Mothering › Forums › Health › Vaccinations › logical, scientific book suggestion?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

logical, scientific book suggestion? - Page 2

post #21 of 26
My dh is a scientist for a pharmaceutical company. He is definitely pro-vax. However he knows I am not on board with vaxing with the CDCs schedule so we've worked out a compromise. I really think that would be your best bet. I don't see my dh giving much credibility to some of the sources I see posted here. If we started down that road I'm sure he could dig up plenty of pro-vax medical literature for me.

My 21 month old son is totally unvaxed so far. That was mostly because we never found a doctor supportive of delayed vax so he hasn't seen a doctor since he was born. Not that I would recommend that approach. Fortunately my dh isn't the type to make doctors appointments or take a child for vaccines behind my back. He mentions occasionally that he'd like me to pick a vaccine to start with for ds but I haven't done it yet. Now he's pretty much too old to worry about Hib, PC7, and Rotavirus at least although I had planned to do Hib for him as a baby and skip the other 2 (PC7 was not even offered when our first 2 kids were babies so that was an easy sell to dh). Dh is supportive of not doing Hep B and Chicken Pox so that leaves IPV, MMR, and Tdap and I have agreed to do those at some point.

For my husband the point where he became more supportive of selective/delayed vaxing was when our 4 month old (born 11 week premature even) contracted whooping cough even after having 1 DTP shot. He said he didn't see much point in the WC protection if it didn't work for those that they were most trying to protect. I've been told she got it because she hadn't had the full number of doses yet however by then she would have been at least 6 months old and past the point where getting WC is as big a concern. Our 9 year old dd who was fully vaxed also got WC probably because the immunity to WC wears off.
post #22 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by susienjay View Post
I don't see my dh giving much credibility to some of the sources I see posted here. If we started down that road I'm sure he could dig up plenty of pro-vax medical literature for me.
This is the obvious catch to the whole deal. If a scientist/doctor discovers something the puts a big chink in the armor of the paradigm, then that person automatically becomes a quack. There are no exceptions to this. Quacks aren't allowed to enter the peer-review process because they are quacks and not taken seriously.

Dr. Peter Duesberg is the perfect example of this. Arguably one of the most respected scientists in the world in his field with hundreds of peer reviewed papers to his credit, he voiced his opinion that AIDS was not what people were being told. Automatically labeled a quack regardless of credentials and no longer able to even enter the peer review world.

The medical literature will always be pro-vax. Vaccination in the Holy Grail of medicine. It is a foundational piece of the entire medical model in it's current state. Chip away at the foundation and the whole model could fall apart and that ain't going to be allowed to happen since the pharmaceutical industry is a trillion dollar money machine.

The first book I'd give someone is Dr. Mendelsohn's. A Shot in the Dark is pretty good as is Scheibner's. I like Miller's info. My favorite is Dr. Moulden. His dvd's show exactly what is happening after vaccination. For those in disagreement with him because he is selling a diagnostic or treatment protocol, how exactly is he supposed to live? He went through over a decade of extremely expensive school only to discover that he didn't believe in the very basic premise of his profession. He did tons of research on his own dime. He can't treat people based on Germ Theory which is the entire mechanism behind the current medical model, and he has dedicated almost all his energy to ending the vaccination campaign which has harmed and killed God knows how many people. He is probably the most outspoken medical critic of vaccination. He has to be labeled a quack. Forget his information. I guarantee has has done more free consultations then anyone can imagine. People like him always end up doing stuff for free because the model doesn't pay for their beliefs.

People who have children who are suffering from vaccine damage are often so desperate to have a medical professional not blow them off and listen to them, that when a person like Moulden comes along he gets completely overwhelmed with the demands.

Until someone knows what it is like to go against their entire profession, a profession that is immensely powerful on many levels, one should not throw stones. The professional and personal/financial repurcussions are unbelievable. As far as not renewing a license, there could be many angles to that. I personally know how hard it is to attain a license to help others, only to realize that the profession is based on a house of cards. Does the license even matter after that? To what end?
post #23 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scattershoot View Post
This is the obvious catch to the whole deal. If a scientist/doctor discovers something the puts a big chink in the armor of the paradigm, then that person automatically becomes a quack. There are no exceptions to this. Quacks aren't allowed to enter the peer-review process because they are quacks and not taken seriously.

Dr. Peter Duesberg is the perfect example of this. Arguably one of the most respected scientists in the world in his field with hundreds of peer reviewed papers to his credit, he voiced his opinion that AIDS was not what people were being told. Automatically labeled a quack regardless of credentials and no longer able to even enter the peer review world.

The medical literature will always be pro-vax. Vaccination in the Holy Grail of medicine. It is a foundational piece of the entire medical model in it's current state. Chip away at the foundation and the whole model could fall apart and that ain't going to be allowed to happen since the pharmaceutical industry is a trillion dollar money machine.

The first book I'd give someone is Dr. Mendelsohn's. A Shot in the Dark is pretty good as is Scheibner's. I like Miller's info. My favorite is Dr. Moulden. His dvd's show exactly what is happening after vaccination. For those in disagreement with him because he is selling a diagnostic or treatment protocol, how exactly is he supposed to live? He went through over a decade of extremely expensive school only to discover that he didn't believe in the very basic premise of his profession. He did tons of research on his own dime. He can't treat people based on Germ Theory which is the entire mechanism behind the current medical model, and he has dedicated almost all his energy to ending the vaccination campaign which has harmed and killed God knows how many people. He is probably the most outspoken medical critic of vaccination. He has to be labeled a quack. Forget his information. I guarantee has has done more free consultations then anyone can imagine. People like him always end up doing stuff for free because the model doesn't pay for their beliefs.

People who have children who are suffering from vaccine damage are often so desperate to have a medical professional not blow them off and listen to them, that when a person like Moulden comes along he gets completely overwhelmed with the demands.

Until someone knows what it is like to go against their entire profession, a profession that is immensely powerful on many levels, one should not throw stones. The professional and personal/financial repurcussions are unbelievable. As far as not renewing a license, there could be many angles to that. I personally know how hard it is to attain a license to help others, only to realize that the profession is based on a house of cards. Does the license even matter after that? To what end?
absolutely wonderful scattershoot!
post #24 of 26
In your situation I would look at this book called "Vaccines: What CDC Documents and Science Reveal". This is written by Dr. Tenpenny and is researched using scienfitic sources like CDC literature. This link it to a DVD which might be good if you're short on time but she has several books on the subject too.

http://www.amazon.com/Vaccines-What-...5455156&sr=8-2
post #25 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cristiaz View Post
absolutely wonderful scattershoot!
post #26 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZoeyZoo View Post
In your situation I would look at this book called "Vaccines: What CDC Documents and Science Reveal". This is written by Dr. Tenpenny and is researched using scienfitic sources like CDC literature. This link it to a DVD which might be good if you're short on time but she has several books on the subject too.

http://www.amazon.com/Vaccines-What-...5455156&sr=8-2
I second Dr. Tenpenny (and her book Saying No to Vaccines). She is a physician herself and backs up her statements with hundreds of references.

Another idea: watch this video "Evaluating the Science and Rationale of Vaccines" together.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Forums › Health › Vaccinations › logical, scientific book suggestion?