Are Immunizations unhealthy and sinful?

[rivers1222]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by rivers1222:
Dr. Bob writes:
They can poison and harm their children if they so desire.
------------------------------------------
I'm gonna take that as levity and your sence of humor that you are famous for.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's why we use icons/smilies like or to try to take the bite off and show humor or tongue-in-cheek.
-----------------------------

I am aware of that Dr. Bob. My fault. Bad day yesterday and took it wrong.

 

[dianetavegia]

If you had a potentially fatal disease and the cure was created in animal serum, would you accept the cure or just assume God wanted you to die?

After about six months on the drug, 66 percent no longer needed blood transfusions, said the study's leader, Dr. Alan List of the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla. A year later, three-fourths of them still don't need transfusions.

But the big surprise was that signs of the genetic mutation fueling the disease diminished in 81 patients and vanished in 51.

"The chromosome abnormality completely disappeared, something we've never seen before" from a drug aimed just at boosting red blood cells, List said.


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050516/D8A47UQG0.html

 

[Charles Meadows]

Here we go again...

Immunizations save lives. They do not cause autism. They do not hurt the liver or kidneys.

I cannot believe that this is even being discussed here. What conspiracy theory will people think of next????

 

[Ed Edwards]

Amen Brother Charles Meadows -- Preach it!

 

[Paul33]

Originally posted by Thankful:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> But seriously, you have to admit that simply raising the question of whether we should or should not immunize our children riles up even the nicest people who have immunized their children without thinking it through.

There you go again making incorrect assumptions.

You can not know this for a fact. You do not seem to understand that there are people who immunize their children and they do think it through and they do study the facts. </font>[/QUOTE]There "you" go making assumptions. I have never said that no one ever thinks it through. I said that most people do not think it through and that even the nicest people get upset when the issue is brought up.

Wow!

 

[Paul33]

Originally posted by menageriekeeper:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Did you not imply that I'm proposing a conspiracy theory just because I questioned government statistics?

Is that not twisting my words? Is that not an attempt to slur at my credibility?

I sure did. And I will any time someone suggests dishonesty on the part of government agencies without offering a shred of proof.

However that is not a twist of your words. It's and out and out accusation that you believe there is some sort of conspiracy going on that the government is trying to get all of us to poison our children with vaccinations. As far as your credibility goes, show me some evidence that we are "naive" in our ideas of "how government agencies work". Then maybe I'll give you credit for some.

In the spiritual realm we are to test everything. Why doesn't that hold true in the physical realm?

You say this and then expect me not to question you? Either you want a discussion of the issue or you want us to believe you just cause you said it. Sorry Paul, there is only One whom I don't question, you are not him.

Now we have established a few things here. We've established that people should know what they are getting into before vaccinating themselves or their children. We've established that there are some risks involved. We've established that the carriers of the vaccine are/can be poisoness.

The question that remains is are vaccinations sinful? You presented at my request, scripture that you consider to support your position that vaccinations are indeed sinful. I in turn presented scripture that I believe supports my position that a vaccination given with informed consent, is not sinful. Now you tell me that my references aren't germane to the issue?

Get real Paul. You can't call something sinful unless God does. Sin is something HE defines not us.

I haven't twisted or misunderstood anything you have said. Instead I'm trying to draw out on the basis of SCRIPTURE whether or not vaccinations are sinful, just as was asked in the subject line of the question.

What I believe is you simply don't have an answer for my questions and would like to simply brush them aside and continue in you way.

Btw, I'll be around today if you want to show me where I've twisted your words. I'll still apologize if you can. </font>[/QUOTE]Testy, aren't we?

Scriptures that speak of what defiles a person's body, such as what one puts in his mouth, etc. are not germane. If you can't understand that, that's your problem. What does eating food or ceremonial cleansing of hands have to do with injecting monkey serum directly into a person's bloodstream? Not drinking the blood of animals might have some relevance, though, since we are talking about animal proteins being injected into human bodies. God forbids drinking the blood of animals. Perhaps we should consider if God might not also forbid the injection of foreign animal proteins directly into the bloodstream of human beings. Hmm.

I've given specific quotations that show that the studies done by scientists and used by government agencies are biased and misleading.

And you just blew them off! Of course, you believe everything unregenerate persons in government tell you.

 

[Paul33]

Originally posted by Charles Meadows:
Here we go again...

Immunizations save lives. They do not cause autism. They do not hurt the liver or kidneys.

I cannot believe that this is even being discussed here. What conspiracy theory will people think of next????

Where's your proof? Even the government admits that immunizations are not 100 % safe! That's why every state in the union allows parents to object and exempt their children from getting immunized.

But you know that "no one" has ever become autistic from immunizations implying that no one has "ever" died, either.

That puts a whole new spin on political correctness.

 

[Paul33]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
Amen Brother Charles Meadows -- Preach it!

Ed, are you a cheerleader for the pharmaceutical companies!

 

[Ed Edwards]

Paul33: "Scriptures that speak of what defiles a person's
body, such as what one puts in his mouth, etc. are not germane."

Yes, they are germane. Else why would some (not necessarily those
present here) use those very scriptural arguments for not
"injecting monkey serum directly into a person's bloodstream"?

Paul33: "I've given specific quotations that show that the studies done by scientists and used by government agencies are biased and misleading."

I've given stats and shown that you
are making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[Charles Meadows]

Paul33,

There is no significant evidence that immunizations cause autism.

Nothing is 100% safe - that certainly applies to everything about medicine. And of course there is politics involved as well.

But neither of these change the fact that the risk/benefit ratio for immunizations is way in favor of benefit. That is a fact. You can choose to believe otherwise if you wish - but you would be wrong.

This whole thing is just another conspiracy theory.

And those pastors and church leaders spearheading this deserve to have their mouths sutured shut - before they cause any more parents to refuse immunization and bring risk upon children.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Paul33: "That's why every state in the union allows parents
to object and exempt their children from getting immunized."

We have shown that these laws are hollow. The states make the
rules cause the federal government requires them to make the rules
if they want $$$ support. In general, the only thing that works
is if you have a doctor who says your child had an allergic
reaction earlier OR if you have a government complaint on file.

There are also procedures for those harmed to file complaints
against the Federal Government.
Of the under 2% who file complains
only about 12% receive average payments for damages done of
about one-half a million dollars. This was a maximum of 4,000
in the US in one year for ALL immunizations.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Paul33:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
Amen Brother Charles Meadows -- Preach it!

Ed, are you a cheerleader for the pharmaceutical companies!

</font>[/QUOTE]

BTW, i live
behind a pharmaceutical plant. This pharmaceutical
plant employees 230 of my fellow central
Oklahomans. Yes, i'm a cheerleader for the
pharmaceutical companies.

Charles Meadows: "This whole thing is just another conspiracy theory. "

Amen, Brother Charles Meadows -- Preach it!

 

[Paul33]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
Paul33: "That's why every state in the union allows parents
to object and exempt their children from getting immunized."

We have shown that these laws are hollow. The states make the
rules cause the federal government requires them to make the rules
if they want $$$ support. In general, the only thing that works
is if you have a doctor who says your child had an allergic
reaction earlier OR if you have a government complaint on file.

There are also procedures for those harmed to file complaints
against the Federal Government.
Of the under 2% who file complains
only about 12% receive average payments for damages done of
about one-half a million dollars. This was a maximum of 4,000
in the US in one year for ALL immunizations.

Ed, is there any topic you speak to that you actually know something about?

I have lived in Wisconsin, Alabama, Illinois, Nebraska, and California. In all of those states I simply had to object in writing.

It is absolutely amazing how little you know about state exemptions to immunizations.

 

[Ed Edwards]

USA TODAY had an interesting article 18 May 05 called:
PUSH TO RID AFRICA OF POLIO MARCHES ONWARD.

"A massive campaign this week to immunize more than 77 million children
across Africa against polio is the latest effort
to stop the spread of the disease by the end of this year.

However, Africa may take until 2006 to end all Polio.

"When authorities in northern Nigeria stopped
immunizing children from August 2003 to July 2004,
wrongly suspecting that the vaccine could cause
HIV infection or sterility, polio rates shot up."

"In 2004, Nigeria reported 792 cases of polio."
Indonisia was polio free 1995-2004. But 8 cases
have been reported in 2005 so far.
India had 14 cases of polio in 2004 and Pakistan 7.

Speaking of Small pox: "About one in 200 children with the
virus become paralyzed."

Note that 1/2 of 1% is not much. But if you are talking
2 billion children world-wide, you are talking ten million
paralized children

 

[rivers1222]

posted by charles meadows:

Nothing is 100% safe - that certainly applies to everything about medicine. And of course there is politics involved as well.

But neither of these change the fact that the risk/benefit ratio for immunizations is way in favor of benefit. That is a fact. You can choose to believe otherwise if you wish - but you would be wrong.

---------------------------
Ah, the risk /benefit ratio.
Example: Aids has taken a huge toll in the continent of Africa. Suppose, just suppose, a vacine is found. However, this vacine has a 1/2 per cent mortality rate and those effected refused to take it. Or worse, their government refused to deliver and administer it. With this epidemic taking more lives than the plague, and a vaccine readily available, we in the western hemisphere would call them backward,unintelligent, and uncivilized, for refusing such a medical miracle.

 

[Charles Meadows]

No one would ever administer a vaccine with a 0.5% case fatality rate.

 

[dianetavegia]

Well without the 'treatment', AIDS has a 100% mortality rate.

 

[menageriekeeper]

Hey Paul! Where you been for a week? I thought you'd gotten tired of playing and gone home.

Since your back.....

I've given specific quotations that show that the studies done by scientists and used by government agencies are biased and misleading.

I counted two specific quotations that were posted without a link to their source. One of these purported to be a quote from a CONGRESSIONAL hearing. (Congress=government) If the government is talking about them how is that misleading?

You also posted a link to a document called "Vaccines: A Second Opinion", in which the author takes data from one country and applies it to another. (Specifically data from Australia that is then applied to an American formula). This authors statistical ability is then in question. You cannot interchange medical data/formulas from different countries. Doing so can create huge errors due to the differing diets, climates, and general environment that may have an effect on the data in question. It is just not good science.

Neither of these things supports your assertation that:

you have a really simple and naive understanding about how government agencies work.

Hey everyone, alleged results aside. Is it right for Christians to put foreign animal proteins directly into their children's blood streams?

This then is the question that we are left with, which I have attempted to give an answer to. Answers I might add that have been swept away as "not germaine".

How is the idea that the blood of Christ has cleansed the unclean, not germaine to the topic of whether or not it is a sin to vacinate our children, seeing as how the blood of animals is sometimes used in the manufacture of said vaccines?

Hmmm, I've heard such things as, I've been misinformed, I'm not listening, I don't have the intelligence to know when something is relavent to a conversation and the like before. It happened every time I had a differing opinion from my "absolutely in control parents who absolutly had all the answers and could never be wrong". They used those things when they knew they didn't have an answer to my questions and simply wanted me to shut up and go along with them. (It only worked for them till I turned 21, it won't work for you at all).

Testy? Hmmm, didn't think I was, but perhaps. It is something of a pet peeve of mine to be told that I must do/believe something just because I've been told to.(see above comments on controlling parents)

Now you have made one comment that might be a good reason for not using products made from the blood of animals. That is the scripture you quoted from Deuteronomy 12:16 that the nation of Isreal was not to eat the blood of animals.

Here again, we are back to whether or not the ceremonial laws given to Isreal are part of our covenant with God as Christians. I say not, based on scripture I have already given. What say you?

This mission should you wish to accept it will only be complete if arguements are backed up with scripture!

 

[Paul33]

Church planting boot camp! I actually do have a life!

 

[Paul33]

I would think that God gave specific commands to Israel to protect them and keep them from contracting the diseases of the Egyptians.

Not drinking the blood of animals is probably good advice, if not a command.

Not polluting our ground water is another good command that we still follow today. (Actually, third world countries defacate in the water they drink in contrast to the laws given to Israel.)

The point I'm making is simple. Does God's Word say anything about disease and health that should cause us to pause in our rush to immunize our children?