Tell me, ANYONE, why would the US Supreme Court (on 22 Feb 2011) rule vaccines as "unavoidably unsafe" in their decision to exempt vaccine makers from any liability in ALL cases of injury or death caused by vaccines?
Why did Congress enact the Vaccine law in 1986 which prohibits Americans from holding vaccine-makers accountable in civil courts? Instead we have kangaroo courts run by the pharmaceutical reps thus forcing tax-payers to pay for damages caused by vaccines.
Tax-payers have already paid out over $4 billion to victims of vaccines thanks to these kangaroo courts run by pharmaceutical reps, thus giving no incentive to vaccine makers to make their products safer. And if anybody dares to object to unsafe vaccines, they get demonized as "anti-vax" in the media? Why is it okay to demonize advocates for safer vaccines as "anti-vax"?
@Katm3, the reason the U.S. media is so steadfast to demonize skeptics of the ever-increasing vaccine schedule likely relates to the little realized/purposely ignored pattern of deeply intertwined financial ties.
In other words...the next time you watch CNN, MSNBC, or FOX for the latest headline-breaking news, PAY ATTENTION to the advertisements that come on during commercial breaks. Guarantee you will see at least ONE new offering by a pharm each time....but likely even more. Hard to demonize the industry which buys up lucrative ad space during your show, isn't it?
Let me say (as someone who spent 20years as a pharmacist) that vaccines per se are not the problem, given individually they are very safe but the current trend is to stuff 4 different vaccines into one injection.
Basically 4 different potentially lethal viruses being introduced into a babies system, there are bound to be problems for a significant percentage. If your child needs vaccinating ask your doctor for individual vaccines, sure you have to make a few more trips to the surgery but it reduces any long term risks drastically. The main side effect is over heating of the babies system while it tries to fight off all the new viruses in it's body, that excessive heat can be catastrophic to the young brain and can cause serious long term damage.
Big Pharma will always deny responsibility and have the deep pockets to control government agendas and fight off the little guy.
When I first started it was in the days when pharmacists actually made up the drugs themselves , Pig Pharma (typo but it stays) infiltrated with premade everything until now they have the entire market and you are totally dependant on what they dish out, you will be very hard pressed to find a compounding pharmacist these days, because the raw ingredients are made/provided by Big Pharma and are way over priced, to prevent any form of competition.
Once more big pharma sucks, that's why I got out of pharmacy as soon as the chance arose. I think at least half of the pharmacists I have worked with and stayed in contact with quit for other industries. From landscape gardening to teaching and accountancy.
This is my major issue, plus some of the ones they give are not necessarily necessary, in conjunction with the number of side effects. All you need to do is look at the list given in 1969,1989,2009 to 2019 & the list has quadrupled. I'm all for the stripped down basics and willing to discuss a handful more as possibilities, but the crammed jammed schedule given needs to GO. 4 injections in one day bullshit is just not a good thing, but when you say you're concerned ppl act like you're a loon. Nope.
Well said, @Emerald. Question, as a former pharmacist do you feel any concern at the ever-increasing schedule (which has not been studied in totality for safety, efficacy or for potential synergistic adverse effects caused between multiple injections given at same time) and/or with the use of aluminum adjuvants in some of the vaccines? These are my own biggest personal concerns.
I am terrified that in 50 years, we will regard aluminum in the same manner we now regard other naturally occurring elements that were later discovered to be toxic or otherwise adverse to human health (i.e. asbestos, silica, talcum).
There have been compelling studies done overseas that have shown that aluminum particles settle in brain tissue. There is also data going back to the 60s showing a correlation between Alzheimers cases and high quantities of aluminum in brain tissue, shown post-mortem. Predictably, the regulatory agencies and corporate giants here in the U.S. continue to downplay the hazards and defend the use of aluminum. Not shocking, considering the vast array of corporate interests tied up in this (vaccines are only one of MANY types of exposures to aluminum that U.S. citizens can expect during the average lifetime).
To me, the deflection and reliance of non-comparable science reeks of the same disingenuous tactics utilized by the corporate giants who manufactured products that contained absestos, for instance. For those not aware, many of these industries repeatedly denied or downplayed suspected asbestos hazards FOR DECADES, even in the face of COMPELLING patterns of potentially correlative cancer diagnoses for individuals known to have worked with or around it. Food for thought...overseas, governmental action was being taken to reduce or eliminate asbestos exposures in the 1930s. In the U.S., our government did not regulate it until the 1980s. So FIFTY YEARS after it was declared unsafe by our trans-Atlantic neighbors. It was only the power of subpoena that determined during the late 1970s that the asbestos-related industries were NOT ONLY well aware of the dangers, but actually took it further by CONCEALING this information to shield assets. True story - so please allow this to sink in before you automatically defend the likes of pharmaceutical corporations.
@longtimereader, are you honestly saying that sadistic men who inflict sexual abuse on little children and infants are PREFERRED in your opinion over deeply concerned, LOVING parents who opt to delay certain vaccines for their infants to lessen potential adverse side effects? Or were you simply making a deeply insensitive and exaggerative statement to underline your deep devotion to your position?
Please do reply. I am VERY interested in exploring your thought process on this issue. Thank you.
I notice that the so called antivaxxers present facts and the herd immunity proponents just bully I guess because they have nothing to back up their hype.
@Turitella, what's sad is that not everyone who disagrees with mandatory vaccination policies is "anti-vax" per se. Many are simply concerned and/or have valid questions which NO ONE SEEMS APT TO ANSWER. Such questions generally relate to industry practices, composition of individual vaccines, disingenuous declarations of safety, the lack of legal recourse given in the event of provable injury, and the corporate interests tied up in the ever-increasing schedule of shots for diseases that ARE NOT life threatening, such as chicken pox.
I suppose it is MUCH EASIER to demonize said concerned individuals than it would be to ACTUALLY ADDRESS these areas of potential human ethics violations, however....*sigh*
@yummyboogers Co-sign everything you said, 100%! Are you aware that Johns-Manville (a major manufacturer of asbestos products) commissioned an internal study by their own in-house physicians as to the safety of their products in 1931? Yes, 1931, and the findings of their own physicians revealed that asbestos was not only dangerous, but deadly. And. They. Covered. It. Up. For decades. I spent a while working in mass torts (asbestos, specifically) and that whole situation just makes my blood boil. THOUSANDS of innocent men and women did nothing wrong, they just went to work every day, and they were exposed to a substance that the manufacturers KNEW, for DECADES, was deadly to them. Anyone interested in reading more about the asbestos story can check out a condensed version here. https://www.ewg.org/research/asbestos-think-again/industry-hid-dangers-decades
Kate Moss?
ReplyDeleteHere's to hoping she's invested before this power move
ReplyDeleteI was thinking Kate or Heidi Klum but Heidi just did a promo in favor of vaccinations. I can't think of anyone else.
ReplyDeleteahhh yes could be Heidi!! I was about to say Giselle but I think you could be right with Heidi
ReplyDeleteIt's Elle McPhereson. I just saw something about this in the news yesterday
ReplyDeleteElle McPherson and andrew wakefield.
ReplyDelete+123
DeleteI mean it's not as if Kate Moss can claim any reservations about sticking needles in arms, is it.
ReplyDelete@FlashyVic....dead!! hahaha
ReplyDeleteisn't Elle with Carole formerly from Real Housewives of NY 's ex?
ReplyDeleteGood for her!
ReplyDeleteTell me, ANYONE, why would the US Supreme Court (on 22 Feb 2011) rule vaccines as "unavoidably unsafe" in their decision to exempt vaccine makers from any liability in ALL cases of injury or death caused by vaccines?
ReplyDeleteWhy did Congress enact the Vaccine law in 1986 which prohibits Americans from holding vaccine-makers accountable in civil courts? Instead we have kangaroo courts run by the pharmaceutical reps thus forcing tax-payers to pay for damages caused by vaccines.
Tax-payers have already paid out over $4 billion to victims of vaccines thanks to these kangaroo courts run by pharmaceutical reps, thus giving no incentive to vaccine makers to make their products safer. And if anybody dares to object to unsafe vaccines, they get demonized as "anti-vax" in the media? Why is it okay to demonize advocates for safer vaccines as "anti-vax"?
@Katm3, the reason the U.S. media is so steadfast to demonize skeptics of the ever-increasing vaccine schedule likely relates to the little realized/purposely ignored pattern of deeply intertwined financial ties.
DeleteIn other words...the next time you watch CNN, MSNBC, or FOX for the latest headline-breaking news, PAY ATTENTION to the advertisements that come on during commercial breaks. Guarantee you will see at least ONE new offering by a pharm each time....but likely even more. Hard to demonize the industry which buys up lucrative ad space during your show, isn't it?
@A.Claire...you’re silly.
ReplyDeleteLet me say (as someone who spent 20years as a pharmacist) that vaccines per se are not the problem, given individually they are very safe but the current trend is to stuff 4 different vaccines into one injection.
ReplyDeleteBasically 4 different potentially lethal viruses being introduced into a babies system, there are bound to be problems for a significant percentage. If your child needs vaccinating ask your doctor for individual vaccines, sure you have to make a few more trips to the surgery but it reduces any long term risks drastically. The main side effect is over heating of the babies system while it tries to fight off all the new viruses in it's body, that excessive heat can be catastrophic to the young brain and can cause serious long term damage.
Big Pharma will always deny responsibility and have the deep pockets to control government agendas and fight off the little guy.
When I first started it was in the days when pharmacists actually made up the drugs themselves , Pig Pharma (typo but it stays) infiltrated with premade everything until now they have the entire market and you are totally dependant on what they dish out, you will be very hard pressed to find a compounding pharmacist these days, because the raw ingredients are made/provided by Big Pharma and are way over priced, to prevent any form of competition.
Once more big pharma sucks, that's why I got out of pharmacy as soon as the chance arose. I think at least half of the pharmacists I have worked with and stayed in contact with quit for other industries. From landscape gardening to teaching and accountancy.
This is my major issue, plus some of the ones they give are not necessarily necessary, in conjunction with the number of side effects. All you need to do is look at the list given in 1969,1989,2009 to 2019 & the list has quadrupled.
DeleteI'm all for the stripped down basics and willing to discuss a handful more as possibilities, but the crammed jammed schedule given needs to GO. 4 injections in one day bullshit is just not a good thing, but when you say you're concerned ppl act like you're a loon. Nope.
Well said, @Emerald. Question, as a former pharmacist do you feel any concern at the ever-increasing schedule (which has not been studied in totality for safety, efficacy or for potential synergistic adverse effects caused between multiple injections given at same time) and/or with the use of aluminum adjuvants in some of the vaccines? These are my own biggest personal concerns.
DeleteI am terrified that in 50 years, we will regard aluminum in the same manner we now regard other naturally occurring elements that were later discovered to be toxic or otherwise adverse to human health (i.e. asbestos, silica, talcum).
There have been compelling studies done overseas that have shown that aluminum particles settle in brain tissue. There is also data going back to the 60s showing a correlation between Alzheimers cases and high quantities of aluminum in brain tissue, shown post-mortem. Predictably, the regulatory agencies and corporate giants here in the U.S. continue to downplay the hazards and defend the use of aluminum. Not shocking, considering the vast array of corporate interests tied up in this (vaccines are only one of MANY types of exposures to aluminum that U.S. citizens can expect during the average lifetime).
To me, the deflection and reliance of non-comparable science reeks of the same disingenuous tactics utilized by the corporate giants who manufactured products that contained absestos, for instance. For those not aware, many of these industries repeatedly denied or downplayed suspected asbestos hazards FOR DECADES, even in the face of COMPELLING patterns of potentially correlative cancer diagnoses for individuals known to have worked with or around it. Food for thought...overseas, governmental action was being taken to reduce or eliminate asbestos exposures in the 1930s. In the U.S., our government did not regulate it until the 1980s. So FIFTY YEARS after it was declared unsafe by our trans-Atlantic neighbors. It was only the power of subpoena that determined during the late 1970s that the asbestos-related industries were NOT ONLY well aware of the dangers, but actually took it further by CONCEALING this information to shield assets. True story - so please allow this to sink in before you automatically defend the likes of pharmaceutical corporations.
EmeralCity thanks for the explanation.
ReplyDeleteA model that’s a dumb fuck? Shock.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who doesn't vaccinate their child are worse than pedophiles. Evil child abusing scum.
ReplyDelete@longtimereader, are you honestly saying that sadistic men who inflict sexual abuse on little children and infants are PREFERRED in your opinion over deeply concerned, LOVING parents who opt to delay certain vaccines for their infants to lessen potential adverse side effects? Or were you simply making a deeply insensitive and exaggerative statement to underline your deep devotion to your position?
DeletePlease do reply. I am VERY interested in exploring your thought process on this issue. Thank you.
I notice that the so called antivaxxers present facts and the herd immunity proponents just bully I guess because they have nothing to back up their hype.
ReplyDelete@Turitella, what's sad is that not everyone who disagrees with mandatory vaccination policies is "anti-vax" per se. Many are simply concerned and/or have valid questions which NO ONE SEEMS APT TO ANSWER. Such questions generally relate to industry practices, composition of individual vaccines, disingenuous declarations of safety, the lack of legal recourse given in the event of provable injury, and the corporate interests tied up in the ever-increasing schedule of shots for diseases that ARE NOT life threatening, such as chicken pox.
DeleteI suppose it is MUCH EASIER to demonize said concerned individuals than it would be to ACTUALLY ADDRESS these areas of potential human ethics violations, however....*sigh*
@Meredith, can you please provide the double-blind, placebo controlled studies to which you are referring?
ReplyDelete@yummyboogers Co-sign everything you said, 100%! Are you aware that Johns-Manville (a major manufacturer of asbestos products) commissioned an internal study by their own in-house physicians as to the safety of their products in 1931? Yes, 1931, and the findings of their own physicians revealed that asbestos was not only dangerous, but deadly. And. They. Covered. It. Up. For decades. I spent a while working in mass torts (asbestos, specifically) and that whole situation just makes my blood boil. THOUSANDS of innocent men and women did nothing wrong, they just went to work every day, and they were exposed to a substance that the manufacturers KNEW, for DECADES, was deadly to them. Anyone interested in reading more about the asbestos story can check out a condensed version here. https://www.ewg.org/research/asbestos-think-again/industry-hid-dangers-decades
ReplyDelete