No. Different time. Different environmental factors. Different vaccine schedules. Different diet. Different vaccine ingredients. It's today's vaccine schedule as a whole that is more than likely the problem, probably in conjunction with other environmental factors.
It's too bad you stopped reading at that spot. If you had continued on to the rest of the paragraph it got much more interesting. Head in the sand or just another attempt to duck and weave?
When asked about vaccinating a future child, a sig-
nificant proportion of respondents would deviate
from CDC guidelines, spec
ialists more than general
pediatricians (21% vs 9%). Generalists were more
likely to give a future child Hepatitis A (OR: 3.6; 95%
CI 1.3 - 10.4), Rotavirus (OR: 2.2; 95% CI 1.1 - 4.4),
Meningococcal (OR: 9.9; 95% CI 3.3 - 29.9), and in-
fluenza (OR: 5.4; 95% CI 1.1 - 26.7) vaccines. Spe-
cialists were more likely to postpone MMR vaccine-
tion (OR: 4.4 95% CI 2.3 - 8.6). Safety was listed by
both groups as the most
common reason for altering
the recommended immunizati
on schedule. Until 2009,
general pediatricians and pediatric specialists have
largely adhered to ACIP
recommendations, but due
to vaccine safety and other concerns, both groups,
albeit a higher percentage of specialists, reported
greater numbers willing to
diverge from these rec-
ommendations
That was 8 years ago when the wheels started coming off - it's probably gettin' real shaky by now.
It's too bad you stopped reading at that spot. If you had continued on to the rest of the paragraph it got much more interesting. Head in the sand or just another attempt to duck and weave?
When asked about vaccinating a future child, a sig-
nificant proportion of respondents would deviate
from CDC guidelines, spec
ialists more than general
pediatricians (21% vs 9%). Generalists were more
likely to give a future child Hepatitis A (OR: 3.6; 95%
CI 1.3 - 10.4), Rotavirus (OR: 2.2; 95% CI 1.1 - 4.4),
Meningococcal (OR: 9.9; 95% CI 3.3 - 29.9), and in-
fluenza (OR: 5.4; 95% CI 1.1 - 26.7) vaccines. Spe-
cialists were more likely to postpone MMR vaccine-
tion (OR: 4.4 95% CI 2.3 - 8.6). Safety was listed by
both groups as the most
common reason for altering
the recommended immunizati
on schedule. Until 2009,
general pediatricians and pediatric specialists have
largely adhered to ACIP
recommendations, but due
to vaccine safety and other concerns, both groups,
albeit a higher percentage of specialists, reported
greater numbers willing to
diverge from these rec-
ommendations
That was 8 years ago when the wheels started coming off - it's probably gettin' real shaky by now.
Does botulism grow in Chianti? Because that would be an awesome addition to your concoction.
“No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable…for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death.” – President Ronald Reagan, as he signed The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986, absolving drug companies from all medico-legal liability when children die or are disabled from vaccine injuries.Does botulism grow in Chianti? Because that would be an awesome addition to your concoction.
The poor vaccine Nazis are losing the war. The only thing left to do now is for congress to do the bidding of their paymasters: no exemptions for vaccination - and failure to provide proof of up to date shots will result in heavy fines, jail time and removal of children from the home.
Welcome to the brave, new world.
Yep. But fear of what, and built up by whom? Measles for example: is it the harmless childhood illness exemplified by these sitcoms from the 50's and 60's?
Exactly. Where are all these autoimmune disorders coming from: carbon dioxide?
No the point of the argument was that I was questioning whether herd immunity was actually taking place amongst today's US population. It's you guys who went off on measles. Link and post # please to where I said the measles vaccine was "unnecessary". I never said that because, again, I'm not anti-vaccine, I'm pro-safe vaccines. Measles deaths were on the downfall before vaccination, and may have continued that trend without vaccination. And....more than likely, we are exposing our children to "real dangers" with vaccines. If I'm going to expose my child to vaccines that I suspect may have lasting negative health effects, I do look at mortality and the probability of lasting negative effects that particular pathogen may cause. So, the deaths chart in my mind is an important tool, and may be more important than looking at just cases. That was one of the points that article was trying to make. I'm not interested in continuing that talking point because it's not central to this debate, and quite frankly a waste of time. Nobody's lying, this is a debate. We're presenting ideas, it is a fact that the supporters are failing miserably to answer the most important issues on the table.Dodging the question. YOU claimed that vaccines were ineffective. YOU claimed that measles was disappearing before the vaccine was introduced. The entire point of your f'n idiotic argument was that we were injecting an unnecessary vaccine into children and exposing them to "real" dangers. YOU WERE WRONG. STUPIDLY wrong. MONUMENTALLY wrong. Your response was and is to brush it aside and pretend it didn't matter. You have to pretend that measles wasn't a major killer of children around the world before widespread vaccinations for your argument to hold...you have to lie.
And here's the result of your rank imbecility:
That's why you have zero credibility. Less than zero, actually, since you've been exposed as a liar. It takes an especially low form of life to put children's lives in danger for a lie.
Vaccines are a left thing? Damn, I don't know a single con who is anti-vax. My sister and all of the people I know who are anti-vax are lib hippies.
This is about as backwards thinking as you get. If you have a vaccine/autism case correlation like we do, you do the appropriate science to figure out whether or not the vaccines are the cause. Given the vaccine science is so severely inadequate and fraudulent that it can't be trusted, then you still have to suspect the vaccines, especially given the other evidence of the whistleblowers, vaccine court paying out for autism cases, and the fraudulent science acting like it's trying to cover up the fact that there is a problem. That's the point. And it's a good one.
My point was that herd immunity was highly questionable for (applicable) vaccines in general, then you went off on measles specifically. If I implied that I was questioning the necessity of the measles vaccine, it was done giving consideration to it's potential costs. If you see a tradeoff in negative health outcomes, then of course you have to start to assess costs vs. benefits. Ideally, yes, you'd like a vaccine with no lasting negative side-effects. I'm ok with that. Who wouldn't be? So yes, I'm not anti-vaccine, or specifically anti measles vaccine. If there are suspected problems though, you study it. Honestly. Then you correct the problem. Clearly, that's not currently what's happening, as the safety studies are deceitful and fraudulent. You're both obviously smoke-screening the real issues at hand.
I was questioning its applicability currently in today's US population, as you should well know by now. Not the concept. As I probably said 5 times.
Parents should skip vaccinations if they have decided that's what is best for their families.
Everybody else should piss off.
Here's another idea, talk to someone who is 70+ years old and ask them if they remember the population being as sick with chronic conditions as they are. We've traded infectious disease for chronic disease. Which one is worse? And no, vaccines should not take all the blame.
Just like there's enough money set aside for ALL the vaccine injured? Dumb post.
