Debate on Vaccines

[Emsyboo]

I have seen a few threads where mums have an opinion pro or con vaccine and asking for more information I would like to know your reasons for being one or the other.
My MIL is very anti vaccine and told me 4 out of 30 children die from vaccinations - I don't believe this to be true think their may be a decimal point missing although I have seen some posts from people who seem to have backed up information about vaccines.

I am pro vaccine but like to see both sides before I make a decision so if anyone has any information pro or con and more importantly has info to back up I would be really interested.

Thanks

Pity you feel you need to shut up Katiebeau. It can be very hard to choose the right words sometimes though.

Ah I just hate unintentionally causing offence, I'm not that kind of poster. I don't come on any board with the intent or not caring about upsetting anyone.

Gooseberry - it is NOT me who did the association between anti-vaccine activists and conspiracy nuts - that interview that Rosi linked to, with that German anti-vaccine person is framed by conspiracy theorists (you did follow the link, right? I did! And I do know this scene all too well - I have a feeling you and some others didn't realise that it was this specific person and her home page that I was talking about and took my comments all too personal) and Wakefield of course recently started touring with the 9/11 truthers (www.sovereignindependent.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/all_Poster_updated_724.jpg). Rather sad (the Wakefield thing).

It seems you have all gone off on a tangent between long timers, so I won't disturb much - I am sure we will see each other in a discussion with content again soon and maybe I can change your mind about me (certainly not about vaccines ;) ).

Uh huh - so by that one association you dismiss the entire possiblity that there may be a problem with vaccine safety.

Happily I can then dismiss the claims of any pharmaceutical companies associated with - or, more properly, responsible for - the dissemination of lies about their products, rejection of responsiblity and damages, and misselling over the years?

Or we can look at the evidence specific to the conversation. You are evidently choosing your sources according to your faith. It's not uncommon.

Couple of points to pick up from this thread. Firstly the idea that improved hygiene and nutrition means that children now healthy enough to withstand infections (without need for vaccines).
This is a fallacious argument. Malnutrition damages the immune system. Serious malnutrition, in young humans, where the demands of growth and brain are competing with the immune system for inadequate nutrients.
But flipping that around and saying that some perfect standard of nutrition is going to lead to a perfect immune system is without basis. You might as well argue that putting more and more oil in your car is going to make it go better and better. Pathogens pick off the weakest first, but even the best nourished can and do get ill. My cousin when a child had a fantastic standard of nutrition but she got tubercular meningitis when she was 3.

Then there is the historical argument that scarlet fever declined despite there being no vaccine. This one is down to antibiotics. SF starts with a streptococcal sore throat which if untreated spreads through body. Sadly this disease is still common in some places e.g. ethnic minorities in NZ. They are not malnourished or unhygienic but their communities do not tend to access health care as readily as the white population. Hence kids don't get the antibiotics they need to prevent SF developing.
I'm glad the cysts disappeared after the colour light therapy. It does not mean that the colour light therapy made the cysts disappear. Just because people would like to believe in nice things does not mean nice things are true. Just because A happens after B, does not mean A caused B.
Finally - just because medical staff can be grumpy and impatient does not mean that vaccines are a bad thing. Or that they are bad people. Maybe they had a bad day or maybe they get upset and unprofessional when people spread around unscientific notions about the dangers of vaccines.

Gooseberry - you seem not to read anything I write - your so by that one association you dismiss the entire possiblity that there may be a problem with vaccine safety. is completely made up.

imadgeine, I can give you an 'unscientific' quote of Dr. Kate Baldwin, former senior Surgeon, Woman's Hospital, Philadelphia, Pa. Here is what she says (the quote is taken from Darius Dinshah's book 'LET THERE BE LIGHT'):

"For about six years I have given close attention to the action of colors in restoring the body functions, and I am perfectly honest in saying that, after nearly thirty-seven years of active hospital and private practice in medicine and surgery, I can produce quicker and more accurate results with colors than with any or all other methods combined - and with less strain on the patient. In many cases, the functions have been restored after the classical remedies have failed."

You could also got back to Dr. Buchwald, a German doctor who started doubting the use of vaccination 38 years ago and has collected a huge amount of data.

Are all people nuts just because they have the courage to doubt a 'holy cow'? To doubt a system which claims to hold the only truth? A system which has managed to be paid for by the state (at least in Germany), a system that spreads the belief that there is nothing better out there even though there is proof enough that this is not true?

And - seriously - which channels are willing to spread such challenging ideas beyond the crazy conspiracy theorists? Will you find them in mainstream media?

If people talk about conspiracy - I could talk about a pharmaceutical mafia. Dinshah was taken to court and his reputation ruined. Why? Because he developed a simple healing system using colour light. A very convincing criminal act, of course. In 1958 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration obtained a permanent injunction against the Projectors and books pertaining to them. The injunciton still stands.

.. and again it is a matter of whom you believe. I stopped believing the pharmaceutical model when I heard that they were selling vaccines in third world countries after they had to be taken from the European market because they had shown a damaging effect. Even more when I heard the comment of a manager of a pharmaceutical comapany: My task is not to look after people's health - my task it to optimize profits.

I would rather believe a doctor who starts researching about the effects and use of vaccination because his experiences forced him to find an answer to questions that arose.

But again - it is up to any individual to decide for themselves.

Rosi,

You could also got back to Dr. Buchwald, a German doctor who started doubting the use of vaccination 38 years ago and has collected a huge amount of data.

Buchwald would be the doctor who claimed that the brains of African babies are less developed and therefore African babies don't get vaccine damaged:

"In der Dritten Welt ist sicher vieles anders als bei uns; Kultur, Zivilisation und Wohlstand. Wahrscheinlich sind nicht nur die dortigen Länder in ihrer Gesamtheit unterentwickelt, möglicherweise sind dies auch die Nervensysteme der Neugeborenen und der Kleinkinder. Vielleicht liegt es daran, dass Impfungen so komplikationslos vertragen werden, wie von Herrn Ehrengut geschildert. Vorsichtig möchte ich jedoch erinnern, dass die Nebenwirkungen meist erst nach vielen Jahren an das Tageslicht kommen. Trotz zunächst noch bestehender kindlicher Unreife der Gehirne unserer Kinder, scheinen diese im Gegensatz zu den Gehirnen der Kinder der Dritten Welt doch zu sein, um auf Impfungen entsprechend zu reagieren."

Quelle: Gerhard Buchwald "Gedanken zu Publikationen eines Impfgegners" Naturheilpraxis 1989; 5: 5-10

" Just because A happens after B, does not mean A caused B."

Yes, we could use this in relation to vaccines too when people say things like, "After vaccines were introduced, deaths from these diseases declined." ignoring the major decline that had occured prior to the vaccine being introduced. Funnily enough the same decline that was occurring with things like scarlet fever and that continued even without a SF vaccine. Dare anyone suggest that the same may have happened with the other diseases that we do vaccinate against?

Also, I would really like to hear how vaccinating against diseases that are usually mild in childhood such as mumps and rubella comes out in the whole 'weighing the benefit to society' argument. They weren't even considered dangerous enough to require notification until the vaccine was being introduced.

Yes sure Catherina - you can carry on defending the 'only valid way' of treating illnesses in the world. It does not affect my reality which is a different one. But to me it feels rather arrogant to push away all the evidence that shows that there are different ways of healing and protecting our health than a system which causes so many side-effects and only survives because it spreads the fear of illness.

If my child becomes ill there is a reason or even a message in it. According to my understanding the easiest way is to put the blame on the nasty world outside - bacterias and viruses, crazy parents who dare not to vaccinate their children.... - and claim that it is nothing to do with me, nor the way I live - but I doubt that this is true.

Imagedine

I am not sure whose comment you were responding to so forgive me if my responses are random.

I would not avoid vaccines on the basis that I don't need them. I avoid vaccines because they produce spectacularly unhelpful reactions in my family - because I have to.
It is however a comfort to me that improved health and hygiene and medicine mean that my dd unvaccinated status is less of an issue than were she born 100 years ago.

I am not sure where anyone would have written that they avoid vaccination because medical staff are grumpy. I suspect what people tried to say is that medical practitioners can be aggressive and obstructive if you express concerns about vaccination, and that this hinders the process rather than helping it. Possibly you were trivializing that issue unintentionally.

ROAR @ imadgeine's comments on "grumpy" medical staff.

if they were made in reference to what I have said re: various doctors and nurses and their behaviour - I think downplaying it to that extent is a little disingenuous, don't you think?

A nurse refusing to give me the patient information leaflet before I sign the consent form (thus rendering the consent useless anyway, as it was not informed consent) is a little more than "grumpy" surely?

a paediatrician refusing to give me the results of tests on my daughter, and refusing to discuss the implications of those tests results is also not someone I woudl describe as "grumpy"

I can only think you have never been in a situation where the doctor has mentioned there is something worrying about your child's health test results, but refuses to actually tell you what those results are, or what they mean unitl you have proven that a) you are not hysterical (admittedly a bit diffiicult to do, as blanket refusal to tell me information pertaining to the health and well being of my infant is not the best way to keep a person calm) and b) that you have actually researched the possibilities yourself, and know what the fuck you are talking about - a situation which woudl never has arisen, I am quite sure, if my elder daughter had not been ASD. the paed made huge assumptions about me and my ability to make rational decisions based purely on a label one of my children has. certainly I have never beofre been in the situation where I have to prove I fully understand what the doctor is abotu to tell me before he actually tells me

Rosi, you are totally free to believe senile racists and paranoid conspiracy theorists. If you believe your sick child is a "message", Buchwald and those Alpenrepublik folk are the right company.

Silverfrog I am sorry you have been having a hard time with the medical profession. There seemed though to be an implication that rude or inept interactions by medical staff somehow brought vaccines into disrepute. I think you should complain to the hospital and your MP if you feel you have been treated badly and maybe you have done so already. Of course there are some children who are unsuitable for vaccinations - those with inherited immunodeficiencies for instance. I would expect that their parents would be very much in favour of other children being vaccinated as this is their only protection.
Rosi7 - Dr Baldwin's honest opinion does not convince me of anything. Peer reviewed papers might, so can you provide some references please? Just because someone has written a book does not necessarily mean there is a gram of truth or value in it. It would be fascinating to know which significant medical conditions Dr B had successfully treated with light.
Bubbleymummy - re. scarlet fever, see my previous post. But surely you are not seriously suggesting that plummeting rates, during 20th Century, of whooping cough, measles, diphtheria and polio were nothing to do with vaccinations? And then there is smallpox, now eradicated. Precisely what do you put that down to if not to vaccination?

Catherina, yes I am grateful to have learnt to trust myself and people where my gut feeling tells me that there is something valid in what they have to say even if the whole world puts them down and takes them to court because they seem to challenge some people's belief systems or their profits.

Imadgeine, I can understand your scepticism. I learnt about colour light about 8 years ago because I met a woman who has been using and teaching about colour light for more than 25 years. She has more than 25 years of experience mostly supporting her own children, mums and families. She can tell you loads and loads of stories which she has experienced in those years. But of course you do not know her as I do and therefore it was easier for me.

As to reference concering Dr. Baldwin - if you are really interested to find out, go and get the book on Amazon 'LET THERE BE LIGHT' from Darius Dinshah. In that book you will find photographs of a case Dr. Baldwin has documented. Grace Shirlow, a young girl whose left side of the body was burnt to an extent that there seemed to be no hope for recovery at all. She completely recovered through the use of a special diet and colour light.

imadgeine, I do not believe vaccines are solely responsible for the decline and I think it is difficult to distinguish their contribution because they have not been used in isolation from other influential factors. I think many of us take things like clean water, good sanitation and availability of antibiotics and good healthcare for granted and if all that was removed I don't think that vaccines would be able to prevent the outbreaks of disease that would occur. Despite this, many people give sole credit to vaccines for eliminating certain diseases without even looking at the much more significant decline that occured prior to the vaccines. Tbh I think we'd be much worse off without antibiotics. Measles was a much bigger killer when there was nothing to treat secondary infections such as pneumonia.

.."you dismiss the entire possiblity that there may be a problem with vaccine safety" is completely made up."

• - "nothing they say has any value whatsoever" - - this from you

The association is irrelevent - you are not interested in a serious conversation if you use it.

"paranoid conspiracy theorists"

yada yada

no I don't think I'll change my mind about you any time soon

rosi7 I am afraid that a few case studies in a book won't convince me. Proper studies where someone has written up what they have done and published it where others can criticise might do.
Bubbleymummy.
What about smallpox. Antibiotics don't help with that.

imadgeine:

www.klinghardtacademy.com/images/stories/color_therapy/color_therapy_through_eyes.pdf

www.ukb.uni-bonn.de/quick2web/internet/internet.nsf/04fa7deb65dc84f9c1256a6200552c10/512a257549d85d2241256cd300515125?OpenDocument

www.alzheimer-forschung.de/forschung/aktuelles.htm?showid=2820

www.designandhealth.com/uploaded/documents/Publications/Papers/Latrobe-Fellowship-whd-april08.pdf

Gooseberrybushes -

do you disagree about those links, or do you believe in chemtrails, disease as a consequence of inner conflict, 9/11 planned and executed by the US government? Do you believe that brains of "third world babies" are more "primitive" than ours and therefore "less likely to be damaged by vaccines"?

Again: have you read the links that surround Rosi's "info"? They are bottomless crap (in my opinion) and I also don't think that certain ideas (like the one with the black, vaccine damage resistant babies) should be entertained.

Either you have not read the links (in that case, get thee off thy high horse), or you have and agree with Rosi that these sites could harbour a shred of useful/truthful info (in that case, oops, sorry, I don't think I want to play with you on that ledge). I am the eternal optimist, hence I think it is the former and with a bit of reading you will see that those sites are, well, worthless.

oh, I had not seen this:

The association is irrelevent - you are not interested in a serious conversation if you use it.

actually, the association is ultra-relevant, because if someone thinks that chicken pox is not a contagious virus, but an expression of a "separation shock" (hence the infections in daycare and/or school, you know), then they are not living in the same reality as I (and most, actually) do (where chicken pox is a consequence of contact and infection with the varicella virus) and I don't need to try and sift through they "construct" to find a shred of intersubjective reality.

On top of that, as said, I have spent years reading the info from exactly those people that Rosi is linking to, i.e. I have done my home work, all I found was completely ludicrous junk free re-interpretation of the physical world and I do not see the necessity to wade through their delusional interviews/write ups again.

Imadgeine,

Rosi's second link is just a description of the spectra of light and what UV does to our skin, totally neutral, the third one is a press release to a legitimate JAMA study that found that people with Alzheimer disease, who also have seasonal affective disorder perform 5% better on the mini mental test if they get exposure to strong light a certain amount of time per day. Both links have nothing to do with the healing powers (of light) that Rosi and Klinghardt claim.