or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Free Online Course on Vaccinations
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Free Online Course on Vaccinations

post #1 of 46
Thread Starter 

Thought this was potentially a useful resource for those wanting to do some guided research on why Doctors recommend vaccinations and what we know about vaccination safety. It's a free online course run by Paul Offit and the University of Pennsylvania. 

 

https://www.coursera.org/course/vaccines

 

From the website: 

 

"This course will discuss issues regarding vaccines and vaccine safety: the history, science, benefits, and risks of vaccines, together with the controversies surrounding vaccines and answers to common questions that parents have about vaccines."

post #2 of 46
Heads-up--the "course" is taught by Paul Offit, inventor of the RotaTeq vaccine, and member of ACIP, which determines the recommended vaccination schedule. He has earned approximately $10 million from RotaTeq. http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/01/counting-offits-millions-more-on-how-mercks-rotateq-vaccine-made-paul-offit-wealthy.html

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2011/04/23/offit-congressional-reprimand/

He also denies any possible link between vaccines and autism, in spite of admitted and compensated cases involving vaccines and autism. He refuses to even discuss any of the studies that DO show such a link, nor will he discuss any severe adverse effects from vaccines.

In fact, he throws people out from Q&A sessions at his lectures who dare to ask questions that challenge his position: http://www.ageofautism.com/2012/01/the-hell-with-balance-paul-offit-throws-out-jake-crosby-argues-with-nyu-research-scholar-mary-holland-at-yale.html

He has also harassed CBS news reporter Sheryl Atkisson for her coverage of the vaccine/autism controversy, and was forced to correct statements in his book which were lies about vaccine safety advocate, J.B. Handley:
http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/offit-lying-again/

He recommends his own Rotateq vaccine, in spite of the facts that
1) it is largely unnecessary in developed countries, as rotavirus is spread by feces contamination
2) it is almost completely unnecessary for breastfed babies
3) RotaTeq is contaminated by DNA from a pig virus that causes a wasting disease in baby pigs.

http://vaccinenewsdaily.com/fda/212970-pig-virus-dna-found-in-mercks-rotateq-vaccine/
http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/05/paul-offit-rotateq-pig-viruses-and-the-rest-of-the-world.html

Seems to me that Dr. Offit has some serious conflicts of interest when it comes to discussing vaccines, with or without autism. I would not want someone like that giving me advice on what is best for my child. One might as well go to Phillip Morris for advice on smoking.
Edited by Taximom5 - 4/21/12 at 6:32am
post #3 of 46

He's a doctor.  He's an expert on the topic.  He's an experienced lecturer.  I don't personally feel the need to sign up, but he is a pretty logical choice for explaining the medical consensus on vaccines.  

post #4 of 46

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post
he is a pretty logical choice for explaining the medical consensus on vaccines.  

 

I agree with you. If you want to learn more about pro-vax viewpoint, knock yourself out.

post #5 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post
he is a pretty logical choice for explaining the medical consensus on vaccines.  

 

I agree with you. If you want to learn more about pro-vax viewpoint, knock yourself out.


Is there only one "pro-vax viewpoint?"

Most of my doctor friends who consider themselves "pro-vax" actually do delayed/selected vax for their own children. Even TV's Dr. Oz, who pushed the flu shot to the point of taking his flu shot on the air, admits that his own children are on a selective/delayed vax schedule. And I just read a study on pediatric nurses, the vast majority of whom turn down recommended vaccines for themselves, while administering vaccines to infants and children.

http://www.vaccineliberationarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/What-lies-behind-the-low-rate-of-immuniz-among-nurses.pdf

http://roarnews.co.uk/2011/12/nurses-turning-down-flu-vaccine/

So what, exactly, does "pro-vax" even mean?

The "pro-vax" posters on this forum tend to believe 100% in the current recommended vaccination schedule, have no concerns about potential side effects, believe that aluminum and thimerosal in vaccines are safe, believe that there is absolutely no link between vaccines and autism, and are unconcerned about vaccines' link to autoimmune disorders, and about the pharmaceutical companies' demonstrated lack of ethics.

At least, that is the picture one comes away with after reading their posts.

That's quite an extreme position, and it's not one I see amongst most of the real people I know, who consider themselves pro-vax.

Another position taken by the "pro-vax extremists" is that anyone who questions the safety of the current vaccine schedule is a fool,and listens to strippers and bad actresses rather than real doctors, and to debunked fraudsters rather than "real" science, and is a tin-foil-hst-wearing conspiracy theorist.

Any argument made by vaccine questioners is met with personal attacks, or accusations that we are launching personal attacks. Personal tales of vaccine damage is met with a combination of scorn and doubt ("you're wrong, vaccines didn't damage your child," etc).

I would assume that, just as vaccine safety advocates do not wish to be known as "conspiracy theorists," and many do not consider themselves to be "anti-vax," those who believe that vaccines are necessary don't necessarily believe the above-mentioned extremist propaganda on the "pro-vax" side.

But it does seem like only the extremists are posting.
post #6 of 46
Are you arguing that the pro-vax posters on MDC aren't real people?
post #7 of 46

ok, I guess I should have added a few adjectives. "ultra, extreme, non-compromising pro-vax" viewpoint. 

 

as spin-off from other thread with "those women," maybe we can start referring to him as "that man"?

 

post #8 of 46

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

ok, I guess I should have added a few adjectives. "ultra, extreme, non-compromising pro-vax" viewpoint. 

 

as spin-off from other thread with "those women," maybe we can start referring to him as "that man"?

 

 

ROTFLMAO.gif

post #9 of 46
Thread Starter 

I don't consider myself extremist and I post. I like real science, not conspiracy theories which involve either (1) many thousands of (presumably stupid) Doctors being hoodwinked by the CDC and "big Pharma" or (2) many thousands of Doctors conspiring to hurt children.

 

Back to the topic of the thread, it seems to me that I this course would give you an introduction to the real science behind vaccines. 

post #10 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

I don't consider myself extremist and I post. I like real science, not conspiracy theories which involve either (1) many thousands of (presumably stupid) Doctors being hoodwinked by the CDC and "big Pharma" or (2) many thousands of Doctors conspiring to hurt children.

 

Back to the topic of the thread, it seems to me that I this course would give you an introduction to the real science behind vaccines. 

 

Ok, well now I am feeling pretty raw from one of the other thread's in this board, but I will try to be civil. 

 

I don't think you need to be a conspiracy theorist to have questions or recognize certain aspects of vaccine safety that are under-studied.

In the other thread, I have seen quite a few CHOP links. One stated that the normal aluminum accumulated in adults is 50 - 100 mg. 

The CDC's ATSDR puts it at 30 - 50mg. There is also conflict about ingestion vs. injection, and lack of info about how well neonates really tolerate aluminum. I also wish they would footnote their info instead of just making authoritative statements.

 

http://www.chop.edu/export/download/pdfs/articles/vaccine-education-center/aluminum.pdf

and a bunch of info I have found about aluminum, links posted in this thread:

http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1351675/can-we-continue-to-justify-injecting-aluminum-into-children

 

I don't want to argue about aluminum here, I am just trying to point out that any course on vax taught by Offit is not exactly going to be the most "un-biased" info for parents researching vaccine decisions. Ignoring issues and labeling as "conspiracy theorists" is not going to make this lack of true vax safety knowledge magically ok.

 

But heck, if you already are of the opinion that vaccines are 110% safe, or totally ok with maybe your child being injured for greater good, then, probably this is the course for you.

post #11 of 46
That man Paul Offit has made his money from the vaccine he spent 25 years developing. He has no financial interest in people using or not using it, now. I don't see the conflict of interest.

The honorable ms Sheryl Atkinson (dont want anyone to think I'm dissing her) routinely writes biased articles that aren't founded in science. I hope it's not true that that man Paul offit "attacked" her, but I hope he has and will continue to correct we facts when she gets them wrong.

I thought the pig wasting disease thing had been thoroughly debunked already, but it's honestly not an issue I know much about.

Glad to see baggage from the the thread beat me here. Very classy.
post #12 of 46
Chop is one of the top children hospitals in the country. I use them as a resource because they are extremely knowledgable and write things in a very approachable way. I also wish they footnoted their resource, but they did list the studies they drew the information from at the bottom of the PDF.
post #13 of 46
The difference in 50 mg to 100 mg is really not that big of a deal. Someone with aluminum toxicity has levels hundreds of times normal. I imagine the amount in people varies a fair amount based on lifestyle or even the water in the area that you live, so perhaps it's as simple as different studies coming up with different amounts. Either way, both values dwarf the amount of aluminum accumulated from vaccines. Vaccines don't even noticeably raise the level of aluminum in the blood stream above normal background levels.

I try to avoid labeling people as conspiracy theorists, by when every reputable scientist that disagrees with you is dismissed for habit a conflict of interest or accused of suppressing research, not to mention theories like doctors have just changed the names of diseases, I can see how people would think it was warranted.

I hope this course helps people make an informed choice about vaccination, because thats really the important thing, that we're making informed and empowered choices about what we think is best for our families, not making a decision based on fear from something we heard from a friend or read on a biased and inflammatory website.
post #14 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I thought the pig wasting disease thing had been thoroughly debunked already, but it's honestly not an issue I know much about.
 

 

No, it is a fact that the Rotavirus vaccines were both contaminated.

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm205585.htm#news

 

I would like to know how that happened, since there are no other pig parts listed on the product inserts, and also how exactly they determined that it is not a problem, other than "we sat down and decided there is no evidence of a problem"... 

 

So if Mercola sold his whole enterprise right now, he would become a "valid" source since he no longer has financial interest? 

post #15 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I try to avoid labeling people as conspiracy theorists, by when every reputable scientist that disagrees with you is dismissed for habit a conflict of interest or accused of suppressing research, not to mention theories like doctors have just changed the names of diseases, I can see how people would think it was warranted.
I hope this course helps people make an informed choice about vaccination, because thats really the important thing, that we're making informed and empowered choices about what we think is best for our families, not making a decision based on fear from something we heard from a friend or read on a biased and inflammatory website.

 

Rrrrrachel, both sides are guilty of this. You dismissed Bernadine Healy (cardiology, director of NIH, president of Red Cross, etc.) because she said study b/t vaccines and autism link should continue, that there isn't enough information.

 

Other posters come here posting about how terrible, horrible it is that there was a chicken pox death somewhere 15 years ago. That is also fear. 

Apparently only people with vax concerns can be biased or inflammatory??

 

And it would help CHOP a bit if their information matched CDC I would think.

post #16 of 46
No, because he has no qualifications to be an expert on vaccines or immunology, that I know of. It would make him a lot more legitimate, though.
post #17 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

No, because he has no qualifications to be an expert on vaccines or immunology, that I know of. It would make him a lot more legitimate, though.

 

Bernadine. She was a woman. We went at this like 5 times in the other thread. 

post #18 of 46

No aluminum talk!!!  Bolt.gif      biggrinbounce.gif

 

Thanks for the link, prosciencemom.  

 

I do not doubt it is has a very pro-vax POV, but I bet that is useful for some.

 

 

post #19 of 46
I agree the fear thing goes both ways.

The most honorable and lamentedly late doctor Healy does no have the bonafides someone like that man Paul offit does. She also had a track record of selling her opinion.
post #20 of 46
Was talkin about doctor mercola when I said he has no qualifications. I believe he is a man.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › Free Online Course on Vaccinations