New here, what do you guys think about this woman who regrets not vaccinating? - Page 3 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 119 Old 04-27-2013, 11:04 AM
 
MyLilPwny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: California
Posts: 821
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

The theory on how vaccines work is that they make the body produce antibodies. The theory is that if you have enough antibodies, then the antibodies will fight off the disease. The theory is that "enough" antibodies means that you are "immune" to the disease. Its a scam since this theory is only focusing on the antibody little part of the immune system (humeral a.k.a. TH2 immune system) whereas completely ignoring the cellular part of the immune system (cell-mediated a.k.a. TH1 immune system - which involves white blood cells, macrophages, lymphocytes, etc.), plus the immune system is way more complex than just those 2 parts- involving cells, tissues, mediators, etc. So its a scam to be completely ignoring that the body is a holistic complex system and to just be focusing on one little tiny part: how many antibodies do I have. Let me get this vaccine and let me produce a bunch of antibodies and now I'm magically immune & I'll completely ignore the rest of my complex immune system & its ok if I'm continually pumping vaccines into myself to make me have a humeral/TH2 dominant immune system. People with TH2-skewed immune systems (which would be caused by injecting yourself with vaccines to produce all these abnormal unnatural antibodies), end up with allergies and asthma if they're lucky and if they don't develop even worse auto-immune diseases. So that's why I think titer testing is a scam & vaccines are scams too.

Mirzam, applejuice and BeckyBird like this.

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  
#62 of 119 Old 04-27-2013, 11:21 AM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
MyLilPwny, thanks for answering my question! I was thinking about it while waiting for your response, and came up with more questions.

If I haven't been exposed to chicken pox in years, isn't it probable that I wouldn't have any antibodies to chickenpox left in my bloodstream? And isn't it also true that my body still remembers chicken pox and would quickly make the antibodies if I were exposed? So doesn't that make titer testing ineffective?
pek64 is offline  
#63 of 119 Old 04-27-2013, 11:35 AM
 
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 pek64 View Post

If I haven't been exposed to chicken pox in years, isn't it probable that I wouldn't have any antibodies to chickenpox left in my bloodstream? And isn't it also true that my body still remembers chicken pox and would quickly make the antibodies if I were exposed? So doesn't that make titer testing ineffective?

 

I agree!


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  
#64 of 119 Old 04-27-2013, 12:57 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pek64 View Post

MyLilPwny, thanks for answering my question! I was thinking about it while waiting for your response, and came up with more questions.

If I haven't been exposed to chicken pox in years, isn't it probable that I wouldn't have any antibodies to chickenpox left in my bloodstream? And isn't it also true that my body still remembers chicken pox and would quickly make the antibodies if I were exposed? So doesn't that make titer testing ineffective?

I think chicken pox is different from other viruses.


First of all, the virus never leaves your system.  It settles in one of the spinal nerves, and goes dormant. You do continue to produce antibodies that keep the virus in check (dormant); periodic re-exposure to chicken pox "reminds" your immune system to keep producing these antibodies that keep the virus in your system from re-activating as shingles.

 

Disruption of the immune system--chemotherapy, steroids, etc.--can interfere with the ability to keep one's own chicken pox virus dormant.

 

But another thing to consider is whether you might have been exposed to chicken pox without having known that you were?  It's not like you know what germs are left on the grocery cart handle--someone who was just coming down with either chicken pox or shingles could have used it just before you.  It is even possible to be exposed via someone else's Varivax (live virus varicella vaccine); according to 

 

http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/v/varivax/varivax_pi.pdf:

"Due to the concern for transmission of vaccine virus, vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid whenever possible close association with susceptible high-risk individuals for up to six weeks following vaccination with VARIVAX."

 

So I wouldn't assume that you haven't been exposed to chicken pox in years.

Taximom5 is online now  
#65 of 119 Old 04-27-2013, 01:48 PM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ok. Chicken pox was a poor example. My point is ....it might be possible to have a titer test say I am no longer immune to a disease, when I would still not become ill if exposed, because my body would respond so quickly, recognizing the virus from my childhood illness. Perhaps whooping cough is a better example for this point. Or measles. Or mumps.
pek64 is offline  
#66 of 119 Old 04-27-2013, 02:04 PM
 
katelove's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,747
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pek64 View Post

Ok. Chicken pox was a poor example. My point is ....it might be possible to have a titer test say I am no longer immune to a disease, when I would still not become ill if exposed, because my body would respond so quickly, recognizing the virus from my childhood illness. Perhaps whooping cough is a better example for this point. Or measles. Or mumps.

Well the Hep B vaccine is an example of this (although not via initial exposure to the disease). Boosters are no longer recommended because it has been found that, in people with lower titres, the body will respond to exposure by producing more antibodies.

Mother of two spectacular girls, born mid-2010 and late 2012  mdcblog5.gif

katelove is online now  
#67 of 119 Old 04-27-2013, 05:39 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Outside the hive mind
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)

pek64, I am still searching for the study, however, I did remember Heidi Stevenson writing about the failed MRSA V710 vax which despite creating antibodies in people, failed to protect them, more people died of MRSA after receiving the vaccine than those who did not.

 

http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2012-11-03/new-failed-vax-study-proves-vaccine-antibody-theory-is-false/

 

Okay, I found a reference to the NIH study I was looking for, also on Gaia Health with links to study for those that wish to bypass Heidi's interpretation.

 

http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2012-07-04/vaccine-theory-proven-wrong-study-by-nih/


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  
#68 of 119 Old 04-27-2013, 05:51 PM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am not talking specifically about vaccinations. Actually, what was in my mind was having the disease. My question(s) is -- if I get a disease, and recover without complications, and don't come in contact with again for years (because of vaccination of the younger population, probably), is it possible that I wouldn't have antibodies in my bloodstream and would have a negative result for the titer, but if then exposed to the disease still react quickly and not get sick (because my body still remembers the disease from the previous illness)?

A lengthy hypothetical situation, perhaps. Still, given the vaccinating of so many, it seems possible, to me. If this is too far off topic, I'll understand. It might be deserving of a separate thread.
pek64 is offline  
#69 of 119 Old 04-27-2013, 09:18 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pek64 View Post

I am not talking specifically about vaccinations. Actually, what was in my mind was having the disease. My question(s) is -- if I get a disease, and recover without complications, and don't come in contact with again for years (because of vaccination of the younger population, probably), is it possible that I wouldn't have antibodies in my bloodstream and would have a negative result for the titer, but if then exposed to the disease still react quickly and not get sick (because my body still remembers the disease from the previous illness)?

A lengthy hypothetical situation, perhaps. Still, given the vaccinating of so many, it seems possible, to me. If this is too far off topic, I'll understand. It might be deserving of a separate thread.

I think it would depend a great deal on your general health--whether you have had adequate (or optimum) nutrition, exercise, rest, etc., what your stress levels are, even how happy you are.

Other factors might include whether your immune system is compromised in any way--say, an autoimmune disorder, cardiac/lung problems, or even whether youre fighting a common cold or flu virus, whether you've successfully encountered other illnesses with no complications, whether you've been exposed to any chemicals (pesticides? Herbicides medications?)...

In general, I'd say, yes, of course you would be able to fight off just about any illness you're likely to encounter. But all those variables can put quite a different spin on things....
Taximom5 is online now  
#70 of 119 Old 04-28-2013, 08:03 AM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by katelove View Post


Well the Hep B vaccine is an example of this (although not via initial exposure to the disease). Boosters are no longer recommended because it has been found that, in people with lower titres, the body will respond to exposure by producing more antibodies.

That is interesting, because I have had two sets of 2 HepB vaxes (the full series is considered to be three). In both cases, I got fed up after 2 and dropped it for years . . . The second time was when I discovered Thimerisol after asking for the package insert . . . I have never titre'd immune to Hep B . . . 

dinahx is offline  
#71 of 119 Old 04-28-2013, 08:06 AM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post


Um, I'm actually pro-vax in that there are vaccines that I give my children. It's just that people like Dr. Sears and I see complexities where you seem to see black and white.

It doesn't actually matter what he says on Facebook compared to what he says in a published book available @ public libraries across the country. He has convinced more parents to Vax in my experience than dogmatic books like "Your Baby's Best Shot" (oooo so punny!) which are all like 'just do it and stay away from NVIC and AoA!!!!!!

 

I have never gotten the impression from Facebook that he was AntiVax, but I do think he is not into poorly done CDC funded studies, and that's great because neither am I!

 

I am a little tired of the 'criticisms only apply to those who don't agree with me'. ORAC says some crazy things on his blog, like long paragraphs about his eyes are burning from the stupidity of woooooo, but no one representing the pro side on here seems to think these rants undermine his reputation as a sober objective scientist of the first order. So why would an occasional rant from Dr. Sears undermine his reputation then?

BeckyBird likes this.
dinahx is offline  
#72 of 119 Old 04-28-2013, 02:42 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It doesn't matter what he says on Facebook? Really? That's one of the more wtf statements I've seen on here. Why in the world do his public statements outside of his published books not matter?

He's probably more an example of how the labels pro and anti vax just don't work very well. My bigger issue is he's not very well informed and misrepresents the issues in his book. I don't think it's intentional, I just don't think he knows any better.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#73 of 119 Old 04-28-2013, 03:13 PM
 
dinahx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: earth
Posts: 2,144
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

His book is straight up excellent and it just got updated. If he is uniformed of something, it is only the bizarre Pharma spin on the issues. Labeling those of us who do not buy the spin 'uninformed' is one of the most obvious tropes in the, well, Pharma spin.

 

I think Facebook is sorta more informal than published literature. If Joe/Jane Pediatrician can't possibly understand vaccines, then Houston, we have a problem. Every single national level figure in this debate is sorta wild in their own way. I have never heard an introduction as flamboyant as Paul Offit's (he actually refers to himself as a Rock Star). And I know y'all don't want to talk about Seth McNookin. LOL.

 

I would prefer if we don't swear in these debates tho.

Mirzam and Marnica like this.
dinahx is offline  
#74 of 119 Old 04-28-2013, 05:18 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Who swore?

Rrrrrachel is offline  
#75 of 119 Old 04-28-2013, 05:31 PM
 
kitteh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Santa Monica
Posts: 1,540
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think she means the "wtf" though imo its kinda a stretch to label that an actual swear/curse, though I'm sure others will disagree.

Married 12/08 to Chilean DH and mama to DD 2/2/10. We're a bilingual home and we familybed1.gif and toddler.gif

 

Expecting #2 in late June!

kitteh is offline  
#76 of 119 Old 04-28-2013, 05:32 PM
 
thispathisme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
When I read your post Rrrrrachel I read, "what the f***", not double u-tee-eff.
thispathisme is offline  
#77 of 119 Old 04-28-2013, 06:02 PM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well then you should stop cursing!
Katie8681 likes this.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#78 of 119 Old 04-28-2013, 06:26 PM
 
thispathisme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 148
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ha!
thispathisme is offline  
#79 of 119 Old 04-29-2013, 09:01 AM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,028
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

It doesn't matter what he says on Facebook? Really? That's one of the more wtf statements I've seen on here. Why in the world do his public statements outside of his published books not matter?

He's probably more an example of how the labels pro and anti vax just don't work very well. My bigger issue is he's not very well informed and misrepresents the issues in his book. I don't think it's intentional, I just don't think he knows any better.

Upthread you stated that Dr. Sears "isn't pro-vax." Specifically what would it take to meet your own golden standard of "pro-vax?"

Has it occurred to you that it's possible to favor/choose/advocate for one or more vaccines while still being critical of vaccine policy and research? That it's possible to see the good and bad in a single a vaccine? These positions really, really can juxtapose each other. I promise.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#80 of 119 Old 04-29-2013, 09:03 AM
 
Rrrrrachel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,154
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Like I said, turquesa, probably more a great example of how those labels aren't very meaningful.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
#81 of 119 Old 04-29-2013, 09:36 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 Taximom5 View Post

I think it would depend a great deal on your general health--whether you have had adequate (or optimum) nutrition, exercise, rest, etc., what your stress levels are, even how happy you are.

Other factors might include whether your immune system is compromised in any way--say, an autoimmune disorder, cardiac/lung problems, or even whether youre fighting a common cold or flu virus, whether you've successfully encountered other illnesses with no complications, whether you've been exposed to any chemicals (pesticides? Herbicides medications?)...

In general, I'd say, yes, of course you would be able to fight off just about any illness you're likely to encounter. But all those variables can put quite a different spin on things....

I agree with what you say here, in general. I don't feel it answers my question, however.

Having seen and successfully fought the illness once, am I able to create the antibodies as soon as the illness is encountered, even if I had no antibodies to the illness in my bloodstream when the illness was encountered? In other words, is there still a memory of the illness, even if there are no antibodies to verify that memory? If such a memory exists, then my immune system could respond faster than someone who had never been exposed to the illness. I don't know if that question can be answered, actually. With no way to determine such a memory, how can one prove its existence? So, it's a theoretical discussion, unless someone knows another way to test for the memory.
pek64 is offline  
#82 of 119 Old 04-29-2013, 02:18 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
I don't understand how you successfully fought the virus the first time around if you didn't make any antibodies. Could the test have gotten screwed up?

I think, theoretically, yeah, your immune system is supposed to recognize a previously beaten-into-submission virus. But there are too many variables that could over-ride that.
Taximom5 is online now  
#83 of 119 Old 04-29-2013, 02:56 PM
 
Asiago's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,735
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
I haven't read the entire thread but pertaining to the titer question, it may have been that the titer result was not within the accepted value range. Meaning there may have been antibodies but not what would be considered sufficient for immunity. Never the less if there are antibodies then there are memory cells, and those kick in upon the second exposure.
Asiago is online now  
#84 of 119 Old 04-29-2013, 08:19 PM
 
pek64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I still think my query is slightly misunderstood.

First, some background information.

The lifespan of an antibody is six months, or so I was told by a pediatrician. It was in reference to the rh factor problem (mother negative, baby positive and anemic), and the child got better after six months. The pediatrician wasn't surprised, since antibodies have a six month life span. The mother, who had 2/3 of her blood samples just antibodies at the end of her pregnancy, notices that future blood samples have much fewer antibodies, so her body is not still making them. I assume that would be typical. Why make antibodies if the invader is not being encountered.

Now the hypothetical situation.

I get sick, create antibodies, then don't encounter the virus again for years, antibodies created during the illness died long ago, and no more are made. Do I still have immunity, hypothetically speaking. What do you think?
pek64 is offline  
#85 of 119 Old 04-29-2013, 09:08 PM
 
hushpuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 13
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pek64 View Post

I get sick, create antibodies, then don't encounter the virus again for years, antibodies created during the illness died long ago, and no more are made. Do I still have immunity, hypothetically speaking. What do you think?

Yes :) Long after your original B lymphocytes have died, the body continues to harbor (very very low) levels of memory cells specific to that antigen. They continue to exist for many years after original exposure (memory T lymphocytes for some strains of flu have been found in elderly people who were exposed during epidemics 60 plus years ago for example. Memory B cell lifespan is somewhat lower though I believe). When memory lymphocytes encounter the antigen again the immune response is swift and strong as you no longer have the latency period between encountering the antigen and producing the specific immune response, so technically that constitutes immunity.

 

Edit: I should add that the lifespan of memory T lymphocytes is relevant because they have a role in activating B lymphocytes, so even after the antibody producing cells are depleted, as long as you still have specific T cells the immune response will be fast and strong.

applejuice likes this.
hushpuppy is offline  
#86 of 119 Old 05-01-2013, 10:44 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

It doesn't matter what he says on Facebook? Really? That's one of the more wtf statements I've seen on here. Why in the world do his public statements outside of his published books not matter?

He's probably more an example of how the labels pro and anti vax just don't work very well. My bigger issue is he's not very well informed and misrepresents the issues in his book. I don't think it's intentional, I just don't think he knows any better.

Funny, I did not get this from reading his book at all. I think he's rather well informed in fact. He just presents a more balanced viewpoint and at the end of the day supports parental choice. 


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  
#87 of 119 Old 05-01-2013, 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)

Have you actually fact checked his various claims, or did you just role with it?  There are a lot of misleading statements, if not outright falsehoods.  Not at all surprised we got different things out of it, though :)

 

I do think he tries to take a more moderate view and ultimately supports parental choice.  I certainly wouldn't call him vehemently anti vax, either.  I think he's ultimately pro business, and he was one of the first to realize there was money to be made on this issue.

Rrrrrachel is offline  
#88 of 119 Old 05-01-2013, 12:03 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,028
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dinahx View Post

It doesn't actually matter what he says on Facebook compared to what he says in a published book available @ public libraries across the country. He has convinced more parents to Vax in my experience than dogmatic books like "Your Baby's Best Shot" (oooo so punny!) which are all like 'just do it and stay away from NVIC and AoA!!!!!!

I have never gotten the impression from Facebook that he was AntiVax, but I do think he is not into poorly done CDC funded studies, and that's great because neither am I!

I am a little tired of the 'criticisms only apply to those who don't agree with me'. ORAC says some crazy things on his blog, like long paragraphs about his eyes are burning from the stupidity of woooooo, but no one representing the pro side on here seems to think these rants undermine his reputation as a sober objective scientist of the first order. So why would an occasional rant from Dr. Sears undermine his reputation then?

"Your Baby's Best Shot." Lol, that book was terrible! It really talks down to parents: "There, there, dearie. (Pat, pat, pat) do as your doctor says." Never mind that the author is not a doctor, but a psychologist who romps with the usual pseudo-skeptics.
Marnica likes this.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#89 of 119 Old 05-01-2013, 12:11 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,085
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel View Post

Have you actually fact checked his various claims, or did you just role with it?  There are a lot of misleading statements, if not outright falsehoods.  Not at all surprised we got different things out of it, though :)

 

I do think he tries to take a more moderate view and ultimately supports parental choice.  I certainly wouldn't call him vehemently anti vax, either.  I think he's ultimately pro business, and he was one of the first to realize there was money to be made on this issue.

 

You seem to think that Dr. Sears is in it to make money on the issue (because >GASP< he wrote a book about his position), while your opinion of Paul Offit, Seth Mnookin, Brian Deer, etc., who  not only wrote books pushing vaccination/lamabasting anyone who disagrees, but go around the country lecturing (and pushing their books) are not in it to make money, but are doing the humanitarian thing.

Taximom5 is online now  
#90 of 119 Old 05-01-2013, 01:11 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 that I've said any such thing about those others, but yes, I think dr bob is a very savvy business man.
Rrrrrachel is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
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