20 hours ago, johng said:

Great lets see independent transparent placebo controlled trials for all 'vaccines' and medication.

Sure great let measles continue to spread and other diseases flourish……meanwhile we have a cartoon president taking advice from another trustfund baby who’s major qualification is collecting road kill has a brain worm was a heron addict…..sleeps through the announcement…..what could possibly go wrong…other than killing more Americans.pathetic.

2 hours ago, Tug said:

Sure great let measles continue to spread and other diseases flourish……meanwhile we have a cartoon president taking advice from another trustfund baby who’s major qualification is collecting road kill has a brain worm was a heron addict…..sleeps through the announcement…..what could possibly go wrong…other than killing more Americans.pathetic.

Measles is not a disease. It is not contagious. It is not caused by a virus.

What is it: A set of symptoms announcing the detoxification of the body. Perfectly natural occurrence; especially with youngsters.

8 hours ago, xylophone said:

So I believe in them and the science wholeheartedly

Just because you 'believe' in something doesn't mean its true 😋

11 minutes ago, johng said:

Just because you 'believe' in something doesn't mean its true 😋

It's ok that you don't accept science.

It's not ok that you think you are a scientist. You are clearly not.

On 8/10/2026 at 10:34 PM, Emdog said:

The depth and breadth of this guy's willful ignorance reaches new heights with each passing day

tell us how, doc.

none of you can. you will just copy and paste something.

7 minutes ago, Schoggibueb said:

It's ok that you don't accept science.

It's not ok that you think you are a scientist. You are clearly not.

I guess you are talking medical science in your post Sir? If you are, them I'll inform you that MOST medical science is nothing but quackery; plain and simple.

As I've often stated - in fact last time only 20 minutes ago - there is just a handful of things that make us ill/sick. The medical industry would have up s believe there are thousands. Their view is not science. It's fraudulent nonsense.

Understand nature. Understand oneself.

6 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Measles is not a disease. It is not contagious. It is not caused by a virus.

What is it: A set of symptoms announcing the detoxification of the body. Perfectly natural occurrence; especially with youngsters.

So van Leeuwenhoek was wrong. I guess you are an adherent of the Miasma Theory.

Another mother's mistake to add to the <deleted> list.

On 8/11/2026 at 9:34 AM, Emdog said:

The depth and breadth of this guy's willful ignorance reaches new heights with each passing day

'Let him, who has never had a stupid thought, or done a stupid deed, rule the world of k!ngs.'

The biggest danger to truth is apathy and ignorance.

5 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

So van Leeuwenhoek was wrong. I guess you are an adherent of the Miasma Theory.

Another mother's mistake to add to the <deleted> list.

I researched Van Leeuwenhoek during my medical Uni days 50+ years ago. Not thought much about him since.

He did break new ground when he started talking microbes. It was commonly thought then, and it stayed that way for another 200 years or so, that the the body was inert, and had to keep so, if it was to remain healthy. He did challenge that thinking. Did he make any headway? I don'tknow.

As for the 'Miasma Theory'; eras of what might have been called 'The Plague' had reports of 'noxious air' at the same time. Could I refer you to the book:

What really makes you ill --- by Dawn Lester and David Parker. They dive into this impressively.

Edited August 12Aug 12 by Stiddle Mump

58 minutes ago, Schoggibueb said:

It's not ok that you think you are a scientist.

when did I claim to be a scientist ?

3 hours ago, johng said:

when did I claim to be a scientist ?

Since you view yourself as more intelligent than established science, and were best in physics and math (by your own account), you must be something of a super-scientist.

Other people who don't deny science like you do would possibly think you're a weirdo.

Edited August 12Aug 12 by Schoggibueb
typo

You are the weirdo, hallucinating about things I've never said.

Trump and Kennedy are going to be responaible for millions of deaths.....

https://scontent.flhr10-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.99422-6/780505092_3604575993056902_667233443579361635_n.png?stp=dst-jpg_tt6&cstp=mx1080x1350&ctp=s1080x1350&_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=29z-evVoi14Q7kNvwEgph4u&_nc_oc=AdoS58AUK-2BSF-7EPyLt0MERz7g3XFe_-E7-g0TejmaSu67eIzHEpnyeio-mOGP0bSvoXc08WWwTIOJSeM36P8y&_nc_zt=14&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr10-1.fna&_nc_gid=R3TnQgxFjQMPQFoRnfkyPQ&_nc_ss=7f2a8&oh=00_AQHlfwKOyGv8DLn-3WGg5VJuJlFf8E80IZUao2X998kaJw&oe=6A8F5A14

2 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Trump and Kennedy are going to be responaible for millions of deaths.....

https://scontent.flhr10-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.99422-6/780505092_3604575993056902_667233443579361635_n.png?stp=dst-jpg_tt6&cstp=mx1080x1350&ctp=s1080x1350&_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=29z-evVoi14Q7kNvwEgph4u&_nc_oc=AdoS58AUK-2BSF-7EPyLt0MERz7g3XFe_-E7-g0TejmaSu67eIzHEpnyeio-mOGP0bSvoXc08WWwTIOJSeM36P8y&_nc_zt=14&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr10-1.fna&_nc_gid=R3TnQgxFjQMPQFoRnfkyPQ&_nc_ss=7f2a8&oh=00_AQHlfwKOyGv8DLn-3WGg5VJuJlFf8E80IZUao2X998kaJw&oe=6A8F5A14

The good thing is, i don't think it can be implemented on short notice.

2 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Trump and Kennedy are going to be responaible for millions of deaths.....

https://scontent.flhr10-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.99422-6/780505092_3604575993056902_667233443579361635_n.png?stp=dst-jpg_tt6&cstp=mx1080x1350&ctp=s1080x1350&_nc_cat=1&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=29z-evVoi14Q7kNvwEgph4u&_nc_oc=AdoS58AUK-2BSF-7EPyLt0MERz7g3XFe_-E7-g0TejmaSu67eIzHEpnyeio-mOGP0bSvoXc08WWwTIOJSeM36P8y&_nc_zt=14&_nc_ht=scontent.flhr10-1.fna&_nc_gid=R3TnQgxFjQMPQFoRnfkyPQ&_nc_ss=7f2a8&oh=00_AQHlfwKOyGv8DLn-3WGg5VJuJlFf8E80IZUao2X998kaJw&oe=6A8F5A14

The Don and Kennedy are only scratching the surface of this evilness.

We - as in the Human Race - must get off our knees and assert our authority, And what is that? Numbers!!!!

I posted this elsewhere, but it applies here equally well. There are some people here to quote of Wolfgang Pauli, "not even wrong" – you simply can't have a rational argument with these people

You can’t debate someone who treats counter-evidence as proof of the cover-up.

Bring a fact? "That's what they want you to think." Show an expert? "They're compromised."

When every single contradiction is automatically swallowed by the theory itself, you aren't playing chess—you're arguing with a self-sealing mirror. You can’t logic someone out of a position they didn't logic themselves into.

There is a rather fundamental point being lost in the argument over childhood vaccination:

Vaccines save lives. Lots of them…

 

We don't have to speculate about this. We have 50 years of real-world data.

A landmark analysis published in The Lancet estimates that global immunisation programmes have saved 154 million lives since 1974. Of those, approximately 146 million were children under five, including 101 million infants under one year old.

 

Routine childhood vaccination now prevents an estimated 3.5–5 million deaths every year.

The researchers estimate that vaccination has contributed to a 40% reduction in global infant mortality. A child under ten today is estimated to have a 40% greater chance of reaching their next birthday than a comparable child would have in a hypothetical world without vaccination.

 

Those aren't opinions. They're the measurable consequences of vaccination programmes.

And look at what the vaccines have actually achieved.

Measles vaccination alone is estimated to have prevented around 94 million deaths. Tetanus, pertussis, tuberculosis and polio vaccines account for millions more lives saved. Yet we increasingly hear that vaccines are somehow unnecessary or that children are better off acquiring these diseases naturally.

 

That isn't what the historical evidence shows. There is another useful reality check: infant mortality.

The United States has a considerably higher infant mortality rate than many other wealthy Western and Northern European countries. There are obviously many factors involved in infant mortality — healthcare access, socioeconomic conditions, maternal health, prematurity and many others — so it would be simplistic to claim vaccination alone explains the difference, but it is nevertheless striking that countries with strong, comprehensive vaccination programmes generally achieve dramatically better childhood health outcomes than societies where vaccination coverage is allowed to deteriorate.

 

COVID provides another example of the consequences of vaccination refusal. During the pandemic, studies repeatedly found substantially higher risks of severe disease and death among unvaccinated people. In some periods and populations, the risk of COVID death among unvaccinated adults was dozens of times higher than among vaccinated people.

 

Vaccines aren't perfect.

They don't eliminate every infection, and no medical intervention is completely risk-free. But demanding that vaccines have zero risk while apparently accepting the much greater risks posed by the diseases themselves is not rational risk assessment.

 

What many people don’t understand is the extraordinary thing about vaccination is not that it is perfect. It is that it works well enough to have changed the survival prospects of entire generations.

 

We have spent decades making childhood diseases less common, less deadly and sometimes almost forgotten.

The danger now is that people who have never seen a child die from measles, polio, diphtheria or whooping cough mistake the absence of those diseases for evidence that the vaccines weren't necessary.

 

That's the vaccination paradox:

The more successful vaccines become, the easier it is to forget why we needed them in the first place.

 

Before dismantling vaccination programmes, perhaps we should remember what the world looked like before they existed.

4 minutes ago, kwilco said:

There is a rather fundamental point being lost in the argument over childhood vaccination:

Vaccines save lives. Lots of them…

 

We don't have to speculate about this. We have 50 years of real-world data.

A landmark analysis published in The Lancet estimates that global immunisation programmes have saved 154 million lives since 1974. Of those, approximately 146 million were children under five, including 101 million infants under one year old.

 

Routine childhood vaccination now prevents an estimated 3.5–5 million deaths every year.

The researchers estimate that vaccination has contributed to a 40% reduction in global infant mortality. A child under ten today is estimated to have a 40% greater chance of reaching their next birthday than a comparable child would have in a hypothetical world without vaccination.

 

Those aren't opinions. They're the measurable consequences of vaccination programmes.

And look at what the vaccines have actually achieved.

Measles vaccination alone is estimated to have prevented around 94 million deaths. Tetanus, pertussis, tuberculosis and polio vaccines account for millions more lives saved. Yet we increasingly hear that vaccines are somehow unnecessary or that children are better off acquiring these diseases naturally.

 

That isn't what the historical evidence shows. There is another useful reality check: infant mortality.

The United States has a considerably higher infant mortality rate than many other wealthy Western and Northern European countries. There are obviously many factors involved in infant mortality — healthcare access, socioeconomic conditions, maternal health, prematurity and many others — so it would be simplistic to claim vaccination alone explains the difference, but it is nevertheless striking that countries with strong, comprehensive vaccination programmes generally achieve dramatically better childhood health outcomes than societies where vaccination coverage is allowed to deteriorate.

 

COVID provides another example of the consequences of vaccination refusal. During the pandemic, studies repeatedly found substantially higher risks of severe disease and death among unvaccinated people. In some periods and populations, the risk of COVID death among unvaccinated adults was dozens of times higher than among vaccinated people.

 

Vaccines aren't perfect.

They don't eliminate every infection, and no medical intervention is completely risk-free. But demanding that vaccines have zero risk while apparently accepting the much greater risks posed by the diseases themselves is not rational risk assessment.

 

What many people don’t understand is the extraordinary thing about vaccination is not that it is perfect. It is that it works well enough to have changed the survival prospects of entire generations.

 

We have spent decades making childhood diseases less common, less deadly and sometimes almost forgotten.

The danger now is that people who have never seen a child die from measles, polio, diphtheria or whooping cough mistake the absence of those diseases for evidence that the vaccines weren't necessary.

 

That's the vaccination paradox:

The more successful vaccines become, the easier it is to forget why we needed them in the first place.

 

Before dismantling vaccination programmes, perhaps we should remember what the world looked like before they existed.

4 minutes ago, kwilco said:

We have 50 years of real-world data.

The biggest load of old nonsense I've read about health on AN. I'll go further; it's Monumental; Humbug. Where on earth did you lift that rubbish from? The CDC? There is NO data what so ever.

You are missing the whole point. What are vaccines for? Understand that and you are halfway to seeing the light.

None so blind as will not see.

2 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

The biggest load of old nonsense I've read about health on AN. I'll go further; it's Monumental; Humbug. Where on earth did you lift that rubbish from? The CDC? There is NO data what so ever.

You are missing the whole point. What are vaccines for? Understand that and you are halfway to seeing the light.

None so blind as will not see.

There you go – what can you say – QED??? See the earlier post - You can’t debate someone who treats counter-evidence as proof of the cover-up.

Bring a fact? "That's what they want you to think." Show an expert? "They're compromised."

When every single contradiction is automatically swallowed by the theory itself, you aren't playing chess—you're arguing with a self-sealing mirror. You can’t logic someone out of a position they didn't logic themselves into.

22 minutes ago, kwilco said:

There you go – what can you say – QED??? See the earlier post - You can’t debate someone who treats counter-evidence as proof of the cover-up.

Bring a fact? "That's what they want you to think." Show an expert? "They're compromised."

When every single contradiction is automatically swallowed by the theory itself, you aren't playing chess—you're arguing with a self-sealing mirror. You can’t logic someone out of a position they didn't logic themselves into.

Must ask you Sir; what are vaccines for? To save you the bother of looking it up; I'll tell you what the white-coat word on the street is. ''To protect individuals from getting sick, and prevent dangerous viruses and bacteria from spreading throughout communities.''

Well, I've got news for the dumb white-coats; and you. There is no such entity as a virus. And there is no such things as 'bad' bacteria. There is also no such thing as disease. Or contagion.

I've already said why we do get ill. Want me to tell you again?

Edited August 22Aug 22 by Stiddle Mump

2 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Must ask you Sir; what are vaccines for? To save you the bother of looking it up; I'll tell you what the white-coat word on the street is. ''To protect individuals from getting sick, and prevent dangerous viruses and bacteria from spreading throughout communities.''

Well, I've got news for the dumb white-coats; and you. There is no such entity as a virus. And there is no such things as 'bad' bacteria. There is also no such thing as disease. Or contagion.

I've already said why we do get ill. Want me to tell you again?

Dear God, I hope you haven't got dependents!

1 hour ago, kwilco said:

Dear God, I hope you haven't got dependents!

Strange world is it not? Instead of asking me why I don't believe in viruses, bad bacteria, contagion or disease, you resond in silly-billy talk.

I'll tell you this Sir; unvaccinated children fare far better that the jabbed up ones. I'll tell you this also; there has never been an experiment in a lab, or anywhere else, that has found a virus. I'll tell you also; contagion is a myth spread by the white-coats.

The person most likely to kill you is your doctor. c/o Dr Vernon Coleman.

Humans must rise up. We have the numbers. We can change things for the better and for the children that follow.

28 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Strange world is it not? Instead of asking me why I don't believe in viruses, bad bacteria, contagion or disease, you resond in silly-billy talk.

I'll tell you this Sir; unvaccinated children fare far better that the jabbed up ones. I'll tell you this also; there has never been an experiment in a lab, or anywhere else, that has found a virus. I'll tell you also; contagion is a myth spread by the white-coats.

The person most likely to kill you is your doctor. c/o Dr Vernon Coleman.

Humans must rise up. We have the numbers. We can change things for the better and for the children that follow.

So why would I want to discuss it with you?

 

You have already declared that viruses don't exist, disease doesn't exist, contagion doesn't exist and “bad” bacteria don't exist. You then dismiss the entire medical profession as “white-coats” and cite Vernon Coleman as an authority.

 

What exactly is there to debate?

You have constructed a position that makes itself impossible to falsify. If scientific evidence contradicts you, the evidence is dismissed. If doctors disagree, they're part of the problem. If millions of observations contradict you, presumably they're all mistaken or part of the conspiracy.

 

That isn't scepticism. It's a belief system designed to make itself immune to evidence.

 

You even claim that “there has never been an experiment in a lab, or anywhere else, that has found a virus” — a statement that can be tested against an enormous body of virology, microscopy, molecular biology, sequencing, cell culture and epidemiological evidence.

 

So here's the problem:

You haven't presented an alternative explanation that survives scrutiny. You've simply declared the entire body of evidence you dislike to be invalid.

You can't debate someone who treats counter-evidence as proof of the conspiracy.

Bring a fact? “That's what they want you to think.”

Show an expert? “They're compromised.”

Show the experimental evidence? “There is no such thing as viruses.”

Show the real-world consequences of infectious disease. “Contagion is a myth.”

 

At that point, we're not having a debate about evidence. (Who is this mysterious “they” BTW?)

 

We're watching a belief system protect itself from evidence.

And I'm really not interested in playing chess with a self-sealing mirror.

If your position cannot be disproved by any possible evidence, it isn't a scientific hypothesis, it's a faith position, and faith is perfectly entitled to exist. But it just shouldn't be masquerading as science.

 

Children die of measles...

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRzBQpKZZTAYvhI2-jAlaJGQOuZdhP_jctUyiwAHAeE8w&s

Edited August 22Aug 22 by kwilco

2 hours ago, kwilco said:

So why would I want to discuss it with you?

 

You have already declared that viruses don't exist, disease doesn't exist, contagion doesn't exist and “bad” bacteria don't exist. You then dismiss the entire medical profession as “white-coats” and cite Vernon Coleman as an authority.

 

What exactly is there to debate?

You have constructed a position that makes itself impossible to falsify. If scientific evidence contradicts you, the evidence is dismissed. If doctors disagree, they're part of the problem. If millions of observations contradict you, presumably they're all mistaken or part of the conspiracy.

 

That isn't scepticism. It's a belief system designed to make itself immune to evidence.

 

You even claim that “there has never been an experiment in a lab, or anywhere else, that has found a virus” — a statement that can be tested against an enormous body of virology, microscopy, molecular biology, sequencing, cell culture and epidemiological evidence.

 

So here's the problem:

You haven't presented an alternative explanation that survives scrutiny. You've simply declared the entire body of evidence you dislike to be invalid.

You can't debate someone who treats counter-evidence as proof of the conspiracy.

Bring a fact? “That's what they want you to think.”

Show an expert? “They're compromised.”

Show the experimental evidence? “There is no such thing as viruses.”

Show the real-world consequences of infectious disease. “Contagion is a myth.”

 

At that point, we're not having a debate about evidence. (Who is this mysterious “they” BTW?)

 

We're watching a belief system protect itself from evidence.

And I'm really not interested in playing chess with a self-sealing mirror.

If your position cannot be disproved by any possible evidence, it isn't a scientific hypothesis, it's a faith position, and faith is perfectly entitled to exist. But it just shouldn't be masquerading as science.

 

I thin k you are doomed attempting to debate with this chap. He's play acting, and role he's picked is as a Moron. I think someone said never go full retard.

5 hours ago, kwilco said:

So why would I want to discuss it with you?

 

You have already declared that viruses don't exist, disease doesn't exist, contagion doesn't exist and “bad” bacteria don't exist. You then dismiss the entire medical profession as “white-coats” and cite Vernon Coleman as an authority.

 

What exactly is there to debate?

You have constructed a position that makes itself impossible to falsify. If scientific evidence contradicts you, the evidence is dismissed. If doctors disagree, they're part of the problem. If millions of observations contradict you, presumably they're all mistaken or part of the conspiracy.

 

That isn't scepticism. It's a belief system designed to make itself immune to evidence.

 

You even claim that “there has never been an experiment in a lab, or anywhere else, that has found a virus” — a statement that can be tested against an enormous body of virology, microscopy, molecular biology, sequencing, cell culture and epidemiological evidence.

 

So here's the problem:

You haven't presented an alternative explanation that survives scrutiny. You've simply declared the entire body of evidence you dislike to be invalid.

You can't debate someone who treats counter-evidence as proof of the conspiracy.

Bring a fact? “That's what they want you to think.”

Show an expert? “They're compromised.”

Show the experimental evidence? “There is no such thing as viruses.”

Show the real-world consequences of infectious disease. “Contagion is a myth.”

 

At that point, we're not having a debate about evidence. (Who is this mysterious “they” BTW?)

 

We're watching a belief system protect itself from evidence.

And I'm really not interested in playing chess with a self-sealing mirror.

If your position cannot be disproved by any possible evidence, it isn't a scientific hypothesis, it's a faith position, and faith is perfectly entitled to exist. But it just shouldn't be masquerading as science.

 

What a ramble! Evidence? There is NO evidence that shows a virus has been isolated and purified.

As for contagion; In Dr D Roytas book, 'Can You Catch A Cold', he lists dozens of experiments - many done by the US Navy - that failed to show that an infected person could pass that infection onto another.

Bacteria are natures 'clean up' agents. Without these beauties we would all soon die. There is no such thing as 'bad bacteria'.

Diseases; the symptoms we experience are the cure. It is the body cleansing itself that shows as symptoms;;; that the white-coats readily call disease.

Vaccinations! This is a giant money making scam. They all, we are told, save lives. In the book 'Dissolving Illusions' it points out that many of the so called diseases were in sharp decline before a vaccine was brought to the market. And often, those jabs, kick-started the problem all over again.

Lastly 'viruses'. The virologists, and other 'ologists, do not attempt to purify any substance obtained from an infected person or animal. Why? Because they can't. And rather than say 'we can't find the virus' they pretend they have the entity, and go through the quite fraudulent process of 'isolating' (which they certainly do not) by growing bacteria, and other entities, on cells from monkeys in petri dishes.

Dr Enders in 1954 developed the 'isolation' method that the 'ologists currently use. However, in his experiments he did another, that ran alongside, but without the gloop/puss from the measles patient. Called a 'control'. And guess what? Both tests yielded the same end result. This is why the lab white-coats do not do controls. It is the procedure itself that gives the desired result. Wouldn't want the cat to get out would they!

So, when we talk of evidence, I have it in abundance. You and your followers have none. If you think you have; show it.

The mighty oak tree was once a tiny acorn that stood its ground.

Edited August 23Aug 23 by Stiddle Mump

On 8/12/2026 at 10:34 AM, Tug said:

Sure great let measles continue to spread and other diseases flourish……meanwhile we have a cartoon president taking advice from another trustfund baby who’s major qualification is collecting road kill has a brain worm was a heron addict…..sleeps through the announcement…..what could possibly go wrong…other than killing more Americans.pathetic.

I don't fully understand this post.

Are you saying The Don is not up to the job? Who is the 'trustfund' baby? Are you implying that measles are hurting US citizens. What are you saying?

Please be more concise Sir.

3 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

I thin k you are doomed attempting to debate with this chap. He's play acting, and role he's picked is as a Moron. I think someone said never go full retard.

Another poster that replies in silly-billy talk.

Debate; why don't you! If you have something worthwhile to say that is.

https://rumble.com/v7du5ta-dr.-sam-bailey-the-future-of-vaccines-what-are-they-good-for-14.06.2022.html?e9s=src_v1_s%2Csrc_v1_s_o&sci=709eefb5-e1df-4143-a298-5556fde63f30

Nature rules.

Edited August 23Aug 23 by Stiddle Mump

How vaccination is recommended by the Department of Health

in Switzerland (BAG)

Key milestones in the first year of life

• 2 months: 6-in-1 vaccine (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, Hib, hepatitis B) and pneumococcal vaccine. Rotavirus vaccine (oral) is also often given optionally.

• 4 months: Second dose of 6-in-1 vaccine and pneumococcal vaccine (plus a second dose of rotavirus vaccine, if applicable).

• 9 months: First dose of MMRV (measles, mumps, rubella, varicella/chickenpox).

• 12 months: Third dose of 6-in-1 vaccine and pneumococcal vaccine, as well as the second dose of MMRV.

Subsequent recommendations and adolescents

• 2 years: Meningococcal vaccination (depending on vaccine recommendations).

• 11 to 14/15 years: Booster shots and additional vaccinations such as HPV (human papillomavirus), diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, and varicella/hepatitis B (if not already administered).

9 minutes ago, Schoggibueb said:

How vaccination is recommended by the Department of Health

in Switzerland (BAG)

Key milestones in the first year of life

• 2 months: 6-in-1 vaccine (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, Hib, hepatitis B) and pneumococcal vaccine. Rotavirus vaccine (oral) is also often given optionally.

• 4 months: Second dose of 6-in-1 vaccine and pneumococcal vaccine (plus a second dose of rotavirus vaccine, if applicable).

• 9 months: First dose of MMRV (measles, mumps, rubella, varicella/chickenpox).

• 12 months: Third dose of 6-in-1 vaccine and pneumococcal vaccine, as well as the second dose of MMRV.

Subsequent recommendations and adolescents

• 2 years: Meningococcal vaccination (depending on vaccine recommendations).

• 11 to 14/15 years: Booster shots and additional vaccinations such as HPV (human papillomavirus), diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis, and varicella/hepatitis B (if not already administered).

Absolute madness! Especially that 6 in 1 one.

Poor kids.

Edited August 23Aug 23 by Stiddle Mump