Bedrock Of Vaccination Theory Crumbles As Science Reveals Antibodies Not Necessary To Fight Viruses

[The Eagle]

in fact without the vaccine the mice (both normal and mutated) die when subjected to high dosages of the virus.

High dosages of a virus are not a natural event, therefore that observation is completely meaningless.

[fluffy666]

Much of the concern surrounding vaccines seems to be rooted not in the process of vaccination itself but the additives that may or may not be included in the shots - mercury compounds, adjuvants such as squalene etc.

As an aside, many moons ago I worked with a prof who spent his time irradiating rates at different doses and then saw how long they lived. The longest living rats were on the receiving end of doses higher than natural background levels.

Much of the concern around vaccines is driven by parental squemishness, massively encouraged by lawyers who would like a nice cut.. so it's more a case of 'what can we possibly think of now that our last complaint has been shown to be a load of cobblers'.

And, of course, since nowadays we don't have direct experience of acquantiances dropping dead of being cripples by vaccine-preventable diseases, people think that they are not really taking a risk by not vaccinating.

[The Eagle]

the one which misrepresents the original study and which draws a the ridiculous conclusion that forms the title of this thread.

That is your interpretation, fact is there has never been any scientific proof that vaccines provide immunity against a specific virus, in fact there is plenty of evidence of people who were vaccinated and still got sick with the virus that they were supposed to be immune against.

[The Eagle]

Much of the concern around vaccines

Concern about vaccines existed way before the MMR issue, only before the MMR issue debate about efficacy of vaccines was mostly relegated to the scientific community that has always been divided about the efficacy of vaccines.

[Tenubracon]

I have never had a flu in my whole life despite I only started taking vitamin D recently to see what the fuss is about.

Many people have never had measles, polio, rubella and a whole host of other nasties, either. That's because of vaccination. Even if one child isn't vacciniated, he/she is protected through herd immuinity, where the lack of available hosts stops a disease spreading. The increasing anti-vaccination nonsense reduces the uptake of vaccinations, which in turn reduces herd immunity, making it much more likely that children whose parents don't get them vaccininated will catch these diseases. Measles is no fun, and can be fatal, so why take the chance?

[Tenubracon]

That is your interpretation, fact is there has never been any scientific proof that vaccines provide immunity against a specific virus, in fact there is plenty of evidence of people who were vaccinated and still got sick with the virus that they were supposed to be immune against.

Again, I give you small pox. Not literally, of course, it's been eradicated.

[Tenubracon]

High dosages of a virus are not a natural event, therefore that observation is completely meaningless.

Really? High dosages of viruses never occur naturally?

[The Eagle]

Again, I give you small pox. Not literally, of course, it's been eradicated.

Do you have any conclusive proof that small pox has been eradicated by vaccines?

I remember seeing studies showing that the incidence of small pox was already fading way before the vaccine was introduced, most likely due to increased hygiene and other environmental factors.

[The Eagle]

Really? High dosages of viruses never occur naturally?

You tell me if you know otherwise.

[Tenubracon]

You tell me if you know otherwise.

You made the claim, how about you back it up?

[The Eagle]

You made the claim, how about you back it up?

Don't play stupid, you started talking about high doses of viruses, so show me evidence where they happen in real life (at the levels used in the experiment).

And you haven't given me conclusive proof that small pox has been eradicated by vaccines yet either.

[Tenubracon]

Do you have any conclusive proof that small pox has been eradicated by vaccines?

I remember seeing studies showing that the incidence of small pox was already fading way before the vaccine was introduced, most likely due to increased hygiene and other environmental factors.

Well yes, that would make sense. Containment of infected individuals was another major strategy that helped to reduce infections. However, the extinction of the virus in the wild happened in exact symmetry with the vaccination program. You can call that coincidence if you like, but the WHO seem pretty happy to make the explicit connection between the elimination of the two events.

[Bloo Loo]

Many people have never had measles, polio, rubella and a whole host of other nasties, either. That's because of vaccination. Even if one child isn't vacciniated, he/she is protected through herd immuinity, where the lack of available hosts stops a disease spreading. The increasing anti-vaccination nonsense reduces the uptake of vaccinations, which in turn reduces herd immunity, making it much more likely that children whose parents don't get them vaccininated will catch these diseases. Measles is no fun, and can be fatal, so why take the chance?

Ok, so what do you make of the claim made by many theorists that vaccines are often introduced at the end of the "epidemic", if that is the right term, and success is as much due to the herd causing the disease to reduce in numbers infected with the BIO firms taking the credit that their vaccine is the real cure they claim it is.

Im sure some vaccines work, but we dont need hundreds as it appears US kids are getting/

[The Eagle]

WHO seem pretty happy to make the explicit connection between the elimination of the two events.

It should be clear to anyone these days (at least since the swine flu debacle) that the WHO is a 'marketing' organisation of global big pharma, so the WHO certainly cannot be taken seriously anymore by anyone with at least half a brain.

---

[Game_Over]

The Demented Budgie strikes again!

[Tenubracon]

Don't play stupid, you started talking about high doses of viruses, so show me evidence where they happen in real life (at the levels used in the experiment).

And you haven't given me conclusive proof that small pox has been eradicated by vaccines yet either.

No, you mentioned that high dosages don't appear in nature, I wondered why you thought that. I thought perhaps that you had some information you'd like to share, but if not fine.

A simple google will take you to the WHO site, which describes the eradication of small pox.

[Tenubracon]

It should be clear to anyone these days (at least since the swine flu debacle) that the WHO is a 'marketing' organisation of global big pharma, so the WHO certainly cannot be taken seriously anymore by anyone with at least half a brain.

---

Ah, I wondered when BIG PHARMA would show up. OK, if you aren't interested in evidence based medicine, there's not really much more to say from my side.

[The Eagle]

Ah, I wondered when BIG PHARMA would show up. OK, if you aren't interested in evidence based medicine, there's not really much more to say from my side.

'Big pharma' is just a short form for for saying the largest and globally dominant pharmaceutical companies, withdrawing from this debate because that term 'irritates' you is just a cheap excuse.

Anyway, show me the evidence! You still haven't provided any for the statements made so far in this thread (just like the WHO)!

What you call 'evidence based medicine' is often based on circumstantial evidence or even outright fabricated evidence (big pharma can't afford a flop after all), not hard proof.

---

[Tenubracon]

Ok, so what do you make of the claim made by many theorists that vaccines are often introduced at the end of the "epidemic", if that is the right term, and success is as much due to the herd causing the disease to reduce in numbers infected with the BIO firms taking the credit that their vaccine is the real cure they claim it is.

Im sure some vaccines work, but we dont need hundreds as it appears US kids are getting/

If you could provide a link, Bloo, I might be better placed to comment.

Off the top of my head, if vaccinations have no effect, you'd expect populations with high vaccination rates to behave in the same way as those with low vaccination rates: in both populations, you'd get outbreaks of the disease (say, measles), which would peak, then fade away. But this only happens in populations with low vaccination rates. In populations with high vacciniation rates, you don't get outbreaks, or a least only very few small ones. This is because vacciniation prevents individuals from getting infected in the first place, so the outbreak never occurs.

[The Eagle]

But this only happens in populations with low vaccination rates. In populations with high vacciniation rates, you don't get outbreaks, or a least only very few small ones

Another statement without any proof to back it up, it's funny that in the same post you ask BlooLoo for evidence...

[Tenubracon]

'Big pharma' is just a short form for for saying the largest and globally dominant pharmaceutical companies, withdrawing from this debate because that term 'irritates' you is just a cheap excuse.

Anyway, show me the evidence! You still haven't provided any for the statements made so far in this thread (just like the WHO)!

What you call 'evidence based medicine' is often based on circumstantial evidence or even outright fabricated evidence (big pharma can't afford a flop after all), not hard proof.

---

Big Pharma is a phrase that tends to be used by individuals with an anti-science mindset, it is not a simply neutral term as you suggest.

I've got three different web pages open in my browser that describe the eradication of small pox, You could easily find this info yourself, but itnstead you prefer to complain about me not providing evidence for you. Fine.

If you choose to not believe in evidence based medicine, it makes no difference to me. I'm sure that BIG PHARMA is not whiter than white (pharmaceutical companies are businesses after all), but it puzzles me why so many people are so keen to dismiss genuine medical progress because of what sites like naturalnews.com post. Still, it's your life.

[Tenubracon]

Another statement without any proof to back it up, it's funny that in the same post you ask BlooLoo for evidence...

I clearly indicated that this was 'off the top of my head'. Perhaps you could point out where my logic was wrong?

[The Eagle]

Big Pharma is a phrase that tends to be used by individuals with an anti-science mindset

LOL , do you realise that medicine isn't even a science? Chemistry, Physics, Maths are sciences, but medicine isn't. Very few things in medicine are based on actual proven facts, it's mostly circumstantial evidence.

I've got three different web pages open in my browser that describe the eradication of small pox, You could easily find this info yourself, but itnstead you prefer to complain about me not providing evidence for you. Fine.

So why don't you post them? Maybe because they don't contain any hard conclusive evidence, but rather pure speculation?

[The Eagle]

I clearly indicated that this was 'off the top of my head'. Perhaps you could point out where my logic was wrong?

Now you are really getting desperate, asking me to prove your claims wrong, rather than providing factual evidence...

Do you realise that something can be very logical yet completely wrong? Science doesn't seem to be one of your strenghts....

[Tenubracon]

LOL , do you realise that medicine isn't even a science? Chemistry, Physics, Maths are sciences, but medicine isn't. Very few things in medicine are based on actual proven facts, it's mostly circumstantial evidence.

So why don't you post them? Maybe because they don't contain any hard conclusive evidence, but rather pure speculation?

I've had enough of these discussions to recognise the tactics, eagle my laddie. Have fun going round in circles.