TB/Meningitis inoculations: Necessary?

Taiwan Parenting
21

[quote=“urodacus”]A) got definitive proof of that? (and more than from the CDC saying it will compensate those who had vaccine-related deaths as was announced last week, because those cases are not, still not, definite vaccine-caused deaths, but just made it onto the list for various reasons, some of which are genuine, but some as a result of cajolerey, some as a consequence of a medical worker using vaccine related death to divert attention from bad practice, and some by coincidental timing).

B) many many more would have died without the vaccinations. that’s why they require that children have them.[/quote]

So the government paying out millions to people for vaccine related deaths…isn’t enough proof to you that vaccines sometimes kill? So what kind of proof do you want exactly?

22

[quote=“Mordeth”][quote=“urodacus”]A) got definitive proof of that? (and more than from the CDC saying it will compensate those who had vaccine-related deaths as was announced last week, because those cases are not, still not, definite vaccine-caused deaths, but just made it onto the list for various reasons, some of which are genuine, but some as a result of cajolerey, some as a consequence of a medical worker using vaccine related death to divert attention from bad practice, and some by coincidental timing).

B) many many more would have died without the vaccinations. that’s why they require that children have them.[/quote]

So the government paying out millions to people for vaccine related deaths…isn’t enough proof to you that vaccines sometimes kill? So what kind of proof do you want exactly?[/quote]
Absurd. 0.1% of people suffer adverse effects. Your point?

23

[quote=“jimipresley”]
Absurd. 0.1% of people suffer adverse effects. Your point?[/quote]

Well…he said,

[quote=“sjhuz01”]

The chance of losing your child overnight should far outweigh any remote worries about side effects from the vaccination. [/quote]

So I responded with,

I would’ve thought my point was obvious. But I’ll re-explain it.

He said “the chance” of death should out weigh any worries about side effects. But there is also a “chance” of death when receiving a vaccine. So either way there’s a chance…regardless of percentages.

And another way to look at it. There is a very good chance…that if you give your son none of the vaccines…he still won’t catch any of the diseases and die. But if you give him the vaccines…you’re pretty much guaranteed to at least be doing some small amount of harm to your newborn’s developing brain.

And now someone might come in here and tell me how smart their kid is…but brain damage doesn’t necessarily mean stupidity. He could be suicidal or become a fecaphilliac or learn to play the saxophone or lord knows what else.

24

Don’t mean to be stubborn but … scientific proof maybe?

Showing my bias I’m sure, I was trained as a scientist, so I’ll take reproducible scientific tests as evidence over the choices [choices which have many influences, including which is more expensive to pay or to fight?] of any particular agency.

25

Um, no. There is no evidence of brain damage to infants (or anyone else) from taking a vaccine. And furthermore, your statistics are off. Even if some of the controversial cases are caused by vaccine - which has not been confirmed, but allowing it for the sake of argument - they are one out of millions kind of odds, nothing even remotely close to the .1% someone mentioned in this thread. Your odds of getting a disease in an area where it is prevalent are far far higher than that.

It is simple math. There is, at this point, no logical justification for refusing vaccines for your children.

26

[quote=“gamemaker”]
Um, no. There is no evidence of brain damage to infants (or anyone else) from taking a vaccine. [/quote]

Considering people have something called the Blood Brain Barrier which helps keep toxins in our blood from effecting our brain. And considering that a baby doesn’t have the B.B.B. until they are older than a year old. Doesn’t common sense just seem to say that we should be injecting mercury, formaldehyde, thirmesol (sp?), foreign animal DNA, and whatever else…directly into their blood stream…and without the B.B.B. that’s pretty much the same as injecting it into their brain.

Taking animal matter combined with toxic chemicals…then injecting them into a developing brain…I can’t imagine how that wouldn’t cause defects or mutations on some level. Is there any scientific proof that shows developing brain cells…and how immune to change they are when the above said toxins and foreign DNA are introduced to them? If not then there’s no scientific proof that the vaccines don’t cause harm either.

And once again but in short: Our body has a specific defense system to keep the kind of toxins that are found in vaccines away from our brain. But a newborn with it’s even more vulnerable brain…doesn’t have that defense system yet.

27

[quote=“Mordeth”]
Taking animal matter combined with toxic chemicals…then injecting them into a developing brain…[/quote]

Mordeth, that kind of alarmist crap is simply flat-out totally wrong. one does NOT inject vaccines directly into a brain, but intramuscularly. the vaccine materials travel then through the lymphatics, passing through many lymph nodes where they activate and select clones of the appropriate effective antibody-manufacturing B cells and memory T cells, and thereby giving you immunity to that particular combination of antigens. it makes no matter if there are one or five diseases vaccinated against in one shot, because there is not a one-to-one correlation of antibody types to each antigen, but many different antibodies are raised against each antigenic protein, so its not as if you need to worry about multishots. multishots probably give you even less of a dose per vaccine of the preservatives, even though they are given in such minor amounts anyway.

a baby DOES have a blood brain barrier, it is just not quite as tight a barrier as exists in an older individual, though there is no magic date where it is 0% effective one day and then 100% the next. the ‘illness’ that you often see after a vaccination is not an illness as such, but a turning on of the body’s reaction to infection system, which includes subjective lassitude, aches and pains like in the flu, and a raising of body temperature. It is the raised temperature that may cause the rare (extremely rare) febrile incidents that have affected children in the past, but as i mentioned earlier, there is no guarantee that this was caused by the vaccine and not by some other infection that the child caught at the same time. if you look at the list of cases compensated, it’s two children per year across a population of 24 million, which is effectively nothing.

I have suggested before that you really should study some of the background to the science you berate so strongly, if only so your comments don’t look so foolish, but i guess i needn’t bother to ask again.

28

[quote=“urodacus”][quote=“Mordeth”]
Taking animal matter combined with toxic chemicals…then injecting them into a developing brain…[/quote]

Mordeth, that kind of alarmist crap is simply flat-out totally wrong. one does NOT inject vaccines directly into a brain, but intramuscularly. the vaccine materials travel then through the lymphatics, passing through many lymph nodes where they activate and select clones of the appropriate effective antibody-manufacturing B cells and memory T cells, and thereby giving you immunity to that particular combination of antigens. it makes no matter if there are one or five diseases vaccinated against in one shot, because there is not a one-to-one correlation of antibody types to each antigen, but many different antibodies are raised against each antigenic protein, so its not as if you need to worry about multishots. multishots probably give you even less of a dose per vaccine of the preservatives, even though they are given in such minor amounts anyway.

a baby DOES have a blood brain barrier, it is just not quite as tight a barrier as exists in an older individual, though there is no magic date where it is 0% effective one day and then 100% the next. the ‘illness’ that you often see after a vaccination is not an illness as such, but a turning on of the body’s reaction to infection system, which includes subjective lassitude, aches and pains like in the flu, and a raising of body temperature. It is the raised temperature that may cause the rare (extremely rare) febrile incidents that have affected children in the past, but as i mentioned earlier, there is no guarantee that this was caused by the vaccine and not by some other infection that the child caught at the same time. if you look at the list of cases compensated, it’s two children per year across a population of 24 million, which is effectively nothing.

I have suggested before that you really should study some of the background to the science you berate so strongly, if only so your comments don’t look so foolish, but i guess i needn’t bother to ask again.[/quote]

You say there’s no guarantee that those kids didn’t just get sick for some other reason. Well it works both ways. There’s no guarantee that half the kids with mental disorders didn’t get them from vaccines. There are many cases of a normal healthy child recieving a vaccine and then…becoming mute, having seizures, retardation…etc.

And the fact that the government pays out to 2 per year…would hardly represent the number harmed. If you take red tape and doctor bureaucracy into mind…that 2 could easily be 200.

29

But where’s the fun in that?

To clarify the point, and I’m certainly in no way surprised by the sentiment. “Let other people take the remote risk of something going on because there are enough responsible people vaccinating their kids out there that I can be a completely irresponsible fuckwit bewitched by my utter lack of scientific knowledge and simply pray for the best.”

Since I do think there still maybe some scientific merit left in basic eugenics, I for one encourage, no, implore that you do all you possibly can not to immunise your child!

HG

30

I fail to see Mordeth’s point either, considering the way I’ve seen him drive on his videos…

Just saying is all…

31

[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]

To clarify the point, and I’m certainly in no way surprised by the sentiment. “Let other people take the remote risk of something going on because there are enough responsible people vaccinating their kids out there that I can be a completely irresponsible fuckwit bewitched by my utter lack of scientific knowledge and simply pray for the best.” [/quote]

Gonna have to repeat myself again. The people least likely to immunize their children…are doctors. My ex graduated top of her class and is a doctor…and she’s not immunizing at all. Not only that she says she regularly sees children who have vaccine damage. Regularly.

So you guys can laugh all you want about my lack of scientific knowledge. The fact still remains that those most knowledgable on the subject (doctors) are also those least likely to immunize.

32

My dad is a doctor. He did not vaccinate me against the whooping cough. I got the rest though.

Once I got bitten by a dog, he could not wait to get to jab a syringe of tetanus vaccine into my shoulder.

When I left for Taiwan, he sent me to a specialist, which administered a battery of vaccines as well.

Note that my old man is not out of line with the general sentiment among Danish doctors on that one, moreover he has never worked as a GP, so he has no financial gain in promoting vaccines either.

Vaccines and penicillin are the 2 best medical inventions ever made, and both have saved countless lives.

33

But where’s the fun in that?

To clarify the point, and I’m certainly in no way surprised by the sentiment. “Let other people take the remote risk of something going on because there are enough responsible people vaccinating their kids out there that I can be a completely irresponsible fuckwit bewitched by my utter lack of scientific knowledge and simply pray for the best.”

Since I do think there still maybe some scientific merit left in basic eugenics, I for one encourage, no, implore that you do all you possibly can not to immunise your child!

HG[/quote]

Well written, :notworthy:

I feel for the kid though.

34

Actually, I’m embarrassed and apologetic about the snarky tone in that earlier piece.

Mordeth, I haven’t followed this thread closely, so I’m not sure where you’ve managed to get this idea medicos don’t immunise, aside from, I think, some reference to a former girlfriend. In my experience, in particular working as a paediatrics nurse in a major teaching hospital during a whooping cough outbreak, all medical staff, doctors, nurses, etc, reserved a particular level of scorn for kids that arrive with preventable diseases, or rather diseases that the kid simply would not have had if their parents had seen that their kids get basic immunisations. As really shitty as this sounds, these kids certainly didn’t get the same level of compassion or care they would have had they been immunised - read into that as you will, because I’m not about to explain that further.

While I completely agree with not buying holus bolus the medical world’s expertise on spec, ie, always maintain a wary skepticism, things have moved along considerably since the days of thalidomide. I do applaud the concerns you have for your kid, but I think given you seem to have gotten yourself into a rather entrenched position on all this, the only advice I can suggest is to echo what Urodocus offered, and that is to really get your head around the medical science behind immunisation. Unfortunately you will have to start at the fundamentals before leaping into the speculative area of the fringe medicos that may oppose immunisation. I’m afraid that’s just how it works, as there are no short cuts.

I might add that at the time my son was born I was studying Chinese medicine, and so had similar concerns about the validity of immunisation. Fortunately for me, I was also earning my way through TCM medical school as a nurse, so was able to test my ideas on a wide range of real experts. I also happened to have a very good friend who was married to one of Australia’s leading (actually a global luminary as it later transpired) immunological specialists and discussed the issue ad nauseam - at his incredible patience in hindsight - over many a dinner party. I finally opted for immunisation and have absolutely no regrets.

BTW, the incidence of issues with immunisations are blurred by the process itself. All intervention entails some risk, especially breaking the skin barrier with a sharp object and inserting a foreign element, however, smarter minds than you and I have calculated the risk reward in all this and it always comes down on the side of immunisation.

HG

35

The people least likely to immunise their children are the poorest of the poor in southern Africa, in fact, not the medical community, who as far as I know are the MOST likely to maintain immunisation, though perhaps to their own schedule rather than the state-suggested one. Coincidentally, the highest rate of childhood disease, especially of things like polio, whooping cough, diptheria, etc, is in southern Africa.

Mordeth’s former girlfriend was once a doctor and later rejected medical science and its tenets and is now a naturalist, according to some earlier post of his. Hardly representative of nor likely to be sympathetic to mainstream medicine, I think. and i would not be surprised if all her friends Also rejected immunisation, so perhaps that’s where the erroneous picture comes from.

36

Gravedigging, personal attacks, nasty personal invective masquerading as intellectualism,
are all exceedingly:
:offtopic:
This thread was started with specific mention of TB/meningitis. Save your hackery quackery for a more general thread. That way someone might actually be helped instead of hindered by such drivel as posted over the course of the last two pages.

37

I asked my old man and my sister about this, because we’re in the same process with our infant. They both said “you’re absolutely off your rocker” if you decide against immunization. They’re both doctors. My dad’s been practicing for 50 years and my sister’s a member of a practice that has more than 40 docs. they ALL recommend immunization. And they both know of doctors who, like Mordeth’s ex, don’t recommend immunization. They regard this TINY minority of practitioners as dangerously wacked-out idiots.

38

A few people seem to think I’m making up the facts with regards to doctors not immunizing. The vast majority of doctors immunize…yes…no argument there. But, roughly 5% of doctors don’t immunize their children. They’ve done these kinds of surveys in a few first world countries. For any other profession…school teacher, garbage man, plumber…etc…it’s maybe only 1% who don’t immunize their children. So I just find it odd…that the people who are most knowledgeable are also those least likely to immunize (yes, it’s only 5%, but compared to the 1% of other people…that’s still fairly high). Another honest way to represent those figures is to say " A doctor is 5 times more unlikely to immunize his children than someone from any other profession."

Not to mention stuff like this keeps appearing on the news: cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/ … 1658.shtml

And people keep denying there’s a connection…when there so obviously is (5000 ER visits after getting a shot?!?)

39

No, I just think that you haven’t read the original journal article that was (very inaccurately) cited on that alternative medicine site you linked to in the other thread.

Ah, yes. “They.” The conspiracy theorists favourite way of trying to avoid actually providing evidence for an argument. Sources please?

Source please. The only source you have cited is the "cure-guide’ one, which links to, and inaccurately as well as selectively borrows information from a peer reviewed article published in Pediatrics in 2005. No where in the Pediatrics article were vaccination percentages given for parents in other professions. Seeing as how you picked out this study of Swiss doctors, would you care to provide us with the citation details for a study of vaccination rates of children by Swiss parents in other professions? A study that used similar data collection techniques to the Pediatrics one would be best.

40

Well there is the Swiss study which you mention. And I have seen others. Although google isn’t being too co-operative at the moment.

Here is one Doctor’s opinion though:

Dr Robert Mendelsohn -
He received his Doctor of Medicine degree from the University of Chicago in 1951. For 12 years he was an instructor at Northwest University Medical College, and an additional 12 years served as Associtae Professor of Pediatrics and Community Health and Preventive Medicine at the University of Illinois College of Medicine.

He was also President of the National Health Federation, former National Director of Project Head Starts Medical Consultation Service, and Chairman of the Medical Licensing Committee of the State of Illinois.

"Here is the core of my concern:

I. There is no convincing scientific evidence that mass inoculations can be credited with eliminating any childhood disease. While it is true that some once common childhood diseases have diminished or disappeared since inoculations were introduced, no one really knows why, although improved living conditions may be the reason. If immunizations were responsible for the diminishing or disappearance of these diseases in the United States, one must ask why they disappeared simultaneously in Europe, where mass immunizations did not take place.

  1. It is commonly believed that the Salk vaccine was responsible for halting the polio epidemics that plagued American children in the 19405 and 1950s. If so, why did the epidemics also end in Europe, where polio vaccine was not so extensively used? Of greater current relevance, why is the Sabin virus vaccine still being administered to children when Dr. Jonas Salk, who pioneered the first vaccine, points out that Sabin vaccine is now causing most of the polio cases that appear. Continuing to force this vaccine on children is irrational medical behaviour that simply confirms my contention that doctors consistently repeat their mistakes. With the polio vaccine we are witnessing a rerun of the medical reluctance to abandon the smallpox vaccination, which remained as the only source of smallpox-related deaths for three decades after the disease had disappeared.

Think of it! For thirty years kids died from smallpox vaccinations even though no longer threatened by the disease.

  1. There are significant risks associated with every immunization and numerous contraindications that may make it dangerous for the Shots to be given to your child. Yet doctors administer them routinely, usually without warning parents of the hazards and without determining whether the immunization is contraindicated for the child. No child should be immunized without making that determination, yet small armies of children are routinely lined up in clinics to receive a shot in the arm with no questions asked by their parents!

4 While the myriad short-term hazards of most immunizations are known (but rarely explained), no one knows the long term consequences of injecting foreign proteins into the body of your child. Even more shocking is the fact that no one is making any structured effort to find out.

  1. There is growing suspicion that immunization against relatively harm-less childhood diseases may be responsible for the dramatic increase in auto-immune diseases since mass inoculations were introduced. These are fearful diseases such as cancer, leukemia. rheumatoid arthritis, multiple sclerosis, Lou Gehrig’s disease, lupus erythematosus, and the Guillain-Barre syndrome. An autoimmune disease can be explained simply as one in which the body’s defense mechanisms cannot distinguish between foreign invaders and ordinary body tissues, with the consequence that the body begins to destroy itself. Have we traded mumps and measles for cancer and leukemia?"