 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Family Forum / Parenting / Children's Health / June 2006Measles, Mumps, Rubella Vaccine
I continuously hear controversy surrounding the MMR vaccine, and I have looked into the issue and the best that I can come up with is that the triple shot is safe for most kids, but some have problems with it. That is enough for me to caution on the side of safety, and I am considering getting single vaccine shots of measles, mumps and rubella for my infant. I am having a hard time finding anyone who carries the single shots. Can anyone offer and recomendations or advise as to how to go about getting single shots? Thanks. In misc.kids.pregnancy yossarian@catch22.net wrote: : I continuously hear controversy surrounding the MMR vaccine, and I have : looked into the issue and the best that I can come up with is that the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] : offer and recomendations or advise as to how to go about getting single : shots? Thanks. There is some conflicted evidence that shows that combining measles and mumps can create a problem in some children. There are other studies that purport to say that such a connection does not exist. There is a great deal of shouting and little clear proof on either side. There are also other "explanations" for the MMR problems that have since been corrected (mercury preservative in the vaccine). This all leads to a very unclear conclusions about what the problem is, and if there is one. In fact, proponents of both sides will blast this post as not sufficiently supporting their point of view. I cannot offer advice either way that I am convinced about. I will say that we delayed the vaccine until almost 3 yo, then used the combination shot at that time. Larry larry, that is what we are leaning towards---possible delaying until 2-2.5. we may give them sooner if we could give single shots spaced out by several months. as they say, the truth generally lies somewhere in between. I think that mmr is linked with autism in some children. I wish that the appropriate people would start behaving like scientists (that would involve throwing their egos aside as well as influence from others such as big pharma and politics) and start researching questions other than if MMR is safe. It is clearly not for some children. Why is this the case? > as they say, the truth generally lies somewhere in between. I think that > mmr is linked with autism in some children. Be very careful when you say this... MMR is linked with autism in some children only because in every population of autistic children, you will find a good percentage with MMR vaccinations. That means nothing! > I wish that the appropriate > people would start behaving like scientists (that would involve throwing > their egos aside as well as influence from others such as big pharma and > politics) and start researching questions other than if MMR is safe. It is > clearly not for some children. Why is this the case? When you say "safe", are you talking about allergic reactions or autism? The issue of allergic reactions has already been researched quite rigorously. As to autism, there is no good of causation. The fact that ONE paper initially that was biased and *intended* to show a relationship got parents all up in arms just goes to show the desperation of parents - understandably - when their child is diagnosed with something as serious as autism. -- Anita -- agreed. please see my other reply. In fact there are 2 other papers that appear to support Wakefield's claims (I am not vouching for the quality of those studies at this point, as I have only seen summaries of results in the mainstream press). >I continuously hear controversy surrounding the MMR vaccine, and I have > looked into the issue and the best that I can come up with is that the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > offer and recomendations or advise as to how to go about getting single > shots? Thanks. Read this: http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-summary.htm The only reason there is controversy is because a lawyer paid a less than honest doctor to come up with specific "research results". Because of that there is now a serious mumps outbreak in the UK and a serious increase in measles. Also think about this: Starting when your child is about a year old you have a choice of 1 MMR or 3 single shots ... and repeat when he/she is 5 years old. Hmmm... 2 jabs instead of 6? For no good reason. thanks for the article. I had come to a personal conclusion that the MMR vaccine was probably safe for most kids. However, a new study out of New York School of Medicine and Wake Forest University has again suggested some type of link between mmr and autism ( see this link: http://www.news-medical.net/?id=18137 ). At this point, there seems to be flawed designs in just about every study that I have looked at concerning this issue, and although this newest study has yet to be published or peer reviewed, it suggests some relationship between mmr and autism. I believe the results were presented at a conference this week, but I have yet to hear any more about it. > thanks for the article. I had come to a personal conclusion that the MMR > vaccine was probably safe for most kids. However, a new study out of New [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > hear > any more about it. Yes, there has been research showing possible links between the MMR and autism, but as you say they have been flawed and there's no concrete proof for the link (that I know of, if anyone knows better, please prove me wrong). One thing to keep in mind about the MMR is that the vaccine is grown in egg (or the egg embryo) so if your child is allergic to eggs it is better for the vaccine to be administered in hospital where any adverse reaction can be monitored and dealt with, rather than in a general practitioner's surgery where possible anaphylaxis cannot be dealt with. But that's if your child is allergic to eggs. but there is no concrete proof that there isn't a link either. correlational research suggests that there is a relationship. any idea on how to get single shots? > but there is no concrete proof that there isn't a link either. > correlational research suggests that there is a relationship. You will never find proof that there is no link other than epidemiological research which shows that there is none. > any idea on how to get single shots? > thanks for the article. I had come to a personal conclusion that the MMR > vaccine was probably safe for most kids. However, a new study out of New [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > hear > any more about it. The results that were presented were only a "poster presentation". They have not been accepted to any peer reviewed journal, and the "investigators" are trying to scam for more funding (yes, the word is "scam")... also the folks promoting it are too closely related to the guy who is under investigation in the UK for taking money from a lawyer for specific results. Oh... and there was no control group. Read this: http://www.kevinleitch.co.uk/wp/?p=375 There is not control group, so you can't infer causation. But just because you cannot infer causation does not preclude a causal relationship from existing. Give me a methodologically sound study on this issue that offers definitive answers, because I haven't seen one as of yet. > There is not control group, so you can't infer causation. But just > because > you cannot infer causation does not preclude a causal relationship from > existing. Give me a methodologically sound study on this issue that > offers > definitive answers, because I haven't seen one as of yet. Exactly WHAT methodologically sound study are you basing YOUR opinion that the MMR causes autism (and it better not be the one by Wakefield... since it has been withdrawn and not replicated, not even by Krigsman nor Walker)? http://www.jr2.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/Vaccines/noMMR.html http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/113/2/259 http://adc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/88/8/666 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/110/5/957 http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/reprint/325/7361/419.pdf http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/324/7334/393/DC1 To get the full text of the following papers will require that you go to a library with a subscription to the journals (many universities and several larger municipal libraries have access to the full papers): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstra ct&list_uids=15364187 http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/347/19/1477 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/108/4/e58 There are a lot of people out there--I know of one personally--who believe (although anecdotally) that mmr has caused damage--regressive autism--in their children. I don't claim to know if there is a true relationship (and I truly hope that there is not), but I am starting to err on the side of caution and believe that for some children, there is a relationship. That relationship may be very complex and multifaceted--we won't begin to understand this relationship as long as we keep fighting over whether the vaccine is safe or not. At this point, there is huge liability (in many ways, not just financial--the public trust will further be eroded in public health, government and medicine) if the vaccine is found to be unsafe (remember the polio vaccine fiasco). Let's face it, measles is a nasty thing and without a vaccine many will suffer/die. However, I am not willing accept the possibility that while vaccine may be good for the herd, it will hurt (in terrible ways) some. Why not look at why the attenuated virus of the vaccine occurs in children with autism who have had the MMR? For one, I would also look at for the presence of the virus in vaccinated vs unvaccinated children with autism and bowel problems, those with only bowel problems, those with only autism and healthy controls. This type of study should elicit relationships if they exist and serve as the basis for theory generation. Science is not about fighting, egos, politics, money, (am I being too idealistic?) etc. and this whole MMR controversy has slid into a polarized shouting match that unfortunately obfuscates what I believe are the real issues and precludes the possibility of finding meaningful answers. Wakefield is being vilified in the British Press, perhaps deservedly; but we must realize that flawed design or not (it is the only thing we have at this point) 2 other independent studies have generally supported Wakefield's claim. I remember hearing awhile back that the Japanese put of mandatory vaccination until age 2 and their autism rates dropped to baseline levels. Perhaps I am wrong here. > There are a lot of people out there--I know of one personally--who believe > (although anecdotally) that mmr has caused damage--regressive autism--in > their children. I There's a lot of people out there who think the Freemasons are Satanists and rule the world, too. Michelle Flutist In misc.kids.pregnancy Michelle J. Haines <mhaines@nanc.com> wrote: :> There are a lot of people out there--I know of one personally--who believe :> (although anecdotally) that mmr has caused damage--regressive autism--in :> their children. I : There's a lot of people out there who think the Freemasons are : Satanists and rule the world, too. : Michelle : Flutist Naaah, it's the Illuninati. And they are headed by the families of the founders of all the big Eurpoean (and American) banks, and they have members on the board of every major multinational corporation. Further they choose the leader to be either elected or appointed for most of the nations of the earth, and all the wars fought are solely for the enrichment of this group of people. Sheeh, I though everybody knew that! :-) Now, sarcasm(?) aside, I thought your reposnse to yossarian's comment out of context was quite unfair, and the possible research he suggested would go a LONG way to answering the question in a more factual manner. Larry > Now, sarcasm(?) aside, I thought your reposnse to yossarian's comment > out of context was quite unfair, and the possible research he suggested > would go a LONG way to answering the question in a more factual manner. I addressed that in other posts. However, my point in this one is that "a lot of people" believe in all kinds of stupid, nutty, crazy, odd-ball things that have not a shred of proof behind them, and knowing them personally doesn't make that any different. So saying, "A lot of people believe and I know one.." is evidence of nothing at all. Michelle Flutist In misc.kids.pregnancy Michelle J. Haines <mhaines@nanc.com> wrote: :> Now, sarcasm(?) aside, I thought your reposnse to yossarian's comment :> out of context was quite unfair, and the possible research he suggested :> would go a LONG way to answering the question in a more factual manner. : I addressed that in other posts. : However, my point in this one is that "a lot of people" believe in all : kinds of stupid, nutty, crazy, odd-ball things that have not a shred : of proof behind them, and knowing them personally doesn't make that : any different. So saying, "A lot of people believe and I know one.." : is evidence of nothing at all. : Michelle : Flutist Yes, but the illuminati thing is true! ;-) Larry > In misc.kids.pregnancy Michelle J. Haines <mhaines@nanc.com> wrote: > :> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Larry Thank you for giving me the first laugh of the day (and it's what, 9:30 p.m.?). Good comeback... Caledonia > There are a lot of people out there--I know of one personally--who believe > (although anecdotally) that mmr has caused damage--regressive autism--in > their children. But there is no evidence nor science to support it.... and the following diatribe does show any real evidence.... > I don't claim to know if there is a true relationship That is obvious. (and > I truly hope that there is not), but I am starting to err on the side of > caution and believe that for some children, there is a relationship. That [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > vaccination until age 2 and their autism rates dropped to baseline levels. > Perhaps I am wrong here. Yes you are... and I even gave the paper with their experience with the MMR (it is different than either the UK or USA version) and autism. It was the FIRST one on the list (which basically proves you did not click on any of the actual science research links provided): http://www.jr2.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/booth/Vaccines/noMMR.html In the future start your research at www.pubmed.gov, not with "what you hear". that does seem to be solid study--I looked at those studies--I must have missed that one somehow. > > I don't claim to know if there is a true relationship > > That is obvious. No need to get nasty! > There are a lot of people out there--I know of one personally--who believe > (although anecdotally) that mmr has caused damage--regressive autism--in > their children. For those who claim that their kids suffer from "regressive autism" I often ask them to prove that it exists. I don't claim to know if there is a true relationship (and > I truly hope that there is not), but I am starting to err on the side of > caution and believe that for some children, there is a relationship. That [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > health, government and medicine) if the vaccine is found to be unsafe > (remember the polio vaccine fiasco). VERY poor analogy. The OPV was discontinued when it was determined that the risks outweighed the benefits. Instead, the IPV was recommended as it provides sufficient protection in most of the Western world. For those going to areas where wild polio is still a massive problem, the OPV is strongly suggested before departing. Let's face it, measles is a nasty > thing and without a vaccine many will suffer/die. However, I am not willing > accept the possibility that while vaccine may be good for the herd, it will [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > generation. Science is not about fighting, egos, politics, money, (am I > being too idealistic?) etc. You are. In fact, ego is an important part of the scientific process. One researcher finds 'X' and the rest of them goes to see if that finding is valid...to knock the guy who found it. and this whole MMR controversy has slid into a > polarized shouting match that unfortunately obfuscates what I believe are > the real issues and precludes the possibility of finding meaningful answers. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > vaccination until age 2 and their autism rates dropped to baseline levels. > Perhaps I am wrong here. You are. Japan changed the start time for vaccinating from 3 months to two years and straight away their SIDS rate plummeted? "Delay of DPT immunisation until 2 years of age in Japan has resulted in a dramatic decline in adverse side effects. In the period of 1970-1974, when DPT vaccination was begun at 3 to 5 months of age, the Japanese national compensation system paid out claims for 57 permanent severe damage vaccine cases, and 37 deaths. During the ensuing six year period 1975-1980, when DPT injections were delayed to 24 months of age, severe reactions from the vaccine were reduced to a total of eight with three deaths. This represents an 85 to 90 percent reduction in severe cases of damage and death." Raymond Obomsawin, M.D. http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/vaccine_sids.htm > Japan changed the start time for vaccinating from 3 months to two years > and [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > total of eight with three deaths. This represents an 85 to 90 percent > reduction in severe cases of damage and death." Raymond Obomsawin, M.D. Thanks. That must have been what I was thinking about in an earlier reply--sids rate dropping. thanks for the links. it is my hope that these studies are right. however, studies that use statistical analyses on a general population is a poor way to identify relatively rare adverse outcomes, so I am not putting much weight behind them. perhaps these guys are quacks. I don't know. > perhaps these guys are quacks. I don't know. Who?... you did not use any quotes to indicate what you are responding to. But Bradstreet, Wakefield and Fudenberg are all quacks. And the owner of the whale.to website, John Scudamore, is a net-loon. yeah I was referring to the guys you named. the cdc has a nice summary of the research concerning this issue. >> perhaps these guys are quacks. I don't know. > > Who?... you did not use any quotes to indicate what you are responding to. > > But Bradstreet, Wakefield and Fudenberg are all quacks. And the owner of > the whale.to website, John Scudamore, is a net-loon. he would be a loon without the net. >>> perhaps these guys are quacks. I don't know. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > he would be a loon without the net. Did you see his page on dealing with "black lines"?... pure comedy gold! >>>> perhaps these guys are quacks. I don't know. >>> Who?... you did not use any quotes to indicate what you are responding [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Did you see his page on dealing with "black lines"?... pure comedy gold! I think he was born here: http://tinyurl.com/q5ekx >>>>> perhaps these guys are quacks. I don't know. >>>> Who?... you did not use any quotes to indicate what you are responding [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > http://tinyurl.com/q5ekx Sometimes it does seem like he emerges out from under a large rock. > thanks for the article. I had come to a personal conclusion that the MMR > vaccine was probably safe for most kids. However, a new study out of New [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > the results were presented at a conference this week, but I have yet to hear > any more about it. Same problem as with Wakefield's study. They're only looking at children they -know- to have autism. Not taking random samples from normal and autistic children, anonymously labeling them, and sending them to a lab to see which do and don't have measles in the gut. There's not even a number in any of these studies saying how common measles is in the normal population post-vaccination. Michelle Flutist great idea. someone should do this research. studies out there aren't blind (that I can recall). >> thanks for the article. I had come to a personal conclusion that the MMR >> vaccine was probably safe for most kids. However, a new study out of [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Same problem as with Wakefield's study. They're only looking at children > they -know- to have autism. AND the children were provided by the lawyer who was representing them in a lawsuit! Not taking random samples from > normal and autistic children, anonymously labeling them, and sending them > to a lab to see which do and don't have measles in the gut. There's not [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Michelle > Flutist ... More info: http://nhsblogdoc.blogspot.com/2006/06/measles-mmr-children-at-risk.html http://www.breakspearmedical.com/ in UK but MMR is ineffecitive and unsafe http://www.whale.to/vaccines/measles.html >I continuously hear controversy surrounding the MMR vaccine, and I have > looked into the issue and the best that I can come up with is that the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > offer and recomendations or advise as to how to go about getting single > shots? Thanks. > http://www.breakspearmedical.com/ in UK > > but MMR is ineffecitive and unsafe http://www.whale.to/vaccines/measles.html Are any of these peer reviewed? >> http://www.breakspearmedical.com/ in UK >> >> but MMR is ineffecitive and unsafe >> http://www.whale.to/vaccines/measles.html > > Are any of these peer reviewed? Yawn http://www.whale.to/w/journals1.html I din't know vaccine deaths were peer reviewed, or that you needed to peer review statistics that showe deaths had declined by 99.4% before vaccination, unless you want to peer review that stat into something else, ie vaccination eliminated 99.4% of measles deaths? >> http://www.breakspearmedical.com/ in UK >> >> but MMR is ineffecitive and unsafe http://www.whale.to/vaccines/measles.html > > Are any of these peer reviewed? whale.to is the Internet's largest suppository of misinformation regarding health matters. If it were not about serious topics, it would be a joke. > I continuously hear controversy surrounding the MMR vaccine, and I have > looked into the issue and the best that I can come up with is that the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > offer and recomendations or advise as to how to go about getting single > shots? Thanks. This interest me too. As far as I can ascertain there is no supported research that proves mmr causes autism. All the people that supported the original research have retracted their support and the research has proved to be seriously flawed. Everything else is anecdotal. If I am wrong and anyone can point to a peer reviewed and accepted piece of clinical research that proves the point I would be happy to read it, but as far as I am aware it does not exist. I found a programme presented by Richmond Hammond on the BBC very incitful. He looked into it very thoroughly from *both* sides and seemed to come to the conclusion that part of the reason parents still mistrust the government advice about mmr is because they got it so badly wrong with mad cow disease. The increase in measles etc in the UK is the result of this and is enough for me not to delay it at all - never mind 3 years. Jeni > This interest me too. As far as I can ascertain there is no supported > research that proves mmr causes autism. All the people that supported > the original research have retracted their support and the research has > proved to be seriously flawed. Everything else is anecdotal. Just like all the "research" showing it to be safe is seriously flawed http://www.whale.to/vaccine/mmr54.html And "just anecdotal" is a rationalisation http://www.whale.to/vaccine/rationalization_h.html like peer review and the rest And if you think the 5,000 parents filing in the US courts are delusional, it says something for medical brainwashing > > This interest me too. As far as I can ascertain there is no supported > > research that proves mmr causes autism. All the people that supported [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > And if you think the 5,000 parents filing in the US courts are delusional, > it says something for medical brainwashing That would be no to my question then. Jeni > That would be no to my question then. > > Jeni Thanks, that proves my point on rationalisation, if you believe in vaccination you HAVE to believe anecdotes don't count, only peer review etc and if you can provide those gov studies that show it is safe then we can take them apart > > That would be no to my question then. > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > and if you can provide those gov studies that show it is safe then we can > take them apart Still no then. >He looked into it very thoroughly from *both* sides and > seemed to come to the conclusion that part of the reason parents still > mistrust the government advice about mmr is because they got it so > badly wrong with mad cow disease. Typical BBC spin, the government works for the Corporations, go figure the last MMR was withdrawn, bet he never mentioned that http://www.whale.to/vaccine/mmr15.html plus the 4 gov admitted MMR deaths http://www.whale.to/vaccines/mmr443.html more likely 26 http://www.whale.to/v/mmr101.html not forgetting MMR deaths in Vietnam for a disease curable with vitamin C http://www.whale.to/m/measles.html > >He looked into it very thoroughly from *both* sides and > > seemed to come to the conclusion that part of the reason parents still > > mistrust the government advice about mmr is because they got it so > > badly wrong with mad cow disease. > > Typical BBC spin, the government works for the Corporations, go figure No it was what people actually said. > the last MMR was withdrawn, bet he never mentioned that > http://www.whale.to/vaccine/mmr15.html [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > for a disease curable with vitamin C http://www.whale.to/m/measles.html None of the above are related to autism, which was the op.s concern and all I have been talking about. And again you haven't ansered my question. > No it was what people actually said. They only ask people who haven't much of a clue, or say what they want to hear >> the last MMR was withdrawn, bet he never mentioned that >> http://www.whale.to/vaccine/mmr15.html [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > all I have been talking about. And again you haven't ansered my > question. no peer review on measles stats? Was that the one? No concern about deaths, and the ethics of the government? That is called only looking where you can find what you want > > No it was what people actually said. > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > No concern about deaths, and the ethics of the government? That is called > only looking where you can find what you want Again, I was answering the question on autism. I can see I'm getting no-where so I'm not replying anymore. ...>> No concern about deaths, and the ethics of the government? That is called >> only looking where you can find what you want > > Again, I was answering the question on autism. I can see I'm getting > no-where so I'm not replying anymore. I see you have been introduced to John Scudamore... where a conspiracy beats facts everyday: http://web.archive.org/web/20050206005334/pages.ivillage.com/vaccinesupport/anti vaxsites/whale.html "HCN" <hcn@nospam.com> wrote in message > I see you have been introduced to John Scudamore... where a conspiracy > beats facts everyday: > http://web.archive.org/web/20050206005334/pages.ivillage.com/vaccinesupport/anti vaxsites/whale.html oh dear, only in web archive now. "Non-drug medicine has been ignored which could deal with measles complications". This is actually true, no child gets vitamins as a medical treatment No vitamin c to prevent cot death http://www.whale.to/w/sids.htm Vitamin C to cure measles http://www.whale.to/m/measles.html etc etc http://www.whale.to/m/therapies.html that is a conspiracy to suppress nutritional medicine they have known for decades vit c cures heart disease http://www.whale.to/w/nutrition.html FACT > "HCN" <hcn@nospam.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > "Non-drug medicine has been ignored which could deal with measles > complications". .... snip... Granted she has not maintained the website, but it is still valid. As is this: http://www.pathguy.com/antiimmu.htm and this: http://www.fetalneonatal.com/cgi/content/full/archdischild;87/1/22 and these news reports: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1061838,00.html and http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/story/0,,-5886818,00.html > ...>> No concern about deaths, and the ethics of the government? That is > called [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > beats facts everyday: > http://web.archive.org/web/20050206005334/pages.ivillage.com/vaccinesupport/anti vaxsites/whale.html CONSPIRACY FACT Cure for heart disease ignored http://www.internetwks.com/pauling/index.html PaulingTherapy.com(mirror) Call Owen at 800-894-9025 for info (630-416-1438). This website is about reversing "heart disease". Reversing heart disease is not only possible, it is likely. Heart attack and stroke are the leading killers, but not because science has failed. On the contrary, medical pioneers long ago uncovered the cause of cardiovascular disease, aka "heart disease." It is hardly known that Linus Pauling, arguably the greatest scientist of all time, invented a rapid, nontoxic cure for the condition. Fortunately, this claim was made on video and was patented. This means that Cardiology should not exist. An entire profession, and its arsenal of toxic drugs, are based on lies and misguided "science." (Whether cardiologists, the products of the best training that pharmaceutical dollars can buy, know this, is debatable.) So, why you ask, isn't this knowledge made public? Well, heart disease generates (one might say costs the economy) more than $300 billion every year. So far Pauling's claim, is dismissed a priori by medicine without comment or critique. On this page are links to vast amounts of information, both scientific and anecdotal. This information has been swelling like a tumor since Pauling first claimed the cure for heart disease on video. The medical profession, which could surgically excise this tumor with a study or two, has instead adopted a "head in the sand" stance, hoping the growth is benign, afraid of what the biopsy might show. Medical training and most of the literature fed to the medical profession is funded by pharmaceutical interests, which explains why medicine still can not quote even one study that refutes Pauling. Read on and learn how simple it is to safely avoid becoming a statistic that feeds this corrupt "industry." - Owen Fonorow, Naturopath A conspiracy against vitamin C supplements has been underway for over three decades. Public health authorities have hidden the positive impact that supplemental vitamin C has had upon human health. Now, that conspiracy is revealed in graphic form. The hidden human tragedy is too awful to contemplate. http://www.vitamincproject.com/ > I see you have been introduced to John Scudamore... where a conspiracy > beats how come you like to bandy my name about yet you like to hide behind HCN? jeni, as I have alluded to in other replies, there seem to be 2 other studies that support wakefield's original one. I am not defending anyone or taking a strong position one way or the other at this point...just playing devil's advocate. > jeni, as I have alluded to in other replies, there seem to be 2 other > studies that support wakefield's original one. I am not defending anyone or > taking a strong position one way or the other at this point...just playing > devil's advocate. Firstly, can you show what you are quoting please, a I have no idea from this post. Secondly, can you point me to these studies, as I would like to read them if they do exist. Thanks Jeni >> jeni, as I have alluded to in other replies, there seem to be 2 other >> studies that support wakefield's original one. I am not defending anyone [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Secondly, can you point me to these studies, as I would like to read > them if they do exist. Don't bother, they have not been published. The closest thing was a poster presentation recently... one that caused the UK newspapers to claim that US scientists "confirmed" Wakefield's finds --- only to have Walker quoted in a US paper that there was no real proof. Basically a bunch of speculation over nothing. It is discusssed here: http://www.kevinleitch.co.uk/wp/?p=375 Funny thing... There have been population studies in at least 4 different countries showing there is no greater incidence of autism among vaccinated versus unvaccinated kids, and lots of other real science that show that the vaccines are much safer than not vaccinating --- Yet, all it takes is the flimsiest of hints in a press release to a "possible link" to get anti-vax folks to prove their point. > Thanks > > Jeni > Secondly, can you point me to these studies, as I would like to read > them if they do exist. I am not sure where they are--they are not in pubmed. >> I continuously hear controversy surrounding the MMR vaccine, and I have >> looked into the issue and the best that I can come up with is that the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > the original research have retracted their support and the research has > proved to be seriously flawed. Everything else is anecdotal. Not quite. Andy Wakefield has not retracted anything. Of course, if he did, he would have to repay the lawyers. > If I am wrong and anyone can point to a peer reviewed and accepted > piece of clinical research that proves the point I would be happy to [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > is the result of this and is enough for me not to delay it at all - > never mind 3 years. Smart person you are. > >> I continuously hear controversy surrounding the MMR vaccine, and I have > >> looked into the issue and the best that I can come up with is that the [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Not quite. Andy Wakefield has not retracted anything. Of course, if he > did, he would have to repay the lawyers. I meant obviously everyone else - it would be a rare thing for a researcher not to support his own research;) Measles Vaccine Undeniably Linked to Autism http://www.mercola.com/2006/jun/15/measles_vaccine_undeniably_linked_to_autism.htm > Measles Vaccine Undeniably Linked to Autism > http://www.mercola.com/2006/jun/15/measles_vaccine_undeniably_linked_to_autism.htm This work doesn't show up in PubMed. Can you provide us with the reference to the peer-reviewed literature that supports this assertion? >> Measles Vaccine Undeniably Linked to Autism >> http://www.mercola.com/2006/jun/15/measles_vaccine_undeniably_linked_to_autism.htm > > This work doesn't show up in PubMed. Can you provide us with the > reference to the peer-reviewed literature that supports this assertion? yawn http://www.whale.to/w/journals1.html > >> Measles Vaccine Undeniably Linked to Autism > >> http://www.mercola.com/2006/jun/15/measles_vaccine_undeniably_linked_to_autism.htm [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > yawn http://www.whale.to/w/journals1.html In other words, you don't believe in scientific evidence - unless, of course, it agrees with your agenda. >>>> Measles Vaccine Undeniably Linked to Autism >>>> http://www.mercola.com/2006/jun/15/measles_vaccine_undeniably_linked_to_autism.htm [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > In other words, you don't believe in scientific evidence - unless, of > course, it agrees with your agenda. Since his agenda is not based on scientific evidence, there is no scientific evidence that John believes in. >I continuously hear controversy surrounding the MMR vaccine, and I have > looked into the issue and the best that I can come up with is that the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > offer and recomendations or advise as to how to go about getting single > shots? Thanks. If you want to practice caution, give your kid a single shot. There will be two less shots, which means a slightly less risk of getting an infeciton. In addition, the triple shot has been better tested. Your son is much better off with one shot than three. Jeff thanks. so you are convinced that there isn't a mmr-autism link? another question--what is your opinion on waiting until age 2-3? check out this link: http://www.aapsonline.org/nod/newsofday295.php . be sure to see the studies on the bottow of the news summary. > check out this link: http://www.aapsonline.org/nod/newsofday295.php . be > sure to see the studies on the bottow of the news summary. It was a poster presentation, and there really is no real paper, and no actual data to be reviewed. It is discussed here: http://www.kevinleitch.co.uk/wp/?p=375 and http://www.badscience.net/?p=249 The Walker and Krigsman are both associated with Wakefield. > It was a poster presentation, and there really is no real paper, and no > actual data to be reviewed. It is discussed here: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > The Walker and Krigsman are both associated with Wakefield. good links. >check out this link: http://www.aapsonline.org/nod/newsofday295.php . be >sure to see the studies on the bottow of the news summary. Please don't cite rabid anti-vaccination liar web sites. You are as unlikely to get the truth from AAPS as you are from NVIC.  SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > Please don't cite rabid anti-vaccination liar web sites. You are as > unlikely to get the truth from AAPS as you are from NVIC. agreed. > check out this link: http://www.aapsonline.org/nod/newsofday295.php . be > sure to see the studies on the bottow of the news summary. Be careful what you read, and WHERE YOU READ IT. The AAPS is a fringe group which is far more political than medical. Let me suggest: http://neurodiversity.com/weblog/article/91/strange-bedfellows which shows that the AAPS is a Political Science, not medical science, organization. > Be careful what you read, and WHERE YOU READ IT. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > which shows that the AAPS is a Political Science, not medical science, > organization. I know they are--just playing devils advocate. >> Be careful what you read, and WHERE YOU READ IT. >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > I know they are--just playing devils advocate. Be careful. Jan will think you are a satanist. >>> Be careful what you read, and WHERE YOU READ IT. >>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > >Be careful. Jan will think you are a satanist. Or worse - the official title of "Devil's Advocate" could only be held by a Catholic. And it was related to the making of saints, to whom only Satanists pray. SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com In misc.kids.pregnancy Mark Probert <markprobert@lumbercartel.com> wrote: :>> Be careful what you read, and WHERE YOU READ IT. :>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] :> :> I know they are--just playing devils advocate. : Be careful. Jan will think you are a satanist. Hey! I own all the snappy comebacks on this thread... unless you want to admit to being a member of the Illuminate. Larry >In misc.kids.pregnancy Mark Probert <markprobert@lumbercartel.com> wrote: >:>> Be careful what you read, and WHERE YOU READ IT. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > >Larry I was accused by a leading Australian "journalist" who regularly writes lies about alternative medicine of being a member of the Illuminati. The editor of Nexus magazine, however, disagrees with her and says that I am not smart enough to be a member. Unfortunately, there is no way I can comment on either opinion without compromising my safety. If you get my meaning ... SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > In misc.kids.pregnancy Mark Probert <markprobert@lumbercartel.com> wrote: > :>> Be careful what you read, and WHERE YOU READ IT. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > unless you want to admit to being a member of the > Illuminate. I am well illuminated, thank you. What country are you in? I need to find the sheet of paper the pediatrician gave me, but I have info on how to get individual shots in the US. We are going that route as the Rubella vaccine has fetal cells in it, which my family is opposed to. We are also not getting Varicella vaccine at this time for the same reason. I'll post as soon as I can find that paper..... I hate moving.... Sharalyn mom to Alexander James (9/21/01) Ok--top posting and replying to myself (I know, bad no-nos): Hopewell Pharmacy in New Jersey stocks the single dose Measles, Mumps, and Rubella vaccines. www.hopewellrx.com. It runs about $26 per vaccine and they ship overnight and cold to your ped's office for about $35. That $35 will cover up to 4 vaccine doses, so that charge is a one time charge if you get all three shipped at once, then stored to give individually at your ped's office (this is all what my ped told me about 6 weeks ago, so things may have changed in that time). HTH! Sharalyn mom to Alexander James (9/21/01) > What country are you in? > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Sharalyn > mom to Alexander James (9/21/01) hey--thanks for the info--at least I have options! >What country are you in? > >I need to find the sheet of paper the pediatrician gave me, but I have >info on how to get individual shots in the US. We are going that route >as the Rubella vaccine has fetal cells in it, The rubella vaccine does not have fetal cells in it. This is another lie told by the anti-vaccinators. A year or so back the anti-vaccination liars teamed up with the anti-abortionists to try to get the Catholic Church to speak out against vaccination because of the supposed but not true fetal cell story. The church refused to do so and in fact came out strongly in favour of vaccination. > which my family is >opposed to. We are also not getting Varicella vaccine at this time for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Sharalyn >mom to Alexander James (9/21/01) SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com > The rubella vaccine does not have fetal cells in it. This is another > lie told by the anti-vaccinators. Have you read the actual ingredients in the insert of the vaccine itself? It's listed right on there. I go directly to the source. MMRV: http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/p/proquad/proquad_pi.pdf MMR: http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf Varicella: http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/v/varivax/varivax_pi.pdf I'm *not* advocating this position for everyone--it is what is right for my family after *much* research and careful consideration. Sharalyn mom to Alexander James (9/21/01) >> The rubella vaccine does not have fetal cells in it. This is another >> lie told by the anti-vaccinators. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >MMRV: >http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/p/proquad/proquad_pi.pdf "ProQuad, when reconstituted as directed, is a sterile preparation for subcutaneous administration. Each 0.5-mL dose contains not less than 3.00 log10 TCID50 (50% tissue culture infectious dose) of measles virus; 4.30 log10 TCID50 of mumps virus; 3.00 log10 TCID50 of rubella virus; and a minimum of3.99 log10 PFU (plaque-forming units) of Oka/Merck varicella virus. Each 0.5-mL dose of the vaccine contains no more than 21 mg of sucrose, 11 mg of hydrolyzed gelatin, 2.4 mg of sodium chloride, 1.8 mg of sorbitol, 0.40 mg of monosodium L-glutamate, 0.34 mg of sodium phosphate dibasic, 0.31 mg of human albumin, 0.17 mg of sodium bicarbonate, 72 mcg of potassium phosphate monobasic, 60 mcg of potassium chloride; 36 mcg of potassium phosphate dibasic; residual components of MRC-5 cells including DNA and protein; <16 mcg of neomycin, bovine calf serum (0.5 mcg), and other buffer and media ingredients. The product contains no preservative." No fetal cells there. The rubella component is cultured using WI-38 human diploid cells (none of which end up in the vaccine) which is a cell line derived from about 1962. That fetus, had it lived (which it would not have, as the termination was done to save the mother's life, and done well before abortion was legal), would now be a middle-aged person. Like I said: "The rubella vaccine does not have fetal cells in it. This is another lie told by the anti-vaccinators". >MMR: >http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/m/mmr_ii/mmr_ii_pi.pdf "The growth medium for rubella is Minimum Essential Medium (MEM) [a buffered salt solution containing vitamins and amino acids and supplemented with fetal bovine serum] containing human serum albumin and neomycin. Sorbitol and hydrolyzed gelatin stabilizer are added to the individual virus harvests". No WI-38 in sight. Like I said: "The rubella vaccine does not have fetal cells in it. This is another lie told by the anti-vaccinators". >Varicella: >http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/v/varivax/varivax_pi.pdf "Each 0.5 mL dose contains the following: a minimum of 1350 PFU (plaque forming units) of Oka/Merck varicella virus when reconstituted and stored at room temperature for 30 minutes, approximately 25 mg of sucrose, 12.5 mg hydrolyzed gelatin, 3.2 mg sodium chloride, 0.5 mg monosodium L-glutamate, 0.45 mg of sodium phosphate dibasic, 0.08 mg of potassium phosphate monobasic, 0.08 mg of potassium chloride; residual components of MRC-5 cells including DNA and protein; and trace quantities of sodium phosphate monobasic, EDTA, neomycin, and fetal bovine serum. The product contains no preservative". Ni WI-38 left behind. Like I said: "The rubella vaccine does not have fetal cells in it. This is another lie told by the anti-vaccinators". Need I point out that this is not a rubella vaccine anyway? If it was made by just mincing up babies and injecting the puree it wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that there are no fetal cells in rubella vaccine. >I'm *not* advocating this position for everyone--it is what is right >for my family after *much* research and careful consideration. What is right for your family should have nothing to do with people telling lies about vaccines containing parts of dead babies. >Sharalyn >mom to Alexander James (9/21/01) SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com ...> No fetal cells there. The rubella component is cultured using WI-38 > human diploid cells (none of which end up in the vaccine) which is a > cell line derived from about 1962. That fetus, had it lived (which it [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Like I said: "The rubella vaccine does not have fetal cells in it. > This is another lie told by the anti-vaccinators". ... In addition, in the early 1960's there was a rubella epidemic. In addition to the high numbers of rubella affected babies being born blind, deaf and/or mentally retarded... many others died in utero. Sometimes after the fetus died they had to be removed in a manner similar to an abortion. A co-worker's wife had to go through this... and because of it she was excommunicated for having an "abortion". > "ProQuad, when reconstituted as directed, is a sterile preparation for > subcutaneous administration. Each 0.5-mL dose contains not less than [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > -- > Peter Bowditch aa #2243 Ok--so no fetal cells in the vaccine itself, but used for cultures. To my family--it doesn't matter whether in or used in the production of, we find that objectionable for our family's use, and therefore are not vaccinating for Rubella or Varicella. Sharalyn >> "ProQuad, when reconstituted as directed, is a sterile preparation for >> subcutaneous administration. Each 0.5-mL dose contains not less than [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > >Ok--so no fetal cells in the vaccine itself, but used for cultures. There are no fetal cells in the cultures. The cells in the cultures are very many generations distant from fetal cells. > To >my family--it doesn't matter whether in or used in the production of, >we find that objectionable for our family's use, and therefore are not >vaccinating for Rubella or Varicella. Here's what the Catholic Church's Pontifical Academy for Life had to say about people who refuse to vaccinate their children because of a concern about "aborted foetuses": "This is particularly true in the case of vaccination against German measles, because of the danger of Congenital Rubella Syndrome. This could occur, causing grave congenital malformations in the foetus, when a pregnant woman enters into contact, even if it is brief, with children who have not been immunized and are carriers of the virus. In this case, the parents who did not accept the vaccination of their own children become responsible for the malformations in question, and for the subsequent abortion of foetuses, when they have been discovered to be malformed". Go ahead. Cause women to have abortions. Tell us how good that makes you feel. Full statement at http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/ni/vaxliars/vaticanresponse.pdf Notice that it was addressed to an anti-abortion group. >Sharalyn SignaturePeter Bowditch aa #2243 The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com http://briandeer.com/mmr-lancet.htm this weblink really makes wakefield and others to look like self-serving quacks. also I did not know that one of the 2 studies that support wakefield was discredited. I feel a bit better about the mmr. I'll feel a lot better after the newest study is examined. > http://briandeer.com/mmr-lancet.htm > > this weblink really makes wakefield and others to look like self-serving > quacks. also I did not know that one of the 2 studies that support > wakefield was discredited. that is Deer's job, smearing Thanks to all that have posted a reply to my question--feel a bit better overall about the MMR. > Thanks to all that have posted a reply to my question--feel a bit better > overall about the MMR. OK. Please start properly quoting and attributing your posts. These blank sentences responding to something unknown are disconcerting. :) Michelle Flutist This seems like a good and long over due idea: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/18/nmmr18.xml&sShee t=/news/2006/06/18/ixuknews.html . |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.