Married to Medicine

Married to Medicine

Monday, November 25, 2013

The Top Six LEAST Logical Anti-Vaxx Arguments

After a little rant I wrote went viral, I found myself mired in the black hole of vaccine "debates."  And I'm putting "debates" in quotations because it pains me to even elevate much of what is being said to "debate" where so many "points" and "counterpoints" make no sense whatsoever.  It was hard to narrow it down but I think I've found the six least-logical anti-vaccination points of all.  Here they are, in no particular order.

1.  We can't trust the researchers or the doctors because they're all part of a vast "Big Pharma" conspiracy to make money off of vaccines.

There are at least five good and obvious reasons why this is clearly not true, but I'll make room here for just one:  The "naive" parent who didn't "do her homework" by running a google search or listening to her friends is not, in fact, the one paying for her child's vaccines.  Vaccinations are paid for largely by private health insurance companies and, for uninsured children, the government.  Hopefully we can all agree that health insurance companies are not an innocent, naive, duped party in this or any other equation.  Not only is the health insurance industry a major political powerhouse, but health insurance companies employ hundreds of physicians whose sole jobs are to find ways to deny coverage for any medical care that is even arguably not "medically necessary."  If you must have a conspiracy theory, and you really don't believe vaccines work, maybe you should consider the idea that the "Big Health Insura" put out all the anti-vaxx internet quackery so that fewer people would vaccinate.  *I* know that's not true, because *I* know that health insurance companies don't want to pay for babies hospitalized with pertussis.  But if you're a vaccine-denier, then I have to tell you that my conspiracy theory is far more likely than yours.

2.  They've never done a study of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children and autism rates.

They have, in fact, and it was done in Denmark - here it is.  It studied all children born in Denmark from 1991-1998.  Update:  Here's another one, this one a massive study new this year, out of the U.S.!  What they haven't done is a double-blind study.  And that's not because Big Pharma is preventing one - it's because it would be considered unethical to randomly assign babies to not be vaccinated.

3.  It's actually the vaccinated children who are dangerous - they are the ones most commonly infecting other people.

One good argument against that is that it's factually not true.  See also this, thisthis, and this:

Most of the 288 measles cases reported this year have been in persons who were unvaccinated (200 [69%]) or who had an unknown vaccination status (58 [20%]); 30 (10%) were in persons who were vaccinated. Among the 195 U.S. residents who had measles and were unvaccinated, 165 (85%) declined vaccination because of religious, philosophical, or personal objections, 11 (6%) were missed opportunities for vaccination, and10 (5%) were too young to receive vaccination (Figure).

But let's imagine it were true, and vaccines were only ("only"), say, 85% effective.  Now imagine a town of 100 people.  Ninety of them are vaccinated and ten are not.  Everyone is exposed.  If this were to happen, in theory, 10 unvaccinated people would contract the illness, but thirteen vaccinated people would.  It's simple math.

Oh yeah, the pertussis vaccine.  That one has its own ironic twist.  In 1997 we switched over to an acellular vaccine formula in order to appease vaccination fears.  The cellular formula was more effective but it had more side-effects - more fevers, and thus more febrile seizures.  But febrile seizures are not actually dangerous and if you're prone to them, you're not going to avoid them by not getting vaccinated.  My 13-month old inherited them from her father and while she never experienced one after a vaccination, she had one anyway when she caught a simple passing illness that spiked her fever.  She's perfectly fine and was never in any danger.  So now to avoid a false danger we've increased the real danger:  a less effective vaccine where vaccination rates are declining.

**Even at that, though, studies show that even in populations including non-infants (so people far removed from their infant pertussis vaccines), the unvaccinated are 2.5 times as likely to catch (and potentially spread) the disease.  And as for infants - the people most likely to die from a pertussis infection - it's 90+% effective.

4.  If vaccines are actually effective, vaccinated people shouldn't care whether some people don't vaccinate.

Is this how you feel about hand-washing?

5.  It's better to be "naturally" infected than to receive a vaccine.  

This reasoning is so circular it makes my head hurt:  It's better to risk death, brain damage, paralysis, birth defects, and various kinds of cancer by getting a full-blown "natural" case of one or more of these diseases because... because it's a more effective way of making sure you don't ever get the disease you already had.

And if you do subscribe to this theory, I certainly hope you're formula-feeding.  Antibodies passed to your infant through your breast milk won't be quite as effective or long-term as the antibodies your baby's own body would produce in response to full-on "natural" infections of various illnesses.  You wouldn't want to jeopardize his developing immune system by nursing, would you?  (Disclaimer:  This is sarcasm; I'm nursing my 13 month old through this winter JUST to - maaaaybe - give her any antibodies I happen to acquire).

Photo Credit

6.  We shouldn't blindly trust our doctors.

Agreed.  Physicians make mistakes, and we as patients can optimize our medical care by staying informed and by self-advocating where appropriate.  Thankfully, though, we have very little such work to do when it comes to vaccination.  Contrary to what anti-vaxxers would have you believe, vaccines are some of the most thoroughly studied medications out there and there is not just a national but a global consensus on their safety and efficacy.  Really, people, you might find my vaccination posts a little too snarky for your tastes.  But at least admit that it's not exactly humble to ignore the consensus of every legitimate medical and public health group in the world.

79 comments:

  1. Thank you for the follow up. Perhaps someone on the fence with at least some desire to make a reasoned choice will be read this and be able to understand why the rest of us have chosen to trust science, medicine and even (gasp!) medical research, rather than the, at best, misguided and, at worst, deeply paranoid advice of the anti-vaccination movement. Why people who make money through recognized, proven medical practice and well researched pharmaceuticals are vilified, while those who make their fortunes selling 'alternative', unproven, poorly regulated treatments are made out to be rebel heroes is beyond my understanding.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you so much for this post as well as the last one about vaccines! You answered so many questions that I had and I love that you include actually links to real data to back everything up!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Very well reasoned and thought out. I'm still in shock that with the history of death and debility these diseases have (before vaccinations) that anyone could want to avoid them based on conspiracy theory, or what a friend says, or what they googled for 40 hours. 1st rule of the seeker of truth, "People believe what they are afraid of, or what they hope for, rather that what is obvious". Kudos, well done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regarding point six: You can find unethical, immoral, or just plain bad doctors. You should check and find one you feel comfortable with and who's practices are in your best interests, based on sound science.
      And why do I say we can find bad doctors?
      Two words: Andrew Wakefield.

      Delete
    2. My husband and I just got whooping cough boosters because there are so many unvaccinated vermin running around. There is no way I am getting whooping cough. I actually fear for folks with blood cancers, as they have little immunity and the immunity they had is gone. They can DIE from an unvaxxed kid.

      Delete
    3. Unvaccinated vermin? Really? I wasn't going to get into this debate with you, but this is just extremely judgmental, uneducated and unkind. My hopes here are to perhaps enlighten you, but this will depend are how open you are to learning. I will tell you, no vaccine is 100% safe and no vaccine will give you 100% immunity. Many vaccines are not even necessary. Let's take Hep B for example. My children are at 0% risk of contracting Hep B. My newborn baby was not a sex trade worker or drug addict and neither was anyone in my entire family or extended family nor was I about to "travel to Mexico for a pedicure" as my baby's surgeon had suggested. Either way, it is important to do your research and to research credible sources, such as the drug company's actual vaccine inserts for ingredients, and the CDC website for vaccine failure rates. You may also want to know things like 144 girls have now died from the HPV vaccine, there have been over 32,000 adverse side effects and over 1,400 severe, permanently disabling reactions to this vaccine which only covers 4 strains of HPV. There are over 100 strains. These are also just the reported incidents regarding the HPV vaccine. Japan has now banned this vaccine in their country. People who choose not to vaccinate, all of the people that I have met and know, are extremely well educated, many are doctors (my best friend who is in internal medicine specialist), nurses (another very, very close friend who is a Neonatal Intensive Care Head Nurse who has watched so many preemies die within hours of receiving their vaccines, but otherwise who should have made it) and other nurses who have seen the adverse reactions in the hospital of babies actually dying, parents who have lost their children or their children who have been permanently disabled, parents with Master's degrees, double Master's degrees. We are not uneducated and our children are not vermin and should not be treated as such. It was not their choice not to get vaccinated, it was the choice of their parents. Are you really this cruel? We have done our research of the most relevant information available. To go against the grain on this decision is, in the beginning as we are just learning, heart wrenching for most of us until we learn the truth. I personally do everything I possibly can to build my family's immune system to be so strong that they can fight anything that comes their way, and they have. When travelling in South America I contracted HIB. It was nothing more than an irritating cough that wouldn't go away. After 3 months and multiple visits to the doctor, they finally took a swap and I got my diagnosis. Neither my husband nor our "vermin" child (who is a performance athlete by the way and never, ever get's sick) contracted HIB from me. Neither of them have had the HIB vaccine and we were in very close quarters, all sleeping in the same bed while traveling for over a month. We eat organically, we use the best vitamins in the world, we exercise regularly and we take time to enjoy our lives together as a family. We are extremely careful about hand washing. We don't touch doorways in public bathrooms and will avoid them when possible. We don't touch railings in public places or doorways. We always wash our hands before eating, before going to a play date and after because there is a risk to our children that they are being exposed to vaccine shedding and this is something we cannot avoid, it's everywhere. So I am truly sorry for you Stephanie that you would classify the children of highly educated individuals, who have done their research, who have seen the deaths and the adverse side effects, who have felt that pain and who choose after much heartache and copious amounts of research as "vermin". It is people like you that I fear most. Your judgement is callous and uneducated.

      Delete
    4. Thank you! Great Answer! I agree with you!

      Delete
    5. Thank you ^^ very well said.

      As a mother who witnessed her daughter suffer a fatal reaction to her first round of vaccines. I have spent countless hours researching, crying, praying and wishing I could take back that one doctors visit.

      To the blogger up there- you cited the Denmark study. That shows me you have not researched AT all. you are regurgitating bullshit. Don't worry, they surely have a vaccine coming out for stupidity and I bet you will be first in line. Or third after your Children.

      Doctors are in the business of being sick. End of story. They treat symptoms while causing a host of other issues. They know nothing of true health.

      Delete
    6. I am sorry for your loss. While it is impossible in this setting to comment on the cause of your child's death, it is not likely due to your doctor's supposed greed. Vaccines have saved an approximate 3-4 million lives as cited in today's NY TImes, quoting an article in this week's New England Journal of Medicine. Although we have no way to know what happened to your child, we can continue to vaccinate to keep our children as safe as is possible.

      Delete
    7. To "Anonymous"

      "I will tell you, no vaccine is 100% safe and no vaccine will give you 100% immunity." This is a true but trivial point. Nothing in life is 100% safe, even staying in bed. It is also true that no vaccine will give you 100% immunity; some vaccines are better than others. On the other hand, having the disease the vaccine protects against may not confer immunity. Take pertussis, for example -- the immunity conferred by having the disease fades rather quickly (less than two decades at most).

      What this Anonymous is advancing is the "nirvana fallacy" -- rejecting a good and workable solution (in this case, vaccination against disease) because it isn't perfect. That's a failure in logic right there.

      Delete
    8. The same Anonymous went on to write,

      "Many vaccines are not even necessary. Let's take Hep B for example. My children are at 0% risk of contracting Hep B. My newborn baby was not a sex trade worker or drug addict "

      I am afraid you have bought into the false idea that Hep B is only spread by IV drug abuse or sexual contact. In fact, according to Parents of Kids with Infectious Diseases (PKIDS),

      "In household settings, non-sexual transmission of HBV occurs primarily from child to child, and young kids are at highest risk of infection. We’re not sure exactly how transmission occurs, but frequent contact of non-intact skin or mucous membranes with blood-containing secretions including, perhaps, saliva, are the most likely means of transmission. HBV remains infectious at mild temperatures for extended periods and can be found on and transmitted through sharing of inanimate objects such as wash towels or toothbrushes."

      Many people infected with the Hepatitis B virus are asymptomatic and thus spread the disease unknowingly. Furthermore, the virus is very hardy -- it can survive outside the body for over 7 days.

      Before universal vaccination was introduced, the mortality from HBV in the US was 5 times higher than Haemophilus influenza type B (HiB) and 10 times greater than measles.

      The younger a person is when infected with Hepatitis B virus, the greater his or her chance of developing chronic Hepatitis B. Approximately 90% of infected infants will develop chronic infection. The risk goes down as a child gets older. Approximately 25%–50% of children infected between the ages of 1 and 5 years will develop chronic hepatitis. The risk drops to 6%–10% when a person is infected over 5 years of age.

      Why the birth dose? From 1981 through 1991 the US vaccinated only people with identified risk factors. Predictably, this campaign had an underwhelming effect on HBV infections seen during this time period.

      In 1991, the US Hep B elimination strategy was reworked to better address the various methods of HBV transmission. In addition to vaccination of high risk groups, the US began universal vaccination of all infants at birth, vaccination of adolescents, and prenatal screening of pregnant women to identify children who would require not only vaccination at birth but also Hep B immunoglobulin (HBIG).

      Dr. Joseph Albietz wrote in "Why the Universal Hepatitis B Vaccination Isn't Quite Universal", "Since its launch in 1991, the US seen a steady decrease in Hepatitis B infections. Hep B incidence in the US fell from 10.7/100,000 in 1983 to 2.1 per 100,000 in 2004. (25,916 total cases down to 6212 cases). Though it’s true other factors have been contributing to HBV’s decline, most notably the public education campaign aimed at curbing the spread of HIV, this doesn’t account for the pattern of HBV decline across age groups. There has been a 95% drop in HBV in people under 15 years of age, 87% in ages 15-24, 71% from 25-44, and 51% decrease in people over 45 years old. This is precisely what you would expect from a pediatric vaccination campaign."

      The current vaccine has an excellent safety profile.

      I think eliminating a chronic disease is overall a good thing. Perhaps you disagree.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous #1 went on,

      " it is important to do your research and to research credible sources, such as the drug company's actual vaccine inserts"

      You do know that the vaccine inserts are not scientific documents, correct? You do know how they are developed and approved by the FDA?

      Oh, you don't?

      Michael Simpson, a pharmaceutical industry executive, has written a lengthy description at his at his excellent blog Skeptical Raptor, "Vaccine package inserts–debunking the myths". I recommend you study Simpson's explanation.

      Delete
    10. One: the "144 dead girls....32,000 adverse reactions" trope is drawn from reports to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). Anyone may report anything to VAERS, and they have done so, including a report that one person became the Incredible Hulk after vaccination Essentially, VAERS is a net that sweeps up everything, and the reorts of adverse effects have then to be evaluated by trained researchers. Voluntary reporting systems are not scientifically rigorous assessments of true risk. They are useful for generating, but not testing, hypotheses.

      Someone quoting VAERS reports as fact is betraying either either their naiveté or their anti-science, anti-vaccine bias.

      Adverse events have been reported following HPV vaccination, but the overwhelming majority of these reactions are minor and largely local injection site reactions (e.g. redness, swelling, pain at injection site). These reactions do include other minor self-limiting reactions such as syncope (fainting episodes), headache, and nausea. In addition to our paper, the CDC has a useful summary of minor to moderate reactions of short duration for both types of HPV vaccines and other vaccines. These are consistent with other vaccinations.

      Klein et al published "Safety of quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine administered routinely to females" in 2012; the study enrolled almost 190,000 young women "This study did not detect evidence of new safety concerns among females 9 to 26 years of age secondary to vaccination with HPV4". Arnheim-Dahlström et al. published "Autoimmune, neurological, and venous thromboembolic adverse events after immunisation of adolescent girls with quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in Denmark and Sweden: cohort study"; the study had 997,585 subjects. "This large cohort study found no evidence supporting associations between exposure to qHPV vaccine and autoimmune, neurological, and venous thromboembolic adverse events."

      Two: "this vaccine which only covers 4 strains of HPV." The implication is that the vaccine is worthless. Yes, Gardasil® covers four strains, types, 6, 11, 16, and 18. Strains 16 and 18 are the most common types linked to cervical cancer, while types 6 and 11 are linked to genital warts. The vaccine has also been shown to reduce infection with some cancer-associated HPV types that are closely related to those in the vaccines.

      Delete
  4. Great post, thank you! I especially like the handwashing-reply. :)
    About the antibodies in breastmilk: won't they be destroyed in your 13 month old's digestif system?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "No doubt some are destroyed, but enough pass further into the digestive tract to be absorbed or to act in the lumen. This may be in part because babies have lower stomach acid and less digestive enzymes. At any rate it seems to work. It's kind of similar to taking probiotics which are also largely killed in the stomach but enough get through to get into the intestine to have benefits."

      Delete
  5. Thank you so much for this post, and also for your earlier post; I would have loved to comment on that too, but I completely understand why you closed off comments. So consider this a comment that relates to the earlier article too, please

    I'm not a doctor, I'm not even a parent, but I am passionately pro-vaccination. I am a music educator and I work with very young children; I want to see them live long, healthy, happy lives. Vaccination is essential for that to happen. I am, of course, fully vaccinated; I could not live with myself if I were to infect one of the children I work with. I'm old enough to remember what it was like before many of the vaccines we now have; the world was an much, much more dangerous place.

    I'm continually frustrated by trying to deal with people who have a degree from the University of Google, who think that their time spent perusing the myriad web pages written by anti-vax nutjobs and conspiracy theorists makes them more qualified than pediatricians, epidemiologists, virologists, biochemists, statisticians et al. The internet is a mile wide and an inch deep.

    I am thoroughly depressed by the constant flood of misinformation and outright lies about vaccination that pours through my Facebook feed, the bizarre tin-foil hat theories espoused by some of my friends, the disgusting self-serving money-making sites like Natural News and Mercola which spout complete BS about vaccines - they all make me so angry! Children are dying because of these charlatans and fools!

    I had thought seriously of trying to write a similar article to yours for my own blog - I even made a good start on it. But then I realised that while I know a fair amount about the science of vaccines and could link to reputable peer-reviewed research and solid sites like the CDC and the Australian Health Department, I simply do not have the in-depth knowledge to do the subject justice.

    Better not to write it at all than to do it badly. There's enough misinformation out there without me possibly contributing to it.

    As an example of how pervasive is the influence of the anti-vax propagandists on the net, here in Australia if you search Google for "vaccination" the very first result will be the Australian Vaccination Network, who despite their name are a virulently anti-vaccination organisation. AVN ranks higher in Google than the Australian Health Department! That's an appalling state of affairs.

    In better news, the AVN has been dealt a blow just yesterday: they have been ordered by the courts to change their name to something that expresses their true position on vaccination, because the name has been held to mislead people into thinking that the information is impartial and balanced, when it is manifestly not.

    As a result, under Australian law they will have to get a new web address for their site too, and will lose their Google ranking :) Such small victories make the world a safer and better place, as do articles like your own.

    Thanks again!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did hear about that victory in Australia! Congratulations :) And yes, of course, I share all of your views. I could never have written the original article if not for having access to two excellent physicians (three, really) and a "free month trial" of UpToDate, which is a practitioner source my husband uses. I don't believe in lay people blogging about vaccination... but they are. My aim was to both personalize the medical/scientific point of view and to provide lots and lots of REAL science and legitimate resources.

      Delete
  6. Thank you! Thank you!
    Brave to put your voice out there AND leave it open to comments. I started scrolling through them on your earlier post, but quickly gave up. Nothing new under the sun when it comes to the Anti-Vacc people. Best close this one for comments, too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you! I will probably close the comments to this one as well, shortly. We really did cover it all in the comments section of the first one and I'm not going to be any less busy with the holidays upon us.

      Delete
    2. Do all of you honestly believe the pharmaceutical companies and government have our best interests in mind? It is all about the all-mighty dollar, the execs don't care about the average American. Money breeds greed, and they are making money on our fear that is being bred into us. It doesn't matter who is buying the vaccines, the are being bought for billions of dollars. Pull the wool people.

      Delete
    3. Of course the pharmaceutical companies make money; businesses that don't make money go broke. The alternative medicine companies and practitioners are also in business, and they make billions of dollars too, JC. They aren't giving away their worthless woo for free, you know.

      Try going to your homoeopath, your crystal healer, your naturopath, your reiki master; try going to that huckster Mercola or that tinfoil hat-wearing Mike Adams of Natural News. Tell them: "I know you aren't in this for the money; I know you are going to give me your services and products for nothing, because *you* aren't driven by greed and profits like the pharmaceutical companies."

      Good luck with that! You do know that "alternative medicine" is a 114 BILLION dollar industry, don't you? http://www.prweb.com/releases/alternative_medicine/homeopathy_chinese/prweb9087888.htm You do know that it is astonishingly profitable?

      And you must know that in the vast majority of cases it simply doesn't work at all. You know what they call alternative medicine that is scientifically proved to work? They call it medicine.

      Delete
  7. Do you all really think the gov't and pharmaceutical companies have our welfare in mind? there was a key point in the article about who purchases the vaccines. The point is that they are purchased and these companies make billions of dollars off of the fear of humans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And? Organic food companies make loads of money off of people's fear of pesticides/ GMOs/ etc.

      Delete
  8. Rightly so. Monsanto? That's a whole different issue. I refuse to live in fear and give my power to big govt and big medicine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. cool, stay the hell away from me and mine. this is a well thought out argument, where is yours

      Delete
  9. From my research homeopathic vaccinations put a lot let less strain on little ones immune systems. I have seen first hand vaccines destroy little peoples lives, I don't judge those for choosing to, but understand those that don't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are absolutely correct; "homoeopathic vaccinations" actually put zero strain on immune systems. That's because all homoeopathic preparations (I won't call them medicines) are just water, without a single trace of active ingredient. Unfortunately, being just water, they don't work at all to prevent disease.

      In a standard 30C dilution homoeopathic preparation the active ingredient has been diluted by a ratio of 1:1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. To save you counting the zeros, that's 10 to the power of minus 60.

      That's so dilute that the chances of it containing just a single atom of the active ingredient are mind-bogglingly slim. How slim? A patient would have to drink 10 to the power of 34 gallons of liquid remedy (10 billion times the volume of the Earth) to consume a single molecule of the original substance.

      Homoeopathy is simply selling expensive water to the gullible; there is not one shred of scientific peer-reviewed evidence that it has any medicinal effect whatsoever.

      Delete
    2. Honestly your hazy maths and limited understanding of un-conventional medicine shines through in a desperate attempt to slam the conclusions I have come to through much research and talking to doctors and homeopaths alike... and most importantly I have the facts of experience, with 4 kids, 2 that are traditionally vaccinated and two that have had homeopathic vaccinations the effect and contracted illnesses is startling. Both the traditional vac children have had whooping cough, neither of the homeopathic vac kids contracted. Both the traditional vac kids have been sick more and had lower immune systems.. some say this is coincidence but I have friends with very similar stories.. some a lot more heart breaking.

      From all the people I know who have not vaccinated (a lot), none have had serious scares from unvaccinated illnesses. The same can't be said for friends that have had kids with vaccinations, the long term effects and counts of whooping couch in the vaccinated kids was scary, hence my move to homeopathics.

      Honestly, if homeopathy is "simply selling expensive water to the gullible", traditional vaccines are simply "appealing to the fearful side of masses of paranoid or uneducated parents".

      Everybody has a choice, I believe the strength and potency of traditional vaccinations pose a greater risk on the long term well being of a child... in saying that I also believe we are turning into a society of guinea pigs that just accept what we are told. Fear tends to always underpin this topic, especially when the government and doctors get involved to the extent they do without solid facts or unbiased research.

      Finally I think vaccines are marvelous inventions and have in a way saved our butts... we just know how to take things too far without thinking of the long-term consequences. Viruses have one goal, survival, we really are helping them to get stronger and stronger because we are scared of maybe getting sick, could be a painful cycle, maybe I should be upset with all the vaccinators for aiding the strengthening of these viruses.

      Delete
    3. If it worked, wouldn't it become mainstream medicine? Or is there another conspiracy theory there? Homeopathic remedies are regulated by the FDA, but the FDA chooses not to test them for safety or effectiveness. Seems like an interesting omission, yeah? Why do you think that is?

      Delete
    4. Herbal medicine that works = mainstream medical treatments. See: yew, vinca, foxglove, belladonna, willow, etc. It just doesn't sound as cool when you call it "aspirin" or "chemotherapy".

      Delete
    5. When we start to close the gap of alternative and traditional medicine (which is happening) it will be a better outcome for all. They both have very different approaches that can compliment each other perfectly.

      Delete
  10. Its nice to see an open mind. Labels being put on people (antivax) just fuel the tension and divide. I don't judge the people who get the flu shot or vaccinate their kids, but those of us who choose not to pump seven or more shots of antibodies into our infants and tax their immune system, not to mention mercury, formaldehyde and thimerisol, do get judged. Our country is ruled by pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies and the money that follows them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Except that insurance companies are the ones paying for the vaccines. So they've "conspired" against themselves, apparently. See the comment above and links in my first post for how unprofitable vaccines have become.

      Delete
    2. Hmm... this is very interesting.. I had no idea that pharmaceutical companies create and distribute their product without being paid to do so. How very noble of them!

      Delete
    3. They are paid... by insurance companies. You said "Our country is ruled by pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, and the money that follows them." But insurance companies pay for vaccines. And if you'll take the time to read the comment above and the link in my original entry, you'll see that vaccines are not even that profitable.

      Delete
  11. I've enjoyed reading this blog post and your previous one. I've always vaccinated my children, but honestly, I've been questioning it lately. You've reassured my original thoughts as to why to vaccinate. However, I still question one vaccine in particular, and that is the flu shot. What are your thought on that? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

    All of my children are healthy (no asthma, allergies, etc.), so I don't see the need for them (or me for that matter), but in past years, we've all gotten the flu shot at the urging of our pediatrician. I'm just not sure that I buy that it's necessary for us, in our circumstance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rarely but occasionally, perfectly healthy young people do actually die of the flu. In Massachusetts we had two such deaths last flu season - one child with no underlying health condition, and one with just mild asthma. Here is a memorandum that was sent this year to all physicians at MGH, which is Harvard's primary teaching hospital and the #1 hospital in the nation last year per U.S. News and World Report. This was sent out by my children's pediatrician and my husband received it (since he is also a physician at MGH) and forwarded it on to me. Dr. Greenspan is Vice Chair of Pediatrics at MGH and Medical Director of MGH's Hospital for Children:


      Dear Colleagues:



      There were five influenza-related pediatric deaths in Massachusetts during the 2012-2013 flu season. These pediatric deaths remind us that influenza vaccination may prevent severe illness and death, and that even previously healthy children may face life-threatening illness from influenza. MDPH recommends that all people age six months and older receive annual influenza vaccination.



      · All five young patients ranged from 1 year to 17 years of age; and all were not fully vaccinated. Four of them were school-aged. Three of the cases had very rapid onset of symptoms and were either found unresponsive at home or expired within 24 hours of being rushed to the hospital. One patient was hospitalized in intensive care for approximately four days and one was hospitalized on life support for over 30 days with significant complications that included pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, sepsis, and Methicillin-resistant Staph. aureus superinfection. Nationally, there were 146 pediatric flu deaths reported as of May 18, compared to 34 for the same time frame in 2011-2012.



      · Three of the five children in Massachusetts had significant underlying health conditions such as neurological and neurodevelopmental disorders and heart disease. One had mild asthma, and one had no underlying health conditions. This underscores the fact that otherwise healthy children may experience life-threatening illness and even death from flu. Nationally, approximately 40% of pediatric flu deaths are in children with no known underlying health problem. Despite a flu season that started and peaked early, one of the children had symptom onset in March and another in April.



      · Consistent with the predominant influenza strains circulating in Massachusetts at the beginning and end of the season, the first two children who died tested positive for influenza A/H3, and the three children who died later in the season tested positive for influenza B.



      · Four of the children had not received any influenza vaccine during the current flu season. The fifth and youngest child, under 2 years of age, had received his first dose of influenza vaccine in December 2012, but did not attend an appointment for a second seasonal dose); 90% of pediatric flu deaths nationally are in unvaccinated children.



      In addition to taking advantage of pediatric visits and local public health flu clinics, we want to encourage all communities to consider holding school-located flu vaccination programs.



      There are a number of tools available to assist you in holding school-located flu clinics. These include:



      · MDPH School-Based Flu Vaccination Clinics website at www.mass.gov/dph/flu



      · Information on getting reimbursed by private health plans for administering flu vaccine at school-located and/or public health clinics at http://commed.umassmed.edu/flureimbursement. A schedule of trainings on the reimbursement project is attached.



      · Information on getting reimbursed by MassHealth at http://www.mass.gov/eohhs/gov/newsroom/masshealth/providers/mh-flu-vaccine-program.html



      It’s not too late to vaccinate!





      Peter T. Greenspan, MD

      Vice Chair, Department of Pediatrics, Massachusetts General Hospital

      Medical Director, MassGeneral Hospital for Children

      Delete
  12. Thank you for your well-reasoned prior blog post, as well as this one. I'd like to add a couple things:
    (1) The argument about vaccines being a big money-maker. Ask any pediatrician how much they make off of vaccines, and they will laugh at you. Reimbursement is so low that many actually lose money on providing the service. Their tireless promotion of vaccines in presence of a financial disincentive to do so speaks to how much they care about their patients. As to big pharma profiting - look at any company's financial statement and see how much they're actually making from childhood vaccinations. Merck, for example, had global sales of ~$47 billion last year, of which a grand total of $651 million was for MMR, Varivax, and ProQuad combined. That's sales, mind you, not profits, and worldwide, not just the U.S. Compare that with global sales of $9.48 billion for the drug Humira, and it's clear that vaccines are a bit of an afterthought as far as sales/profits.
    (2) Individual exceptionalism. As an internist, I only see adults, but I hear all the time about how "I know my own body." For instance, there are a certain number of people who are convinced that the normal temperature range for their body is different than that for everybody else - "My normal body temperature is 97, so 98.6 for me is actually a fever." People extend this to their children, and believe that they know what is best for their children's health. Nothing could be further from the truth. Even very-well-trained physicians cannot be relied upon to judge their own health, or that of their loved ones. I had a very personal experience with this when convinced by others to get seen when I felt that I just had a case of indigestion. I explained to the ER physician why this could not possibly be appendicitis; 6 hours later I was in the operating room. Despite having diagnosed dozens of cases of acute appendicitis in my career, I couldn't recognize it in myself. I shouldn't have been surprised, because I've seen plenty of cases of doctors trying to treat themselves and experiencing adverse effects as a result. Responsible pediatricians don't treat their own children, and rely on other pediatricians to guide their decision-making.
    (3) The idea that we are overtaxing the immune system by exposing it to too many vaccines. This is easily refuted by considering what the immune system is presented with on a daily basis. Thousands of antigens are seen by the gut, the respiratory tract, and the skin. If the immune system couldn't handle the 20-something total vaccinations given in childhood, it'd be overwhelmed within hours of the start of life.
    (4) If anti-vaccine people want to know how they sound, they should check out
    http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
    Yes, believe it or not, there is a group of people who believe the earth is flat, and that the "earth is round" idea is a vast conspiracy. Their forums have hundreds of thousands of posts. Remarkably, their arguments parallel those of the anti-vaccine crowd, and result in the same circular arguments. If those folks can't be convinced that the earth is round, then I'm not sure how much overwhelming evidence can convince the anti-vaccine folks to change their minds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately the medical worlds understanding on health is driven partly by science and partly by pharmaceuticals, until we gain a deeper understanding of the body, viruses and their relationship, people are crazy to think vaccines are the silver bullet. We will look back and 'laugh' in 50 years... much like we do of the medical practices of 50 years ago. But oh no, you're all stupid for not trusting our big business funded clinical trials that are being debunked more and more.

      In my experience the extreme people are the ones grouping people that aren't pro-vac with people that think the world is flat. There are holes in both sides of the argument, I'm just amazed at how many only see the other sides holes. Now I'm off to find the edge of the world!

      Delete
    2. We are actually getting to the point where 50 years ago (1963) medicine was pretty decent. An excellent book on the history of U.S. medicine is Paul Starr's "The Social Transformation of American Medicine." It's a fascinating read and well worth anybody's time. http://www.amazon.com/The-Social-Transformation-American-Medicine/dp/0465079350/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385618314&sr=8-1&keywords=paul+starr

      Delete
    3. Point taken, there have been some great discoveries in the medical world and I may have been better off saying 80-100years ago ;)

      I suppose my point really was this debate almost feels like a religious war, two sided that believe so strongly that they're right, they fail to see what the other side is getting right. I think that's crazy as there are very solid arguments on both sides. I give people a lot of respect for there decisions either way, because when you actually know the the facts if each side it isn't an easy choice.

      Delete
  13. Hi,
    I read your both your posts about vaccination and think they are amazing! I am a mother of 3 children who are fully vaccinated. When I made the appointment for my youngest to get her 18 month vaccinations, I was dating someone who believed everything she ever read online. She was very hostile in telling me not to do it. In the end I told her I would ask the doctor about it when I got to the appointment. When I asked him he explained where the misinformation is coming from and why it is wrong. He also told me about how bad the diseases vaccines protect against really are. When I got home with a vaccinated baby she was disapointed. And when I told her everything the doctor had told me she said it was all (even his personal experiences) just a conspiracy. Some people really cannot be convinced, but the anti-vaxx people are so loud and so emotional that it makes people like me question. I'm glad I have a good doctor who completely explained it to me, and I'm glad I read this because it confirmed what my doctor said and more! Thank you! My kids and I will always be fully vaccinated! And someone said in a comment that Jehovah's Witnesses are against vaccination. My parents were Jehovah's Witnesses when I was a kid and my sister, my 2 brothers and I are all fully vaccinated since birth!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your comment! There are so many things we, as parents, can worry about. If I can help to clear up just one of these, it will have been well worth the work.

      Delete
  14. "But scientists say the problem of surging whooping cough cases has more to do with flaws in the current vaccines than with parents’ resistance."http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/11/26/health/study-finds-vaccinated-baboons-can-still-carry-whooping-cough.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to the article, pertussis was being spread to the unvaccinated baboons: "Even though those baboons did not get sick from it, they spread the infection to others that were not vaccinated." So if you hang with baboons, it's still better to be vaccinated. That said, yes, the current pertussis vaccine is nowhere near as protective as the older version. I did mention this in the blog entry above.

      Delete
  15. Just to let you know since you are unaware, the child you are holding in this pix is showing classic UNDENIABLE signs of vaccine induced brain strokes. I'd suggest to familiarize yourself with Dr Andrew Moulden's work because you are causing this poor child great harm by vaccinating him. Does he already have an autism dx? because take a look at his fingers-another classic sign of vaccine induced autism. (which today autism is just a label for the aftermath of repeated vaccinations causing brain strokes. I am assuming since you are married to medicine you not likely did your research so here is his work in an easy to listen to format. Once you are ready to actually read or hear the science behind it, let me know and I will send it to you. Good luck, and I will pray your son doesn't suffer lifelong debilitation from being exposed to known neurotoxins. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58KLLm1q0_Y I suggest watch 6-8 and then go to 1-11.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Link not working ^

      Delete
    2. It's not allowing a clickable link. You'll have to copy paste into Google or whatever search engine you use!

      Delete
    3. Madison (featured in the video) is my daughter. She did the same finger thing that this woman's son is doing. She was born neuro typical with symmetrical eyes and mouth...as you can see she didn't develop the asymmetrical attributes until after EVERY shot. Micro vascular ischemic brain damage. Again just like this woman's son. I hope parents will wake up!

      Delete
    4. Try this one, it will show all 11 slides. Its suggested to watch 6-8 first then go back to the first one and follow in order thereafter! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58KLLm1q0_Y&feature=c4-overview-vl&list=PL5B173BE99A025F19

      Delete
    5. ElleMura: never mind I just read your blog about raising a "challenging" toddler" and it answered my autism question for me. PLEASE do your research before you re vaccinate him for school. He's had the chance to catch up on speech and has done well with the tantrums (they're called meltdowns btw) because he hasn't been poisoned in a while. Watch out for kindergarten shots...I would bet money that he will regress again. It's what brain damage (ischemic strokes) does to children. Prayers!

      Delete
    6. First of all, autism isn't a transient illness that comes and goes. Second, my son definitely doesn't have it - my own parents are a pediatrician and a PhD child therapist, and my son's pediatrician is co-chief of peds at the #1 hospital in the U.S. Pretty sure they didn't all miss what you found by looking at a single photograph of a child you've never met. My son has blossomed into one of the best behaved, sweetest, most loving and social 3 year-olds I've ever known and I've worked a great deal with young children. LOL, not every toddler who has tantrums - or meltdowns if you're picky - is autistic.

      Delete
    7. See also on this topic: http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/07/autism-study-emory-infants-eye-contact

      Delete
    8. http://www.executivereasoning.com/health/vac/tol_lost_v1.html I hope your "doctor" husband takes this knowledge and actually does something useful with his skills. your son shows ALL the classic signs of ischemic brain damage...your husband or the rest of your family will not recognize this because they do not have the skills or tools to do so. I hope for your whole family's sake that you actually do some real homework and make a difference in this world. Good luck. Can't teach truth to a world who bases their whole life around lies. But...I we can try!

      Delete
    9. http://www.executivereasoning.com/health/vac/tol_lost_v2.html
      http://www.executivereasoning.com/health/vac/tol_lost_v3.html
      http://www.executivereasoning.com/health/vac/med_myst_solved.html

      There you all the SCIENCE you need to do something about the damage we are causing our children and this world as a whole. I don't expect to hear back from you for some time as there's a lot to learn. I suggest letting your whole family watch this brilliant doctor explain truth as plain as day to them also. Your husband has the potential to actual save children, I'm curious to see if you allow that to happen! Thank GOD; he's forgiving!

      Delete
    10. Hello Elle, there are people here who are a bit aggressive-I suppose that happens when truth you want to share meets frustration of certain people not wanting to listen. From a parent who was PRO vaccine, vaccinated my daughter on schedule to the day without question; I unfortunately learned the hard way that vaccine do and can cause harm. Even the manufactures admit SIDS and autism can be a side affect in the inserts however we are not told by our MD to think for ourselves. Like I said my daughter Madison was featured in Dr Mouldens presentation, a doctor whom has extensive top of the class medical knowledge and experience. He spent his WHOLE adult life trying to save children. He has all the science you need to make better decisions for yourself and your children. Unfort because he was planning to squash the vaccine industry-had the proof to back it up and in turn call for a rather LARGE class action law suit he was turned away, gag ordered and they wanted to buy his work to keep it from getting to the public. Sounds crazy? Sounds like a fictitious Hollywood movie? Yes it does, however the fact of the matter is he refused to sell his work, and he refused to shut up. For 6yrs he went around the country to bring his knowledge to the people. Anyone who actually takes the time (including doc's, scientists, parents, and gov alike) cannot deny his truth but recognize they cannot go up against a giant corp without huge personal consequence. No one will go near it. But here we have a situation with your family- Medical background, law and whether you want to believe it or not your son IS a victim of ischemic strokes; you could really make a difference with a family like this. I know it wont be easy, to know that everything you've been taught and based your beliefs upon is a lie...but it will do no good continuing to live that lie instead of waking up (while you are still young, and your children still have a chance) and doing something really brilliant with your knowledge. I beg you to watch his presentations all the way through (theres a lot of science so it's boring in some sections) but if you can get through it you will be forever changed. I know you think "autism" isn't something that can come and go and you are right; autism isn't! BUT the autism label that we see today IS environmentally caused and when they are accompanied with the signs of strokes (mouth, eyes, tongue going to one side which I saw in photos of both your kids) ONLY STROKES can cause this to happen. Todays' autism IS caused by ischemia and like my daughter her behavior and neurological issues did subside after a period of not vaccinating. She was diagnosed with severe autism at 2yrs old, now you wouldn't know she ever had a neurological blow. She bright, top of her class and super social and lovable. Like what you now describe your son. However, like Chelsea said your WILL notice regression after you vaccinate for school... it's not a 50/50 its a 100% chance of this happening. So unless you see this as an opportunity to change what's happening to your kids and stop vaccinating then I hope after he does regress and you have to look at his cross eye, droopy mouth every day it will be enough to come to your senses and finally want to do something! PLEASE take the time to watch his work. He literally died a week before his 50th bday as a direct result of telling the truth. Lets not allow his death to be the end of his truth for all!

      Delete
    11. Mel, aggressive isn't the word. Crazy is. My son is not autistic, and if you'll do some research on the guy you two have decided to trust more than the consensus of every legitimate health organization in the world, you'll see he's a complete quack. The types who follow personalities like his are never convinced by science or reason, so I don't expect to convince either of you. I am, however, going to close the comments to this post. The purpose of this post is not to discuss the science behind vaccines; my original post did that and the comments were open for a month and are quite extensive. I don't have time this during the holidays for a repeat, especially where it would mainly be a lengthy conversation between me and "Chelsea."

      Delete
    12. But I'll tell you what: If when my son receives future vaccinations, he goes "cross-eyed" and "droopy-mouthed," I'll reconsider. If that happens, I will update the comments section here accordingly.

      You should know though, that he was never cross-eyed or droopy mouthed. It was hard to get a shot of all 4 of us looking at the camera and smiling at the same time, and I think he was in-between here. This photo was taken last month when he was already 3, and his challenging phase was months 15-27. There was nothing wrong with him at the time of this photo and other than typical challenging toddler behavior, there never was.

      Delete
    13. And last, I'll note that even if there was a risk in vaccination, you're ignoring the risk in remaining unvaccinated. Perhaps you don't think that vaccines work. If that's the case, I refer you to all the science linked to in my original blog entry and all of the discussions in the lengthy comments section that follows it. Please see especially the links on the lack of profitability of vaccines.

      Delete
  16. Cornell med school and MIT trained doctor speaks out about vaccine safety and eficacy. OR you can trust a blog by someone married to a doctor who has never worked in the field as I have and seen the distruction vaccines can and do cause. "As those of us who shake our heads in pain and frustration watching the sheep get herded off the cliff, we refrain: these agents cannot be considered “safe and effective” and also “unavoidably unsafe” as the government agencies would have us accept. They are avoidably unsafe, in fact, when you don’t use them as part of your healthcare." ~Kelly Brogan, MD - See more at: http://www.vaccinationcouncil.org/2013/11/27/a-shot-never-worth-taking-the-flu-vaccine-by-kelly-brogan-md/#sthash.G6HRMEof.dpuf

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The flu vaccine is arguably the least important one out there. However, you should be aware that far more people die of the flu every year than of the flu *vaccine*.

      "Cornell med school and MIT trained doctor." My husband is a "Wash U med school (#2 after Harvard) and Harvard-trained doctor." And actually, the lady you're talking about did her undergrad at MIT not her medical training. Her medical training was in "psychiatric oncology" and "reproductive psychiatry." If those specialties even exist, they have nothing to do with pediatrics or immunology. To be honest with you, I wonder if you've really found a completely fake website. There's a reason that all hospitals require all health care workers to get their flu shots. You can read my comment above to see what the Vice Chief of Pediatrics at Harvard's primary teaching hospital has to say about the flu vaccine.

      Delete
    2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32D_nIGtSnw&list=PL5B173BE99A025F19 Your whole family doesn't have even close to the knowledge, medical training as this man. Listen to him, or continue to kill harm your children. It's simple.

      Delete
  17. Is it true you are Christian? Please explain to me, if you are a true follower of God and his law why you would ever inject poison into HIS children?

    Perhaps you should pick up a bible sometime and re read it before disgracing His name in the man made "medicine" Horrible. Here are some things I found for you to get started on:

    The Bible teaches that the truthfulness of an issue is to be sought and should stand on no less than two or more witnesses (Deuteronomy 19:15). The following is the result of a study on biblical parental responsibility in regards to the practice of unclean, unsafe vaccines.

    A diligent study on vaccine safety and effectiveness reveals that there are many informed and qualified researchers and doctors who have found and teach that there are many serious health risks involved with vaccines. The Comprehensive Child Health Immunizations Act of 1993 made known the fact that there are risks to vaccinations by stating “Vaccine information should be simplified to ensure that parents understand the benefits and risks”. Congressional Records (2000 – 2003) have shown that the pharmaceutical companies are more concerned with profit than they are with safety and have knowingly used toxins in the manufacturing of vaccines regardless of the risks.

    The Bible teaches us that children are a gift from God (1 Timothy 5:8). Some vaccines are produced using aborted baby lung tissue, which are man and government profiting from the murder of our innocent children. To partake in vaccines is to support that individuals/government that no longer has respect for the sanctity of human life.

    The Bible teaches that the parents are entrusted with the care and welfare of the child. (1 Timothy 5:8). Parents, not the state, are responsible to make health care decisions on behalf of their children.

    The Bible also teaches that there have been times in history when evil government and government employees have attempted, through force or color of law, to intimidate, harm or destroy the children of God’s people. (Exodus 1 and 2/ Matthew 2). Therefore, if a parent feels that vaccines are not safe, it is their responsibility to defend our children from and individual or government who is attempting to subject our children to those vaccine risks.

    The Bible teaches that the body is “The temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own. For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.” (1 Corinthians 6:19-20) To inject known neurotoxins into our children, which have known health risks, would be a violation of these biblical teachings.

    The Bible teaches that there are clean and unclean animals and that God’s people are not to put the unclean into their bodies. Many vaccines are made from the blood of diseased animals, decomposed animal parts and are not sterile.

    The Bible teaches that when man’s law contradicts God’s law, His people must obey God over man. (Acts 5:29) Therefore, be it known, should any policy, edict or legislation of man decree our children must be vaccinated, we must obey God rather than man just as Moses’ parents of old, we will do so without fear. (Exodus 2)

    The Bible teaches us that we are not to harm or wrong our neighbor. (Romans 13:10 and James 2:8) Our decisions to decline vaccines do not wrong or threaten our neighbor. If vaccines were truly effective, the neighbor would not be in danger from someone who is not vaccinated.

    Therefore, be it known, that based upon the teachings of the Holy Bible, it is our religious conviction not to have our children vaccinated. We desire to be at peace with those who may feel or think differently than we do on this issue and that is why we humbly explain the choice we have made.

    We will protect our children from the injection of neurotoxins, retroviruses and foreign animal proteins that are in vaccinations.

    Just in case people are confused about what God wanted for us, as his children.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't wait until our church starts requiring proof of vaccination for Sunday School.

      http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/11/27/the-vaccination-effect-100-million-cases-of-contagious-disease-prevented/?emc=eta1&_r=0

      Delete
    2. Eww.. you're disgusting. You approve of the poisoning of HIS children then advocate to have them poisoned before going to Church? There will be a very special place for you when you die. horrible person. And so when a parent vaccinates, and there's a terrible perhaps lethal reaction so that parent chooses not to allow any more shots for them or future children...you would want your church to turn these families away? WOW!

      Delete
    3. It won't be me advocating. It will be their in-house counsel, to protect them from law suits. And yes, some children have legitimate medical reasons not to vaccinate. They are the most vulnerable to diseases spread by unvaccinated children and un or under-vaccinated adults. Just ask any pediatric oncologist.

      Delete
    4. Re; "They are the most vulnerable to diseases spread by unvaccinated children and un or under-vaccinated adults. Just ask any pediatric oncologist"

      I am so confused, an oncologist will tell AYONE WHO'S RECENTLY BEEN VACCINATED to stay far away from their patients.

      Maybe you should have consulted your doctor husband with this statement before making yourself look foolish. Point taken though!

      Delete
    5. Anonymous, respectfully, you have no idea what you're talking about. Children and adults with immuno-suppressive illnesses and/or conditions cannot be vaccinated themselves and are at a much higher mortality risk from vaccine-preventable and other illnesses. They have far more to fear from the unvaccinated than from the recently vaccinated. There are plenty of sources and physicians who speak to this point in the body and comments of my first blog entry.

      Delete
  18. I just want to say thank you for your two posts on vaccines and also give you huge kudos for putting up with some of the most offensive, personal attacks I have ever seen on one of these vaccine threads. I am appalled at the gall shown by some commenters who think they can diagnose your child from a photo (seriously?) and who insist you are poisoning/harming/killing your children. They have no shame and their comments speak volumes about who they are and how they interact with the world. You have more grace than I!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Anonymous, you can't show your name? Must be easier for you I suppose. You clearly did not chose to educate yourself through the work I presented. Oh well, can't save them all. Her child suffered BRAIN STROKES! It doesn't take a expert to see that. But thankfully it IS an expert that presents the truth that you wish not to look at. If I am right, if Dr Moulden if right (which there is NO denying as much as you wish you could) and her child did suffer from vaccine induced brain damage, wouldn't that be proof that he as essentially poisoned? I know you won't be able to contribute much to this conversation because you have nothing that could possibly refute what this brilliant doctor presents, but I will I am hopefully since this mother is a lawyer, and her family has a medical background and her husband is a new doctor that they will recognize the HUGE responsibility they have to change their thinking, see that we've all been lied to in the name of profit and be proactive in getting this valuable information to the world. I would understand if Dr Dad didn't want to leave medical school- it's a lot of money and time spent however after seeing this science, my hope would be they'd be a little more gentle with their attitude towards parents that have already woken up and chose not to make the same mistakes vaccinating parents have made for 50 yrs. Anonymous is it? lol yes I am aggressive, it stems from ignorant people who think they know something, when in fact they know very little about this topic. I don't apologize.

      Now, do yourself a favor and look at the science presented right in front of you before replying. There is NO debate. Period!

      Delete
    2. Again Chelsea, your beloved Andrew Moulden is a complete quack. You're free to trust him but you certainly haven't given anyone else any reason to.

      Delete
    3. Okay, I was hopeful that you would take an active approach to keeping your children safe. You clearly did not watch any of the presentations this brilliant doctor (way higher medical training and education than your whole family put together) because if you had you wouldn't say he's a quack. You can't deny his work no matter how much you wish you could. I am glad that at least you will reconsider AFTER you see your son suffers yet another stroke to his brain...too bad it can't be now before you allow him further injuries but anyhow, I really don't care about you or your husband. I do however care about innocent children being harmed by the hands of their doctor (in this case you and your husband) but hey, when it's too late don't come crying. Because unfort it's almost always the case- provax~child gets unjured~becomes educated~stops vaccinating~tries to warn others~finds it impossible to convince the mindset of the mindless! You have the chance to make a difference, being a lawyer and having family with a medical background you could really do something good for once. But, if you do a quick google search at the "quack site" and see his name and base your opinion on that, then it speaks volume about your priorities. You have the proof. Up to you now to open your eyes before its too late. You are welcome. Good luck.

      Delete
    4. Oh and one more thing, it was a nice try saying that I based my claim on ONE photo. Its wasn't a bad day, it wasn't an "in between" stop lying to yourself. It looks like you love taking lots of photos. Look at all his infant photos and you will see he's been suffering from brain strokes since infancy. The ONLY reason a mouth would droop like it is in all his photos (uneven smile) is100% caused by a stroke. I am shocked that your "dr" husband doesn't know this. It's common knowledge within the medical community. But anyhow, like I said I don't care at this point if you refuse to do your due diligence as a mother to protect your kids. You have all the info you need, I provided it to you on a silver platter. But in case you need it all in once simple easy to watch format: http://www.executivereasoning.com/health/vac/med_myst_solved.html

      When you finally see that your son IS stroking in his brain my hope (again) is that you will come here like promised and revise. Even an apology would be nice for the hard work people like myself and others who have the knowledge you clearly do not have, have done.

      I wont hold my breath. But if he's three right now, then I will come back in a year or a bit to make sure you held up your end of the deal. He WILL stroke out and it's always only a matter of time before his brain, body and immune system will give up. Heaven forbid. :(

      Delete
  19. Elle, I would like to retitle your blog: Married to medicine, should be changed to indoctrinated by the AMA second hand. You have little to no formal education in health, you trust what your husband tells you and run with it. The problem lies in him being indoctrinated at school and blindly following. The reason I say this, is that many studies have been published on how Vaccines do not work very well. There are some in the past that were very necessary (small pox) and some that are needed in 3rd world countries that have poor sanitation. You state that whooping cough is a needed vaccine. I may suggest that you choose a different vaccine to purge your indoctrination information. Whooping cough is one of the most ineffective vaccines ever utilized. This is not just an opinion this is factual information. See links to government published articles (NIH) also journal of new england medicine. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1200850
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24216286
    These are very recent articles Nov. 2012 and Nov. 2013. I can find many more.
    I will give you the conclusion because you probably won't read the research from these epidemiologist researchers.
    Conclusion: Despite high levels of vaccination coverage, pertussis circulation cannot be controlled at all. The results question the efficacy of the present immunization programmes.

    When several epidemiologist researchers are saying that whooping cough vaccine offers no protection, that is when you don't vaccinate. These people are the specialists in the field, not just regular indocrinated M.D's that think they know everything these are the medical professionals that prove or disprove things through research.
    You may try to come back with some seemingly smart comeback from some chair of medicine of some university or similar quoted statement but I have quoted the current experts in the industry doing the current research in the field.
    I would challenge you to look at both sides of the issue and learn how to review research without bias. If you look at both sides of the issue you will be far ahead of most pediatricians who don't even acknowledge dangers of vaccines.
    I recently went to help my friend who is a cardiothoracic surgeon and family practice M.D. We went to a business that requested the swine flu vaccine. We gave all the employees the vaccine and then i turned to the M.D. and said your next. His response was "HELL NO" I am not putting that SH-- it my body, it has not been properly tested, evaluated and is dangerous.
    In conclusion: You must wade through the research to educate yourself as to what vaccines you should have and not have. The AMA docs will tell you to get every vaccine despite research saying it is ineffective, so we must educate ourselves and make our own judgement calls on it, but to blindly follow or hope all vaccines are required is probably the greater danger we face.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please see the 20-30 links to peer-reviewed science in the body of and comments following my first blog entry on this topic. Please also note that the current whooping cough vaccine is indeed problematic, as noted in the body of this blog entry. It's still highly effective though especially at protecting infants, who face by far the highest mortality rates when they contract whooping cough. Please also note that the one study you cite to is "not available on this site."

      Delete
  20. Dr. M:

    Not sure who all of you are believing saying vaccinations are not profitable. Last year the flu shot made 1.2 billion dollars, this year with a new 4 in 1 flu vaccine the profits are projected to be 3.7 BILLION!!!. Vaccines are money makers, maybe not for the docs giving them but for the drug companies they are big business.

    When fear mongering of health and disease meets profit margins we are now going down a questionable road. Research funded by the ones making the money is very questionable. Big Pharma is the biggest scam we have ever seen in medicine. I wish we lived in the days where medical treatment and advice were given only with the best interests of the patient in mind, now everyone worries most about the bottom line and says the patient will be fine. Give them some useless and un-needed crap just make sure I get my kickback.
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/19/us-flu-vaccines-idUSBRE98I0M720130919

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Please see my first blog entry for links to and discussions on this topic. It's not that they're not profitable; it's that they're not profitable as profitable as other things that pharm companies are investing in, and they're not profitable to individual physicians administering vaccines because insurance companies don't reimburse much for them. Regardless, it is insurance companies who pay for vaccines and as I note above, they would be the first to stop paying if there was any reasonable argument that they could.

      Delete
  21. Thank you for your efforts and your detail.

    A point from your previous post lamenting that most of the “good” research is beyond paywalls at the major and minor peer-reviewed journals.

    A suggestion would be to contact them and recommend that, in the interest of public health, that they place papers about vaccines in front of their paywall. Of course papers that are current could be embargoed to subscribers for some period of time.

    Someone could then link to all of the “good” papers on one (or more) websites, and we google bomb the heck out of them to bring them up in the rankings.

    Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, in an ideal world everything would be publicly available and free. It's worth noting that it all of these sources *are* available at medical school libraries; just not on the internet. With research funding dwindling and government cuts to boot, it is not likely that all resources will be made freely available on the internet any time soon. I also have to note that a lot of practitioner-intended resources are not very readable to laypeople, myself included; medicine is a profession, and like any other profession it cannot be mastered without training.

      Delete