| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| 22shortie |
Posted - May 02 2008 : 6:44:02 PM
I know people on both sides of the fence but I am curious to know where some of you stand on this matter. My daughter is up to date on all of her shots but I have heard so many horror stories about autism and other effects of vaccines that I dread taking her in for any more shots. So, what do you think? Do you or DONT you?
Fresh and creative projects popping up on my blog daily! Stop by and check out what I'm up to today!
http://pumpkinseed-unscripted.blogspot.com/ |
| 25 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| lavendermom |
Posted - Aug 03 2008 : 6:09:46 PM
It took me over 2 years to really research this topic and I am glad that I did...I encourage all parents to research (you don't have to take 2 years!) any medical procedure and don't just do something because you feel like you must or because the doc says so! My first 3 children were all immunized on schedule. #2 came down with whooping cough/pertussis (very NASTY) after (inspite of) his shots. Something seemed wrong with #3...every shot seemed to not sit right with him or me. I began wondering... Then #4 came along and she was bright, happy, beautiful...until her 6 months shots when she became very ill, lethargic, feverish. She had been given a total of 6 shots in one visit! My husband scolded me severly for allowing it! She recovered, thank the LORD. But, we started really digging into everything we could find. Not biased info, but I visited the various pharm sites, sites for individual vaccines, sites for the CDC. I actually counted myself the number of deaths/complications reported for diseases vs. the vaccines. The truth might shock you!
Needless to say, #5 is 100% organic and the healthiest child we have! He has never been to a doctor and he is 3 years old. He has never had an earache. He has never run a fever for over 24-48 hours. When he does get ill, he recovers swiftly. Actually, none of my children have been to the doctor in well over 5 years since we became "health-food nuts" and I became an herbalist! #3 still has many food allergies and other issues that we are overcoming and I am convinced that they were triggered by the vaccines.
Bottom line...do your homework and don't make a decision based on fear one way or the other. We are blessed with abundant resources today at our fingertips! Use them to empower yourself! Know the facts! 
I have more info on this at my site...
www.fromfieldsandgardens.com
www.homesteadblogger.com/fromfieldsandgardens
www.farmsteadorganics.etsy.com
|
| keeperofthehome |
Posted - Jul 25 2008 : 8:36:27 PM
Hey! I just finished a great article in the August issue of Kiwi Magazine. I got the mag today at Whole Foods. I'm not sure if it's on their website or not. It shows the pros and cons of having immunizations, delaying and skipping them altogether. This may help those trying to make the decision.
My youngest son that I've spoken about before and has speech issues, began those issues the day after having his MMR shot. He was a premie and had reactions to every shot. I undertand immunization because it has saved many lives and prevented diseases such as meningitis and polio, however, I don't believe they are safe for all children. If we were to ever have any more, doubtful but not impossible, I would do delayed immunizations and skip MMR altogether.
Blessings!
~Farrah
www.homesteadblogger.com/keeperofthehome/
|
| babysmama |
Posted - Jul 22 2008 : 6:57:21 PM
Kimberly,
I realize that it is horrible to witness a child being sickened by an illness that a vaccination could have prevented but it is also hard to see a perfectly healthy child one day and one completely different the next. Though most studies say there are no links between vaccinations and autisim there are many parents who say otherwise since their kids were healthy and right after the shots were a totally different person.
Thankfully, in America, there is little chance of getting most of the diseases. I realize that this is because the majority of the population has been vaccinated and I am thankful for that. Each parent needs to weigh the pros and cons of the vaccinations. I personally feel that there are way too many shots given to a child and therefore chose to forgo some for my children and delay other shots until their immune systems are stronger. Flu shots are pushed on everyone but this years strain wasn't even the one that the flu shot guarded agaisnt. The HPV vaccine is pushed even though there isn't much research on the long term side effects.
As a RN you realize that there are sometimes side effects to vaccinations. And while most of them are mild with a small fever and fussing you also realize that every so often there is a very dangerous reaction to a shot. Imagine how you would feel it if were your child that had that dangerous reaction.
-Elizabeth |
| kimberly renae |
Posted - Jul 21 2008 : 6:40:50 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Carolinagirl
I understand your point about the vaccines not wearing off. However, just because it may wear off or may not be effective after a long time doesn't seem to be a good reason to not get it at all. I'd have to know how the body handles those sicknesses after it has had a vaccination to make an informed response. For example, would I have a better chance of repelling the sickness because I have had the immunization in the past, even though it may have weakened, than someone who hasn't had the vaccination at all?
I haven't made a decision on the HPV vaccine yet. I have two daughters. I also fought HPV for four years, having the warts frozen, cut and lazered off. Very painful disease to deal with. If I had had a chance for a vaccine that would have prevented the fear of cancer caused by HPV, I would have jumped all over it. Hypothetically, I would seriously consider ANY vaccine that would prevent cancer. But, I am being cautious and learning what I can before making any decision about that.
Ultimately, I agree with you about the parent being the final say about their child's well-being. However I don't think that decision ought to be taken into account when the child will be in a public setting (such as school) and the risk they pose others by not having the vaccine.
ETA: Here's the analogy I thought of in regards to vaccinations... I rarely get sick. I'm just a healthy person. I want everyone else to wash their hands because of sicknesses that spread hand to mouth (or whatever), right? But is it fair for me to decide that since everyone else is supposed to be washing their hands, then I am safe to not wash mine? I wash my hands because it protects me and everyone else, and I hope that everyone else is washing theirs for the same reason. I don't want to get what someone else has, and I don't want to spread anything myself.
amen, i applaud you!!! well said!!
my thinking is that the majority of you as mothers had vaccines when you were little and you are still here right??!!!
http://simple-needs.blogspot.com/ |
| kimberly renae |
Posted - Jul 21 2008 : 6:38:23 PM
being an RN and working in the missions for 3 years,about the first time you see a child dying from german measles or a child with polio and the effects it causes. YOU would get your child vaccintaed. no child should ever have to deal with such diseases. they are not old enough to make the choice of yes or no when they are at the age to have it done. it is a parents responsibility.
http://simple-needs.blogspot.com/ |
| Mommyswanson |
Posted - Jul 16 2008 : 08:52:34 AM
My kids are both vaccinated & I honestly thank God on a regular basis that they did not have any strong reactions to them.
Laura
"That which does not kill us makes us strong!" "I cast all my cares upon you Lord." |
| greentea |
Posted - Jul 15 2008 : 10:11:03 AM
I'm enjoying this tolerant and gray-scaled discussion!
5 days after receiving his 1 year shots, my son went into 'status epileptus'. We went through a battery of tests, the specialist assuming he had West Nile.
In the end, the best guess is that he was sick when he got his shots, with a common virus that sometimes causes encephalitis. But the shots (5 of them!) worsened his symptoms. He always did react to shots, and I regret, and will always regret allowing him to have so many shots on one day.
Getting through that experience, if I had it to do over again, I'd stagger shots, and give only vaccs for life-threatening diseases.
My son's blog (designed to keep in touch with Grandma and all her friends:
http://babycork.blogspot.com/ |
| CarharttQueen |
Posted - Jul 11 2008 : 2:39:51 PM
Here's my 2 cents...
My bottom line is this: YOU as the parent should make the decision. Don't let your doctor or peers decide for you, either way. As with many decisions you make as a parent, you just have to do what research you can and make the best choice you know of at that time. That's really all you can do. Then trust God to take care of your children!
Personally, my 6 month old has not had any vaccines. My husband is a R.N., and we decided that we will do selected vaccines when she is older (at least 5) or not at all. Because our current lifestyle does not bring us close to populations with diseases/illnesses that are vaccinated against (we live out in the country, baby isn't in daycare, and we plan to homeschool), at this point I see MORE risk in the vaccines then in the likelihood of her getting some illness or disease. However, if our lifestyle changes we will re-evaluate at that point what the greater risk is.
I just feel that if I think logically and honestly, WHAT is the need, especially for a baby, to be injected with all those different diseases, in the hopes that the baby will become immune to them??? A normal healthy baby, born to a healthy mom, especially one getting good nourishment from breastmilk, in my opinion, does not have a great enough risk of contracting HEP-B, and all those other things, to need vaccines when he's just born, 3 or 6 months old!
Those are just my feelings, but as I said, I think every parent needs to make their own choice, and just trust it's the best they could do.
|
| oldfashioned girl |
Posted - Jul 11 2008 : 12:26:22 PM
Wow what a subject!! Personally I have decided not to vaccinate my kids, but that was after hours of searching information online and much much prayer as to what to do. I honestly don't trust the pharmaceutical companies at all. I don't understand why there are commercials and marketing campaigns for vaccines or medicines. There is so much money involved that I question where my child's best interest comes into the picture. I think the biggest thing that is needed is respect for a parents decision because no matter what you decide it's a hard decision. I personally don't think HepB should be given at birth unless the baby has medical problems. A friend of mine knew a missionary who got cut on the heel while fishing and even though he was fully vaccinated he died from tetanus. I really am against the blatant marketing of the Gardasil vaccine. It's like we have just accepted that are kids are going to have sex and get hpv. I do not understand that if it such a good thing why do they have to push it the way they are to make it look like such a hip cool thing to get the shot and yes I have 2 girls and I do want to protect them. I am also skeptical when they have an adverse reaction compensation fund. Well to all the moms out there find out all you can and go with your instincts. And whatever you decide stick to your guns because someone will always disagree.
Monica
www.justducky.etsy.com |
| babysmama |
Posted - Jul 10 2008 : 12:40:03 PM
I thought this was worth posting about the HPV vaccine:
Merck Madness
July 7th, 2008 by Judie Brown
Call it a hunch, but those of us at American Life League who have been studying pharmaceutical giant Merck’s marketing plan for Gardasil, commonly known on television by its “one less” mantra, have been suspicious for some time. Apparently, we were right to be less than ecstatic about this latest scheme for “protecting” young women from the human papillomavirus.
Just yesterday, Judicial Watch, a public interest group that investigates government corruption, exposed the findings in new documents they obtained from the federal Food and Drug Administration pertaining to the vaccine’s adverse effects. What have those adverse reactions included?
Here is a partial list:
10 deaths have been reported since September 2007. The total number of death reports is at least 18 and as many as 20.
Just since January 2008, the following incidents have been reported:
140 “serious” reports, 27 of which were categorized as “life-threatening,”
10 spontaneous abortions and
six cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome.
For those with a keen interest in this matter, the complete 25-page document prepared by Judicial Watch is online at http://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/2008/JWReportFDAhpvVaccineRecords.pdf. The Alliance for Human Research Protection has been on the case for at least the past 18 months and is equally concerned about the possible jeopardy that children will be in if parents don’t take this matter seriously and become familiar with this vaccine’s side effects.
But perhaps the best resource for parents, and without a doubt the most comprehensive collection of information on this out-of-control situation, is Children of God for Life. They specialize in vaccine news and have not overlooked the Gardasil mess. Among all the excellent articles you can find, there is one that exposes the truth about cervical cancer and the effect Gardasil actually could have on cervical cancer prevention. Remember that Gardasil is designed to protect a young woman from the human papillomavirus, which is alleged to be a cause of cervical cancer.
But what Cynthia Janek uncovered in her research is that “…the FDA knew back in 2003 that a HPV is not the actual cause of cervical cancer. The actual cause is a ‘persistent HPV infection that may act as a tumor promoter in cancer induction.’”
Further, she examines the statements on record at the FDA and tells the reader,
What we have here is proof that there is scientific evidence that has been published in the past 15 years that states that HPV infection does not bear a direct relationship to the forming of cervical cancer. It also tells us that HPV, if allowed to will be taken care of by our own body’s natural processes. . .“most infections are short-lived and not associated with cervical cancer.” With this being said, why do we need Gardasil when our own body is more than capable of eradicating HPV? What we need is a government policy to assist women with the cost of getting follow-up tests when persistent HPV infection is present. This would make more sense and our government would save so much money on these types of programs instead of $360 each for the Gardasil vaccination.
It could well be that the vaccine may not do a thing to protect anyone from cervical cancer, regardless of the claims being made by Merck Pharmaceutical. What the vaccine is causing is death and immense suffering among those who have been vaccinated.
When I read the Judicial Watch report, it occurred to me that the Food and Drug Administration might already be having second thoughts about this vaccine. Just one week ago, federal regulators advised Merck that they would not approve Gardasil for expanded marketing to an older group of women.
The news report tells us that Gardasil is currently approved for preventing cervical cancer and genital warts in females aged 9-26. It also tells us, as if this is any surprise, that Gardasil “has been one of Merck’s most successful newer products and has helped the company recover after the 2004 withdrawal of its Vioxx arthritis treatment.”
Remember the Vioxx recall? The announcement went like this:
On September 30, 2004, Merck & Co., the manufacturer of the blockbuster arthritis drug Vioxx (rofecoxib), announced the voluntary, worldwide recall of Vioxx after a recent clinical trial confirmed previous studies linking Vioxx to serious cardiovascular problems, including heart attack and stroke. The withdrawal of Vioxx marks the biggest drug recall in history. The three year trial was originally aimed at showing Vioxx’s effectiveness at reducing polyps in the colon, however the study revealed an increased risk of heart attack and other cardiovascular problems. Merck stopped the study after it discovered that participants taking Vioxx had twice the risk of heart attack than other participants taking placebos. The study showed the increased risk of heart attack began 18 months after patients started taking Vioxx. Medical experts advise Vioxx users to consult their doctor about alternatives.
Imagine it! And now that we know that young women are dying and suffering a host of side effects from Gardasil, we can only hope that, as it did for Vioxx, Merck announces a recall and that Gardasil will soon be just a memory.
This article is courtesy of the American Life League.
|
| MarySueK |
Posted - Jul 10 2008 : 12:01:58 PM
My kids are all caught up with their vaccinations, but I haven't had my daughter (13) do the HPV one yet. I probably will, but she (and my middle son) are bad with shots - they either faint or puke. They aren't wimpy in other ways - it is just a reaction to shots. So I have sort of put that off since it is a series of 2 or 3 shots and I am not up for that yet! I think we do forget how bad childhood diseases were back before immunizations came along.
Sue in Richland WA |
| clux64 |
Posted - Jul 10 2008 : 11:21:15 AM
So much information here on both sides of the fence. My children have most of their vaccines. I don't allow vaccines with thimerisol in them. It's mercury used as a preserviative--and one of the things implicated in the childhood vaccines and autism argument. I don't get flu shots and I refused the chicken pox vaccine (I envision kids of child bearing age in about 15 years all being at risk for chickn pox--nighmare!). I can't help but feel because of the vaccines that most of us have received, we don't seem to grasp the gravity of a population that isn't properly vaccinated against basic childhood diseases because we don't see their effects anymore. My parents were children of the early 20th century when chilhood death due to disease was common place. Both sides of my family experienced loss of children due to TB, polio and the like. This was driven home when I was in a college english class about 20 years ago when the question was posed, "what do you thing the greatest invention of the 20th century was? We of course chimed in with stuff like computers or nuclear power. A fellow class member, someone from the Greatest Generation, said he believed that the polio vaccine was the greatest invention--something we baby boomers took for granted. My parents would NEVER have allowed me to not be immunized because of their experiences. I do think there is room for caution, and parents should definately educate themselves on the subject. I also believe that we are over-vaccinating our children. But to eliminate vaccinating entirely may be short sighted in my opionion.
Celeste
"No matter where you go, there you are"
--Confucious
www.urbanprairiehome.blogspot.com
|
| GaiasRose |
Posted - May 14 2008 : 9:40:09 PM
zoe had whooping cough last winter. it got treated and done in 2 days time. just an anecdote but a worthy one.
~*~Brightest Blessings~*~
Tasha-Rose
Farmgirl Sister #88
Blogs:
http://frugalwitch.wordpress.com/
http://youtube.com/profile?user=GaiasRose
Homepage:
http://ForestFaeries.etsy.com
"Joyful chaos, working in tune with the seasons, telling itme by the sun, variety, change and self-direction; all this wwas replaced with a brutal, standardized work culture, the effects of which we are still suffering from today." - Tom Hodgkinson in 'How To Be Idle' |
| yasmine |
Posted - May 14 2008 : 8:33:43 PM
Hey I did not read all the posts except the first couple and one being about a 6 month old having whooping cough. First I hope that baby is ok, second, vaccinated children get whooping cough.!!!!! I know of lots of cases! I also know that lots of kids get chicky px too, after being vaccinated! not ten years after but only 3-4 years!
Just my 2cents
Obviously, I do not vax. All my kids have been born at home (5)and my biggest fear would be having to go a hospital route, fighting the first few vaccinations, and getting out of there with all of our health! Now , nobody get mad. If I'm in a accident or some other unfortunate thing occurs , I'll be there in a jiff! But, I tell you there are some pretty disturbing accidents happening in hospitals, ALL the time...
so hence I do not trust the pharmacutical companies, and here, the world takes their advice and trusts them, even though anyone will tell you that those guys are in it for the money!!! Thats just a given, even most honest doctors and chiropractors will tell you that! |
| HAINAngel2000 |
Posted - May 14 2008 : 10:33:59 AM
Well here in Oregon we didn't have a choice if we wanted our kids in a public or private school. We are not allowed to have our kids in school with out them. My youngest needed 6 shots!! Because they keep adding new ones and apparently by the time he was in kindergarden he was not up to date with the current ones. They kicked him out of school for over a week, until he has ALL 6 shots (at the same time) done then they would allow him back. ANd since we has insurace the "health department who requires them" would not do them. And our new doctor wasn't taking patiets. The ER doesn't do them. It was a HUGE MESS! I do not really like shots. I know they have helped prevent many diseases from raiding our children. But I also know a girl who is not prob 18 who got shots when she was 5 and she ended up with a severe form of autism. (something like this) she has a body like and adult but is stuck at the age of 5. Its so sad girls. Lacy is a realy doll and it breaks my heart that this could have been prevented. I think it should be a choice. When my youngest got shots we were given consent forms with info on side affects and more. Do you know that when my other kids got shots, I was never given the info (paper work) on the shots and since now its "required" we don't have a choice anymore to decide if we want shots or not which to me is WRONG! When parents aren't allowed to make health desisions for their own children then goverment is to big! I won't even go into what I feel about the passing law in oregon on abortion!!! grrrrrrrrr
Website: http://Heavenlyangelsinneed.com
Email: info@heavenlyangelsinneed.com
Bereavement: http://Heavenlyangelsinneed.org
Blog: http://Heavenlyangelsinneed.blogspot.com/
Home: http://rockypointschool-homestead.blogspot.com/ |
| mikesgirl |
Posted - May 14 2008 : 08:21:01 AM
I guess I should consider myself lucky. When my kids were little, there was no controversy regarding immunizations. Everyone had their child immunized without question. If the pediatrician said to do it, you did it. That was before all the research that brought up questions regarding their safety. All four of my kids turned out fine so I'm glad I did it. But who knows - they may have turned out fine without the immunizations too. One side note - when I was a baby, the doc gave me one of my immuinizations in the "bum". The next day, my mom noticed that the site of the injection had swollen up like a goose egg. She took me back to the doc and he immediately lanced the egg and mom said (sorry about this) a pint of pus drained out. Sounds like an infection to me - non-sterile injection? Anyway, I still have a big "dent" in my bum where he drained it! I know, TMI!
Farmgirl Sister #98
Check out my new online store
http://www.shopthefrontier.com/VFstore/index.php?manufacturers_id=79&osCsid=6be4b25bf9555031c6e2e86bbde23dba |
| Carolinagirl |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 4:51:47 PM
I understand your point about the vaccines not wearing off. However, just because it may wear off or may not be effective after a long time doesn't seem to be a good reason to not get it at all. I'd have to know how the body handles those sicknesses after it has had a vaccination to make an informed response. For example, would I have a better chance of repelling the sickness because I have had the immunization in the past, even though it may have weakened, than someone who hasn't had the vaccination at all?
I haven't made a decision on the HPV vaccine yet. I have two daughters. I also fought HPV for four years, having the warts frozen, cut and lazered off. Very painful disease to deal with. If I had had a chance for a vaccine that would have prevented the fear of cancer caused by HPV, I would have jumped all over it. Hypothetically, I would seriously consider ANY vaccine that would prevent cancer. But, I am being cautious and learning what I can before making any decision about that.
Ultimately, I agree with you about the parent being the final say about their child's well-being. However I don't think that decision ought to be taken into account when the child will be in a public setting (such as school) and the risk they pose others by not having the vaccine.
ETA: Here's the analogy I thought of in regards to vaccinations... I rarely get sick. I'm just a healthy person. I want everyone else to wash their hands because of sicknesses that spread hand to mouth (or whatever), right? But is it fair for me to decide that since everyone else is supposed to be washing their hands, then I am safe to not wash mine? I wash my hands because it protects me and everyone else, and I hope that everyone else is washing theirs for the same reason. I don't want to get what someone else has, and I don't want to spread anything myself. |
| babysmama |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 3:33:36 PM
CarolinaGirl wrote:
"BUT your sick child does pose a threat to my children who are too young to be immunized, older people whose immune systems are weak and those who are susceptible to certain things, regardless. It poses a threat to the community at large."
This is my point exactly. There are many, many people that don't realize that vaccines do not always work or many times "wear off" after years. So while my un-vaccinated children may pose a small risk to the public, there are many vaccinated people who also do because their vaccines are not effective in their body. Take for example whooping cough. By the time that you are in your late teens or twenties the immunity has basically worn off, hince the reason for so many college outbreaks. So teachers in schools working around children all day are often times not immune to the virus themselves and can pass it along. Sometimes the media potrays all the outbreaks as being because of an unvaccinated person and those stories do get all the hype, such as the measles outbreaks in some Amish areas a few years ago but at the same time they downplay the other outbreaks that occur in a mainly vaccinated population.
As I mentioned before, I think that vaccinations are not such a bad thing as it has gotten rid of many deadly diseases. I also do not think that it would be a good idea for every person in America to stop getting vaccinated. I don't think that doctors and drug companies are pushing posion into us but I do think that there are some people who's body can not handle being injected with so much in such a short time and think it should be up to each parent to decide what is best for their child.
Just like the new HPV vaccine that has come out. While it sounds like a good thing it is quite new and there have not been many studies done and no way to know the long term side effects. Plus, it only protects agaisnt a few of the strains of HPV while there are several more that it does not protect agaisnt so I feel the commericals are quite misleading since it makes it sound like you are pretty safe if you get the shot. How do others feel about this new vaccine?
-Elizabeth
|
| Alee |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 2:04:12 PM
I think it is great that we are all sharing information and helping each other to be informed. I know what is right for one family isn't always right for the next. Anything that concerns our precious children and concern anything that we feel passionate about- especially our sense of right and wrong can be a source for endless debate.
What really warms my heart is that fact that we all care so much about our children and our friends (each other) that we are sharing our knowledge.
Let's just remember to read each post with the filter of friendship and try and temper our posts with a measure of restraint when the debate gets heated. :D
Alee
Farmgirl Sister #8
www.awarmheart.com
Please come visit Nora and me on our new blog:
www.farmgirlalee.blogspot.com |
| Peanut |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 1:38:16 PM
quote:
Did I confuse the whole thing even more
Not at all! That was very clear. Thanks for the info!
My blog: http://thecottonwife.wordpress.com/
"John Deere. We stand behind everything we sell. Except the manure spreader." |
| corporatefarmgirl |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 12:37:51 PM
DOUBLE OOPS here is a link to the Univ of NE fetal cell research information page where they clearly state the use of fetal cells for lines of vaccines http://www.unmc.edu/fetalcellresearch/factsheet.htm
Not saying pro or con as I stated earlier my kids were vaccinated just at a later date and spread out more. Good info is always important. I WILL STOP NOW
Tamara
http://smallfarm.about.com small farms give big benefits
|
| corporatefarmgirl |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 12:30:09 PM
OOPS should have mentioned the following - One brother in law is a doctor ( PEDS) another is a Pharmicist and I work for an FDA manufacturing company so I do a lot of FDA stuff. One of my contacts told me about the alternatives
Tamara
http://smallfarm.about.com small farms give big benefits
|
| corporatefarmgirl |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 12:27:13 PM
The misunderstanding comes because the government and pharmaceutical companies are saying "NO NEW FETAL CELLS" . What they do not clarify is that the "cell lines" that were required to develop vaccines are in many instances derived from aborted fetuses.
In order to develop a immunization you have to start with a weaken form of the disease. That weaken virus is then put into a cell line. Many of our standard vaccines orginate from that original cell line. This means that many of our common vaccines were derived from cell lines using fetus. So even though aborted fetus are not used today for new vaccines most of the old standard vaccines were from aborted fetus cells. The vaccines themselves do not contain the fetal cells but the concern is that the "residual biological matter " of the cells have been assimilated into the vaccine. One referance point is the Catholic Church Newsletter ( this is from 2005 but not too old)http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=38498.
MCR5 and WI38 are two of the cell lines that used human embryos. They are in the Polio, MMR, Rabies, Hepititus and Chickenpox vaccines. These are the standard shots given by DR's. HERE IS THE OTHER KICKER. There are alternative immunizations that are manufactured without the fetal cell lines and are FDA approved. The problem is that very few people know to ask for them. Today most vaccines use animal embryos ( Flu shot uses chickens).
Ok BIG question. Did I confuse the whole thing even more
Tamara
http://smallfarm.about.com small farms give big benefits
|
| Carolinagirl |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 12:14:00 PM
Elizabeth, I was thinking about the question you asked in regards to the idea that if my child is immunized why do I care if yours are (that's the hypothetical my and yours... not you and me, specifically). And it's true, if my child's be immunized then your sick child poses no threat to her. BUT your sick child does pose a threat to my children who are too young to be immunized, older people whose immune systems are weak and those who are susceptible to certain things, regardless. It poses a threat to the community at large.
While I don't have an issue with this personally, I think the way it is presented is the same as all the arguments that rankle me- breastfeeding v formula, homeschooling v public school, "natural" birth v hospital birth. Those people who I've encountered who choose not to vaccinate don't just NOT do it and move on, they seem to want to make us who do vaccinate feel like we aren't taking our children's best interests to heart. Emotional barbs are tossed out without any reliable information- aborted fetus tissue, antifreeze... silly things that just don't make sense. Information presented by the no-vaccination side (not you specifically, but the machines that drive theories about vaccinations and why people shouldn't have them)would lead everyone to believe that the entire medical establishment is just a bunch of boobs who are out to kill us. I'm afraid that in real-life, I would appear hostile in this argument, because there's a point where I get tired of hearing the fallacies.
|
| Peanut |
Posted - May 08 2008 : 10:45:02 AM
quote:
There are some I will never get, mainly the MMR because of the fact that there is cells from aborted babies in it and that is totally agaisnt my beliefs.
Elizabeth, just curious... do you have a reference for this? I can find nothing (well, from a reputable source) that says there are fetal tissues in any vaccines given today.
The information seems to point that these cell lines are about 40 years old - not that aborted fetuses have been used since then.
My blog: http://thecottonwife.wordpress.com/
"John Deere. We stand behind everything we sell. Except the manure spreader." |
|
|
