As long as it's making money, it won't be taken off the market.
And as long as parents just follow what they're told they need to do for their children, without questioning why, children will continue to die from this unnecessary vaccine.
What a tragedy for this family and so many others.
Posted by GretaM (Member # 40917) on :
Makes me sick to my stomach.
Parents need to open their eyes and research.
Assuming drug companies have lives in mind is deadly.
Drug companies have the bottom line in mind. Always have always will.
Would rant on about vaccine deaths but buttons on phone tricky. Haha. Feel Like thumbs are size of golf balls. Posted by surprise (Member # 34987) on :
Can't even go here. I have 2 young daughters, they know us well at our Ped's office, good relationship, but if they ever ask me about this 'shot'...
think I need to rehearse an answer in a mirror a few times that doesn't include strong swear words and my face distorting into hate.
At the same time, hope by now they have a skull and crossbones symbol in our files indicating asking mom about more vaccines (pun intended.)
By the way, yes, my kids are vaccinated, but not with the insane amount of boosters constantly being added.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
LOL surprise, I imagine my daughters' files are filled with notes!
Thankfully our peds is of the same mindset re: gardasil vaccine and others.
My kids are vaccinated too. In recent years, I've had their titers checked prior to receiving boosters, only to find they have immunity and booster shots are unnecessary.
New parents need to understand that their newborns have underdeveloped immune systems.
There is little to no logic I have seen to warrant the onslaught of vaccines given to newborns.
Posted by Judie (Member # 38323) on :
I never even heard of HPV until this vaccine came out.
Are the bad effects of HPV really that common?
From the cloudy data I can find on the Internet, it looks like most people have some form of HPV and it doesn't cause any problems.
Am I missing something???
This is the only article I found that makes sense:
"Governor Jerry Brown has signed AB499, which allows children age 12 and up to consent to the triple jab Gardasil from Merck for genital warts without parental consent."
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
It's all about the money .. for sure. Cervical cancer happens, but with preventive care it can usually be arrested in time.
I would rather take my chances than get the Gardisil. So dangerous!!
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
I think there is little to no logic in the anti-vaccination movement. I have just as much distrust in the privatized medical system we have as the next person, however, I think vaccines are one of the few great public health successes. That doesn't mean that every vaccine is a good idea.
A vaccine can be a dead virus, attenuated or live virus, or bits of viral proteins. How are vaccines the biggest threat to your child's immune system? I mean really? Their immune system is bombarded at that age with things...a weakened virus that can't cause disease would seem to me to be the least of your body's worries.
A vaccine essentially teaches your immune system to be able to more effectively respond to an actual infection of the live virus. Risk of measles shot: Mild irritation at injection site or allergic reaction in less than 1 out of a million doses. Risk of measles: pneumonia, a serious lung infection, lifelong brain damage, deafness, and even death.
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
Maia .. Do you realize how many young girls have DIED from this vaccine!? How many have permanent injury from it?
Wake up!
From the CDC itself (which would never admit to how serious this is):
I was in my mid 20s when the gardisil shot came out. I quickly got mine before my insurance company would not pay.
Why don't I want to "take my chances" with HPV? Because I have had TWO friends get the aggressive form of HPV. Both had health insurance received regular pap smears, so it was caught.
Both of my friends had to have surgery, one had part of her cervix removed and is lucky in that she can MOST LIKELY still carry a pregnancy to term.
HPV causes abnormal cell changes, so if you contract the aggressive form, you have to monitor it. Because while most HPV can be cleared by your body, some don't. Those are the ones that can cause cancer. They have begun linking oral HPV to oral cancer now.
Why do I care so much? Because I contracted one of the "harmless" types of HPV from a boyfriend. One of the strains not covered by the vaccine. The treatment was painful. Because of my compromised immune system and lyme, I do not know if I have fully cleared it.
I do not know if this is something I could potentially spread to future partners. HPV can be a lifelong virus, even if over time your body gets it under control..you can still spread it.
There is no evidence that the HPV vaccine has directly caused any deaths. It is possible to have an adverse reaction or go into anaphylaxis, but your chances of that are on par with getting struck by lightening.
If I ever have daughters, I would 100% consider getting this vaccine. It has been extensively tested for safety.
................................................
Breaking up the text for easier reading for many here -
[ 08-13-2014, 09:54 PM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Vaccines undergo a standard of 3 clinical trials, as well as post licensure safety evaluations. These are reported via the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
THEN they use that data to do studies that help determine if possible side effects identified using VAERS are *actually* related to vaccination. The information on that CDC site isn't claiming that the vaccine definitively CAUSED those events.
You are claiming that MANY young girls have died as a result of this vaccine. The 32 death reports were reviewed and there was no common pattern to the deaths that would suggest they were caused by the vaccine. The VSD will search for any links, thus far none have been found.
Correlation does not imply causation. If there is a link determined, it will be picked up in post-clincical safety evaluations.Case in point: Man gets flu shot. Later dies of heart attack. Death reported in VAERS.
Is it possible that a death occurred post vaccination, or that those two woman had an unusual neurological illness because of the shot? Sure. But with millions of doses given..that's only 0.03928571% of the vaccinated population having an adverse reaction.
In 2010 11,818 women in the United States were diagnosed with cervical cancer. 3,939 women in the United States died from cervical cancer that year. They took their chances, so to say.
..............................................
Breaking up text for easier reading for many here -
[ 08-13-2014, 09:55 PM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
I don't think we will convince each other of anything.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Well, are you implying that the HPV vaccine is killing young woman? Where is your scientific data to back up such an assertion? Is this viewpoint related to all vaccines or just this one in particular?
It's not out of the realm of possibility that that young woman died of hypotensive anaphylactic shock, but usually that type of shock is pretty obvious, with pruritis, urticaria, or dyspnea. What's not clear is whether or not she had a completely unrelated undiagnosed medical problem.
VAERS reporting largely consists individuals who had a medical problem after receiving the shot, but there is no causative proof showing the vaccine was responsible as of yet.
As someone who's suffered from HPV, "harmless" is a subjective term. I underwent painful nitrogen freezing treatments, topical creams that caused intense burning (that cost me $150), and no guarantee that I would clear the infection.
To some people, the less than 1% chance of having a mild reaction at the injection site, or the 0.00016651% of a chance of going into anaphylaxis from the shot, might not be worth it. But exposure to HPV causes the cancer, not failure to clear HPV. That's how the vaccine prevents cancer.
HPV might not sound threatening to people out of the high risk dating game, but as someone who has never had children, the thought that 10,000 woman contract cervical cancer each year, and some of those woman die or undergo hysterectomy's doesn't seem worth it to me, since there is no cure for HPV.
If anyone can provide data showing that this particular vaccine is unsafe, by all means post it. A hysterical fox news report isn't scientifically valid. Here is a recent 2013 study on HPV vaccine safety:
Breaking up the text for easier reading for many here -
[ 08-13-2014, 09:56 PM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Robin123 (Member # 9197) on :
Maia, you were lucky that you did not have problems from the gardasil shot. I'm happy for you.
But others have died or become crippled from it. I did my research when CA went for it. I don't have the urls from then, I just know I had them then. Total tragedies. I also spoke with the anti-gardasil campaign and heard about more reactive cases.
I testified before the school board in SF and said don't do it. They agreed. This is one county that will not follow any state law as they are aware of possible consequences and do not wish to kill or maim any students.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
Maia, perhaps you should hold your opinion until you are faced with vaccinating a newborn with numerous shots (many more than even 20 years ago) and/or are faced with vaccinating very sick children with compromised immune systems.
There are plenty of other mothers here who will second that. We know what we know from EXPERIENCE and discussions with physicians.
Posted by surprise (Member # 34987) on :
Maia no offense, but you are completely out of touch to what is happening out here in the real world with young children.
Posted by Keebler (Member # 12673) on :
And let's remember what the CDC used to say about Lyme Disease.
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
Oh yes, I always believe the CDC. Yepper. Sure. Right.
Posted by poppy (Member # 5355) on :
I think the CDC has decided that if they admit to vaccine problems, everyone will just stop taking them. They must figure that some casualties along the way don't matter if the majority are protected.
What other explanation could there be for such stonewalling? Some do have vaccine patents and presumably make money, which means they might be less than truthful on the subject.
IMO this was a terrible decision on the part of Congress to allow CDC and NIH employees to personally profit from things under their jurisdiction professionally. A real conflict of interest. Leaving us to wonder when they are telling the truth and when they aren't.
................................................
Breaking up paragraph...
[ 08-15-2014, 02:47 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by surprise (Member # 34987) on :
OMG, I need a break from the Internet. I refuse to get into a vaccine debate.
Just this morning I read a thread on a private group I am on where many mothers painfully told their REAL LIFE stories about LOSING their children after vaccines. It was a congenital Lyme group, and a vaccine triggered the disease into action. I am not even speaking about autism!
I have been reading for years these tragic stories in relation to autism, ADHD. NOT ONE HAD BEEN REPORTED TO THE CDC.
Just like when I tried to report my positive Lyme test, no- one to report it to! They do not want to know! The vaccine manufacturers even have a law that they cannot be sued! A 'special appointed' separate court!
The CDC spends millions counteracting the truth about their excessive and damaging vaccines, and vaccine schedule. Wake up! We are destroying our youth!
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
If I am so completely "out of touch" with what is happening with young children, where is the evidence of all this malfeasance? If 32 woman "died" or were "maimed" by the HPV vaccine, one would assume a positive correlation was found.
That no one has linked the deaths in any readable pattern, makes your claim suspect. You don't know, but you WANT it to be true because it fits in nicely with your predetermined beliefs.
Posting links to websites with authors peddling books to sell ON the subject matter isn't an unbiased source. I get it that the medical community has failed many of us with lyme disease, but that doesn't mean there is conspiracy lurking in every facet of public health.
Our privatized health care industry may be inept at treating chronic disease, but that doesn't mean that we haven't taken great leaps forward in other areas.
My problem with the Anti-vaccine movement is, it is hysterical anecdotal claims that have not lived up to scrutiny. One of those links takes aim at herd immunity, but doesn't even seem to understand the concept. Many vaccines do not induce lifelong immunity and require boosters.
This is not a failure of vaccination as there are usually enough children being vaccinated as to not pose a public health risk, thus a booster as adults is usually unnecessary.
Finally, I know it's easy to equate Big Pharma with all things bad, but i don't think many of you even understand how vaccines are developed.
Basic research for vaccines comes from the government via the NIH. The data is published in peer-reviewed literature.
It can take half a billion dollars to license a vaccine, thus research into development of vaccines is not going to occur unless there is a real public need
as those companies will not take risks to development a vaccine with no guarantee the FDA will allow a license and they can recoup their expenses and make money.
........................................
Breaking up paragraphs...
[ 08-15-2014, 02:46 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by surprise (Member # 34987) on :
No predetermined beliefs.
I do not wish to debate or argue.
God speed with your health.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Surprise,
I have an autistic family member, and there was once a point in time that I believed that he may have developed autism from the MMR vaccine. But the new research coming out is starting to show pretty direct evidence of a prenatal origin. Thus autism arises from genetic susceptibility and yet unknown environmental factors.
It can be pretty compelling to claim a vaccine gave a child autism, but the reverse is that they are given the vaccination right at the time of development of autistic symptoms.
No one disputes that for a very small percentage of the population, immune dysfunction can occur when exposed to a vaccine.
We understand how the dysfunction occurs, but without knowing the exact genetic and phenotypic makeup of every single person, predicting exactly who is going to be affected is impossible.
You also can't discount the fact that many people have underlying medical issues that may or may not have been triggered.
But based on the large amount of credible evidence available, risks from vaccines are minimal, and the benefits are huge and greatly outweigh what small risk there is. That is why each person must weight the pros and cons individually.
If vaccines arent safe then someone should do a proper study, publish it in a peer reviewed journal, have their observations verified by independant third parties.
Edward Jenner tested his initial hypothesis in 1796. That is 218 years worth of evidence that vaccines work.
Polio has seen a 99.9% reduction since the WHO began its eradication program.
If vaccines on the market aren't safe, why hasn't that come out in the past 200 years? The data is all public, surely someone out there can extrapolate it and prove it?
Of course you are all free to read mommy blogs and websites created by health guru's looking for profits to be had on scaring you all.
Science is super important in our fight against Lyme disease, and in the end, science will prevail as peer reviewed research comes out.
Until someone can present compelling research into vaccine induced dysfunctions that are as widespread as you claim, I'm disinclined to support internet hoaxes.
..............................................
Breaking up paragraphs...
[ 08-15-2014, 02:44 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Keebler (Member # 12673) on :
- The work of Robert Kennedy, Jr. is a wealth of excellent information. It really is. Sadly, the government would not listen to him.
Please don't let the government "experts" and the puppets behind them cloud the truth. Much of the "accepted" studies re: autism / vaccines are contrived and ignore a great deal of evidence and correlations. He could talk, interact perfectly . . . until that set of shots.
I've seen it with my own eyes, with a friend's child. Fine little lad . . . and all of the sudden, right after a new round of vaccines, he was autistic overnight. No other variables for him.
To overlook the wealth of information that Kennedy compiled with doctors, parents, etc. . . . well, it's going to cause more harm by ignoring that. -
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
Maia, you are assuming that "we" are part of an anti-vaccine "movement." You are mistaken.
It is one thing to give a child vaccines to prevent polio and meningitis. Gardasil and flu vaccines are a whole other ball of wax.
You want evidence? My "evidence" was watching my child have an adverse reaction to the flu vaccine. And watching the other as a newborn having an adverse reaction to the DTP vaccine.
That doesn't meet your criteria as my observations of my children were not conducted in a CDC lab and officially documented.
Physicians have told me it is not prudent to vaccinate a child with chronice lyme whose immune system is compromised., unless absolutely necessary.
And even then a protocol cosisting of herbs, homeopathic and supplements should be followed so as to minimize vaccine side effects or reactions.
So like I said, perhaps you should reserve your opinion on children and vaccines until you have a child or two of your own.
............................................
Breaking up paragraphs...
[ 08-15-2014, 02:42 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
There is a special vaccine court because some people have an immune dysfunction when exposed to a vaccine. With 30-40 vaccines given to each person that means you're going to have a few thousand people with adverse reactions. The court has never found that a vaccine is deadly or overtly harmful to the population at large.
No, I don't have children yet. But I would vaccinate them on an alternative schedule for things they *would* be at risk for. It's rather bizarre to think that people really believe that a weakened virus that can't cause disease is MORE harmful than actually getting the disease itself.
Risk of measles shot: Mild irritation at injection site or allergic reaction in less than 1 out of a million doses. Risk of measles: pneumonia, a serious lung infection, lifelong brain damage, deafness, and even death.
I would 100% embraced a Lyme disease vaccine if it was found to not interfere with diagnostic testing or induce a negative immune response, which seems to be a concern with the original vaccine.
Posted by Keebler (Member # 12673) on :
- It's not just the vaccine that is the question here, it's all the additives in them, too.
It's not about vaccine theory, but all the other chemicals, neurotoxins in those shots.
I also had my own experience, twice, with vaccines as an adult. I cannot describe the neuro damage in just overnight, with each of those, too (years apart. One a flu shot, the other a tetanus booster). And the neuro damage has never left me.
Tests for heavy metals help connect some dots but there should be ZERO HEAVY METALS in anyone's vaccines. Zero. And the same for the other additives. They must be held to a higher, proper, standard of safety that totally eludes them now. -
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Beaches,
I have adverse reactions to the flu shot. I used to have to get them in half doses as they would induce 3 days of fever and swollen lymph nodes.
But, as a person with asthma and chronic immune dysfunction, the short 3 days of discomfort was more preferable to dying from a respiratory infection, which would have been way more damaging to my immune state. Its always a cost/benefit for each individual.
For DTP, I would still vaccinate despite the slight chance of adverse reaction. Whooping cough can induce pneumonia, encephalopathy, earache, or seizures.
Children die from it, most deaths occur among infants younger than 3 months of age.
The fact that more deaths don't occur is because most people choose to vaccinate. If we reversed to a state without vaccination, I'm sure people would be clamoring for vaccines once their children began suffering and dying from preventable diseases.
................................................
Breaking up paragraphs...
[ 08-15-2014, 02:41 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Keebler (Member # 12673) on :
- Again, missing the point.
We don't have to just take the toxic shots as offered, suggested, required. We can change that - insist on a full list of all safe ingredients.
But we have to also not bury our heads in the sand about it. Why so many are willing to ignore the toxic additives is beyond me. We must start looking for safer ways, that will be safer for all, not just the lucky ones who manage to not be affected. -
Posted by surprise (Member # 34987) on :
Maia, sorry for your relative with autism.
Honestly, I didn't read past the next few lines of your post.
We have very different views/ read different studies / read different evidence on this issue.
I am signing out on this thread. There is a lot more I could say, links to posts, citations,
but I am just not interested.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Keebler,
I find your comment interesting. Because, could not your neuro symptoms be originating from lyme? It's entirely possible and no one disputes that vaccines can induce immune dysfunction, but if you have an underlying immune dysfunction, it's hard to point fingers at a vaccine.
Of course, the antigen in the vaccine could have triggered a response, yet, a lot of my neuro symptoms may have been triggered by natural antigens. I worked in a horse barn 2 years ago, never had a horse allergy in my life. Suddenly, I can't even be around horses.
Did being in the barn trigger this allergy? Sure, but I'm willing to bet its the Lyme that is making me more susceptible.
That's why I think the vaccine debate is interesting in immune dysfunction. But what would be a more interesting question would be, if I have an adverse reaction to a flu shot..can we dismiss the idea that actually contracting the full blown flu be MORE adverse to my immune system?
Same thing with the fly vaccine, you don't have to give it to your infant..but if your infant is premature, the greater risk is the flu. Infants die every winter at hospitals with the flu, so its not theoretical. Its a risk you run with not vaccinating, which may be more or less than vaccinating.
I got the Pneumonia vaccine last year after developing asthma (from my allergies). Did this vaccine contribute to my very sudden decline over the next 6 months? It's possible.
But I also know I am now not at risk of developing Pneumonia in my lungs, which is important to me as I am very sick, have asthma and two strains of active Mycoplasma pneumonia.
I am hesitant to blame my decline on a vaccine, as there are plenty of other reasons for my decline. I know stress was a huge part of my relapse this time. I may have decline rapidly because of my vaccine, or it is just coincidental.
Either way, without my rapid decline I would not have sought help and be under the care of an LLMD now.
I too have wondered about the additives in vaccines. The vaccines do need preservatives, and the amounts are so low, most people find it negligible. I'm actually more concerned with the chemicals people rub on their skin, under their arms, and whats in our food.
A minute amount of preservative injected in the muscle, I'm not sure there is enough evidence to prove harm. Though, I always request a thermerisol free flu shot
................................................
Breaking up paragraphs...
[ 08-15-2014, 02:40 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Suprise,
I am completely willing to read different evidence. Probably more willing than you are as evidenced by some of the attitudes here. I read the literature, lots of it.
No one here has actually posted a link to a citation besides me. All that is posted here is a link to a fox news article (fox news, hardly trustworthy) and a webpage of some random guy who sells nutritional supplements.
IF there is alot more you can say, then you are free to say it. I think most people would be interested in actual real data. I WANT to believe, in fact I was pretty convinced once by RFK JR's article a few years back. But it millions of people receive vaccines each year and less than 1% report an adverse event, and every death so far cannot be conclusively linked to the vaccine, then its hard to get on that boat.
Posted by Keebler (Member # 12673) on :
- Maia,
Immediate damage - ER, convulsions . . . 2 hours after the shot, each time. Other neuro symptoms, too.
Don't know how that is not directly related. Within 2 hours, I nearly died, twice, and left so much worse in so many ways, even today. That was 1987 & 1993.
I was not diagnosed with lyme and other TBD until 1997, but likely did have it long before. Still, until the vaccines, I was managing. They caused real damage to me that would not have occurred had I not had them.
Just because there are other factors does not lessen the damage caused.
Does a person who has other factors not also deserve a shot that is safe? A shot free of mercury, formaldehyde, etc.? I say: yes. Everyone does.
We need to make vaccines safer for all. There is no reason for status quo any longer. Too many have been damaged. The problems are not fixed by saying, well, a certain percentage will always suffer some side-effects. This is damage. Not just side-effects.
And, as a nation, we just lie down and take it, hoping to be lucky to not be the "small percentage" - I don't think so.
And we also don't need a vaccine for everything.
And those who study and come to the decision to opt out, don't deserve to be mocked. This needs to be an individual's decision (or parents). Most who opt out are very well educated in the matter and are mindful of good health practices.
There are better ways to achieve health than just a vaccine for every thing in the world.
The money behind many of these is what's pushing the campaigns, not the interest of real people. The HPV vaccine has many flaws.
A Hep B vaccine does not need to be given to babies at birth - it's a body fluid transmitted disease. For crying out loud, babies, children are not in a high risk group at all. -
[ 08-14-2014, 09:33 PM: Message edited by: Keebler ]
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by Maia_Azure:
I got the Pneumonia vaccine last year after developing asthma (from my allergies). Did this vaccine contribute to my very sudden decline over the next 6 months? It's possible. But I also know I am now not at risk of developing Pneumonia in my lungs, which is important to me as I am very sick, have asthma and two strains of active Mycoplasma pneumonia.
I am hesitant to blame my decline on a vaccine, as there are plenty of other reasons for my decline. I know stress was a huge part of my relapse this time. I may have decline rapidly because of my vaccine, or it is just coincidental.
- Think about it.
Posted by MannaMe (Member # 33330) on :
When I was in 3rd or 4th grade in school, the measles went through our classroom. Quite a few were out sick with measles. Including myself.
Not one of us had any life threatening events with the measles. We all recovered and went back to school.
My siblings had the measles also. I don't know of anyone who died or was seriously harmed by measles.
I wonder how many children actually die of the childhood diseases? Is that hyped up to scare people into getting vaccines?
Oh and my nephew who got the chicken pox vax had a worse case of chicken pox than his siblings with no chicken pox vaccines.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Keebler,
The problem with "those who opt out" is most of them aren't relying on scientific evidence.
The link between autism and vaccines started because in 1998 a physician in England claimed to have evidence showing a relationship. The "study" was based on reports from parents of 12 children, not a valid sample size.
That study has been retracted. When comparing rates of autism across the globe between vaccinated and vaccinated children, there was no correlation found.
So if a vaccine is causing autism, how come there is no correlation between the incidence of autism among vaccinated children and un-vaccinated children ACROSS the glove? Isn't that a bit suspect? "Think about it."
There are plenty of studies that look into this. It's nice to imagine medical research is done by evil Big Pharma corporations rubbing their hands together, but most vaccine research is done by NIH funded institutions and academic institutions.
Places like the one that brought us studies like the Tulane Primate study "Persistence of Borrelia burgdorferi in Rhesus Macaques."
Research points to autism being caused by toxic exposures during pregnancy and complications disrupting brain processes before birth and shortly afterwards.
Mutations in the genes associated with autism can affect how the brain develops and functions, and this starts well before birth.
The brain can compensate to make up for the disrupted processes. But, symptoms will emerge when the disruption is sufficiently severe and the compensatory processes are no longer enough, which happens at specific points of time in development. There a replenty of studies tha tlook into this link:
"Vaccines and Autism: A Tale of Shifting Hypotheses"
[ 08-15-2014, 02:38 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
Maia, my DD was given the flu shot because of severe asthma. The reaction she had to the shot was horrendous. Never again.
As for DTP, the majority of the time the reaction is from the pertussis portion. If an infant reacts, he/she can never get that portion of the vaccine again. Just ask any pediatrician.
You do realize that many, if not most adverse affects are not reported, right? My children's reactions weren't. So it's questionable as to just how "slight" the chances of adverse reactions are.
And despite not having any other pertussis booster since the first shot as an infant, my child has immunity to pertussis (tested titers).
In the old days, parents kept their infants at home for the first few months so as not to expose them to germs before their immune systems were developed (especially during the cold weather).
Nowadays, mothers pass their newborns from person to person to person and have them at the mall when they're a week old. I never believed in that. My babies were at home the first couple of months +.
I allowed immediate family to visit, but only if they did not have a cold and only after they washed their hands. Some could not understand why I was so strict about this, but that was their problem. Perhaps if more parents did this, risks to the newborns would be reduced.
The other thing is that vaccines are now combined - MMR, DTP for example. And often one of those is combined with Polio, Hep B, etc. It is just too much to subject a newborn to all of that at once.
Now, you can't even get a standalone measles vaccine. If your college-bound child is not immune to measles, he or she is forced to have the mumps and rubella portion of the shot as well, despite having immunity to those.
As for the varicella vaccine, I wish my youngest had gotten the chicken pox as a young child. Instead, she got the vaccine. Immunity wore off after a few years and we were faced with vaccinating her when she was very ill vs. taking a chance that she would get the disease when she is older. These are not easy decisions, to say the least.
Regarding autism, I am no expert on the subject by a long shot. And I thank God my family has not been hit with this horrendous condition. It is very, very difficult for parents who must deal with this on a daily basis.
But, having been a parent for 25 years, I must say that back in the day, I think I heard the word "autistic" 3 or 4 times. Fast forward years later, and all of a sudden every other kid it seems is on the spectrum. Why???
Well I certainly don't think it's a genetic thing. If it were, it would have been much more prevalent years back. People don't develop a huge upswing in genetic defects over the course of 20 years. And it's certainly not due to better diagnoses. It's pretty apparently early on in a child's life if he or she has autistic tendencies.
I speculate that the increase in autism could be due to environmental issues, the huge increase in the number of vaccines and/or tick-borne diseases.
.............................................
Breaking up a paragraph...
[ 08-15-2014, 02:36 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
One of my relatives had the measles back in the 50s, I forget who. I do know that measles is one of the most contagious diseases in the world and is pretty serious disease. Worldwide the deaths were in the millions before vaccinations. It can cause blindess as well. The common diseases resulted in thousands of deaths, which is why vaccines were created.
Thousands of people contracting preventable dieases would be a strain on the health care system, and would impart a cost on the system. The money in the healthcae industry is in treating disease, not preventing it.
The only nefarious thing I can think of drug companies doing is trying to get their vaccines required for school children when they disease they are preventing don't pose a serious threat.
For Hepatitis, you can get it from fluids spread between family members, not just sexual contact. Health care workers are more at risk than babies, but it is a necessary vaccine for foreign travel.
The vaccine is more effective in children, meaning that protective levels of antibodies are reached and maintained throughout life as long as you are vaccinated young. That's why it is given to babies and not adults.
Some vaccines offer lifelong antibody protection when administered before a certain age, and why waiting is not endorsed.
............................................
Breaking up paragraphs...
[ 08-15-2014, 02:35 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
I wish I had had the chicken pox vaccine. I got shingles a few years back and had lingering nerve pain for a year. I blame my mother for that, she put me in the bathtub with my sibling with chicken pox. Any of lyme sufferers here have shingles?
Increases in autism is most def due to environmental issues, but the consensus is more geared to issues during pregnancy (toxic exposures or mother contracting a virus during pregnancy). I personally feel that if autism were link to a shot, it would be really easy to compare the data to non-vaccinated children, which has been done. I think that horse had been beaten pretty hard.
I would be nice to blame my sibling's autism on a MMR vaccine, and believe me, I've looked into it out of fear of having it happen to my own child someday..but it's not very likely to be linked. Immune systems must play a large role in the development of autism, but I think the better tree to bark at is the one when the child is in the womb.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
I don't have shingles but I know of a lyme patient who does. I don't know whether she had chicken pox in childhood. She must have. My understanding is that the varicella virus has to be in your system already (from chicken pox) in order to develop Shingles. Shingles is very painful, that I know. Sorry to hear you've had it.
Odds are if you had the vaccine, the immunity would have worn off within a few years--that happened to most of the kids I know who got the shot.
As for the measles, that is one vaccine that I am on board with. Too bad you can no longer get it as a standalone shot. There have been measles outbreaks all over the country and on college campuses.
To me, measles, polio and meningitis vaccines are a must (timed apart and while on vaccine protocol mentioned earlier). As for the Hep B, Hib, Flu, Pneumonia, Gardisil, no thank you.
Regarding autism again, what in a mother's womb has changed so drastically from 20/25 years ago? If anything, pregnant women today are eating much more healthily than they did years ago. And what viral infection are we talking about here? Is there a new one out there affecting pregnant women all of a sudden?
.............................................
Breaking up paragraphs...
[ 08-15-2014, 02:33 AM: Message edited by: Robin123 ]
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
There is a theory that the reason so many are getting shingles now is that before the chicken pox vaccine, older people were regularly exposed to the chicken pox. That BOOSTED their immunity.
That made them LESS likely to get shingles. Nowadays, shingles is VERY common.
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
Maia .. Did you see this regarding vaccines?
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
LT, yes, I've heard that as well. Little kids are much better getting the chicken pox vs. the vaccine in my opinion and experience, having one kid who got the disease and remains immune vs. having another one who got the shot whose immunity quickly wore off.
Posted by Robin123 (Member # 9197) on :
Hi everyone - please break up your paragraphs into one, two or three line units as many people here cannot read chunks of text - thx -
Posted by droid1226 (Member # 34930) on :
I scanned through this thread quickly, here's my take.
-I gotta agree with Maia on a lot of her statements. Even on her Causal vs. Correlation points. Though I hate that statement, scientifically it's true and undeniable. Try and prove a negative. That's all it is(for someone trying to state a case in their favor).
-The whole HPV and other vaccinations goes along with the "The Sacrifice of Few for the Good of Many" --said by someone smarter and healthier than myself.
-It's undeniable had this girl not gotten that shot that day, she'd be alive.
I do find this statement by Maia rather odd though....
--It's rather bizarre to think that people really believe that a weakened virus that can't cause disease is MORE harmful than actually getting the disease itself.--
-I'm not going to correct her incorrect (IMO) sentence, I'm just going to say that it's the "weakened virus" that can activate other devastating dormant viruses in a person. Because of other immune system problems.
I think we're kinda saying the same thing.
*sidenote--- another blonde haired, fair skinned girl that died after that vaccine. I've glanced at all 32 deaths....most of them look like the same girl. Idk what that means except maybe one bad genetic father 50 generations ago. Thanks pops..
Autism, ALS, Lyme is rampant in my family. Just depends on how much you like the dr that diagnosed you I guess(in my family)....
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
Still awaiting a response....
Regarding autism again, what in a mother's womb has changed so drastically from 20/25 years ago? If anything, pregnant women today are eating much more healthily than they did years ago. And what viral infection are we talking about here? Is there a new one out there affecting pregnant women all of a sudden?
Posted by droid1226 (Member # 34930) on :
Maia???
Here's an interesting video released today. No proof just interesting results.
Thank you for posting this droid. Very, very interesting.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Sorry, Had a hard weekend..I've developed some pretty bad hip pain and have gone to bed early every night since!
As per vaccines, I agree with the statement "Sacrifice a few for the good of the many."
Studies show that the risk of severe infection is greater after natural infection than immunization with attenuated viruses. Which is why I pondered the idea that some people believe a "weakened virus that can't cause disease is MORE harmful than actually getting the disease itself."
I understand the fear of chemicals in vaccines, but they have trace amounts not yet shown to cause harm. "Toxins" in vaccines is a vague statement. You can encounter formaldehyde off gassing in fuel, fabric, drapes, etc. Formaldehyde is also produced naturally in the human body, so I am not convinced yet it causes harm via IM injection.
Ive only ever had a reaction to the flu shot, just swollen glands and slight fever for 2 days. This is because the shot is a either recombinant or deactivated..it is stimulating your immune response, but it's not infectious the way the actual flu would be. Vaccination can cause mild illness, but noting on par with what the actual wild type virus would do.
I believe it is hard to discuss vaccines in a subset of people who EXPERIENCE chronic illness, because we are all the very people who experience the uncommon side effects of vaccination.
But the original point is, Vaccines are safer now than they use to be. I don't believe gardisil is maiming and killing young girls, if it was, it would be pulled and data would link it. That doesn't mean I don't believe it may have contributed to some deaths or illnesses. Its just 99.9% of the time, it hasn't. I was at risk for developing HPV, so it made sense for me.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
You can only get shingles if you have had chicken pox, as the virus takes residence in your nervous system. If it reactivates, it can cause permanent nerve damage. I don't know how long the vaccine lasts in children (children can develop lifelong immunity if vaccinated early to some diseases, unsure about chicken pox though).
People with weakened immune systems get shingles, which is why it happens in the elderly. I haven't seen any correlation in the idea that more people are getting it because of vaccination. I don't think the vaccine has been around long enough.
Take smallpox, the vaccine is a live virus called vaccinia, which causes a mild infection. This improves its effectiveness, but causes serious complications for people with impaired immune systems.
The original smallpox vaccine contained 200 antigens, as opposed to the total load for all childhood vaccines is something like 130 proteins in total. A child with a developing immune system is exposed to thousands of times greater number of antigens than exposure from the vaccine schedule.
Studies of children with immunodeficiencies respond well to live viral vaccines. Why then do people in our state appear to have issues with vaccines? All evidence is of now, anecdotal.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
Does anyone know how long it took to pull the lymerix vaccine or how many people died and were injued before it was finally pulled from the market?
----------
Maia, what studies are you refering to that state immunocompromised children do well with live vaccines?
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
Supposedly, more are getting shingles because of the chicken pox vaccine not allowing "older" people to receive a natural "booster" by being exposed to chicken pox on a regular basis. That is what I read.
This is the link I meant to post above... pertinent to the vaccine discussion.
quote:Originally posted by beaches: Does anyone know how long it took to pull the lymerix vaccine or how many people died and were injued before it was finally pulled from the market?
----------
- I think at least 2-3 years. I was on Lymenet when it happened.
Not sure if anyone died, but at least 1,000+ filed suit against the company because it GAVE THEM intractable Lyme.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Beaches, a lot has changed in the past few generations.Autism is linked to inflammatory diseases, which has increased significantly in that past 50-60 years.
I think immune dysregulation is a fairly serious disorder. I don't think there is proof that vaccines would cause such a high incidence (though could contribute in a very small subset? maybe?).
And Maia, I would appreciate an answer to my questions that I asked in response to your statements re autism. What has changed in women's wombs over the past 20 years and what viral infection are you referring to?
Posted by droid1226 (Member # 34930) on :
The problem is if you give a newborn the same amount of toxins, even trace amounts that you do a full size human. It's going to do neuro damage.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
Unable to open the NY Times link. Re Science Daily, no one doubts that maternal illness can affect the unborn child. But this article does not prove anything with words like "might" and "potential."
How does one explain the extraordinarily high incidence of autism/autism spectrum over the past 20 years? There is one thing that stands out: the very aggressive vaccine schedule.
And if you truly believe the CDC wouldn't suppress evidence to the contrary, let me remind you how the CDC has handled Lyme Disease, ignoring SCIENCE to the devastation of very sick people.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
And let's not forget - how many times has "scientific proof"' followed anecdotal evidence, even as far back as Lister, who hypothesized via observation that when physicians washed their hands prior to delivering babies, the mother's chances of developing infection was reduced. He was ridiculed by his peers.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
And again Maia, what studies are you referring to that state immunocompromised children do well with live vaccines?
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
quote:Originally posted by beaches:
And if you truly believe the CDC wouldn't suppress evidence to the contrary, let me remind you how the CDC has handled Lyme Disease, ignoring SCIENCE to the devastation of very sick people.
- Indeed
Posted by TNT (Member # 42349) on :
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Maia_Azure: [QB] Beaches, a lot has changed in the past few generations.Autism is linked to inflammatory diseases, which has increased significantly in that past 50-60 years.
I think immune dysregulation is a fairly serious disorder. I don't think there is proof that vaccines would cause such a high incidence (though could contribute in a very small subset? maybe?).
I think that is the crux of the conversation.
One HUGE cause of inflammatory diseases and immune dysregulation is the increase of the undetected stealth infections (lyme, bartonella, etc.) in the past several decades!
So if one is sub-clinically infected with these infections and passes them on to their children...[this is a very strong possibility why a child at that age might have an inflammatory disease or be prone to inflammatory disorders]
...and then the young children (with their immature and overloaded--"dysregulated"--immune systems) are loaded up with many vaccines
(along with all the stuff that is in the vaccine besides the deactivated virus or dead bacteria, such as foreign animal proteins and heavy metals)
... on top of what their immune system is already dealing with....
The result could be.... Autism! Or worse!!
From the New York times article:
But how to address it, and where to begin? That question has led scientists to the womb. A population-wide study from Denmark spanning two decades of births indicates that infection during pregnancy increases the risk of autism in the child. Hospitalization for a viral infection, like the flu, during the first trimester of pregnancy triples the odds. Bacterial infection, including of the urinary tract, during the second trimester increases chances by 40 percent.
The lesson here isn’t necessarily that viruses and bacteria directly damage the fetus. Rather, the mother’s attempt to repel invaders — her inflammatory response — seems at fault. Research by Paul Patterson, an expert in neuroimmunity at Caltech, demonstrates this important principle. Inflaming pregnant mice artificially — without a living infective agent — prompts behavioral problems in the young. In this model, autism results from collateral damage. It’s an unintended consequence of self-defense during pregnancy.
Yet to blame infections for the autism epidemic is folly. First, in the broadest sense, the epidemiology doesn’t jibe. Leo Kanner first described infantile autism in 1943. Diagnoses have increased tenfold, although a careful assessment suggests that the true increase in incidences is less than half that. But in that same period, viral and bacterial infections have generally declined. By many measures, we’re more infection-free than ever before in human history.
Obviously, they don't see what is right under their noses concerning infections of epidemic proportions!!!
...And the fact that the number of vaccines have increased dramatically as well.
I, too, would like to see the studies that prove that immune-compromised children do well with vaccines (or the adults for that matter).
Posted by Judie (Member # 38323) on :
The thing that I don't understand is can't a person use a condom to protect themselves from HPV and other STDs????
It seems like an educational element is being missed in all this.
Is there just the assumption teenagers and young women are on the pill and don't need a condom?
Isn't the vaccine just assuming people are having unprotected sex? Can't you get tested for HPV?
I remember a time (before I was in a long-term relationship) where if there was the potential to have sex, me and the guy would get an AIDs test first. It wasn't weird, it was just what was done.
If you aren't exposing yourself to the potential of getting an infection, shouldn't that be the best bet for not getting it?
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
You think like I do, Judie!
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
A MUST READ! VIA Laura Hovind:
Does someone close to you have Lyme disease? Chances are, the answer is 'yes,' but due to the politically and emotionally charged climate surrounding Lyme disease, you may be unaware of their plight. In fact, many sufferers themselves are unaware of their true diagnosis.
Here is a story that will leave anyone with a conscience asking, "how can we let this continue?"
It has all the elements of a best-selling modern crime novel. It has mad scientists, hungry for money and fame. It has backroom handshake deals between international corporations and corrupt government officials. It has people dying, begging for help, and being shunned, oppressed, and destroyed--physically, emotionally, financially. It has deathly ill children, and doctors losing their licenses for simply trying to help them. It has a whistleblower who was jailed and lost both her career and her children, but continues to fight 20 years later. It is tragic beyond belief, yet 100% true. It is the story of Lyme disease.
Facts: Prior to development of a Lyme vaccine (LYMErix), diagnostic guidelines were straightforward and valid.
The case definition and diagnostic guidelines were falsified in 1994 at the Dearborn conference of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) to make LYMErix appear safe and effective, when in fact it made people sick. More than 1,100 systemic adverse events were reported through the VAERS.
In order to rule out vaccine recipients from being diagnosed with Lyme disease, IDSA and FDA fraudulently redefined Lyme disease as "arthritic knees" so that only people of a certain genetic type (15% of the population) could be positively diagnosed.
Not coincidentally, participating labs reported a combined accuracy rate of just 15% with the revised, fraudulent guidelines. Their results were ignored, and the CDC, FDA and IDSA went ahead with the revision despite protests from the labs and some FDA panel members that the new method did not detect "protean" (systemic) cases; only Lyme arthritis.
The other 85% of patients are the sickest, and have no chance of testing CDC-positive on the Dearborn standard, because the actual disease is one of immunosuppression, similar to HIV/AIDS. (The test looks for antibodies. Diseases of immunosuppression do not produce antibodies.)
With more than 300,000 people in the U.S. sickened with Lyme disease every year, Lyme's magnitude is far greater than that of AIDS.
Instead of being treated for Lyme disease, the 85% are given garbage pail diagnoses of Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and psychosomatic disorders, for which there are no cures--only expensive drugs to mask some of the symptoms.
The scientists who developed LYMErix hold patents on the Lyme (borreliae) bacteria and stood to profit tremendously from the sale of vaccines and test kits. They still do, as the primary patent holders for vector-borne diseases.
In a clear conflict of interest, these same scientists make up the majority of the IDSA, in addition to being CDC officers and holding leadership positions at major research institutions such as Yale and Johns Hopkins. Their influence and funding from Big Pharma prevent the truth from being exposed, and patients from being properly diagnosed and treated.
Senator Richard Blumenthal has said this amounts to a RICO Act violation. The result of this violation is homicide.
The LYMErix whistleblower, a former pharmaceutical industry scientist, filed a RICO Act complaint with the U.S. Department of Justice. For more than 10 years there has been a total failure by the USDOJ to prosecute this crime and protect U.S. Citizens.
Activist patients are organizing and mobilizing with national efforts to #CureTheCDC and #OccupyTheUSDOJ. Though we are extraordinarily ill, we have passion and truth on our side.
We also have all the necessary research and documentation to prove this crime. Those responsible will be prosecuted. We will get justice.
This is one of the biggest corruption cases in U.S. history. It involves medical research fraud, and organized crime between government agencies, academia, and the health care industry. As a bonus, the prosecution of the Lyme criminals also will expose the key to unlocking the autism epidemic and Gulf War Syndrome. Your assistance in bringing attention to our movement has the potential to help millions of people suffering needlessly all over the world.
The time is now.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Beaches,
There is data from children with HIV infection, showing that immunizations are well-tolerated and confer protective immunity (Live Virus Vaccines in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Children: A Retrospective Survey).
The confusing part of the autism-vaccine link theory is that, if autism rates have increased in the past 20 years, and vaccines expose us to fewer antigens today than in the past..you would expect rates to be HIGHER at the start of vaccination 200 years ago and to be slowly dropping. Also, thimersol has been removed since 1999, so why are the rates still going up?
The theory has further holes in it because when data comparing rates of autism between non-vaccinated kids and vaccinated kids shows no links:
The only suspect part of the youtube link is the idea that African American boys in that study were vaccinated earlier than others, but I can't find more data for that relationship.
For autism and changes in the womb, the only "change" you can think of is vaccines (despite them getting safer and more refined for the most part). But besides genetics, there are a lot of environmental factors that could be at play here: pregnant woman's exposure to chemical pollutants, heavy metals, pesticides, etc, altering a developing baby's brain structure?
There is a lot of work being done at John Hopkins with mouse studies showing infection triggers the mother’s innate immune system, thus it is the reaction of the mother’s immune system to the infection that affects the developing brain. It may be that the presence of these environmental triggers, viral or bacterial exposures that results in the production of antibodies against the fetus or child's own brain tissue.
Its an idea that is gaining traction because many autistic individuals have impaired immune systems (my younger brother has Chrohn's disease and my mother had a virus while pregnant, interestingly).
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Judy,
HPV is the human papilloma virus...the same family that causes skin and plantar warts. HPV as an STD just refers to the species that infects the anal-genital region. So you can get it from skin to skin contact without even having sex. Its on the skin, so can be spread even by your hands. That's why it is so common. There are over 30 types that are STDs..and 90% of them do go away on their own, but woman still die from cervical cancers, and others from oral cancers (yes, even oral sex spreads it).
What is a bit frightening is, the age of marriage is being delayed, thus total exposure time is probably increasing for young adults. So the theory is, give the vaccine to girls and boys before they are sexually active and protect them from the forms that can cause cancer.
I don't think it is a bad idea, though if one believes they suffer from vaccine reactions, then the cost benefit might not be in their favor. If you read the vaccine reporting data, it comes out to 0.03928571% of the vaccinated population having an adverse reaction. Therefore it's still in the "win" bucket for public health as a whole, unless statistically something changes. All my female cousins and siblings got the vaccine and are fine, so I think it really depends what someone personally thinks the balance is. Not concerned about HPV, don't get it. But, I know two people who had cancer in their 20s, so that was enough for me to find it important.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Lymetoo,
My problem with the lyme vaccine is they don't know enough about the bacteria and how it affects the body..so who knows what exposure to lyme antigens could do. They also haven't even refined diagnostic testing..seems important before you develop vaccines.
My problem with linking gardasil concerns with lyme concerns, is that there is plenty of medical research that proves lyme disease can be chronic, the CDC and IDSA choose to pretend it doesn't exist. There isn't enough peer reviewed data to back up vaccine fears, though it's not out of the realm of possibility. I'm just skeptical that they do the damage people think they do. Unless we are talking about people with compromised immune systems, we don't know enough about the mechanisms of those conditions to rule out vaccine induced exacerbation.
Posted by Judie (Member # 38323) on :
"So you can get it from skin to skin contact without even having sex."
So touching someone can lead to HPV which may lead to cervical cancer?
Hmmmmmmmmm.....
"What is a bit frightening is, the age of marriage is being delayed, thus total exposure time is probably increasing for young adults."
There's flawed logic here. People can still be monogamous, but not married. This assumes people are only monogamous if married.
That's also assuming young, married people were faithful. I'm old enough to remember the 1970s and knew people who hit the sexual revolution in the 1960s. People got married young, but were not faithful.
I think there was more unprotected sex back them before AIDS.
Until there's an AIDS vaccine, condoms will still be needed. That's way more frightening to me than HPV.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
Maia, here are the results of a quick google search re: vaccines and immuno-compromised patients:
“Potentially Harmful Vaccines in Immunocompromised Hosts"
"Live, attenuated viral and bacterial vaccines induce immunity by causing a limited infection. Persons with some immuno-deficiency disorders, generally those with impaired humoral or cellular immunity, may not be able to contain infection with live, attenuated vaccine strains. Severe disease can result."
In general, immunocompromised people should not receive live vaccines because of the risk of disease caused by the vaccine strains. People who are severely immunocompromised or in whom immune status is uncertain should not receive live vaccines.
In less severely immunocompromised people, the benefits of vaccination with routinely recommended live vaccines may outweigh risks.
When considering immunization of an immunocompromised person with a live vaccine, approval from the individual's attending physician should be obtained before vaccination. In complex cases, referral to a physician with expertise in immunization and/or immunodeficiency is advised.”
---
But I didn't need to know that. I know enough from PERSONAL experience and knowledge of pediatricians that it is not WISE to inject an immuno-compromised patient with live vaccine. In fact, it is contraindicated for children with parents who are immuno-compromised to receive live vaccines.
With all due respect, I've been around and been parenting long enough to see many "differences" over the years.
Let's remember that that 25+ years ago there was no MMR. There was a measles shot and a rubella shot. It wasn't until relatively recently that shots for all 3 diseases have been combined.
I'd bet that ingestion of "junk food" and diet everything was much more prevalent years ago than it is today. The womb, as it were, was a much more dangerous place years ago than it is today. Yet, every other kid I've encountered in the past 15 years is "on the spectrum"
Vaccines on steroids are not safer for anyone. As I've said, the vaccine schedule nowadays is extremely aqgressive. I've seen a HUGE change over the course of the 25 years I've been parenting. And it's not for the better.
Vaccines are not the "only" change I can think of, but thanks for putting those words in my mouth. If you want to get down to brass tacks here, another huge change I can think of is the drastic increase in tick-borne diseases.
Beyond those two things, I do not see much more evidence. The vast majority of women today are very health-oriented, especially when they find out they are pregnant - much more so than a quarter century ago.
This notion that pregnant woman today are harboring infections that change the environment of the womb is frankly, quite ridiculous as far as I am concerned.
I will stick to my guns and go out on a limb and state that the high rates of autism today is due to the very aggressive vaccine schedule, combined with the extremely high number of those infected with tick-borne diseases.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
And thanks for the lesson on HPV. I'm with Judie. I have never heard of it being spread by just touching.
HPV is an STD. It can be prevented by absinence or using a condom.
And honestly who WOULDN'T be using a condom to prevent gonorrhea, AIDs, etc. these days?
I personally know two young women who had cervical cancer in their 20s. Both went on to have a few children each.
Cervical cancer is preventable and detectable via pap smear.
It is illogical to me why anyone would get vaccinated with God-only-knows-what for something that is preventable, detectable and curable.
So glad I didn't subject my daughters to this shot.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Sorry, I wasn't talking about touching as in, holding hands. You can spread HPV via Oral sex and HPV can infect areas that are not covered by a condom.
Basically, you would have to pretty faithfully use both condoms and dental dams, and you would only be lowering your risk. A virus like HIV is spread via body fluids, but HPV is spread via direct skin to skin contact.
As for the age thing, what I meant was, the vaccine is only useful in young people before you are exposed to the virus. Most older people may have been already exposed to the virus, or may be in a long term committed relationship, which lowers your risk. If you are over 30, then it would only possibly be of benefit to you if you have had no more than four sexual partners in your lifetime.
I'd prefer not to have cervical cancer or oral cancer. I don't think there is anything illogical about getting a shot that prevents it in the first place. Especially if it has a well documented safety record. Being recently separated from a long term partner, I do feel better knowing that my chances of getting the type of HPV that leads to cancer is decreased. I mean sure, if someone would rather get the cancer and have to freeze, burn or remove pieces of their cervix instead, have at it. As someone who has the benign type of HPV, it has been no picnic. It was a no brainer for me, considering at the time it came out I was in my 20s.
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
Who says it actually PREVENTS the cancer? The flu shots don't work. So why would this vaccine be any better?
Posted by Judie (Member # 38323) on :
I agree with Lymetoo.
STDs and HPV sounds preventable. Wear a condom and don't engage in risky behavior if you're concerned about cancer being caused by HPV.
Vaccines are NO guarantee against cancer.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
The links that you posted say that immunization with live vaccines are generally safe for administration to immunocompromised persons, which is the same as my studies stated. I am not sure what your argument is.
Of course, those with impaired humoral or cellular immunity should not get live vaccines, because humoral immune deficiency refers to diseases resulting from impaired antibody production. That manifests itself via antibody deficiency. Of course vaccinating such persons would be unwise, as they have a defective antibody response. Defects in cellular immunity have to do with cell‐mediated responses involving mostly T cells.
I have Hypogammaglobulemia, but I show excellent antibody response to being vaccinated. It involved getting the flu shot and then testing my titers. It was an important part of my treatment to judge how well my system was functioning. I was on Doxycycline for 3 years to keep the recurrent infections away.
For me, being vaccinated stimulated my immune response, and getting sick with those wild type illnesses is much worse than any minor discomfort from a vaccine. I could die if i contracted the flu or pneumonia, so benefit vs risks might be higher for me than most people here.
You are saying that there has been a huge change in the past 25 years, and that there are vaccines on steroids. How then, do you explain that vaccines are more refined than ever, and have less antigens in them than they did 20, 30, 40 years ago? According to your theory, rates should have spiked when vaccination started (small pox had 200 some-odd antigens) and gone down as the total amount of antigens in childhood vaccinations went down (less than the single dose from small pox). The MMR vacccine has not had thimerisol in it since 1999 I think.
If there was a link to autism, it would be easily traceable via a cohort study between non-vaccinated and vaccinated children. No studies have seen a link, and there have been many. I believed it once, but my belief is slowing dissipating.
Research is looking at the cause of autism to be in utero. If you read the studies, it's not a theory of pregnant woman harboring viruses. It's environmental and genetic. What they are saying is that the changes in the brain occur in the womb. The child is born, seems to develop normally, then an autistic regression occurs.
You are more than welcome to believe that autism is caused by "aggressive vaccines." But, without scientific evidence, it doesn't hold much weight. If someone can produce a study that shows it, instead of the gut feelings from the imaginations of mothers, then that would be great. It would be a brilliant AH HA moment to see it published. It sounds great, except for the idea that infants are exposed to thousands of antigens every day after they leave the womb.
I am open to reading anything that talks about the link between vaccines and immune health. All I see here are people talking about how they have had kids and they just KNOW its the vaccines. So what is the percentage being caused by vaccines? What are the risk factors? Why do most vaccinated children not go on to develop autism?
What percentage of vaccine induced autism would be enough to recall vaccines? My younger brother may have autism, but he is brilliant, albeit socially inept.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Lymetoo,
From what I understand, they isolated the 4 common strains that induce cancer. I think the only question is, how long does it work? 5 years? 10? My biggest concern in giving it to a young child is, what would be the point if it is not effective after 5 years?
The flu shot is variable because the virus itself mutates. That's a whole other problem. There is no "universal" vaccine for the flu. Its a guessing game to be sure. I probably won't get one this year, if my asthma is in control. My immune system is way too problematic right now.
Posted by Judie (Member # 38323) on :
"Research is looking at the cause of autism to be in utero."
Well, they better be looking at Lyme.
The association between tick-borne infections, Lyme borreliosis and autism spectrum disorders
The wife of the man who wrote the article passed Lyme on to her autistic son in utero.
Vaccines can cause Lyme to come out of hiding which can result in autistic behavior. I don't know if that's what happened to this family, but it's something to consider.
Until we get better testing for latent infections, there's a BIG risk for autism caused by Lyme and other seemingly dormant infections to reactivate with a vaccine.
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
I know quite a few cases of autistic children being healed by diets like GAPS and the Body Ecology Diet.
The gut/brain connection is huge.
Posted by MannaMe (Member # 33330) on :
I wonder if the ones who become autistic are the ones with methylation defects and don't detox well?
They would be the ones who can't get rid of all the toxins in the vaccines.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
Judie, I wonder if there is a difference in this "autistic behavior" and true autism. Autism is seen as a spectrum, with behavioral and cognitive problems. It would be nice to see if vaccines can induce latent infections, but that is a whole different story than CAUSING the problems.
That CDC whistle blower link tries to make the connection between autism and MMR vaccine, saying that the CDC hid data that shows a 3.4-fold increased risk for autism in African-American males.
The original Destefano study was a case-control study, for those who don't know, that is an observational epidemiological study of persons with the disease (or variable, like autism) of interest and a suitable control group.
Destefano found no statistically significant correlations. So the question is, how did brian hooker find it in his re-analysis? He took data from a case-control study, and created a cohort study. He then performed multiple subset analyses. I have a masters in a science field, so this immediately jumped out at me. Essentially:
Findings from multiple subgroup analyses may be misleading. Subgroup analyses are observational by nature and are not based on randomized comparisons. False negative and false positive significance tests increase in likelihood rapidly as more subgroup analyses are performed. If their findings are presented as definitive conclusions there is clearly a risk of patients being denied an effective intervention or treated with an ineffective (or even harmful) intervention. Subgroup analyses can also generate misleading recommendations about directions for future research that, if followed, would waste scarce resources.
so, we have someone who "reanalyzed" a CDC study, changed the design of the study, then used a method prone to false negatives and positives.
No followup studies have shown any link whatsoever. Add this to the fact that the original MMR vaccine autism link study was retracted, as Dr. Andrew Wakefield misrepresented or altered the medical histories of all 12 of the patients whose cases formed the basis of the 1998 study.
[ 08-31-2014, 02:12 PM: Message edited by: Maia_Azure ]
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
I am interested in autism as it's happened in my family. I originally bought into the vaccine hype, I now put it in the category as "unlikely." If anything, it's statistically insignificant. And irrelevant, since thimerisol is not in those vaccines for 15 years, yet autism is on the rise.
Neurological research has moved on as well, all of the research is looking at in utero, as fetal brain development is really intricate.
People here seem convinced it is the vaccine schedule, yet can't show any correlation. They just "know." My fear is that we become obsessed with a disproved theory and ignore other more likely explanations.
This is a great article for those interested in environmental toxins:
quote:Originally posted by MannaMe: I wonder if the ones who become autistic are the ones with methylation defects and don't detox well?
They would be the ones who can't get rid of all the toxins in the vaccines.
- That is probably part of it.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
Maia, you have been on this forum less than one month. Out of your 44 posts, 24, or more than half are on this thread. I find this to be unusual to say the least.
You spout CDC dogma ad infinitem yet do not acknowledge how the the CDC's "facts" regarding Lyme Disease have devastated hundreds of thousands of people, including children. To say that many people here and/or their children have endured an immense amount of suffering at the hands of the CDC is an understatement.
So, I for one take what this agency has to say with a grain of salt. The CDC has lost its credibility. If you chose to believe everything you read, be my guest.
No one here has claimed "proof" that vaccines cause autism. But absence of proof does not mean proof of absence. As I noted previously, often the facts come to light after years and thousands of anecdotal accounts.
You completely disregard the opinions, real life (emphasis on REAL LIFE) experiences and suggestions of those of us "in the field" so to speak. We are the ones who know our children more than any suit sitting at a desk at a CDC office.
And we rely, not only on our own knowlege and experiences as parents, but upon the expertise of physicians across many specialties.
I am not compelled to prove to you that there are immuno-compromised children who should not recieve certain vaccines. You will just have to take my word for it, as I have extensive firsthand knowledge of this and have had extended conversations with several physicians.
It is not clear to me what your motives are. I hope they are sincere.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
One is free to post on any topic that is of interest to them, and as someone here who has actually suffered from HPV, received the vaccine, and suffers from chronic illness, I would say that this is something I might be inclined to discuss.
I also work in the scientific field and am considering continuing my education to the PHD level. So I spend time reading science articles and peer- reviewed data. It's just what I do and argue about for a living, it's not meant to be taken personally.
Having a different opinion than some here and a more strict sense of credible proof doesn't make me a spouter of CDC dogma. It just means I'm more conservative in what I'll believe.
I've had Lyme disease for over 15 years, so I know full well the harm the CDC can do. However, there is a plethora of research into Lyme that the CDC is flat out ignoring. This is not so with vaccines.
I am completely open to reading alternative viewpoints, yet nothing of substance has been posted. The original study by DR Andrew Wakefield was retracted as he misrepresented and altered medical histories.
Multiple studies afterwards have shown no correlation when comparing non-vaccinated vs vaccinated children. That doesn't mean that inflammation of the brain via vaccination has never cause an adverse effect or autistic symptoms, its just not the the cause of the increase in autism nor is it statistically significant, and possibly not the cause whatsoever.
The YouTube video on Brian Hooker's "study" was based on methodology blatantly prone to false positives, in order to support his viewpoint.
The DeStefano study found no difference in the odds of receiving the MMR shot between groups of autistic and neurotypical children of the same age. Hooker re-analyzed the data with a Pearson’s chi squared test.
For non biostatitions, suffice it to say, you’re going to have more children diagnosed as autistic at 36 months than you will at 18 or at 24 months. Using the chi square test doesn’t equal a correlation. It makes me want to facepalm.
Unfortunately, analyzing case control data as a cohort study and using bad statistical analyses is over the head of most laypersons, so we have to hear this CDC cover up again and again.
Posted by Maia_Azure (Member # 44330) on :
I have never said there aren't immune compromised children who should not receive vaccines, in fact vaccines are KNOWN to have risks. Statistically speaking, the benefit to public health still outweighs the risks for most.
The polio vaccine as a live vaccines, was risky. So is the smallpox vaccine. The active ingredients in the HPV vaccine are proteins produced by bacteria. It has not, as of yet, been maiming and killing people in large numbers.
The Clinical trials had an excellent safety record, post-clinically, no deaths have definitively been linked, besides the possibility of 2 cases noted for unusual neurological symptoms similar to Lou Gehrig’s disease.
There was an increase in patients who had potentially dangerous blood clots, although 90% of those patients had a risk factor for those clots, such as taking birth control pills. The problem is, records of adverse events in Vaers doesn't necessarily mean it was caused by the vaccine.
Having children doesn't qualify people to be experts on the topic of vaccines or give you "firsthand knowledge" on vaccine safety. That comes from data.
I'm not arguing that all vaccines are innocuous, they carry risks, they can have adverse reactions. Some people should not get them. We don't know exactly how they work, and of course they don't stimulate long lasting immunity the same as getting the disease. But, in diseases where the outcome is death, then they do have benefit.
I have the yellow fever vaccine, as I travel to places it is endemic. I consider this a good choice. Vaccines against deadly viruses probably are a good choice, the others, you need to think of risk vs benefit.
But, of interesting note, a paper published in PloS One indicates a 61% fall in genital warts for Australian women aged 15-27 since widespread vaccination began in 2007.
How could anyone living with Lyme trust anything the medical community says especially the CDC?
Our Pediatrician told my sister-in-law not to vaccinate with HPV. If even he says not to than there's no way I would give it to my kids.
I like the form, Keebler. It would be fun to hand it to a Dr. the next time they give you the guilt trip!
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
Well-said Mvdr!
Maia, why on earth would you believe in your heart of hearts that the CDC wouldn't conduct itself in the same manner as it did with Lyme Disease?
Why would you think that the vaccination program/protocol is exempt from the same sort of corruption and greed as we know has been the case with Lyme Disease? Greed is greed. Power is power. Money is money. Those things are a constant in government agencies.
You said:
"Having children doesn't qualify people to be experts on the topic of vaccines or give you "firsthand knowledge" on vaccine safety. That comes from data."
I never stated I was an expert on "the topic of vaccines." But I sure as hell am an expert on my own children, as well as a witness to the children of others over the past 25 - 30 years, which gives me "firsthand knowledge" of and "data" about many, many things involving children, including vaccine efficacy and safety.
Posted by Lymetoo (Member # 743) on :
This is a really strange discussion, to say the least. I have no idea (or maybe I do) why this thread keeps being brought up again and again.
Posted by beaches (Member # 38251) on :
I think the discussion really hits home for people like me, a mother of chronically ill children.
When your kids are sick and immuno-compromised and you're faced with inoculating them, you really have to think long and hard and have to have discussions with all their docs about the pros and cons of doing so.
And in my case, I took the recommendations from our LLMD and naturopath as to how to mitigate any possible adverse reactions. Thankfully, our pediatrician is a very smart older lady who doesn't believe in "shooting 'em up" and recommended my kids NOT get the Gardasil shot.
I have family and friends whose children are on the spectrum. It is truly heartbreaking to see a beautiful child, who is obviously so bright, struggle with everyday tasks.
Is autism caused by vaccines? I have no idea. But I surely wouldn't trust the CDC to tell me one way or the other, given that agency's track record with Lyme Disease.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
You can spread HPV via Oral sex and HPV can infect areas that are not covered by a condom.