Found you in quest of an answer to the vaccination question - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 65 Old 10-16-2012, 11:01 AM
 
Marnica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 5,585
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post

Well, it really doesn't matter what people "feel" a placebo is. A placebo has a definition that I posted above.

 

 duh.gif I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm trying to clarify that when the safety of a placebo issue gets discussed (which it does periodically here) that it is important to differentiate between the definition of a placebo and what many people think (perhaps feel was the wrong choice of words) is a true placebo (ie saline).  Nobody is questioning your defition of a placebo.


If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny." Thomas Jefferson.

Marnica is offline  
#62 of 65 Old 10-16-2012, 03:55 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,132
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)

What is the point of safety-testing a vaccination against a "placebo" that just happens to have ingredients (such as preservatives and/or adjuvants) that are known to cause neurological damage?  If it's known to cause neurological damage, then it isn't an inactive substance. Therefore, it's not a true placebo.

Taximom5 is online now  
#63 of 65 Old 10-16-2012, 04:07 PM
 
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 Taximom5 View Post

What is the point of safety-testing a vaccination against a "placebo" that just happens to have ingredients (such as preservatives and/or adjuvants) that are known to cause neurological damage?  If it's known to cause neurological damage, then it isn't an inactive substance. Therefore, it's not a true placebo.

Yes, it IS.  You are testing the antigenic substance in the vaccine, not the preservatives.  That's the whole point.

 

The only difference in the placebo and the true drug/vaccine (depending on what's being tested) should be the active substance.  That way, if there's an adverse effect, you know it's from the active substance, not from the preservatives, carrier substances, etc.  

WildKingdom is offline  
#64 of 65 Old 10-16-2012, 05:56 PM
 
emmy526's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,667
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)

maybe we should test those preservatives and adjuvants before doing anything else further on the vaccine making front..let's test them against saline and see what happens... have all the experts who claim no harm can come from using them in vaccines, can volunteer for a blind study.  They won't know what or if they are getting anything and will be left to wonder. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post

What is the point of safety-testing a vaccination against a "placebo" that just happens to have ingredients (such as preservatives and/or adjuvants) that are known to cause neurological damage?  If it's known to cause neurological damage, then it isn't an inactive substance. Therefore, it's not a true placebo.

emmy526 is offline  
#65 of 65 Old 10-16-2012, 06:19 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,132
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post

Yes, it IS.  You are testing the antigenic substance in the vaccine, not the preservatives.  That's the whole point.

 

The only difference in the placebo and the true drug/vaccine (depending on what's being tested) should be the active substance.  That way, if there's an adverse effect, you know it's from the active substance, not from the preservatives, carrier substances, etc.  

But when there are adverse effects from both "placebo" and "true vaccine being tested," ALL THAT'S REPORTED IS SOMETHING LIKE: "true vaccine being tested did not have significantly different rate of adverse effects than placebo," WHICH IS GROSSLY MISLEADING.

 

It's not a true safety test if you are not looking at the adverse effects from the ingredients other than the antigenic substance.

 

In many cases, it's not the antigenic substance that is the biggest trigger of adverse effects.  It's the adjuvant, or the preservative, or a combination of either/both with other ingredients or other environmental factors.

 

Which offers a plausible explanation of why some of us are able to fight off the flu just fine, but become extremely ill from flu shots.  And no, I'm not talking about getting "the flu" from the flu shots.  I'm talking about having one or more autoimmune disorders triggered by vaccines when various illnesses like the flu did not trigger them.

Taximom5 is online now  
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