RE: Measles RE: Your Child Next

[Guest guest]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-2118360,00.html

>Measles is back: not in regiments, but in numbers sufficient to send a shiver

down many parents’ spines. There have been more confirmed cases of the disease

in the first three months of the year than in the whole of 2005. One boy has

died, the first measles death since 1992. Nine have needed hospital treatment.

My goodness, what melodramatic responses for a single death that occurred 14

years ago. The child was probably immune compromised and treated allopathically

which was a certain recipe for death. What about all the VACCINE induced deaths,

disabilties and hospitalizations that have occurred in the past 14 years; no

mention there and certainly a worse cause for " shivers " down the spine of these

terribly concerned parents and healthcare workers. Someone already wisely

mentioned that measles outbreaks are cyclical and always affect both vaxed and

unvaxed individuals.

> NI_MPU('middle'); These, of course, are nothing like the

numbers who used to catch measles, once a childhood rite of passage along with

mumps and chickenpox. But today there is no excuse for any case of measles in a

child younger than 18 because there is a vaccine, offered routinely to all

children since 1988, that protects against it: MMR.

It was a childhood right of passage, not a death sentence, and natural

immunity was the reward for having the illness. Contracting measles after their

so-called mutated brand of protection wears off would be more difficult and

dangerous for an adult to process.

>Today’s measles cases, which have the potential to grow into something much

worse, are appearing because parents were frightened by bad science, and worse

journalism, into refusing to have their children vaccinated.

In my opinion, today's measles cases have the potential to grow into something

much worse because they have been mutated by the vaccine version of an otherwise

natural disease. Shoot that into a child who has already been blasted by a

number of lab created, mutations of other natural diseases and of course you

raise the risk for complications. So easy to blame Dr. Wakefield for their own

obvious mistakes.

I think every single paragraph of the article " Your Child Next " reveals some

form of stupidity or admission that contadicts the ridiculousness of it's

claims. This stuff really raises the hair on the back of my neck.

Anita

---------------------------------

Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates

starting at 1 & cent;/min.

[Guest guest]

>

> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-2118360,00.html

>

> >Measles is back: not in regiments, but in numbers sufficient to

send a shiver down many parents' spines. There have been more

confirmed cases of the disease in the first three months of the year

than in the whole of 2005. One boy has died, the first measles death

since 1992. Nine have needed hospital treatment.

>

> My goodness, what melodramatic responses for a single death that

occurred 14 years ago. The child was probably immune compromised and

treated allopathically which was a certain recipe for death. What

about all the VACCINE induced deaths, disabilties and

hospitalizations that have occurred in the past 14 years; no mention

there and certainly a worse cause for " shivers " down the spine of

these terribly concerned parents and healthcare workers. Someone

already wisely mentioned that measles outbreaks are cyclical and

always affect both vaxed and unvaxed individuals.

Interstingly, Anita, a member of my parenting list says that she

knows of a 3yo boy who died from *complications* of measles five

years ago. He was vaccinated, of course, and ultimately died from

pneumonia but he had measles. Seems the doctors refused to admit it

until it he was too ill to save.

In my opinion, today's measles cases have the potential to grow into

something much worse because they have been mutated by the vaccine

version of an otherwise natural disease. Shoot that into a child who

has already been blasted by a number of lab created, mutations of

other natural diseases and of course you raise the risk for

complications. So easy to blame Dr. Wakefield for their own obvious

mistakes.

>

> I think every single paragraph of the article " Your Child Next "

reveals some form of stupidity or admission that contadicts the

ridiculousness of it's claims. This stuff really raises the hair on

the back of my neck.

>

> Anita

What surprises me is this flagellation by Hawkes of himself and the

journalistic profession. Doesn't ring true... He is normally a

(reasonably) rational journalist...well, as rational as they come.

One of the more *analytical* ones, if you like...