anti-all of it

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2007
anti-all of it
100
Fri, 12-05-2008 - 2:03am

I've been reading lots of posts and I know there's lots of people here who will most likely just agree with what I have to say. I'll say it for those who won't.

I agree with most that I have read from the "anti-vaccine" people. One thing I'm surprised to not be reading is thoughts on antibiotics. I've seen some of you "anti" talking about being sick but it's okay because you're taking drugs. I don't think that many provaccine people realize that the human body is genetically, on the most basic scientific level, DESIGNED to fight off invaders (i.e. germs, illness) IF left to grow the way it is designed to the immune system is made to heal the body. The problem is that we (general) introduce unnatural things into a brand new immune system unnecessarily. On top of the vaccines that are growing too numerous to count, any time there is a sniffle or blink these children are stuffed with antibiotics or otc medicines. Let's remind that immune system that it doesn't have to do a thing!! That way when the illness comes back or the germs are touched again the body won't know what to do and the antibiotics will rush in and save the day. (Oh, and the pharm companies will buy a bigger wallet)
Let me just give a personal example of prodrugs vs antidrugs.
My ds stopped getting vaccines when he was about 1. In 4 years he has been to the dr. 2 times for being sick. Both times he got so much worse than if he hadn't gone at all. I was a worried mom and wanted to alleviate his pain. Turns out he's allergic to antibiotics. The second time they gave him a different one and he ended up in the hospital. After that we gave high doses of tlc anytime he was under the weather, which has been once since that incident 2 years ago. When he was 2 he was in daycare and almost every child got pinkeye. Of course, every single parent ran for the antibiotics. I said, no thanks and used homeopathic drops and warm compresses. His cleared up overnight and stayed gone as child after child developed reoccuring cases and needed repeat antibiotics.
My ds and dd have natural immune systems that are as untainted by the pharm companies as I can get them. We don't fight a fever off with meds and stuffy noses and chest congestion are treated with humidifiers and steamy bathrooms. My children are very rarely sick and when they are it is for a very short period of time. If they were to get an illness on the vaccine list I honestly feel they would fight if off better than a vaccinated child. I welcome everyday germs and don't use antibacterial soap. My kids touch shopping carts and cookies that fell on the kitchen floor. Yet, my friends kids who are all vaccinated and go to the dr for this that and everything in between are constantly getting sick. Their immune systems cannot handle anything because they are conditioned to wait for the drugs to take over.
So, if an immunized, frequent antibiotic user gets a case of the mumps their immune system thinks that it doesn't have to do anything because it already got a shot for it. The weakened immune system allows secondary illnesses to take over and lead to complications. Complications from these illnesses are rare but in a child with a real immune system they would be even more rare.
I read a post from someone claiming that a can of tuna has more mercury that a shot. Um, who in the world do you know that is shooting tuna into their veins? I hear these arguments a lot about those chemicals being in other things that we ingest all the time. I don't think these people understand that there really is quite a difference between inGesting and inJecting.
To all you hogwash swallowers out there...just because the cdc says it doesn't mean it's true. There are so many fear mongerers in the media outlets these days that I understand why you'd think that your kid needs the flu shot or the latest vaccine or the newest antibiotic for their sneezes. I wish more people would do their own research. And remember, doctors who go against the pharm companies are not popular people. Pharmaceutical companies control a lot. and hide a lot.
I'm a stay at home mom so I get to see daytime tv commercials. I'm sure you've all seen the ads run for local lawyers. It seems that every day there is a new commercial asking if you or someone you know was harmed from some kind of drug. If so you should join the "sue em" bandwagon. When I was young I remember the birth control patch being a big fad that all the high school girls wanted because you didn't have to remember to take it everyday. Guess what? Now the Ortho Evra patch people are being sued. My point is that these drugs have not been around long enough for any of us to know all the ramifications of them.

Bottom line- I don't think it's enough to just not immunize. Use common sense with the smaller things. If you have a strong immune system you don't need the pills and shots. If you don't take the pills and shots then you have a strong immune system. And science wins again.

Photobucket

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-24-2008
In reply to: robin_3764
Tue, 12-09-2008 - 1:12pm

I agree there are strong feelings on both sides .. that is what is at the heart of any strong "hot topic" debate. I'm willing to take criticism and even to be enlightened .. but not through sarcasm and hostility -- which is what I feel from some of the replies I've received.

I can sympathize with parents who's children have been harmed by vaccines -- though I just don't believe that swearing off all future vaccines is the answer -- except (obviously) in the case of severe anaphylaxis. I cannot realistically compare my pets to my children .. but my pets do not receive annual vaccines because there is enough research indicating that many of the veterinary vaccines will last for the lifetime of that animal -- or at least 6-7 years of it .. but I made sure that my pets had their "kitten / puppy" vaccines so that they would have the immunity they need to survive otherwise fatal illness, should they encounter it. I have two cats who had severe vaccine reactions when given multiple vaccines at one time ... so instead we spread them out and only do one vaccine at a time -- to which there have been no reactions. And granted -- cats are not children, by any means .. I guess I'm not sure the point I'm trying to make at this moment .. other than I just can't wrap my head around how not vaccinating at all is better than vaccinating with caution and awareness of the side effects and possible adverse reactions.



Photobucket





Photobucket




Photobucket











Lilypie Expecting a baby Ticker


Photobucket






Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2007
In reply to: robin_3764
Tue, 12-09-2008 - 1:30pm

<<>>


I'm sorry if you feel attacked.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-05-2008
In reply to: robin_3764
Tue, 12-09-2008 - 3:12pm

I'm curious exactly to which group of women's hostility you are referring. Those on this vax debate board? Those women who don't vax? Who? Because personally I have received very judgmental remarks from women - those who vax and who are on other message boards. They like to say that I don't love my kids because I don't vax or I'm a bad mom bordering on child abuse. That sort of thing.

Personally, I have a problem with anyone making such personal remarks about anyone's decision. But that's me.

re
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-05-2008
In reply to: robin_3764
Tue, 12-09-2008 - 3:50pm

<< other than I just can't wrap my head around how not vaccinating at all is better than vaccinating with caution and awareness of the side effects and possible adverse reactions.>>

You're trying to wrap your hands around this question. One of the questions I try to wrap my hands around is the fact that "they" don't know which child might have what reaction to which vaccine. I think about that question every time I consider the question of vaxing my kids. I truly don't believe in a one-size-fits-all system of medical care. Especially when that system is coupled with basically a blind eye towards adverse reactions to vaccines. It seems that the vast majority are too quick to dismiss a reaction and say that it couldn't possibly be related to a vaccine. And SIDS - I have ZERO doubt in my mind that that is an all to convenient way to dismiss deaths due to vaccine injury.

For me, I have built up a distrust of CDC, FDA, the pharma cos and many pediatricians because they too quickly dismiss the concerns of parents. I don't think it's right to tell so many moms who say - my healthy child quit walking, talking, interacting after x round of vaccines - well, it's coincidence and it would have happened anyway it was in no way related to the vaccines. I'll grant you that they may be true for some of the cases. I truly don't believe it is the case for all cases. So, until these people start addressing that vaccines are not good for all kids, I'm not going to subject my kids to blind faith in something that they claim is totally safe and effective. NOTHING in this world is 100 percent safe with zero bad side effects for all people. You can't tell me ahead of time how my baby will react? Then you can't tell me that the benefits outweigh the risks. Because if your vaccine is going to kill MY baby, all for some disease they very well might not have caught anyway, then for me - the benefits DO NOT outweigh the risks.

re
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-13-2008
In reply to: robin_3764
Tue, 12-09-2008 - 6:06pm

LOL!

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-13-2008
In reply to: robin_3764
Tue, 12-09-2008 - 6:13pm

Main reasons not to vaccinate at all in my sitch:


At 15 months my son had several shots at once.

Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-14-2005
In reply to: robin_3764
Wed, 12-10-2008 - 10:24am

"other than I just can't wrap my head around how not vaccinating at all is better than vaccinating with caution and awareness of the side effects and possible adverse reactions."

We took the advice of our Doctor on this. DD's Hep B vaccines of which she had sooo many were all given with other vaccines - so though Hep B "appears" to be the vaccine that causes the seizures we can not be 100% sure and she said no more.

We recently had her at the Dr's office and she is well behind on vaccines now and my Doctor still does not want to vaccinate her. And frankly, we don't want to either.

How do we know that next vaccine won't bring on a seizure that leaves her with permanent damage? We simply can not know given her history.

And the pro-vaccine response would be that's a reasonable reason not to vaccinate and why it is so important that levels of herd immunity are maintained to protect those who can not be vaccinated for medical (aka more legitimate) reasons.






iVillage Member
Registered: 06-05-2008
In reply to: robin_3764
Thu, 12-11-2008 - 10:45am
I am very surprised that your dr acknowledged that a vaccine was the culprit for the problem. Further, does NOT want to give any more vaccines? Wow, you have a wonderful dr indeed. Most are so brainwashed that it couldn't be the vaccines.
re
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-14-2005
In reply to: robin_3764
Thu, 12-11-2008 - 12:07pm

We had to keep a seizure log for the neurologist and the pediatrician that saw DD. We went through an EEG to rule out epilepsy. The pediatrician disagreed with my Doctor and said it was myoclonic jerking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myoclonus) that she would outgrow.

At the end of the day when reviewed the log with her Doctor - the frequency/severity of episodes increased right after vaccination. She determined based on that, it could be the culprit and thankfully aired on the side of caution. She also went through the product inserts and the clinical trial data which shows seizure as an AE.

It's worth nothing that within a few months of ceasing vaccination all those seizure like episodes ceased entirely. The ped would say she outgrew the myclonus - but really.... how could you ever find evidence of either scenario?

We live a good 60 minute drive away from our Doctor and we could move three hours away and I would still keep her as our physician. She is very open-minded.






iVillage Member
Registered: 10-25-2008
In reply to: robin_3764
Sun, 12-14-2008 - 1:30pm
Just know by spreading them out that way you can miss the window of opportunity when they would be most effective. Please respond to this each single bacteria has about 2-3000 components that stimulate an immune response from the body. As they multiply the challenge to the body increases. The ENTIRE 14 shot course an infant gets as part of childhood immunizations is only about 150 immune components. so it is literally about 1/10 the challenge posed by exposure to ONE germ. How can that be that bad in terms of amount?

Pages