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.
They came around with the first measles vaccine when I was in HS. We were asked if we had measles before. The majority of us did, but there were a few who hadn't.
In those days measles was all around. So tell me HOW these teenagers had managed to escape catching "high contagious" measles in a city of 8 million people like NY? They sat in classroom with other kids who came down with measles. They went to public parks, movies, rode subways and buses, etc. They didn't have any siblings? Their parents "cocooned" them to prevent them from catching this contagious disease? Totally impossible to do in a major city, especially for a teenager. Maybe they were too young to know when they had measles themselves? If they were that young when they caught it, their PARENTS would have told them they did. I was a 6 month old baby. My Mom talked all the time about me getting measles. She was even happy that I got it so young. Horror! Child Abuse today!
Anyway, explain WHY these few kids did not catch measles when they were exposed to it????? Explain WHY even the CDC says if you were born before 1957, they assume you have immunity to it. They are NOT saying ONLY if you HAD the measles, but you lived during a time when it was widespread. Oh, just LUCK, right? Um, I don't think so. Perhaps, these kids got immunity, and antibodies, just from being around others with it. Perhaps not as much as actually having the disease itself, but just enough to not catch it themselves at the time.
Isn't it sad that a common childhood illness (when we were young) that our mothers treated themselves, without fear, has been turned by the CDC into a serious life threatening disease. Now instead of dealing with measles, parents are dealing with seizures, high pitched screaming and debilitating illness from the vaccine.
The link you posted talks about "reports" yet gives absolutely NO links to access such research and "posts". Are we supposed to believe it because they (and you) say so?
Given the info in the news article, the full article was not hard to find:
As of 2012, over a BILLION dollers has been awarded to children and adults damaged by vaccines.
Yes, there is a system to identify people who are truly harmed by vaccines. No one denies that such injuries do happen. They are, however, rare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purehuman
How many people get "tested" for antibodies? or are even offered the test...none?
And how are we to know if our infant child is allergic to any of the additives in the vaccine...egg, mercury etc, something CDC warns about in their inserts....totally ridiculous.
Any one who is unsure whether he needs a particular vaccine can ask for a titer for the disease he is concerned about. Just ask a doctor to order it. Insurance may or may not pay for it, though.
You can stop worrying about mercury because you can get any children's vaccine without thimerosal in it, although there is absolutely no scientific evidence that mercury in vaccines was ever harmful.
Most people who are allergic to eggs know it because they have symptoms when they eat anything with eggs in it.
Please provide links to the scientific evidence supporting that any of the problems in your "stories" were actually caused by vaccines.
I only read "Riley's Story", about a baby who had jaundice (a lot of them do - it has to do with the physiology of fetal blood cells and is common in some babies with minor blood incompatibilties with the mom) and feeding problems and reflux. Mom blames the hepatitis B vaccine. Poppycock.
They came around with the first measles vaccine when I was in HS. We were asked if we had measles before. The majority of us did, but there were a few who hadn't.
In those days measles was all around. So tell me HOW these teenagers had managed to escape catching "high contagious" measles in a city of 8 million people like NY? They sat in classroom with other kids who came down with measles. They went to public parks, movies, rode subways and buses, etc. They didn't have any siblings? Their parents "cocooned" them to prevent them from catching this contagious disease? Totally impossible to do in a major city, especially for a teenager. Maybe they were too young to know when they had measles themselves? If they were that young when they caught it, their PARENTS would have told them they did. I was a 6 month old baby. My Mom talked all the time about me getting measles. She was even happy that I got it so young. Horror! Child Abuse today!
Anyway, explain WHY these few kids did not catch measles when they were exposed to it????? Explain WHY even the CDC says if you were born before 1957, they assume you have immunity to it. They are NOT saying ONLY if you HAD the measles, but you lived during a time when it was widespread. Oh, just LUCK, right? Um, I don't think so. Perhaps, these kids got immunity, and antibodies, just from being around others with it. Perhaps not as much as actually having the disease itself, but just enough to not catch it themselves at the time.
Those born before 1957 in the 2% that never had measles were just that: lucky.
"Measles is so contagious that if one person has it, 90% of the people close to that person who are not immune will also become infected."
They were in that 10% of people who didn't catch it each time there was an outbreak. Maybe they were home sick with something else for a few days or on vacation or absent for other reasons during the height of the outbreak. But it really is just luck. Back then people WANTED their kids to catch it and get it over with so they would be immune for the rest of their lives. Getting it as a baby is extremely dangerous. I think the preferred age was 5-9. Nowadays we have the vaccine so you don't have to put your child through that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by purehuman
Isn't it sad that a common childhood illness (when we were young) that our mothers treated themselves, without fear, has been turned by the CDC into a serious life threatening disease. Now instead of dealing with measles, parents are dealing with seizures, high pitched screaming and debilitating illness from the vaccine.
It is a serious life threatening disease. 400 people in third world countries die every DAY of the measles. Mothers in these countries will walk for days if they know a vaccine clinic is being held, because they SEE what happens to kids who are not protected. Your child is much more likely to get a life long injury or die from measles than they are to have any side effects from the vaccine. 1-2 per 1000 kids with measles will have swelling of the brain. 1-2 per 1000 kids with measles will die. 4 per 10,000 kids who receive the MMR vaccine will have a ferbile seizure. And yes, I would rather my kids cry for a few minutes over a shot than get a disease that can kill them.
They came around with the first measles vaccine when I was in HS. We were asked if we had measles before. The majority of us did, but there were a few who hadn't.
In those days measles was all around. So tell me HOW these teenagers had managed to escape catching "high contagious" measles in a city of 8 million people like NY? They sat in classroom with other kids who came down with measles. They went to public parks, movies, rode subways and buses, etc. They didn't have any siblings? Their parents "cocooned" them to prevent them from catching this contagious disease? Totally impossible to do in a major city, especially for a teenager. Maybe they were too young to know when they had measles themselves? If they were that young when they caught it, their PARENTS would have told them they did. I was a 6 month old baby. My Mom talked all the time about me getting measles. She was even happy that I got it so young. Horror! Child Abuse today!
Anyway, explain WHY these few kids did not catch measles when they were exposed to it????? Explain WHY even the CDC says if you were born before 1957, they assume you have immunity to it. They are NOT saying ONLY if you HAD the measles, but you lived during a time when it was widespread. Oh, just LUCK, right? Um, I don't think so. Perhaps, these kids got immunity, and antibodies, just from being around others with it. Perhaps not as much as actually having the disease itself, but just enough to not catch it themselves at the time.
Jo, there are easy explanations for why 2% of the kids didn't get measles before 1957. And, remember the CDC said 98% of the population did get the measles before than. It probably has to do with the amount of measles virus that the 2% were or were not exposed too. I can also make allowances for the idea that some people have better immune systems than other people do. Its also possible that these kids you refer to did have the measles, but for some reason didn't remember it, or refused to acknowledge it. Parents can have the same gaps in their own memories. They may even be bigger, because of their age. These diseases were mild and less memorable for some individuals than for others.
Standards of parenting do change over time. What was acceptable in 1950 or 1960 is not necessarily acceptable today. Deliberately exposing a child to a virus is one thing when no vaccine exists and your child is 98% certain to catch a disease. Its something entirely different when a safe and effective means of disease prevention exists. I won't get into all the other ways that parenting has changed since my childhood in the 1960's. However, the fact is that change has occurred and most of us can recognize it. We happily accept the positive changes (in which I put vaccines nearly on top).
They came around with the first measles vaccine when I was in HS. We were asked if we had measles before. The majority of us did, but there were a few who hadn't.
In those days measles was all around. So tell me HOW these teenagers had managed to escape catching "high contagious" measles in a city of 8 million people like NY? They sat in classroom with other kids who came down with measles. They went to public parks, movies, rode subways and buses, etc. They didn't have any siblings? Their parents "cocooned" them to prevent them from catching this contagious disease? Totally impossible to do in a major city, especially for a teenager. Maybe they were too young to know when they had measles themselves? If they were that young when they caught it, their PARENTS would have told them they did. I was a 6 month old baby. My Mom talked all the time about me getting measles. She was even happy that I got it so young. Horror! Child Abuse today!
Anyway, explain WHY these few kids did not catch measles when they were exposed to it????? Explain WHY even the CDC says if you were born before 1957, they assume you have immunity to it. They are NOT saying ONLY if you HAD the measles, but you lived during a time when it was widespread. Oh, just LUCK, right? Um, I don't think so. Perhaps, these kids got immunity, and antibodies, just from being around others with it. Perhaps not as much as actually having the disease itself, but just enough to not catch it themselves at the time.
No, you cannot make antibodies just by being around someone else with the disease. The CDC presumption of immunity based on age does not ignore that 2 to 5% of people born before 1957 are not immune. It just means that 95 to 98% chance of being immune is good enough not to test or vaccinate people in that age group.
"Why are people born before 1957 exempt from receiving MMR vaccine?
People born before 1957 lived through several years of epidemic measles before the first measles vaccine was licensed. As a result, these people are very likely to have had the measles disease. Surveys suggest that 95% to 98% of those born before 1957 are immune to measles."
The question about why the two to five percent did not catch measles is a good one.
Luck certainly plays a part in it. I had measles, rubella, and chickenpox, but never had mumps. I got the vaccine for that when I went to college.
Other possibilities are that the case of measles was mild and not diagnosed as measles or that some people might be genetically resistant to it.
How many people get "tested" for antibodies? or are even offered the test…none?
If one is aware and INFORMED, one knows to ask.
Who are those who are so informed to deny vaccinations but not informed "enough" to be tested for antibodies?
Quote:
And how are we to know if our infant child is allergic to any of the additives in the vaccine...egg, mercury etc, something CDC warns about in their inserts....totally ridiculous.
If you are informed about the possible allergens and don't want to play the "let's see what happens" game, you get your infant strapped down to have his/her blood tested for allergens.
Who is allergic to mercury? Ethyl vs. Methyl.
Give your 4 week old scrambled eggs for breakfast and see what happens…with an epi pen within your reach. Give the 6 month old a bowl of ice cream. See what happens….all through the night…and the next two days.
Last edited by Informed Info; 05-27-2015 at 10:17 PM..
You can stop worrying about mercury because you can get any children's vaccine without thimerosal in it, although there is absolutely no scientific evidence that mercury in vaccines was ever harmful.
Most people who are allergic to eggs know it because they have symptoms when they eat anything with eggs in it.
How many newborns do you know that eat eggs for breakfast.
The CDC considers ANY vaccine containing 3 micrograms or less as mercury free.
If your baby receives 2 "thimerosal free" shots, such as Hep B and DTap, she/he has now received up to 6 micrograms of mercury..........The very corrupt CDC still considers that thimerosal free.
If your baby gets those 2 shots and then a flu vaccine (from the most common multi dose vial) she/he has now received up to 31 micrograms of mercury.
It's easy to see how our infants are being neurologically damaged.
Amazing how some people are still anti-vaccine. The stupidity would be funny if it wasn't so damn dangerous.
Oh, such a great contribution to the debate.....YOU are immensely funny, thanks for that.
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.
