Amy Parker's hit piece, "Growing Up Unvaccinated," deconstructed. - Page 5 - Mothering Forums

Amy Parker's hit piece, "Growing Up Unvaccinated," deconstructed.

fruitfulmomma's Avatar fruitfulmomma
04:54 PM Liked: 32153
#121 of 168
01-29-2014 | Posts: 4,205
Joined: Jun 2002
Quote:
 As far as I am aware MMR was made available in 1963.  

 

Quote:

 

Looks like it was the measles-only vax that was available in 1968.

 

 

And for our newcomers, please be sure to take a look at the forum guidelines - http://www.mothering.com/community/a/vaccination-forum-guidelines

 

Quote:
I'm Not Vaccinating - This is a support-only forum for those not or those seriously considering not vaccinating. Here we host discussion of issues that arise when choosing to not vaccinate and sharing of resources and information that are related to the no-vax decision. Members who are vaccinating should not post here to debate or argue accuracy or opinion of things posted. 

 

 

 


Mirzam's Avatar Mirzam
04:57 PM Liked: 181685
#122 of 168
01-29-2014 | Posts: 7,629
Joined: Sep 2002

The single measles vaccine was introduced into the UK in 1968, MMR in 1988. Single measles vaccine was introduced into the US in 1963, but it was a live virus that was administered with measles immunoglobulin because it was so reactive. The attenuated live vaccine was introduced in 1968. There was no MMR vaccine in 1963 in any country. The MMR vaccine became available in the US in 1971.


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
09:55 PM Liked: 266502
#123 of 168
01-29-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmhmhmhm View Post

Hi taximom4 - I went to that link you used to source your statement that MMR was not available in the UK until 1998; and that page says nothing of the sort, so I'm wondering where you got that information.  As far as I am aware MMR was made available in 1963.  The NHS link you posted http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/vaccinations/Pages/mmr-vaccine.aspx says that in 1998 a paper was written by Andrew Wakefield that created doubts and controversy around the MMR vaccine.  And then it says that this paper was later completely discredited and Wakefield no longer a doctor in the UK.  In 2010, health experts criticized media reporting of the MMR-autism controversy for triggering a decline in vaccination rates.  
Before publication of Wakefield's findings, the inoculation rate for MMR in the UK was 92%; after publication, the rate dropped to below 80%. In 1998, there were 56 measles cases in the UK; by 2008, there were 1348 cases, with 2 confirmed deaths.  http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/autism/%E2%80%9Cparanoia-strikes-deep%E2%80%9D-mmr-vaccine-and-autism


I understand the worry about not properly understood vaccinations for young children, but I also fear the misunderstanding and false proliferation of side effects caused by vaccines that turn out to be false and cost lives.  

Anyways I'd still like to know where you sourced your information that the MMR vaccine was not available in the UK until 1998.  

Hi, hmhmhmhm, welcome to the forum!

Perhaps you skipped around when you went to the link I posted? It says very clearly, "Since the MMR vaccine was introduced in 1988..." in the fourth paragraph. I'm wondering why you think the MMR was available in 1963, as you didn't post a source for that.

Oh, and you got my name wrong, too.
Sukhada's Avatar Sukhada
03:14 AM Liked: 587
#124 of 168
01-30-2014 | Posts: 210
Joined: Jul 2011
It's not strange to wait 6 months re: HPV. Pre-cancerous cells can take many, many years to transition to cancer and often spontaneously resolve. They often do a repeat pap/wait and see approach before more invasive biopsies or removal of cells.
serenbat's Avatar serenbat
07:10 AM Liked: 106305
#125 of 168
01-30-2014 | Posts: 4,447
Joined: Nov 2007

This is some good information on fluoride - http://www.dancingwithwater.com/articles/how-to-remove-fluoride-from-water/

 

http://www.brita.net/ae/faqs_contaminations.html?L=24&cat=7#2


Mirzam's Avatar Mirzam
07:14 AM Liked: 181685
#126 of 168
01-30-2014 | Posts: 7,629
Joined: Sep 2002
Quote:

Thanks for that! 


applejuice's Avatar applejuice
08:09 AM Liked: 87234
#127 of 168
01-30-2014 | Posts: 18,536
Joined: Oct 2002

RE: fluoride.

 

Ever see the huge astronaut-like suit that a water worker wears when fluoride is put into the water? It was put in the press before LA voted to refuse fluoride in its water in 1960s. I will look in my books for it.


Mirzam's Avatar Mirzam
08:15 AM Liked: 181685
#128 of 168
01-30-2014 | Posts: 7,629
Joined: Sep 2002

Not fluoride, farming GMOs

 


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
10:51 AM Liked: 266502
#129 of 168
01-30-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by applejuice View Post

RE: fluoride.

Ever see the huge astronaut-like suit that a water worker wears when fluoride is put into the water? It was put in the press before LA voted to refuse fluoride in its water in 1960s. I will look in my books for it.

LA doesn't have fluoridated water? Or did they cave in at a later date?
applejuice's Avatar applejuice
02:13 PM Liked: 87234
#130 of 168
01-30-2014 | Posts: 18,536
Joined: Oct 2002

In 1996, Governor Pete Wilson-R, mandated fluoride in all communities statewide that have 100,000 or more residents. So Los Angeles has fluoride in its water. I helped circulate a petition at the time, but obviously it went no where. This article seems to be all over the place about when LA started to fluoridate, but it is currently fluoridated. 

 

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/dec/22/local/me-fluoride22

 

The first city in the world to fluoridate I believe was Grand Rapids, MI. 

I seem to recall that cancer rates are highest in  cities where the water has been fluoridated for the  longest time. 

And I know for sure that dentists are not moving out of Grand Rapids, MI.


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
05:53 PM Liked: 266502
#131 of 168
01-30-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sukhada View Post

It's not strange to wait 6 months re: HPV. Pre-cancerous cells can take many, many years to transition to cancer and often spontaneously resolve. They often do a repeat pap/wait and see approach before more invasive biopsies or removal of cells.

 

You are right. I found a few sites saying exactly that. Here is one:  http://www.cancer.ca/en/cancer-information/cancer-type/cervical/pathology-and-staging/precancerous-conditions/?region=on

 

However, her story still doesn't ring true.  She says that she was diagnosed with precancerous HPV:  "In my twenties I got precancerous HPV and spent 6 months of my life wondering how I was going to tell my two children under the age of 7 that mummy might have cancer before it was safely removed."

 

​Now, if they knew that she had a "precancerous HPV infection," why would they wait 6 months to see if it would resolve or not? Is she confusing genital warts with precancerous lesions?  Or did her doctors confuse the two?  I ask because most HPV infections do not lead to cancer.


dterpstra's Avatar dterpstra
11:00 AM Liked: 611
#132 of 168
02-01-2014 | Posts: 1
Joined: Feb 2014

Yes and yes!  I had a facebook friend throw the "Growing Up Unvaccinated" article out there and noticed all of the inconsistencies, but deemed it pointless to argue with her about the consistencies given she (and her faithful "likers") wouldn't know the first thing about what this author claimed to live.  THANK YOU for typing up a valid response on it.  THANK YOU for working to put a stop on ignorant assumptions about the motives behind "anti-vaxers".  I am sure you have many haters for writing this, but know that your utilitarian ways are appreciated by many!  Cheers


Chloebelle's Avatar Chloebelle
02:11 PM Liked: 7524
#133 of 168
02-01-2014 | Posts: 283
Joined: May 2010

Great work!

 

Saw this on my news feed a few times, but never read it. I'm finding a lot more propaganda out there these days. It's brewing. The big guys are at work trying to pit pro-vaxers and non-vaxers against each other. Create fear so we'll give up our health freedoms just like we gave up  our privacy freedoms after 911. Sick world.


applejuice's Avatar applejuice
04:28 PM Liked: 87234
#134 of 168
02-01-2014 | Posts: 18,536
Joined: Oct 2002
Quote:
 ....wouldn't know the first thing about what this author claimed to live. ...

I grew up never vaccinated in the polio era and I know what this author claimed to live is a BIG FAT LIE.

 

And, welcome, dterpstra, to mdc and to the I Am NOT vaccinating forum.


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
07:34 PM Liked: 266502
#135 of 168
02-03-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloebelle View Post
 

Great work!

 

Saw this on my news feed a few times, but never read it. I'm finding a lot more propaganda out there these days. It's brewing. The big guys are at work trying to pit pro-vaxers and non-vaxers against each other. Create fear so we'll give up our health freedoms just like we gave up  our privacy freedoms after 911. Sick world.

 

Yes, you are right, there is an absolute firestorm of propaganda out there these days. It's like they've declared war on all independent thought.


Jean-LucS's Avatar Jean-LucS
12:02 AM Liked: 10
#136 of 168
02-07-2014 | Posts: 1
Joined: Feb 2014

In fact, very nice article ! So well said !

 

Congratulations... :-)


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
06:25 AM Liked: 266502
#137 of 168
02-08-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jean-LucS View Post

In fact, very nice article ! So well said !

Congratulations... :-)

Thank you, Jean-LucS, and welcome to the forum!
TheSkeptic's Avatar TheSkeptic
05:26 PM Liked: 0
#138 of 168
02-10-2014 | Posts: 1
Joined: Feb 2014
I didn't learn anything from this. I was looking for an alternative view to Amy Parker's piece. But all I found was someone talking about it in bold letters. As if that's supposed to mean anything. "Here now look at this." "Now take it even further." This has no value or meaning. It provides no contrast to Parker's piece at all.

I also saw someone quote the forum guidelines about this being a "support only" forum. Are the people here suffering through diseases or depression and is that why they need support only? How can anyone get an educated opinion if they only hear one side? I'm sceptical of everything, vaccines and doctors' opinions included. However, I'm more sceptical of anyone or any place that preaches one side only.

 


fruitfulmomma's Avatar fruitfulmomma
05:31 PM Liked: 32153
#139 of 168
02-10-2014 | Posts: 4,205
Joined: Jun 2002
Quote:
I also saw someone quote the forum guidelines about this being a "support only" forum. Are the people here suffering through diseases or depression and is that why they need support only? How can anyone get an educated opinion if they only hear one side? I'm sceptical of everything, vaccines and doctors' opinions included. However, I'm more sceptical of anyone or any place that preaches one side only.

This is a sub-forum. There are several other forums with different view points presented. Feel free to browse them if you are not finding what you need here - http://www.mothering.com/community/f/47/vaccinations


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
07:39 PM Liked: 266502
#140 of 168
02-10-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSkeptic View Post
I didn't learn anything from this. I was looking for an alternative view to Amy Parker's piece. But all I found was someone talking about it in bold letters. As if that's supposed to mean anything. "Here now look at this." "Now take it even further." This has no value or meaning. It provides no contrast to Parker's piece at all.

I also saw someone quote the forum guidelines about this being a "support only" forum. Are the people here suffering through diseases or depression and is that why they need support only? How can anyone get an educated opinion if they only hear one side? I'm sceptical of everything, vaccines and doctors' opinions included. However, I'm more sceptical of anyone or any place that preaches one side only.

 

 

Welcome to the forum, TheSkeptic.

 

You need to be able to read and understand beyond simply recognizing which letters are bolded.


The sentences written in bolded font are an explanation of the tactics Amy Parker used in her attempt to take down vaccine critics (and we're not even discussing why someone would find it necessary to "take down" critics rather than coming up with a valid answer to the criticisms).

The quotes immediately following those sentences demonstrate the point.

The "take it even further" illustrated the pattern she employed, where, for every point she made (even if it was in error), she tried to make it seem stronger by giving a second, grossly exaggerated, even completely unrealistic example.

 

Perhaps you didn't read the 2"edited to add" sections, each separated by a line of asterisks.  The first ETA section points out 9 fairly major errors or inconsistencies in Amy Parker's article.   Since her piece has so many obvious errors and inconsistencies, contrast to her piece is hardly necessary.

 

As fruitfulmomma pointed out, you are welcome to browse other forums if you are not finding what you need here.  You are also welcome to write your own contrast piece to Amy Parker's.


Chicharronita's Avatar Chicharronita
12:55 PM Liked: 9466
#141 of 168
02-11-2014 | Posts: 1,564
Joined: Oct 2006

Hey Taximom5, I just wanted to thank you for the Amy Parker hit piece deconstruction, and express my wonder at the fact this one thread has garnered over 55,000 views! Good work.


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
01:10 PM Liked: 266502
#142 of 168
02-11-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012

Aw, gee, thanks, Chicharronita!  I love both your username and your avitar!


Viola's Avatar Viola
09:17 PM Liked: 10051
#143 of 168
02-11-2014 | Posts: 22,567
Joined: Feb 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSkeptic View Post
 
I also saw someone quote the forum guidelines about this being a "support only" forum. Are the people here suffering through diseases or depression and is that why they need support only? How can anyone get an educated opinion if they only hear one side? I'm sceptical of everything, vaccines and doctors' opinions included. However, I'm more sceptical of anyone or any place that preaches one side only.

 

 

This is a support forum.  We have a debate forum.  If you wish to debate, go to Vaccinations Debate. If you wish to post about the benefits of full immunizations done on the standard schedule, go to Vaccinating on Schedule Knowing that this is a support forum and choosing to engage in debate here is against our posting policy, and your posts will be removed. Mothering wishes to have places where people can go for support and information, whether they vaccinate on schedule, delay or selectively immunize, or do not immunize.  There is also debate.  You can be sure that many members who choose to post in the Vaccination forum are aware of the things going on in the sub forums, but moderation is more streamlined with this approach.


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
01:03 PM Liked: 266502
#144 of 168
02-19-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012

When I wrote the OP, it didn't occur to me to look for proof of who is pulling the strings at Voices For Vaccines (who published Amy Parker's hit piece).  

I'm glad to post here that someone has done just that:

http://vactruth.com/2014/02/19/cdc-and-emory-university/

Voices for Vaccines: 11 Facts Show How it’s a Propaganda Ploy for Emory University, CDC, and Big Pharma

 

Vactruth is not I site I like or recommend, generally, but maybe they are improving things over there.  At any rate, this article is very illuminating, and I'm so glad they did the research to find evidence of pharma-pulled strings at Voices For Vaccines .  Not that it's a surprise to any of us, but it sure is nice to see the proof.

 

I'm betting that there some of the members over there who haven't quite given up all of their questions surrounding vaccine safety.  I wouldn't be surprised if they start distancing themselves from Voices For Vaccines...


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
06:37 AM Liked: 266502
#145 of 168
04-10-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012
Does anybody else wonder what Amy Parker thinks of the latest vicious bullying attempts, such as the recent Time Magazine piece by Jeffrey Kluger?
emmy526's Avatar emmy526
06:57 AM Liked: 27463
#146 of 168
04-10-2014 | Posts: 1,673
Joined: Jul 2007

I've noticed her piece is circulating again on fb


Taximom5's Avatar Taximom5 (TS)
02:31 PM Liked: 266502
#147 of 168
10-07-2014 | Posts: 3,335
Joined: Jan 2012
And....the Amy Parker's piece is circulating again, in the version published by Slate.

The good news: Barb Feick put up a page containing SEVEN (so far) rebuttals! http://barbfeick.com/vaxrebuttals/re...accinated.html

Looks like there are too many people seeing through the Vaccine Machine's marketing ploys to the unethical garbage within.
carolinliv
03:43 PM Liked: 0
#148 of 168
10-07-2014 | Posts: 1
Joined: Oct 2014
Thank you so much Taximom5 ! I agree 100% with you. I found her article (if she indeed wrote it ...but someone did) very compelling and well written...but in the end..it just get to be too much...too organized in a way to make you think in one direction...

but all you work and analysis of her text were fantastic ! It is indeed propaganda in disguise..

Anyway the scary part is that this article popped up on my Fb page as I regularly post articles and informations about vaccinations (mostly warnings) and exchange strictly with my friends (and I only have about 80..) so this was part of "related articles"...but it is dated from january...so I wonder...

Maybe it comes as a form of response on this :
http://freewiseman.wordpress.com/201...r-les-vaccins/

let's just say that the medical-lab are well organized...

sorry it is in french but I am sure that you know it.
Anyway I just wanted to thank you.
Ceezil
03:54 PM Liked: 1
#149 of 168
10-08-2014 | Posts: 1
Joined: Oct 2014
It's her opinion. Why shouldn't she tell it like she wishes to? We live in a free world (last time I checked) where we can say what we like, in the way that we'd like to say it. And yes, there are SO MANY articles on the evils of vaccination, it's refreshing to see something different get published for a change.
beckybird's Avatar beckybird
04:23 PM Liked: 61025
#150 of 168
10-08-2014 | Posts: 2,069
Joined: Mar 2009
By that same freedom of choice, some of us don't like that article. We choose to talk about it on this forum, titled "I'm Not Vaccinating". We have the freedom of speech too, right?
Tags: Vaccinations

Reply Subscribe I'm Not Vaccinating
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3