Vaccine- Autism link proven to be a FRAUD!

[Halbleib1]

Well, correlation can sometimes "imply" causation, but I agree that we still don't have absolute proof that in those instances the vaccine CAUSED the autism. But, I think it is pretty universally accepted that some children have adverse reactions caused by vaccines and that in at least some instances those adverse reactions can cause autism-like symptoms. I know at least one family recently recovered in the vaccine court on this theory but the court was very careful to state that she had an underlying mitrochondrial disorder that was also a contributing cause of the adverse reaction.

To be clear, I think you would be nuts to forgo vaccines if you didn't have some other family history, but I do think it is wise for families with a history of autism to be very careful about the environmental factors to which you expose your child -- including considering delaying/forgoing some of the non-essential vaccines, like chicken pox.

My son had all of his vaccines up until he received the first dose of MMR. At that point he lost all speech and had to relearn every last word that he had ever spoken. Was it from the MMR vaccine or from one of the other 4 that he had at the same time? Maybe/Maybe not. We will never know for sure. Could it have possibly been from the wrong combination being given all at once? Again maybe/maybe not. Even the Drs. can not give us that answer. It is also possible it is not related to vaccines at all but to his galactosemia. Am I willing to take that chance and to continue on with vaccines? Absolutely not. He is 6 years old and still struggles with his speech. It is getting better but it is a slow process and a very frustrating one for him.

I have done much research on vaccines since this happened with him and after reading the ingredient list imparticularly I have decided that for my children vaccines are not the way to go at this time.

 

[Halbleib1]

The reason these diseases are uncommon is BECAUSE people vaccinate (in the past and now). Small pox has been eradicated due to vaccines. People were as scared of that as they were of AIDS in the early 80s. Small pox could wipe out entire towns in a matter of days. We don't have to worry about that any more due to vaccines.

Even 50 years ago - polio was feared.

As for chickenpox, a very good friend growing up ended up with complications for chicken pox and was in the hospital for 2 months, most of it in the ICU. He was then on bed rest for several more weeks. The whole time they were not sure if he would live or die never mind lasting complications.

I agree but you have to look at the here and now of it. You have to decide what is best for your child today. Back in the 80s when I was vaccinated we did not have as many as we have today. Also they did not combine them like they do today. Also I believe they put more research into a vaccine before giving it out to the masses unlike today where they rush it to market. I believe today it is more about making money than it is about saving lives unfortunately.

 

[Halbleib1]

As I said earlier ultimately it is up to each parent to decide what is right for their children. There really is no right or wrong answer. I do not judge those that choose to vaccinate and I respect their right to choose. What is right for your child may not be right for mine. Every child is different. Every situation is different. All I ask in return is the same treatment. This world would be a whole lot better if everyone treated each other the way that they would like to be treated in return. In the end we all want the same thing. We want our children to grow up healthy and happy.

 

[2Pirates2Princesses]

As I said earlier ultimately it is up to each parent to decide what is right for their children. There really is no right or wrong answer. I do not judge those that choose to vaccinate and I respect their right to choose. What is right for your child may not be right for mine. Every child is different. Every situation is different. All I ask in return is the same treatment. This world would be a whole lot better if everyone treated each other the way that they would like to be treated in return. In the end we all want the same thing. We want our children to grow up healthy and happy.

I certainly understand where you are coming from, especially as a mother of a child with severe autism and another child that developed speech delays after developing "normally" for 19 months. It can be hard for those who don't have children with these issues (not saying that there are those that don't) to understand where families like us are coming from which is why it may be better that issues like this aren't posted on a Disney based online forum because so many people have so many different passionate personal beliefs and it becomes a back and forth type thread. It is certainly not like discussing why you like one WDW resort over another In my previous post I stated that I am not anti-vaccines as vaccines have and continue to save millions of lives; but there needs to be more done in the medical community and more in depth, biased free research with respect to the legitimate concerns over the current AAP recommended vaccination schedule for infants, how vaccines are manufactured, and the increasing number of combined immunizations.

 

[brymolmom]

As I said earlier ultimately it is up to each parent to decide what is right for their children. There really is no right or wrong answer. I do not judge those that choose to vaccinate and I respect their right to choose. What is right for your child may not be right for mine. Every child is different. Every situation is different. All I ask in return is the same treatment. This world would be a whole lot better if everyone treated each other the way that they would like to be treated in return. In the end we all want the same thing. We want our children to grow up healthy and happy.

Of course you respect those of us who vaccinate - as our choice is protecting your child from these diseases.

Unfortunately it is diffiucult to have the same understanding when what your choice does is potentially harm our children.

Not the same thing at all. So the same viewpoint cannot be expected.

If your choice HELPED our children (or all children), then I guess we would be coming from the same place.

 

[MommyBell08]

Of course you respect those of us who vaccinate - as our choice is protecting your child from these diseases.

Unfortunately it is diffiucult to have the same understanding when what your choice does is potentially harm our children.

Not the same thing at all. So the same viewpoint cannot be expected.

If your choice HELPED our children (or all children), then I guess we would be coming from the same place.[/QUOTE

If you choose to vaccinate your child based on that fact that it "protects your child from disease" then why worry about children that are not. The choice for someone else to not vaccinate is theirs. If you are worried about children that are not vaccinated "potentially harming" yours than keep worrying because 100% of that population will never be up to date with the recommended schedule. At lease not while Im around. Your first statement claims that vaccinations protect children from disease, so why would a child that was not vaccinated effect yours in any way, based on your claims?

 

[tlbwriter]

So if you were to look at it from your child's perspective can you honestly say they would be better off if they were to have damage from a vaccine than to take the slim risk that they would get one of these diseases and possibly die?

You're kind of implying that parents who choose to vaccinate haven't already considered this. That may not be what you meant, but it's what this statement makes me think. And if that's the case, I don't know what makes you think that parents who vaccinate are mindlessly following their doctors' advice any more than parents who chose not to vaccinate are mindlessly following the advice of experts like Jenny McCarthy.

Anyway. When I look at it from my child's perspective, and ask if she were better off with the SLIM risk of damage from a vaccine that protects her from a potentially deadly illness, I can honestly say yes.

 

[deegack]

Of course you respect those of us who vaccinate - as our choice is protecting your child from these diseases.

Unfortunately it is diffiucult to have the same understanding when what your choice does is potentially harm our children.

Not the same thing at all. So the same viewpoint cannot be expected.

If your choice HELPED our children (or all children), then I guess we would be coming from the same place.[/QUOTE

If you choose to vaccinate your child based on that fact that it "protects your child from disease" then why worry about children that are not. The choice for someone else to not vaccinate is theirs. If you are worried about children that are not vaccinated "potentially harming" yours than keep worrying because 100% of that population will never be up to date with the recommended schedule. At lease not while Im around. Your first statement claims that vaccinations protect children from disease, so why would a child that was not vaccinated effect yours in any way, based on your claims?

Because children don't get all their vaccines until they are several years old so they are still susceptible to the diseases. Also no vaccine is 100% effective for all children and some of the diseases can mutate and rendering the vaccine ineffective against that strain. In addition there are children who cannot receive vaccines due to allergy or other reasons. So we as a society rely on the herd to protect them. Just as the nonvaccinating parents are relying on a herd to protect their children.

 

[brymolmom]

[/QUOTE]
If you choose to vaccinate your child based on that fact that it "protects your child from disease" then why worry about children that are not. The choice for someone else to not vaccinate is theirs. If you are worried about children that are not vaccinated "potentially harming" yours than keep worrying because 100% of that population will never be up to date with the recommended schedule. At lease not while Im around. Your first statement claims that vaccinations protect children from disease, so why would a child that was not vaccinated effect yours in any way, based on your claims?[/QUOTE]

You must not have read the entire thread or researched enough. Vaccines aren't 100%...We can only give our child the best chance possible and then unfortunately they can be exposed by people who have chosen against protection. And obviously not all children can have vaccines (too young or too sick or other) - so I'm not sure how you can possibly think that your decison won't perhaps negatively affect others. Especially the very sick and the very young who are the most vunerable but their parents cannot give them what might be life saving....These are the ones who suffer the most. The most innocent.

 

[tartemis]

Of course you respect those of us who vaccinate - as our choice is protecting your child from these diseases.

Unfortunately it is diffiucult to have the same understanding when what your choice does is potentially harm our children.

Not the same thing at all. So the same viewpoint cannot be expected.

If your choice HELPED our children (or all children), then I guess we would be coming from the same place.

Seriously? Look, my kids vaccines are up to date (well my 3 year olds are, my 1 year old has a milk and egg allergy so we are delying the MMR at the advice of our allergist).

And, in general, I disagree with parents who choose not to vaccinate. But if my child or a close relative of my child had a serious adverse reaction to a vaccine there is no way we would vaccinate.

I get really frustrated by this because there are too many nutjobs that are refusing to vaccinate with no legitimate basis, but there are a very small proportion of people (like the prior poster) who, in my view, are making a justifiable choice in delaying or forgoing vaccines. And, there is nothing wrong with relying on the herd mentality for those individuals. You shouldn't lump everyone together in your crusade -- it is counterproductive.

 

[brymolmom]

Seriously? Look, my kids vaccines are up to date (well my 3 year olds are, my 1 year old as a milk and egg allergy so we are delying the MMR at the advice of our allergist).

And, in general, I disagree with parents who choose not to vaccinate. But if my child or a close relative of my child had a serious adverse reaction to a vaccine there is no way we would vaccinate.

I get really frustrated by this because there are too many nutjobs that are refusing to vaccinate with no legitimate basis, but there are a very small proportion of people (like the prior poster) who, in my view, are making a justifiable choice in delaying or forgoing vaccines. And, there is nothing wrong with really on the herd mentality for those individuals. You shouldn't lump everyone together in your crusade -- it is counterproductive.

Nothing in my post states that I have any negative feelings toward those who CAN'T vaccinate. It is those who choose not to, like you said, who hurt the rest. I am in total agreement with you.

I have a similar view on blood donation...Those who can't - fine (and by can't - I don't include 'i don't like needles' - of COURSE you don't, nor do those of us who donate for you I mean for medical reasons, etc). Those who choose not to - not a huge fan of that decision.

 

[princessmom29]

Just as parents are not required to tell you that they do vaccinate either. It works both ways. If you want the privacy of those that do not vaccinate to be disclosed than you need to be willing to give up your right to privacy as well. And be prepared because if you give up your right to privacy on this matter you will be asked to do so on others as well.

Actually here in PA you do have to answer in writing why you are asking for a religious exception. I know because I had to do so in order for my son to enter cyber school.

Also you can take a medical exception as well and for this you need to get a form filled out by your Dr.

I really don't care who knows my child has had her shots. We are not information horders in genral. My life is pretty much and open book. I don't hide things. That is just not me.

Than you had better keep your child home and in a bubble at all times because you never know what type of disease you are going to run into outside of that bubble. Esp. at Disney World and other tourist attractions as well as on airplanes where people are coming from all over the world. There are many many diseases out there that we do not even have vaccinations for that are just as deadly. The chances that your child is going to get one of them? Small just as small as them getting a disease that we do vaccinate for from a child that is not vaccinated. Also even us adults do not have all of the vaccinations that children can get today. There are more vaccinations available today than ever before. You yourself could be just as infectious to an infant as that unvaccinated child.

And just because someone is vaccinated does not mean that they can not still get that disease and spread it. When I was in first grade I got the chicken pox and I was vaccinated for it. I could have passed that disease on to an infant that was not vaccinated just as easily as a child who was never vaccinated could have.

Point being an infant can be just as vulnerable from a vaccinated child as from an unvaccinated child or adult for that matter.

Well, of course. Everyone is exposed to disease every day just living thier lives, but if there is something simple that i can do to prevent exposure to a potentially deadly illness, why would I not do that?

I agree but you have to look at the here and now of it. You have to decide what is best for your child today. Back in the 80s when I was vaccinated we did not have as many as we have today. Also they did not combine them like they do today. Also I believe they put more research into a vaccine before giving it out to the masses unlike today where they rush it to market. I believe today it is more about making money than it is about saving lives unfortunately.

Agian, What happens whe everyone chooses not to vaccinate and these diseases start ravaging our children? I personally look on it a s more than a bit selfcenterd to say I am choosing ont to vaccinate MY child, but I want everyone else to keep doing it so that the incidence of the diseases my children are not protected agianst says low. This is essentially what those who choose not tovaccinate are doing. They are counting on those of us that do vaccinate to keep doing so, so that they can choose not to.

 

[tlbwriter]

I believe today it is more about making money than it is about saving lives unfortunately.

I assume you know how much doctors and pharmaceutical companies make on vaccines as opposed to the money they'd make if those vaccines weren't available and they were treating sick people instead. Would you mind sharing that info?

 

[MommyBell08]

Because children don't get all their vaccines until they are several years old so they are still susceptible to the diseases. Also no vaccine is 100% effective for all children and some of the diseases can mutate and rendering the vaccine ineffective against that strain. In addition there are children who cannot receive vaccines due to allergy or other reasons. So we as a society rely on the herd to protect them. Just as the nonvaccinating parents are relying on a herd to protect their children.

I am a nonvaccinating parent, so I can speak for myself. I don't rely on vaccinated children to keep my child healthy. I was just at my In-laws who are all very vaccinated and always sick with things they are "preventing". I am very aware that vaccinated children can get and spread the very thing they are vaccinated for. I rely on my child's immune system, after breastfeeding and proper nutrition, as well as God for his health. I know this will not prevent him from getting sick, nor will a vaccination, and that's a fact, although both have pro's and con's. God is in ultimate control. I will make the decisions I feel best for my child/children. I'm sure we are all just trying to do the best we can for our children, and its not a black and white.

 

[mrsr2ro]

Wow - never expected to see this debate on DIS!!

I have to say after spending time on pregnancy/baby forums on and off for the last 7 years -- it's usually the non vacc. in the majority. This is the first time I've seen more supportive than against.

 

[jodifla]

Wow - never expected to see this debate on DIS!!

I have to say after spending time on pregnancy/baby forums on and off for the last 7 years -- it's usually the non vacc. in the majority. This is the first time I've seen more supportive than against.

But those boards are populated by a certain subset of parents.

In fact, most parents in the general population vaccinate. I always marvel that other people try to encourage others not to vaccinate. I can see why certain parents would not vaccinate, if they've had a bad experience with their child or close family. That makes sense.

But when the vaccination level drops below the level of protecting the herd, you are going to see things get ugly. And "choice" is going to fly out the window in favor of public health.

 

[princessmom29]

I am a nonvaccinating parent, so I can speak for myself. I don't rely on vaccinated children to keep my child healthy. I was just at my In-laws who are all very vaccinated and always sick with things they are "preventing". I am very aware that vaccinated children can get and spread the very thing they are vaccinated for. I rely on my child's immune system, after breastfeeding and proper nutrition, as well as God for his health. I know this will not prevent him from getting sick, nor will a vaccination, and that's a fact, although both have pro's and con's. God is in ultimate control. I will make the decisions I feel best for my child/children. I'm sure we are all just trying to do the best we can for our children, and its not a black and white.

Wait, they are "always" sick with things that they have been given a vaccination for, or just sick with a cold, asthma, flu, whatever. If they are constantly having outbreaks of things like measels and whooping cough, or even punemonia and chicken pox, there is defintely a larger health concern no being addressed. IF they are just sick with common ilnesses, the issue is not wether they are vaccinated or not, but something else in thier environment.

You are wrong on the bolded part. Vaccinations don't prevent all ilnesses, but for 97% of people who take them, they are effective in preventing the diseases they protect agianst. A vaccine can keep a child from getting sick.

 

[Hannathy]

I agree but you have to look at the here and now of it. You have to decide what is best for your child today. Back in the 80s when I was vaccinated we did not have as many as we have today. Also they did not combine them like they do today. Also I believe they put more research into a vaccine before giving it out to the masses unlike today where they rush it to market. I believe today it is more about making money than it is about saving lives unfortunately.

I can not let this statement go..... I generally try to stay out of these cause I just end up getting points BUT this got to me so much.

Please go read a book on the development of the polio vaccine and Salk before making generalities like this. the idea that they put more research into the effects of vaccines before giving them in the past is laughable. They were desperate (something the current generation of parents who don't vaccinate truly do not understand) and they needed something and they did not have time to do the years and years of trials they do now , nor did the have the money hungry lawsuit happy lawyers and public they do now. Much of the Salk vaccine was tested on children without clear known results. The public who volunteered their children were very brave and willing to make a sacrifice for the general good which isn't there today. Of course if your child caught Polio it was very likely they could/would die.

It is very easy for the non vaccinaters to spout off things because they rely on the herd immunity and the excellent health care in the US. I'd like to see them feel the same way if they had to take their child to a 3rd world country with no herd immunity or decent health care and see if they feel the same way. Expose your child to rampant measles or whooping cough and see if your so called principals still stand.

 

[princessmom29]

I can not let this statement go..... I generally try to stay out of these cause I just end up getting points BUT this got to me so much.

Please go read a book on the development of the polio vaccine and Salk before making generalities like this. the idea that they put more research into the effects of vaccines before giving them in the past is laughable. They were desperate (something the current generation of parents who don't vaccinate truly do not understand) and they needed something and they did not have time to do the years and years of trials they do now , nor did the have the money hungry lawsuit happy lawyers and public they do now. Much of the Salk vaccine was tested on children without clear known results. The public who volunteered their children were very brave and willing to make a sacrifice for the general good which isn't there today. Of course if your child caught Polio it was very likely they could/would die.

It is very easy for the non vaccinaters to spout off things because they rely on the herd immunity and the excellent health care in the US. I'd like to see them feel the same way if they had to take their child to a 3rd world country with no herd immunity or decent health care and see if they feel the same way. Expose your child to rampant measles or whooping cough and see if your so called principals still stand.

Very well put. We were discussing this yeaterday, and several people who remeber Polio were commenting on just that. Until you have lived it, you have NO comprehension of that kind of fear, and thanks to mass vaccination, we don't have to. Wether they want to admit it or not, I think parents who choose not to vaccinate ARE relying on herd immunity to keep thier chilren safe. iti s just the reality of the situation. Everyone around you is vaccianted, so you are less likely to get the disease. You can likely get away with not vaccianteing your child and not loose them to something preventable. I would be willing to lay bets that many would change their mind when faced with a massive measels or polio outbreak, which WOULD happen without mass vacciantion, make NO mistake.

 

[Lauren79]

As a medical technologist at a small urban hospital, I have been following the story of Dr. Andrew Wakefield for years. This man published a paper in a medical journal (Lancet) that claimed to prove that their was a causative connective between the combination MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) and the onset of autism in young children, who until they received the vaccine had been developmentally normal. The money that paid for the "research" (research is in quotations because it was doctored research) came from a company that wanted to manufacture the MMR vaccine as three individual vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella. If Dr. Andrew Wakefield could convince parents that the combination vaccine (the MMR vaccine) was a medical threat to their children, he would stand to make a very large profit from the medical company manufacturing the individual vaccines as he was guaranteed a share of the profits. When this was discovered, his article was retracted from the edition of lancet that it was published in, and 10 of the 13 co-authors removed their names from the article. He was then stripped of his license to practice medicine and he absconded to the United States, attempting to gain notoriety here (he has a new audience). In the meantime, the terrified and sometimes innocently ignorant parents of young children in Europe, stop vaccinating their children at all or at other than recommended time limits for measles, mumps and rubella. My cousin is a social worker in London where breakouts of measles and mumps are now killing groups of young children. The scare has spread to the United States where parents have also stopped vaccinating their children for other important childhood disease. Haemophilus influenzae b (hib) is once again killing young children in the United States through meningitis. Unfortunately, when parents don't understand the immunology involved behind vaccination, and they are given the choice as to whether to vaccinate or not, that leaves the rest of us hoping our children aren't affected by other people's choices. The ripple effect of Dr. Andrew Wakefield's actions has certainly been seen by the medical community and felt by the parents of children who are dying from eradicated disease. The resurgence of smallpox could be next...then we all suffer (not just the children). What the common person fails to understand is that bacteria and viruses are not stagnant entities, they change genetically on a regular basis (the flu virus is a perfect example). If we can't get a handle on the things that have been eradicated for years, what happens when our compromised immune systems encounter the "superbugs" of the future. I am completely for a parents right to choose the best for their child, but when those choices are based on faulty reasoning, then I am heartbroken, as well as concerned for the rest of us and our children.