• Brendan Hurrle
    0
    Ok, so we're all obviously of the same mind on this subject or we wouldn't be here. The real question is how do we get such a complicated subject to reach the tipping point from a general public awareness standpoint? The stakes are high, as we are poisoning the minds and bodies of an entire generation of people in the name of the greater good (er, I mean profit).
    There have been anecdotal stories abound for decades (lots of them here and anywhere else you want to find them) about the dangers of vaccinations, but as long as the "research" shows that everything is fine, then nothing will change from a public policy standpoint.
    I think the angle is to somehow get enough money together to fund a study, as well as an institution willing to publish (that would be the hardest part). I think it should all hinge on the data we already have from the VICP (which has paid out over $1,000,000,000 for traumatic injuries just since 2011), and the basic facts about toxicology that aren't being considered.
    The two most prominent things the VICP awards for are anaphylaxis and encephalopathy.
    The basic facts to consider:
    1) These are traumatic autoimmune and traumatic neurological reactions, respectively. What are we seeing in our childhood population? 1 in 3 children have some kind of autoimmune condition, and 1 in 6 have some kind of neurodevelopmental issue. It's vital that we make the connection from the few traumatic reactions (which affect far too few to naturally cause an uproar) to the epidemic levels of sub-acute issues vaccines are causing our kids.
    *btw, if we were just getting better at diagnosing, then we'd also be seeing the same issues in the adult population that was vaccinated on the pre-1986 10 shot schedule (as opposed to the 50+ schedule kids now face before hitting kindergarten).
    2) We are not currently even trying to look for sub-acute reactions. The VICP only looks at the first 7-14 days for reactions...anything after that could theoretically be from anything. This is a legalistic argument (you could have dropped your baby on her head, or taken him to Chernobyl), but not one that keeps with common sense medical safety. We're expected to believe that there are some truly traumatic reactions, but sub-acute reactions are non-existent. This goes against everything we know about how the body reacts to toxicity (think lead poisoning, for example...it can take months or years to show up).
    3) All vaccine policy is based on these short term safety studies, and most parents aren't aware enough about the state of the medical research system to question any of it (never mind the pediatricians, who should at least have the capacity to dig a little).

    We need basic bench science. It could start as simply as a retrospective study on a large group of children who haven't had vaccinations, or perhaps delayed vaccinations (think about the whole CDC William Thompson thing with black kids in inner city Atlanta who didn't get shots until later). Even if 98% of families are choosing to follow the full schedule (an indication of the mountain that we're up against from a PR standpoint), that still leaves hundreds of thousands of kids out there who didn't. Every school has a full record of kids who are and aren't vaccinated. The data is there, it's just a matter of mining it. From there, it's a PR game. The pharmaceutical industry and the CDC have successfully painted this issue as a conspiracy theory rabbit hole for crack pots, which allows most people to discard it out of hand without engaging in any meaningful way (until it's too late, in many cases). We need a simple clear study to stand on, and then a smart PR game that is able to deliver a very simple, pre-digested message into most people's already crowded mind ("Injected toxins are 100x more dangerous than ingested toxins...that's why we're all naturally afraid of snakes and spiders, but we can drink their venom without any problem"...maybe even that is too much, idk).

    Thoughts?
  • Angela Herd
    1
    But of course, the data and information to formulate into a study is there; the political will isn't. Yes all these things are not studied, but it is getting first the funding and the people to do the study, and then to stop it from being censored. We recently had the small scale Mawson study, which was an excellent and valid starting point for more research, but the problem is that with such shocking outcomes shown for the vaccinated, the powers that be will not let it become public. So yes, great study ideas and no doubt, the information is there, but it is a political issue. 'They' will not let us do the study, and if we did they would not publish it or would simply review it into 'rubbish'.
  • Agatha David
    1
    World Mercury Project has great persuasive videos perfect for showing to your state reps. There is also a members only section of worldmercuryproject.org, lifetime membership for $10 and it's tax deductible.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Join Our Vaccine Free Parenting Forum To Build Confidence, Community & Awareness

Join our feature-rich and topic categorized forum to connect with like-minded parents who raise healthy, vaccine free children.