Opinions on MMR vaccinations for children

1,235 posts in this topic

 

Measles may be a killer in developing countries but shouldn't be in Westernised countries.

And yet, it is.

 

From the World Health Organization:

 

  • Measles is a leading cause of death among young children even though a safe and cost-effective vaccine is available to prevent the disease.
  • In 2007, there were 197 000 measles deaths globally - nearly 540 deaths every day or 22 deaths every hour.
  • More than 95% of measles deaths occur in low-income countries with weak health infrastructure.
  • Measles vaccination efforts have reaped major public health gains, resulting in a 74% drop in measles deaths between 2000 and 2007 worldwide - a drop of about 90% in the eastern Mediterranean and Africa regions.
  • In 2007, about 82% of the world's children received one dose of measles vaccine by their first birthday through routine health services, up from 72% in 2000. (Two doses of the vaccine are recommended to ensure immunity, as about 15% of vaccinated children fail to develop immunity from the first dose.)

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm afraid to say that pharamceutical companies only make money when people get sick so it's not in their interests to prevent disease.

That's amusing. If you get measles, mumps or rubella there's no pharmaceutical cure for any of them. Bed rest is what is recommended. So actually, it's in pharmaceutical companies' interests to provide a drug that prevents these diseases, and to prove that it works so that people actually use it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And since Nord1's link was to a pediatrician's website, you could say that pediatricians also have an interest in the anti-vaccine movement, because they can make more money off sick patients than well ones, too. :rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ring the conspiracy theorist alarm. Perhaps I'm just a brainwashed dupe refusing to acknowledge the Matrix, but when people get contract diseases, is it now abnormal to visit the doctor to take preventative measures? I'm not saying that there is no big business behind this, but it is a kind of damned-if-you-do, damned-if you-don't-situation. If diseases ran rampant and it was known that certain companies possessed vaccines, wouldn't there be a public outcry to put the vaccines out on the market? I'm thinking of the antiretroviral drug in South Africa. Or perhaps Dr. Jayne can provide a homepathic treatment for that.

I always like to think of the film "Invasion of the Body Snatchers" where only the select few are informed of what's going on and the rest of us just walk around like uninformed sheep.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

http://www.jayne-donegan.co.uk/MyExperienc...85/Default.aspx

This is what happens when you go looking for the truth (at least in the UK).

I'm afraid to say that pharamceutical companies only make money when people get sick so it's not in their interests to prevent disease. Incidences of disease were already falling PRIOR to the introduction of vaccinations. Your immune system keeps you healthy so why weaken it with chemicals, genetically modified proteins? Measles may be a killer in developing countries but shouldn't be in Westernised countries. Fatalities are as a result of improper care. Pharmaceutical companies thrive on the "fear factor" and the media go along with this. There is so much information out there, please read both sides and then make an INFORMED DECISION. It is your right.

The obvious thing to say to this sort of scare-mongering is that treating the diseased is a lot more profitable for the medical industry than vaccination. Gosh, why didn't big Pharma think of that? The treatments weaken your system too, just with different chemicals, and some, like excreted antibiotics, go on to harm the environment too. Your argument amounts to "treatment is better than prevention".

 

Incidentally, there was a long article on this in the Times newspaper in the UK on Sunday, which stated that the researchers involved in the original, UNREPLICATED DESPITE MANY EFFORTS, medical study linking MMR vaccine and autism essentially falsified their research in large part. I wish they could be sued for malpractice by anyone who is harmed by relying on their research and fails to get themselves or loved ones immunized.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your comments. Having a healthy immune system is the only way to prevent disease. The only way to do this is through a healthy lifestyle. This is why there have always been people who survived the most awful epidemics. It's not the virus, bacteria, prion etc but rather how your body reacts to it. Vaccinations do not stop you from catching a particular disease and make you susceptible to catching OTHER diseases http://www.healthy.net/scr/article.asp?ID=539. (By the wayantibiotics are prescribed at least for secondary infections).

Statistics have shown time and time again that disease has STILL broken out in immunised populations.

Statistics show that the incidence of disease was falling PRIOR to the introduction of vaccinations so to claim that vaccinations have "saved" us is simply untrue. Conspiracy, call it whatever you like. I prefer the word greed. The fact is that this will not be the last time time that truth has been withheld from the general population if it means making money.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story...eadly_immunity/

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thank you for your comments. Having a healthy immune system is the only way to prevent disease. The only way to do this is through a healthy lifestyle. This is why there have always been people who survived the most awful epidemics. It's not the virus, bacteria, prion etc but rather how your body reacts to it. Vaccinations do not stop you from catching a particular disease and make you susceptible to catching OTHER diseases http://www.healthy.net/scr/article.asp?ID=539. (By the wayantibiotics are prescribed at least for secondary infections).

Statistics have shown time and time again that disease has STILL broken out in immunised populations.

Statistics show that the incidence of disease was falling PRIOR to the introduction of vaccinations so to claim that vaccinations have "saved" us is simply untrue. Conspiracy, call it whatever you like. I prefer the word greed. The fact is that this will not be the last time time that truth has been withheld from the general population if it means making money.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story...eadly_immunity/

http://childhealthsafety.wordpress.com/

1. Preventing disease can be done by innoculation, too. It is a straight-out lie to say that it does not.

2. A healthy lifestyle does nothing to prevent you catching a disease, unless by healthy you mean you avoid sick people. It is a flat-out lie to say otherwise.

3. Some people have natural immunity to a disease, but that's an evolved characteristic that normally derives from a lot of people suffering that disease. Living a healthy lifestyle by avoiding the sick actually reduces this effect.

4. Nobody but the uninformed credits vaccinations for saving us, but the development of public health programs and particularly sanitation. Effective sewerage systems are the most effective public health measure ever, far more so than vaccinations and all other forms of healthcare you can think of including antibiotics. But that does not mean that vaccinations don't work, either. This truth is so carefully held that it featured on the BBC's "7 technological wonders of the century", I believe. But of the diseases that good sanitation can't save you from, vaccinations are extremely helpful.

5. Your contention that "disease breaks out in immunised populations" means nothing unless you argue that the people who were immunised got sick with the same strain of the disease they had been innoculated against.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Eurovol has got it 100% right here. I find the arrogance of people who choose not to immunize astounding. They read a few conspiracy websites, and suddenly believe they know more than the medical establishment. Immunization is truly one of the marvels of modern medicine, and do treat it with such disrepect blows me away.

 

I didn't know it was the case, but I like the idea that the Australian government won't let kids into kindergardens/schools or give parents child support without being immunized. Because when you choose not to immunize your child, you're not only being irresponsible in regards to your own children, but also in regards to the general population who have been responsible and got vaccinated as you're contributing to the risk of these things mutating.

This was posted on this thread some time ago, and I think Hutcho has hit the nail on the head so well that it bears repeating. Inform yourself on what to expect and how best to prepare, then vaccinate yourself and your children.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it interesting that Nord1 joined only about a quarter of an hour before his or her first post, sounds like somebody with an axe to grind, to me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Having a healthy immune system is the only way to prevent disease.

Fundamentally and almost totally wrong. A healthy immune system is no defence against a whole world of nasties.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nord1, it sounds to me as if you are a scientologist. Is that correct? It is always best to be upfront about your agenda and yours looks pretty obvious from this standpoint.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thank you for your comments. Having a healthy immune system is the only way to prevent disease. The only way to do this is through a healthy lifestyle.

not true! There are alot of genetic predispositions to diseases and a lower immunity to certain diseases.

 

So, a totally healthy person, can still develop certain problems or virus as their body from nature cannot fight it. I know we test for certain genes in the dental office as a sign of Periodontal disease.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nord1, it sounds to me as if you are a scientologist. Is that correct? It is always best to be upfront about your agenda and yours looks pretty obvious from this standpoint.

Is that really Scientologist dogma? Amazing. At least with that sort of health advice Tom Cruise won't be ruining movies for too much longer ;)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For your information I am not a scientologist. For the record I am Anglican (I'm not really sure what this has to do with the argument but I hope this makes you feel better). If you have to be insulting to get your point across fine. It's usually the sign of a weak argument. However it's your perogative. Thank God we live in a democracy!

I have no agenda. I am a concerned mother of 2 children who happens not to believe everything I read in the general media. If you read the Guardian or Independent you can't help but notice someone has an axe to grind. Noone reports about the vaccination court cases in America. The Poling case is a very good example.

With regard to the truth. It's not like there haven't been health scandals before.

If you want vaccinate fine just don't force other people to do it. Most people don't even know what goes into a vaccination, adverse effects are rarely reported (see impfschaden.de as one source) If you feel that vaccinated children are protected why should you worry about those who aren't?

Before you comment on sources I suggest you read the article first. It was written by Senator Kennedy who actually believes in vaccination. The article appeared on several websites including Rolling Stone. (It happened to be the first one that came up when I googled).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not trying to be insulting. Scientologists believe the same kind of things you seem to believe and personally I find them pretty offensive.

 

My family carries the Cystic Fibrosis gene, and my nephew has CF. Vaccination and the prohphylactic treatment of opportunistic infections has lengthened the average life expectancy for people with CF from three years of age to close to 40. Gene therapy holds the promise of extending lifespans of childeren with CF even more in the future.

 

I would like you to explain to me carefully why you think my nephew would be better off without these treatments.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

adverse effects are rarely reported (see impfschaden.de as one source) If you feel that vaccinated children are protected why should you worry about those who aren't?

Before you comment on sources I suggest you read the article first. It was written by Senator Kennedy who actually believes in vaccination. The article appeared on several websites including Rolling Stone. (It happened to be the first one that came up when I googled).

your link does not work matey. And neither, it would appear, do your critical faculties.

 

So ready to reject the mainstream media as if you have some higher sense only to see those critical faculties vanish when you find some dodgy blogspot that confirms your idiotic prejudices.

 

Postmarketing ADRs have a regulatory requirement to be reported. However that depends very much on the country. It works pretty well in Europe bt there are reasons to doubt whether it works at all in the USA, hence Kennedy's presumable concerns.

 

However, clinical trials conducted before market authorisation need to be reported in full and companies can be prosecuted and have their products refused authorisation if there is any evidence that ADRs have been concealed.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would like you to explain to me carefully why you think my nephew would be better off without these treatments.

I doubt she thinks he would be better off. I think she simply wants to be able to decide what she feels is right for her OWN children. Freedom of choice as a parent.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

vaccination has removed from the pool of infections a large number of pathogens but it depends on the majority of people actually getting vaccinated. Pockets of maniac mothers/fathers putting their children at risk for idiotic ideological reasons based on very little real knowledge fosters a climate of prevalent infection and puts the whole of society at risk.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like the abortion debate... there are no right or wrong answers, just the right to do what you want with your own child[ren].

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now