A revolution in thought

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Of people who get tetanus, 1 out of 5 die. Do you think the vaccine is the more dangerous risk than the disease in the case of this specific disease, peacegirl?

I've had several tetanus shots, and I haven't died yet, at least I don't think so.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

If all you have are anecdotal accounts of the few children who have gotten a reaction and don't have the equivalent accounts of children who do not get a reaction, you have no useful data. Having comparative statistics is useful for a parent to use in deciding, but only waving a few accounts of reactions is a scare tactic and not a responsible presentation of information. Until you have a reliable pretest for reaction, statistics are the only viable information to consider.

That is not true. There is something called data collection which relies on anecdotal responses. This can give researchers a clue as to patterns of illness. It is often difficult to see a connection between vaccine use and illness unless data (anecdotal reports) is obtained over an extended period of time, which then allows the researchers to see a correlation that may have previously gone undetected.

[peacegirl]

[quote=LadyShea;1155858]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Fume all you want, but the survey isn't about vaccine injury at all. It's about the overall health of unvaccinated children. Why don't you actually read what you are putting forth as evidence*? The questionnaires are public, you can actually read the questions.

You can't keep a single thought in your head, and you go off on these wrong paths.

Also you have never answered the original question. Can you support your assertion that today's generation of children is in general weaker and sicker than previous generations? If you can't support it then retract it.

From all the reputable reports, there seems to be enough evidence to support a link between the vaccinations given and lowered immunity (lowered resistance to colds, asthma, and other autoimmune difficulties) in some children.

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You're right that the purpose of the questionnaire was not to find any connection. It was to collect data to see if there is a link. That is why it is ongoing; to try to gather as much data as possible in as unbiased way as possible.

I am wondering if that is their final conclusion to this study, and if it is, what does it mean.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

That's not what the survey is about at all anyway. It has nothing to do with vaccine reactions.

But in general thedoc is right.

So you are saying that this questionnaire had nothing to do with seeing if there was a link between the frequency of illness and vaccines? I agree that they weren't looking for children who had an immediate reaction but rather they were looking for a long term change in immune function over time, which is much more difficult to identify. That's what I thought it was about, but maybe I'm wrong.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Nope, you still haven't read it, have you? It was a survey about the overall health of unvaccinated children. They added a questionnaire for vaccinated children later, and they did some comparisons against a German study.

Here is the results page, it's all about general health.

Survey results

I looked over the results of the survey, and it is ongoing which is good because the more data, the more accurate the results will be. Are you saying that because their survey was a questionnaire based on anecdotal reports, it has no value?

Illnesses in unvaccinated children

The survey is an ongoing project, so if you have unvaccinated children or are unvaccinated yourself, please fill in the questionnaire.
If you have vaccinated children as well please go to the questionnaire for vaccinated children. We started to do a comparative study of the two groups.
Thank you for your support!

The results of our survey with currently 12551 participants show that unvaccinated children are far less affected by common diseases than vaccinated children. Due to the fact that the majority of children in the survey are between 0 and 2 years of age and some diseases generally do not appear in this age group, the results are subdivided into different age groups (you can see that by clicking on the chart). Information about country, gender, age, age distribution, breastfeeding, preferred treatment can be found here.

Atopic diseases among unvaccinated children

Asthma, hayfever and neurodermatitis are seen very frequently today. A recent German study with 17461 children between 0-17 years of age (KIGGS) showed that 4.7% of these children suffer from asthma, 10.7% of these children from hayfever and 13.2% from neurodermatitis. These numbers differ in western countries, i.e. the prevalence of asthma among children in the US is 6% whereas it is 14-16% in Australia (Australia’s Health 2004, AIHW)
The prevalence of asthma among unvaccinated children in our study is around 2.5%, hayfever 3% and neurodermatitis 7%.

According to the KIGGS study more than 40% of children between the ages of 3 and 17 years were sensitized against at least one allergen tested (20 common allergens were tested) and 22.9% had an allergic disease. Although we did not perform a bloodtest, around 10% stated that their children had an allergy.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

No, you haven't been paying attention, these diseases can be deadly in their full strength, natural form. The vaccines contain weakened or killed virus that do not cause the disease, only the immune reaction that confers immunity to the recipient. More children died of the actual disease than have been harmed by the vaccine. Those are the meaningful statistics that a parent needs to consider. That un-vaccinated children are more healthy has not been proven, only asserted by the loud lunatic fringe of society.

That is your defense mechanism thedoc, to call anyone who has a different point of view a lunatic. You cannot say that because more and more people are questioning the safety (and efficacy) of a growing number of vaccines given over the course of a child's young life. That means this concern is not involving just a fringe group anymore.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

I'm sure the participants were from a broad sampling of vaccinated and unvaccinated children. How do you know they were self-selected, or did you just make this up because you want to find something wrong with the study?

Did you not follow your own links to see where your information came from? It's an ongoing survey, not a study at all. The participants are anyone who finds the survey online and wants to answer it-I could do so right now- hence self selected with zero controls, and hence absolutely meaningless results. It's a collection of anecdotes.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Also I am very curious as to how you became "sure" the participants were from a broad sampling when you completely failed to find out the basic methodology?

This was not a controlled experiment but that does not mean that they didn't get valuable information that can be used later on.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

So you were completely wrong when you said you were "sure" about something that was not remotely true? I don't care about the information because it is meaningless without any controls, I do care about your repeated assertions and what they are based on. It fascinates me how clueless you are.

It can give information. Data collection is an important part of the scientific method.

Oh really? Well then where are the experiments that replicate that the dog just simply walked up and chose his owner?

It's just a collection of anecdotes

What the fuck? The survey is still available for anyone to take! You can read it yourself! It has nothing to do with vaccine injuries!

Show me the evidence.

Here is the video. The woman talks about the Sweden results later in the discussion, so you may want to scroll forward.

AGreenRoad Magazine - Teaching A Science Of Sustainable Health/Success: Dr. Viera Scheibner PhD - Vaccination, The Hidden Truth

Vaccinations: Parents’ Informed Choice - Weston A Price Foundation

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

You are merely asserting the premise that you need instead to prove if you want to make the argument non-fallacious.

That's because you don't understand the proof, which compels you to say that I am asserting the premise. Nothing has changed since day one. You cannot use empirical testing to test greater satisfaction, but it is as clear as day that man moves in this direction. His observations were spot on.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by thedoc

Was there any correlation with diet and the general health of these children? They mentioned Herpes and I assume it was oral herpes. I know that eggs contribute to nervous conditions and Herpes infections in the mouth can be triggered by the consumption of too many eggs. Without considering diet and correlating this to the other factors there is a genuine lack of precision in the data. Vaccination may not be the only factor effecting a child's health, and diet can vary wildly from one region to another.

That's why they are studying different regions of the world to see if there is a common denominator, or if this is just a coincidence that vaccinated children are chronically weaker and sicker than their unvaccinated counterparts.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Of people who get tetanus, 1 out of 5 die. Do you think the vaccine is the more dangerous risk than the disease in the case of this specific disease, peacegirl?

http://www.vaccineriskawareness.com/Tetanus-Vaccine

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

It can give information. Data collection is an important part of the scientific method.

Yes, data collection is important. Anonymous questionnaires open to any and all on the internet is not a scientifically valid method of collecting data however.

Oh really? Well then where are the experiments that replicate that the dog just simply walked up and chose his owner?

Where are the experiments using levers? There are none, you just got that stuck in your head after I mentioned it as a possibility. Multiple experiments using some method of dogs and other animals choosing between two still images have shown the same results. You have been linked to them many times.

But you seem to find anecdotes convincing and solid and methodologically rigorous experiments to be flawed. That's your brainwashing from Lessans. You don't trust science.

It's over an hour. You need to give me the time in the video (such as 20:15 or whatever) where the info you are referring to is

I asked for evidence. Did Sweden actually ban vaccines? When? Why? For how long? All vaccines or only some? I can't find anything that says this happened except on anti-vax sites. That seems to be a rumor. The European CDC shows Sweden has a very similar schedule to us.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

It's over an hour. You need to give me the time in the video (such as 20:15 or whatever) where the info you are referring to is

I asked for evidence. Did Sweden actually ban vaccines? When? Why? For how long? All vaccines or only some? I can't find anything that says this happened.

I think it was the pertussis vaccine. I will look for the place where she explained the ban and the comeback of generalized illness when it was reinstated. I would also like to add that this is not just about the statistics which can be misleading. This is about the subtle changes in immune function that cannot be tested in this way. Ladyshea thinks that empirical evidence proves that these subtle differences don't exist, or that these subtle changes don't matter. Is she that sure of herself that if she was a doctor, she wouldn't have concerns? It takes years of research to see any patterns that may arise, but she poohs all of it. This to me spells someone who is determined to be right regardless of the evidence right in front of her.

[LadyShea]

I can't find anything that says that Sweden banned vaccines except on anti-vax sites. This is your evidence? The European CDC shows Sweden has a very similar schedule to us.

If you gave me any kind of real evidence, I would be happy to look at it. All you give are opinions and anecdotes and scare mongering.

Lets take your still unsupported claim of this generation of children being weaker and sicker in general, you've yet to offer any evidence for that.

[LadyShea]

I found it myself, peacegirl. There is evidence that Sweden didn't vaccinate against pertussis between 1979 and 1996
Study: Adult whooping cough vaccinations fail to stem outbreaks - Health - Infectious diseases | NBC News

Certainly pertussis rates increased over neighboring Norway who continued to vaccinate against pertussis

http://www.drwile.com/lnkpages/pert_sw_n.jpg

Maybe you can find evidence that Norwegian children were/are weaker and sicker than Swedish children due to that lapse in Pertussis vaccines?

[LadyShea]

MMR: Measles is dangerous, and single jabs aren't good enough | Martin Robbins | Science | theguardian.com

There's an assumption among many that, with Western medical care, even if measles were to come back it would be trivial. Well, let's look at some recent outbreaks, all occuring in areas where vaccination rates fell:

Italy, 2002: 4 deaths, 594 hospitalizations.
California, 1989/90: 75 deaths, 3,390 hospital admissions.
Japan, 2000: 88 deaths.
Germany, 2006: 160 children hospitalized, 3 with brain inflammation.
Ireland, 2000: 3 children dead, 350 hospitalized.
Bulgaria, 2009-2010: over 20,000 cases, 24 dead.
Wales, 2013: over 1,000 cases, 84 hospitalized at the time of writing.

The inconvenient truth for those who deny the danger of measles is that currently, in the United States, a quarter of cases result in the patient being hospitalized, while 1 in 250 result in death. And let's just look at the statistics on complications in the UK:

1 in 25 cases result in pneumonia/bronchitis.
1 in 200 cases result in fits.
1 in 1000 cases lead to inflammation of the brain - 40% of those leading to permanent brain damage.
1 in 8000 cases appear normal but lead to serious brain complications years later.

No effect of MMR withdrawal on th... [J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

Autism rises despite MMR ban in Japan - health - 03 March 2005 - New Scientist

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This is about the subtle changes in immune function that cannot be tested in this way. Ladyshea thinks that empirical evidence proves that these subtle differences don't exist, or that these subtle changes don't matter. It takes years of research to see any patterns that may arise, but she poohs all of it. This to me spells someone who is determined to be right regardless of the evidence right in front of her.

What subtle changes? How can they be tested? What patterns? Evidence of what? You've made very vague claims so far, do you have something concrete to put forth?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Yes, data collection is important. Anonymous questionnaires open to any and all on the internet is not a scientifically valid method of collecting data however.

I would tend to disagree with you. There may be no controls insofar as demographics, but that does not mean the information isn't offering researchers vital information.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

You call a controlled experiment where a dog chooses between two pictures "flawed" (though you couldn't identify the flaws) but you are somehow magically "sure" that an internet survey open to anyone is statistically valid.

A controlled experiment with a dog trained to push a lever to identify his master with a slight statistical significance (which may mean nothing when it's replicated) is not proof that the dog actually recognizes facial features of his master.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

There have never been any levers! You have head levers stuck on your brain.

I showed you the diagram and an actual photograph of the experiment set up. The dog simply walked up the chosen image.

And it was slight statistical differences, it was very significant differences.

Oh really? Well then where are the experiments that replicate that the dog just simply walked up and chose his owner?

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Where are the experiments using levers? There are none, you just got that stuck in your head after I mentioned it as a possibility. Multiple experiments using some method of dogs and other animals choosing between two still images have shown the same results. You have been linked to them many times.

That must have been a different experiment. There was on experiment where the dog was trained to use levers. Show me the multiple experiments in action. I want to see it for myself.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

But you seem to find anecdotes convincing and solid and methodologically rigorous experiments to be flawed. That's your brainwashing from Lessans. You don't trust science.

You're so mixed up LadyShea because the new world will be based on science. But scientific methodology includes observation and data collection. Lessans didn't collect data but he had the data, and for you to ignore his conclusions is as bad as any fundie.

Originally Posted by LadyShea

It's over an hour. You need to give me the time in the video (such as 20:15 or whatever) where the info you are referring to is

I asked for evidence. Did Sweden actually ban vaccines? When? Why? For how long? All vaccines or only some? I can't find anything that says this happened except on anti-vax sites. That seems to be a rumor. The European CDC shows Sweden has a very similar schedule to us.

I gave the link. Go find it if you're interested. I told you it is in the latter half of the video. Scroll forward. I will look for it myself but that shouldn't stop you from looking.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

What subtle changes? How can they be tested? What patterns? Evidence of what? You've made very vague claims so far, do you have something concrete to put forth?

Subtle changes in health LadyShea; in frequency of illness. They are trying to determine objectively what these patterns show. The patterns are the frequency of illness that is not life or death, but is affecting quality of life. These are not vague claims; these are noticeable changes within the confines of scientific testing which tell us a completely different story than what government is telling us. Shouldn't this make you desire to hear the other side, or are you that biased in favor of vaccinations and government propaganda that you can't be objective? It's ironic that you of all people would be this brainwashed.

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

MMR: Measles is dangerous, and single jabs aren't good enough | Martin Robbins | Science | theguardian.com

No effect of MMR withdrawal on th... [J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

Autism rises despite MMR ban in Japan - health - 03 March 2005 - New Scientist

This is one snapshot; this does not tell us the cumulative effect of giving 36 doses (and counting) of vaccines [with toxic adjuvants] to children younger than 6 months that are supposed to protect them from illnesses that do not even pose a major threat. Do you not see the slightest problem here? I wouldn't be surprised if you don't. You are that myopic.

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That is your defense mechanism thedoc, to call anyone who has a different point of view a lunatic. You cannot say that because more and more people are questioning the safety (and efficacy) of a growing number of vaccines given over the course of a child's young life. That means this concern is not involving just a fringe group anymore.

Do you even understand that these childhood diseases, in their natural form, can be deadly?

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

From all the reputable reports, there seems to be enough evidence to support a link between the vaccinations given and lowered immunity (lowered resistance to colds, asthma, and other autoimmune difficulties) in some children.

Some children is not a whole generation, nor are you offering any comparison with past generations.

Can you support your assertion that today's generation of children is in general weaker and sicker than previous generations?


[quote]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

You're right that the purpose of the questionnaire was not to find any connection. It was to collect data to see if there is a link.

Where did you see that purpose stated?

Originally Posted by peacegirl

That is why it is ongoing; to try to gather as much data as possible in as unbiased way as possible.

There is little that is more inherently biased then self selected uncontrolled surveys.

I am wondering if that is their final conclusion to this study, and if it is, what does it mean.

Why don't you read it to find out? What is wrong with you?

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

This is one snapshot; this does not tell us the cumulative effect of giving 36 doses (and counting) of vaccines [with toxic adjuvants] to children younger than 6 months that are supposed to protect them from illnesses that do not even pose a major threat. Do you not see the slightest problem here? I wouldn't be surprised if you don't. You are that myopic.

Now you've gone from 36 vaccines before 2 years of age to 36 doses under 6 months, without bothering to back that up (hint: it's not remotely true).

I am not myopic, I am simply not gullible and apparently incapable of reading like you are

Anyway, those are the KNOWN effects of one disease, measels. It is information needed to make an informed decision, don't you think? Shouldn't parents know the risk of the diseases so they can compare against the risk of vaccines? Oh wait, since you don't know the risk of vaccines, or even that there is any, they should do what instead...take their chances that their kid won't be the 1 in 1000 to be brain damaged because there might be some unknown effects sometime?

[peacegirl]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

MMR: Measles is dangerous, and single jabs aren't good enough | Martin Robbins | Science | theguardian.com

No effect of MMR withdrawal on th... [J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2005] - PubMed - NCBI

Autism rises despite MMR ban in Japan - health - 03 March 2005 - New Scientist

We're not going to agree, so let's agree to disagree.

Measles Vaccines Part II; Benefits of Contracting Measles ~ by Dr Viera Scheibner (PhD) | International Medical Council on Vaccination

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Subtle changes in health LadyShea; in frequency of illness. They are trying to determine objectively what these patterns show. The patterns are the frequency of illness that is not life or death, but is affecting quality of life. These are not vague claims; these are noticeable changes within the confines of scientific testing which tell us a completely different story than what government is telling us. Shouldn't this make you desire to hear the other side, or are you that biased in favor of vaccinations and government propaganda that you can't be objective? It's ironic that you of all people would be this brainwashed.

You are still making vague claims! Show me the science, show me the numbers. You haven't given me anything to look at objectively. I keep asking for evidence and you keep giving me scare mongering and opinions.

And really, as long as you are spouting the anti-vax propaganda and bias, you're not one to talk about objectivity. Calling me brainwashed while making hysterical claims and offering zero evidence for them is particularly ironic.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by peacegirl

There was on experiment where the dog was trained to use levers.

No, there wasn't. There were never any levers mentioned in any study. I, personally, mentioned levers as one of several possible ways to train a dog to indicate a choice. That was the only mention ever of levers.

I have pointed this out to you many times, yet you heard "levers" and that has been stuck in your head...it's like you have a disorder that disallows new information to get into your brain so you just hold on to whatever is already there

Originally Posted by peacegirl

Show me the multiple experiments in action. I want to see it for myself.

You've been given the links to the studies and to the main peer-reviewed journal for such research, go find the information for yourself.