Government tricks

[danoldboy]

As with all these things, the best way to gauge how we are now being treated by the establishment and corporates is to look at how we have been treated in the past.

Not alot has changed.

Just more smoke and bigger mirrors.

[Milky Pirate]

OMFG I STARTED AN ACTUAL PRODUCTIVE THREAD!
cookie plz

[DRTY]

Their bullshit claims cost lives.

evidence

how about the huge rise in Mumps, after the initial scares; the printed stories about the vaccine being bad were from 1996-2004. By 2004 cases of it had come from a constant average of under 50 cases per quarter (1995-2001), up to just under 3000 in 2004. The rise starting at about 1998.

-BMJ. 2005 May 14;330(7500):1132-5.
Mumps and the UK epidemic 2005.

Gupta RK, Best J, MacMahon E.

^I have this as a printed graph, can't find the image online but the original source is above.

The autism bullshit was basically media panicking trying to fill the gap of knowledge in what causes Autism. Pedalling bullshit to sell papers.

what are you about? the media crucified andrew wakefield......[/quote]

Yes, now they have. After they pushed his Lancet paper to the front pages like it was going out of fashion for several years. Now that he's been charged with misconduct and struck off the register, they can't carry on purveying his bullshit anymore, so now they change their minds and say that he's a bad man.

[hackman]

not specifically about swine flu as title suggests, but about vaccinations as a whole
the interviewer is a skeptic, so it should appeal to you
but he gets slayed

THE FACT IS IF YOU LOOK AT GRAPHS FOR POLIO ETC THE DISEASE WAS IN A DECLINE DECADES BEFORE THE VACCINATION WAS INTRODUCED
COUNTRIES THAT DIDN'T HAVE THE VACCINATION PROGRAMME HAVE GRAPH CURVES EXACTLY THE SAME AS COUNTRIES THAT DID
THEN LOOK AT DISEASES SUCH AS CHOLERA, SCARLET FEVER, BUBONIC PLAUGE ETC WHICH HAVE NEVER HAD VACCINATION PROGRAMMES BUT HAVE BEEN IN DECLINE ANYWAY

chea

[hackman]

mumps is hardly life threatening lol

[hackman]

i'd also like to mention the anthrax vaccine given to the troops before the first gulf war

squalene.......

[hackman]

HAHA just heard this for the first time from interview i just posted, which is reallllly good

look up history of autism, it was first officially named as a new disorder in 1943 by Dr. Leo Kanner of Johns Hopkins University
isn't that odd? never existed until the late 30s?

well guess what, Thiomersal was first put in vaccines in 1931 by Eli Lilly Corporation

READ IT AND WEEP BIATCHES

[hackman]

and then correlate the increase of autism with the increase in vaccination

IT'S STARING YOU IN THE FACE

[DRTY]

not specifically about swine flu as title suggests, but about vaccinations as a whole
the interviewer is a skeptic, so it should appeal to you
but he gets slayed

THE FACT IS IF YOU LOOK AT GRAPHS FOR POLIO ETC THE DISEASE WAS IN A DECLINE DECADES BEFORE THE VACCINATION WAS INTRODUCED
COUNTRIES THAT DIDN'T HAVE THE VACCINATION PROGRAMME HAVE GRAPH CURVES EXACTLY THE SAME AS COUNTRIES THAT DID
THEN LOOK AT DISEASES SUCH AS CHOLERA, SCARLET FEVER, BUBONIC PLAUGE ETC WHICH HAVE NEVER HAD VACCINATION PROGRAMMES BUT HAVE BEEN IN DECLINE ANYWAY

chea

I'll watch this video now, but it's gonna take a while. I'm not saying ALL vaccinations are a sweet idea, just that all the mis-information about them from internet warriors watching google videos is not correct, and it's putting people at higher risk than they need be. MMR is a particularly good example of this.

I'd rather look at actual evidence as opposed to Jenny McCarthy and her retarded campaigns of death.

Diseases change and evolve, they're just lifeforms like us. We adapt to resist them, and they adapt to attack us (or whatever host they choose), it's like an arms race, there will always be big fluctuations in the numbers. Even with these vaccinations, eventualy, they will become useless as the virus will evolve and we'll need a new vaccine.

You can clearly see the good that these vaccinations do.

mumps is hardly life threatening lol

It's viral meningitis. It can cause deafness, it can damage the central nervous system, testicular astrophy, and reduced firtility.

[hackman]

anyone could have made those graphs

[hackman]

HAHA just heard this for the first time from interview i just posted, which is reallllly good

look up history of autism, it was first officially named as a new disorder in 1943 by Dr. Leo Kanner of Johns Hopkins University
isn't that odd? never existed until the late 30s?

well guess what, Thiomersal was first put in vaccines in 1931 by Eli Lilly Corporation

READ IT AND WEEP BIATCHES

seriously this is the best bit of info against vaccinations i've come across

[hackman]

how the fuck can autism just magically appear?

[hackman]

more good shit, links n ting

http://www.infowars.com/they-want-to-in ... with-what/

[DRTY]

hackman you're making your own truths now lol. If you insist on writing in capitals I'll join you.

JUST BECAUSE AUTISM WASN'T OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZED AS A CONDITION BEFORE 1943 THAT DOESNT MEAN THAT IT DIDNT EXIST. IT MEANS IT DIDNT HAVE A NAME OR COULD NOT BE SEPERATELY IDENTIFIED FROM ANOTHER CONDITION.

PEOPLE WITH AUTISM USED TO BE LABELLED AS 'MENTALLY SUBNORMAL' OR 'SCHIZOPHRENIA', THIS ISN'T BECAUSE THEY DIDNT HAVE AUTISM, ITS BECAUSE AUTISM WASNT SEPERATELY RECOGNIZED AT THAT TIME.

OBVIOUSLY IF A NEW CONDITION IS RECOGNIZED AS BEING SEPERATE FROM A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING ONE. NUMBERS OF CASING ARE GOING TO SKY ROCKET.

This is pretty common sense, it's only as obscure as you're making it. Let's look up something else that happened around that time shall we, see if we can find another mythical 'cause'.....

OK, in 1935 Monopoly was released. 8 years later AUTISM HAPPENED! ZOMFG. MONOPOLY CAUSES AUTISM.

[hackman]

OK, in 1935 Monopoly was released. 8 years later AUTISM HAPPENED! ZOMFG. MONOPOLY CAUSES AUTISM./quote]

man, you seem sound
but you're being completely blind

JUST BECAUSE AUTISM WASN'T OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZED AS A CONDITION BEFORE 1943 THAT DOESNT MEAN THAT IT DIDNT EXIST. IT MEANS IT DIDNT HAVE A NAME OR COULD NOT BE SEPERATELY IDENTIFIED FROM ANOTHER CONDITION.

rubbish

Leo Kanner published his first paper identifying autistic children in 1943, asserting he had noticed such children since 1938 (see reference to Kanner, "Autistic Disturbance of Affective Contact", see Selected Articles section below). Before Kanner noticed and recorded a pattern of symptoms, such children would be classified as emotionally disturbed or mentally retarded. Kanner observed that these children often demonstrated capabilities that showed that they were not merely slow learners, yet they didn't fit the patterns of emotionally disturbed children. Thus he invented a new category, which he called Early Infantile Autism, which has since sometimes been called Kanner's Syndrome. Hans Asperger (see section Well Known Researchers and Practicioners and reference to Asperger, "Autistic Psychopathy in Childhood" in Selected Articles section below) essentially made the same discoveries at the same time, independently of Kanner, but the patients he identified all had speech, so the term Asperger's Syndrome or Asperger Syndrome is often used to label autistic people who have speech.

OBVIOUSLY IF A NEW CONDITION IS RECOGNIZED AS BEING SEPERATE FROM A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING ONE. NUMBERS OF CASING ARE GOING TO SKY ROCKET.

yeah but the point is the number of cases DIDN'T skyrocket, not until the 1980s, when vaccination programmes were dramatically increased

[hackman]

hackman you're making your own truths now lol.

how the fuck am i making my own truths

[symmetricalsounds]

hackman you're making your own truths now lol. If you insist on writing in capitals I'll join you.

JUST BECAUSE AUTISM WASN'T OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZED AS A CONDITION BEFORE 1943 THAT DOESNT MEAN THAT IT DIDNT EXIST. IT MEANS IT DIDNT HAVE A NAME OR COULD NOT BE SEPERATELY IDENTIFIED FROM ANOTHER CONDITION.

PEOPLE WITH AUTISM USED TO BE LABELLED AS 'MENTALLY SUBNORMAL' OR 'SCHIZOPHRENIA', THIS ISN'T BECAUSE THEY DIDNT HAVE AUTISM, ITS BECAUSE AUTISM WASNT SEPERATELY RECOGNIZED AT THAT TIME.

OBVIOUSLY IF A NEW CONDITION IS RECOGNIZED AS BEING SEPERATE FROM A PREVIOUSLY EXISTING ONE. NUMBERS OF CASING ARE GOING TO SKY ROCKET.

This is pretty common sense, it's only as obscure as you're making it. Let's look up something else that happened around that time shall we, see if we can find another mythical 'cause'.....

OK, in 1935 Monopoly was released. 8 years later AUTISM HAPPENED! ZOMFG. MONOPOLY CAUSES AUTISM.

you may aswell let it go, you're trying to use reason to argue against someone who believes diluting something in water lots and lots of times til there is nothing left but water is somehow medically useful.

[hackman]

supposing autism was present pre 1900s.....
the fact that a study into autism took place in the late 30s indicates to anyone with a half decent sense of logic that the number of autism cases must have increased significantly for people to take notice

[ashley]

how the fuck can autism just magically appear?

Psychology.

ADHD etc.

Those were never really understood until this century.

[DRTY]

anyone could have made those graphs

The NHS, and the CDC.

how the fuck can autism just magically appear?

That's my point. It didn't it was only officially recognized in 1943. That doesn't mean that it didn't previously exist.

This sort of thing has happened countless times, things don't spring into existence, they gradually come about and eventually have their own seperate diagnosees (dont think thats a real word lol). Just because something has a new label it doesn't mean that it is new.

how the fuck am i making my own truths

That's what I was saying in the Monopoly example. You want to think it's because of some vaccination, so you found a vaccination introduced 12 years before Autism was recognized and connected the two to fit your agenda.

I'm not having a go at you personally btw, just the infomation you're buying into.