SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : General Topics : Vaccination Questions

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 Next Page )
PosterThread
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5586
NC, USA

 Vaccination Questions

I know there are some folks on here against vaccinations.

I ***DO NOT*** want this thread to be about the pros and cons of vaccinations--please! I respect both sides of the debate.

In fact this can hopefully be a pretty short thread because I am just curious about a few things that I am sure can be answered easily.

Here are my questions (for the sake of ease and clarity let's assume we are talking about measles):

1) Is the mindset of a non-vaccinator that if their child contracts measles they will likely recover w/o complications? If so, is a risk analysis involved (i.e. the risk of the vaccination is greater than the risk of serious complication) or would you not vaccinate even if the risk of serious complication was very high?

2) What are your thoughts about the fact that your non-vaccinated child might infect other children with measles (presumably only other children who are not vaccinated) before you realize your child has measles and what if one of those other children developed serious complications?

3) Do you rely on the fact that the great majority of children ARE vaccinated which greatly reduces the risk of your non-vaccinated child being exposed to measles?

I appreciate your responses and again, I do not want this to be a debate- i would just like your insight into these questions.


_________________
Todd

 2016/8/19 22:05Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re: Vaccination Questions

Hi Todd,

I have posted information in the past, concerning what many of us consider as unethical ways in which these vaccines have been created and are being produced and I believe that it is well worth reposting some facts to start with:

vaccines that are produced using Aborted Cell Lines :

Disease
Vaccine Name
Manufacturer
Cell line

Adenovirus
Barr Labs., Inc
WI-38

Chickenpox
Varivax
Merck & Co.
MRC-5 & WI-38

WI-38

Chickenpox
Varivax
Merck & Co.
MRC-5 & WI-38

Diphtheria, Tetanus, Pertussis, Polio, HIB
Pentacel
Sanofi Pasteur
MRC-5

Hepatitis A
Havrix
GlaxoSmithKline
MRC-5

Hepatitis A
Vaqta
Merck & Co.
MRC-5

Hepatitis A-B
Twinrix
GlaxoSmithKline
MRC-5

Measles, Mumps, Rubella
MMR II
WI-38

Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Chickenpox
ProQuad
Merck & Co.
MRC-5 & WI-38

Rabies
Imovax
Sanofi Pasteur
MRC-5

Rubella
Meruvax II
Merck & Co.
WI-38

Shingles
Zostavax
Merck & Co.
MRC-5

....

.There are currently no U.S. approved alternatives for Adenovirus, Chickenpox, Hepatitis A, Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Shingles. Merck & Co. announced in 2008 that their Mumps and Measles alternatives, Mumpsvax and Attenuvax, will no longer be produced. The new version of the Adenovirus vaccine is currently only approved for use for military personnel.

Right to Life of Michigan
http://www.rtl.org/prolife_issues/LifeNotes/VaccinesAbortion_FetalTissue.html

edit :clarity

 2016/8/19 22:50Profile
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5586
NC, USA

 Re:

PP-

I understand why people choose not to vaccinate. I would much rather this not be a debate about vaccinating or not vaccinating.

But I was really just curious about the questions I asked.


_________________
Todd

 2016/8/19 23:57Profile
proudpapa
Member



Joined: 2012/5/13
Posts: 2936


 Re: Vaccination Questions

Hi Todd ,

The answers to your questions simply can not be answered without first laying out a basic foundational understanding of our reasoning.
To give a short answer to your questions I believe would simply be foolish.

In regards to asking questions specifically concerning the measles vaccine or MMR vaccine. An important fact to keep in mind is that:
According to the 'Right to Life of Michigan' which by no means is antivac : :

".There are currently no U.S. approved alternatives for Adenovirus, Chickenpox, Hepatitis A, Measles, Mumps, Rubella and Shingles. Merck & Co. announced in 2008 that their Mumps and Measles alternatives, Mumpsvax and Attenuvax, will no longer be produced."

I post all of this information not to persuade others to not vaccinate but to help others understand in part why some of us Christians are antivac.

If alternatives where provided that did not use the cell lines that originated from aborted fetuses,
Would we than feel comfortable injecting these vaccines ?
The answer is no, As Christians we are very skeptical of the world and its agendas.
Not only are we not trusting of the motives behind those such as Big Brother and Big Pharma, Big Corp Scientist etc.
But we do not trust there wisdom.
For instance I was speaking to a guy just today that has some pasture that I am renting for some cows and he was talking about spraying his fields with a herbicide 2-4-d to kill the weeds.
To prove my case that we can not trust the saftey labels.
I brought him a local newspaper clipping from 50 years ago in it contained these statements :

"The forest service , US dept. of Agriculture will use helicopters to spray 2-4-5-T on nearly 7,000 acres of ..National Forest. .... Careful scientific investigation and field testing have proved that 2-4-5-T is not harmful nor toxic to birds,animals,fish,or human beings,the Forest Service spokesman said"

That was in 1965 today we know that : "2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid (also known as 2,4,5-T), a synthetic auxin, is a chlorophenoxy acetic acid herbicide used to defoliate broad-leafed plants. It was developed in the late 1940s and was widely used in the agricultural industry until being phased out, starting in the late 1970s due to toxicity concerns. Agent Orange..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic_acid

The careful scientific investigation and field testing of 1965 has proven through time to have been greatly flawed :
To such an extent that some scientist today believe that dioxin that was in 2,4,5-T aka : 'agent Orange', is the most toxic molecule ever created by man.

Interesting enough I did not relieze when I was talking to him this afternoon : that the 2-4-d that he had just sprayed on one of his fields was the other part of : Agent Orange, In which was not outlawed because it did not contain the dixon that the 2,4,5-T did

Nor did I relieze untill just now as I have been researching for this post that : "A July 2013 Four Corners investigation found elevated levels of dioxins in a generic version of 2,4-D, one of Australia's most widely used herbicides. One scientist said the product tested by Four Corners, which was imported from China, had "one of the highest dioxin readings for 2,4-D in the last 10 to 20 years"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic_acid

There are good reasons for me and others not to have alot of faith in the information coming from Big Bro and Big corp.

edit : clarity

 2016/8/20 1:17Profile









 Re:

Generally speaking, it is kids who are not eating a natural foods healthy diet and/or living a healthy lifestyle that catch these infectious diseases and develop complications.

There are many many testimonies from families who do go the natural way, eating a plant based food diet (with it without meat) and who treat illnesses naturally and not pharmaceutically, using things like homeopathy, that will say their kids just don't catch the things that are going around, but if they do get them, they recover quickly.

I brought my kids up this way and they were able to shrug things off.

So the question should be, if children are brought up in this manner, why should their health be put at risk by the very real dangers of vaccinations like the aluminium and other substances they contain, for the sake of parents who do not care for the general health of their kids because they give in to demands for candies and junk food?

The SAD, that is, the standard American diet, is well named.

Also, rates of infectious diseases went right down before they used vaccinations and antibiotics, when living standards improved, so it was not due to medical intervention though the pharma companies would like us to believe so.

We should not trust in man, with the processed foods we find at the store. We should eat the foods that God says are safe, that is, unsprayed and as they are in the field. Untouched by profit making industries.

These processed foods cause disease to flourish and leave us open to the second deception, that we need a medication from the doctor which merely hides symptoms and in fact causes another disease called side effects.

I find Christians fall for this deception, sometimes even more than the unsaved because of some misguided idea that whatever is on offer is from God.

 2016/8/20 2:49
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5586
NC, USA

 Re:

PP-

So basically you are saying my questions are irrelevant because in your view vaccines are immoral.

I can respect that and see what they can't be answered in that context.

I lost 5 great aunts and uncles to childhood diseases that are now vaccinated against and I think that's a shame. Of course I realize that childhood mortality has always been an issue prior to the 50s or so.


_________________
Todd

 2016/8/20 11:03Profile









 Re: Vaccination Questions

HI Todd,

I think if I were the parent of a young child today, I would be worried about Autism. Looking at all the data and the massive increase in Autism in the last 30 years, I would be thinking seriously about vaccinations, particularly the three in one. And yes, I would consider that the child would recover from measles or mumps. The fact that other children are or are not vaccinated wold have no bearing on my decision. .............bro Frank

 2016/8/20 11:15
forrests
Member



Joined: 2016/3/11
Posts: 301


 Re: proudpapa, aborted cell lines and "big pharma", etc.

proudpapa,

Thank you so much for the information! As one who has only been a believer for a little over 5 years, I have not assumed an "antivac" position and have had my children vaccinated.

While I have heard quite a few arguments for an "antivac" position in the past - not the least of them the mercury/autism argument - none of them have been compelling enough to me to change my mind.

Admittedly I have done very little research on this matter (the mercury/autism connection included), largely because of my concerns about who to trust and what information is valid. I ended up looking to past experience and present conditions and trusting in the grace and mercy of God to protect us if it would be His will - and also decided that I would do what seemed best/right and that our hope is not in this life/world anyhow so I would not spend too much time on the subject and just trust in the Lord where my knowledge and wisdom were lacking.

But one argument I have never heard was the moral one. I never heard that vaccines were manufactured using aborted fetal tissue. This changes everything.

And your subsequent comment about the trustworthiness (rather, the lack thereof) of "Big Brother", "Big Corporations" and "Big Pharma"...was very insightful and compelling as well.

To answer the OP:

1) Is the mindset of a non-vaccinator that if their child contracts measles they will likely recover w/o complications? If so, is a risk analysis involved (i.e. the risk of the vaccination is greater than the risk of serious complication) or would you not vaccinate even if the risk of serious complication was very high?

Answer: No, such a 'mindset' is a not always present and 'risk analysis' is not always involved. If my wife and I decide to abstain from vaccines (or at least ones manufactured using aborted human cells), such subjective and temporal reasoning that are largely humanistic in their argumentation - would not even enter in to the thought process. Wrong is wrong no matter what good it seems may be wrought as the result of it.

2) What are your thoughts about the fact that your non-vaccinated child might infect other children with measles (presumably only other children who are not vaccinated) before you realize your child has measles and what if one of those other children developed serious complications?

Answer: Very similar if not identical to the previous answer. If my main goal and objective is the pleasure and service of God first, then the good of mankind must line up with that. If abstaining from something that we perceive as offensive to God and sinful, can in some way be pointed to as the cause of harm to our fellow man, I would say, "be that as it may". That is far too slippery and subjective of a slope, and I dare not tread there. I reject such argumentation as well.

3) Do you rely on the fact that the great majority of children ARE vaccinated which greatly reduces the risk of your non-vaccinated child being exposed to measles?

Answer: See answers one and two. I rely on the Father, the Son and the Spirit (albeit admittedly woefully imperfectly at times) and do not make decisions solely (or even mainly) based on how they effect me, my family or even humanity as a whole. Our foundation and basis of our decisions ought to be the word of God - both the written word and the Person of the word.

Many dark and evil things (including Humanism and occultism) are "sold" under the banner that they are "good for humanity": eugenics, abortion, very unethical "scientific" testing, euthanasia, and much, much more.

My answer is that in my estimation your questions are not ideal because they seem to assume that such considerations even come to bear in the mind of one making such a decision. For some they may, but for many they may not.

So I think the better question would be: "What caused you to arrive at your 'antivac' position and do things such as (insert previous questions here) have any bearing in your mind at all?"

Great topic and from what I see there has been a largely mature, level headed and grace-filled dealing with it here - which given the topic and common "platforms" (and probably my position, bias and own perception of the opposition) has been rare to encounter heretofore!

Your brother in the Lord Christ,

Forrest.


_________________
~ Forrest

 2016/8/20 14:14Profile









 Re:

Look at all the young people being severely injured or dying from the gardasil vaccine.

Aluminum Adjuvants plus Gardasil Vaccine: Uniquely Damaging Neuroinflammatory Cocktail
http://healthimpactnews.com/2016/aluminum-adjuvants-plus-gardasil-vaccine-uniquely-damaging-neuroinflammatory-cocktail/

Are aluminum adjuvants plus Gardasil a uniquely damaging neuroinflammatory cocktail?

By CLAIRE DWOSKIN
Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute

Health authorities and the media relentlessly repeat the mantra that vaccines are unequivocally safe, and many uninformed consumers cling to this mantra like a lifeboat. More often than not, however, consumers know little or nothing about the vaccine safety testing process and assume that vaccine manufacturers and regulatory institutions have exercised due diligence in ensuring that vaccines are as safe as possible.

In an ordinary clinical trial, investigators compare a group that receives a drug with another group that receives a harmless placebo. Not so with vaccine clinical trials, many of which use placebos that contain an aluminum adjuvant. What are the implications of using aluminum-based placebos that are not innocuous or inert but instead are “intrinsically capable of stimulating pathological immune and neuro-inflammatory responses”? This is one of the critically important questions that Dr. Yehuda Shoenfeld and colleagues at Tel Aviv University and University of British Columbia researchers Lucija Tomljenovic and Christopher Shaw address in a July 2016 study in Immunologic Research about aluminum adjuvants and the quadrivalent Gardasil vaccine that ostensibly protects against four types of human papillomavirus (HPV).

Dr. Shoenfeld and colleagues begin and end with the assertion that aluminum-containing placebos represent both a scientifically and ethically inappropriate choice for vaccine clinical trials, given aluminum’s well-documented neuro- and immunotoxic properties. Moreover, Gardasil (as well as the Cervarix HPV vaccine) uses newer-generation aluminum adjuvants that induce a far more forceful immune response than conventional aluminum adjuvants (which are far from benign to begin with). The more powerful aluminum adjuvants have a correspondingly stronger “reactogenicity” (the term used to describe the degree to which a vaccine provokes adverse reactions).

In their study, Dr. Shoenfeld’s research team assessed behavioral and inflammatory markers in four groups of young female mice after injecting the mice (in amounts equivalent to human exposure) with either Gardasil vaccine (or Gardasil plus pertussis toxin), aluminum adjuvant, or a vehicle control (solution of sodium chloride and histidine – Gardisil carrier solution). The researchers found pronounced and highly statistically significant behavioral differences between the groups at both three and six months post-injection. At six months, the aluminum-injected group showed reduced exploratory behavior, and the mice in all three treatment groups (Gardasil and aluminum) were less likely to exhibit escape-oriented behaviors (a marker of depression) compared with the control group. The researchers note that “the extent of adverse neurological manifestations was similar in the three treatment groups whose only common denominator was the [aluminum] compound.”

In addition to the behavioral tests, the researchers examined the potential of mice blood samples to bind proteins extracted from mice brain tissue. If such binding was observed in Gardasil-injected mice but not in aluminum or placebo-injected mice (as the latter two groups would not mount an anti-HPV antibody response), it would indicate that the antibodies raised against HPV following Gardasil vaccination, have not only the ability to bind to HPV antigens but also the neural proteins present in the host’s brain. This phenomenon, where cross-reactivity occurs and the vaccine-induced antibodies are able to bind not only the target foreign antigen (i.e., the HPV virus) but also host proteins, can be the result of molecular mimicry, where a foreign antigen shares a structural similarity with a particular self-antigen. Consequently, host antibodies which are raised in response to vaccination or infection (whatever the case may be), will not only recognize and attack the particular foreign antigen, but also the host antigen which is structurally similar to it. A well-known example of molecular mimicry is found in the etiology of the anti-phospholipid syndrome (APS), which is an autoimmune multi-systemic disease associated with recurrent fetal loss, thromboembolic phenomena, and neurological, cardiac and dermatological adverse manifestations. APS is characterized by the presence of pathogenic auto-antibodies against a molecule known as β2-glycoprotein I. The infectious triggers of APS are well recognized (ie, syphilis, leprosy and varicella to name a few). Likewise, tetanus vaccination may also trigger APS by producing antibodies which target both the tetanus toxoid and the β2 glycoprotein I, due to structural similarity between these two molecules. This is one of many examples of the molecular mimicry phenomena, which shows that overly vigorous and/or aberrant immune responses to either infections or vaccinations, while protective, can also be detrimental to the host. The research by Shoenfeld’s group shows that the molecular mimicry phenomenon might also be relevant in explaining some of the neurological adverse events reported following HPV vaccination. The reason for this is as Tomljenovic and Shaw have observed, that cross-reactivity due to molecular mimicry “is generally accepted as a mechanism by which vaccines can trigger autoimmune diseases.” The microglia act as the primary form of active immune defense in the brain, and other glial cells called astroglia are responsible for maintenance of brain homeostasis.

The researchers note that their cross-reactivity findings in mice are consistent with work conducted by Kanduc in humans, who identified considerable amino acid sequence similarity between the Gardasil vaccine antigen and a number of human proteins. According toKanduc, “the number of viral matches and their locations make the occurrence of side autoimmune cross-reactions in the human host following HPV16-based vaccination almost unavoidable.”

The mouse study findings also corroborate and amplify a prior case study report by Tomljenovic and Shaw describing immunohistochemical analysis of brain tissue specimens from two young women who died after receiving the Gardasil vaccine.Immunohistochemistry is a method for demonstrating the presence and location of antigens in tissue using antibodies that recognize the target antigen. In both cases, the standard autopsies had previously failed to ascertain an exact cause of death. Case 1 experienced progressively worsening neurological symptoms following her first Gardasil injection and died in her sleep six months after her third Gardasil booster. She showed no notable neuroinflammatory changes upon autopsy using an unspecified histological protocol. Case 2 developed a variety of symptoms after her first injection and died two weeks after the second booster. The autopsy report for Case 2 found cerebral changes consistent with encephalopathy and indicative of a “focally disrupted blood-brain barrier.”

The World Health Organization’s Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) critiqued the Tomljenovic and Shaw case study but did so on the basis of several extremely careless and factually incorrect statements, as rebutted by leading scientist Sin Hang Lee of Milford Molecular Diagnostics. One of the objections of the GACVS was that there was “no evidence of inflammation on autopsy”—despite the fact that the autopsy for Case 2 found evidence of encephalopathy. In addition, Tomljenovic and Shaw point out that their fine-tuned analyses of brain tissue from the two deceased young women, unlike the autopsies, used microglia- and astroglia-specific markers that were able to identify “exceptionally intense micro- and astrogliosis in all brain tissue sections examined” from both cases.Microgliosis represents “an intense reaction…to pathogenic insults” and astrogliosissimilarly occurs when the “astrocytic defense mechanisms [are] overwhelmed in pathological conditions.” This type of glial activation can produce “irreversible neurodestructive and pro-inflammatory processes in the brain,” according to Tomljenovic and Shaw.

With its triple findings from behavioral tests and serum and brain tissue analyses, the mouse study validates the case study report, which concludes that Gardasil (and Cervarix) are “inherently unsafe” for at least some individuals. Although it is clear that much more needs to be done to tease out the specific mechanisms whereby HPV (and other) vaccines and aluminum adjuvants can trigger autoimmune disease, the combined results of the carefully conducted mouse and human Gardasil studies cannot be easily dismissed. Together, the two studies’ results indicate that there is good reason to be cautious about aluminum-containing HPV vaccines—particularly now that the reformulated Gardasil-9 vaccine contains more than twice the amount of aluminum as its quadrivalent predecessor. The next time vaccine experts loudly proclaim that vaccine safety is unassailable, consider whether the researchers exhibited any genuine curiosity about adverse events to begin with. It’s not possible to find what you don’t look for.

Aluminum is Toxic to All Life Forms: So Why is it Used in Vaccines? by Dr. Suzanne Humphries

Gardasil: The Decision We Will Always Regret

The Gardasil Vaccine After-Life: My Daughter is a Shadow of Her Former Self

Gardasil: An Experience no Child Should Have to Go Through

I Want my Daughter’s Life Back the Way it was Before Gardasil

Gardasil Vaccine: Destroyed and Abandoned

15-Year-Old Vaccinated by Force with Gardasil now Suffers from Paralysis and Pain

Recovering from my Gardasil Vaccine Nightmare

Gardasil: We Thought It Was The Right Choice

“HPV Vaccine Has Done This to My Child”

13 Year Old World Championship Karate Student Forced to Quit After Gardasil Vaccine

If I Could Turn Back Time, Korey Would not Have Received any Gardasil Shots

What Doctors Don’t Tell You: Our Gardasil Horror Story

Family Fights U.S. Government over Compensation for Gardasil Vaccine Injuries

Gardasil: When Will our Nightmare End?

HPV Vaccine Injuries: “I Cannot Begin to Describe What it is Like to Watch your Daughter Live in Such Agony”

Gardasil: Don’t Let Your Child Become “One Less”

The Gardasil Vaccine Changed Our Definition of “Normal”

Gardasil: I Should Have Researched First

“They’ve Been Robbed of Their Womanhood” – Local Milwaukee Media Covers Gardasil Vaccine Injuries

Gardasil: The Day Our Daughter’s Life Changed

Gardasil: The Decision I will Always Regret

Gardasil Vaccine: One More Girl Dead

Gardasil: A Parent’s Worst Nightmare

After Gardasil: I Simply Want my Healthy Daughter Back

Gardasil: My Family Suffers with Me

Gardasil Changed my Health, my Life, and Family’s Lives Forever

Gardasil: Ashlie’s Near-Death Experience

Gardasil: My Daughter’s Worst Nightmare

My Personal Battle After the Gardasil Vaccine

Gardasil: The Worst Thing That Ever Happened to Me

A Ruined Life from Gardasil

HPV Vaccines: My Journey Through Gardasil Injuries

The Dark Side of Gardasil – A Nightmare that Became Real

Toddler Wrongly Injected with Gardasil Vaccine Develops Rare Form of Leukaemia

 2016/8/20 14:32
TMK
Member



Joined: 2012/2/8
Posts: 5586
NC, USA

 Re:

Forrest wrote: "Wrong is wrong no matter what good it seems may be wrought as the result of it."

I suspect a bottom line question that must be asked is whether it is "wrong" to use those stem cell lines. I can see both sides of that argument. But that would be another thread and I don't want to discuss that here. I am pretty sure PP started a thread on that not terribly long ago- perhaps he can find it and link to it.

Like I said previously, if a person is convicted/convinced that it is morally wrong (i.e. sinning) to vaccinate their child, then my questions in the OP are irrelevant. They should not vaccinate their child. The questions in the OP are only relevant to the person who does not believe it is morally wrong to vaccinate, but choose not to for other reasons, like the safety concerns quoted by Julius.

And I didn't want this to turn into a debate about the safety of vaccinations. Those discussions generally haven't ended well.


_________________
Todd

 2016/8/20 16:24Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy