Important new info regarding Autism & Vaccines
Cece00 wrote: I thought this was pretty important, wanted to share...
http://www.nbc11.com/family/15000784/detail.html
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jq0InE_..._I_rEAD8U2KASO1
Hillbilly Housewife replied:
Duh. People started spacing out their kids vax due to the threat in the vax... yet at the same time that whole crap about stronger flu came up..so more people got the flu shot for their kids.
So DUH, of course there was no drop, thimerisol was taken out of one but put in the other. 
Cece00 replied:
Actually, a lot of ppl dont get flu shots for their kids or themselves. I would say a good percentage of ppl I know regularily dont get them.
I wish I had actual numbers but I would bet that the percentage of ppl who got those vax's without mercury compared to the number of ppl who got flu vax's with mercury (btw, you ARE aware that not all flu vax's HAVE mercury, right???) is a lot higher, so still showing that vaccines dont cause autism.
Did you read the other link?
ETA, from the CDC
>>Yes, the majority of influenza vaccines distributed in the United States currently contain thimerosal as a preservative. However, some contain only trace amounts of thimerosal and are considered by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to be preservative-free. Manufacturers of preservative-free flu vaccine use thimerosal early in the manufacturing process. The thimerosal gets diluted as the vaccine goes through the steps in processing. By the end of the manufacturing process there is not enough thimerosal left in the vaccine to act as a preservative and the vaccine is labeled "preservative-free".
>>Today, all routinely recommended licensed pediatric vaccines that are currently being manufactured for the U.S. market, with the exception of influenza vaccine, contain no thimerosal or only trace amounts. Thimerosal preservative-free influenza vaccines are available, but in limited quantities. The total amount of inactivated influenza vaccine available without thimerosal as a preservative will continue to increase as manufacturing capabilities are expanded.
Here, the whole link, you can read for yourself if you are interested
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/thimerosal.htm
MommyToAshley replied: Thanks for posting, both articles were a pretty interesting read. I can understand why a lot of people think vaccinations are/were related to autisim since the signs usually develop around the same time that vaccinations are given. But, I hope they can really nail down more scientific proof that it is genetic because then maybe more people will vaccinate. I'm also glad some of these parents are finally getting some answers.
Birth really is a miracle. One little misplaced or duplicated gene on a chromosome can make a big difference. It doesn't surprise me that genetics is a major factor. Downs is also associated with chromosome 16. Joshua's condition was due to an extra chromosome 18. If one little chromosome created a condition that is "not compatible with life", then I have no doubt genetics is involved in autism.
On another note, I am not sad that they took thimerosal out of the shots. Even though it may not be linked to autism, it's probably not the best thing to put in our babies.
Thanks for posting!
Hillbilly Housewife replied: I'm reading the 2nd one now. Yeah, i'm aware they don't all have the mercury derivative... just the way they said it in the article was like... ppl stopped using one, but are using the other... and there has been no drop...
It's all bogus anyways... it's probably more due to something else rather than the thimerisol. Of course, not saying it CAN'T be the cause... but not at 1 \ 150 kids.
Kentuckychick replied:
Well... I've never believed it to be the only cause -- yes I believe there's some link, but for people to think the disease will simply dissappear with the ban of these vaccinations... crazy.
-- edited to add - I wonder more about the theory that the vaccinations in a child with autism spark the autism because of the changes they cause in the body. There's the theory that a child with autism typically begins to show symptoms after an injury, physical illness, hospital stay, or doctor's visit (ie; vaccinations) and that something about the stress on the body is what makes the child get worse so quickly.
Hillbilly Housewife replied:
Good call ... lol
I typed that and posted it before I was done the 1st sentence of the 2nd article. 
Cece00 replied:
I agree, I'm glad they took it out.
BUT, I hope more ppl will vaccinate & not be scared of autism since there is NO proof that they are linked, and now looks like there is proof that they ARE NOT linked.
I think they need to stop with all the "vaccines cause autism!" studies so they can find the REAL reason kids are getting this horrible disease, which I believe is gene linked & could possibly be fixed in a lot of children via gene therapy.
coasterqueen replied:
I think definitely think it's possible that it's gene linked, but why are the cases so much higher than they used to be? So if it's gene linked is there some mutation going on -- could it be environmental factors, etc causing this to happen? I never believed that the mercury in vax was the sole reason for autism, but I think there are numerous factors possibly involved -- genetic, mercury in vax, as well as a whole number of environmental factors.
Just like with cancer -- it's not just genetics, because one smokes cigarettes, etc -- they are a lot of environmental factors that I think are involved that are completely ignored -- factors such as all the chemicals in our food and water sources, etc.
boyohboyohboy replied:
a lot of the reason, why some of us do not vaccinate or change the way we vaccinate is not just the threat of the thimerasol, it was also due to the facts that some kids are not tolerating the other components of the shots..
or the combination of shots.
there is no disputing that something is definetely coming of these shots..
just ask some of the poor parents of the kids who had the adverse effects.
i dont think its just the vaccinations in the case of autism, but i do feel it needs further studies.
as do all the vaccines.
MommyToAshley replied:
You're right... there could be some kind of trigger. But I personally think the main reason is that we now have a broader definition of autisim and children are diagnosed at a much earlier age. Someone that is mildly autistic that functions in school and society is now classified in that 1/150. If you met them, you'd probably not even they were diagnosed as autistic. When we hear the word autistic, we think of the most extreme cases, but that's not what is being reported in the statistics. So, I am not so sure it is on an incline as much as we have broadened our definition and more cases are being reported.
mommy~to~a~bunch replied: I still won't be vaxing my kids, this does NOT change my stance on vaxes at ALL. The main focus is on mercury, but what about aluminum, and all the other crap in them? What effect does that have on kids?
And if you look at the handful of vaxes we got when we were little, over a span of 5 years, to what is given now, there HAS to be SOMETHING that is causing ND's (neurological disorders) in children.
A&A'smommy replied: I plan on spacing out vax for Autumn I just can't understand WHY they want to put SOO much into their little bodies at one time it CAN'T be healthy. Yes i think people should vaccinate because otherwise if no one did we would have more deaths from polio ect... anyway I don't think the sole reason for Autism is vax but I do think they are some sort of 'trigger"
A&A'smommy replied:
I completly agree it just can't be good for their little bodies!!
Cece00 replied:
I agree with you. I think the reason it seems like so many children have autism or asd these days is b/c they lump those kids you would NEVER know have that or that wouldve been diagnosed with something else in the past, in that 1/150.
mommy~to~a~bunch replied: http://www.generationrescue.org/pdf/070626.pdf
http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/529621
Read these links & tell me you would still vax.
My3LilMonkeys replied:
Based specifically on those 2 links, yes, I would. They wouldn't even sway my mind the tiniest bit.
Why? Neither of them offer ANY proof of what they are claiming. The first one does provide a website for more information, but I'm too lazy to read the whole website.
ITA with the others who have said autism is up because of the broader definition. The same is true for ADHD, which is referenced in your link. 30 years ago most people hadn't heard of ADHD now it seems like every child that's a little over active gets labeled with it.
boyohboyohboy replied: i do agree we seem to live in a society that needs to name each and every little behavior. that said though, I am finding more and more real mom's in every day life and contact that tell stories of their kids being "different" or harmed shortly after recieving something in the vax.
I myself do a delayed vax schedule. but even that i am not so comfortable with. i guess i am just as afraid not to, as to....
i took the new study to mean, that they feel more confident that the thimerisol was not the primary cause of autism in the kids, or the rise of it in the kids...but i myself in my own belief feel that there are some kids who just do not handle them right, and its not a shot that should be one size fits all.
the kids with different immune systems, or different sensativies just dont seem to be able to handle these vax. I think there are far more reasons to do more studies on it, then to just lable it as one thing causes it..it could be a combo of issues including the vax.
and i see nothing wrong with the ones who decide to do it and the ones who dont.
it seems more and more people are opting not to do it.
mommy~to~a~bunch replied: I guess seeing the actual statistics from the CDC that the VAX killed MORE than the actual disease really says something.
Calimama replied:
Can you post those?
Anthony275 replied:
this is so true...my mom has been feeding me pills for adhd for about 7 years now and i grew out of all the symptoms..kinda makes me wonder if i even did have it to begin with?
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
Calimama replied:
Is that from the ACTUAL CDC site?
My3LilMonkeys replied:
Without doing any research at all , I would say many of these statistics are true largely because so much of the population gets the vaccines has caused the diseases to be at least partially wiped out in our country. The % of people vaccinated vs. unvaccinated (and therefore likely to contract the disease) would be useful in putting these numbers into perspective.
Edited to clarify that this is my unreasearched opinion - I"m too lazy to try and back it up with anything. 
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
But if vaxes WORKED, no one would get sick, RIGHT  ?!? If everyone is getting vaxed, and people are still getting sick AND dying, what is the point?
My3LilMonkeys replied:
The point is to have LESS people getting sick and dying. Just like everything else, no one solution works for every person. Taking 2 Tylenol to stop a headache works for me, but not my DH. It would be impossible to create a vax that works exactly the same and exactly the way it's designed to for every single person who takes it since everyone's chemistry is different.
Boo&BugsMom replied: This is one thing I've always been on the fence about.  I do not trust the F&D Administration much though. They could say the sky is blue and I'd probably argue it. I'm still in the middle though. And seeing numbers posted on a website doesn't sway me either, as anyone could just type of numbers and pose it as "evidence"...especially when they do not give thorough or accurate sources.
My3LilMonkeys replied:
Granted, the CDC website is HUGE....but about 15 minutes of various search combinations turned up no statistics on deaths from vaccinations at all.
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
So why vax at all then? If the chances of it working are so slim, why bother?
Calimama replied:
I couldn't find anything either.. the only facts I could find were on biased websites.. and ones that didn't look very legit.
Boo&BugsMom replied:
Yup. Case in point. *sigh*
My3LilMonkeys replied:
Because in my opinion, the chance isn't slim - it's just not 100%. If the chance were slim, there'd be a lot more people sick or dying from the diseases. Assuming the statistics on your website are correct, 105 people dying from pneuococcus (the highest # of deaths listed there) out of an estimated 300 million people living in the US is .000035% of the population. To me, that's a pretty good number! Even the 4,290 people with "adverse Events" (whatever that means) from Hep B is only .00143%.
boyohboyohboy replied: its like everything else on the internet, there is a case for any point
MommyToAshley replied: I have to agree on both accounts.... I don't trust anything on the web that is not from a trusted source. Anybody can post their opinion and say it is fact. If those numbers come from the CDC, can you provide a link to them on the CDC site?
Also, I agree with the opinion that the number of deaths from these illnesses would be low becuase most people have been vaccinated. However, I read an article not too long ago about an outbreak of polio... and it's most likely due to people not being vaccinated. My biggest fear is that these major illnesses are going to make their way back into our society because people are not getting vaccinated, and hte ones that are going to suffer are the kids that haven't been vaccinated yet and the elderly who may have had their immunity wear off. Of course, this is just my opinion and I doubt that if the study with proof linking autism to genetics isn't going to sway anyone neither is my opinion. I just hope everyone researches both sides of things before making the decision not to vax.
Cece00 replied: Yes, I would. The first one contains no research whatsoever.
The 2nd one doesnt show how many people die from those diseases in countries where vax's arent readily available. Yeah, it shows that nobody died here from measles here in the US in 2002. Guess how many died in other parts of the world in 2006?
36,000 people. And that was DOWN 90% from 200 because of VACCINES.
And we dont see these illnesses in a lot of parts of the world anymore...until the vax rate drops, then they start to resurface.
Thanks, but I'm doing AOK without measles.
You know, its very sad when a few children die from the vaccine. But WITHOUT the vaccine, MANY children will die. Which is worse?
I know a lot of anti vax ppl count on "herd immunity" to protect their children but IMO, that is risking A LOT. You think "Well, everyone ELSE vax's so my kid wont get it" until someone comes into your town carrying measles & spreads it to all those unvax'ed children.
And that will be a true tragedy.
Cece00 replied:
You should look at the statistics for countries that dont have ready access to those same vaccines.
Cece00 replied:
Vaxes DO work. Thats why we dont have thousands of people dying from measles here, like in other parts of the world.
Almost 2000 ppl had REACTIONS (didnt even die...that was only 17 people...and I've still yet to see where its proven this ACTUALLY comes from the CDC, but lets give it the benefit of the doubt & say its true)
How many people HAD the vaccine? Do you have those numbers?
Do you have the numbers of how many people DID NOT get sick from those vaccines and DID NOT die?
Cece00 replied:
Exactly.
Cece00 replied:
I've also searched for them before when I saw her sig and also couldnt find any evidence to back this up.
And I'd like to see statistics for last yr, or the year before, or even the year before that.
And ppl should look up statistics of how many people die from those same diseases in places where they arent getting protection against those diseases.
Cece00 replied:
The fact that children arent dying of measles is evidence of how well they DO work.
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
No, the diseases were already on a decline BEFORE the vaxes were even introduced: http://truthquest2.com/vaccination4.htm .
My3LilMonkeys replied:
Even if it was previously on the decline, the vaccine certainly didn't hurt that. I can't prove it helped, but no one can prove it didn't help either. It's just speculation either way.
And the measles is just one of many things that we vax for. Without doing any research I would bet that not all of those diseases were on the decline before the vax.
redchief replied: Autism is one of five Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDDs).
According to The Autism Society of America, in my opinion the most non-politically or personally motivated group concerned with autism in America today, "Whatever the cause, it is clear that children with autism and PDD are born with the disorder or born with the potential to develop it.". This group was formed by parents of autistic kids and is the largest and best funded group with the primary focus on autism in this country. They are the source of the puzzle ribbons you see on the backs of so many cars.
The documents posted earlier were compiled by fringe groups whose main goals are to foster distrust in government (don't get me wrong, no one distrusts government more than I; just don't use disinformation to do it). A very good friend of mine, in fact my daughter is their babysitter, has an autistic son. They want nothing more than to be able to connect and enjoy their son's growth. He has been vaccinated with non-thimerosal solutions, and has not had flu shots. He is autistic with none of the so-called triggers. Thank heavens they have finally been able to scientifically prove that thimerosal isn't what causes PPDs. Perhaps now we can put all of the money put into studying the nonexistent thimerosal link into trying to find out how to predict, then minimize the occurrences of PPDs in the future.
Most of science has believed for a long time that genetics is the cause of all of the five recognized Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDDs). All of Why is it that so many find it so hard to believe that their children could simply have faults in their neurological wiring? How many of you don't have moles? How many think that everything about yourself is perfect, physically, mentally, intellectually? We all have faults built into us. Autistic children have neurological faults built into them that doesn't allow them to connect with the outside world. Why is it that people must find another cause? Why does it have to be some outside force's fault? Is it because we find it so hard to believe that our act of love and procreation could be flawed?
Cece00 replied:
Personally I dont trust biased sites and I didnt see where they got any of that information...
however, go to the CDC's website and look up the HUNDRED'S of thousands of ppl that havent died since they've been vaccinating over there.
And its literally ON the CDC's website, not on some "pro vax" site that says the CDC says this or that
redchief replied:
I simply couldn't leave this alone. This site was compiled by smart people who think the world is too dumb to investigate or refute their manipulation of data to say what they want it to say. This isn't anything new - it's been done since the beginning of spoken language.
My turn.
First of all... the owner of truthquest2.com is not a doctor or scientist. He's just a Washington State healthfood lover who also believes in homeopathic medicine. Here's one of his other pages. More power to him. Just because it's on the internet doesn't make it fact. Just because facts are on the internet doesn't make them factually presented. That being said, the link referenced above is HIGHLY misleading.
The editorial states that death rates for all of the diseases charted were in decline prior to the introduction of vaccines for each. The editorial credits Australia with the study, but the charts originated at the CDC in the USA, but that's not what's important - it just shows that the editorial is factually flawed and suspect. Death were indeed in decline for all communicable diseases listed prior to vaccine introduction, those are facts. The reasons for this decline were three-fold. One, education played a large part in the declines of death in each case. As the diseases were recognized symptomatically, the medical community worked to educate the public in recognizing early onset of symptoms, thereby getting medical attention sooner and reducing morbidity. Two, medical advances gave doctors more treatment options for these diseases, thus reducing deaths by keeping patient alive long enough for their bodies to fight off the disease from within. Third, and perhaps most important, if you look at the time lines of the decline of all of the listed diseases, you will see that all of those famous diseases experienced rapid decline in the mid-19 teens. This is in direct correlation to modern advances in sanitation and hygiene. Thank your local plumber and civil engineers for much of that.
Now let's look at some of the chart the editorialist has chosen and see how the facts have been twisted to present a narrow view. Typhoid fever (typhus) and Scarlet Fever (streptococcus) are subsets of wider bacteriological groups that have no effective vaccines. Typhus has been eradicated nearly solely because of advances in sanitation. Typhus bacteria live in human feces and contact caused infection. Chlorination and time are it's enemy, and modern sanitation provides both. My grandfather died of typhoid infection. Scarlet Fever is caused by streptococcus bacteria. This is the same bacteria that causes strep throat and Scarlet Fever is late onset of this infection. Antibiotic advances are credited with the near eradication of Scarlet Fever.
It is nearly universally accepted that polio, smallpox (not shown because the charts don't look quite the same - vaccination was the obvious reason for the eradication of this deadly disease), and diphtheria have been almost completely eradicated from the planet due to vaccination. Those charts, extrapolated globally, would look much different, with the incidences worldwide, especially in Africa and Asia, remaining much higher until vaccinations were introduced into those areas primarily by the United States.
If you're going to present this argument, it would be much better to analyze the effectiveness of vaccines in the modern world. Take a look at what vaccines have done for bacterial pneumonia (also a strep subset): Decline in Invasive Pneumococcal Disease after the Introduction of Protein–Polysaccharide Conjugate Vaccine
Arguing against vaccinating Heb B floors me. This is a disease without a cure for those infected. It will eventually kill it's victims through liver failure or complications of liver failure.
Vaccines DO work to remove disease from the general populace. It's difficult to see the effects because the effects are nonevents. Everyone must decide for themselves whether or not to vaccinate their children. That's a personal matter. However, what would happen if everyone else in the population decided that vaccines weren't for them? Would you want your child to suffer smallpox? German Measles? Even the less harmful ones like mumps and measles are dangerous to internal organs over time, often causing infertility, especially in older male children who get the diseases. My mother suffers from Post-Polio Syndrome ( Click here for more information on this ), and has pain and her loss of muscle function that grows every day. She wishes the polio vaccine was available to her.
So choose not to vaccinate at your own and your children's peril, but don't brow beat us for vaccinating our kids. Thank us for quite possibly saving your unvaccinated child the pain and suffering that he or she may suffer if they were exposed.
Boo&BugsMom replied: Just want to quickly state, that even though I am on the fence still about the whole debate on a whole...although Crystal and Ed are doing a great job at showing the pro-vaxs side of things  , we do vaccinate our children. We do not do flu or chicken pox though. 
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
I'm not going to thank you for anything redchief. I know the risks, and I am refusing to vax my kids because of those risks.
And no, my children will not perish if they are not vaxed . I know how to keep them healthy. And I REFUSE to inject my children with these ingredients:
http://www.909shot.com/Vaccine%20Excipients%20CDC.pdf
We will have to agree to disagree, because we will NEVER see eye to eye.
My2Beauties replied:
I'd really hate to see what would happen to your children if many parents had your thought process...TBH. I'm not trying to be mean. I'm not saying I'm completely pro-vax, I don't really like the flu vax, I don't believe they should get all those vacs at one time, i'm all about a delayed vax schedule...but to think if everyone thought along these same lines, we'd be living back in the 1800's where smallpox and the like eradicated entire communities  I hope your children are never exposed to any of these horrible diseases. 
holley79 replied: Thanks for the articles.
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
Actually, more & more people are saying no to vaxing. I personally know of 4 other families who don't vax either. And I must say, our kids are MUCH healthier than those who do vax. It is so obvious on playdates. The vaxed ones are CONSTANTLY sick with something or other.
And back in the 1800's things were no where as sanitary as they are today. So knowing what we know now about sanitation and how germs are spread, it is HIGHLY unlikely that my kids would ever catch any of those diseases.
holley79 replied: You said the vax kids are sicker then the non- vax kids?? How is that possible? Annika's play group they are all vaxed and no one is ever sick. Annika has only had one sick baby appointment and it was because of a contact staph infection from me. Common colds are just that and I don't see how that has anything to do with whether a child is vaxed or not. What are the kids sick with? (i'm curious.)
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
Colds, ear infections, one has asthma...stuff like that. What are you saying, that unvaxed kids are germy & contagious? I guess it's because the non-vaxed kids have a whole immune system that hasn't had to fight off all kinds of poisons.
holley79 replied:
Nope I'm not at all. I'm just curious as to what kind of illnesses you are seeing in the vax children who are in your play group. I"m just curious what being vaxed/ unvaxed has to do with nonvax related illnesses. (ie colds, ear infections, ect.) Annika plays with only children, Annika is in a day home as an only child. I chose a private day home where she got one on one so she wasn't exposed to the runny noses. I would not keep Annika from playing with unvaxed children. I just choose to vax her.
My2Beauties replied: Being vaxed has absolutely nothing to do with ear infections and the common cold. FWIW, Hanna is never ever sick, she had to go to the doctor for the first time (sick appt.) in over 2 years the other day, and she is in daycare so don't even go there with me. 
MommyToAshley replied: There isn't enough evidence one way or another to say vaccinated kids are more/less healthy than non-vaccinated kids when you are talking about a playgroup of six people. There's too many other factors that are probably common to narrow it down to vaccinations. It may be your opinion and you are entitled ot have your own opinion, but you can't really draw a conclusion based on 6 kids in a playgroup. Ashley had her vaccines on schedule and I can count on one hand the number times she's been sick. She's never had an ear infection, strep, or any other major illness. She's had a cold here or there, but again she is 5 years old and she is almost never sick. Her file at the doctor's consists of her well-baby check-ups and one a visit due to a fall. Her ped said she is a really healthy child.
holley79 replied: It's funny you say that about Ashley's chart. Annika's pedi was talking about how she can pull up Annika history on her laptop and not have to scroll one way or the other. 
3_call_me_mama replied:
Not everyoen who doesn't vaccinate is afraid of autism. there is SO much other junk in vaccines that thermisol is just the tip of the iceberg.
Things that wre never intended to be injected into peoples bodies are in all sorts of vaccines. . Autism is the farthest thought from several people's mind whne they decline vaccines. I know it wasn't even CLOSE to teh top of my reasons not to . Almost Losing a child to a vax reaction and watching a friend bury theirs after a vax reaction adn watch another friend go through 2 years of rehab to get their child back to a functioning level of a 3-4 year old (their 7 year old who was perfectly normal until he recieved his 5 year mmr booster) child due to a severe vax reaction were way in front of any autism risk. but that's just me.
Boo&BugsMom replied:
Exactly! Vaxs are only for the diseases intended to guard against, and only specific strains of that particular illness. Vaccinations have nothing to do with whether a child is "sicker" than the next.
Tanner has been vaxed for nearly everything other than flu (we don't do those). He use to get sick a lot when he as younger, but that was because he was in daycare. Daycare is a breeding ground for germs, and kids are as well in general because of their immature immune systems. Since Tanner has been home with me since the age of 2 he has rarely ever gotten ill. Even a flu that went around my home, Tanner didn't even get it when everyone else was throwing up. None of that has to do with vaccinations.
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
I think vaxes and the immune system are directly linked, and that vaxes can cause problems, making SOME kids more susceptible to illnesses than others.
Boo&BugsMom replied:
I agree that could be a possibility in some kids, but I also don't see concrete evidence yet to fully believe this 100%.
My2Beauties replied:
Question....where did you get your PhD from?
redchief replied: I stand on the numbers, which say that vaccinations work. I must agree with one point, advances in sanitation and technology have definitely made a difference in how healthy the general populace is. It is almost, and I admit that the line of thought is not universal, but almost certain that vaccinations rendering most of the world's population immune to those old diseases has definitely made it highly improbable that there could be an epidemic outbreak of them.
My question is, in the event of pandemic of SARS or bird flu, will you be so high and mighty. My bet is that almost everyone will be fighting for vaccination as soon as one is available. I know I'll be there. So tell me, you who shake your finger at those of us who choose to boost our children's immune systems with vaccines, what will you do in the event of a pandemic of avian flu?
PrairieMom replied: I haven't read all the responses here I would be here all night trying to wade through it all, I skimmed through. One thing i didn't see mentioned was who is funding this studies you are reading?
Do you really think that a government agency is going to release a study that says vax are linked to autism? Vax are made by pharmaceutical companies. and where do you think the vast majority of lobbyist are from? Not to mention, if they could prove a link, all the ticked off parents that would be sueing those companies? its not going to happen.
Up until the recent past I vax in schedule, I have now started delaying them, but my children will be getting most of them. We did not do the flu shot even tho it was very strongly encouraged for me to get it, and even tho I am at a very high risk of getting the flu, (due to my job). IMO, the flu vax is just not that necessary.
Cece00 replied:
Prove that kids that are not vaccinated are healthier than kids who are.
I have kids who RARELY get sick. I RARELY get sick. My husband almost NEVER gets sick. Most people I know have kids who rarely get sick and are vaccinated.
So please prove how that is true and not just something imagined by you.
ETA: My youngest son caught the CP @ THREE WEEKS OLD from my daughter, who caught it @ 11 months old from a child who WAS NOT VACCINATED against the CP. So yeah, unvaccinated kids carry germs around...like CP. Oh, and my older 2 boys who were vaccinated did not get it from their sister, cause they were, uh, vaccinated.
And if you think its fun having a 3 week old with CP, you are WRONG.
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
I just stated a personal observation, and my friends & I have discussed it a lot and have come to the same conclusions. We'll believe what we want, you believe what you want. It wasn't imagined either, the proof was right there .
gr33n3y3z replied:
I couldnt have said it better Ed
Cece00 replied:
Except a couple of kids in a playgroup out of millions of children worldwide dont prove a single thing
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
Nope, I would NOT be getting any vaxes for the avian flu for my kids, myself, or my DH either. And I can't see how you are boosting your children's immune systems by contaminating it with KNOWN poisons and bodily extracts from dead babies and animals.
redchief replied:
It's my understanding that slander is still against the law. THAT is a slanderous statement (against the vaccine manufacturers). Keep that kind of nonsense up and you just might find yourself in a libel suit against a company that spends more on coffee break than you make in an entire career. Stop with the rhetoric and outright lies! There is no dead baby anything in vaccines.
Poisons? That's more rhetoric. Anything can be poisonous to the body in quantities beyond those which the human body can handle within it's systems. Even pure water can kill you.
When this thread began as an intelligent debate I was all for it. At this point your desperation has kicked in and the nonsense is spewing forth. I am personally sorry you would refuse to have your children vaccinated in the event of a pandemic. I can only hope the kids can understand... after all, you only have their best interests at heart.
I have my children's best interest at heart as well, and feel secure in the knowledge that I have done what is right for them, and in doing so, what is right for society as a whole.
mommy~to~a~bunch replied:
You are WRONG. AGAIN .
Like I said before, you believe what YOU want, I'll believe what I want. You can poison your kids, mine will be fine.
This is my last post in this thread.
Calimama replied:
Is that really needed? I don't think is the first comment I've seen from you to that extent. It's one thing to DISAGREE with someone because of their choices, it's another to DISRESPECT someone because of their choices. Makes me think twice about being here.
redchief replied: Technically, I stand corrected. However, the only link left from the cells extracted from those fetuses that is left is lineage. But like I said, I stand corrected. Everything I'd read up to that last website (which by the way, I found to be extremely informative) was carefully worded to avoid stating that aborted fetuses were used to start the cell line. However, what you said was, "...bodily extracts from dead babies...." The problem with this is that you infer that this is a current and ongoing practice, when in fact, the diploid cell cultures that the vax manufacturers have without exception, been growing in a laboratory without harming any humans. The lineage is there, but aborted fetuses are not being used anymore, and have not for nearly 40 years.
Now if all of the sites you posted were so mainstream and well-researched as that one....
Kentuckychick replied:
Up until now I haven't said anything and I want it to be noted that I respect the right of any parent to decide their own course of action regarding vaccinations and I respect your decision not to vaccinate.
It was the last sentence there that really got to me.
I was actually aware of what was in the vaccinations (reproduced cells that were originally taken from aborted fetuses) and it does not sway my mind to not vaccinate. I have family members who have donated organs. I met a woman who donated her son's heart, lungs, and corneas after a tragic accident. My brother is able to walk around normally because he has a part of a dead man's knee in his body.
I will not say whether or not I agree with abortion because it's beside the point. I see it as this; those three babies/fetuses did not get a chance at life. For whatever reason their mothers decided to abort them. But something came from their deaths. Who knows how many children have lived because of those vaccines created in part from their bodies (probably 100's of 1000's).
Those same sorts of cells and poisons have been used to cure cancers and make advances in medicine beyond the comprehension of anyone who hasn't walked a mile in a patient's shoes.
It's easy to be the one on the outside looking in. Don't take your decision not to vaccinate so lightly. Try having a child suffering from neuroblastoma. Try having a child that you HAVE to pump poisons into daily or that child WILL die. Just be thankful you have a choice to make.
And give those "dead babies" a little credit.
It's disgusting that people argue over this sort of thing -- isn't parenthood full of hard enough decisions without having to worry about putting each other down??
Cece00 replied:
Some people can not make an argument without resorting to that sort of business.
I dohope for her that her kids never have to suffer any of those illnesses. They are innocent in this and I hope they arent exposed, for they will be left vulnerable.
Cece00 replied:
That is so true.
Those cells have saved MILLIONS of lives....hundreds of thousands in just the past few years in places like Africa, where the measles rate dropped by 90% due to vaccinations from 2000-2006. Thank goodness for the people who had their heads on straight enough to make that happen for countries where people die daily from preventable illness....it seems that is taken for granted here.
My husband's life was saved from "poisons" being pumped into his body- chemotherapy. We would be willing to do it again if he got cancer a second time or if I got cancer or if my children got cancer.
Are you against westernized medicine as well? Would you not give your children chemotherapy if they developed cancer?????
Cece00 replied: A good link from the CDC- DIRECTLY from the CDC
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/6misho...easeshadalready
Has info like:
Following are six misconceptions that appear in literature about vaccination, along with explanations of why they are misconceptions.
Diseases had already begun to disappear before vaccines were introduced, because of better hygiene and sanitation.
The majority of people who get a disease have been vaccinated.
There are "hot lots" of vaccine that have been associated with more adverse events and deaths than others.
Vaccines cause many harmful side effects, illnesses, and even death.
Vaccine-preventable diseases have been virtually eliminated from the United States.
Giving a child multiple vaccinations for different diseases at the same time increases the risk of harmful side effects and can overload the immune system.
Graph that show REAL numbers for measles decline due to vax, etc.
>>Vaccines cause many harmful side effects, illnesses, and even death - not to mention possible long-term effects we don't even know about.
Vaccines are actually very safe, despite implications to the contrary in many anti-vaccine publications (which sometimes contain the number of reports received by VAERS, and allow the reader to infer that all of them represent genuine vaccine side-effects). Most vaccine adverse events are minor and temporary, such as a sore arm or mild fever. These can often be controlled by taking acetaminophen before or after vaccination. More serious adverse events occur rarely (on the order of one per thousands to one per millions of doses), and some are so rare that risk cannot be accurately assessed. As for vaccines causing death, again so few deaths can plausibly be attributed to vaccines that it is hard to assess the risk statistically. Of all deaths reported to VAERS between 1990 and 1992, only one is believed to be even possibly associated with a vaccine. Each death reported to VAERS is thoroughly examined to ensure that it is not related to a new vaccine-related problem, but little or no evidence suggests that vaccines have contributed to any of the reported deaths. The Institute of Medicine in its 1994 report states that the risk of death from vaccines is "extraordinarily low."
>>>Vaccine-preventable diseases have been virtually eliminated from the United States, so there is no need for my child to be vaccinated.
It's true that vaccination has enabled us to reduce most vaccine-preventable diseases to very low levels in the United States. However, some of them are still quite prevalent - even epidemic - in other parts of the world. Travelers can unknowingly bring these diseases into the United States, and if we were not protected by vaccinations these diseases could quickly spread throughout the population, causing epidemics here. At the same time, the relatively few cases we currently have in the U.S. could very quickly become tens or hundreds of thousands of cases without the protection we get from vaccines.
>>The second reason to get vaccinated is to protect those around us. A small number of persons cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons such as a severe allergy to vaccine components, and a small percentage simply do not respond to vaccines. These persons are susceptible to disease, and their only hope of protection is that people around them have been successfully vaccinated and cannot pass disease along to them. A successful vaccination program, like a successful society, depends on the cooperation of every individual to ensure the good for all. We would think it irresponsible of a driver to ignore all traffic regulations on the presumption that other drivers will watch out for him or her. In the same way, we shouldn't rely on people around us to stop the spread of disease if we ourselves can be vaccinated. We must all do what we can.
Nina J replied: Polio may soon be totally eraticated from this world thanks to vaccinations. For me, to know that an injection could and probably will ridthe world of a disease that is tragic and debilitating, is enough for me to say yes to vaccinations. My Aunt's leg has not grown since she was 8 years old because of polio. She has worn a brace so she can move her leg for decades. I can't imagine having to fiddle with a metal hinge every time you want to bend your knee. Thats what shes dealt with since she was a little girl. A needle could've prevented it. I have read people who have had experiences with the negative side of vaccinations, but my experience with the negative side of the diseases they prevent is enough for me to go ahead despite the risks. Everything has risks.
|
