Nine Questions, Nine Answers. – Science-Based Medicine

but the antigens of the potential infection. That is assuming that the author of the nine questions does not consider the antigens to be neurotoxins, and to judge from his understanding of disease later in the post, I am not so certain he warrants the benefit of the doubt.Could you please provide scientific justification as to how applying naturopathy to a human being is beneficial to human health and prevents disease?6. Can you provide a risk/benefit profile on how the benefits of injecting a known neurotoxin exceeds its risks to human health for the intended goal of preventing disease?Since there is no longer mercury in most vaccines, I will assume, for the sake of argument, he is referring to aluminum.  Risk from aluminum in the H. influenza type b vaccine, where aluminium is used as a adjuvant: zero.The benefit from the vaccine:“From eight trials, the protective efficacy of the Hib conjugate vaccine was 84% (OR 0.16; 95%CI 0.08-0.30) against invasive Hib disease, 75% (OR 0.25; 95%CI 0.08-0.84) against meningitis, and 69% (OR 0.31; 95%CI 0.10-0.97) against pneumonia. Serious adverse events were rare.”Seems a good trade off. No risk from aluminum, significant decrease in morbidity and mortality from disease.7. Could you please provide scientific justification on how bypassing the respiratory tract (or mucous membrane) is advantageous and how directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream enhances immune functioning and prevents future infections?Well, things really get off the rails here.  Vaccines are not injected into the blood stream, they are infected into the soft tissues.   At a simple level, an infection enters to body, the body makes a variety of antibodies to the constituent parts of the infecting organism and next time the patient is exposed, the pre-existing antibody can, if there is a match with new strain, inactivate the new infection.It doesn’t matter how the antigen is presented to the immune system, the response is the same. Natural influenza, inhaled influenza vaccine, or injected influenza vaccine, the same antibody will be made to the proteins.Mihalovic says later“All promoters of vaccination fail to realize that the respiratory tract of humans (actually all mammals) contains antibodies which initiates natural immune responses within the respiratory tract mucosa. Bypassing this mucosal aspect of the immune system by directly injecting viruses into the bloodstream leads to a corruption in the immune system itself. As a result, the pathogenic viruses or bacteria cannot be eliminated by the immune system and remain in the body, where they will further grow and/or mutate as the individual is exposed to ever more antigens and toxins in the environment which continue to assault the immune system.”This is what we call in the trade, gibberish. At least it makes no sense to me.  I will leave to the readers to search, Bible Code style, for truthiness in the above selection.8. Could you please provide scientific justification on how a vaccine would prevent viruses from mutating?That is actually a very interesting question. It has nothing to do with why we give vaccines and  I fear our intrepid ND does not have a firm grasp on what he is talking about as he says“Despite the injection of any type of vaccine, viruses continue circulating through the body, mutating and transforming into other organisms. The ability of a vaccine manufacturer to target the exact viral strain without knowing its mutagenic properties is equivalent to shooting a gun at a fixed target that has already been moved from its location. You would be shooting at what was, not what is!”Mutating and transforming into other organisms. Sigh.  Either the author is a sloppy writer  (sloppy writing (not typos, but logic and word selection) reflects a sloppy mind) or his understanding of microbiology is so profoundly mistaken it boggles the mind that he takes care of patients.  And in Oregon he would allowed by the state to prescribe antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals.If you have a population of viruses and a specific antibody against the virus, then those naturally occurring mutants that are not recognized by the antibody should have a replication advantage.  It is possible that the vaccine can help select for new strains of an infection, but not new organisms.Vaccines selecting for new mutants has been looked at for the Hepatitis B vaccine, and found not to be a issue.In HIV, there is an ongoing interaction between the immune response and the virus, driving mutations that escape the immune system and, in some patients leads to a marked increase in HIV replication and a clinical decline decline. Oh wait, this is a natural infection. That shouldn’t happen.  It is the vaccines that do this.There is nothing unique about the vaccine response acting as environmental pressure on the evolution of infections; the response from the natural infections should be the same.  I would wonder, since the response to  a natural infection is broader, w

Source: Nine Questions, Nine Answers. – Science-Based Medicine

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s