From: Jason on
In article
<7f899bb1-3777-4a2c-b507-71ae49408756(a)h11g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>, Mark
Probert <mark.probert(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 6, 12:49=A0am, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> > I see you are still lying. =A0You proved with your own words, you are
> > not a doctor.
> >
> > Why would anyone believe anything you post?
>
> Hmmmm...because he is educated FAR MORE than you are, writes
> coherently, does not stalk, harass or abuse, is not a bigot, and is an
> all around nice guy.
>
> You should learn from him.
>
> > On May 5, 5:58 am, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Jan Drew wrote:
> > > > On May 3, 6:05 am, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
> > > >> Jan Drew wrote:
> > > >>> On May 2, 8:23 am, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
> > > >>>> Kevysmom wrote:
> > > >>>>>> You now know the reason that most people in America (including m=
> yself) do
> > > >>>>>> NOT waste our time watching PBS shows. PBS has to rely mainly on=
> the gov't
> > > >>>>>> for funding. They do collect donations but as far as I know--mos=
> t of their
> > > >>>>>> funding comes from the government. If it was not for gov't fundi=
> ng, PBS
> > > >>>>>> would have gone out of business many years ago. Most all of thei=
> r
> > > >>>>>> producers and directors are very liberal
> > > >>>>> Major funding for PBS is from tax payers donating moent to the
> > > >>>>> government by force, Then the government forces parents to vaccin=
> ate
> > > >>>>> their babies,
> > > >>>> No one forces anyone to be vaccinated.
> > > >>> A blatant lie.
> > > >>>http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/WaterCooler/story?id=3D3880578&page=3D1
> > > >> From the story: "Hundreds of parents and their children descended on=
> a
> > > >> suburban Maryland courtroom today to protest a judge's order requiri=
> ng
> > > >> all children to be vaccinated in order to attend classes."
> >
> > > >> The parents have the option of a religious exemption. In addition, t=
> hey
> > > >> have the option of homeschooling.
> >
> > > >> Jeff
> >
> > > > Rather difficult when both parents have to work.
> >
> > > Really?
> >
> > Yes, really. =A0One cannot be at home with their kids if they are
> > working. =A0Duh.
>
> Well, if they have to work, then they have to go by the rules.
>
> > =A0How difficult is it to get a religious exemption?
> >
> > They should not have to. =A0It is their right not to vaccine.
>
> Yes, for themselves, but not for the community as a whole, and the
> school community in particular. Their choice not to vaccinate may
> impact on others.
>
> > >As far as home schooling is concerned, that's their problem.
> >
> > > Jeff
> >
> > How nice, since you don't have any kids, you have not a clue.
>
> People have choices and choices lead to consequences.

Mark,
This is related to a point you made in another post. You stated that
babies were born with a fully developed immune system. I stated that
babies were born with an immune system that was NOT fully developed. I
done some research and found out that I was correct. Babies are born with
an immune system but it is NOT fully developed. If a baby is breast fed,
the immune system in a baby develops much faster than in a baby that is
bottle fed. You can find out this same info. if you google the correct
terms.
jason


From: Jason on
In article <rOednbM0bJckBn_WnZ2dnUVZ_jmdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, utz(a)msu.edu wrote:

> Jason wrote:
> > In article <N7WdneWE4KV6v3_WnZ2dnUVZ_tyqnZ2d(a)giganews.com>,
utz(a)msu.edu wrote:
> >
> >> Jason wrote:
> >>> In article <sImdnUMDLvooaHzWnZ2dnUVZ_roAAAAA(a)giganews.com>,
> > utz(a)msu.edu wrote:
> >>>> Jason wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> <...>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Jeff,
> >>>>> Why are you an advocate for a known poison that is also a known
> >>>>> neurotoxin?
> >>>> No, I am not. I am an advocate for vaccination, which save lives. While
> >>>> I am glad that thimerasol has been removed from most vaccines, there is
> >>>> no evidence that the chemical poses a risk at the very small doses used.
> >>>> And, there is no evidence that vaccines cause autism, as some suggest.
> >>>>
> >>>>> You remind me of the people that are advocates for tobacco. Do
> >>>>> you work for a drug company that sells vaccines that contain mercury?
> >>>> No, I work for no drug company. What I say is my own opinion, not those
> >>>> of any company.
> >>>>
> >>>> Jeff
> >>> Jeff,
> >>> Thanks for answering my questions. I don't have problems with mercury free
> >>> vaccines that have been properly tested. The vaccine for swine flu was NOT
> >>> properly tested so I did NOT get that vaccine. I do have a problem with
> >>> any vaccine that contains mercury since mercury is poison and is a
> >>> neurotoxin. When even small amount of a neurotoxin is injected into a
> >>> child, it is like playing with fire. Children (esp. babies) do not have
> >>> fully developed immune system. It's for that reason, neurotoxins--even in
> >>> small doses--should not be given to children. At the very least, doctors
> >>> or nurses should test children to determine if they have an allergic
> >>> reaction to mercury.
> >> Allergic reactions to mercury are extremely rare.
> >>
> >>> If they do not have an allergic reaction to
> >>> mercury--give them the vaccine. An even better option would be to remove
> >>> thimerasol from all vaccines. Do you see my point?
> >> I see your point, but, because allergic reactions to mercury are so
> >> rare, and doctors are equipped to deal with them, they are a very small
> >> concern.
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >
> > Lots of experts would disagree with you. I have read that they have
> > removed mercury from all vaccines in Europe. They must have had good
> > reasons for making that decision. Related to your other point, the reason
> > children could develop autism from mercury could be because of an allergic
> > reaction to mercury.
>
> An allergic reaction to mercury would be caused by a specific type of
> immune response, similar to the reaction I have to some types of pollen.
> People who are allergic to peanuts get a similar type of allergic
> reaction when they eat peanut butter.
>
> > There may be other reasons. Have you done any
> > research on a disease called hemochromatosis. Many researchers believe
> > this disease develops because of genetics. It's also possible that
> > children that develop autism have a genetic disorder that causes them to
> > accumulate mercury in their bodies.
>
> Evidence that this is actually occurring, please.
>
> > That means that children that do not
> > have this genetic problem would NOT accumulate mercury in their bodies and
> > therefore not develop autism.
> > jason
>
> This is hypothetical, at best. It fails to explain why mercury poisoning
> affects different parts of the brain than are affected in autism. It
> also fails to explain why the genes that have been identified in autism
> have nothing to do with handling mercury in the body.
>
> Jeff

Jeff,
Yes, it is hypothetical but it could explain why some children develop
autism shortly after getting a vaccine that contains mercury and other
children do NOT develop autism after taking vaccines that contain mercury.
jason


From: Jason on
In article <1nc5u5djsqenujju298qfmo5q6iltthc8e(a)4ax.com>,
bobofficer(a)127.0.0.7 wrote:

> On Wed, 05 May 2010 17:53:49 -0700, in misc.health.alternative,
> Jason(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
> >In article <sImdnUMDLvooaHzWnZ2dnUVZ_roAAAAA(a)giganews.com>, utz(a)msu.edu
wrote:
> >
> >> Jason wrote:
> >>
> >> <...>
> >>
> >> > Jeff,
> >> > Why are you an advocate for a known poison that is also a known
> >> > neurotoxin?
> >>
> >> No, I am not. I am an advocate for vaccination, which save lives. While
> >> I am glad that thimerasol has been removed from most vaccines, there is
> >> no evidence that the chemical poses a risk at the very small doses used.
> >> And, there is no evidence that vaccines cause autism, as some suggest.
> >>
> >> > You remind me of the people that are advocates for tobacco. Do
> >> > you work for a drug company that sells vaccines that contain mercury?
> >>
> >> No, I work for no drug company. What I say is my own opinion, not those
> >> of any company.
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >
> >Jeff,
> >Thanks for answering my questions. I don't have problems with mercury free
> >vaccines that have been properly tested. The vaccine for swine flu was NOT
> >properly tested so I did NOT get that vaccine.
>
> Why do you say that?

There was an article in thousands of newspapers indicating that about half
the doctors refused to take the vaccine since it was not fully tested.
Upon request, I'll try to find that same article on the internet and post
it for you. I also seen another article in two different newspapers
indicating that there was fear that swine flu was a pandemic (spelling???)
so they rushed through the vaccine without testing it the way they
normally test new vaccines. They said there was no cause for concern since
they made the vaccine the same way they made other vaccines. That's true,
however, they failed to say that even if the swine flu was developed the
exact same way that other vaccines were developed--it means nothing since
the ingredients in the swine flu are different than the ingredients in
other vaccines. In other words, the swine flu was not fully tested in the
same way that other vaccines were tested. That's the reason half the
doctors refused to take the swine flu vaccine.


>
>
> >I do have a problem with
> >any vaccine that contains mercury since mercury is poison and is a
> >neurotoxin.
>
> I do not have a problem with it. It isn't "Mercury" anymore than it
> is "Carbon." Make statement like that shows you are only repeating
> something you hear, rather than your own understanding of science or
> research.

I disagree. It's still mercury. If scientists made a vaccine that
contained a special form of a deadly poison, would you take the vaccine?
>
>
> >When even small amount of a neurotoxin is injected into a
> >child, it is like playing with fire. Children (esp. babies) do not have
> >fully developed immune system. It's for that reason, neurotoxins--even in
> >small doses--should not be given to children. At the very least, doctors
> >or nurses should test children to determine if they have an allergic
> >reaction to mercury. If they do not have an allergic reaction to
> >mercury--give them the vaccine. An even better option would be to remove
> >thimerasol from all vaccines. Do you see my point?
>
> What's "an allergic reaction to mercury?"

I don't know but I have read that doctors can easily determine if a
patient develops an allergic reaction to dozens or hundreds of substances.
Mercury is one of those substances. There are doctors that specialize in
testing patients to determine the substances they are allergic to.
jason


From: Jason on
In article <t0g5u59m37ghmhvkrjd60dl75nnifamn70(a)4ax.com>, Happy Oyster
<happy.oyster(a)ariplex.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 06 May 2010 05:19:57 -0700, Bob Officer <bobofficers(a)127.0.0.7> wrote:
>
> >>When even small amount of a neurotoxin is injected into a
> >>child, it is like playing with fire. Children (esp. babies) do not have
> >>fully developed immune system. It's for that reason, neurotoxins--even in
> >>small doses--should not be given to children.
>
> That is very funny, beacause it outrules to eat any seafish.
>
> .

That is true. Many parents don't allow their small children to eat fish.


From: Mark Probert on
On May 6, 3:06 pm, Ja...(a)nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
> In article
> <7f899bb1-3777-4a2c-b507-71ae49408...(a)h11g2000vbo.googlegroups.com>, Mark
>
>
>
>
>
> Probert <mark.prob...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 6, 12:49=A0am, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> > > I see you are still lying. =A0You proved with your own words, you are
> > > not a doctor.
>
> > > Why would anyone believe anything you post?
>
> > Hmmmm...because he is educated FAR MORE than you are, writes
> > coherently, does not stalk, harass or abuse, is not a bigot, and is an
> > all around nice guy.
>
> > You should learn from him.
>
> > > On May 5, 5:58 am, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
>
> > > > Jan Drew wrote:
> > > > > On May 3, 6:05 am, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
> > > > >> Jan Drew wrote:
> > > > >>> On May 2, 8:23 am, dr_jeff <u...(a)msu.edu> wrote:
> > > > >>>> Kevysmom wrote:
> > > > >>>>>> You now know the reason that most people in America (including m=
> > yself) do
> > > > >>>>>> NOT waste our time watching PBS shows. PBS has to rely mainly on=
> >  the gov't
> > > > >>>>>> for funding. They do collect donations but as far as I know--mos=
> > t of their
> > > > >>>>>> funding comes from the government. If it was not for gov't fundi=
> > ng, PBS
> > > > >>>>>> would have gone out of business many years ago. Most all of thei=
> > r
> > > > >>>>>> producers and directors are very liberal
> > > > >>>>> Major funding for PBS is from tax payers donating moent to the
> > > > >>>>> government by force, Then the government forces parents to vaccin=
> > ate
> > > > >>>>> their babies,
> > > > >>>> No one forces anyone to be vaccinated.
> > > > >>> A blatant lie.
> > > > >>>http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/WaterCooler/story?id=3D3880578&page=3D1
> > > > >> From the story: "Hundreds of parents and their children descended on=
> >  a
> > > > >> suburban Maryland courtroom today to protest a judge's order requiri=
> > ng
> > > > >> all children to be vaccinated in order to attend classes."
>
> > > > >> The parents have the option of a religious exemption. In addition, t=
> > hey
> > > > >> have the option of homeschooling.
>
> > > > >> Jeff
>
> > > > > Rather difficult when both parents have to work.
>
> > > > Really?
>
> > > Yes, really. =A0One cannot be at home with their kids if they are
> > > working. =A0Duh.
>
> > Well, if they have to work, then they have to go by the rules.
>
> > > =A0How difficult is it to get a religious exemption?
>
> > > They should not have to. =A0It is their right not to vaccine.
>
> > Yes, for themselves, but not for the community as a whole, and the
> > school community in particular. Their choice not to vaccinate may
> > impact on others.
>
> > > >As far as home schooling is concerned, that's their problem.
>
> > > > Jeff
>
> > > How nice, since you don't have any kids, you have not a clue.
>
> > People have choices and choices lead to consequences.
>
> Mark,
> This is related to a point you made in another post. You stated that
> babies were born with a fully developed immune system.

I believe you mis-read it. Try to find it.

I stated that
> babies were born with an immune system that was NOT fully developed. I
> done some research and found out that I was correct. Babies are born with
> an immune system but it is NOT fully developed.

However, what the baby has is a very robust immune system. The baby
has hundreds, if not thousands "assaults" a day and handles them.

If a baby is breast fed,
> the immune system in a baby develops much faster than in a baby that is
> bottle fed. You can find out this same info. if you google the correct
> terms.

I am sure I could. However, try reading what I said again.



> jason- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
Prev: A grade of D
Next: Jeff Utz is not a doctor