03-14-2015, 08:20 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-14-2015, 08:23 PM by indolering.)
As of Friday, August 5th, 2022, the Bring4th forums on this page have been converted to a permanent read-only archive. If you would like to continue your journey with Bring4th, the new forums are now at https://discourse.bring4th.org.
You are invited to enjoy many years worth of forum messages brought forth by our community of seekers. The site search feature remains available to discover topics of interest. (July 22, 2022)
x
|
03-14-2015, 10:03 PM
03-14-2015, 11:18 PM
 Indolering: Here are 3 links (not from the same website (!)..) regarding Wakefield: http://www.newsweek.com/2015/02/20/andre...05836.html http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cd...blower.asp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield " Andrew Jeremy Wakefield (born c. 1957) is a British former surgeon and medical researcher, known for his fraudulent 1998 research paper in support of the now-discredited claim that there was a link between the administration of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, and the appearance of autism and bowel disease.[1][2][3][4][5] After the publication of the paper, other researchers were unable to reproduce Wakefield's findings or confirm his hypothesis of an association between the MMR vaccine and autism,[6] or autism and gastrointestinal disease.[7] A 2004 investigation by Sunday Times reporter Brian Deer identified undisclosed financial conflicts of interest on Wakefield's part,[8] and most of his co-authors then withdrew their support for the study's interpretations.[9] The British General Medical Council (GMC) conducted an inquiry into allegations of misconduct against Wakefield and two former colleagues.[10] The investigation centred on Deer's numerous findings, including that children with autism were subjected to unnecessary invasive medical procedures,[11] such as colonoscopy and lumbar puncture, and that Wakefield acted without the required ethical approval from an institutional review board. On 28 January 2010, a five-member statutory tribunal of the GMC found three dozen charges proved, including four counts of dishonesty and 12 counts involving the abuse of developmentally challenged children.[12] The panel ruled that Wakefield had "failed in his duties as a responsible consultant", acted both against the interests of his patients, and "dishonestly and irresponsibly" in his published research.[13][14][15] The Lancet fully retracted the 1998 publication on the basis of the GMC's findings, noting that elements of the manuscript had been falsified.[16] The Lancet's editor-in-chief Richard Horton said the paper was "utterly false" and that the journal had been "deceived".[17] Three months following The Lancet's retraction, Wakefield was struck off the UK medical register, with a statement identifying deliberate falsification in the research published in The Lancet,[18] and is barred from practising medicine in the UK.[19] In January 2011, an editorial accompanying an article by Brian Deer in BMJ identified Wakefield's work as an "elaborate fraud".[1][20][21] In a follow-up article,[22] Deer said that Wakefield had planned to launch a venture on the back of an MMR vaccination scare that would profit from new medical tests and "litigation driven testing".[23] In November 2011, yet another report in BMJ[24] revealed original raw data indicating that, contrary to Wakefield's claims in The Lancet, children in his research did not have inflammatory bowel disease.[25][26] Wakefield's study and his claim that the MMR vaccine might cause autism led to a decline in vaccination rates in the United States, United Kingdom and Ireland and a corresponding rise in measles and mumps, resulting in serious illness and deaths, and his continued warnings against the vaccine have contributed to a climate of distrust of all vaccines and the reemergence of other previously controlled diseases.[27][28][29] Wakefield has continued to defend his research and conclusions, saying there was no fraud, hoax or profit motive.[30][31] As recently as February 2015, he publicly repeated his denials and refused to back down from his assertions,[32] despite the fact—as stated by a British Administrative Court Justice in a related decision—that "there is now no respectable body of opinion which supports [Dr. Wakefield's] hypothesis, that MMR vaccine and autism/enterocolitis are causally linked."[33]" ------------------------------------------  Please don't "make up numbers" Shemaya. 0_0 You write: "The fact is that communicable diseases are controlled via good hygiene, universal precautions and hand washing. Good health and overall nutrition is important also to maintain a healthy immune system, which will maintain health and homeostasis provided that a body's needs are met." This is inaccurate because it's only a part of prevention: "» What is transmission by droplet contact? Some diseases can be transferred by infected droplets contacting surfaces of the eye, nose, or mouth. This is referred to as droplet contact transmission. Droplets containing microorganisms can be generated when an infected person coughs, sneezes, or talks. Droplets can also be generated during certain medical procedures, such as bronchoscopy. Droplets are too large to be airborne for long periods of time, and quickly settle out of air. Measles and SARS are examples of diseases capable of droplet contact transmission. » What is airborne transmission? Airborne transmission refers to situations where droplet nuclei (residue from evaporated droplets) or dust particles containing microorganisms can remain suspended in air for long periods of time. These organisms must be capable of surviving for long periods of time outside the body and must be resistant to drying. Airborne transmission allows organisms to enter the upper and lower respiratory tracts. Diseases capable of airborne transmission include: Tuberculosis Chickenpox Measles » What is vector-borne transmission? Vectors are animals that are capable of transmitting diseases. Examples of vectors are flies, mites, fleas, ticks, rats, and dogs. The most common vector for disease is the mosquito. Mosquitoes transfer disease through the saliva which comes in contact with their hosts when they are withdrawing blood. Mosquitoes are vectors for malaria, West Nile virus, dengue fever, and yellow fever. Vectors add an extra dimension to disease transmission. Since vectors are mobile, they increase the transmission range of a disease. Changes in vector behaviour will affect the transmission pattern of a disease. Biting is not the only way vectors can transmit diseases. Diseases may be spread through the feces of a vector. Microorganisms could also be located on the outside surface of a vector (such as a fly) and spread through physical contact with food, a common touch surface, or a susceptible individual." http://microbiology.mtsinai.on.ca/faq/tr...sion.shtml Your questioning the philanthropy of Bill Gates is very valid, and I agree we can benefit from "more investigation to determine the safety of vaccines." I also agree "Transparency regarding motivations of those set to profit from them. Honestly, a health care system based on making profit is corrupt at it's core." Yes, Capitalism is corrupt at it's core it's STS. (In the long term STS doesn't have the transformative power of STO - of LOVE (for ALL). This is stated by Ra also). Additionally, conflating so many issues together requires a lot of discernment and information. And is prone to massive inaccuracy and unhelpful generalisations. This is what is so troubling about the internet; we think through online searches/reading we can become expert at understanding massively complex interconnected issues and come to ONE definitive conclusion that applies to the freewill of 7 billion individual life forms. It's an inaccurate (and patronising) idea that humans are 'sheeple'. I can't speak for Americans, but it's not the case in my country or many many others. I know the power of Love; of my inner self, and my courage and capacity to effect change and bring more Light. That's my focus. what we focus on.. give our energy to - grows... Indolering's postings focus on what he perceives as wrong.... offering no solutions, and full of fear. Light extinguishes darkness. (Darkness can not extinguish Light. It has no power over Light/Love.) Moment by moment we can ask ourselves "What am I focussing on?" (Because that is what I'm creating.) 
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)
2 members thanked for this post
03-15-2015, 01:21 PM
(03-14-2015, 11:18 PM)Sheldor Wrote: ok. :-/ How about gazillion? Big Pharma makes a gazillion dollars on vaccines and seeks to increase both the market and profit from the sale of vaccines. Quote:You write: "The fact is that communicable diseases are controlled via good hygiene, universal precautions and hand washing. Good health and overall nutrition is important also to maintain a healthy immune system, which will maintain health and homeostasis provided that a body's needs are met." not really. Universal precautions means wearing gloves, mask, eyewear. This would prevent infection via airborne and droplet modes of transmission. It is standard procedure in healthcare. Hand washing is absolutely vital and infectious disease is well controlled with consistent hygiene and hand cleansing, avoiding touching eyes ,nose , mouth unless hands are clean. Vector transmission would be greatly reduced in impoverished regions if clean, sanitized water was available and a sanitary infrastructure for water and sewage was created. Quote:This is what is so troubling about the internet; we think through online searches/reading we can become expert at understanding massively complex interconnected issues and come to ONE definitive conclusion that applies to the freewill of 7 billion individual life forms. I don't know about that. Who thinks that? Freely available information is troubling? What would trouble me is if the ONE definitive conclusion was mandatory vaccinations for all children. It would trouble me if my freedom to choose or decline an invasive procedure /inoculation for my child was taken away. There are enough unanswered questions regarding vaccines that it doesn't take an expert to understand the controversy. Are you advocating we give our power away by agreeing to vaccines even if intuition strongly leads us to decline? Just rely on" experts" and ignore the pertinent questions? I don't know the older and wiser I get, the less I trust the medical racket. I am more likely to decline vaccination now than 20 years ago. Quote:I know the power of Love; of my inner self, and my courage and capacity to effect change and bring more Light. A mother or father who is focused on love is fiercely protective of her child. Refusing vaccination because she fears injury to her child, based on evidence or experience, is pure love.
3 members thanked Shemaya for this post
03-15-2015, 01:21 PM
Vaccination from VX-Nerve Gas
03-15-2015, 06:41 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-15-2015, 06:52 PM by indolering.)
.
Sheldor... Your opinion nor the hit pieces on Dr Wakefield are convincing. It only shows me how corrupt the MSM and Wikipedia are. I expose the lies and I offer the limited solutions left to those who realize we're being enslaved. My solution to poisonous jabs is to take responsibility for your own health, and expose the vicious, lethal, illuminati-created medical industry. You disagree? Fine. Take your jabs, give 'em to your kids, and pray they don't become vegetables. Vaccinations are proven to be deleterious to health and rarely efficacious in practice. Disneyland and measles?? Did you even read that article I posted? The Disneyland/Measles brouhaha is another wicked scheme to frighten people into getting their jabs, and to attack those who refuse by accusing them of being responsible for outbreaks. You had better do some serious research, Sheldor before you go accusing me of propaganda or any other such tactics you feel I'm using. Truth will stand on the evidence, and lies will be exposed by the liars who promote them. The liars always have ulterior motives and if you examine them, you will find them. I don't know where you're from, but the evidence is overwhelmingly in my favor and internet searches can be quite productive and informative. One day you'll realize the evil intent behind mainstream allopathic medicine. But don't worry - God knows we were all stupid at some point till we learned the truth.
2 members thanked indolering for this post
03-18-2015, 06:42 PM
.
Some of the members of Bring4th have accused me of fear-mongering and focusing only on the negative without offering solutions. Icke also gets accused of this. There is no doubt that research into the manipulation of humanity reveals reams of data which ought to shake an individual to his core, and compels him to wonder how men can be so wicked. Our common dilemma is truly frightening, and if allowed to continue will spell misery for all humanity for years to come. And although the information is difficult to contemplate without feeling a sense of dread, we must not allow it to dominate our emotions to the point where we become incapable of accurately integrating the data and formulating a positive response. We simply have to take responsibility to not only protect ourselves and our family from the oppression, but to take an active role in preventing the culmination of the globalists' plans. It takes courage and dedication to the Light to rise above our fears and mobilize resistance to the invading horde. Perhaps you don't believe the evidence; that is your prerogative, and should not be ridiculed – we're each entitled to our opinions. I present evidence and conclusions which I have found to be accurate. I'm not infallible. But I will say this: if even 25% of what I believe is true, all of us are in serious trouble. There can no longer be any doubt that our world and major world events are engineered by negative entities to conform to their overall agenda: control of Earth. I hope the hundredth monkey syndrome is as true for humans as it is for chimps – this phenomenon could, if true, bring awareness of our condition to millions of people almost overnight. If that were to happen, our chances of defeating the controllers would be so great that we would surely bring about the changes we so desperately need. Nevertheless, it's true that only a certain percentage of humanity is necessary to effect the changes we seek. Thus, an important part of the work is to inform as many as possible of our common dilemma. Finally, we should never be afraid to face the truth, regardless of its negativity. This is made difficult by the lies and the brainwashing which has been our heritage throughout our lives. No one likes to admit that many foundational principles we were taught are outright deception. Personally, I hold truth to be among the highest of virtues, and I crave to understand the truth of our world so that I may be effective in working for Peace and Harmony.
2 members thanked indolering for this post
03-19-2015, 02:41 PM
Quote:Personally, I hold truth to be among the highest of virtues, and I crave to understand the truth of our world so that I may be effective in working for Peace and Harmony Amen brother! For it is the truth that will set us free, this I know.
03-21-2015, 09:17 PM
(03-20-2015, 07:41 PM)Monica Wrote: Snopes.com isn't an authoritative source. It's just a husband-wife team who know how to use Google. So anything you read there is just their opinion. Isn't it alarming that people are so disconnected from "knowing" that they are forced to rely on the beliefs and opinions of others, and propaganda? Backwards world society has created. Maybe he is right. Maybe God created us without immune systems solely that we develop synthetic and harmful methods of modification? Ya never know. (Well some do lol)
03-22-2015, 04:40 AM
What about animal vaccinations? Do you guys think that the same malevolence and secrecy that is behind human vaccinations is also behind those?
03-22-2015, 05:34 AM
1) - "Snopes.com isn't an authoritative source. It's just a husband-wife team who know how to use Google. So anything you read there is just their opinion. " (Quote: Monica)
Therefore: 'Monica, Indolering, BrownEye, Shemaya, Sheldor, (etc) aren't an authoritative source. It's just an individual who knows how to use Google. So anything you read from them is just their opinion.' (Question to Monica: Why are a husband and wife team "who know how to use Google" less informed than any who post here on B4th?) (Unless any who have replied to this vaccine thread have a medical degree ?) 2) BrownEye, you speak of propaganda. I counter that there is much propaganda coming from the anti vax lobby. Several posts back Indolering posted a sensationalist photo montage which reminds me of hundreds of propaganda posters for various causes (both left and right wing) throughout the last century. Have a look at the imagery. It is clearly alarmist propaganda. 3) Indolering, a few posts back you essentially intimated I'm "stupid", when you wrote: ("One day you'll realize the evil intent behind mainstream allopathic medicine. But don't worry - God knows we were all stupid at some point till we learned the truth.") I have read Icke and Marciniak, Alfred Webre, David Wilcock, Bill Cooper, Alan Watt, Zecharia Sitchin, John Lear, Jim Marrs, Tenpenny, Jenni McCarthy, Alex Collier, Zeitgeist Movement, seen Network (film) and numerous others, I've had private email conversations with Miriam Delicado, I've read Hidden Hand etc etc etc....for over 2 decades, I've read dozens of authors and websites concerning Illuminati, Reptilians, Annunaki, Orion entities, bloodlines and Luciferian agenda, New World Order, etc - I've read hundreds of metaphysical books from American authors and international authors. I have a university degree in philosophy and BA/Communications and have been researching metaphysics for over 25 years. Your replies patronise me. (Additionally, I never said you were using "propaganda" and "tactics" (though you say that I did).) There are hundreds of Australian, European, Asian, African books, authors websites I could suggest you read; non Americans read internationally as well as being fully versed on your culture; (which is statistically not reciprocal re your citizens); but you haven't had me be patronising to you. And BrownEye, as a practising clairvoyant I'm very connected with my inner "knowing"... no-one "forces" me to believe anything. 4) Americans world view isn't the whole world's view, experience, or truth of reality. If you're determined to claim that from your research/reading it IS... travel for a few years. Get out of your 4.5 % bubble. I apologise in advance if this sounds rude, but re-read peoples rude replies to me and you'll see I have been spoken to in a way here that gives me a right to be this emphatic in my rebuttle; to defend my intelligence and knowledge, and to draw attention to being patronised and discounted. I've tried to be heard on this website as someone who's from the 95% of the rest of the world.. but it seems USA respondents here can't move their minds outside their country and consider that their thinking is strongly controlled by the ego-centric, self referential paradigm that is 'America'; and that much of the rest of the world knows a lot about their country but that they know so little about the rest of the world. Nearly all the authors/theorists for anti-vax are USA based and therefore myopic, mono cultural. Wakefield is a British example, but he's an exception. And it's proven he tampered with his own research (on only 12 children) for financial profit. You come from a country with only 4.5% of this planets population... yet you proclaim that you and your informants speak for the entire world? I don't know how to say this gently - but it needs to be said: the world is very tired of American self centred arrogance and cultural imperialism. 5) I am sure there is much STS agenda in this world. But there is much cognitive distortion and fear mongering regarding vaccines; and MOST DISTURBINGLY no alternatives to pandemics are being provided by any anti vax lobby. A return to world wide pandemics would bring about massive population reduction. So, if anything, the anti vax lobby actually fits in with an Illuminati-type agenda. 6) I have personally experienced STS in alternative health practitioners just as much as I have in allopathic doctors. 7) What disturbs me is the closed mindedness of this discussion. And the selfishness!! Thinking of yourselves and your children only, and reacting from fear - refusing to read the actual science unless it's filtered through your approved 'natural health' websites and/or agenda laden conspiracy websites.. who bend the truth as much as any other humans with agenda. Where is your INTERNATIONAL research? on both sides? Have you travelled outside of your country? Do you speak other languages? Have you researched the 6.7 billion other people who share this planet with "America'?? Or do you insist we can only find truth by reading mostly American authors? Your 4.5% population size 'reality' seems like "a 100% of the world" to you - in your minds.... but to others it's just 4.5% of what's happening.... can't you see your collective bias? 8) As I've said previously; it is clear LOGIC that there is far more money to be made from sick people - ill from (vaccine preventable) diseases. 9) Please understand, I do know that there are a small amount of extremely wealthy, politically powerful STS people who have various agendas that we need to be very wary of, and actively subvert. What I'm trying to say is that FEAR energy, fearful rhetoric and 'information/disinfo'... is tricky by nature, and the zealous closed minded discussions on this forum are what have me most alarmed. I'm no fool - but I'm wise enough to know I must keep constantly open-minded and discerning about ALL I read and hear (both sides).. and remember that whenever I think I have 'the whole picture', is when I need to check and recheck to see if I'm being played. My strong response to this particular conspiracy theory; comes from direct personal experience of the destructiveness of peoples refusal to vaccinate; and from anti-vax providing no alternative to lethal disease and reinforcing STS selfishness and fear. I repeat: I'm sure there are nefarious agendas in this world. There is also free-will, individual goodness, honesty and honour in millions and millions of individual people; and your country is but one part of the world. You don't have 'the whole picture'. This world is too massive and complex, too intricate and multifaceted. And we're getting tired of Americans thinking they have 'the whole picture' about the world. If you've been influenced by FEAR you haven't necessarily thought clearly. You haven't been impartial and used discernment. You have been 'influenced'. Even if the information is fully or partially accurate; if high levels of fear are involved, the power of discernment is compromised. 10) So to clarify; I'm concerned at the incompleteness and the closed mindedness of conspiracy opinions - not necessarily that they are untrue, but that they are INCOMPLETE. Just as those who say 'all is well in the world' also have incomplete knowledge. As to vaccination ? - yes, of course it's possible there's issues with some vaccination schedules/contents - (and with alcohol, cigarettes, McDonalds junk 'food', guns, cars running people over etc ) but there's SIGNIFICANTLY more hard evidence of enormous harm to humans from disease. OVER MILLENNIA. I offer love and an open heart to all here. I sincerely do. But I can't allow myself to be subject to overt or subtle bullying, passive/aggressive comments, or assumptions about my knowledge/intelligence and/or life experience. 11) Here's some useful information about decision-making, belief, and behavioural biases for all of us (including me too) -to have a think about: (comprehensive lists of the potential biases and cognitive distortions that can occur from being in human mind/body complexes) Decision-making, belief, and behavioral biases Ambiguity effect - The tendency to avoid options for which missing information makes the probability seem "unknown".[8] Anchoring or focalism - The tendency to rely too heavily, or "anchor", on one trait or piece of information when making decisions (usually the first piece of information that we acquire on that subject)[9][10] Attentional bias - The tendency of our perception to be affected by our recurring thoughts.[11] Availability heuristic - The tendency to overestimate the likelihood of events with greater "availability" in memory, which can be influenced by how recent the memories are or how unusual or emotionally charged they may be.[12] Availability cascade - A self-reinforcing process in which a collective belief gains more and more plausibility through its increasing repetition in public discourse (or "repeat something long enough and it will become true").[13] Backfire effect - When people react to disconfirming evidence by strengthening their beliefs.[14] Bandwagon effect - The tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. Related to groupthink and herd behavior.[15] Base rate fallacy or base rate neglect - The tendency to ignore base rate information (generic, general information) and focus on specific information (information only pertaining to a certain case).[16] Belief bias - An effect where someone's evaluation of the logical strength of an argument is biased by the believability of the conclusion.[17] Bias blind spot - The tendency to see oneself as less biased than other people, or to be able to identify more cognitive biases in others than in oneself.[18] Cheerleader effect - The tendency for people to appear more attractive in a group than in isolation.[19] Choice-supportive bias - The tendency to remember one's choices as better than they actually were.[20] Clustering illusion - The tendency to overestimate the importance of small runs, streaks, or clusters in large samples of random data (that is, seeing phantom patterns).[10] Confirmation bias - The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions.[21] Congruence bias - The tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, instead of testing possible alternative hypotheses.[10] Conjunction fallacy - The tendency to assume that specific conditions are more probable than general ones.[22] Conservatism or regressive bias - A certain state of mind wherein high values and high likelihoods are overestimated while low values and low likelihoods are underestimated.[23][24][25][unreliable source?] Conservatism (Bayesian) - The tendency to revise one's belief insufficiently when presented with new evidence.[23][26][27] Contrast effect - The enhancement or reduction of a certain perception's stimuli when compared with a recently observed, contrasting object.[28] Curse of knowledge - When better-informed people find it extremely difficult to think about problems from the perspective of lesser-informed people.[29] Decoy effect - Preferences for either option A or B changes in favor of option B when option C is presented, which is similar to option B but in no way better. Denomination effect - The tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts (e.g. coins) rather than large amounts (e.g. bills).[30] Distinction bias - The tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them simultaneously than when evaluating them separately.[31] Duration neglect - The neglect of the duration of an episode in determining its value Empathy gap - The tendency to underestimate the influence or strength of feelings, in either oneself or others. Endowment effect - The fact that people often demand much more to give up an object than they would be willing to pay to acquire it.[32] Essentialism - Categorizing people and things according to their essential nature, in spite of variations.[dubious – discuss][33] Exaggerated expectation - Based on the estimates, real-world evidence turns out to be less extreme than our expectations (conditionally inverse of the conservatism bias).[unreliable source?][23][34] Experimenter's or expectation bias - The tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations.[35] Focusing effect - The tendency to place too much importance on one aspect of an event.[36] Forer effect or Barnum effect - The observation that individuals will give high accuracy ratings to descriptions of their personality that supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people. This effect can provide a partial explanation for the widespread acceptance of some beliefs and practices, such as astrology, fortune telling, graphology, and some types of personality tests. Framing effect - Drawing different conclusions from the same information, depending on how or by whom that information is presented. Frequency illusion - The illusion in which a word, a name or other thing that has recently come to one's attention suddenly seems to appear with improbable frequency shortly afterwards (not to be confused with the recency illusion or selection bias).[37] Colloquially, this illusion is known as the Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon.[38] Functional fixedness - Limits a person to using an object only in the way it is traditionally used. Gambler's fallacy - The tendency to think that future probabilities are altered by past events, when in reality they are unchanged. Results from an erroneous conceptualization of the law of large numbers. For example, "I've flipped heads with this coin five times consecutively, so the chance of tails coming out on the sixth flip is much greater than heads." Hard–easy effect - Based on a specific level of task difficulty, the confidence in judgments is too conservative and not extreme enough[23][39][40][41] Hindsight bias - Sometimes called the "I-knew-it-all-along" effect, the tendency to see past events as being predictable[42] at the time those events happened. Hostile media effect - The tendency to see a media report as being biased, owing to one's own strong partisan views. Hot-hand fallacy - The "hot-hand fallacy" (also known as the "hot hand phenomenon" or "hot hand") is the fallacious belief that a person who has experienced success has a greater chance of further success in additional attempts. Hyperbolic discounting - Discounting is the tendency for people to have a stronger preference for more immediate payoffs relative to later payoffs. Hyperbolic discounting leads to choices that are inconsistent over time – people make choices today that their future selves would prefer not to have made, despite using the same reasoning.[43] Also known as current moment bias, present-bias, and related to Dynamic inconsistency. Identifiable victim effect - The tendency to respond more strongly to a single identified person at risk than to a large group of people at risk.[44] IKEA effect - The tendency for people to place a disproportionately high value on objects that they partially assembled themselves, such as furniture from IKEA, regardless of the quality of the end result. Illusion of control - The tendency to overestimate one's degree of influence over other external events.[45] Illusion of validity - Belief that furtherly acquired information generates additional relevant data for predictions, even when it evidently does not.[46] Illusory correlation - Inaccurately perceiving a relationship between two unrelated events.[47][48] Impact bias - The tendency to overestimate the length or the intensity of the impact of future feeling states.[49] Information bias - The tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect action.[50] Insensitivity to sample size - The tendency to under-expect variation in small samples Irrational escalation - The phenomenon where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong. Also known as the sunk cost fallacy. Less-is-better effect - The tendency to prefer a smaller set to a larger set judged separately, but not jointly Loss aversion - "the disutility of giving up an object is greater than the utility associated with acquiring it".[51] (see also Sunk cost effects and endowment effect). Mere exposure effect - The tendency to express undue liking for things merely because of familiarity with them.[52] Money illusion - The tendency to concentrate on the nominal value (face value) of money rather than its value in terms of purchasing power.[53] Moral credential effect - The tendency of a track record of non-prejudice to increase subsequent prejudice. Negativity effect - The tendency of people, when evaluating the causes of the behaviors of a person they dislike, to attribute their positive behaviors to the environment and their negative behaviors to the person's inherent nature. Negativity bias - Psychological phenomenon by which humans have a greater recall of unpleasant memories compared with positive memories.[54] Neglect of probability - The tendency to completely disregard probability when making a decision under uncertainty.[55] Normalcy bias - The refusal to plan for, or react to, a disaster which has never happened before. Not invented here - Aversion to contact with or use of products, research, standards, or knowledge developed outside a group. Related to IKEA effect. Observer-expectancy effect - When a researcher expects a given result and therefore unconsciously manipulates an experiment or misinterprets data in order to find it (see also subject-expectancy effect). Omission bias - The tendency to judge harmful actions as worse, or less moral, than equally harmful omissions (inactions).[56] Optimism bias - The tendency to be over-optimistic, overestimating favorable and pleasing outcomes (see also wishful thinking, valence effect, positive outcome bias).[57][58] Ostrich effect - Ignoring an obvious (negative) situation. Outcome bias - The tendency to judge a decision by its eventual outcome instead of based on the quality of the decision at the time it was made. Overconfidence effect - Excessive confidence in one's own answers to questions. For example, for certain types of questions, answers that people rate as "99% certain" turn out to be wrong 40% of the time.[23][59][60][61] Pareidolia - A vague and random stimulus (often an image or sound) is perceived as significant, e.g., seeing images of animals or faces in clouds, the man in the moon, and hearing non-existent hidden messages on records played in reverse. Pessimism bias - The tendency for some people, especially those suffering from depression, to overestimate the likelihood of negative things happening to them. Planning fallacy - The tendency to underestimate task-completion times.[49] Post-purchase rationalization - The tendency to persuade oneself through rational argument that a purchase was a good value. Pro-innovation bias - The tendency to have an excessive optimism towards an invention or innovation's usefulness throughout society, while often failing to identify its limitations and weaknesses. Pseudocertainty effect - The tendency to make risk-averse choices if the expected outcome is positive, but make risk-seeking choices to avoid negative outcomes.[62] Reactance - The urge to do the opposite of what someone wants you to do out of a need to resist a perceived attempt to constrain your freedom of choice (see also Reverse psychology). Reactive devaluation - Devaluing proposals only because they purportedly originated with an adversary. Recency illusion - The illusion that a word or language usage is a recent innovation when it is in fact long-established (see also frequency illusion). Restraint bias - The tendency to overestimate one's ability to show restraint in the face of temptation. Rhyme as reason effect - Rhyming statements are perceived as more truthful. A famous example being used in the O.J Simpson trial with the defense's use of the phrase "If the gloves don't fit, then you must acquit." Risk compensation / Peltzman effect - The tendency to take greater risks when perceived safety increases. Selective perception - The tendency for expectations to affect perception. Semmelweis reflex - The tendency to reject new evidence that contradicts a paradigm.[27] Social comparison bias - The tendency, when making hiring decisions, to favour potential candidates who don't compete with one's own particular strengths.[63] Social desirability bias - The tendency to over-report socially desirable characteristics or behaviours in one self and under-report socially undesirable characteristics or behaviours.[64] Status quo bias - The tendency to like things to stay relatively the same (see also loss aversion, endowment effect, and system justification).[65][66] Stereotyping - Expecting a member of a group to have certain characteristics without having actual information about that individual. Subadditivity effect - The tendency to judge probability of the whole to be less than the probabilities of the parts.[67] Subjective validation - Perception that something is true if a subject's belief demands it to be true. Also assigns perceived connections between coincidences. Survivorship bias - Concentrating on the people or things that "survived" some process and inadvertently overlooking those that didn't because of their lack of visibility. Time-saving bias - Underestimations of the time that could be saved (or lost) when increasing (or decreasing) from a relatively low speed and overestimations of the time that could be saved (or lost) when increasing (or decreasing) from a relatively high speed. Unit bias - The tendency to want to finish a given unit of a task or an item. Strong effects on the consumption of food in particular.[68] Well travelled road effect - Underestimation of the duration taken to traverse oft-traveled routes and overestimation of the duration taken to traverse less familiar routes. Zero-risk bias - Preference for reducing a small risk to zero over a greater reduction in a larger risk. Zero-sum heuristic - Intuitively judging a situation to be zero-sum (i.e., that gains and losses are correlated). Derives from the zero-sum game in game theory, where wins and losses sum to zero.[69][70] The frequency with which this bias occurs may be related to the social dominance orientation personality factor. Social biases Actor–observer bias - The tendency for explanations of other individuals' behaviors to overemphasize the influence of their personality and underemphasize the influence of their situation (see also Fundamental attribution error), and for explanations of one's own behaviors to do the opposite (that is, to overemphasize the influence of our situation and underemphasize the influence of our own personality). Defensive attribution hypothesis - Attributing more blame to a harm-doer as the outcome becomes more severe or as personal or situational similarity to the victim increases. Dunning–Kruger effect - An effect in which incompetent people fail to realise they are incompetent because they lack the skill to distinguish between competence and incompetence. Actual competence may weaken self-confidence, as competent individuals may falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding.[71] Egocentric bias - Occurs when people claim more responsibility for themselves for the results of a joint action than an outside observer would credit them with. Extrinsic incentives bias - An exception to the fundamental attribution error, when people view others as having (situational) extrinsic motivations and (dispositional) intrinsic motivations for oneself False consensus effect - The tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with them.[72] Forer effect (aka Barnum effect) - The tendency to give high accuracy ratings to descriptions of their personality that supposedly are tailored specifically for them, but are in fact vague and general enough to apply to a wide range of people. For example, horoscopes. Fundamental attribution error - The tendency for people to over-emphasize personality-based explanations for behaviors observed in others while under-emphasizing the role and power of situational influences on the same behavior (see also actor-observer bias, group attribution error, positivity effect, and negativity effect).[73] Group attribution error - The biased belief that the characteristics of an individual group member are reflective of the group as a whole or the tendency to assume that group decision outcomes reflect the preferences of group members, even when information is available that clearly suggests otherwise. Halo effect - The tendency for a person's positive or negative traits to "spill over" from one personality area to another in others' perceptions of them (see also physical attractiveness stereotype).[74] Illusion of asymmetric insight - People perceive their knowledge of their peers to surpass their peers' knowledge of them.[75] Illusion of external agency - When people view self-generated preferences as instead being caused by insightful, effective and benevolent agents Illusion of transparency - People overestimate others' ability to know them, and they also overestimate their ability to know others. Illusory superiority - Overestimating one's desirable qualities, and underestimating undesirable qualities, relative to other people. (Also known as "Lake Wobegon effect", "better-than-average effect", or "superiority bias".)[76] Ingroup bias - The tendency for people to give preferential treatment to others they perceive to be members of their own groups. Just-world hypothesis - The tendency for people to want to believe that the world is fundamentally just, causing them to rationalize an otherwise inexplicable injustice as deserved by the victim(s). Moral luck - The tendency for people to ascribe greater or lesser moral standing based on the outcome of an event Naïve cynicism - Expecting more egocentric bias in others than in oneself Naïve realism - The belief that we see reality as it really is – objectively and without bias; that the facts are plain for all to see; that rational people will agree with us; and that those who don't are either uninformed, lazy, irrational, or biased. Outgroup homogeneity bias - Individuals see members of their own group as being relatively more varied than members of other groups.[77] Projection bias - The tendency to unconsciously assume that others (or one's future selves) share one's current emotional states, thoughts and values.[78] Self-serving bias - The tendency to claim more responsibility for successes than failures. It may also manifest itself as a tendency for people to evaluate ambiguous information in a way beneficial to their interests (see also group-serving bias).[79] Shared information bias - Known as the tendency for group members to spend more time and energy discussing information that all members are already familiar with (i.e., shared information), and less time and energy discussing information that only some members are aware of (i.e., unshared information).[80] System justification - The tendency to defend and bolster the status quo. Existing social, economic, and political arrangements tend to be preferred, and alternatives disparaged sometimes even at the expense of individual and collective self-interest. (See also status quo bias.) Trait ascription bias - The tendency for people to view themselves as relatively variable in terms of personality, behavior, and mood while viewing others as much more predictable. Ultimate attribution error - Similar to the fundamental attribution error, in this error a person is likely to make an internal attribution to an entire group instead of the individuals within the group. Worse-than-average effect - A tendency to believe ourselves to be worse than others at tasks which are difficult[81] Memory errors and biases Bizarreness effect - Bizarre material is better remembered than common material. Choice-supportive bias - In a self-justifying manner retroactively ascribing one's choices to be more informed than they were when they were made. Change bias - After an investment of effort in producing change, remembering one's past performance as more difficult than it actually was[82][unreliable source?] Childhood amnesia - The retention of few memories from before the age of four. Conservatism or Regressive bias - Tendency to remember high values and high likelihoods/probabilities/frequencies as lower than they actually were and low ones as higher than they actually were. Based on the evidence, memories are not extreme enough[24][25] Consistency bias - Incorrectly remembering one's past attitudes and behaviour as resembling present attitudes and behaviour.[83] Context effect - That cognition and memory are dependent on context, such that out-of-context memories are more difficult to retrieve than in-context memories (e.g., recall time and accuracy for a work-related memory will be lower at home, and vice versa) Cross-race effect - The tendency for people of one race to have difficulty identifying members of a race other than their own. Cryptomnesia - A form of misattribution where a memory is mistaken for imagination, because there is no subjective experience of it being a memory.[82] Egocentric bias - Recalling the past in a self-serving manner, e.g., remembering one's exam grades as being better than they were, or remembering a caught fish as bigger than it really was. Fading affect bias - A bias in which the emotion associated with unpleasant memories fades more quickly than the emotion associated with positive events.[84] False memory - A form of misattribution where imagination is mistaken for a memory. Generation effect (Self-generation effect) - That self-generated information is remembered best. For instance, people are better able to recall memories of statements that they have generated than similar statements generated by others. Google effect - The tendency to forget information that can be found readily online by using Internet search engines. Hindsight bias - The inclination to see past events as being more predictable than they actually were; also called the "I-knew-it-all-along" effect. Humor effect - That humorous items are more easily remembered than non-humorous ones, which might be explained by the distinctiveness of humor, the increased cognitive processing time to understand the humor, or the emotional arousal caused by the humor.[citation needed] Illusion of truth effect - That people are more likely to identify as true statements those they have previously heard (even if they cannot consciously remember having heard them), regardless of the actual validity of the statement. In other words, a person is more likely to believe a familiar statement than an unfamiliar one. Illusory correlation - Inaccurately remembering a relationship between two events.[23][48] Lag effect - See spacing effect. Leveling and Sharpening - Memory distortions introduced by the loss of details in a recollection over time, often concurrent with sharpening or selective recollection of certain details that take on exaggerated significance in relation to the details or aspects of the experience lost through leveling. Both biases may be reinforced over time, and by repeated recollection or re-telling of a memory.[85] Levels-of-processing effect - That different methods of encoding information into memory have different levels of effectiveness.[86] List-length effect - A smaller percentage of items are remembered in a longer list, but as the length of the list increases, the absolute number of items remembered increases as well.[87][further explanation needed] Misinformation effect- Memory becoming less accurate because of interference from post-event information.[88] Modality effect - That memory recall is higher for the last items of a list when the list items were received via speech than when they were received through writing. Mood-congruent memory bias - The improved recall of information congruent with one's current mood. Next-in-line effect - That a person in a group has diminished recall for the words of others who spoke immediately before himself, if they take turns speaking.[89] Part-list cueing effect - That being shown some items from a list and later retrieving one item causes it to become harder to retrieve the other items[90] Peak–end rule - That people seem to perceive not the sum of an experience but the average of how it was at its peak (e.g. pleasant or unpleasant) and how it ended. Persistence - The unwanted recurrence of memories of a traumatic event.[citation needed] Picture superiority effect - The notion that concepts that are learned by viewing pictures are more easily and frequently recalled than are concepts that are learned by viewing their written word form counterparts.[91][92][93][94][95][96] Positivity effect - That older adults favor positive over negative information in their memories. Primacy effect, Recency effect & Serial position effect - That items near the end of a sequence are the easiest to recall, followed by the items at the beginning of a sequence; items in the middle are the least likely to be remembered.[97] Processing difficulty effect - That information that takes longer to read and is thought about more (processed with more difficulty) is more easily remembered.[98] Reminiscence bump - The recalling of more personal events from adolescence and early adulthood than personal events from other lifetime periods[99] Rosy retrospection - The remembering of the past as having been better than it really was. Self-relevance effect - That memories relating to the self are better recalled than similar information relating to others. Source confusion- Confusing episodic memories with other information, creating distorted memories.[100] Spacing effect - That information is better recalled if exposure to it is repeated over a long span of time rather than a short one. Spotlight effect - The tendency to overestimate the amount that other people notice your appearance or behavior. Stereotypical bias - Memory distorted towards stereotypes (e.g., racial or gender), e.g., "black-sounding" names being misremembered as names of criminals.[82][unreliable source?] Suffix effect - Diminishment of the recency effect because a sound item is appended to the list that the subject is not required to recall.[101][102] Suggestibility - A form of misattribution where ideas suggested by a questioner are mistaken for memory. Telescoping effect - The tendency to displace recent events backward in time and remote events forward in time, so that recent events appear more remote, and remote events, more recent. Testing effect - The fact that you more easily remember information you have read by rewriting it instead of rereading it.[103] Tip of the tongue phenomenon - When a subject is able to recall parts of an item, or related information, but is frustratingly unable to recall the whole item. This is thought an instance of "blocking" where multiple similar memories are being recalled and interfere with each other.[82] Verbatim effect - That the "gist" of what someone has said is better remembered than the verbatim wording.[104] This is because memories are representations, not exact copies. Von Restorff effect - That an item that sticks out is more likely to be remembered than other items[105] Zeigarnik effect - That uncompleted or interrupted tasks are remembered better than completed ones. Common theoretical causes of some cognitive biases Bounded rationality – limits on optimization and rationality Prospect theory Mental accounting Adaptive bias – basing decisions on limited information and biasing them based on the costs of being wrong. Attribute substitution – making a complex, difficult judgment by unconsciously substituting it by an easier judgment[106] Attribution theory Salience Naïve realism Cognitive dissonance, and related: Impression management Self-perception theory Heuristics in judgment and decision making, including: Availability heuristic – estimating what is more likely by what is more available in memory, which is biased toward vivid, unusual, or emotionally charged examples[47] Representativeness heuristic – judging probabilities on the basis of resemblance[47] Affect heuristic – basing a decision on an emotional reaction rather than a calculation of risks and benefits[107] Some theories of emotion such as: Two-factor theory of emotion Somatic markers hypothesis Introspection illusion Misinterpretations or misuse of statistics; innumeracy. A 2012 Psychological Bulletin article suggested that at least eight seemingly unrelated biases can be produced by the same information-theoretic generative mechanism that assumes noisy information processing during storage and retrieval of information in human memory.[23] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
3 members thanked for this post
03-22-2015, 08:19 AM
Good points Sheldor. I agree that it is so easy to fall into biased and narrow thought and not even realise it. Like you said, it is important to always question ourselves and our intentions and motives. I don't know the full truth in regards to vaccinations and I'm not sure if anyone does.
(03-22-2015, 08:19 AM)Folk-love Wrote: Good points Sheldor. I agree that it is so easy to fall into biased and narrow thought and not even realise it. Like you said, it is important to always question ourselves and our intentions and motives. I don't know the full truth in regards to vaccinations and I'm not sure if anyone does. The biggest problem I have with vaccines, since the information is so sketchy and across the board, is that people should have the freedom to decline what gets put into their body and their children's bodies. Pressure to mandate vaccines is what concerns me. Mandated vaccines are a violation to our individual sovereignty. You can see the propaganda best when you consider Hollywood. How many movies push the idea of the horrible disease that requires a saving vaccine? It's a large number. Every year there are movie or TV productions about a deadly disease, pandemic, a rush for a " saving" vaccine. Hollywood is propaganda at it's most insidious, because we think it is entertainment. I found this source of info to be excellent on the corruption in our medical system. A Healed Planet If you scroll down to Pasteur and germ theory, there is good vetted information about vaccine's
1 member thanked Shemaya for this post
03-22-2015, 01:29 PM
I think this is a helpful TEDx talk by Sharyl Attkisson who has over 30 years experience of investigative journalism. A good researching guide if nothing else.
1 member thanked Nicholas for this post
03-23-2015, 01:41 AM
03-23-2015, 05:46 AM
I will not be swayed by the fear of 'you will get sick and get others sick if you don't take vaccines', nor will I be swayed by 'if you get a vaccine you may have a wide range of negative health consequences'.
All the debunking (on both sides of the argument) does nothing to convince me either way. All the crying of 'dysinfo!' just cancels itself out and I fall back on the only thing I have left: my own discernment and free will.
2 members thanked Parsons for this post
03-23-2015, 07:33 AM
(03-23-2015, 05:46 AM)Parsons Wrote: I will not be swayed by the fear of 'you will get sick and get others sick if you don't take vaccines', nor will I be swayed by 'if you get a vaccine you may have a wide range of negative health consequences'. Totally agree with you Parson's!
1 member thanked Shemaya for this post
03-23-2015, 12:59 PM
(03-23-2015, 05:46 AM)Parsons Wrote: All the debunking (on both sides of the argument) does nothing to convince me either way. All the crying of 'dysinfo!' just cancels itself out and I fall back on the only thing I have left: my own discernment and free will. Of course that is what you are left with. That is what we are always left with. Even if we choose not to exercise it. Those in this thread are trying to express their own opinions, their own experiences, and their own discernments. They are trying to share it with others here. I do think sometimes we get too offended by what others think, because after all, as you say, we have free will and our own discernment to choose what we will do with it. We are not being forced into anything by just listening to another person. So what if someone is passionately trying to convince others of something they see as truth? Christians come to mind. A Christian can talk all day to me about burning in hell for eternity if I don't do A or B. It will simply never happen that they convince me to do A or B, because I have free will and discernment, and I utilize it to make my own determinations. If we were in the 15th century, that would be an entirely different thing, when Catholics were forcing their religion via the Inquisition. But let me give another example so as not to be one-sided, though this one is fictionalized: The Matrix. Could you talk to those in the Matrix and convince them they were living like slaves? Would you want to? Of course you would (or I think most would). You would not only want to free them out of compassion, you would want to stop the enslavement in general which benefits only the machines. The ones asleep affect the ones awake by perpetuating the system. My point is that here at B4 we are trying to communicate and express our opinions in a community of people. I do not think for one minute we should all be "nice" all the time as New Agers do if it is not honest. I think we could all remember that no one is forcing anyone to do anything. This is just a discussion. And when a person here starts feeling forced, that's when resistance sets in and then the information being offered (biased as all information is, but that doesn't mean there's no truth in it) is not being looked at. What is being shared is no longer being shared because it's not being received (but that is not to say it has to be acted upon, just received for consideration or to be thrown out or whatever the person hearing it decides).
4 members thanked Diana for this post
03-23-2015, 07:00 PM
Good God, Sheldor. For someone so smart and sure of himself, you certainly posted a lot of stuff in your defense.
I said that we were all stupid at one time or another. And if you have read all that you say you have and you still don't see through the bullshit, perhaps you are stupid. I don't know nor do I care. Vaccinations are dangerous. If you don't see that, and you risk the life of your child to protect him from some possible future, well, I tend to think that person is, perhaps not stupid but foolish , foolhardy. Call it whatever, man. We are the enemy of big pharma. I can hardly believe you read all you say you did and still defend lethal, genocidal practices. You think Bill Gates might need a bit more research before you realize he's a eugenecist?? What does it take to convince some people that we're being played by human-appearing monsters, parasites who want it all...? ![[Image: Sheeple-15-R_zpsfokope10.jpg]](http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag395/indolering/Sheeple-15-R_zpsfokope10.jpg) By the way, David Dees is far from being a propagandist. He's one of the most talented and courageous artists alive who's not afraid to challenge the lethal cabal and expose them however he can.
Better get a grip, Sheldor, and get ready for the fight of your life. The NWO won't care if you're on their side or not - everyone gets a free ride to a FEMA camp near you.
And you, Diana, are being rational and truthful as usual, and I'm glad to be on the same 'side' whatever the hell that means.... It means we both care about the truth more than anything, no matter how wonderful or vile.
03-25-2015, 12:37 PM
199658-fear_is_the_mind_killer_super.jpg (Size: 35.6 KB / Downloads: 9)
Indolering, I have been trying to help you feel less fear.Fear keeps us small and weak. Fear is false evidence appearing real. I am trying to help you look beyond the darkness and pain that for you has been so strong in your life that it has convinced you that it is stronger than you. It is not. If you could see the enormous power of Love inside you; you would throw your head back, and cry, and laugh, and dance in circles. Darkness is an Illusion. Light illuminates darkness. ALWAYS. It is simply how it IS. There is no lasting power in negativity. It swallows itself and implodes from the weight of it's own entropy. All is well. In the midst of this 'hell', all is well. I'm trying to help you see you don't have the full picture, because you simply don't. Just as you assume you are correct, you also assumed I'm a man. I am not a man. I am a woman. And I am more powerful than any 'dark elite agenda'. My power is LOVE ~ "Let me explain exactly why there are people, institutions and forces who are actively trying to use fear to persuade you that you are weak; it is because you are staggeringly POWERFUL! People have forgotten how powerful they are; they have been distracted and a bit domesticated, at least on the surface. If you have forgotten yourself, allow me the pleasure of reminding you. Do you think a mountain lion is powerful and dangerous? Let me tell you something — you are dangerous. A human being is infinitely more powerful and dangerous than a mountain lion. Your will, your mind, your heart, your body; your total intelligence orchestrated into one razor-focused determination IS the hungry eye of the tiger. There is a fierce concentration inside of you; dormant — it is in your blood. It is the strength of your ancestors. It is the hammer and anvil of eons which struck the hardened steel of your spirit into a weapon of survival. You are a weapon. People deny their own strength because they are afraid of their own strength. Whether it's a corrupt government or an abusive lover, those who seek to control you want you to forget your strength, because they are afraid of you. And they should be afraid. In you is the terrible power to lay waste to a dark enemy in the resistance of evil. In you is the glorious power to heal, to love and to protect what is virtuous and honorable in life. Your awesome strength is a guardian and champion for all manner of good to prevail. In your hands and words are both the power of healing and destruction. When the false voice of doubt starts whispering in your darkest hours, let the other voice, the voice of ages, which speaks through time to give you life — answer back with your defiant, awakened resolve. Awaken to your power; the power to live, the power to overcome and the power to survive the challenges presently before you. — Bryant McGill
3 members thanked for this post
03-27-2015, 11:51 PM
.
You misinterpret my posts. I'm obsessed with truth. Not fear. The truth happens to be rather dismal here at the end of the age. But I do not advocate hiding in your shell and allowing fear to take over. On the contrary, I first expose the lethal agenda of the controllers of this planet, and then offer solutions to our dilemma. I don't dispute your counsel to remain in the Light - but I object to your claim that I am full of fear and negativity. The Darkness emanates from the ET/Illuminati cabal - I shine the light of truth upon them that we may understand what we're up against. I have the feeling that you do not believe we need to do anything to resist this effort to enslave the race. In any case, Ms Sheldor, this tangent of the vaccination thread has about run its course. A lethal part of modern medicine, i.e., Big Pharma, in collusion with government agencies are promoting the mandatory vaccination of everyone. This not only violates individual sovereignty but the jabs themselves are part of the slow cull of the population, which according to the Georgia Guidestones should be kept at 500,000,000. Know your Enemy. Do not fear him. Neutralize him. Quote:Source Perhaps the answer is that the immune system is incredibly good at learning, because it has to learn to identify pathogens. Our bodies learn by association; give a rat sugar water with an immunosuppressant a few times, then if you give it only sugar water - the rat will become immunosuppressed through the magic of classical conditioning, which clearly functions through physiological mechanisms. Now, administer a pathogen (e.g., a partially deactivated virus in a vaccine) at the same exact instant as you introduce molecular components of peanuts, eggs, etc. into the bloodstream - and should we be surprised if the body learns that those substances are also pathogenic, and begins attacking them? Link to a nice summary, from which comes this quote: Quote:Medical literature has illustrated that the only means by which mass allergy has ever been created was by injection. With the pairing of the hypodermic needles and vaccines at the close of the 19th century, allergy and anaphylaxis made their explosive entry into the western world. Serum sickness from this new procedure was the first mass allergic phenomenon in history. Epidemic allergy to penicillin reminiscent of the ‘days of serum sickness’ emerged with its mass application following WWII. And with it came peanut allergy. Penicillin was administered using POB, the Romansky peanut oil formula. The continued use of refined peanut oil in drugs and vaccine adjuvants resulted in the slow growth of the allergy primarily in children until the late 1980s when its prevalence exploded. Extensive and sudden changes to childhood vaccination precipitated the new mass allergy to peanut.
2 members thanked Stranger for this post
03-28-2015, 09:18 PM
I completely concur with this assessment. Vaccines are responsible for a host of maladies, of which food allergies are one. Asthma, God, I don't even know the extent of it all.... If this isn't a conspiracy to decimate the race, I'll be a blue-nosed gopher.
04-13-2015, 07:50 PM
I heard about the proposed change in Australian laws indolering.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/p...mj837.html basically the Abbott government (perhaps a worthy name?) is taking financially punitive measures to enforce vaccination, rather than leaving it up as a choice.
04-13-2015, 09:57 PM
(04-13-2015, 07:50 PM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote: I heard about the proposed change in Australian laws indolering. That kind of strong arming is subtle and manipulative. There is a choice, but a negative financial impact on families, which is incentive enough for many people to go along with the program. In the past, ( 19th century) people were imprisoned for not getting vaccinated, believe it or not. I really question a " pro - vaxx" stance when enforcement like this is proposed. I feel strongly that freedom of choice needs to be preserved.
04-13-2015, 10:11 PM
To vaccinate or to not:
Definitely Not. Conspiracy level...well....over 9000.
04-13-2015, 10:31 PM
I don't see vaccinations as in the best interest of the people receiving them. I think this is deliberate. Not to say the doctors and nurses involved in giving them don't mean well. But I believe the "concoction" is mean't to do damage in the long run and not to help. This is the "understanding" I have come to with my personal research and guidance system.
5 members thanked for this post |
![[Image: Andrew-Wakefield_zpsyk0nsofd.jpg]](http://i1373.photobucket.com/albums/ag395/indolering/Andrew-Wakefield_zpsyk0nsofd.jpg)
