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.
Gosh, you're right! I sure as heck hope those parents who are so concerned about vaccines don't give their kids antibiotics. Do you know how many allergic (and even fatal) reactions there have been to them? I hope they never give their kids Tylenol or Ibuprofen. Those are horrible for your liver. And I'm sure they've never fed them anything artificial. Have you actually read the labels on Halloween Candy? I'm sure these people are so afraid of putting those things in their body that they don't allow their kids to eat any of it. Or heck, even peanuts, eggs, soy, dairy, wheat, strawberries, etc. because do you know how many people have fatal reactions to them every year? And you can't even tell that you're allergic to them until you actually try them! I'm sure there is no way they would EVER expose their kids to something that dangerous. Especially since, unlike vaccines, a peanut butter sandwich has absolutely no benefits. You can get nourishment from much safer sources.
I personally don't give my kids antibiotics but that's a different story. However, I posted legitimate questions. If a parent is concerned that a substance in any injection will cause a reaction then that concern is valid as it is with any medical treatment/procedure.
You creating a strawman here does nothing for the conversation.
That you immediately discount that concern in the case of vaccines specifically causes me to wonder how narrow your thinking is and if you indeed posses the type of critical thinking skills necessary to form an opinion independently. My conclusion would be that you just follow what you are told by the medical community. That same medical community that diagnoses perfectly healthy people with cancer for extra profit. That same medical community that prescribes drugs that could conflict and potentially harm rather than cure/treat.
The medically community is not infallible and neither are parents but I respect a parent's concern when it comes to injecting unknown substances, especially in cocktail form. Whether they want to take the risk that their child gets sick or not is not for me to judge. My daughter gets strep throat nearly once a year. There is no vaccine for it and I do not give her antibiotics. Am I not allowed to treat her at home? Do I have to run to the doctor every time my child gets the sniffles or coughs? A parent should have the right to choose what medical treatments (including vaccines) their child NEEDS. That is my stance.
If a parent is concerned that a substance in any injection will cause a reaction then that concern is valid as it is with any medical treatment/procedure.
You creating a strawman here does nothing for the conversation.
That you immediately discount that concern in the case of vaccines specifically causes me to wonder how narrow your thinking is and if you indeed posses the type of critical thinking skills necessary to form an opinion independently. My conclusion would be that you just follow what you are told by the medical community. That same medical community that diagnoses perfectly healthy people with cancer for extra profit. That same medical community that prescribes drugs that could conflict and potentially harm rather than cure/treat.
The medically community is not infallible and neither are parents but I respect a parent's concern when it comes to injecting unknown substances, especially in cocktail form. Whether they want to take the risk that their child gets sick or not is not for me to judge. My daughter gets strep throat nearly once a year. There is no vaccine for it and I do not give her antibiotics. Am I not allowed to treat her at home? Do I have to run to the doctor every time my child gets the sniffles or coughs? A parent should have the right to choose what medical treatments (including vaccines) their child NEEDS. That is my stance.
Vaccines are extensively researched and a concern is NOT valid just because you have it - if it's made up based on a celebrity endorsement and a single debunked study by a doctor that's lost his license (or a few naturopaths to sell books) then that is not valid. It's fiction.
The medical community has studied vaccines extensively, the data is conclusive. The risk of vaccination in no way comes into the same stratosphere as the benefits. In the case of vaccines, the ability for parents to make a decision that puts not only their own kids at risk, but also other members of society based on their "spidey sense" should be limited.
California lets parents do that, it just keeps the kids away from other kids who don't want the decisions made by ill informed or conspiracy theorist parents getting them sick.
I confess, I follow medicine and science when I make medical decisions for me and my kids.
There are also plenty of people in CA who can not afford the medical treatment required after their kid contracts a totally preventable disease from your unvaccinated kid. Not everyone can be vaccinated but those you can be, should (see my other post).
And there are families who can't afford the medical treatment that comes with a vaccine injury. Neither decision is risk free.
I personally don't give my kids antibiotics but that's a different story. However, I posted legitimate questions. If a parent is concerned that a substance in any injection will cause a reaction then that concern is valid as it is with any medical treatment/procedure.
You creating a strawman here does nothing for the conversation.
That you immediately discount that concern in the case of vaccines specifically causes me to wonder how narrow your thinking is and if you indeed posses the type of critical thinking skills necessary to form an opinion independently. My conclusion would be that you just follow what you are told by the medical community. That same medical community that diagnoses perfectly healthy people with cancer for extra profit. That same medical community that prescribes drugs that could conflict and potentially harm rather than cure/treat.
The medically community is not infallible and neither are parents but I respect a parent's concern when it comes to injecting unknown substances, especially in cocktail form. Whether they want to take the risk that their child gets sick or not is not for me to judge. My daughter gets strep throat nearly once a year. There is no vaccine for it and I do not give her antibiotics. Am I not allowed to treat her at home? Do I have to run to the doctor every time my child gets the sniffles or coughs? A parent should have the right to choose what medical treatments (including vaccines) their child NEEDS. That is my stance.
Parents are not infallible either. And they are less educated. Sorry, but internet education and other parents are not really accurate. You are free to determine what your child needs, but you are not free to put other children at risk.
And I do not agree that I am creating a strawman. I think it is totally legitimate to question the hypocrisy of some of the arguments. To avoid the additives in vaccines but not avoid the ones in food or cleaning products, which which people are actually exposed to in higher quantities, is very hypocritical to me. So is trusting a doctor for certain things that are convenient (like diagnosing strep throat or treating a broken arm) but mistrusting them so much that you refuse to give vaccines. Which is it? Are doctors good and competent or not? Or are they good and competent only when it's convenient?
Vaccines are extensively researched and a concern is NOT valid just because you have it - if it's made up based on a celebrity endorsement and a single debunked study by a doctor that's lost his license (or a few naturopaths to sell books) then that is not valid. It's fiction.
The medical community has studied vaccines extensively, the data is conclusive. The risk of vaccination in no way comes into the same stratosphere as the benefits. In the case of vaccines, the ability for parents to make a decision that puts not only their own kids at risk, but also other members of society based on their "spidey sense" should be limited.
California lets parents do that, it just keeps the kids away from other kids who don't want the decisions made by ill informed or conspiracy theorist parents getting them sick.
I confess, I follow medicine and science when I make medical decisions for me and my kids.
So many lies. If you think there was just one debunked study that was critical of vaccines then you obviously have not done any research at all.
Parents are not infallible either. And they are less educated. Sorry, but internet education and other parents are not really accurate. You are free to determine what your child needs, but you are not free to put other children at risk.
And I do not agree that I am creating a strawman. I think it is totally legitimate to question the hypocrisy of some of the arguments. To avoid the additives in vaccines but not avoid the ones in food or cleaning products, which which people are actually exposed to in higher quantities, is very hypocritical to me. So is trusting a doctor for certain things that are convenient (like diagnosing strep throat or treating a broken arm) but mistrusting them so much that you refuse to give vaccines. Which is it? Are doctors good and competent or not? Or are they good and competent only when it's convenient?
It all boils down to choice. How do you know that people who question some or all vaccines don't also use natural cleaning products, eat organic food and utilize more alternative health models? I think that there is value in both eastern and western medicine and people should have the freedom to choose how to best care for their health.
And there are families who can't afford the medical treatment that comes with a vaccine injury. Neither decision is risk free.
Please open this graphic and read carefully, since scientific studies can be super annoying I'm moving to pictures.
SOOO, according to statistics - I hope you've spent 100 times as many hours keeping your kid away from rain as you do on vaccines.
The odds are MORE likely that your kid will be a BILLIONAIRE (with a B) than they are to have a severe response to a vaccine, and remember they will be at the doctor's office if that occurred so the odds of it being "life altering" are very very small.
And there are families who can't afford the medical treatment that comes with a vaccine injury. Neither decision is risk free.
But I don't choose to catch a preventable disease from an unvaccinated person. That is an expense that was forced upon me. People who vaccinate assume that (very small) risk. How small the risk is impossible to say because reporting systems like VAERS is so ridiculously inaccurate.
Please open this graphic and read carefully, since scientific studies can be super annoying I'm moving to pictures.
SOOO, according to statistics - I hope you've spent 100 times as many hours keeping your kid away from rain as you do on vaccines.
The odds are MORE likely that your kid will be a BILLIONAIRE (with a B) than they are to have a severe response to a vaccine, and remember they will be at the doctor's office if that occurred so the odds of it being "life altering" are very very small.
Stats can be used the other way as in your child is much more likely to be killed in a car crash on the way to the doctor's office to get their vaccine for chicken pox then dying or having a serious complication from contracting chicken pox.
It all boils down to choice. How do you know that people who question some or all vaccines don't also use natural cleaning products, eat organic food and utilize more alternative health models? I think that there is value in both eastern and western medicine and people should have the freedom to choose how to best care for their health.
You're right. But it's a choice that affects, and can even kill, other people. You have the right to do whatever you want, so long as it doesn't affect other people.
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.
