Posted on 01/07/2002 1:15:35 PM PST by expose
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:50:29 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Which means they still have some CONTAINING mercury.
How dare you single out High Risk mothers. That is profiling. </sarcasm>
I would never give nothing to a newborn child unless I knew what the side effects were.
It amazes me that parents would inject their children with anything.
I personally believe a lot of deaths are caused by these vaccinations.
The government calls it crib death.
Okay. You're paranoid.
How much?
Is it more money than treating sick kids?
You are essentially saying that just about every pediatrician and family practice physician in this country (for starters) is involved in a conspiracy to harm children by giving them unnecessary vaccinations just to make money.
That is pretty far-fetched.
It is also normal precedure to sue doctors for malpractice when they give advice that injures a patient.
If you remember, back in 1993, Rodham and Shalalah were pushing for all kids to be vaccinated by the age of two. It doesn't take a tin-foil hat to think that Hillary and Donna might have been up to no good.
Maybe it is for some company kickback from the manufacturer.
Didn't Hillary badmouth the drug companies during the health care deal? Almost like she may have been angling to pocket some change after talking up vaccines.
Hmmmm.
it cannot diges it because of the hepitis shot.
With the "back to sleep" campaign in the early '90s, crib deaths are down from an average of 5000 a year to under 3000. Concurrent with this decrease was an increase in the number of children immunized. If vaccines were responsible for crib death, we would expect to see a rise in mortality as the vaccine rate goes up, but it is the opposite.
So much for your theory.
As for AZT, perhaps it's a matter of degree. Just as I'm acutely attuned to the "look" of someone who's positive and failing, I can't get the "look" of those drenched in AZT out of my mind. Strictly emotional and subjective on my part, to be true.
If these shots for newborns are required, is there some similar requirement for AZT treatments by mothers (particularly the positive)? What do we do here in that circumstance?
Don't know what you do for a living, but I'm willing to bet you don't restrict your reading to just a portion of your business.
There is NOTHING in the current literature that connects autism with vaccines. The subject has been beaten to death the past year or two and all the recent studies have come up empty.
Aruanan was only pointing out that a neonate nurse would have a hard time seeing any kind of correlation with autism because autism cannot be diagnosed until the child begins to interact (around age 3).
What does that have to do with what I'm talking about?
But to answer your question, I trust them about as much as I trust those pseudo-scientific anti-vaccine websites.
I know a dear physician in my area, who had a healthy 15 mo.old son.....a beautiful child....and after his MMR, Hib, and varivax injections .....started regressing.
He now has autism.
This father is a good physician, his wife is a dentist......and over the past few years they have spent countless time, energy and money to find out what went wrong......and why certain vaccines are being 'pushed' on our little ones.
The result is... now this doctor devotes full-time in hopeful experimental treatments for his son and ....others who hear about & come to him.
He has also testified before Congress.
There is a history of increased liver cancer in persons have have been immunized against hepatitis B. It is not a risk worth taking unless you are certain that you will be placed into a position to be exposed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.