or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › vaccines are great
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

vaccines are great - Page 3

post #41 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by djrn View Post


The problem with flu vaccines in particular is that the influenza virus mutates rapidly and sometimes unpredictably. The vaccines are produced to battle the strains that scientists expect to become prominent several months later. From what I've seen, the H1N1 vaccine was about as effective as any other similar vaccine. There are conflicting studies about the side effects, but many studies show that it is as safe as similar vaccines. It is credited with preventing around 1 million illnesses and hundreds of deaths in the US. I would also point out that the vaccine was very similar in its production to seasonal flu vaccines, which makes me skeptical of most claims about major risks.

 

Actually, the problem with the flu vaccine is that it doesn't work.  Please read what the Cochrane Review has to say about the flu shot--they are widely considered the gold standard of medical review.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001269.pub4/full

"The results of this review seem to discourage the utilisation of vaccination against influenza in healthy adults as a routine public health measure. As healthy adults have a low risk of complications due to respiratory disease, the use of the vaccine may be only advised as an individual protection measure against symptoms in specific cases."

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by djrn View Post


By "regressed," do you mean that they began to display autistic symptoms? It is known that autism commonly manifests before the age of 2 years.old, regardless of whether the child is fully, partially, or not at all vaccinated. It is apparently a coincidence that this also happens to be around the time at which a number of vaccines are provided. As I said, there is no scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism, despite numerous rigorous studies.

 

 

 

I don't even know where to start here.  You state things as though you are absolutely correct, and you're...well, absolutely wrong.  

 

Just because autism commonly manifests at around a certain age doesn't mean that it always manifests at that age, and just because some children develop autism as a result of vaccination does not mean that all cases are caused by vaccination. Nobody is saying that all cases are caused by vaccination, but you are apparently trying to say, "Look!  There are cases weren't caused by vaccination, therefore NONE OF THEM ARE!!"  And that's just ridiculous. And very unscientific.

 

It is not at all a coincidence that autism symptoms manifest shortly after vaccination. (Funny, nobody claims that their child's autism manifested "around " the time of vaccination, and certainly never right BEFORE a vaccine visit. They either notice an immediate reaction, or one that starts 10-21 days post-vaccination--which fits perfectly with vaccine0induced seizures described by Merck concerning the MMR.) Many parents have before-and-after video footage, showing a healthy, normal, and engaged toddler talking and laughing with his parents the day before a vaccine visit, and the same child flapping, spinning, screaming,and utterly unable to communicate the day after. And some vaccine-induced autism cases have been admitted and compensate just this year.

 

Perhaps you aren't aware that the US Department of Health and Human Services has also admitted and compensated a couple of thousand cases of vaccine-induced brain damage (including many cases of autism)?  Kind of silly for anyone to think that yes, vaccines can cause brain damage, but no, not the brain damage known as autism.

 

There are also a few documented cases of slightly older children being given vaccines and regressing into autism.

 

The "numerous rigorous studies" you mention are not rigorous.  They are seriously flawed in many ways. Read how here: http://www.fourteenstudies.org/studies.html, and please don't give us rants about how you don't like anti-vaccine sites.  Their criticisms of the studies are valid, whether or not we like the site.

 

Perhaps the most serious flaw in those studies is the way that they are interpreted.  Those studies are not designed to catch subgroups who might be affected by vaccines.  They are designed to show no link, and that's exactly what they do.  Children who might be predisposed to have vaccine reactions at all--children with family histories of autoimmune disorders, learning disabilities, seizures, food allergies, intestinal disorders, eczema, and, of course, vaccine reactions, are excluded from the studies.

 

 The official conclusion by the epidemiologists is "Based on the current research, we can neither confirm nor deny a causal link between vaccines and autism."

 

In fact, that's exactly the position of the CDC:  "WE CAN NEITHER CONFIRM NOR DENY A CAUSAL LINK."  

That is not the same thing as saying, "There is no link."  Not by a long shot.

 

So it seems like a good idea to take a closer look at the people who are saying "OMG!!  Science!  There is no link!"  Are they saying this because they are parroting what they've read elsewhere? Or are they saying this because they believe it to be the case, in spite of the fact that "science" has NOT concluded that there is no link, "science" can neither confirm nor deny a link, because they have not investigated the link?

 

Sorry, taking two groups of vaccinated children with similar rates of autistic symptoms and comparing....(drum roll, please)....ONLY the number of antigens used in the vaccines received?  No, that is NOT investigating the link.   You don't investigate a link by examining a tiny, unimportant fraction of an environmental exposure (without a true control group, too), and then say "ha-ha!  Absolutely no link whatsoever!"

 

And while we look at this, we need to remember that we are dealing with one of the most powerful and corrupt lobbies EVER.  You think the banking industry was unethical?  NOTHING compared to what Big Pharma has done, over and over and over again, and continues to do.

 

And those of us who actually think for ourselves, rather than relying on the media to tell us what to think, realize that we can't trust the studies designed and executed by such an industry, any more than we can trust cigarette/cancer studies designed by the tobacco industry.


Edited by Taximom5 - 6/21/13 at 4:01am
post #42 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Actually, the problem with the flu vaccine is that it doesn't work.  Please read what the Cochrane Review has to say about the flu shot--they are widely ocnsidered the gold standard of medical review.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD001269.pub4/full
"The results of this review seem to discourage the utilisation of vaccination against influenza in healthy adults as a routine public health measure. As healthy adults have a low risk of complications due to respiratory disease, the use of the vaccine may be only advised as an individual protection measure against symptoms in specific cases."


Quote:
I don't even know where to start here.  You state things as though you are absolutely correct, and you're...well, absolutely wrong.  

Just because autism commonly manifests at around a certain age doesn't mean that it always manifests at that age, and just because some children develop autism as a result of vaccination does not mean that all cases are caused by vaccination. Nobody is saying that all cases are caused by vaccination, but you are apparently trying to say, "Look!  There are cases weren't caused by vaccination, therefore NONE OF THEM ARE!!"  And that's just ridiculous. And very unscientific.

It is not at all a coincidence that autism symptoms manifest shortly after vaccination. (Funny, nobody claims that their child's autism manifested "around " the time of vaccination, and certainly never right BEFORE a vaccine visit. They either notice an immediate reaction, or one that starts 10-21 days post-vaccination--which fits perfectly with vaccine0induced seizures described by Merck concerning the MMR.) Many parents have before-and-after video footage, showing a healthy, normal, and engaged toddler talking and laughing with his parents the day before a vaccine visit, and the same child flapping, spinning, screaming,and utterly unable to communicate the day after. And some vaccine-induced autism cases have been admitted and compensate just this year.

Perhaps you aren't aware that the US Department of Health and Human Services has also admitted and compensated a couple of thousand cases of vaccine-induced brain damage (including many cases of autism)?  Kind of silly for anyone to think that yes, vaccines can cause brain damage, but no, not the brain damage known as autism.

There are also a few documented cases of slightly older children being given vaccines and regressing into autism.

The "numerous rigorous studies" you mention are not rigorous.  They are seriously flawed in many ways. Read how here: http://www.fourteenstudies.org/studies.html, and please don't give us rants about how you don't like anti-vaccine sites.  Their criticisms of the studies are valid, whether or not we like the site.

Perhaps the most serious flaw in those studies is the way that they are interpreted.  Those studies are not designed to catch subgroups who might be affected by vaccines.  They are designed to show no link, and that's exactly what they do.  Children who might be predisposed to have vaccine reactions at all--children with family histories of autoimmune disorders, learning disabilities, seizures, food allergies, intestinal disorders, eczema, and, of course, vaccine reactions, are excluded from the studies.

 The official conclusion by the epidemiologists is "Based on the current research, we can neither confirm nor deny a causal link between vaccines and autism."

In fact, that's exactly the position of the CDC:  "WE CAN NEITHER CONFIRM NOR DENY A CAUSAL LINK."  


That is not the same thing as saying, "There is no link."  Not by a long shot.

So it seems like a good idea to take a closer look at the people who are saying "OMG!!  Science!  There is no link!"  Are they saying this because they are parroting what they've read elsewhere? Or are they saying this because they believe it to be the case, in spite of the fact that "science" has NOT concluded that there is no link, "science" can neither confirm nor deny a link, because they have not investigated the link

Sorry, taking two groups of vaccinated children with similar rates of autistic symptoms and comparing....(drum roll, please)....ONLY the number of antigens used int he vaccines received?  No, that is NOT investigating the link.   You don't investigate a link by examining a tiny, unimportant fraction of an environmental exposure (without a true control group, too), and then say "ha-ha!  Absolutely no link whatsoever!"

And while we look at this, we need to remember that we are dealing with one of the most powerful and corrupt lobbies EVER.  You think the banking industry was unethical?  NOTHING compared to what Big Pharma has done, over and over and over again, and continues to do.

And those of us who actually think for ourselves, rather than relying on the media to tell us what to think, realize that we can't trust the studies designed and executed by such an industry, any more than we can trust cigarette/cancer studies designed by the tobacco industry.

Awesomely put! I had to say I thoroughly enjoyed your use of caps as well. Your reasons above are exactly the reason I won't and never will vaccinate my kids. I'm going to tell them that if they want to risk a vaccination in their adult life-- so be it, I won't stop them. But right now, I will not inject something like that in their bodies. No way.

I also think it's funny you say "flu vaccine doesn't work" because DH comes home from work every "flu season" to tell me that the office is having some drug pusher come in to poke everyone and he loves to debate the coworkers that get the shot. He doesn't get one. He doesn't get the flu. Coincidentally, the coworkers who GET the shot GET the flu. Strange isn't? My conspiracy theory is Big Pharma companies dumbing down our immune systems to make more money on us later when we need things like a thyroid pill to take everyday or metformin. But this isn't just vaccines-- our food system is to blame as well (antibiotics in the food supply for starters...). But it's not a very scientific theory. Just an observation.
post #43 of 47
Quote:

Originally Posted by djrn View Post
 


By "regressed," do you mean that they began to display autistic symptoms? It is known that autism commonly manifests before the age of 2 years.old, regardless of whether the child is fully, partially, or not at all vaccinated. It is apparently a coincidence that this also happens to be around the time at which a number of vaccines are provided. As I said, there is no scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism, despite numerous rigorous studies.

 

 

 

Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

Quote:


It is not at all a coincidence that autism symptoms manifest shortly after vaccination. (Funny, nobody claims that their child's autism manifested "around " the time of vaccination, and certainly never right BEFORE a vaccine visit. They either notice an immediate reaction, or one that starts 10-21 days post-vaccination--which fits perfectly with vaccine0induced seizures described by Merck concerning the MMR.) Many parents have before-and-after video footage, showing a healthy, normal, and engaged toddler talking and laughing with his parents the day before a vaccine visit, and the same child flapping, spinning, screaming,and utterly unable to communicate the day after. And some vaccine-induced autism cases have been admitted and compensate just this year.

 

 

Bolded in djrn mine.

 

The relevant questions are:

a. What is the probability that the symptoms occur due to random chance? 

b. What is the probability that the symptoms occur due to vax? 

 

'apparent', 'as far as we know' ... are - not - enough.

It's - crucial - to quantify these statements.  Numbers are needed, not verbal qualifiers.

 

Then, how are these numbers computed?  2 possibilities:

- if the computation is kosher, then how do they compare?   Is a = b roughly, a = 0.1xb, a=0.01xb, a=10xb, a=100xb?

- if bogus computation, ignore.

 

So far, I've not found what these numbers are for autism-vax ... pls if someone has any link or resource, pls do share.

post #44 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaMunchkin View Post

Bolded in djrn mine.

The relevant questions are:
a. What is the probability that the symptoms occur due to random chance? 
b. What is the probability that the symptoms occur due to vax? 

'apparent', 'as far as we know' ... are - not - enough.
It's - crucial - to quantify these statements.  Numbers are needed, not verbal qualifiers.

Then, how are these numbers computed?  2 possibilities:
- if the computation is kosher, then how do they compare?   Is a = b roughly, a = 0.1xb, a=0.01xb, a=10xb, a=100xb?
- if bogus computation, ignore.

So far, I've not found what these numbers are for autism-vax ... pls if someone has any link or resource, pls do share.

Parents report these symptoms to their doctors--who have been trained to believe that vaccines cannot cause them. Therefore, they are rarely if ever officially recognized/reported/investigated.
post #45 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by serenbat View Post

 

Other countries do not always act like the US does! We even have requirements for visas as well, so we do require non-US citizens to be vaccinated.

 

As far as thinking things are being done without "public impute", that is not technically the case, when you vote (and those who don't- tuff-tuff!) you give those in office the right to vote how and when they choose and under the guise that they are doing so on your behalf - public impute (as you mean it) is not required, you gave that up when you voted the voters in!!

 

IMO- and this does go for vaccines too, freedoms are not really being taken away, too many simply have no clue how the "system" works and they don't do there share to change it.........VOTE and know who you are voting for and do ALL you can to change laws (those who were voted in created them and new ones too) and make your voice heard.

 

these might also be on interest to you - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccination_Act

http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2005/9241580364_country_list.pdf

http://www.travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/cis/cis_4965.html

http://france.angloinfo.com/family/schooling-education/vaccinations/

http://www.vaccineethics.org/issue_briefs/requirements.php

i think too  many people have allowed the gov to take over their wellbeing, (the masses)and then there's those who manipulate the gov for their own well being (politicians, corporations)..

post #46 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post


Parents report these symptoms to their doctors--who have been trained to believe that vaccines cannot cause them. Therefore, they are rarely if ever officially recognized/reported/investigated.

 

It's not even bogus data - the data is not even collected.

post #47 of 47
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaMunchkin View Post

It's not even bogus data - the data is not even collected.
Exactly.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › vaccines are great