Top 5 compelling reasons NOT to vaccinate? - Page 3

[Marnica]

[QUOTE=Lauren710;13509134]
if a doctor/scientist has written a book but has not been published extensively in peer-reviewed journals as well, they're most likely a quack. (Not *always*, but this is usually the case in bio/med.) I've yet to find anything really convincing from Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, for example.
QUOTE]

I couldn't disagree more. Just because a doctor that has written on the subject has not been extensively published in a medical journal doesn't mean they do not have something worthwhile to contribute. Dr. Tenpenny's info is easily verifiable. Her material is well documented. If one so chose they could look up/follow up on every single reference she uses.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by Lauren710

As a caveat, books are NOT. double-blind peer-reviewed; if a doctor/scientist has written a book but has not been published extensively in peer-reviewed journals as well, they're most likely a quack. (Not *always*, but this is usually the case in bio/med.) I've yet to find anything really convincing from Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, for example.

These are the quacks IMO, not Dr Tenpenny:

http://www.naturalnews.com/025833.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/025744.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/025852.html

[PaigeC]

Anyway, OP...I say many of the reasons others listed but my "go to" explanation is this (obviously I judge my audience and I tend to hang with "geeky" sci-fi folks since I work for NASA):

Vaccination is based on human arrogance. Arrogance that we can tip the balance of nature without consequences. H.G. Wells said it best in War of the Worlds:

"From the moment the invaders arrived, breathed our air, ate and drank, they were doomed. They were undone, destroyed, after all of man's weapons and devices had failed, by the tiniest creatures that God in his wisdom put upon this earth.

By the toll of a billion deaths, man had earned his immunity, his right to survive among this planet's infinite organisms. And that right is ours against all challenges. For neither do men live nor die in vain (emphasis mine)." I collect more scientific and less inspiring reasons on my blog.

[Lauren710]

Originally Posted by uccomama

These are the quacks IMO, not Dr Tenpenny:

http://www.naturalnews.com/025833.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/025744.html

http://www.naturalnews.com/025852.html

Oh I agree that these people are atrocious. Especially the third link, thanks for that. I'll be looking at that one further, I'm interested to see what the fabricated studies looked like. Here's another story I read just today actually (not vax-related, but seriously, Big Pharma continues to give science a bad name! The rest of us don't do this. ): http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...040301877.html

I guess my point was, you have to wade through a LOT of crap to find any valid science on either side of the argument. At which point, your best bet will probably be to follow your gut and do what you think is best for your LO.

And I will reiterate that I am a scientist, and I *still* haven't been convinced either way... so that should tell you something about the pro-vax side of things. I can't find credible studies that are anti-vax, and I can't find *good* science to support vaxing! Which is why I'm here and not on some mainstream "OMG-vax-your-kids-or-they'll-die!" forum I'm trying to do some honest research into both sides before I decide to continue vaxing, delay, or stop altogether.

[Mama2Kayla]

Originally Posted by Lauren710

Oh I agree that these people are atrocious. Especially the third link, thanks for that. I'll be looking at that one further, I'm interested to see what the fabricated studies looked like. Here's another story I read just today actually (not vax-related, but seriously, Big Pharma continues to give science a bad name! The rest of us don't do this. ): http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...040301877.html

I guess my point was, you have to wade through a LOT of crap to find any valid science on either side of the argument. At which point, your best bet will probably be to follow your gut and do what you think is best for your LO.

And I will reiterate that I am a scientist, and I *still* haven't been convinced either way... so that should tell you something about the pro-vax side of things. I can't find credible studies that are anti-vax, and I can't find *good* science to support vaxing! Which is why I'm here and not on some mainstream "OMG-vax-your-kids-or-they'll-die!" forum I'm trying to do some honest research into both sides before I decide to continue vaxing, delay, or stop altogether.

Have you checked out www.insidevaccines.com yet?

Everything there is very well backed with studies.

Good luck!

[Lauren710]

Originally Posted by Mama2Kayla

Have you checked out www.insidevaccines.com yet?

Everything there is very well backed with studies.

Good luck!

I haven't yet, I've seen it mentioned here but I'll give it a serious look tomorrow (my brain's just about to go off-line for the evening). Thanks!

[dinahx]

Scientific studies actually do hold water in my house.. DH and I are both scientists. But this still doesn't mean we believe everything we read

.

Check out the vax lit on PubMed. I went there searching for answers because my son had a severe reaction to DTaP and I wanted info, if there was any, on what component of the shot could have caused his specific reaction (the DTaP scream). It is fairly shocking for anyone who has studied science on any level. It is like the rest of PubMed is college or even grad school and the Vax stuff is Kindergarden. The bar is seriously lower! As in most of the studies have several authors and are very 'scientific seeming'. The vax papers generally have one author and are filled with statements like 'we don't know' and 'multiple variables' 'multitude of possible causes' etc. Basically really vauge and non specific.

Also you can check you faith in the double blind study right here. <3
My BIL partipates in these so called scientific studies as a professional guinea pig. All the other people in the studies are making it a de facto career too. And the companies know about it. It is REALLY lucrative! Like 5000/per? How objective could that possibly be? Ask yourselves! And also, they are not tested on women, or small children, or the immunocomprosied mostly, they are tested on healthy young men. Also, they are double blind for about 2.5 seconds. The participants figure out who got the placebo pretty soon after the first dose. It is real obvious typically. Double blind is really a utopian dream, not a reality!

[amnesiac]

I have removed many posts from this thread which are in violation of our UA or subforum guidelines or are responses to such posts. Please review the guidelines stickied at the top of this subforum before further participation. Should this thread further deteriorate it will be either removed from the board or closed to discussion.

[larkedyflarp]

Many of you are talking about autism and I just thought I would add that I recently read some things that said 20 or so years ago autism was diagnosed with people that couldn't really function, rocking in a corner somewhere.

Now it's a "spectrum" and also there are people that seek the diagnosis of autism so they can get speech therapy etc. covered with insurance because their child needs it but doesn't have autism but insurance won't cover it with any other diagnosis. Also I believe that some people look for the diagnosis of Asperger's because they are thought to be misunderstood geniuses.

I did a search of symptoms of Aspergers and a gifted child and the list is almost IDENTICLE. Are there gifted children being labeled as Aspergers or vice versa?

I do believe that autism is linked to vaccines but autism is not in my top 5 reasons for avoiding vaccines. I think vaccines are bad on many level, see my previous post on page one of the thread.

[caro113]

Someone said something about (I assume) my daughter not being vaccinated and what happens when she's pregnant and never contracted chicken pox and now may pass it to her child .. Well see, she will get chicken pox as a child. I don't really see how she won't. I don't keep her away from other children and I don't plan to. I'd rather she'd get chicken pox now, before she can remember it, rather than later when she will. Besides, she will have a stronger immune system if she contracts it naturally.

Anyhow, I have to agree with what has happened to this post. It was supposed to be about why not to vaccinate, not a debate, but I can see how that happened. Reasonably so, when someone said "this is why I don't" someone else challenged it. That's how we learn, but it has gotten out of hand.

Humans have been around for tens of thousands of years. We earned our immunity by catching the diseases and fighting them off naturally. That's not going to change just because time has progressed.

Also, in the US, we tend to allow any drug to make it to the shelf. We have a "we'll just wait to see if it's harmful" policy, while in Europe (and the rest of the first world) they have a "prove it's not harmful or you aren't selling" policy. Amazingly enough, the rest of the first world live longer, healthier lives. They have fewer infant deaths. They don't routinely vaccinate. (They also have better health care, practice full term breastfeeding, believe in cosleeping)

[Jugs]

Exactly. If autism existed in huge numbers way back when like it does today, not only would it have been recognized, but it would have had a name and we'd be calling it that name today. Doctors aren't so completely oblivious that they would not have noticed 1 in 60 children coming into their practice with these painfully obvious symptoms. It's also interesting that those who defend the vaccinations and doctors' ability to know what is best (ex. vaccination) will say doctors didn't have a clue to the point of not being able to diagnose something so obvious. So doctors are simultaneouosly clueless and someone to be trusted wholeheartedly. Autism diagnosis is made strictly by observation.

I agree with the bolded. However, one of the most common experiencess in autism circles is just how clueless about autism the average pediatrician is; many still cling to the stereotypical signs the same way they cling to infant formula propaganda, and are the last to pick up a child's autism. Not that I have ever been dependant on doctors, but my experience has taught me that pediatricians have become not much more than pharmaceutical distributors.

[Jugs]

Originally Posted by larkedyflarp

Many of you are talking about autism and I just thought I would add that I recently read some things that said 20 or so years ago autism was diagnosed with people that couldn't really function, rocking in a corner somewhere.

Now it's a "spectrum" and also there are people that seek the diagnosis of autism so they can get speech therapy etc. covered with insurance because their child needs it but doesn't have autism but insurance won't cover it with any other diagnosis. Also I believe that some people look for the diagnosis of Asperger's because they are thought to be misunderstood geniuses.

I did a search of symptoms of Aspergers and a gifted child and the list is almost IDENTICLE. Are there gifted children being labeled as Aspergers or vice versa?

I do believe that autism is linked to vaccines but autism is not in my top 5 reasons for avoiding vaccines. I think vaccines are bad on many level, see my previous post on page one of the thread.

But the thing is, simply suspecting Aspergers isn't enough. Autism evaluations take place over the course of several sessions, with a full team of specialists. Its not in their best interest to "over-diagnose" the quirky kids because it costs the state a great deal of money to make accomodations for them; my son's tuition is $2500/month!!!

[caro113]

I believe, looking back, that I responded to anony-mouse as the OP, when she was not, so I apologize by directed what I said towards the OP. But everything I said still goes .. just wanted to point that out.

[Barbee]

I for one have really appreciated this thread. Periodically I rethink my decision not to vax. The responses and debate (even though it wasn't an intended debate forum) helped to reinforce all of the reasons I originally made my decision. Thank you all.

[larkedyflarp]

The books listed in the recommended book section are great if you want to know everything and feel that it's valid. Some are at the public library so it's easy.

Dr. Mendelsohn's Confession of a Medical Heretic and Raising a Healthy Child Despite your Doctor.

Raising a Vaccine Free Child

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny has a couple DVD's and a book I just started yesterday as well as a website.

[larkedyflarp]

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny's book "Saying No to Vaccines" has a list of Ten Reasons to Say "No Thank You" to Vaccination on pg 5. I liked my 5 on pg one of this thread but here's the good doctor's 10:

1. Vaccinations are promoted through fear, intimidation- and often- coercion.
2. Vaccine manufacturers are protected from liability by the government when their products cause injuries.
3. Those who administer vaccines are protected from liability if an injury or death occurs.
4. Vaccinations can damage the immune system and the nervous system. Vaccine mandates ignore biochemical individuality and family genetics.
5. Vaccinations contain many toxic substances.
6. Vaccinations are aggressively promoted by those who have a financial interest in their us: drug companies and physicians.
7. Vaccinations are misrepresented by government agencies and public health officials as safe and effective when they can cause harm and can fail to protect.
8. Vaccinations are heavily subsidized by tax dollars and injuries are compensated through taxes paid by parents for each vaccine a child receives.
9. Vaccine production is a $12 Billion per year business, and growing.
10. Vaccines are the economic loss-leader of the pharmaceutical industry. Vaccines are relatively inexpensive but the medications necessary to treat injuries generate billions for drug companies.

I also want to add that my daughter had an anaphylactic reaction to her vaccines in the ped. office when she was a baby and the docs swooped in and did Epi-Pen, nebulizer, Benadryl and Steroid shot having an ambulance take us to the hospital for observation to make sure the reaction didn't recur (biphasic reaction).

On the VAERS sheet the pediatrician put that it was NOT a life threatening reaction. I've always known that anaphylaxis IS life-threatening which is why you use and Epi-Pen. Pretty fishy I think.

Also like Dr. Tenpenny is talking about all this money stuff. It sucks that we had to pay all these hospital bills for her vaccine reaction when it was caused by the vaccines. Turns out the Vaccine Reaction people only conpensate if you die.

I had a bad feeling about vaccines before that reaction and didn't do all of them, but after that, needless to say we didn't finish and my son has had none and any of our future children will not have any either. I just wish I knew when my daughter was born what I know now.

[caro113]

Originally Posted by larkedyflarp

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny's book "Saying No to Vaccines" has a list of Ten Reasons to Say "No Thank You" to Vaccination on pg 5. I liked my 5 on pg one of this thread but here's the good doctor's 10:

1. Vaccinations are promoted through fear, intimidation- and often- coercion.
2. Vaccine manufacturers are protected from liability by the government when their products cause injuries.
3. Those who administer vaccines are protected from liability if an injury or death occurs.
4. Vaccinations can damage the immune system and the nervous system. Vaccine mandates ignore biochemical individuality and family genetics.
5. Vaccinations contain many toxic substances.
6. Vaccinations are aggressively promoted by those who have a financial interest in their us: drug companies and physicians.
7. Vaccinations are misrepresented by government agencies and public health officials as safe and effective when they can cause harm and can fail to protect.
8. Vaccinations are heavily subsidized by tax dollars and injuries are compensated through taxes paid by parents for each vaccine a child receives.
9. Vaccine production is a $12 Billion per year business, and growing.
10. Vaccines are the economic loss-leader of the pharmaceutical industry. Vaccines are relatively inexpensive but the medications necessary to treat injuries generate billions for drug companies.

: Thats a great list! I think thats basically what most mommas were saying in their lists, but this is really nice and concise

Originally Posted by larkedyflarp

I also want to add that my daughter had an anaphylactic reaction to her vaccines in the ped. office when she was a baby and the docs swooped in and did Epi-Pen, nebulizer, Benadryl and Steroid shot having an ambulance take us to the hospital for observation to make sure the reaction didn't recur (biphasic reaction).

On the VAERS sheet the pediatrician put that it was NOT a life threatening reaction. I've always known that anaphylaxis IS life-threatening which is why you use and Epi-Pen. Pretty fishy I think.

Wow!! That is terrifying. Yet one more reason I don't trust doctors. I'm sorry your daughter went through that, but I'm glad she's doing alright now. Did you question the doctor as to why he called an ambulance if it wasn't life threatening? : Definitely pretty fishy, if not right out fraud.

[larkedyflarp]

I didn't realize the report had no checked under life threatening until about a week or so ago when I had it out after calling some vaccine manufacturers again and finding out there was dairy in the DTaP.

This happened over 2 years ago and it was traumatic for us all.

Next time we're at the pediatricians though I'm bringing my copy of the report in and asking about it. The doc. also put on the form that they used Epi, nebulizer etc.

Why are we told her food allergies are life threatening and given an Epi-Pen, but when the doctors use an Epi-Pen on her for vaccines that's all of a sudden NOT. Hmmmm.....

[claddaghmom]

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pin...safety-508.pdf

Quote:
...approximately 15,000 cases of adverse events following vaccination are reported in the United States each year (these include both true adverse reactions and events that occur coincidentally after vaccination). This number exceeds the current reported incidence of vaccine-preventable childhood diseases. As a result, parents and providers in the United States are more likely to know someone who has experienced an adverse event following immunization than they are to know someone who has experienced a reportable vaccine-preventable disease. Thus, the success of vaccination has led to increased public attention on health risks associated with vaccines."

"However, while rates of common vaccine reactions, such as injection-site reactions and fever, can be estimated before licensure, the comparatively small number of patients enrolled in these trials generally limits detection of rare side effects or side effects that may occur many months after the vaccine is given. Even the largest prelicensure trials (more than 10,000 persons) are inadequate to assess the vaccine’s potential to induce possible rare side effects. Therefore, it is essential to monitor reports of vaccine-associated adverse events once the vaccine has been licensed and released for public use."

[amnesiac]

This discussion is now closed as per my previous caution.