Freedom of Information Act in the UK filed by a doctor there has revealed 30 years of secret official documents showing that government experts have

1. Known the vaccines don’t work
2. Known they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent
3. Known they are a hazard to children
4. Colluded to lie to the public
5. Worked to prevent safety studies

Read Full Story here: http://nsnbc.me/2013/05/10/the-vaccine- ... f-coverup/

Oh for fuck's sake.

trubble76 wrote:Oh for fuck's sake.

/thread.

Someone move this over to the 'conspiracy theories' section. Or better, dump this thread. The last thing these stupid sites need is any more publicity.

trubble76 wrote:Oh for fuck's sake.

Beat me to it!

natselrox wrote:Someone move this over to the 'conspiracy theories' section. Or better, dump this thread. The last thing these stupid sites need is any more publicity.

So you haven't read the article?
PDF linky

Cause the diseases they are meant to prevent ? Hahahahahahahahaha

You couldn't make this shit up... Oh wait some fucktard already has

I don't readily subscribe to the notion of a vaccination conspiracy, but the following may be of interest...

In 2011 the 3 yr-old son of a friend was taken to a doctor for investigation of a persistent subcutaneous lump in his leg. The diagnosis came as a shock... rhabdomyosarcoma, a rare (but dangerous) cancer of the connective tissue.
After two surgeries and nearly a year of chemotherapy (with a few radiotherapy treatments as well) he was declared cancer-free in September last year. He is still required to go for check-ups every six months.

The boy's mother noted that the tumour had developed in precisely the area where he had received his innoculations.
I dismissed this as coincidence, but she persisted in the belief that the vaccinations had caused the cancer. Eventually I did a bit of Googling. While I could find no articles suggesting an association between vaccinations and human rhabdomyosarcoma, I did find several describing vaccination as a causative agent of feline rhabdomyosarcoma!

Here's one of them...

Vaccine-induced rhabdomyosarcoma in a cat

Vaccine-induced fibrosarcomas are well-known in feline practice. This is a very interesting other vaccine-induced problem: a rhabdomyosarcoma which also invaded the spine and caused metastases in the lung.

A 7-year-old, female, domestic medium-haired cat had a recurrent deep dermal mass in the interscapular region after initial surgical removal 3 months earlier.

The cat had received a killed rabies vaccine and a five-in-one vaccine in the same area about 2 months prior to the first surgery.

The relapsed mass was diagnosed as vaccine-associated sarcoma. The cat was euthanized 2 months later because of hind limb paralysis.
...

CONTINUED
Full article at:
http://www.vetcontact.com/en/art.php?a=1073&t=

So vaccine-induced rhabdomysarcoma in cats is not merely acknowledged, it is "well-known".
And if it can happen in one mammal, could it possibly happen in another (human) mammal as well?

No one has ever claimed that vaccines are completely without risk of negative effects in isolated, rare cases.

What is clearly acknowledged, by honest reporters, is that these negative effects are RARE, and the risk is FAR outweighed by the benefits of the vaccine.

Regarding the article in the OP - some subjects seem to require a new sub-forum, beyond simple "conspiracy theory" - perhaps the title could be something like "Stuff that is too fucking stupid to be allowed to infect the rest of the forum."

Weaver wrote:Regarding the article in the OP - some subjects seem to require a new sub-forum, beyond simple "conspiracy theory" - perhaps the title could be something like "Stuff that is too fucking stupid to be allowed to infect the rest of the forum."

and we seem to be getting a lot of it lately. Co-incidence or ... conspiracy?

Weaver wrote:No one has ever claimed that vaccines are completely without risk of negative effects in isolated, rare cases.

What is clearly acknowledged, by honest reporters, is that these negative effects are RARE, and the risk is FAR outweighed by the benefits of the vaccine.

Exactly. All medical procedures carry some element of risk, however small. Pretty much every human activity carries some risk but we learn to live with the risks when they are clearly outweighed by the benefits. People have died after choking on chicken bones. I don't see the Great Chicken Bone Hoax conspiracy stories everywhere. Because even the most dense meat-eater can understand that the risks are minimal, accidents are rare and chicken tastes good and is nutritious. But when it comes to medicine and the use of statistical risk evaluation, many people appear to be dimmer than chickens when it comes to trying to understand the risks.

So, a conspiracy theory website masquerading as a proper news agency (note the URL, folks) peddles yet more known lies and shit on the subject. Quelle surprise.

Oh, and interestingly enough, when I tried clicking on the "About" link to find out more about these people, I was redirected to a "Service Temporarily Unavailable" page. Again, quelle fucking surprise.

Looking over the original article, this appears to have been published in something called the BSEM. The article is not referenced in Pubmed, so it is unclear whether this is peer reviewed.
In essence it is a trawl of documents obtained under the freedom of information act from the UK JCVI committee that analysed data to determine whether to continue with current policy or advise a change in policy over 30 years. Unsurprisingly this details loads of possible cases where concerns over vaccines have been discussed, often at times when the full story was not known. The author appears to take the view that failure to stop the program in its tracks every time there was a hint of concern this is evidence of negligence. Further he/she fails to differentiate clearly between aseptic meningitis with encephalitis - trying to suggest that that the former should also be treated as serious events.
There is almost complete failure to consider the denominator issues and the background event rates caused by the diseases being prevented.

the_5th_ape wrote:

natselrox wrote:Someone move this over to the 'conspiracy theories' section. Or better, dump this thread. The last thing these stupid sites need is any more publicity.

So you haven't read the article?
PDF linky

Holy shit!

the_5th_ape actually responded to someone's query instead of just going off and starting another thread about bollocks!

Calilasseia wrote:So, a conspiracy theory website masquerading as a proper news agency (note the URL, folks) peddles yet more known lies and shit on the subject. Quelle surprise.

If you are suspicious about that link, you can refer to the link I posted in my reply to "natselrox"

Oh, and interestingly enough, when I tried clicking on the "About" link to find out more about these people, I was redirected to a "Service Temporarily Unavailable" page. Again, quelle fucking surprise.

It works for me:
http://nsnbc.me/about-nsnbc-international/

MrFungus420 wrote:

trubble76 wrote:Oh for fuck's sake.

/thread.

LMAO!!

the_5th_ape wrote:

Freedom of Information Act in the UK filed by a doctor there has revealed 30 years of secret official documents showing that government experts have

1. Known the vaccines don’t work (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)
2. Known they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)
3. Known they are a hazard to children (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)
4. Colluded to lie to the public (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)
5. Worked to prevent safety studies (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)

There I think I fixed that for you and no, I haven't read any of it, but am I right?

the_5th_ape wrote:

natselrox wrote:Someone move this over to the 'conspiracy theories' section. Or better, dump this thread. The last thing these stupid sites need is any more publicity.

So you haven't read the article?
PDF linky

I study this shit for a living. I don't need a wordpress blog or ecomed to teach me this.

Blackadder wrote:

Weaver wrote:No one has ever claimed that vaccines are completely without risk of negative effects in isolated, rare cases.

What is clearly acknowledged, by honest reporters, is that these negative effects are RARE, and the risk is FAR outweighed by the benefits of the vaccine.

Exactly. All medical procedures carry some element of risk, however small. Pretty much every human activity carries some risk but we learn to live with the risks when they are clearly outweighed by the benefits.

Yes, but nowdays vaccines carry more risks than benefits

Teague wrote:

the_5th_ape wrote:

Freedom of Information Act in the UK filed by a doctor there has revealed 30 years of secret official documents showing that government experts have

1. Known the vaccines don’t work (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)
2. Known they cause the diseases they are supposed to prevent (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)
3. Known they are a hazard to children (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)
4. Colluded to lie to the public (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)
5. Worked to prevent safety studies (in some cases - found in one line of text somewhere in one report so it means ALL vaccines of course)

There I think I fixed that for you and no, I haven't read any of it, but am I right?