why not put the word out?

[Fuchsia!]

Mmmm this may sound a little rude but why don't non vaxers put the word out that its dangerous?

I mean we know breast is best and we all like to tell people that then why don't non vaxers try to educate people on vax's?
same as c/s vs vb's

I may sound really out of line here so im sorry if i offend, i truley do but lately i have been trying to research why vaxxing is so dangerous and only a couple of people have come forward and actually offered me a couple of links. Im not sure if its because the same question is asked over and over so i would like to think that was the reason.


But something is telling me that non vaxxers don't want to get the word out cause if more people don't vaccinate then obviously the risk goes up that the dieseses will come back and therefore it could affect them.

And i do apologise if this isn't the case but its just how i am feeling at the moment. Sorry to offend:)

[the_queen]

For some non-vaxxers, herd immunity is a big part of why they don't vaccinate.

But me, heh :D I get on my soapbox at every opportunity :D (in real life, i mean)

There are lots of organisations trying to get the word out to the public, but there are two main problems: some people won't open their minds enough to listen; and big pharma companies have much much more money and influence than small non-profit organisations.

[our little treasures]

I think vaxers like myself already know some os the "dangers" but believe that it is in more of our interests to vaccinate.

[Fuchsia!]

that's the thing i always see threads putting the word out about how breast is best and c/s's are dangerous and feeding your baby under 6mths is dangerous but why not warn people about the dangers of vaxxing?

[SassyMummy]

Like The Queen said, I've heard that part of the reason some don't vaccinate is because lots of others do.

If no child was vaccinated then they would ALL be at risk of disease... but because so many ARE vaccinated, it means it's relatively safe not to vaccinate as the risk of the disease spreading is minimal, as not many people have a chance of actually catching it... if that makes any sense.

We vax in this household, and I don't think I could be talked around.... but hey, take one look at my sig and you know there's a chance...:laughing:

[the_queen]

I feel like I do :yes: I mean, in appropriate threads. I don't go into a thread about IVF and spout off about the dangers of C/section - I stick to the right section. I think I put forward my opinion fairly strongly :) (if you disagree, let me know, i'll work on it ;))

[Freya]

Yeah like queen said alot of non-vaxxers rely on herd immunity so understandably wouldn't be out there telling every tom, **** and harry! But there is other parenting forums where non-vaxxers are talking about the risks, and if you go to a naturopath they will always tell you the risks too.

[the_queen]

OK in the spirit of getting the word out there:D Stacey, I think that's a bit of a fallacy that if no kids were vaccinated there'd be rampant disease. There are HEAPS of other factors that have contributed to the lowering of infectious diseases in the last 100 years. Have you ever heard of Scarlett Fever? It used to be a killer disease, very scary for parents and very deadly for children. But nowadays it is unheard of. There's no vaccine for it. It has pretty much died out on it's own, through advances in hygiene, nutrition, infrastructure, and treatment. i.e. Nowadays we have flushing toilets, and hygenic garbage disposal, and clean running indoor water, and access to fresh fruit and veggies, and access to vitamin supplements and fresh milk and fresh meat. We all wash our hands multiple times throughout the day - only 100 years ago, doctors who delivered babies did not wash their hands inbetween one woman and the next :eek: So imagine how many times the normal average person washed their hands in a year?!!
There's lots of reasons that diseases die out, and one of the smallest and most inconsequential reasons is that a multi-national pharmaceutical company developed what they say is a vaccine against it.

[Fuchsia!]

maybe im not understanding this properly but to me if i knew something was dangerous, for example vaccination and that the ingredients were harmful and had serious effects and may even cause death i would want the whole world to know. I think it would be selfish of me not to.

If a recalled toy, for example Bindeez was going to harm babies then its important to get the message out there that its dangerous and can cause harm. i wouldn't want any baby to suffer

[shed]

what? you mean like ram it down people's throats??

ooh no, would never do that luv :shame:

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

:p

The information is there for those who want it. Its not a secret. I found it easily and I'm no rocket scientist.

[RedPanda]

Serious question here Queenie, when did Scarlet Fever die out? My BIL had it about 15 years ago, and when I found out I scoffed and thought it hadn't been around since Anne of Green Gables' era!

[Fuchsia!]

what? you mean like ram it down people's throats??

ooh no, would never do that luv :shame:

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

:p

The information is there for those who want it. Its not a secret. I found it easily and I'm no rocket scientist.

well im not the brightest crayon in the pack cause i find it really difficult to read statisics and medical studies! I just can't understand it at all. Im not sure if the kids whinging and jumping around like lunitics contribute to it!

Oh well i guess im just going to have to keep reading until i come across something that i can understand!

[SassyMummy]

Sorry Queen, didn't mean we'd all be diseased... there might just be a higher RISK of disease because there'd be more people for it to spread amongst.

As for Scarlet Fever... my 12 year old cousin had it when she was about 5...:confused:

[AM]

I did a big long stint about non vaxxing a couple of years back, and I think I got serious burnout from it!!

I do get tired of repeating everything over and over, especially when Perth Pony is here to give the goods.

Actually, that is going to be my standard line from now on..."search Perth Pony's posts" :)

[shed]

I agree, Perth Pony is the one to go to if you just want the cold hard facts in front of you.

Knows her stuff she does.

[metalhead713]

that's the thing i always see threads putting the word out about how breast is best and c/s's are dangerous and feeding your baby under 6mths is dangerous but why not warn people about the dangers of vaxxing?
because the benifets outweigh the risks and i wouldnt change my mind anyway.
Made my desicion and sticking to it.

[shed]

because the benifets outweigh the risks and i wouldnt change my mind anyway.
Made my desicion and sticking to it.

Actually you can't undo it anyway so its good that you're happy about it.

[metalhead713]

cant undo it? Yes you can.. I know quite a few people who afer a few vaccs decided to stop...:confused:

[SassyMummy]

That's not undoing it though, that's just decided not to continue.

Undoing it would be to somehow extract what was injected from the body... and somehow take back to effects it's supposed to have on the body.

You can't undo it. You can stop doing it in hte future, but you can't undo what you've already done.

I'm a vaxer, so don't think I'm having a go...

[Fuchsia!]

so do you think i would be able to ask perth_pony if she would be able to make it sound easier to understand? If that makes sense?

Oh god im such a derro!

[metalhead713]

you can undo it, because eventually it 'wears out' if you know what i mean.. thats why babies go for repeats so much every 2, 4, 6, etc. months. And they gradually build up an immunity. This is with the first year shots anyway, not sure about the rest, and this is what my chn was telling me the other day. If you dont make vaccs a routine they are useless.

[AM]

Vaxes skew the whole immune system. You can't undo that.

[metalhead713]

im talking if it was like, the first vaccs ever receieved, then you stopped, it would be close to nothin at all, you could definetly still stop if you wanted to.

[Fuchsia!]

thanks PP that would be a great help! But to be honest i have no idea where to start! I have come to the conclusion that the chicken pox vax isn't for me. Even though the complications that can come of it scares the hell out of me but is it true that the vax doesn't last forever? So to me if it doesn't last then if they were to get it when they are older than it would be far more risky.

I would like to know what diseases are still out there. So how many cases there have been. What is the chances of cooper getting them.

What are the side affects from the vax's? I have there have been links to autism with the MMR vax.

Its too late for jaxon cause he's had them all apart from the chicken pox and its a little too late for Cooper cause he's up to date. his next ones are when he's one. but for future kids its not to late

thanks PP:)

[3cherubs]

jaxcoop- A good website is avn.org.au, tells you lots about dangers of vaccines etc.

Or go to http://www.whale.to/vaccines/butler88.html
The book "Just a little prick" is excellent too:thumbsup: :thumbsup: Gives a very good insight into diseases and vaccines.

Good luck with it all...

[moonblossom]

There has been so many FOR/AGAINST threads for vacs, I just never felt the need to jump up on my pedestal and scream till people heard me.

It is the parents job, to inform themselves, then make the right decision for their family. And if they dont bother researching, then I think they are foolish, because that is not an informed choice.

Thats all

[Pippi Longstocking]

I did a big long stint about non vaxxing a couple of years back, and I think I got serious burnout from it!!

I do get tired of repeating everything over and over, especially when Perth Pony is here to give the goods.

Actually, that is going to be my standard line from now on..."search Perth Pony's posts" :)


I agree, Perth Pony is the one to go to if you just want the cold hard facts in front of you.

Knows her stuff she does.

What they said. As the decision to vax or not is about risk analysis, you really need to do your own research and work out where you feel the greatest risk lies.

[Fuchsia!]

wow thanks PP that is great info there. i will come back tonight when the kids are asleep and go through the links.

the only other thing im worried about (may seem petty) but what if they do get measles and if im pregnant that would be bad right? Cause its really dangerous if i get measles while pregnant?

[the_queen]

Are you thinking of German Measles, AKA Rubella. It can cause birth defects (although I have a study around here somewhere which refutes the huge scare tactics surrounding that fact... I will try to find it after dinner)


:yelclap: PP ya legend!!!!

[Fuchsia!]

yep sorry that's the one!

My mums best friend had a baby with bad birth defects (can't remember what) and she was exposed to rubella when she was pregnant, that is why i asked:)

[the_queen]

Generally it's thought that contracting Rubella during pregnancy can make the baby deaf.

The problem with the rubella vaccine is that it probably wears off in adulthood. Ideally, all women who are about to get pregnant should have their titres done and find out whether they're immune to Rubella. But of course not all pregnancies are planned like that.

[Fuchsia!]

i know when i was pregnant with cooper it said on my prenatal card that i was low and im sure he said on the card to give me a shot after the baby was born but i can't remember! I will have to search out the card and see what it said. If i have had my shot then it wouldn't matter would it?

Also i will ask my mum what the birth defect was.:)

[the_queen]

If you have had a Rubella booster, then technically you're "covered" - but what if it has worn off already, what if it was a bad batch that didn't work, etc etc. If you're really concerned about it (and I totally understand - when something bad has happened to someone we know, it really drives that point home) then you can have a blood test before you get pregnant again, to check your immunity levels.

:)

[Fuchsia!]

well i asked mum and she seems to have forgotten :rolleyes: but that's a good idea about the blood test. Thanks for your help you have been great :hugs:

[the_queen]

No problem :) And can I just make this clear - I am certainly anti-vax for myself and my kids, but for other people I am absolutely pro-informed-choice and if you read all the info and ask all the questions and then still decide to vaccinate, then I will absolutely support you in that decision. :hugs: :hugs:

[bindiloo]

Mmmm this may sound a little rude but why don't non vaxers put the word out that its dangerous?

I mean we know breast is best and we all like to tell people that then why don't non vaxers try to educate people on vax's?
same as c/s vs vb's

I may sound really out of line here so im sorry if i offend, i truley do but lately i have been trying to research why vaxxing is so dangerous and only a couple of people have come forward and actually offered me a couple of links. Im not sure if its because the same question is asked over and over so i would like to think that was the reason.


But something is telling me that non vaxxers don't want to get the word out cause if more people don't vaccinate then obviously the risk goes up that the dieseses will come back and therefore it could affect them.

And i do apologise if this isn't the case but its just how i am feeling at the moment. Sorry to offend:)



Hi Jaxcoop, i guess i dont go running around starting threads telling people these are the dangers WARNING WARNING because alot of the vaxers dont like it and we all end up in slinging matches. As for the ones in between who are undecided and looking for info then it is best to just ask us and we will help but sometimes we have a heap of threads started around the same time asking the same questions and yes if your really not in the mood then i think most people just cant be bothered going thru it all again.
Basically if we non-vaxers started lecturing our friend etc about vaccinations then we probably wouldnt have many:D .
Most people dont realise u have an option to refuse vaccinations and wouldnt dare go against what a doctor or society tells them is what is the norm to do so we would be talking on deaf ears plus you can tend to get treated like a bad parent so most non-vaxers just keep to ourselves in the real world about our choices.
I must say though it is great to see more and more people on here questioning the vaccines and wanting to actually make informed researched decisions and not just following the herds.:thumbsup:

[Fuchsia!]

yep i totally understand where your coming from.

Before bubhub, i always thought that something was a little iffy about vaxing but i wasn't sure why i felt like this and then since coming in bubhub i have learnt so much and i can't believe i am actually considering not vaxing! Now i realise it was my insincts kicking in. I have loads of research to do and lucky me i have 4mths to decide cause his next needles are at 12mths. I have already decided not to do chicken pox and MMR (maybe, not 100% sure yet)

[Pauline70]

Generally it's thought that contracting Rubella during pregnancy can make the baby deaf.

The problem with the rubella vaccine is that it probably wears off in adulthood. Ideally, all women who are about to get pregnant should have their titres done and find out whether they're immune to Rubella. But of course not all pregnancies are planned like that.

This is going back MANY years ago, but my Mum was diagnosed with German Measles when she was pregnant with my youngest brother - he was born deaf in 1 ear.

When I've had pregnancy tests with bloods done by doctors they always check my Rubella. Just thought that was interesting.....

[the_queen]

It is interesting - if doctors had faith in the Rubella vaccine, why bother checking your immunity levels? and if it isn't very effective, then why give it at all?

[Seekrit]

Because some people don't get vaccinated and also some people actually don't get immune to it.. I know someone who had the rubella vaccine TWICE when she was younger, had her levels checked and it showed not immune, so she had it done again and when she was checked again it showed non-immune - it's how some people's bodies work... so basically she knows that when she does fall pregnant, she needs to avoid rubella, instead of assuming she's immune to it. IYKWIM

I haven't read the whole thread.. but I'm a bit of the opinion that BOTH vaxxing and non-vaxxing have equal pros and cons, I, personally, did my research weighing into the diseases, the chance of getting them and their long term/short term/very rare side effects and the same with vaccinations... then I made up my mind.

Why, instead of pushing bf v ff, cs v nb, co-sleep v cot-sleep... why not just raise your own children and not 'put the word out' as to how others should raise theirs?

Why cause more divide over an already touchy subject.

[Oscar's mum]

Because some people don't get vaccinated and also some people actually don't get immune to it.. I know someone who had the rubella vaccine TWICE when she was younger, had her levels checked and it showed not immune, so she had it done again and when she was checked again it showed non-immune - it's how some people's bodies work...

I read an article not that long ago about a study of Diphtheria patients by the British Medical Council. The results obtained in the study were quite unexpected and contradictory that the study had to be bought to a close.

It was found that many Diphtheria patients had high leves of antibodies, whereas many of the doctors, nurses and friends who were in close contact with the Diphtheria patients had low antibody levels and yet remained perfectly well.

[Josh]

I have already mentioned this in another post, the non vaxers should lobby the govt if they feel that vaccines contain something that is not good.

[AM]

I have already mentioned this in another post, the non vaxers should lobby the govt if they feel that vaccines contain something that is not good.


In essence, that is what we do when we submit our Conscientious Objectors forms.

[Fuchsia!]

oh thats another thing, if i decide to not vax what it that form thing? Is that what you give the school to say that he can still be enrolled?

[AM]

It states that you have a conscientious objection to vaccines,you get it signed by a doc and you submit it to medicare before your child is 18 months of age to still get the immunisation allowance ($200 odd) and keep a copy (signed by a doc) to show day care or school or whoever, as by law, you cannot be excluded because of vax status, but you can be asked to keep your child at home during an outbreak if one occurs.

[3cherubs]

jodie9- Because the numbers of non-vaxers are small compared to those that Vax.
The Government would laugh it off and it has probably already been done by the AVN etc.
That is why studies showing that vaccines ARE dangerous are always laughed off and ignored. The lobby groups do not have the cash and backing to push it further.

Where as Pharmaceutical Companies do countless studies into how GOOD ( not) Vaccines are. Because they have all the money in the world...

Bit of a shame:snow: :gloomy:

[missie_mack]

The Government would laugh it off and it has probably already been done by the AVN etc.
That is why studies showing that vaccines ARE dangerous are always laughed off and ignored. The lobby groups do not have the cash and backing to push it further.

Interestingly the use of formaldehyde has been completely banned this year by the European Union so perhaps some things are starting to change??

[shed]

I have already mentioned this in another post, the non vaxers should lobby the govt if they feel that vaccines contain something that is not good.

No way. I am happy for you to vax your kids. Your kids your choice. I have nothing to lobby the government about, I just make my own choice.

If vaxing was compulsory then I would lobby for it to be optional. But it already is.

Its a vaxxers job to lobby the government to take out the dangerous part because they are the ones that it is affecting. It has no effect on us whatsoever.

[Fuchsia!]

you are so right shed! its up to the vaxxers to say something cause it is going into their kids :yes:

Is there any way you can find out how many other kids aren't vaxxed at their preschool or is their a privacy act?

[Oscar's mum]

Is there any way you can find out how many other kids aren't vaxxed at their preschool or is their a privacy act?


I very much would hope that information like that is covered in the privacy act.

[missie_mack]

Its against Privacy Laws to release information on anothers medical records. A breach of the act can see an individual fined up to $60k (I think) and a lot more for the company they work for :eek:

[Fuchsia!]

i wouldn't want to know who's had them just how many

[missie_mack]

I am fairly confident they still cannot release that information. There was recently a issue about releasing numbers in schools for a medical study and those conducting the study were peeved because they were declined the data they wanted and made a submission to parliament and the privacy commissioner about it.

[Fuchsia!]

ok that's ok, i am just curious that's all. Is there any statistics out there on how many people do and don't vax?

[missie_mack]

Bureau of Statistics (http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/9ACFFBA936A179CBCA256D3A002760D9#APPENDIX%20D.%20C haracteristics%20of%20ch)data on immunisations and the ACIR :)
Medicare (http://www.medicareaustralia.gov.au/providers/health_statistics/statistical_reporting/acir.htm)

[Fuchsia!]

thanks for that!

I am really surpirised at how many people vax! I didn't think there would be that many!

[Josh]

you are so right shed! its up to the vaxxers to say something cause it is going into their kids :yes:

Is there any way you can find out how many other kids aren't vaxxed at their preschool or is their a privacy act?


I already know who isn't vaccinated at my kids school, there is not many, only 10 kids that i know of,just ask the school they might tell you.

[missie_mack]

I already know who isn't vaccinated at my kids school, there is not many, only 10 kids that i know of,just ask the school they might tell you.

Im a little confused :confused: It wasn't that long ago that you stated

The primary school which my kids go to includes a pre school, you have to be fully immunised to gain enrolment,it is there policy, no immunisation, no go

[Josh]

Hi missie_mack, I'm sorry that you misunderstood, it is only the pre school where you have to be fully immunised, the primary school is not the same, I am pretty sure that public schools have to accept non immunised kids.Thanks for the query.:thumbsup::)

[prideNJoy]

Hi missie_mack, I'm sorry that you misunderstood, it is only the pre school where you have to be fully immunised, the primary school is not the same, I am pretty sure that public schools have to accept non immunised kids.Thanks for the query.:thumbsup::)

WOW, so 10 kids in a pre-school that your little ones go to are NOT vaccinated! If i was a vaxer i would consider 10 to be alot.:confused:

ETA: scrap that, i read it differently.:o

[Josh]

I just want to comment on the rubella vaccine,(i know it's off topic), I have had to have the rubella shot 5 times in the last 7 yrs, my body absorbs it really quickly, every time I give birth it goes back down.

[the_queen]

You are misinformed jodie9. Your body doesn't absorb it quickly - it wears off.

[Josh]

How can it wear off the_queen, i was pregnant sometimes only 2mths after giving birth each time, how can that be?, and also I was told by my ob that my body is absorbing it, so maybe you are the 1 that is misinformed.Have a nice day.:)

[PaperTiger]

Mmmm this may sound a little rude but why don't non vaxers put the word out that its dangerous?

Hi jaxcoop :wave: how you doing?
Thats a fair question jc, dont think its rude at all. I think most do try and put the word out.
Sometimes though it feels (to me) a bit like bashing your head against a brick wall iykwim :D :banghead: :D So its easier just to shrug shoulders and think, "oh well c'est la vie".

But to be honest, its not down to the non vaxers to inform others of the dangers of vaccine induced illnesses IMO. Really I beleive those that really DO want to find out, will do the research and discover for themselves the reasons that non vaxxers feel the way they do.
Most people, when researching has been thorough and extensive will usually be persuaded IMO :)


I already know who isn't vaccinated at my kids school, there is not many, only 10 kids that i know of,just ask the school they might tell you.

How did you find out which children are not immunized. Did the parents tell you? I hope it wasn't the school. If it was they could be in serious trouble for breaching confidentiality laws.

[the_queen]

How can it wear off the_queen, i was pregnant sometimes only 2mths after giving birth each time, how can that be?, and also I was told by my ob that my body is absorbing it, so maybe you are the 1 that is misinformed.Have a nice day.:)

So.... you had the vax in early pregnancy, then when that baby was 2 months old you got pregnant again, and when you went for pre-natals, your immunity was tested again and you had no immunity?

Jodie9 are you arguing for or against vaxes?? :D

[Tea Lady]

Hazellew: The incidence of Scarlett fever has been in decline ever since the early 1900's. It is the SAME for all other VP diseases. Only difference is, the decline in these diseases has been attributed to the development of vaccines. Well, there is no vaccine for SF and that was in decline at the same time.
Amazing stuff huh.

http://www.healthsentinel.com/graphs...rint_list_item

This page also shows a list of graphs that dictate the decline of diseases in relation to the introduction of vaccines.

http://www.whale.to/a/graphs.html

I'm sorry but I really have to take issue with this.


The graphs you have provided show (with a couple of exceptions) the DEATH rate from these diseases, not the decline of the diseases, as you claim. There is a BIG difference. There are many reasons why the death rate of a disease may decline without the incidence of the disease actually decreasing (eg the introduction of the iron lung preventing polio deaths).

I would strongly suggest that people check out the rest of the website www.whale.to before they decide whether or not to trust their information on vaccinations ..... it seems to me to be a site not exactly laden with scientific integrity.

People may also like to read this (http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/0201hyglibcat/020115/Credentials.disputed.htm) conversation about Raymond Obomsawin, the author of the book that most of the graphs were taken from.

[Tea Lady]

There are numerous potential side effects, I think the most important side effect from vaccinating our children is that WE do not ALLOW for our babies to build up their immune systems. They are never taught to fight off diseases by themselves so how in the world do we expect them to know how to put up a fight against diseases that are not VP.

This strikes me as a truly bizarre thing to say. On what do you base the idea that an immunised baby is not "allowed" to build up its immune system?

Please provide some evidence that this is a possible effect of vaccination because this is a very serious claim to make (and quite contrary to what I've observed in real life and read in medical literature).

[LovelyRita]

However, do you know what the statistics are for adverse reactions and death from the actual vaccine??


Serious adverse events have been reported to be temporally related to vaccination at a rate of 2.9 per 100 000 doses distributed.50 (http://www9.health.gov.au/immhandbook/handbook/section-s-3-27.html#S-3.27-R-50) These include encephalitis, ataxia, erythema multiforme, pneumonia, thrombocytopenia, seizures, neuropathy, anaphylaxis and death.Compared to the actual incidence of death from chicken pox.

The overall case-fatality rate in Australia is approximately 3 per 100 000 cases. In the USA, the fatality rate of varicella is approximately 1 per 100 000 cases among children aged 1 to 14 years; this increases to 25.2 deaths per 100 000 cases among adults aged 30 to 49 years.
This is why it is so important to contract chicken pox and the rest early on in life.




That isn't exactly a fair comparison though. You are comparing the overall serious side-effects of the vaccine only to the death rate of the chicken pox itself. It would be fairer to make a direct comparison of serious complications of both to get a more clear idea of what would be the higher risk.

[the_queen]

But serious complications from any communicable disease are generally caused by a weakened/compromised immune system.

[Josh]

So.... you had the vax in early pregnancy, then when that baby was 2 months old you got pregnant again, and when you went for pre-natals, your immunity was tested again and you had no immunity?

Jodie9 are you arguing for or against vaxes?? :D

the_queen I wasn't arguing about anything, I only commented on the fact that , after i have a baby my immunity is zero so therefore i have a shot of rubella whilst I'm still in hospital, and this has been repeated several times due the fact that i have had 6 kids in 7 yrs, I am hoping that I have explained it a little better this time.

[cosmic]

Jodie, I think the point Queenie was making was just that your experience highlights one thing: Being vaccinated doesn't necessarily make you immune!

It's a bit weird that you have to keep getting a shot over and over again. What's the point of the vaccine? :confused:

And on a completely separate topic... 6 kids in 7 years? Holy dooley! You need to get a TV love!! :D

[LovelyRita]

But serious complications from any communicable disease are generally caused by a weakened/compromised immune system.

But that wasn't exactly the point of my question. I am not necessarily pro-vaccination. I am still researching at the moment to work out what I think is best and am delaying further vax until then. But when people compare one thing with another like that and it isn't a direct comparison to make just seems to put out misinformation.
JMO

[Josh]

Jodie, I think the point Queenie was making was just that your experience highlights one thing: Being vaccinated doesn't necessarily make you immune!

It's a bit weird that you have to keep getting a shot over and over again. What's the point of the vaccine? :confused:

And on a completely separate topic... 6 kids in 7 years? Holy dooley! You need to get a TV love!! :D

I know what your saying cosmic, sometimes i have actually dreaded when the time came to have my shot , because those rubella shots hurt like crazy, for some reason my body doesn't hold onto it for long, anyway yeah, i know 6 kids under 7, I actually have 9 all up.:yelclap:

[LovelyRita]

Mr.Mustard, please dont take my post the wrong way. My intention was only to question why you called my post mis-information.
Are those statistics contrary to another report?
FWIW, I got those stats off a PRO-vaccination website.

I also have the same trouble with finding info that isnt contradicted in every other site.
You have to read between the lines with some of them. They have sneaky ways of hiding things or bringing across a point without revealing the true facts about it.

I dont mind being questioned, challenged or refuted, but due to the time i take to be as balanced as possible, and to ensure i provide correct links, someone calling my posts misinformation, i find offensive to say the least. Thats all. :)

Oh, I'm sorry for offending you. :)

I was going to go into the discussion further but have changed my mind. Maybe misinformation was the wrong word used. I just worry that people don't look at it as a whole and will only look at certain things and not the big picture but I guess that's up to them.

Have a nice day. :)

[UmmInayah]

I don't think that any of the risks of vaccinating have actually been PROVEN. If someone can prove me wrong? It is hard to tell whether the vaccination is what has caused the problem.

[shed]

I don't think that any of the risks of vaccinating have actually been PROVEN. If someone can prove me wrong? It is hard to tell whether the vaccination is what has caused the problem.

For instance, maybe the child was going to scream excessively, break out into a rash or a fever, or have welts at the injection site, or suffer from allergies, eczema and behaviourial problems or have brain damage or die anyway

Is that the sort of thing you mean?

[Tea Lady]

Here is a graph showing disease rates, and all apart from measles showing a steady decline in incidence since the earlier part of the 1900's.

http://www.healthsentinel.com/graphs...rint_list_item

http://www.healthsentinel.com/graphs...rint_list_item

Its still rather interesting to note though the decline of deaths occuring FAR before the introduction of vaccines.

You seem to misunderstand me. I am not disputing the fact that the incidence of many diseases decreased before the introduction of vaccines for those diseases - it's hard to imagine how it could not have decreased, given the improved understanding of how diseases are transmitted as well as improvements in hygeine and sanitation.




that people check out the rest of the website www.whale.to before they decide whether or not to trust their information on vaccinations ..... it seems to me to be a site not exactly laden with scientific integrity.
This site is the one i have taken these graphs from. http://www.healthsentinel.com
This information was sourced from the Historical/Vital Statistics of the United States. The same source of which the CDC obtain their information.

One graph was from the healthsentinel site, the rest were linked in your post from the whale.to site. My problem is not just with those graphs, it is with the integrity of the site in general. Anybody can set up a website, even if they have no idea what they are talking about, or have some kind of warped agenda, so I think it's important to carefully weigh up the value of information presented by any website, when it comes to important issues like my family's health.




Originally Posted by Tea Lady View Post
This strikes me as a truly bizarre thing to say. On what do you base the idea that an immunised baby is not "allowed" to build up its immune system?
By allowing our babies to naturally fight off these diseases i believe enables their immune system to be better equipped at dealing with other non VP diseases. Trying to make this as easy to read as possible...
The more exposure one has to a pathogen/antigen, the more antibodies are made... the more antibodies circulating the blood, the more efficiently they bind to an antigen enabling that pathogen to be broken down by white cells.
See what goes on here?

This is why natural exposure to a disease can produce a longer lasting immunity to that of vaccine aquired immunity. You will of course understand this from reading your medical literature.


Once again you misunderstand me. I was not saying that natural exposure to a disease cannot provide longer lasting immunity than vax acquired immunity.

That is not what you stated though - you said "we do not allow them to build up their immune systems" - very different. If you make a statement like that as if it is fact, it is your responsilbility to back up that statement, anyone else's to disprove you. This is especially true since it is obvious that some people on this forum regard you as something of an expert on the subject of vaccination.

I'm happy to chase up some links though, and I'll check out the other info you gave when I'm less snowed under with other stuff - would you mind going back and putting links to the 2 large quotes so I can read them in context? Thanks.

Just for the record, I have no problem whatsoever with people making an informed decision based on correct information. However, a decision based on misrepresented information (whether accidentally or deliberately misrepresented) is not an informed decision. I personally am not going to be giving my children all of the recommended vaccinations, so I am not on some kind of "vaccination is the answer to all our problems" kind of crusade.

It really concerns me however to see statistics and scientific studies being summarised incorrectly and compared inappropriately, especially on an internet forum where people by their own admission are trusting others to explain things for them.

[PaperTiger]

Perth_Pony, you are fighting an almost lone battle here, it is obvious. Your posts are very factual from what I can see and in my opinion; but I also see the struggle you have with those who choose to see subversivness in what you write.
It is very much like bashing your head against a brick wall, a thankless task indeed.
I believe your heart is in the right place and your concerns are genuine.
Let those who want to stay on their side of the offence stay there. You cannot force people to see what they dont want to see.
You are struggling against mainstream ideology, power and money, a difficult and complicated road.
If people ask questions its fine to answer as best as you know how. However getting involved in debate about those answers is a waste of time, because for the most part, every answer is a rabbit hole of semantics and perceptions, perceptions which are primarily driven for the most part by personal beliefs and history.
Given the paucity of information in the general public domain about the side effects, it is no surprise that for most, it is inconceivable that the anti vaccination agenda is anything other than for 'hippies' and their followers.
The fact that any dissenters are widely criticized and condemned, and that the government offers financial inducements (I know it isn't if one looks carefully, but this is what most beleive because they don't go looking) to vaccinate, and that it is widely considered 'bad parenting' or worse, not to vaccinate, does not for the most part unfortunately, gives reason to question deeply and thoroughly the supposed ideology that lies behind it.
To the OP, my apoligies for going off topic from the original question, but it does bear some relevance to it I believe.

[missie_mack]

Given the paucity of information in the general public domain about the side effects, it is no surprise that for most, it is inconceivable that the anti vaccination agenda is anything other than for 'hippies' and their followers.

I always find that people see them as being hippies ironic. As when research was done by the Australian Medical Journal they found that most objectors were well educated, older and females (and of Anglo-Saxon background not that that makes a difference to the Hippy labels)

Incidently (Its probably a little off topic) the National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance has a new tool (which seems very balanced on the pros and cons) for making a informed decision about the MMR Vaccine Link here (http://www.ncirs.usyd.edu.au/decisionaid/index.html)

[Harriet]

I find it frustrating and feel as though your picking through my posts now with a fine tooth comb. Why not do that with others who DO make incorrect, unsubstantiated claims.

Maybe it would be best if i just left the immunisation topic from now on.

Exactly! There are pro-vaxers making all kinds of unresearched, ridiculous statements on these threads and yet you feel the need to play semantics with a well-researched non-vaxer who is trying to spread an important message. :thumbsdown: I find this quite bizarre! She is providing links which are very hard to find and I for one, am very happy about that. Of course, I take nothing at face value and I do my own research, as everyone should. PP makes it easier is all.

Keep the goods coming PP:thumbsup: You will find there are many here grateful for your input.

[shed]

Keep the goods coming PP:thumbsup: You will find there are many here grateful for your input.

I agree.

[Snugglepot]

I agree too, thanks to everyone for all the links put up. :thumbsup:

[Fuchsia!]

Maybe it would be best if i just left the immunisation topic from now on.

PP i think you shouldn't go anywhere, i think you put valuable info out on the table and its up to each individual if they wish to believe it or look into to it more. You know your stuff and you need to stick around to help out people like me:)

[the_queen]

I think, in TL's defence, it is certainly appropriate to doubt and question each and every bit of information you find - whether it's from the legendary Perth Pony (:smiliedance:) or from your local God - i mean, Doctor :mad: :p

Being truly informed means not just doing what other people tell us, right? I love reading your stuff, PP, absolutely and I would not want you to bow out at all. But TL raises a good point that each of us needs to research everything for ourselves in order to make an informed decision for our selves and our children.

[the_queen]

What's the difference between God and a doctor?


God never thought he was a doctor..... :p