Vaccines: more good than harm? - Page 5 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
#121 of 144 Old 07-22-2013, 09:54 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakunin View Post


Brilliant Turquesa. Use a scientific reference, an outdated one and with no epidemic as predicted in the 11 year old paper. Here's a more current paper debating those findings using more extensive data. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0060732

You're trying to use beliefs to shape the science. I recommend you use science to shape the beliefs.

Let me see if I get this straight. In my 'position post' I implied that most vaccines cause more benefit than harm (that is what generally means), and many members posted their opposition to that view. Let's be clear, if you oppose that view then you think that "the majority of vaccines cause more harm than benefit". I still can't possibly understand how parents think that way.

Unless people misinterpreted my post as meaning: "ALL vaccines cause more benefit than harm". That is certainly NOT what I said. So before judging my objectiveness, check the remarks made in the 'position post' including the comment on Gardasil. I hope you can understand the difference between objectiveness and neutrality, but I'm not holding my breath.

To be honest I for one understand the resistance of parents to varicella and influenza vaccines. Mainly because the benefits are not as big as the ones from other vaccines. But the serious risks with these two vaccines have a very low probability of occurring. I may not be running to the doctor to vaccinate my 2 year old for influenza (not required here), but I wouldn't hold it against parents who do.

Bakunin, why exactly are you here?

It doesn't make sense that you spent so much effort trying to insist that you are objective concerning the vaccine safety debate, when it's obvious that you're one of the strongest proponents of vaccines here--and one of the strongest attackers of those criticizing vaccine safety.

It doesn't make sense that you would misunderstand or worse, ignore every single valid point made by those who disagree with your narrow-minded views.

It doesn't make sense that you would pretend that those of us who disagree with you all share a particular position--of believing that vaccines harm more often than they help--when several who disagree with you have posted quite clearly that long-term adverse effects are not entirely known.

It doesn't make sense that anyone would consider your little survey here a valid study of anything when you'd managed to trigger the Militant-Pro-Vaxxer-Alert-Radar of so many here before you closed your survey.

It doesn't make sense that you're still here, trying to aggressively convince us that your views on vaccination are The Right Views.

It doesn't make sense that you imply that those who criticize vaccines would "hold it against" another parent their choice to vaccinate their child for influenza,

And it certainly doesn't make sense that you would say that, since reported adverse effects are lower in numbers than reported helpful effects, they are therefore acceptable, and that those whose children suffered serious damage from vaccines are an acceptable loss.

One has to wonder--if your child suffered a severe reaction to a vaccine for a disease that had very little chance of causing complications, would you proudly proclaim that your child's vaccine damage was acceptable, and that he "took one for the herd?"
applejuice likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#122 of 144 Old 07-22-2013, 11:16 PM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,706
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
I've actually often wondered what would happen to my general view that vaccines do more good than harm if my family were unlucky to have one of the rare reactions. I know no-one in real life with any reactions. I like to think I would still look at the overall picture, but I can't deny it would be harder. It can be very hard not to let emotions rule when it comes to our kids.

I'm surprised no one has wondered/insinuated if Bakunin is paid by big pharma yet. Isn't that standard debate practise here?

I've never understood why some people here can't understand why other people passionate about vaccines doing more good than harm and want to share those views. I understand why, if you firmly believe they do more harm than good, you would want to share that.

When it comes down to it we just all want our kids to be as healthy as possible.

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  
#123 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 12:08 AM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
 I like to think I would still look at the overall picture, but I can't deny it would be harder. It can be very hard not to let emotions rule when it comes to our kids.
 

If a mother decided not to vaccinate after her child had a reaction, would that be an example of letting emotions rule, and not looking at the overall picture?

applejuice likes this.

               "Those who are able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed, by the masses."

                ~Captain Hammer (j/k, it was Plato)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

beckybird is online now  
#124 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 01:02 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 BeckyBird View Post

If a mother decided not to vaccinate after her child had a reaction, would that be an example of letting emotions rule, and not looking at the overall picture?

 

That's a curious question - suggest to me that you have misunderstood my point, so I apologise if I did not make it clearly.

 

 If a child has had a reaction then there are clear medical reasons why for that child vaccination may not be the right choice. But it still would mean the "big picture" is that over the population vaccinations do more good than harm. Even more important - for that child it would be very important that most other families make the choice to vaccinate. We can use herd immunity to great effect to protect those who cannot be vaccinated, or have not yet been vaccinated.


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  
#125 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 04:58 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post


I've never understood why some people here can't understand why other people passionate about vaccines doing more good than harm and want to share those views. I understand why, if you firmly believe they do more harm than good, you would want to share that.

You're twisting my point and moving the goalpost at the same time.

The point isn't that vaccines cause more cases of documented injury than documented cases of disease, though that may even be true.

The point is that, even if the number of vaccine injuries is smaller than the number of injuries from disease, the number of vaccine injuries is still large enough to be unacceptable.

How do we get you to understand this? You have such a double standard, and you see this from such a narrow perspective, I don't know if you can be objective.

You look at your own child and her known sensitivity to disease, and you believe it's unacceptable to allow her to be exposed to vaccine-preventable diseases, because she might die from the complications of said diseases. You believe everyone should be vaccinated against those diseases unless they've ALREADY shown a reaction to that vaccine.

But you're asking other parents to rely on a vaccine program that is run by people who have denied vaccine reactions, failed to adequately study the vaccine reactions that they HAVE admitted, and failed to prescreen for known susceptibilities for those reactions. And you yourself have demonstrated an unwillingness to believe posters here (including myself) who have reported such reactions. You've denied, derided, and belittled such reports. You've denied the existence of studies showing links between vaccines and brain damage/autoimmune disorders/other damage widely associated with vaccines, and ignored similar and worse flaws in studies that support your faith in vaccines.

What if the shoe were on the other foot? What if we treated you the way you treat autism mothers?

What if the prevailing view were that your child wouldn't be harmed by the diseases you fear? What if your reports of her medical condition were scoffed at? What if everyone told you--even though you know better from the available studies--that the chances of your child having complications from diseases are vanishingly rare? What if the government mandated a program that forced your child to be exposed to those diseases--not the weakened vaccines, but the actual diseases--on a schedule that puts her at increased risk, because that schedule is based on convenience ("9 at once! you don't have to bring her in as often!") ("you don't want to miss 2 weeks of work when she gets sick with NO warning, so expose her now!")? And what if companies associated with the government were making billions of dollars of profit on that program, but people said, oh that doesn't matter, that's not a conflict of interest, because those companies make even more money selling other unneeded products that they lie about, so trust them, prosciencemum! Trust them with your child's life!

You see, we can't have a real conversation about this until you recognize how unfair you are being to every at-risk-for-reaction child that you are demanding be vaccinated to protect your at-risk-for-disease child.
applejuice likes this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#126 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 06:21 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakunin View Post


Brilliant Turquesa. Use a scientific reference, an outdated one and with no epidemic as predicted in the 11 year old paper. Here's a more current paper debating those findings using more extensive data. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0060732

 

You're trying to use beliefs to shape the science. I recommend you use science to shape the beliefs.

 

 

banghead.gif

 

Thank you for illustrating oh-so-perfectly the point I made earlier:

 

"2.  Pro-vaxxer and non-vaxxers always poke holes in studies.  Always.  And there are huge holes (conflict of interest and design issues come to mind).  It is a waste of time."

 

Your second line is highly assumptive and you have no evidence for it.  

applejuice likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#127 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 07:05 AM - Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turquesa View Post

How's that objective article coming along, Bakunin? My Devil's Dictionary definition of "objective": "Confirming of one's bias."

But that's me. I'm old and cynical. wild.gif


Above is one of your replies to my post Turquesa. Do you still think the tone in my rebuttal is unjustified?

bakunin is offline  
#128 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 07:29 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakunin View Post


Brilliant Turquesa. Use a scientific reference, an outdated one and with no epidemic as predicted in the 11 year old paper. Here's a more current paper debating those findings using more extensive data. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0060732

 

You're trying to use beliefs to shape the science. I recommend you use science to shape the beliefs.

 

Let me see if I get this straight. In my 'position post' I implied that most vaccines cause more benefit than harm (that is what generally means), and many members posted their opposition to that view. Let's be clear, if you oppose that view then you think that "the majority of vaccines cause more harm than benefit". I still can't possibly understand how parents think that way.

 

Unless people misinterpreted my post as meaning: "ALL vaccines cause more benefit than harm". That is certainly NOT what I said. So before judging my objectiveness, check the remarks made in the 'position post' including the comment on Gardasil. I hope you can understand the difference between objectiveness and neutrality, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

 

 

 

The bolded is breath-takingly rude and assumptive.   I am starting to think you are nothing but a pot-stirrer - having fun?

 

I regret participating in your study.  If you really are a journalist - this should bother you.  I typically do participate in surveys and polls as a way of furthering information and understanding, but now I am going to rethink it.  I am going to question the motives of those asking for information a bit more closely.  

applejuice likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#129 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 07:41 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post

Perhaps "freeloading" was too weighty a word to use. I'm sorry if I have made anyone feel bad about their choices. I am strongly in favour of informed parental choice for all medical decisions, and I strongly disagree with mandatory vaccination policies. 

 

 

yeahthat.gif

applejuice likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#130 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 08:06 AM - Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

 

The bolded is breath-takingly rude and assumptive.   I am starting to think you are nothing but a pot-stirrer - having fun?

 

I regret participating in your study.  If you really are a journalist - this should bother you.  I typically do participate in surveys and polls as a way of furthering information and understanding, but now I am going to rethink it.  I am going to question the motives of those asking for information a bit more closely.  


kathymuggle, the proper way to do a debate on vaccines, if one is to be objective, is through the use scientific studies. And not just one study. Arguments commonly come with evidence from MANY studies. Check out post #89, I provide 7 links with info on multiple studies.

I've made an attempt to be clear in that although the vaccination program is not perfect, in general, we are better off with it. I have even pointed out some concerns: like the current debates on Gardasil, and that just because the vaccination program is effective now it doesn't mean it will be effective in the future. But to some of the people replying, since I don't point out adverse events that are either rare or have not been conclusively linked to vaccines, to them I am simply wrong!!

 

Rude? I've received far more insulting posts through this thread to comment on your statement.

 

Why would you regret to participate in the poll? I posted the results here. Exactly as they came out, I didn't even round.

 

I'd suggest we stick to the evidence if the debate is to be continued. You (and your friends) can gather all the necessary studies to make your point. I'll do the same. If we are to do the debate properly, we should gather all the evidence. To make matters simple we can simplify the question. How about comparing the benefits and risks of just ONE vaccine? Any choices? Mind you, as I've implied, just because I think the vaccine program is generally good, I don't necessarily think the benefits of all vaccines carry the same weight in a risk/benefit comparison

bakunin is offline  
#131 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 08:17 AM
 
dalia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I regret being duped into taking the poll as well. I know that both sides can get ugly here, but I think there is a certain level of professionalism expected from someone who has benefited from our participation in their poll. I'm disappointed.
applejuice and kathymuggle like this.

Wife to one amazing husband superhero.gif, SAHM to DS bouncy.gif 10/09, DS babyboy.gif 10/19,  one furbaby dog2.gif, and lots of chicken3.gif!

 
joy.gif

dalia is offline  
#132 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 09:01 AM - Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalia View Post

I regret being duped into taking the poll as well. I know that both sides can get ugly here, but I think there is a certain level of professionalism expected from someone who has benefited from our participation in their poll. I'm disappointed.


If it brings you peace of mind, I didn't benefit from the poll. I will not get paid and this will not go for scientific publication. It will only be used for an article addressed to parents. Furthermore, the article will rely in many studies analyzing the benefits and risks (the poll is not considered a study. As carefully written in the first post of this thread, poll results will be used to complement the article). Facts, myths and open questions will be pointed out in the article. Tips for parents will also be provided. Most importantly, many links will be provided so parents can make their own decision on vaccines.

 

It's very unfortunate to see the animosity to my posts by some members. It appears that this subgroup of members feels that "you are either with us, or against us". Anyone who thinks differently should be flushed out. That's just my perception. Maybe I'm wrong. Yes unfortunate, but the animosity wasn't unexpected. Anti-vax parents are always the most vocal about their opinion.

 

The purpose of the poll was to determine how parents using forums and social networks PERCEIVE the vaccination of children. Why would anyone regret in participating in a poll like that? Oh, because the person who conducted the poll: "Is not one of us". Hmmmm, again, that's just my perception.

 

You want to know something else? I'm a green parent. We recycle, we use vinegar to clean the floors at home and have solar panels for power. I make sure my son eats healthy and that he has an appropriate dose of exercise every day. As far as we're concerned he has never had a soda in his almost 3 years of life. And as many green parents, when it was time to vaccinate, I had questions. So I looked into it, I did my research. Afterwards I decided it was appropriate to share what I found through an article. What's wrong with that?

 

So tell me dalia. Do you hear it? That little voice in your head that says: "He is not one of us, He is not one of us, He is not one of us, ..... "

bakunin is offline  
#133 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 09:03 AM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Quote:
Check out post #89, I provide 7 links with info on multiple studies.

Yes, you gave 7 links. 2 of these went to abstracts (aka studies). 4 went to statements. 1 went to a page telling us how Wakefield's paper had been pulled. Of the 2 abstracts you linked to, 1 was on whether or not exemptions lead to increase in cases of measles and the other was about the risk of GBS and vaxx. Perhaps it would be helpful if you told us which one of these you'd like to discuss and how it relates to the topic at hand.


fruitfulmomma is online now  
#134 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 09:04 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakunin View Post

 

 

I'd suggest we stick to the evidence if the debate is to be continued. You (and your friends) can gather all the necessary studies to make your point. I'll do the same. If we are to do the debate properly, we should gather all the evidence. To make matters simple we can simplify the question. How about comparing the benefits and risks of just ONE vaccine? Any choices? Mind you, as I've implied, just because I think the vaccine program is generally good, I don't necessarily think the benefits of all vaccines carry the same weight in a risk/benefit comparison

If you want to debate, I suggest you start a new thread and lay out the parameters at the beginning.  If you want a real debate, I would suggest (as someone who has been here a while) that you be very careful with wording and assumptions, so things do not spiral into ugliness.

 

I suggest you also check in on your motives - what is the goal of such a debate?

applejuice likes this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#135 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 09:27 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bakunin View Post

 

 

Why would you regret to participate in the poll? I posted the results here. Exactly as they came out, I didn't even round.

 

 

I regret taking the poll for 2 reasons.

 

1.  It is personal.  You have made some rude, hurtful comments about posters here - as such I am not interested in helping you.  Talking a poll or survery is a generous move - even when the poll is small.  No one has to bother, and this is how we are treated?  

 

2.  Based on your posts here, you seem like an incredibly assumptive person when it comes to non-vaxxers.  You have said something assumptive in almost every post  in the last few pages.    I doubt you are capable of writing an objective article on vaccination - as such I regret helping you.  

applejuice and BeckyBird like this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#136 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 09:47 AM
 
dalia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,982
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
"So tell me dalia. Do you hear it? That little voice in your head that says: 'He is not one of us, He is not one of us, He is not one of us, .....'"

I will tell you what I hear.

I hear condescending language, the kind used when changing my mind really isn't a concern as much as making me wrong.

One thing to understand is that folks on the "anti-vax" side have been inundated with insults, assumptions and condescending language. We've been called irresponsible at best, and at worst, stupid and "baby killers". Thus the defensiveness. Many of us are tired of defending ourselves for trying to do what's best. We're fighting an uphill battle and getting kicked all the way up.

I am not a doctor or a scientist. I am no expert, and I have never claimed to be. I'm just a mom trying to take care of my children. My points may seem irrational and unscientific to some. But I will tell you that nothing changes until the validity of both sides is acknowledged. In my personal life, I have friends who vax and friends who don't. I respect them all. And they respect me.

You think I see you as "not one of us" but that's not true. I see you as human, capable of getting carried away by a passionate argument and getting more invested in being right than anything else. I understand this because I've done it. But I have never changed anyone that way. I've only furthered the divide and halted the communication once again.

Wife to one amazing husband superhero.gif, SAHM to DS bouncy.gif 10/09, DS babyboy.gif 10/19,  one furbaby dog2.gif, and lots of chicken3.gif!

 
joy.gif

dalia is offline  
#137 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 09:56 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,870
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:


Quote:
Originally Posted by bakunin View Post


 Here's a more current paper debating those findings using more extensive data. http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0060732

 

FYI - I did look at this paper at it is very interesting and worth a read.  

 

From the section on vacination on varicella:

 

 

"Model simulations suggest the possibility that incidence of breakthrough varicella might be very relevant in the long term. For instance, a scenario where breakthrough varicella may be as high as 10 per 1000 individuals per year in Finland i.e., very close to the pre-vaccination varicella incidence (about 12 per 1000 individuals per year) cannot be excluded.

Moreover, model predictions show that the age at varicella infection increases in all considered scenarios (See Fig. 4 and Text S1). Specifically, in Finland, before the introduction of vaccination, less than 5% of varicella cases are predicted to occur among individuals older than 20. If a single-dose program with 100% coverage is considered, after 20 years of vaccination, the proportion of cases occurring in Finland among individuals older than 20 is predicted to increase to 20% and to more than 50% after 50 years of VZV vaccination."

applejuice and BeckyBird like this.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.

 

Book and herb loving mama to 1 preteen and 2 teens (when did that happen?).  We travel, go to school, homeschool, live rurally, eat our veggies, spend too much time...

kathymuggle is offline  
#138 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 10:58 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)
You know what really convinces us a poster is 'one of us'? If they have many posts on several topics across several forums, about parenting. Yk, if they come here to share the parenting journey. Maybe the concept of a mommy board is not being understood. This is a discussion & debate sub forum but it is a parenting support community, generally.

We'd have to pick a specific BRAND of one vaccine, to have a proper debate. wink1.gif
applejuice likes this.
dinahx is offline  
#139 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 11:44 AM - Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 156
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

@kathymuggle - Have you gone to the beginning of this post? You would notice how you are very diplomatic at first. But then you put some members on the spot for some kind of inappropriate post. When you do, it is always members who have made positive comments about vaccines? hushpuppy and myself, maybe others. However, you never, put anti-vax members on the spot when they make strong remarks against those who oppose their views.

Just with a quick browse, I noticed I've been told that I "lack basic knowledge of the problem", that I'm being biased, narrow-minded (literally) and some others. Check it out yourself. There's a lot. In the meantime you haven't bothered to put those members in the spot. On the other hand I've acknowledged good points from people who don't agree with my stance (look it up), although more recently I've changed my tone to some. I'm afraid I won't be able to convince you with these remarks about your bias, but by writing this fact here I hope other readers will understand what's happening in the lasts few posts of this thread.

 

@fruitfulmomma I meant a benefit risk debate about any vaccine. Perhaps another thread would be appropriate for it, but I would like to see if a consensus can be reached about a question for the thread. For example: "Does the MMR vaccine cause children generally more benefits than harm?". This is just an example and I'm open to suggestions. Again, as I've implied, just because I think the vaccine program is generally good, I don't necessarily think the benefits of all vaccines carry the same weight in a risk/benefit comparison. For example, personally I wouldn't feel comfortable debating about the benefits/risks of Gardasil (I remain unconvinced it has more benefits)

bakunin is offline  
#140 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 01:11 PM
 
Kamiro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,923
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Alright ladies, I have received some flags on this thread. I'm going to look through the thread. If your post contains any ugliness, go through and re-edit and save me some typing time - will ya' please?

http://www.mothering.com/community/a/user-agreement Mothering's User Agreement

& this is the

Quote:

Vaccinations Discussion and Debate: This is our main discussion, wear-your-big-girl-panties, forum to discuss all information and concerns about vaccinations. We expect and insist that all members post here with an open mind and a willingness to learn. It is for parents who vaccinate as well as those somewhat or staunchly against vaccination. Intelligent, informative, and civil debate should be the shining light of this forum. Do not stoop to accusation, condescending comments and veiled insults against an individual's character or intentions in posting here, as if that will somehow discredit the person or information.

 

This is the Debate forum, and the "big girl panties" forum.. So we must remember as posters in this forum that just because something ruffles feathers does not make it flag worthy. If I could have added blinking, neon lights to the red words in the quote above - I would have. ;)

 

Carry on...


sewmachine.gifknit.gifrainbow1284.gifDaughter of Him, Wife and Mother to them partners.gifstillheart.gifstillheart.gifstillheart.gifstillheart.gif,  

heartbeat.gifOne more on the way Fall 2013 pos.gif

 

Kamiro is offline  
#141 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 04:01 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)

"@fruitfulmomma I meant a benefit risk debate about any vaccine. Perhaps another thread would be appropriate for it, but I would like to see if a consensus can be reached about a question for the thread. For example: "Does the MMR vaccine cause children generally more benefits than harm?"

 

I'd be interested in a debate on the MMR, or at least the measles portion of the vaccine.  I personally feel like the negative consequences of measles returning to pre vaccine numbers is severely minimized by some in the anti vaccine crowd. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#142 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 04:02 PM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,049
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Well, I somehow managed not to get any nastigrams in my in-box (whew!), but I did some edits just in case.

Bakunin, three things:

First, I didn't intend any rudeness. I am just genuinely curious how you expect to write an "objective" piece when your posts in this thread have made it clear that this is an extremely emotional issue for you.

Second, playing the "outdated study" card won't work with Brisson's research. First, the date and validity of a scientific finding are very often separate issues. We've known for centuries the "out-dated" fact that the earth revolves around the sun. Also, as recently as last year, physicians and scientists were arguing that mass chicken pox vaccination was causing the uptick in shingles cases. (As just one example look up physician David Witt with Kaiser Permanente). So that "out-dated" argument was nothing of the sort.

Finally, if you read it carefully, your link broaches some interesting questions but doesn't actually "debunk" Brisson's earlier research.

I'm concerned that whatever piece you end up producing will sound a lot like Andrew Goldman's "objective" railing against the evils of homebirth. But, since I can't any stop that from happening, I'll just heave a sigh of relief that I didn't take your non-generalizabe survey.
applejuice, japonica and BeckyBird like this.

In God we trust; all others must show data. selectivevax.gifsurf.gifteapot2.GIFintactivist.gif
Turquesa is offline  
#143 of 144 Old 07-23-2013, 08:57 PM
 
av00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Hi,

 

I started a related thread:

http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1387063/c-section-parenteral-administration-of-food-proteins-food-allergy

 

Please see:

 

  https://sites.google.com/site/vaccineinducedfoodallergy/

 
Thanks.
av00 is offline  
#144 of 144 Old 07-24-2013, 07:02 AM
 
Kamiro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,923
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I'm going to lock the thread ladies...I just discovered way more flags in the queue I hadn't noticed re: this thread. Hope you all understand - I'll work on getting things cleaned up- Bakunin your poll will still be available for those who wish to take it. smile.gif


sewmachine.gifknit.gifrainbow1284.gifDaughter of Him, Wife and Mother to them partners.gifstillheart.gifstillheart.gifstillheart.gifstillheart.gif,  

heartbeat.gifOne more on the way Fall 2013 pos.gif

 

Kamiro 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