http://vactruth.com/2009/07/21/dr-andrew-moulden-interview-what-you-were-never-told-about-vaccines/
Basically, the upshot of this Doctor's conclusive, irrefutable evidence is that vaccinations not only are not preventing disease, they are killing and disabling millions.
Read this article all the way through and send the link to everyone you possibly can.
Yeah, I've absolutely refused vaccinations and antibiotics for years. I have no desire for disease to be injected into me, when all of the nature of it's lifecycle and reproduction aren't fully understood, and then there's the issue of them injecting you with mercury with some of those poisons that they try to inject people with. People are usually deficient in probiotics rather than in antibiotics that don't differentiate between good and bad bacteria and just kill it all....hmmm....sorta like chemo...as an equal opportunity killer of anything that it encounters/is exposed to. There are plenty of all natural antibiotics in a well balanced diet. If people aren't eating a well balanced diet, witchcraft from the local doctor's not going to improve their health. I meant to say witch's brew instead of witchcraft, but I think I'll leave that as I said it. I've read way too much over the last 30+ years to ever mess with any of it.
Others can do what they want, and others can't base their basis for healing on my faith for my own wholeness in the Written Word that's been painstakingly developed for 20yrs. They've gotta get in the Written Word and do for the next 20yrs what I've done for the last 20yrs about it. And 20yrs from now, I'll be lightyears healthier and stronger than I am right now, and I'm the strongest right now, physically, that I've ever been in my entire life. But each of us has to do what we have the most peace about in our relationship with God, whether or not to allow the laying on of the hands of the ungodly or not. I realize a lot of people are going to continue to do what they've always done with going to these witch doctors and are going to continue to be poisoned as they've always been 'cause that's where their faith(?) is the strongest, and they regard that as cheaper and less painful than having a wide enough variety of herbs and vegetables in their diets.
So, I don't mean anything that I've said as condemnation to anybody. I'll go to doctors to give them blood that's got Holy Spirit without measure in it, and if I'm ever needed by family in some type of organ donation. I'll even go for a complete physical when I'm over a hundred years old, including blood work, to verify, medically, that I've got the body of a teenager still because of the nourishing properties of the Written Word taken multiple times a day. And then I'll do it again when I pass 200yrs old, and I'm not sure if I'll mess with any of it beyond then. After a while, you've just got to decide that the Written Word is first priority and final authority regarding absolutely every single thought, every single action, and every single word that you speak and that there's too much in the New Testament commanding you to live in the person or fulfill the role of our risen Lord Jesus Christ in this life. The New Testament promises each overcomer on His Written Word a minimum of a thousand years to live in this life, pre immortal state.
Most people don't have the thousands of hours invested in the New Testament yet to successfully pull that off with all of the backing of the Spirit. I totally realize that, and they've got to do what they can in the meantime, but hopefully they're not content to leave the bar that low in their lives 'cause there are superior provisions available for each detail of our lives in the Written Word, but each reading of the Word aloud is like materializing/inheriting one solitary molecule of whatever the finished product is. Your mouth is the transporter (i.e. as in a Star Trek transporter) and the Written Word is all of the heavenly blessings in heavenly places that you're to pull into this world. Hence, the Bible's not a good fire extinguisher 'cause it only works [successfully] when it's contents are under pressure in your spirit. Redemption has just got to be more real to you than your own name when it comes to your anointing, spirit, soul, body, finances, ministry, and social life. You can't have that on half an hour of the Written Word [if that] each day. Promises of redemption regarding your anointing, spirit, soul, body, finances, ministry, and social life have got to be written down and plastered all over the home, office, automobile, lockers at work, at the gym, and in the plane, etc., and read aloud each time you pass by them, and thank God that in Christ Jesus that's a reality in you NOW!!
Every moment of the day and night should revolve around the Written Word, so that it's life to those that find it, as the woman finding her man in Song of Solomon, and health to all of their flesh. Everything that one encounters all day and all night long needs to be met by turning inward asking your spirit (that's been filled with His Written Word): "What does the Word say about this?" and then speak and act accordingly on the resurrection side of the Written Word, taking the side of redemption rather than the side of the curse as many folks in UR slip into. That Book says you've already been delivered of all of these afflictions -- absolutely all of them. Getting in agreement with the Book is getting in agreement with Holy Spirit and He'll quicken your mortal body by His Spirit that dwells in you. :Sparkletooth:
I don't intend to get any flu vaccination. I'll just take my chances. I've heard a lot of rather disturbing news concerning vaccines over the past few years.
More articles about flu vaccine:
http://www.commondreams.org/search/commondreams?cx=002299596031389324112%3Aodhtzdyi_ja&cof=FORID%3A9&query=flu+vaccine&op=Search&form_id=google_cse_results_searchbox_form#956
RA,
In case you are meaning Swin Flu....
That's a hoax. About the whole program is dropped here. Doctors subcribe rest....
The main advising virologist that advised our .gov and WHO is loaded with stocks in a flu company.
All execpt him speak of a mild nothing special virus.
The chances getting the flu with a shot is double from getting it without (Jab you still have the link?)
It prevents nothings. At best you are one day less ill.
vitamin D is supposed to be one of the best defenses and because of lack of sunlight in the winter, that's supposed to be one of the number one reasons why more people get their butts kicked during that time of year with the flu than at any other time of the year. start really upping your vitamin D intake and I don't mean vitamin D "fortified foods" where you can never be sure of exactly how much you're getting with mass produced commercially prepared foods.
Quote from: martincisneros on October 16, 2009, 08:17:04 AM
vitamin D is supposed to be one of the best defenses and because of lack of sunlight in the winter, that's supposed to be one of the number one reasons why more people get their butts kicked during that time of year with the flu than at any other time of the year. start really upping your vitamin D intake and I don't mean vitamin D "fortified foods" where you can never be sure of exactly how much you're getting with mass produced commercially prepared foods.
Definitely vitamin D. I agree!
There's a new documentary out by the geniuses over at the lymesentinel blog. I think it links a myriad of diseases from ms to cancer to biological warfare experiments, and a biologic agent called mycoplasma. But I haven't seen it yet. Here's a trailer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UOhME0K4hw
MYCOPLASMA
The Linking Pathogen in Neurosystemic Diseases
http://www.whale.to/m/scott7.html
Behold the power of cheese vaccinations!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT7oTQyJjZ0
Sneaking in some good news.... [can we get algore to give his nobel prize back?]
Energy crisis is postponed as new gas rescues the world
Engineers have performed their magic once again. The world is not going to run short of energy as soon as feared.
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
Published: 5:47PM BST 11 Oct 2009
America is not going to bleed its wealth importing fuel. Russia's grip on Europe's gas will weaken. Improvident Britain may avoid paralysing blackouts by mid-decade after all.
The World Gas Conference in Buenos Aires last week was one of those events that shatter assumptions. Advances in technology for extracting gas from shale and methane beds have quickened dramatically, altering the global balance of energy faster than almost anybody expected.
Tony Hayward, BP's chief executive, said proven natural gas reserves around the world have risen to 1.2 trillion barrels of oil equivalent, enough for 60 years' supply – and rising fast.
"There has been a revolution in the gas fields of North America. Reserve estimates are rising sharply as technology unlocks unconventional resources," he said.
This is almost unknown to the public, despite the efforts of Nick Grealy at "No Hot Air" who has been arguing for some time that Britain's shale reserves could replace declining North Sea output.
Rune Bjornson from Norway's StatoilHydro said exploitable reserves are much greater than supposed just three years ago and may meet global gas needs for generations.
"The common wisdom was that unconventional gas was too difficult, too expensive and too demanding," he said, according to Petroleum Economist. "This has changed. If we ever doubted that gas was the fuel of the future – in many ways there's the answer."
The breakthrough has been to combine 3-D seismic imaging with new technologies to free "tight gas" by smashing rocks, known as hydro-fracturing or "fracking" in the trade.
The US is leading the charge. Operations in Pennsylvania and Texas have already been sufficient to cut US imports of liquefied natural gas (LGN) from Trinidad and Qatar to almost nil, with knock-on effects for the global gas market – and crude oil. It is one reason why spot prices for some LNG deliveries have dropped to 50pc of pipeline contracts.
Energy bulls gambling that the world economy will soon resume its bubble trajectory need to remember two facts: industrial production over the last year is still down 19pc in Japan, 18pc in Italy, 17pc in Germany, 15pc in Canada, 13pc in France and Russia. 11pc in the US and the UK and 10pc in Brazil. A 12pc rise in China does not offset this.
OPEC states are cheating on quota cuts. Non-compliance has fallen to 62pc from 82pc in March. Iran, Nigeria, Venezuela et al face a budget crunch. Why comply when non-OPEC Russia is pumping at breakneck speed?
The US Energy Department expects shale to meet half of US gas demand within 20 years, if not earlier. Projects are cranking up in eastern France and Poland. Exploration is under way in Australia, India and China.
Texas A&M University said US methods could increase global gas reserves by nine times to 16,000 TCF (trillion cubic feet). Almost a quarter is in China but it may lack the water resources to harness the technology given the depletion of the North China water basin.
Needless to say, the Kremlin is irked. "There's a lot of myths about shale production," said Gazprom's Alexander Medvedev.
If the new forecasts are accurate, Gazprom is not going to be the perennial cash cow funding Russia's great power resurgence. Russia's budget may be in structural deficit.
As for the US, we may soon be looking at an era when gas, wind and solar power, combined with a smarter grid and a switch to electric cars returns the country to near energy self-sufficiency.
This has currency implications. If you strip out the energy deficit, America's vaulting savings rate may soon bring the current account back into surplus – and that is going to come at somebody else's expense, chiefly Japan, Germany and, up to a point, China.
Shale gas is undoubtedly messy. Millions of gallons of water mixed with sand, hydrochloric acid and toxic chemicals are blasted at rocks. This is supposed to happen below the water basins but accidents have been common. Pennsylvania's eco-police have shut down a Cabot Oil & Gas operation after 8,000 gallons of chemicals spilled into a stream.
Nor is it exactly green. Natural gas has much lower CO2 emissions than coal, even from shale – which is why the Sierra Club is backing it as the lesser of evils against "clean coal" (not yet a reality). The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said America may not need any new coal or nuclear plants "ever" again.
I am not qualified to judge where gas excitement crosses into hyperbole. I pass on the story because the claims of BP and Statoil are so extraordinary that we may need to rewrite the geo-strategy textbooks for the next half century.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/6299291/Energy-crisis-is-postponed-as-new-gas-rescues-the-world.html
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 16, 2009, 07:43:05 AM
RA,
In case you are meaning Swin Flu....
That's a hoax. About the whole program is dropped he. Doctors subcribe rest....
The main advising virologist that advised our .gov and WHO is loaded with stocks in a flu company.
All execpt him speak of a mild nothing special virus.
The chances getting the flu with a shot is double from getting it without (Jab you still have the link?)
It prevents nothings. At best you are one day less ill.
Yep. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/science/study-prompts-provinces-to-rethink-flu-plan/article1303330/
Quote from: Molly on October 16, 2009, 09:59:50 AM
Sneaking in some good news.... [can we get algore to give his nobel prize back?]
Energy crisis is postponed as new gas rescues the world
Getting a gas vaccination Molly? :laughing7:
http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5868
I'm a big proponent of alternative/natural preventions and treatments, and NO vaccine.
What thoughts do you have about this article I just saw?
"Swine flu hits hard, early - claims 11 more kids
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091016/ap_on_he_me/us_med_swine_flu
First thing I would like to know is; what was the health condition of the kids before they got the flu? Were they vaccinated?
I ask because I know of a person that died because of swinflu. But they conveniently forgot to mention the person was already terminally ill for months before he caught the flu.
I see it's a WHO advertorial so :thumbdown:
Where I live the hype is almost dead. A little extra hygene is all that's advised.
Simple things like washing hands etc (the virus isn't airborne)
That flu starts early doesn't mean it lasts longer. I can just as well stop earlier in the winter.
I wondered the same thing as I was to read it. In fact I told my wife recently that many/most that were dying had some sort of pre-existing condition. I don't believe this article elaborates. Once again, not the best journalism - and I agree - WHO :thumbdown:.
It is worrisome. We got permission slips from school today for the Swine Flu vaccines that are on the way. I have two children in high school and two in college. I'm not sure what to do. I will discuss it with my husband this weekend and we will have to reach a mutual decision as well as allowing the kids to have a say in the matter. It seems like there is a bit of a media push for people to panic as they are rolling out this new vaccine. But perhaps they really are just trying to save lives.
This is a serious health concern. The Flu Epidemic of 1918 killed millions. Flu certainly can be deadly. One of my daughters was very sick with the flu back in 1998 to the tune of losing 10 of her 70 pounds of body weight and she had a fever of 105-106 for over a week and I had to hospitalize her. I think IV fluids saved her life.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/28/science/28flu.html
Swine Flu Shots Revive a Debate About Vaccines
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/16/health/16vaccine.html?em
I'm pretty darn sure I had the swine flu back in early September. I'll never know for sure, as I didn't go to see the doctor - my symptoms weren't severe (my fever topped out at around 102 F), and I read the CDC was reserving flu tests and medication for those with severe symptoms, so I figured there'd be little point in doing so. But I'd been flu-free ever since I was ten years old, and this one knocked me out of work in September for almost the whole week, so putting those two facts together made me conclude that it certainly didn't seem like the seasonal flu.
I agree with jabcat (and others) that the first line of defense in anyone's body should be natural - if your first instinct is to leap for the drugs the moment you get a sore throat and a sniffle, that's a problem. Your immune system is there for a reason, and contrary to what seems to be popular belief it isn't self-sufficient and static. I'm a huge proponent of Brazil nuts (best source in the world of the little-known nutrient selenium) and vitamin C, both of which are essential to a well-functioning immune system. I was initially skeptical, but ever since I started regularly eating three Brazil nuts a day at breakfast and taking a vitamin C supplement every night, colds have become usually little more than a minor annoyance, often almost less than 24 hours in duration.
On the other hand, though, I can't agree with the notion that one should entirely swear off anything from the medical world. Modern medicine isn't perfect and ought not to be the front line of defense against ill health, but the hugely extended life expectancies today compared to one or two centuries ago ought to give at least a certain indication that it's at the very least a little more than 21st century snake oil. If I or my loved one were to come down with, say, meningitis, I'm not exactly going to forbid the use of antibiotics. I also have a certain puzzlement with the absolute opposition to the use of vaccinations - although the unfortunate reactions to the ill-advised mass vaccinations of 1976 were certainly tragic, the fact that they have been instrumental to the widespread eradication of polio and smallpox can't really be denied (well, I suppose it can, but not very well, considering how closely linked the implementation of the vaccination was with the resulting falloff of new cases).
Wow, poignant and good posts, Anne and Gab. Much to agree with and think about.
A few quick thoughts. I had planned on buying Brazil nuts on Saturday! :laughing7:
With those experiences Anne, I can see why you'd be attending to this as you are. I found Doc's link in the OP to be quite enlightening, worth a read.
First of all, the power and protection of God is paramount. Secondly though, WW and I have talked about this - I'm a big believer in true colloidal silver, along with good healthy foods and supplementation. I also have a stock of elderberry extract (natural antibiotic) on hand.
And yes, I do take some medications too - the ones I haven't thus far seemed to be able to do without.
We need to be holding each other up in prayer.
God's blessing, James.
CDC Flu Tracking Page:
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/
RA,
Noone denies flu can be deadly. It simple is. As Jabcats article states nearly 36000 Americans die of the flue yearly. The difference with swine flu is that they want you to believe half of the USA will be wiped out in the next few months.
I'm also doubting the 36000 a bit. Nothing like corruption or something similar but how things are registered. Often old people die of the flu. The question is did the old man of 95 die of the flu or was he just to old to live on? The flu just tipped the scale.
Same with AIDS deaths. AIDS itself isn't a real illness. It breaks down your immume system and then you get ill of all kinds of things. Those patients get pneumonia (spelling) in the middle of the summer. Often the cause of death is written down as pneumonia.
Strickly speaking that's correct. But OTOH it was AIDS that indirectly caused that pneumonia.
Where I live leaflets are spread. A simple checklist to see you got swine flu.
The leaflet ends with a 'warning' not to go to the doctor. It only infects people in the waiting room. Call the doctor. The doctor basicly asks the same things as listed on the leaflet and tells you to take an asprine and goto bed.
Isn't that strange? Here the flu is 'cured' by telephone and sleep. And in teh meanwhile hals of the USA is wiped out?
Quote from: jabcat on October 17, 2009, 09:59:48 AM
I found Doc's link in the OP to be quite enlightening, worth a read.
It was interesting, but to be honest there were a few big red flags that went up for me as I was reading through it. Any time someone exclaims that what they have discovered is absolutely, 100% undeniable, I immediately get skeptical almost as a reflex. That he claims that there is no opposition to his stance when his stance remains a small minority in the medical world amplifies those effects.
Probably the most confusing accusation that he made was that the Spanish flu of 1918 was caused by vaccinations. I literally cannot believe he made that claim, and for a very simple reason: the first vaccination for the flu did not occur until 1945. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to claim that the Spanish flu was due to vaccination, as there was quite literally no new vaccination established in that time period to account for the rash of flu-like symptoms - the last vaccine established prior to 1918 was the 1897 vaccine for bubonic plague, and the first vaccine established after 1918 was the 1921 vaccine for diphtheria. It's estimated that approximately one billion humans were infected with the Spanish flu virus, yet I know of no billion-person vaccination drive in 1918. He claims it was due to the vaccination of American military personnel, yet it was a global pandemic. And for that matter, we
know that there was a flu virus in 1918 because we've seen it under microscopes and observed its effects on animals. And we have observed its similarity to the viruses present during all instances of the seasonal flu. Would not the logical conclusion be, then, that that flu virus caused the flu-like symptoms seen in people around the world?
There are other strange claims, as well. For example, he claims that viruses like polio and smallpox have been eradicated (or all but eradicated for polio) due to sanitation, potable water, nutrition, and the like, and that the vaccines had nothing to do with it whatsoever. Yet, this too is incongruent with the evidence - when the polio vaccine was first implemented on a broad scale, the number of new polio cases dropped like a rock. Sanitation, water, and nutrition didn't just magically improve on that broad a scale at the exact same time the vaccine was implemented. When a worldwide effort to eradicate the disease was undertaken in 1988, the number of new cases per year dropped from over 350,000 in 1988 to a little over 1,000 in 2007. Again, this cannot possibly be attributed solely to an improvement in sanitation, water, and so forth.
I don't mean any disrespect to Dr. Moulden, but I have to say that he really seems to have come to a conclusion in life and is now basically trying to cram all of the evidence available into the hole he has constructed, even when it just plainly does not fit in the least. Most of the time I just leave such people alone, but in this case I really am honestly concerned, because when there is so much evidence in favor of vaccines having a huge impact on the combating of diseases, for someone to then come along and declare that all vaccines ought to be banned is really being quite dangerous - this is a lot more than just a person respectfully differing with the scientific and medical consensus. I don't want him silenced or anything, but I would certainly caution people against simply taking his word as given and then passing it on to everyone they know.
Quote from: jabcat on October 17, 2009, 09:59:48 AM
First of all, the power and protection of God is paramount. Secondly though, WW and I have talked about this - I'm a big believer in true colloidal silver, along with good healthy foods and supplementation. I also have a stock of elderberry extract (natural antibiotic) on hand.
I certainly agree with this - when I came upon the realization that there was something definitely wrong with me when I came down with the flu, I prayed on the first day to God to be with me while I recover. And I absolutely agree that healthy foods and proper acquisition of nutrients is paramount. I just don't think it should be the
only thing one is willing to undertake.
Quote from: jabcat on October 17, 2009, 09:59:48 AM
We need to be holding each other up in prayer.
Agreed. :smile:
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 10:39:00 AM
The difference with swine flu is that they want you to believe half of the USA will be wiped out in the next few months.
Well, that depends on who the "they" is. Everything I've seen from medical professionals has been trying to
downplay the effects of the flu. Strictly speaking, the WHO classification of "pandemic" means nothing other than that they do not believe the virus can be successfully contained, and I've seen a number of attempts to drive home the fact that "pandemic" does not mean "we're all gonna die". If, on the other hand "they" is the media, then yes - anything for a good headline.
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 10:39:00 AM
I'm also doubting the 36000 a bit. Nothing like corruption or something similar but how things are registered. Often old people die of the flu. The question is did the old man of 95 die of the flu or was he just to old to live on? The flu just tipped the scale.
Same with AIDS deaths. AIDS itself isn't a real illness. It breaks down your immume system and then you get ill of all kinds of things. Those patients get pneumonia (spelling) in the middle of the summer. Often the cause of death is written down as pneumonia.
Strickly speaking that's correct. But OTOH it was AIDS that indirectly caused that pneumonia.
As I understand it, the statistic for number of deaths from the flu is basically based on whether or not the person was infected with the flu and if his or her cause of death was related to a symptom or complication of the flu. Whether or not that slants or misrepresents things is up to the observer to decide, but I don't think it's deceptive to say that such a person died from the flu. Elderly people are also more likely to die from heart attacks than young people, but that doesn't mean it's incorrect to say that they died of a heart attack.
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 10:39:00 AM
Where I live leaflets are spread. A simple checklist to see you got swine flu.
The leaflet ends with a 'warning' not to go to the doctor. It only infects people in the waiting room. Call the doctor. The doctor basicly asks the same things as listed on the leaflet and tells you to take an asprine and goto bed.
Isn't that strange? Here the flu is 'cured' by telephone and sleep. And in teh meanwhile hals of the USA is wiped out?
The CDC's website (an American governmental medical organization) when I visited in September actually said much the same thing: if you have the symptoms from this list then seek immediate emergency medical help, but otherwise just don't go out in public, drink liquids, and get rest.
Quote from: Gab on October 17, 2009, 09:53:03 AM
I agree with jabcat (and others) that the first line of defense in anyone's body should be natural - if your first instinct is to leap for the drugs the moment you get a sore throat and a sniffle, that's a problem. Your immune system is there for a reason, and contrary to what seems to be popular belief it isn't self-sufficient and static.
Seasonal flu often is similar. So your immume system fights it of without you knowing it.
i think nearly 100% of the people get the flu. But a decent immume system kills of the virus almost instantly.
Swine Flu is new (old actually 1918) so the immume system has to build up defenses.
That possibly means more people get ill.
Swine Flu is less infectious than normal natural flu. But because the immume sysyem isn't trained yet a higher percentage of infected people get ill.
Note: I'll doesn't mean die by defenition; a running nose is ill too.
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 10:49:29 AM
Seasonal flu often is similar. So your immume system fights it of without you knowing it.
i think nearly 100% of the people get the flu. But a decent immume system kills of the virus almost instantly.
Swine Flu is new (old actually 1918) so the immume system has to build up defenses.
That possibly means more people get ill.
Swine Flu is less infectious than normal natural flu. But because the immume sysyem isn't trained yet a higher percentage of infected people get ill.
Note: I'll doesn't mean die by defenition; a running nose is ill too.
Yes, that's exactly correct - I can't imagine that my not having had the flu in fourteen years could have possibly been simply because I was never exposed to it.
Quote from: Gab on October 17, 2009, 10:40:49 AM
Quote from: jabcat on October 17, 2009, 09:59:48 AM
I found Doc's link in the OP to be quite enlightening, worth a read.
Probably the most confusing accusation that he made was that the Spanish flu of 1918 was caused by vaccinations. I literally cannot believe he made that claim, and for a very simple reason: the first vaccination for the flu did not occur until 1945.
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/sf1.html
Quote from: Gab on October 17, 2009, 10:47:41 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 10:39:00 AM
The difference with swine flu is that they want you to believe half of the USA will be wiped out in the next few months.
Well, that depends on who the "they" is. Everything I've seen from medical professionals has been trying to downplay the effects of the flu. Strictly speaking, the WHO classification of "pandemic" means nothing other than that they do not believe the virus can be successfully contained, and I've seen a number of attempts to drive home the fact that "pandemic" does not mean "we're all gonna die". If, on the other hand "they" is the media, then yes - anything for a good headline.
The media certainly is part of they. But most of the time the media quotes a scientist.
Or misquotes perhaps...
The defenition of a pandamic was that a certain percentage of people got infected
and a certain percentage dies of that infection. Last year the 'percentage dies' is removed from that defenition. That means WHO has to declare a possible pandamic much sooner. Many countries must (by their on law) act upon the recommendation of WHO. Coincidence?
QuoteAs I understand it, the statistic for number of deaths from the flu is basically based on whether or not the person was infected with the flu and if his or her cause of death was related to a symptom or complication of the flu. Whether or not that slants or misrepresents things is up to the observer to decide, but I don't think it's deceptive to say that such a person died from the flu. Elderly people are also more likely to die from heart attacks than young people, but that doesn't mean it's incorrect to say that they died of a heart attack.
True. To a certain extend....
Example. A hunter with a running nose steps in a bear trap. He free himself and starts a 3 hour walk to the hospital. His foot is cut off by the trap and loose lots and lots of blood. after 2 hours he dies.
Did he die because of bloodloss? The bear trap? Or the running nose (flu)?
Don't get me wrong Gab I don't really disagree with you; but we both know how stats are abused.
QuoteQuote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 10:39:00 AM
Where I live leaflets are spread. A simple checklist to see you got swine flu.
The leaflet ends with a 'warning' not to go to the doctor. It only infects people in the waiting room. Call the doctor. The doctor basicly asks the same things as listed on the leaflet and tells you to take an asprine and goto bed.
Isn't that strange? Here the flu is 'cured' by telephone and sleep. And in the meanwhile half of the USA is wiped out?
The CDC's website (an American governmental medical organization) when I visited in September actually said much the same thing: if you have the symptoms from this list then seek immediate emergency medical help, but otherwise just don't go out in public, drink liquids, and get rest.
[/quote]
That's still a bit different. "emergency" sounds quite threatening.
"but otherwise just don't go out in public, drink liquids, and get rest." That doesn't sound really deadly.
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 10:59:35 AM
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/sf1.html
Well, the article certainly makes bold claims, but I can't help but notice that it seems to suffer from a dearth of solid evidence. Conversely, the evidence in favor of the Spanish flu, and the tens of millions of fatalities, being caused by a strain of flu virus, is easily presentable. As I said, medical professionals have seen the 1918 flu virus. It is not a form of typhoid as claimed; it is undeniably a strain of the flu virus, the same type of virus responsible for seasonal flu. They have injected it into lab animals and observed that the symptoms seen were precisely those symptoms observed in sufferers during the 1918 flu pandemic. Many who were afflicted with the 1918 flu had never even seen a vaccine in their lives, having no money to spare for such a thing. The way in which such an organism can mutate into a deadlier form is quite well-understood by the scientific community, as well.
Moreover, the flu had a truly global reach. It was seen everywhere from the United States to New Zealand to Japan, with deaths everywhere. Places that strictly controlled entry into their borders suffered less from the virus than places that did not. And the only places that registered no deaths from the flu were those that instituted quarantines that held up successfully until the end of the pandemic. Places that were more humid - that is, places in which the dissemination of microorganisms is much easier - were much harder hit than places with low humidity. All of these facts utterly fly in the face of the idea that the Spanish flu is linked to vaccinations, rather than a virus spread person-to-person.
Ironically enough, the article also states that "(the flu) will not kill 20,000,000 people unless the people submit to the disease-producing shots," yet there were indeed mass immunizations implemented in light of the 1976 flu outbreak (of which the article is speaking), and there were only 25 deaths associated to side effects of the vaccine - each of them tragically unnecessary, but nothing approaching the apocalyptic imagery anti-vaccine crowds were attempting to drum up. And in recent years, no such deaths due to vaccine side effects have been seen, ever, despite vaccines for the seasonal flu being given to people every single year. The writer's own article is now practically self-refuting in light of the realities of the 1976 immunizations whose results we now know.
I don't mean to come across as pushy or anything - I've just honestly never even heard this claim before, and it is one of the strangest I have ever seen. I'll give its advocates credit for their sincere concern and passion, but I can't say I can give them credit for having the balance of evidence on their side.
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 11:25:22 AM
The media certainly is part of they. But most of the time the media quotes a scientist.
Or misquotes perhaps...
The defenition of a pandamic was that a certain percentage of people got infected and a certain percentage dies of that infection. Last year the 'percentage dies' is removed from that defenition. That means WHO has to declare a possible pandamic much sooner. Many countries must (by their on law) act upon the recommendation of WHO. Coincidence?
Do you have a source documenting the change? I can't find a comprehensive one. The only change, at least that I can find, is the removal of "causing serious illness" from the three signs, as was previously documented in a WHO article I found on the H5N1 avian flu. Transmission from animals to humans, the infection of humans, and human-to-human transmissions are still in place. The reason why this change occurs is because we have become more aware as time goes on of the danger of a mild virus mutating into a serious virus, and such a mutation becomes more likely the more people who have it - so preventing the disease from spreading is of paramount importance.
I suppose if you really wanted to find a link between that and H1N1 rather than passing it off as a coincidence, someone who is truly determined to pin this all on a conspiracy will inevitably do so, but I don't exactly see the evidence in favor of such a thing. People have been predicting death and doom resulting from vaccines for a long time now - so it's not as if the opposition to this vaccine is some particularly new thing. And such predictions have turned up basically nothing at all - as I pointed out, people in 1976 were also predicting a repeat of 1918 if vaccination programs go ahead, but absolutely nothing came of that despite vaccinations going ahead. So one will have to forgive me for being skeptical now that history has officially come full circle since that 1976 article.
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 11:25:22 AM
True. To a certain extend....
Example. A hunter with a running nose steps in a bear trap. He free himself and starts a 3 hour walk to the hospital. His foot is cut off by the trap and loose lots and lots of blood. after 2 hours he dies.
Did he die because of bloodloss? The bear trap? Or the running nose (flu)?
Don't get me wrong Gab I don't really disagree with you; but we both know how stats are abused.
I would guarantee you that that would be ruled death by blood loss by anyone acting in a competent fashion. People whose job it is to determine cause of death know their stuff - they don't just guess; they earnestly search for what portion of the body failed in its vital functions. A death that would be ruled as a death from flu would be something along the lines of a terribly infected and failed respiratory system.
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 11:25:22 AM
That's still a bit different. "emergency" sounds quite threatening.
"but otherwise just don't go out in public, drink liquids, and get rest." That doesn't sound really deadly.
Well, like I said, it wasn't saying that for anyone with flu-like symptoms. It was only specific symptoms, such as severe shortness of breath or chest pains - indications that a serious infection of pneumonia has occurred on top of the flu, in other words. And such a situation would absolutely be a cause for alarm - pneumonia can be a deadly disease if left untreated.
And no, that doesn't sound really deadly - that's the point; the article was reassuring people that if all they have is mild-to-moderate flu symptoms then they probably are not going to die, and should just rest at home.
Quote from: Gab on October 17, 2009, 11:58:51 AM
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 10:59:35 AM
http://www.whale.to/vaccine/sf1.html
Well, the article certainly makes bold claims, but I can't help but notice that it seems to suffer from a dearth of solid evidence. Conversely, the evidence in favor of the Spanish flu, and the tens of millions of fatalities, being caused by a strain of flu virus, is easily presentable. As I said, medical professionals have seen the 1918 flu virus.
.......
Moreover, the flu had a truly global reach.
That flu was during a war period. Actually at the end of it. During war the health of people drops because of ll kind of things. Food shortage being one of them.
So the immume syem was likely weak. There were also troop transports. That aids spread of the virus.
Greece had no vacination program. No flu there.
There is more than just one article. Later today I'll try to find some.
QuoteAll of these facts utterly fly in the face of the idea that the Spanish flu is linked to vaccinations, rather than a virus spread person-to-person.
Not really. The flu has to gain momentum. So if more are infected by vaccines the chance that people without a vaccine get infected increases to.
QuoteI don't mean to come across as pushy or anything - I've just honestly never even heard this claim before, and it is one of the strangest I have ever seen.
May I conclude that you haven't read the article(s) that state it was manufactured by the US military? :laughing7:
Quote
Quote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 11:25:22 AM
The media certainly is part of they. But most of the time the media quotes a scientist.
Or misquotes perhaps...
The defenition of a pandamic was that a certain percentage of people got infected and a certain percentage dies of that infection. Last year the 'percentage dies' is removed from that defenition. That means WHO has to declare a possible pandamic much sooner. Many countries must (by their on law) act upon the recommendation of WHO. Coincidence?
Do you have a source documenting the change? I can't find a comprehensive one.
I'll try to find that one also. I think I already post it somewhere on this forum.
The 'problem' is that a large part of the articles I read are in Dutch.
QuotePeople have been predicting death and doom resulting from vaccines for a long time now
Do a search on Google or this forum for autistic children in the USA from 1:10000 to 1:166
Since a certain vaccine. But not among the Amish who refused vaccines.
QuoteQuote from: WhiteWings on October 17, 2009, 11:25:22 AM
True. To a certain extend....
Example. A hunter with a running nose steps in a bear trap. He free himself and starts a 3 hour walk to the hospital. His foot is cut off by the trap and loose lots and lots of blood. after 2 hours he dies.
Did he die because of bloodloss? The bear trap? Or the running nose (flu)?
Don't get me wrong Gab I don't really disagree with you; but we both know how stats are abused.
I would guarantee you that that would be ruled death by blood loss by anyone acting in a competent fashion. People whose job it is to determine cause of death know their stuff - they don't just guess; they earnestly search for what portion of the body failed in its vital functions. A death that would be ruled as a death from flu would be something along the lines of a terribly infected and failed respiratory system.
Ok fair. Same example but now the leg was shot off by someone on puspose.
I think a judge won't see the shooting and dying of bloodloss as something unrelated.
Gab,
I'll start with the articles about autism. A little off-topic but I mentioned it in my post so a few links to such articles.
Autism Rate - US 1:166, Amish 1:15,000
QuoteWashington, DC, Jun. 8 (UPI) -- The autism rate for U.S. children is 1 in 166, according to the federal government. The autism rate for the Amish around Middlefield, Ohio, is 1 in 15,000, according to Dr. Heng Wang.
http://www.wellsphere.com/autism-autism-spectrum-article/autism-rate-us-1-166-amish-1-15-000/389502
QuoteDid mercury in vaccines cause an epidemic of autism, ADD, ADHD, speech
delay and other childhood disorders? Evidence of Harm: Mercury In Vaccines
And The Autism Epidemic: A Medical Controversy (St. Martin's Press, April
2005, $24.95 Hardcover, ISBN: 0-312-32644-9), by New York Times contributor David Kirby, is a disturbing, important book that examines both sides of this brewing controversy-the personal stories of the affected families and the unfolding political drama in the courts and halls of Congress.
http://www.autismtoday.com/articles/1_in_6.htm
QuoteMOUNTING EVIDENCE suggests that Thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative in children's vaccines, may
be responsible for the exponential growth of autism, attention deficit disorder, speech delays, and other
childhood neurological disorders now epidemic in the United States.
Prior to 1989, American infants generally received three vaccinations (polio, measles-mumps-rubella, and
diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis). In the early 1990s, public health officials dramatically increased the number of
Thimerosal-containing vaccinations without considering the cumulative impact of the mercury load on
developing brains.
http://autism.pbisillinois.org/RFK_mercury_article.pdf
http://74.125.155.132/scholar?q=cache:TXEKInc3WJwJ:scholar.google.com/+166+US+children+autistic+mercury&hl=en&num=100
[/hr]
Pandemic definition
The original pandemic definition had two important words removed shortly before the World Health Organisation (WHO) on 11 June 2009 declared the current H1N1 flu outbreak to be a "pandemic".
Current definition:
1] There must be a disease new to a population - or at least a disease that had not surfaced for a long time.
2] This disease must be caused by disease-causing agents that infect humans, causing serious illness.
3] The agents must spread easily and sustainable among humans.
I did not realize it at the time and I only just recently found out (in late July) that the pandemic definition had been changed by the WHO just before they declared the "pandemic" on June 11. The original definition contained two other conditions --
there must be a high morbidity and a high mortality rate. (can't find old and new definitions on for example the WHO site)
Interview with Epidemiologist Tom Jefferson (also mentions changed definition) http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,637119,00.html
Quote
Swine flu is more than ten times less severe than the seasonal flu, he said. (Professor James Chin, an epidemiologist at University of California, Berkeley.)
.....
The WHO's old definition of a pandemic encompassed a new strain of the virus appearing against which the human population has no immunity, resulting in several, simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.
http://gulfnews.com/business/general/illness-found-in-definition-1.18327
Just a few numbers you can compare: http://www.cynthiajanak.com/Definition-of-a-pandemic.html
Spanish Flu => didn't find much (yet). Just a few links you will likely don't find of much value.
QuoteA similar story can be told of the deadly Spanish flu of 1918. This erupted from a new forced vaccination program of all WWI American soldiers. In fact, it is said that a common saying of the day was that more men were lost to shots from the medics than from shots by the enemy. And even after the results of the shots should have been glaringly obvious to all, they pushed ahead with a nationwide vaccination program to 'protect' the civilians from the 'bugs' the soldiers picked up overseas. They then exported this vaccination program to the rest of the world which then suffered a deadly pandemic which cost some 50 million souls. Greece, one of the few countries to abstain from the Spanish flu vaccination program, had no Spanish flu outbreak.
http://www.theshotheardroundtheworld.info/LettertoHealthCare.html
http://www.rense.com/general74/amak.htm
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message852138/pg1
http://archives.tcm.ie/irishexaminer/2003/05/08/story265526733.asp
http://www.rense.com/general45/USvaccinescaused.htm
:cloud9: I got my first ever flu and pneumonia shot last year, after I finally got free of pneumonia. I didn't get the flu at all, but normally I don't anyway, for some reason. I've had the flu maybe 3 times in my life, total. But will try the Brazil nuts; I'm already on vitamin C and other things trying to boost my weakened immune system from being fed prednisone for 14 months straight, which nearly killed me. Never again. Blessings....
Try this emergency package Cardinal.
(http://chocolatecrisiscenter.com/store/images/cranberry_nutcase.jpg)
:cloud9: :laughing7:
Quote from: Gab on October 17, 2009, 10:40:49 AM
There are other strange claims, as well. For example, he claims that viruses like polio and smallpox have been eradicated (or all but eradicated for polio) due to sanitation, potable water, nutrition, and the like, and that the vaccines had nothing to do with it whatsoever. Yet, this too is incongruent with the evidence - when the polio vaccine was first implemented on a broad scale, the number of new polio cases dropped like a rock. Sanitation, water, and nutrition didn't just magically improve on that broad a scale at the exact same time the vaccine was implemented. When a worldwide effort to eradicate the disease was undertaken in 1988, the number of new cases per year dropped from over 350,000 in 1988 to a little over 1,000 in 2007. Again, this cannot possibly be attributed solely to an improvement in sanitation, water, and so forth.
Ah, but Dr. Moulden is not the first to comment on this. The actual evidence (As presented by Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, D.O.) is that the historical evidence (from the CDC) conclusively shows that polio was going away on its own before the vaccination program even got started. You should check out her video called: vaccination: the risks, the benefits, the choices. It is a three hour condensed version of a 13 hour presentation that she did before a large group of medical professionals. It's a number of years old now, but the information is still good, albeit a bit dated. The CDC's own documents actually show that vaccines are neither safe or effective.
One has to keep in mind that there is a large disinformation campaign going on in this country, and that voices like Dr. Moulden's are going to become more prevalent. Of course his view is a minority "opinion". We've been told lies for years.
That said, I agree that we don't necessarily need to entirely throw out the baby with the bathwater. My point is that people need to know that there are very real and potentially serious risks to be considered with vaccinations. The risk of an adverse event from vaccination is actually much higher than serious complications from any of the diseases they are purported to protect against.
While this may sound harsh, and any child death is a tragedy, 11 deaths or even 100 deaths in a year from flu is nothing compared to the number of deaths caused by modern medicines and medical practices. There are far more deaths each year from people taking ibuprophen.
Check this out. Does this sound crazy to anyone?
"The H1N1 vaccine will arrive too late to help most Americans who will be infected during this flu season, according to a study conducted by scholars at Purdue University, The Washington Times reported on Tuesday.
The study also estimates that the virus — commonly referred to as the swine flu bug — will infect about 60 percent of the U.S. population, although only about 25 percent of Americans will fall ill.
Published Oct. 15 in Eurosurveillance, a scientific journal devoted to epidemiology and the surveillance and control of communicable diseases, the study was conducted by professors Sherry Towers and Zhilan Feng of, respectively, Purdue's statistics and mathematics departments.
"The model predicts that there will be a significant wave in autumn, with 63% of the population being infected, and that this wave will peak so early that the planned [U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention] vaccination campaign will likely not have a large effect on the total number of people ultimately infected by the pandemic H1N1 influenza virus," the authors wrote in their study.
The authors said that this is the week, through Oct. 24, during which the greatest number of people would be infected. The vaccination program has barely started in the U.S.
"The model predicts that the peak wave of infection will occur near the end of October in week 42, with 8% of the population being infected during that week. By the end of 2009, the model predicts that a total of 63% of the population will have been infected," the authors wrote in a conclusion that ignored the effects of a CDC vaccination program.
Continue reading at The Washington Times"
I would like to read a similar article on ordinary flu.
"a total of 63% of the population will have been infected"
Sounds very dangerous. There is a huge difference in 63% of the Americans sneezing once a week or dying.
The stats can be correct; but the way it's presented it's fear mongering.
We are infected with all kind of things many times a day. That's why we have an immume system. And we don't get the slightes bit ill. Ever seen that documentary of people without a immume system? They live in some sort of tent in a hospital. Hyper purified air because they even get sick from the smell of a flower.
For them a swin flu infection equals death.
So as said the stats might be correct. What they mean exactly by infection my be very well understood in the medical society. But when releasing an article to the general public requires some extra info like: 75% don't notice anything. 20% feel slighly sick. Etc
:2c:
A little more fear-mongering, would you say? :sigh:
I've been reading about elderberry extract, vitamin d, and colloidal silver. My son's been sick the past few days, some aching, eyes sore, etc...besides prayer, using all the supplements above. He really seems to be doing pretty well, hasn't gotten extremely ill, told me tonight he felt pretty good.
I saw some info tonight that said the elderberry extract (sambucol) is very good for "regular" flu, but some say it can cause or exacerbate a cytokine storm, i.e., an over-response of the immune system that causes inflammation in the lungs and can be lethal IN H1N1. Many though are saying it's very good for H1N1. Sometimes it's hard to sort through all the opinions.
Quote from: jabcat on October 20, 2009, 11:36:01 AM
A little more fear-mongering, would you say? :sigh:
Could be.
Could also be they have absolutely no hidden agenda.
But after the fear-mongering I would say the article isn't complete enough.
Quote from: jabcat on October 20, 2009, 11:44:57 AM
I've been reading about elderberry extract, vitamin d, and colloidal silver. My son's been sick the past few days, some aching, eyes sore, etc...besides prayer, using all the supplements above. He really seems to be doing pretty well, hasn't gotten extremely ill, told me tonight he felt pretty good.
I saw some info tonight that said the elderberry extract (sambucol) is very good for "regular" flu, but some say it can cause or exacerbate a cytokine storm, i.e., an over-response of the immune system that causes inflammation in the lungs and can be lethal IN H1N1. Many though are saying it's very good for H1N1. Sometimes it's hard to sort through all the opinions.
Personally I think the immume system needs to be build/strengthended before the illness.
Bit like smoking can cause cancer. But when you have cancer it won't go away when you stop smoking.
Quotetold me tonight he felt pretty good
Sounds like his immume system is winning the battle. Plus the next time it will battle that flu in a much more effecient way. God put huge army with tiny soldiers with a big brain inside of us :winkgrin:
Quote from: wwGod put huge army with tiny soldiers with a big brain inside of us
Cells that have memory [the immune system]...hmmm
Like that water that has memory. Wait, cells are mostly water!
Cells demand equal time! :girlheart:
:cloud9: Purdue University is here in Indiana, and we're so far out of the loop of national politics rungs of power, I doubt they have any hidden agenda whatsoever. My :2c: Blessings.....
Quote from: jabcat on October 20, 2009, 11:44:57 AM
I've been reading about elderberry extract, vitamin d, and colloidal silver. My son's been sick the past few days, some aching, eyes sore, etc...besides prayer, using all the supplements above. He really seems to be doing pretty well, hasn't gotten extremely ill, told me tonight he felt pretty good.
I saw some info tonight that said the elderberry extract (sambucol) is very good for "regular" flu, but some say it can cause or exacerbate a cytokine storm, i.e., an over-response of the immune system that causes inflammation in the lungs and can be lethal IN H1N1. Many though are saying it's very good for H1N1. Sometimes it's hard to sort through all the opinions.
Hi Jabcat,
I know from personal experience that vitamin C will stop a cold if you start taking it at the first sign of one. A couple of weeks ago I felt like I might be getting a cold and I started taking Vitamin C and it went away. I have done this more than once. Always take the Ester C so as not to mess up the stomach.
CHB
Quote from: CHB on October 20, 2009, 06:03:54 PM
Quote from: jabcat on October 20, 2009, 11:44:57 AM
I've been reading about elderberry extract, vitamin d, and colloidal silver. My son's been sick the past few days, some aching, eyes sore, etc...besides prayer, using all the supplements above. He really seems to be doing pretty well, hasn't gotten extremely ill, told me tonight he felt pretty good.
I saw some info tonight that said the elderberry extract (sambucol) is very good for "regular" flu, but some say it can cause or exacerbate a cytokine storm, i.e., an over-response of the immune system that causes inflammation in the lungs and can be lethal IN H1N1. Many though are saying it's very good for H1N1. Sometimes it's hard to sort through all the opinions.
Hi Jabcat,
I know from personal experience that vitamin C will stop a cold if you start taking it at the first sign of one. A couple of weeks ago I felt like I might be getting a cold and I started taking Vitamin C and it went away. I have done this more than once. Always take the Ester C so as not to mess up the stomach.
CHB
I can confirm that - whenever I feel a cold coming on, I always take 1000-1500 mg of vitamin C, and it's almost always gone by the morning. Vitamin C is quite possibly one of the least toxic substances in all of God's green earth, so at the very least it can't hurt.
http://www.leefbewust.com/themas/griep_vaccins.html
WHO sees 4.9 billion pandemic flu shots in best-case (http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE54H1XO20090519)
Next step in H1N1 scare: Microchip implants (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=107588)
http://www.biodiem.com/index.asp?menuid=070.020
http://www.theshotheardroundtheworld.info/#top
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1K74Tnrrok
Doc
Thanks for the article. I lost a neice to sids 2 weeks after her shots. I was caring for a baby on a ventilator about the same time. He got innoculations and had to be placed in ICU.
The ICU nurse and I got to talking, and she told me she was doing a paper on innoculations and sids. Also, my daughter came down severely ill with Lupus /Rheumatoid arthritis,after being required to get innoculations for nursing school.
Same thing happened to me, innoculations brought on my Lupus. Now, my little 9 yr old grand-daughter has been dx'd
with it. She had a severe reaction to her shots as a three year old,to such an extant that they ceased all innoculations.
We have a lot of auto-immune disease in our family.
My little 6 year old grand-son is being tested for autism.
I always knew it it my bones.
Sheila