That's a despicable libel, and I utterly refute it.
There's nothing libel about it. Right now they can stand confident they are protected by the herd. Take that protection away and they'll be singing another tune.
You further expose your misunderstanding of history and the fact that in almost every case of epidemic disease the relevant problem was almost completely resolved prior to introduction of vaccines.
History is not on your side in that one. There's no way you are going to explain away thousands of deaths a year before the introduction of a vaccine. What they really need to do is get volunteers who'd like to prove the whole scientific community wrong on vaccine, put those people on an island with people infected with measles or any other virus and lets see what unfolds out for them. Let's see how fast they are to jump to prove science wrong.
This statement is pejorative and libelous. You're basically accusing people of desiring genocide. You may not be concerned over injecting heavy metal, human fetal tissue, or all sorts of unidentified nanoparticles into children, but you should be, and characterizing folks that are as genocidal maniacs should be beneath you.
As you can see below, I am not wrong about the bulk of control of diseases for which vaccines have eventuated pre existing the advent of vaccines. Feel driven to counter this data. Search high and low for contrary information. In looking at this chart you should keep in mind that one of these diseases still has no vaccine, yet it is all but eradicated anyway.
I want you to be convinced of this fact, and failing to prove it's false will do that if it can be done.
I really hate to do this to you dude but here's the rundown. The study done by Charles T Pearce was a chart comparison that vaccines had not slowed down the death rate and that people were still dying at increasing rates....not that they were dying exclusively at the hands of the stated illnesses in the chart. His primary argument was that he thought vaccines may have actually compromised people's immune systems thereby they couldn't fight off other diseases. Which a lot of those disease's they had no idea what they actually were....
Scarlett fever ran rampant, discovered in 1685 but it is a bacterium not a virus, there is no Scarlett fever vaccine, Scarlett Fever wasn't cured until penicillin was discovered in 1928.
There was no was they knew measles was measles as it wasn't discovered until the 1930's by John F. Enders...so before that date in time there was no diagnosis and no measles vaccines.
They couldn't have known anyone had whooping cough at it wasn't discovered until 1906 and the vaccines against it were weak as it is also caused by a bacterium, it is still persistent to this day even though in 1949 there was a vaccine that was more potent in fighting it.
Diphtheria wasn't discovered until 1888 and in 1890 they produced a vaccine that worked it wasn't until in the 1920's when the vaccine's use became wide spread did they see a significant drop in cases.
So you see it wasn't even that the vaccines suppressed the immune system, these people just got other serious diseases and died.
You seem not to understand the chart. Do you see where the vaccines are introduced? These diseass were all almost totally under control by the time the vaccines were introduced. That was my point. Vaccines did not do most of the job. They actually almost had no effect compared to the effects we had already achieved.
Scarlett Fever is a particularly good example of this, and why it's on the chart.
But Scarlett Fever was almost completely eradicated by 1927. Penicillin did not reduce Scarlett Fever deaths even remotely as much as better hygience already had.
These diseases were not eradicated by vaccines, but by better treatment and living conditions, and that's what this chart shows.
Do you just make stuff up? You're claiming the first case of Whooping Cough was1906. You know that's false.
I am observing that you are utterly going to ignore facts and reality and stick to your story. There's no point in discussing it then. No one will be proved wrong except you when you stick to your story despite it being false.
Won't hurt me none, and I'm not responsible for you. Good luck with that.
No, it was the first time in was isolated in 1906, before 1906 it was labeled whooping cough as that is what happened to people who contracted the bacterium, after the confirmation (or isolation) of the bacterium it became labelled Pertussis.
You really have no clue what scarlett fever really is do you? You have no idea it's not eradicated as much as you'd like to think.....it's strep throat, something people get to this very day, something which some people react to by also showing signs of red blotchy bumps on their bodies. Yes it's true...thousands of people today get scarlett fever and it can be just as deadly as it was in the yester years.
You really need to look at the report mentioned in the chart. Look up the guys name and read it. They couldn't even have kept records on those mentioned in the chart as statically back then someone getting strep throat who didn't break out in bumps may have never been diagnosis as having scarlett fever...so they can't go back and say someone who was listed as coughing and high fever was scarlett fever because there was no way to confirm the bacterium in the body at the time...so minus the red bumps they'd never known.
What this guy said was that with the invent (of minimal vaccines back then) that people's deaths weren't declining, he tried to attribute it to the vaccines causing a immunity problem so people couldn't fend off illnesses....but that wasn't true, what was true was that in the future they'd finally found the science that helped them isolate the bacterium or virus that was killing people. If what he was saying were held to be true then that would be like saying that because someone got a vaccine they'd never die of something else as the body should have been strong enough to fend it off...we know that's hog wash.
You can never stand being proven wrong but aren't you the guy who posted this:
Yeah, I book marked that. This is exactly what that is except it deals with illness vs climate change. Someone took what this guy said and attached labels of illnesses to it to further their anti vaccine agenda.
Now before you come back at me at least take the time to go read what this guys report was and see he doesn't mention anything other than the rates of death unattributed to any various causes. I gave you that much consideration you should have no problem doing the same.
I am glad you support Heller and agree with his assessment of climate science and political propaganda on the matter. You seem to fail to grasp that both vaccination and privatization of Earth's carbon are aspects of globalism.
You have indeed got the vaccination issue backwards. Just as AGW alarmists misrepresent relevant issues to facilitate their ultimate goal - which ordinary people do not understand - of privatization of Earth's carbon, Vaccine advocates mirror that propaganda to facilitate direct introduction of every possible genetic, toxic, psychoactive and medical intervention into civilians conceivable. You can compare the governmental mechanisms, enemedia propaganda, and indoctrination that has been undertaken on both issues and those exact same elements of disinformation and collectivation is impossible to miss.
Just as Heller's review of the evidence reveals that insuperable disinformation is how AGW alarmism is advanced, the chart's that @frot and I both posted reveal that same fact regarding vaccines.