OnlyTheGhosts #quack #conspiracy #pratt #dunning-kruger

OnlyTheGhosts #quack #conspiracy #pratt #dunning-kruger deviantart.com

By the way, I see that you think PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC STUDIES can be just flippantly ignored.

Clearly you READ NOTHING, and have NO RESPECT FOR SCIENCE.

Let's go over this, since you want to behave like a child, I will treat you as one;

"Keep in mind that maternal antibodies levels decrease with time"
- WRONG, THIS ONLY APPLIES TO VACCINE ANTIBODIES, NOT NATURAL ANTIBODIES. IT WAS BACKED BY PEER REVIEWED SCIENCE YOU SCIENCE-DENIALIST
READ THE SCIENCE I CITED, IDIOT

""reduce the immune system's ability to fight infections"""the vaccines ruin people's natural protection against viruses"

- UNNATURALLY ACQUIRED PROTECTION DOES NOT LAST. NATURAL PROTECTION IS PERMANENT. THEREFORE THIS STATEMENT OF YOURS ("Being un-vaccined, you increase the possibility for them to get some bad stuff") IS WRONG. IT WAS BACKED BY PEER REVIEWED SCIENCE YOU SCIENCE-DENIALIST
READ THE SCIENCE I CITED, IDIOT

" little immunosuppressed kid died because another kid (NOT VACCINED) infected him."

- BULLSHIT. NO EVIDENCE THIS EVER REALLY HAPPENED. IT'S A FAIRYTALE. The scientifically established fact is that it is the vaccinated who spread most of the modern epidemics, not the unvaccinated. WHAT I STATED ALREADY WAS BACKED BY PEER REVIEWED SCIENCE YOU SCIENCE-DENIALIST
READ THE SCIENCE I CITED, IDIOT

("Children of mothers vaccinated against measles and, possibly, rubella have lower concentrations of maternal antibodies and lose protection by maternal antibodies at an earlier age than children of mothers in communities that oppose vaccination. This increases the risk of disease transmission in highly vaccinated populations.")

"No way jose."

- WRONG FUCKTARD, IT WAS BACKED BY PEER REVIEWED SCIENCE YOU SCIENCE-DENIALIST
READ THE SCIENCE I CITED, IDIOT

4 comments

Vaccines in general BOOST people’s natural protection against viruses. The body doesn’t know if it’s a vaccine or a “real” disease. The vaccine carries with it the extra bonus of not having to be sick (or to just get a small flicker of sickness).

Again, the body doesn’t know how the virus entered the body. But sure, a dead virus in a vaccine might give a shorter immunization. It’s still much, much better than to DIE of the disease itself. The medical science usually KNOW that the immunization might be shorter, and advice people to get a new shot in a number of years. Like with tetanus and TBE.

In areas were most are vaccinated, VERY FEW contract the diseases.

With all the ALL CAPS, you are the one acting like a child, dearie. Screaming does not make you more right, it only makes you more loud.

There is one scientific study, perhaps you’ve heard about it? It was a scientist who wanted to patent his own separate measles vaccine, and was trying to show that the combined MMR vaccine gave kids IBS (and, as an afterthought, yeah, perhaps also autism). The study was done on just 12 kids, some of which showed IBS and/or autism BEFORE they were vaccinated. It was first peer-reviewed and published in a science journal. When they checked it more thoroughly, and most of the backers started to redact their earlier agreement, a complete removal of it from the status of “scientific theory” was published in the same journal, though it was done in a small article, and relatively few noticed it. The disgraced “scientist” was dismissed and not allowed to do science anymore.

In short, ONE STUDY is ONE STUDY. If the hundreds of thousands of other studies that have been done show something else, we are going to wait for more studies corroborating that ONE study, before we swallow it, hook, line, and sinker. Nothing in this study, as far as I see, says it’s DANGEROUS to vaccinate, only that the disease might be more EFFECTIVE in making one immune to it. But, again, the disease itself carries with it PEOPLE DYING of it! That’s why we vaccinate in the first place, dearie.

Maternal antibodies only last a year or so until the neonate’s own immune system has developed. Using all caps and not citing any studies doesn’t make anything factual.

With the kind of research he's done, it's not for nothing that Robert Winston is not only a Professor of Gynaecology, but as a peer in the House of Lords he heads committees which advises the government on Science & Technology. One of said Sciences would be in the field of Medicine (as Prof. Winston is a medical doctor & surgeon too), Immunology; probably why the newspaper which supports the government of the day - Conservative - the right-wing rag Daily Mail does the same re. Vaccination.

He will back up his research & findings - especially in certain subjects to advise the government on in said Parliamentary committees - with papers published in the august periodicals "The Lancet" and "British Medical Journal": which do extremely rigorous Peer Review, which by definition has to be to pass as treatments, procedures etc to the ultimate end user/patient: the public.

So you know more than him, OP? Produce your qualifications which prove you do. It's okay, we can wait...!

I have a feeling the peer that reviewed your studies was yourself.