Myths and facts:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...are-dangerous/
Myths and facts:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...are-dangerous/
Ja-mata TosaInu
As usual, being biased one way the article is silent about some things that pertain to the issue. For example, in the chapter "What's in the vaccine?" it says nothing of other substances (beside the vaccine proper) composing the said drug. Some of them, as I have remarked, contain lead. This is the same as saying that everything you buy at a supermarket is good for you because it is food while it is common knowledge that modern technologies allow to give a piece ofthe taste, flavor, texture, color etc of the product you desire.
One more important thing it skips is how vaccination is organized, which is what makes me apprehensive to it.
Oh goody that tired old trope again...
yes some vaccines contain Lead - many also contain Mercury - however both are in minute quantities - you get more mercury from eating Tuna...
To quote a Renaissance doctor "Poison is in everything, and no thing is without poison. The dosage makes it either a poison or a remedy." - Paracelsus
And we all know how much mercury and lead was used back then, and it was thought to be a remedy.
Yet my point was not that vaccines contain lead, but that "unbiased experts" fail to mention it. Being unbiased presupposes giving both pros and cons leaving a person to make a choice for himself. Anything different is propaganda/advertisement/imposition.....
Oh agreed however the problem with being unbiased is the other side isn't.
Science tried to be "unbiased" and look where it ended up - we now have a Measles crisis across most the Western world all because the Anti-Vac crowd throw out so much Conspiracy nonsense being "unbiased" basically hands the floor to them.
Let me put it this way - why mention that vaccines contain substances which can be harmful in massively larger doses when such information is immediately used by opponents to shout "LOOK LOOK I TOLD YOU THEY WERE POISONOUS!"
As Paracelsus said - EVERYTHING is poisonous if taken in large enough doses - even water or oxygen...
Not so long ago DDT was not considered to be harmful in any doses. Our knowledge about substances changes, so in any case I would like (and have a right, don't I) to know what I'm going to let inside my body. Somehow, harmful substances in sweet carbonated drinks and french fries don't discourage people from consuming them in hideous quantities. But they know what's in them anyway.
thats disingenuous - DDT was dangerous in high doses (it was a pesticide for christ sake) - we knew that which is why it was "deployed" in lower doses that were thought safe.
The failing was one of testing - no long term testing was performed and thus the fact that DDT built up through the food chain was missed - since that mistake drugs testing is far more thorough.
Modern vaccines have gone through this far more rigorous drug testing - they are safe.
Bookmarks