everybody has got to choose what to what's best for their children. And I say best for their children.. not for the parents piece of mind. To do so... we need to poke, prod and try and decipher the mountains of research.
As for France, is the SIDS rate up? the alzheimers rate? the cancer rate? the autism rate? I have no idea.. what I do know is that chronic disease is sky rocketing all over the world. asthma, diabetes, skin conditions, allergies, mental illness why? I also know that for example, the makers of Prozac in the US Eli Lilly (maintenance antidepressant which they tell you, you will probably have to continue to the rest of your life).. was the pharmaceutical companies number one selling drug at one time. One of the major side effects of Prozac is psychosis. Prozac goes off patent and all of a sudden their next number one drug is Zyprexa.. for psychosis. $5.8 billion worth they sold of Zyprexa! Zyprexa is known to induce diabetes. So what was the number two drug being sold by this pharmaceutical company, Eli Lilly? their diabetes drugs. and they keep lining them up and selling them down the pipeline. Pharmaceutical reps are taught this! The pharmaceutical companies are creating their own markets.
MMR Vaccination
-
caithnesscrofter
- Living the good life
- Posts: 253
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:00 pm
- Location: bottomsupster
-
caithnesscrofter
- Living the good life
- Posts: 253
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:00 pm
- Location: bottomsupster
vaccines destroy the immune system. after you've had the vaccine you are more susceptible to getting other illnesses. again.. the antigenic complex and autoimmunity. diet and holistic living can boost the immune system. I believe their was a laddy that died of measles not long ago. however.. how many children died from sids? cancer, or the treatment of cancer? other diseases? accidents? to me.. the risks just don't balance out. i should mention that the link I posted is the package insert for the MMR II vaccine from the manufacturer.. sanofi-pasteurchadspad wrote:It says in that report that the odds of something serious happening are 6 to 22 times higher from contracting measles than from having the jab. The a good point for the jab in my opinion. Yes there are nasty things in the vaccine but seems the disease is worse. Not so long ago there was a lad in the UK died from measles because he hadnt had the jab. I understand what some of you are saying about having a good diet etc is important, I agree - I am a Reiki practionner and know the benefits of alternative medicines - but how can a diet and holisyic living prevent a child from catching a virus?
No where on the that insert does it tell you that contracting measles makes you alot less likely to develop certain types of tumours, eczema and a range of other illnesses either.
-
Martin
- A selfsufficientish Regular
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 8:50 am
- Location: Nr Heathfield, East Sussex
- Contact:
loads of people die of 'flu, and noone bats an eyelid! Yes measles can kill, but very seldom does, the theory put forward by many alternative practitioners (with which I heartily concur), is that we are constantly besieged by several challenges to our immune systems, and that the healthy way to survive is to build a good immune system - it is designed for the job! 
Having survived very happily for many years, using only the "alternatives", and getting to know how other disciplines view how the body works, I feel that for the most part, allopathic medicine has lost it's way, and is based on great fallacies.
For a viral infection, the classic nostrum nowadays is antibiotics - I can't use them, I'm allergic to the lot, so have had to find effective alternatives -vitamin c, zinc, echinacea and garlic all work very effectively - and garlic has antiviral properties absent from antibiotics. The gross over-use of antibiotics for every little sniffle is causing great problems, and the advent of "superbugs" - for most infections, simple folk remedies are more than adequate,and do not themselves challenge the system by killing off all the "good bugs" too
And what's wrong with a "good sweat"? - it's the body's way of killing bugs - but there is this fantasy that it's "unhealthy" - and immediately stifled with aspirin!
Every drug I can think of is a single, extracted or synthesised artificial concentrated substance - which is something that would never occur in nature, and can never be viewed as "natural" - allopathy is only just getting to notice that synergy exists, let alone to use it! In simple terms, the whole plant contains a cocktail of compounds, in a natural balance - they often work together to produce their effect - to extract just the "active ingredient", and use it in concentrated form is just stupid - we never evolved to take them in this form, but we did evolve to cope with (most) plants. There was a case cited on tv recently - there is a herb being used in AIDS treatments, and it is wonderfully effective - the scientists looked at it, analysed it, and said there was indeed something that could be of use, but in a form unassimilable to the body - the natural saponins in the plant allow it to do it's work!
The only reason that safe, natural remedies are not used widely is because the drug companies can't patent them, and rob us blind!
Having survived very happily for many years, using only the "alternatives", and getting to know how other disciplines view how the body works, I feel that for the most part, allopathic medicine has lost it's way, and is based on great fallacies.
For a viral infection, the classic nostrum nowadays is antibiotics - I can't use them, I'm allergic to the lot, so have had to find effective alternatives -vitamin c, zinc, echinacea and garlic all work very effectively - and garlic has antiviral properties absent from antibiotics. The gross over-use of antibiotics for every little sniffle is causing great problems, and the advent of "superbugs" - for most infections, simple folk remedies are more than adequate,and do not themselves challenge the system by killing off all the "good bugs" too
And what's wrong with a "good sweat"? - it's the body's way of killing bugs - but there is this fantasy that it's "unhealthy" - and immediately stifled with aspirin!
Every drug I can think of is a single, extracted or synthesised artificial concentrated substance - which is something that would never occur in nature, and can never be viewed as "natural" - allopathy is only just getting to notice that synergy exists, let alone to use it! In simple terms, the whole plant contains a cocktail of compounds, in a natural balance - they often work together to produce their effect - to extract just the "active ingredient", and use it in concentrated form is just stupid - we never evolved to take them in this form, but we did evolve to cope with (most) plants. There was a case cited on tv recently - there is a herb being used in AIDS treatments, and it is wonderfully effective - the scientists looked at it, analysed it, and said there was indeed something that could be of use, but in a form unassimilable to the body - the natural saponins in the plant allow it to do it's work!
The only reason that safe, natural remedies are not used widely is because the drug companies can't patent them, and rob us blind!
http://solarwind.org.uk - a small company in Sussex sourcing, supplying, and fitting alternative energy products.
Amateurs encouraged - very keen prices and friendly helpful service!
Amateurs encouraged - very keen prices and friendly helpful service!
-
caithnesscrofter
- Living the good life
- Posts: 253
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:00 pm
- Location: bottomsupster
couldn't agree with you more, martin. however.. the last bit. is it maybe on the agenda though with codex ailmentarius? I suspect they will pass legislation like this claiming that it is not regulated enough and the pharmaceutical companies will start patenting and marketing our natural remedies and vitamins and such in the future.
-
hedgewizard
- A selfsufficientish Regular
- Posts: 1415
- Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:26 pm
- Location: dorset, UK
- Contact:
Gosh, I'm afraid I can't answer all the topics raised in this thread, since it seems to be changing more into a rail about allopathic medicine than a focussed debate about vaccination. I have an ethical requirement to be as sure of any answers as I can possibly be, which means researching them which sadly I don't have as much time for as I'd need. I'll do my best with a few points though.
Firstly, Caithness your point on aluminium is a good one. Many of the newer vaccines (such as MMR II) don't use it, but there are still plenty that do. As for formaldehyde I'm afraid I'm woefully ignorant there, hands up to that one.
You're quite right to say that I'm educated by material produced by "scientists, doctors, professors and researchers in the pharma/industrial complex". When it comes to evidence-based medicine, they're the best sort of information. I think you have an idea that I've been handed a pack of glossies and taught to parrot the stuff though, and that's wrong. My degree course - and everything I've done since - was aimed at teaching me to find, gather and evaluate information, and make up my own mind.
Your mention of excitotoxins is a good case in point, since there's a staggering amount of disinformation on the web. The first things I ask when looking at any information is "Who's telling me this? Do they have the IQ of a garden fern? Do they have a vested interest, or an axe to grind? Are the trying to sell me anything?" Then there's the quality of their data. Where does it come from? Is it referenced? Only then do you even consider the information itself.
It's always worth chasing up the reference chain to the original data - sometimes it's misunderstood, misapplied, of poor quality, or just plain not there. One common trick is to publish a small trial - three groups of half a dozen volunteers, discarding data from any of the groups that doesn't support what you're trying to prove. That data won't stand up to even casual scrutiny, but all you need to do is get it published. Then you write an article elsewhere, referencing your original dodgy study. Thereafter you only ever reference the second article, and surprisingly quickly the thing gets quoted all over the place because people are too lazy to check up the references, and so don't realise you're actually quoting yourself. Another thing you often find is groups of websites quoting each other, with only one outside reference (such as a doctor selling a book). It looks like there's lots of information there; there isn't.
I'm not paid by pharmaceutical companies, but mainly by you the taxpayer. My salary isn't affected by "peddling" drugs, or not "peddling" them - I couldn't give a stuff about making sales or supplies. Sorry, but there you are. Number one thing I try to get prescribers not to give? Antibiotics. Number two? Sedatives. Number three? Anti-inflammatories. Not in all cases you understand, but they're often not necessary.
I also don't trust the pharmaceutical companies to do anything other than gun for profit. That's why we have systems to evaluate the data they produce that are as robust as we can make them (so far), such as the Cochrane Collaberation. There's a bit of fuss brewing in the industry at the moment because Cochrane has questioned the herd effectiveness of flu vaccination programmes, and the pharmaceutical companies are not pleased. No doubt that'll hit the media shortly. They won't understand it, will misreport it as questioning individual effectiveness, and public confidence in that vaccine will plummet.
The MMR vaccine is a good case in point. Harry is 3, so a year and a half ago I had to research the case for the vaccine myself. I came to the conclusion that there were risks inherent in the vaccine (temporary overload of the immune system being one of them), but they were smaller than the risks posed by the diseases themselves.
Antibodies to measles (an acute infection) are a good sign, because they indicate previous infection or vaccination, both conferring a degree of immunity (meaning you're unlikely to get it again). Antibodies to HIV (a lifelong infection) are a bad thing because there isn't a viable vaccine yet, so the antibodies indicate infection (meaning you've already got it).
I'm sorry I don't have time to address more of the many points you've both raised, but I must point something out.
I'm afraid I didn't understand your question about antigenic complexes though, sorry. In this context a complex is a group of two or more molecules loosely bound together, and if one is antigenic that simply means that it can stimulate an immune response, particularly the formation of antibodies. Hope that helps.
Firstly, Caithness your point on aluminium is a good one. Many of the newer vaccines (such as MMR II) don't use it, but there are still plenty that do. As for formaldehyde I'm afraid I'm woefully ignorant there, hands up to that one.
You're quite right to say that I'm educated by material produced by "scientists, doctors, professors and researchers in the pharma/industrial complex". When it comes to evidence-based medicine, they're the best sort of information. I think you have an idea that I've been handed a pack of glossies and taught to parrot the stuff though, and that's wrong. My degree course - and everything I've done since - was aimed at teaching me to find, gather and evaluate information, and make up my own mind.
Your mention of excitotoxins is a good case in point, since there's a staggering amount of disinformation on the web. The first things I ask when looking at any information is "Who's telling me this? Do they have the IQ of a garden fern? Do they have a vested interest, or an axe to grind? Are the trying to sell me anything?" Then there's the quality of their data. Where does it come from? Is it referenced? Only then do you even consider the information itself.
It's always worth chasing up the reference chain to the original data - sometimes it's misunderstood, misapplied, of poor quality, or just plain not there. One common trick is to publish a small trial - three groups of half a dozen volunteers, discarding data from any of the groups that doesn't support what you're trying to prove. That data won't stand up to even casual scrutiny, but all you need to do is get it published. Then you write an article elsewhere, referencing your original dodgy study. Thereafter you only ever reference the second article, and surprisingly quickly the thing gets quoted all over the place because people are too lazy to check up the references, and so don't realise you're actually quoting yourself. Another thing you often find is groups of websites quoting each other, with only one outside reference (such as a doctor selling a book). It looks like there's lots of information there; there isn't.
I'm not paid by pharmaceutical companies, but mainly by you the taxpayer. My salary isn't affected by "peddling" drugs, or not "peddling" them - I couldn't give a stuff about making sales or supplies. Sorry, but there you are. Number one thing I try to get prescribers not to give? Antibiotics. Number two? Sedatives. Number three? Anti-inflammatories. Not in all cases you understand, but they're often not necessary.
I also don't trust the pharmaceutical companies to do anything other than gun for profit. That's why we have systems to evaluate the data they produce that are as robust as we can make them (so far), such as the Cochrane Collaberation. There's a bit of fuss brewing in the industry at the moment because Cochrane has questioned the herd effectiveness of flu vaccination programmes, and the pharmaceutical companies are not pleased. No doubt that'll hit the media shortly. They won't understand it, will misreport it as questioning individual effectiveness, and public confidence in that vaccine will plummet.
The MMR vaccine is a good case in point. Harry is 3, so a year and a half ago I had to research the case for the vaccine myself. I came to the conclusion that there were risks inherent in the vaccine (temporary overload of the immune system being one of them), but they were smaller than the risks posed by the diseases themselves.
Antibodies to measles (an acute infection) are a good sign, because they indicate previous infection or vaccination, both conferring a degree of immunity (meaning you're unlikely to get it again). Antibodies to HIV (a lifelong infection) are a bad thing because there isn't a viable vaccine yet, so the antibodies indicate infection (meaning you've already got it).
I'm sorry I don't have time to address more of the many points you've both raised, but I must point something out.
I actually said;Children do die of preventable diseases everyday in this country and your inference that we are being arrogant in questioning vaccines because you claim that children don't die of preventable of diseases here everyday is the prime example of why I don't trust those in your field.
...and I stand by that sentiment absolutely. I don't think that my statement that "Everyone is of course entitled to their own opinions about vaccination" implies arrogance on your part at all - in conversations like this I often find myself walking a fine line between sounding pompous by being too technical, and sounding condescending by trying to simplify things too much. If you have any specific questions feel free to PM me and I'll chip in again.this whole thread could only be possible in a society where children don't routinely die of these preventable diseases.
I'm afraid I didn't understand your question about antigenic complexes though, sorry. In this context a complex is a group of two or more molecules loosely bound together, and if one is antigenic that simply means that it can stimulate an immune response, particularly the formation of antibodies. Hope that helps.
-
caithnesscrofter
- Living the good life
- Posts: 253
- Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:00 pm
- Location: bottomsupster
yes.. the antigenic complex... if we ingest animal proteins or other foreign species/fungus proteins it breaks down into it's amino acid constituents and is absorbed into the body and built back up into protein usable by the body. When we inject foreign proteins into the bloodstream.. it causes half of the foreign protein particle to connect to our own protein particles inducing a autoimmune reaction... whereas the body recognises the whole complex... including it's only body parts/tissues as foreign.. hence autoimmunity. This is how it's been explained to me on more than one occasion.
no... the arrogance lies in the statement you quote from yourself. "this whole thread could only be possible in a society where children don't routinely die of these preventable diseases." basically I see this as a stab at anyone questioning vaccines or the doctors that adore them. What is the uptake rate of vaccines by doctors and their children? it ain't to great.
quite frankly, I don't care how you make your money. but, evidence based medicine.. sorry. as I mention above the package insert to the MMR II vaccine will tell you how great the vaccine is and how you'll die if you don't get it.. but, it doesn't tell you that actually contracting measles will dramatically reduce you chances of certain tumours, eczema and many other ailments plus induces developmental spurts in children. I'd like to hear how your a pharmacist but, don't peddle pharmaceuticals.. I am quite interested in how this works... are you a herbalist or what? I assume because my cousins wife is a pharmacy lecturer at University of Iowa and is an ex drug rep.. and has become completely disillusioned with her line of work. She admits the drug marketing to me, is a socially acceptable drug addict (antidepressants) herself and also as I explained about Eli Lilli above, she admits this, yet, she is still in the denial stages of it and wonders if she could afford to give up her quarter million dollar a year job for the sake of telling the truth to whoever will listen. I would have to say that it does tie into what a sham conventional medicine is. It is only the chip off the block.
Aluminium & formeldehyde is used in Pediacel.. the 5-in-one jab... nearly nobody has yet, to get the MMR but, not the 5-in-one or the previous 4-in-one or DPT but, look at the ingredients of MMR II... phenylalanine.. yes, it occurs naturally in foods but, a large percentage of the population are adversely affected by too much... Aspartame.. that is what phenylalanine is. the same crap they put in diet soda and a hundred other products in T***o. it is poison and is a neurotoxin.. it kills brain cells. in the case of diet coke we ingest it.. in vaccines we pump it straight into the bloodstream. that should be bad enough to put anyone off.. but, look at the other multitude of ingredients.. MSG, medium 199, phenol red... I would be here all day discussing the whole list and how it is so poisonous to the body.
I am not trying to be confrontational or harsh.. or anything such. The fact is, is that there are mountains of evidence proving that vaccines do not work.. but, not only do not work.. they are harmful to ones health. It is been through the courts in Australia, USA and even places in Europe where children have died or even been denied access to schools or nurseries and the courts have found in the favour of the complaintants because of overwhelming evidence otherwise. My concern is that people are getting scared into vaccinating their children.. like I was.. and they are even being lied to. There is mass confusion and fear inducing cognitive dissonance concerning the subject in every nation on the planet. Who will tell us the truth?
no... the arrogance lies in the statement you quote from yourself. "this whole thread could only be possible in a society where children don't routinely die of these preventable diseases." basically I see this as a stab at anyone questioning vaccines or the doctors that adore them. What is the uptake rate of vaccines by doctors and their children? it ain't to great.
quite frankly, I don't care how you make your money. but, evidence based medicine.. sorry. as I mention above the package insert to the MMR II vaccine will tell you how great the vaccine is and how you'll die if you don't get it.. but, it doesn't tell you that actually contracting measles will dramatically reduce you chances of certain tumours, eczema and many other ailments plus induces developmental spurts in children. I'd like to hear how your a pharmacist but, don't peddle pharmaceuticals.. I am quite interested in how this works... are you a herbalist or what? I assume because my cousins wife is a pharmacy lecturer at University of Iowa and is an ex drug rep.. and has become completely disillusioned with her line of work. She admits the drug marketing to me, is a socially acceptable drug addict (antidepressants) herself and also as I explained about Eli Lilli above, she admits this, yet, she is still in the denial stages of it and wonders if she could afford to give up her quarter million dollar a year job for the sake of telling the truth to whoever will listen. I would have to say that it does tie into what a sham conventional medicine is. It is only the chip off the block.
Aluminium & formeldehyde is used in Pediacel.. the 5-in-one jab... nearly nobody has yet, to get the MMR but, not the 5-in-one or the previous 4-in-one or DPT but, look at the ingredients of MMR II... phenylalanine.. yes, it occurs naturally in foods but, a large percentage of the population are adversely affected by too much... Aspartame.. that is what phenylalanine is. the same crap they put in diet soda and a hundred other products in T***o. it is poison and is a neurotoxin.. it kills brain cells. in the case of diet coke we ingest it.. in vaccines we pump it straight into the bloodstream. that should be bad enough to put anyone off.. but, look at the other multitude of ingredients.. MSG, medium 199, phenol red... I would be here all day discussing the whole list and how it is so poisonous to the body.
I am not trying to be confrontational or harsh.. or anything such. The fact is, is that there are mountains of evidence proving that vaccines do not work.. but, not only do not work.. they are harmful to ones health. It is been through the courts in Australia, USA and even places in Europe where children have died or even been denied access to schools or nurseries and the courts have found in the favour of the complaintants because of overwhelming evidence otherwise. My concern is that people are getting scared into vaccinating their children.. like I was.. and they are even being lied to. There is mass confusion and fear inducing cognitive dissonance concerning the subject in every nation on the planet. Who will tell us the truth?
-
hedgewizard
- A selfsufficientish Regular
- Posts: 1415
- Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:26 pm
- Location: dorset, UK
- Contact:
I don't understand enough about the immune system to discuss the antigenic complex thing any further, although what you've just posted does strike me as being a fundamental misunderstanding. It's difficult enough for me to read the information out there even knowing the terminology, and once you start reading sensational digests complied by people with axes to grind, you're doomed. I'm sure the people compiling them are sincere, but they're so full of misunderstandings and unsupported statements that trying to get at the truth is extremely difficult.
As I said though, I don't know enough about this subject to argue; neither of us does.
I'm sorry you still infer arrogance into my statement. I thought it was fairly straighforward and uncontentious! I should remind you that I questioned the need for vaccination myself 18 months ago, so does that make me arrogant for questioning it too?
I can see we're not going to get anywhere Caithness, so I think I'll bow out. Your distrust of allopathic medicine is too deep-seated to be swayed by argument without both of us becoming a lot better educated than we are, yet you've already stated you wouldn't be willing to do this because you wouldn't trust the educators. Fair enough and, sadly, the end of the conversation.
As I said though, I don't know enough about this subject to argue; neither of us does.
I'm sorry you still infer arrogance into my statement. I thought it was fairly straighforward and uncontentious! I should remind you that I questioned the need for vaccination myself 18 months ago, so does that make me arrogant for questioning it too?
I can see we're not going to get anywhere Caithness, so I think I'll bow out. Your distrust of allopathic medicine is too deep-seated to be swayed by argument without both of us becoming a lot better educated than we are, yet you've already stated you wouldn't be willing to do this because you wouldn't trust the educators. Fair enough and, sadly, the end of the conversation.
-
Martin
- A selfsufficientish Regular
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 8:50 am
- Location: Nr Heathfield, East Sussex
- Contact:
personally, I reckon Hedgie was incredibly moderate, and I've got no problems with having opposing views - he recognises that there are problems of over, and mis-prescription, and admits that the whole vaccination question is incredibly difficult to get to the bottom of!
And yes, I will admit to veering off-topic, and having a general tilt at high tech medicine - in my defence, I think that looking at the source of any information, it helps to say "who funded the research?" - unfortunately that nearly always means drug company money -"pure" research, untainted by commerce is extremely rare
As far as I'm concerned, the pharmaceutical companies are totally amoral, and will use every trick in the book to push their pernicious nostrums, and spend BILLIONS each year on publicity, and fighting lawsuits from their victims - one third of all deaths are now attributed to iatrogenic illness (doctor/drug caused)
I plain don't trust them - look at all the "wonder drugs" that have proved to be incredibly dangerous - introduced in a fanfare of publicity, then withdrawn once the body count gets too high to hush up any more!
A case in point at the moment is that nowadays, thanks to government being totally in the pharmaceutical company's pockets, if you present yourself to your gp with totally normal blood pressure, you are now told you are "pre-hypotensive", and slapped on a lifetime course of statins (about which much evidence is already surfacing of some potentially lethal side-effects!)
The other point is that the public are now brainwashed into thinking - headache? - take a pain-killer!
My view is that if I have a headache, there is a reason, find the reason, and you can probably get rid of it, or stop it happening again - to just "squash" a symptom is plain daft!
And yes, I will admit to veering off-topic, and having a general tilt at high tech medicine - in my defence, I think that looking at the source of any information, it helps to say "who funded the research?" - unfortunately that nearly always means drug company money -"pure" research, untainted by commerce is extremely rare
As far as I'm concerned, the pharmaceutical companies are totally amoral, and will use every trick in the book to push their pernicious nostrums, and spend BILLIONS each year on publicity, and fighting lawsuits from their victims - one third of all deaths are now attributed to iatrogenic illness (doctor/drug caused)
I plain don't trust them - look at all the "wonder drugs" that have proved to be incredibly dangerous - introduced in a fanfare of publicity, then withdrawn once the body count gets too high to hush up any more!
A case in point at the moment is that nowadays, thanks to government being totally in the pharmaceutical company's pockets, if you present yourself to your gp with totally normal blood pressure, you are now told you are "pre-hypotensive", and slapped on a lifetime course of statins (about which much evidence is already surfacing of some potentially lethal side-effects!)
The other point is that the public are now brainwashed into thinking - headache? - take a pain-killer!
My view is that if I have a headache, there is a reason, find the reason, and you can probably get rid of it, or stop it happening again - to just "squash" a symptom is plain daft!
http://solarwind.org.uk - a small company in Sussex sourcing, supplying, and fitting alternative energy products.
Amateurs encouraged - very keen prices and friendly helpful service!
Amateurs encouraged - very keen prices and friendly helpful service!
-
2steps
- A selfsufficientish Regular
- Posts: 607
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 10:39 am
- Location: Grimsby
- Contact:
whereas I think they effect it, I don't believe that's true. My son had all his vaccines, as I already explained, my daughter didn't. Niether gets any sicker than the other. Infact it is very rare that either of them are ill even with a cold. My OH had all his vaccines and is never ill either. I on the other hand had them all but was quite sickly as a child, I would catch every cold, cough and bug going round I had measles and mumps and caught chicken pox 3 times. My dad is the same.caithnesscrofter wrote:
vaccines destroy the immune system.
Interestingly, since I left home and have been in control of my own diet and enviroment I have become a lot more resisitant and now hardly ever even get a cold too. The terrible hayfever I used to suffer has also gone. I odn't think thats a coincedence. My parents fed us well, not always ready meals and junk but didn't know much about nutrition - we didn't have much fruit and not a variety, same with vegetables. In fact I distintly remember trying several vegetables for the first time ever at my OH's nan's and I don't mean unusual things - I'm talking red cabbage, broad beans..... my mum is a cleaners addict and both parents smoke like chimneys. Away from that enviroment, eating good, fresh food and working with crystals, meditation, homeopathy and simular I have improved my health hugly reguardless of the fact that I was immunised. Didn't even catch chicken pox when my children had it
-
Martin
- A selfsufficientish Regular
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 8:50 am
- Location: Nr Heathfield, East Sussex
- Contact:
I think the major problem lies in the fact that people are different - allopathic medicine does not take that into account - one disease, one remedy! - The alternative therapies recognise that people all "march to the beat of their own drummer", and prescribe accordingly - go to a homoeopath or acupuncturist, and the treatment for each person is slanted to their "makeup"
The plain fact is that some people can be vaccinated with live vaccines till the cows come home, and suffer no visible damage, whereas others have an inbuilt susceptibility to react badly - until such time as conventional medicine starts recognising our "uniqueness" there is no way of finding out beforehand of those susceptibilities, and using ANY allopathic remedy is essentially russian roulette!
The plain fact is that some people can be vaccinated with live vaccines till the cows come home, and suffer no visible damage, whereas others have an inbuilt susceptibility to react badly - until such time as conventional medicine starts recognising our "uniqueness" there is no way of finding out beforehand of those susceptibilities, and using ANY allopathic remedy is essentially russian roulette!
http://solarwind.org.uk - a small company in Sussex sourcing, supplying, and fitting alternative energy products.
Amateurs encouraged - very keen prices and friendly helpful service!
Amateurs encouraged - very keen prices and friendly helpful service!
-
hedgewizard
- A selfsufficientish Regular
- Posts: 1415
- Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:26 pm
- Location: dorset, UK
- Contact:
-
hedgewizard
- A selfsufficientish Regular
- Posts: 1415
- Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 9:26 pm
- Location: dorset, UK
- Contact:
being a person who has high blood pressure I can tell you from experience you are not put on any medication unless the high blood pressure continues, and that's not immediately either.
Normal blood pressure varies from person to person, mine is naturally high any way and I was certainly not offered medication until it got higher, and that is not diet problems but I have a family history of it
Normal blood pressure varies from person to person, mine is naturally high any way and I was certainly not offered medication until it got higher, and that is not diet problems but I have a family history of it
-
Martin
- A selfsufficientish Regular
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 8:50 am
- Location: Nr Heathfield, East Sussex
- Contact:
I honestly can't remember where I first read it - must have been 2-3 years ago - here's a recent link on the subject/! - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4122692.stm
http://solarwind.org.uk - a small company in Sussex sourcing, supplying, and fitting alternative energy products.
Amateurs encouraged - very keen prices and friendly helpful service!
Amateurs encouraged - very keen prices and friendly helpful service!
-
the.fee.fairy
- Site Admin
- Posts: 4635
- Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 5:38 pm
- Location: Jiangsu, China
- Contact:
I've read through this thread.
I'm a bit worried.
The children that are not being vaccinated - they will become either infected by the diseases, or carriers.
If your child comes into contact with a pregnant wman whilst carrying measles/rubella, you are endangering the life of the unborn child. You may not know your child is incubating the disease, or that the woman is pregnant, but should your child spread it to the woman, the baby is likely to become deformed, or have other serious birth defects.
You are putting your child at risk of death because you refuse to vaccinate them? I wouldn't do that to my dog, let alone a child.
Holistic therapies have their place, and building up strong healthy immune systems is always good, but putting your own child at risk, and other people is not acceptable in my opinion.
There are millions and millions of children who are routinely vaccinated every year, and a very very small percentage of them have problems with the vaccine. The risks of not having it far outweigh the risks of having it. I'd rather risk illness than death personally.
I'm a bit worried.
The children that are not being vaccinated - they will become either infected by the diseases, or carriers.
If your child comes into contact with a pregnant wman whilst carrying measles/rubella, you are endangering the life of the unborn child. You may not know your child is incubating the disease, or that the woman is pregnant, but should your child spread it to the woman, the baby is likely to become deformed, or have other serious birth defects.
You are putting your child at risk of death because you refuse to vaccinate them? I wouldn't do that to my dog, let alone a child.
Holistic therapies have their place, and building up strong healthy immune systems is always good, but putting your own child at risk, and other people is not acceptable in my opinion.
There are millions and millions of children who are routinely vaccinated every year, and a very very small percentage of them have problems with the vaccine. The risks of not having it far outweigh the risks of having it. I'd rather risk illness than death personally.
http://thedailysoup.blogspot.com
http://thefeefairy.blogspot.com/
http://feefairyland.weebly.com
Commit random acts of literacy! Read & Release at
http://www.bookcrossing.com/friend/the-fee-fairy
http://thefeefairy.blogspot.com/
http://feefairyland.weebly.com
Commit random acts of literacy! Read & Release at
http://www.bookcrossing.com/friend/the-fee-fairy