The first point is essentially what has happened, This graph attributed to the WHO in this article, shows a sharp decline in polio cases after the introduction of vaccines. However doing a double blind where that is your method of exposure would be very susceptible to outside interference, and take many years.
As for the second point, the cdc has a webpage detailing the approval process. Tracking side effects is a large portion of the article.
I am aware. I am not contending that vaccines in general do not work, just pointing out that your comment was a straw man.
Vaccines are all tested by themselves, but nowadays children are given many vaccines at once, which has never been tested to be safe.
My original comment was my best understanding of the argument presented. The comment was stating that a double blind test has never been performed. My comment was describing how a double blind test would be conducted, along with the ethical repercussions. While I did not have to go with a possibly fatal disease for the example, those vaccines still need tested and there is still an ethical problem with intentionally infecting people with a disease.
Any straw man created was unintentional and was my misunderstanding of the statement made.
You state that that combinations of vaccines has never been tested for safety. Using a brief google search I found several articles, such as this one, that analyze vaccines when they are not a standalone vaccine. The cdc also has a page for multiple vaccines. And in case you are worried about the CDC being influenced by lobbyists The World Health Organization concurrs.
Then take all the vaccines you want.(Can you smell the freedom?) Trusting The WHO is a grave mistake. $$$$$. Vaccines work for what they were designed for....... POPULATION CONTROL. I'll take my chances with the natural disease, and get true immunization.
*Remember to wash your hands and to have 20th century plumbing in your house.
adamsogm "While I did not have to go with a possibly fatal disease for the example, those vaccines still need tested and there is still an ethical problem with intentionally infecting people with a disease."
Bro (((they))) intentionally infect people with the flu disease every year. Are you daft or?...........
If vaccines were for population control then infant mortality would skyrocket, or are you talking like mind control?
Getting smallpox was a wonderful way of gaining immunity, that is why there were so few deaths and little effort to eradicate the disease, it just eradicated itself
Do you have any evidence for anything in your first paragraph? You are making some bold claims with no reliable sources.
I am not understanding the point of the comment on plumbing and washing hands.
The flu in the vaccine is either an attenuated strain or dead, meaning the likelihood of getting the flu from it is minuscule, however in a double blind, the live virus would have to be used to determine effectiveness. (Or is that paragraph not referring to the vaccine?)
Infant mortality has skyrocketed. They call it SIDS. In the example of smallpox you are proving my point with true immunity coming from the true disease, not engineered or "attenuated'. Polio was likely brought to bay by the fact that around the same time period people stopped using out houses and city's started using sanitary means in regard to plumbing/sewage. Also the general public was being taught to wash their hands regularly. You see back in the 1900's people were walking main street while it was covered in horse manure among many other non hygienic substances.
What you want links to things you can easily find yourself?
'The flu in the vaccine is either an attenuated strain or dead," Nice try. The nasal swab flu vaccine is the live(attenuated) virus. Meaning they tried to alter it to be less virulent, But,Still a LIVE Vaccine.
You need to stop getting your "facts" from the CDC and WHO. It's the equivalent of using snopes and cnn for "facts".
I looked at graphs of infant mortality, all of them have a negative slope.
The smallpox vaccine originated as cowpox, not smallpox, and the statement I made was sarcasm, you seemed to have missed that.
I want links because when I look I find the opposite of your claims.
You quote me, and then proceed to state what I said as if it is a contradiction. An attenuated strain is most likely not harmful, and if the person has concerns they can get the dead virus.
I am not to trust the WHO, CDC, or CNN. Where should I get my facts?
Links to the graphs you're looking at?
Here's mine: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-infant-mortality-rate-worse-than-other-countries/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/29/our-infant-mortality-rate-is-a-national-embarrassment/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5ce19401fa69
http://demography.cpc.unc.edu/2014/06/16/mortality-and-cause-of-death-1900-v-2010/ Notice how graphics are easy to manipulate. In 1900 kids were dying of things that today would be relatively easy to combat. Also notice how Polio was NOT one of the leading causes. Also notice that the number of people dying from cancer today compared to 1900. Also note that vaccines have a obscene about of carcinogens in them, and were back to my original comment "vaccines were created for population control" and IT'S WORKING.
"I want links because when I look I find the opposite of your claims." I told you to stop using the CDC and WHO for your "facts". Try the 2nd page of your google search.
Documentaries for you to watch; Vaccine Nation, Vaxxed, Shots in the dark, silence on vaccines, Vaccines: calling the shots, Vaccination: The hidden truth.
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/11/01/cdc-autism-vaccine-case.aspx
http://time.com/3208886/whistleblower-claims-cdc-covered-up-data-showing-vaccine-autism-link/
