Disturbing Information
WARNING: SOAPBOX POST AHEAD!!
For a number of years now, I've heard about the evils of vaccinations. Many doctors push them, and parents--believing their child will grow three heads if they don't get vaccinated--often blindly comply. But among the serious, proven, well-documented side-effects or after-effects are SIDS, paralysis, autism, and Ausbergers disease (sp?). Okay, so I knew that and something about monkey parts in the vaccines, but imagine my horror when I recently learned (from a reliable source) that among the ingredients in vaccines are mercury, monkey embryo, and (brace yourself) aborted human fetus! That last one made me sick.
So why is abortion still legal? The libs may pretend they're supporting a woman's "choice," but it's got a lot to do with cold, hard money. Why? Because the trafficking of human body parts is a multi-million dollar business. Why are vaccinations (which aren't proven to prevent anything) so promoted? Money and ignorance, my friends. But I think the truth is spreading. Parents and future parents, PLEASE spare your child from this evil! And when you don't vaccinate, you'll also be serving a blow to the abortion industry.
(In places like schools where vaccines are required, you can appeal on religious grounds. They can't force you.)
For a number of years now, I've heard about the evils of vaccinations. Many doctors push them, and parents--believing their child will grow three heads if they don't get vaccinated--often blindly comply. But among the serious, proven, well-documented side-effects or after-effects are SIDS, paralysis, autism, and Ausbergers disease (sp?). Okay, so I knew that and something about monkey parts in the vaccines, but imagine my horror when I recently learned (from a reliable source) that among the ingredients in vaccines are mercury, monkey embryo, and (brace yourself) aborted human fetus! That last one made me sick.
So why is abortion still legal? The libs may pretend they're supporting a woman's "choice," but it's got a lot to do with cold, hard money. Why? Because the trafficking of human body parts is a multi-million dollar business. Why are vaccinations (which aren't proven to prevent anything) so promoted? Money and ignorance, my friends. But I think the truth is spreading. Parents and future parents, PLEASE spare your child from this evil! And when you don't vaccinate, you'll also be serving a blow to the abortion industry.
(In places like schools where vaccines are required, you can appeal on religious grounds. They can't force you.)
posted by Kristi | 2:02 PM
14 Comments:
Yo, don't take this the wrong way, but, do you have documentation of some sort or another to back that up? And forwarded emails don't count :)
I got this info from an article from the Tacoma News Tribune (a liberal newspaper), but couldn't access the article on the website. However, here are some other sites with the same info:
www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/vaccines
www.mercola.com/2001/mar/7/vaccine-ingredients
www.vaclib.org/toc.htm#aborted
I know of two children, personally, that literally woke up with autism within a week or two of having vaccinations.
It is a crime against humanity to inject mercury into the blood streams of anyone.
I have quite a large file on the dangers of mercury, in vaccinations as well as teeth, and a research video done by a university in Canada showing brain cells being killed by exposure to mercury vapors.
Between the dental industry and the vaccination industry there will be a lot of people that have to give a reckoning for their actions on Judgment Day.
And don't even get me started about Fluoride! :~)
Thanks.
As for mercury fillings, tht is pretty much done with. They use the polymer stuff now...
Oops, I hope Jill didn't read that before I corrected my four or five mistakes! Nobody else noticed, right? :-)
I have to say that when vaccines first came out, they were real life savers. I also wouldn't say that none of them work. But I have skipped them for my kids, believing that I'd rather face the low risk of things like measles and mumps than mercury and body parts. Ewwww!!!
This is one of those touchy subjects that, the more research you do, the more you find out how little you know. I struggled with this decision for a long time and did a little research myself. Most vaccines don't have mercury or thalidomide in them anymore and you can request mercury-free just in case. I've never heard about the aborted fetus parts.
The autism/asperger's link is tenuous and very controversial. It's almost too big a topic to even comment on but definitely a decision not to made lightly.
I have to agree with Liane. I've heard enough arguments in favor of and against to not be black and white in my views. Jed has had the tetanus shot because the prevention is safer than the treatment if he should step on a rusty nail. But like Lori I've chosen instead to deal with minor sicknesses (which so far have not been an issue; there is such a thing as "herd immunities") rather than the unknown of injecting my kids with icky stuff. Everybody has to do as they feel led.
As for the aborted-fetus argument -- you need to understand what a cell-line is.
Cells from human or animal sources can be grown in a lab -- under the right conditions they just keep growing and dividing, thus you can get all the cells you want from just a couple cells. This is incredibly useful in biology research, especially when we keep cell-lines separate (which means all the cells in one container are descended from one source).
You can go to a biological supply store, for example, and buy skin cells that came from a woman who died of cancer in the 50's and were donated to the hospital -- grow millions of copies, and use them in cancer research.
When people say that some cell-lines are from aborted children, this is what is really going on. We aren't using actual cells taken from recently-killed people and using them for reasearch, but there are cells in the banks that are descended from cells whose ancestors came from an aborted child somewhere (the child could have been aborted as long ago as the early 1970s).
Personally, I see no ethical problem with using cells for research that just happen to have the same DNA as someone who was murdered decades ago.
Oh, and back to basic high-school chemistry -- chemical compounds do not have the same properties as their ingredients.
Common table salt contanes sulfur and chlorine, but has none of the properties of either (which would be quite toxic if eaten separately).
Likewise, compounds contianing mercury have none of the properties of straight mercury (which would indeed be toxic).
These compounds are used as preservatives with one common vaccine, but despite a big scare a few years back, and thorough research on its properties, the preservative has been shown to have no health risks (it will probably be replaced by more expensive preservatives, however, just because of the scare).
As for autism, although the cause of autism remains unknown, we can safely rule out vaccinations. A thorough study of every single person alive in England, and another in Denmark (both countries keep detailed medical records of all their citizens) has shown that those who are vaccinated are not more likely to develop autism (actually the likelihood of autism dropped by a few points, but this may be a coincidence).
Just followed the links you provided ... and yes, the article only claims that DNA from fetuses aborted in the 1960s were used in the production of Rubella virus -- thus eventually leading to one of today's vaccines.
Whether or not you think this was an ethical decision back in the 1960s, using the vaccine today does not support the abortion industry any more than buying an Arabian horse is supporting Osama-bin-Laden (since his ancestors raised horses from which today's Arabian horses are descended).
So you don't think fetuses aborted today are going to be used in the future?
Autism may not have one cause, but I think you're wrong to say that vaccinations have no effect. Check out some interesting vaccination research on www.autismwebsite.com/ari.
No offense, but people on the West Coast are a lot more accepting of this forward kind of info, and a little less trusting of the medical industry.
Another point: you can find "research" to support any point of view, basically. But look at who sponsored/promoted the research. If everybody suddenly heard that vaccinations were harmful, where would that leave the companies who produce them? Do you think they want people to hear that kind of info? Naturally, their research will encourage people to believe that vaccinations are perfectly fine. But if a couple's child dies of SIDS a week after a vaccination (we know such a family), might not their research come from a different perspective and with different results? I think we all tend to believe what we want to believe or what we've been "pre-programmed" to believe, whether or not it's the truth.
So when we examine something this controversial, I think it's important to first of all PRAY, and seek the wisdom from above. Secondly, check out the research and info sources.
The trouble with personal experiences and testimonials is that the small number of cases tends to confuse the truth.
The whole autism/vaccination scare started because autism typically develops in the first few years of childhood -- which is around when most children get their first MMR vaccinations.
Naturally a parent whose child gets autism right after his first shots is going to include the shots as possible suspects (especially for a condition where the actual causes are still unknown).
The trouble with this is it never takes into account the number of people who got vaccinations and DIDN'T develop autism, or the number of people who didn't get vaccinations and developed autism anyway.
In the end this is like suggesting that eating Cheerios causes people to commit violent crime -- after all isn't it true that over 98% of all violent criminals eat Cheerios? Or does this have more to do with the fact that most people eat Cheerios?
Likewise with vaccinations and autism, or SIDS, or any number of diseases. In each case, if you look more closely, the fact that incidence of childhood diseases often occur after vaccinations has everything to do with the fact that most children get vaccinations, and nothing to do with the vaccinations themselves. Correlation does not imply causation.
That is why I trust large scale studies published in peer-review journals (where all work has to be carefully checked for bias and possible logical flaws before it can be published) over any number of personal testimonies.
It is hard to get more thorough than checking the medical records of every single person born in England and Denmark in the past few decades to see who got thalomide-containing vaccinations and who developed autism. If you check the published results, you will see that autism was less common among those who got thalomide-containing vaccinations than it was among those who did not.
All I'm saying is that the scary stories just don't have anything to do with the facts. They will, however, be repeated indefinitely because it is human nature to look for someone or something to blame whenever something bad happens -- no matter how unjustified the blame is.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home