or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › From Acrodynia to Autism: Mercury Across Generations, More Evidence of Harm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

From Acrodynia to Autism: Mercury Across Generations, More Evidence of Harm - Page 6

post #101 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

So if they did this study (lets say for the sake of argument that it was done by a NVer) and they found absolutely no difference in the health of the vaccinated vs unvaccinated animals then what? Would you go out and vaccinate your kids? Would the debate be over?  Somehow I seriously doubt it....

So what?  Does it matter if any of us as individual posters vax their kids? Not really.

 

The whole "some NVer might never accept the study" is perhaps the worlds lousiest reason not to do a study.

 

Really, studies should be done so everyone ( and primarily those who vax) have more information on vaccines, their consequences, etc.  


Edited by kathymuggle - 10/29/13 at 10:28am
post #102 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

So if they did this study (lets say for the sake of argument that it was done by a NVer) and they found absolutely no difference in the health of the vaccinated vs unvaccinated animals then what? Would you go out and vaccinate your kids? Would the debate be over?  Somehow I seriously doubt it....


I would like to see what happens first. If the study is good, with no COI, even from the no-vax side, then it would be something to consider.
It might put an end to a lot of questions and uncertainty that many of us have with the vaccine program.

Of course, I think the study would be damaging to the vaccine program. Many animals already experience vaccine related injuries and health problems, and that is one reason I think it's happening with humans as well. But, since there is no such study, all we can do is speculate.

 

I could do my own animal study on mice, rats, and chicks, but I don't know how to adjust their injections to match an equivalent human schedule. If someone else could come up with this info, I would like to do my own study. Of course, the results would only be important to me, since nobody else would ever accept my results (understandably!). It would help me though, lol! And it might be a good idea for my son's science fair project when he enters high school.

 

I've been asking for a study like this for several years now, and I still don't see one in the works, even from the "no-vax" side.

post #103 of 114

The point is that it wouldn't really be applicable. Lots of conditions affect humans that don't affect animals. 

 

Plus, vaccines are tested in animals. Usually monkeys and mice. It's part of the vaccine development process. 

post #104 of 114

But I don't want to know how effective a certain vaccine is. Take out the virus, and do a study on the other ingredients.  Then compare that group to the unvaccinated group. Are there any health or developmental differences?

 

Since vaccines are tested on animals, why would a study involving vaccine ingredients be any different? Why is there no such study? I want to know how the full schedule affects animals, compared to the unvaccinated group.

post #105 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post
 

But I don't want to know how effective a certain vaccine is. Take out the virus, and do a study on the other ingredients.  Then compare that group to the unvaccinated group. Are there any health or developmental differences?

 

Since vaccines are tested on animals, why would a study involving vaccine ingredients be any different? Why is there no such study? I want to know how the full schedule affects animals, compared to the unvaccinated group.

 

HUMAN studies have found vaccines to be extremely safe and effective for humans. Why do we need to do a separate study on animals when we've they've already been done on humans? 

 

What I meant when I said it wouldn't really show us much was that there are SO many conditions that NVers think are caused by vaccines and many many of those conditions don't exist in animals. So even if the two groups of animals showed no difference in health, it couldn't show anything as far as those other conditions are concerned.  

post #106 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

So what?  Does it matter if any of us as individual posters vax their kids? Not really.

 

The whole "some NVer might never acdept the study" is perhaps the worlds lousiest reason not to do a study.

 

Really, studies should be done so everyone ( and primarily those who vax) have more information on vaccines, their consequences, etc.  IF it is so great - simply do a real study and reassure everyone! :wink

I can personally think of many area within the US where such groups exist (vac & non) and both have near identical "life styles"(diet, economics, education, etc)  where a large number could be studied and they happen to be in areas where I feel this would be very welcomed. 

post #107 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

Bat, would you be OK with a study that looked at poor unvaccinated children in Detroit (who couldn't afford to get vaccinated, lets say) and compared them to wealthy vaccinated children in Beverly Hills as a way to determine who is healthier between vaccinated and unvaccinated kids?  If not, why not? 

 

Exactly my point. Such a study would be a great waste of money and not say anything about vaccinations, but other factors that determine the health of a child. It wouldn't give additional info about vaccinations.

 

Serenbat, by taking out the poverty factor I of course meant that both groups have to be equal in that respect, and as you so rightly pointed out, most non-vaxxers are not poor. Or uneducated. Most people are not poor or uneducated either, but the groups would have to exactly the same in that respect.

 

The link that said that vaccinated children are more prone to disabilities is from fourteenstudies, it was given here in a previous post. I just pointed out that the reason for that will not be the vaccinations, but the differences in the cohorts. 

 

http://www.fourteenstudies.org/

 

The NAS study will have a qualitative approach, case studies. Not quantitative. Like other studies though, it may have to be purchased online or read in a library. How many times have you went on google scholar and couldn't read what you wanted, because it costs 40 pound per article? 

post #108 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

HUMAN studies have found vaccines to be extremely safe and effective for humans. Why do we need to do a separate study on animals when we've they've already been done on humans? 

 

What I meant when I said it wouldn't really show us much was that there are SO many conditions that NVers think are caused by vaccines and many many of those conditions don't exist in animals. So even if the two groups of animals showed no difference in health, it couldn't show anything as far as those other conditions are concerned.  


There are no HUMAN studies comparing fully vaccinated to non vaccinated. If it's acceptable to test vaccines on animals, then why not test adjuvants as well?  The FULL combination of adjuvants and ingredients, equivalent to what would be given to a child. Are there any animal studies that prove the safety of this? Some of us don't think the human studies are good enough, so animal studies might be the next best thing.

 

If I were to vaccinate, I would want to know that the combination of adjuvants and other vaccine ingredients were tested and found to be safe in animals. I also disagree with your statement that many human conditions don't exist in animals. There are many similarities between chronic health conditions in humans and animals.  This is just something I found http://www.npr.org/2013/04/22/177452982/zoobiquity-what-humans-can-learn-from-animal-illness . Testing vaccine ingredients seems more like a toxicity test, and animals are used all the time for that. Are the vaccine ingredients toxic in any way, and do they cause any illnesses, reactions, strange behavior, etc. How does a full schedule of vaccine ingredients affect animals? I stand by my beliefs on this one. I really do think it would be a beneficial study. I know you don't, so we have to disagree here. Neither of us will budge, that's for sure!

post #109 of 114

One of the big concerns with mercury is autism... 

 

I can't for the life of me figure out how to diagnose a lab rat that has been vaccinated with echolalia, inability to interpret facial expressions or distinguish the crazy running in a wheel from pathological stimming? 

post #110 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by EineMutti View Post

One of the big concerns with mercury is autism... 

I can't for the life of me figure out how to diagnose a lab rat that has been vaccinated with echolalia, inability to interpret facial expressions or distinguish the crazy running in a wheel from pathological stimming? 
Yeah, great point- cause brain damage would manifest the same way across species, duh.
post #111 of 114

It was a joke. 

 

Bolt.gif

post #112 of 114

I want to know if there are any differences at all. What if there are differences between the injected groups and injection free groups? (I'm going to stop using the term "vaccinated", since I'm more interested in a study of the injected ingredients.) Test several species of animals--for that matter, test all animals that would receive vaccines, like pets and farm animals. I just want to know if there is a difference in health or behavior between injected vs. injection free groups. IF there is a difference, and this spans many different species, then wouldn't that be an indication of what might happen to the human animal?

 

I know, a bunch of "what ifs"....but, to my knowledge, there has yet to be a study like this. A type of toxicity study, to determine the safety of injected ingredients that are given frequently throughout the early stages of life.  I think there would be a lot to learn from this type of study. Whether or not it would prove my theory that vaccine ingredients are harmful is beside the point.

post #113 of 114

EineMutti, I think this is a pretty serious discussion so you'd serve it better by not making jokes. If you feel it would be a problem to test with rats then explain your misgivings about it so it can be beneficial contribution to the debate. 

post #114 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthia Mosher View Post
 

EineMutti, I think this is a pretty serious discussion so you'd serve it better by not making jokes. If you feel it would be a problem to test with rats then explain your misgivings about it so it can be beneficial contribution to the debate. 

:yeah

this serious discussion does effect many!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post
 

I want to know if there are any differences at all. What if there are differences between the injected groups and injection free groups? (I'm going to stop using the term "vaccinated", since I'm more interested in a study of the injected ingredients.) Test several species of animals--for that matter, test all animals that would receive vaccines, like pets and farm animals. I just want to know if there is a difference in health or behavior between injected vs. injection free groups. IF there is a difference, and this spans many different species, then wouldn't that be an indication of what might happen to the human animal?

 

I know, a bunch of "what ifs"....but, to my knowledge, there has yet to be a study like this. A type of toxicity study, to determine the safety of injected ingredients that are given frequently throughout the early stages of life.  I think there would be a lot to learn from this type of study. Whether or not it would prove my theory that vaccine ingredients are harmful is beside the point.

Oh, I do know!

 

My close friend a nurse practitioner dealt with a new puppy - vaccines were just a chapter along with OB stuff - he works in an office where he is dealing just with adults and vaccines are not (were NOT) on his radar, no kids even in his immediate family, vaccines were just what he was told and 100% with that SUPER tiny SUPER rare, never going to see it footnote - get's a puppy, goes to a vet, (his first dog ever - all new to this!) puppy has a reaction, a bad one (since she got several he had no way to know what caused it) just makes through, vets states it was a reaction - learns that vets and reactions in animals and the numbers ARE NOT TO BE FOUND! You don't know how many pets have died at a practice or with a certain vet, you don't know the number that have had reactions - alive or dead and it OPENED up his eyes! 

 

http://www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/five-vaccine-ingredients-that-can-harm-your-dog/  apparently concerns about ingredients are on the radar for some people and not just in children!

 

given the laws in this county, I think it would be hard to do the study you want Becky (because of people's views on testing on animals NOT because it can't be done!)  and what lots of us would like to see - BUT WE CAN HOPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations Debate
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › Vaccinations Debate › From Acrodynia to Autism: Mercury Across Generations, More Evidence of Harm