From: PeterB - Original on 19 Nov 2009 02:17
On Nov 19, 1:40 am, "Peter B" <origin...(a)frag.com> wrote:
> > How can vaccines be unpredictable when they are.......
> > Tested against known historical problems
> What is that supposed to mean?
> You mean you haven't a clue re the history of vac's? Oh MY!
I was suggesting that you explain your poorly written sentence. As
for the history of vaccine, it's filled with considerable death and
debility. If you like, I can post an article.
> > Tested in the real world with animals
> You were tested?
> LOL, yes, many times.
So your idiocy has a medical cause. Always good to have a diagnosis.
> > Tested in the real world with willing humans.
> Yes, like HRT and Vioxx were tested on "willing" humans. I'll bet
> many or most of them wish they had it to do over again.
> So ask them.
I don't have to. Unlike you, most people aren't morons.
> > Then you have all the freaks telling you of this or that problem,
> > death,
> > or whatever made up out of fear or paranoia, who then post their
> > feelings all over the Net so much so that everyone knows the ins n
> > outs.
> So cite any source of published scientific data proving vaccine
> safety. You can't do it, can you?
> You claim to know so much about the industry but here you point
> out that it was all just a lie?
Meaning you can't cite a single source of published science to back up
your bogus claims about vaccine effectiveness or safety.
> That you really don't have a clue, never did any personal research
> on it, nor read all the recently published articles in the news as well
> as here in the ng's?
These diversions you use to avoid responding to my challenge only
prove what an idiot you are. Either cite published scientific data
proving vaccine safety or admit you can't. Well?
> Now you're claiming you were just a fraud.
You were the subject of that particular adjective, shadow poster.
> > Besides out of all the reported deaths you guys post here after
> > searching the whole earth for possibilities there are maybe one in
> > 500 have any real but distinct possibilities.
> It isn't the public's responsibility to prove that vaccines are
> unsafe. It's your responsibility, as a promoter of vaccine on behalf
> of your sponsors, to prove that they ARE. So far, you haven't done
> No my job man. I have no sponsors, hence no responsibility thank you for
> pointing that out.
Defending an industry whose profits are derived from death and illness
says that you do.
> And yes, I have done squat, all over your......well, no sense in rubbing
> it in, eh?. ;)
From: Peter Bowditch on 19 Nov 2009 04:31
PeterB - Original <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>Meaning you can't cite a single source of published science to back up
>your bogus claims about vaccine effectiveness or safety.
Would PubMed do as a single source?
Search for "vaccine safety"
Results: 1 to 20 of 7879
Search for "vaccine efficacy"
Results: 1 to 20 of 14143
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
From: PeterB - Original on 19 Nov 2009 18:36
On Nov 19, 4:31 am, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
> PeterB - Original <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
> >Meaning you can't cite a single source of published science to
> >back up your bogus claims about vaccine effectiveness or
> Would PubMed do as a single source?
Pubmed is not a source, it's a resource. You should cite particular
studies within that resource on which your opinions are based.
> Search for "vaccine safety"
> Results: 1 to 20 of 7879
As has been explained to you many times, a keyword search result does
not mean the study is favorable to your position, it just means that
your word string is found somewhere in the text. In this case, you
didn't even perform your query on the term "vaccine safety," so your
result included articles where those two words show up in any order or
even paragraphs apart. Using your method, I can prove the hazards of
vaccine by merely doing a search on "vaccine risk" and producing well
over 16,000 results. I know you won't answer honestly, but do you
accept this much larger search result is proof of the hazards of
vaccines -- Yes or No?
> Search for "vaccine efficacy"
> Results: 1 to 20 of 14143
From: Jan Drew on 19 Nov 2009 21:01
On Nov 17, 8:49ï¿½pm, Jan Drew <jdrew63...(a)aol.com> wrote:
> Profit Drive Swine Flu Propaganda - Pump Up the Volume - Part VI
> by Evelyn Pringle, health freedom writer
> (NaturalNews) This article is part five in a six-part series. Be sure
> to read part five athttp://www.naturalnews.com/027363_a...
> Most American are unaware that flu vaccines still contain thimerosal
> and that to avoid mercury, they have to ask for mercury-free shots. On
> November 13, 2007, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ran the headline:
> "Most flu shots contain mercury, but few know it."
> Thimerosal consists of 49.6% ethyl mercury. The Environmental
> Protection Agency and Food and Drug Administration have not set an
> exposure limit for ethyl mercury.
> "The federal agencies have, however, set exposure limits for another
> organic and closely related form of mercury, methyl mercury - the type
> that comes from coal-fired power plants and is found in fish," the
> Journal said. "They use that standard when estimating the safety of
> ethyl mercury."
> "A typical 0.5 milliliter flu shot contains 25 micrograms - or 50,000
> parts per billion - of mercury," the Journal reported.
> "The EPA classifies a liquid with 200 parts per billion of mercury as
> hazardous waste," it advised. "The limit for drinking water is 2 parts
> per billion."
> Using the standards set for methyl mercury consumption, "an average
> 130-pound person getting the flu shot would exceed the daily limit by
> more than four times," the Journal reported.
> "A 22-pound baby would get more than 25 times the amount of mercury
> considered safe," it said.
> "Mercury is among the most toxic heavy metals and is known to poison
> the central nervous system, liver, gastrointestinal tract and other
> systems in the body," the Journal reported.
> When the influenza vaccines "are injected into pregnant woman and
> infants as young as six months, those vaccines contain 50,000 ppb
> mercury," warns Deirdre Imus in a November 19, 2007, Huffington Post
> article titled, "Over Medicated and Over-Vaccinated: The Unintended
> Consequence of Medicines Meant to Protect."
> This amount of mercury is 250 times higher than hazardous waste, she
> notes, and, according to EPA guidelines, this amount can only be
> considered safe if a person weighs 550 pounds. "Even trace amounts of
> mercury in vaccines can be anywhere from 600 to 2000 ppb," she
> People need to ask for a thimerosal-free vaccine if they want it,
> health officials told the Journal. "But many people aren't aware that
> mercury is in the flu shot," the Journal found.
> "I didn't know," said Kate Strzok, a 23-year-old Oak Creek woman, as
> she walked out of the Piggly Wiggly where she had just gotten the flu
> shot. "Interesting that they don't tell you."
> PutChildrenFirst.org, a parent-led organization advocating for vaccine
> safety, announced the results of a survey on November 13, 2006,
> conducted during October 27-30, 2006, by Zogby International of over
> 9,000 Americans, to learn their plans for getting flu shots, their
> knowledge of its ingredients, and who they held responsible for making
> sure vaccines are safe.
> The survey showed that an overwhelming majority of Americans were
> unaware that most flu shots contained mercury. After learning that
> mercury was an ingredient, 74% of those polled said they were less
> likely to get a flu shot and 86% of parents said they were less likely
> to allow their children to get a shot.
> "The survey reveals that Americans are overwhelmingly in the dark
> about what is in most flu shots," said Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN, president
> of SafeMinds, a nonprofit organization committed to ending mercury-
> induced neurological disorders, in a press release.
> "They do not want a known neurotoxin injected into their children, and
> they believe Congress and medical professionals must be more vigilant
> about keeping vaccines safe and mercury-free," she advised.
> "With everything we know about the dangers of mercury and the havoc it
> can wreak on young, developing brains," she said, "there is no excuse
> for any vaccine to contain mercury."
> Lisa Handley is a founding parent of PutChildrenFirst whose son had an
> adverse reaction to a flu shot with mercury in 2003. "I know firsthand
> how life-changing a flu shot with mercury can be, since our son began
> his regression into autism after his flu shot," she stated in the
> press release.
> Damning Reports
> On October 5, 2009, the Maternal & Child Health Bureau of Health
> Resources and Services Administration, US Department of Health and
> Human Services released a study evaluating the number of children in
> the US who currently have a Autism Spectrum Disorder diagnosis,
> titled, "The Prevalence of Parent-Reported Diagnosis of Autism
> Spectrum Disorder among Children in the United States, 2007."
> The study evaluated data from a national Survey of Children's Health
> and found that 1 in 91 children between the ages of 3 and 17 currently
> carry an ASD diagnosis.
> "Even more alarming, for the subset of children between ages 6 and 14
> immunized during the 1990's the prevalence is actually 1 in 71
> children with an autism diagnosis," Age of Autism reports.
> "This age group represents children in the U.S. with the highest
> exposure to thimerosal, the mercury preservative routinely used until
> CDC, AAP and industry recommended its removal "as soon as possible"
> from all childhood vaccines," AoA advises.
> "We are especially alarmed by these findings because the seasonal
> influenza and H1N1 vaccines contain mercury well in excess of EPA safe
> exposure guidelines," said Theresa Wrangham, president of SafeMinds,
> in a statement to President Obama calling for a ban on mercury in
> vaccines given to pregnant women and young children.
> Another new study found that giving Hepatitis B vaccine to newborn
> boys may triple the risk of developing an autism spectrum disorder. An
> abstract of the study was published in the September, 2009 "Annals of
> Epidemiology" journal. "Boys who received the hepatitis B vaccine
> during the first month of life had 2.94 greater odds for ASD compared
> to later - or unvaccinated boys," wrote Carolyn Gallagher and Melody
> Goodman of the graduate program in public health at Stony Brook
> University Medical Center in New York.
> On September 30, 2009, Age of Autism Editor-at-Large, Mark Blaxill,
> reported on a new study in the journal "Neurotoxicology," by a
> research team led by scientists from the University of Pittsburgh and
> Thoughtful House, that found exposure to a birth dose of a hepatitis B
> vaccine that included thimerosal caused significant delays in the
> development of several survival reflexes in male rhesus macaque
> "In the first safety study of its kind of the hepatitis vaccine birth
> dose, the researchers showed that male macaques vaccinated at birth
> with a hepatitis B vaccine (HBV) took more than twice as long as
> unexposed macaques to acquire three standardized skills typically used
> to measure infant brain development," Blaxill wrote.
> The study showed vaccinated monkeys learned more slowly to (1) turn
> their head in response to a brush on the cheek (root reflex); (2) open
> their mouth in response to a brush on the forehead (snout reflex); and
> (3) suck on a nipple placed in their mouth (suck reflex). The
> researchers found the unvaccinated monkeys developed normally.
> The study is part of a larger research program looking at the safety
> of the vaccine schedule in children from birth to age four.
> Dr Andrew Wakefield, Executive Director of Thoughtful House, and a co-
> investigator of the project, told Age of Autism that he found it
> particularly concerning "that in spite of the recommendation to remove
> thimerosal from vaccines a decade ago, millions of people, many of
> them children and pregnant mothers, are about to get mercury in their
> A 2006 study in the "Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons," by
> Dr David Ayoub and Dr F Edward Yazback, titled, Influenza Vaccinations
> During Pregnancy: A Critical Assessment of the Recommendations of the
> Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), states:
> "The ACIP policy recommendation of routinely administering influenza
> vaccine during pregnancy is ill-advised and unsupported by current
> scientific literature, and it should be withdrawn. Use of thimerosal
> during pregnancy should be contraindicated."
> "Because the benefits of influenza vaccination during pregnancy appear
> lacking, a safety-benefit analysis should not tolerate any risk to
> vaccine recipients or their offspring, even at a theoretical level,"
> the doctors conclude.
> Back on February 28, 2005, the Associated Press reported that lower
> "IQ levels linked to mercury exposure in the womb costs the United
> States $8.7 billion a year in lost earnings potential," citing a study
> by researchers at New York's Mount Sinai hospital published in the
> journal, "Environmental Health Perspectives."
> The Mount Sinai Center for Children's Health and the Environment
> combined a number of previous studies to determine hundreds of
> thousands of babies are born every year with lower IQ associated with
> mercury exposure.
> Lead researcher and pediatician, Leonard Trasande, reported that
> annually between 316,588 and 637,233 infants are born with umbilical
> cord blood mercury levels linked to IQ loss.
> As an example, Dr Trasande said, each year about 4% of babies are with
> blood mercury levels between 7.13 and 15 micrograms per liter. That
> level of mercury causes an IQ loss of 1.6 points, the researchers
> A 1.6 point drop could cost a person more than $31,000 in potential
> earnings over a lifetime due to missed educational opportunities or
> jobs, the study calculated. The researchers found the IQ losses linked
> to mercury ranged from one-fifth of an IQ point to as much as 24
> "The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that about 8 percent of
> American women of childbearing age have enough mercury in their blood
> to put a fetus at risk," the Associated Press noted.
From: Peter B on 19 Nov 2009 21:13
"tools" <tools22(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
> Peter B wrote:
>> "tools" <tools22(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> Peter B wrote:
>>>> "tools" <tools22(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> dr_jeff wrote:
>>>>>> Jan Drew wrote:
>>>>>> Copyrighted material deleted.
>>>>>> So what? What percentage of the mercury in a woman's body comes
>>>>>> from vaccines? 0.1% or so? What about the mercury in fish, in the
>>>>>> air from coal-burning power plants, etc.? Wouldn't you be fore
>>>>>> effective if you lobbied against these rather than life-saving
>>>> Take that as a compliment Dr. Jeff, he says he knowingly lies alot.
>>> Um, Petey, do you know what a "Putz" is?
>> Yes, but as a liar your word never means what it says. Get it?
> So, scum calles me names? And I'm supposed to be hurt?
WOW, a PKB? I think so!
You called someone a putz, then "scum "calles" me names" All because I
said you were a liar? Talk about hypersensitivity, you were the one who
was all proud about doing that a few posts ago. Can you say major
hypocrite? I think SO!
Are you hurt? Obviously. Why? shrugs, who knows? You seemed to rather
enjoy reveling in your hatred and disgust for those that have more than
you, especially when it comes to integrity in spite of being a self
proclaimed liar and proud of it.
Get out of the gutter and your shoes won't be covered with feces all the