[run4yourlives]

I up-voted you because you are wrong, in the hopes that as many people as possible will give you reasons as to exactly how.

There is no grand conspiracy to make the world sick via vaccines to profit. If they are truly 'evil', both insurance and big pharma would benefit much, much more in not having people vaccinated and overpricing drugs every time there is a panic and a run on supplies, ala H1N1. Could you imagine the demand with today's media if there was a measles outbreak in a major city with many deaths?

There is no conspiracy.

As for mecury, you ingest much more of it every time you eat some fish. It is a fact of life.

With every medication, a certain percentage of people will experience side effects. People have died from taking aspirin after all. The point is that a major outbreak of a disease like measles, mumps, rubella, etc would be catastrophic for a large group of people. It is in all of our interests to do what we can to prevent this from happening, even if it means a small, small percentage suffer in the process.

Look at a history book. There is but one constant dread in every story: plague. Disease has culled populations quickly and dramatically in regular fashion for as long as humanity has existed. When is the last time you remember a major outbreak killing off half your neighbourhood? Exactly. That's due 100% to vaccinations.

Get vaccinated. Help yourself and your children; help our civilization survive the horrible effects of these diseases.

[dimas]

First of all, I was not referring to any conspiracy at all, it is simple business and benefit analysis unless you believe in idealistic and humanitarian business that only care about human well being(I am not saying they do not exist either). Second, the mercury and heavy metals that fish you eat might contain are not injected into your blood and small amounts if any gets there. Third, "According to the British Association for the Advancement of Science, childhood diseases decreased 90% between 1850 and 1940, paralleling improved sanitation and hygienic practices, well before mandatory vaccination programs. Infectious disease deaths in the U.S. and England declined steadily by an average of about 80% during this century (measles mortality declined over 97%) prior to vaccinations.". Once again I am not forcing you to believe in what I believe and made conclusion based on what I have read and reasoned so please do not attack me as an enemy of humanity I am just voicing my opinion and believe I have a valid argument. Though I like when people tell me that i am wrong, otherwise there will be no arguments and learning.

[isleyaardvark]

childhood diseases decreased 90% between 1850 and 1940, paralleling improved sanitation and hygienic practices, well before mandatory vaccination programs

The polio vaccine's first mass vaccination campaign was in 1955, take a look at what happened to the incidence of polio: http://www.post-polio.org/ir-usa.html

A measles vaccine became available in 1963. Take a look at what happened to the incidence of (or more importantly the deaths caused by) measles here: http://www.iayork.com/MysteryRays/2009/09/02/measles-deaths-...

You are spreading misinformation, you should do the research first.

[run4yourlives]

it is simple business

Yes, and I just gave you a better business case to not vaccinate.

Second, the mercury and heavy metals that fish you eat might contain are not injected into your blood and small amounts if any gets there.

Fish are the number one source of Mercury poisoning incidents, according to the USEPA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercury_poisoning#cite_note-EPA...). There is no protection offered from your digestion system against this heavy metal. Your argument is irrelevant here.

childhood diseases decreased 90% between 1850 and 1940, paralleling improved sanitation and hygienic practices, well before mandatory vaccination programs

Really? Source this please, because according to wikipedia, the UK Vaccination of 1840 first introduced vaccinations, which were made mandatory by the 1853 act. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccination_Act#The_1840_Act)

That seems to coincide pretty well with the drop in diseases, actually.

[prbuckley]

I think a lot of this disagreement could be cleared up if there were studies done on the long term effects of low doses of mercury.

Mercury is bioaccumalitive and so I think such studies are justified. Why is no one doing this?

Also from a business perspective if there is such concern about methylmercury in vaccines why doesn't someone bring to market vaccines that use a different (more natural?) preservative? It seems like this would be a win win all around.

Also I would avoid using wikipedia as a direct source.

[mhansen]

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/Concerns/thimerosal/index.h...

Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative used in some vaccines and other products since the 1930's. There is no convincing evidence of harm caused by the low doses of thimerosal in vaccines, except for minor reactions like redness and swelling at the injection site.

However, in July 1999, the Public Health Service agencies, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and vaccine manufacturers agreed that thimerosal should be reduced or eliminated in vaccines as a precautionary measure.

[henrikschroder]

Actually, most deadly plagues in the history of mankind has been caused by bacteria, and it is antibiotics, not vaccines, that has stopped them. :-)