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.
You cited the same thing twice and all you cited is the opinion of an MP a. Pharmacist that homeopathics dont work. No damage, nor any proof for his opinion. There have been many observations to the contrary. Not to mention the article make it quite clear that the opinion comes from one who lacks full understanding of homeopathy. I suppose it was the placebo effect that help homeopaths during the plague to right?
Umm, no. Those are two completely different articles addressing two separate issues in two separate countries. There are many articles citing the dangers of homeopathy that include delayed treatment, wasted resources, and nocebo effects. Zicam anyone??
Quote:
But an Associated Press analysis of the Food and Drug Administration's
side effect reports found that more than 800 homeopathic ingredients
were potentially implicated in health problems last year. Complaints
ranged from vomiting to attempted suicide.
In its review of homeopathy, the Associated Press also found that:
-- Active homeopathic ingredients are typically diluted down to 1 part
per million or less, but some are present in much higher
concentrations. The active ingredient in Zicam is 2 parts per 100.
-- The FDA has set strict limits for alcohol in medicine, especially
for small children, but they don't apply to homeopathic remedies. The
American Academy of Pediatrics has said no medicine should carry more
than 5 percent alcohol. The FDA has acknowledged that some homeopathic
syrups far surpass 10 percent alcohol.
-- The National Institutes of Health's alternative medicine center
spent $3.8 million on homeopathic research from 2002 to 2007 but is
now abandoning studies on homeopathic drugs. "The evidence is not
there at this point," says the center's director, Dr. Josephine
Briggs.
-- At least 20 ingredients used in conventional prescription drugs,
like digitalis for heart trouble and morphine for pain, are also used
in homeopathic remedies. Other homeopathic medicines are derived from
cancerous or other diseased tissues. Many are formulated from powerful
poisons like strychnine, arsenic or snake venom.
One hep B shot is not all that is needed so that argument fails.
No. Go back and re-read my post. "...because that's when they have the greatest likelihood of getting the child vaccinated (or started on their vaccines). Nice attempt though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jammer5000
I would disagree that antibiotics in my newborn eye is harmless. Secondly any informed parent has the right to deny it being done. I understand your point, however it should be gone over with parents prior to birth and they should be able to make a well thought out decision. Their are tests for all of the diseases you are trying to stop the spreading of. You may have no issue with a baby having it rubbed in their eyes upon birth, I do. I also think parents have a right to do a hearing test or not do one. I opted out as it was very clear from day 1 my child could hear.
You are obviously completely ignorant about the newborn auditory system if you can positively claim with certainty that your child "could hear" from day 1. What did you base your findings on? How were you able to discern and document your child's auditory status? I cannot wait to hear your reply on this, this ought to be good. If there was any doubt as to your medical knowledge shortcomings before, rest assured that there is none now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jammer5000
You seem misinformed. They are not required at all. You do not have to vaccinate your children at all if you chose not to and their is no one who can tell you other wise. You can attend public schools, participate in public activities such as sports. Their is no requirement by law at all.
I am not misinformed at all. I do realize that parents can opt out of vaccination requirements for different reasons (religious, personal, philosophical exemptions) although it is not always easy to do and varies by state. I think it's BS.
I just love when parents think they are doing the right thing for their children and upholding their "rights" when in effect, you and other parents like you, pose a very real threat to the rest of society. Continue to think of yourself as the "informed" one, and the rest of society as the misinformed, but you could not be further from the truth.
You just lost all credibility. There are treatments for bronchitis, staph infections, cancer, high BP, cholesterol. You clearly do not have enough knowledge to comment on the topic so don't.
Credibility, you have got to be joking? From you? Show me the data? Show me a verified diagnosis, what treatment was given, and outcomes. Don't tell me, prove it with a reputable source.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jammer5000
As far as you plant derived pharmaceuticals.....thanks for proving a point. The plants are the basis of the cure
What? Of course plants are used, and have been for thousands of years. Lucky for us we can now monitor doses and blood levels. If someone has cardiac failure, give them a foxglove to chew on, see what happens (hint - caput!). OR give them digitalis in a specific dose, and monitor their blood levels. Not magic, just science.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jammer5000
Oh I see you have the right to tell me or someone else what to do with their children right. You know what irk me....people like you who think what they do is the only way to go and they have a right to tell others what to do.
I'm not telling you anything. I was talking about the role of herd immunity. The successful measles vaccination campaigns in the Nixon era resulted in the strong herd immunity. But as more and more children are not immunized, that is lost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jammer5000
You do know that the majority of diseases vaccinated for are highly treatable when caught early and cause no long term effects?
Wow, we have a winner. Post of the day. I am tempted not to respond to this statement, because it is beyond ignorant.
Have you ever seen a child with measles, or an infant with pertussis? I worked in maternal-child health in sub-Saharan Africa for many years. Hospitals are filled with children dying of post-measles pneumonia, and infants are chemically paralyzed for up to 8 weeks to treat pertussis. Those are the 2 worst culprits. These are otherwise healthy children who were not adequately immunized. I really don't care if you immunize your kids or not, but for goodness sake educate yourself properly. Better yet, why not volunteer your services and go and tell the parents of these children that died of measles that childhood infectious diseases are not a big deal.
"Measles is one of the leading causes of death among young children. In 2008 there were 164,000 measles deaths globally or 18 deaths every hour." WHO | Measles
And before you start with the fact that it's a different continent, all that is different is the herd immunity protection. I took care of an 18 month-old in New Orleans that lost both eyes from chicken pox. Preventable childhood diseases are here, and they are not nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jammer5000
You also know that the rates of most of diseases are minuscule? You do know many of them where already dropping befor the vax even became common use? Like Polio?
I wouldn't call 350,000 cases miniscule. And how did they nearly completely eradicate it? Immunizations.
"A global effort to eradicate polio began in 1988, led by the World Health Organization, UNICEF, and The Rotary Foundation. These efforts have reduced the annual diagnosed cases by 99%; from 350,000 cases in 1988 to 1,310 cases in 2007. Should eradication be successful it will represent only the second time mankin has ever successfully eliminated a disease. The first such disease was smallpox, which was officially eradicated in 1979."
You do know vaccinations, especially in the current recommended schedule have very real potential for negative side effects. The only ones ever addressed are the generally immediate one and not the potential of the lifelong immune system issues?
Sorry, I'm not going to take your word on this. Show me the proof, reputable sources please. In fact if you do search there are many studies proving just the opposite, that immunizations boost the immune system. I don't have time to search now, but will leave you with one, and will find the others later.
Seriously believe what you want, but your lack of knowledge is putting your children at risk. Is it worth it? Can you live with the consequences if one of your children were to die from and entirely preventable disease. I know I couldn't. At least make an informed choice, that's really what's important.
Umm, no. Those are two completely different articles addressing two separate issues in two separate countries. There are many articles citing the dangers of homeopathy that include delayed treatment, wasted resources, and nocebo effects. Zicam anyone??
Well you seem to think you know it all, unfortunately even using zicam as your argument shows you know very very little about actual homeopathy. Zicam is not homeopathic, although advertised as such. Homeopathy does not use carte blanch treatment for everyone. The same disease will be treated differently depending on the individual. Nice try though. Also on your attempt at the placebo effect...nice try again but how would you explain the placebo effect in an infant teething? Hmmmmm. Also the whole placebo argument is based of the fact that the medical society want to put everything into the same basket and be able to test it all the same way. That simply does not work for hoeopathy.[/quote]
No. Go back and re-read my post. "...because that's when they have the greatest likelihood of getting the child vaccinated (or started on their vaccines). Nice attempt though.
Yes I read the post but you also stated parents are not responsible to bring the child back so what will one shot out of a series do??
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay
You are obviously completely ignorant about the newborn auditory system if you can positively claim with certainty that your child "could hear" from day 1. What did you base your findings on? How were you able to discern and document your child's auditory status? I cannot wait to hear your reply on this, this ought to be good. If there was any doubt as to your medical knowledge shortcomings before, rest assured that there is none now.
Actually I completely understand the auditory system and how the tests are performed. Through monitoring reactions to clicks. So shall you now argue that a child who physically responds to sound cannot hear? Yes I know the test tests different levels. I also know hearing is not something that can be fixed and the test is done to enable the beginning of alternative communication for the child. Sorry to burst your inflated ego about the situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay
I am not misinformed at all. I do realize that parents can opt out of vaccination requirements for different reasons (religious, personal, philosophical exemptions) although it is not always easy to do and varies by state. I think it's BS.
Oh well why did you tell me to cry to the government that took my right then?? Sounds like you are the one crying because people have choices. Also the exemptions are actually quite easy to obtain by anyone who wants one. See the state is not allowed to question religious affiliation. You thinking its BS really has no importance at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatyousay
I just love when parents think they are doing the right thing for their children and upholding their "rights" when in effect, you and other parents like you, pose a very real threat to the rest of society. Continue to think of yourself as the "informed" one, and the rest of society as the misinformed, but you could not be further from the truth.
Again you know everything You are right, anyone disagreeing with you wrong. You are informed anyone who disagrees is not. Everyone shoul be forced to vaccinate their children for disease that does not exist in this country or is very much treatable just because you feel its the best option. Thankfully you are not in charge of other peoples children.
Just wondering...I had the Measles and German Measles (Rubella) in the early and mid sixities, respectively. I don't remember that there were other kids dying at the time from these illnesses, at least not anyone that I knew. I always heard that German Measles were dangerous for a pregnant woman, but my family did not seem to fear for my life when I had either of these. Did the diseases mutate over the years? I did run a fairly high fever with the Measles, but other than a rash, I felt fine when I had the German Measles.
Just googled "Rubella" and it states that it is not very serious and there are no long term problems associated with the disease, with the exception of pregnant women. Why would anyone other than a female approaching child bearing years need a vaccine for it?
Last edited by sickofnyc; 02-23-2010 at 07:16 PM..
Well you seem to think you know it all, unfortunately even using zicam as your argument shows you know very very little about actual homeopathy. Zicam is not homeopathic, although advertised as such. Homeopathy does not use carte blanch treatment for everyone. The same disease will be treated differently depending on the individual. Nice try though. Also on your attempt at the placebo effect...nice try again but how would you explain the placebo effect in an infant teething? Hmmmmm. Also the whole placebo argument is based of the fact that the medical society want to put everything into the same basket and be able to test it all the same way. That simply does not work for hoeopathy.
Let an infant go through teething. Isn't that the most natural process? Why herbalize the kid up if it's just nature taking it's course? Home births are about nature too, no? Breast feeding? All natural and good.
Quote:
Yes I read the post but you also stated parents are not responsible to bring the child back so what will one shot out of a series do??
Keeps them away from my kid.
Quote:
Actually I completely understand the auditory system and how the tests are performed. Through monitoring reactions to clicks. So shall you now argue that a child who physically responds to sound cannot hear? Yes I know the test tests different levels. I also know hearing is not something that can be fixed and the test is done to enable the beginning of alternative communication for the child. Sorry to burst your inflated ego about the situation.
Clicks of what? Your tounge? Hearing ABSOLUTELY can be "fixed" and it depends on what the issue is to begin with.
Quote:
Oh well why did you tell me to cry to the government that took my right then?? Sounds like you are the one crying because people have choices. Also the exemptions are actually quite easy to obtain by anyone who wants one. See the state is not allowed to question religious affiliation. You thinking its BS really has no importance at all.
They are BS. Total BS and public schools ask for written proof and citations from whatever religion (the head of the whatever you pretend to practice) and the doctrine that states why your kid can't be vaccinated. So many LIE through it...I'm glad my kids go to a private school where if you aren't vaccinated...you can't attend. Keep your (not you specifically, you in general) mess and germs and disease in your own house. You don't know who may have a child who is immuno compromised and b/c you choose not to vaccinate, and your diseased kid comes in contact with that immuno-compromised kid...that your lack of responsibility isn't going to kill that kid. Nothing other than irresponsible and selfish.
Quote:
Again you know everything You are right, anyone disagreeing with you wrong. You are informed anyone who disagrees is not. Everyone shoul be forced to vaccinate their children for disease that does not exist in this country or is very much treatable just because you feel its the best option. Thankfully you are not in charge of other peoples children.
You said they should be forced to prove claims and safety. I simply pointed out pharmaceutical companies do not do that so why should others be forced to?
I know this has been addressed, but as a big bad pharma scientist I have to say that you're wrong. As has been mentioned, it takes 10-15 years to get a drug to market. And yes, there will always be side effects, from mild to horrific. Why? Because at this juncture it's difficult to target a theraputic site without involving the entire system. That's metabolism for you. As far as homeopathy goes, if there's an active ingredient there's going to be side effects. The only way not to have a side effect is not to have an active ingredient and this is what comprises much of homeopathy.
Lets look at red rice yeast as an example. It's natural and it does lower cholesterol. It has the same active ingredient as commerical cholesterol lowering medications. It can damage your liver and you shouldn't be taking it if you're trying to get pregnant (this I know because that's the boat I'm in and I don't consume pills). Fish oil is a better alternative, but it won't yeild the same results to the same degree. I suspect it's a prime preventative tool.
Until we learn how to wield nano-technology (or something) for perfect delivery, side effects will remain a reality.
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.
You are right, anyone disagreeing with you wrong. You are informed anyone who disagrees is not
