the amish dont get autism: VACCINES

[Monica]

I am going to have to study the material you provided dear Monica... Thank you so much for taking the time to put it all in.

You are quite welcome! Actually, I didn't spend too much time on it...I just reposted stuff I've posted before elsewhere. This is a hot topic for me so I've engaged in this discussion before! Also, my son, who did not get vaccinated, questioned my decision when he started dating a pro-vaccination medical student in college...so I had to present to him why my hubby and I made the decision we did. That was fun!

Before anything else, let me assure you that I do not believe vaccinations to be a panacea, I just believe them to be potentially better than the diseases they protect us against.

That's what I thought too at one time. But that presupposes that:

a.) vaccines work

and

b.) there aren't alternative methods for treating the diseases

Upon researching the issue, I found a.) to be quite questionable, even indisputably false in many cases. (Case in point: Ever wonder why pro-vaccination people make such a big deal about those who choose to not vaccinate? If their vaccines worked reliably, then why should they care if some people choose to not vaccinate? I've seen parents really freak out when they find out a child in their midst isn't vaccinated. Say, what?? What's the big deal if their own children are 'immune?' The truth is that they're not immune! And the medical industry knows it!)

And b.) is quite true, but unbeknownst to most people. Did you know that there is clinical evidence showing that homeopathic treatments got better results than conventional treatments during the polio epidemic and other epidemics? See the works of Dr. Dorothy Shepherd, a British MD/homeopath.

So, I agree with Lorna, that it's not a black-and-white issue. It's not nearly as simplistic as the medical industry would like us to believe.

Lets be clear, it is poisonous chemicals that we're talking about here. However, the dosage is low.

What is 'low?' The drug companies have not shown any studies proving that the 'low' dosages aren't harmful. Also, take into consideration that the toxins are compounded. For example, I once read an article in a mainstream magazine that toddlers by age 2 had already received their lifetime's allotment of individual pesticides! But that wasn't even taking into consideration the potential effects of multiple pesticides interacting with one another!

Likewise, a newborn baby is given a cocktail of toxic ingredients, at a time when his/her immune system is immature. Add to that the fact that this cocktail is injected directly into the bloodstream, with preservatives such as formaldehyde which keep the body from breaking it down and eliminating it. I find the very idea very creepy!

Meanwhile, the medical industry keeps people in the dark about the myriad things they can do to naturally strengthen their immune systems as well as treat illnesses using alternative healing modalities.

Case in point: Right now, how often do you hear mention of the importance of vitamin D in combating the flu? This is well documented, but is the media talking about it? No! They're pushing their vaccines, but ignoring such an important, simple, and inexpensive safeguard against the flu. It's criminal!

Also the companies involved are clearly unethical but this does not detract from the principle.

I think it does detract, in the sense that we really can't trust their statistics. I've already shown (in the above posted video) how they manipulated the graphs which had the effect of misleading the public. In addition, data is only as good as the ability to properly gather it. I read (in books written by MDs) that whenever a parent reported a side effect from a vaccine, doctors and nurses routinely didn't report it as such....when a child who had been vaccinated for measles got measles, it was often not recorded as measles ("That can't be measles...he's been vaccinated!"). In other words, can you say, B-I-A-S?

Add to that, poor reporting methods thru no fault of anyone, and you've got a very skewed picture of the true degree of side effects.

Add to that, the long-term side effects which aren't linked to the vaccines because no one has ever done a fair, unbiased study seeking that link! Ie. if the drug companies don't fund a study to determine the link between a vaccine and a disease, that doesn't necessarily mean no such link exists.

The whole autism situation is a horrible mess, with those children and parents having to pay a heavy price...there's too much politics involved for honesty in this case. Drug companies don't want to be found liable...if they proved it with one vaccine, it would establish a precedent and open the floodgates for other side effects, of other vaccines. They won't let that happen!

I know 2 women who are military nurses. Both of them told me that if anyone comes to the hospital with a sniffle, they have been instructed to record it as swine flu. ??? No verification. None. This is a clear example of inaccurate reporting.

The question isn't so much are they safe.... The question is if we inject a million kids, how many are going to die compared to if we don't...

Lorna has already responded to this and I agree with her! It's not a simple equation of die/not die. It's far, far more complex than that!

I appreciate your willingness to investigate the other side of the issue, Ali!