Australia bans flu vaccine - child in coma - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 73 Old 02-03-2013, 07:05 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,302
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Vaccinations for children under five have been suspended in Australia.  Many children have been hospitalised with febrile convulsions within hours of the shot.  Febrile convulsions are fits associated with a high temperature.  A baby just one year old is still in a coma in a Perth hospital.  Other reactions to the vaccine have been fevers and vomiting.

 

 

 

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/australia-bans-flu-vaccine-child-in-coma-others-hospitalised/


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#2 of 73 Old 02-03-2013, 01:20 PM
 
WildKingdom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 684
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is reporting on a ban from 2010. Why is it being "reported" as though it is breaking news?

Odd, no mention in the article about the ban being lifted after there was no evidence found of an increased incidence of adverse effects.

http://mobile.news.com.au/breaking-news/ban-on-flu-vaccine-for-young-children-lifted/story-e6frfku0-1225899116050
Alenushka and prosciencemum like this.
WildKingdom is offline  
#3 of 73 Old 02-03-2013, 01:54 PM
 
minerva23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: down by the riverside
Posts: 465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)

You don't bite the hand that feeds you!
 

nia82 likes this.

“The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.”
―Socrates

minerva23 is offline  
#4 of 73 Old 02-04-2013, 05:23 AM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The antivax position is always easily debunked.
DHinJersey is offline  
#5 of 73 Old 02-05-2013, 01:10 PM
 
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 DHinJersey View Post

The antivax position is always easily debunked.

um no it's not actually which is why there are and always will be highly educated parents that have done immense amount of research and choose not to vaccinate their children. 

Mirzam and rachelsmama like this.

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  
#6 of 73 Old 02-06-2013, 11:22 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,706
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post

um no it's not actually which is why there are and always will be highly educated parents that have done immense amount of research and choose not to vaccinate their children. 

 

And vice versa (ie. you do the research and find the anti-vax position "easy to debunk" as DHinjersey puts it).

 

I think it's an interesting pyschological phenomena actually - we must just filter the information differently somehow, that different people can look at the same information and basically come to opposite conclusions. 


Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#7 of 73 Old 02-06-2013, 12:57 PM
 
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 prosciencemum View Post

 

And vice versa (ie. you do the research and find the anti-vax position "easy to debunk" as DHinjersey puts it).

 

I think it's an interesting pyschological phenomena actually - we must just filter the information differently somehow, that different people can look at the same information and basically come to opposite conclusions. 

While I agree that two people can review the same material and come to different conclusions,  the previous poster stating that the "antivax" position is always easily debunked is false -  which was my point. If it was always easily debunked, there wouldn't be an antivax position. PP was making a false statement of fact - not expressing an opinion which is very different IMO. 

rachelsmama likes this.

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  
#8 of 73 Old 02-06-2013, 01:58 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marnica View Post

it was always easily debunked, there wouldn't be an antivax position.

Well that's not true. People hold all kinds of positions that are easily debunked. Like that the world is flat or we never landed on the moon.

That being said, some anti vax arguments ARE easily debunked, but people still cling to them. Some are somewhat debunked but the door is still left open. Some can't really be totally and specifically debunked with the current body of research.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#9 of 73 Old 02-07-2013, 08:22 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 Rrrrrachel View Post


Well that's not true. People hold all kinds of positions that are easily debunked. Like that the world is flat or we never landed on the moon.

That being said, some anti vax arguments ARE easily debunked, but people still cling to them. Some are somewhat debunked but the door is still left open. Some can't really be totally and specifically debunked with the current body of research.

If you want to get uber specific  ok - then what you have stated is true. That is not what the previous poster said - what they said was a sweeping generalization that is untrue and that was the point I was trying to make. 


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  
#10 of 73 Old 02-07-2013, 09:57 AM
 
DHinJersey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: joisy
Posts: 127
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

edited

DHinJersey is offline  
#11 of 73 Old 02-12-2013, 04:33 PM
 
researchaddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

And vice versa (ie. you do the research and find the anti-vax position "easy to debunk" as DHinjersey puts it)
I think it's an interesting pyschological phenomena actually - we must just filter the information differently somehow, that different people can look at the same information and basically come to opposite conclusions. 
It goes deeper than viewpoints. some parents know of or have had a child that had a reaction, the possible conflicts of interest, some of the diseases are mild and most are rare. what got me was the toxic ingredients formaldehyde, animal DNA, and the heavy metal that accumulate in your body, etc... also the FDA held meetings to consider using human tumor cells. Your right there are different ways to looking at it you could look at it as a good thing these ingredients boost effectivness or you could look at the risks of the ingredients either way both sides are right . But How many times has a dangerous product been on the market long before it gets pulled? To often and some never get pulled at all
researchaddict is offline  
#12 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 07:03 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,706
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by researchaddict View Post



 what got me was the toxic ingredients formaldehyde, animal DNA, and the heavy metal that accumulate in your body, etc... also the FDA held meetings to consider using human tumor cells. Your right there are different ways to looking at it you could look at it as a good thing these ingredients boost effectivness or you could look at the risks of the ingredients either way both sides are right .
 
But How many times has a dangerous product been on the market long before it gets pulled? To often and some never get pulled at all

 

These ingredients sounds scary,  but if you delve deeper you find they are in miniscule amounts and/or are chemicals which are in things you would consider healthy (e.g. there's more formaldahyde in a pear than any vaccine, more mercury in a can of tuna than any vaccine). So it's really nothing to be concerned about.

 

And no other industry is as carefully checked as medicines. Vaccines are held to higher safety standards than most medicines even being as they are given to healthy people. Sure dangerous things have been pulled before - the point being surely though that they were found to be dangerous and pulled. That gives me confidence that safety checks work and that people are doing the best they can.


Mother of two living in UK. Daughter (2007) born in USA, son (2010) born here. I'm pro natural birth, midwife care, breastfeeding, co-sleeping, baby wearing and a keen advocate of cloth diapering. I'm a full time working research scientist (physical sciences) and I'm pro-vaccine.

prosciencemum is online now  
#13 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 07:18 AM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildKingdom View Post

This is reporting on a ban from 2010. Why is it being "reported" as though it is breaking news?

Odd, no mention in the article about the ban being lifted after there was no evidence found of an increased incidence of adverse effects.

http://mobile.news.com.au/breaking-news/ban-on-flu-vaccine-for-young-children-lifted/story-e6frfku0-1225899116050


It is not debunked, as the article states the investigation continues and parents are encouraged to discuss the matter with their GP prior to vaccinating. That's a far cry from "debunked", and nothing like believing the earth is flat.
pek64 is offline  
#14 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 07:48 AM
 
Jennyanydots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

These ingredients sounds scary,  but if you delve deeper you find they are in miniscule amounts and/or are chemicals which are in things you would consider healthy (e.g. there's more formaldahyde in a pear than any vaccine, more mercury in a can of tuna than any vaccine). So it's really nothing to be concerned about.
Really? Injecting a substance into the body works the same as eating it? Great! I was going to have pizza for lunch, but now I have an idea... So cool!

chicken3.gif mama to two teens and two tots partners.gif madly in love with DP guitar.gif

Jennyanydots is offline  
#15 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 08:43 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,302
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

These ingredients sounds scary,  but if you delve deeper you find they are in miniscule amounts and/or are chemicals which are in things you would consider healthy (e.g. there's more formaldahyde in a pear than any vaccine, more mercury in a can of tuna than any vaccine). So it's really nothing to be concerned about.

 

 

I find this such a fallacious argument because injecting substances is in no way shape or form the same as ingesting them. This is the issue with AS03 (squalene) the adjuvent in some European flu vaccines, that is found naturally in many healthy foods. This causes a problem, when injected into the body, it is seen as an enemy and is treated as an antigen and the body creates antibodies to it. So now squalene is seen as an enemy, but this enemy exisists throughout the body and is important to many functions, so the body ends up attacking itself, ie autoimmune disease.

 

 

 


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#16 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 09:32 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's not the same as injesting them, but it's not that different either. Your body only absorbs part of what is injested, but that part is dealt wih the same way an injected substance is. Obviously when you consume far far more of a substance than what is injected they become more and more comparable.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#17 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 09:43 AM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

It's not the same as injesting them, but it's not that different either. Your body only absorbs part of what is injested, but that part is dealt wih the same way an injected substance is. Obviously when you consume far far more of a substance than what is injected they become more and more comparable.

Except that when you ingest something it's exposed to acid in your stomach, and injected substances are not. I'm not sure what that acid bath does to the substances, but maybe along with statistics, you have chemistry and biology expertise, as well.
pek64 is offline  
#18 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 09:58 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,302
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

It's not the same as injesting them, but it's not that different either. Your body only absorbs part of what is injested, but that part is dealt wih the same way an injected substance is. Obviously when you consume far far more of a substance than what is injected they become more and more comparable.

Are you telling me that eating you think eating olive and palm oils, amaranth and shark liver oil, or slathering squalene over your skin can cause the same potentially dangerous autoimmune disease that injecting a minute amount of the substance into the body can?


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#19 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 10:03 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't concede the point that vaccines cause autoimmune diseases.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#20 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 10:04 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pek64 View Post

Except that when you ingest something it's exposed to acid in your stomach, and injected substances are not. I'm not sure what that acid bath does to the substances, but maybe along with statistics, you have chemistry and biology expertise, as well.

So you're saying "except," implying its different, except you actually have no clue whether its different or not? Am I reading that right?
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#21 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 10:11 AM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

So you're saying "except," implying its different, except you actually have no clue whether its different or not? Am I reading that right?

Since you're misdirecting again, I gather you don't know if they are the same.
pek64 is offline  
#22 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 10:20 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm not misdirecting anymore than you are.

Despite the bodies various mechanisms for filtering out injested contaminants, some of them are still absorbed into the blood stream. This is demonstrably true. Once absorbed, these are eliminated using the exact same mechanism as the substances absorbed from injection. The difference is that a smaller percentage of an injected substance is absorbed. When we're talking about substances that are injested in much larger quantities than are present in vaccines and are injested habitually over time, that becomes less relevant.

For substances like aluminum, the amount circulating in the body is predominantly determined by injested aluminum not injected. A vaccine doesn't even raise aluminum levels in the blood measurably above background levels.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#23 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 10:42 AM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I'm not misdirecting anymore than you are.

Despite the bodies various mechanisms for filtering out injested contaminants, some of them are still absorbed into the blood stream. This is demonstrably true. Once absorbed, these are eliminated using the exact same mechanism as the substances absorbed from injection. The difference is that a smaller percentage of an injected substance is absorbed. When we're talking about substances that are injested in much larger quantities than are present in vaccines and are injested habitually over time, that becomes less relevant.

For substances like aluminum, the amount circulating in the body is predominantly determined by injested aluminum not injected. A vaccine doesn't even raise aluminum levels in the blood measurably above background levels.

You were misdirecting, and haven't answered the question that was asked.
pek64 is offline  
#24 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 10:43 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What question?
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#25 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 10:54 AM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

What question?

Enough said. Thank you.
pek64 is offline  
#26 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 11:07 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Pek, you didn't ask me a question.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#27 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 12:53 PM - Thread Starter
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,302
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

I don't concede the point that vaccines cause autoimmune diseases.

So vaccines don't cause the body to make antibodies to squalene in your "opinion"?


Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#28 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 01:00 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't know much about squalene beyond its not in us vaccines and its something the body produces naturally. I have read that most people have squalene antibodies in their system.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#29 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 05:53 PM
 
researchaddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post


Despite the bodies various mechanisms for filtering out injested contaminants, some of them are still absorbed into the blood stream. This is demonstrably true. Once absorbed, these are eliminated using the exact same mechanism as the substances absorbed from injection.
.
this is not always true for example in the case of foreign DNA when directly injected into the blood stream cells will undergo apotosis and kill themselves to reproduce altered DNA but when we consume DNA from our food the body does not leak them it has many complex processes of breaking down the foreign DNA( and RNA) to be converted and used as its own. same for food proteins they are converted, it is plausible that in certain individuals injected with foreign food proteins can suffer a severe food allergy .
researchaddict is offline  
#30 of 73 Old 02-13-2013, 06:31 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Vaccines aren't injected directly into the blood stream.
Rrrrrachel 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