[John gave me his permission to re-post to the whole group the follow-up to
my earlier question to him regarding primary sources.}
I understand that a primary source for the assertion may not exist, which is
why I am asking for it. Much of what is sent around on the Net is invented
for
I love this stuff!
Let's take one assertion at random: The WHO in 1985 documented that one of
its' primary goals for the use of a sterility vaccine disguised as a
smallpox vaccine was to eliminate 150 million excess Sub Saharan Africans.
(Fact, 1985-ongoing)
Please provide your primary
John Berry wrote:
*The Vaccine exists and will soon be trialed* (note: different versions
will exist!):
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/07/22/swine.flu.vaccine.trials/index.html
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/07/28/military.swine.flu/*WHO
recommends every country to make vaccine
John Berry wrote:
*Military will help*:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/07/28/military.swine.flu/
They are clearly preparing for the *possibility* (unlikely as it seems)
of 1918-all-over-again. If that were to happen, the military's help
would be needed and appreciated.
In Philadelphia
BB
*This* journalist nominates this thread for relocation elsewhere. Puhleeze.
SK
John Berry wrote:
I absolutely believe that there have been many cases where vaccines
kill more than they saved.
I have read many books about public health, and I know of no evidence
for this assertion. Where did you get this information?
That is not the same as saying all vaccines have
John Berry wrote:
Short version, Swine Flu is not especially deadly and compared to
the numbers killed by regular flu it isn't a concern . . .
Influenza is always a concern. It kills 30,000 to 50,000 people in a
normal year, and ~200,000 when a relatively new variety appears. This
one is
While what you say is true, Jed, not all vaccines are equally safe or
effective, especially when it involves influenza. In my case, I got a
flu shot a few years ago and suffered from a sore shoulder for months
and still got the flu. I find that certain natural immune enhances and
Edmund Storms wrote:
While what you say is true, Jed, not all vaccines are equally safe or
effective, especially when it involves influenza.
Absolutely! The 1976 swine flu vaccines were spectacularly
ineffective and dangerous.
Personally, I would rather wait to see how many people suffer
On Jun 29, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms wrote:
While what you say is true, Jed, not all vaccines are equally safe or
effective, especially when it involves influenza.
Absolutely! The 1976 swine flu vaccines were spectacularly
ineffective and dangerous.
Edmund Storms wrote:
That's wise but unfair. If everyone did what you are doing, no one
would go first. You are letting other people act as guinea pigs,
taking the risk for you, like collective food tasters.
That's an interesting approach to ethics. Everyone has a choice to be
first in line
From Ed Storms:
I could go on, but you can see that some really big lies,
along with many smaller ones I have ignored, have been told.
As for the US being one of the most knowledgeable, fair
and effective organizations in history, I need only remind
you that it was the failure of the US
There are a number of things I disagree with (including Spanish flu) but the
only one i can be bothered with is your claim that it always helps more than
it harms.
In New Zealand there was a tainted polio vaccine and they knew it was but
used it anyway, I don't know how many died but my mother
That is getting a bit too close to politics, I know because I wanted to make
a political reply regarding elections...
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 6:55 AM, OrionWorks svj.orionwo...@gmail.comwrote:
From Ed Storms:
I could go on, but you can see that some really big lies,
along with many smaller
John Berry wrote:
There are a number of things I disagree with (including Spanish flu)
but the only one i can be bothered with is your claim that it always
helps more than it harms.
I did not say that. On the contrary, I said there are some examples
of spectacular failure such as the 1976
I didn't read the second post from you when I wrote that, however you did
say: Every vaccine kills or disables some number of people, but the number
is far lower than the number who would die without the vaccine.
Since you have now said that that is not always the case I guess we can just
forget
John Berry wrote:
I didn't read the second post from you when I wrote that, however you did
say: Every vaccine kills or disables some number of people, but the number
is far lower than the number who would die without the vaccine.
Since you have now said that that is not always the case I
I absolutely believe that there have been many cases where vaccines kill
more than they saved.
That is not the same as saying all vaccines have or that any one vaccine has
(though I am not ruling it out) but yes I solidly believe that some
applications of some vaccines have been mostly/entirely
How do they plan to enforce delivery of the vaccine? Personally, the
police would have to come to my door and restrain me. How about you?
Ed
On Jun 26, 2009, at 4:20 PM, John Berry wrote:
I don't think this can be considered political as no one votes for
the UN or WHO and it's a health
I'd have already headed for the hills...
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
How do they plan to enforce delivery of the vaccine? Personally, the
police would have to come to my door and restrain me. How about you?
Ed
On Jun 26, 2009, at 4:20 PM,
This sounds like another run-of-the-mill scare-story to me.
1. There is no 'forced-vaccination' program being proposed.
2. The use of live virus in the making of vaccines is routine. Some
vaccines, like the Salk polio vaccine, is made with attenuated live virus.
These kinds of
21 matches
Mail list logo
