OK Republican calling for forced vaccininations - as predicted

[sh00ter]

You tell me. I'm not a Dr., but if there's a potential for one in 100,000 child deaths from a vaccine, don't we owe it to those children to develop a test that would identify incompatible antigens(?) or whatever it is that causes the body to react in a lethal way to the vaccine?

Or are you stating that you do not believe any of these vaccines ever cause a reaction as bad or worse than the disease they immunize against? Don't give us this BS that "you can't prove it", when recorded medical cases never refer to or investigate vaccines as a potential cause.

It is proven already by the drug companies themselves and the National Vaccine Compensation Program...the vaccine inserts say that taking them can cause viral shedding in some cases where a vaccinated person could be the ORIGIN of an outbreak...it also says that vaccines can cause narcolepsy, encephalitis, etc...just like all prescription drugs...and the fact the drug companies are EXEMPT from law suits means that their inserts are not just legal CYA jargon...

 

[Glocktogo]

Oh now this sounds as though it came directly form a court transcript.

Whatever, Statist. We already know you don't care beyond your own need for control.

 

[farmerbyron]

the vaccine inserts say that taking them can cause viral shedding in some cases where a vaccinated person could be the ORIGIN of an outbreak....

Funny thing is that the outbreaks nearly always occur when vaccination rates drop. Wouldn't the outbreaks be more common during periods of high vaccination rates?

I equate those labels to the same legal CYA as the tag on your couch that reads "this product known to the state of California to cause cancer".


Eh, we've had this conversation before. Never mind.

 

[sh00ter]

Funny thing is that the outbreaks nearly always occur when vaccination rates drop. Wouldn't the outbreaks be more common during periods of high vaccination rates?

I equate those labels to the same legal CYA as the tag on your couch that reads "this product known to the state of California to cause cancer".


Eh, we've had this conversation before. Never mind.

well certainly a non-vaccinated person can spawn an outbreak, but so can a vaccinated person...either because vaccines are not 100% effective which is known, or because certain live virus vaccines can cause a person to shed the virus that has replicated...this is a bigger issue in 3rd world nations that get mass vaccines and are all close together. But then again, that is also a problem for them if they are all unvaccinated...we have it better here any way you slice it except we have so many shots that might not be necessary vs. their benefits. The chance you would get cancer from the formaldehyde in a vaccine is probably similar to the chance an unvaccinated child would be the SOURCE of an outbreak in Oklahoma that proves fatal for an innocent person (and if vaccinated then they should be protected for the most part anyway?). Now if you are talking flu, then that is different...but I'm talking childhood disease. I do appreciate the civil discussion though farmer...you usually like to roast me!

 

[Glocktogo]

I equate those labels to the same legal CYA as the tag on your couch that reads "this product known to the state of California to cause cancer".

For all of you who refute the NVCP he's referrinfg to, have you even read it?

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/vaccinetable.html

Now I'm going to make an uncomfortable analogy for all you statists who want mandatory vaccines and don't care about the potential collateral damage it may cause.

The State of New Jersey and the Berlin Township police are currently under fire by many of you for denying Carol Browne her 2A rights for protection from her ex boyfriend, who killed her. We know that NJ widely disregards the 2nd Amendment rights of it's citizens in favor of people control. People like Carol Browne are merely an acceptable level of collateral damage in order to maintain that level of control.

So if you disagree with how NJ treats it's citizens, how can you then go on and accept collateral damage in order to facilitate mandatory vaccinations?

Keep in mind that I'm still in favor of vaccinations, but not state control over it's citizens to the level that child deaths are an acceptable level of collateral damage.

 

[MadDogs]

Vaccines keep very bad things from happening. Children who are not vaccinated present a higher risk to others in the public arena. Facts share that the risk of not being vaccinated is greater than the risk of some side effect to the vaccination.

So … if I have this right … what some are saying is that they do not disagree with the upside and benefits to vaccines, they object to the government telling them and mandating that they get their children vaccinated.

Again, given the benefits to vaccinations and the said benefits outweigh any potential risks, shouldn’t a responsible parent get their mouth breathing fruit of their loins vaccinated anyway and not give a flip about what the government says?

Next question. Those that are against government mandating that children be vaccinated, do you vaccinate your pets?

 

[farmerbyron]

For all of you who refute the NVCP he's referrinfg to, have you even read it?

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/vaccinetable.html

Now I'm going to make an uncomfortable analogy for all you statists who want mandatory vaccines and don't care about the potential collateral damage it may cause.

The State of New Jersey and the Berlin Township police are currently under fire by many of you for denying Carol Browne her 2A rights for protection from her ex boyfriend, who killed her. We know that NJ widely disregards the 2nd Amendment rights of it's citizens in favor of people control. People like Carol Browne are merely an acceptable level of collateral damage in order to maintain that level of control.

So if you disagree with how NJ treats it's citizens, how can you then go on and accept collateral damage in order to facilitate mandatory vaccinations?

Keep in mind that I'm still in favor of vaccinations, but not state control over it's citizens to the level that child deaths are an acceptable level of collateral damage.

Not a statist. As I said earlier, I don't support the law but I'm not wound up about it either.

 

[sh00ter]

For all of you who refute the NVCP he's referrinfg to, have you even read it?

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/vaccinetable.html

Now I'm going to make an uncomfortable analogy for all you statists who want mandatory vaccines and don't care about the potential collateral damage it may cause.

The State of New Jersey and the Berlin Township police are currently under fire by many of you for denying Carol Browne her 2A rights for protection from her ex boyfriend, who killed her. We know that NJ widely disregards the 2nd Amendment rights of it's citizens in favor of people control. People like Carol Browne are merely an acceptable level of collateral damage in order to maintain that level of control.

So if you disagree with how NJ treats it's citizens, how can you then go on and accept collateral damage in order to facilitate mandatory vaccinations?

Keep in mind that I'm still in favor of vaccinations, but not state control over it's citizens to the level that child deaths are an acceptable level of collateral damage.

Yes, and you link to the official page and they recently scrubbed the real data:

http://www.wnd.com/2015/06/feds-scrub-data-on-vaccine-injuries/

I know there are a few on here who like WND so hopefully I won't get the standard "attacking the source" LOL.

 

[POKE1911]

I'll believe a "lie" from a .gov before I believe anything on WND or infowars.

 

[Coded-Dude]

I used to read WND daily back in the early 2000's, in fact my next door neighbour was an editor there(he has a couple of pretty good books). They have certainly gotten more fringe over the years, but they still put out some good information. It's just like any other biased media(i.e. all of them)....you have to know how to sift through the bs and propaganda to get to the details.