Originally Posted by kidspiration
But you can't just put that out there without delving into WHY recent research and evidence isn't there about Vitamin C and it's role in health and healing. Care to venture to guess why it's not being looked into? Just saying the evidence is "old" is deceptive. Why do you need evidence on the amounts of Vitamin C? Do you know how it works? The dosage needed for each person is highly variable on the individual as well as their health status, but luckily, our bodies are pretty clear on telling us when we've reached a threshold level of Vitamin C. Just because "science" looked into it before but isn't currently looking at it doesn't mean that it's not a safe/effective treatment.
By the way, you wanna talk about old? Go look up the package insert of the MMR, and look at the dates of some of the studies that are cited on it. Then we can address the double standard.
I am guessing you will say that the reason for no research into it is money and the powers that be not wanting us to know about it.
This is not my point. My point is that there is SOME research and it's old.. There is a VERY high chance your infant or young toddler will NOT be willing to drink SA. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED TO ME. When my daughter was very sick with pre-pneumonia and straph (diagnosed tentatively after 4 days), she would NOT drink or eat anything and barely wanted to nurse. And when I took stuff, it did not work. In the end, antibiotics were the only thing that worked. Whether SA would have worked for this particular illness is not the point: the point was there was no way to get it into her. And it might have worked for these illnesses as they really were never confirmed by a lab test or x-ray, but the fact is what little I could get to her via breastmilk did not work.
I just get burned with the somewhat flippant recommendations that exist on this forum for how to treat illnesses when they do NOT come with any sort of caveats. The recommendations come with tones of certainty and proven effectiveness.
Yes, maybe maybe SA has been helpful. Yes, maybe some kids will drink it. Maybe some breastfeeding mom's can pass on some Vit C in whatever form through breastfeeding.
But to throw out SA and some of the treatments recommended here as if they work 100% and have been SHOWN to do so is just as bad as vaccine makers throwing out their vaccines and telling you they work without enough science and study and research. You just can't have it both ways.
So back to what sparked this.... yes, SA might help. There may be some treatments. But to be so empirical in stating that these are treatments to many of these VPD is wrong IMHO. It gives people the illusion that they will have effective options for treating their child and therefore, there is no need to vaccinate. This is just not presenting an accurate picture. If you want to present all the buggy information on vaccines, you must do the same for SA (and CLO) for their to be true balance and for anyone to really make a good decision.
And for the record, I have not vaccinated my daughter yet except for one DTaP. I am not advocating vaccines or anything. It's an individual choice. But when I read mom's here saying the know how to treat diseases so they are well armed for not vaccinating, I honestly cringe. How many diseases have they REALLY had to treat? Is this based on experience or just reading some book? Have they had to try to treat the full range of a diseases potential course? For instance, the worst case of measles or just a mild case? The worst case of pertussis or just a mild, diagnosed at home case. Have they really had a case of polio start to go haywire? To say it doesn't exist isn't the point. The point is do they really know how to treat these diseases and all the directions they can take when complications start to arise.
Do you understand what I am trying to say?