26 votes

Vaccinated Children Five Times More Prone to Disease than Unvaccinated Children (update)

An ongoing study out of Germany comparing disease rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated children points to a pretty clear disparity between the two groups as far as illness rates are concerned. As reported by the group Health Freedom Alliance, children who have been vaccinated according to official government schedules are up to five times more likely to contract a preventable disease than children who developed their own immune systems naturally without vaccines.

Released as its own preliminary study back in September 2011, the survey includes data on 8,000 unvaccinated children whose overall disease rates were compared to disease rates among the general population, the vast majority of which has been vaccinated. And in every single disease category, unvaccinated children fared far better than vaccinated children in terms of both disease prevalence and severity. In other words, the evidence suggests that vaccines are neither effective nor safe. http://consciouslifenews.com/vaccinated-children-five-times-... SEE whooping cough BELOW



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I'm not disagreeing with you,

I'm not disagreeing with you, I just don't believe that ALL vaccines are bad.

Sure. Tb, polio, measles,

Sure.

Tb, polio, measles, etc....

Ok to start with check out the charts on this page

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/

You will see how these diseases bottomed out long before vaccines were introduced

Do you have something when

Do you have something when those vaccinations became mandatory?

Ok I hope this helps you

They developed
smallpox 1796
pertussis 1914
diphtheria 1926
tetanus 1938

Large scale vaccination for smallpox, diptheria, tetaus and Pertussis started in the 1940's

1955 they added Polio

1963 they added measles
1967 mumps
1969 Rubella

Thsese three were combined to make the MMR vaccine1971

by 1971 they no longer recommended smallpox

1989 influenza
1994 Hepatitis B vaccine
1996 chicken pox
1998 rotavirus (again in 2006 and 2008)
2000 hepatitis A
stopped oral polio and rotovirus in 2000 due to problems
2001 pneumococcal vaccine

Disclaimer: I'm not saying

Disclaimer: I'm not saying all vaccines.

This tells me that they worked.

For some really great perspective

I like the paper Death and the Human Environment by some guys at Rockefeller Universtiy.

http://phe.rockefeller.edu/death/

You'll find the graphs there that show infectious diseases dropping while sewage and water systems were on the rise. The paper also credits refrigerated milk trucks for cutting back on the disease. No where in the paper could I find vaccines specfically mentioned as being responsble for the dramatic drop in infectious disease.

Also, TB, which my g grandmother died of, has never been in the vaccine schedule. The advent of antibiotics stopped the spread of it, so now the many TB hospitals that dotted our country are not shuttered or converted.

Back in the 1700 -1800s, people would just throw their chamber pot pee and poo into the streets. Sewage would run off back into the river. Whenever someone brings up all the dead children from infectious diseases, I'm like yeah, that's what happens when you live in your own crap!

Check out that paper though, it tells when the big killer diseases peaked and it's not as the vaccine industry advertises at all. It also predicts that cancer will be the number one killer in 2015, which leads to this nugget, Merck vaccine honcho Hilleman on tape saying that the vaccines had cancer viruses in them. (The Russian, who were getting the "trials" would get whipped in the Olympics being loaded down with tumors and all) hehehe, vaccine scientist humor there..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e93q7ANOO8k&feature=youtube_...

Your reply is better than mine

Nicely put!

No it doesn't

ALL of these diseases were rock bottom by the time the vaccines were developed

I'm not jumping down on you

Honestly, re look at those graphs and look at how far they declined and then compare that to when the vaccinations started. There is NO correlation.

By the way, they stopped small pox vaccine in 1970. It didn't eradicate the disease. People still get it today. There are outbreaks in India still. But hoards of people aren't vaccinated here in America and yet remain disease free....explain that. It's been over 40 years.

Have you guys seen the story

coming out of Italy. Court ruled there is a link to autism. http://www.nyrnaturalnews.com/chemicals-2/2012/05/italian-co...

Minimum 40 Children Paralyzed after Meningitis Vaccine

DEATHS FROM VACCINE CAMPAIGN DISASTER OCCURED Last Month in a North African Country

Original article at Namaste Publishing http://www.namastepublishing.co.uk/deaths-from-vaccine-campa...

"Its easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
Mark Twain

Northern Africa?

But there could be innumerable factors in Northern Africa contributing to those reported deaths: Incompetence, disease, environmental factors, pre-existing conditions, etc.

How is it that reports from no-name publications go unquestioned if their reporting supports your opinions, while so-called mainstream news cannot be believed regardless? At the minimum, any source reporting should be viewed skeptically until thoroughly cross-referenced.

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/graphs/

For the same reason vaccines do not “work” and “save” lives in impoverished African and other third world economies. The majority of third world child deaths still occur despite vaccination. These children need proper food, clean water to drink and wash in and sanitation. We give them vaccines instead.

"Its easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
Mark Twain

Have you read the vaccine inserts?

They LIST this as a possible side effect! Guillain-Barre Syndrome as well as brain swelling is a LISTED SIDE EFFECT!

This happened in India too after a mass vaccination program. "Polio like symptoms" they said.

And the symptoms happen soon after the vaccine. It's not hard to see cause and effect.

Irrelevant.

The Italian courts are a joke.

sorry, the game is over.

There was extensive research and many believe this honest evaluation is going to crush the cowardly doctors that are hiding behind money from Big Pharma. By the way, anyone that simply dismisses a legitimate court ruling from a civilized country like Italy, is a clown and the label "joke" fits them. Always makes me giggle when an American claims another country's court system is a joke :)

Being dismissive of foreign courts in general, maybe

But when you're talking about the Italian courts, dismiss away.

Defend Liberty!

Lol.

You mean the Italian courts who threw the seismologist in prison for not predicting an Earthquake?

Lol get real dude. You are a stereotype of the intolerant natural health fanatic I am warning people about. You are appealing to the fictitious authority of the joke Italian courts and calling all doctors who disagree with you shills.

And the Italian courts ruled that bottled water can not be labeled as hydrating. Yeah the Italian courts are super awesome. The hypocrisy of the natural fanatics would be cute if it was not so aggressive.

As if our coursts are better???

Are you kidding me?

Why not argue on the facts instead of lumping all judges and court rooms together.

Why do you think we have vaccine courts? Vaccine issues don't grace the threshold of our civil or criminal courts. Why do you think that is? Why can't we sue vaccine companies?

Did I say our courts are better?

A court ruling is not proof of anything. It is the appealing to authority logical fallacy.

The politics of medical liability is not proof of anything. That's a separate issue from the immunology itself

Argue the facts of the case

And you insinuated that our courts are better by singling out Italian courts.

Regardless, Why not make your points on facts rather than on whether the court was Italian or not?

Do you want to talk about the retracted Wakefield paper?

Or the numerous studies debunking the vaccine/autism link claim?

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&prev=/search%3Fq...

I'll talk legitimate studies with you IF

you can show me ONE study that follows unvaccinated kids vs fully vaccinated kids that proves your point.

I'll be waiting

That study doesn't exist

Which makes the claim "vaccinated children 5 times more prone to disease" pretty ridiculous, don't you think?

Don't be lazy

I have at least four studies out of Canada one of which I posted a link to in my response to you below that talk about how immune system is depressed after vaccination.

But you are mixing apples and oranges. What I asked YOU for was studies that show unactivated kids vs vaccinated kids and the occurrence of autism. And you are right it doesn't exist. Ask yourself why it doesn't exist. Wouldn't that be the first most logical study to do?

How about we just look at the anecdotal evidence of the largely non-vaccinated Amish population vs the vaccinated population of the rest of the US? You would have to admit there is a huge difference in occurences.... something worth studying don't you think?

Who is paying to suppress these studies? Probably the same people who came up with "vaccine court" to handle all complaints.

The Amish get autism, too.

Along with a bunch of other genetic diseases. Those Amish studies have been debunked.

Back up your statement with facts

I'm waiting

He will never respond factually to your challenge.

THe answer is in his earlier post about drugs. As long as he can can feel confident in "medical science" he can justify his defense of drugs. Let's hope it is not to the death.

This is exactly the crap I'm talking about.

You refuse to accept anything I argue because you believe a scientific and logical fallacy from the get-go, the natural fallacy.

"I know drugs are bad so anything Delysid says is invalid."

I have been patiently trying to explain the fundamentals of medicine to people here, and it is usually in vain. "He won't reply factually, he is a sheep, blah blah blah."

If a natural themed blog is posted, it is celebrated, if I post a counter-blog it is invalid. If I post a published journal, I'm just a shill for Big Pharma. If an alternative medicine advocate posts something they just want to help humanity, if I give my medical opinion and defend mainstream medicine I just want to harm children.

There is no debating with many naturopaths. They refuse to accept science, they refuse to accept that mainstream physicians also strongly support medical ethics.

apparently you're right

...