Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

[Guest guest]

What a crock of truth, lies, and spin... Even the truthful parts are so

twisted as to have little or no truthful value.

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32285;_ylc=X3oDMTM2djFwdnZ\

0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2MzkEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTE4Mjc5NwR0cGNJZAMzMjI4NQ-->

> 4.2.

>

>

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32651;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcmFtZzl\

iBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2NTEEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTE4Mjc5Nw-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " planeproductions " planeproductions@...

>

<mailto:planeproductions@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20O\

n%20Mercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> planeproductions <planeproductions>

>

>

> Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:32 pm (PST)

>

> The coming flu pandemic

>

> The Centers for Disease Control reports that 132 million doses of flu

> vaccine will be available for the upcoming 2007-08 flu season, in an

> effort to prevent the 36,000 flu-related deaths each year. But the CDC

> keeps quoting that mortality number each year when it has been widely

> criticized and the flu is likely to cause less than one thousand

> deaths annually, most which would not be prevented by immunization.

>

> The CDC has now set a goal for 218 million Americans to receive flu

> shots. But last year 18 million flu shots went unused as the CDC

> didn't issue its annual " cry wolf " flu scare. Recall that the US has

> ~300 million people and only about a third of the population lines up

> for flu shots each year, yet there is no epidemic in the unvaccinated.

>

> It appears the whole flu shot campaign is created by the CDC which

> works as a free publicity agency for the flu shot manufacturers. The

> CDC underwrites the cost of flu shots to the manufacturers, which

> simply becomes a disguised political pay off. Scientific reviews do

> not show flu vaccination is beneficial. What's worse is that the

> vaccine makers have figured out how to ensure the spread the flu each

> year by administering millions of doses of nasal flu mist that

> contains a live virus which can be easily spread to family members in

> the days immediately following vaccination.

>

> Be wary of news reports of any impending flu pandemic. Watch for

> onerous new laws that would mandate that Americans receive flu shots

> or they can't travel, work or go to school. - Copyright 2007 Bill

> Sardi, Knowledge of Health, Inc.

> posted by Knowledge of Health at 9:47 AM

>

[Guest guest]

No; facts trump faith.

But my facts may be flawed if all the flu vaccine has modified viruses

rather than dead viruses.

Flu is caused by a massive growth of new viruses from the original

infecting virus. Dead viruses don't grow.

I do have quite a bit of faith that once live dead things don't grow and

reproduce.

>

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32661;_ylc=X3oDMTJxa25jMzQ\

zBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2NjEEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTIwODE3OA-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " and Irwin " familyirwin@...

>

<mailto:familyirwin@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On\

%20Mercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> fritzalseth <fritzalseth>

>

>

> Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:13 pm (PST)

>

> How sure are you? You have a lot of faith.

> Blessings,

>

>

> <res075oh@... <mailto:res075oh%40verizon.net>> wrote:

> You can react negatively to darn near anything. But you CANNOT get the

> flu from a flu shot when the shot contains only dead viruses.

>

>

>

> >

> > Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

> >

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32606;_ylc=X3oDMTJxY3JyaWt\

sBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2MDYEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTA4NzQ2OA--

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32606;_ylc=X3oDMTJxY3JyaWt\

sBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2MDYEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTA4NzQ2OA-->>

> >

> >

> >

> > Posted by: " and Irwin " familyirwin@...

> <mailto:familyirwin%40sbcglobal.net>

> > <mailto:familyirwin@...

> <mailto:familyirwin%40sbcglobal.net>?Subject=%20Re%

> 3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On%20Mercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> > fritzalseth <fritzalseth

> <fritzalseth>>

> >

> >

> > Wed Nov 14, 2007 9:46 am (PST)

> >

> > Right, and what I said is that they can get the flu or even

> > die...which was part of the discussion.

> > Blessings,

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Most illnesses are defined as a set of symptoms. You get many disease

organisms which do not grow into an illness, because your body fights

them off and prevents the development of an illness. If you get one

cold virus which is then promptly killed by your immune system would you

say you have a cold??? Hardly. By the same token if you get a

vaccination of modified or dead flu viruses that cannot cause the flu

then you do not have the flu. At least that's the way it seems to me.

Unless, of course, you get another flu virus from another source.

We literally have billions of microorganisms in our system at all times;

many of which if allowed to develop and reproduce uncontrolled could

cause illness or death. But we never say we have

dozens/hundreds/thousands of illnesses all the time, do we???

>

>

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32665;_ylc=X3oDMTJxY2c0NnZ\

pBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2NjUEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTIwODE3OA-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " Crystal " sweetnwright@...

>

<mailto:sweetnwright@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On%20Me\

rcury%20In%20Vaccines>

> sweetenloe1 <sweetenloe1>

>

>

> Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:25 pm (PST)

>

> You are getting the flu when you get the flu shot technically. Otherwise

> you can get the flu later on.

>

> -- Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

> You can react negatively to darn near anything. But you CANNOT get the

> flu from a flu shot when the shot contains only dead viruses.

>

>

[Guest guest]

The world standard among intelligent, educated people is peer reviewed

literature. From that comes the more massive writings and

interpretations of same, which will have generally less authority the

further they are removed from the source. For example, if you are

reading something by someone frequently published in peer reviewed

literature in the field of his/her expertise then it would probably be a

good idea to consider it as being well founded.

If I tell you there are 13 inches in a standard foot then you should

probably question my sources. And much of what you will read, both on

the internet and elsewhere, has about that level of credibility.

The nice thing is that after you have read [or studied] enough you can

pick out a tremendous amount of the BS automatically with a very high

degree of reliability.

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32668;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcHBmbDk\

2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2NjgEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTIwODE3OA-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " and Irwin " familyirwin@...

>

<mailto:familyirwin@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On\

%20Mercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> fritzalseth <fritzalseth>

>

>

> Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:34 pm (PST)

>

> That's fine...but who is the authority? Who gets to decide?

>

> <res075oh@... <mailto:res075oh%40verizon.net>> wrote:

> What she posted is IMHO well documented. Perhaps you should do a bit of

> research yourself. Or if there happens to be some part of her post with

> which you disagree please point out what it is. AFAIK I have personally

> posted to this list links which support basically everything in her

> post. I cannot, nor do I have any desire, to make you read them.

>

>

[Guest guest]

It was not intended as an insult, but a suggestion.

If you have in fact done any investigation I would suggest that you

investigate from more authoritative sources. And that is not intended

as an insult either. I made the original suggestion because you made

statements contrary to the best evidence we have. I have examined

Dusty's post and as far as I can tell it is generally accurate. If you

see anything in it that I have missed I'd like to know what it is.

>

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32671;_ylc=X3oDMTJxb2ZmaWI\

5BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2NzEEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTIwODE3OA-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " and Irwin " familyirwin@...

>

<mailto:familyirwin@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On\

%20Mercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> fritzalseth <fritzalseth>

>

>

> Thu Nov 15, 2007 7:38 pm (PST)

>

> And by the way, , don't insult me. I HAVE done my research...

>

> and Irwin <familyirwin@...

> <mailto:familyirwin%40sbcglobal.net>> wrote: That's fine...but who is

> the authority? Who gets to decide?

>

> <res075oh@... <mailto:res075oh%40verizon.net>> wrote:

> What she posted is IMHO well documented. Perhaps you should do a bit of

> research yourself. Or if there happens to be some part of her post with

> which you disagree please point out what it is. AFAIK I have personally

> posted to this list links which support basically everything in her

> post. I cannot, nor do I have any desire, to make you read them.

>

>

>

> >

> > Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

> >

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32617;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcWZ0cGs\

1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2MTcEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTA4NzQ2OA--

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32617;_ylc=X3oDMTJxcWZ0cGs\

1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2MTcEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTA4NzQ2OA-->>

> >

> >

> >

> > Posted by: " and Irwin " familyirwin@...

> <mailto:familyirwin%40sbcglobal.net>

> > <mailto:familyirwin@...

> <mailto:familyirwin%40sbcglobal.net>?Subject=%20Re%

> 3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On%20Mercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> > fritzalseth <fritzalseth

> <fritzalseth>>

> >

> >

> > Wed Nov 14, 2007 2:52 pm (PST)

> >

> > Says Who? You? Prove to me that is not the case.

> > Blessings,

> >

> >

> > Dusty <dusty@... <mailto:dusty%40brookehurst.net>

> <mailto:dusty%40brookehurst.net>>

> > wrote:

> > Wrong again, MIchelle, the flu shot cannot GIVE one full blown flu

> (of the

> > variety for which the shot is being given). I repeat my initial

> post... If

> > one has already exposed at time of receiving flu shot, the shot will not

> > stop the development of the flu.... as it takes about 10 to 14 days

> > for the

> > your body to build an immunity to the flu bugs delivered in the shot. 10

> > to 14 days is way too long a time frame to stop what one had already

> have

> > been exposed to prior to the shot. Sooooo - the shot isn't the

> culprit in

> > that case, the prior exposure is.

> >

> > Blessings

> > Dusty

[Guest guest]

Well, I believe that I should have said " modified " rather than " dead " ;

but it amounts to the same thing. If it is modified so that it cannot

grow into a massive flu infection then the result should be about the same.

In any case; yes, I generally trust the flu vaccine to be modified or

dead to a high degree. Not 100%, of course.

The main reason for so many posts on vaccinations seems to be caused by

the fact that so many people really don't have a very clear idea of how

they work; or of how diseases and the immune system in general work.

Saying someone can get the flu the next day from a flu shot just flies

in the face of all of our knowledge on the subjects.

> .

>

>

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32677;_ylc=X3oDMTJxMjEzaG0\

4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2NzcEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTIwODE3OA-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " PATRICK REYNAUD " dauphine999@...

>

<mailto:dauphine999@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On\

%20Mercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> ryn564 <ryn564>

>

>

> Fri Nov 16, 2007 1:27 am (PST)

>

> What you all are talking about is trust. Do you trust them when they

> say that the virus is dead??? There has been a lot of recalls lately

> on food drugs etc. What some people are saying is " Is the virus dead

> or is it not dead ? "

[Guest guest]

That was long before the invention of the scientific method, when the

general populace accepted as " best evidence " whatever the priest's

interpretation of the Bible [or whatever holy book they used] happened

to be. So they really relied upon authority, not evidence. And there

actually were quite a few people who happened to look at the evidence

who figured out that the world was not flat long before it was accepted

by a majority of people. The best evidence was often utterly ignored;

many people refused to look through the first telescopes because they

were afraid of seeing something contrary to the authority of the time

[the church].

So actually real evidence had little or nothing to do with it; " facts "

were established by authority. If the priest said a horse had 32 [or

whatever] teeth you did not dare show him a horse scull with some other

number of teeth for fear of being charged with heresy.

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32695;_ylc=X3oDMTJxMzVydWN\

sBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI2OTUEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTI5NDMzMQ-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@...

>

<mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On%20M\

ercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> matchermaam <matchermaam>

>

>

> Fri Nov 16, 2007 7:01 pm (PST)

>

> " According to the best evicence we have " was the attitude of the

> people when they

> thought the world was flat.

>

> Roni

>

> <res075oh@... <mailto:res075oh%40verizon.net>> wrote:

> It was not intended as an insult, but a suggestion.

>

> If you have in fact done any investigation I would suggest that you

> investigate from more authoritative sources. And that is not intended

> as an insult either. I made the original suggestion because you made

> statements contrary to the best evidence we have. I have examined

> Dusty's post and as far as I can tell it is generally accurate. If you

> see anything in it that I have missed I'd like to know what it is.

>

>

>

> >

[Guest guest]

You've spoken some great truths about science. But if I have given you

the impression that I revere today's interpretations of the " facts " then

please allow me to correct that misimpression. What I value is the

scientific method, far above whatever is considered to be the facts of

today. Perhaps the greatest strength of science is that it has built in

the capability and methods to change whatever is considered to be fact

when new evidence is found. One of the greatest and most exciting

things that can happen in science is for a long held view of what

constitutes facts to be disproved.

So, actually I don't love the " facts " of 2007; although I have great

appreciation and respect for the journey that brought us to this time.

And it is that same scientific method that I so admire which will in the

future show us which of today's " facts " aren't.

>

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32706;_ylc=X3oDMTJxZTJxbGt\

0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI3MDYEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTM4MDkxMQ-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@...

>

<mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On%20M\

ercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> matchermaam <matchermaam>

>

>

> Sat Nov 17, 2007 6:11 pm (PST)

>

> True science is always changing as it finds out new things. Any real

> scientist

> will attest to that fact. To tout MOST of the " facts " we currently

> have as some

> sort of divine truth, is as much folly as the people of that time

> touting the flat

> earth theory. In time, medicine as it is practiced to day will be an

> oddity of

> ancient history, as more and more is found out about the earth, outer

> space,

> human bodies, human minds and genes. New " truths " will abound and your

> beloved science of 2007 will be gone.

>

> Roni

>

> <res075oh@... <mailto:res075oh%40verizon.net>> wrote:

> That was long before the invention of the scientific method, when the

> general populace accepted as " best evidence " whatever the priest's

> interpretation of the Bible [or whatever holy book they used] happened

> to be. So they really relied upon authority, not evidence. And there

> actually were quite a few people who happened to look at the evidence

> who figured out that the world was not flat long before it was accepted

> by a majority of people. The best evidence was often utterly ignored;

> many people refused to look through the first telescopes because they

> were afraid of seeing something contrary to the authority of the time

> [the church].

>

> So actually real evidence had little or nothing to do with it; " facts "

> were established by authority. If the priest said a horse had 32 [or

> whatever] teeth you did not dare show him a horse scull with some other

> number of teeth for fear of being charged with heresy.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I would guess that I've read more than anyone on the list with a couple

of exceptions. I've read enough to, in many cases, pick out the bs

signs; even in a subject in which I am not well versed.

If you think the supplement industry is more credible than the modern

medical establishment [with all its faults] then you are massively

misinformed. Almost every internet site I've visited that sells

supplements contain so much invalid info and lies that it is astounding

that anyone is foolish enough to believe them.

I'm not overly concerned with the " establishment " ; as you say it can

look after itself. Our purpose here is supposed to be to help each

other out, and recommending some worthless quack practice is a

disservice to someone who may be sick and desperate.

Did you even bother to read the success stories included in the post by

Chuck on the reduction of diseases for vaccinations? That's 100% the

modern medical establishment at work.

>

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32718;_ylc=X3oDMTJxaDEwMWZ\

1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI3MTgEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTQyODA4Ng-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@...

>

<mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On%20M\

ercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> matchermaam <matchermaam>

>

>

> Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:45 pm (PST)

>

> C'mon . You MUST have read how this entire medical system we have

> today

> was set up, by whom, and for what reasons. The current system has

> allowed bad or

> useless drugs to be used for years, to the protestations of actual

> patients who

> are telling their doctors that these things are either not working or

> causing them pain and illness.

>

> The supplement people have been telling it (with a few greedy little

> exceptions) like it

> is for years and years. The things I hear doctors (in my own limited

> experience)

> telling me to take, namely vitamins and minerals, have been in print

> in health magazines since 1953, and have been ridiculed by the

> establishment all this time.

>

> Columbia Presbyterian hospital in NYC has instituted different

> " alternative " regimes to

> help their patients to heal. Neurologists and Cardiologists are

> telling their patients

> that listen to them to take a walk every day, take folic acid, vitamin

> D3, potassium, magnesium, get some sunshine, don't eat trans fat, a

> little butter is better, cut way down on carbohydrates,

> an egg or two a few times a week won't give you high cholesterol. Some

> of the doctors are actually waking up to the harm that they and others

> have been causing to their patients, and are trying to change things.

> Reactionism is a political position, but it has no business in health

> care.

>

> You are one of the patients that needs good health care. Please don't

> worry

> about the establishment's position. The establishment will take care

> of itself. The one

> to worry about is you, and what you are allowing them to put into your

> system. At

> some point, it won't help to say that the establishment is wrong, the

> damage will have already been done.

>

> And that is my wise old broad lecture for today.

>

> Roni

>

>

>

> <res075oh@... <mailto:res075oh%40verizon.net>> wrote:

> You've spoken some great truths about science. But if I have given you

> the impression that I revere today's interpretations of the " facts " then

> please allow me to correct that misimpression. What I value is the

> scientific method, far above whatever is considered to be the facts of

> today. Perhaps the greatest strength of science is that it has built in

> the capability and methods to change whatever is considered to be fact

> when new evidence is found. One of the greatest and most exciting

> things that can happen in science is for a long held view of what

> constitutes facts to be disproved.

>

> So, actually I don't love the " facts " of 2007; although I have great

> appreciation and respect for the journey that brought us to this time.

> And it is that same scientific method that I so admire which will in the

> future show us which of today's " facts " aren't.

>

>

>

> >

[Guest guest]

Certainly there are risk and cost factors in vaccinations; sometimes

including grave harm or death, and I've never indicated otherwise. It's

little comfort to a parent who loses a child due to a vaccination to be

aware that 100 or 1000 children are alive who would not be if no one

were vaccinated.

I don't personally have sufficient information as to the advisability of

spacing out vaccinations to intelligently comment. There are, of

course, pros and cons; but I don't know which has the greater weight.

>

> Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32741;_ylc=X3oDMTJxZzZrMm5\

qBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI3NDEEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTQ2ODU0MQ-->

>

>

>

> Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@...

>

<mailto:matchermaam@...?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On%20M\

ercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> matchermaam <matchermaam>

>

>

> Sun Nov 18, 2007 6:08 pm (PST)

>

> I was not one who said that vaccinations are bad, quite to the

> contrary. What I

> did say was that IMHO I think the doctors are givng too much vaccine

> to children

> at the same time. I feel the vaccines should be split up into several

> different visits

> over time, and a period of at least a month should elapse between shots.

>

> It just seems to me that some very sensitive children (for whatever

> reason) could have

> a really adverse reaction to all that vaccine being pumped into their

> little bodies

> all at the same time. I'm sure there is no telling what kind of

> reactions could

> occur, but to believe that the vaccines are totally benign is to view

> the debate

> with closed eyes.

>

> Roni

>

> <res075oh@... <mailto:res075oh%40verizon.net>> wrote:

> I would guess that I've read more than anyone on the list with a couple

> of exceptions. I've read enough to, in many cases, pick out the bs

> signs; even in a subject in which I am not well versed.

>

> If you think the supplement industry is more credible than the modern

> medical establishment [with all its faults] then you are massively

> misinformed. Almost every internet site I've visited that sells

> supplements contain so much invalid info and lies that it is astounding

> that anyone is foolish enough to believe them.

>

> I'm not overly concerned with the " establishment "

> ; as you say it can

> look after itself. Our purpose here is supposed to be to help each

> other out, and recommending some worthless quack practice is a

> disservice to someone who may be sick and desperate.

>

> Did you even bother to read the success stories included in the post by

> Chuck on the reduction of diseases for vaccinations? That's 100% the

> modern medical establishment at work.

>

>

>

> >

> > Re: Bush To Veto Ban On Mercury In Vaccines

> >

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32718;_ylc=X3oDMTJxaDEwMWZ\

1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI3MTgEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTQyODA4Ng--

>

<hypothyroidism/message/32718;_ylc=X3oDMTJxaDEwMWZ\

1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzE0NTY2NARncnBzcElkAzE3MDkyNTEwODIEbXNnSWQDMzI3MTgEc2V\

jA2Rtc2cEc2xrA3Ztc2cEc3RpbWUDMTE5NTQyODA4Ng-->>

> >

> >

> >

> > Posted by: " Roni Molin " matchermaam@...

> <mailto:matchermaam%40>

> > <mailto:matchermaam@...

>

<mailto:matchermaam%40>?Subject=%20Re%3A%20Bush%20To%20Veto%20Ban%20On%\

20Mercury%20In%20Vaccines>

> > matchermaam <matchermaam

> <matchermaam>>

> >

> >

> > Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:45 pm (PST)

> >

> > C'mon . You MUST have read how this entire medical system we have

> > today

> > was set up, by whom, and for what reasons. The current system has

> > allowed bad or

> > useless drugs to be used for years, to the protestations of actual

> > patients who

> > are telling their doctors that these things are either not working or

> > causing them pain and illness.

> >

> > The supplement people have been telling it (with a few greedy little

> > exceptions) like it

> > is for years and years. The things I hear doctors (in my own limited

> > experience)

> > telling me to take, namely vitamins and minerals, have been in print

> > in health magazines since 1953, and have been ridiculed by the

> > establishment all this time.