Is it time to consider compulsory vaccinations?

Even the film says it is cleared from the body the first time around, after which it builds up, and has features that lock it in permanently, more than the mercury in fish.All the stuff I get "shown" here is usually biased.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Provide the evidence. What studies did they cite? Why does it clear the first time? Why do no scientist know of this neat trick ethyl mercury does?Why do you let people lie to you so easily? 5 mins of research will show this is not true.

So there is no mercury problem with childhood vaccinations? 1) Your being "put-out" isn't of interest in this discussion.2) It was never unsafe and there is no evidence that it ever was unsafe. But more to the point, you don't seem to be bothering to put up articles showing a problem with ethyl-mercury.

Your film is not a reference, nor is your recollection of the film all that helpful. Show me a reference that claims that any of this BS is the way ethyl mercury behaves.On what basis do you decide whether such a description is possible or reasonable? Was there anything at all in the film that you found difficult to believe?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

DUPEdited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

As a matter of fact I'm probably not remembering that part of the film very accurately. Something to do with research that showed that ethyl mercury reaches the brain faster than methyl mercury, and gets "locked in" in some way methyl doesn't as much or something like that. Unfortunately I'm now back home on my own computer and can't access the film for some reason. Also having computer problems I need to solve before I try to watch it again anyway.The details of such information are only of academic interest to me in any case. The very idea of intentionally putting any kind of mercury into my body, except unavoidably and sparingly in otherwise good food, is horrifying, and nothing anybody could possibly say could justify it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

You have a knack for completely missing the point. The other vaccines that have the amounts that can add up in multiple shots are given to children.

They are our rules and we are talking about changing them. I object to the de facto annulment of a citizen's right to participate in society unless they surrender their right to bodily integrity.I object to the idea that one member of the public has the right to demand that another member change his natural state of existence. Please note that this is different from telling someone that they may not smoke or speed or intentionally harm people. You don't actually have to use direct physical force in order to force someone to do something against their will. Obviously a ridiculous statement given the fact that I am here talking about the rules and what the dangers really are.

How can you trust yourself on the issue of what should go into your body? A couple of post ago, in Message 475, you were ranting about sodium bicarbonate in vaccines.

No I wasn't at all. Total misreading.

Continued in Message 478: Yup, total misreading.

That's fine. Object away. But a lot of your freedoms exist in exactly the same conditional way. You have a right to a fire arm, but the local bar may not allow you to carry there. You have a right to free speech, but you cannot incite a riot. True. But the fact that you really badly want something does not mean you are being coerced if you must meet condictions. Nobody is going to make you work. You can lay about your apartment. But the state doesn't have to feed you or protect when when it comes time for eviction. That's right. And you've admitted that there is no good reason for not getting vaccinated. You just want the right to not do it anyway regardless of the affect on society, but you also want to put your kids in public school. I don't see why respecting your rights to body integrity means that the rest of us have to put up with the risk you present when you attend school. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I find it quite bizarre that you don't remember what the movie says and yet you still insist that whatever they said was correct. How can you possibly make such a judgment? Your sentiment is insane. You'd gladly accept mercury in some fish when you could easily avoid it, but you'd rather get sick then have an immunization shot. How does that make any sense? What you are demonstrating is exactly the irrationality that anti-vax people demonstrate. Aluminum is in baby formula and soy milk, but it is only in immunizations that it must be avoided. Meanwhile you've got a kitchen full of aluminum pans.Besides that, I recall that you interrupted my discussion with Prototypical about childhood vaccinations to start this little sub thread. Can we accept that there is no mercury involved in childhood vaccines?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Which vaccination on the child immunization schedule contains any mercury, Faith? Remember that only the ones on that schedule are mandatory before entering school.Without conceding that ethyl mercury is dangerous in the doses given, mercury is pretty clearly not an issue under the compulsory vaccination scheme. If you've got some reason to believe otherwise I'd like to hear that?

Standard procedure: if the claim turns out to be unsubstantiated or even downright false, science is still automatically wrong.