There is no grand conspiracy to make the world sick via vaccines to profit. If they are truly 'evil', both insurance and big pharma would benefit much, much more in not having people vaccinated and overpricing drugs every time there is a panic and a run on supplies, ala H1N1. Could you imagine the demand with today's media if there was a measles outbreak in a major city with many deaths?
There is no conspiracy.
As for mecury, you ingest much more of it every time you eat some fish. It is a fact of life.
With every medication, a certain percentage of people will experience side effects. People have died from taking aspirin after all. The point is that a major outbreak of a disease like measles, mumps, rubella, etc would be catastrophic for a large group of people. It is in all of our interests to do what we can to prevent this from happening, even if it means a small, small percentage suffer in the process.
Look at a history book. There is but one constant dread in every story: plague. Disease has culled populations quickly and dramatically in regular fashion for as long as humanity has existed. When is the last time you remember a major outbreak killing off half your neighbourhood? Exactly. That's due 100% to vaccinations.
Get vaccinated. Help yourself and your children; help our civilization survive the horrible effects of these diseases.
Yes, and I just gave you a better business case to not vaccinate.
Second, the mercury and heavy metals that fish you eat might contain are not injected into your blood and small amounts if any gets there.
Fish are the number one source of Mercury poisoning incidents, according to the USEPA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poisoning#cite_note-EPA...). There is no protection offered from your digestion system against this heavy metal. Your argument is irrelevant here.
childhood diseases decreased 90% between 1850 and 1940, paralleling improved sanitation and hygienic practices, well before mandatory vaccination programs
Really? Source this please, because according to wikipedia, the UK Vaccination of 1840 first introduced vaccinations, which were made mandatory by the 1853 act. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccination_Act#The_1840_Act)
That seems to coincide pretty well with the drop in diseases, actually.
Mercury is bioaccumalitive and so I think such studies are justified. Why is no one doing this?
Also from a business perspective if there is such concern about methylmercury in vaccines why doesn't someone bring to market vaccines that use a different (more natural?) preservative? It seems like this would be a win win all around.
Also I would avoid using wikipedia as a direct source.
Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative used in some vaccines and other products since the 1930's. There is no convincing evidence of harm caused by the low doses of thimerosal in vaccines, except for minor reactions like redness and swelling at the injection site.
However, in July 1999, the Public Health Service agencies, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and vaccine manufacturers agreed that thimerosal should be reduced or eliminated in vaccines as a precautionary measure.
The polio vaccine's first mass vaccination campaign was in 1955, take a look at what happened to the incidence of polio: http://www.post-polio.org/ir-usa.html
A measles vaccine became available in 1963. Take a look at what happened to the incidence of (or more importantly the deaths caused by) measles here: http://www.iayork.com/MysteryRays/2009/09/02/measles-deaths-...
You are spreading misinformation, you should do the research first.
What you are doing to your kids is an insult to mine, and I will continue to fight those who oppose vaccinations until you lose.
The mission statement:
To replace the existing systems for health, education, government, money and business with systems which are in harmony with nature and which give maximum freedom, wealth and happiness to ALL the people and animals of earth. Please pray for this situation to come into existence