The work, they don't work, they work, they don't work - Mothering Forums

Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 11:01 AM - Thread Starter
 
JaneSmith1010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,339
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Ok ladies, every time I post a thread the argument/discussion turns into 'vaxes work' vs. 'vaxes don't work'. So, here's the thread to get it out of your systems. First, what do you think the objective of vaxing is? Is there a clearly defined set of objectives or is this a subjective opinion based thing? Second, based on these objectives, do you think vaxes work?

Example, 'the objective of vaccinations is to induce anti-body responses in the blood of an individual to confer such and such a length of immunity to such and such disease. In achieving an X% immunization rate such and such disease will be eradicated". And, example: I think vaxes do not work b/c anti-body response has not been shown to be adequate in producing immunity, not everyone responds the same way to all vaxes, X% of the community cannot safely handle vaxes, you cannot eradicate a disease this way, no vax produces lifelong immunity,etc. You get the idea. Have at it ladies.
JaneSmith1010 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 12:09 PM
 
Plummeting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,009
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
I think the goal of the vaccination program is to prevent the communicable diseases for which we have vaccines, without replacing them with other diseases (chronic or acute) as a side effect. I think most vaccines do reduce the incidence of the diseases they were created to prevent. Some don't, though. And some seem to cause more problems than they prevent. The issue is really complicated and you just can't sum it up into one "I think vaccines work because VPDs are less common today" or "I think vaccines don't work because vaccinated kids still catch VPDs". You can't lump them all together, as if each vaccine is the same - works the same way, does the same things - as each other vaccine. Trying to lump all vaccines together into a "they all work" or "they all don't work" would be like trying to say that all men are better at math than all women. It's just not true. Life's not like that.
Plummeting is offline  
#3 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 02:07 PM
djt
 
djt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It's always going to be that way because there are those who chose to believe their doctors and the medical information from government sources, which always means the pharmaceutical drug cartels, and that is their right. On the other side, there are those who chose to research the subject and to question "official" opinions, considering that they may have tainted motives. Between these two positions lies a wide chasm, and basically, "never the twain shall meet."

As for me, my family has a history of vaccine injuries. Thanks to one of them, I'm alive. My dad got yellow fever from his yellow fever shot during WWII, which kept him hospitalized for many weeks. He was a pilot/flight engineer. During that time everyone he trained with--every single one--died in combat. So, I figure that because if his failed vaccine disaster, I'm here to talk about it since I wasn't born yet.

I had such a horror of the vaccinations after being herded into the first polio "field trial" mass vaccination experiment that I managed to skip out on most of them by hiding at school. Lucky me. The "killed" virus shots weren't so dead and gave many children polio, created the childhood leukemia epidemics due to contaminants (they all have contaminants from their animal or human sources of "attenuation" and other animal, human, fetal abortion components added--you can't "sterilize" a vaccine), created autoimmune diseases, and many other conditions. All one has to do is to look up SV40 and HeLa cells to get an idea of what millions of people have been exposed to and since passed on to generations of offspring--all of the cancers, brain damage, learning disabilities and other conditions. It's all out there for anyone who cares to look.

I was lucky to find a naturopath who restored my own health before I got married and had a child, but he said "no shots" which was easy in WA state which allows personal exemptions, so my only child got to the age of 5 without any vaccinations. That made an easy baby to raise. No fussing, no childhood illnesses, no infections, no colds, no flu, nothing except inherited food intolerances. Her immune system was so powerful that not even the usual cuts and abrasions every kid gets ever got infected.

But, we had moved to Texas temporarily so I could collaborate on a book with another person and as retired military (My husband was retired and older than me--we married late and had a child at a later age than most) we were on a base heading for the PX to shop when my daughter was playing around and fell on an exposed sprinkler pipe and cut her neck. It was only skin deep, but was on on area that stretches so it opened up very wide and we had to go to the hospital for stitches.

To shorten the story, they basically forced a tetanus shot on her. It didn't take long for the fever and the beginning of the inconsolable screaming she couldn't explain. Soon after, the eruptions started. The first one popped up on her instep and looked like half a striped green grape sticking up through unbroken skin. She screamed with pain and couldn't move. I had to carry her to the toilet because she couldn't walk there. Luckily, I knew what to do for her from the old naturopath, and gave her a "hydrotherapy" treatment, using alternating hot and cold packs in a timed sequence front and back, which took the pain away by the time I was done a half hour later. But that was just the beginning. I knew it was the vaccine, so I wasn't going back to the same doctors that did this.

The blisters opened up into horrible looking sores that began to stink like rotting flesh. The day that happened I stayed up all night holding my little one and praying. Some time during the night it came to me to douse her with apple cider vinegar, which I did. By morning the dead flesh smell was gone, and I knew she had passed a crisis stage.

I contacted my doc back home and described the situation. His first response was, "DAMNED SHOT!" But he told me to continue doing what I was doing, the treatments and alkaline-forming foods because it would just have to run it's course while her system detoxed the poisons. This acute reaction probably saved her from any kind of chronic damage. The fevers came and went daily, and the screaming episodes, but less intense, and she didn't break out any more after the first 12 eruptions. When I knew she had started healing, I took her back to the doctors to demand a medical exemption so she could get into school. At that point, no daycare or school would accept her.

The doctors went crazy! I won't describe what happened. It's on a web page I already listed. What it boils down to is that the vaccine caused a flesh-eating viral/staph infection which in someone else probably would have evolved into necrotising fasciitis. You can see some of the photos of it on my website--they called it "vaccinia" in past times. The doctors told me that if she wasn't hospitalized immediately and put on a course of antibiotics...THAT SHE WOULD DIE. In fact, we all would since by then my husband and I were infected in every open sore we had--every mosquito bit, hangnail, scratch. We hadn't realized we were dealing with something contagious, and that our own immune systems were at low ebb from all of the stress and we got infected immediately. But...my old doctor had already warned us--that we needed to AVOID antibiotics as if our lives depended on it. Later I did research and found that of course all the people who died and lost huge sections of body parts were all treated with antibiotics. They ones who survived basically just did so after the surgical removal of all infected and surrounding tissues.

My daughter was already recovering, and I did in a couple of months. My husband took to the bottle, didn't keep to the regimen he needed to and got so bad that when he ended up in court-ordered alcohol treatment in a VA hospital they threw him in isolation and heavy antibiotic treatment. The infection "dried up" so to speak, but it left him with gnarled flesh and a fulminating yeasty lung infection, and it took him two years on a natural healing regimen to get the chronic infection back into an acute stage where it could heal. Basically, we had to bring it back and heal it again, the right way, but the flareup resolved very quickly.

Meanwhile, we had to flee the state of Texas in the dark of night to escape the authorities threating to take custody of our daughter and put us in jail. She was well by the time we got home.

That was 1986, and gave me a pretty good reason to start researching the entire history of vaccination. I was already a researcher/writer focused on natural healing other aspects of alt med. I came close to death prior to that, found a doctor who was curing cancer and every other disease without drugs or surgery, and wanted to explore this whole new world of medicine that was doing what conventional medicine was unable to do--produce health in the "incurable".

I'm not going to post a stack of links. I've already done so. If anyone is interested they can look them up. But I do have one thing to add for people to consider...

For the last 200+years researchers, writers, doctors, scientists, epidemiologists, statisticians, and concerned citizens world-wide have been trying to warn the public that the entire practice of vaccination is based on an ignored superstition, that it is based on bad science, that the "antibody" theory of immunity is faulty--like taking one letter out of the entire alphabet and trying to communicate with it. That it doesn't work. That it causes harm and that all of the reports to the contrary are "revisionist" history created for immense profit and to escape liability. Basically, that one good piece of advice always is to "follow the money".

Why would all of these people risk their reputations, their careers, their lives even, to try to warn people off of something the government is telling us is a "miracle of modern medicine" and the "end of epidemics" even though the epidemics of "filth diseases" ended world-wide in unvaccinated countries when filth itself was eliminated for the most part through improved sanitation, cleaner food and water supplies, and waste disposal?

Some links I don't think I listed previously are:

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/default.htm

http://www.redflagsweekly.com/confer...aby/index.html

--the vaccination news "they" don't want you to know about.

http://herbdatanz.com/ --for anyone interested in a whole different world of health care--natural healing, a different theory of disease, and in general a wealth of information not provided by "conventional medicine." (New Zealand)
djt is offline  
 
#4 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 02:32 PM - Thread Starter
 
JaneSmith1010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,339
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plummeting View Post
I think the goal of the vaccination program is to prevent the communicable diseases for which we have vaccines, without replacing them with other diseases (chronic or acute) as a side effect. I think most vaccines do reduce the incidence of the diseases they were created to prevent. Some don't, though. And some seem to cause more problems than they prevent. The issue is really complicated and you just can't sum it up into one "I think vaccines work because VPDs are less common today" or "I think vaccines don't work because vaccinated kids still catch VPDs". You can't lump them all together, as if each vaccine is the same - works the same way, does the same things - as each other vaccine. Trying to lump all vaccines together into a "they all work" or "they all don't work" would be like trying to say that all men are better at math than all women. It's just not true. Life's not like that.
I understand your point. So, with the general objective you outlined though could you tell me if you think the vax campaign in the US, as a whole is accomplishing this goal? Or is this too broad of a statement/assesment for you to comfortably make? I think it may be. You'll have to excuse my persistence, I have just been reading more in the vax section lately and everytime someone says they think vaxes don't work someone chimes in to say that they do. I'm just assuming this is either a difference in information or a difference in what each person thinks the goal of vaxing is.
JaneSmith1010 is offline  
#5 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 02:45 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Quote:
I'm just assuming this is either a difference in information or a difference in what each person thinks the goal of vaxing is.
It's a difference in how deep one thinks "the conspiracy" goes.
Some people literally think ALL the studies that show that vaccines have ANY effect towards preventing a certain disease are either deeply flawed or fraudulent.
What's confusing, furthermore, is that even those of us who believe that many vaccines "work" to some extent (at what cost being the key question) also agree that some studies are flawed, and some probably are fraudulent, too.
So trying to work out whats going on is sort of tricky.
I think it's easier to take the issue of vaccine effectiveness on vaccine by vaccine.
mamakay is offline  
#6 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 09:00 PM
djt
 
djt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The only way a proper study could be done on the efficacy of any vaccine is to use a large cohort--I think I read somewhere that it needs to be at least 300--and to vaccinate them. Then, they must inject or otherwise expose them to disease. And to be realistic, it would have to be a cross-section of people. Infants, healthy and ill, old people, children, etc.

Nope, they don't do that. Can't do that. Never will do that. It would be unthinkable. So, they use statistics. And how are statistics created? Well, consider this, such as in the case of polio. They start separating certain cases or type of cases so they can be eliminated from that category, and they have a number of other tricks. My personal favorite is this one:

Have you had your smallpox vaccination? No. Well, sorry, you have smallpox.
Have you had your smallpox vaccination? Yes. Well, sorry, you have monkeypox.

Those who profit from the practice and those who fear liability (usually the same people) have every trick in the book to manipulate numbers and the perceptions of the general public. FOLLOW THE MONEY. For something more real, look to those who have nothing to gain and much to lose for providing information that is negative in nature. And going straight to scientific research is a way of bypassing the hype also, because scientists love to publish and often bluntly write the truth and only get the fallout afterwards, so you will only often see them do this once. And if they reverse themselves, it's even more telling. There was a major study done once that was covered on a national news show one night. I don't recall if it was the causative connection between aluminum and Alzheimers, or mercury and autism. But I was thinking, wow--that's going to all over the papers and other news media the next day. But there was nothing. Absolutely nothing. Somebody got to them. And there was a study on mercury/autism I do recall, because they came out and announced a connection was found. However, every single scientist on that study afterwards recanted the findings. The only one that held his ground was the lead scientist. And I would guess his career came to a screeching halt after that. The pharmceutical companies control the government health offices, medical journals, media--they pour money into everything so that "official" sources reflect the "party line" and woe to anyone who crosses that steamroller. They can't even find material to publish in the medical journal any more that doesn't have Big Pharma funding involved, so the had to change the publishing criteria to allow writers with these connections to continue submitting their tainted articles.
djt is offline  
#7 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 09:05 PM
 
lokidoki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: North Cackalacky
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The bottomline for me is that a lot of the information is skewed so it is hard to even tell if they work ~ for instance the "r" portion of the MMR is truly to protect pregnant women from CRS. There is no way to really know if this is happening or if the vax made any difference at all ~ because #s of CRS cases were not kept until the MMR was already being administered.

Same can be said for a few other vaccines. I think to some degree they work somewhat ~ but vaccines are not the only reason incidence or mortality start to decline.

As many have stated before me ~ it is hard to lump all vaccines into a statement like "they work but aren't worth it" or "they don't work so they aren't worth it" kind of thing. The whole practice of mass vaccination hasn't been thought all the way through ~ like what happens if we eradicate one thing but something worse comes along. Or, say we stop children from developing measles in childhood but this causes some other health issues when they get older because their immune systems didn't get the chance to fight off the disease naturally.

Kind of like the environment thing ~ someone invented plastic and disposable diapers but no one stopped to consider what 30 years worth of disposable diapers would look like in a landfill or consider what they would do to our environment. Just seemed like a good idea at the moment so why the heck not (and screw the future generations who have to deal with the clean up of our neat little convenient invention).

Wife to DH (06/09/01), Mother to DS coolshine.gif (04/10/06) saynovax.gif and rescuer of dachshunds ~ and joy.gifthat our rainbow1284.gif arrived (06/10/11) safe and sound. Love cd.gif our little one ~ and lactivist.gif

lokidoki is offline  
#8 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 09:22 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 18,361
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3199 Post(s)
Lokidoki wrote:
Quote:
Kind of like the environment thing ~ someone invented plastic and disposable diapers but no one stopped to consider what 30 years worth of disposable diapers would look like in a landfill or consider what they would do to our environment. Just seemed like a good idea at the moment so why the heck not (and screw the future generations who have to deal with the clean up of our neat little convenient invention).
Yes, shortsighted is a long-running human behavior, but our technology has made the volume of screw-up much larger. Any thoughtful study of history will find large numbers of people doing really dumb stuff. Nothing new. The new part is our ability to cause mass destruction when we do dumb stuff. This is called progress!

On the vaxes work/don't work question.

I agree that it would have to be considered one vax at a time. We would also have to consider the long-term effects of vaxing as part of the equation.

So, how about we start with the perennial favorite: Pertussis?

It does seem to have, perhaps, some effect on the intensity of the illness. The evidence that the vax halts the spread or reduces the overall incidence is very weak.

The evidence that this particular vax causes damage in babies is strong.

The possibility that this particular vax adds to the danger of exposure is also strong. If vaxing increases misdiagnosis, then vaxing contributes to the spread of the disease.

Any further thoughts? Anyone want to argue the positive aspects of the pertussis vax?

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is offline  
#9 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 09:35 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Quote:
Any further thoughts? Anyone want to argue the positive aspects of the pertussis vax?
Well, if everyone stopped vaccinating their infants, we might see more infant deaths from pertussis. But without actual effectiveness studies on the first couple of doses, there's no way to know for sure.
Of course, on the flip side, babies probably die from the vaccine every once in a while, too.
So who's to say what's really better or worse there?

Also, in defense of the vaccine, kids coughing for 2 weeks as opposed to 4-6 is worth something, as well.
mamakay is offline  
#10 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 10:44 PM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
First, what do you think the objective of vaxing is?
the system will say that depends on the vax. tet vax only for personal 'protection'.

other vaccines, the objectives vary according to the year, or the propaganda. like chickenpox which i don't think is in the schedule here yet : but when it first came out it was more to do with me taking time off work, than my kiddos dying from it.

now this gardasil thing which is having lots of denied side effects here, well, that's supposedly to protect against a couple of types amongst lots, of cancer viruses 40 years down the line. providing your kiddos survive the lunatic drivers on the road in the meantime.

as to the pertussis vaccine. in australia its a laugh a minute. everyone i know with kids with whooping cough, they were vaccinated.

Quote:
Is there a clearly defined set of objectives or is this a subjective opinion based thing?
defined set of objectives for whom? people pushing drugs and vaccines, or people trying to live their lives?

my objectives sure aren't their objectives.
Quote:
Ok ladies, every time I post a thread the argument/discussion turns into 'vaxes work' vs. 'vaxes don't work'. So, here's the thread to get it out of your systems....You get the idea. Have at it ladies.
:

maybe the real issue isn't resolving the issue by having at it with each other. who has the issue? you or me? perhaps the real issue is the definition of the word "fanatic".

the medical profession considers anyone who doesn't vaccinate to be a fanatic or stupid.

Like this pubmed article here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/en...ubmed_RVDocSum

PMID: 14585678 in case it won't come up through the URL...

this article about how antivaxxers write in magazines which support UFO's and conspiracies and are really a bunch of total idiots ~ one of the best comments is this:

Quote:
...fanaticism is probably their own worst enemy, such arguments can attract media attention and health workers will often lament these effects... responding publicly might unwittingly lend credibility to such claims, with some preferring to leat fanaticism speak for itself. however ignoring such lobbyists poses its own risks. In the absence of expert voices refuting the theories advances some parents may uncritically accept the informtion...
really pretty simple to me.

i've never met more fanatical people than pro-vaccine medical drug pushers who say every child should have every vaccine available, and be damned to parents thoughts. then they say if parents disagree, they are the equivalent of child murderers. to repeat from memory from a famous ocker immunologist who said that some time back, and also dr woolridge, who said something similar the other day.

what sort of fanaticism talks like that?

in my opinion if people think vaccine work, then have them, and be done with having it out.

if people think vaccines don't work, or don't want them, leave them be.

but provaccine people who write articles like this in vaccne, should go look in the mirror.

their own fanaticism, and the way they go after mothers with a bull whip half the time, makes bulldogs look tame.
yabba kina is offline  
#11 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 10:52 PM
 
yabba kina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: australasia
Posts: 57
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
off topic

djt thanks for the link to the herbal site.

http://herbdatanz.com/Forum/index.ph...124.msg943#new

this was great. a pregnant mare has a bad cut I was scratching my head about and i'll try this out. her skin is taut like a barrel, so this sounds good to me
yabba kina is offline  
#12 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 11:08 PM
Spy
 
Spy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yabba kina View Post
chickenpox which i don't think is in the schedule here yet :
If 'here' is in Australia, then it is, funded under the NIP for children born after 1 May 2004, congratulations

Even rotavirus is in now, wow! :
Spy is offline  
#13 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 11:09 PM
djt
 
djt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 61
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The CREATOR certainly screwed up in the process of human design. Imagine, sending little ones into the world without syringes. What was SHE thinking?

Whatever one's religious persuasion or lack thereof, it's hard to deny that with our Judeo/Christian heritage, and the Koran, and other guidelines from antiquity that we were provided with some pretty good health instructions and very effective remedies provided by Mother Earth. None of them included exposing our bodies to any kind of infectious material, pus, or unclean products. In fact, all instructions that have come down to us from the ages have advised against this specifically. That includes the closed/protected vascular system and it's fragile blood. This is not a religious issue for me. In fact, I've never been exposed to a church which respected and taught the "health laws". I'm sure those bacon-eating, junkfood loving elders would have had FITS and fired the minister/pastor/priest/teachers who did so. But those laws have stood the test of time with untainted scientific validation in most respects.

Would you rub pus from a sick, infected horse or sheep into your toddler's cut foot? No? But you would allow it to be injected into into her unprotected bloodstream? Welcome to the world of the old tetanus vaccination. Of course it's different now. The vaccine virus is "attenuated" using pooled human blood products (from GOD only know where and from whom) now instead of animals. Same with Diphtheria and Hep B.

Why does cannibalism come to mind?
djt is offline  
#14 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 11:21 PM
 
lokidoki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: North Cackalacky
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post
Well, if everyone stopped vaccinating their infants, we might see more infant deaths from pertussis. But without actual effectiveness studies on the first couple of doses, there's no way to know for sure.
Of course, on the flip side, babies probably die from the vaccine every once in a while, too.
So who's to say what's really better or worse there?

Also, in defense of the vaccine, kids coughing for 2 weeks as opposed to 4-6 is worth something, as well.
It would be interesting to see if perhaps infant mortality would go down because some other things that are killing our infants (SIDS among other various infant mortality issues) might be (IN PART) being caused by the pertussis component of that vax.

Wife to DH (06/09/01), Mother to DS coolshine.gif (04/10/06) saynovax.gif and rescuer of dachshunds ~ and joy.gifthat our rainbow1284.gif arrived (06/10/11) safe and sound. Love cd.gif our little one ~ and lactivist.gif

lokidoki is offline  
#15 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 11:26 PM
 
Genesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 3,120
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

knit.gifMama to reading.gif  and  babygirl.gif
Genesis is offline  
#16 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 11:32 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 18,361
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3199 Post(s)
Whoopee! That was totally clear so let's move on to another popular vax: diphtheria.

I'm no expert on this one, but I do know that the vax doesn't prevent transmission of the disease.

Also, folks with the disease wandered into Europe from Russia, while the epidemics were raging a few years ago, and in spite of the fact that millions of adults in various European countries were not up to date on this vax, there wasn't an epidemic. The epidemic was confined to the areas where there was malnutrition and overcrowding and sanitation problems So was the vax a decisive factor in controlling the epidemic?

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is offline  
#17 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 11:42 PM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Quote:
So was the vax a decisive factor in controlling the epidemic?
My vote is "probably not".
We still have lots of diphtheria circulating in the US subclinically, according to the CDC. And we have enough people not up to date on the vax (with no detectable antibodies) to where I think there has to be other factors at play with diphtheria.
mamakay is offline  
#18 of 52 Old 09-10-2007, 11:59 PM
Spy
 
Spy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
Also, folks with the disease wandered into Europe from Russia, while the epidemics were raging a few years ago...
Just to put some things into perspective . At the very peak of this raging epidemic the incidence never exceeded 27 per 100,000 which is just under the incidence of gonorrhea in the US among the white population in 2005, according to the CDC (28.4 per 100,000). Would you say the americans had a raging epidemic of gonorrhea in 2005, considering that the rate for white population was the lowest, compared to 464 for black and 57.5 for hispanic? :


Oh, but of course there is no vaccine for gonorrhea in the schedule, how can we even think about it ...
Spy is offline  
#19 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:13 AM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Quote:
Would you rub pus from a sick, infected horse or sheep into your toddler's cut foot? No? But you would allow it to be injected into into her unprotected bloodstream? Welcome to the world of the old tetanus vaccination. Of course it's different now. The vaccine virus is "attenuated" using pooled human blood products (from GOD only know where and from whom) now instead of animals. Same with Diphtheria and Hep B.
1) tetanus is a bacteria, not a virus
2) the toxoid is not grown in human blood. The bacteria is grown in a bovine muscle tissue culture
3) the Hepatitis B antigen is grown in genetically modified yeast
4) diphtheria (another bacteria who's toxin is the only part of the vaccine) is grown in bovine material, as well.
mamakay is offline  
#20 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:14 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 18,361
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3199 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spy View Post
Just to put some things into perspective . At the very peak of this raging epidemic the incidence never exceeded 27 per 100,000 which is just under the incidence of gonorrhea in the US among the white population in 2005, according to the CDC (28.4 per 100,000). Would you say the americans had a raging epidemic of gonorrhea in 2005, considering that the rate for white population was the lowest, compared to 464 for black and 57.5 for hispanic? :


Oh, but of course there is no vaccine for gonorrhea in the schedule, how can we even think about it ...
Oh, that is interesting! The way it was reported one got the impression that people were dropping like flies. And further, that it was only through the determination of the public health folks, who went out and vaxed like mad, that the epidemic was "controlled."

Gosh, are you implying that there was some inflating of the facts? I'm shocked!:

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is offline  
#21 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:20 AM
 
mamakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: in la la land, or so they say...
Posts: 8,343
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Didn't they count asymptomatic carriers as "cases", too?
mamakay is offline  
#22 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:30 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 18,361
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3199 Post(s)
And then all they need to do is stop counting the carriers as cases after the vaxing has been done, and whoopee! the epidemic goes way down. Or something like that. Is cynicism communicable?

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is offline  
#23 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:30 AM
Spy
 
Spy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
Oh, that is interesting! The way it was reported one got the impression that people were dropping like flies. And further, that it was only through the determination of the public health folks, who went out and vaxed like mad, that the epidemic was "controlled."

Gosh, are you implying that there was some inflating of the facts? I'm shocked!:
:

Next lovely piece of info: the current (off raging epidemic) incidence of diphtheria in Russia is 0.3-0.5 per 100 thousand, which is about 500-600 odd cases each year (20-30% of this are kids under 14). Compared to a flat zero (or thereabouts) of the US, why don't we call this a raging epidemic and why do we ever stop worrying about tourists from eastern Europe?
Spy is offline  
#24 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:33 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 18,361
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3199 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spy View Post
:

Next lovely piece of info: the current (off raging epidemic) incidence of diphtheria in Russia is 0.3-0.5 per 100 thousand, which is about 500-600 odd cases each year (20-30% of this are kids under 14). Compared to a flat zero (or thereabouts) of the US, why don't we call this a raging epidemic and why do we ever stop worrying about tourists from eastern Europe?
I'm getting the impression that you don't think this particular vax is worth the paper it is printed on (or the equivalent). Is this correct?:

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is offline  
#25 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:33 AM
Spy
 
Spy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post
Didn't they count asymptomatic carriers as "cases", too?
Yes, but only the contacts of clinical cases, which they still do.
Spy is offline  
#26 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:34 AM
Spy
 
Spy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
I'm getting the impression that you don't think this particular vax is worth the paper it is printed on (or the equivalent). Is this correct?:
Not just this particular one. : I wish they were printed on paper though rather then shot into live people
Spy is offline  
#27 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:45 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 18,361
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3199 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spy View Post
Not just this particular one. : I wish they were printed on paper though rather then shot into live people

Me too, actually. I hate to read all the stories about vax damaged kids. There are way too many of them.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is offline  
#28 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:46 AM
 
lokidoki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: North Cackalacky
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The example of diptheria #s is a good example of how I feel there is no way I can really say for sure that vaxes work. The numbers seem so skewed immediately when a vax comes on the market. Prior to a vax being present the numbers are no biggie ~ and no one makes a big fuss about them and uses big terms like 'epidemic' or such...they just go on about their lives trying to stay healthy...but then a big, bad vax comes on the market and suddenly the disease is an absolute hazard and everyone must run and get shot full of vaxes for fear (gasp).

How can an argument be made that vaxes have made a difference in a lot of these cases when the numbers are intrinsically flawed...how do you make a rational judgment call when the numbers are so skewed? I have a hard time thinking that something like the pertussis vax works when it seems so many cases go unreported.

Wife to DH (06/09/01), Mother to DS coolshine.gif (04/10/06) saynovax.gif and rescuer of dachshunds ~ and joy.gifthat our rainbow1284.gif arrived (06/10/11) safe and sound. Love cd.gif our little one ~ and lactivist.gif

lokidoki is offline  
#29 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:48 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 18,361
Mentioned: 373 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3199 Post(s)
This is why I think it really is a good idea to go one vax at a time. What applies to diphtheria doesn't really fit when we go to talk about measles.

Perhaps we should do measles next. That being a vax that does perhaps really work, but which also has some big questions about safety and other stuff.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is offline  
#30 of 52 Old 09-11-2007, 12:55 AM
 
lokidoki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: North Cackalacky
Posts: 1,143
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
This is why I think it really is a good idea to go one vax at a time. What applies to diphtheria doesn't really fit when we go to talk about measles.

Perhaps we should do measles next. That being a vax that does perhaps really work, but which also has some big questions about safety and other stuff.
Add to that some interesting studies (albeit some small studies) that seem to show that perhaps having the immune system battle measles is healthful and can be beneficial to one's health later in life?

Measles vax is a tough one for me. I often waffle on whether or not I feel it really, truly has worked as well as it is proclaimed to have done so. Sometimes I feel it worked...sometimes I feel it didn't...sometimes I am in the middle and feel it worked somewhat but has lots of negative effects.

Wife to DH (06/09/01), Mother to DS coolshine.gif (04/10/06) saynovax.gif and rescuer of dachshunds ~ and joy.gifthat our rainbow1284.gif arrived (06/10/11) safe and sound. Love cd.gif our little one ~ and lactivist.gif

lokidoki is offline  
Reply


User Tag List

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



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

Online Users: 1,832

11 members and 1,821 guests
91mj , Beccamom32 , Hyacinthe , idler , KerriB , manyhatsmom , OliviaBenjamin , Realdeal , sarrahlnorris , skyrocket , xsukix
Most users ever online was 21,860, 06-22-2018 at 08:45 PM.