How Steemit can save millions of lives?

in #steemit4 years ago

Wiltw world.jpg

I’d like to just put my thoughts on paper, so to speak, an aside from the science and the fiction, because there’s something that bothers me on this site. I think this site can prevent countless deaths if used correctly.

Now I’m a big fan of free speech, and I really appreciate the magical aspect of this site which brings people from all walks of life together. People who would otherwise hate other people on Facebook are essentially forced to come together in an amicable way with open ears.

Otherwise how would you get paid?

So I never want that to actually stop. I don’t want the site to start filtering out people I happen to disagree with.

Having said that, the pseudoscience that plagues the website is potentially life threatening. This might seem sensationalistic, but it has happened numerous times and continues to do so all over the world: misinformed believers killing themselves or their babies or their boyfriends based on insane beliefs.

But these beliefs don’t typically sound insane to those who haven’t spent years of their life building their critical thinking skills. And that’s the issue. It’s not that these people are complete morons, what they’re doing is falling for something all humans are vulnerable to; herd mentality.

Put a baby alone in a room of Hindus and that kid will grow up a Hindu, believing in everything Hindu. If you put a baby alone with a bunch of biologists, and you’ll get yourself a biologist. Like father, like son, as they say.

But that in itself doesn’t represent what is true. Of course it doesn’t. But that doesn’t matter. When that baby becomes a young child and starts to be inquisitive about the world, those questions asked that go out of line with what all the other Hindus believe will be quickly stamped out and suppressed. They will teach the child in a direction that they are most familiar and comfortable with.

When he asks a question that can be answered with ease by them, they will all quickly jump to attention with enthusiasm and teach him ‘the way’. This gives confidence and that child suddenly has no doubt that he had a good question, he learned something valuable, and that he is a good boy.

Lap it up.

But we all fall for this. I remember in school; it was a CoE (Church of England) school. My parents weren’t religious, as far as I could tell, and I guess in England nobody actually cares about religion for the most part, but either way, between our real classes teaching real subjects, we had some assemblies where we would sing church music, sing parts of the bible, have bibles handed out to us once in a while. I think there was even a cross on the uniform!

To this day, I still have those songs ringing around in my head ‘thy Kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heav’n’. It wouldn’t take much for that to actually make a lasting impression on a child, who goes to seek answers to the principle.

The principle will decide to be impartial and simply forward the child to the local vicar and that’s the end of that.

The same goes for pseudoscience. Thanks to the wonderful revolution of the internet, anyone can find that room of Hindus, wherever they are. Anybody can find that vicar. If you love cars, you go to a mechanic forum. If you love cars, you go to There you will feel at home, surrounded by others with the same mind as you. You’ll support each other and recognize that you’re all correct.

But why does the rest of the world say otherwise?

Well obviously there’s a reason. It’s because… the world is against us. It’s a conspiracy. Obviously nobody would believe car lovemaking is wrong in a logical world, but the government, yes, the government is behind all this because… well we don’t know right now but it’s true.

When you read Huckleberry Finn, you’ll often laugh at the stupidity of the King and the Duke trying to fool Huck with their pseudo intellect. How absurd! But that’s a terrifying reflection of what’s actually going on in the world today. Two big grown men who have convinced themselves they are great, passing their knowledge onto one small child from a place of authority. In most cases around the world, that kid doesn’t stand a chance. Thankfully Huck was at least a little savvier than that.

Just recently, I saw a post about how a doctor claims 97% of chemo doesn’t actually work, according to a 12-year study of people all over the world with cancer. 97%.

The ONLY reason we’re still treating patients with it is because chemo is expensive and it lines the pockets of doctors with lovely cash, much more than simply prescribing natural medicine.

Instantly I was a believer in the evil intent of Big Pharma. But then I accidentally typed ‘’ into google, and within seconds, I came across this:

FALSE? Well, I just had to read more. So I scrolled and I read. And I discovered after about 1 minute of skimming that the study was not only incredibly questionable, but it also took place in the 1950’s! My dad was barely a year old. HIV was not even heard of.

Even worse, the paper in question discusses data from the 1920’s, with a sample size of people barely over 100 in number.
Additionally, the data was then cherry picked and misunderstood, and incredibly biased.

Snopes goes on and on about this one instance of pseudoscience. It’s all there, plain to see, open to check and scrutinize for yourself.

Snopes is essentially the best and in my opinion most important website on the internet and we should all have it bookmarked.

There are 50 million views on the above video. There are going to be some people in that 50 million that will refuse chemo because of that video they once saw saying Doctors just want to be rich. Those people may die.

Anti-vaxxers have already on numerous occasions been imprisoned by endangering and sometimes killing their child by refusing to vaccinate and even further, to get treatment for their sick, dying child.

Damage caused by the anti-vaccination movement. Measles in red, Mumps in brown, Rubella in blue, Polio in gold, Whooping cough in green, other in yellow

People have died or become very sick with the belief that they are breatharians – people who do not need to eat or drink, and can survive on the energy of the universe alone.

David Wolfe, the food babe, Anita Sarkeesian, Donald Trump. These people aren’t scientists. They’re murdering people.

In less developed countries, it’s even worse. Between 1999 and 2007, 343,000 people lost their lives to AIDS in South Africa because the government embraced AIDS denialism.

In the middle east, Pakistan and other Muslim countries, vaccine workers trying to cure polio are literally being shot dead by anti-vaxxers.


These people, these deniers, these pseudoscientists are not mentally disabled. As shocking as that is to say, but they have been surrounded by other believers; friendly, calming people with white shirts and clean ties. They’re supportive and help them, guide them to the way of the all-natural lifestyle. They warn them about those scary sounding chemicals in expensive medicine that we don’t even have information about (if you don’t know about snopes). Stay away from that, and come to me they say.

And the result is literally, without adding any exaggeration, the loss of millions of lives that did not need to be lost.

The internet is the single most powerful tool in helping kill these individuals by having misrepresented and false science instantly at your fingertips at any given time. In India, more people have access to smartphones than toilets. We need to, as individuals, do what we can to protect them.

Steemit is a fantastic community and nowhere else have I seen people actually listen to others, at least on some level, that oppose them than I do on here. The most unique thing about this site is that members are actively encouraged to listen on here in hope for monetary reward.

That’s not to say that they will actually be open to those ideas, the human brain is flawed and there are numerous battles going on within that makes it very uncomfortable for the brain to be wrong. But if we just do our part, we can literally save lives.

If people don’t listen to people, just drop a link from, or a print screen. Show evidence, not patronization. People are more open to change if the feel they are the ones doing the searching themselves.

That’s all I have to say. I hope this place can grow and change the world. Thanks for reading!



Critical thinking is necessary for us to lead free and prosperous lives, and most people seem unwilling to develop it in themselves. And that's okay, but it comes with a cost. I am against laws that "protect from misinformation", but I am for fraud legislation, which is a more libertarian concept.

However, your statements are just the flip side. I could write a post asking how many lives were destroyed and terminated by people's belief in chemo and vaccines and anti-depressants and anti-psychotics...I could go on.

There are people (I've met two personally) who's children's lives were changed dramatically by detrimental treatment accepted as standard medicine. And on chemo, I have a few success stories in my vicinity and a few obituaries as well.

Instead of railing against this treatment or that, we should focus on people's happiness, and helping guide people to actions that feel best. Some people avoid vaccines out of fear, and shouldn't, while others use them out of fear, and should't.

If you could go on, please do. I'd need evidence that removing vaccines from the world somehow would be better for us than keeping them.

I honestly want you to try. good luck

It's not about removing vaccines from the world, it's about you staying away from my right not to use them.

I would love evidence too...maybe we could ask the government to investigate...oh, wait, they'd never actually do that and settle this once and for all.

What are you on about?

Is it my right to not stop that crazy gunman from shooting his gun in the street whenever he feels like it? Think about it.

Look, the idea of vaccines sounds great but the implementation is like gross negligence. You just have to dig in order to find the truth. I have found that wherever there is so much controversy surrounding something, something stinks. It's rotten. That's your first clue.

It might be a lot of work but when you start to know the truth it is so worth it. From the bottom of my heart. Good luck.

And to that end, it's mostly about the idea that all bodies, brains and systems work and respond differently to different things. " Nothing is good or bad; only thinking makes it so." - Shakespeare. The strength of belief itself may be behind efficacy across the board with respect to healing.

I find that to be a convient generalization which isn't necessarily true at all. You can easily see that things are going in the wrong direction for society as a whole so there must be systemic problems which we all have in common.

I don't believe in generalizations other than to be convenient, untruths. Indeed systemic problems persist throughout humanity, but the source of many still lies within the individual. Our thoughts are what kill us. It is not the technology, the guns or the vaccines. Fighting is a low vibration. To "fight" anything, without first identifying its cause, its a solution looking for a problem. Self mastery is a lonely path and I can't teach anyone anything.

Please provide the evidence, the burden of proof is not on me

Read @ura-soul or @canadian-coconut, not going to repeat what they have already clearly demonstrated. You can also watch any of Truth about Vaccines documentary series.

I feel like all these anti-vaxx replies are completely missing the point...

Whatever, take your next flu shot please.

Good job. Enjoy indirectly killing people!

Shifting the burden of proof will not make your beliefs true.

I have spoken directly with the author of the paper that is being quoted about chemotherapy - it was NOT from the 1950s - it was published by the Australian Royal college of Radiologists about 13 years ago:

Having studied this topic for 10 years and read a vast array of authors, including Gorski - AND having seen Snopes being found to be totally wrong on a variety of subjects AND having had to watch my own mother DIE from chemotherapy last year - I am passionate about exposing the reality here. I have a science degree and am pretty capable with processing information. As such I have combined numerous speakers and sources on the controversial subjects - such as vaccines and cancer. I suggest readers review my hard work and draw your own conclusions instead of just jumping to ANY conclusion based on bias or desire to believe anything at all. 'Voices of authority' prove time and time again that they lie, are biased or are just as likely to introduce error as anyone else.
I suggest checking out my recent posts for a variety of speakers I have found over 10 years that I almost NEVER see linked on pages that claim that the problems with chemotherapy and vaccines are 'pseudoscience'.


and vaccines:

This is a different study, only a 5 year study, a very small sample size of just 22 individuals, different author

When I asked, years ago, for the study that was being referenced in the video highlighted on Snopes - I was pointed repeatedly to the one I posted here and not to any other. Did you read it? The study is a meta-analysis and certainly not based on a small sample group by any means.

I read the brief, seemed small to me, but as you can see, I'm getting hundreds of comments...

I'm legitimately interested if that is the case, however it doesn't take away the point of my article since the chemo thing was just something I pulled as an example. If you at least agree that we should talk about these things, engage in discussion with an open mind, then I'm happy.

A few respondents here seem to think the best thing to do is keep to their own beliefs and ignore everything else

Yes, I am totally open to discussing the reality of the situation with an open mind. I have received several death threats from pro-vaccine 'crazies' and so far in all my (probably hundreds) of online conversations regarding chemotherapy and vaccines, I have never been proven to be incorrect in what I am saying.
I am only interested in the truth and health - which is provably not the pure agenda of the pharmaceutical industry. I once worked for Glaxo and know first hand.

Evidence would be appreciated here

Evidence of what? I have already linked you to hundreds of hours of research.

Oh sorry I didn't see your second comment at all. I'm getting way too many comments to keep up with. I'll look into it

Hi first I want to say I enjoyed your style...Some months ago an article came to my attention about a new study in UK. Somehow nobody really ever thought about checking out how many people die in 1 month after receiving chemo. So they looked at it and found out in 1 hospital it was about 50 % and other hospitals up to above 70% of patients. I don't know where this article is but you might get interested, if the truth is what you really seek, to find it out. Also there is a 9 episodes documentary The truth about cancer where some doctors, parents and survivals speak about their journey. Also you could look at the story of Dr. Simoncini and his findings on what cancer really is. It is then not to difficult to understand why the chemo was brought to cancer treatment. I attended a lecture of dr. Brian Clement of Hippocrates health institute where in passed 30 years or something more then 40 000 terminal cancer patients have cured. He spoke about the most poisonous chemo of that time, in the 80s if I recall it right, which was based on zyclon B. This chemo was given to aids patients, the scientist who told him this in that time knew also this would kill the dying people faster but they will bring more money first. One doesn't have to be the smartest boy in the class to see what is really happening. Just follow the money...if you really want the truth of course...and then you will see the same people who control drugs, control food and water by now, lobbying and paying out the politicians...many eye witnesses and whistleblowers come out these days..It is therefore not a dangerous is dangerous to believe the richest and most powerful who control everything to care about each one of us. They don't.
But I enjoyed your way of writing and hope you mean what you say about being open to discussions...I think finding truth should be our highest priority and we all should work together instead of trying put each other down for having a different opinion or knowledge. i think the best way to find the truth is look around in your life, just like @ura-soul who saw with own eyes things happening on or without chemo..these are reliable sources and not the payed scientists and agents of propaganda. Only the fact that children get kidnapped to be put on chemo even if they and the parents do not want that should be at least alarming. I decide for my child for it is my flesh and blood, my tears and laughs, my effort and government or pharma should be able to take it away...and yet they do because they own our children, they own us, they own our lives...But who loves my child the most? Me or my president? Me or my doctor? Me or the classroom teacher? Me or the paus? It is I have the best intentions for my child, I want it to be happy and healthy. There are to many perfectly healthy children who die or get disabled after vaccines...then it is more than obvious parents will get afraid of vaccination. Even if it was right thing to do, why all the additives like aluminium, msg or even nagelase? It doesn't make any sense...And because all of this, people do not trust big corporations and politicians anymore...can you blame them? I don't even trusted my teachers at school because they were not able to give me some logical explanations about things they were teaching. So I follow my own logica based on information I find, never just believe anything but keep digging and digging until it feels right and I think if people start to do that more instead of fighting about whether the government loves us or tries to kill us there will be much more clear.
Have a blessed day and thanks for your thoughts.

Bravo! Thank you.

You seem to be bent on keeping your own beliefs and ignoring anything that doesn't agree with them.

Vaccination and chemotherapy are archaic technologies that demonstrably do physical injury to a larger than admitted segment of the populations who use them. If the FDA was not being used, by the pharmaceutical industry, to suppress new technologies, this would all be a moot point. Search the patent record if you wish to convince yourself. If @ura-soul cannot inspire the interest in truth in you, I wonder if anyone or anything can.

I'mm too drunk to go into this, especially given this post is months old. I disagree with your views, I disagree with ura-soul, but I fully enjoyed my debate (though I got too busy to get back to it...should set a reminder).

ura-soul did indeed inspire interest in truth, but the truth I found was apparently different to you guys.

That's fine with me, I love a debate, I love learning and being corrected, as long as it's civil, and ura-soul (up to where I caught up) was being very civil... so I'm not sure why you went on a tirade of comments on an ancient post of mine?

Objective truth is not subjective, and it is always relevant.

It was hardly a 'tirade'. I'm merely getting caught up.

Anyone searching for this topic can still find it, I did.

Thanks @mobbs for this sincere and thought-provoking piece. I think on similar themes often about how, in this new world of fake news and totally siloed self-affirming media consumption, we lose the common ground (based in facts) to have real discussions and make progress working with people who have fundamentally different views. I think in a way, this site and more broadly blockchain-based technologies, are a lesson for how best to fight the growing threat of falsehoods, fake news, and pseudoscience, as you call it.

We do indeed live in a more divisive time than ever before, with ISIS playing the political game and strategically timed attacks, Trump, Brexit and more. It's scary!

We can all find common ground if we just take a deep breath and respond thoughtfully, I think.

This does not demonstrate proof, but I find, in my own experience that what most people believe is fundamentally flawed, and the facts are not to be found in the pro- versus anti- stances of a false dilemma. The answer is usually something not addressed by either 'side'.

Keep it up!

do you think steemit has what it takes for mass adoption?

Not in its current state. For example, I have very real concerns about when the Chinese find out about it en masse and, well, you got yourself 400 million users doing everything they can to abuse the system with 400,000 phone sim cards each and so forth. On the other hand they will do wonders in trading.

There's a reason it's still in beta I guess, there's just so much to figure out, but I definitely thing it can accomplish this in some years from now

It's not just about manipulation, I think in order for mass adoption to occur with such a platform it'd need to be easy to use. Currently it's a bit difficult to sign up and even though it's beta, I do believe it's not the platform for the typical person. People coming from Reddit, 4chan, forums, wordpress blogs? Sure. The average consumer from FB and Twitter? Ehhh. I do think there's a lot of potential, I mean there's going to be millions of users for sure.. but hundreds of millions might be a little over-reaching (unless things change, which they totally could).

Wonderful ideas! I agree I noticed as I refer more and more people from Facebook, They rapidly get confused and give up. When I first started here, it took months to get the hang of it. Even now I don't feel like I understand all of it. Some of it is a little confusing to me. Things need to be easier. People usually are hesitant on investing any sort of time, or money on something that may not pan out.

Right, I generally tend to steer away from the technical aspects of the site. Think about grannies on the street or some 13 year old trying to figure out delegation, voting for witnesses (and what that even would be), hardforks, etc. <<< That's pretty much simple stuff, but it takes some research to fully understand what it is. With people who can't even figure out Instagram, I'm saying Steemit is more for the tech savvy. And when you factor in payouts through cryptocurrency, it just makes everything a bit more trickier. People immediately scream SCAM! It is what it is, but I think there's a limit with Steemit's growth eventually (a few years down the line). It's unique, and it will have an amazing fanbase due to that.. but it'd need to introduce marketing and simplify a few things to get it to the masses.

Well, true, but then again, cryptocurrency is quite literally the future and for people like me who just don't get it, we have to put up or shut up. We have to put the time in or we're gonna fall behind. The same could be said for social media. The time of just liking and sharing is probably going through a very slow death.

Maybe 'some years' is putting it lightly though, you're right

The average person still has no idea what a Bitcoin is. I mean when I tell girls what I do.. they think it's related to like stealing or they're honestly confused what a "cryptocurrency" is. Nevermind the grannies on the street ;p

Bitcoin and especially mt.gox and silk road has put a bad name to it and its innovation.

I think without the darknet markets, the prices of cryptocurrencies wouldn't be where they are right now. For years Bitcoin was used while few knew about it. When Alphabay put up Monero and Zcash and similar onto its marketplaces, boom, the prices rose. Of course these aren't GIANT details, but it's enough to have a decent sized impact on the market. I agree wholeheartedly that BTC has a bad reputation on it though due to it, Mt. Gox, Cryptsy, etc. The only thing we can do? Keep going further and spreading the knowledge as much as we can. People will eventually become more open to it anyways

Well yeah. I'm basically one of those girls too. But We say this stuff about the phone and the internet when they're new too. This things tend to have an exponential curve about them. I guess we'll see!

There's a lot of people who don't fact check anything for themselves, even when it comes to something as important as voting for a leader of their own country.

You're right that the disinformation about chemotherapy could kill a lot of people. I'm usually against laws regarding the right to speak, but there should be some sort of consequence for spreading blatant misinformation about important matters such as health and politics.

In the past when there was no internet media, the newspapers could be held acocuntable by some Government body. However, they abused that power and they merely became propaganda tools. The internet allows us access to vast swathes of information and opinions which is a blessing. It's up to the reader to be more diligent though and stop accepting information at face value.

I couldn't agree more. I wish more people understood this. Great post!

This is a well written post, I agree with most of your view points, keep it up.
You earned my 100% upvote for this post..more success and lets stay in touch.

Welcome and more success.
Dont forget to check out my post for a link to collect free crypto..a once in a life time opportunity.

There is indeed a lot of misinformation in the internet.That's why the source of the information has to be verified before we can accept that information as true.

Excellent post, thanks. Completely agree with you about the Internet being the most powerful tool and that we need to use it for the greater good. And Steemit is a fantastic community that seems to be getting ready to break out. Here's to it helping make life a much better place for many. Upvoted and following you.

Thank you and yes, let that positivity flow!

It's incredible that even with all the advances that we make in technology, our thinking can just as easily go backwards based on rumors. I do see the potential for Steemit as a social network for good, and I truly hope it accomplishes that.

Information is so scattered and spread with certain agendas, it is really hard to know what's real. This is why i said I like people who are ”soft core", it allows for discussion, brainstorm, sharing of ideas.

Is there a wide collection of more recent studies that were done free of corporate interests? Or maybe the last sufficient studies that are looking to find negative effects through real evidence have been discouraged since then? All I know is, I've been fucked around by hospitals in 3 different countries, it was obvious that there was a kind of systematic indifference to my problems even if the doctors personally wanted to help me. And a lot of science is done in the same fashion.

I was on the road to being diagnosed with serious illnesses to explain some chronic discomfort and then i stopped going to doctors and started studying eastern medicine and experimenting on my own body (I know most people wouldn't want to go so far) and now I am finally getting better instead of being diagnosed with a serious disorder of the nervous system.

Anecdotal yes, but still relevant.

I try to always keep two minds about things. The only real problem is when you find people who refuse to admit that they could possibly be wrong, to the point where they don't want to hear the experience and observations of others.

In England, the NHS is so underfunded, doctors are so jaded - especially in the mental health sectors. It just becomes a routine apathy handing out prescriptions and not listening. It took my sister 3 years to actually get a diagnosis. It's pretty insane.

But yeah Doctors aren't Gods, Scientists aren't infallible. We have to watch our own backs and actually learn how to interpret and extrapolate data ourselves, not just take the word of anybody with a PhD.

As you say, and as I said, the issue comes when people are so established in their view, surrounded by yes men, there's nothing valuable to get from that. Dead end. Doors need to be open no matter what. Like in the 70's

The doors of perception ? ;-)

I relate to all you've said and you've done a great job in collating different experiences that are detrimental to the advancement of our thinking as humans. I have experienced this but it didn't result in the loss of lives, just money and time. I had sealed a deal with someone on a property I was selling, had put in a lot of effort in getting things moving, only to be disappointed days later when he called and said he was pulling out because he was told by his religious leader that the deal was bad/cursed because I wanted to con him. I was speechless, not to mention insulted.

I just accepted it and quietly moved on but I incurred great losses. I had even turned other people down who had better offers because I liked the guy and wanted to give him the property. I spent money running around and getting paperwork done, paid my lawyers etc all for him to bail out. I didn't want to create arguments so I didn't challenge his "leader's" prediction and waste even more time trying to convince him otherwise. I just told him that not all is as it seems and that he should think about what has happened and learn from it. then I went my way.

There's a whole industry in the US of people de-ghosting new houses, or checking for their presence. It's pretty hilarious. Or in your case, infuriating...

Yes, your right, stemmit can change the world . good job, I enjoyed you write up.

This post is really important and speaks from my heart..

I'm glad we speak on the same wavelength

This was literally my life! I grew up in a hindu god fearing family. But I wasn't like them, I always had questions. Why can't I do this or that! And they would always say that it's a sin or don't ask us so many questions. We are your parents so we know best. Ofcourse, in their minds they were obviously right but for me they weren't. It took me a lot of years and a lot of courage to finally get out of there and find who I really am and how this world works!
Thanks for this post. I got seriously choked up reading this.

Oh wow, I'm happy to hear your story! It's always such a battle, especially for the beliefs that actively punish a second thought. I'm lucky that I never had to experience it but I hear it through so many like yourself, it's harrowing.

Thanks for reading!

Thanks for writing :-)

You really need to research what is in child Vaccines. David Wolfe is a good guy, and if you really know children - hang out with some 6 year olds that are Vaccine and Flouride free, and then some 6 year olds that had all the 10 or so Government and big Pharma pushed Vaccines and Flouride - then get back to me. Peace, ww.

The burden of proof is not on me. You cannot submit an argument by saying 'well if you think it's true, YOU prove yourself wrong!'

That's not how things fly, I'm afraid. Submit your rebuke here and I'll gladly address it!

I know we come here perfect, I know mercury is a poison, I know entities like the Bill Gates foundation, The UN, and Central Bank run Governments don't have the human interest at heart. I also know that non-vaccinated children against other vaccinated children are more present, more awake, more energetic, and more independent.

Evidence please!

David Wolfe has so many easy facts about many subjects going wrong I haven't even tried to follow him pretty far.

Talking about random children as a proof for anything is one thing. However if you are interested, I can use my own son as an example for children who have had vaccines and use flouride. It'd be interesting to see what kind of problems he should have, if we take vaccine and flouride scares as truth.

This is really a nice post. i am agree with the author. Thanks for sharing.

Honestly, there's a reason why there is falsehood spreading on the Internet. To sway unsuspecting crowd towards an ideology so the person responsible will be able to gain financial or political benefit.

Commonsense is still a very useful tool to discern the truth.

Yeah it's almost entirely about money and not so much about an actual crazy person with a wild belief. Though that does exist, too

Thank you for this great post .

So vaccines saved hypothetical lives of people who supposedly would have died with out them, that is all speculation... as if better sanitation practices, technological advancement and environmental factors didn't influence anything. So again sacrificing a percentage of trusting healthy people for "the greater good"....there's gotta be a better way...but that's not as profitable as pushing 14 shots at multiple doses that cost an average of 136 each...

The Price of Prevention: Vaccine Costs Are Soaring

U.S. court pays $6 million to Gardasil victims

By Peter Lind - - Wednesday, December 31, 2014
WASHINGTON, April 10, 2013 - Gardasil, the vaccine for HPV (human papillomavirus), may not be as safe as backers claim.
Judicial Watch announced it has received documents from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) revealing that its National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) has awarded $5,877,710 dollars to 49 victims in claims made against the highly controversial HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccines. To date 200 claims have been filed with VICP, with barely half adjudicated.
“This new information from the government shows that the serious safety concerns about the use of Gardasil have been well-founded. Public health officials should stop pushing Gardasil on children.” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
The CDC recommends the Gardasil vaccine, made by Merck Pharmaceuticals, for all females between 9 and 26 years to protect against HPV. Furthermore, the CDC says Gardasil is licensed, safe, and effective for males ages 9 through 26 years.
The facts appear to contradict the FDA’s safety statements. The adverse reaction reports detail 26 new deaths reported between September 1, 2010 and September 15, 2011 as well as incidents of seizures, paralysis, blindness, pancreatitis, speech problems, short term memory loss and Guillain-Barré Syndrome. The documents come from the FDA’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) which is used by the FDA to monitor the safety of vaccines.
That’s 26 reported deaths of young, previously healthy, girls after Gardasil vaccination in just one year.In response to the concern about death reports among those who received Gardasil, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) insists “there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine.”
While it is not clear exactly what is causing so many adverse reactions, Gardasil does contain genetically engineered virus-like protein particles as well as aluminum, which can affect immune function.
Further, according to the vaccine manufacturer product information insert, “Gardasil … not been evaluated for carcinogenicity or impairment of fertility.” (2007 [227] p1986 )
In fact, Merck studied the Gardasil vaccine in fewer than 1,200 girls under 16 prior to it being released to the market under a fast-tracked road to licensure. To date, most of the serious side effects, including deaths, that occurred during the pre-licensure clinical trials and post marketing surveillance have been written off as a “coincidence” by Merck researchers and government health officials.
Neurologist Dr. Ian Sutton reported negative neurological side effects from Gardasil. He reported five cases of multiple sclerosis-like symptoms emerging shortly after women received the Gardasil vaccine, noting:
“We report five patients who presented with multifocal or atypical demyelinating syndromes within 21 days of immunization with the quadrivalent human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine, Gardasil. Although the target population for vaccination, young females, has an inherently high risk for MS, the temporal association with demyelinating events in these cases may be explained by the potent immuno-stimulatory properties of HPV virus-like particles which comprise the vaccine.”
From its inception, the use of HPV (human papillomavirus) vaccines for sexually transmitted diseases has been hotly disputed. According to the Annals of Medicine: “At present there are no significant data showing that either Gardasil or Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline) can prevent any type of cervical cancer since the testing period employed was too short to evaluate long-term benefits of HPV vaccination.”
There are more than 100 types of human papillomaviruses (HPVs). Of them, about 40 types of HPV are sexually transmitted and 15 of these types are most associated with cervical cancers and genital warts in women and men.
HPV vaccines have been illegally administered to millions without informed consent, as the risks rarely disclosed.
Not only are there questions about the safety of the vaccine, there are questions about the need for the vaccine. Over 90 percent of women infected with HPV clear the infection naturally within two years, at which point cervical cells go back to normal.
Meanwhile, Merck is benefitting tremendously from vaccine sales. The vaccine is expected to reach $1 billion in sales next year, and could reach more than $4 billion in sales in five years, according to Wall Street analysts.
Dr. Peter Lind practices metabolic and neurologic chiropractic in his wellness clinic in Salem, Oregon. USA. He is the author of 3 books on health, one novel, and hundreds of wellness articles. His clinical specialty is in physical, nutritional, and emotional stress. He is virtual staff doctor for

So what you're saying is, something was made to save people, people discovered it may not be safe, and action was taken.

Kind of a good system, don't you think? Also:

I hope you like taking the bus


An interesting read but I'm afraid I do not share your views on this matter in the slightest and would suggest that perhaps you are the one taking your information from sources that should not be trusted. Just MY opinion!

Then, as suggested, please provide evidence! ^__^ It's not me you're disagreeing with, but scientific consensus

I have no desire to argue with you on the matter. We are each responsible for doing our own research and due diligence when it comes to the safety and protection of our children and our own health. My only suggestion would be to look at all of the information, good or bad and come to your own conclusions. I have no need for someone to tell me how wrong I am because I do not take as gospel the 'evidence' provided by those who have an interest in aligning themselves with organisations that are put in place to control the thoughts and actions of the masses. If you believe that your 'evidence' is better than my 'evidence' because your evidence comes from sources that you have been told are trustworthy, then that is your decision. You say you are a critical thinking person so there is no point in me trying to convince you that you are wrong and I am right as your post tries to do.

On a side note, I'm not a particularly big fan of your avatar and wonder what your intentions were when choosing it to be displayed on your page. Clearly you are not a stupid man so you must realise the significance of the one eye symbolism and either choose to have it because you align yourself with the ideology it suggests or are using it as a means to get an adverse reaction from some of us here.

I think you are a lot smarter than you would have us believe and are playing a game that I myself do not think is in the best interest of yourself or other easily influenced users on steemit.

You're over thinking.

I like my picture of my eye. It stands out. Good picture. I'm aware of what it potentially means to conspiracy theorists.

You presume a lot about me here without actually knowing who I am. You presume my method of critical thought and yet fail to provide any of your own evidence to be discussed.

Unlike you, I'm totally open to discussion and indeed, being wrong. If you can show me that. The point of my article, whether or not you are right or I am wrong, is that we need to be open to discussion to share each other's thoughts.

If you don't want to then you basically missed the point of the entire post.

As I said, I am not here to argue! If these are your beliefs then I will not try and persuade you otherwise. There is plenty of information out there on the subject for others to look at and come to their own conclusions.

Perhaps I am over thinking but the fact that you are aware of the symbolism and meaning to others and yet still choose to have it as your avatar tells ME something. Again, I leave others to reach their own conclusions.

I don't think I did miss the point of the article @mobbs but I could be wrong!

I hope the rest of your day goes well my friend!

Well, that's your choice. Cheers

Yeah, lots of gullible people out there. I don't take piece of information as truth. I always try to gather as much from different sources and compare them. Most people don't have the time and are eager to make their mind up about things they have 0 clue about.

You should try living in China, it can be exasperating!

Hah, no thanks! :D
I get a good climpse from some youtube channels like "serpentza".

Very well written! It was worth a read. Thank you @Mobbs.

Thanks for reading =)

I saw u r entire post it looks good. Perhaps u r debating whether the world even needs saved? or If you think it doesn't, then u should probably just stop reading this right now, because I don't intend to dive into all the reasons why it does in this particular post. The truth of the matter is that Ur right to free speech is dependent on Ur lack of influence. If u r someone whose voice is heard by few, then u r welcome to say whatever u want to say.

Sorry I'm not sure I understand, and I'm pretty sure you don't understand, either. It's ok

Great post. I really enjoyed reading it.

This is a known fact and people should really start thinking more about the standard recommended treatments. There are a lot of studies which show that doctors and pharma companies just want to earn more and more and don't really care about the lives of millions of people. For them, we are all just "numbers".

sure up-voted and followed, nice work buddy

I just became sick to my stomach.
The Chemo thing? REALLY?!

My mom just got done with Chemo. She HAD breast cancer! Luckily it's gone now. But she is still dealing with that.
I really hope that it's somehow not true. Because thats terrifying. I've been suspecting that doctors have been doing similar things LIke being affiliates for certain drug companies so they can make extra money by referring people to those drugs.

It really makes you not want to trust these people.

I'm so grateful for steemit though. It allows us to be more open and transparent. Wonderful post!

As I said in the article, it isn't true. Though people in the science community do often deliberately alter results and make bias decisions to be published and money etc, but the same can be said in every industry in the entire world. For the most part, that simply isn't the case.

If you think about it, it's far more in a doctor's interest to release a huge one-time miracle drug. That doctor would earn billions on that alone. The idea that they're suppressing the truth to earn more money just doesn't match up with reality

Yes :( We've seen that so many times! I know money is a huge motivator in life, But sometimes I don't understand how people can feel okay publishing lies so knowing they aren't doing the right thing.

It would take far too long to unravel, and unpack all of the logical fallacies you've used here. Just from a cursory glance, I see:

Appeal to emotion
Appeal from authority
Appeal to popularity
Genetic fallacy
Appeal to common practice
and the ever present Ad hominem

Calling something names does not make it into what you think it is.

From someone who has spent decades, rather than simply years of their life building their critical thinking skills, you might benefit from taking another look at who is suffering from herd mentality. Who is the herd, and what is their mentality? The herd is the majority, who accept whatever they are told, and their mentality is the Appeal from authority, Genetic fallacy, and Appeal to common practice, among others.

Snopes are not scientists either. I would not be using them as a source if you are interested in the facts. The cherry picking that you point out is rife on Snopes, as is almost every logical fallacy you'd care to name. Relying on 'fact check' sites, and not using grammar and logic to sort out the facts, is the definition of the Genetic fallacy. The facts of the argument are what matter, and not the source. There may be a valid fact or two on Snopes, but I have found too much mis- and disinformation there to continue using it.

In order to know the facts, we must be willing to attempt to prove ourselves wrong. No one else will convince thinking people of our biases. The desire to resist knowledge which does not agree with our existing beliefs is inherent, and the easiest way out of entrenched beliefs is to challenge ourselves. Then we can be open to recognizing facts, and separate them from beliefs.

Yes, but we have to change the impact of this country of racism and blocking the thought until it becomes a society free of extremism and isolation and we in Islam, God Almighty love everyone and think about the latest and not to abandon the people are Kano

Here is where i'm personally less optimistic. I think until we have a form of unlimited resource, extremism isn't going away. Jihad extremism is working hard to isolate muslims from the rest of the world, for example, which helps them recruit more extremists.

Most revolutions and war tends to come from a lack of resource, or a demand higher than the supply. That's the number one thing that needs to be addressed, I'd say

Lack of resources requires thought and creativity to work and effort until the nations

Good point, totally agree

Do you acknowledge that many areas of 'science' is manipulated?

Yeah for sure. As mentioned in another comment, scientists are only human. They want money and they're willing to cheat as much as the next person.

But these people are almost always found out due to the scientific method. Sure it can take time (even hundreds of years, if you look in the past), but peer review and the need for reproducible data is an inherent part of the process.

Recently there has been a reproducibility crisis in science, and many journals for example have taken new measure in improving this by increasing rigorous methodology to assure legitimacy.

It's the best process we have to fight against human nature, but I doubt we'll ever be perfect.

The trouble is that there are many ways to influence the outcome of science and the scientific method. The majority of science is centrally controlled and there really is no way to understate the influence of money and big business. It is very easy to manipulate data. There is no way for anyone to validate the observations of is all based on trust. That trust is demonstrably being abused all the time. I think your point of view is genuine, but it doesn't offer any kind of solution to people searching for the truth in matters affecting them.

Take vaccinces...i loved your blob chart by the way. Vaccines kill and damage people all the time. Diseases kill and damage people all the time. People are generally pro health. So given that science is clearly manipulated with blatant conflicts of interest infecting the whole edifice, people are forced to make decisions the best way they can to find a way to be as healthy as possible. One has to try to evaluate the risk profile of taking vaccines against the possibility of being infected by a disease and what the outcome of that might be. Is it any wonder that people might come to the conclusion that possibly acquiring a natural infection with a high chance of a positive outcome might be better than injecting a concoction of chemicals, toxins and pathogens on the say so of corporate influenced 'science'? Especially when there is ZERO 'science' behind the effects of a vaccine schedule in the long term? When you say science isn't perfect, you know what that means? It means some child somewhere dies or is damaged from by a medical procedure that perhaps they needn't have been exposed to.

But you're coming from a place where you n ever experienced what the world was like before vaccines. You are ignoring the fact that millions of people die around the world and history has shown us results.

It's easy to forget:

It's all very well lamenting the death of a child whose immune system couldn't handle a vaccine - if that even happens more than, like, twice, but just look at the hundreds of millions that vaccines are preventing, and look at how these diseases are coming back with a vengeance since people have started questioning something they're not experts at.

It's true that it's overwhelming to most of us to actually try to understand everything - the science of vaccines - as well as any other science - is the result of thousands of people working over hundreds of years, standing on shoulders of giants and building from there.

It's hard to just sit down and 'get it'. But that's why faith in the scientific method is vital.

There is no way for anyone to validate the observations of is all based on trust.

As I said in my last post this simply isn't true. They can sometimes get away with it for a while given enough money - like the whole cigarette scandal - but the very proess of reproducibility is the key.

The more we improve this process, the less people can get away with. Science in itself is perfect, and we would be crazy to think trusting somebody selling an alternative is better.

I've heard these arguments before, however you put a chart up that means absolutely nothing. There is a laundry list of ways that chart is misrepresenting the cause of disease, our susceptibility to it, the effect of vaccines on incidents of disease. I could go on and on and on. What you are espousing is religion, faith. It is not pseudo-science to reject flawed science, it is rational.

Let me ask you this. How do you know that the reason for disease increase isn't a result of the vaccines themselves? How do you know that it isn't the result of a complex relationship between environmental pollution and vaccines?

Look, a parent making decisions on the welfare of his or her child hasn't got a hundred years to wait for the bad bits of science to slowly reveal themselves. They have to make difficult decisions today. And what can they see? The centralised control of information, science, money....on and on....and a litany of corruption. We know science is not infallible, we know that conflicts of interest exist and produce egregious crimes, we know there are ongoing legal disputes resulting from corruption in science. Have faith in your chart if you like, there is simply way more going on than you seem to be prepared to acknowledge.

The chart is obviously just an easy representation of my point. At this point we do need evidence. I mean what you're saying is the world would be better without vaccines, right? Can you honestly say that without a smile?

Sanitation and other factors has obviously improved lives but if you leave the US, for example, vaccines have effects RIGHT NOW. Not hundreds of years. just last year or so people were dying from diseases that are viral and cannot be fixed by things like lifestyle.

Go to Africa and tell those people who were dying, and now are not dying, that their vaccines are not to be trusted and they should go the natural route.

You may look at America and say we don't need it because of our advanced lifestyle, but you can't put evidence to that, you can only assume.

Old people die in masses with the flu virus every year, UNTIL a new vaccine for the current strain is manufactured and lo and behold, lives are saved.

There is plenty of information publicly available and it's not all the government. You think independent individuals and organisations haven't looked into these things, and only the government has a hold of the simple technology required to check the components of a vaccine, replicate and test it?

Of course not. We can all, if we can be bothered, test for ourselves. It's all out there in public databases. If we can't trust that, who or what can we trust? The mother with motherly instinct but no formal educational background?


Because it's nice and it makes us feel safe?

What about that child with auto-immune disease in school that contracts a deadly virus because 5% of the students were denied vaccines as a kid. They contracted a disease that made them a little sick, meanwhile that auto-immune disease child is dead.

the difficult decision you speak of should only be 'how much time should I spend trying to understand the science?'

Sure, if there's a brand new vaccine that's been rushed and put out into the community you might wanna be skeptical, but that only happens during huge epidemic crises. Otherwise, years, decades go into the research and testing of vaccines before it hits the shelves.

I think it's a tragic life if we can't put some trust in the very things that are allowing us to propagate and live longer than ever before. And when I say trust, I don't mean blind trust. I mean 'if I had time in my busy day to check, I will, but otherwise, scientific consensus is enough'

Thank you for the stimulating conversation. The relationship between naturally acquired disease, recovery and future health is never discussed clearly. Instead of giving Africans vaccines, why don't we give them control of their resources and allow them to provide proper sanitation and nutrition to their people?

Can I check, you believe it is ethical to medically intervene in the life of a healthy child with a procedure that has potentially grave risks for the sake of another child?

What if the first child gets brain damaged by the vaccine and the second child catches a different pathogen and dies anyway? Is that moral?

At best, science presents working assumptions based on repeated observations. At worst it is use as propaganda in order to manipulate and control people.....often to very great harm. Trust is the only thing that matters. If you didn't trust the engineer who built a plane, you wouldn't fly in it, it's that simple.

If the idea of a vaccine is to improve health, lets look at what it means to be healthy, define that (and not just in the short term.) If we need to sensitise the immune system in some way for certain diseases, let's make better vaccines.....ones that aren't a russian roulette or chronic disabler for a proportion of the population. Let's not start with the position that it's ok to take risks with the life of a child for the sake of another.

IMO, mother nature is a bitch who needs a cure for her indifference to her children.

great post.i really feel that this site is actually going to change the lives of millions all over the world

This is great! You should start a non-profit steaming page for people to donate for a cause

Charity is one great potential thing here. The one's i've seen and put some towards don't seem to do so well, unfortunately, but I'm hoping we can work on improving that

so you see writing as therapy?

Well, it can have some therapeutic effects, but It's just a passion of mine, more than anything else

Very good article @mobbs! I tend to search out snopes about anything that just seems too extreme to me, but of course, I also realize that are always more than two sides to a story. So many people, so many opinions (supposed "truths")-- I don't even try to sort them all out.

@mobbs, I loved the gripping narration. I am going to check out the snopes website right away.

People are more open to change if the feel they are the ones doing the searching themselves.

That's a very very important lesson there. People are inherently by reflex prone to denial. You try a new idea with your friend and the instantaneous reply will be ' mate, that won't work'. You put it forward in a way to make him feel that it is his idea, he is more likely to agree with you. That's inherent human nature I think.
I need to learn how to form my sentences and communication in order to achieve that. This is going to be interesting.

Yep! This is why psychology is so important. Sure we argue whether it's actual science or not, but the more we actually understand about how we behave, the easier it is to manipulate it... for better or worse. In this case, for better

good article ;)

The first question when gathering information ought always be, from where do I get my data? Discrimination has its utility in a narrow lane, perhaps. Great read. I, too, mourn for those who follow their lives unquestioned.

Congratulations @mobbs! You have completed some achievement on Steemit and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

Award for the number of upvotes

Click on any badge to view your own Board of Honnor on SteemitBoard.
For more information about SteemitBoard, click here

If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

By upvoting this notification, you can help all Steemit users. Learn how here!

You say: "There are going to be some people in that 50 million that will refuse chemo because of that video they once saw saying Doctors just want to be rich. Those people may die."
Wrong! In many cases of cancer chemo is not a cure, it's just a life-prolonging treatment. I've checked out all the treatments my sister was offered when she was dying of lung cancer. It never said - this new expensive drug will cure you, it'll just give you a little more time! I'm not a doctor, but most people with cancer just die, with or without chemo or radiation. You don't need to check on Snoopes for that. My sister shared your beliefs, took all the treatments available and then she died.
I do admire you for your dream of saving lives, but chemo works only in a small number of cases. You do realize that at this very moment all over the world there are millions of people undergoing chemo. Well, a year from now most of them will be dead.

Snopes acknowledges that in many cases chemo has dangerous side effects and is not always effective, and some doctors - being human - have some bias and misdiagnose. But it would be dangerous to ignore the very real benefits of chemo, either way.

most people with cancer just die, you don't need to check snopes for that

Well ok if not snopes, cancer.gove says

1,685,210 new cases of cancer will be diagnosed in the United States and 595,690 people will die from the disease.

Correct me if I'm wrong but that's only 35%, a little over 1/3. 'most' implies a majority. So yes, we DO need to check these things.

I understand the pain of losing one to a disease but the best thing to do is stay rational for the sake of others, and prevent them in the best way from falling into the same fate.

And besides, chemo was simply one example of many thousands. Even if it's wrong - which it isn't - it would be hard to deny the problems I discuss

Are you seriously trying to say that 2/3 of cancer patients get cured? We must be living on different planets!

I'm not saying it. Science is. And that was statistics for the US. Show me evidence that it isn't true and we can move the discussion on, rather than just saying 'nope!'

Excellent post friend thanks for the information, I am new to steemit if you can pass by my blog there I am telling you what happens in my country, I hope your support God bless you

So can alcohol.

Ha? Realy i'm not understand😢😢😢😢 @mobbs

Haha take your time. Basically, steemit will encourage people to think more carefully and be more thoughtful in discussions, since there is a money reward in being respectful, compared to, for example, facebook, youtube, reddit which is full of angry trolls

The greatest benefit of an educated mind is to not find safe spaces, but to disrupt the safe spaces of others with discourse and fact. You shouldn't teach things, but how to find out about things from reputable and peer reviewed sources.

Comprehension and legitimate critical thinking is become a thing of the past.

Excellent post.

Totally agree, this is pretty much my teaching philosophy over the last 7 years