Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And kids died from measles. All of the newer vaccines are for illnesses that can kill children. The names of the illnesses may not be as familiar to you, but they are not trivial. Concern about "the number and amount" of vaccines is misplaced and based on theories of immunology concocted by the anti-vax crowd that are totally fallacious.
I don't think that was the point of that part of CharlotteGal's post. The point was, as I see it, that omigawd said in a post
Quote:
Gee, what happened to the generations and generations of kids who got all the immunizations and never "caught" autism? duh.
Generations and generations of people have NOT been vaccinated the same way kids are now, so it's not right to "duh" people when you don't have your facts straight.
The fact that kids died from measles was not in dispute, nor was it discussed that vaccines are bad, and nobody stated that the illnesses vaccinated against are trivial, in that particular post.
I don't think that was the point of that part of CharlotteGal's post. The point was, as I see it, that omigawd said in a post Generations and generations of people have NOT been vaccinated the same way kids are now, so it's not right to "duh" people when you don't have your facts straight.
The fact that kids died from measles was not in dispute, nor was it discussed that vaccines are bad, and nobody stated that the illnesses vaccinated against are trivial, in that particular post.
I interpreted CharlotteGal's post to represent a concern about the increased number of vaccines. If that is not what she intended, I hope she will clarify her position.
I don't think that was the point of that part of CharlotteGal's post. The point was, as I see it, that omigawd said in a post Generations and generations of people have NOT been vaccinated the same way kids are now, so it's not right to "duh" people when you don't have your facts straight.
The fact that kids died from measles was not in dispute, nor was it discussed that vaccines are bad, and nobody stated that the illnesses vaccinated against are trivial, in that particular post.
Many people have disputed that measles is a serious disease, on this thread and others, inclduing threads on Politics and Other Controversies. The anti-vaccine literature is full of BS stating that pertussis is just like a "bad cold", that "not that many" died and/or were paralyzed from polio, etc. Maybe not in a specific post you are referring to, but it's all over the place.
Many people have disputed that measles is a serious disease, on this thread and others, inclduing threads on Politics and Other Controversies. The anti-vaccine literature is full of BS stating that pertussis is just like a "bad cold", that "not that many" died and/or were paralyzed from polio, etc. Maybe not in a specific post you are referring to, but it's all over the place.
I totally agree that many people dispute it, and I wouldn't be surprised about anything anybody says in the Politics and Other Controversies forum, but I don't see it on this thread.
I was a child of the 60's, so I remember iron lungs and kids walking around with braces from polio, and I got the measles and the mumps and am fully aware there were many serious complications from what people consider "simple childhood diseases", so I'm definitely with you on that.
IMO, the broader picture here, is not the use/non use of vaccines, but the issue that a Medical Doctor who has now been outed as a fraud and a quack, had a study published in The Lancet, the equivalent of the Journal of the American Medical Association - which led to 10 years of fears and doubts on the part of a lot of parents who had the relatively simple act of getting your child immunized turned into a minefield of research and worry over the pros and cons of doing so.
How did a Dr, who as part of the medical community we a told to trust on one hand, but be personally responsible for making our decisions about our children on the other - get this thing published and then get away with perpertrating this fraud on the general public at all? How did this get so out of hand that it even got to this point where vaccination rates have gone down and children and their parents have suffered as a result? Is it the Doctor's fault, the Parent's fault, or the Media's fault?
For those of us without the benefit of medical training, I think this has been one of the most unnecessarily stressful things I've had to deal with as far as keeping my kid safe goes. DD didn't start talking until late, so I worried for no reason that perhaps my decision to vaccinate was causing a delay. I'm really quite angry about the whole thing.
I can't speak for the Lancet. A lot of these journals will publish research articles, but that doesn't make the research valid; the research has to be duplicated, and triplicated, and quadruplicated, you get the drift before it's considered accepted. Generally there is supposed to be some peer review, so that the research structure is valid and so on. I don't know if the Lancet did or didn't do this. It's sometimes hard to detect a lie at first glance; e.g. that these kids were all supposedly 'normal' until their MMR. That's why research needs to be repeated before it's accepted as truth.
I can't speak for the Lancet. A lot of these journals will publish research articles, but that doesn't make the research valid; the research has to be duplicated, and triplicated, and quadruplicated, you get the drift before it's considered accepted. Generally there is supposed to be some peer review, so that the research structure is valid and so on. I don't know if the Lancet did or didn't do this. It's sometimes hard to detect a lie at first glance; e.g. that these kids were all supposedly 'normal' until their MMR. That's why research needs to be repeated before it's accepted as truth.
Thanks for understanding it from a lay parent's perspective. I appreciate that. I think it sometimes gets lost on the medical community that we have to take a leap of faith about certain things. I'm sure the anecdotal "evidence" from the parents that their kids were effected didn't help, and was instrumental in sustaining the lie, although you can't blame them for connecting the dots and ultimately perpetuating this scam.
It's a shame, because it really does bring ill repute on research as a whole, and I'm sure the medical community at large, who I have a great deal of respect for, including yourself and suzy_q, are probably not too happy about it either.
IMO, the broader picture here, is not the use/non use of vaccines, but the issue that a Medical Doctor who has now been outed as a fraud and a quack, had a study published in The Lancet, the equivalent of the Journal of the American Medical Association - which led to 10 years of fears and doubts on the part of a lot of parents who had the relatively simple act of getting your child immunized turned into a minefield of research and worry over the pros and cons of doing so.
How did a Dr, who as part of the medical community we a told to trust on one hand, but be personally responsible for making our decisions about our children on the other - get this thing published and then get away with perpertrating this fraud on the general public at all? How did this get so out of hand that it even got to this point where vaccination rates have gone down and children and their parents have suffered as a result? Is it the Doctor's fault, the Parent's fault, or the Media's fault?
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
It's a shame, because it really does bring ill repute on research as a whole, and I'm sure the medical community at large, who I have a great deal of respect for, including yourself and suzy_q, are probably not too happy about it either.
All very good points. There are rotten apples in every profession, and this man has single-handedly caused the greatest mistrust in the medical profession amongst parents than anyone else, and that is a very great shame.
You know, everyone can get real snarky about parents who had their babies in the 10 years or so, and have been concerned about this, and have your fun doing it - but if you were a new parent in these times, when all you heard was that 1 out of 110 kids has autism, and nobody has a clue why, and there's tons of media bru-ha-ha about how the new vaccines may be causing it - it could be the number, it could be the mercury, it could be the combos - and you have to take your very tiny baby in for multiple shots and then watch them like a hawk for all of the signs that something may be up with them - then you would know what a terrifying decision it is to do so and may not be so smug and I-told-you-so about it.
Common sense tells a person that it isn't the immunizations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkb0305
It is frustrating now to know that we STILL don't know what's causing it.
All the chemicals people use every day. But then, people would have to take personal responsibility for what happens to their children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nana053
For anyone who doesn't think parents had to worry about autism years ago, that was only because there was no publicity about the condition. Autism has been around forever. The *epidemic* is not an *epidemic* - it has to do with better diagnosis mostly. As the autism dx has gone up, the diagnosis of mental retardation has gone down. The dx will be changing, also, in the new DSM. For parents, be glad you live now when treatments are better and parents are not *blamed* for the child's condition. Back in the 1960s, the cause was *refrigerator mothers.* Can you imagine living with that? Note that other conditions have also *looked* like they have become more common because we found new ways to diagnosing them that detected them earlier. See examples in the second article below.
It IS an epidemic. "Normal" USED to be epidemic. "Normal USED to have the wide spectrum and autism, ADHD, ADD and all the other labels used, USED to be pinpoints.
Now normal is a pinpoint and all the others, including autism, ADHD and ADD are epidemic in their wide spectrums.
Common sense tells a person that it isn't the immunizations.
Really? Without the benefit of hindsight, kindly tell me exactly what common sense you used to figure that out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakija9311
All the chemicals people use every day. But then, people would have to take personal responsibility for what happens to their children.
This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. What chemical SPECIFICALLY is it that you know for sure, that we are all not taking personal responsibility for using, that causes autism. People who investigated the vaccine/autism link for themselves WERE taking personal responsibility for their children, but you as good as just said they didn't have any common sense. But seeing as you HAVE the answer, please tell us what it is.
All the chemicals people use every day. But then, people would have to take personal responsibility for what happens to their children.
It would be impossible to avoid all chemicals that we are all exposed to every day, and nearly impossible to pin point which one or what combination is causing it. To imply that people who don't do this are being irresponsible parents is quite a stretch.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
