Why does the anti-vax perspective exist?

[Ima Freeman]

@Consept Thats a big source of mercury too. Some that I was exposed to as my mother had 10+ amalgams in her mouth.
I doubt tough that you get as much mercury or aluminum at once into the body as with certain vaccines.

You have to consider, that in this case the metals pass the digestive tract where there is only limited uptake, because there is a filtering effect.

With intramuscular injections tough, all of the toxic compounds get past the bodies barriers (skin for outer contact, digestive tract for swallowing, lungs for inhalation) and then into the bloodstream.

[Consept]

4 hours ago, Ima Freeman said:

@Consept Thats a big source of mercury too. Some that I was exposed to as my mother had 10+ amalgams in her mouth.
I doubt tough that you get as much mercury or aluminum at once into the body as with certain vaccines.

You have to consider, that in this case the metals pass the digestive tract where there is only limited uptake, because there is a filtering effect.

With intramuscular injections tough, all of the toxic compounds get past the bodies barriers (skin for outer contact, digestive tract for swallowing, lungs for inhalation) and then into the bloodstream.

Its actually a lot more, theres around 15x more mercury in breast milk compared to an influenza jab, also keep in mind breast milk is being given daily whereas a vaccine is only a few times in a lifetime. I take your point that a vaccine is straight into the bloodstream but even if i steelman the point and say a vaccine is more effective in terms of negative effects of metals if it goes into the bloodstream, surely it would only be negligible. Point being if you are that concerned with metals in vaccines yo should also be as concerned with breast milk, baby formula and many foods including tuna. Its strikes as quite hypocritical (not necessarily you) that theres all this outrage over a vaccine but not these other things, are these metals dangerous or not?

A big thing i think is just the perception of it being administered with a needle, as someone said in the thread, if they put the same ingredients in your food you probably wouldnt bat an eyelid.  

[Ima Freeman]

19 hours ago, Consept said:

A big thing i think is just the perception of it being administered with a needle, as someone said in the thread, if they put the same ingredients in your food you probably wouldnt bat an eyelid.  

I do, as I try to avoid pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, antibiotics, hormones, metals etc. in food 

I for my part have no big problem with needles as I do blood tests regularly.
And many "anti-vaxxers" did not have problems with needles too. But then they saw their children spiral into autism right after getting vaccinated.
Can you imagine what this does to you as a parent?

 

19 hours ago, Consept said:

Its actually a lot more, theres around 15x more mercury in breast milk compared to an influenza jab, also keep in mind breast milk is being given daily whereas a vaccine is only a few times in a lifetime. I take your point that a vaccine is straight into the bloodstream but even if i steelman the point and say a vaccine is more effective in terms of negative effects of metals if it goes into the bloodstream, surely it would only be negligible. Point being if you are that concerned with metals in vaccines yo should also be as concerned with breast milk, baby formula and many foods including tuna. Its strikes as quite hypocritical (not necessarily you) that theres all this outrage over a vaccine but not these other things, are these metals dangerous or not?

Why is there mercury in breast milk?
Because the mothers are toxic. 

Why is there outrage over vaccines but not over tuna?
Because the goverments/big pharma are not trying to force tuna on the population. They neither cover up it's toxic effects (Japan maybe)

I think toxicity is the main cause behind the epidemic of diseases like autism, ADHD, depression, anxiety, digestive issues, diabetes, cardivascular ailments, cancer, infectios disease,... and vaccines are one of it's sources.

 

[mandyjw]

 I have an autistic kid and I'm completely at peace that it had nothing to do with vaccines. The year my child was diagnosed they changed the criteria to combine diagnoses under the autism spectrum. It's easy to say that cases have skyrocketed, when in actuality, we are becoming much more proactive about testing children and giving them more tailored learning environments. From a personal perspective, it sucks as a mother to have someone's personal theory of cause pushed on you based on the assumption that something is horribly wrong with your child, which is not at all the case. Granted, my child has mild autism not severe autism, and there are some challenges for sure, but the way his brain works is unique and fascinating to me. 

Edited June 24, 2021 by mandyjw

[Eternity]

I don't think the theory that mercury in shots translates to autism has ever been proven though it has been given a lot of publicity.  If anyone has a link that confirms this theory as scientifically proven, please post it.  I would be interested to find out.

[Ima Freeman]

@Eternity https://odysee.com/@Evolutionary_Life_Video_Archive:3/Trace-Amounts--Ethyl-Mercury-(Educational-Documentary):c

[Consept]

1 hour ago, Ima Freeman said:

@Eternity https://odysee.com/@Evolutionary_Life_Video_Archive:3/Trace-Amounts--Ethyl-Mercury-(Educational-Documentary):c

Could you provide a link to the scientific study where the conclusion is that vaccines are linked to autism, there maybe good information in the hour and a half documentary you posted but it would be easier just to have the study, if there is one. 

[Ima Freeman]

@Consept First there was the unpublished Verstraeten study, as mentioned in the documentary. Only raw data was released after a Freedom of Information Act request: https://www.safeminds.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/GenerationZeroNotes.pdf

 

Significantly increased risk of autism, autism spectrum disorders, tics, attention deficit disorder, and emotional disturbances with Hg exposure from thimerosal containing vaccines: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5368423_Thimerosal_exposure_in_infants_and_neurodevelopmental_disorders_An_assessment_of_computerized_medical_records_in_the_Vaccine_Safety_Datalink

 

Vaccination associated with neurodevelopmental disorders,  preterm birth and vaccination was even associated with 6.6-fold increased odds of neurodevelopmental disorders: https://www.oatext.com/Pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-6-to-12-year-old-U-S-children.php 

 

Significant relationship between mercury and lead body burden and autism: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/Hamed-2020-the-relationship-between-the-level-of-copper-lead-mercury-.pdf


Threefold greater odds for autism:

[Village]

On 6/23/2021 at 1:17 PM, Consept said:

What would you say about the fact that theres a lot more mercury and aluminium in breast milk than there is in any vaccines?

It's the mothers detoxing their own vaccines, lmao. And you can't compare oral ingestion of mercury (most of which is neutralized and filtered by the digestive system) to an intramuscular injection, wherein your body cannot do anything to mitigate the damage and the metals pass the blood-brain barrier in no time.

[Consept]

2 hours ago, Village said:

It's the mothers detoxing their own vaccines, lmao. And you can't compare oral ingestion of mercury (most of which is neutralized and filtered by the digestive system) to an intramuscular injection, wherein your body cannot do anything to mitigate the damage and the metals pass the blood-brain barrier in no time.

On 20/06/2021 at 3:43 AM, Tanz said:

  

" Thimerosal, the organic compound used as a preservative in some vaccines, breaks down in the body into ethyl mercury. Since our bodies can remove ethyl mercury, it doesn’t bioaccumulate. This is very different from methyl mercury, found in trace amounts in certain fish like tuna. Methyl mercury is hard for our bodies to remove and can bioaccumulate. It’s the buildup of mercury over time that can be dangerous, which is why the FDA recommends limiting consumption of certain varieties of fish. While both compounds contain mercury, the two molecules are structurally different and behave differently in our bodies. It’s similar to the difference between ethyl alcohol and methyl alcohol. The former is found in beer and wine and used as a social lubricant, while the latter is used in things like antifreeze and is highly toxic. Simply stating some vaccines contain mercury is like saying “OMG! Beer contains antifreeze!”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/briankoberlein/2016/09/20/vaccines-meteors-and-why-details-matter/amp/

[ValiJustus]

Even if we assume that thimerosal the preservative containing Hg is dangerous  (used in vaccine like tetanus and flu shots), most of vaccines using other preservative, and Hg is only for inhibiting the bacterial growth so probably we should advocate to change the Hg not throw all vaccines.

But yeah vaccine development is not quick and cheap, unless its globalwide pandemic Lol. Oh regarding the new type of vaccine, probably we will get newer/updated type of other vaccines after the development of Covid vaccine with no metal preservatives required so everybody happy, but probably after pandemic wave stopped.

[Ima Freeman]

On 3.7.2021 at 10:52 PM, Consept said:

" Thimerosal, the organic compound used as a preservative in some vaccines, breaks down in the body into ethyl mercury. Since our bodies can remove ethyl mercury, it doesn’t bioaccumulate. This is very different from methyl mercury, found in trace amounts in certain fish like tuna. Methyl mercury is hard for our bodies to remove and can bioaccumulate. It’s the buildup of mercury over time that can be dangerous, which is why the FDA recommends limiting consumption of certain varieties of fish. While both compounds contain mercury, the two molecules are structurally different and behave differently in our bodies. It’s similar to the difference between ethyl alcohol and methyl alcohol. The former is found in beer and wine and used as a social lubricant, while the latter is used in things like antifreeze and is highly toxic. Simply stating some vaccines contain mercury is like saying “OMG! Beer contains antifreeze!”

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/briankoberlein/2016/09/20/vaccines-meteors-and-why-details-matter/amp/

I don't know how the author arrives at his conclusion that mercury from MeHg does accumulate in the body and mercury from EtHg does not. Most likely because the blood half-life of EtHg is shorter.

It is known that ethylmercury, like methylmercury, is converted into inorganic mercury in the body. This form is what causes brain damage and stays in the brain for decades.

Of course the two compounds behave slightly different, but blood half-life says nothing about the rate in which these compounds cross cell membranes or the blood brain barrier and how fast they are converted into inorganic mercury. Both of them are converted to this far more toxic form.

[NorthRise]

On 6/17/2021 at 2:34 PM, Consept said:

I honestly think it's an anti-government thing,

This is what I was thinking of as well. People have heard the stories of the experiments our government has done on people (Tuskegee Study, CIA and LSD, etc.) and also what corporations are willing to do to make a buck. Anti-vaxxers are very untrustworthy of the powers that be.

[Crane Bahnsteik]

Speaking solely on the covid vaccine issue, the more the government pushes the vaccination the more people will push back, it is normal human behavior, that's why the best form of control is the one you are don't even aware of.
About the people who don't want to take the vaccine, well, there are various types, some have good points while others don't, fundamentally nobody knows anything, it's an experimental vaccine and just because you feel tired for 2 days and then feel fine it doesn't mean you won't have any problems years from now (you can check side effects on openvaers), some diseases take years to develop symptoms, adding to this the censorship that is going on where even the Mrna vaccine inventor got censored on youtube and no one is talking about prescribing ivermectin only generates more disbelief, you even have organizations like OSHA stating that they will not enforce 29 CFR 1904’s recording requirements to require any employers to record worker side effects from COVID-19 vaccination. This will result on a segmented society where you will be able to clearly distinguish who's vaccinated and who isn't, and shame/discriminate who isn't until they are vaccinated, which is another form of control and a decentralized one.  Want everyone to take the vaccine? Stop pushing and put a price on it, people love paying for stuff.

[Preety_India]

On 07/07/2021 at 9:00 PM, Crane Bahnsteik said:

 vaccination. This will result on a segmented society where you will be able to clearly distinguish who's vaccinated and who isn't, and shame/discriminate who isn't until they are vaccinated, which is another form of control and a decentralized one.  Want everyone to take the vaccine? Stop pushing and put a price on it, people love paying for stuff.

Why do you think this is control?

 

[Arcangelo]

There's mass vaccination going on in my country right now.

 

[Arcangelo]

On 7/7/2021 at 9:30 AM, Crane Bahnsteik said:

adding to this the censorship that is going on where even the Mrna vaccine inventor got censored on youtube

 

On 7/7/2021 at 9:30 AM, Crane Bahnsteik said:

This will result on a segmented society where you will be able to clearly distinguish who's vaccinated and who isn't, and shame/discriminate who isn't until they are vaccinated, which is another form of control and a decentralized one.  Want everyone to take the vaccine? Stop pushing and put a price on it, people love paying for stuff.

Yes this is exactly how I feel. I am not taking that shit.

 

 

[Sonny]

I'm not anti-vax, but I am (so far) not going to take the vaccine. I have invested countless of hours last year into researching this whole covid thing, like a lot of people. My simple conclusion is that it is not as bad as it is portrayed. It's worsely portrayed to convince people to follow the measures and take the vaccin. As far as I know, it's a little worse than the flu, mainly because it's new, so there is no herd immunity so there is a way higher spread. If everyone would get the flu right now, it would look very much the same as covid, I think. Apart from that, I am 27 and healthy and I am not getting a flu-shot every year (elder and 'weak' people do). So would I take this one then? If you look at the fatality rate, it's much less than originally expected. All the doom scenarios are not coming true, everytime they give the reasons for some new measures, the scenario is very far away from the truth. Apart from that, scientists with different opinions are getting censored. I am not saying that it is all true what I write now... but for me, this removes the trust in this whole thing. I also don't trust the process of how the vaccine is made. For example the mexican flu's vaccine caused narcolepsy, which is officially accredited by governments now. Who knows what this vaccin will do... I don't trust it and many doctors say it's a risk. For me a greater risk than covid, I think we know enough of that disease now to make a good estimation how bad it is.

I think many basic human rights are getting ignored/taken away, so it's also principally not good for me to take the vaccine, it would feel like I support this whole thing which I don't. Doesn't mean that covid is laughable... absolutely not. The flu is very serious too. Every year the hospitals are full of flu patients, from young to old. Although mainly old of course. But did we have a lockdown because of that? No. But I respect everybody's decision of course.

Edited July 29, 2021 by Sonny

[Consept]

After talking to people who have the anti-vaxx perspective and contemplating this topic for a little while I've come to a conclusion on it. 

I think it really just comes down to fear and this is a somewhat justified fear, but it's also the inability to admit and face that fear. There's 2 types of fear involved, one is fear of government which manifests in distrust of anything they try and impose on the population. The second is just a fear of having to have something stuck in their arm and injected into them, this is actually a fear many people have had since childhood, what's worse is that they feel pressure to have the shot which makes them feel bad as they're unable to overcome this fear. These 2 fears also cross over of course. 

Now the big factor is that people are not willing to face this fear, which is to say to recognise where this fear comes from and either go through it and take the shot or just admit that you're fearful of it and don't want to take it. Because the fear is strong, people selling the anti-vaxx narratives can target these people and stoke up the fears within them, because it gives them a rationale and 'evidence' no matter how tenuous it might be. The implication is that these are just 100% rational people who don't have any particular emotions either way, they have looked at the research and it's clear that it's more in favour of the anti-vaxx view.

This is simply not the case. The fear was there first and the 'research', came after making it an exercise in looking for a justifiable reason not to take it. The weighting that's given to anti-vaxx research compared to normal research is far greater. For example there can be an anti-vaxx meme given more weight than a peer reviewed scientific paper, not by everyone but a lot of people will give the meme greater significance. This doesnt strike me as a cold hard 'stick to the facts' perspectives. 

The anti-vaxx perspective doesn't exist without fear, as I said it somewhat makes sense as the government and big business have a history of not having our best interests at heart, so I do get why the fear is there and that shouldn't be shamed its a real thing. However I feel it would be a more honest assessment if the anti-vaxxer would just say I'm scared and its not necessarily rational, this would gain a lot more understanding from other people. What has been happening is that people are so scared that they don't want to admit they're scared and are getting defensive calling others sheeple etc. Also the smarter you are the better you can probably put together a complex argument against the vaccine, but again if you look honestly at it fear is still a big component. 

Also extra note, I'm not saying people who take the vaccine are fearless, of course they will have their fears too, either they do fear the vaccine but still go ahead with it or they really fear covid or they're just not that fearful either way and do what they think is the best thing, which is probably the majority. 

Edited July 29, 2021 by Consept

[Sonny]

7 minutes ago, Consept said:

After talking to people who have the anti-vaxx perspective and contemplating this topic for a little while I've come to a conclusion on it. 

I think it really just comes down to fear and this is a somewhat justified fear, but it's also the inability to admit and face that fear. There's 2 types of fear involved, one is fear of government which manifests in distrust of anything they try and impose on the population. The second is just a fear of having to have something stuck in their arm and injected into them, this is actually a fear many people have had since childhood, what's worse is that they feel pressure to have the shot which makes them feel bad as they're unable to overcome this fear. These 2 fears also cross over of course. 

Now the big factor is that people are not willing to face this fear, which is to say to recognise where this fear comes from and either go through it and take the shot or just admit that you're fearful of it and don't want to take it. Because the fear is strong, people selling the anti-vaxx narratives can target these people and stoke up the fears within them, because it gives them a rationale and 'evidence' no matter how tenuous it might be. The implication is that these are just 100% rational people who don't have any particular emotions either way, they have looked at the research and it's clear that it's more in favour of the anti-vaxx view.

This is simply not the case. The fear was there first and the 'research', came after making it an exercise in looking for a justifiable reason not to take it. The weighting that's given to anti-vaxx research compared to normal research is far greater. For example there can be an anti-vaxx meme given more weight than a peer reviewed scientific paper, not by everyone but a lot of people will give the meme greater significance. This doesnt strike me as a cold hard 'stick to the facts' perspectives. 

The anti-vaxx perspective doesn't exist without fear, as I said it somewhat makes sense as the government and big business have a history of not having our best interests at heart, so I do get why the fear is there and that shouldn't be shamed its a real thing. However I feel it would be a more honest assessment if the anti-vaxxer would just say I'm scared and its not necessarily rational, this would gain a lot more understanding from other people. What has been happening is that people are so scared that they don't want to admit they're scared and are getting defensive calling others sheeple etc. Also the smarter you are the better you can probably put together a complex argument against the vaccine, but again if you look honestly at it fear is still a big component. 

 

How much is the whole covid narrative based on fear then?