THE DEADLY TOLL OF VACCINE HYSTERIA

New York Post ^ | 16 feb 09 | SCOTT GOTTLIEB

[rellimpank]

THE idea that a preservative once used in vaccines is to blame for rising autism rates has just been authoritatively debunked - again. Indeed, some of the key early "evidence" now stands exposed as fake.

Sadly, none of this will kill this myth - because it was never based on good science.

[Question_Assumptions]

Using PROPER terminology, a "whore" is what contracts this disease in their teens and twenties. We don't' raise whore so it is not needed her to protect against promiscuity.

Well, whores actually get paid. Many promiscuous young women give away for free what others charge for so "whore" isn't the proper term. The term I think you are looking for is "slut".

That said, part of how they discovered the relationship between STDs and cervical cancer is that many women in Latin America were not promiscuous yet they still had a very high cervical cancer rate. The problem was that their husbands were promiscuous and were cheating on them. So it's not simply a matter of how you raise your own daughter but who she marries and what he does, too.

[netmilsmom]

>>I am very much anti-drug.<<

Me too!
Not all drugs are bad, but not all of them are good either.

What’s the case for enzymes?

[netmilsmom]

Personally, I’m not so much against the HPV vaccine as the timing of it.

Way too early in my opinion.

[bert]

When considering the intelligence of collective American women, think Oil of Olay, think hydrate/hydration.....they will believe about anything.

[AnAmericanMother]

Here's the deal: Congruity in time is not causation.

Autism has always shown first symptoms around 18 months of age. This was the case long before vaccinations, but until recently autism was lumped in the general category of "severely retarded" and the kids were institutionalized so you didn't see them around.

The vaccine theory has been disproved over and over. Last week the special court set up to hear the vaccine cases held that no link had been shown. And one of the doctors involved in the original claims has been shown to have tampered with the data (that was on FR a couple of weeks ago). It's time for research to go in other directions instead of going on and on trying to prove a discredited theory.

As for why there are more and more cases, that one's easy. It used to not be a separate diagnosis = more diagnoses. The feds pay benefits for autism = more diagnoses. The criteria for the diagnosis have been drastically relaxed = LOTS more diagnoses.

Under today's standards, I probably would have been diagnosed with "autism spectrum disorder" as a child. My sister whose quirks were more obvious than mine might well have been diagnosed as autistic. It's gotten to the point where "kinda geeky" is pegged as autistic or autistic spectrum or Asperger's. And that does a disservice to the kids like the child of some friends of mine, who at 25 is still mute, unable to communicate, rocks in corners constantly, and will have to be institutionalized when his parents die.

[mysterio]

What were the symptoms you experienced after getting the flu shot?

[dangerdoc]

A persons number of sexual contacts includes direct and indirect.

If a young woman saves herself for marriage and marries a man with a history of one sexual contact, she is at risk. Even if both parties claim to be virgins, one could be a liar.

HPV is a sneaky virus, often the lesions are not easily visible or are in a non visible location.

Once infected, it is very dificult to eradicate and if a young woman is infected, it causes a significant risk of cervical cancer down the line.

From a medical standpoint, cervical cancer is not related to her socioeconomic cercumstance, it is related to her husband’s.

People are concerned that the vaccine will protect indescrete women from cancer. The way I look at it, it protects women from indescrete men.

[netmilsmom]

>>What were the symptoms you experienced after getting the flu shot?<<

The point of injection was very sore. The muscles under were sore for both myself and my husband for nearly a month. Within two days both of us had respiratory problems that went on for two weeks. Mine lingered, with a runny nose that lasted well past the time I sought medical help. My doctor actually suggested the second year that it might be something in the injections themselves.

I told him that if I ever went back to working in a hospital, I would ONLY get a vaccine from him. I trust that if everyone were getting sick from a batch, he would stop using that batch. Where a clinic would use it all up before knowing it’s a problem.

[netmilsmom]

>>The way I look at it, it protects women from indescrete men.<<

I never thought about it that way. Thank you.

I do believe in immunizations. I want my girls protected. I’m not happy with the timing of the shot. I do not want to give it to them pre-puberty. I don’t think there is enough testing on that.

Is that reasonable?

[Question_Assumptions]

As I've said in other threads, my issue is with government mandates for all sorts of vaccines that cover diseases that aren't all tha turgen. People know their own circumstances better than the government and the reason why several of these vaccines are being given to everyone at very early ages is that it's politically incorrect to single out the high risk groups for special attention. As for the HPV vaccine, the problem with the current one is that it's not 100% which means that not only do women still need to get checked, anyway, but it may give them a false sense of security, not only encouraging them to not get checked but it can also make the strains not covered by the HPV vaccine more prevalent.

[Conservativegreatgrandma]

Please read what I have said. I can assure you, I only care about the truth. You sound as though you dismiss the condition of those like my grandson. There is no way that what happened to him is "normal". He could possibly be put in that category now but a youngster that still does not speak well at age five, did not make eye contact, would run away because he was not aware of where he was, walked on his tip toes and flapped his hands, he could not have been called normal.

Do I believe that all vaccines are dangerous--of course not but neither am I convinced that there might not be some problem with either certain vaccines, perhaps the mercury contamination, the combinations or the frequency, etc.

I have never read of one person that has a theory of what is causing it. Do I agree with those who claim there are far too many so-called cases? Yup. I believe there are those who will look for excuses for financial gain, etc. but I also believe we do have increased cases and there has to be a reason.

[netmilsmom]

>>anyway, but it may give them a false sense of security, not only encouraging them to not get checked but it can also make the strains not covered by the HPV vaccine more prevalent.<<

Ooooo, never thought of that.
Spot on!

[jalisco555]

Personally, I’m not so much against the HPV vaccine as the timing of it. Way too early in my opinion.

No, the time to vaccinate is before girls become sexually active. 50% of women will be infected with one or another type of genital HPV within three years of becoming sexually active. If you wait too long it could be too late. The vaccines are only prophylactic, not therapeutic. Therefore vaccinating at age 11 or 12 makes sense. I can't tell you how many STDs I've diagnosed in the 15-20 age group.

[Question_Assumptions]

The Chicken Pox vaccine is relatively new and nobody ever thought it was bad to get as a child. The reason why it was mandated was not to save lives or medical expenses. It was so that parents wouldn't have to spend a week at home out of work with their sick kids. As for Shingles, the reason why people get Shingles during times of stress is that you never get rid of the disease and that's what gives people perpetual immunity to it. Their immune system is always fighting it off. That's also why mothers pass the immunity on to their newborns. But the vaccine doesn't give perpetual immunity and sometimes it doesn't work at all because it's a weaker form of the disease that your body can fight off. So what happens if a person who relied on the vaccine gets exposed to chicken pox in their 30s, 40s, or 50s and their immunity has worn off because, like most adults, they've never bothered to keep up with boosters? We're likely going to find out the hard way.

It's also exactly Mickey Mouse vaccinations like the chicken pox vaccine that make people doubt the need for all of them. At some point, enough is enough for mandated vaccines and we're already going well beyond the point of diminishing returns. You can try to make chicken pox sound like polio but nobody without a vaccination agenda is going to buy that argument and without worldwide vaccination, the idea of herd mentality in a world with non-stop flights to the other side of the planet is absurd.

[WVNan]

Just to see the other side: I’m 75 years old, never have had a flu shot and never had the flu. I will not get flue shots, period.

[jalisco555]

As for the HPV vaccine, the problem with the current one is that it's not 100% which means that not only do women still need to get checked, anyway, but it may give them a false sense of security, not only encouraging them to not get checked but it can also make the strains not covered by the HPV vaccine more prevalent.

It is certainly true that even vaccinated women will continue to need Pap smears, although there is some debate over whether the frequency of screening and the age of starting screening should be modified if the person is vaccinated. The concern over whether non-covered HPV types will fill in the gap left by types 16 and 18 is something we are watching. There is no evidence so far to say it will occur but it's at least theoretically possible, although I personally doubt it will be a serious problem.

[jalisco555]

Just to see the other side: I’m 75 years old, never have had a flu shot and never had the flu. I will not get flue shots, period.

I hope you reconsider and that you also get the pneumonia vaccine. Not to be morbid but people your age are at the highest risk of succumbing to these diseases.

[Freedom4US]

It was not entire without controversy. Among the first in the U.S. was Smallpox vacc.

Polio was a major concern. Remember there was a Sak and Sabin innocuation. There were a number of citizens whom contracted Polio because of the medicine administered at that time. It was a big story in the 50s. But it was considered the enemy of the good is “perfect”.

Not to mention Typhoid, Meases, Whooping cough, Tetanus, Rubeaa, Yeow fever, Dengue Fever, Chagas disease, Pauge, Rabies, Anthrax, a host of unmentioned waterborne diseases, STDs, and engineered threats. I’m sure I didn’t mention a number of other threats.

[Question_Assumptions]

I say you stop being insensitive to people whose children die of preventable diseases because you grab hold of junk science.

If your goal is to save children from bad parental choices, why stop there? A person is as likely to die from chicken pox as they are to die from all sorts of other things. Let's ban parents from letting their children outside in the rain (they might get hit by lightning). Let's ban children from skiing and any sport where they might get hurt. Let's ban bicycles and skateboards and bats and hockey sticks around children and let's ban them from sporting events and monster truck shows and any other place where they might get hurt. And child safety seats? Let's ban children in cars all together, or within 50 feet of a moving car. Think of all of the children's lives that would save. All of those children who die in car accidents could have been saved if only their parents weren't so irresponsible as to put their child in a car in the first place.

If liberty means anything, you have to accept that people are going to use it to make choices that you wouldn't make and even choices that are objectively stupid. The alternative is totalitarianism and the exact same justifications that you are using here for your own little limited brand of totalitarianism, that people are too stupid to make the right choices for the benefit of all without a government mandate, can be used to justify the full-blown 1984 variety.

[Question_Assumptions]

And if you thin my previous point is hyperbole, then tell me what level of risk is a parent allowed to expose their child to before the government steps in and mandates a certain form of behavior? Who gets to decide?