SMALLPOX AND FORCED VACCINATION: WHAT EVERY AMERICAN NEEDS TO KNOW

National Vaccine Information Center ^ | Winter 2002 | Barbara Loe Fisher, Editor

[Centurion2000]

bump

[bonesmccoy]

ARE YOU A DOCTOR?

NO?

THEN SHUT THE HELL UP!

I AM ONE and if YOU ARE NOT, you are commiting FELONY for impersonation of a doctor because YOU are offering faulty medical advice.

Apparently, I DO KNOW more than CDC's pundits. HAVE you actually read the ring vaccination strategy? IT SUCKS.

[FormerLurker]

I AM ONE and if YOU ARE NOT, you are commiting FELONY for impersonation of a doctor because YOU are offering faulty medical advice.

Perhaps you should give us a bit of info about your practice. Because YOU ARE claiming to be a doctor. And you ARE commiting a felony if you aren't.

If you're too uneducated to understand what the CDC is, and if you're too ignorant to understand what the New England Journal of Medicine is, then you aren't only NOT a doctor, but you are a seriously ill individual to come here and pretend that you are.

Apparently, I DO KNOW more than CDC's pundits. HAVE you actually read the ring vaccination strategy? IT SUCKS.

That's nice. And if you're too ignorant to know that MANY individuals should NOT take the smallpox vaccine unless ABSOLUTELY necessary due to increased susceptability to serious side effects, you are practicing QUACKERY.

In fact, you could be SUED for giving faulty medical advice if there are any adverse effects due to YOUR postings. You DO know that, don't you?

You see, I'm making no claims concerning MY expertise. I'm relating published studies, CDC recommendations, and video documentation of what happens to neurons when exposed to mercury. You, on the other hand, come here, claim to be a DOCTOR, and tell us to IGNORE the evidence. I leave it up to the readers to speak with THEIR doctor for any MEDICAL ADVICE. I don't give it.

[Big Horn]

I have been vacinated several time for smallpox no bad results except a little brain damage.

[bonesmccoy]

YOU ARE NOT A DOCTOR.

I AM ONE.

YOUR MESSAGES ARE DEAD WRONG.

I WANT TO LIVE. IF YOU DON'T, THAT'S YOUR PROBLEM.

ENOUGH SAID!

[schmelvin]

(I apologize if any of these points have already been discussed; I'm still in the process of reading the entire thread.)

IMHO, the main topic of this thread isn't vaccination, but forced vaccination. I've seen a number of arguments regarding the possible benefits and dangers of vaccines here, but I think they're only relevant for the purpose of deciding whether or not one should voluntarily obtain a vaccination. Any and all pro-vaccine arguments, regardless of any validity they may have, in no way give credence to a government mandated/forced program of mass vaccinations.

The two main arguments for forced vaccinations seem to be: 1.) It's for your own good. (Oh, yeah? Well, I can make that decision for myself, thank you very much. I don't need "help" foisted upon me.) 2.) It's for the good of society, the unvaccinated benefit from the risks taken by the vaccinated, etc. (If you choose not to be vaccinated, as far as I'm concerned you're taking a greater risk than those who are vaccinated. If you do choose to be vaccinated, how will being around the unvaccinated harm you, if your vaccination truly makes you immune?)

I don't like people telling me what I can or cannot do for my own good (I've always operated under this bizarre notion that I'm a sentient adult fully capable of managing my own affairs; It's a strange concept for some, I know), and I am extremely leery of people who want to force things on the individual for the good of the masses.

It could just as easily be argued by some that for the good of society, we should implement forced euthanasia of the elderly and infirm. After all, they're a burden, an economic drain, no longer able to do their "fair share", etc. Exterminating them would benefit society.

But, would it?

What kind of a society would we become if we did such a thing? Should we do what's easy and practical, and in the process treat human beings like cattle? Or do we respect the God-given rights of men and women to freely follow their own consciences and make their own choices. The latter is messy, risky, and uncertain, but much less so in the long run than the alternative.

PS. I hope this thread doesn't veer off-topic and become a euthanasia debate. I merely used it as an example to clarify the dangerous mindset behind the argument for forced vaccination for the good of society.

[FormerLurker]

You better hope nobody DIES because of your advice. And you also better hope than nobody suffers permanent injury. Because there would be some SERIOUS penalties in store for you if there is.

As I said earlier, I leave it to the individual to speak with their physician concerning any medical advice. I am simply presenting information that relates to this topic.

You ARE giving medical advice. And YOUR advice is that we should simply ignore the CDC and various esteemed authorities, simply because YOU say so. You provide NO evidence to back up your ridiculous claims, and give us NO proof that you really ARE a doctor. You shouldn't be giving medical advice out on the Internet. Even REAL doctors don't do that.

The only thing you've done is scream in capitals all over the place. You haven't even given us any "esteemed insight" in relation to the published studies that I present to you, you simply scream at me that you're a doctor and that you're smarter than those people. In retrospect, you don't even TYPE like a doctor....

[FormerLurker]

My BIGGEST concerns with the idea of massive forced vaccinations are as follows;

1. It does not take into consideration the fact that the CDC recommends against vaccinations in certain cases, EXCEPT for those actually exposed to the smallpox virus. People at risk include those WHO HAVE EVER HAD eczema, herpes, atopic dermatitis, or who are currently suffering from cancer, HIV, burns, are on any immunosuppressants, steroid therapy, and those who have had organ transplants. Pregnant women are also at risk. The info on that is available at the CDC web site.
2. There IS a concern over the fact the vaccine might contain Thimerasol, which is thought to be linked to ADD/ADHD, autism, Alzeimer's, and various other neurological disorders.
3. The Institute for Vaccine Safety is against widespread vaccinations. Instead, they side with an alternate CDC position where they recommend use only AFTER a smallpox release in ONLY that specific population, as the vaccine is effective within 4 days AFTER exposure to smallpox.

[FormerLurker]

There is ALSO another BIG reason why I have a problem with this forced vaccination idea. The drug companies are absolved from ANY liability issues if people are permanently injured or die.

Shields for vaccine makers weighed

[A Navy Vet]

Just to put things into perspective:

The chemical H2O has been shown to cause serious illness and even death when improper doses are administered to infants.

[FormerLurker]

Very witty. Perhaps you should read posts 266, 271, 288, and 289. Then come back and tell me another joke..

[FormerLurker]

If you think this stuff is as safe as H₂O, then you might want to click on the link below.

Vaccine Reaction Images

[woofie]

A little reality:(from http://www.nature.com/nsu/021111/021111-13.html)


Smallpox strategies simulated
Models call for vaccinations before bioterror attack.
15 November 2002
KENDALL POWELL


Immunity levels of people vaccinnated in the 1970s are uncertain.
© SPL



Pre-emptive vaccination of healthcare workers is the key to thwarting a deadly smallpox epidemic, according to the latest simulation1.

A previous study concluded that the best strategy would be to vaccinate the entire US population after an attack2. But vaccinating only those who are likely to be exposed initially, such as healthcare workers, could be almost as effective, say statistician Elizabeth Halloran of Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, and her colleagues.

The existing immunity of people vaccinated before 1972 - when immunization of US children stopped - might reduce the need for mass vaccination. "With residual immunity, the two strategies become close," says Halloran.

The current US plan for a smallpox outbreak calls for targeted vaccination, followed by mass vaccination if necessary. But public-health and national-security agencies continue to seek the best protection strategy.

Halloran says that targeted vaccination might be the best strategy only if vaccine supplies are limited, or to reduce the rare, but sometimes fatal, reactions to vaccination. The United States stockpiles enough vaccine for all its residents.

Stopping the spread

Halloran's model charts the fates of 2,000 citizens in a neighbourhood containing either one or five infected people. The previous model, developed by a team led by Edward Kaplan of Yale University, began with 1,000 infected people in a city of 10 million.

Kaplan's model assumes that people mix freely, resulting in millions of interactions. In fact, says Halloran, people usually make fewer than 10 contacts close enough to be infectious per day.

"We were searching for a robust policy that could contain worst-case scenario outbreaks," Kaplan counters. "That is common sense - any intervention that can control the worst case can also control anything less severe."

Kaplan is reassured that such different studies give similar recommendations. Both show that any amount of pre-attack vaccination limits the outbreak, and that the quicker the response, the better.

Targeted vaccination was used to eradicate smallpox, but it would not be as effective now, says Alan Zelicoff, a biowarfare expert at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, New Mexico. "Nailing down each case wouldn't work in New York City in 2002," he says.

As more studies are done, notes Zelicoff, the number of people recommended for pre-emptive vaccination has gone up and up.

The federal government has called for about 500,000 healthcare 'first responders' to be vaccinated. Kaplan has calculated that roughly 2 million people, including ambulance drivers, police officers and vaccinators would be needed for a mass vaccination effort.

[bonesmccoy]

that analysis is far better than others offered in this thread.

[FormerLurker]

Asthma, Autism, ADHD up 250% in children while in the 1950's it was unheard of, sure maybe one or two kids in a school had asthma now it's seems half the classes have these diseases.

And, special ed. in the schools, WOW, everyone and his brother has a kid in special ed. these days. I wonder why? No, not vaccines, it must be magic or a bad spell from Harry Potter.

And of course, there will always be denials of WHY the children are like that today..

[theartfuldodger]

However, at least the regular schools won't let their children into classrooms next to my kids, where they pose a disease threat to all the other children.

If your kids are vaccinated, how exactly does an unvaccinated kid pose a threat to your kid?

[theartfuldodger]

And those few who abstain from vaccinations are like draft dodgers... They receive the full benefits of vaccination... because the vast majority who are vaccinated keep these diseases in check.

I was under the impression that only unvaccinated people would catch the disease but you're telling us that they also receive FULL benefits from not being vaccinated? This sounds good to me, full benefits with no risk.

[Coleus]

Of course, the pharmaceutical/medical industry is a trillion dollar business. It's funny, before Ritalin and prozak and immunizations when most high schools had rifle and shooting clubs in the schools, you never had the school shooting episodes like you have today--please note, ALL the shooters were either on one or both of those drugs, none were drug free. Kids were much more calm and level headed. Immunizations? who knows, just dope them up with SSRI's and Stimulants and not find the cause. Yes, I know,it's magic or a spell from Harry Potter, immunizations, no Never, couldn't be from them.

Hey, did you see the news that the Atkins' Diet works better than most for lowering cholesterol and losing weight? It's in all the papers today.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Heart-Diet.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b185e111ead.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b7923334c84.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3aba815e6893.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3afe977c2d0f.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/648293/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3aa9893f05aa.htm
http://www.adhdfraud.com/
http://www.dadi.org/ritalin.htm
http://www.breggin.com/
http://www.mercola.com/2002/apr/20/ritalin_patch.htm
http://www.mercola.com/2002/apr/13/depression_drugs.htm

[theartfuldodger]

Just because people are vaccinated against smallpox doesn't mean they can't get sick with smallpox. There have been cases where vaccinated individuals have contracted the disease, but they didn't die because the vaccine strengthened their immune system. Also, they pose a threat to newborns who have not yet been vaccinated.

That's a nice spin on the evidence. Couldn't it also be true that the vaccine didn't do what they claim it does? After all plenty of people who where never vaccinated didn't get smallpox.

Men stumble over the truth from time to time, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened.

Sir Winston Churchill

[FormerLurker]

Hey, did you see the news that the Atkins' Diet works better than most for lowering cholesterol and losing weight? It's in all the papers today.

LOL, they must be reading FR...