Is it time to consider compulsory vaccinations?

Unfortunately your sigh conveys no information about the meningitis study. Nor did your first post on the subject. I believe you are required to explain an opinion you post here.You claim what I said misrepresented the study but how it misrepresented it you do not say. When I put the title of the study into Google I got a couple of references to something by Robert Kennedy who is a spokesman for the "anti-vaxxers" as you all call them, so I assume it would not disagree with what the movie had to say about the study.How the movie information is wrong is left to you to reveal. Please do so.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Faith writes:

quote:

---

I WOULD like to believe vaccines are safe, but at the moment all I'm hearing from your side is assurances I don't trust.

---

Then what would it take?Be specific.

quote:

---

AS I SAID, soon as you guys start taking the dangers seriously and addressing them appropriately

---

They have been. What is your evidence that they have not?Be specific.

quote:

---

You'd need to recognize that there has been fraudulent research for one thing and the possibility that research you are trusting and promoting might possibly not be quite on the up and up either.

---

Where is your evidence that there has been any with regard to vaccine?Be specific.

quote:

---

I'm not listening to the usual assurances based on hot air.

---

So what would it take?Be specific.I'm still waiting on an answer to my question, Faith. This is at least the sixth time I've asked it of you:Do you know the difference between ethyl and methyl mercury?

Faith, did you read your own source? How much is "large amounts" and how does it relate to the amount found in vaccine?According to the Material Data Safety Sheet for thimerosal, the LD50 level is on the order of grams-per-kilogram. Thus, for a 4 kg infant, the LD50 would be 20 grams.The largest dose of thimerosal found in vaccine is from multi-use flu vaccine which is 25 mcg. That's nearly a millionth of the LD50 dose. You do recall that toxicity is based upon dosage, yes? Thus if you don't receive enough to have a toxic reaction, then it necessarily isn't toxic. How long is "constantly" and how does it relate to the vaccine schedule?Thimerosal is ethyl mercury which has a half-life in the body of about 2.2 days. And in children, it's even faster. And since the only vaccine children might receive that has thimerosal is a once-a-year flu shot, exactly what sort of "constant" exposure is there?So let's take a 25-kg child. Given the LD50 dosage requirements, you'd need to inject the child with 4 million doses of flu vaccine every day in order to get a toxic level.So what more do you need, Faith? The amount of thimerosal in vaccine is not large enough to cause toxicity nor is it administered often enough to cause any effect.What more do you need, Faith?Be specific.

Faith writes:

quote:

---

You'd have to join in the effort to show that they are dangerous

---

But what if they're not dangerous?What do you need to have you consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you were wrong and vaccines are not dangerous?Be specific.

quote:

---

and then in the effort to make them safe.

---

But if they're already safe, what would be the point?What do you need to have you consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you were wrong and vaccines are safe?Be specific.

quote:

---

What all that would involve I don't know

---

Why not? If you don't know what would convince you, why are you so certain that the evidence that has been shown to you is all part of some conspiracy?

quote:

---

but just insisting they're safe in the teeth of everything I've been hearing that says they aren't, isn't going to convince me of anything.

---

But that isn't what has happened. Every time you have put forward specific information, you've been shown directly how it is false and does not support your claim. So why do you continue to insist that there is something more that is required?What do you need to have you consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you were wrong?Be specific.

* sighs again*In claiming that the study involved "22 people with meningitis in 1927 all of whom died shortly after being given the Thimerosal".

Faith writes:

quote:

---

They don't say what "large amounts" means, do they? In the film even parts per billion were shown to be toxic.

---

That's because, as your source says: Is there a reason you are putting your faith in a source that directly states that it cannot provide you the information you are looking for?Instead, let's look at the Material Safety Data Sheet for thimerosal, it's on the order of 5 mg-per-kg.The dose of thimerosal found in vaccine is 25 mcg.

quote:

---

In the film even parts per billion were shown to be toxic.

---

Incorrect. The film shows no such thing because it isn't true.

Faith writes:

quote:

---

Earlier in the movie a case is mentioned that was decided by the court in favor of a girl claimed to have autism as a result of Thimerosal. Anna Poling I think was the name. 2007 case.

---

Then your film is lying to you, Faith. The VICP did not find any connection between autism and thimerosal.Anna Poling does not have autism. If your movie said she does, your movie is lying to you, Faith. Instead, the VICP found that the vaccine she received "the vaccinations CHILD received on July 19, 2000, significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy."The VICP has never concluded that vaccines cause autism. There have been neurological conditions, but all conclusions of the VICP have found that there was an underlying physical condition.And the total number of such cases? 9.Remember, Faith, this is out of more than 4 billion doses of vaccine.What more do you need, Faith? What would it take for you to consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you were wrong?Be specific.

Coragyps writes:

quote:

---

With the number of owies that I had painted with merthiolate back before 1960, a significant toxicity in the parts per billion would have had me dead a long time ago.

---

And all those people who wore contacts, like I did. The cleaning solutions used to contain thimerosal. I used to pour it in my eyes.

Please report exactly what the study says.

I also got merthiolate on cuts and wounds.

Faith writes:

quote:

---

All I could find with that title was something by Robert Kennedy

---

You mean the Rolling Stone/Salon article? They retracted it. According to Salon: So since you're so concerned about fraud, Faith, what does this do to your reliance upon material that has been shown to you to be fraudulent?What more do you need? What would it take to have you consider the possibility that maybe, just maybe, you were wrong?

It exactly says not that.

Faith responds to me:

quote:

---

I also got merthiolate on cuts and wounds.

---

We used Mercurichrome.But here's the question: Do you think you still have the mercury from those applications inside you?Or, did your body metabolize the ethyl mercury and excrete it?We're back to my question you have yet to answer, Faith:Do you understand the difference between ethyl and methyl mercury?

The movie reports that they reported "no toxic effects" although the 22 given Thimerosal died.The movie is mostly about fraudulent research. I can't keep up with the information so I'm going to have to watch it again. You all are trusting in the very studies and reports the movie is debunking.

Faith writes:

quote:

---

The movie reports that they reported "no toxic effects" although the 22 given Thimerosal died.

---

Did you read the study, Faith?How many people died?