- topicVaccinationstagged by System, 5/28/12
Related Forum Threads
- The New And Improved Medical Cure For Hunger And Malnutrition Last post on Today at 11:10 am in I'm Not Vaccinating
- Some interesting articles to be read ... for those with time. Last post on 4/17/14 at 6:27pm in I'm Not Vaccinating
- LOVE........... & cholera Last post on 4/17/14 at 5:55pm in I'm Not Vaccinating
- Pictures Used to Warn Parents Last post on Yesterday at 2:54 pm in I'm Not Vaccinating
- More Ontario mandatory vaxxes Last post on 4/17/14 at 4:05pm in I'm Not Vaccinating
My Vaccine Info
Last edited: 3/4/13
- Vaccinations: Why All the Fuss?Last edited: 12/26/13
- Resources for Non-vaccinating FamiliesLast edited: 1/18/13
- Frontline's War on Selectively Vaccinating ParentsLast edited: 3/14/13
- In Britain 12-Year-Olds Vaccinated Without Parental ConsentLast edited: 3/8/13
what are the cons of vaccinations? - Page 5post #82 of 1036/2/12 at 11:15ampost #83 of 1036/2/12 at 11:54amQuote:
Yeah, it's not so much DNA as it is individual nucleotides, that mean nothing and do nothing without the entire DNA sequence. They can't do anything unless they are strung together in the double helix, and even if there was an entire gene in the vaccine it wouldn't be inserting itself into your DNA.post #84 of 1036/2/12 at 12:10pmQuote:
DNA is found in vaccines, albeit in tiny amounts. I am not sure why you are surprised people want to discuss it, or see studies on it, particularly since they are being asked to inject it into themselves and their children. Hardly shirmp on treadmills - but if you find any studies on shrimp on treadmills, please share.post #85 of 1036/2/12 at 12:36pmpost #86 of 1036/2/12 at 12:37pmI absolutely understand why people want to discuss DNA. I don't personally think it's a concern, but I can see why the topic is compelling and why others are concerned. Also, I really want to hear more about the hybrid thing.
Becky said scientists were putting shrimp on treadmills, which is why I asked. That sounds fascinating too.post #87 of 1036/2/12 at 12:46pmpost #88 of 1036/2/12 at 1:54pmpost #89 of 1036/2/12 at 9:17pmpost #90 of 1036/2/12 at 9:59pm
Well, there have been NO safety tests on genetically modified food, straight from Monsanto's website. So I try to avoid them whenever I can.
As for vaccines, I am not satisfied at all with the current safety tests. We've been over this discussion many times, and my answer is the same. There have never been true safety studies on the full recommended schedule. I know, it's unethical, but that doesn't change the fact that there are no true studies. At least, the studies are unacceptable to Me.
Even an animal study, to learn what happens when a full series of adjuvants are injected, would be a start. How do all of the combined, injected adjuvants affect the mammalian system? We can test other drugs on animals, so why not adjuvants? Scientists are testing cancer therapies on animals as we speak, right now. I know not all viruses affect animals the same way they affect humans, so that's a tricky one. But adjuvants, I assume, would damage mammals in similar ways. So, where are the adjuvant tests? One group injected with a full series of adjuvants, and one group injected with nothing? Compare the the 2 groups. Do the same study with gmo food while you're at it. Pretty simple if you ask me. As far as I know, and I would be glad to be shown otherwise, these tests do not exist.
Or, find 2 groups of willing parents. parents who have decided not to vaccinate, and parents who have decided to fully vaccinate. Throughout each round of vaccines, starting at birth, compare the groups. Take blood samples, hair samples, samples from any place that would be helpful. Have the parents document every time the child goes to the doctor. The parents must be as cooperative as possible, and report everything--milestones, injuries, illnesses, regressions, etc. This kind of study would satisfy me. It's a start.post #91 of 1036/3/12 at 4:27ampost #92 of 1036/3/12 at 4:43am
That's not true.
Squalene has been used in Europe, with disastrous results. Adjuvant 65, derived from peanut oil, has not been approved for use in US pediatric vaccines, but has apparently been used in trials, which can involve thousands.
"The most common adjuvants for human use today are still aluminum hydroxide and aluminum phosphate, although calcium phosphate and oil emulsions also have some use in human vaccinations. During the last 15 years much progress has been made on development, isolation and chemical synthesis of alternative adjuvants such as derivatives of muramyl dipeptide, monophosphoryl lipid A, liposomes, QS21, MF-59 and immunostimulating complexes (ISCOMS). Other areas in adjuvant research which have received much attention are the controlled release of vaccine antigens using biodegradable polymer microspheres and reciprocal enhanced immunogenicity of protein-polysaccharide conjugates."
MF-59 is a squalene adjuvant.
Edited by Taximom5 - 6/3/12 at 4:55ampost #93 of 1036/3/12 at 4:48amQuote:Originally Posted by BeckyBird
Or, find 2 groups of willing parents. parents who have decided not to vaccinate, and parents who have decided to fully vaccinate. Throughout each round of vaccines, starting at birth, compare the groups. Take blood samples, hair samples, samples from any place that would be helpful. Have the parents document every time the child goes to the doctor. The parents must be as cooperative as possible, and report everything--milestones, injuries, illnesses, regressions, etc. This kind of study would satisfy me. It's a start.
Becky. This "study" that you propose would be useless in so many ways. In all ways, really. First, you need a hypothesis. You have to be looking for specific things, not just "samples of everything." You can't just look around and hope to hit pay dirt. It would also be biased in every way imaginable. Selection bias, recall bias...it would also be totally underpowered to the point of no statistical significant at all.
I really, really suggest you read this- http://photoninthedarkness.com/?p=154 It very succinctly explains the difficulties in doing such a study.post #94 of 1036/3/12 at 6:11amWhy would you want parental documentation of every doctor visit? There already is a record of every doctor visit in every child's medical record.
Also, taking samples of "everything" has significant risks for the study population with no potential benefit. You can probably get all the blood, hair, pee, and poop in the world, though parental compliance with frequent fecal sample requests will likely become problematic once study participants are out of diapers. Bone marrow and colonoscopy have sometimes been considered relevant to vaccine related issues, but have obvious drawbacks. You will not be able to get review board approval to conduct those on apparently healthy children in order to study an extremely rare problem. I'm going to guess that, as a kind person who likes children, you probably don't actually want those. What about fasting blood work? Sleep studies? What frequency of behavioral inventories? MRIs and EKGs? Food logs? Reporting of minor illnesses?
But more importantly than any of that, would you consent to having your children participate in such a study?
I would not. It's too much scrutiny, too much testing and record-keeping, and too much time for my kids who are children, not lab rats. My kids don't want to be pooping for the doctor once a year or having strands of hair yanked out or blood drawn at every doctor visit. An annual developmental psych interview/observation plus the associated surveys do not serve their interests. With a study this hefty, you're going to be limited to subjects for whom study participation is the only way to get access to medical care. There goes your chance to recruit non-vax participants.post #95 of 1036/3/12 at 6:24amQuote:Originally Posted by stik
But more importantly than any of that, would you consent to having your children participate in such a study?
I would not. It's too much scrutiny, too much testing and record-keeping, and too much time for my kids who are children, not lab rats. My kids don't want to be pooping for the doctor once a year or having strands of hair yanked out or blood drawn at every doctor visit. An annual developmental psych interview/observation plus the associated surveys do not serve their interests. With a study this hefty, you're going to be limited to subjects for whom study participation is the only way to get access to medical care. There goes your chance to recruit non-vax participants.
I wouldn't either. For the bolded reasons.
I do think a study that looks at the health profile of completely unvaxxed children versus vaxxed children would be helpful.
I think we need to be creative in figuring out how to do it, rather than saying it cannot be done (which I know you did not say, but is sometimes the vibe I get from the pro-vax community).post #96 of 1036/3/12 at 6:35amI think the difficulty is finding the sweet spot - the type and quantity of information that will satisfy those who have safety concerns surrounding vaccines and also be possible to collect without unreasonable intrusion on children and their parents.
I also think some of those who are concerned will, for various reasons, never be satisfied with any safety study. I think there is a portion of the population that scientists have given up on efforts to satisfy, and I think that's ok too.post #97 of 1036/3/12 at 6:43ampost #98 of 1036/3/12 at 6:48amQuote:
However, the study would not really be for them, it would be for undecided parents, future parents, researchers, etc. It could add to a body of knowledge, even though some people are not open to being swayed.post #99 of 1036/3/12 at 6:50amQuote:
Was it vaxxed versus unvaxxed?
Who did the study?
- Vaccinations: Why All the Fuss?
- › 2014 Low Income Support Thread 3 minutes ago
- › Surprise? 8 minutes ago
- › A litany of failed vaccines 16 minutes ago
- › lightweight baby carrier 16 minutes ago
- › The Real Reason Kids Aren't Getting Vaccines 17 minutes ago
- › Starting to feel better 19 minutes ago
- › Pool at MIL's house - wwyd? 21 minutes ago
- › the forum that will keep me on mdc 21 minutes ago
- › Looking for a carrier for an older toddler with special needs 22 minutes ago
- › Homeschooling Through Disney Project 24 minutes ago
- › Epibi Nursing Pads by SparkleMaman
- › By Marie Winn - The Plug-In Drug: Television, Computers, and Family... by Catholic Mama
- › Vaccine: The Controversial Story of Medicine's Greatest Lifesaver by ss834
- › Pyur Diaper Balm by MimiPilla
- › Burt's Bees Mama Bee Belly Balm, Fragrance Free, by KatelynRose
- › Summer Infant Best View Handheld Color Video Monitor with 2.5"... by thebessmartinfo
- › Happy Heiny's One Size Cloth Diapers by SquirmyWorm
- › Homesteader's Kitchen, The: Recipes from Farm to Table by Monica S
- › Rainbow Light Just Once Prenatal One Multivitamin, 90 Tablets by glwilson22
- › Bear Stays Up for Christmas by rosemarievpaulson
- › Turning Five by Sheryl Paul
- › WellFuture WellBelly April 2014 Giveaway by JenniO11
- › 30 Hilarious and Inspiring Parenting Quotes... by Melanie Mayo
- › Should We Stop Acting Like Breastfeeding is a... by Sarah Clark
- › Got Trust? The Antidote for Insecurity &... by Marcy Axness
- › Finding My Tribe After the Death of My Daughter by Melanie Mayo
- › Ten Tips for Surviving Two Under Two by Melanie Mayo
- › The Worry and Wonderment of Parenting by Melanie Mayo
- › 5 Surprising Benefits to Making a Pet a Part... by Melanie Mayo
- › Mining Joy from the Muck of Daily Mothering by Marcy Axness