Yep, nor were my kids allowed. You had to have all your vaccinations up to date. Measles is a nasty illness that can cause many problems including death. I did have measles because there wasn't a vaccine at the time and I was lucky not to have gotten any of the bad complications but there were those that did. It's not worth taking the risk.
Here is some facts that you can add The vaccines came out when the disease was almost gone and took credit for eradicating it what a laugh. Polio vaccine in India caused 47,500 cases of a more deadly polio virus Here is a doctor who have done research in the medical literature. Dr. Tenpenny
I remember taking the Salk vaccine in a sugar cube at school..and we were vaccinated for whatever was available. I had chicken pox, measles twice (once as a kid..once in Jr.high). I believe in vaccinations for kids and animals. I lost a cat to Feline Leukemia years back before the vaccine came out...so I was pleased for that addition.
Chrissy..we had to put her down and I adored that cat... It was awful and my vet bills were sky high. I would never risk that disease in another cat. Nothing is perfect..but I'll go with my best shot.
Yes, everytime I got a kitten that was my biggest fear til I got them to the vet. Had a few kitties that I took in that were on my doorstep.
Martin, this seems to have nothing to do with scarlet fever, diphtheria, etc. ever starting up again. It's not about stopping what would have been a current epidemic that was going on but rather making sure there weren't outbreaks in the future. And there's no way, even with false information, that anyone can PROVE that they would have never returned. Or do you disagree with that, too?
Just as an interesting side note, are you aware that Sherri Tenpenny sells supplements and vitamins and has a lot to gain (it's all green and spendable) by misleading the public about vaccines? If you were aware that she has a huge interest in getting people to take her vitamins instead of vaccinations, then please disregard my question. But I'd still like to see something reputable at which point I could stand down with a clear conscience.
So you get your information from the largest provider and lobby group for abortions in the world, but you consider that to be objective, and you question where I got my information, despite the fact that I posted a prominent link to it -- from thelawdictionary.com -- not a lobby group. On that basis, there's no point in continuing this discussion. Plus, the thread is about the pulling of the anti-vaccination movie anyhow, and my position on that topic is that we should not suppress information. People should be informed, and informed people should be allowed to make health decisions for themselves and their children.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...ccines-are-dangerous-says-the-government.aspx There is also the fact that those who are claiming the vaccines are safe are News Stations that are owned by those who allow their Reporters, etc. to say only what they want them to say, medical people, etc. that are tied to the Big Drug Companies who produce these vaccines, etc. and newspapers, etc. that also are usually bought and paid to say what those in power want them to say. It's really easy to believe anything that is out there...but that doesn't mean it's the truth.
Overall, I am not opposed to vaccines. I do believe that we're having far too many of them forced on us and our children, and that there are risks as well as benefits. Let's examine two different arguments, and see if you can appreciate the fact that they are the same. For one position, we have the government and most reputable (reputable by virtue of the fact that they are in agreement with the government agenda) medical professionals pushing vaccines on us, arguing that mandatory vaccines will bring about herd immunity, which will be a good thing overall, despite the risk to individual children. Because most people think more highly of their own children than of the herd, they do their best to suppress information relating to the risks. For another, we have a group of powerful people (including the same people who are arguing for mandatory vaccinations and government healthcare) who are arguing that the earth would be a better place if three-quarters of its human population would die. Since individuals are unlikely to step forward to volunteer to be killed for the greater good of humanity, this agenda - when it comes about - is unlikely to be a voluntary one. Will it come disguised as a war, as an epidemic or pandemic, or through the predictable failures of a government run healthcare system?
Nopers. I researched a number of different places and chose to name the one that seemed the less likely to have false information. Who else would better know where you need permission? You'd think their interest would be in opposite direction, so yes, I chose the source (that I am VERY morally against) that would seem to have the most up to date information. The question was made about your information because it was not up to date or accurate, that's all.
Here is an extract from a 2014 BBC report full text here Wakefield became convinced that William and a number of other children he had examined were suffering from a new kind of bowel disease that could be linked to their autism. What's more, he started to wonder whether this condition was being caused by the MMR vaccine. At the press conference to coincide with the publication of this research he suggested that the combined MMR jab should not be used. The result was a media storm. Ever since, scientists have been looking at the evidence to see whether there really is a link between autism and the vaccine. The medical community has relied mainly on epidemiology - the statistical study of large populations. These studies have overwhelmingly found no link between autism and MMR. Opponents claim that some of these studies might have flaws, but there are over a dozen epidemiological studies in different countries that use different techniques that have reached the same conclusion. At the very least, these studies show that the large increases in rates of autism that have been reported in many countries around the world cannot be due to MMR.