Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The first varicella vaccines were developed over 50 years ago. The next batch were developed in the early 1980's. They were AVAIALABLE. Perhaps you are confusing words: available does not mean recommended.
Kids COULD HAVE been vaccinated prior to the 1990's. But the vaccine didn't become a "recommended" vaccine til then.
Varicella vaccine
The live attenuated varicella vaccine was first developed in Japan by Takahashi [Takahashi et al. 1974]. Initially, the vaccine was solely used to protect high-risk leukemic children [Gershon et al. 1984; Takahashi et al. 1985]. In 1989, the vaccine was first introduced to healthy children in Japan and Korea and in 1995 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the vaccine for children aged at least 12 months with a negative varicella history [Hambleton and Gershon, 2005].
Well when you force an untested vaccine that was rammed through and then given legal protections by governments throughout the world onto a population where 97%+ didn't need the vaccine at all....and that vaccine proved to be overall more harmful than the disease itself for the vast majority of people.....well, what do you expect?
Of course people are hesitant. We were collectively lied to, and most people believed the lies quite readily. Many people took the shots immediately out of fear, others because they didn't want to lose their livelihoods. Imagine that, a vaccine so amazing they had to threaten people with destitution in order to "convince" them to take it.
Some tyrants even proposed jail, concentration camps for "the unvaxxed", or removing people's children from their homes. The entire time they made people who didn't want this product out to be monsters, murderers, inhuman, and worthy of being culled or at least of having their livelihoods ruined and their personal lives upended.
And it was all a money grab by the pharmaceutical companies. Taxpayers paid handsomely and are still paying for it and will yet pay more. Many are dead, especially many young adults, from these vaccines, and the pharmaceutical companies are legally immune from their crimes. Those who pushed the vaccines, whether government employees or NGOs, are just as guilty. They knew what they were promoting, and they are daily walking back their lies, little by little.
Your post is full of conspiracy thinking...not medicine.
I've never been in a car accident in my life.
I have an autoimmune disease.
The vaccine has not been adequately tested and has been issued for emergency use.
It does not prevent car accidents to any significant degree.
It is advertised as keeping you from dying if you do get into an accident, but so does good driving and safety measures in the vehicle.
In the long run, it's shown that the vaccine causes lifelong health issues.
So that's a no for me.
In a sense, car safety regulations and laws is the vaccine to car accidents. Seat belts, air bags, etc. are sorta like a vaccine in general concept.
So you acknowledge that you don't know about the current situation with regards to the shingles vaccine. But you're sure they're lying. Because...
Meanwhile, the supplement companies are raking in massive profits on people who refuse to accept valid medical attention, come down with symptoms, refuse to "pop a pill" and instead pop dozens of capsules, gargle with gallons of liquids, rug multitudes of tubes of unguents on their skin, bathe in pounds of crystalline substances... They spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on alt-med, just to avoid having to take a $5 pill that might actually treat what ails them.
The advertising claims that one in three will get shingles over a lifetime.
The research record, however, shows that:s at least 2x too high and probably more like 10-30x too high. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/N...n%2065%20years.
The original vax claimed only about a 50% effectiveness, the newer one 90% RRR- that translates to about one case "saved" for every 20 vaxs taken....??? How much risk are you willing to take?
Last edited by guidoLaMoto; 05-24-2024 at 11:59 AM..
The advertising claims that one in three will get shingles over a lifetime.
The research record, however, shows that:s at least 2x too high and probably more like 10-30x too high. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/N...n%2065%20years.
The original vax claimed only about a 50% effectiveness, the newer one 90% RRR- that translates to about one case "saved" for every 20 vaxs taken....??? How much risk are you willing to take?
How much risk am *I* willing to take? I was a test subject for the RSV vaccine clinical trials. I was willing to risk my life in the efforts of saving the lives of others. Shingrix was already approved and known to be helpful in reducing risk of being affected by shingles. If it was only 10% effective - I would've gotten the shot. Why? Because 10% is greater than 0%.
I've never been in a car accident in my life.
I have an autoimmune disease.
The vaccine has not been adequately tested and has been issued for emergency use.
It does not prevent car accidents to any significant degree.
It is advertised as keeping you from dying if you do get into an accident, but so does good driving and safety measures in the vehicle.
In the long run, it's shown that the vaccine causes lifelong health issues.
So that's a no for me.
Severe adverse effects from vaccines show up quickly, within 42 days.
I've never been in a car accident in my life.
I have an autoimmune disease.
The vaccine has not been adequately tested and has been issued for emergency use.
It does not prevent car accidents to any significant degree.
It is advertised as keeping you from dying if you do get into an accident, but so does good driving and safety measures in the vehicle.
In the long run, it's shown that the vaccine causes lifelong health issues.
So that's a no for me.
So how would a vaccine ever get on the market based on your standards? No pre-release study will include a study having long-term effects 20, 30, or 40 years later. There is no way to relate causality given that distant timeline. How can one do a 30-year study of the vaccine side effects if it isn't released for use?
Let's not release the vaccine and only have 100 people take the vaccine and 40 years later we will see if there are any late-term side effects before it is allowed to be released to the public. Low numbers of being vaccinated won't pick out low-incident side effects. Such a study would be useless. It would not predict anything when millions of people take it.
There can't be a better study than giving it to millions and millions of people and monitor for side effects. It has always been that way. Pre-release studies are for short term effects. No long term side effects.
We're arguing relative rates-- you apparently think serious complications in 1 in 1000 (almost all in immunocompromised kids) is too high. Others of us think the 1 in 3000 complication rate from the MMR itself is too high.
Pneumococcal vaccine is a good example of lobbyist influence in determining good medical practice-- Half of all of us will eventually get a death certificate bat reads "CoD-- pneumonia secondary to X, Y Z.... You don't "catch" pneumonia. We're all harboring Gram positive dipplococci in our resp tracts right now. Healthy immune systems and cough reflexes keep them in check. They take over and kll us when our resistance and strength diminishes blow a critical level. The old man's friend...
There are over 100 strains of pneumococcus. The first PneumoVax vaccine was only directed against three of them-- and they were among the least common strains to boot--but the lobbyists went into high gear and it quickly became a sure malpractice suit if your 90 y/o pt with lung cancer finally succumbed with pneumonia and a vaccine had not been recommended earlier.....(Now a 23 valent strain is available, but BFD-- healthy people don't get pneumococcal pneumonia and the unhealthy ones will merely die of some other infection rather than the target of the vax....Nobody gets out of this alive. That vax is only changing the details of the death certificate.)
Where do you get the 1 in 3000 figure?
Healthy people do get pneumococcal infections, not just pneumonia but also meningitis and septicemia. Age is the biggest risk factor. You do "catch" pneumococcus. It is spread by respiratory droplets.
"Anyone can get pneumococcal disease, but some groups are at increased risk including:
Children younger than age 2 years
Adults age 65 years and older
Children and adults with certain chronic health conditions, including chronic heart disease, lung
disease, kidney or liver disease, diabetes, sickle cell disease, or illnesses that weaken the immune system, such as HIV and certain cancers, among others
Pneumococcal disease is spread from person to person through coughing, sneezing, and close contact. Some people, especially children, can carry the bacteria in their nose and throat without being sick and can spread the bacteria to others."
The vax can also change the date on the death certificate to a much later one.
So how would a vaccine ever get on the market based on your standards? No pre-release study will include a study having long-term effects 20, 30, or 40 years later. There is no way to relate causality given that distant timeline. How can one do a 30-year study of the vaccine side effects if it isn't released for use?
Let's not release the vaccine and only have 100 people take the vaccine and 40 years later we will see if there are any late-term side effects before it is allowed to be released to the public. Low numbers of being vaccinated won't pick out low-incident side effects. Such a study would be useless. It would not predict anything when millions of people take it.
There can't be a better study than giving it to millions and millions of people and monitor for side effects. It has always been that way. Pre-release studies are for short term effects. No long term side effects.
So many seem unable to grasp the concept of balancing risk against benefit. I've heard countless people proclaim that the Covid 19 vaccines should not have been approved because there was so much "uncertainty" about them. In 2020, we had thousands of people getting sick and dying from Covid 19. We ultimately lost over a 1,000,000 Americans due to Covid 19 and would have likely lost 3,000,000 if the vaccines had been developed, approved, and administered when they were. Those were objective facts that were difficult to dispute.
What the contrarians were really saying is that: "Its better to lose 4,000,000 lives than accept the fact that there is some unknown and totally hypothetical problem with these vaccines that *might* appear years down the road".
It doesn't make any sense to rational people. However, so much opposition to vaccines is totally irrational.
It doesn't make any sense that people are so ho hum about the very real possibility that vaccine related research may have just killed millions.
Individuals aren't important, only the survival of the species .... and I get the uncomfortable feeling that the Coincidence of Wuhan, and the resultant indifference of the general population to that (potentially) horrific workplace accident ( I hope), will encourage big pharma to keep playing with viruses as though they are just another thing to be risk managed.
One thing for sure, is that the virus manipulators will feel emboldened to take even greater risk, without fear of angry mobs..... because people only get angry when the media tells them to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
