Join Date: Dec 2007
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
How the hell can men and women of science promote a mass campaign based on a hunch or an assumption which has no basis in fact?
Yup, that is the DTP study.... any others that have been done that you know of?
This could just be totally naive, but I really really hope that doctors are not working on the assumption that the DTaP prevents transmission (from parent to child for instance) if this is patently not the case..... my point? How the hell can men and women of science promote a mass campaign based on a hunch or an assumption which has no basis in fact?
After my little exchange with a prominent doctor in Child Vaccination I am begining to think this might be the case. I know many people here would no longer be horrified by this. But if the doctors have actually read the study and had their curiosity piqued, how can they ignore it? (granted, the chances that any doctor has read this study are VERY slim, even if it is on the cdc - but I sent it to a prominent doctor on Child Vaccination and he just stopped communication once I had highlighted the conclusion)
Anyway, perhaps no straight answer exists?
|It's something about how the vaccine protects against the toxoid, not the bacteria, right??? That just because the exposed person does not appear sick does not mean they can't pass the bacteria on... ??|
|33 members and 14,660 guests|
|anisaer , bananabee , coconotcoco , conzy , ELTAZ , emmy526 , hillymum , incorrigible , Iron Princess , Janeen0225 , lilmissgiggles , mama24-7 , Maxim , MeanVeggie , Mirzam , NaturallyKait , omarinbox1888 , Omotie , RollerCoasterMama , rubelin , samaxtics , sciencemum , shantimama , Skippy918 , Socks , Springshowers , stephalittle , stephaniepifer , texasfarmom , transpecos|
|Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 01:21 PM.|