Do you get a flu shot?

[Canofbier]

Originally Posted by Floridafan

I suppose there are some of you that believe the polio vaccine cured polio. If so, do some research and see what happened to the spinal meningitis numbers in children the years following the start of mass vaccines. To those to lazy, they skyrocketed. Reason? The virus mutated, got stronger and attacked the CNS. If you think the govt. and their BS articles written by "scientists" bought and paid for, are accurate, I have some waterfront property to sell you, along with a bridge. I know you believe the govt, is always doing whats best for you cause they care so much, right? Getta a clue.

I have numerous articles written by referred journals that show a large number of these so called scientific researchers are "paid" researchers to give them the results they want, not the truth. If you believe they wouldn't do that you are more than naive, your just dumb and probably believe that Obama is in DC looking out for you and your best interests.

Conspiracy logic at its best. What's the excuse for the smallpox eradication, then? ASTHMA NUMBERS HAVE SKYROCKETED IN RECENT YEARS, COINCIDENCE?

[ptlyon]

Originally Posted by Canofbier

Conspiracy logic at its best. What's the excuse for the smallpox eradication, then? ASTHMA NUMBERS HAVE SKYROCKETED IN RECENT YEARS, COINCIDENCE?

Just shut up & eat your fiber!

(sorry, had to do it)

[Floridafan]

Originally Posted by Canofbier

Conspiracy logic at its best. What's the excuse for the smallpox eradication, then? ASTHMA NUMBERS HAVE SKYROCKETED IN RECENT YEARS, COINCIDENCE?

First I would like to say that I do not post to cause an argument, but to cause people to think outside the box as it were and make intelligent decisions with something as important as ones health. I have made my choices in my life and have been very fortunate. I raised four children who have never been sick. They are 37, 34, 29 and 27 and never been sick, ever. They have never had a shot of any kind in their lives. Their bodies know what to do because they have been raised naturally with a strong belief that the body knows what to do considering they started out as two half dead germ cells, the sperm and the ovum. I believe our Creator does not make junk and the human body needs no help, just no interference. I am by no means telling you what to do, just sharing my experience. You must ask yourself how is what you've been doing working for you? If you or your family is sick a lot maybe it's time for a change? Now to your comments:

Ever consider all the crap that's in the shots and foods that kids years ago didn't get? Consider that maybe, just maybe they have poisoned children and therefore all these new conditions? (Because of weakened immune systems)

Years ago there was not the peanut allergy where a small ingestion of anything with peanuts can cause a child's death. Asthma through the roof. Autism rates are rising at an alarming rate. Used to be one in ten thousand and now one in eighty nine? What changed? Did our bodies forget how to make healthy children? Or could it be we are being poisoned all in the name of science?

As far as smallpox I will paste this article from those much more enlightened on that specific disease than me.

WHO SMALLPOX ERADICATION SUCCESS RECONSIDERED--Raymond Obosawin MD

Although smallpox is apparently now accorded to the history books, it will be necessary to re-examine the issue of this disease having been universally eradicated, with particular reference to the WHO eradication campaign. An honest look at this question is of considerable importance, as the current worldwide UCI-EPI program gains much of its legitimacy and inspiration from this widely acclaimed success story.

A strong challenge to this now popular view, is reflected in the post-campaign findings of medical researchers like Buttram and Hoffman:

Most people probably credit the smallpox vaccine with playing the major role in recent eradication of smallpox throughout the world, but let us examine the facts. In the article 'Vaccines a Future in Question,' statistics showed that less than 10 percent of children in developing countries have received vaccines.



They went on to comment that with this level of coverage, the WHO campaign was not a real factor in the eradication. Data obtained in their broad based research also led them to conclude that "mass smallpox vaccination was not necessary for the eradication of smallpox.110

In further examining this question from a longer historical perspective, it became readily apparent that the WHO claim did not at all square with the earlier data, i.e., historical smallpox eradication efforts. If we go back as far as the last century, we discover that Creighton's independent research findings as published in the Ninth Edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, strongly contradict the effectiveness of mass smallpox immunization programs. A few revealing excerpts follow:

. . . in Bavaria in 1871 of 30,742 cases 29,429 were in vaccinated persons, or 95.7 percent.
Notwithstanding the fact that Prussia was the best re-vaccinated country in Europe, its mortality from smallpox in the epidemic of 1871 was higher (69,839) than any other Northern state.
According to a competent statistician (A. Vogt), the death-rate from smallpox in the German army, in which all recruits are re-vaccinated, was 60 percent more than among the civil population of the same age . . . although re-vaccination is not obligatory among the latter.
It is often alleged that the unvaccinated are so much inflammable material in the midst of the community, and that smallpox begins among them and gathers force so that it sweeps even the vaccinated before it. Inquiry into the facts has shown that at Cologne in 1870 the first unvaccinated person attacked by smallpox was the 174th in order of time, at Bonn the same year the 42d, and at Liegnitz in 1871 the 225th.111


As we move on into the earlier part of this century we find the same dismal picture of increased susceptibility correlated with increased vaccination coverage. Dettman and Kalokerinos describe a visit they paid to the Philippines about 15 years ago:

. . . We were fortunate enough to address their own medical (and) health officials where we reminded them of the incidence of smallpox in formerly "immunized" Filipinos. We invited them to consult their own medical records and asked them to correct us if our own facts and figures disagreed. No such correction has been forthcoming, and we can only conclude that between 1918-1919 there were 112,549 cases of smallpox notified, with 60,855 deaths. Systematic (mass) vaccination started in 1905, and since its introduction case mortality increased alarmingly. Their own records comment that "The mortality is hardly explainable." 112



Speaking at a 1973 environmental conference in Brussels, Professor George Dick admitted that in recent decades, 75 percent of those that have contracted smallpox in Britain, have had prior a history of vaccination. In that "only 40%" of children were vaccinated (and at most 10 percent of adults), such figures clearly indicate that the vaccinated--as in the much earlier historical record--continue to show a higher tendency to contract the disease. Dick also admitted that smallpox had been eradicated in certain tropical countries without mass vaccination.113 (Table VIII reveals that in the 16 year period preceding the year the WHO eradication campaign was launched--38 additional countries had ceased to report any smallpox cases.)114

A. Hutchison writing in the Journal of the Royal Society in 1974, referred to the smallpox vaccines "lack of potency" and the inadequacies of other measures for containment, in his words, "I have given details of the various outbreaks of smallpox in Britain and where they were diagnosed. These clearly indicate that the (preventive) measures are most ineffective.115

An article in the New Scientist indicates that "The smallpox family of viruses is genetically unstable," and that new viral strains which threaten the "WHO smallpox eradication programme, could emerge anywhere.116 It is thus of interest that in a 1980 article in the Australasian Nurses Journal, Dettman and Kalokerinos pointed out that electron-microscopy cannot distinguish between the various "poxviruses.117 (According to D, de Saving of IDRC, as of 1990 DNA sequencing can make the distinquishingment. What is not known though, is whether this has any beating on the reporting of the various "pox" diseases worldwide.) This fact led them to raise a vitally significant question "as to whether smallpox may be declared conquered, (it's estimated that only 10 percent of the world population actually received the vaccine) with the possibility of it masquerading under the guise of a similar pox." Their line of evidence and reasoning is summarily stated:

. . . we claim that if the evidence is honestly evaluated that smallpox has actually been prolonged and that the so called protective vaccinations actually put the recipient at risk from . . . the disease itself. Authorities now realize this and the 'top world' countries are making vociferous protests about third world countries continuing use of smallpox vaccination because (a) suddenly it has become recognized that it is an extremely dangerous procedure, (To give some idea of the vaccine's dangers, it was reported--in the late sixties--that annually, roughly 3,000 children were experiencing varying degrees of brain damage due to the smallpox vaccine; and according to G. Kiftel in 1967, smallpox vaccination damaged the hearing of 3,296 children in West Germany, of which 71 became totally deaf.117) and (b) it has now been conquered. The ultimate in ingenuity. . . .118



In turning to recognized textbooks on human virology and vertebrate viruses we find that attention has been given since 1970 to a disease called "monkeypox," which is said to be "clinically indistinguishable from smallpox." Cases of this disease have been found in Zaire, Cameroon, Nigeria, Ivory Coast, Liberia, and Sierra Leone (by May 1983, 101 cases have been reported). It is observed that " . . . the existence of a virus that can cause clinical smallpox is disturbing, and the situation is being closely monitored."119 (For a highly detailed account of the history of this disease and efforts to eradicate it, which further corroborates these observations, see, Razzell P., The Conquest of Smallpox, Caliban Books, United Kingdom, 1977.)

[Canofbier]

Originally Posted by Floridafan

First I would like to say that I do not post to cause an argument, but to cause people to think outside the box as it were and make intelligent decisions with something as important as ones health. I have made my choices in my life and have been very fortunate. I raised four children who have never been sick. They are 37, 34, 29 and 27 and never been sick, ever. They have never had a shot of any kind in their lives. Their bodies know what to do because they have been raised naturally with a strong belief that the body knows what to do considering they started out as two half dead germ cells, the sperm and the ovum. I believe our Creator does not make junk and the human body needs no help, just no interference. I am by no means telling you what to do, just sharing my experience. You must ask yourself how is what you've been doing working for you? If you or your family is sick a lot maybe it's time for a change? Now to your comments:

Ever consider all the crap that's in the shots and foods that kids years ago didn't get? Consider that maybe, just maybe they have poisoned children and therefore all these new conditions? (Because of weakened immune systems)

Years ago there was not the peanut allergy where a small ingestion of anything with peanuts can cause a child's death. Asthma through the roof. Autism rates are rising at an alarming rate. Used to be one in ten thousand and now one in eighty nine? What changed? Did our bodies forget how to make healthy children? Or could it be we are being poisoned all in the name of science?

As far as smallpox I will paste this article from those much more enlightened on that specific disease than me.

I appreciate your point of view; it's never a bad thing to question what you're being told. However, the article you reference is itself referencing studies and quotes from 40 or 50 years ago. As far as I know, there is no valid, recognized case of Smallpox since 1977, thus invalidating many of the claims of "increased Smallpox mortality" claimed by the article you included. Keep in mind, too, that there are records of smallpox from as early as 1350 BC. I have a very hard time believing that the disappearance of smallpox was the result of any sort of natural process.

If it's indeed true that your children have never been sick in their entire lives, then I applaud you for raising them in a healthy environment; I also consider both you and them to be quite lucky. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much legitimate evidence of a "no-vaccine" solution working on a population or world-wide level.

As far as the increased incidences of allergies and asthma: it's difficult to factually deny those trends. However, attributing them to "increased use of vaccinations and medications" without concrete evidence is not only baseless, but potentially destructive to the health of the world. I would support any valid research that proves the status quo wrong, but where is the foundation for that research? The coincidence of the increased incidence of these unfortunate health problems and increased use of vaccines is hardly conclusive without definitive evidence to tie them together, and to spread that message without proof is completely irresponsible.

I'm glad that people like you question what the authorities are putting out as factual evidence, but there is absolutely no proof that the current view of disease is wrong until your counterpoint is made with as much absolute evidence.

[Floridafan]

Originally Posted by Canofbier

I appreciate your point of view; it's never a bad thing to question what you're being told. However, the article you reference is itself referencing studies and quotes from 40 or 50 years ago. As far as I know, there is no valid, recognized case of Smallpox since 1977, thus invalidating many of the claims of "increased Smallpox mortality" claimed by the article you included. Keep in mind, too, that there are records of smallpox from as early as 1350 BC. I have a very hard time believing that the disappearance of smallpox was the result of any sort of natural process.

If it's indeed true that your children have never been sick in their entire lives, then I applaud you for raising them in a healthy environment; I also consider both you and them to be quite lucky. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much legitimate evidence of a "no-vaccine" solution working on a population or world-wide level.

As far as the increased incidences of allergies and asthma: it's difficult to factually deny those trends. However, attributing them to "increased use of vaccinations and medications" without concrete evidence is not only baseless, but potentially destructive to the health of the world. I would support any valid research that proves the status quo wrong, but where is the foundation for that research? The coincidence of the increased incidence of these unfortunate health problems and increased use of vaccines is hardly conclusive without definitive evidence to tie them together, and to spread that message without proof is completely irresponsible.

I'm glad that people like you question what the authorities are putting out as factual evidence, but there is absolutely no proof that the current view of disease is wrong until your counterpoint is made with as much absolute evidence.

While I appreciate your response I would say, how can you expect to get funding for any kind of research that does not involve a "pharmaceutical answer". It won't happen. That is why you won't find any mainstream research about the dangers, they have a vested interest in only finding a drug related answer therefore no funding.

I would use a good friend of mine as an example. God rest his soul. He was from the KC area and had four Ph. D's in chemistry. Dr. Delta Gier. He left the "scientific world" because he got fed up with being denied funding when he would find answers to major conditions and be denied funding. The reason? They were vitamin based and therefore Big Pharma could not patent the drug and the research so they were not interested. He ended up in the "alternative" health sciences because he found them searching for the truth not just the profit.

I understand why people think the way they do. We are all bombarded with drug commercials all day long and by the time we are old enough to make a decision for ourselves we assume drugs are the answer.

One of the biggest reasons we don't have the mass deaths anymore from disease is we finally figured out simple sanitation. Believe it or not the Jewish Old Testament taught sanitation to the Jews. That is why they were accused many times in history of poisoning the water etc wherever they lived and were punished. They followed Torah and the Goys were too busy pissing upstream and drinking downstream. What I'm saying is sanitation has taken care of many of the dreaded diseases from the past.

As far as the rest of the world, I can't say. Too many children suffer from malnutrition and unsanitary conditions. I do know that there is a chiropractic hospital in Zimbabwe and they are having phenomenal results with AIDS patients there.

While I know I don't have all the answers I know Big Pharma isn't it. Click on the link in my other post and just see the lawsuits brought on by their deceptive ways of doing business. To them its all about profits, not health, it's been shown too many times to be otherwise.

One last thing You said "but there is absolutely no proof that the current view of disease is wrong until your counterpoint is made with as much absolute evidence"

Our current view of disease is the Germ Theory. Why after all this time is it not called the Germ Law? Because it is a theory nothing more. If it were true we would all be dead. Why did only 1/3 of Europe die of Bubonic Plague, 25 million died, 50 million lived. All were exposed so why? It's called immunity. That is why it makes more sense to keep your immunity strong. My children were not lucky, they were taken care of and we built there immunity in early childhood. We also fed them healthy food and kept their bodies functioning properly. Healthy people don't get sick, sick people get sick. We have been taught that if you feel OK you must be healthy. Wrong. symptoms are nothing more than a warning sign, much like the oil light in a car. You don't fix that with tape over the light, you check the oil pan to make sure your wife didn't rip it off going over a concrete stopper in a parking lot. Watch all the drug commercials, they all talk about getting rid of your symptoms not correcting the underlying cause of the disease. Just my opinion.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Floridafan

While I appreciate your response I would say, how can you expect to get funding for any kind of research that does not involve a "pharmaceutical answer". It won't happen. That is why you won't find any mainstream research about the dangers, they have a vested interest in only finding a drug related answer therefore no funding.

I would use a good friend of mine as an example. God rest his soul. He was from the KC area and had four Ph. D's in chemistry. Dr. Delta Gier. He left the "scientific world" because he got fed up with being denied funding when he would find answers to major conditions and be denied funding. The reason? They were vitamin based and therefore Big Pharma could not patent the drug and the research so they were not interested. He ended up in the "alternative" health sciences because he found them searching for the truth not just the profit.

I understand why people think the way they do. We are all bombarded with drug commercials all day long and by the time we are old enough to make a decision for ourselves we assume drugs are the answer.

One of the biggest reasons we don't have the mass deaths anymore from disease is we finally figured out simple sanitation. Believe it or not the Jewish Old Testament taught sanitation to the Jews. That is why they were accused many times in history of poisoning the water etc wherever they lived and were punished. They followed Torah and the Goys were too busy pissing upstream and drinking downstream. What I'm saying is sanitation has taken care of many of the dreaded diseases from the past.

As far as the rest of the world, I can't say. Too many children suffer from malnutrition and unsanitary conditions. I do know that there is a chiropractic hospital in Zimbabwe and they are having phenomenal results with AIDS patients there.

While I know I don't have all the answers I know Big Pharma isn't it. Click on the link in my other post and just see the lawsuits brought on by their deceptive ways of doing business. To them its all about profits, not health, it's been shown too many times to be otherwise.

One last thing You said "but there is absolutely no proof that the current view of disease is wrong until your counterpoint is made with as much absolute evidence"

Our current view of disease is the Germ Theory. Why after all this time is it not called the Germ Law? Because it is a theory nothing more. If it were true we would all be dead. Why did only 1/3 of Europe die of Bubonic Plague, 25 million died, 50 million lived. All were exposed so why? It's called immunity. That is why it makes more sense to keep your immunity strong. My children were not lucky, they were taken care of and we built there immunity in early childhood. We also fed them healthy food and kept their bodies functioning properly. Healthy people don't get sick, sick people get sick. We have been taught that if you feel OK you must be healthy. Wrong. symptoms are nothing more than a warning sign, much like the oil light in a car. You don't fix that with tape over the light, you check the oil pan to make sure your wife didn't rip it off going over a concrete stopper in a parking lot. Watch all the drug commercials, they all talk about getting rid of your symptoms not correcting the underlying cause of the disease. Just my opinion.

No offense, but you're slipping into a laughable position now. To say there's no funding for actual effective medical research is incredibly ignorant. The pharmaceutical market certainly appreciates their pills that treat symptoms and require continued use. But to say that an actual effective treatment for something important would or could be denied or ignored because Big Pharma can't make as much money is an incredible stretch. The pharmaceutical market couldn't completely control it even if it wanted to.

And in the example with your friend, he didn't get funding because vitamins and other homeopathic items are not regulated. There's an important reason why it's not regulated. Because the entire homeopathic market is full of worthless junk that has never been proven to actually treat any condition. If it actually did work, then it wouldn't be a "Vitamin" or "Supplement". It's not labeled a "Vitamin" because the evil Pharm industry doesn't like it and can't make money on it. It's labeled "Vitamin" because it hasn't shown any actual proof of effectiveness.

Regarding "Germ Theory".. Please learn the difference between a scientific theory and a normal casual theory as it is used outside of the scientific world. They are vastly different. Being labeled as theory does not equate to not being true. Far from it. Scientific theories are explanations to explain what we know to be fact. Building a strong immune system does not depend on avoiding vaccinations. They can certainly be safely combined, and it happens all the time.

[Floridafan]

Originally Posted by Fish

No offense, but you're slipping into a laughable position now. To say there's no funding for actual effective medical research is incredibly ignorant. The pharmaceutical market certainly appreciates their pills that treat symptoms and require continued use. But to say that an actual effective treatment for something important would or could be denied or ignored because Big Pharma can't make as much money is an incredible stretch. The pharmaceutical market couldn't completely control it even if it wanted to.

And in the example with your friend, he didn't get funding because vitamins and other homeopathic items are not regulated. There's an important reason why it's not regulated. Because the entire homeopathic market is full of worthless junk that has never been proven to actually treat any condition. If it actually did work, then it wouldn't be a "Vitamin" or "Supplement". It's not labeled a "Vitamin" because the evil Pharm industry doesn't like it and can't make money on it. It's labeled "Vitamin" because it hasn't shown any actual proof of effectiveness.

Regarding "Germ Theory".. Please learn the difference between a scientific theory and a normal casual theory as it is used outside of the scientific world. They are vastly different. Being labeled as theory does not equate to not being true. Far from it. Scientific theories are explanations to explain what we know to be fact. Building a strong immune system does not depend on avoiding vaccinations. They can certainly be safely combined, and it happens all the time.

Having done this for over 40 years I choose not to waste time on a mind that cannot or will not be willing to consider any other train of thought. All I would ask you is this. We as Americans represent approx 5% of the worlds population and take over 80% of the worlds prescription drugs. If Big Pharma were the answer we should rank number one in overall world health and yet we rank around 37th. Despite having more hospitals, nurses, MRI machines etc than the rest of the world.

Question: So hows that workin for ya?

[loochy]

Originally Posted by Floridafan

Having done this for over 40 years I choose not to waste time on a mind that cannot or will not be willing to consider any other train of thought. All I would ask you is this. We as Americans represent approx 5% of the worlds population and take over 80% of the worlds prescription drugs. If Big Pharma were the answer we should rank number one in overall world health and yet we rank around 37th. Despite having more hospitals, nurses, MRI machines etc than the rest of the world.

Question: So hows that workin for ya?

Pretty good. I'm in great health and I rarely take anything.

[Stewie]

Originally Posted by Floridafan

Having done this for over 40 years I choose not to waste time on a mind that cannot or will not be willing to consider any other train of thought. All I would ask you is this. We as Americans represent approx 5% of the worlds population and take over 80% of the worlds prescription drugs. If Big Pharma were the answer we should rank number one in overall world health and yet we rank around 37th. Despite having more hospitals, nurses, MRI machines etc than the rest of the world.

Question: So hows that workin for ya?

I discount cholesterol drugs and fancy high blood pressure pills from the 80%. The original old-fashioned BP pill still works amazingly well, it's just doesn't buy lunch for the doctor with pharma dollars.

[Cephalic Trauma]

Originally Posted by Floridafan

Having done this for over 40 years I choose not to waste time on a mind that cannot or will not be willing to consider any other train of thought. All I would ask you is this. We as Americans represent approx 5% of the worlds population and take over 80% of the worlds prescription drugs. If Big Pharma were the answer we should rank number one in overall world health and yet we rank around 37th. Despite having more hospitals, nurses, MRI machines etc than the rest of the world.

Question: So hows that workin for ya?

A. People such as yourself get so enamored with "thinking outside the box" that you are unable to consider the side of the debate that is backed with an enormous amount of research. Thus, people with your frame of mind are not worth arguing with.

B. We rank 37th by what measure? I've seen a similar statistic in terms of mistakes in medical practice (which has many different reasons, but seems to be popular in the debate against the competence of our doctors), but if you have a measure that accurately quantifies life expectancy and quality of life as a result of healthcare, I'd like to see it.

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Floridafan

Having done this for over 40 years I choose not to waste time on a mind that cannot or will not be willing to consider any other train of thought. All I would ask you is this. We as Americans represent approx 5% of the worlds population and take over 80% of the worlds prescription drugs. If Big Pharma were the answer we should rank number one in overall world health and yet we rank around 37th. Despite having more hospitals, nurses, MRI machines etc than the rest of the world.

Question: So hows that workin for ya?

I'm not opposed to other trains of thought at all. I'm just completely unconvinced by your information.

I don't believe for a second that Big Pharm is the answer. I'm actually not a fan of the commercial pharmaceutical industry. I just don't think they're intentionally causing harm with some grand conspiracy. They screw up plenty, and have caused their share of fatalities. But the scare tactics you're using to portray them are not accurate.

Our overall health ranking is due to many factors that have little to do with Big Pharm or vaccines. A great majority of our health problems are self inflicted, due to people's choice of poor hygiene, poor eating habits, and lack of exercise. You're trying to make the case that our heath system is the cause of our poor health. But that's just not true. The problem is that people choose to damage their own health, and then cannot or will not change their bad habits. Or for many, they cannot afford it. But for those who choose to live healthy and can afford health care, they have access to the best in the world. We have more hospitals, nurses, and MRI machines for sure. But those are not readily accessible to anyone and everyone that needs it. And that simple fact is infinitely more responsible for our overall poor health than any of the unsubstantiated stuff you've been talking about.

[Canofbier]

Originally Posted by Floridafan

While I appreciate your response I would say, how can you expect to get funding for any kind of research that does not involve a "pharmaceutical answer". It won't happen. That is why you won't find any mainstream research about the dangers, they have a vested interest in only finding a drug related answer therefore no funding.

I would use a good friend of mine as an example. God rest his soul. He was from the KC area and had four Ph. D's in chemistry. Dr. Delta Gier. He left the "scientific world" because he got fed up with being denied funding when he would find answers to major conditions and be denied funding. The reason? They were vitamin based and therefore Big Pharma could not patent the drug and the research so they were not interested. He ended up in the "alternative" health sciences because he found them searching for the truth not just the profit.

I understand why people think the way they do. We are all bombarded with drug commercials all day long and by the time we are old enough to make a decision for ourselves we assume drugs are the answer.

One of the biggest reasons we don't have the mass deaths anymore from disease is we finally figured out simple sanitation. Believe it or not the Jewish Old Testament taught sanitation to the Jews. That is why they were accused many times in history of poisoning the water etc wherever they lived and were punished. They followed Torah and the Goys were too busy pissing upstream and drinking downstream. What I'm saying is sanitation has taken care of many of the dreaded diseases from the past.

As far as the rest of the world, I can't say. Too many children suffer from malnutrition and unsanitary conditions. I do know that there is a chiropractic hospital in Zimbabwe and they are having phenomenal results with AIDS patients there.

While I know I don't have all the answers I know Big Pharma isn't it. Click on the link in my other post and just see the lawsuits brought on by their deceptive ways of doing business. To them its all about profits, not health, it's been shown too many times to be otherwise.

First of all, you don't have to "educate" me about Jews and their history; I am one. In fact, I find it ironic that you reference the Jews being accused of poisoning the water but ultimately being correct when there are so many people in this thread and the world who are accusing vaccines of poisoning the population without the evidence to support it. It's unfortunate that your friend had the experience he had (and there's no lack of selfish people in the pharmecutical industry) but anecdotes aren't proof of anything, as there are mountains of personal experiences supporting either side of the issue.

My issue with these anti-vaccine "studies" is not only in their lack of support from the professional world, but also their reliance on meaningless anecdotes and arguments based on entirely uncorrelated data. I haven't seen one of these studies yet that uses legitimate scientific method to create their samples to convince me of their lack of bias. Because of that, neither I nor anyone with a scientific background can take their research seriously.

Finally, as great as it is that secondary practices are making life better for AIDS patients in Africa, they're ultimately treating the symptoms and not the disease itself; their patients are doomed to to spread their virus and ultimately die from it until a cure is developed. Until then, the money is best spent researching cures to the virus and preventing its spread as much as possible through promotion of condoms and safe birthing practices for those already infected.