Mothering Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,729 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
See how they spin it to their favor EVERY time, no matter what the circumstance? It really gets old. The timing of this "study" is impeccable, as always, which makes it even more suspicious, as always. I could barely read this article because I know where it's coming from and the reasoning behind it. They are really trying their darndest to market that vaccine to make it more appealing to those who don't want it, aren't they?

The study comes amid rising concern among public health leaders about parents who refuse to get their children vaccinated for measles, based on discredited claims about the vaccine’s safety or for religious and other reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,867 Posts
Religion is good until it gets in the way of conventional medicine.As Mr.Offit would say,"What would Jesus do?"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,729 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Religion is good until it gets in the way of conventional medicine.As Mr.Offit would say,"What would Jesus do?"
Why would I worry what a secular Jew has to say about what Jesus would do?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,233 Posts
Religion is good until it gets in the way of conventional medicine.As Mr.Offit would say,"What would Jesus do?"
Yes, and the hypocritical liar, Offit, is a self-prolaimed Atheist with some Jewish heritage.

Jesus, Mr Offit, would not call children a blessing, and then harm them, and suffer all the little children to come to Him, while advocating that we inject children with parts of other children that were murdered before their birth.

I don't expect everyone to follow my Jesus, but if you don't, (Offit) then shut the hell up about His nature, as you know nothing of His character and "what He would do".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,729 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Yes, and the hypocritical liar, Offit, is a self-prolaimed Atheist with some Jewish heritage.

Jesus, Mr Offit, would not call children a blessing, and then harm them, and suffer all the little children to come to Him, while advocating that we inject children with parts of other children that were murdered before their birth.

I don't expect everyone to follow my Jesus, but if you don't, (Offit) then shut the hell up about His nature, as you know nothing of His character and "what He would do".
As a religious Jew by choice, let me add, AMEN! אמנ
 
  • Like
Reactions: samaxtics

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,233 Posts
I hadn't seen your post above mine @applejuice! :love
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
Before the measles vaccine, it was well known that measles helped prevent other diseases - cancer was one. Now the vaccine gets the credit.

https://www.yahoo.com/health/measles-vaccine-thwarts-other-diseases-too-118378301333.html
What are your thoughts about this;

Do people who received measles vaccine in the 1960s need to have their dose repeated?

Not necessarily. People who have documentation of receiving LIVE measles vaccine in the 1960s do not need to be revaccinated. People who were vaccinated prior to 1968 with either inactivated (killed) measles vaccine or measles vaccine of unknown type should be revaccinated with at least one dose of live attenuated measles vaccine. This recommendation is intended to protect those who may have received killed measles vaccine, which was available in 1963-1967 and was not effective.
Why are people born before 1957 exempt from receiving MMR vaccine?

People born before 1957 lived through several years of epidemic measles before the first measles vaccine was licensed. As a result, these people are very likely to have had the measles disease. Surveys suggest that 95% to 98% of those born before 1957 are immune to measles. Note: The "1957 rule" does not apply to women of childbearing age who could become pregnant. (Because rubella can occur in some people born before 1957 and because congenital rubella and congenital rubella syndrome can occur in the offspring of women infected with rubella virus during pregnancy, birth before 1957 is not acceptable evidence of rubella immunity for women who could become pregnant.)


http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/measles/faqs-dis-vac-risks.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,729 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Do people who received measles vaccine in the 1960s need to have their dose repeated?
Simple. You all ready know the answer to this. Not every single person achieved lifelong protection against measles from the vaccine; we all ready know the vaccine wears off after 5-10 years and only one shot gives 95% of those who receive it any protection at all.

Why are people born before 1957 exempt from receiving MMR vaccine?
Not every single person got the measles and developed lifelong immunity. I did. But that does not mean every single person did.

"Surveys suggest that 95% to 98% of those born before 1957 are immune to measles." A woman born in 1957 is now 57-58 years old and will probably not be having children any time soon.

I do recall when I was married civilly in the mid 1970s, I got blood tests for my marriage certificate; a Wasserman to prove I did not have syphllis and a titre count to show that I had immunity to rubella. I do not know if these tests are required any longer since the requirements have changed over time, but I do know there are a whole generation of women having children now who have no immunity to rubella or any other childhood disease because their vaccinations have waned and are now failing them.

What are your thoughts, bannerd?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
Simple. You all ready know the answer to this. Not every single person achieved lifelong protection against measles from the vaccine; we all ready know the vaccine wears off after 5-10 years and only one shot gives 95% of those who receive it any protection at all.



Not every single person got the measles and developed lifelong immunity. I did. But that does not mean every single person did.

"Surveys suggest that 95% to 98% of those born before 1957 are immune to measles." A woman born in 1957 is now 57-58 years old and will probably not be having children any time soon.

I do recall when I was married civilly in the mid 1970s, I got blood tests for my marriage certificate; a Wasserman to prove I did not have syphllis and a titre count to show that I had immunity to rubella. I do not know if these tests are required any longer since the requirements have changed over time, but I do know there are a whole generation of women having children now who have no immunity to rubella or any other childhood disease because their vaccinations have waned and are now failing them.

What are your thoughts, bannerd?
The logic doesn't make too much sense. 1900's population was lower, 1957 population was around 170 million. Measles was 98% gone due to natural immunity. Parents bringing their kids over to other kids that had measles and spreading it around. Today it's trending backwards, 90% and declining.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,729 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Why is "it" declining?
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top