OT: ease my mind about immunizations!

[DVCLiz]

I'm not defending any postings but that is true about creating some vaccines using lung tissue from both a male and female aborted fetus. They are referred to by number.

I don't know about growing cultures but it looks like they've been able to keep this line of cells going since the 60's and even created the chicken pox vaccine from the same line.

Regardless of a person's religious or ethical beliefs on using aborted tissue, it's still pretty gross and parents have a right to know this. Four vaccinated kids and 21 years later, I learn this here.

But not in any way that is different from the information about any other growth medium - that's my point. And only if knowing the original growth medium of any vaccine is information that parents usually seek out. It's inflammatory to pick out the ones that have some other religious or ethical significance and leave all of the others growing in different media alone. It makes it seem dramatic when in truth it's simply a growth medium like many others - something that helps in the process of producing the vaccine. It has no relation to the actual vaccine. Why is it importnat to know that the "aborted fetus" (inflammatory language to me already) was male or female, or that the mother was 25 years old? Totally unnecessary and cherry-picked to cause consternation without revealing any useful information.

 

[Pennykay]

DVC Liz, some vaccines are made from aborted fetal tissue. You can choose not to believe that if you want to, but it doesn't make it not true. I have never tried to scare anyone. I am just sharing what I have learned. It is obviouse that any constructive conversation here is dwindling, so I will just move on and go back to my happy place of Disney planning.

 

[nairv]

as a pediatrician, I just wanted to make everyone aware of something you may not realize.....diseases such as chicken pox and rubella pose a HUGE risk to babies in utero. so if you are pregnant and get exposed to someone infected with these, you baby is at a high risk of developing the congenital rubella syndrome or congenital varicella...both of which are deadly and cause blindness, deafness, profound mental retardation......in short, very very sick children who usually die soon after birth. also, the 1st trimester is the most risky, when often you don't even know you are pregnant yet.

 

[DVCLiz]

DVC Liz, some vaccines are made from aborted fetal tissue. You can choose not to believe that if you want to, but it doesn't make it not true. I have never tried to scare anyone. I am just sharing what I have learned. It is obviouse that any constructive conversation here is dwindling, so I will just move on and go back to my happy place of Disney planning.

Pennykay, I understand that some vaccines are made from aborted fetal tissue. I have never said I don't believe the list of ingredients, just that I think the inclusion of those facts is inflammatory and designed to scare people or inflame their emotions instead of providing valid scientific information. I am sorry you cannot seem to understand the difference here, but I am convinced most of the others on this thread can, so I too will be done talking about it.

 

[_queenie_]

My BIL's brother has 10-year-olds identical twin daughters who are severely autistic. It's very sad, they can barely do anything on their own, apparently their docter says it's one of the worst cases he's seen in a while.

Anyway, their parents, as well as me, don't believe immunizations are to blame. I find it very possible for them to trigger autism, but that's only if the child has the specific "gene", which obviously has been said already. I'm no expert on autism, but it seems a little far-fetched for a shot to completely make one child autistic and not to have the same effect on another. To me it seems that the child who develops it must have some common problem that the vaccine brings out/makes worse.

To anyone debating whether or not to vaccinate, I suggest doing it, and if you're uncomfortable with certain ones wait a little while (depending on the vaccine). There are a lot benefits, most of these diseases are plain scary, if there's some sort of outbreak they can easily kill your little one. One that really scares me that they are not requiring a shot for is bacterial meningitis, up here in the northeast there have been quite a few cases, even one at my DS17's school . I don't think you're neglecting your child for not vaccinating them, obviously if you choose not to it's because you are concerned, but I think it's the smart and responsible thing to do in our country. It's your decision though, everyone has to make it on their own and decide what they feel is most important for their child. For mine it wasn't getting some awful disease, but that's only me.

Just my two cents, if you don't like it simply ignore it.

 

[iggbees]

you do know that a ton of scientists uses cells that were part of a human body don't you? in fact i use human breast cancer cells to conduct the research that i am doing. should we stop doing that because they are from humans or is just the fact that these cells are fetal? the cells were taken from a fetus in the 1960s!! it's not like they are constantly taking cells from new fetuses, they just culture them from the initial stock. they actually only need a very very small amount of cells to begin inital cultures (which again was in the 1960s!!!!). also, how do you know that the fetus wasn't a miscarriage? the one even said it was aborted after the mom got rubella, which indicates to me that the mother's body was attacking itself and probably the fetus, causing a miscarriage. maybe the mother wanted the child to go to research? i sure don't know, but it's just a thought. i just don't see the reason to get so worked up over cell cultures and what types of cells were used to culture what.

and for the record, i personally don't find the need to immunize my children against the flu and chickenpox. i have had both in my time and never had a problem. i also don't see the need for 20 different immunizations now as well, there is definitely no need for some of the ones that are given. also, i said that the ingredients that were listed in the vaccine are laughable, because they are. i also said that at high concentrations they are probably pretty potent and i personally don't know the concentrations that they use in the vaccines. i'm sure that it is possible that children have more of a tendency to get some sort of poisoning and some children are more susceptible to getting sick than others are (thank you genetics).

 

[LanaJae]

But not in any way that is different from the information about any other growth medium - that's my point. And only if knowing the original growth medium of any vaccine is information that parents usually seek out. It's inflammatory to pick out the ones that have some other religious or ethical significance and leave all of the others growing in different media alone. It makes it seem dramatic when in truth it's simply a growth medium like many others - something that helps in the process of producing the vaccine. It has no relation to the actual vaccine. Why is it importnat to know that the "aborted fetus" (inflammatory language to me already) was male or female, or that the mother was 25 years old? Totally unnecessary and cherry-picked to cause consternation without revealing any useful information.

Well I do agree with that. It's the background information that really got to me (not from the post, I found it elsewhere). I suppose its better that we don't know this, but at the same time, having something made "real" for some people is important too and helps their decision process. Even the Vatican decided that the benefit of the vaccines that use those cells outweighed the morality of it.

People tend to alter their beliefs based on what personally happens to them or people close to them and that's why this debate is difficult. I never thought I would want to get a blood transfusion (and I haven't), but at one point I needed an IV blood product created from 10,000 donors. It would've been much more difficult to make that decision for my kids because I've lived through a time where unknown diseases were in blood supply and weren't discovered until later. That's how some people feel about some vaccinations, so they want to do what they can to learn more and limit risks, etc., which is what the OP was doing. I'm sure she already knew there were polar opposites on each side.

 

[AndyLL]

Actually, until recently there has not been a full out study examining the saftey of giving multiple vaccines at the same time.

Interestingly, there seems to be some evidence now that children that receive the new proquad vaccine (MMR + Chicken Pox) are have more serious side effects than those that get them separately and they are moving towards recommending to NOT use the proquad vaccine.

I need to go figure out where I read that...I believe it was in an article I read last week. I'll check and edit my post w/ the info.

FWIW (and I posted this earlier in the thread) MMR has never contained thimerisol but one of the theories that is out there is when children recieved the MMR in addition to other vaccines that did contain thimerisol...that may have been an issue.

I'm just sharing the theory... I'm not sure what the trigger is.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7076

Japen banned the MMR in 1993

Andy
(However... I don't know if they banned sodium chloride yet)

 

[Minniemouse07]

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7076

Japen banned the MMR in 1993

Andy
(However... I don't know if they banned sodium chloride yet)

What does that have to do with what I was discussing?

I'm talking about proquad which bundles MMR WITH the chicken pox vaccine. It is fairly new (last few years) and produced by Merck.

I never said that MMR caused autism... all I stated was that one theory that is out there revolves around MMR being given with other vaccines that contained thimerisol. The news article you linked is interesting but I need to read the actual paper to see how the study was conducted and what the variables/conditions were.

 

[Minniemouse07]

as a pediatrician, I just wanted to make everyone aware of something you may not realize.....diseases such as chicken pox and rubella pose a HUGE risk to babies in utero. so if you are pregnant and get exposed to someone infected with these, you baby is at a high risk of developing the congenital rubella syndrome or congenital varicella...both of which are deadly and cause blindness, deafness, profound mental retardation......in short, very very sick children who usually die soon after birth. also, the 1st trimester is the most risky, when often you don't even know you are pregnant yet.

FYI, chicken pox actually only harms the fetus if the mom gets it while pregnant...and then the most damage happens in the THIRD trimester, not the first.

I did a bunch of research into how illnesses affect fetuses when mom gets ill w/ them because I had whooping cough while pregnant w/ my son (which I caught from my FULLY VAXED for DTaP dd!). Another biggie to not get during the third trimester is regular measles.

Also, a very good friend of mine was exposed to chicken pox (again from a fully vaxed child ) while pregnant but she was in her 2nd trimester and her OB told her that the third trimester is when she should worry.

 

[maymom96]

My daughter has never been vaccinated and my son has never gotten any booster shots. When I had my son, I was young and wasn't allowed to ask questions. I had to do what the doctors wanted. When my son had a severe reaction to a vaccination (and changed his whole personality), I became sick with how casual the doctors were about it. When I had my daughter, I refused to get her vaccinated. She is now 5 and my son is 11.
The only problem I have had was several years ago. The state thought they had a measles outbreak. In our county, a child came down with measles type symptoms. The school district decided that any child who was not UTD wouldn't be able to go to school until it had been 6 weeks since someone reported similar symptoms.
I asked the health department and the school district how they could do this to kids when nothing had been confirmed. I never received an answer. It turned out that it was just a virus and not the measles. So a big deal was made for no reason.
I don't make it know my children are not vaccinated. It's because of how people act when they find out that I want to avoid. But I want to scream that if vaccinations work, then there should be no problems with your vaccinated child being around my unvaccinated child.
Check your state guidelines and don't ask the school if you have questions about state requirements. Every state allows medical exemptions, most permit exemptions based on religious practices, and twenty states allow some kind of personal exemption. If you are not sure what to do, wait and research the information. You can always vaccinate but you can't unvaccinate.
There is an excellent book written by Stephanie Cave and Deborah Mitchell if you want to do a search. She is a doctor who deals with vaccine damage. She also explains what you can do to make them safer if you do choose to immunize. Also, which children should avoid them because they are at higher risk for adverse reactions.

 

[maymom96]

I have been reading about getting Titer Levels checked.

Two years ago when a possible measles outbreak happened in our area, I was going to get my sons titer levels checked. I had a friend who was in the medical profession who was going to request the lab work. The health department in my area said that they would refuse to accept the report with the titer levels. I asked why and they said they just wouldn't. So I never had the blood work done. BTW, it was just a virus going around and not measles.
I will say this. Anyone can doctor a vaccination card to make it look like a child is current on shots. Until some other type of system is in place, a card with dates next to a vaccination means nothing IMO.

 

[jodifla]

My daughter has never been vaccinated and my son has never gotten any booster shots. When I had my son, I was young and wasn't allowed to ask questions. I had to do what the doctors wanted. When my son had a severe reaction to a vaccination (and changed his whole personality), I became sick with how casual the doctors were about it. When I had my daughter, I refused to get her vaccinated. She is now 5 and my son is 11.
The only problem I have had was several years ago. The state thought they had a measles outbreak. In our county, a child came down with measles type symptoms. The school district decided that any child who was not UTD wouldn't be able to go to school until it had been 6 weeks since someone reported similar symptoms.
I asked the health department and the school district how they could do this to kids when nothing had been confirmed. I never received an answer. It turned out that it was just a virus and not the measles. So a big deal was made for no reason.
I don't make it know my children are not vaccinated. It's because of how people act when they find out that I want to avoid. But I want to scream that if vaccinations work, then there should be no problems with your vaccinated child being around my unvaccinated child.
Check your state guidelines and don't ask the school if you have questions about state requirements. Every state allows medical exemptions, most permit exemptions based on religious practices, and twenty states allow some kind of personal exemption. If you are not sure what to do, wait and research the information. You can always vaccinate but you can't unvaccinate.
There is an excellent book written by Stephanie Cave and Deborah Mitchell if you want to do a search. She is a doctor who deals with vaccine damage. She also explains what you can do to make them safer if you do choose to immunize. Also, which children should avoid them because they are at higher risk for adverse reactions.

If you've truly done your research, how can you say this?

Everyone knows vaccines aren't 100 percent effective. No one ever claims they are. People who don't vaccinate are weakening the herd immunity that keeps ALL of us safe. Why is this such a difficult concept? Medical exceptions should be the standard. Not made-up other exceptions.

I'm glad you shared that your children weren't allowed in school with no vaccinations once an outbreak occurred.

Something for parents to consider....your child will have to be kept home for possibly months if you don't vaccinate.

 

[maymom96]

If you've truly done your research, how can you say this?
Everyone knows vaccines aren't 100 percent effective. No one ever claims they are. People who don't vaccinate are weakening the herd immunity that keeps ALL of us safe. Why is this such a difficult concept? Medical exceptions should be the standard. Not made-up other exceptions.
I'm glad you shared that your children weren't allowed in school with no vaccinations once an outbreak occurred.
Something for parents to consider....your child will have to be kept home for possibly months if you don't vaccinate.

Yes I have done my research. The concept of “herd immunity” is used to explain the eradication of many childhood diseases due to a high vaccination rate among the population. I think the belief is 95% of the population must be vaccinated for the herd immunity to be true.
Well a quick check at the CDC website shows that in 2006, Michigan had 85% of children 19-35 months of age vaccinated with DTaP. I couldn't find the outbreak stats for 2006 in Michigan, but I don't recall an outbreak of diphtheria, tetanus, or pertussis for 2006. Since the vaccinate rate wasn't at 95%, according to the herd immunity belief the diseases would be rampant.
For some diseases, however, herd immunity offers no protection. For example, tetanus is not contagious. Between 40-60 cases of tetanus are reported in the United States each year. It is contracted when a wound comes in contact with soil contaminated with the tetanus bacterium.
The "outbreak" wasn't even measles but a virus at my sons school. Parents were told to pick up their children and vaccinate them or the child couldn't come back to school. Nothing was confirmed before the health department made the decision. When the illness was found out to be a virus and nothing more, parents were never contacted. The health department kicked kids out of school to force parents to vaccinate. The school had nothing in place on what to do so these students could still get an education at home. Parents were gave the option to vaccinate and your child was welcomed back or don't do it and teach your child at home. But then you would have been turned in for your child missing too much school. I wasn't prepared for what happened. I always thought that a disease first needed to be confirmed before unvaccinated kids would be removed from school. I know better now.
For the record, I don't expect your vaccinated child to protect my unvaccinated child. I send my children out in the world fully aware that they may get something. If they do get something, we will deal with it. It's a decision I live with everyday and it doesn't stop us from living a wonderful and active life. Unvaccinated children who do contact a disease typically have a milder case then their peers who were vaccinated. Afterwards, they have natural immunity that never goes away.
I didn't make this decision blindly. I continue to educate myself on vaccinations and diseases. I am not closed minded and am always looking for information to make me change my mind. I do keep in mind when I read stories or studies of who paid for the study. Every study needs funding and I ask myself who has the biggest gain from the information. That answer usually points you in the direct of who shelled out the money.

 

[jodifla]

Yes I have done my research. The concept of “herd immunity” is used to explain the eradication of many childhood diseases due to a high vaccination rate among the population. I think the belief is 95% of the community must be vaccinated for the herd immunity to be true.
Well a quick check at the CDC website shows that in 2006, Michigan had 85% of children 19-35 months of age vaccinated with DTaP. I couldn't find the outbreak stats for 2006 in Michigan, but I don't recall an outbreak of diphtheria, tetanus, or pertussis for 2006. Since the vaccinate rate wasn't at 95%, according to the herd immunity belief the diseases would be rampant.
For some diseases, however, herd immunity offers no protection. For example, tetanus is not contagious. Between 40-60 cases of tetanus are reported in the United States each year. It is contracted when a wound comes in contact with soil contaminated with the tetanus bacterium.
The "outbreak" wasn't even measles but a virus at my sons school. Parents were told to pick up their children and vaccinate them or the child couldn't come back to school. Nothing was confirmed before the health department made the decision. When the illness was found out to be a virus and nothing more, parents were never contacted. The health department kicked kids out of school to force parents to vaccinate. The school had nothing in place on what to do so these students could still get an education at home. Parents were gave the option to vaccinate and your child was welcomed back or don't do it and teach your child at home. But then you would have been turned in for your child missing too much school.
I wasn't prepared for what happened. I always thought that a disease first needed to be confirmed before unvaccinated kids would be removed from school. I know better now.

I'm not understanding. You think that the diseases just went away by themselves? You don't think that it was the immunizations that eradicated them??

 

[AndyLL]

What does that have to do with what I was discussing?

You stated:

Actually, until recently there has not been a full out study examining the saftey of giving multiple vaccines at the same time.

I gave you a link to one of many studies done on this subject. I made no comment on if that, or any of the other, studies support/dis-proves any thories you have.

I just dislike absolute statements that I know not to be true.

I personally feel that vacines have been studied to death and that research money and time are being wasted on them based on hysteria.

But I have no dog in the fight and I'm only interested in the tatics people use to try to prove their points.

Andy

 

[maymom96]

I'm not understanding. You think that the diseases just went away by themselves? You don't think that it was the immunizations that eradicated them??

From what I have found, each disease had been virtually eliminated decades before the introduction of the relevant vaccine; through improved hygiene, better nutrition, clean drinking water and improved sanitation and health care. Basically, as people's overall health and immune systems improved, they didn't get sick. Check out reliable sources such as the Lancet, WHO and UNICE for graphs that show vaccinations were not the reason for the decline in the diseases.
I just want to say even if you do vaccinate, I applaud you because you decided to research the issue. An informed decision is never wrong. You didn't bury your head in the sand or take a doctors word.
I once had someone tell me they didn't want to do the research because then they couldn't vaccinate their children. I thought that was so sad. Being a parent isn't an easy job and we often times have to do things we don't like. But we do it because our children mean the world to us. So you step outside your comfort zone and do what you need to.

 

[DVCLiz]

From what I have found, each disease had been virtually eliminated decades before the introduction of the relevant vaccine; through improved hygiene, better nutrition, clean drinking water and improved sanitation and health care. Basically, as people's overall health and immune systems improved, they didn't get sick. Check out reliable sources such as the Lancet, WHO and UNICE for graphs that show vaccinations were not the reason for the decline in the diseases.

Wow - I don't even know what to say to this.

 

[EMom]

Wow - I don't even know what to say to this.

I do, but I'll resist because once I start, I won't be able to stop. It's not April 1, so I'll have to assume she is serious.

 

[AndyLL]

From what I have found, each disease had been virtually eliminated decades before the introduction of the relevant vaccine; through improved hygiene, better nutrition, clean drinking water and improved sanitation and health care. Basically, as people's overall health and immune systems improved, they didn't get sick. Check out reliable sources such as the Lancet, WHO and UNICE for graphs that show vaccinations were not the reason for the decline in the diseases.

I'm not surprised to see these statements. It's a common refrain from the anti-vaccine people.

I'm amused that the post used the WHO as a source to back up these statements. The WHO believes their vaccine policies worldwide has led to the eradication of smallpox and polio. They have 1000s of reports from the years they went into various countries and did blanket immunizations for smallpox and tracked quarter after quarter the results until they considered the region small pox free.

For those that want to research NNii is a good start. (http://www.immunizationinfo.org ) They are not funded by the Government or the pharmaceutical companies.

While pro vaccine they footnote all their claims so you can go to the source. Do not believe websites that make claims but do not footnote their sources.

However you have to be careful because sometimes you will see attributations that are completely bogus like the post I quoted.

If you truly want to research the issue you have to delve into the studies themselves and quite honestly most lay people are not able to do so.

While browsing the NNii site I came across another website. While I did not research this website to see who runs it I did come across an interesting page. It talks about the links between autism and vaccines. It mentions (and summarizes) the 1 study that linked autism and vaccines, 2 studies that disprove the notion, and several studies talking about autism research in general. http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/4038myth.pdf (page 5)

Getting the names/sources of the original studies will give the research a starting point.

I was fascinated by the autism ‘Home Movie Study’ I would have never thought of that idea in a million years. I hope to look closer at what they did.

Andy