colinthewarriormonkey wrote:
This was an idiot who managed to get a stupid study published in the Lancet (shame on them), and then the story was perpetrated by an out of control press.
Indeed, colin.
But at the time, none of us were 100% sure. Were we?
I certainly wasn't & I was not prepared to play God with my two children's lives. The problem is that by refusing access to the old triple jab (which you & I would have had), many sceptical/worried/scared parents did not get their kids vaccinated at all.
The end result was inevitable. A rise in these preventable diseases.
I was - I called bullshit as soon as I heard it.
Can you also tell me who will win the 3'30 at Kempton Park today please, Nostradamus?
Joking aside, good to see you posting in D&D again.
Royal24s wrote:Quote Hillmans
That's because his reasoning is sound, but I've tried to spell it out to you before and you either can't or won't understand it. His work has been refuted by SEVENTEEN separate studies. One of the reasons he was struck off was because he failed to follow protocol in his work.
Mass vaccination saves the government money in treating childhood illnesses but costs the lives of individual children and causes brain damage in others. No they don't.That's the point. And the rise in autism levels is to do with better diagnosis, not MMR.
You speak for the government No, nothing of the kind. I speak as a parent deploring the foolishness of others.
and I , and Doctor Wakefield ,speak for the dead children and those who will be killed by future vaccination. I am not aware of any child killed by MMR.
Simple as that really.
Obviously the parents of the kids they killed want to sponsor a doctor who is speaking out to prevent other deaths - preventing other deaths is one of the reasons for suing the bastards responsible for the policy.
[/b]See above. That is not what is happening.
You and several other people here actually cannot see the logical and very clear answer when faced with the choice between the risk of a child contracting a very treatable childhood illness and the risk of death or permanent brain damage if the child reacts badly to the vaccine .
Frankly this is a lack of intelligence and nothing else.
Whether there's an increased risk of autism or not is really neither here nor there - that's a side issue which has been chosen as the most plausible argument in support of mass vaccination.
If you are concerned about the safety of an individual child rather than the overall reduction of a particular,( generally non life threatening), illness - and as a parent you SHOULD be- there is no choice in the matter.
If you are so stupid as to be convinced by the deplorable persuasion of the state and those with a vested interest in mass vaccination, then to be honest you have failed in your duty to protect your own children. If that is the case then I hope and pray that you are not within that albeit small group who come to regret that decision.
Once you have had to deal with parents who have lost a child to an adverse reaction to this vaccination- and I have more than once- you will be I no doubt as to the decisions you must make.
'"Beauty is truth, truth beauty,
That is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know".
Royal24s wrote:Quote Hillmans
That's because his reasoning is sound, but I've tried to spell it out to you before and you either can't or won't understand it. His work has been refuted by SEVENTEEN separate studies. One of the reasons he was struck off was because he failed to follow protocol in his work.
Mass vaccination saves the government money in treating childhood illnesses but costs the lives of individual children and causes brain damage in others. No they don't.That's the point. And the rise in autism levels is to do with better diagnosis, not MMR.
You speak for the government No, nothing of the kind. I speak as a parent deploring the foolishness of others.
and I , and Doctor Wakefield ,speak for the dead children and those who will be killed by future vaccination. I am not aware of any child killed by MMR.
Simple as that really.
Obviously the parents of the kids they killed want to sponsor a doctor who is speaking out to prevent other deaths - preventing other deaths is one of the reasons for suing the bastards responsible for the policy.
[/b]See above. That is not what is happening.
You and several other people here actually cannot see the logical and very clear answer when faced with the choice between the risk of a child contracting a very treatable childhood illness and the risk of death or permanent brain damage if the child reacts badly to the vaccine .
Frankly this is a lack of intelligence and nothing else.
Whether there's an increased risk of autism or not is really neither here nor there - that's a side issue which has been chosen as the most plausible argument in support of mass vaccination.
If you are concerned about the safety of an individual child rather than the overall reduction of a particular,( generally non life threatening), illness - and as a parent you SHOULD be- there is no choice in the matter.
If you are so stupid as to be convinced by the deplorable persuasion of the state and those with a vested interest in mass vaccination, then to be honest you have failed in your duty to protect your own children. If that is the case then I hope and pray that you are not within that albeit small group who come to regret that decision.
Once you have had to deal with parents who have lost a child to an adverse reaction to this vaccination- and I have more than once- you will be I no doubt as to the decisions you must make.
Measles alone can cause blindness, brain damage & death. All medicines, vaccines etc have serious side-effects. Point is the benefits massively outweigh the risks.
colinthewarriormonkey wrote:
This was an idiot who managed to get a stupid study published in the Lancet (shame on them), and then the story was perpetrated by an out of control press.
Indeed, colin.
But at the time, none of us were 100% sure. Were we?
I certainly wasn't & I was not prepared to play God with my two children's lives. The problem is that by refusing access to the old triple jab (which you & I would have had), many sceptical/worried/scared parents did not get their kids vaccinated at all.
The end result was inevitable. A rise in these preventable diseases.
I was - I called bullshit as soon as I heard it.
Can you also tell me who will win the 3'30 at Kempton Park today please, Nostradamus?
Joking aside, good to see you posting in D&D again.
Sorry mate, I did all my luck on the Grand national. I won't be betting again.
Royal24s wrote:Quote Hillmans
That's because his reasoning is sound, but I've tried to spell it out to you before and you either can't or won't understand it. His work has been refuted by SEVENTEEN separate studies. One of the reasons he was struck off was because he failed to follow protocol in his work.
Mass vaccination saves the government money in treating childhood illnesses but costs the lives of individual children and causes brain damage in others. No they don't.That's the point. And the rise in autism levels is to do with better diagnosis, not MMR.
You speak for the government No, nothing of the kind. I speak as a parent deploring the foolishness of others.
and I , and Doctor Wakefield ,speak for the dead children and those who will be killed by future vaccination. I am not aware of any child killed by MMR.
Simple as that really.
Obviously the parents of the kids they killed want to sponsor a doctor who is speaking out to prevent other deaths - preventing other deaths is one of the reasons for suing the bastards responsible for the policy.
[/b]See above. That is not what is happening.
You and several other people here actually cannot see the logical and very clear answer when faced with the choice between the risk of a child contracting a very treatable childhood illness and the risk of death or permanent brain damage if the child reacts badly to the vaccine .
Frankly this is a lack of intelligence and nothing else.
Whether there's an increased risk of autism or not is really neither here nor there - that's a side issue which has been chosen as the most plausible argument in support of mass vaccination.
If you are concerned about the safety of an individual child rather than the overall reduction of a particular,( generally non life threatening), illness - and as a parent you SHOULD be- there is no choice in the matter.
If you are so stupid as to be convinced by the deplorable persuasion of the state and those with a vested interest in mass vaccination, then to be honest you have failed in your duty to protect your own children. If that is the case then I hope and pray that you are not within that albeit small group who come to regret that decision.
Once you have had to deal with parents who have lost a child to an adverse reaction to this vaccination- and I have more than once- you will be I no doubt as to the decisions you must make.
Now you're just trolling.
My mum is blind in one eye because she contracted measles as a child.
