• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Quacks & Pseudoscience

JPBB said:
i agree their homophobic and neo christian views are disconcerting but nevertheless they are very eminent pediatricians.
Click to expand...

Define eminent? It is good to see though that you acknowledge that they are not pharmaceutical or research scientists.
 
Seedy Ron said:
There's that ridiculous doom-laden language again, your posts should really be scored by John Williams. It's not looking more and more anything of the sort.

Who are the many?

I posted this link way back when all this started up:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-37211349

I would say halving cervical cancer rates is to be lauded, wouldn't you?
Click to expand...

Of course halving the cancer rate is good

But I have a few questions.

You are the scientist and big on stats but surely we won't see any benefit for 30 years or so.

Is it possible that improvement is down to better screening and treatment (see passim re Chinese girl)?

How many of those with cancer would expected to be in their early twenties? Not many I guess so It is hard to tell today how successful the vaccine is.

How many of those people who did not get cancer were vaccinated? And more importantly how many were vaccinated . i guess we can not know.

What are the risks in Australia? there are 100 deaths a year?

The side effects are pretty devastating and in the same way we don't know how successful it is we dont know the long term effects. It is a shot in the dark for all concerned

Is this not propaganda for the vaccine lobby. (haha don't answer this one. I know your answer)
 
JPBB said:
Of course halving the cancer rate is good

But I have a few questions.

You are the scientist and big on stats but surely we won't see any benefit for 30 years or so.

Is it possible that improvement is down to better screening and treatment (see passim re Chinese girl)?

How many of those with cancer would expected to be in their early twenties? Not many I guess so It is hard to tell today how successful the vaccine is.

How many of those people who did not get cancer were vaccinated? And more importantly how many were vaccinated . i guess we can not know.

What are the risks in Australia? there are 100 deaths a year?

The side effects are pretty devastating and in the same way we don't know how successful it is we dont know the long term effects. It is a shot in the dark for all concerned

Is this not propaganda for the vaccine lobby. (haha don't answer this one. I know your answer)
Click to expand...
Are you from the us?

Are you aware that other countries vaccinate?

Are you aware that non us aligned countries vaccinate?

Do you know that these countries have their own capable scientists and lobbyists are not as powerful?

Can you explain why they would be involved in a cover up?
 
Screening would detect cancer (Australia also has excellent screening), this is suggesting there's less to detect. I don't know the numbers on how many young women get cervical cancers, but CRUK say that the highest rates are in young women:
"Cervical cancer incidence is strongly related to age, with the highest incidence rates overall being in younger females – the converse pattern to most cancers."

http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/hea...cervical-cancer/incidence#w11ojCLFDQxAX1Ug.99

What side effects specifically, or are you passing off the ones you posted previously as gospel again?
 
r-u-s-x said:
Are you from the us?
Click to expand...

No. SE England. Occasionally to be found at WHL or Wembley.

r-u-s-x said:
Are you aware that other countries vaccinate?
Click to expand...

Yes

r-u-s-x said:
Are you aware that non us aligned countries vaccinate?
Click to expand...

Yes

r-u-s-x said:
Do you know that these countries have their own capable scientists and lobbyists are not as powerful?
Click to expand...

Pharma is a global business. And their influence is global. Although in the far east there is some push back.

r-u-s-x said:
Can you explain why they would be involved in a cover up?
Click to expand...

They need the money for research grants etc. Most of those in power have staked their careers on mass vaccination. To change course now would lead to ruin for them (see Wakefield, Abramson, etc)
 
Last edited:
JPBB said:
Pharma is a global business. And their influence is global. Although in the far east there is some push back.



They need the money for research grants etc. Most of those in power have staked their careers on mass vaccination. To change course now would lead to ruin for them (see Wakefield, Abramson, etc)
Click to expand...

Would you agree that entertainment lobby is global etc. Yet many western democracy are not influenced in the same way that the US. Pirate Bay etc.

Why are they not as influential.

How much is being spent by pharma in nordics, scandi etc.

Why are Google./apple getting such a hard time in Europe but pharma is not. (and Microsoft before them)
 
r-u-s-x said:
Would you agree that entertainment lobby is global etc. Yet many western democracy are not influenced in the same way that the US. Pirate Bay etc.

Why are they not as influential.

How much is being spent by pharma in nordics, scandi etc.

Why are Google./apple getting such a hard time in Europe but pharma is not. (and Microsoft before them)
Click to expand...

I am not sure I'd agree. I can not remember the last time NewsCorp lost an election but this probably not the thread for this.

If Google turned on vaccines, I think Pharma might have a problem (now there is a new strategy...)

Also I think Pharma's influence is more focused on decision makers.
 
JPBB said:
I am not sure I'd agree. I can not remember the last time NewsCorp lost an election but this probably not the thread for this.

If Google turned on vaccines, I think Pharma might have a problem (now there is a new strategy...)

Also I think Pharma's influence is more focused on decision makers.
Click to expand...

Rather than trying to find a conspiracy, why don't you look at the evidence (not anecdotal)? The reason why vaccines programmes are supported by all major world governments is because they dramatically cut the risk posed by preventable infectious diseases and this benefit can be clearly demonstrated. Unless the anti-vaccine movement can find empirical evidence to support their theories, they are never going to get any traction with decision makers.
 
richie_spur said:
I've only read a few of the pages, but has anyone managed to establish a definition of 'vaccine-damaged kids' with some hard evidence that the vaccine itself caused damage (and didn't just highlight a pre-existing condition, or have a co-incidental condition develop over time)?

A moral question: If a vaccine was found to cause autism in 1 in a million kids but, for example, measles was found to cause death in 1 in 1000 kids, is it still 'evil vaxxers' (whatever a vaxxer is - never heard it as a negative term before this thread) causing autism, as opposed to 'clever vaxxers' saving 1000 lives?

A better question: @JPBB - you do know the diseases that people are vaccinated against can kill them, don't you?
Click to expand...

To summarize my position. Vaccine benefits are overstated. Vaccine damage is significantly understated.

Pharma spends much effort crushing evens the smallest dissent. The result is a one sided debate and an industry too scared to question the status quo.

To clarify. I will never tell you not to vaccinate. I say you have a choice. I think you should look at both sides of the arguments and blind faith in Pharma is misplaced.

And Vaxxed is a good film and worth seeing.
 
milo said:
Rather than trying to find a conspiracy, why don't you look at the evidence (not anecdotal)? The reason why vaccines programmes are supported by all major world governments is because they dramatically cut the risk posed by preventable infectious diseases and this benefit can be clearly demonstrated. Unless the anti-vaccine movement can find empirical evidence to support their theories, they are never going to get any traction with decision makers.
Click to expand...

Japan?

They don't seem too positive about HPV.

They withdrew it.
 
Last edited:
JPBB said:
To summarize my position. Vaccine benefits are overstated. Vaccine damage is significantly understated.

Pharma spends much effort crushing evens the smallest dissent. The result is a one sided debate and an industry too scared to question the status quo.

To clarify. I will never tell you not to vaccinate. I say you have a choice. I think you should look at both sides of the arguments and blind faith in Pharma is misplaced.

And Vaxxed is a good film and worth seeing.
Click to expand...
And to summarise you have provided no evidence to backup your claims.

Others have provided evidence to backup the case for vaccination.

Every one can have an opinion but opinions can be wrong.

There is a tipping point where your opinion becomes dangerous and it is negligent to present it as fact
 
JPBB said:
They tend to push back harder than the rest against Pharma pressure

Also have a very high rate of autism.
Click to expand...

But you ignore the fact that it points against a link between vaccination and rising diagnosis of autism
 
@JPBB it would appear that Japan's vaccination currently includes:

BCG, PCV(Pneumococcal Conjugate vaccine), DTP-IPV(Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis and injectable polio)*, MR(Measles and Rubella), Japanese Encephalitis, Chickenpox, Hib, HPV.

With the following vaccinations being voluntary:

Seasonal Influenza, Mumps, Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, Rotavirus.

http://japanhealthinfo.com/child-health-and-childcare/vaccination/

It would also appear that Japan's vaccination program is not without controversy

https://www.japantoday.com/category...munisation-program-still-trails-behind-europe
 
The Japanese are not convinced by your links though.

They remain concerned by vaccine safety.

See HPV withdrawn over safety fears

MMR withdrawn over safety fears.
 
milo said:
@JPBB it would appear that Japan's vaccination currently includes:

BCG, PCV(Pneumococcal Conjugate vaccine), DTP-IPV(Diphtheria, Tetanus and Pertussis and injectable polio)*, MR(Measles and Rubella), Japanese Encephalitis, Chickenpox, Hib, HPV.

With the following vaccinations being voluntary:

Seasonal Influenza, Mumps, Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B, Rotavirus.

http://japanhealthinfo.com/child-health-and-childcare/vaccination/

It would also appear that Japan's vaccination program is not without controversy

https://www.japantoday.com/category...munisation-program-still-trails-behind-europe
Click to expand...

But they have a healthy scepticism about vaccination.

And it is to be admired.
 
JPBB said:
The Japanese are not convinced by your links though.

They remain concerned by vaccine safety.

See HPV withdrawn over safety fears

MMR withdrawn over safety fears.
Click to expand...

So again you refuse to accept that it weakens your case. You have repeatedly made the link between vaccination and the increased diagnosis of autism. The experience of Japan, where the vaccines that you speculate could be the cause of the rise were withdrawn but the diagnosis of autism continued to rise in line with western rates, strongly support a false correlation.

If you read the article in Japan Today at the bottom of my post, you will have also noted that western vaccines have sometimes been withdrawn whilst a local vaccine was developed. They are also very bureaucratic in licencing drugs. Rather than just being a scepticism about vaccines, it appears that there could be an element of industrial protectionism and a bureaucratic logjam too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back