СЛУЧАЈ МАЛОГ ЛУКЕ - Исцељење од тешких последица вакцинације

[Aquilius Cratus]

  Цитат

Јеси ли сигуран да је наше право да жртвујемо туђе животе зарад живота осталих људи? А ти још тврдиш да је то наша обавеза, а не ни право.

Св. Николај Српски: «Ни отац ни мати немају права да лише живота своју децу, јер не дају родитељи живот детету, него Бог кроз родитеље... А ако родитељи, који се тоико труде и брину око своје деце, немају права да их лише живота, како могу имати то право они ко се случајно срео с децеом тих родитеља?"

Lepo izvucen citat iz konteksta. Naravno da je ovde vladika Nikolaj Govorio o abortusu i svakom drugom

obliku ubistva.

Ali ovde se ne radi o ubijanju nekoga nego o zrtvovanju sebe da bi drugi, bliznji koga volimo ziveo.

Sto kaze apostol Pavle "Nema veceg dela ljubavi nego poloziti zivot za brata.".

Dakle ko nije spreman da rizikuje svoj zivot da bi njegovi voljeni ziveli on nemoze istinski reci da ih voli.

  Цитат

Ја бих се бојала какве мене плата чека за овакав цинизам.

Pa nisu svi tako plasljivi. facenew22222222

[mila]

  Цитат

A gde su reference za one tvoje tvrdnje? Pojela maca?

Ево референце:

1. Dick, G., Practical Immunization, MTP Press Ltd., (a member of the Kluwer Academic Publishers Group), Falcon House, Lancaster, England, 1986, pp. 2-5.

„The pre-immunization era declines in infectious diseases should make one careful in attributing changes in the epidemiology of some diseases to the result of a specific treatment or immunization“.

2. Table IV--Based on McKeown, T., The Role of Medicine--Dream, Mirage, or Nemesis?, Princeton University Press, 1979, p. 104.

Table IV: Smallpox (England & Wales)

http://www.whale.to/a/obomsawin_b1.html#IMMUNIZATION%27S%20IMPACT%20IN%20THE%20DECLENSION%20OF%20INFECTIOUS%20DISEASES

„Table IV--reveals that in England and Wales there was a continuing decline in the annual death rate from smallpox, with a reduction in mortality of roughly 300 per million to virtually 0, taking place in the 60 year period following the middle of the last century. This table further illustrates that the progressive rate of decline was severely disrupted--with a roughly 275 percent increase in mortality from the disease--occurring immediately after smallpox vaccination laws were enforced“.

Без примене вакцине вирус вариоле је континуирано био у опадању неколико деценија, а у Енглеској је, чим је уведена обавезна вакцинација, 1972. године избила  највећа епидемија великих богиња у 19. веку, која је однела скоро 45000 живота. Скоро 98% умрлих било је вакцинисано.

3. Sinclair, I. , 1992: Vaccination: the hidden facts, Ian Sinclair, Ryde, NSW:

„At the time Jenner was carrying out his experiments using "cowpox" to vaccinate against smallpox, smallpox deaths had fallen from 500 per 100,000 population to 200 per 100,000 population in England over a period of 200 years“. Значи, током 200 година до тренутка кад је Џенер почео с вакцинацијама од крављих богиња, стопа смртности већ је била пала 2,5 пута.

И да скратимо причу:

4.  McBean, Eleanor, 1959: The Poisoned Needle, Health Research, California:

„Јenner himself admitted that smallpox was almost unknown when he inoculated young James Phipps”. Дакле, сам творац вакцине против крављих богиња признаје да вариоле практично није ни било док он није почео с вакцинацијом. Кад смо већ код Џенера, добро је знати да је он вакцинисао и свог десетомесечног сина, који је од тога стекао менталну ретардацију и на крају умро у 21. години од туберкулозе.  

У вези са свим осталим заразним болестима за које постоје вакцине ево га одличан модеран историјски преглед с картама (из 2009): http://www.whale.to/vaccine/ImmunizationGraphs-RO2009.pdf. Закључак је да вакцине с нестајањем или слабљењем поменутих болести немају никакве везе. И све статистике су из званичних, државних агенција за статистику.

  Цитат

Lepo izvucen citat iz konteksta. Naravno da je ovde vladika Nikolaj Govorio o abortusu i svakom drugom

obliku ubistva.

Тачно. И о сваком другом облику убиства.

  Цитат

Ali ovde se ne radi o ubijanju nekoga nego o zrtvovanju sebe da bi drugi, bliznji koga volimo ziveo.

Којег себе ти то витешки жртвујеш када приносиш туђе дете на жртву не зна се коме и не зна се зашто? Нема веће љубави него кад неко за брата положи туђи живот, је л'? Или ниси баш најбоље разумео да се овде не ради о родитељској одлуци да вакцинише себе самог, него другог беспомоћног човека који од њега потпуно зависи и за којег ће сам дати одговор Господу?

  Цитат

Pa nisu svi tako plasljivi. eheeeej

Ти не знаш шта причаш. Њена плата ће бити велика на небесима не зато што је несвесно и нехотице принета на жртву богу смрти, него што је та жртва недужна и што је доказ да овај свет у злу лежи. Да си макар толико разумео, разумео би и не само колико је јадно хвалити се својом шатро храброшћу на туђ рачун, него и да би ти можда ипак било паметније да почнеш да се бојиш. Ово је цинизам недостојан човека који носи хришћанско име.

Свако добро.

[Spooky]

Ja ne mogu da vjerujem koliko su neki ovdje zatucani...

Vakcinacija je pored toga što štiti konkretno osobu koja je vakcinisana (npr. u 90% slučajeva ta osoba dobije imunitet) mnogo važnija jer ukoliko je broj onih koji imaju imunitet veći od nekog kritičnog procenta - širenje praktični biva sasečeno u korjenu i nema šanse da se ostvari eksponencijalni rast...

Uzmimo sada neki virus - neka on otprilike se širi tom brzinom da jedna osoba u prosjeku zarazi 5 osoba pre nego se stavi u karantinu... U ovom slučaju - ukoliko više od 80% osoba ima imunitet na pomenuti virus - on nema šansu da se širi - ukoliko ima manje - on se širi eksponencijalno... (ovo je naravno veoma pojednostavljena slika - brzina širenja zavisi od mnogo često nepredvidivih uslova) Pri tome će stradati i osobe koje su vakcinisane a koje nisu razvile imunitet (i eto kako nevakcinisano djete potencijalno ubija i drugu vakcinisanu djecu)...

Takodje ne razumijete da su na recimo te velike bolesti kao variola vera nekada većina odraslih osoba u Evropi imale imunitet... Neke su ga dobile vakcinacijom - neke prirodno - nakon što su preležale bolest u djetinstvu (bolest koja je ubijala npr. polovinu djece) jer su te bolesti tada veoma mnogo harale... Znate li koliko je djece recimo u 19. vijeku umiralo pre 5. godine života (child mortality)??? Nekada su majke rađale po devetero-desetero djece u nadi da će 2-3 preživjeti do odraslih godina... Samo od 1960ih je mortalitet djece pao 60%...

Koliko su bolesti bile opasne pri susretu sa odraslim osobama bez imuniteta su pokazala recimo osvajanja amerike kada su američki urođenici stradali od bolesti mnogo više nego od oružja kolonizatora... Sada da se pojavi variola vera na koju skoro niko nema imunitet ukoliko se ne bi odgovorilo brzom karantinom između država i vakcinizacijom - stradala bi trećina svjedskog stanovništva...

Opasnosti od vakcina - ako i postoje - one su svakako minimalne - jer bi se nesumnjivo uočili na svim istraživanjima i ne bi ih bilo moguće sakriti... Ovdje mnogi spominju i živu i ostale gluposti... Baš sad kada je bila ova afera sa svinjskim gripom (fail druge vrste - djelomično zbog pretjerane predostrožnosti - što podržavam, ali i zbog pohlepe farmaceutskih kuća) - baš sam malo istražio materiju... Naime - ta živa koja je bila sastavni dio konzervansa nekih vakcina se u njima nalazila u tako maloj količini - da je jedna konzerva tune sadržala 5 puta veću količinu žive...

Inače - i živa i arsen i razni druge štetne materije su štetne samo preko određene količine - i u nekim malim količinama se nalaze u gomili hrane koju jedemo i sa tim količinama je naš organizam itekako u stanju da se izbori...

[Aquilius Cratus]

Samo prve dve reference mogu imati kategoriju naucnog rada. Sa time sto se prvi jedino bavi konkretno

medicinom i ima osnovu u empiriji, istrazivanjima sa konkretnim vakcinama i opste toeriji imunologija ali on

nam sustinski nista ne govori o tome zasto bi vakcina bila losa.

Drugi, ovaj Thomas McKeown jeste izdao naucni rad na princtonu ali to je sociologija i istorija nikako

medicina ili biologija bilo sta sto bi imalo empirijsku, konkretnu potvrdljuvu ili oborivu osnovu. Jedan pregled

istorije medicine dakle nista sto bi mogli reci hard science. A taman posla neki dokaz.

Ostalo nisu nikakvi naucni radovi nego neka lupetanja teoreticara zavere.

Osvrnuo bih se samo na ovo.

  Цитат

Без примене вакцине вирус вариоле је континуирано био у опадању неколико деценија, а у Енглеској је, чим је уведена обавезна вакцинација, 1972. године избила  највећа епидемија великих богиња у 19. веку, која је однела скоро 45000 живота. Скоро 98% умрлих било је вакцинисано.

[/b]

Kakva je ovo zezancija?

Vakcine su vec 1803 raznosene ekspedicijama po svetu na Filipine i "novi svet".

Sasvim je normalno da se do polovine 19. veka odigravao kontantan pad v.v epidemije. Dakle ipak taj

konstantan pad imas TEK NAKON pojave vakcina.

Zasto je onda opet doslo do inflatornog sirenja?

Mutacije! Da, sve dok se virus ne eradikuje postoji sanda da mutira a sa takvom viruletnostu virusi znaju

biti veoma gadni kad mutiraju.

 

P.S Pogresno si tu upisala datume 1972. je 20. vek.

  Цитат

Којег себе ти то витешки жртвујеш када приносиш туђе дете на жртву не зна се коме и не зна се зашто? Нема веће љубави него кад неко за брата положи туђи живот, је л'? Или ниси баш најбоље разумео да се овде не ради о родитељској одлуци да вакцинише себе самог, него другог беспомоћног човека који од њега потпуно зависи и за којег ће сам дати одговор Господу?

Idiii?!

A ti si jedini roditelj na svetu? Druga deca ne postoje? Deca tvoje brace, sestara, prijatelja su nevazna?

Da????

Umesto sebe licno i svojih bliznjih stavi svoje dete i njihovu decu u taj primer i opet si na istom. Ako neces

da rizikujes da ti se dete nadje u onih 0.1% velika vecina dece tvojih bliznjih ce se naci u onih 40%. To je

ovako bas hriscanski i velikodusno, covekoljubivo nema sta.

  Цитат

Ти не знаш шта причаш. Њена плата ће бити велика на небесима не зато што је несвесно и нехотице принета на жртву богу смрти, него што је та жртва недужна и што је доказ да овај свет у злу лежи. Да си макар толико разумео, разумео би и не само колико је јадно хвалити се својом шатро храброшћу на туђ рачун, него и да би ти можда ипак било паметније да почнеш да се бојиш. Ово је цинизам недостојан човека који носи хришћанско име.

Свако добро.

Jedno je nepormisljenost a drugo je strah i plasljivost koji svi imamo ali post je taj tip emocija totalno

demonski treba ga izbegavati koliko god mozemo.

Da ne dao Bog izbije neka velika epidemija/pandemija ja bi se sa sve vakcinisao svestan da mogu da obolim

od same vakcine ali i svestan da time povecavam sansu citavoj zajednici (medju kojom zive ljudi koje volim

beskrajno) da uopste ostane u zivotu.

Ne brini pocinjem ja evo vec sada da se plasim ali ne neke tamo kosmicke pravde nego nepormisljenosti, paranoje i zatucanosti vas neoludita koji ste jedni od kadnidata za izazivanje velikog fallouta.

[Aquilius Cratus]

  Цитат

Junk Science and the Anti-Vaccine Fraud

By John E. Calfee

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Filed under: Health & Medicine, Public Square

The campaign against the most valuable medical technologies ever invented is based on junk science.

Vaccines occupy an odd place in medical history. They are almost universally recognized as among the most valuable and cost-effective medical tools ever developed. The very first vaccine—for smallpox—curtailed and finally eradicated the most devastating infectious disease ever to strike humanity. The list of lifesaving vaccines developed in the past century or so is long. Most of them are especially protective for diseases that hit children the hardest, such as polio, measles, mumps, whooping cough, and diphtheria.

Yet vaccines have also been controversial, starting with the smallpox vaccine. Paul Offit, a noted vaccine researcher at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and the University of Pennsylvania, just published a book recounting the history of vaccine controversies and anti-vaccine movements in the United States and England. Partly history and partly a critical assessment of science and policy, it supplies essential guideposts for recent events.

Vaccine debates are sometimes about mandates, such as the requirement that children be vaccinated before starting school. But usually the issue is safety. At first glance, this makes little sense. Vaccines are tested on thousands or tens of thousands of patients, and because they are typically given to healthy persons, dangerous side effects are easy to spot, even when they are quite rare. Safety controversies usually focus on children, however, because millions of children are vaccinated every year at ages when several worrisome illnesses tend to arrive.

Vaccines are still probably the most valuable medical tool ever invented, and the failure to use them would be a disaster of epic proportions.

Occasionally, a new vaccine causes problems. This happened a decade or so ago with a vaccine for rotavirus. The vaccine kept children from being infected by a common virus that sometimes causes life-threatening dehydration, but the vaccine turned out to have a rare and dangerous side effect (a vaccine without that side effect has since received approval). Almost always, though, careful examination of huge databases makes clear that when an illness strikes soon after vaccination, it is almost always a coincidence.

In recent years, the biggest vaccine controversy by far has been over autism, which, yes, typically reveals itself in children at an age when vaccination is common. Offit wrote a book on this, too.

But some news this month requires a bit of background information.

A seminal event in the vaccine-autism controversy was the 1998 publication of an article in The Lancet, an old and prestigious medical journal in Britain. Coauthored by Andrew Wakefield and 12 others, the article reported on an examination of 12 children who had developed both gastro-intestinal problems and severe behavioral problems after receiving the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. Nine of the children had become autistic. The authors concluded that they had identified a new syndrome involving “colitis and pervasive developmental disorder,” which they surmised but had yet to demonstrate was caused by the MMR vaccine.

Although immediately criticized as scientifically implausible, the article nevertheless created a firestorm—as did its flamboyant lead author. Ever since, the Wakefield Lancet article has been the single most prominent weapon in attacks on vaccines as a cause of autism. Among its consequences was that MMR vaccination in England dropped to dangerously low levels.

The Wakefield article cried out for close scrutiny, which it eventually received. Investigative reporting by Brian Deer, a British journalist, has played a crucial role. Starting in early 2004, Deer’s reports for the Sunday Times (of London) and a television network revealed numerous troubling details about the Wakefield study, including that Wakefield, some of his coauthors, and some patients in the study were involved in liability litigation against vaccine firms, that some of Wakefield’s research was funded via the plaintiff bar, and that subjects were recruited in a non-scientific manner. (One source for these and other details is the excellent Medscape medical news service.)

Careful examination of huge databases makes clear that when an illness strikes soon after vaccination, it is almost always a coincidence.

In its response to the first wave of Deer’s reporting, The Lancet issued a statement on February 23, 2004, that reaffirmed the article’s methods and conclusions but expressed regret that the editors had not been informed of an obvious conflict of interest. More telling, ten of Wakefield’s coauthors published a brief “retraction of an interpretation” in The Lancet on March 6, 2004, in which they disavowed any conclusion that the MMR vaccine had been shown by their study to cause autism.

In the meantime, Deer continued his own investigation, publishing and otherwise communicating his findings to interested parties. In due course, the U.K.’s General Medical Council (GMC) conducted lengthy hearings into the study and the actions of Wakefield and his coauthors. These revealed, among other things, that the children in the study had been put through painful and dangerous procedures with scant notice, warning, or scientific justification.

Last May, the GMC revoked Wakefield’s medical license. He has since moved to Texas, where he operates an autism clinic that, according to Offit’s autism book, offers treatments that involve substantial risks to patients but no prospect of benefit.

Last February, The Lancet finally retracted the article, not on scientific grounds but because of inadequate handling of the subjects in the study. This half-hearted retraction essentially left the study’s conclusions in place. Long before, however, a series of studies (summarized in Offit’s two books) had failed to replicate Wakefield’s results and in fact had ruled out any connection between autism and any vaccine, including the MMR vaccine.

And, now, the final chapter.

On January 5, another U.K. medical journal—BMJ, formerly known as the British Medical Journal—posted the first of a series of articles by Deer in which Wakefield’s article was revealed as being not merely sloppy or deceptively presented, but fraudulent. In combing through voluminous records in the Wakefield hearings plus other sources, Deer had found pervasive manipulation of basic data. For example, some of the subjects had behavioral symptoms before vaccination, post-vaccination data were misrepresented, and only one subject had regressive autism, the main condition at issue. Data for all 12 subjects had been manipulated in one way or another, always in a manner that favored the autism hypothesis.

In an accompanying editorial, the journal’s editor-in-chief and two other editors endorsed these conclusions while also asking probing questions about, among other things, editorial oversight at The Lancet, a topic that BMJ will address in articles to be published shortly.

Ten of Wakefield’s coauthors disavowed any conclusion that the MMR vaccine had been shown by their study to cause autism.

The denouement of the Wakefield scandal held few, if any, surprises for the scientists who have followed it most closely. But for the rest of us, a few remarks are in order on the entire vaccine controversy.

As Offit has pointed out in interviews, this latest finding will do little to deter those who think vaccines cause autism. They will always find plausible arguments for their cause and will receive support from a small coterie of physicians.

One has to wonder about The Lancet, however. One would have expected the editors to have fully retracted the article when its dubious provenance was first revealed. When a complete retraction finally came in February 2010, its tortured wording mainly suggested embarrassment, as if the editors already knew that the article was disreputable but did not want to let it go until they had some new facts to lean on, which happened to be fresh information (from Deer) about the manner in which the subjects were recruited.

More fundamentally, we can hope that these events will reinforce certain truths about the childhood vaccine market.

First, checks and balances are potent. Naturally overcautious, the Food and Drug Administration is a nearly insurmountable barrier between children and bad vaccines.

Second, there is such a thing as junk science, and it has been at the middle of the anti-vaccine movement since its inception.

Third, vaccines are not perfect, and they do sometimes have serious side effects. The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program is designed to deal with that. If anything, it is too generous in the sense of assigning blame to vaccines for harms for which even a biological plausibility is weak at best.

Fourth, liability litigation is a terrible way to deal with vaccine safety. Indeed, the failure of the liability system in the childhood vaccine market in the mid-1980s is the reason the system was replaced by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in 1986. The simple fact is that it is usually impossible for a jury to know whether a vaccine caused the harm at issue. That leaves sympathy for the victim as the dominant force. That arrangement nearly destroyed the childhood vaccine market in the 1980s.

Fifth, yes, there are good arguments to be made about vaccination mandates and the importance of “herd immunity,” which provides protection to the unvaccinated if, and only if, enough people are vaccinated.

And finally, the most important truth by far: vaccines are still probably the most valuable medical tool ever invented, and the failure to use them would be a disaster of epic proportions.

[sqny]

  Цитат

Човече. Сад још вакцине спасавају животе.

Da mi je neko pricao - ne bih verovao.

Ovakav nadobudni kretenizam davno nisam cuo. 

[Aquilius Cratus]

  Цитат

  Цитат

Човече. Сад још вакцине спасавају животе.

Da mi je neko pricao - ne bih verovao.

Ovakav nadobudni kretenizam davno nisam cuo. 

Tu bi palo 200 od mogucih 50 poena na onom Cirkovicevom testu. 0409_feel

[mila]

  Цитат

Da mi je neko pricao - ne bih verovao.

Ovakav nadobudni kretenizam davno nisam cuo.  :cheesy:

Врати вилицу на место:

- In 1871-72, England, with 98% of the population aged between 2 and 50 vaccinated against smallpox, it experienced its worst ever smallpox outbreak with 45,000 deaths. During the same period in Germany, with a vaccination rate of 96%, there were over 125,000 deaths from smallpox. (The Hadwen Documents)

- In Germany, compulsory mass vaccination against diphtheria commenced in 1940 and by 1945 diphtheria cases were up from 40,000 to 250,000. (Don't Get Stuck, Hannah Allen)

- In the USA in 1960, two virologists discovered that both polio vaccines were contaminated with the SV 40 virus which causes cancer in animals as well as changes in human cell tissue cultures. Millions of children had been injected with these vaccines. (Med Jnl of Australia 17/3/1973 p555)

- In 1967, Ghana was declared measles free by the World Health Organisation after 96% of its population was vaccinated. In 1972, Ghana experienced one of its worst measles outbreaks with its highest ever mortality rate. (Dr H Albonico, MMR Vaccine Campaign in Switzerland, March 1990)

- In the UK between 1970 and 1990, over 200,000 cases of whooping cough occurred in fully vaccinated children. (Community Disease Surveillance Centre, UK)

- In the 1970's a tuberculosis vaccine trial in India involving 260,000 people revealed that more cases of TB occurred in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. (The Lancet 12/1/80 p73)

- In 1977, Dr Jonas Salk who developed the first polio vaccine, testified along with other scientists, that mass inoculation against polio was the cause of most polio cases throughout the USA since 1961. (Science 4/4/77 "Abstracts" )

- In 1978, a survey of 30 States in the US revealed that more than half of the children who contracted measles had been adequately vaccinated. (The People's Doctor, Dr R Mendelsohn)

- In 1979, Sweden abandoned the whooping cough vaccine due to its ineffectiveness. Out of 5,140 cases in 1978, it was found that 84% had been vaccinated three times! (BMJ 283:696-697, 1981)

-The February 1981 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found that 90% of obstetricians and 66% of pediatricians refused to take the rubella vaccine.

- In the USA, the cost of a single DPT shot had risen from 11 cents in 1982 to $11.40 in 1987. The manufacturers of the vaccine were putting aside $8 per shot to cover legal costs and damages they were paying out to parents of brain damaged children and children who died after vaccination. (The Vine, Issue 7, January 1994, Nambour, Qld)

- In Oman between 1988 and 1989, a polio outbreak occurred amongst thousands of fully vaccinated children. The region with the highest attack rate had the highest vaccine coverage. The region with the lowest attack rate had the lowest vaccine coverage. (The Lancet, 21/9/91)

- In 1990, a UK survey involving 598 doctors revealed that over 50% of them refused to have the Hepatitis B vaccine despite belonging to the high risk group urged to be vaccinated. (British Med Jnl, 27/1/1990)

- In 1990, the Journal of the American Medical Association had an article on measles which stated " Although more than 95% of school-aged children in the US are vaccinated against measles, large measles outbreaks continue to occur in schools and most cases in this setting occur among previously vaccinated children." (JAMA, 21/11/90)

- In the USA, from July 1990 to November 1993, the US Food and Drug Administration counted a total of 54,072 adverse reactions following vaccination. The FDA admitted that this number represented only 10% of the real total, because most doctors were refusing to report vaccine injuries. In other words, adverse reactions for this period exceeded half a million! (National Vaccine Information Centre, March 2, 1994)

- In the New England Journal of Medicine July 1994 issue a study found that over 80% of children under 5 years of age who had contracted whooping cough had been fully vaccinated.

- On November 2nd, 2000, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) announced that its members voted at their 57th annual meeting in St Louis to pass a resolution calling for an end to mandatory childhood vaccines. The resolution passed without a single "no" vote. (Report by Michael Devitt)

[mila]

  Цитат

Samo prve dve reference mogu imati kategoriju naucnog rada.

Ostalo nisu nikakvi naucni radovi nego neka lupetanja teoreticara zavere.

Аха, за разлику од Стаљиновог биографа ког ти пејстујеш у нади да нећемо приметити. :-)

  Цитат

konstantan pad imas TEK NAKON pojave vakcina.

Ти не умеш да прочиташ карту? Истим темпом којим је падало до увођења вакцине пада и даље. Осим што је непосредно након увођења дошло до најпогубније епидемије у историји Енглеске. Исте оне која је тамо однела 45000 живота, од којих су практично сви били вакцинисани, а у Немачкој 125000.

  Цитат

Umesto sebe licno i svojih bliznjih stavi svoje dete i njihovu decu u taj primer i opet si na istom. Ako neces

da rizikujes da ti se dete nadje u onih 0.1% velika vecina dece tvojih bliznjih ce se naci u onih 40%.

Референце на сто. Којих 40%? Чији то биограф каже? И разумеш ли ти да чак ни у случају епидемије вариоле 1972. није било вакцинисано више од 10% популације (иако је за стицање "колективног имунитета" потребно 95%), па је вариола ипак била смирена?

[mila]

  Цитат

Vakcinacija je pored toga što štiti konkretno osobu koja je vakcinisana (npr. u 90% slučajeva ta osoba dobije imunitet) mnogo važnija jer ukoliko je broj onih koji imaju imunitet veći od nekog kritičnog procenta - širenje praktični biva sasečeno u korjenu i nema šanse da se ostvari eksponencijalni rast...

Ма да, "нема шансе", али пракса је оваква:

"In 1967, Ghana was declared measles free by the World Health Organisation after 96% of its population was vaccinated. In 1972, Ghana experienced one of its worst measles outbreaks with its highest ever mortality rate". (Dr H Albonico, MMR Vaccine Campaign in Switzerland, March 1990).

"In the UK between 1970 and 1990, over 200,000 cases of whooping cough occurred in fully vaccinated children". (Community Disease Surveillance Centre, UK)

Теоретски, за колективни имунитет потребно је 95%. А у епидемији вариоле из 1972. вакцинисано је само 10% популације, па свеједно отада нема глобалних проблема.

[Crveni Baron]

Ja mislim da je citava stvar sa vakcinama definitivno pukla i da je vreme da se  vratimo pijavicama i pustanju krvi. To provereno pomaze i nema kontraindikacija.

[obi-wan]

  Цитат

Ja mislim da je citava stvar sa vakcinama definitivno pukla i da je vreme da se vratimo pijavicama i pustanju krvi. To provereno pomaze i nema kontraindikacija.

Sasvim nepotreban sarkazam, brate... ako imas kakve argumente - pricaj, ako nemas ne spamuj... ovakve poruke ce ubuduce biti brisane...

[mila]

  Цитат

А у епидемији вариоле из 1972. вакцинисано је само 10% популације, па свеједно отада нема глобалних проблема.

  Цитат

И разумеш ли ти да чак ни у случају епидемије вариоле 1972. није било вакцинисано више од 10% популације (иако је за стицање "колективног имунитета" потребно 95%), па је вариола ипак била смирена?

Исправка. Не 1972. године, него је укупан проценат вакцинисане популације само 10%.

[дибидусрус]

  Цитат

  Цитат

Данас сам чуо да је ђаконово дете било болесно од Великог Кашља. Знам да му деца не примају вакцине.

Pa dobro i tako ce steci prirodni imunitet i meni je baba pricala kako je bila bolesna od velikog kaslja.

Био сам и ја  у 4 месеца. Изгледа да ми остала астма од тога. Него има нека мода да не треба никаква вакцинација.

[Aquilius Cratus]

  Цитат

Ти не умеш да прочиташ карту? Истим темпом којим је падало до увођења вакцине пада и даље. Осим што је непосредно након увођења дошло до најпогубније епидемије у историји Енглеске. Исте оне која је тамо однела 45000 живота, од којих су практично сви били вакцинисани, а у Немачкој 125000.

Nece biti. Kroz ceo 17 i 18 vek je divljala v.v a to opadanje koje se vidi na grafiku pocinje bas "slucajno" kad

i se i prve vakcine distribuisane. Izgleda ta neposrednost je tebi nekih 50-60 godina. 0102_laugh 0102_laugh

  Цитат

Референце на сто. Којих 40%? Чији то биограф каже? И разумеш ли ти да чак ни у случају епидемије вариоле 1972. није било вакцинисано више од 10% популације (иако је за стицање "колективног имунитета" потребно 95%), па је вариола ипак била смирена?

40% smo rekli primera radi nisam rekao da su to neki proracuni. Nek je i 10% naspram 1% i dalje je van

pameti, etike bilo cega ljudskog.

Zato sto je bio lokalizovan na vreme. Ali jos uvek nisam dobio odgovor kako bi ti to magicnim karantinima

smirila bez vakcina.