Peach Magazine - Don't force your ideas on everyone else

amother

Thu, May 08 2014, 2:45 pm

I'd like to talk about a different kind of poison. While consumption in small quantities is usually asymptomatic, ingestion of larger quantities causes cells to swell. In the brain, this swelling increases intracranial pressure (ICP). It is this increase in pressure which leads to the first observable symptoms: headache, personality changes, changes in behavior, confusion, irritability, and drowsiness. These are sometimes followed by difficulty breathing during exertion, muscle weakness & pain, twitching, or cramping, nausea, vomiting, thirst, and a dulled ability to perceive and interpret sensory information. As the condition persists, papillary and vital signs may result including bradycardia and widened pulse pressure. The cells in the brain may swell to the point where blood flow is interrupted resulting in cerebral edema. Swollen brain cells may also apply pressure to the brain stem causing central nervous system dysfunction. Both cerebral edema and interference with the central nervous system are dangerous and could result in seizures, brain damage, coma or death.

And yet many schools offer this poison to children every day, and many quack parents allow their children to ingest this poison.

We need to put an end to it.

Please, today, write to your lawmakers and demand that the US ban the use of water for drinking purposes.

amother

Thu, May 08 2014, 3:03 pm

MaBelleVie wrote:

Oh, were you referring specifically to flumist? You should make that clear.

The effects of one method have nothing to do with the effects of another method. Not knowing you were referring specifically to flumist, I was wondering why anyone cares what the consequences of inhaling formaldehyde are, at least in the context of this discussion (lol).

Quote:

Flumist doesn't contain formaldehyde, so she couldn't have been referring to it.

What are the ingredients in FluMist Quadrivalent?
Active Ingredient:
FluMist Quadrivalent contains 4 influenza virus strains that are weakened (A(H1N1), A(H3N2), B Yamagata lineage, and B Victoria lineage).
Inactive Ingredients:
monosodium glutamate, gelatin, arginine, sucrose, dibasic potassium phosphate, monobasic potassium phosphate, and gentamicin
.
FluMist Quadrivalent does not contain preservatives.

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/B.....3.pdf

Think1st

Thu, May 08 2014, 3:21 pm

amother wrote:

"Vaxi-quack." I like it. Its like being on the playground with a not very bright 4 year old. When the other kids run rings around him, he shouts "you're just a poopy head!" and thinks its a brilliant retort. When all else fails, call everyone who disagrees with you nasty little names. Do you honestly think that it makes everyone know that you're mature, intelligent, and have the facts behind you to argue in an intelligent manner? Or do you understand how it undercuts every word you say? I won't lower myself to question your intelligence, the way you question everyone who disagrees with you; I'll let people judge that based on your words.

So, you DO understand that all thimerosal was removed from vaccines in the US more than a decade ago. (No, I won't explain to you why thimerosal was in vaccines. I do understand it. Do you? Do you know what thimerosal is? Have you read about how it is metabolized, how it is excreted, or about the difference in how different types of mercury derivatives are metabolized? Can you explain the difference between ethylmercury and methylmercury -- without googling?)

Your only response is, well, they must have replaced it with other poisons. What are those poisons? How and why do they act in a manner identical to the manner in which you claim that thimerosal worked as a "poison" (that is, in creating autism). And how are these other "poisons" metabolized in a manner that would create the mercury in the hair that you claim is a characteristic of autism? Do you believe that all "poisons" act in the same manner, or create the same results? For example, would a child with lead poisoning become autistic, as you claim a child "poisoned" by thimerosal or other unidentified "poisons" would? What about arsenic poisoning? Belladonna?

What mercury-containing agent do you claim is now in vaccines? Give me the name, and the type of vaccine (other than influenza) that it is in.

Oh, and while we are talking. Circa 2010, the autism rate in states such as South Carolina, South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado and Montana was .4%. At the same time, it was 1.1% in Maine, 1.2% in Oregon and 1.4% in Minnesota (highest rate in the country). Why are these "poisons" 3 times more toxic in some places than in others? And most specifically, why does Mississippi, with the highest MMR vaccination rate in the country (99.9%) have amongst the lowest autism rates (.4%)? http://graphics.latimes.com/us.....tate/ http://www.advisory.com/daily-.....erage Oh, and please make sure that you cite peer reviewed studies and statistics. Vaxiquacks like me who are too stupid to even know what's inside a vaccine are also too stupid to understand anything else.

1. I agree name calling is not the most diplomatic behavior, but it was the establishment that coined the name quacks for anyone promoting non-chemical healing,

2.some vaccines still have mercury, some flu shots & the multi-dose vials

3.if it so safe why are they removing it?

4.Mercury is not the only toxin in vaccines

5. 1985 study - There was little difference in the neurotoxicities of methylmercury and ethylmercury
http://link.springer.com/artic.....24789

EPA just as concerned about both forms of mercury
http://www.epa.gov/teach/

http://nlquery.epa.gov/epasear.....t.hts

5.Toxins in the environment may be a minor contributor

Last edited by Think1st on Thu, May 08 2014, 3:28 pm; edited 1 time in total

Scrabble123

Thu, May 08 2014, 3:23 pm

Think1st wrote:

1. measles was on the decline 40 years before the vax

2.Why don't you screen kids for vitamin a deficiency rather than shooting them up

3.where r taking those figures from

4.History teaches us the medical establishment resits change even at the expense of our lives

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

Measles was on the decline 40 years before the vaccine?
Here is the history of the Vaccine: http://www.historyofvaccines.o.....asles

Is approximately 800,000 cases in 1958 called a decline? Do you know how many hospitalizations, complications, and deaths occurred as a result of that? Even after 1958, we see large numbers of people infected with measles. 450,000 Cases in 1965 is called a decline for you? The vaccine was licensed in 1963!

The decline in cases does not bother me at all. It appears to be common sense that when so many people were infected one year, they had immunity and were not re-infected again the following year. Eventually though, as more children are born, attend school, etc. the virus will again create a large epidemic if not for vaccines.

BTW measles was almost completely eradicated. Many medical professionals believed that we would not be hearing about it again in the United States, but.............as a result of people who do not vaccinate, we are hearing about more and more cases.

[And those are medically publicized figures. The figures I quoted for complications & outbreaks are accepted by the CDC. BTW, I find it interesting that you should ask me about sources....]

Dolly Welsh

Thu, May 08 2014, 3:38 pm

Wikipedia says ..

"The earliest well-documented case of autism is that of Hugh Blair of Borgue, as detailed in a 1747 court case in which his brother successfully petitioned to annul Blair's marriage to gain Blair's inheritance.[179] The Wild Boy of Aveyron, a feral child caught in 1798, showed several signs of autism; the medical student Jean Itard treated him with a behavioral program designed to help him form social attachments and to induce speech via imitation.[180]"

This implies autism has always existed. The ancient Greek word "idiot" means "self concerned" (id) which is the same idea as the word autism. The word autism means "self" ism, "auto" meaning self.

Wikipedia isn't perfect, as everybody knows, it can be user-edited, but this seems hard to argue with.

Wikipedia says this about vaccines:

"The terms vaccine and vaccination are derived from Variolae vaccinae (smallpox of the cow), the term devised by Edward Jenner to denote cowpox. He used it in 1798 in the long title of his Inquiry into the...Variolae vaccinae...known...[as]...the Cow Pox, in which he described the protective effect of cowpox against smallpox.[1] In 1881, to honour Jenner, Louis Pasteur proposed that the terms should be extended to cover the new protective inoculations then being developed.[2]"

Again, nothing to argue with, that is just factual history.

There were no vaccines yet in 1798, just discussion of the mechanism of immunity, from cowpox.

So, there was autism BEFORE there were any vaccines in existence.

That goes a long way to negating the notion that vaccines cause autism.

Think1st may not like vaccines for who knows what other reason, but at least the autism thing seems dead, from this simple chronology.

The Wikipedia page on autism does go into its genetic aspect, which is complex. "Blue eyes" is too simple an analogy, but that was shorthand for: you are born with this. You don't get it.

I privately think an inborn pre-disposition to autism may express as a result of a first fever, even if mild. But I am no medic. That might cause the appearance of something, such as a vaccine, causing the autism, but that something was not really a cause. It was going to express anyway.

As teething must cause fever in every infant, there is no way to permanently escape fever.

Last edited by Dolly Welsh on Thu, May 08 2014, 3:56 pm; edited 1 time in total

amother

Thu, May 08 2014, 3:39 pm

Think1st wrote:

1. I agree name calling is not the most diplomatic behavior, but it was the establishment that coined the name quacks for anyone promoting non-chemical healing,

No one here has called you a "quack." Yet you have repeatedly called people who oppose you here that, in violation of the TOS. You steadfastly refuse to apologize when called on it. Your behavior is despicable.

Think1st wrote:

2.some vaccines still have mercury, some flu shots & the multi-dose vials

Yes, SOME flu vaccines have thimerosal. What other vaccines have it? Names. Manufacturers. Since ingredients are posted online, give us a link.

Think1st wrote:

3.if it so safe why are they removing it?

I think the word you're looking for is "removed." As in "more than a decade ago." Why? Because of the unsupported pseudo-scientific rantings of the anti-vaccination lobby, based on the fraudulent reports of Wakefield. It created hysteria, and it was easier to remove it than to argue. As you know, removing thimerosal did not reduce the incidence of autism, but that hasn't stopped you from spending 30-something pages arguing that a substance removed from US vaccines for children in 2001 is STILL, 14 years later, is causing 12 month olds who are immunized with thimerosal -free MMR to be diagnosed with autism.

Think1st wrote:

4.Mercury is not the only toxin in vaccines

So you keep saying. Name them. Name the vaccines they're in. Explain how they are metabolized into mercury in the hair of autistic children, as you claim. Explain how these other "toxins" act in precisely the same way as thimerosal in causing children to be diagnosed with ASD as opposed to something else.

Think1st wrote:

5. 1985 study - There was little difference in the neurotoxicities of methylmercury and ethylmercury
http://link.springer.com/artic.....24789

Aww. You googled. Now try again, without googling. Your own words. Are they metabolized the same? Explain. Hint. I already posted the answer, so you should know it.

Think1st wrote:

5.Toxins in the environment may minor contributor

Is that supposed to be your explanation of why the state with the highest MMR vaccination rate has the lowest autism rate? Sorry. You're going to need to do better than that.

amother

Thu, May 08 2014, 4:12 pm

Think1st wrote:

Think1st wrote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardasil

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/731407

Gardasil targets only 4 HPV strains. 6, 11, 16 and 18

However HPV strains 16, 18, & 45 cause 94% of cervical cancers

8 HPV types cause more than 90% of all cervical cancers worldwide

1. So there are many more strains that cause cancer not targeted by the shot including strain # 45, & we have no idea if it may cause you to get more of the other strains

2. 10's of death's & 1,000's of injury reports from the vax http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafe......html

3. ask any Isreali frum or traditional woman they do not take HPV shot. Ask any bikur cholim org if they ever dealt with a frum cervical cancer case

June 2006 through December 2008

23,000,000 doses ,3 per person =7,666,666 people got the shot
12,424 adverse reactions reported =1 in 617
6% serious reaction 1 in in 10,284

That is assuming all case get reported if only 10% gets reported or 1% you do the math

2012 It only gets better hpvshot death toll over nearing 200

http://sanevax.org/hpv-vaccine.....2012/

You are honestly making me angry now. Read this: Frum women can 100% get cervical cancer all too easily. I don't care what some Bikkur cholim lady says?!

But it clearly makes you happier to bury YOUR head in the sand on this and Many other issues.

dancingqueen

Thu, May 08 2014, 4:14 pm

amother wrote:

We've got vaxi-quacks here advocating for a product they have no idea whats inside it.

Mercury was said to be safe by the doctors for 50 years and now its being removed due to all the problems its causing the drug industry.

Do you think its simply removed without being REPLACED by another poison which serves the same purpose?

Are any of you vaxiquacks intelligent enough to know why the mercury is there in the vaccine?
the formalehyde ?
all the other poison?

for those of you here who advocate for vaccines but don't know whats there and still insist its all safe and don't see the problem of claiming "safer" for the last 50 years...I'll spoonfeed it to you.

A vaccine contains a weakened or dead form of the virus.
if you wish to weaken or kill the virus you need a means to do so.
the poisons they introduce the virus to serve that purpose, but once introduced the two cannot be separated, leaving the only option to inject the virus WITH the poison into the person as one unit.

this unit also requires a preservative. Enter more poison.

If the mercury is being removed you need another agent to do what the mercury was doing.
Sometimes they will even be as deceptive as to replace a mercury-containing agent which carries a name other than mercury....with a different mercury containing agent which carries a third name.

sometimes its actually removed and replaced with a different poison but all YOU will ever hear is that "they took out the mercury".

That was #1.

#2 is that you vaxiquacks do not seem to understand what heavy metal poisoning even is or does.

This "amother" is so clearly think1st that it's laughable.

Dolly Welsh

Thu, May 08 2014, 4:17 pm

Wht is this "non-chemical healing"? You don't believe in chicken soup?

If you drink willow bark tea for headache, you are being natural and organic and crunchy.

If Bayer Aspirin cooks willow bark extract down to a powder, and sells it to you in a tablet, the exact same compound, you are being establishment.

If Bayer Aspirin synthesizes the compound found naturally in willow bark in a laboratory, so they don't have to farm willow trees, and you take it in a tablet, you are being establishment.

But the tea was not "non-chemical healing". It's the same chemical in all three cases.

"Natural remedies" are chock full of chemicals.

Many establishment medications are just the same chemicals found in nature, made easily available to mass markets, and with testing, and uniform concentrations and doses.

Or, synthetic imitations that are, at the molecular level, the same thing. The same chemical as in nature. Or better.

Chemicals aren't any less chemicals because you picked them in your backyard and made tea with them.

Nature is chock full of chemicals, some useful, and many poisonous.

There is nothing magic about ingesting a chemical in an organic-looking form such as a tea. It's the same thing as the pill. But the pill has a carefully controlled, predictable dose. And, as it came from a lab not a garden, no insect parts, soil particles containing heavy metals!, molds, and who knows what.

amother

Thu, May 08 2014, 4:31 pm

Think1st wrote:

FDA list of vaccine ingredients including formaldehyde

Why is formaldehyde in some vaccines?

Formaldehyde has a long history of safe Very Happy

use in the manufacture of certain viral and bacterial vaccines. It is used to inactivate viruses

http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBl.....0.htm

EPA

Inhalation of formaldehyde can cause irritation of the eyes, nose, throat, and skin, as well as inflammation and damage to the upper respiratory tract.

Additionally, there is growing evidence that formaldehyde exposure may impact pulmonary function,and increase respiratory symptoms, asthma

there is sufficient evidence in humans and sufficient evidence in experimental animals for the carcinogenicity of formaldehyde

http://www.epa.gov/ocir/hearin.....j.pdf

formaldehyde is only poison when you want it to be, or by coincidences

Call up the EPA tell them correlation is not causation Very Happy

Think1st you could not have said it better.

I have a feeling the people you are responding to either just arent very bright or have some agenda or ulterior motive here!
one or the other!
How long should it take before a pro-vaxer realizes it DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. your post here alone should be enough!
Goodness!

if this was a public debate with an audience you'd have had the audience roaring for you after this one!
this is why pro-vaxers won't debate in public.

this is also why the letter the lakewood doctors prepared in response to the peach magazine which was due to be published in this weeks publication has been CANCELLED.
They'd look like a bunch of fools.
Today's young people are more streetsmart then ever and they know when they are being messed around with!

imasinger

Thu, May 08 2014, 4:40 pm

amother wrote:

I reported this post for improper use of the amother feature.

It is a shame that the real issues worth debating have degenerated to this level.

amother

Thu, May 08 2014, 4:48 pm

amother wrote:

Gosh. I know I'm not very bright. I've even been brainwashed to use capital letters and proper grammar. But since you're so gosh-darned brilliant, can you answer the questions I posed to your alter-ego, that is, the person for whom you're a sock puppet (although , gosharooney, I'm just do darned stupid to explain those terms). That is:

(1) Do you understand that all thimerosal was removed from vaccines in the US more than a decade ago.

(2) If thimerosal was replaced by "other poisons," what are those poisons? How and why do they act in a manner identical to the manner in which you claim that thimerosal worked as a "poison" (that is, in creating autism). And how are these other "poisons" metabolized in a manner that would create the mercury in the hair that you claim is a characteristic of autism? Do you believe that all "poisons" act in the same manner, or create the same results? For example, would a child with lead poisoning become autistic, as you claim a child "poisoned" by thimerosal or other unidentified "poisons" would? What about arsenic poisoning? Belladonna?

(3) What mercury-containing agent do you claim is now in vaccines? Give me the name, and the type of vaccine (other than influenza) that it is in.

(4) Circa 2010, the autism rate in states such as South Carolina, South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado and Montana was .4%. At the same time, it was 1.1% in Maine, 1.2% in Oregon and 1.4% in Minnesota (highest rate in the country). Why are these "poisons" 3 times more toxic in some places than in others? And most specifically, why does Mississippi, with the highest MMR vaccination rate in the country (99.9%) have amongst the lowest autism rates (.4%)? http://graphics.latimes.com/us.....tate/ http://www.advisory.com/daily-.....e-coverage Oh, and please make sure that you cite peer reviewed studies and statistics. Vaxiquacks like me who are too stupid to even know what's inside a vaccine are also too stupid to understand anything else.

Please use teeny-tiny little words. You know I'm just not very bright. Not like you. You're so smart, you don't need to use capital letters or proper grammar. Oh, and again, unlike you, I'm so stupid that I need citations to studies and information. I don't immediately grasp ideas just because really smart people like you claim they're true.

Dolly Welsh

Thu, May 08 2014, 4:53 pm

Think1st, why is it so hard to understand that a small amount of something can be useful and all right, and a lot of it can be bad?

I will drink a little alchohol later.

Alcohol can certainly kill you if you drink too much at once.

So, is alchohol ok or not?

It depends on dosage.

Same with formaldehyde.

We take in lots of things that are ok in small doses, and not in big ones.

Another is fluoride. Poisonous bad in large doses. But I will smear some on my aging teeth later and it will strengthen them, and do me no harm. For someone my age, this fluoride cream is extremely valuable to keep teeth. Precious stuff.

It is obtained by prescription.

My dentist said not to swallow it, and not to use it more than once a day.

Small dose: good.
Lots: bad.

Don't say "we can never use formaldehyde for anything ever".

Say "we have to know what we are doing when we use formaldehyde, and not use too much, and for a proper purpose".

YES SOMETHING CAN BE SAFE SOMETIMES AND NOT SAFE OTHER TIMES. THE SAME EXACT THING.

amother

Thu, May 08 2014, 4:56 pm

Think1st wrote:

FDA list of vaccine ingredients including formaldehyde

Why is formaldehyde in some vaccines?

Formaldehyde has a long history of safe Very Happy

And what does any of this have to do with autism? The autism rate is going up because ... something that might cause asthma is in vaccines?