U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-13-2015, 12:19 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,446,487 times
Reputation: 1690

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415 View Post
Again... you don't need "experience" to know how type 1 diabetes is treated. There is only one way. You are free to try whatever you want regardless but your child very well could die from hypo or hyperglycemia or suffer permanent side effects like blindness and "diabetic foot." There is one treatment - injected insulin. And even then it can be difficult to control and it's a lifelong burden.

There is no "well let me see what I do when/if my kid gets diabetes" because what you would do is (hopefully) give them insulin, or risk their lives. I mean I guess you could deny treatment and do your own thing but it would not be wise or recommended (like not vaccinating! now I see how things work for some people. I see the connections.) It would be dangerous.
But my child would have less chance to get diabetes if they are not vaccinated. Also, I have 4 kids that are "under" vaccinated and they are perfectly healthy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415 View Post
The two of you are still being obstinate on this so I'll just answer the question in the post that started this little diabetes thing - no you would not treat type 1 diabetes with herbs or a special diet, perhaps as a supplement to actual treatment (insulin and strips to test your sugars and maybe even a monitor that automatically senses you sugar levels or a pump that administers insulin without having to jab yourself) but it would not suffice as a standalone treatment and would cause the child problems. This is a known fact. There is no "well maybe..." "well I don't have the experience so I can't say..." ... I'm telling you how it would be.
Yet you don't see that diabetes is a disease that has symptoms. The symptom is insulin deficiency. However, the underlying cause is never addressed by the medical community. Why?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415 View Post
Now I see exactly how you behave when it comes to vaccines. The truth, like this, is right in front of you and you still question it as if it's up in the air. It's not. This stuff has been heavily researched. The processes medications/treatments have to undergo before being given to the general population are rigorous. They test vaccines, make sure they're as safe as can be, there is oversight, and they are administered with the extremely rare chance of severe adverse effects - because it's not possible for them to be 100% safe for everyone - the risk of which is much lower than the risks associated with the very diseases the vaccinations protect against.
THEY test vaccines.... who is the "THEY" that you speak of? And the tests they did. What were the controls? Where did the money for the tests come from?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyGirl415 View Post
As for the mandates, there is still choice involved. These mandates are for public schools. Sending a kid to public or private school is a choice itself, regardless of vaccines. You can make the choice to not vaccinate, but your kid can't go to public school. If you're that against vaccinations, you should have no problem with this. There are other options. There are a variety of private schools a child can attend. But public schools are run by state governments (or local), they receive state funding, funding from taxpayers. Schools mandate lots of things. There are many requirements involved with schools, before you get there or once you're inside. The government controls them. They can require kids to be vaccinated before attending their schools. You have a problem with it? Fine. They can't and won't force you to vaccinate. But if you can't, you can't go to their schools. Tough.
Actually, many kids can be unvaccinated by law in this new bill because if they are not changing schools (like an elementary school to middle school or middle school to high school) then they do not need to be vaccinated. This all starts in 2016 so if I have a HSer in 9th grade, then they can be unvaccinated until 2019 when they graduate.

Did you read the bill in question? And if so, how does that "protect" the rest of the population? Also.... Does this really mean that more kids will be bullied...errrrr vaccinated?

 
Old 07-13-2015, 12:47 AM
 
Location: Hyrule
8,401 posts, read 9,620,671 times
Reputation: 7421
Pharmaceutical companies and their trade groups gave more than $2 million to current members of the Legislature in 2013-2014, about 2 percent of the total raised, records show. Nine of the top 20 recipients are either legislative leaders or serve on either the Assembly or Senate health committees. Receiving more than $95,000, the top recipient of industry campaign cash is Sen. Richard Pan, a Sacramento Democrat and doctor who is carrying the vaccine bill.

In addition, the industry donated more than $500,000 to outside campaign spending groups that helped elect some current members last year.

Leading pharmaceutical companies also spent nearly $3 million more during the 2013-2014 legislative session lobbying the Legislature, the governor, the state pharmacists’ board and other agencies, according to state filings.

Read more here: Drug companies donated millions to California lawmakers before vaccine debate | The Sacramento Bee


Funny how this seems to be the cart before the horse in these mandates.....Gotta love our for profit healthcare system. Anything for a buck. We need to get rid of it.
Doctors lying to patients about cancer and bowel disease just to make money off healthy people. Mandating vaccines without any hint of an epidemic in our country.

They have to post warnings to run t.v. commercials on drugs, I hope they have to post warnings before they vaccinate. At least they should be required to have people read the insert and sign a paper.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 12:47 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,446,487 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Achieving high levels of vaccination will not prevent cases of a disease. It does limit the size of outbreaks and prevent epidemics.

Perhaps you did not read this earlier in the thread.

https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...ssis-immunity/

"It’s no secret that recent outbreaks have been notable for a large contingent of vaccinated children being affected, as has been pointed out in three recent studies. All three indicate that there appears to be a hole in the vaccination schedule that leaves children in the 9-12 year age range inadequately protected against pertussis. Two of these studies suggest that in that age group the attack rate during the recent outbreak in California the attack rate among vaccinated children approached that of unvaccinated children. Antivaccinationists love to cite these studies as smoking gun “proof” that the acellular pertussis vaccine “doesn’t work” and that “natural immunity is better,” but what they always leave out are the findings that the acellular pertussis vaccine in DTaP is quite effective in protecting younger children and in protecting teens who have received the recommended Tdap booster at age 11 or 12. The problem, it appears, is mostly in the range between the last DTaP dose, usually administered around age five or so, and the Tdap booster dose recommended for preadolescents."

There is ongoing research towards producing a better pertussis vaccine. Right now it appears that adjusting the dose schedule might help fill in the gap in protection prior to the Tdap at age 11 to 12.

The problem is not that the vaccine does not work, it is that it wears off. The reasons for that remain to be elucidated.

By the way, immunity due to wild pertussis infection wanes, too.

Duration of immunity against pertussis after natural infection or vaccination. - PubMed - NCBI

"A review of the published data on duration of immunity reveals estimates that infection-acquired immunity against pertussis disease wanes after 4-20 years and protective immunity after vaccination wanes after 4-12 years."

Having pertussis is no guarantee you will not get it again, and it is a nasty disease to have. I would not wish it on anyone, and being sick with it is the only way to get your precious "natural" immunity.

Edited to add: Now that I think about it, the fact that you can get pertussis more than once suggests that the tendency for protection from the vaccine to wear off is actually predictable. The thing about the vaccine is that if we need to give boosters we can do that - without the need to be horribly ill.

Yes, I suggested that if she did not know anything about juvenile diabetes a few minutes with Google might allow her to determine whether she would treat a child with the diagnosis solely with diet. It is a simple, very narrow question.

I have had college and graduate level courses in physiology and immunology. I use Google to find sources to support what I say here, and not websites created by insurance salesmen who believe they are smarter than Einstein, either. I prefer to get information from those who are actual experts on vaccines, having accumulated years of formal education and actual research in the field.
So you suggested that she Google information yet you also say that people who Google are un-informed. Which is is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
I never said he did not have the diagnosis. I only pointed out that weight loss does not cure the problem. Most people with it end up needing insulin eventually. I even gave you a link to more information.
You actually said that I was incredible because he was Type 2.. when in fact he was Type 1... The weight loss was not the cure.. I never said that. Now you are misrepresenting what I said. The weight loss (amongst other things) resulted in not needing insulin. The "doctor" (notice the quotes) also had my FIL on steroids for 15 years.... why... Only God knows.

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
If you are going to say all vaccine research is biased, you really need to provide evidence that the source of funding has actually influenced the results of specific studies. Could you please provide links to actual studies that you can demonstrate are biased?
Show me a study that is not from a vaccine affiliated person..... *crickets*

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
If there are "issues that cause concern", please cite the exact studies that concern you.
All these: Fourteen Studies

Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
What evidence do you have that vaccines cause diabetes? Right now, the most likely culprit for type 1 diabetes is infection with certain enteroviruses. If that is confirmed, conceivably vaccines against diabetogenic viruses could actually prevent diabetes.
ummm.. I tried to tell you that one of the enteroviruses is Polio. That vaccine for polio would be enough. Also because the vaccines give a "small amount" of the virus/bacteria would be evidence that they could actually cause these things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
The science behind vaccines is well established, down to the molecular level.
Ummm.... no it has not. The studies were NOT unbiased or scientific.
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
The proof of the success of vaccines is that when we reach high levels of vaccine coverage we see fewer cases of vaccine preventable diseases. Whatever you want to believe about vaccines, it's silly to say they do not work, though some better than others. Smallpox is gone because of vaccination.
Small pox? really? Tell me why there was a spike after the vaccine.... http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/wp...8/graph-21.png
 
Old 07-13-2015, 12:51 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,446,487 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
That is untrue. Three doses of pertussis vaccine give 80-85% of vaccinees immunity. Ask the Experts about Pertussis Vaccines (DTaP, Tdap) - CDC experts answer Q&As

Natural immunity lasts 4-20 years, and it's a heck of a way to get immunity.
Immunity from vaccination lasts 4-12 years.
It's funny to see people post that they had pertussis as a child, so they're immune for life, as some have said.
Duration of immunity against pertussis after natural infection or vaccination. - PubMed - NCBI

There is no study that says pertussis is unsafe. "Fourteen Studies" is not a reputable website.
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...rteen-studies/
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...ks-14-studies/
So we need 3 doses now? Wow then 5 doses would be even better... what about 10 doses. Hmmm... maybe it just doesn't ****ing work?
 
Old 07-13-2015, 12:53 AM
 
Location: Hyrule
8,401 posts, read 9,620,671 times
Reputation: 7421
HPV vaccine, Merck and Rick Perry's money - CNN.com

And since January 2006, Merck has given an additional $377,500 to the Republican Governors Association, which, in turn, was one of the largest backers of Perry's own campaigns. Notably, Perry also served as the chairman of the governors association in 2008 and again this year, until last month, when Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell succeeded him, so that Perry could pursue his presidential run.

Did Bachmann's drug lobbyist claims ring true?

Perhaps more importantly, Perry's friend, former chief of staff Mike Toomey, spun through the revolving door to become a lobbyist for Merck in Texas, a position he held at the time of the HPV-related executive order.

Merck was the first company to offer an FDA-approved HPV vaccine, which it offers under the brand name Gardasil.

In 2009, the FDA also approved the drug Cervarix, made by GlaxoSmithKline, which, for its part, has given about the same amount of money as Merck to Perry's gubernatorial campaigns since 2001 and nearly four times as much as Merck to the Republican Governors Association since 2006.

In fact, three other pharmaceutical companies have given more money to Perry than Merck and substantially more money to the Republican Governors Association than Merck.

The absence of attention-grabbing headlines does not signify that these companies expect nothing in exchange for their investments. To the contrary, it is their fiduciary obligation to return a profit to their shareholders. Bankrolling politicians -- Republican and Democrat -- is just another tool to help them meet their goals and, in so doing, bolster their profits. If anything, money spent on political donations and lobbying holds more sway when it is unexamined.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 01:07 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,446,487 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
Pharmaceutical companies and their trade groups gave more than $2 million to current members of the Legislature in 2013-2014, about 2 percent of the total raised, records show. Nine of the top 20 recipients are either legislative leaders or serve on either the Assembly or Senate health committees. Receiving more than $95,000, the top recipient of industry campaign cash is Sen. Richard Pan, a Sacramento Democrat and doctor who is carrying the vaccine bill.

In addition, the industry donated more than $500,000 to outside campaign spending groups that helped elect some current members last year.

Leading pharmaceutical companies also spent nearly $3 million more during the 2013-2014 legislative session lobbying the Legislature, the governor, the state pharmacists’ board and other agencies, according to state filings.

Read more here: Drug companies donated millions to California lawmakers before vaccine debate | The Sacramento Bee


Funny how this seems to be the cart before the horse in these mandates.....Gotta love our for profit healthcare system. Anything for a buck. We need to get rid of it.
Doctors lying to patients about cancer and bowel disease just to make money off healthy people. Mandating vaccines without any hint of an epidemic in our country.

They have to post warnings to run t.v. commercials on drugs, I hope they have to post warnings before they vaccinate. At least they should be required to have people read the insert and sign a paper.
I have no problem with the medical field turning a profit. That is what a business does. However, if you want to vaccinate my child then let me see the vaccinated vs un-vaccinated studies.

Wait... There aren't any? Why?
 
Old 07-13-2015, 01:10 AM
 
Location: Hyrule
8,401 posts, read 9,620,671 times
Reputation: 7421
SB 277 SIGNED INTO LAW JUNE 30, 2015
Picture
SB 277, eliminates a parent’s right to exempt their children from one, some, or all vaccines, a risk-laden medical procedure. On June 30, 2015, Governor Brown signed SB 277 the most stringent vaccine mandate in the United States into law. In 2016, California parents will be forced to give their children more than 40 doses of 10 federally recommended vaccines. Families that do not comply with the one-size-fits-all vaccine mandate, will loose the option to use licensed daycare facilities, in-home daycare, public or private preschools and even after school care programs. School aged children, not up-to-date on every mandated vaccine, will be required to home school without options for classroom learning. This open-ended vaccinate mandate allows the legislature to add any additional vaccines they deem necessary at anytime. The only exemption available is a medical exemption that doctors deny to 99.99 percent of children under federal guidelines.


They can add on as many vaccines as they want in the future. That includes any with increased side effects without counsel.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 01:18 AM
 
Location: Seattle, Washington
8,435 posts, read 8,446,487 times
Reputation: 1690
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
SB 277 SIGNED INTO LAW JUNE 30, 2015
Picture
SB 277, eliminates a parent’s right to exempt their children from one, some, or all vaccines, a risk-laden medical procedure. On June 30, 2015, Governor Brown signed SB 277 the most stringent vaccine mandate in the United States into law. In 2016, California parents will be forced to give their children more than 40 doses of 10 federally recommended vaccines. Families that do not comply with the one-size-fits-all vaccine mandate, will loose the option to use licensed daycare facilities, in-home daycare, public or private preschools and even after school care programs. School aged children, not up-to-date on every mandated vaccine, will be required to home school without options for classroom learning. This open-ended vaccinate mandate allows the legislature to add any additional vaccines they deem necessary at anytime. The only exemption available is a medical exemption that doctors deny to 99.99 percent of children under federal guidelines.


They can add on as many vaccines as they want in the future. That includes any with increased side effects without counsel.
Exactly... They can add any vaccine they want. So what if they want to add organ donation to the mix.. or vaccination against stupidity.....
 
Old 07-13-2015, 01:43 AM
 
Location: Hyrule
8,401 posts, read 9,620,671 times
Reputation: 7421
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj View Post
I have no problem with the medical field turning a profit. That is what a business does. However, if you want to vaccinate my child then let me see the vaccinated vs un-vaccinated studies.

Wait... There aren't any? Why?
My post is why. We are a for profit healthcare system, private studies get no funding. It's expensive. Only large corporations have the money to do studies and they don't have to be that long or thorough.

Here is one that showed baby monkeys having autism like reactions to vaccines. I doubt anyone will believe it.
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org...tism-research/

Caustic effect is lost to rhetoric. Good luck.

If we had a non profit system, there would be no need for mandates without an epidemic. Our outbreaks are small, even with the disney outbreak it's less than previous years. We h ave a pretty high voluntary vaccine rate. The motivation rhetoric to encourage mandates are "what if's" or "it could be's" not real data. Not current epidemics. They lobby for mandates, not to save the world but to make a profit. They are a business after all. So is the cancer doctor that told healthy patients they had cancer to make money off their treatment. Ethics don't really come first, profit is the bottom line and nobody pretends it isn't. Except maybe laymen who don't know much about corporate operations.

The drug companies threatened to stop making the vaccines because they lacked profit, so they received mandates as incentive. This is common news, it's easy to find. Their business is always profit driven, not the health care of Americans, it would be silly if it were. They make the most money off us here. We are their largest profit market.
Vaccines Are Profitable, So What? - The Atlantic

You don't see other studies because they would, simply put, hurt their business.
 
Old 07-13-2015, 07:56 AM
 
3,404 posts, read 2,420,277 times
Reputation: 5917
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katarina Witt View Post
I am close behind you in age, Jo48. I never heard of a chickenpox or measles party, let alone attended one in suburban Pittsburgh. DH is the same age as you; his experience in urban Omaha was the same as mine. We both agree that our mothers would have thought the whole concept insane.

People were very afraid of polio in the early 50s. DH had a cousin who died of it then.
So, did you both have measles, chickenpox, etc when you were children? What about your own children? Did you try to make sure they had chickenpox when young?

Because it was understood 30+ years ago that it was better for your child to get chickenpox when young because it was a dangerous disease if you didn't have immunity and got it when you were an adult. So of course we all tried to make sure our children caught it!

Back when my kids were little, I babysat the neighbor kids. One child broke out in chickenpox on a Friday, and every Friday a new child broke out for several weeks. Everyone got it except my 4 year old, so I hoped she just had an extremely mild case with no symptoms. Parents were very happy to be through it. We knew how to care for the children through the course of the illness, there was nothing insane about the practice. In fact, to prevent your child from getting chickenpox so they could get it as an adult would have been seen as insane.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top