Selfsufficientish.com

again... yes, people who live in poverty and are malnourished and already have an ailment (like the wee boy in England) are susceptible to complications and even death from measles. we've already gone over this previously in the thread. Just like people with emphysema can die from a chest cold.

do you know how measles is treated? if so, it will answer the question.

we need to recognise fearmongering when we see it.

Hi Firefly

:welcomeish:

Thanks for posting the link - it sure is a can of worms all this vaccination stuff... there are so many differing opinions!

caithnesscrofter wrote:so, you're saying that if you catch measles your going to die then?

when did I say that?

what I said was why take the risks accossiaed with vaccination to then have your child catch measles and then the risks of the disease too. Thought that was resonably clear

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?

This particular lad died this year from measles from not having had the benefit of the vaccine, I remember seeing it on the news.

these are your quotes above. I'm saying he did not die from measles because he didn't have the jab. I'm saying it is extremely likely the wee boy died from measles because he was already ill with a lung condition and weakened immune system and was actually on immunosuppressants.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/4871728.stm

I think that people's quotes are being attributed to the wrong poster here...

yea.. sorry.. I meant to say that in the last post LOL... I didn't mean you 2 steps.. I was referring to what I was speaking to chadspad about yesturday about the wee boy in England.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm confused.. .and I really need to sit down... and read right the way through the whole thread again before making any comments.. SO much stuff has been said and I can't possibly assimilate ANY of it, much less add any valuable comments right now.

I do think that it's great that we can have such controversial threads running and not fall out with each other.

It seems just about everyone has a different view on the subject which is hardly surprising considering the mass confusion and the fearmongering in the mainstream about the whole issue. Although the debate here has raised more questions I would like to ask my GP about though... so, until then I'll be doing even more research to try and answer the unanswered ones I already have. The more I research.. the more I find we are only in the foothills of the mountain. Eventhough, the thread is about the MMR.. nobody has mentioned the smallpox vaccine yet and what happened at Highgate in the early 1900's and about Jenner. It is a good place to start to research efficacy anyways. Also, more currently, the Bird Flu fearmongering and vaccination for it... Tamiflu... and all the rest of it.

then if you really want to give yourself a dose of the willies, read into the theory that aids may have happened because of the polio vaccine!
http://www.uow.edu.au/arts/sts/bmartin/ ... ents/AIDS/

caithnesscrofter wrote:yea.. sorry.. I meant to say that in the last post LOL... I didn't mean you 2 steps.. I was referring to what I was speaking to chadspad about yesturday about the wee boy in England.

ahh now that makes a lot more sense :)

aye.. I've read about that before, thanks for this link martin. I've also read that the hepatitis B vaccine caused AIDS outbreaks in the mid-80's. Way off topic.. it all ties into the big question... why is Africa one of the richest in the world in natural resources but, the people some of the most impoverished and diseased on the planet?

Then you start learning about AZT and it's origins as a failed cancer drug now used to "treat" AIDS.. sheesh... pretty ugly stuff really.

edited to add link to award winning.. but, suppressed film concerning the topic Martin is addressing.. "The Origin of AIDS"... http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... in+of+aids

Scaremongering? That's an interesting word to use in this thread. Especially given how the fuss about the MMR vaccine started.

hedgewizard wrote: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.

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.

I actually said;

this whole thread could only be possible in a society where children don't routinely die of these preventable diseases.

...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.

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.

I don't understand how you cannot understand my question about the antigenic complex. I thought this was pretty basic stuff for anyone in the healthcare industry? I understand what you are saying about the creation of antibodies.. but, the point is that the antigenic complex can stimulate an AUTOimmune (self-destroying) response. I must stress it is not just foreign proteins from animals, other species or fungus either. People develop autoimmune responses from other alloantigens from foreign blood products. (other blood groups/types) An example of this is Factor 8 which is used in the treatment of Haemophiliacs which is made from a mix of blood products from different types. I should guess you know plenty about Factor 8. And perhaps.. back to the "railing" of medical/pharmaceutical complex... which in my opinion has everything to do with the debate.. hears something very interesting about Factor 8.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWiq1buwUqM (I must add these two guys are saying Factor 8 contained the AIDS virus.. it did not.. they have it confused.. it contained HIV) this is another shining example of who we are up against here.

So, I must explain what I am stressing about autoimmune diseases and the antigenic complex which is my number one argument against vaccination. As I understand it, the damage done to the body from autoimmunity depends on where the antigenic complex attaches in the body. For example, it is shown when the antigenic complex is attached in the Islets of Langerhan in the pancreas, it results in diabetes. It is also shown that the antigenic complex attaches in some cases to the myelin sheath where diseases like MS- multiple sclerosis and others can result. (back to the MMR) Studies have shown autism is a demyelination disorder because it is shown antibodies reactive with the myelin basic protein had been found in the sera (serums) of autistic children . You of all people should notice there is a huge surge the past 5 decades in autoimmune diseases such as diabetes (which is exploding and new types are even being found), asthma, MS (which Scotland has the highest rate in the entire world!), lupus and many, many, many others. Autoimmune diseases account for at last check the third largest killer disease groups in the western world... well beyond any infectious diseases which we are being vaccinated for and including AIDS!

I don't understand how if you know this, you can say the risks of vaccines, inducing a manifestation of antigenic complexes in different parts of the body causing autoimmune chronic lifelong and life threatening well, obviously eventually fatal diseases in certain parts of the body outweigh relatively non serious brief childhood diseases such as measles, mumps and rubella (which also make us less susceptible to catching other serious diseases in trade for contracting these relatively harmless ones) especially understanding what we do about treating & preventing these diseases currently and knowing autoimmune diseases kill alot more people and cause alot more long term suffering than any infectious diseases? This is what I send GP's storming out of the room with or asked to come back when they're not busy when I ask? Because there is no logic in it.

So.. yes.. you are correct.. scaremongering people and trusting they will not research these things is why we have such a high uptake of vaccinations. When there is a simple outbreak of measles.. and even with no complications mind you in Scotland.. it is front page news for weeks and is always complemented by doctors scaring people on the TV, radio, and newspapers into getting their vaccines. Fearmongering.. whilst the fact the MS is the most prevalent in Scotland than anywhere else in the world sits in a paragraph on page 9 but, nobody wants to talk about that. What I'm regurgitating is scientific evidence, so, we need not shoot the messenger. I know I'm in the minority in my thinking.. but, that's the idea. How can the minority compete with the mass media and pharma/medical industries fearmongering. Most of the fear with the MMR for parents is autism. Yet, nobody explains to them why the MMR could possibly cause autism and there is alot of swaying power in this because the mountain of evidence to get through to find it yourself is very daunting and time consuming to say the least. I think if these theories were explained to people they could make more informed decisions, because it ain't rocket science.. they just fail to take the time to explain it to concerned parents. But, they never will and the vaccination programs will continue and chronic autoimmune diseases will skyrocket. And yes, there are several theories on autism.. but, again.. you have to watch where you get your information. Your autism information source for example you quote earlier in the thread.. have a look at who their corporate funders are and who runs these corporations.. I did... and I see some cross interests. We've got to look at the bigger picture here.

Secondly, alot of my research does not take place on the web.. I'm a boring geek that also reads medical journals and books which I admit sometimes takes me a day to get through one page and am lucky enough to have several people in my family in the medical profession at all ends of the spectrum who help me learn what I don't understand on the medical side of things. This is not even my main full-time research subject but, it has become a spin off... a quite scary connected spin off I'm afraid. I also need no references to tell me that autoimmune diseases are swallowing us up.. it is right in our faces and I see it in almost every family I've been acquainted. And if you care to follow up references on the studies of the antigenic complex.. I can find around 40-50,000 articles, experiments and evidence you could cross reference if you need to.. to be completely sure. And do the scientists, researchers and doctors in the minority have the IQ of a garden fern? and are they usually selling something? a book? natural remedies.. probably.. because as soon as you go against a medical science hypothesis and even mention nutritional deficiency or adverse reactions from pharmaceuticals, you are the one eyed monster.. you are shut up.. you are not published in medical journals anymore.. you do not get interviews on the BBC.. you may even lose your job..you certainly do not get anymore government funding.. you do not pass go.. you do not collect £200.

So far, I've only seen you mitigate the effects of vaccines and their ingredients such as aluminium, formeldehyde, neurotoxins, MSG, countless others and foreign proteins which may of come from an animal that has a unidentifiable virus and I'm afraid it is quite shocking really considering your position and does not make good debate nor does it really make much sense. And come on.. HIV... no vaccination yet? What are you on about... going back to your own evaluation measures... what about Koch's Postulates... the current HIV/AIDS hypothesis does not pass on Koch's Postulates. 10-20% of AIDS cases are not even positive for HIV and when it is found it is in small amounts and dormant. How could they come up with a vaccine for something that is dormant in the body, does not kill anyone until they take "treatment" (AZT and the like) for it and the theories surrounding the causation of AIDS is completely unfounded. Honestly.. I could write a book here on the unfounded hypothesis of AIDS.. and HIV causing it but, it's already been written. And yes.. a real experiment would be good in this area.. seeing it sees more funding than any other disease. So far there haven't been any.

These days we spend our entire lives on drugs... we are born on drugs that our mothers took during labour.. we are injected all through life with vaccinations eventhough we are perfectly healthy.. this results in chronic disease which we use more drugs to combat and we die on drugs. Does anybody wonder why humans all die from disease and illness these days? What happened to being born into good health, living in good health and dying in good health? the natural course of peaceful birth, peaceful life and peaceful expiration...

caithnesscrofter wrote:Can you speak to the antigenic complex?

I meant I didn't understand the syntax of your question. Sorry, should have made that clear. As a matter of fact I think you mean something a bit more specific than I understand from the language you're using, since antigenic complexes are formed in your body all the time. It's part of how the immune system works. "Antigenic complex" isn't a single thing by the way, it's a descriptive term. For example, when a cold virus penetrates the lining of your nose and an antibody sticks to it, that's an antigenic complex.

Like I said, I'm not getting back into this argument with you because it takes too long to research proper answers, which I'm obliged to do to the best of my ability. I think that's the problem when you speak to GPs too, except they have even less time than I do. You have a bit of a scattergun approach to argument too, raising lots of separate threads to support your case. I suspect we'd get on fine on a mushroom walk together so long as we didn't get on to healthcare!

At any rate, we're never going to agree so I'll stop checking this thread. For what it's worth I don't believe there is a conspiracy to keep everybody in the dark about vaccination, although individual drug companies obviously try to hush up contrary data if they can to make more money.

I'm gonna try and say little on this subject and sit on the fence (best way to watch the world go by and wave )

Several points have been identified and I'd like to throw a few titbits into this bubbling cauldron.

Infant mortallity HAS gone down in the UK, even from as near as the beginning of the 20th Century.

Innoculation does NOT stop infection by a disease, it just gives your immune system the key signatures and building blocks to EFFECTIVELY fight a disease, thereby reducing the term and degree of symptoms and complications and subsequently reducing the period of infectious transference.

The debate on MMR innoculations, Combined,Single or non is complex and passionate on all sides, personal choice has to come into the situation as parents hope that their children will be healthy and do whatever they deem necessary to ensure that their children should maintain a healthy life (Within reason and great thought and contemplation should be made before any decision to change is made. Avoid knee jerk reactions and research the FACTS).

Cancer treatments are in the most pallitive medicine, invasive measures and radiotherapy being used to treat agressive cancers. Without these actions life expectancy on most patients would be severely reduced. I know that complementary medicines and a holistic approach CAn help but in severe cases when you find out you have got it it's treat it as quickly as possible ro you die, (personal experience, lost a friend due to secondary cancer, primary was lymphatic cancer in a man who had one of the healthiest lifestyles you could imagine.)

To achive an effective antibody level against certain diseases a particularly severe reaction to the illness is needed. Case point as example, Chicken pox and Shingles. (going out on a limb here as this is from personal experience and observation) The greater the reaction you get in your first contracting chickenpox the chances of re-occurance later in life, and subsequently suffing from shingles are reduced. Some people seem prone to multiple infection, I think we all know someone that had a light dose as a child and had it several times. I personally had a bad reaction, very high fever and delerium induced nightmares, became an outcast whilst the spots were apparent (Had spots in places I didn't even KNOW you could get spots! Don't ask!!! ). Never had problems since.

A healthy diet, adequate sleep, and adequate amounts of sunlight are all essentials of maintaining a healthy immune system, something that is usually lacking in a modern lifestyle. I'm not a big organic fan, but grow as many of the vegetables my family eat myself, without bought pesticides (Does washing up liquid count?).Stress and increases in nervous illness due to working in airconditioned, over heated, and inadequately lighted environments at home and at work (My personal hate is being inside under flourescent lights with airconditioning that only seems to make hot and cold areas in an office).
oh and did i mention the E word yet?...........
EXERCISE, something I think most of us on here know all too much about when you've been digging the garden over and picking that glut of fruit and veg we all seem to get lol.

Not amanging to sit on the fence much am I?
Here I go again.....

On a personal note:
with the new idea of innoculation against pneumonia, I can whole heartedly agree with this! 3 years ago iwas working on site in -3 conditions and thought I had a cold, did the usual, garlic, codliver oil, increased fruit intake especially citrus etc. 5 days later felt more like flu but as I was self employed carried on, after a total of 2 weeks from initially feeling ill I was delerious and on the friday I was sent to hospital with double pneumonia. if i hadn't litterally dragged myself to the doctors, and I mean litterally, I was told I would have been dead by the monday. The symptoms were not what i expected, painful and very dibilitating. also in that period I lost over 3 stone of weight. I wouldn't wish that illness on my children.

Well there is my 2 peneth over

Hope you all come to the conclusions you need to on the debate.

Just remember, we all look at things from different perspectives, and whilst ours might seem the right one, that doesn't negate anybody elses personal choice or ideas. It's an essential part of progress, without differing points of view and debate we would not be as rich or diverse a community.

Chris (And Helen by Default)