I am going crazy... - Page 4 - Mothering Forums
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#91 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 02:34 AM
 
nwmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alegna View Post
Could you specify what kinds of complications you're speaking of?

-Angela
I can't speak for junomama, but here a just few complications that she might be wondering about:

Measles Complications - Source

* Otitis media (Ear infection - acute)
* Bronchitis
* Pneumonia
* Encephalitis (occurs in approximately 1 out of 1,000 measles cases). Encephalitis is an inflammation (irritation and swelling) of the brain, usually caused by infections.

Diphtheria Complications - Source

The diphtheria toxin can damage the heart, nervous system, kidneys, or other organs. This may lead to:

* Myocarditis, which can lead to heart failure
* Nerve problems such as peripheral neuritis, which can cause uncoordinated movements and paralysis
* Kidney damage
* Inflammation of the kidneys (nephritis)

Poliomyelitis (Polio) Complications - Source

* Spread of infection to other non-immunized persons
* Permanent muscle paralysis, disability, deformity
* Pulmonary edema
* Shock
* Complications of immobility and lung involvement
* Aspiration pneumonia
* High blood pressure
* Urinary tract infections
* Kidney stones
* Paralytic ileus (loss of intestinal functioning)
* Myocarditis (Inflammation - heart muscle)
* Cor pulmonale (Right-sided heart failure)

Pertussis (whooping cough) Complications - Source

* Pneumonia
* Convulsions
* Seizure disorder (permanent)
* Nose bleeds
* Ear infections
* Brain damage from lack of oxygen
* Bleeding in the brain (cerebral hemorrhage)
* Mental retardation
* Slowed or stopped breathing (apnea)
* Bluish skin color, which indicates a lack of oxygen
* High fever
* Persistent vomiting
* Dehydration
* Death
nwmom is offline  
#92 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 12:17 PM
 
Trillian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaPossum View Post
I have not met any mothers who do not vax who are not well read on this issue.
I assume you mean in real life? People come to this board all the time saying they can't explain their decision not to vax, but instead based their decision on a "gut feeling".

And, if anecdote is worth anything, the people I know in real life who didn't vax were much less informed than those who did.
Trillian is offline  
#93 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 12:26 PM
 
MamaPossum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Maine
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The people I've met in real life who DO NOT vax seem to have read at least one book on the issue and know something about the issue.

The people I've met in real life who DO VAX don't seem to have a clue about this issue and spout off stuff that sounds an awful lot like Offit.

It is just impressions I get. I try not to talk about vaxes with people who I think may not be of like mind or at least open minded about it. It just isn't worth the headache.
MamaPossum is offline  
#94 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 12:35 PM
 
capricorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquafina View Post
This is all so much for me to handel,every little sickness: out there every vax.I try to feel good about not vaxing and I just feel overwelhemed.I truly think that OCD has taken over my life since I got into not vaxing,I have become a weirdo,and all the info out there is to much to take.I belive that not vaxing is healthy yes you dont get all that garbace into your system.I also belive that the vax companys are out for $$$$ but I also belive they want to protect us to ....And my Family thinks I am crazy for being able to prevent someting and not doing it..I really feel pulled in both derections and I dont want my lo to be one with a vax reaction,and I dont want my lo be one with a vpd..I feel I have no one to talk to this about,my mom acts bipoler,my DH is a BLEEP that just tells me do what you want...Vaxes I dont think are needed Depthira,Tetnus,Polio,Hep B,Hep A,MMR,Ones I would feel safer with but scared of the reactions would be Pertussis,Hib,and I dont know about Prevnar the ones that are probbly the most reactive,I truly feel like I am turnning into nut case and I really dont think I could get a shot for my lo,beacuse of the what if reactions....I just want to run,and run ,and run until I pass out and then go to the bar and get drunk and forget about all this stress of worring...I had to vent
I can understand how you feel - been there done that! My life changed when I came across a book by the New Zealand Antivivisection Society called "Animal Research Takes Lives". It had a whole chapter on vaccination, including graphs based on the official statistics of deaths from infectious diseases from various countries which showed that the remarkable decline in the infectious disease mortality rates over the past century had absolutely nothing to do with vaccines! The penny had dropped, but even then I continued to believe for some time that "there must be something good about vaccinations as otherwise they wouldn't be doing it!"

How wrong I was! Check out the eye-opening "Dr Mark Randall interview" via google (but avoid abridged Nexus Magazine version). Dr Randall used to work for some of the big vaccine manufacturers, but finally resigned when he could no longer reconcile what he was doing with his conscience. In this interview, he blows the lid on vaccinations and tells why vaccinations are really carried out. It has nothing to do with disease prevention!
capricorn is offline  
#95 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 12:41 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,258
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
The how much do people know who don't vax argument is so far purely anecdotes. There were a couple of studies that said that people who didn't vax on purpose (rather than just letting things slide) were better educated.

This is an excellent example of something that can't be settled by anecdotes because you need a large sample.

The question of people beginning their non-vax journey based on gut feelings is interesting. Do they stop with the gut feelings? Then they would fall into the non-research group. But if they start with the feeling and then do the research?

Okay, here is the challenge: How would Trillian and MamaPossum design a study to determine if vaxers or non-vaxers had done more research? At what point in the journey should the question be asked? If you asked moms of 6 month old babies you'd certainly get a different set of responses than if you asked moms of 18 month olds, just because there would have been more time to study the problem. What sort of questions would you ask? How would you find a random sampling of the population of parents? How large a group would you need to survey? Where would you draw the line between well researched and not well-researched?

On this forum, well-researched goes a lot farther than most places. No one would call themselves well-researched here if they had just read the vax handouts or the parent pages at the CDC, for example (I can think of one exception), but to the average pediatrician a parent who actually insisted on reading the handouts before vaxing is probably the exception! And someone who went so far as to look at the CDC parent pages would probably be sort of scary!

Interesting question. I wish someone would do the study.
Deborah is online now  
#96 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 12:42 PM
 
capricorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 85
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trillian View Post
I assume you mean in real life? People come to this board all the time saying they can't explain their decision not to vax, but instead based their decision on a "gut feeling".

And, if anecdote is worth anything, the people I know in real life who didn't vax were much less informed than those who did.
My own son wasn't vaccinated because his mother "always had a funny feeling about vaccinations". Many women have this gut feeling about vaccinations, but are talked into vaccinating by health professionals or spouses. Many others who go by their gut feeling and don't vaccinate later become well-informed, either to confirm their decision to themselves or to be able to back up their decision to others. As Dr Eva Snead MD pointed out in one of her lectures, "a well-informed parent knows more about vaccination than most doctors."
capricorn is offline  
#97 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 12:42 PM
 
lastrid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cockeysville, MD
Posts: 1,080
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I couldn't find this video. Do you have a link?

<>< Alison
lastrid is offline  
#98 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 12:50 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 44,408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nwmom View Post
I can't speak for junomama, but here a just few complications that she might be wondering about:

Measles Complications - Source

* Otitis media (Ear infection - acute)
* Bronchitis
* Pneumonia
* Encephalitis (occurs in approximately 1 out of 1,000 measles cases). Encephalitis is an inflammation (irritation and swelling) of the brain, usually caused by infections.
Okay- skipping Polio and Diptheria, because according to the CDC there are NO cases of polio in decades and very little diptheria.

So- Measles:
* Otitis media (Ear infection - acute)
>Pretty run of the mill- can get one from a cold too

* Bronchitis
>Ditto above.

* Pneumonia
>And again.

* Encephalitis (occurs in approximately 1 out of 1,000 measles cases). Encephalitis is an inflammation (irritation and swelling) of the brain, usually caused by infections.
>I'd be interested in the 1/1000 stat and what population it was in. But at any rate, this is a known possible side effect of the vaccine as well.

Pertussis in the next post so as not to get too long.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
#99 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 12:58 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 44,408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by nwmom View Post
Pertussis (whooping cough) Complications - Source

* Pneumonia
* Convulsions
* Seizure disorder (permanent)
* Nose bleeds
* Ear infections
* Brain damage from lack of oxygen
* Bleeding in the brain (cerebral hemorrhage)
* Mental retardation
* Slowed or stopped breathing (apnea)
* Bluish skin color, which indicates a lack of oxygen
* High fever
* Persistent vomiting
* Dehydration
* Death
Okay- Pertussis

* Pneumonia
>again, nearly anything can cause pneumonia- including a cold or flu

* Convulsions
>a known vaccine reaction as well

* Seizure disorder (permanent)
>also a known vaccine reaction

* Nose bleeds
>

* Ear infections
>pretty common

* Brain damage from lack of oxygen
>I would like stats on this- haven't found any, but sure, in *theory* a risk

* Bleeding in the brain (cerebral hemorrhage)
>also would love stats on this... but also can happen as a vax reaction

* Mental retardation
>isn't this redundant? see brain damage above

* Slowed or stopped breathing (apnea)
>in theory a risk- very unusual

* Bluish skin color, which indicates a lack of oxygen
>symptom, not actual condition- the lack of oxygen being the problem. Can also be caused by any number of things

* High fever
>a symptom, not a "complication"

* Persistent vomiting
>also a symptom and would not last

* Dehydration
>easy to treat

* Death
>rare - nearly unheard of beyond infancy.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
#100 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 01:29 PM
 
MamaPossum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Maine
Posts: 230
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
Okay, here is the challenge: How would Trillian and MamaPossum design a study to determine if vaxers or non-vaxers had done more research? At what point in the journey should the question be asked? If you asked moms of 6 month old babies you'd certainly get a different set of responses than if you asked moms of 18 month olds, just because there would have been more time to study the problem. What sort of questions would you ask? How would you find a random sampling of the population of parents? How large a group would you need to survey? Where would you draw the line between well researched and not well-researched?
Good one Deborah. If I was given a test on what DTP stood for after my first child I wouldn't have had a clue. I read the sheets at the office, but it went in one ear and out the other. I vaxed out of fear and because I was told to do so. Now, after 6 mo. of research I know (or know where to find the info) what DTP stands for how the vax has changed over time, what ingredients are in the vax, what are reactions to the vax, what are the chances of my child getting the diseases, how to care for my child if there is a risk of disease or if my child has the disease. When to to go to the emergency room, etc. I've carefully educated myself about all this stuff. I would not feel comfortable with my decision if I had not taken the time to do that. I guess you are right that people on both sides of the fence may be educated or not educated. I presonally feel I have put my time in, but was an ignorant fool with my first child and knowing what I know now. So I guess I'm basing my perceptions on how I did things.

As far as designing a study. It will take more time than I can put into it now. It would be a difficult study to do in many ways without access to study subjects. I think there are more important things to study such as why the heck so many kids have autism.
MamaPossum is offline  
#101 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 02:15 PM
 
Proverbs31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 602
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trillian View Post
I assume you mean in real life? People come to this board all the time saying they can't explain their decision not to vax, but instead based their decision on a "gut feeling".
I think many of us initially decided not to vax based on a "gut feeling" and then researched our butts off to make sure we were doing the right thing.
Proverbs31 is offline  
#102 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 03:40 PM
 
mykdsmomy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: On the way to or from Starbucks
Posts: 3,384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proverbs31 View Post
I think many of us initially decided not to vax based on a "gut feeling" and then researched our butts off to make sure we were doing the right thing.
so true

Here's me I married then we had dd15 , dd11 , ds10 , and then and now we and I blog!
mykdsmomy is offline  
#103 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 03:55 PM
 
stacyann21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: California
Posts: 1,516
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I didn't know much beyond the CDC parent pages until I stumbled upon this forum. Now I regularly spend time researching vaccination, almost on a daily basis. I've never met so many intelligent, well-informed people in any one place. I highly disagree that pro-vaxxers are more well-read or researched than non-vaxxers. The typical pro-vax argument goes something like, "Why wouldn't you listen to your doctor, do you want your baby to get tetanus?!!!".

Mom to a bright & energetic 6 y.o. boy  blahblah.gif   With my sweetie for 10 years now  blowkiss.gif  Registered nurse  caffix.gif

stacyann21 is offline  
#104 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 04:15 PM
 
nwmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stacyann21 View Post
I didn't know much beyond the CDC parent pages until I stumbled upon this forum. Now I regularly spend time researching vaccination, almost on a daily basis. I've never met so many intelligent, well-informed people in any one place. I highly disagree that pro-vaxxers are more well-read or researched than non-vaxxers. The typical pro-vax argument goes something like, "Why wouldn't you listen to your doctor, do you want your baby to get tetanus?!!!".

How omnipotent of you to assume that pro-vaxers are "less well-read" then anti-vaxers.
nwmom is offline  
#105 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 05:27 PM
 
twinsplusone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
I highly disagree that pro-vaxxers are more well-read or researched than non-vaxxers. The typical pro-vax argument goes something like, "Why wouldn't you listen to your doctor, do you want your baby to get tetanus?!!!".
I have to agree. The majority of pro-vaxxers I talk to, have NO idea what vax's their child got at their last appointment, & say, "I trust what my doctor says. I'll let them decide what they should get."
twinsplusone is offline  
#106 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 07:48 PM
 
Trillian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alegna View Post
Okay- Pertussis

* Pneumonia
>again, nearly anything can cause pneumonia- including a cold or flu

* Convulsions
>a known vaccine reaction as well

* Seizure disorder (permanent)
>also a known vaccine reaction

* Nose bleeds
>

* Ear infections
>pretty common

* Brain damage from lack of oxygen
>I would like stats on this- haven't found any, but sure, in *theory* a risk

* Bleeding in the brain (cerebral hemorrhage)
>also would love stats on this... but also can happen as a vax reaction

[etc.]

-Angela
I think the point was that one would need to compare the rate of complications to the rate of adverse vaccine reactions. Just saying it is *possible* is not very meaningful.
Trillian is offline  
#107 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 08:00 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 44,408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trillian View Post
I think the point was that one would need to compare the rate of complications to the rate of adverse vaccine reactions. Just saying it is *possible* is not very meaningful.
But it would depend on the complication. I don't give a flying rat if having a disease increases the chance of my child having an ear infection... just not on the radar.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
#108 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 08:20 PM
 
Trillian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
Okay, here is the challenge: How would Trillian and MamaPossum design a study to determine if vaxers or non-vaxers had done more research? At what point in the journey should the question be asked? If you asked moms of 6 month old babies you'd certainly get a different set of responses than if you asked moms of 18 month olds, just because there would have been more time to study the problem. What sort of questions would you ask? How would you find a random sampling of the population of parents? How large a group would you need to survey? Where would you draw the line between well researched and not well-researched?
That's a very difficult question, and unfortunately I don't have time today to give it a huge amount of thought. However, I think it would be interesting to compare not only how much research parents have done, but to look at what sources they used (doctors, VIS, books, internet, original articles, etc.), and how they interpreted what they read.

When it comes to the second part, I would like to see a survey that distinguishes between "widely-read" and "educated". After all, there are lots of questionable sources of information out there, and even if you use good sources, not everyone is capable of reading them with a critical eye and drawing reasonable conclusions from them. So I think such a survey would have to include a wide range of questions covering both knowledge of the (commonly accepted) facts (e.g., how does the immune system work? what are the complication rates of x disease vs. the adverse reaction rates of x vaccine?), acceptance or disagreement with those facts (eg., are the published statistics wrong or inapplicable?), and beliefs (e.g., is it beneficial to fight off the natural disease?)
Trillian is offline  
#109 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 08:27 PM
 
Trillian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 635
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alegna View Post
But it would depend on the complication.
Of course. But you didn't give that comparison for any of the complications you listed.

The implication of your list seemed to be that since any particular complication could also result from other diseases or from vaccine reactions, getting the disease is no more dangerous than getting the vaccine, which would be rather faulty logic. Or did I miss your point?
Trillian is offline  
#110 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 08:36 PM
 
alegna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 44,408
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trillian View Post
Of course. But you didn't give that comparison for any of the complications you listed.

The implication of your list seemed to be that since any particular complication could also result from other diseases or from vaccine reactions, getting the disease is no more dangerous than getting the vaccine, which would be rather faulty logic. Or did I miss your point?
What I was getting at was that for the minor complications they are not even on my radar screen. Not part of my decision-making process. Not an issue.

The more serious complications you would have to go to historical textbooks to get the best idea of true complication rates.

-Angela
alegna is offline  
#111 of 117 Old 02-27-2007, 10:40 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,258
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trillian View Post
That's a very difficult question, and unfortunately I don't have time today to give it a huge amount of thought. However, I think it would be interesting to compare not only how much research parents have done, but to look at what sources they used (doctors, VIS, books, internet, original articles, etc.), and how they interpreted what they read.

When it comes to the second part, I would like to see a survey that distinguishes between "widely-read" and "educated". After all, there are lots of questionable sources of information out there, and even if you use good sources, not everyone is capable of reading them with a critical eye and drawing reasonable conclusions from them. So I think such a survey would have to include a wide range of questions covering both knowledge of the (commonly accepted) facts (e.g., how does the immune system work? what are the complication rates of x disease vs. the adverse reaction rates of x vaccine?), acceptance or disagreement with those facts (eg., are the published statistics wrong or inapplicable?), and beliefs (e.g., is it beneficial to fight off the natural disease?)
Yes, that struck me as one of the difficulties. The interpretation of the material studied and the conclusions drawn are incredibly difficult to evaluate. But if you just ask: "How much material have you studied on the topic of vaccination?" the question is too vague.

On the other hand, if all you want to do is prove that people who don't vax are ignorant, it is easy. Vaxing is good. Therefore anyone who turns it down is ignorant. End of discussion. It doesn't matter how much research they have done because they came to the wrong conclusion.

And yes, I understand that the majority view on this forum runs to the opposite position, i.e., vaxing is bad, therefore anyone who accepts it is ignorant.
Deborah is online now  
#112 of 117 Old 02-28-2007, 12:22 AM
 
nwmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by alegna View Post
What I was getting at was that for the minor complications they are not even on my radar screen. Not part of my decision-making process. Not an issue.

The more serious complications you would have to go to historical textbooks to get the best idea of true complication rates.

-Angela
Have you not researched the rate of disease complications to the rate of adverse vaccine reactions??

I was under the assumption that anti-vaxer's have done all the research and have all the answers.
nwmom is offline  
#113 of 117 Old 02-28-2007, 02:10 AM
Banned
 
sweetasalemon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There was a time I got really overwhelmed by it all myself, I've given myself near panic attacks trying to process it all. The more i learned, the more i still learn, the better I feel, the stronger i feel, the more empowered i feel and confident I am.
Disease is a part of being AN ORGANISM A LIVING THING. THE IDEA THAT YOUR GONNA WIPE OUT DISEASE OR ERADICATE IT IT COMPLETELY ILLOGICAL.

If you do that, you probably won't function long as a human being, because your body with probably stop working, or evolving.

Nutrition is key, natural medicine (what your body has evolved with and can naturally process and absorb and utilize better and safer) and excersise is the only way, you cannot expect those intricate cellular biochemical pathways to work outside thier natural evolutionary state without consequences. Pharmecuticals and chemicals eventually breakdown your dna/rna blah blah and people usually starve thier cells from bad nutrition, toxic overload, etc etc so ... It all falls into place after a while and you can get more peace with your desicions, knowledge is power, not profits or money, once you know this, you will have more control, more confidence. ALWAYS QUESTIONS THE QUESTIONS AND THE ANSWERS hehehehe sorry i'm getting carried away...<--no social life
sweetasalemon is offline  
#114 of 117 Old 03-01-2007, 03:02 PM
 
lioralourie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: A Frum Jew in China
Posts: 836
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
lastrid, it's not a video, it's a transcript and it's amazing. http://www.vaclib.org/basic/manu.htm

I finally have a quote in my siggy (from the interview!!)

Liora, Frum Jew In Beijing, Mom of Three (one "Almost Autistic" healed in 3 years with biomed and one amazing girl with Down syndrome using Targeted Nutritional Intervention (TNI)
lioralourie is offline  
#115 of 117 Old 03-01-2007, 03:22 PM
 
lyttlewon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trillian View Post
I assume you mean in real life? People come to this board all the time saying they can't explain their decision not to vax, but instead based their decision on a "gut feeling".
Kind of like the CDC claiming 100% efficay on the tetanus shot based on "gut feeling"
lyttlewon is offline  
#116 of 117 Old 03-02-2007, 05:03 AM
 
Plummeting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,383
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trillian View Post
That's a very difficult question, and unfortunately I don't have time today to give it a huge amount of thought. However, I think it would be interesting to compare not only how much research parents have done, but to look at what sources they used (doctors, VIS, books, internet, original articles, etc.), and how they interpreted what they read.
Emphasis mine, to make a very important point: THIS IS A PRIME EXAMPLE OF BIAS. How on earth would it be anything but biased to say that a determination of a person's level of education on vaccines should include an analysis of their interpretation of what they've read? If you base your determination of their knowledge of this topic on whether or not they agree with the researchers, the researchers' conclusions or the majority of scientists, then you are automatically going to find that the people who do not agree with the majority opinion are "less educated". Obviously, you'd need to know how people interpret what they read in order to place them in the "pro-vax" or "anti-vax" group, but you simply can't use their interpretation of the information as proof of anything. And I think the fact that a vehement supporter of current vaccination policies would suggest such a thing is just more evidence of the attitude that anyone who disagrees with the mainstream is automatically wrong. It's more proof that people are willing to discount our opinions based on nothing more than the fact that they aren't popular.

You have to pay careful attention to the things people say, because you can frequently discern a lot more than someone is willing to admit openly.

Quote:
When it comes to the second part, I would like to see a survey that distinguishes between "widely-read" and "educated". After all, there are lots of questionable sources of information out there, and even if you use good sources, not everyone is capable of reading them with a critical eye and drawing reasonable conclusions from them. So I think such a survey would have to include a wide range of questions covering both knowledge of the (commonly accepted) facts (e.g., how does the immune system work? what are the complication rates of x disease vs. the adverse reaction rates of x vaccine?), acceptance or disagreement with those facts (eg., are the published statistics wrong or inapplicable?), and beliefs (e.g., is it beneficial to fight off the natural disease?)
This part is just more of the same, with the theme being that if you don't agree with the "commonly accepted facts" then you're not educated and don't know how to red with a critical eye and draw reasonable conclusions. Basically, if you believe for instance, that adverse reactions of x vaccine are more common than officially admitted, you must not be capable of drawing reasonable conclusions or reading with a critical eye.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah
On the other hand, if all you want to do is prove that people who don't vax are ignorant, it is easy. Vaxing is good. Therefore anyone who turns it down is ignorant. End of discussion. It doesn't matter how much research they have done because they came to the wrong conclusion.
Well I think Trillian's entire description is exactly that kind of study, isn't it? Using one's agreement or disagreement with the officially accepted version of things as a determinant of one's level of education on the matter is exactly like what both you and Trillian have just described in your posts. Trillian's version was just worded differently.

Anyway, I just wanted to point that out, because I think it's kind of important for everyone to be aware of this kind of thing. I think it's such a part of our society that people don't even realize their thinking is biased. I think the study outlined by Trillian probably sounds valid to a lot of people because they are so biased they can't even see it. Their bias is so strong that they are completely unable to see how it influences their perception.
Plummeting is offline  
#117 of 117 Old 03-02-2007, 12:16 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 6,258
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 63 Post(s)
Plummeting, thank you for an excellent summary and analysis.

And many of the studies that look at non-vaxers include just that sort of bias: starting with the assumption that they must be confused, uneducated, reading the wrong material, misinterpreting what they read, hanging with the wrong crowd (us), any and every explanation other than admitting that they might be right about something.
Deborah is online now  
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