logical, scientific book suggestion?

[marcib28]

So my DH is very stubborn and is incredibly pro-vax schedule (I would like to selective/delay vax). He's in dental school and, as a result of the science classes he's taken, thinks he knows everything about vaccines and how they work. I've read a couple of books and could definitely stand to read a few more. However, with DH being in school, he really doesn't have time to read much, so everything he knows is what his professors tell him (which, of course, is all pro-vax). He punches holes in every argument I have against vaccinating. If you had to choose the BEST vax book you've read that is full of scientific studies showing the dangers of vaccinations, what would it be? He'll only probably read 1 book and it needs to be logical (something he can't punch holes through). I feel like we're never going to come to an agreement on this please help!

[lisalou]

Sorry there really aren't any books full of actual scientific studies showing the dangers of vaccines. There are a lot of anti-vax books by people who aren't scientists reinterpreting data to conform to anti-vax arguments though.

[Liquesce]

I'm kind of curious what you mean by "punching holes"? To me that phrase indicates finding inarguable flaws.

[bbrandonsmom]

What are some things you are telling him why you want to delay, and what is he responding back with? Maybe we can help you a little better if we know some of that.

[ammiga]

The information that Dr. Moulden presents is the most easy to understand and scientific information I have found.

He has video clips from the series you can purchase on www.brainguardmd.com and a ton of other information as well. There is currently a very good presentation running on his homepage.Here is a text interview with him that you can have dh read, although I find his videos to be very compelling. Watching the things happen with my own eyes, and not just reading a description was very helpful.

[Delicateflower]

If he'll only read one book about vaccines you should get him to read "Just a Little Prick" by Hilary Butler. I found it very entertaining.

[Romana]

Edited: Dr. Moulden's reputation as a scientist in the broader scientific community, the integrity (or lack thereof) of his scientific research, and commercialization/advertising of his purported vaccine damage treatments and theories may lead someone with a rigorous scientific background to dismiss his claims and research. If you have a scientifically-sophisticated husband, I would not put him on to Dr. Moulden.

Instead, I suggest that you both read the CDC "pink book" (Epidmiology and Prevention of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases), available here:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/Pubs/pinkbook/default.htm

And read the vaccine package inserts, available here:

http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm

Making this decision is really about risk-benefit analysis, rather than making emotional or appealing arguments, especially when discussing the decision with someone who is approaching it from a very scientific mindset. Much of the argument on the non-, delayed-, or selective-vax side is really about what information is lacking, in conjunction with the actual rates of disease and actual risks of contracting disease coupled with the known risks of the vaccine.

Part of the problem is that there is arguably a lack of information regarding the risks of vaccination.

It is less scientific, but you can also browse VAERS for interesting information:

http://vaers.hhs.gov/index

Try to get inside his head and make arguments that will appeal to his sense of logic and scientific reasoning. I think that is your best bet. Good luck!

ETA: Also, try to get him in a frame of mind where this is a discussion in which you are both seeking truth, rather than a competition (which it sounds like it currently is).

[ccohenou]

I went looking for such information some years ago, and continue to be interested in the topic. I never found credible information from what I consider to be reliable peer-reviewed sources that indicated anything other than that the benefits of currently administered vaccinations outweigh the risks. At this point I can only presume that others have a very different idea of what constitutes credible scientific information (cf Moulden).

If the guy who claims he can diagnose and treat your neurological disorders via webcam is the best source of evidence on your side, I think you're out of luck. If you show that to anyone who has any previous idea what a macrophage or ischemia is or what they do or how you might detect them, they are going to laugh, not be impressed. I am just saying.

[Cristiaz]

The book, The Truth About Childrens Health by Robert Bernardini, M.S. is a great one. This guy is a scientist and his chapter on vaccines is the most knowledgable I've read (or at least one of them). His info digs deep and he lists his sources...be prepared to change your mind and not vax at all. Lots of other great info in the book as well.

[PlayaMama]

Originally Posted by Romana

I'm sorry, but Dr. Moulden seems like he may very well be a quack. If you have a scientifically-sophisticated husband, I would not put him on to Dr. Moulden.

if your husband is scientifically minded avoid that guy and his website like the plague. pun totally not intended but funny all the same.

seriously though, you should be able to refute his arguments with valid arguments of your own. why is he able to shoot holes in your arguments? are you able to shoot holes in his arguments?

i think that approaching it as working together to find a solution is a good idea.

also, try to find responses for his specific questions, like, have him give you a question he has and then research for an answer and get back to him, it seems like it should not be terribly hard.

[Sileree]

Originally Posted by lisalou

Sorry there really aren't any books full of actual scientific studies showing the dangers of vaccines. There are a lot of anti-vax books by people who aren't scientists reinterpreting data to conform to anti-vax arguments though.

Absolutely not true.

Lot of ad hominems and thinly veiled insults in this thread. Lame.

I recommend The Vaccine Safety Manual by Neil Miller. Everything is backed up with peer-reviewed studies (there are over 1000 listed) so you can check it out for yourself.

[elmh23]

My husband is also very scientific and when I started researching vaccine's we had a lot of intense conversations about it. I was unable to pull up anything that made concrete to him that vaccine's were dangerous.

I was also wanting to do a selective/delay schedule so I brought up exactly why I wanted this schedule. For me, I felt there were to many vaccine's in to short of time and some vaccines that should be delayed until older (Hep B for one.) My husband understood this reasoning and took a close look at the schedule and what was really important to him. We agreed to do DTaP and Polio on schedule, not do chickenpox until 10 unless they got the disease (which they did) and delay everything else until the children were 3. Compromising on some things (Polio on schedule for instance) got me what I wanted (everything else delayed.)

Really, figure out why you want to do selective/delayed and then go from there. You won't find a credible book (IMO) to change his mind completely.

[zinemama]

My dh is also a scientist. Dr. Stephanie Cave's book was very helpful to him (me, too) in our decision to delay/selectivly vax. What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Childhood Vaccinations

[marcib28]

Thank you all for the many suggestions. Unfortunately, I guess DH and I are just very different when it comes to how we think about things. He is very scientific/logical where I am more of an emotional decision maker. From what little I've read, I feel it is best to delay/selective vax due to the amount of dangerous ingredients in the vaccinations. For me, I will be a SAHM and will be breast feeding my LO, so the risks of him catching something are small to me. However, DH continues to tell me that, unless our entire family is planning on quarantining ourselves, the baby will be exposed to everything just as if he were in daycare or what not. Any argument I have regarding the amount of dangerous ingredients in the vaccines (in an attempt to simply get him to agree to spread them out) is shot down with, "if there were any evidence that the established schedule by the CDC were dangerous, they would change it" or "have you ever personally known anyone to have a reaction to a vaccine?" I hate that one! No, I haven't, but that doesn't mean they aren't more common than he thinks. So apparently I have to really dig deep and come up with specific patterns, specific problems, and most importantly, incredibly specific concerns with ANY ingredient in a vaccine. I don't know how to make it like we're working together. At the end of the day, we both want what's best for our baby, but we have very different ideas of how to accomplish that

[newmum35]

I beg to differ from those trying to discredit Dr Mouldin. If you know something we don't, please share it. One can actually see in photos the changes in the face and eyes in babies, children and adults before AND after vaccination. Care to offer a better explanation instead of planting rumors? He doesn't have a book that I'm aware of but there is a free video presentation on his homepage right now. While I'm not convinced Mouldin is the direction you should go with this, he is not a quack and his videos are a must-see! His research is revolutionary and I hope it changes the world.

Your best bet may be to try to convince your husband that you DON'T want to vax. That you haven't found any evidence that the benefits outweigh the risks and challenge him to come up with something thats going to convince you to change your mind. Let him talk you into a compromise if there are a few vaccines you feel are worth getting, and decide to get only those, the next thing is to figure out when is the best age for that. Another thing you might want to do is print out the list of school requirements for your state (you will find it varies significantly from the AAP schedule- school requirements are a LOT LESS) - work from that if possible and not from the AAP list.

Stall as long as you can. When he sees your baby is completely healthy and thriving despite not having said vaccines "on schedule" maybe he will be a little more flexible.

How many vaccines has HE had on the schedule? Why don't you print out the adult vaccine schedule and if he is so gung ho about vaccines, then he should be up to date on HIS as well, otherwise its hyprocritical of him.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/recs/schedules/default.htm


Another thing: go to your pediatrician and ask for the "manufacturer's insert" for each and every vaccine that they want to give your baby. Read them all front and back (print is very, very fine) in advance of your appointments and make sure your husband does too. You might want to highlight notable sections from the inserts. Note these are the instructions from the manufacturer included in every box shipment of vaccines. This does not refer to the one simple sheet handout the dr will be giving you. The inserts are available to read online as well. Here is one link that lists them:

http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm


Also be sure to print out the vaccine schedule from when he was in 1st grade (The ones he would have been required to get prior to entering school for the first time) and print out today's schedule. Let him see the difference. Make sure he realizes his child will be getting over 3 times the amount of vaccines HE got when HE was a kid. HE obviously survived to adulthood without the majority of vaccines on today's schedule; why does he think his child would not?

http://www.generationrescue.org/pdf/070626.pdf


Make sure he's aware of the difference in vaccination schedules from the U.S. compared to other countries of the world (there is no other country on earth that gives more vaccines than we do) Their schedules are much simpler and they are not dropping dead from lack of vaccines. In fact the U.S. actually has one of the worst infant mortality rates in the world! (29th I think) So 28 countries are better than us? What are they doing differently?

http://www.euvac.net/graphics/euvac/...ccination.html


Are you breastfeeding? Is he afraid your baby will die if you do not vaccinate? Make sure he realizes breastfeeding is "the most effective preventive means of reducing the death rate of children under five."

http://www.nature.com/nri/journal/v4...s/nri1393.html

http://www.nrdc.org/breastmilk/benefits.asp


I really liked this report another user here at MDC wrote - its 50 pages and can be printed out. It was a summary they pulled from different sources helping them in their decision. The list of vaccines linked above is also included in this report.

http://raising-angels.com/wp-content...accination.pdf



Some other bookmarks I have:

http://www.nvic.org/ (be sure to read "diseases and vaccines" section)

http://www.thinktwice.com/

http://www.homefirst.com/ (has free vaccine webinars you can listen to online)

http://tetrahedron.org/articles/vacc...radictions.htm


Finally, instead of YOU having to come up with evidence to prove "the established schedule by the CDC is dangerous" why doesn't HE come up with evidence to prove "the established schedule by the CDC is safe?"

In fact there are already studies underway to find out just how safe or dangerous the current schedule is (believe it or not, it has NOT been done by our government, so we really don't even know!)

Recent findings from these preliminary studies are NOT encouraging. I know there is a better link here somewhere, someone else can post if they have it but I was referring to this study

Infant Primates Given Vaccines On U.S. Children's Immunization Schedule Develop Biomedical And Behavioral Symptoms Of Autism

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/107994.php

There are at least half a dozen good books I'd recommend but I'm not sure any one is better than the others. Dr Sears book is VERY pro-vax and even he talks about the risks of the aluminum and offers an alternative schedule. Perhaps you should begin there.

Dr Gordon is not anti-vax but is much more reasonable in terms of which ones and how many. I think it might be a good idea for you and your DH to watch his dvd together. He will realize that the world is not going to come to an end if some of these vaccines are not given.

http://www.drjaygordon.com/

[Romana]

IMO, Dr. Moulden has a free video on his website to convince potential clients to purchase his products, or in the past, hire him to diagnose and treat them over the internet. Here is his website: http://www.brainguardmd.com/

The very top part says "Visit shop.massflo2.com," where you can go to buy his products. For me, any doctor whose professional site's primary object appears to be selling merchandise is immediately suspect. When you click on the link, you can purchase four products produced by Dr. Moulden, which supposedly give irrefutable proof of the existence of MASS, a syndrome he named after himself in which he claims vaccines cause multiple conditions.

If his research really demonstrated what he says it demonstrates, he should have some sort of actual research published. Or there should be more doctors and scientists interested in his work, attempting to duplicate it, etc.

On the website page, many of the tabs that should be links do not link at all. While "Donate to MASS Research Fund" works and "Volunteer" works (he wants people to volunteer to translate his DVDs into other languages, presumably so he can sell his products in other countries), *none* of the other tabs in that section are linked to anything. Maybe the site is just "under construction," but it seems extremely odd to me how much space on the front page of his website is devoted to selling his products (i.e., essentially all of it).

If we can come on here and rail against people like Dr. Offit for making tremendous profits on his development of the rotavirus vaccine, or rail against the FDA/CDC for not being rigorous enough because everyone in government wants a cushy pharma job afterwards, or rail against pharma for being profit-driven, then we should be able to point out when those who are against vaccines, or talking about the dangers of vaccines, seem to be doing the same thing.

Also, Dr. Moulden at one time offered to respond to photos for free, but there are many reports on the web of people who sent him photos, emailed him photos, etc. but never heard back from him on his opinion of their children. In any case, I think claiming the ability to diagnose complex medical conditions (including pre-diagnosing SIDS) via photographs is highly suspicious.

He is also not actually licensed to practice medicine anywhere. To be fair, at this point (though not previously) he acknowledges this on his website, saying he wants to focus on research. However, one must then question why he is not pursuing scientifically rigorous research.

In my opinion, his research, theories and methods are the definition of pseudoscience: "a methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific, or that is made to appear to be scientific, but which does not adhere to an appropriate scientific methodology, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, or otherwise lacks scientific status."

I don't believe it's possible to make meaningful decisions regarding vaccines if those decisions are based upon unsupportable data or theories. If Dr. Moulden is correct about clumping white cells and minivascular strokes, he should be able to demonstrate it.

I'm guessing it's against the UA to link to sites that give factual information about Dr. Moulden, but if you do enough googling you can discover a lot more about him. He does not seem to have engaged in any scientific research since medical school or earning any of his advanced degrees, nor has he kept up a license to practice medicine. At one time, he claimed to have earned an MD from McMaster University, but McMaster has responded that he did not, and he has since removed that claim (it does not appear on the newest version of his website).

All of what I have read of Dr. Moulden leads me to the conclusion that he earned multiple degrees because he enjoyed school and it gave him credibility, and he is now using that apparent credibility to make money off his theories (untested in any scientifically rigorous way) by selling DVDs and other information to people who want and need answers that are not currently available from the medical establishment.

I don't believe anything I said here was a UA violation. I am not calling Dr. Moulden any names. I am questioning his motives, his experience, his track record thus far, his current business practices, and his conflicts of interest. If we can do that about people who promote vaccines, those who oppose them should be fair game as well, if we're really interested in understanding what's going on and carefully scrutinizing the claims of those who are selling something on either side of the discussion.

[PlayaMama]

Originally Posted by Romana

IMO, Dr. Moulden has a free video on his website to convince potential clients to purchase his products, or in the past, hire him to diagnose and treat them over the internet. Here is his website: http://www.brainguardmd.com/

The very top part says "Visit shop.massflo2.com," where you can go to buy his products. For me, any doctor whose professional site's primary object appears to be selling merchandise is immediately suspect. When you click on the link, you can purchase four products produced by Dr. Moulden, which supposedly give irrefutable proof of the existence of MASS, a syndrome he named after himself in which he claims vaccines cause multiple conditions.

If his research really demonstrated what he says it demonstrates, he should have some sort of actual research published. Or there should be more doctors and scientists interested in his work, attempting to duplicate it, etc.

On the website page, many of the tabs that should be links do not link at all. While "Donate to MASS Research Fund" works and "Volunteer" works (he wants people to volunteer to translate his DVDs into other languages, presumably so he can sell his products in other countries), *none* of the other tabs in that section are linked to anything. Maybe the site is just "under construction," but it seems extremely odd to me how much space on the front page of his website is devoted to selling his products (i.e., essentially all of it).

If we can come on here and rail against people like Dr. Offit for making tremendous profits on his development of the rotavirus vaccine, or rail against the FDA/CDC for not being rigorous enough because everyone in government wants a cushy pharma job afterwards, or rail against pharma for being profit-driven, then we should be able to point out when those who are against vaccines, or talking about the dangers of vaccines, seem to be doing the same thing.

Also, Dr. Moulden at one time offered to respond to photos for free, but there are many reports on the web of people who sent him photos, emailed him photos, etc. but never heard back from him on his opinion of their children. In any case, I think claiming the ability to diagnose complex medical conditions (including pre-diagnosing SIDS) via photographs is highly suspicious.

He is also not actually licensed to practice medicine anywhere. To be fair, at this point (though not previously) he acknowledges this on his website, saying he wants to focus on research. However, one must then question why he is not pursuing scientifically rigorous research.

In my opinion, his research, theories and methods are the definition of pseudoscience: "a methodology, belief, or practice that is claimed to be scientific, or that is made to appear to be scientific, but which does not adhere to an appropriate scientific methodology, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, or otherwise lacks scientific status."

I don't believe it's possible to make meaningful decisions regarding vaccines if those decisions are based upon unsupportable data or theories. If Dr. Moulden is correct about clumping white cells and minivascular strokes, he should be able to demonstrate it.

I'm guessing it's against the UA to link to sites that give factual information about Dr. Moulden, but if you do enough googling you can discover a lot more about him. He does not seem to have engaged in any scientific research since medical school or earning any of his advanced degrees, nor has he kept up a license to practice medicine. At one time, he claimed to have earned an MD from McMaster University, but McMaster has responded that he did not, and he has since removed that claim (it does not appear on the newest version of his website).

All of what I have read of Dr. Moulden leads me to the conclusion that he earned multiple degrees because he enjoyed school and it gave him credibility, and he is now using that apparent credibility to make money off his theories (untested in any scientifically rigorous way) by selling DVDs and other information to people who want and need answers that are not currently available from the medical establishment.

I don't believe anything I said here was a UA violation. I am not calling Dr. Moulden any names. I am questioning his motives, his experience, his track record thus far, his current business practices, and his conflicts of interest. If we can do that about people who promote vaccines, those who oppose them should be fair game as well, if we're really interested in understanding what's going on and carefully scrutinizing the claims of those who are selling something on either side of the discussion.

this is exactly what i wanted to say except i have to leave for work in about 15 minutes after i eat breakfast and get the kiddo ready for pre-school.

when i look at things critically the first question i have is, "is there a profit somewhere?" i do question the current vax schedule and the introduction of vaxes like chicken pox but i have to question those on the other side as well. this is what would lead me to NOT recommend your husband look at that site, his profit motive is very obvious.

i'll be honest, i think that going the selective/delayed route is your best bet (it's also my choice though my 20 mo dd is currently unvaxed).

you could ask him if he knows anyone that was harmed by chicken pox (in response to his asking you if you know of anyone harmed by a vaccine), you could ask him which vaccines he had as a child and compare that to how many are offered now.

the thing is, there is a BIG agency that he trusts to do what is right that is telling him to vax his baby to keep it safe. i think it would be respectful to acknowledge this. maybe, "honey, i know we both want to do what is best for our baby. let's try to work out a compromise that will work for both of us."

since it seems to be about the ingredients for you then you need to find exactly which ingredients bother you and why. get as specific as possible and i bet it will help. it's easier to talk about concrete facts rather than an ephemeral bad feeling about something.

my advice is to get your facts together from a source he will respect (find the chances of your babe contracting polio from the CDC) and then be willing to compromise with him. best of luck!

[jammomma]

I also recommend The Vaccine Safety Manual by Neil Miller. Great book.

[ammiga]

I didn't mean to start a huge Dr. Moulden debate. I don't think he's the only place to look, but I do think it's worth checking out.

It seems to me that anytime a doctor publicly questions vaccines, they are discredited and trashed all over the media. I think a lot of doctors are scared to say what they think. I personally know several people in the medical and vaccine research fields who do not vaccinate, but would never admit it at their jobs or to their patients.

From what I can tell, funding the type of research that is described in earlier posts is quite expensive. And most companies aren't too fond of the idea of spending money to research something that will result in "don't buy our product". Maybe Dr. Moulden is selling his stuff to raise money for research. Maybe he's doing it to pay his bills (I don't think they are that expensive). Maybe he's selling it to buy a summer home in Europe. I don't know. But I do think his theories are food for thought.

[FraggleLover]

Originally Posted by marcib28

Thank you all for the many suggestions. Unfortunately, I guess DH and I are just very different when it comes to how we think about things. He is very scientific/logical where I am more of an emotional decision maker. From what little I've read, I feel it is best to delay/selective vax due to the amount of dangerous ingredients in the vaccinations.

Read more and don't panic

What I did with DH is looked at the schedule and decided what we would do at each visit. This stopped us full looking at vaccines as a whole and allowed us to make smaller decisions.

The third study and this one helped us decide on DTaP which were the first on our schedule.

As you are simply trying to delay vaccination this might be a good approach