Vaccines

Hobbitfeet

cbyrd wrote: »

I'm not sure about my parents having had m/m/r .. but i was breast fed for over a year.. i have 6 brothers we were all breastfed i was the only one who got measles mump or rubella.. i'm also the only girl :rolleyes: i'm also the only one who has allergy issues (not related) and auto-immune problems..

Thank you for being so open I think this will be one of the hardest decisions in my life and I just want to get as much information and knowledge as I can. I want to be able to make an informed decision.

ImRighturWrong

this lady knows what she's talking about... http://tenpennyimc.com/vaccines-and-vaccine-consultations/

also, from an insider of the pharmaceutical idustry....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6NNSafjAy4

also, a long but very informative documentary....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liKsuQhC9Cs

It's not what they tell you (CDC links lol) it's what they don't tell you

DON'T VACCINATE....don't fall into the trap.

quozl

ImRighturWrong wrote: »

this lady knows what she's talking about... http://tenpennyimc.com/vaccines-and-vaccine-consultations/

Have you anything to back your claim that she knows what she's talking about? Apart from the fact that she says she's spent 7000 hours reading about vaccines. You think the CDC don't have 7000 hours of research behind them?

And statements like this (by her)

Vaccines are not “relatively harmless”…as thousands have been injured and have died, as a result of vaccination.

are her showing herself, by her own words, to be unreliable.

If hundreds of millions of people are vaccinated, and by her own claim, thousands have been injured or died, then how is that not "relatively harmless"? Bee stings probably have a higher harm ratio, and without the major benefits that vaccines claim. You don't even need to know anything about either side of the argument to see that this doesn't make sense.

As for

There are no true double-blind, placebo-controlled studies used in vaccine research. The new, investigational vaccine is compared against a vaccine with a “known side effect profile.” Therefore, “control group” is given a “placebo” that is another vaccine, not saline, sterile water, or no vaccine at all.

This is normal practice in medical trials where there is a current best practice treatment. For example in radiotherapy trials you don't have a control group where you give them nothing (and therefore watch them die!) - You give the control group the current best practice and you then compare the trial group to this to see if it's better or worse.

This complaint of hers sounds reasonable at first glance but is absolute nonsense if you think about it.

I would be very interested as to what she thinks wiped out smallpox if it wasn't vaccination. You should note that should doesn't even bother to back up any of her claims, or even say what her claims really are! She just says that vaccines didn't erradicate smallpox. So then, what did? Moon fairies?

Hobbitfeet

So I have been reading Dr Sears The Vaccine Book and find it the most unbiased informative piece of information on vaccines I have found. Although figures are based on America I have been researching figures of disease for Europe which makes it more relevant.
I am still undecided on which vaccine to give and when to give them but this book is making the decision easier and clearer for me.
I just wanted to update in case any other parents or parents to be are in the same situation and looking for clear unbiased advice and research.

Gurgle

-edit- removed post.
Uncivilized.

Hobbitfeet

Gurgle wrote: »

I calls bùll****.

You made the decision first and then went looking for 'research' to support your decision. If you had genuinely researched the subject with an open mind there is no way you would risk the lives of your children based on the mutterings of a few internet nut-jobs who may or may not have any meaningful qualifications.


.

I find your comment extremely rude and inappropriate especially the last paragraph. I have not made any decision yet I am still pregnant and all I am trying to do is make myself as informed as possible before my child gets here.

Moonbeam

Gurgle wrote: »

I calls bùll****.

You made the decision first and then went looking for 'research' to support your decision. If you had genuinely researched the subject with an open mind there is no way you would risk the lives of your children based on the mutterings of a few internet nut-jobs who may or may not have any meaningful qualifications.


.

Mod Warning -
Please keep the thread on topic and do not insult other posters. Some of your post is offensive,off topic and uncalled for. If you continue posting in this manner it will warrant an infraction and possible holiday from this board.

Gurgle

Moonbeam wrote: »

Mod Warning -
Please keep the thread on topic and do not insult other posters.

Sorry. Short fuse on certain topics.

mr.mickels

Hobbitfeet wrote: »

So I have been reading Dr Sears The Vaccine Book and find it the most unbiased informative piece of information on vaccines I have found. Although figures are based on America I have been researching figures of disease for Europe which makes it more relevant.
I am still undecided on which vaccine to give and when to give them but this book is making the decision easier and clearer for me.
I just wanted to update in case any other parents or parents to be are in the same situation and looking for clear unbiased advice and research.

Dr Sears??? Unbiased????? And from whom did Dr Sears receive his entire education on vaccines, who funds all research on vaccines.......hmmmm, I wonder, would it by chance be from the industry that profits from selling vaccines. Yes is the answer to that.

OldNotWIse

cbyrd wrote: »

As a child i had measles mumps and rubella.. it has left me with hearing impairment from 7 years of chronic earaches headaches and throat infections.. a generally impaired immune system that means as i get older i will pick up more allergies to add to the 4 known ones that i have (one that causes annaphylaxis) i was lucky though.. the measles didn't leave me brain damaged or dead...

The thing about vaccines is they're a victim of their own success.. when you don't see the damage the disease can do you don't realise how important it became to eradicate the disease in the first place...

Do you put a seatbelt on your child?? or use an appropriate car seat?? why not protect them against disease that can seriously affect them or even kill..just my humble opinion...;)

But what if they are allergic to the seatbelt material?

liliq

mr.mickels wrote: »

Dr Sears??? Unbiased????? And from whom did Dr Sears receive his entire education on vaccines, who funds all research on vaccines.......hmmmm, I wonder, would it by chance be from the industry that profits from selling vaccines. Yes is the answer to that.

Just to clarify- No is the answer to that.
It's not always pharmaceutical industry that fund research on vaccines, there are a huge number of charities and government organisations (who are not all, believe it or not, in the pockets of the pharma industry) who fund research on vaccines and their development.
I'm not sure whether there is any non industry funded reasearch on vaccines already on the market, but pharma companies are legally obliged to do follow up on all their products, and this is audited thoroughly on a regular basis.
For research on vaccines such as the HPV vaccine against cervical cancer, much of the research was funded by charities similar to the Irish Cancer Society internationally.

Also, there are muliple "Dr. Sears", all qualified nurses and physicians, with many years relelvant clinical experience in pediatrics.

Back to the OP- My child will get all of the well established vaccines, in the time frame they are currently recommended. To be honest, I'd rather leave them slightly later, ie. start the vaccination programme at 6 months, but I obviously don't feel that strongly about it as he's recieved them all on time so far.
When the time comes for the newer vaccines, I might have to rethink it, and wait a few years to see if there have been any adverse effects.

Hobbitfeet

mr.mickels wrote: »

Dr Sears??? Unbiased????? And from whom did Dr Sears receive his entire education on vaccines, who funds all research on vaccines.......hmmmm, I wonder, would it by chance be from the industry that profits from selling vaccines. Yes is the answer to that.

Have you read the Dr Sears book? I find it so far to be very unbiased. It is clearly telling me what ingredients are in the vaccines, how rare or common the diseases are and their seriousness. He also takes into account whether the child will be breastfed and attend childcare early on and many other factors that will naturally protect your child form the possibility of contracting some diseases.

I don't want to rush into vaccinating my child when he or she arrives I want to know I have made the most informed choice possible. I have been researching the pros and cons of vaccinating for the last 5 months and in my opinion Dr Sears The Vaccine Book has been the clearest and most unbiased piece of info I can find on the topic.

Most anti vaccine websites I have found have been negative and misleading in the way they put forward their information and I find the same thing from pro vaccine websites.

There is no doubt that vaccination has done a lot of good and saved a lot of people but there is also no doubt in my mind that there is some serious side effects to some vaccines and a lot of missing research to possible complications arising from vaccinations. This is why I am doing so much research before I decide whether or not to have all or some of the vaccinations, which I think every parent should do.
Can I ask you what information you got and from where, that helped you decide not to vaccinate your child?

Hobbitfeet

[QUOTE=liliq;75858219
Also, there are muliple "Dr. Sears", all qualified nurses and physicians, with many years relelvant clinical experience in pediatrics. .[/QUOTE]

This is not entirely true which I have found out by talking to my GP, midwives and Doctor during my pregnancy. I have asked all of the above people about research on vaccines and none have been able to give me any clear details of recent research or results on vaccines. I found that some actually knew less than I know about vaccines. My GP could not even tell me the ingredients of the vaccines.

Dr Sears took it upon himself to research vaccines in-depth. Most GPs and Physicians don't actually study these details in-depth they just trust that the relevant research has been done by FDA and such.

Ayla

Personally, it took me about half a second to decide categorically to immunise both of my children with all the childhood vaccines within the recommended timeframe. I did not have the Flu or Swine Flu jabs, and the jury's still out on the Cervical Cancer vaccine (although I know which way I'm leaning).

Yes, as with anything, there will be a small percentage of people who have adverse reactions to the chemicals in the drugs, and a small percentage of these people will have severe reactions. That is an unfortunate reality of medicine in general. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.

But as others have said, and I firmly believe, if it is in my power to prevent my child from contracting a potentially debilitating disease then I think it unfair (bordering on neglectful) to refuse this opportunity. How would I ever feel if I chose to not immunise and then my own child contracted something serious that I could have prevented? At least if I immunise them and they beat the odds and still contract the disease I know that I did the best I could for them. I think the seat belt analogy is a fair one.

Another way of thinking of this is this: if (god forbid) you are diagnosed with cancer, would you do anything & everything to overcome it and survive? Or would you be so skeptical of what *might* happen by taking the chemo drugs that you would refuse them and potentially kill yourself in the process?

Statistically speaking, the overwhelming majority of children in this country receive the vaccines, and how many do you know who have had horrible experiences with them? I do not personally know any, either here or in the States where I grew up.

In a pure mathematical cost/benefit analysis, I think giving your child a vaccine (which has a very small chance of causing a side effect) against a dreadful disease (which has a great chance of causing lifelong issues) is a fair risk to take.

liliq

Hobbitfeet wrote: »

This is not entirely true which I have found out by talking to my GP, midwives and Doctor during my pregnancy. I have asked all of the above people about research on vaccines and none have been able to give me any clear details of recent research or results on vaccines. I found that some actually knew less than I know about vaccines. My GP could not even tell me the ingredients of the vaccines.

Dr Sears took it upon himself to research vaccines in-depth. Most GPs and Physicians don't actually study these details in-depth they just trust that the relevant research has been done by FDA and such.

What I meant is that the Dr. Sears website, books, information leaflets etc are written by a collective, and that the collective were not funded by the pharmaceutical industry to study anything about vaccines. Rather they chose certain aspects of pediatric medicine, which they are both qualified and experienced in, such as childhood vaccines to specialise in.

Ayla

I will say one last thing and then I've said all I have to say:

When our eldest daughter was 15 weeks old she suddenly wouldn't stop crying one morning. She had become incrimentally irritable over the last couple of weeks, but we put it down to any number of other normal newborn problems. But then, one morning, she just wouldn't stop her screaming.

We took her to the GP, who decided to send her to the hosp, and we spent the next 5 days undergoing tests and consultations to try to determine what was wrong. The whole time we were a complete wreck - our newborn, lovely, daughter was hooked up to IVs, poked with a lumbar puncture, and in overall horrible pain and no one could tell us why. When we should have been home enjoying our moments together, we were instead pacing the halls & taking turns attempting to ease the suffering of our little girl. The helplessness that we felt was suffocating.

Turns out she had a rather severe grade of a kidney reflux, so all of that suffering was due to a kidney infection. Nothing serious, nothing life threatening, nothing that couldn't be treated in time. But it left its emotional scars all the same.

Now imagine that - multiplied by a thousand, and you'll imagine what it might be like if your child contracts something really serious like menengitis, or rubella, or measles, or....

Now imagine that - multiplied by another thousand, and maybe you can imagine what it would be like to be in that situation but know that you could have prevented it.

As the parent you have the opportunity to avoid that suffering. Why in god's name would you not do it? Because of a concern over an ingredient list??? Because you are suspicious of the pharma companies and their profits? I can tell you 100000% that if someone had offered me a pretty good odd that we could give our daughter a jab that would have prevented that week of hell for us all I would have signed up without a moment's hesitation, regardless of the ingredient list or profit margin.

I personally am friends with a (very anti-vaccination) family who lives a very healthy lifestyle, and their 3-yr old boy is still being breastfed, but he contracted whooping cough in the last 12 months. To this day his mother has said that when he gets sick now he gets *really* sick and the whooping cough re-emerges, and she admits freely that this will be the way her 3-yr old son will live the rest of his life. Worse again, before they knew he was infected they were at a gathering where the infection spread to other (non-immunised) children, so those children will suffer in the same way as well. I am without words as to why anyone would do this to their child?

part time punk

Haven't read the whole thread or looked at the links posted to pro/anti vaccine debates but have to give my tuppence worth ... IMO not vaccinating your child is just stupid, dangerous and selfish. If either of my kids picked up measles, mumps etc. from an unvaccinated child, I would hold their parents personally responsible and seriously think about suing them. *By the way I am not the suing type in general*

trowel

cbyrd wrote: »

As a child i had measles mumps and rubella.. it has left me with hearing impairment from 7 years of chronic earaches headaches and throat infections.. a generally impaired immune system that means as i get older i will pick up more allergies to add to the 4 known ones that i have (one that causes annaphylaxis) i was lucky though.. the measles didn't leave me brain damaged or dead...

The thing about vaccines is they're a victim of their own success.. when you don't see the damage the disease can do you don't realise how important it became to eradicate the disease in the first place...

Do you put a seatbelt on your child?? or use an appropriate car seat?? why not protect them against disease that can seriously affect them or even kill..just my humble opinion...;)

I thought this study might be of interest - reports that those who developed measles as children are protected from allergies later in life.
This has been shown in other similar studies and lends support to childhood illnesses having a protective role to play in the development of the immune system.

http://www.elsevier.es/es/node/2047580

One theory of why there is much more asthma, excema and allergic tendencies around nowadays is that our bodys immune system is not being 'stimulated' through the normal exposure to germs/bugs/viruses.

GerardKeating

Ayla wrote: »

In a pure mathematical cost/benefit analysis, I think giving your child a vaccine (which has a very small chance of causing a side effect) against a dreadful disease (which has a great chance of causing lifelong issues) is a fair risk to take.

That's my reasoning, even if half the hair brained theory's on the net were true, it would still be safer to vaccinate than not to.

quozl

trowel wrote: »

One theory of why there is much more asthma, excema and allergic tendencies around nowadays is that our bodys immune system is not being 'stimulated' through the normal exposure to germs/bugs/viruses.

Hah! My twins are giving me almost a different illness a week currently

There is a vast array of wonderful illnesses out there to stimulate their immune systems without the few really life-threatening or crippling ones that we vaccinate against.

trowel

quozl wrote: »

Hah! My twins are giving me almost a different illness a week currently

There is a vast array of wonderful illnesses out there to stimulate their immune systems without the few really life-threatening or crippling ones that we vaccinate against.

Such as what? Sniffles? Ear infections? Perhaps these are good for stimulating immunity too, but the study suggests protective role for measles specifically in relation to allergies.

The list of once 'normal' childhood illnesses that now have vaccines/antibiotic remedies is now almost as long as the 'new' emerging illnesses such as allergies/asthma/intolerences/behavioral problems.

My child had chicken pox recently. He was poorly for 1/2 days and that was it (apart from lots of spots which went away after a couple of weeks). Should i have vaccinated for that too?

Goodness, if some posters on this forum had their way i'd be in jail for not doing so. What a world we'd live in if all childhood 'interventions' were mandatory - a chemical supervsion of our personal health on a global scale, made by people in power with our interest at heart of course. Hold on....

Ayla

trowel wrote: »

The list of once 'normal' childhood illnesses that now have vaccines/antibiotic remedies is now almost as long as the 'new' emerging illnesses such as allergies/asthma/intolerences/behavioral problems.

My child had chicken pox recently. He was poorly for 1/2 days and that was it (apart from lots of spots which went away after a couple of weeks). Should i have vaccinated for that too?

Goodness, if some posters on this forum had their way i'd be in jail for not doing so. What a world we'd live in if all childhood 'interventions' were mandatory - a chemical supervsion of our personal health on a global scale, made by people in power with our interest at heart of course. Hold on....

I think there is a massive difference between the life-long effects caused by menengitis vs. those caused by chix pox. I vaccinate to avoid the "baddies" (ie: the ones that can kill or maim my child) not the ones that cause temporary annoyance.

Ayla

trowel wrote: »

One theory of why there is much more asthma, excema and allergic tendencies around nowadays is that our bodys immune system is not being 'stimulated' through the normal exposure to germs/bugs/viruses.

A fair point, but I don't think you need to expose your child to the really horrible reality of measles in order to boose their immune system. A lot of kids these days aren't exposed to germs to begin with - what with antibacterial cleaners, kids not going out to eat dirt, and chemical shampoos/cleaners/etc. All those are factors in why kids aren't being exposed to germs. I think it's nuts to carry on with all those (modern) practices but then expose them to measles to "boost" their immune system.

quozl

trowel wrote: »

Goodness, if some posters on this forum had their way i'd be in jail for not doing so. What a world we'd live in if all childhood 'interventions' were mandatory - a chemical supervsion of our personal health on a global scale, made by people in power with our interest at heart of course. Hold on....

LOL, no need for the strawman argument there trowel. Disagree with my point if you like, not ones that you would prefer I had made.

You said and I quote

One theory of why there is much more asthma, excema and allergic tendencies around nowadays is that our bodys immune system is not being 'stimulated' through the normal exposure to germs/bugs/viruses.

I just read the conclusion of that article you linked, they're not saying that, and again, I quote

A multi-center cohort study in Germany indicates that recurrent viral upper respiratory tract infections early in life decrease the likelihood of asthma, whereas a positive correlation is present between recurrent lower respiratory tract infections and wheezing attacks

They're saying that some infections may reduce the risk of asthma, whereas some other infections may increase the risk of asthma. I'm not arguing that measles don't affect asthma risks, though look at the danish study mentioned below, but I did smile at the idea of children not getting their immune systems stimulated because they avoid select potentially crippling or fatal diseases.

They also link to a much larger danish study of 547 910 children where

The results of this study were not consistent with the hypothesis that measles could prevent allergic diseases.

So you're choosing the study with a sample size of 52 children that happens to be closer to what you believe, over the Danish study it mentions that disagrees with you, that has the sample size 10,000 times larger?

Why did you choose this one?

I am in favour of vaccines and I do agree with the point about piggy backing off children who have the vaccines. A certain proportion of the population has to receive the vaccinations in order for them to work. Some people cannot be vaccinated for health reasons so the take up among healthy children has to be quite high in order to keep these diseases at bay.

My ten-month-old nephew has been struggling with measles for the past 3 months. He is too young to have received the vaccine and there was an outbreak at his creche thanks to older, unvaccinated children. I would like to respect other people's decisions in this area but, to be honest, I find I can't - they put other people's children at risk too and to me that's unacceptable.

angelfire9

I'm going to weigh in on this from a different perspective, not as a mother but as someone who as a child HAD measles, mumps, German Measles, AND whooping cough
(I think I must have been every parent's worst nightmare because if there was a case of something in the town it was guaranteed I'd get it)

Let me tell you, long term risks aside, having ANY of the MMR's as an illness is a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE thing and if vaccinations had been around when I was a child I could have been spared alot of hospital visits, alot of needles, a lot of pain
I can't understand how any parent thinks that a series of vaccines is more harmful than WEEKS of illness

My mother had Rubella during her 1st trimester with me
Ironically she was a nurse nursing a child through it and didn't realise she was pregnant until it was too late
I can't imagine what the next 6/7 months must have been for her, not knowing if the baby she was carrying was going to be mentally or physically challenged (or both)
I was born with congenital deafness and zero immunity to Rubella (i've had it myself as a child and been vaccinated and I still have no immunity)

When I was pregnant with both my girls I was TERRIFIED I'd come in contact with a child who had Rubella as a result of their parents not trusting vaccines

I stopped going places where I might meet kids (only went shopping at night, never went into toy shops or nursery shops for the 9 months, stopped visiting friends who had kids just in case... etc etc)

I have to say I resent people who "choose" not to vaccinate because it puts lives at risk not just the lives of their own kids but the general public as well

CathyMoran

angelfire9 wrote: »

I'm going to weigh in on this from a different perspective, not as a mother but as someone who as a child HAD measles, mumps, German Measles, AND whooping cough
(I think I must have been every parent's worst nightmare because if there was a case of something in the town it was guaranteed I'd get it)

Let me tell you, long term risks aside, having ANY of the MMR's as an illness is a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE thing and if vaccinations had been around when I was a child I could have been spared alot of hospital visits, alot of needles, a lot of pain
I can't understand how any parent thinks that a series of vaccines is more harmful than WEEKS of illness

My mother had Rubella during her 1st trimester with me
Ironically she was a nurse nursing a child through it and didn't realise she was pregnant until it was too late
I can't imagine what the next 6/7 months must have been for her, not knowing if the baby she was carrying was going to be mentally or physically challenged (or both)
I was born with congenital deafness and zero immunity to Rubella (i've had it myself as a child and been vaccinated and I still have no immunity)

When I was pregnant with both my girls I was TERRIFIED I'd come in contact with a child who had Rubella as a result of their parents not trusting vaccines

I stopped going places where I might meet kids (only went shopping at night, never went into toy shops or nursery shops for the 9 months, stopped visiting friends who had kids just in case... etc etc)

I have to say I resent people who "choose" not to vaccinate because it puts lives at risk not just the lives of their own kids but the general public as well

My mother was exposed to German Measles during her pregnancy too and I was not immune to it during the pregnancy with my son either (I chose to have the vaccine as a grown up and it did not take the first time). My son and daughter are having all of their vaccinations - yes, I was concerned about the MMR but I did get it done.

kelle

My children have received all their vaccinations, plus the swine flu jab.

The only one I had concerns about was the MMR with all the publicity about Autism. It didn't help that my friend's son started showing signs of autism after getting his jab, he was officially diagnosed at 3. She blames the vaccination, the rest of us remember him being able to say "clock" and "Bob" (his favourite TV character at the time) but he has not spoken since so it's hard for us to contradict her.

Anyway, to cut a long story short I waited until all my children had their full speech and they had their first MMRs at 4 years old. My middle daughter was shortly afterwards diagnosed with Aspergers, but her symptoms could be traced back to before she got the vaccine so I was relieved I could rule out the MMR.

F.A.

trowel wrote: »

One theory of why there is much more asthma, excema and allergic tendencies around nowadays is that our bodys immune system is not being 'stimulated' through the normal exposure to germs/bugs/viruses.

This is nonsense. In the GDR, vaccinations were mandatory, yet allergies were significantly less prominent there then in West-Germany. This is well-documented and clearly contradicts the theory presented above.

As for the old chestnut of the big, bad pharma industry making loads of money from vaccines - said industry would be mad to produce vaccines simply to make money as the treatment of illnesses actually costs a fair amount more than a simple jab that protects against them. Without jabs, diseases such as Polio, Diphteria etc, would be just as prominent as they used to be, and you can bet your bottom dollar the pharma industry would make a much bigger profit. Keep in mind that many diseases such as measles can have live-long implications and require treatment all the time - resulting in quite a bit more cash for the oh-so-bad guys from the pharma industry. This really isn't rocket science!

OldNotWIse

F.A. wrote: »

This is nonsense. In the GDR, vaccinations were mandatory, yet allergies were significantly less prominent there then in West-Germany. This is well-documented and clearly contradicts the theory presented above.

As for the old chestnut of the big, bad pharma industry making loads of money from vaccines - said industry would be mad to produce vaccines simply to make money as the treatment of illnesses actually costs a fair amount more than a simple jab that protects against them. Without jabs, diseases such as Polio, Diphteria etc, would be just as prominent as they used to be, and you can bet your bottom dollar the pharma industry would make a much bigger profit. Keep in mind that many diseases such as measles can have live-long implications and require treatment all the time - resulting in quite a bit more cash for the oh-so-bad guys from the pharma industry. This really isn't rocket science!

Very good point actually. A lot of the anti-vacc brigade use the fact that pharma industry makes profit as a stick to beat them with, and as a justification for not trusting them. Since when does making a profit make you untrustworthy? The food industry makes profit. Cars. Construction. Etc. We do not automatically assume that because someome is making a profit that they are necessarily bad...