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.
Thanks for the life story? Kind of an irrelevant "overshare" but whatever.
The whole discussion here has nothing to do with adults, it has to do with children in CA being required to vaccinate (notwithstanding the rather random re-titling of the thread).
In discussing the issue of children being infected and in doctors offices, I take issue with "you and your kind" - the current anti-vaxers who want their right to choose not to vaccinate to supersede the safety of others.
The likelihood of an unvaccinated child being ill with one of these largely preventable illnesses is significantly higher, so no I don't want to sit beside them with anyone who is unable (for age or health) to protect themselves.
I will match my ability to read, and especially to comprehend. against any anti-vax conspiracy theorist. I do have trouble following "bait and switch", distractions, circular, repetitive arguments - not due to a lack of ability but rather due to boredom.
The OT "Vaccine Controversy" goes beyond vaccinating children for public school. Vaccine controversy does not include adult vaccinations because there isn't any controversy? There is no vaccine controversy surrounding nurses refusing flu shots and being fired? There is no vaccine controversy with California's proposed legislation for mandating vaccinations for adult Day Care staff? There is no vaccine controversy with Vermont's proposed legislation for mandatory vaccinations for public school STAFF? These bills are now targeting ADULTS and their EMPLOYMENT. That isn't controversial? It is all part of the big picture of mandating vaccinations. Very broad topic, unlike the other OT "California mandates vaccinations for public school children". Of course, that too can be included in this OT.
I do think that the subject of pushing adult vaccinations deserves it's own thread, but for now it can be included in the general topic of "Vaccine Controversy". I am sure once the Fall comes and Flu shots are being pushed, that will be discussed again in a new OT.
Yes parents tell "stories" on social media, doesn't make them science or fact
News should show both vaccinated and unvaccinated illnesses as it reinforces the need for "herd immunity"
1 in one million chance of severe reaction to vaccine - prevents at least 14 life threatening illnesses in both the vaccinated child and those with underdeveloped or compromised immune systems they come in contact with
No medicine is 100% safe, so I assume you've never taken any medicine, ever.. Oh, I forgot, you claim to have a superhuman immune system
In fact, I would hold the parents of an unvaccinated kid (who was healthy enough to receive it) completely and totally responsible for the death of their child and anyone they infected - and boy do I wish the law would allow those who deliberately spread misinformation (including on forums like this) to be held accountable (or at a minimum liable for contributory negligence for spreading information they KNOW to be false)
You keep claiming big pharma is in it for the money. The anti-vax movement just cares about people. Here's your hero "Dr" Mercola's home - boy would he have a lot to lose if people paid attention to science!
There's no conspiracy, let it go.
The link I provided you was from a local Fox News Station, not Dr. Mercola. There are others from broadcast news stations. These reporters make this up?
If these parents are making this up, then the parents who say that an unvaccinated child gave the "vaccinated" child some disease aren't? Works both ways.
That I will agree with because it is unbiased and people can decide for themselves.
That goes to whose child's life is worth more. They are equal.
How many medications? Birth Control pills. One increased the odds of ectopic pregnancy which I had. Another didn't. Antibiotics. They were fine, except for CIPRO. I almost blind from that one. Steroids. They made me vomit. That is it. Point being that we are not clones of one another. No medication, including vaccines, won't have a severe reaction in some people. They will not know that they will unless the take it.
Freedom of information. Cannot ban opposing views. I worked for a Fortune 500 Pharmaceutical. I know what they do. They do not lose $$$$$. They also get Government Grants. I was working there for the 1976 Swine Flu "Epidemic". Advertising. Trial run to sell a product.
No conspiracy? When the government, CDC, Medical Associations, and the Pharmaceuticals (Stakeholders) are working together to achieve this? Why does the ACA mandate that health insurance cover vaccinations without a copay?
Once again, my issue is the freedom of choice, not the science. Pro Choice for whatever an individual decides. While I am not a fan of scripts, I do not take any "natural supplement" (Dr. Mercola's) products either.
I assume you are not aware that untreated strep infections can lead to rheumatic fever and glomerulonephritis?
You may be surprised that doctors do not treat strep to make your child's throat feel better. They do it to prevent serious, but uncommon, late effects of strep infections.
"The exact link between strep infection and rheumatic fever isn't clear, but it appears that the bacterium "plays tricks" on the immune system. The strep bacterium contains a protein similar to one found in certain tissues of the body. Therefore, immune system cells that would normally target the bacterium may treat the body's own tissues as if they were infectious agents — particularly tissues of the heart, joints, skin and central nervous system. This immune system reaction results in inflammation.
If your child receives prompt and complete treatment with an antibiotic to eliminate strep bacteria — in other words, taking all doses of the medication as prescribed — there's little to no chance of developing rheumatic fever. If your child has one or more episodes of strep throat or scarlet fever that aren't treated or not treated completely, he or she may — but won't necessarily — develop rheumatic fever."
"Acute PSGN is prevented by early antibiotic treatment, and the spread of nephritis-associated streptococcal infection is contained by prophylactic antibiotic treatment to individuals at risk."
Antibiotics have been overused for ear infections. Not treating confirmed strep infections of the throat and skin is unwise.
Most "studies" critical of vaccines have been debunked, with Wakefield's at the top of the list.
There is no bacterial mutation that has made the pertussis vaccine "ineffective". Less effective is not the same as "ineffective." The whole cell pertussis vaccine was more effective than the current acellular version, but the acellular version does work.
This discusses the waning effectiveness of the pertussis vaccine quite nicely:
"Finally, we should consider the potential contribution of genetic changes in circulating strains of B. pertussis. It is clear that genetic changes have occurred over time in three B. pertussis antigens — pertussis toxin, pertactin, and fimbriae. In fact, changes in fimbrial agglutinogens related to vaccine use were noted about 50 years ago. Studies in the Netherlands and Australia have suggested that genetic changes have led to vaccine failures, but many people question these findings. If genetic changes had increased the rates of vaccine failure, one would expect to see those effects first in Denmark, which has for the past 15 years used a vaccine with a single pertussis antigen (pertussis toxin toxoid). To date, however, there is no evidence of increased vaccine failure in Denmark."
While the mutations in the pertussis organisms are real, they do not seem to be the cause of the acellular vaccine's lowered effectiveness. Until a better vaccine is available, the current vaccine is the best we have. Adjusting the schedule of administration of the vaccine might be one approach to dealing with the situation.
"Contrary to what antivaccinationists tell us, recent outbreaks of pertussis do not mean that vaccines don’t work. They do, however, mean that we probably need to develop a new vaccine that overcomes the shortcomings of the existing DTaP. In the meantime, it also suggests that we need to use the vaccine we have better, perhaps through earlier and more frequent doses, until we have a new vaccine."
The fact remains that unvaccinated people are much more likely to catch whooping cough, and that vaccinated people who get it tend to be less sick:
"Again, the conclusion is not that the vaccine doesn’t work, but rather that, given the limited duration of immunity from the acellular pertussis vaccine, our current vaccination schedule is probably not aggressive enough, particularly in children aged 6 to 10, where another booster would likely be a good idea. Moreover, what antivaccinationists tend to completely ignore are observations that, although vaccinated children can still be susceptible to pertussis, they are less infectious, have milder symptoms and shorter illness duration, and are at reduced risk for severe outcomes, such as requiring hospitalization."
Two problems. Babies too young to be vaccinated. Waning immunity from the vaccination, requiring boosters. I believe that Tdap only came out in 2005. Is that enough time to know how long it will be effective? If teenagers are given that vax, will it last the rest of their lives?
It's because vaccination does not guarantee immunity and immunity is what is required for "herd immunity."
If we really assess the population of the US with immunity from any of these childhood diseases, it would be... maybe 50% immunity (long-term immunity) because vaccines provide short-term immunity.
Had we not invented all of these vaccines for childhood diseases, the chances of herd immunity would be increased rather than decreased. Anyone who cannot fathom this is indoctrinated with the vaccine agenda.
This gets into natural immunity from the disease. Epidemics of measles went around. There were times in school when so many kids were out with measles. No, none were hospitalized, maimed, or died. I grew up in NYC. Millions of people. By the time I got into HS and they came around with the vaccination in school, VERY FEW went down to the nurse for that vax. Why? Because by the time they have reached the teen years they all had it already, from the years when it was very widespread.
I also think that the birthrate at that time played a factor. The WW2 Baby Boom was over by the early 60s. Certainly in Manhattan by then, adults were having fewer children. Fewer hosts for the virus. The older children and adults were immune from having measles. The virus cannot live on a school desk indefinitely waiting for a baby to get old enough to go to school. So I suppose you could say that "Herd Immunity" from the disease was playing out with natural immunity.
It does make you wonder what happened with those teens who got that first vax, which they now say wasn't as effective as the one today. Since they graduated HS not long afterwards, did they ever get that newer MMR? Those teens would be in their 60's today. The "vaccinated" but maybe not immune after all these years?
If these parents are making this up, then the parents who say that an unvaccinated child gave the "vaccinated" child some disease aren't? Works both ways.
...
No conspiracy? When the government, CDC, Medical Associations, and the Pharmaceuticals (Stakeholders) are working together to achieve this? Why does the ACA mandate that health insurance cover vaccinations without a copay?
.
The original post was California legislation on childhood vaccines, as you are well aware. The difference between the parents making things up and the data on transmission of disease is, again, that pesky science.
Anyone else feeling this way about the same 3-4 anti-vax posters that are now entering round 3 in the same thread of rehashing the same made up views?
The original post was California legislation on childhood vaccines, as you are well aware. The difference between the parents making things up and the data on transmission of disease is, again, that pesky science.
Anyone else feeling this way about the same 3-4 anti-vax posters that are now entering round 3 in the same thread of rehashing the same made up views?
I am feeling that your little meme fits you very well. Maybe you should get a T-shirt made for yourself.
Last edited by MissTerri; 07-08-2015 at 08:40 AM..
Sorry, my error. Posted before having my coffee. There are also many herbs that are antibacterial, in addition to being anti-viral. Garlic is just one of many. Antibiotic Properties of Garlic
She did treat the strep. She treated it with herbs, many of which are antiviral (garlic is one example) rather then with antibiotics.
Strep is caused by a bacterium, not a virus......just saying.
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.
Kind of an irrelevant "overshare" but whatever.
So I suppose you could say that "Herd Immunity" from the disease was playing out with natural immunity.
