The Sift Here’s what we’re Sifting today

Quarantine ordered at two LA universities

by Rachel Lynn Aldrich
Posted 4/26/19, 11:12 am

Los Angeles public health officials issued quarantine orders for more than 200 staff and students at two universities this week due to five confirmed cases of measles in the area. The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), said 119 students and eight faculty members were under quarantine as of Wednesday. It was not immediately clear how many were quarantined at California State University, Los Angeles. The order requires people who might have been exposed to measles and either have not been vaccinated or cannot verify that they are immune to remain isolated until proof of immunity is established, usually in 24 to 48 hours, officials said. Some people may be quarantined for a week.

“One person with a confirmed measles case can expose thousands of people to measles,” Los Angeles County Department of Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer said at a news conference Thursday.

A UCLA student diagnosed with measles might have exposed 500 people earlier this month. As of Thursday afternoon, 79 of them had not provided the required medical records, the university said in a statement. At Cal State, an infected student visited the library, and 156 people who might have been exposed could not provide immunization records as of Thursday afternoon, according to the school.

The five Los Angeles County measles cases are linked to overseas travel. This year, California has had 38 cases of measles across 11 counties. The number of measles infections in the United States hit a 25-year high this week with nearly 700 cases since the start of the year, most of them in New York.

Read more from The Sift Sign up for The Sift email
Rachel Lynn Aldrich

Rachel is an assistant editor for WORLD Digital. Follow Rachel on Twitter @Rachel_Lynn_A.

Read more from this writer


You must be a WORLD Member and be logged in to the website to comment.
  • Mrs D's picture
    Mrs D
    Posted: Fri, 04/26/2019 12:45 pm

    L.A. goes as far as quarantining for a week those without proof of innoculation for measles after exposure, and yet Arizona doesn't want to stigmatize LHBT students in AIDS/HIV education by stating homosexuality is an avenue for the disease (two reports from World Magazine today).  

    Both arenas have been politicized beyond reason.  Measles is not near as dangerous as AIDS is, but you wouldn’t know it by what lengths the government is willing to go to avoid it.  Dictates are mounting on one side (to the point of not even being able to question vaccines), while permission (even encouragement) is given to homosexuality.

  • cln
    Posted: Fri, 04/26/2019 02:38 pm

    Mrs D. Good comment. The measles thing is totally out of control. THe only reason this is blared all over is because there are vaccinations for it. If it was something that can't be vaxxed for we wouldn't hear about it. And they never report how many of those who have it are vaccinated against measles. Most outbreaks now days are caused by the vaccines. The MMR is a live virus vaccine which can cause measles. When whooping cough goes around it is among the vaccinated. And they always say to get vaccinated. :) 

  • Laura W
    Posted: Fri, 04/26/2019 10:06 pm

    cln, do you have a source for your claim that most outbreaks are caused by the vaccines? That is a pretty bold claim to make without evidence to back it up. (Yes the virus is live, but it's a much weakened form, to make sure the body can "win the fight" against it and create antibodies for next time.) And none of the vaccines claim 100% effectiveness at protecting against the disease. The CDC lists a 97% rate of effectiveness against measles for the recommended two doses of the MMR vaccine. This means that if you've been given the MMR vaccine, then you only have a 3% chance of being one of those people who remains succeptible, even after being given the vaccine. (Though this 3% still receives some protection, including being less contagious while infected.)

    For that 3%, if no one else is getting the disease around then, then they're still pretty safe, but because measles is so contagious, it sometimes only takes one person bringing it into the area to start infecting the ones who got the short end of the stick (about 3 out of every 100, plus those who couldn't be vaccinated). That's why they're in such a hurry to quarantine. Also, have you noticed that nearly all of the recent outbreaks are happening in areas with low vaccination rates? Why do you think that could be?

  • GR
    Posted: Fri, 04/26/2019 02:54 pm

    An echo of Mrs D's post - Quarantine for measles, but not for HIV/AIDS or ebola? According to, approximately 1.1 million people in the U.S. are HIV-positive and about 1 in 7 don't yet know it. According to a CDC fact sheet published in 2016, more than 675,000 Americans have died from HIV/AIDS. The biggest difference between HIV/AIDS and ebola is the length of time between onset and death. Not quarantining the first people who brought in ebola can mean a very large number of American deaths - way more than caused by measles. Where is the sanity in that???

  • cln
    Posted: Fri, 04/26/2019 03:13 pm

    From a chemist.See credit below:

    The media insists that it’s raining measles and everyone should get the MMR vaccine, made by Merck, to protect themselves.

    Even Obama has publicly stated, “those who don’t get their shots can pose a risk to infants and other people who can’t get vaccinated.”

    He assures parents that vaccine science is “pretty indisputable.”

    What science is he looking at?

    First of all, as a non-vaccinated person, you’re more likely to die from an ant bite than you are from measles.

    Are you afraid of ants?

    Then you shouldn’t be afraid of measles or the unvaccinated.

    Still though, millions of parents are frothing at the mouth, enraged at parents who choose not to vaccinate and supposedly risk “herd immunity.” The bigots among them want to sue the family who refuses to accept pharmaceutical propaganda and questions vaccine safety and effectiveness.

    Well, you can try and sue me.

    I have three unvaccinated kids (along with a 1986 BMW and a much newer, 1999 Toyota 4-Runner with really nice tires – big time assets for the litigious).

    Unlike working with the media, at least I’d be able to show all the facts in a courtroom.

    I’d start by proving that herd immunity is a failed hypothesis, proving that it should never be used to divide parents or rationalize the blind use of vaccines.

    Fortunately, herd immunity is very easy to test: Find a vaccinated herd and monitor them for infection.


    That’s science: The observation of reproducible results

    Observing the MMR vaccinated herd, we find that they get sick, often. The New England Journal of Medicine published that, “An outbreak of measles occurred among adolescents in Corpus Christi, Texas, in the spring of 1985, even though vaccination requirements for school attendance had been thoroughly enforced.”

    A thorough investigation, as outlined in my book, Over-The-Counter Natural Cures, shows how this same scenario has happened worldwide, numerous times. Even naturally acquired immunity fails to “protect the herd!”

    This failure of herd immunity was also stressed by the medical journal, Clinical Infectious Diseases. Warning against using the vaccine for protection, they wrote, “Other problems arise because herd immunity is not the same as biologic (immunologic) immunity; individuals protected only by indirect herd effects remain fully susceptible to infection, should they ever be exposed.”

    Translation, “Herd immunity can’t protect you. Only your immune system can.”

    Unfortunately, the MMR vaccine won’t bolster your immune system. It’s a complete failure. That science is indisputable and proven both in the lab and the courtroom.

    In 2012, a class action lawsuit —United States v. Merck & Co. and Chatom Primary Care v. Merck & Co. – two virologists from Merck proved that the drug giant “falsified testing of the efficacy of the drug and misstated the drug’s efficacy to the government as having a 95 percent efficacy rate.”

    In the court trial, it was discovered that, “Merck incorporated the use of animal antibodies to artificially inflate the results, but it too failed to achieve Merck’s fabricated efficacy rate. Confronted with two failed methodologies, Merck then falsified the test data to guarantee the results it desired. Having reached the desired, albeit falsified, efficacy threshold, Merck submitted these fraudulent results to the Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”) and European Medicines Agency (“EMA”).”

    The CDC, along with Obama and the media need to check their facts better. After all, it’s a child’s life we’re talking about here!

    It gets worse.

    Following the trail of the government “science” leads you to CDC researcher Poul Thorsen. He was indicted by the Department of Justice for vaccine research fraud and money laundering. He is currently on the Office of the Inspector General’s most wanted list.

    There’s very little to debate when you have the facts.

    The unvaccinated parents have justifiable concerns to avoid shots. But, the vaccinated, even more so.

    One brave father stepped forward to show pictures of his 15 month old son playing with his tool box and scrambling through the house to use them on furniture and toys. Days later he received his MMR shot. 18 years later, he’s still in diapers trying to learn his first words.

    I’ll risk measles any day over Merck’s bullshit science.

    When herd immunity and vaccines are proven failures, you can’t use them as evidence to encourage vaccination or to sue a family who refuses to accept the flawed status-quo perpetuated by the pharmaceutically compliant politicians and the media. Mike Wagnitz, Ph.D., Senior Chemist at the a University of Wisconsin.



  • Laura W
    Posted: Fri, 04/26/2019 09:43 pm

    I don't have time to respond to all of your points, but I'd like to address this quote:

    “Other problems arise because herd immunity is not the same as biologic (immunologic) immunity; individuals protected only by indirect herd effects remain fully susceptible to infection, should they ever be exposed.” (emphasis mine)

    What this means is that people who can't be vaccinated for various reasons (compromised immune system, allergic, too young, etc.) only benefit from herd immunity if they are actually surrounded by an immune "herd". If they are ever exposed to infection, they will be as vulnerable to the disease as anyone else who hasn't received the vaccine for it. So this quote isn't actually "warning against using the vaccine for protection", it's explaining how relying on herd immunity is less reliable than being vaccinated.


  • dt
    Posted: Fri, 04/26/2019 10:50 pm

    From a quick check, I can't find a "Wagnitz" at the University of Wisconsin (Madison) chemistry department.

  • cln
    Posted: Sat, 04/27/2019 06:21 pm

    dt. I am checking it out. I found his FB page and it appears it would be him. Will let you know when I find out more. 

  • cln
    Posted: Sat, 04/27/2019 08:12 pm

    dt     Here is the reply from my friend: He is still Wisconsin. He might not be (professor) anymore, many good guys lose their jobs for doing the right thing. He is also infamous for his defining mercury in vaccines. 0.5 parts per billion (ppb) mercury = Kills human neuroblastoma cells (Parran et al., Toxicol Sci 2005; 86: 132-140). 2 ppb mercury = U.S. EPA limit for drinking water. 20 ppb mercury = Neurite membrane structure destroyed (Leong et al., Neuroreport 2001; 12: 733-37). 200 ppb mercury = level in liquid the EPA classifies as hazardous waste. 25,000 ppb mercury = Concentration of mercury in the Hepatitis B vaccine, administered at birth in the U.S., from 1990-2001. 50,000 ppb Mercury = Concentration of mercury in multi-dose DTaP and Haemophilus B vaccine vials, administered 4 times each in the 1990's to children at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 18 months of age. 50,000 ppb Mercury = Current "preservative" level mercury in multi-dose flu (94% of supply), meningococcal and tetanus (7 and older) vaccines. This can be confirmed by simply analyzing the multi- dose vials.

  • Laura W
    Posted: Sun, 04/28/2019 02:30 am

    So ppb is a measurement of concentration, not the total amount of a substance. Whatever concentration (ppb) there is in the vaccine is immediately diluted in the bloodstream to a much lower ppb after it's injected. So it makes me rather suspicious that the concentration rather than the amount of mercury in the vaccine is the focus here.

    By way of analogy, if I want to put a few drops of honey in my tea, and someone tells me that I shouldn't do it because honey has a higher ppb of sugar than soda does (and everyone knows that soda is bad for you), this doesn't actually make much sense. If I only add a little honey, then I'm consuming much less sugar than I would with a can of soda, even though the concentration of sugar in honey is higher than that of soda.)

  • cln
    Posted: Sun, 04/28/2019 06:29 pm

    Laura W. Here is information for starters: 

    “For those who want both sides of the coins...if you’re concerned with who is spreading viruses/disease, is it the vaccinated or the unvaccinated....?

    Here’s what I’ve learned, is that vaccines shed. They are the ones spreading the virus, especially the man made version of it...”

    Vaccine shedding:

    The Emerging risks of live virus & virus vectored vaccines…/Live-Virus-Vaccines-and-Vaccine-Shedd…

    What's shedding?…/secondary-trans…/comment-page-1/

    Flu (FluMist Intranasal) - Shedding (Section 5.4)…/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM123743.pdf

    Flu vaccine shedding

    Chicken Pox (Varivax) - Shedding (Section 5.4)…/pi_circulars/v/varivax/varivax_pi.pdf

    Shingles (Zostavax} - Shedding (Section 5.2)…/pi_circu…/z/zostavax/zostavax_pi2.pdf

    MMR Shedding (Page 5, Under Precaution)…/…/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf

    Rotavirus (Rotarix)- Shedding (Section 5.4)…/ht…/documents/ROTARIX-PI-PIL.PDF

    Smallpox (ACAM2000) - Shedding (Section 5.4)…/vaccines/approvedProducts/UCM142572.pdf

    Detection of Measles Virus RNA in Urine Specimen from Vaccine Recipients

    Did you know that there are such things as "live virus vaccines"? These obviously contain live viruses. What does that really mean for us? They may be weakened, but they still come with inherent risks. Since they are alive they can still replicate given the right environment and infect the vaccinated individual and/or "shed" to people around them for weeks after the vaccine is given.

    Live virus vaccines and the links to the package insert position that discusses shedding:

    But does that REALLY happen? Yes. Yes it can and does as these studies illustrate:

    Varicella transfer after vaccine to pregnant mom:

    Pub Med article on Rotavirus shedding:

    Small Pox vaccine sheds to infant from parent (military personnel)

    Mumps Vaccine sheds:

    Mumps vaccine sheds:

    Mumps outbreak in Netherlands linked to those vaccinated twice with MMR:

    (Vaccinated) Student Diagnosed With Mumps at California State University San Marcos…/Cal-State-San-Marcos-Student-D…

    Harvard Mumps Outbreak - all students vaccinated

    Measles virus sheds for 1-13 days after vaccination:

    Measles outbreak in a fully immunized secondary-school population

    Catching measles in an appropriately vaccinated group: a well-circumscribed outbreak in the South East of Ireland, September-November 2013

    Measles vaccinated child responsible for outbreak in British Columbia:…/dy…/EE/V18N49/art20649.pdf

    New York Measles outbreak linked to vaccinated:…/…/2014/02/27/cid.ciu105

    Measles outbreak among the vaccinated:

    We don't know for certain how long shedding occurs because we don't test for it long term or regularly but in rare instances, it has gone on for years:…/story-2769…/story.html

    Additionally, the Dtap/Tdap that is NOT live vaccine has been shown by the FDA to cause the vaccinated to become asymptomatic carriers whenever exposed to the bacteria for both pertussis and diphtheria, thus spreading the illness without knowing.

    Pertussis carrier:…/Newsr…/PressAnnouncements/ucm376937.htm

    Diphtheria carrier:

    You can also find that most medical facilities are aware of this. Johns Hopkins and St. Jude hospitals are just a few of many who post precautions for recently vaccinated visitors.

    Why does this matter?

    Because society has become so deathly afraid of these illnesses that they rush out and load up on vaccines and want to even pass laws forcing others to do the same, but the science shows that it's the vaccinated that are at a higher risk of infections and spreading the illnesses. Be aware of the infection and carrier risk each vaccine has when making your choice, and take care when around the immuune compromised if you have been recently vaccinated or around someone with the illnesses even if you don't show symptoms.…/…/globe-newswire-public-health-official…


    Live vaccines that may shed include:

    MMR - the combination measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine
    Vavivax - the varicella or chicken pox vaccine
    Proquad - a combination of MMR and Varivax
    rotavirus vaccines - including two oral vaccines, RotaTeq and Rotarix
    Flumist - the nasal spray flu vaccine
    yellow fever vaccine - an attenuated, live-virus vaccine recommended for travelers to high risk areas
    adenovirus vaccine - a live-virus vaccine that protects against type 4 and type 7 adenovirus but which is only approved for military personnel
    typhoid vaccine - the oral typhoid vaccine is made with a live-attenuated strain of Salmonella typhi. An inactivated, injectable version of the vaccine is also available. Either typhoid vaccine would only be given to travelers to high risk areas.
    BCG - the bacille Calmette-Guerin tuberculosis vaccine, which is not routinely used in the United States because it mainly prevents severe TB, which isn't at all common in the United States.

    smallpox vaccine - has not been routinely used since 1972, but is available from stockpiles if it is needed
    oral polio vaccine - the original OPV (Sabin vaccine), which has been replaced in the United States by the inactivated polio vaccine (Salk vaccine)
    Few of these live virus vaccines are actually routinely used anymore. Those that are include MMR, Varivax, rotavirus, and Flumist.

    Shedding is when the live virus that is injected via vaccine, moves through the human body and comes back out in the feces, droplets from the nose, or saliva from the mouth. Anyone who takes care of the child could potentially contract the disease for some time after that child has received certain live vaccines. This was a huge problem with the oral polio vaccine, and was one of the reasons why it was taken off the market in the US.


  • Laura W
    Posted: Sun, 04/28/2019 08:30 pm

    Thanks for your reply. So yes, I did know that some vaccines use a live (but much weakened) form of the virus to train the immune system. The thing is, I'm still not seeing evidence for this claim in your comment:

    "the science shows that it's the vaccinated that are at a higher risk of infections and spreading the illnesses" (emphasis mine)

    So it isn't enough to show that vaccinated people can sometimes spread the weakened form under certain conditions (to someone who has a damaged immune system from chemo, for example), you have to show that we actually have a worse situation now than we would if no one was vaccinated. (And it doesn't prove anything at all to show that vaccinated people still have a small chance to catch the disease normally and spread it, unless you can show that they're more likely to catch and spread the disease than unvaccinated people.) I didn't have time to follow all the links right now, but in looking through the titles, I don't see any that would support that conclusion. Could you point me to which ones address it? Thanks!

    P. S. I noticed something strange when I followed this link:…/globe-newswire-public-health-official… It appears to link to an article on, but when I clicked it (after I clicked through the "leaving Facebook" page--sloppy work or tracking?), I got a page-not-found result on So I googled the title in the link, and came up with this article in the Globe newswire:…/globe-newswire-public-health-official… Well, I'd never heard of the Globe Newswire before, so I did another search and found this: They're a company that publishes--press releases. So I still wanted to know who the article was from, and I saw there's a note at the top saying the source is the Weston A. Price Foundation. Well, I looked into them, and they're all about promoting their own ideas about healthy diets. ( Not exactly someone who would be in a position to know about the best ways to control infectious diseases. So we've gone from a link that appears to go to a nationally-recognized news website (although one for business news--odd), to an article on a site that will publish whatever people want to pay for. And the organization that paid for it doesn't even work in that field. The article itself quotes the foundation's founder as if she were an independent source, and also implies that they're revealing some hidden secret ("Public Health Officials Know"), when they're quoting from publicly available hospital policies--hardly hidden. I doubt that you personally were responsible for any of this, but to me this again looks very suspicious, like someone is intentionally trying to hide the truth on this subject.

  • Laura W
    Posted: Sun, 04/28/2019 08:49 pm

    I did try another link in the list, and here's the abstract:

    Catching measles in an appropriately vaccinated group: a well-circumscribed outbreak in the South East of Ireland, September-November 2013.

    O'Connor B, et al. Epidemiol Infect. 2016.


    A measles outbreak occurred in a school in a small town in the South East of Ireland in September-November 2013. Most (and all early) cases had one dose of the measles-mumps- rubella (MMR) vaccination. All suspected cases were followed up, in order to advise on sampling and provide public health advice to them and their contacts. MMR vaccination control measures were instituted in the town. These included early second MMR in primary schools and childcare facilities, bringing forward the planned school MMR catch-up programme, early first MMR dose for children aged 6-12 months and targeted advice to unvaccinated children. There were 20 cases (17 confirmed) of measles associated with the outbreak. Fifteen cases occurred in the index school, with four in pre-school-age children (<4 years) who had clear epidemiological links with children at the school. This was a well-circumscribed outbreak occurring, unusually, in a well-vaccinated population. The outbreak came late to the attention of Department of Public Health staff but prompt action, once notified, and institution of control measures resulted in quick termination of the outbreak and prevention of cases in a neighbouring city.


    In other words, there was a measles outbreak that occurred mostly among children who had already been given their first doce of the MMR vaccine. This was unusual. Public health officials vaccinated a lot more people, among other measures, and the outbreak was quickly stopped without spreading further. Based on this article, it would appear that mass vaccination is a very effective strategy for controlling these outbreaks when they do occur, combined with encouraging parents of unvaccinated children to keep them away from any outside social contact while they may be contagious. The article also includes information about the particular strain of measles implicated--a wild type, so not the one used in the MMR vaccine.

    Here's the full text of the article:

  • cln
    Posted: Mon, 04/29/2019 02:41 pm

    Laura W. I could send you more information. I am not sure it would be worth it. Here is a few links but I doubt it will make a difference.


    When whooping cough was going around in this area I called the health department. Yes, they said, the kids who had whooping cough were vaccinated. But, of course, the big push was to get vaccinated! Why not push for taking vitamin C, eating a healthy diet, avoiding junk food? No, the push is always to vaccinate even though the vaccinated are the sick ones. The population in every state is usually over 90% vaccinated so if vaccines work then the vaccinated have nothing to fear. But often it is the vaccinated who are sick. So it makes sense that if a lot of kids have the measles the vaccinated are among them. Their immune systems are compromised. They are getting sick. It is known that live viruses can shed.  Many of us had measles. Now it is being promoted as a dreadful, fearful thing even though no one is dying. My grandson nearly died from vaccines and it took a couple of years for his neurological damage to heal. He did not get the MMR because his mother was opposed to abortion but it was other vaccines that nearly took his life. The Christian organization which required the vaccines would not relent. 

  • cln
    Posted: Mon, 04/29/2019 06:13 pm

    Laura W Here is one more:


  • not silent
    Posted: Tue, 04/30/2019 12:51 pm

    To address some of the comments here:  Regarding the first comment about why we hear so much about measles vs HIV/AIDS and Ebola: Measles is far more contagious than HIV/AIDS and is significantly more contagious than Ebola.  Both HIV/AIDS and Ebola are transmitted by blood and body fluids, which means you must have physical contact with someone who has the disease (in the case of HIV, they also have to have a high enough viral load to transmit it).  Measles is airborne and can live up to two hours in the air after someone with the disease coughs or sneezes.  Even though there are no cases of Ebola in the US that I know of right now, every time I have been to the ER in the past year, I have been asked questions that screen for Ebola.  (I'm also asked questions that screen for flu.)  Incidentally, HIV/AIDS is not just spread by homosexual sex practices-it is also spread by heterosexual sex and from mother to child in utero.

    There is no vaccine for Ebola, but we heard a LOT about it when there were cases in the US. We hear a lot about any illness when there is an outbreak. 

    The vast majority of deaths due to ant bits are caused by anaphalactic shock after multiple bites (or even suffocation if someone is attacked by an overwhelming number of them).  In other words, whether vaccinated or not, your chances of dying from ONE ANT BITE are extremely low.

    Laura W already addressed herd immunity. (I.e. if you want to prove that vaccinating large numbers of people does not decrease the number of cases, you have to compare the rate of infection in populations with NO vaccinations to the rate in populations with vaccines.  According to the CDC, before vaccinations for measles were introduced, almost all kids got measles-in other words, there were millions of cases per year. Since 2010, the largest number of cases reported in the US has been THIS YEAR; and it is 704 cases.  That's a lot less than the number before vaccinations and shows that vaccinations DO decrease cases.)  

    According to the CDC, the measles outbreak last year occurred largely in UNVACCINATED people-not people who were vaccinated.  While some people still get measles after being vaccinated, and there have been outbreaks among those populations, that is the exception not the rule.  (As per my paragraph above.)

    Regarding "shedding" of virus after vaccines:  I suppose it's possble for someone who has had a live virus vaccine to spread it to someone who has no immunity to the disease (i.e, someone who hasn't had it or has not been vaccinated), but that is more reason to be vaccinated!  Incidentally, I am one of the people who should not be around someone who has recently had a live vaccine because of an immune system disorder; but it would be FAR WORSE to be around someone who is sick with the illness! 

    For those who are worried about shedding or the effectiveness of vaccines (and those who talk about how everyone got measles in the 50's but it wasn't a problem): If you think the only way to be immune is to have the illness, and if you don't think measles is very dangerous, then why is it a problem for someone around you to be "shedding" the virus or to have a vaccine that is less effective than stated?  Are you saying you would rather be around sick kids?

    I DO find it troubling if Merck is guilty of making inaccurate claims about the effectiveness of vaccines, and I hope they get to the bottom of the issue, but my information has come from the CDC, not from Merck. 

  • cln
    Posted: Tue, 04/30/2019 03:08 pm

    not silent Merck does give the vaccine side effects in their package inserts. Which no one reads, but these inserts can be 12-15 pages long. Merck is not liable for anything they put in a vaccine due to the 1986 bill passed by Congress.  It is about the only product in the US that has zero liability for the manufacturer. Peanut butter and romaine lettuce and Ford and Mazda do not have that exclusion. The car manufacturer will recall your car before you even know you have a problem and they will spend millions. Not with vaccines. Car seats for children need to be safe also. Not vaccines. And yes, I would rather be exposed to the wild virus of measles than the ones shedded from a vaccine. There is a difference. A vaccine injury court has been set up for the injured and more than $4billion has been paid out to injured kids with most who seek compensation getting nothing. And that's just the beginning.....

  • Laura W
    Posted: Wed, 05/01/2019 08:19 am

    Um, why? "I would rather be exposed to the wild virus of measles than the ones shedded from a vaccine." I get that you're wary of vaccines, and they do have the potential for bad side effects, but when you say things like that, I have a really hard time trying to understand your thought process. When we're talking about shedding, it's only the virus, right? Not anything else that was in the vaccine. So why would that kind of virus (that's been specifically chosen to be weak enough for the body to fight off easily) be worse than the one in the wild?

    I feel for you, I really do. And I'm glad your grandson made it out okay in the end. But have you considered that your experience may be interfering with your judgement? I'm sure that anyone who's ever been struck by lightning out of the blue sky is going to be nervous about lightning afterward, but that doesn't mean that everyone should stay indoors. We even keep driving cars, and so many people die from that. Nothing in life is 100% safe--it's all about weighing the relative risks and benefits, and doing the best we can. With so many kids getting vaccinated, some of them are bound to have some side effects. But that doesn't prove that we should stop using vaccines any more than we should stop doing surgery because sometimes the doctors mess it up and make things worse.

    Am I missing something? I've been doing my best to understand your point of view, but it's sounding like most of your objections boil down to "there's a chance that something bad could happen, so we shouldn't do it". Maybe I'm oversimplifying this, but if that's not it, then could you explain a bit more? It just doesn't sound like you're weighing and comparing the relative risks between the options, because not being vaccinated also has risks, up to and including death.

  • not silent
    Posted: Wed, 05/01/2019 12:54 pm

    I realize there are very strong feelings about this topic.  I have said previously that I'm not crazy about the government forcing people to do things, but I also feel very strongly about presenting accurate information so that we can all make informed choices.  The Bible tells us that the truth will set us free.

    Cln, you have been very gracious in answering comments and have used sources to back up your comments; and that has made it much easier and more pleasant to have a discussion with you.  Since you used it as a source, I looked up the information Merck provides with the MMR vaccine.  It IS 11 pages long; but most of that is information about the vaccine itself and what is in it, how to administer it safely, who should and should not receive it, precautions for certain populations, and references.  The list of "adverse effects" begins on page 6 halfway down the page and ends on page 8, halfway down the page.  In other words, it's a total of two pages out of 11.  There are two pages of references alone.

    I agree with you that it's important to read the inserts for all meds; and, if you do this, you must know that they are all required to include information about the chemical makeup of the drug, about how to take it, who should and should not take it, special precautions for certain populations, how effective it has been based on research, and all side effects that were reported during testing and even in post-marketing (whether they were actually caused by the med or not).  Incidentally, the pharmacy rarely includes the insert that comes with the medication and includes all that-it gives us its own insert containing the name of the medication, its common use, what to tell your doctor before taking it, how to take it, cautions (such as the names of other meds that could interact and medical conditions that could have an effect), possible side effects, what to do in case of overdoes, and misc info.  ALL meds have the potential for side effects and some have the potential for very serious ones.  I'm looking at one right now for an antibiotic, and it lists over 32 serious side effects that you need to call a doctor about and 4 "common side effects."  I guess I would have to ask if the potential for side effects would lead you to avoid antibiotics also.

    Car manufacturers aren't required to give you a list of precautions, though I think a lot more people have been killed using cars than receiving vaccines.  The last time we bought a car we were NOT given a list of all possible adverse effects from owning our car that were documented by the manufacturer. There was an owners manual, but it didn't teach us how to drive-we had to have a drivers license issued by the government to buy the car. If we wanted to know how reliable the car was (or the best price for it), we had to do our own research on our own time.  

    I also looked up the law passed in 1986 on several sites.  (Presumably you mean the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act?) From what I can tell, it does LIMIT the liability of manufacturers of vaccines but does not remove it entirely.  It established a program to compensate victims of adverse events caused by vaccines.  It also required healthcare providers to report all adverse vaccination events to a national database (VAERS) and established a committee from the Institute of Medicine to study all reports of adverse events after vaccinations AND it requires all healthcare providers to provide a "Vaccine Information Statement" with a discription of the vaccine and its risks and benefits to recipients or their parents or guardians. 

    Regarding Merck not being liable, it took me less than a miniute to find a legal page ( which described a class action lawsuit against Merck based on a vaccination.  It was listed as "open."  I have lawyers in my family, and lawyers usually don't get paid in these cases unless they win. It doesn't make sense to prosecute a case like this unless they think they can get something. 

  • cln
    Posted: Tue, 05/07/2019 04:26 pm

    not silent and Laura

    I just looked at this thread again. Thank you for keeping it friendly. Here is another link, not current, but nevertheless it shows that the vaccinated get the same illness as they were vaxxed for.

    Yes, cars have killed people and I think everyone who drives a car knows that they contain risks. But a car manufacturer is held liable for potential injury producing flaws and will recall it before you even know you have a problem. If your child dies from a vaccine, you don't get an investigation into the vaccine. The cause of death is rarely acknowledged and goes down as "unknown" or SIDS. The parents are ignored and left to grieve on their own. If you don't believe me, attend an Autism convention as I did a few years ago. It reminds you of the weeping mothers of Ramah. Except weeping does no good. These parents have to go on with dealing with their damaged children. They get about zero acknowledgement from their health care providers and even relatives and friends because vaccines win in everyone's mind. They are lonely, guilt ridden, financially stressed and desperate. THese are parents who believed in vaccines, not anti-vaxers. And the journalists are silent.  Read "Rising from the Dead" by Dr. Suzanne Humphries. Look at the work of the CHildrens Medical Safety Research Institute,, Dr. Theresa Deisher and many more.

    The issue now with vaccines is not their safety or how they have "saved the world," but at stake are basic freedoms. Are we going to be forced to take vaccines? Thrown in prison for refusing? Is the government going to "big brother" us into telling us what we need? Vaccines are so adored and worshipped and the herd immunity myth has been so bought into that even many who normally accept the idea of personal liberty are now challenging this basic freedom.  When the government has the right to get into your blood stream, in my opinion, that is tyranny. Parents and people should be able to say "no." Nurses should be able to say no.  All school children should not be force vaccinated. Vaccinations should be free to partake of or not to partake of. It is a medical procedure with risks and no one should be forced to take a risky procedure for an unknown. If I need a risky procedure I want to be able to weigh benefit vs risk. This does not happen with vaccines because the person does not EVER know the risk he has for any illness since risk assessments are never done. So you are getting a drug for diptheria? You will probably never get diptheria. You do not know your risk factor for the the ingredients in vaccines since risk assessments are never done. You don't know if you have a genetic mutation or your tolerance level for aluminum or the DNA of insects or how the cell fragments of an aborted boy will affect a girl or vice versa.  

    My grandson was healthy before vaccinations..He didn't get any until he was 9 months old. Cheerful, never sick, robust, large. He quit growing, he had to relearn walking, he had to be watched 24/7 from neurological damage. His previously unvaxxed 3 year old brother, also very healthy, got multiple ear infections after vaccinating and lost some hearing. The oldest 2 siblings, ages 5 and 7 were also previously healthy. All were sick for months after vaccinating. The doctor said it had to be vaccines since nothing else changed. None of these kids had ever had a medication for an illness or been sick more than something minor for a day or two. 

    Where there is risk, there must be choice. I think we can all agree on that. Our basic freedoms are at stake right now. When government oversteps it's boundaries we need to speak up. We need to take back the right to make our own health decisions. When we lie down and let the power of government and multi billion dollar industries make up our mind for us, then we can review some fairly recent horrors of history and realize we are repeating it. I have visited Dachau. There were nice houses right outside the camp. Who was speaking up before the moves of Hitler? Once he made his moves it was too late. We are on the precipice right now but  it has been coming on for years. I am quite sure that WORLD readers are independent thinkers who do NOT want the government and pharma making all their health choices for them. 


  • cln
    Posted: Wed, 05/08/2019 11:07 am

    Here is a brief video from a scientist on the measles and the vaccine.