Since Andrew Wakefield's 1998 paper is "an elaborate fraud", should I vax? - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 54 Old 01-11-2011, 08:08 PM
 
awallrising's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wyoming Valley (PA)
Posts: 682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Sorry, I gotta chime in on this....missed it the 1st time around.  Unvax'd kids/people do not cause outbreaks, that is a myth & has no basis in fact.  Look at data on who actually contracts VPDs during outbreaks...many people who contract are vax'd & not all people who are unvax'd contract.  I have a very strong sense of social responsibility & do not feel  that I go against that ethic b/c I choose to not vax.  I was worried about DS passing whooping cough to the new baby (due in July), but the more I research the vaccine, the less confident I become that it would actually prevent transmission to the baby.  One thing I do worry about is passing Rubella to an unborn fetus, but that is one of the few example where "social responsibility" might come into play....even so I question the efficacy of vaccines & many eventually wear off, so unless we all get booster shots on a regular basis there is not true herd immunity & the concept of social responsibility goes out the window.

 

I can understand the concern with foreign travel & associating with people from other countries.  But one thing to consider is that despite millions of visitors to the US (& millions of US visitors to other countries), Polio, for instance, hasn't been seen in the US in decades just like many other fear-instilling diseases still active in other parts of the world.

 

I had many assumptions before I had a child & started researching vaccines.  My assumptions went out the window once I started looking at actual data (much of it posted by the US Gov't & the EU) & other hard data about VPDs & vaccines.  I have no problem with parents who choose to vax, that is their choice.  I wish that my ethics & intelligence not be questioned (as it seems to be on a regular basis esp. lately) b/c of my decision to not vax. 


"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."- Albert Einstein

awallrising is offline  
#32 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 04:57 AM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

Quote:
Unvax'd kids/people do not cause outbreaks, that is a myth & has no basis in fact.

 

could you, perhaps, show me a couple recent outbreaks of measles that have been started and maintained in predominantly vaccinated individuals? I can show you 20+ started and maintained in unvaccinated populations, with very low numbers of vaccinated cases, and pretty much no fully vaccinated cases (with odd one here or there, usually less than 3% of the outbreak population in total).

 

YOu have to go back to the days of one measles dose to find cases where the "fully" vaccinated population in an outbreak is significant.

 

How about Rubella? can you show me a recent outbreak in a vaccinated population? I can show you some that meet the opposite criteria. here's one: 

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19710586

 

If you wanted your kid to catch measles or chicken pox, would you seek out an exposed vaccinated individual or an exposed unvaccinated individual? why?

 

do you really think you would  have equal chance of getting the disease from both individuals?


"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#33 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 05:34 AM
 
Pirogi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by carriebft View Post

If you wanted your kid to catch measles or chicken pox, would you seek out an exposed vaccinated individual or an exposed unvaccinated individual? why?

 

do you really think you would  have equal chance of getting the disease from both individuals?


I have no opinion on the Wakefield topic.  I haven't looked into it enough to form an opinion, and I don't really care.  Autism is not on my radar for not vaccinating.

 

If I were going to try to expose my child to measles or chicken pox, I would expose them to a suspected case of disease from an unvaccinated individual.  I would do this because I would much rather they catch the wild type virus than the vaccine virus.  I don't know what the odds are of being able to catch the wild type virus today, even in an unvaccinated individual, but I do think that a vaccinated individual is virtually guaranteed to be carrying the vaccine virus. 

 

Also, I do believe that the likelihood of transmission is greater with an unvaccinated individual than a vaccinated individual, but that doesn't mean that I believe that only unvaccinated people can spread disease.  Is it more likely to spread a disease between or from individuals who have not been vaccinated for the disease?  Yes.  Is it possible to spread disease from live virus shedding or asymptomatic/mildly symptomatic illness from a vaccinated person?  Yes.

Pirogi is offline  
#34 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 05:45 AM
 
EarthMamaToBe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sunny, SC
Posts: 564
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by freestylemama View Post

We vaccinate because we've done our research.


 

We selectively/delayed vax because we've done OUR research.

EarthMamaToBe is offline  
#35 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 05:50 AM
 
awallrising's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wyoming Valley (PA)
Posts: 682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

My grandmother died today & I do not have the energy to expend on arguing.  Peace.


"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."- Albert Einstein

awallrising is offline  
#36 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 05:54 AM
 
Pirogi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

candle.gif  Thinking of you.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by awallrising View Post

My grandmother died today & I do not have the energy to expend on arguing.  Peace.



Pirogi is offline  
#37 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 05:59 AM
 
Quinalla's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 2,354
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There is so much more information and research to base your decision to vaccinate or not on than this one small study. I choose to vaccinate, though I do delay some and skip "optional" ones when it makes sense. And realize this is such a political issue that you have to dig a lot deeper to find good information, anything in the media about vaccines tends to be so skewed and full of misleading information.

Katie trekkie.gif - Married to Mike 06/02/01, Mom to Sydney Anne born 11/21/09 and Alice Maeryn & Oliver Thomas born 04/24/13  hug.gif 

 

 

Quinalla is offline  
#38 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 06:21 AM
 
freestylemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarthMamaToBe View Post


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by freestylemama View Post

We vaccinate because we've done our research.


 

We selectively/delayed vax because we've done OUR research.



We delay ours as well and do them one at a time and haven't vaccinated for everything. . . .  Our choice to vaccinate is research based, I'm not sure why that's a controversial subject.  I assume that everyone else makes similar choices but based on epistemologies and what research they follow, come to different conclusions. 

 

 

Awallrising, I'm very sorry for your loss. 


Healthcare is a human right!
freestylemama is offline  
#39 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 07:03 AM
 
awallrising's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Wyoming Valley (PA)
Posts: 682
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Sorry, I just couldn't help myself.  I didn't say I was anti-Rubella vaccine nor did I refer to any rubella outbreaks...I mentioned it as a vaccine that "maybe" we should all get to protect unborn fetuses.  I can't take the time to pull up more research but here's one example....Dr Nancy Snyderman, as usual, sounds like a mouth-piece for Big Pharma as she spreads her fear-instilling propoganda....she also thinks that "formula is great" & does not promote breastfeeding like a medical professional interested in immunity should (in my opinion)....formula is ok but it doesn't, for instance, increase the size of your child's thymus (an important player in your child's innate immunity) or provide your child with leukocytes, antibodies or stem cells.

 

Back to vax, all (or nearly all) of the babies that died in the Whooping Cough "outbreak" were around 8 wks or less (under vax age) & were mainly in Hispanic population which has typically vax's (so Snyderman's 1st quote below is pure myth).  It has been suggested that there was a cultural component in that those babies were perhaps exposed to extended family more than other babies of the same age.  Many teens/adults don't even know they have WC.  It doesn't mean that I think all vaccines are bad or that some unvax'd people caught the disease.  From what I read, the pertussis vaccine doesn't always prevent transmission anyway.

 

As for measles outbreaks....how many people died or were permanently damaged?  I know people can die from measles, but everyone in my Mom & Aunt's generation got measles & they personally know of no one who died from measles.

 

Excerpt from an article.....

 

Are Unvaccinated Children Responsible for Whooping Cough Outbreak?

 

    Responding to recent press releases and media reports, in which California health officials say the state is experiencing the worst whooping cough outbreak in 50 years with about 1,500 reported cases and six infants dying from B. pertussis, 4 on July 28 Dr. Snyderman offered the following explanation:

 

        "I think that what we are seeing here is a tipping point in unvaccinated children because the hot pockets are in families where, frankly, parents have under-vaccinated or decided not to vaccinate their children."

 

    A quick fact check reveals that both California health officials and Snyderman have not been entirely honest with the people.

 

    The Centers for Disease Control's published morbidity and mortality report shows that in the past 12 months, between July 24, 2009 and July 24, 2010, there were a total of 809 "provisional" cases of whooping cough reported in California.6 In fact, in the entire United States of America for the week ending July 24, there were only 187 reported cases of whooping cough, with no cases occurring in California.

 

Even the New York Times Acknowledges Problems with Pertussis Vaccine

 

    The New York Times also reported that:

 

        "The rise in pertussis doesn't seem to be related to parents' refusing to have their children vaccinated for fear of potential side effects.

 

        In California, pertussis rates are about the same in counties with high childhood vaccination rates and low ones. And the C.D.C. reports that pertussis immunization rates have been stable or increasing since 1992."

 

    When disease incidence statistics publicized by state health departments do not match those published by federal health agencies, there is something wrong.

 

    It is time for California health officials to fully disclose complete details of the 1,500 whooping cough cases they allege have occurred in the state during the past year, including how many cases were lab confirmed as B. pertussis; how many cases were classified as "epidemiologically linked" - which means they were NOT lab confirmed; and the ages and vaccination status of all cases, including whether people with suspected or confirmed cases had been given 1,2,3,4,5,6 or more pertussis shots.


"Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."- Albert Einstein

awallrising is offline  
#40 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 07:05 AM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by freestylemama View Post


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by EarthMamaToBe View Post


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by freestylemama View Post

We vaccinate because we've done our research.


 

We selectively/delayed vax because we've done OUR research.



We delay ours as well and do them one at a time and haven't vaccinated for everything. . . .  Our choice to vaccinate is research based, I'm not sure why that's a controversial subject.  I assume that everyone else makes similar choices but based on epistemologies and what research they follow, come to different conclusions. 

 

 

Awallrising, I'm very sorry for your loss. 


I agree with you (again); I believe 15 rational people can look at the same data about vaccines and come to 15 different conclusions about schedules and which to do and which not to and whether to not vaccinate at all. I believe this is true because people have different values, experiences, and life circumstances. No two are going to be exactly the same. Someone with a history of reaction to vaccines might be more drawn to that part of the research and more likely to skip while someone with a history of VPD in their family might be drawn to other aspects. A traveler with one set of experiences and values might make one decision on a travel vax plan while someone else going to the same place will make a totally different decision...all based on the same information.  kwim?


"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#41 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 08:51 AM
 
majormajor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 777
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

i've been thinking about what explains how people can draw different conclusions from the same information, with respect to vaxes, and i think that our previously held beliefs are what explain most of the difference in opinion.

i can't even estimate how many research articles i've read (i try to restrict myself to original sources of info). too many. and i haven't kept a spreadsheet of results or anything.  i have to remember all of my reasoning and conclusions, and i'm sure there's a bias filter going on in my brain, and everyone else's. so when i come to the conclusion that vaxing is a pretty great thing, for the most part, and there are only a few i am interested in skipping/delaying, well that has a lot to do with the fact that i believe most scientists are honest (wakefield being of of the exceptions!), and that the CDC isn't on a mass campaign to poison our children and cover it up. my science background (BS in physics, MA in science journalism) certainly plays into it.

 

but, if i were a person that distrusted government more, and had an initial bias away from science, then i'm sure i could easily come to a different conclusion. it's so hard to try to control our own biases. one thing i always try to do is be on the lookout for how much i "like" the results of a scientific paper--how much they agree with my previously held beliefs. if they're results i like, i make myself pretend they're the opposite of what i want to hear. how hard would i be on the paper then? and likewise, if i don't like the paper, how would i analyze it if i did? i usually find that my first instinct is to go easier on papers when the conclusion agrees with my beliefs, and harder if it doesn't. forcing myself to behave oppositely has been immensely helpful.

majormajor is offline  
#42 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 09:30 AM
 
Pirogi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 964
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by majormajor View Post

i've been thinking about what explains how people can draw different conclusions from the same information, with respect to vaxes, and i think that our previously held beliefs are what explain most of the difference in opinion.

i can't even estimate how many research articles i've read (i try to restrict myself to original sources of info). too many. and i haven't kept a spreadsheet of results or anything.  i have to remember all of my reasoning and conclusions, and i'm sure there's a bias filter going on in my brain, and everyone else's. so when i come to the conclusion that vaxing is a pretty great thing, for the most part, and there are only a few i am interested in skipping/delaying, well that has a lot to do with the fact that i believe most scientists are honest (wakefield being of of the exceptions!), and that the CDC isn't on a mass campaign to poison our children and cover it up. my science background (BS in physics, MA in science journalism) certainly plays into it.

 

but, if i were a person that distrusted government more, and had an initial bias away from science, then i'm sure i could easily come to a different conclusion. it's so hard to try to control our own biases. one thing i always try to do is be on the lookout for how much i "like" the results of a scientific paper--how much they agree with my previously held beliefs. if they're results i like, i make myself pretend they're the opposite of what i want to hear. how hard would i be on the paper then? and likewise, if i don't like the paper, how would i analyze it if i did? i usually find that my first instinct is to go easier on papers when the conclusion agrees with my beliefs, and harder if it doesn't. forcing myself to behave oppositely has been immensely helpful.


Not to devalue your reasoning and thought process, but I have a strong science/math background (BS and MS in chemical engineering), and my DH has a strong science and math background (2 BS in math and chemistry, MS in chemical engineering, PhD in chemical engineering), and we still came to the opposite conclusions.  Based on what we saw in graduate school, we certainly don't believe that most scientists are honest.  However, I appreciate and respect your approach to consider how your previously held beliefs could influence your ability to believe or disbelieve a scientific paper.  I think this is a valuable technique that everyone would benefit from.
 

Pirogi is offline  
#43 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 10:13 AM
 
freestylemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 504
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Majormajor you're so right.  My father is a chemist and worked for a government agency.  DH has a PhD in physics and is funded by a massive federal grant.  The last job I had was as a researcher in a medical school on another federally funded grant.  I have an MA and have taken many grad level public health classes. 

 

Our educational experiences and the fact that I understand the research process gives me a mostly benevolent opinion about science.  I am not naive about the unfortunate impact that profit motives have on medicine, but good science and evidence based medical research exist and it's possible to weed out good results from profit motivated decisions and policies.  I think that we all have to be careful not to blindly join "sides" when making decisions about our health.  It's very appealing to discount all medical research because some pharmaceutical companies make immoral and unjust decisions (I'm thinking specifically of patent issues with life saving ARVs) that are motivated by profit.  Nothing is ever that clear though.    

amitie likes this.

Healthcare is a human right!
freestylemama is offline  
#44 of 54 Old 01-12-2011, 10:25 AM
 
kittywitty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The Room of Requirement
Posts: 13,486
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
My dh is a chemist and worked QA in pharmaceuticals. We do NOT vax and his experience had a big hand in that. I don't trust it at all. The Wakefield studies have nothing to do with it, honestly. My medical and science background also give me a healthy dose of skepticism behind vax'ing.

AP Mom to 5 knit.gifhomeschool.giftoddler.gif
 
  

kittywitty is online now  
#45 of 54 Old 01-13-2011, 11:33 AM
 
carriebft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,947
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

awallrising-

 

My response to you was directly related to your quote that unvaccinated individuals do not cause outbreaks, that this idea "is a myth with no basis in fact." I provided you with facts and asks for facts to back up this statement you made. It is a general statement that does not specify disease. My aim was to demonstrate to you that unvaccinated individuals do indeed initiate most outbreaks of two specific illnesses: measles and rubella. Moreover, they are also the populations were the outbreak is maintained and spread. There are, of course, other illnesses were this is true (varicella and hib disease come to mind).

 

As you mentioned, there are vaccines that do not do as good of a job at creating "herd immunity." Pertussis is one of these.


"Parents are simply trustees; they do not own the bodies of their children"-Norm Cohen  Martial arts instructor intactlact.gifhomebirth.jpgnak.gif and mom to 4: DD1 (1/05) DS (7/06) DD2 (5/08) DD3 (2/11)
carriebft is offline  
#46 of 54 Old 01-13-2011, 03:58 PM
 
amnesiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: at the end of the longest line
Posts: 4,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I have removed several posts from this thread which were not consistent with our guidelines or which were responses to such posts. Please remember that discussion should remain on topic, regarding how this study relates to vaccines or vaccination decisions. Any discussion or speculation about individuals is not permissible. Should there be any further issues, the thread will be removed from the forum.

amnesiac is offline  
#47 of 54 Old 01-14-2011, 10:35 PM
 
amitie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I am very, very grateful for this timely discussion. We are just in the process of registering our child for school, and this issue is going to come up.

 

Thank you to all who have kept it civil and who have taken the time to post links. I look forward to reading more. I think it's safe to say that this is not a black and white issue!

amitie is offline  
#48 of 54 Old 01-15-2011, 02:36 AM
 
ema-adama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,392
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by gr8tmama View Post

My 2 children are not vaxed. After the recent new that this paper is a fraud and some correlations between autism and vaccinations, but no proven causation/evidence.  I think it's time to have DC vaxed. What do you guys think?


It really depends on why you have not vaccinated your children so far. If the basis of your decision relied on this study, then you could be in a fix. Although, the study never claimed MMR caused Autism. And a case series of 12 children would not convince anyone of causation. However, if despite that, you relied on the interpretation by the media on what the study concluded, and decided not to vaccinate, then yes, your reason would be on very shaky ground at the moment.

 

Knowing the reasons why you give each specific vaccine, and when you give it (or don't - whatever your ultimate choice is) is probably the best way forward for you and your family.

 

 


 


 

Pirogi likes this.

Megan, mama to her little boy (Feb2008) and introducing our little girl (Dec 2010)
ema-adama is offline  
#49 of 54 Old 01-18-2011, 10:14 AM
 
nattyblonde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 

 

@ gr8tmama

 

Do your kids have any medical conditions that would preclude vaccinations? As others have pointed out - it depends on what your concerns are? 

 

It is so heartening to see a person willing to reexamine an opinion after new evidence surfaces. When discussing the possible reactions to the Wakefield fraud with a friend she told me about a study done by a political scientist (Univ of Mich) in which participants were deliberately given misinformation and later researchers issued a correction. A lot of people continued to believe the original lie and a fair number of those believed it even more strongly after the correction. Ironically, they stick to their beliefs even more strongly in the face of new information. So, rather than attributing the continued anti-vaccination stance to stupidity or ignorance (as some commentators in other venues have) it seems it is more like an unavoidable part of the human psyche. It is a part of my psyche I do not wish to be a slave to, however.  Speaking of being willing to take a second look, Salon did a really great interview with Seth Mnookin recently in which he discusses the “Why?” behind the anti-vaccination movement (related to his book “Panic Virus”).

 

Whatever you decide to do, thank you for being willing to take another look at your decision. Parenting decisions are hard enough without the second-guessing helped along by the media (Mothering included). Four years ago I did extensive research into this topic because I saw many intelligent and trusted friends choosing not to vaccinate. I trusted that their concerns were real and their conclusions were based on good information, but like to educate myself as well.  I was prepared not to vaccinate the child I was pregnant with. Instead I found that their decisions were based on misinformation and misapplications in logic with heavy doses of fear-mongering that they fell prey to. It is still a topic I keep educated about. As a mother who knows vaccines are vastly safer then the diseases they were designed to prevent I am always on the watch for credible information that might show otherwise. Contrary to what has been promulgated on many platforms, including this one, that information does not yet exist. 

nattyblonde is offline  
#50 of 54 Old 01-18-2011, 08:09 PM
 
jimblejamble's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Central California
Posts: 2,874
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nia82 View Post

We select and delay, and autism was never on my list, so the Wakefield study whether true or faked didn't go into my decision whatsoever.


Ditto.

Formerly known as "JessicaRenee".  hang.gif  Single mama to Jude (Sept '09)!  biggrinbounce.gif

jimblejamble is offline  
#51 of 54 Old 01-18-2011, 08:59 PM
 
frogeagle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Central Pa
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

 First, I believe that every one out there needs to read the book Deadly Spin by Wendell Potter.  The Medical Field in America is a For-Profit Oraganization that uses Fear Tactics to control YOUR HEALTHCARE.  Therefore I DO NOT believe one commercial, FDA approved drug, magazine advertisement, or media driven news clip on T.V. Every parent out there needs to use their own gut instinct and watching their child's drug reactions and family health history to make the best decisions possible.  If that decision is to not VAX or use a different schedule then so be it.  I used a different schedule, believeing that my child has better chances with VAX with a more mature immune system.  Why?  I saw, first hand, what MMR VAX did to my individuals in the house that I was a house manager for, for mentally disabled.  I had a good Ped. that blew off my concern but did not fight my decision, provided me with the information I rightfully had access to and also gave me pro's and con's of my decisions.  He respected me and many dr's today do not do even that. 

So, if you see something on T.V. to de-bunk such research, I say that researcher hit a nerve in some rich person's pocket.  Also, it is hard for any parent to weigh your "gut instinct" but are you willing to bet that the new drug out or even improved drug released is to make more money and was pushed through the FDA to be cleared, then to weigh that on your childs life?  Todays healthcare, lack there of, and decisions made by non medical corporations are killing people, period, including children.  They do not care.  Stick to your instinct and always keep informend from all sources, domestic and foreign. 

 

jimblejamble likes this.
frogeagle is offline  
#52 of 54 Old 01-18-2011, 09:05 PM
 
CookAMH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: the great northwest
Posts: 4,472
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I am sure sufficient things were mentioned, but if that study was the sole reason you chose not to vaccinate, then I guess it makes sense to go ahead and start vaxing.

 

It actually has NO effect on our position. There are so many other reasons we don't vaccinate, it changes nothing.


Alicia, wife to an loving and faithful DH, and mama to three fantastic though nutty children (cs, then an HBAC, then a VBAC!!).
CookAMH is offline  
#53 of 54 Old 01-19-2011, 03:23 PM
 
Lisa1970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,604
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I do not buy that it was a hoax. But, autism risk is not the reason I don't vax. I think vax'ing is innappropriate for babies and I think most of the vaccinations out there are a waste.

Lisa1970 is offline  
#54 of 54 Old 01-19-2011, 07:09 PM
 
amnesiac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: at the end of the longest line
Posts: 4,984
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Since there have continued to be multiple instances of posts in violation of our UA and/or forum guidelines, the thread is now closed to further discussion.

amnesiac is offline  
Closed Thread

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