This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Shutterbug · 56-60, M
@Shutterbug why are you pro vaccines?
Shutterbug · 56-60, M
@Shutterbug
From his book 'Health and Healing' Dr Andrew Weil best answers it with this statement:
"Scientific medicine has taken credit it does not deserve for some advances in health. Most people believe that victory over the infectious diseases of the last century came with the invention of immunisations. In fact, cholera, typhoid, tetanus, diphtheria and whooping cough, etc, were in decline before vaccines for them became available - the result of better methods of sanitation, sewage disposal, and distribution of food and water."
From http://www.vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html
I am 100% for making ours bodies stronger, but not through poison and not before we are ready for them:
Babies are given a hepatitis B vaccine in the first 12 hours of life, when hepatitis B happens by:
- Sexual contact
- Sharing of needles
- Accidental needle sticks
- Mother to child (the mom would already have very visible symptoms if she she's already infected)
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hepatitis-b/symptoms-causes/syc-20366802
From all I read, baby's immune system is not fully developed before 2 years old, so no vaccines should be accepted before that as they will be no anti-bodies produced anyway.
Also veccines are not given in a natural way: if we'd ever get a virus/bacteria from our environment, they would go first through our stomach/lungs, and not directly in our blood like vaccines are given.
If you read about it, many of the diseases for which vaccinations are given are not even lethal. And they don't guarantee anything, they could even cause the disease they are trying to prevent, depending on how strong your immune system is. For me, a strong immune system and liver are a far better guarantee than vaccines. Especially because I don't see how me being healthy is in the interest of a pharmaceutical company.
Our bodies need the proper environment and resources to heal themselves. Not synthetic/patented poisonous ones :-)
From his book 'Health and Healing' Dr Andrew Weil best answers it with this statement:
"Scientific medicine has taken credit it does not deserve for some advances in health. Most people believe that victory over the infectious diseases of the last century came with the invention of immunisations. In fact, cholera, typhoid, tetanus, diphtheria and whooping cough, etc, were in decline before vaccines for them became available - the result of better methods of sanitation, sewage disposal, and distribution of food and water."
From http://www.vaclib.org/sites/debate/web1.html
I am 100% for making ours bodies stronger, but not through poison and not before we are ready for them:
Babies are given a hepatitis B vaccine in the first 12 hours of life, when hepatitis B happens by:
- Sexual contact
- Sharing of needles
- Accidental needle sticks
- Mother to child (the mom would already have very visible symptoms if she she's already infected)
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hepatitis-b/symptoms-causes/syc-20366802
From all I read, baby's immune system is not fully developed before 2 years old, so no vaccines should be accepted before that as they will be no anti-bodies produced anyway.
Also veccines are not given in a natural way: if we'd ever get a virus/bacteria from our environment, they would go first through our stomach/lungs, and not directly in our blood like vaccines are given.
If you read about it, many of the diseases for which vaccinations are given are not even lethal. And they don't guarantee anything, they could even cause the disease they are trying to prevent, depending on how strong your immune system is. For me, a strong immune system and liver are a far better guarantee than vaccines. Especially because I don't see how me being healthy is in the interest of a pharmaceutical company.
Our bodies need the proper environment and resources to heal themselves. Not synthetic/patented poisonous ones :-)