posted
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.
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
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?
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96239 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
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?).
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
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?
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
droid1226
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 34930
posted
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.
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
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.
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
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.
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
And again Maia, what studies are you referring to that state immunocompromised children do well with live vaccines?
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
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
-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96239 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
TNT
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 42349
posted
[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).
Posts: 1308 | From Eastern USA | Registered: Oct 2013
| IP: Logged |
Judie
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38323
posted
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?
Posts: 2839 | From California | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
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.
-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96239 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
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).
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
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.
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
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.
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
Judie
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38323
posted
"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.
Posts: 2839 | From California | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
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.
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
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.
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
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.
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
Judie
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38323
posted
"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.
Posts: 2839 | From California | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
posted
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.
-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96239 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
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.
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
-------------------- Sick since 2000 Bulls eye 2005 Dx Babesia, Lyme 2014 Posts: 247 | From New Hampshire | Registered: Aug 2014
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
posted
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!
Posts: 143 | From Pittsburgh | Registered: Jan 2014
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
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.
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
posted
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.
-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96239 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
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.
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
You can spread HPV via Oral sex and HPV can infect areas that are not covered by a condom. 
Printer-friendly view of this topic