What were your reasons for not vaccinating your child?

[Londonmamma]

I don't think we've done this for a while and I like to keep up to date on the vaccination issue so - fire away!

Beach - thanks, BUT it still does not answer the question of how you can ISOLATE gut permeability or susceptibilty caused by OTHER factors (i.e formula milk, introduction of certain allergenic foods before 6 months and others after 6 months, hereditory factors which in some cases can be as high as 60%, etc.) from the effects of a vaccine. One of the BEST known preventions against Crohn's Disease by the way is a natural substance known as breastmilk.

If any scientist can ISOLATE those factors for me, I may be convinced. I haven't seen anything on this thread to persuade me though, I have read these things before deciding to vaccinate ds. He wasn't injected with mercury containing live vaccines, not because I was convinced it causes autism, etc, but because I generally don't think mercury is great floating about in any one's body, even if the amount is minute.

You're welcome.

Yellowrose this subject (the huge unexplained increase in autoimmune disease) is highly complex and you are right that many factors are certainly involved. I and others who have comprehensively researched the subject are trying to suggest that vaccination might be one of those factors, is this really so very controversial?

I would have thought that the simple fact of vaccines containing potent neurotoxins like mercury and aluminium would be enough to raise a few basic questions about their safety.

Those who refuse to question vaccination have no explanation for why my eldest child is unable to eat most common foods other than vague mumblings about genetics and too much hand washing. Those who question vaccination have provided comprehensive, well researched, highly convincing, impartial information which gives a possible explanation for my child's serious health problems. There are stacks of research that show vaccination to be highly questionable and no well researched long term studies which suggest vaccines are anywhere near as safe (and effective) as they are made out to be.

Both of my children were exclusively breastfed for over six months. My vaccinated child is multiallergic (the list of foods she cannot eat is much longer than the list of foods she can eat). My unvaccinated child is allergic to cow's milk protein and nothing else.

For anybody interested in scaring the life out of themselves with a whole load of info about vaccination I can recommend the following site.

interesting site

By the way, hate to put a total downer on things but mercury is still used in the production of most vaccines. Manufacturers are not obliged to give this information on the package insert. A vaccine that you and your doctor consider to be mercury free probably contains trace amounts of mercury leftover from the production process. Mercury free only means that mercury has not been added as a component of the actual finished product.

Remember that there is no safe level of mercury exposure i.e. all mercury exposure is unsafe. Also when you combine even trace levels of mercury with another toxin like aluminium the toxicity of the two combined is much higher than just the sum of the parts.

you say: "I and others who have comprehensively researched the subject are trying to suggest that vaccination might be one of those factors, is this really so very controversial"?

No saying that it may be ONE of the factors isn't illogical at all, but quite a few posters here have suggested that they are absolutely POSITIVE that a child has been damaged by a vaccine, when in fact there could have been multiple reasons.

I also comprehensively researched before vaccinating my child becasue I would not and still will not risk my child's life in the face of common illnesses that one can vaccinate against. If I had come across any serious study that said the vast MAJORITY of children who are vaccinated have been damaged and the LINK had been positively made, then I would not have gone ahead with it, it would be madness.

Yes, the kinds of illness you refer to have increased, but I have not seen anything that says CONCLUSIVELY that a child WILL be damaged if vaccinated. I want to have conclusive evidence and it just doesn't exist.

Ok, let's leave it at that because we are in serious danger of going round in circles !

Beachcomber, I was told that the tetenus vaccine didn't contain mercury, do you think that it might? That is the only vaccine I was concidering giving dd, although how to go about getting single jab is a whole new problem...

My family react terriblly to the tetnus jab, my bro had it, the hospital gave it to him as he had an injury and they asked when his last jab was, he said he hadnt had one so they did it there and then, he reacted against the vaccine and needed an antidote.

There are no allergies in my family (but my aunt is a celliac (sp?). Tetenus really frightens me, I have just been reading about it in my baby book...

Yellowrose I see things from the other side. I have found no conclusive evidence that shows that a child will not be damaged if vaccinated (if you have any I would be very interested to read it).

The way I see it is this.

Individual vaccines are not comprehensively tested.
The cumulative effect on the body of lots of vaccines has never been tested.
The long term effect of vaccines has never been tested.
Vaccines have never been tested on anyone other than the healthiest of individuals.
Vaccines have never been tested on my children so how can anyone know that they are safe for my children.
The effectiveness of vaccines has never been proven to outweigh the risk of vaccine damage. Indeed their effectiveness is highly questionable.
Even if you are vaccinated you can catch the disease you are supposedly protected against (?!).
Vaccines contain toxic chemicals.
Batches of vaccines are often recalled due to contamination, dangerously high potency and high incidence of reaction provocation.

Vaccine manufacturers have a long record of highly dubious practices, conflict of interest, coverups, mistakes and fuck ups. I do not trust them with my child's life.

Cazee, I don't know if current tetanus vaccines are produced using mercury but it is certainly a strong possibilty. I don't know how you could find out for sure as the manufacturers don't have to give out this information (I wonder why, don't they think it is important?). I know the tetanus vaccine is much criticised for its' low effectiveness. Tetanus is a bacteria and even coming into contact naturally with it does not create immunity so critics question how a vaccine could do so. If I were you I would try to find out as much as I could about the real danger of tetanus as well (as opposed to the 'cut by rusty nail=lockjaw' myth that most of us believe). Remember there is much scaremongering that goes on about the risks these diseases carry.

Sorry folks another long post, I always promise myself I'll keep it short on this topic but never seem to be able to...

"Remember there is much scaremongering that goes on about the risks these diseases carry".

I would say that was also true of vaccinating. I see lots of scaremongering.

Vaccines ARE tested on healthy children. Quite my point. If you are worried that vacs. are only tested on healthy children, then you also need to worry about every other medicine on earth too, as most are only tested on healthy people. Most of us will give our children meds. that we know may contain nasties too. Unless of course you refuse all meds. too ?

I think sometimes there are people who talk about vaccination risks in an uninformed manner and that this could be seen as scaremongering. However, the majority of the people I have encountered (in RL or on the web) who are against mass vaccination in its current form are extremely well informed and often victims or parents of victims of vaccine damage.

I would say that where there is smoke there is fire and that the determined denial of the government and the manufacturers to acknowledge that vaccination carries an unknown risk is scandalous. The continued failure to seriously address the well documented problems with vaccines whilst allowing profit to be made from them is just plain wrong.

I think the common provaccination argument that 'it's just a coincedence' when parents see their children change dramatically following vaccination is insulting and offensive.

Re what you say about other meds, I do worry about this!
Thankfully I haven't had to make too many decisions about this so far. I approach all chemicals that are to be put into my children's bodies with the same attitude I now take to vaccination. Basically I do not take the doctor's or the manufacturer's word as gospel and I try to find out as much as I can about the product myself. My daughter nearly died at the hands of these people and this medicine, I think I'm justified in questioning their methods.

Forgot to say, I see that there was mention of nut allergy earlier.

On of the theories about why increasing numbers of children are allergic to nuts is because peanut oil is one of the ingredients used in vaccines.

My vaccinated daughter tests very allergic to peanuts and yet she has never eaten them how on earth did she develop an allergy to something that she has never come into contact with???

Beachcomber- that is exactly what we think happened in our family, although it seems that the molecules that get through the damaged gut (gluten and casein being the big suspects) seem to either trigger autism or type 1 diabetes in our family. Quite a lot of literature on leaky gut/gluten/milk and type 1 diabetes.

Re the tetanus. The usual way that tetanus is now given (since end of 2005) to babies does not contain thimerosal. If you come across an old paediatric DT lying around then that will contain thimerosal. Current jabs for the over 10's may or may not contain thimerosal- I don't know.

nut allergies like all other allergies can be hereditary and can skip generations. you may get an allergy despite all you efforts never to come into contact with a known allergen, i.e. where both parents have the allergy, the baby/child has a 60% chance of getting it too. my friend got asthma, a very severe form of it, at age 50. she has absoluletly no explanation for it.

of course there are positive things you can do to REDUCE THE RISK of an allergy, but they are not relevant for discussion on this thread, so i won't go into them.

also beach as you know, many foods have traces of nuts in them, even if you avoid them like the plague like i have for ds, even things like cornflakes and most cereals may have traces of nuts.

unless you read every single label, you are very unlikley to avoid all traces of nuts. i doubt that vaccines will have anything other than a trace of nuts, like most foods, but i will check this. isn't even a trace of it lethal to a child with a nut allergy ?

Kerrymum. I'm really sorry to hear of everything that you and your son have been through, it's so heartbreaking when your child is ill.
Your situation sounds quite complex, I'm afraid I'm not a doctor or any kind of specialist (just a well-read mum) so I can't really advise you.

I would just say that it sounds like you are doing the right things re antibiotics and supplements (fish oils etc).
Has your child been checked out for dairy allergy as this is often a factor in recurrent ear problems (soya and wheat are other candidates but dairy is very common)?

I'm a bit confused by what you say about mumps. I would have thought that any good doctor would do a lab check to be sure whether you had mumps or not especially if you were pregnant at the time.
If your son had mumps as an infant I don't think this carries a risk of sterility as this effect is considered a risk for older children (teenagers and older). Also the risk of sterility from mumps is greatly exaggerated as it is unusual for both testicles to be damaged. What makes you think your son had mumps and that this has damaged his hearing?

I think the only thing you can do is try to find out as much as you can about vaccination and also the real (not media inflated) risks that the relevant infectious diseases pose for your child. If you suspect that he has already had mumps maybe you could have him tested so that at least you would know that he does not need to be vaccinated against this. Rubella is a very mild illness and does not normally pose a threat (apart from to unborn babies) so doesn't require vaccination either.
Sorry to not be much help but I think you need to find out as much as you can and weigh up all the information. Good luck.

Hi again gess!
Sorry I haven't CATed you yet, I am really interested in the info you have, it's just that I haven't used the CAT facility yet and haven't set it up. Am using the pc in quick snatches whilst looking after a three year old and an eleven month old!

Hi yellowrose!

I don't disagree with what you say exactly but I do think that if we really want to try to understand the enormous increase in atopic children we need to look at all the possible contributing factors, why not look at vaccination as one of these?

another interesting site

There is no shortage of evidence that points towards vaccination as a factor.

proof that peanut oil is, or ever has been, used in vaccines? Refined peanut oil isn't generally a problem even for those who are ananphylactic to peanut.

Advice from a consultant in allergy - almost every child in this country has been exposed to peanut by age 3 even if the parents think they are avoiding nuts. Until you have to avoid any trace of peanut you don't realise how many products are ruled out.

i agree beach, i am not at all disputing that the WHO or UNICEF or anyone else on a global level should be pushing for more research into vaccines.

i would like to see it done thro the global orgs. that fight for children's health, as i tend to dispute anything coming out at national level, i am too paranoid with the NHS ! both WHO and UNICEF recommend vacs. even in developed countries which is why i was more confident in getting them done.

there is evidence that some children have been damaged, i absolutley do not wish to deny this or denegrate anyone's effort into looking at vacs. as being harmful.

this was a very interesting debate, thanks everyone !

absolutley true, even if you are careful in not exposing your own child to nuts, you can bet your bottom dollar someone else will ! my son was given a pistachio nut by another parent at a picnic recently. i find it irritating that other people give children things to eat before checking with the parents.

OMG i cant believe how useful this thread is.Have only briefly read last few entries but am soooo glad i did.

DD1 had vaccines.Developed high temp and then fitted.
Her fit was so bad she was left with epilepsy which was quite severe for several years.MIL begged me not to get her vacs as my dh AND his brother both fitted following their jabs as children, but i thought i knew better.

Obviuosly was very dubious with dd2 and finally let her have only the first mmr.
Follwing this she was admitted to hosp a few weeks later because she stopped breathing.
Thorough investigations only concluded severe tonsillitis and they removed her tonsils.I was adamant she hadn`t got tonsillitis.
Same thing happened a few weeks later except i realised straight away it was peanut allergy as she was eating crunchy nut cornflakes when it happened and she started to swell before my eyes.It was awful and she was lucky the paramedic had enough adrenaline, but again she stopped breathing.
Obviuosly i am now really concerned that there is talk of peanut products in the vaccines because 1 ) did this expose her in the first place and 2 ) what do i do with ds1 now 4 and had no vacs at all because i cant bring myself to risk it.
Sorry its so long- just cant get over the peanut oil thing in the vaccinations !

Haven?t read the whole post and has to make it short, but will expand it soon. My best friend?s daughter 3y was given the ?pneumoccco (in Italian, don?t have time right now to search for translation but belongs to the MENINGITIS immunization group) in august 2005 and was diagnosed with leukaemia shortly before xmas, after 7 months chemio, they tried and succeed with transplant, and now she?s fine. It has been recognised that she developed the illness because of the shot and receives now compensation from the state. All the doctors in all the hospitals she?s been agree about it because of the atypical cell anomaly. This is not an urban legend, I have been close to the family for the whole year.

who has proof that peanut oil is, or ever has been, in vaccinations? Easy to start a scare but don't trust everything you read on the internet. Even if there was peanut oil in vaccines refined oil is not a problem to almost all those with an anaphylactic peanut allergy (like my child)so why should it trigger an allergy? I'm interested in this story - but at the moment I see no proof it's anything but a unsubstantiated scare story.

There are more likely contenders for the increase in the number of children with allergy.

I absolutely do not want to 'start a scare story' and am sorry if my mention of peanut oil has upset anyone.

Perhaps I should not have mentioned it in the first place. I often find myself not sharing some of the information that I have encountered about vaccines as it is such a controversial subject and a VERY personal decision.

It is quite right that you shouldn't believe everything you read on the internet (or anywhere else). However I would apply this to both vaccine danger and vaccine safety.

Don't you think it odd though that some vaccines are cultered on chick embryos (aka as eggs!) and that anaphylactic egg allergy is also on the increase?

If exposure to peanuts through diet alone is enough to provoke such severe allergies why is there not a high incidence in the level of allergy in countries where peanuts form part of the staple diet?

Tatt can you expand on what you say about more likely contenders for the increase in allergy incidence?

Lory, I have heard of links to leukaemia as well.

Like yellowrose I think it's great that this thread is being a nice one. See we can do it!!

Forgot to say do you know what researchers do when they want to study allergies using animals? The animals used for the studies do not have allergies so something must be done to make tham allergic so that the tests can be carried out.

So what do they do? They vaccinate them.

From this page quite far down

"Helm et al in Environmental Health Perspectives article "Nonmurine Animal Models of Food Allergy" discuss ways to create animal models of human food allergy. (59) Animal models are discussed extensively, including "the use of adjuvants (natural or artificial--alum, cholera toxin, Bordetella pertussis, and carrageenan are known IgE-selective adjuvants)" in those animal models. They go on to describe, "In the atopic dog model for food allergy (Ermel et al. 1997), newborn pups (day 1) were subcutaneously injected in the axillas with 1 µg of cow's milk, beef, ragweed, and wheat extracts in alum. Food antigen was again administered on days 22, 29, 50, 78, and 85. At ages 3, 7, and 11 weeks, all pups were vaccinated with attenuated distemper-hepatitis vaccine...Immunized pups responded with allergen-specific IgE by week 3 and peaked at week 26 of age...All clinical manifestations are consistent with infant, adolescent, and adult food allergy in humans."

It has been shown repeatedly that vaccination can cause sensitization, including anaphylaxis, to vaccine ingredients. Nelson et al (2000) discuss a 4 month old baby's anaphylactic reaction to the CRM 197 protein in the Hib vaccine. (60) As far back as 1940 Cooke et al noted that "The real object of this presentation is to acquaint the medical profession with proof of the fact that sensitivity can be induced as a result of the present procedures of active immunization to tetanus." (61) Cooke et al also mentioned Neill et all (1929) noted hypersensitivity to diphtheria bacilli. (62)"