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.
People of all ages got shingles before the vaccine. The risk of getting it just gets higher as you get older.
Your whole body is chemicals. It has natural levels of the chemicals in vaccines that are much higher than what you get from all the vaccines an individual would ever take. About half your body weight is monohydrogen dioxide, which can kill you if you drink too much or inhale it.
Your link does not work. However, people with late onset type 1 diabetes also usually end up on insulin. They also tend to not be overweight.
Most of us know what type 1 diabetes is, and a simple Google search should provide the basic info. She is dodging the question, the way she often does.
So you are a Google educated person? AND you think you SHOULD Google said diseases to learn more? So then that makes you an anti-something... right? Do you also listen to celebrities to determine the medical treatment for your ailments? OMG I think you just suggested to Google it for more medical information!
BTW a medical doctor diagnosed my FIL with Type 1 diabetes. I don't know why you would want to deny that but....
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
It has to do with the attitude toward medicine and medical studies.
Speaking of studies, where are those that compare "cinnamon and liquid ionic vanadium" to insulin in the treatment of type 1 diabetes?
Why will you believe a web site run by an insurance salesman who believes Einstein was wrong about the Theory of Relativity rather than people who actually research diabetes and treat patients with it? He is an evolution denialist, too.
The site you linked to is one of the worst pieces of anti-medicine garbage I have seen, and I have seen a lot of them. It does not try to sell you anything - it just refers you to another site that you have to pay to access to learn how to "cure" your diabetes. Wink. Wink.
Yet you just told her to look it up on Google... so does that mean Google is a medical God? I mean... really? Most of the studies (if not all) of vaccines were done by money from vaccine manufacturers or the scientists employed by them. If you want to take them with a grain of salt then I would say you are not indoctrinated. However, you seem to think they are correct even given their obvious bias.
We are free-thinking adults saying that there are issues which cause concern. If you can't even acknowledge that concern then I have to assume you are indoctrinated. I am sorry you have no other choice. It's sad and I feel sorry for you. Google that...
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010
There is certainly an art to medicine, but that most often comes into play in making a diagnosis, decoding symptoms that may be the same for many diseases or atypical of a given disease. I know of a woman who was diagnosed with severe cardiac artery disease. Her presenting symptom was pain behind her left ear. An astute clinician, who had seen other women with atypical symptoms of heart disease obtained an EKG, which was abnormal.
However, the science behind vaccines is well established. No "feelings or intuition" are required to understand it.
The health care system would make billions more treating vaccine preventable diseases than it does on vaccines.
The "science behind vaccines has NOT been established. You were told it was established but in fact the studies were done by people that had a stake in those vaccines succeeding.
So sad.. The health care system makes billions treating the auto-immune diseases (like diabetes) that vaccines CAUSE.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Last edited by JerseyGirl415; 07-12-2015 at 10:10 PM..
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.
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.
We're not the ones being obstinate. I answered honestly and I have been berated for it over and over again by yourself and few others. It's getting old. It's also off topic.
"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.
"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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by katjonjj
So you are a Google educated person? AND you think you SHOULD Google said diseases to learn more? So then that makes you an anti-something... right? Do you also listen to celebrities to determine the medical treatment for your ailments? OMG I think you just suggested to Google it for more medical information!
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.
Quote:
BTW a medical doctor diagnosed my FIL with Type 1 diabetes. I don't know why you would want to deny that but....
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.
Quote:
Yet you just told her to look it up on Google... so does that mean Google is a medical God? I mean... really? Most of the studies (if not all) of vaccines were done by money from vaccine manufacturers or the scientists employed by them. If you want to take them with a grain of salt then I would say you are not indoctrinated. However, you seem to think they are correct even given their obvious bias.
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?
Quote:
We are free-thinking adults saying that there are issues which cause concern. If you can't even acknowledge that concern then I have to assume you are indoctrinated. I am sorry you have no other choice. It's sad and I feel sorry for you. Google that...
If there are "issues that cause concern", please cite the exact studies that concern you.
Quote:
The "science behind vaccines has NOT been established. You were told it was established but in fact the studies were done by people that had a stake in those vaccines succeeding.
So sad.. The health care system makes billions treating the auto-immune diseases (like diabetes) that vaccines CAUSE.
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.
The science behind vaccines is well established, down to the molecular level.
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.
I have to say, I don't understand the conclusion. Prior to 2005, there was no vaccine for pertussis for anyone past age 7! So how could a vaccine that provides 2-4 years immunity be worse than no vaccine/no immunity? Strange.
Let me say something you AVers will probably consider shocking. I spent a great deal of my career in public health. PH can be, well, political. The PH people went to great lengths, until they couldn't do it any more, to avoid saying that failure to vaccinate was at least partly responsible for the pertussis epidemics. It took some good clear published research to get them to change their tune. Nonmedical Vaccine Exemptions and Pertussis in California, 2010 "CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest clustering of NMEs may have been 1 of several factors in the 2010 California pertussis resurgence." (NME = Non-medical exemption)
Probably because having pertussis gives longer immunity. The vaccine does not work.... We saw that in the latest "outbreak." There are numerous studies that show that pertussis vaccine efficacy is not guaranteed or even safe.
That is why these vaccines can cause harm...Look at these evaluations of the current studies here: Fourteen Studies
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.
...
This x 100000000!
Hopefully people aren't actually stupid enough to believe that all internet "sources" are equal. There's nothing wrong with using the Internet but if you can't find an actual reputable medical source for what you're reading then it may as well be fiction. Opinions might lead to questions but they sure as h**l don't give you the answer.
Edit: there's no better example of the WRONG way to ask questions than the laughable site above - a discussion here (for those that believe in science not fiction):
Probably because having pertussis gives longer immunity. The vaccine does not work.... We saw that in the latest "outbreak." There are numerous studies that show that pertussis vaccine efficacy is not guaranteed or even safe.
That is why these vaccines can cause harm...Look at these evaluations of the current studies here: Fourteen Studies
I'm pretty much out of this thread. We could go on and on, but the bottom line is, people will continue to not vaccinate their kids and nothing except force is going to make them. I still feel that your choice to vaccinate ceases being a choice when my health and the health of other people are affected. If you don't feel like that, consider the following:
Would any of you willingly and knowingly get on a plane if you knew another passenger had MDR-TB? According to the anti-vaxxers' philosophy, shouldn't it be a choice of the person with TB to be able to go where he wants, even if he is exposing other people to his TB? According to you anti-vaxxers, isn't it government interference with personal choice if the state decided to restrict the places this person could go and especially if they wanted to keep him confined? That's your attitude towards vaccination and when the shoe is on the other foot, what do you say then?
For all of you anti-vaxxers out there, think about this: one of you killed that woman in Washington. Someone who should have been vaccinated against measles wasn't, and somebody else died because of that. I'm sure that woman had parents and people that loved her, and she deserved to live as much as anyone. But somebody else's selfish decision ended her life. The parent who decided to not vaccinate the measles patient who exposed this woman to measles and ultimately killed her, got his/her choice to not vaccinate. Whoopee. Because they exercised their choice, the woman who died didn't get a choice of her own. She was vaccinated and she was a person for whom vaccination of other people should have protected her. Instead, she died, NOT because of the vaccination she had as you would have us believe so many people do, but because of the negligence of others.
If you're an anti-vaxxer, what would you say to this woman's parents if it was your unvaccinated child who passed measles on to her. Go on, I really want to know what you'd say if you were face to face with the parents of the woman who died. Put your money where your mouth is and tell us what excuse you'd give to the parents.
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
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
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
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?
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.
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.
