Natural food better than vaccinations?

servilia

Ok that does it ! I am done with this thread apparently it is not only okay to inject TOXINS into your infants body it is also okay to drug them to cover up any symptons that may arise due to those toxins you injected ! That is just beyond anything I can consider normal.

If vaccinations cause no harm then there should be no need for a medicine before or after a vaccination. If you must dope your child up in order to vaccinate them then apparently something is wrong.

Not to mention that in my "scenario" my child still catches Pertussis which is extremely likely .. So lets dope our infants , inject them full of KNOWN TOXINS and then shrug our shoulders when the vaccine fails.

I truly am done with this thread . I will not be returning because I realize that none of you are even able to admit for one second that vaccinations do harm. I hope that your child does not suffer all through infancy only to catch the very disease you were trying to prevent however that seems to be likely.

I am disgusted that your suggestion is to just give tylenol. For one tylenol is not incredibly safe but that is for another thread ! For another tylenol will not prevent seizures in anyway it may reduce the fever but you will have to give it repeatedly for numerous days in the event of a true reaction and the child can still suffer seizures or other permanent brain damage. My son does suffer seizures thanks to a flipping vaccination and Tylenol when adminstered does absolutely nothing to prevent him from having a seizure !

Children DIE from vaccinations DAILY !! Just because your child did not die does not mean it doesn't happen it is a real danger. I understand catching a disease is a real danger as well but there is no way in HELL I am going to take on both risks which is what every vaccinating parent chooses to do.

Vaccines FAIL Miserably ! That has been proven and I am afraid it will continue to be proven. I did not come on this thread to change anyone's mind I politely listened to every arguement. I didn't even get mad when I was told I was being irresponsible , when I was called a moron or when I was told I was a bad mom for not having a child that will eat a full course balance diet every day. I however am extremely mad that any parent feels that it is "normal" to adminster a medicine before or after a vaccine.

You continue to take your children to get vaccinated. You continue to watch your children suffer from the pain of the toxins you are allowing to enter their body. I am just going to have to pass and you can call me stupid or irresponsible or any other combination of names that you want too but I can guarantee you my child will never DIE from a vaccination ... you can't say the same for your child!

You're showing your true colours in this post. Very judgmental.

Oh please forgive me for being a little judgmental. If I recall correctly you have told me I was a bad mom because I have a 18month old who chooses to eat grapes as his main "meal" for one day. Oh and the kicker was when after I had clearly stated my son couldn't have vaccinations you informed me I was making a bad decision in not vaccinating him.

I cut out the rest of that post just to make this shorter but I acknowledge your explanations. I recall a post where I specifically stated that if your son has a medical reason for an exemption and vaccines are in fact dangerous for him then of course he should not have one. I don't think anyone would expect that. I don't think I said you're a bad mom - if I recall correctly I just pointed out that JUST grapes all day isn't the most balanced diet.

SarabellPlus3

Mrs. McCullen, you keep pointing out that vaccinations fail-- that's a one-liner of a very big topic, and you're purposefully taking it out of context and misconstruing it. YES, we all know that there is a small percentage of vaccinated persons who for whatever reason the vax didn't "take" in, and therefore they can contract the disease. You are not telling us something new there, you are just misinterpreting it to be more meaningful than it is. Yes, a few people will not have the immunity from the innoculation they took, this number varies by the virus. That does not mean "vaccines" don't work. That's like saying that I once drove a car that stalled every time it rained, so cars don't work in the rain, so people shouldn't buy cars.
Vaccines work. I have no problem with your son not having them-- a seriously dangerous medical reaction with a doctor's guidance is called a medical exemption, and it's the same medical exemption that other posters who's children are medically unable to take vax have. Philisophical exemptions though-- the more people who get those, the more handhold these diseases get in our populus, and the more people are exposed-- people like YOUR son (who can't medically be vaxed) are exposed because there are more people who will spread it as less people are vaxed, another poster's daughter (who can't medically be vaxed) exposed, and any of the rest of us who might be in that SMALL percentage who the vax didn't "take" for exposed.

You keep wanting a "link" or an "article." I'm reacting to your outlandish claims that "vaccines don't work." That's so patently untrue that I don't need some kind of link for it, history offers the huge lesson.

HotMamaByVday

Nutrition based cancer cure and research links: http://gerson.org/

This is starting to diverge considerably from the initial topic. However:

From the NIH:

"Have any preclinical (laboratory or animal) studies been conducted using the Gerson therapy?

No results of laboratory or animal studies have been published in scientific journals."

"Have any clinical trials (research studies with people) of the Gerson therapy been conducted?
In 1947 and 1959, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) reviewed the cases of a total of 60 patients treated by Dr. Gerson. The NCI found that the available information did not prove the regimen had benefit."

There is no evidence that natural foods protect you from communicable diseases, cancer or any other illness at a level comparable to that of a vaccine, neither will they cure you in a manner comparable to tested, proven medications once you contract that disease. Eating a healthy diet is probably better than not eating a healthy diet, but any claim that it will save you or anyone else from polio, chickenpox, measles, cancer or whatever else is false. The Gerson 'research' is based on case notes made by the doctor himself, thus not meeting even the most lenient requirement for disinterest in reporting outcomes.

In my opinion people who actively promote this type of 'therapy' are dangerous. Note that this 'therapy' requires patients to stop chemotherapy entirely in order to undergo it, thus this is not complementary medicine, it is purely alternative, and it is costly - just the 2 week initial stay is $5500, and this is followed by a months-long regimen of unproven supplements that are also rather overpriced. Making money offering worthless, or potentially harmful 'treatments' is unethical and no self-respecting medical practitioner would likely condone it.

But let's assume it works - Why not donate some of those proceeds to fund a clinical trial, then there can be no doubt. It's been around since the 50's, so there's been plenty of opportunity to demonstrate it's purported success.

I can COMPLETELY understand your point of view. Seems a little fishy right? I thought the same thing so I read the book and am about to read a second and try it- will cost me about $100 plus the price for a juicer (which I wanted anyway) My comparison is it's the same reason when we walk into our Doc and say "I have XYZ symptoms" they prescribe us a pill instead of saying, "yeah, it's because you are obese and unhealthy. try going on a freaking walk and eating a carrot." Natural cures don't make $$. And people want quick fixes. The price tag on it is $5500 for a two week all inclusive intensive treatment/education and is probably really only needed for really sick patients. They have tried and failed to get medical approval but can't in the US but have physicians that practice this in Mexico and Europe.

edited because I wasn't happy with my wording initially.

I wish the best to all of you- whatever you decide to do. Stay healthy!

Hmm, but what would your reaction be if yoru doc did say this?

So your okay with paying your doctor to lie to you ? I would prefer my doctor tell me the truth and not prescribe me a pill that is not necessary.

NO. I did not say that. I get to know our doctors and they get to know me. I build relationships and choose docs that do the same with limited patient loads so that they know they can be honest. When my OB thought my son might have some series birth defects (based on blood tests), she didn't just call me and sugar coat it. She set the appointment with the ultrasound specialist and then called me to tell me to get there that day and then told me worst case scenario, best case and statistics. I want and need brutal honesty in my life, but MANY people in this overly pc world do not.

I think you think I am diametrically opposed to your viewpoint. I am not. For example, our pedi knows I will not fill an antibiotic script unless we know the antibiotic is necessary. He gives me the script and tells me what to look for and how long to wait for symptoms to subside before I need to fill and administer it. We do not take medications unless I feel it is absolutely necessary. I let my kids have mild fevers. I treat headaches with water and /or a bit of caffine.

HotMamaByVday

As the mother of 3 and a teacher who deal with behavior issues, I say YES! He needs to eat what you provide or not eat. You are only making more work for yourself in the long run. I deal with severe behavior problems (ages 11-13) and my biggest advice to all parents is to say no and stick to your guns. I am not suggesting your child will end up in my school, but I am saying that children must have discipline. This is what is for dinner, you can eat it or go hungry. I have a 7 year old with some food aversions. He knows (although sometimes still complains) that what mommy makes for dinner is all that is available. If you don't eat, no seconds of things you like, no snacks and no dessert.

With all due respect my son referenced in that post is 18months old. How do you propose I explain that to him ? I keep food in the house that is good for my children and my 4 year old eats a much more balanced diet. My 4 year old also understands you eat what I cook. I can assure you my children have discipline but I will not deny my child food ! I am not feeding him processed crap for heavens sake he was eating grapes all day.

In short, you say "When you eat your chicken you can have grapes." You are not denying him food. You are setting the boundaries of what is acceptable in your household and society. You have provided him with perfectly acceptable healthy food and you are expecting him to eat it.

As someone else posted, you said he eats junk. Why are you suddenly changing your tune? I am not trying to hurt your feelings or even attack you. I am very blunt and honest. This is all off topic, so I will leave it at that.

rml_16

Our country has some of the highest Infant Mortaility Rates

Please provide some data for this erroneous claim.

Otherwise, recant.

This is not even close to being true.

I want to see too!!

Never mind, I already know where the US is on the list But I want to hear it from her!

Sorry apparently I didn't finish my sentence on that post. I am well aware that the US does not have anywhere near the highest number of infant deaths. I do indeed apologize !! I try hard to re-read my posts to be sure everything is included but I apparently missed that.

I was going to say that it has been noted that the US gives our children the most vaccinations and yet we are still 34th (if I am recalling correctly I do not have the article up). In the study I was viewing it showed the vaccinations given by other countries that have fewer infant deaths than the US and they all give less vaccinations. I really am sorry I mistyped I at no time want to inform anyone of incorrect information.

34th is way off. Please show your source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate

I will admit that I am awful at reading statistics and I always get my husband to verify the way I read it is correct therefore if I did misspeak please inform me kindly and direct me to further information. I do all the research and print all the articles and my husband and I read them I normally have "read" them right but I do occasionally misunderstand (normally when I am reading pro-vaccination articles and studies)

Wikipedia is a great place to look up useless facts to get an idea of, say, how old a celebrity is (though it's been wrong about THAT, and even said someone was dead who wasn't), but PLEASE do not use it as a source for something that actually matters.

Any time I'm in a debate with someone and that person pulls up Wikipedia as a source, I know I've won.

catherine1979

As a health care professional and a mother, I have chosen to vaccinate. Vaccines work. The risks of side effects are very low. Vaccines are safe and effective.

darklord48

http://www.thinktwice.com/HET_study.pdf

The conclusion from that article:
"The US childhood immunization schedule requires 26 vaccine doses for infants aged less than 1 year, the most in the world, yet 33 nations have better IMRs. Using linear regression, the immunization schedules of these 34 nations were examined and a correlation coefficient of 0.70 (p < 0.0001) was found between IMRs and the number of vaccine doses routinely given to infants. When nations were grouped into five different vaccine dose ranges (12–14, 15–17, 18–20, 21–23, and 24–26), 98.3% of the total variance in IMR was explained by the unweighted linear regression model. These findings demonstrate a counter-intuitive relationship: nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates. Efforts to reduce the relatively high US IMR have been elusive. Finding ways to lower preterm birth rates should be a high priority. However, preventing premature births is just a partial solution to reduce infant deaths. A closer inspection of correlations between vaccine doses, biochemical or synergistic toxicity, and IMRs, is essential. All nations—rich and poor, advanced and developing—have an obligation to determine whether their immunization schedules are achieving their desired goals."

One thing I notice, they don't study countries with less than 12 vaccine doses per year. So the issue may not be the vaccines, but the number of vaccines given. It is possible that if you were to perform the same study again, on 0-4, 5-8, 9-11, in addition to the dose ranges they tested, that an optimum number of doses per year would arise, allowing us to make a better informed decision about what vaccines to give and when.

After re-reading this article I have a question. What countries should they study with less than 12 vaccine doses per year ? They compared the US with the 33 countries that have less infant deaths than us. I am just trying to really understand this article and after re-reading it and re-reading your comment I am confused.

There are well over 200 countries in the world. While some may have no vaccinations at all, there should be some that have more than 0 and less than 12 that could be added to the study.

mrsmccullen07

I am going to answer everyone at once since I dont want to continue to have mile-long threads of quotes.

1- I understand that vaccines work in some cases however I am just pointing to the fact they do not work in all cases. I feel this is important in relation to my decision not to vaccinate. I am not against vaccinations for anyone. I just want everyone to make informed decisions. For me the risk of reaction in my son is too great to vaccinate and I know that no one expects me to vaccinate him. I still do not believe that by others being vaccinated he is protected from any disease however I respect that you do.

2 - I understand entirely that Wikipedia is not a great resource and I will refrain from using it. I do not feel that any of you have won this debate because ultimately I am still choosing not to vaccinate either of my children. My husband and I also are not vaccinated. I do not believe that either side can win the arguement since their are faults with both choices.

3 - I have not met a doctor yet that I fully trusted nor do I trust the opinion of doctors. I have never heard of a doctor directly admitting his patient died from a reaction to a vaccine when it is known to happen. Furthermore we have switched doctors 3x with our son and each doctor has told me its safe to vaccinate him when the vaccine manufacturer clearly states it is not.

I think vaccines should be approached with a open-mind and you should make informed decisions for you and your family. Information leaflets should be handed out to all patients before their child is vaccinated so they can read the ingredients and the risks. There is a number of patients who should not receive certain vaccinations however most parents do not know if there child falls in that category.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/vis/downloads/vis-dtap.pdf

Many stories that I read tell of a child having a reaction within days of the dose of DTaP. The doctor typically reassures the parent it was not because of the vaccine and recommends they continue to vaccinate. If doctors would recognize that some children do have reactions and stop vaccinating those children I think there would be less controversy as there would likely be less deaths linked to vaccinations.

We have all agreed that we are not going to change each other's mind so I think it is time we let this thread die. I came to MFP looking support on my weightloss journey and I realize I posted on this thread and I do indeed regret it now. I have learned to not talk about vaccines to anyone in my daily life and I have now learned not to discuss it with anyone on a community board. Vaccinations are a very personal decision and they have a huge impact on our lives whether you choose to vaccinate or not to vaccinate.

mrsmccullen07

Wikipedia isn't generally accepted as a scholarly or reliable source of anything. Because of the nature of it, the definition of "wiki", means that any user has rights to edit content. Anyone at all can "contribute" to it, and this makes it unreliable.
My 4th grader brought me an article from Wikipedia that stated "Jane Goodall was born a chimpanzee, and morphed into a gorilla by age three".

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html

I think the factbook has them ranked at the 46th so no improvement .

And if you have a better more reliable link please show me.

I have the same source - except I paid some attention to how to read the chart. They are 176th highest. Out of 222 countries. 222-176 = 46. You read it backwards dear.

I stated they were ranked 46th how did I read it backwards ?

hannahmayr30

I wish everyone would do their research and make educated choices. Making any decision in ignorance is a bad idea. I respect everyones opinion on this issue as long as it's educated.

BrettPGH

So this morning while driving my wife to the airport, I was listening to a topic on vaccinations and how some people who are adamant that vaccinations have cause more issues with illness (like Autism) and that natural foods can cure such diseases as whooping cough. One female stated that vaccinations are nothing more than a way for the Pharmacy companies to make big money. And her stance was that if vaccinations would be banned that we would have cured diseases by eating natural foods.
Now while I will agree that GREAT nutrition can help with boosting the immune system, I will emphatically disagree that the approach that eating natural foods will protect any child from diseases like measles, mumps, whooping cough, etc.

Thoughts?

I'm gonna ignore the mess of nonsense behind me and just focus on post numero uno.

You were right to be skeptical. Ignore the anti-vax crowd at all costs. They use pseudo-science and emotional feelings in place of real science and research. It's disgusting.

You know how you don't have polio? How no one you know has polio? How no one you've ever met has had polio? It didn't used to be that way. It was widespread and life threatening. Children were paralyzed. This was cured by vaccines. It's one of the greatest accomplishments of the scientific community, and that's saying something. Polio has nearly been eradicated.

Natural foods? Great for health. They may even have some therapeutic benefits that have been overlooked. But they can't replace vaccines. Not by a long shot. No natural food protected us from measles, mumps, rubella, polio, etc. etc. That was vaccines.

They've been tested. They work. The side effects are minimal. Your personal opinion does not equal the decades of research and study that have been conducted in this matter. Trust science. It's given you every single thing you have, and I'm not exaggerating.

SueGremlin

So this morning while driving my wife to the airport, I was listening to a topic on vaccinations and how some people who are adamant that vaccinations have cause more issues with illness (like Autism) and that natural foods can cure such diseases as whooping cough. One female stated that vaccinations are nothing more than a way for the Pharmacy companies to make big money. And her stance was that if vaccinations would be banned that we would have cured diseases by eating natural foods.
Now while I will agree that GREAT nutrition can help with boosting the immune system, I will emphatically disagree that the approach that eating natural foods will protect any child from diseases like measles, mumps, whooping cough, etc.

Thoughts?

I'm gonna ignore the mess of nonsense behind me and just focus on post numero uno.

You were right to be skeptical. Ignore the anti-vax crowd at all costs. They use pseudo-science and emotional feelings in place of real science and research. It's disgusting.

You know how you don't have polio? How no one you know has polio? How no one you've ever met has had polio? It didn't used to be that way. It was widespread and life threatening. Children were paralyzed. This was cured by vaccines. It's one of the greatest accomplishments of the scientific community, and that's saying something. Polio has nearly been eradicated.

Natural foods? Great for health. They may even have some therapeutic benefits that have been overlooked. But they can't replace vaccines. Not by a long shot. No natural food protected us from measles, mumps, rubella, polio, etc. etc. That was vaccines.

They've been tested. They work. The side effects are minimal. Your personal opinion does not equal the decades of research and study that have been conducted in this matter. Trust science. It's given you every single thing you have, and I'm not exaggerating.

As a scientist, I thank you

Too many people are quick to demonize pharma companies. You know what? People who work for pharma companies go to doctors and receive vaccines, too. We're consumers the same as anyone else.

rml_16

3 - I have not met a doctor yet that I fully trusted nor do I trust the opinion of doctors. I have never heard of a doctor directly admitting his patient died from a reaction to a vaccine when it is known to happen. Furthermore we have switched doctors 3x with our son and each doctor has told me its safe to vaccinate him when the vaccine manufacturer clearly states it is not.

I trust the many health professionals (including pediatricians) in my family and who make up my close friends and the parents of my close friends -- one of whom is a NICU pediatrician.

Somehow, I don't think they would tell me vaccines are safe if they aren't. They love me. They love my child. They aren't making a dime off of either of us being vaccinated.

I didn't address this earlier, but you said you hope my daughter never has an adverse reaction to a vaccine. She's going to be 17 in seven days. I think she's going to be just fine.

BrettPGH

As a scientist, I thank you

Too many people are quick to demonize pharma companies. You know what? People who work for pharma companies go to doctors and receive vaccines, too. We're consumers the same as anyone else.

Well they only demonize you until they need you. Then they run screaming and demand all the help you can offer. Then on their way out the door they start talking smack again.

Don't thank me. You're the scientist. I thank you.

servilia

Wikipedia isn't generally accepted as a scholarly or reliable source of anything. Because of the nature of it, the definition of "wiki", means that any user has rights to edit content. Anyone at all can "contribute" to it, and this makes it unreliable.
My 4th grader brought me an article from Wikipedia that stated "Jane Goodall was born a chimpanzee, and morphed into a gorilla by age three".

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html

I think the factbook has them ranked at the 46th so no improvement .

And if you have a better more reliable link please show me.

I have the same source - except I paid some attention to how to read the chart. They are 176th highest. Out of 222 countries. 222-176 = 46. You read it backwards dear.

I stated they were ranked 46th how did I read it backwards ?

You said the US has one of the highest infant mortality rates. Country 176 out of 222 (1 having highest mortality rate and 222 having the lowest rate) is not one of the highest. That's all.

mrsmccullen07

I wish that adults would quit calling each other names. In reality you calling me names only reinforces my choice. If you can not discuss it with me as two adults should then I tend to overlook you and any "knowledge" you may think you have.

I really want to leave this thread but it is so hard for me to back away when parents are being put down for their decisions. Whether you agree or not parents are allowed to make the choice to not vaccinate and it most defintly does not mean they are stupid. We love our children as much as you do and we are doing what we feel is best. You are doing the same therefore we both should respect one another.

Vaccines prevent a percentage of disease and they cause a percentage of reactions. I as a parent have to choose which "risk" I am willing to take. If your child suffers from a disease after being fully vaccinated then that vaccine failed 100%. If my child suffers a serious complication following vaccination then the risk of reaction was 100% for my child. I fully understand the percentage of complications is far less than the success rate according to what is published. I am not willing to allow my child to be injected with something that could potentially harm him.

I am tired of discussing the same thing over and over in this thread. I do not want any of you not to vaccinate all I want is for you to respect the decision of other parents.

I chose to breastfeed as its proven best for my child however you may choose to formula-feed and I respect that. I understand it is your decision and why I dont agree I would never call you names because of your choices.
I chose to cloth-diaper both of my boys because it was the best fit for our family.I do not expect any of you to do the same nor do I judge you for using disposable diapers.
I chose to deliver my son by VBAC even though I was aware of the risks. I however do not judge mothers who choose to have unnecessary c-sections.

I am different from you and you are different from me. Your views are not my views. We happen to live together in a country where we are both allowed to be who we are. Please respect my decision ! You do not have to like it nor do you have to believe in it but you should respect it !

TaraTLC83

I'm gonna ignore the mess of nonsense behind me and just focus on post numero uno.

You were right to be skeptical. Ignore the anti-vax crowd at all costs. They use pseudo-science and emotional feelings in place of real science and research. It's disgusting.

You know how you don't have polio? How no one you know has polio? How no one you've ever met has had polio? It didn't used to be that way. It was widespread and life threatening. Children were paralyzed. This was cured by vaccines. It's one of the greatest accomplishments of the scientific community, and that's saying something. Polio has nearly been eradicated.

Natural foods? Great for health. They may even have some therapeutic benefits that have been overlooked. But they can't replace vaccines. Not by a long shot. No natural food protected us from measles, mumps, rubella, polio, etc. etc. That was vaccines.

They've been tested. They work. The side effects are minimal. Your personal opinion does not equal the decades of research and study that have been conducted in this matter. Trust science. It's given you every single thing you have, and I'm not exaggerating.

Nice post

SarabellPlus3

I wish that adults would quit calling each other names. In reality you calling me names only reinforces my choice. If you can not discuss it with me as two adults should then I tend to overlook you and any "knowledge" you may think you have.

I really want to leave this thread but it is so hard for me to back away when parents are being put down for their decisions. Whether you agree or not parents are allowed to make the choice to not vaccinate and it most defintly does not mean they are stupid. We love our children as much as you do and we are doing what we feel is best. You are doing the same therefore we both should respect one another.

Vaccines prevent a percentage of disease and they cause a percentage of reactions. I as a parent have to choose which "risk" I am willing to take. If your child suffers from a disease after being fully vaccinated then that vaccine failed 100%. If my child suffers a serious complication following vaccination then the risk of reaction was 100% for my child. I fully understand the percentage of complications is far less than the success rate according to what is published. I am not willing to allow my child to be injected with something that could potentially harm him.

I am tired of discussing the same thing over and over in this thread. I do not want any of you not to vaccinate all I want is for you to respect the decision of other parents.

I chose to breastfeed as its proven best for my child however you may choose to formula-feed and I respect that. I understand it is your decision and why I dont agree I would never call you names because of your choices.
I chose to cloth-diaper both of my boys because it was the best fit for our family.I do not expect any of you to do the same nor do I judge you for using disposable diapers.
I chose to deliver my son by VBAC even though I was aware of the risks. I however do not judge mothers who choose to have unnecessary c-sections.

I am different from you and you are different from me. Your views are not my views. We happen to live together in a country where we are both allowed to be who we are. Please respect my decision ! You do not have to like it nor do you have to believe in it but you should respect it !

It's funny, b/c in another thread, you and I would have agreed. I did a lot of the things you mention, from cloth diapering to breastfeeding to natural births (though I would have preferred the epidural, sometimes you just can't get there fast enough LOL). And as far as vaccines go, I absolutely understand your medical exemption, as your son's dangerous reaction to a vaccination-- I have no qualms with that at all. But the philisophical exemptions, yes, it's within a parent's rights, but I'm not required to pretend I think they are wise. I get that you are looking at risk A, and risk B, and deciding which risk to take, but that doesn't mean the risks are equal. It's like saying you worry more about the risk of a seat belt strangling and killing someone, than about the risks of driving without a seat belt, so you don't put your kids in seat belts and I need to respect that. Those risks aren't equal, I'm not going to pretend they are in the name of political correctness.

megan6709

My husband is 31 he hadn't had chickenpox as a child so as a young adult he got the chickenpox vaccination (before I met him I am not 100% sure how old he was) anyway when I was pregnant with our first child 2007 he was 27 and he got shingles and they could not figure out why he got it .. and he has had it 3x since then and the last time we went to a walk in clinic since we were out of town when they hit him again and the dr. there told us it couldn't be shingles because he got the vaccination and that prevents shingles too well they scraped a sample off and we got a call a week later that it was indeed shingles ... oh and he has had shingles 4x total first time I was pregnant , second time we had a 8week old baby , third time we were in the hospital with our baby and his sleep apnea and the fourth time we had a 2 year old and a 3 month old .. each time my husband was still involved with our family we were cautious and we prevented our children from getting chickenpox now that they are both older if hubby happens to get shingles again we aren't going to be so careful I want my kids to get chickenpox its a normal childhood thing and I think it is best if they get it naturally !! My best friend was pregnant when she found out she had been neither vaccinated or had the disease and if she had gotten it the outcome would have been ALOT worse than if she had just gotten it as a child.

And just something else I have wondered about is chickenpox and the number of people who make it to adulthood without receiving a vaccination and without ever having chickenpox I would think that chickenpox would be the one disease you were LIKELY to get ... I haven't researched this so I have no clue why but just something I was thinking about

I'd like to see clinical studies on adults who have had shingles yet were vaccinated. I'm more than sure that people that have been vaccinated that don't get shingles will be in much much larger numbers than those that have. Again no medicine is perfect, but benefit outweighs results.
It seems that you correlate what may happen in your life personally to your belief in vaccinations. IMO, that would be like saying crime is high because you were held up at gun point when in fact crime is actually down statistically. Doesn't mean that crime doesn't happen, it just means that doing some of the things we have done have reduced it. You could well say that spending more money on Police did nothing for you, but it has done lots for others. Just a perspective you may not have considered.

The studies show that it prevents about 70% of the cases of shingles. Ask someone who has had shingles 10 times what they would give to have had it only 3, and I bet you would be surprised. If you've never had shingles, there really isn't much reason to get the shot. But if you're like my cousin and get it about once a year (she's in her early 20s and will probably live with it the rest of her life), it might be invaluable.

Just sayin'.

megan6709

I read the first post in this topic and cannot read further because I get so angry about this so called "debate" that my blood pressure rises incredibly high, I get pissed off, and I can't sleep.

Vaccines are a victim of their own success. It is so frustrating.

I have a sick child that isn't fortunate enough to receive all of the usual vaccines. She has a poor immune system and at the age of 1 is not allowed to get MMR because it is a live vaccine AND because she received certain blood products.

This forces me to rely on the stupidity of others to protect my child which puts me into mama bear mode and gets me angry.

Deaths/Illnesses I have seen personally that could have been preventable
1 aunt - polio. Suffered paralysis
1 uncle - polio. Deformations
1 baby - died. RSV
2 babies - died only 2 weeks after going home from NICU from pertussis (whooping cough)
1 sister in law - hospitalization due to chicken pox as an adult.

NONE of these could have been prevented by healthy eating or exercise.

That is all.

First of all, I do not have children. I have a niece and two nephews who are all young and I love them very much. I respect that you (people who don't vaccinate) believe differently than I do. I won't try to argue with you if you don't act like people who actually DO vaccinate their children are horribly bad parents.

I totally agree with the quoted post. The resurgence of pertussis in this country that is killing small children is simply a failure of vaccination. Adults with pertussis don't have the "whoop" when they cough, so don't recognize pertussis. It kills small children because their throats are smaller and the same swelling that causes the whooping cough restricts the airways sufficiently to kill the child. The CDC has changed their recommendations to include a TdaP (Tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis) to replace at least one routine tetanus shot (which is recommended every 10 years) in order to address that issue.

Some vaccines, specifically chix pox and MMR are given to children because the consequences are so severe. Not so much with chix pox, but German measles can cause some serious problems, developmentally and physically. It is even more serious in an unvaccinated adult women who happens to be pregnant - both chix pox and rubella can cause serious birth defects.

For the persons who do not vaccinate their children - I would be worried about my children spreading it to ones like she is talking about above who cannot get their vaccines. Even if your kids aren't getting sick, they are still able to spread it to others. The same goes for vaccinated children. And IF a vaccinated child gets sick, they could be potentially less ill than an unvaccinated child. That might make the difference between deafness (or worse) from a communicable disease and recovering fully.

For the argument that those diseases aren't in our country right now - our horizons have expanded. You might be sitting next to someone tomorrow on your morning commute who was exposed to polio two days ago on a trip to another country. It could be right now if you're in public. All of those far-off places where vaccines exist safely isolated are not nearly so isolated as our minds tell us.

I think some of it was also stated earlier, when someone mentioned that we have little idea of what the diseases we vaccinate against can really do. Part of it is the very ego-centric attitude much of this country has adopted, and also propagates. You may see the television commercials (for the US Army, I believe) stating that we have the best health care in the world and think that if your child gets measles that it will be OK because we can treat it. This is so not the case. As a country, we spend more health care dollars for less value than many other nations. There are some categories of health care measures where the US is hardly above nations far less developed. Doctors are still taught what the diseases look like, but not all of them would be able to recognize measles in its initial presentation. So please don't assume that our "great" health care system will take care of you.

FYI, Dr. Wakefield, the man behind the "Vaccines cause Autism" hoopla did in fact lose his license to practice medicine in the UK. However, he is now practicing in Texas. Good job, America.

Just my six cents worth. Hey, I'm not cheap!