• Phoenix Rising needs funds to operate: please consider donating to support PR

Has anyone here with Vaccine Injury tried Homeopathic medicine? *Please tag fellow users of users of Homeopathy*

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
2,056
Likes
3,496
@Fat Viking , I never heard of vaccine injury before, so I looked it up. According to the wiki page, it seems like it's an extremely rare occurrence.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Tammy

Senior Member
Messages
1,471
Likes
2,324
Location
New Mexico
I have never tried homeopathy for vaccine injury. Some members of another health group I belong to have recommended Rita Kara Robinson (In UK) who practices homeopathy. She has worked at length with vaccine injury.
 

Fat Viking

Senior Member
Messages
113
Likes
88
Location
UK
@Fat Viking , I never heard of vaccine injury before, so I looked it up. According to the wiki page, it seems like it's an extremely rare occurrence.
Vaccine Injury is very much REAL that's why there's a National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in USA and Vaccine Damage Payment in the UK.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Messages
2,811
Likes
9,095
Location
Massachusetts
This thread has been re-opened. Please try to respect each other and our forum rules (which can be read here) as you continue this discussion.

Our forum rules state, in part, that:
When a member chooses to attack the author of a post rather than the content of the post, that is a personal attack. Please keep your focus on the facts of the topic under discussion - not on the person with whom you disagree.
 
Last edited:

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
2,056
Likes
3,496
Vaccine Injury is very much REAL that's why there's a National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in USA and Vaccine Damage Payment in the UK.
The existence of that program doesn't prove that vaccine injury is real; it only proves that the legal system isn't perfect. Legal claims may be decided by a jury: randomly selected people who most likely aren't properly capable of judging the scientific evidence of a claim, so a judgement in favour isn't really proof of anything.

From the wiki page: 'The burden is on the defendant, the Department of Health and Human Services, to disprove the claim. It is extraordinarily difficult for HHS to do this. Therefore, table injury claims are generally resolved through settlement fairly quickly.' In other words, it's cheaper to pay a settlement than take it through the courts.

This isn't proof that vaccine injuries aren't real or common; it's just that the existence of the program isn't proof that they are real.
 

Wishful

Senior Member
Messages
2,056
Likes
3,496
Clinical trials and research studies cost a lotttttt of money, which isn't a problem for BigPharma, but is a problem for most herbals and all of homeopathy. And since by and large homeopathic treatments can't be trademarked and marketed like chemical derivatives, and the market for them is slim absent a lot of promo and easily absorbed information, there's no potential money in it.
Can't homeopathic treatments be trademarked, patented, or otherwise protected? For example, say that a company did a clinical trial that proved that "Dr. Trustworthy's homeopathic treatment for Alzheimer's Disease is Clinically Proven to be 57% effective at reducing the symptoms". Wouldn't the market for that be in the hundreds of millions of dollars per year? Since there's no way to measure what's in the bottle, it's only that particular product (secret recipe) that can be marketed as 'clinically proven', which is even better protection than patents or trademarks. So, I don't see how you can say that there's no money in it.

Given that there is potential for large profits, the potential investment available isn't limited to what the small companies can scrape together; it's the entire global investment funds. Financiers look for opportunities and compare the potential payoff with the probability of it paying off. To me, the logical explanation for the lack of investment in clinical trials is that while the potential payoff is high, the experts have judged that the probability of a successful result is too low to be worth the risk.

There's a whole field of study for how effective markets (and gambling) can be for predicting outcomes. Set up a betting pool for election results, and (if properly done) the results are likely to be more accurate than the professional election predictors. The same should apply to predicting outcomes for clinical trials. The financiers study all the available evidence, and should judge the risk fairly accurately.
 

JES

Senior Member
Messages
940
Likes
2,031
I have had acquiantances try homeopathy for different sort of things. Some of them claim they have received benefits, which as I've stated I'm skeptical about. What I have never heard is someone recovering from moderate/severe ME/CFS or any severe condition in general, Alzheimer's or Parkinson's would be good examples. So if you have a condition that is mild, whatever the effect homeopathy works with, maybe it's more likely you'll see benefits.
 
Messages
42
Likes
84
The existence of that program doesn't prove that vaccine injury is real
If you are looking to homeopathy for vaccine injury, you may want to focus on toxicity from the chemicals added to the mixture used in vaccines--they are usually using mercury as a preservative (frequently referred to as Thimerosal). There is also use of aluminum and formaldehyde for other purposes in the mix. See https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm. Your body may have reacted to any of these other substances, viewed them as a threat, and gone into a tail-spin.
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
13,375
Likes
25,255
very effective for minor ailments
Can you provide evidence for that?



Your body may have reacted to any of these other substances, viewed them as a threat, and gone into a tail-spin.
You get more mercury and aluminum into your bloodstream from your diet than you do from a vaccine. So the simple notion of toxins causing vaccine adverse events does not hold.

More sophisticated ideas suggest that the insoluble particle nature of the aluminum adjuvant may cause issues; these particles do not dissolve in water, and thus remain intact within tissues and in cells. See the research on macrophagic myofasciitis and its link to aluminum adjuvant particles made of insoluble aluminum hydroxide.
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
13,375
Likes
25,255
What you have to say has a bunch of assumptions in it about how the human body works that are simply not true. Go back to the research....
I did not provide any references to support my statement about the degree of dietary absorption of mercury and aluminum from food compared to vaccines. So how do you know that my statement was based on a bunch of assumptions, if you did not see its basis?

If you would like to examine my calculations behind my statement, then they are as follows:

Aluminum in vaccines compared to diet:
Around 24 mg of aluminum is eaten in food daily in the US (ref: 1). And one 600 mg aluminum hydroxide antacid tablet contains 208 mg of aluminum (ref: 1).

Around 0.2% of orally ingested aluminum is absorbed in the body(ref: 1), so that means your body gets a dose of around 0.05 mg (50 mcg) of aluminum daily just from your diet.

By contrast, a vaccine contains typically around 250 mcg of aluminum (ref: 1), so you absorb more aluminum from you diet in a week than you do from a typical vaccine.

Mercury in vaccines compared to diet:
The form of mercury in vaccines is ethylmercury (aka: thiomersal, or thimerosal) which is not known to bioaccumulate in any substantial way.

The form of mercury in tuna fish is methylmercury which does bioaccumulate.

In a vaccine, you get around 10 to 25 mcg of ethylmercury. In a can of tuna, you get around 40 mcg of the methylmercury — and methylmercury is very well absorbed in the gut (95% is absorbed).

So eating a can of tuna not only gives you a higher dose of mercury than a vaccine injection, but the mercury in tuna is the bioaccumulating kind that stays in your body for long periods.

Other fishes with high mercury content detailed in this post.


Furthermore, people with 8 amalgam filings in their mouth will absorb up to 70 mcg of elemental mercury each day (see this post), some of which is converted to methylmercury by gut bacteria. So the amount of extra mercury you get from a vaccine (10 to 25 mcg) is totally negligible compared to the amount you get every day from amalgam filings.
If you find any technical flaws in those calculations, please let me know. Otherwise I think you will agree that diet provides more mercury and aluminum than vaccines.



I am the evidence--I just told you, it worked for me.
You made a general statement of homeopathy being "very effective for minor ailments". If you had said "I tried some homeopathic remedy and afterwards my symptom improved", that's one thing. But if you make a general statement, then that should be based on scientific evidence.
 
Messages
42
Likes
84
So how do you know that my statement was based on a bunch of assumptions, if you did not see its basis?
.
Hi Hip, Look at the most updated research related to (1) oxidative stress, (2) hormone disruption, (3) metabolism and (4) DNA mutations during cell division in response to antagonistic exogenous agents (xenobiotics, EMF radiation, etc).
 
Last edited:
Messages
42
Likes
84

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
13,375
Likes
25,255
Look at the most updated research related to (1) oxidative stress, (2) hormone disruption, (3) metabolism and (4) DNA mutations during cell division in response to antagonistic exogenous agents (xenobiotics, EMF radiation, etc). That will be a start and may help you sort out some of your assumptions.
You are going off on an unrelated tangent. Let's stick to the subject: we are talking about dietary absorption of mercury and aluminum, in relation to the dose of these metals found in a vaccine.

My calculations regarding dietary absorption are simply explained above. If you think there is something wrong with those calculations, then please point out any faults you find.



you have outdated and/or incomplete information
Specifically, what information of mine is outdated or incomplete? In relation to the dietary absorption of mercury and aluminum.
 
Messages
42
Likes
84
Specifically, what information of mine is outdated or incomplete? In relation to the dietary absorption of mercury and aluminum.
Your assumptions about dose-response (see further comment below). Also, the leads I gave you above are directly on point.

Hormone disruptors such as heavy metals have a u-shaped dose-response curve. These substances can be quite toxic at very trace levels and are actually less toxic at moderate levels. This is because at trace amounts, the body sees these substances as potential messengers in systems such as the endocrine (hormone) system. There is a lot of literature about this topic, which has evolved over the last 40 years or so. Google Scholar is a good way to access this and other scientific literature related to toxic substances and chronic illness.
 
Last edited:

Mary

Moderator
Messages
9,665
Likes
20,698
Location
Southern California
THIS THREAD IS BEING REOPENED. I'M GOING TO COPY THE MODERATOR'S NOTE POSTED ABOVE ON DECEMBER 3, 2019 - IT STILL HOLDS TRUE!

This thread has been re-opened. Please try to respect each other and our forum rules (which can be read here) as you continue this discussion.

Our forum rules state, in part, that:
When a member chooses to attack the author of a post rather than the content of the post, that is a personal attack. Please keep your focus on the facts of the topic under discussion - not on the person with whom you disagree.
 
Last edited: