religious reasons too. I don't see much of a difference between the two. I consider both to be irresponsible.

Posted on Jun 21, 2011, 9:58:46 AM PDT
DJD says:
Isopathy, tautopathy, homeopathy are better choices than vaccinations when someone has been exposed to a disease such as you describe. Why do you proliferate vaccines when there are better alternatives without the side effects? The people in third world countries have many problems but I wouldn't feed them GMO's or hormone/anti-biotic saturated meat just because they are poor. I don't want to poison poor people anymore than I want to poison people in developed countries. Don't be misled by an industry whose profits are in the billions because you are too lazy to research a better alternative.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2011, 10:13:45 AM PDT
Darks says:
You misunderstand the point of my post. I was addressing the claim that herd immunity is reason enough for everyone to get vaccinated. It isn't.

As for why polio is uncommon in the US but common in this developing country of yours, polio is spread through contact with faeces, therefore hygiene and sanitation play a far larger role in preventing polio than the vaccine ever did.

You may consider the decision to vaccinate as irresponsible, but unless you have a personal stake in another child's well-being, it really doesn't matter what you think.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 21, 2011, 12:18:39 PM PDT
Farhad Nagi says:
I am not a medical pro to judge if cancer can be contagious by injection and all that, but to all those who radically deny any possibility of health care hunta to do such thing, let me point a couple of Facts here:

- In Feb 2009 Baxter sent H5N1 to 27 countries inside the vials that were saying "Flu Shot" on them. they made a "mistake". Miraculously we are still alive because one of the specialists Gladly checked it on rats before injecting. And the best part is that CDC did not even start an investigation of almost a murder of half of the planet. Go check bloomberg on it.

- In Jan 2010 EU Parliament instigated an investigation of conspiracy of swine flu by Big Pharma.

But unfortunately a lot of people are still in hypnosis, they dont believe that these things are possible, they got their brain washed well by the masss-media propaganda of this left-right paradigm we live in, and they were taught well that if smth does not come from cable wire, then it is CONSPIRACY and it must be immediately ridiculed and marginalized to crazies. Half of this country still believes in official 911 story, because they dont have guts or intelligence to watch Loose Change...

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 24, 2011, 8:42:27 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 24, 2011, 8:58:00 AM PDT
ColdShot says:
I don't get injections since the service 30 yrs ago
I turned them all down except one tetanus shot.

and they weren't injection crazy when I was a baby like they are today
I only had a cpl shots and luckily was ok

fear leads too many people around by their noses and they don't even know it.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400 Next ›
Discussion locked

Recent discussions in the Health forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  Health forum
Participants:  227
Total posts:  10000
Initial post:  Jun 17, 2011
Latest post:  Oct 22, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 18 customers