This article bothers me. What do you think? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-13-2013, 12:09 AM - Thread Starter
 
tillymonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Central Coast California
Posts: 1,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://www.voicesforvaccines.org/growing-up-unvaccinated/

To me, it's just the same old vax scare tactics. The whole "crunchy" thing was insulting and way off the mark to me. This is just my opinion.

I'm (mostly) unvaccinated and glad for it. I'm also glad that I never contracted any diseases too, obviously. I do also thank herd immunity for that. My brother had a reaction to the only vax he got so I believe my mother stopped vaxing my 3 other sibs because of that. Something no one talks about. Vaccine reactions are not often reported. All my sibs are pretty healthy though lots of autoimmune disease runs rampant through our family.

I'm annoyed because this article seems to suggests that getting the mumps while unvaxxed is because you were unvaxxed. I personally know someone who was given a vaccination for mumps and got it anyway. Rotavirus and pertussis I've read cases where they were not prevented by getting vaccinated either. It was the person who got the shot that got sick! The chicken pox virus is just silly in this context because to me, it's a necessary childhood illness and I do not agree with getting vaccinated for it. It's a sucky one, I remember. Same with HPV. Flu shots. I just don't see them being necessary. But I never get the flu (knocking on wood as we speak!).

Dealing with autoimmune disorders in my family has lead me to believe gut health is the issue as well as ignoring food intolerances. Eating organically and not eating sugar is great, but who is to say this woman didn't have some underlying food allergy (dairy, wheat, soy) that lead to her weakened immune system which led to her getting ill!?! Especially the part about her antibiotic use. I'm still trying to figure out why her mom would allow the use of antibiotics but keep her off sugar and eating only organic food? It seems weird to me.

Just wanted to see what the mothering community has to say about it.

geek.gif Mama + superhero.gifDaddy +energy.gifDD (12/20/09) = heartbeat.gif

Expecting stork-girl.gif #2 in September!

tillymonster is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-13-2013, 06:27 AM
 
naimah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 62
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Well, I'm vaxxed up the wazoo (all the childhood ones plus a bunch more for international travel, plus some experimental vaccines) and I've never had any of those diseases and I've gone years without getting sick at all, and I've certainly never gotten the flu (most people don't).  I do have a mild autoimmune disease (psoriasis) that has run in my family for generations, and I can mostly control it with diet.  

 

My story, your story, and the author's story are all just anecdotes.  They don't really convey much in terms of data, and the only reason we like or dislike them is because the narratives fit into our personal worldview or not.

naimah is offline  
Old 12-13-2013, 06:54 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)

Well, the article was no worse then any other I read on people who talk about why they vax.

 

I do find it mildly amusing she is complaining about her parents - good food, lots of fresh air and exercise, parents who tried to research ways to help her with her health, yet sought western medicine when needed…oh, the hooror!  No one should be so unlucky! 

 

I was starting to call bull$hit in my mind on the list of illnesses she had.  I am quite familair with the CDC pink book, and the likelihood of someone born in the 1970's getting all the VAD's she listed is really low.  Alas, she lived in England, maybe the stats were different there in the 1970's - who knows?

 

Even if she did get all those diseases, that does not explain why she got so sick with them.  The stats on chicken pox, rubella and mumps show that most children do not get very sick with them.  She did.  I bet something else was going on, or she was simply incredibly unlucky. 

 

Tillymonster, my DH got mumps around age 13. He had been vaxxed for it as a child.  While he reports it was kind of freaky to watch things swell, he was not miserable with it, and  it did not impair his fertility. 


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 online now  
Old 12-13-2013, 06:54 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by naimah View Post
 

 

My story, your story, and the author's story are all just anecdotes.  They don't really convey much in terms of data, and the only reason we like or dislike them is because the narratives fit into the our personal worldview or not.

:yeah


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 online now  
Old 12-13-2013, 10:03 AM
 
prosciencemum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,828
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 144 Post(s)
It's a personal story about how she came to her choices about vaccinating.

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 offline  
Old 12-14-2013, 02:54 AM - Thread Starter
 
tillymonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Central Coast California
Posts: 1,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm with kathymuggle (love your username!) and think the article might be fake. If I was to come upon this article before deciding to vax or not vax it wouldn't have helped me choose. It would just make more confused. It's irritating.

geek.gif Mama + superhero.gifDaddy +energy.gifDD (12/20/09) = heartbeat.gif

Expecting stork-girl.gif #2 in September!

tillymonster is offline  
Old 12-14-2013, 06:54 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Looks like she didn't do any research, if she thinks the flu vaccine is worth getting. She's just swallowing all the propaganda fed to her by the vaccine manufacturers.
Taximom5 is offline  
Old 01-08-2014, 12:54 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)

It's interesting that I don't hear NVers disputing claimed infectious diseases when Sherri Tenpenny says that as an unvaccinated child she had "measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox and pertussis" and then also goes on to say that she missed nearly the entire third grade due to illness and says they "wanted to hold me back a year" and later in the interview admits she was really sick as a child, but it was a "good thing".   Guys, these illnesses are not fun.  It's not part of some conspiracy for someone to state that. 

 

 

 

I also read some people state that they don't believe she had measles or knew someone who became deaf from measles because it was uncommon in the 70s in England.  Wrong.  In 1970 in England there were over 300,000 cases of measles.  http://www.hpa.org.uk/webw/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1195733835814

 

 

 

 

Also I've been hearing allegations that she is a "pharma shill" and part of the CDC.   Because there is only one person in the US named Amy Parker right? :eyesroll

 

 

Clearly it's a mass conspiracy ;) 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 01-08-2014, 02:43 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

Interesting that I don't hear NVers disputing claimed infectious diseases when Sherri Tenpenny says that as an unvaccinated child she had "measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox and pertussis" and then also goes on to say that she missed nearly the entire third grade due to illness and says they "wanted to hold me back a year" and later in the interview admits she was really sick as a child, but it was a "good thing".   Guys, these illnesses are not fun!  It's not part of some conspiracy for someone to state that. 

 

Amy Parker listed far more illnesses than the four diseases Sherri listed.  

 

I think some of the reason NVers might be crying foul (and certainly why I did, until I did a bit more research) is because they are assuming North American historical rates more or less applies to the UK.  It doesn't. 

 

Here is a graph that shows when vaccines were introduced in the UK, and if you play around on the site, you can get notification rates per year as well.

http://www.hpa.org.uk/Topics/InfectiousDiseases/InfectionsAZ/VaccineCoverageAndCOVER/EpidemiologicalData/coverVaccineUptakeData/

 

So, it is possible she got the diseases she mentioned.  With the exception of pertussis and measles, none of diseases she got had vaccine available where she lived during her childhood.  Her article is mildly condemning of her mother (where is the father in all this?  Either absent, or classic blame the mother!)  yet most of her suffering would not have be avoided by vaccines.  

 

It does not explain why she got so sick with them or why they affected her so greatly.  Teacozy - you say these disease are not fun…but have you had them?    Unless you have had the diseases yourself, you are choosing to listen to people who say they are awful, and choosing not to listen to people who said they were not that bad.  Of course, being logical is the best path - look at typical disease presentations in the demographic you are interested in and go from there.  

 

Alas, as to whether she is the Amy Parker of the CDC or not - I don't really care. I certainly do not know, although I am inclined to think not. 

 

There are a lot of holes in her story and it very much does read like a pro-vax playbook more than anything else.  That is why this story more than others has sparked non-vaxxers interest.  


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 online now  
Old 01-08-2014, 03:27 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

Amy Parker listed far more illnesses than the four diseases Sherri listed.  

 

I think some of the reason NVers might be crying foul (and certainly why I did, until I did a bit more research) is because they are assuming North American historical rates more or less applies to the UK.  It doesn't. 

 

Here is a graph that shows when vaccines were introduced in the UK, and if you play around on the site, you can get notification rates per year as well.

http://www.hpa.org.uk/Topics/InfectiousDiseases/InfectionsAZ/VaccineCoverageAndCOVER/EpidemiologicalData/coverVaccineUptakeData/

 

So, it is possible she got the diseases she mentioned.  With the exception of pertussis and measles, none of diseases she got had vaccine available where she lived dung her childhood.  Her article is mildly condemning of her mother (where is the father in all this?  Either absent, or classic blame the mother!)  yet most of her suffering would not have be avoided by vaccines.  

 

It does not explain why she got so sick with them or why they affected her so greatly.  Teacozy - you say these disease are not fun…but have you had them?    Unless you have had the diseases yourself, you are choosing to listen to people who say they are awful, and choosing not to listen to people who said they were not that bad.  Of course, being logical is the best path - look at typical disease presentations in the demographic you are interested in and go from there.  

 

Alas, as to whether she is the Amy Parker of the CDC or not - I don't really care. I certainly do not know, although I am inclined to think not. 

 

There are a lot of holes in her story and it very much does read like a pro-vax playbook more than anything else.  That is why this story more than others has sparked non-vaxxers interest.  

 

Thanks for the graph.  Tenpenny listed the same 5 (now) VPDs that Amy did.  "As healthy as my lifestyle seemed, I contracted measles, mumps, rubella, a type of viral meningitis, scarlatina, whooping cough, yearly tonsillitis, and chickenpox, some of which are vaccine preventable. "   As I stated earlier, Tenpenny was very sick and ill as a child from these diseases too. 

 

Amy stated that only some of them are vaccine preventable, but I got the impression that her intention was to demonstrate that even if you grow up eating all fresh food, get plenty of exercise, take vitamins every day, stay away from processed foods and chemicals etc that doesn't mean you are going to be healthy because of it, and it doesn't mean you are guaranteed to sail through the childhood illnesses without complications.  

 

Her immune system isn't/wasn't better because she got mumps and pertussis as a child.  That's just not how the immune system works and I think that is part of her point.  Of course the other part of her point was that her experience with these diseases was not fun and pleasant, and that impacted her decision in wanting to vaccinate her own children.  Why would anyone want to see their child, or any child for that matter, sick? It just doesn't make sense to me.  

 

If we stopped vaccinating we would have pre vaccine era disease incidence and complications for most of the VPDs.  Measles would certainly come back, so would hib (which effected 1 in every 200 children), and rubella, and polio, and mumps etc.  I posted in another topic that just a few years before the rubella vaccine there was an outbreak that effected 20,000 pregnancies.  In one country in one year.   Those of you with unvaccinated children who have never had most of these childhood diseases are just fortunate to live in country where herd immunity currently protects them from being exposed to them. It has nothing to do with how great their non vaccinated immune systems are.  Simple as that, really. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 01-08-2014, 06:12 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)

The article bothers me, too, because it reads as terribly contrived.  Someone on another forum described it as "nobody in the UNIVERSE has ever had so many communicable diseases as a child!"  Even more telling are the glaring errors.

 

It bothered me so much, I sat down and reread it carefully, and kind of deconstructed it, looking for a pattern.


I found a pretty obvious one.  And other members here found a truckload of inconsistencies.  Read about it here http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1395352/amy-parkers-hit-piece-growing-up-unvaccinated-deconstructed

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 01-08-2014, 07:58 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)

 Quote:Originally Posted by teacozy View Post

 

Her immune system isn't/wasn't better because she got mumps and pertussis as a child.  That's just not how the immune system works and I think that is part of her point.  Of course the other part of her point was that her experience with these diseases was not fun and pleasant, and that impacted her decision in wanting to vaccinate her own children.  Why would anyone want to see their child, or any child for that matter, sick? It just doesn't make sense to me.  

 

 

As for your first sentence…I am not sure.  I think it deserves its own post, actually, but not tonight,  

 

What role does illness play in health or immune system function?  Does it need a work out?  What role do illnesses or lack thereof play in allergies and auto-immune issues?  I have heard, through most of my life, that it is better to get sick occasionally, that people who rarely get sick get horribly sick when they do catch something.  Wives tale or not?  I also think nature abhors a vacuum…we have less acute childhood illnesses but more chronic childhood illnesses (which I suspect it multi-factorial, and may or may not have anything to do with vaccines).  I do think normal diseases in normal amounts might be healthy for people, however an abnormal amount of illness or particularly bad bouts can cause recurrent issues or do damage of some sort.  

 

As per the bolded,  I don't get bent out of shape when my kids get sick.  Of course I worry sometimes, seek appropriate care, and feel a little sad for them.  I do not, however, pathologize things like colds or chicken pox. 


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 online now  
Old 01-08-2014, 08:37 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

  Why would anyone want to see their child, or any child for that matter, sick?

 

Well, that's a total straw man!

Nobody WANTS to see their child sick with a disease, vaccine-preventable or not.  You might just as well ask, "why would anyone want to see their child, or any child for that matter, in pain and fear from a needle stick?"

The ironic thing is, most of us who question vaccine safety aren't in the least worried about the temporary discomfort from the needle stick, any more than we worry about temporary discomfort from changing a diaper or washing hair.

 

I guess some of us realize that a mild illness, which the vast majority of vaccine-preventable diseases are for the vast majority of people, are to be managed intelligently, not feared.

 

I do get tired of the circular argument from the vaccine defenders, who then yowl, "but the vast majority of people don't have adverse reactions to vaccines!"

But that was only true when there were very, very few vaccines.  Now that we have more vaccines, we have more reactions, both from the new vaccines, and from the synergistic effect of vaccines in combination.  Most importantly, we are realizing that there have likely been undesirable autoimmune reactions --like inflammation beyond the intended antibody response--all along from vaccines, and only recently has research begun to look at these reactions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

If we stopped vaccinating we would have pre vaccine era disease incidence and complications for most of the VPDs.  Measles would certainly come back, so would hib (which effected 1 in every 200 children), and rubella, and polio, and mumps etc.

 

First of all, I think you mean "affected," not "effected."  Pet peeve of mine.  ;)

 

Second of all, no, we would not have pre-vaccine era disease incidence and complications.  In 50 years, hopefully medical knowledge and nutritional support have advanced!  Measles complications, for example, can be reduced by vitamin A supplementation.  And I'd like to see a citation for your claim that Hib "effected 1 in every 200 children."

 

There is very interesting information on Hib here: http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/vaccine-efficacy-how-often-do-vaccines-work/hib/

 

"Though numbers of Hib infections in adults fell after the introduction of Hib vaccines for children (P = 0.035), and there was no increase in infections caused by other capsulated Hi serotypes, total numbers of invasive Hi infections increased due to a large rise in infections caused by non-capsulated Hi (ncHi) strains."

 

Since 1999, however, low effectiveness in infants, declining effectiveness with age, and the use of lower-efficacy vaccines have contributed to increased rates of Hib infection.

 

 

The Journal of Infectious Diseases published Prevention of Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) meningitis and emergence of serotype replacement with type a strains after introduction of Hib immunization in Brazil in January 2003 which had findings of:

The incidence of Hib meningitis decreased 69%during the 1-year period after initiation of Hib immunization (from 2.62 to 0.81 cases/100,000 person-years; P<.001). In contrast, the incidence for H. influenzae type a meningitis increased 8-fold.

Therefore, Hib immunization contributed to an increased risk for H. influenzae type a meningitis through selection of circulating H. influenzae type a clones."

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 01-08-2014, 10:48 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

 

Well, that's a total straw man!

Nobody WANTS to see their child sick with a disease, vaccine-preventable or not.  You might just as well ask, "why would anyone want to see their child, or any child for that matter, in pain and fear from a needle stick?"

The ironic thing is, most of us who question vaccine safety aren't in the least worried about the temporary discomfort from the needle stick, any more than we worry about temporary discomfort from changing a diaper or washing hair.

 

I guess some of us realize that a mild illness, which the vast majority of vaccine-preventable diseases are for the vast majority of people, are to be managed intelligently, not feared.

 

I do get tired of the circular argument from the vaccine defenders, who then yowl, "but the vast majority of people don't have adverse reactions to vaccines!"

But that was only true when there were very, very few vaccines.  Now that we have more vaccines, we have more reactions, both from the new vaccines, and from the synergistic effect of vaccines in combination.  Most importantly, we are realizing that there have likely been undesirable autoimmune reactions --like inflammation beyond the intended antibody response--all along from vaccines, and only recently has research begun to look at these reactions.

First of all, I think you mean "affected," not "effected."  Pet peeve of mine.  ;)

 

Second of all, no, we would not have pre-vaccine era disease incidence and complications.  In 50 years, hopefully medical knowledge and nutritional support have advanced!  Measles complications, for example, can be reduced by vitamin A supplementation.  And I'd like to see a citation for your claim that Hib "effected 1 in every 200 children."

 

There is very interesting information on Hib here: http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/vaccine-efficacy-how-often-do-vaccines-work/hib/

 

"Though numbers of Hib infections in adults fell after the introduction of Hib vaccines for children (P = 0.035), and there was no increase in infections caused by other capsulated Hi serotypes, total numbers of invasive Hi infections increased due to a large rise in infections caused by non-capsulated Hi (ncHi) strains."

 

Since 1999, however, low effectiveness in infants, declining effectiveness with age, and the use of lower-efficacy vaccines have contributed to increased rates of Hib infection.

 

 

The Journal of Infectious Diseases published Prevention of Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) meningitis and emergence of serotype replacement with type a strains after introduction of Hib immunization in Brazil in January 2003 which had findings of:

The incidence of Hib meningitis decreased 69%during the 1-year period after initiation of Hib immunization (from 2.62 to 0.81 cases/100,000 person-years; P<.001). In contrast, the incidence for H. influenzae type a meningitis increased 8-fold.

Therefore, Hib immunization contributed to an increased risk for H. influenzae type a meningitis through selection of circulating H. influenzae type a clones."

 

It wasn't meant to be a strawman.  Of course I don't think that any parent wants their child to have polio or diphtheria, but I have read and heard many NVers say they want their children to get "natural" immunity from diseases.  I just don't understand that concept. I would rather prevent them in the first place. 

 

As far as hib, I posted this information in a response earlier today in the Miss America thread.  

"Before the vaccine was developed, there were approximately 20,000 invasive Hib cases annually. Approximately two-thirds of the 20,000 cases were meningitis, and one-third were other life-threatening invasive Hib diseases such as bacteria in the blood, pneumonia, or inflammation of the epiglottis. About one of every 200 U.S. children under 5 years of age got an invasive Hib disease. Hib meningitis once killed 600 children each year and left many survivors with deafness, seizures, or mental retardation.

Since introduction of conjugate Hib vaccine in December 1987, the incidence of Hib has declined by 98 percent. From 1994-1998, fewer than 10 fatal cases of invasive Hib disease were reported each year." http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/whatifstop.htm

 

So we went from 600 deaths a year to less than 10.  Clearly that can't be attributed to better sanitation ;) 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 01-09-2014, 06:40 AM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

It wasn't meant to be a strawman.  Of course I don't think that any parent wants their child to have polio or diphtheria, but I have read and heard many NVers say they want their children to get "natural" immunity from diseases.  I just don't understand that concept. I would rather prevent them in the first place. 

 

If a NVer says they prefer natural immunity for a disease, it is likely that they think the disease offers better or longer immunity than the vaccine.  This is relevant as it might:

-cut down on their chances of getting xyz as an adult, should outbreaks occur 

-if they are female, it might mean they pass on more immunity to their infant through birth and nursing.

 

They might also think getting the milder diseases has some health benefits. 


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 online now  
Old 01-10-2014, 01:46 PM
 
Andrew Lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

 

…it is likely that they think the disease offers better or longer immunity than the vaccine.…

Yeah, and if they died of these diseases their immunity lasts forever! I'm sure the remaining patients in Iron Lungs are happy to know they can't get polio again!

 

This is just sad.

Andrew Lazarus is offline  
Old 01-10-2014, 01:48 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Lazarus View Post
 

Yeah, and if they died of these diseases their immunity lasts forever! I'm sure the remaining patients in Iron Lungs are happy to know they can't get polio again!

 

This is just sad.

 

And I'm sure Heather Whitestone is thrilled to bits that she now has "natural immunity" to Hib!  


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 01-10-2014, 01:50 PM
 
Andrew Lazarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The advances in Medicine over the last 50 years are the vaccines. Why should we research whether Vitamin A reduces (but does not eliminate) the likelihood of measles-induced blindness when we can eradicate measles entirely?
Andrew Lazarus is offline  
Old 01-10-2014, 03:49 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Lazarus View Post
 

Yeah, and if they died of these diseases their immunity lasts forever! I'm sure the remaining patients in Iron Lungs are happy to know they can't get polio again!

 

This is just sad.

Did you read the post?  I specifically said for a disease.  I did not say which disease.  While NVers will often say that Polio was not always the horror story it is painted to be (in over 95% of people Polio was asymptomatic and fewer than 1% of cases lead to flaccid paralysis.  Source:  CDC Pink Book) they do not usually say they would prefer their child to have natural immunity to Polio  :eyesroll

 

I would expect it to be understood that when a poster talks about a child acquiring natural immunity in childhood, they mean it in conjunction with milder diseases, such as rubella or chicken pox.   


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 online now  
Old 01-10-2014, 03:49 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

And I'm sure Heather Whitestone is thrilled to bits that she now has "natural immunity" to Hib!  

And deafness from the DPT.


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 online now  
Old 01-10-2014, 04:00 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
 

And deafness from the DPT.

 

Except she didn't become deaf from DPT.  They didn't even know she was deaf until 4 months after she received the vaccine!  

 

I know it irritates NVers when this is pointed out, but having a child doesn't make someone a medical expert.   There was a meme circulating a couple weeks ago that went something like " Just because a baby came out of you doesn't mean a medical degree did".   Not the most tactful language, but the point remains. 

 

Her vaccine and hospitalization were a month apart. Deafness is the most common complication resulting from Hib.  She is diagnosed as being profoundly deaf after having a confirmed Hib diagnoses.  But that's all a coincidence I suppose. Obviously, It's much more likely she had a never before reported "deafness" reaction to the DTP vaccine. :eyesroll   


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 01-10-2014, 07:10 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

Except she didn't become deaf from DPT.  They didn't even know she was deaf until 4 months after she received the vaccine!  

 

I know it irritates NVers when this is pointed out, but having a child doesn't make someone a medical expert.   There was a meme circulating a couple weeks ago that went something like " Just because a baby came out of you doesn't mean a medical degree did".   Not the most tactful language, but the point remains. 

 

Her vaccine and hospitalization were a month apart. Deafness is the most common complication resulting from Hib.  She is diagnosed as being profoundly deaf after having a confirmed Hib diagnoses.  But that's all a coincidence I suppose. Obviously, It's much more likely she had a never before reported "deafness" reaction to the DTP vaccine. :eyesroll   

You are leaping to the conclusion that sudden hearing loss in a baby/toddler is immediately apparent. Actually, delayed recognition/diagnosis of hearing loss is very common in toddlers with hearing loss.  4 months between onset of hearing loss and recognition of the hearing loss by parents and doctor is common.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/24/3/462

"Medical conditions, such as meningitis, which might have alerted the physician to the possibility of deafness as a sequella did not always result in prompt recognition of this complication."

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8741968

Results revealed substantial delays between parental suspicion, audiologic-medical diagnosis, fitting of acoustic amplification, and initiation of early intervention services.

 

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S2179-64912011000100009&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en

Suspicion of deafness, the first visit to a doctor, diagnosis, intervention and hearing aid adaptation were all delayed when compared to current recommended diagnostic standards and conditions of access to services. In addition, there was a significant delay between each stage, especially in the period between the suspicion of deafness and the beginning of clinical intervention.

 

You also seem to want to jump to the conclusion that gentamicin-induced toxicity always causes instantaneous hearing loss, with no other symptoms, such as vestibular disorders.

I also found this on gentamicin-induced hearing loss:

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/857679-overview

 

"The usual time of onset is often unpredictable, and marked hearing loss can occur even after a single dose. Additionally, hearing loss may not manifest until several weeks or months after completion of antibiotic or antineoplastic therapy.

Vestibular injury is also a notable adverse effect of aminoglycoside antibiotics and may appear early on with positional nystagmus. If severe, vestibular toxicity can lead to dysequilibrium and oscillopsia."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3488158"Gentamicin ototoxicity is vestibular in two thirds of patients and cochlear in one third. One half of the patients with cochlear toxicity also have vestibular symptoms. Symptoms are often vague, insidious in onset, and masked by the critical presentation of the primary infectious process. Symptoms may occur immediately upon initiation of therapy, any time during the course of treatment, or after administration has been completed."

I don't see that gentamicin has ever been the drug of choice to use for Hib infections, but perhaps someone can find more information.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 01-10-2014, 07:27 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

You are leaping to the conclusion that sudden hearing loss in a baby/toddler is immediately apparent. Actually, delayed recognition/diagnosis of hearing loss is very common in toddlers with hearing loss.  4 months between onset of hearing loss and recognition of the hearing loss by parents and doctor is common.

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/24/3/462

"Medical conditions, such as meningitis, which might have alerted the physician to the possibility of deafness as a sequella did not always result in prompt recognition of this complication."

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8741968

Results revealed substantial delays between parental suspicion, audiologic-medical diagnosis, fitting of acoustic amplification, and initiation of early intervention services.

 

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S2179-64912011000100009&script=sci_arttext&tlng=en

Suspicion of deafness, the first visit to a doctor, diagnosis, intervention and hearing aid adaptation were all delayed when compared to current recommended diagnostic standards and conditions of access to services. In addition, there was a significant delay between each stage, especially in the period between the suspicion of deafness and the beginning of clinical intervention.

 

You also seem to want to jump to the conclusion that gentamicin-induced toxicity always causes instantaneous hearing loss, with no other symptoms, such as vestibular disorders.

I also found this on gentamicin-induced hearing loss:

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/857679-overview

 

"The usual time of onset is often unpredictable, and marked hearing loss can occur even after a single dose. Additionally, hearing loss may not manifest until several weeks or months after completion of antibiotic or antineoplastic therapy.

Vestibular injury is also a notable adverse effect of aminoglycoside antibiotics and may appear early on with positional nystagmus. If severe, vestibular toxicity can lead to dysequilibrium and oscillopsia."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3488158"Gentamicin ototoxicity is vestibular in two thirds of patients and cochlear in one third. One half of the patients with cochlear toxicity also have vestibular symptoms. Symptoms are often vague, insidious in onset, and masked by the critical presentation of the primary infectious process. Symptoms may occur immediately upon initiation of therapy, any time during the course of treatment, or after administration has been completed."

I don't see that gentamicin has ever been the drug of choice to use for Hib infections, but perhaps someone can find more information.

 

I am not leaping to the conclusion that hearing loss is immediately apparent.  My point was that it wasn't like she got the DTP, had a high fever, was diagnosed with hearing loss and then got diagnosed with Hib afterwards. 

 

The hearing loss realization came many months after both the vaccine and Hib, so the question is which one is more likely to be the cause of her deafness?  The clear answer is Hib. Hearing loss is the most common complication of the disease, affecting as many as 1 in 5 children.  There has never been any documented cases of the DTP resulting in hearing loss.  It is not listed as even an extremely rare side effect by the CDC, even though they do list hearing loss as a possible rare side effect to the MMR.   


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 01-10-2014, 09:01 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

I am not leaping to the conclusion that hearing loss is immediately apparent.  My point was that it wasn't like she got the DTP, had a high fever, was diagnosed with hearing loss and then got diagnosed with Hib afterwards. 

 

The hearing loss realization came many months after both the vaccine and Hib, so the question is which one is more likely to be the cause of her deafness?  The clear answer is Hib. Hearing loss is the most common complication of the disease, affecting as many as 1 in 5 children.  There has never been any documented cases of the DTP resulting in hearing loss.  It is not listed as even an extremely rare side effect by the CDC, even though they do list hearing loss as a possible rare side effect to the MMR.   

Ah, but you were insisting that the vaccine CERTAINLY did not cause her hearing loss.  Now you say that the Hib was MORE LIKELY to have caused her hearing loss.

 

The truth is, we don't know, and probably never will.  It really doesn't matter what is more likely to have caused hearing loss if there are 3 distinct possibilities--the Hib, her vaccination, and the gentamicin.  As for hearing loss never having been reported as a DPT reaction, I was able to find one that has:

http://www.ties.org/sarah/msnbc/

You seem to have already forgotten that sensoneural hearing loss can be a gradual process--which means that it may be caused or triggered by a vaccine, especially one that has a track record of causing central nervous system damage, seizure disorders, inflammation, encephalopathy, etc.


For all you know, there may have been some kind of synergistic reaction between all 3, resulting in her hearing loss.

WE DON'T KNOW.

 

What we do know is that her mother was certain that it was the vaccine for several years, until she was told that it wasn't.  And that's what strikes most mothers here as more than a bit unrealistic.

 

Mothers don't forget events like that.   For you to insist that the mother must have gotten confused is unbelievably insulting.  It's the sort of comment we often hear from men, particularly men with MDs or PhDs, but one we rarely hear from women--particularly from mothers.

 

No, I am not accusing you of not being a parent in real life.  I'm just saying that your insistence that a mother MUST have been wrong about her child's life-changing medical event is unusual to see on an attachment mothering site.

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 01-10-2014, 09:04 PM
 
chickabiddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,435
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)

You agreed that it's very possible that the hearing loss wasn't recognized for weeks or even longer.  Therefore, yes, even a very attached mother could be unable to accurately link it to a specific date.


Carseat-checking (CPST) and WAH mama to a twelve-year-old girl.
chickabiddy is online now  
Old 01-10-2014, 10:48 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by chickabiddy View Post

You agreed that it's very possible that the hearing loss wasn't recognized for weeks or even longer.  Therefore, yes, even a very attached mother could be unable to accurately link it to a specific date.

The question wasn't whether the mother could link onset of hearing loss to a specific date; the question was whether the mother remembered events incorrectly. It seems to many of us that teacozy is maintaining that the mother MUST be remembering incorrectly that the hearing loss was triggered by the vaccine, because she was later "corrected" by the doctor.

I'm suggesting that the mother remembered correctly all along; that she'd been initially told by one or more doctors that the hearing loss was a vaccine reaction.

Remember, the 18-month schedule back then also probably called for at least one other vaccine, but DPT was known for neurological reactions, which would be a plausible explanation for a doctor's assuming that am acquired hearing loss was linked to the DPT. Rather than, say, the polio shot.

This doesn't mean that it was necessarily the vaccine that caused the hearing loss.

I still maintain that we don't know, we never will know, and that there are several plausible possibilities, including vaccination.
Taximom5 is offline  
Old 01-11-2014, 10:37 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post


The question wasn't whether the mother could link onset of hearing loss to a specific date; the question was whether the mother remembered events incorrectly. It seems to many of us that teacozy is maintaining that the mother MUST be remembering incorrectly that the hearing loss was triggered by the vaccine, because she was later "corrected" by the doctor.

I'm suggesting that the mother remembered correctly all along; that she'd been initially told by one or more doctors that the hearing loss was a vaccine reaction.

Remember, the 18-month schedule back then also probably called for at least one other vaccine, but DPT was known for neurological reactions, which would be a plausible explanation for a doctor's assuming that am acquired hearing loss was linked to the DPT. Rather than, say, the polio shot.

This doesn't mean that it was necessarily the vaccine that caused the hearing loss.

I still maintain that we don't know, we never will know, and that there are several plausible possibilities, including vaccination.

 

She did remember incorrectly.  There are medical records that have dates.  She did not receive the vaccine the day before being hospitalized. 

 

As I have pointed out several times at this point, her memory *is* fuzzy.  She has given at least two different versions of what happened before the "powers that be" got involved.  Story A was that she received a vaccine and then was hospitalized the next day.  Story B was that she was sick with Hib before receiving the vaccine.   Then when questioned about exactly what happened, she contacted her daughter's childhood pediatrician who confirmed the dates and diagnosis. 

 

The fact that her daughter's deafness wasn't diagnosed for 3 to 4 months after the vaccine has also been pointed out to you several times.  How could she possibly know that the vaccine was the cause then?  It was *months* earlier. 

 

An MSNBC article is not evidence.  Show me a peer reviewed study, or statement from the CDC/WHO that the DTP can cause deafness, and how likely it is. 

 

"Ah, but you were insisting that the vaccine CERTAINLY did not cause her hearing loss.  Now you say that the Hib was MORE LIKELY to have caused her hearing loss."

 

I shouldn't speak in absolutes. What I meant to say/should have said is that there is no evidence that the vaccine caused her deafness.  I said "more likely" because it is impossible to prove a negative (that the DTP absolutely did not cause her deafness).  You don't win debates by asking the other person to disprove your claim and then think that because they can't, that means there is validity to your claim.  It's a logical fallacy called the Burden of Proof fallacy. Asking you to prove that resurrection stones don't exist would be impossible too.  You are making the claim that you believe that the DTP caused her deafness, it's up to you to prove it.  

 

"I'm suggesting that the mother remembered correctly all along; that she'd been initially told by one or more doctors that the hearing loss was a vaccine reaction."  Where is there any evidence for this statement? I haven't seen any articles or interviews with her mother where she stated that a doctor or multiple doctors told her that her daughter's deafness was caused by the DTP. 

 

I have provided evidence that hib can cause deafness, and I have also provided evidence via statements from her doctor about the dates and cause of hearing loss. 

 

There is zero evidence that the DTP is the cause of her deafness, or that it can even cause deafness at all.   Even if her mother maintained to this day that the cause of Heather's deafness was the vaccine (which she doesn't) that is still not evidence that it's true.  As far as I am aware, her mother does not have a medical degree and is not a doctor.   Parents claim all sorts of things are caused by vaccines that have been disproven by science.  


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 01-11-2014, 11:24 AM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,313
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)

Oh, come on.  Are you telling me that medical records are are always correct?  Or even usually correct?  Especially back in 1974?  If I look back at my own records, and those of my child, they are absolutely teeming with errors.  And at nearly every appointment, I have had to correct either the nurse or doctor (sometimes both of them) as they were writing.  
 

Here's a word-for-word transcription of one of my visits to my primary care provider. 

 

Nurse:  Which ear hurts?

Me:  Neither one.  My left ear seems blocked.


Nurse (writing):  Pain in left ear.

 

Me:  But I said blocked, not hurts!

 

5 minutes later...

 

Doctor:  You can take Advil or Tylenol for the pain, and that will help the fever, too.

 

Me:  But it doesn't hurt, and I don't have a fever!

 

This is absolutely typical.

I've stopped looking at my records, because it's so ridiculous.  I've turned down prescriptions for narcotic painkillers, but the doctor wrote in the record that I was given them.  Fevers I described weren't listed, while fevers that never happened were.  Vaccines that I KNOW were given (because I wrote down the lot number) are not on the record, while vaccines that I know I declined (left the visit without ANY vaccination) are listed.


In the last few years, things have  improved enormously with the adoption of computerized records, but human error still abounds.  I know not to talk while the doctor or nurse is writing/typing, because that can distract them, and they can write down a totally incorrect word, or one that is opposite of what they intend, or leave off information entirely.  But I'm betting that a lot of folks don't know this.

 

So yes, I put more faith in a mother's recollection than in medical records. I've been there.

 

Perhaps we should have a thread on errors in medical records...

Taximom5 is offline  
Old 01-11-2014, 12:16 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,588
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
 

Oh, come on.  Are you telling me that medical records are are always correct?  Or even usually correct?  Especially back in 1974?  If I look back at my own records, and those of my child, they are absolutely teeming with errors.  And at nearly every appointment, I have had to correct either the nurse or doctor (sometimes both of them) as they were writing.  
 

Here's a word-for-word transcription of one of my visits to my primary care provider. 

 

Nurse:  Which ear hurts?

Me:  Neither one.  My left ear seems blocked.


Nurse (writing):  Pain in left ear.

 

Me:  But I said blocked, not hurts!

 

5 minutes later...

 

Doctor:  You can take Advil or Tylenol for the pain, and that will help the fever, too.

 

Me:  But it doesn't hurt, and I don't have a fever!

 

This is absolutely typical.

I've stopped looking at my records, because it's so ridiculous.  I've turned down prescriptions for narcotic painkillers, but the doctor wrote in the record that I was given them.  Fevers I described weren't listed, while fevers that never happened were.  Vaccines that I KNOW were given (because I wrote down the lot number) are not on the record, while vaccines that I know I declined (left the visit without ANY vaccination) are listed.


In the last few years, things have  improved enormously with the adoption of computerized records, but human error still abounds.  I know not to talk while the doctor or nurse is writing/typing, because that can distract them, and they can write down a totally incorrect word, or one that is opposite of what they intend, or leave off information entirely.  But I'm betting that a lot of folks don't know this.

 

So yes, I put more faith in a mother's recollection than in medical records. I've been there.

 

Perhaps we should have a thread on errors in medical records...

 

Those are anecdotal stories.  My medical records from the 80s are extremely detailed and accurate. 

 

Remember, she was hospitalized for two weeks.  It's not like the records just say "Heather was hospitalized on X" and thats the end of it.  There are two weeks worth of tests, IVs, medications etc that would ALL have to be wrong.   Also keep in mind the quote from Heather's facebook where her mother states that "exactly 20 years ago this night" Heather was deathly ill in the hospital.  So there are two confirmations on the dates she was hospitalized.  Her mothers account (I'm adding this because you seem completely convinced that her mother remembers every exact detail) and her medical records. 

 

 

Dates for vaccines are generally extremely accurate.  Writing down "painful ear" instead of "blocked ear" is one thing,  but since vaccines have to be given on a schedule at certain points in time, the age and dates are very accurate.  Writing August 6th instead of 7th is slightly more plausible, but writing the date *completely* wrong, month and day, for multiple vaccines, is extremely extremely unlikely.  Your basing your argument on something that is highly highly improbable.  Just because you can't prove that the medical records were not wrong, doesn't mean the opposite (that they were wrong) is true or even likely.  Again, that's a logical fallacy. 

 

This is a debate forum. You still need to provide evidence that the DTP causes deafness, as you claim. 


“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson
teacozy is offline  
Old 01-11-2014, 12:35 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,226
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 227 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
 

 

 

This is a debate forum. You still need to provide evidence that the DTP causes deafness, as you claim. 

DPT can cause high fever.   1/330 doeses had a fever higher than 105  (ouch!)  http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00046738.htm#00001898.htm

 

High fever can cause deafness

http://www.rockymountainhospitalforchildren.com/ear-nose-throat-center/hearing-hearing-tests.htm

 

It is plausible.


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 online now  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not 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