Embrace the “Science” of “Herd Immunity,” or Reject it as Pseudo-Scientific, Human-Sacrificing Soft Eugenics?

The following debate originally took place on my Facebook wall, upon my post, “But… Muh Herd Immunity!“…

Merck: Murking the Weak for the “Greater Good” of Humanity

Merck: Murking the Weak for the “Greater Good” of Humanity

Rayn: Merck Has Some Explaining To Do Over Its MMR Vaccine Claims:

But… but… muh herd immunity! :_(


Stacie T.http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp

Stacie T.: I’ll take my chances. Death of children from these diseases had hit too close to home for me.

Rayn: Actually, there are three court cases mentioned in the article, and they were placed in order of occurrence and importance, for a reason, with the third one you choose to focus upon being the least relevant, the least substantiated, the least current, and the most controversial. It was likely reported only in the interest of noting the fact that Merck is being accused on many fronts. I was really only interested in sharing the latest “news” (the latest case, that is) but didn’t feel like navigating through the mainstream media monopoly’s efforts to trivialize it, as expected, since I’m using my phone to read and post, instead of my laptop, like I’ve done so often in past. Since I’m currently traveling, I’m not exactly in an ideal position to do the full-time-job’s worth of mental leg-work that so many others else avoid, like I usual do, and had hoped others would be able to do the filtering for themselves, occasionally. I stand corrected…

From the article, “The first court case, United States v. Merck & Co., stems from claims by two former Merck scientists that Merck ‘fraudulently misled the government and omitted, concealed, and adulterated material information regarding the efficacy of its mumps vaccine in violation of the FCA [False Claims Act].’

According to the whistleblowers’ court documents, Merck’s misconduct was far-ranging: It ‘failed to disclose that its mumps vaccine was not as effective as Merck represented, (ii) used improper testing techniques, (iii) manipulated testing methodology, (iv) abandoned undesirable test results, (v) falsified test data, (vi) failed to adequately investigate and report the diminished efficacy of its mumps vaccine, (vii) falsely verified that each manufacturing lot of mumps vaccine would be as effective as identified in the labeling, (viii) falsely certified the accuracy of applications filed with the FDA, (ix) falsely certified compliance with the terms of the CDC purchase contract, (x) engaged in the fraud and concealment describe herein for the purpose of illegally monopolizing the U.S. market for mumps vaccine, (xi) mislabeled, misbranded, and falsely certified its mumps vaccine, and (xii) engaged in the other acts described herein to conceal the diminished efficacy of the vaccine the government was purchasing.’

These fraudulent activities, say the whistleblowers, were designed to produce test results that would meet the FDA’s requirement that the mumps vaccine was 95 per cent effective. To the whistleblowers’ delight, the judge dismissed Merck’s objections to the case proceeding, finding the whistleblowers had plausible grounds on all of the claims lodged against Merck.

If the whistleblowers win, it would represent more than a moral victory (they repeatedly tried to stop Merck while still in its employ). Under the False Claims Act, the whistleblowers would receive a share — likely 25 per cent to 30 per cent — of the amount the government recovers. Previous settlements involving extensive fraud by pharmaceutical companies under the False Claims Act have run into the hundreds of millions of dollars, and in some cases such as against GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer, into the billions.

The second court case, Chatom Primary Care v. Merck & Co. relies on the same whistleblower evidence. This class action suit claims damages because Merck had fraudulently monopolized the mumps market. Doctors and medical practices in the suit would be able to obtain compensation for having been sold an overpriced monopolized product, and a defective one to boot, in that the mumps vaccine wasn’t effective (indeed, the suit alleged that Merck expected outbreaks to occur and, as predicted, they did — mumps epidemics occurred in 2006 in a highly vaccinated population and again in 2009-2010).

‘Plaintiffs have argued sufficient facts to sustain a claim for proximate causation, detailing the significant barriers that other companies would face to enter the mumps vaccine market,’ the court ruled.”

Stacie T.: There were other articles I found, but I am on my phone, as well. I posted one to show the ease at which you can find information to contradict the statements in this article. There is always a chance that a batch of medication produced will be faulty. There’s a chance that any product can have a faulty batch. I am not willing to write off all protection for my child based on speculation. There is so much propoganda against vaccines. I go with the research from a trusted toxicologist whom I know personally and her trusted partners. After seeing a close friend’s life ruined by her two year old’s death, I’d rather do what I can and hope for the best. Could it still happen? Yes. No immunity, including natural immunity, is 100%. (Click Here to Continue Reading This Post)

But… Muh Herd Immunity!

I originally posted the following information and commentary onto my Facebook wall…

Merck: Murking the Weak for the “Greater Good” of Humanity

Merck: Murking the Weak for the “Greater Good” of Humanity

Merck Has Some Explaining To Do Over Its MMR Vaccine Claims:

(Huffington PostMerck, the pharmaceutical giant, is facing a slew of controversies over its Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR) vaccine following numerous allegations of wrongdoing from different parties in the medical field, including two former Merck scientists-turned-whistleblowers. A third whistleblower, this one a scientist at the Centers for Disease Control, also promises to bring Merck grief following his confession of misconduct involving the same MMR vaccine.

The controversies will find Merck defending itself and its vaccine in at least two federal court cases after a U.S. District judge earlier this month threw out Merck’s attempts at dismissal. Merck now faces federal charges of fraud from the whistleblowers, a vaccine competitor and doctors in New Jersey and New York. Merck could also need to defend itself in Congress: The staff of representative Bill Posey (R-Fla) — a longstanding critic of the CDC interested in an alleged link between vaccines and autism — is now reviewing some 1,000 documents that the CDC whistleblower turned over to them.

(Read entire article here…)

My Commentary: But… but… muh herd immunity! :_(


When the State Medically Rapes You for the “Greater Good”!

The following correspondence originally took place upon the Facebook wall of my friend, Jordan K…

Jordan K.: The Toll of the Anti-Vaccination Movement, in One Devastating Graphic:

This guy is suggesting you shouldn’t have the right to decide if your kids are vaccinated or not!
“The lesson of all this is that vaccination is not an individual choice to be made by a parent for his or her own offspring. It’s a public health issue, because the diseases contracted by unvaccinated children are a threat to the community.”

This guy, or any of you for that matter, tries to force a needle in my child that I don’t agree with and you’re gonna see something far worse than a threat to the community.

Rayn: When the State medically rapes you, it’s for the “greater good”! 😉

Luis V.: Nobody forces you, if you want your kid in day care or school it is necessary. What is your beef with vacinations?

Rayn: “Necessity is the argument of tyrants, it is the creed of slaves.” – William Pitt

Luis V.: LoL ok.

Jordan K.: “The lesson here is that vaccination is not an individual choice to be made by a parent…” my beef is with the article suggesting that I shouldn’t have a choice. Currently any child can attend school without being vaccinated by claiming religious beliefs. In 2014, religious beliefs will grant your child freedom from vaccinations but your personal choices won’t.

Luis V.: Why would you put your child in harms way by not vaccinating them? That’s up there with those people that refuse medical help for their children on the grounds of religion. I don’t understand the objective of denying your child vaccines?

Jordan K.: Then why are dozens of vaccines optional?

Jordan K.: Putting my child in harm’s way would be pumping him full of mercury for a virus when the death rate for said virus is no higher than the common cold. This is my informed and well researched stance, and I would appreciate it if other people gave me the respect that my education has earned and allow me to decide what is and isn’t harmful for my own child.

Rayn: Individual Sovereignty, The Non-Aggression Principle, and Voluntaryism, for the win! Without Informed consent, even so-called “medical procedures” merely represent illegitimate acts of aggression against the bodily integrity of the Individual.

Luis V.: Well my mom is an RN and my wife works with kids. It is not manditory until you go to school or day care. My wife has a cousin whos sister in law was into that holistic shit and she refused to vaccinate her kid. Kid came down with whooping caugh and it almost killed him. All because she was afraid of a fucken vaccine. Then to top it off, my ladies cousin had a new born that had to be put on heavy antibiotics to prevent him from coming down with the same shit.

Jordan K.: Then you know it’s not mandatory for religious children.

Luis V.: Sorry bro but you are not a doctor, nurse, or practice medicine so I would not take your advice on this for my child. I respect your opinion but I beleive you are wrong. (Click Here to Continue Reading This Post)

Force-Frame Vaccination Discussion into False Dichotomy of “Pro” Versus “Anti,” OR Present UNIQUE THIRD Option?

The following debate originally took place upon the Facebook wall of an ex-acquaintance…

2013-05-11 - Force-Frame Vaccination Discussion into False Dichotomy of 'Pro' Versus 'Anti,' OR Present UNIQUE THIRD Option

Brian K.: The Anti-Vaccine Movement: A Terrible Track Record:

“As it turns out, the anti-vaccinationists are remarkably consistent. Time and time again, they are shown to be wrong. I’m not sure how many times a group needs to be wrong before people stop seeing them as credible. Perhaps people need to be reminded of how many times this group has been wrong?”

Genaire: I can’t say for certain how wrong or right they are, I can say for certain that most medicine’s side effects are far worse then the illness they have been created to treat. I would think the same would apply to vaccinations. I would also ask myself why would I want to get vaccinated when my body’s own immune system can do the same thing in most cases without the side effects.

(Click Here to Continue Reading This Post)

“Pro” and “Anti” Extremists Dominate Almost All Debates About the Use of Vaccinations

The following correspondence originally took place upon my Facebook wall, after a mutual acquaintance inexplicably posted an article that I was in the very process of debating on the wall of an ex-acquaintance, in what seemed like a concerted effort to distract me from continuing to reply, there…

Stephen K.: Thanks, Brian!

The Anti-Vaccine Movement: A Terrible Track Record

Brian K.: I posted this on my own feed a few days ago and we’ve been having an interesting “debate”

(provides link to debate taking place on his wall)

(update: debate is now concluded, and a copy is located at: http://acidrayn.com/2013/05/11/force-frame-vaccination-discussion-into-false-dichotomy-of-pro-versus-anti-or-present-unique-third-option/)

Rayn: And, due to that same “debate,” I am beginning to believe that so much of the “controversy” regarding vaccines really comes from “gut-reaction” responses to the subject, along with the push to frame all debates on the topic into the false paradigm of “pro-vaccination” versus “anti-vaccination” – an activity that has taken CENTER STAGE, over the facts! Strangely, there appears to be no room in the minds of these two extremist groups for individuals to be somewhat pro-vaccination, while also somewhat anti-vaccination, and, they are FAR from interested in understanding the reasons behind viewpoints that don’t correspond 100% with their own. It’s ALL OR NOTHING in their minds. Both of these “sides” could use a lesson in respect, as well as THE RULES OF LOGICAL DEBATE!

Alison K.: I seem to picking up on the tail end of this. But to address Rayn – I am one of the people you speak of, who is both ‘pro’ and ‘anti’. My son is up to date on all vaccines except two – I am against them for different reasons and it has nothing to do with the autism/allergy debate. For certain things I feel it should be the parent’s choice. And if it means my son cannot attend traditional public school – then so be it. I’ve remained unimpressed with traditional schooling for a long time anyway.