Vaccines

Dylan

Jedi
I thought it was a good movie. It is interesting to me, when discussing these things with my wife,
that she descends to the use of logical fallacies like ad hominem attacks on me rather than reading any source material or watching movies like this. It is like having a microcosm of the larger debate right in my house!

The point, is obviously that the vast majority will accept, a priori, arguments from authority and will employ logical fallacy to deny the need to research themselves. Frustrating, to say the least.
 

Nancy2feathers

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I watched this video on fb yesterday and thought it interesting. Dr. Stephanie Seneff discusses the potential connection between vaccines and autism.
http://tv.greenmedinfo.com/vaccine-causes-autism/
 
Another pro-vaccine article I saw today. The debate continues; http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-truth-about-vaccines
 

denekin

Jedi
FOTCM Member
interesting video on vaccines and cancer: I can't vouch for its accuracy, but it is certainly interesting...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8FCJ_VPyns
 

hlat

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History
by Suzanne Humphries MD
ISBN 1480216895
_http://www.amazon.com/Dissolving-Illusions-Disease-Vaccines-Forgotten/dp/1480216895

Has anyone read this book? What did you think? I ran a couple searches but didn't get any results.
 

Konstantin

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Dylan said:
I thought it was a good movie. It is interesting to me, when discussing these things with my wife,
that she descends to the use of logical fallacies like ad hominem attacks on me rather than reading any source material or watching movies like this. It is like having a microcosm of the larger debate right in my house!

The point, is obviously that the vast majority will accept, a priori, arguments from authority and will employ logical fallacy to deny the need to research themselves. Frustrating, to say the least.
I was in the same situation with my wife few years ago. She accepted arguments from authority propaganda without any solid evidence. But then she saw few cases when children from people who we know have severe vaccine complications and with the time she awakened about all that vaccine scam, that authorities are proclaiming.
I think that as people are more aware of the danger of vaccines, in the same time authorities are pushing more and more the laws about mandatory vaccination.
 

aragorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
In the country where I live, the discussion on vaccinations is heating up again big time. With a couple of well timed propaganda pieces by the media, the majority of people I know are now fully supporting the idea of forced vaccinations. Some of my relatives, friends and other acquaintances are posting and commenting in such a way that it's utterly unbelievable and horrifying. If you thought russophobia was bad, it's nothing compared to the wrath of pro-vaccine people against anyone who even raises a tiny bit of doubt against their use.

This 100% authoritarian and hysterical and even ponerized mindset is of course nothing new, but I'm surprised that people that I've previously viewed as moderately open minded and smart, are eagerly joining the "shoot the anti-vaxxers" crowd. The good side, if there is one, is that all this works as a good litmus test to identify these brain washed individuals. I've even unfriended (on FB) some of them because of their bullying comments.

I decided to ramp up my reading on vaccines, just to be better prepared , and I recently read these two well known books that I found very educating (especially the latter):

Vaccination Is Not Immunization 4th Ed. Fourth Edition (2015)
by Tim O'Shea
Link: http://a.co/5MneZKN

Dissolving Illusions
by Suzanne Humphries et al.
Link: http://a.co/19CBinF

I might be off, but after a lot of reading, my guess is that the rabbit hole goes even deeper than these authors realize. What I mean is, that vaccines might be one of the key components of programming and manipulating people, even on some sort of "soul level".

I'll try later to post some of the notes and quotes I've gathered from these books. One thing that I however want to mention, that relates to the thing I wrote above, was something that was mentioned in these books. It's a very simple fact, but the idea still surprised me and made me wonder:

To determine what's in a liquid, like a vaccine, you can only test for things that you suspect that might be in there.
I guess this isn't completely true, since I suspect you can do "sweeps" searching for a group of things, like metals etc. But if there would be something completely "outlandish" in those vaccines, that no one suspects is there, it wouldn't be found. But now I'm digressing into conspiracy theory... ;)

One more thing. Since Andrew Wakefield is one of the main characters in the whole "debate" (the one who exposed the link to autism), and who "everyone agrees" is a fraudster, you can guess that in his case everything is certainly not what it seems - or what you hear. Here he gives an excellent talk, giving his side of the story:


https://youtu.be/Ra0QtTUuFIc
 

hlat

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Aragorn said:
I decided to ramp up my reading on vaccines, just to be better prepared , and I recently read these two well known books that I found very educating (especially the latter):

Vaccination Is Not Immunization 4th Ed. Fourth Edition (2015)
by Tim O'Shea
Link: http://a.co/5MneZKN

Dissolving Illusions
by Suzanne Humphries et al.
Link: http://a.co/19CBinF
You may want to read Virus Mania too. It explains that some so called viruses don't even exist. For example, there is no polio virus, so that the nonexistent polio virus cannot be contagious or even cause polio.
https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,37840
_https://www.scribd.com/doc/112444916/Virus-Mania
 
In my country it has become a big dilemma and a topic of discussion among young couples with babies. I guess some improvement regarding individual opinions and skepticism towards those things has been made.
Anyway, those who do not vaccine their child need to pay some fee and are not allowed to register their kid in state kindergardens.
What is also bad is that doctors nowadays treat babies and little kids with far more aggressive therapies than when I was a kid. Almost everytime antibiotics are included and corticosteroids are also much more used.
I am curious to know what is the situation with the quality of health service in other countries, but it is easily noticed here that the doctors are much worse than before.
They stick to prescriptions from their books, think less, know less and don't have a "feeling" anymore about the situation, if I can say it like that.
 

Odyssey

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
PerfectCircle said:
I am curious to know what is the situation with the quality of health service in other countries, but it is easily noticed here that the doctors are much worse than before.
They stick to prescriptions from their books, think less, know less and don't have a "feeling" anymore about the situation, if I can say it like that.
I work in health care here in the US and I can only say that the quality of care if sorely lacking. There's plenty of hospitals and doctors in practice so treatment (medications, tests and procedures that don't do the patient any good in the long run, in my opinion), unless you don't have insurance, is available but for the most part it keeps them just well enough to function and sick enough to keep going back to the doctor.

Some doctors are decent but you have to search long and hard for one.

Aragorn said:
To determine what's in a liquid, like a vaccine, you can only test for things that you suspect that might be in there.
I guess this isn't completely true, since I suspect you can do "sweeps" searching for a group of things, like metals etc. But if there would be something completely "outlandish" in those vaccines, that no one suspects is there, it wouldn't be found. But now I'm digressing into conspiracy theory... ;)
Speaking of gross things in vaccines...check out this interview where Jon Rappaport interviews an ex vaccine researcher. He says he found a hair in one of the vaccines :scared: and all manner of 'foreign proteins' which could be anything. The ingredients that are listed on the vaccine inserts are bad enough. I shudder to think of all the crud that they don't even think to test for.
 

aragorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Thanks, Odyssey, for posting that interview. Most people would dismiss that as complete nonsense and a hoax, but even if the source and autenticity is hard to verify, I certainly think that the things this whistleblower says are completely plausible.

In a sense, I feel like a total looser and a whimp because I'm not taking a stand against this pro-vaxx hysteria and bullying. There was one recent thread on FB that was really nasty, where a whole bunch of people I know personally lambasted and bullied this one courageous individual who had to courage to say how she thought what they were doing was wrong (the whole thing started with promoting and "hooraying" of a very nasty article that smeared a public figure who is coraugesly talking against vaccines). I would have liked to give her support by commenting or 'liking', but out of fear of getting in trouble I decided against it. At instances like this, I feel trapped; seeing what they've done to the reputation of people who raise questions about the safety and usefulness of vaccines I just can't take the risk of our kids being ridiculed and bullied at school because of their "dad is a weirdo", or troubles for us adults to get work etc.

On the other hand, the most loud bullies are more or less pathological, so debating with them, and showing your true colors would not be wise, I guess.

If taking a stand against a system is hard for people like me, I can imagine how it's almost impossible for those whose whole career is based on these lies.
 

Odyssey

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Aragorn said:
On the other hand, the most loud bullies are more or less pathological, so debating with them, and showing your true colors would not be wise, I guess.
Yes. Arguing with someone and trying to get them to see the light only leads to people clinging even more strongly to their beliefs. Needing to shout your beliefs in peoples' faces only reveals the shakiness of your beliefs and your own insecurity. So not getting drawn into a public debate can be a wise move. What you share with close, personal friends and family who know what you know is another story.
 

manitoban

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Odyssey said:
Aragorn said:
On the other hand, the most loud bullies are more or less pathological, so debating with them, and showing your true colors would not be wise, I guess.
Yes. Arguing with someone and trying to get them to see the light only leads to people clinging even more strongly to their beliefs. Needing to shout your beliefs in peoples' faces only reveals the shakiness of your beliefs and your own insecurity. So not getting drawn into a public debate can be a wise move. What you share with close, personal friends and family who know what you know is another story.
I agree. I've found the bottom line is that they simply do not want to know, and no evidence you could provide would change their views. I tend to keep a low profile regarding my son's vaccination status, as there is no need to provoke attack from the pro vaxxers, who absolutely won't listen to reason anyway.


I too, have been disappointed in friends who I had thought would know better, but it really is a good litmus test! On the other hand a few people I would never have expected to have actually surprised me by seeing the light. It seems to me that at the moment there is obviously a big push going on for mandatory vaccinations, YET at the same time, the info of the dangers of vaccines is also slowly but steadily coming out, hence the desperate push to enforce them legally.
 

Woodsman

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
manitoban said:
Odyssey said:
Aragorn said:
On the other hand, the most loud bullies are more or less pathological, so debating with them, and showing your true colors would not be wise, I guess.
Yes. Arguing with someone and trying to get them to see the light only leads to people clinging even more strongly to their beliefs. Needing to shout your beliefs in peoples' faces only reveals the shakiness of your beliefs and your own insecurity. So not getting drawn into a public debate can be a wise move. What you share with close, personal friends and family who know what you know is another story.
I agree. I've found the bottom line is that they simply do not want to know, and no evidence you could provide would change their views. I tend to keep a low profile regarding my son's vaccination status, as there is no need to provoke attack from the pro vaxxers, who absolutely won't listen to reason anyway.


I too, have been disappointed in friends who I had thought would know better, but it really is a good litmus test! On the other hand a few people I would never have expected to have actually surprised me by seeing the light. It seems to me that at the moment there is obviously a big push going on for mandatory vaccinations, YET at the same time, the info of the dangers of vaccines is also slowly but steadily coming out, hence the desperate push to enforce them legally.
Indeed!

I don't think I've seen a confirmed case of anybody changing their mind, but I have seen a lot of people stock up mightily on dogma, linked articles and even a lot of actual knowledge in an effort to fortify their pre-existing positions.

In the short term, anyway.

Over the long term.., the kind of information being seeded through such debates can be very useful and requires a sort of gestation period before coming to fruition.

I think back to when I was much younger and lived my life as a confirmed materialist, laughing and mocking anybody who spoke against official reality. I denied arguments on principle, and it was only after many years and personal exploration, actually forgetting my original positions, that I realized just how far I'd come. One friend pointed out that long ago I'd argued against him on certain points. I didn't even believe him, until he brought up specific creative arguments I remembered using. I felt like an idiot.

Which is half the problem.

Ego, ego!

Changing one's mind indicates losing as opposed to learning, and as such we have been "inoculated" against knowledge as a culture. We are taught to be ashamed of learning. To be more precise, we're allowed to learn new information once when there is a blank canvas being filled with data for the first time, but after that, changing one's mind is verboten.

If any change is going to happen, people feel the need to distance themselves from the threat of shame before they take on new information. For those not engaged in the Work in any significant way, this is generally achieved, (if ever), only over a long period of time.

The great vaccine debates also serve, as others have noted, to illuminate those who will most likely become dangerous should politics turn deadly. Know your enemy and anticipate their actions. It is fascinating to see how crazy works.
 

aragorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
manitoban said:
Odyssey said:
Aragorn said:
On the other hand, the most loud bullies are more or less pathological, so debating with them, and showing your true colors would not be wise, I guess.
Yes. Arguing with someone and trying to get them to see the light only leads to people clinging even more strongly to their beliefs. Needing to shout your beliefs in peoples' faces only reveals the shakiness of your beliefs and your own insecurity. So not getting drawn into a public debate can be a wise move. What you share with close, personal friends and family who know what you know is another story.
I agree. I've found the bottom line is that they simply do not want to know, and no evidence you could provide would change their views. I tend to keep a low profile regarding my son's vaccination status, as there is no need to provoke attack from the pro vaxxers, who absolutely won't listen to reason anyway.


I too, have been disappointed in friends who I had thought would know better, but it really is a good litmus test! On the other hand a few people I would never have expected to have actually surprised me by seeing the light. It seems to me that at the moment there is obviously a big push going on for mandatory vaccinations, YET at the same time, the info of the dangers of vaccines is also slowly but steadily coming out, hence the desperate push to enforce them legally.
Noticing the recent media propaganda push, I suspect they're soon going to introduce a new scare of a pandemic (Zica virus?) so that they can sell a new vaccine.

Just thinking out loud here, but the main arguments of the authoritarians seem to be:

1) Herd immunity: the unvaccinated are a danger to the whole population, since they keep the disease alive and thus infect others. The bullies go even so far as saying how anti-vaxxers are murderers, since their actions (not vaccinating) kill innocent children.

Interestingly, this logic includes the admission, that vaccines do not give 100% protection, as does natural immunity by having the disease the natural way. Otherwise, the vaccinated wouldn't be in any danger. This is even stated by the vaccine manufacturers. The manufacturers also admit that the vaccines are effective only for some years (this they measure by the level of antibodies), ca 3 years, some say even under a year. This is of course good for business, since everyone needs booster shots for the rest of their lives. However, by logic, this means that there's no way - even if everyone would be 100% willing to take all the shots - that the whole population would have "active immunization", since no one can say for sure how long the protection by the vaccine lasts. Thus, even the pro-vaxxers, who take their shots, are "murderers" at some point in their lives.

Another thing they forget however, is that even if you're vaccinated, you still carry the virus/bacteria and thus you can infect others. And it also seems quite clear after reading the literature is that "stirring up" antibodies by vaccines and adjuvants isn't anything close like the normal immune response. The human immune system is a complicated process, that includes many "programming" events and not just one type of "killer cells". The vaccines often only include a part of the disease, or it's deactivated (by e.g. formaldehyde), and the important part of the immune defense, the gut, is bypassed.

The counter argument they provide for this is that "in real life you also can get infected by a scratch from a rose thorn, which is the same thing as getting an injection". This sounds like a compelling argument, but I'd say that getting microbes directly into your bloodstream is always bad, be it the natural or artificial way. Plus, a rose thorn probably will not have all those other chemicals in it (or even several different types of viruses like in many vaccines).

The original idea of herd immunity, if I remember correctly, was that if a certain percent of the population gets natural immunity against the disease, then the disease will not spread anymore and ultimately it will disappear. I haven't yet found a good comparison of this original idea, and the idea of vaccination providing herd immunity, but the evidence supporting the pro-vaxxers seems quite shaky. Also, it might just be, that actually it is the vaccines that keep all these disease strains alive.

Lastly, regarding this point, I come to think of how the pro-vaxxers have a mindset of "eradicating every bug in the world". As I understand it, humans are practically "built from bugs", our whole body is bugs. Some bugs are good, some bad, but we can never - and nor should we - get rid of all the even slightly bad ones. I guess it's like with STS and STO: there must exist both sides, how else could the immune system train itself? As the C's pointed out, the root of the problem is toxicity of the body and the mind. When we are clean, both physically and mentally, we can easily coexist with and suppress the bad bugs (sometimes we might nee a little help by supplements, herbs) - at least the natural ones originating from Earth ;)

2) The medical experts know best, we all should trust them. A layman can and should never try to know better than the experts.

The absurdity of this argument is clear for all of us here, there's no need to explain it. However, for an authoritarian follower this is God's word.

There's a lot more than these points, of course.
 
Top Bottom