11 shocking things you now realize to be true

[✖Ice✖]

http://www.naturalnews.com/034126_aw...g_beliefs.html


1. most of the honey you buy in the grocery store contains no actual honey whatsoever
It's true, the so-called "honey" isn't even technically honey. Most of it is made of cheap "mystery" sweeteners, illegally imported from China, right under the nose of the FDA.

#2 - The fluoride that's dripped into municipal water supplies is actually a highly toxic industrial chemical byproduct
This scam is exploding in the faces of all the ignorant dentists and doctors who have been pushing this poison for years.

#3 - Flu vaccines often contain live flu viruses and actually cause the flu as a way to worsen the flu season and scare more people into buying vaccines
It's also true with MMR vaccines, which cause the measles. Flu vaccines are the greatest medical hoax that has ever been perpetrated on the world:

4. Ron Paul is deliberately stripped out of mainstream news reports, online polls and debate coverage in order to "game the system" against him
The power elite don't really want "fair and open" elections in America, you see. It's all about rigging the system to make sure a globalist puppet gets elected instead of a Man of the People.
#5 - The United States government openly trafficks illegal guns into Mexico as a way to cause gun violence in the USA
It all seemed so very clever until they got caught, and now it just seems flatly criminal. So why can the federal government run illegal guns and nothing happens to them, but if you or I do it, we go to prison for a long, long time?
#6 - Prestigious U.S. hospitals are widely engaged in black market organ trafficking and organ transplants
And why not? It's profitable, and they can claim they're "saving lives!" Make no mistake: the organ transplant industry is steeped in dark, psychopathic criminal activity.

#7 - The child sex slave industry is huge, highly profitable, and found everywhere across America (and the world)
You wouldn't have believed this, probably, until the whole Penn State scandal recently made headline news around the world. As everybody now knows, Penn State sports officials routinely raped young children, even pimping them out to other criminal rapists who paid big money to rape young boys. This went on for 15 years right inside a prestigious university, right here in America.
Are you shocked? You shouldn't be. Alex Jones has been sounding the alarm about this for a decade. Nobody listened to him. They couldn't believe it was real. People would rather bury their heads in the sand than face reality.
And yet, this Penn State scandal just scratches the surface. The far deeper horrifying truth of all this is that Child Protective Services routinely kidnaps young American children and sells them into sex slavery — so-called "white slavery." That story has not yet been covered by the mainstream media.

#8 - Commercial chickens are routinely fed arsenic, and commercial cows are routinely fed chicken poop
Oh, you didn't know that? When you eat conventional beef, you're eating meat from cows who created that meat by consuming chicken poop. Yumm! Can I have some more poop on that burger, please?
#9 - "Natural" foods and cereals are routinely made with genetically modified ingredients
Oh, you thought "natural" meant better than organic? Non-GMO? Stop getting suckered by the cereal companies and dishonest food conglomerates. Know what you're really eating:

#10 - The global banking industry is a criminal racket that steals wealth from working class People and redistributes it to the global wealthy elite
You wouldn't have believed this five years ago, but now, looking at your own bank account, the job you lost, the house you can't sell and the health care you can't afford, it's all sinking in: The global financial system is an engineered con that suckers working-class people into giving up all their wealth, piece by piece, until they die bankrupt. Indentured servitude...

#11 - The U.S. government routinely conspires with pharmaceutical giants to conduct criminal, inhumane medical experiments on innocent people
Recent revelations about the U.S. government's secret medical experiments in Guatemala are just the tip of the iceberg here. Dr. Jona Salk, inventor of the polio vaccine, also ran unethical medical experiments on people. In fact, the entire history of modern medicine (pharmaceuticals, vaccines, chemotherapy and more) is something of a "house of horrors" of inhumane medical experiments on innocent victims.

[Acheron]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0he-LZNzVg0

[Aletheia*]

I actually knew about #3. However, I'm under the impression that they're doing it for so your body can create an immunity against it by putting the flew virus inside the body.

[Fairy Poppins]

I knew about all of these things.

No, really.

We should talk, Zack.

[-A-]

I find it funny that most of the article sources, are from their own website.

I only went through number 3, and really they're just grasping at straws.

[Revolution]

Knew about a lot of this. #4 made me laugh. Everything I have seen of Ron Paul is him making a fool of himself. I wouldn't be surprised if they're doing this on purpose as well. Very interesting article, what kind of source is the website? I saw a lot of their articles came from websites a lot like them, what kind of site is it?

[Ibanez]

No mention of 9/11? They didn't want to go all in, huh.

[BDF]

I'm allowing my mind to get polluted with all this kind of stuff. I don't buy into what the government says, or most people for that matter, neither will I just buy into this so easily. Until I see further proof backing it all up I'm sceptical. Some of these points I knew or at least am not surprised about. For some of these points, the proof is all around me (like no.10... although not exactly how I see it but close enough), but others like number 8... that chickens are fed arsenic... really??? Where's the proof? What does anyone stand to gain from something like that? What's the motive behind it? I see none. In fact it's counter productive. If you're going to kill your customer base off with arsenic, you're reducing demand for your product and losing money because of it.

As for point 3, it is possible that unintentionally some of the virus would make it through alive. Doesn't rule out the possibility that it might be done on purpose. I've never taken any such vaccines, and in fact I get sick a lot less than most people I know.

[Fairy Poppins]

Originally Posted by BDF

I've never taken any such vaccines, and in fact I get sick a lot less than most people I know.

Probably because your immune system wasn't flooded with chemicals when you were only a few months old.

I'm not getting my children (when I have them) vaccinated either.

[JKmadu619]

If number 8 is some pro-vegatarian thing, thing about this:

Your "organic" vegtables are fertilized with the cow crap, after they've apparently ate chicken crap.

My parents, grandparents and great grandparents were cow farmers, and I would know that this method is extremely uncommon, especially in nothern states and Canada. It does happen in the south on occasion by eccentric farmers though. However their meat is then usually cheaper because it's lower quality.

- Justin

[Marguerite]

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

I'm not getting my children (when I have them) vaccinated either.

It's really fine for people to believe these bullshit conspiracy theories but it really makes me angry when people inflict their idiocy onto their children.

The pharmaceutical industry is not behind some Lex Luther style plot to make us ill. I have no doubts that the industry likes to trick us into buying unnecessary medication (and let me make this clear- Vaccinations are COMPLETELY necessary), but the idea that they are poisioning us on purpose is beyond ridiculous.

If you want to risk your children's health, and their lives potentially, on some half baked theory than the government is plotting with the pharmaceutical industry to kill us because some crazy fringe doctors, dumb bloggers and airhead actresses say so, fine. But I'd rather listen to the respected people within the medical community and protect them against things like the Measels, Chicken Pox, Hep B, Whooping Cough and countless other conditions.

By the way guys, did you know that the government invented the electric slide to take societies attention away from AIDS? It's totally legit, I read it on someone's Myspace page once, and it had a link to political anaylist from the 80's who spent a couple of years in jail (for being TOO honest?? Smells fishy to me). Anyone who doesn't believe this is clearly too feeble minded to read between the lines and just listens to any crap the government wants to feed them. Believe your lies, you naive sheeple, hope it makes you feel better at night.

[Fairy Poppins]

Marguerite, I didn't make this decision over night, based on some whimsical, half-baked "facts" that I found on a website. I've been looking into it for over 5 years, taking information from various offline sources.

And I wasn't looking for anyone's approval on it.

Your opinions and insults have no effect on my view.

But thanks for sharing.

[Marguerite]

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

Marguerite, I didn't make this decision over night, based on some whimsical, half-baked "facts" that I found on a website. I've been looking into it for over 5 years, taking information from various offline sources.

And I wasn't looking for anyone's approval on it.

Your opinions and insults have no effect on my view.

But thanks for sharing.

You don't need my approval. I just hope your kids don't die too soon because you think their health is better left in the hands of sunshine and organic food rather than medicine that has saved so many lives over the course of several lifetimes.

I'm not attempting to insulting you, either, I'm usually pretty civil on these boards. I just get angry when child abuse is involved.

[BDF]

Originally Posted by Marguerite

You don't need my approval. I just hope your kids don't die too soon because you think their health is better left in the hands of sunshine and organic food rather than medicine that has saved so many lives over the course of several lifetimes.

I'm not attempting to insulting you, either, I'm usually pretty civil on these boards. I just get angry when child abuse is involved.

Mhm... I don't have to read very far and wide to get a good idea, that over-doing it with detergents, vaccines and medication during childhood can significantly f**k with their bodies and immune system. Sure, some basic sanitary habits are good, such as washing your hands before food and after the toilet etc.

But I hear frequently of paranoid parents who will wipe the handlebars of a mini-shopping trolley with a disinfecting towel before they let their kids touch it. That kind of stuff is simply dumb. Kids have to get ill, if they are to develop their immune system at all. Doing it artificially with vaccinations can never make up for it practically, since you'd have to expose your kids to thousands of various strains in vaccines. It's just not practical, or economical, or particularly pleasant.

All this stuff with hay-fever rising, and all sorts of other allergies due to malfunctioning immune systems, is largely because of this whole damn culture of parents keeping the house so clean that you could probably safely eat your food off the floor, even if it's a jam toast which lands butter side down. And I CAN quote myself as an example... like I said I rarely get ill and have no allergies whatsoever, and my parents weren't paranoid with respect to keeping my room disinfected etc. In fact I'd say they were very relaxed in that respect. I also spent some of my childhood in Brazil, with some frikkin nasty viruses... which probably strengthened me... but those kinds of things are better avoided.

[~Mr. Self Destruct~]

Originally Posted by BDF

Mhm... I don't have to read very far and wide to get a good idea, that over-doing it with detergents, vaccines and medication during childhood can significantly f**k with their bodies and immune system. Sure, some basic sanitary habits are good, such as washing your hands before food and after the toilet etc.

But I hear frequently of paranoid parents who will wipe the handlebars of a mini-shopping trolley with a disinfecting towel before they let their kids touch it. That kind of stuff is simply dumb. Kids have to get ill, if they are to develop their immune system at all. Doing it artificially with vaccinations can never make up for it practically, since you'd have to expose your kids to thousands of various strains in vaccines. It's just not practical, or economical, or particularly pleasant.

All this stuff with hay-fever rising, and all sorts of other allergies due to malfunctioning immune systems, is largely because of this whole damn culture of parents keeping the house so clean that you could probably safely eat your food off the floor, even if it's a jam toast which lands butter side down. And I CAN quote myself as an example... like I said I rarely get ill and have no allergies whatsoever, and my parents weren't paranoid with respect to keeping my room disinfected etc. In fact I'd say they were very relaxed in that respect. I also spent some of my childhood in Brazil, with some frikkin nasty viruses... which probably strengthened me... but those kinds of things are better avoided.

We're not talking about obssessive sanitation, simply vaccines which protect against life-threatening, hideous diseases.

[Fairy Poppins]

Originally Posted by Marguerite

I'm not attempting to insulting you, either, I'm usually pretty civil on these boards. I just get angry when child abuse is involved.

And do you not think that accusing me of child abuse is insulting?

I have cared for children for the past 4 years.

I am entering into a career as a Paediatric Nurse.

How clear do I need to make it? I deeply care about the well-being of children and get equally angry when true child abuse happens.

Avoiding giving my future children vaccines is not child abuse because I feel I would be doing what is best for them.

It's not the exposure to the dead virus I am concerned about. If vaccines contained that and nothing else, I would consider using them. It's all the other shit they contain which I do not want being pumped into my baby.

I would rather take the small risk of them coming into contact with these diseases in modern society, than compromise their immune systems with chemicals so that they are forever dependent on pharmaceutical companies in some way or another.

Also, in protecting them against one disease, they are being made more susceptible to everything else. Again, considering how scarce diseases like Polio are in our society, I don't feel that this is worth it.

You will think what you will and I am not going to bother trying to change your view because there are millions of people like you. And I guess the whole vaccination process has relied on you people to wipe out a lot of hideous diseases. But I for one am not going to compromise my own child's lifelong health for the greater good of everyone.

And finally, it's not a good idea to go around accusing people of child abuse just because they don't share your views on best practice. I personally feel that giving children vaccines is child abuse, considering how the child suffers as a result (and not just in the week following when they are really sick, but how they are more likely to suffer with smaller illnesses for the rest of their life). But am I going to accuse you of child abuse? No, because it's your decision and, just like every other good parent, you would be doing what you felt was best for your child.

[Snufkin]

I agree with Marguerite, as per usual, and think the whole thread is riddled with conspiracy theories and bullshit.

[Acheron]

OK, so I took a quick glance at their website. First point I'd like to make is that I find it deeply suspicious that they're selling all kinds of detox pills and vitamin supplements. Sure, they have absolutely no vested interest in convincing people that they're being poisoned by the government.

Anyway, onto deconstructing an article:

http://www.naturalnews.com/033998_in...ctiveness.html

This article, because it's the second one I clicked on and I couldn't be bothered to write about water fluoridation. It's about as painfully bad as I'd expected. They're arguing that you can't claim that flu vaccines are 60% effective, because less than 60% of those tested contract influenza in the first place.

Originally Posted by Natural News

What we found is that the "60% effectiveness" claim is utterly absurd and highly misleading. For starters, most people think that "60% effectiveness" means that for every 100 people injected with the flu shot, 60 of them won't get the flu!

OK, this made me chuckle. First, how can they possibly know how people interpret that finding? Second, those same people would be thrilled to learn that, by applying this test, they'd discover that the flu vaccine is actually 97% effective. Their argument hinges on the fact that in the control group, 2.7% of subjects caught the flu, while in the group given the vaccine 1.2% caught the flu.

Originally Posted by Natural News

Note that this is very, very close to my own analysis of the effectiveness vaccines as I wrote back in September of 2010 in an article entitled, Evidence-based vaccinations: A scientific look at the missing science behind flu season vaccines (http://www.naturalnews.com/029641_v...)

In that article, I proclaimed that flu vaccines "don't work on 99 out of 100 people." Apparently, if you believe the new study, I was off by 0.5 people out of 100 (at least in adults, see below for more discussion of effectiveness on children).

This bit is especially painful.The fact that the difference between the numbers was 1.5% doesn't mean that the flu vaccine only works on 1.5% of people. Most of the people in both groups never caught the flu. That doesn't mean that the vaccine is ineffective, it means that its effectiveness was never tested. While further down the article the author compares this to a car that only runs 1.5% of the time, a better analogy would be car insurance. If I buy car insurance and never get into an accident, does that mean that my insurer wouldn't have paid out if I had? Of course not, but that's the logic used here.

But OK, there's still a bit of a discrepancy. In adults, the actual effectiveness rate was a little under 57%, according to Natural News. So why 60%? Natural News claims that this is because the pro-vaccine scientists used children as well as adults in their results. But the Lancet meta-analysis found a pooled efficacy of 59% in adults 18-65, and did not find trials that met inclusion criteria for children of most ages (http://www.thelancet.com/journals/la...295-X/abstract). Apparently NN didn't even read the article that they're attacking.

Once the section on statistics ends, it's a list of unsourced speculations. It's all "may"s and "perhaps"s and "what if"s and scare quotes. Oh, and their 7th problem is that "the Lancet is, itself, a pro-vaccine propaganda mouthpiece funded by the vaccine industry!", and the Alfred P. Sloan foundation that funded it is "the very same non-profit that gives grant money to Wikipedia (which has an obvious pro-vaccine slant), and is staffed by pharma loyalists".Which would presumably be why the Lancet piece that they linked to found that:

Originally Posted by The Lancet

Influenza vaccines can provide moderate protection against virologically confirmed influenza, but such protection is greatly reduced or absent in some seasons. Evidence for protection in adults aged 65 years or older is lacking. LAIVs consistently show highest efficacy in young children (aged 6 months to 7 years). New vaccines with improved clinical efficacy and effectiveness are needed to further reduce influenza-related morbidity and mortality.

That's some awesome propaganda right there.

[deadlyninjabee]

Yeah, it all sounds like a load of shit to me.

[JKmadu619]

While it is true that exposure to dirt and some dust can actually be helpful to building the immune system, and decreased the risk of asthama or lung sensitivity later in life, denying a child potentially life-saving vaccinations (The seventh grade ones especially.) is very important to ensure they don't die some horrific death from hepatitis or the sorts.

- Justin

[BDF]

Originally Posted by ~Mr. Self Destruct~

We're not talking about obssessive sanitation, simply vaccines which protect against life-threatening, hideous diseases.

To take what I said word for word and 100% literally is foolish. I thought it's obvious that I was exaggerating. You look like you missed my point.

My overall point was that kids should be left to develop naturally, with as little chemical interference as possible. Our bodies evolved to have an immune system so that they put it to practical use. Otherwise there's no point in even having it.

I would oppose taking vaccines to any viruses unless they are genuinely deadly strains, such as swine or bird flu, or some tropical virus. Just generally not a good idea to become dependant on whatever chemicals, drugs etc, and I get the impression a lot of people take flu jabs simply because they think it'l "bulletproof" them from the illness, so that they don't waste time being sick. What happens when there's no flu jab around suddenly? You'd get so sick the next winter you'd probably get sacked from the human gene pool. Let your body develop by itself as much as possible. If you start throwing chemicals at it, you're just going to upset the balance probably. It's very difficult to accurately simulate what long term effects something like that may have, just like it's difficult to simulate almost anything in the long term in fact. Research goes on... but this kind of stuff takes ages.

This doesn't apply to people with some sort of disabilities. Special conditions apply to them, and it's understandable that they'd take more regular flu jabs (just for example), to avoid weakening them further with illness.

[The Morrigan]

Some of these I could believe but even then I'd be a bit sceptical (except #10 since that's just stating the obvious). Maybe if they had some REAL sources rather than just links to more of their site and even the ones not from their site just look like a bunch of conspiracy theories like other people have said.

Even if most of these things were true some of them I don't even care about. I don't care if I'm eating GM food, I thoroughly agree with it.

As for the flu virus thing I have no idea what that's like in America but I'm fairly sure that in the UK even if they're using a 'live' virus that it's been (can't remember of the proper term for this) 'deactivated' so it doesn't actually cause too much harm since some vaccines only work if a live, 'deactivated' virus is used as killing them destroys the proteins on the outside of their membrane so antibodies and immune-response cells can't attach and recognise them (or something along those lines).

[Dream]

Where is the evidence for any of this?

And don't vaccines always carry the disease they are trying to prevent except in certain cases?

[✖Ice✖]

Jesse Venturas conspiracy episode about Fema camps was actually banned from airing on Tv by Homeland security. so red flag in america!!

[BruceLeeDemarcus]

i knew about #3, but not the others. Wow!

[Sythan]

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

And do you not think that accusing me of child abuse is insulting?

I have cared for children for the past 4 years.

I am entering into a career as a Paediatric Nurse.

How clear do I need to make it? I deeply care about the well-being of children and get equally angry when true child abuse happens.

Avoiding giving my future children vaccines is not child abuse because I feel I would be doing what is best for them.

It's not the exposure to the dead virus I am concerned about. If vaccines contained that and nothing else, I would consider using them. It's all the other shit they contain which I do not want being pumped into my baby.

I would rather take the small risk of them coming into contact with these diseases in modern society, than compromise their immune systems with chemicals so that they are forever dependent on pharmaceutical companies in some way or another.

Also, in protecting them against one disease, they are being made more susceptible to everything else. Again, considering how scarce diseases like Polio are in our society, I don't feel that this is worth it.

You will think what you will and I am not going to bother trying to change your view because there are millions of people like you. And I guess the whole vaccination process has relied on you people to wipe out a lot of hideous diseases. But I for one am not going to compromise my own child's lifelong health for the greater good of everyone.

And finally, it's not a good idea to go around accusing people of child abuse just because they don't share your views on best practice. I personally feel that giving children vaccines is child abuse, considering how the child suffers as a result (and not just in the week following when they are really sick, but how they are more likely to suffer with smaller illnesses for the rest of their life). But am I going to accuse you of child abuse? No, because it's your decision and, just like every other good parent, you would be doing what you felt was best for your child.

If there was a vaccine for HIV/AIDS prevention, you wouldn't have your child vaccinated? You're entering as a pediatric nurse, but think that vaccines are a scheme by the health industry to keep people sick, without any factual evidence of such, and will refuse to vaccinate your own children, that's not caring deeply for children's well being, that's putting them at risk for serious health problems or even death. Just because you think you know what's best for your child, doesn't mean it isn't child abuse or that it's true. That's like me saying my child doesn't need to eat or drink anything because I know what's best for my child, that thinking is quite frankly dangerous.

For your "I think that giving children vaccines is child abuse", I refer to three points, HIV/AIDS, the H1N1 virus and the Ebola virus. All are ailments are things that modern humans aren't able to fight themselves, therefore, if you refused to vaccinate your child, (If one were available for HIV/AIDS and Ebola) you would be killing them, not helping them.

If you still think giving vaccines to children is child abuse(You do realize as a pediatric nurse, you will be giving vaccines, right?) I think you need to switch careers.

[MichWolverineFreak]

I knew all of this, but as for the Ron Paul thing, I think the Republican party and all rich people are corrupt in general.

[Guile]

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

Again, considering how scarce diseases like Polio are in our society, I don't feel that this is worth it.

Scarce, you know, because we have vaccines to avoid contracting and spreading them... Doh!

[Fairy Poppins]

Originally Posted by Sythan

If there was a vaccine for HIV/AIDS prevention, you wouldn't have your child vaccinated?

No I wouldn't, because HIV can easily be avoided. It's not something you contract just by walking past someone in the street.

Originally Posted by Sythan

You're entering as a pediatric nurse, but think that vaccines are a scheme by the health industry to keep people sick, without any factual evidence of such

You misunderstand me. Like everyone else, I know they're a scheme to wipe out diseases. But they make people dependent on pharmaceutial companies as a by-product of that.

Why else would they contain so many other chemicals?

Originally Posted by Sythan

and will refuse to vaccinate your own children, that's not caring deeply for children's well being, that's putting them at risk for serious health problems or even death. Just because you think you know what's best for your child, doesn't mean it isn't child abuse or that it's true. That's like me saying my child doesn't need to eat or drink anything because I know what's best for my child, that thinking is quite frankly dangerous.

You can't compare what all organisms need to survive (nutrients) with something like vaccinations which are not necessary for survival unless the child was to come into contact with something that they couldn't fight off.

Originally Posted by Sythan

For your "I think that giving children vaccines is child abuse", I refer to three points, HIV/AIDS, the H1N1 virus and the Ebola virus. All are ailments are things that modern humans aren't able to fight themselves, therefore, if you refused to vaccinate your child, (If one were available for HIV/AIDS and Ebola) you would be killing them, not helping them.

ONLY IF THEY CAME INTO CONTACT WITH THE DISEASE.

Originally Posted by Sythan

If you still think giving vaccines to children is child abuse(You do realize as a pediatric nurse, you will be giving vaccines, right?) I think you need to switch careers.

I don't view it as child abuse in the same way I view paedophilia, violence towards children, etc. But if someone is going to accuse me of being abusive for not giving my children vaccinations, I will argue the point that giving children what usually prove to be unnecessary vaccines is equally abusive.

Also, what I will give to other children with their parent's permission is different to what I would give my own. Obviously I understand that I cannot make the decisions for every parent and, if my call of duty extends to giving vaccinations, I will do so.

Originally Posted by Guile

Scarce, you know, because we have vaccines to avoid contracting and spreading them... Doh!

I know. I already acknowledged that:

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

You will think what you will and I am not going to bother trying to change your view because there are millions of people like you. And I guess the whole vaccination process has relied on you people to wipe out a lot of hideous diseases. But I for one am not going to compromise my own child's lifelong health for the greater good of everyone."

[BDF]

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

No I wouldn't, because HIV can easily be avoided.

Depends what kind of crowds some people mix in... but I wouldn't imagine it being a problem for 99% of kids on the planet.

If someone knows they're the type to go for one night stands several times a week, perhaps they also live in Africa where HIV is rampant, then I'd recommend a vaccine for it... if there was one. But then there are also scores of other venereal diseases that a person would be a risk off in this scenario... if I was them I'd probably find it easier, more economical and convenient to just change my ways.

[Marguerite]

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

And do you not think that accusing me of child abuse is insulting?

I have cared for children for the past 4 years.

I am entering into a career as a Paediatric Nurse.

How clear do I need to make it? I deeply care about the well-being of children and get equally angry when true child abuse happens.

Avoiding giving my future children vaccines is not child abuse because I feel I would be doing what is best for them.

It's not the exposure to the dead virus I am concerned about. If vaccines contained that and nothing else, I would consider using them. It's all the other shit they contain which I do not want being pumped into my baby.

I would rather take the small risk of them coming into contact with these diseases in modern society, than compromise their immune systems with chemicals so that they are forever dependent on pharmaceutical companies in some way or another.

Also, in protecting them against one disease, they are being made more susceptible to everything else. Again, considering how scarce diseases like Polio are in our society, I don't feel that this is worth it.

You will think what you will and I am not going to bother trying to change your view because there are millions of people like you. And I guess the whole vaccination process has relied on you people to wipe out a lot of hideous diseases. But I for one am not going to compromise my own child's lifelong health for the greater good of everyone.

And finally, it's not a good idea to go around accusing people of child abuse just because they don't share your views on best practice. I personally feel that giving children vaccines is child abuse, considering how the child suffers as a result (and not just in the week following when they are really sick, but how they are more likely to suffer with smaller illnesses for the rest of their life). But am I going to accuse you of child abuse? No, because it's your decision and, just like every other good parent, you would be doing what you felt was best for your child.

I don't think you're making the decision to not vaccinate them to abuse them, I think you're well intentioned. I just happen to think you're wrong and putting your children at great risk.

I'm not going to bother going into much of the semantics. That's really your job because I have the majority of the population and the medical community on my side. Whatever I point out, you will come back with some story about some healthy child you knew who got sick after vaccination, or some fringe doctor's ideas on the topic... because that's how conspiricy theories are formed.

Do you think the people who made 9/11 loose change care about the large amounts of evidence that seem to prove 9/11 was NOT an inside job? Of course not, because they have some fuzzy photos and circumstantial evidence about the timing of media releases and what not.

I would rather risk the slim chance of the minor (almost non existant) side effects of vaccinations than expose them to the diseases that they could have been protected against had I been intelligent enough to get them vaccinated. You talked about polio. Yes, Polio is rare in our society. Why? Vaccinations. But I guess you already know that as;

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

And I guess the whole vaccination process has relied on you people to wipe out a lot of hideous diseases. But I for one am not going to compromise my own child's lifelong health for the greater good of everyone.

I guess you owe us all a thank you then for protecting your future children where you wont. Not that it will protect them if they come into connect with someone with similar values as you. To be honest, I can't even wrap my head around how wildly irresponsible the above statement is, not just of a (future) parent but just as a human being living in our society.

[Fairy Poppins]

Originally Posted by Marguerite

I just happen to think you're wrong and putting your children at great risk.

That's fine, we're all entitled to our opinions. But being wrong in another person's view doesn't = child abuse. And child abuse is what you said.

Originally Posted by Marguerite

I'm not going to bother going into much of the semantics. That's really your job because I have the majority of the population and the medical community on my side. Whatever I point out, you will come back with some story about some healthy child you knew who got sick after vaccination, or some fringe doctor's ideas on the topic... because that's how conspiricy theories are formed.

Do you think the people who made 9/11 loose change care about the large amounts of evidence that seem to prove 9/11 was NOT an inside job? Of course not, because they have some fuzzy photos and circumstantial evidence about the timing of media releases and what not.

First of all, I don't view vaccinations in the same way as 9/11. As far as I'm concerned, nothing good has come out of 9/11, whereas clearly vaccinations have proved successful in wiping out diseases.

But conspiracy or no conspiracy, I still wouldn't have all those chemicals injected into my baby.

Originally Posted by Marguerite

I would rather risk the slim chance of the minor (almost non existant) side effects of vaccinations than expose them to the diseases that they could have been protected against had I been intelligent enough to get them vaccinated. You talked about polio. Yes, Polio is rare in our society. Why? Vaccinations. But I guess you already know that as;

Deciding to get your children vaccinated doesn't show any more intelligence than those who don't. It all depends on what background information you have and therefore what angle you're approaching the topic from.

Originally Posted by Marguerite

I guess you owe us all a thank you then for protecting your future children where you wont.

Of course I will protect them. I just won't compromise their already fragile immune system with chemicals at a few months old.

Originally Posted by Marguerite

Not that it will protect them if they come into connect with someone with similar values as you.

Just because another child hasn't been vaccinated doesn't mean they will have one of these diseases.

Originally Posted by Marguerite

To be honest, I can't even wrap my head around how wildly irresponsible the above statement is, not just of a (future) parent but just as a human being living in our society.

I realise it sounds harsh and, if we were living at a time when these diseases were still prevalent, then I would be more inclined to "do my bit". But we're not; the majority of people do not get sick from these diseases any more (and yes, I realise that this is because of the vaccinations, but that doesn't change the fact that they don't).

So yes, I am thankful to the millions of parents who got their children vaccinated decades ago when these diseases were still rife. But not so much the people now who are just doing it because it has become customary.

Also, I don't view it in terms of, "Thanks for vaccinating your kids, it saves me the job of getting mine done." Even if the situation arose where lots of other parents weren't vaccinating, I still wouldn't immediately run out to vaccinate my children, because I don't feel there is any need for us to keep continually vaccinating children and compromising their own natural immunity to other illnesses, when the chance of them needing to make "use" of the vaccination is so slight.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

Probably because your immune system wasn't flooded with chemicals when you were only a few months old.

I'm not getting my children (when I have them) vaccinated either.

I assume you're willing to take full responsibility when they die of flu as well?


You're wishing death upon your future children, that's not a particularly nice thing to do.

Let me guess, you also think that MMR vaccines give children autism?

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

Avoiding giving my future children vaccines is not child abuse because I feel I would be doing what is best for them.

I beat my children into unconsciousness, it's not child abuse because I feel I would be doing what is best for them.

See why that reasoning doesn't work?

[Fairy Poppins]

Originally Posted by Cosmo

I assume you're willing to take full responsibility when they die of flu as well?

If I was going to give my child a vaccine, the Flu vaccine would not be top of my list.

I do not believe that child Flu vaccinations are necessary unless the child is either very sickly anyway or their immune system is compromised by something like AIDS.

Lots of the children I worked with hadn't had Flu vaccinations. When they got ill with Flu they didn't die from it because they were generally healthy and could fight it off.

See, this is what I hate about the whole vaccination process. You get your child vaccinated for a bunch of diseases, then their natural immunity is so compromised that you're forced to get them vaccinated against other less serious illnesses. And the whole thing becomes a vicious circle, with more and more chemicals being injected time after time.

Originally Posted by Cosmo

You're wishing death upon your future children, that's not a particularly nice thing to do.

If we're going down that road, I won't let my 11 year-old kids cross the busy road near me because it's wishing death on them.

I'm taking a risk but not vaccinating, yes, but a calculated one. And taking calculated risks is something we all do everyday.

Originally Posted by Cosmo

Let me guess, you also think that MMR vaccines give children autism?

I haven't looked into this particular area enough to say yes or no at the moment.

Originally Posted by Cosmo

I beat my children into unconsciousness, it's not child abuse because I feel I would be doing what is best for them.

See why that reasoning doesn't work?

If you bothered to do any research into beating children into unconsciousness, you'd quickly see that it has no benefits.

Conversely, I have done my reseach and have found that not giving vaccinations does have benefits.

So I think you'll find it's your reasoning that doesn't work.

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

If I was going to give my child a vaccine, the Flu vaccine would not be top of my list.

I do not believe that child Flu vaccinations are necessary unless the child is either very sickly anyway or their immune system is compromised by something like AIDS.

Lots of the children I worked with hadn't had Flu vaccinations. When they got ill with Flu they didn't die from it because they were generally healthy and could fight it off.

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

See, this is what I hate about the whole vaccination process. You get your child vaccinated for a bunch of diseases, then their natural immunity is so compromised that you're forced to get them vaccinated against other less serious illnesses. And the whole thing becomes a vicious circle, with more and more chemicals being injected time after time.

If we're going down that road, I won't let my 11 year-old kids cross the busy road near me because it's wishing death on them.

I agree actually somewhat. I think we do need less vaccinations, our natural defenses are becoming weaker and weaker. That said, I hope you agree that it's a good idea to be vaccinated against some, because our bodies are not capable of fighting off all of them.

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

If you bothered to do any research into beating children into unconsciousness, you'd quickly see that it has no benefits.

Conversely, I have done my reseach and have found that not giving vaccinations does have benefits.

So I think you'll find it's your reasoning that doesn't work.

I lol'd then realised you were being serious.

You believe not getting vaccinated has benefits? Fine. That's your opinion.
I happen to believe that beating the shit out of my kids every night is good for building character.

Do you really not see the double standard of logic?

[Fairy Poppins]

Originally Posted by Cosmo

I agree actually somewhat.

Someone somewhat agrees with me? Flippin' 'eck.

Originally Posted by Cosmo

I think we do need less vaccinations, our natural defenses are becoming weaker and weaker. That said, I hope you agree that it's a good idea to be vaccinated against some, because our bodies are not capable of fighting off all of them.

I think that vaccinations are a good idea if the child/person is in an area where a certain disease is prevalent.

For example, if I took a child on holiday to a country where malaria is rife, I would get them vaccinated.

But as for vaccinating them against something when there's no real danger of them coming into contact with the disease, no. That's the problem; we're just vaccinating for the sake of it without giving any thought to the likelihood of exposure.

Originally Posted by Cosmo

I lol'd then realised you were being serious.

You believe not getting vaccinated has benefits? Fine. That's your opinion.
I happen to believe that beating the shit out of my kids every night is good for building character.

Do you really not see the double standard of logic?

The difference is that if you were found to be beating your kids up (particularly to the point of unconsciousness), it wouldn't take long for them to be put into care.

However, the worst the authorities would do if they found out your child wasn't vaccinated, is try to convince you why you should.

In simpler terms, one is illegal, one isn't. See my point?

[Cosmo]

Originally Posted by Fairy Poppins

In simpler terms, one is illegal, one isn't. See my point?

Legality =/= morality

[Fairy Poppins]

Originally Posted by Cosmo

Legality =/= morality

True, but child abuse laws are there for exactly that reason - to find some common ground on what should and shouldn't happen to children, rather than leave everything down to the morals (or lack of) of the individual.

If not vaccinating was considered child abuse, it would be illegal to do so.

Beating children is most definitely child abuse and no court of law will accept the defense of "I was trying to build their character". A case of non-vaccination wouldn't even make it to court.

I agree that if I was to avoid vaccinating my child against a disease and then lock them in a cupboard with a child who had that disease, then yes, it is worth kicking up a fuss about.

But I am in no way doing that.

[JKmadu619]

Originally Posted by Cosmo

[color=DimGray] You believe not getting vaccinated has benefits? Fine. That's your opinion.
I happen to believe that beating the shit out of my kids every night is good for building character.

This make me laugh so hard.

I completely agree that vaccinations are positive, and it's only propoganda against them instead of scientific research by a well-respected institution.

- Justin

[BDF]

I don't get how the hell you can compare beating kids up to not giving them vaccines. We're not talking about "building character"... where if someone's character is good or bad is a matter of opinion anyway, we're talking about health risks... and beating kids up certainly poses more health risks than not doing so.

Vaccines should only be given when needed. Full stop. Needed = without it you'd probably die, where the probability of death is attributed to coming in contact with the disease in the first place, catching it, and the chances of you recovering from it naturally. There's a chance you can die from anything... I might trip over walking down the stairs and break my neck, but the chances of that are so insignificant that I don't see this as a good enough reason for me not to use stairs, people would say "bullshit" if I gave them that as a reason. Few people die from flu... 3000 to 4000 a year, out of 60,000,000 in the UK, and I'l bet most of those deaths are attributed to older people, or people who's immune system are compromised some other way, or people who are just plain stupid, get sick, then go play in the snow, and don't take the meds etc. Also somewhat attributed to more vicious strains for which there are no vaccines anyway because those strains develop and evolve too fast for medical science to keep up. Even assuming that these deaths are evenly spread across all society, then dying of flu for any person has a chance of 0.005%. It's minuscule. Other more rational, and sensible procedures can be taken to reduce chances of illness: good diet, exercise, balanced vitamin intake, healthy sleeping patterns, dressing appropriately, keeping your house at the right temperature, not exposing yourself to sudden drastic temperature changes too frequently etc.