U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
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)
Reply Start New Thread
Old 08-23-2010, 04:37 PM
Location: In a house
13,258 posts, read 36,253,393 times
Reputation: 20198


Originally Posted by nana053 View Post
I'm tellin ya - that stuff'll kill ya. I'd rather brush my teeth with a strip of vaccinated mad cow meat dipped in fluoride, than OD on the stuff in that link.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Old 09-01-2010, 07:26 PM
24 posts, read 35,310 times
Reputation: 29
Originally Posted by Eleanora1 View Post
So you do or you don't care if people make money?

Because most of your argument is constructed around the belief that pharmaceutical companies are making great big profits on vaccines. On most vaccines they aren't.
Pharmaceutical companies make billions off of all vaccines! Do you know how the whole process works with the purchase of vaccines?

Originally Posted by Eleanora1 View Post
You also haven't clarified what you mean by conflict of interest here.

You want conflict of interest? Go look at Wakefield. He was hired by lawyers to attempt to demonstrate that the MMR vaccine causes autism. The lawyers wanted to sue the pharmaceutical companies. He also patented his own version of the MMR vaccine which he wanted to sell to patients.

How's that for conflict of interest?
I believe I've made it quite clear about conflicts of interest with the links I've provided in a past statement. That was only the tip of the iceberg too. Second you point out only one case that deals with conflict of interest on behalf of the non vaccine side. The thing is, I'm not going to defend the man because he literally has hundreds of people including dozens of not for profit organizations doing that. For anyone that reads, make your own judgment and read the case studies and the studies that are taking place now. Also take a look at who stands behind this man, and ask your self what do they have to gain? Besides only wanting the truth to come out.

Of course you'll comeback with some statement like all those people are crazy, stupid, or some form of derogatory comment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-01-2010, 07:32 PM
24 posts, read 35,310 times
Reputation: 29
Originally Posted by marmac View Post
Great post !

The problem comes when people blindly close their eyes to info like you gave and presume those rates would be the same if there were no vaccines.
Presume? How can you presume that the evidence right in front of your eyes clearly shows that the diseases were darn near eradicated before the vaccines were even introduced to the mass public.

Albert Einstein once said that there were three types of lies--lies, damned lies and statistics! It is easy to provide statistical evidence which creates the impression that vaccination works. Here is a good example which appears in the book, Communicable Diseases Handbook by L. Claire Bennett and Sarah Searl from the University of British Columbia, Vancouver. On Page 44 it states: "An effective inoculation program should obviously result in a lowered incidence of the particular disease under surveillance. For instance, since 1963 there have been more than 80 million doses of red measles vaccine given. The number of reported cases has gone from a pre-1963 total of about 500,000 to a total of about 35,000 in 1975". Now this suggests that the vaccine was indeed responsible for this decline, that is until we go back to 1958 and learn that the number of cases was 800,000! In other words, measles cases were in decline before the 1963 vaccine commenced. (In fact by 1955, still eight years before the start of this vaccine, there had been a 97% decline in the death rate from measles since the turn of the century!) What is more, medical authorities have since acknowledged that the 1963 measles vaccine was a complete failure!

Another method of creating misleading statistics is False Diagnosis'. This involves a doctor diagnosing a particular disease, say polio, when in fact the patient does not really have polio. From the book, Hygienic Care Of Children, Herbert Shelton comments on the polio epidemics: "Polio epidemics are very largely physician made. Great numbers of cases of illness diagnosed as polio are not". Shelton goes on to say: "The apparent disappearance of polio as a result of vaccination was brought about by a clever juggling stunt. Before the Salk vaccine was introduced, thousands of cases of polio were diagnosed each year in children who had no polio. After the introduction of the vaccine, these cases were no longer diagnosed as polio, this automatically appeared to reduce the case rate to the near vanishing point".

Dr Bernard Greenberg, head of the Department of Biostatistics of the University of North Carolina School of Public Health, USA, has stated that prior to the Salk vaccine, large numbers of Cocksackie virus and asceptic meningitis cases were mislabelled as paralytic polio. Following the start of polio vaccinations, no such mislabelling occurred. Following the commencement of the Salk vaccine, many polio cases were reclassified under a different name, this again, leading to statistics indicating a reduction in polio incidence. Walene James, in her book, Immunization, Reality Behind the Myth, provides figures from the Los Angeles County Health Index Morbidity and Mortality, Reportable Diseases which reveals this fact.

Date / Viral or Asceptic Meningitis / Polio

July 1955 / 50 / 273
July 1961 / 161 / 65
July 1963 / 151 / 31
Sept 1966 / 256 / 5

Originally Posted by marmac View Post
Reminds me of " little Johnny"

Teacher asked what is more important.........sun or the moon.
All the kiods said the sun was.

"little Johnny" disagreed and said the moon was.

When asked to explain, he said the moon shines at night when it's dark.
The sun shines in the daytime when it's already light.

Taking the sun for granted and believing it would be light out in daytime anyway, is similar to people saying diseases would be nearly non existant even w/o vaccines.

Also, that info you commented on had no detailed dates or time lines. So how was that great? Here are some numbers for you then. Lets jump subject on vaccine for a second and touch on heath care as a whole since you like big numbers.


Condition / Deaths / Cost

Adverse Drug Reactions / 106,000 / $12 billion
Medical error / 98,000 / $2 billion
Bedsores / 115,000 / $55 billion
Infection / 88,000 / $5 billion
Malnutrition / 108,800 / no cost analysis
Outpatients / 199,000 / $77 billion
Unnecessary Procedures / 37,136 / $122 billion
Surgery-Related / 32,000 / $9 billion
Totals / 783,936 / $282 billion

We could have an even higher death rate by using Dr. Lucien Leape’s 1997 medical and drug error rate of 3 million. Multiplied by the fatality rate of 14% (that Leape used in 1994) we arrive at an annual death rate of 420,000 for drug errors and medical errors combined. If we put this number in place of Lazorou’s 106,000 drug errors and the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) 98,000 medical errors, we could add another 216,000 deaths making a total of 999,936 deaths annually.

Condition / Deaths / Cost

ADR med error / 420,000 / $200 billion
Total / 999,936


Unnecessary Events / People Affected / Iatrogenic Events

Hospitalization / 8.9 million / 1.78 million

Procedures / 7.5 million / 1.3 million

TOTAL / 16.4 million / 3.08 million

The enumerating of unnecessary medical events is very important in this analysis. Any medical procedure that is invasive and not necessary must be considered as part of the larger iatrogenic picture. Unfortunately, cause and effect go unmonitored. The figures on unnecessary events represent people ("patients") who are thrust into a dangerous healthcare system. They are helpless victims. Each one of these 16.4 million lives is being affected in a way that could have a fatal consequence. Simply entering a hospital could result in the following:
  1. In 16.4 million people, 2.1% chance of a serious adverse drug reaction, (186,000)
  1. In 16.4 million people, 5-6% chance of acquiring a nosocomial infection, (489,500)
  1. In 16.4 million people, 4-36% chance of having an iatrogenic injury in hospital (medical error and adverse drug reactions). (1.78 million)
  1. In 16.4 million people, 17% chance of a procedure error. (1.3 million)
All the statistics above represent a one-year time span. Imagine the numbers over a ten-year period. Working with the most conservative figures from these statistics you can project the following 10-year death rates.


Condition / 10-Year Deaths

Adverse Drug Reaction / 1.06 million
Medical error / 0.98 million
Bedsores / 1.15 million
Nosocomial Infection / 0.88 million
Malnutrition / 1.09 million
Outpatients / 1.99 million
Unnecessary Procedures / 371,360
Surgery-Related / 320,000
TOTAL / 7,841,361

But I'm sure you believe that the health care industry in America is the best in the world.......

Last edited by mrkartheiser; 09-01-2010 at 08:19 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-01-2010, 07:36 PM
24 posts, read 35,310 times
Reputation: 29
Originally Posted by Eleanora1 View Post
You've posted from whale to as a credible source and you're talking about credibility?

The nuttiness that is Whale.to: Save Scopie's Law! : Respectful Insolence

Whale to quotes from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a known anti-Semitic forgery. They believe the Jesuits are soldiers of satan. They think CPR is a plot to control your brain.
Whale.to is a website with a collection of over thousands of documents, statements, and articles, written by......hold on..... thousands of different individuals. Not any by the people that actually set the site up. So what if it has some articles that are absolutely outrageous, am I sitting here backing those claims, no. So do you feel the same way about the mass media, as they cover some really outrageous stuff? Should I post the same articles, statements, and what not from a different site? Would that make you happy?

A little quote for the rest of you all that are reading these posts.

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." ----Buddha

Originally Posted by Eleanora1 View Post
Polio exists today solely because of anti-vax lunacy:

Polio cases rise in Nigeria as vaccine is shunned for fear of AIDS -- Raufu 324 (7351): 1414 -- BMJ

Posting links from blogs and websites maintained by crazy people is not evidence!

Go read the link I posted.

Mostly, you give a link to a site that covers a small bit of information about Nigeria refusing the vaccine. Then if you want to read the article you have to sign up. Did you just do a search on Google for rise in the polio virus and find that? Just like I said before they did in fact do mass vaccination, and hold on, low and behold the mass vaccination did in fact cause an outbreak. Outbreaks caused by the oral vaccine's live virus have happened before. But the continuing Nigerian outbreak is the biggest ever caused by the vaccine. Wow the truth, such an ugly thing.

Lets just look at the math for a second. Nigeria has a population of 146,255,312. Now this "outbreak" caused parallelization in only 124 children in the country and no deaths. Thats 0.0000847% of the population. What this country really needs is better sewage and water period. That is the best way to ever get ride of any polio virus. But, do you even know what and how polio spreads?
Polio is spread through the ingestion of an infected person's feces, most commonly transmitted through drinking unclean water with fecal contaminates in it (which is why polio rarely exists anymore because of advancement in plumbing and water filtering systems). Despite the stigma that comes with the name, Polio is actually a very mild disease itself. In 95% of cases, there are ZERO symptoms. In 4% of cases, flu like symptoms appear, and in less than 1% of cases (actually, closer to 0.1%) muscle weakness or paralysis can occur. Most people who become infected with polio don't even know it. Polio was on the dramatic decline before vaccines came out. The polio vaccine itself has been the biggest culprit in causing polio cases since 1961. An easy way to prevent polio is proper hand washing to prevent contamination.

Polio Surge In Nigeria After Vaccine Virus Mutates
Polio vaccine blamed for outbreaks in Nigeria - Health - Infectious diseases - msnbc.com
Opps hold on, is this site an OK reference for you, or do I have to post a link to 50 different sites covering the same thing?

Vaccination Debate

Polio Index page Vaccination Liberation Information

The United States Center for Disease Control (CDC) admitted that the polio vaccine has become the dominant cause of polio in the US today, with 87% of cases between 1973 and 1983 caused by the vaccine. More recently, 1980-1989, every case of polio in the US was caused by the vaccine. Doctors and scientists on the staff of the National Institute of Health during the 1950’s were well aware that the Salk vaccine was ineffective and deadly. Some frankly stated that it was “worthless as a preventative and dangerous to take”. The Salk “inactivated” or “killed-virus” was actually regulated to permit 5,000 live viruses per million doses.
A large vaccine trial in 1955 showed a total failure of the Salk vaccine to protect against poliomyelitis. During a 1959 epidemic in Massachusetts, 77.5% of the paralytic cases had received three or more doses of the inactivated vaccine.
In 1956 with the infamous Francis Field Trials they discovered large numbers of children contracted polio after receiving the vaccine. Instead of removing the vaccine from the market, they decided to exclude from the statistics all cases of polio that occurred within 30 days after vaccination on the pretext that such cases were “pre-existing”. In 1958 mass vaccination triggered a disastrous increase in polio, the highest being 700% in Ottawa, Canada. The highest incidence in the USA occurred in those states which had been induced to adopt compulsory polio shots, and cases of polio increased after mass inoculations.
Originally Posted by Eleanora1 View Post
Autism is merely the new diagnosis. Children who used to be learning disabled and mentally retarded are now autistic.

The rest of your post is merely unbacked up speculative paranoia.

You want a toxin? Try diphtheria. It will close up your throat and choke you to death. You want another toxin? Try whooping cough. You'll cough so hard your ribs will break. Go after another toxin like Hib. You'll be in the hospital with meningitis.

Oh no wait. You won't. Why? Because of vaccination!

Um not being dead from smallpox makes me healthier? Not having a rotted liver from Hep B makes me healthier? Not having to worry about lockjaw from tetanus makes me healthier?

Vaccines don't just prevent disease. They prevent people from disability as well.
All you keep doing is posting speculations and scare tactics. You really need to study on these different diseases on what they are, how they act, and how they are contracted. No matter what you say or post will never prove that the absolute fact on an unreasonable doubt, vaccines did not eradicate any disease. You have a higher chance of getting struck by lightning then even seeing the worse case in any of these diseases, and it is not because of vaccines!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-01-2010, 07:40 PM
24 posts, read 35,310 times
Reputation: 29
Originally Posted by Eleanora1 View Post
Take Hib for example.

Hib causes pneumonia and all kinds of other horrible effects primarily in babies. The Hib vaccine was licensed in 1985. Yes, that's right 1985. Do you really think in that in 1985 people lacked sanitation? Clean food? Sewage disposal?

Since the introduction of the vaccine cases have fallen drastically:

Hib Disease Questions and Answers

How common is Hib disease in the United States?

Before the introduction of a Hib vaccine, H. influenzae type b (Hib) was the leading cause of bacterial meningitis among children younger than age five years in the United States. Every year about 20,000 children younger than age five years got severe Hib disease and about 1,000 children died. More than half of children who developed severe Hib disease were younger than age 12 months.

From 1996 through 2000, an average of 68 reported cases of Hib disease occurred in children younger than age 5 years each year. By 2006, this number had dropped to just 29 cases and, although some of the 179 cases with unknown serotype could have been due to Hib, the significant decline in incidence (>99%) since the pre-vaccine era is truly remarkable.

So we've gone from 20,000 cases to under 50 each year after the introduction of the vaccine. That's an indisputable fact.

How can you possibly deny this? Or deny that vaccines are responsible for saving nearly 20,000 kids each year from a terrible disease?

First off these numbers were pulled from the CDC website, as the site you referenced pulls all of its information off the CDC site. Here's a little look on how the CDC exaggerates their numbers.

Press: Are US flu death figures more PR than science?

Take a look at the Manufacturer’s Inserts and efficacy statements: Pedvax HIB- Efficacy of Hib ranged from 59-98%
(see pdf if link dosen't work)

You should study on exactly how the bacterium works. Only a extremely small fraction of those who harbor this organism will subsequently develop the disease. The Hib bacterium is widespread in humans. Along with other bacteria, it usually lives in the throat and nose without causing illness. In rare cases, though, the bacterium breaks through the body's defenses and causes disease. So only through the compromise of the immune system is the bacterium able to take hold.
A study was done and looked at fifty-five children who had contracted invasive HiB at least three weeks after they had been vaccinated. Thirty-nine of these children developed Meningitis, of whom three died. The CDC says further investigation is necessary to evaluate the meaning of Hib cases found soon after vaccination. They warn that physicians should be aware that "cases may occur in the week after vaccination, prior to onset of the protective effects of the vaccine." That study has still not been conducted.
A Finnish study of 114,000 children, found that those who received four doses of the vaccine had a higher incidence of Type 1 Diabetes than those who received only one dose.

Hemophilus Vaccine Study

In a more disturbing study Hib may be changing and becoming more virulent do to vaccination. Viruses want to stay alive just like anything else in nature and to do this they must adapt.
Hib vaccinations started in Finland in 1986, and the last case of invasive disease was seen in 1991. Thus, results suggest that following the disappearance of invasive Hib disease in children, bacteraemic pneumococcal infections have increased. A similar, although less striking increase has been reported in Philadelphia.
Pneumococcus is a far more serious disease, and far more untreatable, with more antibiotic resistance than Hib ever had, and the vaccinated majority would be responsible for passing this on to both the unvaccinated minority and the older community. So lets just trade one minor thing for something far worse.

You keep throwing all these diseases out there but not once have you brought up Hep B. Why is that? It's the very first shot that is stuck in a child before they even leave the hospital. Lets talk about that shall we...

The hepatitis B vaccine was effectively mandated in 1991 for universal immunization of newborn babies by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) -- an adjunct of the CDC. Paradoxically, the CDC's own Fact Sheet on the hepatitis B disease does not include newborn babies as a risk group for that disease. That Fact Sheet lists the risk groups as injection drug users, homosexual men, sexually active
heterosexuals, infant/children of immigrants from disease-endemic areas, low socio-economic level, sexual/household contacts of infected persons, infants born to infected mothers, health care workers and hemodialysis patients NOT NEWBORN BABIES.

Question: Why then, did the ACIP establish a policy mandating that newborn babies not at risk of the disease be automatically administered the 3-shot hepatitis B vaccine as their first involuntary indoctrination into the pediatric care of America?

Answer: Here is that rationale from the original ACIP 1991 statement establishing the official vaccination policy "Hepatitis B Virus: A Comprehensive Strategy for Eliminating Transmission in the United States Through Universal Childhood Vaccination ..." "In the United States, most
infections occur among adults and adolescents ... The recommended strategy for prevent/rig these infections has been the selective vaccination of persons with identified risk factors ... However, this strategy has not lowered the incidence of hepatitis B, primarily because vaccinating persons engaged in high-risk behaviors, life-styles, or occupations before they become infected generally has not been feasible ... Efforts to vaccinate persons in the major risk groups have had limited success.
For example, programs directed at injecting drug users failed to motivate them to receive three doses of vaccine ... In the United States it has become evident that HBV transmission cannot be prevented through vaccinating only the groups at high risk of infection ... In the long term, universal infant vaccination would eliminate the need for vaccinating adolescents and high-risk adults ... Hepatitis B vaccination is recommended for all infants, regardless of the HBsAg status of the mother... The first dose can be administered during the newborn period, preferably before the infant is discharged from the hospital, but no later than when the infant is 2 months of aqe ..." (emphasis added).

So in the CDC and ACIP's own words, almost every newborn US baby is now greeted on its entry into the world by a vaccine injection against a sexually transmitted disease for which the baby is not at risk '-because they couldn't get the junkies, prostitutes, homosexuals and promiscuous heterosexuals to take the vaccine. That is the essence of the hepatitis B universal vaccination program.

Question: What are the risks and benefits for administering this vaccine to infants?

Answer: Hepatitis B is a rare, mainly blood-transmitted disease. In 1996 only 54 cases of the disease were reported to the CDC in the 0-1 age group. There were 3.9 million births that year, so the observed incidence of hepatitis B in the 0-1 age group was just 0.001%. In the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), there were 1,080 total reports of adverse reactions from hepatitis B vaccine in 1996 in the 0-1 age group, with 47 deaths reported. Total VAERS hepatitis B reports
for the 0-1 age group outnumber reported cases of the disease 20 to 1.

Question: Why don't they just screen the mother to see if she is infected with hepatitis B (since that is about the only way a baby is likely to get the disease), instead of vaccinating infants?

Answer: Selling vaccines is extremely profitable and the process of mandating vaccines is fraught with conflicts of interest between vaccine manufacturers, the ACIP and the American Academy of Pediatrics. The business model of having the government mandate everyone must
buy your product is a monopolist's delight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-25-2011, 02:33 PM
2 posts, read 1,491 times
Reputation: 10
Originally Posted by MrsMo View Post
I chose not to fully immunize my youngest 2 children as their older brother died within 24 hours after his first vaccinations. The autopsy said SIDS, but I was with him not the drs. and my baby's little body slowly shut down after those vaccines. Never did trust vaccines, then after our tragedy, will not say anything positive about them. DH and I refuse a flu vaccine. As far as watching the foods my kids eat (Youngest is 17) I figure I and a whole generation of baby boomers lived on sugar sweetened cereals, etc., whats good enough for me is good enough for my kids. We do only eat whole grains. We never did feed them fast food such as McD's. We eat at home, always have, I cook a full meal every night. I packed their lunches every day for school. Read what goes into those vaccines and you'll refuse them too.
I'm so sorry to hear about your baby. Good for you for seeing the possible link to the vaccinations. So many ignore the signs after their first couple of children have had complications and continue to vaccinate. A close friend of mine has three children with autism that developed in each immediatly after recieving certain vaccinations. They finally decided not to vaccinate their fourth child and he is now 6 and shows no signs of autism what so ever. There is some form of mitochondrial defect in some children that if given certain vaccinations can form into a autism or a digest disorder. The problem is no one tests for this mitochondrial defects prior to vaccinating. It is genetic by the way so not all children are affect after vaccinating.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-25-2011, 07:21 PM
Location: In a house
13,258 posts, read 36,253,393 times
Reputation: 20198
There is no link, at all, between autism and vaccines. There IS a link between the mitochondrial disorder and autism. So that means, that those kids with the mitochondrial disorder, who developed autism, WOULD HAVE DEVELOPED IT WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE VACCINATED. The vaccine had nothing to do with the development of their autism.

Not all children with the mitochondrial defects develop autism. In a family of 6 kids, all of whom have a defect/disorder, it is very possible that one, two, or even all of them would -not- develop autism. It is also possible that all 6 of them would. It is also possible that only 4 would. This is regardless of their vaccinations.

This information is from the United Mitochondrial Disease Foundation. Someone from Autism Speaks acknowledges that vaccines manipulate the immune system, and this can trigger *autism-like symptoms* (read: NOT ACTUALLY AUTISM), in some children with these mitochondrial disorders.

Huffington Post - their article says no link.
CDC - says no link.
Autism Speaks - an advocacy group - says link possible to certain symptoms, but NOT to autism.
UMDF - a research group - says no link.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 02-28-2011, 02:20 PM
Location: Australia
1,492 posts, read 2,742,083 times
Reputation: 1708
Originally Posted by strawberryfield View Post
Here's a question I have for those who don't vaccinate. It's a question, not any sort of accusation.

I've seen health reasons (autism, etc) sited as to why many don't vaccinate and the rise in autism cases, among other things, as something which concerns those who don't vaccinate.

There is a plethora of information supporting the idea that preservatives are really bad for our health, can lead to the enormous rise in ADD, and a myriad of short and long-term health issues for our children. Goodness knows what toll meat which has been fed antibiotics, killed when sick, etc. takes on our children. I personally try to eat whole, non-processed, organic food (and local food) whenever possible and steer clear of all the junk (corn syrup, red dye #40, etc). I make sure my kids are eating good wholesome food as well.

Recently, I've done more research on the potential health hazards of fluoride in our water and I've started buying distilled water. I'm not exclusively drinking distilled (nor are my kids) but it is something I've started considering.

I breastfed my babies and more and more research is showing that although formula today is better than it was 30 years ago, there appear to be long-term health risks (increased incidence of Parkinson's later in life, for one).

So, the other day I was with someone who was lecturing me on why vaccinations are not good (my children are fully vaccinated). She pulled out Fruit Loops for her kids to eat as snack. I was asking her about why she would not vaccinate b/c of health risks, yet would feed her children terrible food which certainly has health risks.

So I guess that's my question...how many of you are careful about some of the other big risks out there--food, water, etc.? Why turn down vaccinations b/c they could be harmful, you think, to your children, and then hand them red dye #40, corn syrup, and fruit loops?
breast fed.
normally no junk food.
eat some meat, mostly salad, fruit etc.
eat peanuts, etc too.

But at perties we...
eat junk food, ice cream, red cordial, a double helping of fruit loops in the holidays.
(no breast milk or vaccinations at parties.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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 update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply

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 > Parenting
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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