Well said. It was a great post up to this point.
It would be immoral to run controlled experiments on the timing of vaccines. That would mean deliberately delaying important medication to children.
Should Obama stop this?
- Thread starter franklin
- Start date
Well said. It was a great post up to this point.
It would be immoral to run controlled experiments on the timing of vaccines. That would mean deliberately delaying important medication to children.
TheSilencer1313
Well-Known Member
Do you actually realize that most "white coat" doctors actually get paid extra money to prescribe certain medications and push certain vaccines?
The minute you realize that EVERYTHING is about money, is the minute you realize it's all ********.
Absolutely everything pushed by the mainstream media is about making money, and has nothing to do with helping anyone.
Some of these great white coat doctors are some of the fattest people I've ever met in my life.
Not saying their are not good practitioners out there, but most of those practitioners are independent, and DO NOT accept federal insurance.
TheSilencer1313
Well-Known Member
To some up all of my posts.
Let's just say "I believe" that without a doubt mercury contributes to autism. Now there's evidence that points to it as well, but there will always be the other guy that says the evidence points the other way.
Just like I mentioned earlier, there is no cut and dry science and it's always theory.
Why do you think I prefer to stick to things that come from the earth as opposed to things that were created out of a big corporate lab?
Oh yeah.... and your "conspiracy theory" label was pretty predictable.
Even though those arguments are slowly losing there ground as these things all get squeezed out of mainstream publications.
5 years ago, you would've told me that saying the Federal Reserve is a private corporation with control of all American dollars is a conspiracy theory.
You think the Founding Fathers created a document suitable for toddlers and you hate capitalism. Is there anything about America you like?
Maybe. There's a difference between conspiracy and bat **** crazy though.
TheSilencer1313
Well-Known Member
Haha, I like your style of twisting peoples words around.... quite cute.
I said the document could be easily understood by a 5 year old, and that's the way it was supposed to be written. Not 1000 page long winded rhetoric.
There is also no correlation between the medical industry and capitalism, considering it's completely government controlled.
Capitalism is also a liberal style idea of an other words conservative free market system.
Call things bat **** crazy all you want, but that's your jaded opinion.
I would also like to know what you think is so bat **** crazy about any of my statements?
Opinions are biased or jaded by nature.
OK, so this statement refers to something I know nothing about---- a special court----and it's special determinations.
Well, I was about to just respectfully invite you to explain more about it, and I should do that. . . . because at this moment I have not even one single fact about it in my possession.
But I do know that the FDA has in-house "Adminstrative Judges" who hold court and regularly clear their client corporates of all charges. Please tell me this is not the court you are referring to. . . . Please.
I guess you missed my poor attempt to imic your humor.
Lewis Caroll dealt scientifically with the effects of mercury on brain function in his greatest scientific publication, Alice in Wonderland and created a public icon representing the achievements of those dedicated public servants who used to sew the fine gentlemen's and ladies' hat using mercury-weighted threads.
Today, most of these dedicated public servants and probable savants are employed in Chinese toy manufacturing establishments. I pride myself on my membership in the the "Mad Hatters' Union" and attribute my status to the mercury amalgam in my teeth, and the little mercury BB's I used to chase around on the linoleum kitchen floor when I was a toddler, and my father's employment with National Lead and his exclusive use of Dutch Boy Paints throughout the house he built for my mom.
However, when I was diagnosed with the possible autoimmune disease "Multiple Sclerosis", one of the tests that was run on me was for mercury and lead because I worked routinely in a lab where these were much-used reagents, but my blood levels of these things was remarkably below normal for some reason, and were ruled out as the cause of my particular problems. My later work in the lab doing metal-binding studies on the general class of the inducible metallothionein proteins gives a clue as to why my blood and urine levels of heavy metals were below normal. While feeding heavy metals to yeast, mice and dogs for two months, and sacrificing these to recover the produced metallothioneins from the subjects, I'm pretty sure I induced my own production of metallothioneins, which secure and sequester heavy metals and remove them from circulation.
The fact that autoimmune disease is believed to be the root cause of Multiple Sclerosis has been on the table for forty years, with many studies on how the use of vaccines in childhood, and in particular the measles vaccine, have positive and significant correleations with the epidemiology of this disease which shows it's presence by effects on the brain and spinal column. And yet, when I was poring over all the research on MS, I found some less-respected discussions of nutrition being a factor, and decided to change my diet. When I did that, my recovery was so remarkable the doctors decided they must have been just wrong in their diagnosis, because nobody recovers from MS.
Imagination rules, however. And I have kept my imagined status in my imagined union.
Last edited:
I understand. I thought it was a useful take-off point for my little rant, though.
Behavior like winds up in sanctions from local medical boards. You're allowed to be wined and dined by pharmaceutical representatives, but not to change patient care on that basis. Of course, you're hearing this from local naturopaths who mix their own medicine and sell to their patients. . The most common proganda tick in the book is to accuse "the other guy" of engaging in the same behavior you engage in. You probably even think the naturopaths are virtuous for selling you their home-made garbage instead of medicine.
NOthing makes money like an effective medicine. That's why pharmeceutical companies rake in the dough, and naturopaths don't.
In regard to the first enquiry, the answer is yes, yes, and because I'm right. I've also written some things that did get past peer-review and get published.
On number two the answer is you're just wrong. Yes, some outfits have folded, and sold out their products to larger, more profitable concerns who have better lobbyists and connections.
Yes, the death rate for measles is small. The death rate for vaccines is also small. Might be an order or two smaller than that of measles. Could be reduced an order or two in magnitude by taking the trouble to evaluate some parameters of health before giving vaccines. The government will not do that because it looks too expensive and is not "cost-effective". But if it was my kid, I'd want to take that trouble. If a school district or a court is going to compel kids to be vaccinated, they should take that trouble.
Adults in general could be considered somewhat "immuno-compromised" in regard to many infectious pathogens, compared to kids whose immune systems are in full tilt responding to all the stuff being seen, and with practically no age-caused declines in function. So on a case by case basis we could talk about each vaccine and the disease.
The long term effects of injecting the vaccine should include autoimmune risks that might show up much later in life. And need to be considered as part of the decision proess.
Any details of which grant boards you've served on, and which grants you've approved or disapproved? Whant grants have you written, did they result in publishable research, and where can it be read?
Why say I'm wrong and then immediately confirm what I said?
What part of the research leads you conclude this? Which papers?
OK, so I noticed the style and bias of the offerings in VRAN.
But discussion of thimerosol was factual. The carrying capacity of the salicylate moeity is real, and the toxicity of the ethylthiomercury group is real. And the increase effects of that toxic substance inside the BB barrier is real. I can understand you being confused when reading what I'd call irresponsible publications that downplay the toxicity of thimerosol itself because it's direct action is reduced in some experimental circumstances and ignore the actual reality of what happens to thimerosol in the body. It is at some point metabolized, and the ethylthiomercury is released. The dangers of thimersol are therefore at least just as great as that of ethylthiomercury. And the fact that the salicylate carries if to a place where it wouldn't go otherwise does mean it is actually much more potent as a toxic effector of brain pathology.
The bias of your mainstream offerings actually renders them less credible than VRAN.
You missed the logic there. The fact that some business fail might not be because there is not a profit margin in the product. And an uninformed outsider might think the business failed when in fact it succeeded wildly and was bought out. Companies with very clever management routinely complain about the adversities of the market while they, the insiders, jockey for some personally profitable relocation of the company assets, leaving investors believing it failed for some other reason.
But the point where you are just wrong is your assertion that the poor vaccine producers are too timid to ask a very good price for their product. There is a profit margin, and there is little competition actually going on, so it is a really nice profit margin.
I think there are huge profits particularly where the government is pushing the requirement for vaccines. Lobbyists have to be paid a lot, and that might be a huge expense in getting the government officials lined up with the program, and maybe there's even more payola involved, but if there was not a lot of room for a lot of folks to rake in a lot of money, there would be no lobbyists. People with health concerns, wanting vaccines, would have to create the demand. And if there was no profit in producing the vaccines, the producers would just raise the price to where there is a profit.
And, oh, so you actually think I have to be the honcho to make a statement about being "published", or doing any of the menial work actually done in "peer review" or grant processing/applications. I worked for the dean of the graduate school, the heads of two departments of the college of medicine, and several research professors, as well as the then-president of the American Chemical Society. Effective leadership always involves delegation of the actual work. Not to say these folks actually had good "leadership" talents, exactly. That's why I make comments about deficiencies that exist in the culture.
It could hardly be worse than an Administrative Judge under the FDA, but it is:
I guess you are deaf to the thunder of this statement. Let me restate it in simple terms:
Vaccine makers were justly fearful that trials by juries in fair courts would put them out of business, so they hired lobbyists to convince lawmakers to set up a kangaroo court where claims against their ware could reliably be dismissed.
TheSilencer1313
Well-Known Member
Jesus..... where do you come up with all this ongoing stuff?
Good thing I didn't sign up for a book reading circle.
It is this magical place called the internet. Full of lollipops and pedophiles. Some people know how to use it and some don't
TheSilencer1313
Well-Known Member
Well you made in interesting attempt, but allow me to retort.
I would love to be sanctioned by a local medical board. Wait... does it hurt?
Now when you're talking about "naturopaths", as I suppose your circles call them..... you decribed them as "home-made garbage".
Well that's a very interesting comment, but I think you're forgetting that herbs are not man-made.
Now sure, you can take a mixture of different herbs and put them into pill form.... but they are not conjured up voodoo style lol.
I will tell you exactly why so-called "effective medicine" makes 100 times more money for any company.
Man-made over the counter and prescription drugs can be PATENTED.......
Yes that's right folks. When you create something out of thin air, you can patent what you created. This means you make money off of anybody that markets or sells the drug. And believe me, that's what they are, "drugs".
They are a mixture of man-made chemicals, created in a lab and put into a pill.
You can not patent an herb. It would be like trying to patent a tree.
Not to mention how the government is in bed with all of these companies, this is widely known.
TheSilencer1313
Well-Known Member
Haha good one. But he/she must really have some time on their hands to throw down this much long winded info.