what are the cons of vaccinations? - Page 4 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#91 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 04:27 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
There's only one adjuvant, aluminum salts.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#92 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 04:43 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

There's only one adjuvant, aluminum salts.

That's not true.

Squalene has been used in Europe, with disastrous results. Adjuvant 65, derived from peanut oil, has not been approved for use in US pediatric vaccines, but has apparently been used in trials, which can involve thousands.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0264410X9500011O (1995)

"The most common adjuvants for human use today are still aluminum hydroxide and aluminum phosphate, although calcium phosphate and oil emulsions also have some use in human vaccinations. During the last 15 years much progress has been made on development, isolation and chemical synthesis of alternative adjuvants such as derivatives of muramyl dipeptide, monophosphoryl lipid A, liposomes, QS21, MF-59 and immunostimulating complexes (ISCOMS). Other areas in adjuvant research which have received much attention are the controlled release of vaccine antigens using biodegradable polymer microspheres and reciprocal enhanced immunogenicity of protein-polysaccharide conjugates."

MF-59 is a squalene adjuvant.
Taximom5 is online now  
#93 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 04:48 AM
 
WildKingdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 684
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeckyBird View Post

 

 

Or, find 2 groups of willing parents. parents who have decided not to vaccinate, and parents who have decided to fully vaccinate. Throughout each round of vaccines, starting at birth, compare the groups. Take blood samples, hair samples, samples from any place that would be helpful. Have the parents document every time the child goes to the doctor. The parents must be as cooperative as possible, and report everything--milestones, injuries, illnesses, regressions, etc. This kind of study would satisfy me. It's a start.

 

Becky.  This "study" that you propose would be useless in so many ways.  In all ways, really.  First, you need a hypothesis.  You have to be looking for specific things, not just "samples of everything."  You can't just look around and hope to hit pay dirt.  It would also be biased in every way imaginable.  Selection bias, recall bias...it would also be totally underpowered to the point of no statistical significant at all.

 

I really, really suggest you read this- http://photoninthedarkness.com/?p=154  It very succinctly explains the difficulties in doing such a study.

WildKingdom is offline  
#94 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 06:11 AM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Why would you want parental documentation of every doctor visit? There already is a record of every doctor visit in every child's medical record.

Also, taking samples of "everything" has significant risks for the study population with no potential benefit. You can probably get all the blood, hair, pee, and poop in the world, though parental compliance with frequent fecal sample requests will likely become problematic once study participants are out of diapers. Bone marrow and colonoscopy have sometimes been considered relevant to vaccine related issues, but have obvious drawbacks. You will not be able to get review board approval to conduct those on apparently healthy children in order to study an extremely rare problem. I'm going to guess that, as a kind person who likes children, you probably don't actually want those. What about fasting blood work? Sleep studies? What frequency of behavioral inventories? MRIs and EKGs? Food logs? Reporting of minor illnesses?

But more importantly than any of that, would you consent to having your children participate in such a study?

I would not. It's too much scrutiny, too much testing and record-keeping, and too much time for my kids who are children, not lab rats. My kids don't want to be pooping for the doctor once a year or having strands of hair yanked out or blood drawn at every doctor visit. An annual developmental psych interview/observation plus the associated surveys do not serve their interests. With a study this hefty, you're going to be limited to subjects for whom study participation is the only way to get access to medical care. There goes your chance to recruit non-vax participants.
stik is offline  
#95 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 06:24 AM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

But more importantly than any of that, would you consent to having your children participate in such a study?
I would not. It's too much scrutiny, too much testing and record-keeping, and too much time for my kids who are children, not lab rats. My kids don't want to be pooping for the doctor once a year or having strands of hair yanked out or blood drawn at every doctor visit. An annual developmental psych interview/observation plus the associated surveys do not serve their interests. With a study this hefty, you're going to be limited to subjects for whom study participation is the only way to get access to medical care. There goes your chance to recruit non-vax participants.

 

I wouldn't either.  For the bolded reasons.

 

I do think a study that looks at the health profile of completely unvaxxed children versus vaxxed children would be helpful.

 

I think we need to be creative in figuring out how to do it, rather than saying it cannot be done (which I know you did not say, but is sometimes the vibe I get from the pro-vax community).  

purslaine is offline  
#96 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 06:35 AM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think the difficulty is finding the sweet spot - the type and quantity of information that will satisfy those who have safety concerns surrounding vaccines and also be possible to collect without unreasonable intrusion on children and their parents.

I also think some of those who are concerned will, for various reasons, never be satisfied with any safety study. I think there is a portion of the population that scientists have given up on efforts to satisfy, and I think that's ok too.
stik is offline  
#97 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 06:43 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Comparing overall health has been done, in Germany. I hope it's done more and over and over, but I also hope when it is done people don't continue to just reject results because they disagree with them.
prosciencemum likes this.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#98 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 06:48 AM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

I also think some of those who are concerned will, for various reasons, never be satisfied with any safety study. I think there is a portion of the population that scientists have given up on efforts to satisfy, and I think that's ok too.

 

I agree.

 

However, the study would not really be for them, it would be for undecided parents, future parents, researchers, etc.  It could add to a body of knowledge, even though some people are not open to being swayed.

purslaine is offline  
#99 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 06:50 AM
 
purslaine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Comparing overall health has been done, in Germany. I hope it's done more and over and over, but I also hope when it is done people don't continue to just reject results because they disagree with them.

link please!

 

Was it vaxxed versus unvaxxed?

 

Who did the study?

 

Thanks!

purslaine is offline  
#100 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 07:08 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Wait, maybe it was Denmark.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#101 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 07:13 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I've already linked to it a bunch of times. Pretty sure it's in the case for vaccination thread.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#102 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 10:36 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,131
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

Why would you want parental documentation of every doctor visit? There already is a record of every doctor visit in every child's medical record.

And you think that's sufficient?  You've never seen a doctor either neglect to write something important in the medical record, or write something that wasn't correct?

 

I've seen my kids' medical records.  Doctors have written that there was an ear infection when there wasn't one, that the child didn't have a fever when he did, that he did have a fever when he didn't, that the child RECEIVED a vaccine that I turned down, and that "the parent had no concerns," when in fact, I brought up more than one serious concern. 

 

I've seen my own medical records, where the orthopedist  wrote that I injured my right shoulder when it was in fact my left, and where my primary care doc wrote that I'd reported a sore throat when I didn't.

 

It's not just a recent phenomenon.  My mother tells how my hip displasia was misdiagnosed as a progressively deteriorative condition because the orthopedist read the X-rays in backwards order, and how her pediatrician wrote that "mother is spoiling the baby" because she didn't follow his orders not to pick up the baby more than one every 4 hours for feeding, even though she was breastfeeding.  The same pediatrician diagnosed my brother with colic because he screamed after 2 hours--because he was starving because the doctor told my mother not to feed the baby more than every 4 hours.

 

If you think it's sufficient to have only medical records as the single record, with no input from the parents, then you are sadly mistaken.

applejuice likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#103 of 103 Old 06-03-2012, 12:56 PM
Banned
 
stik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,942
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Taximom, I fully agree that medical records have mistakes in them, but so do parent reports. To take my own children, I have never yet managed to hear a child wheezing, even though both have had multiple illnesses with wheezing. On the other hand, I have taken my younger dd to be assessed for wheezing on multiple occasions when there was no wheeze present. Last week, I insisted that our ped culture my dd for whooping cough because she has a cough and there is an outbreak in the community where I teach. But there isn't one in the community where she attends school and the culture was negative - it's her allergy to oak pollen. Why make the researchers sort through two sets of flawed records? I think that parental vigilance in re medical records is really important to ensuring appropriate treatment of individual children, but in a population study like the one Becky proposed, researchers would be using the records to track diagnoses, which should show up even in records with a number of errors.

Something else to consider - the overall goal of the study Becky proposed would be to reassure parents about vaccine safety and increase compliance. Vaccine compliance is an important public health issue. The government agencies involved in public health are already pursuing this through outreach to doctors and insurance companies and through schools and other institutions. They are unlikely to have the funding for a major study on this. If anyone has the cash for it, it would probably be Big Pharma.
stik is offline  
Reply

Tags
Vaccinations

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