Lack of true scientific understanding in all vaccine rhetoric

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An infant that is being breastfed receives whatever immunities his or her mother has, so babies actually can have some protection before they are vaccinated. One of my children was born during a measles outbreak and the doctor was very reassuring that my baby had a lot of protection through my immunities (which had been checked during pregnancy).

All babies receive congenital immunities. However, I wouldn't be comfortable relying on that to protect my baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An infant that is being breastfed receives whatever immunities his or her mother has, so babies actually can have some protection before they are vaccinated. One of my children was born during a measles outbreak and the doctor was very reassuring that my baby had a lot of protection through my immunities (which had been checked during pregnancy).

+1

But since DCUM'ers don't breastfeed, they worry about this stuff. It must suck to be that afraid of something.

You are an idiot. Plenty of DCUMers breastfeed, but still vaccinate. And you should do a bit more research on how much protection BFing actually confers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An infant that is being breastfed receives whatever immunities his or her mother has, so babies actually can have some protection before they are vaccinated. One of my children was born during a measles outbreak and the doctor was very reassuring that my baby had a lot of protection through my immunities (which had been checked during pregnancy).

+1

But since DCUM'ers don't breastfeed, they worry about this stuff. It must suck to be that afraid of something.

You're both wrong. It's weird, by the way, that you're exalting breast milk as the magical elixir that will save your non-vaccinating bacon, which does suggest you are that afraid of something. Me? I'm nursing my 10 month old and hoping to Jesus she isn't exposed to measles (thank you, non-vaxxers, for this trip down developing nation road no one wanted to take!) before she gets her MMR.

And to the first quoted PP: your ped was likely reassuring you that your baby received some of your immunity to measles while you were pregnant, but just like stores of iron, that runs out after a while. It isn't breast milk that will save you here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An infant that is being breastfed receives whatever immunities his or her mother has, so babies actually can have some protection before they are vaccinated. One of my children was born during a measles outbreak and the doctor was very reassuring that my baby had a lot of protection through my immunities (which had been checked during pregnancy).

All babies receive congenital immunities. However, I wouldn't be comfortable relying on that to protect my baby.

There is a sad story in the autobiography of Jessica Mitford about her baby who died from measles in the 1930s. The public health nurse told her not to worry, because breastfeeding conferred immunity from the mother, but she'd never had measles, so there was no immunity to confer...

Herd immunity is good for everybody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An infant that is being breastfed receives whatever immunities his or her mother has, so babies actually can have some protection before they are vaccinated. One of my children was born during a measles outbreak and the doctor was very reassuring that my baby had a lot of protection through my immunities (which had been checked during pregnancy).

All babies receive congenital immunities. However, I wouldn't be comfortable relying on that to protect my baby.

There is a sad story in the autobiography of Jessica Mitford about her baby who died from measles in the 1930s. The public health nurse told her not to worry, because breastfeeding conferred immunity from the mother, but she'd never had measles, so there was no immunity to confer...

Herd immunity is good for everybody.

There are lots of sad stories this decade of kids hurt or that have died due to vaccines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An infant that is being breastfed receives whatever immunities his or her mother has, so babies actually can have some protection before they are vaccinated. One of my children was born during a measles outbreak and the doctor was very reassuring that my baby had a lot of protection through my immunities (which had been checked during pregnancy).

All babies receive congenital immunities. However, I wouldn't be comfortable relying on that to protect my baby.

There is a sad story in the autobiography of Jessica Mitford about her baby who died from measles in the 1930s. The public health nurse told her not to worry, because breastfeeding conferred immunity from the mother, but she'd never had measles, so there was no immunity to confer...

Herd immunity is good for everybody.

There are lots of sad stories this decade of kids hurt or that have died due to vaccines.

Among 100 kids under 5 who get measles, 59 will have only the common and usually mild symptoms of measles e.g. fever, cough, runny nose, red, painful eyes, rash. 12 will have diarrhea. 14 will have an ear infection. 9 will have pneumonia. 5 will have measles croup. 1 will have measles-induced convulsions. Also, among 1,000 kids under 5 who get measles, 2 will have encephalitis, and 3 will have thrombocytopenia. Also, among 100,000 kids under 5 who get measles, 1 will get subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE).

Among 100 kids under 5 who get the MMR vaccine, 86 will have only pain or swelling at the injection site, joint pain and stiffness. 4 will have high fever. 4 will be irritable. 1 will have swollen salivary glands. 5 will have a non-infectious faint red rash. Also, among 1,000,000 kids under 5 who get the MMR vaccine, 26 will have thrombocytopenia.

http://www.ncirs.edu.au/immunisation/education/mmr-decision/measles.php

[Anonymous]

Vaccines are not 100%...they are 99.999 - 99.9999% safe: 1/100,000 - 1/100,000,000 problems. By comparison, not having vaccines places you and everyone else in society at risk. IMHO, if you do not vaccinate, and infect someone else who dies, that is negligent homicide.

[Anonymous]

I only agree with OP on one point and that is that some people on this site overstate things. I have seen a few people on this site stating that vaccines are 100 percent safe. They're very, very safe but not 100 percent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Vaccines are not 100%...they are 99.999 - 99.9999% safe: 1/100,000 - 1/100,000,000 problems. By comparison, not having vaccines places you and everyone else in society at risk. IMHO, if you do not vaccinate, and infect someone else who dies, that is negligent homicide.

Unfortunately for you, the legal system doesn't agree. Go force your views somewhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An infant that is being breastfed receives whatever immunities his or her mother has, so babies actually can have some protection before they are vaccinated. One of my children was born during a measles outbreak and the doctor was very reassuring that my baby had a lot of protection through my immunities (which had been checked during pregnancy).

+1

But since DCUM'ers don't breastfeed, they worry about this stuff. It must suck to be that afraid of something.

You're both wrong. It's weird, by the way, that you're exalting breast milk as the magical elixir that will save your non-vaccinating bacon, which does suggest you are that afraid of something. Me? I'm nursing my 10 month old and hoping to Jesus she isn't exposed to measles (thank you, non-vaxxers, for this trip down developing nation road no one wanted to take!) before she gets her MMR.

And to the first quoted PP: your ped was likely reassuring you that your baby received some of your immunity to measles while you were pregnant, but just like stores of iron, that runs out after a while. It isn't breast milk that will save you here.

Well, I vaccinate, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. I'm also quite comfortable with the antibodies that are transferred by nursing until my child can get the MMR. Again, it must suck to be as afraid as you are. Get a real problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vaccines are not 100%...they are 99.999 - 99.9999% safe: 1/100,000 - 1/100,000,000 problems. By comparison, not having vaccines places you and everyone else in society at risk. IMHO, if you do not vaccinate, and infect someone else who dies, that is negligent homicide.

Unfortunately for you, the legal system doesn't agree. Go force your views somewhere else.

Actually, lots of legal experts think there would be a good case. Certainly for civil if not criminal liability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vaccines are not 100%...they are 99.999 - 99.9999% safe: 1/100,000 - 1/100,000,000 problems. By comparison, not having vaccines places you and everyone else in society at risk. IMHO, if you do not vaccinate, and infect someone else who dies, that is negligent homicide.

Unfortunately for you, the legal system doesn't agree. Go force your views somewhere else.

Actually, lots of legal experts think there would be a good case. Certainly for civil if not criminal liability.

Yes, litigious as American society is, I'm sure we'll get there. I hope so! That would be one good use of the propensity of our legal system to award damages.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:whistleblower at Merck...it seems like the MMR might not prevent mumps as fully as predicted. Link in OP's original post

I can't find a single reputable source reporting on this. Nothing but Huffington Post and a bunch of anti-vaccine sites. If somebody can find a reputable source, could you please post a link?

Op here.....I can't find any major news coverage, but it is on blogs on both sides of the vaccine issue, so the facts about the court case look true. I don't know what the actual truth is.
http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/merck-mumps-motions-whistleblowers-the-actual-story/
http://www.fiercevaccines.com/story/lawsuits-claiming-merck-lied-about-mumps-vaccine-efficacy-headed-trial/2014-09-09
http://www.inquisitr.com/1459159/lawsuits-allege-merck-lied-about-mmr-efficacy-motions-to-dismiss-denied/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:whistleblower at Merck...it seems like the MMR might not prevent mumps as fully as predicted. Link in OP's original post

I can't find a single reputable source reporting on this. Nothing but Huffington Post and a bunch of anti-vaccine sites. If somebody can find a reputable source, could you please post a link?

Op here.....I can't find any major news coverage, but it is on blogs on both sides of the vaccine issue, so the facts about the court case look true. I don't know what the actual truth is.
http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/merck-mumps-motions-whistleblowers-the-actual-story/
http://www.fiercevaccines.com/story/lawsuits-claiming-merck-lied-about-mumps-vaccine-efficacy-headed-trial/2014-09-09
http://www.inquisitr.com/1459159/lawsuits-allege-merck-lied-about-mmr-efficacy-motions-to-dismiss-denied/

There is no "both sides of the vaccine issue".

[Anonymous]

Whether you agree or not there clearly are people with differing opinons.