What on earth is wrong with vaccinating children ffs?

[poshsinglemum]

I'm sure this has been done before a million times.

A friend of mine who has gone all woo recently isn't vaccinating her dd because some quack gave a lecture on the evils of vaccinating. My ex boyfriends mum was a complete quack/chrystal healer and begged me not to vaccinate against typhoid, encaphalitus, rabies etc when I went to the third world. She gave me a homeopathic kit. Needless to say I got the jabs anyway.

I think that the ''evidence'' not to vaccinate is coming from the woo crew and is fuelled by paranoid conspiracy theories concerning the pharmeceutical industry. I am not completely convinced by the industry myself but I'd rather take a chance on them than my dd getting polio etc.

I just read the MIL thread but I have been meaning to discuss this for ages.

Which page on this thread talks about the 'calpol' thing? What 'calpol' theory?!

Ah, OK then

It's been in the news. It's actually one of those "I knew I was right" occasions for a lot of people.

The idea is that any anti-pyretic suppresses oneof the most important weapons in the body's immune system fever. Fever raises the body's temperature mainly so that the blood cells responsible for producing antibodies, basically, produce more of them. Also I think it's supposed to make an inhospital environment for the virus and bacteria. So the idea is that suppressing fever somehow subverts or perverts the immune response thus causing possiby auto-immune disorders.

With relation to vaccines, it's that anti-pyretics subvert the immune response to the vaccine, so th children are less well-protected by the vaccine.

Oh GGGOOOODD bloody hell

And another three pages in and no one has been able to reference any kind of evidence that there is any kind of link between the vaccines in use in the UK and ASD or any other kind of so called "vaccine damage"...

I don't need to go on.

"If you can find anything illogical, ill-informed, "six-day-creationist" in the above, do say what and why."

Because your assumptions about the understanding of immunisation are incorrect.

Like the creationist, it's very easy to create a nice soundbite that sounds plausible enough to the uninformed but is based on fundamental unsound assumptions and data. It's easy to say X & Y therefore Z if X and Y are wrong in the first place.

Like I say, immunisation has a history of over 200 years of research. Where is the evidence against vaccination as it stands?

But you have no grounds at all for your position. You've no comment on My post or any of the Others posts that show your position is flawed. Another one; that people who hold my view are all idiot, flat earthers, creationists.. That would include all the doctors, clínicas researchers, immunologists who agree? Your view are too extreme to hold any water.

The abstract to the peer reviewed article above should prove a decent starting point ref the copious amount of research in to trying to establish a link between the MMR and ASD.

I believe others have posted similar content.

I've no comment on your post because its unreferenced, illogical scaremongering shite.

Give me some references to a peer reviewed source that support (for example) a link between ASD and MMR and I'll read them.

Until then you're just a noisy troll.

I means not even my old mate heading up the epidemiology dept of a major farmacéutica, who disagrees with me violently natch, would deny "so-called" vaccine damage. Are you for real?

No, you have no comment because it makes perfect sense and you don't.

Show me some evidence.

I already pointed out the flaws in two of limbo's references and the complete worthlessness of four other major epi studies that people like you always hail as "proof". No comment from you? Of course not.

No, you show me some that actually stands up. You're floundering lovey, turning into a broken record because you've nothing to say, nothing to responde with.

Leonie what is it with this one? Black is white cos a doctor told me syndrome?

"I already pointed out the flaws in two of limbo's references"

No you haven't. You've made some spurious remarks about the authors of the journals and some pretty poor observations that make it hard for me to believe you've even read the abstracts.

Even if you had something worthy to point out about them I don't really care because some unreferenced tripe on an internet forum really doesn't stand up. If however you do feel you do have a good critique then get in touch with the journal - I'm sure they'd be thrilled to publish something that could cause the biggest upset in two hundred years of medicine.

Let me know when its published.

Show me some evidence.

So let's get this straight. 28 pages of posts, of you and Appletrees posting about the harm that vaccines cause and you refuse to post any kind of supporting material?

I'd say if you're going to make such a controversial claim then you are duty bound to provide the supporting evidence.

If after 28 pages you aren't able to provide a single reference then it would suggest you, in fact, can't...

Show me some evidence.

Humour me for a moment wind. You know the vaccine damage compensation scheme? And you know those liitle leaflets inside vaccine boxes explaining adverso effects? And you know that deal between manufacturers and the goverment under which uk ltd accepts liability for vaccine damage?

Why do you think they do that when there is "no evidence" of "so called" vaccine damage?

Seeing as you can't actually provide any evidence to support your shite, allow me to on your behalf:

Wakefield AJ, Murch SH, Anthony A, et al. Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet 1998;351:637-41.

and link here

And just in case it's not clear:

Show me some evidence.