Vaccines Are An Attack

Nutrition
101

[quote]mezcal wrote:

Now that we have that out of the way, let’s get to the nitty gritty since you clearly chose to ignore the majority of the content of my posts. What you lack in reading comprehension you certainly make up for in righteous indignation, so I’ll hold your hand as we go through this.

First, and I do not know how I can make this more clear to you than I thought I had in my posts: DRUG THERAPY IS A LAST RESORT. DRUG THERAPY IS NEVER THE FIRST ANSWER. DRUG THERAPY IS SOMETHING THAT ONLY BECOMES NECESSARY WHEN PATIENTS REFUSE TO MAKE CHANGES TO THEIR UNHEALTHY LIFESTYLES. When I see someone’s weight and blood sugar creeping up in their chart, I talk to them about managing their weight through diet and exercise, and the consequences of not doing so. Unfortunately, 9 times out of 10, the next time they come in, things have only progressed to a worse state. After a while, to NOT prescribe something would be a dereliction of duty and not fulfilling the standard of care. There are two reasons to do get them on therapy: 1) current research (and personal experience) justifies it and shows the utility to be FAR better than not doing so, and 2) I’m not interested in a lawsuit, which you bet your ass will come from the patients family when the patient dies of a heart attack at 50 DESPITE ignoring medical advice for years on end.

Yeah, if I could follow the patient around 24/7, throw away all of their cigarettes, stop them from drinking so much, force them to eat clean organic food, and exercise, I’d probably make a lot more progress staving off the progression of diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and other chronic disease (and, by the way, this ENTIRE discussion is ignoring the existence of IDIOPATHIC disease of UNKNOWN etiology that affects otherwise healthy individuals, for which drug therapy is an especially good option. See my previous post on my own personal health for a tidbit on that). Unfortunately, doing so is absolutely impossible while simultaneously providing care for a large population with a dwindling number of doctors.

Do you get it now? I’m not a pharma rep. I am left with no choice. I’m not a life coach, I’m a doctor.

[/quote]

lacking in reading comprehension and hold my hand? How sweet, nah not a prick at all :slight_smile:

This is really the best part of your post and if you had replied with something more akin to this, the name calling and ad hominems probably wouldnt even have started. I get it, doctors are SOL quite often when bound by standard of care and with the litigious nature of our society currently and especially (as you so correctly pointed out) the lack of personal responsibility by most people in this country, what choice does a standard MD have?

If you don’t prescribe drugs in many cases you are not adhering to standard practice of care, I get that and it’s a tough line to walk for you I’d imagine as you seem to be very conscious of the positive possibilities that taking personal responsibility would have for your patients. I think the scenario you described with a family suing you is disgusting and an unfortunate reality in our current system. Why else would docs so freely prescribe a goddamn disaster of a drug like Coumadin (Warfarin)?

You should understand one thing, there is a lot of “unknown” etiology that may be indeed something known by other approaches. This is why we have had so many people that have not found the results in traditional care use approaches we promote and find answers “hidden” right in front of them. It’s a shortcoming in the education process, not the doctor per se

102

I think, now that we’re done drawing our lines in the stand and knee-jerk reactions and feelings aside from our previous posts, we actually do agree with one another on a lot of things. I completely agree with everything from your second post, and I think that there is a lot of overlap in the ways that we view the causes and treatments of chronic conditions. This would make sense, of course, as we’re both on a nutrition forum of a bodybuilding website for god sakes.

So I apologise for being a dick in the way I phrased some things. I also submit that the tools available to the modern doctor are in no way comprehensive, but the way it stands, I’d say we get pretty good results. Is there room for improvement? Always. That’s why it’s a science, not some static, unchangeable doctrine. This is why like I said before, I am all for alternative treatments with the one caveat that they not interfere with whatever plan has already been established with the patient. If it helps, it helps, and at the end of the day, the mechanism of relief is far less important than the fact that the patient is making progress.

We may disagree on our feelings regarding pharma firms (although I have plenty of non-conspiratorial complaints about them, to be sure), but these are trivial when we’re focusing on the overall goal of patient care, and can be saved for another day.

Cheers.

103

[quote]mezcal wrote:

Moving along, you are correct in your assertion that the link between cardiovascular risk and cholesterol is not a crystal as once thought. That does not, however, immediately invalidate years of experience and better outcomes caused by treating it as such. In fact, if there ever comes a day when we more clearly elucidate the intricacies of coronary artery disease, atherosclerosis, cholesterol, and metabolism (which I expect will be within the next decade, especially as pharmacogenomics rapidly expands), then guess what? The paradigm will shift and we will change the standard of care. Medicine is a fluid field, and if evidence that suggests we should alter treatments arises, then it will be done without hesitation. Until then, however, it would be irresponsible to neglect patients by not treating with a regimen that we have found to be effective.

I never said doctors have all the answers, but with the information they do have, they treat patients as best they can. In fact, alternative therapies, are long as they do not interrupt with the allopathic treatment regimen, can be very, very beneficial to patients. Whether or not this is due to placebo or intrinsic to the respective alternate therapy is up for debate, but plenty of patients find comfort in things like accupuncture. More power to them. They are not, however, a replacement for pharmacotherapy after medical management has failed.
[/quote]

Maybe, maybe not but who are you to decide. Our clinic has a case of reversing pulmonary fibrosis, after she was let go by the medical management with 3 months to live. Of course after all of the work and getting her off oxygen, out of a wheelchair and off all meds except thyroid, her MD back home’s response was “Well I must have misdiagnosed you because PD is incurable”. It’s not that he’s an ass or an idiot, its that he (and many other MDs) simply don’t get some basic holistic tools to use in their practice from the onset and only the ones seeking out “functional, integrative, or (gasp!) alternative” therapies are finding new approaches to patient care that may get them results where pharmacology has failed.

But that’s not what you said, you actually said “How is taking a statin, something that overtime is going to significantly lower cardiovascular risk, impacting someone in a negative way?” I responded by showing EXACTLY how it can impact someone in a negative way, then you proceed to dismiss those findings and re-word what you said. I GET IT, drugs arent side effect free, not all drugs are bad, not all MDs are bad, I posted that previously already too. Those side effects are trivial until they happen to your wife or kid, especially if there is an alternative (which there is)that FAR FAR outweighs the risk of taking the drug.

Finally, an interesting discussion. Tell you what I apologized for coming at you the way I did so let’s agree to drop the “in your infinite wisdom” horseshit and have a good discussion from here on out. Fair enough?
That being said (and I’m being for real here) besides the metabolism of statins, why did we immediately jump to P450 from my comment saying that something that depletes CoQ10 (an isoprenoid) is bad? I am aware that NADH cytochrome can deplete CoQ10 and thats involved in P450 detoxification but I think I’m missing your assertion. Studies do show that low isoprenoid levels may lead to mitochondrial abnormalities. That side effect is not studied for a long enough time (nor may it be possible to isolate that factor) to know that these are really truly safe for long term consumption in my opinion. Also seeing as how the heart uses CoQ10 more than any other organ, it seems to me that something that depletes this vital nutrient might not be the way to go except in extreme cases but certainly not widely prescribed as it is now. Sure you can supplement with CoQ10 but taking something that works against my body in this fashion is bothersome to begin with.

[quote]
Finally, the rarer side effects you’ve mentioned. These are true results. There’s no denying it. However, they are extraordinarily rare (rhabdomyolysis, for example, is <0.1%). Even still, we keep an eye out for them: any responsible doctor, for example, will follow serum level CPK in a patient upon commencing statin therapy, to make sure rhabdo does not happen. If the side effects are found to be unbearable, the patient can be switched to other lipid lowering drugs (you do know we have those, right?)

This has gone on long enough, but I want you to understand something. This is important. Medicine has come a long way. Gone are the days of blood letting, of mercury therapy, of lobotomies. Perhaps one day we will add some of our current drug regimens to that list. Believe me, the day that significant research demonstrates there are other, better ways to provide our patients with relief and decrease significant morbidity/mortality better than we already do, they will be investigated and utilized to the fullest. Until then, please stop pretending like you’re the smartest guy in the room because you’ve read some WebMD and a PubMed article or two. The answer is always somewhere in the middle, and the sooner you realize that, the better.[/quote]

Medicine has come a long way. So has the research on botanicals, traditional medicines, nutritional therapy, etc. Do you check out worstpills.org? I wonder how many MDs dont and still prescribe pills daily that fall into this list simply from a lack of education or general enough consensus? I agree that the answer is in the middle. Your initial responses really dont indicate such a fair, middle ground approach nor do many others on this board, its more like a knee jerk “those guys are quacks and you guys are idiots for thinking it could be another way”

“they will be investigated and utilized to the fullest” ummmm…no they won’t and often they will be persecuted (as most good science is initially) or dismissed. All healing should START with the food and until allopathic medicine can fully embrace this then it will always be like you described, which is “well patients wont change anything so best i can do is give them a pill to cover up the symptom and possibly extend their life by a few years”

104

[quote]mezcal wrote:
I think, now that we’re done drawing our lines in the stand and knee-jerk reactions and feelings aside from our previous posts, we actually do agree with one another on a lot of things. I completely agree with everything from your second post, and I think that there is a lot of overlap in the ways that we view the causes and treatments of chronic conditions. This would make sense, of course, as we’re both on a nutrition forum of a bodybuilding website for god sakes.

So I apologise for being a dick in the way I phrased some things. I also submit that the tools available to the modern doctor are in no way comprehensive, but the way it stands, I’d say we get pretty good results. Is there room for improvement? Always. That’s why it’s a science, not some static, unchangeable doctrine. This is why like I said before, I am all for alternative treatments with the one caveat that they not interfere with whatever plan has already been established with the patient. If it helps, it helps, and at the end of the day, the mechanism of relief is far less important than the fact that the patient is making progress.

We may disagree on our feelings regarding pharma firms (although I have plenty of non-conspiratorial complaints about them, to be sure), but these are trivial when we’re focusing on the overall goal of patient care, and can be saved for another day.

Cheers.[/quote]

Fair enough Mezcal, and my last post says the same, let’s drop the names and just chat. I actually really would like to hear where you’re going with the P450 link as I guess I am missing some key biochemistry info to make the connection mentally that I think you can shed some light on!

105

Vaccine Exemptions: Do They Really Put Others at Risk?

“Myths about vaccines and infectious disease persist, despite voluminous information refuting them, probably because fear is more powerful than reason. As the above reveals, this is true even within the world of vaccine mainstream beliefs. One of the more common mistakes comes from trying to apply concepts to individuals that really only apply to groups ? that is the flawed basis for discriminating against exempt children and their parents.”

106

[quote]Jeffrey of Troy wrote:

[quote]K2000 wrote:
Why is this thread in Supplements and Nutrition Forum? It should be in the Batshit Crazy Conspiracy Forum. Or try the cesspool of Politics and World Issues.

It always blows my mind when people post anti-science diatribes on a website dedicated to scientific approaches to bodybuilding.[/quote]

In my OP, I clearly stated : sanitation, NUTRITION, and hygiene are the answer to what the Medical Business wants us to believe we need vaccines for.

re: science. The EVIDENCE proves that vaccines are not safe and not effective. The drug companies and regulatory agencies know this evidence, and they are simply lying. There is no shortage of people willing to lie - including PRETENDING to understand science - in this world.

Smearing and slander is all you’ve got, because you don’t have the facts on your side.[/quote]

I’m amazed that this thread is still on the front page. I’m a veterinary student and vaccines are a godsend in preventing a host of diseases. To Jeffrey who posted the link claiming that Andrew Wakefield was completely exonerated but not just the government but by the medical field. He’s still considered a quack in the medical field even if the government reversed their ruling.

I would also counter that the evidence proves the opposite that vaccines are in fact safe and effective. I’ll bring up a vaccine that no one has mentioned, Rabies. Vaccine is the only method of treatment, there is literally no other treatment. If I come in contact with a rabid animal, I need to be vaccinated immediately or I will die. So explain to me how this treatment doesn’t work and is in fact dangerous?

107

[quote]UAphenix wrote:

[quote]Jeffrey of Troy wrote:

[quote]K2000 wrote:
Why is this thread in Supplements and Nutrition Forum? It should be in the Batshit Crazy Conspiracy Forum. Or try the cesspool of Politics and World Issues.

It always blows my mind when people post anti-science diatribes on a website dedicated to scientific approaches to bodybuilding.[/quote]

In my OP, I clearly stated : sanitation, NUTRITION, and hygiene are the answer to what the Medical Business wants us to believe we need vaccines for.

re: science. The EVIDENCE proves that vaccines are not safe and not effective. The drug companies and regulatory agencies know this evidence, and they are simply lying. There is no shortage of people willing to lie - including PRETENDING to understand science - in this world.

Smearing and slander is all you’ve got, because you don’t have the facts on your side.[/quote]

I’m amazed that this thread is still on the front page. I’m a veterinary student and vaccines are a godsend in preventing a host of diseases. To Jeffrey who posted the link claiming that Andrew Wakefield was completely exonerated but not just the government but by the medical field. He’s still considered a quack in the medical field even if the government reversed their ruling.

I would also counter that the evidence proves the opposite that vaccines are in fact safe and effective. I’ll bring up a vaccine that no one has mentioned, Rabies. Vaccine is the only method of treatment, there is literally no other treatment. If I come in contact with a rabid animal, I need to be vaccinated immediately or I will die. So explain to me how this treatment doesn’t work and is in fact dangerous? [/quote]

Then, I hope you’re not going solely by that which your professors teach. Sadly, many vets are way behind on the current vaccines, and some holistic ones are using even more current research to be ahead of the game and showing that many vaccines for dogs protect lifelong once given.

Too many vets push unnecessary vaccinations. The rabies one is a perfect example. I tused to be required yearly, then some states changed to every 3 yrs, yet studies are showing that it often protects for 5-7 yrs.

I can’t blame this on a vaccine, but it’s odd timing. My dog was diagnosed with lymphoma 3 months after a rabies vaccine. Granted, she was fed shit food for at least 1st 3 yrs of her life (I just wasn’t aware). I never got her rabies vaccine updated, after about 6 yrs I did. 3 months later she had lymphoma :frowning:

again, can’t say for certain it was the vaccine, but this was a dog in good health until this point. She also had Lyme’s, not sure if that played a role or not.

108

I for one think vaccines have their place, and going to extremes in either direction is a bit narrow-minded.

For example, the flu vaccine, which boasts impressive statistics, when you actually dig deep those stats are manipulated to look larger than they are.

109

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:

[quote]UAphenix wrote:

[quote]Jeffrey of Troy wrote:

[quote]K2000 wrote:
Why is this thread in Supplements and Nutrition Forum? It should be in the Batshit Crazy Conspiracy Forum. Or try the cesspool of Politics and World Issues.

It always blows my mind when people post anti-science diatribes on a website dedicated to scientific approaches to bodybuilding.[/quote]

In my OP, I clearly stated : sanitation, NUTRITION, and hygiene are the answer to what the Medical Business wants us to believe we need vaccines for.

re: science. The EVIDENCE proves that vaccines are not safe and not effective. The drug companies and regulatory agencies know this evidence, and they are simply lying. There is no shortage of people willing to lie - including PRETENDING to understand science - in this world.

Smearing and slander is all you’ve got, because you don’t have the facts on your side.[/quote]

I’m amazed that this thread is still on the front page. I’m a veterinary student and vaccines are a godsend in preventing a host of diseases. To Jeffrey who posted the link claiming that Andrew Wakefield was completely exonerated but not just the government but by the medical field. He’s still considered a quack in the medical field even if the government reversed their ruling.

I would also counter that the evidence proves the opposite that vaccines are in fact safe and effective. I’ll bring up a vaccine that no one has mentioned, Rabies. Vaccine is the only method of treatment, there is literally no other treatment. If I come in contact with a rabid animal, I need to be vaccinated immediately or I will die. So explain to me how this treatment doesn’t work and is in fact dangerous? [/quote]

Then, I hope you’re not going solely by that which your professors teach. Sadly, many vets are way behind on the current vaccines, and some holistic ones are using even more current research to be ahead of the game and showing that many vaccines for dogs protect lifelong once given.

Too many vets push unnecessary vaccinations. The rabies one is a perfect example. I tused to be required yearly, then some states changed to every 3 yrs, yet studies are showing that it often protects for 5-7 yrs.

I can’t blame this on a vaccine, but it’s odd timing. My dog was diagnosed with lymphoma 3 months after a rabies vaccine. Granted, she was fed shit food for at least 1st 3 yrs of her life (I just wasn’t aware). I never got her rabies vaccine updated, after about 6 yrs I did. 3 months later she had lymphoma :frowning:

again, can’t say for certain it was the vaccine, but this was a dog in good health until this point. She also had Lyme’s, not sure if that played a role or not.
[/quote]

Sorry about your dog, that’s rough, but I feel trying to pin on a vaccine is a gut reaction to find something to blame; it’s human nature. The truth of the matter is cancer can show up in perfectly healthy animals for no reason. Again, really sorry about your dog.

I was referring to rabies vaccine for people. But about vaccination protocols for animals. The reason why you give boosters, initially for puppies they’re given because you don’t know if the mother’s antibodies are still in the puppies system when the vaccine is given, which if they are, basically makes the vaccine useless. That’s why it’s a safe bet to hit the puppy a second time to ensure that immunity is developed. On the rabies vaccine for animals, I feel like that’s a better safe than sorry protocol. Most of the time, if an animal contracts rabies, it’s impossible to tell that they have it until they are already showing signs and then it’s too late. With vaccine boosters for adults, you’re able to make sure that the animal’s immunity to the pathogen is at peak levels. So even though immunity may last for 5-7 years, the county like making sure that boosters are given every 3 years to ensure that if an animal bites a human there’s minimal chance the animal has it and passes it along to the human.

110

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
We have better health practices as a general population but people lived really long before that time as well. Ben franklin died at age 84. Hippocrates lived to 83. Odd that Hippocrates first taught the “food is medicine and medicine is food” and Ben Franklin was also known for very healthy practices. Its not like you need drugs to live long guys. Just because we have them now doesn’t mean they are the cause of longer lifespans. Some could probably be contributed to vaccines and antibiotics that are used for serious bacterial infections but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria.

As I stated before we have all the knowledge of how to be healthy but you can’t go get a degree in health. Only in how to cure disease. the medical industry is so focused on disease when the man focus should be health and nutrition We now all for the most part wash our hands, brush our teeth, bathe more frequently, clean our wounds and actually know about bacteria and viruses and how they spread. We have clean water which was absent for the most part and unclean water caused a lot of deaths (dysentery, cholera and redistributing other pathogens and pollutants). We didn’t even know about much about viruses and bacteria before the 1900’s.

The world is also a different place then is was pre 1900. We have vastly exceeded our capacity to deal with life. We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things. Everything is convenient and food water and shelter are pretty much a given for most of the population. Before 1900, all that most people really worried about was food water and shelter for themselves and their family. Those were even hard to come by.

It all adds up. I’m sure there are more and even better reasons but I think you can agree that the tendency to only focus of disease and curing it with drugs is a major problem is society. While they may extend life in some cases intake of drugs does not correlate to a long lifespan. Being healthy makes you live long and its a sad truth that you can’t study health at a university[/quote]

Ok still no proof. Weird. No one ever said you need drugs to live long. We’re arguing your idiotic point that drugs aren’t needed once you have a disease. (Again show me how food, water, air and light can cure cancer, hiv, als, ischemia, parkinsons, huntingtons, lupus, acromegaly, cretinism, etc)

“but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria”…umm yeah? You’re essentially bashing drugs in your posts and then complaining that we can’t fight superbugs with our current antibiotics? You can’t have major milestone breakthroughs for every type of illness/disease on the planet nonstop. What is even your point there?

And no, the medical community should be focused on…medicine (see how that works?) You can’t study health at a university? Really? So there are no programs in nutrition, health sciences, physiology, biology, biochem?

And this…“We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things” Seriously wtf are you even talking about there?[/quote]

are there modern medical CURES for all those things u stated? no, cant believe how many close minded fucks are on this site who think they know everything. you are pretty much saying that western medicine is perfect by not allowing any outside ideas to enter, clean diet is good, clean water is good, clean air is good, i’m sure it could reverse some diseases that are directly caused by not having those very things, and yes modern medicine is good too he never said the shit doesn’t work bro u fucktard thats ur only argument he simply said maybe its not the best approach as far as i have read.

but ur all brb im a genius
brb nothing can be true if i dont know it
brb i therefore know everything

shit my bad bro u must have some kinda alien intelligence, was wrong to question ur omnipotence

111

explain that shit with ur perfect goddamn medicine, i know it doesnt have much to do with the topic but goes to show that no one yet knows everything about the body works

112

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
We have better health practices as a general population but people lived really long before that time as well. Ben franklin died at age 84. Hippocrates lived to 83. Odd that Hippocrates first taught the “food is medicine and medicine is food” and Ben Franklin was also known for very healthy practices. Its not like you need drugs to live long guys. Just because we have them now doesn’t mean they are the cause of longer lifespans. Some could probably be contributed to vaccines and antibiotics that are used for serious bacterial infections but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria.

As I stated before we have all the knowledge of how to be healthy but you can’t go get a degree in health. Only in how to cure disease. the medical industry is so focused on disease when the man focus should be health and nutrition We now all for the most part wash our hands, brush our teeth, bathe more frequently, clean our wounds and actually know about bacteria and viruses and how they spread. We have clean water which was absent for the most part and unclean water caused a lot of deaths (dysentery, cholera and redistributing other pathogens and pollutants). We didn’t even know about much about viruses and bacteria before the 1900’s.

The world is also a different place then is was pre 1900. We have vastly exceeded our capacity to deal with life. We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things. Everything is convenient and food water and shelter are pretty much a given for most of the population. Before 1900, all that most people really worried about was food water and shelter for themselves and their family. Those were even hard to come by.

It all adds up. I’m sure there are more and even better reasons but I think you can agree that the tendency to only focus of disease and curing it with drugs is a major problem is society. While they may extend life in some cases intake of drugs does not correlate to a long lifespan. Being healthy makes you live long and its a sad truth that you can’t study health at a university[/quote]

Ok still no proof. Weird. No one ever said you need drugs to live long. We’re arguing your idiotic point that drugs aren’t needed once you have a disease. (Again show me how food, water, air and light can cure cancer, hiv, als, ischemia, parkinsons, huntingtons, lupus, acromegaly, cretinism, etc)

“but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria”…umm yeah? You’re essentially bashing drugs in your posts and then complaining that we can’t fight superbugs with our current antibiotics? You can’t have major milestone breakthroughs for every type of illness/disease on the planet nonstop. What is even your point there?

And no, the medical community should be focused on…medicine (see how that works?) You can’t study health at a university? Really? So there are no programs in nutrition, health sciences, physiology, biology, biochem?

And this…“We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things” Seriously wtf are you even talking about there?[/quote]

are there modern medical CURES for all those things u stated? no, cant believe how many close minded fucks are on this site who think they know everything. you are pretty much saying that western medicine is perfect by not allowing any outside ideas to enter, clean diet is good, clean water is good, clean air is good, i’m sure it could reverse some diseases that are directly caused by not having those very things, and yes modern medicine is good too he never said the shit doesn’t work bro u fucktard thats ur only argument he simply said maybe its not the best approach as far as i have read.

but ur all brb im a genius
brb nothing can be true if i dont know it
brb i therefore know everything

shit my bad bro u must have some kinda alien intelligence, was wrong to question ur omnipotence [/quote]

Is there something wrong with you? How does your rant and the video you posted above have anything to with vaccines?

113

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
We have better health practices as a general population but people lived really long before that time as well. Ben franklin died at age 84. Hippocrates lived to 83. Odd that Hippocrates first taught the “food is medicine and medicine is food” and Ben Franklin was also known for very healthy practices. Its not like you need drugs to live long guys. Just because we have them now doesn’t mean they are the cause of longer lifespans. Some could probably be contributed to vaccines and antibiotics that are used for serious bacterial infections but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria.

As I stated before we have all the knowledge of how to be healthy but you can’t go get a degree in health. Only in how to cure disease. the medical industry is so focused on disease when the man focus should be health and nutrition We now all for the most part wash our hands, brush our teeth, bathe more frequently, clean our wounds and actually know about bacteria and viruses and how they spread. We have clean water which was absent for the most part and unclean water caused a lot of deaths (dysentery, cholera and redistributing other pathogens and pollutants). We didn’t even know about much about viruses and bacteria before the 1900’s.

The world is also a different place then is was pre 1900. We have vastly exceeded our capacity to deal with life. We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things. Everything is convenient and food water and shelter are pretty much a given for most of the population. Before 1900, all that most people really worried about was food water and shelter for themselves and their family. Those were even hard to come by.

It all adds up. I’m sure there are more and even better reasons but I think you can agree that the tendency to only focus of disease and curing it with drugs is a major problem is society. While they may extend life in some cases intake of drugs does not correlate to a long lifespan. Being healthy makes you live long and its a sad truth that you can’t study health at a university[/quote]

Ok still no proof. Weird. No one ever said you need drugs to live long. We’re arguing your idiotic point that drugs aren’t needed once you have a disease. (Again show me how food, water, air and light can cure cancer, hiv, als, ischemia, parkinsons, huntingtons, lupus, acromegaly, cretinism, etc)

“but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria”…umm yeah? You’re essentially bashing drugs in your posts and then complaining that we can’t fight superbugs with our current antibiotics? You can’t have major milestone breakthroughs for every type of illness/disease on the planet nonstop. What is even your point there?

And no, the medical community should be focused on…medicine (see how that works?) You can’t study health at a university? Really? So there are no programs in nutrition, health sciences, physiology, biology, biochem?

And this…“We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things” Seriously wtf are you even talking about there?[/quote]

are there modern medical CURES for all those things u stated? no, cant believe how many close minded fucks are on this site who think they know everything. you are pretty much saying that western medicine is perfect by not allowing any outside ideas to enter, clean diet is good, clean water is good, clean air is good, i’m sure it could reverse some diseases that are directly caused by not having those very things, and yes modern medicine is good too he never said the shit doesn’t work bro u fucktard thats ur only argument he simply said maybe its not the best approach as far as i have read.

but ur all brb im a genius
brb nothing can be true if i dont know it
brb i therefore know everything

shit my bad bro u must have some kinda alien intelligence, was wrong to question ur omnipotence [/quote]

LOL what are you even saying? This has to be a troll job. Obviously I don’t think modern medicine is perfect, otherwise I wouldn’t have listed all those diseases with no cures or unknown etiologies. I don’t even know how to address the rest of your post. It is just too stupid to make sense

114

In reality, the majority of this back-and-forth has been one side stating objectively-proven medical data which is then straw-manned by the other side saying “you think you’re so smart just because you’re a doctor/vet/healthcare professional! You don’t know everything!”

No one in this entire discussion has alluded to knowing “everything”. It seems that having a breadth of knowledge on a subject brings forth some sort of anger from the opposing side wherein it then becomes an ad hominem attack that centers around some sort of made up megalomania.

When it doesn’t regress to this you get productive discussions like the one above by storey and mezcal.

@UAphenix: I addressed Jeffrey of troy’s assertion that all is right with Wakefield and Walker-Smith on the last page. He did not respond, or discuss

115

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
We have better health practices as a general population but people lived really long before that time as well. Ben franklin died at age 84. Hippocrates lived to 83. Odd that Hippocrates first taught the “food is medicine and medicine is food” and Ben Franklin was also known for very healthy practices. Its not like you need drugs to live long guys. Just because we have them now doesn’t mean they are the cause of longer lifespans. Some could probably be contributed to vaccines and antibiotics that are used for serious bacterial infections but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria.

As I stated before we have all the knowledge of how to be healthy but you can’t go get a degree in health. Only in how to cure disease. the medical industry is so focused on disease when the man focus should be health and nutrition We now all for the most part wash our hands, brush our teeth, bathe more frequently, clean our wounds and actually know about bacteria and viruses and how they spread. We have clean water which was absent for the most part and unclean water caused a lot of deaths (dysentery, cholera and redistributing other pathogens and pollutants). We didn’t even know about much about viruses and bacteria before the 1900’s.

The world is also a different place then is was pre 1900. We have vastly exceeded our capacity to deal with life. We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things. Everything is convenient and food water and shelter are pretty much a given for most of the population. Before 1900, all that most people really worried about was food water and shelter for themselves and their family. Those were even hard to come by.

It all adds up. I’m sure there are more and even better reasons but I think you can agree that the tendency to only focus of disease and curing it with drugs is a major problem is society. While they may extend life in some cases intake of drugs does not correlate to a long lifespan. Being healthy makes you live long and its a sad truth that you can’t study health at a university[/quote]

Ok still no proof. Weird. No one ever said you need drugs to live long. We’re arguing your idiotic point that drugs aren’t needed once you have a disease. (Again show me how food, water, air and light can cure cancer, hiv, als, ischemia, parkinsons, huntingtons, lupus, acromegaly, cretinism, etc)

“but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria”…umm yeah? You’re essentially bashing drugs in your posts and then complaining that we can’t fight superbugs with our current antibiotics? You can’t have major milestone breakthroughs for every type of illness/disease on the planet nonstop. What is even your point there?

And no, the medical community should be focused on…medicine (see how that works?) You can’t study health at a university? Really? So there are no programs in nutrition, health sciences, physiology, biology, biochem?

And this…“We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things” Seriously wtf are you even talking about there?[/quote]

are there modern medical CURES for all those things u stated? no, cant believe how many close minded fucks are on this site who think they know everything. you are pretty much saying that western medicine is perfect by not allowing any outside ideas to enter, clean diet is good, clean water is good, clean air is good, i’m sure it could reverse some diseases that are directly caused by not having those very things, and yes modern medicine is good too he never said the shit doesn’t work bro u fucktard thats ur only argument he simply said maybe its not the best approach as far as i have read.

but ur all brb im a genius
brb nothing can be true if i dont know it
brb i therefore know everything

shit my bad bro u must have some kinda alien intelligence, was wrong to question ur omnipotence [/quote]

LOL what are you even saying? This has to be a troll job. Obviously I don’t think modern medicine is perfect, otherwise I wouldn’t have listed all those diseases with no cures or unknown etiologies. I don’t even know how to address the rest of your post. It is just too stupid to make sense[/quote]

ur tellin this guy to allow his body to heal its self and because it cant heal its self from the most serious of diseases we have today it is impossible( guy clearly healed himself in some way in that vid) and can never happen (even though it is never tried). modern medicine has tried to heal these things and things like it and failed thus far, and with other medication normally caused more disease later on. so how far fetched is it to say vaccines could have bad shit in it, pretty much everything else giving out has bad shit/side effects that comes wit it. just going with the logic of rational as u twats would say. call me dumb w.e ur invested in the medical field somehow obvi ur not gonna wanna believe some of the things u learned are lies, i wouldnt either. and before u say anything remember science is ever changing so what you know now could be incomplete i accept my ideas might be (and definitely i am not educated in the medical field), only difference is i am open to change that will hopefully come to the flawed medical field

inb4 only reading i am not trained in the medical field so i have no opinion because i am stupid and impressionable

116

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
We have better health practices as a general population but people lived really long before that time as well. Ben franklin died at age 84. Hippocrates lived to 83. Odd that Hippocrates first taught the “food is medicine and medicine is food” and Ben Franklin was also known for very healthy practices. Its not like you need drugs to live long guys. Just because we have them now doesn’t mean they are the cause of longer lifespans. Some could probably be contributed to vaccines and antibiotics that are used for serious bacterial infections but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria.

As I stated before we have all the knowledge of how to be healthy but you can’t go get a degree in health. Only in how to cure disease. the medical industry is so focused on disease when the man focus should be health and nutrition We now all for the most part wash our hands, brush our teeth, bathe more frequently, clean our wounds and actually know about bacteria and viruses and how they spread. We have clean water which was absent for the most part and unclean water caused a lot of deaths (dysentery, cholera and redistributing other pathogens and pollutants). We didn’t even know about much about viruses and bacteria before the 1900’s.

The world is also a different place then is was pre 1900. We have vastly exceeded our capacity to deal with life. We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things. Everything is convenient and food water and shelter are pretty much a given for most of the population. Before 1900, all that most people really worried about was food water and shelter for themselves and their family. Those were even hard to come by.

It all adds up. I’m sure there are more and even better reasons but I think you can agree that the tendency to only focus of disease and curing it with drugs is a major problem is society. While they may extend life in some cases intake of drugs does not correlate to a long lifespan. Being healthy makes you live long and its a sad truth that you can’t study health at a university[/quote]

Ok still no proof. Weird. No one ever said you need drugs to live long. We’re arguing your idiotic point that drugs aren’t needed once you have a disease. (Again show me how food, water, air and light can cure cancer, hiv, als, ischemia, parkinsons, huntingtons, lupus, acromegaly, cretinism, etc)

“but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria”…umm yeah? You’re essentially bashing drugs in your posts and then complaining that we can’t fight superbugs with our current antibiotics? You can’t have major milestone breakthroughs for every type of illness/disease on the planet nonstop. What is even your point there?

And no, the medical community should be focused on…medicine (see how that works?) You can’t study health at a university? Really? So there are no programs in nutrition, health sciences, physiology, biology, biochem?

And this…“We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things” Seriously wtf are you even talking about there?[/quote]

are there modern medical CURES for all those things u stated? no, cant believe how many close minded fucks are on this site who think they know everything. you are pretty much saying that western medicine is perfect by not allowing any outside ideas to enter, clean diet is good, clean water is good, clean air is good, i’m sure it could reverse some diseases that are directly caused by not having those very things, and yes modern medicine is good too he never said the shit doesn’t work bro u fucktard thats ur only argument he simply said maybe its not the best approach as far as i have read.

but ur all brb im a genius
brb nothing can be true if i dont know it
brb i therefore know everything

shit my bad bro u must have some kinda alien intelligence, was wrong to question ur omnipotence [/quote]

LOL what are you even saying? This has to be a troll job. Obviously I don’t think modern medicine is perfect, otherwise I wouldn’t have listed all those diseases with no cures or unknown etiologies. I don’t even know how to address the rest of your post. It is just too stupid to make sense[/quote]

ur tellin this guy to allow his body to heal its self and because it cant heal its self from the most serious of diseases we have today it is impossible( guy clearly healed himself in some way in that vid) and can never happen (even though it is never tried). modern medicine has tried to heal these things and things like it and failed thus far, and with other medication normally caused more disease later on. so how far fetched is it to say vaccines could have bad shit in it, pretty much everything else giving out has bad shit/side effects that comes wit it. just going with the logic of rational as u twats would say. call me dumb w.e ur invested in the medical field somehow obvi ur not gonna wanna believe some of the things u learned are lies, i wouldnt either. and before u say anything remember science is ever changing so what you know now could be incomplete i accept my ideas might be (and definitely i am not educated in the medical field), only difference is i am open to change that will hopefully come to the flawed medical field

inb4 only reading i am not trained in the medical field so i have no opinion because i am stupid and impressionable [/quote]

I wasn’t telling anyone to heal themselves? Where are you even getting this from??? I’m not even going to respond to this anymore because what went on in this thread was clearly way over your head. People from both sides of the debate put out logical responses (mezcal and storey) and then there are your posts with random, incoherent babble that has nothing to do with what has been discussed. Congratulations

117

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
We have better health practices as a general population but people lived really long before that time as well. Ben franklin died at age 84. Hippocrates lived to 83. Odd that Hippocrates first taught the “food is medicine and medicine is food” and Ben Franklin was also known for very healthy practices. Its not like you need drugs to live long guys. Just because we have them now doesn’t mean they are the cause of longer lifespans. Some could probably be contributed to vaccines and antibiotics that are used for serious bacterial infections but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria.

As I stated before we have all the knowledge of how to be healthy but you can’t go get a degree in health. Only in how to cure disease. the medical industry is so focused on disease when the man focus should be health and nutrition We now all for the most part wash our hands, brush our teeth, bathe more frequently, clean our wounds and actually know about bacteria and viruses and how they spread. We have clean water which was absent for the most part and unclean water caused a lot of deaths (dysentery, cholera and redistributing other pathogens and pollutants). We didn’t even know about much about viruses and bacteria before the 1900’s.

The world is also a different place then is was pre 1900. We have vastly exceeded our capacity to deal with life. We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things. Everything is convenient and food water and shelter are pretty much a given for most of the population. Before 1900, all that most people really worried about was food water and shelter for themselves and their family. Those were even hard to come by.

It all adds up. I’m sure there are more and even better reasons but I think you can agree that the tendency to only focus of disease and curing it with drugs is a major problem is society. While they may extend life in some cases intake of drugs does not correlate to a long lifespan. Being healthy makes you live long and its a sad truth that you can’t study health at a university[/quote]

Ok still no proof. Weird. No one ever said you need drugs to live long. We’re arguing your idiotic point that drugs aren’t needed once you have a disease. (Again show me how food, water, air and light can cure cancer, hiv, als, ischemia, parkinsons, huntingtons, lupus, acromegaly, cretinism, etc)

“but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria”…umm yeah? You’re essentially bashing drugs in your posts and then complaining that we can’t fight superbugs with our current antibiotics? You can’t have major milestone breakthroughs for every type of illness/disease on the planet nonstop. What is even your point there?

And no, the medical community should be focused on…medicine (see how that works?) You can’t study health at a university? Really? So there are no programs in nutrition, health sciences, physiology, biology, biochem?

And this…“We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things” Seriously wtf are you even talking about there?[/quote]

are there modern medical CURES for all those things u stated? no, cant believe how many close minded fucks are on this site who think they know everything. you are pretty much saying that western medicine is perfect by not allowing any outside ideas to enter, clean diet is good, clean water is good, clean air is good, i’m sure it could reverse some diseases that are directly caused by not having those very things, and yes modern medicine is good too he never said the shit doesn’t work bro u fucktard thats ur only argument he simply said maybe its not the best approach as far as i have read.

but ur all brb im a genius
brb nothing can be true if i dont know it
brb i therefore know everything

shit my bad bro u must have some kinda alien intelligence, was wrong to question ur omnipotence [/quote]

LOL what are you even saying? This has to be a troll job. Obviously I don’t think modern medicine is perfect, otherwise I wouldn’t have listed all those diseases with no cures or unknown etiologies. I don’t even know how to address the rest of your post. It is just too stupid to make sense[/quote]

ur tellin this guy to allow his body to heal its self and because it cant heal its self from the most serious of diseases we have today it is impossible( guy clearly healed himself in some way in that vid) and can never happen (even though it is never tried). modern medicine has tried to heal these things and things like it and failed thus far, and with other medication normally caused more disease later on. so how far fetched is it to say vaccines could have bad shit in it, pretty much everything else giving out has bad shit/side effects that comes wit it. just going with the logic of rational as u twats would say. call me dumb w.e ur invested in the medical field somehow obvi ur not gonna wanna believe some of the things u learned are lies, i wouldnt either. and before u say anything remember science is ever changing so what you know now could be incomplete i accept my ideas might be (and definitely i am not educated in the medical field), only difference is i am open to change that will hopefully come to the flawed medical field

inb4 only reading i am not trained in the medical field so i have no opinion because i am stupid and impressionable [/quote]

I wasn’t telling anyone to heal themselves? Where are you even getting this from??? I’m not even going to respond to this anymore because what went on in this thread was clearly way over your head. People from both sides of the debate put out logical responses (mezcal and storey) and then there are your posts with random, incoherent babble that has nothing to do with what has been discussed. Congratulations [/quote]

yea that was essentially what he was saying about clean water, food, air ect. he wasnt trying to say it has healing effects like medicine huuurrrrdduurrr it puts the body in an optimal state to heal ITSELF and u completely disregarded those statements, and no we arent talking about life threatening things were talking vaccines aka preventative shit when i decided to comment so imo clean environment=better prevention because the body is healing itself as it should… i think maybe that flew over UR head makes sense now… awkward

118

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]wilks19 wrote:

[quote]relentless2120 wrote:

[quote]ElevenMag wrote:
We have better health practices as a general population but people lived really long before that time as well. Ben franklin died at age 84. Hippocrates lived to 83. Odd that Hippocrates first taught the “food is medicine and medicine is food” and Ben Franklin was also known for very healthy practices. Its not like you need drugs to live long guys. Just because we have them now doesn’t mean they are the cause of longer lifespans. Some could probably be contributed to vaccines and antibiotics that are used for serious bacterial infections but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria.

As I stated before we have all the knowledge of how to be healthy but you can’t go get a degree in health. Only in how to cure disease. the medical industry is so focused on disease when the man focus should be health and nutrition We now all for the most part wash our hands, brush our teeth, bathe more frequently, clean our wounds and actually know about bacteria and viruses and how they spread. We have clean water which was absent for the most part and unclean water caused a lot of deaths (dysentery, cholera and redistributing other pathogens and pollutants). We didn’t even know about much about viruses and bacteria before the 1900’s.

The world is also a different place then is was pre 1900. We have vastly exceeded our capacity to deal with life. We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things. Everything is convenient and food water and shelter are pretty much a given for most of the population. Before 1900, all that most people really worried about was food water and shelter for themselves and their family. Those were even hard to come by.

It all adds up. I’m sure there are more and even better reasons but I think you can agree that the tendency to only focus of disease and curing it with drugs is a major problem is society. While they may extend life in some cases intake of drugs does not correlate to a long lifespan. Being healthy makes you live long and its a sad truth that you can’t study health at a university[/quote]

Ok still no proof. Weird. No one ever said you need drugs to live long. We’re arguing your idiotic point that drugs aren’t needed once you have a disease. (Again show me how food, water, air and light can cure cancer, hiv, als, ischemia, parkinsons, huntingtons, lupus, acromegaly, cretinism, etc)

“but even now we can’t combine our most powerful antibiotics into a cocktail and kill some resistant bacteria”…umm yeah? You’re essentially bashing drugs in your posts and then complaining that we can’t fight superbugs with our current antibiotics? You can’t have major milestone breakthroughs for every type of illness/disease on the planet nonstop. What is even your point there?

And no, the medical community should be focused on…medicine (see how that works?) You can’t study health at a university? Really? So there are no programs in nutrition, health sciences, physiology, biology, biochem?

And this…“We have all this stuff if you actually maintained it all according to the directions you would spend your whole life maintaining things” Seriously wtf are you even talking about there?[/quote]

are there modern medical CURES for all those things u stated? no, cant believe how many close minded fucks are on this site who think they know everything. you are pretty much saying that western medicine is perfect by not allowing any outside ideas to enter, clean diet is good, clean water is good, clean air is good, i’m sure it could reverse some diseases that are directly caused by not having those very things, and yes modern medicine is good too he never said the shit doesn’t work bro u fucktard thats ur only argument he simply said maybe its not the best approach as far as i have read.

but ur all brb im a genius
brb nothing can be true if i dont know it
brb i therefore know everything

shit my bad bro u must have some kinda alien intelligence, was wrong to question ur omnipotence [/quote]

LOL what are you even saying? This has to be a troll job. Obviously I don’t think modern medicine is perfect, otherwise I wouldn’t have listed all those diseases with no cures or unknown etiologies. I don’t even know how to address the rest of your post. It is just too stupid to make sense[/quote]

ur tellin this guy to allow his body to heal its self and because it cant heal its self from the most serious of diseases we have today it is impossible( guy clearly healed himself in some way in that vid) and can never happen (even though it is never tried). modern medicine has tried to heal these things and things like it and failed thus far, and with other medication normally caused more disease later on. so how far fetched is it to say vaccines could have bad shit in it, pretty much everything else giving out has bad shit/side effects that comes wit it. just going with the logic of rational as u twats would say. call me dumb w.e ur invested in the medical field somehow obvi ur not gonna wanna believe some of the things u learned are lies, i wouldnt either. and before u say anything remember science is ever changing so what you know now could be incomplete i accept my ideas might be (and definitely i am not educated in the medical field), only difference is i am open to change that will hopefully come to the flawed medical field

inb4 only reading i am not trained in the medical field so i have no opinion because i am stupid and impressionable [/quote]

I wasn’t telling anyone to heal themselves? Where are you even getting this from??? I’m not even going to respond to this anymore because what went on in this thread was clearly way over your head. People from both sides of the debate put out logical responses (mezcal and storey) and then there are your posts with random, incoherent babble that has nothing to do with what has been discussed. Congratulations [/quote]

yea that was essentially what he was saying about clean water, food, air ect. he wasnt trying to say it has healing effects like medicine huuurrrrdduurrr it puts the body in an optimal state to heal ITSELF and u completely disregarded those statements, and no we arent talking about life threatening things were talking vaccines aka preventative shit when i decided to comment so imo clean environment=better prevention because the body is healing itself as it should… i think maybe that flew over UR head makes sense now… awkward [/quote]

I’m confused at what you’re trying to get at here. No one said that proper nutrition and reduced exposure to pathogens was a bad thing. But the problem is that bacteria, virus’ and parasites (to a lesser extent) are everywhere, they’re a natural component to the environment. It’s easy to say that clean water and food would help the healing process because the body would be able to focus on the major task at hand instead of being compromised further with pathogens. Clean water has been achieved in modern civilization. But pathogen free food is a whole other story, pathogens are at a minimum but it’s next to impossible with current practices to remove all pathogens from food. The best way possible is irradiating the food, but I’m willing to bet that anti-vaccines zealots would lump irradiating food right up there with modern plagues of society.

Getting back to your “clean” environment. Are you talking pathogen free environment b/c for all practical purposes that’s impossible. Even bacteria that normally wouldn’t cause issues can be opportunistic and if the right circumstances arise can become pathogenic.

The use of vaccines is allowing the body to better defend itself against certain pathogens. So you could make the argument that vaccines are helping the body “heal” itself by being able to mount a response before symptoms arise and quell the infection before it can take hold. What about getting vaccinated against pathogens endemic to a part of the world (say africa) that you a going to visit. Would you take the vaccines and give your body a fighting chance against the pathogens or would you take your chances that you could be potentially exposed to a host of novel pathogens that could kill you?

I feel that having the ability to damn vaccines is a luxury only people in first world countries have. These individuals haven’t seen or been directly affected by the host of pathogens that dramatically increase morbidity and mortality. Check out this link that goes over all the vaccines and vaccine policies associated with disease in sub-saharan Africa alone: Vaccine-Preventable Diseases - Disease and Mortality in Sub-Saharan Africa - NCBI Bookshelf .

119

[quote]bam7196 wrote:

@UAphenix: I addressed Jeffrey of troy’s assertion that all is right with Wakefield and Walker-Smith on the last page. He did not respond, or discuss [/quote]

I did not assert anything, it was a link to an article about vaccine safety. As I said in the edit of my OP, I started this thread as a repository of links to articles that tell the other side of the vaccine story, so that people may be exposed to something other than Medical Business propaganda. I am not trying to convince anyone.

120

[quote]Jeffrey of Troy wrote:

[quote]bam7196 wrote:

@UAphenix: I addressed Jeffrey of troy’s assertion that all is right with Wakefield and Walker-Smith on the last page. He did not respond, or discuss [/quote]

I did not assert anything, it was a link to an article about vaccine safety. As I said in the edit of my OP, I started this thread as a repository of links to articles that tell the other side of the vaccine story, so that people may be exposed to something other than Medical Business propaganda. I am not trying to convince anyone.[/quote]

But when you describe one side as “Medical Business Propaganda”, who can honestly take you seriously? None of the articles you’ve provided are backed by sound science that the Medical Business Propaganda has provided in countless peer-reviewed science journals. You need to have sound science substantiate the claims that are being made in your articles, and other than a few MDs who are just making claims, I’ve seen nothing supporting your side.