Admitted: Vaccines Are Used for Human Depopulation page 1
Jerome
5th February 2012, 12:03 AM
Bill Gates Admits Vaccines Are Used for Human Depopulation - YouTube
oblivion
5th February 2012, 12:03 AM
bill gates is an expert on vaccines. I'll take his word on this one.
eta I like "admitted" in the OP title. You're nothing if not predictable.
eta I like "admitted" in the OP title. You're nothing if not predictable.
Jerome
5th February 2012, 12:08 AM
bill gates is an expert on vaccines. I'll take his word on this one.
eta I like "admitted" in the OP title. You're nothing if not predictable.
So you disagree with Bill that we need to reduced the population to reduce human carbon emissions?
eta I like "admitted" in the OP title. You're nothing if not predictable.
So you disagree with Bill that we need to reduced the population to reduce human carbon emissions?
oblivion
5th February 2012, 12:09 AM
putting words in my mouth?
Bye.
Bye.
Jerome
5th February 2012, 12:09 AM
"The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that [number of 9 billion] by perhaps 10 or 15 percent. But there we see an increase of about 1.3 [billion]."
Jerome
5th February 2012, 12:14 AM
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/14/health/main5242168.shtml
Polio, the dreaded paralyzing disease stamped out in the industrialized world, is spreading in Nigeria. And health officials say in some cases, it's caused by the vaccine used to fight it.
In July, the World Health Organization issued a warning that this vaccine-spread virus might extend beyond Africa. So far, 124 Nigerian children have been paralyzed this year - about twice those afflicted in 2008.
WHO officials discovered a polio outbreak in Nigeria was sparked by the polio vaccine itself, they assumed it would be easier to stop than a natural "wild" virus.
They were wrong.
In 2007, health experts reported that amid Nigeria's ongoing outbreak of wild polio viruses, 69 children had also been paralyzed in a new outbreak caused by the mutation of a vaccine's virus.
Back then, WHO said the vaccine-linked outbreak would be swiftly overcome - yet two years later, cases continue to mount. They have since identified polio cases linked to the vaccine dating back as far as 2005.
Polio, the dreaded paralyzing disease stamped out in the industrialized world, is spreading in Nigeria. And health officials say in some cases, it's caused by the vaccine used to fight it.
In July, the World Health Organization issued a warning that this vaccine-spread virus might extend beyond Africa. So far, 124 Nigerian children have been paralyzed this year - about twice those afflicted in 2008.
WHO officials discovered a polio outbreak in Nigeria was sparked by the polio vaccine itself, they assumed it would be easier to stop than a natural "wild" virus.
They were wrong.
In 2007, health experts reported that amid Nigeria's ongoing outbreak of wild polio viruses, 69 children had also been paralyzed in a new outbreak caused by the mutation of a vaccine's virus.
Back then, WHO said the vaccine-linked outbreak would be swiftly overcome - yet two years later, cases continue to mount. They have since identified polio cases linked to the vaccine dating back as far as 2005.
nick
5th February 2012, 12:19 AM
Western "medicine" is a scam to support big pharma, I only take natural herbal remedies and homeopathic medicines.
Grumps
5th February 2012, 04:34 AM
Gee, Jerome, why would a population with a higher rate of infant survival due to vaccines cut down on the number of children they are having?
Cunt
5th February 2012, 05:56 AM
Plus it turns out that if you give women a true choice, fewer of them choose to enslave themselves to offspring they haven't met yet.
Cunt
5th February 2012, 06:01 AM
Oh, is there something wrong with using vaccines to help reduce human population?
Hermit
5th February 2012, 07:12 AM
Oh, is there something wrong with using vaccines to help reduce human population?Yes, if it is the polio vaccine that allegedly gives people that dreaded crippling disease it is meant to immunise them against. Mind you, I suspect the statistics may show that the vaccine is preventing more disease than causing it, like so many other medical drugs and procedures. At any rate, the polio theory seems just another one of those conspiracy theories beloved by nutters who think Above Top Secret is the bee's knees of internet forums. I wish they'd stick to their belief that water chlorination is a communist plot or the moon landing is faked. If you wanted to use vaccines to reduce population growth, the polio vaccine is incredibly inefficient. One that has the side effect of sterilising its recipients would be the go. Altogether, though, providing affordable education is by far the best. FACT! But then, how can you reconcile that with libertarianism?
Jerome
5th February 2012, 01:18 PM
Gee, Jerome, why would a population with a higher rate of infant survival due to vaccines cut down on the number of children they are having?
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Jerome
5th February 2012, 01:20 PM
Plus it turns out that if you give women a true choice, fewer of them choose to enslave themselves to offspring they haven't met yet.
Absolutely birth control is a method to control population growth, particularly encouraged for the poor seems to be the goal.
Absolutely birth control is a method to control population growth, particularly encouraged for the poor seems to be the goal.
Jerome
5th February 2012, 01:22 PM
Oh, is there something wrong with using vaccines to help reduce human population?Yes, if it is the polio vaccine that allegedly gives people that dreaded crippling disease it is meant to immunise them against. Mind you, I suspect the statistics may show that the vaccine is preventing more disease than causing it, like so many other medical drugs and procedures. At any rate, the polio theory seems just another one of those conspiracy theories beloved by nutters who think Above Top Secret is the bee's knees of internet forums. I wish they'd stick to their belief that water chlorination is a communist plot or the moon landing is faked. If you wanted to use vaccines to reduce population growth, the polio vaccine is incredibly inefficient. One that has the side effect of sterilising its recipients would be the go. Altogether, though, providing affordable education is by far the best. FACT! But then, how can you reconcile that with libertarianism?
lol @ The World Health Organization and CBS News is part of a conspiracy theory.
lol @ The World Health Organization and CBS News is part of a conspiracy theory.
Facetious
5th February 2012, 01:31 PM
Gee, Jerome, why would a population with a higher rate of infant survival due to vaccines cut down on the number of children they are having?
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Because they contribute to a higher rate of infant survival .....
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Because they contribute to a higher rate of infant survival .....
Jerome
5th February 2012, 01:44 PM
Gee, Jerome, why would a population with a higher rate of infant survival due to vaccines cut down on the number of children they are having?
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Because they contribute to a higher rate of infant survival .....
That doesn't make sense right, so why is Gates, a believer in depopulation, using his vast fortune to vaccinate and claim it helps slow population growth?
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Because they contribute to a higher rate of infant survival .....
That doesn't make sense right, so why is Gates, a believer in depopulation, using his vast fortune to vaccinate and claim it helps slow population growth?
Facetious
5th February 2012, 02:21 PM
Gee, Jerome, why would a population with a higher rate of infant survival due to vaccines cut down on the number of children they are having?
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Because they contribute to a higher rate of infant survival .....
That doesn't make sense right, so why is Gates, a believer in depopulation, using his vast fortune to vaccinate and claim it helps slow population growth?
Having 7/8/9/10 kids makes sense if half of them or more are likely to die before reaching adulthood. Introduce vaccines and good healthcare etc, the risk of your children dying before adulthood drops significantly. If the example of the west is anything to go by, this is enough to make most people choose smaller family sizes - thus slowing population growth.
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Because they contribute to a higher rate of infant survival .....
That doesn't make sense right, so why is Gates, a believer in depopulation, using his vast fortune to vaccinate and claim it helps slow population growth?
Having 7/8/9/10 kids makes sense if half of them or more are likely to die before reaching adulthood. Introduce vaccines and good healthcare etc, the risk of your children dying before adulthood drops significantly. If the example of the west is anything to go by, this is enough to make most people choose smaller family sizes - thus slowing population growth.
Jerome
5th February 2012, 02:26 PM
Wealth in general as opposed to vaccines specifically is what reduces population growth.
Facetious
5th February 2012, 03:03 PM
Queen Victoria had 9 children.
Grumps
5th February 2012, 03:23 PM
Gee, Jerome, why would a population with a higher rate of infant survival due to vaccines cut down on the number of children they are having?
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Because they contribute to a higher rate of infant survival .....
That doesn't make sense right, so why is Gates, a believer in depopulation, using his vast fortune to vaccinate and claim it helps slow population growth?
Oh wow... you're a special kind of ignorant.
The more likely it is your kids die in infancy, the more kids you have to compensate for the loss.
The less likely it is for your kids to die in infancy, the less kids you have because the net gain is worse. You put pressure on resources and risk the health and safety of your children because you have more than you can provide for.
It is not 'money' that increases infant survival at all. Throw all the shiny coins you want a country, that's not going to do a thing.
Food? Yes. Medicine? Yes. Education? Yes.
Money? No.
Right, so why are vaccines in the arsenal to slow population growth?
Because they contribute to a higher rate of infant survival .....
That doesn't make sense right, so why is Gates, a believer in depopulation, using his vast fortune to vaccinate and claim it helps slow population growth?
Oh wow... you're a special kind of ignorant.
The more likely it is your kids die in infancy, the more kids you have to compensate for the loss.
The less likely it is for your kids to die in infancy, the less kids you have because the net gain is worse. You put pressure on resources and risk the health and safety of your children because you have more than you can provide for.
It is not 'money' that increases infant survival at all. Throw all the shiny coins you want a country, that's not going to do a thing.
Food? Yes. Medicine? Yes. Education? Yes.
Money? No.
Jerome
5th February 2012, 03:53 PM
Queen Victoria had 9 children.
lol :)
Society as a whole, there is a correlation between low birth rates and a wealthy society.
lol :)
Society as a whole, there is a correlation between low birth rates and a wealthy society.
Jerome
5th February 2012, 03:57 PM
The more likely it is your kids die in infancy, the more kids you have to compensate for the loss.
So if someone loses a child in infancy they have two children to make up for the lose??
The less likely it is for your kids to die in infancy, the less kids you have because the net gain is worse. You put pressure on resources and risk the health and safety of your children because you have more than you can provide for.
The net gain is worse for whom?
It is not 'money' that increases infant survival at all. Throw all the shiny coins you want a country, that's not going to do a thing.
Food? Yes. Medicine? Yes. Education? Yes.
Money? No.
Money is not wealth, ask the Weimar Republic. The other things you are talking about are in fact wealth.
So if someone loses a child in infancy they have two children to make up for the lose??
The less likely it is for your kids to die in infancy, the less kids you have because the net gain is worse. You put pressure on resources and risk the health and safety of your children because you have more than you can provide for.
The net gain is worse for whom?
It is not 'money' that increases infant survival at all. Throw all the shiny coins you want a country, that's not going to do a thing.
Food? Yes. Medicine? Yes. Education? Yes.
Money? No.
Money is not wealth, ask the Weimar Republic. The other things you are talking about are in fact wealth.
Cunt
5th February 2012, 04:32 PM
Altogether, though, providing affordable education is by far the best. FACT! But then, how can you reconcile that with libertarianism?
How about this:
If the young people are in school, they are less likely to kill you and take your horse.
How about this:
If the young people are in school, they are less likely to kill you and take your horse.
Cunt
5th February 2012, 04:34 PM
Absolutely birth control is a method to control population growth, particularly encouraged for the poor seems to be the goal.
It seems that the less educated a woman is, the more likely she is to begin squeezing out puppies at a young age.
Why do you think women with advanced education choose to have fewer children, and later?
It seems that the less educated a woman is, the more likely she is to begin squeezing out puppies at a young age.
Why do you think women with advanced education choose to have fewer children, and later?
Jerome
5th February 2012, 04:35 PM
Altogether, though, providing affordable education is by far the best. FACT! But then, how can you reconcile that with libertarianism?
How about this:
If the young people are in school, they are less likely to kill you and take your horse.
Education is not currently affordable, it is being paid for with the future earnings of the next couple of generations.
How about this:
If the young people are in school, they are less likely to kill you and take your horse.
Education is not currently affordable, it is being paid for with the future earnings of the next couple of generations.
Jerome
5th February 2012, 04:40 PM
Absolutely birth control is a method to control population growth, particularly encouraged for the poor seems to be the goal.
It seems that the less educated a woman is, the more likely she is to begin squeezing out puppies at a young age.
Why do you think women with advanced education choose to have fewer children, and later?
One, the State provides a living for single poor woman, thus there is not an incentive to get an education despite the fact that there is no one in this nation that does not have access to a relatively high quality education if they so desire.
Two, women have been educated that they can "Have it all!"
Both of these circumstances degrade the basic foundation of society, the family structure. Now I am not arguing what the proper family structure is, or anything of the sort, but the fact remains that family structure has been eroded leading to ever more reliance on government, which in turn creates a slavish class of people to serve the interests of the elite.
It seems that the less educated a woman is, the more likely she is to begin squeezing out puppies at a young age.
Why do you think women with advanced education choose to have fewer children, and later?
One, the State provides a living for single poor woman, thus there is not an incentive to get an education despite the fact that there is no one in this nation that does not have access to a relatively high quality education if they so desire.
Two, women have been educated that they can "Have it all!"
Both of these circumstances degrade the basic foundation of society, the family structure. Now I am not arguing what the proper family structure is, or anything of the sort, but the fact remains that family structure has been eroded leading to ever more reliance on government, which in turn creates a slavish class of people to serve the interests of the elite.
Cunt
5th February 2012, 05:20 PM
Two, women have been educated that they can "Have it all!"This I somewhat agree with. Women should be taught that they are solely responsible for any people they create.
Trouble is, once they create a person, that person deserves the same kind of treatment as you.
So we treat the new person well. Try to find the best place for that person to grow up. Where would that be...perhaps in a state-run creche? Where good nutrition, routine and education are delivered?
Is there another way? Say, a group of volunteers who will provide that kind of service?
Both of these circumstances degrade the basic foundation of society, the family structure. Now I am not arguing what the proper family structure is, or anything of the sort, but the fact remains that family structure has been eroded leading to ever more reliance on government, which in turn creates a slavish class of people to serve the interests of the elite.
Oh, right, the family. The reason women are supported with their children is because of the value of the family. Good news for you - welfare supports keeping families together!
Trouble is, once they create a person, that person deserves the same kind of treatment as you.
So we treat the new person well. Try to find the best place for that person to grow up. Where would that be...perhaps in a state-run creche? Where good nutrition, routine and education are delivered?
Is there another way? Say, a group of volunteers who will provide that kind of service?
Both of these circumstances degrade the basic foundation of society, the family structure. Now I am not arguing what the proper family structure is, or anything of the sort, but the fact remains that family structure has been eroded leading to ever more reliance on government, which in turn creates a slavish class of people to serve the interests of the elite.
Oh, right, the family. The reason women are supported with their children is because of the value of the family. Good news for you - welfare supports keeping families together!
Grumps
6th February 2012, 12:59 PM
Altogether, though, providing affordable education is by far the best. FACT! But then, how can you reconcile that with libertarianism?
How about this:
If the young people are in school, they are less likely to kill you and take your horse.
Education is not currently affordable, it is being paid for with the future earnings of the next couple of generations.
Education is perfectly affordable, you just have your priorities wrong.
How about this:
If the young people are in school, they are less likely to kill you and take your horse.
Education is not currently affordable, it is being paid for with the future earnings of the next couple of generations.
Education is perfectly affordable, you just have your priorities wrong.
Facetious
7th February 2012, 12:39 PM
]This I somewhat agree with. Women should be taught that they are solely responsible for any people they create.
What about the men who are also involved in the creation of said people?
What about the men who are also involved in the creation of said people?
Facetious
7th February 2012, 12:41 PM
Absolutely birth control is a method to control population growth, particularly encouraged for the poor seems to be the goal.
It seems that the less educated a woman is, the more likely she is to begin squeezing out puppies at a young age.
Why do you think women with advanced education choose to have fewer children, and later?
One, the State provides a living for single poor woman, thus there is not an incentive to get an education despite the fact that there is no one in this nation that does not have access to a relatively high quality education if they so desire.
Two, women have been educated that they can "Have it all!"
Both of these circumstances degrade the basic foundation of society, the family structure. Now I am not arguing what the proper family structure is, or anything of the sort, but the fact remains that family structure has been eroded leading to ever more reliance on government, which in turn creates a slavish class of people to serve the interests of the elite.
Am I understanding you correctly. Women being able to have economic independence, apart from a man, is degrading the family structure. Is that right?
It seems that the less educated a woman is, the more likely she is to begin squeezing out puppies at a young age.
Why do you think women with advanced education choose to have fewer children, and later?
One, the State provides a living for single poor woman, thus there is not an incentive to get an education despite the fact that there is no one in this nation that does not have access to a relatively high quality education if they so desire.
Two, women have been educated that they can "Have it all!"
Both of these circumstances degrade the basic foundation of society, the family structure. Now I am not arguing what the proper family structure is, or anything of the sort, but the fact remains that family structure has been eroded leading to ever more reliance on government, which in turn creates a slavish class of people to serve the interests of the elite.
Am I understanding you correctly. Women being able to have economic independence, apart from a man, is degrading the family structure. Is that right?
nick
7th February 2012, 12:50 PM
Yes.
Jerome
7th February 2012, 01:00 PM
Am I understanding you correctly. Women being able to have economic independence, apart from a man, is degrading the family structure. Is that right?
Not exactly, men being able to have economic independence, apart from woman, is also degrading the family structure. I would argue that the circumstance in which a man can impregnate a woman and leave the responsibility to feed and cloth and house the child to the State is also a degradation of the family structure.
Not exactly, men being able to have economic independence, apart from woman, is also degrading the family structure. I would argue that the circumstance in which a man can impregnate a woman and leave the responsibility to feed and cloth and house the child to the State is also a degradation of the family structure.
nick
7th February 2012, 01:33 PM
Women should not work outside the home.
Cunt
7th February 2012, 05:14 PM
]This I somewhat agree with. Women should be taught that they are solely responsible for any people they create.
What about the men who are also involved in the creation of said people?
I don't agree with giving men rights over a womans womb...the rest follows pretty clearly.
What about the men who are also involved in the creation of said people?
I don't agree with giving men rights over a womans womb...the rest follows pretty clearly.
ziploc
25th November 2015, 02:09 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/14/health/main5242168.shtml
Polio, the dreaded paralyzing disease stamped out in the industrialized world, is spreading in Nigeria. And health officials say in some cases, it's caused by the vaccine used to fight it.
In July, the World Health Organization issued a warning that this vaccine-spread virus might extend beyond Africa. So far, 124 Nigerian children have been paralyzed this year - about twice those afflicted in 2008.
WHO officials discovered a polio outbreak in Nigeria was sparked by the polio vaccine itself, they assumed it would be easier to stop than a natural "wild" virus.
They were wrong.
In 2007, health experts reported that amid Nigeria's ongoing outbreak of wild polio viruses, 69 children had also been paralyzed in a new outbreak caused by the mutation of a vaccine's virus.
Back then, WHO said the vaccine-linked outbreak would be swiftly overcome - yet two years later, cases continue to mount. They have since identified polio cases linked to the vaccine dating back as far as 2005.
However, in the end stages of polio eradication, with most of the world polio-free, the risks posed remaining vaccination coverage gaps anywhere is becoming more evident. On extremely rare occasions, in areas of chronic vaccination coverage gaps, circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses (cVDPVs) can emerge to cause outbreaks of polio cases. This is not a side effect of the oral polio vaccine, but rather an effect of low vaccination coverage in a community, which is enabling such strains to emerge. Though typically less virulent than wild polioviruses (ie typically causing fewer cases and having a lower profile for geographic spread), such strains nevertheless are this year causing paralysis in children at a rate greater than wild polioviruses. More countries are affected by cVDPV outbreaks (Ukraine, Guinea, Lao, Nigeria, Madagascar) than wild polioviruses (Pakistan and Afghanistan); 3 WHO Regions are affected by cVDPV outbreaks. - See more at: http://www.polioeradication.org/dataandmonitoring/poliothisweek.aspx#sthash.RsWJpXWB.dpuf
The emergence of circulating VDPVs forces us to accept the reality that we are fighting fire with fire and that once eradication of WPV [wild polio virus] is assured, the use of live polio virus vaccines will need to cease globally in a coordinated manner. Because cVDPVs will probably continue to circulate for at least 1 to 3 years after WPVs are eradicated, and live polio viruses may be reintroduced from rare immunodeficient persons who continue to excrete virus, the world will need to rely on inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) indefinitely to maintain immunity.
John F. Modlin, M.D
New England Journal of Medicine (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1005405)
Back when the first live vaccine was being used, one of the big problems was some people actually got polio from it. It was a big issue.
Vaccine-associated paralytic polio is a rare adverse event following live oral poliovirus vaccine. Inactivated poliovirus vaccine does not contain live virus, so it cannot cause VAPP. The mechanism of VAPP is believed to be a mutation, or reversion, of the vaccine virus to a more neurotropic form. These mutated viruses are called revertants. Reversion is believed to occur in almost all vaccine recipients, but it only rarely results in paralytic disease. The paralysis that results is identical to that caused by wild virus, and may be permanent.http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/polio.html
In fact, it's still a real problem.
Unless you call it "non-polio acute flaccid paralysis", which occurs in countries where the live vaccine is sued. This condition is not common in countries that banned the live vaccine.
None of this is comfortable to hear about, so LOL is the only sane response.
Why must OPV vaccination be stopped? Vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis was recognized shortly after the introduction of OPV, with cases occurring in both vaccinees and their contacts. The time is coming when the only cause of polio is likely to be the vaccine used to prevent it. Oxford JournalsMedicine & Health The Journal of Infectious Diseases Volume 192, Issue 12Pp. 2033-2035 (http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/192/12/2033.full) 2005
The ugly truth about Polio and the vaccines, it's not something most people want to even know about.
lol!
:awesome:
Yes, let us all LOL and go back to obsessing over the new Star Wars movie.
Polio, the dreaded paralyzing disease stamped out in the industrialized world, is spreading in Nigeria. And health officials say in some cases, it's caused by the vaccine used to fight it.
In July, the World Health Organization issued a warning that this vaccine-spread virus might extend beyond Africa. So far, 124 Nigerian children have been paralyzed this year - about twice those afflicted in 2008.
WHO officials discovered a polio outbreak in Nigeria was sparked by the polio vaccine itself, they assumed it would be easier to stop than a natural "wild" virus.
They were wrong.
In 2007, health experts reported that amid Nigeria's ongoing outbreak of wild polio viruses, 69 children had also been paralyzed in a new outbreak caused by the mutation of a vaccine's virus.
Back then, WHO said the vaccine-linked outbreak would be swiftly overcome - yet two years later, cases continue to mount. They have since identified polio cases linked to the vaccine dating back as far as 2005.
However, in the end stages of polio eradication, with most of the world polio-free, the risks posed remaining vaccination coverage gaps anywhere is becoming more evident. On extremely rare occasions, in areas of chronic vaccination coverage gaps, circulating vaccine-derived polioviruses (cVDPVs) can emerge to cause outbreaks of polio cases. This is not a side effect of the oral polio vaccine, but rather an effect of low vaccination coverage in a community, which is enabling such strains to emerge. Though typically less virulent than wild polioviruses (ie typically causing fewer cases and having a lower profile for geographic spread), such strains nevertheless are this year causing paralysis in children at a rate greater than wild polioviruses. More countries are affected by cVDPV outbreaks (Ukraine, Guinea, Lao, Nigeria, Madagascar) than wild polioviruses (Pakistan and Afghanistan); 3 WHO Regions are affected by cVDPV outbreaks. - See more at: http://www.polioeradication.org/dataandmonitoring/poliothisweek.aspx#sthash.RsWJpXWB.dpuf
The emergence of circulating VDPVs forces us to accept the reality that we are fighting fire with fire and that once eradication of WPV [wild polio virus] is assured, the use of live polio virus vaccines will need to cease globally in a coordinated manner. Because cVDPVs will probably continue to circulate for at least 1 to 3 years after WPVs are eradicated, and live polio viruses may be reintroduced from rare immunodeficient persons who continue to excrete virus, the world will need to rely on inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) indefinitely to maintain immunity.
John F. Modlin, M.D
New England Journal of Medicine (http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1005405)
Back when the first live vaccine was being used, one of the big problems was some people actually got polio from it. It was a big issue.
Vaccine-associated paralytic polio is a rare adverse event following live oral poliovirus vaccine. Inactivated poliovirus vaccine does not contain live virus, so it cannot cause VAPP. The mechanism of VAPP is believed to be a mutation, or reversion, of the vaccine virus to a more neurotropic form. These mutated viruses are called revertants. Reversion is believed to occur in almost all vaccine recipients, but it only rarely results in paralytic disease. The paralysis that results is identical to that caused by wild virus, and may be permanent.http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/polio.html
In fact, it's still a real problem.
Unless you call it "non-polio acute flaccid paralysis", which occurs in countries where the live vaccine is sued. This condition is not common in countries that banned the live vaccine.
None of this is comfortable to hear about, so LOL is the only sane response.
Why must OPV vaccination be stopped? Vaccine-associated paralytic poliomyelitis was recognized shortly after the introduction of OPV, with cases occurring in both vaccinees and their contacts. The time is coming when the only cause of polio is likely to be the vaccine used to prevent it. Oxford JournalsMedicine & Health The Journal of Infectious Diseases Volume 192, Issue 12Pp. 2033-2035 (http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/192/12/2033.full) 2005
The ugly truth about Polio and the vaccines, it's not something most people want to even know about.
lol!
:awesome:
Yes, let us all LOL and go back to obsessing over the new Star Wars movie.
borealis
25th November 2015, 02:20 PM
Ziploc, are you intending to necro every done to death heavily trolled thread here? Because you have TR for that noise.
ziploc
25th November 2015, 02:24 PM
Are you the resident thread Nazi?
:awesome:
Them's some nice jackboots you got there.
:awesome:
Them's some nice jackboots you got there.
borealis
25th November 2015, 02:29 PM
Are you the resident thread Nazi?
:awesome:
Them's some nice jackboots you got there.
I'm as free as you are to say whatever strikes me as something I want to say.
Apparently that leads to you calling me a nazi. So your pov is that you can say whatever the hell bitter cynical paranoid bullshit you want to, and I have to meekly and graciously like it?
Not how it works.
:awesome:
Them's some nice jackboots you got there.
I'm as free as you are to say whatever strikes me as something I want to say.
Apparently that leads to you calling me a nazi. So your pov is that you can say whatever the hell bitter cynical paranoid bullshit you want to, and I have to meekly and graciously like it?
Not how it works.
ziploc
25th November 2015, 03:05 PM
Thread Nazi is an old term, it doesn't actually mean you are a Nazi.
:awesome:
I actually am in love with you.
:awesome:
I actually am in love with you.
ziploc
25th November 2015, 03:06 PM
I think it's the cute picture of a lamb.
I see it whenever you post, and I am all like "Oooh, look at that cute lamb!"
:awesome:
I see it whenever you post, and I am all like "Oooh, look at that cute lamb!"
:awesome:
Imp
25th November 2015, 05:32 PM
I think b's nazi tendencies are self-evident, really, but must you necro jerome threads?
borealis
25th November 2015, 05:57 PM
:owned:
Zeluvia
25th November 2015, 07:32 PM
http://www.cutecatgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/hj.gif
ziploc
25th November 2015, 08:17 PM
http://replygif.net/i/435.gif
Majiffy
25th November 2015, 11:19 PM
I think b's nazi tendencies are self-evident, really, but must you necro jerome threads?
:christyes:
:christyes:
ziploc
25th November 2015, 11:59 PM
but must you necro jerome threads? I was going to post in a Cunt thread, but then I saw this cat rolling down the stairs, and then I put on some ...
hey wait
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o286/VespertineIconoclast/i-c-wut-u-did-thar-and-here.jpg
hey wait
http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o286/VespertineIconoclast/i-c-wut-u-did-thar-and-here.jpg
ziploc
30th November 2015, 01:46 PM
http://fcdn.mtbr.com/attachments/downhill-freeride/704128d1359601749t-new-school-gravity-bikes-thread-necromancy-thread-necromancy-demotivational-poster-1271554886.jpg
Prince Humperdinck
30th November 2015, 03:47 PM
interesting times...
Nhận xét
Đăng nhận xét