4 ms·

If you can provide any proof that vaccines cause long term diseases in any significant rate, I would appreciate it.

briantakita 9y ago
The question is what constitutes as "proof"? It's certainly isn't going to be a mathematical proof. Is "proof" limited to being sanctioned by a homogeneous scientific community who receives their funding from the same institutions that they are analyzing? Is there "proof" that vaccines are essential to public health? Would sanitation not have a contributing factor to reduction of disease? Can you rule out biological warfare as a catalyst for various epidemics? Perhaps "proof" can mean implication in an investigative sense through collating evidence & connecting the dots. In this sense, would a conviction in a non-biased criminal or civil court be "proof"? Here's some evidence; note that the most of the corporate media is sponsored by pharma/medical advertisement, creating a conflict of interest in reporting. Approach this like an investigator, do the research, & listen to the various interested parties: * The National Childhood Vaccine Act limits the liability of vaccine manufactures from claims. There is a separate fund which pays off families whose children were injured by a vaccine. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Injury_Act https://www.wikiwand.com/en/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Injur... https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html * Several CDC & industry whistle-blowers reported rigged scientific studies re: MMR & other vaccine effects. Why would these people ruin their nice jobs & face public scrutiny to blow the whistle if there were not a moral reason to do so? http://www.naturalnews.com/046535_MMR_vaccines_autism_CDC_whistleblower.html http://www.naturalnews.com/046535_MMR_vaccines_autism_CDC_wh... * Studies indicating that Unvaccinated Children are Healthier than Vaccinated Children https://healthimpactnews.com/2016/study-unvaccinated-children-healthier-than-vaccinated-kids-doctors-agree/ https://healthimpactnews.com/2016/study-unvaccinated-childre... * President Trump commissioned a panel headed by Robert Kennedy & supported by Robert De Niro (a vocal critic of Trump whose child has been injured by vaccines). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEkbXGAfMyY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEkbXGAfMyY * Propaganda/Public Relations campaigns directed at any skeptic of vaccines. You know the dreaded "anti-vaxxers". If there were no culpability, why would there be such heavy Progadanga demonizing people from exercising their free speech? Bill Nye wants anti-vaxxers to be killed. Penn & Teller seemed zealously angry in their video against the evil "anti-vaxxers". Why such a harsh response? Is this not similar to the Catholic Inquisitions where the religious hegemony was challenged by esoteric & scientific belief? The establishment Scientific homism of GMOs, Vaccines, Climate Change, compulsory fluoridation has been unable to silence it's critics through studies & rhetoric. Instead, the arguments & evidence against these organizations is only growing in volume. * Anecdotal evidence/videos of many people who have suffered injuries from vaccines. This is not limited to autism. I personally know a few people who have been injured (mainly from the East Coast). Before you write them off, these people seem quite convinced over the causes of their injuries. There is little motivation to be reporting such causes. It's important to elevate direct reports, as there is a heavy vested interest in spinning stories (similar to blaming the rape victim). http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/march-2015-settlements-in-vaccine-court-117-vaccine-injuries-and-deaths/ http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/march-2015-settlements-in-v... http://vaxxedthemovie.com/ http://vaxxedthemovie.com/ * Measles outbreaks where those infected had the measles vaccine. I thought the value proposition of vaccines was inoculation for life? https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000359.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000359.htm * Mercury & other compounds found in the vaccines. Independent labs have analyzed harmful bioaccumulative compounds in vaccines. https://www.ecowatch.com/glyphosate-vaccines-1999343362.html https://www.ecowatch.com/glyphosate-vaccines-1999343362.html
epmaybe 9y ago
I can't respond to the original comment anymore, but I'll just throw it under yours because it tipped me enough over the edge that I thought I would respond. To help provide some counterpoints: > The National Childhood Vaccine Act limits the liability of vaccine manufactures from claims. There is a separate fund which pays off families whose children were injured by a vaccine. Read the background section of this wikipedia article, to better understand the reasons why the act exists in the first place. Additionally, look through some of the other provisions of the act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Injury_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Inj... The way I see it, and with the supreme court decision in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, yes, vaccine makers are protected from some liability. However, there is nothing stopping someone from suing in federal court, and any attorney's fees during "Vaccine Court" are paid for by the government due to the Vaccine Injury Fund. > Several CDC & industry whistle-blowers reported rigged scientific studies re: MMR & other vaccine effects. Why would these people ruin their nice jobs & face public scrutiny to blow the whistle if there were not a moral reason to do so? http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp Maybe Snopes is too mainstream for some readers, and therefore can't be taken seriously. My guess however is that they're more right than they are wrong. Additionally, they link to the CDC statement that has instructions to view the data that was "rigged" according to the whistleblowers (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Autism/cdc2004pediatrics.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Autism/cdc2004ped...), in case you don't believe Snopes. Make sure you "approach this like an investigator," by looking at primary sources instead of naturalnews.com > Studies indicating that Unvaccinated Children are Healthier than Vaccinated Children Just so everyone can see the abstract and the research methods including data collection: https://i0.wp.com/www.skepticalraptor.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Screen-Shot-2016-11-28-at-09.36.00.png https://i0.wp.com/www.skepticalraptor.com/blog/wp-content/up... Now, I'm not the best researcher, but I feel like I would have picked a more representative group than just homeschooled children (maybe they were the only groups of mothers that would complete a survey? Unlikely, I would imagine that I could get more than 600 responders from a far larger group). Additionally, I found it interesting that the results stated the odds-ratio for preterm birth + vaccination -> NDD (autism), but not the odds-ratio for vaccination - preterm birth -> NDD. I get that the authors are trying to tell a compelling story in the abstract to get more people to read it, but I'd argue that it is frowned upon to "lead" the reader that way without them having seen any of the data. If anyone has the actual paper, I would appreciate a link! > President Trump commissioned a panel headed by Robert Kennedy & supported by Robert De Niro (a vocal critic of Trump whose child has been injured by vaccines) Not sure what you're trying to prove with this one. If you can explain further, I'd appreciate it. > Propaganda/Public Relations campaigns directed at any skeptic of vaccines. You know the dreaded "anti-vaxxers". If there were no culpability, why would there be such heavy Progadanga demonizing people from exercising their free speech? Bill Nye wants anti-vaxxers to be killed. Penn & Teller seemed zealously angry in their video against the evil "anti-vaxxers". Why such a harsh response? Is this not similar to the Catholic Inquisitions where the religious hegemony was challenged by esoteric & scientific belief? Could an easier explanation exist for why there is such a harsh response? That maybe people don't want children to die unnecessarily? That's my reasoning, at least. Unpopular opinion: I'd much rather my child have autism than die of a disease that could be vaccinated against. > Anecdotal evidence/videos of many people who have suffered injuries from vaccines. This is not limited to autism. I personally know a few people who have been injured (mainly from the East Coast). Before you write them off, these people seem quite convinced over the causes of their injuries. There is little motivation to be reporting such causes. It's important to elevate direct reports, as there is a heavy vested interest in spinning stories (similar to blaming the rape victim). It's unfortunate that people are suffering these injuries. However, let's break this down a little. In the healthimpactnews.com link you showed, the report of injuries caused by vaccines notes a lot of guillan barre syndrome cases. Influenza and things like a GI infection (campylobacter) are known to cause GBS. So is the influenza vaccine, but the benefits far outweigh this risk. This is because even with the risk of GBS cases from the vaccine itself, it lowers the overall risk for GBS due to people not getting influenza. This link goes into more detail and has sources with data: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/765744?pa=43IhRB6hh0hnsztE0Di0ymOOClMNFHxa4amvmsFCTM3LevkgN0da%2F6LjU0OgqdGZ8SIvl8zjYv73GUyW5rsbWA%3D%3D http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/765744?pa=43IhRB6hh0hnsz... (apologies if this link doesn't load in advance, medscape sometimes requires a login) I can't speak much for the other settlements in that healthimpactnews article, as I'm just not that knowledgeable about those vaccines or diseases. I could claim something like "varicella vaccine is a live attenuated virus, so there is obviously a risk of shingles" or "lupus is common enough that it could just be coincidence that someone with the HPV vaccine would get lupus" but the truth is that we really don't know from the data presented in that article. > Measles outbreaks where those infected had the measles vaccine. I thought the value proposition of vaccines was inoculation for life? That's definitely not what I've ever been told about vaccines...We get booster shots for a reason. Hell, I had the varicella vaccine again two years ago for school. Also, note that this report is from 1984, and the measles vaccine has gotten a bit better since then. However, measles is pretty virulent, so the vaccine isn't 100% effective, more like 97%. > Mercury & other compounds found in the vaccines. Independent labs have analyzed harmful bioaccumulative compounds in vaccines. The link you have is about glyphosate. Even if you think glyphosate is dangerous for your health, the small amounts of it in vaccines that you take rarely compared to the massive amounts in daily food and drink makes it hard for me to worry. As for the mercury and other compounds, I honestly don't know. I do however know that the MMR vaccine never had thimerosal to begin with, so take that for what you will.

The question is what constitutes as "proof"? It's certainly isn't going to be a mathematical proof. Is "proof" limited to being sanctioned by a homogeneous scientific community who receives their funding from the same institutions that they are analyzing? Is there "proof" that vaccines are essential to public health? Would sanitation not have a contributing factor to reduction of disease? Can you rule out biological warfare as a catalyst for various epidemics? Perhaps "proof" can mean implication in an investigative sense through collating evidence & connecting the dots. In this sense, would a conviction in a non-biased criminal or civil court be "proof"? Here's some evidence; note that the most of the corporate media is sponsored by pharma/medical advertisement, creating a conflict of interest in reporting. Approach this like an investigator, do the research, & listen to the various interested parties: * The National Childhood Vaccine Act limits the liability of vaccine manufactures from claims. There is a separate fund which pays off families whose children were injured by a vaccine. https://www.wikiwand.com/en/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Injury_Act https://www.wikiwand.com/en/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Injur... https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/index.html * Several CDC & industry whistle-blowers reported rigged scientific studies re: MMR & other vaccine effects. Why would these people ruin their nice jobs & face public scrutiny to blow the whistle if there were not a moral reason to do so? http://www.naturalnews.com/046535_MMR_vaccines_autism_CDC_whistleblower.html http://www.naturalnews.com/046535_MMR_vaccines_autism_CDC_wh... * Studies indicating that Unvaccinated Children are Healthier than Vaccinated Children https://healthimpactnews.com/2016/study-unvaccinated-children-healthier-than-vaccinated-kids-doctors-agree/ https://healthimpactnews.com/2016/study-unvaccinated-childre... * President Trump commissioned a panel headed by Robert Kennedy & supported by Robert De Niro (a vocal critic of Trump whose child has been injured by vaccines). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEkbXGAfMyY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEkbXGAfMyY * Propaganda/Public Relations campaigns directed at any skeptic of vaccines. You know the dreaded "anti-vaxxers". If there were no culpability, why would there be such heavy Progadanga demonizing people from exercising their free speech? Bill Nye wants anti-vaxxers to be killed. Penn & Teller seemed zealously angry in their video against the evil "anti-vaxxers". Why such a harsh response? Is this not similar to the Catholic Inquisitions where the religious hegemony was challenged by esoteric & scientific belief? The establishment Scientific homism of GMOs, Vaccines, Climate Change, compulsory fluoridation has been unable to silence it's critics through studies & rhetoric. Instead, the arguments & evidence against these organizations is only growing in volume. * Anecdotal evidence/videos of many people who have suffered injuries from vaccines. This is not limited to autism. I personally know a few people who have been injured (mainly from the East Coast). Before you write them off, these people seem quite convinced over the causes of their injuries. There is little motivation to be reporting such causes. It's important to elevate direct reports, as there is a heavy vested interest in spinning stories (similar to blaming the rape victim). http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/march-2015-settlements-in-vaccine-court-117-vaccine-injuries-and-deaths/ http://healthimpactnews.com/2015/march-2015-settlements-in-v... http://vaxxedthemovie.com/ http://vaxxedthemovie.com/ * Measles outbreaks where those infected had the measles vaccine. I thought the value proposition of vaccines was inoculation for life? https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000359.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00000359.htm * Mercury & other compounds found in the vaccines. Independent labs have analyzed harmful bioaccumulative compounds in vaccines. https://www.ecowatch.com/glyphosate-vaccines-1999343362.html https://www.ecowatch.com/glyphosate-vaccines-1999343362.html

epmaybe 9y ago

I can't respond to the original comment anymore, but I'll just throw it under yours because it tipped me enough over the edge that I thought I would respond. To help provide some counterpoints: > The National Childhood Vaccine Act limits the liability of vaccine manufactures from claims. There is a separate fund which pays off families whose children were injured by a vaccine. Read the background section of this wikipedia article, to better understand the reasons why the act exists in the first place. Additionally, look through some of the other provisions of the act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Injury_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Childhood_Vaccine_Inj... The way I see it, and with the supreme court decision in Bruesewitz v. Wyeth, yes, vaccine makers are protected from some liability. However, there is nothing stopping someone from suing in federal court, and any attorney's fees during "Vaccine Court" are paid for by the government due to the Vaccine Injury Fund. > Several CDC & industry whistle-blowers reported rigged scientific studies re: MMR & other vaccine effects. Why would these people ruin their nice jobs & face public scrutiny to blow the whistle if there were not a moral reason to do so? http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp Maybe Snopes is too mainstream for some readers, and therefore can't be taken seriously. My guess however is that they're more right than they are wrong. Additionally, they link to the CDC statement that has instructions to view the data that was "rigged" according to the whistleblowers (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Autism/cdc2004pediatrics.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/Autism/cdc2004ped...), in case you don't believe Snopes. Make sure you "approach this like an investigator," by looking at primary sources instead of naturalnews.com > Studies indicating that Unvaccinated Children are Healthier than Vaccinated Children Just so everyone can see the abstract and the research methods including data collection: https://i0.wp.com/www.skepticalraptor.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Screen-Shot-2016-11-28-at-09.36.00.png https://i0.wp.com/www.skepticalraptor.com/blog/wp-content/up... Now, I'm not the best researcher, but I feel like I would have picked a more representative group than just homeschooled children (maybe they were the only groups of mothers that would complete a survey? Unlikely, I would imagine that I could get more than 600 responders from a far larger group). Additionally, I found it interesting that the results stated the odds-ratio for preterm birth + vaccination -> NDD (autism), but not the odds-ratio for vaccination - preterm birth -> NDD. I get that the authors are trying to tell a compelling story in the abstract to get more people to read it, but I'd argue that it is frowned upon to "lead" the reader that way without them having seen any of the data. If anyone has the actual paper, I would appreciate a link! > President Trump commissioned a panel headed by Robert Kennedy & supported by Robert De Niro (a vocal critic of Trump whose child has been injured by vaccines) Not sure what you're trying to prove with this one. If you can explain further, I'd appreciate it. > Propaganda/Public Relations campaigns directed at any skeptic of vaccines. You know the dreaded "anti-vaxxers". If there were no culpability, why would there be such heavy Progadanga demonizing people from exercising their free speech? Bill Nye wants anti-vaxxers to be killed. Penn & Teller seemed zealously angry in their video against the evil "anti-vaxxers". Why such a harsh response? Is this not similar to the Catholic Inquisitions where the religious hegemony was challenged by esoteric & scientific belief? Could an easier explanation exist for why there is such a harsh response? That maybe people don't want children to die unnecessarily? That's my reasoning, at least. Unpopular opinion: I'd much rather my child have autism than die of a disease that could be vaccinated against. > Anecdotal evidence/videos of many people who have suffered injuries from vaccines. This is not limited to autism. I personally know a few people who have been injured (mainly from the East Coast). Before you write them off, these people seem quite convinced over the causes of their injuries. There is little motivation to be reporting such causes. It's important to elevate direct reports, as there is a heavy vested interest in spinning stories (similar to blaming the rape victim). It's unfortunate that people are suffering these injuries. However, let's break this down a little. In the healthimpactnews.com link you showed, the report of injuries caused by vaccines notes a lot of guillan barre syndrome cases. Influenza and things like a GI infection (campylobacter) are known to cause GBS. So is the influenza vaccine, but the benefits far outweigh this risk. This is because even with the risk of GBS cases from the vaccine itself, it lowers the overall risk for GBS due to people not getting influenza. This link goes into more detail and has sources with data: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/765744?pa=43IhRB6hh0hnsztE0Di0ymOOClMNFHxa4amvmsFCTM3LevkgN0da%2F6LjU0OgqdGZ8SIvl8zjYv73GUyW5rsbWA%3D%3D http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/765744?pa=43IhRB6hh0hnsz... (apologies if this link doesn't load in advance, medscape sometimes requires a login) I can't speak much for the other settlements in that healthimpactnews article, as I'm just not that knowledgeable about those vaccines or diseases. I could claim something like "varicella vaccine is a live attenuated virus, so there is obviously a risk of shingles" or "lupus is common enough that it could just be coincidence that someone with the HPV vaccine would get lupus" but the truth is that we really don't know from the data presented in that article. > Measles outbreaks where those infected had the measles vaccine. I thought the value proposition of vaccines was inoculation for life? That's definitely not what I've ever been told about vaccines...We get booster shots for a reason. Hell, I had the varicella vaccine again two years ago for school. Also, note that this report is from 1984, and the measles vaccine has gotten a bit better since then. However, measles is pretty virulent, so the vaccine isn't 100% effective, more like 97%. > Mercury & other compounds found in the vaccines. Independent labs have analyzed harmful bioaccumulative compounds in vaccines. The link you have is about glyphosate. Even if you think glyphosate is dangerous for your health, the small amounts of it in vaccines that you take rarely compared to the massive amounts in daily food and drink makes it hard for me to worry. As for the mercury and other compounds, I honestly don't know. I do however know that the MMR vaccine never had thimerosal to begin with, so take that for what you will.