[www.forumsovetov.ru]

I like NOW's system. of course

Now is all we have, use it well

[fedelwet]

So, you actually read Zarky's posts?

I read most people's posts..

[orapope]

http://www.naturalnews.com/Vaccines_...ull_Story.html

Comments please ?

Since you asked so nicely.

Anything natural news publish is wrong. Vaccines are one of the best things science has given us to reduce or eliminate the causes of suffering for many, many people and animals (cat flu anyone? pavo? rabies?)

[Emunsesoxmete]

Now specifically for vaccination
It would be wise to use the tools sparingly, rather than wide scale

treat the sick and ?protect those near... and monitor

In other words, keep your powder dry

Most unfortunately is the fascist attitude evoked by fear


and extremely unfortunately, it is the ignorant that propaganda is most effective


Until y'all really understand the situation that LIFE presents, discrimination, blame and violence will be the outcome of your myopic and self centred thoughts

Socrates: Beware your wishes

I won't bother with the first paragragh. It made no sense.

Now to the vaccination part. It also makes no sense, but at least it isn't just random words thrown together, he has at least tried to make a point.

This idea you don't use vaccines wide scale.

Well firstly the problem with that is that vaccines only work wide scale. Herd immunity requires wide scale use.

Secondly you can't treat the sick with vaccines. They are a preventative measure. For the vast majority if vaccines once you are sick it is too late (there are a couple of post exposure scenarios, e"g. Rabies).


Zarky has some weird idea that vaccines will somehow hurt us. He has no idea how or why, but it has something to do with Iraq. Need I say more?

[PRengine]

Can we leave big Farmer alone...

And big pharma...

But Pig Farmer is fair game

[arcaniagainee]

I like NOW's system. NOW is fine for now... but what of tomorrow ??

Science is more interested in the consequences of actions-of-NOW

selection of pathogens, has undesirable consequences... MRVR Staph, multi-antibiotic resistant TB, drug resistant intestinal parasites.......... The future for effective pharmaceutical drugs to counter infections is rather bleak ATM
why?
because of mass overuse.... herd mentality

Such negative consequences have been shown again and again

Why wouldn't vaccinations en mass result in similar disastrous consequences

[Pyuvjzwf]

Why wouldn't vaccinations en mass result in similar disastrous consequences Yep, unfortunately hundreds of thousands of people are alive today due to vaccinations.

Disastrous.

Sometimes I wonder what Zarky is thinking when he posts this stuff.

[markphata]

Sometimes I wonder what Zarky is thinking when he posts this stuff. yes, there is a divide... massive

[cajonnmu]

Woof! Woof! Grrrrrr!

[ZAtlLVos]

NOW is fine for now... but what of tomorrow ??

Science is more interested in the consequences of actions-of-NOW



The future for effective pharmaceutical drugs to counter infections is rather bleak ATM
why?
because of mass overuse.... herd mentality

Such negative consequences have been shown again and again

Why wouldn't vaccinations en mass result in similar disastrous consequences

Why would they. Seen any mutant smallpox lately?

What are these negative consequences for vaccines? You keep bringing up anti biotics, but even thought their effectiveness is less now, they have still saved millions of lives, and will save millions more.

Anti biotic use hasn't resulted in Disastrous consequences, at worst you could say it is now less effective than before, but it is not disastrous by any reasonable defi inion.

[stastony]

Why would they. Seen any mutant smallpox lately?

What are these negative consequences for vaccines? You keep bringing up anti biotics, but even thought their effectiveness is less now, they have still saved millions of lives, and will save millions more.

Anti biotic use hasn't resulted in Disastrous consequences, at worst you could say it is now less effective than before, but it is not disastrous by any reasonable defi inion.

This issue is with how you are defining "disastrous". you may be using the wrong dictionary, something like the OED.

[SnareeWer]

Zarky seems to be saying that it would be better if antibiotics weren't used wide scale, so that they will be more effective if he gets sick later. Save them for the important individuals... the plebs? well, they can eat cake!

[Rwujnezq]

Save them for the important individuals yea, like your children when they get REALLY ill

talk of plebs !!!

PS
he gets sick I NEVER get sick

[#[SoftAzerZx]]

Not just interesting, but important
From Seth Mnookin ‏@sethmnookin

Interesting post by @SavorToothTiger about how he came to change his mind on vaccines.

http://theheidihypothesis.blogspot.com/2012/08/how-i-changed-my-mind-about-vaccines.html

[TypeTeasiaDer]

Not just interesting, but important if you like
I dislike; he knows little (and acknowledges that point) and says mainstream... much like the posters here on this thread

If you fail to understand ACT---> CONSEQUENCES in regards to medical intervention... then you will get what you deserve.
Unfortunately you may also screw it up for all and sundry with all your selfish short sighted wants.

*END*

[insoneeri]

yea, like your children when they get REALLY ill

talk of plebs !!!

PS

I NEVER get sick

but you made the same statement for vaccines. Which makes zero sense, because vaccines are a preventative measure, and they work in populations only when used wide scale.

What is this disastrous consequence you keep speaking of? Vaccines can totally eradicate some diseases, which means you never need the vaccine again (we no longer vaccinate for smallpox, polio, and Tb here. if there was gig to be a disastrous consequence from widespread usage then those consequences have already missed the boat because the vaccines are no longer used).

[pprropeciaaa]

if you like
I dislike; he knows little (and acknowledges that point) and says mainstream... much like the posters here on this thread

If you fail to understand ACT---> CONSEQUENCES in regards to medical intervention... then you will get what you deserve.
Unfortunately you may also screw it up for all and sundry with all your selfish short sighted wants.

*END*

What consequence did the widespread (worldwide) use of smallpox vaccine have? What about polio vaccine? You keep saying the same thing but you seem to have zero evidence to back yourself up with

[IvJlNwum]

I find this story inexplicable ... or the behaviour of the two neurosurgeons inexplciable I should say.

Whatever were they thinking?

It _sounds_ as though they subscribed to the view of AuDigga or ummm .. can't think.
Whatever, it beggars belief and no punishment could be serious enough in my book, except maybe putting their theories to the test on THEM, but then I see that one of them reckons he would insist on it IF he got the same thing.

I guess offence is the best defence sometimes.

(yep, sometimes I do feel vindictive).

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/07...nfections.html

Two neuroscientists who injected bacteria into the brains of dying patients will no longer be allowed to conduct medical research, according to The Sacramento Bee.



J. Paul Muizelaar and Rudolph J. Schrot, both neurosurgeons at the University of California, Davis, reportedly introduced bacteria into open head wounds of three patients with malignant brain tumours and then withheld antibiotics.

Muizelaar and Schrot believed that the infections would prompt the patients’ immune systems to attack the cancer. Two of the patients developed sepsis and all three have since died.



On the day that the third patient died in 2011, an institutional review board learned that Muizelaar and Schrot hoped to infect more patients.

The university stopped the work and began an internal investigation.

In October 2011, the vice-chancellor of research notified the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of noncompliance, but the agency has not indicated what, if any, disciplinary action it would take.

In April this year, Muizelaar was awarded an endowed chair in the department of neurosurgery.



Two bioethicists quoted in the Bee both condemned the procedures.

The neurosurgeons counter that they believed that the FDA had given permission, the patients had given consent and their actions were primarily intended to treat.

Muizelaar said that he hoped to continue. “If I come down with a glioblastoma, I will demand that it be done on myself,” he told the Bee."

[Smittoh]

I find this story inexplicable ... or the behaviour of the two neurosurgeons inexplciable I should say.

Whatever were they thinking?

It _sounds_ as though they subscribed to the view of AuDigga or ummm .. can't think.
Whatever, it beggars belief and no punishment could be serious enough in my book, except maybe putting their theories to the test on THEM, but then I see that one of them reckons he would insist on it IF he got the same thing.

I guess offence is the best defence sometimes.

(yep, sometimes I do feel vindictive).

http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/07...nfections.html

Two neuroscientists who injected bacteria into the brains of dying patients will no longer be allowed to conduct medical research, according to The Sacramento Bee.



J. Paul Muizelaar and Rudolph J. Schrot, both neurosurgeons at the University of California, Davis, reportedly introduced bacteria into open head wounds of three patients with malignant brain tumours and then withheld antibiotics.

Muizelaar and Schrot believed that the infections would prompt the patients’ immune systems to attack the cancer. Two of the patients developed sepsis and all three have since died.



On the day that the third patient died in 2011, an institutional review board learned that Muizelaar and Schrot hoped to infect more patients.

The university stopped the work and began an internal investigation.

In October 2011, the vice-chancellor of research notified the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of noncompliance, but the agency has not indicated what, if any, disciplinary action it would take.

In April this year, Muizelaar was awarded an endowed chair in the department of neurosurgery.



Two bioethicists quoted in the Bee both condemned the procedures.

The neurosurgeons counter that they believed that the FDA had given permission, the patients had given consent and their actions were primarily intended to treat.

Muizelaar said that he hoped to continue. “If I come down with a glioblastoma, I will demand that it be done on myself,” he told the Bee."

Or they didn't wait for the ethics committee to approve their study...

[emupsMaispubs]

Or they didn't wait for the ethics committee to approve their study...

You'd have to think so ... but why would they even propose such a thing in these days, UNLESS they believed that it was "healthier" to let the body fight things on its own, which is what I understand the antivax people to believe?

And the response seems to be very minimal to me.