Vaccinations in the spotlight

**Trickzta** · 15-Nov-13, 01:08 PM

When billions of dollars are driving a Government protected industry, what are the chances of public interest being of a higher priority than the continuation of the ‘Program” and the profits it makes? Sure, the same old ‘made for public consumption’ Media releases will pay lip service to the concerns raised by ‘stupid and ignorant people’ who question aspects of the industry generated ‘feel good’ reports.

Only when blatant and catastrophic slip-ups occur do the big guns step in and act. Nice word ‘act’, behind the act of investigating is the mad rush to find a scape-goat and/or a reason for transferring blame before the current crises gets too out of hand.

Many such Industries exist in these supposedly enlightened times.
I previously posted this link but as there are warnings about the safety of the site, warnings that could deter some from accessing the site, (nothing wrong with a cautious approach, I’ve taken the liberty of posting the thread in its entirety. Apologies to those who have already accessed this post.
Vaccine Bombshell: Leaked Confidential Document Exposes 36 Infants Dead After This Vaccine

A report to the government noted babies died after receiving a vaccine.
A confidential GlaxoSmithKline document recently leaked to the press exposed that within a two-year period, a total of 36 infants died after receiving the 6-in-1 vaccine, Infanrix Hexa. [1] According to the website Initiative Citoyenne [2] who reported the news, the 1271 page document revealed that GlaxoSmithKline received a total of 1,742 reports of adverse reactions between October 23, 2009, and October 22, 2011, including 503 serious adverse reactions and 36 deaths. Initiative Citoyenne stated:
“It’s not that 14 deaths were recorded by GSK between October 2009 and end in October 2011 as we had originally calculated but 36 (14 from 2010 to 2011 and 22 from 2009 to 2010). In addition to these 36 deaths at least 37 other deaths (sudden death mainly), bringing the total to at least 73 deaths since the launch of the vaccine in 2000, and again, this concerns only the death by sudden death, no further recovery of under-reporting.”
Using the figure of 36 deaths over a two-year period, this averages 1.5 deaths per month, which by anyone’s standard is extremely high. Note that only 1 to 10% of adverse reactions to vaccines are actually reported. Therefore, in reality, the problem could potentially be far more serious and the actual number of fatalities much higher.
THE DEADLY CHEMICAL COCKTAIL
The charts show that many of the babies who died passed away within the first few days of receiving the vaccine. [3] A total of three infants were reported to have died within hours of receiving the vaccine. This tragedy is hardly surprising given the vaccine’s ingredients listed on the GSK Infanrix Hexa product information leaflet, which parents are rarely given the chance to read prior to vaccination, including non-infectious substances from tetanus, diphtheria bacteria, purified proteins of pertussis bacteria, the surface protein of the hepatitis B virus (HBsAg, derived from genetically engineered yeast cells) and inactivated poliovirus. [4] Each 0.5mL dose contains:
• diphtheria toxoid
• tetanus toxoid
• pertussis toxoid
• filamentous haemagglutinin
• pertactin
• recombinant HBsAg protein
• poliovirus Type 1
• poliovirus Type 2
• poliovirus Type 3
• purified capsular polysaccharide of Hib covalently bound to tetanus toxoid
• aluminium hydroxide
• aluminium phosphate
• 2-phenoxyethanol, lactose
• Medium 199
• neomycin
• polymyxin
• polysorbate 80
• polysorbate 20
• sodium chloride
• water
TOXIC DOSES OF TOXIC CHEMICALS
In an interesting article by Dr. Harold Buttram titled “The Ultimate Gamble: Do Childhood Vaccines Result in Genetic Hybridization from Alien Human and Animal DNA Contents?” he highlighted the problems associated with just two of these ingredients, including aluminum, which is a neurotoxin associated with Alzheimer’s disease and seizures, and formaldehyde, which is a known cancer-causing agent commonly used to embalm corpses. [5]
Dr. Harold Buttram also stated:
“It is universally recognized among toxicologists that combinations of toxic chemicals may bring exponential increases in toxicity; that is, two toxic chemicals in combination will bring a ten-fold or even a hundred-fold increase in toxicity.
A classical example of this principle was the Schubert study [21] in which it was found that the amount of lead and the amount of mercury, when each was given separately, would be lethal for one percent of rats tested, would become lethal for one hundred percent of rats tested when combined.
In vaccines this principle would apply at least to mercury and aluminum, both of which are potent neurotoxins.”
CONCLUSION
Considering this information, is it any wonder that babies are dying after receiving vaccinations containing these ingredients? GlaxoSmithKline may try and hide the facts from us but they cannot hide them forever. Infanrix Hexa should be removed from the market immediately.
See more at: http://vactruth.com/2012/12/16/36-in....kjuZbcR3.dpuf

My opinion of observations gleaned from this ‘highly dangerous report’ include,
1) The initial report serves as a form of ‘damage control’ by initially downsizing the extent of the problem in public Media Releases.
2) The argument that “dead or weakened germs cannot make you ill therefore the vaccine is safe” does not take the other toxins in vaccines into account. This completely and utterly destroys what little science is presented in their ‘theory’.
3) The number of times they say ‘at least’ when adjusting totals for Public consumption is cause for concern, it tacitly suggests that there are more casualties hidden from sight. (opinions may differ, even worse is that some will have no opinion of their own) Arguably it is “legalese”;- a term used to refer to ‘defensive or carefully worded text in anticipation of future legal argument or suchlike. Even then it is cause for concern.
4) Some vaccines are made from ingredients that are toxic enough to be a danger to people even if the germs are not taken into consideration.
5) Major Companies, often with government support and protection, and even Special Laws and Special Courts in some cases, to further protect the Companies, are still in the habit of misrepresenting the truth and hiding reports and findings from the public’s eye.
6) Protocol is rarely exercised by the Medical practitioner or Institution when it comes to informing the patient/parent about the benefits vs the dangers of vaccines. Little or no background screening is done in most cases.
I've omitted the source material list for this post, it is available on request.

**pmbguy** · 15-Nov-13, 02:35 PM

I just pray that nobody takes your posts seriously. Trickzta - would you be able to cope with having the death of a child on your hands because you convinced somebody not to vaccinate? This is a serious matter. I don’t think you fully comprehend the possible consequences of your actions. You are not a doctor and you have zero authority on the matter. This is the most harmful thread I have seen so far on TFSA. I really think you should think long and hard about this. Think of what you doing. You are trying to save the world...I get it, but what you are doing is the opposite. I just hope you will see the light. But I doubt that...you are too far into your quest for a turnaround. But may I please appeal to your better judgement and ask you to rather not continue with this quest. Think about it...what if you wrong and caused the unnecessary death of a child because of your unprofessional opinion on the matter.

Here is an interesting thought. Instead of vomiting out all this crap you find on the internet, do this instead. Make a list containing the phone numbers of a 100 doctors. Then ask each of them what they, as professionals, have to say on the matter.

Trickzta my post is harsh, sorry. I know you have good intentions. You are not a bad guy. But I have to be harsh given the fact that your beliefs may actually kill somebody.

For anybody else who read this thread and is consequently convinced by it, Pease Please speak to your doctor first before deciding not to vaccinate.

**Trickzta** · 15-Nov-13, 03:32 PM

I'll not post again until I've answered your post in full. Professionals should always be consulted in any health issues. On this we agree. That I'm not a Medical Professional is a fact. I've never made any intentional claim to the opposite, that is I've never claimed to be a Expert or Doctor or other Professional. Whenever I remember I state that my words (my own words) are merely 'opinion'.

You are correct in saying that I mean no harm to others, especially children. When I originally posted the subject was (in my opinion) about a loving family that was badly affected by *let's call it circumstance for now*. I believed that they were charged with murder but every mention of their plight by others spoke of 'negligence' but no links were supplied. I'm still unsure of the precise charges they face. There was little regard for the parents in replies that mentioned them. Their was some but not much sympathy for them even when (and here I rely on overseas sources) had they been guilty of shaking their baby why did the Medical Fraternity not detect the trauma that such violent action would present as marks and bruises especially around the neck area?

This is what my post was intended to do, discuss the case in general and the charges in particular.

I think you're a good guy too. I could see that we were on a collision course with our opposite views and a bit of "getting personal" was creeping into the conversation.

I'll suspend posting as per your plea, for the meantime anyway. May I contact you directly (in the forum of course) to discuss this privately?

Take Care.

**pmbguy** · 15-Nov-13, 07:11 PM

Hi Trickzta – You can send me a private message anytime I really don’t mind. However I must point out that I don’t wish to discuss this topic in much more depth than we already have. You see I studied child development and epidemiology, I know how deadly and debilitating some of these preventable diseases are. I also know what a huge positive impact vaccines have had worldwide, Saving the lives of millions. So I won’t be swayed by any argument you put forward, therefore I wish to abstain from debating this issue with you.

You have the right to post your opinions, however wrong I may feel they are. I regret the tone of my other posts above, But I could not help myself since I feel it is potentially harmful.

You must understand that the internet is full of information that seems to disprove any scientific fact you can think of. There are Professors that believe aliens walk amongst us. You will find the dissertations of doctors that believe Hiv-Aids does not exist. Just because you find a mountain of evidence on the internet does not mean it is true.

**adrianh** · 15-Nov-13, 08:06 PM

@pmbguy - I must admit that I don't read any of the junk that the guy posts. My dad was an orthopaedic surgeon, my mom a radiographer and my sister was a nurse for a couple of years... We grew up around hospitals and medical professionals so I don't have much regard for the opinions of untrained people in this regard.

**pmbguy** · 15-Nov-13, 08:56 PM

I struggled to read all the long posts, I tried but could not for the life of me read everything, sorry Trickzta

It is weird how some people are very impressionable when it comes to things they read on the internet. I think that from when children start to read they learn that there are only 2 major types of literature, factual and fiction. This gets burned into the psyche and when the internet came along there was suddenly this huge amount of fiction but written in a factual manner. So the person reading it has a natural inclination to take it at face value and not doubt its integrity. I know one or two people that will accept almost anything they read on the internet, no matter how much I appeal to their reason. Children should get taught in school that there is a third major class of literature called internet misinformation.

Also each individual fact stated in Tricksta’s posts may be correct on its own, but it is the way the information is put together that leads to false conclusions, especially when other much more prudent facts are left out. The issue is then not seen in a holistic balanced manner, creating a totally false impression.
At some point he quoted some number of babies that apparently died from a specific vaccine, 34 or something, but he failed to investigate how many millions are saved by that very same vaccine.

The following fictional scenario is for demonstration purposes only, I don’t wish to get sucked into a pointless discussion over vaccines again: Leaked documents show that in 2010 alone 12 people died from drug X. This is horrific. The document is real and was hidden from public consumption. The FDA has approved this drug and they won’t ban this drug even though it kills people. They just after money...conspiracy....bla bla bla. BUT what the impressionable reader does not know (does not want to know) was that the same drug directly lead to the recovery of 10 000 people in the same year, therefore no FDA investigation etc etc etc. You need the full picture to draw conclusions. You can’t only listen to one side of the story and think you got the whole picture.

**adrianh** · 15-Nov-13, 11:13 PM

When we were kids the stories always started off by saying "my friend know somebody who says..." or "they say..." now it's "I saw it on the internet..." of course photographs don't lie, Photoshop is a myth, journalist don't make up stories or embellish and fools & spin doctors don't create websites to flaunt their ideas!....hmmmm...seems we're back at the old story of "who's truth are we talking about" - the truth seen through various perceptions could be contradictory...

You see the problem lies in the fact that the deaths due to vaccines are visible and countable but the lives saved are not because there is no way to quantify whether a specific person would have contracted the disease if they were not vaccinated. The only thing that one can say is that there were a specific number of deaths reported due to a particular disease and with the advent of vaccinations there are a smaller number of deaths which implies that the vaccines do make a difference.

I would hazard a guess that chemotherapy kills 10 times more people in a day than vaccines kill in a year....and I would also add that cars kill 1000x more people per hour that vaccines kill in an year...we should rather ban cars to save lives...but we are ok with the risk of driving a car...funny how silly our brains are!

**Trickzta** · 18-Nov-13, 01:51 PM

Disclaimer; applicable to all my posts in this forum and elsewhere. My posts are opinion and are not intended to influence any decisions especially those that are related to health or Medical issues. Consulting a professional is strongly recommended before any change to your medical regime is considered, whether such change or thought of changing is derived from content in my posts or not. Always consulting an expert before following advice from any source is, in my opinion, good practice.

I am not a medical professional by any means or any stretch of imagination, I’m not qualified to give medical advice. My posts are not to be seen as medical advice, I strongly recommend consulting a professional with any concerns or health issues before making any decisions on health matters. Please consult with your GP or your professional of choice before drawing conclusions from my posts including links to third parties, or any other posts that appear on internet in any form or shape. This thread has tilted off topic to some degree, nevertheless, it is healthy to debate in an open and honest manner, presenting available data in good faith without attacking the people who have an opposite view to the one you present, whether that viewpoint is what you truly believe or not.

A debate or discussion should be viewed as a means to broaden our knowledge and/or understanding of the subject matter and related issues and in some cases, unrelated issues. To approach such debate with a ‘win by any means’ attitude defeats the object, in fact the notion of winners and losers detracts from the essence of such debate and often debases the content by evolving into a personal battle of wits and/or a exchange that ridicules the oppositions viewpoint, sometimes even causing personal insults to replace ordered discussion based on verifiable points of contention. This is my opinion.

**Trickzta** · 18-Nov-13, 03:27 PM

Are you guys serious? Have you read what you've posted? I have and will point out blatant discrepancies in your posts should you request me to do so. Take care.