AP Baby

My first post...

It's so sad that anytime rich people TRY to do something good, they are reviled for it. Madonna, Bill Gates, whoever. Meanwhile if they DON'T try to do something good, people revile them for that as well, for being so selfish.

Bill Gates is a lot of things, but I don't believe he is evil, much less trying to SPREAD AUTISM TO AFRICA. What a strange thing to say. What a horrible worldview it must be to be putting such malice into someone. Bill and Melinda are in a word, mainstream. The mainstream view is that vaccines are good.

Anyways, doesn't ANYONE here think that the vaccination situation IS actually different in third world countries which do not have access to the level of cleanliness and medical care, not to mention FOOD, that we do? One of the arguments I continually read on these boards in reference to vaccines is that many of these diseases are only prevalent in areas where cleanliness, medical care, clean water, and adequate food supply are an issue. In a nutshell, third world countries!

So anyways if you DO believe that vaccines are horrible, do you weigh the risks for a child of getting a disease, say something like measles, in a tiny African village with no food, no water, no resources, vs. the amount of mercury in the vaccine? And anyways, does anyone know for A FACT that the vaccines the Gates' are helping distribute DO contain mercury? Seems odd that they'd be taking the mercury out of vaccines here and continuing to use it for vaccines for other countries.

Bill Gates has so much money he can literally throw hundreds of millions of dollars at the needy, without ever feeling it. The idea that he'd be maliciously targeting children to make more money is... I'm sorry, I just find it utterly outrageous. There's really no benefit in it for him. And it's sad to see such a depth of evil attributed to him and his wife. He could just... yanno, KEEP his money and make MORE profit just from the interest it earns him! He no longer needs to DO ANYTHING to make more money than he, his children, his grandchildren, his entire extended family, COULD EVER SPEND.

Those of you objecting to his donating computers; now I am part of the universe who comes from the MAC realm and I believe Bill nabbed Apples GUI and ran with it, and I also believe that Microsoft does in some ways want to take over the world. However the reality (she says, typing on her mac!) is that PC's HAVE taken over the world and for you to be successful in the world now you have to know how to use them. So taking computers AWAY from children isn't doing them any favors. Does he plan for them to be Microsoft users when they grow up? Of course. But.. they are going to be either way, unless there is some huge seismic shift in the world of computers!

I don't know Bill Gates or care about him personally, just hate the attitude that any time a rich person tries to be benevolent, they must have "sinister" motivations. I've spent plenty of time making "evil" Bill Gates jokes throughout my life. But I could never have imagined people would think he would deliberately cause children to become autistic or DIE. I mean... he's just a really smart geek!

I'd also love to see people actually posting links that prove their statements instead of doing what amounts to very malicious gossip.

My second post, and the quotes I'm responding to...

"Also he is leaving only a fraction of his wealth to his children when he dies."

Yes, and you think this is good or bad??? I wasn't sure from what you posted. A fraction will be enough to care for them for life; plus, he wants them to make their own way and not rest on his laurels. A sentiment I'd think most people would applaud, vs. denigrate.

"While I see your point and think it is valid why would you assume that someone who stole another person's product and then monopolized the market is a trustworthy person?"

Well, I don't *really* think he stole it anymore than Apple stole it from Xerox, which is where the original desktop idea came from. He's just a really good businessman. Really, really, scary good. And this is not about his being TRUSTWORTHY. It's about whether or not he is maliciously plotting to kill babies, which is what many of these posts are saying. Surely there is some kind of middle ground between someone you'd find trustworthy enough to babysit your children, and someone you'd applaud for making a global effort to help needy children?

"But no, I don't think that vaccinations work any better in third world countries than they do here. They are the SAME vaccinations."

Ok, well, here we just don't see eye to eye. I have never seen any proof that vaccines don't actually vaccinate against diseases. I've seen lots of people say it is true all over the internet. I've seen people point to better water and other things, which of course are important. But a study showing that all vaccines are ineffective and don't work? I haven't seen it. I'm still looking. That vaccines have side effects, yes, that I've seen and won't argue.

"It is a fact and why does it seem odd to you that they are using mercury-laced MULTI-DOSE vaccines in third world countries? They want to vaccinate the most number of people and as cheaply as possible - that means multi-dose vials."

It seems agreed that most vaccines (flu being the exception) being produced now do not contain thimerosal. Not since about 2003. I continually see discussion about leftover batches still having it... but I can't believe there are THAT many still left over now! Or that big pharma would find it profitable to deliberately keep mercury in ONLY for use in Third World countries. Just seems wierd to me. But if it is a fact, surely you can back it up with some kind of proof instead of just saying "It is fact!"

It's funny how everyone is so sure of themselves but not one person has a link or any proof whatsoever about any of this... and honestly this is, to me, what makes the mainstream look at the philosophies espoused here and go right back to being mainstream. Bill Gates killing babies to make money he doesn't need? I'm sorry, that is illogical and more than a little paranoid.

Here's a link from the Gates foundation showing some FEW of the initiatives this foundation is involved in.

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/GlobalHealth/Pri_Diseases/default.htm

Here's them giving $46 million to a nonprofit organization to fight diarrheoa.

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/001200611010908.htm

Here's $287 million for HIV/AIDS research (I know, some MDCers don't believe it exists...I disagree.)

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003139170_aids20m.html

"Traditionally, most vaccine studies are conducted in individual labs, or among small groups of colleagues, McElrath said. Data are often kept secret until publication, to gain advantage over competitors.

The Gates recipients — including some drug companies — all agreed to share information promptly with everyone else in the program and the wider science community. Individuals can patent breakthroughs, but each signed a contract pledging that any vaccines developed through the collaboration will be sold cheaply in Africa and other developing regions, where the epidemic is most intense."

ie: The Gates foundation set this up so as to be LESS profitable for the scientists and all involved.

Here's another article...

"So Gates has launched a revolution in international health. It starts with his unprecedented private investment in vaccines. But its long-term goal is nothing less than shattering the cycle of disease and poverty by eradicating illnesses, finding new vaccines for old health scourges, helping governments improve basic services such as clean water, and giving developing nations financial incentives to improve the health of their people."

To me it seems the problem is this... if you believe vaccines are bad, you assume Bill Gates must be bad. But, seriously... most people here should be aware that the VAST majority of the WORLD believe vaccines are GOOD. Whether rightly or wrongly (debate for another day). So why would the assumption that he is trying to do BAD by providing vaccines make sense? It doesn't.

As for clean water, they are working on that too...

"The fight against Guinea worm is about as low-tech as it could be. The goal is making sure people don’t drink contaminated water, which can mean building wells to protect water at its source, treating water to kill the fleas that carry the larvae, or filtering the water. One of the most effective tools is this little gadget.

It’s called a pipe filter, but it looks like a piece of jewelry, and it acts like a portable water purification plant. It’s not much more than a fancy straw, but it has a fine screen here at the bottom that filters out fleas. With a pipe filter, anyone can drink from any water source, and it’s safe. "

"One must also listen to the voice of an impoverished mother of five say that it was at an AMREF clinic that she and her husband learned that their sick two-year-old was malnourished because she’d taken him off breast milk so she could feed his infant brother. "

Man I never thought I'd see the day when I'd be defending Bill Gates so vehemently. But honestly, if you are going to say something like that about someone (they want to deliberately kill babies to make money) it should have some basis in a verifiable fact somewhere down the line. Maybe it's the journalist in me, but I need PROOF.

BTW the Gates foundation involves more than just vaccines, look through their website to see all the many, many different things they are trying to do. Or google it. There is tons of info about them out there.