Dear parents, are you being lied to? (LivingWhole.org)


This post re-appeared on FaceBook and in re-reading it myself, I became aware of how valuable this is in presenting the “other” side of the vaccination “debate”.

There are clearly two sides.  A blanket statement or approach to arriving at the real picture “Vaccines are needed for the greater good”,  “Vaccines are dangerous”, or “Vaccines are Safe” do not help in a proper understanding. BTW ” the U.S Supreme Court exempted physicians and pharmaceutical companies from vaccine liability in their infamous landmark case that declared vaccines to be “unavoidably unsafe.” ”

The detail must be included. No leaving out any relevant compromising information. All factors need to be considered, including vested interests and biassed reporting, such as the article instigating the ‘Living Whole’ response. That it is biassed, is well explained here.

Is this article also biassed? It is presented from the opposing viewpoint and concentrates on that theme, but is the information incorrect correct? Perhaps not perfectly, but the substance is true, meaningful and convincing.  Comments are invited!

We are invited to share this post, I hope the blatant copying below is an acceptable method.

It is copied complete except for normal post peripherals and all the comments. To gain a full understanding of the picture presented here, of peoples’ understanding of it, reading the comments and the original source article  is recommended.

Advertisements

About Ken McMurtrie

Retired Electronics Engineer, most recently installing and maintaining medical X-Ray equipment. A mature age "student" of Life and Nature, an advocate of Truth, Justice and Humanity, promoting awareness of the injustices in the world.
This entry was posted in drugs & medication, HEALTH, vaccines, World Issues and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Dear parents, are you being lied to? (LivingWhole.org)

  1. This article has some serious issues. The claims that diseases like chickenpox, measles, and the flu aren’t serious are ones we’ve seen before, of course, and you can make a cost-benefit analysis. However, saying that the 60,000+ deaths due to influenza aren’t really caused by influenza since people die from pneumonia instead of the flu itself is intentionally misleading – we don’t say that cancer doesn’t kill people, even though cancer patients usually die from organ failure. The organs wouldn’t fail without the cancer, and the flu victims wouldn’t have died from pneumonia without the flu.

    I really take issue with the assertion that the vaccine is causing outbreaks in this article. “After licensure pertussis incidences increased, stabilized, and then reached a 50-year high in 2013. (Do check out the lovely chart on p. 64 here)” I did check out that chart, and it is again, intentionally misleading. That chart starts in 1975, long after the initial vaccine for pertussis was available, so it intentionally omits the successful portion of the virus’ history. It also ignores this lovely chart: http://www-tc.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/assets/img/autism-vaccine-myth/image-01-large.jpg
    Which clearly shows that pertussis vaccination coverage plummeted before the spike in cases. When people stop using a vaccine, how do you still blame the vaccine for the outbreaks?

    That and the fact that it brings back the autism boogeyman makes me think that I’m not going to learn anything new reading this article like I did that one that made me reply on my blog (http://blog.douglips.com/2015/05/25-questions-that-will-not-likely.html), so I gave up.

    • Hope to get back to you Doug. Don’t rest on your laurels just yet 🙂

      • Initial response Doug. Please explain what you mean about the “autism boogeyman” and consider carefully what you say.
        Second, off-the-cuff comment: when quoting mortality statistics, are you looking at total global statistics? Realistically, we are looking at “local” statistics where living conditions provide major improvements in health issues and some feedback on adverse reactions.
        Sensible people would not judge local health needs on issues in under-developed countries.

      • Another look at your comment, Doug.
        Sorry, but I cannot actually see that what you say has much substance.
        Maybe another reader would like to comment?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s