Mothering Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,825 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'd like to indulge in an imagination exercise.

Let us imagine a world in which giving vaccines to babies is considered risky and controversial.

Any doctor who gives vaccines is subject to strict scrutiny. Any lapse in record-keeping, failure to report even the mildest reaction can get a doctor into trouble.

There is a big crowd of anti-vaccine bloggers who dominate the media and who rejoice whenever a vaccine giving doctor gets into trouble, proclaiming:

"We don't want any doctors around who carelessly or lightly give out vaccines without thorough scrutiny of the medical history of the baby involved, including the last 3 generations of the family. Vaccine injury is very costly and we have to bring it to a halt, now."

Use wording examples from the attack on Dr. Sears as inspiration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
852 Posts
I'd like to indulge in an imagination exercise.

Let us imagine a world in which giving vaccines to babies is considered risky and controversial.

Any doctor who gives vaccines is subject to strict scrutiny. Any lapse in record-keeping, failure to report even the mildest reaction can get a doctor into trouble.

There is a big crowd of anti-vaccine bloggers who dominate the media and who rejoice whenever a vaccine giving doctor gets into trouble, proclaiming:

"We don't want any doctors around who carelessly or lightly give out vaccines without thorough scrutiny of the medical history of the baby involved, including the last 3 generations of the family. Vaccine injury is very costly and we have to bring it to a halt, now."

Use wording examples from the attack on Dr. Sears as inspiration.
I don't get it. If vaccines were risky and controversial, then yes I would expect that? Is that what you're asking?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,825 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I don't get it. If vaccines were risky and controversial, then yes I would expect that? Is that what you're asking?
I'm playing an imagination game, just as I said.

Over the last 20 or 30 years vaccines have gone from taken for granted to frantically pushed to the point where parents who refuse vaccinations are being threatened with loss of custody and jail.

I just wanted to imagine the world turned upside down. Where doctors were required to be really careful and conscientious around vaccines, instead of blithely pushing them into every body that is still breathing with no fear of any consequences for the doctor.

Even the simple change of requiring doctors to report all vaccine reactions, even mild ones, would provide a lot of useful information. Information which might support mass vaccination. But required reporting is not wanted for some reason.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,825 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I think doctors should take as much care as is warranted.
So do I. I'm just concerned by the number of people I run into who describe vaccine reactions being blown off by doctors. Not years later. Within hours or at most a few days.

But that is okay in our current model of "medical care."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,567 Posts
Especially as vaccines are tested on healthy individuals, those with health problems are excluded from vaccine trials.
Also the so-called placebo is often another vaccine, so typically the trial only shows that the new vaccine is not significantly more dangerous than an existing vaccine.

However, once approved the vaccine is given to all: pre-term babies, frail elderly, diabetics etc. Even those that supposedly have only a 'mild' illness at the time. Even though we have seen/heard of several instances of a child that seems to be OK during an illness then suddenly takes a turn for the worse, perhaps even dies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
In the situation you describe, if a doctor in fact gave vaccines, and then made up a diagnosis for why he did so without actually seeing the child and having a medically documented reason for doing so, and also did not document his files and ALSO didn't conduct a neurological exam following head trauma, then yes, I would support that doctor being sanctioned, because that doctor would have failed to meet the set standard of care.

I have a related hypothetical question:

Is there anything a vaccine critical doctor such as Dr. Sears could do that those here supporting Dr. Sears would not condone? I keep hearing about "unwavering" support of Dr. Sears, his Facebook page is full of it actually. The term "unwavering" is a bit scary to me. As a pro-vaccine parent, are always told they are "sheeple" by vaccine critical, the idea that we just do whatever the Dr. Says, it seems to work both ways. It doesn't seem to matter what popular names of the vaccine critical does, as long as they remain vaccine critical it is okay.

Don't document your files, no problem as long as you are not trying to promote vaccines. Diagnosis a child with serious medical ailments without seeing it or seeking medical documentation? No problem as long as you are not trying to promote vaccines. Didn't conduct a neurological exam of a child hit in the head with a hammer now complaining of 2 weeks of headaches? No problem as long as you are not trying to promote vaccines. Failed to get a university human subject review board approval for your research? no problem as long as you are vaccine critical. took blood samples at a birthday party? no problem as long as you are vaccine critical.

What is the standard of care you wouldn't accept in a vaccine critical physician?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
852 Posts
So do I. I'm just concerned by the number of people I run into who describe vaccine reactions being blown off by doctors. Not years later. Within hours or at most a few days.

But that is okay in our current model of "medical care."
What do you mean by "blown off?" If I have a mild reaction to something, it's not necessarily contra-indicated in the future, it's situation-dependent. For instance, if I have a mild reaction to an antibiotic, but there is another one that can be used to the same purpose then I would say ok let's not use the one I had the reaction to. On the other hand, if there isn't a good substitute, then I might say that mild reaction is worth risking, for the benefit I get from the medication. And if "blown off" means that the doctor seems unconcerned, maybe it's because the reaction is unconcerning. I mean, if I call the doctor after a vaccine to report that my kid had a slight fever, I wouldn't expect anything different from the doctor than if I told them the same at any other time. And I wouldn't expect the doctor to tell me to run the kid to urgent care that minute.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,851 Posts
What do you mean by "blown off?" If I have a mild reaction to something, it's not necessarily contra-indicated in the future, it's situation-dependent. For instance, if I have a mild reaction to an antibiotic, but there is another one that can be used to the same purpose then I would say ok let's not use the one I had the reaction to. On the other hand, if there isn't a good substitute, then I might say that mild reaction is worth risking, for the benefit I get from the medication. And if "blown off" means that the doctor seems unconcerned, maybe it's because the reaction is unconcerning. I mean, if I call the doctor after a vaccine to report that my kid had a slight fever, I wouldn't expect anything different from the doctor than if I told them the same at any other time. And I wouldn't expect the doctor to tell me to run the kid to urgent care that minute.

I can't speak for Deborah, but I doubt she was talking about mild reactions when she mentioned being "blown-off" The stories we have read here and elsewhere over the years have involved doctors turning a blind eye to much more serious issue than fussiness or mild fever.

This comes off a bit as mommy blaming - there, there, dear, it is all fine......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,851 Posts
What is the standard of care you wouldn't accept in a vaccine critical physician?
I expect the same standard of care from a vaccine critical doctor as I do from a pro-vax doctor. There are lots of things I expect from a hcp, but respect is at the top of the list.

I do not for one second trust any complaints by zealous pro-vax forces, including the government of California. As stated on the other thread, and by skeptics no less, they are likely trying to make an example of him. I smell a witch hunt. I don't think peoples unwavering support means they think Dr. Sears should be able to do anything, it means they don't trust the source of the complaint in the first place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,825 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
I can't speak for Deborah, but I doubt she was talking about mild reactions when she mentioned being "blown-off" The stories we have read here and elsewhere over the years have involved doctors turning a blind eye to much more serious issue than fussiness or mild fever.

This comes off a bit as mommy blaming - there, there, dear, it is all fine......
Exactly.

I could line up a bunch of vaccine injury stories, complete with doctors denying that anything is wrong or that if something is actually wrong it is connected to vaccines...but why bother. Thousands of such stories have been posted here over the years and the vaccine faithful just aren't interested. They are all anecdotes. Parents should trust doctors even when the doctor is totally uninterested in the fact that their baby has been screaming for hours, suddenly developed severe diarrhea, won't nurse, has a major swollen area around where the vaccine was given, and so on.

If a doctor does pay a little bit of attention, the chances are that when the next round of vaccines is due, the doctor will insist that the baby stay on "schedule" regardless of what might have occurred the last time around.

Add to that sort of medical practitioner behavior the disappearance of actual medical records documenting illness following vaccines and you've got a sort of baby sacrifice to the vaccine program being carried out by the very people who claim to be protecting the health of your infant.

There are a lot of reasons people don't trust vaccine pushing doctors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,825 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
My point, which I think is being missed by the vaccine defenders, is that a group that is dominant can twist politics and law to get the outcome they desire.

It is perfectly easy for me to imagine a world in which giving vaccines is controversial and which is dominated by people who distrust vaccines. In which case a doctor who tried to give vaccines would be subject to the same sort of harassment being meted out nowadays to doctors who question vaccines.

In both cases there would be a failure of objective analysis and balance.

We don't know that Dr. Sears actually behaved in the way that is being claimed.

We do know that most of the attacks on Dr. Wakefield turned out to be BS and distortions. Given the track record of the vaccine supporters...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,825 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
There are a lot of reasons people don't trust vaccine pushing doctors.
OKAY, I get this. But is it really better to put blind unwavering support to vaccine hesitant doctors? This is the part I don't understand. This isn't about not trusting doctors who promote vaccines to me. I keep reading about people saying they have "unwavering support". That is dangerous. What if these allegations are true? he will still be supported because he is critical of vaccines? That is odd to me, considering the Sheeple comments I receive from vaccine critical individuals that I am just "following the orders of doctors" yet it appears that that is what is going on here. Unwavering support and not even caring if these allegations are true or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
This is not about the individual child's right to a medical exemption, this, this is about medical exemptions in general, who's science will prevail?

GO SEARS!!! YOU ARE RIGHT!!! DON"T LET THE NAZIS PREVAIL!! AND THANk YOU FOR ALL YOU DO!!!!!
No this about whether or not Sears deviated from the standard of care of the Medical Board of the State of California. This isn't about whose science will prevail. This is about the individual actions of Dr. Sears. If he had said "given the mothers statements of the childs vaccines reactions in the past, it is my medical opinion this child should not have further vaccines" we wouldn't be having this conversation. he diagnosed encephalitis, renal failure and intestine shutdown, and did not document the file. he had a child in his office who allegedly was hit in the head with a hammer two weeks previously and had been having repeated headaches since, and he didn't conduct a neurological exam. He prescribed Tamiflu (which has a potential side effect of encephalitis) to a child to be taken at home, whom he had less than a year ago diagnosed with pharmaceutically endured encephalitis. These are what is in question. What exactly is he right about in these instances? How is calling these medical practice violations into question letting the Nazis prevail?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,825 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Curiously, I've heard over the years from hundreds of parents who trusted their mainstream pediatricians and ended up with chronically ill children. This path to disaster always seems okay to vaccine supporters. I've never seen even one who says: The AAP acceptance of money from pharma, formula companies and junk food purveyors undermines trust.

On the other hand, except for this one situation, which seems to involve a marital dispute, the patients of Dr. Sears seem to be very happy. Are there hundreds or even tens of reports from unhappy parents talking about the terrible care he gave their kids? I don't think so.

The focus on the accusations is the frame in which the provaccine are trying to confine the discussion.

Obviously, if it was just a careless doctor providing bad care, the criticisms would be entirely correct. But that isn't the story that the provaccine folks are spreading. Both Orac and Dorit have clearly stated that the purpose is to stop doctors from giving medical exemptions. They may add modifiers...but that is really what they are after.

Parents with safety concerns about vaccines want exemptions. This is why they are offering unwavering support to Dr. Sears.

Seems pretty straightforward to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,825 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
And to go back to my imaginative exercise in the OP, if parents who wanted vaccines saw one of the few remaining doctors who dared to give vaccines being harassed as Dr. Sears is being harassed, they would also offer unwavering support.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,389 Posts
No this about whether or not Sears deviated from the standard of care of the Medical Board of the State of California. This isn't about whose science will prevail. This is about the individual actions of Dr. Sears. If he had said "given the mothers statements of the childs vaccines reactions in the past, it is my medical opinion this child should not have further vaccines" we wouldn't be having this conversation. he diagnosed encephalitis, renal failure and intestine shutdown, and did not document the file. he had a child in his office who allegedly was hit in the head with a hammer two weeks previously and had been having repeated headaches since, and he didn't conduct a neurological exam. He prescribed Tamiflu (which has a potential side effect of encephalitis) to a child to be taken at home, whom he had less than a year ago diagnosed with pharmaceutically endured encephalitis. These are what is in question. What exactly is he right about in these instances? How is calling these medical practice violations into question letting the Nazis prevail?
And the only thing he is being reported for is his medical exemption. And sorry, should not have said the "nazis prevail" thing. Way too salacious, my bad! Again sorry!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,389 Posts
And to go back to my imaginative exercise in the OP, if parents who wanted vaccines saw one of the few remaining doctors who dared to give vaccines being harassed as Dr. Sears is being harassed, they would also offer unwavering support.
No, i don't think they would, too scary, but that 's just me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,825 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
No, i don't think they would, too scary, but that 's just me.
Well, we actually do see parents offering unwavering support to vaccine pushing doctors. How many of you have friends who vaccinate? How often do these friends report unpleasant or scary reactions and then insist that they will stick with vaccinating?

Or the many people who spread the story about the 50% drop in the cervical cancer rate without looking to see if the official statistics actually show the drop? That also qualifies, in my mind, as unwavering support for the vaccine narrative, to the point where an absolutely absurd statistic, with no supporting evidence, is held up as fact.

It happens. All the time. Here is an example of a parent with a very sick baby. They will probably just keep right on with the schedule. https://www.facebook.com/1020722891...722891331216/1193128884090615/?type=3&theater
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top