March 30, 2008
Vaccinations and drugs the government says fight against disease are being forced on the public more and more these days. These are vaccines that are not necessary and are having serious health effects on the public.Suicide. Seizures. Fainting. The list goes on and on. Are those the sort of side effects you would want associated with your medicines or a vaccination?
The drug companies that make many drugs on the market today are not concerned with side effects; they are not concerned until they are sued by a victim of a drug. The number of people harmed by vaccinations and "recommended" drugs is larger than is reported.Just a few days ago, Singulair, an allergy drug came under fire for its link to suicides in children. An ALLERGY drug. I still see the Singulair drug commercial (manufactured by Merck) on the air even after the suicide reports
According to the link, few other drugs offered by Merck have also come under fire. Also, a recent study came out that mentioned most adults are not getting vaccinated against Shingles, Whooping Cough, and HPV (human papillomavirus). I am not inclined to believe that vaccinations are the direct link to keeping one healthy. I'm certainly not going to become dependent on vaccinations in that aspect...vaccinations with horrendous side effects.
If one's immune system and overall health is up to par, these diseases...shingles and whooping cough would be a non-issue. I will not wreck my immune system by accepting vaccinations that come with negative side effects. No doubt, exposing the body to various immunizations wears on the immune system. The immune system has to fight to build up antibodies against the invading pathogen.Speaking of HPV, government has pressed the importance that young women get the vaccine Gardasil to guard against HPV ( http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16948093 ) which causes cervical cancer. But at what risk? Merck, the makers of Gardasil, are all too happy to allow lawmakers to state the case for young women to become vaccinated as they have lobbied to get the vaccination mandatory
( http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSN2022501520070221?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0 )
...all for financial reasons obviously. At Merck, the Executive Director of Medical Affairs for Vaccines Richard Haupt, mentioned "the media publicity had become a 'potential distraction' that was interfering with the company's objective of promoting widespread use of the product."We've reevaluated our position, but certainly plan to continue education efforts in different venues, such as with legislators, health departments and coalition groups in various states." If that isn't a statement of admission to pushing a product, I don't know what is!As fellow writer Cynthia Janak reports, many young women have had their lives turned upside down due to side effects from this drug.
Too many young women have had seizures, fainting, numbness, dizziness, etc. ( http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/janak/080328 ) from Gardasil. I say to all mothers and fathers out there, would you put your daughter at risk for adverse reactions such as those mentioned above?
A solution to avoiding sexually transmitted diseases... keep your legs closed. Our children are growing up in such an oversexed society as it is, and it's about time to introduce those long lost mores to our children. Respect your body (that goes for adults as well), don't put anything in it that will cause harm.
As I've said before, we should be vigilant in taking care of our health and vitality. To leave our bodies and health in the hands of the government is detrimental.
The human body is capable of warding off illness if one makes a concerted effort to stay healthy. In one's quest to stay healthy, it's important to make sure there is not another motive behind the "recommendations" of vaccines.
If we truly live in a free society, then adults should be able to make decisions whether or not to get vaccinated or allow their children to be vaccinated.
*If there is any doubt that any symptom you experience after getting a vaccine is related to the vaccine, there should be no hesitation in stating your case to your health professional. This is about your health...you and only you should be in control of what goes into your body.
The medical industry is not always right, hence the many adverse reactions people are suffering at the hands of immunizations and drugs. Many in the medical field don't want to admit that vaccines are causing people horrible side effects. This is either because they lean on medical statistics from various medical organizations that the incidents of adverse reactions to vaccines are rare (which is a lie) or it is because they secretly have some profit motive behind the drug.
The harsh reality is that many people are suffering horrible reactions to vaccines and drugs and it is getting underreported. Please remember, medical professionals are not gods.Stay tuned to my next article on childhood vaccinations.
Related Reading:Vaccines:
Vac-Gen/Side Effectshttp://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm
WAVE — World Association for Vaccine Educationhttp://www.novaccine.com/
WAVE — Testimonialshttp://www.novaccine.com/testimonials/
Felicia Benamon is a conservative columnist who writes from a political perspective, but occasionally deviates to write about other concerns facing her country. A patriotic American, Felicia hopes to motivate others to be more conscious of the current state of affairs in America, and to hold true to the wonderful traditions that make America great.Felicia comes from a military background and is proud to support the men and women who put their lives on the line daily to protect American citizens and who reach out to help those in need across the globe.
© Copyright 2008 by Felicia Benamon
11 comments:
Vaccines are one of the greatest, if not THE greatest, advancements in medical history, ever.
How many lives have been saved by the Salk/Sabin polio vaccine? How many people aren't rendered sterile by mumps, or killed by the measles every year?
Want to see what happens to countries that don't have mandatory vaccination programs? Look at India or sub-Saharan Africa. The risks (of which no long term risks which are actually proven) are crushed under the weights of the benefits.
And I love how it's up to women to keep their legs closed to prevent HPV infection, and not men to stop trying to get between those legs - which you know, is the actual disease vector for HPV. As soon as people behind those amazingly creepy "Purity Balls" and bullshit "Silver Ring Thing" crusades start focusing on boys and girls equally, I'll believe this is about abstinence and religious belief and not about controlling women.
Let's see seizures and fainting as the worst case in the short term vs. a slow, agonizing death from cervical cancer... Hmmmm. Let me think which one I'd rather deal with.
And wow, hey, here's something topical.
A MEASLES OUTBREAK IN PIMA COUNTY.
Wonder if that could've been prevented by, what're those things called? [snap, snap] Oh, right. VACCINCATIONS.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0401measles0401.html
To Theklute,
I suggest you check out:
http://newswithviews.com/Tocco/mary1.htm
Mary Tocco, a chiropractor who discusses the polio vaccine. If HPV is going to be marketed to young women as a deterrent to cervical cancer that is spurred on by sexual contact, then yes, it's appropriate to tell young folk to keep their legs closed. It's about making sound choices. There have been detrimental side effects that are occurring with young women while Merck makes more and more off of their suffering. I've done the research, where is your research on a "slow, agonizing death" from cervical cancer?
Also, you mentioned the measles outbreak. How many people contracted the measles even though they already had the vaccine? That's also something to consider.
People need to view this from all sides. Obviously I'm not done talking about this issue, I've had firsthand experience dealing with indifferent doctors when a child who had a severe reaction to a vaccine was hospitalized. So, don't mock what I'm saying. Take this into consideration. I'm not the only one talking about this.
--Felicia Benamon
Stay tuned to Part II
"Mary Tocco, a chiropractor who discusses the polio vaccine."
What's Mary's background in epidemiology? Any?
I'm no epidemiologist, but a cursory glance at WHO data shows:
In 1988, 355,000 cases of polio in 125 countries were reported. By the end of 2004, there were just 1,255 cases [after the global polio eradication program began in 1988].
The last case of "wild" polio in the United States was 1979. This was 20 years after eradication began in 1952, which was about 100 years after the major outbreaks began to due the US population shift to the cities, which is considered the reason why the outbreaks began. In less than a generation, a disease went from wildfire outbreaks to gone. Cause? Effect?
Polio disappeared in the United States after the vaccination program began. Show me a pathologist or epidemiologist who says otherwise. Mary gives no theory or evidence that eradication happened for any other reason.
She references smallpox, and a quote that says it would have "died out on its own". Just like Bubonic Plague did. Or Influenza. Or Ebola. Or any other of the disease with vectors that are unknown, that either can't be or shouldn't be eradicated or quarantined. Vaccines are the only way to prevent these types of disease. And in the case of smallpox, it worked, and polio where we're just about there.
Which brings us to HPV. You mention the "legs closed" thing again. As chaste as woman could be, if her husband screwed around before marriage (or during, a la Gov. Spitzer or Sen. Vitter), she can be infected just as easily. Marriage is a trust that one should assume won't be broken, but to paraphrase Reagan, "Trust, but Immunize".
If I was a woman, and there was a chance I could not be eaten inside out from my body's own cells, you can be damned sure I would take a slight risk fainting after the shot.
I'm going to Brazil in 6 months. I've determined the risk of vaccination side effects is less of a concern than bleeding from my eye sockets due to Yellow Fever.
As for research, when I was 12 years old, I watched my mother die in agony due to cancer. So yeah, I've done my research, right up close. No one should have to go through that.
And vaccinations fulfill the government's Consitutional obligation of preserving and defending the United States. Mankind has always been at war with disease. Only in the last 100 years have we really been winning.
I am going to offer another side and point of view to this debate. It's time one point of view stops trying to dominate. There has been too many instances where vaccines have done damage and it is underreported. It's time to face reality.
--Felicia Benamon
Felicia,
This is not about a side "winning" a debate. This is about responsible public health policy.
Antibiotics... How many people have died from penicillin or sulfa drugs? Do we forgo antibiotics because some people have died?
Do I deny there are risks in vaccines? No. But there's risk in taking an aspirin or getting a blood transfusion. But the risks for the individual are minute, and for society as a whole, there's nothing but benefit.
By all means, express your point of view. I'll be reading. But don't ignore the facts like Mary Tocco has - because ignorance like that will be humanity to its knees. We saw it during the Black Death in Europe. We could see it again.
Whether you like it or not, there IS a debate raging over this issue. And it should be...in our nation, and others, there is an increasing number of people who are having significant side effects from vaccinations. Babies are getting vaccinated WAY too young AND they are given more than infants were given about 20 yrs ago. There's no need for it. Now, there are no numbers out there that says that kids who have not been vaccinated will immediately become a threat to society. I've had people tell me that they have declined to give their child vaccines and they are as healthy as ever and have avoided illness. Parents DO have a choice. As it should be in our nation. No one should be forced to get vaccinated. And those who choose not to, they are NOT an immediate threat to society.
As long as drug companies are throwing countless drugs out there (seems like a new drug every few months on the market) there is reason to worry. They are clearly doing it out of profit and then the public suffers later with horrible side effects and death. So YES there needs to be a debate!
--Felicia Benamon
its true thereare risks with vaccines, but they are minimal. have many vaccines have you had in your life? how many have your friends and family had? and how many of those times have you or they had an adverse reaction? most of us can say never, but those of us who had will mostly likely say it was such a serious reaction.
the reason babies get vaccinated at such a young age is because their immune system is fresh and clean. their bodies havent had the chance to build of protection against common illnesses so when they do come in contact its much more dangerous to them than to you or i. a common illnes to us could be a fatal illness to someone so young. vaccines are there to help prevent that.
no vaccine is 100% effective, and will work differently for every individual, one may work for one person and fail for the next. so if i get a vaccine that isnt quite up to par for my immune system, it increases the odds of me getting sick from you because you chose not to get it.
yes its profit for someone else, but what isnt? the food we eat to the clothes we wear its all money going into someone elses pocket. and where there is money to be made there will always be somebody to try to cheat the system, yes this is true. that doesnt mean everybody is trying to make a buck with no sympathy to the risks it may bring.
frankly i would hate to see a world where there is no profit being made in the world of medicine. its what keeps it thriving. do you think that all these helpful medicines and treatments today would exist at all if people produced them out of the kindness of there heart? how much research would be done if no one was there to make a quick dollar off of it?
the health system would be a joke and the mortality rate would skyrocket.
the numbers are out there, you just have to look. now im not saying all vaccines are good, but most of them are definately not bad.
if there are no numbers on a certain topic that doesnt automatically falsify it neither.
now heres a good example i would just like to throw out on the table. let say for instance the holy grail of vaccines has been made, im talking of course to an AIDS or HIV vaccine. now lets just say in one of those places where the mortality from AIDS is very high that the vaccines is optional and voluntary. someone chooses not to get it and is strucken with the virus. now this person decides to go sleep around maybe perhaps he's a serial rapist for that matter. those that chose not to get it get infected, but those who chose to get the vaccine only to have it fail also get infected. now if the vaccine was manditory this person may have no even contracted the virus at all, therefor eliminating the spread to those where the vaccine wouldve failed.
now if the side-effects from this miracle vaccine were minimal, such as stated above, do you still think it should be volutary? in this circumstance?
why should someone else have their life cut short because someone else chose not to get vaccinated?
Felicia,
You bring up that it's a "choice" to get kids vaccinated, but when it comes to many public health matters, you emphatically DO NOT have a choice.
Here in AZ, a man was diagnosed with Tuberculosis. He made a "choice" not to walk around without a micron-filter facemask and could have exposed other people. They threw him into quarantine in the "jail" section of the hospital.
Also in Arizona, you're not allowed to make the choice to not maintain your swimming pool - because it allows the reproduction of mosquitos which spread the West Nile virus. If you fail to do so, the government can levy large, daily fines until such time as the threat is gone.
There's dozens of other examples - maintenance of septic tanks, rabies vaccinations for pets, public food handling, slaughterhouse maintenance, etc. The government can put you in jail, shut down your business, seize your property if you fail to follow public health concerns.
You (and I'm speaking in the "royal" you here) have the choice to be unhealthy - eat red meat until you're blue in the face, chain-smoke unfiltered clove cigarettes, etc. - but your choice stops the second it infringes upon my choice to be healthy.
An indivdual cannot control the billons of bacteria and virii that inhabit their bodies. They're sloughed off in dead skin, hang in aeresolized spittle and mucus in the air when we breathe, coat the surfaces of everything we touch in our sweat. It's exceedingly unpleasant to think about - but that's what surrounds us every day. That's what medical science has to protect us from.
You say you know mothers with children that aren't vaccinated and healthy? That wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that everyone around them is immmunized, would it? They're pulling the lever on the one-armed bandit where the payout spells "disease".
But let's say this is a choice. How about this? If you forgo the vaccinations on your child, and the child gets sick from that illness down the line, neither the government nor your insurance provider is obligated to pay any current and future costs of treatment for that illness? And if the un-immunized child is determined to be the "patient zero" for an outbreak, the parents would be obligated to pay for the health care (present and future problems caused by that infection) of anyone infected by that child?
That would be fair, wouldn't it? And since the costs of that would probably be cost-prohibitive, "immunization insurance" could be purchased, with the parents having to pay the premiums until the kid reaches 18 - at which point they could make their own decisions on immunization.
What do you think?
WalterClark,
I believe I mentioned beforehand that there are no numbers to indicate that there is a risk to society by unvaccinated children. I just released Part II. I've had parents tell me that they chose not to vaccinate their children and these children HAVE NOT had any type of illness and are THRIVING. It clearly is up to the parent, and the parent SHOULD have the choice. CHOICE is what I'm getting at AND I'm exposing the dangerous metals in vaccines, Thimerosal is STILL present in many vaccines. The vaccine issue needs to be looked at again and again. The risks, the numbers of people getting reactions...they are not low. They've been underreported. I won't sit idly by while clearly there is a serious problem with vaccines and the pimping of prescription drugs.
And "theklute", I'm done speaking with you. You either take the info. I put up to heart, or you don't...makes no difference to me.
--Felicia Benamon
And this is EXACTLY what I expected to happen when I brought up the concept of "personal responsibility".
Felicia says she wants to be "part of the debate" - but when she can't come up with a response that validates her point of view, she bails.
She wants to legislate from the heart, instead of the head; apocryphal data instead of the facts - isn't that the usual indictment of Democratic Party?
All of this speaks to the immaturity of the modern conservative movement.
Post a Comment