NO on Mandatory vaccines bill SB277

For anyone not familiar, a bill was introduced in the Senate on February 18th to mandate/force vaccines on all children in California. This would apply to all children whether in public, private or homeschool. This is about personal freedom and CHOICE. Whether you agree with vaccines or not, we should demand liberty in our state, to make our OWN medical decisions. If you are concerned about herd immunity, it is covered with the 97.5 vaccination rate (herd immunity - if even legitimate - requires 95%)

We have been fighting it since it was introduced, but there are MANY people in our state who are not aware of the bill. So I am writing today to inform you of it and to let you know what you can do to fight it if you choose to do so. If you are interested in daily action plans and ongoing updates you can join our group at:

• https://www.facebook.com/groups/968032779888190/ And let me know in the comments here that you asked to join so I can approve you (please don't ask to join if you plan to use inflammatory arguments.)

Other things you can do:

• Call, write and email our representatives in this area. Ask for an appointment and let the know your stance. Find your representative here:
  https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/
• Pass out informative flyers (I uploaded one here). And talk to people to let them know this is happening.
• the bill had been assigned to 3 committees for hearings. Call, write and/or email the members of those committees to let them know your stance.
• City councils and School boards have been putting the item on their agendas for review to take an official stand on it. Take a preemptive action and let them know your stance.
• Show up at the capitol for the first hearing in the Health Committee on April 8th to show your support. (Hearing is at 1:30 - we will be there at 9:00 to rally)

Key talking points:

IF PASSED, SB 277 WOULD:

A. Remove parents’ rights to personal & religious vaccine exemptions for their children, and violates a parents right to informed consent

B. Remove parents’ rights to a modified vaccine schedule for their children.

C. Mandate full vaccination of any minor, from daycare through secondary school in order to attend school, whether private, public, or home school.

D. Permit the addition of any new vaccines that may be added to the schedule at any time, which already includes annual flu shots.

Great talking points from Sally Fallon at WAPF for when we all are contacting our senators and representative.

1) Your body and your children’s bodies do not belong to the state. You want to be free to choose how you nourish and keep yourselves healthy.

2) Vaccines are recognized by the US Supreme Court to be “unavoidably unsafe” and to cause injury and death in some recipients. The US government has paid out more than $3 billion to the victims of vaccine injury. Hundreds of thousands have reported an adverse reaction to vaccination. No one knows in advance who will be harmed by a vaccine.

3) Vaccines fail even in fully vaccinated people and no one knows who will not respond to a vaccine nor how quickly the vaccine’s protection will wane if it did provoke a response in the first place.

4) Vaccinated individuals can spread disease for several weeks after receiving a live virus vaccine.

5) Vaccine makers and the healthcare providers who administer them bear zero liability for vaccine injuries and deaths. Vaccine makers have no incentive to make vaccines safe.

6) Most of the vaccines given today are for diseases that are either rare or mild. For example, there have been no deaths from measles during the last 10 years, but 108 deaths reported after the MMR vaccine during the same time period.

7) It is immoral to force a person to inject a pharmaceutical product into their body, or anything for that matter, even more so when that product could injure or kill them.

8) There are many other ways to stay healthy: a healthy diet, adequate rest, sunshine and exercise, etc. without any risk of vaccine injury.

9) If we mandate vaccines, will we also mandate other medical procedures, such as fetal ultrasound, mammograms and colonoscopy? Will we dictate medical procedures based on genetic testing? Will we have a medical police to determine whether someone can leave the house with a cough?

10) Children today receive 69 doses of vaccines for 16 different viral and bacterial illnesses which more than doubles the government childhood schedule of 34 doses of 11 different vaccines in the year 2000. A vaccine exemption is filed regardless of whether it is for one dose or all doses. Thirty-five doses and 5 more unique vaccines have been added to the schedule in the last 15 years. Those supporting forced vaccination are being dishonest by not acknowledging the exploding vaccine schedule while sounding alarms over small increases in overall non-medical exemptions.

11) There are hundreds of new vaccines in development including some of the following in clinical trials: HIV, herpes, E. coli, dengue fever, avian influenza, smallpox, tuberculosis, typhoid, norovirus, cholera, smoking cessation, syphilis, and gonorrhea. If vaccine manufactures and others who profit from forced vaccination convince legislators to take away our right to delay or decline a vaccine now, what will our future look like?

12) In the past 5 years, drug makers have paid the U.S. Government 19.2 billion in criminal and civil FRAUD penalties. Skepticism of the pharmaceutical industry is well deserved.

13) Physicians, in the American Medical Association Code of Ethics, affirm philosophical and religious exemptions for themselves. See Opinion 9.133 Routine Universal Immunization of Physicians. Parents should have that same right.

I just wonder...is this issue REALLY worthy of so much excellent, articulate, energetic attention?? There are people dying of stupid violence, suffering with terrible thirst and hunger, women who really want to go to school. There is a killer of a widening income gap. There's a planet that's going to dry up and send us into something unknowable, possibly unknowably awful. There's racism seeping through our society still and so toxic. There's THE FRICKEN TEA PARTY THAT SEEMS TO HAVE TAKEN OVER THE RUNNING OF OUR COUNTY.

Vaccines? Choice? Freedom? In the face of so much science about the massive benefit and nonexistent harm? iS THIS really the thing you want us all to focus on??

perplexed,

Kathy

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by joyma:

For anyone not familiar, a bill was introduced in the Senate on February 18th to mandate/force vaccines on all children in California...

---

You're right, there are many terrible things happening on our planet; all those you mention and more. I see this as a focus on "freedom", which we're losing more and more of day by day. Personally I can't do much about the violence, thirst and hunger (except to share a few dollars with the homeless in my path), women's inequality, toxic racism, animal abuse, the widening income gap or the Tea Party, except to sign petitions that come my way. But I'm glad that there are real activists who are speaking up, and acting to save our freedoms, what little we have left.

Did you notice No.13 on this list?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by kpage9:

I just wonder...is this issue REALLY worthy of so much excellent, articulate, energetic attention??...

---

Thank you Joyma, I've requested to join your group on FB. Sandy Murphey

I certainly noticed #13 on the list. "They" don't have to take mandatory vaccines themselves, just like politicians have special rules that give them advantages "over and above" the common man or woman, whatever that may mean.
Rev. BE :heart:

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

...Did you notice No.13 on this list?

---

I guess i see it this way. Yes there are freedoms, and freedom is certainly worth protecting. But just because we are free to do something--because we have the legal right--doesn't mean we SHOULD do it--that's reserved, in my mind, for what's morally right.

so--because we CAN refuse vaccination, because it is one of a gazillion rights we actually do have--is that a freedom worth fighting for? i mean: there are freedoms and there are freedoms, no? the freedom to carry an assault rifle--yep it's a freedom, so we should go to the mat to protect it just because it's our legal right ? What about the moral right, the ethical right, the societal consequences?

I also have to say I don't share your view that our freedoms are so imperiled...i do see much of america's wielding of them as increasingly selfish and stupid...maybe causing my own fealty to civil liberties to erode a little

sorry i didn't notice #13--i will go back and find it, although it would have been helpful if you had included it...

kathy

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

You're right, there are many terrible things happening on our planet; all those you mention and more. I see this as a focus on "freedom"...

---

Brakes on cars: mandatory, to stop crashes and accidents.
Vaccinations in people: mandatory to stop spreading diseases.
Get a grip you selfish anti's.

Bravo, ericvonk, for regurgitating the tired Fox News response to those who question the safety and actual efficacy of toxic injections created by, promoted by, and profited by a TRILLION dollar industry.

People who have actually researched and are actively questioning the motives and practices of the world's largest pharmaceutical corporations are FIGHTING to maintain "a grip" on their right to say NO to having their children injected with toxic vaccines that may or may not "stop spreading diseases."

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by ericvonk:

Brakes on cars: mandatory, to stop crashes and accidents.
Vaccinations in people: mandatory to stop spreading diseases.
Get a grip you selfish anti's.

---

Do brakes stop crashes and accidents? Yes, some, but there are still many that happen even when brakes are applied. It's a little different when we're talking about mandatory drug use.

There are many things that could be mandatory to prevent harm, illness, disease, and even death. One thing I'm thinking of is to mandate a way to actually prevent people from using cell phones while driving. Laws and fines aren't doing it; I still see many people with cell phones in their hands. This is a weapon that maims and kills.

What about mandating these things? Flu and pneumonia shots? Colonoscopies, mammograms, prostate exams, no smoking in public, no homeless people (oh, that's already mandated as a criminal offense in some areas), no cannabis growing or smoking or using it as a medicine. I could go on, but it won't really help. It's good to know that some people care so much that they rely on being "mandated" by the government as a way to divest themselves of personal freedom and responsibility, and depend on "mandates" to keep them safe and healthy. Although we know that vaccines have caused horrible reactions and death in many.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by ericvonk:

Brakes on cars: mandatory, to stop crashes and accidents.
Vaccinations in people: mandatory to stop spreading diseases.
Get a grip you selfish anti's.

---

no.13) Physicians, in the American Medical Association Code of Ethics, affirm philosophical and religious exemptions for themselves. See Opinion 9.133 Routine Universal Immunization of Physicians. Parents should have that same right.

I wonder why.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by kpage9:

...sorry i didn't notice #13--i will go back and find it, although it would have been helpful if you had included it...

---

Today is the opening day of the new Wacco Category The Red Pill Roundtable, a category meant exactly for situations like what is happening in this vaccine thread, like the others before it.

Many crucial issues and questions have been posed here again but are quickly dismissed, ridiculed and lost in lieu of having to respond to people blanketly overriding them with declarations that vaccines are all harmless - period - with an attitude of 'you're wrong and even dangerous, go away'.

The phrase 'nonexistent harm' was even flatly declared about any and all vaccines despite the US Vaccine Injury Compensation Board having already admitted paying $3,000,000,000.00 (billion) in damages.

Those who share the valid questions can now go away to The Red Pill Roundtable and actually continue to address them without interference.

I have begun the category with a thread on vaccines to be able to continue moving forward and leave closed minds behind called Serious Vaccine Questions and Ramifications here

Pursuing answers to valid questions about crucial issues is not wrong.
Looking forward to meeting with other open-minded questioners at the Red Pill Roundtable.

Shandi you are not being rational. Read your history of disease and you will understand why vaccines are essential. Meanwhile, ranting from ignorance is an embarrassment to you.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

Do brakes stop crashes and accidents? Yes, some, but there are still many that happen even when brakes are applied. It's a little different when we're talking about mandatory drug use.

There are many things that could be mandatory to prevent harm, illness, disease, and even death. One thing I'm thinking of is to mandate a way to actually prevent people from using cell phones while driving. Laws and fines aren't doing it; I still see many people with cell phones in their hands. This is a weapon that maims and kills.

What about mandating these things?...

---

Shandi is being VERY rational and has NOTHING to be embarrassed about. The "history of disease" you refer to is written by those who profit from disease and the control of pharmaceuticals, including vaccines. Those who think that vaccines are safe just because Big Pharma and their minions at the CDC say so should be embarrassed, not those who question authority, especially when authority is so clearly controlled by money.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by gypsey:

Shandi you are not being rational. Read your history of disease and you will understand why vaccines are essential. Meanwhile, ranting from ignorance is an embarrassment to you.

---

Your response seems unkind, but we are all entitled to our opinion. Sorry for your embarrassment. Make sure you get all the vaccines you want and deserve.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by gypsey:

Shandi you are not being rational. Read your history of disease and you will understand why vaccines are essential. Meanwhile, ranting from ignorance is an embarrassment to you.

---

There is one consideration which is bulletproof and final:

If vaccines work as claimed, then the vaccinated have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated.

That should end accusations of the "selfishness" of those who refuse vaccinations. It should also end the call for mandatory vaccination.

But further: there is a ton of evidence (look on the web) that vaccines not only don't work, but in some cases actually infect people with the disease they were supposed to prevent.

Very intelligent point!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by comodin:

There is one consideration which is bulletproof and final:

If vaccines work as claimed, then the vaccinated have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated.

That should end accusations of the "selfishness" of those who refuse vaccinations. It should also end the call for mandatory vaccination.

But further: there is a ton of evidence (look on the web) that vaccines not only don't work, but in some cases actually infect people with the disease they were supposed to prevent.

---

Dr Jamie Deckoff-Jones' most recent two blog installments are worth reading, regarding vaccination and safety.

Starting with a look at the current debate, The Myth of Vaccine Safety cites published research and also draws on first-hand experience as a doctor and a parent.

The doctor is not an anti-vaxer but suggests an anti vaccine injury movement, outlining in Vax to the Future how we might move forward from here.

I appreciate these articles for being so well-researched, and for offering a calm and reasonable approach for progress, where elsewhere the vaccine discussion has degenerated into a mud-slinging, name-calling street fight.

have a look at this factual information ...

https://www.mctlawyers.com/vaccine-injury/cases/

I was tempted to agree with you on this but there is a serious problem with it. What about the children who die or are severely handicapped for life because of the stupid decisions made by their insanely foolish parents?

Children have rights too and they need to be protected from grossly irresponsible parents. I strongly support the mandate. I hope it passes; the sooner the better. People do not have a right to hurt or kill their own children. Religion, ignorance, or anti-government hatred are not excuses.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by comodin:

...If vaccines work as claimed, then the vaccinated have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated...

---

First of all my reply to Shandi was private so I am not sure how it got printed publicly-but I take full responsibility for pushing the wrong button. And I apologize to Shandi for therefore saying publicly when I intended to admonish in private as part of a dialogue..

As for where I get my information, it is not from "Big Pharma" or any other usual suspects but from a critical examination of historical facts and reading of history through the last 2 centuries including the present.

While no public undertaking is perfect---and this includes vaccines, I suggest that wholesale opponents and conspiracy theorists look beyond their own POV and look at the issues objectively---from all angles, using critical thinking skills. Gather your facts from ALL angles--not just the one s that suit your beliefs.

I for one am always interested in an objective, statistical argument. So far, these rants have failed to
provide that.

May the dialogue continue!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by gypsey:

Shandi you are not being rational. Read your history of disease and you will understand why vaccines are essential. Meanwhile, ranting from ignorance is an embarrassment to you.

---

I suggest everyone interested in this subject watch the episode on FRONTLINE (PBS) called Vaccine Wars.

[Video included! it's HD so zoom to full screen and sit back! Note that it is from 2010 - Barry :waccosun:]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPOrnU3ImxI

i think the vaccine discussion is better served by diversity rather than just among those with rpr assumptions. and just about every other topic too : ) i read that you think the depth of sharing will deepen but, i am not clear why? my experience in life is that i learn more with people who don't share my assumptive framework, like taking in news from sources whose policy advocacy i don't agree with. could you explain further why you think the rpr would be a superior format for mutual learning? some of the assumptions you list as important to participate i either don't share or i don't think they are meaningful. i love your 3 bill factoid, new to me and makes me think enough to check it out. of course i am a vaccine careful person, (ie no more for me and some of my children have received some shots). and i hate that these vacists are pushing to take away medical choice!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Alex:

Today is the opening day of the new Wacco Category The Red Pill Roundtable, a category meant exactly for situations like what is happening in this vaccine thread, like the others before it...

---

Children do indeed have rights and of course they need to be protected.

But as I said, there is a ton of evidence that vaccines are quite dangerous, largely ineffective, even counter-productive. In which case the children's deaths or severe handicaps for life are more likely to result from parents' decisions to vaccinate them. I know just such a person — handicapped for life because of vaccinations in infancy. And her mother is not "insanely foolish," she merely followed the recommendations of the physicians. You could call it a "stupid decision," since it was the wrong one, but in those days no one knew any better.

As you say, ignorance confers no right to hurt or kill your children. Therefore we have an obligation to dispel our ignorance. Anyone who claims to know that vaccines are good for children simply has not done their homework. Ten minutes on the web will give some idea of the wealth of research on this question.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza:

...Children have rights too and they need to be protected from grossly irresponsible parents. I strongly support the mandate...

---

Do you really watch news from sources you don't agree with? Please share those with us. Seems like there's hardly enough time to watch those sources that we most likely agree with. Do you read all the information presented here on WaccoBB that are in opposition to your beliefs? Can you share those, and what you've learned?

Are you checking out the information listed by ArtHunter?: For example: (this is just the latest one)

https://www.mctlawyers.com/vaccine-injury/cases/

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

... in my experience in life is that i learn more with people who don't share my assumptive framework, like taking in news from sources whose policy advocacy i don't agree with...

---

Because PBS presents it doesn't mean it's true, or in our best interests.

The pharmaceutical company Pfizer doesn't have a great reputation. Take a look:
https://www.drugwatch.com/manufacturer/pfizer/ Still trust them with your vaccines?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by gypsey:

I suggest everyone interested in this subject watch the episode on FRONTLINE (PBS) called Vaccine Wars....

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

i think the vaccine discussion is better served by diversity rather than just among those with rpr assumptions...

---

The quick answer - the RPR community is tired of back and forth with people who won't take the time to really understand the gravity of the questions we put on the table.

How many toxic adjuvants, their confirmed damages and ramifications of no required standard testing of long term effects before mass inoculation are you able to discuss intelligently? Have you even bothered to look at adjuvant issues before injecting yourself or your child with them? The pro-vaxxers don't want to talk about it.

The posts anti-vaxxers have made here aren't just quick fished copies of things that support a rebellious point of view that our egos need to defend. It's questions born of serious homework and great concern that point to an even bigger picture of greater concern. Our questions are ignored by pro-vaxxers and stagnate from having to deal instead with their condescending responses that vaccines are 'harmless', that harm is 'nonexistent' and we are 'embarrassing ourselves' for asking.

Then the pro-vaxxers post links to mainstream media propaganda - that we don't want or need to argue about anymore either - because it ALSO ignores our questions and we see through it. This pattern happens over and over in all controversial subjects and we don't see this repeating scenario as productive 'sharing' so we want our own club to be able to move forward.

I think it will become apparent over time that the RPR community will actually make much more balanced, comprehensive progress inclusive of ALL data by ourselves because we really do ignore nothing. Time will tell.

Thanks Barry for providing the video!

Thank you again for an intelligent answer that sums up the two positions. I wonder if there are any "pro-vaxxers" that can refute this, intelligently. Or if there are any who are "open minded" on the issue. Maybe they wouldn't call themselves "pro-vaxxers", but may just be "on the fence". Anyone still researching, and discovering that vaccines are "harmless", even with the billions paid out by for Vaccine Compensation? Maybe they believe that this is fabricated by the anti-vaxxers?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Alex:

The quick answer - the RPR community is tired of back and forth with people who won't take the time to really understand the gravity of the questions we put on the table.

How many toxic adjuvants, their confirmed damages and ramifications of no required standard testing of long term effects before mass inoculation are you able to discuss intelligently? Have you even bothered to look at adjuvant issues before injecting yourself or your child with them? The pro-vaxxers don't want to talk about it.

The posts anti-vaxxers have made here aren't just quick fished copies of things that support a rebellious point of view that our egos need to defend. It's questions born of serious homework and great concern that point to an even bigger picture of greater concern. Our questions are ignored by pro-vaxxers and stagnate from having to deal instead with their condescending responses that vaccines are 'harmless', that harm is 'nonexistent' and we are 'embarrassing ourselves' for asking.

Then the pro-vaxxers post links to mainstream media propaganda - that we don't want or need to argue about anymore either - because it ALSO ignores our questions and we see through it. This pattern happens over and over in all controversial subjects and we don't see this repeating scenario as productive 'sharing' so we want our own club to be able to move forward.

I think it will become apparent over time that the RPR community will actually make much more balanced, comprehensive progress inclusive of ALL data by ourselves because we really do ignore nothing. Time will tell.

---

I couldn't agree more. My mind was made on the issue when I did a job for a couple who at one time were against vaccines. They had a ten year old son who in the 1980s right here in Santa Rosa got polio at the age of 3 or 4 His body was basically a round ball, he couldn't stand too much light, he was a real mess and always would be thanks to the foolishness of his parents. You talk about heartache they lived it every day as they attended him.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Edward Mendoza:

I was tempted to agree with you on this but there is a serious problem with it. What about the children who die or are severely handicapped for life because of the stupid decisions made by their insanely foolish parents?

Children have rights too and they need to be protected from grossly irresponsible parents. I strongly support the mandate. I hope it passes; the sooner the better. People do not have a right to hurt or kill their own children. Religion, ignorance, or anti-government hatred are not excuses.

---

So . . . . what about the children, and the parents of the children, who are permanently maimed by vaccines? Are you going to tell them that they made the right decision (to have their child vaccinated)? If you haven't already, I would encourage everyone to take a close look at this lengthy, partial list of actual cases during which it was determined by a court decision that vaccines caused irreparable harm to these children.
https://www.mctlawyers.com/vaccine-injury/cases/

But, beyond the increasingly heated debate about whether vaccines cause more harm than childhood diseases is that Big Pharma, the CDC, and other government agencies are actively working together toward eliminating freedom of choice regarding any vaccine for children AND adults that they deem "necessary."

Public health officials have unveiled a new plan to launch a massive nationwide vaccination promotion campaign involving private business and non-profit organizations to pressure all adults to comply with the adult vaccination schedule approved by the Centers for Disease Control - See more at: https://healthimpactnews.com/2015/fe....0LkjmWtc.dpuf

This NOT just about vaccines -- it is about our government, which is controlled by huge corporations and huger banks, deciding what THEY think is best for our health and our children's health. Yes, the same government that says that ketchup is a vegetable and that aspartame is good for you.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Goat Rock Ukulele:

I couldn't agree more. My mind was made on the issue when I did a job for a couple who at one time were against vaccines. They had a ten year old son who in the 1980s right here in Santa Rosa got polio at the age of 3 or 4 His body was basically a round ball, he couldn't stand too much light, he was a real mess and always would be thanks to the foolishness of his parents. You talk about heartache they lived it every day as they attended him.

---

This proves only that there are two sides to this coin, as there are with any issue.

A new neighbor moved in next door a few weeks ago. He is obviously disabled, but I didn't know by what until we spoke a few days ago. He has caretakers come every day. He was affected by the polio vaccine as a child, and has many physical and mental issues. So, he didn't get polio, but he got something that destroyed his health. He has a trust, but I don't know if it's vaccine compensation or not.

I wouldn't make a any serious decision based on one incident or one piece of information. But many people do. Life presents many dangers, and all we can do is be informed with facts as much as possible, keeping in mind that facts can and will be skewed by the informant. So, being aware of the source is important. Even then, sources we believe in, like our church, our doctor, our vet for example, may have a hidden agenda.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Goat Rock Ukulele:

I couldn't agree more. My mind was made on the issue when I did a job for a couple who at one time were against vaccines. They had a ten year old son who in the 1980s right here in Santa Rosa got polio at the age of 3 or 4 His body was basically a round ball, he couldn't stand too much light, he was a real mess and always would be thanks to the foolishness of his parents. You talk about heartache they lived it every day as they attended him.

---

mostly i read news and yes i most appreciate sources which challenge my knowledge and assumptions. easy to find in this info age. arthunter's links i have looked at many times. the one you include is similar to others i've read, yes we pay plenty for adverse vaccine reactions, adds up too 3 billion! i've also looked at many links people have shared to support vaccination. it's a complex story and there are many questions where more research is needed. one reason i think the vacist (thats vaccine fascist) strategy is a mistake is that the present situation where people have choice is such a research goldmine. the fact data for adverse vaccine reactions is not collected by the cdc is a huge red flag. so many scientific medical recommendations have been changed after further research into health results.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

Do you really watch news from sources you don't agree with? Please share those with us. Seems like there's hardly enough time to watch those sources that we most likely agree with. Do you read all the information presented here on WaccoBB that are in opposition to your beliefs? Can you share those, and what you've learned?

Are you checking out the information listed by ArtHunter?: For example: (this is just the latest one)

https://www.mctlawyers.com/vaccine-injury/cases/

---

my chosen assumption is that people usually have good intent and are the most complex part of a complicated world, duality just doesn't do us justice. also i willingly assume that all communication is an honest attempt to communicate. so the medical scientists who replaced the mercury with aluminum as vaccine preservatives were doing so because of concerns expressed by parents of autistic kids and their own desire to keep the vaccines available. and the bureaucrats who delayed this change and suppress data on vaccine reactions truly believe these choices were best for overall public health. while i don't dismiss the possibility of conspiracy, i don't see one here. so to take the discussion off into a rpr community might limit the information shared. the history of human health and public health policy is a vast, fascinating, and important from the personal to the global level topic. we need all to figure anything out.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Alex:

The quick answer - the RPR community is tired of back and forth with people who won't take time to really understand the gravity of the questions we put on the table.

How many toxic adjuvants, their confirmed damages and ramifications of no required standard testing of long term effects before mass inoculation are you able to discuss intelligently? Have you even bothered to look at adjuvant issues before injecting yourself or your child with them? The pro-vaxxers don't want to talk about it.

The posts anti-vaxxers have made here aren't just quick fished copies of things that support a rebellious point of view that our egos need to defend. It's questions born of serious homework and great concern that point to an even bigger picture of greater concern. Our questions are ignored by pro-vaxxers and stagnate from having to deal instead with their condescending responses that vaccines are 'harmless', that harm is 'nonexistent' and we are 'embarrassing ourselves' for asking.

Then the pro-vaxxers post links to mainstream media propaganda - that we don't want or need to argue about anymore either - because it ALSO ignores our questions and we see through it. This pattern happens over and over in all controversial subjects and we don't see this repeating scenario as productive 'sharing' so we want our own club to be able to move forward.

I think it will become apparent over time that the RPR community will actually make much more balanced, comprehensive progress inclusive of ALL data by ourselves because we really do ignore nothing. Time will tell.

---

Thanks for more clarification on your position. What news sources do you read? Which would you recommend? And, can you share the topics where you've been challenged, and changed your assumptions because of new information you've received?

In the past few months, many of my assumptions about veterinarians and pet food companies have been challenged so much that I've become an advocate in this area. I've found that even with the evidence about vets/pet food, many pet guardians refuse to accept it, because they want to "trust" their vet and they think that they don't have a choice. And, their vet is so "nice and friendly". As I discover more revealing information, I post in the "pets and other critters" category. I'm now involved in research on yearly mandatory vaccines for pets, beyond the initial ones.

I understood everything you said except this: "one reason i think the vacist (thats vaccine fascist) strategy is a mistake is that the present situation where people have choice is such a research goldmine." Can you explain this further?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

mostly i read news and yes i most appreciate sources which challenge my knowledge and assumptions. easy to find in this info age. arthunter's links...

---

My belief is that when big money is involved, "good intent" goes by the wayside. "Follow the money" is my guide. I wish that public health was actually a priority, but I see evidence everywhere I look, that it's not.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

my chosen assumption is that people usually have good intent and are the most complex part of a complicated world, duality just doesn't do us justice. ...

---

Rossman, your words are a great illustration of the two mindsets and how little they have to really share with each other. Bluepill wants to make comforting assumptions about government intent and blindly comply, Redpill wants answers to disturbing questions before compliance. Both sides think their world is round, and the other still arguing it's flat.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

....my chosen assumption is that people usually have good intent...

---

Questioners think it's deadly dangerous to make pretty assumptions about anybody in power telling us to obey them after countless examples of their proven corruption, lying, stealing, data manipulation and total absence of good intent.

Quote:

---

...i willingly assume......the medical scientists who replaced the mercury with aluminum as vaccine preservatives were doing so because of concerns expressed by parents of autistic kids......and the bureaucrats who delayed this change and suppress data on vaccine reactions truly believe these choices were best for overall public health.....

---

Nice assumptions, but the serious questions and deadly lies still exist. You know enough? to assume how nice the scientists and CEO's at Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Novartis, Sanofi and Merck are? Do you care about the specific mercury affects or aluminum in a newborn's bloodstream they knew about? You're not showing any interest in those questions or the rest.

Quote:

---

...while i don't dismiss the possibility of conspiracy, i don't see one here....

---

What facts comprise this conclusion? Any of the 100's+ of disturbing facts?

Quote:

---

.... so to take the discussion off into a rpr community might limit the information shared.....

---

??? Why isn't this saying.... 'if you go off by yourself there's going to be missing out on input from people like me.....but I'm not interested in understanding adjuvants, bacteriophages, nanobots, reporting manipulation, autism damage payouts, diploid cells, lab vs wild virus contagion, Bill of Rights ramifications of forced anything..... because big pharma scientists are so nice, they don't mean to hurt me.... "

Questioners don't want to just argue about whether things should be talked about or not. We want to actually talk.

Problem is that it takes a lot of work to really understand even one of these complex issues to discuss it intelligently. Would you try something? Take just one issue - adjuvants - read and watch 25 articles and videos on vaccine adjuvants - both sides - and come back and tell us what you learned.

Barry,
I wanted to add that anyone looking for more info (videos, clips, interviews etc) can find it on PBS' website simply by clicking videos and then doing a search with the word "vaccines."

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by gypsey:

I suggest everyone interested in this subject watch the episode on FRONTLINE (PBS) called Vaccine Wars.

[Video included! it's HD so zoom to full screen and sit back! Note that it is from 2010 - Barry :waccosun:]

---

alex your matrix mindset is just too limiting for me. hopefully you get that i share many of the same concerns as you about vaccination and that sb277 sucksass. of course formulating vaccines is a tradeoff, a balance of risk and gain. do you really believe they are a cynical attempt to poison the general population to extract money, reduce population, and weaken our bodies and minds?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Alex:

Rossman, your words are a great illustration of the two mindsets and how little they have to really share with each other. Bluepill wants to make comforting assumptions about government intent and blindly comply, Redpill wants answers to disturbing questions before compliance. Both sides think their world is round, and the other still arguing it's flat.

Questioners think it's deadly dangerous to make pretty assumptions about anybody in power telling us to obey them after countless examples of their proven corruption, lying, stealing, data manipulation and total absence of good intent....

---

i agree that money can corrupt both intent and science and understanding the money involved is essential for a wholistic knowledge of the topic. i'm not sure about the vaccine industry. it seems limited to a few large companies who are actively subsidized in production and research because of relatively low profit potential.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

My belief is that when big money is involved, "good intent" goes by the wayside. "Follow the money" is my guide. I wish that public health was actually a priority, but I see evidence everywhere I look, that it's not.

---

your posts on pet care have educated and inspired me to be even more raw/organic/herbal for all the animals i care for (1 cat, 2 dogs, 6 goats, 85 chickens !: ). it is frightening to understand the problems with kibble and know how i have poisoned in the past.

the sebastopol independent charter school has immunization rates below 25%. my 10yr old has had a few shots related to foreign travel and barnyard risks. she and her schoolmates appear to be healthier than the students at other public schools. is this true and why? forcing vaccination would eliminate islands which could make it possible to answer these questions with more depth.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

In the past few months, many of my assumptions about veterinarians and pet food companies have been challenged so much that I've become an advocate in this area. ...

---

Thank you for acknowledging that my pet posts have helped, and I'm sure that you probably share this information with others who care for animals.

I'm wondering about how you know that your daughter and her classmates appear to be healthier than students at public schools.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

your posts on pet care have educated and inspired me to be even more raw/organic/herbal for all the animals i care for...

---

Low profit potential? Really? Can you provide some sources for this information? It seems so strange that drug companies would even consider doing business if the potential for profit was low. Something about this doesn't ring true in this multi-billion dollar industry, and the billions it pays out in health damages. But, I'm open to knowing more about this.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

i agree that money can corrupt both intent and science and understanding the money involved is essential for a wholistic knowledge of the topic. i'm not sure about the vaccine industry. it seems limited to a few large companies who are actively subsidized in production and research because of relatively low profit potential.

---

Even if there is no specific intent to poison us, reduce population, or weaken our bodies and minds, there is an intent to extract money, as much as possible. We are just "collateral damage".

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

alex your matrix mindset is just too limiting for me. hopefully you get that i share many of the same concerns as you about vaccination and that sb277 sucksass. of course formulating vaccines is a tradeoff, a balance of risk and gain. do you really believe they are a cynical attempt to poison the general population to extract money, reduce population, and weaken our bodies and minds?

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

alex your matrix mindset is just too limiting for me.

---

Limiting?? Don't get that at all, but don't need an explanation.

Quote:

---

... hopefully you get that i share many of the same concerns as you about vaccination and that sb277 sucksass.

---

No I didn't, but saying so, your interest here plus being unalarmed about the low vaccinated % at the school, and saying you might investigate the $3B paid in adjuvant damages tells me you might be a bit on the fence and taking a second look at some things.

Quote:

---

...of course formulating vaccines is a tradeoff, a balance of risk and gain....

---

There's another one of those sentences that sounds logical, but again if not what you personally really know, it's another easier to live with assumption. I've seen enough data that I would no longer shrug off vaccines as acceptable risk.

Quote:

---

... do you really believe they are a cynical attempt to poison the general population to extract money, reduce population, and weaken our bodies and minds? .

---

I would say the agendas behind vaccines, and technologically now more than ever, are completely other than what they are sold as being. Besides the easily confirmable ingredient dangers and their suspicious agendas, there's snowballing massive profit but that's not the primary intent. The many faceted agendas of biological weaponry are even more daunting.

I think forced vaccinations is one of the biggest issues with the most dire ramifications to liberty and health facing everyone alive today and future generations.

Watch this 4 minute snip of a Department Of Defense lecture on just one gene targeted vaccine application as identified by the University of Kentucky among countless others already mapped and LONG used for targeting. I'm trying to point out how far greater advanced this all is than most people have ANY idea. Genes have been mapped far beyond what you have any clue. You're next.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-el008ECxiE

I wasn't sure where to post this YouTube video, so here it is, from TruthTheory.com:

https://www.truththeory.com/2015/02/...vaccines-safe/

This is a complex issue and a lot of research is required to decide about vaccine safety ... but the real issue of this thread is whether or not vaccines should be mandatory ... do we allow our government to dictate what risks we should take? ... shouldn't that be up to each and every citizen? .... as long as there are records which verify health damage from vaccines, and there are plenty, how can they be mandated?

There's been a lot of reporting from the international community about the serious consequences of Bill Gates' vaccine program ... this is hard to verify because it's only being reported by international press ... the American press won't touch it ...

Judges demand answers after children die in controversial cancer vaccine trial in India

charters are public schools. as a parent (lots of experience in this life role), i look at mood, engagement, and physical signs to guess how a kid is doing. there are lots of different things that effect wellbeing. at alex's urging i did read a literature review of studies documenting negative effects of vaccine additives. the most interesting part was the experience of the author. she is a professor of paleomicrobiology who was helping her husband develop a sids monitor. the data showed that the funky breathing associated with sudden infant death was associated with vaccination. as soon as they reported this to public health researchers they were shut down.

if true another example of establishment arrogance. while i choose to believe that public health officials have good intentions, stories like this indicate they don't trust people to care for themselves. understandable given all the stupid stuff we do that makes us sick. i think this prejudice leads to bad policy and research choices, as well as justifying vacist propaganda. vaccination is one of the few success stories of western scientific preventative medicine. so in this reductionist biomechanical world it is clung to, over promoted, and increasing shoved at the populace while any contra indications are squashed. no conspiracy, just arrogance and self blinding stupidity. this is my understanding of the situation.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

...I'm wondering about how you know that your daughter and her classmates appear to be healthier than students at public schools.

---

"Besides the easily confirmable ingredient dangers and their suspicious agendas, there's snowballing massive profit but that's not the primary intent. The many faceted agendas of biological weaponry are even more daunting."

Alex, what DO you think the primary intent is? Is the next sentence about weaponry somehow related to what you believe it is?

kathy

I appreciate your information. I can understand how we can compare our unvaccinated children to their vaccinated playmates, but this doesn't give an accurate picture. There are so many variables, and we're only looking at a few kids. It may be true that our kids are healthier because of other factors like food, environment, parenting, etc. I'm not disagreeing with the premise, but it's really a limited perspective to say that unvaccinated kids are healthier than vaccinated ones.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

charters are public schools. as a parent (lots of experience in this life role), i look at mood, engagement, and physical signs to guess how a kid is doing...

---

International cancer vaccine trials are concerning but the issue we folks here in the USA are focusing on is whether or not to mandate vaccinations for our children and the exponential result to the children of the world to prevent recognized, destructive diseases..

I am 70 years old so I have lived through the "unvaccinated years" and friends who died. I also remember the horror of a tainted polio vaccine and those who were damaged vs the now millions who were protected from that same vaccine.

I am not sure how I feel about mandatory vaccination, which seems coercive, but I also understand the importance of vaccines here and in the developing world, and wonder why we would want to deny benefit to many to suit a few.

To sum up, I am a proud proponent of vaccination to prevent disease because I have lived through the consequences of a world without these safeguards.

To the anti-vaxx people, how many of you have lived in an unvaccinated world?

Just asking.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:

This is a complex issue and a lot of research is required to decide about vaccine safety ...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by kpage9:

...Alex, what DO you think the primary intent is? Is the next sentence about weaponry somehow related to what you believe it is?...

---

Sorry if this seems vague but it's so complex. I think the 'primary' intent is the combined political/medical/scientific/military awareness of the huge benefits to them of the sum of the parts, and has fast tracked their aggressive pursuit of more and more that can be packed into this extremely convenient means of inserting controls in all the most fundamental issues of life - health, liberty and money all at once plus the convenience of it's built in reinforcement over and over all life long. When you add the star wars level biological weaponry capability, once you are injected, you are even more of a sitting duck of their will and high-tech triggers and no longer 100% in control of your body or mind for life.

That said, I agree with Shandi that whatever side you're on, the emphasis and joint efforts right now should be the absolute war against SB277 representing the end of the fundamental American right to 'self determination' - there will be few nail holes left in the coffin of the Bill of Rights after that loss.

By the way, adults are next. Look up the National Adult Immunization Plan (NAIP) target date of 2020. Obamacare was fast tracked first to organize the tracking of you.

I'm 72, and vaccines have been around longer than I have. I wasn't sure when they were first introduced, so I did a search, and in the meantime saw this: "Vaccines Did Not Save Us"

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by gypsey:

International cancer vaccine trials are concerning...

---

Another movie coming out about this .... https://traceamounts.com/watch-the-trailer/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqqiy8DhyH0

Hi Alex,

you say

"When you add the star wars level biological weaponry capability, once you are injected, you are even more of a sitting duck of their will and high-tech triggers and no longer 100% in control of your body or mind for life."

i have two reactions:

1) if you think anyone is EVER 100% in control of their body or mind for life, well...one can always pretend, i guess, but no way is it true for any of the mere mortals i know.

2) i still wonder this: in your understanding, who is "they" and what IS their will? Again I think you're giving an awful lot of credit to mere mortals. (The Them as opposed to the Us in #1.)

but let's see if i followed at least the meaning of your paragraph, pruned of adjectival phrases:
The intent (of vaccination efforts) is the awareness of the benefits to them of the sum of the parts (which has fast-tracked) their pursuit of this means of inserting controls. And you thus become a helpless victim of their will.

And further editing the participles out, I THINK we have this: The intent of vaccination is to subjugate us to unspecified but weapons-related purposes.

THANKS much for tackling an answer, even knowing it was not to a "red pill" comrade.

kathy

of course! and it would be possible to study the question, just difficult, expensive, and time consuming. and no company could make money with the answers, so it won't happen. and yet the data collection on our personal choices continues to expand exponentially, so maybe yes...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

...I can understand how we can compare our unvaccinated children to their vaccinated playmates, but this doesn't give an accurate picture...

---

Great Trailer! Former Rep. Dan Burton was at the end of it. In 2002, after his daughter, Danielle Sarkine, had her son immunized with 9 vaccines as recommended, the child developed autism right after. His daughter responds to false statements by WEBMD https://www.whale.to/v/sarkine.html about what happened...corporate distortions as usual. Rep. Burton helped create the National Vaccine Compensation Program.

He also talks in the following article how studies are done and the two schools of thought around vaccines and autism. I appreciated his research and showing the flaws that occurred. https://adventuresinautism.blogspot....ngress-on.html

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:

Another movie coming out about this .... https://traceamounts.com/watch-the-trailer/

---

its unusual for our government to release companies from liability for their product and set up courts to compensate damage from product use, as well as a powerful profit sweetener. i do not know, do the drug companies pay the costs and compensation awarded in vaccine courts or us?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

Low profit potential? Really? Can you provide some sources for this information?...

---

I just came across this information about the American History of Compulsory Vaccines, and it's ties to Eugenics (I didn't know what that meant. Think Hitler and a master race.):
https://vaccineimpact.com/2015/the-a...s-to-eugenics/

There are many corporations that are sued when they aren't peddling vaccines. And Taxpayers are responsible for settlements of the vaccine court...no accountability nor liability for the corporations....which is one of the points...if its such a wonderful thing, then why is their no accountability...it makes the corporations like Gods. Notice that all of the below companies are also vaccine producers,

*2005: Serono (now Merck Serono) paid $704 million after pleading guilty to two felony charges for fraudulent marketing related to a growth hormone to treat wasting in HIV patients.
*2007 Bristol Myers Squibb was fined $515 million in 2007 to settle charges of illegal marketing of Abilify, atypical antipsychotic drug, to child psychiatrists for children and seniors.
*2007: Purdue Pharma paid $634.5 million for fraudulently misbranding Oxycontin, and suggesting it was less addictive and less abused than other painkillers.
*In 2009 Eli Lilly was fined $1.4 billion for the illegal marketing of its antipsychotic drug Zyprexa for off-label uses, often to children and the elderly.
*In 2009, Pfizer paid $301 million for illegal marketing of its drug Geodon, and in 2009: Pfizer pays $2.3 billion for marketing fraud related to Bextra, Lyrica and other drugs.
*2010: Allergan paid $600 million for aggressively pushing Botox for unapproved uses.
*2010: AstraZeneca settled for $520 million for trying to persuade doctors to prescribe its psychotropic drug Seroquel for unapproved uses ranging from Alzheimer's disease and ADHD to sleeplessness and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
*2011: Merck settles for $950 million to resolve fraudulent marketing allegations related to Vioxx.
*In July ‘12, GlaxoSmithKline was found guilty of the largest health fraud in US history, and was fined $3 billion after pleading guilty to three counts of criminal misdemeanor and other civil liabilities relating to a number of different drugs, including Paxil and Wellbutrin and downplaying safety risks of Avandia.
* In June ‘12, Johnson & Johnson agreed to pay $2.2 billion for illegally marketing its drug Risperdal
*2012: Abbott Laboratories settles for $1.6 billion for aggressively promoting their seizure drug Depakote for off-label use in elderly dementia patients, despite lacking evidence of safety or effectiveness.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

its unusual for our government to release companies from liability for their product and set up courts to compensate damage from product use, as well as a powerful profit sweetener. i do not know, do the drug companies pay the costs and compensation awarded in vaccine courts or us?

---

Thank you Kathy! Trying to coherently explain complex stuff in a short post is hard enough and leaves so much room for interpretation. Your response is a ray of hope of a non RP actually trying to understand and ask instead of attack, here's big hugs for that.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by kpage9:

...I THINK we have this: The intent of vaccination is to subjugate us to unspecified but weapons-related purposes.

---

Really good try at my badly worded paragraph, and really close. I'd rephrase... first it's an incredibly convenient and powerful one stop ongoing political, health, experimentation and financial manipulation and control tool for numerous major industries, then if that all weren't bad enough, on top of it is the star wars level weaponry aspect. I'm not sure what you meant that we're never 100% in control of, but it's not having a chip, nanobyte, metal or specific DNA/gene target in you that can wait dormantly for someone else's use and trigger of a health or mind functionality.

How do I condense 1000's of books, sites, forums, documentaries and interviews of 100 years of just vaccine history and it's politics the RP community shares into a sentence to answer who 'they' and their 'will' is for you?

Blue doesn't mean you are wrong, it means you are utterly unaware of big stuff right on the other side of a thin curtain. The worldwide RP community has pulled back those curtains and could talk for hours about the many interweaving 'wills' and long lists of 'they'. I can't summarize all the homework it takes to get to that point in a short answer.

If you want to peek behind that curtain, I'd like to suggest you read this recent thread on a different forum. They're all RP people, but don't all agree either. But take note of what perspective and depth of information necessary is taken for granted communally, how only interested in respectfully comparing facts they are and how the only interest is truth.

Media Blitz Against Anti-Vaxxers
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/sho...hlight=vaccine

Even here at wacco in 2009 someone noticed that the swine flu epidemic came from the military base responsible for biological weapons. https://www.waccobb.net/forums/showt...ns-Coming-Soon

They keep trying to scare us into forced vaccinations. I want to again stress that FIRST PRIORITY now is stopping the new one, SB277. We have so lost America if this passes both for the 'self determination' loss and the subjugation of the WHOLE next generation by forced injections over and over for LIFE. If you need to just know why it's not good for your kids first to act, here's step 1.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsZbVg6vmVs

Yes, I was aware of this. It's an interesting history. The Rockefeller Foundation helped found the German eugenics program...that's where Hitler got it from... and they even funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to Auschwitz. Merck is a Nazi company...big vaccine company...don't feel their agenda is any different then or now.

In 1904, the Carnegie Institution established a laboratory complex at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island (this name comes up in human experimentation many times) that stockpiled millions of index cards on ordinary Americans, as researchers carefully plotted the removal of families, bloodlines and whole peoples. From Cold Spring Harbor, eugenics advocates agitated in the legislatures of America, as well as the nation's social service agencies and associations. California was considered an epicenter of the American eugenics movement. The state's two leading sterilization mills in 1933 were Sonoma State Home with 388 operations and Patton State Hospital with 363 operations. Other sterilization centers included Agnews, Mendocino, Napa, Norwalk, Stockton and Pacific Colony state hospitals. https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Eugenics-and-the-Nazis-the-California-2549771.php

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

I just came across this information about the American History of Compulsory Vaccines, and it's ties to Eugenics (I didn't know what that meant. Think Hitler and a master race.):
https://vaccineimpact.com/2015/the-a...s-to-eugenics/

---

Quote:

---

I just came across this information about the American History of Compulsory Vaccines, and it's ties to Eugenics

---

everything was tied to eugenics then.

well, not quite. But, for example, take a look at the history of IQ tests. The early 20th century was full of crazy ideas about how to perfect the human race. Weird, as I write it, that seems familiar for some reason. Anyway, that's a pretty indirect taint by association. Vaccines aren't really the sole surviving vestiges of a plan for lebensraum...

you might also find the history of lobotomies a source of analogy to something. Hell if I know what, but it's gruesome and quirky enough that it's got to be useful for some argument somewhere. Walter Freeman just kind of wandered the country helping the afflicted. Gynecology and psychology have equally sordid pasts. None of it all that relevant in my mind, but I know many waccos feel differently.

Interesting that people panic when they discover toxic substances in their houses, but are o.k. with it in their bodies. I wonder how many people in our community can relate to these positions of being concerned about toxins in environments, but not in vaccines.

"Lumber Liquidators came under fire when it was discovered that they were selling flooring containing very high levels of formaldehyde. People panicked, the retail giant's stocks fell, and across the country, health questions ran rampant. Why all the fuss over flooring, when formaldehyde is also found in vaccines? Why is it that we can question the cancer-causing chemical when it's in our floors, but we're crazy anti-vaccination folks when it comes to injecting it in our bloodstream?" Sorry, but this is from a source that many people criticize. Not sure if the link will work, but you can find the information by searching. https://www.naturalnews.com/049216_formaldehyde_vaccine_ingr…

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

Interesting that people panic when they discover toxic substances ...
formaldehyde...

---

people panic very easily. Your body is full of toxins that it makes itself but you wouldn't want to come into external contact with. Chemicals like sodium chloride can easily kill you, or make a tomato more tasty in smaller quantities. Benghazi!! Squirrel!!! really, everyone should learn to avoid reacting to presence of 'toxins' or 'contaminants' or any substance just by its scary name. Prominant use of those terms in an argument are often signs that it's just going for the emotional reaction - cooties!!! - since they're so distracting. But as other threads here are bringing out, people panic or react emotionally way before more thoughtful reasoning kicks in.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

Your body is full of toxins that it makes itself but you wouldn't want to come into external contact with.

---

coincidentally enough, I just came across this:

Quote:

---

What many people may not know is that our own bodies produce and use formaldehyde as a part of our normal metabolism (Final Report on Carcinogens Background Document for Formaldehyde [PDF], 2010). When we are exposed to methanol (e.g., via inhalation or ingestion of foods like citric fruits and juices, vegetables or fermented beverages), our bodies break it down into formaldehyde and other byproducts. Our bodies produce formaldehyde as a result of DNA demethylation (an important process for controlling gene expression, e.g., in developing embryos) and other biological processes. It is such a regular part of human metabolism, that our normal, naturally produced blood concentrations are generally about 2-3μg of formaldehyde per gram of blood (or about 2.12-3.18μg/mL)*. And it is actually a pretty important chemical; our bodies use formaldehyde to form DNA and amino acids (Toxicological Profile for Formaldehyde [PDF], ATSDR, 1999).

Role in Metabolism

Formaldehyde plays an essential role in our metabolism. As part of the metabolic process, formaldehyde, whether from an external source or produced by our bodies, is converted into formate (PDF) by the enzyme formaldehyde dehydrogenase. The resulting formate can then be eliminated in the urine, further broken down into CO₂ and exhaled, or used by our cell machinery to synthesize nucleotides and nucleobases, such as purines and thymidine.

---

so, if you're using a juicer for your health, you're probably increasing your exposure to formaldehyde!

I don't say this just to try to ridicule people's beliefs - it's a meme I use on myself, too - but I find it helpful to visualize Sterling Hayden's regard for precious bodily fluids to give some perspective. We live in a messy stew of chemicals and competing biological elements, and more importantly, that's what shaped our evolution.

Thank you for this information. Maybe toxicity has to do with the "amount" of exposure or ingestion? Some people are more sensitive to common foods and other substances because of certain chemicals or compounds found in them.

When my mother, who had smoked for over 60 years, read that tobacco contains formaldehyde, she quit cold turkey. If she had known that it was a naturally occurring substance in her body, she would have continued smoking.

Cannabinoids are also part of our chemistry, but those who oppose cannabis use may not want to admit that.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

...so, if you're using a juicer for your health, you're probably increasing your exposure to formaldehyde!...

---

"The dose makes the poison"

Paracelsus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dose_makes_the_poison

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paracelsus

This has been known since the Renaissance - get a grip folks.

Richard

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

...Maybe toxicity has to do with the "amount" of exposure or ingestion? ...

---

I think that's absolutely true.

I'm not a doctor, though apparently I have an internet doppelganger who is, but I think the amount of any substance is of crucial importance in regards to its health effects. I also think that the normal tendency toward simplification of knowledge makes most folklore, and a lot of research, pretty useless as guidance to diet and exposure. For example, there's no magic substance that 'cures cancer' or, for that matter, causes it. Biological systems are mathematically chaotic. That doesn't mean 'chaos' in the sense of random crazy behavior, but chaos in the sense that the outcomes are functions of an incredibly complex set of conditions while at the same time tend to cluster in predictable patterns. Some substances may always make large contributions, others may only rarely impact the system as a whole. But we all want to find something tractable so we can try to exert control or at least explain what's happening.

So for example, when you say "people are sensitive to .. substances.. because of certain chemicals .. found in them" you unfortunately have no real way to know that's true, at least in the sense I think you mean it. For example, maybe it's the odor triggering a learned response from childhood trauma. Maybe it's intestinal flora reacting to something that's harmless (whether you ARE your biome is a different question). Placebo effects are huge too. I find the whole field fascinating, but I do think that few of us (including me) are really qualified to have anything more than heart-felt opinions. The data's just not complete, unambiguous or easy to understand.

This was on the internet this morning ... it seems well documented ... I'm coming across these stories all of the time now ... what's going on? ...

https://yournewswire.com/whooping-co...ated-children/

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:

This was on the internet this morning ... it seems well documented ... I'm coming across these stories all of the time now ... what's going on? ...

---

it seems so because the barrier to publishing on the internet is so low. Consider it gossip. Word count doesn't equal meaning. It's no way to distinguish worthy from unworthy. Cats aren't the dominant life form, regardless of their internet presence.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by geomancer:

"The dose makes the poison"
--Paracelsus ...

---

Interesting dude.

Here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia article regarding Paracelsus's views:

"Because everything in the universe was interrelated, beneficial medical substances could be found in herbs, minerals and various chemical combinations thereof. Paracelsus viewed the universe as one coherent organism pervaded by a uniting lifegiving spirit, and this in its entirety, Man included, was 'God'. His views put him at odds with the Church, for which there necessarily had to be a difference between the Creator and the created."

Scott

Podfish,

This article was backed by a report from Fox news ... are we to believe that Fox news now engages in gossip?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

it seems so because the barrier to publishing on the internet is so low. Consider it gossip. Word count doesn't equal meaning. It's no way to distinguish worthy from unworthy. Cats aren't the dominant life form, regardless of their internet presence.

---

I count Fox News as "doubt worthy", and would check other more reliable sources.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:

This article was backed by a report from Fox news ... are we to believe that Fox news now engages in gossip?

---

https://img194.imageshack.us/img194/...1206081330.png
California lawmakers advance vaccine bill amid heated debate

https://www.waccobb.net/forums/wacco...9_10-50-35.png

SACRAMENTO — California lawmakers on Wednesday advanced a bill that would require schoolchildren in the state to be vaccinated amid impassioned pleas from parents and doctors, even activist Robert Kennedy Jr.

Under the proposal, parents would no longer be able to send unvaccinated kids to school with waivers citing religious or personal beliefs. Exemptions would be available only for children with health problems.

Supporters say the measure would increase the number of vaccinated young people and improve public health.

Ariel Loop told lawmakers that such a plan could have prevented her child from contracting measles at Disneyland. "My infant shouldn't have had to suffer. He shouldn't, still months later, be having complications with his eyes," she said. "I shouldn't have had to fear for his life."

Opponents, however, say vaccines can be as dangerous as the diseases they aim to fight and that the bill would trample parental rights.

Continues here

I don't get it ... what's the good of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from getting the disease from someone else? Isn't that the point of getting it? If you are so afraid of a disease and think vaccine will prevent you from getting it, your dose should be sufficient; if not, what's the point?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

California lawmakers advance vaccine bill amid heated debate

---

agreed, but as "mainstream media" they will have more pressure on them to report the facts ... it is the interpretation of those facts which is usually questioned ...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

I count Fox News as "doubt worthy", and would check other more reliable sources.

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:

Podfish,

This article was backed by a report from Fox news ... are we to believe that Fox news now engages in gossip?

---

surely that question answers itself.

A lot of the time they use the dodge "people say..." or "some people believe..." which is a CYA technique that removes the burden of having to come up with any pretence of fact-checking. But yea, they engage in gossip too. It's extremely rare for them to apologize. One thing that's gotten them their reputation is that, compared to other news organizations, they rarely retract their mistakes. And it's not likely they make fewer mistakes.

Of course, this isn't to claim that the rest of the pots in the closet are all shiny - only when compared to FOX's kettle.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by gardenmaniac:

I don't get it ... what's the good of vaccination if it doesn't protect you from getting the disease from someone else? Isn't that the point of getting it? If you are so afraid of a disease and think vaccine will prevent you from getting it, your dose should be sufficient; if not, what's the point?

---

'cuz "it's not all about you" to use a cliche.

Vaccines are about shifting the odds. So those fearful of vaccines sieze on cases where someone's purportedly hurt by taking them. It's pretty clear that people overestimate the odds of harmful reactions, but there really isn't a claim that vaccinations are always totally benign. Putting anything in your body - food, tattoo ink, other people - introduces substances that may trigger a reaction. But none of us are hermetically sealed. Doing it voluntarily, though, means we want justification. So the justification is that vaccines make it less likely that you'll be colonized by harmful bacteria, which will use you to incubate their brood and spread it around the world. Some individuals may react to vaccination and be harmed, others will be saved from a destiny as a source of pestilence. Without vaccines, a few will be spared the direct harm, but they may in turn get infected and suffer from that. And many more who would have tolerated the vaccination without harm, will now get infected as well.

There's no option that eliminates all negative health consequences for everyone. It's a mathematical decision - what level of harm for how many people is acceptible to lower the risk of harm (by how much) for the population at large. The individual who opts out is usually imagining themselves in the first group of risk-takers.

Looked at that way, it's clearly a choice to screw your neighbors because you don't want to accept the risk. Some people are identified in advance as being at high risks - some children with immunity deficiencies, for example. Others self-identify as being at high risk because they have their own opinion about the 'science' that determined the efficacy of the vaccines.

I think you've missed my point, which is this:

if/when you are vaccinated - against measles, for example - the purpose of said vaccine is to create immunity so that if exposed, you won't get measles. If everyone has been vaccinated, then there will be no measles to catch, case closed. But if one person who has chosen to NOT get the vaccine comes down w/ measles and you are exposed, shouldn't you have immunity thru the vaccine with which you have been vaccinated? Isn't that the exact reason for having been vaccinated -- so that if/when you are exposed, you will not get sick?, and if not that, what exactly was the point of having been vaccinated in the first place?

There are those, too, whose beliefs include treating the body as a self-regulating and self-healing unit. They eschew most allopathic medical treatments. I may not agree with them, but in this country, it is their right to hold and practice these beliefs. It is not my (or your) place to dictate what they can or cannot do. For the greater good? What happened to freedom of religion, separation of church and state?

So if you believe that vaccination will prevent the spread of disease, by all means get vaccinated. If you are correct, and the vaccine protects you by creating immunity to the disease, then you will be protected - no matter what I have done or not done. If you get measles, what? Vaccination didn't work?

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

...Vaccines are about shifting the odds. ...

---

If you do a search using the words "vaccination lawsuits" you'll get 445,000 pages ... it's very revealing ... most of these links are about actual lawsuits ... most of them were won ...

Mandating a treatment protocol which has this kind of history is questionable ....

in sacramento a couple of days ago, robert f. kennedy jr. spoke before and after the sold-out showing of the movie "Trace Amounts" which is about vaccines and the link to autism.
a showing here - and everywhere - would be good.
jude

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

California lawmakers advance vaccine bill amid heated debate

---

This is an interesting addition to the whole vaccine debate ... what if we're supposed to get sick as children to protect us throughout our lives?

https://vaccineimpact.com/2015/is-ma...all-americans/

the problem with this tidy piece of vaccine fascist logic is that it ignores numerous facts. such as the consistent effort by the cdc to not record negative vaccine reactions, or the powerful paradigm of the hygiene hypothesis and the role it plays in human health, and the history of communicable disease in developed societies.

the most powerful argument for mandated vaccination is protection of babies who are not breastfed and children and adults who are too weak to choose vaccination. the present level of voluntary vaccination does seem to provide protection for the most vulnerable in societies with easy access to vaccination, so the theory is more is better. to agree or not is a matter of conjecture, since science asking this question is nonexistent!

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

'cuz "it's not all about you" to use a cliche. Vaccines are about shifting the odds....

---

Your point is a logical one. But it misses the fact that the youngest children can't be vaccinated til they're at the right age (which is 12 months for the mmr, if i read the chart right) leaving these kiddos who are innocent of any decision-making to suffer the potential consequences of being exposed to measles, mumps or rubella or whatever.

here's the link to the chart:

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/schedul...dolescent.html


kathy

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by gardenmaniac:

I think you've missed my point, which is this:

if/when you are vaccinated - against measles, for example - the purpose of said vaccine is to create immunity so that if exposed, you won't get measles...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

the problem with this tidy piece of vaccine fascist logic is that it ignores numerous facts. such as the consistent effort by the cdc to not record negative vaccine reactions,

---

hey, at least the CDC would keep the trains running on time.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by gardenmaniac:

I think you've missed my point, which is this: if/when you are vaccinated - against measles, for example - the purpose of said vaccine is to create immunity so that if exposed, you won't get measles. ...

---

you're less likely to get sick - and not necessarily the you you. The aggregate you. So if you expose a quantity of vaccinated people, and a similar quantity of unvaccinated people, it's not going to be 100% for one group and 0% in the other. There will just be (hopefully a lot) fewer cases in the vaccinated group. If the difference is minor, then any risk from taking vaccines makes less sense to take. But since the difference is not minor, the small risk from vaccines is a reasonable one in the aggregate. Of course, if you do believe 'they' are lying to us and the risk is huge but the benefits are faked, then it's all a scam like the Easter Bunny, fostered on us starting sometime last century by socialistic Petaluma egg farmers for their own gain.

socialistic Petaluma egg farmers? ... now that's interesting ... so if you question the safety of vaccines you probably believe in the Easter Bunny? ... hey, let's just insult each other ... it's so much easier then having a good solid discussion in which all of the facts are looked at and all opinions are considered ...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

...Of course, if you do believe 'they' are lying to us and the risk is huge but the benefits are faked, then it's all a scam like the Easter Bunny, fostered on us starting sometime last century by socialistic Petaluma egg farmers for their own gain.

---

I highly encourage everyone to watch the film, Silent Epidemic; The Untold Story of Vaccines. I thought I knew something about this issue but after watching this movie I realized I didn't know as much as I thought. I'll bet the majority of you will come to the same conclusion. It is literally criminal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJGyN3gCsBg&feature=youtu.be

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

the problem with this tidy piece of vaccine fascist logic is that it ignores numerous facts. such as the consistent effort by the cdc to not record negative vaccine reactions...!

---

I came across this petition online ... it seems that Dr. Pan might benefit financially from this legislation ...

https://www.change.org/p/richard-pan...st-this-causes

I tried the link, but it didn't work....

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:

I came across this petition online ... it seems that Dr. Pan might benefit financially from this legislation ...

https://www.change.org/p/richard-pan...st-this-causes

---

here try this ... https://tinyurl.com/qbbxqu6

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

I tried the link, but it didn't work....

---

Signed and shared. This petition needs more signatures to get him out of office for blatant conflict of interest. I hope those in our community who favor choice over mandatory vaccine compliance, and those who don't support conflict of interest, will sign.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:

here try this ... https://tinyurl.com/qbbxqu6

---

discussing vaccines and policy with you is like shooting fish in a barrel, boring and tedious. please educate yourself. there is a lot of information available on this thread which makes your simplistic logic completely out of date. can you imagine a set of information from which the conclusion is that not vaccinating contributes to aggregate health? thats the case being made, if you are curious, explore it...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

you're less likely to get sick - and not necessarily the you you. The aggregate you. So if you expose a quantity of vaccinated people, and a similar quantity of unvaccinated people, it's not going to be 100% for one group and 0% in the other. There will just be (hopefully a lot) fewer cases in the vaccinated group. ...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

discussing vaccines and policy with you is like shooting fish in a barrel, boring and tedious. please educate yourself. there is a lot of information available on this thread which makes your simplistic logic completely out of date. can you imagine a set of information from which the conclusion is that not vaccinating contributes to aggregate health? thats the case being made, if you are curious, explore it...

---

oh, shucks, didn't realize that this was a technical forum - I thought it was a discussion for lay people who don't typically read studies in the journals where they're published. The response matches the question which was "if I get sick even though I took a vaccine, why doesn't that disprove their efficacy?" Yeah, that presumes that they do prevent disease. If you're too bored to read posts that don't fit your guidelines maybe you should just fish in a smaller bucket.

i can argue all sides, as i guess you have seen me do. i take my responsibility as a parent and citizen seriously to meaningfully discuss a political issue about a medical subject. you just seem to play around in your tiny bucket. there are a number of aspects which bring to question vaccine efficacy, the one you cite being the least meaningful. it is boring to dispute someone who lacks curiosity about the subject.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by podfish:

oh, shucks, didn't realize that this was a technical forum - I thought it was a discussion for lay people who don't typically read studies in the journals where they're published. The response matches the question which was "if I get sick even though I took a vaccine, why doesn't that disprove their efficacy?" Yeah, that presumes that they do prevent disease. If you're too bored to read posts that don't fit your guidelines maybe you should just fish in a smaller bucket.

---

If anyone wants to avoid personal put downs, join the Red Pill Roundtable.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by rossmen:

i can argue all sides, as i guess you have seen me do...

---

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Shandi:

If anyone wants to avoid personal put downs, join the Red Pill Roundtable.

---

And please don't insult each other here either!

Thank you Barry ...

These are very complex issues ... the good news is that humanity seems to be waking up because of the internet and questioning everything ... vaccines, wars, climate change, government, water rights, food production, population, etc etc ... the bad news is that the world is suddenly crammed with information, some of it valuable, some of it fabricated to support special interests ... and I will be the first to admit that it is NOT easy to sort it all out ...

Debate is valuable ... what isn't valuable is judgement calls and labeling ... that only shuts down conversations that we really need to be having ... if you read your post and honestly conclude that it would be insulting to you if the situation was reversed, can you edit it please? ... can we really strive to be a conscious community that practices the golden rule?

I am no better or worse then anyone here and I do feel frustrated at times and I do battle with my ego ... but I do try to show respect at all times ... sometimes I might fail and if I do please call me on it ...

There are no dummies here ... and discussions get passionate because we really do care about our world and our community ... the level of discussion is very high and I value each and every one of you, but I also know of many in our community who don't get involved because of fears of being insulted ... just sayin ...

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Barry:

And please don't insult each other here either!

---

Insulting each other to try to get our point across seems like a last resort for control in a discussion. Some people will retaliate in a similar manner, but as Arthunter pointed out, some won't even enter the discussion for fear of being insulted. Some people who have good input will stay away because of their sensitivity to insults. That's unfortunate. I wish that this community in particular would set an example of conscious, non-violent communication, and I think it does for the most part. If we could just imagine the feeling of being on the receiving end of someone using our words to communicate with us. As Arthunter says "if you read your post and honestly conclude that it would be insulting to you if the situation was reversed, can you edit it please? ... can we really strive to be a conscious community that practices the golden rule?

It's a simple practice we can use to elevate our communication, even when we disagree. In my marriage, there were so many things we didn't agree on, but there were never insults or name calling in 18 years.

I'd rather focus on saving some of the outrageous salaries that these people make and using it for feeding people or providing them with health care rather than being so upset about #13.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by kpage9:

I guess i see it this way. Yes there are freedoms, and freedom is certainly worth protecting. But just because we are free to do something--because we have the legal right--doesn't mean we SHOULD do it--that's reserved, in my mind, for what's morally right.

so--because we CAN refuse vaccination, because it is one of a gazillion rights we actually do have--is that a freedom worth fighting for? i mean: there are freedoms and there are freedoms, no? the freedom to carry an assault rifle--yep it's a freedom, so we should go to the mat to protect it just because it's our legal right ? What about the moral right, the ethical right, the societal consequences?

I also have to say I don't share your view that our freedoms are so imperiled...i do see much of america's wielding of them as increasingly selfish and stupid...maybe causing my own fealty to civil liberties to erode a little

sorry i didn't notice #13--i will go back and find it, although it would have been helpful if you had included it...

kathy

---