the amish dont get autism: VACCINES

[Monica]

Monica, do you want a real answer or continue to believe your chosen vaccination beliefs?

My dear friend Ali: I invite you to consider that there is no such thing as a 'real' answer. We live in a holographic UniVerse which responds to our free will. In my opinion, this translates to a tendency to accommodate whatever we each choose to believe. I've observed this to be true.

Case in point: I have a lot of respect for Dr. Mercola's work on exposing the corruption in the medical industry, and his extensive library of well-documented vaccine info (which I posted earlier, in the same post as those videos...perhaps it might be more to your liking?). But, I vehemently disagree with his views on the vegetarian diet! I find it interesting how Dr. Mercola, an MD with a fair share of mainstream credentials, could arrive at the conclusions he has regarding diet. Other MDs with similar credentials arrive at totally opposite conclusions!

Does this mean that I should believe nothing Dr. Mercola says about anything? Personally, would answer No to that question. I subscribe to Dr. Mercola's newsletter and find much of value. If I read something that doesn't resonate, I either toss it aside, or I cross-reference it with other sources, depending on my level of interest in that particular topic.

Don't we all do that, to some degree? Can anyone among us claim to have completely figured out the 'real answer' to anything? Don't we all still have varying degrees of distortion, biases, and presuppositions? How, then, could one person's conclusion be considered 'chosen beliefs' while another's be considered a 'real answer?'

I invite you to consider that my opinion is neither better nor worse than yours. We have both researched the vaccination issue to the degree that it was important to us. We used some of the same sources, as well as some different sources. Rather than seeing this as a debate to be 'won' I prefer to see it as a sharing of ideas, offered for consideration.

---

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

Which is evident.

What is considered evident or even obvious to one person isn't necessarily so to another. I question the very premise you consider a given.

That, imo, is a more important point than whether you and I ever agree on vaccinations or not. I think an important key to establishing peace on this planet is for us to be able to respect that something we consider a 'given' is not a given in someone else's mind.

For example, a person who believe that the Bible is the infallible 'word of God' might say, "God said it so it's true" presupposing that we agree that if the Bible says God said, then that means God said it. That person might not have ever considered the possibility that the very premise (of the words in the Bible being God's words) could be legitimately questioned by someone who didn't share his presuppositions and paradigm.

So, my invitation here is that, when we discuss these volatile topics, we remember that we all have different paradigms, and what seems obvious to one person isn't so to another. We are like the blind men describing the elephant...we each have a piece of the truth but none of us has all the truth.

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

An alternative method to treat the disease also has side effects may not work and usually is much less preferable to just not getting the disease.

In general, alternative therapies have far fewer and far less severe side effects than allopathic drugs. The path of taking on a serious disease using alternative methods isn't for everyone! There is no way I would recommend that someone eating a mainstream diet and not knowledgeable about herbs, homeopathy, etc. take this on.

I offer this only as an option, for those who would choose it. For those already adhering to an alternative lifestyle, diseases aren't as scary, and many other preventative and treatment options exist.

I don't seek to completely eradicate the option of vaccines. I seek to offer alternatives, and end the suppression of opposing viewpoints by the mainstream media. Right now, the allopathic multi-billion-$-per-year medical industry has a monopoly on disease management. They actively seek to discredit anyone who challenges them. (Yes, I can back up that statement, but I'd rather not, as it would be time consuming.)

I champion the efforts being made by those courageous parents who have taken on the vaccination issue. I am just thankful that it was never an issue for me. Those parents have engaged a behemoth adversary.

That's not my path, but I respect what they're doing. I just try to offer some little tidbits of info, for those who might be interested.

This isn't a relevant side track.. I believe in homeopathy. I know there is much evidence for it. I don't know about this particular case but I'll take it as read.

The reason it's relevant is this: What if you could confer immunity to a disease with a homeopathic nosode, with zero side effects? Wouldn't that be preferable?

Such remedies exist. Why should we subject ourselves to toxins unnecessarily?

At this point, homeopathy isn't mainstream enough for most people to use it properly. They just don't have the necessary knowledge. But why isn't that avenue being explored? Hmmm...could the fact that homeopathic remedies are dirt cheap have anything to do with it?

You have to understand that you're listening to the channels of the sellers to the average and usually pretty uninformed and uninterested population. If you look at the science then no one is painting a black and white picture at all.

I submit that even the science isn't so clear-cut. There's that little inconvenience of gathering data...the gathering of data relies on humans...and humans have biases.

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.

This is also not relevant to the issue of whether vaccination works..

Does not the issue of whether vaccination works or not, depend on accurate gathering of data?

It's very very irresponsible to ban vaccinations...

I don't recall anyone suggesting that vaccines be banned. I think they should remain available to those who would choose them. I simply would like to see more openness about their true nature and controversial aspects, so people can make a more informed decision.

We were not healthier 200 years ago. Life expectancy of the countries where people are vaccinated is drastically higher than countries where this does not happen. And so is quality of life.

I have a friend in a nursing home. Every week, when I visit her, I have to psyche myself up to enter that place. The pain is so prevalent. All those people...most of them elderly, but some young and just disabled...in extreme states of deterioration.

Contrast that to the Hunzas, who work hard, climbing mountains, living a robust and healthy life until they just pass quietly in their sleep at age 120.

I'm sorry to disagree again, Ali. But I don't think we have a very good quality of life here. Sure, we no longer have the problems associated with starvation and filth (in our country anyway, for the most part! It still exists elsewhere in the world), but we have other, equally serious 'quality of life' impediments...like children being autistic or getting cancer. How many children got cancer 200 years ago?

Monica, do you want a real answer or continue to believe your chosen vaccination beliefs?

Really? You think that's what this is? Seriously, I'm stunned! I had no idea I was coming across in such a closed-minded way, blindly believing something I supposedly have a vested interest in.

If that's how I presented this info, then I sincerely apologize! That was not my intention!

My beliefs are based on having met real people whose children were affected by vaccines, as well as having read many books written by MDs who stated that the side effects from vaccines were vastly under-reported. The kicker was when I saw the CDC graph - yes, the actual CDC graph - showing that diseases had already declined before vaccines were introduced. (I confess I now feel disappointed that you didn't watch far enough into the video to get to that part. But I respect your choice so I'm letting go of that expectation.)

As I mentioned in my very first post, I once thought that anyone who didn't vaccinate their children was essentially guilty of child abuse!

Why did I do a 180?

This was not just an intellectual exercise to me. This was my child! Deciding whether or not to vaccinate him was the most agonizing decision of my parenting career!

Ali, my son is now 21. I no longer have any personal interest in this topic. (At least not until I have grandchildren, and then it won't be my decision anyway.)

I have rejected the entire premise of injecting poisons into the body to bring about health...this includes not only vaccines but other mainstream 'therapies' such as chemotherapy as well.

I simply have a different paradigm now, Ali. I respect that your paradigm is different from mine. It is not my intention to convince you or anyone else to believe as I do. I am simply offering some of the info that I found helpful in making my decision.

Because I can go away and ignore this topic if you prefer.

?? Why would I prefer that? Of course you are welcome to express your own opinions!

And I'm sensing we're on a collision course.

I sure hope not! I would like to think that we can politely and respectfully disagree! If you and I can't do that, what hope is there for the rest of the world?

You're heavily invested in this topic,

What makes you think that?

and I don't agree with you, also I'm a stubborn git. I'm not going to agree with you unless you come with really eye opening science that somehow makes all the other facts evaporate.

Well, if by 'science' you mean massive, double-blind studies, you won't find it...because those studies are extremely expensive and the only entity rich enough to fund them are the drug companies.

The video you showed (or at least the first part of it) is so full of nonsense that I really can't get through the first part. I don't think I'll be able to watch all of it.

You and I sure arrived at different conclusions on that! A beautiful example of the lovely diversity in the UniVerse!

If I missed anything you consider important or smoking gun material, specific please tell me the specific video and the time to check so I can check it.

It's been awhile since I watched it, and keep in mind this was just one of many, so I really don't remember the exact video and timestamp. There were a number of smoking guns, the most compelling being that distorted CDC graph (but I had already seen that years ago, in books). Sorry, but I have neither the time nor the inclination to watch it again in order to tell you the exact time.

Now maybe if I were more heavily invested in this topic, I might feel compelled to do so! But, the truth is that I don't really care whether you agree with me or not. I have no agenda to convince you of anything!

So, I simply offered the info that I found helpful. Apparently it doesn't resonate with you. That's cool! No problem! The info is there in case others find it useful.

I get too angry watching the video, I don't like being lied to in this manner (combination of emotion with misinformation), and I don't have the time or desire to debunk it line by line.

That's so curious! That's how I often feel whenever I encounter mainstream AMA/FDA info!

But it doesn't matter, it wasn't my only "source" as you assumed.

Ah, I think I see where the disconnect occurred. Ali, it sounds like I offended you when I said it was your only source. I apologize! I made that comment in response to your words, when you said, "I had only to look at pubmed..." which to me indicated that pubmed was your 'only' source. It was not my intention to offend you, so please accept my apology!

Also FYI Pubmed is a collection database, it's not a "source" as you call it, it contains evidence for homeopathy, evidence for vaccines. Even evidence for bigfoot, telepathy, telekinesis and what not. It doesn't sound very selective to me.

Just because it includes articles about homeopathy etc. doesn't mean it isn't biased. There are a great many pro-homeopathy articles and studies which will never make it to pubmed. As an example, quackwatch.com includes articles on all sorts of alternative therapies...but their prime directive is attempt to debunk all of them.

This anti vaccination stuff has been going mainstream for a little while now.

Have you ever wondered why? Have you ever wondered why these parents feel so passionate about it?

I'm sorry but in spite of "popular" opinion vaccination DOES work.

Well, you are stating that as though it were an indisputable fact. You are certainly entitled to your opinion! I respect your opinion. I just happen to disagree with it.

PEACE!

---

If you go down that rabbit hole you will find them embedded and integrated and nested so deeply that you will never come out. But worst of all, with each layer of the onion that you peel, you will become more and more mistrusting of your fellow man, your elected governments, and ultimately even yourself. This is, in my humble opinion, the true aim behind all conspiracy theories: To slowly erode away our faith in the good aspects of human nature.

Well said! I too realized this, after digging deeply into the rabbit hole for awhile.

This is why I reject all conspiracy theories. Not because I know they are all false, but because the way to counteract the conspiracy's aim of fear of doom and mistrust is not by fighting it. It is by transcending it and responding with love and acceptance and caring.

Again, well said! I understand and respect your choice! I have made the same choice, but to a lesser degree. There are a few conspiracies I feel very strongly about as being true, that I see the value in exposing...so I continue to work on those causes. But we can't all do everything! We each take on the causes we feel drawn to be involved with. I have chosen to work in a different way than you in only a few areas...but overall I do agree with your stance. I feel exactly the same way whenever I hear someone saying we'll have martial law next month, be rounded up into concentration camps, or whatever. It's sad to see just how deeply entrenched in fear so many well-intentioned people are!

The handful of causes I do feel compelled to pursue, I do without fear. It's just work I have felt guided to do. I made a decision to not take action based on fear. That decision has helped me to gain some clarity about which issues to take on.

Personally, I think this thread should be deleted, because I see it creating a wedge between some of our most prolific and respected members. This is a shame, and one which I wish was not allowed to happen.

This is sort of a trial run. The other mods and I have been discussing the pros and cons of starting a new sub-forum for just these types of discussions...current events, politics, etc. as viewed thru the lens of the Law of One. If we could work peacefully and respectfully on those issues, it would be very powerful indeed! But if we can't get past our disagreements with love and respect, then it would be counterproductive.

The fate of that new forum will be influenced by how this thread turns out. If this thread continues to decline, then yeah, we may lock it or delete it. We'll see what happens.

At this time of holiday festivities and planning I would simply ask that we please, release all thoughts of negative conspiracies and redouble our efforts in our positive conspiracy of love, light, and acceptance.

That's a great idea!

Note: post edited