To think that anti-vaxers may actually being onto something?

[viiz]

I don't have children myself yet but I don't know what I would chose when the time comes. Most of pro vax/anti vax threads turns nasty with people not even willing to try and look at things with others side perspective. Not willing to even consider points of view different than their own and that's a very silly approach. People believed a lot of things that turned out to be false over the years and centuries. Why not to doubt a little?

I was born in early '80s and not in UK. Myself, my siblings and friends were all vaccinated at the time. I don't even remember what I was vaccinated against but had to be pretty basic. Just a few jabs throughout my whole childhood/teen years and nothing 3in1 or 10in1 or whatever they'll bring next.

Now to the point. Reading through hundreds of threads it jumps at me how many children have neurological, behavioural or emotional disorders. No one else sees it really?? I don't know even one person from my childhood including friends, extended family , neighbours etc who would have ADS or ADHD or any other issues like that. I see their children to have it though.

AIBU to consider there could be a link here??

Please be gentle. I hope to have a discussion here. I don't disrespect anyone's views and I only ask to try and ask yourself 'what if'.

@cheetahs... nope!

Cathmidston It doesn't really matter if it's a life or death situation, you're still trying to give out medical advice/information, so it's pertinent to ask what your qualifications are

I was asked an opinion on what I thought caused it ...not what treatment to take, not what protocol to follow ... just what I thought caused it.

Or are only the lay people on here allowed to give advice on getting vaccines

You can give your opinion on what causes it all you want, but it's worth while knowing what qualifications you have that gave you the skills and information to come to that opinion

Please don't shut cathm down. I'm enjoying this.
What "biological purpose" can pneumonia serve? What biological purpose would measles serve?

We don't have records what type of pneumonia. GP wanted DH hospitalised, so I bet both lungs.

My son... was vaccinated against HIb. Like most tots. So that explains him staying well.

People can recover from HIb without antibiotics (I reckon that was me). After about 5 weeks.

After 6.5 wks husband went to GP & got chest infection diagnosis. After 1 week on first lot of antiBs, progressed to pneumonia. Tested & found to have antiB-resistant HIb. 2 other types of antiBs, to wipe it out fully.

Does that mean you'd never take antiBs for illness? On the bright side, your type won't ever be responsible for making antiB resistance worse, right?

I think it's worth flagging that there's evidence that some vaccinations (against diphtheria or tetanus, poliomyelitis and influenza) may protect against subsequent development of Alzheimer's disease. Vaccination rates are lower amongst Alzheimer's sufferers.

It also seems an Alzheimer's vaccination is on the horizon.

Am i

Sorry...
Am I right in thinking there’s good evidence that tetanus vaccination rates are higher than those for the communicable diseases that are vaccinated against? If so, presumably that’s because anti-vaxxers hide behind herd immunity.

No idea what cath has been studying for 25 years but it isn’t an intelligent response to disease. But please come and talk to my aunt who is still mourning my uncle who died through complications of the polio he had as a child.

If you want your future offspring to live, ignore any "facts" that anti-vaxxers give you. They will say they have "done their research" - but they consider 5 minutes on Wikipedia to be "doing their research"

They're stupid. Dangerous and stupid.

Do people who deny germ theory reckon that all scientists are 'in on it' together, when they report things like very similar incubation periods for the same microbe? I don't think they understand what a feral lot we are .

This is informative (if you enjoy nutty, even has a short reading list). Seems like main idea is that germs are attracted to bad tissue; so the person was ill already just the bacteria multiplied in the bad place hence why the illness coincides with the germs being found. I'm trying to figure out what one does to avoid having bad tissue. Drink Apple cider vinegar, maybe?

Oh for heavens sake! It’s obviously the agues and miasmas. Don’t they teach you anything at Med School?

Are you not a 'lay' person cathmidson?
Please tell us where you studied immunology

but they consider 5 minutes on Wikipedia to be "doing their research"

I wish they did look on Wikipedia. Wikipedia articles are written more intelligently.

You know nothing about my background, life, interests, anything infact...other than the fact I disagree with you.
The reason I don’t vaccinate is because over the last 25 years + that I have been looking at this I have come to the conclusion that neither germ theory or virus theory actually adds up.

In that case you've wasted 25 years of your life.

You may be like some chemists who reject evolution. Different fields, not enough information to reach a properly informed conclusion. Pre-conceptions leading to confirmation bias.

This is informative (if you enjoy nutty, even has a short reading list). Seems like main idea is that germs are attracted to bad tissue; so the person was ill already just the bacteria multiplied in the bad place hence why the illness coincides with the germs being found.

They seem to ignore that to blame a germ for a disease, scientists require the presence of the germ before development of the disease, and a mechanism for the disease. Culminating in detailed studies where they innoculate animals or cells with the germ, see what they cause, and measure all sorts of changes. Not only that, they study how organisms fight off said germ to discover how to develop treatments and vaccines.

But, sure, any idiot can come along and say germs don't cause disease.

"A crackpot friend of mine believes vaccination is a conspiracy by 'THEM' to harm our children and that pharmaceutical companies make so much money from vaccines and drugs that they withhold research findings of cures for diseases.
Apparently, cancer can be cured but there's too much profit to be made from the drugs treatments.
It's people like him that start and spread these bloody scare stories. God knows why, but like I said, he's a crackpot."

The technology we have is incredible, it's well beyond what you think we have. It's well beyond that of iPhones etc but it's withheld. Think of iPhone 'updates' iPhone 5 all the way through 10. They're released in stages with a 'new technology' - this isn't because it was newly discovered, it's because they want to make a profit. Capitalism relies on a steady flow of trade so as to not flood the market and drive down costs. And with clever marketing etc you're made to believe you need this new and 'advanced' tech, couldn't live without it.

Why do you think it would be any different for pharmaceutical companies? They're huge billion dollar corporations. Capitalism literally has children digging for diamonds and parts for iPhones, people working in factories making clothes that collapse above them, animal slaughter houses where animals are killed in the millions every day in brutal and in humane ways... but sure, the pharmaceutical industries are the ONLY genuine, honest and humane billion dollar industry out there.

As an aside, I vaccinate, I eat meat and I use an iPhone. I'm not a saint but I'm also not stupid. Feel bad for your 'friend'.

Trouble with all that is that fully effective vaccination programmes - like for small pox or, prospectively, polio - eliminate the disease and deny the pharma companies money-making opportunities altogether.

Pharma profits in vaccines is no argument at all.

As for cancer, thank god the Cancer Act, which outlaws claims to treat or advise on cancer, is still on the books. Keeps the cranks and charlatans out.

There should be a similar Act for vaccination.

@KissingInTheRain - I wasn't aware there were charlatan 'vaccinators'? I suppose you could make the argument that your own immune system is a a charlatan and completely unreliable as a way to fend off disease.. oh wait..

Er, there are sadly charlatan anti-vaxxers. A suitable law would criminalise anyone offering to advise the public on vaccination or offer alternatives.

What do people mean when they say "they dont want to cure cancer" etc

Someone i worked with back in the 80s wife was the first person to be cured of Hodgkinsons.
I was talking to a 25 year old the pther day. Ive known her since she was 3, at 5 she was diagnosed with leukhemia. She is now a lovely healthy mother of 2 despite DS nearly giving her Chicken Pox and her having to be rushed to GOSH for the 4th time for the special CP vaccine for those with immunity deficiency
My dad was cured of throat cancer, my dsis had cervical cancer 15 years ago and is still here.
They are not on drugs for life, keeping "big pharma" going,. That argument really doesnt make sense

"Er, there are sadly charlatan anti-vaxxers. A suitable law would criminalise anyone offering to advise the public on vaccination or offer alternatives."

So, you want to end freedom of information? You want to police speech you don't agree with? You want scientific processes to cease existing? Are you hearing yourself here? People like you are so dangerous to our freedom.

The technology we have is incredible, it's well beyond what you think we have. It's well beyond that of iPhones etc but it's withheld. Think of iPhone 'updates' iPhone 5 all the way through 10. They're released in stages with a 'new technology' - this isn't because it was newly discovered, it's because they want to make a profit.

What does that mean?

Pharma are eager to put drugs and technologies out asap, even to the point of skipping proper trials.

An example is the malaria vaccine. It's hardly effective, but it's been pushed. But only to a point.

I'm in a scientific community that works on this area, as well as TB. Some very interesting debates.

I also know people who work at the forefront of some of the technology.

Pharma aren't ghosts who don't live in the real world.

Sure, most lay people are simply not aware of most developments, but they're not big secrets. Only some in the normal context of securing parents.

No, pharma aren't saints, but their sins aren't exactly those that people tend to complain about.

Yes there are people who offer "homeopathic vaccines" - I was offered these for DS1 back when I wasn't sure. The person offering me them claimed that they were just as effective and she'd used them on her daughters including when her daughters travelled to areas you are advised to get travel vaccines for (the DD made the decision as an adult). In many ways this is awful because a parent might believe that their child was protected when they would not be.

The whole "Cancer can be cured but they are hiding a cure" thing is bullshit. Cancer is not one disease. There will never be a single cure. And don't get me started on "Marajuana is a wonder drug which magically shrinks cancer" - it's a decent painkiller and antiseizure drug but it has really varying effects on mood. I do believe that restrictions ought to be removed on using it medically but it should be used with a medical licence rather than legalised for medical use as it is allowed in some states in America.