Premier Rock Forum

Hi there,

Re; antibodies...there is some reading here -

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/antibody.html

I will try and dig up some more later.

Re; diseases alredy on decline -

http://www.whale.to/a/bystrianyk3.html

I'm in Australia and while I was getting confused with the conflicting information from both camps I decided to look on our government website to see what the "officials" had to say. I could see by the graphs that it was difficult to say just how much immunisation contributed as the vaccines were clearly introduced at the end of the epidemic. There had already been a big decline and it would be reasonable to think it would continue regardless.

I do admit that I get confused over this issue. It seems that both camps can present figures to state their case. I tend to think "so who has the most to gain here?"

OTOH, it seems that whenever vaccination rates go down there is a spike in disease incidence. Whether it would reach epidemic proportions I am not sure.

I was interested to read this -

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/conte ... t/120/1/39

I had always wondered if the whole system of artificial immunity would one day collapse in on itself.

I think when we begin vaccinating our kids early on; then they are at greater risk of getting childhood disease in adulthood when they are more dangerous. Take rubella for instance. I never had a natural case of it as a child and once I was pregnant discovered the vaccines I had were useless (no antibodies) and I had no natural protection at the time I needed it most.

Its a very mild illness and i hope my girls can get it before puberty but , maybe, due to vaccination it isn't around much. With each shot you have comes a risk and the immunity only lasts several years anyway.

I also think there is a cumulative effect on one's health with each vaccine. After my eldest daughter's 3rd round of shots she broke out in eczema. These are the things that are rarely resported and the drug companies dismiss. Its estimated only around 10% of reactions are actually reported.

scarlettrose wrote:Re; diseases alredy on decline -

http://www.whale.to/a/bystrianyk3.html

Some of this is interesting. I will say that some of your reasoning (specifically, that a child gets a round of shots, then gets autism as proof of a link) falls into the post hoc ipso proctor hoc fallacy. I still think that at worst, the statistics are mixed and more studies should be done. I'll still be vaccinating my children, put it that way.

Thanks for the info.

There's some really interesting info here - particularly if you scroll down to the graphs towards the bottom -

http://www.alternative-doctor.com/vacci ... sawin.html

stevenstillborn wrote:

scarlettrose wrote:Re; diseases alredy on decline -

http://www.whale.to/a/bystrianyk3.html

Some of this is interesting. I will say that some of your reasoning (specifically, that a child gets a round of shots, then gets autism as proof of a link) falls into the post hoc ipso proctor hoc fallacy. I still think that at worst, the statistics are mixed and more studies should be done. I'll still be vaccinating my children, put it that way.

Thanks for the info.

No problem - yes, its a very personal decision and I started out parenthood feeling exactly the same way. I can't prove that vaccines cause autism, but I think the powerful testimony of hundreds of thousands of parents means there should be more independant research. I also get the impression there has been research that has been largely ignored. Dr. Bernard Rimland is someone who has done alot of work in this area. He has video testimony from many parents, too -

http://www.whale.to/v/rimland2.html

Anyway, its certainly thought-provoking. I also think its interesting that the Amish (who don't vaccinate) have virtually NO cases of autism (I think there are a couple, but those kids had had vaccines)

http://www.mercola.com/2005/may/4/amish_autism.htm

A few people are saying that they played with mercury as kids and there were no consequences. In fact, my Dad told me the same thing.

I think the natural mercury found in the environment has less toxicity. And far more importantly, things that enter your bloodstream via injection are very different from those that enter through natural portals of entry.

http://www.mercola.com/2004/oct/30/merc ... dicine.htm


http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medical ... wsid=67953


Some of the vaccines still contain thimerosal - namely the flu shots and HepB (if I recall correctly). It is still used in the manufacturing process of the other ones and trace amounts remain after processing. Also, many doctors are still using up *old* supplies of vaccines on their shelves that contain thimerosal, rather than disposing of them.

If you are going to have your child vaccinated be very careful to read the insert of the package to make sure you are getting one without thimerosal. Of course there are other issues to consider, but this would mean there is one less risk factor.

A friend recently had a trip to the ER with her child and the doctor wanted to give a tetanus shot. She asked to read the package insert and neither of the doctors or nurses present had even heard of thimerosal!

Mark Van Deel wrote:

night_tools wrote:Perhaps the number of reported cases of autism is increasing because doctors are more aware of autism now and are more likely to diagnose it.

When this is factored in, it explains most of the increase. Apparently, one of the reasons doctors are more likely to diagnose it now is that there's government support for kids with autism that isn't avaliable for other mental disorders.

Um, if that were the case where are all the autistic 20,30 or 50 year olds? Austism is overrepresented among children these days. And they don't normally grow out of it.

scarlettrose wrote:Hi there,

I stumbled upon this forum and think its great to hear from both sides of the debate.

I will admit from the outset I am not a scientist. I am a mother who no longer vaccinates her children, and have read widely. There are many reasons for my decision; and fear of autism is only one of them.

I think we can argue back and forth endlessly about the studies and about the vested interests, etc. But there are many thousands of parents around the world who have seen *with their own eyes* their child regress into autism after a round of vaccination. I have a friend in this situation. To me that powerful real life experience says much more than anything in a medical journal.

Coming from a instinctive viewpoint (and instinct has served us for the whole of human history before modern medicine) it just seems completely wrong to inject my child with these questionable substances. The long-term safety is not established.

The only real way to know if vaccines are not implicated in juvenile diabetes, autism, allergies, arthritis, etc is to do long-term comparative studies between vaccinated and unvaccinated children. People have been asking for this to be done for *years* and are still waiting. Of course it will never be done because the results would be too damaging. Anecdotal evidence suggests unvaxed kids are on the whole way healthier than vaxed kids. It is true from my experience and I know many kids in both catagories.

Just because vaccines induce antibody titres I don't think this necessarily equates to real-life immunity. Because these childhood diseases werre on a steep decline *before* the vaccines were introduced I think it is probably difficult to say just how much they contributed. I'm not saying they didn't contribute, but I think their value is probably exaggerated.

This is incredibly ill-informed nonsense. The long-term safety of vaccines has been well established. Seriously, nearly every sentence of your post is flat-out wrong.

If your kids don't get sick, it's because they're being protected by the herd immunity offered by my son. Vaccines are associated with a small amount of risk (obviously, some vaccines, like the smallpox vaccine, have a higher risk, but smallpox vaccine is only administered to a select group of people these days). It's incredibly selfish of people like you to reap the benefit of my son's vaccination without sharing any of the risk.

I cannot begin to descibe how angry this makes me.

scarlettrose wrote:Hi there,

Re; antibodies...there is some reading here -

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/antibody.html

I googled the author of this paper. His medical training consists of . . . well, he doesn't have any. He has a BA in engineering and a Masters in software design, and he's apparently an active Dungeons & Dragons player.

Researchers spend years and years and millions of dollars researching this field. It's amazing that all that hard work can be compromised by a D&D player who writes code.

Yes, lets go back to the days when we had to worry about polio epidemics every summer. I know a few older folks who had polio, and they still suffer, to a certain extent, from it's effects.

I know I'm being kind of snotty, but I think the overall risk to benefit ratio is heavily weighted towards the benefits.

I do think it's a good idea to remove thimerosol from vaccinces, just on the general principal that you should reduce your exposure to mercury, or toxins in general.

I'm sure I've absorbed more mercury from eating fish than from probably any other source, including vaccines. I am paying attention to what kinds of fish I eat nowadays, and tend to stay away from tuna and swordfish, even though I love both, because mercury tends to accumulate in these top end predators from the oceans.

Wood Goblin wrote:

scarlettrose wrote:Hi there,

Re; antibodies...there is some reading here -

http://www.whale.to/vaccines/antibody.html

I googled the author of this paper. His medical training consists of . . . well, he doesn't have any. He has a BA in engineering and a Masters in software design, and he's apparently an active Dungeons & Dragons player.

Researchers spend years and years and millions of dollars researching this field. It's amazing that all that hard work can be compromised by a D&D player who writes code.

This is kind of amazing, that anyone would take this guys word on anything medical related.

On the other hand, at least 50% of the people in this country don't believe in evolution either, so maybe it's not really so surprising. I know, it's an ad hominem attack, so don't bother pointing that out, as I've already done that for you.

You really need a degree in, at least, Bio-Statistics, to interpret the things he is talking about to any reliable degree. And then, you need to make sure your initial database that you get your evidence from is not, intentionally or unintentionally, weighted to predispose your results to have a certain outcome.