She looks like a caricature of her former self

Ahh sounds like Lilith.

Are we sure it wasn't just botox?

Are we sure it wasn't just BOTOX induced facial paralysis?

Bell's Palsy is literally a side effect of Botox. Botox is fucking nasty and we'll probably hear a lot more about its dark side in the coming years.

but I thought injecting your face with formeldahyde was totally safe /s

They use botulinum toxin for botox.

They use botulinum toxin for botox.

Maybe Ollie just had a negative reaction to botox in north korea ^/s

same thing

It's the same thing like water and arcade cabinet are the same thing

highly likely

I doubt she's actually taking all these shots herself. She's just a mouthpiece to spew propaganda.

Or she's just that brainwashed. I get a terrible aura and energy coming off of her. I can't even look at her.

You really believe she had that done for "no good reason?" Like she would go through that just for fun? What kind of stupid are you? I had a double mastectomy. It was no fun but may have saved my life, just like this could have saved hers. I think if you don't know something, keep your mouth shut or you sound like an idiot.

OMG! You don't really believe that do you?? I've never heard such an uninformed opinion. It is NOT avoidable-a lot of time it's in your genes (like Angelina) and yes it absolutely spreads. The only way women die from breast cancer is if it spreads. Please please stop commenting. You have no idea what you're talking about

Welcome to the subreddit.🙄

now you're right root canals are bullshit and dangerous, better to get tooth pulled, but it can lead to breast cancer? never heard that.

This is basically one persons experience with breast cancer. There are thousands of others with different stories. The root canal and bc risk you are talking about has NOT been studied. There are stories about it but not in any reputable magazine. Also, bc drugs only account for 10% of pharmaceutical sales. It's not like they wouldn't make money on any cure also. Stop believing everything you read-not everything on the internet is true, you know?

You do realize that there are people who are diagnosed "de novo" which means they had breast cancer they didn't know about or treat and then it spread. So leaving it alone is NOT an option

You should watch Adam Ruins Hospitals. It just aired and Breast Cancer was one of the main topics. OPs comment is exactly what was said. Mammograms are not necessary except for women over 50. Most types of Breast Cancer will not spread and will not kill you.

Don't hate the messenger, just watch the show and do your own research.

not so sure about that, easily avoidable wtf?

what do you mean "no good reason"? Her supposed 87% chance of getting breast cancer was no good reason to her? She is not the first person in the world to get preemptive mastectomy, so you could argue that the science is flawed or that doctors are lying to her, but it wasnt like she woke up one day and said "Hey I have boobs, breast cancer is a thing, I should get my breasts removed!"

Dawn. She was beautiful 15 years ago, now she's looking more and more like MJ.

Selling your soul to the devil will do that to people.

her lips were always fake tho

Do you guys hate vaccines?

I mean I think that vaccines being able to completely eliminate diseases like polio is all the proof we need, but alright.

You're falsely attributing success in certain areas to vaccines, when it's several factors. Take polio as an example, since you brought it up. Before the polio vaccine was invented or even before there was a laboratory test isolating the polio virus, doctors were diagnosing polio based on clinical symptoms of paralysis. Heck even Angelina Jolie with her "Bell's Palsy" would have been diagnosed with polio if this was the early 20th century. So what happened when the vaccine came out is the government (i.e. drug companies) insisted that a diagnosis of polio be accompanied by a lab verification. Obviously for this reason alone, polio dropped significantly overnight. Now that didn't mean that people weren't still being paralyzed (again Angelina Jolie), it was just that the cases were spread out among a bunch of other names. Looked at another way, the polio vaccine lead to a sharp rise in the incidence of Bell's Palsy at the same time it was dropping the incidence of polio.

So the key to the whole vaccine debate is whether people are becoming healthier overall or if a specific disease is being eradicated. Pro-vaxxers like to argue that the focus should be on just the single disease, whereas anti-vaxxers like to look at overall wellness. So we're sicker as a society now, with more dependence on medicine than ever before in history.

That's a good argument and good points to bring up, and you have a few good points. But generally I still think vaccines are a good thing.

My understanding is that a lot of times it is better to let our bodies handle those things ourselves so that we develop immunity and pass that on to the next generation. However for some things that are too deadly we have to overcome them with things like vaccines.

But generally I still think vaccines are a good thing.

That's the same reason you think coca-cola is refreshing rather than loaded with salt and sugar. Marketing rather than facts is what guides our beliefs today.

However for some things that are too deadly we have to overcome them with things like vaccines.

The fact is that if better sanitation, clean water and better nutrition dropped the death rate of diseases more than vaccines. Source. However there is no money to be made by drug companies over these things, so the argument is shifted to eliminating the disease rather than saving lives, since the fact is clean water saves more lives than vaccines.

Look at it this way, if you really are in favor of vaccines, then do you get the flu vaccine each year? Have you updated your measles vaccine recently? Probably not, because these are not the major concerns in your daily life. You are more concerned with putting food on the table rather than dying of the flu. Sure if someone asks you whether you want to die from the flu, you're going to say "hell no", but it's not something that occupies your thoughts as much as car accidents, unemployment or homelessness.

The point here is that the system today sells you a $5 cup of coffee at starbucks that you could have made yourself for under $1. Vaccines are over-rated to their benefits and under-rated in their dangers.

I don't drink pop cause it's horrible for you. but anyways.

You are right, I don't regularly update my flu shot but that's because I'm a healthy young adult with the immune system to deal with it, and I'm smart enough to stay home and not spread things when I am sick since I don't contribute to heard immunity for the flu specifically.

When I'm an old ass man with a compromised immune system then maybe I would consider taking the flu shots more serious, however I am vaccinated for most other things that would be of serious concern and I try and stay up to date on the things I consider to be relevant.

I mean I've had rusty nails go thru my foot 3 times in my life, I can tell you that I am glad I had a tetanus shot.

Maybe they are not perfect, and have side effects but all medicines do. And what's the problem with irradiating diseases anyways? I mean yea I wish that big pharma would fuck off and help people for the sake of humanity instead of cash, but we are still progressing towards a better future by trying to eliminate serious diseases from our population.

that's because I'm a healthy young adult with the immune system to deal with it, and I'm smart enough to stay home and not spread things when I am sick

Exactly, but this is what the drug companies don't want people to know. Near the end of the 19th century giving birth in hospitals was a virtual death sentence for women. The doctors giving birth to their babies weren't washing their hands between patients, so they were spreading disease to these women. When it was learned that germs were causing disease and simply hand washing saved lives, then the death rate plummeted almost overnight.

It's the same thing with you, you know not to goto work when you have the flu. You know to wear a condom when having sex. You know not to share dirty needles when doing drugs. These things all help stop the spread of disease, yet each of these things we're told are addressed by vaccines. So which is it, was the flu rate dropped because people stayed home or because of the flu vaccine? Was HIV decreased because of some (future) vaccine or because of condom use? Was hepatitis decreased because of awareness how it was spread through sharing needles or because of the vaccine?

It's interesting to consider that when we develop a new vaccine, we also learn about the spread of that disease. So it becomes a questions as to which solved the problem more, the drug companies product or the knowledge of how to avoid the disease? naturally the drug company wants to make it appear that it was their snake oil that did the heavy lifting.

When I'm an old ass man with a compromised immune system then maybe I would consider taking the flu shots more serious,

Catch-22, when you're immuno-compromised, then vaccine don't work. Here's the thing, there are other things to treat disease than vaccines. You don't hear about these things though, because they don't make the drug companies as much profit as vaccines do. Vaccines have 100% market penetration, require zero cost to market and have no legal liability. No other drug company product can compare to this profit potential.

I've had rusty nails go thru my foot 3 times in my life, I can tell you that I am glad I had a tetanus shot.

Does that mean you didn't seek medical attention and relied entirely on the vaccine? If you sought medical attention and they did something to treat you, then you don't really know if it was the vaccine that saved you or the medical treatment (e.g. cleaning the wound). On this basis, you should not give full credit to the vaccine for your recovery.

And what's the problem with irradiating diseases anyways?

I like to compare it to eradicating terrorists on airplanes by using the TSA. The thing is, the TSA isn't really doing 100% of the terrorist prevention. Sure maybe they do 10% of the prevention, but we're told that they are the only thing standing between us and another 9/11. That is deceptive marketing.

I think it would be both factors that would help cause the drop in the disease. While knowledge of how the disease works allows us to counter it without things like vaccines, the vaccine will still have it's place.

It will have a place because it is a longer term preventative solution for diseases. People want that kind of protection, and it's shitty that the big pharma gets filthy rich off it but that's just the way our world is right now.

And maybe not immuno-compromised in the sense that might immune system is dead but working less hard. My understanding of vaccines is that they are weakened versions of a virus that your body can easily overcome, and store the weakness of that virus in your Memory B cells for later use against that virus or similar ones.

So long as my body can overcome those weakened viruses then I am benefiting from the vaccine.

You bring some good points to the table, and I agree that what they do is a lot like false advertising. It's just that to me, something like a vaccine would never make it to market if it didn't work.

In a perfect world, things like vaccines and life savings medicines would be free, but we just are not there yet.

While knowledge of how the disease works allows us to counter it without things like vaccines, the vaccine will still have it's place.

Fair enough, but you never hear this said. There should be evidence and studies outlining how much each played it's part. The fact that this is not put forward I think shows that it's not in the drug companies favor.

It will have a place because it is a longer term preventative solution for diseases

longer term than clean water? I disagree. If you stop providing proper sanitation and nutrition, then people are going to get sick despite vaccines.

So long as my body can overcome those weakened viruses then I am benefiting from the vaccine.

If you can overcome them, then you're not immuno-compromised. If you are immuno-compromised, then it doesn't matter if the virus is a weakened form or not, you're going to be in trouble.

So this logic is faulty, in that when you get old and weakened, then vaccines are not going to help you. Vaccines help the healthy people the most, yet those are the ones that need it the least.

This is why people bring up herd immunity. They say that these immuno-comprised people can't benefit from vaccines, therefore it's up to everyone else to eliminate the disease from the planet.

So long as my body can overcome those weakened viruses then I am benefiting from the vaccine.

Exactly and when you are no longer healthy, the vaccines don't help. It's like giving a glass of water to someone in a swimming pool, but nothing to a man in a desert.

I think that providing things like clean water and education on sanitation should absolutely be the first step, and that it should be accessible to everybody. You will hear no argument from me there. But that's not a long term solution in the sense that your body isn't getting to kill weakened viruses and store that information for later use. That's what vaccines are valuable.

If we are just treating sickness instead of preventing it from happening in the first place then we are only profiting from those in misery. But that doesn't mean that vaccines don't have a place, and that they don't work.

To be Immuno compromised means that your immune system is not as strong, it still works just fine it's just weakened. Vaccines make it so that a weak immune system can overcome a virus that would normally be to strong for the bodys defenses.

That is why they are valuable, and still work for people who are compromised.

I'm never going to argue against the fact that big pharma is taking advantage of the situation, that is a fact. but that does not mean that vaccines don't save lives, and that they are not valuable to humanity.

If we are just treating sickness instead of preventing it from happening in the first place then we are only profiting from those in misery.

So I agree that prevent is important, that's why I think the focus should be upon sanitation, clean water and nutrition. This are preventative measures in addition to helping people prepare their body to fight the disease when they get it.

To be Immuno compromised means that your immune system is not as strong, it still works just fine it's just weakened.

"Not as strong" is not the same as "works just fine". If the engine in my car doesn't allow me to travel faster than 30mph, then my car isn't working just fine.

Vaccines make it so that a weak immune system can overcome a virus

Not true at all. A vaccine helps a healthy immune system more quickly fight a disease. If the immune system is weakened, then the immune response is weakened, regardless if there is a vaccine or not.

I'm never going to argue against the fact that big pharma is taking advantage of the situation,

I don't think you're taking into account that the talking points you espouse here were crafted by the marketing department of the drug companies. It's not that I think you're defending them, it's just that we don't recognize where a lot of the information we speak about comes from.

Did you know that government is the solution to every major problem we've ever encounter? I know this because government told me it.

You are right, "not as strong" is not the exact same, however it still works. And what you are doing with a vaccine is giving a person a weakened virus to overcome and store the results of that for later use. So that the person with the weakened immune system who would perhaps die from a serious illness would not die, because they had encountered that virus before. As you said, it saves the body time(by getting to the fighting more quickly), and that time saved is what saves lives. That time is saved regardless of if you have a healthy or not healthy immune system.

I agree with your feelings that we need to make other things(water,sanitation,etc) a priority before we jump to things like vaccines, however they will always have a place in modern medicine. All we can do is call on our businesses and governments to be more open and accountable for their actions, and keep pushing ourselves towards a better future.

All we can do is call on our businesses and governments to be more open and accountable for their actions

Fortunately we can do more than that, we can refuse to participate in their system of lies. At least in the US, they aren't forcing vaccinations onto people. So that in itself is an accountability mechanism, where we refuse to use their vaccines unless they show a benefit to us.

Good point, we may as well start insulating Schools with Asbestos again too.

We want to see the science improved,

thats the thing

I do

I like what vaccines have done in the past, I hate what they do in the hands of big business today.

only need it for polio

There is evidence, the fact that we eradicated measles in the us (at least we did until some anti vax parents didn't vax their kids and brought it back) as well as the fact that neither you or I haven't died of many horrible diseases that we have vaccines for

I can come up with one explanation being that it seems to validate the anti vaxers claims by agreeing to go along with their demanded studies. And then of course, it likely wouldn't change things, just like how anti vaxers ignore other scientific studies in favor of whatever agrees with them, if they didn't get the results they wanted it would be because the study was influenced by the pharmaceuticals or whoever else pulling the strings.

you or I haven't died of many horrible diseases that we have vaccines for

Using this logic, you attribute the drop to anything. Maybe it was the fact that Apple released it's new iPhone series that lead to the drop in deaths?

More seriously, you're not taking into account the improvement in things like sanitation and nutrition. Clean water does a lot to stop the spread of disease, so why not mention that in your statement at all? Wouldn't it be more accurate to say "clean water plus vaccines helped drop disease"? Instead you repeat the propaganda of the drug companies and eliminate the role of anything other than their products.

You're leaving out that measles has made a reappearance in communities that have stopped vaccinating but still have access to clean water and nutrition. When vaccines are the only variable it's pretty clear what the cause is.

How many of those people have died? That's where sanitation and clean water come in, we no longer die from disease. That's why I said elsewhere, that the narrative has changed from dying from the disease to never experiencing the disease at all. The war of stopping people from dying from a disease was won without vaccines.

The drug companies sell vaccines therefore on the same basis that they sell anti-depressants (e.g. Prozac), that we will never be sad or sick and everything will be perfect always. How is that working out? It isn't, we're sicker today that we were prior to vaccines.

Now one thing I will agree with is that the nature of disease is different than it was long ago. Today we have obesity, cancer, diabetes and autism as our diseases. We're not healthier though, we just changed diseases.

According to the CDC 1 out of 1,000 children with meatless will die from it. Another 1 out of 1,000 will have brain swelling which leads to other issues. 1 in 20 will get pneumonia which is the most common cause of death in children with measles.

Is it going to wipe out humanity? No. Are these deaths and complications avoidable? Yes.

natural selection !?

According to the CDC 1 out of 1,000 children with meatless will die from it.

one in a thousand that catch the disease, not one out of every thousand children. This is a subtle difference, but it's important. Taken across the entire population, healthy and sick together, the death rate comes out to be less than 1 per 100k.

Another 1 out of 1,000 will have brain swelling which leads to other issues.

This happens with vaccines as well. It's recognized as a vaccine side effect by the CDC.

1 in 20 will get pneumonia which is the most common cause of death in children with measles.

This is where things get interesting. So if your point is that a child dies from a secondary infection, then it's not the fault of measles directly. This might seem like a loophole, but it goes to the distinction as to whether our goal is to be healthy or it's to target a specific disease. A child can develop a secondary infection from countless of methods.

Are these deaths and complications avoidable? Yes.

Are they? Children are still dying today, they just die from other things than measles. Childhood obesity, diabetes and autism are all on the rise today, so it appears that we're not healthier so much as we're trading one set of illnesses for another.

Plus there is the issue of whether vaccines the only mechanism by which deaths were reduced. Here is a graph showing that the death rate of measles was reduced to almost nothing long before vaccines were introduced. So I agree we should be working to mitigate disease, but lets give credit where credit is due, don't you agree?

Oh, well since only 1 in 100k children will die from this disease, why even bother? Fuck that 1 child in particular, I say! Fuck it, expose them all! Only 1 in 100k will die, and only another 1 in 100k will die from complications! Their parents and families too! Fuck 'em! It's not my child, so who cares? That's just nature keeping us humans in check, right?

Except no, FUCK nature. If that 1 in 100k was you, or your child, or your best friend, or your best friend's child, you would want every treatment available to help.

Humans have the amazing ability to shape the world as we sit fit. that's why humans are the top of the food chain. A lot of the time humans adversely affect nature, but on some rare occasions we are able to improve our quality of life while not shitting on the world.

Vaccines are one of those rare occasions.

When administered properly by a healthcare professional, vaccines are amazing. They give your body a fighting chance against some serious diseases. The fact that you want to take this away from a child is beyond atrocious. Don't gamble with the lives of others.

Your graph is interesting. It clearly shows what proper hygiene and clean water can do. However, I can't help but notice that the trend stagnates at around 1952 until the creation of the measles vaccine 11 years later at around 1963. Giving it some years to reach full availability shows us that the trend begins to continue downward until it reaches practically 0 by 1967. Thank you hygiene, clean water, AND vaccines.

I agree that a healthy skepticism is nothing but good. Just don't try to say that people should trust what you say over the pharmaceutical companies. If you believe it's true, then try to prove it. Don't just ride the coattails of individual "scientists" that claim they've done the science but have never been thoroughly peer-reviewed, and their experiments repeated and results reproduced. Science is all about repetition.

Yeah, children die in the world. Yeah, there are other harmful things in the world today, such as childhood obesity or diabetes. So why add another problem into the mix? I feel sorry for you. You claim that we're simply trading one set of illnesses for another, when the reality is that these are all part of the same set. There is no two sides in the illness world, and it's not like you have to have at least one set of illnesses in the world. Humans are actively trying to solve this whole world of disease, and we are doing it one step at a time. So yes, let's please give credit where credit is due. Thank you hygiene, thank you clean water, thank you sterile operating rooms, and thank you vaccines. Actually, thank you medicine in general. Here's to not having another Black Death!

Also, I don't give a fuck about what you have to say back to me, I just wanted to type on my new keyboard. Cheers!

Except no, FUCK nature. If that 1 in 100k was you, or your child, or your best friend, or your best friend's child, you would want every treatment available to help.

Humans have the amazing ability to shape the world as we sit fit. that's why humans are the top of the food chain

That's a very arrogant attitude and it's what has lead to a lot of horrible mistakes. Sure we want to do everything we can to help people, but there are costs associated to these activities. You're probably under the false impression that vaccines are free and have no side effects, but while you're busy trying to say the life of that 1 in 100k child, you're harming thousands of others with side effects.

Now I don't want to turn this into a debate as to whether vaccines cause autism, so there are plenty of well recognized side effects that they cause that you can't dispute. For example if 1 in every dozen gets a fever and has to stay home, then that is a substantial side effect. So is it a fair tradeoff to make thousands of people sick in order to save one persons life?

When administered properly by a healthcare professional, vaccines are amazing. They give your body a fighting chance against some serious diseases. The fact that you want to take this away from a child is beyond atrocious. Don't gamble with the lives of others.

So is it your position that the human body can't fight disease without vaccines? Children don't have a "fighting chance" without them?

You're mistaken if you think children are dying has frequently as you're implying here. I mean you even quoted that only 1 in 100k children die each year to measles in an unvaccinated population. How isn't that a "fighting chance"? Of the people infected with measles only 1 in 1000 die, so what does that say about the other 999 that survived, didn't they have a "fighting chance"?

You use the hyperbole and marketing of the drug companies. Maybe step back for a second to consider if a 99.9% survival rate is a "fighting chance". You're caught up in the emotions of the situation and not evaluating the facts.

Your graph is interesting. It clearly shows what proper hygiene and clean water can do. However, I can't help but notice that the trend stagnates at around 1952 until the creation of the measles vaccine 11 years later at around 1963.

I agree.

However isn't it a bit odd that you first heard this point from an anti-vaxxer. I gave you the facts and this is likely the first time you're heard this presented in this way before. Probably the dozen or so times you've heard vaccines discussed in your life before and this is the first time anyone has told you that sanitation, clean water and nutrition played any role whatsoever in the eradication of disease. Come on, this has to be a curious observation to you at least.

Don't just ride the coattails of individual "scientists"

Would it be OK for me to ride the coattails of scientists if I was to adopt the popular view?

Yeah, there are other harmful things in the world today, such as childhood obesity or diabetes. So why add another problem into the mix?

Why? Because you're not considering that some of these modern problems might be caused by vaccines. Again, I don't feel like debating autism, but there are considerations of autoimmune diseases and allergies that should be considered. If any of these things ever have the slightest connection to vaccines, that whatever good they have done is totally negated. Sanitation and clean water aren't causing horrendous side effects, but it's possible that injecting chemical brews into children does.

Actually, thank you medicine in general. Here's to not having another Black Death!

There is misconception that anti-vaxxers are anti-medicine or anti-science. We're more anti-band wagon and anti-propaganda.

The black death was a problem solved before there were any vaccines. You bring up this example as if this is a justification for vaccines, when it is totally irrelevant. You might as well be saying "we went to the moon, therefore we should use vaccines as patriotic americans". Don't you see how this is the real anti-science position to be appealing to peoples emotions rather than hard facts?

I don't give a fuck about what you have to say back to me

At least you're honest about being closed minded, I'll give you that. There might be people seeking answers though that read this, so I reply for their benefit.

There are definitely communities that have stopped vaccinating and they've seen measles outbreaks.

"As of Wednesday, the case count was up to 34 — all but two unvaccinated, almost all Somali-American, and mostly children ages 5 and under."

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/05/03/526595475/understanding-the-history-behind-communities-vaccine-fears

http://www.familyhealthchiropractic.com/wp-content/uploads/measle_rates_us.jpg

tens of millions of undocumented immigrants will do wonders for public health.

My mom Had bells palsy, im pretty sure it a virus, and nothing to do with a fucking vacccination.

What do you think is in a vaccine sweetheart? Rainbow juice?

I had Bell's Palsy as a teenager, way back when teenagers weren't vaxxed to death. And it went away since it was a mild case.

My mother in law has had Bell's Palsy for a few months now (even though they thought it would only last a month). As for vaccines, she's "from the island" and refuses to take any doctor's orders or advice on anything so I highly doubt she's been vaccinated for damn near anything.

Love how you were downvoted because your experience doesn't fit OP's narrative.

Cool, it was at zero when I posted. Thanks for the update.

Yeah, that happens sometimes, lol.

[removed]

Of all the vaccines, Hepatitis B is the most absurd one ever.

It is given at birth BY DEFAULT unless you have a birth plan properly filed, injecting 150mcg of aluminum into a ~7lb baby.

Note that the FDA themselves state that 15mcg of aluminum per pound per month is the upper safety limit. This is most likely WAY too high, and it's still even lower than this absurd fucking Hep B shot.

Unless you know of any fucking newborn babies being sexually active and sharing needles, THERE IS NO REASON TO GET THIS VACCINE UNLESS MOM HAS HEP B!!!!!!!!!!

This is really the "WTC 7" of vaccines, and even if you're pro-vaccine, you should have your kid NOT get this one unless you yourself have Hep B. But in order to do that, you have to file a bunch of paperwork. What an absurd fucking racket.

Do your research and do NOT go into the delivery room without a notarized birth plan in place, approved by your pre-selected pediatrician. Otherwise you're getting you some Hep B and aluminum at BIRTH. Unreal.

I waited a month to give that one to my baby and was so proud about the growth of my baby's head in the days after. In hindsight I'm thinking that was inflammation of the brain.

well babies heads are supposed to grow but how is the kid doing now, not mentally disabled?

Has had some developmental issues (speech delay, anxiety but ahead academically) and improves each year as we focus on health and nutrition. I had allergic reaction to the hep B vaccine so it would not surprise me if it caused some issues

sounds like autism.

we have been to many doctors, thanks. not autism.

weird doctors. he has the signs.

as i said, with a change in diet things have changed. anxiety is pretty much gone, speech delay is gone. maybe we could say "he" had autism that was cured by changing diet, but there's definitely no autism now. socially there were never issues, no repetitive behaviors. i believe it was actually PANDAS. vaccines are known to trigger regressions in PANDAS. diet is known to help in PANDAS. i do think a lot of kids with PANDAS get misdiagnosed as having autism when they could easily treat and see a reduction in symptoms.

https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/pandas/index.shtml

this is from the NIH's website. that's the national institutes of health, who funds most of our country's research at universities.

Babies that are vaginally born will have misshapen heads that take time to come together. It is probably normal to have some change!

From WdbMD:

It’s caused by some kind of trauma to the seventh cranial nerve. This is also called the “facial nerve.” Bell’s palsy can happen to anyone. But it seems to occur more often in people who have diabetes or are recovering from viral infections.

Most of the time, symptoms are only temporary.

I did suffer it recently for 2 months. Had a nasty cold that lasted for almost 3 weeks, with lots of fever and so. One day I woke up with half of my face paralyzed, scary. Went to ER, had cerebral scans, lots of tests (blood, eyes, another scan) and finally another doctor diagnosed me Bells palsy. I had to take cortisone for 2 months and suddenly in a few days (after 2 months) it went away. Doctor told me the same as the info you posted, they are not sure why it happens but use to be linked to a viral infection( I was sick as a dog when I got it but have no diabetes) Btw the doc told me too that most of the people recover but other dont...so they dont really know that much about it.

Fuck off anti-waxxer.

and has been getting every vaccine under the Sun.

Any actual proof of this, or just inserting your own details to the story?

Facial paralysis is pretty common. Sometimes goes away in a week. Very few times stays longer than that.

Measles as well, you don't want that shit coming back

As well as mumps, pertussis, and meningitis

Brad got out just in time!

Isn't Bell's Palsy linked to cannibalism too?

botox and plastic surgery, tons of both

I don't drink pop cause it's horrible for you. but anyways.

You are right, I don't regularly update my flu shot but that's because I'm a healthy young adult with the immune system to deal with it, and I'm smart enough to stay home and not spread things when I am sick since I don't contribute to heard immunity for the flu specifically.

When I'm an old ass man with a compromised immune system then maybe I would consider taking the flu shots more serious, however I am vaccinated for most other things that would be of serious concern and I try and stay up to date on the things I consider to be relevant.

I mean I've had rusty nails go thru my foot 3 times in my life, I can tell you that I am glad I had a tetanus shot.

Maybe they are not perfect, and have side effects but all medicines do. And what's the problem with irradiating diseases anyways? I mean yea I wish that big pharma would fuck off and help people for the sake of humanity instead of cash, but we are still progressing towards a better future by trying to eliminate serious diseases from our population.

I think that providing things like clean water and education on sanitation should absolutely be the first step, and that it should be accessible to everybody. You will hear no argument from me there. But that's not a long term solution in the sense that your body isn't getting to kill weakened viruses and store that information for later use. That's what vaccines are valuable.

If we are just treating sickness instead of preventing it from happening in the first place then we are only profiting from those in misery. But that doesn't mean that vaccines don't have a place, and that they don't work.

To be Immuno compromised means that your immune system is not as strong, it still works just fine it's just weakened. Vaccines make it so that a weak immune system can overcome a virus that would normally be to strong for the bodys defenses.

That is why they are valuable, and still work for people who are compromised.

I'm never going to argue against the fact that big pharma is taking advantage of the situation, that is a fact. but that does not mean that vaccines don't save lives, and that they are not valuable to humanity.