Is it dangerous to start vaccines and then stop aburptly? i.e. not giving boosters etc - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 29 Old 12-02-2009, 09:53 AM - Thread Starter
 
ewe+lamb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: just journeying along .....
Posts: 2,268
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OK, here's my question, in fact I was in discussion with someone yesterday and although this mother has now decided to stop doing the vaccines, she has let her child be vaccinated for the last two years, now she's taken the decision to stop any other vaccines and asked me this, 'Is it dangerous to start a vaccine, such as the MMR and then not to return for the boosters?' I have absolutely no clue, we were obliged by law here in france to vaccinate our kids with the first three given at 3,4,5 months but other than that haven't considered doing any others, so is it fine to just stop the vaccine process - I would imagine that it wouldn't pose a problem - only to the drs who are pro-vaccines, anyway i would appreciate any clarification from all the wise mamas here. I'll be seeing the mother again in a couple of weeks and would love to have some answers or at least continue on this discussion.

ewe + dh = our little lambs + we and have many just : and : life .
ewe+lamb is offline  
#2 of 29 Old 12-02-2009, 10:05 AM
 
Plaid Leopard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 2,618
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not dangerous. The only thing is that if you need 3 doses of a vaccine to have full immunity, then you may not have full immunity after only one or two. Of course, you may not have full immunity after 10 either... vaccines are tricky that way.

Vaccines are not like antibiotics, for example, where you need to complete the course in order that the bacteria does not become resistant.

If you think about it, adults are supposed to get boosters as well, but most don't, so technically if adults don't get boosters, then they have not - and will never - complete the vaccine process, but that is not a problem, depending on your POV.
Plaid Leopard is offline  
#3 of 29 Old 12-02-2009, 11:08 AM
 
emma1325's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The only dangerous part is the starting, in my opinion. Stopping is better than continuing.

Loving mother, Devoted Wife
emma1325 is offline  
#4 of 29 Old 12-02-2009, 11:23 AM
 
13Sandals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: north of NY
Posts: 1,624
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
no danger at all. the less toxins put in the body, the less you try to 'trick' the immune system into thinking its in danger when its not, the better.
13Sandals is offline  
#5 of 29 Old 12-02-2009, 07:42 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,049
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
I have my children on a delayed schedule. The Centers for Disease Control even has "catch-up" recommendations that involve giving only one vaccination at a later age. I'm thinking that if there's no danger in a partial dose for toddlers, there's no danger in a partial dose for the younger ones.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#6 of 29 Old 12-03-2009, 12:13 PM - Thread Starter
 
ewe+lamb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: just journeying along .....
Posts: 2,268
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well thank you ladies - just what I was sort of thinking but had a doubt if the actual vaccination process had started, anyway I'll convey your thoughts to the mother next week and thank you all for the replies. I guess I'm feeling a bit stupid really, we had just decided not to vaccinate and that was that so other points of vaccination have just slipped past us!! But just once again thank you for your replies!

ewe + dh = our little lambs + we and have many just : and : life .
ewe+lamb is offline  
#7 of 29 Old 12-03-2009, 04:07 PM
 
hippy mum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 2,555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
No. You could hand her some facts about vaccines each having a different % of success rate, and that some they claim must have boosters etc. Which means we need to get them for life. As another poster said-most adults are not utd on vaccines.
hippy mum is offline  
#8 of 29 Old 12-06-2009, 02:26 AM
 
zylph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 67
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ewe+lamb View Post
OK, here's my question, in fact I was in discussion with someone yesterday and although this mother has now decided to stop doing the vaccines, she has let her child be vaccinated for the last two years, now she's taken the decision to stop any other vaccines and asked me this, 'Is it dangerous to start a vaccine, such as the MMR and then not to return for the boosters?' I have absolutely no clue, we were obliged by law here in france to vaccinate our kids with the first three given at 3,4,5 months but other than that haven't considered doing any others, so is it fine to just stop the vaccine process - I would imagine that it wouldn't pose a problem - only to the drs who are pro-vaccines, anyway i would appreciate any clarification from all the wise mamas here. I'll be seeing the mother again in a couple of weeks and would love to have some answers or at least continue on this discussion.
I am about as pro-vaccine as they come here. And, no, there is no danger in stopping a vaccine. That is, it's not any more dangerous than never starting to vaccinate in the first place.
zylph is offline  
#9 of 29 Old 12-06-2009, 03:17 AM
 
MyLilPwny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: California
Posts: 821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree that there is no danger at all in stopping vaccines---I think that it poses less danger actually because vaccines are known to cause so many adverse reactions, including very dangerous reactions.

Traditional & nutrient-dense foods/Weston A. Price Foundation advocate, Reiki II practitioner, EFT practitioner, past life & life between lives Hypnotherapist practitioner. Home birth with DD 2007 = never vaccinated, breastfed 3 years

MyLilPwny is offline  
#10 of 29 Old 12-06-2009, 10:29 PM
 
Gitti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ready to move on...
Posts: 14,805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The sooner she stops the better off her child will be.

http://users.telenet.be/vaccine.dama...frenchhomepage
Gitti is offline  
#11 of 29 Old 12-06-2009, 10:50 PM
 
stiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The only danger is that the vaccine's full immunity hasn't been conferred, and if the mom is comfortable with that decision, there's no other risk to health (as others have posted.)
stiss is offline  
#12 of 29 Old 12-07-2009, 02:54 PM
 
MyLilPwny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: California
Posts: 821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stiss View Post
The only danger is that the vaccine's full immunity hasn't been conferred
That would only be a "danger" if you actually believe that vaccines confer immunity. Many people such as myself do not believe that vaccines confer immunity. They can raise antibodies, which is one little part of immunity, but it doesn't mean it is conferring immunity. There are books and articles that you can find online (Dr. Tenpenny has some in her book and web site) that describe studies where adequate titer levels do not confer immunity, and where no titer levels at all are showing the person to be immune. Therefore, I see no danger in what you are describing.

Traditional & nutrient-dense foods/Weston A. Price Foundation advocate, Reiki II practitioner, EFT practitioner, past life & life between lives Hypnotherapist practitioner. Home birth with DD 2007 = never vaccinated, breastfed 3 years

MyLilPwny is offline  
#13 of 29 Old 12-07-2009, 10:36 PM
 
stiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThereseReich View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by stiss View Post
The only danger is that the vaccine's full immunity hasn't been conferred
That would only be a "danger" if you actually believe that vaccines confer immunity.
Umm....clearly.
stiss is offline  
#14 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 12:39 PM
 
emma1325's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stiss View Post
Umm....clearly.
It's irritating to be in the minority on an issue like this, isn't it? Now you know how we non-vaxers feel in nearly every other avenue of life.

Loving mother, Devoted Wife
emma1325 is offline  
#15 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 03:45 PM
 
stiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by emma1325 View Post
It's irritating to be in the minority on an issue like this, isn't it? Now you know how we non-vaxers feel in nearly every other avenue of life.
You know, once again I typed out this big long answer, but I don't see the point. The short version is that I have always been forthcoming in having open, respectful discussions about perspectives on immunization. I know that my views are "in the minority" in this forum, but only sharing knowledge from one perspective serves nobody, in the end.

I answered the OP, and for the record, my view didn't differ from that of ThereseReich (who already answered before me) or any other poster, for that matter. There was nothing to clarify - clearly my answer presupposes a belief in vaccine efficacy, which is quite possibly a concern for the mother (otherwise, what danger of NOT vaccinating would one be concerned about, exactly?) I thought the caveat was superfluous and unnecessarily adversarial, so I rolled my eyes. I think I may have found a use for the ignore button!

Trust me, if I found it irritating to be "in the minority", I wouldn't bother. Glad you found it entertaining, though.
stiss is offline  
#16 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 04:00 PM
 
Gitti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ready to move on...
Posts: 14,805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stiss View Post
The only danger is that the vaccine's full immunity hasn't been conferred,
Immunity is quite an individual thing. Most kids are immune after one shot. From what I remember about 80%.

But rather than check every vaccinated child's immunity, they simply give a booster to all kids to catch the other 10-15%.

Most kids have all the immunity they will ever get from the first shot.


ETA-

Quote:
...but only sharing knowledge from one perspective serves nobody, in the end.
That is a very good point. But look around you, who gives more than one perspective of the vaccine issue? Everywhere I look, other than a few little forums, claims how great vaccines are and how they have saved humanity from total demise.

But then who does all the educating and informing? The manufacturer of course. And what else would he say?

Fact is that social progress and human well being is always second to monetary gains. And certainly there is little to extract from a healthy human body.
Gitti is offline  
#17 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 04:10 PM
 
stiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gitti View Post
Immunity is quite an individual thing. Most kids are immune after one shot. From what I remember about 80%.

But rather than check every vaccinated child's immunity, they simply give a booster to all kids to catch the other 10-15%.

Most kids have all the immunity they will ever get from the first shot.
Yes, you're quite right. I meant the statement as really a potential issue, that may be a concern*.

*and that concern only exists if the person in question actually believes in the efficacy of vaccines. Just in case it wasn't clear.
stiss is offline  
#18 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 04:29 PM
 
MyBoysBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 1,116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
And even after the all the boosters are done some kids will still not be immune. I was fully vaccinated and still had the mumps at around 10 years old. There are plenty of stories like mine where fully vaxed kids have still gotten what they were fully vaxed against.

Wife to DH, Mom to my Intact Boys DS1: Born 02 Pain Med Free Hospital Birth, BF'ed for 9 Months, Partially Vax'd DS2: Born 06 via UC, BF'ed 3 years 10 months, and UnVax'd
MyBoysBlue is offline  
#19 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 04:34 PM
 
stiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyBoysBlue View Post
And even after the all the boosters are done some kids will still not be immune. I was fully vaccinated and still had the mumps at around 10 years old. There are plenty of stories like mine where fully vaxed kids have still gotten what they were fully vaxed against.
Yep, also true - you're never going to have 100% efficacy in a population, though immunity is generally not a dichotomous phenomenon, either*. I found out that I wasn't immune to Rubella when I was pregnant, which was a little scary for me*. Boo to you getting the mumps!

*maybe I'll put the disclaimer in my sig so I don't need to write it out each time, heh heh.
stiss is offline  
#20 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 04:35 PM
 
Gitti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ready to move on...
Posts: 14,805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyBoysBlue View Post
And even after the all the boosters are done some kids will still not be immune.
Right!

And that is why "herd immunity" is a theory and will always remain that way.
Gitti is offline  
#21 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 04:50 PM
 
lovebug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: back in the GREAT state of Minnesota! oh how i have missed you!
Posts: 5,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
as PP have said there is no harm in stopping.

Your life doesnât change by the man whos elected. If your loved by someone you can't be rejected... decide what to be and go be it! If your a caged bird brake in and demand that somebody free it.
lovebug is offline  
#22 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 04:50 PM
 
stiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gitti View Post
That is a very good point. But look around you, who gives more than one perspective of the vaccine issue? Everywhere I look, other than a few little forums, claims how great vaccines are and how they have saved humanity from total demise.

But then who does all the educating and informing? The manufacturer of course. And what else would he say?

Fact is that social progress and human well being is always second to monetary gains. And certainly there is little to extract from a healthy human body.
Health researchers DO call for a more balanced discourse on the issue. I know. I just wrote a 50 page paper on the topic. It's definitely a problem in vaccine research and policy. As for "who gives more than one perspective"...well, there ARE researchers out there, and I think that policy makers are trying as well. Are they still biased? Always. Everyone is. However, most experts totally acknowledge that vaccines are not without risk, and not without fallibility. I can find lots of papers for you, written by doctors and researchers who support vaccination, who do not agree with mandatory vaccination, or pressuring parents to vaccinate. There is also an ongoing discourse about conflicts of interest and the need for greater transparency in vaccination research. None of these claims are not without merit - they are serious issues.

I've had this debate before, in other threads...there is no doubt that we need better independent research on safety and efficacy trials. That doesn't mean that everyone who supports/researches vaccines is working for big pharma. They're making way more money off anti-depressants and Viagra than they ever will off vaccines, by the way.

Now...your turn. What's the problem with the anti-vaccination movement? Do you know? Unless you've really looked at both sides on an issue and can honestly speak to the biases and shortcomings, you're doing yourself a disservice. Talk to me about Wakefield, Mercola, and Tenpenny.

It's great to have a forum to learn more and share information, but if your information is only coming from one side, you're not any better informed than someone who just "blindly follows mainstream medicine". The truth is always somewhere between A and B.
stiss is offline  
#23 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 05:03 PM
 
Gitti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ready to move on...
Posts: 14,805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks for your response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stiss View Post
Now...your turn. What's the problem with the anti-vaccination movement? Do you know? Unless you've really looked at both sides on an issue and can honestly speak to the biases and shortcomings, you're doing yourself a disservice. Talk to me about Wakefield, Mercola, and Tenpenny.

It's great to have a forum to learn more and share information, but if your information is only coming from one side, you're not any better informed than someone who just "blindly follows mainstream medicine". The truth is always somewhere between A and B.
I don't agree and don't really want to get into it. I will only tell you this: my information comes first and foremost from one side - gut instinct. I will stick with that no matter what. I relied on it before I had ever heard the names Wakefield etc. or MDC for that matter. I needed no books or anyones paper. Thank you!

But I must say it is nice that so many people have come to the side of Mother Nature. Nice to finally not feel like I am the only one.

As for doctors, our family does not need nor use them (no types) unless in case of trauma. Than I am very grateful for their knowledge.

OK. end of private discussion.
Gitti is offline  
#24 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 05:34 PM
 
stiss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gitti View Post
Thanks for your response.



I don't agree and don't really want to get into it. I will only tell you this: my information comes first and foremost from one side - gut instinct. I will stick with that no matter what. I relied on it before I had ever heard the names Wakefield etc. or MDC for that matter. I needed no books or anyones paper. Thank you!

But I must say it is nice that so many people have come to the side of Mother Nature. Nice to finally not feel like I am the only one.

As for doctors, our family does not need nor use them (no types) unless in case of trauma. Than I am very grateful for their knowledge.

OK. end of private discussion.
Well yay for open-minded discussion!
stiss is offline  
#25 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 06:15 PM
 
emma1325's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stiss View Post
Yes, you're quite right. I meant the statement as really a [I]potential [/I]issue, that may be a concern*.

*and that concern only exists if the person in question actually believes in the efficacy of vaccines. Just in case it wasn't clear.
The addition of the word potential (or, better yet, theoretical) would have been better, IMO, since immunity is so individual and dependent on different factors.

Loving mother, Devoted Wife
emma1325 is offline  
#26 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 06:18 PM
 
emma1325's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stiss View Post
You know, once again I typed out this big long answer, but I don't see the point. The short version is that I have always been forthcoming in having open, respectful discussions about perspectives on immunization. I know that my views are "in the minority" in this forum, but only sharing knowledge from one perspective serves nobody, in the end.

I answered the OP, and for the record, my view didn't differ from that of ThereseReich (who already answered before me) or any other poster, for that matter. There was nothing to clarify - clearly my answer presupposes a belief in vaccine efficacy, which is quite possibly a concern for the mother (otherwise, what danger of NOT vaccinating would one be concerned about, exactly?) I thought the caveat was superfluous and unnecessarily adversarial, so I rolled my eyes. I think I may have found a use for the ignore button!

Trust me, if I found it irritating to be "in the minority", I wouldn't bother. Glad you found it entertaining, though.
I saw nothing wrong with the post after yours clarifying that you have to believe vaccines confer immunity in order to say there is danger. You were obviously annoyed by her clarification with the eyeroll comment. So I tried to diffuse the situation a bit...wasn't entertained. Just trying to keep things light.

Now that I think about it, you really aren't "in the minority," here or in the world, are you? You delay/selectively vaccinate. You probably get heat from both sides.

Loving mother, Devoted Wife
emma1325 is offline  
#27 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 06:21 PM
 
sweetpeppers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Medford, NJ
Posts: 847
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
haha, it's less dangerous than continuing them, anyway (IMO)

my toy shop on etsy.com: wooden baby keys, natural bathtub toys, wooden animals, little kitchens, waldorf dolls...also check out my blog about saving money, creating things, and natural living
sweetpeppers is offline  
#28 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 06:29 PM
 
emma1325's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stiss View Post
Health researchers DO call for a more balanced discourse on the issue. I know. I just wrote a 50 page paper on the topic. It's definitely a problem in vaccine research and policy. As for "who gives more than one perspective"...well, there ARE researchers out there, and I think that policy makers are trying as well. Are they still biased? Always. Everyone is. However, most experts totally acknowledge that vaccines are not without risk, and not without fallibility. I can find lots of papers for you, written by doctors and researchers who support vaccination, who do not agree with mandatory vaccination, or pressuring parents to vaccinate. There is also an ongoing discourse about conflicts of interest and the need for greater transparency in vaccination research. None of these claims are not without merit - they are serious issues.

I've had this debate before, in other threads...there is no doubt that we need better independent research on safety and efficacy trials. That doesn't mean that everyone who supports/researches vaccines is working for big pharma. They're making way more money off anti-depressants and Viagra than they ever will off vaccines, by the way.

Now...your turn. What's the problem with the anti-vaccination movement? Do you know? Unless you've really looked at both sides on an issue and can honestly speak to the biases and shortcomings, you're doing yourself a disservice. Talk to me about Wakefield, Mercola, and Tenpenny.

It's great to have a forum to learn more and share information, but if your information is only coming from one side, you're not any better informed than someone who just "blindly follows mainstream medicine". The truth is always somewhere between A and B.

So agree with the bolded. The problem is, the majority of the time, even if "both sides" are discussed throughout, the conclusion is always the same: Vaccines always have and always will be more beneficial than risky. The benefits ALWAYS outweigh the risks.

The risks may be examined briefly, but then we come full circle and are assured that the answer is always to vaccinate.

Yes, there are doctors and scientists who do not do this. But rarely are they given voice. The few times in which they are, they are dismissed and/or drowned out by the mainstream message.

What we need, honestly, is for the government to end vaccine mandates and recommendations and admit that there are serious risks to vaccines which may override the benefits in some individuals, then advise parents to research the issue and make an informed decision for their families. (Of course, I imagine if this were to happen any time soon, it would be the evil Obama administration trying to kill all of the world. )

Loving mother, Devoted Wife
emma1325 is offline  
#29 of 29 Old 12-08-2009, 10:34 PM
 
Gitti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ready to move on...
Posts: 14,805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stiss View Post
Well yay for open-minded discussion!



To me the truth is always hidden in plain sight.
Gitti is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off