Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,510
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 30, 2012 16:44:15 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 16:56:15 GMT -5
90% of the .5 to 1.5 in 100,000 ? ... the rate of contraction in 1990 among infants to age 14 ? ... And the ones who DID were most certainly among the high risk groups, for which I would advocate vaccination at a younger age... Infants are NOT generally vulnerable to Hep B... it is an adolescent/adult's diease. Meanwhile, the vaccine does not behave the same in infants as adults either www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X03007047 ... and According to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), operated jointly by the CDC and FDA, there were 36,788 officially reported adverse reactions to hepatitis B vaccines between 1992 and 2005. Of these, 14,800 were serious enough to cause hospitalization, life-threatening health events or permanent disabilities. And 781 people were reported to have DIED following hepatitis B vaccination. This when underreporting is universally acknowledged. I don't care if you vaccinate against Hep B or not, but I am not off my rocker for thinking this is not a good idea, and has no real benefit outside of more guarenteed funding to the pharma industry. Vaccinations should be used when the risk of the disease outweighs the risks of the vaccination. A 1 in 100,000 risk of contraction, which is almost always found among high risk groups, is not a logical reason to vaccinate all infants within 12 hours of their birth, in my opinion.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 30, 2012 17:10:55 GMT -5
I don't have kids so I can't say for sure what I'd do, but I'm pretty dang sure I would get them everything a doctor suggests and on the timetable that doctor suggests. Reading articles on the internet, in my opinion, does not override the years of medical school and experience a pediatrician has. Just as your child has no say in what is introduced into his body, that same child also has no say when it is decided NOT to vaccinate him/her. I would be pissed as all hell if I got some life-changing illness because my mother read some article that says only 1 in 100,00 kids get some disease and decided not to have me vaccinated and I happened to be that 1 in 100,000. In my opinion, you are playing Russian roulette with your child's heath and that, to me, is unacceptable. Unless, of course, you have a medical degree with years of experience along with it. While I can totally understand both sides of the circumcision debate, the vaccination debate, to me, is a no-brainer.
My sister asked about the Hep B vaccination for my nephew. While she and my nephew are definitely at low risk, her pediatrican told her that with the large number of children moving here to this country from another country where the disease is much more prevalent, she would be remiss not to vaccinate him. Even a 4 month old in day care could be exposed to a child who has just recently migrated to the States from somewhere where Hep B isn't rare - let alone the large number of children entering our school systems unvaccinated and exposed. She got the vaccination. Because she doesn't feel she knows more than the pediatrician. And because nothing is more important to her than her son's health. And she doesn't care who makes money off the damn thing just as long as her child is as safe as she can possibly make him.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Sept 30, 2012 17:16:50 GMT -5
And unlike internet sources, doctors are infallible.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 17:18:01 GMT -5
Some article? .... That was a published study. Unlike the 'articles' that generally claim vaccinations safe, actually... and that graph is from the CDC. www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5343a4.htmHow about STATEMENT of the ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS to the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources of the Committee on Government Reform U.S. House of Representatives RE: Submitted by Jane Orient, M.D. June 14, 1999 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/01/02/hepatitis-b-vaccine-part-four.aspxDo you think those doctors know what they are talking about ?? But by all means, be a sheeple. Do everything your doctor says and ignore the pharma machine which is responsible for way too much of doctor education in this country.... Personally, I don't think injecting 24 innoculations into a child before their first birthday makes him as safe as I can possibly make him... but if you want to keep casting me as the crazy one, go righ ahead... no skin off my nose...
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 30, 2012 17:20:14 GMT -5
I'm much better today, wrongside. Thank you for asking. I think I might live!
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 30, 2012 17:26:28 GMT -5
Oped? I don't think you are crazy. Whoever said that? I think you have opinions about what is best for your children and that is your right. I don't agree with them but I certainly don't think you are crazy. There's certainly no need to get all defensive and start calling people names because they don't agree with you. And by the way? "Sheeple" are the exact reason why diseases like polio are no longer a huge threat to your children. Because people went out and got their children vaccinated when it was recommended they do so. In herds. Just like sheep.
Thank you, Sheeple!!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 17:34:56 GMT -5
Some article? .... That was a published study. Unlike the 'articles' that generally claim vaccinations safe, actually... and that graph is from the CDC. www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5343a4.htmHow about STATEMENT of the ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN PHYSICIANS & SURGEONS to the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources of the Committee on Government Reform U.S. House of Representatives RE: Submitted by Jane Orient, M.D. June 14, 1999 Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/01/02/hepatitis-b-vaccine-part-four.aspxDo you think those doctors know what they are talking about ?? But by all means, be a sheeple. Do everything your doctor says and ignore the pharma machine which is responsible for way too much of doctor education in this country.... Personally, I don't think injecting 24 innoculations into a child before their first birthday makes him as safe as I can possibly make him... but if you want to keep casting me as the crazy one, go righ ahead... no skin off my nose... vaccinations come with a risk....just like non-vaccinating comes with a risk....either way that risk is moot unless your child is the 1 in whatever that gets the disease or has an adverse reaction. Doctors don't know everything. Each parent is hopefully intelligent enough to make the decision for their children regarding which risk they are willing to take.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 17:37:18 GMT -5
No. Sheeple is not the reason that polio is no longer a threat. I have said repeatedly, I am not anti-vaccine. What stopped polio is informed consent and the knoweldge that any risk from the vaccine was generally smaller than the threat from the disease. They made an informed, thoughtful decision. That is not sheeple.
(in order to simplify the argument I will not go into detail on the whole Sabin/Salk... or the fact that incidence of polio were already dropping off due to hygeine, etc. ... The point was that people were at least informing themselves to the best of their knowledge re: the risks during an epidemic, and were NOT just sheeple...).
Hep B is/was not epidemic among children in the United States.
What i question is the willingness to do whatever the doctor says, just because they are 'the doctor'.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 19:53:32 GMT -5
The AAPS is not considered a reliable source by the mainstream medical community. quick wiki: AAPS opposes mandated evidence-based medicine and practice guidelines, criticizing them as a usurpation of physician autonomy and a fascist merger of state and corporate power where the biggest stakeholder is the pharmaceutical industry.[17] Other procedures that AAPS opposes include abortion[18] and over-the-counter access to emergency contraception.[19] AAPS also opposes electronic medical records[10] as well as any "direct or de facto supervision or control over the practice of medicine by federal officers or employees."[20]
On Oct 25, 2008 the AAPS website published an editorial implying that Barack Obama was using Neuro-linguistic Programming, "a covert form of hypnosis", to coerce people to vote for him in his 2008 presidential campaign.[21] Risk-benefit analysis is tricky. It takes specialized training. That's why doctors listen to epidemiologists and public health specialists when making their own recommendations to their parents. That's why insurance firms have massive computers and teams of analysts. I'm not a health expert. I'm not a doctor. Therefore I assume that a doctor is better trained, has access to better information, and a better conceptual framework in which to analyze bits of data when it comes to health. I don't write my own legal documents, I don't do my own complex taxes, I don't do my own estate planning and I don't read stuff on the internet and think I'm better informed than people who devote their lives to studying something and do it as a profession. I don't think I can learn these skills on the internet. I guess that makes me a proud "sheeple".
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 20:40:46 GMT -5
Good thing your doc never recommended thalidomide then. ... because no doctor, lawyer, financial planner or accountant is every wrong or misled, or had an ulterior motive. Nor any organization.
I remember the time our pediatritian prescribed a topical medication to my 2 year old that had been banned in Europe. There is often not concensus on these things. As you note by showing that there are doctors with whom you do not agree, in terms of the AAPS (not sure how you know which doctors should be questioned and which shouldn't?)...
The FDA is frequently wrong. And even when they are in the right, Pharma does a ton of illegal things that the FDA is generally ineffective in stopping it until it has already impacted significant numbers.
It isn't hard to understand information, and to be able to evaluate a source for credibility, examine evidence and make a reasoned decision. It isn't any kind of extraordinary accomplishment...
I have made too many mistakes already on the advice of medical professionals and a system of recommended practices which are questionable... I will never do so again. I will be an informed consumer.
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 30, 2012 21:08:41 GMT -5
Agreed. I think I'd have to choose my pediatrician as the "credible source".
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 21:08:59 GMT -5
If you are interested, here is the longer doc on hep b testimony... www.thinktwice.com/Hep_Hear.pdf It was one of the things i was reviewing today, along with the CDC statistics and several published articles, like the one I linked earlier that noted how infants respond differently to the vaccine than adults... Like I've said before, I have no problem if you choose to vaccinate. I have a problem with a system which assumes all infants should have a Hep B vaccine within the first 12 hours of birth, and 24 innoculations in their first year... All I have said at all is that people should make INFORMED, thoughtful choices about their care, and not just follow some protocal. It does make me nervous when people blindly trust in any industry without an understanding of the inner workings and influences of that industry and the players that influence it. Too many of our medical guidelines and practices are written BY industry, pharma in particular... and too much doctor education takes place within the practice of marketing.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 21:09:03 GMT -5
No. I don't get a flu shot.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 21:38:25 GMT -5
It isn't hard to understand information, and to be able to evaluate a source for credibility, examine evidence and make a reasoned decision. It isn't any kind of extraordinary accomplishment... We have to disagree. I believe it's exceedingly difficult if you don't have the background to understand the relevance, meaning and source of a particular piece of information. DH has a kidney condition that has a substantial chance of leading to kidney failure. It's not common. Every now and then a study comes out and is published in a reputable journal. I pay my $30, download it, and read it. Without a medical background all it does is lead me to further questions, which I ask when we conference call with DH's nephrologist.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 21:39:07 GMT -5
All I have said at all is that people should make INFORMED, thoughtful choices about their care, and not just follow some protocal. Informed from where? I'd prefer to get my knowledge from son's pediatrician than from random websites and blogs.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 21:46:41 GMT -5
You know anne. Lets give it up now. I was not looking at random websites or blogs. I was looking at congressional testimony, CDC statistics and peer reviewed journals.
And no. I will not accept a single doctors, or a system which i find fundamentally flawed by special interest money, to be an end all be all authority on these things. I am a thinking, capable person who can read and reason and make informed decisions for myself, and while educated advisors i trust may lend to that processs, I trust no one indivdiual, or even organization, to make my decisions for me.
Pharma routinely influences doctors, research and medication protocals in this country. It is an extreme conflict of interest.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 30, 2012 22:00:28 GMT -5
If you are interested, here is the longer doc on hep b testimony... www.thinktwice.com/Hep_Hear.pdf It was one of the things i was reviewing today, along with the CDC statistics and several published articles, like the one I linked earlier that noted how infants respond differently to the vaccine than adults... Like I've said before, I have no problem if you choose to vaccinate. I have a problem with a system which assumes all infants should have a Hep B vaccine within the first 12 hours of birth, and 24 innoculations in their first year... All I have said at all is that people should make INFORMED, thoughtful choices about their care, and not just follow some protocal. It does make me nervous when people blindly trust in any industry without an understanding of the inner workings and influences of that industry and the players that influence it. Too many of our medical guidelines and practices are written BY industry, pharma in particular... and too much doctor education takes place within the practice of marketing. I explained to you the reason why the schedule is set up the way that it is. They have done studies and have determined tat unless an infant is vaccinated at well child visits, they are likely to not be, or get fully immunized. An infant is naive immunologically as soon as the immunity that crossed the placenta from mom wanes.....around 2 months. That means that they are essentially a sitting duck for any bacteria and virus that comes their way....about the time where they go into daycare. So you start getting them immunized against the things that can kill them as soon as you can. I'm thinking that getting stuck with a needle is a little better than catching diphtheria, or rotavirus.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 22:09:04 GMT -5
But infants were not being threatened by Hep B when the protocal was adopted. Very few children under age 14 were infected, and targeted vaccination would have been able to close that gap, without every child being vaccinated within 12 hours of birth.
So, because some parents can't be trusted to vaccinate at a later date, ALL infants should be given 24 innoculations in their first year?
How does breast feeding impact immunity?
'Stuck with a needle' isn't the issue. There are adverse effects of vaccinations. They do impact infant systems differently than adults.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 22:24:15 GMT -5
Pharma routinely influences doctors, research and medication protocals in this country. It is an extreme conflict of interest. What do you think of Andrew Wakefield then? He convinced tons of parents there was a link between vaccinations and autism at the same time he was trying to promote his own vaccine, which he claimed didn't cause autism. He used patients referred to him by a vaccine lawyer for his trials. He did spinal taps on kids that he met through his child's birthday party. How does breast feeding impact immunity? It's impossible to tell from child to child. Studies have shown that breastfeeding provides moderate protection against gastrointestinal illness and ear infections. It can't provide protection against illnesses that the mother was never exposed to. I will never do so again. I will be an informed consumer. It is impossible to be an informed consumer in any specialty unless you have that background yourself.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 22:31:52 GMT -5
I don't know of Andrew Wakefield and don't feel like looking it up now, but based solely on your statements, I do not support his practices or believe his claims. But you also must realize that much of pharma's research is also poorly constructed, intentionally biased and misused. I can't believe you honestly think its impossible to be an informed consumer unless you have an education/experiential background in every specialty ... I find that beyond scary...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 22:43:30 GMT -5
I don't know of Andrew Wakefield and don't feel like looking it up now, It's hard to believe you've done research on vaccine safety and haven't heard of Andrew Wakefield. I can't believe you honestly think its impossible to be an informed consumer unless you have an education/experiential background in every specialty ... I find that beyond scary... I can read a legal opinion and understand it but I couldn't tell you how it works in the real world. Do lawyers and judges cite it? Does it stand against appeal? Does it apply to my case? That takes a lawyer. I can read about a tax shelter but I can't tell you how often the IRS challenges it, whether or not it will make the IRS take a look at my tax returns, whether or not an alternative deduction makes more sense in my position. That takes an accountant. I can take a look at my crappy arm, read symptoms on the internet, and think I have carpal tunnel, and then find out from the doc that I actually have tendinitis - happened last week. That's why we hire specialists. I think it's arrogance to assume that I can study things for a short amount of time and have the same command of facts and judgement as someone that has been looking at it for much longer.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 22:55:10 GMT -5
I have been very clear that I am not anti-vaccine. I have not said I think vaccines cause autism. Although I do think there is an autism and autoimune connection and a vaccine autoimune connection. I think that in families with predisposition toward autoimmune, it makes even more sense to delay vaccination, take them slower and not so many at a time, etc. as you judge how an indivdiual child responds. I have never said though that I believed vaccines were evil, or that they caused autism, etc.
I don't know what to say about the informed consumer issue. I would not want to think that I was so incapable that I couldn't rely on my own sense and ability to reason, and had to be beholded to whatever the expert dejour happened to suggest was best for me. I don't know how you hire competent specialists without having some ability to make informed decisions ?? ...
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 30, 2012 23:32:06 GMT -5
But infants were not being threatened by Hep B when the protocal was adopted. Very few children under age 14 were infected, and targeted vaccination would have been able to close that gap, without every child being vaccinated within 12 hours of birth. So, because some parents can't be trusted to vaccinate at a later date, ALL infants should be given 24 innoculations in their first year? How does breast feeding impact immunity? 'Stuck with a needle' isn't the issue. There are adverse effects of vaccinations. They do impact infant systems differently than adults. So which vaccine do you think should be given at later dates? I'll give you hepatitis, but I understand their rationale for giving it on this schedule. Which disease do you think it is worthwhile increasing the risk for disease by delaying vaccination in an infant, who has very few defenses? Realize, the 2 month intervals between exposures are optimal for the production of the maximum antibody titer for many proteins. We use this schedule regularly in the lab as well when we want to generate antibody in lab animals.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2012 23:42:51 GMT -5
I would take out hepititis A and B right away. The rest, I don't know, I haven't had to look at it closetly for a long time... I doubt I'd be inclined to give any for the first year... after that prioritize based on likelihood of contraction, give more slowly, see what happens before progressing. I mean, what are the liklihood of an infant getting tetnus? I would want to look at each one indivdiually before committing. I would also consider paying for titers myself before subsequent doses.
I've said, I did not question a lot of things when I had my kids. Regarding them or me. There weren't as many then, but I would question every one if I was doing it again today. I just would not take any establishment answer on merit without reading and researching for myself.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 30, 2012 23:56:16 GMT -5
I would take out hepititis A and B right away. The rest, I don't know, I haven't had to look at it closetly for a long time... I doubt I'd be inclined to give any for the first year... after that prioritize based on likelihood of contraction, give more slowly, see what happens before progressing. I mean, what are the liklihood of an infant getting tetnus? I would want to look at each one indivdiually before committing. I would also consider paying for titers myself before subsequent doses. I've said, I did not question a lot of things when I had my kids. Regarding them or me. There weren't as many then, but I would question every one if I was doing it again today. I just would not take any establishment answer on merit without reading and researching for myself. Tetanus is given with diphtheria and pertussis......so this comment makes no sense, especially considering the resurgence of pertussis right now. Primary production of antibody usually produces a decent titer, but the antibody has poor avidity (which is the strength of the bond that forms between an antibody and antigen). A lower titer, higher avidity antibody is much more effective than a high titer lower avidity one. Avidity is partially a function of maturity. Higher avid antibody is formed after multiple exposures. Titer will tell you exposure, but rarely tell you effectiveness of the antibody.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2012 0:13:29 GMT -5
Are you saying that titers are not used to test the efficacy of Hep B vaccinations, and/or to determine the need for a booster immunization?
Yes, there is an outbreak of pertussis, so we must administer tetnus... sigh, am i the only one to whom this stuff sounds crazy... You know most of the kids getting whopping cough actually WERE vaccinated against it...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2012 0:24:11 GMT -5
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Oct 1, 2012 1:53:44 GMT -5
children.webmd.com/vaccines/features/robert-sears-alternative-vaccine-scheduleMeg Fisher, MD, a pediatric infectious disease specialist and medical director of the Children’s Hospital at Monmouth Medical Center in New Jersey and chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics' section on infectious diseases stops just short of calling Dr. Sears reckless and irresponsible. I'd go ahead if I were her. Since there is no proof, one way or the other, of the consequences/benefits of such a schedule as Dr. Sears proposes, I suppose he can't have his medicial license revoked for reckless endangerment, but I sure wish someone would consider it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 5:54:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2012 8:12:09 GMT -5
lol. A person can't know enough through research to make decisions on their own, but you are knoweldgable enough to speak for another doctor, and suggest who deserves to have a license... No, no, i understand, as long as they agree with you, they are a 'good' doctor... ok. There are whole countries who you should be speaking out against too you know. Not to mention how in the world you managed to survive without the current vaccination schedule.
Since the mid 80s, vaccines have gone from 7 diseases totalling 5 shots before age 2... to 14 diseases totally 24+ shots before 2, the majority before age 1. The studies on newer vaccines are not long term, nor do they adequately examine the sheer quantity of immunization and nonactive material being given at this time. Not to mention, again, the continuing conflict of interest of research and lobbying being completed by product manufactureres.
But again. Do what YOU feel is right. But you might want to hold back from suggesting that anyone who does something else is reckless, irresponsible, etc. ....
|
|