From: Mark Probert on
Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

Things that do not exist:

> reputable alt site

The Easter Bunny
Santa Claus
From: vernono on

"Mark Probert" <markprobert(a)lumbercartel.com> wrote in message
news:ckr2j.22412$701.11430(a)trndny08...
> yu00ku(a)gmail.com wrote:
>> On Nov 23, 8:13 pm, wri...(a)l1000.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote:
>
> When the only sources of the quote are anti-vac websites, and you refuse
> to post the original in context, it is more likely to be fraudulent than
> valid.
>


BINGO


From: Vaccine-man on
On Nov 25, 9:34 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" <y...(a)trends.ca> wrote:

> I don't have the entire text of Dr. Sabin's speech.

Have you ever read or heard a recording of his speech? If not, how can
you be certain if it was ever made or, if it was, in what context this
quote may have been made?

> Nevertheless, I'm not aware of a single case when a reputable alt site
> posted a fake quote. Therefore, I give it a very high probability that this
> particular quote from Dr. Sabin is valid.

Can you explain under what possible circumstances that Dr. Sabin would
make a comment condemning vaccines, yet continue his career's work and
establishing a pro-vaccine organization, the Sabin Vaccine Institute?

http://sabin.org/about/sabin_mission.html

> How about this one from Dr Morris?

I'd like to resolve the one regarding Dr. Sabin first, if you don't
mind. No sense in distractions.

From: Vaccine-man on
On Nov 25, 9:28 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" <y...(a)trends.ca> wrote:
> "Vaccine-man" <ziggit...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:f84e577c-ce38-467b-b307-74260993b4ce(a)d4g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Nov 25, 7:46 pm, "Yuri Kuchinsky" <y...(a)trends.ca> wrote:
>
> >> Since polio is most likely just a form of chemical poisoning, it won't be
> >> too surprising that the symptoms of polio may result from vaccines.
>
> >> Yuri.
>
> > So why was it, then, that the only ones who got polio received
> > immunizations from the *improperly* inactivated Cutter vaccine (i.e.,
> > still contained infectious polio virus), while those who received the
> > *properly* inactivated Cutter vaccine did not get polio? The only
> > difference between the lots was that the one that caused polio didn't
> > have enough formalin in it. Everything else between the lots was
> > identical.
>
> Hmm... interesting. You cite a case of iatrogenic disease to prove the
> validity of mainstream medicine? :(

Sorry, no curve balls allowed. You stated that polio is most likely a
form of chemical poisoning (see your words above, preserved here for
posterity). Yet when two groups of people receive vaccines that only
differed in the amount of formalin (resulting in one with infectious
polio virus because of too little formalin), only those who received
the improperly prepared vaccine developed polio. There is no other
explanation but that polio virus causes polio. It cannot be chemically-
induced; your argument is disproved.

> I don't buy your account of the Cutter incident.

It's not my account. What don't you "buy" about it?

> The whole dirty business
> stinks to high heaven. There's no silk purse in this sow's ear...

Personal incredulity and colorful metaphors are note the path to good
decisions.
From: Jeff on
yu00ku(a)gmail.com wrote:
> On Nov 23, 8:13 pm, wri...(a)l1000.prodigy.net (David Wright) wrote:
>> In article <03ee1d5f-b61d-4455-a86a-11faca05f...(a)e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, <yu0...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone who's really interested in the history of polio, and how the
>>> polio epidemics correlate with pesticide production, will do well to
>> read the following article by Jim West,
>>
>>
>>
>>> http://www.geocities.com/harpub/pol_all.htm
>>> Polio was a new disease (which should already be quite suspicious),
>> What's suspicious is that polio is not a "new" disease. It was first
>> named in 1840 and is clearly much older. Certainly older than the
>> pesticide industry.
>
> But the first polio epidemic was in 1887.


Actually, it was first described 1789 and pictured about 3400 years ago
in Egypt. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio). It was endemic for
thousands of years.

It is believed that before improved sanitation, polio viruses infected
young kids. For some reason, the virus usually didn't attack the nervous
system. So while the infection was common, the paralyis was rare. As
improved sanitation became more widespread, so did polio. This also
explains why polio was also seen in cities, far away from teh pesticides.

>>> and it was never really 'eradicated'. The same types of symptoms are
>>> still quite prevalent, they are just given different
>>> names/diagnoses. Polio vaccines didn't really help anyone, as
>>> Dr. Sabin seems to confirm below.
>> In the fraudulent "quotation."
>
> The quotation is not fraudulent.
>
>> Except that the symptoms are not "still quite prevalent;"
>
> Yes, they are still quite prevalent.
>
>> we aren't sticking people in iron lungs any
>> more, nor do you see all the kids with leg braces etc.
>
> These were old treatments. Irrelevant.

Yet, the symptoms of polio, like inability to breath and paralysis would
still be seen, even better means of helping the victims.

Jeff

> Yuri.
>
> Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.globalserve.net/~yuku
>
> "May as well consult a butcher on the value of vegetarianism as a
> doctor on the worth of vaccination." -- George Bernard Shaw