Vaccinations and health ... for or against?

How to stay healthy and prevent risks and consequences on your health and public health. occupational disease, industrial risks (asbestos, air pollution, electromagnetic waves ...), company risk (workplace stress, overuse of drugs ...) and individual (tobacco, alcohol ...).

vaccinations

You can select 1 option

 
 
Consult the results
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by Janic » 20/11/20, 15:11

eh yes! Despite their demagogic, carrot or stick rhetoric, people are even more afraid of these hastily developed vaccines than of a stalling covid. especially with the discordant speeches of the specialists, these vaccines (balèze the doctor who will have to choose which one, is the good one or then with the pif) will arrive perhaps on the real market once the crisis passed.
What happened to the previous coronas vaccines?
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by Obamot » 20/11/20, 15:57

To date there has never been any vaccine to contain a coronavirus (cold, etc.) they've been looking for more than forty years,

It's a bit as if the coronaviruses were in us, permanently installed, and that they would wake up when we catch a cold or when we are affected by another virus that passes through there ... Or / and weakened ...

Then go back to sleep when health returns. There is competition between viruses. Which can explain a lot of things.

https://www.rts.ch/play/radio/la-matina ... d=11016674

A study carried out on 40 Britons (before the covid) has therefore shown that there is very little chance of contracting these 000 viruses at the same time. So you just have to wait for a "bad flu" to make SARS-cov-2 disappear.
The vaccine ... we'll see : roll: I bet on “as usual ...”

In fact, you can have a cold any time of the year, you just need to take a cold!
Their theories are therefore hazy since as long as they do not consider the terrain, it is like listening to a concert through a small hole in a wall.
Last edited by Obamot the 20 / 11 / 20, 16: 13, 1 edited once.
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by Janic » 20/11/20, 16:12

Obamot »20/11/20, 16:57

To date there has never been any vaccine to contain a coronavirus (cold, etc.) they've been looking for more than forty years,
as the great charles said "we don't need seekers, but finders"How many industrialists would spend the maddening sums of labs, so as not to have tangible results? None! And the pseudo researchers, not finders, would have been fired quickly!
It's a bit as if the coronaviruses were in us, permanently installed, and that they would wake up when we catch a cold or when we are affected by another virus that passes through there ... Or / and weakened ...
Then go back to sleep when health returns. There is competition between viruses.
This is more than hypothetical and the work taken up by Montagnier will probably demonstrate it one day. It is not a virus in itself that is dangerous otherwise we would all be dead before becoming alive, but what it transmits as information to the rest of the body. Transmission not limited to usual physical barriers. Now what are they? Who looked into the matter?
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by Obamot » 20/11/20, 16:20

Perhaps orthomolecular medicine researchers who had discovered “that the human body developed cancer because it needed it”. And when we know that there are cancers triggered by viruses ... (papilloma) that opens up a considerable field of possibilities.

The number of things that certain manufacturers know without divulging it, sometimes in defiance of human life, must be enormous.

In France it is even better, only 4 out of 10 French people would agree to be injected with the poison. https://www.bfmtv.com/sante/sondage-bfm ... 80267.html

With such a calamitous score, if they make it compulsory, they risk insurgency (with the elections approaching)
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by Janic » 20/11/20, 17:11

In France it is even better, only 4 out of 10 French people would agree to be injected with the poison. https://www.bfmtv.com/sante/sondage-bfm ... 80267.html

With such a calamitous score, if they make it compulsory, they risk insurgency (with the elections approaching)

Governments are used to forcing democratic representation. During the obligation of the 11 vaccines (on children because adults are rarely revaccinated) out of the 543 deputies less than 100 remained present to vote for this law? What representativeness and I think that if we examined the professions of the voters a majority would be from the medical world in place.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by Obamot » 16/12/20, 02:14

Brandy Vaughan, an “anti-vaccine” activist at the head of an organization
who explained the underside of the marketing of the vaccine business
is dead "under suspicious conditions”(According to Wikipedia) this December.
A police investigation has been opened
The cause of death is declared a priori “natural” even though the results of toxicological examinations are not known. :!:




https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learn_The_Risk

Police investigate sudden death of anti-vaccine activist
BY SAMANTHA LOCK ON 12/15/20 AT 10:33 AM EST
https://www.newsweek.com/police-probe-s ... st-1554784

The sudden death of a prominent anti-vaccination activist prompted a police investigation.

Brandy Vaughan, 45, was found dead on December 7 by her 9-year-old son in the family home in California.

On Monday, the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office announced an investigation into the circumstances of his death.

The deceased has been formally identified and the death appears to be due to natural causes based on an autopsy examination conducted last week, "said Raquel Zick, Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Public Information Officer, in a statement. "The final cause and the method of determining the death are pending toxicological examination which normally takes 4 to 6 weeks."

Vaughan, a former representative of Merck, openly criticized mandatory vaccinations and drug companies.

She founded the non-profit organization Learn The Risk in an effort to educate people "about the dangers of pharmaceuticals, including vaccines and unnecessary medical treatments," according to its website.

A fundraising website set up by a close friend, Tina Marie, describes Vaughan as an "amazing warrior" and a "loving mother."

“This past Thanksgiving, Brandy, her son and their dog took a road trip to come and spend the holidays with our family,” wrote Marie. “We had an amazing dinner, played games and laughed together until the wee hours of the night. She told me that is what she had always dreamed of for her son, to be a part of a big family spending time together ... and she wanted me to raise it for her, if anything should happen to her (as she had requested several times in the past). asked exactly 8 days before his death ".

This Santa Barbara resident and University of Santa Barbara alumnus worked for Merck Pharmaceuticals as a sales representative for Vioxx, a pain reliever that was eventually taken off the market.

Vaughan "never intended to take on the most powerful industry in the world," her website read, but "felt she had no choice when the agenda industry to keep us all sick has started to spiral out of control. "

“From that experience, I realized that just because something is on the market doesn't mean that it is safe,” writes Vaughan. “Much of what the healthcare industry is telling us is just not the truth.

In a Facebook post dated December 4, 2019, Vaughan asks the question, "Have you ever wondered why I oppose the big pharmaceutical companies and suffer the main consequences? Because I will fight for my son and humanity and that I will educate people about the dangers of pharmaceuticals until my last breath!

It is not trivial that she has repeatedly asked her relatives to take care of her son, in case something happens to him.
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by Janic » 16/12/20, 07:06

the same phenomenon also occurs in France where the same protesters suddenly died under doubtful circumstances. life has no value in the face of money, that's nothing new : Evil:
1 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by izentrop » 16/12/20, 07:37

Well ! As if by chance this kind of news is particularly broadcast on the sites conspis. We also know very well that they are also infiltrated on Wikipedia. : Twisted: : Twisted:
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by Janic » 16/12/20, 07:40

Well ! As luck would have it, this kind of news is particularly broadcast on conspis sites. We also know very well that they are also infiltrated on Wikipedia. : Twisted: : Twisted:
whether pro or anti, anything, everyone does it. You have well infiltrated this site to spread the opposite!
1 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Vaccinations and health ... for or against?




by Janic » 16/12/20, 07:57

so a little reminder on the vaccine myth:
Re: A critical look at zetetics
by janic »13 / 12 / 20, 13: 57

Diphtheria is a disease that has been vaccinated for decades, even though
vaccine program start dates vary widely from country to country.
The vaccine began to be used in the 20th century, in the 20s. In France, country
pioneer, it has been compulsory since 1938 and in Germany, during the Nazi era and in
the occupied zones it was used massively during the second world war. In
France there were some 15 annual cases in the years preceding the
war and during the war the cases were multiplied by three and the deaths by two. In
Germany the incidence rate in 1940 was 12,4 per 100. In Norway in 000
there were 17 cases and in around 000 54 ; in 1908, there were 555 deaths while in
1939 there was none that 2. However, with the decree making the vaccine compulsory in 1941
(it was an area occupied by the Germans), in 1942 there were 22 cases and nearly
of 700 deaths.
In Spain the registers indicate 60 cases at the beginning of the 000th century and nearly 20
death. Concretely, in 1901 there were 6 deaths, in 299 (beginning of the war
civil) there were 1 dead, however in 100 (end of the civil war) there were
4 dead. After the disasters of the war, in 058 there were 1950 deaths and in
1964 only 81. Thus, during the period 1901-1964, the death rate from
diphtheria descended from 98,7% and the morbidity rate of 97,2%.

Whooping cough is a disease that has been vaccinated against for a long time. The
first vaccinations were carried out in the United States in the 40s, so
limited. England approved the vaccine for sale in 1953, but its use
was not massive right away. However, in the middle of the 19th century, in England and
in Wales the death rate in children aged 0 to 15 was close to 1 cases per
million inhabitants, while in 1953 the number of deaths was 25 per million. What
means that the decrease in the incidence of the disease between 1868 (date of the first
censuses) and 1953 (date of introduction of the vaccine) was 98,5%.

In 1906 the total mortality from pertussis in France represented around 3 deaths,
whereas in 1959 (year of marketing of the vaccine) there were 280 deaths; the
decrease was therefore 92% between these two dates. Nevertheless, as in many
other countries, vaccination became generalized in France from 1966 in the form
a multiple vaccine (tetracoq, then pentacoq). If we consider the period 1906-1966, the
decrease in mortality was 96%.
In Spain, pertussis deaths topped 4 at the start of the 000th century
century; in 1931 there were 1 deaths, 114 in 491, 33 in 1965. It is precisely in
1965 that the vaccination campaigns against tetanus, diphtheria,
whooping cough. The decrease in mortality during the period 1901-1965 in Spain has
summer of 99,15%, which means that the mortality in 1965 was 147 times lower than in
1901
. If we take into account the fact that in 1965 the Spanish population had
practically doubled compared to the beginning of the century (same thing in France and
England) the decrease is even more significant.

Measles is a disease for which we systematically vaccinate in some
country for only twenty years, usually in combination with the
rubella and mumps (MMR in France, MMR in Anglo-Saxon countries, TV in
Spain…). In the case of measles, in England and Wales the rate of
mortality, in children up to 15 years, in the middle of the 19th century was 1 deaths
per million inhabitants, in 1960 there were hardly any more deaths. The first ones
Measles vaccines were used in the United States in the 60s.
consequently the decrease in mortality in England and Wales can not
be attributed to vaccination campaigns.


In France, massive MMR campaigns began in 1983, despite
warnings in 1977 from Professor BASTIN who stated: "It will be difficult to vaccinate
systematically in our country where the disease is mild given that out of 100
hospitalizations mortality is only 0,17% ". In France, the absolute figures of
deaths attributed to measles in 1906 were 3, rising to 756 in 20, which
shows that the decrease in mortality between the years 1906-1983 was 99,5%.

In Spain, according to the statistics directory, the number of deaths due to measles in
1901 was 18 and in 463 the figures were around 1907. In 14, we
counted 19 death and vaccination campaigns began in 1982. We can see
therefore, that in Spain, without vaccination, the decrease in mortality between 1901 and 1981
was from 99,9%. As we said before, the numbers are even more
impressive when you consider that the population of most of Europe
doubled between 1900 and 1980.

Epidemics and vaccinations
The examples cited clearly show that in the epidemiological dynamics of these
diseases, the role of vaccinations has been insignificant. This finding applies
also to other diseases: tuberculosis, mumps, rubella, haemophilus, etc ... If we
except polio, a disease for which it would be necessary to devote another study,
the impact of these diseases gradually diminished during the 20th century as
that socio-economic progress transformed the living conditions of citizens
Europeans.

The almost total disappearance of typhoid fever (vaccination has never been
systematic in the general population) as well as the disappearance of scarlet fever, other
dreaded infectious disease for which no vaccination has existed, confirms what
just said. However, and despite the evidence of the data presented here, we continue to
make use of vaccinations with a species ingenuity peculiar to believers
religious fervor.
In this regard, the case of tuberculosis is particularly
dramatic: in almost all European countries, we stopped practicing
BCG in the 70s and 80s due to its ineffectiveness and the many effects
serious secondary effects that it entailed.

If we pay attention to the conclusions, quite official, made after the tests
controlled with BCG, the list of observations is sufficiently explicit to
do without comments.

1. The efficiency oscillates between 80% and 0%. There is even a study that talks about effectiveness
negative (-57%), which means that among the vaccinated there were more than
cases of tuberculosis than in unvaccinated.
2. The explanation for this phenomenon remains a mystery.
3. The vaccine does not prevent infection or transmission.
4. The vaccine would protect by limiting dissemination in the blood and would be
probably effective in cases of endogenous reactivation in the early phase of
life but not in cases of adult reactivation nor in cases of
new re-infections. Note that the italics are there to mark the aspect
very hypothetical of these observations. It should be noted that in Barcelona (Spain) there are
had a very significant decrease in the number of meningitis
tuberculosis in children after the withdrawal of BCG, a vaccine that was
used precisely to make this condition disappear in infants.
5. The protection is limited in time: maximum 10-15 years. Should not
revaccinate (latest recommendations).
6. BCG does not protect infected individuals; it is precisely those who have the
more risk of getting sick.
7. With full immunization coverage, overall tuberculosis mortality could
be reduced, at best, by only 6%.
8. Vaccination does not reduce the annual risk of infection.
(RAI).
9. The fact that it is a vaccine with live bacteria, there are risks
of concern to serious or fatal complications in children and adults
infected with HIV, individuals who represent the highest risk group for
tuberculosis.
10. Hypersensitivity to tuberculin after BCG vaccination makes it impossible to
differentiation between a positive reaction to vaccination and the presence of
natural infection, which leads to the conclusion that
- the tuberculin test has no predictive value
- vaccination hinders the implementation of other prevention strategies
- it makes it difficult to diagnose non-bacillary forms of tuberculosis
- it prevents the use of epidemiological indicators of infection.

In view of what has just been explained, it seems completely absurd that this vaccine
continues to be used in some autonomous communities in Spain and that it is
still compulsory in France. Equally incomprehensible is the fact that WHO has
included this vaccine in its EPI (Extended Vaccination Program), while from the mouth
even of its representatives, it is starvation, misery, undernutrition etc ... that we
owes the emergence of tuberculosis in the world. How to explain that with such
bases, have we vaccinated 1/3 of the world's population?

Vaccination against rubella further strengthens the almost religious belief in
benefits of immunization programs. Yet once again we are faced with
a paradox: vaccineists put forward data that demonstrate the irrationality of
allegedly preventive measures. In Catalonia (Spain), the vaccine sectors
claim that when vaccination campaigns began in the 70s,
90% of European women of childbearing age were immune to rubella.
However, PUMAROLA et al. maintain that today 97% of Catalan women
of childbearing age are immune not through vaccination, but through circulation
wild virus
! In addition, it is recognized that women who are artificially immunized
are likely to be contaminated if exposed in a proportion of 50% to
80%, while for women naturally immunized the proportion is only
of 5%.
This means that you create a feeling of security that is totally counterproductive.
and which can facilitate contamination between infected people and pregnant women. Yes
to this is added the declarations made at the Glasgow Congress in 1993 highlighting
evidence of the problems of osteoarthritis and neuritis induced by vaccination in
adult women, the question we have to ask ourselves is: why do we persist in
vaccinate with this vaccine which, in addition to the undesirable effects it causes, offers only
false security, which could explain the cases of congenital rubella syndrome in
people vaccinated?
Regarding influenza, Spanish morbidity data, provided by
the health administration itself, are indisputable. We discover that
parallel to major vaccination campaigns, the incidence of the disease for
100 inhabitants increased by almost 400% ! This does not prevent vaccineists
to state that influenza vaccination is a good measure to reduce the
influenza morbidity. These claims were made precisely at the time when Spain
was the country in Europe with the highest influenza vaccination rate in
level of the number of doses per capita.


The data we have just provided appear to us sufficient to provide the
proof that vaccines played only a secondary or even an insignificant role in the
control and disappearance of the epidemics which, in the past, decimated populations
Europe
1 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré

Back to "Health and Prevention. Pollution, causes and effects of environmental risks "

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 255 guests