More Evidence Proves Nutrition Beats Vaccines in Preventing Disease

[Ender]

I like how the article cites more of their own articles as sources. The "New Zealand Study" was not a real study but a poll among members of an anti-vaccination group. It did not conduct any randomized studies.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/studies-prove-doubt-unvaccinated-children-healthier/

Read post #35, Zip- lottsa references.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Read post #35, Zip- lottsa references.

Randomly chose #4.

4. Uncoupling of ATP-mediated Calcium Signaling and Dysregulated IL-6 Secretion in Dendritic Cells by Nanomolar Thimerosal

The authors noted: http://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/4736

“Our findings do not directly implicate thimerosal as a single causative agent for triggering neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism,” Pessah said. “There is growing evidence that autism is several disorders that we now refer to as just one. There is also growing evidence that some children with autism have unique immune cell composition and responses to antigens. The results of our work provide a framework to test the hypothesis that the genetic background of some individuals may render them especially susceptible to thimerosal.”

Other experts also advise drawing no final conclusions regarding thimerosal and autism based on these outcomes.

Also should be noted that if thimerisol was a major contributing factor in autism, autism rates should have declined when it was removed from vaccines intended for children. It didn't. It went up (cases grew with the expanding definition of conditions considered to be part of the autism spectrum).

What about the first one?

Hepatitis B Vaccination of Male Neonates and Autism

Annals of Epidemiology , Vol. 19, No. 9 ABSTRACTS (ACE), September 2009: 651-680,

p. 659

One look at some of their numbers: https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2009/09/17/another-weak-study-proves-vaccines-cause-autism/

The autism group had 33 kids total. Of these, 9 of 31 (29%) were given the HepB vaccine. Compare this to 1,258 of 7,455 (17%) of the non-autism group who were given the HepB.

9 out of 31.

Were there more cases of autism in the group with the HepB vaccine vs those who did not get it? Somehow they both had the same percent.

 

[Zippyjuan]

How about #7?

7. Increases in the number of reactive glia in the visual cortex of Macaca fascicularis following subclinical long-term methyl mercury exposure.

The test subjects were exposed to:

Four groups of monkeys were exposed to MeHg (50 micrograms Hg/kg body wt/day) by mouth for 6, 12, 18, and 12 months followed by 6 months without exposure (clearance group). A fifth group of monkeys was administered IHg (as HgCl2; 200 micrograms Hg/kg body wt/day) by constant rate intravenous infusion via an indwelling catheter for 3 months.

How does that compare to the amounts in a vaccine? (currently only multi- use flu vaccines have it in the US- you can request thimerisol free version if you like)

http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/ucm096228.htm

A vaccine containing 0.01% thimerosal as a preservative contains 50 micrograms of thimerosal per 0.5 mL dose or approximately 25 micrograms of mercury per 0.5 mL dose.

25 micrograms of mercury per dose.

Let's take a 50 pound child. That would be 23 kg. The "low dose" mercury exposure apes were given 50 micrograms per kg per day every day. That would be equal to this 50 pound child getting 46 vaccines a day every day or 322 vaccines a week for at least six months. The "high dose" subjects got four times that amount (184 vaccines a day's worth) Nobody is exposed to that much which makes it difficult to extrapolate their data to the impact of giving a human child a vaccine. Toxicity depends on dosage.

The study noted no effect on any other sorts of cells in the monkeys besides the glia.

All other cell types, including the neurons, showed no significant change in number at the prescribed exposure level and durations.

 

[CCTelander]

Decided by whom?

You?

This is an unhealthy obsession.

Put her on ignore and leave it alone.

Best advice I've seen all day.

I'm a big boy and responsible for my own life and outcomes. This, of course, includes what I decide to do about health issues, or what I decide to put into my body or not. I'm perfectly capable of taking something posted on a message board and researching it myself, evaluating what value it may or may not have for me, and taking appropriate action from there. I assume everyone else here is similarly capable. We don't need a surrogate parent telling us what to do or how horrible someone else is for posting alternative or functional health care information.

 

[Ender]

How about #7?



The test subjects were exposed to:



How does that compare to the amounts in a vaccine? (currently only multi- use flu vaccines have it in the US- you can request thimerisol free version if you like)

http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/ucm096228.htm


25 micrograms of mercury per dose.

Let's take a 50 pound child. That would be 23 kg. The "low dose" mercury exposure apes were given 50 micrograms per kg per day every day. That would be equal to this 50 pound child getting 46 vaccines a day every day or 322 vaccines a week for at least six months. The "high dose" subjects got four times that amount (184 vaccines a day's worth) Nobody is exposed to that much which makes it difficult to extrapolate their data to the impact of giving a human child a vaccine. Toxicity depends on dosage.

The study noted no effect on any other sorts of cells in the monkeys besides the glia.

How about this:

Evidence that vaccines can cause autism

It is an often repeated fallacy that there is no research that supports the supposition that vaccines can cause autism. This talking point is most often repeated by medical personnel and public health officials who have simply never been told that these studies exist, and in some cases by those who refuse to read the information when it is offered to them, so they continue to labor under the false assumption that vaccine autism causation is merely an “internet rumor” or a result of one paper that was published in 1998.

This untruth was again testified to during the HHS Committee hearings

In fact, the first research paper to offer evidence that vaccines may cause autism was THE first paper ever written on autism. In the 1930’s, Child Psychiatrist Leo Kanner discovered 11 children over the course of several years who displayed a novel set of neurological symptoms that had never been described in the medical literature, where children were withdrawn, uncommunicative and displayed similar odd behaviors. This disorder would become known as “autism.” In the paper, Dr. Kanner noted that onset of the disorder began following the administration of a small pox vaccine. This paper, was published in 1943, and evidence that vaccination causes an ever increasing rate of neurological and immunological regressions, including autism, has been mounting from that time until now.

Autism seems to have not existed until vaccines.

 

[Zippyjuan]

The diagnosis didn't exist before then because the term had not been invented yet. The symptoms did exist and were called by other names. Maybe a kid was a "slow learner" or an "idiot". Today the "spectrum" (spectrum because it covers a growing range of symptoms- there isn't an "autism test" to say a person does or does not have it for certain) has expanded and kids who would not have been called autistic even in the 1980s get the title today.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tarahae...gnostic-changes-finds-new-study/#6bf19e2c737c

Majority Of Autism Increase Due To Diagnostic Changes, Finds New Study

Almost two thirds of the increase in autistic Danish children results from how autism is diagnosed and tracked, found a new study in JAMA Pediatrics, lending more support to the idea that the apparent rise in autism rates, or at least most of it, is unlikely to be “real.” That is, the increase is likely more about previously-unidentified autistic individuals getting an autism diagnosis than more individuals actually developing autism.

Although the term “autism” has been around for more than a century, it didn’t start taking on a meaning we would recognize today until the 1940s, and it remained linked to schizophrenia, a completely unrelated psychiatric disorder, until the 1960s. The definition has continued to expand and become more detailed, and thus autism prevalence has been adjusted accordingly over the years.

In Denmark in particular, the diagnostic criteria for autism expanded in 1994 to include a spectrum of disorders with a broader list of symptoms, thereby widening the definition of autism. Then in 1995, national data tracking began to include diagnoses made from outpatient patient visits rather than just diagnoses of those admitted to a healthcare facility. Since every Danish resident has a complete health record maintained by the Danish government, researchers can use this national health registry to study an entire population with lower likelihood of bias from those included or excluded in a study.

By examining the health records of all children born in Denmark from 1980 through 1991 – nearly 668,000 children – the researchers determined that 60 percent of the increase in autism rates in Denmark could be attributed to those two changes in the way Danish autistic children have been counted since the mid-1990s. The change in the diagnostic criteria accounted for a third of the increase in autism, and including outpatient diagnoses in the statistics account for 42 percent of the increase.

The vast majority of people diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders today would never have qualified under the 1980 classification, and no formal classification separate from schizophrenia existed before then. So it’s not surprising that numbers have increased in the U.S. The CDC puts the current incidence of autism spectrum disorders at 1 in 68, or about 1.5 percent,* though this figure may also mislead those unfamiliar with the broad diversity – quite literally, the neurodiversity – that autism encompasses since popular images of autism still unfortunately misrepresent the condition. The 1 in 68 refers to individuals all over the autism spectrum, from those who need only some supports and accommodations to those who need very substantial support. It is the latter group, especially those who have little spontaneous language (verbal or nonverbal) who are the stereotypical face of autism, but they are the minority of autistics.

The idea that increases in autism rates reflects changes in diagnostic definitions rather than a real change in the developmental condition’s prevalence is not new. Other recent studies have found similarly that real rates of autism have not changed significantly over the past couple of decades, and a 2013 study found that identified autistic children “clustered” where resources for diagnosis and treatment were greater. In other words, where there’s more access to diagnostic services, the autism rate is higher.

 

[donnay]

How about this:



Autism seems to have not existed until vaccines.

You cannot win, Ender, these people have an excuse for anything anyone post to the opposite of their thinking. It's their Clinton defense, if you get my drift.

But all the new disease names they have for the same symptoms as polio and they turn their backs on Acute Flaccid Paralysis after children get the polio vaccine. You cannot even try to discuss these things when people are so brainwashed into thinking vaccines saved the planet.

 

[Zippyjuan]

You cannot win, Ender, these people have an excuse for anything anyone post to the opposite of their thinking. It's their Clinton defense, if you get my drift.

But all the new disease names they have for the same symptoms as polio and they turn their backs on Acute Flaccid Paralysis after children get the polio vaccine. You cannot even try to discuss these things when people are so brainwashed into thinking vaccines saved the planet.

You mean "Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis"? "Non- polio" meaning it isn't polio. (polio vaccine does not cover non- polio viruses).

You cannot even try to discuss these things when people are so brainwashed into thinking vaccines saved the planet.

Dr. Ron Paul himself called the polio vaccine "a blessing"- having seen friends devastated by the disease some who were paralyzed and some who even died. I guess he is "brainwashed" too. He says they should not be mandatory but does say they have greatly benefited society.

 

[donnay]

You mean "Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis"? "Non- polio" meaning it isn't polio. (polio vaccine does not cover non- polio viruses).



Dr. Ron Paul himself called the polio vaccine "a blessing"- having seen friends devastated by the disease some who were paralyzed and some who even died. I guess he is "brainwashed" too. He says they should not be mandatory but does say they have greatly benefited society.

Prior to 1954, the following undoubtedly hid behind the name “poliomyelitis”: Transverse Myelitis, viral or “aseptic” meningitis, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS)- (what Franklin Delano Roosevelt had)[4], Chinese Paralytic syndrome, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, epidemic cholera, cholera morbus, spinal meningitis, spinal apoplexy, inhibitory palsy, intermittent fever, famine fever, worm fever, bilious remittent fever, ergotism, post-polio syndrome, acute flaccid paralysis(AFP).

Included under the umbrella term “Acute Flaccid Paralysis” are Poliomyelitis, Transverse Myelitis, Guillain-Barré syndrome, enteroviral encephalopathy, traumatic neuritis, Reye’s syndrome etc.

Before you believe that polio has been eradicated, have a look at this graph of AFP and Polio. If you are wondering why there is no data prior to 1996, go to the WHO website for AFP and you will see that there is no data prior to 1996, and note that AFP conitnues to rise in 2011. Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) is just another name for what would have been called polio in 1955, and is used to describe a sudden onset of paralysis. It is the most common sign of acute polio, and used for surveillance during polio outbreaks. AFP is also associated with a number of other pathogenic agents including enteroviruses, echoviruses, and adenoviruses, among others. But in 1955, there was no attempt to detect anything other than polio in cases of AFP. Once the vaccine was mass marketed, the game changed.

http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2011/11/17/smoke-mirrors-and-the-disappearance-of-polio/


ETA:
Child's Mysterious Paralysis Tied to New Virus
http://www.livescience.com/51451-paralysis-children-enterovirus-c105.html

 

[Zippyjuan]

Hmm. That chart looks kinda like this one. Cases rising as population increases? The incidence rate of about one case per 100,000 people continues.

How many cases in the US- a country of 330 million people?

That peak in this chart is twelve cases in July, 2016. Not twelve thousand, but twelve. Two more than ten. Out of 300 million.

 

[Ender]

You mean "Non-Polio Acute Flaccid Paralysis"? "Non- polio" meaning it isn't polio. (polio vaccine does not cover non- polio viruses).



Dr. Ron Paul himself called the polio vaccine "a blessing"- having seen friends devastated by the disease some who were paralyzed and some who even died. I guess he is "brainwashed" too. He says they should not be mandatory but does say they have greatly benefited society.

Ah..... you mean like my cousin who caught polio directly from the vaccine? How nice she has benefited so well.

We can go on until the world ends about the pros and cons- been there done that already.

If you want to vax, Zippy, go for it, and trust the whole Big Pharma and the Medical industry to save you.

As for me and mine, we will not.

 

[MelissaWV]

You cannot win, Ender, these people have an excuse for anything anyone post to the opposite of their thinking. It's their Clinton defense, if you get my drift.

But all the new disease names they have for the same symptoms as polio and they turn their backs on Acute Flaccid Paralysis after children get the polio vaccine. You cannot even try to discuss these things when people are so brainwashed into thinking vaccines saved the planet.

The same could be said of people who think vaccines ruined everything. What's weird is that earlier you admitted you were fine with the vaccines themselves, just not the additives and poisons contained therein and the mandating of so many damned vaccines at such a young age (and, by extension, I'd imagine the easiest objection to cure would be to allow for opt-out of innocuous diseases that are now being vaccinated against for no good reason).

* * *

There's some truth in just about everything being said that isn't about personal insults or demonizing an entire swath of the country.

Autism likely did exist before vaccines. It's fruitless to try to figure out precisely which cases of people acting certain ways were really autism, or would at least be categorized as such today. The diagnoses they were saddled with at the time are all we have to go on. It would be a hundred times more futile to argue that autism rates were anywhere near what they are today --- even accounting for a broadening of the spectrum and a much higher frequency of pediatrician visits where the physician is on the lookout for autism in youngsters. Something, or many somethings, obviously changed and contributed to a climb.

Studies of "unvaccinated children" are usually not great. Even though I'm not going to whisper about conspiracies here, the main reason is that unvaccinated children are rare and could easily be categorized as endangered. Would you want your unvaccinated child to participate in an official study?

Pakistan Polio Push: 471 Parents Arrested for Refusing to Vaccinate Kids

Are we too far away from this? It would fall under the umbrella of "child endangerment" and the very first thing that would be done to your kids while you are trying to muster a defense is that they would be vaccinated, possibly with more of them occurring at the same time than they would have experienced had they been vaccinated on the generally accepted "schedule." It's a real fear. Moreover, some people are anti-too-many-vaccinations, and get what they feel are the "biggies," but that disqualifies them from being in the category of entirely unvaccinated. Even the studies and surveys cited throughout this gem of a thread concede there are just not a lot of kids to study.

What about the conclusions? Again, with the studies being pretty garbage, it's not enough to simply point and decide that correlation equals causation in this case. Which group spent more time outdoors and around animals, for instance? In the US, mandatory vaccinations go hand in hand with public schools and there are very few unvaccinated kids in the visible, study-able segment of the big city population. These are the kids least likely to be eating well, getting fresh air, and able to afford a family pet. It just so happens those things contribute to whether you're likely to develop many of the conditions mentioned earlier. Is there a genetic component (not a cause, but a gene that makes a body more likely to react poorly to a certain chemical combination)? The allergy correlation has always been interesting to me. Is it the vaccines that have led to an increase in allergies, or is it something else that has led to overly sensitive body chemistry, making more people allergic to previously harmless and common things... and also allergic to multiple ingredients in the vaccines or the means they are provided? It's hard to pinpoint any of that with such a tiny and reluctant population left. All you're left with is a mountain of historical data that provides too few details about the members involved.

I'm not even going to get into the HPV discussion. The people that mentioned it obviously are of the opinion two people must go into a marriage as complete (as opposed to "technical") virgins to avoid the scourges of this God-sent cancer-causing plague. I have my own reasons for thinking the vaccine is a bad idea, but I didn't realize we were back in the 1800's.

Also, I'm not sure who's turning their backs on Acute Flaccid Paralysis as it relates to polio. I understand the premise that diagnostic changes could be the reason there are fewer polio cases out there (along with the vaccine); you have a twofold cause leading to the dramatic result usually paraded about by the CDC and WHO if that's the case. There hasn't been a huge increase in AFP diagnoses, though, so that's not the smoking gun one would think it would be. Even if it deflates the CDC/WHO numbers a bit (50k-100k), it would still leave a huge drop in the number of global polio cases. Applause, take a bow, everyone's happy except the people making child-sized leg braces and the like.

But chicken pox? Exposing children to all kinds of nastiness to avoid chicken pox?

I don't think this is a good thing. Even if I don't mind most vaccination protocols, I think the line has been crossed and people are now vaccinating just because they can. It's not all profit; it's also the same reason people sanitize the hell out of their kids' hands (despite studies showing that eating dirt as a kid is a really, really good thing). People are overprotecting, and this is a big symptom of it. The consequences won't be fully known for too long to be acceptable. Look at chicken pox vaccinations versus the rise in shingles... but don't worry, there's a vaccine for that, too

So the bottom line comes down to common sense. You can attempt to adjust a child's nutrition to a more whole, nutritious, sustainable kind of diet from an early enough age that they'll grow up self-sufficient and much less addicted to nasty processed junk. At worst, this has zero effect on their chances of getting scoliosis, but it seems like a smart idea regardless of whether or not it can replace vaccines.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Ah..... you mean like my cousin who caught polio directly from the vaccine? How nice she has benefited so well.

We can go on until the world ends about the pros and cons- been there done that already.

If you want to vax, Zippy, go for it, and trust the whole Big Pharma and the Medical industry to save you.

As for me and mine, we will not.

When was this? Sorry to hear. Thankfully that is an extremely rare occurrence.

The last cases of naturally occurring paralytic polio in the United States were in 1979, when an outbreak occurred among the Amish in several Midwestern states. From 1980 through 1999, there were 162 confirmed cases of paralytic polio cases reported. Of the 162 cases, eight cases were acquired outside the United States and imported. The last imported case caused by wild poliovirus into the United States was reported in 1993. The remaining 154 cases were vaccine-associated paralytic polio (VAPP) caused by live oral poliovirus vaccine (OPV).

Over a 20 year period and out of 300 million people in the US. That averages about eight a year.

 

[angelatc]

Decided by whom?

The over whelming body evidence based science. If she's going to persist in doling out bad advice, I am going to continue to challenge the "facts" she presents. She may not ever learn anything new, but other people will.

 

[Bryan]

and Bran has made it clear that he doesn't value volunteer efforts as much as he values her brand of "promotion of liberty" via the conspiracy nonsense and endless promotion of quackery,

The site has political sections on the 2016 U.S. Elections, the Liberty Movement, Political News & Current Events & a Political Think Tank -- followed by a non-political, but still mission supporting section on Lifestyles. Members can filter out which sections / forums they see, we also provide a "New Posts: Liberty Topics" button up top.

We don't try to moderate content volume.

If she's going to persist in doling out bad advice, I am going to continue to challenge the "facts" she presents. She may not ever learn anything new, but other people will.

That's fine, please do, just follow the guidelines. The site can also help manage this issue with some of the established protocols we have:

Site Issue Evaluations - Managing Contentious Issues
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/content.php?1989

 

[angelatc]

The site has political sections on the 2016 U.S. Elections, the Liberty Movement, Political News & Current Events & a Political Think Tank -- followed by a non-political, but still mission supporting section on Lifestyles. Members can filter out which sections / forums they see, we also provide a "New Posts: Liberty Topics" button up top.

We don't try to moderate content volume.

I am not talking about content volume. I am talking about the fact that I've donated money to the site, to various candidates and organizations that the site promoted. Additionally I have literally provided 10s of thousands of dollars in a specialized volunteer capacity. I've sat through seminars and lectures to ensure I stayed up to date on campaign finance law.

I don't start endless threads that support my personal beliefs about certain issues because I know how divisive some topics are to your audience.

But I can't get more than 5 green bar things, while people who admit they've not done much activism at all get to be anointed platinum members for contributing content that has absolutely nothing to do with politics or getting people elected.

You wanted to showcase your favorites with the subjective criteria of the green bars. I got the message, loud and clear. Like I said, there's some cool things happening on Facebook. If it works out, maybe we can toss you some ad cash.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Good grief, is that what all this is about?

Never once has content been brought up as membership criteria or "status" enhancer. Donations to the site and to specific fund raising efforts are all that has ever been taken into consideration on either account.

Tell you what, what is your current membership level?

I will donate the difference to get you at the same level, platinum, so you have the same status as donnay and myself.

I am not talking about content volume. I am talking about the fact that I've donated money to the site, to various candidates and organizations that the site promoted. Additionally I have literally provided 10s of thousands of dollars in a specialized volunteer capacity. I've sat through seminars and lectures to ensure I stayed up to date on campaign finance law.

I don't start endless threads that support my personal beliefs about certain issues because I know how divisive some topics are to your audience.

But I can't get more than 5 green bar things, while people who admit they've not done much activism at all get to be anointed platinum members for contributing content that has absolutely nothing to do with politics or getting people elected.

You wanted to showcase your favorites with the subjective criteria of the green bars. I got the message, loud and clear. Like I said, there's some cool things happening on Facebook. If it works out, maybe we can toss you some ad cash.

 

[Influenza]

 

[Suzanimal]

I think whether or not vaccines are a good idea for you (or your children) depends a lot on the patient's situation. For example, my children have only received about half of the recommended vaccinations but chicken pox was one of them. Not because I think chicken pox is especially dangerous for my children (I had it) but because my husband never had it and getting it as an adult is rather nasty. My oldest brother got it in his thirties and was hospitalized.

I let my kids eat dirt, though.

...

But chicken pox? Exposing children to all kinds of nastiness to avoid chicken pox?

I don't think this is a good thing. Even if I don't mind most vaccination protocols, I think the line has been crossed and people are now vaccinating just because they can. It's not all profit; it's also the same reason people sanitize the hell out of their kids' hands (despite studies showing that eating dirt as a kid is a really, really good thing). People are overprotecting, and this is a big symptom of it. The consequences won't be fully known for too long to be acceptable. Look at chicken pox vaccinations versus the rise in shingles... but don't worry, there's a vaccine for that, too

So the bottom line comes down to common sense. You can attempt to adjust a child's nutrition to a more whole, nutritious, sustainable kind of diet from an early enough age that they'll grow up self-sufficient and much less addicted to nasty processed junk. At worst, this has zero effect on their chances of getting scoliosis, but it seems like a smart idea regardless of whether or not it can replace vaccines.

 

[specsaregood]

I think whether or not vaccines are a good idea for you (or your children) depends a lot on the patient's situation. For example, my children have only received about half of the recommended vaccinations but chicken pox was one of them. Not because I think chicken pox is especially dangerous for my children (I had it) but because my husband never had it and getting it as an adult is rather nasty. My oldest brother got it in his thirties and was hospitalized.

I let my kids eat dirt, though.

We did a delayed schedule with my son, our pediatrician said that if he had to choose between delaying the MMR or chicken pox vaccine (IIRC, both were recommended at the same visit) he said he would prefer our son get the chicken pox vaccine first as it was more likely to get caught and have serious side-effects. He really wasn't concerned one bit about us delaying MMR for a year.