Tragedy for the Greater Good? - Mothering Forums
1 2  3 
I'm Not Vaccinating > Tragedy for the Greater Good?
emmy526's Avatar emmy526 05:19 AM 03-16-2012

 

Here is a story from a recent mother i read:

 

 

Quote:
My dear cousin who I will call D lost her 2 month old son Jayden this past weekend. He had a severe reaction after receiving vaccinations that caused him to have a siezure and bleed out. D is still not taking calls at this time. So I am still unaware of all the details. What she has told me online was that she bf him at 5:30am and he died at 7:10am on Sunday. When I emailed her to encourage her to make sure she had all of his medical records and vaccine lot #'s she assured me they were well aware of what caused the situation and were told by medical staff that it was indeed a vaccine reaction. Not that it should matter but he was a premie. I had someone in another group say it was because he was a premie and someone else claim he must have had an underlying issue. As far as I know there were none and being a premie should not matter.

Now, i have to wonder, do pro vaxers see that as a child "taking one for the herd"?      and what do they think when they see a story like that?   Do they think, well, something must have been wrong with the child anyway?   Or  it was "meant to be"...

 



Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 08:01 AM 03-16-2012

Good questions, Emmy.

 

My son also had a seizure reaction to his 2-month vaccines, and he, too was a premie.  I was also told that his premie status had no bearing on vaccine safety (they didn't bother to tell me vaccine safety has never been tested on premies), and that he was just fine to receive all vaccines on schedule. I was also initially told that it couldn't be a vaccine reaction, because "vaccines don't do that." Thank heavens, the pediatrician and the neurologist both said that yes, vaccines do indeed do that, and they did it in this case, too.

 

From the point of view of the mom of the vaccine victim, I can say that I NEVER wanted to "take one for the herd," and refuse to risk that ever again.

 

But you asked about pro-vaxers.  I'd suggest that you post this on one of the regular vaccine forums as opposed to the "I don't vax" forum, as I don't think the pro-vaxers come here--but then again, you might not want to, as it would probably start a fight.  Some of those pro-vaxers can be very vicious towards non-vaxers, even towards non-vaxers whose children have had serious vaccine reactions.  My experience with them is that they

1) DO expect us to "take one for the herd"

2) deny that our children even had serious reactions

3) spout drivel about how rare reactions are (if it doesn't happen to you, it must be rare)

4) quote reams of vaccine studies done by the vaccine industry, without admitting the potential for conflict of interest, let alone admitting the glaring flaws in those studies.


Marnica's Avatar Marnica 08:07 AM 03-16-2012



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

 

Here is a story from a recent mother i read:

 

 

Now, i have to wonder, do pro vaxers see that as a child "taking one for the herd"?      and what do they think when they see a story like that?   Do they think, well, something must have been wrong with the child anyway?   Or  it was "meant to be"...

 


Im not a provaxer however this is what I have heard some say when a story like this surfaces.

 

'Whenever a child loses his life it is a tragedy, however a reaction like this is so incredibly rare - 1 in a million - that no one should take this as a reason to not vaccinate. The benefits still FAR outweigh the risks and this poor child probably had some underlying issue that had not been identified"

 

 

The whole issue of having an underlying medical problem and blaming that is convenient. Lets assume it's true....IMO this is what makes the whole concept of vaccinating so risky. If we cannot tell if our child has some genetic issue or mitochondrial issue (like Hannah Polling) or some other "silent" problem that has not been identified because there are no symptoms and otherwise would not cause any serious problem - then vaccinating truly is like playing Russian Roullette. But then the whole "serious reactions are 1 in a million" is used to justify playing that game.


 

 


Slmommy's Avatar Slmommy 12:11 PM 03-16-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

But you asked about pro-vaxers.  I'd suggest that you post this on one of the regular vaccine forums as opposed to the "I don't vax" forum, as I don't think the pro-vaxers come here--but then again, you might not want to, as it would probably start a fight.  Some of those pro-vaxers can be very vicious towards non-vaxers, even towards non-vaxers whose children have had serious vaccine reactions.  My experience with them is that they

1) DO expect us to "take one for the herd"

2) deny that our children even had serious reactions

3) spout drivel about how rare reactions are (if it doesn't happen to you, it must be rare)

4) quote reams of vaccine studies done by the vaccine industry, without admitting the potential for conflict of interest, let alone admitting the glaring flaws in those studies.


5) your anecdotal stories mean nothing...

 


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 12:22 PM 03-16-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Good questions, Emmy.

 

My son also had a seizure reaction to his 2-month vaccines, and he, too was a premie.  I was also told that his premie status had no bearing on vaccine safety (they didn't bother to tell me vaccine safety has never been tested on premies), and that he was just fine to receive all vaccines on schedule. I was also initially told that it couldn't be a vaccine reaction, because "vaccines don't do that." Thank heavens, the pediatrician and the neurologist both said that yes, vaccines do indeed do that, and they did it in this case, too.

 

From the point of view of the mom of the vaccine victim, I can say that I NEVER wanted to "take one for the herd," and refuse to risk that ever again.

 

But you asked about pro-vaxers.  I'd suggest that you post this on one of the regular vaccine forums as opposed to the "I don't vax" forum, as I don't think the pro-vaxers come here--but then again, you might not want to, as it would probably start a fight.  Some of those pro-vaxers can be very vicious towards non-vaxers, even towards non-vaxers whose children have had serious vaccine reactions.  My experience with them is that they

1) DO expect us to "take one for the herd"

2) deny that our children even had serious reactions

3) spout drivel about how rare reactions are (if it doesn't happen to you, it must be rare)

4) quote reams of vaccine studies done by the vaccine industry, without admitting the potential for conflict of interest, let alone admitting the glaring flaws in those studies.


yes i thought it would start something totally off topic on the other forum, so i posted it here to get a perspective opinion of other non-vaccinating parents.  

 


member234098's Avatar member234098 12:30 PM 03-16-2012
Q

SilverMoon010's Avatar SilverMoon010 12:57 PM 03-16-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

Surely keeping the baby away from other sick persons would help prevent an illness as pertussis or diphtheria for a preemie until he was healthy enough to get vaxed. Odd thinking, that a baby would have to be healthy enough to get vaxed.  A contradiction in terms?


Excellent point, miriam.

 


Bokonon's Avatar Bokonon 04:45 PM 03-16-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

Quote:


5) your anecdotal stories mean nothing...

 



But "My grandmother almost DIED from measles" is an acceptable anecdote.

 

That poor baby.  My kids were both preemies and vaccinated on schedule at ages that make me shudder when I think about it.  guilty.gif  I was admittedly ignorant and didn't know what I was allowing, nor what the risks were.


jules33's Avatar jules33 05:49 PM 03-16-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

Good questions, Emmy.

 

My son also had a seizure reaction to his 2-month vaccines, and he, too was a premie.  I was also told that his premie status had no bearing on vaccine safety (they didn't bother to tell me vaccine safety has never been tested on premies), and that he was just fine to receive all vaccines on schedule. I was also initially told that it couldn't be a vaccine reaction, because "vaccines don't do that." Thank heavens, the pediatrician and the neurologist both said that yes, vaccines do indeed do that, and they did it in this case, too.

 

From the point of view of the mom of the vaccine victim, I can say that I NEVER wanted to "take one for the herd," and refuse to risk that ever again.

 

But you asked about pro-vaxers.  I'd suggest that you post this on one of the regular vaccine forums as opposed to the "I don't vax" forum, as I don't think the pro-vaxers come here--but then again, you might not want to, as it would probably start a fight.  Some of those pro-vaxers can be very vicious towards non-vaxers, even towards non-vaxers whose children have had serious vaccine reactions.  My experience with them is that they

1) DO expect us to "take one for the herd"

2) deny that our children even had serious reactions

3) spout drivel about how rare reactions are (if it doesn't happen to you, it must be rare)

4) quote reams of vaccine studies done by the vaccine industry, without admitting the potential for conflict of interest, let alone admitting the glaring flaws in those studies.


Taximom, I am shocked that you get the same level of viciousness from the pro-vax camp :(  I can't imagine how scary that experience must have been for you and I'm so glad that your son is ok.  My heart is breaking for the friend of the original poster.  I think deep down most people are just terrified and unwilling to imagine that anything bad can happen to them or their children...that can make them extremely irrational.  

 


member234098's Avatar member234098 07:29 PM 03-16-2012

e


purslaine's Avatar purslaine 07:43 PM 03-16-2012

I think some people straight up think parents are lying when they say their child was harmed by a vaccine.  Alternately they just think parents are delusional and looking for a scapegoat for a negative event.
 

 


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 07:50 PM 03-16-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by miriam View Post

emmy526, the woman who recounted that story is lucky that she has not been falsely accused of SBS or falsely accused of infanticide.

 

Yes.

 

I was told in my refresher course for first aide and CPR at the Red Cross that ALL cases of SIDS in the U.S. are treated by the local police departments as homocides with the parents being the first and primary "persons of interest".  

 

 

yes she is lucky..  i found it amazing the drs actually admitted it was the vaxes, and the mom was on top of getting the lot #'s and making sure appropriate reports are filed.  
 

 


purslaine's Avatar purslaine 07:59 PM 03-16-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

yes she is lucky..  i found it amazing the drs actually admitted it was the vaxes, and the mom was on top of getting the lot #'s and making sure appropriate reports are filed.  
 

 


 

Bolding mine.  It is hard to use the word "lucky" in this situation greensad.gif

 

I do know you mean no disrespect though.

 

 


Slmommy's Avatar Slmommy 08:00 PM 03-16-2012

disappointed.gif a mom lost her 2mo baby b/c of vax and she is "lucky" that she has not been investigated for sbs/homicide, and "lucky" her drs. admit it was vax.........  terrible. (not implying you guys are terrible - the situation/state of things!)

 

oops - we posted at same time kathy... my thoughts exactly!


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 05:39 AM 03-18-2012

the lucky part for the mom is knowing the vaccines killed the baby and she knows the cause, and the drs willingly admitted it........not so lucky parents are put thru the mill of lies by the industry, when it was clearly the vaccines that killed an infant and no one wants to take responsibility, and the parents go around in circles for years before they get an answer about the death...and often its not the answer they know in their hearts to be true..its what the industry told them killed their baby.  


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 05:44 AM 03-18-2012

here is what is happening to many parents

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2075884/Parents-guard-accusations-babies-shaken-death-continue-grow.html#ixzz1h12719QL

 

 

 

Quote:
The disturbing reason why a growing number of parents are being falsely accused of shaking their babies to death

 


Lookingup's Avatar Lookingup 07:48 AM 03-19-2012

This whole thread makes me cry.  That poor, poor mom.  I can't even imagine.

 

I can still hear the ped telling me "It's COINCIDENCE" when Thomas couldn't stop screaming after his vaccines, and that there was "no such thing" as vaccines causing brain swelling.  (I had never heard of Cri encéphalique; how many parents even consider that when their doctor tells them it's abuse not to vaccinate??) 

 

I thank God for sending me one friend who told me to get another opinion, and that the new ped admitted that T was having reactions.  I can't imagine what would have happened if we vaxed beyond 6 months.  Even with mild autism and all the developmental battles, I know very well it could have been much worse.

 

On a side note about doctors recognizing (and admitting to) vaccine reactions... at T's 5 year visit, his pediatrician was not himself.  He admitted that the pressure he was getting from insurance and the AAP for allowing non-vaxers in his practice was unrelenting.  It's sick.

 

 


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 05:10 AM 03-20-2012

http://www.ias.org.nz/natural-immunity/so-how-does-a-mother-feel-when-her-baby-is-dead-from-vaccines-and-all-she-hears-from-doctors-the-government-and-media-is-that-vaccines-are-safe-and-effective/

 

 

 

Quote:

So how does a mother feel when her baby is dead from vaccines and all she hears from doctors, the government and media is that vaccines are safe and effective?

by ADMIN on DECEMBER 10, 2011

 


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 06:35 AM 03-25-2012

 i own  a  forum on supporting parents who choose not to vaccinate, and it saddens me to say, in the last 3 weeks, i have heard now of 3, yes 3 babies dying after their 2month shots.   I am actually outraged...and sickened that there is no real investigation going on into all babies that die within a 48hr period after being vaccinated.  


Bokonon's Avatar Bokonon 08:18 AM 03-25-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

 i own  a  forum on supporting parents who choose not to vaccinate, and it saddens me to say, in the last 3 weeks, i have heard now of 3, yes 3 babies dying after their 2month shots.   I am actually outraged...and sickened that there is no real investigation going on into all babies that die within a 48hr period after being vaccinated.  


censored.gif  Those poor babies and families.

 

Can you give them each other's contact information, and maybe together they can contact the local news or something?  I doubt anything would come of it, as how strongly the media is controlled, but you never know.

 


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 01:53 PM 03-25-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokonon View Post


censored.gif  Those poor babies and families.

 

Can you give them each other's contact information, and maybe together they can contact the local news or something?  I doubt anything would come of it, as how strongly the media is controlled, but you never know.

 


at the very least, the NPR will air a story about it, i would think...i know our local public station would.  i have access to the station, and i can have my own segment on the air if i want to...maybe i should start a health talk show on the radio, and see what kind of discussions come up.  Thanks for the idea

 


boomer78's Avatar boomer78 06:19 PM 03-27-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post



 


Im not a provaxer however this is what I have heard some say when a story like this surfaces.

 

'Whenever a child loses his life it is a tragedy, however a reaction like this is so incredibly rare - 1 in a million - that no one should take this as a reason to not vaccinate. The benefits still FAR outweigh the risks and this poor child probably had some underlying issue that had not been identified"

 

 

The whole issue of having an underlying medical problem and blaming that is convenient. Lets assume it's true....IMO this is what makes the whole concept of vaccinating so risky. If we cannot tell if our child has some genetic issue or mitochondrial issue (like Hannah Polling) or some other "silent" problem that has not been identified because there are no symptoms and otherwise would not cause any serious problem - then vaccinating truly is like playing Russian Roullette. But then the whole "serious reactions are 1 in a million" is used to justify playing that game.


 

 



Marnica, this is exactly what I always hear (or read) from pro vaxes when something tragic happens with a child following a vaccine. The incredibly rare reactions are not a reason not to vax and the child must have had an underlying condition. End of story.

 


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 06:02 AM 03-28-2012

We have the capacity to send a man to the moon, and visit distant galaxies with our space technology..heck, now we've gone to Mars to study the rocks to see if life was there before...we have the world literally at our fingertips via iphones, etc...but science can't come up with a test for babies to see who is at risk from a vaccine reaction??  in this day and age, one would think pharma would have invented such a test, capitalized off of it, made an antidote for said child, capitalized off the antidote, then make more money off of the vaccine eventually given because  pharma gave the "all clear" sign for said child to receive the vaccine, and if they would put their money where their mouth is, they'd make more money off of doing this kind of regimen.  They could actually guarantee parents there would be no reactions, and would gladly pay them for a lifetime of care should there be mistake made and the child suffered.  


Slmommy's Avatar Slmommy 06:27 AM 03-28-2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

We have the capacity to send a man to the moon, and visit distant galaxies with our space technology..heck, now we've gone to Mars to study the rocks to see if life was there before...we have the world literally at our fingertips via iphones, etc...but science can't come up with a test for babies to see who is at risk from a vaccine reaction??  in this day and age, one would think pharma would have invented such a test, capitalized off of it, made an antidote for said child, capitalized off the antidote, then make more money off of the vaccine eventually given because  pharma gave the "all clear" sign for said child to receive the vaccine, and if they would put their money where their mouth is, they'd make more money off of doing this kind of regimen.  They could actually guarantee parents there would be no reactions, and would gladly pay them for a lifetime of care should there be mistake made and the child suffered.  

If that were true I think they would have done it. I think it is still more profitable to just keep adding vax to the schedule (and additional boosters) and maligning the questioners. Right now it seems like they are really trying to get the adult market moreso than ever before, especially with flu and dtap. Might as well go for the easier marketing routes before having to invest in something as expensive as actual safety studies. Ensuring your child won't have a reaction, or being able to predict what sort of reaction, that would take a TON of investment (assuming possible), and there just can't be that much incentive. 

 

Kinda ot, but not really, has anyone seen the movie Unthinkable with Samuel L Jackson? I watched it the other night and it made me think of vax... the ethical/moral issue of harming/killing a few people to "save" many.


 

 


Bokonon's Avatar Bokonon 08:56 AM 03-28-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

If that were true I think they would have done it. I think it is still more profitable to just keep adding vax to the schedule (and additional boosters) and maligning the questioners. Right now it seems like they are really trying to get the adult market moreso than ever before, especially with flu and dtap. Might as well go for the easier marketing routes before having to invest in something as expensive as actual safety studies. Ensuring your child won't have a reaction, or being able to predict what sort of reaction, that would take a TON of investment (assuming possible), and there just can't be that much incentive. 

 

 

 


I agree.  There isn't any money to be made in that kind of test, and lots of money to be made in vaccines.  It's all about the bottom line...never health.

 


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 12:28 PM 03-28-2012

but if parents had a choice whether or not to test their kids, don't you think some would opt NOT to just out of dr pressure?  I can just imagine a dr telling the parents, "yes there a risk blood test test available, but i don't think  your child would qualify to take it, theres not enough risk factors in your family"....and the newer vaxes would still be created, sold and administered, regardless, so they arent losing any money.  


Bokonon's Avatar Bokonon 12:35 PM 03-28-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post

but if parents had a choice whether or not to test their kids, don't you think some would opt NOT to just out of dr pressure?  I can just imagine a dr telling the parents, "yes there a risk blood test test available, but i don't think  your child would qualify to take it, theres not enough risk factors in your family"....and the newer vaxes would still be created, sold and administered, regardless, so they arent losing any money.  



I think a choice would be wonderful.  I just don't think it would ever happen, because there wouldn't be much money to be made from the test.  The R&D would have to be from a company that doesn't make vaxes, because otherwise it would be a conflict of interest to their own products, and shareholders wouldn't want it.


Slmommy's Avatar Slmommy 01:42 PM 03-28-2012

I don't see how this could even be possible... we don't even know what underlying genetic/immunological/environmental/ etc issues could factor in vax reactions. And here we speculate vax could be playing a role in neurological disorders, learning disorders, auto immune issues, etc. They have no clue the long term, cumulative consequences of the pediatric vax schedule, and it changes every few years... Ethically we can't even do "real" safety studies on one vaccine. We don't even know the safety of adjuvants. There is no financial incentive to even study the real safety of one vaccine - parents either want it or are convinced or strong armed into getting it. Pharm industry doesn't even have to justify vax for health anymore - for Chicken pox financial issue of parents missing work was enough for it to be added to schedule. dizzy.gifWhile sel/del may be becoming more popular, I think alternative vaxers are still very much the minority, and met with increasing hostility.

 

I guess they could test for mitochrondrial disorders, look at some (known) genetic markers for autoimmune, some kind of allergy testing... but I don't think that would be close to enough, some of those tests are barely reliable as is. Is there even a way to know which kids will have febrile seizures? We don't even know what causes autism. 

 

A few months ago I met someone who had been working as a researcher developing new methods for identifying/diagnosing some autoimmune disorders. She had recently quit her job upset with the profit driven-ness of the industry that she felt was hindering valuable developments. She didn't, and I'm sure couldn't go into specifics with me, but I got the real impression she was disgusted.

 

You read the Simpsonwood Transcripts and the experts there were all admitting they have no real clue what ethylmercury could do to developing babies. They mention concern about aluminum and have no clue what that would do either...

 

Speculation labeled as science. 


tonttu's Avatar tonttu 11:36 AM 03-29-2012

First of all , let me say , that I cannot even begin to know , how the thread starter´s relative must feel now .

No mother should have to bury her child hug2.gif

But it does get a big tiring , when non-vaxers , who claim to love their children , come along and blame EVERYTHING and ANYTHING to the bad , bad vaccines .

We love our kids and that is why we vaccinate them , so that they DO NOT die or have serious side effects from so - called " kids " diseases , that used to kill thousands of kids ( and still do in many countries ) before the age of five . 

Of course , it is the single most unimagineable thing , that can happen , if your child dies from an , extremely rare and unlikely , reaction to a vaccine , but the risk stands in no relation to the benefit , when the vaccine does its job properly .


emmy526's Avatar emmy526 12:02 PM 03-29-2012


Quote:
Originally Posted by tonttu View Post

First of all , let me say , that I cannot even begin to know , how the thread starter´s relative must feel now .

No mother should have to bury her child hug2.gif

But it does get a big tiring , when non-vaxers , who claim to love their children , come along and blame EVERYTHING and ANYTHING to the bad , bad vaccines .

We love our kids and that is why we vaccinate them , so that they DO NOT die or have serious side effects from so - called " kids " diseases , that used to kill thousands of kids ( and still do in many countries ) before the age of five . 

Of course , it is the single most unimagineable thing , that can happen , if your child dies from an , extremely rare and unlikely , reaction to a vaccine , but the risk stands in no relation to the benefit , when the vaccine does its job properly .


i dont know of any vaccine that does its job properly without some kind of side effects and for some kids, the side effects last a lifetime, and that lifetime might be a day.  For my son, who is 24, it is a never ending battle. 

 


Tags: Vaccinations
1 2  3 

Up