Anyone read this page on the CHOP site? - Page 2 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
 182Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 12:46 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
*The tiny, "drop in the ocean" amount of adjuvants in vaccines is enough to stimulate the immune system, right??? So, in the same respect, couldn't that tiny, drop in the ocean amount also cause unpleasant side effects? How can a vaccine only produce positive results, and never negative results?

*Quote by Samaxtics:
Quote:
You do know that during clinical trials for vaccines parents of participants are asked to fill out cards describing any symptoms? Does it magically change from anecdotal evidence to scientific evidence in the hands of the pharmaceutical companies?
I like this!!


*I notice there is still not an answer to the question from the original post.

               "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  
#32 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 12:58 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,244
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Very good point, beckybird. It only takes a little aluminum to provoke an immune response. Is provoking an immune response during pregnancy a good idea?

Quote:
Originally Posted by beckybird View Post
*The tiny, "drop in the ocean" amount of adjuvants in vaccines is enough to stimulate the immune system, right??? So, in the same respect, couldn't that tiny, drop in the ocean amount also cause unpleasant side effects? How can a vaccine only produce positive results, and never negative results?

*Quote by Samaxtics:

I like this!!


*I notice there is still not an answer to the question from the original post.
serenbat and beckybird like this.
Deborah is online now  
#33 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 01:08 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,872
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
Does "a drop in the ocean" have a different meaning in the us?
I don't think so. I intepret it to mean a tiny amount compared to a huge amount. It is often used dismissively, and I have heard people say "drop in the bucket" as well.

I don't think it is a brillaint saying with regards to aluminum and vaccines, though.

If a 1 month old can handle xyz amount of aluminum on a daily basis, and the aluminum is over that amount - then the aluminum is not a drop in the bucket - it is the bucket, plus overflow.

If a bucket/ocean = the safe level of a substance, then the size of the bucket and ocean changes, depending on substance and size of the individual. In some cases there might not be a safe known level or the safe level is very tiny (think thimble more than bucket). Moreover, vaccines are not the only source of substance. We need to look at the total environmental exposure when we look at safe limits- some things we can reduce easily (ex:bath products) while some are much harder to reduce - such as substances found in the air. I see no reason why vaccine manufacturers can't make green vaccines.

If anyone has any details regarding the safe daily limit for aluminum for babies and fetuses and if the vaccination schedule is under, meets or surpasses those daily limits, I would be thrilled.

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...


Last edited by kathymuggle; 07-06-2014 at 02:44 PM.
kathymuggle is offline  
#34 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 01:39 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
Does "a drop in the ocean" have a different meaning in the us?
Does "science" have a different meaning in the UK?

There is peer-reviewed science showing that what have been considered tiny amounts are actually neurologically and developmentally harmful.

Do you think the following sentence represents a proscience approach?

"Oh, it's just like a drop in the ocean, let's trust pregnant women's bodies and assume that the amazing placenta will filter it (even though we know that that doesn't happen with heavy metals)."

Because that sure seems like the position you are taking.
Taximom5 is online now  
#35 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 02:09 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,244
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Returning once again to the original statement from CHOP, if the evidence shows that aluminum is neurologically harmful, then why are they implying that is needed during pregnancy? This is an authoritative source that people depend on when they make vaccine decisions. This source is 1) using old science when there is newer science available and 2) stating something that is the opposite of current thinking on aluminum and pregnancy.
Deborah is online now  
#36 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 02:16 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by prosciencemum View Post
Does "a drop in the ocean" have a different meaning in the us?
means to many, it doesn't count - just like vaccines, meanness!
applejuice likes this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#37 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 03:00 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
I believe CHOP is using old science to prove aluminum is safe and beneficial during pregnancy, because they want to promote using vaccines during pregnancy. This is why health decisions should be left to parents/guardians, because some of the "health authorities" use questionable science. We should have the right to choose which health recommendations to follow.

               "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  
#38 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 03:30 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)
@ samax

The anecdote I was referring to was the one about my grandmother, not Betty Draper.

The claim seems to be made by many non vaxxers that children born in the 50s and 60s were all healther than children today. Less autism, ADHD, asthma, food allergies, diabetes etc. Yet, women smoke and drank throughout their entire pregnancies in those days. Maybe smoking cigarettes and drinking during pregnancy helps prevent those things

The question "where are all the 50 and 60 year olds with fetal alcohol syndrome?" could be asked as well. Maybe smoking and drinking heavily during pregnancy isn't so bad after all! I mean most babies were all born healthy during those times, and kids were supposedly so much healthier then than they are now right?

See how silly that argument is? "Most kids had measles and were just fine! I don't know anyone who died from measles!" should apply here as well if that's the argument non vaxxers want to stick to. "I don't know of anyone who was born with fetal alcohol syndrome! Most came out just fine!"

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#39 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 03:42 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
@ samax

The anecdote I was referring to was the one about my grandmother, not Betty Draper.

The claim seems to be made by many non vaxxers that children born in the 50s and 60s were all healther than children today. Less autism, ADHD, asthma, food allergies, diabetes etc. Yet, women smoke and drank throughout their entire pregnancies in those days. Maybe smoking cigarettes and drinking during pregnancy helps prevent those things

The question "where are all the 50 and 60 year olds with fetal alcohol syndrome?" could be asked as well. Maybe smoking and drinking heavily during pregnancy isn't so bad after all! I mean most babies were all born healthy during those times, and kids were supposedly so much healthier then than they are now right?

See how silly that argument is? "Most kids had measles and were just fine! I don't know anyone who died from measles!" should apply here as well if that's the argument non vaxxers want to stick to. "I don't know of anyone who was born with fetal alcohol syndrome! Most came out just fine!"
Your logic is flawed.

We know people who had measles (many of US had measles) and were just fine.

How many children do you know who were born to mothers who were heavy smokers and drinkiers?

We already know that the death rate due to measles infection went down to nearly zero before the measles vaccination was introduced. We know that fetal alcohol syndrome isn't even possible for children born to mothers who don't drink during pregnancy.

What exactly were you trying to prove here?
Taximom5 is online now  
#40 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 05:39 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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
Your logic is flawed.

We know people who had measles (many of US had measles) and were just fine.

How many children do you know who were born to mothers who were heavy smokers and drinkiers?

We already know that the death rate due to measles infection went down to nearly zero before the measles vaccination was introduced. We know that fetal alcohol syndrome isn't even possible for children born to mothers who don't drink during pregnancy.

What exactly were you trying to prove here?
It would have been fairly unusual for a woman to abstain from alcohol for 9 months in those days if she didn't know she was supposed to.

My grandmothers both smoked and drank through all their pregnancies. Nine children total between them. All 100% healthy and thriving. Their friends all drank and most smoked while pregnant as well. And they didn't just drink wine, either. No one thought anything of it in those days. They didn't know it was potentially harmful, so there was no stigma attached to it.

Yet, you don't hear of babies being born with all these problems in the 50s and 60s. You don't see tons of 60 year olds walking around with fetal alcohol syndrome do you? Non vaxxers always like to point out how healthy children were back then don't they?

Point being, the fact that most people who drank/smoke had healthy babies isn't a convincing argument that it's fine and dandy and no big deal to do so today.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 

Last edited by teacozy; 07-06-2014 at 06:03 PM.
teacozy is offline  
#41 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 06:16 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,244
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
My mother neither smoked, nor drank during any of her 5 pregnancies.

None of us got vaccines, either.

I think we need some actual statistics on the percentage of women who were smoking during the 1950s and the percentage of women who drank regularly.

Otherwise, we are talking anecdotes.

With the measles info during the 1950s we have actual statistics available.
Deborah is online now  
#42 of 62 Old 07-06-2014, 06:23 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,244
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
I think I've worked it out Teacozy.

It is vaccines following smoking and drinking during pregnancy that causes all the problems. Back when there were fewer vaccines being used, women could smoke and drink and it didn't do as much damage. (just in case someone is humor impaired, I'm joking)
Deborah is online now  
#43 of 62 Old 07-07-2014, 02:13 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
I think I've worked it out Teacozy.

It is vaccines following smoking and drinking during pregnancy that causes all the problems. Back when there were fewer vaccines being used, women could smoke and drink and it didn't do as much damage. (just in case someone is humor impaired, I'm joking)
IMO you got it Deborah!

Vaccines are so great you can just keep getting and getting them with no harm at all......

Aspirin or Brie anyone??
Deborah and sassyfirechick like this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#44 of 62 Old 07-07-2014, 06:54 PM
 
samaxtics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 335
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 38 Post(s)
These quotes are from this link: http://www.cps.ca/documents/position...cohol-syndrome

Quote:
Maternal age and the amount of alcohol consumed were directly related to cognitive defects in a group of alcohol-exposed infants [17]. There was no relation between maternal drinking and neurodevelopmental outcome with a threshold intake of less than 15 mL (0.5 ounces) of alcohol per day, but above this level, infants of mothers older than 30 years of age were two to five times more likely to be functionally impaired than those of younger mothers. Functionally significant defects were seen primarily in infants whose mothers drank more than five drinks per occasion on an average of at least once a week.
Quote:
Abel [3] gave convincing arguments that low alcohol consumption levels are unlikely to cause FAS, that effects depend on high blood alcohol levels, and that the number of drinks consumed at a time is more important than the ‘average’ alcohol consumption.
From what I have read, alcohol content in beverages would have been less in the 1950s compared to today.

The average age for a first time mother during the 1950s was 22.

So unless those pregnant women were binge drinking 30+ year olds, no, you wouldn't have seen a lot of FAS babies.
samaxtics is online now  
#45 of 62 Old 07-07-2014, 10:54 PM
 
Taximom5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 3,097
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
It would have been fairly unusual for a woman to abstain from alcohol for 9 months in those days if she didn't know she was supposed to.

My grandmothers both smoked and drank through all their pregnancies. Nine children total between them. All 100% healthy and thriving. Their friends all drank and most smoked while pregnant as well. And they didn't just drink wine, either. No one thought anything of it in those days. They didn't know it was potentially harmful, so there was no stigma attached to it.

Yet, you don't hear of babies being born with all these problems in the 50s and 60s. You don't see tons of 60 year olds walking around with fetal alcohol syndrome do you? Non vaxxers always like to point out how healthy children were back then don't they?

Point being, the fact that most people who drank/smoke had healthy babies isn't a convincing argument that it's fine and dandy and no big deal to do so today.
Wow, teacozy, your grandmothers ran with an unusually tough crowd.

According to http://books.google.com/books?id=IpB...lcohol&f=false

"Women who drank, on the other hand, were seen as transgressing gender norms and challenging traditional female roles. In particular, the woman who drank too much was seen as abandoning her children and domestic duties. (McClellan, 2004) In the 1930's and 1940's, the bar was still not an acceptable place for women."

"...Social drinking abounded in the 1950's and 1960's, but women were still expected to remain in control, and alcoholism was interpreted by psychologists and medical practitioners as far more abnormal in women."
applejuice and sassyfirechick like this.
Taximom5 is online now  
#46 of 62 Old 07-08-2014, 05:06 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Not everyone's mom, grandmother, great-grandmother smoked and drank! On both sides of my family I only had two TOTAL male relatives that smokes, drinking also was something done on holidays in my home. I was born in the 1960's too. Once again, broad brush stokes to paint a point of view shared by a few but making it out to seem like EVERYONE did it to excess!

Let's also remember our family members (back in the day) also didn't have vaccines in them, my mother has never had a DTap or Tdap anything, nor did my grandmothers or their mothers, or my aunts either. Nor did they have a DTap during each pregnancy or a MMR prior too.
applejuice and sassyfirechick like this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#47 of 62 Old 07-08-2014, 11:52 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post
Wow, teacozy, your grandmothers ran with an unusually tough crowd.

According to http://books.google.com/books?id=IpB...lcohol&f=false

"Women who drank, on the other hand, were seen as transgressing gender norms and challenging traditional female roles. In particular, the woman who drank too much was seen as abandoning her children and domestic duties. (McClellan, 2004) In the 1930's and 1940's, the bar was still not an acceptable place for women."

"...Social drinking abounded in the 1950's and 1960's, but women were still expected to remain in control, and alcoholism was interpreted by psychologists and medical practitioners as far more abnormal in women."
"Social drinking abounded in the 1950s'...."

Exactly. That's what I've been saying. From this book about the 1950's :

"During the 1950's, the hard liquors- whisky, scotch, gin, vodka, rum and the like- gained wide acceptance."

"Overall, the cocktail epitomized drinking and the 1950's."

"...cocktails ruled as the drinks of choice for the middle class and above. Martinis, Manhattens, gimlets, old fashioneds- all were served in restaurants, classy bars, and even in suburban homes. The martini...emerged as a status drink during the decade. "

It goes on to say that cocktail drinking in the media depicted women and men consuming them equally.

"Cocktails, either at home or in a lounge, became an American ritual, with "cocktail time" recognized as a special hour."

The book also talks about how chlorophyll was advertised in the early 1950s as eliminating bad breath when consumed and was subsequently added to just about anything: toothpaste, cough drops, deodorant, clothing and even pet foods.

http://books.google.com/books?id=pt-...01950s&f=false


I believe I've seen non vaxxers link to this blogger before http://prenatalexposures.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html

She quotes from a book called Origins that says:

"Doctors' confidence in the harmlessness of alcohol was based on their beliefs about the placenta. This organ, which implants itself in the uterus soon after conception to form a way station between woman and fetus, was thought to provide seamless protection from harmful substances.

Pregnant women were not counseled about the dangers of medications or alcohol, Dally notes, and new drugs were not thoroughly tested for their safety during pregnancy.

And new drugs there were in abundance. The middle of the twentieth century was a golden age of pharmaceutical innovation, a time when serene sleep and steady nerves and a slim figure could be found inside the medicine cabinet. Pregnant women, too, were promised relief from all the complaints, small and large, of their condition: sleeplessness, morning sickness, miscarriage.

The sales job worked: those who gave birth in the postwar years, writes one chronicler of the period, "were among the most medicated women in history." Between 1958 and 1965, according to one study, half of all new mothers took two to four pharmaceutical products while pregnant."



Articles discussing that period point out that doctors used to actually prescribe cigarettes to pregnant women during the 1950s to "relax" them and help keep their weight down.

Yup, the good ole 50s! Where most kids turned out just fine even after being exposed to alcohol, cigarettes, and countless medications while in utero. Guess those things aren't so bad after all

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 

Last edited by teacozy; 07-08-2014 at 11:58 AM.
teacozy is offline  
#48 of 62 Old 07-08-2014, 12:09 PM
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,872
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 91 Post(s)
Tea - you realise you are coming across as arguing in favour of drinking alcohol during pregnancy (which so many organsiations are against on the precautionary principal of "we do not know the safe limits and the jury is largely out" )and the good old days of the 50's and indiscriminate use of pharmaceuticals to try and win a debate???

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  
#49 of 62 Old 07-08-2014, 01:57 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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
Tea - you realise you are coming across as arguing in favour of drinking alcohol during pregnancy (which so many organsiations are against on the precautionary principal of "we do not know the safe limits and the jury is largely out" )and the good old days of the 50's and indiscriminate use of pharmaceuticals to try and win a debate???
Guess you missed the wink face at the end?

A big portion of my previous post was responding to the insinuation and dig that my grandmothers must have "run with a tough crowd" because they drank alcohol during their pregnancies during the 50's.

It shows complete ignorance of what the drinking culture and attitudes of 1950s America was, and I was responding to that.

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#50 of 62 Old 07-08-2014, 02:08 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,244
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
To return, once again, to the original topic of this thread, does anyone think that CHOP has it right and that aluminum in some form or other is actually NECESSARY during pregnancy?
serenbat and beckybird like this.
Deborah is online now  
#51 of 62 Old 07-08-2014, 03:15 PM
 
applejuice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: hunting the wild aebelskiever
Posts: 18,605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
It is my understanding from studying nutrition for years that aluminum has no biological function in the human body. NONE

I understand there is no disease recognized in the human body that comes from a lack of aluminum in the diet.

I have never seen a bottle of aluminum tablets in the HFS, nor is aluminum ever listed as an essential nutrient or mineral. If there was, the greedy vitamin cartels would be making it and marketing it with lots of fanfare.

In addition to sodium, iron, magnesium, calcium, phosphorus, there are micronutrients as chromium, molybdenum, boron, cobalt, copper, iodine, silica, manganese, selenium, zinc that are necessary for maximum health. Iodine is necessary for health in daily and tiny amts of 150-290 mcg and without it, the thyroid gland will swell and expand looking for it, causing a condition known as goiter.

What happens if a person does not get aluminum?

The Pure Food Act allows for a certain amount of insect particles and dirt to be allowed in food; should we advocate for those little bits for pregnant women too?

Last edited by applejuice; 07-08-2014 at 04:53 PM.
applejuice is offline  
#52 of 62 Old 07-08-2014, 06:14 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
To return, once again, to the original topic of this thread, does anyone think that CHOP has it right and that aluminum in some form or other is actually NECESSARY during pregnancy?
NO!
Mirzam, applejuice and Deborah like this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#53 of 62 Old 07-10-2014, 02:11 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
CHOP is wrong about aluminum. They are also wrong about vitamins.
http://www.research.chop.edu/blog/ch...y-supplements/
(I'm sure CHOP has super-nutritious hospital food to compensate for the lack of vitamins! Because, as you know, hospital food is the most nutritious food on earth.)

If Offit gets under your skin, you will really enjoy this video. Offit dislikes vitamins, and is on a crusade against them. He advises against taking vitamins! I understand this video is not about the original post, but since it involves Offit and his terrible advice, I figured it would fit in nicely with the topic.

Quote from the video:
"Dr. Offit says you should absolutely avoid vitamin supplements, especially those megavitamins. I say, I think you should absolutely avoid Dr. Offit. His statements, in my opinion, need a Surgeon General's warning." Hahaha, I love Andrew Saul!!!
http://www.andrewsaul.com/megaclosing/

               "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  
#54 of 62 Old 07-11-2014, 11:42 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 1,282
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 139 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by beckybird View Post
CHOP is wrong about aluminum. They are also wrong about vitamins.
http://www.research.chop.edu/blog/ch...y-supplements/
(I'm sure CHOP has super-nutritious hospital food to compensate for the lack of vitamins! Because, as you know, hospital food is the most nutritious food on earth.)

If Offit gets under your skin, you will really enjoy this video. Offit dislikes vitamins, and is on a crusade against them. He advises against taking vitamins! I understand this video is not about the original post, but since it involves Offit and his terrible advice, I figured it would fit in nicely with the topic.

Quote from the video:
"Dr. Offit says you should absolutely avoid vitamin supplements, especially those megavitamins. I say, I think you should absolutely avoid Dr. Offit. His statements, in my opinion, need a Surgeon General's warning." Hahaha, I love Andrew Saul!!!
http://www.andrewsaul.com/megaclosing/
On his website he calls himself "Andrew Saul- The Megavitamin Man" and makes his living selling books on megavitamins etc.

Hardly surprising that he would have an issue with Paul Offit's statements on megavitamins....

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#55 of 62 Old 07-11-2014, 11:53 AM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
On his website he calls himself "Andrew Saul- The Megavitamin Man" and makes his living selling books on megavitamins etc.

Hardly surprising that he would have an issue with Paul Offit's statements on megavitamins....
Well Teacozy can you give us ANY examples where Offit supports or endorses the use of vitamins?
Mirzam and applejuice like this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#56 of 62 Old 07-11-2014, 12:05 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
gee, lack of vitamin A and D causes illness - http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/201...t-test-in-iowa http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/278323.php
beckybird likes this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
#57 of 62 Old 07-11-2014, 12:56 PM - Thread Starter
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,244
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 59 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
On his website he calls himself "Andrew Saul- The Megavitamin Man" and makes his living selling books on megavitamins etc.

Hardly surprising that he would have an issue with Paul Offit's statements on megavitamins....
He makes a number of specific points about statements from Offit, pointing out why they are incorrect and providing info which could be checked.

For example, is Offit right in comparing vitamins with Vioxx?
applejuice and beckybird like this.
Deborah is online now  
#58 of 62 Old 07-11-2014, 03:47 PM
 
beckybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: The Shattered Paradigm
Posts: 1,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
On his website he calls himself "Andrew Saul- The Megavitamin Man" and makes his living selling books on megavitamins etc.

Hardly surprising that he would have an issue with Paul Offit's statements on megavitamins....
Of Course he has an issue of Offit's statements, which is why he made the video. He is an expert on vitamins, while Offit is not. Were any of his statements untrue, or do you just dislike the fact that he is an authority on vitamins who is pointing out the flaws in Offit's interview?
applejuice, Deborah and serenbat like 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  
#59 of 62 Old 07-11-2014, 04:12 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)
Quote:
Originally Posted by beckybird View Post
Of Course he has an issue of Offit's statements, which is why he made the video. He is an expert on vitamins, while Offit is not. Were any of his statements untrue, or do you just dislike the fact that he is an authority on vitamins who is pointing out the flaws in Offit's interview?
I didn't watch the video, so can't comment on what was in it but Offit is hardly the only doctor who hold those views on "megavitamins".

If you google "are vitamins beneficial" tons of studies (some with hundreds of thousands of people) and articles come up validating that megavitamins are a huge waste of money.

I haven't really looked into it so I don't have much to add. Vitamins are not a topic that interest me.

Not sure how this is relevant to the discussion anyway...

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” ~ Neil deGrasse Tyson 
teacozy is offline  
#60 of 62 Old 07-11-2014, 04:17 PM
 
serenbat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,102
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
I didn't watch the video, so can't comment on what was in it but Offit is hardly the only doctor who hold those views on "megavitamins".

If you google "are vitamins beneficial" tons of studies (some with hundreds of thousands of people) and articles come up validating that megavitamins are a huge waste of money.

I haven't really looked into it so I don't have much to add. Vitamins are not a topic that interest me.

Not sure how this is relevant to the discussion anyway...
I see it as VERY relevant SINCE vitamin deficiency and diseases (even those VPD's) are directly related and I take that as a NO to my question -
applejuice and beckybird like this.

 

 pro-transparency advocate

&

lurk.gif  PROUD member of the .3% club!

 

Want to join? Just ask me!

 

"You know, in my day we used to sit on our ass smoking Parliaments for nine months.

Today, you have one piece of Brie and everybody goes berserk."      ROTFLMAO.gif 

serenbat is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off