AP Baby

Of all vaccine preventable diseases, Hib is IMO particularly scary. I am not afraid to admit being scared of meningitis...

"Children who survive Hib meningitis may develop permanent neurological disability, including brain damage, hearing loss, and mental retardation. 15% to 30% of children who survive Hib disease are at risk for these disabilities. 5% to 10% cases of Hib meningitis are at risk of dying." http://www.who.int/immunization/topics/hib/en/index1.html

Not my idea of good odds.

Here's another good link about Hib
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs294/en/

"The rate of invasive Hib disease has been reduced by 95% in neonates and infants since the introduction of its preventative vaccines...Hib was the leading cause of bacterial meningitis in children under age 5 before its vaccines were introduced. "http://www.meningitisfoundationofamerica.org/templates/content-view/80/index.html

So, in a nutshell...

The disease is particularly scary and targets the youngest and most vulnerable of our population. The vaccine is safe and effective. That's why I chose to give Hib.

Posted by JoAnna at 06:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This particular myth was started by Vera Scheibner, basically saying that when Japan raised the vaccination age to 2 years old, their SIDS rates plummeted. Of course it's totally not true.

Scheibner systematically misrepresents the Japanese situation. SIDS continued to occur in Japan but since the diagnosis is restricted to children under 12 months and the minimum age for vaccination increased to two years, it merely disappeared as an entity from the vaccine compensation system. (
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/322/7290/822)

Japan SIDS rates are currently at their lowest ever
http://www.sids.gr.jp/en/recent_projects.html

See page 73 for Dtap study results (no difference in SIDS rates in DTAP'd and un vaxed babies)
http://www.sids.gr.jp/invi/The%209th%20SIDS_0522.pdf

Scheibner rests her statement about the "disappearance of cot death" on data showing that no claims were lodged under the compensation scheme when the vaccination age was increased from 3 months to 2 years of age. However, she fails to point out that a SIDS diagnosis is restricted to infants under 12 monmths. SIDS had merely disappeared as an entity from the vaccination compensation system which was now compensating only for events occurring after 2 years, the new minimum age for vaccination.(
http://www.utoronto.ca/virology/mby480/lectures/Scheibner.pdf)

Posted by JoAnna at 05:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I'm having a really hard time with this book because literally every paragraph of every page is chock full of hundreds upon hundreds of completely ridiculous statements. I am not kidding. I'm actually quite surprised at how outrageous some of this is; anti-vaxers present this book as a "balanced" view. Hmm.

Ok, so this next chapter is titled "Contaminated Vaccines," and delves right into the anonymous source game.

Continue reading "Debunking the Vaccine Guide, #2... " »

Posted by JoAnna at 04:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Vaccine Guide, by Randall Neustaedter OMD, bills itself as "Risks and Benefits for Children and Adults." However, this book wastes no time getting to the manipulative language. Right on the cover, there is a list of vaccines which are discussed in the books pages. Anthrax is the first one. Smallpox and typhoid are also included, despite the fact that the vast majority of Americans will never be vaccinated with those vaccines.

Manipulative language is the name of the game in this book though, I really could go on and on as each paragraph is positively stuffed with it.

"The damage that vaccines cause on immune functions is now undeniable, but the repeated denial of serious adverse events and deaths by vaccine manufacturers is reminiscent of the tobacco industry's stonewalling. (page xi, preface) "

So much for risks and benefits, hmm? Now that we have *that* out of the way...

Continue reading "Debunking The Vaccine Guide, Part 1... " »

Posted by JoAnna at 04:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)

Highlights from a WHO document about the Initiative for Vaccine Research (pdf file):

The process of developing vaccines is complex, risky and lengthy: it usually takes more than 10 years to arrive at a fully licensed product. Moreover, the required investment both of capital and highly skilled expertise is substantial and, as a result, those who most need the vaccines are the least able to afford or develop them.

Even when an efficient vaccine is developed and licensed, R&D should not stop there. Implementation research... is a vital component of successful vaccine introduction.

Vaccines used today are the yield of decades of devoted effort, requiring not only excellence in research, but also managerial and funding commitment throughout the endeavor. The total cost of the R&D process for a single vaccine candidate is estimated at US $200 million to US $500 million... registration of a single vaccine requires the development of four to five independent vaccine candidates and a constant pipeline of potential new products.

Using the life-cycle approach applied to commercial vaccines, innovation and research into even better vaccines and vaccine delivery systems continue, for example towards improved manufacturing processes to reduce gradually the cost of a vaccine for the end user.

Posted by JoAnna at 11:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Whale.to is a popular anti-vaccine site that I can't help myself, I love to have fun with. With pages like these, it just gets to be too easy.

http://whale.to/v/biowarfare.html
http://whale.to/a.html
http://whale.to/b/mind_control.html
http://www.whale.to/b/demons_q.html

Here's a fabulous quote from one of Whale's pages about Satanism...

Well, sad to say, there are sexual rituals involving demonic beings known as sucubus and incubus. These reptilian beings densify during the slaughter of a young virgin girl, no older than 12, but menstruating. That's the reason for the growth hormones in milk - to produce more menstruating young women in western countries. It was getting tough - as the CIA continued its Satanic expansion of itself into every town, city, and hamlet in the North and Southern Americas, to fill the needs of the Beast. Plus, keeping their own undead here, requires a whole cataloge of young children (http://www.whale.to/b/demons_q.html)

Did you know if you search whale.to for the word "satan" you get 180 responses?

Posted by JoAnna at 09:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I'll start with the good news... Bella gained two pounds since her last visit! Baby girl is really chubbing up. :)

That's the good news from our 2 month WBV (well baby visit) with our pediatrician. The new pediatrician, for the record.

I was very, very apprehensive about this visit because I knew she'd be getting her first round of vaccines. Currently that includes Rotateq, Pediarix, DTaP, and Hib.

It's disturbing how easily the anti-vax culture seeps into your brain, as even though I *know* vaccines are very safe, I was so nervous! Nervous about the pain from the actual sticks (3, Rotateq is an oral vax), nervous about any potential side-effects, just nervous! Although really I guess anytime someone says "Do X and it will hurt your baby," if you are a mom, you are going to think about it a little bit no matter what common sense tells you. We are mama bears, for real!

So who would've thunk that the oral vax, Rotateq, would be the one to cause us a problem?

I guess the nurse administering the vaccines is new to administering oral vaccines. She btw, is the same lady who did our PKU stick which she did a fantastic job at. She was just so fast, it was much better than when my midwife did it (six sticks and the test still had to be redone, awful awful awful!). But she wanted Bella to be lying flat on her back for this. My instinct told me she should be sitting up; I don't know why I didn't say anything, honestly. I just figured this lady knew what she was talking about.

So she has Bella lying flat on her back and starts letting her suck on the end of this little syringe-type thing which has the vaccine in it, and squirting it a little bit too, I guess, because my baby choked. I'm going to go ahead and assume that the problem here was that she was lying on her back and she was not controlling the rate of the flow into her mouth. (When I give her bottles for supplementing, I have her sitting up.) So she really choked. I mean stopped breathing for at least five seconds while this nurse just looked at her, and I was overcome by some odd doctors-office paralysis. I know what to do when a baby chokes, but I just assumed this woman would do something! She did not, so I grabbed her and flipped her over, which seemed to help. Once Bella caught her breath she was soooo upset and screaming, and making wierd little hiccoughing sounds. You could tell the fluid had gone down wrong.

I guess we really should've let her settle down then before moving on to the needles, but we didn't. I am a newbie mom and this whole visit I felt like I just screwed up. Anytime I don't listen to my instincts I wind up regretting it, and this was one of those times.

Poor baby, of course she screamed her little head off when she got stuck; but honestly that part was very, very fast. Awful. But fast. It was calming her down afterwards that I got worried. The nurse had left and I was trying to nurse her and she just absolutely would not calm down and latch on. She was still making that wierd hiccoughing noise. I finally got her latched on, but she kept unlatching, hiccoughing, and then she would start screaming again.

Finally I stepped out and asked for the doctor to come back in. She did, and listened to her lungs to make sure she hadn't aspirated anything. Her lungs were clear, so the doc told me she thought she was refluxing up some of the vax, which was what was causing that scary sound when she was breathing. She advised me that the baby might throw up the vax. Then she told me to stay until her breathing was normal or I felt comfortable; which I did. I think I stayed for another 45 minutes just sitting there, I finally got her to latch on, and then shortly after she fell asleep. Her breathing returned to normal and my heart started beating again.

The doc came back in to check on us and gave me her cell number to call, just in case. The nurse kept poking her head in and apologizing; she clearly felt awful about the whole thing and I think her technique with Rotateq will be modified in future!

Bella slept off and on for the rest of the day, and that night woke up. Smiling. Flirting. Cooing and being her totally normal, beautiful self. I think she's had some mild soreness in her legs, but nothing that has made her very upset.

Who would've thought I would've been foiled by what I thought would be the "easy" vaccine?

Posted by JoAnna at 08:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Someone on a message board recently PMd me to ask my thoughts on vaccines. The board is overwhelmingly anti-vax in sentiment, and this person was interested in a less biased opinion. I sent her some links and a few of my posts on why I am pro-vax. She hasn't written me back, and I was just sitting here pondering and thinking that I bet she got my email, realized I am pro-vax, and sighed... thinking to herself that she sure wishes she could find a *neutral* source to read about vaccines on.

I remember thinking the same thing when I first started reading about vaccines. There are the anti-vax sites, hundreds of them. Then there are the government, medical, and scientific sites, which are pro-vax. There is no in between. Why isn't there an in between?

This may seem silly, but it just hit me right now. There is no in between because the entire body of medical research and science support vaccination. So there really can't be an "in between."

This isn't to say that modern medicine is not without its pitfalls; of course it is. Nor do I believe that vaccines are either 100% safe or 100% effective; they make no claim to that effect, either. But I do believe, based on the entire body of medical science in the world (not just America), that vaccines are very very safe and very very effective.

So I guess I sound biased in favor of medicine, don't I?

Posted by JoAnna at 04:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

"Geesh, it's not like the chickenpox is going to suddenly cause everyone to drop dead. I just don't understand some people."

That's a quote from some random anti-vaxer on a random anti-vax message board.

On the other hand, I don't understand why anti-vaccine folks seem to think that death is the only bad thing that can happen to you. "Complications of chickenpox can include pneumonia, encephalitis (inflammation of the brain), or a severe bacterial infection (immunize.org)." Don't miss these photos for a graphic warning about the potential complications of chickenpox, and when you're done there, please read these case reports of people who've died of chickenpox.

I don't understand why the idea that vaccines are not 100% effective would make anyone LESS LIKELY to get vaccinated. Shouldn't that make you more likely to get vaccinated? I know the anti-vaxers claim that herd immunity is a myth, but I wonder if they'd be as strident about that if they lived in an area without a strong committment to immunization. (They *say* they would. It's easy to say that when you live protected by the US herd.)

I also don't understand the blase' attitude about time spent sick during childhood. I'd like my child to be able to enjoy the benefits of the life modern medicine can give her, with LESS time spent suffering during her childhood, and more time playing and learning. She is going to get sick regardless, but shouldn't I as a mother protect her as much as I can from that?

Posted by JoAnna at 06:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

SIDS scares me to death. I have a feeling most parents feel the same way. The idea that for no apparent reason, your wonderful little baby could just... stop breathing... is horrifying. Beyond horrifying. Honestly there are no words! (She says, looking down at her sleeping baby snug in her sling.)

So it really yanks my chain, personally, when I see people blaming this and that on SIDS and implying that those people who work to end SIDS are part of a conspiracy. Well, they may not *say* they are in a conspiracy but I'm not sure how else you could look at it. Much like my posts regarding mattress wrapping as a source of SIDS, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever connecting SIDS and vaccines. So if you are going to say that anything causes SIDS, and reputable SIDS organizations do not address that cause, then there is a conspiracy at work by default, right?

Though I never do understand the motivation. Usually anti-vaxers try to bring it back to money. SIDS organizations must be taking donations from Big Pharma who are buying their cooperation to kill babies so they can profit from selling a $20 vaccine. (No, Big Pharma is busy profiting from cholesterol meds and viagara. Not from vaccines, people!)

I'm not a doctor, and I am not a medical researcher. I am really good at googling stuff! I try to read reputable sources and I am good at evaluating sources to determine if they are reputable and reliable. (It's my background in journalism which makes me a stickler for a reliable source!) I simply don't believe that every SIDS organization in the world is conspiring to keep information from parents which could save babies lives. Thus, by default, there is no connection between SIDS and vaccines.

But ok, that is just the logical part for me. Let's be more evidence-based.

"The studies showing no increased risk for SIDS with the DTP immunizations actually showed that fully immunized infants had a lower risk for SIDS. Although no study has yet explained this relationship, it is likely indirectly related to other risk factors like socioeconomic status (SES)-------babies fully immunized likely have good access to health care and higher SES than infants not up to date on immunizations, and may be more likely to be full term, etc." (In other words, healthy, well-cared for infants are less likely to die of SIDS.) ~ http://sids-network.org/experts/immunize.htm

"The study released in March 2003 confirmed that there is no evidence of a link between Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) and multiple vaccines given in infancy. Many parents have been reluctant to give their children the most common vaccine against measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR). Most American children get several vaccines during their first year of life, including MMR; some of the first questions about vaccine safety came from all Australian researcher in the 1980s who argued that MMR may cause autism. (For more on vaccination scares see "Anti-Vaccination Fever," page 21.) Marie McCormick, head of the committee that wrote the March report, said that "although the timing of infant vaccinations coincides with the period when SIDS is most likely to occur, parents should rest assured that the number and variety of childhood vaccines do not cause SIDS." From Skeptical Inquirer.

"Although previous studies have shown either no association between immunisation and SIDS or even a decreased risk of SIDS, adverse effects, including death, from immunisations continue to cause concern, especially when a new vaccine is introduced. METHODS: A large case control study with immunisation data on 307 SIDS cases and 971 controls. RESULTS: SIDS cases were immunised less frequently and later than controls. Furthermore there was no increased risk of SIDS in the 14 days following immunisation. There was no evidence to suggest the recently introduced hexavalent vaccines were associated with an increased risk of SIDS. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides further support that immunisations may reduce the risk of SIDS." From PubMed.

I could go on, but I think that's enough. The only place on the 'net where you can find "proof" that vaccines cause SIDS is on anti-vaccination websites. If there were really a link, don't you think that SIDS researchers and organizations would be shouting it from the rooftops to save any other baby from dying?

OK, I can't talk about this anymore. But I really hate people who exploit our fear of SIDS.

Posted by JoAnna at 02:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

My pediatrician is anti-vax. Now how is that for irony? All the anti-vax crowd claim that anti-vax pediatricians don't exist, and yet I... a pro-vaxer... manage to find one. I really like her too. She is actually a family practice physician who I've been seeing for my own thyroid issues, and I was so glad when I first found out she takes baby patients. I saw her as the best of both worlds; an MD who also believes in a more holistics perspective of health, including diet and natural healing in her arsenal of remedies.

Now, I find myself in a quandry. I love that she comes from a more natural perspective. When my baby girl was not pooping for the first two weeks of her life (to clarify: she had many meconium poops the first week, then nothing for TEN DAYS! Yes, I was panicking!), she evaluated her overall health and told me not to worry... breastfed babies just do that sometimes. She was right. My baby is now pooping plenty! :) But I can't help thinking that a more traditional MD might have been more invasive and ordered dozens of tests and who knows what, based on the fact that B. was not doing what *most* babies do.

But, I want to vaccinate my baby. I believe after having done much research, that it is the best thing for her. (Though I am dreading the actual shots. So much!) When I went to my doc for our "pre-baby" interview, I asked her about vaccines, and she replied very very carefully. She said that she did not feel comfortable making the decision to vaccinate or not for a parent; that it was up to the parent to decide. Which is a great thing! But I replied, "Of course it is my decision! But I value your professional opinion as part of my decision-making process."

She told me that she does not carry vaccines in the office, that it is not cost-effective to do so. Apparently this is true even for doctors with much bigger practices. She then went on to comment on the Hep B vax and say that "It's not as if babies are having sex or using drugs." Well, no, my baby is not going to have sex or use drugs. But how are children giving each other Hep B?

"It is estimated that 18% of all persons with chronic HBV infection acquired their infections postnatally during early childhood. In some populations, childhood transmission was more important than perinatal transmission as a cause of chronic HBV infection before infant hepatitis B immunization was widely implemented." From immunize.org.

"Other primary means of HB infection include: child-to-child transmission (from children being in contact with one another in household settings), contaminated blood transfusions, unsterile needles and sexual activity." From Unicef.org

She went on to say that the last outbreak of measles occurred in the 80's amongst vaccinated children. This is absolutely not true. The last big outbreak of measles was amongst the non-vaccinating Amish. Apparently it was severe enough that it resulted in many Amish children getting vaccinated!

I can't help but wonder how a care provider could be so misinformed, when an easy google search turns up this information. She did give me a book by Randall Neustaedter called "The Vaccine Guide," before I left. The only thing I can figure is that sometimes people assume that if you read something in a book, and it has a footnote, it *must* be true. Unfortunately, in the case of the anti-vax world, those footnotes frequently are flawed when you trace them back. But who has the time to actually verify all the sources used by the anti-vaxers to make their point?

So anyways... Now I am in the position of needing to find a pediatrician who can vaccinate my babygirl. But I want the best of all possible worlds. I want an AP/NFL, pro-vaxing, evidence-based doctor who doesn't tell me to let my baby cry or feed her solids when she is too young or tell me to supplement my breastmilk with formula.

Really, is that too much to ask???

Posted by JoAnna at 02:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

#1... pediatricians are pushy about vaccinating because they make so much money from vaccines. Reality? Nope.

Recently a physician who has a 20-person practice calculated that they would spend $2 million on Gardasil to be able to give it to everyone in the age range who needed it. If they don’t generate $2,010,000 back, he’s lost money because it wasn’t just the outlay for the purchase of the vaccine. There was the refrigerator, the utilization of space by that refrigerator, the cost of the generator, the cost of the security system, and then everything else that goes into giving the vaccine. The AAP has come out with a business case for pricing vaccines. They talk about the average wholesale price [AWP] and average sale price [ASP]. What we are saying is that the range to break even above the actual cost is anywhere from 17% to 28%. Managed care companies are not giving you that and certainly vaccines have become, at this point in time, the major issue between pediatricians and managed care. The line has been drawn in the sand, and many pediatricians have said, ‘I can’t keep losing money. This is it. You give this to me or,’ as Stan said, ‘I’m not going to purchase it. I can’t give it. It’s a problem.’

Posted by JoAnna at 02:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

When I first approached the vaccine question, I actually did so from an *anti* perspective. I'd been pretty inundated with that attitude on the Mothering boards, and as I agree with so much else there... I really assumed I'd wind up agreeing with that too, once I started digging. But there were a few things right off the bat that turned me off.

1) The fact that if you question an anti-vaccine resource (many anti-vaccine websites are run by individuals with no medical training or background whatsoever), you get slammed, demeaned, belittled, and accused of not doing any research.

2) When you ask for verifiable facts regarding statistics, 9 times out of 10 you are sent to one of those anti-vaccine websites.

3) That the authors who write books about how terrible vaccines are have not done any original research, but distort results from the research of others... carefully choosing which studies they will use and trying to find the most flawed studies. (Because yes, of course, scientists do make mistakes and not every study is perfect.) Also these authors usually spend all their time quoting one another so that the entire thing is circular. "Anti-vaccine guy A says vaccines are horrible!" This gets repeated over and over by all the other anti-vaccine folks until it is accepted as a verifiable fact, when really it is just an *opinion.*

4) It seems the majority of anti-vaccine folks do not understand even what I mean when I ask for a verifiable fact. They think they do. They seem to think that if someone put something on a website, that makes it a verifiable fact.

5) The conspiracy theories! Oh the conspiracy theories! I think there is a reason that people tend to roll their eyes at conspiracy theorists. I simply cannot imagine how anyone could believe that every government in the world, every doctor in the world, every SIDS organization in the world, every Autism organization in the world, are ALL in on the conspiracy to harm people with vaccines. Not to mention the very bizarre idea that Bill Gates would somehow make a profit from donating free vaccines to third world countries. How does that work again?

6) A lot of these people don't seem to understand that not only can anyone write a book (especially a self-published book, like "Just a Little Prick," which I can't help laughing at every time I think of it), but anyone can much more easily post a website. (Yes, I include myself in that statement. Did you think I was giving medical advice? I am not. It's just a blog, people.) Anyone can make it *look* official and *sound* official if they try and have a decent education. That doesn't make the information found in the book or website reliable.

I mean really, if Ann Coulter can write a book and be taken seriously... *anyone* can!

7) The fact that anytime you present any study or studies disproving what the anti-vax community claims, the response is... "That study is bogus!" They don't ever give a reason why the study is bogus. They just say it over and over again in hopes you'll eventually shut up. It's easy to believe that you have all the information if you just completely disregard anything that conflicts with your opinion. But why? Who would want to make medical, life or death decisions for their families that way? I don't understand.

8) The homeopathy connection. Homeopathy, if you don't know, is basically an alternative medicine practice which involves giving a person a tiny amount of a toxin, to somehow balance their system and cure whatever the problem is. Yet somehow, the anti-vaccine community does not see how protesting against the toxins in vaccines (Picture a needle, and the TINY amount of fluid in the needle, think of the many ingredients in that needle and try to figure out just how tiny an amount we are talking about. REALLY tiny!), while ingesting toxins from homeopathy, are in conflict. I recently saw a strident anti-vaccine activist discussing taking homeopathic doses of arsenic... while pregnant. So arsenic in homeopathics is ok, but formaldehyde in a vaccine that could save your child's life is not? Sorry... what was that?

9) Unverifiable quotes. Like this one.

"Dr. James R. Shannon, former director of the National Institute of Health reported in December, 2003 that “the only safe vaccine is one that is never used”.

Wow, that's pretty intense. Notice I don't give a citation for it, though. That's because there is no citation for it. You can find it on every anti-vaccine website out there on the wide world of the 'Net. But you won't find (or at least, I have been unable to find, and I tried) an original source or citation for this quote. When I pointed this out on an anti-vaccine message board, I was told that it came from private correspondence between Dr. Shannon and another Dr. That some anti-vaxer had somehow gained access to this private correspondence, quoted Dr. Shannon, and thus it is a verifiable fact, just not verifiable to anyone but that first person. Hmmmmmm....

There are lots of these quotes out there, this is just one example.

10) The insistence that mercury is still in our vaccines even though thimerosal was removed from vaccines years ago. (Aside from one incarnation of the flu vaccine. There are thimerosal free versions of flu vaccine available.) The insistence that thimerosal causes autism even though numerous studies have shown there is no connection between the two. The total crazy hysteria over thimerosal while people munch away on their tuna sandwiches.

So... ten reasons for me to be turned and completely swayed by the anti-vaxers themselves, to go the other way. I prefer living in the land of reality where I can verify things via solid medical research, personally.

Posted by JoAnna at 04:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

When I first started poking around the anti-vax issue, it was with the belief that vaccines are bad. Which is a very trendy thing to believe these days. Although, I had already been exposed to the skeptical side of myself via my research into SIDS and mattress fumes. So, I suppose I was feeling a bit skeptical when I started out.

However, what I've found is... more than a little bit scary. People who assert that vaccines cause everything from autism to allergies to SIDS and everything in between, and who do so in the face of all research which concludes the contrary. People who believe that every SIDS organization, autism organization, government health organization IN THE WORLD are in on a grand conspiracy to convince us all to vaccinate for monetary gain.

Someone close to me sent me to the Dr. Carly website, which was one of the first that I really made myself sit down and analyze... and found myself reading things like:

"However, the reverberating truth, “the shot heard round the world” which will lead to the evolution of consciousness necessary to stop the holocaust against humanity known as vaccinations, will be that not only are vaccinations not safe or effective, but that they are actually weapons of mass destruction being perpetrated upon humanity in the name of health, for the purpose of genocide and to bring in the New World Order. Part 2 of the genocidal plan could drop anytime with activation of the Model State Health Emergency Powers Act whenever the next fabricated terrorist attack using biological agents occurs. The “bird flu” is apparently going to be used as an excuse to inoculate the masses soon, as predictions of a pandemic are being made by the media almost every day." ~Dr.Carly

Yes... that's right, folks. Vaccines are part of an attempt at global genocide.

Of course there is no explanation as to who would benefit from said genocide nor what their motivation would be to do such a thing.

Not only that, but Dr. Carly is part of a group of people who believe that vaccines are part of some satanic ritual.

It doesn't bother me or scare me to see parents (like myself) doing more in-depth research as to what is in vaccines, why they are given, what they prevent against, and all the facts therein. It does bother me to see people taking advice from someone who believes a) vaccines are part of a global genocidal plot or b) vaccines are part of a satanic ritual. Either way, consider your source please!

Trying to have a coherent discussion with the most vehement anti-vax people usually goes something like:

Anti-vaxer: "Rotavirus is no big deal."
Skeptic: "My godson had rotavirus and spent a month at children's hospital. It was way more than "no big deal" for us. A vaccine could've saved a month of his life spent hooked up to IVs."
Anti-vaxer: "But if he'd died of a vaccine, you'd have a different perspective."

What???? I'm not sure how that is relevant, except for being able to say in response: "Yes, and if your child had almost died of rotavirus, maybe your perspective would be different as well."

I'm really doing this only for my own sanity and to sort out all the information I've been collecting about vaccinations, but I'll be going through and addressing some of their basic arguments and concerns about vaccines.

To clarify, I will just say that being concerned over vaccines is good. Researching them is good. Having a dose of *healthy* skepticism towards modern medicine can be good. But rejecting all medical science, all medical research, and every doctor on the face of the earth in the belief that sodium ascorbate can heal all the world's ills and vaccine preventable diseases are no big deal... sorry, that is not good.

Posted by JoAnna at 10:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)