“Don’t let the world around you squeeze you into its own mould, but let God re-mould your minds from within...”
Romans 12:2

No one logged in. Log in

Hilary's Desk

"One Less" selective thinking

Hilary Butler - Saturday, February 28, 2009

In the Escape section of Sunday Star Times, March 1, 2009, journalist Karen Tay, who admits to viewing beauty and skincare products as sacred miracle potions, was researching their true cost to her body, and the environment. “While researching this story, I learnt many unpleasant truths about my beauty products…”

She discovered that some cosmetics claiming to be natural were not necessarily so, containing as little as 1% natural ingredients.

In her review, she quotes Dawn Mellowship, author of the book called, “This is not my beautiful life” who exposes the outright toxicity of many of the products which women slather on their faces. Mellowship says, “The industry wouldn’t acknowledge that synthetic ingredients are toxic anyway, because to do so would be to admit what they were using before, were dangerous.” Mellowship also warned against falling for marketing claims because the beauty products made out of synthetics, don’t work. Now that is contrary to the conformed sheeple view of beauty products isn’t it? Perhaps she’s a .. wait for it… “radical” !!! Maybe a hippie? No, she’s a woman who has chronic fatigue syndrome, and fibromyalgia (both disorders some doctors still don’t believe exist) who has discovered what, in her environment, trashes her immune system.

I suppose were I to ask Mellowship if such a state of affairs in the cosmetic industry, was a “conspiracy”, she would just laugh, and say, “No, Dozie, it’s just business. Profit, home and hosed.” Right. As she says, “Consumers are hoodwinked because they don’t really understand what’s going into the products, all they see are the advertising and marketing.” Nothing new in that. Down through the centuries, profits have been made out of the gullible, from snake oil, to email Nigerian scammers, who continue to do very nicely from the shallower element of society.

Look at how stoutly the fag industry has defended it’s claims for nearly 50 years; that modern cigarettes, grown on artificial phosphate fertilizer, force grown, and just about sprayed to death, couldn’t possible cause any form of cancer in anyone at all. Was that a conspiracy? “No Dozie, it’s just business. Profit, home and hosed.” Right. Again, the gullible majority believed, and got hooked.

As I went around my morning chook chores, I couldn’t help laughing.

You won’t find the medical profession admitting that vaccines today still cause serious reactions, because to do so, would be to admit that the history of vaccines is littered with such disasters, which is not a good look, and does nothing to reassure and comfort prospective jabees.

Once again, children are coming home crying, after seeing DVD presentations from the Health Department, which convinces these children that if they don’t have the vaccine they will die of cancer. The Health Department has learned well from their MenZB emotional blackmail tactics, that disabling thinking by creating fear, ensures that the masses continue to get sucked in.

Advertising and marketing is now such an insidious part of life, that most adults and children no longer realise they are manipulated, not informed.

If coercive marketing and advertising didn’t work, they wouldn’t do it. Just because there is an Advertising Standards Tribunal, doesn’t mean that advertising isn’t nasty, coercive and emotional blackmail. The Health Department’s modus operandi is always that the means justifies the end. Add to that their current education DVD which can be summed up on one sentence. All loving parents vaccinate their children. By implication, if you don’t vaccinate, you are a cruel heartless monster of a parent.

And so we have the “one less” Gardasil Ad. Naturally, if you aren’t “one less” you will be “one more” who will kill “someone else”.

All around the world, discussion boards discuss these manipulative and outrageous mind bending strategies; toxic ingredients in vaccines; the fact that many which are promoted as working, don’t work; like the whooping cough vaccine, and the flu vaccine and the manipscrewlation data to suit.

One good example is the London NHS website here.

One in ten children with measles land up in hospital. Is that laughable or not? It reminds me of way back when the MMR vaccine was introduced and a justification of the Mumps part of the vaccine was that one in SEVEN children with Mumps gets mumps encephalitis. When I showed it to my GP, he was “Whaaaa????”

I asked, “And how many cases of mumps have you seen in your 30 years as a GP?”

“Oh loads – too many to count!” he replied.

“And how many cases of mumps encephalitis have you seen?”

“You know,” he said, “I can’t think of one. I’m sure there have been some… but even when I was a paediatric registrar at hospital, I never saw one.”

“Well, now you know”, I seriously intoned, “That you are patently blind.”

But back to boards discussing vaccination issues. These board invariably polarise any debate into factions within two factions of laypeople.

Vaccine defenders, or sort of:

The vaccine fence sitters, who vaccinate, or will probably vaccinate, because everyone else does (peer pressure); the medical profession says so, and it’s the “right” thing to do (government/doctor says), or because, while they can see that there are some serious issues there, what matters more than whether or not vaccines are effective and safe, is acceptance by family, friends and society as a whole. And usually, the primary motivation is “fear” of disease, and “fear” of what society will say or do if their child gets sick, and worse… dies. They will be considered on a par with murderers.

The outright vaccine defenders, who usually use stories of older relatives, still alive, who had polio, or the odd person in their family tree who died from diphtheria, or they read like pharma shills, always quoting “experts”; while giving lip service to decision-making and choice; who are followed around by purring pussy-cats who metaphorically sit on their laps, paying verbal obeisance to their mockery of research; which they use as their basis for their own “informed choice”. And who view any material put up, which might counter their prescribed mindsets, as “debate” material, when their own is, of course unbiased and neutral,

The fact that the pseudo pharma shills vaccinate on schedule, or perhaps a slightly delayed schedule, doesn’t raise any flags for the pussy cats who, instead of getting off their time consuming board addictions and doing their own research, hang onto their lay-“ex-spurt’s” every word as if their own lives depend on it. The irony is, that the pussy cats often claim to have “no time” to do their own research. You’d think with a few thousand post counts after their names, on several boards, they would have realised that their total internet board time could be better used.

Vaccine critics, or sort of.

The fruit loop anti-vaccine brigade who do it because it’s hip; have no knowledgeable convictions based on fact to back up their hippie exteriors, and who at the first sign of infection, panic, become hysterical, can’t think, cave, and give the medical profession all the armoury they need to brand anti-vaxxers as vacuous two-timers.

Forgetting the hippie-brigade amongst those who chose not to be vaxxers, what about those who seriously question the rationale behind vaccines? Who really, incisively, question vaccines; who know what the Health Department Handbook says; who could just about recite all of IMAC’s varied sites and all the other medical provaccine marketers around; but who also have an intimate knowledge of Pubmed, medical articles, medical libraries, and medical textbooks. You’d be surprised at just how many of those sorts of people exist. And they ask incisive questions, because they know the answers to those questions before they ask them, so vaccine defenders can’t jerk them around by pulling “strings”.

But there are some questions vaccine questioners never ask, because if they do they will be labelled conspiracist theorists.

A good example of this is a debate on a New Zealand board right now, about the Flu vaccine, which the New Zealand medical profession wants parents to be jabbing into every possible baby and toddler. They too, like to be in a society where they do what all the rest of their colleagues are advocating. After all, if they don’t, they too could be accused of “not caring”.

Conformity, compliance and control, permeates all levels of society.

When someone posted the Cochrane Library website, and pointed out that they could read for themselves all the flu vaccine evidence-based reviews which show the flu vaccine isn’t worth having, some woman, who reads just like a pharma shill came out with exactly the sort of pro-vaccine thoughtless response I read on many boards:

“I guess though it stands to reason that if simple vit D cut down patient cost then why pay for immunisation? Why immunise at all if it doesn't work? Apparently (from what anti vaxers have told me), NZ'ers are of no risk at all from "not enough sun", so why all the deaths related to flu? If it is in fact a big conspiracy to have us all vaccinated, why is it primarily elderly that die? And next, pre-schoolers? Are they lying? Do they all just want to make vaccines for some fun thing to taunt us and make us sick, because they don't work right? I just don't get it.”

Of course, this same mother might “get it” about cosmetics. Or maybe not. Even sprays, you know. Or maybe not. Definitely cigarettes, you know, because smoking amongst that sector of society is just so ‘dirty’. you know…. like. Or maybe not.

She might be able to rattle off why you should never trust second hand car dealers, real estate agents, lawyers, finance advisors (look what a mess they’ve got the world into…) and a whole raft of other dubious elements of society. Or maybe not.

But when confronted with the watchdog repository of all evidence based wisdom; the Cochrane Library, which has consistently said that medical policy on the flu vaccine isn’t based on evidence based medicine, she resorts to the old hoary of insinuating that only the lunatic fringe conspiracy theorists could come up with garbage like that?

She might be one of those who always uses organic food; uses natural fibres to dress her babies in; gentle natural washing powder; never uses a deodorant with aluminium in it, (since that’s been implicated in breast cancer), but hey: let our kids be jabbed with vaccines containing aluminium amongst a raft of other stuff which provaxxers see nothing untoward about. Let our teenagers be jabbed three times with Gardasil, (which has one of the highest aluminium quantities of any vaccine), because we can’t be seen to spurn the “one less” brigade.

Got to be with it. Look the part.  Meld into the herd.

To not be jabbed, would make it look like we don’t care, either about our girls, or society as a whole, and our girls don’t care about themselves or others.

Funny isn’t it. Selective thinking.

The mother of an American girl, now fighting for her life after the first Gardasil shot, said on TV: “We felt pressured by the advertising pressure… I wish I could turn the clock back.”

That’s what happens when you don’t make informed choices, even if you “believe” you are.

It’s ironic to me, that parents who follow the herd and vaccinate, can rarely tell you anything about the disease, the vaccine, the side effects… The first thing that comes to their mind, is “one less”.

And the Health Department knows it.

Bookmark and Share